HARRISBURG – The Superior Court of Pennsylvania has quashed a trio of appeals from plaintiffs in three separate-but-related sexual assault cases, finding that the Court had no jurisdiction over the specific appeals in question.
On Feb. 15, Superior Court judges Anne E. Lazarus, Deborah A. Kunselman and Mary P. Murray opted to deny the interlocutory appeals of the three Jane Doe plaintiffs, with Kunselman authoring the Court’s judgment.
“Plaintiffs, three Jane Does, filed this personal injury action against numerous defendants, claiming they were sexually assaulted during a massage. They appeal from the orders granting summary judgment to Ruffenach, G., LLC, (trading as “Hand and Stone Phoenixville-Oaks Spa”), Gerard Ruffenach and Catherine Ruffenach (docketed at 1510 EDA 2022) and to Hand and Stone Franchise Corporation (docket at 1511 EDA 2022),” Kunselman said.
“Previously, the plaintiffs obtained a default judgment against two other defendants, Steven M. Waldman and his business entity, Steven Waldman Massage. The issue of damages remains against these two defendants. As a result, the summary judgment orders do not constitute final orders as to all parties and all claims, and we lack jurisdiction to address these appeals.”
Kunselman explained that the unnamed plaintiffs obtained a default judgment on liability against Waldman and his business and subsequently, the trial court granted summary judgment to Ruffenach, G., LLC, the Ruffenaches and Hand and Stone Franchise Corporation on all counts.
While the plaintiffs moved for reconsideration, they decided to appeal the granting of summary judgment before the trial court ruled on their motion, and no trial for damages against Waldman and his business had yet occurred.
“Under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1037(b)(1),(2), the Philadelphia County Office of Judicial Records may only assess damages following a default judgment when the damages are for a sum certain. Otherwise, a trial on damages is required. Because this is a sexual-assault case, the plaintiffs’ damages for pain and suffering and emotional anguish are uncertain sums that a jury or the trial court must find, in order to resolve all claims against all parties. The court of common pleas has yet to adjudicate the damages claims against Waldman and his business,” Kunselman said.
“As such, the appealed-from, summary judgment orders are not final orders that ‘disposed of all claims and of all parties.’ Also, they are not appealable, interlocutory orders under Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 311 or collateral orders under Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 313. The appealed-from orders are interlocutory orders, over which this Court has no appellate jurisdiction. Appeals quashed.”
Superior Court of Pennsylvania case 1510 EDA 2022
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 190804964
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com