PHILADELPHIA – The dismissal of a class action lawsuit against the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office stemming from the sheriff's sale of a property was affirmed on April 12.
Calling it "without merit," Judge Christine Fizzano Cannon for the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania affirmed a trial court ruling that dismissed Joanne Thornton's claim against the Sheriff's office.
Thornton’s home was sold via Sheriff's sale in September 2014 for $305,000, court documents state. As part of that sale, Thornton was entitled to $11,968.17 from that sale.
However, she failed to file within the 10-day period accordingly. She received a check of $1,307 from the Sheriff's office in 2016. Thornton thought the “lengthy” delay “illustrates the constitutional infirmities of the Defendant Asset Recovery Team, or DART claim.” Furthermore, she asserts she was unaware of a Sheriff charging her the premium for the title policy until she received a breakdown of costs with her refund check.
On appeal, Thornton contends the trial court erred when it concluded that she had to "exhaust the remedies provided by Rule 3136 and the Local Agency Law because the remedies provided therein are inadequate to address her claims."
Under Rule 3136, prior owners have no more than 10 days to file an exception to a proposed distribution schedule filed by the sheriff. Thornton alleges the Sheriff's office "imposed procedures not required by Rule 3136 on her and other owners whose properties had been foreclosed."
Thornton also claims that she was required by the Sheriff's office to file a DART claim and "charged her a premium on the title policy, but neither procedure is expressly provided by Rule 3136." Thornton claims the DART procedure is unconstitutional.
However, Cannon ruled Thornton's explanation to address her claims relating to the cost charged and procedures used by the Sheriff’s Office were not sufficient.