Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-00281 . ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . !~ '" lr. i .. )' i. "J ~ \l .~ ~ (" ,... q~ - . ,":I 'c:.") ...... . 0.. ~ , t>o Ct- .,.. I , ~ , , I t:l;::!~~0< ~ ! ~~. ~~>H~ ~g~ ~." ~~ ~ W~ '~l13~ ~ P <i~~ :tl::~~~ r ~. ~ tI ~. ~ ~ ~, ~. & K: ~ 5 :r: w.... :;Ii'" ~ O"f' ~ 0 ~rt PEl: 0. PPOl rt. . > .... (1) t::" co U'J (l) I c:: ro rt H CD :S::r: S ,l:a. N-- . -:r:. - ~OJ~.o~.~tIl ........ '<: ... C'. P'::l R H {)i H j ....'tl & ~ "U H '"d f-< "tl 11:1 t"1 i:i'tl co:ti''tl >cg.~ >~(j'<: fii >;!f -, >~i . p~& I' PUlH '-Q1Jl~H >-,ro ""[ ~I ~ro , a' ~r:rz~<: I~::l ~ r f3 ~ r o - o~ 0. 0(:; N j--l('[) f-l I-' (l) Ul W - W(l)HW rt w -...J.. ~ g rt H U'J .......... , H r:r OJ ~ . ~ .. ffi tIl " r . 1 . rt ... 1t :r: 'lO C1 c.() iI .. "1') ~ r:,=i ;',) .',1:] C., ,J. , , ~-~'1 , I , ) " , I , -';-1 ,_.. ;r;.; " J, rJ\ -~'. "" ':1) ~~.~ tV".> ()"~'~") \-,i~ ~\: \)\. ~;'f': L-P I. , : i1J \1 u."i;' i' p- o ('f) - i~ ;"r" b:: ,,-.0 I r' -,'. v.J. ~ i';:' 0'\ "- ["e- e" ~'.:~~S I.! ~ ,: (,"~'t)j' " ;, : ;_~, 5'~ >HU \,:qO.. j- "'\ t> - ',' ~- '<i- ".., .....-"-. (....:-~-~ GARY A, HIPPENSTEEL and DIANNA IN THE COURT OF' COMr~ON PIJEAS M. HI PPENSTEEl" CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Plaintiffs v, JOHN H, BILIJMAN, RANDY BILLMAN, and DOUGLAS R, HEINEMAN, Individually t/a B & H AGENCY REALTORS, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW (!>f ;-Cih'l NO, 'f&J CIVIL TERM I I I I. I I I I FRAUD, NEGLIGENT, MISREPRESENTATION, PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE AND BREACH OF CONTRACT ,JURY 1'RIAL DEMANDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Heineman t/a B & H Agency Realtors, Please enter my appearance on behalf of Defendant, Douglas R, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: ~-, S( ----2.~ , ' Doug! s B, Marcello, Esquire 305(.l'1orth Front Street Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7238 11. As of January I, 1996, Dcfendants John L. Billman, Randy Billman and Douglas R. Ilcinclllann, and Harold S, Irwin III specilieally kncw and/or should have known that approxilllately one half of Ihe property was located in a noml hazard area, 12, On or about January 13, 1996, the Plainlilr~ were searching fill' a lot ofland to purchase and upon which to place a mal1lilllctured home they had just purchased, 13. The Plaintifls had never owned real property before and were ignorant as to the steps necded to purchase thc same, 14, Plaintitls drove past the property, liked its location and size and noting the information contained on Defendant Heinemann's sign telephoned Defendant Randy Billman, 15, frolll about Jilnuary 13, 19% lhrough Jilnuary 17, 1996, Defendilnt Randy Billman had telephone conversations with Plilintifls J'(~garding the property and Plaintifls' desire to place a manufilcturcd home on the property if they were 10 purchase the same, 16 Defendant Randy Billman disclosed thallhe property was owned by his father, Defendant John Billman, had formerly had illllobile home located on the property and that hook-ups for water and septic were in place and further informed the PlaintillS that they eould buy the property on a sak,s agreelllent and have Del('ndant John H, Billllllln act as the bank, 17, Defendant Randy Billman asked if the Plaintitls wished to purchase the property and when they would be able 10 settle and Plilintills told Defendant Randy Billman that they ,~ould purchilse the property as SOOIl as possible, 18, Defendant Randy Billnllln told Plaintifls thilt in order to save time and money, he would havc his father's attorney, Defendant Hilrold S, Irwin III ("Attorncy Irwin") represent them in the transaction and lhilt they would not have to hire a lawyer to represcnt themsclves, .. 19, On or about January 17, 1996, the Plaintill's verbally agreed thilt they would purchase the property for $19,900,00 and would I1nanee $15,000,00 by means of a sales agreement with Defendant John II. Billman with an annual interest rate) of ten (10%) percent amortized over a ten year period The Plaintilr, were told by [)elendant Randy Dillman that their payments would be a little less than $20000 per month 20, Dclendant Randy Billman and Deli)l'(dant Douglils R, Ileinelllan did not have the Plaintills sign a standard written Agreement fi.)r the Sille and Purchase of Real Estate which generally sets forth the terms and conditions of the oller 01' a prospective buyer which will be accepted or countered by a seller llfthe land 21, The Plaint ills were told by Delendant Rilndy Billmiln to meet him and his father, Defendant John H, llilllllan, at Attorney Ilarold S Irwin, Ill's law olliceg the next day for settlement on the property and that he and the ilttllrney would take care of everything, 22, On or about Jilnuilry 18, 1996, PlaintitTs met with Dcfendants Rilndy Billman and attorney Harold S, Irwin, !II, Esquire in Attorney Irwin's law oll1ce seeking legal assistance f1'01ll Attorney Irwin which he agreed 10 render at which time the Plilintills were presented with an Instilllment Sales Agreement lilr the property (a true and correct copy of which is attached hercto, marked Exhibit" A" and milde iI part hereof), a Conventional Buyer's Cost Estimate, (a true and correct eopy of whieh is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "8" and made a part hereof) and a Certil1cate of Title (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof) and aU,S, Department of Housing & Urban Development Settl()lnenl Stntement (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "[)" and milde a part hereof). 23. Although prior to the mec,ting with Attorney Irwin on January 18, 19%, Plaintills had never spoken with him, Attorney Irwin agr(~ed to represent them in the settlement of the property, agre\'d to p()rfllrm iI title s\)arch of the property and charged Plaintiffs $250,00 for attorney's fees for document preparation, settlement and closing fee and title examination, together with a two ($2,00) dollar lee for notary charges as rellected on Exhibit "0", 24, In preparation for the meeting of January 18, 191)6 and prior to the issuance of the aforementioned Certificate of Title for the property, Attorney Irwin did not copy nor did he review the Pliln of Walnut Grove said plan being recorded in the Omce of the Recorder of Deeds in and for the County of Cumberland in Plan Book 41, Page 59, 25, At no time prior to, during or ill\cr the n1l'eting of January 18, 1996 in his office, did Attorney Irwin provide Plilintills with a writt('n or verbal stiltement as to his dualrepresenlation of both buyer (the Plaint illS) and seller (Defendant John II Billmiln), the implicalions of the common representation ilnd the advantflges and disadvantages involved, 26, At no time prior to, during or ill\er the meeting of January 18, ] 996 in his office, did Attol'lley Irwin receive informed consent from Plaint ill), as to his dual representation of both they as buyer and Dclendant John II. Billman ilS seller of the property. 27, Paragraph 4 of the Installment Sales Agreement states in part: "The Purchasers [the Plaintifls] agree at their expense to keep the property insured against fire, with extended coverage" 28, At no time did Defendants John 11 Billman, Randy Billman, Douglas R. Heinemann 01' Harold S, Irwin, III, Esquire inlorm or convey to the Plaintills that the properly was in a flood hazard ilrea, 29, Defendant John II. Billlllan did not attend the meeting of January 18, 1996 at Attorney Irwin's omee, 30, At the silid meeting, in the presence of Attorney Irwin, Defendant Randy Billman forged the name of his father, Defendant John II. Billman to the sales agreement prepared by Attorney Irwin und then signed his own namo as witness to the signature he hud JUS! forged, 31. A notury public in the otlice of Attorney Irwin was requested to notarize the said forged document und did so noturize the documont. 32, At no time did any of the Defendants tell PlaintilI~ of the property being in the flood huzurd area and more particularly that the previous home on the property and the existing hook-ups for water and sewer were in the said flood hazard area, 33, On or about January 18, 1996. as required by their agreement with Defendant John H. Billman, Plaintitl's contacted an insurance agent and purchased liability and property damages, as well as fire and casualty insurance fhr the home they were placing on the property, 34, Plaintiffs did not purchase flood insurance f(lr the property. 35, On or aner January 19, 1996, PlaintilTs having finalized payment on a manufactured home, contracted to have their home installed on the property, Installation was completed therealler to the then existing wilter and septie hook-ups located on the property. 36. Plaintitl's' agreement with Defendant John 1-1, Billman docs not disclose the need for flood insurance or Ihat the property and the hook-ups fhr utilities and septic are located in the flood hazard zone, 37. On or ubout September 7, 1996 and again on September 13, 1996 storms struck South Hampton Township in the area of the property which caused Burd Run to fill and leave its banks flooding Plaintifl's' property, The area was later declared a federal disaster area, 38, As a result of the flood, Plaint ill",' home was destroye,d beyond repair, Plaintiffs also lost personal property, 39. Plaintiffs contactcd their insurnncc carricr and were informed af\cr investigating the loss that thc property wns in a tlood zonc, had no tlood coverage and thus their loss was not covered by insurance, 40. Thereafter, Plaintiffs uneovered thilt the propcrty wns npproximatcly one hnlf in the flood zone, that their home was placed in thc tlood zone, Had they been informcd of this fact, they would have purchased flood insurance, which insurance would have been approximately two hundred ($200,00) dollars morc a yen I' or mny not havc purchased the propel1y. 41. As n result of thc failure to bc informcd that the propcrty wns in a tlood hazard area, thus triggcring iI necd for tlood insurance, and of thc aforemcntioncd tloods, Plaintiffs suffered extreme dnmagc to their homc and their personnl property, COUNT ONE - JOliN II, DILLMAN - FnAUl> ANl> I\IISnEl'nESENTATION 42, Paragraphs 1-41 arc incorporatcd by rclcrencc ns though morc fully set forlh herein. 43, The fact that a propcrty for sale is located in n flood plain is a matcrial fact. 44, Thc fact thnt a propcrty is in a tlood plain crcatcs n potcntial hnzard on thc land to life and/or propcrty which must be disclosed to potcntial buyers. 45. Defendnnt John 1-1, Billman, his agcnts nnd nttol'l1cys with full knowledge of his duties to disclose the fact, intentionally concenlcd thc fact that the propcrty he wns selling was in !I tlood plain by not informing thc PlaintilTs of thc sallle. 46, Dcfendant John 1-1, Billman, his ngcnts nnd nttorncys negligently and/or intentionally misreprescntcd through omission of a known matcrinl facI thaI thc property he was selling was in not a tlood plain by not informing thc Plnintifls of the same, 47. Not having bcen informcd of the flood hazard on the propcrty, Plaintiffs were unaware of such ha7,ard and did not insure the propcrty for thc samc, 54, The fact that a property is in II 1100d plain creates a potential hazard on the land to life and/or property which Illust be diselosed to potentilll buyers, 55, Defendllnt Randy Billllllln by tlliling to diselose the known filet that the property WIlS located in a llood plllin constituted misrepresentlltionllnd/or fraud, 56, Pbintilfs were induced into purchilsing II property believing thllt it did not need any insurance other thlln standard fire and liability insurance and had they been informed that the property they were purchasing WilS in iI 1100d pJlIin they would have purchased appropriate insurance or not purchllsed the property. 57, Plaintil1s' losses in the aforementioned flood resulted in II substantilll part from Defendant Randy Billmlln's fraud and misreprescntlllion WHEREFORE, PllIintitlS pray that this Honorable Court award them compensatory damages against Defendllnt RlIndy Billmiln in an IImount in exeess of $25,000,00 for fraud and misrepresentation, COUNT FOUI~ - RANDY BILLMAN. FRAUD. PUNITIVE DAMAGES 58, Paragraphs I-57 are hereby incorporllted by reference liS though more fully set forth herein, 59, It is believed and therefore avened that Defcndilnt RlIndy Billman intentionally withheld that the property WIIS in II flood plain, IInd convinced the PllIintil1s to use John H. Billman's attorney so that the concealment would not be uncovered, Further that he eonspired with others, including a notary to place her ol1icial seal on a known forged document to complete his traud induced transaetion 60, Defendant Randy Billman's deceitful conduct was outrageous andlor involved bad motive, WHEREFORE, PlaintilTs pray that this Honomble Court IIward them punitive damages against Defendant John Billman in an amount in excess of $25,000.00 for fraud and misrepresentation COUNT FIV.: - HANDY BILLMAN. PIWFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 61, Paragraphs 1-60 arc hcreby incorporated by rclerenee as though more fully set forth herein. 62, As a licensed rcal estate agent Defendant Randy Billman owed a duty to PlaintifTs to eonduct himself in accordancc with the geneml standards of conduct for real estate agents, 63, Defendant Randy Billman tililed in his duty liS Il)lIows: a, ti\iling to disclose to Plilintill's a known materiill faet concerning the character of the property sold, that being that the properly was in illlood plilin; b. failing to provide Plaintill's with an agreement of sale for the purchase of the property setting forth the oller ofpurchasc with its terms and conditions; c, f~li1ing to provide in writing the relationship between hilllself as agent, the seller of the property and PlaintitTs as buyers and the duties owed to the seller of the property and the buyer of the property; d, failing to properly establish a settlement date ilnd time, in writing informing all parties, including his broker and his broker's stair as to the timing of the same; e, informing Plaintills that they did not need to consult an independent attorney to review or prepare necessary documentation regarding the sale and purchase of the property; 1', informing and convincing the Plaint ill's not to seek private counsef, but to use the attorney of the seller of the property to represent PlainlifTs in the sale and purchase of the property; g, forging the name of the seller of the property, thaI being the signature of his father, Defendant John II. Billman, on the sales agrecment bctween Plaintills and Defendant John Billman prepared by John Billllliln's attorney, then witnessing the same; and h, conspiring with others, including but nut limited to ilnotary public, in an ellbrt which convinced the notary to be derelict in hcr duties under thc law which strietly requires that the person signing a document to be notarized be personally present and not require the same so that the forged signature of Defendant John Billman by Dcfcndant Randy Billman would be notarized and that the notary unlawfldly cxecut() her signature and place her seal on the document without hilving seen the signing or having the alleged executor personally appear and acknowledg~ that he had executed the sallle 64, PlaintilTs did not purchase tlood insurilnce based on the ilctions or intentional omissions of Defendilnt Randy Billman 65, Had Plaintills b()en properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Randy Billman's intentional <<nd/or negligent actions, they would hilve either not purchilsed the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the tlood plain, or have purchased flood insurance, Plaintills' home was severely damag('d in a tlood and Plilintill's had no tlood insuranee, 66. Defendant Randy Billman's professional negligence as a real estate lIgent was a substantial factor in causing PllIintil1S not to purchase proper tlood insurance which resulted in them sullering great I1nilnciallosses, WHEREFORE, Plaintil1s pray that this Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Randy l3illman in an amount in cxccss of $25,000,00 for professional negligence, COUNT SIX - DI~FENDANT RANDY BILLMAN - PUNITIVE DAMAGES 67. Paragrnphs 1-66 are hercby incorporated by rclcrcncc as though more fully set forth herein, 68, It is belicvcd and thcrcforc ilvclTcd that Randy llillmiln intentionally abandoned his professionill duties as a liccnscd real estatc agent in an attcmpt to consummate the sille of his father's propcrty by convincing the Plaintiffs to use John H, Billman's attorney so that his actions would not bc uneovercd and that such actions on his part are unconsciollilblc and shock the scnse of deccncy ilnd to curb such Ililure action damages ofa punitive nature are appropriatc givcn the 111CtS of the case, WHERErORE, Plaintil1s pray that this Honorable Court award them pUllitive damages against Defcndant Randy Billman in an amount in excess of $25,00000 for his aetions in this maller, COUNT SIW~:N - DOUGLAS It IIEINEMAN - FRAIJI> AND MISREPRESENTATION AND I'IWFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 69, Paragraphs 1-68 are hcreby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 70. As a liecnsed rcaf cst ate broker cmploying Defcndnnt Rnndy Billman ns one of his agcnts, Dcfendant Douglas R. IIcincmnn had n master-scrvant rclationship with him, thus is liable to thc Plaintil1s for the nets, cnOl'S, omissions, nnd negligence of said agent on the theory /'c,\polldmf slIjh'rlor, 71. Dcfcndilnt Douglns R, lIeincmnn f1liled to properly supcrvise nnd/or rcview the work of Randy Oillman regarding the salcs of rclatcd parties property or to have proper procedures instituted in his ollice to insure that transactions in which related parties are represented arc closely monitored, 72, PlaintiilS did not purchase flood insurance based on the actions 01' intentional omissions of Defendant Randy Billman and/or the f\lilure of Defendant Douglas R. Heineman to properly supervise the activity of'Defbndilnt Randy Billman, 73, Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Randy Billman's intentiollal and/or negligent aetions, and Defendant Ileinelllan properly review the work of his agent, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an ind(~pendent ailol'lwy who would have advised them of the 1100d plain, 01' have purchased flood inslll'ance, 74, Plaintifl's' home was severely danwged in a 1100d and Plaintill's Iwd no flood insurance, 75, Defendant Douglas It Heinemann's professional negligence as a real estate broker was a substantial factor in causing Plaintil1's not to purchase proper flood insurance which resulted in them sullbring great tinanciallosses, WHEREFORE, I'laintill's pray that Ihis Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Douglas R, I-Ieinemiln in an amount in excess of $25,000,00 for his professional negligence and the actions of his agent, together with costs of this action. interest, attol'l1ey's fees and any additional amount the court deems appropriate, COUNT EIGHT. DEFENDANT ""ROLl> S, mWIN III. I'IWFESSIONAL NF.GLlGENCI,; 76. Paragraphs 1-75 are hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 77. Defendant Attorney Irwin accepted dUill representation of Plainlill's and John Billman In a transaction which involved persons with known adverse interests, 78, Dcfcndant Attorney Irwin infi.ml1cd Plaintil1s that hc hl1d conducted 11 title search on the propcrty and prescnted thcm with a ccrtil1cate of title when he had not donc a full cxamination of thc titlc, 79, In the alternative, Defendilnt Attorney Irwin did eomplete a full title search of the property, determiaed that it Wl1S in a flood zonc and intentionl1lly withheld the information from Plaintifls, 80, Defcndant Attorney Irwin was negligent in the represcntation of the Plaintiffs as follows: a. failing to perform a propcr litle search of till' property including a review of the plan oflots which detailed thc flood hazard area; b, fililiag to inform the Pll1intilTs vcrbally as to the problems associated with an attorney representing all parties to a transaction who milY then or at a future time have differing interests; e failing to inform the PlilintilTs in writing and rcceiving their written approval to pcrmit him to so rcprcsent both they as buyers and Defendl1nt John Billman as scller and financier of a real estate transilction; d, failing to inform thc Plilintil1s that because hc reprcscnted John Billman, that plaintiffs should consult an indcpcndent attorney to review the documents he had prepared; e. failing 10 object to Dcfendant Randy BillnHlIl's forgcry of legal documents and pcrmitting the slime to be notarized by a notary employed by his law oflicc; f. tailing to obtain the signaturc of the seller of the property, Defcndant John H. Billman, on thc I-IUD settlcmcnt shect and disbursing funds without written approval from t hc scller; II, The balance of the purchase price, being Fif1een Thousand and noli 00 ($1 ~,OOO,OO) Dollars, in equal monthly installments or One Hundred Ninety-eight and 2J/I00 ($I'JH,21) Dollars, said monthly installments commencing on Fdll'lHIIY 18, 1996. Said mOlllhly payments shall be applied lirsl to interest on the unpaid balance of the purchase price al a rille ofTen and no/lOO Iwrcenl (10,00%) per annUlll, and the balance thereof applied to the reductiol\ of tlw unpaid principal balance of the purchase price. These monthly pnyments shall be due on till: 18th day of each month suhseCJucnt to the commencement datc as slaled herein, In the event that IIny monthly payment is not received hy the Sl'Iler on or before the Iinh (5th) day aner the same becomes dlle, the Purchasers shall pay a late charge of live percent (5.00%) of the payment due. The monthly paymcnts shall continue untif JalllHIIY 18, 2006, at which time the Seller agrees to convey the Property in Ice simple, by special warranty deed, free and clear of all eneumhranees, except casements, building and use restrictions, visible or of record, and the Purchasers agree to pay the balance of the purchase price in cash. c. Purchasers may pay the entire balance and accumulated interest at any time without incurring any penalty, 3. Purchasers agree to keep the Property in a good state of repair. Purchasers agrees not to make any substantial alterations in the condition of the Property without first securing writtcn consent or Seller. Howevm', in the event that Purchasers becomes in default as set forth in this agreement, any and all improvements whieh Purchascrs has made to the Property will be and become the property of Seller as 01' the date of default and will remain with the Property. 