Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-02730 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff ARBITRATION vs. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, : No. 00-2730 INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE RULE OF NOVEMBER 21, 2003 AND NOW comes Plaintiff by its attorneys, Mette, Evans & Woodside, and files this response to the Rule to Show Cause dated November 21, 2003. Plaintiff does not object to or oppose Defendant's counsel Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance. Respectfully submitted, METTE„EVANS & WOODSIDE By: X/,- Z,/ 14' Ambrose W. Heinz, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 91021 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: 14+a C?f= ;, ARY "3 CCMbcri; A'4D COUNTY PFVNSYLVANIA c CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with first-class postage prepaid, as follows: Charles L. Noel P.O. Box 1547 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Michael R. Miller P.O. Box 800 Grantham, PA 17027 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 Mr. Chuck Knoll Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. 250 Oak Grove Court Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: X/' vv /g.---" Ambrose W. Heinz, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 91021 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: ILI ? 1 03 386770vl o ro FVITI- T4 Z ?7 ? G CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. NOD - 2003 : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. RULE AND NOW this 2/ day of N&vli? , 2003, upon consideration of the Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance, a rule is hereby issued to show cause why the within request should not be granted. Rule returnable 2-o AN X days after service. BY THE COURT: By Ll ) 2. 'J J CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM PETITION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL AND NOW comes Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, of the law firm of Irwin & McKnight, and respectfully petitions this Honorable Court for permission to withdraw as counsel for Defendants for the following reasons: 1. Douglas G. Miller, Esquire and the then law firm of Irwin, McKnight, & Hughes was retained by Defendants, Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller for the purpose of providing a defense against a District Justice action filed on or about January 24, 2000. 2. Following consultation with the Defendants, a District Justice Appeal was filed with the Prothonotary on or about May 3, 2000. 3. Following the appeal and subsequent Complaint filed by the Plaintiff, an Answer with New Matter was subsequently filed on behalf of Defendants. 4. The undertaken representation is unable to continue for the following reasons: a. There has been a serious failure of communication between legal counsel and the Defendants; b. Defendants by their conduct have rendered it unreasonably difficult for legal counsel to fulfill its representation by this failure of communication; and c. Defendants have disregarded an agreement with legal counsel as to the payment of fees and costs. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSWa Ltltw 5. Despite attempts, both by mail and telephone, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, has been unable to contact Defendants in more than a year. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that this Honorable Court grant Douglas G. Miller, Esquire's Petition for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & MCKNIGHT Dated: November 10, 2003 FP?1114K-- At D glas . Miller, Esquire Supreme 'ourt I.D. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, do hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States mail, postage paid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, on the date set forth below: DAVID A. FITZSIIvIMONS, ESQUIRE METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 NORTH FRONT STREET P.O. BOX 5950 HARRISBUG, PA 17110 CHARLES L. NOEL P.O. BOX 1547 MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 MICHAEL R. MILLER P.O. BOX 800 GRANTHAM, PA 17027 Date: November 10, 2003 IRWIN & McKNIGHT JJA? o Douglas G ' er, Esquue Supreme C I.D. No. 83776 West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3222 (717) 249-2353 CJ (? r-5 c c... ;, - i ;? -_, n = - 2 -- ' - i L ? - .._ - ce-, U.? _? ? ? _? - ?_ _ (. '=f?? ` r- ?` T, ( C -,i !`_ C.a7 ? ITi ?* -G ti ?p ? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V? V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW JAN u I LUU4 HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this (e r' day of January, 2004, it is hereby Ordered and Decreed that Petitioner is granted leave to withdraw as counsel for the Defendants in the above-captioned matter. V o`.o oa ??( V ? ??. ? : ? G c e? ?,??..?' ' r, .,?,`1 ??Q ? `'?' ? „?"??? vU? e `r ? ?l ?? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND NOW comes the Petitioner, Douglas G. Miller Esquire, of the law firm of Irwin & McKnight, and respectfully requests this Honorable Court make absolute the Rule to Show Cause and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On November 21, 2003, the Honorable Kevin Hess signed a Rule to Show Cause in this case, said rule Returnable 20 days from service upon the parties. 2. The Rule was served upon the Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. through its counsel, David A. Fitzsimmons, Esquire on or about November 23, 2003 at 3401 North Front Street, P.O. Box 5950, Harrisburg, PA 17110. 3. On December 9, 2003, Plaintiff filed a Response to the Rule to Show Cause indicating that they had no objection to Defendant's counsel's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance. 4. The Rule was served upon the Defendants, Charles L. Noel at his last known address at P.O. Box 1547, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 and Michael R. Miller at his last known address of P.O. Box 800, Grantham, PA 17027 on or about November 23, 2003. Said mail was not returned to Petitioner's office. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 5. Defendants were required to show cause, if any, by December 13, 2003. 6. To date, no response to the Rule to Show Cause has been filed by either of the Defendants, Charles L. Noel or Michael R. Miller. WHEREFORE, Petitioner moves that this Honorable Court make the Rule Absolute and grant the requested relief contained in the Petition. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & MCKNIGHT Dated: December 31, 2003 l? Douglas G Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, do hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States mail, postage paid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, on the date set forth below: DAVID A. FITZSIMMONS, ESQUIRE METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 NORTH FRONT STREET P.O. BOX 5950 HARRISBUG, PA 17110 CHARLES L. NOEL P.O. BOX 1547 MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 MICHAEL R. MILLER P.O. BOX 800 GRANTHAM, PA 17027 CHARLES SHIELDS, III, ESQUIRE 6 CLOUSER ROAD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 (HEAD ARBITRATOR) Date: December 31, 2003 IRWIN & McKNIGHT AAW Douglas Co Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3222 (717) 249-2353 c g C b Cs .?' `'`J C., CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 -,2730 CIVIL TERM ORDER AND NOW, this day of January, 2004, it is hereby Ordered and Decreed that Petitioner is granted leave to withdraw as counsel for the Defendants in the above-captioned matter. J. CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND NOW comes the Petitioner, Douglas G. Miller Esquire, of the law. firm of Irwin & McKnight, and respectfully requests this Honorable Court make absolute the Rule to Show Cause and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On November 21, 2003, the Honorable Kevin Hess signed a Rule to Show Cause in this case, said rule Returnable 20 days from service upon the parties. 2. The Rule was served upon the Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. through its counsel, David A. Fitzsimmons, Esquire on or about November 23, 2003 at 3401 North Front Street, P.O. Box 5950, Harrisburg, PA 17110. 3. On December 9, 2003, Plaintiff filed a Response to the Rule to Show Cause indicating that they had no objection to Defendant's counsel's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance. 4. The Rule was served upon the Defendants, Charles L. Noel at his last known address at P.O. Box 1547, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 and Michael R. Miller at his last known address of P.O. Box 800, Grantham, PA 17027 on or about November 23, 2003. Said mail was not returned to Petitioner's office. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 5. Defendants were required to show cause, if any, by December 13, 2003. 6. To date, no response to the Rule to Show Cause has been filed by either of the Defendants, Charles L. Noel or Michael R. Miller. WHEREFORE, Petitioner moves that this Honorable Court make the Rule Absolute and grant the requested relief contained in the Petition. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & MCKNIGHT Dated: December 31, 2003 :?a? 2? , Douglas . Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, do hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States mail, postage paid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, on the date set forth below: DAVID A. FITZSIMMONS, ESQUIRE METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE. 3401 NORTH FRONT STREET P.O. BOX 5950 HARRISBUG, PA 17110 CHARLES L. NOEL P.O. BOX 1547 MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 MICHAEL R. MILLER P.O. BOX 800 GRANTHAM, PA 17027 CHARLES SHIELDS, III, ESQUIRE 6 CLOUSER ROAD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 (HEAD ARBITRATOR) Date: December 31, 2003 IRWIN & McKNIGHT ? qq Y ? dJt/ Douglas Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3222 (717) 249-2353 --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ak- Date 12/2/2004 From Sandy Time 3:29:38 PM Company JudgeHoffer's office Phone 240-6292 FAX Taken By A Phoned I ' I Please Call Back _ _ Fx] Returned Your Call F] Will Call Back Was Here to See You Urgent Message Received a list of old arbitrations. Can you bring her up to date on the outcome of Classic Printing v. Hoop Net Productions Plaintiff Defendant In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania No. - Civil Action - Law. Oath We do solemnly swear (or affirm) that we will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth and that we will discharge the duties of our office with fidelity. Signature Name (, airman Law Firm Address Signature Name Law Firm Address Signature Name Law Firm Address City, zip city, zip City, Zip Award We, the undersigned arbitrators, having been duly appointed and sworn (or affirmed), make the following award: (Note: If damages for delay are awarded, they shall be separately stated.) Arbitrator, dissents. (Insert name if applicable.) y"<5iii?n.L Date of Hearing: ::. r- (Chanman) Date of Award: " Notice of Entry of Award Now, the day of 20 , at , _.M., the above award was entered upon the docket and notice thereof given by mail to the parties or their attorneys. Arbitrators' compensation to be paid upon appeal: By: - Protlionotary Deputy I Date 12/11/2003 Time 4:58:58 PM From Elizabeth Stone Company Phone 774-7435 FAX Taken By mh Phoned N Please Call Back ? Returned Your Call Will Call Back Was Here to See You Q Urgent ? Message RE: Arbitration- All of January is available except for Fridays. Hem' -Z 5 aAl?i? -A, Date 12/10/2003 Time 3:11:28 PM From Atty. Doug Miller Company Phone 249-2353 FAX Taken By mh Phoned rx] Please Call Back 11 Returned Your Call Q Will Call Back Q Was Here to See You Q Urgent El message Re: Arbitration - he had filed a motion to withdraw to David Fitzsimmons and David is not . opposing that. Waiting on final papers in regards to that. Z" az? _? ? Yz, CHARLES E. SHIELDS, HI ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 6CLOUSERROAD Corner ofTrmdle and Clouser Roads MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 GEORGE M. HOUCK (1912-1991) TO: David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire Plaintiff's Representative Fax # 236-1816 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Defendant's Representative Fax # 249-6354 FROM: Charles E. Shields, 111, Chief Arbitrator November 26, 2003 TELEPHONE (717) 766-0209 FAX (717) 795-7473 Paul Orr, Esquire - Co-arbitrator Fax # 258-5289 Elizabeth Barron Stone, Esquire Co-arbitrator Fax # 774-3869 RE: Arbitration No. 00-2730 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., vs HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiff CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants MEMO:Please fax to me at your earliest convenience the dates in January 2004 that you would be available for arbitration. I have enclosed my outline of the suit. Thank you. The information contained in this facsimile message is information protected by attorney-client and/or the attorney/work product privilege. It is intended only for the use of the individual named above and the privileges are, not waived by virtue of this having been sent by facsimile. If the person actually receiving this facsimile or any other readerof the facsimile is not the name recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication inesor,please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via U.S. Postal Service. /dt /O/17 S. Ys r (/ Sf /dj p .2??