Roth Appeal

47 A.2d 716, 159 Pa. Super. 145, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 346
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 22, 1946
DocketAppeals, 134
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 47 A.2d 716 (Roth Appeal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Roth Appeal, 47 A.2d 716, 159 Pa. Super. 145, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 346 (Pa. Ct. App. 1946).

Opinion

Opinion by

Rhodes, J.,

These appeals involve the extent, under the Act of July 28, 1941, P. L. 535, 72 PS § 6105.1 et seq., of the right of redemption of real property purchased by a political subdivision (county) at a tax sale.

Properties of the appellants were sold in 1937 at a county treasurer's sale for nonpayment of taxes, and *147 were purchased by the County Commissioners of Erie County. In 1945 written offers were made to the county commissioners to purchase the respective properties at private sale. The commissioners, in regular meeting, by resolution accepted the offers. 1 Petitions were presented to the court of common pleas by the county commissioners asking approval of the proposed private sales under the Act of May 21, 1937, P. L. 787, as amended by the Acts of July 29, 1941, P. L. 600, May 21,1943, P. L. 282, May 16,1945, P. L. 603, May 17,1945, P. L. 627, 72 PS § 5878c et seq.

Appellants, prior to any action by the court on the petitions for approval of the private sales, petitioned to redeem under the provisions of the Act of July 28,1941, P. L. 535, 72 PS § 6105.1 et seq., and tendered as the first installment 20 per cent of the amount of all taxes and municipal claims and penalties and interest accrued and charged against the respective properties, together with the costs incident to the treasurer’s tax sale, as provided by the said act. Appellants were not permitted to exercise their alleged redemption rights, and the petitions to make private sale of the properties were approved and decrees were entered. These appeals have followed.

The court below, in approving the sales and directing the execution and delivery of deeds to the respective purchasers, held that the right of redemption by the former owners could only be exercised prior to the time when the county commissioners had contracted to sell the respective properties. 2 The court recognized that the *148 right of redemption extended beyond the statutory period under the circumstances, but was of the opinion that after the offers by the purchasers and the acceptance by the commissioners the transactions were closed and there could be no rescission. The statutory requirement of approval by the court, and its relationship to the passing of title were not considered.

Section 1 of the Act of July 28, 1941, P. L. 535, 72 PS § 6105.1, reads as follows: “In all cases where here-, tofore or hereafter real property shall have been or shall be purchased at any tax sale by any political subdivision, any person who was or is entitled under existing law to redeem such property shall have such right of redemption so long as the title thereto remains in said political subdivision upon the payment of the amount due thereon by installments in the manner hereinafter provided, whether or not the period during which the right of redemption existed shall have expired.”

Obviously, under the Act of 1941, the right of redemption has been substantially expanded. By this act a former owner of real estate acquired by the county at a sale for delinquent taxes is given an absolute right of redemption as long as the title remains in the county, although the period of redemption fixed by prior legislation has already expired. 3 Blythe Township School Dis *149 trict v. Mary-D Coal Mining Co., Inc., 354 Pa. 407, 47 A. 2d 535.

Section 4 of the Act of May 21, 1937, P. L. 787, as amended, 72 PS § 5878d, provides: “If, after snch hearing, the court is satisfied that the proposed compromise or private sale is proper and to the advantage of all the municipalities interested, it shall enter a decree approving such compromise, settlement, private sale or such other settlement as the court may find to be proper, and directing a conveyance of such property to the person or persons with whom the agreement has been made, upon the payment of the agreement amount or such amount as the court may approve, and all costs of the proceeding.”

