HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-05750
,
COMMONWIALtH 0" NNIYLYANIA
._~---_...~-^-_..--
CO"I' O' COMMON 'LIAI
NOTICE OF APPEAL
fROM
DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT
_c~!l\O~~:~~~~~-.9k>.::.S:I5.0 (j~i LTer""
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Nolie. II 01.... lhal lhe appeIlanl hal filed In the above COUll o' Cammon Pleal an appeallrom lhe judgmenl ..nd.r.d by lhe Dillrld JUllit. an lhe
date and In the co.. mentioned below.
IUDICIAL D'"IIC1
:1~1].., 1-QfCJ:1l= ~OV\\f()-~)ilL~'~'~w~~~-=_~_J~~r~".r~)t{ IPCOO<<
10 il DLD )t) ~Gl= l~. CiA D.._.___._f-E)j}!.'ib t:ef~\L__. -..-J.[\-'-7.~ Il33'L
binorlDNI ;~CAYOf"""'t,,,, . 7 flN'ml~j II _ ~
QL~ -o? -lj{f~~f-l"tLJF!lf~.ADt1~~liitCn~. Y\. ~~~r()(:1[ NcrHlt'J ~~
CV 19. C. v- u oOOQ,Z(/,'ib 1 \, ,~~ { / . "
Thil black wlH ~~ :"d ONLY when Ihll nolali~'i;;~q~i';dUnd';'-Po::~~t~""~II~t was ;~~;~~ (;:"~."~.P.~:'NO.
~~8~lit. of Appeal. when received by lhe Dillricl Ju.rice. will ""..01. a. a" 1001(6) in action belore District Justice, he MUST
SUPERSEDEAS fa lhe judgmenl far pall.lI;an In Ihl. COte. FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days al/er
filing his NOTICE 01 APPEAL.
sv,,'/,iroiil1tiil/iiiiiOiii/yo..DtyJUly
PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO'FlLE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(This sec/Ion oIlotm to be used ONLY II-hcn awollal!/ was DEFENDANT (500 Pa R.CPJP. No, 1001(7 J ,I! actiOI! belore Dis/Jict Justico.
IF NOT USED, del8ch lrom c~y 01 notice 01 awoal/o be selVed upon awolloo),
PRAECIPE, To Pralhono~ ~ ., ~ I r:7' _
EnIOlrll'.upan ~ rr2Af}ff:!t.tL J )1{ If I !/Jt1Nt,appel1..(.).talll.acOl11f'lalnlinlhllappeal
(CllIM>OIl Pleal No. ) within lwenly 120) dayl oller S..V' . /.M at fU" (IrY~~f l~' of non pICIL
').., .....,.
~oIllI
RULE, Taj'j?f\/11P}r>fo..llo, (Yt I) r
I Niml Il/flllIIOO(sJ
J ':I '
.- IIMt _" ()
. oppn.. I .
01 ,.. 0I1omey 01 IgIInt
11) You are notlfJed lhal a rule II hereby enl...d upan you to file a complainlln IhI. appeal within lwenly (20) daYI alt.. lhe date of
senk. of !hi. rule upon you by penanallervke ar by certlfoed ar regi,l...d mall
(2) H you do nol file a complaint wilhln 1101 lime, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS Will BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. ,
(3) The date of ..,vIc. of Ihll rule 111...ic. wel by malllllho dol. 01 mailing.
Dato:-CR L ~'t9 ~.
\i.~n
~~ ~
~oI OI~
ACre 317.84
COWl! I III to Ill' 11110 WillI fllHJttl0lldf ^"Y
"'1J
u..
t
.J
t
()
C;
:t:.
;,A.
~~
fl
1i
t.~
~
1JJ'5
8 (f1
~K
~~4
...
e
;Rro.,
;(;1
PJ.
ee
)';8
!:I!
~
~
~
~
-
~
jl\
~
OJ
~
-
-
..
r
Nt
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT
(TIllS PIOO' 0' ~HIVI( (I MUS T Hr I fi r lJ \\'i' 1iIN , I N 1 7th 0") tj AI 11/~ !,ft/l!} Itlfj "lit,ell 01 \ljJpPili Churl-. apph(;aIJ/l1lwllVS)
COMMONWEAL TIl OF PENNSVl YANIA
COUNTY OF ___-.. . It
AFFIOA VIT: I herehy ."PAI or 01111'" thAt I ,p"ell
lJ i1 cop)" 01 lilt' Ntlli{f 01 ~'\I'IH'al (()Inmon PlflAli Nu "_".,0<...._,,,.,......_..<,,....___'_, upon th@Oi$tIlC1 Jus11cQ (h~slgr1l1led t1WWIIl on
(rIal. of 'PIV/CII) _ , Hl...w..., 0 hI' pOl,ollAlservil:n 0 by (tnrl","d) (Iel/lil.r.dl 11101', sendOl.'
rocetpt atlBchf1d "I',.'ln. un1lllpon the ilpf'I'lltm. (oamtl) .___.________~__....______,,_~____.__._._..____.n_' on
_.~___~__ . IO___lJ II, 1""'0"0' ."""n 0 h)' ,In,Blind) UnlltSI.,",J) moll. 6ondOl'.,nC,Jlpl 011111 hed 11"'.'0
[] nnd 1\111111;/ IIIi'll I bPfvvd the 1111[1' 1'1" d(; il C,)f!il1lillnl iH'tOfi1pnnyllln thlt obovu NaUru 01 Apponl upon 'he app~II'1u('J 10 whom
Ihp Rljff' wilr; I1dllIPs'Wt1 011 . 19,,,..,,,,.,., [] hy IHH50tiitl $lu,irn [) by ((;'HlIhi~fJl (IOW6hHHlt)
nlilll. sender's ICClJipl nllnChod t1(Htltl'J
SWORN 1M IIf1MED) AfHl ~'Hl!JCII'IIl_ll UEf OnE ME
THIS ._.___'m.~_.[)AV OF ...________.19__.
I
,
I
I
SiQrl.tu,., 01 .""nl
S,gn'fllfi uIIJl!.t:>/Ji tflk-Iflltoh(l-'Il ../I'IIt,,1 ,U) I!!ihhf
Ti,J,01 O"'C,,'
M, tomml'.IOf1 f..puus un
,18_.
, c"
~~
THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT:
Judgmelll:
IKI Judgment was onlorod for: (Namo)
I~ Judgmonl was onlOlmJ against: (Namo)
.- In Iho amount 01 $ 4,232,58
o Judgment wlla onlorod against
LendlordlTonant aellon In tho amounl 01 $ on
The amounl of ronl par month. as ostabllshod by the Dlslrlet Juslleo, Is $
[J Damages will bo ossessed on: (Dalo & Time)
FOR PL1UNTIFL_.
FRAMPTON. CHRIS & plANE
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC,
on: (Dalo 01 Judgmolll)
. 'COMMONWI!ALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COU~I~ 9r::.:E!!f1.U.E.!~I:~~~O"'" o. _ _.._
U'~llkl N..
____4 ~__ _.p._
-..--...--
09-3-04
1)1'4011"" I....'
GLENN R. FIIRNER
........ 5002 LENKER STREET
MECHANICSBURG, PA
~~._ 0171761-8230
17055-0000
.----------.--
OLD mRGE HOMES, INC,
1047 OLD FORGE RD.
LEWISBERRY, PA 17339
[J This caso dismissod without proludice,
o Possession grantod.
O Possosslon granted II money ludgmontls nol
sallsflod by limo 01 ovlellon.
o Possosslon not granted.
o Lovy Is slayed lor _ days or 0 genllrally stayed.
0_. Objection t~ levy has been hllltl an~ 110arlng will be held:
Datu: - Plaeo:
Tlmo:
NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT
f1l.AINllrl UAMI ..",I"UOlltH'j
IF-HAMPTON, CHRIS & DIANE
6102 WALLINGFORD WAY
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
L
..,
.J
VS.
OEHNUANI
N"UI '1111 ALX)IlUlU
roLD FORGE HOMES, INC.
1047 OLD FORGE RD.
LEWISBERRY, PA 17339
L
DoekeINo.: CV-0000329-96
Date Fllod: 8/27/96
..,
.J
10/09/96
In a
(Dato 01 Judgment)
Rontln arroars $
Damagos UnJusl Oolonllon $
Damagos to Proportyl
Rosldenllal Loaso . $
Loss AmI Duo Delondant - $
Amount 01 JudgnlDnt '" $
Judgmonl Costs $
Interost on Judgment $
Altomey Feos $
4,146,58
86.QQ
.00
,00
TOTAL
$
4.232.50
ANY IWIIY liAS' 1/' /lIOII I 10 AI'I'f"'. A JUDGMENrlNVOL VINO A RES/DCNrtAL LEASE AND AFFECTING THE
llf.LIVWY O/I'OS.';UiSION or I/I:AI. 1'llOl'WIY wm /IN 10 /JAYS OF mE /JArE OF JUDOMENT C1Y F/LlNO A
NartCr or AI'/'I:AI WI/II IIII' I'nrHI/ON01AI1YICLEIlK or /lIE caUln or COMMO!:, ~[/:~9t'CIVIL DIVIS/ON
ANY PARTY AGGRIEVED BY A JUDGMENT FOR MONEY OR A JUDGMENT INVOLVING.A.t.4PNRt~IOENTIAL LEASE
MAY APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS Of EIiTRY OF THE JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE !llf APPEAL WITH THE
PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF -my ~plJRT OF COMMO~ PLEASflVIL DIVISION. . '.
n (1L. /) )\. 1't) (
-10:..-1'::. . Datu ....c_--"'--'c-Yl\,L----~~--I. . fl.J:..:~:__.DISltlcIJuSlico
I curllly IhutUlIS is IIl1un mill CIln)lrltopy ullhl1 rncord olllle proOll1iUlngs c;untBlnln[) tho ludgll1l1nl.
J U:J :~l(p Dnlu . ___ _ \ 1..!LV\l.L-I<, ;.,..<<~ l1U'.\..~, Dislrlcl Justlco
My wll1Ullsslnn mpllU!; IImt MOIlllilV III Jnllunry, 1'.1'1f! , SEAL
AOI'C Jlb.!M}
NOTICE OF APPEAL
\ ),.0'
CCIMMONWIALYH or PIHNlYLVANIA
COUI' Of COMMON PUA
FROM
DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT
COMMONPLIAIN.. QIo..5750 C~i I TerlY\
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Notlce II gIwn that the appellant ha. liltd In the above COlKt of COIMlOO Plea. an appeal from the Judgment rendeI.d by the Diltrld Ju,lic. an the
clatt and In the CGIlI mentlontd btla.o
lUOlCIAL DIIIIIC'
CV 19-
LT 19
ThIs bIaclc wII be Ilgntd ONlY when thl. notoHan I. rtquil1td undl!f Pa. R.cPJP. No.
tOO8&.
ThIs Notlce of Appeal. when I1tcel..d by the Di.lricl Ju.tice. will operal. a. a
SUPERSEDeAS to the Judgment lot palltlllon In Ihl. co'~
C
OA 0 /..ewfs6fe.e
e"M '" C ~M A ~Mlf Vi
C, v- 0000 3Cf.Cj b
f\.
I
Ol-'D tU(2(:E
. -'L-. ~fJ /~I 5:qr" ~p.
lanf was CLAIMANT (see Pa. .C.P.J.P. No.
tOOt (6) In action before District Justice, he MUST
FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days 811M
filing his NOTICE of APPEAL.
SIQIla/ulll 0/ PtothonolBty 01 Deputy
PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(Th/I section of /DIm 10 be used ONLY wilen eppo/lant was DEFENDANT (soo Ai. RC.P.J.P. No. 1001 (7) In action befote DIstrict JtJstice.
IF NOT USED. detach from ~Y 01 notice of eppes/to be served upon eppofloo).
PRAECIPE. To Pru~"""":: rYG. I I C J J r;7 .
Enter nAe upon reA ~o/ P!!,; fte If v Jt1Nt: oppeIIte(.,. lo!ile a complalnl In thll appeal
(Common PItas No. 1 within IMIlly (20) day. of"" 'I!f~f-~'~rt at non pto~
_ ~1'~_'#.1 1.....,
r. ~ (II (I tf 'j) . Sip/IIf of -"" or ,.../fDIntr or t(IIIi
RULE, To t-?~n-I Ot--' I L /1 1/ j -lAMt-, app....(.~ . .:::;:.:: f
N,mel" fIR'IlI/IlIlIl'
(tl You 011I notified that a nAe Is hereby enlertd upon you to lilt a cOf11'lalnt In thl. appeal wlthln IMIlly (201 daYI of"" the dale 01
..me. ollhl. nAe upon you by penona!ltfvic. ... by c"'lfied ... "'lI1.lertd mall
. .
(21 If you da not lilt a complalnl within IhI. 111IlI. a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. .
'. . I
., ,
" (tJ')
(3) The ~ of sfMce of'.hI~ rule If .tfvlet W'O' by mall I. the dale of malting.
Dalt:J-:C\:, \ca~9~~ ~~'MwIYlqn~~~~
,'\'
. ~ ~ ' '- ' -
I. ~.
t') -
lIT;
,
I"'
..
I' _
,
,
,
.
u
I"
N:IPC 31''''
COURT FILE
,~-
...
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT
(Th" prool 01 so,,'CO MUSIIJf rtl co WIIIIIN II N, IV) DA \'S AF ICR ''''''V Ih. 1101'''0 of OPI'''dl CtIO" ,pJ>II('.bl$ /lOAU)
COMMONWEAL tH OF PENN&YLVANIA
COllNTY 0' .L""!.~! B!:.l~ (,~hP ._
; I.
AFFIDAVIT: 1'11'101'\ 'WI'AI 01 . !film lho' , S.I\Ad
o fll"Py otthe IJ<'I11I1 ",t "1'1"'''' ':"""'lU" "\1'"' No 9lo.-S7~U c..,v,L ,J3;~~; [\,.tllll JlIstlf. de5lgnalod """OIflll/1
(da'. of ,.",ro! J(;)=:./fJ ,IH'1lt2, ll.,hY PJ.f.L~,\;:\1.d ~.+I~lltj r)4 bYl.(t~!llflHd) \f~f.tl'lecJ) mall, ~ender's
"CI'~I.t1a'h",j l>l".'o l'iyt IIpon the IIPI'I'II<'I' /",""O! t-{f\''''~CN I c.: ""hS fI .LJ'....N!I!-. ____ ,on
._l.__~_~._.__.. I 1971:J. LJ II', 1'111"(11\,-11 <.t_'r~i(_I'~ b} (I 1'llil;l!l1! \!i'~J",lt"i'dllllild :-f'nlll'! l'l1l!(HII,1 i111rl.dlt~d hereto
[J and liJ!lhlllliH11 ~l!I.,t:\l !iil- Huh: t; '.il' d C';ll<jil,ltnl {I' ('HlljiillltilllJ Ill'; ~1I!\,~f' fJl)tio 1",,;1 t'l!j!\,al \.l~hHl the iJPPIJIIUtHI) lowhom
the nU!tl 'WillS fldl1rf'~!;tld llfl 10.~ Ie HI(fi:. I J 'f 1;1.,~(;':,\I.;'l:b;ll~h' 11 f'l!111ed) tfeo,Ue,ml)
milll umder's ,e(Oipl nlli\clwd ht:fell) fil, _ ./7: )/,
6WORN JAIIIIIMED, AND l>lJlJbUHIlllJ ULI OIlE ME ~_~; _-
];:c1 t1AvmQ.f~v lQ'l~ "=':"'. C {._______. __,~ ___.~_____
{-..-.- S.p".hn. 01 ,III""
TI'?J!.~ . "
'"(;l'''''''' I. "."0'''''''''',\"'''''''' . '-
-~.._. . ---,,--.-
loftltl';
MrtOmll""'on~'!I""C" I~_.-~~ 18fi.
,.
. ..~ "--~l
I.. -
.~,
'I,
"
WJ"'<l jf
p n
ICl dH" ~ lR Gl
ICl
ITI m a ~
IJ'1 ,!I !_I~ I {It (It I"
I !~
.JI fr. -. t -
"" 111:1.. , ~~" CJ) .'
..lJ v ~;\ )) '"II
:J !' ';
~ .~ "'l I r . ,..(') ~
0 i~~ '. . !:t: ~ ~~
I, , l ,
" ~
1'1. ~II ;:" \' I~ t ,4 , ~1 -.
" t It 1 r j / <. W ~
' .. .'.'.1 t I , b \A ;4/
t 'I' := ~ t J~
,," J l 1 "
. "011 .
..- - -
1661 BU"r '008& IUlIIJ Sd
DIANE FRAMPTON,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I'lnlntifh,
NO. 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO nnd
OLD FORGE HOMES,INC.,
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Defendnnh,
JURY TRIAL I>EMANI>H1)
NOTICE
YOU HAVE BEEN sUlm IN COURT, If you wish 10 defend ugalnst Ihe clnhns
set forth In the following pnges, you lI1usl tuke ncllon within Iwenty (20) days aftcr
this Complaint and Notice nre served, hy enlering n wrlllen nppenrunce personally or
by nllorncy nnd filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the
claims sct forth ugnlnst you. You arc wnrned lhal if you fnll to do so the cnse mny
proceed without you and a judgment may be entered ngainst you by the Courl without
further nollce for uny money c1ulmcd In the Complulnt or for nny other c1ulm or
relief requested by the I'lulntlff. You muy lose money or property or olher rights
importunt to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE TIUS I'APER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE, IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GIIT LEGAL HELP.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURT ADMINISTRATOR
I COUR11l0USE SQUARE
CARLlSLE,I'A 17013
(717) 240.6200
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN &: MENSEL
I~
DATE: 11/119/1
R ert E. Mensel, Esquire
4775 L1ngleslown Road, Ste. 200
Harrisburg, P A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney 1.0./# 77410
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMI'TON, his wife,
Plaintiffs,
IN THE couln OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBliI{LAND COUNTY , PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES. INC.,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Defendants.
