Huntington National Bank v. K-Cor, Inc., 107 A.3d 783

Sky Bank (predecessor to Huntington) made two commercial loans to Rock Airport of Pittsburgh, LLC in 2000 ($3,000,000) and 2002 ($370,000); K‑Cor, Inc. guaranteed both loans with guaranties that permitted confession of judgment on default.
Following default, Huntington filed a complaint in confession of judgment in May 2013; judgment entered for $3,282,049.77.
K‑Cor filed a one‑paragraph petition to strike or open the confessed judgment in June 2013, asserting it had not knowingly waived notice/hearing; the petition included no substantive defenses.
At a July 2013 hearing the trial court denied the petition and refused K‑Cor’s oral motion to amend the petition; K‑Cor later submitted proposed written amendments with its reconsideration motion.
The trial court denied reconsideration; K‑Cor appealed. The Superior Court affirmed, addressing both (1) whether amendment of a petition to open is permissible and (2) whether K‑Cor’s proffered amendments showed merit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying leave to amend a petition to open/strike a confessed judgment	Amendments not permitted; petitioner waived defenses not in original petition	The omission was an administrative oversight; liberal amendment rules and lack of prejudice justify amendment	Trial court has discretion to permit amendment before adjudication, but here denial was not an abuse of discretion because proposed amendments lacked merit and were considered by the court
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying reconsideration of denial to amend	Denial of reconsideration was proper	Trial court should have reconsidered and allowed amendment	Denial of reconsideration is not reviewable on appeal per controlling precedent; issue not properly before the Court

PNC Bank, Nat’l Ass’n v. Bluestream Tech., Inc., 14 A.3d 831 (Pa. Super. 2010) (standard of review for opening confessed judgment)
Midwest Fin. Acceptance Corp. v. Lopez, 78 A.3d 614 (Pa. Super. 2013) (interpretation of procedural rules reviewed de novo)
Yentzer v. Taylor Wine Co., 186 A.2d 396 (Pa. 1962) (single‑step pleading requirements promote expedition of litigation)
Bowman v. Meadow Ridge, Inc., 615 A.2d 755 (Pa. Super. 1992) (permitting amendment of preliminary objections where no prejudice/delay)
In re Larsen, 812 A.2d 640 (Pa. 2002) (procedural rules are not ends in themselves; liberality in construction)
Mellon Bank v. Rafsky, 535 A.2d 1090 (Pa. Super. 1987) (waiver where defenses raised during hearing but not pleaded)