4. The Purchasers agree at their expense, to keep the Property insured against fire, with 'Jxtended eovemge, with a company authorized to do busines9 within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and acceptable to Seller, for a sumcient sum to cover the unpaid purchase price, t'JOK ;')11,( fACt 261 2 I':XIITIITT "A" said insurance to be carried in I he name of Seller, loss payable t1rst to Seller and the remainder to the Purchasers, as their interests may appeal'. 5. Purchasers shall be entitled to possession of lhe Property ill1mediately upon execution of this Agreement. 6. Purchasers hereby assume nil risk and responsibility for any accidents, injury or damage to persons or property and to itself and any others on the Property, The Purchasers shall dc/end, indemnify and hold harmless the SelicI' /1'0111 and against all actual 01' potential claims, delllands, liabilities, damages, losses und out-of-pocket expenses including reasonable attorneys' Ices whether or not reduced to judgment, order or award, on account of any and all injury or damage to persons or property associ at cd with the Property. 7. All real estate taxes with regard to the current year will be prorated as of the date of the execution of this Agrcemeul. Therealler, PlII'ehasers willlJe responsilJle for the payment of all subsequent reill eslate taxes as provided above, All reaf estale transfer taxes upon t1nal selllement and conveyance of lhe deed as provided herein shalllJe paid equally by the parties hereto, II: however, PlII'ehasers at any time shall request Seller to convey the Property to a third party, Seller shull be relieved of paying uny transfer tax associated therewith and the same shull be the sole responsibility of the Purchasers or the third party. In uddition to the above, all the utilities shall be prorated as of the date of this Agreement. Therealler, Purchasers will be responsilJle Ill!' payment of all utilities und uny olher services performed which are associated with the Properly. 8, Purdlllsers understand and agree that the property is being purchased "as is" and Seller is making no represenlations or warl'llnties with regard to the condition of any improvements located on the property, fl:JOK 51 'i' fl.ct ? H2 J EXlITIlT'r "A" 9, Upon delilull hy the Pl1I'chasers in tendering IIny of the monthly payments due hereuuder or in perllll'1l1i1nCe of ilny othcr obligiltions undcr this Agrecment, for II pcriod exeecding thirty (30) days, Seller mllY declilre this Agrccmcnt to bc tcrminated, ret,~ining all pilym\mts made to thilt time ilS liquidilted damages ilnd in such evcnt, the prothonotary or any allol'lley of any COllrt of record is Iwrehy lIuthorized to IIppeilr I'llI' and to confess judgment in an ilpplieable action of ejectmcntagilinst said Purchasers, their heirs llnd llssigns and in favor of the silid Seller, his heirs ilnd ilssigns for the Property and to direct the immediate issuing of a Writ of Possession with Writ of Execution for costs, including attorneys' fee of at least live percent (5%) of the unpilid hillilnce of the purchilse price, without notice and without asking Icave of Court, or at Ihe oplion of Seller, said prothonotary 01' allol'lley is hereby authorized to confess judgmcnt agilinst the Purehilsers and inllIYOI' the Seller for the entire unpaid halance of the purchase price, together with costs, intcrest, insurance payments, tilxes, etc" and with lit least five percent (5%) added thereon as ilnattorncy lcc, \ 0, The interest of the Purchasers conveyed by this Agreement shall not be assignable by sale, assignmcnt, lease, pledgc, suhleilsing or otherwise, in whole or in part, without the prior writtcn consent of the Scller, In the event such llssignmcnt, pledge, etc., is accepted, the rights stipulatcd in Pnragmph Ninc shall ilccrue to the Seller. II, Faill1l'e by Scller to Insist on strict pCrfOJ'lllanCe by Purchasers of UIlY of the terms of this Agrcemcnt shilll nol he eonstnled as a waiver, release or rclinquishment thcreof. This Agreelllent shall inure to and he binding upon thc suecessors Ilnd assigns of the purties hereto. \2. The provisions of this Agreement shull be construed IInd enforced in accordance with the laws of the Conul1onweallh of Pennsylvunia. This Agreement represents the entire agreement and understilnding between the parties hereto llnd there lire no other terms, obligations. covenants, representations, stiltements or conditions, oral or otherwise, of any kind whatsoever coneel'lling this sille, The provisions of this Agreement supersede any and all prior writings B'JOK 5~'7 i/,[.[ 2f):~ 4 FXlIT1\TT "A" ~ ALL that certain 101 of ground with the improvements thereon situate in Southampton Township, Cumbl,r1and Counly, I'ennsylvanin, bounded nnd described as follows: U1,GINNING atn point onlhe cenlerlino of Clevorsburg Rond utthe corner of Lot No. 24 on plun of Wnlnut Grove: theneo along the centerline of Cleversburg Rond, North 29 degrees 5R minutes 04 seeollds West, n distunee of 4,96 feet to a point: thence along the same, by a curve 10 Ihe righl having a radins of 2,4)0,00 fcet, an arc length of 80,68 feet to n point at Lot No. 22 on said pialI', thence nlong lhe laller, North 61 degrees 56 j\,;r,utes 05 seconds East, a distance of 172.41 reel 10 a point at olher lands now or fbnuerly or John II. Billman: thence along the latter, South 28 degrces 41 minutes /17 seconds East, a distance of 82.49 feet to a point at Lot No. 24 on said plan: lhcuce along the hIller, South 60 degrees 05 minutes 29 seconds West, II distancc of ! 71,R5 feet to a point, the l'lucc of lIICGINNING. CONTAINING 1/1,449,69 squnre fcet and being Lot No. 23 as shown on the Plun of Walnut Gl'Ove rceorded in the Cumberland County Reeorder of Deed's Office in Plan Ilook 41, Page 59, m:ING part of thc same property which IIARRY ODI!~lUIOLl'Zlm allll EDNA OIH:IUIOI:l'lJm, his wifl" grnnted and conveycd unto JOliN II. U1LLMAN. grnntor herein, by deed dilled March] I, I 'nil nnd reeordcd in the Cumberland Coullty Recorder of Deeds Office in Deed !look "N", Volullle 26, Page 142, ANI> ImlNG the same property which the said JOliN II.IHLLMAN sold by installmellt snles agreement to GEnALI> A, IIITNICll IUld JEANETrIC M. IllTNER, his wife, by agreement dated JUlie I, 1989, but which was seized by the Sherin' of Cumbmland County, Pennsylvlwia. n. TIIOMAS KLI NI':, in execution of il judgment entercd nt No. 6119 Civil Term I ()94, Cumberland County Courl of Common Pleas, alld sold 10 the said JOliN 11. lHLLMAN. grnntor herein, Oil March R, 1995, aner due advertisement according to law, by deed recorded in the ol1ice al'oresaid in Deed Book 121, Page 207. SllIlJI~CT, 1I0WI~Vlm. to various building and use restrictions as recorded with the albresaid plnn of lots nnd as provided in other deeds of record. (" ;r\' . ." ' I';., !h / \. . ,; I'Joosvl"unia 1 55 ,I cumb\Jrland , p\ Ill" o!tH;e lor the rocordillg of D"llIIs ~" ".u,,,\)nrliJ~ld coun\Y',ft 0 .. ~ Y.~llIul ':..__.. h'\1e -- i ,., ",I ,,"d 0(",1 of otflco 0' '7"1 ".' ...<1 _. day of t'~UL(" ,,,,. -.-...... '~~ .- "-:7:;:jt<-~""&'or or (/' , ' ; 1:'1',. ',i)' ','.\( .1 ~ I, '., ," Ie '.\;, I,'; 'l;i;~I.~ Ii;, t,..:,\ ,l,.': .,',1'" '~:t " "1. "', " ',';" ~'. , ,Y: /, .ll . , -",.( ";"'l"'!.:'\{ K l','J~JK ~)4'i' I Al,i. ~ (i'/ "XIIIllIT "~" A, lJS I >t:Pilllllll'1I1 tlllllIlI~llIg ,'I(, lllhaulk\'dlfplIll.'HI 'IIII' 1/.IllfIH.I,\THIN ('(INI,\IflJ-:II IN 1I111('~:i ,",,0,11,1 MHII,INI: ~UI t~ lMI'oIUMO '1'1\,'\ iNHIUM>\IION ANU IS m,I~HII'IIMNISIIEII '101m. illS II' )'nll AlU: I(UJIIIIU-,ll III I'ILl: ,\ 1(I-nIIIN. ,\ NI-:tll,IUE~WI-: l'l-tll\I:IY tllllHm:1l MN'"IIlJN WILl. m.IMI'(I,~I:I) {IN Ylltlll' 'I Ills lll,M l.~ I(rljIJUIU)'IIIIIL IU:I'OIUI':UM/l)TIII; IIUllJl-:'ll-:ItMINWI TIII\I II IINi NIIl' III-:I'fj 1l1,I'illl Il-Il ~r,~t~l";,'=f,!~;!'i"{.i~'";~l'''''!;;..'.I(;-I'I;/;.!.o: '=='-.I:i'="-:;;~~~L=""""'=FH, ~0Ig";:;;j,;;-ij,,,, .ii;;;'~::"== Sn'l'I,l':MI:NT sTAn:Ml:NT c, NO....:: llih 1<'1111" hUIII.h.;<Ilu 11i~~ ~,~, ~ ;(.II>'IIIo'nl ill ~'hl,~1 "'1I1~llIcn. ".." ^!I~"llIlt ll~j,J (II 'I~l hv Ih~ ..:1I1(lIlI:nl ~1I(11l'(, ..M'...." It(ll11 ml,kw "I~X'" \I",' 1.11,1 "'!I'ld~ II~ ll"'11I '. Ill,'" ,U~ ,1""I"II,'ll'I", 1IIIl"III,.I",""t ',III~';~' ~IHt ~I') 11<.1 il"~ tul~11 n, Name 1I11lt ^lltln.'_~~ u, 1II.\l'nllH'l': K NllllU' lllUI AIltlrc...., II' Scllcn .', NlllllC IIlId AlIlII'cn u, 1~lldl'l': (;MW A, 1l1l'''':NSn:t:l, ,Il>IIN II, 1l1!.!.MAN N/A lHANNA M,III1'l'I:NSn:I:I, (;, JIW11t't"t)'I,41I'llllulI: II, Sl'lllclllcut ^"cnl: l. SclllClIlcllt "Wlc: SOlITIIAI\1J1MTON TOWNSIIII' IIAIIO!.l' S. IIIWIN. III JANUARY H', 19% ClIMIlI:llI,ANl' COllNT\', PA l'lllce t1rSClllClIIClll: ('An!."u: l'A ,I, SlIMMAIl\' OFIIOltlUlWI:Il'S 'I'IlANSAI"I'lON: I;. lilt.. f:WI_'i-" ,\i'lllllloYl' UliI': I'IU,'" IllJlClll"n:ll: 41HI. WI l'UlIhMIS..k'I'rl'" I'J.'JOUlJO_ 41/1 _-I~'l 1'~"'~""!_~'I~'I~'!IJ.~:_-_ :--_. ......_.+..-_. . -'~: ,W~ .I ~~'!~~~~'!'::.'~~.!:.'!'~L,.'..!.!,,~I.'~\~~'.1I-'.!~~!~!L-~_,_ 1 n Ill)' -~1I'. 11101 n__~_,__ -:<<iT -iIi"\---------n....--.-..-~-~-~~-.-.__ ~------ lii1 <_ _'__ ~~-:-,\~lio;.,i!.Il!I~~~j,.J-il;,!;II"j,il;l~S;11;;:..i!L;ol;,~;'~r-'-= .-==---=== =_<_MUtli;;~i",'r;.;!i;;;it 1I.lih ,""II;~<I;I'''';;;;f- ~--- ~~>:(!~-I.I,I"--_:~'.!..,-~_.._~ ___~_ ..:!!~!:ili-!.rQ",'I'r.~~t 'I'Cl _ Jf~~~!!!!}~!!!..~~~~__u____,_.~___.__~. ,_~___ j~.....l'"uI1Ctl~~__ ., lUll !id~~,I'rI1H' _~IJI'IIII'J(, 'I(III('!~()'J(, _ ,11.(,IL .JOM Sdl'~IIT.~elI UI/I!tt')6T~ HJ') WI1I~rIS~\\~f ,Ill'). W~I~iS4",~r I'-il __ .- _, ._ _ 110 _ - III ,III "iil -- .... .. .., --- ".ill - -,il; lalll~.~,'~'IiIII~i7'iIIIEHHI.,iliIIIlIHIWI,:i(' - If! iii.f.6U ..-in, (lIlo'ss;"-~lfljirfl' uiif:i'Os~:I,I,II~ii JUU. .v.IOIIN'ls r,\IIII1\' 411t I'ltU lit JIlI((IWI.:H: !lnu. lill.U\I('1'I0NS IN ,\i'lUHlNT IHIt;St',I,U:llr 1~!_!!~1~.';'!t..~!1~~~~~'!L..___.,.... _...____..~ .___ ___.__'~~(~. ..~~~'~'Jlt:I~...il '__m__.___..___~ ~__.__ )~IL..t~i~I'~'!.'~~I~~~_\'.'.~~t')---'.\!J!~!::~_.." _.".~__J1,mJlJIH~ l.!!L.~11!'i1l1;!1I1 ,'I!:!.!.II.~~'!.U'!.~.~~__~ 2,141110 ~II' 1:,i,Ii"~1,1~~I1~lIhN,.IIo' _"_'_~,,__ _:!!!JcJ':.~~!!!!~!t!J.l~~!'.'.tuhl~'IIo~.___ ____ 111:1---- - u+___._______....___. ~___~ _~'11 1'~)'ul1'liltll1l!!!.!~!i'!..b!.!.!.._.__ ___ -Iii\--"'---'~'~-'---~u_- 111~ -!ii(.".'-~--~--'---- _.__ _~~.rl.. 1'~'l<\,'l'lKl;;;()r1~"Il~lo~n lii1---~------------ 1(11, ~lil,i----"-~--'--------._-- -'. ~I'H '"ii'I~-' .. 1U<J -'-~\iiJ;!1!:~;,jI;r"f I!rlll,~~;i{f.i s!il~~:-----= ----.. --------=:-&ti~.!tll"nl;r;;;IluILt !illJ!lIld bj'StUn llii~('.!!}::TI"lllhm _U!;"j"J/. '~(l nl!IIl~~0 ___ .,~ }.!~_~I'''\\nTu~~ 11IiIll;:?(, '1'(1 OIlIIi'J(' --ill ('"''"1\''''<1\''' _ ,_ ._ _ _ ~II t''''lIlll't~~e<1 "21 J Sd"".F1 ",\~. ~ 11 1id"ool Tot' 21,1 \~';I~IJ1i~\I':I' m._ 'U_ ~~;;iih",~1 _ J14, !\14. II!\. _ ~ _ !\I!\. J1(i, !\16. 'ill." .. - -- !l11, JIM. - -!lIlt. 'il'i. - -- -- ~i.j: lW. '1'l"~I'~\I. 1',\II"li"/I' (lll-,illlliUI\\:i.:ii - tHIIII/I,lJ -!\JII~-;I'fI:r,\I.ltt:IHI('H(IN.'i I"'HI"I SI':I,I,I':1l UlU. (',\sl!.n ,"ij-:'I'II,I':.\li::>f1 ITllf'\! IUU,Ucl\n:u (,IH' (',\.'ill .\'!'.'wnu:^ t'.N'I'TCl/I'Msl':I.U:U \Ill t 111";~!IU~'~.'~~ d""!I.~!I~.' llo'''~~_\I~r l!!!"L!l!..!L_ _ __~!L!H.I (,lj ~~ UII'-" llU""lIlf .Ju~ I" .';,11" 'illl I,'''' "'''''''''1' 1'.lId 1.,11",1'''1I''\\~1 I",~ 2lUI W.UIIU 11 (,Ill. -i,,;,~ fC(ru,ti";l~ li,,";.~'U~r li;l': ~l:1l .IU.I, 4',\.0;11 .\ 1'llll.\1 _ ___ '10 1I0lUWWlm III.I.IIM 611.1, (,"o\.'ill ~ IIIIUM _:\_ TO SI':LU:1l SIIMMAllY OF SI:l,U:Il'S TltANSA('T10N: (mOSS'\MClll~Sy.I,U:Il: C.'1I11~.1 SOlIe. l'ri"'1 1'~lI,'u"II',ul''''IIY "_ "),'I1I(/.IIU ,12(,(J 1'I"',.ii"u -- ,,- _. llun 1".'IHr.n ~.Hn1 17,1119,1111 I !I;IW l'"~'ull\' '~~I':\\nllh" ,~~tllcnk'llf .~I'II~II":lllllnd h' II..: 1":\1 ulll'~ ~1",....lttl~.: 1I11l111l/1Id, Ill' 11/110 .lId 1I,'1;lll~t~ '1IIellll'l11 01 tn rtl:rlp" I1MI tlllhllll>.'l'lo:lllt Illlltl.l 'MI my "~llllll>l '" hy 1'1(1 fIl thi, 1r~1"~,li"n I hlll"~r '~Ihly Ih~11 hu~ rl'(~iI~,I. ~"I'Y "fllut 11t11},1 Selll~ltlell" StllcllltI", 1 di,co.1.1It1II1UM"iL~ IJ", S~Hh:m(1I1 "8(llt I" 111l1h IIIIl .h.(,iIHtIMI\ l1MIil'llkd I", II,V ,"u'''IlI, r~'''l\lllJillllll",1 tllOJ .~~(IIcIlI<:IIII\g~nt i.1M>lI~IMM"'ihl~ Ii" UIO I/J>,:un"y llf Vilidily Qfu-..i1j.bunorUlIIllItulOUllUllf U", Wflll'l~lill_lIf d"lrW~' 1I)~1'" Ioy o>lllo:u tuw illlw.:,( ~MI1~,ll~' hllMh 1h:1~"'le,J I'Iltll S~ltkm~1l1 ^8~nl hcnulMltr Illoty be IclllbMII by Scltjffnclll ""flll (ll '--'r".) . .C2Ll.o-::c.-.2./X..k'1 :ilL!.cA,,{/.l,(::_.__ 1l1lWI OMV 1I1I'(.iil:is-nw.1/ A ~..&.Lt~~t,.-,:-{..L-2~'<':k.:Lt:-dt 'ilflvBlI UIANE 11I1'1~i~STI~i1J Siil:UJI\JOiiN It DILLMAN"""-- SELLEIl - .----.-~-----.. .__~..__u_~~_...,_~ AI)lJIWSS AUUIlESS ,'lull... 110:'1 IIl'nw ~llu\~I~,II:~, 11'<.> Iltllll Sdlkl1lo:1I1 SI"ll'II~I't IIhio.h I h,,~~ 1"(ll.retl iltlml II .,WIIIII l<.:willll o('ho l\ltllh "lIkh W"I IMiVfd Iud hnclwlllllll dllbult<ld by "Z".'" ""~':;'~:';;~:'::~'_~~~~=~._ _"_ ,'/1117~ SETl'I.liMENT A(IENT II OW S. II WIN, III (lATE ---'-(-'- FXIIlIII'l' "n" I" SI;l'l'I.I:~":NT ('UAllla:S !'a'cl 1.'1'1',\ \.lltlp.IIU~V HI'JIII 71Hl. TOTAl. SAU:S/IJ<<OKI:l('S UIMMlSSlON: l'AlO ~IUlM l'AIUHt()M UASIiIl ON I'ltlCI! ~P),')UO,UU ((I! IlUHI%=i ~1,1)1}(I,lJO UOIl<<OW~H'S S.:I.I.~:n's Division of COllllllission (lI11e 7tKI) liS fullows' l'lINUS AT I'UNUS AT 1111. $1.1)I)(U)() 10 1"'1 AOI!NCY ~.I:""'j.I:MI:"!1 ~1:'I'I'I.I:~lI:NI 1111. $ 10 ?II'! l'ollllllisstolllJaid ul sclllclllclIl 1,1"11100 HUO. In:MS I'A Y AUU: IN C(lNNHTION WI'I'lII.llAN Kill l.o11110rigilllUiou Fcc " .~--!~'.__._-_...._--_._...,.__..~.__.__... --.--- .--<.---- ._-_..._----~- _KII2. 1.~~~OIlII!._._---Y~I~~____..___.____..__._..__._____., .---..--...--........--.. _._----~--~ ~1.._~J!l'!!!~~li.c In -~-_._- ---~ M04. Crcdllltcj)ort ___....___!2_.._,____..__.______.____.._.,__. ----..-......-...--- ...----------- IUI~. I.emler's Illsl~Il~.!.t'~~____._!~~.___._,..______._._______ -------.-" ._~-_._------ lUll,. MOll~llKQ IIIStllUlI'C Ajllllkalioll Fcc 1(1 , -. -- -lUIL!~~I~~~~!!!illlt!.!_IIICC ___!(J -_._--~----_._-- ~~-- ~----- HUH Tw'( SlJrvicc Fcc .. In '-' , -.---.----.- --_._._---~-"- _~11~1, Ulldcn~ililll: Fcc .... ._---~~-- _~J.!.I.:...lroccssin~ycc - ---_._~-- --------. KII. Flood Illspectil!.!!.!~~~ In ----.~"- .!~"h:rJ!EI~l..!~.~_________.!!~_____~__ _..__.-----_..-~-- KI1. IJIW, I'n:MS 1l~:C)IIlIlI'1l UY U:NIII:lt TO III: l'AIII IN AIIVANC~ _1)01 IUleresl ffulII , If/! I (!i!L~~...ili!~ s .. 1)112, MOII)!il)!C IIlSlltllll(,'C Prcmium !1!L.--.!!IE).~ili!L!!!. .. ---'- .------ _.~~.l..:..J!!l/Ufd 1.~~!.!!!'.!!~.!!..!'!21!!!!!.l!!..[ur J ycnr In POC -------- ----_._--~ " IJlI~. IOUII, <<~SI:<<V~:S III:I'OSln:II WITII U:Nl'l:lt 11I01. Ilu/md IUStHllllCC 'IItlntIIS!~.----1~~~~!1 ------------ 11"12. MUfl)!IIJl.C Insufll!~~e monlhs (m-~ l)Or mOllth .. - IIIOJ. Ci~rown TlI.'\cs monlhs.!!!! $ I>crmollth 1-- ~:.. COil Illy Tuxes llIollths!!/! $ IllJr 1l101!lh ..---- - ~.'.:,\, Sc~ool Tll.,,~S llIonlll.~ (I/!_\ per monlh -' , WIll.. 11l\)III!!.:!..!!!l..l_--1~I~!!.!.I.!....-_ ----.- ------~ IUU7, 1II01l11ls (II!.~ IIcr llItllllh tlUlI, '1'1'1'1.1: <:llAlHa:S 11\11. SCllh:IlICIlI or closinil fee to 11U2, AbstrllCt or lhlc liCafch 10 , 1111], Tille CXilllllulIllol! 10 ---- IIlll. Titlc illSlImlli:e biuder 10 - JJ..t.!L.~~llclll prcj)nrntioH 10 lW6. NOlnr)' fee tQ...CAS!! 2.00 2, I ~(!. l!!11. AII~rncy's Fcc !'l...!IAltoLD S IIIWIN,1I1 Uuun I.\IHJO (illcludes ulxlvc llumbers: I J~~.!!~l!!!~L. .--..-.-- .... ---~ IltlK. Title Jnsurullce 10 .. ---- {includcs ubovc Items ll11ilil)lJIS: J.lli2.'. I.ender's COVCfllKe I IIW. OWllcr'sCoVclllgc .. .._-- f..~----' 1111, Endotsl.:mclIl fees , 1111 -~._._-~- 12110, GOVt:HNMt:N'I' IU:('OIUHNO ANI} T"ANS"'":''' CIIAH.Gt:S J.;.~!1.J!.~~rdill~ fws, Deed $ MOII}tu)!Il $ (~~!I.:r $ .. 1202, lOCllllfllllsrcr IIl,VSlllIllPS: "e,", $ ~---- -. , .---~-- 12U1, Slnle Irallsfer 11l....JsIIl1l111S: Deed $ J20.1 - - ---0__- 120.\ .--. , ,. ,.... - , ....-....-.. ... ,. IJUII, AUlll'l'lONAl. SITl'l.l:~lI:NT CIlAllm:S ..J!"I l'esl ill,pccliOlU" - 110l, ..... '- l.ltrl, ---.--_._. 1111,1. -- 0_.__. "----~ 11n~. ------_._-~.- ---.--- __..__0-4____ 1.106 4_____~~_______.____..___ ------.. .-----."--- ___n..__.__ -,-.-..--.- l.tllII, TOTAl. St:TTU:I\U:NT CIIA'Ua:S 'clller ulllluc~ IHJ Sl'l.~, J anti ~1I2 SC~', t\) 2~2,UII 21-U,1I11 NOI./C'1 1.\1 IUN (It Nl-.l,l.I'.Il'.'II,\XI'.\\'liIt WMfl'lt"I(',\'nON NIIMIU':H: !1I:1.I.1'.111.~ 1lI'(JlIIIU,P m lAW 10 I'IH\IIIIII, 'l'IU: SI.'l'IIHIl,tj I ,\tIl_N I WIl'II Ills/111m ('111("1-:1....1' l,\.'\I'1\Y1-:t1IIlENTIl'll'AThIN NIIMIW,lt IFllIl':I'OI11Urrli\XI'AYt-:K llll-:NllI'1C,HION NtlMm:1( IS NCII' 1'lttlVIII!-:lI, SU,I!:11 "bW III. Sl!IIJI':n '10 ('lVII, (II( ('IUMIN,\!. nNI'I.'III~N IMI'H'tI':l) II\' LI\\V, IIEM L, WIIIl'1I t'ONli\lN!i 'fillS INHII("II\TIUN SlItI\lW III,: ('IIH't-;I:U l.tlll 1\('t'lIIlM'\' IINIII~Jt l'I':Ni\I:rWs 01'1'1':"11111\',1 t't-:IlTWY '1'111\'1' '1'111': T_IN. SIIOWN IN TlII!i S'l'i\T1':~lI~NT HI Mr t'cIIUlI,:n 'I'AXI'An,IlIlWHI"IFI(WrI!IN NII~UlI:U W,\ItNINfh IT 1.'1 ^ ('RIME H't'NOWIN<lI.Y MAt'I': l'AUIl( NTAn:MWI' TO Tilt'. IJNITY.1l STA'I'I.:!! ON Tills 011. ANY SIMII.i\l1 HlIlM l'I~Ni\l.lIH, III'oN (.'CINVICI1/lNI'/\N INet.Ullt,: A HNE ANI> IMl'ltlSllNMWT nm IIKI'/\U_S !U:H TnI.t: IN tJS <.'(lllt: SP.l."I'lONS 10UI ANlllI1lu ,\ "r t,:,;~ I" \.1.1',0', r-)/.. tl-":: ()r I' f,)" .. '-'I [I~ ' I U, c_> co ~~;;' \ .. (,~ "'.-' L\. ..' ,'j.! :1..' ',--..' i'{(i :';1::". i; ~ .) D U\ ._ 1-. . . .' 4, PUI'sulln! t.o 1'1I.ltC.I'. 101fJ{1I). it. IS noeosslll'y t.o plolld t.hoso fuct.swhich SllPpOlt t.hose oluims 1\>1' whieh !'Oliel' is sOllHht.. Ii, I'luintil'l's' fuil\ll'o t.o plond thoso facts which support impoaitlon of punitivo damugos violatos l'a.RC.I'. \01!J{c). (;, l'ul'sunnt to l'u,ltC,I'. I020{a){2), ir is pl'OpOl' to strike from a pleading flllegutions which fnil t.o comply t.o luw 01' rule of court.. WHlmIWOlm, it is I'ospectfully I'cquested thut. thiS Honomblo COUlt stl'iko Count Nino of Plaintiffs' Complaint. n. MOTION TO STRIKE PAUAGRAPH 80m OF PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT 7. PUl'suunt to Pal'agl'uphs 80U) of the Compluint, the Plaintiffs sook to impose liability upon Defondant Harold S, Irwin. 1lI for allegodly violating tho I'ulos of pl'ofossional cond uct. 8, 'rhe rules of professional conduct do not ostablish un indepondunt busIs for imposition of liability. Maritl'an" v, PenileI'. Humilton & Sheetz, (;02 A.2d 1277 (Pa. 1992). 9. The inclusion of Puragl'uph 80(j) within the Complaint served no propel' purpose. 10. PUl'agl'aph 80(j) is scandalous and impertinent. 11. Pursuant to Pu.H.C,P. 1028(?), it is propel' to strike from a pleacllng scandalous and importinent alleuations. WHlmEFORE, it is respoctfully I'oquested that this Honorable Court strike Pfll'Ugmph 80(j) of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 2 ". III. MO'fION FQR~MORg SPI<JCIFIC PLgADlNG 12, Pm'Huant to Pa,H.C.I', lO19(a), it is neeessHl'y to set forth the l\1aterial facts upon whieh a claim is presented, la, The l'equirements for factual specificity in a pleading applies to claims fOl' liquidnted damagcs. 14. Pursuant to Paragrnph ,11 of Plnintiffs' Complaint, Plaintiffs Hssel't that they "suffered extreme damage to their home find their perSOnfll!ll'Opel'ty," 15, At no point in the Complaint do the Plaintiffs set forth the amount of their liquidated damage claim, 16, Pursuant to Paragraph 3fl of the Complaint, Plflintiffs assort that they submitted a elail\1 for the 108s of their real and per80nnl property to their casunlty insurance earrier, 17. Having 8ubmitted a claim for their alleged loss ef I'eal and pcrsonal property, thfl Plaintiffs have already ascel'tained the amount of (,helt' alleged liquidated dnmages. 18. The amollllt of the Plaintiffs' liquidated damages is not imprecise or incapable of caleulation. 19, Failure to set forth the amount of liquidated dnl\1ages sought violated Pa.R.C.P. 1019(a). 20, Pursuant to Pa.RC,P, 1028(a)(3), it is pl'Oper to compel a party to mOl'e specifieally plead those allegations to which a defendant must respond. 3 professional real estate agent currently and at all times pcrtincntto this action cmployed by Defendant Douglas R, Hcincmann tla B.H Agcncy Rcaltors with ofliccs locatcd at 163 North Hanover Strcet, Carlislc, PA 1701.1. Randy Billman is thc son of Defcndant John H, Billman, 4. Defendant Douglas R. Hcincmann is an adult individual currcntly residing at 130 Wilson Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17013, S, Defendant Douglas R, Heincmann is a Iiccnscd professional real cstate broker practicing undcr the fictitious name B.II Agcncy Rcaltors with ofliccs located at 163 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 170Il 6, Defendant Harold S Irwin, Ill, is an allorney Iicenscd to practice law in this Commonwealth with of11ces locatcd at 3S High Strect, Carlisle, P A 170 I 3 and is opcn to the public for hire for a fce. 7, As of January I, 1996, John H. Billman owncd a lot of land located in South Hampton Township, Cumberland County, PA containing 14,449,69 squarc feet and being Lot No, 23 as shown on thc Plan of Walnut Grove, as record cd in thc ofl1cc of the I \ Recorder of Deeds in and for thc County of Cumbcrland in Plan Book 41, Page S9 (hereinafter called "thc pr0pcrty"). 8. The property was listed for sale through Defendant Douglas R, Heineman tla B.H Agcncy Realtors and had been listed for sale through thc efTorts of Defendant Randy Billman, I , ) \ 9, The property had a for sale sign posted on it citing B.H Agency Rcaltors as the broker and Randy Billman as the sales agent, as well as telcphone numbers for prospcctive purchasers to contact said agency and agent, 10, As of January I, 1996, Dcfendant John H. Dillman had rctained as his attorney Harold S, Irwin 111, Esquirc whose oflices were located at 3S East High Street, Carlisle, " PA 17013. 11. As of January 1, 1996, Defendants John L. Billman, Ramly Billman and Douglas R. Heinemann, and Harold S, Irwin III specifically knew and/or should have known that approximately one half of the property was located in a flood hazard area. 12, On or about January 13, 1996, the PlaintitTs were searching for a lot ofland to purchase and upon which to place a manufactured home they had just purchased, 13, The Plaintiffs had never owned real property before and were ignorant as to the steps needed to purchase the same, 14. PlaintitTs drove past the property, liked its location and size and noting the information contained on Defendant Heinemann's sign telephoncd Dcfcndant Randy Billman. 