JUltY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
Le han demandado u ustcd en 10 corte. S lusted quiere defenderse de
estas demandas expueslas ell IllS p"glnus slgulenles, listed Ilene vlenle (20) dlus de
pluzo III purtlr de lu fechll de lu del11l1nda y lu notlflcntion. Usled dehe presenlur IIn
upnriencia esrllu 0 en personll 0 por lIhogudo y lIrchivur ell III corte en formu escrltn
sus defensus 0 sus ob]eclones 0 IllS del11undus en cOIUru de su pcrsonu. Seu uvlsndo que
si usled no se deflende, lu corle lomuru ll1edldus y puede enlrur unu orden contrn usted
sin prevlo ovlso 0 notlficnclon y por cuolquler que]u 0 ulivio que es pedldo en 10
petlclon de demondu. Usled puede perder dinero 0 sus propledudes 0 otros derechos
imporlonles pllrn usted.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN AIIODAGO INME()JATAMENTE, SI NO TIENE
ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN
PERSONA OR LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUY A D1RECCION SE ENCUENTRA
ESCRIT A ABAJO PARA A VERIOUAR DON DE SE PUEDE CONSEOUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURT ADMINISTRATOR
I COURTHOUSE SQUARE
CARLISLE, PA 17013
(717) 240-6200
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
DATE: " 17 (q (p
.,;.""
R bert E, Mcnse], 'squire
4775 L1ng]cslown Road, Ste. 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney J.D.II 77410
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CIiIUSTOPHER FRAMPTON unl!
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife.
IN TIlE couln OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMJlERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plnlnllfh,
v'
NO. 96.mo CIVIL TEI{M
STEVEN SANTIAGO nnd
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
CIVIl. ACTION - I.A W
Dcfenl!nnts.
JUI{Y TRIAL IJEMANDE()
mMI!LMNr
AND NOW, come thc plaintiffs. Chrislophcr Frampton and Dlanc
Frampton, by lhcir allorncys, Will, Frccburn & Menscl. and fIIc the within
Complaint:
I. Plnlntiffs, Christopher Frampton and Diane Frampton arc
OdUItN. ond 0 morrled couple rcsidlng al 61112 Wallingford Way,
Mcchonlcsburg, Cumherland Counly, PCl1l1sylvunlu 171155.
2. Defcndant, Old Forgc I!omcs. Inc., is u Pcunsylvunlu Corporntlon
wilh prlnclpul plncc of huslncss nt 11147 Old Forgc Roud. Lewisherry, York
County, Pcunsylvnnla nnd cngnged In the huslncss of thc cllnslrucllon und
Nnlc of rcsldcntlal homcs In Cumhcrland ClIunly und clscwhcrc.
3. Defcndnnl. Stcvcn Suntlugo. Is n shnrcholdcr nud officer of Old
Forge Homcs, Inc.
4, Old Forgc l!olllcN, Inl:., is Ihc nllcr.cgo of Slcvcn Snntlngo.
5. Stevcn Sanliago and Old Forge Homcs, Inc. Wcre the general
conlraetors for the construction of Ihe house at 6102 Wllllingford Way,
Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County. Pennsylvanill.
6. Steven Sanlillgo and Old Forge Homes, Inc. held fce simple lille
to thc premises lit 6102 Wllllingford WilY, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pcnnsylvanill prior 10 December 7, 1995.
7. On December 7, 1995. Old Forge Homcs, Inc. IInd Steven
SlIntiago Irllnsferred tille 10 Ihc premises III 6102 Wllllingford WilY,
Mechanlcsburg, Cumberland Counly, Pennsylvllnlll to Christopher Prllmpton
IInd Diane Frampton. husband and wife. in fee simple lille.
8, The purchllse price for the premises al 6102 Wallingford Way,
Mechanicsburg, Cumberland Counly, Pennsylvania Was $162,900.00.
9. In connecllon whh Ihe Iransfer of litle 10 Chrislopher and Diane
Frampton, Old Forge Homes, Inc. IIno Sleven SlInllago, for good and legal
consideration, ano wilh the intention to be legally bouno, extendeo and
conveyed to Christophel' ano Dlllne Framplon a wllrranly that the building
at 6102 Walllngford Way, Mechanicsburg, Cumherland County,
Pennsylvania WIIS conSlrUcled in II sound IInd workmllnlike fllshlon, and
was habitable.
10. After the tl'llnsfer of tille to Chrislopher IIno Diane Prnmpton,
plalnllffs became IIWllre of cerlllin oefects In the conslrucllon of the
premises, speclficlllly, squellky floor bOllros Ihl'llughout the premises, IInd
unevenness in the khchen floor.
,
II, Plnintiffs brought these defects to the nllention of defendnnt,
Steven Snntingo, who ugreed to tukc thc steps nccessary to remedy nnd
nlleviatc those conditions,
12. These defects constituted violutions of the wurruntics provided
by defendants to pluintiffs.
13. Defendunt, Stevcn Suntiago. has fuilcd to repuir. remedy, nnd
nlleviate the squenking of the floor bonrds in certuin locutions within the
house.
14, In the course of his efforts to repnir. remedy, nnd nllevinte the
condition of the squenky floor boards throughout the housc, defendant,
Steven Santiago, improperly drove nails and screws through the cnrpeting
nnd into the squeaking floor boards, causing damage to the carpet
throughout the house.
15, Defendnnt. Steven Santiago. hns failed to take steps to repnlr,
remedy. or allevlnte the condition of the kitchen floor in the premises.
16, The cost of repair of the squenky floors. repair nnd
replncement of the damaged carpet. together with the cost of repair nnd
replncement of the kitchen floor, 1111 of which were defectively constructed.
instnlled, nnd designed by defendnnts, will cost a sum in excess of FIVE
THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5.000.00) DOLLARS.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs demand Judgmcnt against Steven Santiago,
Individually, nnd Old Forgc Homes, Inc.. Jointly and severully, for u slim In
'\
- '"""'"
excess of FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5.000.00) DOLLARS. together
with Interest and costs of suit.
Respectfully submitted,
WILT. FREEBURN & MENSEL
DATE: /1/1 I'll?
)
)/? / "
/ 1t1i!t~ tit i
bart E. Mensel, Esquire
4775 Lingleslowl1 Road, Ste. 200
Harrlshurg. P A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Atlorney 1.0.# 774\ 0
AlIorneys for Plainllff
I
;
4
~
I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.e.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated: II- '1.. '16
..
f'
~ ..:J' i;
l": .,
ff, ,..
.. ,3:$
-
~ 0;1:
:f ,').. 1::i
'~j .,.~
,... " VI
L I J .~.
a:\:. f.'; ilH!
"u
1" .- J
I. U)
0 (J, I
5H~nIFF'5 RETUnN - OUT or COUNTY
CAH~ NUl 1~~~-051~~ P
CIlI1I1UNWI::AI. TIl UP PI':NNHYL v ANlA I
ClllJNTY U~' CUI1H~:nLAND
VIJAI1l'Tutt CWHH I':T AI,
VS.
UI,I) FUllll~: JlOl1~:H IN!:
_R.Ih.Q1'l!l~.K~'ne
to law, eays, that he made
nsmsd defendant, to witl
...., Sheriff, who
a diligent search
l:1ANITAGU lOTI::VI::N
being duly sworn aooording
and inquiry for the within
but was unable to locate Him __ in his bailiwick. He therefore
dsputized the sheriff of YUnK CUUNTY County, Pennsylvania.
to serve the within CUI1I'I,AINT
On Novsmbsr 2;.nd. 1~~6
the atteched rsturn from
this office was in receipt of
YUnK CUUNTY County, Pennsylvania.
~hartff'8 Coste I
Go anDwerSI
BocktJt10g
ut of County
<lurcharBe
VOIIK CO NTY
lH.00
9,00
2,00
48.32
r.7'r.32 WILT & FR~.~:BUnN
1l/22/199G
rr/ T~~-;;~~ '~n;~;/Sht'riff .
~worn and subs~rtbed to bofore me
this .<Sr.!:-. day of "1~~",L
1'" ?<, A,O,
It l'- C )tl~t1.....- ~.
~ prolhonotar~
Hltl-:nlFF'H IlI-:TUnN - UUT UF CUIINTY
C^H~ NUl t~9n-0~7~~ p
CUI1I1UNW~:^I.TH IW Pl::NNliYLVANIA I
CUIINTY UF CUI1"~nLAND
I"nAI1I''fllN CHRIH ~T AL
VS,
UI,I) VUllm: 11Il!'l~:H ING
.Jl, Th"mall Kl1n" . Sh..rUf, who "..ing duly .worn Iccording
tQ llW, .IY., thlt h.. mid., I diligcnt s.lroh Ind inquiry tor th.. within
nlmco def..ndlnt, to wit I _ULD vlJnm; 1l0rU;H I1il;
bul w.s unobl~ to locat.. Th.m _ in his bailiwick, II. th.r.forw
d.putiz..d th. ah.riff ot YORK COUNTY .. County, Pennsylvania.
to ..rv. th. within CO!'lPI.AHIT
YIJnK COUNTY
County,
r.c.ipt of
P..nn.ylvania,
On Novlfmbn 22no. 1 'J'J6
th. IIttlloh.d r.turn from
. this ottic.. w.s in
I:lh.riff's Co.t.,
Dook.Hng
Dut of County
Elurchllrg..
So an.w.r81
1,.00
,00
2,00
,
." _t _ _I .r".
R. i'no~.. KItn.. sn.rill
~8,~W WiLT & rn~VBUnN
1 /22/1 t;l1;lt.
Iiw"rn anll lJubu',rtb.,j to ht.'fon. me
thtll J S If- ,jay of '-lu,lJ<....~
l~ Il~ . A, D,
(~ I', .
, 1'/ h_ Lt, hl( (('I.... (.~.
I Prllthonnhry f
1 -, C . . C
nIne ~urr Ci .::mmC~i
::l:::-~
I ---
_ .... t, "I
...~r I .,....ll--=I~l-..,...-t' .'L!'-'.'-'
"-.....,.._...... -'1-.....- 011,1
P~"''''~yl',,,,,,, ...
............, .......1'-01
Christopher Frampton and Diane Frampton his wifo
,~~
, .,
Steven Sanitago'ond
g~~vforge Ilomos Inc,'
Steven Sanitago
,. Novemher 7, Iqqr,
.'cw,
~c.
!)(,_t.,,1r,n Civ.~ 1
':l
.---, .--
'Q
.--
!. s:~~:: C': C::~G::::~A...'t::J CO~-:{":'?I FA.... C~
, ,
.:.:-..:,
,
..:_....:.... .:... ~.....:= cz'
-r'-- ........ ---
York
C.....- ." "--". =:..: ',"..:.
'w,,",-_: ,"'" _____ "....,
.~:. ":_.._..:_ ~.:_.. __.:... .1... _._
- -;----- ..~ - .... - .--:-.
,
---
--
:-.2 cf
~
-::t..:...:=
.--.
- ....~I'~.:
1;.1 "
. .'.,
"
-,
S=C"'':: ct C=::er..:r..:u
C:u.:.:r. P:..
A.Sce:rit or Sem~
Sc A.:..-wC-:_
!!::::5 c,
C:u.::.tT, P:.
CC:a.:l
C",__ .." .,1-._"--> \..J~
... ...... -- __~ ""'z::::;.....
::.:....J..,t~C!
J
-. ,~:. >.., .{
-"_--;;';'.'"'
19_
~c::..1..i.O!
.1-,.1'-
.":1_..1...
------.
!
,- '-I
I .I.Q wl.h IQ "Q.lv. Ihe
'Q\lQwlng ..rvIQ" IIQt .n .klr.
1..1:
1. D Addr....... Addl'"
2. D R..IrIQI.d O.Uv.ry
''''' .
II, c(lftlll!t,.l\lm' 1 .nd/OI 11., oddItIolIII "MelI.
I I' C~pItl. h.m. 3,lnd <Ie n. i
t . . ,tin, VIM "'11\1 .nd addr... on the ,'VI'" Df thi. '0"" 10 that WI un
. "1UtIl111l....nll.VO<l.
,! . Alia"" IhI. I.,m I. 11111...,.11110 m.Upltco. 01 on Ih' I>t.k If .p.co
-~~ . J
i . i Wril' "~II'" R'coi!>l R_"'d"..1M mlllpl... bolo" 1M .rtklo numbel
, '$I . The R.turn "HlIp_ d .how to whom thI.nk:ll wi' dllly.,td and UlI dl"
I Ii d'U."ttI. CQn.ull Q.tm..t.r IQr I...
1.13' Artlcl. Addr....d IQI 4.. Artlcl. Nu mb.r
: ,..1 J, ",' C' -~J I' 0 \ I. 1 I.. S :3 8'8' I
I L.,.\I\Q.I$ i vi "'14~ rMIVlf'" 4b. Silvie. Typ.
I I , D Regl'l8"d D Irt.u"d
I (,,/02. ,^,,,,,,,,NIl'Iiet:> W"i lHCIIIIII.d DcoO I
i 1Y\e"c..MIJ'"'' otJe& I.P~ nO.$'5' D bpr... M.u D .Iurn R.c.lpl f.r 1
: 7. O.t..f ,UVllY ! .
i-I
I B. Addr..\iQ Addr... 10nly II "qu..t.d ..
I ~~~~ ~
.U.'.Ol'Ol'. IIUII DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT
CHlUSTOPllIllt FItAMPTON unLl
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBEltLAND COUNTY,PIlNNSYLV ANIA
Plulullffs,
v.
NO. 96.S750 CIVIL TEltM
STliVEN SANTIAGO unLl
OLD FaROE 1I0MES, INC.,
CIVIl. ACTION - LAW
Dcfendunls.
HI/tV TIUAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
YOU If A VI~ Iml~N sUlm IN COURT, If Y"U wish III defend uuulnst tho c1ulms
sol fOrlh In Iho following puges, you must tuke uclion wllhln IWent)' (20) du)'s unor
this COlllplulnt uud Ntlllee ure served, hy elllerlng u wrluen uppeurtlnce personull)' or
h)' ullorne)' und filing In wrlling wllh the Court your defenses or ohjectlol15 10 Iho
c1ulllls sel fOllh ugulnsl you. You ure wUllled Ihul If )'ou full 10 do so Ihe euse Illu)'
proceed wllllllul )'ou und u judgment muy he elllered uuulnM )'IlU hy the Court withoul
further nollee for un)' mone)' c1ulllled in the COlllplulnl or for un)' othor c1ullll or
relicI' requesled h)' the Pluintlff. YIlU IllUY lose money or pmperly or other rlghls
Imporlutll to you.
YOU SIIOUI.!> TAKE TillS I'AI'ER TO YO un LAWYEn Al' ONCI~. IF YOU DO
NOT IIA VA A LA WYliR OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE. 00 TO OR TELEPHONE TilE OFFICE SaT
FORTII BELOW TO FIND OUT WHIilUi YOU CAN aET LEOAL HELl'.
CUMlIllItLAND COUNTY LA WYlilt IUiFERRAL smWICE
CUMBERLANIJ COUNTY COURTIIOUSI!
COllin ADMINISTRATOIt
1 COlJltTIIOlJSI! SQUARI!
CAIU.lSLB, I'A 17(J1]
(717) 240.620(J
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
t~~
\{o ert fl, Ml'llSl'l, Esquire
4775 Lhll\II'slowll ({ond, Stl', 2nn
)-lntl'lsburl\, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
AlIlll'l1ey /.1J./# 7741 n
DATfl: 1~/3{q,
AlllltlWYIl (or PlnlllllU
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON nnd
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plnlnllffs,
IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBEI{LAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO nnd
OLD FORGH HOMES,INC.,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Dcfendnnls.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
I,e hnn demandndo n lIsled en In corte. SI lIsled qlliere defenderse de
cslns demnndns cxpllcstns en Ins pnginus sigllienles, lIsled liene vienle (20) dins de
pluzo ul pnrllr de In fechu de lu demundn y In nolificullon. Uslcd debe presenlnr lIlI
npariencln esriln 0 en personn 0 por ubngudo y nrchivur en In corle en formu escriln
sus defensns 0 sus objeciones II Ius demulldns ell conlrll de Sll persollu. Sell uvisndo que
si lIsled 110 se defiende, In corle IOlllurn medidus y puede enlrnr lIlIU ordell cOlllrn lIsled
sin previn uviso 0 nollficuclon y por cuulquier '1uejn n ullvio que es pedldo en lu
pellclon de demundu. Usled puede (lerder dillero n sus (lropiedndes 0 olros derechos
Imporlnntes puru uslcd.
LLEVE ESTA IlEMANDA A tiN AJlOIlAGO INMEDlATAMENTI~, SI NO TIENH
ABOOADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DlNElW SUFICIENTIl DE !'AOAR TAL SERVICIO. VAYA EN
PERSONA OR LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUY A DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA
ESCRITA ABAJO !'ARA A VERIGUAR DONDE SIl PUEDIl CONSEOUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURT ADMINISTRATOR
I COURTHOUSE SQUAIUl
CARLlSLlI, PA 17013
(717) 240.6200
DATU: , 1. \ I ~ I ~ "
Hespeclfully submitted.
WILT, FREEDUHN & MENSEL
I ,
~ '
R ert E. Mensel, Esquire
4775 L1ngleslown Hoad. Ste. 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671- 1 955
Attorney).D.# 77410
Attorneys for PlalntiH
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON IInd
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMIlERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
1'llIlnllffs.
NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO IInd
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Defendllnls.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
AND NOW, come the plnintlffs. Christopher Frnmpton nnd Diane
Frnmpton. by their nttorneys, Wilt, Freeburn & Mensel. nnd file the within
Complnint:
COUNT I,. BREACH OF COISTRACT
I, Plnintiffs, Christopher Frnmpton nnd Diune Frampton are
ndults. nnd a mnrried couplc rcsidlng ut 6102 Wullingford Way.
Meehnnicsburg. Cumbcrland County. Pennsylvunlu 17055.
2, Defcndunt. Old Forgc HOIllCS, Inc., is u Pennsylvuniu Corporntion
with principul place of husincss ut 1047 Old Forgc Roud, Lcwishcrry, York
County, Pcnnsylvunlu und cngugcd in thc buslncss of the construction und
sulc of rcsldcntilll homes in CUllIhcrlund County IInd clscwhcrc.
3, Dcfcndllllt, Stevcn SUlltillgo, Is n shllrcholder IInd offlecr of Old
Forge Homcs, Inc.
4. Old Forge Homcs, Inc.. Is thc ulter-ego of Stevcn SlIntlngo.
5. Slcvcn Snnlingo nnu Diu Forgc Homes. Inc, wcrc thc gcncrul
contructors for thc conslruction of the house ul 6102 Wullingforu WilY,
Mcchllnicsburg, Cumberlllnu County. Pennsylvuniu.
6. Stcvcn Sunlillgo IInd Old Forge Homcs, Inc. held fee simple Ii tic
to lhc prcmiscs ut 6102 Wullingford Wuy, Mcchllnicsburg. Cumbcrlllnd
County. Pcnnsylvllnill prior 10 Dcccmber 7, 1995.
7. On Dcccmhcr 7, 1995, Diu Forgc Homcs, Inc. unu Steven
Sunliugo lrllnsfcrrcd lille 10 thc prcmiscs ut Ci I 02 Wullingford WilY,
Mechunicsburg, Cumbcrlllnd Counly, Pcnnsylvuniu 10 Chrislopher Frumplon
unu Dillne Frumpton, husbund unu wife, in fce simplc lille.
S. Thc purchuse price for lhe prcmiscs III Ci I 02 Wullingforu WilY,
Mcchllnicsburg, Cumberlnnd County, Pcnnsylvuniu WIIS $162,900.00.
9. In conncctlon wilh lhc lrllnsfer of litlc to Christophcr nnu Dinnc
Frnmpton. Diu Forgc Homcs, Inc. und Slcvcn SlInliugo, for good nnu Icgul
consiucrulion, IInu with lhc inlcnlion to hc Icgnlly bound, cxlcnueu und
convcycu to Chrislophcr unu Dlunc Frumpton II wnrrunly lhut thc building
ul 6102 Wllllingforu WilY, Mechllnicsburg, Cumberlllnu Counly,
Pcnnsylvunin \Vus constructed In n sound nnLl \Vorkmnnllke fnshion, nnd
\Vns hnbilnble.
In. Aftcr lhc lrunsfcr of title to Chrislophcr uuLl Dlllne Frumpton,
pluintiffs bccumc uwnre of ccrluin dcfccts In lhe construclion of lhc
prcmises, specificnlly, squcllky floor hOllrds thrnughoul the prcmiscs, IInu
uncvenncss in the kitchcn floor.
?
II, Plaintiffs brought these defects to the nllention of defendant.
Steven Santiago. who agreed to tuke the sleps necessury to remedy und
allevinle those conditions.
12. These defects constituted violutions of the wurrnnties provided
by defendunts 10 plaintiffs.
13. Defendunt, Steven Suntiugo, has fuited to repair, remedy. and
ullevinle the squeaking of the floor hourds in ccrtain Jocntions within the
house.
14. In the course of his efforts to repulr, remcdy, und alleviate the
condition of the squcnky floor hourds Ihmughout thc house, defendant,
Steven Santiago, improperly drovc nails nnd screws through the carpeling
and Into the squenking floor bourds, cuusing dum age to the carpet
throughout the house.
15. Defendanl, Steven Santiugo, hns fulled 10 take steps to repair.
remedy, or nllevlate the condition of the kitchen lloor in the premises,
16. The cosIOI' repair of thc squeaky floors, repair and
replaccment of the damngcd cnrpct, togcther with thc cost of repair and
rcplacement of thc kitchen floor, nil of which were dcfcclivcly construclcd,
installed. and designed by defendnnts, will cost a sum In cxcess of FIVE
THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5,000.001 DOLLARS,
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs demund Judgmcllt ugnlnst Stcvcn Snlltlago,
individually, and Old Forge Homcs, (nc" Jointly nnd scverully, fill' u sum In
1
excess of FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5,000.00) DOLLARS, together
with interest aud costs of suit.
UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND COMillMER PROTECTION..LA.W
17. The allegutions set forth in puragrnphs 1-16 ure incorporated
herein as if set forth in full.
18. Prior to the purchnse of the uforesnid premises by the
plnintlffs, defendunts represellled to plaintiffs, hoth orally und in wrlling,
thut the goods and services thut they provided in connection wllh the
construction nnd snle of the house were of u purticular standurd, quality, or
gl'llde. when In fact such goods und services were of u standard, qunlity, or
grade inferior to that set forth In defendalllS' representations.
19. The defenduuts have failed to comply wilh the terms of wriUen
guarantees and wllrrnnties provided to the plllintlffs nt. prior to, or IIfler
Ihe contract for the purchllse of the home wns executed.
20. Afler the sale of the home to the plaintiffs, the defendants
mnde repnlrs, improvements or replncemeuts on the property, specifically
consisting of repnirs to the floor honrds throughout the house, the cnrpet
throughout the house, uud the suhfloor In the kilchen, which were of II
nllture or qunllty inferior tu or below the stundnrd set forlh in the wriuen
snles ngreemenl.
21. Throughout the pcriod hcforc the signing of the contl'llct for
purchase nnd slllc, IIflcr the signing of snid contl'llcl, IInd both hcfore IInd
IIfler thc trllnsfer of title to thc prcmlscs fl'llm thc dcfcudnnts 10 the
plllintlffs, dcfcndllnts cngllgcd in frllndulcnl conducl which crcnted II
oj
Iikclihood of confusion or misundcrstnnding in thc minds of thc plaintiffs,
inllsmuch liS thc dcfcndllnts pl'llmiscd rcpclIlcdly to rcpllir the mllny
dcfcctivc condilions in thc housc, nnd pcrformcd pllrtinl IInd incomplclc
rcpnirs. which wcrc ncvcr inlcndcd to rcmcdintc the dcfcctivc condilions.
hut wcrc inlendcd tll dcccivc thc plnintiffs nnd mislend lhcm into
hcllcving lhnl thc dcfcndnnt \Vns mnking n gllod fnith cffort tll mnkc good
on thc wnrrnnties lInd olhcr cllntrlll'lunl ohliglllions running from
dcfcndnnts 10 plllintlffs.
22, All of thcsc nClions, liS scl forlh nhovc nnd in Counl I, consllllllc
violnllons of thc Pcnnsylvnnill Unfnir Trndc Prncliccs lInd Consumcr
Protection Lnw, 73 P.S. ~ 201-1 tlli.l:..ij..
WHEREFORE. plninliffs rcspcctfully rcqucst thnl this Courl cnlcr
Judgment ngninsl lhc defendnnls, Jointly, severnlly, nnd indlvidunlly, for
the cosls of repnir, logcthcr with inlerest, costs. nnd ulIorneys' fees liS
permillcd under the Unfllir Trudc Prllctlces IInd Consumer Protccllon Lnw.
together with lrehle dumllges. us permilled under lhe Unflllr Trnde
Prnclices nnd Consumer prolection Luw.
DATE: , J...( I ''?( (1 ~
Rcspectfully suhmillcd,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
, (:-r~d:ip~_
Mhcrl E. Mcnscl, Esquirc
4775 Linglestown Rond, Ste. 200
Hnrrishurg, P A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney J.D.# 7741 II
Allorneys for Plnintiff
Ii
VERIE.lCA TION
I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and
correct, I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.e.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated: II-z(.. ,t.
~
I hereby verify that the statements In the foregoing document are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein arc made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.e.S. Section 49114, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated: 11- ~~"I'"
_blllMli r-~~
PlANE FRAMPTON
.\'A
l~,..
I , '
I
j
- 1;
I',.:t 4', .l.
1~' f '3.~l
. tr
m ~, )!
\\1 ~', J\
fl' P t)
'ti $
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
PLAINTIFFS
V.
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
DEFENDANTS
~
TO: CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and DIANE FRAMPTON
You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter
within twenty (20) days from service hereor or a judgment may be entered against you.
Respectfully submitted,
"61 :3~ tm
Date
...
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUI E
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife I
PLAINTIFFS
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
V.
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
DEFENDANTS
AND NOW, come the Defendants, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc"
by their attorney, Robert Peter Kline, Esquire, and file the following answer to the
Plalntlffs' First Amended Complaint:
COUNT l:..B.REACIi.Q.F CON'[~CT
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
4. Denied. Steven Santiago is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
5. Admitted In part, denied in part. Old Forge Homes, Inc. was the general
contractor for the construction of a house at 6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanlcsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge
Homes, Inc.
6. Admitted In cart, denied In part. It Is admitted that Old Forge Homes, Inc. did
hold fee simple title to the premises at 6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanlcsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania prior to December 7, 1995. It Is specifically denied
that Steven Santiago ever held fee simple title to said premises.
7. Admitted In part, denied In part, It is admitted that on December 7, 1995 Old
Forge Homes, Inc. did transfer title to the premises at6102 Welllngford Way,
Mechanlcsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania to Christopher Frampton and
Diane Frampton, husband and wife, In fee simple litle. It Is denied that Steven
Santiago ever held title whatsoever In said premises and, consequently, did not
transfer any title to said premises to Mr. and Mrs. Frampton.
e, Admilled.
9. Admllled as to Old Forge Homes, Inc., specifically denied as to Steven
Santiago.
10. Defendants are without specific knowledge as to when Plaintiffs became
aware of any alleged defects to the premises and, to the extent that a response to this
paragraph Is required, the allegation of this paragraph Is denied and proof Is
demanded. Furthermore, It Is specifically denied that any unevenness existed to the
kitchen floor,
11. Admllled In part, denied In part. It I. admitted that the Plaintiffs brought
alleged defects to the attention of Defendant Steven Santiago. It Is further admllled
that Steven Santiago I In his capacity as an employee for Old Forge Homes, lnc, did
agree to take steps necenary to repair the squeaky floo's. It Is specifically denied that
there was an unevenneu to the kitchen noor and that any repairs to the kitchen floor
were necessary, or that Defendant agreed to take steps necessary to repair the kitchen
noor.
12. The allegation of this complaint is a legal conclusion to which no response
is required. To the extent that a response may be required, the allegation Is denied
and proof is demanded.
13. Denied, proof demanded.
14. Denied, proof demanded.
16. Denied, as no repair was necessary.
16. Denied, proof demanded.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against
Plaintiffs.
17. No response required.
18. Denied. On the contrary, this was a spec house which was complete with
the exception of the Installation of the carpet when Plaintiffs first initiated an interest in
purchasing the premises and, therefore, Plaintiffs purchased the property In the
condition In which it was found.
19. Denied, proof demanded.
20. Admitled In part, denied In part. It Is admltled that, after the sale of the
home to the Plaintiffs, end at the request of the Plaintiffs, repairs to the squeaky noors
were made. It Is specifically denied that these repairs were of inferior quality.
21. Denied, proof demanded.
22. The allegallon of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Is specifically denied.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs.
NEW MATJ.E.B
23. At all limes relevant to this complalnt, Defendant Steven Sanllago was an
employee, and not a principal, of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
24. At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Steven Sanllago acted In
his capacity as an employee and business manager of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
25. Plalnllffs have failed to allege that Defendant Steven Sanllago exceeded
the scope of his employment with Old Forge Homes, Ino. or abused his poslllon as an
employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc. and, therefore, Defendant Steven Sanllago cannot
be held personally liable In the event of any judgment against Old Forge Homes, Inc.
26. Plalnllffs have failed to allege damages In an amount that warrants a jury
trial pursuant to the Local Rules of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County
and, therefore, this matter Is within the Jurlsdlcllonal limits for arbltrallon.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: 20 s~ 10,'17-
r vol- EKo.
ROBERT PETER KLINE, EsaEUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070.0461
(717) 770.2540
Attorney for Defendants
~
I, Robert Peter Kline, Esquire, attorney for the Defendants herein, have
sufficient knoWledge of the facts contained In this Answer to Plaintiffs' First
Amended Complaint and New Matter and verify that the statements made In the
foregoing Answer are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, based upon
'nformatlon received from the Defendants. I understand that false statements
herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities. A verification executed by the Defendants will
be filed of record as soon sslt becomes available.
30.J'"A-N ~
Oate
r~ ~
~ ~~O. t
R BERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 481
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Answer to Plaintiffs'
First Amended Complaint and New MaUer upon Plaintiffs, by depositing same In the
United States Mall, first class, postage pre-paid on the 3 I S'T' day of
-
....J 1tN. ~I.I
, 1997, from New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, addressed as
follows:
Robert E. Mensel, Esquire
4775 Llnglestown Road, Suite 200
Harrlsburg,PA 17112
Attorney for Plaintiffs
.
1 --p
ROBERT PETER KLI E, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
I
I
I
I
... ..:I' ~
l"; j..'
- . ,
" ~, .. ,.'
\\1 ~ .... : ,
"
r..' ,
l
l [";
\,."
: II "
II, .
I .
,-.
1.1 'J' ..~j
".
CIIIUSTOPIIER FltAMI'TON ulIll
DIANE FltAMPTON, his wife,
IN TllliCOllln OF COMMON PLEAS
ClJMIlIiIU.AND CO\lNTY,I'ENNSYLVANIA
I'lui 111 iffs,
NO. 1Jh.~7~1I CIVIL TEltM
v,
STIlVEN SANTIAGO uml
OLD FORGE IIDMES, INC"
CIVIL ACTION .I.AW
Defendnnls,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
AND NOW, COIllC thc pluiutifl's, Christophcr Fl'lIl1lpton und Diunc
Frnl1lpton, by thcir ullorllCYs, Wilt, Frccburn & Mcnscl. und filc thc
following rcply to ncw llIullcr,
23,-24.
Aftcr rcusonublc invcstiglltlon, plaintiffs arc without
knowlcdgc 01' information sufficicnt to form 1I hclicf us to thc truth of thc
Ilvermcnts contained in thcsc pUl'llgruphs. !lnd strict proof thcreof is
dcmunded ut thc time of trlu\.
25,-26.
This purugruph coutuins 110 uvcrlllcnts or ruct. only
conclusions or luw to which no rcply is rClluircd. By way or rurthcr rcply,
plaintiffs' compluillt speuks 1'01' itsclf.
WHEREFORE, pluintirfs rcspcctrully rcqucst thut this Honorablc Court
dismiss uny und all ufl'lnl1alivc defcnscs containcd in defcndunts' Ncw
Mallcr. ulld thut it cntcr judglllcnt in its ravor und Stcvcn Suntiugo,
Individuully, alld Old Forgc Homcs. tnc" jointly und scvcl'lllly, for a sum in
exccss Ill' FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5,OOlI.OO) DOLL^I~S, togcthcr
with interest and costs of suit.
Respectfully suhmittcd,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
i2(~[
Richnrd ' E, Frcchurn, Esquire
4775 Linglcstllwn Rllnd, Stc. 200
Hunishurg, P A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorncy 1.0.# 30965
DATE:
~J,qJq,.,
Attol'l1cys for PluinlifJ's
?
.
YIllU.EJ.CAIJ.Q
I hereby verify that the statemcnts in thc furcgoing documcnt aru true and
correct, I understand that falsc statemcnts hcrein arc madc subjcct tulhe pcnalties
of 18 Pa.C,S. Scction 4904, relating tu unswurn falsifkntiun tu authurltlcs,
Dated: -t~/f!-97
N
1
\.
CIIIUSTOP"E1~ FRAMPTON UlIlI
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
IN TilE COUIO' OF COMMON PLEAS
CIJMUHlU.AND COIJNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I'lullIl iff~,
Nil %.~7~O CIVIL THltM
v,
STliVEN SANTIAGO tlud
OLD FORGE 1l0MES, INC"
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Uel'cndunls,
Jl/ltY TIUAL DEMANDED
I hcreby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to New
MaUer, haH been duly Hcrvcd on the following thiN .JJHb.. day of February, 1997
by placing the same in the U.S, FirHt Class Mail, certified postage prepaid, at
Harrisburg, PennHylvanla, addrcHsed aH followH:
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
33 I BRIDGE STREET, SUITE 35ll
PO BOX 461
NnW CUMBERLAND, PA I 7()7().ll46 I
.
DATE: _/1C\/'t"
Respectfully submilled.
WII.T, FlmEBURN & MENSEL
/. ;; (:'
j COOl i
{' (' '; i:'cc ..;.-~"
(\ .. -'
I{lcluh'd E, Frechurn, Esquirc
4775 Linglcstown ROlld, Stc. 200
BlIlTishlll'g, PA 17112
(717) (171-1955
AlIlll'l1CY I.D./I JO%5
Allorncys fill' PlnintlrrH
4
,
~ N .'-
C ".
".
I~ .. r~ .!I"
.. -
r~~, ) ,-J.
.- -, .. ~-{.
u. : '",1
~\ 0 i"
N 1-'.;
(II' t.~ "\ "1
" t ~c...
,
\5 '."
S- .)
\.)
CHIUSTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wire.
