LSF8 Master Participation Trust v. Petrosky

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the lower court’s order, which denied the lender’s petition to set aside a sheriff’s sale in this mortgage foreclosure action. Three parcels of land were at issue; the parcels are contiguous and owned by the defendants. One parcel contained the defendants’ home, and the other two were vacant and landlocked. The legal description of the property in the mortgage is that of the vacant, landlocked parcels, not the parcel on which the residence is located. After the defendant defaulted on the mortgage and the lender purchased the mortgaged properties at the sheriff’s sale, the lender petitioned to set aside the sale, claiming that the mortgage should have been for the parcel containing the residence. The resolution of the matter hinged on Rule 3135 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which makes clear a party must raise a challenge to a sheriff’s sale within a period of time after the sale but before the deed is delivered. Here, the Superior Court agreed with the trial court that the lender’s petition was untimely because it was filed in approximately two years and nine months after the sheriff’s deed at issue was recorded.

Search entire site by keyword...

Search for Summaries by Hashtag...

Past Opinion Summaries