The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About00-05362 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTHOUSE 1 COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA. 17013-3387 MEMORANDUM FROM: The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley Taryn N. Dixon, Assistant Court Administrirtor - ~~ IV July 9, 2001 TO: DATE: INRE: 5362 Civil 2000 HOWARD STEAGER v. ROBERT CORNMAN The above case is assigned to you for a non-jury triaL Please provide me with copies of your scheduling orders and final disposition date so that I can monitor the case for statistical purposes. Attachment .-"'''1': ~ ", "," , , "-,' ,-F - o PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL JUl II 6 2001 GM (Must be typewritten and sulnlitted in duplicate) TO 'IHE PJ<OI'I1ONJ'1'ARY OF CUMBERLANO COUNTy (") 0 c: <.' r Please list the following CElSe: -Of)"- D.lh' ).-. Z:J:' (Check one) for JURY trial at the next telTll of civil ~. u: ' , -<~r:::: r:: ,--- X for trial without a jury. ~:: -,., -------------~----------------------$~--~ CAPTION OF CASE :::; :''1 (entire caption IT1llSt be stated in full) (check one) .< (XX) Civil Action - Law HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, Appeal from Ami tration (other) (Plaintiff) vs. ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, The trial list wil.l be called on 8/14/01 and Trials comnence on 9/10/01 (Defendant) PJ:etrials will be held on 8/22/01 (Briefs are due 5 days before pretrials, ) (The party listing this case for trial shall provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local RIle 214.1.) vs. No. 2000 Civil 5362 19 Indicate the atto:rney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe; Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South St., Harrisburg, PA 17101 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front St., Harrisburg, PA 17102 This case is ready for trial. Signed: ' ~ ~.~ Print NaJre,Peter B. Foster Date: July 3, 2001 Attorney for: Plaintiffs B "-,',,"1 ~- ~~ ~I -r j _ 9te.o-C1-eV ~D {Ml..rJ.- steC.S' {' ~ --l"""UV- iJ' \O)i\..:V\+,'~~q 1A r",+iJt" ~fYH'>V"'""hPJe():.s -+1\ ... f\e L0"- r + {Je.V\(\OV.l,uUA<It., CiA...Yr> b-i:...!(}./\'i cA <.--0 Ll" ~, 0 y. IUJ ' '2.owu- S 3'" L ~~ey-\-o (' r \,/, ) 40\L-N-. - l-"'--'-" C~r\"\jY\1>M ~.J.. '::::>(YNl.'" Co.,,~ , '- v (){>+0Y\.~ ))c!>~ +0 De. .\u.-Q"- You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you nust take action within bienty (20) days after this oooplaint and notice aJ:e served, by entering a written appeanmce personally or by an attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objec- tions to :the claims set forth against you. You aJ:e wro:ned that if you fail to do so the case nay pr:o<::=;J without you and a julgrent nay be entered against you by the court without further notice for any m:mey cl.aiIred. in the catplaint or for any other claim or relief J:eqiJested by the plaintiff. You nay lose m:mey or property or other rights iuportant to you. YCXJ SIKXJID TAKE 'lHIS PAPER '10 YOOR LAWYER Nr (KE. IF YOO 00 NJr HAVE A LAWYER OR CI\NIUI' AFFURD em, 00 '10 OR 'lElliPlKl'm THE OFFICE SET FORlH BEL<W '10 FIND '. em.' WHERE YOO CAN GET IEGM. HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLE PA 17013 (717) 249 3166 . "-'~"""~1 HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiffs Howard and Ida Steager, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 411 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 2. Defendants are Robertand Sandra Cornman, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 504 Third Street, New Cumberland, Cum:berland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 3, On November 30, 1983, Defendants initially entered into a Lease Agreement with Plaintiffs for the premises at 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and continued to occupy said premises until May 8, 2000. Plaintiffs own said premises. 4. On June 13, 1990 Defendants entered into another Lease Agreement for said premises with Plaintiffs, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A". 5. This Lease provided for a one year term, with automatic renewal each year pursuant to occupation ofthe premises, at a monthly rental of$450.00 payable on the first day of each month. ~'", --J1I , h . 6. Said rental amount by agreement of the parties increased to $650.00 per month by agreement dated October 14, 1998. Said agreement is attached as Exhibit "Boo. 7. On May 8, 2000, Defendants vacated the leased premises and surrendered possession thereof to Plaintiffs. 8, After September 1, 1999, Defendants ceased topaythe rent due under the Lease. The amount of rent in arrears from that date forward if $5200.00. 9. In addition, Defendants owe late fees of $1220 for failure to rent from October 1, 1999 through May of2000 pursuant to the late fee provision of said Lease. 10. In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to $321.00 for attorney's fees for collection of said unpaid rents and penalties pursuant to the provisions of said Lease. 11. Plaintiffs have made repeated demands upon Defendants for payment of said unpaid rent, but Defendants have failed and refused and still refuse to pay the same or any part thereof. 12. At or prior to the time when Defendants vacated the leased premises, Defendants damaged the premises and otherwise breached the Lease by failing to surrender the leased premises in substantially the same condition in which they were leased to Defendants, in that the; premises were damaged as follows: a) Kitchen area: Spackling on the surface of the wallpaper; glue on the wallpaper; wallpaper is stained; the walls are marked and the kitchen floor is stained, b) Dinine: Room area: Dining room flOQr is stained from dogs; wallpaper is stripped off in spots; ceiling tile is "- . ~I ~" stained; plastic fixture for light is ripped off; dining room fan is off balance; ceiling tiles are broken and stained. c) Livilll! Room area: There are several holes in the walls; the 220 watt outlet has no cover; paint missing from stripping around windows; wall next to stairway has screw holes in it; there are drilled holes in the floor; dogs have scratched the floor; and the surface of ceiling tiles is ripped off. d) Stens to Second Floor: Mats were stripped off the steps to the second floor which left large bare spots; and the railing has paint chipped off of it. e) Bathroom: Wallpaper is stripped off and loose; vinyl floor is uneven and does not properly fit against the wall; walls have blank spots without wallpaper; the faucet and faucet plate are missing from the bath stall and the faucet pipe is incorrectly mounted; the fan is inoperative and is missing a cover plate; the vanity finish is ruined and reqnires being stripped and refinished. 1) Walk-in Closet: The walls, ceiling and floor are rough and unfinished; the ceiling light has no fixture and is not properly mounted; and the hearing duct has not been installed and merely consists of an open hole. g) Bedroom No. I: Walls need to be painted; the door is missing and there is no trim around the door. h) Bedroom NO.2: Floor has a large bare spot which needs to be stained; there is a large section of the wall in the closet which is open; wallpaper is peeled off; there. are two holes in the wall; the stripping around windows has paint chipped off; and the carpet in this bedroom is ruined from paint urine. i) Third Floor Room: The wall paneling is loose and unglued and the carpeting is stained with dog urine. j) Basement area: There is a large hole in the wall next to the steps leading to the basement. "'>t._~_ __ -. k) Outside of House: Flashing on outside of windows has not been folded and attached properly which will cause rotting. 13. The fair and reasonable cost of repairing and replacing the broken and missing items described above is $26,439.00 as shown more particularly by the estimate attached hereto as Exhibit "C"'. 14, In addition, the Defendants left the exterior of the premises in a run-down, dirty and damaged condition as follows: a) In the garage, the Defendants left 23 five gallon buckets of oil, a 55 gallon drum of oil and a 35 gallon drum of oil; b) In the yard, the Defendants left a large pile of sand in the yard, further damaging it; c) In the garage and yard the Defendants left large quantities of trash; d) Throughout the exterior of the property Defendants left large quantities of uncut grass over fifteen inches in height. 15. The fair and reasonable cost of removing the trash and sand and oil, and cutting the grass is $2610.00. 16. Defendants vacated the premises leaving $1753.53 in unpaid sewer and trash bills which they were required to pay under Section A4 of said Lease. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants as follows: (1) In the amount of $6420,00 for backrent and late fees; "'~I'''' -, ~- "~ . -"-'"' ,= ',~ " , (2) In the amount of$29,049.00 for repairs and clean-up of the premises; (3) In the amount of$1753.53 for sewer and trash bills; and (4) In the amount of $321.00 for attorney's fees. September 6, 2000 ~~,~, Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South St. Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 234-9321 ,-," _'c''- . ~I -..,.. ~. 0 ! ~ B 0\ .... .... ~ O"":l Q Q "'<: "'<: 0 0 ..:: ~ E +> ..... s:: ~ 0 <fl ..: ~ E ~ P< <>. ~" 0 ('"\ (f) +> ..:: ..... ... Q) 'tl 0 .... ~ "" Q) ~ III ~ ~ I-l Q) ~ ~ +> .-l ,.... P ~ tt:l s.. .-l ..., Q) 0 .0 l>> tit, s:: S .-I ~ Q) ::l 0::: U ..., \0 ~ .... Q) "> ~ @ ~ ;Z; ~ ~ :s ;: ti ~ "t;>" .~ " ;,- " ~ :Q ki 0::: c.. .m . !\lfltuttttIUf, t~ .Afaele this thirteenth clay u[ June .1. D. 15)0 18chltCCU HOWARD P. STEAGER and IDA L. STEAGER, his wife hereinafter ca.lled Let...wr, and ROBERT H. COR!\1MAN and SANDRA K.CORNMAN his wife herc:ina[ter called Le.,see. ~if1tcg:5.cH" That the said Le.\'.wr, in con.,ideralion o[ the ren/'s and covenants JwrdnCl[tcr mcn.tloncd does hereby rctl.-t1 demi.'ic and lca~c U..ll.to the said Lc.'i!wc, to br.. u.H~cl for Lhe purr:o,';,c o[ residential dwelling the premises situated in the COl<nty o[ Cumberland and Com.JnoJl.weaLLh of Pcnu,.'iyluanial dexcribed as [ollow." CCY.U~\~ I[ A' '!J!L ~ ,,' .-", ,- ,- -""'>';:;;;~' :~ 'oj ",' -,;,. Ii ilfo ~n'Ut ullb 10 '!iol~ unto the said ment, for the term of ~'bne year the tst day of July the 30th day of June ~al ~OlUiibtrltlioll ~H~trtl.lf the said, Less'-c agree.' u.se of tha said premi.,es, the sum o[ $450.00 per month Lc..uwe, .<:;u..bject to the conditions of thi.<:; a~rec- cOlnmen..ci.n..t on A. D. 1990 . and arulin:! on .If. D. 19 91 to pay to the said Les.'or for the Dollar., , payabl,: a., {ollows, vi,,: ( Rent in the amount of $450.00 per month is due the first day of the month. A grace ueriod of five (5) days is given. If payment is not received, a $5.00 per day penalty will be ~ auplied beginning on the 6th day: J' ~11b: the satd, Le.<:;:we aL'io agrr.e.ll 1.0 keep the .'wid prclw:.'iC$ in aR gooel r,~pair a1~d co!"ditiulI. Cl.<:i at present and at the expiration of this leaRe. or any renewal fil iLl to .'lurrendcr fl,P $a.lne in lilCt~ repair and condition, n.atural wear and dall~(J,gc by the elcm,ent.~ cxccpte.d,. to perrnit ItO l.I.nlawflLl bu.:,incs.o:; ~_~,_:,l:?-(J"cal"rir.d_o,IL upon." ~a_ill pre.rlti.~r.:if n.~:~ .t(),.,n~r.m..i.L~,~~!fthind to be done which i.<:; contrary.to the . con.diii.c)IJ.~ of tii/l polic;ir.,~' 0/ i1L.'ilI.;'a,n.(i(tf(.;;U;-~~'ri" the .fald prclnisc.\" or which llUI!/ 'be -placed -thereon. du.rint the Lp.nn of thi.~ lC!fJ,.'w, ur alLY rcn(~Ulal thereof. whereby the hazard 7night be increased or the in.furance ill.lJa.lida.tr.d,' not to u.u.d(!rll.t thr. ..wid pTluni.'.e.'l. nor as.~ig1t thi.'i leau~ or anI! intcrc.-;t therein.. to CUty per:wn or /J(lr:-:(Jfl,R; anci not '1.0 f('lIWI1C~ frum.. thp Raicl prenti.'H!.": clu.rin~ the terrn..Qf thi.'l lea.'ie or arLY renewal thereul. ~1 :i~ lu,..:rbU '\l~IT:c.ril b(!twr.r.n the /",rties to these preseILts, that ilL ca.'a the buildinf or bu.ildin~s r.~ectf.(l 0/1. I. he fJrel1l,i.H~s hr.rebylt!u.'icd ...halt be' pCJrtially da1Jl.n~cd by fire, tile :Wlne slw.ll be Tc~pairc~d as .llfJClr.tlily Wi /JOx...ibl,"" at. t.he. r.l"pc'n...r. of the ."aiel Lc.(OiOr; that. in. cu::;c t.he d/Jlna-~c .<;hall be .'i0 extcnsillc u... to rr..lulcr the. bu.ilt/in!} It nl.f~n(l1/.talJlr. the rent .o:;hall cease: lUl,til ."'Lch tilne as i.he. buildill.~ ..,hall be fuLl in. cOIll.fJlr.lc~ rc~fJair. but ill. (.'(l.\'(! o/the total destruction of the preJni...c.~ by fire or otherwise, the rent shalll;c fJaic1llfJ 1.0 thr. tinw of ~uch ele..;trlH'tion. and then. and front thenceforth thi:; lea:l!; .o:hall cea"'(~ alul ceune. to (J.1~ end. PTUllidcl(l, howclJer. that su.ch dam,a~e and dC!itru.ction be not cau.acd by the ca.rcle..u;nr.~N;. nr.g/i~cll.Cc. or im.propcr cOl~dlLct of the Le!l.~cc. his agent.'l or 8cruall.ts. The .o:;aid Les.liee a~rfU!.'i to ket-I' the. said premise.", in a clean and .1an.itary condition, and to rC1nOVe all u.'