HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-1040
NOTICE TO DEFEND
You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following
pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after the complaint and notice are served, by
entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court you
defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so
the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without
further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by
the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
PENNSYLVANIA LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES
PENNSYLVANIA BAR ASSOCIATION
PO BOX 186
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: 800-932-7375
AVISO
Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas de estas demandas
expuestas an las paginas signientes, usted tiene veinte (20) dias de plazo al partir de is fecha de la
demanda y is notificacion. Hace falta asentar una comparencia escrita o en persona o con un
abogado y entregar a la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en
contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, le corte tomara medidas y puede
continuar la demanda en contra suya sin previo aviso o notificacion. Ademas, la corte puede
decidir a favor del demandante y requiere que usted cumpla con todas las provisioner de esta
demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades u ostros derechos importantes para usted.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE, SI NO TIENE
ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO.
VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION
SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE
CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
PENNSYLVANIA LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES
PENNSYLVANIA BAR ASSOCIATION
PO BOX 186
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: 800-932-7375
JERRY DANYLUK
834 Acri Road
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Plaintiff,
V.
John M. Lucidon, Jr.
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
and
Paradise Landscaping and Construction
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
Defendants
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -LAW
NO. 03-597 CIVIL TERM
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Jerry Danyluk by and through his attorney, Daniel K.
Natirboff, Esquire, to request relief before this Honorable Court and in support thereof avers as
follows:
1. Plaintiff, Jerry Danyluk ("Danyluk" or "Plaintiff') resides at 834 Acri Road,
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055.
2. Defendant, John Lucidon, Jr., ("Lucidon") resides at 1910 Spring Road, Carlisle,
PA, 17013.
2
3. Defendant, Paradise Landscaping & Construction ("Paradise") is a sole
proprietorship owned and operated by Defendant Lucidon with its principal place of business at
1910 Spring Road, Carlisle, PA 17013.
4. On or about December 6, 2001 Plaintiff and Defendants executed a Contract for
the moving of a cedar fence on Plaintiff's property, adding an addition of 21 feet to the fence and
leveling a gate on the other side of Plaintiff's house. A true and correct copy of the contract is
attached hereto and incorporated herein marked as "EXHIBIT 1 ".
Pursuant to the terms of the Contract Defendants were to remove the existing
fence on the right rear side of the house, rebuild and reset the fence along the border of
Plaintiff's property line, build an additional fence to add 21 feet of cedar slotted fence 6 feet
high, as well as a 13 foot section and door in the center adjusting the door level and building a
slotted section over the top of the door area to match the fence.
6. Pursuant to the terms of the Contract the fence was to be constructed on a "two-
foot high boulder wall" of natural limestone which would be exposed on both sides. The fence
posts were to be cemented. Defendants were to repair and level the gate on the left side of the
house. (See Exhibit 1)
7. For the work to be performed in paragraphs 4-6 above, Plaintiff was to pay the
amount of $4,325.
8. Pursuant to the terms of the Contract Defendants were also to relay pavers on
Plaintiff's house for the sum of $275.
9. Pursuant to the terms of the Contract "all material" was to be "guaranteed as
specified", and the work was "to be completed in a substantial workmanlike manner." (See
Exhibit 1)
10. For the construction to be performed as specified above and pursuant to the terms
of the Contract Plaintiff paid Defendants the amount of $4,600 in two checks for the sum of
$2,300 on December 6, 2001 and $2,300 on December 22, 2001.
11. Upon information and belief the Defendants commenced construction on
December 10, 2001 and ceased work on December 22, 2001.
12. Plaintiff noticed immediately when Defendants ceased work that the work was
not performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract and mentioned same to Defendant
Lucidon. Lucidon indicated that he could not make the repairs at that time and that he would
return after the Christmas holiday to correct any deficiencies in the construction.
13. On or about the week of January 7, 2002, Plaintiff called Defendant Lucidon on
the telephone to inquire when Defendants would return to correct the deficiencies in the
construction. Lucidon indicated again that he would return to correct any deficiencies.
4
14. On or about January 16, 2002, Plaintiff sent a confirmatory letter outlining the
conversation and detailing observed deficiencies in the construction. The letter is attached hereto
as "EXHIBIT 2" and incorporated by reference herein.
