Case Name: Pennsylvania Power & Light Company v. Stoppi, Appellant
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1962-12-18
Citations: 200 Pa. Super. 101
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 378
Parties: Pennsylvania Power & Light Company v. Stoppi, Appellant.
Judges: Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (Rhodes, P. J., absent).
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 200
Pages: 101–103

Head Matter:
Pennsylvania Power & Light Company v. Stoppi, Appellant.
December 18, 1962:
Argued December 11, 1962.
Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (Rhodes, P. J., absent).
W. J. Krencewicz, for appellant.
Charles L. Frank, with him E. Mac Troutman, for appellee.

Opinion:
Opinion
Per Curiam,
While the defendant had an absolute right to file an amended answer and counterclaim by filed consent of the plaintiff under Pa. R. C. P. 1033, the court below had the right to require that this be done in accordance with its Rule 240 by filing an entire new pleading, properly executed, rather than by a stipulation that the "prior Amended Answer and Amended New Matter and Counterclaim is reinstated".
Under the circumstances in this case the court below no doubt will give the defendant an opportunity to reinstate his counterclaim by filing an amended answer and counterclaim. The refusal of the court to accept the stipulation has not put the defendant out of court as to Ms counterclaim and the appeal must be quashed.
Appeal quashed.