Plalnurrs,
IN 11IE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUN1Y. PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 96-5750 CIVII. mHM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES. INC"
CIVII. ACTION - I.AW
Derendants.
JUHY TIUAL DEMANDED
It Is hereby stipulated by and between the parties herein, through
their undersigned counsel, that plaintiff be allowed to file within 10 days a
Second Amended Complaint as set forth In the aUached Exhibit "A,"
DATE: 1'1 ~IIi.cH Iqll1-
J~l-YKQ~~
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
AUorne for Defendant
DATE: 5~'d / C) 7-
I I
CIlRISTOplUlR FRAMPTON IInd
I>IANE FRAMPTON, hl~ wife,
IN TIlB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plnlntlff~.
NO. 96.~750 CIVIL TERM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO ul1d
OLD FOROE HOMES, INC..
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Defendunts.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
VOU HAVE BEEN sllIm IN COUnT, If you wish tu defend IIglllnil the clnlms
set forth in the following pugcs, you lIIust luke uctlon within twenty (20) days lifter
this Complulnt und Notlcc nre scrvcd, by el1lcrlng II wrlllen nppcllrunce pcrsonlllly or
by lIuorney and filing In writing with the Conrt your dcfcl1scs or objections to the
c1ulllls set forth ugull1st you, You IIrc wurncd thul If you fuil 10 do so the cuse muy
proceed wlthoul you Ilnd II Judglllcnl 1II11Y be cntcrcd ugllll16t you by the Court without
further nOllce for lIny money c1uimcd in Ihc COlllpllllnl or for lIuy olher c1ulm or
relief request cd by Ihc Plull1lll'r. You 1II11Y losc money or propcrly or olher rig his
IlIIportUl11 to you,
VOU SHOULI) TAKE TillS l'AI'En TO youn LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, 00 TO Olt TELEI'1l0NE TIlE OFFICP. SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WIlERE YOU CAN GET LEOAL HELP,
CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SElWICE
CUM8IiRLAND COUNTY COUlnHOUSE
COURT ADMINISTRATOR
I COURTIlOUSE SQUARE
CAltLISLE,I'A 17013
(717) 240.()2011
RCHpCClfully Hubmltlcd,
WILT, P EEnURN & MENSEL
DATE:
-s/r~ /q 7
Rl crt E. MenHcI, EHqul .
4 75 Lingll'Hlown Rond, Ste. 200
Hnl'l'isburg, PA 17112
(717) 671.1955
Attorney 1.0.# 77410
AttorneYIl for PlnlnUffH
CHRISTOPIlHlt FRAMPTON uud
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLUAS
CUMllliRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plulutlffs,
v,
NO, 96.~750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO UIIlI
OLD FOIWE 1I0MES, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION. LA W
Dcf'cllduIIIS.
JUIn' TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
Le han demundado u ustcd en la corlc. SI IIslcd qlliere defcllderse de
cslus del1lulldus expllcslus CII Ius puglnus siglliclllcS, IIsled IlcllC VICIIIC (20) dins dc
pluzo ul purlir de lu fcchu dc lu dCl1Iundu y lu IIlllificUlillll. UslcLI dehc prcscnlnr IIU
upurlcllclu esrilu 0 CII pcrsllllll II pilI' lIhllgudll y urchlvur CII lu cllrlc CIl formu cscrllu
SIlS dcfclIsus II slIS Ilhjccillllcs U Ius dClllulldus CII Clllllru de su pcrsnllu, Seu uvlsudo qllc
sl usted 110 sc dcficnde, III Corle IlllIIUru IIIcdidus y Pllcde Clllmr IIUU llrdclI Clllllru IIsled
sill prcvlo UVISll II 1l11lificuclllll Y pilI' clIulqulcr qllcju II ullvill quc cs pedldo en lu
peliclOIl de dCll1ul1du, USlcd pucdc pcrder dillcrll II sus pfllpicdudes II lllros dercchos
Imporlulllcs purn IIstcd,
LLEVE ESTA D1~I\1AN()A A UN AIIOIJAGO INI\1EIlIATAI\1ENTE, SI NO TIENE
ABOOADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL D1NElW SUFIClliNTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN
PERSONA OR LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUY A D1RECCION SB ENCUENTRA
BSCRITA ABAJO PARA A VEIUGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEaUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
CUMllliRLAND COUNTY LAWYER IWFEltRAL SERVICE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSB
COURT ADMINISTRATOIt
I COURTHOUSE SQUARE
CAltLlSLE,l'A 17013
(717) 240.6200
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, rREEnUI~N & MIlNSEL
.~
DATB, -;/rg!77
~9l'iert E. Mense , Esq lire
1775 Llngleslllwn RlInd, Ste, 200
Hnrrlsburg, PA 17112
(717) 671 - 1 955
Athll'lll'Y I.D,# 7741ll
Attorneys for Plnlnlif(s
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
v.
NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO 1I1ld
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
DefendUI1I5.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
AND NOW, come the plaintiffs, Christophel' Frampton and Diane
Frampton, by their allomeys, Wilt, Freeburn & Mensel, und file the within
Complaint:
COUNT 1.- BREACH OF CONTRACT
I, Plaintiffs, Christophel' Frampton and Diane Frampton ure
adults, and a married couple residing ut 6102 Wallingford Way,
Meehanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
2, Defendant, Old Forge Homes, Inc" is a Pennsylvania Corporation
with principal place of busincss ut 1047 Old Forge Road, Lewisberry, York
County, Pennsylvanlu IInd enguged in the husiness of the constl'llclion IInd
sule of residenliul homes in Cumbcrland County IInd elsewhere,
3. Defendant, Steven Sanlillgo, is u shareholder IInd officer of Old
Forge Homes, Inc.
4. Old Forge Homcs, Inc., is thc IIltcr-cgo of Stcven Suntiago,
5, Stevell Sllnllllgo Ilnd Old Forgc Homcs, Inc. wcre the general
contruclors for the construction of thc housc at 6102 WullingfOl'd WilY,
Mechunicshurg, Cumberlllnd Coullty, Pennsylvunill.
6. Steven Suntiugo und Old Forge Homes, Inc, held fee simple title
to the premises ut 6102 Wulllngford Wuy, Mechunicshurg, Cumberlund
County, Pcnnsylvuniu prior to Dccemhcr 7, 1995.
7. On Dcccmbcr 7, 1995, Old Forgc Homcs. Inc, und Stcvcn
Suntiugo transferrcd titlc to thc prcmiscs ut ClI02 Wullingford Wuy,
Mechunieshurg, Cumbcrlund County, Pcnnsylvuniu to Christophcr Fnllnpton
und Diune Frumpton, husbund und wirc, in fcc simple titlc,
8. Thc purchuse price ror thc prcmises ut 6102 WullingfOl'd Way,
Mechunicsburg, Cumbcrlund County, Pcnnsylvuniu wus $I(J2,90().O(),
9. In connection with thc trunsfcr or titlc to Christophcr und Diunc
Frul1lpton, Old Forge Homes, Inc. und Stevcn Suntiugo, for good und Icgul
conslderution, und with the intention to he Icgully bound, cxtcndcd und
conveyed to Christophel' und Diunc Frumpton a wurrunty thut the building
at 6102 WulIlngford Wuy, Mcchunicshurg, Cumherlund County,
Pennsylvania wus constructcd In u sound und workmunlikc fushion, Ilnd
was hnbituble.
10, Prior to und uftcr thc trunsrcr or titlc to Christophel' und Diunc
Frumpton, pluintlrrs bccume uwurc of ccrtuln defccts In thc construction of
the premiscs, spccificully, squcuky floor bourds thl'llughout thc premlscs,
und unevenncss In thc kltchcn floor,
II. Pluintlrrs brought thcse defects 10 the utlentlon or defcndllnl,
Steven Suntiugo, who ugrccd to tukc lhc stcps ncccssury 10 remcdy und
Illleviute thosc cOlldillons,
12. Thcsc dcrccts cOllstilutcd vloluliolls or thc WUlTUlltlcs pl'llvlded
hy dcfendunls 10 plulntlffs.
.,
13, Defendant, Stcvcn Suntiugo, has failed to rcpnir. remedy, and
alleviate the squcnking of thc floor honrds in eertnin locutions within the
housc.
14. In the coursc of his clTol'\s to rcpnir, remcdy, nnd alleviute the
condition of the squenky floor honrds thl'Oughout thc house, defendant,
Steven Snntiagu, impropcrly drove nuils und screws through the carpeting
und into the squcaking floor bourds. cuusing dumugc to the carpet
throughout the house.
IS. Defcndant, Stcven Snntingo, hus fuilcd to lnke steps to repair,
remedy. or alleviate the condition of the kitchen floor in the premises.
16. Defendant Steven Suntiago wus the ugent of Defendunt Old
Forge Homes, Inc, and Defendunt Old Forge Homes, Inc. is vicariously liable
for the negligence of Steven Snntiago commilled in the course und scope of
his employment.
17. The cost of rcpulr of the squeaky floors, repulr und
replacement of the dumuged curpet, together with lhe cost of repuir and
replacement of the kitchen floor, ull of which wcre defcctively constructed,
installed, und designed hy defcndunts, wi1\ cost u sum In excess of FIVE
THOUSAND AND OO!lOO ($S,OOO.OO) DOLLARS.
WHEREFORE, plulntlffs dcmund judgmcnt uguinst Steven Suntiugo,
lndlvidunlly, und Old Forgc Homcs, Inc" Jointly IInd scverully, for u sum in
excCSH of FIVE THOUSAND AND 0011 00 ($5,000,00) DOLLARS, together
with Interest ulld costs of sUIL
'\
UNFAlll....lllAIlltfRACTICES AN.D CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW
18. The IIl1egutions sct forth In purngl'llphs 1.17 urc incorporuted
herein us if sct forth in full.
19. Prior to thc purchusc or thc uforcsnld prcmiscs by thc
plaintiffs, defendants reprcsentcd to plnintilTs, both llI'ully IInd In writing,
thut the goods and services thut they provided in conncction with the
construction nnd salc of the house wcrc of u pUl'liculllr stundurd, quality, 01'
gl'Dde, when in faet such goods und scrvices werc of n stundard, quality, 01'
grade infcrior to thut set forth In dercndunts' rcpresentutions,
20. The defendunts huve fulled to comply with thc tcrms of wrllten
guarantees und warranties providcd to the plaintiffs nt, prior to, or ufter
the contract for the purchuse of the home was executed.
21, After the sule of the home to thc plaintlrfs, thc defendants
made repairs, improvements or rcplaccments on thc property, specifically
consisting of replllrs to thc floor bourds throughout thc house, the carpet
throughout the house, nnd the subfloor In thc kitchen, which were of a
nature or quulity inferior to 01' bclow thc stllndurd sct forth In the wrlltcn
sules IIgreemenl.
22, Throughout thc pcriod before the signing of the contract for
purchuse IInd sulc, uftcr thc signing or Sllld contl'llct, und hoth before IInd
lifter the tl'llnsfcr of titlc to thc prcmises rrom thc dcfendunts to the
plulntlffs, dcfcndunts cngugcd in rrnudulcnt conduct which creuted u
Iikclihood of confusion or misundcrstunding in thc minds of thc pluintiffs,
inllsmuch us thc dcfcndllnts pl'llllliscd rcpclltcdly to rcpuir thc IIlllny
4
defeetive conditions in the house, and pcrformed purtiul und incomplete
repairs, whieh wcre never illtended to rel1lcdiutc thc defcctivc conditions,
but were intended to deceive the pluintiffs und mislcud thcm into
believing that the defendunt wus muking u good fuith cffort to makc good
on the wUl'I'unties und other contructuul obllgutions running 1'1'0111
defendants to pluintiffs.
23. All of these actions, us set rOl'th ubovc uod in Count I, constitutc
violutions of the Pennsylvuniu Unfuir Trudc Pructiccs und Consumcr
Protection Luw, 73 P.S. ~ 201-1 !:1~
WHEREFORE, plulntlffs respectfully request thut this COUI'l entcr
judgment against the defendunts, jointly, sevcrally, und individuully, 1'01'
the costs of repuir, togcther with intercst, costs, und ullorneys' fees us
pcrmlued undcr the Unfair Trade Practices und Consumcr Protcction Luw,
together with treble damages, us pcrmiucd undcr the Unfair Trade
Practiccs and Consumer Protection Luw.
co UNI..lll.:.JSEG LtG ENCE
24. The ullegations sct forth in purngrllphs 1-23 lire IncOI'poruted
herein as if set forth in full.
25. Dcfendunt Stcvell SlIntiugo WIIS ullder u duty to cxercisc
reusonnble curc undcr ull the circulllstunccs in thc cunstruction of thc floor
in the subject house.
26. Dcfcndunt Stcvcn Suntiugo wus undcr u duty III cxcrcisc
reusonublc curc undcr ull thc circulllstunccs In thc instullutlun of thc curpct
und othcr floor covcrings in thc subjcct housc.
'I
27. Defendant Old Forge Homes, Inc. was under 0 duty to exerclNe
reaNonuble core under nil thc circumstunces In the construction of the 11001'
in the Nubject house.
28. Defendunt Old Forgc Homcs, Inc. wus undcr u duty to exercise
reuNonnble cure under nil thc circumstnnces in the lnstullution of the curpet
und other floor coverings In thc suhjcct housc.
29. Defendnnts Individunlly nnd jointly breached the duties set
forth in parngraphs 24-28 when they failcd to cxercisc reaNonnble care
under 011 the clrClllllNtnnces In the instullntion of the floor and floor
coveringN, irHINmuch us thc Nubflooring was und iN uncvcn and bumpy. and
Inusmuch IIN the floor under the curpet In IIlllny 10clltionN throughout the
house, including the kitchen. family room and hedroomN, NqueukN and pOpN
loudly when wulked upon.
30. Defendunts indlviduully nnd Jointty hreuched the dutieN set
forth In parngruphs 24-28 when thcy fulled to repuir the defective
condition of the floor nnd floor coverings. und to remedy the negligent
workmunship in the inNtullution of the floor und floor coveringN, inuNmuch
UN they failed to tnke cl'fective measureN to rcmedy thc defccts, und
Increased the dumugc to the premlNcs hy nuillng thl'Ough the curpet into
the floor, clluNlng Nevcre und ulll'cplllrublc dUllluge to the carpet.
3 t. As u direct und pl'llxil1lutc COllNequcnce of theNe hrcllches of
duty, pluintllTs huvc suffercd dnmugc in n sum cxcccding $5,{)()0.{)(), which
rcpresents thc cost or rcpnir of thc squcuky floors, repuir und rcplacement
of the damllged curpct ulld kltchcn floor,
"
WHEREFORE, plnintiffs dcmund judgment uguinst Stevcn Snntiugo,
indivldunlly, nnd Old Forge Homcs, Inc., Individually, jointly nnd severally,
for n sum In excess of $5,000.00, togethcr with interests IInd costs of suit.
DAm J /r13/r 7
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, 4 BURN & M,'NSEL
/ 7 ~~~
/ ' ////,
Ro el'l E. Mensel, Esqui
4 5 Linglestown Roud,
rrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney I.D.# 77410
Attorneys for Plnintiff
7
~
I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein arc made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa,C.S, Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated:
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON
~
I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein arc made subJect to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities,
Dated:
DIANE FRAMPTON
CllIUSTOI'IlEl{ FltAMI'TON uud
mANE FnAMI'TON, his wifc,
IN THE COllnT OF COMMON I'LEAS
ClIM8EnLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
I'luintlffs,
NO. I)(,.H~O CIVIL TEltM
\"
STEVEN SANTIAGO ul1d
OLD FOnGI! 1l0MES, INC,
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Dcfclldunls,
JllltY TI{IAL DEMANDED
NOTICE
YOU IIA VI~ IlImN SlII\/) IN COURT, If yuu wish lu dcfend ugnlnsl Ihe claims
5el fnrlh ill Ihc fnlluwing puges, yuu I11Usl lukc ucliun wilhll1 Iwcnly (20) dUY5 uner
Ihls Coml'luil1l und Nutice urc served, hy cnlcring II wrlllen UppCUrllllCe per50nully or
hy ullorncy IInd riling III wrlllng wllh Ihc COlllt yuur defcnscs or uhjcctlons lu the
clulms scl forlh uguillst yon, Yuu IIrc wllrncd Ihul if yuu fuil 10 du Nil Ihc cuse Illuy
procccd wlthoul yuu lInd u JUdgl11cll1 l11uy bc cnlercd uguinsl you hy Ihc Court withoul
further notice for ul1Y money dllimcd in Ihe COl11pluinl ur fur uny olher dulm ur
reller rcquc51cd by Ihe 1'I1I11l1lrL Yuu muy lusc l110ncy or prnpcrly ur olher rights
lmportunt 10 you,
YOU SIIOULD TAlm TillS l'AI'lm TO YOUn I,A""YER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT IIA VB A LA WYBR OIt CANNOT AFFOIW ONB. 00 TO Olt TELEPllONB THE OFFICE S8T
FOI{TH BELOW TO f<1ND OUT WIlERE YOU CAN GllT LEGAL liEU'.