15. Subsequent to Plaintiff's letter of January 16, Lucidon contacted Plaintiff and
inquired why Plaintiff sent the confirmatory letter and again assured Plaintiff that Defendants
would return in March to correct any deficiencies.
16. Defendants did not contact Plaintiff throughout the month of March. Plaintiff left
a telephone message for Defendant Lucidon on or about the end of March, 2002 stating that his
fence was still defective and leaning over. Defendant responded to Plaintiff's phone call by
calling Plaintiff on the telephone on April 1St at 7 a.m. and engaging in an offensive profanity
laced tirade.
17. Defendant Lucidon followed up his phone call with a letter of April 5, 2002
acknowledging that repairs needed to be made and again indicating he would address the
deficiencies. Defendant's April 5 2002 correspondence is attached hereto and incorporated
herein as "EXHIBIT 3".
18. Plaintiff responded to Defendant Lucidon's April 5, 2002 correspondence by
letter of April 12, 2002 attached hereto as "EXHIBIT 4" and incorporated herein. Plaintiff's
letter of April 12, 2002 detailed multiple deficiencies in the construction and requested that if
5
Defendant was unable or unwilling to correct the deficiencies in a timely manner Plaintiff would
obtain bids from other contractors.
19. Defendants took no further action to address the deficiencies and made no further
effort to contact Plaintiff. Plaintiff brought a Civil Complaint before District Justice Robert V.
Manlove on August 23, 2002 seeking compensatory damages. Defendant sought two
continuances and did not appear for the rescheduled hearing on January 9, 2003. Defendant then
sought an Appeal of the default judgment before this Honorable Court.
COUNT 1- BREACH OF CONTRACT - DEFECTIVE CONSTRUCTION
20. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 19 of the Complaint as if set
forth at length herein.
21. As more fully described herein, on or about December 6, 2001, Plaintiff and
Defendants executed a written Contract for the movement of Plaintiff's existing fence and
construction of an addition to an existing fence on Plaintiff's property as well as the leveling of a
gate on the opposite side of Plaintiff's house. All work and materials were to be as specified and
performed in a "substantial workmanlike manner". See EXHIBIT "1."
22. Defendants breached the Contract by constructing the fence in a defective
manner, not in accordance with the specifications, and constructed so poorly as to render the
fence useless and unfit for its purpose as a fence on a residential property.
23. Defendants defective construction has destroyed Plaintiff's already existing cedar
wood fencing.
6
24. Specifically Plaintiff breached the Contract by: a) failing to build the fence
matching the original fence in material or workmanship; b) not using red cedar for the entire
fence as promised and interspersing the fence with pine boards; c) not using boulders to
construct the wall below the fence and in fact using small stones not level; d) not anchoring the
fence posts in cement as promised which has resulted in the fence being crooked and near
collapse; e) not leveling the gate on the left side of the house; and f) not performing the
construction in a substantial workmanlike manner" as promised.
25. Defendants were given multiple opportunities to cure the defective construction
but to date have failed to make any effort to do so.
26. After Defendant's failed to cure the defective fence, Plaintiff contacted Terry
Wright of Wright's Co-Operative Builder's Association to observe the fence and assess the
damage. Mr. Wright is a reputable builder with multiple years of experience in residential
construction and built Plaintiff's original red cedar fence. Mr. Wright has worked with the
insurance industry as an appraiser of damaged property.
27. Mr. Wright provided his opinion regarding the damage to Plaintiff's fence by
letter after his observations, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as
"EXHIBIT 5". Mr. Wright's letter set forth the defective construction as described above and
stated his opinion that the fence was "completely unacceptable and that the only way the work
can be "straightened out is to completely remove all work and rebuild completely". See Exhibit
5.
28. By proposal of May 4, 2002 Mr. Wright provided his proposal for
repair/reconstruction of Plaintiff's fence, a true and correct copy of which is attached as
7
"EXHIBIT 6". Repair/reconstruction of Plaintiff's fence to the original specifications warranted
by Defendants in Exhibit 1 is estimated by Mr. Wright as costing $7,100.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Honorable Court find Defendants
in breach of Contract and enter an Order as follows:
a. Granting judgment for Plaintiff against Defendants in the amount of at least
$7,100, plus 6% post judgment interest per annum, or as determined by the Court,
exclusive of interest and costs.
b. Granting Plaintiff its expenses, including reasonable attorney fees incurred in
connection with the action and costs of this action; and
c. Granting such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
COUNT 2-BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY
29. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 28 of the Complaint as if set
forth at length herein.
