In re Distribution of Proceeds from Sheriff’s Sale of Premises 250 Bell Road, Lower Merion Township, Montgomery County
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
345 A.2d 921 (1975)
- Written by Ron Leshnower, JD
Facts
John E. Jennings and Helen M. Jennings owned property in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Equitable Life Assurance foreclosed a first mortgage on the property on February 20, 1974, and the property was sold at a sheriff’s foreclosure sale on the same day. After the sale occurred, $66,679.50 remained available to be distributed to creditors. The sheriff posted a proposed schedule of distribution that omitted a judgment obtained by Boenning and Scattergood, Inc. (Boenning) (plaintiff), because the judgment had not been recorded. Sometime after Boenning obtained the judgment, but before the sheriff’s sale, John McCoy (defendant) loaned money and took a mortgage on the property. McCoy was aware of Boenning’s unrecorded judgment. The McCoy mortgage was recorded. Subsequently, Margolies (defendant) and Jay Vending Company (Jay) (defendant) loaned money and took mortgages on the property. Neither Margolies nor Jay knew about the Boenning judgment. The Margolies and Jay mortgages also were recorded. Boenning brought a claim to obtain an order declaring priority status for the Boenning lien of judgment. The trial court ruled in Boenning’s favor. The court resolved the circuitous liens by using the temporal priority rule of first in time, first in right. McCoy, Margolies, and Jay appealed the ruling, claiming that the subsequent liens took priority over Boenning’s unrecorded judgment lien.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Price, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.