vol p. 373 tuesday, july 21, 2020 the legal intelligencer ... · 20/02/2019 · vol p. 375...

14 • THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER T U E S D A Y, D E C E M B E R 8 , 2 0 2 0 VOL P. 2918

CLASSIFIEDS When results matter

Ranked by Alexa#1 Global Legal Job Site

ATTORNEY WANTED ATTORNEY WANTED ATTORNEY WANTED

Find us on facebook www.facebook.com/legalintelligencer

Do you need

to reach the

best candidates

in Pennsylvania’s

legal market?

Look for Great Results with

The Legal Intelligencer’s Newly

Re-designed Classified Section

Call our Recruitment Advertising

consultant today at for more information.

ATTORNEY

Civil rights Philadelphia law firm seeks associate with 2 to 4 years of experience in civil rights litigation with excellent writing skills. Must be admitted in Pa. & N.J.

Send Resume to: [email protected]

ATTORNEY

Defense firm seeking mid-level litigation

associate for Cherry Hill, New Jersey office to

fill Healthcare/Medical Malpractice position.

Candidate must be experienced in New Jersey

and Pennsylvania practice. Strong writing skills

necessary. Competitive benefits and salary.

Submit resume and writing sample to:

[email protected]

Central New Jersey Law Firm seeks associate with a minimum of two years of experience to join the personal injury department. Candidate must possess excellent research and writing skills. Pennsylvania Bar admission is a plus.

Please submit resume and salary requirements to:

[email protected] Rabstein & Altman

989 Lenox Drive, Suite 101, Lawrenceville, NJ 08648

PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY

ATTORNEYS - TWO

Casualty defense & Subrogation - commercial lines.

All experience levels considered. Flexible with remote

working. Great hands-on complex litigation opportunity,

growing 12 lawyer firm. Handle your own caseload - all

aspects. Aggressive compensation, reasonable hours,

professional atmosphere, good benefits. Will consider

laterals with portable business.

Email resume and compensation expectations.

LUCAS and CAVALIER, LLC 1500 Walnut Street.

[email protected]

VOL P. 2919 T U E S D A Y, D E C E M B E R 8 , 2 0 2 0 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER • 15

LEGAL EXPERTS & SERVICESINVESTIGATORS LEGAL SERVICES

Follow us on Twitterwww.twitter.com/thelegalintel

TO PLACE

A CLASSIF IED ADVERTISEMENT

CALL:Mitchell Cohn

973-854-2905

EMAIL : [email protected] ,

DEADLINE: 1PM EST

CIPRIANO INVESTIGATIONS

Nick Cipriano Office: 215-953-6833 | Cell: 215-870-1510

www.ciprianoinvestigations.comEmail: [email protected]

A Complete Information Source

Service of Process Document Retrieval


NOTICE TO COUNSELYour attention is directed toSection 3162 of the Probate,Estates and Fiduciaries Codeof June 30, 1972 (Act No.164) which requires advertise-ment of grant of letters to con-tain the name and address ofthe personal representatives.

ORPHANS’ COURT OFPHILADELPHIA COUNTY

Letters have been granted on theEstate of each of the followingdecedents to the representativesnamed, who request all personshaving claims against the Estateto present them in writing and allpersons indebted to the Estate tomake payment to them (unlessotherwise noted all addresses be-ing in Philadelphia)

ALEXANDER, BARBARA --Chad Alexander, Executor c/oDavid N. Rubin, Esq., 1500 JFKBlvd., Suite 1030, Philadelphia,PA 19102; David N. Rubin, Atty.,1500 JFK Blvd., Suite 1030, Phila-delphia, PA 19102.

11-24-3*

ALVAREZ, JOSE -- Michael A.Dewees, Jr., Executor, c/o S. StacyMogul, Esq., 135 S. 19th St., Ste.200, Philadelphia, PA 19103-4907;S. Stacy Mogul, Atty., Heiligmanand Mogul, P.C. 135 S. 19th St.,Ste. 200, Philadelphia, PA 19103-4907.

12-1-3

APPLE, JEANNE M. -- Lynne J.Lombardo, Executor, 35 ConnorDrive, Royersford, PA 19468;Matthew M. Maertzig, Atty., 375Horsham Road, Suite 100, Hor-sham, PA 19044.

11-24-3*

BRICKNER, LAWRENCEFREDERICK JR. (a/k/a LAW-RENCE BRICKNER, LAW-RENCE F. BRICKNER, JR.) --Charles A. Halpin, III, Adminis-trator, The Land Title Bldg., 100S. Broad St., 1830, Philadelphia,PA 19110; Charles A. J. Halpin,III, Atty., The Land Title Bldg.,100 S. Broad St., 1830, Philadel-phia, PA 19110.

12-1-3

CLARK, ALPHONSO, JR. --Kristen Behrens, Administratrix,457 Haddonfield Rd., Ste. 700,Cherry Hill, NJ 08002; Kristen L.Behrens, Atty., Dilworth Paxson,LLP, 457 Haddonfield Rd., Ste.700, Cherry Hill, NJ 08002..

12-1-3

DILCESE, NANILIA -- CharlesA. Halpin, III, Administrator, TheLand Title Bldg., 100 S. Broad St.,1830, Philadelphia, PA 19110;Charles A. J. Halpin, III, Atty.,The Land Title Bldg., 100 S.Broad St., 1830, Philadelphia, PA19110.

12-1-3

EL KARADISI, AHMED -- Re-becca Sallen, Administratrix, 1350Green Hill Ave., West Chester, PA19380; Rebecca Sallen, Atty. ,Sallen Law, 1350 Green Hill Ave.,West Chester, PA 19380.

12-1-3

GUENTHER, LIZETTE -- MariaVirginia Guadalupe, Executrix, c/oStephen M. Howard, Esq., 605 N.Broad St., Lansdale, PA 19446;Stephen M. Howard, Atty., 605 N.Broad St., Lansdale, PA 19446.

12-1-3

HARDMAN, FRANCIS (a/k/aFRANK J. HARDMAN) --Charles A. Halpin, III, Adminis-trator, The Land Title Bldg., 100S. Broad St., 1830, Philadelphia,PA 19110; Charles A. J. Halpin,III, Atty., The Land Title Bldg.,100 S. Broad St., 1830, Philadel-phia, PA 19110.

12-1-3

LAPETINA, JOHN CHARLES(a/k/a JOHN C. LAPETINA) --Joseph P. Lapetina, Executor, c/oPaul H. Masciantonio, Esq., 1806Callowhill St., Philadelphia, PA19130; Paul H. Masciantonio,Atty., 1806 Callowhill St., Phila-delphia, PA 19130.

12-1-3

LEE, RONALD LORENZO --Jeanne Lee, Administratrix, c/oSean Murphy, Esq., 340 N. Lans-downe Ave., Lansdowne, PA19050; Sean Murphy, Atty., 340N. Lansdowne Ave., Lansdowne,PA 19050.

12-1-3

LUNING, RAYMOND F., SR.(a/k/a RAYMOND LUNING) --Thomas A. Connor, Executor, c/oKeelin S. Barry, Esq., 1700 Mar-ket St., Ste. 1005, Philadelphia, PA19103; Keelin S. Barry, Atty., LawOffice of Keelin S. Barry, LLC,1700 Market St., Ste. 1005, Phila-delphia, PA 19103.

12-1-3

MAIER, AGNES LEE (a/k/aAGNES MAIER) -- Ronald D.Friedman, Executor, c/o StephenH. Frishberg, Esq., 50 S. 16th St.,Ste. 3530, Philadelphia, PA 19102;Stephen H. Frishberg, Atty.,Dolchin, Slotkin & Todd, P.C., 50S. 16th St., Ste. 3530, Philadelphia,PA 19102.

12-1-3

MARINO, CAMILLO T. (a/k/aCAMILLO MARINO) -- DonaldWeyler, Jr., Executor, c/o HenryM. Clinton, Esq., Queen Memori-al Bldg., 1313 S. 33rd St., Philadel-phia, PA 19146; Henry M.Clinton, Atty., Law Firm of Hen-ry M. Clinton, LLC, Queen Me-morial Bldg., 1313 S. 33rd St.,Philadelphia, PA 19146.

12-1-3

MELCHIORE, LORETTA --John Della Rocca, Executor, 1500JFK Blvd., Ste. 520, Philadelphia,PA 19102; John Della Rocca,Atty., 1500 JFK Blvd., Ste. 520,Philadelphia, PA 19102.

12-1-3

MORRIS, RONALD GEORGE --Basil A. Cooper, Executor, c/oJohn F. X. Fenerty, Jr., Esq., 2661Huntingdon Pike, HuntingdonValley, PA 19006; John F. X.Fenerty, Jr., Atty., The FenertyLaw Firm, L.L.C., 2661Huntingdon Pike, HuntingdonValley, PA 19006.

12-1-3

Notice is hereby given of the ad-ministration of the VERNESSERM. JONES TRUST DTD 10/30/02,Settlor, late of Philadelphia, Phila-delphia County, PA died 3/9/20.All persons having claims againstthe decedent are requested tomake known the same, and all per-sons indebted to the decedent arerequired to make payment withoutdelay to: Carlos Jones Trustee c/oPatricia A. Coacher, Esq., 166 Al-lendale Road, King of Prussia, PA19406.

12-8-3*

NUNEZ, EMIL G. -- Joseph W.Bullen, III, Administrator, P.O.Box 217, Lansdowne, PA 19050-0217; Joseph W. Bullen, III, Atty.,Hennessy & Bullen, P.O. Box 217,Lansdowne, PA 19050-0217.

12-1-3

OLDAK, GLENN MICHAEL --Kathryn Oldak, Executor c/o An-gela D. Giampolo, Esq.,Giampolo Law Group, 1221Locust St., Suite 202, Philadephia,PA 19107; Angela D. Giampolo,Atty., Giampolo Law Group, 1221Locust St., Suite 202, Philadephia,PA 19107.

12-1-3*

PLUMMER, SEBASTIAN R. --Karen L. Bush, Administratrix,c/o 104 North York Road, Hat-boro, PA 19040; Laura M .Mercuri, Atty., 104 North YorkRoad, Hatboro, PA 19040.

12-8-3*

RAFFA, JOANN D. (a/k/aJOANN RAFFA) -- Charles A.Halpin, III, Administrator, TheLand Title Bldg., 100 S. Broad St.,1830, Philadelphia, PA 19110;Charles A. J. Halpin, III, Atty.,The Land Title Bldg., 100 S.Broad St., 1830, Philadelphia, PA19110.

12-1-3

RICHARDS, ARADEAN L. (a/k/aARADEAN RICHARDS) -- JamesE. Monk, Executor, c/o LenHaberman, Esq., 1800 JFK Blvd.,Ste. 1500-A, Philadelphia, PA19103; Len Haberman, Atty.,Haberman Law, P.C., 1800 JFKBlvd., Ste. 1500-A, Philadelphia,PA 19103.

12-1-3

ROSENFELD, ROSE -- RuthKatz, Executrix, c/o Michael D.Rubin, Esq., 686 Gray Circle,Southampton, PA 18966; MichaelD. Rubin, Atty., Law Office Mi-chael D. Rubin, 686 Gray Circle,Southampton, PA 18966.

12-1-3

SIMMONS, CARLA R. -- CalvinLeon Simmons, Administrator, c/oSean Murphy, Esq., 340 N. Lans-downe Ave., Lansdowne, PA19050; Sean Murphy, Atty., 340N. Lansdowne Ave., Lansdowne,PA 19050.

12-1-3

WILLIAMS -- RICH, DIANERENEE (a/k/a DIANE RICH) --Jazmine N. Santos,Administratrix, c/o Karen L.Wolfe, Esq., 6377 GermantownAve., Philadelphia, PA 19144-1947; Karen L. Wolfe, Atty.,Commons & Commons, LLP,6377 Germantown Ave., Philadel-phia, PA 19144-1947.

12-1-3

WILSON, JANET J. -- Judy S.Wilson, Executrix, c/o JonathanH. Ellis, Esq., One Tower Bridge,100 Front St., Ste. 100, Consho-hocken, PA 19428; Jonathan H.Ellis, Atty., Flaster Greenberg PC,One Tower Bridge, 100 Front St.,Ste. 100, Conshohocken, P A19428.

12-1-3

Carlos B. Sports, Inc. has been in-corporated under the provisions ofthe Pennsylvania Business Corpo-ration Law of 1988.Bovarnick & Assocs., LLC1 South Broad StreetSuite 1600Philadelphia, PA 19107

12-8-1*

Commercial Roofing & Solar, Inc.has been incorporated under theprovisions of the PennsylvaniaBusiness Corporation Law of1988.Robin, Kramer & Green, LLP550 Pinetown Rd.Suite 410Fort Washington, PA 19034

12-8-1*

Digiovanni & Bradley, Inc. hasbeen incorporated under the provi-sions of the Pennsylvania BusinessCorporation Law of 1988.Bovarnick & Assocs., LLC1 South Broad StreetSuite 1600Philadelphia, PA 19107

12-8-1*

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIAORPHANS’ COURT DIVISION

Laurel Hill Cemetery Company, A Nonprofit CorporationO.C. No. 1414 NP of 2006

Control No. 204647

NOTICEThis Notice is published pursuant to the Preliminary Decree of the Courtdated November 19, 2020, requiring the following general notice via pub-lication in a newspaper of general circulation two (2) times and in TheLegal Intelligencer two (2) times. On November 9, 2020, Petitioner, BNYMellon, National Association, filed a Petition to Terminate and ApproveDistribution, Conditions and Costs/Fees (“Petition”) with the Orphans’Court Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.BNY Mellon, National Association requests approval to terminate cer-tain irrevocable trusts created for the sole benefit of particular plots lo-cated at Laurel Hill Cemetery, owned by Laurel Hill Cemetery Compa-ny, and West Laurel Hill Cemetery, owned by West Laurel Hill CemeteryCompany, and to distribute the remaining assets of such trusts to the ap-plicable cemetery to thereafter be used for the continuing benefit of plotslocated within.

Any objections to this Notice of Petition are to be filed in writing withthe Clerk of the Orphans’ Court Division on or before December 31,2020. If an objection is received, a hearing on the Petition will be sched-uled.

12-1-2*

1602 North Third CondominiumAssociation has been incorporatedunder the provisions of the PANonprofit Corporation Law of1988.

12-8-1*

24th and Federal CondominiumAssociation has been incorporatedunder the provisions of the PANonprofit Corporation Law of1988.

12-8-1*

508 West Norris CondominiumAssociation has been incorporatedunder the provisions of the PANonprofit Corporation Law of1988.

12-8-1*

Locomotive Content, Ltd. has beenincorporated under the provisionsof the Pennsylvania Business Cor-poration Law of 1988.

12-8-1*

Steggy, Inc. has been incorporatedunder the provisions of thePennsylvania Business Corpora-tion Law of 1988.Friedman, Schuman, PC101 Greenwood Ave.Fifth FloorJenkintown, PA 19046

12-8-1*

Germantown Square Condo Asso-ciation, Inc. has been incorporatedunder the provisions of the PANonprofit Corporation Law of1988.

12-8-1*

Solidarity, Inc. has been incorpo-rated under the provisions of thePA Nonprofit Corporation Lawof 1988.Philip E. Hughes, Jr., Esq.3936 Netherfield RoadPhiladelphia, PA 19129

12-8-1*

Washington Parks CondominiumAssociation has been incorporatedunder the provisions of the PANonprofit Corporation Law of1988.

