Legal Opinion

Hollopeter v. Wassil

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Mercer County

Decided September 16, 1960No. 51Published

1Opinion of the Court

Rodgers, P. J.,

The question for decision is whether the failure of a plaintiff to reply to an answer in trespass setting up new matter and endorsed with a notice to plead admits any allegations of facts in the answer other than those relating to identity, agency and ownership.

We hold that it does not.

The bar has long sought to have the failure to reply to an answer in trespass amount to an admission of the facts alleged in the new matter. In Brennan v. Huber, 104 Pa. Superior Ct. 556 (1931), the contention was made that the 1929 amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure made the failure to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brennan v. HuberSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. Gurzon v. H. J. Williams, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API