Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-3691 Civil WILLIAM WALKER, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. JENNIFER LAUGHERY, DEFENDANT 06-3691 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PETITION TO FILE AN APPEAL OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., July 3, 2006:-- On June 28, 2006, Jennifer Laughery filed a "petition for leave to file appeal beyond 30 days after entry of judgment for good cause." She avers: 1. On May 24, 2006, Magisterial District Judge Martin, after a hearing at which Petitioner was unrepresented by counsel, entered a Notice of Judgment for rent and for possession of the rental premises, in favor of Plaintiff/Landlord, William Walker. A copy of the Notice of Judgment is attached as Exhibit A. 2. An Order of Possession was issued in the above referenced action on June 6, 2006. A copy of the Order of Possession is attached as Exhibit B. 3. Petitioner contacted MidPenn Legal Services on or about June 14, 2006 for the purpose of representing her in filing an appeal of the judgment as she denies owing the money determined to be owing by the Magisterial District Judge. 4. Petitioner's undersigned counsel has been in communication with Plaintiff/Landlord, William Walker for the purpose of attempting to negotiate an acceptable resolution of the matter. 5. Petitioner vacated her apartment pursuant to an Order of Possession on or about June 20, 2006 and no longer resides in the subject premises. 6. Due to Petitioner's search of other housing, the immediate necessity of moving all of her belongings, and her inability to miss any more time from work without losing her job, she was unable to come to the office of her undersigned counsel to discuss the details of filing an appeal of the money portion of the above referenced judgment until the close of business on June 23, 2006. 7. Also, due to her moving her residence, Plaintiff was unable to locate and provide counsel with the documentation necessary to 06-3691 CIVIL TERM verify that her appeal had merit until after the expiration of the thirty day appeal period. 8. As a result, Petitioner was unable to file her Notice of Appeal within 30 days of entry of the Notice of Judgment by the Magisterial District Judge. . . . 10. For the reasons set forth above, Petitioner has good cause for not having filed her appeal within 30 days, has a meritorious defense and wishes to file her Notice of Appeal, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. (Emphasis added.) Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. No. 1002A, provides: A party aggrieved by a judgment for money, or a judgment affecting the delivery of possession of real property arising out of a nonresidential lease, may appeal therefrom within thirty (30) days after the date of the entry of the judgment by filing with the prothonotary of the court of common pleas a notice of appeal on a form which shall be prescribed by the State Court Administrator together with a copy of the Notice of Judgment issued by the magisterial district judge. The prothonotary shall not accept an appeal from an aggrieved party which is presented for filing more than thirty (30) days after the date of entry of the judgment without leave of court and upon good cause shown. (Emphasis added.) In McKeown v. Bailey, 731 A.2d 628 (Pa. Super. 1999), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania stated that the phrase "good cause shown" as used in Rule 1002A requires "an appealing party to proffer some 'legally sufficient reason' for requesting relief.,,1 The proffer in the within petition essentially avers that petitioner, for more than thirty days, chose to attend to needs other than her need to file a timely appeal, and because of those needs she did not take the 1 Petitioner does not make any proffer that her failure to file a timely appeal was caused by an extraordinary circumstance involving fraud or some breakdown in the court's operation through a default of its officers, or that any honest effort on her part to file an appeal was accompanied by substantial compliance with Rule 1002A. See McKeown -2- 06-3691 CIVIL TERM time necessary to secure the documentation of the merits of such an appeal. This proffer does not constitute a legally sufficient reason for granting relief. Therefore, the following order is entered without the entry of a Rule to show cause. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of July, 2006, the within petition, IS DISMISSED. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. William Walker 170 Brindle Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Grace E. D'Alo, Esquire For Jennifer Laughery Mark W. Martin, Magisterial District Judge :sal v. Bailey, supra. -3- WILLIAM WALKER, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. JENNIFER LAUGHERY, DEFENDANT 06-3691 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PETITION TO FILE AN APPEAL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of July, 2006, the within petition, IS DISMISSED. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. William Walker 170 Brindle Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Grace E. D'Alo, Esquire For Jennifer Laughery Mark W. Martin, Magisterial District Judge :sal