12-8-1*

PUBLIC NOTICES 215.557.

ESTATE NOTICES

CORPORATE NOTICES

MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL NOTICES

NON-PROFIT C

Find us on facebook

www.facebook.com/legalintelligencer

VOL P. 2921 T U E S D A Y, D E C E M B E R 8 , 2 0 2 0 T H E L E G A L I N T E L L I G E N C E R • 1 7

DECEMBER 8

Wills of the Rich and FamousWebcast 9:00 AM to 1:15 PMCost: $249 Standard; $125 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals3 substantive/1 ethicsFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org How to Launch Your Successful Law FirmWebcast 2:15 PM to 5:30 PMCost: $199 Standard; $100 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals3 substantiveFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org Walk-ins welcome.

DECEMBER 9

Making Your Case With a Better MemoryWebcast 9:00 AM to 4:15 PMCost: $299 Standard; $150 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals6 substantiveFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org Handling the Workers’ Comp CaseWebcast Replay 9:30 AM to 3:30 PMCost: $199 Standard; $100 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals

5 substantive/1 ethicsFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org

DECEMBER 10

Legislative Update Webcast 9:00 AM to 4:30 PMCost: $279 Standard; $140 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals5 substantive/1 ethicsFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org

Drafting and Using POAsWebcast Replay 10:00 AM to 1:00 PMCost: $249 Standard; $125 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals2 substantive/1 ethicsFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org

DECEMBER 11

Year in Review for the General Practitioner Webcast 9:00 AM to 1:30 PMCost: $279 Standard; $140 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals3 substantive/1 ethicsFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org

On the Inside and Out: Excessive Force, Police Brutality and Prisoner Rights Cases Webcast 2:30 PM to 5:10 PMCost: $149 Standard; $75 Attorneys licensed 5 years or less, judicial law clerks & paralegals2.5 substantiveFor more information contact PBI Customer Service at 800-247-4PBI or go to: www.pbi.org

L E G A L L I S T I N G S

C O U R T N O T I C E S

C O M I N G E V E N T S

I N S I D E

Department Of RecordsAs of September 21, 2020 all instruments left for record are ready for delivery

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

ORDER AMENDING RULES 515 AND 516 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BEFORE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES

::::::::

NO. 449

MAGISTERIAL RULES DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 4th day of December, 2020, upon the recommendation of the Minor Court Rules Committee, the proposal having been submitted without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3):

It is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rules 515 and 516 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure Before Magisterial District Judges are amended in the attached form.

This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall be effec-tive on January 1, 2021.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined.Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets.

Rule 515. Request for Order for Possession

A. If the magisterial district judge has rendered a judgment arising out of a non-residential lease that the real property be delivered up to the landlord, the landlord may, after the 15th day fol-lowing the date of the entry of the judgment, file with the magisterial district judge a request for an order for possession. The request shall include a statement of the judgment amount, return, and all other matters required by these rules.

B. (1) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision B(2), if the magisterial district judge has rendered a judgment arising out of a residential lease that the real property be delivered up to the landlord, the landlord may after the 10th day but within [120] 180 days following the date of the entry of the judgment, file with the magisterial district judge a request for an order for possession. The request shall include a statement of the judgment amount, return, and all other matters required by these rules.

17 Coming Events

20 Common Pleas Court

21 Civil Trial List

18 Federal Court

21 Orphan’s Court

21 Supreme Court

21 U.S. Bankruptcy Court

21 Hearings

21 Court of Appeals

21 District Court

(2) In a case arising out of a residential lease, if before the landlord requests an order for possession,

(a) an appeal or writ of certiorari operates as a supersedeas; or

(b) proceedings in the matter are stayed pursuant to a bankruptcy pro-ceeding or other federal or state law; and

(c) the supersedeas or the bankruptcy or other stay is subsequently strick-en, dismissed, lifted, or otherwise terminated so as to allow the landlord to proceed to request an order for possession,

the landlord may request an order for possession only within [120] 180 days of the date the super-sedeas or the bankruptcy or other stay is stricken, dismissed, lifted, or otherwise terminated.

Official Note: The 15 days in subdivision A of this rule, when added to the 16-day period provided for in Rule 519A, will give the tenant time to obtain a supersedeas within the appeal period. See Rules 1002, 1008, 1009, and 1013.

The 1995 amendment to section 513 of The Landlord and Tenant Act of 1951, 68 P.S. § 250.513, established a 10-day appeal period from a judgment for possession of real estate arising out of a residential lease. See also Rule 1002B(1). Rule 1002B(2)(a) provides for a 30-day appeal period for tenants who are victims of domestic violence. In most cases, the filing of the request for an order for possession in subdivision B(1) is not permitted until after the appeal period has expired. In cases arising out of a residential lease, the request for an order for possession generally must be filed within [120] 180 days of the date of the entry of the judgment.

If the tenant is a victim of domestic violence, he or she may file a domestic violence affidavit to stay the execution of the order for possession until the tenant files an appeal with the prothonotary pursuant to Rule 1002, 30 days after the date of entry of the judgment, or by order of the court of common pleas, whichever is earlier. See Rule 514.1C. No posting of money or bond is required to obtain a stay with the filing of a domestic violence affidavit; however, upon the filing of an appeal pursuant to Rule 1002, the stay is lifted, and the supersedeas requirements of Rule 1008 shall apply.

The magisterial district court shall enter stays in compliance with federal or state law, such as the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 3901 et seq. Subdivision B(2) provides that in a case arising out of a residential lease, if a supersedeas(resulting from an appeal or writ of certiorari) or bankruptcy or other stay is stricken, dismissed, lifted, or otherwise terminated, thus allowing the landlord to proceed with requesting an order for possession, the request may be filed only within [120] 180 days of the date the supersedeas or the bankruptcy or other stay is stricken, dismissed, lifted, or otherwise terminated.

Court Notices continues on 23


COURT OF APPEALS

CASES LISTED FORDISPOSITION

TUE., DEC. 8, 2020Jacobs v. Cumberland County, et al., Appellant

(SUBMIT); 19-3269.Soutner, Appellant v. Penn State Health, et al.

(SUBMIT); 20-1763.Lopez-Reyes, et al., Petitioners v. Att. Gen. of

the U.S., et al. (SUBMIT); 20-1862.Sisco, Appellant v. Comm. of Social Security

(SUBMIT); 20-2101.

TUE., DEC. 8, 2020

ZOOM CONFERENCEBracy, Appellant v. Pfizer Inc. (SUBMIT);

20-1266.USA v. Alexander, Appellant (SUBMIT);

19-3423.USA v. Brooks, Appellant (SUBMIT); 19-3562.American Resort Development Association, et

al., Appellants v. Gov. of the Virgin Islands (ARGUE); 20-1964.

Great Bay Condominium Owners Association, Inc., Appellants v. Gov. of the Virgin Islands, et al. (ARGUE); 20-1965.

Gov. of the Employees Retirement System of the VI, Appellants v. Gov. of the Virgin Islands, et al. (ARGUE); 20-1749.

Gov. of the Employees Retirement System of the VI, Appellant v. Gov. of the Virgin Islands, et al. (ARGUE); 20-1766.

DISTRICT COURT

NOTICE1. Counsel shall promptly notify the dep-uty clerk to each judge before whom he/she has a case listed upon becoming attached for trial in another court. To be accorded recognition, a busy slip, using the designated form, MUST be filed in Room 2609 before 1 p.m. on the day after counsel becomes attached.2. Cases in the trial pools do not necessar-ily appear in the order in which they will be called. Counsel should therefore be ready to begin trial upon receiving telephone call notice, subject to the following:(a) Counsel whose cases are in the pools will be given 48 hours’ notice, if feasible, but not less than 24 hours notice to ready for trial with witnesses.(b) It is counsel’s responsibility to check with each judge’s deputy clerk on the status and movement of criminal and civil cases in that judge’s pool.(c) Counsel will not be required to com-mence trial less than 24 hours after com-pleting trial of another case.

J. SANCHEZChief Judge

SANCHEZ, CH.J. Scheduling Courtroom Deputy: Nancy DeLisle

Phone: (267) 299-7789ESR/Courtroom Deputy: Stacy Wertz

Phone: (267) 299-7781

______

P. B. TUCKER, J.Courtroom Deputy: Kimberly Scott-Hayden

Phone: 267-299-7619

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 20209:30 A.M.CR2019-000463-0 F. Weber

United States of America v.Jose Manuel Figueroa

K. Young

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-000377-0 J. OrtizUnited States of America v.Ricardo Carrion

B. Cooper

C.M. RUFE, J.Scheduling/Deputy Clerk: Velma T. White

Phone: (267) 299 -7490Fax: (267) 299-5077

ESR/Courtroom Deputy: Erica PrattPhone (267) 299-7499

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2018-417- V. Gauri, AUSA

United States of America v.Rodney KentP. Levin, Esq.

CR2018-578- J. Grenell, AUSA

United States of America v.Luis Enrique Rodriguez-Sebastian

L. Savino, Jr., Esq.CR2018-590- J. Labrum, III AUSA

United States of America v.Juan Alicide Abreu-Espinosa

M. Isenberg, Esq.CR2019-267- S. Solow, AUSA

United States of America v.Brian HowellC. Martir, Esq.

CR2019-548- K. Newton, AUSAUnited States of America v.Dimitre Hadjiev

P. Scuderi, Esq.

T. J. SAVAGE, J.Courtroom 9A

Courtroom Deputy: Alex Eggert Phone: 267-299-7599

Judicial Secretary: Joanne TyerPhone 267-299-7480

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020Specially Listed

Criminal Jury Trial9:00 A.M.CR2018-000582-0 L. C. Wright

United States of America v.Leroy WattsL. T. Savino

CR2019-000336-0 P. T. DeSouza; P. T. DeSouzaUnited States of America v.Malcolm Xavier

TaylorM. T. Wilson; W. J. Brennan

CR2019-000537-0 S. SchlessingerUnited States of America v.Michael Miller

K. YoungCR2019-000584-0 M. B. WilmothUnited States of America v.Shantel Foxworth

N. CaravasosCR2020-000027-0 M. S. Miller

United States of America v.Lawrence Nathaniel Galloway

E. ToplinCR2019-000336-0 P. T. DeSouza; P. T. DeSouza

United States of America v.Michael Whitehurst

M. T. Wilson; W. J. BrennanCR2019-000365-0 M. B. Dubnoff; S. A. Solow

United States of America v.Jarrett Melvin Tarn

S. P. PatrizioCR2019-000676-0 M. CurranUnited States of America v.Richard Meleski

N. MacEoin

G.E.K. PRATTER, J. Secretary/Civil Deputy: Susan.Flaherty

Phone: (267) 299-7350Courtroom/Criminal Deputy: Mike Coyle

Phone: (267) 299-7359

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 20209:30 A.M.2016-05874

Joseph H. Lewis, Jr. v.University of Pennsylvania

______

On Trial9:30 A.M.2013-07556SHAWN T. WALKER v.FRANK REGAN

______

P.S. DIAMOND, J.Courtroom 14-A

Secretary/Courtroom Deputy: Richard ThiemePhone: (267) 299-7730

Criminal Courtroom Deputy: Lenora Kashner Wittje

Phone: (267) 299-7739r


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2018-013- J. R. Arteaga

U.S. v.Vines, et al.R. D. Thompson; S. J. Britt

CR2020-314- R. LivermoreU.S. v.Williams, et al.

R. Goldman


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-368- K. T. Newton

U.S. v.TantushyanJ. H. Ibrahim; B. J. Zeiger; L. J. Bozzelli;

G. G. Besnilian; A. R. Kessel; P. J. Hetznecker


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-044- M. Curran

U.S. v.SimpsonA. Halim

CR2020-204- F. WeberU.S. v.Henderson

A. Joseph

TUE., JANUARY 12, 2021On Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2019-257- A. Reinitz

U.S. v.BarnetteR. D. Thompson

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-017- J. T. Labrum

U.S. v.AdamesC. O. Reynolds

SAT., JANUARY 16, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-013- P. T. Desouza

U.S. v.Shawn BrownJ. J. McHugh, Jr.


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-538- J. A. LaBar

U.S. v.HopperA. C. Joseph

TUE., FEBRUARY 2, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-710- K. T. Newton

U.S. v.McCorkleJ. P. Green, Jr.

CR2020-115- A. R. ReinitzU.S. v.Ashford, Bodie & Rhodes

C. A. Martir; R. P. Lowe; L. J. Bozzelli


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-112- T. A. Marinari

U.S. v.ClarkeE. M. Cohen

SAT., MARCH 20, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-132- D. S. Wolf

U.S. v.CarthonE. Toplin; K. M. Gaughan

TUE., MARCH 30, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-210- E. Gibson

U.S. v.MyersN. Gorson

TUE., APRIL 6, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-588- N. Rue

U.S. v.MorganA. Halim

C. D. JONES II, J.Courtroom 15-B

Secretary/ Civil Deputy: Jamie McDermottPhone: 267-299-7750

Courtroom/Criminal Deputy: A’iShah L. El-ShabazzPhone: 267-299-7759

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2018-467- F. Costello

United States of America v.Carla SlaterM. Jayaraman

Civil Jury Trial2016-2348

Tacconelli v.Taconelli______

2017-2894Pham v.Quadgen

______

Specially ListedCriminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2019-270- A. Eve.

United States of America v.Mark GreenT. Fitzpatrick

M.S. GOLDBERG, J.

Secretary/ Civil Deputy: Sharon LippiPhone: 267-299-7500

Criminal Deputy: Steve SonniePhone:267-299-7509

______

QUINONES ALEJANDRO, J.Courtroom 8B

Secretary/Civil Deputy, Nicole Phillippi(267) 299-7460

Criminal Deputy Clerk, Rosalind Burton-Hoop(267) 299-7467

FRI., DECEMBER 11, 2020On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2018-580- R. E. Eckert AUSAUnited States of America v.Roberto 7DeJesus

NegrinG. S. Silver Esq.

FRI., JANUARY 29, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-257- S. T. Damiani AUSA

United States of America v.Leonardo Dan Almonte-Fernandez

R. Mozenter Esq.

SCHMEHL, J.Criminal Deputy Tanya L. Allender

Phone: 610-320-5030Secretary/civil Deputy: Barbara A. Crossley

Phone: 610-320-5099The Gateway Building

201 Penn St.Room 518

Reading, PA 196013rd flr., Rm. 3041 when in Phila.


Civil Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2015-005820

Thomas W. Olick v.City of EastonD. J. MacMain

2015-05820 T. W. OlickThomas W. Olick v.Commonwealth of PA,

City of EastonD. J. MacMain

2018-04121 T. TOMLINSONSAMANTHA ROOS-MEISER v.USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

______

G.A. MCHUGH, J.Civil Deputy: Patricia Clark

Phone: 267 299-7301Criminal Deputy: Christian Henry

Phone: 267-299-7307

______

E.G. SMITH, J.Civil Deputy Clerk, Shana Restucci

(610)333-1836Criminal Courtroom Deputy Clerk Jennifer Fitzko

(610) 333-1837Holmes Building

4th Flr.101 Larry Holmes Dr.Easton, PA 18042-7722

610-333-18334th Flr. Rm. 4000 when in Phila.

