Legal Document

405 U.S. 191 92 Supreme Court Reporter 767 31 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 138 Nellie SWARB et al., Appellants,v.William M. LENNOX al. Number 70—6. Argued Nov. 9, 1971. Decided Feb. 24, 1972. Syllabus Appellants (hereafter plaintiffs), purporting to act on behalf of a class consisting all Pennsylvania residents who signed documents containing cognovit provisions leading, or that could lead, confessed judgments in Philadelphia, brought this action challenging the system as unconstitutional its face violative due process. The three-judge District held that: leading and execution complies with process only if 'there has been an understanding voluntary consent debtor signing document'; plaintiffs did not sustain their burden proof respect lack valid bonds warrants attorney accompanying mortgages; record establish be maintained natural persons incomes over $10,000, but for those earn less than $10,000 consumer financing lease contracts provisions; there was no intentional waiver known rights by members executing confession judgment clauses; might entered after November 1, 1970, member recognized unless it is shown 'intentionally, understandingly, voluntarily waived' his rights; court declared practice confessing unconstitutional, prospectively effective noted, applied designated class, enjoined entry any against absent showing required waiver. appealed, claiming entire scheme face. Held: 1. rules statutes relating are face, under appropriate circumstances, may effectively legally have waived he would possess document had contained provision. D. Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Overmyer company versus Frick Co., 174, 775, 124. Pacific KF135 P2 200. 2. In light fact named defendants intervenors taken cross appeal, affirmance below does mean Court's opinion approved other aspects details were before Court. 201. 314 F.Supp. 1091, affirmed. David Atlantic Scholl, Pa., appellants, pro hac vice, special leave Philip C. Patterson, appellees. William L. Matz, Savings Loan League, amicus curiae. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered 1 This heard companion 124, decided today, also purports raise issue validity provisions. challenge case Pennsylvania.1 Court, one judge dissenting part because, view, go far enough, refrained from declaring Commonwealth's granted declaratory injunctive relief limited signers. 1091 (ED Pa. 1970). plaintiffs, defendants, appealed. We noted probable jurisdiction same day certiorari Overmyer. 401 991, 91 1220. 28 529. 2 * firmly entrenched long effect there. 3 A money 'may prothonotary . without agency filing complaint, declaration confession, amount which appear instrument,' Pa.Rule Civ.Proc. 2951(a), except must instituted complaint instrument more 10 years old cannot produced filing, 'or requires occurrence default condition precedent entered.' Rules 2951(c) (d). plaintiff shall file substantially prescribed form, sign defendant' statute provides otherwise. Rule 2955. enters 'in conformity confession.' 2956.2 due, interest, attorneys' fees, costs included praecipe writ execution. 2957. 4 Within 20 days mail defendant written notice. Failure do this, however, affect lien. 2958(a). so even notice yet mailed. 2958(b). If affidavit mailing filed within 20-day period, until filed. 2958(c). 5 Relief sought petition asserting '(a)ll grounds whether strike off open .. 2959(a). states prima facie relief, issues rule show cause grant stay. 'waives defenses objections' petition. 'shall dispose answer, testimony, depositions, admissions evidence.' 2959 (b), (c), (e). opened whole part, then tried. 2960. 6 procedure possession real property essentially commenced complaint. 2970—2973. 7 specifically given power 'enter at instance upon confessions defendants.' Pa.Stat.Ann., Tit. 17, § 1482. clerk common pleas. He judicial function. It said derived acts office, Smith Safeguard Mut. insurance 212 Pa.Super. 83, 87, 239 Reporter, 2nd 824, 826 (1968), ministerial act, Lenson Sandler, 430 193, 197, 241 66, 68 (1968). 8 exists 'independent statute.' Equipment Corporation America Primos Vanadium 285 432, 437, 132 360, 362 (1926); Cook Gilbert, Serg. & R. 567, 568 (1822); Hatch Stitt, 66 264 (1870). 