15, From about January 13, 1996 through January 17, 1996, Dcfcndant Randy Billman had tclephone conversations with Plaintitl's rcgarding the property and Plaintiffs' desire to place a manufacturcd home on the propcrty ifthcy were to purchasc thc same, 16, Defendant Randy Billman discloscd that thc properly was owncd by his father, Defendant John Billman, had formerly had a mobile homc located on thc property and that hook-ups for water and septic were in place and fmthcr informed the Plaintin:~ that they could buy the property on a salcs agrecmcnt and havc Defendant John 1-1, Billman act as the bank. 17. Defendant Randy Billman asked if the Plaintitl's wished to purchase the properly and when they would be ablc to settle and Plaintitl's told Defendant Randy Billman that they could purchasc thc propcrty as soon as possible, 18. Deftmdant Randy Billman told PlaintifTs that in order to save time and money, he would have his father's attorney, Defcndant Harold S. Irwin III ("Attorney Irwin") represent them in the transaction and that they would not have to hire a lawyer to represent themselves, 19, On or about January 17, 1996, the PlaintHl's verbally agreed that they would purchase the property for $19,900,00 and would finance $15,000,00 by means of a sales agreement with Defendant John II, Billman with an annual interest rate of ten (10%) percent amortized over a ten year period. The Plaintilfs were told by Defendunt Randy Billman that their payments would be a little less than $200,00 per month. 20. Defendant Randy Billman and Defendant Douglas It Heineman did not have the Plaintiffs sign a standard written Agreement /)Jr the Sale und Purchase of Real Estate which generally sets f0l1h the terms and conditions Df the oll'er of a prospective buyer which will be accepted 01' countered by a seller of the land. 21. The Plaintill's were told by Defendant Randy Billman to meet him and his father, Defendant John II. Billman, at Attorney Harold S. Irwin, Ill's law ol11ces the next day for settlement on the property and that he and the aHorney would take care of everything. 22 On or about January 18, 1996, Plaintitls met with Defendants Randy Billman and attorney Harold S, Irwin, III, Esquire in Attorn"y Irwin's law ol11ce seeking legal assistance from Attorney Irwin which he agreed to render at which time the Plaintill's were presented with an Installment Sales Agreement for the property (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof), a Conventional Buyer's Cost Estimate, (a true and correct copy of which is attadlCd hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof) and a Certificate of Title (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "e" and made a part hereof) and a U.S, Department of Housing & Urban Development Settlement Statement (a true and correct copy of which is attadled hereto, marked Exhibit "0" and made a part hereof). 23. Although prior to the meeting with Attorney Irwin on January 18, 1996, Plaintiffs had never spoken with him, Attorney Irwin agreed to represent them in the settlement of the property, agreed to perform a title search of the property and charged Plaintiffs $250,00 for attorney's fees for document preparation, settlement and closing fee and title examination, together with a two ($2.00) dollar fee for notary charges as reflected on Exhibit "D" 24, In prcparation for thc mecting of January 18, 1996 and prior to thc issuance of the alorementioned Certitlcate of Title for the propcrty, Attorney Irwin did not copy nor did he rcview the Plan of Walnut Grove said plan being recorded in the Office of the Recordcr of Dccds in and for the County of Cumberland in Plan Book 41, Page 59, 25. At no timc prior to, during or aner the mecting of January 18, 1996 in his office, did Attorney Irwin provide Plaintitl's with a written or verbal statement as to his dual representation of both buycr (thc Plaint ill's) and scllcr (Defendant John H. Billman), the implications of the common rcprcscntation and the advantages and disadvantages involved, 26. At no timc prior to, during 01' allcr the mecting of January 18, 1996 in his office, did Attorney Irwin reccive informed consent from Plaintill's as to his dual representation of both thcy as buycr and Defendant John H. Billman as seller of the propcrty, 27. Paragraph 4 of the Installmcnt Sales Agreement states in part: "The Purchasers [the Plaintiffs] agree at their expense to kccp the property insured against tire, with extended covcrage." 28, At no time did Defendants John H, Billman, Randy Billman, Douglas R. Heinemann or Harold S. Irwin, Ill, Esquirc inform or convey to the Plaintiffs that the property was in a flood hazard arca. 29. Defendant John H, Billman did not attend the mceting of January 18, 1996 at Attorney Irwin's office, 30, At the said meeting, in the presence of Attorney Irwin, Defendant Randy Billman forged thc namc of his father, Defendant John H. Billman to the salcs agrecmcnt prepared by Attorney Irwin and then signed his own name as witness to the signature he had just forged, 31, A notary public in the ofl1ce of Attorney Irwin was requested to notarize the said forged document and did so notarize the document. 32, At no time did any of the Defendants tell Plaintiffs of the property being in the flood hazard area and more particularly that the previous home on the property and the existing hook-ups for water and sewer were in the said 1100d hazard area. 33. On or about January 18, 1996, as required by their agreement with Defendant John H. Billman, Plaintiffs contacted an insurance agent and purchased liability and property damages, as well as fire and casualty insurance for the home they were placing on the property. 34. Plaintiffs did not purchase 1100d insurance for the property. 35, On 01' after January 19, 1996, PlaintifTs having finalized payment on a manufactured home, contracted to have their home installed on the property. Installation was completed thereafter to the then existing water and septic hook-ups located on the propel1y, 36. Plaintiffs' agreement with Defendant John H. Billman does not disclose the need for 1100d insurance or that the property and the hook-ups for utilities and septic are located in the flood hazard zone. 37, On 01' about September 7, 1996 and again on Selltember 13, 1996 storms struck South Hampton Township in the mea of the property which caused Burd Run to fill and leave its banks flooding Plaintifl's' property. The area was later declared a federal disaster area, 38, As a result of the 1100d, Plaintil1's' home was scvcrcly damaged and yet repaired at an estimated cost of repair to be $40,894.49 and their personal property at an estimated cost of $2,500.00, for II total loss of $43,39449. 39, Plaintitl's contacted their insurance carrier and were informed after investigating the loss that the property was in a flood zone, had no flood coverage and thus their loss wafl not covered by insurance, 40, Thereafter, Plainlitl's uncovel'fld that the property was approximately one half in the flood zone, that their home was placed in the flood zone. Had they been informed of this fact, they would have purchased flood insurance, which insurance would have been approximately two hundred ($200,00) dollars more a year or Illay not have purchased the property, 41. As a result of the failure to be informed that the property was in a flood hazard area, thus triggering a need lor flood insurance, and of the aforementioned !loods, Plaintiffs sutlbred extreme damage to their home and their personal property. COUNT ONE - JOliN II. BILLMAN - FRAliI> ANI> MISREPRESENTATION 42, Paragraphs 1-41 are incorpolated by reference as though more fully set forth herei n, 43, The fact that a property for sale is located in a flood plain is a material fact, 44, The fact that a property is in a flood plain creates a potential hazard on the land 10 life and/or property which must be disclosed to potential buyers 45, Defendant John H. Billman, his agents and attorneys with Itlll knowledge of his duties to disclose the fact, intentionally concealed the fact that the properly he was selling was in a flood plain by not informing the Plaintill's of the same. 46, Defendant John H, Billman, his agents and attorneys negligently and/or intentionally misreprcsentcd through omission of a known material fact that the property he was selling was in not a flood plain by not informing the Plaintitl's of the same. 47, Not having been informed of the flood hazard on the property, Plaintiffs were unaware of such hazard and did not insure the property for the Slime. 54, The facl thai II property is in a flood plain creates a potential hazard on the land to life and/or property which musl be disclosed 10 potential buyers. 55, Defendant Randy Billman by failing to disclose thl~ known facl that the property was located in a flood plain constituled misrepresenlation and/or fraud. 56, Plainlitl's were induced into purchasing a property believing Ihal il did not need any insurance other than standard fire and liability insurance and had they been informed that the properly Ihey were purchasing was in a flood plain they would have purchased appropriate insurance or not purchased the property. 57, Plaintiffs' losses in the aforementioned flood resulted in a subslantial part from Defendant Randy Billman's f1'aLld and misrepresentalion WHEREFORE, PlainliflS pray thaI this Ilonorable COUf1 award them compensatory damages againsl Defendant Randy Billman in an amount of $43,394,49 for fraud and misrepresentation. COUNT FOUR - RANDY BILLMAN - FRAUD - PUNITIVE DAMAGES 58, Paragraphs I-57 are hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein, 59, It is believed and therefore averred that Defendant Randy Billman intentionally withheld that the property was in a flood plain, and convinced the Plaintifrs to use John H. Billman's attorney so that the concealmenl would nol be uncovered. Further that he conspired with olhers, including a notary to place her otl1cial seal on a known forged document to complete his fraud induced transaction. 60. Defendant Randy Billman's deceilful conduct was outrageous lind/or involved bad motive, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court award them punitive damages against Defendant John Billman in an amount in excess of $25,000,00 for fraud and misrepresentation. COUNT FIVE; - RANDY lIILLMAN - PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 61, Paragraphs 1-60 are hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 62, As a licensed real estate agent Defendant Randy Billman owed a duty to Plaintiffs to conduct himself in accordance with the general standards of conduct tor real estate agents, 63. Defendant Randy Billman failed in his duty as follows a, failing to disclose to Plaintiffs a known material fact concerning the character of the property sold, that being that the property was in a /lood plain; b, failing to provide Plaintills with an agreement of sale for the purchase of the property setting forth the oller of plll'chase with its terms and conditions; c, failing to provide in writing the relationship between himself as agent, the seller of the property and Plaintills as buyers and the duties owed to the seller of the propel1y and the buyer of the property; d, failing to properly establish a settlement date and time, in writing informing all parties, including his broker and his broker's slaff as to the timing of the same; e. informing Plaintills that they did not need to consult an independent attorney to review or prepare necessary documentation regarding the sale and purchase of the propel1y; f, informing and convincing thc Plaintiffs not to seck private counsel, but to use the attorney of the seller of the property to rcpresent Plaintill's in the sale and purchase of the property; g. forging the name oflhe seller of the property, thai being the signature of his father, Defendant John H, Billman, on the sales agreemenl between Plaintiffs and Defendant John Billman prepared by John Billman's attorney, then witncssing the same; and h, conspiring with others, including but not limited to a notary public, in an effort which convinced the notary to be derelict in her duties under Ihc law which strictly requires that the person signing a document to be notarized be personally present and not require the same so that the forged signature of Defendant John Billman by Defendant Randy Billman would be notarized and that the notary unlawfully exccule her signature and place her seal on the document without having seen the signing 01' having the alleged executor personally appear and acknowledge that he had executed the same. 64, Plaintiffs did not purchase nood insurance based on Ihe actions or intentional omissions of Defendant Randy Billman. 65, Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Randy Billman's intentional and/or negligent actions, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the nood plain, or have purchased nood insurance. Plaintifl's' home was severcly damaged in a flood and PlaintifT:~ had no flood insurance, 66, Defendant Randy Billman's professional ncgligence as a real estate agent was a substantial factor in causing Plaintifl's not to purchase proper flood insurance which resulted In them suffering great t1nanciallosses. proper procedures instituted in his office to insure that transactions in which related parties are represented are closely monitored, 72. Plaintiffs did not purchase flood insurance based on the actions or intentional omissions of Defendant Randy Billman and/or the failure of Defendant Douglas R. Heineman to properly supervise the activity of Defendant Randy Billman. 73. Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Dl~fendant Randy Billman's intentional and/or negligent actions, and Defendant Heineman properly review the work of his agent, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the flood plain, or have purchased flood insurance. 74. Plaintiffs' home was severely damaged in a flood and Plaintiffs had no flood insurance, 75. Defendant Douglas R. Heinemann's professional negligence as a real estate broker was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs not to purchase proper flood insurance which resulted in them suffering great financial losses, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Douglas R. Heineman in an amount of $43,394.49 for his professional negligence and the actions of his agent, together with costs of this action, interest, attorney's fees and any additional amount the court deems appropriate. COUNT EIGHT. DEFENDANT IIAIWLI) S. IRWIN III. PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 76, Paragraphs 1.75 are hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein, 77. Defendant Attorney Irwin accepted dual representation of Plaintiffs and John Billman in a transaction which involved persons with known adverse interests. .,. 78. Defendant Attorney Irwin informed Plaintiffs that he had conducted a title search on the property and presented them with a certilicate of title when he had not done a full examination of the title 79. In the alternative, Defendant Attorney Irwin did complete a full title search of the property, determined that it was in a flood zone and intentionally withheld the information from PlaintilTs, 80, Defendant Attorney Irwin was negligent in the representation of the Plaintiffs as follows: a. failing to perform a proper title search of the property including a review of the plan of lots which detailed the flood hazard area; b, failing to inform the PlaintifTs verbally as to the problems associated with an attorney representing all parties to a transaction who may then or at a future time have differing intorests; c, falling to inform the Plaintiffs in writing and receiving their written approval to permit him to so represent both they as buyers and Defendant John Billman as seller and financier of a real estate transaction; d, failing to inform the PlaintitTs that because he represented John l3illman, that plaintiffs should consult an independent attorney to review the documents he had prepared; e, failing to object to Defendant Randy l3i11man's forgery of legal documents and permitting the same to be notarized by a notary employed by his law office; f. failing to obtain the signature of the seller of the property, Defendant John H, Billman, on the HUn settlement sheet and disbursing funds without written approval from the seller; g. failing to provide an abstract of title to Plaintiffs including a copy of a known and recorded plan of lots; h. failing to fully e.xplain the terms of the documents prepared by him for the seller of the property and presented for signature: i. failing to not aCC(1pt representation of a party whom he had never met, never been contacted by and had been solicited to reprcsent by others with known adverse interests; and j, withholding known information lhlm a c1icnt to his clicnt's dctriment. 81. Defendant Attorney Irwin's ncgligcncc was a substantial faclor in bringing about the harm and damages caused to Plaintill's' propcrty by the nood. 82, Plaintift's were not informed that the property \Vas in a flood zone and proper representation including a title search of the property and settlement on the property would have uncovered the same. 83. Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Attorney Irwin's intentional and/or negligent actions, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the nood plain, or have purchased flood insurance, Plaintift's' home was severely damagcd in a nood and Plaintift's had no nood insurance, 84, Defendant Attorney Irwin's professionalneglig(mcc as a liccnsed attorney was a substantial factor in causing Plaintitl's not to purchase proper llood insurance which resulted in them suft'ering great tinanciallosses. 8S, Defendant Attorney Irwin's wiltl,1 and intentional disregard 1'01' of his duties as a licensed attorney and the needs of his clients, the Plaintitl's, was a substantial factor in causing Plaintitl's not to purchase propcr flood insurancc which resulted in them sutlering great financial losses. 86. Plaintiffs home was damaged in the flood at an estimated cost of repair to be $40,894.49 and their personal property at an estimated cost of $2,50000, for a total loss of $43,494,49 all of which was substantially caused by Defendant Irwin's negligent and/or intentional acts, WHEREFORE, Plaintitls pray that thin Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Harold S. Irwin, III in an amount of $43,494.49 for his professional negligence in the representation of Plaintitls, together with costs of this action, interest, attorney's fees and any additional amount the Court deems appropriate. COUNT NINE - HAROLI> S, I!{WIN, Ill. PUNITIVE I>AMAGES 87, Paragraphs 1-86 are hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein, 88, It is believed and therefore averred Attorney Irwin wilfully and intentionally abandoned his professional duties as a licensed attorney in an attempt to consummate the sale of his client's property by convincing the Plaintitls that he had searched the property'o title and that the settlement on the property was appropriate so that his actions would not be uncovered and that such actions on his part were deceitful, wilful, wanton, unconscionable and shock the sense of decency, involved bad motive and bad faith and to curb such future action, damages of a punitive nature are appropriate given the facts of the case, 90, It is believed and therefore averred Attorney Irwin wilfully and intentionally abandoned his professional duties as a licensed attorney in an attempt to consummate the sale of his client's property by convincing the Plaintitls (I) to purchase a property for which he had searched the propel1y's title and certilied the same even after he had determined it to be in a flood hazard area; and (2) to settle on the property even thpugh such was inappropriate so tlmt his actions would not be uncovered; and further that such II. The balaal:e or Ilw purchase price, ueing Filleen Thousllnd 11m! noli 00 ($1 S,OOO,OO) Dollars, in ellulIl monlhly illstlllllllents or Olle Hundred Ninety-eight IInd 23/100 ($ll!X.2.1) Ilollms, sllid nlolllhly illstlllllllenls cOIIllHoncing on FcurulIIY 18, 1996. Said monthly pllymeats shall hl' applied lirst to interost 011 the unpaid blllanco of the purehllSO price al a rail: or Ten aad ao/l 00 percent (10,00%) per unnum, IInd the ulllance tlwreol' applied to Ihl' rl'dnelion of IIIll unpllid principal blllance of the purchllse price. ThllSl' monthly pllynwnls shall he due on tho Illth day or ollch 1Il0nth subsequent to the conllllencemcnl dale as stilled herein, In the event thllt uny monthly payment is not roeeiVl'd hy Ihe Seller on or belore the fillh (5Ih) dllY uller the sume becomes due, the Porchasms shllll pay a lale charge or five percent (S,OO%) of the pllyment due, The monlhly paynlllnls shall continuo unlil Jllnuary 18. 2006, ut which tillle the Scller agrces to convey the Properly in Ice simple, hy speciul wlIITllnly deed, lice IInd clear of all llncumbrallclls, exeCI'I casements, building and use restrictions, visible or of record, IInd the PlII'chasers agree to pay the hulance of the purehllso price in clIsh, c. Purchllscrs may pay the entire uulance IInd uccllmulatea interest at IIny time without incurring IIny penlllty. 3. I'urehllsers agree to keep the Property luu good stille of repllir. Purchllsers "Brees not to mllke aay suhstanlial alteflltions in the condition of the Property without first securing wrillen consent of Seller. Ilowlwor, in the event that Purchasers becomes in aetiUllt as set forth in this IIgreenlellt, any and all improvemellts which Purchasers has n1lldo to the Property will be and hocome the property of .seller as of the dnte of delimit IInd will remain with the Property. 4. The Purchasers IIgree lit their expense, to keep the Property insured against fire, wilh oxlended coverage, with II compllny lIuthorized to do uusiness within the Commonwealth'of Pennsylvllnia lInd acceplill)le 10 .seller, lor a sullicient sum to cover the unpnid purchllso price, ",')"",' 1" "'''('1 r, ." ')'1 ( I/,l~! r.) 2 Exhibit "A" sllid insurllnce 10 be cllrried in thlllUlmo of Sellor, loss pllyablo 01'8110 Soller and the remainder 10 tho PlIrchllsers, liS thoir inlorllsts may npponr. 