{/te.s or oth(',r garilat!e wlLicb. m,ay acculludale UpOIt. th.e .fa1ll.e. du.rifl,,~ the .faid term. or alLY renewal thereof, or [aiii,,!! therein to I'ay to the .,aid Le..so'i. ~ouble the CORti! removing the same, to be recov- ered tlu, .o:ontc a." rent 1l1.{.C and in arrr.ar.,;; to pernY-it the .',aid L63..10.,. to ditlplay a '-for rent" Or a "for .'iale" card upon. the Naicl prr.n-~,i.'\c.1j I and to enter the .'laid preTni.'lc.'1 at any tim.c for the plLrpose of makin~ nr.cf!,'i.'lary repairs, or .o:;howind the .<;aid pre.m"i.'Ics to pro.'lpectivc pu.rcha3Crtt or lessees. . ~ R'f-ftlSft:eQ. -2- ~ I' -~, '" -~ e~, -~-' ,; " .1\lI() :it ,,~ ,f\)Xill!X ~,~:rrth tHat .,halitd the Lr..,.'ee remove or attempt to remove from tlie ...did r!"r:ql.i.<;('!:'i ilnring 0/('. tr.nn vi this lr.a.'if, or any rent:wal thereof. or :~hou.lll the .,:aid Lessee hreak or t>1'adr., ar lzlll'.U1pl to brraA: ur l'.flQlh'.. any of the cOlJcnant.'i or re.~triction$' set forth in this lease, thr.n tlw ""lire unt for thi! full term of this IP.a.'", .,hall become duc and payable at onee and may forthwith iJr ('ollrctr.ll by distrr..'i.'i or oth(~rlUi.<i('.. ~'1n.d any good.~ rMnoved jroln said prcntises either tlrfort' or aft,'r thl' r.xpiration of tlw Raid term, while any portion of the .,aid rent remains '''''paid, whctlll'r dllr. or not, shall rwwin liablr. to di.,tre.,.' for .mch rent for the period of thirty days after ...ltch rem.(Jt1ul, thr. .'iamf. QR thuugh l.hr.y rp,1Juzinr.d on the prr.mi,';e.~: and any rC1noval o[ the goods [Nun tlw Raiti p;r./n,i!\('..<; at a;~.y lillLr., t>.ither by day or night, without the written. con.sent 01 the said JA!....'iOr _,'!Lal! br. ('ou.'ii<icred a clauclr..'i/.ilw Ull.cl fraudulent runollal. And if default shall be 1nade in the jJa!JIIUUl.t of U/I.!J part of the .~(lifl rent fur jive clay'" after the .'iam.e becolnes due, or if the said Lessee .'ihali b7f:ak (Jr {wade, or attelnpt to break or p.l1a(lc, any 01 the covenants or restriction.s set forth in thi.~ lease, th~ !..{!.'i.'ior nwy forfeit and annul the 111r.cxpirecl portion of this lease, arany renewal thereof, an.d ente.r UpOiJ. al1.(1 u.pu.'l."r_~s the said preln.i.fje.~ withou.t proce.~.~ of law and without any notice what...o(wr.r. ,~ lib it .i.ll. .;f\\ rH:1,rr ~~.B'r:,th that the aeeeptance b; the .<aid Lessor of any of the said rent . at any time after the .'ame .,hall br.come duP., or default ha., been made in the payment thereof or any failure of thr. said Lr.swr to enfurce any of the rights gained Imder thi., leasc or any of the penaltics, for/eilu.re.'i or conditiun..'i h{!rr.il~ containml, ...hall not in any wise be considered as a waiver of the ri~ht to enforce the Same alul that ."luch ri~ht or forfeiture m.ay be enlorce.d.withou.t any notice whatsoever; and that anll aUempt to collect the rent by one proceeding shall not bc eon"idered as a waLver of the ritht of the .<aid I,c.,,'or to collect the ,<ante by any other proceeding. I The .~aid Le.''.~e.e hereby waive.,; the usual three m.onth.~ notice to qu,it and agrees to .fjurrendcr the .,ai,l prcmi.,e" at t/", expiration of the said term, or the terlni1tation of thi., lea.,e or any renewal thereof, without. any ILotice whateoer, a1td 01"0 waives the benefit of all appraisement, stay and exemption law.Oj, the right. of in.qu.i:litioll. art real c,r.tate and all balr.krupt.or i,L:iOluenl law.'i now in/oree ur which may hereafter be !la.'Iscd, upon any procecdin~ instituted /6r the recovery 01 the said rent, either by di"it'e.<;.~ or otherwi/.e. ,,,If_~efa1tlt .hall pe madeln the,paVrn.e1,tof any,r,entwhen the ,'ame shall pecome due, or if the "~'aid' Le'uee .~hali be .'ioZcl out at ..,heriff'.'i or COlL.~table'.'j ."laZe 0" permit any judglnent to be entered atainst hint, Or make any a.~.'iignment for the benefit o[ creditors J or comm,it any act 01 bankruptcy whateoer, then. the rent for the balance of the term.' .,hall at once become dlLe and payable, as if by the tcrrn.'i of the lea.~c it were all payable in adrlan-cc, and may be collected by distres,o; or otherwise, and ."lhall be paid in, Ju.ll out 0/ the proceeel." of an.y such (l..<:1,1iignntent, ,~ale or bankru.ptcy proceedings, alLY law, usage or Cu.~tOln to thc"coll.trary notwith.~tall.cli/1.g. . The said Leuee hereby confesses judgme"t i" favo,rof the said Lessor for the whole amount of the rent at any tinte rel'll.cint1l.1! unpaid, whether the sante shall have been due or not, waivinc stay of exccu,tiOtJ., in.qui3itio1l. an.d all e:::,clnption laws now in force or whic}l..lnall hereafter be pas3ed, and authorizes the addin~ of floe per cel>. ttornell's commissio1t for collection; and further does hereby upon the breach 01 any of t l.e conditI.O LS of thisleasc, aut orize any attorney of any Court of Reoord to appear for rum and enter an anticable action of ejcctnterl,t and confess a judglncnt of ejcctrnent therein for the rre1nises herein described and does authorize. the irn1nediatc issu.ing of a writ of possession and executiolL for eosts without askinlf leaue of the 'Court. , ,/ ~..l!t ~i iJ!l<' f:u.dI1tllC '..!3x:tb tha~ if the said Lessee (with the consent of the Lessor) shal/\ ! :~nttnue tn poss~sSton of the sa,d prem,se. after the expiration of the said term, or any renewal ' thereof, t!,e(> tlus afreemeltt shall becolne ill>mediatel'f operative for another like term, and the Lessor shall. have the rilfht to enforce any of the conditions or forfeitures of this al!reemen0nclu,dinlf the confcs.'il.on Qf judgrTl..:!.nl, with th.e waivers, etc., as if a new a~recn~Cll.t, identical with this had been. executed by the said parties lor the succeeding term or terms, with the proviso that in ease any part,r.ular conditions arc set forth in this lease to take effect upon a renewal thereof, then should there be any such relz,ewGl as above provided lor, the said particular conditions shall take. eiJect upon ~ueh renewal, but they shall app~y to only .,uc/t parts of this l~asc as it is .,tated herein that they arc tntended to supersede, and "hall ,n no way (Jffeet any of the remainin!! parts of thi" lease. -'3- "~",I' "~', .<:,~, '"-, ~- ,.. 'j -.," , ? j ;-- , l~ 10 !h- I I ~nb i1 i!ef fl~d(~tl!: aSl!:u,b that thefollowin.g eonditions,forfeiture..,eoverLant. and restrie- Lions are a part of this agreement, and that each an.d all of them are bindin!! upon the partie.. hereto: ('1 J That Schedule "A" attached hereto and marked "nulas and C. Lessee shall have complied with all Lhe terms, covenants '-:fiegulations" shall extend to and bind the parties hereto, their and conditions of this lease, in which event the deposit so paid heirs, administrators and executors. hereunder shall be returned to Lessee; otherwise, said sum 2. Either party hereto may terminate tl,is lease at the end of said deposited hereunder or any part thereof may be retained by term by giving to the other party written notice thereof of at Lessor, at its option, as liquidated damages or may be applied by least thirty days prior thereto; bul in default of such notice, this Lessor, at its option, as liquidated damages or may be applied by lease shall continue under the same provisions and conditions in~ Lessor against any actual loss, damage or injury chargeable to 11l"rce Immediate! rlor to the ex iration of the term hercol for, Lessee hereunder or otherwise, if Lessor determines such loss, e ur er i f c car an so on eve Icar. un css or- damage or injury exceeds said sum deposited. Lessor's deter~ un I erminated by either party hereto g:vmg the otlier thirty mination of the amount, if nny, be returned to Lessee shall be days written notiec thereol previous to expiration of the then final. It is understood that tile said depositis notto be considered current. term. as the last rental due under tilis lease. 3. shall, upon ex..eulion hereof, depllsit wilh L~"a.< 4. It is also understood and agreed that in the event Ihe tenant is security 0 crformancc of all the terms, co\fcn:l.ll~d con~ transferred by the Covernment. away from this vicinity, this dilion:; of this Ie J c sum of pt of which is lease will be declared null and void provided tho tenant presents hereby acknowledged. ,o,it sl )0 retained by Lessor not less than thirty (30) days notice in writing of his intention to until the expiralion of this Ica.~' len shalt be rdurnablc lo vacate premises plus a certified copy of hi... trnll...fcr orders. L"",cc provided that: _, A. PremO aVO hccn vacated; ., B. r shall have inspected the pr~mises after such'vaca.. 5. Lessec agrees to cover a minimum of at least 75% of all fioors in the apartment witl. carpeting for the purpose of keeping noise to a minimum for other tenants wilhin the building. The word.') U Les.')orll a1t(1 H Le..vsce" a,'f herein used and person.al pron.ouns Teferrin~ thereto, ..~hall include the sin"eular a.') well a.~ the plura.l It,,,nbcr, the male, neu.ter an,d fcm.ale gcndcr$, and shall ~lI,ptY".to corp_q_ra~,i~,ns:a.... ~ell ,a,'<;, tou.a{l(.ra..l_p!!:r$,oTJ.$:,__--arl._~ all the ternts, coucn.ant.f an.d conditions oi t1l.'i."i lease ,~;"all extend to and 'lic.'-btifUiil1' ltp(/it;~n::t heiri~ ~xecu.tors I adntinistrators, a.~sig~~~.~ and su.ccessors of the Lc.~sor and Lessee, saue that no rights shall enu.re to the bencf~t of any as,t;ign.ec of Lessee u,n.les.<; the a.fisigtl,ment ollr.asc has prc:c:"oltsly been. approved in. writing by Le.~lwT. ~n ~l1:iJ1\'ht>\$';:."i ~l1il;t'l:t9(~ the p",ties afore.wid have hereunto set their hand. and seal.tt ou. tlte day aru:l, year first abolJc written. ~n H~f llu5fluf !If .l;JA. A/J' /1r~d:.'-; ~'?-~~~ CORNMAN SANDRA K. CORNMAN SEE ADDITIONAL TERMS AS SET FORTH ON ATTACHED PAGES _1.1_ '''''T '''1 - "'" ,." " --, -'~~. , , " l ; iJale H. Steager RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" It is understooD. and agreed to by and between the Lessor and Lessee that a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer are,nat pr~vided by Lessor and that no such appliances are contemplated by this lease or any amendment thereof. In the event a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer are located on the premises, it may be used by Lessee only under the following conditions hereby agreed to by Lessee: a. Lessor may replace, remove or modify any or all of the aforementioned appliances at any time without prior notice t~ the Lessee; b. Lessor is not responsible for any maintenance or repairs wha ts oever at any time; c. Lessor is not responsible for any of Lessee's property contained within or without the above mentioned appliances; and d. Lessor is not responsible for any damage caused to any area of the house resulting from the use of the above mentioned appliance by Lessee. 2. Any notices from a financial institution that a check r,eqeive.ti?by/~aleSte~~,clJ.~!L..pee,llrejec:ted due to non- sufficierit:funds;--account'closed, stClp payment, missing. signature, or any such item that will make the issued check uncollectable, the issuer of such instrument will be assessed a non-refundable fee of $20.00 per occurrence. A CERTIFIED replacement check and the appropriate fee must be delivered to Dale Steager within five (S) days of such occurrence to avoid incurring legal fees. ~. The placement and use by Lessee of any equipment on the roperty (kiddie pool, jungle gym, play pens or articles of a like nature) shall be at Lessee's own risk and responsibility. No risk or liability of any nature what- soever is assumed by the Lessor. 0 v...... .J.-tl-h~ J "- /' '1 P Its<.- y!-t?1Dv o.-t 4. Lessee will pay water, sewage and trash service fee~, gas, elect,rical service, telephone service and television cable, if applicable. Lawn care and snow removal will be the responsibility of the Lessee. Upon Lessee's failure to pay the costs of the same, Lessor may collect the amounts due as rent due in arrears and remit the same tOfhe providers of these services. '_9 ,. ,,~ . r,' - 1. DALE H. STEAGER 4978 ERij's BRIDG MECJIANICSBORG. P: ~055 ,~ , i', I' ,I Ii I , i I' I' I: I , I, ! ,,'," r __ I'~'" ,,~ ,-- , -e. 7. 10. 11. if). 13. 14. Dale H. steager RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) 5. Lessee must advise Lessor of the telephone numbers of both the house and the business phone number where he/she works. Private. unlisted or any other telephone number will not be excluded from this request. These phone numbers will only be used by the Lessor or his representative for official business or emergency purposes. ~Ie aegl'!, ca.ts or pets af iiW.; k~"d w.i.tl-be-permi ttcG-.. Lessor will notify Pennsylvania Power and Light Company when Lessee signs lease and transfer the electric service to his name. 8. Lessee is responsible for contacting Pennsylvania Power and Light Company upon termination of the lease. Lessee shall not park or store or suffer to permit to be parked or stored in any parking areas. any truck. trailer or disabled vehicle. 