Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-01954 Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attomey J.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. Docket # 00-- /9sy Ctu~l~ CIVIL ACTION - LAW BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v. WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH Defendants ARBITRATION DEMANDED NOTICE 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 Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with this 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. CUMBERLAND County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 NOTICIA LE HAN DEMANDO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plaza al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrito e en persona 0 por obogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas 0 sus objectiones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus propiedades 0 ostros derechos importantes para usted. -.> o __~ __j' -. ,~, '- ,,' ~, "-''''''' . .'-y,. , "'-'''.' ~ > --~, ",,-""""1- - . ,~ ~ .-.~'-- - - ~. ~.-. -" ~ ~, .' - 1.-'''-- " ", ,e, , -,--...'~ fl.. , -', - , !II!- "'"' - -~ ._- ,-'... " "~ '~,- '-, . .-."', ,"-. CUMBERLAND County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP By: ~ Stephen Geduldig, Esquire 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 237-7119 .:"""--':-,,'-,.. "- - ,~, Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attomey I.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA /'J'.,-r~ NO. Docket # iHJ- jlrS1.f L.--UJ"'-'< BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v. WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants ARBITRATION DEMANDED COMPLAINT 1. Best Western Carlisle is an entity with offices located at 1245 Harrisburg Pike, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. CGU Insurance Group is an insurance company with offices located at P.O. Box 8851, Camp Hill, PA 17001. 3. Defendant Wesley Ankney is an adult residing at P.O. Box 341, New Kingston, Pennsylvania. 4. Defendant, Jamie Kough, is an adult residing at P.O. Box 341, New Kingston, Pennsylvania. 5. Best Western Carlisle was at all times in question the owner of a property located at 1245 Harrisburg Pike, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.. 6. At all times in question, said property was insured by CGU Insurance Group. , ~ -,<", q. -'", ..~--- - - ',_;)~,-r'",_:,~ '~.' <> '.-'-,C, ., ;~. ,'_ _/'~_ -:; "'I'" ., M" ~",", .l'''" _ _' :": """'"'. ',_~<:" ,'P, L ---,--,"~- - 7. On information and belief, Defendant, Wesley Ankney resided with Defendant, Jamie Kough, in the same household on February 13, 1999 and were tenants of the Plaintiff. 8. On February 13,1999, Defendants had possession and control of an efficiency apartment known as Room 106 on said property. 9. On February 13,1999, Defendant Wesley Ankney fell asleep on the sofa leaving the bread he had placed in the toaster exposed to the heating element which burned and subsequently ignited a fire. 10. The fire spread, requiring the fire department to respond to the scene in order to extinguish the fire. 11. As a result of the negligent, careless and reckless conduct of Defendants, there was smoke, fire and water damage to the premises occupied by Defendants and owned by the Plaintiff. COUNT I BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS. WESLEY ANKNEY 12. The averments of paragraphs 1-11 are incorporated herein and made a part hereof as set forth in full. 13. Defendant, Wesley Ankney was reckless, careless and negligent in the following manner: a. failing to take proper safety precautions to prevent the ignition of a fire; b. failing to exercise due care and caution in ascertaining that the electric cord was not extended at, over or near the top of the toaster, preventing the toaster mechanism from ejecting the toast; ,,'. "__,"".' .L,;_ ,<,:""_.,,,)~..- _," _,'""_'_'_" . _. "~__'.._'._Y "<Co '<, ", <- , .. .':'~'-'; -':-::"'l-'!O>~- .' 'F",_"'," - ," - ~~. ,_.n,.'." '-' ,_, c. falling to sleep and leaving the toaster unattended; d. failing to make sure that the area was safe and secure; e. failing to properly contain or extinguish the fire after it broke out; 14. As a result of the aforesaid negligent, reckless and careless conduct of Defendant, Plaintiffs were caused to incur expenses for the repair of the premises in the amount of Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04 ). COUNT II BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS. JAMIE KOUGH 15. The averments of paragraphs 1-14 are incorporated herein and made a part hereof as set forth in full. 16. Defendant, Jamie Kough was reckless, careless and negligent in the following manner: a. failing to take proper safety precautions to prevent the ignition of a fire; b. failing to exercise due care and caution in ascertaining that the electric cord was not extended at, over or near the top of the toaster preventing the toaster mechanism from ejecting the toast; c. falling to sleep and leaving the toaster unattended; d. failing to make sure that the area was safe and secure; e. failing to properly contain or extinguish the fire after it broke out; 17. As a result of the aforesaid negligent, reckless and careless conduct of Defendant, Plaintiffs were caused to incur expenses for the repair of the premises in the - ~'" "-"'0 _~ n_ amount of Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04 ). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Honorable Court enter judgment against Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04). costs. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: St hen E. Geduldig, Es ire 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 "'.--. '.- ".-,., . "..'