______

BEETLESTONE, J.Courtroom 3B

Civil Deputy Aaris Wilson (267) 299-7450,

Criminal Deputy Nelson Malave(267) 299-7459

______

KEARNEY, J.Deputy Clerk: Ulrike Hevener

(267) 299-7688

______

PAPPERT, J.Civil Deputy Katie Furphy

(267) 299-7530Criminal Deputy Jeff Lucini

(267) 299-7537

______

J.F. LEESON, JR., J.Civil Duputy Clerk: Diane J. Abeles

(610) 391-7020Criminal Deputy: Justin F. Wood

(610) 776-6118Chambers of the Honorable Joseph F. Leeson, Jr..

United States District CourtEastern District of PA.

Edward N, Cahn U.S. Courthouse, Suite 3401504 W. Hamilton St.Allentown, PA 18101

4th Flr., Rm. 4000 when in Phila.


Criminal Jury Trial9:00 A.M.CR2019-000535-0 P. G. Shapiro; A. D. Kehner

USA v.Frances EddingsR. P. Lowe; J. L. Denis

C.F. KENNEY, J.Criminal Deputy: Christopher Kurek

phone 267-299-7549Civil Deputy: Shelli MacElderly

phone 267-299-7540Chambers of the Honorable Chad F. Kenney..

United States District CourtEastern District of PA.

______

J.D. WOLSON, J.J.D. WOLSON, J.Civil Deputy: Jeannine Abed

Phone: (267) 299-7321Criminal Deputy: Laura Buenzle

Phone: (267)299-7239


9:30 A.M.2018-4486 M. P. Murphy Jr.; P. Bansal; R. R. Stevens

Melissa Melendez v.A Step Above House Cleaning, Inc.

J. P. Hickey

J.M. YOUNGE, J.Courtroom A

Criminal Courtroom Deputy: Sean ArmsteadPhone: 267-299-7369

Civil Courtroom Deputy: Dedra BrannanPhone: 267-299-7360

MON., DECEMBER 21, 2020On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial2:00 P.M.CR0020-000255-1 S. Damiani

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.MAURICE ALEXANDER

R. Thompson

MON., JANUARY 11, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000383-0 M. Flannery

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.DONTE MATTHEWS

L. T. Savino Jr.


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000103-0 D. Ignall

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.QUINN MCLENDON

M. Meehan

THU., JANUARY 28, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000049-0 V. Guari

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.CORNELL-GREEN

K. Young; C. Henry


MON., FEBRUARY 22, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000232-1 J. LabrumUNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.JUAN

CACERES, ET AL.C. Cinquanto; G. Sciolla; M. Pedraza; P.

Bowers; L. Ortiz; J. Brown; J. Ongay

MON., MARCH 1, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000220-0 A. Glenn

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.WILLIAM K. WASHINGTON

K. Young


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000348-0 F. Weber

United States of America v.Donte TaylorN. Taylor-Smith


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR0020-000375-0 C. J. Mannion

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.BIANCHA KRANZLEY

A. C. Moon; C. C. Henry

K. S.. MARSTON, J.Courtroom TBA

Courtroom Deputy/Criminal: Lara Karlsonphone: 267-299-7379

______

J. M. GALLAGHER, J.Courtroom TBA

Courtroom Deputy/Criminal: Christine Steinphone: 610-391-7012

Courtroom Deputy Civil: Brian Dixonphone: 610-434-3457

______

R. F. KELLY, S.J.Courtroom 11B

Courtroom Deputy: Mark A. RaffertyPhone: 267-299-7319

Civil Deputy Clerk: Susan RenzPhone 215-597-0736

______

J. E. DUBOIS, S.J.Courtroom 12B

Courtroom Deputy: Milahn HullPhone: 267-299-7339

Trial Pool2013-005195 M. Brown; B. D. Dockwell; D. C. Lesser; J. B. Nimeroff; R. McGarryKilbridge Investments Limited v.Cushman &

Wakefield of Pennsylvania, Inc.J. Risk; B. D. Kelly; N. P. Heller; J. G.

Harkins Jr; A. Teitelman2015-000405 H. I. Pass; J. M. Scott; K. E. Chewing; R. G. Tuttle

Paramount Financial Communications, Inc. v.Broadrige Investor Communicaton

Solutions, Inc.C. A. Miller; M. O. Adelman; R. M.

Haggerty Jr.; A. M. Snodgrass Jr.2016-005796 J. H. FeinbergDavid Wichterman, Jr. v.City of Philadelphia

J. Cooper; T. J. Gregory

H. BARTLE, III, S.J.Courtroom 16A

Deputy Clerk: Kristin MakelyPhone: 267-299-7389


Criminal Jury Trial10:00 A.M.CR2019-000606-0 R. Eckert

USA v.William JohnsonR. Jarvis

CR2019-00690- B. BurkeUSA v.Charles Oliver

C. Henry

Trial PoolCivil Jury Trial

10:00 A.M.

2015-6082Noonan v.Kane

______2019-0794 L. Mattiacci; L. Schiff

Denham v.CHOPJ. Tucker Jr.; L. Greenspan Jr.

2019-3528 L. BermanHerron v.Pennbrook

T. Schaer2019-3604 A. J. Diulio

Balu v.The Cincinnati Insurance CompanyW. Krekstein

2019-4861 A. OleceseLeslie v.County of Chester

K. Ladow

J. R. PADOVA, S.J.Courtroom 17B

Criminal Deputy Clerk: Michael BeckPhone: 267-299-7409

Deputy Clerk Civil: Malissa WolenskiPhone: 267-299-7459

MON., DECEMBER 14, 2020Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2020-000373-0 A. Glenn

USA v.HuntN. Taylor - Smith

MON., JANUARY 11, 20219:30 A.M.CR2020-000038-0 A. Lastowski

USA v.Dominguez-RondonR. Lowe; L. Ortiz


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-000362-0 B. Burke

USA v.DeadwylerR. Thompson

MON., JANUARY 25, 2021Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2019-000439-0 J. Arteaga

USA v.HarrisM. Jayaraman

MON., FEBRUARY 8, 2021Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2020-000137-0 M. Rotella

USA v.GoerigK. Young

MON., FEBRUARY 22, 2021Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2019-000301-0 K. Harrell

USA v.BlongK. Young

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020Trial Pool

9:30 A.M.2020-000105 J. Lord

McNeil v.USAS. Reid

TUE., FEBRUARY 2, 2021Trial Pool

9:30 A.M.2020-000459 M. Natale

Jones v.AmazonJ. Settlemyer

J. C. JOYNER, S.J.Courtroom 17AChambers: Room 17614

Criminal Deputy: Sharon ScottPhone: 267-299-7419

Civil Deputy: Tashia ReynoldsPhone: 215-597-1537

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 20209:30 A.M.CR2019-547- T. A. MARINARI

USA v.DANIELLE HOLMESK. YOUNG

CR2020-89- K. L. JayneUSA v.Jose Alexander Reyes-Herrera

E. Toplin

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-391- R. J. LIVERMORE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.JASON RIVERA

J. NECHIN

On Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-313-

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.CLINTON BOSTIC

______10:00 A.M.CR2018-180-02UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.LUIS

ALGARIN-TORRES______

9:30 A.M.CR2018-180-01 J. M. MaiaticoUNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.LUIS

ALBERTO ROSADOM. F. Frumer; J. F. Alva

CR2018-503- R. J. LivermoreUNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.LAM

TRIEUJ. Kaye; P. G. Lieber; M. C. Rifkin

E. C. ROBRENO, S.J.Courtroom 15A

Deputy Clerk: Ronald VancePhone: 267-299-7429

______

A. B. BRODY, S.J.Courtroom 7B

Scheduling/Deputy Clerk: Joseph WaltonPhone: 215-597-3978

ESR-Courtroom Deputy: Jim ScheidtPhone: 267-299-7439

______

B. SCHILLER, S.J.Courtroom 13B

Secretary/Civil Deputy: Jean Pennie 267-299-7621

Courtroom/Criminal Deputy: Christopher Campoli

267-299-7629

______

R. SURRICK, S.J.Secretary Civil Deputy: Donna Donohue Marley

Phone: 267-299-7630Criminal Deputy Clerk: Patrick Kelly

Phone: 267-299-7639

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020Criminal Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.CR2019-000354-0UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.HAFIZ

ANTONIO MYRICK______

On Trial9:30 A.M.CR2018-000524-0

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.VICTOR CLAYTON

______CR2019-000053-0

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.JERMAINE JONES AND SEAN

WILLIAMS______

Trial Pool2011-006843 J. E. Wolfson Esquire; R. C. Nissen Esquire; E. A. Ware Esquire; N. H. Pennington Esquire; S. A. Scrivani Esquire

Ecore International, Inc. v.Paul DowneyD. A. Phillip Esquire; J. A. Handelman

Esquire; J. J. Theis Esquire; K. D. Kent Esquire; A. S. Gallinaro Esquire; J. R.

Sobieraj Esquire; J. H. Beaupre Esquire

M. BAYLSON, S.J.Secretary/Civil Deputy: Lori DiSanti

Phone: (267) 299-7520Criminal Deputy: Janice Lutz

Phone: (267) 299-7291


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-000063- D. Ignall

USA v.CharlesW. Brennan

CR2019-000254- T. WrightUSA v.Murdock

A. HalimCR2019-000452- D. Troyer

USA v.YoungM. Jayaraman

CR2020-000341- M. NewcomerUSA v.Sanchez

C. Henry

Civil Jury Trial9:00 A.M.

2018-000553 A. BUGAYELIOTT MIRANDA v.C.H. ROBINSON

COMPANYT. RAU

2018-005050 W. RIESLERKATHLEEN MCCAFFERY v.CREATIVE

HAIRDRESSERSM. HANAN

2018-005590 B. SALVINA; M. MURPHY JR.; P. BANSALTAMMY D v.RECYCLING EQUIP CORP

E. O SHEA2018-005591 B. SALVINA; M. MURPHY JR.; P. BANSALELLEN TORPEY v.RECYCLING EQUIP

CORPE. O SHEA

2018-005592 B. SALVINA; M. MURPHY JR.; P. BANSAL

MONIQUE DAVIS v.RECYCLING EQUIP CORP

E. O SHEA2019-000315 A. BARON; J. HOFFMAN; M. SIMON

JEFFREY JOHNSON v.USAAC. SCHWEIZER; D. RYAN JR.

MON., DECEMBER 14, 2020On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2020-00028- R. Benjamin

USA v.RiveraR. Thompson

WED., DECEMBER 16, 2020On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-000510- C. Mannion

USA v.PalmerH. Mattes

CR2020-000334- C. DivinyUSA v.Bullock

M. Wilson


Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2000-0170- J. Grenell

USA v.McIntoshL. Savino

WED., FEBRUARY 24, 2021On Trial

Criminal Jury Trial9:30 A.M.CR2019-000438- C. Diviny

USA v.PalmerR. Thompson

J. H. SLOMSKY, J.Courtroom Deputy: Matt

Higgins Courtroom Deputy: Matt Higgins

Phone: 267-299-7349Civil Deputy: Kelly Haggerty

Phone: 267-299-7340

______

T. J. RUETER, M.J.Courtroom 3C

Deputy Clerk: Debbie OwensPhone 215-597-0048

______

C. S. WELLS, M.J.Deputy Clerk: Edward Andrews

Phone: 215-597-7833

______

L.K. CARACAPPA, M.J.

Courtroom 5A Deputy Clerk: Ian Broderick

Phone: 267-299-7640

______

T.R. RICE, M.J.Deputy Clerk: Donna Croce

Phone: (267) 299-7660

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 20209:30 A.M.2019-1959 C. MANNO; K. DALY; M. I. SIMON; M. DOBSONTAYLOR NGUYEN v.THE HARTFORD

INSURANCEM. R. BOSNIAK

On TrialCivil Jury Trial

9:30 A.M.2017-4035 S. J. MENSING

DONALD D. TAYLOR v.SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITYA. C. LACHOWICZ; D. J. MCGRAVEY;

L. A. KAVULICH; B. J. SMITH; C. COOPER

2017-889 J. C. DODDS; M. DRAGALIN; J. M. SABALBARO; M. I. GORNY

DARUS LEON HUNTER v.PHILADELPHIA POLICE

DEPARTMENTD. P. CORTES; S. G. ZABEL

2019-1195 M. O. PANSINI; G. J. KOWALSKI; S. M. MEZROW

BRIAN VICARI v.BRUNSWICK CORPORATION

T. J. KEPNER; M. D. SHORT III; M. G. ZOLFO; W. J. RICCI

2019-2380 V. P. WILSONSANTOS KAMARA v.SEAN FLETCHER

L. FALCONE2019-3132 M. K. ALTEMOSE; K. RAMBO-WILLIAMS

RAMA SATTOUF v.STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

COMPANYG. A. DRAKAS

2019-3742 J. W. CHASE; C. P. SALTRYKEITH REGAN v.TEMPLE

UNIVERSITYN. J. HAMBURG; M. E. SACKS

Non-Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2015-5285 J. A. GRAN

MORGAN COHEN v.CHESTER CTY DEPT OF MENTAL HEALTH/

INTELLECTUALG. A. DONATELLI; R. E. LUSK; J. S.

DAVIS; K. L. JOEL

D.R. STRAWBRIDGE, M.J.Courtroom 3H

Deputy Clerk: Jenna GallelliPhone: (267) 299-7790

______

H.S. PERKIN, M.J..Courtroom 4A

504 Hamilton St.Room 4401

Allentown, PA 18101-1514


Civil Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2019-4016 D. L. DuffyNidia Solano-Sanchez v.State Farm Mutual

Auto Insurance CompanyG. A. Drakas; C. L. Kochel


Civil Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2020-2233 J. A. Cullen

Amanda Selvidio v.Hafizuddin KadriC. R. Breon

E.T. HEY, M.J.Courtroom Deputy: Mia Harvey

phone (267) 299-7670

______

L.A. SITARSKI, M.J.

Deputy Clerk: Regina M. ZarnowskiPhone: 267-299-7810

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 2020Specially ListedCivil Jury Trial

10:00 A.M.2017-2887 S. D. Brown; M. A. Fazio; R. Gledhill

ANDRE SMALLS v.EDGAR VAZQUEZS. G. Zabel

M. HEFFLEY, M.J.Deputy Clerk: Sharon A. Hall-Moore

Phone: 267-299-7420


Civil Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2018-2822 D. M. Koller; S. R. Lavelle


Shaneane Davis-Jackson v.American AirlinesS. B. Fask

2018-3864 N. N. PeckhamPenelope Kontoulis v.Enclara Pharmacia, Inc.