9. No mechanical, electrical, plumbing. or structural eq~iT.1lllent,prc()n:figur!lti9non"anY part of the premises may be altered. modified or removed without the express written consent of the Lessor, unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. All costs arising our of repair or renlacement to any unauthorized removals or changes shall be at the expense of the Lessee. Lessor, at its option, upon notice to Lessee and at Lessee's expense, may either require the disconnection and/or removal of, or disconnect and remove, any interior or exterior electrical appliances, apparatus, eq~ipment, antennas or material installed or connected by Lessee .in or about the building. Running exposed wires or fixtures in violation of electrical code is prohibited. Notice of defects in water or electrical wiring shall be reported immediately to the Lessor by the Lessee, in writing, unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. Lessee shall not use or operate any machinery, equipment 0r appliances that, in the Lessor's opinion ,. are unSafe, harmful to the building. or disturbing to other Lessees ')ccupying other parts thereof. The toilets, bathtubs, and sinks shall n0t be used for any uurpose other than for which they were constructed. and no sweepings, rubbish, rags, paper, disposable diapers, sanitary napkins. .ashes, or 0ther substances shall be thrown therein. Any damage resulting from misuse thereof shall be borne by the Lessee by whom or upon whose premises it shall have been caused. T"""? 0" I ~~ f Ii " ,I 11 II il ,I 'i , I j I ] I 15. (t) rf) 18. (@ 20. {V 22, (@ "1<1~, -,I,,, _~~^ ""c,,_ ,.' ua.J..t:: .1.1.. o.Jl"CQ.5'"'.L RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) Locks may not be changed or added without the prior written consent of the Lessor. Lessor must be provided with a key. If not, it is understood that in the case of an emergency any damage done to the door, frame. etc. upon entran~e to the premises, will be at Lessee's expense. Locks or cha1ns added must be left in place when Lessee vacates. All keys must be returned to the Lessor, both provided by the Lessor and those made at the Lessees expense, upon vacating the premises. or Lessee will forfeit said security deposit in full. Nbspikes or hooks shall be driven into the walls and/or woodwork. Small nails may be used for the purpose of hanging pictures unless other devices are recommended by Lessor. Fixtures used for hanging draperies or curtains are permitted. Painting of any area of the house by individuals other than one designated by the Lessor is prohibited. No colors other than those put on by the Lessor is permitted. Walls and ceilings which are altered by paint or other substances will be restored to the original color. The Lessee will be charged for paint and labor to restore same. Lessee shall not place any .weights in any portion of the premises beyond the safe carrying capacity of the structure. If a waterbed is used, insurance for such is required and a copy of such insurance shall be provided the Lessor. Lessee shall keep the premises in a good state of preservation and cleanliness. Any maintenance calls are to be called in between 5:00 p.m. - 9.00 p.m., Monday - Friday and weekends, 737-1812. Only in extreme emergency is Reta Steager, 731-2330, to be contacted Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 4.15' p.m; No heat, broken pipes are emergency. Lessee understands that if they contact any companies withour authorization from Steagers for maintenance purposes, they are responsible for said bill. No noise or loud parties will be tolerated that is disturbing to the neighborhood. Premises are to be left in liveable status when terminating lease. Severe damages will be responsibility of l~ssee to correct or reimburse Lessor for corrected dama~s in full. LIVEABLE STATUS DEFINED AS. Cleaning of stove/oven, frig, cabinets, tub/shower, toilet and sink; all else in broom swept condition. '--.;J" . "I ,--, " ~__ U~J.t: n. ,:) \.1It:a.5e'.l- RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CaNT) 24. Lessor reserves the right to inspect premises with one (1) day notice to Lessee. 25. Lessor reserves the right to update the clauses of this contract and Lessee will be notified of any changes. DATE _.June 1'. 1990 DALE 11. STEAGER 4978 ERB'S BRIDGE RD. MECHANICSBURG, PA 1705~ ( _ . i! ~_ J.~ .lr;:~-r ~ta .W. Sttlager ~~~~_/ ROBERT H. CORNMAN )~tf: ~ SANDRA K. CORNMAN LESSEE(S) ~" ~ "'< HOWARD P & IDA L STEAGER 4] ] RENO AVENUE NEWC~AND PENNSYLVAN]A 17070 PHONE: (717 774-4623) October 14, 1998 Mr. and Mrs.Robert H. Conunan 4]6 Reno Avenue NewCumbefland PA 17070 Subj: Arrears of monthly rental payments for property located at 416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cornman: Due to the fact that as of October ], ]998, you are three (3) months in arrears for rental of the proPerty located at 4]6 Reno Avenue: $500.00 per month for three (3) months for a 10tal arrear in the amount of $1,500.00, you are hereby advised that if the total amount ($1,500.00) is not paid to Howard Por Ida L Steager by November 1, ]998, eviction proceediljgS will be initiated. ]n addition, you are.h~reby advised that as ofDecernber I, 1998, the rental amomll wiil be increased to $650.00 per month payable on the first d;ly of each mouth. A new lease will be available for signature November ], ]998. Please advise of your intentions 10 either enter into the new lease or to vacate prior to that time. Sincerely, .." ~-M~ Howard P. Steager 1t41 l ( z.A'l~ f e-<?Y$-P,# H. Gleml Steager ~hl.J~ Ida L. Steager ~ N~rO j~- f/:;;~;~ Marlin D. Steager . CM&4~ ' Da'lea S' -" ~e \;.-(( () II -- ~ "'I ' '~""".> , c"'- 0<1/01/1995 10:12 717-2<10-092<1-7 ST~AG~RS COUNTRY OUT Ark Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 717-728-3222 NAMEIAOORESS Ida Sleager ~09 Geary RJI, New Cumberland Po 17070 Estimate PAGE. 01 6/&1~o Esn'rTE,q P.O. NO. TERMS 10% 40% JO% REP C DESC$IPTION FQr PrQperty 014 J 1 R.no 81, New C..",herlalld KIrCHEN/bIN/NO RM. I. Strip wallpclp8r ill kitchen, remove flooring in both roomJ, remove ceiling Iile III dinillg rm. 1. Skim coat walls ill kitchell, instal/lauan floor anti vinyl floor in both rooms, paint walls in kilchen with one coat offlat and aile ofsemi-gloss, inslall...,e", 2'x2' ceiling liIe in dining rm. LIVING ROOM. J. Re1Ifove plaSler and lalhe from waUs and remove tile from ceiling. 2. IllS/aU ondfinlsh drywall on wa1/s and painl wilh 2 coals offlat paim, install new 12"xl2" cel/illK Iile, carpet and pod, hC8ebaQrd dOor and window Irim. BATHROOM /, Remove IIIb, faut;ets, Will/paper, vanity/lop jaucet3 4nd exhawl fan. 1. IM/Illlnew tub/surround andfal./Cets, vallity /I()P andfaucels, skim coal WIllis and palnl wil}, one COQI of flat and one o/s""i-gloss and installn"", emaust fan 4nd vlTl)'I floor STAIRS AND HALL I. Palch wal1& and cellillg& as needed and painl wilh 2 (;oats of flat paint, illStall new carpel and pad WALK IN CLOSET I. Finish electrical wlrlllg, painlwalls wllh two coat3 offlal painl, install and paint baseboard door and window trim and In'tal/ carpet and padding JEDRooM1IJ J. Paillt with 2 coals of flat paint 6EDROOM II-z J. Remove plC8ter from walls and tile from ceiling 2. JnsIQ/I andjitlisll drywall ()n walls andpailtl with two COalS offlat pallll, install J2"xI2" ceiling Iile, curpet and pad alld bC8ehoard, door and window trim 3RD FLOOR BEDROOM 1.Re1llOve prmelillgfro/tl end wall, palch walls and a.mng as neederl, paint walls and ceilings with 2 caalS offlal paint, 111$1011 railing arQUIld slairway, ami install carpet on floor and steps ClfQ1l up and permits wlllh. provided by cOII/raclor A.llowances Yinyl flwr "j.OO per yd illStlllled, CarPfI/pad $20,QO per yd Iltstalled , i"', Page 1 TOTAL i,'l ()wner & Co-Owners Slfll(llw'e " , PROJECT rorAL 4.7HOO 6,2$4.00 4,186.00 [,609.00 1,022.00 ~97.00 4,340.00 J.780,00 ~ < (I \\ cc.~\QiT C 04/01/1995 10:12 717-240-0924-7 STEAGERS COUHT'<V OUT PAGE 02 . Atk' Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 7 J 7-728-3222 NAME / ADDRESS Estimate DATE 6/13/2Qoo ESTIMATE ... 7 I I IdQ Sleager ~ 40ft G D.3 ,.0. NO " .ary 1Uf. JO% 40"Ai 50% New Cumberland PIl J 7070 ,.J. DES..,.IPT/ON The following is Iln outli~e of condition of quotallf/n we propose onlhe referenced project. All material is gllarallleed as specified. We reservel the right to determine the source of all labor and materillls rlative io any work thaI we preform undet the quo/aliQIl . If this quo/Iltloll Is accepted, the work covered by same will be performed upon acctlr:,tance of this proposal and as weather cOtldltlons Ilnd OUr work schedule permlth. Due 10 the incon.dltellcles of w.ather WId other ccnditlotls, cracks may occur Ilnd these conditions are comidlred acceptable in the concrete business. A.1I work will be completed In a worlcman like manner accordlllg to ~tandard practicet. Allyalteratllms or deviations form above, projX>sallnvolving extra cost eill be etecuted Qnly upon written offler chu~ge, and will become alld extra charge over and ilbove the con~ct., rhis proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within 30 dCl)'S of proposal dllte. : Payment schedule is asfollow$, JO% deposit dowlt at signing ofprQPosal. 40% Ilt start ofprojecJ, and then followed wllh a 50% final payment. This !naY vary due to project sixe. Refer 10 (terms) listed above for your particular project. Amoninalfee wrtl be deductedform deposit ifprojecl is canceled by custoltler for any reQ.lon after slglling of contract. fhe fee will cover cost for estimute.!, drawings, layouts, and scheduling changes. A cborge of 1 1.1% per month will be charged 0/1 any balance past JO da)lS dwe beginning with the completion date o!'pl'Oject. We wish to thank youfor the opportunity of subJIIlltlng Il proposal and hope to be of service t"!You. REP C PROJECT TOTAL I '1 " Ii i:i i , !: i I: I': P,gB 2 TOTAL $26,431I.OU Ii ii !i i'i " ii " q " I: ! ~ Own.r cl co~rs Signature 1 I .~1. . . VERIFICATION I, Ida Steager, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Civil Complaint are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.SA Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. September 6, 2000 J~J >>;:~g.v Ida Steager '~'-"-~'I' ~ I -,' 1(' ----" :.1 ;,1 , . ,~~ , , 'I ' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, September 8, 2000, I served a copy of the foregoing Amended Complaint on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, PA to counsel for Defendants the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017N. Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 September 8, 2000 ~~~ Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff , - .-=1......"""'l~~'"'lIIm~ 'b":i-'",," -" ~-",.<-",^ IIT""lIfflf'r ,-,-, '-"--, - , )~~ ('-'= C) , . ::.< ., 'TT" 'Wf' ,~ :::-) ..';--! ., <__n \......) u ..-:-, -r:-- ).J -< '",1'1 CD , ,~_~!'If ~.<li:B,~l1"I'l_~ T~I"iNN,~4~~fI!WI~~WiN'("""",'f"'']"-'"'''';'''''''''~-'l*'9~'''''fr-~~~:!I"1l!ffllf;tJ-"f~";::)fflIPI!i~~~'ilf!Ij!ijRi!!!lil\ljM~ HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN TIIE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney and filing, in writing with the court, your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint, or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE TIIE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LffiERTY AVENUE CARLISLE, P A 17013 TELEPHONE: (7117) 249-3166 'j;' , -" - ~ -- HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiffs Howard and Ida Steager, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 411 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 2, Defendants are Robertand Sandra Cornman, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 504 Third Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 3. On November 30, 1983, Defendants initially entered into a Lease Agreement with Plaintiffs forthe premises at 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and continued to occupy said premises until May 8, 2000. Plaintiffs own said premises. 4. On June 13, 1990 Defendants entered into another Lease Agreement for said premises with Plaintiffs, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A". 5. This Lease provided for a one year term, with automatic renewal each year pursuant to occupation of the premises, at a monthly rental of$450.00 payable on the first day of each month. 6. Said r~ntal amount by agreement of the parties increased to $650,00 per month by agreement dated October 14, 1998. Said agreement is attached as Exhibit "B". 1 I 7. OnMay 8, 2000, Defendants vacated the leased premises and surrendered possession thereof to Plaintiffs. 8. After September 1, 1999, Defendants ceased to pay the rent due IBlderthe Lease. The amolBlt of rent in arrears from that date forward is $5200,00. 9. In addition, Defendants owe late fees of$1220 for failure to pay rent from October 1, 1999 through May of 2000 pursuant to the late fee provision of said Lease. 