- -,-- 5 VERIFICATION I, Vi F?iE.N.D f<-A.T' IV).E:...H-rf/- a Representative of Carlisle Best Western, " verify that the foregoing action and that the attached document is based upon the information which has been gathered by me, my counsel and/or others on my behalf in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is that of counsel and is not mine. I have read the document, and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I understand that intentional false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsifications made to authorities. Date: ;3 / I 5' ! oD D .MefJ7.f2 , ' ", -"- ',>'-" , SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2000-01954 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS ANKNEY WESLEY ET AL DAWN KELL ,Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT IN ARBITRATION was served upon ANKNEY WESLEY the DEFENDANT , at 0015:18 HOURS, on the 3rd day of April , 2000 at C/O KARL ROMINGER 155 SOUTH HANOVER ST CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to ATTORNEY KARL ROMINGER a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT IN ARBITRATION together with NOTICE and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Additional Comments SEE ATTACHED COPY OF ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE FORM. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge So Answers: 18.00 3.10 .00 10.00 .00 31.10 ~~~~ R. Thomas Kline 04/04/2000 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER Sworn and Subscribed to before By: ~a.W'n {. ~ Deputy Sheriff me this II ~ day of (Jf---<:~::uruv A.D. ~. {2 ~,~ rothonota:cy , . SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR . . CASE NO: 2000-01954 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS ANKNEY WESLEY ET AL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensyl vania , who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT IN ARBITRATION was served upon KOUGH JAIME the DEFENDANT I at 0015:18 HOURS, on the 3rd day of April , 2000 at C/o KARL ROMINGER 155 SOUTH HANOVER ST CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to ATTORNEY KARL ROMINGER a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT IN ARBITRATION together with NOTICE and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge So Answers: 6.00 .00 .00 10.00 .00 16.00 r~wt~~p R. Thomas Kline . 04/04/2000 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER Sworn and Subscribed to before By: ~~{,& Deputy Sheriff me this /1 f:!:::. day of D~ r2.mro ~. . () rv,,fI/;. rothonotary A.D. IA~~ "~ I; _,~~,""'" , ,.~, , I f'_'" ~ '--,-~ ~ J1J',,,,,,, 'T"" -~~ ~ ", , - J!lff. ~"""'1 ell~1 "_~_~" , '. ~fNill~ ,'!"",,~'1!~~!~1 6. Plaintiff, in its prayer for relief, asks for $43,292.04 as liquidated damages. 7. In its caption Plaintiff has stated "ARBITRATION DEMANDED." 8. The Plaintiff has improperly demanded arbitration and insomuch that Plaintiff has demanded arbitration and the amount in controversy is in excess of $25,000, the Complaint is not in compliance with the Cumberland County Rules of Court as read in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that this Court strike Plaintiffs Complaint for failure to substantially conform with the Cumberland County Rules of Court and the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Respectfully submitted, ?/~ /' Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Defendants ,.- . - ,.~ . "'"'-- VERIFICATION KARL E. ROMINGER, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, defendants in this action; that he makes this affidavit as attorney because he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Pa.C.S. ~4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: April 24, 2000 ~/ , Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for Defendants .-- -,. I,. . '-^-7""-_,0",_,. f-,"'","-'---""-"" ",,,,,," ,"'".' .. _ _ ,"" r, =,_._w , -~. " - ~ . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, attorney for Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, Defendants, do hereby certify that I this day served a copy of the Preliminary Objections upon the following by depositing same in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 ~~ Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for Defendants Dated: April 24, 2000 - ~ _: _",':""',,__~,,"_, '--'V-' ~._ -"::~ ~:'-T -. .",--"- - ,,-_.,=-.~.,. BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBIlRATION DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendant Wesley Ankney. Date: April 24, 2000 ,~'- ----- Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ill # 81924 . Vi"<'1'\='-H~_ -e,' -':"~__'-"''''''_:/"h,-"... ,,~"-1',"./- ~_, ""7', .,,-0__. ,-, - ,,_ >. ,__~ ,~,,'__ = ~."" " dO . BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendant Jamie Kough. Date: April 24, 2000 ~ Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ill # 81924 "" " ,-, T'P'~.1"'t"y,~,- ,_', ,- ',' ,,_, , ,,",' - ., _,__,<,\~"" --,,'-.r- . Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attomey J.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 Nortl1 Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Maii: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v. WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH NO. 00-1954 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Best Western Carlisle is an entity with offices located at 1245 Harrisburg Pike, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. CGU Insurance Group is an insurance company with offices located at P.O. Box 8851, Camp Hill, PA 17001. 3. Defendant Wesley Ankney is an adult residing at P.O. Box 341, New Kingston, Pennsylvania. 4. Defendant, Jamie Kough, is an adult residing at P.O. Box 341, New Kingston, Pennsylvania. 5. Best Western Carlisle was at all times in question the owner of a property located at 1245 Harrisburg Pike, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.. 6. At all times in question, said property was insured by CGU Insurance Group. - '-- ~, . , '_"""""".Y- -',h,,- ~,,' ., -< " .:',.:z,,,, "~~'="<;",~." _ _ '.'-.' ',"" """,..-,_ ,,~-_c~ - ." 7. On information and belief, Defendant, Wesley Ankney resided with Defendant, Jamie Kough, in the same household on February 13, 1999 and were tenants of the Plaintiff. 8. On February 13, 1999, Defendants had possession and control of an efficiency apartment known as Room 106 on said property. 