S. E. Hoffman; P. T. Collins2018-5500 M. P. Micciolo; R. J. Boyd

Erie Insurance Exchange v.Ford Motor Coompany

E. J. Rogers2019-1064 J. E. McCain III; Z. E. Moore

C. NICOLE HENDERSON v.MONTGOMERY COUNTY

COMMUNITY COLLEGES. K. Ludwig; B. A. Young

2019-1314 E. GiordanoNorris McLaughlin, P.A. v.Northampton

County General Purpose AuthorityJ. E. Freund III

2019-187 J. C. KilgannonHealthcare Services Group, Inc. v.Blue Ridge

Healthcare Montrose Bay, LLCC. E. Ezold

2019-2083 B. M. GinsburgAudra Gorman v.Lindsey Pino

J. I. Gordon2019-2117 J. D. Baer

Elena Rosario v.Brittany M. RandallG. L. Slocum

2019-23 M. I. Simon; M. G. McCarthyAlex Levy v.United Parcel Service

R. J. Sexton2019-2438 B. M. Ginsburg

Janet Graves v.New Prime, Inc.D. L. Jennings

2019-3235 M. A. WeinbergPatrick Walsh v.State Farm Fire Insurance

Co.S. D. Gioffre; P. A. Carlos

2019-4317 A. J. Aigeldinger IIICarl Frampton v.Interstate Management

Company, LLCS. J. Kokonos

2019-4526 J. W. Chase; C. W. Levko; C. P. Saltry

Sean Voiles v.Softerware, Inc.B. R. Picker; D. R. Moretzsohn

R.A. LLORET, M.J.

US Dist. Court601 Market St., Phila., PA 19106Chambers 4006

Courtroom Deputy Sheila McCurry267-299-7410

______

J. P. HART, M.J.Courtroom 3D

Chambers3006 U.S. Courthouse

Philadelphia, Pa.Court Deputy: Deborah Stevenson

Phone: 215-597-2733


Civil Jury Trial9:30 A.M.2019-0262 K. S. SAFFREN; J. D. SCHAFFER

LAMONT ANDERSON v.UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICEG. B. DAVID; L. M. SHENK; A. G.

CASIDY; A. L. LONGO2019-4511 L. R. Jubelirer

MATTHEW LYNCH v.PRIMECARE MEDICAL INC., et al.

J. R. Ninosky

COMMON PLEAS COURTCASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE LIST

CASE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMROOM 613 CITY HALL

Any questions regarding the Case Management Program should be directed to [email protected]

TUE., DECEMBER 8, 20209 A.M.

0011805-3240R. P. Whitehurst; S. M. Rothman

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v.Berry______

0021903-1275R. F. DatnerHawkins-Lewis v.Bartuah

J. J. McGrath0031904-1583D. Salaman

Ehmedi v.City Holdings, Llc et al.C. I. McCabe; J. Moon; P. J. Cohen

0041904-3183S. C. ToppinMack v.Parsley

______0051906-7403D. M. Bercovitch; J. E. Fine; J. C. Larosa

Shippen v.Pham et al.______

0061908-0358____________Sandoval v.Jefferson/All Unknown Occupants

______0071908-3178J. M. Rosenbaum; J. F. Hanahan

Hartfield et al. v.Lawson et al.D. W. Waties

0081909-0106E. B. Freedman; M. V. Phillips

Barsky v.Elebah Inc.A. K. Gonzalez; M. S. Arnold; D. M.

Tancredi; G. R. Heleniak0091909-1989J. P. Kerrigan

Philly Prop Re 2018, Llc v.Estate of Rita Klimash

______0101909-3421F. C. Depasquale

Gigliotti v.GrossK. J. Fox; K. R. McNulty

0111911-1263____________Roberts v.Moffett

______0121911-2781B. S. Chacker

Gerace v.Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility Et

T. J. Gregory0131911-3623M. L. Goldfield

Wilbanks v.Clemens Construction Co. Inc. et al.

M. J. Dunn; P. T. Kaczynski0142001-3754P. D. Press

Nguyen v.O’sullivanS. H. Eichler

0152002-1147B. R. CullinCity of Philadelphia v.Fisher

______0162002-2256P. Jimenez

Greenwood et al. v.Temple Univ. Hosp.______

0172003-1894R. M. MajorJenkins v.City of Philadelphia et al.

et al.C. M. Thurmond; T. A. Fabro

0182004-0143I. E. LeeCornick v.Burton et al.

______0192004-0670R. J. Snopek; R. L. Sachs; T. M. BlancoBowers v.Thomas Jefferson Univ. Hosp. et al.

K. M. Funaro; T. A. Vizza0202004-1085J. R. Lessin

Palmer-Mosley et al. v.St. Christopher Children’s H

E. L. Wilson; G. M. Samms; M. A. Diantonio

0212005-0977A. N. AndersonLi v.Shou

______0222005-0987C. Peruto

D’acchioli v.White et al.______

0232005-1089N. HoffmanCooper v.Gilroy et al.

M. Zabel0242005-1640M. Casper

O’hara v.Erie Insurance CompanyD. L. Petrilli

0252005-1645C. S. CooperBazi v.Smith et al.

______0262006-0201D. S. Berman

Lin v.Farmers Insurance CompanyD. S. Bergstralh; H. P. Mehta

0272006-0741D. P. Heim; G. Bochetto; J. A. Oconnell

Mirarchi v.City of Philadelphia et al. et al.

D. E. Walsh; D. P. Cortes; E. N. Ewing; M. S. Pratt; M. W. Pfautz; S. J. McGrath;

S. Kivell0282006-1216A. J. Diulio

Philips et al. v.Lititz Mutual Insurance Company

M. B. Malamud; R. T. Horst0292006-1823M. I. Simon

Henderson v.City of Philadelphia et al. et al.K. D. Lawfer; M. Rong

0302006-1827G. Z. LevinWorman v.Wang

I. Kim0312006-1829V. J. Iozzi

Peninsula Insurance Company A/S/O It Transportatio v.WangB. A. Judge; J. Schwegler Kelley

0322006-1832M. J. DoughertyBmo Harris Bank N.A. v.Fsw Express, Llc

et al.______

0332006-1833A. M. KroupaWalker v.Snyder

A. B. Wicker0342006-1838M. J. Dougherty

Amur Equipment Finance Inc. v.Lego Transportation

______0352006-1839D. H. Denenberg

Dyer-Goode v.Goode______

0362001-1208R. B. AxelrodJones v.Oquendo et al.

D. J. Dawson; J. M. Endler; J. T. Donovan

1 P.M.0012001-0746J. R. Davey; W. GouldsburyNationstar Mortgage Llc v.Equity One Inc.

et al.______

0022003-0813B. S. ChackerRichardson v.C.J.W. Construction & Home

ImprovemeS. D. Lee

0032003-2680B. HanrattySchuck v.Voyeur et al.

______0042004-0749M. O. Pansini; S. M. Mezrow

Radziuk et al. v.Haynes et al.J. P. Silli

0052004-0793J. E. FineDickerson et al. v.Boulevard Ventures Rolling

Thund______

0062004-0882L. B. HimmelsteinBoyd et al. v.Nyanue et al.

______0072005-1416C. B. Wolf

Cutler v.Shomo______

0082006-0279M. I. SimonLaboy v.Hovington et al.

M. L. Fink0092006-1843C. P. Kristofco; G. S. Shields

Terry v.JacksonZ. J. Zahner

0102006-1849I. Harel; R. RossWilliams et al. v.The Children’s Hosp. of

PhilaK. M. Kramer; T. K. Fitzpatrick

0112006-1852J. L. ArisTaub et al. v.Fedex Ground Package System

Inc. et al.B. F. Datt; K. P. Dapper

0122006-1856C. BenedumDoe v.Threemb, L.L.C. D/B/A Kiddie

Academy of HoA. O. Pappas; M. J. Obrien

0132006-1865I. Harel; R. RossKalah et al. v.Nazareth Hosp. et al.

A. B. Tomlinson; A. D. Rogin; A. V. Romanowicz; A. B. Cairns; D. J. Brooks Jr0142006-1867D. J. DelucaState Farm Fire & Casualty Co. A/S/O Carol

A. Dzvo v.Nazareth Hosp. et al.M. A. Salvati

0152006-1877F. J. O’Neill; M. T. Vanderveen

Goodwin v.The B.A.C. Group, Llc et al.______

0162003-2276M. F. GreenfieldRoberts v.Torres et al.

S. A. Lytle; K. J. Fox0172005-0115J. S. Zafran; R. M. Kenny

Jiang v.BennettA. L. Riemenschneider; J. P. Lindsey; S.

A. Lytle0182006-1878W. J. Coppol

Bennett v.JiangK. J. Fox

0192006-1881D. A. PomoCrews v.City of Philadelphia et al.

et al.

M. S. Saltzman; S. Randazzo; W. B. Shuey0202006-1882D. Zillas; J. S. Zafran

Lynch et al. v.Lx Coach Charter Company et al.

______0212006-1884M. S. Mednick

Ribeiro v.Menasha Packaging Company, Llc et al.E. P. Heffron; F. W. Baer

0222006-1887B. A. Swartz; T. M. FelzerBonilla-Urena et al. v.Conover et al.

C. A. Murphy0232006-1889R. S. Miller

Murphy v.McLane Company Inc. et al.G. N. Stewart

0242006-1898P. WapnerWells Fargo Bank, National Association

Et.Al v.Pe______

0252006-1902M. S. NathanRomano v.Seybold

______0262006-1904J. D. Marx

Kim v.Hawkins et al.J. M. Demarco; K. E. Lizzano

FRI., DECEMBER 11, 20209 A.M.

0012005-1648R. RajanRajan et al. v.Crawford et al.

______0022005-1720R. A. Stoloff

Tran et al. v.Brown et al.______

0032007-0225D. R. Jacquette; S. D. WilsonSumair v.Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp. et al.

K. E. Johnston; N. A. Nolan; S. Harkins0042007-0227A. S. Barrist

Fortson et al. v.BurlessH. B. Welch

0052007-0232S. M. McMonagleJacobson v.All Around Entertainment Llc

et al.C. W. Sweeney III; K. S. Fair

0062007-0234A. C. Goldstein; R. W. Stanko

Schindler Elevator Corp. v.Horizon House De

G. Vilim0072007-0242E. A. Pearce; N. Vitale

Alassane v.Kone et al.G. L. Slocum

0082007-0243E. B. JensenGordon v.Gordon

______0092007-0245A. B. Feenane

Torgan v.GribbinB. A. Carter; K. L. Raymond

0102007-0260C. BurkeWilson et al. v.Chickie’s And Pete’s - South

PhillyJ. M. Clark; S. K. Mintzer

0112007-0268G. B. BaldinoLeonard v.Reinhardt

S. A. Lytle0122007-0270L. G. Villari; T. A. Lynam

Oglesby v.Hoveround Corp. et al.T. G. Nalencz

0132007-0273M. B. BarishArcee et al. v.Chahal et al.

A. A. Adams; A. P. Campbell; C. A. Murphy; D. J. Rucket; D. B. Marcello; E. L. Kates; E. C. Johnson; H. Marcel; J. H. McCarthy; J. J. Delany; J. M. Pecci; M. P.

Rausch; T. M. Peters0142007-0275M. I. Simon

Day v.DepaoloF. D. MacKin

0152007-0290R. JablonskiLohmann et al. v.Bistocchi et al.

K. M. Meindl0162007-0305E. Levine

Vinson et al. v.Houser et al.P. B. Hinton

0172007-0306D. T. Thistle; K. P. Obrien

Estate of Paul David Cheskis et al. v.Gera et al.

D. E. Dolente; J. C. Farrell; K. J. McHale0182007-0307K. J. Keller

Williams v.Coleman et al.______

0192007-0309D. B. RoddenRiley v.Williams et al.

B. A. Carter; K. L. Raymond; S. J. Tredwell

0202007-0314R. T. PriceAbdul-Shakur v.Cousin’s Fresh Market 3 Llc

et al.D. S. Bergstralh

0211912-0107D. S. Jaffe; J. RosenauDunn v.Ngoma

E. A. Dalberth; G. Mercogliano0222007-0318M. Kresman

Swaray v.NgomaE. A. Dalberth; G. Mercogliano

0232007-0319L. M. Keller; R. DennisSaunders v.Reading Terminal Market Corp.

EtJ. P. Silli; K. R. McNulty

0242007-0325L. B. Himmelstein; M. D. Raisman

Statham et al. v.Chau et al.N. M. Durso

0252007-0328M. E. QuinlanThurman et al. v.City of Philadelphia et

al. et al.K. E. Rompala

0262007-0329L. KalikhmanQuiles v.Collins et al.

J. L. Gilman0272007-0331J. A. Zenstein

Thompson v.Mahari Yared Development Company et al.

______0282007-0358D. Klayman Weitz

Collins v.City of PhiladelphiaP. W. Baker

0292007-0360D. Klayman WeitzWilliams v.Aviles

C. Ackley0302007-0362A. M. Sasso

Thomas v.City of Philadelphia et al. et al.

S. Kivell0312007-0363I. A. Schwartz; S. T. Ohanlon

Thompson v.Philadelphia Police Officer Lamanna (

J. L. Jankowski0322007-0369R. A. StoloffMcAllister v.Philadelphia Water Department

et al.M. Rong

0332007-0371M. BreslinLucas v.Solid Concrete Walls et al.

E. Merrigan; M. N. Hadgis; P. J. Manos0342007-0372R. Jablonski

Dandridge v.McHenryA. F. Zabicki

0352007-0373R. F. KuhnCostello v.Albertson’s Inc. T/A Acme Inc.

et al.______

1 P.M.0012004-0557A. H. Tulio; C. A. Denardo; K. D. Little

Bank United N.A. v.Brown______

0022005-1722M. A. WeinbergYoung v.Lopsonzski 1815 N Willington St

Lp______

0032005-1727J. M. Rosenbaum; J. P. Curry

Adams et al. v.Hall et al.L. A. Zikoski

0042007-0380J. S. ShorrEast v.Boni et al.

M. S. Berger0052007-0382____________

Miller v.Comcast Ctr.M. Berry; S. F. Summers

0062007-0383J. S. ShorrRichard et al. v.George Hutt Inc. et al.

D. S. Altschuler0072007-0391M. I. Simon

Watkins v.Pacific Insurance Company, Limited

M. R. Bosniak0082007-0393J. A. Zenstein

Vlot et al. v.Whirlpool Corp. et al.M. J. Noble

0092007-0395D. Zillas; J. S. ZafranDesoto v.Divirgilio

E. C. Good0102007-0408K. M. BlakeHornick et al. v.Sodexo Operations, Llc et al.E. Horneff; L. Hockman; M. E. Daley; R.

J. Siegel; R. M. Stroh; S. A. Scheuerle0112007-0428F. Campese

Isaac-Tucker v.Dlc Transportation et al.A. J. Fuga; J. B. Anderson; K. M. Maschke;

M. S. Takacs0122007-0429M. Breslin

Jones v.Rodriguez et al.Y. Koelsch

0132007-0431N. L. PalazzoNguyen et al. v.Amin et al.

C. J. Renitsky; T. J. Omalley0142007-0432R. K. Teitell

Barton v.Dheera Fuels Inc. et al.A. J. Keenan

0152007-0438A. J. Ginsburg


Robinson v.Carrion-Hernandez et al.______

0162007-0443D. A. Shafie; N. HoffmanPlatt v.Flanagan et al.

A. M. Digiulio0172007-0449J. J. Aversa

Martin v.RothJ. Thomas

0182007-0451M. A. WeinbergAbuskin v.Acme Market et al.

J. F. Longo; J. M. Toddy0192007-0453R. W. Bucher III

Colony Insurance Company v.NguyenF. T. Lachat Jr

0202007-0456J. M. BieberStuckey v.5546 Bloyd Street Acquisition, Llc

et al.D. P. Bateman

0212007-0463P. G. MurphyHendershot et al. v.City of Philadelphia et

al. et al.P. W. Baker

0222007-0465J. W. GarberSeamon v.Acme Market et al.

