Hotel Furniture Liq. v. Castor Avenue Prop. (concurring and dissenting statement)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S11043-16 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 HOTEL FURNITURE LIQUIDATORS OF PHILADELPHIA, INC. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CASTOR AVENUE PROPERTIES, LLC Appellant No. 2075 EDA 2015 Appeal from the Order Entered May 27, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): December Term, 2014, No. 00855 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------HOTEL FURNITURE LIQUIDATORS OF PHILADELPHIA, INC. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. CASTOR AVENUE PROPERTIES, LLC Appellant No. 2377 EDA 2015 Appeal from the Judgment Entered June 26, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): December Term, 2014, No. 00855 BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., OTT, J., and MUSMANNO, J. CONCURRING AND DISSENTING STATEMENT BY OTT, J.:FILED APRIL 29, 2016 While I join in the decision of the Majority that rejected the argument of Castor Avenue Properties, LLC (“Castor”) that the trial court erred in denying its Petition to Open Default Judgment, I write separately to express J-S11043-16 my view that Castor waived its argument that the trial court erred as a matter of law in assessing damages against Castor. In my view, because Castor failed to file a motion for post-trial relief as required by Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 227.1 following the assessment of damages hearing, this Court should not address the damages issue on the merits. Therefore, I would adopt the trial court’s discussion regarding waiver as dispositive of this issue. See Trial Court Opinion, 8/28/2015, at 7–8. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