30. Defendant's Form Proposal which Plaintiff contends constitutes the Contract at
Exhibit 1 in this matter contains an express warranty setting forth that "All material is guaranteed
to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and
specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial workmanlike manner.."
31. Defendant's breached this express warranty by failing to provide the materials as
guaranteed, failing to perform the work as guaranteed in accordance with specification and
failing to complete work in a substantial workmanlike manner as more specifically described in
paragraph 24 of this Complaint above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that if this Honorable Court fails to find
Defendants in Breach of Contract this Honorable Court find that Defendants have breached the
Express Warranty in this matter and that this Honorable Court enter an Order as follows:
a. Granting judgment for Plaintiff against Defendants in the amount of at least $7,100, plus
6% post judgment interest per annum, or as determined by the Court, exclusive of interest
and costs.
b. Granting Plaintiff its expenses, including reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection
with the action and costs of this action; and
c. Granting such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
8
COUNT 3-BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF REASONABLE WORKMANSHIP
32. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Complaint as if set
forth at length herein.
33. Courts in this Commonwealth have held that once a builder executes a
construction contract that builder impliedly warrants that the construction will be performed in a
reasonably workmanlike manner. See Groff v. Pete Kingsley Building, Inc, 374 Pa. Super. 377,
543 A.2d 128 (1988).
34. Defendants executed a Construction Contract on December 6, 2002 marked as
Exhibit 1 but failed to perform the work in a reasonably workmanlike manner as more fully
described above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that if this Honorable Court fails to find
Defendants in Breach of Contract or Express Warranty, that this Honorable Court find that
Defendants have breached the Implied Warranty of Reasonable Workmanship in this matter and
that this Honorable Court enter an Order as follows:
a. Granting judgment for Plaintiff against Defendants in the amount of at least $7,100, plus
6% post judgment interest per annum, or as determined by the Court, exclusive of interest
and costs.
b. Granting Plaintiff its expenses, including reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection
with the action and costs of this action; and
c. Granting such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Daniel K. Natirboff, Esq.
Supreme Court No. 785941 r
4138 Wimbledon Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 576-3386
Attorney For Plaintiff
9
EXHIBIT I
h Oise "N*>oSWjDf
t`ttc? P G eZ PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO: '"?{? ' `?? WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT
NAME ?QII' V
Ar1[7Flt-SS .
???1?c.Gra?ic?c bMr? . -?'? 17o s?
vA?
Val. "her y prapQse to ? rntsh >;?te rhateriais and perform the labor necessary for the completion of
AW _?r?. •
114 1
AL-
-___._?.??..__4-¢,c?.__..?.._?? _¢?c? cry ?er?s?, ?-'I??r?rr
All.material is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specifi-
catio *bmitted for. ove work and completed in a Osttahtia ?w•ork,,m like manner for the sum of
OtJSLL,c 1??_ _ _`j`- _ , dollars ($ ellu
with payments to be made as follows.
11 :?i.r Respectfully submitted Any alteration or rr n bove sp no involving extra costs
will be executed only upon un order, and will become an extra charge over over and above the ostiniate, All agreements contingent upon strikes, ac- Per - S a
cidenls, or delays beyond our control.
Note -This proposal may be withdrawn
L7,- b us if not accepted
y within days.
r1t.?.cr t fAM;t UI' VHU UaAL
The abo"v prices,. larvcificatidhs; arld,c:ohditions` are "sat factory and are eby accepted.
as-:specified.' Payments will be made a? outlined above. ( `
Signature
Clete -?' ?- Signature
ADDRESS
DATE OF PLANS
.200
ARCHITECT i
? hrt wl ?.c.?c?r'
are authorized to do the work
APE IN USA 3131F3-50 O
MApE IN USA A f PRV I?Op
EXHIBIT 2
John Lucidou
Page 1.