CUMBlmLAND COUNTY LA WYER IWFmmAL SERVICE
ClIMDBltl.AND mUN1'Y COURTHOlJSE
COllin AIJMINISTltATOIt
I mURTHOUSH SQUAIUi
CARLISLB,I'A 1701J
(7m 240-li20()
Hl'spl'ctfully submittl'd,
WILT, FREEUURN & MENSEL
DATE: 3/2..1 (f17
I lert E, Mcnsl'l, ESLjuln'
4771'1 L1nll'l'stllwn l{lInd, Stl'. 20()
Hnrtlsbu tll, I' A 17112
(717) 671-11)1'15
AttornllY LIlli 774 J(}
Alhmlt!ys fot I'lnlnliffs
CHIUSTUI'HER FltAMPTON 1I11d
DIANE FRAMI'TUN, his wifc,
IN THE CUURT OF COMMUN PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,I'ENNSYLVANIA
1'I1IInllfh,
NO. 96-~750 CIVIL TERM
v,
STEVEN SANTIAGO. und
OLD FORGE Ho.MES, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Defel1dunls,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
No.TICE
Le han demand ado a usled en III corlc. Si usled quiere defenderse de
cslos dcmondos expueslus CI1 Ills puglnlls slgulenlcs. uslcd Ilenc vlente (20) dlos de
plu10 01 porllr de 10 fcchll de 10 dClTllllldu y III uOllficUlloll, Usled debe presenlor uo
IIpurlenclll esrltu 0 ClI persol1n 0 por lIhoglldu y IIrchlvur ell III corte ell forma escrllo
sus defensos 0 SUS objecioncs u Ius dcmundus cn cOl1lra de su personll, Sco uvlsodo que
sl usled no se deflellde, lu corlc lomutll ITlcdidus y pucde enlrar UI1U ordcll conlru usled
sin previo oviso 0 nOllflcuclol1 y por cuulquier qucju 0 1Ilivlo que es pcdldo en lu
llellcloll de demundo. Uslcd pucdc pcrdcr dineru 0 sus propiedudes 0 olros derechos
I11porluntes puro uslcd.
LLEVli liSTA I>EMANDA A UN ADo.UAGO INMIWIAl'AMENTE. SI NO. TIENE
ABo.GADo. 0. SI NO. TIENE EL D1NERU SUFlCIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIU. VAYA EN
PERSONA UR LLAME PUR TELEFUNU A LA OFICINA CUY A IJIRECCIUN SE ENCUENTRA
ESCIUTA ABAJO (lARA A VERIGUAR DUNDE SE J>UEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL,
CUMBEltLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFElmAL SERVICE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTlWUSB
COURT ADMINISTRATOR
1 COURTlWUSIl SQUAIUl
CARLlSLll,I'A 17013
(717) 240-6200
Respcctfully submitted,
WILT, PREEDURN & MENSEL
OATH. ~(",,117
Ro crt E. Mensel, Esq ire
47 5 Llngleslown Rond, SIl!. 200
Ilnrrlsburg, I'A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney !.D,# 77410
AlInrneYll for 1'IIIIntlffll
\J\~~e
~ .~
~~ .,.,,~\\
~ ~
<\\0 ~e
,,,"''''
~\~ \~e
~\e\ .~~~
...\O~ ...e\'
C\\\'\' ~e~'
,~S":o' ~ ~
. \\\\ ~\\
,~\ e~
~' ~\c
. ~\e ~'~\,
~\'" .
CO :-\""
..l.O~ ' ~\\O\\\e
\~ .\
~\J ~\e\
to- ~i
o~'
~~" .
~\~~ ~i'~\;'
CO~~
'O~ 00.1
~' ....'~l'
~\~~ ~ "'l'
e \0\
\J\~~ ~\\~~ ~O~
~ ~ ~ O\~
~~:1. CO\~ '\ 0\';.
\O~ b\~ ~~. .~
<".\~~~ ~\ \'\~ 'I\>l~~\ ~e\\i'
'\ ~ .~ ~ ~~ ~~
,.e\ . ~,~'" _,~~' <le\\~ 've <~c'\
~" \e":o\ o;,i\'" ~ '\ ~. ~<o\'
\\":0\0 e e~~' \":0 ~o~ CO
C" ~~\; ~ ~c., s~e ~e \e.
,\":0' CO ~\i' .... \: ~o 0\ ~\\e \\Ce\
. ~\\\ \\e~ CO~ y.o~\e' O\~ ~e<O":o e\":oe ~ o~
~\~\ \\\~\ \~~~ s~e \~I),'\ ~~":o'\ ~~~ \ ~~
\ . ~ ~ \~~e\ ~~ ~o . ~\ ~\e ~\\\i ~o\~e
~~ C~ 0 .~e":o'" ,,\~, Co \\~\e
,,-, ~\, .....\ e\> ~\> ....
,\<0' ~~\'" ~~ ~". ~~ \~\ ~ '
~~' \c":o \e~ 0' c\\~ ~~c\ \":0
~ ~~~ \Je CC ~~ l'~\' ,,0'
~"eC ~W ~ v \\~'"
\'t. 'l.' ~\ ~\~ ,\~ s~~
\~C\~ ~\-l~ O,\\C'" C,\
~\ ~~<o ~ \" S\C>l
.,.,,~ ~C \'~
~ \i' :~~e~ ~~,\\,
CO~~ ,\e'" e\e~ c":o'
0\ \J C. \\0\\"
...~\e ~ \\" ,e ,c
. . c":o' ,\.o\~ \\~~ \o~
y.o'\" ~~ o;~\" ~c\;
,,~ 0 .,\' \\":0\\
<"'0\'" . c-l'" c" ~
' 1),. ~" \\c ,~~
\' c\'
t:>. \0\ .....,\\~
":0 C
.\0\ <,,-,
\~o,;, ~~. "
o'\\; . c":o
C c\\~'\\
- ..~~
~,,~
~O~o:io\\e.,
t'~'o \..,
" ,,\\\
~\
~\
S;.~
,...0 ~ ",C., ,,''0'
\'-V \\- ~~
~~\ .ft.\!}>' \e"
~~\\o~. ~e
>
..
S \'-~\\'-
~ ~,,~'\,,-.\
~~O ~"'~
CO ...".
0'" ~~'
~~ CO .It.
O~ ~~ .Q~'
C \'-,- ~".Y"
~ ~\~...~" \-.\\V
'l Y:>~ ~c;
C; ..,"1"
o,~"
..
.,,\'-~
C~\O~ ~~""~
~\\.I" -&",1"
C" y\)'
~~\I"
\Y:>~"
..
~o.
..
'.
"
..
..
..
..
~\e
\\
\
S~~
e~
~ S\e-l ~e\
.~o 0 \'\c, ...\
<.'" . "'l'
\e' ."" "
~\: 0\\\'" \~~
~\e \\; b
.... ,c >10,\
\. s~ .
c.' ~o ~...e
\\" ~~ \\0' ~\~.
~ 0 \\\C \-l~
~\" ~ \\":oi
CJ ~c\"
\\\i'
CO~
6. Stevcn Suntiugo und Old Forgc Homcs, Inc. hcld fcc simplc tllle
to the premises ut 6102 Wullingford Wuy, Mcchunicshurg, Cumberlund
County, Pennsylvuniu prior to Dcccmbcr 7, 1995.
7, On Decel1lbcr 7, 1995, Old Forgc Homcs, Inc. und Steven
Suntiugo lrnnsfel'l'ed titlc to thc prcmiscs nt 6102 Wnllingford Wny,
Mcchanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pcnnsylvllniu to Christophel' Frampton
nnd Dianc Frnmpton, husband nnd wife, in fce simple tille.
S, Thc purchusc pricc I'lli' the prcmiscs nt 6102 WnIlingford Wny,
Mechnnicsburg, Cumbcrlnnd County, Pcnnsylvuniu wus $162,900,00.
9, In conncction with the trnnsfcr of titlc to Christophel' nnd Dlune
Frnmpton, Old Forge Homes, Inc, und Stcvcn Santiugo, for good nnd Icgul
consideration, and with the Intention to bc IcguIly bound, extended and
convcyed to Christophel' und Diune Frampton n warrnnty thnt thc building
ut 6102 WnlIlngford Wuy, Mcchunlcsburg, Cumbcrland County,
Pennsylvnnia wns constructed In u sound und workmunllke fushlon, und
was habitablc,
10, Prior to nnd nfter the trnnsfcr of tllle to Christophel' und Diane
Frnmpton, plnintilTs becnmc awnrc of ccl'lnin dcfccts In the construction of
the premises, spcclflcnlly, squcnky 1'1001' hoards throughout the premises,
nnd unevenness In the kitchcn (loor,
II. Plnintiffs brought thcsc dcfccts to the ullcntion of dcfendunt,
Stevcn Snntingo, who ngrccd to tukc thc stcps ncccssnry to remcdy und
ullevinte those conditions.
I 2. These defccts constitutcd vlolutions of thc wUlTunties provided
hy defcndants to plnlntlffs.
?
13. Defendant, Steven Snntiago, hus fullcd to rcpnir, rcmcdy, und
nlleviute the squeaking of thc floor bourds in ccrtuin locutions within the
house.
14, In the coursc of his cfforts to repuir, remcdy, und nile vi ute the
condition of the squenky floor hourds throughout thc housc, dcfendant,
Steven Suntiugo, improperly drovc nulls und scrcws through thc cnrpeting
and into the squenking floor bourds, causing dumugc to thc carpet
throughout the housc.
15. Defendant, Steven Sautiugo, hns fallcd to tukc stcps to repair,
remedy, or nlleviate the condition of the kitchcn 11001' in the prcmiscs,
16, Defendant Slcven Snntiugo wus the ugent of Dcfendnnt Old
Forge Homes, Inc. and Dcfendunt Old Forge Homcs, Inc. is vicnriously liable
for the negligence of Stevcn Snntiugo committcd in the coursc und scope of
his employment.
17. The cost of repair or thc squeaky floors, repnir and
replaccment of the dnmaged carpet, togcthcr with the cost of repair und
replacement of the kitchen floor, all or which wcre defcctivcly constructed,
installed, and designed by defendnnts, will cost u SUI1l in cxcess of FIVE
THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5,000.00) DOLLARS.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs dcmund judgmcnt ugulnst Steven Suntiago,
indivldunlly, and Old Forge Homcs, Inc., jointly nnd scvcl'lllly, for n sum In
cxcess of FIVE THOUSAND AND 0011 00 ($S,OOO.OO) DOLLARS, together
wllh intercst IInd costs of suit.
1
COUNT 11.- VIOLA TION OF PENNSYLVANIA
lJNFA.lR TRADEJ)JtACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW
18. The alleglltions sct forth in pllragruphs 1-17 are incorporatcd
herein as if sct forth in full.
19. Prior to the plll'chusc of Ihc aforesaid premises hy the
pluintiffs, defcndants rcpresented to pluintiffs. hoth orally and in writing,
that the goods and scrvlccs that they provldcd in conncction with the
construction und sate of the house wcrc or a particulur standard, quality. 01'
grude, when in fuct such goods and scrviccs wcre of a stundurd, quality, or
grnde inferior to that sct forth in defcndunts' reprcscntutions.
20. The defendants havc fullcd to comply with the tcrms of writlen
guarantees and wurl'Unlies providcd to thc pluintlffs ut, prior to, or uner
the contl'Uct for the purchuse or the home wus executed.
21. After the sulc of the home 10 the plaintiffs, the defendants
made repuirs. Improvements 01' replucements 011 the propel'ly, speclficully
consisting of repairs to the flom boards thl'Oughout thc house, the carpet
throughout the house, und the subfloor in thc kitchcn, which were of a
nature 01' quality inferior to or bclow the stllndurd set rorth in the writtcn
sales IIgreement.
22, Throughout the pcrlod hcfore thc signing of thc cnntrllct for
purchase and sllle, ancr thc signing or suid contruct, and holh heJ'orc and
uner the tl'llnsfcr of tltlc to the prcmiscs from thc dcfcndunts to thc
pluintlJ'fs, dcfcndunts cngagcd in fruudulcnt conduct which crclltcd u
likelihood of confusion or misundcrstunding In thc minds of thc pluintlffK,
inasmuch us the dcfcndunls promised rcpcatedly tn rcpllir Ihe mllny
4
defective conditions in the house, und performcd partiul and incomplete
repairs, which were ncver intended to rcmediutc thc defective conditions,
but were intendcd to dcceive thc plaintiffs und mislcad them into
belicving that the defcndant wus muking u good faith cffort to make good
on the warl'llnties and othcr contractual ohligations running from
defendants to plaintiffs,
23. All of thesc actions, as sct forth above and in Count I, constilute
violations of the Pennsylvllnia Unfair Tl'llde Practices and Consumer
Protection Law, 73 P,8. ~ 201-1 C1:u:..Q..
WHEREFORE, pluintiffs respectfully rcquest thut this Court enter
judgment against the defendants, jointly, scverally, and individually, for
the costs of repulr, logethcr with interest, costs, IInd lIttorneys' fees as
permitted undcr the Unfair Trade Pl'Uctices and Consumer Protection Law,
IOgether with trcble damages, us permillcd under the Unfair Trude
Practices and Consumer Protcction Luw.
24, The allegations set forth in plIl'IIgraphs 1-23 arc incorporated
herein as if set forth in full.
25. Dcfendant Stevcn Suntiago was under u duty to cxerclse
reusonable care undcr 1111 thc circumstunces in thc construction of the floor
in the subject house.
26. Defendllnt Stevcn Suntillgo WIIS undcr a duty to excrcise
reasonable cure undcr all thc circumstllnccs in the inslullution of the carpct
und other floor covcrings in the subject housc.
"i
27. Defendunt Old Fnrge Homcs, Inc, wus undcr II duty to exercise
renhllnllhlc cure undcr 1111 thc circulllstllnccs in the construction of the 11001'
In thc suhjcct housc.
2 H. Defcndunt Old Forgc Homcs, Inc. was undcr II duty to exercise
rcusonllhle curc under ull thc circulllstllnccs in the instullution of the carpet
ullll other floor covcrings in thc suhjcct housc.
21). Dcfcndunts individuully IInd jointly hrcuchcd the duties set
furth In purugruphs 24.2H whcn they fuiled to cxercise reasonable care
under ull thc clrculllstllnccs in thc installution of the floor and floor
coverings, inusmllch us thc suhflooring wus and is uneven und bumpy, and
Inusmllch us thc floor undcr thc curpet in llIuny locutions throughout the
huusc, Including the kitchcn, fllmity 1'00m IInd bedrooms, squcuks und pops
loudly when wulkcd upon.
30. Dcfcndunts Indlviduully IInd jointly breuched the duties set
furlh In purugrllphs 24-2H whcn they fuiled to repuir the defective
coltllitlun uf the floor IInd floor coverings, und to remedy the negligent
worklllunship In the instullutlon of thc floor IInd floor coverings, Inasmuch
us they rllllcd to tllkc cfrcctivc mcnsures to remedy the defects, IInd
increllNed the dUllluge to the prcmiscs hy nuiting thl'llugh the curpet Into
the f1uur, cllusing scvcrc und unrepuil'llblc dllmugc to thc curpct.
31, As n dlrcct IInd proxil1lute conscqucncc or thcsc hrellches of
duty, plulntlffs huvc suffcrcd dllmllge in u sum cxcccding $5,0011.110, which
rcprcsents thc cost of rcpuir of thc squcllky floors, rcpuir und replucelllent
of thc dumuged ClII'pct und kitchcn floor.
(i
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs demand judgment aguinst Steven Santiago,
individually, and Old Forge Homes, Inc., individually, jointly and sevel'Ully,
for a sum in excess of $5,000,00, together with intercsts and costs of suit,
DATE: J/~I f;7
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
~~~~)
Robtrt E. Mcnsel, Esquire
4775 Linglestown Roud, Ste. 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney 1.0.# 77410
Attol'llcys for Pluinliff
7
VERlF,CATION
I hereby verify that the statements in the forcgolng document are true and
correct, I understand that false statemcnts hercin are made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S. Sl'Ction 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authoritics.
Dated: 3-18-17
Y.IllUEJCAIION
I hereby verify that thc statements in the foregoing document are true and
correct. I understand that falsc statcments herein are made subjcct to the penalties
of 18 Pa,C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Da ted: .'J:::1.fl::.J.
_\\ lDJV\-L I ^ n. M1:4JinL
DIANU FRAMPTON
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON und
DIANE FRAMI'TON, his wife,
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY , PENNSYLVANIA
PllIinlifh,
NO. l)6.~7~() CIVil. TEltM
v.
STEVEN SANTIAGO und
OLD FORGE HOMES,INC"
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Defcndllnls.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing 2nd Amended
Complaint, has been duly servcd on the following this 2L day of March, 1997,
by placing the same In the U,S, First Class Mail, certified postage prepaid, at
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addrcsscd as follows:
Robert Peter Kline, Esquire
331 Drldge Streel, Suite 350
P,Q. Dox 46\
New Cumberlund. PA 17070-0461
\
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
DAm ?l~1 /11
Ro rt E, Mcnscl, Esquirc
4775 L1nglcstown Rond, Stc. 2011
Hunlshurg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Allorney I.D,# 7741 ()
Attorneys for Plnlntlrf
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON. his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
NO 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC,.
Defendants :
vs,
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
TO: The Carpel Mart, Incorporated
tiQlJli
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend agaln.t the claims set
forth In the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Answer
to Seconded Amended Complaint, New Matter, Cross-Claim and Counterclaim, and Notlca
are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing In writing
with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you, You are
warned that If you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be
entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed In the
Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or
property or other rights important to you,
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE, IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE yOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP,
Court Administrator
Cumberland Oounty Courthouae
Fourth Floor
Carllale, PA 17013
(7171240.8200
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
NO, 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants :
VB,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED, :
Additional Defendants :
NQDQE.IQ..fWQ
TO: CHRISTOPHER AND DIANE FRAMPTON, Plaintiffs
You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter and
Counterclaim within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a Judgment may be entered
against you,
Respectfully submitted,
I( AltLIL /qcf=!
Date
<--.; ~~J l2Xo~
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
;
ij
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
NO, 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
Defendants :
vs,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT,
~EW MATTj:R. CROSS.CLAI~AND COUNTjffiCLAIM
AND NOW, come the Defendants, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc.,
by their attorney, Robert Peter Kline, Esquire, and file the following answer to the
Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint:
COUNT~REACHO~TRACt
1, Admitted,
2. Admitted,
3, Denied, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Ino.
