By: Kevin L. Connors, Esquire

Patricia Burns Horn, Esquire

Civil Procedure in Pennsylvania is controlled by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to as the Pennsylvania Code, available at www.pacode.com.

The PRCP controls all aspects of civil litigation to include:

  • Rules of Construction, dealing with time computation and principles of interpretation;
  • Business of the Courts, dealing with the filing of legal pleading, etc.;
  • Identification of parties, as individuals, corporations, and/or partnerships;
  • All procedures regarding trial, trial preparation, discovery, venue, jurisdiction, and service.

The Pennsylvania Code was enacted by the Pennsylvania General Assembly, and it is amended, from time to time, by both statutory enactment, decree of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and by judicial interpretation.

In addition to the Pennsylvania Code, Pennsylvania has also adopted the Rules of Evidence, the Rules of Appellate Procedure, as well as operating procedures for the various Court systems, to include the Supreme Court, the Superior Court, the Commonwealth Court, and Magisterial District Judges.

No less true, all attorneys practicing before the Courts and judicial system in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania are bound by the Rules of Professional Conduct, which are administered and enforced by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Secondarily, every county in Pennsylvania has also enacted local rules, typically published through access to individual county judicial websites, and/or also published and updated on a yearly basis.

There are 67 individual counties in Pennsylvania, with the largest and most litigious counties being Philadelphia, Allegheny, Lackawanna, Luzerne, and Dauphin Counties, based upon their judiciary, their bars, and as well by their demographics.

Not withstanding the Pennsylvania Code dictating that the Rules of Civil Procedure in Pennsylvania are the controlling procedures for the administration and litigation of all civil matters, to include both casualty and commercial litigation, the 67 individual counties nevertheless maintain their own dockets, trial lists, judicial assignments, and sometimes byzantine local rules.

In almost every county in Pennsylvania, the judiciary is divided into three primary matrixes, being civil, criminal, and family or orphan court cases.  In the more heavily populated counties, judicial assignments are often more permanent than in suburban or rural counties, where judicial assignments are shifted, dependent upon judicial tenure.

Throughout all 67 Pennsylvania counties, the primary focus in civil litigation cases, is whether cases are deemed, at initial filing, to either be arbitration-level cases, or cases that would be assigned to the jury trial divisions.

In Class I counties, to include almost any county with a judicial bench of more than 5 judges, the initial filing of a civil action, either by Writ of Summons or by Complaint, must designate whether or not the case is being filed as an arbitration case, such that the filing party is not demanding damages in excess of the mandatory arbitration limits of $50,000.00, as opposed to designating that the filing party is seeking damages in excess of mandatory arbitration limits, such that the filing party is seeking damages greater than $50,000.00.

Irrespective of the county, cases that are filed as arbitration-level cases are routinely scheduled to be arbitrated within nine (9) months of the initial pleading filing date, although that date is subject to extension, particularly if the filing party has not perfected service of the initial pleading on the party being sued.

The PRCP controls service of original process with service to be perfected either by the Sheriff of the county in which service is sought, although service is permitted to be perfected in Philadelphia County by a competent adult, or in any other county, it must be perfected by deputized service.

Service is required to be perfected within thirty (30) days after issuance of the Writ or the Complaint.  If service is not perfected within that timeframe, a Praecipe must be filed, to reinstate the originally-filed pleading.

Serving an individual Defendant requires that original process be handed to the original Defendant, and they can be served either at their residence, or “at any office or usual place of business”, such that an individual Defendant that does not reside in, for instance, Philadelphia, can still be served in Philadelphia, if the individual has either an office or usual place of business in Philadelphia, or, for that matter, any other county in which service is being sought.

Service is permitted by mail or by alternative means, if the individual or party being served either refused service, or avoids service.

Venue is also a very important procedural construct that should require consideration in the course of defending or evaluating any suit that has been filed against a client or insured.  Under the PRCP, an individual can only be served in a county in which the cause of action arose, or in which service can be properly perfected.  Corporations can also be sued in any county in which they regularly conduct business.