9. On February 13, 1999, Defendant Wesley Ankney fell asleep on the sofa leaving the bread he had placed in the toaster exposed to the heating element which burned and subsequently ignited a fire. 10. The fire spread, requiring the fire department to respond to the scene in order to extinguish the fire. 11. As a result of the negligent, careless and reckless conduct of Defendants, there was smoke, fire and water damage to the premises occupied by Defendants and owned by the Plaintiff. COUNT I BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS. WESLEY ANKNEY 12. The averments of paragraphs 1-11 are incorporated herein and made a part hereof as set forth in full. 13. Defendant, Wesley Ankney was reckless, careless and negligent in the following manner: a. failing to take proper safety precautions to prevent the ignition of a fire; b. failing to exercise due care and caution in ascertaining that the electric cord was not extended at, over or near the top of the toaster, preventing the toaster mechanism from ejecting the toast; , ,~",. H~__" ,'" _0 ",. ~ """, __" ,,' ~_ ~"""O-:O-' ,',n ", ,'~ ,--<"- c. falling to sleep and leaving the toaster unattended; d. failing to make sure that the area was safe and secure; e. failing to properly contain or extinguish the fire after it broke out; 14. As a result of the aforesaid negligent, reckless and careless conduct of Defendant, Plaintiffs were caused to incur expenses for the repair of the premises in the amount of Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04 ). COUNT II BEST WESTERN CARLISLE VS. JAMIE KOUGH 15. The averments of paragraphs 1-14 are incorporated herein and made a part hereof as set forth in full. 16. Defendant, Jamie Kough was reckless, careless and negligent in the following manner: a. failing to take proper safety precautions to prevent the ignition of a fire; b. failing to exercise due care and caution in ascertaining that the electric cord was not extended at, over or near the top of the toaster preventing the toaster mechanism from ejecting the toast; c. falling to sleep and leaving the toaster unattended; d. failing to make sure that the area was safe and secure; e. failing to properly contain or extinguish the fire after it broke out; 17. As a result of the aforesaid negligent, reckless and careless conduct of Defendant, Plaintiffs were caused to incur expenses for the repair of the premises in the ,,,w,,,",,,r, -'<";,', "'--' ,^ ,-,P,~., ",._<,~._Y---~~'t'--.;:" "'i'm',."",'" - - -. ~ , ,u_~_~ 0 "'" _., _ _. '- .' _) .. amount of Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04 ). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Honorable Court enter judgment against Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Two Dollars and Four Cents ($43,292.04). costs. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: Ste en E. Geduldig, Esqui 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 ">-;'~_~"7"'-, - '_ '-~ ,_'_",e.., ,.. ~ ,,'^:\___Y,,'_'_" _'.',t-',..",,_,_-,,~_~' ,--' .' , '.' --~ .-. -.' ,"" ' - ~ . VERIFICATION \ I, V~. r-nr;H-rA-- a Representative of Carlisle Best Western, p verify that the foregoing action and that the attached document is based upon the information which has been gathered by me, my counsel and/or others on my behalf in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is that of counsel and is not mine. I have read the document, and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I understand that intentional false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. c.s. 94904 relating to unsworn falsifications made to authorities. Date: .5 /6L I tJD . a ~-t{) '-'-;--"'"." ,,,-,-,.,-,.. "'~.' "."-"~'" '. "' t.,~,_-",\,-::--:,,; ". "'-""'. .~ "-P'~"-""-^~--~".-."-' " ,"0 Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attomey J.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, NO. 00-1954 WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED I, Barbara A. Onorato, a Legal Assistant for the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Amended Complaint was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows, on the date set forth below: By First Class U.S. Mail: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 1701@ THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP ~().~ Barbara A. Onorato Dated: May 8,2000 . - '4__:~ ,i'~-.c..." - >,,,"'~,,~-, _ ,~,____,_,<_?" --^!' "'!, 'f'!/-"."",,,,,,o ,,_.,___ '"-,, ',_ ,,-' _, > _' __ _ - "'-"',_- .,~ ~ ",-' , .~ ,'" "c /'_ , .,,~ BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: BEST WESTERN CARLISLE You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed ANSWER, NEW MATTER and COUNTER-CLAIM of the Defendant, Wesley Ankney within twenty (20) days from the date of service hereof or a Default Judgment may be entered against you. "~~.-"--~ ,--' c---- BY: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Defendant Date: February 12, 2001 '1'1. --.- . BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CNIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER. NEW MATTER AND COUNTER-CLAIM AND NOW, this 12th day of February 2001 comes the Defendants, Wesley Ankney by and through his attorney, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, and files his Answer, New Matter and Counter- Claim to the Plaintiffs Complaint. In support thereof, Defendant avers as follows: I. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Defendant was without sufficient information to admit or deny this paragraph and therefore strict proof ofthe same is demanded at trial. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted so much as the Defendants resided there, however it is specifically denied that he had exclusive possession or control of room # 106, and it is averred that Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, also had control and possession of said premises. 9. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. ",' . - .""-.'~ 10. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is admitted that there was a fire but at this time Defendant is without sufficient information to determine how the fire proceeded. 11. Denied. By way of further answer it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. By way of further answer, strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. COUNT!. BEST WESTERN CARLISLE vs. WESLEY ANKEY 12. No answer is required. 