5. I'urchasers shnll be entitled to possession of Iho Properly immodialely upon eXl'Clll ion of this Agreelllent, 6, Purchasers hereby aSSUllIe all risk nnd responsibility for nny accidents, injury or dalllage to persons or property nnd to ilself and nny others on the Property. The Purchasers shall delcnd, indcnlllily and hold hnnnless tho Seller 11'01ll nnd ngainst all n(,tual 01' potential c1nims, delllnnds, linbilities, dalllages, losses nnd out-of-pocket expenses including reasonable attorneys' Ices whether 01' Ilot reduced to judglllent, order or award, on nccount of any Ilnd all injury or dalllllge 10 persolls or properly associllted with the Property. 7, All real estate taxes with regard 10 the cUlTent year will be prornled ns of Ihe dale or the execution of Ihis Agrecllleot. Therelll\er, I'urchllsers will be responsible for the payment of 1111 subsequent renl eslllte laxes as provided above. All renl estnte lransfer Inxes upon Onnl selllelllenl and cOllveynnce of the deed liS pl'llvided herein shnll be pnid equnlly by Ihe pnrlies herelo, II: however, Purchnsers nt any time shllll requesl Seller to convey the Properly 10 a third party, Seller shall be relievcd of Pllying nny transfer tllX IIssocialed therewith and Ihe same shnll be Ihe sole responsibility of the I'urehnsers or the third party. In addition to Ihe above, all the utililies shllll be prorated as of Ihe dllte of Ihis Agreement. Thereal\or, PlIrchllsers will be responsible Ihr payment of alllltilities and nny olher services performed which Ilre associaled with Ihe I'rnperly. /I, I'lII'chasers nnderstand and agree lhat lhe properly Is being purchased "as is" and Seller is making ao l'Cpresentations or warrllnties with regard 10 Ihe condition of any illlprOVl'llIenlS loclllcd on 111(1 property, 1"'1:1" '-)11'" "'1 ,. f\. (1"I,j 'If") t_ .It: J Exhibit "A" 9, Upon delilnlt by the Purchasers. in tendering any of the monthly payments due hcrcumlcr or in pcrlilrmance of any other obligations under this Agreement, for a period exceeding thirty PO) days, Seller may declare this Agreement to be terminated, retaining all payments made to that time as liquidated damages and in such event, the Prothonotary or any atlol'lley of any court or record is Ill'reby authorized to nppear for and to confess judgment in an llpplicnhle action of ejectmellt against said Purchascrs, their heirs and assigns and in favor of the said Seller, his heirs and assigns lill' the Property and to direct the immediate issuing of a Writ of Possession with Writ or Execution 1'01' costs, including allOl'neys' fee of at least live percent (5%) of Ihe unpaid halance of the purchase price, without notice nnd without asking leavc of COllli, or al the oplion of SelicI', said I'rolhonotary or allol'lley is hereby authorizcd to confess judgment against the Purchasers and in !llYor the Seller for the entire unpaid balance of the purchase price, tngether with costs, interest, insurance payments, taxes, etc., and with at least live percent (5%) added thereon as an allol'llcy l'ce, 10. The interest of the Purchasers conveyed by this Agreement shall not be assignable by sale, assignment, lease, pledge, subleasing 01' otherwise, in whole or in part. without the prior wrillen consent of tlm Seller. In the event such assignment, pledge, etc" is accepted, the rights stipulnted in Paragraph Nine shall accrue to the Seller, 11. Failure hy Seller to insist oa strict performance by Purchasers of any of the terms of this Agreement shall not be construcd as a waivm', release or relinquishment thereof. This Agreemcnt shall inure to and be binding upon the suceessors and assigns of the parties hereto, 12. The pl'Ovisions of this Agreement shall be consll1led and cnforced in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This Agreement represcnts the entire agreement and understanding between the parties hereto and therc arc no other terllls, obligations, cnvenllllts, rl~prescntlltiollS, statements or conditiolls, omlor otherwise, of any kind whatsoever cOllcernill!; this sale, The provisions or this Agrelllllent supersede any alld all prior writings r'i'l~ r:) 1'.' "it "f") . \ I I r ",I r: )1) 4 Exhibit "A" ~ ALL Ihllt certain 101 of grouud wilh the improvements thereon siluate in SoulhamJlton Township, CUlllberland Counly, I'ennsylvllnill, houndcd and described as follows: 1lI';(;INNING ala point onlllll ccntcrline ofCleverslJUrg Road atlhe cornel' of Lot No, 24 on plnn or Walnut Grove; thence along the cenlerline of Cleversburg Road, North 29 degrees 58 minutes 0'1 sccouds West, a dblanee 01'4,96 lee I to n point; thence nlongthe Slime, by a curve 10 Ihe righl having a radius of 2,430,00 leel, an are lenglh of 80,68 feet 10 a point at Lot No, 22 on said plan; thence along the hIller, Norlh 61 degr(]es 56 minules OS seconds East, a distance of 17Vllleetlo a point al olher lands now 01' formerly of John II, Billmun; thence along the latter, South 28 degrees 'II minules 47 seconds East, u distunee of82A910etlo a point III Lot No, 24 on suid plan; thence nlong the latter, Soulh 60 degrees OS minules 29 seconds West. a distllnce of 171,85 reel to a poinl, the l'lnee of IlI.;GINNING. CONTAINING 1'1,449.69 square feel alllllJOing Lot No, 23 as shown on the Plan of Walnul Grovc recorded in t!te CumIJl~r1and County Reeorder of Deed's 001eo in Plan !look 41. Page 59. 1IIo:ING part or the same properly which IIARRY OIll';llIIOLTZER and EDNA OIlEIUIOLTZlm, his wife, granlmlund conveyed unto JOliN II. IIILLMAN, granlor herein. by deed duted March 3 I, I '>76 and recorded in the Cumberlund Counly Recorder of Deeds Otl1ee in Deed Book "N", Volul\1e 26,I'uge 142. ANI) ImlNG the same properly which the said JOliN II.IIILLMAN sold by instullmenl Sides ugrecment to GlmALI) A. IlITNER and .JEANETm M. IJITNER, his wife, by ugreement daled June I, 1989, but which wus seized by the Sherill' of Cumberland Counly. I'em,sylvania, It TIIOMAS KLlNI':, in (,xecution ofajudgment entered ul No. 6119 Civil Term 1')94, Cumberlllnd Coullty Court of Common Pleas, IInd sold 10 Ihe said JOliN II. IlILLMAN, gl'llnlor hercin, 011 March 8, 199\ liner due udverlisementaccording 10 law, by deed recorded in Ihe ollice albr('said ill Deed Book 121, Page 207. SUIl.mCT, 1I0WI';Vlm, 10 various building and US(' restrictions I\S recOl'ded with the alhrcsaid plall ortots and as provided ill other deeds of record, , ". '.,',...' . , .r., '." "., I' " . ,:," \-; I' . ,i '; ,\ i',:. ',:-':'" ,':, , .... ., :-, ,': I' Hlnsylvania 1 55 ,: .;,lInl.hll'lulld , \ lI,'I ollico lor Ino rocordlnll of D41uols ~' (/ """.li\l\lrl"lirJ coun\y"Pt 0 . ~ 'f'l\I,,1 :::,.- h.\j~ ~ i<,tl,I:'l\d~.(hllofuffl(;t)O. d"J C\ d t CL 1."" /.. ,'...,...,."\-,.._ ayo '~.. _ 1 _~" ~ . ...~.,t...t<I';. , 'I"',.' .' "l'iucor , , . AI , ", \q\", "'"I' . I', ~ (' K I"m ~)4 'i' 1I\~,i, ~(;'i' Kl(hlbit"A" ,1:\1, */ddd "'-*...*.....* "4-* * l..... ..****.#1. *... It..*** CONV!!:N'l'lONA1, UUn:H I s com' E:S'l'IMA'l'I'; 01/10/96 11:54 AM *********.******************:***....********:. The following data is for information purposes only and accuracy of the figures hereinafter set forth i[3 lIot guarant<>ed. 'l'he actual. costs with respect to each transaction will vary depending upon Lhe circumstances. PurchasB Price Loan Amount (fixed) Estimated Interest Hate Term of the Loan (in years) '$ $ 19/900.00 15/000.00 10.000't 10 !!:STIMA1'!!:D CI,OSING COS1'S: I,oan origination E'ee Appraisal E'ee Credi tree Total Estimated Closing Cosls $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 251. 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 'fax Service Fee Title Insurance/Endorsements Document Preparation fee Recording fee state Transfer Tax, half share Notary ree Location Survey flood certification Miscellaneous !!:xpense(s) 0.00 Miscellaneous Credit(s) 0.00 251. 28 ESTIMAT!!:D PREPAID EXP!!:NS!!:S: Prepaid Interest (17 days) Hazard Insurance Reserves (14 mo.) Property Tax Reserves (14 mo.) $ $ $ 69.61 0.00 38.03. Total Estimated Prepaid Bxpenses $ 107.64 Total Closing Costs and Prepaid Expenses Plus Down Payment Less Closing Costs Paid by Seller Le s s Depos it $ $ $ $ 358.92 4,900.00 0.00 0.00 EstimatBd Cash Required $ 5,258.92 · Lender may requre 2 mont.hs payment in reserve. Monthly principal & Int.erest. Monthly Property Taxes Monthly Hazard Insurance Other Monthly payments !!:stimated Total Monthly Payment $ 198.22 $ 2.71 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 . ' ---------- $ 200.93 \.AJ I+"Q):,/) r\) C-) \"'ftM~ l~.>-QQ"%'l ---1-0 b(,:'-\l" -.. ..--.--....... --~_....,.-,..- ------. -...... - Exhibit "0" A. tiS Ih:PiIlIIlH'IlIIIIIItU!\lllg 1'V_IJ.hilU IIndlll1l1l1.'1I1 HIE HlIOIUMII(I" t'ONIAlNW IN IIUI(....~ 1',II.lt,1 "NI) IINI: "lIIIS IMI'tIlIlMH lit" INI-OIUI" lioN "Nil IS IIUNII HIMNlsm:U'1I1 'IIII-, IllS II' \'OlJ "HI. HIJ}lIIHI.tI III I'IU: " IlI-.IIIIIN. " NI'.mIU~:Nt'I-: 1'1 '1"1.1 \' tilt OIlIU( HMH'1I0N Will. lir. IMI'(IS!.H tiN \'IIU II'IIIIS IIUIIS IIt,I}IIIItU,'IIIIlt. HnuHIt',U /\tW'II!t'. Iltslnnt,HMINI:.'i 111"1 .,II,\o.;rllltmHIIIII'jllllll' ~t~~3jtl_~t!_:,'!f;:~iX!-!(-,'~~-: ~'!~!~\~~~!..,I.l!!:~ " +_ :11-,-- _~'!I~' .~_I!~_ .-.~_=..~=])~- i'~~;'-Nm-~I-H~-~ll1rt~ i'~;-~,.c N-;:-- ,t, V^ ~. (nll\, lll~, -..l " C'. NUT.:: thi\ 10""11' 11111I1.1....110 r,"c ,'~I. '''lkn~nll,1 .<111.1 'dlltlllclIl ....It An""nl.I.~kl"ItI'.JI,y lb. Mllt~l)lul.'toll au """'1\ Iltol1l Ul&l"~ "I'()t;" ~~" .",,<1<'111<1'''-' 110:<1"'1"1:. Ih.'\ ,'''' .1"","1""0;,,."" "'(,'1"','1..,....1""1 ",,'1 ~I"l ~,,' ,,,,I it"ll1,,,,"t i"II":I,,r~h ". Nllllle 111111 ^dllll',~~..r 1IIII"I'Iml'l': .:. N"llll' IUlll ^1111.-cu Ur Sellcr; "', Nllnlc .ud ^lftJl"cl! ull,clllll'l'i SI: ITU:M1:N' s,^n:~":NT (~Alt\. A, IIIl'I'I:NSn:I:1. .JOIIN II, nll.l.M.IN N/A III^NN^ M. 1111'I't;Nsn;~;I, (;, l"nlllcl"ly Lm:llllulIl II, SCllh'lllcnl ^"Cllll I, Sclllclllc"t Ullle: SlIlITIIAMI'MTIIN TIIWNSllll' IIAIlOl.nS.IIIWIN,11l JANIIAIIV IY,I996 ('lIMUI:III.ANII 1:()IINT\',I'A l'IIICCU(SclllcllIcut: ('AllUSU: l'A - .I. SUI\tI\-1t\Il\' (>>I<' IU,IUU>>W.:H'S TIl^NSI\("I'lON: K. StlMM^IlV Ofo' St:l,u:n's TltANS^CTION: lUll l:llw,'i .'''IOIlN I' 11111'. HIli,\! UIIIlIU .\\'t,II' ~1II1 1iI11lS'i ""IOIlNI' 11m: 1"0,<;1'.1.1.1-:11: _11I1 1'~II',ld.S"",'.I'II'" '__.'_ '..____ .._____.___. _.~___.!'!~~I _,WI ("'''(14d:i4It~I'li<~ ~._~~~ tHl-'\;"'I;I'I'''1''')-'- 'Wl-F~~;;Ii;f-;;,-,,:-,ty"------ ". I~! '-_ ~~I~!~I!~~':~~ I~!!~'!~,. t~I.'~:i:!~~jL. __..:.~ ~~=.=l\'i'li!I . ~Iii 11',1 ~~~ .111'--------.----.....-----.-----...- ------. -~Ij, -- ~ ~.':_=l\!!lI~.j~t~._II~_~--'''r..~I'!'!~s!J0.-~!!..I.!'!'~..-=_ =:~== _.. ^,ij~~.il;~~ili7i~rirlin' J;j:,-~.r~li<<ii.-...;.UI'- J~'f!_!:~J/!_~~~!..'~~_.___~___ _~___ j~~!'l~.rO\'l1llun '1'0 __0__ _!~~....l'!~~JJ~.(!..-_________..________,___ _1U1 t'!'Unlt])_et 11IM S,t"",IT;11~' 111'1"~J(,11I11(,/1tl'J(, ,1ir'IL .fUN Sdk~.ITurt ,il;;:-'K4iw:..-~-;W- ~.IO,), W~lfj'Se"'u l~------~--- 4111 -i-ii~~--~---_.---_.. - 411. -,il '-4Ii - -jili-i:ilii~;; -,\^il'iiiN-i:-lllii,:.IIIlI~I-llllllll'I\\ ril---- -.---------:Jij-illl:f.II- -~iu:-ilm,;.~i'ljijiirlrmiii,l',,""ili::iJ:i.:i(-- --,.,---;J.iir.o lUll, ,\o\UiimF,\iiiiI\' 1111 !-lIIlIlIIUUI,WEtI: ~1I11, Ht',11l1('1'I0N.~ IN ^"llll'NT 11!11~.'ll':r.I.t',lll J'!L_J_~l~~,:!~,~!,I_'~~~.'~,,!~'__. _. ____.... _'__'___ \lMIIIIIII -~!~!:....!'Y;~~~.L~~!L___._..._~__ ..l'!!-~'!.I~~..I'.~I!.!'~,-'!~I...~.~,!!.."!.~,!,,'!I...~}_:~!.!.I.I!.::l!!!:tE__ =-==-Ti;i,ii",!ii.. l!!J. ~~llk.!.!~ul ~:".i~.lu S~I!~J!!::-: 14(10) --=.-IT:jTTM' _lUI__~,Jj~Itl!:!~,~!1J.~~~'m_.______....__._ __'__'__, .\!!~. t-"~~!I~!8.!"~'1~!4~t'.!.~'!~t<II" In'' .1r!!_t!i."lltlllll~.:!!l~&~ I"~n 1'-1'-~-----'--------- 'II' -ji"Ii:' ___ J~~," 1'.1"tlMO.>~K111';'!!CIl.el"ftn J~~-----'--' Sill. JilM - - _ ,~ilii ~" -~ =~1i~Ij."!~!~;;III; ~ll.i~;~~';!;l,;!~.~i.)if!~'~~-==-= --- ~_..__ A:ljl!!~;I~.I\I' 1,;,'l~~ii~l unl,.td ,,is,IIt, .~IU ~'II>~!"'~I!]"~"" UI,IJ,~!~lf' I~_I 11111"''1(, --'7( _~JU ~:!I10_<1\-OlIl.~~. IHilllm."llI III/18m, J) I .~~~'!!!t'~~w. _ _ H I ""I~ I~tes III ~d"~.I'IoI\,'~ -'IJ Sdl,.,ITUet ""JI \-'\\';l~I;:'iC\l~' _ _'.~ - J[1. W-'I~,i,'i."'e' JI~, ~U, J~~ ~i~ .ii", ~ ~ili, j!!:- - -- .- __" .. ~Il. WI, -~'ljj. 1ii ~~ ~ilji. 'i-j"I':,i:'i',\iii-li\':Il:i-,iiilii,tiii-I\\:6i - - Ili"lIiHll1' -~l!I, "IIH.\!. "":111 IC 'I:jflii,o.; 1"1l1l~1 SI'.I.U:1l lUll ",\SI~n,r,"rNI'IIIIl-M 1I0UlIlI\\'I',U (,1M' (',\\;11.\'1' ,'iI':I"IU:"It:Nr'IOII.'M 0;1-:1,1,1-:11 - 1~1! ~II!~,:,-, n!!~.~.'I.!'. ~Ju~' !'!!,-,-! Il'~I'''~,:~{I~m'.UY) _~_ ______~~!~.:!.'~ll hUI li''''1 IIlM't11l1 .1"" 1.,,':.11,, 111/ 1<" ."""1<1'" '.lI,II",'I", II.",,,,,,, Ih.., llill 111.1'111111 -(,iil-r::;;~;;i,~~~tij~,;,~s;li;j-!,i;.7-fii;---'-"--- -, UIIUiV6'ftJ 06/,IONti .Il60 --~ JlU1J .I11.1,I'NiII 1'1,'Jllr.o -----l"':ll"iT 11,11'1,. .\ 1'1111,'1 llllllllllltlWt.1I IIlJ.IIM 6IIJ, (:MilI t'llllM _"'._ 10 !i~;l,L.;" Il,..w <M~lulh' fCVl",,~.I Ih" S~ul"II"'1l1 Sl.lI~III1,'I1' ..MII" II": 10.:'11111"'" ~IM."'I~,II\,. .I"II-.:h,f, lilt. I"M .,M) a~",l}ICI. .Wcu.....ll ,,( .1l1~'tIII>(. 1ll,.1 <lIIhun.11111111. 111"1'" nJ 11l~ ,".."unl '" lo~u~!U Ihi, 1'.1...11".. 11011111.-, <elMy 110.11 h~v~ It..dud. ~'1'~\l1 !l1I1I 1I111f.1 Stllklllfnt Rlale1''''~' Ilh,,,.... ..,.1 aull""i1.II", Stllkflllltll ^I~~ III """'.Ii.. Ih'llil'IlIM"" ""h<.I~" Ill' Ill} ~~~"IIIlI. 1~'''WUJjlllt 11..11111I S~1I1~1l",.,f ^A~IlII, I"~ '<<f'I".ihl. f,,, II". _"f~Y Of ....tldilyQfll.. dl.t..uWlIMnt AlllllUloU (If 1114 ''OlfI...lcICll_lo( d"'I.....~ nl.lW hy ,~h...u ^n~ lI~cl~'1 nll..:,1 ,,,,lIud,, okl~'''lt,1 \lUll ScUlfnllllll "'flll MUIII...kr IllllY I.. '''IIU...J b~ Sttll""'''1I1 Aa"ll r)// ',-'/-) ,.a'J'Ja:':Lo-..Li"'X b~}&L::"'" A /(.;'(, nU]'lt uMl'v liil'(.i;'Nsn;r:1 , . :LJl.Ll<"L<'I,,'- 'o/L . > ....whdz.. ~ Vl.iIt UIANE 1II1"(Nsnft'ru: SiiCLiiilJOIIN 1I.IiiLLMAN Sl!l,Ll!l1 --- AIIlJllliSS------- ADDRESS , I 'I" 1111.I101;01 uf Illy "1l",~k<II:'" II.... III till S~lllclI"'~1I SI"tl1lflll "'hldlll~n l'Ulllnol.. II".. II kl.",.I. '""lUlll u(1he 1\11. ""hidl ""I I~i"".1II 11."*'"11 bt ~ II)' 111I.I1I,,.t.:"'ilP....1 1'...ulllll:IIo:UlCIllO.'l"..ldllthm..<ji'''1 ;j .. .{ 17;.';,(}'( ,~! -.-- .... .. ,,-, {,......, .)":.. - . SIi'ITl.IiMIiNT AlIliNT II /lli-' r<L' /' i' . Ij'^,ili- EX1II1I1'l' "Il" .,... " \ I ,.. b~ ~f;. -,:,1- ~r .~ ,.. {,';" , " 11,1(,l (',-, ~-.U" \ .,' f..J p.. -:-C (L .I--i c./r, C':"t , ,_,1 fi~-, 'I I ti~~:: J L , , I "''', F;: " , 1,1 r'~; '"'~J () U' , ) <>- ~ ~;$ o-IU :21 gz-. 0-1 OZ 1J.l_ Q::l ~o ~~ < 80- <~ z!Xl :~ z <i 1J.l0-l z ~~~ ~ ...J>- eJ~ :"'~~ ..: !Xl::: "J .0 ~ t< "' z < ..J~v) ~o ::i 01J.l0-l -0-1 ~.., f~' ~ '" '., :;;0.., liittj ;:1-00 0 '''. on :@ 'z !Xl Iii -l ~ :I on , t; ::; , 0-11-< ~ ., o~o ' 0 ~< ~ ~ ~ "' LlJ(/] "... ;..~ 0:: '^ lol Z '" usi= IJ.lz ;,; 0-' '" 0 o f, z r: '" N z]~ ZZ o ;: ~ ::; ~ U I-<IJ.l 0 './) ;- 5' 00..: (/]0.. <-0 :dt: ~O~ u :r: '.r, Zo.. '" '; -0 o:d () 7. to I-<U-1 I-<IJ.l - '/.. 1J.l- ,'- :a Cl ~ :r:o:: ~o- 0..:I: ~ -g . -0 ~;8~ ~ '" z::: 0.. :;:~ ,. f- . z ~ ::2 f-:gj z ';? ::J ) O..:U ~o V) ,., ~ Zo r-' ::; d u:J 'f.; Uc;j <( ~;)] ~ ~ p z 01 W o-I~I-< ~ ~ ~ ,'1 UJ .,' ~ ~1J.l >- -. -l Vl< L, ~ <t: "'U '" ,",!Xl ~ ctllJ.l< ~d '~ ~ ~ ..: ::r: IJ.l . (/] 0", ~ .., U P" -, tlllt'i\).\I\IIII'iI.\llllll,II\"'>llIhu <<-1,"11<-01 0" II 'I, II !Il' ,\\1 1l"li','1! (,_, ill LI~ i'_' II 111'\1 01'0'11 " ClARY A. IIIPPENSTEEL IInd DIANNA M, HIPPENSTEEL, PllIintifls. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, I'ENNSYLV AN/A v. CIVIL MTION" LAW JOliN II. BILLMAN, RANDY BILLMAN, DOUGLAS R. HEINEMAN, Individually and I/a B & II AGENCY REALTORS, and NO, 9R"211 I CIVIL TERM HAROLD S. IRWIN, III, Defendants JURY TRIAL OF TWEL VE DEMANDED ~.sW.;J{ WITII NEW MATTER AND CROSS CLAIM OJ! IlEFENDNfI' JO...l11S II. /lILLMAN TO: GARY A. HIPPENSTEEL and DIANNA M, IIIPI'ENSTEEL, Plaintin:s, and their attorney, JOSEI'll D, BUCKLEY YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO nm ENCLOSED NEW MATTER WITfIIN TWENTY (20) DA YS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT MA Y BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. 1"3, Admitted, 4. Aner reasonable investigation, the answering [)efeJ1(hll1t is without knowledge or information suftkient to limn a bdief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, The averments arc therefore dllcmed dcnied and proof is demanded if relevant to the claims against Defendant John Billman. 5-10. Admitted, II. It is admitted that as of January I, 1996 Defendant John Billman specifically knew that approximately 1/2 of till) propcrty descrihed in paragraph 7 and recorded in plan book 41, page 59 in the Cumberland County Recorder of Deeds was localed in a hazard boundary. 12"27, A flcr rcasonablc investigation, the answering Defendant is withoul knowledge or infhnnation sufticient to f(mn a belief as to the truth or Illlsity of the averments contained in these paragraphs. The avcrmcnts arc thcrefore dccmed dcnil)ll and proof is dcmanded if relevant to the claims against Defcndant .Iohnllillman. 211. Dcrcndanl John II. Billman IIdmits that hc ncver directly conveyed to the Plaintiffs that thc propcrty was in a flood hazard area, By way of fbrthcr response, DcfcndanlJohn H. Billman never met the Plaintiff); as the lmnsactionand the conveyance was handled hy the other individuals mentioned in paragraph 2X. In addition, hy way of further response, the tilel that a portion of the pl'Operty is in a flood haZilrd area is amalter of public record, 29, Admitted. 30. It is admitted thatlkt,~ndant John Billman did not attend the meeting and sign the Sales Agrecment. As indicated in paragraph 2X, the othcr Dcfcndants handlcd this transaction Illr Defendant John II, Billman, 31, After rcasonahle invcstigation, tbe answcring Dcfendant is without knowledge or information sufticient 10 tlll'll1 a belief as to the trutb 01' lillsily of the averments contained in this paragmph, Tbe avermcnts arc thcret(lI'l: dcemcd denied and proof is dcmanded if relcvantto the e1aim~i against Defendant Jobn Billman, 32. It is admitted that Defendant John Billman never told PlaintitT anYlhing ahout the propcrty since he ncvcr met them, 3).35. After reasonahlc invcstigation, the anslwrlng Defcndant is without knowledge or inf(lI'Il1atiOIl sufficient to form a helieI' as to the truth or tidsity of the averments contained in these paragraphs. The averments are therefore deemcd denied and proof is demanded if relevant tOlhe claims against Defendant John Billman. 36. Denied as stated, To the contrary, the Sales Agreement is a document whieh speaks t(lI' itself and it is denied tliat thcrl' is any legal requirement f(lI' the Agreement to mention flood insurance, I I' 37.41. After reasonablc investigation, the answering Defendant is without knowledgc or information sufficienl to f(l[fl1 a helieI' IlS 10 lhe truth or tillsity of the averments contained in these pmagraphs, The averments are theref()re deemed denied and proof is demanded if relevant to the claims against Defendant John Billman. WHEREFORE, AnsIVering Defendant demands judgmenl in his thl'or and dismissal of Plaintiff);' Complaint with prcjudiee. I, f' 1 CQl.lli.T 0 N E .J 011 n Rl1lnlllll.-..E:r.llll.l!..Jrnd-MWcprcsclltll ti!!Jl 42. The averments of paragraphs I through 41 of this Answer are herehy ineotpowtcd hy rcfcrenee. 43-44. Thc avcrmcnts of thcsc paragl'llphs arc conclusions of law to which nOl'Usponsc is rcquircd, To thc \~xtcnt a rcsponsc may bc dccmcd rcquircd, thcsc avcrmcnts arc denicd and proof is demandcd, WHEREFORE, Answcring Ddcndant dcmands judgmcnt in his tlwor ami dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prcjudicc. COlJNI.TWO ,John Blllmllll..: Fraud -Punitive ..Damage 49. Thc avcrmcnts of paragraphs of I through H arc hcreby incorporated by rcference. 50. Dcnicd to thc contrary. Ddcndant .fohn Billman did not intentionally withhold inthnnation and no conduct on his part was dcccitful, outragcous, involved bad motivc or otherwisc cntitlcd Plaintiffs to punitive damag\'s against Dclcndant John Hillman. WHEREFORE, Answering Dcfendant dcmands judgmcnt in his fll\'or and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudicc, COUNT Tlllum Defendant Randy Billman .. FralHt.ll.Jl!LMisrepresentathm 51 -57, Thc avcrmcnts of thcsc paragraphs rcfer to a party other than thc answering Defendant and therethrc no rcsponse is rcquired, To thc extcnt a rcsponse may hc deem cd required, thcsc avermcnts arc dt'nicd as they pcrtain to thc answcring Delcndant. WHEREFORE, Answcring Dclcndant dcmands judgmcnt in his favor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudicc. COUNT FOUR Bandy Billman .. 1'r.lU!.d..:..r.rnillJ~ 58-60. Thc avcrmcnts of thcsc paragraphs rctcr to a party othcr than the answering Dclcndant and thercl(lrc no rcsponsc is I'llquircd, To thc cxtent a rcsponse may bc dccmcd \'cquircd, thcsc avermcnts arc dcnicd as thcy pcrtain to thc answcring Dcfcndant. WHEREFORE, Answering Dclcndant dcmands judgmcnt in his favor and dismissal of Plaintift:s' Complaint with prcjudice. .' CilllKUlYE RlIlldy Blllmlln - Profcsslonlll NClllIgcncc 61.66. The averments or these paragraphs reflJr to a party other than thlJ answering Defendant and therelhre no response is rlJquired, To the extent a respun,;e may he dlJemed required, these averments me denied as they pertain to the answering Delendant. WHEREFORE, Answering Delllndant demands judgment in his filvor and dismissal of PlaintilTs' Complaint with prlJjudke. mll.J~JJ)l.:\ Dcfcndllllt RlIndy BlIIlIIlIII - P1!n.W.Y~ 67-6S. The averments of these paragraphs reler to a party other than the answering Defendant and therelhre no response is required, To the extent a responSl' may he deemed required, these averments are denied as they pl'rtainto the answering Defendant. WHEREFORE, AnswlJring DerlJndant demands judgmlJnt in his III 1'01' and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prlJjudiec. LQlINT SE~ Douglas R. Ilclncmlln - Froud lIml Misrcprcscntlltlon and Profcssional NClllIgcncc 69-75. The averments of thlJse paragraphs refer to a party other than the answering Defendant and therel1Jre no response is required. To the extent a responSlJ may he deemed required, these averments arc denied as they pertain to the answering Defendant. WHEREFORE, Answering Dclendant demands judgment in his filvor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. \ . , , g)llNT EIGill M~Jdllnt Harold S. Irwin, 11I- Profl:ssionlll NClllillcncc 76-R6. The averments or these paragraphs rercr to a party other than the answering Defendant and therelllre no response is required. To the extent a response may he deemed required, these avernwnts are denied as they pertain to the answering Defendant. WIIEREFORE, Answering Delendant demands judgment in his III 1'01' and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. llUJKI.'JI..J.m; .llilrold S. Irwin. III - PuoillYe Ilamal:c~ 87-90. The averments of these paragraphs refer to a party other than the answering Defendant und tlll'rcfore no response is required, To the extent u response muy be deemed required, these avermcnts ure denied as they pertuin tothe answering Defendant. WHEREFORE. Answering Defendant demands judgment in his tilVor and dismissul of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. NI':W MATTEn 91. Plaintiffs' Complaint is harred or reduced hy the eontrihutory or eompamtive negligence of the Plaintiffs, 92. Pluintiffs' Complaint is harred by the doetrinc ofvoluntury ussumption of the risk, 93. Plaintiffs' Complaint is barred by the terms of the Installment Sale Agreement which is attached to Plaintiffs' Complaint and is hereby identi!ied as Exhibit "A" including but not limited to pumgraph 6 und S of the Agreement. 