Osprey Portfolio, LLC v. Izett, 620 Pa. 274

Appellant Izett Manufacturing, Inc. executed a guaranty under seal for a loan up to $50,000; the note and guaranty were dated September 9, 1999.
By 2001 Izett had borrowed the full $50,000 under the agreement; Osprey Portfolio, LLC acquired the loan and related note and guaranty in late 2001.
In late 2005 Osprey declared default and demanded payment; Izett failed to remit.
On June 15, 2010, Osprey filed a Complaint in Confession of Judgment against Izett as guarantor, resulting in a judgment dated June 15, 2010 for $85,473.42 plus interest.
Appellant filed a petition to strike/open judgment arguing the action was precluded by Section 5525(a)(8) of the Judicial Code (four-year limitation for writings not under seal).
The central issue was whether a loan guaranty executed under seal is an instrument under seal subject to the 20-year limitation in Section 5529(b).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does a loan guaranty executed under seal qualify as an instrument under seal for 5529(b)?	Osprey contends the guaranty is an instrument under seal and falls within 20-year limit.	Izett contends the UCC definition of instrument limits to negotiable instruments, so the guaranty should not be under 5529(b).	Yes; guaranty is an instrument in writing under seal, triggering 20-year limit.

Meadow Run/Mountain Lake Park Ass’n v. Bantell, 985 A.2d 989 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2009) (application of 20-year limit to deeds and under-seal writings)
In re Estate of Snyder, 13 A.3d 509 (Pa.Super. 2011) (dictionary-based instrument interpretation for sealed writings)
Township of Indiana v. Acquisitions & Mergers, Inc., 770 A.2d 364 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2001) (relation among 5525(a)(7), (8), and 5529(b))
Osprey Portfolio, LLC v. Izett, 82 A.3d 793 (Pa. Super. 2011) (affirmed 20-year instrument under seal interpretation)
Atalanta Corp. v. Ohio Valley Provision Co., 489 Pa. 389 (1980) (definition of guaranty as a written instrument defining liability)