Natale v. St. Anthony of Padua Italian Mut. Relief Society

Citations

• 66 Pa. Super. 199
• 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 224

Syllabus

<p>Practice and .pleading — Municipal Court of Philadelphia County — Beneficial ■associations.</p> <p>In an action in the Municipal Court of Philadelphia County against a beneficial association to recover sick benefits, plaintiff in his statement set forth a ljy-law providing for sick benefits and averred that he had broken his leg, that he had notified the defendant of the same, and was confined to his room for a stated number of weeks. The defendant in its answer admitted the by-law and averred that it had no knowledge of the nature of plaintiff’s illness, and called for proof of the same, hut admitted receiving notice of the illness. After answering all the paragraphs in the statement, the defendant added two additional paragraphs to its answer, the first of which recited a by-law to the effect that no benefits could be recovered for a sickness due to intemperance. The second averred as follows: “Deponent is informed and believes, and therefore avers that the illness for which this claim is made was caused by the plaintiff’s intemperance.” No reply was filed to these additional paragraphs of the answer. At the trial defendant produced no testimony to show that the illness was caused by intemperance, but maintained that under the Act of July 12, 1913, P. L. 711, establishing the Municipal Court, the facts alleged in the additional paragraphs of the answer were admitted. Held, that the answer did not sufficiently aver that plaintiff’s illness had been caused by intemperance, and that there was consequently no admission of this by the failure to reply.</p> <p>In such a case the defendant must go further than merely to allege that he is informed and believes, he must aver that ¡he expects to be able to prove the facts at the trial.</p>