94. Plainti!'!"s claim for punitive damages against this Defendunt is in violution of und is precluded by Artie"~ I, * 10, and the Fit\h, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amcndments to the United States Constitution, and by Article I, 9, I n, II, 12, 17 and 26 of the Pennsylvania Constitution for reusons including the t(lllowing: u. The claim for punitive dumages is intended to punish the Derendunt in a manner which is tantumounttothe imposition of a criminal tine bused upon conduct und u mentul stute which is not detined with suftieient preeisionto notify Defendunt inudvanee of thut conduct which will give rise to the imposition of punitive damages und violates Defendunt's right to procedural and suhstuntive due proeess: h. The umounl of the penulty that may be imposed as punitive dutnuges is indeterminute inthutthere are no standards or surtieient standurds governing the discretion of the fact-tinder in determining the severity of punishmentlo the intlicted, which violales defendant's right to proeedurulund substantive due process; c, The claim IiII' punitive dumages constitutes un excessive tine und thercl(lre deprives the Defendant of the constitutional guarantel' that excessive tines shall not he imposed: d. The punitive damagL' claim discriminates against Defendants on the Inu:is of wealth in that different Defendants 1\11' the same act out oased only upon the difference in material wealth, and Illl1her a lack of standards Ill!' imposing punitive damages allow the nlcl,lindcr to impose punishment on one Defendant while refusing to impose punishment on another dcl(mdant for engaging in the same or similar conduct and, therclllre, is irrational, arhitrary and capricious and a deprivation of Defendant's constitutional rights to equal protcction ofthc law; and e. Thc claim 1'01' punitive damagcs amount to an ex post facto law and a punishment which is retrospcctive in operation impairs Defellllant's right to contract and access to the courts constitutes an uncertain remedy and is otherwise unconstitutional under the Constitution of the United States, mid under the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant demands judgment in his tilvor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. j I I COUNTER CLAIM 95. The averments of Defendant John Billman's Answer with New Matter are hereby incorporated by reference, 96. Plaintiffs have lililed to make the timely payments which werc due under the Agreement of Sale which is attached to Plaintiffs' Complaint as Exhibit "A" and has been recorded in the Cumherland County oflice of Reeordcr of Deeds at hook 547, page 260, 97. Dclendant John II, Billman had no (,ontaet whatsoever with the Plaintiffs in this case and therefore made no representations or misrepresentations to the Plaintiffs. 98. Defendant John Billman hereby asserts a counter claim against the Plaintiff for any and all amounts due under the Agreement of Sale including out of pocket expenses, including reasonahle attorneys tees. WHEREFORE, Detendant John II. Billman demands judgment against the Plaintiffs in an amount to he determined hut hclieved to be k,ss than $25,000.00 plus pre and post judgment interest. NEW MATTI<:I{ PURSlJANT TO PR. RCP, 2252Id} J.l!bnJllil.nlllll v. RIlrnb'..Hlllman. DouiUM.l!JWIlCllllln. Indlvldulllly IIlld till 1l.&1lAL:cncy ItCllltl!l:S..lln.dJ1Jlf.l!.ld,li...1nvlll. III 99, The avcrments ofl'laintifls' ('omplaint, which averments have heL,n expressly denied, lire hereby incorporated hy rclerenee Illl' the limited purpose of this cross claim. 100. IfPlnintilTs a1'l' entitled to recover from any party, which is expressly dcnicd, thcn Defendants Randy Billman, Douglas lIeincman, Individually and tla B&H Agency Realtot's and Harold S. Irwin, III arc alonG lianle to Plaintiffs or lianle over to Dct'endant John II, Billman by way of further contribution and/or indemnity or arc jointly and/or severally liable to Dcfendant John H, Billman on account of his own negligence or other lianility producing conduct as alleged in the pleadings. 101. If Defendant John II. Billman is found liable to Plaintil'ls, which liability is expressly denied, its liability is secondary and passive to the liability of Defcndants Randy Billman, Douglas Heincman, Individually and tla B&H Agency Rcaltors and lIamld S, Irwin, III whose liability is primary and active, i II I 1 WHEREFORE, Defcndant John H. Billman dcmands judgment against Defendants Randy Billman, Douglas Heineman, Individually and tla B&H Agency Realtors and Harold S. Irwin, III for all sums that may be adjudged against Defcndant.John \I, Billman in lilVOI' of Plaintiffs; and in the alternativc, Defendant .John H. Billman demands judgment against Dcfendants Randy Billman, Douglas Heineman, Individually and t/a B&H Agency Realtors and Harold S. Irwin, III for contribution and/or indemnity for the appropriate part of thc amount of damagcs and costs awardcd to Plaintiffs, if any. L ::RTSON DliARDZd'LL:MS~ OIT~ "'" g . ",~"', L' ~re-- I.D, Number 49X 13 tl,rc Tcn East II igh Street Carlisle, PA 17013,3093 (717) 243,3341 Datc: Ih IOu', I rq N'I~\" J Attorneys for Defendant .John H. Billman " ~ '- " ,. ~ ... '~ , ,~ ;n ')' I. 'j ; :~- 3. Defendant Randy Billman is an adult individual curnmtly residing at 300 Bolton Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17013. Randy Billman is a licensed professional real estate agent currently and at all timcs pertincnt to this action employed by Defendant J)oughts R, Heinemann tla 13,11 Agency Realtors with ol'/iccs located at 163 North Hanover Strect, Carli sic, P A 17013. Randy Billman is the son 01' Delimdant John H, Billman. 4, Defendant Douglas R, Heinemann is an adult individual currently residing at 130 Wilson Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, P A 17013, 5, Defendant Douglas R. Heinemann is a licensed prol'essionall'cal estate broker practicing under the Iictitious name B,H Agency Realtors with ol'/iees located at 163 North Hanover Street Carli sic, P A 17013. 6, Defendant Harold S. Irwin, III, is an attorney licensed to practice law in this Commonwealth with ol'/ices located at 35 High Street, Carlisle, PA 17013 and is open to the public 1'01' hire for a fee. 7. As 01' January I, 1996, John H, Billman owned a lot 01' land located in South Hampton Township, Cumberland County, PA containing 14,449.69 square feet and being Lot No. 23 as shown on thc Plan 01' Walnut Grovc, as recorded in the ol'liee 01' the Recorder 01' Deeds in and 1'01' the County 01' Cumbcrland in Plan Book 41, Page 59 (hOl'einal'tcr called "the property"), 8. The property was listed 1'01' sale through Defendant Douglas R. Hein<!l11an tla 8.H Agency Realtors and had becn listed 1'01' sale through the efforts 01' Defendant Randy Billman. 9, The property had a 1'01' sale sign posted on it citing 3.H Agency Realtors as the broker and Randy Billman as the sales agent, as well as telephone numbers 1'01' prospective purchasers to contact said agency and agont. 10. As of January I, 19'>6, Defendant .Iohn II, Billman had retained as his attorney Humid S, Irwin Ill, Esquire whose omces were located at 35 Eastlligh Street, Carlisle, PA 17013, 11. As of January I, 19%, Defendants John L. Billman, Randy Billman and Douglas R, lIelnemann, and lIarold S, Irwin III specilically knew and/or should have known that approximately one halfofthe property was located in a !lood hazlIrd area, 12, On or about JanuHl'Y 13, 1996, the Plaintiffs were searching for a lot of land to purchase and upon which to place a manufactured home they had just purchased, 13. The Plaintiffs had nevl~r owned real property before and were ignorant as to the steps needed to purchase the same. 14. Plaintl ffs drove past the property, liked its location and size and noting the information contained on Defendant Heinemann's sign telephoned Defendant Randy Billman, 15, From about January 13, 1990 through January 17, 1996, Defendant Randy Billman had telephone conversations with Plaintiffs regarding the propcrty and Plaintiffs' desire to place a manufactured home on the property if they were to purchase the same, 16. Defendant Randy Billman disclosed that the property was owned by his father, Defendant John Billman, had formerly had a mobile home located on the property and that hook,ups for water and septic were in place and further informed the Plaintiffs that they could buy tbe property on a sales agreement and have Defendant John II, Billman act as the bank. 17. Defendant Randy Billman asked If the Plaintiffs wished to purchase the property and when they would be able to settle and Plaintiffs told Defendant Randy Billman that they could purchase the property as soon as possible. 18, Defendant Randy Billman told Plaintiffs that In order to save lime and money, he would have his father's aHomey, Defendant lIarold S. Irwin III ("Altomey Irwin") represent them in the tl'Unsaetionand that th"y would not have to hire a lawyer to represent themselves, 19. On 01' about January 17, 199(" the Plaintiffs verbally agreed Ihallhey would purchase the properly for $19,900.00 and would finance $15,000.00 by means of a sales agrecment with Defendant John II. Billman with an annual interest rate of ten (10%) percent amortized over a ten year period, The l'laintiffs were told by Defendant Randy Billman that their paymcnts would be a little less than $200.00 pel' month. 20. Defendant Randy Billman and Defendant Douglas R, lleineman did not have the Plaintiffs sign a standard written Agreement for the Sale and Purchase of Real Estate which generally sets forth the terms and conditions of the offer of 'j prospeetive buyer whieh will be accepted 01' eOllntered by a seller of the land, 21. The Plaintiffs were told by Defendant Randy Billman to meet him and his father, Defendant John II, Billman, at Attorney Harold S, Irwin, Ill's law offices the next day for s(,ttlement on the property and that he and the attorney would lake care of everything. 22. On or about Janullry 18, 1996, Plaintiffs mel with Defendants Randy Billman and attorney Harold S, Irwin, III, Esquire in Attorney Irwin's law offiee seeking legal assistance from Attorney Irwin which hc agreed to rendcr at which time thc Plaintiffs were presented with an Instalhllcnt Sales Agreement for the property (a true and correet copy of which is attached hereto, murked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof), a Conventional Buyer's Cost Estimate, (a true and correct copy of whieh is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made 1I part hereof) and a Certificate of Title (alrue and eorrect copy ol'whieh is attached hereto, mnrked Exhibit "e" and made a part hereof) and aU,S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Settlement Statement (a true and eorreet eopy of whieh is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "D" and made a part hereof). 23, Although prior to thc mccting with Attorncy Irwin on January 18, 1996, Plaintiffs had ncvcr spoken with him, Attorney Irwin agrccd to rcprcscnt them in thc settlemcnt of thc property, agreed to perform a titlc scarch of the propcrty and chargcd Plaintiffs $250,00 for attorney's Iccs for docul11ent preparation, settlemcnt and closing fee and titlc cxamination, together with a two ($2,00) dollar fee Il)r notary charg"s as reflected on Exhibit "[)". 24. In preparation fl)r the mecting of January 18, 1996 and prior to the issuance of the aforcmentioned Ccrti Iieatc of Titlc for the property, Attorney Irwin did not copy nor did he rcview the Plan of Walnut Grove said plan being recorded in the o I' rice of the Rccorder of Deeds in and for the County of CUl11bcrland in Plan Book 41, Pagc 59, 25, At no timc prior to, during or after the mccting of January 18, 1996 in his oflicc, did Attorney Irwin providc Plainti rfs with a writt'Jn or verbal statcment as to his dual representation or both buyer (the Plaintiffs) and seller (Defendant John H. Billman), the implications of the common rcprcsentation and the advantages and disadvantages involvcd, 26, At no timc prior to, during or after the mecting of January 18, 1996 in his ofliee, did Attorney Irwin rceeive informcd consent from Plainti ffs as to his dual representation of both they as buyer and Dcfendant John Il Billman as seller of the property. 27, Paragraph 4 of the Installment Sales Agreement states in part: "Thc Purchascrs [the Plaintiffs] agree at their expcnse to keep the propcrty insured against lire, with extended covcragc." 28, At no time did Dcfendants John H, Billman, Randy Billman, Douglas R. Heincmann or Harold S, Irwin, III, Esquire inform or convey to the Plaintiffs that the property was in a /lood hazard area. 29. Defendant John H, Billman did not attend the meeting of January 18, 1996 at Attonley Irwin's office, 30, At Ihe said mceting, in the presence of Attorney Irwin, Defendant Randy Billman forged the name of his lilther, Defendant John H. Billman to the sales agreement prepared hy AlIorncy Irwin and then signed his own name as witness to the signaturc he had just forged, 31. A notary public in the office of Attorney Irwin was requcsted to notarize the sllid forged document and did 30 notarize Ihe document. 32. At no time did any of the Defendants tell Plaintiffs of tbe property being in the flood hazard area and more particularly that tbe previous home on the property and the existing hook-ups for wator and sewer were in thc sai(1 flood hazard arca, 33. On 01' about January 18, 1996, as required hy their agrcement with Defendant John H. Billman, Plaintiffs contacted an insurance agent and purchased liability and property damages, as well as fire and casually insurance for the homo they were placing on the property, 34. Plaintiffs did not purchase flood insuHlnce for the property, 35. On or after January 19, 1996, Plaintiffs having finalized payment on a manufactured hOl11e, contracted to have their home installed on the property, Installation was completed thereafter to the then existing water and septic hookuups located on the property. 36, Plaintiffs' agreement with Defcndant John H. Billman docs not disclose the need for flood insurance or that the property and the hook-ups for utilities and septic arc located in the flood hazard zone, 37. On 01' about Septemher 7, 1996 and again on September 13, 1996 storms struck South Hampton Township in the area of the property whieh caused Burd Run to fillund leave its banks Oooding Pluintiffs' property, The area was later declared a fedeml disustel' arou, 38. As a result of the Oood, Plaintiffs' home was severely damaged and yet repaired at an estimated cost of repair to he $4(),894.49 and their personal property at an estimated cost of $2,500,()0, l'or a total loss of $43,394.49. 39. Plaintiffs contacted their insurance carrier and were informed aller investigating the loss that the property was in a tiood zone, had no tiood covemge and thus their loss was not covered hy insurancc, 40. Thcreafter, Plaintiffs uncovered that the property was approximately one half in the Oood zone, that their home was placed in the Oood zone. Had they been informed of this fact, they would have purchased tiood in~uranee, which insurance would have been approximately two hundred ($200.00) dollars more a year or may not have purchased the property. 41. As a result of the failure to be informed that the property was in a Oood hazard area, thus triggering a need for Oood insurance, and of the aforementioned Ooods, Plaintiffs suffered extreme damage to their home and their personal property. COUNT ONE - JOHN H. BILLMAN - FRAUD AND MISREPR~:SENTATION 42. Parugraphs 1-41 are incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth heroin. 43. The fact that a property for sale is located in a 1100d plain is a material fact. 44. The fact that a property is in a 1100d plain creates a potential hazard on the land to Ii fe and/or propel1y which must be disclosed to potential buyers, 45. Defendant John H. Billman, his agents and attorneys with full knowledge of his duties to disclose the fact, intentionally concealed the fact that the property he was selling WllS in a 1100d plain hy 110t infonning the Plaintiffs of the same. 52, Pursuant to the Unfair Trade Pmetices and Consumor Pl'Otection Law, 73 P,S, Sections 201-1 ot. seq., (UTpCPL), Plaintiff.~ fall within the law's definition of Buyer. 53. Pursuant to the UTPCpL Defendant John Billman fhlls within the law's definition of Seller, 54. Defendant John Billman, his agents, attol'l1ey, and those acting at his direction and/or on his behalf concealed 01' failed to disclose a hidden, latent defect in the properly he sold to Plaintiffs, that being thatlhe property was in a nood hazard zone. 55. The fact that the pl'Operty was In a nood hazard zone was serious and dangerous such that it presented a hazard to the health, safety and welfare of the occupiers of the property so as to pose a serious risk of harm to the occupiers or to thc structure to be placed on the property. 56. Defendant John Billman's, his agents', attorney's and those acting al his direction and/or on his behalf, actions in concealing the fact that the property was in a nood hazard area or failing to disclose the defect after being told that the Plaintifrs mobile home would be placed on the property at the same location of a fonner home, resulted in ascertainable loss and damages to plaintiffs property. 57. Defendant John Billman, his agents, attorney, and those acling at his direction and/or on his behalf engaged in a course of fraudulent conduct which either created a likelihood of confusion or misundcrstanding as to the sale of the property and its condition to Plaintiffs or represented to Plaintiffs through their silence that the property was not in a nood hazard area and was of a p'lrticular standard gradc and quality. 58. As a result of Defendant John Billman's actions and that of his agents, attorney and those acting at his direction and/or on his behalf, Plaintiffs suffered damages iI', the amount $43,394.49. 59, The UTpCPL provides in part that Sellers such as Defendant John Billman, his agents, attorney and thosc acting at his direction and/or on his behalf who have COUNT FIVE - RANDY RILLMAN - FRAUD - PUNITIVE DAMAm:S 68, Pamgraphs I -67 arc Iwreby incorporated by rcferenee as though more fully set forth herein, 69, It is bclieved and therel()re averred that Defcndant Randy Billman intentionally withheld that the property was in a flood plain, and convinced the Plaintiffs to use John 1-/, Billman's attorney so that the concealn1Cnt would not be uncovered, Further that he conspired with others, including a notary to placc her orficial seal on a known forged document to complete his fraud induced transaction, 70, Defendant Randy Billman's deceitful conduct was outrageous and/or involved bad motivc, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court award them punitive damages against Defendant John Billman in an amount in cxcess of $25,000.00 for fraud and misrepresentation, COUNT SIX - RANDY BILLMAN - PROn:SSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 71. Paragraphs 1,70 arc hereby ineorporatcd by reference as though more fully set forth herein, 72. As a licensed real estate agent Defendant Randy Billman owed a duty to Plaintiffs to conduct himsclf in accordance with the gcneml standards of conduct for real estate agents. 73. Defendant Randy Billman I1liled in his duty as follows: a, failing to disclose to Plaintiffs a known material fact concerning the character of the property sold, that being that thc property was in a flood plain; b. failing to provide Plaintiffs with an agreement of sale for the purchase of the property setting fOl1h the alTer of purchase with its terms and conditions; e. failing to provide in writing the relationship between himself as agent, the seller of the property und Plaintiffs as buyers and the duties owed to the seller of the property and the buyer of the property; d. fuiling to properly establish a settlement date and time, in writing Informing all pa11ies, including his hroker and his broker's staff as to the timing of the same; e. informing Plaintiffs that they did not need to consult an independent attorney to review or prepare necessary documentation regarding the sule and purchase of the property; f. informing and convincing the Plaintiffs not to seek private counsel, but to use the attorney of the seller of the property to represent Plaintiffs in the sale and purchase of the property; g. forging the name of the seller of the property, that being the signature of his father, Defendant John 1-1, Billman, on the sales agreement between Plaintiffs und Defendant John Billman prepared by John Billman's attorney, then witnessing the same; and h, conspiring with others, including but not limited to a notary public, in an effort which convinced the notary to be derelict in her duties undcr the lull' which strictly requires thatthc person signing a document to be notarized be personally present and not require the same so that the forged signature of Defendant John Billman by Defendant Randy Billman would be notarized and lhatthe notary unlawfully execute her signature and place her seal on the document without having seen the signing or having the alleged executor personally appear and acknowledge that he had executed the same, 74. Plaintiffs did not purchase Oood insurance based on the actions or intentional omissions of Defendant Randy Billman, 75. Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the propel1y, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Randy Billman's intentional and/or negligent actions, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the flood plain, or have purchased flood insurance. Plainlifl:s' home was severely damaged in a Ilood and Plaintiffs had no flood insurance, 76. Defendant Randy Billman's prorcssionalncgligenee as a real estate agent was a substantial factor in causing Plainti fls not to purchase proper flood insurance which resulted in them suffering great Iinaneiallosses. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that Ihis Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Randy Billman in an amount of $43,394.49 for professional negligence, COUNT SIX - Dt:FENDANT RANny BILLMAN - PUNITIVE DAMAGF;S 77, Pmagraphs 1-76 arc hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 78, It IS believcd and therefore averred that Randy Billman ir.tentionally abandoned his professional duties as a lieeused real estate agent in an attempt to consummate the sale of his f\tther's property by convincing the Plainti ffs to use John H. Billman's attorney so that his actions would not be uncovered and that ~;uch actions on his part arc deceitful, unconscionable, involve bml faith, bad motive and shock the scnse of decency and to curb such future action damages of a punitive nature arc appropriate given the faels of the case. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court award them punitive damages against Defendant Randy Billman in an amount in excess of $25,000,00 1'01' his aelions in this matter. c. failing to inform the Plaintiffs in writing and recciving their writtcn approI'll I to pcrmit him to so rcprcsent both thcy as buyers and Defendant John Billman as seller and I1nancier of a real estate transaction; d, failing to inform thc Plaintiffs that because hc represented John Billman, that plaintiffs should consult an independent attorney to review the documents he had prcpared; e. failing to object to Dcfendant Randy Billman's forgery of legal documents and permitting the same to be notarized by a notary employed by his law office; f'. failing to obtain thc signature of the scller of the propCl1y, Defendant John H. Billman, on the HUn settlement sheet lInd disbursing funds without written approval f1'omthe seller; g, t~1iling to provide an ahstract of title to Plaintiffs including a copy of a known and recorded plan of lots; h, flliling to fully explain the terms of the documents prepared by him for the seller of the propet1y and presented for signature; i, failing to not accept representation of a party whom he had never met, never hecn contacted hy and had been solicited to represent by others with known adverse interests; and j. withholding known inll)\'\nation li'om a client to his client's detriment. 91, Defendant Attorney Irwin's negligence \Vas a substantial factor in bringing ahout the harm and damages caused to Plainti ffs' propcrty hy the nood, 92. Plaintiffs were not informed that thc property was in a nood zonc and proper representation including a title scarch of thc propcrty and scttlement on the property would have uncovered the same. 93. Had Plaintiffs been properly informed of the conditions of the property, had Plaintiffs not been led and deceived by Defendant Attorney Irwin's intentional and/or negligent actions, they would have either not purchased the property, hired an independent attorney who would have advised them of the 1100d plain, or have purchased 1100d insurance, Plaintiffs' home was severely damaged in a 1100d and I'laintiff.~ had no 1100d insurance, 94. Defendant Attorney Irwin's prolessionalnegligenee as a licensed attorney was a substantial nietoI' in causing Plainti ffs not to purchase proper 1100d insurance which resulted in them suffering great financial losses, 95. Defendant Attorney Irwin's willful and intentionll: disregard for of his duties as a licensed attorney and the needs of his elicnts, the Plainti ffs, was a substantial factor in causing Plainti ffs not to purchase proper 1100d insurance which resulted in them suffering great finllnciallosses. 96. Plaintiffs home was damaged in the l100d at an estimated cost of repair to be $40,894.49 and their personal property at an estimated cost of $2,500,00, for a total loss of $43.494.49 all of which was substantially caused by Defendant !twin's negligent and/or intentional acts. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court award them damages against Defendant Harold S. Irwin, III in an amount of $43,494.49 for his professional negligence in the representation of Plaintiffs, together with costs of this action, interest, attorney's fees and any additional amount the Court deems appropriate, COUNT TEN - HAROLD S. IRWIN, III -I'lJNITIV.: DAMAGES 97. Paragraphs 1-96 arc hereby incorporated by reference as though more fully set forth herein, ., 4, This Paragl'aph refers to a Defendant other than the Answering Defendant; aocordingly, no affirmative response is required, To the extent an affirmative response may be required, said Paragraph is denied in confol'lnity with !'a,R,C,!', 1029(c), 5, This Paragraph refers to a Defendant other than the Answering Defendant; accordingly, no affirmative response is required, Te the extent an affil'llHlI.ive response may be required, said Pal'agraph is denied in conformity with Pa,R.C.P, 1029(e), 6. Deniod as stated. It is admittod only that Harold S. Irwin, III is an att01'Ooy liconsed to practice law in the Commonwonlth of Pennsylvania with offices located at 35 High Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, 7, Admitted in part, denied in part. '1'0 tho e:<tent the averments contained in this Paragraph are found within tho public I'Ocords of tho Recordor of Deeds Office of Cumberland County, thoy are ndmitted, To the extent the averments are not found within the records of thc Recordel' of Deeds Office of Cumberland County or are contradicted thereby, they are denied, 8, Denierl. After reasenable investigntion Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies the samc and demands stdct proof thereof at the time of tdal if deemed material. 9, Deniml. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies the same and demands strict proof thereof at, tho time of tdal if doomod m!ltorial. 2 10, Dunied flS stflted, It is denied that Hm'old S, Irwin, 1II, gsquire's offices were loeated at 35 fllast Hi!(h 8tl'eet, Carlisle, PA 17013 fit fill times matorifll hereto, 1'0 the eontrary, at all t.imos mflterial hereto, Answel'ing Defendant's offices were located at 3(; South Pitt Stl'eet, Carlisle, PA By WHY of further Ilnswor, tho l'omaining aVNments contained in this Pal'agl'aph flI'C denied in conformity wil.h l'a,ItC,P. 102f.l(e), 11. Denied, 'l'o the extent this l'arflgraph l'efers to Hal'Old S, Irwin, Ill, it is specifically and unequivocally denied and stl'iet proof thereof demundedat the time of trial if deemed mflterial. 1'0 the extent this Paragraph l'efem to Co,])efendants John H, Billmfln, Randy Billmfln and ])ouglaiJ R. Heineman, it is denied sinco after reasonablo investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit or deny tho truth or falsity of the said avel'nlOnts and accordingly denies the sllme und demands stl'iet proof thereof at the time of t.rial if deemed mat.erial. 12, Denied. Aft.er l'eflsonable investigation Answering Defendflnt is wit.hout information sufficient to fldmit 01' deny the trut.h or falsity of the said flverments and aecordingly denies t.he sflme find demands strict proof thereof fit. tho time of trial if deemed material. 13, Denied, Aft.er reasonable investigation Answering Defendflnt is without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or ffltsity of the sflid averments and accordingly denies the sarno flfld demands strict proof thereof at the time of tl'ial if deemod material. 14, Denied, After roasonable investigation Answering Defendant ill without information sufficient to fldmit or deny the tmth or ffllsity of the sflid averments and 3 accor(lingly donios tho same and demands strict proof thereof at tho time of tl'ial if deemed material, 15, Deniod, Aftel' I'easonable investigation Answoring Defondant is without. information sufl1cient to admit 01' deny the truth 01' falsit.y of the said averments and accordingly do nics the same and demands strict. proof thel'oof at. tho time of trial if deemed mat.el'ial. 16, Denied,Mtel' l'Oasonable invest.igation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth 01' falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies the samo and demands stdct proof thereof at the timo of trial if deemed material. 17, Denied, After reasonablo invnstigation Answering Defnndant is without information sufficiont to admit 01' deny tho truth 01' falsity of thn said averments and accordingly donies tho sumo and dnmands strict proof thoreof at the time of trial if deemed material. 18, Denied. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny tho truth 01' falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies tho same and demands stdct proof thereof at the time of tdal if deemed material. 19, Denied, After reasonable investigation Answering Def()l1(lnnt is without. information sufficient. t.o admit or den)' tho trut.h or falsity of t.he said averment.s and accordingly denies the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of tr'ial if deemed material. 'I 32. Doniod, To t.ho oxtont. the aVOl'montH contninod in t.hiH l'aragl'Hph 1'01\,,' to Defendants othOl' t.han t.he AnswOl'ing Dofondnnt, it iH donioi! slnco nft.er rensonuble investigation Answoring Defondnnt iH without information Hld'ficiont t.o ndmit or deny tho truth 01' fnlsity of tho Hnid nVOI'montH and accol'dingly donioH t.ho snmo und domandH Htl'iet proofthoroof nt tho t.ime of trial if doomod mat.ol'inl. By way of furthol' anHwor, t.o the oxtont. t.his l'amgraph roforH to t.ho Answering Defendant, Hurold S. Irwin, [II, IGsqult'e, it is spoeifically and unequivocally denied and st.fiet pl'Oof thereof to the contl'ary is demanded at. the t.ime of t.rial if deemed material. 33, Denied, After reasonable investigat.ion Answering Defendant is without information sufficient. to admit. or deny the truth 0\' falsity of the said averment.s and aecordingly denies the same and demands striet proof thereof at t.he time of trial if deemed material. 34. Denied. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient t.o admit 01' deny tho truth 01' falsity of the said averments and accorrlingly denies the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 35. Denied, After reasonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the t.r'uth or falsity of the said averment!! and accordingly denies the same and demands striet proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 36, Denied, After reflsonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny tho truth 01' falsity of the said averments and 7 accOl'dingly donieR tho Sflmo Hnd domandR sl,rict proof thoroof at the tlmo of trial if doomod materiHI. 37, Deniod. Aft.er reasonablo invoRtigat.ion AnRwol'ing Defondant is without. infol'mation sufficient to admit. 01' dony t.ho tl'ut.h 01' falsity of t.he said avermonts and accordingly donioR t.ho samo and donwnds Rtrict proof t.hereof at t.he t.ime of tl'ial if deemed material. 38, Deniod, Aftor reasonHble invest.igation At1Rwel'ing Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth Ot' falsity of the Raid avermentR and accOl'dingly denieR the same and demands stl'ict proof thereof at t1w time of trial if deemed material. 39. Deniod, After l'Oasonable inveRtigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth 01' falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 40, Doniod. After reasonable investigation Answoring Defendant is without information sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth 01' falsity of the said averments and accot'clingly denies the same and demands iJtrict proof the roof at tho time of trial if doomod material. 41. Denied. To the extent this I'Hragraph is an allegHtion of proxima to causation, it is deniod as a conclusion of lHw to which no affirmativo rORponse is required, '1'0 the extent an affirmative response mHY be required, said Paragraph iR are denied and strict pl'Oof t,hereof demanded at time of trial if deemed moterial. By way of further anRwer, to the extont this Paragraph ropl'osonts Hn averment of Plaintiffs' alloged damni(os, it is donied H since after roasollublo investigation Answering Dofendant is without infol'lnation sufficient to admit 01' deny the truth 0)' falsity of the said averments and acc(lI'dingly denies the same und demands strict IJI'oof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. COUNT ONE" JOHN H. BILLMAN" FHAUD AND MISIU~PRgSEN'fATION 42, Answering Defendant Hal'Old S, Irwin, III, I~squire incorporates by mferenee his rosponses to Paragmphs I through <II ahove as in mOl'e fully set forth herein at length. 43.48 Denied. The averments contained in these Pamgraphs refer to a Defendant other than Answering Defendant; accordingly, no affirmative response is required, To the extent an affirmative response may be required, said Paragl'Hphs are denied and strict proof thereof demanded at the lime of trial if deemed material. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant respectfully request.~ that this Honorablc Comt enter judgment in favor of the Answering Defendant and against the Plaintiffs and that he be awarded appropriate costs and fees, COUNT'IWO "JOHN H, BILLMAN" FRAUD" PUNITIVE DAMAGES 49. Answering Defendant Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire incorporates hy referencc his I'osponses to Paragraphs 1 through <18 above as in more fully set forth herein at length, 50. Denied. The nverments contained in this PHl'HgrHph refer to u Dcfendunt other thun Answering Defendant; accordingly, no l1ffmnntive response is requil'ed, To the oxtent an affirmative response may be required, said ParngrHph is specifically Hnd unoquivocnlly doniod and strict proof the roof domfllldod at tho timo of trial if deemed matol'lal. 9 oxtent an affil'mative I'osponse may bo l'equired, said Pal'Ugl'Uphs aro denied and stl'iet proof the roof domanded at the time of tl'ial if doc mod mllterial. WHI<JREFORE, Answel'ing Def(JIldant. l'eHpeet.fully l'eqtlests that this Honomblo COllrt entel' judgment in favor of the AnHwOl'ing I)ofendant and against the Plaintiffs and that he be awardod appropl'iate costs and f(JOs, COUN'r FIVE - RANDY BILLMAN - FRAUD - PUNITIVE DAMAGES 68, Answering Defondant. Hal'old S. Irwin, III, gsquil'o incorporatos by reforonco his responsos t.o Paragraphs 1 through G7 above IlS in mOI'() fully Hot forth heroin at longth, 69.70 Denied, The avorments eontained ill these Paragraphs rofer to a Defendant othel' than Answering Defendant; accordingly, no affirmativo response is required. To the extent an affirmative response may bo required, said Paragraphs are specifically and unequivocally denied Ilnd striot proof thereof demandod at the time of trial if deemed material. WHEREFORE, Answering ])ofendant reHpeetfully requests that this Honorable CO\ll't enter judgment in favor of the Answering Defendant and against tho P\aintiffH and that he be awarded appropriate COstH and fees, COUNT SIX - RANDY BILLMAN - PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 71. Answering Defendant Harold S, Irwin, III, gsquire ineorporntes hy I'dorence his I'esponses to Paragraphs I through 70 ahove as in more fully set forth hOl'ein at longth. 72.76 Denied. The averments eontained in t.hese Paragraphs nnd their subpm'ts rofer to a Defendant other thlln the Answering Dofendant; accordingly, no affirlllat,ive 11 c, Doniod, It iH HJlecifically anrlllncqllivocully r1oniod that AUornoy Irwin wu~ negligont in "failinl( to infclI'm tho J>laint.if'I:~ in wl'itinj.( anrll'ecoivinl( lhoil' written aJlpl'Ovll1 to Jlel'lnit him to HO I'l'JlI'OHont both tlwy UH buy",',", anrl Defondant .John BillmHn aA Aollol' and financier of u l'oul oAlate tJ'unAfwtion," '1'0 the conlt'ul'y, at ull timeH materiul hOl'oto, Attornoy hwin Hoted JlroJlorly Hnrl uppl'opriHtely anrl within tho Btandal'r1 of CHl'O roqllirod for l'ol"'Of;ontation of pal'tioA Auch UH tho PlaintiffH, d, Doniod, It iA Apoeifiefllly find unequivocally deniod that Attorney Irwin was nel(ligent in "fuiling to inform thc Plnintiff, that becallAe 118 1'0proAentod John Billman, that plaintiffs Hhould eonsult un inrlepondont. attorney to reviow the documents he had prepured," To the contrmy, at all times material hOI'eto, ^ttorney Irwin providod propel' und appropriat.e repl'esontation within t.ho Ht.anrlal'd of eal'e required for ropreHentation of pattios such as the Plaintiffs, e, Donied, It is specifically and unequivocally denied t.hat Attorney Irwin was negligent in "failing to objed to Defondant Handy Billman's forgot'y of legal documents and permitting the same t.o be notal'ized by a notary employed by his law offico," To the contrury, at all times mat.eriul horeto, Answering Defendant aeted properly and appl'Opl'iatoly and within the standurd of cat'e required for representation of PHl'ties such as the Plaintiffs. By way of fUI'tllOl' answor, all Aignatul'es were exocuted with the propel' consent and a ut.hodty of the respective patties, f. Denied, It is specificully anrlunequivocally denied that Attorney Irwin wus nogligent in "failing to obtain the signature of the Heller of the property, Defendant .John H, Billman, Oil tho HUD settlement shoet Hnrl disbursing funds without written IIpproval from the Heller," '1'0 the contl'lIry, at uIl timoH material hereto, Answering Defendant. aoted 15 pl'opody unci uppl'oprlatoly and withill tho Htandurd of' cal'o I'oquil'od fOl' uttorneys I'opl'osontin!( partieH Huoh as the PlaintiffH, g, Doniod. It iH Hpocifically anclunoquivocally dcniml that tho AllHwol'ing Defondant WfHl no!(li!(ollt in "failill!( t.o Pl'Ovide an abHlt'm:t of t.itlo to Plaintiff" illcludin!( a copy of' a known and l'ecordod plan of lotH." '1'0 the contl'UI'y, at all timoH materiul hereto tho AnHwol'ing Defendunt Ill'ovidod Ill'Opel' ancl apPl'opriato I'Opl'Osentation wit.hin tho Htandard of care roquil'od for repl'eHentation of partios Huch us the PlaintiffH, h, Denierl, It is specifically and unequivocally deniod t.hat tho Answel'ing Defendant was negligent. in "failing to fully explain tho terms of the r1oCUl11entH propal'od by him for the seller of tho propel't.y and pl'oHent.od for signature," '1'0 thf' contl'al'y, at all til110H material horeto, Answering Defendant acted pl'Opel'ly and appropl'iately and within the standard of CUI'e required fOI' l'opl'osentation of parties such aH tho Plaintiffs, 1. , Donied, It iA specit1calIy and unequivocally deniod that the Answering Defendant waH negligont in "fuiling to not accept representation of u party whol11 he had never met, never been eontacted by and had been Holicited to represent by others with known adverse interesl." '1'0 the contrHl'Y, at all times l11atel'ial hOl'eto, ^nHwol'ing Defenrlant acted propel'ly and appropriately and within the Htandal'cl of caro required fOI' l'epreHentat.ion of parties such as the Plaintiffs, j, Denied, It iH HpocifiealIy and unoquivocalIy denied that the Answol'ing Defendant was negli!(ent in "withholding known inf<lI'l11ation 1'1'0111 a client t.o his client.'H detriment," '1'0 the contrary, at /III times material hereto, Answering Defondant acted propedy and appropl'iate'ly and within the standard of eftl'o required for I'epl'osont.ation of' part.ies such as the Plaintiffs, 16 91. Deniod, Tho averments containod in thiH PHl'agraph Ul'e conclusionA oflaw to which no affil'mat,ive l'eHponAo iH required, '1'0 tho extont IIn affil'mativo rosponse may be roquirod, Huid allogationH aro HJlecifically and unoquivoeully denied und Btdct proof thereof demandorl ut timo of tl'ial if deemed matorla!. HZ, Deni(J(!. It iH spedfically and unoquivooally donied that the Plaintiff A were nol informed that the pl'opelty WUA in a flood zono, By way of fUI'thor answel', to the extent this Paragmphs implies that ropresentation IVas impl'Opel' inregurd to title search and settlement, it iH spocificully and unequivocally denied, '1'0 the contrary, at all times mutedal hereto, the Answedng Defendant rendored pl'Oper and appropriato roprosentation within the standard of' caro requirod for reprosentation of pal'tios such as the Plaintiffs, 9a, Denier!. '1'0 the oxtent this Pm'a!(I'aph rofers to Plaintiffs' alleged damages and Plaintiffs' subjective beliefH, it iH deniod since after reasonable investigation Answedng Defendant is without infermation sufficiont to admit 01' deny the tl'uth 01' falHity of the said avermonts and accordingly donies the Hamo and demands stdct pl'Oof thereof at the time of trial if deemed matoria!. By way of further answor, it is specifically and unoquivocally denied that Defondant Irwin doceived tho PlaintiffH, By way of further answor, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that ^tt.orney Irwin was negligent in his representation of tho Plaintiffs, 94, Denied, To t.ho oxtent. thiH Pfll'Hgraph representH an avol'ment of pl'oximnte causatien, it. is donior! as u concluHion of law t.o which no affirmative rosponso is roquil'od, '1'0 tho cxtont an flffil'mativo reHponHe may bo roquired, said avel'monts al'o specificnlly lInd unoquivecally doniod unrl Htrict proof thoroof domundod ut time of trial if deemod mutol'iu!. By way of further anHWOI', to tho oxtont. thiH I'al'agraph I'Opresent.s an avorment. of 17 Plaintiffs' allegod r1umagos, it iH deniod sinee nlLer l'ollHollnhlo invostigat.ion AnHworing Defondant iH without infol'mation sufficient. to admit 01' dony the tl'ut.h 01' falsity of' the said averments and accordin!(ly r1enies t.ho Hamo nnd demamlA Atrict. pl'oof thereof at the timo of trial if doemed mntel'ial. fir" Donied, '1'0 tho extent this PHl'a!(I'aph l'cpresent.H an avel'ment of proximllte causation, it iH denied aH a concluHion of law t.o which no affirmative reHponso iH roqnit'ed, '1'0 tho extent an affirmative responHe may be I'Oquirod, saiel averments are specifically and l1noquivocally donied anrl Ht.l'iet proof the roof demanded at t.ime of tl'ial if deemed matol'ial. By way of further anHWlH', to theext.ont thiH Paragraph represents an averment of Plaintiffs' alleged damagos, it is deniod Hince after reasonablo investigation Answering Defendant is without. information sufficient t.o admit 01' deny the truth 01' falsity of the said avermentH and accordingly denieH the same and demands strict. proof thereof at. tho time of trial if deemcd material. By way of further response, it is Bpecifically and unequivocally denied that Attorney Irwin engagod in willful 01' intent.ional disrogmd of his dutieH for t.he noeds of his clients, To the contrary, at all timeH material heret.o, Defendant Irwin actod properly and appropriately and within the Htandard of care required for repreHentation of pm'ties such as the Plaint.iffs, 96, Denied, '1'0 t.he extent this Paragraph r8preHents an averment of proximate causation, it. is denied as a concll1Hion of law to which no affirmat.ive reHponse is requil'od, '1'0 the extent !1n affirmat.ive responHe may be requirod, saiel averments are specifically ami unequivocally denied and Htrict proof thereof demanded at. time of trial if deemed mat.el'ial. By way of further answer, to the oxtent thiH PHl'a!