Dependent upon the county, the same scheduling requirement is not applicable in cases that are filed as jury trial matters.  In these types of cases, trial scheduling is county-by-county, with some counties, particularly the counties with larger demographics and higher docket counts, having implemented case management procedures, trafficking off of the Federal District Court case management procedure of setting fixed deadlines, at case initiation, for the completion of discovery, the production of expert reports, the scheduling of court-initiated conferences, and the placement of the case on the trial list, in an attempt to streamline case management, as well as in avoidance of an open-ended docket, with no fixed timelines being imposed upon the litigants.

No less true, it is important to consider the procedural rules applicable to service, after the filing of a civil action, as the filing party is required to perfect service on the party being sued within thirty (30) days of the case initiation, and that rule can be particularly important, in any case that is filed at or near the expiration of whatever statute of limitations is applicable, with a two year statute of limitations being applicable in any tort-based litigation, and a four year statute of limitations being applicable in any contract-based litigation.

The failure to perfect timely service can result in the potential dismissal of the civil action for failure to prosecute.

If a civil case is timely filed within the two year statute of limitations and is timely served on the party being sued, the party being sued is then required, under the PRCP, in avoidance of a potential default, to file a response to the initial Complaint, either by filing an Answer, in which the responding party either admits or denies the allegations in the initial Complaint, as well as setting forth, in New Matter, all affirmative defenses to the action being pled, or the responding party must file Preliminary Objections, there being limited bases to object to the allegations in a Complaint, although certain objections must be made at the outset of the case, to include objections required to be pled under PRCP No. 1028, as to lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, improper venue, improper form or service of a Writ or Complaint, impertinent allegations, insufficient specificity in a pleading, or the leading insufficiency of a pleading, referred to as a demurrer, the lack of capacity to sue, pendency of prior actions or agreements, the failure to exhaust statutory remedies, or the existence of a full and complete non-statutory remedy.

The requirement of filing a response within twenty (20) days of the timely service of an initial pleading, typically a Complaint, can result in the party filing the Complaint seeking a Default Judgment against the party failing to respond.

In Pennsylvania, the typical practice is that attorneys filing civil actions will grant the responding party a “reasonable extension”, typically limited to thirty (30) days from the date upon which an Answer should have been filed to the Complaint, to allow the responding party more time to answer the initial pleading.

Although formal extensions regarding the filing of responses in federal courts require the filing of a Stipulation, the same is not true in state court, as the extension is often merely confirmed in writing, although the party granting the extension is then empowered to take a default against the party granted the extension, if the party that was granted the extension does not file the responsive pleading within the agreed-upon extension timeframe.

In counties with a formal case management administrative procedure, cases are often scheduled for either arbitration or trial at the initial outset of the case, either by court notice, or through a court-mandated case management conference.

In counties that do not have a formal case management administrative procedure, the counties often require a case to be scheduled for arbitration and/or trial through the filing of an Arbitration/Trial Praecipe, the same often requiring all parties involved in a case to agree that the case is ripe to be listed for either arbitration or trial, such that the parties are representing to the Court, as well as to each other, that all relevant discovery has been completed, and that the case is ripe to be either arbitrated or tried.

Over the last 10+ years, there has generally been a movement within the judiciary of the more populated and docket-intense counties to require that civil actions be “trial ready”, either for arbitration and/or trial, within approximately 12-18 months of the initial pleading being filed of record with the Court.

Taking Philadelphia as an example, from the initial filing of the Writ or Complaint initiating the action, Philadelphia Judges expect the parties to have the case ready to be placed in a civil jury trial pool between 12-18 months after the initial filing.

Absent the parties requesting and being granted an extension, Philadelphia will place the case in a civil jury trial pool, assigning it to a judge team leader, as of a point approximately 12-18 months post-initial filing, with the judge team leader being empowered to pull any case out of the judge’s civil trial pool, and to then have the matter listed for trial, with the judge team leader only being required to give the parties 24 hours’ notice that the case is being listed for trial.

