Opinion
2044 EDA 2020
08-05-2021
SERGEI KOVALEV Appellant v. AKASH ASHOK BAROT, DDS., NORTHWOOD DENTAL GROUP, LLC AKA/DBA NORTHWOOD AESTHETIC DENTAL, JANE DOE I, JANE DOE II, AND HIRABEN PROPERTIES, LLC
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Order Entered October 13, 2020, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil Division at No(s): No. 190102873.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and COLINS, J.[*]
JUDGMENT ORDER
KUNSELMAN, J.:
Pro se Appellant, Sergei Kovalev, seeks reversal of the trial court's order denying a preliminary injunction to escrow the funds from the Appellees' sale of certain real estate. That property is unrelated to the underlying causes of action. Mr. Kovalev wished for the trial court to control the proceeds from the real-estate transactions pending the outcome of this personal-injury lawsuit, in which Mr. Kovalev sued Dr. Akash Ashok Barot, DDS, and the dentist's various companies.
In his brief, Mr. Kovalev asserts the Appellees "liquidated and dissipated all financial assets, at least the real-estate assets used by [Dr.] Barot's dental offices." Mr. Kovalev's Brief at 10. This assertion ends the need for further appellate review. Mr. Kovalev admits that the funds from the real-estate sale are gone, leaving nothing to be escrowed. As such, even if we reverse the trial-court order, denying the preliminary injunction, we could not grant Mr. Kovalev his requested relief. Therefore, this appeal is moot.
"It is well established in this jurisdiction that this Court will not decide moot questions . . . [and] a legal question can become moot on appeal as a result of an intervening change in the facts of the case." In re Gross, 382 A.2d 116, 119 (Pa. 1978) (emphasis added). Because the Appellees have dissipated the funds at issue, that intervening change in the facts of this case moots the instant appeal.
Hence, we now dismiss this appeal as moot.
The fact that these defendants have liquidated and dissipated their real-estate assets has no bearing on the merits of Mr. Kovalev's personal-injury lawsuit against them. If Mr. Kovalev ultimately succeeds in his claims, he may execute his judgment against the defendants' remaining assets; this is the typical manner in which personal-injury suits proceed following judgment.
Appeal dismissed.
Judgment Entered.
[*] Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.