196 A. 71 | Pa. | 1937
Defendant filed in the court below exceptions to and a motion to set aside a sheriff's sale on a judgment confessed *430 on a bond accompanying a mortgage. After argument the motion was denied. He later applied for reargument and for the taking of testimony. This was also refused. The appeal followed.
Because no testimony was taken and since plaintiff by responsive answer denied most of defendant's allegations of fact (Harr v. Bernheimer,
On an application to set aside a sheriff's sale the court below has a broad discretionary power, reversible only for manifest abuse: Hettler v. Shephard,
Nor has gross inadequacy of price been shown, as it must be (Watkins v. Justice,
The principal object of the petition for reargument was to reopen the issues so that testimony might be taken. The court below was well within its power and had substantial reasons for refusing further to consider the case. Depositions could have been submitted on the original motion to vacate the sale. In fact rule 86 of the court below requires that they be submitted at that time. Considering this very rule, we have held a party may not complain when it is invoked against him: Watkins v.Justice, supra.
The defendant had ample opportunity to save his property from foreclosure. Taxes, water rent, and interest were so far in arrears they almost exceeded the principal debt. He had one stay of execution, was denied a second, and delayed until two weeks after confirmation to move to set the sale aside. He employed dilatory tactics throughout, and cannot complain that the grace of the court below was exhausted.
Order affirmed. *432