Legal Opinion

Langman v. Metropolitan Acceptance Corp.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 12, 1983No. 1398PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order refusing to strike a judgment confessed pursuant to a warrant contained in a lease. We reverse. Because the confessed judgment included an amount for which there was no authority to confess judgment, the judgment is void and must be stricken.

Stanley and Ethel Langman, as lessor, entered a written agreement to lease premises known as 22 North 60th Street, Philadelphia, to Metropolitan Acceptance Corporation, as lessee. The lease contained, in paragraph 16, a warrant authorizing the lessor to confess judgment against the lessee for “rent and/or any…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Curry v. Bacharach Quality Shops, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Scott Factors, Inc. v. HartleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  3. Grady v. SchifferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. Grakelow v. KidderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  5. Housing Mortgage Corp. v. Tower Development & Investment Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. PNC Bank v. BolusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Drum v. LetaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Beckett v. LauxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Courtney v. Ryan Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Ruehl v. Maxwell Steel Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

3 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