Janes v. Charles, 2025 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 4 (Lackawanna Cty. Ct. of Common Pleas, January 28, 2025) (Nealon J.)
This case lays out the law pleading in respect to punitive damages. The “material facts” standard in Rule 1019(a) is confined to a “cause of action or defense” as opposed to a demand for punitive damages incidental to an independent cause of action. Rule 1019(b) in the case law allowed those conditions of the mind to be averred generally. The Superior Court laid this out in Monroe v. CB, 286 Atl. 3d., 785 (Pa. Super., 2022) (en banc). At the pleading stage the plaintiffs can make general affirmants of gross negligence or recklessness. The plaintiff may not be completely aware of defendant’s state of mind at the time the complaint is filed. Once this discovery is complaint, plaintiff can be required to produce evidence of recklessness. Therefore, at the pleading stage, standard is different than at the summary judgement stage.