J

- A17020

- 16

NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

- SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

PARKTOWN PARTNERSHIP , L.P., BY ITS GENERAL PARTNER: P. T. DINNOCENTI LLC C/O PALLADINO DE VELOPMENT GROUP, INC. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

ROYERSFORD RECOVERY

APPEAL OF: JOHN LEONARD No. 3228 EDA 2015

Appeal from the Order Entered October 20
, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County

Civil Division at No(s): 2015

- 25761

BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., LAZARUS, J., and PLATT, J. *

MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, J.: FILED AUGUST 09, 2016

John Leonard appeals, pro se , from the trial court’s order denying his

petition to strike a judgment entered in favor of Appellee, Parktown

Partnership, L.P. (Parktown), in this confession of judgment action. We

dismiss the appeal.

Parktown is a Pennsylvania limited partnership; its general partner is

Appellee, P.T. Dinnocenti LLC, c/o Palladino Development Group, Inc.

(P alladino). Royersford Recovery (Royersford) is a Pennsylvania non

- profit

organization. In December 2014, Royersford entered into a ten

- year lease

agreement for the rental of 2,300 square feet of commercial space from

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.J

- A17020

- 16

- 2

-

Parktown at Parktown Plaza, located a t Lewis Road and Oak Street, in

Limerick, Pennsylvania. The lease contains a confession of judgment clause,

for both money damages and possession, which states in part:

Tenant hereby knowingly, intentionally, voluntarily and irrevocably agrees that, if fi xed minimum rent or any charges hereby reserved as additional rent or liquidated damages, or any other sum payable hereunder shall remain unpaid when the same is due beyond any applicable grace period (if any), tenant hereby empowers any Prothonotary or at torney of any court of record to appeal for tenant in any and all actions which may be brought for such rent, liquidated damages or other charges or expenses agreed to be paid by tenant, hereunder, and to confess judgment against tenant in any competent co urt for the recovery of such rent, liquidated damages or other charges or expenses[.]

Park Town Plaza Lease Agreement, 12/4/14, at Section 18:06(i). Leonard

executed the lease on behalf of Royersford, which included initialing the

Confession of Judgment c lause.

On September 22, 2015, Parktown filed a confession of judgment

action 1 against Royersford claiming that it breached the lease by defaulting

on its monthly lease payments, including payment of its security deposit.

On September 22, 2015, the cour t entered judgment in the amount of

$15,068.28, 2 plus possession of the leased premises, in favor of Parktown.

____________________________________________

1 The complaint also sought ejectment of Royersford from the leased premises. See Plaintiff’s Complaint (Count II), 9/22/15, at 5. The lease also contains a confession of judgment clause for ejectment. See Park Town Plaza Lease, 12/4/14, at Section 18:06(ii).

2 Royersford’s monthly rent totaled $1,404.92, plus common area maintenanc e and sewer charges. At the time the complaint was filed, Royersford was allegedly $10,068.28 in default under the lease.J

- A17020

- 16

- 3

-

On October 2, 2015, Leonard filed a petition to strike the judgment, which

was denied after a hearing. This timely pro se appeal follows.

Due to the substantial deficiencies in Leonard’s appellate brief, which

greatly impair our ability to conduct meaningful appellate review, we are

constrained to dismiss this appeal. To begin, we refer Leonard to the

general rule requiring that briefs conform to the Pennsylvania Rules of

Appellate Procedure. Rule 2101 states:

Briefs and reproduced records shall conform in all material respects with the requirements of these rules as nearly as the circumstances of the particular case will admit, otherwise they may be suppressed, and, if the defects are in the brief or reproduced record of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal or other matter may be quashed or dismissed.
Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (emphasis added). We also bring Rule 2111 to Leonard’s

attention. That rule provides:

Rule 2111. Brief of the Appellant

General rule. The brief of the appellant, except as otherwise prescribed by these rules, shall consist of the following matter, separately and distinctly entitled and in the following order:

(1) Statement of jurisdiction. (2) Order or other determination in question. (3) Statement of both the scope of review and the standard of review. (4) Statement of the questions involved. (5) Statement of the case. (6) Summary of argument. (7) Argument for appellant. (8) A short conclusion statin g the precise relief sought. (9) The opinions and pleadings specified in Subdivisions (b) and (c) of this rule.J

- A17020

- 16

- 4

- (10) In the Superior Court, a copy of the statement of the matters complained of on appeal filed with the trial court pursuant to Rule 1925(b), or an ave rment that no order requiring a Rule 1925(b) statement was entered.
Pa.R.A.P. 2111. Leonard has completely failed to comply with the

requirements of Rule 2111(a). His brief contains no statement of

jurisdiction, statement of scope and standard of review, statement of the

questions involved, statement of the case, summary of argument, argument,

or conclusion stating his sought

- after relief.

Rather, Leonard’s brief consists of “general rambling discourse.” See

Commonwealth v. Sanford , 445 A.2d 149, 150 (Pa. Super. 1982). Under

such circumstances, dismissal of the appeal is appropriate. See Branch

Banking & Trust v. Gesiorski , 904 A.2d 939 (Pa. Super. 2006) (appeal

dismissed where numerous defects in pro se brief prevented court from

conducting meaningf ul appellate review).

Appeal dismissed.

GANTMAN, P.J., Joins the memorandum.

PLATT, J., Concurs in the result.J

- A17020

- 16

- 5

-

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 8/9/2016