G. C. Major0232007-0467J. M. Turner Jr

Depaul-Martin v.Giant Food Stores, LlcJ. M. Toddy; S. B. Weinstock

MUNICIPAL COURT

CIVIL LISTINGS

TUE., DEC. 8, 20202-TO BE ASSIGNED

9 A.M.1 Edwards v. Progressive Specialty Insurance

Co.2 Edwards v. Progressive Specialty Insurance

Co.3 Tuzzo v. Sprint Mobile4 Nguyen v. Mcdevitt

9:45 AM1 Philadelphia Gas Works v. Peco Energy2 Breuer v. Silber3 Hatchigian v. Robin Ford

10:30 A.M.1 Tom Golden Plumber v. Santore

11:15 AM1 Lvnv Funding Llc v. Gushae2 1352 Lofts Condominium v. Alpert3 Miles v. Haba4 Germantown Cab Co. v. Jeffries

1 P.M.1 Abc Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Turner2 Zoppina v. Eltity3 Suon v. Thornton4 Philadelphia Contributionship Ins. Co. A/s/o 5

Sta v. Kumas Homes5 Igielski v. Burgos

1:45 PM1 Abc Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Blakely2 Cavalry Spv I, Llc, As Assignee Of Citibank,

N.a. v. Wright3 Cavalry Spv I, Llc, As Assignee Of Citibank,

N.a. v. Wnukowski4 Eversley v. Ocasio

2:30 P.M.1 Cavalry Spv I, Llc, As Assignee Of Citibank,

N.a. v. Solomon2 Cavalry Spv I, Llc, As Assignee Of Department

Stor v. Himles3 Hart v. Family Dollar4 Comegys v. Lewis5 Hines v. Dougherty

3-TO BE ASSIGNED8:45 A.M.

1 Buchanan v. Hennessey2 Giovanni Siciliano v. Pace3 Danjon Properties v. Allen4 Hass v. Apex Manayunk Apartments5 Pugliese v. Redziak6 Allegheny Apts Llc v. Riley

9:30 A.M.1 Stateside Investment Management Ll v.

Summers2 Jaiveer Budwal v. Wallace3 Perez v. Tausendfraundt4 Lin v. Caldwell5 Chase v. Stallworth6 60th Street Corridor Lp v. Bunkley

10:15 AM1 Ps Homes 2 Lp v. Palmer2 Ming And Stevens Co Llc v. Pheneger3 Ap Canterbury Court Llc v. Matthews4 Ap Canterbury Court Llc v. Santos5 Koller v. Traverse6 Dukach v. Smith

11 A.M.1 Laura Thawley v. Levy

2 Lxr Rs Vii, Llc v. Brown3 Lxr Rs Vii, Llc v. Torres4 Lam v. Thompson5 915-17 S. 11th St Llc v. Woll6 Dukach v. Cuevas

12:45 P.M.1 Knox Street Partners v. Bibbs2 Ilovich Investments, Llc v. Battle3 Nb Project Owner Llc v. Markus4 Cca 1 Properties v. Carraway5 Griffin v. Christian6 Dukach v. Horton

1:30 P.M.1 Hathaway Associates v. Humphrey2 Kirshenbaum Assets Group Llc v. Kerver3 901 Partners Lp v. Morse4 Dukach v. Stanton5 Steagall v. Holsey6 Leonardo v. Ruffin

2:15 PM1 Dukach v. Smith2 Parkside Walnut Llc v. Simon4 Misgav Llc v. Charrafi5 Wells Jr v. Langiewicz6 Nicco v. Moraff

1:30 P.M.1 Hathaway Associates v. Humphrey2 Kirshenbaum Assets Group Llc v. Kerver3 901 Partners Lp v. Morse4 Dukach v. Stanton5 Steagall v. Holsey6 Leonardo v. Ruffin

4-TO BE ASSIGNED8:45 A.M.

1 City of Phila. v. Dabney

9 A.M.1 City of Phila. v. Dabney

9:15 A.M.1 City of Phila. v. Dabney Rowena

9:30 A.M.1 City Of Philadelphia, Office Of Administrative

Rev v. Jreg Holding Company

9:45 AM1 City Of Philadelphia, Office Of Administrative

Rev v. Ross

10 A.M.1 City Of Philadelphia, Office Of Administrative

Rev v. Ross


Rev v. Jetlc Holdings Llc


Rev v. Graham


Rev v. Jce Development Llc

11 A.M.1 City Of Philadelphia, Office Of Administrative

Rev v. Ross


Rev v. Ross


Rev v. Walsh

12:45 P.M.1 Yu v. Abibou2 Daniel v. Montgormery3 Johnson v. Spencer

1:30 P.M.1 Coffee v. Rhedrick2 Hall v. Williams3 Liu v. Ruffin4 Zucker v. Sigismondi

2:15 PM1 Likiesha v. Mcpherson2 Pan v. Wilson3 Henry On The Park Jv, Lp v. Hurt

5-TO BE ASSIGNED10 A.M.

1 Second Round Sub, Llc v. Assinor2 Second Round Sub, Llc v. Ramos3 Second Round Sub, Llc v. Mclaughlin4 Crown Asset Management, Llc v. Cheng5 Crown Asset Management, Llc v. Mccarty6 Crown Asset Management, Llc v. Malone

6-TO BE ASSIGNED9 A.M.

1 Edwards v. Progressive Specialty Insurance Co.

2 Barriga v. Pollino3 New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group

A/s/o Nas v. H&d Auto Sales Corporation4 Jones v. Llc

9:45 AM1 Applewhite v. Savabera2 Papillo v. Adams3 Lkq Penn-mar Inc v. Mack

10:30 A.M.1 Philadelphia Gas Works v. Victoriano2 Patterson v. Johnson3 Morel v. Saint Marc

11:15 AM1 Jonathan Wheeler v. Foremost Insurance Co.

Grand Rapids2 Minority Arts Resource Council v. Jones

1 P.M.1 Abc Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Owens2 Cavalry Spv I, Llc, As Assignee Of Citibank,

N.a. v. Luczak3 Dixon v. Philadelphia Public Auto Inc.

1:45 PM1 Abc Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Myrick2 Viaud v. Thomas3 Roberts v. Taylor

2:30 P.M.1 Midland Funding, Llc v. Winston2 Midland Funding, Llc v. Crawley3 Midland Funding, Llc v. Haas4 Delotach v. Mccoy5 Walden v. Johnson

COURT OF APPEALS

OPINIONS FILEDDECEMBER 3, 2020

BY McKEE, J.A.B. v. Pleasant Valley School District; 19-2513;

judgment of the district court affirmed.

DISTRICT COURT

MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

DECEMBER 2, 2020

BY ROBRENO, J. Suniaga et al v. Downingtown Area School

District et al; 20-2283; For all of the afore-mentioned reasons, SDD’s Motion to Dismiss and German’s Motion to Dismiss will be denied.

BY PADOVA, J. Stocker et al v. Greene, Tweed & Co., Inc.;

18-4503; For the reasons stated above, we deny GTCâ€™s Motion for Reconsideration in its entirety.

BY JOYNER, J. USA v. Phillips et al; 07-0549; Finding extraor-

dinary and compelling circumstances, consider-ing the 18 U.S.C. Â§ 3553(a) factors, and seeing no danger to the community, we grant the motion for compassionate release.

Watkins v. Vision Academy Charter School; 20-0656; Defendantâ€™s Motion to Dismiss and to Compel Mediation and Arbitration is Granted in part as to the provisions of the Arbitration Agreement exclusive of the fee-allocating provisions and Denied in part as to the motion to dismiss.

CIVIL ACTIONSThe defendant’s name appears

first, followed by the name of the plaintiff, the number, the nature of the suit and the name of plaintiff’s attorney.

DECEMBER 3, 2020Commissioner of Social Security--Jessica

Salgado; 20-06094; U.S. Government Defendant.

Scott F. Waterman: United States Trustee--Abraham O. Ituah; 20-06095; Fed. Question; M.A. Kearney.

Standard Insurance Company--Pamela Peck; 20-06096; Fed. Question; G.J. Pappert.

Jiffy Lube International, Inc--Charles Bennett; 20-06101; Diversity.

Jiffy Lube International, Inc; Team Car Care, LLC dba Jiffy Lube--Charles Bennet; 20-06102; Diversity.

Endo International PLC: Rajiv De Silva: Paul V. Campanelli--Park Employees’ and Retirement Board Employees’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago; 20-06103; Fed. Question; J.E. DuBois.

Commissioner of Social Security--Lisa Nelson; 20-06104; U.S. Government Defendant; T.R. Rice.

Merck & Co., Inc.; Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp.; “John Doe”--Mary Louise Emery: Floyd Emery; 20-06106; Diversity; H. Bartle, III.

Theresa Murrell: American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida, Inc.; CEFCO National Claims Inc.--AAA Public Adjusters, LLC; 20-06107; Fed. Question.

Mark Chrislip & Associates, Inc. individu-ally and t/a Tornado Fitness; Mark Chrislip, individually and t/a Tornado Fitness; Fujian Junda Sports Goods Company, LLC--Leo Soto; 20-06108; Diversity.

Sterling Bancorp; Sterling National Bank--Philip C. Pulley: Devra K. Pulley; 20-06109; Fed. Question; J.M. Younge.

Oxtim, Inc., d/b/a Fix Auto Bellevue--Axalta Coating Systems, LLC; 20-06110; Diversity; C.D. Jones, II.

Target Corporation--Khadijah Major; 20-06111; Diversity.

Daniel Winard: D&S Consolidated--AAMCO Transmissions, LLC, f/k/a AAMCO Transmissions, Inc.; 20-06114; Diversity.

Beebe Healthcare: Beebe Medical Group; Jefferson Health System, Inc. indi-vidually and d/b/a Jefferson Health--United States ex rel Dr. Abraham Scheer; 20-06117; Fed. Question.

Home Depot U.S.A, Inc.--Kaitlynn Sturgill; 20-06105; Fed. Question.

Andrew Saul--Sonia M DeJesus; 20-06115; U.S. Government Defendant.

Commissioner Social Security--Mary Elizabeth Cera; 20-06116; U.S. Government Defendant.

BANKRUPTCY COURT

PETITIONS FILEDDECEMBER 3, 2020

(READING)

Chapter 13Dennis R. Karalfa, 245 E. Orange Street,

Elizabethtown, PA 17022 -- Scott F. Waterman (Chapter 13); United States Trustee; 20-14630; no summaries listed; T.W. Fleckenstein, atty.; P.M. Mayer, B.J.

Susan M. McGuigan-Good, 5-4 Willow Way, Reading, PA 19606 -- United States Trustee; 20-14635; no summaries listed; M.D. Hess, atty.; P.M. Mayer, B.J.

Yolette Desrosiers, 318 W. Wilkes Barre Street, Easton, PA 18042 -- United States Trustee; 20-14636; no summaries listed; R. Glazer, atty.; P.M. Mayer, B.J.

DECEMBER 03, 2020

(PHILADELPHIA)

Chapter 7Deborah Y Ale, 1726 N Aberdeen Street,

Philadelphia, PA 19131 -- Christine C. Shubert; United States Trustee; 20-14633; no summaries listed; S.M. Dunne, atty.; M.D. Coleman, B.J.

Elizabeth Evans, 601 Green ST, B2, Parkesburg, PA 19365 -- Christine C. Shubert; United States Trustee; 20-14637; no summaries listed; D. Annecharico, atty.; E.L. Frank, B.J.

Chapter 13Frank Paul Orlando, 1209 S RAPPS DAM RD,

Phoenixville, PA 19460 -- United States Trustee; 20-14631; no summaries listed; R.N. Lipow, atty.; A.M. Chan, B.J.

Shelley E. Lempergel, 7820 Hampton Drive, Morrisville, PA 19067 -- United States Trustee; 20-14632; no summaries listed; M.S. Schwartz, atty.; A.M. Chan, B.J.

Shannon C Sainato, 47-3 Revere Road, Drexel Hill, PA 19026 -- United States Trustee; 20-14634; no summaries listed; B.J. Sadek, atty.; M.D. Coleman, B.J.

Jennifer Lynne Cosmo, 317 Krewson Terrace, Willow Grove, PA 19090 -- United States Trustee; 20-14638; no summaries listed; J.L. Quinn, atty.; E.L. Frank, B.J.

Raymond A. Anderson, 5104 Overbrook Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19131 -- United States Trustee; 20-14639; no summaries list-ed; B.J. Sadek, atty.; A.M. Chan, B.J.

Zev M. Guttman, 1100 S. Broad Street, Apt. 513C, Philadelphia, PA 19146 -- United States Trustee; 20-14640; no summaries list-ed; D.B. Spitofsky, atty.; M.D. Coleman, B.J.

SUPREME COURT

ORDERS & DECREES November 04, 2020

Apartment Association Of Metropolitan Pittsburgh, Inc. v. The City Of Pittsburgh; 144 WAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Granted. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are Did the Commonwealth Court err where it failed to follow the dictates of this Honorable Court in Pennsylvania Rest. & Lodging Ass’n v. City of Pittsburgh, 211 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2019), and rather than analyz-ing whether the Second Class City Code and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act sat-isfy the “expressly provided by statute” excep-tion to the Business Exclusion (i.e. whether

relevant statutory authority has a nexus to the core functions of the Nondiscrimination Ordinance) as Pa. Restaurant requires, the Commonwealth Court instead focused its anal-ysis on the perceived weight of the burdens that the Nondiscrimination Ordinance might impose on landlords.

Com. v. Bey, Petitioner; 134 WAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Denied. The Application For Relief Is Granted.

In The Matter Of Monica Atwood Hanover Petition For Reinstatement From Inactive Status ; 140 DB 2020; The Report and Recommendation of Disciplinary Board Member dated October 26, 2020, is approved and it is Ordered that Monica Atwood Hanover, who has been on Inactive Status, has demon-strated that she has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth.

Pinkins, Petitioner v. Pennsylvania Board Of Probation And Parole; 194 WAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Granted. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are Is the language of a commutation a permissible basis for the Parole Board to deviate from the pre-sumptive recommitment ranges for a convicted parole violator and to not establish a new mini-mum parole eligibility date.

Mar-Del Holdings, LLC, Petitioner v. Orange Township Board Of Supervisors; 229 MAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Denied.

Franconi Enterprises, Inc., Petitioner v. Kingston Borough; 249 MAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Denied.

Com. v. Santiago, Petitioner; 322 MAL 2020; The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is Denied.

In The Matter Of David E. Piver; 2742 Disciplinary Docket No. 3; Upon consider-ation of the responses to a Notice and Order directing David E. Piver to provide reasons against the imposition of a suspension recipro-cal to that imposed by the United States Board of Immigration Appeals, David E. Piver is sus-pended for 30 days from the practice of law in this Commonwealth, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217.

Office Of Disciplinary Counsel, Petitioner v. Segota; 2755 Disciplinary Docket No. 3; upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent is granted, and Jami Segota is suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of six months. Respondent shall comply with all the provi-sions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board.

ORPHANS’ COURTDIVISION

ORDERS AND DECREES

BY CARRAFIELLO, J.

