Barren v. Commonwealth
74 A.3d 250
Pa. Super. Ct.2013Background
- Pro se Appellant David Morris Barren appeals a dismissal of his replevin action in Allegheny County.
- Trial court found the civil action sought the same relief as a pending Somerset County criminal matter.
- In 2004, Barren was arrested on multiple charges in Somerset County, which were dismissed on February 20, 2004.
- On December 28, 2011, Barren filed a Rule 588(A) motion in the criminal matter seeking return of allegedly illegally seized property.
- On September 2, 2012, Barren filed the instant replevin action under Pa.R.Civ.P. 1075.1 seeking the same property; the case was dismissed on October 25, 2012.
- The court held lis pendens applied, and Rule 1079.1 did not permit independent relief to overcome the dismissal; the constitutional arguments were waived; the order was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does lis pendens bar the replevin suit? | Barren argues Rule 1079.1 allows independent action and relief. | Commonwealth argues the two actions involve the same parties and relief, so lis pendens applies. | Yes; lis pendens bars the replevin action. |
| Does Rule 1079.1 permit independent equitable relief to defeat lis pendens here? | Rule 1079.1 permits pursuing separate equitable relief notwithstanding pendency. | Rule 1079.1 does not permit duplicative relief when both actions seek the same outcome. | No; lis pendens controls and dismissal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- PNC Bank, Nat. Ass'n v. Bluestream Tech., Inc., 14 A.3d 831 (Pa.Super.2010) (limits of lis pendens; same parties and relief required)
- Norristown Auto. Co., Inc. v. Hand, 386 Pa.Super. 269 (1989) (same parties; same rights; avoid duplicative litigation)
- Tronzo v. Tronzo, 63 Pa. D. & C.2d 479 (Pa.Comm. Ct. 1973) (example of precluding identical relief in concurrent actions)
- Rostock v. Anzalone, 904 A.2d 943 (Pa.Super.2006) (theories of recovery determine whether actions involve same claim)
- Janda, 14 A.3d 147 (Pa.Super.2011) (Rule 588(A) movant must show entitlement to property)
- Lowenschuss v. Selnick, 324 Pa.Super. 193 (Pa.Super.1984) (where complete records available, affirming dismissal on lis pendens)
- Dietz v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 41 A.3d 882 (Pa.Super.2012) (appellate review of lis pendens under applicable record)