4, Denied, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc,
5, Admitted In part, denied In part, Old Forge Homes, Inc, was the general
contractor for the construction of a house at 6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanlcsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge
Homes, Inc,
6, Admitted in part, denied in part, It is admitted that Old Forge Homes, Inc, did
hold fee simple title to the premises at6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania prior to December 7, 1995. It is specifically denied
that Steven Santiago ever held fee simple title to said premises,
7. Admitted in part, denied in part, It is admitted that on December 7, 1995 Old
Forge Homes, Inc, did transfer title to the premises at 6102 Wallingford Way,
Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania to Christopher Frampton and Diane
Frampton, husband and wife, In fee simple title, It Is denied that Sleven Santiago ever
held title whatsoever in said premises and, consequently, did not transfer any title to said
premises to Mr. and Mrs, Frampton,
8. Admitted.
9, Admitted as to Old Forge Homes, Inc" specifically denied as to Steven
Santiago.
10, Defendants are without specific knowledge as to when Plaintiffs became
aware of any alleged defects to the premises and, to the extent that a response to this
paragraph is required, the allegation of this paragraph Is denied and proof is demanded,
Furthermore, it is specifically denied that any unevenness existed to the kitchen floor,
11, Admitted in part, denied In part, It Is admitted that the Plaintiffs brought
alleged defects to the attention of Defendant Steven Santiago, It Is further admitted that
Steven Santiago, In his capacity as an employee for Old Forge Homes, Inc" did agree to
take steps necessary to repair the squeaky floors, It Is specifically denied that there was
an unevenness to the kitchen fioor and that any repairs to the kitchen fioor were
necessary, or that Defendant agreed to take steps necessary to repair the kitchen fioor.
12, The allegation of this paragraph is a legal conclusion to which no response Is
required, To the extent that a response may be required, the allegation is denied and
proof Is demanded,
13. Denied, proof demanded,
14, Denied, proof demanded,
15. Denied, as no repair was nece8sary,
16, It Is admitted that Steven Santiago was an employee of Old Forge Homes,
Inc, The remaining allegations of this paragraph are a legal conclusion to which no
response is required, To the extent that a response may be required, the allegation Is
denied and proof Is demanded,
17, Denied, proof demanded,
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment in their favor and against Plelntlffs,
COUNT II. VIOLATION OF PENNSYLVANIA
C C
18, No response required.
19, Denied, On the contrary, this was a spec house which was complete with the
exception of the Installation of the carpet when Plaintiffs first Initiated an Interest In
purchaling the premlsel and, therefore. Plaintiffs purchased the property In the condition
In which it was found,
20, Denied, proof demantled,
21, Admitted In part, denied in part, It is admitted that, after the sale of the home
to the Plaintiffs, and at the request of the Plaintiffs, repairs to the squeaky fioors were
made, It Is specifically denied that these repairs were of Inferior quality.
22, Denied, proof demanded.
23, The allegation of this paragraph is a legal conclusion to which no response is
required, To the extent that a response is required. it is specifically denied.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against Plaintiffs,
24. No response required.
25. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
is required, To the extent that a response Is required, it Is specifically denied,
26. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required, To the extent that a response Is required, It is specifically denied,
27. The allegation of this paragraph is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required, To the extent that a response Is required, it Is specifically denied,
28, The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Is specifically denied,
29. Denied, On the contrary, Defendants did exercise reasonable care under all
of the circumstances Involved In the install allan of the floor and fioor coverings,
30, Denied, On the contrary, Defendants did exercise reasonable care under
all of the circumstances Involved in the Installation of the fioor and floor coverings,
Including the carpet.
31. Denied, proof demanded,
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs.
~
32, At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Steven Santiago was an
employee, and not a principal, of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
33, At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Steven Santiago acted in his
capacity as an employee and business manager of Old Forge Homes, Inc,
34. Plaintiffs have failed to allege that Defendant Steven Santiago exceeded the
scope of his employment with Old Forge Homes. Inc. or abused his position as an
employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc. and, therefore, Defendant Steven Santiago cannot
be held personally liable In the event of any Judgment against Old Forge Homes, Inc,
35, In the event that either Defendant Is found liable to the Plaintiffs In any way,
said liability is expressly limited to the costs of replacement of the small portion of
carpeting located on the landing at the top of the stairwell,
36, Plaintiffs have failed to allege damages In an amount that warrants a Jury trial
pursuant to the Local Rules (If the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County and,
therefore, this matter Is within the jurisdictional limits for arbitration,
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against Plaintiffs,
CROSS-CLAIM - STEVEN SANTIAGO AND
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC. VS. CARPET MART. ADDITtONAL DEFENDANT
37. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 36 are Incorporated herein
as If set forth In full,
36, Additional Defendant, The Carpet Mart, Incorporated, Is a Pennsylvania
corporation whose registered office Is located at 300 Green Ridge Street, Scranton,
Pennsylvania, and who maintain a place of business In Cumberland County located at
5103 Carlisle Pike, Mechanlcsburg, Hampden Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania,
39. The Carpet Mart, Incorporated was the subcontractor contracted with by Old
Forge Homes, Inc, for the Installation of all fioorlng and carpeting In this home,
expressly including Installation of the underlayment and vinyl floor In the kitchen and
all carpeting throughout the house.
40, In the event that Steven Santiago and/or Old Forge Homes, Inc, are found
liable to the Defendants In this matter, said liability Is a direct result of the actions of
The Carpet Mart, Incorporated In Its role as subcontractor, and, therefore, The Carpet
Mart, Incorporated, and not either of the named Defendants, are responsible for the
payment of any damages to the Plaintiffs,
WHEREFORE, In the event that this Honorable Court finds that the Plaintiffs are
entitled to award, said judgment shall be against The Carpet Mart, Incorporated and
not against either Steven Santiago or Old Forge Homes, Inc, Furthermore, In the
event that judgment is entered against Steven Santiago and/or Old Forge Homes, Inc"
Defendants respectfully request that Judgment be entered against The Carpet Mart,
Incorporated, Additional Defendant, In favor of Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes,
Inc, to the extent of any liability of Defendants to Plaintiffs,
COUNTERCLAIM
41. The allegations set forth In Paragraphs 1 through 40 are Incorporated herein
as If set forth In full.
42, All work performed by Old Forge Home, Inc, and by Steven Santiago on
behalf of Old Forge Homes, Inc. was performed In a professional and workmanlike
manner,
43, Old Forge Homes, Inc, and Steven Santiago on behalf of Old Forge Homes,
Inc, undertook reasonable efforts to correct any and all complaints made by the
Plaintiffs regarding the conditions of this house,
44. All Issues In regard to the squeaking fioor boards have been adequately
resolved,
45, Plaintiff. Diane Frampton, has admitted under oath that the squeaking
fioorboards have been adequately repaired.
46, There has been no damage whatsoever to the carpet that would adversely
affect Plaintiffs' warranty on said carpet.
47, Any alleged unevenness to the kitchen fioor was not present the Isst time
that Steven Santiago or any other representative of Old Forge Homes, Inc. inspected
the premises,
48, Plaintiffs have undertaken Improvements to their basement since acquiring
this property,
49, Said improvements may be the cause of any unevenness, if such
unevenness does, In fact, exist. Since the date of settlement, the carpet throughout
the house has been damaged and/or soiled as a result of the Plaintiffs' pets,
50, There does not exist any basis whatsoever, either In fact or at law, with the
possible exception of the issue raised In Paragraph No, 35 of the New Matter herein, to
holding either Defendant liable to Plaintiffs as to any of the allegations made In the
Plaintiffs' Complaint.
51, Plaintiffs' Complaint is a frivolous cause of action flied solely for the purpose
of extorting a sum of money from the Defendants for damages which, If in fact they do
exist. have resulted from Plaintiffs' own actions or from the actions of Plaintiffs' pets,
Such action by the Plainllffs Is an abuse of the legal process and Justifies the awarding
of legal fees and costs to the Defendants.
52 Defendants have Incurred and will continue to incur legal expenses and
COlts in defending this action until a final resolution Is made,
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs, together with an award of attorneys fees and costs.
Respeclfully submitted,
/1 At-l-,'( 1't9{
DATE
~Ir
"",,-=-e
R BERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
~
I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs' Second
Amended Complaint and New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false
statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa, C,S, Section 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
fit /11
Oat
~
I verify that the statements made In the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs' Second
Amended Complaint and New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false
statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S, Section 4904 relating to
unswom falsification to authorities.
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC,
L-fJ0/i7
Date
By:
<:.-
, ~Ir, fyG,J.e,., -
I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Answer to Plaintiffs'
Second Amended Complaint, New Matter, Cross-Claim and Counterclaim upon Plaintiff, by
depositing same In the United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid on the J \ T \\ day
of ~~ \ , 1997, from New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, addressed as
follows:
Robert E. Mensal, Esquire
4775 Unglestown Road, Suite 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
Attorney (or Plaintiff
-
,
Roa RT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Streat, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumbertand, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
i~
..,.. (., ."
t~; - l>._
j' lO, !...:'"
\1 J t' ~ ..:! .,1
l)"" -'
~~ " .
. I
','
&j~' ;'1
'f)
J (. .~H!
[';':\' 1..;-
F. M.' ,.:
t.I. r- .J
U ". f..)
.tllI\l!
CHRISTOPHER FHAMIYI'ON amI
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
IN THE COlJln OF COMMON I'WAS
CUMlIElUAND COUNTY, I'I:NNSYI.VANIA
Plaintiffs,
NO. %-5750 CIVIL TEHM
v,
STINEN SANTIAGO and
OlD FOHGE HOMES, INC.,
CIVil. ACTION - lAW
Defendants.
JlIHY THIAI. DEMANDI:D
AND NOW, come the plaintIffs, Christopher Frampton and Diane
Frampton, by their attorneys, Wilt, Freeburn & Mensel and me the
following reply to new matter, answer to cross-claim and answer to
counterclaim:
32. Denied that Steven SantIago was an employee of Old Forge
Homes, Inc. for purposes of shielding himself from personalllabl1lty for the
matters asserted In plaintIffs' complaint. Old Forge Homes, Inc. Is the
alter-ego of Steven SantIago for purposes of that liabIlIty.
33. DenIed that Steven SantIago was an employee of Old Forge
Homes, Inc. for purposes of shIelding hImself from personalllabl1lty for the
matters asserted In plaintIffs' complaint. Old Forge Homes, Inc, Is the
alter-ego of Steven SantIago Ii.ll' purposes of that liabIlIty.
34. This parugraph asserts a legal conclusion to which no reply Is
required. To the extent that It asserts a factual positIon, plaintiff denies
that the limitatIons of thc scopc of Stcven SantIago's cmployment, or the
abuse of his position are relevant or necessary In order to establish his
personal liability under the counts of the complaint.
35. Denied that liability Is so limited; rather, defendant Is liable for
the full cost of the repairs to the 1100rs In all of the bedrooms and In the
kitchen, Including replacement of any 11001' coverings destroyed by the
repair to the underl1oor,
36, Admitted that the matter Is within the Jurisdictional lImIts for
arbitration.
37,-40. These paragraphs do not pertain to plaintiffs, and
plaintIffs make no reply thereto.
41. The allegations set forth In paragraphs 1-40 are Incorporated
herein as If set forth In full.
42, Denied, It Is further asserted that the work performed by Old
Forge Homes, Inc. and Steven Santiago was performed negligently, and that
the house was left In a defective condition as a consequence of the poor
quality of defendants' work, and that defendants' faIlure to remedy the
defective condition of the premises constitutes consumer fraud,
43, Admitted that Steven Santiago made sOllle efforts to correct
some of the complaints Illade by the plaintiffs regardlllg the condition of
the house. Denied that he made reasonable errorts to correct any and all
such complaints,
44. Denied that the squeaking 11001' boards have been .ldequiltely
repaired. It Is ilsserled on the contrary that Ihe !loor boards continue 10
squeak loudly, and that counter-claimant Is fully aware of the squeaking of
the 11001' boards,
')
45. Denied that Diane Frampton has admitted under oath that the
squeaking floor boards have been adequately repaired, It Is rather
asserted that the conditIon has not been repaired, that Mrs, Frampton has
been aware aU along that the condition has not been repaired, and that she
did not make any such statement. Admitted that Mrs. Frampton testIfIed
that some of the squeaking floorboards were repaired.
46. Admitted that the warranty on plaintiffs' carpet remains In
place.
47. Denied that the unevenness In the kitchen floor was not
present the last time Steven SantIago or any other representatIve of Old
Forge Homes, Inc. Inspected the premises, In fact, counterclalmant Steven
Santiago was present at the premises on April 21, 1997, when the
unevenness In the kitchen floor was palpable, and Mr. Santiago saw the
uneven floor and touched It, and acknowledged Its condition.
48. Admitted that plaintiffs have undertaken Improvements to
their basement since acquiring this property.
49. Denied that such Improvements Illay be the cause of any
unevenness In the kitchen floor. Denied that the carpet throughout the
house has been damaged or soiled In any way relevant to this litIgatIon as
a result of any Incidents Involving plaintIffs' pets.
50. This paragraph asserts a conclusion of law to which no reply is
required, To the exlentthat it asserts facts contrary to those aUeged by
the plaintiffs, It Is explIcitly denied. The facw set forth In plaintiffs'
complaint provide hoth a factual and legal basis for recovery of damages
by the plalntlffs.
'~
51. Denied that the claim asserted by plaintiffs Is frivolous, and It
Is explIcitly denied that It was l1Ied solely for the purpose of extorting a
sum of money from the defendants, Denied that the damages to the
plaintiffs' home resulted from the plaintIffs' own actions or from the
actIons of plaintIffs' pets. Denied that the actIon Is an ahuse of legal
process. Denied that It Justifies the awarding of legal fees and costs to the
defendants. Further, this paragraph Is scurrilous and Improper and should
be stricken by the Court.
52, It Is admitted that defendants have Incurred and wIll continue
to incur legal expenses and costs In defending this action until a final
resolution Is made.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs demand judgment In their favor and against
defendants, together with an award of attorneys' fees and costs, on the
counterclaim asserted by defendants In this action.
I
I
I
I
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
~
,// .n{J~
pt>bert E, Mensel, Esquire
Attorney !.D. II 77410
4775 LInglestown Rami, Suite 200
Harrisburg, P A 17112
(717) 671-1955
Date: t.i/3 0/17
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
4
4-30-18Sl7 ~ I 4' AI-l
FROM MEM. INVEST. SERVICES 717 777 2497
P. ,
~
1 h~1 verily thaI the *tlnnentf In tIw fortSOlfta cIocumenl .... In.. and
co"...I. I uncImland thaI ,aIM .tatemerlla herein are made .ubJect to tI\t pmaltS..
of 18 PCIoCS. s.ction .~ relatlnS to UlUWom fllklflcatIon to IUthorltiet.
Dated: 'I" .31). "-7
II
_.n"
717 777 un
04-30-U7 02'48PN POOl hl3
,
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing reply to new
matter, answer to counter-claim and answer \0 cross-claim, has bccn duly served on
the following this 30 day of April, 1997, by placing the same In the V,S. First
Class Mall, certified postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as
follows:
Hobert Peter Kline, Esquire
331 IJrldge Street, Suite 350
P.O, Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461 ~
Respectfully submitted,
WILT, FREEBURN & MENSEL
DAm ~(t,uh1
R ert E. Mensel, 'squlre
4 75 L1nglestown Road, Ste.lOO
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney 1.0,# 77410
Attorneys for Plaintiff
(1
,
>- 1:" ;-
, ,.,
. -
, .. , ,1'
UJ1 .-
, '.
("II 'l~
Ii' , l ,'"
Ll' :J
..~.
(,1 ,
, " ::'t
l. ,
I ....~
\l. ,....
l I c'" U
Office of the Sheriff
JOHN SZYMANSKI,SHERIFF
tAIU,V-:ANNAulllf>4ll . M"AN10N "I",..StlyAtiIA llJ',ql. ifl119filtHIlf
SHERIFF'S AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN
1. PLAINTIFF/SI
C1ffiISTOPlmn NUl IlIANE 1'IlANPTON
3 OEFENDANTISI
STEV~ SANTIAGO I~r AL
SERVEl"' NAME or INDIVIDUAL, COMPANV, CORP0I1AlI0N. ElC
.. TIlE CARI'ET lWlT, INCORP,
., 6 AODI1ESS ,Slreel or 11m, Ap..tmenl. Clly, Bo.o, Twp Slole ond ZIP Codel
AT 300 GIlEEN RIIlGE 81', SCIlA
2 COUI1T NUMBER
4 TVPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT
NOTICE, ANSlffllS, Nrn~ NATTEn I:.1'AL
CUmlEIHlIND COUNTY
TIt,ereby CERTIFY and RETURN thai I hove 0 hove pal.onolly bc"ed, 0 hove .e.ved Ihe pCI.on incholge, 0 have.e"eda per.on o',uil.
Ible age and discretlon thun IUlidlng 81 the defendant'. 116ual plar.a 01 abode, 0 have posted lhe above described property with the wrn 0'
tomplelnl delcrlbed on Ihe indIvidual. company. cotpmstion, ole ,at the address shown above or on the individual. company. corporetlon, etc.,
at Ihe add,e.. In.e'led below by handing 10 I PO'ling a TRUE AND ATTESTED COPY the,eol
Mho,eby certify and relurn NO SERVICE beCSUlB I am unAole to locale Ihe IndIvidual. company, corporation, etc., named .bovs.
