Scott, C. v. Berger, D.
1153 EDA 2016
Pa. Super. Ct.Nov 21, 2016Background
- Minority Owners (unit owners at 3360 Chichester Ave.) sought to stop an auction of the condominium after >80% of owners voted to terminate the condominium under 68 Pa.C.S. § 3220.
- The Association, controlled by Berger, obtained an independent appraisal valuing the property at $18.5 million and scheduled an auction for April 13, 2016.
- Minority Owners filed for special emergency relief and a preliminary injunction on March 16, 2016, principally alleging Berger failed to distribute the full appraisal as required by the UCA and asking to stay the auction.
- After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court entered a preliminary injunction on April 11, 2016 staying the auction until 30 days after distribution of the full appraisal to all unit owners.
- The trial court did not require the plaintiffs to file the preliminary-injunction bond mandated by Pa.R.C.P. 1531(b)(1); Berger appealed.
- The Superior Court vacated the injunction because the mandatory bond was not posted and remanded, declining a remand solely to re-issue the injunction with a bond because circumstances may have changed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a preliminary injunction issued without the bond required by Pa.R.C.P. 1531(b)(1) is valid | Bond requirement was not raised as a basis to deny relief (implicit: injunction otherwise proper) | Failure to require bond renders injunction a nullity; bond is mandatory | Vacated injunction because no bond was filed; injunctions without bond are void |
| Whether the trial court should be remanded to re-issue the injunction with a bond requirement | Re-issuance with bond would cure the error and preserve relief | Remand may be inappropriate because facts/equities may have changed since entry | Court declined remand solely for re-issuance, remanded generally and left possibility to reassert injunction later |
| Whether the Association is an indispensable party because it holds title and the power to sell after termination | Minority Owners sought relief against Berger without naming the Association | Berger: Association is the proper party to enjoin because title vests in the association under the UCA | Not decided on merits because injunction was a nullity; court noted the joinder issue should be addressed on remand if injunctive relief is pursued |
Key Cases Cited
- Soja v. Factoryville Sportsmen’s Club, 522 A.2d 1129 (Pa. Super. 1987) (bond requirement for preliminary injunction is mandatory)
- Goodies Olde Fashion Fudge Co. v. Kuiros, 597 A.2d 141 (Pa. Super. 1991) (failure to post bond invalidates injunction)
- Mamula v. United Steelworkers of Am., 185 A.2d 595 (Pa. 1962) (injunction issued without bond is a nullity)
- Surco Prods., Inc. v. Kieszek, 80 A.2d 842 (Pa. 1951) (trial court lacked power to issue injunction absent bond)
- Walter v. Stacy, 837 A.2d 1205 (Pa. Super. 2003) (where injunction otherwise proper, error may be cured by re-issuance with bond; remand permitted in appropriate cases)