holding notice provision in former 72 P.S. §5860.602, which did not require either personal service or service by mail of an impending tax sale to a record mortgagee, violated the mortgagee’s constitutional due process *473 rights
How later courts described this case
- holding notice provision in former 72 P.S. §5860.602, which did not require either personal service or service by mail of an impending tax sale to a record mortgagee, violated the mortgagee’s constitutional due process *473 rights
- majority of court agreeing with opinion in support of affirmance that notice is governed by Mennonite Board
- describing reasoning behind DJA
- opinion announcing judgment of court
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ZAPPALA, Justice,
concurring.
I agree with the majority that the notice provision of the real estate tax sale act must be held to be unconstitutional in light of Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, 462 U.S. 791 , 103 S.Ct. 2706 , 77 L.Ed.2d 180 (1983). I would find that such holding disposes of the case and makes it unnecessary to reach the issue of the applicability of the deficiency judgment act. I do not join that part of the majority that discusses the deficiency judgment act issue. Such discussion should be regarded as dictum.
NIX, LARSEN and McDERMOTT, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.