Opinion
J-A05019-17 No. 496 WDA 2016
05-25-2017
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE, ET AL., Appellee v. JAMES L. FORTUNATO, SR., Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Order Entered March 7, 2016
In the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong County
Civil Division at No(s): 2010-00144 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., BENDER, P.J.E., and MOULTON, J. MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.:
Appellant, James L. Fortunato, Sr., appeals from the March 7, 2016 order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, et al. ("U.S. Bank"), and denying Appellant's cross and supplemental motions for summary judgment in this in rem mortgage foreclosure action. We affirm.
This appeal arises from a complaint in mortgage foreclosure filed by U.S. Bank against Appellant on January 22, 2010, in which it sought an in rem judgment regarding a parcel of real property located in Elderton Borough, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. On March 7, 2016, after more than six years of litigation, the trial court entered an order granting U.S. Bank's motion for summary judgment and denying Appellant's cross and supplemental motions for summary judgment. We need not reiterate the history of this case at length herein, as the trial court sufficiently set forth the relevant facts and procedural history in its memorandum accompanying the March 7, 2016 order. See Trial Court Memorandum ("TCM"), 3/7/16, at 1-7.
On April 4, 2016, Appellant filed a notice of appeal, followed by a timely, court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of errors complained of on appeal. Appellant now presents the following issues for our review:
1. Whether the trial court committed reversible error by assessing [Appellant's] credibility and his undisputed mental incapacity on summary judgment by holding that each of the multiple statements in [Appellant's] Answer to the Amended Complaint that he was without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of U.S. Bank's allegation was not true and should be treated as an admission.Appellant's Brief at 4.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in holding that the verification on the Amended Complaint was sufficient, notwithstanding that it was executed by a non-employee of U.S. Bank, without any explanation why the verification was made by a non-party, as required by Pa.R.C.P. [] 1024(c).
3. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in holding that [U.S. Bank] had standing to bring this mortgage foreclosure action.
4. Whether the [t]rial [c]ourt committed reversible error by failing to consider [Appellant's] request that additional discovery be compelled (or permitted).
The Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion filed by the trial court states that it thoroughly addressed in its March 7, 2016 memorandum, all of the issues raised by Appellant and the basis for its decision. See TCM at 7-29. We have reviewed the certified record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and the thorough and well-crafted 29-page memorandum of The Honorable Kenneth G. Valasek, President Judge ("PJ") of the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong County. We conclude that PJ Valasek's extensive, well-reasoned memorandum accurately disposes of the issues presented by Appellant on appeal and we discern no abuse of discretion or error of law. Accordingly, we adopt PJ Valasek's opinion as our own and affirm the March 7, 2016 order on that basis.
Order affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 5/25/2017
Image materials not available for display.