*1 471 2d It no in A. 912 has to actions (1953). application equity.
It be Rules of Pennsylvania that the may argued appeal- scope Civil the of are enlarged Procedure what although able orders. This is not interlocutory correct, con- footnote Court indicated in a this so inadvertently 122 A. 2d in Pa. Hill, 590, tained Grossman v. 384 spe- P. While it true Pa. R. C. (1956). 1501, 69 is that in procedure “the provides thenceforth, that cifically the be in accordance with action in shall equity an relates the action of this relating assumpsit,” rules to in the courts of procedure the and solely practice to nor did intend, rule did it not, the instance. This first Act of June appellate jurisdiction. 21, The to enlarge PS No. as 17 §1, amended, §61, P. 392, L. 1937, 1982, Rules of of these promulgation the authorized which limited Supreme clearly Court the by Civil Procedure courts in and the practice procedure to the scope their of the courts re- Jurisdiction the first instance. of mained unaffected. to abide the result. Costs quashed.
Appeal Appellant, v. March. Zehr, 472
Argued April 1962. Before 25, C. Mus- J., Bell, Eagen and manno, Jones, Cohen, JJ. O’Brien, *2 reargument refused June 1962. 13, J. Leon him with Leonard Rabben, F. and Markel, Tubis and for Rabben, appellant.
W. J. G. with him John and O’Donnell, P. Yatsko, O’Donnell & for O’Donnell, appellees.
Opinion Per May 1962: 21, Curiam, The order of the court below is affirmed the on opinion of President Judge Forrest of the Court of Common of Pleas ? Montgomery County.
Dissenting by Opinion Cohen: Justice Since petition open the to in judgment this case did not contain and the defendants did prove not a meri- torious and since defense, the failure on part the of defendants’ counsel to represent defend- diligently the ants has not been properly I excused, would the reverse action of the lower court in opening judgment. the