DEC. 3, 2020Estate of Kyren Amiker, MI; Decree issued;

G. Lowman.Estate of Michael Ladavich, AIP; Decree

issued; Y. Rogers.Estate of Vickey Jean Lusk, AIP; Decree issued;

D. Zabowski.Estate of Frank M. Tarantella, AIP; Hearing

scheduled for 12/17/20 at 11 zoom; K. Marciano.

Estate of Sekou Pressley, MI; Hearing sched-uled for 12/15/209 at 11 a.m. zoom; D. Nagel.

Estate of Cevyn Wiggins, MI; Hearing sched-uled for 12/15/209 at 11 a.m. zoom; D. Nagel.

ORDERS HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN THE FOLLOWING CIVIL MATTERS:

Cheney, III, et al. v. Wyeth, LLC, et al.Colon v. Einstein Medical Center, et al.Craddock v. Belmont Behavioral oing Bounce

RentalsMilledge v. Lewis, et al.Stephens, et al. v. Wyeth, LLC, et al.

ORDERS AND DECREES

BY SHEILA WOODS-SKIPPER, J.

DEC. 3, 2020Estate of James J. Trinacria; Decree issued; L.

Cambria.Estate of Dwayne Cooper; Decree issued; S.

Pritchard.Estate of Mary Bigus; Decree issued; J. Lam.Estate of Walter Geronimo Fox Battle; Decree

issued: W.H. Bishop.

ORDERS HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN THE FOLLOWING CIVIL MATTERS:

Joseph Lindsay v. Susanne Cowden, et al.Vincent Kremer v. 3M Co., et al.Kinsella. v. 1104 Welsh Road Operations,

LLC, et al.


almreprints.com

Increase your recognition and maximize your credibility with ALM Reprints & Licensing. We offer various licensing products to highlight your accomplishments, including; plaques, logo licensing, glossy article reprints, and more, to showcase your industry acknowledgements.

All content featured in ALM products is copyright protected. Before you display your acknowledgments, make sure to contact us to ensure you are copyright compliant!

Have you been featured in an ALM product?

Enhance your brand’s recognition today!Contact: 877-257-3382 | [email protected]

Use code REPRINT10 for 10% off


In many judicial districts, appeals of magisterial district court judgments are submitted to compulsory arbitration pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 1301–1314. If, after the arbitration, the protho-notary enters an award for possession on the docket in favor of the landlord and the tenant fails to maintain the supersedeas required by Rule 1008 prior to the prothonotary entering judgment on the award, then the landlord may terminate the supersedeas pursuant to Rule 1008B and request an order of possession from the magisterial district judge pursuant to Rule 515. If the prothonotary enters an award on the docket in favor of the tenant and the tenant fails to maintain the supersedeas prior to the prothonotary entering judgment on the award, the landlord may not obtain an order of possession between the time that the prothonotary enters the arbitration award on the docket and the time that the landlord files a notice of appeal.

The time limits in which the landlord must request an order for possession imposed in subdivision B apply only in cases arising out of residential leases and in no way affect the landlord’s ability to execute on the money judgment. See Rule 516, Note, and Rule 521A.

At the time the landlord files the request for an order for possession, the magisterial district court should collect server fees for all actions through delivery of possession. Thereafter, if the order for possession is satisfied 48 hours or more prior to a scheduled delivery of possession, a portion of the server costs may be refundable. See Rules 516 through 520 and 44 Pa.C.S. § 7161(d).

Rule 516. Issuance and Reissuance of Order for Possession

A. Upon the timely filing of the request form, the magisterial district judge shall issue the order for possession and shall deliver it for service and execution to the sheriff of, or any certified constable in, the county in which the office of the magisterial district judge is situated. If this service is not available to the magisterial district judge, service may be made by any certified constable of the Commonwealth. The order shall direct the officer executing it to deliver actual possession of the real property to the landlord. The magisterial district judge shall attach a copy of the request form to the order for possession.

B. (1) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision C, upon written request of the landlord the magisterial district judge shall reissue an order for possession for one additional 60-day period.

(2) If an order for possession is issued and subsequently superseded by an appeal, writ of certiorari, supersedeas, or a stay pursuant to a bankruptcy proceeding or other federal or state law or Rule 514.1C, and

(a) the appeal, writ of certiorari, or supersedeas is stricken, dis-missed, or otherwise terminated; or

(b) the bankruptcy or other stay is lifted; and

(c) the landlord wishes to proceed with the order for posses-sion,

the landlord must file with the magisterial district judge a written request for reissuance of the order for possession in accordance with subdivision B(1).

C. In a case arising out of a residential lease[, a] and upon written request of the landlord, the magisterial district judge shall reissue an order for possession for no more than two additional 60-day periods. A request for reissuance of an order for possession may be filed only within [120] 180 days of the date of the entry of the judgment or, in a case in which the order for possession is issued and subsequently superseded by an appeal, writ of certiorari, supersedeas, or a stay pursuant to a bankruptcy proceeding or other federal or state law or Rule 514.1C, only within [120] 180 days of the date the appeal, writ of certiorari, or supersedeas is stricken, dismissed, or oth-erwise terminated or the bankruptcy or other stay is lifted.

D. A written request for reissuance of the order for possession, filed after an appeal, writ of certiorari, or supersedeas is stricken, dismissed, or otherwise terminated, or a bankruptcy or other stay is lifted, must be accompanied by a copy of the court order or other documentation strik-ing, dismissing, or terminating the appeal, writ of certiorari, or supersedeas, or lifting the bankruptcy or other stay.

Official Note: The order for possession deals only with delivery of possession of real property and not with a levy for money damages. A landlord who seeks execution of the money judgment part of the judgment must proceed under Rule 521A, using the forms and procedure there prescribed. The reason for making this distinction is that the printed notice requirements on the two forms, and the procedures involved in the two matters, differ widely.

Subdivision B provides for reissuance of the order for possession for one additional 60-day period. However, pursuant to subdivision C, in cases arising out of a residential lease, the request for reissuance of the order for possession must be filed within [120] 180 days of the date of the entry of the judgment or, in a case in which the order for possession is issued and subsequently superseded by an appeal, writ of certiorari, supersedeas or a stay pursuant to a bankruptcy proceeding or other federal or state law or Rule 514.1C, only within [120] 180 days of the date the appeal, writ of certiorari, or supersedeas is stricken, dismissed, or otherwise terminated, or the bankruptcy or other stay is lifted. In a case arising out of a residential lease, the magisterial district judge may reissue the order for possession for no more than two additional 60-day periods. The additional 60-day period need not necessarily immediately follow the original 60-day period of issuance. The written request for reissuance may be in any form and may consist of a notation on the permanent copy of the request for order for possession form, “Reissuance of order for possession requested,” subscribed by the landlord. The magisterial district judge shall mark all copies of the reissued order for possession, “Reissued. Request for reissuance filed .......... (time and date).” A new form may be used upon reissu-ance, those portions retained from the original being exact copies although signatures may be typed or printed with the mark “/s/.” There are no filing costs for reissuing an order for possession, for the reissuance is merely a continuation of the original proceeding. However, there may be additional server costs for service of the reissued order for possession.

The magisterial district court shall enter stays in compliance with federal or state law, such as the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 3901 et seq.

In many judicial districts, appeals of magisterial district court judgments are submitted to compulsory arbitration pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 1301–1314. If, after the arbitration, the protho-notary enters an award for possession on the docket in favor of the landlord and the tenant fails to maintain the supersedeas required by Rule 1008 prior to the prothonotary entering judgment on the award, then the landlord may terminate the supersedeas pursuant to Rule 1008B and request an order of possession from the magisterial district judge pursuant to Rule 515. If the prothonotary enters an award on the docket in favor of the tenant and the tenant fails to maintain the supersedeas prior to the prothonotary entering judgment on the award, the landlord may not obtain an order of possession between the time that the prothonotary enters the arbitration award on the docket and the time that the landlord files a notice of appeal.

The time limits in which the landlord must request reissuance of an order for possession imposed in subdivision C apply only in cases arising out of residential leases and in no way affect the landlord’s ability to execute on the money judgment. See Rule 521A.

FINAL REPORT1

Recommendation 4-2020, Minor Court Rules Committee

Amendment of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 515 and 516

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A LANDLORD TO REQUEST AN ORDER FOR POSSESSION IN A RESIDENTIAL LEASE CASE

I. Introduction

The Minor Court Rules Committee (“Committee”) recommended amendments to Rules 515 and 516 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure Governing Actions and Proceedings Before Magisterial District Judges (“Rules”). The amendments will permit a landlord in a case involving a residential lease to request an order for possession within 180 days from the date of entry of judgment rather than the current 120 days. The recommendation is necessitated by exigent circumstances requiring the immediate adoption of the proposal and is adopted in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3), without prior publication for public comment.

II. Background and Discussion Following the issuance of a judgment in a landlord-tenant case and the requisite waiting period, a landlord seeking to regain property must file a request for an order for possession with the magisterial district court. See Rule 515. In residential landlord-tenant cases, the landlord must file the request for an order for possession no later than 120 days from the date of entry of the judgment. See Rule 515B(1). Certain actions will stay the period within which a request for order for posses-sion must be filed, such as an appeal or writ of certiorari operating as a supersedeas, or a bankruptcy or other stay required by state or federal law. See Rule 515B(2).

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Court, the federal government, the Governor, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), inter alia, have promul-gated laws and orders suspending certain residential evictions.2 One of the most recent orders stay-ing some residential evictions, issued by the CDC, will expire on December 31, 2020.

The Committee received correspondence recommending an extension of the 120-day period within which a landlord must file a request for an order for possession in a residential landlord-tenant case. An extension would provide the parties with greater flexibility to negotiate and enter into private forbearance agreements. Such private agreements could allow the tenants additional time in which to satisfy back rent obligations while maintaining current rental payments and housing status. Therefore, the Committee recommended increasing the time period within which a landlord must file a request for an order for possession in a residential lease case from 120 days to 180 days. III. Rule Changes

Rules 515 and 516 are amended to provide for 180 days within which a landlord in a resi-dential lease case must request an order for possession. Rule 516C is further amended to provide that upon written request of the landlord in a case arising out of a residential lease, the magisterial district judge shall reissue an order for possession for no more than two additional 60-day periods.

Public Notice

Appointment of New Magistrate Judge in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

The Judicial Conference of the United States has authorized the appointment of a full-time United States magistrate judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at Allentown. The appointee may be required to preside at court sessions to be held at Philadelphia, Allentown, Reading, and Easton. The essential function of courts is to dispense justice. An important component of this function is the creation and maintenance of diversity in the court system. A community’s belief that a court dispenses justice is heightened when the court reflects the com-munity’s diversity.

1 The Committee’s Final Report should not be confused with the Official Notes to the Rules. Also, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania does not adopt the Committee’s Official Notes or the contents of the explanatory Final Reports.2 See Order of March 18, 2020, Nos. 531 and 532 Judicial Administration Docket, In re: General Statewide Judicial Emergency, pp. 8-9 (suspending eviction, ejectment, or other displacement from a resi-dence based upon the failure to make a rent, loan, or other similar payment). See also Order of April 1, 2020, Nos. 531 and 532 Judicial Administration Docket, In re: General Statewide Judicial Emergency, p. 6, Second Supplemental Order; Order of April 28, 2020, Nos. 531 and 532 Judicial Administration Docket, In re: General Statewide Judicial Emergency, p. 12. See also Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, P.L. 116-136 (“CARES Act”); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Executive Order May 7, 2020, § 2, as amended, May 21, 2020; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Executive Order July 9, 2020, § 2; Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions to Prevent the Further Spread of COVID-19, 85 Fed. Reg. 55292 (Sept. 4, 2020) (“CDC Order”).

Court Noticescontinued from 17



The duties of the position are demanding and wide- ranging, and will include, among others: (1) conduct of most preliminary proceedings in criminal cases; (2) trial and disposition of misdemeanor cases; (3) conduct of various pretrial matters and evidentiary proceedings on delegation from a district judge; and (4) trial and disposition of civil cases upon consent of the litigants. The basic authority of a United States magistrate judge is specified in 28 U.S.C. § 636.

To be qualified for appointment an applicant must:

1. Be, and have been for at least five years, a member in good stand-ing of the bar of the highest court of a state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Territory of Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or the Virgin Islands of the United States, and have been engaged in the active practice of law for a period of at least five years;

2. Be competent to perform all the duties of the office; be of good moral character; be emotionally stable and mature; be committed to equal justice under the law; be in good health; be patient and courteous; and be capable of deliberation and decisiveness;

3. Be less than seventy years old; and

4. Not be related to a judge of the district court.

A merit selection panel composed of attorneys and other members of the community will review all applicants and recommend to the district judges in confidence the five persons it considers best qualified. The court will make the appointment following an FBI full-field investigation and an IRS tax check of the applicant selected by the court for appointment. The individual selected must comply with the financial disclosure requirements pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-521, 90 Stat. 1824 (1978) (codified at 5 U.S.C. app. 4 §§ 101-111) as implemented by the Judicial Conference of the United States. An affirmative effort will be made to give due consideration to all qualified applicants without regard to race, color, age (40 and over), gender, religion, national origin, or disability. In 2020, the annual salary of the position is $199,088.00 which may change in 2021. The term of office is eight (8) years.

The application is available on the court’s web site at https://www.paed.uscourts.gov/ Only applicants may submit applications and applications must be received by Tuesday, Janu-ary 19, 2021.

All applications will be kept confidential, unless the applicant consents to disclosure, and all applications will be examined only by members of the merit selection panel and the judges of the district court. The panel’s deliberations will remain confidential.

Applications must be submitted by email to [email protected] with the subject line “Magistrate Judge Application.” An /s/ or e-signature on the application will be accepted.

Applications will only be accepted by email. Applications sent by mail will not be consid-ered. Due to the overwhelming number of applications expected, applicants should not contact the court regarding the status of their application.

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIACOURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

TRIAL DIVISION

Administrative Order66 of 2020

In re: Stay of Litigation Involving SEPTA

ORDER

WHEREFORE, the Court having been made aware of a malware attack on Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) and the resulting inability to proceed with litiga-tion, and as a result, on September 2, 2020, it issued Administrative Order 52 of 2020, which stayed all matters in which SEPTA is a named party until November 30, 2020, and which provided that the stay may be extended upon Good Cause shown, and, following a hearing before Supervising Judge Daniel Anders, SEPTA having shown Good Cause for an extension and having no opposition thereto, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that in all cases in which SEPTA is a named party except those cases brought pursuant to 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq. (Federal Employers Liability Act) filed prior to August 10, 2020, shall remain stayed and in deferred status as provided below.

It is further ORDERED and DECREED that as to any new cases to which this Stay applies filed against SEPTA while this Stay is in effect, the entry of appearance by the attorney on behalf of SEPTA must be accompanied by a Praecipe to Stay the Action, together with a copy of this Order.

It is further ORDERED and DECREED that the Stay shall remain in effect until January 15, 2021 unless counsel for SEPTA notifies the Court before January 15, 2021 that its electronic data and Electronic System are restored. It is further provided, however, that the Stay may be extended upon the filing of a motion to extend the Stay and for good cause shown.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Lisette Shirdan-Harris Honorable Lisette Shirdan-Harris Administrative Judge - Trial Division

/s/ Daniel J. Anders Honorable Daniel J. Anders Supervising Judge - Trial Division – Civil

Dated: November 30, 2020

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAPHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

November 25, 2020TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL

NOTICE TO THE BAR

Resumption of In-Person Jury Trials During the COVID-19 Judicial Emergency

Please take notice that the Court is planning for the resumption of in-person jury trials for matters in the Arbitration Appeal, Major Jury, Mass Tort and Commerce programs. Subject to public health guidance, the Court plans to resume in-person trials starting as of January 21, 2021.

