189 A.2d 849

A. J. Aberman, Inc. v. White Cunningham, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.March 26, 1963.
April 16, 1963.

Judgments — Finality — Appellate decision — Subsequent proceedings in court below — Practice.

Where it appeared that in a previous appeal the Supreme Court had affirmed an order refusing to open a judgment, it wa Held that the court below had properly refused to permit appellant to re-argue the issues already decided against it.

Before BELL, C. J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O’BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.

Appeal, No. 93, March T., 1963, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Jan. T., 1961, No. 1849, in case of A. J. Aberman, Inc. v. White Cunningham, a partnership composed of W. J. White, Jr. and Theodore W. Cunningham. Order affirmed; reargument refused April 24, 1963.

Petition to open judgment.

Order entered sustaining motion to discharge petition, and order affirmed by Supreme Court; motion for reargument after decision of Supreme Court denied, order by BROSKY, J. Defendant appealed.

Page 590

Paul Ginsburg, for appellant.

David R. Levin, J. Leonard Smith, Jr., and Reed, Smith, Shaw McClay, for appellee.

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE COHEN, April 16, 1963:

This litigation began with appellant’s petition to open a judgment entered against it. After hearing the matter on the merits, the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County entered an order on June 5, 1962 sustaining judgment-creditor’s motion to discharge the petition to open judgment. Appellant appealed the order to this Court. In a decision handed down on November 13, 1962, we affirmed the order of the court below agreeing that appellant had presented no basis for opening the judgment. (409 Pa. 148).

Although our decision should have terminated this litigation, appellant’s recusancy led to post-decision motions in the court below attempting to re-argue the issues which previously had been decided against it. The court below properly refused to hold further hearings in this matter.

Order affirmed.