13. (a). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (b). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (c). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (d). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (e). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. 14. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment against the Plaintiff. COUNT II. BEST WESTERN CARLISLE vs. JAMIE KOUGH "~- -.--'-" -~ "~ ~ -, .-f' 15. No answer is required. 16. (a). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflawwhich requires no answer. (b). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (c). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (d). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (e). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. 17. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment against the Plaintiff. NEW MATTER 18. Room #106 was part of the Best Western Carlisle complex. 19. Best Western Carlisle was contributorily negligent and/or comparatively negligent and/or totally negligent for the fire and fire damage insomuch as they: (a). Failed to provide smoke alarms and/or heat detectors. (b). Failed to provide sprinkler systems or fire extinguisher systems. (c). Failed to provide warning devices or other devices which would alert occupants of the room or in the neighboring vicinity of a heat source or an open flame. _c ,"" "-"" . (d). Provided the toaster in question which was defective and/or apparently defective. (e). Failed to properly service the toaster to insure that it operated safely and would not catch fire. (t). Failing to properly ground or fuse the kitchen electrical outlet or receptacle. (g). The cause of the fire was a defective toaster, which was provided by the Plaintiff for Defendant's use. 20. It is believed and therefore averred that part of the award sought by Plaintiff is related to duct cleaning which, upon information and belief, said cleaning was not related to the fire and/or at least in part represented normal hotel maintenance not proximately or in fact related to the fire. 21. Numerous personal items of Defendant, Wesley Ankney were destroyed or damaged by the fire. 22. Plaintiff has refused to compensate Defendant Ankney for said personalty. COUNTER-CLAIM 23. Previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference. 24. Defendant Ankey lost various personalty to fire from the heat, smoke, water and chemical damage including but not limited to: (a). Various boxed goods, canned goods, cookies, meats, frozen foods, cereals and the like which were stored in the kitchen and the refrigderator. (b). Paper plates, plastic knives, spoons, forks, paper towels, paper cups, plastic bowels, napkins and the like. , , .~ (c). A Sharp II Carousel Microwave oven. (d). A can opener. (e). One frying pan and two saucepans. (t). An oil painting and a frame which was hung in the living room and was smoke damaged. (g). Various home electronic devices were damaged including a Nintendo and compact discs. (h). Various clothes and personal effects were smoke damaged. 25. The toaster which ignited was provided by Plaintiff for Defendant's use. 26. Plaintiff provided a defective toaster. 27. It is believed that Plaintifffailed to properly service said toaster and/or maintain it in good working order. 28. Plaintiff's negligence caused the destruction and damage of Defendant' s property. 29. Plaintiff was negligent in that Plaintiff: a). Failed to provide smoke alanns and/or heat detectors. (b). Failed to provide sprinkler systems or fire extinguisher systems. (c). Failed to provide warning devices or other devices which would alert occupants of the room or neighboring vicinity of a heat source or an open flame. (d). Provided the toaster in question which was defective and/or apparently defective. (e). Failed to properly service the toaster to insure that it operated safely and would not catch fire. "'"'^ " (t). Failing to properly ground or fuse the kitchen electrical outlet or receptacle. (g). The cause of the fire was a defective toaster, which was provided by Plaintiff for Defendant's use. WHEREFORE, Defendant Ankney, requests damages in an unliquidated amount below the local limits of compulsory arbitration be awarded in his favor and against Plaintiff. Respectfully submitted, /';:7z / Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ill # 81924 Attorney for Defendants Date: February 12,2001 oiL" ,>- r ~ BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, attorney for Defendant, do hereby certify that I this day served a copy of the Answer, New Matter and Counter-claim upon the following by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, P A 17108 ;9<: c Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Date: February 12, 2001 r'--> , --" ~" ,-" - BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED VERIFICATION KARL E. ROMINGER, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, Defendants in this action; that he makes this affidavit as attorney because he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation ofthe matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Pa.C.S. S4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: February 12,2001 r--// c-=.:.,.. Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for Defendant ~ . ~ , . ,~ -. ' ~, ~ .,~>' BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: BEST WESTERN CARLISLE You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed ANSWER and NEW MATTER of the Defendant, Jamie Kough within twenty (20) days from the date of service hereof or a Default Judgment may be entered against you. ?~ BY: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Defendant Date: February 12,2001 I:' , .~~_"," "" , , BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND NOW, this 12'h day of February 2001 comes the Defendant, Jamie Kough, by and through his attorney, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, and files his Answer and New Matter to the Plaintiff's Complaint. In support thereof, Defendant avers as follows: I. