IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Randy R. Pierce and Leslie Pierce, : husband and wife, : Appellants : : v. : No. 1315 C.D. 2024 : Submitted: November 6, 2025 Conewango Township Municipal : Authority :

BEFORE: HONORABLE CHRISTINE FIZZANO CANNON, Judge HONORABLE STACY WALLACE, Judge HONORABLE MARY HANNAH LEAVITT, Senior Judge

OPINION NOT REPORTED MEMORANDUM OPINION BY JUDGE WALLACE FILED: December 22, 2025

Randy R. Pierce and Leslie Pierce (the Pierces) appeal from the August 21, 2024 order of the Court of Common Pleas of the 37th Judicial District, Warren County Branch (the trial court),1 sustaining the Conewango Township The Pierces filed a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment in the trial court, requesting the trial court’s prothonotary reduce the trial court’s August 21, 2024 order to a final judgment. See Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 2a, 233a-35a. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 227.4 (Rule 227.4) requires certain trial court actions be reduced to judgment before an appeal, and in such circumstances, an appeal must be taken from the entry of judgment, not the underlying decision. See Pa.R.Civ.P. 227.4. Here, however, the trial court’s August 21, 2024 order was not an order that needed to be reduced to judgment. See Pa.R.Civ.P. 227.4. Rather, the trial court’s order was a final, appealable order because it disposed of all claims and all parties and was not an order identified in Rule 227.4. See Pa.R.A.P. 341(b); Pa.R.Civ.P. 227.4. Thus, the Pierces’ appeal of the trial court’s August 21, 2024 order is proper.

Municipal Authority’s (Authority) preliminary objections and dismissing the Pierces’ Amended Complaint (Complaint) with prejudice. On appeal, the Pierces assert the trial court committed errors of law when it concluded the Pierces failed to plead facts sufficient to establish the Authority had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition in its sewer system. The Pierces further assert the trial court erred because the ultimate fact-finder should have reviewed all of the evidence before determining whether the Authority had constructive notice of a dangerous condition.

Upon review,2 we have determined that the trial court, in its comprehensive and well-reasoned Memorandum Opinion Pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b), which the Honorable Gregory J. Hammond authored, succinctly set forth the background of this matter and appropriately resolved the Pierces’ allegations of legal error.

Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order on the basis of the trial court’s memorandum opinion in Pierce v. Conewango Township Municipal Authority (C.P. Warren, Civil Case No. 409 of 2023, filed October 1, 2024), a copy of which is appended to this Memorandum Opinion.

______________________________ STACY WALLACE, Judge

“Where a trial court dismisses a complaint based on preliminary objections, this Court’s review is limited to determining whether the trial court committed an error of law or an abuse of discretion.” Kittrell v. Watson, 88 A.3d 1091, 1095 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014) (citations omitted).

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Randy R. Pierce and Leslie Pierce, : husband and wife, : Appellants : : v. : No. 1315 C.D. 2024 : Conewango Township Municipal : Authority :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 22nd day of December 2025, the August 21, 2024 order of the Court of Common Pleas of the 37th Judicial District, Warren County Branch, is AFFIRMED.

______________________________ STACY WALLACE, Judge