An en banc panel of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court vacated an order of the Court of Common Pleas which had grated partial summary judgement in favor of Altoona First Savings Bank in the bank’s declaratory judgment action against a municipality and real estate developers. The trial court concluded the bank was not obligated to complete development infrastructure at its own cost on property it acquired at a sheriff’s sale pursuant to a mortgage foreclosure against that property, which was formerly owned by the developers. The developers purchased some land and entered into an agreement with the municipality to improve the property at the developer’s expense. The developer’s defaulted on their mortgage, though, and the bank foreclosed. The municipality claimed that bank, by purchasing the property at the sheriff’s sale, had succeeded to developers’ obligations relating to the project under the developers agreement and was required either to complete the infrastructure for the project or obtain a new performance bond to guarantee the cost of such infrastructure. The Commonwealth Court reversed the order and concluded that there were outstanding issues of fact that could allow a factfinder to determine that the Bank was a successor landowner or developer.