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Defendant was without sufficient information to admit or deny this paragraph and therefore strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted so much as the Defendants resided there, however it is specifically denied that they had exclusive possession or control of room # 106, and it is averred that Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, also had control and possession of said premises. 9. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. ':_-' --, ,---, ,~ .,. ~" ^ ~ ". 10. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is admitted that there was a fire but at this time Defendant is without sufficient information to determine how the fire proceeded. 11. Denied. By way of further answer it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. By way of further answer, strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. COUNT I. BEST WESTERN CARLISLE vs. WESLEY ANKEY 12. No answer is required. 13. (a). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (b). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (c). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (d). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (e). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. 14. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment against the Plaintiffs. ~~</> COUNT II. BEST WESTERN CARLISLE vs. JAMIE KOUGH 15. No answer is required. 16. (a). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (b). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion oflaw which requires no answer. (c). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (d). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. (e). Denied. By way of further answer, it is a conclusion of law which requires no answer. 17. Denied and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment against the Plaintiffs. NEW MATTER 18. Room #106 was part of the Best Western Carlisle complex. 19. Best Western Carlisle was contributorily negligent and/or comparatively negligent andlor totally negligent for the fire and fire damage insomuch as they: (a). Failed to provide smoke alarms and/or heat detectors. I".", , ," " (b). Failed to provide sprinkler systems or fire extinguisher systems. (c). Failed to provide warning devices or other devices which would alert occupants of the room or in the neighboring vicinity of a heat source or an open flame. (d). Provided the toaster in question which was defective and/or apparently defective. (e). Failed to properly service the toaster to insure that it operated safely and would not catch fue. (t). Failing to properly ground or fuse the kitchen electrical outlet or receptacle. (g). The cause of the fire was a defective toaster, which was provided by the Plaintifffor Defendant's use. 20. It is believed and therefore averred that part of the award sought by Plaintiff is related to duct cleaning which, upon information and belief, said cleaning was not related to the fire and/or at least in part represented normal hotel maintenance not proximately or in fact related to the fire. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment against the Plaintiffs. Respectfully submitted, c?~ Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Defendant '"- -'" __, "C,__~ , - BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED VERIFICATION KARL E. ROMINGER, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, Defendants in this action; that he makes this affidavit as attorney because he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Pa.C.S. !)4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~.- ~ Date: February 12, 2001 Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for Defendant ,. "H BEST WESTERN CARLISLE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 00-1954 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY AND JAMIE KOUGH, Defendants : ARBITRATION DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, attorney for Defendant, do hereby certify that I this day served a copy of the Answer and New Matter upon the following by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, P A 17108 ~, --" r"- ~=- Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Date: February 12, 2001 ,-~ - -- -, ,. ~ Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S, WESLEY ANKNEY, NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM 18. Admitted. 19 (a) - (g). Denied. The averments of paragraph 19 (a) - (g) state conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 20. Denied as stated. The statements and averments of paragraph 20 state conclusions of law to which no responsive is required. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the duct cleaning was part of normal hotel maintenance and not proximately or in fact related to the fire. 21. Denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 22. Admitted. 23. Paragraphs 18 through 22 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 24 (a) - (h). Denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 25. Admitted. ~-'-!; - . ~-, ,'.- , ,.,cere; , - -..t" "_-",<,;,. . '., ':':'~-'""'~-;)L,'-i-',,,,,,'-f:._-"Y;-~-..;,,, . ,. _ ""1' . . ',~:- -7~-'__'__.,>," '.,;_..>1'!'.._, -."'-:"-''''-'4' '.-l',~_'~'_", , ,. 26. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is, admitted that Plaintiff supplied Defendants with a toaster for use by Defendants. It is specifically denied that the toaster provided by Plaintiff was defective and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 27. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff was negligent as alleged. 28. Denied. The averments of paragraph 28 state conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 29 (a) - (g). Denied. The averments of paragraph 29(a) - (g) state conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, respectfully requests that Defendant's New Matter and Counterclaim be dismissed and that judgment be entered in its favor and against the Defendants in the amount of $43,292.04, together with costs, interest and any other relief this court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 f2, Dated: April 1 ,2001 :125951.1 ,~"e_, ~ " -~ ,-, ""' " ,> -, ,W"-f-,_-~" . -"'7~_"":\?" .,,-~-- ',' ',r_,>' 0' '," ,~~ "t~ <<'~'<'"r-,"_'- . ,. """- 'C, -,_. ''''-,0." , ,,~_,,_ ,-_~"~__,^,,,7.,"" . ," ,. ." . . - .... ",. ~ r ,-',' . _""!"'