9 apparent, therefore, confession-of-judgment full procedural effect; plaintiff's himself effectuate procedure; prothonotary, nonjudicial officer, official utilized; entered; forthwith. seek way it, assert achieves trial persuades open. Meanwhile, lien remain. pervasive drastic character noted. Cutler Latshaw, 374 4—5, 97 234, 236 (1953). See Kine Forman, 404 301, 172 164 (1961), Atlas Credit Ezrine, 25 N.Y.2d 219, 303 N.Y.S.2d 382, 250 North Eastern 474 (1969). II 11 Seven individuals original December 1969. Jurisdiction based civil statutes, Code KF62 1343 42 1983. purport Philadelphia County. county's sheriff, officials responsible, respectively, recording them. alleges each another type agreement pursuant creditor judgment; faces immediate sale home personal belongings; because they deprive denial hearing contract intelligent right hearing; recourse recorded reopen; such costly burdensome low income consumers, denies them equal protection. injunction defendants' 'operating above rules.' requested. 12 single Judge temporary restraining order staying seven plaintiffs. provided adding additional continued expanded stay executions Commonwealth. number added, dismissed case. group finance companies permitted intervene. 13 Stipulations made. One between counsel city solicitor; intervenor companies. These stipulations identical overlap. They established following: 14 Judgments various ranging amounts $249.23 $25,800. 15 called witnesses, testify facts alleged Each unawareness clause, significance read inability bargain about anyway. 16 3. called, some encouraged contracts; exceeded debts addition penalties, costs, fees; afford proceedings believed meritorious defenses. 17 4. imposition sheriff's bar association fee schedules, necessary deposition transcript acknowledged. 18 hearing. appearance intervenors, assistant solicitor appeared Deputy Attorney General added She postal earned $6,100 annually agreed door-to-door salesman buy carpet $1,300. Her clause obtained judgment. detective officer presented testified pervasiveness clauses 'disbelief shock' 19 introduced evidence stipulation published report Caplovitz, Ph. D., Consumers Trouble. 1968 study confessed-judgment debtors four major cities. 245 debtors. purported 96% annual 56% $6,000; 30% graduated high school; 14% knew clauses. witness intervenors. usual making loans. held: 21 comply standards document.' F.Supp., 1095. 22 If, consent, violates requirements opportunity heard. Ibid. 23 mortgages. Id., 1098. 24 individual $10,000. 1098—1099. 5. maintained, residing 1099. 26 6. There prejudgment hearing, creditor, avoid expenses attendant opening striking Since concept adequate understanding, 1100. 27 7. federal court's function dictate 'exactly what constitutes waiver.' Where attorney, prove where school graduate required.' 1101. 'statewide legislation providing intentional, consent,' opinion, among methods available State permit use clause. 1100—1101, n. 24. 8. No time lost law. 1102—1103. 29 9. Liens prior June 1970 (the date opinion), preserved. executed determine 30 dates stated, designated, absence waiver.3 1103. limitation earning annually. 1102. III From appeal. Their claim erred confining certain appellants' proffered should holding facial unconstitutionality, course, wholly apart consideration, every obligor. Today's decision Overmyer, although concerns corporate debtor, adverse contention plaintiff-appellants. recognized, that, 32 On plaintiff-appellants' appeal 33 affirmance, us. As Furthermore, General's apparently interim personnel change, longer supports position deputy general and, choosing pursue customarily assumed duty defend legislation, now joins appellants urging here facially invalid. With taking position, argument side defendant-appellees us amici. permissible reach opposition, coincides goes further extent opposition attack portions favorable IV 34 disposition present prompt following observations: 35 our second concluding comment supra, U.S., 188, S.Ct., 783, we state 'not controlling cases,' refer adhesion, bargaining disparity, anything received return When factors kind present, indicate, 'other legal consequences ensue.' That caveat possible pertinency participants system. 36 necessarily reveals discomfiture However be, impact delineated one-sided make attempt so. 37 Problems peculiarly grist legislative mill. 38 heretofore Circuit dissolved. 39 ordered. 