Quinn v. Pershing

• Decision Date: 21 May 1951
• Citation: 367 Pa. 426,80 A.2d 712
• Parties: QUINN et al. v. PERSHING et al. Appeal of INTERNATIONAL FUR & LEATHER WORKERS UNION OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

80 A.2d 712

367 Pa. 426

QUINN et al. v. PERSHING et al.

Appeal of INTERNATIONAL FUR & LEATHER WORKERS UNION OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

May 21, 1951

Bernard G. Quinn and Anthony R. Massing, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all of the members of the United Leather Workers International Union, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, Lafayette Building, Philadelphia, Pa., brought action for libel against George O. Pershing, International Fur and Leather Workers Union of the United States and Canada, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, and another. The Court of Common Pleas, Forest County, at No. 19 September Term, 1948, Allison D. Wade, J dismissed defendant union's preliminary objections to amended complaint, and it appealed. The Supreme Court, No 179, March Term, 1950, Stearne, J., held that statute providing that service of process upon officer of association or person in charge of place where association regularly conducts business or association activity shall be deemed service upon association did not abridge privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, or violate due process, and service upon officer of union which had main offices in New York, at its regional offices in Pennsylvania was valid.

Order affirmed.

Samuel E. Grant, Oil City, for appellant.

Thomas J. Mullaney, John M. McNally, Jr., Philadelphia, C. Dick Cable, Tionesta, for appellee.

Before DREW, C. J., and STERN, STEARNE, JONES, BELL, LADNER and CHIDSEY, JJ.

ALLEN M. STEARNE, Justice.

Plaintiffs, a leather workers union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, have instituted this action of libel against three defendants, viz.: one George Pershing, the local leather workers union in Forest County and the International Leather Workers Union whose main offices are in New York State and whose regional offices are in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. The International Union is affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. The cause of action arose from certain alleged libelous statements originating in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, allegedly made by defendants concerning plaintiff-union in a labor election where it was to be determined whether the employes desired to be represented by the American Federation of Labor or by no union. The employes voted, by a narrow margin, to be represented by no union.

Defendant International was served in this action by handing a copy of the complaint to defendant Pershing whom plaintiffs maintain was an officer of defendant International in charge of its ‘ business' office or place of carrying on its organizational activities at Williamsport, Pennsylvania. The sole question raised by preliminary objections is whether the defendant, Internatioal Union, was properly served. The court below dismissed the objections. Defendant appealed pursuant to the Act of March 5, 1925, P.L. 23, sec. 1, 12 P.S. § 672 and Pa.R.C.P. 1451(b)(7), 12 P.S. Appendix.

The printed record consists of the docket entries and a portion of the opinion of the court below. It does not contain, inter alia, the pleadings, the preliminary objections, a history of the case or the complete opinion of the court below. As such it is wholly inadequate. We have been obliged to review the original record. As no motion has been made to quash because of the obvious violation of our rules, we have decided to review the proceeding.

In order to secure service upon the International Union, defendant, (hereinafter designated as defendant), in Williamsport, the sheriff of Forest County deputized the sheriff of Lycoming County to make the service in that county. The sheriff of Lycoming County made the following return:

‘ Williamsport, Pa., September 27, 1948 at 2:45, P. M., served the within Complaint in Trespass for Libel upon George O. Pershing, in his capacity as individual defendant and also in his capacity as agent of the International Fur and Leather

Workers Union of the United States and Canada, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, by handing true and attested copies of the same to him at 304 W. 4th St., Williamsport, Pa., and by making known to him the contents thereof, personally.

‘ So Answers,

Joseph M. Schmucker. 'An appearance was thereupon entered for defendant. Upon defendant's motion to strike off the complaint, an amended complaint was filed by permission of the court. Defendant filed preliminary objections to the amended complaint, questioning the validity of service upon defendant, which the court dismissed. This appeal followed.

Service upon defendant was made pursuant to Pennsylvania R.C.P. 2157 which provides: ‘ (a) Service of process upon an officer or a registered agent of an association, or upon the manager, clerk or other person for the time being in charge of any place where such association regularly conducts any business or association activity shall be deemed service upon the association, provided that the person served is not a plaintiff in the action.’ Appellant contends that such a rule violates the privileges and immunities clause of Article IV, sec. 2 of the United States Constitution and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution. Article I, sec. 9, P.S. Although not included in its Statement of Questions Involved, appellant apparently contends also that Pershing was not a duly authorized agent of the union upon whom service could be made so as to bind the union with service.

Discussing appellant's last contention first, the record reveals that Pershing was such ‘ officer’ or ‘ * * * manager, clerk or other person for the time being in charge of any place where such association regularly conducts any business * * *’ as contemplated by Rule 2157. The court below stated: ‘ George O. Pershing was served at 304 West Fourth Street Williamsport, Pennsylvania, the business address of the defendant-International, and, at the time and place of service, George O. Pershing was the person in charge. It was argued that a mere address, such as 304 West Fourth Street, Williamsport, Pennsylvania, might...