10. In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to $32 L 00 for attorney's fees for collection of said unpaid rents and penalties pursuant to the provisions of said Lease. 11. Plaintiffs have made repeated demands upon Defendants for payment of said IBlpaid rent, but Defendants have failed and refused and still refuse to pay the same or any part thereof. 12, On November 30,1983, Plaintiffs, as Lessors, and Defendants, as Lessees, entered into a written lease agreement for the lease of the subject premises. A copy of said Lease is attached as Exhibit "C". 13. Said premises were in good repair and condition at the time they were rented to Defendants on November 30, 1983. 14. Said Lease provided that: "The said premises are to be kept and maintained in as good repair and condition as at present and at the expiration of this Lease, they are to be surrendered in like repair and condition, natural wear and damages happening by fire, storm or other casualties only excepted. " 2 ":~-~I" .- ~ , , 15, Said Lease remained in effect between the parties by verbal agreement until 1990 when a second written Lease was entered into. 16, On June 13, 1990, the parties entered into a second written lease agreement for the lease of the subject premises. A copy of said lease is attached as Exhibit "A". 17. Said second lease provided that: "And the said Lessee also agrees to keep the said premises in as goodrepair and condition as at present and at the expiration of this lease, or any renewal of it, to surrender up same in like repair and condition, natural wear and damage by the elements excepted,. . . ." 18. Paragraph 23 of the Addendum to the June 13,1990 lease provides: "Premises are to be left in liveable status when terminating lease. Severe damages will be the responsibility oflessee to correct or reimburse Lessor for corrected damages in full liveable status defined as: Cleaningofstone/oven, refrigerator, cabinets, tub/shower, toilet and "sink", all else in broom swept condition. 19. Said second lease was renewed and remained in effect until May 8, 2000, when the Defendants vacated the premises and surrendered the premises to Plaintiffs. 20. When the Defendants vacated the premises they left the premises in a dllmaeed and run-down condition which was completely unlike the good repair and good condition of said property at the time of execution of said two leases. Said premises were not in "liveable condition" as described in said Addendum at the time of surrender of the premises on May 8, 2000. 3 '<'" I~ ,. 21. At or prior to the time when Defendants vacated the leased premises, Defendants damaged the premises and otherwise breached the lease by failing to surrender the leased premises in substantially the same condition in which they were leased to Defendants, in that the premises were damaged as follows; a) Kitchen area: Spackling on the surface of the wallpaper; glue on the wallpaper; wallpaper is stained; the walls are marked and the kitchen floor is stained. b) Dining Room area: Dining room floor is stained from dogs; wallpaper is stripped off in spots; ceiling tile is stained; plastic fixture for light is ripped off; dining room fan is off balance; ceiling tiles are broken and stained. c) Living Room area: There are several holes in the walls; the 220 watt outlet has no cover; paint missing from stripping around windows; wall next to stairway has screw holes in it; there are drilled holes in the floor; dogs have scratched the floor; and the surface of ceiling tiles is ripped off. d) Steos to Second Floor: Mats were stripped off the steps to the second floor which left large bare spots; and the railing has paint chipped off of it. e) Bathroom: Wallpaper is stripped off and loose; vinyl floor is uneven and does not properly fit against the wall; walls have blank spots without wallpaper; the faucet and faucet plate are missing from the bath stall and the faucet pipe is incorrectly mounted; the fan is inoperative and is missing a cover plate; the vanity finish is ruined and requires being stripped and refinished; the bathtub is corroded and needs to be replaced. 4 ''''.'''''''''''::~ ",,' "C.-", 0' '. ~~ 1) Walk-in Closet: The walls, ceiling and floor are rough and unfinished; the ceiling light has no fixture and is not properly mounted; and the heating duct has not been installed and merely consists of an open hole. g) Bedroom No. I: Walls need to be painted; the door is missing and there is no trim around the door. h) Bedroom No.2: Floor has a large bare spot which needs to be stained; there is a large section of the wall in the closet which is open; wallpaper is peeled off; there are two holes in the wall; the stripping around windows has paint chipped off; and the carpet in this bedroom is ruined from paint urine. i) Third Floor Room: The wall paneling is loose and unglued and the carpeting is stained with dog urine. j) Basement area: There is a large hole in the wall next to the steps leading to the basement. k) Outside of House: Flashing on outside of windows has not been folded and attached properly which will cause rotting. 22. Defendants breached the terms of said lease and lease renewals at the time they surrendered said premises by leaving the premises in the above-described damaged state. 23. Being in possession of said premises for said time period, Defendants are responsible for said damaged condition of the premises. 5 "~~1n'.'1!lIJf. '0 - -. . 24. At the time they surrendered the leased premises, Defendants were obligated to put said premises in the good repair and good condition as it was at the time of execution of said two leases. 25. Said damaged condition of the premises was not caused by wear and tear due to the elements. 26. To restore the condition existing at the commencement of the two leases, Plaintiffs will be required to spend the following money amount: $26,439.00 27. At the time of surrender of the premises Defendants removed a carpet from the premises valued at $1,000 and Venetian blinds having a value of $200.00. 28. These items belonged to Plaintiffs and, therefore, Plaintiffs claim an additional $1,200.00 in damages. 29, In addition, the Defendants left the exterior of the premises in a run-down, dirty and damaged condition as follows: a) In the garage, the Defendants left 23 five gallon buckets of oil, a 55 gallon drum of oil and a 35 gallon drum of oil; b) In the yard, the Defendants left a large pile of sand in the yard, further damaging it; c) In the garage and yard the Defendants left large quantities of trash; 6 -~ - I'" " ~, d) Throughout the exterior of the property Defendants left large quantities of uncut grass over fifteen inches in height. 30. The fair and reasonable cost of removing the trash and sand and oil, and cutting the grass is $2610.00. 31. Defendants vacated the premises leaving $1753.53 in unpaid sewer and trash bills which they were required to pay under Section A4 of said 1990 lease. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants as follows: (1) In the amount of $6420.00 for back rent and late fees; (2) In the amount of $29,049.00 forrepairs and clean-up of the premises; (3) In the amount of$1753.53 for sewer and trash bills; and (4) In the amount of $321.00 for attorney's fees. October 16, 2000 ~\j,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South St. Harrisburg, P A 17101 (717) 234-9321 7 '--~ -~"'I"'" ;--' 0 I ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... t2t OJ r::::i Q 0 " " 0 0 .r:: 't:t E +' ,..., s:: " 0 en ..: ~ E '" p. Cl, ~, 0 C'"\ en +' .r:: ,..., .... Q) 'd () ..... ~ '" Q) s:: al [il "" 1-< al Q) t. z ,,; +' r-l P ~ rn J.4 r-I ..., OJ 0 ,D >> ~ s:: ~ r-I ~ Q) ;:l 0:: 0 ..., ~ '0 $0 ...-< OJ '" ~ II@ ~ z ~ ~ " :0 ~ 'bfJ .~ '2 ~ ~ ~ k' (Q L,j 0:; jj . SlfiJJJttttttnf ~ t~ .Made this thirteenth day uf June .'/. 1). 1$0 1!\chUCCll '- HOWARD P. STEAGER and IDA L. STEAGER, his wife hereinafter ca.lled Le.....wr, anti ROBERT H. CORNMAN and SANDRA K.CORNMAN his wife /wrcinafler called Le.'soo. ~ illlC ~~t~h, That the s,aid Los.wr, in. cal~'ideraliOl.' uf the ",nl" and cOllenanLs Iwrdnafler mentioned <lacs hereby rent, dcnu.o;c and lease unto the sUlCl Lc.'i.,;{~c. to be U!iCcl for Lh(~ pll.rpos.e ~ residenti~l qwelling the prenLises silu.a.tcd l.n the Cou.nly of Cumberland and C01Jl1nonwcaUh of PcnnRyllJa.niaj dCRCril)(:a as fullow.'i: -- \. If " C; VI J \1}, '""'T" 6. I!,,- EXHIBTT "An ,., ~- . :.;' ,I i1J1l ~(\'lJt nub fiJ 111l1.1l unto the said ment, [or the term a[ cbne year the 1st day o[ July the 30th day o[ June Le.'uwc, ."llbject to the conditions o[ this agrec- cOlnnwncing on A. D. 1990 , and ending on A. D. ]9 91 ~al ~.,lt.l3iibtt"atilln ~HltJr:l'J1)f the said' Le$$p.e agree" to pay to the so,:d Les.wr [or the use o[ the said prani.,e." the .w.m o[ $450,00 per month Dollars , payabl,' as [ollows, viz: ! Rent in the amount of $450.00 per month is due the first day of the mont~, A grace neriod of five (5) days is given, If payment 18 not received. a $5.00 per day penalty will be ~ anplied beginning on the 6th day",' , ~~l~ the soiA. Le.'iS(U1 aL'io a~rtu:,,, t.o keep the ...aid pTCl1U:.'ie..~ in a." ~oOll r(!/la.ir and cO!l.ditiun fl.';; at present and a.t the expiration of this lease, or any renewal of il, to .o;;urrcrulcr 11.;) .<;O.J1l.C in like rr.pair an.d condition, natural wear and cla.m.age by the elcm.ent.~ excepted; to perm.it no lLnlawfu.l bU.sincR." to be carrir.d on u.pan. ....aid prr.m.i.~r.s: not .to ,pcr~nif anything (.0 be done. which is contrary.to the ". condiiif}'/l.:<; o{ tiir. 'jJolii.:'i("..~ o( in.~:-u..ra;l.(;'r.' 'n'i;iv".(~;~' the .,;"'ai~j fJrc11l.i.t~.~. or which ma!J be. placed thereon during the tp.-nn of thi..o: lr~a.'ie ur (llty rc.lwwal thereof. l.uhr.reby the hazard 1night be increased or the in.'iu.rance. inlJalidatr.d; not to u.lulald. thc .wid pNuni.'ics. nor as:,iign. thi.~ lea.H~ or any intcrc..'it therein to (Lny pCF!Wll. or /J(lrxoIM'; and not. t.o f('Ut.UOr. from. the said prcl1ds{'..'i du.ring thc l.erm,.qf thi..~ lca!/c or a~LY rC/wlJlal tJu:rnul. 21 :is kn:rhll ~lqH.r\"l b"twr.r.n llir. part.ie", to the",c pre,'clLt"" that in cO.'e the bldl.dinl! or 1 ..., r- . . bu.ilding.li crf:cted 0/1. I.he pr('w.i.'i(!.o: Jwrr~b!llt!u...('.d .<thaIl be !Jurt.ially dam.aged by fire, t.he .<tOlllC 3hall be T(~paif{!d, (~.'i '~fJ(:('.(lil!l (J..'i fJ(Jo'i.'il:bl.... at. I.hi'. {'.rpi'n.lie of the !;aid Lessor; that. in. CU.'iC the dam,G.gc .'i/J.all be ,'0 exLelLsilm as to r~1Ld(:r th(~ buihlillg II n(.(',nunlablr, the rent :ihall CCQ..,'iC'lLll,lil .'ilLell tim.c G." (.hl! buildin(! shall be pu.t ill. cum.pl(!I.r: repair, 1111 I. in C:{I.~r! of the. totaz.de.~t~ILct.i.on of the premi.~c.~' by fire or otherwi.lIe, tht'. r~nt :dwfl /;r. paid N.n t.o !h(~ liNn! of ~uch destrudion, ,and then and front tlwn.ccfort.h this lca..'/C ...hall ce.a!w ulul C()l11..C tu an end, prol1id(!d, howcue.r, that such dam.age and ac.'it.ru.cUon be not cau.3cd by the carelr.!um..e.'is, nc~li~cnce. or im.prupcr conclu.ct of t.hr. Le.~.~cc, his agent.' or servan.ts. The ..~aid Lesse.e agNu~.,' to Jcer.p the .'Hz,id prem,ise.<i in.. a clean and .<ianHary condition, an.d to relnouc o.ll ashes or <!.,tJwr ~(LTbat!e whicl~ m.ay accuT'nulClle upon l.he,..;;am.l! du.ring the !1oid term, or Gny rcnewal thereof, or failing ther"i" to poy ta the .'ai,d Le.,so'i. fau,ble the co.'tl! removing the .Yome, (,0 be reeov- ered tit('. .<:anw (M rent du,c and in arrears,,' to pcnrtit the .<;a'id Le.s:lor to display a ufor rcnt" or G IIfor .fale" card upon the .'laici PN',:1J!.i.H:.f1 I and to enter t.he .wid premise,Ii at any tim.c for the plLrpOBC of making n('.r:f!~..{ary repair.li, or .'ihowintf the. said prr.1ni.,c-s to prO!lpectivc pu.rclwscr., or lC!itICes. . ~ RffJSCeQ. -2- '''''''ffl "'I . ..i-\.\\~ ~l ~5 .:f\).r\.1ur "~flr;l'cb tliat"hOli.ld the LF.s.'ccremove oraUempt to remove from the .,liz:r//)r~mi.", !/uring Ii.'f- tf-rln of this /wsr, or any renewal thereof, Dr sholl.ld the .wid Lessee break or 1'/'Clrl(I., Of ul[r,1l1jJllO ')ff'uk ur (~jladf'r any oj the COlJcnant.'l or re....'lrictions.set forth in this leasej th(!/L Uw (~1LIif(' ,r<:nL for thi! [ulllenn oflhis If.QSt:. .'ilwll bccom.c du.e and payable at once and may !orLlzwil/1., iJ(' ('olll'clr.t! flY di.\'Lress or otIwrwi.'ic. ~'lnd any ~ood.'i rC])1.Dved [roln said prcm-ises either {"'f()lf' ()r (lftf'T th,' eXl'irution of till' S(lid I.enn, while (lny porl.ioJl. of the .,aid rent remains w'paid, whethf'T dlle or not, shall remain liable to rlisl.res" for such rent for the period of thirty days after such rel1Lc)llul, Ow .o.:Qmr. as l1Juugh I,hr.lj Nmwinr.d on. the premise.'>; and any rcntoval o[ the goods [Nun Uw said jJ;f./H.isr.s at Q,;.Y lintf., e.ithr.r by day or night, without the written consent of the said l.e.,sor .,hall be ('onsiderd a elandr.",lin" and fraudldent removal. .fInd if default "hall be made in the jW!Jm,cnl of tlJ1.!J parL of Lhi? .'wid rr.nt for five day..; altcr the .