(I'aph representH an averment of PI!1intiffH' alleged dama!(cH, it is denied sinco !1fter reaHonahlo invest.igation AnHworillg 18 IJofondunt is without infol'llwtion Huf'ficiont to admit 01' deny thell'uth 01' falHity of tho Haid avol'ments and accol'clingly donioH t.he Hanle amI demands HtriCt pl'Oof thoroof at tho time of triul if deemed material. WHEREFORI<~, Answel'ing Dcfendant I'espect.fully requost that this HonOl'ahlo Coul'l onter judgment in his favor and against. the Plaintiffs and that Answcring Defendant be awardod appl'opl'iate costs and fooH, COUNT TEN - HAROLD S. IHWIN, III - PUNITIVE DAMAGES 97, ^nswering Defendant Harold 8, Irwin III incorpol'ates by refel'encc his I'osponses to Paragraphfl 1 through no above flfI in more fully Het forth hemin at len!(th. 98, Doniod, It is Hpocificfllly and unoquivocfllly denied that "Attorney Il'\\'in willfully and intentionally ubundoned hiH pl'ofessionaJ dutieH us u licensed attorney in an attempt to conHummate t.he Halo of his client's pl'Operty," By wuy of furth('r l'esponse, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that Attol'lley Irwin failed to properly semch the propertY'H title, '1'0 the contrary, fit. all times material hereto, Attorney Irwin provided propel' and appropriate title sel'viceH in confol'lnity with the standard of care mquired for search and title for propel'tieH Huch UH that purchused by the PluintiffH, By way of yet fUI'lher answer, it iH specifically find unequivocally denied that sett.lernont on the property was inappropl'iate, '1'0 the contrary, at all timeH material hereto, settloment on tho propol'ty at issue was propOl' and appropriate, Ily way of furthor answer, it iH specifically donied that Attol'l1ey Irwin engagerl in actions which were "deceitful, wilful, wanton, unconHcionable and shock the HenHe of decency, involved bad motive and bad faith," '1'0 the contrary, at all times matel'iul hemto, Attorney Irwin acted propol'ly and nppropriat.e1y and 1!J within tho stllndal'd of cure requil'Od 1'01' repl'esontation of parties suoh liS the Plaintif'fH, By way of yot flll'ther answer, it. iH Hpecifically denied that Plllint.iffs are entitled to award of dumagos of a punitivo natul'fJ, 100, Denied, It iH Hpocificully find unoquivocally deniod that Attol'floy Irwin "willfully find intontionally abandoned hifl profeAHional duties us fI licenHod attorney in fin attolllpt to conHUlllmate the sale of hiH client's pl'opel'ty," ny WflY of fUl'thol' l'e!Jponse, it iH specificlllly and unequivocally donied that Attorney Irwin abandenod hiH profeHHional dutios by convincing the Plaintiffs "to purchase a pl'Operty for which he had seHl'ched the propel'tY'H title find certifiod thc Harne even after he had determined it to be in a flood ha~ard area," 'ro the contrlll'y, at all timcs materia] hereto, Attorney Irwin actod properly and appropriately and within t.he Atnndal'd of care requirod for repreHentation of parties such as the PlaintiffH, By way of further answer, it is specifically an unequivocally deniod that Attorney Irwin wilfully and intentionally abandoned his professional duties in convincing tho Plaintiffs "to settlo on the property ovon thpugh (sic) slwh was inappropriate so that his actions would not be uncovered," To the centrary, at all timeH Attol'lley Irwin actod properly and appropriately and within the standard of CAre required fer I'epresent.lltion of partios Huch as the Plaintiffs, By way of yet further answor, it iH spocificall~' anrlunoquivocally denied that ^t.torney Irwin's actions wore "docoitful, wilful, wanton, unconscionable and shock tho sonAO of decency, involved bad motive and bad faith," '1'0 the contrary, at all timos material hereto, Attorney Irwin acted properly and appl'Opriatoly and within the Htandard of care required for represontation of pflltioH sllch as tlw Plaintiffs, By way of further reHponse, it is Hpecifically denied that the Plaintiffs HI'e entitled to punitive damageA, 20 , , WHEREFORI<~, ^nswol'ing Dofelldnnt l'espoctf'ully requosts thnt this Honorablo Comt ontoI' judgment in his fnl'ol' and against the Plaintiffs and that Aswol'ing Defendant be awarded appropl'iate costH and fees, NEW MATTER 101. Plaintiffs have failed to Htato a claim upon which relief can be gl'anted, 102, Plaintiffs' claims nre bat'l'od and/Ol' limited by the applicable Statute of Limitntions, 103, It is believed, nnd therofore averred, that the discovery will show that the Plaintiffs were nogligent and thnt their negligence exceeded the negligence, if any, of the Answoring Defendant, thereby barring rocovery by operation of the Pennsylvama Comparative Negligence Act. 10'1. It is believed, ami therefore averl'Od, that discovery will HholV that the Plaintiffs were negligent and that by vil'tue of their nogligenco, their c1aimH may he limIted by the operation of the Pennsylvania Compamtive Negligonee Act, 105, It is believed, and therefOl'e averred, that discovel'y will Ahow that the Plaintiffs voluntarily assumed a known risk thereby barring rocovel'y hy the operation of the Doctrine of Assumption of Hisk. 106, Plaintiffs' injul'ies, if any, were sustainod aH a rosult of natural or unknolVll causes and not as the result of any action or inaction on behalf of the ^nswel'ill!( Ilofondnnt. 107, At all timeH materinl heroto, AnHwel'ing Det'endnnt providod full, completo, propor, reasonable and adequate legal representation in accordnnce with thc npplieable stnndHl'd of care, 21 108, No conduct on thc pal't of tho ^nsworin~ Defendant was a Hubstalltial fact.ol' in oaUsing 01' contributing t.o any hal'lll whioh the Plaintiffs may have suffered, 109, If Plaintiffs Auffered any dama!(e, t.he damages were caused by tho conduet of others over whom the Answerin!( Defendant harl no control 01' I'i~ht t.o contl'Ol. 200, The pl'eHenoe of a waleI' COlll'se on t.he pl'opm'ly of the PII.>intiffH IV \,\ an open find obviollH condit.ion of the land, WHEREFORl~, ^nswerin!( Defendantl'eHpcetfully l'equeBts thal judgmcnt be entered in his favor and againAt t.hc Plaintiff A and that ^nswel'ing Defendant be awarded approprlalo costs and feoA, NEW MATTEn PUnSUANT '1'0 Pa,U.C.P. 2252(d) HAnOLD S. IRWIN, III v. JOI-IN H. BILLMAN 201. Defendant Harold S, Irwin, III hereby incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 lhl'o\\gh 200 of his AnHwel', New Matter and New Mattol' Pursuant to Pa,R,C,P, 2252(d) as if sol forth more fully heroin, 202, Defendant Harold S, Irwin, \II, without. vouching 1'01' its acoul'acy, hereby incol'pol'atos by reference as if fully set forth herein, lhe PlaintiffH' Second Amendod Complaint, aH it pel'tains to Defendant ,John 1-1, Billman and aVOI'H that if till' I'laintiffH are entit.led to any recovery, which entitlemonl is Hpecifically denied, Plaintiffs' r1ama!(os were caused by the negligont and cal'eleHB act.ionH and/or omiHsionH of ])"fendanl. .John H, Billman. 203, Should it. be judicially detol'minod that 1'1aintiffH al'o ontitled to I'oeovol', which iH specifically denied, t.hon purHuant. 1,0 Pa,H.C,P, 2252(d), Defondant Harold S, 22 ,:_- ,,-' '" _:,i,,:l ',!- 0'_1' ',~,~, ' :;::,r;':{ ~ ',' -,~,- ):I/:~ ---J,'_'l!; ~; -, V l' ;,_~-iii .'-- " ,;tf,~~-;.'" ,;. " ' .it ,,:;1 : t .'~ ,.~ (-j'""." ~:,'~ ltl'~I-' ,'R lli --~ ..J (.) :~~-~:~:"f' -,IQ...' . ..\ii', ,.,,'~' ,,' ~ -, '" - " c,;,-', is Ii. ! li,l, '~. ,.1 B ~'f" . .,.. ,Y: -_.,c- , '-'-j _ ,_ _ ,;' ~';',':;F-i-. "., ',\1' .1\, ,___-CT /' ,'co!' ''';-;', -_',1'.- "--:;l ,-, < .,'. :;;:"11) ;,. -il ~'t~- t'-.''''',,,, , C';".::;r ;,::f. .<<;0 p'I "~ ,8 .m.' '6;;' ~.i. '~.;:.i? ~i~ (-)".-j) ,j:5::e t'.>).~' ';~~.~~ ,,:52 . [fila r:.lI:L: ~:;\ -..f" 'i3 ;': ,. '" , .- ,~l ;""., '''.--' ~ - " "':'~ C"'. , n; cr. i' " .' 11.1') .. ('; ~--~ " 1.\; cY " f.) Iii _.1, ,. " It I " C_, , '- i ~..: , OH ~ Ul~ :II l~ <> 'tJ ,...1 oll r.:!H~ i:i ~~ ...:I H ...:1>< ro ~1 H ,~'tl H P<Ulr.:! r.:! ~~ i:i H ~ Zr,.. ...:IE-< ro ro _I ZZ r.:!Ul >< ..... , ~ or, o ~ ~1 ~1 Z o ~./.l . Z .., ~ill~ r,.. ~1 ~Z Ul i? 0 ~ H ~ I. 'f mill H'tl P:: 0 .0 :3: ill ~~G :1 or, 0 -H Z Ii, ~i:i0 f!l H ~ ~ ,.. <: ,'0 u><u ~H :II [.... '''I ill ~ , ro H U ~.J ~: >:1' r,.. I p.,:II ;,- ~ o :? '" .<. e, ~Z.... ill Z' fC,{' ~ ,.. ~ ~p::~~ ~Q8 0 In , F2 OOal H . Ul U :r: ^ ~ ON :r:~ z b ill ;j \) :t: E-<U I ...:IUl'"" 0 Q ~ :t~ P:: al .< ...:Ijro>o , v, "' H ::lu H z ~~ .- ~ I. 000'1 ..:Z 0 " oj 0 'tl 0 1 8~ z ~""ci Z v, " " ~ I.. , u.I v', . ><< ::>;,-r.:! " ~ 0 ~ fu HO ~~ .0 t9 < &: l: ,.. ~ -, :II <' '" W r.:!P::Z :II o;a < " z <: <-.u f-o :II~ t9 i:i E-<~ Z H :Il HU g ~. " .. . ~. 9 F n ,),J) I ") Ce',( MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN BY: Gordon Gelfand, Esquire Identification No.: 02274 The Curtis center, Fourth Floor Independence Square West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3304 (215) 922-1100 GARY A. HIPPENSTEEL AND DIANNA M. HIPPENSTEEL Attorney for defendants, Randy Billman and Douglas R. Heineman Ind. , t/a B - H Agency Realtors v. JOHN H. BILLMAN, RANDY BILJ.HAN, DOUGLAS R. HEINEMAN INDIVIDUALLY AND T/A B , H AGENCY REALTORS, AND HAROLD S. IRWINN, III ANSWER OW DEPENDANTS, RANDY BILLMAN, DOUGLAS R. HEINEMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TIA B-a AGENCY REALTORS (INOORRECTLY DESIGNATED AS B , H AGENCY REALTORS, TO PLAINTIFPS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Admitted. 2. Admitt.ed. 3. Admitted in part. Billman was an independent Douglas R. Heineman. At all times material hereto, Randy contractor associated with defendant, 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Denied. The property was listed by defendant, Douglas R. Heineman. Randy Billman was the sales agent. 9. Admitted. 10. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 11. Denied. It is spec:ifically denied that answering defendants knew or should have known that approximately one-half of the property was located in a flood hazard area. with respect to the knowledge of defendan.ts, John H. Billman and Harold S. Irwin, III/after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 12. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 14. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a beli.f as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 15. Admitted in part. Answering defendants are not certain as to the dates of these conversations but the substance of the conversations are accurately set forth in t.his averment. 16. Admitted in part. It is specifically denied that Randy Billman stated that hook ups for water and septic were in place. On the contrary he stated that publio utilities were available. It is further denied that he stated that defendant, John H. Blllman, would "act as the bank". On the oontrary, Randy Billman stated that John H. Billman would agree to a purchase money mortgage. 17. Admitted. By way of further answer, plaintiffs stated that time was of the essence. 18. Denied. It is denied that defendant, Randy Billman, told plaintiffs that he would have defendant, Harold S. Irwin, III, represent the plaintiffs. On the contrary, defendant, Randy Billman, told the plaintiffs that Harold S. Irwin, III, was John H. Billman I s attorney, and that Attorney Irwin would prepare an Agreement of Sale. 19. Admitted in part. Plaintiffs were told that the payments would be $210.00 per month. 20. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 18 of this Answer. 21. Admitted in part. It is admitted that an appointment was arL"anged. It is denied that defendant, Randy Billman, stated that , I ' \ "he and the attorney would take care of everything". 22. Admitted. 23. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering " defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 24. Denied. After reasonable invest.igati.on, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand striot proof of same at time of trial. 25. Denied. After reallonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 26. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are wlthout knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 27. Denied. The installment sales agreement speaks for itself. 28. It is admitted that answering defendants did not inform or convey to the plaintiffs that the property was in a flood hazard area. As to discussions between the plaintiffs and the defendants, John H. Billman and Harold S. Irwin, III, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 29. Admitted. 30. Denied. It is specifioally denied that defendant, Randy Billman, forged the name of his fat~er, defendant, John H. Billman. On the contrary, Randy Billman, signed hill father's name to the agreement with the express authorization of defendant, John H. Billman. 31. Admitted in part. Forgery is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 30 of this Answer. 32. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 28 of this Answer. This allegation is also denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 16 of this Answer. 33. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 34. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 35. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 36. Denied. The document speaks for itself. 37. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 38. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without k.nowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 39. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand striot proof of same at time of trial. 40. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 41. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment. and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. COUNT I 42. Answering defendants incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 41 of this Answer as if fully set forth at length herein. 43. This allegation is a conclusion of law for whioh no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that this allegation contains factual averments, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 44. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 43 of this Answer. 45. To the extent that this allegation may be construed to apply to answering defendants, it is denied that answering defendants intentionally ooncealed or misrepresented any faots. The balanoe of this allegation is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averm~nt and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. By way of further answer this allegation i. a oonclusion of law for wbich no responsive pleading is required. 46. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 45 of this Answer. 47. Denied. After reaso'lable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 48. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 45 of this Answer. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judg1llent be. entered in their favor. COUNT :n: 49. Answering defendants hereby incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 49 of this Answer as if fully set forth at length herein. 50. To the extent that this allegation may be construed as applying to answering defendants, it is specifically denied that answering defendants intentionally withheld that the property was in a flood plain or engaged in any deceitful conduct that was outrageous and/or involved bad motive. This allegation is further denied as a conolusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required and the balance of this averment is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of tbis averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judqment be entered in their favor. COUNT III 51. Answering defendants hereby incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 49 of this Answer as if fully set forth at length herein. 52. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. 53. This allegation is a conclusion of law for vhich no responsive pleading is required. 54. To the extent that this allegation may be construed as applying to answering defendants, it is specifically denied that answering defendants concealed or failed to disclose a hidden defect in the property. The balance of this allegation i.s denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial and is further denied as a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. 55. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading ill required and to the extent that it contains factual averments, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 56. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 54 of this Answer. with respect to plaintiff'. damages, \ I if any, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 57. To the extent that this allegation can be construed as referring to answering defendants, it is specifically denied that they engaged in a course of fraudulent whIch either created a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to the sale of the property and its condition to plaintiffs or represented to plaintiffs through their silence that the property was not in a flood hazard area and was of a pa.rticular standard grade and quality. The balance of this allegation is denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required and further denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 58. This allegation is denied for the reasons previously set forth in paragraphs 51 through 57 of this Answer. 59. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. 60. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, answering def.endants request that judgment be entered in their favor. COUNT IV 61. Paragraphs 1 though 60 of this Answer are hereby inoorporated by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 62. Denied. Defendant, Randy Billman, was not an employee of defendant, Douglas R. Heineman. On the contrary, he was an independent contractor. assoc.iated with Douglas R. Heineman. By way of further answer the words "all acts" are vague and ambiguous and incapable of response. 63. 'fhis allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that this allegation contains factual averments, after reasonable investigation, ansl/ering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 64. 'I'his allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that this allegation oontains factual averments, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial 65. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is specifioally denied that defendant, Randy Billman knew that the property was on a flood plain and failed to disclose that known fact. 66. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ot this averment and demand striot proof of same at time of trial. ., 67. Fraud or misrepresentation on the part of Randy Billman are denied for the reasons previously set forth. By way of further answer this allegation is a oonclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. with respect to the "aforementioned flood" and plaintiffs' losses, after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. COUNT V 68. Paragraphs 1 through 67 are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 69. Denied. It is specifically denied that the defendant, Randy Billman, intentJ.onally withheld that the property was in a flood plain, and convinced the plaintiffs to use John H. Billman's attorney so that the concealment would not be uncovered or that he oonspired with others, including a notary to place her official seal on a known forged document to complete his fraud induced transaction. On the contrary hs did none of these acts. 70. This allegation is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 69 of this answer and is further denied as a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. ~..J'.1 71. Paragraphs 1 through 69 are honby incorporatsd by ~.fer.no. as though fully set forth at length herein. 72. This allegation is a oonolusion of law for whioh no responsive pleadi.ng is required. 73. It is denied that Randy Billman failed in any duty and it is further denied that Randy Billman: (a) failed to disclose to plaintiffs a known material faot oonoerning the oharaoter of the property Bold, that being that the property was in a flood plainl (b) failed to provide plaintiffs with an agreement of sale for the purchase of the property setting forth he offer of purohase with its terms and conditions I (c) failed to provide in writing the relationship between himself as agent, the seller of the property and plaintiffs as buyers and the duties owed to the seller of the property and the buyer of the property I (d) failed to properly establish a settlement date and time, in writing informing al parties, including his broker and his , ! \ broker's staff as to the timing of the samel (e) informed plaintiffs that they did not need a to consult an independent attorney to review or prepare neoessary dooumentation regarding the sale and purchase of the property I i (f) informed and convinoed plaintiffs not to seek ' private oounsel but to use the attorney of the sellez' of the property to represent plaintiff sin the same and purchase of the property I (g) forged the name of the seller of the property that being the signature of his father, defendant John H. Billman, ~n the sales agreement between plaintiffs and defendant John Billman prepared by John Billman's attor.ney, then witnessed the same, and (h) conspired with anyone. These allegations are also denied for the reasons set forth in paragr.aphs 1 to 72 of this Answer. 74. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. This allegation is also denied for the reasons previously set forth in paragraph 73 of this Answer. 75. It is specifically denied that plaintiffs were led and deceived by defendant, Randy Billman, or that defendant. Randy Billman was negligent or engaged in any intentional torts. The balance of this allegation is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 76. Negligence is denied for the reasons set forth in paragraph 73 of this Answer. The balance of this Answer is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to fora a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at ti.. of trial. The balance of this Answer is further denied as a conclusion of law for whioh no responsive pleading i. required. