J-S42012-14

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 

STEPHEN J. BYERS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 

PENNSYLVANIA 

 Appellee 

v.

ERNEST E. LIGGETT AND MARILYN 

KOSTIK LIGGETT 

 Appellants No. 1730 WDA 2013 

Appeal from the Order September 30, 2013 

In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County 

Civil Division at No(s): GD 09-013539 

BEFORE: PANELLA, J., JENKINS, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY PANELLA, J. FILED SEPTEMBER 23, 2014

 Appellants, Ernest E. Liggett and Marilyn Kostik Liggett, appeal pro se 

from the order denying their Motion to Postpone or Stay Sheriff’s Sale 

entered September 30, 2013, by the Honorable Alan David Hertzberg, Court 

of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. We quash the appeal as 

interlocutory. 

 This appeal is one in a long line of attempts by Appellants to postpone 

a sheriff’s sale of real property located in Allegheny County. In the fall of 

2006, Appellants obtained short-term loans from Appellee, Stephen J. Byers, 

along with his agreement to purchase additional parcels of real property 

located in Brownsville, Fayette County for use in real estate development. 

When Appellants failed to repay the loans or purchase the additional 

property, the parties entered into a settlement agreement in the Court of 
J-S42012-14

- 2 - 

Common Pleas of Fayette County that required Appellants to either pay 

Byers a specified sum of money within 45 days or have judgment entered 

against them. When Appellants did not pay the money within the agreed 

upon timeframe, Byers entered judgment against Appellants in Fayette 

County for $145,000.00. 

 In July 2009, Byers transferred the judgment to Allegheny County, and 

issued a Writ of Execution for the sale of personalty and realty located at 43 

Brownstone Road, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235. Over the following 

years, Appellants have filed various motions to stay or obviate the 

proceedings, all of which have been denied by the trial court and affirmed by 

this Court. Relative to the instant proceedings, on September 20, 2013, 

Appellants filed yet another Motion to Stay or Postpone a Sheriff’s Sale 

scheduled for November 4, 2013. The trial court denied Appellants’ motion 

on September 30, 2013. This timely appeal followed. 

 An appeal will lie only from a final order unless otherwise permitted by 

statute or rule. See Pa.R.A.P. 341. Further, an interlocutory appeal as of 

right will lie from orders that are interlocutory in nature. See Pa.R.A.P. 311 

(an appeal may be taken as of right from orders affecting judgments, 

attachments, changes of venue, injunctions, peremptory judgment in 

mandamus, new trials, partition, or other cases made appealable by statute 

or rule). 

Instantly, as the trial court’s order denying Appellants’ motion to stay 

did not effectively end the litigation or terminate the proceedings, it is 
J-S42012-14

- 3 - 

interlocutory. This Court has further held that an order denying a motion to 

stay is not appealable as of right. See Farmers First Bank v. Wagner, 

687 A.2d 390, 391-392 (Pa. Super. 1997) (order refusing to grant motion to 

stay not appealable). Accordingly, we are constrained to quash Appellants’ 

appeal as interlocutory. 

 Appeal quashed. Jurisdiction relinquished. 

Judgment Entered. 

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. 

Prothonotary 

Date: 9/23/2014