THE COURTS
PART I. GENERAL
[ 246 PA. CODE CHS. 300 AND 1000 ]
Proposed Adoption of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 302.1 and 302.2 and Proposed Amendment of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 314 and 1001
[45 Pa.B. 1358]
[Saturday, March 21, 2015]The Minor Court Rules Committee is planning to propose to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the adoption of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 302.1 and 302.2, as well as the amendment of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 314 and 1001, governing dismissals and transfers of civil actions for lack of jurisdiction, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying explanatory report. Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(1), the proposal is being republished 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 be officially adopted by the Supreme Court.
Additions to the text of the proposal are bolded; deletions to the text are bolded and bracketed.
The Committee invites all interested persons to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in writing to:
Pamela S. Walker, Counsel
Minor Court Rules Committee
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Judicial Center
PO Box 62635
Harrisburg, PA 17106-2635
FAX: 717-231-9526
minorrules@pacourts.usAll communications in reference to the proposal should be received by May 5, 2015. 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 Minor Court Rules Committee
BRADLEY K. MOSS,
Chair
Annex A
TITLE 246. MINOR COURT CIVIL RULES
PART I. GENERAL
CHAPTER 300. CIVIL ACTION (Editor's Note: Rules 302.1 and 302.2 are new and printed in regular type to enhance readability.)
Rule 302.1. Dismissal for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction.
A. The magisterial district judge may dismiss a complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.
B. A party may request a hearing for the limited purpose of contesting personal jurisdiction. Such a request or the party's appearance at such a hearing shall not constitute a waiver of the right to raise any defense including questions of jurisdiction or venue.
C. The magisterial district judge shall issue written notice of the dismissal to the parties.
Official Note: This rule addresses dismissal due to lack of personal jurisdiction. Jurisdictional issues must be raised at a hearing. Personal jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear and determine a case as long as there are minimum contacts between the parties and the Commonwealth. Personal jurisdiction over persons in the Commonwealth is established by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5301. Personal jurisdiction over persons outside the Commonwealth is established by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5322. In contrast, venue refers to the geographical limitations on a court's authority to hear a case that it otherwise has jurisdiction over. See Rule 302 regarding venue.
Rule 302.1B is derived in part from Pa.C.R.P. 1012(a), and provides a method for a party to contest personal jurisdiction, without waiving such objection.
An appeal is the method for challenging a dismissal made on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction. See Rules 1001—1002.
Rule 302.2. Transfer of Action for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
A. When an action is commenced in a magisterial district court but the court does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action, the magisterial district court shall not dismiss the action if there is another court of appropriate jurisdiction within the Commonwealth in which the action could originally have been brought.
B. The magisterial district court shall transfer the action at the cost of the plaintiff to the court of appropriate jurisdiction.
C. The magisterial district court in which the action is commenced shall transfer the complaint to the prothonotary or clerk of the court to which the action is transferred.
Official Note: This rule authorizes a magisterial district court to transfer a case to another court within the Commonwealth when the magisterial district court does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action. The subject matter jurisdiction of the magisterial district courts is governed by Section 1515 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 1515. In contrast, venue refers to the geographical limitations on a court's authority to hear a case that it otherwise has jurisdiction over. See Rule 302 regarding venue.
Rule 302.2 is derived in part from Section 5103(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103(a). ''If an appeal or other matter is taken to or brought in a court or magisterial district of the Commonwealth which does not have jurisdiction of the appeal or other matter, the court or magisterial district judge shall not quash such appeal or dismiss the matter, but shall transfer the record thereof to the proper tribunal of this Commonwealth, where the appeal or other matter shall be treated as if originally filed in the transferee tribunal on the date when the appeal or other matter was first filed in a court or magisterial district of this Commonwealth.'' 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103(a). Rule 302.2 is also derived in part from Pa.R.C.P. No. 213(f) (authorizing transfer of actions for lack of subject matter jurisdiction).
When a complaint is transferred under this rule, it is treated as if it was originally filed in the transferee court on the date first filed in the magisterial district court. It is the intent of this rule that cases may be transferred to any Pennsylvania court with appropriate jurisdiction and venue, including the Philadelphia Municipal Court. Likewise, nothing in this rule prohibits a court other than a magisterial district court from transferring a case to a magisterial district court with proper jurisdiction and venue, in accordance with the procedural rules of the transferring court.
There may be additional costs when a case is transferred, including, but not limited to, service costs.
Rule 314. Return, Waiver and Failure of Service; Reinstatement.
* * * * * C. [The] Except for a limited purpose hearing requested pursuant to Rule 302.1B, the appearance of a defendant in person or by representative or the filing by a defendant of a claim in the case shall be deemed a waiver of any defect in service but not a waiver of a defect in venue.
* * * * * Official Note: The hearing referenced is subdivision C is for the limited purpose of contesting personal jurisdiction. The provision concerning appearance not being a waiver of venue was inserted in subdivision C of this rule to prevent the concentration of business in the office of a favorable magisterial district judge. Also, the public cannot generally be expected to be aware of venue provisions. See Rule 302H regarding improper venue.
* * * * *
CHAPTER 1000. APPEALS
APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WITH RESPECT TO JUDGMENTS AND OTHER DECISIONS OF MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES IN CIVIL MATTERS Rule 1001. Definitions.
As used in this chapter1 :
(1) Judgment—A judgment rendered by a magisterial district judge under Rule 319, 322 or 514, or a dismissal rendered by a magisterial district judge pursuant to Rule 302.1.