=-:ilooPtiT ?r .?ro?(s ? fJr?i 95P AM" Ginue Cz?. !/G1eo/ hs ?SU o¢/t roue Ct. ///cc? s. of_? /lvvp?T 444lel? __/O. /k l ???er?y Novi me 77 vices c7s 7w pri2uu9 7 rI4 17,7.7 /?`'i ces (it'/zCe!'S /2L ?p ??ndy z?-, ??t Cie T ?d/o /Ill/71Fil?z'<ff ofGJl?/1?? eA"l ?i - L`o?r? u /yo?z t /!1lllf?l opt/ G TY_ _ ?y 45 %UOel jz R.'Au 1o?f?f? A." RV. ?oo,,v AP e,7- ef a/ ?o?obsv A/ /tile 7s 2y, /? .f9 ole'?uc?/ Q A Al "COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT Y" NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT ? `J COMMON PLEAS Nn pCj - 2,730 10 t l?'2tr? NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the case mentioned below. CHARLES L. 09-3-05- 60 WEST POMFRET STREET CARLISLE 2000 ICLASSIC PRINTING, CVXW 0000017-00 LT 19 G. MILLER, ESQUIRE This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa R.C.P.J.P. No. If appellant was CLAIMANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. NO. 10086. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a 1001(6) in action before District Justice, he MUST SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after Signatu2 Prothonotary w Deputy tiling his NOTICE of APPEAL. - "- " PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.JP. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee). PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon CLASSIC PRINTING, INC. , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name or appeg&e(s) (Common Pleas NanG - 7 d t r; 11 ) within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. Signature of appelfant or his attorney or agent RULE: To CLASSIC PRINTING, INC. , appellee(s). DOIIG&S G. MILLER, ESQUIRE Name of apxllee(s) (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered maiL (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. Date: .` -Q-00O 1 ET AL " 312.8 COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY f% ° T. 1 PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA -- COUNTY OF AFFIDAVIT: I hereby swear or;affirln that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No. , upon the District Justice designated therein on (date of service) .-, _?'by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) , on 19 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. ? and further that I served the Rule to Filea Complaint accompanying theabove Notice of Appeal upon the appellee(s) to whom the Rule was addressed on '19 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. SWORN (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME - - THIS DAY OF , 19_- - - - - - - - - Signature of aMant Signature of official ateore whom affidavit was made Title of official My commission expires or :t C3 MM GZ' c , 9- COMMONWEALT14?OF PENNSYLVANIA j' Mfg. Dist. No.: u ?b a, r 09-3-05 J Rame: Han. GAYLE-A. ELDER Address 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone: (717) 766-4575. 17055 CHARLES L. NOEL 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: CIVIL CASE ;k; NAME and ADDRESS FCLASSIC PRINTING, INC 7 P.O.BOS 658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET LMECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 J vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS _ FHOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS INC, ET N 250 OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J Docket No.: CV-0000017-00 Date Filed: 1/24/00 _ M M THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT; Y, Judgment: .ROR.-PLAINTY'VV _. - -_ ` ... ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) rT,AcgTr_ PRTNmTNG, TNr: ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) Hoop NRm moue PROnVCTToNB INC in the amount of $ ?, Rq , _ 5a oaN §S 7u Date Au Ju dgment)"Ot' J Y4?n nn Defendants are jointly and severally liable. (Date & Time) Damages will be assessed on: ? This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to AttachmenUAct 5 of 1996 '$ Levy is stayed for days or ? generally stayed. Objection to levy has be?n'filed and hearing will be held: c - r Y v_- Date: Place: N. Time, Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs_ Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARYICLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST. INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENTEfR iA,NSCRrIIP7; FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL 1.I 1 44'?X . 4.1 . 1 -'l i ? Vf y'. i i 1 y r 'i 7 5 Date" Districf`Justlce I certify that this is a true and 'correct copy of the rScorg of the procebclings.containing the judgment. sl Date District Justice My commis k''.. AOPC 315-99 , n, - expires first Monday of January, 2006' SEAL b 1.4 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: COMBERT.ANn '_ __...._.. 09-3-05 %bJ Name: Hen. GAYLE A. ELDER Address: 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA reiepeone:,(717.) 766-4575 -17055 CHARLES L. NOEL - 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT °PLAiNTiFF: - - CIVIL CASE % NAME and ADDRESS FCLASSIC PRINTING, IBYC P.O.BOX 658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET LMECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 J Vs. _ DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS. _ FHOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS'.INC, ET -A 250 'OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J Docket No.: CV- Date Filed: 1/24/00 s• :x THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: T:ATgm+-r ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) c T.A9ERT(' PRTwTNG, TNr- X Judgment was entered against: (Name) mTT.T.ERy MT . ART. R ggy r , - u n ^ mr ba t?QUtsT. ft25'T'iLY PAVII rTS in the amount of $ 6,, R25.54 on: (Date of Judgment) , a/na /nn ? Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Damages will be, assessed on: F] This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ ? Levy is stayed for Date: Objection to levy has Time: days or ? generally stayed. i filed and hearing will be held: Place: (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits, $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE,COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF J U DGMENTZTRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. Date' ff-" District Justice Y E - I certify that this is a true and correct copy of ie record of the proceedings carataipr judgment. t' t // 1 t!! Date District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006 SEAL ', AOPC 315-99 _ __ COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ,,,COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND MBg. Dist. No.: It 09-3-05 i Name: Hon. GAYLE A. ELDER Address: 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA TI eidPncma. (717,) ` 766-4575 17055 CHARLES L. NOEL 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT - } CIVIL CASE PLAINTIFF: -NAME and ADDRESS - "'FCLASSIC PRINTING INC , P.O.B6X-658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET - LMECHANICSBURG,.PA 17055 J vs. DEFENDANT:: =NAMEand aoDRESS-',, WHOOP NET 'TOUR PRODUCTIONS:INCET' -A. 250 OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J DocketNo.: CV-0000017-00 Date Filed: 1/24/00 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT F6IT'-PT:A!17TTI?1?".-...-. Jud?menY: _ ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) r!r.A55Tcy DRTNTTwr-, TVC ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) molim CHART,R8 T.- ;ss.r. :U?b and riu:.virI.a i'u?'i'Ax in the amount of $ F ,R7 S _ 54 on: (Date of Judgment) ' 2 LQu?x/nb Y pffig r T5 Defendants are jointly and severally liable. (Date & Time) Damages will be assessed on This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ Levy is stayed for days or ? generally stayed. n nhipafinn to Ipvv has hopn filers nnri honrinn Will ha hpiri- Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs__ Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT RANSCRI T FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. - ---. .T District Justice . Date, I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record the proce dings containin the Ld ment. i r TDate District Justice rz? M? commission expires first Monday of January, 2006 SEAL T\' AOPC 315-99 _ - - j Classic Printing, Inc. V, Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., et al. Plaintiff(s) Defendant€s) Dockdt No. CV-0000017-00 - .x.130 Legal Caption Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Classic Printing, Inc. intends to proceed with the Date: September 22, 2003 David A. Fitzsimons Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects ofthe recommendation merit comment 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. lI Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. ®i le? 0 m CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION G?o - 92°13o No. CV-0000017-00 PRAECIPE FOR RULE OF REFERENCE FOR ARBITRATION TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter a Rule of Reference of the above cause to the Board of Arbitrators in accordance with the Rules of Court and the Acts of Assembly. Pursuant to Local Rule 1301(2), there is no other action pending. I certify that the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less. Pursuant to Local Rule 1303(a), I have notified all counsel and unrepresented parties of my intention to list this matter for arbitration. The nature of the cause includes dates, times, locations and names of parties, which are agreed to be hereafter set forth. The issues involved are likewise hereafter set forth. STATEMENT OF NATURE OF CAUSES: BREACH OF CONTRACT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation with a place of business at 1017 South York Street, P.O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 2. Plaintiff intends to proceed in this action against Defendants a Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net"), a corporation maintaining a w 4 business address of 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055; and Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Miller"), an adult individual residing at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA 17027. Plaintiff does not intend to proceed against Charles L. Noel, who filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, petition number: 1:02-BK-00759-RJW, on February 13, 2002, and was discharged on June 6, 2002. 3. In or about January 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered an oral contract with Plaintiff for production of numerous printed products, performance of which was adequately completed by Plaintiff. Despite repeated demands Hoop Net has failed to pay for the requested printing services in the amount of $6, 712.54. GUARANTEE- CLASSIC PRINTING v. MILLER 4. Miller is an officer, shareholder and employee of Defendant Hoop Net. Prior to performance of printing services for Hoop Net, Plaintiff sought a personal guarantee from Miller for those services, which was given orally by Miller to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, Inc., and Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing. Despite repeated demands, Miller has not made payment on the guarantee to Plaintiff for the outstanding debt of Hoop Net. UNJUST ENRICHMENT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 5. Plaintiff performed printing and document services for both Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants, which they knowingly and willingly accepted and benefitted thereby. The reasonable value of the services performed by Plaintiff, including materials, which has yet to be received is $6,712.54. