Lafferty, H. v. Ferris, T.
1131 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 21, 2017Background
- In 1998 six men (later eight or nine) formed Facowee Acres, LLC to buy ~100 acres for a hunting lodge; the deed at closing named only Robert F. Ferris and Thomas D. Ferris as grantees because other members could not attend. Members orally agreed to contribute payments over time and that, once paid in full, title would be transferred to members and then to the LLC.
- A 4.4-acre adjacent parcel purchased in 1999 was titled initially to Thomas Ferris and later to Thomas and Robert Ferris; members agreed it would be treated as part of the collective property and paid for from the same account.
- Members (other than Thomas) paid their shares into an account managed by Robert Ferris; the account paid mortgage, taxes, improvements, and timber proceeds; Plaintiffs used the land and made improvements.
- Thomas and Robert Ferris, without other members’ knowledge, used the property as collateral for a $125,000 home-equity line and later executed a natural gas lease producing funds that were escrowed by court order.
- Plaintiffs sued (reformation of deed, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, breach of contract). After a non-jury trial the court found an enforceable oral agreement and ordered conveyance by special warranty deed to the members. Thomas appealed from denial of post-trial relief; trial court later (while appeal pending) entered additional orders enforcing and expanding relief, which the Superior Court vacated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether absence of Facowee Acres LLC as a party renders judgment void for lack of indispensable party | Plaintiffs: not directly argued here; court treated members as real parties in interest | Ferris: LLC was an indispensable party because title/royalty rights belong to Facowee; due process violated | Court: LLC not indispensable—its interest arises only after deeds are transferred; judgment may proceed against record owners/members |
| Whether equitable relief (reformation/specific performance) and direct conveyance to members is barred by statute of frauds/estoppel/estoppel by deed | Plaintiffs: oral agreement + payments, emails and accounting establish agreement and equity supports specific performance | Ferris: statute of frauds, estoppel doctrines, recorded deeds/mortgages/gas contracts defeat reformation; court lacks equity jurisdiction | Court: ample credible evidence of oral agreement and payments; equitable relief appropriate—conveyance to members in proportion affirmed |
| Whether trial court lost jurisdiction by considering a late motion/revising its judgment after 30 days and after notice of appeal | Plaintiffs: motion to enforce was proper; sought to implement January order | Ferris: post-appeal modifications were untimely and void under §5505 and Pa.R.A.P. 1701 | Court: June 27, 2016 denial of post-trial motion affirmed; subsequent August 23 and September 16, 2016 orders were entered without jurisdiction and are vacated |
| Whether limiting defendant’s trial testimony (time limits/restrictions) deprived him of due process | Ferris: one-hour limit and refusal to re-admit cumulative/impeachment evidence prejudiced ability to defend | Plaintiffs: time management and avoidance of cumulative testimony within trial court discretion | Court: trial court didn’t abuse discretion—Ferris had multiple trial days and record shows limits were to prevent duplication; no reversible due-process violation shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Sack v. Feinman, 413 A.2d 1059 (Pa. 1980) (standard for appellate review of equitable decrees)
- Nicholson v. Johnston, 855 A.2d 97 (Pa. Super. 2004) (appellate review standards)
- Nicholas v. Hofmann, 158 A.3d 675 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standards for reviewing non-jury trial findings)
- Richards v. Ameriprise Fin., Inc., 152 A.3d 1027 (Pa. Super. 2016) (appellate review of legal conclusions)
- Orman v. Mortg. I.T., 118 A.3d 403 (Pa. Super. 2015) (test for indispensable parties)
- Grimme Combustion, Inc. v. Mergentime Corp., 595 A.2d 77 (Pa. Super. 1991) (absence of redress militates against indispensability)
- Shedden v. Anadarko E. & P. Co., L.P., 136 A.3d 485 (Pa. 2016) (doctrine of estoppel by deed explained)
- Ruthrauff, Inc. v. Ravin, Inc., 914 A.2d 880 (Pa. Super. 2006) (factfinder may accept any, part, or none of testimony)
- Mfrs. & Traders Trust Co. v. Greenville Gastroenterology, SC, 108 A.3d 913 (Pa. Super. 2015) (30-day reconsideration rule under §5505)
- Gardner v. Consol. Rail. Corp., 100 A.3d 280 (Pa. Super. 2014) (trial court loses power to modify after 30 days or after appeal)
- McCormick v. Northeastern Bank of Pennsylvania, 561 A.2d 328 (Pa. 1989) (court may deem done what should have been done—practical treatment of procedural defects)
- Johnston the Florist, Inc. v. TEDCO Const. Corp., 657 A.2d 511 (Pa. Super. 1995) (appeal lies from judgment after disposition of post-verdict motions)