IRA G. STEFFY & SON, INC. v. CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA

IRA G. STEFFY & SON, INC. v. CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 2481 EDA 2009 2010 PA Super 175 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/17/2010
	Appeal from the Order entered August 7, 2009 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County Civil No. 2009-C-2091
Before: BENDER, OTT and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
Appellant/Plaintiff, Ira G. Steffy & Son, Inc., appeals from the order entered in the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas sustaining the preliminary objections of Appellee/Defendant, Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania, and dismissing Appellant’s amended complaint. After an extensive review of the record, we affirm the trial court’s opinion, finding that Appellant, a subcontractor who was not paid for work performed on a project after Appellee bank failed to release construction funds to the developer, has failed to state a claim for relief against Appellee.

-----------------------------------------------------Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - JEFFREY W. FRANTZ v. CAROL ANN FRANTZ APPEAL OF: PAUL J. McARDLE

JEFFREY W. FRANTZ v. CAROL ANN FRANTZ APPEAL OF: PAUL J. McARDLE No. 567 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 68 Atlantic: 972 A.2d 525 Filed: 4/14/2009
	Appeal from the Order of March 25, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division at No. FD 07 7499-002
Before: MUSMANNO, SHOGAN and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: COLVILLE, J.
Paul J. McArdle, Esq. (“Appellant”) appeals the order striking his judgment lien that he claims had attached to certain realty. The trial court struck the lien because the court found the realty was held under the jurisdiction of the court during certain divorce proceedings and, being under the court’s jurisdiction, the realty could not be attached by a lien such as Appellant’s. The court’s reasoning was based primarily on Klebach v. Mellon Bank, N.A., 565 A.2d 448 (Pa. Super. 1989), discussed more fully infra. Appellant, however, claims the court was without authority to strike the lien because it attached by operation of law as a combined result of 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3507(a) (division of entireties property between divorced persons), 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 4303(a) (effect of judgments and orders as liens), and Pa.R.C.P. 3023 (judgment, lien, duration). Primarily, he claims Pa.R.C.P. 3023 essentially abrogated Klebach. We affirm the order.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here