McCoy v. Home Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Reno, J.,
Plaintiff appealed from an order of the court below dismissing his motion for judgment for want of a sufficient answer. At bar, his counsel stated that he followed the Practice Act of May 14, 1915, P. L. 483, §17, as amended, 12 P.S. §735. That Act was suspended by Pa. R. C. P. No. 1452. The sufficiency of an answer is now tested by a preliminary objection under Pa. R. C. P. No. 1017 or by a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Pa. R. C. P. No. 1034 or No. 1037. Defendant did not object to the procedure adopted by plaintiff and we raise no question regarding it. Pa.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Home Insurance v. Baltimore Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Schell v. Miller North Broad Storage Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Gardner v. Freystown Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Roberts v. Firemen's InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Lippincott v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bogojavlensky v. LoganSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953
- Schuylkill Products, Inc. v. H. Rupert & Sons, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- United States v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1952
- Texas City Terminal Railway Co. v. American Equitable Assurance Co.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1955
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.