Independent Technical Services v. Campo's Express, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that only upon the filing of the complaint is an appeal from the district justice perfected, at which time the action is a de novo proceeding and is subject to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure
• stating that “[a]n order terminating an action for inactivity will not be reversed absent a manifest abuse of discretion.”
• once appeal for trial de novo perfected in Court of Common Pleas, any judgment entered at magistrate level is nullified or extinguished
• “The plaintiff in a case has an affirmative duty to move its case forward.”
• plaintiff in appeal de novo “cannot expect to execute on [] judgment entered three years prior at the magistrate level, that judgment having been extinguished by the perfecting of the appeal de novo in the trial court”
• conclusions of law 7 and 9

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Condio v. Erie Insurance Exchange
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2006-04-25· cited 150×
• David R. Nicholson, Builder, LLC v. Jablonski
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-05-19· cited 27×
• Housing Authority of Beaver County v. Alberts (In Re Alberts)
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2008-01-24· cited 20×
• Golab, D. v. Knuth, S.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-12-12· cited 11×
• Bedford Hill Community v. Brown (In re Brown)
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2016-02-01· cited 2×
• John D. Hughes Construction Inc. v. Funk
  Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas· 2009-12-04

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Pilon v. Bally Engineering Structures
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-07-27· cited 32×
• A.C. Elfman & Sons, Inc. v. Clime
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1986-07-31· cited 18×