Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc. v. Fairy Mills, Inc.

18 Pa. D. & C.3d 364, 1981 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 456
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County·Decided April 27, 1981·No. no. 52·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ESHELMAN, J.,

Presently before us for disposition are defendant’s preliminary objections to plaintiff’s amended complaint in the nature of a more specific pleading.

Defendant in this action, Fairy Mills, Inc., entered into a written contract with Garden State Yarn Corporation for the purchase of certain yarn goods and merchandise. These goods were subsequently delivered, received and accepted by defendant. Plaintiff has alleged that by virtue of a written contract with Garden State Yarn Corporation, it received all rights, title and interest under the abovementioned contract with defendant. Preliminary objections were filed to the complaint and plaintiff has since filed an amended complaint.

Defendant’s preliminary objections to the amended complaint raise two questions for our consideration. We shall deal with each question separately.

ATTACHMENT OF DOCUMENTS

Defendant avers in preliminary objections nos. one, two and three that under Pa.R.C.P. 1019(h) plaintiff is required to attach certain writings to its amended complaint. Respectively, these include enclosures mentioned in an invoice dated March 29, 1979, a copy of the written contract between Garden State Yarn Corporation and plaintiff, as well [366] as a copy of the written assignment of rights under the original contract.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc. v. Fairy Mills, Inc., 18 Pa. D. & C.3d 364, 1981 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 456 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1981).

18 Pa. D. & C.3d 364 (Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc. v. Fairy Mills, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Claims Recovery Systems v. Donley
24 Pa. D. & C.5th 64 (Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas, 2011)