Angelichio, J. v. Meyers, B.
110 A.3d 1046
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2015Background
- 2015 PA Super 37; Joseph Michael Angelichio, as administrator of Tina Plotts' estate, sues Betsy Jo Myers, Joanne E. Myers, and Michael J. D’Aniello, Esq. (administrator of Tyrone Diefenderfer’s estate).
- Diefenderfer consistently refused to appear for a deposition; multiple court orders directed his appearance from 2007–2011; he died in January 2012.
- After death, Angelichio sought sanctions under Pa.R.C.P. 4019 for the deposition refusal; October 9, 2013 judgment was entered against the estate as a sanction.
- Appellant moved to open/strike the judgment and seek finality/apellate certification; trial court vacated and then reinstated the October 9, 2013 order in stages.
- February 25, 2014 order clarified prior actions; Appellant appealed March 3, 2014; petitions for finality and appellate certification were denied; appeal subsequently quashed.
- Court ultimately quashed the appeal, holding the sanction order was not a final appealable order and lacked express finality pursuant to Rule 341(c).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the discovery sanction judgment appealable as a final order? | Miller/Angelichio argues improper to sanction; bears on all claims. | D’Aniello argues Rule 311(a)(1) allows appeal from refusal to open/strike; finality lacking. | No; not a final order under Rule 341; but Rule 311(a)(1) does not render it immediately appealable. |
| Does the sanction and related proceedings implicate due process? | Due process rights violated by harsh sanction. | No merits reached; arguments insufficient. | Issue not reached; appeal quashed before merits; due process not decided. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller Oral Surgery, Inc. v. Dinello, 493 A.2d 741 (Pa. Super. 1985) (sanction judgment under 4019(c) not subject to petition to open; not final)
- Edney v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Authority, 514 A.2d 194 (Pa. Super. 1986) (default judgment sanction is interlocutory; not appealable until damages awarded)
- Mother’s Restaurant Inc. v. Krystkiewicz, 861 A.2d 327 (Pa. Super. 2004) (discusses finality and appellate jurisdiction principles)
- Commonwealth v. Scarborough, 64 A.3d 602 (Pa. 2013) (final order rule; jurisdiction to appeal from final orders)