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched, and Plaintiff damaged, in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. STATEMENT OF ISSUES: 1) Did Defendant Miller orally agree to guarantee payment of printing services for Classic Printing? 2) Did the Defendants specifically benefit from printing services admittedly performed for the Hoop Net by Plaintiff? 3) Were the Plaintiffs services furnished to Defendant Hoop Net on the credit of Defendant Miller, and sufficiently in his interest, to be an original undertaking to pay 1 -1 another's debt, so as to not fall under the Statute of Frauds? F ESTIMATED TIME FOR HEARING: One-half (Y2) day MaETTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By- DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: Septembei, 2003 Date: This case is at issue for Arbitration and Proof of Service has been filed. Prothonotary CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. CV-0000017-00 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Praecipe for Reference to Arbitrators upon the following person, by depositing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17103-3222 By: DATED: Septemb 2003 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff 324322 1 l I, 11 `J ? P Z 6- Y I i Classic Printing, Inc. V, Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., et al. Plaintiff(s) Defendant4s) Dockgt No. CV-0000017-00 --? 780 Legal Caption Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court Classic Printing, Inc. int ends to proceed with the Date: September 22, 2003 David A. Fitzsimons Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governiua the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 190 1. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. I. Rule ofcivil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive' reses s within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases foie ? m inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules progated pursuant to it New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete oycedute-» and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, qsT Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of clay' in ' prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rul"J?f- Judicial Administration 1901." = Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a parry wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Kere the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. Time timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. FFhere the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. a J CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff v. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION <---& _ -2 73? C-l C- 0 --) PRAECIPE FOR RULE OF REFERENCE FOR ARBITRAT16AW3; TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY: `. r r c:? Kindly enter a Rule of Reference of the above cause to the Board of P(rbitrat'ors in accordance with the Rules of Court and the Acts of Assembly. Pursuant to Local Rule 1301(2), there is no other action pending. I certify that the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less. Pursuant to Local Rule 1303(a), I have notified all counsel and unrepresented parties of my intention to list this matter for arbitration. The nature of the cause includes dates, times, locations and names of parties, which are agreed to be hereafter set forth. The issues involved are likewise hereafter set forth. STATEMENT OF NATURE OF CAUSES: BREACH OF CONTRACT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation with a place of business at 1017 South York Street, P.O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 2. Plaintiff intends to proceed in this action against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net'), a corporation maintaining a Defendants : No. CV-0000017-00 business address of 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055; and Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Mille"), an adult individual residing at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA 17027. Plaintiff does not intend to proceed against Charles L. Noel, who filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, petition number: 1:02-BK-00759-RJW, on February 13, 2002, and was discharged on June 6, 2002. 3. In or about January 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered an oral contract with Plaintiff for production of numerous printed products, performance of which was adequately completed by Plaintiff. Despite repeated demands Hoop Net has failed to pay for the requested printing services in the amount of $6, 712.54. GUARANTEE- CLASSIC PRINTING v. MILLER 4. Miller is an officer, shareholder and employee of Defendant Hoop Net. Prior to performance of printing services for Hoop Net, Plaintiff sought a personal guarantee from Miller for those services, which was given orally by Miller to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, Inc., and Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing. Despite repeated demands, Miller has not made payment on the guarantee to Plaintiff for the outstanding debt of Hoop Net. UNJUST ENRICHMENT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 5. Plaintiff performed printing and document services for both Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants, which they knowingly and willingly accepted and benefitted thereby. The reasonable'value of the services performed by Plaintiff, including materials, which has yet to be received is $6,712.54. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched, and Plaintiff damaged, in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. STATEMENT OF ISSUES: 1) Did Defendant Miller orally agree to guarantee payment of printing services for Classic Printing? 2) Did the Defendants specifically benefit from printing services admittedly performed for the Hoop Net by Plaintiff? 3) Were the Plaintiffs services furnished to Defendant Hoop Net on the credit of Defendant Miller, and sufficiently in his interest, to be an original undertaking to pay another's debt, so as to not fall under the Statute of Frauds? J ESTIMATED TIME FOR HEARING: One-half (Y2) day METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: SeptennbeQ3 2003 Date: This case is at issue for Arbitration and Proof of Service has been filed. Prothonotary CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. CV-0000017-00 PROOF OF SERVICE i hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Praecipe for Reference to Arbitrators upon the following person, by depositing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17103-3222 METTE, EVANSC W ODSIDE By: DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: Septemb r 2003 :324322 _1 i 4 November 25, 2003 TO: David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire PlaintiifPs Representative Fax # 236-1816 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Defendent's Representative Fax # 249-6354 RE: Arbitration No. 00-2730 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., vs Plaintiff Paul Orr, Esquire-Co- arbitrator Fax # 258-5289 Elizabeth Barron Stone, Equire - Co-arbitrator Fax # 774-3869 HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants FROM:Charles E. Shields, III, Chief Arbitrator MEMO:Please fax to me at your earliest convenience the dates in January 2004 that you would be available for arbitration. I have enclosed my outline of the suit. Thankyou CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. CIVIL ACTION NOTICE Court Administrator Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square, 4th Floor Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 YOU HAVE SEEN 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 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(s). 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. NOTICIA LE HAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demander y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones 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 o notificacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Court Administrator Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square, 4th Floor Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2000-2730 CIVIL ACTION COMPLAINT AND NOW the Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc., by and through its attorneys Mette, Evans & Woodside bring this Complaint and in support thereof aver as follows: 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. (hereinafter "Classic Printing") is a Pennsylvania corporation with a business address of 1017 South York Street, P. O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 2. Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net" or "the Corporation") is, based upon information and belief, a corporation, which during the times relevant to this action, maintained a business address at 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 3. Defendant Charles L. Noel (hereinafter "Noel") is an adult individual who, during the times relevant to this action, resided, based upon information and belief, at 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 4. Defendant Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Miller.") is an adult individual residing, based upon information and belief, at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA, 17027. a". Based upon information and belief, Noel is an officer of Hoop Net and has a 51% ownership interest in the Corporation. 6. Based upon information and belief, Miller is an officer of Hoop Net and has a 24.5% ownership interest in the Corporation. 7. Classic Printing is in the business of providing printing services. 8. In approximately January of 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered into oral contracts with Classic Printing for the production of numerous printed products over an extended period of time through the calendar year 1999. -2- 9. Hoop Net, through its officer Miller, agreed to pay Plaintiff quoted prices for the production of the printed documents. 10. Prior to agreeing to perform the aforementioned printing services, Classic Printing sought personal assurances from Hoop Net's officers as to payment. 11. Defendants Noel & Miller agreed to act as guarantors of Hoop Net to induce Classic Printing into agreeing to perform the requested printing work. 12. These personal assurances were given to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, and to Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing, by the individually named Defendants, guaranteeing payment of bills for printing services provided by Plaintiff to Hoop Net. 13. At all relevant times, Classic Printing performed its services and obligations to the satisfaction of the Defendants, in relation to both job specifications and delivery time. 14. Plaintiff made numerous demands for payment upon Defendants. -3- 15. Despite numerous telephonic and written demands for payment Defendants have not satisfied the outstanding balance to Classic Printing. 16. The outstanding amount due and owing to Classic Printing from the Defendants is $6,712.54 plus interest. COUNT I- CLASSIC PRINTING v. HOOP NET BREACH OF CONTRACT 17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 17 as if fully set forth herein. 18. The parties entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for Hoop Net. 19. Classic Printing has adequately completed performance of the requested printing services in all respects. 20. Despite repeated demands, Hoop Net has failed to pay Classic Printing for the requested printing services. 21. Hoop Net's actions constitute breach of contract. -4- WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT II - CLASSIC PRINTING v. CHARLES NOEL, AND MICHAEL MILLER GUARANTEE 22. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 22 as if fully set forth herein. 23. Classic Printing required personal assurances from the officers of Hoop Net regarding payment for the printing services due, in part, to Classic Printing's previous experience with collection of outstanding debts from at least one of the principals of Hoop Net. 24. Charles Noel and Michael Miller, jointly or individually made assurances to Classic Printing, guaranteeing all debts owed by Hoop Net for the performance of the printing services. 25. Defendants Noel and Miller are guarantors of the obligations of Defendant Hoop Net arising from Hoop Net's breach of contract, and said obligations are ripe -5- because Defendant Hoop Net has refused to make payment to Classic Printing as demanded. 26. Despite repeated demands, Noel and Miller have not made payment to Classic Printing for the outstanding debt. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants Charles Noel and Michael Miller for $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT III - CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS UNJUST ENRICHMENT 27. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein. 28. Classic Printing performed printing and document production services for the benefit of Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants. 29. Defendants have knowingly and willingly accepted Classic Printing services and benefitted thereby. -6- 30. The reasonable value of the services performed by Classic Printing, Inc., including materials, for the benefit of Defendants for which Classic Printing has yet to receive payments from Defendants is $6,712.54. 31. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched by the receipt of Plaintiff s services. 32. As a direct result of the aforementioned unjust enrichment, Plaintiff is damaged in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: y 6 W- -/' Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. DATED: /As?/D U VERIFICATION I, Kirk Weary, hereby affirm that I am President of Classic Printing, Inc., that I make this verification on behalf of Classic Printing, Inc. and that I have read the foregoing Complaint and verify that the facts set forth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the foregoing document and/or this language is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4204, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: .S-2 3 - oo Kirk Weary, Presi nt Classic Printing, Inc. I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure for District Justices, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, certified return receipt requested with First Class postage prepaid, as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Irwin, McKnight & Hughes 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By:C?? Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 DATED:/60 224893 / Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. ?v 17 rl? ?y rt ? 110 r ( - ()?? ? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff vs. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. 00-2730 ORDER AND NOW this ?0 day of/ , 2003, in consideration of the foregoing Petition, the following three (3) attorneys are appointed arbitrators ji?nJthe above-captioned action as prayed for. CMG 11..E YL? BY THE COURT: P.J. ? 382091v1 'diAVA IASVGd 93:Qt pv GE ija So MVIUNIQ'H-,'C?lj -.1 ' 10 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION VS. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants No. 00-2730 PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. (hereinafter "Classic Printing"), by its undersigned counsel METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE respectfully represents that: 1. The above captioned action is at issue. 2. The claim of the Plaintiff in the action is $6,712.54 plus interest and costs. No counterclaim has been filed. 3. Classic Printing wishes to proceed only against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., and Michael R. Miller as, while this action was pending, Charles L. Noel filed for and was discharged from Bankruptcy Court in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Petition Number 1:02-bk-00759-RJW decree entered June 6, 2002. 4. The following attorneys have interest in this case as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN, McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVAN WOODSIDE By: DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 41722 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: ???2`? j 382088v1 V 2 c? z c+' °a N v u? ti o? f?? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2000-2730 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 33. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of the Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. 34. Admitted that neither Defendant Noel nor Defendant Miller signed a written agreement guaranteeing the debts or obligations of Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. ("Hoop Net"). However, Defendants Noel and Miller orally agreed to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net to Classic Printing, Inc. ("Classic Printing") 35. Admitted only that Classic Printing did not specifically request that the guarantee from Defendants Noel and Miller be in writing. However, Classic Printing did request that Defendants Noel and Miller agree to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net. Furthermore, Defendants Noel and Miller did orally agree to personally guarantee such debts and obligations. 36. Denied. The statements made in Paragraph 36 of Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff's causes of action against Defendant Noel and/or Defendant Miller are barred by the defense of Statute of Frauds. Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller personally benefitted from the services provided by Classic Printing. 37. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller did not orally agree to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of Hoop Net. By way of further answer, prior to agreeing to perform printing services for Defendants, Classic Printing sought personal assurances from Hoop Net's officers, Noel and Miller, as to payment. Defendants Noel and Miller agreed to act as guarantors of Hoop Net to induce Classic Printing into agreeing to perform the requested printing work. Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller orally agreed to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net. 38. Denied. It is specifically denied that all of the printing material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter was for the benefit of Hoop Net only. It is specifically denied that the printing material prepared by Plaintiff did not benefit Defendant Noel and/or Defendant Miller. By way of further answer, all of the printing material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter benefitted Hoop Net as well as Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller. Respectfully submitted, METTE,'EVANS && W?JO?O'DSIDE By: rMohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 DATED: Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. ?2 ?l?OD VERIFICATION I, Kirk Weary, hereby affirm that I am President of 'Classic Printing, Inc., that I make this verification on behalf of Classic Printing, Inc. and that I have read the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's New Matter and verify that the facts set forth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the foregoing document and/or this language is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4204, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. DATE: ' Z7- DO Kirk Weary, Preside -/ Classic Printing, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure for District Justices, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, certified return receipt requested with First Class postage prepaid, as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Irwin, McKnight & Hughes 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 METTE, EVANSS&& WO,ODSIDE By: Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff, J Classic Printing, Inc. DATED: 612glco :228413 1 u 4l It ' FTIM1' - ?`yy i <CJ c - w ;L,t a r CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM NOTICE TO PLEAD You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. IRWIN, MCKNIGHT & HUGHES Dougl G. Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Attorney for Defendants Date: June OR , 2000 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, NO. 2000 -12730 CIVIL TERM INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. DEFENDANTS' ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, this Aft day of June, 2000, come the Defendants, HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, by and through their attorneys, Irwin, McKnight & Hughes, and make the following Answer with New Matter to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff, CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., averring as follows: i. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one (1) of the Complaint are admitted. 2. The averments of fact contained in paragraph two (2) of the Complaint are admitted. 3. The averments of fact contained in paragraph three (3) of the Complaint are admitted. 4. The averments of fact contained in paragraph four (4) of the Complaint are admitted. 1 5. The averments of fact contained in paragraph five (5) of the Complaint are admitted. 6. The averments of fact contained in paragraph six (6) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant Miller is an officer and shareholder, as well as an employee, of Hoop-Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter the "Corporation"). The remainder of the averments contained in paragraph six (6) are specifically denied. 7. The averments of fact contained in paragraph seven (7) of the Complaint are admitted. 8. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eight (8) of the Complaint are admitted. 9. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nine (9) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation through its agents and employees agreed to pay Plaintiff for the production of printed documents. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. The averments of fact contained in paragraph ten (10) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 2 11. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eleven (11) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 12. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twelve (12) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 13. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirteen (13) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Plaintiff performed its obligations with regard to job specifications and delivery time for the benefit of the Corporation. The remaining averments contained in paragraph thirteen (13) are specifically denied. 14. The averments of fact contained in paragraph fourteen (14) of the Complaint are admitted. 15. The averments of fact contained in paragraph fifteen (15) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation has not satisfied in full its outstanding balance to Plaintiff. By way of further answer, the Corporation has offered to make payments over time to Plaintiff to satisfy its obligations in full, which offers have been rejected. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee'the debts of the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 3 16. The averments of fact contained in paragraph sixteen (16) of the Complaint are denied as stated. The value of the services performed by Plaintiff for the Corporation is admitted. The remaining averments in paragraph sixteen (16) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 18. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eighteen (18) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the ',Corporation. The remaining averments, including any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation, are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 19. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nineteen (19) of the Complaint are admitted. 20. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty (20) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation has not satisfied in full its outstanding balance to Plaintiff. By way of further answer, the Corporation has offered to make payments over time to Plaintiff to satisfy its obligations in full, which offers have been rejected. 4 21. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-one (21) of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 22. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth, 23. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-three (23) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 24. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-four (24) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-five (25) of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is required, the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 26. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-six (26) of the Complaint are admitted. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation. 5 27. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 28. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-eight (28) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the Corporation. