Legal Opinion · Dissent

First Citizens National Bank v. Sherwood

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 20, 2005No. 202 MAP 2003Published

1DissentJustice Eakin

The majority’s determination that 21 P.S. § 357 governs the outcome in this case is, in my judgment, erroneous; thus, I respectfully dissent.

First, § 357 does not apply to mortgage recording at all. It is found in Title 21 of Pennsylvania Statutes, titled “Deeds and Mortgages.” Statutes involving these two related but quite independent subjects are then subdivided into separate chapters: Chapter 1 is entitled “Deeds and General Provisions”; Chapter 2 is entitled “Mortgages.” Section 357, which the majority interprets and relies on to resolve this mortgage question, is found in Chapter 1, not…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Penn Title Insurance Co. v. DeshlerCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Prouty v. MarshallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  3. Mid-State Bank & Trust Co. v. Globalnet International, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  4. Antonis v. LiberatiCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. First Citizens National Bank v. SherwoodSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API