~antc bcc01ncs due, or if the said LeS3ee ~hall l)f(~uk Of t'./ludCj or aUem.pi to break or (~ll(ulc, any of the covenants or restrictions set forth in this leasp., t hF. I.r..'",or may fa rfei t and annul the uncxpired porrion of this lease, or any renewal thereof, and c-nter upon arul Tf'.PU."Se..".\' the .<:aid prem,isc... without proces.-c: o/law and without any notice whatt:ocur.r. .:"Ru,(l il -i.$ f\)tihtr a~B'r;l',cb that the acceptance by the said Lessor of any of the said rent at any time after the .iame shall become due, Dr default ha., been made in the payment thereof Dr any f(Jilure ollh(~ saiel Lessur tf) e.n/urcr. any of the rights gained u.nder this lease or any 0/ the penalties, [or!cillLTC.," or condition... JLf~rr.in contail'L-t~d, .'ihall not in any Wi.H~ be consideTed as a waiver of the riCht to enforce the. ...alnr. an.,([ that :wch right Of forfeiture m,ay be:. cnlorce.d.without any notice whatsoeverj and that alLY al.tempt to eaUect the rent by one praceedin~ shall not be considered as a waiver of the ri1ht of the wid 1.c.,sor to colleet the Wine by any other praceedinl!. r The .~aid Le.'ise.e herciJy waiue.<: the usual three n~onth!i notice to qu.it and agrees to .'H/'rrcnder the- .'iaid prernisc.'i a1.l.)w r..xpirutio11. of the .'iaid tenn, or the tcnnination o[ thi,li lease or any renewal thereof, without. any notice whal.ev"" and also waive., the benefit 0/ all appraisement, _,toy and exemption laws, the ri~ht of inquisition O!L real e.'itatc and all bankru.pt,or in.'iolvent laws now infaree or which may hereafter be f)a.<lsc,d, upon any proceeding instituted j6r the recovery o[ the said rent, either by di.o;tre....'i or otherwi.liC. If dcfai<U .,hall be made in the.payment'of any r!int 'wheli the Mme shall becomc du.e, Dr if the ".<;oid Ld!;.<;ee .'iha'il ba .'iold out at .'il~eriJr;.'\ or con.'itable'.'i sale OJ" pennit any judglnent to be entered against hi1)~, or make any as.dgnment for the benefit o[ creditors, or comn~it any act of bankruptcy whatever, then the rent for the balance of the term,s .'ihall at once beconuJ du,e and payable, as if by the tcnns of the lea.'ie it were all payable. in adlJance, and may be, collected by di.'itrcss or otherwise, and ....hall be paid in lull out o[ the proceed.... 0/ any such a.f1.'iigrunent, .',ale or bankru.ptcy proceedings, any law, u.~age or CU.'itoTn to the ~contrary notwith.'itanding. . The said Lessee hereby confesses judl!l1wnt in favor-of the said Lessor for the whole amount of the rent at any tim,e rem,cin'in.i! unpaid, whether the Sante shall have been du.e or not, waiuine stay of excGu,tion, inquisition and all ezcm.ption laws now in force or whiclL'lna.1f hereafter be pasacd, and au.thorizes the adding of flve per cen, ttomey's commission. for collection; and further docs hereby ~P01L the breach. o[ any of t Le conditZo is 0/ this ease, au.t Lonze any attorney of any Court of R.ecord 1'1 to appear JOT (z..im ane entel an cnLicalJLe. action of ejectrll.,cILt ar..d confess aju..dglnent of cjcctm,cnt therein for the rrem;iscs herein described and docs authorize. the imm,ediate issuing of a writ- of l!osscssion all.d executioJl. for costs without askin!, leave of the 'Court.. , ,/ ~.,b ~l ie, f~I,j):Hit:r .';,llr~t.il tha~ if the said Lessee (with the COI/.Se"t of the LC$sor) shall \ ! ~o1Ltz,nue ~n POSs~ssLon 01 the SGLd pren'LL$CS. after the expiration of the said tcnn, or any renewal ' thereof, t!!:.e(, aus agreement shall become in,mediatety operative f:s!r another like term, and thc Lessor shall. have t:'" ril!ht to en(orec arty of the conditions or forfeitures of this atrecme--r;;:;"clu.dinl! the cOILfessI-on o[ jUdglntmt, WI-tlz. the waiversl etc., as if a lLew agrcClnclLt, identical with this had been e:>:ecuted by the said parties for the sueaeeding term or terms, with rhe proviso that in case am partir.u.lar conditians arc sct farth in this lease to take e!Jeet upon a re"ewal thereof, then shoUI~ there be any such re"ew.l as above provided for, the said particuler conditions shall take. e/Ject upon :u.ch renewal, bul. they shall apply to only _,uch parts of this lease as it is stated herein thaI. they arc Lntended to supersede! and shall ilL ILO way affect any o[ the rCJiwinin:! parts of this lease. -3- ~""7" ~I - ~, I ? ,. P it.> tJ .- . ,", ;A..ii). i1 i~ f12id1/tlr (i!3H;f~ that the faliowin.!f conditions,forfcit..res,eovcnants and restric- tion.s arc a part 01 thi. agrccnwnt, and that each cr:.d all of them arc binding I.pon thc par tics hereto: 7) That Sehedule "A" attached hereto and marked "UulC"5 and C. L,,:~cc shall have complied.with all the terms, covenants "1i"egulalions" shall extend to and bind the parties l>ercto, then a"d conditions of thIS lease, In wInch event the depOSit so paId heirs administrator> and executors. hereunder shall be returned to Lessee; otherwise, said sum 2. E;ther party hereto may terminate this lease at the end of said deposited hereunder or.any part thereof may be retained by term by giving to the other party written notice thereof of at Lessor, at :Is opllon, as J~qu~da!cd damages or may be appJ~ed by least thirty days prior thereto; but in default of such notice, this Lessor, at lis optIOn, as hqmdated damages or.may be apphed by lease shall continue under the same provisions and conditions in" Lessor against any actual loss, damage Or injury chargeable to (()fee immediatcl nor totliC ex ira1iOi1oru~crcOffo~ Lessee hereunder or othenvisel if Lessor determines such loss, t 10 ~d of one y-car an so on cvcr.tJ~~n.Il uzUess or--' da.ma~c or injury e);c~ said sum deposiled. Lessor's detcr~ unlllterminated hy either party hereto gIvIng the otlier thirty mmatlO~ of the amount, If any~ be ret~r~ed to Lessec shall be days wrillen notice thercof previous to expiration of the then fmal. It 15 understood that the saJd depOSIt IS not to be eOllSldered current. term. as the last rental due under tl,is lease. 3. shall, upon ""c.culion hereof, dejlosit with Lcssjlr'a.< 4. 11 is also understood ond agreed that in the evelll the lenallt is security 0 crformancc of all the terms, covCIl,all1~-and con. fIb I C I _ trans crrc( )' llC ovcrnmcnt, away from llis vicinitYl this dilion.o:; of this lens, lC sum of r.oeeij)t of which is lease will be declared null and void provided the tCl1aJit prcscnls llcrcby .eknowledged. 1. 'losit 51 . lC retained by Lessor nol1ess Ih," thirty (3D) do)'s notice in writing of his illlelllion to unlillhc expiration of thi~ leas' mn shall be returnable to \'3Cillc premises plus n certined copy of his transfer orders. Lessee provided that: --~. , A. Prem'. ave been vacaled; B. or shaH have inspected the pwmiscs nftcr such "o.ca~ 5. Lessee agrees to cover a minimum of at least 75 % of all Ooors in the apartment with carpeting for the purpose of keeping noise to a minimum for other tenants within the building. The- words I( Les.<;o.,.n and U LlUisce" a.'i herein :;,scd and pcrsona,l pronouns referring thereto, shall include the ."lingu,lar a.s well as the plura.l num.bcr, the m,alcj n.eu.tc:r a.nd fem..ale gender$, and shall l!]!pllf...to corpora~,i,01~S a.~ well a.... .~o nat.._u-.ra.,l,. p~.~~,~.1?-~"', a.nd all the terrns I covenant... and con.~itions 0/ this lease .~il.all extend to a.nd b'c:'biiulilli!' dpviih1:1i:e heir..., cxccu.tor..., adntinisttat.ors, as...ions and - ~'" successors of the Le.~.fi:or and Lessee, !ialJ(j that no rights shall cnu.re to the benefit of alLY assignee of Le.'isee u,n-Ie;,:... the as.<:i~nmr.nt. of lease has prc'i::ou,sly been approved in writing by Les.~oT. ~~\i. 2-11'.i.b~'!l~;;;:i;;: ~l H;Lt':i\-l1"';~)f~ the peet,;e", afore$eid have hereunto set their hand" and seab on the da.y a.nd,yea.r fi.r$L above written, ;lJn Hie lln!lma ~f J1~ )/J. ~,J[;"'-t'-' ~~(~~"7~ f'. :d~ IDA L. .....e-v "4.a SANDRA K. CORNMAN SEE ADDITIONAL TERMS AS SET FORTH ON ATTACHED PAGES -~- -". " ~I .~ .ua..J,.~ J.l. t.J~CG1t.t::.L 'i RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" 1. It is understooD and agreed to by and between the Lessor and Lessee that a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer are,nat nr9vided by Lessor and that no such appliances are contemplated by this lease or any amendment thereof. In the event a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer are located on the premises, it may be used by Lessee only under the following conditions hereby agreed to by Lessee: a. Lessor may replace, remove or modify any or all of the aforementioned appliances at any time without prior notice to the Lessee; b. Lessor is not responsible for any maintenance or repairs whatsoever at any time; c. Lessor is not responsible for any of Lessee's property contained within or without the above mentioned appliances; and d. Lessor is not responsible for any damage caused to any area of the house resulting from the use of the above mentioned appliance by Lessee. 2. Any notices from a financial institution that a check recei ved by Dale steager has been rej ected due to non- sufficieritfunds ;..accouniclosed, stop payment, missing signature, or any such item that will make the issued check uncollectable, the issuer of such instrument will be assessed a non-refundable fee of $20.00 per occurrence. A CERTIFIED replacement check and the appropriate fee must be delivered to Dale Steager within five (5) days of such occurrence to avoid incurring legal fees. ~ The placement and use by Lessee of any equipment on the ~~roperty (kiddie pool, jungle gym. play pens or articles rof a like nature) shall be at Lessee's own risk and responsibility. No risk or liability of any nature what- soever is assumed by the Lessor. 0 v"'l' .1.-~h~ c,.t... (' -1 Pn~...... It-rn 0 0.> .rt 4. Lessee will pay water, sewage and trash service feef/, gas, elec~ical service, telephone service and television cable, if anplicable. Lawn care and snow removal will be the resnonsibility of the Lessee. Upon Lessee's failure to nay the costs of the same, Lessor may collect thr. amounts due as rent due in arrears and remit the same tOfhe providers of these services. DALE /I. ST'EAGfR 4978 EHIi's B . JlEClIANlCSBUHgIDpGE JtE. . A l'055 1",-, , ? ~-', '" ~" ( " f.( 10. 11. /9 13. 14. ~, .......,.,.,.~ RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) 5. Lessee must advise Lessor of the telephone numbers of both the house and the business phone number where he/she works. Private, unlisted or any other telephone number will not be excluded from this request. These phone numbers will only be used by the Lessor or his representative for official business or emergency purposes. -6. 7. Ne aegs, cats ur peto af ~~ kilj~T-~e-peTm.it~~_ Lessor will notify Pennsylvania Power and Light Company when Lessee signs lease and transfer the electric service to his name. 8. Lessee is responsible for contacting Pennsylvania Power and Light Company upon termination of the lease. Lessee shall n0t park or store or suffer to permit to be parked or stored in any parking areas, any truck, trailer or disabled vehicle. 9. No mechanical, electrical, plumbing, or structural equiT.l!llent orconf.iguratil?n on any part of the premises may be altered', modified or removed without the express written consent of the Lessor, unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. All costs arising our of repair or reulacement to any unauthorized removals or changes shall be at the expense of the Lessee. Lessor, at its option, upon notice to Lessee and at Lessee's expense, may either require the disconnection and/or removal of, or disconnect and remove, any interior or exterior electrical appliances, apparatus, equipment, antennas or material installed or connected by Lessee .in or about the building. Running exposed wires or fixtures in violation of electrical code is prohibited. Notice of defects in water or electrical wiring shall be reported immediately to the Lessor by the Lessee, in writing, unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. Lessee shall not use or operate any machinery, equipment 'lr appliances that, in the Lessor's opinion,. are unsafe, harmful to the building, or disturbing to other Lessees ~ccu~ying other parts thereof. The toilets, bathtubs, and sinks shall n0t be used for any uurp0se other than for which they were constructed. and n0 sweepings, rubbish, rags, paper, disposable diapers, sanitary napkins, .ashes, or other substances shall be thrown therein. Any damage resulting from. misuse thereof shall be borne by the Lessee by whom or upon whose premises it shall have been caused. 