uses the term "judgment” is not dispositive. Our Supreme Court and the Superior Court have held that where a trial court issues a decision or verdict following a trial, at which evidence was presented, thereby requiring .the tyial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. based on that evidence, post-trial motions are required to bé filed' in order to preserve issues for appellate review. Motorists Mutual Insurance Company v. Pinkerton, 574 Pa. 333, 830 A.2d 958, 962-63 (2003); Chalkey v. Roush, 569 Pa. 462, 805 A.2d 491, 495-96 (2002); Baughman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 441 Pa.Super. 83, 656 A.2d 931, 932-33 (1,995). See also Newman Development Group of Pottstown, LLC v. Genuardi's Family Markets, 617 Pa. 265, 52 A.3d 1233, 1248-49, 1251 (2012) (<HOLDING>). This is so even if a trial court's order
holding that under rule 5903 posttrial motions brought before either party served notice of filing of the courts order were timely holding that successive posttrial motions do not toll the time for appeal holding that although the defendant filed a number of motions because the original trial date never changed as a result of those motions no delay could be attributed to the motions holding that issues are not waived for failing to file posttrial motions from a remand proceeding where no evidence was presented because no posttrial motions were required under those circumstances holding argument based on economic loss rule waived when raised for first time in posttrial motions