40 Affirmed. 41 POWELL REHNQUIST took consideration WHITE, concurring. 43 N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions join add these comments narrow aspect 44 true portion cross-appeal taken. Morley Construction Maryland Casualty 300 185, 191—192, 57 325, 327—328, 81 L.Ed. 593 (1937); cf. Raines, 7, 80 519, 526, 524 (1960). But well prevailing party need entitle him support favor expressly rejected below. Walling Industries 330 545, 67 883, 1088 (1947); Langnes Green, 282 531, 534—539, 51 243, 244—246, 75 520 (1931); American Railway Express 265 425, 435—436, 560, 563—564, 1087 (1924); plain error disposes it. Reynolds States, 98 145, addendum op., Pages 168—169, 244 (1879). Thus, despite appellee-intervenors cross-appeal, free arriving Those grounds, sustained, finality unappealed judgment, would, sufficient, insofar challenged here. Nothing contrary inferred grounds. At least my join. 45 DOUGLAS, part. 46 permits creditors extract which, while rendering completely defenseless, deprives many safeguards ordinary procedure. low-income asked enjoin operation ground consented abbreviated form justice unwittingly out compulsion supplied standard adhesion contracts. worked when into nonmortgage credit transactions, waivers knowing voluntary. arguing lower invalidated regime event, wrongly denied both yearly mortgagors. 47 Commonwealth instead confesses agrees appellants. Various lending institutions intervened cross-appeals.1 did, motion dismiss law governing main facets Moreover, request brief, maintaining correctly excluded mortgage borrowers excess benefitied decree incorrectly found knowingly understandingly authorization confess 48 appellees sheriff represented concedes State's question unconstitutional. suggests, lacking controversy. say enough. Whether affirm, modify, reverse, ongoing life. become moot. Large interests ride outcome important litigation. 49 said, review. refuse let conclusively govern cases, acting examination record.2 remanded reconsideration error. Young 315 257, 62 510, 86 832 (1942), declined remand incorporated theory advanced Solicitor petitioner. Obviously bind courts parties' view is. 50 'The considered enforcement officers reversible committed entitled great weight, obligations compel examine independently errors confessed.' 258—259, 511. stated Sibron New York, 392 40, 58, 88 1889, 1900, 917: 52 'It uniform conduct own cases Federal Government conviction erroneously obtained.' also. Cates Haderlein, 342 804, 72 47, 96 609. 53 once properly here, follow recommendations concessions parties. Utah Public Service commission El Paso Natural Gas 395 464, 468—469, 89 1860, 1862, 474. case, appellant changed merits reached like appellee, thought dismissed. An amicus, views. concluded remand, order. Consensus parties not, words, control decisionmaking process.3 54 sure, approves holds constitutionally enter instruments waive hand, affirms discussion refusals (1) extend similar either transactions yearly, (2) declare 1102—1103, 1112 (1970). 55 anomalous appellee can defeat instant handicapped appellees' refusal oppose Finance fully informed amici therefore discuss tendered. Pa.Rules 2950—2976, Jan. P.S. Appendix (which, Act 21, 1937, Pa.Laws 1982, statutes); Apr. 14, 1834, 1482, subd. III; 1806, 12, 739; Mar. 738. By 2976, 739 suspended 'only inconsistent rules,' 738 application actions property. Prior duty' 'on writing ..' Compare result Delaware Osmond Spence, 327 1949 (Del.1971). means appellate will upset Cardozo 327, 593: 'Without 'urge matter appearing involve reasoning insistence overlooked ignored it.' 435, 564, 1087. What 'attack enlarging thereunder lessening adversary, seeks correct supplement dealt below.' inveterate certain. Findings revised appellant, weight evidence, equity. subject revision appellees, events circumstances findings carries incident fix limits sharply. 'Where appeals assign error, bound below, court, nor correct, taken." Mayberry Pennsylvania, 382 286, 438, 336 (1965); Nicholson Boles, 375 25, 84 89, (1963). Stern E. Gressman, Practice 224—225 (4th ed. 1969). Cf. County Alameda Carleson (California Welfare Rights Organization Superior County), Cal.3d 730, Cal.Rptr. 385, 488 953 (1971), whom appeal; California 'aggrieved' organization intervention appealed merits. reversed

Classification Label: 1