After the fixed period for redemption has passed, provision is made for private sale in section 2 of the Act of 1937, as amended, 72 PS § 5878b. This section reads: “After the period for redemption has passed, such municipality may sell at private sale any real property purchased at tax sale or sale for municipal claim, and may, in effecting such sale, accept any sum less than the amount of all the taxes, municipal claims, penalties, and interest due, subject to the approval of the court of common pleas, upon petition, as hereinafter provided.” Such sales are statutory; and they are “subject to the approval of the court of common pleas, upon petition ...” A petition and a decree are prerequisites to consummation of the sale and the transfer of title, although such petition may be presented by “any municipality or municipalities [any taxing authority] having an interest therein, or by the other party concerned . . .” Section 3 of the Act of 1937, as amended, 72 PS § 5878c. In Lackawanna County Appeal, 157 Pa. Superior Ct. *150 137, 141, 42 A. 2d 103, we said of a sale under the Act of 1937, supra, that it. is the power of the court which gives validity to the sale.

Appellees in their argument contend that the rule of equitable conversion applies, and that the equitable title of the purchasers came into being upon the acceptance by the county commissioners of the offers made. Appellees follow this by the assertion that the commissioners had parted with the ownership of the properties and simply retained the bare legal title as security for the balance of the purchase price due from the respective purchasers. The cases cited relative to private executory contracts of sale where the rule of equitable conversion has been applied are not relevant. The present transactions are more analogous to orphans’ court sales. Here, as there, no conversion takes place until deed has been executed and delivered. See Brennan’s Estate, 220 Pa. 232, 69 A. 678; Powers Estate, 153 Pa. Superior Ct. 161, 165, 33 A. 2d 501. Appellees also cite as applicable those cases which hold that a mortgagor’s right of redemption, if there is no defect in the record, cannot be exercised after the sheriff’s sale. The exercise of a mortgagor’s right of redemption is not regulated by statute; and the position of a purchaser at a sheriff’s sale is, in substance, that of a purchaser by articles of agréement, who acquires an equitable interest which becomes a complete title on complying with the terms- of sale. Pennsylvania Company for Insurances on Lives and Granting Annuities v. Broad Street Hospital, 354 Pa. 123, 47 A. 2d 281. 4 But in the present case the right of the former owners to redeem is regulated by statute, and the prospective purchasers at private sale from the county commissioners are not in the same category as such purchasers by articles of agreement. A public sale under the Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS § 5971q, of real property by the county commissioners previously purchased at tax sale is

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Investment Resource Holding, Inc.
168 A.3d 225 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2017)
Russell v. Equibank, N. A. (In Re Russell)
8 B.R. 342 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1980)
Sale of Land in Middletown Township
67 Pa. D. & C.2d 632 (Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, 1974)
Hughes v. Farrell
124 A.2d 473 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1956)
City of Philadelphia v. Orliner
86 Pa. D. & C. 398 (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 1953)
School District of Centralia Borough
77 Pa. D. & C. 551 (Columbia County Court of Common Pleas, 1951)
Consolidated Real Estate Co. v. Northumberland County
72 Pa. D. & C. 23 (Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1950)
Imler v. Messner
70 Pa. D. & C. 101 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1949)
Branch Motor Express Co. v. Commonwealth
69 Pa. D. & C. 377 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1949)
Patterson v. Warwick
68 A.2d 396 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1949)
Bolivar Borough Appeal
65 A.2d 390 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1949)
Zerbe Township School District v. Lark
67 Pa. D. & C. 104 (Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1948)
Levick v. North Versailles Township
62 A.2d 758 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Indiana County Petition
62 A.2d 3 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Lycoming County Commissioners' Petition
62 Pa. D. & C. 1 (Lycoming County Court of Common Pleas, 1947)
Douds' Petition
59 Pa. D. & C. 674 (Beaver County Court of Common Pleas, 1947)
Zerbe Township School District v. West Line Coal Co.
59 Pa. D. & C. 505 (Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1947)
Cambria County Commissioners' Petition
59 Pa. D. & C. 519 (Cambria County Court of Common Pleas, 1947)
Zerbe Township School District v. Thomas
61 Pa. D. & C. 355 (Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 A.2d 716, 159 Pa. Super. 145, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roth-appeal-pasuperct-1946.