Court Opinion

ID: 9956596
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-02 16:10:17.671456+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:38.697419
License: Public Domain

J-A27024-23

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

  AVAIL HOLDING LLC                            :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                               :        PENNSYLVANIA
                       Appellant               :
                                               :
                                               :
                v.                             :
                                               :
                                               :
  RONALD C. HELTON                             :   No. 639 MDA 2023

               Appeal from the Order Entered March 27, 2023
   In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Civil Division at No(s):
                                 22-1370

BEFORE:      LAZARUS, J., NICHOLS, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*

JUDGMENT ORDER BY NICHOLS, J.:                            FILED: APRIL 2, 2024

        Appellant Avail Holding LLC appeals from the order granting judgment

on the pleadings in favor of Appellee Ronald C. Helton in the underlying

mortgage foreclosure action. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in

concluding that Appellant’s claim was barred by the statute of limitations. We

quash.

        The relevant facts and procedural history of this matter are well known

to the parties. See Trial Ct. Op., 7/20/23, at 1-2. Briefly, on May 24, 2001,

Appellee and a third-party, Alliance Funding, entered into a mortgage

agreement. The mortgage was purportedly assigned to Appellant on June 3,

2020.     On July 7, 2022, Appellant filed a complaint alleging that Appellee

defaulted on all outstanding mortgage payments after March 1, 2004.

____________________________________________

* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A27024-23

Appellee filed an answer and new matter raising the statute of limitations as

an affirmative defense.    In its reply, Appellant argued that the applicable

statute of limitations in a mortgage foreclosure action is twenty years.

Appellee filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, and Appellant filed a

response and brief in opposition to Appellee’s motion. The trial court held a

hearing at which Appellee argued that Appellant had failed to attach a copy of

the mortgage agreement to its complaint, and therefore, there was no

indication in the pleadings that the mortgage was under seal.         As such,

Appellee argued that the applicable statute of limitations was four years and

barred Appellant’s claim.     On March 24, 2023, the trial court granted

Appellee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. See id. at 1-3.

      Although the order granting judgment on the pleadings was filed on

March 24, 2023, the trial court did not provide notice of the order until March

27, 2023. See Pa.R.C.P. 236. Therefore, Appellant had until April 26, 2023,

thirty days from March 27, 2023, in which to file a timely appeal.         See

Pa.R.A.P. 903(a). However, Appellant did not file the appeal until the thirty-

first day, April 27, 2023. By failing to file a timely notice of appeal, we lack

jurisdiction and are constrained to quash the appeal. See Morningstar v.

Hoban, 819 A.2d 1191, 1194 (Pa. Super. 2003) (explaining that this Court

lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits of an untimely appeal.).

      Appeal quashed.

                                     -2-
J-A27024-23

Judgment Entered.

Benjamin D. Kohler, Esq.
Prothonotary

Date: 04/02/2024

                           -3-