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation or personally benefited from the printing of documents for the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 29. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-nine (29) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the Corporation. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation or personally benefited from the printing of documents for the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 30. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty (30) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. The value of the services performed by Plaintiff for the Corporation is admitted. The remaining averments in paragraph thirty (30) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 6 31. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty-one (31) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff performed printing services on behalf of the Corporation. The remaining averments in paragraph, thirty-one (31) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 32. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty-two (32) of the Complaint are admitted. WHEREFORE, Defendants Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller respectfully request that this Court enter a judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff in this matter, Classic Printing, Inc., together with reasonable costs. NEW MATTER 33. The averments of fact contained in the Answers to the Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference and are made part of this New Matter to the Complaint of the Plaintiffs. 34. At no time did Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller ,sign a written agreement to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation, 'nor has any such writing been attached to Plaintiff's Complaint. 7 35. At no time did Plaintiff request that Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller sign a written agreement to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation. 36. Plaintiffs alleged causes of action against Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller are therefore barred by the defense of the Statute of Frauds. 37. At no time did Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller orally agree to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation. 38. All of the printed material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter was for the benefit of the Corporation and not for the personal use of Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller. WHEREFORE, Defendants Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller respectfully request that this Court enter a judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff in this matter, Classic Printing, Inc., together with reasonable costs. Respectfully Submitted, IRWIN, McKNIGHT & HUGHES By: Dougl G. Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Attorney for Defendants -14 Date: June c5eu, 2000 9 VERIFICATION The foregoing Answer with New Matter on behalf of the Defendants, Hoop-Net Tour Productions, Inc., Charles L. Noel, and Michael R. Miller, is based upon information which has been gathered by counsel for the Defendants in the preparation of this Answer. The statements made in this Answer are true and correct to the best of the counsel's knowledge, information and belief. The Defendants are presently out of the jurisdiction of the court and their verification cannot be obtained within the time allowed for filing the pleading. The undersigned is therefore verifying on behalf of the Defendants according to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 1024(c)(2). The undersigned understands that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Dou as G. Miller, Esquire Date: June A 2000 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, NO. 2000 = 2730 CIVIL TERM INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, hereby certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon the following attorneys by first-class United States Mail, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, addressed as follows: Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Mette, Evans & Woodside 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 Attorneys for the Plaintiff IRWIN, McIGNIGHT & HUGHES Date: June 0 2000 Douglas . Miller, Esquires Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 10 c D - EOMMONWEALTN OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS Ne or) _ 2726 NOTICE OF APPEAL C-tvl f? Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice an the date and in the case mentioned below DIST NQ OR NAME OF 0.l. NA OF AEmS"LNT J I,o &-1 -/ILTRWMI LLER E ,A r? I MA(x 3 CHARLME ES . NO R. 09-3-OS AWOSS ar APPMANT C/O IRWIN McKNIGHT It HUGHES CITY STATE zP CODE 60 WEST POMFRET STREET CARLISLE PA 17013-3 2 DATE OF ADWEW N tHE CASE OF (Pn,infiff) oVale SL? .?? nvyF.+ryPa/1Upi,T^Gn JI V. I ,? ?. APRIL 3, 2000 , CLASSIC PRINTING, INC, ,HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC. ET AL QAIAA NO SIGNATURE OF IANi OR NS ATTORNEY OR NT CvU 0000017-00 ?/ LT 19 DOII G. MILLER, ESQIIIRE This block will be signed ONLY when this natation is required under Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No If appellant was CLAIMANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 10081L This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a 1001(6) in action before District Justice, he MUST SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.JP. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee). PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon CLASSIC PRINTING, INC. , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appe/ke(sl (Common Pleas No r3 G - aZ 72 t?t l tt within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of ran pros 4, d9'& signature of appellant a in attorney or agent RULE: To CLASSIC PRINTING, INC. appellees) DOII G. MILLER, ESQUIRE Name of appePFre(s) (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. Date: / y }d ?QOO o-r 4 co Of AOPC 31P-B COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED INtTHIN TEN (70) DAYS AFTER fibrig the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF_____.. - - ;sir AFFIDAVIT. I herenv swear or:affirm that 1 served Ir_i a r;apy of the, Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No.upon. the Casirict „ustice designaterl therein (;r (dare of service) by personal service Ut by (oernfled) {registered} mail, sender's receipt attacned hereto, and upon the appellee. C'ame'l .. on .__.._.....__..______.. . 19__.._. D by personal service Cl by (certified) {registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto D and further that i served the Ruleto Filea Complaintaccompanymq theabove Noticeof Appeai upon theapponee(sf to whom ,he -bile was addressed or. _ ,'-1 by p 'fso) a, s .e snail. sender. receipt aitachad hereto. SWORN (APFIRMEF)l AND St!"CRIBFD FiUDRE ME THIS GAY OF Signature of affiant S Cnahare c; a' < c.vcre N "Um r r'tls.n u,a. aa- line of otf+cfat {1r yQ 1'2 Q , V. n o 0 F i -m c? 1 7 - r. <J <> rin COMMONWEALTHUF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND Mag. Dist. No.: 09-3-05 DJ Name: Hon. GAYLE A. ELDER Add,ass. 507 N. YORK ST.. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone: (717 ) 766-4575 CHARLES L. NOEL 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FUR PT.ATNTIFF Y Judgment was entered for: (Name) CT.AaSTr. PRTNTTT7rs, TNC Judgment was entered against: (Name) HOOP NRT TOUR PRODUCTTONR TTTC . 1-,7Sn'. in the amount of $ 9, 925 54 aON Y, TO ori: , G 7r t a7 .J rf , y ZA<Jate of Judggment)'' Y' Y i' ' . 4Oa/00 El Defendants are jointly and severally liable. El Damages will be assessed on: This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ Levy is stayed for days or ? generally stayed. Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: Dater Place: (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment $ 6,712.54 Judgment Costs $ 113.00 Interest on Judgment $ .00 Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 6,825.54 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ Time: , ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGM6N C?$?r,RIIVrT1FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. C ? r j Date ; District Justice I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the TCdrti of tfie.procodingS c Date j My commission expires first Monday of January, 20016 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: CIVIL CASE NAME and ADDRESS _ [CLASSIC PRINTING, INC P.O.BO% 658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET LMECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS 17055 [HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS INC, ET ,A 250 OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J Docket No.: CV-0000017-00I Date Filed: 1/24/00 aining the judgment. District Justice SEAL I AOPC 315-99 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND Mag. Dist. No.. 09-3••05 V I DJ Name: Hon. GAYLE A. ELDER Address: 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone: (717 ) 766-4575 17055 CHARLES L. NOEL 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: CIVIL CASNAME and ADDRESS rCLASSIC PRINTING, INC 7 P.O.BOX 658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET LMECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 J VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS FHOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS INC, ET 250 OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J I DocketNo.: CV-0000017-00 Date Filed: 1/24/00 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT. Judgment: FOR Pr.ATNTIPF rr ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) C.T.A.qRTC PRTUTTUa, TUC-. ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) MTT,T,RR, MTCHART. R y'n4AV 13f -?t°.riair` Y rA. Y'wz:i in the amount of $ R, A2R _ 54 on: (Date of Judgment) 1 411711100 Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Damages will be assessed on: El This case dismissed without prejudice. (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total $ 6,712.54 $ 113.00 $, .00 $ .00 $ 6,825.54 Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ Post Judgment Credits. $ El Levy is stayed for__ days or [] Post Judgment Costs $ generally stayed. Certified Judgment Total $ Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: Date: ^^ Place: Time: ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE,COURT 'OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMEN , RANSC T FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. _ J (te District Justice I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the pr eedings containing the judgment. :Date District Justice ? Amount of Judgment Subject to My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006 SEAL AOPC 315-99 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND f Mag. Dist. No.: 09-3-05 DJ Name: Hon. GAYLS A. ELDER Address: 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA `relephona: (717) 766-4575. 17055 CHARLES L. NOEL 250 OAK GROVE CT. MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: CIVIL. CASE NAME and ADDRESS FCLASSIC PRINTING, INS P.O.Bbx 658 1017 SOUTH YORK STREET LMECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 J vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS 'FHOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS INC, ET -A. 250 OAK GROVE COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L J Docket No.: CV-0000017-00I Date Filed: 1/24/00 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: a Judgment: " a t FOR Pr.AT TPYf`N' ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) C-r.ARATC PRTNTTN[S, TNr Judgment was entered against: (Name) WORT., CFiART.PSR T.- in the amount of $ 6,821;-9;4 on El Defendants are jointly and severally liable. 7 Damages will be assessed on: This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ 0 Levy is stayed for__ days or ? generally stayed, t'L` (Date of Judgment) t i 1;r I/A`q' Y (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment $ 6.712.54 Judgment Costs $ 113.00 Interest on Judgment $ .00 Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 6.825.54 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: Date: Place: Time: ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRI?PT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL, .?