132 A.2d 212
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.April 18, 1957.
May 27, 1957.
Practice — Execution — Staying — Insurance — Suspended insurance company — Insurance Department Act — Act of March 22, 1956, P. L. 1328.
The Act of March 22, 1956, P. L. 1328, amending the Insurance Department Act of May 17, 1921, P. L. 789, § 502 (which provides that “. . . no action at law or equity shall be commenced or prosecuted nor shall any judgment be entered against nor shall any execution or attachment be issued or prosecuted against the suspended company . . . or against its property, in any court of this Commonwealth”) is applicable to an action against an insurance company instituted after the effective date of the amendment even though the business of the insurance company was suspended by the Insurance Commissioner prior to the effective date of the amendment.
Before JONES, C. J., MUSMANNO, ARNOLD, JONES and COHEN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 216, Jan. T., 1957, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas No. 5 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1956, No. 5854, in case of Jack Hirsch v. Bunker Hill Mutual Insurance Co. Judgment affirmed.
Same case in court below: 8 Pa. D. C.2d 259.
Proceeding upon petition of defendant and rule to show cause why attachment execution upon judgment in assumpsit should not be stayed.
Page 93
Order entered making rule absolute, opinion by REIMEL, J. Plaintiff appealed.
Marvin H. Levin, for appellant.
Ralph B. Umsted, for appellee.
OPINION PER CURIAM, May 27, 1957:
The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge REIMEL of the court below, reported in 8 Pa. D. C.2d 259.