Bailian v. Keishian
Opinion of the Court
This is a rule taken by the sheriff to amend the return of service in an action of trespass. The sheriff served the writ on Aug. 26, 1922, and made return that he had served the defendant by handing a true and attested copy of the writ to an adult member of defendant’s family at No. 5836 Hazel Avenue, the dwelling-house of defendant. He seeks to amend the return so that it shall read that the copy was handed at the place of residence of defendant, No. 5836 Hazel Avenue, Philadelphia, to an adult member of the family with whom said defendant resided. It will be observed that the original service purported to be made by handing a copy to an adult member of defendant’s family at his dwelling-house, and the amendment seeks to substitute the word “residence” for dwelling-house.
Depositions were taken against the rule. From these depositions it appears defendant had been a resident of the City of Syracuse, in the State of New York, since September, 1920, and was engaged in business there. In the early part of August, 1922, he obtained a week’s vacation to visit Philadelphia to arrange for the disposition of some real estate .owned by him. While in Philadelphia the accident occurred from which the present suit resulted. This caused the defendant to stay in Philadelphia three or four weeks longer than he intended. While here he lived at the residence of his brother’s wife’s family. As soon as he was able he left Philadelphia and returned to Syracuse.
The Act of July 9,1901, § 1, P. L. 614, provides that service of a summons in personal actions may be made upon an individual defendant by handing a true and attested copy (a) to him personally; (b) to an adult member of his i family at his dwelling-house ; (e) at his place of residence to an adult member of the family with whom he resides; and (d) at his place of residence to the manager or clerk of the hotel or boarding-house at which he resides.
In Maloney v. Simpson, 226 Pa. 479, the court said: “The general rule seems to be that a return may always be amended so as to conform to the truth, unless some new right has arisen in the meantime founded upon a
Under the facts disclosed by the depositions, we must refuse to permit the sheriff to amend his return, because it would not conform to the truth.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.