Superior Court Affirms That Statute of Limitations Defense Can Be Reviewed Under Preliminary Objections (PO's) Where No PO's Filed to PO's (Non-Precedential)

In the case of Weisberg v. Bansley, No. 695 MDA 2021 (Pa. Super. Feb. 14, 2023 Bowes, J., King, J., and Stevens, P.J.E.) (Op. by King, J.) (non-precedential), the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a ruling by Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas in which the trial court sustained Preliminary Objections filed by various Defendants that resulted in the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s Dragonetti Act claims in a dispute between parties over an alleged claims of wrongful use of civil procedures that arose out an earlier legal malpractice suit.

In this case, relative to the statute of limitations defense raised by the Defendants’ Preliminary Objections, the court noted that, generally, a statute of limitations defense is more properly raised as a new matter and not Preliminary Objections. 

However, the Court confirmed that where a Plaintiff fails to file Preliminary Objections to strike a Preliminary Objection based upon a statue of limitations, the trial court may address the issues presented relative to a statute of limitations defense. As such, the Superior Court found that the trial court did not err when it addressed the merits of the statute of limitations issues presented in this case.

The Superior Court also found that the trial court’s calculation of time relative to the statute of limitations defense was also proper.


Anyone wishing to review this non-precedential Opinion from the Pennsylvania Superior Court may click this LINK.