15. re ,13 18. ,f@ , ~, I 'i 20. :': , r:', Ii " g 22, (@ -""""l "I ._ " '~"--\_ __ ~ RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" {CO NT) Locks may not be changed or added without the prior written consent of the Lessor. Lessor must be provided with a key. If not, it is understood that in the case of an emergency any damage done to the door, frame, etc. upon entrance to the premises, will be at Lessee's expense. Locks or chains added must be left in place when Lessee vacates. All keys must be returned to the Lessor, both provided by the Lessor and those made at the Lessees expense, upon vacating the premises, or Lessee will forfeit said security deposit in full. N:J spikes or hooks shall be driven into the walls and/or woodwork. Small nails may be used for the purpose of hanging pictures unless other devices are recommended by Lessor. Fixtures used for hanging draperies or curtains are permitted. Painting of any area of the house by individuals other than one designated by the Lessor is prohibited. No colors other than those put on by the Lessor is permitted. Walls and ceilings which are altered by paint or other substances will be restored to the original color. The Lessee will be charged for paint and labor to restore same. Lessee shall not place any weights in any portion of the premises beyond the safe carrying capacity of the structure. If a waterbed is used. insurance for such is required and a copy of such insurance shall be provided the Lessor. Lessee shall keep the premises in a good state of preservation and cleanlinesS. Any maintenance calls are to be called in between 5:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., Monday - Friday and weekends, 737-1812. Only in extreme emergency is Reta Steager, 731-2330, to be contacted Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 4:15' p.m: No heat, broken pipes are emergency. Lessee understands that if they contact any companies withour authorization from steagers for maintenance purposes, they are responsible for said bill. No noise or loud parties will be tolerated that is disturbing to the neighborhood. Premises are to be left in liveable status when terminating lease. Severe damages will be responsibility of lessee to correct or reimburse Less,o, r for corrected dama&,eS in full. LIVEABLE STATUS DEFINED AS: Cleaning of stove/oven, frig, cabinets. tub/shower. toilet and sink; all else in broom swept condition. RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) f ' 24. Lessor reserves the right to inspect premises with one (1) day notice to Lessee. 25. Lessor reserves the right to update the clauses of this contract and Lessee will be- notifi ed of any changes. DATE ___J~ne 1~, 1990 DALE il. STEAGER 1j971l ElUI'S BRIDGE RD. 24ECHANICSBURG. PA 170sr, ( ~' \ 1--- _ '~-).4) L.e ;f",./ ; 'ta "w. st~age~ #~jL~,~_/ ROBERT H. CORm~AN )t~tf.' ~ SANDRA K. CORNMAN LESSEE(S) '''-'m.,,,,,,_, 1"__ ",.. - '.. , --~, ,"" "'.. HOWARD P & IDA L STEAGER 4] ] RENO A VENUE NEW CUMI;lEIJLAND PENNSYLVANIA J7070 PHONE: (717 774-4623) October ] 4, J 998 Mr, and Mrs.Robert H. Cornman 4J6 Reno Avenue New Cumberland PAl 7070 Subj: Arrears of monthly rental payments for properly located at 416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, Pel1nsylvania De3r Mr. and Mrs. Conumm: Due to the fact that as of October l, 1998, you are tlrree (3) months in arrears for rental of the property located at 416 Reno Avenue: $500.00 per month fDr three (3) months for a totalalTear in the amount of $1,500.00, you are hereby advised that if the total amount ($1,500.00) is not paid to Howard P or Ida L Steager by November I, 1998, eviction proceedil]gS will be initiated. In addition, you are,h~reby advised that as of December I, 1998, the rental amount wiii be increased to $650.00 per 1Il0hth payable on the first day of each lllontll. A new lease will be available for signature Noveinber I, 1998. Please advise of your intentions to either enter into the new lease or to V<lcale prior to that time. Sincerely, ,.._ ~~~~ Howard P. Steager 414/ I " le:..4'lV f)&u:JJ{-<>u,) H. Gleml Steager Jc4t .J~ Ida 1. Steager ~ I'/~/.J j~- ft;.'<;Ji~ Marlin D. Steager 17 GJd~~ ' Da"leH. S' ~' EXHIBIT ~~B" ~, '-:- ,It (l 1\ uu.+(i!3 (\ () I -I- , I I ~"- ~~ Made IMJ ,1lbiz .~greement N;?'~} '0' A. D. /9 f 3 30 ,It d.ayof b,'",m HOHARD P. STEAGER and IDA L. STEIIGER, his wife, /tertil/a/ler ~(yle,d lite po/f)' of the fir,Sf part, alld ROBERT H. CORN!-1.AN and SANDRA K. CDRNMAN, his wife, hereillafJer styled II'B JI(Jrijl of tile second pad. li1itHllP!lBPll!. Owl 1~lt. ioid pol'1y of the first pori, ill rOllsidel'a{j(llt o! the- "(II/S alld (Ot''J.lllllIJ j"'frill_ 0{1111" mcn/iol!{'d, do/Ii demise aud Ico;e l/llto the II'I'd party of the UlOlld pari fo be 'lSed oi (/ duelling "-~11rrr--premi:;r:r:ri/llftfl:'ill/"t! &:nrO'..lgh-of- -"_...:." New Cumberland s)'lvolIUr, d~.scrjbr:d as follows: COl/lIly of C1.Bl~)er land (Iud COlmlltlUit'rtl/lh of Pelln. Being premises known as 416 Reno Street, New Currberland, Pennsylvania'- Wn i~aur nub to :ujnliJ 1/11/0 Ore said (lo/"Iy of Ilu second port, subjf'tl If) t/le (Olldit;OllS of tM; Oar!]ll- 11lCll1 [Dr Ille Jerll1 bllyill1lillY 011 IIll! 1st day 0.' Decerrber 19 83, olld cll/ling all the 30th doy of June 19 84. :iht Q).OtlEliUPfUliol1 of 1ll1J1}irl, Ille .fOid party of Ihl! second port ogrces tq]pay /0 the soid POtty of the first part for Ille IISC alld oUl/fancy ofllle said /wcmises, Ihe tlllll of Two .1nousand Four Hundred ($2.400.00) dollars, payable as follows, viz: Four Hundred ($400.00) Dollars each loonth' .beginn:Il111 JaQHs,1-Y. .It,.X~~4::., 'nl.e_p~.J?l]all. ~e.1!o ;rgt1t 'Paid r:r.. .De.cer.ibe:r 1... ~~3. As u iJl'urllJpr mll1t.Bibprutit1l1 for Ille IISC alld DUIlPCJIlCY of said premises the said party of tlte uceJJld part hereby agrees 10 foil1.fl(Jly keep ond be bound by the following CDVellollts, condjtions, alld ag/'crmc.tts, vi;: TIll! .laid premises are 10 be lU$pl ami lII11illlained ill 0.1 gOOt1 repair olld rOl/ditioll as fll IwC,Se/l1 oml at tile eJ:pil'oliotl of tlJiJ leau, OilY arc 10 be Sltrrelldcred i,l like l'cpoir alJd cendition, llalw'ol weill" ol/d dom,agrs happellillg by fire,' slorm or other ctqualties 0111)1 excepted, The premises ol'e IO,be kept ill 0 c/eOll alld sanitary condition aud all oslin or other garbage 'whirll lUay accumulate flleTeOll durillg Ihe lerm are 10 be r~llloved. alld ill .lIse of fai/lIre 10 remove file 'same Illc earty. of the first parI "'a)' collect os ,'ellt due alld ill arrears double the "Cast of rell/oval; Ihe tvater, 1i!lhting or other service 'for the IIse of /lle DCCt/POllls of. the said pmnises fUI'Jlislled by all)' Public Service Campoli)' during lilt said tchn sholl he. poid for hy tile said parly of the serond part tmlen otherwise provided Itcl'cin, or tile sanie may be collected by the said party of the first porI as relit due alld il1 arrears. No/hillg sTlall be dOlle 11/'0.1 said premise.r contrary to Ole COllditiOllS of lhe po/icieJ Of'IISIIl'OIlCe IIPOIl tile bllifdillg tJulr#oll whereby the hazard may be i,lel'cased or I1H! insura"ce iI/validated; Ileitll('r Ihe whO/I! nor OilY por(ioll of tile said premises sholl be sublet, 'lIor shall this lea:se or flny illtcrcsl 11Iereill be OJsigll/!d, 1I0r sholl ihe party o[ lhe secolld pori remov/! or o/lempt to remOVll from said premises dllring Ib, terlll . (If t/ti$' 1/!(1U, 1v1.tholll Il!/! 1CJI.i!tell conUII/ af the said party of tlJe firJ'/ plJrl, ond no zwlalvflll bllSilll!,SJ sllnll 01 allY time be cal',;ed all 1IP011 said premis{1J, ,'_ _ ~_,_ ' 1--- -- TlirptirIy o(ti,;'fi,'si""parl ~:t:pressly reJerVe;~jjle ';:jgh, 10 elIteI' IIPOll the pnmwes at reasollable times.. for Ihs Pllr'J!ose of 1lwkillg llectUDT'j jllspecfioll, repairs or to slJOW lite salllc to pl'ospective purchasers or lessees, and 1IIOY disPlay "for rCIIt" 01. "for sole" cards lhereoll. The'removal of allY goods frolll llle premISes, 1UJlerller oyany or fly mgM, urrlJlOl/t tile written COusellt oj tile p~rly 01 tI!f! firJt port, s]u:1l be de~med ,0 c10lJdestillc alld frOlldultl7ll, removal olld ,fuell g(Jods shall remain lIable to dIStress [or (1 penod of lIurly do)'s aller, sllch removtU, wherever Ihey 1110)r be fOlmd. If defol/lt sholl be 1II0d, illllle PO)"IIClll of all)' pori of I"e said Telll a/Jer the some'bllCOllJeJ dl/e, or ill case of 0 breach or evosi071 or ""y allelllpl 10 break or evade a11Y of t11/1 COVeJlall/S or condiliolls of Illis agreelltell/, tll, elltir:' rSllI resq,,"ed for flle [fdlterlll of lhis lease :retllal'lIillg lit/paid shalC become dlle alld payable 01 Ollce alld may forih:fJilh be coll,eted by distress or ot1lerwise, alld at the sallie lime the party of the first part way forfeil alld mlllUl Ille llllt:t:pired portioll of IMs lease alia eliteI' IIPOlt and repossess ti'e said premhes with or 1ui'holtl process of law, 0110 WithOllt gi't1i71!] a11~ ,Iolice whaf.soever. , ACCfPlollC6 by Ihs party of tll' /i"Sj port of Oll)f of till said T'lll 01 ouy.time of leI" lhe sallie shall become dlle afler def.ollll 110.1 been llInde ill llle paYll/ent tll1ll'eof, or any failtlre 10 ell/ol'ce ally of Ihc riabts llerel'lI res;rved 10 , IS pOT4y of t/ls r,rsl part, 01' (11)1 o/l/le penalties, farfeilllYes 01' cOlldilians herei,,' C01l1Uilleo, sTlall 710t ill a~IY wise b, cOllsldertd a woiver ull1l/1 right 10 ellfl.,.~e 'lIe sOllie 01 auy .tillle willlolll ~lty floli" wliaf.so6verl alld allY alfempt to coiled tile Tell' by Olle prolcedllig SllOIl lIaf be cOlI.lldl!red as 0 wower EXHIBIT "e" - Ii " , H I ! I II Ii 1\ II II I, II il I: Ii ll. I, " I: ,I', Ii !,'I 111 I ~ tii Iii II: Ii - OJ file 1'ighf to collect flie Sflme by (lily olher froau/lllg, bill all of the rights nJ the po,r!)1 oj the firsl pIJI", Gna all/orIei/lires, IltlJoltles fwd cOl1d{/iOl1J 1110)' b,~ ell/orad toga/her or .wccessivcJy (If the Opll'OIl of fhe party of the fil'sl 1'01". It is I'/rlller agrend Iha( if Ole parly of the secolld pari shalf buoIll1' imol1ltllt, JIIalle all assigmllellt fOt, the bel/eft! of creditors, commit OIIJ' fUt (If bankruptcy, file a vollmtary Pdt/iMI ill bankruptcy, Or if {Jlry jl/dgmellt shdll be tll/ned aI' ally ilJvofu"tllry petitiotJ ill ballkruptcy filed agai".rl fhe .raid party.of the secol/d parI, a/{ the rtmf rlJ.ferved for the filII lam of Ihi.! lease .r1l(J1l become dlle miff (ollutib/e immedi- ately by disfre,n Or otherwise, T/'e Pro/hon%r)' or all)! alto-nle)' af ally COlld of Ruord 0-1 PClIlIS)'/1I0/lil1 is llel"ell)1 ollJ)wrized to appear for m:d 10 €onfess a jfldglllellt ogaillst tha .wid party of the seealld part alld i,l 1(1;.'0'1' of the said party of the first pari for the whole ammmt oj sard rent as lureillbefore sel Jorlll mill % aI/awry's rommissj(Jll. Alld Ihe said party af the secolld part hereby wail'es the lI.Illal 1JOti(t! /0 qui/, alld agree.f 10 s~lrrellda said premises at the exPiration of said term, or the lormillOtioll of this Jca.re "lvilhallt allY 1I0tiee wlllltsotvtr. Alld UPOIl allY proceedillg illstituted Inr the rC(overj' of snid "ml, ei/her by dislress or otherwise, the said party of the seCOlld POl't waives Ihe beuefit of oil appraisement, stay Oliff e.remplioll laws, the rig1ll of ill- ql/isitioll 0'11 real es/ate, alld aU bankruptc)' or i/lso/veney faws llaw i1l force '0'1' hereafter passed. Upa1l t},1' brl'ach 01 a1/y nf Ih", (a1'('IIMlts or O!lrUlJ/c/lts of this /coJ(' or 1/POIl it.f t{>l'Imllolioll by [m'" fti/l/re, defMdl or e.\'pirIJ/ioll Ihe P/'olhollOIOl'Y ar allY allomay as aforesaid is Irrreby alllhon':;rd /0 1I1'1'/'/J.1" for allt! to cOllfns jlulg/l1I'lll ill 011 omi(able tIlliOlI of ejrclmmt against ,IIr said I'arty nl the Jewlld fa!'1 and il! favor of Ih" in;d p/lrly of fhe firsl 11/11"( far Ibl' prrmisN Ilarin drsailJi'd. (lIId fa dir('({ ,hl' imm/'(I,.. /llr issuing of wr,l.f nj 1'().fu.rsioll alld ".l"Nll/ian for (nSI,f, II'oil/iu.Q ol! i/"/'r!/u/l1l'irin, without lIolicr ami withollr a.rhllg II'ovo of COllrl. It is (Ilrlhcr agreed that the terms OJld conditiolls of this ngreCllIl'lIt"OIul lease shall ill 110 way he .hmlgad or Illtered except bJf a writing signed by all of thl' f(II'tie.r hel"elo.. alld if thl' said Imr/y of lha SUmld pm'f sholl cOII/illl/e ill .posse.rsiall of tile soid premises oltel' thr. expiratioJl 01 sQi(lle/"fIl, at Ill(! optioll 01 the s(ljd porl)f of the firsl /,01'1 .00e1l holdi1lg OV!!r 11I0)1 be !'rld olld deemcd tJ rrllc'/t'/1/ of thi.r agrccmelll for llIlo/hl'l' like Ie,.,,,, the sallie os though a 11e1U agrermelll af Ictuing, idelllico/ with thi,f, hod beell I!xcot!rd al/d de_ lwcrCli by the .~aid parlies heretofar a slIccer.tlillf: Icrm, Ihl' nlim1e o1llllOri2otioJ/s to ofJl)cm' and cOl~rr.uJlld1;mrlll agail1sl the part'{' oj the ~er.oll(l parI shal/lIol be rxhrwslcd by aile e:l:erci.fe thereof, bll/ll/o)' be rrpealNfly exerristd jro/l1 lilllf 10 lime. AmI . the lessors shall retAin R one hundred ($100.00) doJ.]flr secud,ty deposit which shall be paid by the lessees to the lessors at the signing of this lease. It is hereby agreed that the p<lrtjes of the second parl: will purchase the aforesaid premises on July 1, 198L" on the following tenns: PrIce _ $38,500.00. Four thousand five hundred ($-\,500.00) dollars shall be paid to the parties of the first part in cash and a sales .,greerrent will be entered into for 111irL-y-four thousand ($34,000.00) dollars providing for interest at the rate of twelve (12%) per centum per annum and monthly pRyrrents in the amcnmt of Three hundred ninety-nine and 07/100 ($399.07) dollars, by the further provIsion that the price shall be paId in full no later than five (5) years after the date of the aforesaid agreement. 