Opinion
November 12, 1963.
January 7, 1964.
Appeals — Appealable orders — Dissolving preliminary injunction — Dismissing complaint — Equity case — Jurisdiction of Superior Court — Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212.
1. An order is appealable which dissolves, grants, refuses, or continues a preliminary injunction. [98]
2. Prior to the effective date of the Act of August 14, 1963, P. L. 819, § 7.4(4), under the Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, §§ 7(c) and 9, as previously amended, the Superior Court had exclusive jurisdiction of an appeal in an equity case which involved only $700. [99]
Argued November 12, 1963. Before BELL, C. J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
Appeal, No. 247, Jan. T., 1963, from decree of Court of Common Pleas of Sullivan County, Sept. T., 1962, No. 1, in case of Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 6068 v. Sullivan County School District. Case remitted to Superior Court.
Equity.
Defendant's preliminary objections sustained and decree entered dismissing complaint, opinion by TREMBATH, P. J. Plaintiffs appealed.
E. Charles Coslett, with him Cardoni, Gallagher, Coslett Sobota, for appellants.
Kenneth B. Lee, with him Charles M. Kschinka, for appellee.
Plaintiff filed a complaint in Equity praying for an injunction to restrain defendants from selling real estate which they had purchased at public sale for $700. The Court sustained preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, dissolved the preliminary injunction which it had granted and dismissed plaintiff's complaint.
This was an appealable Order. An Order is appealable which (a) dissolves a preliminary injunction: Rubin v. Bailey, 398 Pa. 271, 157 A.2d 882; Aldrich v. Geahry, 360 Pa. 376, 61 A.2d 843, or (b) which grants or refuses, or continues a preliminary injunction: Dozor Agency v. Rosenberg, 403 Pa. 237, 240, 169 A.2d 771; Slott v. Plastic Fabricators, Inc., 402 Pa. 433, 167 A.2d 306; Williams v. Bridy, 391 Pa. 1, 136 A.2d 832; Lindenfelser v. Lindenfelser, 385 Pa. 342, 123 A.2d 626. However, jurisdiction in this case lies in the Superior Court because, at the time the appeal was taken, the amount involved was only $700. Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, § 7(c) and § 9, as amended, 17 Pa.C.S.A. § 181, 184 and 194.
An Order which overrules preliminary objections is interlocutory and not appealable unless a question of jurisdiction is involved. ( Dozor Agency v. Rosenberg, 403 Pa. 237, 240, 169 A.2d 771; Grosso v. Englert, 381 Pa. 351, 113 A.2d 250).
Under the amendatory Act of August 14, 1963, No. 401, P. L. 819, § 7.4(4), the Supreme Court would have jurisdiction of this case because it now has jurisdiction in all Equity cases, even though the amount involved is less than $10,000.
The case is remitted to the Superior Court, appellant to pay costs.