All pre-trial conferences will be conducted via remote technology. Counsel shall review the pub-lished protocols in preparation for pre-trial conferences, including the Policies and Protocols for Use of Advanced Communication Technology for Court Proceedings in Civil Matters issued on July 16, 2020.

Detailed protocols will be published regarding the operation of court business – including the con-duct of in-person jury selection and jury trials – without creating unreasonable risks to the health or safety of jurors, court personnel, attorneys, court users, and the general public. Such protocols will be published as Notices to the Bar and available on the First Judicial District’s website at www.courts.phila.gov/covid-19 and at @PhilaCourts on Twitter.

Honorable Lisette Shirdan-HarrisAdministrative JudgeTrial Division

Honorable Daniel J. Anders Supervising JudgeTrial Division – Civil

Honorable Gary S. GlazerSupervising Judge Trial Division – Commerce


IN RE:

AMENDMENT OF EXPLANATORY COMMENT [5] TO RULE 1.5, PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

:::::

NO. 204

DISCIPLINARY RULES

DOCKET

ORDERPER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 25th day of November, 2020, upon the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to adopt new Explanatory Comment [5] to Rule 1.5 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct (“Pa.R.P.C.”), as published for com-ment in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, 50 Pa.B. 4013 (August 8, 2020):

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, that the new Explanatory Comment [5] to Rule 1.5 of the Pa.R.P.C. is adopted, and that prior Explanatory Comments [5] and [6] are renumbered as [6] and [7], as set forth in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall be effective immediately.

Material to be added is shown in bold and underlined.Material to be deleted is shown in bold and brackets.

RPC 1.5 Comment:***Successor Counsel in Contingency Fee Matters [5] Unlike the situation in [4], which addresses division of fee between lawyers from different firms who are simultaneously representing a client, there may arise a situation where a client enters a contingent fee agreement with one lawyer (“predecessor counsel”), terminates that lawyer’s services without cause, and enters a new contingent fee agreement with a different lawyer (“successor counsel”). In such a situation, and pursuant to a lawyer’s duties as set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c), successor counsel must notify the client, in writing, that some portion of the fee may be due to or claimed by predecessor counsel for services performed prior to the termination, and should discuss with the client the effect of that claim on successor counsel’s proposed fee agreement. If successor counsel will be involved in negotiating fees with predecessor counsel on the client’s behalf, successor counsel should evaluate whether the circumstances give rise to a conflict of interest with the client and, if so, must obtain appropriate informed consent to the conflict as set forth in Rule 1.7. If a dispute arises regarding distribution of the recovery, successor counsel must hold the dis-puted portion of the funds in trust pending resolution, in accordance with Rule 1.15(f). See ABA Formal Opinion 487 (June 18, 2019) (relating to successive contingent fee agreements). While part II.A of Formal Opinion 487 would require the client’s written informed consent, Rule 1.7 does not require a writing. However, if informed consent is deemed necessary under the circumstances, written consent may benefit both the client and successor counsel for the reasons set forth in Explanatory Comment [20] to Rule 1.7.

Disputes over Fees

[[5]] [6] If a procedure has been established for resolution of fee disputes, such as an arbitration or mediation procedure established by the bar, the lawyer should conscientiously consider submitting to it. Law may prescribe a procedure for determining a lawyer’s fee, for example, in rep-resentation of an executor or administrator, a class or a person entitled to a reasonable fee as part of the measure of damages. The lawyer entitled to such a fee and a lawyer representing another party concerned with the fee should comply with the prescribed procedure.




[[6]] [7] It is Disciplinary Board policy that allegations of excessive fees charged are initially referred to Fee Dispute Committees for resolution.

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIADOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Proposed amendment of Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.11-2

The Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee is planning to propose to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the amendment of Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.11-2 — Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem — for the reasons set forth in the accompanying publication report. Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No 103(a)(1), the proposal is being published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for comments, suggestions, or objections prior to submission to the Supreme Court.

Any reports, notes, or comments in the proposal have been inserted by the Committee for the convenience of those using the rules. They neither will constitute a part of the rules nor will be officially adopted by the Supreme Court.

Additions to the text of the proposal are bolded and underlined; deletions to the text are bolded and bracketed.

The Committee invites all interested persons to submit comments, suggestions, or objec-tions in writing to:

Bruce J. Ferguson, CounselDomestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee

Supreme Court of PennsylvaniaPennsylvania Judicial Center

PO Box 62635Harrisburg, PA 17106-2635

Fax: [email protected]

All communications in reference to the proposal should be received by February 12, 2021. E-mail is the preferred method for submitting comments, suggestions, or objections; any e-mailed submission need not be reproduced and resubmitted via mail. The Committee will acknowledge receipt of all submissions.

By the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee

The Honorable Daniel J. CliffordChair


RULE PROPOSAL 181

Rule 1915.11-2. Appointment of Guardian [Ad Litem]Ad Litem

*** The following text replaces the current rule text in its entirety ***

(a) Appointment.

(1) On its own motion or a motion of a party, the court may appoint a guardian ad litem.

(2) Prior to appointing a guardian ad litem, the court shall find that the appointment is necessary for the court to determine the child’s best interest.

(3) The guardian ad litem:

(i) shall represent the child’s best interest in the custody action;

(ii) shall not act as the child’s legal counsel or represent the child’s legal interest; and

(iii) shall be a licensed attorney or licensed mental health profes-sional.

(4) The court may order the parties to pay all or part of the guardian ad litem’s fees or costs.

(b) Duties and Responsibilities.

(1) Reports. The guardian ad litem shall:

(i) file of record any report prepared by the guardian ad litem; and

(ii) provide to the parties and the court a copy of the filed report not later than 20 days prior to a hearing or trial.

(A) The court shall determine the admissibility of the report at the hearing or trial.

(B) Prior to disclosing confidential information pro-hibited by 23 Pa.C.S. § 5336 to the parties, the court shall determine whether the guardian ad litem may disclose the information.

(2) Testimony. The guardian ad litem:

(i) shall attend court proceedings and testify as necessary; and

(ii) shall be subject to cross-examination if called to testify by a party or the court.

(3) Child’s Statement. The guardian ad litem’s report or testimony may include a subject child’s statement that would be otherwise inadmis-sible hearsay under Pa.R.E. 802.

*** The preceding text replaces the current rule text in its entirety ***

Note: 23 Pa.C.S. § 5334 is suspended insofar as it (1) requires that a guardian [ad litem]ad litem be an attorney, (2) permits the guardian [ad litem]ad litem to represent both the best interests and legal interests of the child, (3) provides the guardian [ad litem]ad litem the right to examine, cross-examine, present witnesses and present evidence on behalf of the child, and (4) prohibits the guardian [ad litem]ad litem from testifying.


PUBLICATION REPORT

Rule Proposal 181

The Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee (Committee) is proposing an amendment to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.11-2 - Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. Specifically, the pro-posed amendment would permit a guardian ad litem (GAL) to testify or include in the GAL’s report a minor child’s statement even if the statement would be otherwise inadmissible hearsay.

The Committee received a request for rulemaking on the admissibility of a child’s state-ment to a GAL in a custody hearing or trial. The Rules of Civil Procedure provides for the appoint-ment of a GAL when the court finds that it is necessary in determining the child’s best interest. As set forth in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.11-2, a GAL is required to meet with a child of an appropriate age in order to ascertain the facts.

Often, the child makes statements to the GAL that could impact the court determining the child’s best interest. The child’s statements are generally considered hearsay under Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 802 unless an exception would apply, but are often included in a GAL’s report or testimony. As a matter of course, a GAL prepares a report, which is filed and served on the parties and the court, and the GAL also testifies at a hearing or trial. Absent a hearsay exception that would permit the child’s statement into evidence, excluding the statement could significantly impact the court’s ability to determine the child’s best interest.

Generally, the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence does not provide for the blanket admissibil-ity of a child’s hearsay statements made to a GAL, and unlike dependency actions under the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301 et seq., in which a hearsay statement may be admissible in dispositional hear-ings, similar statements in a child custody action are inadmissible unless a hearsay exception applies. As reported to the Committee, the statement’s admissibility varies from court to court. Some courts will allow the statement into evidence since it does impact the child’s best interest; while other courts will disallow the statement as hearsay unless a hearsay exception applies.

To remedy the disparate treatment of the child’s statement, the Committee believes an exception to the hearsay rule is necessary to reflect the admissibility of the statement made to the child’s GAL as the statement often is probative of the child’s best interest. As the exception would be limited in its application to child custody cases, the Committee believes the child custody procedural rules should provide the exception rather than the Rules of Evidence. Including a hearsay exception in the procedural rules is permitted by the Rules of Evidence, see Pa.R.E. 802, and the Supreme Court has incorporated hearsay exceptions into other procedural rules. See Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 4020 and 4017(g); Pa.R.Crim.P. 574, 542(E), and 1003(E).

As such, the Committee is proposing an amendment to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.11-2 - Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. The rule proposal rewrites the rule in its entirety; however, the majority of the changes are stylistic and format changes. The substantive change related to the admissibility of a child’s hearsay statement to a GAL is included in subdivision (b)(3). As result of the proposed change, the GAL’s report and testimony would be treated similarly to an expert witness’ report and testimony under Pa.R.E. 701 - 706.

All comments, concerns, and suggestions concerning this rule proposal are welcome.



Proposed amendment of Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2

The Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee is planning to propose to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the amendment of Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2 — No Post-Trial Motions. Motions for Reconsideration — for the reasons set forth in the accompanying publication report. Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No 103(a)(1), the proposal is being published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for comments, suggestions, or objections prior to submission to the Supreme Court.

Any reports, notes, or comments in the proposal have been inserted by the Committee for the convenience of those using the rules. They neither will constitute a part of the rules nor will be officially adopted by the Supreme Court.






Bruce J. Ferguson, CounselDomestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee



Fax: [email protected]

All communications in reference to the proposal should be received by February 12, 2021. E-mail is the preferred method for submitting comments, suggestions, or objections; any e-mailed submission need not be reproduced and resubmitted via mail. The Committee will acknowledge receipt of all submissions.

By the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee

The Honorable Daniel J. CliffordChair


RULE PROPOSAL 182 Rule 1930.2. No Post-Trial Practice. Motions for Reconsideration

(a) There shall be no motions for post-trial relief in any domestic relations matter, including Protection of Victims of Sexual Violence or Intimidation matters.

Note: See Pa.R.C.P. No. 1957. * * * The following text replaces subdivisions (b) - (e) entirely * * *

(b) Motion for Reconsideration. Within 30 days of the entry of an order, a party aggrieved by the court’s order may file with the court a motion for reconsideration.

(1) Reconsideration Granted. If the court grants the motion for reconsideration and enter its order within the 30-day appeal period as provided in Pa.R.A.P. 903:

Note: See Pa.R.A.P. 903. A party shall file the Notice of Appeal within 30 days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is taken, except as otherwise set forth in that rule.

(i) The underlying order under reconsideration remains in effect pending the court’s reconsideration decision unless the court, upon motion of a party or sua sponte:

(A) vacates the underlying order; or

(B) stays the underlying order.

(ii) During the 120-day period provided in subdivision (b)(1)(iii), the court may order additional testimony, and as a result, the court need not render its reconsidered decision within 120 days.

(iii) Reconsidered Decision. Except as set forth in subdivi-sion (b)(1)(ii):

(A) the court shall enter the reconsidered decision within 120 days from the date the court granted the motion for reconsideration; or

(B) if the court does not enter a reconsidered decision within 120 days, the underlying order shall be deemed affirmed.

(iv) Notice of Appeal. The time for filing a notice of appeal will begin to run anew from:

(A) the day the court enters the reconsidered deci-sion; or

(B) the 121st day after the motion for reconsideration was granted, when the underlying order has been deemed affirmed as provided in subdivision (b)(1)(iii)(B).

(2) Reconsideration Denied. If the court denies the motion for reconsideration within the underlying order’s 30-day appeal period, the time for filing a notice of appeal will run as if the motion for reconsideration had never been presented to the court.

* * * The preceding text replaces subdivisions (b) - (e) entirely * * *


PUBLICATION REPORT

Rule Proposal 182

The Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee (Committee) is proposing an amendment to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2 as that rule relates to a motion for reconsideration. The pro-posed amendment would address the status of the underlying order pending the trial court’s recon-

sideration. Currently, the Rules of Civil Procedure do not address the order’s status. Although the Committee is proposing the amendment, it believes the proposal is merely a codification of current practice.

The Committee received a rulemaking request suggesting that Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2 should be amended to clarify the status of the underlying order that a party has requested reconsid-eration from the trial court. The rule as written provides guidance on requesting reconsideration but does not indicate whether the underlying order is effective pending the trial court’s reconsideration.

Unlike other civil actions, post-trial motions are precluded for domestic relations actions. See Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2(a). A party seeking relief from a court’s order may appeal, request the trial court reconsider its order, or both. As noted in the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, the trial court has the authority to reconsider its order even after an appeal is filed. See Pa.R.A.P. 1701(b). Generally, a domestic relations order appealed is effective unless the appellant requests a stay or supersedeas pending the appeal from the trial court as provided in Pa.R.A.P. 1731(b) and 1732. However, there is no similar provision in the Rules of Civil Procedure as it relates to recon-sideration. The Committee is proposing an amendment to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2 that would provide similar treatment of an order pending reconsideration; in other words, the order is effective pending reconsideration unless the moving party requests the trial court stay or vacate the order.

Subdivisions (b) through (e) have been entirely rewritten into an outline format with the substantive change noted above included in subdivision (b)(1)(i). Otherwise, Pa.R.C.P. No. 1930.2 remains substantively unchanged. The 1994 Explanatory Comment is deleted as it essentially reiter-ates the rule text without further explanation.

All comments, concerns, and suggestions concerning this rule proposal are welcome.


IN RE:

ORDER AMENDING RULE 213 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA BAR ADMISSION RULES

::::::

NO. 859

SUPREME COURT RULES

DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of November, 2020, upon the recommendation of the Board of Law Examiners, the proposal having been published for public comment in the Pennsylvania Bulletin at volume 50, no. 32 (August 8, 2020):

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rule 213 of the Bar Admission Rules is amended to add subpart (c) as set forth in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and the amend-ment shall be effective immediately.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined.

Rule 213. Hearings Before the Board

***

(c) Remote Hearing; Remote Testimony. The Board may, at its own instance or upon request of an applicant, conduct a hearing under sub-section (b) via telephone or other method of advanced communication technology (“ACT”). The Board likewise may, in its discretion, allow a wit-ness to testify via ACT. Any witness testifying via ACT must provide valid, government-issued photo identification to the Board office in advance of the witness’s testimony. At least three business days in advance of a remote hearing, the applicant shall provide to the Board the names of all wit-nesses, and copies of any documents or exhibits that the applicant intends to present at the hearing and which are not already part of the Board’s record. Documents and exhibits shall be transmitted electronically via the Board’s secure website unless otherwise directed by the Board. If an applicant is unable to provide such documents or exhibits in advance of the hearing, the Board may, in its discretion, hold the record open and grant an applicant additional time to provide such documents or exhibits. Notice of the technology requirements for the remote hearing, along with instructions for counsel regarding use of the technology in the course of the hearing, shall be posted on the Board’s website and included when giv-ing notice of a remote hearing. An applicant is responsible for complying with the technology requirements and for being familiar with their use.