Ja»uary 16, 2002
January 16, 2002
John Lucidon
Paradise Landscaping & construction
1910. Spring, Road
Carlisle, PA 17013-1155
Dear John:
I wanted to send you a letter noting some of the points we discussed on the
or so ago'to be certain we have communicated everything we feel needs to be addressed
with regard to the job you just completed for us. phone a week
i realize you are busy with other jobs, but hopefully this will expedite the c
as you find an opening In your schedule to return to our job. hanges as soon
Facing the fence from the street, the top part of the ate does no Not only are the boards a different size, they are nailed in crooked t We w the door gate.
finish the top just as the gate appears in a solid finish. ould like you to
The stone wall isn't what we had requested. If you recall, I originally a
wall be built that would pyramid down on both sides, where dirt could e add d that a stone
with the fence above. The manner In which the wall is built does not meet th for planting,
requirements and Is already falling apart. As you know, the fence ma not ex township's
foot
foot mark, unless it rests on a landscaped surface. Y exceed the 6-
top board on the last section toward the creek (part of the original the "fan" You built was damaged during construction and should fence] and before
have been replaced.
The "fan" at'the end of the fence Is not stable, Is not in straight and the to
properly to appear like the "fan" on the other side. In addition, the boards used
don't match in size or color, are spaced too far apart P Is not finished
a wide gap at the bottom, and don't as scats
go all the way down, leaving
On the other side of the fence the gate you repaired doesn't matched-up evenly and, in
time, will begin to sag again. It was our understanding this would be repaired
And finally, the slag-substance used for the side permanently.
Cleaned up In several grassy areas throughout walk and for the stone wall was not
John Lucidon
Pago 2
January 16, 2002
John, It Is evident to us you are a perfectionist in your work from the pictures we saw. We
would appreciate it if you would correct the areas noted to meet with both yours and
satisfaction. our
Pie ase feel free to call me to discuss any of these areas you may have concerns
about
.
Otherwise, I look forward to you taking care of these items noted in the near future,
Sincerely,
Z?Je nd Sally banyluk
EXHIBIT 3
F
' APRIT, S, 2002
i
JERRY nANYLFJK
34 Ac'r.t Road
Rnola, PA
near Sir:
1,^? J• ^J?l1J? t7
c:zr cony-; "ation ro;? Tin?• '-
Job done in your residence at Y834 Acri Road
, Enola, Pennsylvania
last necember,2009. I acknowledge that certain minor repairs
Over the phone with discussed
you needs attention. With the spring season here
and the weather improving, my crew and I can correct and address
Problems based on the existing contract the
you signed and approved last
Dece-mbex,2001. Please give us a call at your convenience so we can
schedule this repair work. Our office number is (717) 245-2099 and
leave a message if I am not available. Thank You.
.Respectfully,
OW M. LUCIDON, JR.
pARAhISF ?.ANnSCAPING R CONSTRUCTION
Omer/Manager
EXHIBIT 4
April 12, 2002
John Lucidon
Paradise Landscaping & Construction
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013-1155
Dear John:
I received your letter dated April 5, 2002, wherein you acknowledge, "certain minor
repairs ...needs (sic) attention." First, permit me to relate the facts and occurrences
concerning this project since its completion on December 2002.
1 sent you a letter dated January 16, 2002, wherein I outlined the problems with the job
that needed to be corrected. You called and stated that you would address the problems
sometime in March, weather permitting. In the meantime, because all of the fence posts
were not anchored in cement, as per the contract, the fence started leaning and is in
danger of breaking off starting at the end where the slotted panel is located. This is
causing additional damage to the fence. I voiced my concern in a message I left on your
answering machine on March 29, 2002.
On Monday, April 1, 2002, you called my home at 7:30 in the morning, left a voice
message, and I immediately returned your call. You then proceeded to engage in a
profanity-laced diatribe that my wife could hear in the next room. I terminated the
conversation by hanging up the phone. I then received your certified letter dated April 5,
2002, as referenced above, acknowledging that certain minor repairs are needed and
asking that I give you a call or leave a message on your answering machine.
The following needs to be fixed:
l . The posts must be properly anchored in cement as per the contract.
2. The slotted panel at the end of the fence must match the one on the other side as
well as the rest of the fence in terms of material, design and quality of
construction. It's falling apart.
