Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Northeastern Bank of Pennsylvania v. Wilkins, Wilkins Investment Properties
Citations: 655 A.2d 1028; 440 Pa. Super. 436; 1995 Pa. Super. LEXIS 585
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania; March 15, 1995; Pennsylvania; State Appellate Court
An appeal was made regarding a trial court's dismissal of a deficiency judgment petition without determining the market value of real estate sold at a sheriff's sale. The appellate court found that the trial court erred and reversed the decision. The case originated from a complaint filed by Northeastern Bank of Pennsylvania against Wilkins Investment Properties (WWIP) for $290,531.02. Following a sheriff’s sale on July 10, 1992, PNC Bank purchased the property for $75,000 and subsequently petitioned to establish the property's fair market value under the Deficiency Judgment Act, claiming it was worth $290,000. Michael and Douglas Wilkins, partners in WWIP, contested the value but did not provide evidence at the hearing. The bank presented appraisal testimony valuing the property at $290,000 as of December 10, 1991, and evidence of a later sale for $250,000. The trial court dismissed the petition, citing a lack of evidence for the property's value on the sale date. However, the appellate court noted that the trial court did not properly apply the statutory provisions of 42 Pa.C.S. § 8103(c), which dictate that if no counter-evidence is presented, the court should accept the petitioner's stated fair market value. The court emphasized that the statute requires the court to determine the fair market value based on the petition if no valid challenge is made. If an answer is filed with testimony showing the fair market value of the property exceeds the value stated in the petition, the court will establish the fair market value, which cannot surpass the total of the debt, interest, costs, taxes, and municipal claims. Following the court's valuation, the debtor and other liable parties will be released from their obligations to the judgment creditor up to the property's fair market value, as determined by the court or agreed upon by the creditor, minus any prior liens, costs, taxes, and claims not discharged by the sale. In this case, the partners did not provide evidence to support a claim that the real estate's value exceeded $290,000. Therefore, under 42 Pa.C.S. 8103(c)(2), the court was required to fix the fair market value at the amount alleged in the petition, which was $290,000. Evidence presented by the petitioning bank indicated that the fair market value was $290,000 as of December 10, 1991, with a subsequent decline leading to a sale for $250,000 in October 1992. The trial court erred by not establishing the fair market value and dismissing the petition, as there was no evidence to justify a lower valuation. This oversight was particularly significant for the judgment debtor. The trial court's order is reversed, the fair market value of the real estate is set at $290,000, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Thomas Wilkins, a third partner in bankruptcy, was not a party to the petition, and a settlement between him and PNC Bank resolved his involvement in this appeal.