(. ! , ,0... D t( r Date District Justice I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record the proceedings containing the judgment. Date f? District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006 SEAL AOPC 315-99 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. No. 2000-2?? o HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CIVIL ACTION CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants 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 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(s). 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 One Courthouse Square, 4th Floor Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 NOTICIA LE RAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demands y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demanders 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 o notificacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Court Administrator Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square, 4th Floor Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2000-2730 CIVIL ACTION COMPLAINT AND NOW the Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc., by and through its attorneys Mette, Evans & Woodside bring this Complaint and in support thereof aver as follows: 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. (hereinafter "Classic Printing") is a Pennsylvania corporation with a business address of 1017 South York Street, P. O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 2. Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net" or "the Corporation") is, based upon information and belief, a corporation, which during the times relevant to this action, maintained a business address at 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 3. Defendant: Charles L. Noel (hereinafter "Noel") is an adult individual who, during the times relevant to this action, resided, based upon information and belief, at 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. 4. Defendant Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Miller") is an adult individual residing, based upon information and belief, at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA, 17027. 5. Based upon information and belief, Noel is an officer of Hoop Net and has a 51% ownership interest in the Corporation. 6. Based upon information and belief, Miller is an officer of Hoop Net and has a 24.5% ownership interest in the Corporation. 7. Classic Printing is in the business of providing printing services. 8. In approximately January of 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered into oral contracts with Classic Printing for the production of numerous printed products over an extended period of time through the calendar year 1999. -2- 9. Hoop Net, through its officer Miller, agreed to pay Plaintiff quoted prices for the production of the printed documents. 10. Prior to agreeing to perform the aforementioned printing services, Classic Printing sought personal assurances from Hoop Net's officers as to payment. 11. Defendants Noel & Miller agreed to act as guarantors of Hoop Net to induce Classic Printing into agreeing to perform the requested printing work. 12. These personal assurances were given to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, and to Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing, by the individually named Defendants, guaranteeing payment of bills for printing services provided by Plaintiff to Hoop Net. 13. At all relevant times, Classic Printing performed its services and obligations to the satisfaction of the Defendants, in relation to both job specifications and delivery time. 14. Plaintiff made numerous demands for payment upon Defendants. -3- 15. Despite numerous telephonic and written demands for payment Defendants have not satisfied the outstanding balance to Classic Printing. 16. The outstanding amount due and owing to Classic Printing from the Defendants is $6,712.54 plus interest. COUNT I- CLASSIC PRINTING v. HOOP NET BREACH OF CONTRACT 17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 17 as if fully set forth herein. 18. The parties entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for Hoop Net. 19. Classic Printing has adequately completed performance of the requested printing services in all respects. 20. Despite repeated demands, Hoop Net has failed to pay Classic Printing for the requested printing services. 21. Hoop Net's actions constitute breach of contract. -4- WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT II - CLASSIC PRINTING v. CHARLES NOEL. AND MICHAEL MILLER GUARANTEE 22. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 22 as if fully set forth herein. 23. Classic Printing required personal assurances from the officers of Hoop Net regarding payment for the printing services due, in part, to Classic Printing's previous experience with collection of outstanding debts from at least one of the principals of Hoop Net. 24. Charles Noel and Michael Miller, jointly or individually made assurances to Classic Printing, guaranteeing all debts owed by Hoop Net for the performance of the printing services. 25. Defendants Noel and Miller are guarantors of the obligations of Defendant Hoop Net arising from Hoop Net's breach of contract, and said obligations are ripe -5- because Defendant Hoop Net has refused to make payment to Classic Printing as demanded. 26. Despite repeated demands, Noel and Miller have not made payment to Classic Printing for the outstanding debt. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants Charles Noel and Michael Miller for $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT III - CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS UNJUST ENRICHMENT 27. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein. 28. Classic Printing performed printing and document production services for the benefit of Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants. 29. Defendants have knowingly and willingly accepted Classic Printing services and benefitted thereby. -6- 30. The reasonable value of the services performed by Classic Printing, Inc., including materials, for the benefit of Defendants for which Classic Printing has yet to receive payments from Defendants is $6,712.54. 31. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched by the receipt of Plaintiff's services. 32. As a direct result of the aforementioned unjust enrichment, Plaintiff is damaged in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc. demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest and costs and such further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. Respectfully submitted, MErM, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 DATED: ?/7 2, '/o%6 l 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. VERIFICATION I, Kirk Weary, hereby affirm that I am President of Classic Printing, Inc., that I make this verification on behalf of Classic Printing, Inc. and that I have read the foregoing Complaint and verify that the facts set forth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the foregoing document and/or this language is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4204, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: S--Z3 - Da Kirk Weary, Presi NZnt Classic Printing, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure for District Justices, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, certified return receipt requested with First Class postage prepaid, as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Irwin, McKnight & Hughes 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 DATED: 224893 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2000-2730 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 33. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of the Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. 34. Admitted that neither Defendant Noel nor Defendant Miller signed a written agreement guaranteeing the debts or obligations of Defendant Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. ("Hoop Net"). However, Defendants Noel and Miller orally agreed to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net to Classic Printing, Inc. ("Classic Printing"). 35. Admitted only that Classic Printing did not specifically request that the guarantee from Defendants Noel and Miller be in writing. However, Classic Printing did request that Defendants Noel and Miller agree to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net. Furthermore, Defendants Noel and Miller did orally agree to personally guarantee such debts and obligations. 36. Denied. The statements made in Paragraph 36 of Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff's causes of action against Defendant Noel and/or Defendant Miller are barred by the defense of Statute of Frauds. Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller personally benefitted from the services provided by Classic Printing. 37. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller did not orally agree to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of Hoop Net. By way of further answer, prior to agreeing to perform printing services for Defendants, Classic Printing sought personal assurances from Hoop Net's officers, Noel and Miller, as to payment. Defendants Noel and Miller agreed to act as guarantors of Hoop Net to induce Classic Printing into agreeing to perform the requested printing work. Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller orally agreed to personally guarantee the debts and obligations of Hoop Net. 38. Denied. It is specifically denied that all of the printing material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter was for the benefit of Hoop Net only. It is specifically denied that the printing material prepared by Plaintiff did not benefit Defendant Noel and/or Defendant Miller. By way of further answer, all of the printing material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter benefitted Hoop Net as well as Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 83925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 DATED: 612q/ob Attorneys for Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. VERIFICATION I, Kirk Weary, hereby affirm that I am President of Classic Printing, Inc., that I make this verification on behalf of Classic Printing, Inc. and that I have read the foregoing Plaintiffs Reply to Defendant's New Matter and verify that the facts set forth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the foregoing document and/or this language is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4204, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: 6 ' 27-00 `GG'?` i Kirk Weary, Preside Classic Printing, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure for District Justices, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, certified return receipt requested with First Class postage prepaid, as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Irwin, McKnight & Hughes 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 53925 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff, J Classic Printing, Inc. DATED: q/OL :228413 1 ??. ' ? ,? .;? ?? __ - ,? !:. =_ CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM NOTICE TO PLEAD You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. IRWIN, McKNIGHT & HUGHES 2ugl G. Miller, E/sXquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Attorney for Defendants Date: June 010 , 2000 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM DEFENDANTS' ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, this A1 day of June, 2000, come the Defendants, HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, by and through their attorneys, Irwin, McKnight & Hughes, and make the following Answer with New Matter to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff, CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., averring as follows: 1. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one (1) of the Complaint are admitted. 2. The averments of fact contained in paragraph two (2) of the Complaint are admitted. 3 The averments of fact contained in paragraph three (3) of the Complaint are admitted. 4. The averments of fact contained in paragraph four (4) of the Complaint are admitted. 5. The averments of fact contained in paragraph five (5) of the Complaint are admitted. 6. The averments of fact contained in paragraph six (6) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant Miller is an officer and shareholder, as well as an employee, of Hoop-Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter the "Corporation"). The remainder of the averments contained in paragraph six (6) are specifically denied. 