-." VERIFICATION I, \-\p.",R"b\" c.. r'f'.-l'e. L- a Representative of Carlisle Best Western, verify that the foregoing action and that the attached document is based upon the information which has been gathered by me, my counsel and/or others on my behalf in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is that of counsel and is not mine. I have read the document, and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I understand that intentional false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. ~4904 relating to unsworn falsifications made to authorities. Date: '3 I '2. 1- ) 0 \ ~[( h" ~'; - ,.,~. " ,~ -,--- '-", .", ',,-'0'._ ~ "_'"',,'_",__ '_<0',._,_,0,,,"_ _0, _, >, c'_ ". "',J"r~,~_,_."",,,,,,,, _ " __ . - . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Rosa 8. Kulp, a secretary for the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows, on the date set forth below: Bv First Class U.S. Mail: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Dated: April 9, 2001 ']~ N~ i:__ . -~ , 'r' 1QiIIIMI," , . " HfIi!lI!'J!I!!llll!!!!!'!ftII!!PI .- " . ,~.,' ,,' ;'1. ,~~"."I> . .,__, __~, ~,__O,"__ (') C) ~, u s:; " f'! < :T:"'> '1:J- ~r~ -1.1 rTi L:. . :::::; ~; - .L - (n ~~ .'l~) " ~~ ~:;: , ' --- 1;Y ..;.-' s.; ...!'::.... ~ -' -< ......! ~ 1l'll1"'iIW~I"I'_~~o:mWi'll!;lR~!j!~I~tlm.._ . , ';mII~_~ ~,-r,~I~!m " " SEP~~ 2001 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants RULE TO SHOW CAUSE nl AND NOW, this 2- ~ day of O~ , 2001 upon consideration of the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, a Rule is hereby issued on the Defendants to show cause why Plaintiffs Motion should not be granted. Rule returnable 2E- days from date of service. BY THE COURT: -1'~ 4;1 / iXJ. ?tl'~ C. ,O'u", I 1 j~"-~. - - "-- -.--:::"'::7'~"'-"_'{~:;_,'~-_"'"",':'o1":-","d"_~"-" ..~," ,_,~," -~'~''"O..' "'-"'_'. .. ^ -"'_<"~_'L ,. '7L~ ~ _'_',."d~',:~"_"">"__' -'<, "";>~,,, ^';, ,'.~,. , I ,"' U~ f\LFn-O\:-F\CE ~'J\D~t\\'"{Y U G- I -' __,!\\~jt\' I j, ~ t. 2- '"l\ _C~. 2. "~- CUhr;3\,: r~iJ-,~<D (~(\jNT\{ ?E;'~;'~S'{l.)i/\N\/\ <.~.-.,,,~- ~~~T '.' ',," ~ ~ .'fM!Il."IU\lIIIIUP ~"",I. ~ - , ,? .~!~ ,.... BEST WESTERN CARLISLE Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v, WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of , 2001, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Defendants are hereby directed and ordered to file full and complete Answers to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Responses to Request for Production of Documents within days of service hereof, or be subject to such sanctions upon application to the Court. BY THE COURT: J. ie," . -. ,7"" ":>-~, "", ______. ~"F-""-'!--'-' .-"._ - "<'_"" . ,p. ",' " _ "'-"~""'.' '"", '" . "-,---".,,,-,.- . -. -,. -. -~ '< Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seq@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, by its attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and brings the following Motion to Compel Discovery: 1. On or about May 12, 2000, Plaintiff forwarded to Defendants' counsel, Interrogatories and a Request for Production of Documents. A copy of the transmittal letter forwarding the Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked as Exhibit "A". 2. On July 24, 2000, Plaintiff forwarded correspondence to Defendants' counsel requesting responses to Defendants' discovery requests which were forwarded to him on or about May 12, 2000. A copy of said correspondence is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "B".. 3. On September 15, 2000, Plaintiff again wrote to Defendants' counsel requesting outstanding discovery responses. A copy of said correspondence is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "C". ~, , ,,' "^'_" ,', . "";'C'_;'_' ,,'-~ ", ',,~ ~--, .---'~-- -~ -.'-='--.'--" ",'" -"~,' ",. . ~<. ",_o,_,,,,,,,_',_""'-r__''''__,~, -~-~- . ' 4. On May 17, 2001, Plaintiff again wrote to Defendants' counsel requesting outstanding discovery responses. A copy of said correspondence is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "D". 5. To date, counsel for the Defendants has neither answered this discovery nor filed any objection to it. 6. The Defendants' failure to respond to written discovery requests are in violation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and are delaying the progress of this case. 7. Plaintiff is severely prejudiced in defending this action in light of Defendants' failure to appropriately respond to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter an Order compelling Defendants to answer their Interrogatories and provide all discoverable documents in response to the Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents of Defendants. Respectfully submitted, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: ~ --::r- - Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 Dated: cr (Wv>l 1'__"""'1' - , . ","'-'-',"-; . '"-'. - ^ -, ~-,,- ~,--, ~ " , ,~ ,,'---- _ T'" ~" ~,., -,,-- , - ,." -, ',-' .~ -, "" -~, -" '. ' ',,' ' -,~, - (717) 237-7141 E-mail bao@tthlaw.com May 12, 2000 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlise vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Mr. Rominger: Enclosed please find Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents directed to each of your clients. Please provide responses in a timely manner. Best regards, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: Barbara A. Onorato, Legal Assistant SEG/bao Enclosure l.ii ."L;,''';:';';',,,,,,",'~''''~'''''' "--- -". (717) 237-7141 E-mail bao@tthlaw.com July 24, 2000 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlise vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Mr. Rominger: I note from reviewing this file that your Discovery responses are overdue. Please let me know if you will be unable to provide responses within the next ten days. OthelWise, I will expect to receive your responses. Best regards, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: Barbara A. Onorato, Legal Assistant SEG/bao Enclosure . -'~'+.