Ridley Park Borough v. American Surety Co. of New York
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Plaintiff appeals from an order of the court below discharging its rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The order is right.
The pleadings in that court were a statement of claim; an affidavit of defense accompanied by a notice of new matter; plaintiff’s reply to the new matter; and a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Two reasons are given for the discharge of the rule. The first is that “the filing of [a reply] to the affidavit of defense (here a reply to new matter in the affidavit, which new matter deals with the merits of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Federal Sales Co. v. FarrellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Rodgers v. MannSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Elliott v. McGounSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
3Cited by7 opinions
- National Realty Appraisal Co. v. Art ClubSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Bean v. Harleysville National BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Drummond v. ParrishSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Pennsylvania Institutional Health Services, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of CorrectionsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Roddy v. United States Fire Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.