5/2/97 NOT I'OUNll
Q. Add"" whet. ,etved lCunlpll'll'un/r Ii dllhl!8Ullhll1lhlll'rrllbOYl'I151ft'rl Uf Rf n IoplrlmNlt Nu C,ly. nUIO ''''Ill to Oaleol Setvice
11. Time
, 2. Nama .nd tllle ollndlVidu.1 ae"ed
, 3, Oe,cllpllon . Oa.pondent d8lclib.. Ihe indlVldu.1 'e"ed a. 'allOW'
o Mala
o tam.la
o WluleSkin
o alack Skin
o BlOwn Skin
0' Vellow Skin
o Bleck Han
[J Btown Hair
D Blond Ha"
D Rad Ho"
D O,ay ito"
o Wlule Ha"
o Bolding
014.20V,.
o 21 .35 V'a
o 36. 50 Vr.
051.65Vr.
D Ova. 65 Vra
o Unda, 5'
o 5'0". 5'3"
D 5'4" . 5'6"
D 5'9" . 6'0"
DOve, 6'
o Undel 100 Lba
D 100 . 130 Lb.
D 131 . 160 Lb.
D 161 .200 Lb..
o Ove' 200 L~I
o MuslAche
o aeard
'4 19G do lurlhel all..1 and daclale Ihallal11 a Depuly She. III In and lor the Counly 01 Lack.wanna, Slate III Penn.ylvanla, Ihat lam 8 fe.ldenl 01
lhe Counly and Slale aloleleld; Ihal I am ovel Ihe ega III 21 yea'a, Ihall .m duly qu.lilied unde, Ihe rula. 01 OUI cou,lllo maka .e,vlca
he,eunda" and Ihall .m nola pa.ly 10 Ihe within acllon
15 0 Allhe lima 01 .a"lce, Ihe aeid
n.Cn,".n. wa. not in Ihe AImed Service 01 the United Slatn
1 e ADVANCe coni: Blierlll
NOla'y Public
PAID IN FULL
2h,;W
,,~ I {I /
1..r II .' I'lI__J 1',.;1."--)
! '
2.00
PAIIl ] N nJU,
......
SO ANSWERS. JOHN SZYMANSKI. SHERIFF
Oe"ulY /~~L~.('r:L~_ itLI
HI C:IIAIlIl HAIlYCK] ;-
In The Court of Common Pleas ofCumberlund County, Pennsylvunlu
Christopher Frampton and Diane j"ialllpton. his wife
VS,
The Carpet Mart Incorporated
No, 96-5750 Civil Term 19_
Now, Apr. 14.
Lackawanna
19..2L, 1 SIIERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY.I'A do hmb)' deputlze Ihe Sherlrrof
CoUnl)' 10 neeule Ihll Wrll, Ihls delJulntlon being mnde nllhe requesl nnd rllk 01 Ihe Plnlnllrr.
~~~rl-t" ...,Jo"{..t
'T ~~ - ol' t: .,:.~i:f'~
SherlITofCumberlnnd CoUnl)', Pn.
Affidavit of Service
Now,
wllhln
upon
DI
by hlndlDlIlo
IlIesled tOpy nf Ihe Drllllnnl
Ihe eonlenlllhereof.
19
,nl
o'dock
M,sernd Ihe
Ilrue nnd
nnd mnde known IU
So Dnswen,
-
Sherlrr 01
Counl)', r..
COSTS
Sworn umlsubstrllled helore
lIIe 11111 duy ul
'''-
SI,fWIct:
MILI:AliE
AHIIlAVIT
s
s
~^""~
Inlh~ Cllurlllr Cummun l'l~us or
CUlllhcrlnnd Counly, r~nns)'lvunlu
va,
Nu, ~_ $ 9so
Civil. 19
~"""liLD ~ C)c..t::.-F'antr.E \4.-.~
v!..
"i~... Cc."'1Iq,l- w...M- :r",~........~
B't'aL"'~ ~bk +\..~ ~~ -i,._1'I~
C4~>r \Je...J 'I/Jo-....~~ ~_ C<U:s1.L~",", ~ "'-~
~~"u~
;
To
PnllhuoUUlIY
~ :\~
l\Jq~
~l f7~O "0
Allurnc~ ror I'tuImlff ~~.Q ft ~
,I
... .
.
... "'''...
'-
.
\.
FI' f:,~ ,,:,-,.-,,:
. ~ " ....,>,.\...., I ",
C/o 'i',", '., i '';''LiTtl)",
.-".1
Nil.
Tenn, t9 _
('7 IJI" ' ,.
.. '.'C' -' .':: I (]I
\.' ,- '- ! il : .1.1
VI,
~\.l"
(i6\j-r'l:l"';\'-", ., i
u, _.. *'F'\
PRAECIPE
Filed
19_
. Auy.
;J
....
.
.
.-:--
SH~:llI FF' S IUTUIIN - Il~UUI.AH
CMjI.: Nil' I ')oJ'" '1IJ~;'/!11lJ P
Cl)I1I1l)NW~:^, ,'I'll IlF 1'1':NN!.m.V AN I A I
ClllIN'fY IW ClJI1Hl':IlI.AND
1.'IIMI'TIlN CIIIl (t; 1.;'1' AI.
VH.
1l1.1) Vllrm~: Blll1~:t; (NC
HR(AN BARIl(CK
, Sheriff or D~puty ~h&riff of
CUI1DElll.AND County, Pennsylvania, who being duly svorn according
to law, says, the within PLTFF' S H~:COND ^11~;ND~:D COI1PI. WI8 served
upon C/jRI'I\T I1ART (NCOllPllIlATED TII~; the
defQndant, at 1;Z1~ BlJURS, on the ...11h day of June
I Y'3'l_ at ~H0:l CAIlI,Il:;t.~; f' IKE
111':CIIANJCSIJI,!!m" PA 17055
County, Pennsylvan1.a, by hand1.ng to PIIJ\.LIP
. CUI1DEHl,ANll
NICOZISIEi. O~Nl':HAI.
I1^"W;~:R
a t.rue and a t tasted .:opy of the PI.T!'!' , S EiECONP AI1~:NPEI) COI1PI.
together with tlIJ'f'(l;~:, I'I.A INTlFF'!:; 1l~:I'I. y TIJ N~;W MATT~:, AtH,WI':R TV
CllIlt;B 'CI.A II1, ANf>W~:R TIl l;IIIINn:R CI.A 111 ANI) ANt;W~:R
and at th~ sam" ttm" dir""ting IHIl at.lrml.1.on 1", thl! nont.~nts t.hlPn"'t',
.
..J
Shnriff's Costsl
Do"klft 1.ng
H~rvi'Je
Affidavit
Surcharge
tH,~~
'/,41
.00
2.00
lio anllVarSI /~v.d
r<~"~ ~
11. Thomas Kline, Sher
IlODEllT KLnn:1Ot~1
06/05/1997 ~.
by _ ~ '
epu y . er
f'7.'I. 44
!iv',rn and subscribed to blPfore me
th is 5 day of \-1... ,
~
1'3 en A. D.
L),t<. C )}u.if......- ~.
'f"; Prothonotary t
CHRISTOIJHER FRAMI'TON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintifi's
: IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, IJENNSYL VANIA
VB,
: NO, 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
I NCORPORA TED,
Additional Defendants :
PRQf;1\
AND NOW. this
day of
, 19_, upon
consideration of the Preliminary Objections of Additional Defendsnt, Carpet Mart, Incorporated.
to the Complaint ofDefendant, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" and Defendant's
Answer thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the said Preliminary Objeclions are sustained and
the Complaint of Defendant, Sleven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" is stricken as to
Additional Defendant, Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
J,
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plalntins
: IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMOElU.AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO, 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.,
Delcndants
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
vs,
TIlE CARPET MART,
INCORI)ORA TED,
Additional Delcndants :
ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
TO 1>t:EENI)(\NT'S CROSS CLAIM
Additional Defendant, The Carpet Martlncorporaled, by Its counsel, preliminarily objects
to defendant's cross claim as follows:
MOTION TO STIUKE 0I1F COI\WLAINT FOR
1
I, Defendantliled a cross claim a!!ainstthe mavin!! party and made several averments of
fact which appear nowhere else in the record,
2, I)a, R,C.II, 1024(a) requires that any pleading containing an averment of fact be
verlt1ed,
3. The document contalninllthe cross claim Includes a verification of the Answer to
Plalnlln's Second Amended Complaint and New Maller, but docs nOlinc1ude a verification of the
Cross Claim.
4. The cross claim has not been veril1ed by the delcndanl or anyone else,
5, As the cross c1ahl1is nol veril1ed as required by Ila, RC.P, 1024(a), It must be stricken,
Wherelbre, delcndanl respcctl\iliy requeslsthat plalnlln's complaint be stricken,
6, The cross claim allellcs thai Ihe defcndant and thc additional defendant entered Into a
contract for the installation oflloorlng and carpctlrlll in the plaintiffs' home and that the additional
defendant Is responsible lor paymcnt of damallcs to lhe plalntifl's,
7, The complaint docs not set forth the terms of the allelled contract.
8. The cross claim fails to setlorth the basis lor the additional defendant being liable to
the plalntltr
9, The cross claim fails to setlbrth which Ifany of the plaintitl's' claims against the
defendant can be altrlbuled to the additional defendant.
10, The cross claim lacks sufllcientspectncity to apprise additional delimdant of the Issues
to be litigated and to allow it to adequately prepare and assert defenses to defendants' allegations,
Wherefore, additional defendant respectfully requests that this court order defendant to more
specll1cally plead the avermellls of his cross claim
Respectfully submitted,
,;l I' , /1.
AlIroll D. Parlle.., E'qlllre
Altomey LO No, 58793
!br KllIg 81 PlIrne.
Allorneys Ibr Plaintiff
17 South Market Square, Suite 310
IlBrrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101
(717) 232.7300
Date: June 30, 1997
.' ,
~JUL 0 2 1997', 1 f
,
CHRIST0I1lmR FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wifc,
Plainllfi's
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMUERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO, 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD fORGE HOMES, INC"
Dcfcndants
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
I NCORPORA TED,
Additional Defcndants :
QB.I!Jill
AND NOW, this
day of
, t9_, upon
consideration ofthc Preliminary ObJcctions of Additional Dcfcndant, Carpct Mart, Incorporated,
to the Complaint ofDefcndant, Stcvcn Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" and Defendant's
Answer thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the sal~ Preliminary Objections are sustained and
the Complaint ofDefcndanl, Stcvcn Santiago and Old Forgc Homcs, Inc., is strlckcn as to
Additional Defcndant, Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
J.
..
.'
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON alld
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
PlaintilTs
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO, 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants
.
t
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
OImEJ~
AND NOW, this
day of
, t9_, upon
consideration ofthe Preliminary Objections of Additional Defendant, Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
to the Complaint of Defendant, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc., and Defendant's
Answer thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the said Preliminary Objections arc sustained and
the Complaint of Defendant, Sleven Sal\llago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" is stricken as to
Additional Defendant, Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
J.
~
"\ ,.
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON nnd
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
vs,
: NO, 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendallls
vs,
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
"
ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
TO DEFENDANT'S CROSS CLAIM
Addltlona,l Defendant, The Carpet Mart Incorporated. by its counsel, preliminarily objects
to defendant's cross claim as follows:
MOTION TO STRIKE OJ~J~ COMI'LAINT FOn
l"IQNCONFQnMANCE TO PA,R,C.I', 1024
I. Defendant /lied a cross claim a!!alnst the movin!! party and made several nverments of
fact which appear nowhere else In the record.
2. Pa. R.C.P. 1024(a) requires thntany pleading containing an averment off act be
verified,
3. The document contalnin!!the cross claim Includes n verification of the Answer to
Plalntlll's Second Amended Complaint and New Maller, but docs not include a verification of the
Cross Claim.
4. The cross claim has not been verified by the defendant or nnynne else,
5, As the cross cJahnls not verilled as rcqulred by Pa, R,C,P, I024(a),lt must be stricken,
Wherefore, defendant respectfully requests that plaillllll's complaint be stricken,
,
""~ . .-
~ I'OI! Mont: S\'F.CWIC \'U;~J>JM.G
6, The cross claim alleges that the defendant and the additional defendant entered into a
contract for the installation of noorlng and carpeting in the plaintllls' home alld that the additional
defendant is responsible for payment of damages to the plaintlfi's,
7, The complaint does not set forth the terms of the alleged contrac,t,
8, The cross claim fails to set forth the basis for the additional defendant being liable to
the plalntlft', . ,
9, The cross claim fails to setlbrth which ifany of the plaintills' claims against the
defendant can be attributed to the additional defendant.
10, The cross claim lacks sulllcient specificity to apprise additional defendant ofthe issues
to be litigated and to allow It to adequately prepare and assert defenses to defendants' allegations,
Wherefore, additional defendant respectfully requests thai this court order defendant to more
specifically plead the averments of his cross claim,
Respectfully sub milled.
~ /" A---
Aaron D. Parnu., Elqulre
Attorney 1.0, No, 58793
tor King & Parnes
AttorneYI for PlalntilT
17 Soulh Market Square, Suite 310
Harrisburg, l'ennBylvlInl1l 17\ 0 I
(717) 232.7300
Date: June 30, 1991
:-e
(#JUL 0 2 1997
. .
,
~
~
,
CHlUSTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintifls
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ,
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
: NO, 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
'1
J
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants
'.
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
,.
I"
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
.
Additional Defendants :
ORDER
AND NQW,this
day of
,19_, upon
consideration of the Preliminary Objections of Additional Defendant, ,Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
to the Complaint of Defendant, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc., and Defendant's
Answer thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the said Preliminary Objections are sustained and
the Complaint ofDefendant, Stevcn Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc,. Is stricken as to
Additional Defendant, Carpet Mart, Incorpontted,
J.
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintil1's
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
: NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
.
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW,
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
ADDITIONAL DEIIENDANT'S I'RELIMINAllV OBJECTIONS
:rQ DEn~DANT'S CROSS CI.AII\1
Additlona,1 Defendant, The Carpet Mart Incorporated, by ita counael, preliminarily objects
to defendant's cross claim as follows:
MOTION TO STRIKE OFII COMI'LAINT FOIl
I. Defendant filed a cross claim allainst the movinll party and made several averments of
fact which appear nowhere else in the record,
2. Pa, R,C,P, 1024(a) requires that any pleadinll cOlltaininll an avermelll offact be
verified,
3, The document containinllthe cross claim includes a verilicalion of the Answer to
Plaintlll's Second Amended Complaint and New Malter, but docs not include a verification of tho
Cross Claim,
4, Tho cross claim has not been verified by the del'endant 01' anyone else,
5, As the cross claim is not verified as required by Pa, ItC-P, 1024(a),1I mUlt be stricken,
Wherefore, defendant respectfully requests that plaintin's cOll1plalnt be stricken,
.
,
.-
,
MOTlQN )Ion MOIU\ SI'EGIFIC I'LMDlN{!
6. The cross claim alleges that the defendant and the additional defendant entered into a
contract for the inslallatlon of Oooring and carpeting in the plaintiffs' home and that the additional
defendant Is responsible for payment of damages to the plaintit1's,
7, The complaint does not set forth the terms of the alleged conlract.
8, The cross claim filils 10 sellorth the basis lor the additional defendanl bcing Iiablc to
the plainlin~
9, The cross claim fails to set forth which ifany of the plaintil1's' claims against the
defendant can be attributed to the additional defendallt.
10. The cross claim lacks suOicient spcciflcity to apprise additional defendant of the issues
to be litigated alld to allow It to adequately prcpare and assert defenses to defendants' allegations.
Wherefore, additional defendant respectfully requests that this court ordcr defendant to more
speciflcally plead the averments of his cross claim,
Respectfully submittcd,
.Jl I' , /1
AlIron D. Parnes., Esquire
Altorncy /.0, No, 58793
for King & Parnes
Altorneys for Plainlit1.
17 South Markct Squarc, Suite 310
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101
(717) 232.7300
Date: June 30. 1997
I
I
I
I
j
j
I
!
_..
,-
.~
~
\
,~
.
-
.
.
'.
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
.'
@JUL 0 2 1997
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
: NO, 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants
vs.
Additional Defendants :
. "
: ',t ..
~ " , ,
t.. '".' .
. ' -,"
I.
'. ...
I _'
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
, .... .
OItDER
AND NOW, this
day of
,19_, upon
consideration of the Preliminary Objections of Additional Defendant, ,Carpet Mart, Incorporated,
to the Complaint of Defendant, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" and Defendant's
Answer thereto, It Is hereby ORDERED that the said Preliminary Objections are sustained and
the Complaint of Defendant, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Inc" Is stricken as to
Additional Defendant, Cnrpet Mart, Incorpornted,
J,
\
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMllERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO. 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC,
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION.. tAW
vs,
.
THE CARPET MART,
INCOIlPORA TED,
Additional Defendantl :
ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
TO OEFEN()ANT'S CROSS CLAW
Additional Defendant, The Carpel Mart Incorporated, by Itl counsel, preliminarily objects
to defendant'l cross claim al fbllows:
MOTION TO STIUKE 01111 COMI'LAINT FOn
, 1. Defendant filed a croll claim allainstthe lIIovlnll party and lIIade several averments of
fact which appear nowhere else in the record, , ,
2, Pa. R.CI', 1024(a) requires that any pleadinll cOlllainlllll an averment offact be
verified,
3, The documelll containinllthe croS8 claim Includes a veril1callon of the Answer to
11laintilfl Second Amended Complaint and New Matter, but does not Include a verificatloll of the
Croll Claim,
4. The cross clah" has not been veril1ed by the defendalll or anyone else,
S, As the croll claim is not veril1cd as required by Ila ltCI', I024(a),lt must be stricken:
Wherefore, defendant respectfully requests that plalntlll's complaint be stricken
,....
