Case ID: pa-d-c_8/html/0060-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Koch, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kaercher v. Rudolph et al.
    
      Practice, C. P. — Pleading—Striking pleading from record — Insufficient statement — Rule for more specific statement — Self-sustaining—Affidavit of defence.
    
    
      1. A pleading may be struck from the record if it does not conform to the Practice Act of May 14, 1915, P. L. 483.
    2. If a statement of claim is not sufficiently specific, a rule to show cause why it should not be made more specific may be taken.
    3. If the statement is not self-sustaining, an affidavit of defence raising a question of law may be filed.
    Trespass. Motion to strike off plaintiff’s statement of claim. C. P. Schuylkill Co., March T., 1926, No. 320.
    
      Roscoe R. Koch, for plaintiff; R. Bashore, for defendant.
    April 19, 1926.
   Koch, J.,

A pleading may be struck from the record only when it does not conform to the provision of the Practice Act of May 14, 1915, § 21, P. L. 483. But the reasons assigned in support of this motion refer to the substance instead of the form of the statement of claim. In general, the objections raised to the statement amount to this, that the statement is not sufficiently specific, or that it is not self-sustaining. When a statement is not sufficiently specific a rule to show cause why it should not be made more specific may be taken: Rhodes v. Terheyden, 272 Pa. 397. Or, if the statement be not self-sustaining, an affidavit of defence raising a question of law may be filed.

The motion is overruled.

From M. M. Burke, Shenandoah, Pa.