Cases filed on the magisterial district judge (MDJ) a/k/a small claims court docket (“lowest court”) suffer from one big problem: any party has the right to appeal the award for any reason or no reason. In fact, the defendant need not even show up for court, then still appeal!
But here’s the catch.
Effectuating an appeal requires two things. First, it must be filed on time, meaning, within thirty days of the award.
Secondly, the Notice of Appeal must be technically sound. The Notice of Appeal form is just that: a form, but the procedures described on the form must be followed precisely. You don’t necessarily need a Pittsburgh attorney to handle your MDJ appeal, but you do need to read the Notice of Appeal form closely. For example, per the form: “YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL.” See Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. 1002(a). Otherwise, the non-appealing party can object to the appeal.
Enter the Parties in Stevenson v. Sallmen.
In Stevenson v. Sallmen, Court of Common Pleas (Lawrence County 10134 of 2022), Defendant-Sallmen filed a counterclaim at the lowest court level, but lost. Sallmen attempted to appeal the decision. Only, he failed to attach to his Notice of Appeal a judgment he disputed, as required. Rather, in confusion, Sallmen merely attached a “judgment summary.” As a result, Stevenson filed preliminary objections to the appeal and counterclaim complaint filed on the appeal.
The Stevenson court also relied on McKeown v. Bailey. There, the superior court determined that an appellant should be permitted to file a late appeal when, as in Stevenson, the court clerk refused to accept the appellant’s timely filed notice of appeal, due perceived technical defects. In McKeown, the court noted that Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. 1002(a) allows for the filing of a notice of appeal after the 30-day period with leave of the court and upon good cause shown. This typically only applies to landlord-tenant disputes, which was not the case in McKeown. But in McKeown, the appellants had made an honest effort. As the Stevenson court further noted: Sallmen had been in “substantial compliance” with the relevant procedural rules. As such, a reversed a trial court decision denying their motion to appeal “then for now” (latin is “nunc pro tunc”).
Ultimate Decision in Stevenson v. Sallmen
The trial court in Stevenson v. Sallmen, Court of Common Pleas (Lawrence County 10134 of 2022) further noted that the “judgment summaries” attached to the notice of judgment contained information pertaining to the disposition of case two. Nor did the appeal cause any undue prejudice. With that, the court overruled Sallmen’s preliminary objections.
Practical Pointers
It’s important to note that, while the appellant in Stevenson survived objections to his technically defective appeal, this is not common. First, individual judges have discretion how they will interpret the rules of civil procedure. Thus, the Stevenson holding is not binding on other judges. Secondly, most judges err on the side of striking off (dismissing) cases coming up from the lowest court, whenever possible, to clear space on the County docket for larger cases. The good news is, you should be able to handle the appeal yourself. The vast majority of appellants from the lowest court in PA effectuate the appeal successfully, without hiring a lawyer.
But again, pay close attention to the appeal form.
Let’s Get Started!
Contact a Pittsburgh lawyer at our firm for a $200 flat fee consultation about small claims court matters including how to respond to the appeal by another party.
412.342.0992
Email Us Today (click here)