.
,
, .
MOTION 11QI~ MOI~E SPECIFIC PLEADING
6. The cross claim alleges that the defendant and the additional defendant entered into a
contract for the installation offloodng and carpeting in the plaintiffs' home and that the additional
defendant is responsible for payment of damages to the plaintifl's,
7. The complaint does not setlorth the terms of the alleged contract.
8. The cross claim fails to set forth the basis for the additional defendant being liable to
the plaintlfi',
9, The cross claim fails to set forth which ifany of the plaintifl's' claims against the
defendant can be attributed to the additional defendant,
10. The cross claim lacks sufliclent specificity to apprise additional defendant of the issues
to be litigated and to allow it to adequately prepare and assert defenses to defcndants' allcgations,
Whereforc, additional dcfendant respcctfully rcqucsts that this court order defendant to l\IOre
specifically plead the avcrments of his cross claim,
Respectfully submittcd,
tf( /J , /l
Aaron D. Parnes" Esqnlre
Attorney I.D, No, 58793
for King & Parnes
Attorneys for Plaintiff
17 South Market Square, Suitc 310
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101
(717) 232.7300
Dale: JUlie 30, 1997
..
-j~
i
I
I
\
..
"'.
.
.
,
.,
, .
<t. ..
CIiIUSTOI'HHR FllAMI'TON and
DIANE FRAMI'TON, his wife,
Plalntlfi's
: IN THH COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO, 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC"
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
vs,
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
I, Aaron 0, Parnes, Esquire. Attorney for additional defendant, The Carpet Mart,
Incorporated, hereby certitY that on July 10, 1997,1 caused to be served a true and correct copy
of Additional Defendant'. Preliminary Objections to Defendant's Croll Clnlm and proposed
Order, by depositing same In the United States Mall, first.c1ass postage prepaid to the following:
Robert Peter Kline, Esquire
33 I Bridge Street. Suite 350 -AND-
1',0, Box46t
New Cumberland, PA 17070.046 I
(Attorney for Defendant)
Robert Ii Mensel, Esquire
4775 L1nglestown Road, Suite 200
HBG PA 17112
(Attorney for Plalntill)
,"'- ,.,. ~
Aaron D. Parnes, Esquire
Altorney 1.0, No, 58793
King & Parnes
17 South market Square, Suite 3 10
Harrisburg, P A 17101
(717) 232.7300
Altorney tor Additional Defendant
,
."':--
CIIRISTOPIIER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
PlaintilTs
: IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
: NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOML'S, INC.,
l)ef~1 ,Jwlts
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
vs,
THE CARPET MART,INCOPORA TED,
Additional nefendant
VEIllfICA TION
I verifY that the statements made in the Answer to Plaintiffs' Second Ameuded COlll111111111. Nc\
Matter, Cross-Clahn and Counterclahn filed of record at the above tenll and number oil April II. 1997
alld reinstated on June 2, 1997, a copy of which Is attached, are true and correct.
.~
I wlderstand that fulse statemenls herein are made su to th naltles of 18 I)n, ('.S, SCI.'Iilll
4904 relating to unswom fnlslficatlon to authuritles.
. J~\"f.J-8.\\~,U
Dnle
.
._.,--_...~---~._- --..__..---
STEVEN SANTIAGO
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC,
-
..' ..J. u. ''f. ,g~L 1 q~1__.
nilte
",.
il
~:
Y'
.... ca .,..
Ir .;j I.-
~.." .'"
I' t~ j,j);'
I~f,-" ,/ rl'
~ :<.';
C; t:C '~r;
ft.., -18
91
C' ,"'1
Ilf ~I .l.:~"
j 1,;:
fi.l' 1:) , 'if',)
I' ~ 'I t1.
..
lS ,- a
11'
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
NO. 96.6750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC., :
Defendants :
vs.
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants :
TO: The Carpet Mart, Incorporated
liQJJ..Q..g
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set
forth In the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Answer
to Seconded Amended Complaint, New Matter, Cross.Claim and Counterclaim, and Notice
are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing In writing
Wlth the Court your defenses or obJections to the claims set forth against you, You are
wamed that If you fall to do so the case may proceed without you and a Judgment may be
entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed In the
Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or
property or other rights Important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE, IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP,
Court Administrator
Cumberland County Courthouse
Fourth Floor rRUE COpy FROM RECOR
Carlisle. PA 17013 'n Tostlmonvwhereof, I hero unto set mv nd
(717) 240.6200 :ud Ihe 101 said ~{1~~ Carlisle, Pa.
11I1s..l day 0 ". 19 9
L
Prothonota
vs.
NO. 96-5750 CIVIL TERM
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC., :
Defendants :
vs.
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED, :
Additional Defendants :
ttQJICEJO eJ.EAD
TO: CHRISTOPHER AND DIANE FRAMPTON, Plaintiffs
You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter and
Counterclaim Wlthln twenty (20) days from service hereof or a Judgment may be entered
against you.
Respectfully submitted,
If Altl./L Iqq~
Date
C-Id3R-~-'-
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070.0461
(717) 770.2540
Attorney for Defendants
I
,
vs.
CIVIL ACTION. U\W
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON, his wife,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
NO. 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
STEVEN SANTIAGO and
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC., :
Defendants :
THE CARPET MART,
INCORPORATED,
Additional Defendants
AND NOW, come the Defendants, Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes, Ino"
by their attorney, Robert Peter Kline, Esquire, and file the following answer to the
Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint:
c
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3, Denied, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Ino,
4. Denied, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
6, Admitted in part, denied In part, Old Forge Homes, Inc. was the general
contractor for the construction of a house at 6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanlcsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Steven Santiago Is an employee of Old Forge
Homes, Inc.
6. Admitted in part, denied In part. It Is admitted that Old Forge Homes, Inc, did
hold fee simple title to the premises at 6102 Wallingford Way, Mechanlcsburg,
Cumberlsnd County, Pennsylvania prior to December 7, 1995. It is specifically denied
that Steven Santiago ever held fee simple title to said premises.
7. AdmiUed In part, denied In part. It Is admitted that on December 7,1995 Old
Forge Homes, Inc, did transfer title to the premises at6102 Wallingford Way,
Mechanlcsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania to Christopher Frampton and Diane
Frampton, husband and wife, In fee simple title. It Is denied that Steven Santiago ever
held title whatsoever In said premises and, consequently, did not transfer any title to said
premises to Mr. and Mrs. Frampton.
6. Admitted,
9. Admitted as to Old Forge Homes, Inc., specifically denied as to Steven
Santiago.
10. Defendants are without specific knowledge as to when Plaintiffs became
aware of any alleged defects to the premises and, to the extent that a response to this
paragraph Is required, the allegation of this paragraph Is denied and proof Is demanded.
Furthermore, It Is specifically denied that any unevenness existed to the kUchen fioor.
11. Admitted In part, denied in part, It Is admitted that the Plaintiffs brought
alleged defects to the attention of Defendant Steven Santiago. It Is further admitted that
Steven Santiago, In his capacity as an employee for Old Forge Homes, Inc" did agree to
take steps necessary to repair the squeaky fioors. It Is specifically denied that there was
an unevenness to the kitchen floor and that any repairs to the kitchen fioor were
necessary, or that Defendant agreed to take steps necessary to repair the kitchen fioor.
12. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response Is
required. To the ex1entthat a response may be required, the allegation Is denied and
proof Is demanded,
13. Denied, proof demanded.
14. Denied, proof demanded.
15. Denied, as no repair was necessary,
16. It Is admitted that Steven Santiago was an employee of Old Forge Homes,
Inc. The remaining allegations of this paragraph are a legal conclusion to which no
response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, the allegation Is
denied and proof Is demanded.
17. Denied, proof demanded.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment In their favor and against Plaintiffs.
u
18. No response required,
19. Denied. On the contrary, this was a spec house which was complete with the
exception of the Installation of the carpet when Plaintiffs first initiated an Interest In
purchasing the premises and. therefore, Plaintiffs purchased the property In the condition
In which It was found,
20. Denied, proof demanded.
21. Admitted in part, denied In part. It Is admitted that, after the sale of the home
to the Plaintiffs, and at the request of the Plaintiffs, repairs to the squeaky floors were
made. It is specifically denied that these repairs were of Inferior quality.
22, Denied, proof demanded.
23. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response Is
required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Is specifically denied.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment In their favor and against Plaintiffs.
CO
24. No response required.
25, The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Is specifically denied.
26. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Js required, It Is specifically denied.
27. The allegation of this paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Ie specifically denied,
28. The allegation of thl. paragraph Is a legal conclusion to which no response
Is required. To the extent that a response Is required, It Is specifically denied,
29. Denied. On the contrary, Defendants did exercise reasonable care under all
of the circumstances Involved In the Installation of the fioor and fioor coverings,
30, Denied, On the contrary, Defendants did exercise reasonable care under
all of the circumstances Involved In the Installation of the floor and floor coverings,
Including the carpet.
31. Denied, proof demanded.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs.
~
32. At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Steven Santiago was an
employee, and not a principal, of Old Forge Homes, Inc,
33. At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Steven Santiago acted in his
capacity as an employee and business manager of Old Forge Homes, Inc.
34, Plaintiffs have failed to allege that Defendant Steven Santiago exceeded the
scope of his employment with Old Forge Homes, Inc. or abused his position es an
employee of Old Forge Homes, Ino. and, therefore, Defendant Steven Santiago cannot
be held personally liable In the event of any Judgment against Old Forge Homes, Inc.
36. In the event that either Defendant Is found liable to the Plaintiffs In any way,
said liability Is expressly limited to the costs of replacement of the small portion of
carpeting located on the landing at the top of the stairwell.
36, Plaintiffs have failed to allege damages In an amount that warrants a Jury trial
pursuant to the Local Rules of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County and,
therefore, this matter Is within the Jurisdictional limits for arbitration.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand JUdgment In their favor and against Plaintiffs.
CROSS.CLAIM . STEVEN SANTIAGO AND
OLD FO~GE I1.QMES, INC, VB. CAI3f.E.T MART. ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT
37. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 36 are Incorporated herein
as If set forth In full.
38, Additional Defendant, The Carpet Mart, Incorporated, Is a Pennsylvania
corporation whose registered office Is located at 300 Green Ridge Street, Scranton,
Pennsylvania, and who maintain a place of business in Cumberland County located at
5103 Carlisle Pike, Mechanlcsburg, Hampden Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania,
39. The Carpet Mart, Incorporated was the subcontractor contracted with by Old
Forge Homes, Inc. for the Installation of all flooring and carpeting In this home,
expressly Including Installation of the underlayment and vinyl floor In the kitchen and
all carpeting throughout the house.
40. In the event that Steven Santiago and/or Old Forge Homes, Inc, are found
liable to the Defendants In this matter, said liability Is a direct result of the actions of
The Carpet Mart, Incorporated In Its role as subcontractor, and, therefore, The Carpet
Mart, Incorporated, and not either of the named Defendants, are responsible for the
payment of any damages to the Plaintiffs.
WHEREFORE, In the event that this Honorable Court finds that the Plaintiffs are
entitled to award, said Judgment shall be against The Carpet Mart, Incorporated and
not against either Steven Santiago or Old Forge Homes, Inc. Furthermore, In the
event that judgment Is entered against Steven Santiago and/or Old Forge Homes, Inc.,
Defendants respectfully request that JUdgment be entered against The Carpet Mart,
Incorporated, Additional Defendant, In favor of Steven Santiago and Old Forge Homes,
Inc, to the extent of any liability of Defendants to Plaintiffs.
QQ.Y.ID]BQbA!M
41. The allegations set forth In Paragraphs 1 through 40 are Incorporated herein
as If set forth In full.
42, All work performed by Old Forge Home, Inc. and by Steven Santiago on
behalf of Old Forge Homes, Inc. was performed In a professional and workmsnllke
manner.
43. Old Forge Homes, Inc. and steven Santiago on behalf of Old Forge Homes,
Ino. undertook reasonable efforts to correct any and all complaints made by the
Plaintiff. regarding the conditions of this house.
44. All Issues In regard to the squeaking floor boards have been adequately
resolved.
45. Plaintiff, Diane Frampton, has admitted under oath that the squeaking
floorboards have been adequately repaired,
the premises.
46. Plaintiffs have undertaken Improvements to their basement since acquiring
46, There has been no damage whatsoever to the carpet that would adversely
affect Plaintiffs' warranty on said carpet.
47. Any alleged unevenness to the kitchen floor was not presenl the last time
that Steven Santiago or any other representative of Old Forge Homes, Inc. inspected
lhls property.
49. Said Improvemenls may be the cause of any unevenness, If such
unevenness does, In fact, exist. Since the date of settlement, the carpet throughout
the house has been damaged and/or soiled as a result of the Plaintiffs' pels.
50. There does not exist any basis whatsoever, either In fact or at law, with the
possible exception of the Issue raised In Paragraph No. 35 of the New Matter herein, to
holding ellher Defendanl liable to Plaintiffs as to any of the allegations made In the
Plaintiffs' Complaint.
51, Plaintiffs' Complalnlls a frivolous cause of action filed solely for the purpose
of extorting a sum of money from the Defendants for damages which, if In fact they do
exist, have resulted from Plaintiffs' own actions or from the actions of Plaintiffs' pets.
Such action by the Plaintiffs is an abuse of the legal process and Justifies the awarding
of legal fees and costs to the Defendants.
52, Defendants have Incurred and will continue to Incur legal expenses and
.
costs In defending this action until a final resolution Is made.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand Judgment In their favor and against
Plaintiffs, together with an award of attorneys fees and costs.
Respectfully submitted,
II Apf...'l 1't9"?
DATE
~~
ff- 2J<Q~ ~e
R -BE~T PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attorney for Defendants
~
I verify that the statements made In the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs' Second
Amended Complaint and New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false
statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
fJt~J
Oat
~
I verify that the statements made In the foregoing Answer to Plelntlffs' Second
Amended Complaint and New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false
statements herein are mede subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S. Section 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
OLD FORGE HOMES, INC.
L1J 1/17
Date
By:
f~f
J
f
ggBTIFICATE O~~VICE
I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Answer to Plaintiffs'
Second Amended Complaint, New Matter, Cross.Clalm and Counterclaim upon Plaintiff, by
depositing same In the United States Mail, first class, postage pre.pald on the J \ T\"\ day
of ~ \ , 1997, from New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, addressed as
follows:
Robert E, Mensel, Esquire
4775 Unglestown Road, Suite 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
Attorney for Plaintiff
~ JJ2 t ~KQ'~
ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Post Office Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
(717) 770-2540
Attomey for Defendants
I hereby certifY that I served a true and correct copy of tile Verincation to the Answer to Plaintiffs
Second Amended Complaint, New Matter, Cross.Clahn and Cowlterclahll, upon the following persons
by depositing sallie in the United States Mall, first class, postage pre-paid on the 3oTli- day 0
_:ru.I..~
, 1997, from New Cumberland, Pennsylvania. addressed as follows:
Robert E. Mensel, Esquire
4175 L1nglestoWll Road, Suite 200
Harrisburg, P A 171 t 2
Attorney for Plaintiffs
Aaron D. Parnes, Esquire
King & Pames
17 S. Market Square, Suite 3tO
Harrisburg. P A 171 0 1
Attorney for Additional Defendant
~r~ ~
W~ Q · to
ROBERT PETER KLINE. dQUlRE
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
Posl Office BOll 461
New CWllberland, P A 17070-0461
(717) 770.2540
Attorney for Defendants
2r t~' '-
.., ..I r ;
I, ..
(..., ~~3
Uj"
(~"- t
\'
~j I;, .,-
, ,"
(;;'
.'1.1 {".
r;: ; , 1
""
r ~ .
,- 'J
II. 1-' , I
(; IT' U
CHRISTOPHER FRAMPTON and
DIANE FRAMPTON. his wife.
Plalnllffs
v.
STEVEN SANTIAOO and
OLD FOROE HOMES. INC..
Defendants
v.
THE CARPET MART INCORPORATED.
Additional Defendant
TO: Prothonotary
IN TIiE COURT Ol~ COMMON I'I.EAS
CUMOERLAND COUNlY. I'ENNSYINANIA
.
.
: NO. 96.5750 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - I.AW
PRAECIPE
Kindly mark the above-captioned action and all counterclaims,
crossclalms and Joinders settled, ended and discontinued.
By:
WILT "'{........lI81f fl
JL9:>:i
R1c lard E. Freeburn, Esquire
!.D. No. 30965
4775 Llnglestown Road. Suite 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671.1955
Attorney for PlalntllTs
By:~l~ ~~KC)'
Robert Peter l{1ine. Esquire
331 Bridge Street. Sulle 350
P.O. Box 461
New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461
Attorney for Defelldnnls
Dated: Cf. ~ - '1 ct
.. .
~i
.:~
:j
,/
j.;:
-.;,;
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Praecipe, has been duly served on the following this 4th day of
September, 1998, by placing the same In the U.S. First Class Mall,
postage prepaid. at Harrisburg. Penllsylvanla, addressed as follows:
Robert Peter Kline, Esquire
331 Bridge Street, Suite 350
P.O. Box 461
New Cumberland. PA 17070-0461
Aaron D. Parnes, Esquire
King & Parnes
17 S. Market Street, Suite 310
Harrisburg PA 17101
,
BY:
"< c d--
R1c~ard'-E. Freeburn, Esquire
Attorney I.D. #30965
WILT & FREEBURN
4775 Llnglestown Road, Suite 200
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 671-1955
Attorney for Plain tilTs
Dated: 9/4/98
. "
" l.l\ -:-
" .,
I ..
11'" 1.',1
.. ,
i~
, , "
:"
l
" I
,", ,
I'
(.'.
\...1
,