Practice — Summary judgment — Pleadings — Answer — Denials — Sufficiency.
In this action in ejectment by a plaintiff who was admittedly the record title holder, in which the complaint set forth that the defendant borough was in possession under the terms of a written lease made on April 16, 1894 (copy of which was attached to the complaint as an exhibit) which had been accepted by the defendant borough by a formal resolution (copy of which was attached to the complaint as an exhibit) and that said lease had been terminated prior to the institution of the action in ejectment; and the answer claimed ignorance concerning the lease and its own borough resolution, alleged that the borough resolution was a preliminary step leading to a possible formal lease, and inadequately pleaded that the plaintiff had dedicated the land to public use and that the borough had acquired title by adverse possession, it was Held that the court below had properly entered judgment for the plaintiff upon the pleadings.
OPINION PER CURIAM, March 13, 1956:
This case is affirmed on the opinion of Judge ROSENFIELD reported in 5 Pa. D. C.2d 294.