Citation Numbers: 38 A.2d 709, 155 Pa. Super. 138
Judges: OPINION BY BALDRIGE, J., July 15, 1944:
Filed Date: 4/19/1944
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/13/2023
Argued April 19, 1944.
Pete Petrovich acquired under deed dated May 14, 1925, title to 3 1/2 acres unseated land in the Borough of Trafford, Westmoreland County, which thereafter was assessed in his name. He became delinquent in the payment of his taxes and as a result the property was sold by the county treasurer to the county commissioners. On September 16, 1941, the commissioners petitioned the court of common pleas for authority to sell *Page 139
the land under the provisions of the Act of July 18, 1935, P.L. 1168,
The defendant's answer raised the question of law that the petitioner could not attack the validity of the sale by a summary proceeding such as a rule to show cause; that petitioner would have to resort to either an action of ejectment or an equity proceeding. This position was upheld by the court below and the rule discharged. This appeal followed.
The action of the court below was proper. A rule is not an original process but is "auxiliary, and for the facilitating of jurisdiction already acquired," (Mitchell, Motions and Rules, p. 3) except where it is authorized by statute to be used as an original process. For instance, one in possession of land may obtain a rule against a person claiming title to bring an action of ejectment: Short v. Board of School District of Upper MorelandTownship,
The Supreme Court in Evans v. Maury,
In an ejectment action or an equity proceeding all the facts may be presented, the rights of the parties strictly guarded, and the controversial issues determined so that the appellant is not without a remedy if his rights have been infringed upon. For the substantive law applicable to an action of ejectment by a *Page 141
former owner of land claiming right of possession against the purchaser at the tax sale see the comprehensive opinion of Judge KELLER (now President Judge) in Ryan v. Bruhin,
The order of the court below is affirmed.
Evans v. Maury , 112 Pa. 300 ( 1886 )
H. O. L. C. v. Edwards Et Ux. , 329 Pa. 529 ( 1938 )
Knox v. Noggle , 328 Pa. 302 ( 1937 )
Beckman v. Altoona Trust Co. , 332 Pa. 545 ( 1938 )
Boocks's Petition , 303 Pa. 363 ( 1931 )
Media Title & Trust Co. v. Kelly , 185 Pa. 131 ( 1898 )
Short v. Board of Sch. Dist. , 108 Pa. Super. 503 ( 1932 )
Kowatch v. Home B. L. Assn. , 131 Pa. Super. 517 ( 1938 )
Ryan v. Bruhin , 88 Pa. Super. 61 ( 1925 )