Workingmen's Sav. Loan v. Kestner

1 Citing case

  1. In re O'Neill

    204 B.R. 881 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1997)   Cited 6 times
    Concluding that it would be "counterintuitive to allow the Debtor to forego the appropriate means [under state law] for adjusting the amount of the [foreclosure] judgment and instead parlay this slight error against him into a preference claim."

    In that regard, Pennsylvania law provides that, after a sheriff's deed has been recorded and delivered to the purchaser of a property at a sheriff's sale, the only acceptable reason for a court to allow a contest of the sheriff's sale is fraud in the sale or the sheriff's lack of authority to sell the property. See Concord-Liberty Savings Loan Ass'n v. NTC Properties, Inc., 454 Pa. 472, 476, 312 A.2d 4, 5-6 (1973); Garrison v. Erb, 424 Pa. 306, 309, 227 A.2d 848, 849 (1967); Knox v. Noggle, 328 Pa. 302, 304, 196 A. 18, 19 (1938); Lengert v. Chaninel, 208 Pa. 229, 232, 57 A. 561, 561 (1904); Workingmen's Savings Loan Ass'n of Dellwood Corp. v. Kestner, 438 Pa. Super. 186, 189, 652 A.2d 327, 328 (1994); and Kowatch v. Home Building Loan Ass'n of Latrobe, 131 Pa. Super. 517, 522, 200 A. 111, 113 (1938). The deed to the Home was recorded and delivered to the Dells on April 10, 1996.