Sign Up for Vincent AI
Dominic's Inc. v. Tony's Famous Tomato Pie Bar & Rest., Inc.
Ronald L. Daugherty, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Douglas Maloney, Langhorne, for appellee.
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., GANTMAN, P.J.E., and COLINS,* J.
OPINION BY GANTMAN, P.J.E.:
Appellant, Tony's Famous Tomato Pie Bar & Restaurant, Inc., appeals from the order entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, which denied Appellant's petition to strike and/or open the confessed judgment entered in favor of Appellee, Dominic's Inc. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The trial court sets forth the relevant facts and procedural history of this appeal as follows.
(Trial Court Opinion, filed January 31, 2019, at 2). In support of the relevant facts, we add that the parties' Agreement of Sale included the following:
29. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including exhibits, contains all of the agreements and understandings between the parties hereto; this Agreement supersedes and replaces any and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, warranties or representations of the parties or their counsel or anyone on the their behalf, of every nature and kind and whenever or wherever made, written or oral; and this Agreement may not be altered or amended except by a writing executed by all of the parties hereto.
(Agreement of Sale, dated 12/31/15, at 14; R.R. at 103a). Further, the Note states:
(Note, 2/29/16, at 3, 5-7; R.R. at 19a, 21a-23a) (some emphasis added). Appellant's signature appears directly under this paragraph.
On appeal, Appellant raises three issues:
In its first issue, Appellant claims the trial court should have used Appellant's proposed rule to show cause, attached to its petition to strike and/or open the confessed judgment, because in its proposed rule, Appellant sought discovery and a stay of execution on the confessed judgment. Appellant insists it was entitled to discovery on disputed facts, which was necessary to provide a proper record for the trial court to decide the matter. Appellant submits the purpose behind the rule to show cause was thwarted, because the court did not allow discovery.
In its second issue, Appellant argues Appellee committed various defaults under the Agreement of Sale. Specifically, Appellant contends Appellee misrepresented the financial information of the business, misconstrued the worth of the equipment purchased, and overvalued the building, which was structurally unsound. Appellant claims these "defaults" constituted meritorious defenses to the confession of judgment. Appellant submits Appellee's general denials to allegations in the petition to strike and/or open constituted admissions of fact, which provided a defense to Appellee's judgment on the Note. Appellant concludes this Court should reverse and remand at least to allow for discovery to create a proper record in order to open the confession of judgment and conduct a trial on the matter. We disagree.
"[W]e review the order...
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialExperience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting