Gordon v. City of Harrisburg

19 Pa. D. & C. 47, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 151
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County
DecidedJuly 28, 1933
DocketNo. 174
StatusPublished

This text of 19 Pa. D. & C. 47 (Gordon v. City of Harrisburg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gordon v. City of Harrisburg, 19 Pa. D. & C. 47, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 151 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1933).

Opinion

Reese, P. J.,

ninth judicial district, specially presiding, William D. Gordon, Secretary of Banking of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in possession of the business and property of the Mechanics Trust Company, of Harrisburg, Pa., has filed his petition under the Act of June 18,1923, P. L. 840, praying for a declaratory judgment upon the facts hereinafter stated. The petition was served upon all interested parties in accordance with the directions of the court. To the petition an answer was filed by the City of Harrisburg and its city treasurer. Prom the petition and answer the following pertinent facts appear:

On December 30, 1929, the Harrisburg Mattress Company executed and delivered to E. Bruce Taylor a mortgage in the amount of $30,000 upon its real estate located in the City of Harrisburg. The mortgage was duly recorded on the same date. The mortgagee thereupon assigned the mortgage to the Mechanics Trust Company, which guaranteed the payment of the principal and interest of the bonds secured by the mortgage and executed and delivered its certificates of assignment and guaranty to the persons named in the petition. The Harrisburg Mattress Company, mortgagor and owner of the mortgaged premises, defaulted in the payment of the Harrisburg city tax assessed for the year 1932, amounting to $184. Pursuant to sections 2575-2586 of The Third Class City Law of June 23, 1931, P. L. 932, the treasurer of the City of Harrisburg advertised that, for the purpose of collecting delinquent 1932 city taxes, he would sell at public sale on the first Monday in June 1933 certain real estate located in the City of Harrisburg, including inter alia the premises of the Harrisburg Mattress Company. When the date for the sale arrived it was postponed until the first Monday of December 1933. On October 23, 1931, the petitioner herein took possession of the business and property of the Mechanics Trust Company, and since that date has been and now is proceeding to liquidate the assets of said bank, including inter alia the mortgage of the Harrisburg Mattress Company.

The petitioner contends that the lien of this mortgage, it being a first mortgage upon the premises, will not be discharged and divested by the sale of the [48]*48premises for delinquent taxes. The City of Harrisburg and its treasurer on the other hand contend that the sale by the city treasurer for delinquent taxes will discharge the lien of the first mortgage on the expiration of the 2-year redemption period. The petition prays for a declaratory judgment upon the following questions:

1. Whether or not a sale of real estate for delinquent taxes by the city treasurer under The Third Class City Law discharges the lien of a first mortgage.

2. Whether or not a sale of real estate for delinquent taxes by the city treasurer under The Third Class City Law discharges the lien of a first mortgage recorded before such tax was assessed.

3. If the court should answer either one or both of these questions in the affirmative, then whether the lien of a first mortgage is discharged on the date of the sale or at the expiration of the 2-year period of redemption as provided in section 2579 of The Third Class City Law.

The facts in the present proceeding disclose that the mortgage herein was recorded and became a lien upon the premises before the delinquent tax involved was assessed. Therefore we deem it necessary to answer only the second and third questions hereinabove set forth.

Sections 2575-2586 of The Third Class City Law of June 23, 1931, P. L. 932, provide for the collection of delinquent city taxes by public sale by the city treasurer. No reference is made in the foregoing sections to the legal effect of a sale made thereunder upon mortgages or other liens already recorded against the properties which may be sold for the collection of delinquent city taxes.

The Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, authorizes the county treasurer to collect delinquent taxes on seated lands in counties, cities, boroughs, towns, townships, school districts, and poor districts on the return of such delinquent taxes by the tax collectors of the various municipalities to the county commissioners, such return being certified to the county treasurer. Section 9 of the last-mentioned Act of 1931 provides inter alia:

“No sale shall discharge the lien of any mortgage which shall have been recorded before such taxes became liens by return and docketing as herein provided, and which is or shall be prior to all other liens, except other mortgages, ground rents, municipal claims, and/or other taxes, and no such sale shall discharge the lien of any ground rent, municipal claim, or tax remaining unpaid____When any real estate is so sold, no lien whatsoever against such real estate shall be deemed to be discharged during the period for redemption; but if such real estate is not redeemed, then all liens against the same, except such liens as are hereinbefore specifically saved, shall be deemed to be discharged from the date that the right of redemption expired.”

It therefore follows that if the premises involved in the instant proceeding were to be sold by the county treasurer the lien of the mortgage, recorded before the tax became a lien, would not be divested by the county treasurer’s tax sale.

The Act of May 16,1923, P. L. 207, known as the Municipal Lien Act, and its amendments, provide when, how, upon what property, and to what extent liens shall be allowed for taxes and various municipal claims, with the procedure upon claims filed therefor, the methods for preserving such liens and enforcing payment of such claims, the effect of judicial sales of the properties liened, &c. Section 2 of this act provides:

“All taxes which may hereafter be lawfully imposed or assessed on any property in this Commonwealth . . . shall be and they are hereby declared to be a first lien on said property, together with all charges, expenses, and fees added thereto for failure to pay promptly; and such liens shall have priority to and be fully paid and satisfied out of the proceeds of any judicial sale of said [49]*49property, before any other obligation, judgment, claim, lien, or estate with which the said property may become charged or for which it may become liable, save and except only the costs of the sale and of the writ upon which it is made.”

Section 9 of this act provides that claims for taxes must be filed in the court of common pleas of the county in which the property is situated. Section 15 provides that such claims so filed shall remain a lien upon the properties for 5 years unless revived as provided in the act. Section 28 provides that executions upon any judgment recovered upon any such claims shall be by writ of levari facias directed to the sheriff and that he shall sell the properties at public sale. Section 31 preserves the lien of the mortgage at such judicial sale under certain circumstances. This section provides:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Northern Liberties v. Swain
13 Pa. 113 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1850)
Perry v. Brinton
13 Pa. 202 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1850)
Cadmus v. Jackson
52 Pa. 295 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1866)
Fisher v. Connard
100 Pa. 63 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1882)
Rhein Building Ass'n v. Lea
100 Pa. 210 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Pa. D. & C. 47, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-city-of-harrisburg-pactcompldauphi-1933.