7. The averments of fact contained in paragraph seven (7) of the Complaint are admitted. 8. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eight (8) of the Complaint are admitted. 9. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nine (9) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation through its agents and employees agreed to pay Plaintiff for the production of printed documents. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. The averments of fact contained in paragraph ten (10) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 2 11. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eleven (11) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 12. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twelve (12) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 13. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirteen (13) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Plaintiff performed its obligations with regard to job specifications and delivery time for the benefit of the Corporation. The remaining avennents contained in paragraph thirteen (13) are specifically denied. 14. The averments of fact contained in paragraph fourteen (14) of the Complaint are admitted. 15 The averments of fact contained in paragraph fifteen (15) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation has not satisfied in full its outstanding balance to Plaintiff. By way of further answer, the Corporation has offered to make payments over time to Plaintiff to satisfy its obligations in full, which offers have been rejected. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 3 16. The averments of fact contained in paragraph sixteen (16) of the Complaint are denied as stated. The value of the services performed by Plaintiff for the Corporation is admitted. The remaining averments in paragraph sixteen (16) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 18. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eighteen (18) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the Corporation. The remaining averments, including any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation, are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 19. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nineteen (19) of the Complaint are admitted. 20. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty (20) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation has not satisfied in full its outstanding balance to Plaintiff. By way of further answer, the Corporation has offered to make payments over time to Plaintiff to satisfy its obligations in full, which offers have been rejected. 4 21. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-one (21) of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 22. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 23. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-three (23) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 24. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-four (24) of the Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-five (25) of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is required, the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 26. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-six (26) of the Complaint are admitted. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation. 5 27. The above responses are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 28. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-eight (28) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the Corporation. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation or personally benefited from the printing of documents for the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 29. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twenty-nine (29) of the Complaint are denied as stated. It is admitted that the Corporation, through its agents and employees, entered into oral agreements for the performance of printing services for the Corporation. Any inference that the Corporation's agents or employees personally agreed to guarantee the debts of the Corporation or personally benefited from the printing of documents for the Corporation is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 30. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty (30) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. The value of the services performed by Plaintiff for the Corporation is admitted. The remaining averments in paragraph thirty (30) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 6 31. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty-one (31) of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff performed printing services on behalf of the Corporation. The remaining averments in paragraph thirty-one (31) are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 32. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirty-two (32) of the Complaint are admitted. WHEREFORE, Defendants Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller respectfully request that this Court enter a judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff in this matter, Classic Printing, Inc., together with reasonable costs. NEW MATTER 33. The averments of fact contained in the Answers to the Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference and are made part of this New Matter to the Complaint of the Plaintiffs. 34. At no time did Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller sign a written agreement to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation, nor has any such writing been attached to Plaintiff's Complaint. 7 35. At no time did Plaintiff request that Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller sign a written agreement to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation. 36. Plaintiff's alleged causes of action against Defendant Noel and Defendant Miller are therefore barred by the defense of the Statute of Frauds. 37. At no time did Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller orally agree to personally guarantee the debts or obligations of the Corporation. 38. All of the printed material prepared by Plaintiff in this matter was for the benefit of the Corporation and not for the personal use of Defendant Noel or Defendant Miller. 8 WHEREFORE, Defendants Charles L. Noel and Michael R. Miller respectfully request that this Court enter a judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff in this matter, Classic Printing, Inc., together with reasonable costs. Respectfully Submitted, IRWIN, MCKNIGHT & HUGHES By: `t? Qi aY• Dougl . Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Attorney for Defendants Date: June 4t 2000 9 VERIFICATION The foregoing Answer with New Matter on behalf of the Defendants, Hoop-Net Tour Productions, Inc., Charles L. Noel, and Michael R. Miller, is based upon information which has been gathered by counsel for the Defendants in the preparation of this Answer. The statements made in this Answer are true and correct to the best of the counsel's knowledge, information and belief. The Defendants are presently out of the jurisdiction of the court and their verification cannot be obtained within the time allowed for filing the pleading. The undersigned is therefore verifying on behalf of the Defendants according to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 1024(c)(2). The undersigned understands that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. , 4a ,v /4z Dou;as G. Miller, Esquire Date: June aO , 2000 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, hereby certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon the following attorneys by first-class United States Mail, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, addressed as follows: Mohammad A. Ghiasuddin, Esquire Mette, Evans & Woodside 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 Attorneys for the Plaintiff Date: June 0 2000 IRWIN, McKNIGHT & HUGHES Douglas (f;. Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 10 ; {-? ? ? t C. 1.,, ? ? ?? ... Classic Printing, Inc. V, Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., et al. Plaintiff(s) Defendant(s) Dockkt No. CV-0000017-00 - 2,130 Legal Caption Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Classic Printing, Inc. intends to proceed with the above Zaboned Date: September 22, 2003 David A. Fitzsimons\ Attomeyfor Classic Printing, Inc. Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. I. Rule ofcivil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administrati on 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. lI Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION Qo - X7- No. CV-0000017-00 PRAECIPE FOR RULE OF REFERENCE FOR ARBITRATION TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter a Rule of Reference of the above cause to the Board of Arbitrators in accordance with the Rules of Court and the Acts of Assembly. Pursuant to Local Rule 1301(2), there is no other action pending. I certify that the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less. Pursuant to Local Rule 1303(a), I have notified all counsel and unrepresented parties of my intention to list this matter for arbitration. The nature of the cause includes dates, times, locations and names of parties, which are agreed to be hereafter set forth. The issues involved are likewise hereafter set forth. STATEMENT OF NATURE OF CAUSES: BREACH OF CONTRACT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation with a place of business at 1017 South York Street, P.O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 2. Plaintiff intends to proceed in this action against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net'), a corporation maintaining a business address of 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055; and Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Miller"), an adult individual residing at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA 17027. Plaintiff does not intend to proceed against Charles L. Noel, who filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, petition number: 1:02-BK-00759-RJW, on February 13, 2002, and was discharged on June 6, 2002. 3. In or about January 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered an oral contract with Plaintiff for production of numerous printed products, performance of which was adequately completed by Plaintiff. Despite repeated demands Hoop Net has failed to pay for the requested printing services in the amount of $6, 712.54. GUARANTEE- CLASSIC PRINTING v. MILLER 4. Miller is an officer, shareholder and employee of Defendant Hoop Net. Prior to performance of printing services for Hoop Net, Plaintiff sought a personal guarantee from Miller for those services, which was given orally by Miller to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, Inc., and Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing. Despite repeated demands, Miller has not made payment on the guarantee to Plaintiff for the outstanding debt of Hoop Net. UNJUST ENRICHMENT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 5. Plaintiff performed printing and document services for both Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants, which they knowingly and willingly accepted and benefitted thereby. The reasonable value of the services performed by Plaintiff, including materials, which has yet to be received is $6,712.54. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched, and Plaintiff damaged, in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. STATEMENT OF ISSUES: 1) Did Defendant Miller orally agree to guarantee payment of printing services for Classic Printing? 2) Did the Defendants specifically benefit from printing services admittedly performed for the Hoop Net by Plaintiff? 3) Were the Plaintiffs services furnished to Defendant Hoop Net on the credit of Defendant Miller, and sufficiently in his interest, to be an original undertaking to pay another's debt, so as to not fall under the Statute of Frauds? ESTIMATED TIME FOR HEARING: One-half ('/2) day METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: Septembe03 2003 This case is at issue for Arbitration and Proof of Service has been filed. Date: Prothonotary CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. CV-0000017-00 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Praecipe for Reference to Arbitrators upon the following person, by depositing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17103-3222 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By \ DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: Septemb? 