Appeal, No. 90, Oct. T., 1958, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County, Sept. T., 1957, No. 47, in case of Robert L. Knecht v. Medical Service Association of Pennsylvania, Inc. Judgment affirmed.
Morris Mindlin, with him Jackson M. Sigmon, and Mindlin and Sigmon, for appellant.
George H. Hafer, with him Robert L. Rubendall, O. J. Tallman, and Hull, Leiby and Metzger, and Butz, Hudders, Tallman and Rupp, for appellee.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin,/ and Watkins, JJ.
[ 186 Pa. Super. Page 458]
This is an appeal by plaintiff from judgment on the pleadings entered for defendant by the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County in an action of assumpsit brought by plaintiff to recover for dental services under a medical-surgical agreement between plaintiff and defendant, known as a "Blue Shield" contract.
[ 186 Pa. Super. Page 459]
On February 21 and 22, 1957, plaintiff received dental services from Dr. Edward Weiner, a dentist, at the Allentown Dental Hospital, and a bill for $35 was rendered. The bill was presented to defendant, Medical Service Association of Pennsylvania, Inc. Defendant refused to pay the bill under the contract for the reason that the services were not rendered in an "accredited hospital."
Plaintiff filed his complaint in assumpsit to recover the sum of $35. The complaint was supplanted by an amended complaint to which defendant filed an answer with new matter. Plaintiff filed a reply to the new matter and moved for judgment on the pleadings. After argument thereon the court below filed its opinion, written by President Judge HENNINGER, and entered judgment for defendant.
On a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Pa. R.C.P. No. 1034 (b), a court may enter any judgment or order which is appropriate on the pleadings, and it may, as here, enter judgment against the party making the motion. See Boron v. Smith. 380 Pa. 98, 102, 110 A.2d 169; Rose Township v. Hollobaugh, 179 Pa. Superior Ct. 284, 299, 116 A.2d 323. While a summary judgment should be entered only where the case is clear and the pleadings are not amendable, the present case is one in which the facts are clear; the issue involves merely the interpretation and application of the law to those facts. See Lehner v. Montgomery, 180 Pa. Superior Ct. 493, 500, 501, 119 A.2d 626.
The medical-surgical agreement between plaintiff and defendant provided in part: "The Subscriber, when admitted as an In-Patient in an Accredited Hospital or an Accredited Dental Hospital, shall be entitled to oral surgical Services... ...