Legal Opinion

Baird v. Congello

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County

Decided August 11, 1998No. 3700-1992Published

1Opinion of the Court

FARINA, J.,

Before the court is plaintiff Ralph Baird’s motion for post-trial relief seeking judgment on the pleadings, judgment n.o.v., or a new trial. Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred by failing to deem as admitted paragraphs 50 through 59 of plaintiff’s complaint and permitting defendant to amend his answer prior to trial as to these allegations. Plaintiff further contends that the trial court erred in refusing to deem paragraph 9 of defendant’s answer admitted because defendant’s answer constituted a general denial. The issues have been briefed and argued, and are ready for…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Moure v. RaeuchleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Ingrassia Const. Co., Inc. v. WalshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Cercone v. CerconeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Peters Creek Sanitary Authority v. WelchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Tanner v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API