Bellevue Borough v. Umstead

Citations

• 38 Pa. Super. 116
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 98

Syllabus

<p>Municipal liens — Continuance of lien after judicial sale — Mortgage— Act of May 16,1891, P. L. 69, June 4,1901, P. L. 364, and May 28,1907, P. L. 280.</p> <p>1. There is nothing in the Act of June 4,1901, P. L. 364, repealing the Act of May 16, 1891, P. L. 69, which exhibits any intention on the part of the legislature of generally preserving municipal liens against property which has been sold at sheriff’s sale.</p> <p>2. Between the dates of the passage of the Act of June 4, 1901, P. L. 364, and the Act of May 28,1907, P. L. 280, there was no law which preserved municipal liens against property which had been sold at a judicial sale on a mortgage. A judicial sale on a mortgage between these dates, which produced a’ fund sufficient only to pay costs, discharged both the mortgage and a municipal lien on the land.</p> <p>3. The thirty-second section of the Act of June 4, 1901, P. L. 364, which provides that “a judicial sale of the property liened, shall not discharge the lien of any other tax or municipal claim than that upon which such sale is had, except to the extent that the proceeds realized are sufficient for its payment,” applies only to a sale which itself is founded on a tax lien or a municipal claim, and has no application to judicial sales founded on mortgages, judgments, recognizances, decrees or otherwise.</p> <p>4. All liens against a property are divested by a judicial sale unless clearly preserved by an act of the legislature.</p>