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL

NOTICE TO THE BAR

HEARING ON SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY’S MOTION TO EXTEND ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 52 OF 2020

And now, this 23rd day of November, 2020, upon consideration of Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority’s Motion to Extend Administrative Order 52 of 2020, the




Court hereby schedules a hearing on the Motion for November 25, 2020 at 3:30 p.m. At the time of the hearing, SEPTA shall be prepared to present evidence and/or testimony as to the issues raised in the Motion and any response thereto.

SEPTA shall send a copy of its Motion via electronic mail to any interested party or coun-sel upon written request to its counsel Mark Gottlieb, Esquire, Offit Kurman. Any written response to the Motion shall be filed no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 24, 2020 via the electronic case filing system by using docket number May Term, 2020 No. 00349 with a courtesy copy emailed to SEPTA’s counsel. The Court will utilize advanced communication technology to conduct the hear-ing. A zoom link will be emailed to counsel two hours prior to the hearing.Honorable Lisette Shirdan-Harris

Administrative JudgeTrial Division


Honorable Gary S. GlazerSupervising Judge

Trial Division – Commerce

NOTICE

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CITY TRUSTS VACANCY

One vacancy presently exist on the Board of Directors of City Trusts. All interested parties seeking consideration for this position should submit a cover letter and resume by Thursday, December 31, 2020, to the office of the Chair of the Selection Committee, the Honorable Timika R. Lane, 1301 Filbert St, Suite 1216, Philadelphia, PA 19107. An election to fill this position will be held at the Board of Judges Meeting on February 18, 2021.

THE PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT CIVIL DIVISION

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAR IN PERSON, VIA ZOOM OR TELEPHONICALLY

You may appear at the hearing Via Zoom, Telephonically or In Person. If you wish to attend Via Zoom or Telephonically, please notify the court of your desire to do so by calling the court at 215-686-2910 no later than five days before the hearing. Untimely requests maybe accommodated based upon both timeliness of the request and the requester’s ability to submit exhibits for docketing prior the hearing.

It is hereby ORDRED that all parties participating in Zoom and telephonic court pro-ceedings, shall take the following actions in addition to any other obligations mandated by the law or this court’s Civil Rules:

1. At least five days prior to the Zoom or telephonic court proceeding, all parties shall provide to the court and to all other parties copies of all documents, including photographs, which each party intends to use during the court proceeding with the exception of any documents other than photographs that have been scanned into the CLAIMS system. The documents shall be provided to all parties and the court as an email attachment. If a party does not have another party’s email address, copies of the documents should be sent by first-class mail, postage prepaid. The email to the court should be sent to [email protected] and [email protected]., and [email protected]. The subject line of the email shall have the case’s docket number and the name of the party who is sending the email.

2. Prior to a Zoom court proceeding, the court will send an email to each party with the information needed to join the Zoom court proceeding. Each party shall join the Zoom meeting no less than five minutes before the court proceeding is scheduled to begin and wait for the court to start and join the Zoom meeting.

3. Prior to a telephonic court proceeding, the party, witness or attorney who will be appearing telephonically must send an email to the court that includes the telephone number of that party, witness or attorney. Each party shall be available to receive a telephone call from the court and shall remain available until contacted by the court.

4. The court will digitally record the court proceeding and a transcript of the proceeding may be ordered from the court. During the court proceeding, no party shall record the proceeding other than by taking informal notes.

Effective Date November 13, 2020 BY THE COURT: Matthew S. Wolf /S/ JUDGE

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIAAPPELLATE COURT PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE


Proposed Amendment of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)

The Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee is considering proposing to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the amendment of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c) governing remand to the trial court for service nunc pro tunc of the statement of the errors complained of on appeal for the reasons

set forth in the accompanying explanatory report. Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(1), the proposal is being published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for comments, suggestions, or objections prior to submission to the Supreme Court.

Any reports, notes, or comments in the proposal have been inserted by the Committee for the convenience of those using the rules. They will neither constitute a part of the rules nor be officially adopted by the Supreme Court.



Karla M. Shultz, CounselAppellate Court Procedural Rules Committee



FAX: [email protected]

All communications in reference to the proposal should be received by January 20, 2021. E-mail is the preferred method for submitting comments, suggestions, or objections; any e-mailed submission need not be reproduced and resubmitted via mail. The Committee will acknowledge receipt of all submissions.

By the Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee,

Patricia A. McCullough Chair

PUBLICATION REPORT

Proposed Amendment of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)

The Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee is considering proposing the amend-ment of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c) governing remand to the trial court for service nunc pro tunc of the state-ment of the errors complained of on appeal (“Statement”). This amendment is intended to provide procedures for an appellant to remediate waiver due to either the failure to serve the Statement or the failure to timely serve the Statement.

At present, Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c) permits the remand for the filing of a Statement when the appellant has either failed to file a Statement or failed to timely file a Statement. An appellant may seek an order remanding for remediation in civil cases for good cause shown. A remand is available in criminal cases when the appellate court is convinced that counsel was per se ineffective and the trial court did not file an opinion.

Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c) is silent whether a remand is permissive when an appellant has either failed to serve a Statement or failed to timely serve a Statement. Case law indicates that defective service of a Statement results in a waiver of all appellate issues. See Commonwealth v. Eldred, 207 A.3d 404 (Pa. Super. 2019). It seemed inconsistent to allow a remand to address deficiencies in the filing of a Statement, but not deficiencies in service, when both may operate to deny appellate review by operation. Accordingly, the Committee proposes to extend the procedures for seeking a remand to include instances of defective service, providing all other requirements of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c) are met.

All comments, concerns, and suggestions concerning this proposal are welcome.

Rule 1925. Opinion in Support of Order.

* * *

(c) Remand.

(1) An appellate court may remand in either a civil or criminal case for a determination as to whether a Statement had been filed and/or served or timely filed and/or served.

(2) Upon application of the appellant and for good cause shown, an appel-late court may remand in a civil case for the filing or service nunc pro tunc of a Statement or for amendment or supplementation of a timely filed and served Statement and for a concurrent supplemental opinion. If an appellant has a statutory or rule-based right to counsel, good cause shown includes a failure by counsel to file or serve a Statement timely or at all.

(3) If an appellant represented by counsel in a criminal case was ordered to file and serve a Statement and either failed to do so, or filed or served an untimely Statement, such that the appellate court is convinced that counsel has been per se inef-fective, and the trial court did not file an opinion, the appellate court may remand for appointment of new counsel, the filing or service of a Statement nunc pro tunc, and the preparation and filing of an opinion by the judge.

(4) In a criminal case, counsel may file of record and serve on the judge a statement of intent to file an Anders/Santiago brief in lieu of filing a Statement. If, upon review of the Anders/Santiago brief, the appellate court believes that there are arguably meritorious issues for review, those issues will not be waived; instead, the appellate court may remand for the filing and service of a Statement, a supplemental opinion pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a), or both. Upon remand, the trial court may, but is not required to, replace appellant’s counsel.

* * *

Official Note:

* * *

Subparagraph (c)(1): This subparagraph applies to both civil and criminal cases and allows an appel-late court to seek additional information—whether by supplementation of the record or additional



briefing—if it is not apparent whether an initial or supplemental Statement was filed and/or served or timely filed and/or served. Subparagraph (c)(2): This subparagraph allows an appellate court to remand a civil case to allow an initial, amended, or supplemental Statement and/or a supplemental opinion. See also 42 Pa.C.S. § 706. In 2019, the rule was amended to clarify that for those civil appellants who have a statutory or rule[s]-based right to counsel (such as appellants in post-conviction relief, juvenile, parental termina-tion, or civil commitment proceedings) good cause includes a failure of counsel to file a Statement or a timely Statement.

Subparagraph (c)(3): This subparagraph allows an appellate court to remand in criminal cases only when an appellant, who is represented by counsel, has completely failed to respond to an order to file and serve a Statement or has failed to do so timely. It is thus narrower than subparagraph (c)(2). See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Burton, 973 A.2d 428, 431 (Pa. Super. 2009); Commonwealth v. Halley, 870 A.2d 795, 801 (Pa. 2005); Commonwealth v. West, 883 A.2d 654, 657 (Pa. Super. 2005). Per se ineffectiveness applies in all circumstances in which an appeal is completely foreclosed by counsel’s actions, but not in circumstances in which the actions narrow or serve to foreclose the appeal in part. Commonwealth v. Rosado, 150 A.3d 425, 433-35 (Pa. 2016). Pro se appellants are excluded from this exception to the waiver doctrine as set forth in Commonwealth v. Lord, 719 A.2d 306 (Pa. 1998). Direct appeal rights have typically been restored through a post-conviction relief process, but when the ineffectiveness is apparent and per se, the court in West recognized that the more effective way to resolve such per se ineffectiveness is to remand for the filing of a Statement and opinion. See West, 883 A.2d at 657; see also Burton (late filing of Statement is per se ineffective assistance of counsel). The procedure set forth in West is codified in subparagraph (c)(3). As the West court recognized, this rationale does not apply when waiver occurs due to the improper filing of a Statement. In such circumstances, relief may occur only through the post-conviction relief process and only upon dem-onstration by the appellant that, but for the deficiency of counsel, it was reasonably probable that the appeal would have been successful. An appellant must be able to identify per se ineffectiveness to secure a remand under this section, and any appellant who is able to demonstrate per se ineffective-ness is entitled to a remand. Accordingly, this subparagraph does not raise the concerns addressed in Johnson v. Mississippi, 486 U.S. 578, 588-89 (1988) (observing that where a rule has not been consis-tently or regularly applied, it is not—under federal law—an adequate and independent state ground for affirming petitioner’s conviction.)

Subparagraph (c)(4): This subparagraph clarifies the special expectations and duties of a criminal lawyer. Even lawyers seeking to withdraw pursuant to the procedures set forth in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) are obligated to comply with all rules. However, because a lawyer will not file an Anders/Santiago brief without concluding that there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, this amendment allows a lawyer to file, in lieu of a Statement, a representation that no errors are asserted because the lawyer is (or intends to be) seeking to withdraw under Anders/Santiago. At that point, the appellate court will reverse or remand for a supplemental Statement and/or opinion if it finds potentially non-frivolous issues during its consti-tutionally required review of the record.


IN RE:

RECOGNITION OF THE SPECIAL COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION OF PENNSYLVANIA AS THE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES, AND AS TO CERTAIN MATTERS, JUDGES OF THE PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT

:::::::::

NO. 858

SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET

ORDERPER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of November, 2020, pursuant to the authority set forth in 42 Pa.C.S. §1728, the Special Court Judges Association of Pennsylvania is hereby designated as the asso-ciation that is most broadly representative of the Magisterial District Judges of this Commonwealth.

The Special Court Judges Association of Pennsylvania is hereby also designated as the association that is most broadly representative of the judges of the Philadelphia Municipal Court as to matters that do not fall within those judges’ representation by the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges.

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAPHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT

President Judge Administrative Order

No. 65 of 2020 _____________________________________________________________________________

In re: Residential Eviction Moratorium and Exceptions. Service of Writs and Alias Writs of Possession

ORDER

AND NOW, this 6th day of November, 2020, pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 1952(B)(2) and in light of the September 1, 2020 Order of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC Order), it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED THAT:

(1) No writs of possession nor alias writs of possession previously issued by the Phila-delphia Municipal Court shall be served in any residential case (i.e., no residential evictions) until after December 31, 2020, except upon order of court upon good cause shown as provided in this order.

(2) In residential cases, Plaintiff Landlords who have obtained a judgement of possession may seek leave of court to be exempted from the moratorium imposed by Section (1) above by filing a petition, supported by exhibit(s) and sworn affidavits or declarations subject to the penalty of perjury, establishing good cause to serve a writ of possession or an alias writ of possession, pursuant to any of the following bases:

(a) Good faith belief based on first-hand knowledge that the tenant has already va-cated the unit/property.

(b) Breach of the lease terms, such as alleged criminal conduct or damage to the property, served as the basis for the Judgement of Possession. Habitual non-payment, late payment of rent or non-payment of utilities shall not be good cause under this order. Landlords must demonstrate a material breach in support of their petition.

(c) Other compelling basis not specifically enumerated above, which shall be strictly scrutinized to ensure that the negative effects of a residential eviction during the pandemic are mitigated to the satisfaction of the Court.

(3) Notwithstanding the relief available as provided in Section (2) above, Plaintiff Landlords are not entitled to request leave of court for permission to serve writs of possession or alias writs of possession if the eviction is otherwise prohibited by law, such as provided in the September 1, 2020 Order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

(4) Calculation of the six-month period set forth in Rule 126(e) (“[a]n alias writ of posses-sion may not be issued after six months from the date of the judgment for possession without leave of court”) and the 180-day period for serving alias writs of possession (the practice of the Philadelphia Municipal Court is to serve the alias writ of pos-session within 180 days from the entry of a judgment for possession), shall exclude the time from March 16, 2020 through and including December 31, 2020 from the computation of those time periods.

(5) This Order supersedes conflicting provisions contained in any prior Administrative Order.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Patrick F. Dugan _______________________________

Patrick F. Dugan, President Judge Philadelphia Municipal Court


DATE: November 4, 2020

TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL

NOTICE TO THE BAR

PROTOCOL FOR CONTESTED DISCOVERY MOTIONSDURING JUDICIAL EMERGENCY CREATED BY COVID-19

In order to facilitate the prompt resolution of contested discovery motions, the Court hereby Orders that parties follow this Protocol for Contested Discovery Motions until further Notice to the Bar.

This Protocol applies to any civil matter currently pending or to be filed in which a party has filed a Praecipe for Contested Discovery Motion in accordance with the June 2, 2020 NOTICE TO THE BAR OF PROTOCOL FOR DISCOVERY MOTIONS DURING JUDICIAL EMERGENCY CREATED BY COVID-19 and any extensions or amendments thereto.

The court hereby orders the following protocol:

(1) All discovery motions for which a Praecipe for Contested Discovery Motion and response thereto have been filed with the Court will be assigned to a Judicial Team Leader for adjudication.

(2) Oral Argument on Contested Discovery Motions will be at the Court’s discretion.

(3) If oral argument is necessary, the court will utilize telephonic means or advanced communication technology (i.e., Zoom, etc.). The date, time and manner of the hearing will be communicated and confirmed to all counsel and unpresented parties.

(4) Questions regarding this protocol should be directed to Mr. Peter J. Divon, Manager of the Discovery Court Program by e-mail to [email protected].

Honorable Lisette Shirdan-HarrisAdministrative JudgeTrial Division


Honorable Gary S. GlazerSupervising JudgeTrial Division – Commerce


TRIAL DIVISION -CIVIL

Monday, November 2, 2020

NOTICE TO THE BAR

HONORABLE DANIEL J. ANDERSAPPOINTED SUPERVISING JUDGE OF THE

TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL SECTION

Please take notice that the Honorable Daniel J. Anders is duly appointed Supervising Judge of the Trial Division – Civil Section, effective Monday, November 2, 2020.

Honorable Lisette Shirdan-Harris Administrative Judge Trial Division