J-A17009-16
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
ESTATE OF MARGARET NAGY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
MCFADDEN, DECEASED PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: RONALD MCFADDEN
No. 2918 EDA 2015
Appeal from the Decree Entered July 17, 2015 and
the Order Entered August 25, 2015
in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Orphans' Court at No.: 608 DE 2005
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., FITZGERALD, J.,* and PLATT, J.**
JUDGMENT ORDER BY PLATT, J.: FILED JUNE 15, 2016
Appellant appeals from the decree of the Orphans’ Court docketed on
July 17, 2015, and the order of August 25, 2015, overruling his exceptions
as untimely. For the reasons set forth below, we quash.
We briefly note that this appeal arises out of a long-running dispute
regarding the estate of Margaret Nagy McFadden (decedent), who died
intestate on December 26, 2003. At issue is the disposal of her residence in
Philadelphia. Appellant is the decedent’s son; he resides in the residence
and has vehemently opposed its proposed sale. In November 2014, the
____________________________________________
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
**
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A17009-16
Administrator D.B.N. of the estate filed a petition with the Orphans’ Court,
averring that Appellant was not cooperating with the sale of the residence.
On July 17, 2015, the Orphans’ Court issued a decree directing Appellant’s
compliance. On August 10, 2015, approximately twenty-five days later,
Appellant filed exceptions. On August 25, 2015, the Orphans’ Court
overruled his exceptions as untimely. The instant appeal followed.1
The Orphans’ Court concludes that this appeal is untimely. (See
Orphans’ Court Opinion, 1/06/16, at 8-10). We agree.2
Timeliness of an appeal is a jurisdictional question. “When a statute
fixes the time within which an appeal may be taken, the time may not be
extended as a matter of indulgence or grace.” Commonwealth v. Pena,
31 A.3d 704, 706 (Pa. Super. 2011) (citation omitted). Our Rules of
Appellate Procedure mandate that the notice of appeal “shall be filed within
[thirty] days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is taken.
Pa.R.A.P. 903(a).” Commonwealth v. Perez, 799 A.2d 848, 851 (Pa.
Super. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). We strictly construe time
limitations on filing appeals. See id.
____________________________________________
1
As ordered by the Orphans’ Court Appellant filed a timely concise
statement of errors complained of on appeal. See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). The
Orphans’ Court filed an opinion. See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a).
2
We note that the sole issue raised on appeal by Appellant concerns the
propriety of the decree directing the administrator to the sell the residence.
(See Appellant’s Brief, at 7). Appellant does not address the issue of the
timeliness of the appeal.
-2-
J-A17009-16
Here, we look to Rule 7.1 of the Pennsylvania Orphans’ Court Rules,
which provides in relevant part: “[e]xcept as provided in Subdivision (e) . . .
no later than twenty (20) days after entry of an order, decree or
adjudication, a party may file exceptions to any order, decree or
adjudication[.]” Pa.O.C.R. 7.1(a). Thus, while the rule does not require the
filing of exceptions, if filed, a party must file them within twenty days to
extend the appeal period. See id.
Here, the Orphans’ Court entered its decree on July 17, 2015.
Appellant’s exceptions were due on or before August 6, 2015. See
Pa.O.C.R. 7.1(a). However, Appellant did not file them until August 10,
2015, and the Orphans’ Court dismissed them as untimely. Because the
exceptions were untimely, the thirty–day appeal period began to run from
the date the court docketed its order on July 17, 2015. See Pa.O.C.R. 7.1
Explanatory Note. Therefore, Appellant’s notice of appeal was due on or
before August 17, 2015.3 Appellant did not file the notice of appeal until
September 15, 2015. Thus, Appellant’s failure to file the notice of appeal
within thirty (30) days of the decree divests this Court of appellate
jurisdiction. See id.; see also Pena, supra at 706. Accordingly, we quash
this appeal.
Appeal quashed.
____________________________________________
3
August 16, 2015 was a Sunday.
-3-
J-A17009-16
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 6/15/2016
-4-