Twenty-four hour notice is often limited to a phone call from the judge team leader’s office, the day before the judge team leader notifies the parties that they will begin to pick a jury and try the case, the very next day.

It is extremely rare, in Philadelphia County, for the parties to be given a “date certain” for trial, as opposed to this practice being more routine in suburban and rural counties, although it is possible to secure a “date certain” trial date in Philadelphia County, but only if the parties make certain representations to the Court, to include that the case will take more than 5 days to try, that the trial of the case must be coordinated around the scheduling of expert trial depositions, and/or that the trial will involve witnesses being called from out-of-state, around which travel must be coordinated.

Outside of Philadelphia, the following local counties require Trial Praecipes to be placed on the Court’s trial list:

  • Montgomery County
  • Berks County
  • Lancaster County
  • Schuylkill County
  • Northampton County
  • Lehigh County
  • York County
  • Dauphin County
  • Luzerne County
  • Lackawanna County.

Counties that operate off of a “one year” from initial filing trial scheduling include Chester and Delaware County, although this rule is observed more in the breach than in strict conformity to the local county rules.

Irrespective of the county in which the litigation is pending, certain procedures must be observed, to include:

  • Tracking electronic dockets for initial filing and service;
  • Tracking dockets for court-imposed case management deadlines;
  • Confirming extensions for filing pleadings and responding to discovery;
  • Coordination of witness depositions after written discovery has been exchanged;
  • Coordination of the production of expert reports;
  • Coordination of expert trial depositions, if experts are not testifying live at trial;
  • Coordination of filing deadlines for case-dispositive motions;
  • Coordination with trial judges for settlement and pre-trial conferences.

Over the last 5 years, a significant number of counties in Pennsylvania, to include, most prominently, Philadelphia County, have moved towards electronic filing, following the lead initiated by the Federal District Court system.

Electronic filing permits not only the monitoring of court dockets, but also the filing of pleadings and motions with the court, typically filing with either a Prothonotary or an official court clerk charged with monitoring litigation.

Keep in mind that we can quickly check any local court rule, as we have access to all local county rules for Philadelphia, Bucks, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware, Berks, Lehigh, Lancaster, York, Dauphin, Schuylkill, Northampton, Luzerne, Lackawanna and Pike Counties.

Anyone having any questions about the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, local county procedural rules, or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should feel free to contact one of our Casualty Practice Group attorneys, to include:

Kevin L. Connors, Esquire

John J. Muldowney, Esquire

Patricia Burns Horn, Esquire

Robert P. Horn, Esquire

Lauren C. Damiano, Esquire.

Thank you.

ConnorsLaw LLP

Trust us, we just get it!

It is trust well spent!

Defending liability-based lawsuits throughout Pennsylvania, on behalf of insurance carriers, third-party administrators, and self-insured businesses and corporations, our 100+ years of cumulative experience defending our clients against negligence and occurrence-based liabilities, empowers our Casualty Practice Trial Group attorneys to be entrusted to create the factual and legal leverage to expeditiously resolve lawsuits and claims, in the course of limiting/reducing/extinguishing our clients’ potential liabilities under Pennsylvania’s common law, trial practices, and rules of civil procedure.

With every member of our trial practice group being AV-rated, our partnership with the Pennsylvania Defense Institute and the Counsel on Litigation Management magnifies the lens through which our professional expertise imperiously demands that we remain dynamic and exacting advocates for our clients, the same being businesses, corporations, insurance carriers, seeking our trial and litigation acumen, to navigate the frustrating and liability-intensive minefield pervasive throughout Pennsylvania trial practice and procedure.

Questions concerning tort and/or contract liability that might arise in the context of casualty claims can be directed to Kevin L. Connors at [email protected] (Phone: 610-524-2100 Ext. 112).