-""_'1~ ',ai . I ! :,~>" :"'\, -, (717) 237-7141 E-mail bao@tthlaw.com September 15, 2000 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlise vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Mr. Rominger: On July 24, 2000, I wrote to you concerning your outstanding discovery responses. To date I have heard nothing. If I do not receive those responses within ten days of this letter, I will file a Motion to Compel and/or for Sanctions. Best regards, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP By: Barbara A. Onorato, Legal Assistant SEG/bao Enclosure ';;{-'.'? '" 1< ,; '- - - .~~~ - .,.....,~ (717) 237-7114 E-mail eal@tthlaw.com May 17, 2001 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlisle vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Karl: It's been almost a month since we spoke about this file. Please advise when we can expect your outstanding discovery responses: Also, I would also like to get depositions scheduled in this matter. Please advise. Very truly yours, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Carol A. Landis, Paralegal /eal .. ':B ..".... 0;;1.;~ :,."0,;"",,..,;,''-'. ,~ --, ~- . .- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Carol A. Landis, a paralegal for the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows, on the date set forth below: Bv First Class U.S. Mail: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Dated: fjdc.jo) L1~ C2 {~d.= Carol A. Landis i." . ~. . .~" ." . .',.." '.---" ~.,-" --'.,'- . , > ," ,Cq ,~ . ~. " '---"- ,1Jlll'!!'If ._"'4\!1!l,,""'- .,. o ~~ ~~~-~ -~/ ',-' ?==-. ;} i~~~ ~::: ~~::: ::~C~ 2.:: =< "'"' =I!!mr ., , "OO"~~_" _". .~ ,,, c-~ C') -,1 L."-' "'1 ~"O N -_J "'i -" '() ;'...) en .c. -< ~ , , JII.IIt!1I.lWJ! 4r2 5 2002 Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ;z'1~ day of A6r-.., , 2002, upon consideration of the attached Petition to Make Rule Absolute this Court's Rule to Show Cause of October 2, 2001, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that said Rule is made absolute, and Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents is GRANTED and Defendants are ordered to serve responses Withi;;:;7:; 77; :~yS or face sanctions on application of Plaintiff. BY THE COURT: :155701.2 -:f-d / J. ~,,~----- ". -~--, ~,'Yr-___ ',",-,r,""-"; -~~_'~_';'~_~' ,-., _ 'r'1<'VYF__~,''''''~''''''_'''_'l:'''' 'r__,.> 0--', ~.->,," _ '" d '" "",~,_"_,._,. ;-'~ . i J. 'f1.~ . ~~ ';' <:> 1" , --~ ~. "':"-" " '" -''' :f' ~---, :' VINV^1,\,8N\\I3d 11 'In"" o,,"r1\J3'"''''ln'' i\.U\ Ud .....,1U kl L!'ll V 5'1:0\ \c\~ l2 \rB 20 H,~', F" Jj'--"e:' . d: ~\n 1L1\1I' \""r .', \ '. ,l..' ~, ,",- .....- AO'i"V'V' .-,,-' .... .'\f"\q...;n-{]:; -,\--1 :JVL~~.... ~ -, h-' _ ~II1l'!!lIlI"",,__=~ ,-.," ".lL ~..,.. _.,~ V"':'[~I~~ ~ FErr;Z002 Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attorney I.D. No, 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PETITION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, by and through its attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and Petitions this Court to make absolute the Rule that it issued in this matter on October 2, 2001, and in support of said Petition states as follows: 1. On September 25, 2001, Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, filed with this Court a Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents which were served on Defendants on May 12, 2000. A true and correct copy of the service letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. On October 2, 2001, this Honorable Court by Judge Kevin A. Hess, issued a Rule to Show Cause, on Defendants to show cause why they should not file full and complete responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. 3. The Rule was returnable 10 days from the date of service. 4. On October 3, 2001, said executed Rule to Show Cause was served upon Defendants' counsel, Karl Rominger, Esquire, 155 South Hanover Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. A ~'7"-'; '_"___",_n__~_, ~ -~,_,'7,____, ,. "_'_",,_"_,'}~_.'_._ ,__', ~;.~_-_". c' ~ " ,,_'__t ',""_ true and correct copy of the service letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "8!'. 5, Defendants have failed to respond to the Rule to Show Cause. 6. More than ten (10) days have passed from the date of the service of the Rule to Show Cause upon counsel for Defendants, yet Defendants have served no response to the Rule to Show Cause. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, respectfully requests that this Court make absolute the Rule to Show Cause it issued on October October 2, 2001, and grant Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Respectfully submitted, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP , l1/t0n-- ephen E. Geduldig, Esquire 305 North Front Street P,O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 By: :155701.1 ',--",., ""___'0' . - ~--' , --, - "_,--_,-r;, q- '0 (717) 237-7119 E-mail seg@tthlaw.com September 25, 2001 Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western vs. Ankney Civil Action Number: Civil 00-1954 Dear Prothonotary: Please file the enclosed Motion to Compel with regard to the above captioned matter. Please forward to the appropriate judge for disposition. Pre-stamped envelopes are enclosed for service of the Rule. Also, please time-stamp the extra copy and return it to me in the enclosed envelope. All counsel of record have been served with a copy. Thank you for your cooperation. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Stephen E. Geduldig Ical:90937.4 Enclosures cc: Karl Rominger, Esquire (w/encl) ~"'""""~~ ~ -"~ (717) 237-7114 E-mail cal@tthlaw.com October 3, 2001 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlisle vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Karl: Enclosed herewith and served upon you is the Rule to Show Cause signed by Judge Hess on October 2, 2001. Very truly yours, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Carol A. Landis, Paralegal /cal 'W~~l:l ~, .~ ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire, of the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows, on the date set forth below: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Attorneys for Defendants THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP ~' Step . Ge~Uldi9 le_ ;,,~,. ,. "':'- ,.?~- - ",." , .',,"-"'-- , . - -~, --,.- - , " ,~" "', ,~~--~- '_-'_'_~~'",-- '" C'""", " ~="" ~" ~ "'1 ,,~, ".",,," ." " ,JllII'I~!~_-!_T " I 0 Co"~ ." , , " r-'.j -- '1 -0 , 1 [1, ;:"J <- -.. f<' / c,~ U 1"",,) ~~~ l' -.' ~".... (~:~ - "-..- L. 5;: r::: C:9 :~ ;"~) --< tv -..; .lIII'n~ ._~ ,',.~n_l 1I'l. ,.;::.. . :.'! 2 5 2H1JZ' , Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-1954 BEST WESTERN CARLISLE v, CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of , 2002, upon consideration of the attached Petition to Make Rule Absolute this Court's Rule to Show Cause of October 2, 2001, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that said Rule is made absolute, and Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents is GRANTED and Defendants are ordered to serve responses within seven (7) days or face sanctionS on application of Plaintiff, BY THE COURT: J. :155701,2 """"" -~ Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Attorney 1.0. No. 43530 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 237-7119 E-Mail: seg@tthlaw.com BEST WESTERN CARLISLE o '4,. (J \,0 C ::'~ 1") 1,~" ~ S~?: li~ (J3 -r~ -~- c:; () t:-': ~i~~ ---"~ 5" C c:? Z .,'0 :2 (,J IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA .... ,-,,'" ~...;-; C'.) \<.",) _.1,' 1- ~~j.\ 5) '-<: Plaintiff v, NO. 00-1954 CIVIL ACTION - LAW WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PETITION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, by and through its attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and Petitions this Court to make absolute the Rule that it issued in this matter on October 2, 2001, and in support of said Petition states as follows: 1. On September 25, 2001, Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, filed with this Court a Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents which were served on Defendants on May 12, 2000. A true and correct copy of the service letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. On October 2, 2001, this Honorable Court by Judge Kevin A. Hess, issued a Rule to Show Cause, on Defendants to show cause why they should not file full and complete responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. 3, The Rule was returnable 10 days from the date of service. 4. On October 3, 2001, said executed Rule to Show Cause was served upon Defendants' counsel, Karl Rominger, Esquire, 155 South Hanover Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. A !J1j!)IlIl,,~ ~I true and correct copy of the service letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B", 5. Defendants have failed to respond to the Rule to Show Cause. 6. More than ten (10) days have passed from the date of the service of the Rule to Show Cause upon counsel for Defendants, yet Defendants have served no response to the Rule to Show Cause. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Best Western Carlisle, respectfully requests that this Court make absolute the Rule to Show Cause it issued on October October 2, 2001, and grant Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendants, Wesley Ankney and Jamie Kough, to serve full and complete responses to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Respectfully submitted, 1 ll/tCn-- By: Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP ~ ephen E. Geduldig, Esquire 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7119 :155701.1 !(" (717) 237-7119 E-mail seg@tthlaw.com September 25, 2001 Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western vs. Ankney Civil Action Number: Civil 00-1954 Dear Prothonotary: Please file the enclosed Motion to Compel with regard to the above captioned matter. Please forward to the appropriate judge for disposition. Pre-stamped envelopes are enclosed for service of the Rule. Also, please time-stamp the extra copy and return it to me in the enclosed envelope. All counsel of record have been served with a copy. Thank you for your cooperation. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Stephen E. Geduldig Ical:90937.4 Enclosures cc: Karl Rominger, Esquire (w/encl) L"~'"'" . . (717) 237-7114 E-mail cal@tthlaw.com October 3, 2001 Karl Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: Best Western Carlisle vs. Ankney/Kough Civil No. 00-1954 Dear Karl: Enclosed herewith and served upon you is the Rule to Show Cause signed by Judge Hess on October 2, 2001. Very truly yours, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Carol A. Landis, Paralegal /cal ~ ~ '.'~ "i'" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire, of the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows, on the date set forth below: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Attorneys for Defendants THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP '~~ ~.JJ...... ~' Step~. Geduldig !;..,.,... BEST WESTERN CARLISLE Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v, NO. 00-1954 WESLEY ANKNEY and JAMIE KOUGH CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned matter as discontinued. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Dated: April cP:J. ,2002 Attorneys for Plaintiff Best Western Carlisle 1,,7 , 'c' )'.,-~, <'';Y~CC-':'>~'''~' _ ,-_",-_-, ~~,,__ _' _', ."",,,- " -,' T:'~ ,"r-1.Pf.,"'i':'c"'-~--~ ,',' ..-- 'c,_' "__~ __ _'_~"., .'. ." ~ . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Kimberly A. Bohle, Esquire, of the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as fOllows, on the date set forth below: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Dated: I..h~t2-~ ~1IhJJ /K' berly A. Ie :";" "0' H;-/ . ,"'~ 'co.' " 1 ',_ '"'",,: ~,c:~"~,~--"",.,";,;_-,,,,._c:' ;0,';.,._", ~__- "r._' , -~~""".-' ,.' ',-- ,,"," ,._, -.- - '" - ~"-'- .,- , -"~'" r ,~ ~ , ~, - ,~"'"' o ~.; .......1 ,..;":~ L.\,_. rnn-c ~~.' ~:::C;- I~ lIIIl'!~ (:::' I'd :?::::I~ f',,) (' , ~~ ,-,.--, ~- .~ -_c.. '~ ,~~ ~-._, 51 -< ." - ~; "Jl -r.,