Case ID: pa-d-c_83/html/0244-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Hoban, P. J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Linko et vir v. Devine
    Before Hoban, P. J., Eagen and Robinson, JJ.
    
      Myron A. Pinkus, for plaintiffs.
    
      Harry A. Kolb, for defendant.
    February 15, 1952.
   Hoban, P. J.,

Plaintiffs claimed damages for personal injuries caused by the collapse of a defective chair in a restaurant owned and operated by defendant. In the preliminary objections defendant says there is no jurisdiction over him because he was not the owner nor operator; that one Beatrice Mildred Devine was the owner and operator and should have been joined as an indispensable party.

These objections simply state a denial of averments as to identity of the person by whom the material act was committed and the ownership and control of the instrumentality involved, which if not denied by a responsive pleading will be taken to be admitted: Pa. R. C. P. 1045(b). Preliminary objections do not constitute a “responsive” pleading. The complaint calls for an answer.

Now, February 15, 1952, the preliminary objections are dismissed, defendant to plead over in 20 days.