Lynnette M. Novak, v. Daryl G. Layser and Lisa R. Layser

Lynnette M. Novak, v. Daryl G. Layser and Lisa R. Layser

Civil Action-Law-Agreement-Promissory Note-Confession of Judgment Clause-Warrant of Attorney-Petition to Strike or to Open Confessed Judgment-Strict Adherence-Signature Under Seal-Consideration-Forbearance

On November 5, 1985, Daryl G. Layser and Lisa R. Layser (“Defendants”) and the mother of Lisa R. Layser purchased a property secured by a mortgage that was satisfied in September of 1986 with proceeds from the sale of Defendants’ property and the property of Lisa R. Layser’s mother.  On March 14, 1989, Defendants executed a promissory note for $14,000.00 authorizing confession of judgment to the sister of Lisa R. Layser, Lynnette Novack (“Plaintiff”) from the expected estate of Lisa R. Layser’s mother that was payable upon her death, which occurred on October 14, 2021.  Following legal proceedings including an appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, Plaintiff on June 6, 2024 filed Confession of Judgment for payment upon the promissory note.  Defendants filed a Petition to Strike or Open Confessed Judgment.

1.  A confession of judgment is an acknowledgement that a debt justly is due, and it cuts off all defenses and right of appeal.

2.  If the instrument containing the confession of judgment is more than twenty (20) years old, judgment may be entered only by leave of court after notice and the filing of a complaint.

3.  A warrant of attorney for confession of judgment must be in writing and signed by the persons bound. 

4.  A confessed judgment will be stricken only if a fatal defect or irregularity appears on the face of the record. 

5.  A judgment by confession may be opened if the petitioner acts promptly, alleges a meritorious defense and presents sufficient evidence in support of the defense to require the submission of the issues to be jury. 

6.  There is a need for strict adherence to the rules governing confessed judgments because of the plenary power afforded to the party who may confess judgment.

7.  Once the signature is proven, consideration and delivery are presumed from the fact that the instrument is under seal. 

8.  A plaintiff who relies upon an instrument under seal is not obligated to prove consideration. 

9.  A written promise, made and signed by the person promising, is not invalid or unenforceable for lack of consideration if the writing also contains an express statement in any form language that the signer intends to be legally bound. 

10.  Where the promissory note legally binds Defendants to pay the judgment, there has been no evidence offered proving that Defendants did not willingly enter into the note and the word “SEAL” is preprinted on the instrument, the promissory note is a document under seal for which consideration is presumed.

11.  Even if the promissory note had not been a document under seal, forbearance, which is agreeing to refrain from doing anything a party has a right to do, is a recognized form of consideration.

12.  The record establishes that Plaintiff elected not to receive $14,000.00 that she was owed in 1989 as consideration with Defendants having received the benefit of having retained those funds to which they no longer were entitled for many years.

L.C.C.C.P. No. 2023-00089, Opinion by Bradford H. Charles, Judge, June 2, 2025.