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judqment be entered in their favor. l " C.OUHT ~ 77. Paragraphs 1 through 76 are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth at length herein. 78. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that this allegation contains factual averments, it is denied for the reasons previously set forth in paragraph 16 of this Answer. WHEREFORE, answedng defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. COUNT VIII - lTHERB 18 NO COUNT VII) 79. Paragraphs 1 though 78 are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth at length herein. 80. This allegation is a conclusion of law for which n 0 responsive pleading is required this allegation is also denied inasmuch as defendant, Randy Billman, was an independent contractor associated with defendant, Douglas R. Heineman. In addition, error8, acts, omissions and negligence of Randy Billman are specifically denied. 81. Denied. It is denied that defendant Douglas R. Heineman failed to properly supervise and/or review the work of Randy Billman regarding the sales of related parties property or to have proper procedures instituted in his office to insure that transactions in which related parties are represented are close 1I0nitored. 82. Intentional omissions and other actions of answering defendant are specifically denied. This allegation is also denied a8 a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading i. required and further denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 83. The conveyance of improper information and deception and intentional and/or negligent actions or omissions of ans~lering defendant are speoifically denied. The balance of this averment is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 84. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are wi.thout knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. 85. Professional negligence is denied for the reasons previously set forth in this Answer. The balance of this Answer is denied inasmuch as after reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment and demand strict proof of same at time of trial. This allegation is also denied as a conclusion of law for which no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. COUNT U 86. Paragraphs 1 through 85 are hereby incorporated by referenoe as though fully set forth at length herein. 87 - 96. These allegations are not directed towards answering defendanty and no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that these averments may be construed as to containing allegations wi th respect to answering defendants, they are denied for the reasons previously set forth in this Answer. WHEREFORE, answering defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. COUlIT J: 97. Paragraphs 1 through 96 are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth at length herein. 98 and 100. (There is no Paragraph 99). These allegations are denied for the reasons previously let forth 1n paragraphs 87 to 96 of this Answer. WHEREFORE, answerlng defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. NEW MATTU 1. Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the provisions of the Agreement of Sale, a true and correct copy of which i. attached hereto as Exhipit A. 2. At all times material hereto answering defendants were acting as agents for the seller and not for the buyers. Plaintiffs had their own agent representing them and answering defendants owed no duty to the plaintiffs. 3. Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the Statute of Frauds. 4. Plaintiffs I claims aI'e barred by the Parol Eviclence Rule. 5. Plaintiffs' claims are barred in whole or in part by their own negligence, carelessness and recklessness. \ I I 6. Plaintiffs' olaims are barred by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligenoe Aot. 7. Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damageo. 8. If any representations were made to the plaintiffs were made by entities or individuals other than answering defendants. 9. Plaintiffs' Complaint does not state olaims for whioh relief oan be granted. 10. Plaintiffs' damages, if any, were oaused by other aots or aotivities unrelated to any acts or aotivities of answering defendants. 11. Plaint1ffs' claims are barred by their o'ym negligence, carelessness and recklessness in not securing appropriate permits froll Southampton 'l'ownehip which would have alerted them to any flood plain problems and which would have required that plaintiffs take precautions which, if taken, would have prevented any or all of their damages. 12. Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the statute of Limitations. WHERE}'ORE, answering defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor. ~TTER/CROSSCLAIM AGAINST HAROLD S. IRWIN. III 1. If there is liability with respect to plaintiffs' olaims the liability is that of defendant, Harold S. Irwin, III, who is solely liable to plaintiffs, jointly or severally liable or liable over to answering defendants for contribution and indellnity inoluding counsel fees and costa. The allegations in plaintiffs' Complaint as far as th€lY relate to defendant Harold S. Irwin, III, I fil.lsU\IAI'III\I.\1111111 .111';" !..I", (1,-,11,,1 "'"~ II'I~ II .' I -I! ,\\1 I(niwd II' :~-11111111, IH I'" H.~" .11 OARY A, 111i'i'ENSTEEI. illld DIANNA M, IIIPi'ENSTEEL, i'lailllil'ls I'i'i IIII ('I II ill I ()I (()~L\ll)N "II'..\S lli" I '11~lIl1'lll A~i1 H '( iI iNn', 1'1 NNSYI VANIA v, ('IVILM'lION lAW ,101lN II, BILLMAN, RANDY BILLMAN, DOUGL^S R, IlEINHvlAN, llldil'idllillly IIl1d tliI B & II AGENCY REM.TORS, illld IIAROLDS, IRWIN, III, Ikt\JIldilnls N( IlJf: :'~I ('IVII IIIlM Wit Y Iln,\1 01 I WI'I VIo I >H,I/\NDED ANSW.EH. WITII NEW MATllm ,\NlIl'IWSS CLAIM OF UEI"El'lDANT JOliN II. IJILLMi\N TO SJo;('ONII AMENl>Im COMI'LA1NT TO: GARY A, 1I1i'1'1':NSlI'll illld III\\INA \1 1I11'1'1:0IS I HI, I'lilintil'ls, alld Ihcil' attol'llcy, ,10SI':I'11 I> III it 'K I I,Y YOU /\I{Io: III'RI'IIY ~~IIIIIII'II III 1111. A Wlml'IiN RliSPONSE TO THE ENCI.OSED NEW MAll'I'R WIIIIIN 111'1 N I Y ('1111 >i\ YS I'RO\l SERVICE IIEREOF OR A ,1UDGMENT MA Y III,: I'NTI:RI'I) Al iAINS I ~'I II!. 1-3. Admittcd, 4, Allcl' 1'l'ilSollahil' 1I)\'csllgillioll, llil' illlSWl'l'illg I>clendanl is without knowledgc or infol'malion slIl'Iicicntlo lill'llla hdil'f ilS 1(1 tlil' tllltli (II fillsily 01' thc ill'elmcnls contilined in this paragraph, The aVCl'mcllts arc I Ii l'l'l'Ii1I'l' dl'l'llll'd lil'lIil'd ilnd 1'1'0(11' is dcmillldcd if I'clcl'anl 10 thc claims against Dcfclldilnt .Iolillllillmllll. 5-1 (), ^dmittcd, II, It is admitted thill .IS (lI',1i1III1II1,\, I, I 'it)(, I ",il'lIdillll ,1nlin Billmiln speeilically kncw that appl'OXimalcly 1/201' the pl'(lpl'111' dl"il'lihl'd illl'ill'ilglilph 7 illld I'eeoldcd in plan hook 41, pilgc 59 in thc Cumbellilnd ('oullt)' [(<'l'Oldl'1 ,Ii I >Ct't,," Wil" l"l'illl'd ill iI hil/al'll houlldalY. 12-27, Allcll'l'aS(lIlahll' illl't'sll)',illi(lll, lilt' illI'iWl'I'III)'. Ilt'klldillll is without kllowledgc 01' inlol'l11alion sui'liciclllt(lli'l'Ill ill",lil'fll', 1(l1I1l' 1IIIIh mlilhtl)'ol'lltl' ilVl'l'llll'nts containcd in lhcsc paragraphs, 'l'hc aVel'lnl'llls IlIl' th",dill" tI"<'III,'tI tI"III"d illlllproofis dClllilllded ifrl'lcvanllo Ihc claims against Dclclldalll ,Iolnlllilllllllll. 28, Iklelldanl .1(1111111 II 11111 lilll iltlllllls Ihlll hl' Ill'I<'r dill'l'ily l'olll'cyed to tl", Plaintiffs Ihatllw pl'opcrly II'as ill ill1(1(1d hil/illd III"iI 11\ II ill' ollllrlh"II'l'SPlIIISI.', Iklendilllt.lohn II Billman ncvel' met thc I'lailltil'iS iI" Ih<' 1I,III'''Il'II''11 ill III I lit' ('illlI"'l'illll'<.' WilS h.llldlcd hy Ihe nthcr individllals mcntioncd in paragl'Hph 28, In addition, by way 01' further responsc, lhe Illet llmt a portiol1 01' thc propcrly is in a flood hazard area is a maltcr ol'publie record, 29, Admittcd, 30. It is admitted that Dcfcndanl John Billman did not attcnd lhc meeting and sign thc Salcs Agrccmcnt. As indicated in paragmph 28, the othcr Defendants handlcd this tnmsaelion for Dcfendanl John H, Billman, 31, Artcr rcasonable investigation, the answering Defendanl is withoul knowlcdge 01' information surticient to form a belief as to the truth 01' I(dsity 01' the averments containcd in this paragraph, Thc avermenls arc therefore deemed denied and proof is demandcd if relcvanllo thc claims against Dcfendant John Billman, 32, It is admitted that Dcfendmll John Billman ncver lold Plaintiff anything about tho property since hc ncver mct lhem. 33-35, Artcr rcasonablc inl'cstigation, the answering Dcfendanl is wilhout knowledgc 01' informalion sufficient to form a belief as 10 the lruth 01' fidsity of the avermenls conlaincd inthcsc paragraphs, The averments arc therel(lrc deemecI denied and proof is demanded if rclcvantto thc claims againsl Dcfcndant John Billman, 36, Denicd as stalcd, To the ('onlrary, the Sales Agreement is a document which spcaks for itsclf and il is dcnicd thatthcrc is any le!)al requircmcnt 1'01' the Agreement to mcntion flood insurance, 37-41. Artcl' rcasonable invcsligation, thc answering Dcfcndant is withoUl knowlcdgc or inl'ormalion surticicnllo form a belicfas to lhc truth 01' I(llsily of tho avcrmcnts containcd in thcsc paragl'Hphs, The avcrmenls arc thercfore decmcd denicd and proof is dcmandcd if rclcvanllo thc claims against Dcfendant John Billman, WHEREFORE. Answering Dcl'endant demands judgment in his favor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complainl with prejndice, lliUN'LONE JDhll..BlIlmRII..,.Fmu (LUll d..Mlsnprcs clIlnUuu 42, The uvcrmcnts ol'panlgraphs I throngh 41 ol'this Answcr arc hcrchy incorpomtud by rcfercncc, 43-44, The awrnwnls of thcsc paragraphs mc conclusions of law to which no rcsponsc is required, To thc cxtcnt a rcsponsc may bc dccmcd rcquircd, these al'cnllcnls mc denied Ilnd proof is dcmandcd, 45-4(, Dl'nied as statcd, Ddcndanl.lohn Billman did not intcntionally withhold infc1I'Illation and no conduct on his part was dcccitlhl, outragcous, inl'oll'cd bad molivc 01' othcrwisc, Morcovcr, Defclldant.lohn Hillman did notncgligclltly 01' intcntionally through olllission 01' othcrwisc wilhhold information to Plainl i fTs, Proof thcrcof is dcmandcd, 47-48, Artcr rcasonabk invcstigation, the answcring Dclcndant is without knowlcdge 01' inforlllation sufficicntto form a bclicf as to thc truth 01' falsity of thc a\'ennents conlaincd inthcsc puragraphs, Thc avcnncnls arc thcrcforc dccmcd denicd and proof is demandcd i frelevantlo the "'aims against Dclcndant John Billman, WHEREFORE, Answl'ring Dclcndinll dcmands judgllll'nt ill his 1(\\'01' and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prcjudkc, COU.NT-TWO JolmlJlIIllulu-_fl'lllld -1'lIlI1tll'c DlIllIlI~C 49, Thc avcnllcnts of pmagraphs of I through 4S are herehy incorporatcd by rel'orenec, 50, Dcnied 10 thc contrary, Dclcndanl John Hillmall did not Illtentionally withhold information and no conduct on his part was dcccitful, outrageous, ill\'oll'cd bad molivc 01' othcrwisc entitlcd Plaintifl's to punitivc damages against Delclldi!l1t John Billman, WHEREFORE, Answcring DL'icndant (kmands judgment in his {((VOl' and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prcjudice. CUU.NTllUlliE Ylollltloa of .thcl'cuus~'I\'lIulllUllfllll']'l'lIl1c_l'l'lIctlccs..lIJl.dCoumlllcrl'J'lItcctiouLlIw 5 I, Thc avermcnts of pmagraphs Ilhl'Ough 50 of this ^nswcr arc hcrchy incorporaled by refcrcncc. 52-53, Conclusions ol'law arc avened which nced not hc answcred, I I' an allswcr is rcquircd, said avcnllents are dcnied and pl'Oofthcreof is dcmalldcd, 54, Dcnied as statcd, Dcicndant.lohn Billman, his agcnts, allorney and those acting at his dircctioll did not intentionally 01' ncgligl'nlly withhold inl(JrI11ation 01' collceal 01' fail 10 disclose infonlliltioll rcgarding the' propl'rty sold to Pia inti 1'1:<;, To the contrary, the inlc1I'Illation that the propcrty was in a l100d hazard WIll' was ofpuhlic rl'cord, Proofllwrcol'is (kmanded, 55, Allcr reasonable inl'estigation, the answcl'ing Ikl,'ndant is without knowledge 01' information suf'licientto form a beliefas to the truth 01' liilsity oftlw al'el'llwnts contained in these paragraphs, l'hc al'erments are thercf'"'e deemed dcnied lllld proof is demanded if relel'ant to the claims against Defendant John Hillman. 5Ci-57, Dcnied as stated, Defendant John Hilllllan, his agents, altol'lleys and t110S(' acling at his direction did not eonccal any relel'ant inll>nllation and did not engage in a course of Ihludulcnt conduct or otherwise conceal in/lll'llllltion li'Olll PilIintilT. To I/Il' contrary, said infc)l'I11ation that the property was in a flood hazard area is lllllatter of public record, I'l'Oofthereol'is denlilnded, 58, Allcr rcasonahle inl'estigation, the answering Defendant is without knowledge 01' information suf'lieientto form a belief liS tll the truth 01' lidsity of the al'ernwnts contained in these paragraphs, The a\Wlllellts are t1wrefore dccllled denied and proof is denlilndcd if rclel'alll to the claims against Defendant John Billman, 59-60, Conclusions of law are awrred which need not be answered, I fan answer is required, said averments arc denied and proof thereof is demanded, WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant demands judgment in his f11vor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudic(" COUNTJ"OVR Dcfeudllul Raudr BiIIllIlIU__ j,'l'lIudJllIdMluepnselllllllou 61-67 The averlllcnts of t1wse paragl'l!phs refer to a party other than the answering Defendant and therefore no response is reqUired, To the extcnt a response may be deemed required, these averments are denied as they pertain to the answering Defendant. W/-IEREFORE, Answering Dellmdant demands judgment in his lill'or and dislllissal of PlaintilTs' Complaint with prejudice, COllNTFJ\'.E RlIud)' Bmlllau - b:lIl1d-j'lIulth'I'DJllllllgCS 68.70, The avel'lllents of these paragraphs retcr to a party other t1li1n the answcl'lng Defcndilllt and therethre 110 response is required, To the extcnl a re;;ponse may be decmcd rcquircd, these avcrments arc dcnied as they Pl,rtain 10 the answering Dcfcndant. WIIEREFORE, Answcring Dclcndant dcmllnds judgment in his litl'or and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with pre;udiel', COUNT SIX Run d)'lJ ilJDllln-J'l'ofessltlJllllNel:Jil: en ce 71- 76, The al'erm,'nls of these paragraphs reler to a party olher Ihan lhc answering Defendant and Iherclore no response is required, To the eXlenta rcsponse may he dcen1('d requircd, thesc al'crmcnts are denied as they perlainto the answ'~ring Defendant. WHEREFORE, Answcring Delendant demands .Judgment in his 1)lvor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice, COUNT.SEV.EN Dl.'fellllulltRlllldrllilJullIIL_ l'uuili\'C DllIl1U~CS 77- 78, TI1<: al'crments of these paragraphs refcr to a party other than the answcl'ing Defendant and thcrefore no responsc is rcquired, To the cxtentaresponse may be dcemcd required, lhesc avermenls are denicd as they pertain to Ihc answering Defendant. WHEREFORE, Answcring Defendant demands judgmcnt in his 1)11'01' and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice, COUNI.EIGll1' J.!oIlI:JlIsR.lldllcllllln_-J"rllndlllld Misrcprcsentlltlou lIlldl'roft'ssiolllll N el:lil:ellcc 79-85, Thc avcnncnts of these paragraphs relel' to a party other than the answel'lng Defendant and thcrcforc no rcsponsc is requircd, To thc cxtenlaresponse may bc dcemed rcquired, lhese al'crments are denied as they pertain to thc answering Dciendant. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant demands judgment in his 1l11'0r and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudicc. COIlliTNJNE Defelldllu UIaroJd S.lmln.lll-. I'rofessiolluLN cl:liJ(l.'llcC 86-96, Thc averments of these paragraphs rcfer to a party other than Ihc ansll'el'lng Defcndant and thercfore no response is required, To the extcnta responsc may he dcell1ed rcquil'ed, these averments are denicd as they pertain to the answering Dciendant. WIIEREFORE, Answering Defendant demands jUdgmcnl in his 111vor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint with pr"judice, illUNT.TEN HnmlcLS..kwln>-lll ~.I).llnltl\'.c.D.nmllgcs 97.100, The avcrments of these paragmphs refer 10 a party olher than the anslVering Defendant and therefore no respollse is rcquired To thc extent a responsc may bc deemed required, these averments arc denied as they pertain to thc ansll'ering Defendant. WHEREFORE, Ansll'ering Dcfendanl demands judgmenl in his 1\lVor and dismissal of Plaintiffs' Complaint lVith prejudice, NEl\'l\1Al'IER 101. Plaintiffs' Complainl is barred or reduccd by the conlribulory or comparative negligcncc of the Plainliffs, 102, Plaintiffs' Complainl is barred by the doctrine of voluntary assumption oflhe risk, IOl Plainliffs' Complaint is barred by the terms of the Instalhllcnt Sale Agrecment which is attached to Plainliffs' Complaint and is hereby identified as Exhibit "^" including but notlimltcd to paragraph 6 and 8 of the Agreement. 104, Plaintirrs claim 101' punitive damagcs against this Defendant is in violation of and is precluded by Article I, * 10, and the Fiith, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenlh Amcndmenls to the United Slales Conslilution, and by Article 1,9, 10, 1\, 12, 17 and 26 of the Pennsylvania Conslitution for reasons including lhe following: a, The elaim for punitive damages is intcnded to punish thc Defendant in a manner which is lantanlOuntto the imposition ofa criminal line based upon conduct and u mental slale which is not defined with sufficient precision 10 notify Defendunl in advance of thaI conduel which will give rise to the imposition of punitive damages and violates Dcfendanl's right to proeedund and subslanlive dne process; b, The amount of the pcnalty thaI may be imposcd as punitive damages is indf!lenllinate in that there arc no standards 01' suf'licient standurds govcrtling the discretion of the facl.finder in determining the severity of punishment 10 lhe inOicted, which violates delcndant's right 10 proeedlll'aland substantivc duc process; e, The claim 101' punitil'e damagcs eonstilules an excessil'c fine and therefore depril'cs the Defendant of the eonslitutional guanlntec tlwt excessive lines !;hallnol be imposcd; d, The punilive danwgc claim discriminates against Dclcndanls on the basis of w(~uIth in that di f1crent Dclcndants for the same act bul based only upon the dil'lcrcnec inmuteriul we<llth, und furl her u luck ofstundards It)r imposing puniti\'e damuges ullow the fuet-linder to impose punishmenl on one [)efcndunt whi Ie refusing to impose punishment on unother defendunl for engaging in the same 01' similar conduct and, tlwrelllre, is irrutionul, arhilrary and euprieious und a deprivution ofDefcndant's constitutional rights to cquul protection of the law; und e, The c1uim for punitive dumagcs amount to un ex posl fllClo law and a punishmcnt which is retrospeeti"" in operation impairs Defendant's righlto eontraet und aeccss 10 the courts constitutes anuneertuinremcdy and is otherwisc lInconstitutionalunder the Constitution of the Uniled Stales, and under thc Constitution of the COlllmonwealth ofPennsylvunia WHEREFORE, Answcring Delcndanl demands judgmcnt in his favor und dismissal of Pluinliffs' Complaint wilh prcjudice, COUNTElLCLAL'\l 105, The al'ermcnls of Defendant John Billman's Answcr wilh Nell' Mallcr ure hereby ineorporuled by reference, 106, Plainlifl!; hal'c Illiled to make the timcly payments which wcre due under lhe Agreemcnt of Sale which is allut'llCd to Pluinliffs' Complainl as Exhibit "N' and hus been recorded in the Cumberland County orticc of Recordcr of Deeds ut hook 547, page 260, 107, Defcndant John II. Billman had no contact whalsocl'er wilh tlw Plainti fI's in this case und therefore mudc no reprcscnlations or misrcpl'l'sentations 10 the Pluinti f'f's, 108, DefendanlJohn Billman hcreby asserts a counter t'laim against the Pluinliff for uny and all umounts due undcr the Agrccmcnt of Sale including oul of pocket cxpenses, including reusonuble allol'lleys fees, WHEREFORE, Defendunt.lohn II, Billman demands jlldgmcnl against the PllIintil'fs in un umounlto be detcrmined but bclieved to be less than $25,0110,00 plus prc and postjudgmcnt inlcrcst. l'IEWl\lATTERJ'URSUANT TO l'lkR.c.I',2252(d) Juhu...B.lUmnny._Rnlld)' llllllllnll, llOlll:hls IUlclnclIlnn, Illdl"ldllllll~' nndt/II II &11 Al:cnc~'_Rcllllol's nlld HIIl'oldS.ll'wln, HI 1O'J, Thc ul'ermcnls of [,Iuinti ffs' Complaint, which a\'crments hal'c bcenl'xprcssly dcnied, arc hercby incorporated hy rclcrence Illl' the limili.'d purpose of this cross claim, 110, IfPluintil'fs are entitlcd to reWl'f:r Ii'om any party, which is expressly dcnied, then [)efendunts Rundy Billman, Douglas IkinenHm, Individually and tla B&H Agcney Rcultors und Harold S, Irwin, III urc ulone liuhIc to Plaintiffs 01' liuhle over to [)clcndanl John II. Billmun hy wuy I I Ui (;: ' Ji" ,--': [ . I;' . , 11 ' ./ [. I ~ ,~ ( C, [, ('.". , (,) ;,\ I.t. ~~~. '~ O<r ~ ~~ U.I "O..-l ..-l"O~ ~ ~o ,~ 0 -I> ~tlJ :::l,~ f-4 S f--<~ 0.. ~...l ~ ~"O ~ ' Z'-: S ;~ 7. :>< <(' "-If--< >,,8 Z , Of/J ' "-<~ ;?,::: f-< ,-' j "'i7,-I f-< -, o '~~ ~~~6 ~ .... i. I .... 'U,J Z~>'~ ~ ~ ,~ :;:'t.i.j;l.", ('. f/Jo... ...... -, > -< Zo... ~ OIr'~ _ U-I '.... -, '" 0<>'0 ' . ~u ' u.~~~ d .", ~~e'" "-<- "-<zf/J ~~;- 0 ,- ,~ o...::r:: ;; U,J ,- - , -, '';' e:: - :ii0u.1Ci OZtb~ ~ g -, l.i ;'S '" ,~ o~<>:z ::r::::?: :5,,-<0'-' u.<r 0 ~ ." /. ~ .~ .'" f-< ,,) -i . ,:1::<>:0 O~O..-l ~Qf: ~ f-. ;::j ~l ~o> -<<<: ~ '::r::~ ;><-1",0 0 Vi ;,. r-.:' >'~ d~~ < co U x v, ::;,u_ o::dO~ ~ .. z Of/JV ~'5 Cl ~ .;0 l) z !:~ ~~~"O fw v;E ~ ;:'2~ ::r:: z Y. ;l '0., w :ri G -g ~ . z ~~ dO o~' ~ ~::J 0 ~~ ~::;,] ~ ~~~ ~ ~t.I !; ~ (.G ~ '3 ~ ~ ~ z ~ 08 - '" w ~ ' 2: < . 'I !- ,1-<..... -. "- ~ , . , . t; co ~ N ~~~: ~ -~) UJr,J ('~ J.. q(, ~- ()~~ ..... II~ :' O,.~ "'1::,j 'i \'1:\' .,"- J (, ,""", <(If.! (-1'i, N . J:C: l,l, Li._ (t:;Z ti: ~;.~ 1-- t41 f.U l._1 UJo.. t-I' e ''4.-.. 1.1.. ('t'J ::; c' 0-' 0 It.. 'i Ii , , ' ""7,'" (' , tc ...;.1 .-~.1 h .. Ut. - r..1 C".2i T,~ p.. :_~ U .L,\ t.:(1< ("j :l 'L (2lli ,..4,1,,: li...':~ ~.; ,., ~.... \I,; t-'".) CJ, l.f\ ... . . ! ~, 1" " ';; - ;.~-, \ J' '-,'; ; ~. - ' '" -I,;' '!t, '.,.'; :',1; ~ '-'/tH{ - 'I --" ';-~: - ,.,-, -;,' -,;' ,_J " ,1,,;'1 -~,<, -" ,~ ,\",,_1 , -ji'---- :~ )b ,<~ '/. -: ,. .- .- - ~ --j,,-,i',i ;~, -, -, ""-!.',:: ;"' )-(:i ,'-"', ,;-' i, ~ ; - i" -"~I'; -c' -," '" ", -;>e--;;; -':' 'o;-;,:-i .,. ;.,.' ,. ,<il' ., f:]~I, ,::) ~'" I t~;-/f . .,..,'~ .' ,.' '.I,:~/ ", , " _' i ~ _ _ ,. - --: ,,' -'" ,_,F"-' "y, ,- -;-' -, ,~ ,I:'" " :;~-li: :?-', -;;,;-'--,-- ';-~_i{;::1 I' ,_i , ,,-,- "~',to, ~ i 1, ,OJ ....." t