'l11e ag1.'eernent: shall also pl:ovlu~ that thel:e will be 110 pellalty fm" prepa.YIilf2nts. lhe $4,500.UO down payment shall be lMde no later than JUL>/ /, ,198-\, and if the said payment is not made, the pnrties of the first part shall be relieved of their obligation to sell the premises to the parties of the second part. . TIlTS, LEASE SHAlL NCIT TIE RENEWED.. , , , 1 lie COlla1110IlS oj tins agreeme11l sliill/ rxtend fa the hnrs, e:l'('wta1"s, Orlllll1l1Slralors. SII{f"/!S5orS tIlut (lSSlgllS of a// tlte porties hereto. atu WUt1P.6!1 ~lllJ,rrrnf. tile par/ies afores.,id ha7Jr. he/"elIlllo .fel their lIands oml sro/,r the day (!lid year first above 7/.n'itte". IN THR PRHSRNc:n OJ' us: , ...j: UI I QJ: M: co; 4-1: 'B' 0: I I ~ oJ! .,,'gj 1 1 I ""g' Iii'i Iii "'! i f ~:Ei F~cgj , ~ ~~i .. .. oj. .;. , .. .. .. .. .; .. '"'- iti::')! ., ~~~1 's ' ~~Ii ' . t:..... ....-lj lr-i :.4' ~tIJ i ' . Hi i oiH ~' ~~ I \::I i 0: ~ ,; ! w: OiW~ "IDi ("1j 010-.1 ~ U)i ~~i wi ~'o . ~ ~J Uj g' i~ i ~i ~j N'b. 1-)1 t5 i 2il '6-i t l; . t , (> '" ~I "" "i! l; ~ "i! (> -" 1j " " t !l ~ t "" ~ . u:ii " 'E n ~ .;:- <;, :0. 0 " t ;; . 0 ,.. ]:" " "" " . 0 t " "- " . . . <0 , . " " " "- h '" c., '<: "' ... ... '" '" Cl ... ~ <.' 1""-''"''1 ,- ", VERIFICATION I, Ida Steager, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Civil Complaint are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. October 13, 2000 j2~ :r 1~ Ida Steager , ", . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, October 16, 2000, I served a copy of the foregoing Second Amended Complaint on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, P A to counsel for Defendants the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 October 16,2000 ~~~ Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff -f>""~_~1 , , , ' "^. ,-- 1'- ~" v_'-,_', " "'- ~ q s -,'.~ rJ"ii' . ~~--: S2~. r:c:' c. ~ t:: 1- ";'''"f ::~\ -< .~~"' ,-, {~.~ -~ :.:\ .. ..' ---. ri ':.~h J -..~'1 -" ._l () -0' .---'- --~ F-5 , " -.;:'; .t::'- ~~'J -<. I.~"-~"~,,<I., i:t1,.,,_~,~4' r 1i'!~,~ _, _L+;~~~~~(;)r~I"flG'''!~!1!lf'')llf';'''-'fJ~f'-'',;~,-, 'B;>'FhH-"!1~i'!i!>lf~!tijbjUr<:~-;ffi1l"",,:'I!'"';;;;~"'f"'-~IRlWf,;l'l;ll~'ff~~ v, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. ::2000 - 53&;) <. / v; I HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CML ACTION . LAW NOTICE YOU HA VB BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections TO the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. 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 HA VB A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE TIlE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. COURT ADMINISTRATOR FOURTH FLOOR I COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013-3387 (717) 240.6200 -"!-]~l)..\~'^I"""'_ " -, - ,,~ v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA NO. f/1J ~ 5.31,;z.. et:.:;J r ~ HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiffs Howard and Ida Steager, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 411 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 2. Defendants are Robert and Sandra Cornman, Husband and Wife, are adult individuals who reside at 504 Third Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. 3. On November 30, 1983, Defendants initially entered into a Lease Agreement with Plaintiffs for the premises at 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and continued to occupy said premises until May 8, 2000. Plaintiffs own said premises. 4. On June 13, 1990 Defendants entered into another Lease Agreement for said premises with Plaintiffs, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A", 5. This Lease provided for a one year tenn, with automatic renewal each year pursuant to occupation of the premises, at a monthly rental of$450.oo payable on the first day of each month. 6. Said rental amount by agreement of the parties increased to $650.00 per month by agreement dated October 14, 1998. Said agreement is attached as Exhibit "B". -=---' 7. On May 8, 2000, Defendants vacated the leased premises and surrendered possession thereof to Plaintiffs. 8. After Septemberl, 1999, Defendants ceased to pay the rent due under the Lease. The amount of rent in arrears from that date forward if $5200.00. 9. In addition, Defendants owe late fees of$1220 for failure to rent from October 1, 1999 through May of 2000 pursuant to the late fee provision of said Lease, 10. In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to $321.00 for attorney's fees for collection of said unpaid rents and penalties pursuant to the provisions of said Lease. II. Plaintiffs have made repeated demands upon Defendants for payment of said unpaid rent, but Defendants have failed and refused and still refuse to pay the same or any part thereof. 12. At or prior to the time when Defendants vacated the leased premises, Defendants damaged the premises and otherwise breached the Lease by failing to surrender the leased premises in substantially the same condition in which they were leased to Defendants, in that the premises were damaged as follows: a) In the kitchen the wall paper and flooring were damaged; b) In the dining room the ceiling tile, and flooring were damaged; c) In the living room the walls, ceiling tile, carpeting and trim around the baseboard door and window were damaged; d) In the bathroom the tub, the faucets and exhaust fan were damaged; e) In the stairs and hallway the walls and ceiling and carpeting were damaged; 2 "'~,.,."o_, .. f) In the walk-in closet the electrical wiring was incomplete and the walls, carpeting, baseboard door and window trim were damaged; g) In Bedroom No. I the walls and ceiling were damaged; h) In Bedroom NO.2 the walls, tile ceiling, carpeting and door and window trim were damaged; and i) In the third floor bedroom the paneling from the end wall, walls, ceiling, stairway and carpeting were damaged. 13. The fair and reasonable cost of repairing and replacing the broken and missing items described above is $26,439.00 as shown more particularly by the estimate attached hereto as Exhibit "C". 14, In addition, the Defendants left the exterior of the premises in a run-down, dirty and damaged conditiort as follows; a) In the garage, the Defendants left 23 five gallon buckets of oil, a 55 gallon drum of oil and a 35 gallon drum of oil; b) In the yard, the Defendants left a large pile of sand in the yard, further damaging it; c) In the garage and yard the Defendants left large quantities of trash; d) Throughout the exterior of the property Defendants left large quantities of uncut grass over fifteen inches in height. 15. The fair and reasonable cost of removing the trash and sand and oil, and cutting the 3 'N'JI,...""""""I -.' grass is $2610.00. 16. Defendants vacated the premises leaving $1753.53 in unpaid sewer and trash bills which they were required to pay under Section A4 of said Lease. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants as follows; (1) In the amount of $6420.00 for back rent and late fees; (2) In the amount of $29,049.00 for repairs and clean-up of the premises; (3) In the amount of$1753.53 for sewer and trash bills; and (4) In the amount of $321.00 for attorney's fees. August 1,2000 ~~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South St. Harrisburg, P A 171 0 1 (717) 234-9321 -~~""":"\"!r, ' ~: ~ Vt =. ~ ~) . ;" i",*, "-~,___";,, '",.t~,_,:"-,,, ^ jJ o ~ . t~ Malle this thirteenth IBthucttt !\lfltJJtUtIUf ~ day o( June HOWARD P. STEAGER and IDA L. STEAGER, his wife .1. D. l!f)O hereinafter caller! Le.<;,\'or, an.d ROBERT H.. CORNMAN and SANDRA K.CORNMAN his wife her"i,,"(ter called Le.'.,e", ~ifltCl'li!:r.t~b, That the s.aid Le.,.vor, in eon.,iderolio~, a( the rents and couenant.. h"r"inalter 7nentioned (loes hereby Tcrl.t, dcmtse anc[ lca$c u.n.to the !wul Lc.<;!wc, to be u.'Mtl for Lhr~ PlU':O.9C o( residential dwelling the premises .,ituated in the ' County o( Cumberland I~""'T ,"I ',~ deNeribed 0" (allow...- ~ , I[ 'I <!.. 'tU ~ \, A and C01nlnOll"wealth of Penn....ylrJania, ~ ~~ ~ 1 iJ.. ~&\'1Jt &\n~ 1.. li..l.b unto the ..aid ment, for the term of 'hne year the 1 st day of July the 30th day of June Le.<rsee, .'ul.-bjcct to the c01l.diLiOlt.t 01 th-i.t atrce- com.mcn,cint on 4. D. 1990 , and emiint on 4. D, 19 91 ~al C!fGlulii.btJ:&lti..u ~H~trt41f the said' LessPoe agree.. to pay to the sa,,; Les.w, (or the u.e o( the .aid premise., the ,.U'11. o( $450.00 per month Dollar.., payabl,' a. (allows, viz: ( Rent in the amount of $450.00 per month is due the first day of the month. A grace neriod of five (5) days is given. If payment is not received. a $5.00 per dav penalt~ will be ~ anplied beginning on the 6th day7 J" ~t.lb the saul Le.tsee also agrt~r.x to keep the said preTni"H!S in as daod r(!fJair and cO!I.ditio", ct.' at prcsent an.d at the expiration of tlt.i.~ lca.~c, or any relt.cwal (11 it, to .'lurrcncler u.jJ .,a.m,(j ilt like rr.pair and condition., natural wear and dam.age by the c-lcn,.ent.~ excepted; to pCTTnit no u,nlawlul busine.,... ;,efMlfl1?A.-f:f~'"t;!.!lJl!4sl!..J.~:;;,~~{!!!]t~4~~gJJ! l?!~/!'-~#::~~"Tof~+jli'#i&IJ.~p::l!NJ~!J1JJLf!.~i!j;l" ,t~ bc'''dohe whic 11. i.t ,contrary. t~_ the conditicJll.$ a/the fJ()lii:[r..<r 0/ in.<rluanC!p. now on the .<raid pram.i.<re.o: or 'l)h.ich lnai/-be placed: 'tJi:ercon durint the tgnn of /.his lea.'lc or alLY renmoul thereof. whereby the hazard 7night be increa.<led or the In..<furunce ill.lJalida.ted; fLat to u.ll.d,~rkt the ..wid pr,unbrr..<l, nor a.uign. thi.'lleau: or any intcrc...t therein to any person or IMrson..<r.. and "'o/. to rrl1WlU~ froul. l he' Raid prem.i.'w.'r clu.rin~ the teT1n .Qf thi.'l lease or a~J,Y rell.r.UJul tltereuf. 21 ;i.::; JU,:r:ebl! ~\B1.":r.dl [",tllleen the /lMtie.. to the..e pre..ents, that in ca..e the building or bu.ilding.. e~ected on Lhe ",rmi..".. herdlY /"u..ed shull be partially dam.aged by flre. the ..ame shall be rf~pai,,~cJ, as .<rpr.r.clily (J.N IJo.-r,..ibt,... at. I.he. (',xpt'n!\'c of the ...aill LC....VOfi that in Ca.'~C the dalna~e .fhoU be 30 ezte/It.iue a.v to T1uuler t}u~ bJl.iJclin~ u U.tf~fl.ClntalJlr, the rent .../tall cca,o;i:: until such til/l.C as the buildi7l.J! skall be pitt in. c()m.plt~t,~ repair. fIlii. in ca.o;(! (If tlta total de.o;tru,cUon of the prem-i..~e.~ byfirc or otherwise, the rent :thall bt! /laid up tu 1Iu:, liuw of su-ch clc::tru{.tion. and then and from thenceforth thi... lca:w shall cea.'u~ an(i com,r,. Lv (In enel. pruuitlc(l. howeller, that llUC!t dam.a~e and dcstru.ction, be not cau.3cci by tlte carele.<r.o;ne.~.o;. 1tr.~lidr.nccf or improper con,du,ct of tlte Lc,~,"ce, hi.o; agcw.t.., or scruall.ts. The ..:aid Le.-rsee a~rc~e." to ker.p the !mid prem..i...e..; in. a clean and ..,a7J.itary condition., and to remove all at,)u!!; or othor garba~e whic/!. Inay accu Inuiate upon, (.he .'alne du.rin~ the ,'laid term, or Gll,Y ,renewal thereof, or (aili"g theFti" to pay to the ..aid Le..soJ.' double the cO..t 0'( remouind the same to be recov- . __ ,. .. I creel the .talne a.~ rent due and ill, arrl!ar.'t; to pcn .it the .o;aid Lea.tor to display a 14{07 rent" 07 a "f07 saleH card "pon the .'(aiel prl!n~.i...e..', and to enter the said prcTni.'les at any ti,n.e for the pu,rpo8c 01 maki,,~ nr.e"..,.ary r~pair.., or ..hOWi"~:::'::-'~;'f~~ ;r~~eetiue pu.rehaser. or le...ee.. -2- "~r~!'''I--<,.',. -.~-" ~ .l\. \\ h :it t!\ .fnrHH.r ~~:lrt ~b tliat ..halild the L...",ee remove or attempt to remove fro1J> the .~iii,i prPlnit>p..'l du.rin,g tJ~'r. tr..rm.. of thi... [Ml.',r, or an.y rell.(~wal thereof. or .<:houltl the !wid Lessee break or ~/'adr.. or "ltr.mpt to brrllk or ella(ll~. any 01 the covell,ant." or re.\.triction.'i'set forth in this lcase, t/u'n th" "/LIi" rent for th" f/lll term uf thi.. lea..". ..hall become dl<e and payable at once al.d may / forthwilh be> colleclrt! by tli."trr..-:.'i or oth.l'.rwi.<:e.. ~1nd any good.... TClnoved {roln said prelnises either I"fore or /1ft", till' r.J:./liratiul. uf tlw ,.aid term, while any portion of the said rent remaiM unpaid, wheth", dltr. or not, .,hall rr./lwin liabl. to di.,tre.,.. for sl.ch rent for the period of thirty days after ? .~lLch TfwLv"al. tlu. ,'lcz,nr., a,... thuugh l.l~(!y rnrwi/l,p.rl on the premi.o;tu;; al~d a.n,y rClnoval o{ the toads INun tlUt .'laid p~-,ni.f~...'a't a-;,.y lim.f'., e.ithe.r by clay or 1l.igJtL, without tlte written, con.sent 01 the said .. I,r..,..or ..hall br. ",,,,sidered a clawlr..'lilw a,ul fraudltlent removal. And if default shall be made in the /1CJyltum.t of un!! part of the .'lClicl rent lor jive clay.... alter the .'ialne becomes due, or if the said Lessee ~ shall brnak or f!l1ade, or att.cj1npt to break or Iwacle, any 0/ the covenants or restrictions set forth in ~ thill lea"H~, t-/l(~ IA'..o;.'