Spotts v. Polastre
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County
1Opinion of the Court
RANCK, P.J.,
This opinion addresses the procedural issue of whether preliminary objections to an amended complaint that raise the defense of pendency of a prior action can be sustained. Pa.R.C.P. 1028 requires that all preliminary objections must be raised in a single pleading. Pa.R.C.P. 1017 categorizes “the pendency of a prior *122action” as a proper preliminary objection, and it must be raised in response to the original complaint.
The following is a sketch of the procedural history in this contract dispute. In the first action, no. CV-89-598, plaintiff, Richard E. Spotts, t/a R&J Laminates,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Penox Technologies, Inc. v. Foster Medical Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Martin v. GernerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Wudkwych v. Borough of CanonsburgCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987