3. The top board of the fence is breaking as a result of the fence leaning, it needs to
be replaced.
4. The finish above the gate does not match either the fence or the gate itself in
terms of material and the 2x4s you substituted were installed crooked. The
contract calls for this to match the fence.
5. The limestone wall is merely constructed of a single row of stone beneath the
fence with absolutely no structural integrity. It is falling apart with large gaping
holes. The contract states that you would add extra stone, 2 feet high and grade
the areas. When you pile a single row of stone, there is nothing to grade, and in a
few more months only rubble will remain where once a faulty wall stood.
G. The gate you repaired on the other side of the house doesn't match-up evenly and
is starting to sag again. The contract states "repair and level", it is neither repaired
not is it level with the fence.
Please be advised that if you are unable or unwilling to satisfactorily correct these
problems in a professional and timely manner, let me know immediately and I will obtain
bids from other contractors to get this work accomplished. My attorney, Mr. Daniel
Natirboff, will then handle the resolution of this matter. I anticipate your prompt attention
to this matter.
Sincerely,
Jerry Danyluk
cc; Daniel Natirboff, Esq.
1.4
EXHIBIT 5
WRIGHT'S CO-OPERATIVE BUILDERS ASSOC
7 KAMP ST
DUNCANNON PA 17020
717/834-6677
Jerry & Sally Danyluk
834 Acri Road
Mechanicsburg PA 17050
Phone: 728-1235
Cell: 991-0516
Mr. Danyluk,
On or about June 3, 2002 you called me to come to your house to inspect some work you
had done by Paradise Landscaping & Construction Co. You ask for my honest opinion of
quality of work done by Paradise Landscaping.
This is a list of problems you have now and problems you will encounter in the near future:
1. Rear section of new fence already collapsing.
2. Post not cemented properly in ground.
3. New fence was to match original (does not come close).
4. Original fence was put together with screws only, add on work was nailed (new
fence already coming apart, original fence is destroyed).
5. New fence was to be built with red cedar to match original. There are pine
boards scattered throughout new work.
6. Area on top of gate does not come close to original work.
7. Upright boards not level.
8. Gate on left side of home crooked still crooked.
9. Gate is hanging crooked on right side of home.
10. Boards are split throughout new work.
11. Stone wail under fence is not secure. Stones were stacked in single column and
are falling down.
My Personal opinion Of work done by Paradise Landscaping & Construction Co, is, that it
is completely unacceptable. The only way this work can be straightened out is to
completely remove all work and rebuild completely.
W.C.B.A.
Terry Wright, owner
EXHIBIT 6
100% Financing
CALL TODAY
Budget Payments ? WCBA Mechanicsbufg (717)8916261
n Duncannon (717)8344677
Equity Loans `=
MS
Extra Cash Discounts ?? ? +A" 7 Kamp Street
F
Duncennon, PA 17020
Local Referrences
PROPOSAL SIIOIIITIED TO PHONE DATE
?hfL? ?- s?1k /T? iV1 +/ti?y' l+c5r >SIc/?Dj.
STREET Joe NAME
CITY. STATE AND ZIP CODE
"_lYl l + i,l rZ +i . N 17 6 C? U
We hereby propose to Iurn-sh materials And labor notes" tot rho ComPWhon of.
f 5 n?r4AO TIC. 1 i1I? Zaldp K ba?Uft 13!4 (Zt'slrtyrt!1?5 f??`?v'T.?at`rt?h? /!.?'7 S` ?` 0
1
:aid l/ f +E't.? ue 4 A4 ] r 5 A 57b v iJ A 11 c) C. c313 7 47n 6 Yt
C A.C-ri El N .$?lo1 S l7
- L 'L(jEFIP do Ail De 21 S' +H,4vt
b1?1 rra?r?d
You may cancel this transaction, without any penalty or obligation within three business days of the
Date of Acceptance of this proposal. Wright's Co-operative Builders Association must be notified no
later than midnight of
I hereby acknowledge being fully informed of this Provision.
Any cancellation beyond this date -I/we understand that I/we are liable for Wright's Co-operative
Builders Association, lost profits and cost _
WE PROPOSE hereby to furnish material and labor - colv*ete in accordance with above wacificetions, for the sum at.
