From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Am. Fam. Life Assur. Co. of C. v. Denenberg

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 4, 1973
302 A.2d 923 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)

Opinion

Argued December 5, 1972

April 4, 1973.

Equity — Injunction — Moot question.

1. An equity action to enjoin the enforcement of an order of a state official is rendered moot by the withdrawal and repeal of the challenged order. [255-6]

Argued December 5, 1972, before President Judge BOWMAN and Judges CRUMLISH, JR., KRAMER, WILKINSON, JR., MENCER, ROGERS and BLATT.

Original jurisdiction, No. 323 C.D. 1972, in case of American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus v. Herbert S. Denenberg, Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Complaint in equity in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to enjoin enforcement of order of insurance commissioner. Temporary injunction issued. Defendant filed motion for summary judgment. Held: Motion for summary judgment granted.

Thomas N. O'Neill, Jr., with him Montgomery, McCracken, Walker Rhoads, for plaintiff.

Charles D. Cowley, Assistant Attorney General, with him Gerald Gornish, Deputy Attorney General, and J. Shane Creamer, Attorney General, for defendant.


Plaintiff, American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus (American) is a stock life insurance company duly incorporated and existing under the laws of the State of Georgia. American is licensed to issue and sell, within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, insurance policies indemnifying against expenses incurred as a result of the contraction of cancer. The defendant is the present Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth. On March 24, 1972, defendant filed an order to take effect April 3, 1972, prohibiting the sale and issuance of the type of cancer policies being sold by American.

On March 30, 1972, American commenced this action in equity by the filing of a complaint alleging that the defendant lacked the power and authority to issue the order of March 24, 1972. Following an amendment to the complaint, the defendant filed an answer to the complaint, and a hearing was held on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. On April 20, 1972, a preliminary injunction was issued enjoining and restraining the defendant from enforcing or in any way giving effect to the order filed March 24, 1972.

American's motion for judgment on the pleadings and request for a permanent injunction were scheduled for hearing on December 5, 1972. On November 13, 1972, the defendant withdrew and repealed the order of March 24, 1972, which prohibited the sale and issuance of cancer policies sold and issued by American. On November 27, 1972, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and dissolution of the preliminary injunction of April 20, 1972. Argument on defendant's motion for summary judgment was heard by the Court en banc on December 5, 1972, although American contended then, and subsequently by oral motion on January 31, 1973, that defendant's motion for summary judgment should be set down for argument after American had had the opportunity to file an answer to the motion.

We hold that the defendant's order of November 13, 1972, withdrawing and repealing the defendant's order filed March 24, 1972, resolved the controversy and rendered this equity action moot. Scranton School District v. Scranton Federation of Teachers, 445 Pa. 155, 282 A.2d 235 (1971); Boone v. Tate, 4 Pa. Commw. 101, 286 A.2d 26 (1972); Taylor Fibre Co. v. Textile Workers Union of America, 395 Pa. 535, 151 A.2d 79 (1959).

In Faust v. Cairns, 242 Pa. 15, 88 A. 786 (1913), the Board of Health of Philadelphia had quarantined premises on which a case of smallpox had developed, and an appeal from an order refusing a preliminary injunction was taken on the day that the quarantine was removed. The Court held the question moot for the reason that, once the quarantine was removed, there was no actual controversy for decision. Likewise, we believe that here, once the defendant withdrew and repealed his March 24, 1972 order, there no longer remained a controversy for decision. We are mindful that, if we could grant plaintiff some requested relief other than the relief of enjoining defendant from enforcing his March 24, 1972 order, this action could not be terminated because of mootness. Keystone Building Corporation v. Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, 439 Pa. 444, 266 A.2d 648 (1970). However, we are satisfied that, under the circumstances and facts of this case, such is not the situation here.

Therefore, we make the following

ORDER

NOW, this 4th day of April, 1973, the preliminary injunction of April 20, 1972 is dissolved; plaintiff's motion for further argument on defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied; defendant's motion for summary judgment is hereby granted; and the Prothonotary is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff. Each party to pay own costs.


Summaries of

Am. Fam. Life Assur. Co. of C. v. Denenberg

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 4, 1973
302 A.2d 923 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)
Case details for

Am. Fam. Life Assur. Co. of C. v. Denenberg

Case Details

Full title:American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus v. Denenberg

Court:Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Apr 4, 1973

Citations

302 A.2d 923 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)
302 A.2d 923