No. 612 Philadelphia, 1981, Appeal from the Order dated February 22, 1981 in the Court of Common Pleas of Columbia County, Civil Division, No. 168 September Term, 1974.
Frederick M. Stanczak, Bloomsburg, for appellants.
John M. Kuchka, Berwick, for appellees.
Cercone, President Judge, and McEwen and Hoffman, JJ.
[ 309 Pa. Super. Page 155]
Appellants, Charles D. Rodgers and his wife, Rose M. Rodgers, take this appeal from the order of the lower court staying writ of execution and levy.*fn* Because we find the order at issue to be interlocutory, we quash this appeal.
This action had its inception as a suit in assumpsit. Plaintiffs-appellants filed suit against Leo J. Yodock, Jr. and his partners, appellees herewithin, to recover their purchase money for a mobile home. The jury returned a verdict, which in effect was a recission of the contract between the parties. The verdict provided:
AND NOW, to-wit: Feb. 21, 1975, We, the jurors empaneled in the above entitled case, find a verdict in favor of Charles D. Rodgers and Rose M. Rodgers the return of the sum of the full purchase price of $5554.00 plus 6% simple interest of $666.48. Trailer to be returned to Yodock Brothers.
Subsequently, appellants filed a praecipe for a writ of execution, and the writ was duly entered. Shortly thereafter, appellees filed a petition to stay and set aside execution, alleging that appellees had tendered a cashiers check in the full amount of the verdict, but appellants refused the check. Whereupon, the court granted appellees petition to stay and the court entered this order.
[ 309 Pa. Super. Page 156]
"AND NOW, January 21, 1981, for the reasons set forth in the opinion of even date filed in the above-captioned matter,
"IT IS ORDERED that the writ of execution and levy heretofore issued or made in the above-captioned matter be and the same are hereby set aside.
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that further execution process may be undertaken by the plaintiffs unless, no later than thirty (30) days after ...