MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

1. (a) General policy.—It is the policy of the unified judicial system to bring each pending matter to a final conclusion as promptly as possible consistently with the character of the matter and the resources of the system. Where a matter has been inactive for an unreasonable period of time, the tribunal, on its own motion, shall enter an appropriate order terminating the matter.

2. (b) Primary responsibility for implementation of policy.—

   1. (1) Except as provided by paragraph (3), each court of common pleas is primarily responsible for the implementation of the policy expressed in subdivision (a) of this rule and is directed to make local rules of court for such purposes applicable to the court and to the community court or magisterial district judges of the judicial district.
   2. (2) The Philadelphia Municipal Court is directed to make rules of court for such purposes.
   3. (3) The policy set forth in subdivision (a) of this rule shall be implemented in actions governed by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure pursuant to Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2.

3. (c) Minimum Standards.—Before any order terminating a matter on the ground of unreasonable inactivity is entered, the parties shall be given at least 30 days’ written notice of opportunity for hearing on such proposed termination, which notice shall be given:

   1. (1) In person or by mail to the last address of record of the parties or their counsel of record and setting forth a brief identification of the matter to be terminated; or
   2. (2) By publication in the manner provided by rule of court in the legal newspaper designated by rule of court for the publication of legal notices in any case where notice by mail cannot be given or has been returned undelivered or where the docket of the matter shows no evidence of activity during the previous two years. Any matter terminated after notice by publication pursuant to this paragraph may be reinstated by the court after dismissal upon written application for good cause shown.

4. (d) Effect of disposition of records. Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of this rule or of any local rule of court made pursuant to this rule, a court shall not entertain any application for the reinstatement of a matter terminated pursuant to this rule if such application for reinstatement is filed after the documents relating to the matter have been disposed of pursuant to the applicable record retention schedule established by or pursuant to law.

   Note:

   The general policy set forth in Subdivision (a) is based on an administrative consideration, not substantive or procedural standards applicable to speedy trials in either civil or criminal cases. This rule is intended to supplement, not to modify or abrogate, procedural rules or substantive decisions involving the rights of defendants in criminal cases to a speedy disposition of charges. It is intended to foster elimination of stale cases from the judicial system where the parties have failed to proceed and which are carried as open matters because of the failure on the part of any party to seek dismissal or otherwise to bring the matter to a conclusion.

   Where a party objects to the termination of an inactive matter, it is intended that the court exercise its judicial discretion. For example, the dormant matter may be a protective action related to a case pending in another jurisdiction between the parties on the same cause of action, or an action involving a controversy arising from a clash of personalities which will probably be terminated upon the death of one of the parties under circumstances where the public interest will not be served by forcing the parties to a judicial resolution of their dispute, etc.

   The rule has no effect on the substantive law and thus a termination effected pursuant to the rule will not necessarily foreclose further proceedings in the matter, e.g., in custody, support and other proceedings of an equitable nature where the parties have the substantive right to apply for the modification of a final order or decree on the basis of changed circumstances.

   The following is a suggested form of local rule:

   Rule

5. (a) The prothonotary shall list for general call at the first civil argument court held after September 1 of each year all civil matters in which no steps or proceedings have been taken for two years or more prior thereto and shall give notice thereof to counsel of record, and to the parties for whom no appearance has been entered, as provided by Pa. R.J.A. No. 1901(c). If no action is taken or no written objection is docketed in such a matter prior to the commencement of the general call, the prothonotary shall strike the matter from the list and enter an order as of course dismissing the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute, under the provisions of this rule. If no good cause for continuing a matter is shown at the general call, an order shall be entered forthwith by the court for dismissal.

6. (b) The clerk of courts shall list at the first criminal argument court held after September 1 of each year all criminal proceedings in which no steps or proceedings have been taken for two years or more prior thereto and shall give notice thereof to the district attorney, any private prosecutor and the defendant, as provided by Pa. R.J.A. No. 1901(c). If no good cause for continuing a proceeding is shown at the general call, an order for dismissal shall be entered forthwith by the court.

   Under Rule 1901(c)(2), in those cases where it is unduly burdensome to research the captions, parties and mailing addresses of cases which have been inactive for two years or more, the moribund matters may be terminated by the adoption and publication of a general refiling requirement, without service of individual notice. Under such a local rule matters in which no paper has been filed within the previous two years would be deemed terminated without any further entry in the docket, and all such matters could be excluded from any computerized or other modern docket control system installed in the judicial district, subject to the right of the parties to reactivate the matter for good cause shown.

   The County Records Committee, established by the act of August 14, 1963 (P. L. 839, No. 407) (16 P. S. § 13001 et seq.), promulgates record retention and disposition schedules applicable to, inter alia, the prothonotary, clerk of the courts, and clerk of the orphans’ court division. Where a matter has been terminated without prejudice under the rule, i.e. subject to the right of the parties to reactivate the matter for good cause shown, and the records relating to the matter have been destroyed without microfilming under the applicable record retention and disposition schedule, this subdivision will eliminate the possibility that a party might attempt to reactivate the matter on the basis of copies of the pleadings and other documents retained by counsel (including the district attorney or public defender) or other noncourt records.

Source

The provisions of this Rule 1901 adopted May 10, 1973, 3 Pa.B. 921, amended through December 28, 1973, 3 Pa.B. 2949, amended and effective January 18, 1974; amended March 20, 2003, effective July 1, 2003, 33 Pa.B. 1711; amended June 14, 2018, effective immediately, 48 Pa.B. 3847. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (392217) to (392218) and (371453).