Summary Judgment Granted Where Plaintiff Did Not Identify Correct Driver in Car Accident Suit

In the Delaware County Court of Common Please case of Moore v. Gilligan, PICS Case No. 16-0357 (C.P. Del. Co. Dec. 9, 2015  Green, J.), the court approved summary judgment in favor of a Defendant in a case where the Plaintiff did not identify the correct Defendant driver involved in the accident.  

The court in this decision ruled that the official note to Rule 1029(c) did not require a Defendant to specifically deny that he was the driver involved in the subject accident.  The Defendant had denied the Plaintiff’s allegation that he was the driver by simply indicating that he was without information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.  The Defendant otherwise specifically denied that the answering Defendant was in anyway negligent.   Moreover, the court found no evidence that the named Defendant concealed the driver’s identity.  

The court granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendant even though the motion was filed prior to the close of discovery.  

In his Answers to the discovery, the Defendant asserted that his niece was the driver involved and that he had no personal involvement in the accident.  

 

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this case may contact the Pennsylvania Law Weekly’s Instant Case Service by calling 1-800-276-7427 and provide the above PICS Case No. and pay a small fee.  

 

Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.”  Pennsylvania Law Weekly (March 20, 2016).