# Hershey v. Segro

> Superior Court of Pennsylvania · December 28, 1977 · 252 Pa. Super. 240

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9757132

## Case

- **Full name:** William L. HERSHEY v. Frank SEGRO and Mary Segro, His Wife, and Richard C. Stoll, Sr. and Dorothy R. Stoll, His Wife. Appeal of Frank SEGRO and Mary Segro
- **Court:** Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 28, 1977
- **Citations:** 252 Pa. Super. 240; 381 A.2d 478; 1977 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2978
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Price
- **Judges:** Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Cercone, Price, Van Voort Spaeth
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9757132

## Opinion text

PRICE, Judge,
dissenting:
I dissent. The passage of almost two years and ten months from praecipe for a writ to entry of a non pros judgment in a trespass action for personal injuries coupled with the fact that no complaint was filed for a period exceeding three years supports the entry of this judgment of non pros. No proper reason is advanced to remove it.
Pa.R.C.P. 1037(c) provides:
“In all cases, the court, on motion of a party, may enter an appropriate judgment against a party upon default or admission.”
*244 The statute of limitation, while not an absolute measure of default in prosecutions, does provide a yardstick of some value, and it has often been said that such a time limit in a non pros situation imposes no hardship on those bringing the suit. It is clearly the law of Pennsylvania that one who brings another into court should prosecute the claim with reasonable diligence. I believe appellee has failed to comply with this requirement.
I would reverse the order of the lower court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9757132. Public record. Not legal advice.