2003 :324322 1 r, ?' t ?? ? ? ?\ ` }? T ? ?' C w -' Classic Printing, Inc. V, Plaintiff(s) Dockl£t No. CV-0000017-00 -a 73° Legal Caption Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., et al. Defendants) Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Classic Printing, Inc. intends to proceed with the abo a Boned Date: September 22, 2003 David A. Fitzsimons\ Attomeyfor Classic Printing, Inc. Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govem the termination of inactivepses within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for; n inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local roles prolgated -:; pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete p *edure- and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, ¢31 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of draay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing RuleW Judicial Administration 1901. " Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil l procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION c)-O- -;1-73,,:> No. CV-0000017-00 c PRAECIPE FOR RULE OF REFERENCE FOR ARBITRATION( TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter a Rule of Reference of the above cause to the Board of Pdbitra'tors in accordance with the Rules of Court and the Acts of Assembly. Pursuant to Local Rule 1301(2), there is no other action pending. I certify that the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less. Pursuant to Local Rule 1303(a), I have notified all counsel and unrepresented parties of my intention to list this matter for arbitration. The nature of the cause includes dates, times, locations and names of parties, which are agreed to be hereafter set forth. The issues involved are likewise hereafter set forth. STATEMENT OF NATURE OF CAUSES: BREACH OF CONTRACT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 1. Plaintiff Classic Printing, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation with a place of business at 1017 South York Street, P.O. Box 658, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 2. Plaintiff intends to proceed in this action against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. (hereinafter "Hoop Net'), a corporation maintaining a business address of 250 Oak Grove Court, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055; and Michael R. Miller (hereinafter "Miller"), an adult individual residing at 2726 High Street, Grantham, PA 17027. Plaintiff does not intend to proceed against Charles L. Noel, who filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, petition number: 1:02-BK-00759-RJW, on February 13, 2002, and was discharged on June 6, 2002. 3. In or about January 1999, Defendant Hoop Net entered an oral contract with Plaintiff for production of numerous printed products, performance of which was adequately completed by Plaintiff. Despite repeated demands Hoop Net has failed to pay for the requested printing services in the amount of $6, 712.54. GUARANTEE- CLASSIC PRINTING v. MILLER 4. Miller is an officer, shareholder and employee of Defendant Hoop Net. Prior to performance of printing services for Hoop Net, Plaintiff sought a personal guarantee from Miller for those services, which was given orally by Miller to Kirk Weary, President of Classic Printing, Inc., and Randy Mentzer, a salesman at Classic Printing. Despite repeated demands, Miller has not made payment on the guarantee to Plaintiff for the outstanding debt of Hoop Net. UNJUST ENRICHMENT- CLASSIC PRINTING v. DEFENDANTS 5. Plaintiff performed printing and document services for both Defendants in expectation of payment from Defendants, which they knowingly and willingly accepted and benefitted thereby. The reasonable value of the services performed by Plaintiff, including materials, which has yet to be received is $6,712.54. In the alternative, if the oral agreements averred above are deemed unenforceable, Defendants have been unjustly enriched, and Plaintiff damaged, in the amount of $6,712.54 plus interest. STATEMENT OF ISSUES: 1) Did Defendant Miller orally agree to guarantee payment of printing services for Classic Printing? 2) Did the Defendants specifically benefit from printing services admittedly performed for the Hoop Net by Plaintiff? 3) Were the Plaintiffs services furnished to Defendant Hoop Net on the credit of Defendant Miller, and sufficiently in his interest, to be an original undertaking to pay another's debt, so as to not fall under the Statute of Frauds? ESTIMATED TIME FOR HEARING: One-half ('/2) day METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: September, 2003 This case is at issue for Arbitration and Proof of Service has been filed. Date: Prothonotary CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff V. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. CV-0000017-00 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of this Praecipe for Reference to Arbitrators upon the following person, by depositing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows: Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17103-3222 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: \ DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #41722 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: Septemb 2003 324322 1 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff ARBITRATION vs. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, No. 00-2730 INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. (hereinafter "Classic Printing"), by its undersigned counsel METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE respectfully represents that: The above captioned action is at issue. 2. The claim of the Plaintiff in the action is $6,712.54 plus interest and costs. No counterclaim has been filed. 3. Classic Printing wishes to proceed only against Defendants Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc., and Michael R. Miller as, while this action was pending, Charles L. Noel filed for and was discharged from Bankruptcy Court in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Petition Number 1:02-bk-00759-RJW decree entered June 6, 2002. 4. The following attorneys have interest in this case as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire IRWIN, McKNIGHT & HUGHES 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVAN WOODSIDE By DAVID A. FITZSIMONS, ESQUIRE Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 41722 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: \\2-'Z?\? 382088v1 b O -OF 0 w 0 h N ?D PA j?y) -TI -C CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff VS. HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ARBITRATION No. 00-2730 ORDER AND NOW this Jt) day of 6&ieA__1 2003, in consideration of the foregoing Petition, the following three (3) attorneys are appointed arbitrators in the above-captioned action as prayed for. BY THE COURT: P.J. 39209Iv1 WNAWWd ,kimir. ;?7 -,y ; Wno $L -0! yln ric iJ0 0 Nq?9 Y003 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RULE CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM AND NOW this 21 day of Navc„ ? , 2003, upon consideration of the Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance, a rule is hereby issued to show cause why the within request should not be granted. Rule returnable 2-o 4e2 days after service. BY THE COURT: By y'1NN?d.;^d l? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. ARBITRATION HOOP NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, No. 00-2730 INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER, Defendants PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE RULE OF NOVEMBER 21, 2003 AND NOW comes Plaintiff by its attorneys, Mette, Evans & Woodside, and files this response to the Rule to Show Cause dated November 21, 2003. Plaintiff does not object to or oppose Defendant's counsel Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: Ambrose W. Heinz, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 91021 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: 2 / + CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with first-class postage prepaid, as follows: Charles L. Noel P.O. Box 1547 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Michael R. Miller P.O. Box 800 Grantham, PA 17027 Douglas G. Miller, Esquire West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3222 Mr. Chuck Knoll Hoop Net Tour Productions, Inc. 250 Oak Grove Court Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: 4Z I4?_ Ambrose W. Heinz, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 91021 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone (717) 236-1816 - Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: Q I S 165 386770vl n ? o t.J O ? 7 !7 ,y 7L; ?? ?., ri.: ? _ s;? I < -' ? ' T s ? c ?, c? ` ?J ? ? CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., Plaintiff, V. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND NOW comes the Petitioner, Douglas G. Miller Esquire, of the law firm of Irwin & McKnight, and respectfully requests this Honorable Court make absolute the Rule to Show Cause and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On November 21, 2003, the Honorable Kevin Hess signed a Rule to Show Cause in this case, said rule Returnable 20 days from service upon the parties. 2. The Rule was served upon the Plaintiff, Classic Printing, Inc. through its counsel, David A. Fitzsimmons, Esquire on or about November 23, 2003 at 3401 North Front Street, P.O. Box 5950, Harrisburg, PA 17110. 3. On December 9, 2003, Plaintiff filed a Response to the Rule to Show Cause indicating that they had no objection to Defendant's counsel's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Appearance. 4. The Rule was served upon the Defendants, Charles L. Noel at his last known address at P.O. Box 1547, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 and Michael R. Miller at his last known address of P.O. Box 800, Grantham, PA 17027 on or about November 23, 2003. Said mail was not returned to Petitioner's office. 5. Defendants were required to show cause, if any, by December 13, 2003. 6. To date, no response to the Rule to Show Cause has been filed by either of the Defendants, Charles L. Noel or Michael R. Miller. WHEREFORE, Petitioner moves that this Honorable Court make the Rule Absolute and grant the requested relief contained in the Petition. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & MCKNIGHT Dated: December 31, 2003 ';? g , 1 Wl& Douglas Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. 83776 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Douglas G. Miller, Esquire, do hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the persons indicated below by first class United States mail, postage paid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, on the date set forth below: DAVID A. FITZSIMMONS, ESQUIRE METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 NORTH FRONT STREET P.O. BOX 5950 HARRISBUG, PA 17110 CHARLES L. NOEL P.O. BOX 1547 MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 MICHAEL R. MILLER P.O. BOX 800 GRANTHAM, PA 17027 CHARLES SHIELDS, III, ESQUIRE 6 CLOUSER ROAD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 (HEAD ARBITRATOR) Date: December 31, 2003 IRWIN & McKNIGHT Douglas Miller, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 West Pomfret Professional Building 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3222 (717) 249-2353 ?. Cl Cfj '' n %TT?' `a'j 1 CLASSIC PRINTING, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW JAN u i LUU4 HOOP-NET TOUR PRODUCTIONS, NO. 2000 - 2730 CIVIL TERM INC., CHARLES L. NOEL, and MICHAEL R. MILLER Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this day of January, 2004, it is hereby Ordered and Decreed that Petitioner is granted leave to withdraw as counsel for the Defendants in the above-captioned matter. V N ? b 0 C)`, j j Renee K. Simpson Deputy Prothonotary Curtis R. Long Prothonotary of the Protbonotarr Office (Sum'berlanb Cauntp .' Jahn E. Slike Solicitor CIVIL TERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES NOVEMBER 2007 AFTER 1\4AILING NOTICE OF AND NOW THIS 5Tx DAY OF RECEIVING I SIN ACCORDANCE WITH PA TO Y TERMINATED D WITH PREJUD CASE IS HINTENTIONERE R C P 230.2. BY THE COURT, CURTIS R. LONG PROTHONOTARY Aisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 240-6195 • Fax (717) 240-6573 n„P Courthouse Square Ca