* * * * * Official Note: Although one of the purposes of the definitions in this rule is to avoid needless repetition throughout these appellate rules, some of the definitions are intended to state or clarify the law as well.
The definition of ''judgment'' includes a dismissal due to lack of personal jurisdiction.
In connection with the definition of ''appeal'' in subdivision (2), see also Rule 1007 and the note thereto.
* * * * *
REPORT
Proposed Adoption of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 302.1 and 302.2, and Proposed Amendment of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 314 and 1001
Dismissals and Transfers for Lack of Jurisdiction I. Introduction
The Minor Court Rules Committee (''Committee'') is planning to propose to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the adoption of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. Rules 302.1 and 302.2, as well as the amendment of Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. Nos. 314 and 1001, governing dismissals and transfers of civil actions for lack of jurisdiction. The goal of the proposed new rules and amendments is to establish procedures when a case is brought in a magisterial district court, but the court is lacking either personal jurisdiction or subject matter jurisdiction.
II. Discussion
The Committee has been examining procedures related to withdrawals, settlements and dismissals of cases in the magisterial district courts.1 In conducting its review, the Committee observed that the rules did not have procedures for addressing cases where the magisterial district court is lacking either personal jurisdiction over a party or subject matter jurisdiction. The Committee previously published proposed rules on this topic in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for public comment. See 44 Pa.B. 479 (January 25, 2014). After reviewing comments received in response to the publication, the Committee determined that further review and revision of the proposal was warranted.
With regard to personal jurisdiction, the Committee further revised proposed new Rule 302.1 to require that jurisdictional issues be raised at a hearing, and permitting such a hearing to be held for the limited purpose of contesting jurisdiction, without waiver of future defenses. The Committee also added definitions of venue and personal jurisdiction to the Official Note, as well as statutory citations to distinguish between personal jurisdiction over persons within and outside the Commonwealth. The Committee is concurrently seeking comments on a proposal that would rescind the rules governing writs of certiorari and making correlative rule changes.2
Currently, jurisdictional challenges are addressed by seeking a writ of certiorari. Because the Committee plans to ultimately recommend the rescission of the certiorari rules, proposed new Rule 302.1 does not identify certiorari as the vehicle for review of a magisterial district court decision on personal jurisdiction; rather, the Official Note to proposed new Rule 302.1 identifies an appeal as the method for challenging a dismissal made on the grounds of personal jurisdiction.
With regard to subject matter jurisdiction, the Committee further revised the Official Note to proposed new Rule 302.2 to distinguish the statutorily established subject matter jurisdiction of magisterial district courts from venue.
Because proposed new Rule 302.1 now provides for a limited purpose hearing for contesting personal jurisdiction determinations, the Committee proposes amending Rule 314C to provide for an exception to the general rule that ''appearance of a defendant in person or by representative...shall be deemed a waiver of any defect in service.'' See Rule 314C. Additionally, the Committee proposes amending the definition of ''judgment'' in Rule 1001 to include a dismissal made pursuant to proposed new Rule 302.1. As the Committee is planning to propose the rescission of the rules governing writs of certiorari, adding dismissals pursuant to proposed new Rule 302.1 to the definition of a judgment will permit such dismissals to be challenged via appeals.
III. Proposed Rule Changes
Proposed Rule 302.1A provides that a magisterial district judge may dismiss a complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. Proposed Rule 302.1B provides for a hearing for the limited purpose of contesting personal jurisdiction, and establishes that such a hearing will not constitute a waiver of the right to raise any defense, such as jurisdiction or venue. Proposed Rule 302.1C provides that the magisterial district judge shall issue written notice of the dismissal. The Official Note provides that jurisdictional issues must be raised at a hearing. The Official Note also sets forth the statutory authority for establishing personal jurisdiction, on persons inside and outside the Commonwealth, as well as distinguishing personal jurisdiction from venue. Finally, the Official Note advises that an appeal is the method for challenging a dismissal made on the grounds of personal jurisdiction.
Proposed Rule 302.2 is derived in part from 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103(a) and Pa.R.C.P. No. 213(f). The proposed new rule provides for the transfer of actions for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and notes that there may be additional costs to the plaintiff when a case is transferred, including, but not limited to, service costs. The Official Note to proposed new Rule 302.2 distinguishes subject matter jurisdiction from venue.
The proposed amendment to Rule 314C addresses the limited purpose hearing authorized by proposed Rule 302.1B. It provides that such limited purpose hearings are exempt from the general provision that ''the appearance of a defendant in person or by representative or the filing by the defendant of a claim in the case shall be deemed a waiver of any defect in service but not a waiver of a defect in venue.'' See Rule 314C.
Finally, the proposed amendment to the definition of ''judgment'' in Rule 1001 would include a dismissal rendered by a magisterial district judge pursuant to Rule 302.1, as well as amend the Official Note to explain that the Rule 302.1 dismissal is due to lack of personal jurisdiction.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 15-495. Filed for public inspection March 20, 2015, 9:00 a.m.] _______
1 Rules in 1000 series. Since these rules are a chapter of the Rules of Civil Procedure Governing Actions and Proceedings before Magisterial District Judges, the rules in the 200 series will also apply.
1 The Supreme Court adopted a procedural rule pertaining to withdrawals and settlements. See Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Order No. 368, Magisterial Docket No. 1 (July 21, 2014); Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. No. 320.
2 Any final recommendation to the Court on this matter will conform to the current status of the rescission of certiorari proposal.
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
