Ventures Trust 2013 v. Barbone, J.
474 EDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 8, 2017Background
- JPMC Specialty Mortgage filed foreclosure against Jamie Barbone (property: 114 Boulder Rd.). Plaintiff later substituted in: Ventures Trust 2013 IHR by MCM Capital Partners, LLC.
- Trial yielded a verdict for Plaintiff on August 14, 2015; Barbone filed a post-trial motion on August 24, 2015 that remained pending.
- Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment on August 28, 2015 while the post-trial motion was unresolved; this praecipe did not create a valid judgment.
- The Superior Court repeatedly quashed Barbone’s appeals, noting no valid judgment had been entered on the docket.
- Despite absence of a valid judgment, the trial court allowed a sheriff’s sale on October 19, 2016; Plaintiff was the successful bidder.
- Barbone moved to set aside the sheriff’s sale; the trial court denied relief. On appeal, the Superior Court reversed, holding the sale invalid because it rested on no valid judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Aug. 28, 2015 "judgment" was valid | The August 28 entry constituted a judgment sufficient to execute | The entry was premature and invalid because post-trial motion was pending | Judgment was invalid; law-of-the-case — prior Superior Court orders so held |
| Whether the sheriff's sale should be set aside | Sale should stand; Plaintiff could refile praecipe and incur costs but result may be same | Sale was improper because execution requires a judgment, not merely a verdict | Sale set aside — execution on a non‑existent/void judgment is invalid |
| Whether a verdict (not a judgment) supports execution | Praecipe/entry in some contexts may suffice | Rules require enforcement of a judgment, not a verdict | Verdict alone insufficient to support sheriff's sale; judgment required |
| Whether Appellant may challenge underlying proof of note possession on appeal | Plaintiff implicitly satisfied note possession at trial | Barbone argued Appellee failed to prove possession of endorsed note | Waived — issue not raised below, cannot be raised first on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Lark, 73 A.3d 1265 (Pa. Super. 2013) (standards for setting aside sheriff's sale and abuse-of-discretion review)
- Harris v. Harris, 239 A.2d 783 (Pa. Super. 1968) (execution sale based on void judgment is void)
- Roberts v. Gibson, 251 A.2d 799 (Pa. Super. 1969) (sheriff's sale issued on void judgment is a nullity)
- Commonwealth v. Starr, 664 A.2d 1326 (Pa. 1995) (law-of-the-case doctrine)
- Steiner v. Markel, 968 A.2d 1253 (Pa. 2009) (issues not raised in lower court are waived on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. York, 465 A.2d 1028 (Pa. Super. 1983) (appellate waiver principle for issues not raised below)