J-A05019-17
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
TRUSTEE, ET AL., PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
JAMES L. FORTUNATO, SR.,
Appellant No. 496 WDA 2016
Appeal from the Order Entered March 7, 2016
In the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong County
Civil Division at No(s): 2010-00144
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., BENDER, P.J.E., and MOULTON, J.
MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.: FILED MAY 25, 2017
Appellant, James L. Fortunato, Sr., appeals from the March 7, 2016
order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, U.S. Bank National
Association, as Trustee, et al. (“U.S. Bank”), and denying Appellant’s cross
and supplemental motions for summary judgment in this in rem mortgage
foreclosure action. We affirm.
This appeal arises from a complaint in mortgage foreclosure filed by
U.S. Bank against Appellant on January 22, 2010, in which it sought an in
rem judgment regarding a parcel of real property located in Elderton
Borough, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. On March 7, 2016, after more
than six years of litigation, the trial court entered an order granting U.S.
Bank’s motion for summary judgment and denying Appellant’s cross and
supplemental motions for summary judgment. We need not reiterate the
J-A05019-17
history of this case at length herein, as the trial court sufficiently set forth
the relevant facts and procedural history in its memorandum accompanying
the March 7, 2016 order. See Trial Court Memorandum (“TCM”), 3/7/16, at
1-7.
On April 4, 2016, Appellant filed a notice of appeal, followed by a
timely, court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of errors
complained of on appeal. Appellant now presents the following issues for
our review:
1. Whether the trial court committed reversible error by
assessing [Appellant’s] credibility and his undisputed mental
incapacity on summary judgment by holding that each of the
multiple statements in [Appellant’s] Answer to the Amended
Complaint that he was without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of U.S. Bank’s
allegation was not true and should be treated as an
admission.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in holding
that the verification on the Amended Complaint was
sufficient, notwithstanding that it was executed by a non-
employee of U.S. Bank, without any explanation why the
verification was made by a non-party, as required by
Pa.R.C.P. [] 1024(c).
3. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in holding
that [U.S. Bank] had standing to bring this mortgage
foreclosure action.
4. Whether the [t]rial [c]ourt committed reversible error by
failing to consider [Appellant’s] request that additional
discovery be compelled (or permitted).
Appellant’s Brief at 4.
The Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion filed by the trial court states that it
thoroughly addressed in its March 7, 2016 memorandum, all of the issues
-2-
J-A05019-17
raised by Appellant and the basis for its decision. See TCM at 7-29. We
have reviewed the certified record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable
law, and the thorough and well-crafted 29-page memorandum of The
Honorable Kenneth G. Valasek, President Judge (“PJ”) of the Court of
Common Pleas of Armstrong County. We conclude that PJ Valasek’s
extensive, well-reasoned memorandum accurately disposes of the issues
presented by Appellant on appeal and we discern no abuse of discretion or
error of law. Accordingly, we adopt PJ Valasek’s opinion as our own and
affirm the March 7, 2016 order on that basis.
Order affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 5/25/2017
-3-
Circulated 05/03/2017 03:17 PM
Circulated 05/03/2017 03:17 PM