Donna L. Eisenhart v. Wellspan Health d/b/a Wellspan York Hospital

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court vacated an order denying Donna L. Eisenhart’s petition to reinstate a premises-liability action dismissed for inactivity. The court held that the record did not establish proper service of the notice of proposed termination under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 or the Rule 236 notice of the termination order, so the applicable filing periods were not triggered and remand was required.

Holdings

1. A docket entry identifying a notice of proposed termination and a copy of the notice bearing counsel's correct address do not establish that the notice was served in a manner required by Rule 230.2(b). Without record evidence showing compliant service, the thirty-day period for filing a statement of intention to proceed did not begin to run, and termination was improper.
2. The prothonotary's docket entry stating only "Case terminated per local rule 230.2" did not satisfy Rule 236(b)'s requirement that the docket note the giving of notice of the order. Because valid Rule 236 notice was not established, the sixty-day period for seeking reinstatement was never triggered, and the trial court was required to reinstate the action under Rule 230.2(d)(2).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the record established that the notice of proposed termination was served in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2(b), such that the thirty-day period for filing a statement of intention to proceed began to run.
2. Whether the record established that Rule 236 notice of the order terminating the action was given, such that the sixty-day period for filing a petition to reinstate began to run.

Disposition

vacated