5,e1jAA" -77j00!.'#A ji ()ue /Jeo p- -- dollars iS-7Id0 I
Payment to be ma a as Allows:
All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed In a sub-
stantial :workmahllke manner according to specifications submitted, per standard Authorttsd
practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications Involving extra Slptetare?+..-?
costs Will be okocutod only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge
over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent Upon Strikes. JCCldents or
delays beyond our Control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary in- Note, This proposal may be
1 surance, Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation insurance, wtkdrsrn by es it not accepted within daps.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, spec?ficattons and Condi-
tions are satlsfaCtorY and are hereby aCCePted. You are authorized to do the work
as specified. Payment will be made as outline above. Si?instYa
UAh of Acceptance: Swint
eh
JERRY DANYLUK
834 Acri Road
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Plaintiff,
V.
John M. Lucidon, Jr.
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
and
Paradise Landscaping and Construction
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
Defendants
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -LAW
NO. 03-597 CIVIL TERM
VERIFICATION
I, Jerry Danyluk, hereby verify that I am the Plaintiff in this matter. I have sufficient
knowledge or information based upon investigation into the matter to make the verification. I
hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements contained herein are made
subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relative to unworn falsification to authorities.
Date: ?,016:3
By: Je anyluk
Acri Road
Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055
10
? ? ??
`' , o ?
? ?
?r
SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR
CASE NO: 2003-01040 P
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
DANYLUK JERRY
VS
LUCIDON JOHN M JR ET AL
DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of
Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law,
says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon
LUCIDON JOHN M JR the
DEFENDANT , at 1935:00 HOURS, on the 13th day of March 2003
at 1910 SPRING RnAT)
CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to
ROSA LUCIDON, WIFE
a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE
together with
and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing 18.00
Service 3.45
Affidavit .00
Surcharge 10.00
Sworn and Subscribed to before
me this day of
d,? U3 A.D.
Proth otary
l
So Answers:
R. Thomas Kline
03/14/2003
JERRY DANYLUK
By:
Deputy Sheriff
SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR
CASE NO: 2003-01040 P
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
DANYLUK JERRY
VS
LUCIDON JOHN M JR ET AL
DAWN KELL
Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of
Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law,
says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE
was served upon
PARADISE LANDSCAPING & CONSTRUCTION
DEFENDANT
at 1910 SPRING ROAD
CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to
ROSA LUCIDON, ADULT IN CHARGE
a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE
together with
and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing
Service
Affidavit
Surcharge
So Answers:
6.00 .00 .00
10.00 R. Thomas Kline
Sworn and Subscribed to before
me this 44 day of
??t lt1LC Q? A.D.
Pro 0 otary
at 1935:00 HOURS, on the 13th day of March , 2003
03/14/2003
JERRY DANYLUK
By C??.?Y1
Deputy Sheriff
MAY 0 4 2004
JERRY DANYLUK : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
834 Acri Road
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Plaintiff,
V. CIVIL ACTION -LAW
John M. Lucidon, Jr. : NO. 03-597 CIVIL TERM
1910 Spring Road NO. 03-1040 CIVIL TERM
Carlisle, PA 17013
and
Paradise Landscaping and Construction
1910 Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
Defendants
ORDER
AND NOW, on this 'day of 20 ., in consideration of Plaintiff's
Motion to Consolidate, Plaintiff's Motion is G D. The Claims docketed at NO(s) 03-597
and 03-1040 shall be consolidated into one Claim at
03-597.
.oa
oh0
sV •
r3..
J
O
N
ko)?
Y
A
Curtis R. Long
Prothonotary
Office of the Protbonotarp
Cumberianb Countp
Renee K. Simpson
Deputy Prothonotary
John E. Slike
Solicitor
b 3 - 10 1/0 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES
AND NOW THIS 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2007 AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF
INTENTION TO PROCEED AND RECEIVING NO RESPONSE - THE ABOVE
CASE IS HEREBY TERMINATED WITH PREJUDICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA
R C P 230.2.
BY THE COURT,
CURTIS R. LONG
PROTHONOTARY
One Courthouse Square • Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 • (717) 240-6195 • Fax (717) 240-6573