.;or 111,.ay forfeit all.tl annul the ll.nexpirecl portion of this lease, or any renewal thereof, all.d enter upon an.d rep(J.'l...r."~s the .<laid pTtnni.'ics withotLt proce.'i,r; allaw and without any notice wll,at.'locwr.r. .~ n,(l i it.:. if!! rilur ~~~-t"t,~h that the acceptance b~ the ..aid Lessor of any of the said rent at any time after the '~"'e ..hall b.co,ne due, or defaltlt ha.. been made in. the payment thereof or any failure of the ..aill L....wr to .,.furee any of the right.. gained under this lease ora'~y of the penalties, forfeitll..rc.'l or condition.'l hr.rr.in containml, ...hall not in any wise be considered as a waiver of the ridht to enforce the ..ame ami that .."eh right or forfeiture may be enforced. without any notice whatsoever; and that anll atte"'pt to collect the rent by one proceeding shall,wt be eon.sidered as a waiver of the ril!ht of the ,wid Le...'ur to collect the .'ame by al~y other proceeding. I The .~aid Lc....<;ee hereby waiue.ll the u.'w,al three lnonth.r; notice to qll,it and agrees to .'iurrender the .taill pre,ni..:c... at thr. r.xptratiun o[ the ...aid ter1n, or the tcnnination 01 this lea:w or any renewal thereof, without any I.otiee whatever, and al,w waive., the benefit of all appraiseme,.t, stay a,.d exemption laws, the ri~ht 0/ inquisition, Q!~ real e.'itate and all bankrupt. or in!iOluent law... now in, force ur which may hereafter be pa.'''''ed, upon un..y proceeding in,stituted lor the recovery 01 the said rent, either by di.'itre.u or otherwi.'ic. ,.,.".lLd,~ll1,(~M:;.}y~#.p.~.(1!!M#~ in.,t!t",paym,~.!~,~:..QIJ~;nycr.&.l1it'"#J"e'Ul'e ..iLlne shall become due, or it the ',.,""""~'\.taiii..'i'~s.fee .'iluiII fie .floZ,l o'u~t at .~l~';rr/t;.~ or con..fltable'... .tale 0"1" permit Ull..Y iudt,nent to be -ell,tered o,gain.'it hiln, or make any assignment for the ben..eftt 01 creditors I or commit any act of bankruptcy whatever, then the rent lor the balance of the term..... ...hall at once become du..e and payable, as if by the teTTn... of the lea:~e it were all payable in adrlance. Gnd1nay be collected by di.ttres.<: or otherwise. a/~d ",hall be paid in, full out of the proceed.'i of any ...ueh (l.<:.lli6n,lnent, "ale or bankruptcy proceedings, any law, u...age or Cu-...toln to the .contrary notwith.fltan,cling. ;!> . The said Lessee hereby confesses judl!rnent in favo,r'of the said Lessor for the whole amount of the rent at any time rem.aill.'in~ unpaid, whether the saIne shall haoe been due or not, waivint stay of 6xccu,tion, inquisition and all e:.elnptio11, laws now in force or whic}l,'lna.lj hereafter be passed, and authorizes the addin!! of flve per een. ttomey's commission for collection; and further docs hereby upon, the breach.. of any of t l,e c01l.ditl.O l.S of this ease, au,t ori::..e. any attorney of any Cou"rt of Record to appear for him and enter on amicable action of ejectment and confess a judgment of ejectment there.in for the prclniscs herein described and does authorize- the immediate issuint of a writ of possession 011.4 ,>:eeutial. for costs without asking teave of the 'Court. .' ,,/ ~~.b ~~ i$\ f~l.,.tllc>r il.slr~cb tha~ if, the said Lesse: (U;ith the consent of the Lessor) shali\., 1 ~~'J,tl.nu.e l.1z. pOSSCSSl.011. 0/ the SDl.d prCTYUses after the upl.ratl..oll.. 0/ the said term", or an.y rCll.cwal \ , thereof, t!~e1J- this atreernent shall become immediateLl/ operative for another like term and the \ Lessor shall. have t~.e rilfht to en(aree al.y a( the eOl1.ditians or forfeitures of this agreement,i,~elu,dinC" '\ the conles.non of juclgm.ent, Wtth. the wawcrs, ctc., as if a new agreelnC!tt, ~dtJll.tical with. this had ' been. executed b~ ~he said parties for the suceeedi,.g term or terms, with the proviso that in case any part.r.u.Lar eand.tLO,loS arc set forth in this lease to take effect upon a renewaL thereof, then should there be any such renewal as above provided for, the said particular conditions shall take. eifeet l<pan ~ueh renewal, but they shall apply to al.ly ..ueh parts of this lease as it is ,.tated herein that they arc t.n.tendcd to superscdc~ and ."hall in. n.o way affect any of thc reil~aining parts of this lease. -3- '-~'I_" ,", - . ""'" ~'\lb i! i. furU~tll: "srtt,b that the following conditiO"M,for/eiture., , covenants cmd restric- tions are a part of this agreement, and that each and aU 01 them ore bindinl! upon the partiM hereto: r 1, That Schedule "A" attaebed bereto and marked "nules and C. Lessee shall have complied with aUtbe terms, covenanls '-iegulations" sha1I extend to and bind the parties bereto, their and conditions of this lease, in which event the deposit so paid heirs, administrators and executors. . hereunder shall be returned to Lessee; otherwise, said .urn Jl. Either party hereto may lerminate this leasc al the end ofsaid deposited hereunder or any part thereof may be retained by term by giving to the other party writlen IlOtiec thereof of at Lessor, at its option, as liquidated damages or may be applied by least thirty days prior thereto; but in default of such notice, this Lessor, al ils option, as liquidaled damages or may be applied by lease sha1I continue under the same provisions and conditions in Lessor againsl any actual loss, damage or injury ehargeabte to tee lmm nor 0 ex In\tion 0 I term creaf for Lessee hereunder or othel'Wise, if Lessor determines such loss, t e cr i 0 ear an sa on eve ear, un ass or damage or injury exeecd5 said rom deposited. Lessor's deler. lin I erminaled by either party hereto g:vmg ~le olIier tbirty mination of the amount, if any, be returned to Lllssce shall be days written notice lhereo[ previous to espiratioa o[ tile then final.ltisunderstoodthatthesaiddepositisnottobeconsidered current. term. as tile last rental due under this lease. 3. shall, upon execution hereof, deposit wilh Less .as 4. It.is also understood and agreed that in the event the tenant is s,:,,~ty o. rformancc of all the terms, covena n~ co~ transferred bj' the Covernment, away from ,this vicinily, tI,is dltJons of thIS I , e, tum of , pt of which IS lease will he declared nuU and void provided the tenanl presents h~ aekn?wl~ged.. SIt sl ,e retamed by Lessor not less than thirty (30) days notice in writing of his intention to untt! the ex\?"allon of th., Ie., let: sl",1I he rctntnable to va""te premises plus a certified copy o[ he< trn'L<fer orders. Lessee provIded tbat: . ~ A. Pre' avc been vacated;'" ..... 5. Lessce agrees to cover. minimum o[ .t least 75 % of all noors B. r shall have In.<pected the premises after such'Vaca. in the apartment with carpeting for the purp05C of kceping noise . ; to a minimum for otbcr tenants witbin the building. The wordlf It Lessorll antl 'f Lessee" a... herein. used afl.d person.al pro,,,ouns Tffle-rrin't thereto, ...hall inclu.de th~ ,singular as well a." the plfl.ral1l.u,nl,.ber, th.e m.a.le, neu.ter and fem,cle dcndcrs, an.d shall ,,:',-,,1;: .s"J1R&(lf.~~~:2l!-Q~'1l~&lJl'l11il!!J~'tf;~;,fflf:,lJ2~;<;;;f?~~~%f)f{~~:~~~~o'fS-~~,~t~~~~,~~{,;_~~~c Jer1ns, c9~c~ants and co~~~itio n:; of th.. lease .h.iill ate,id to alia lie 'IJmtldlf'?tpon."'ffle he"." executors, admt1l.tStrators, a~'J~1'" a..d succe.sors 01 the Les,<or and Lessee, .'al,e that 1:0 rights shall e"'''e to the benef<t 01 any assignee 01 Lessee u.nle.~s the an.~ignm,ent ofleo!;c lta.Ii) prct;oluly been. approved in writ.in~ by Lessor. ~n 2-11:ih.~l!."~"$' ~llibtt'::!.'l(:''.pf? the portics aforesaid have hercu.nto set their hands and ~ . seals 0'. the day and. year first allolle lOTttten. ~lt tilt l1U!H'IUt of J{at.- AJJ' /~/ ~-?~~./ -Lt.> CORNMAN SANDRA K. CORNMAN SEE ADDITIONAL TERMS AS SET FORTH ON ATTACHED PAGES -ll._ '" - ----I', , ",'" Jale H. Steager RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" It is understoo:d and agreed to by and between the Lessor and Lessee that a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer arelnat nrovided by Lessor and that no such appliances are contemplated by this lease or any amendment thereof. In the event a clothes washer and/or a clothes dryer are located on the premises, it may be used by Lessee only under the following conditions hereby agreed to by Lessee: a. Lessor may replace, remove or modify any or all of the aforementioned appliances at any time without prior notice to the Lessee: b, Lessor is not responsible for any maintenance or repairs whatsoever at any time: c. Lessor is not responsible for any of Lessee's property contained within or without the above mentioned appliances: and d. Lessor is not responsible for any damage caused to any area of the house resulting from the use of the above mentioned appliance by Lessee. 2. Any notices from a financial institution that a check "~?~i~~t~~i6~1~i;~g~c.z;:~:~i. t~i~~i~g_ signature, or any such item that will make the issued check uncollectable. the issuer of such instrument will be assessed a non-refundable fee of $20.00 per occurrence. A CERTIFIED replacement check and the appropriate fee must be delivered to Dale Steager within five (5) days of such occurrence to avoid incurring legal fees. ~. The placement and use by Lessee of any equipment on the roperty (kiddie pool, jungle gym. play pens or articles of a like nature) shall be at Lessee's own risk and responsibility. No risk or liability of any nature what- soever is assumed by the Lessor. 0 v"''''' u..l4-bo J..... ( . . 1l1:>1Is<.. r}fhO".rl" 4. Lessee w~ll pay water, sewage and trash serv~ce feed, gas, elect,rical service, telephone service and television cable. if applicable. Lawn care and snow removal will be the resnonsibility of the Lessee. Upon Lessee's failure to pay the costs of the same, Lessor may collect thr. amo~ts due as rent due in arrears and remit the same tOFhe providers of these services. , 1. ,.~w~ "I,'~ DALE H. STEAGER 4978 SR8's BRIDGE HO HEcHANICSBURG, PA J7055 -e. 7. Dale H. Steager RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) 5. Lessee must advise Lessor of the telephone numbers of both the house and the business phone number where he/she works. Private. unlisted or any other telephone number will not be excluded from this request. These phone numbers will only be used by the Lessor or his representative for official business or emergency purposes. Me dega. catsbI ~cts af any k~,~~ll be permitted_ Lessor will notify Pennsylvania Power and Light Company when Lessee signs lease and transfer the electric service to his name. Lessee is responsible for contacting Pennsylvania Power and Light Company upon termination of the lease. Lessee shall not park or store or suffer to permit to be parked or stored in any parking areas, any truck, trailer or disabled vehicle. 8. 9. 10. No mechanical, electrical, plumbing. or structural ,,' " ",<,",')",>;,;,;A; ,;,;;,\i,!1I~~A;l;"i&:r;;;;;C9.l'l;f}i!il'!:llil~$1J1L,,'')I!l";~Y~;''1'>ait't;;'of the premise s may'be altered. modified or removed without the express written consent of the Lessor. unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. All costs arising our of repair or renlacement to any unauthorized removals or changes shall be at the expense of the Lessee. "'M''''~ 11. {j 13. 1.4. Lessor, at its option. upon notice to Lessee and at Lessee's expense, may either require the disconnection and/or removal of, or disconnect and remove, any interior or exterior electrical appliances, apparatus, equipment, antennas or material installed or connected by Lessee ,in or about the building. Running exposed wires or fixtures in violation of electrical code is prohibited. Notice of defects in water or electrical wirinF- shall be reported immediately to the Lessor by the Lessee, in writing, unless it is deemed an absolute emergency. Lessee shall not use or operate any machinery, equipment or appliances that. in the Lessor's opinion,. are unsafe, harmful to the building or disturbing to other Lessees occupying other parts thereof. The toilets, bathtubs, and sinks shall not be used for any purpose other than for which they were constructed, and n~ sweepings, rubbish, rags. paper. disposable diapers, sanitary napkins. .ashes, or other substances shall be thrown therein. Any damage resulting fro~ misuse thereof shall be borne by the Lessee by whom or upon whose premises it shall have been caused. .t _ O~ _ I I 15. (t) ((3 'Y""1"8" . ~ ru ! 20. /@ 22. e ~ "1 Dale H. Steager RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) Locks may not be changed or added without the prior written consent of the Lessor. Lessor must be provided with a key. If not, it is understood that in the case of an emergency any damage done to the door. frame, etc. upon entran~e to the premises, will be at Lessee's expense. Locks or cha~ns added must be left in place when Lessee vacates. All keys must be returned to the Lessor, both provided by the Lessor and those made at the Lessees expense, upon vacating the premises, or Lessee will forfeit said security deposit in full. ,Nbspikes or hooks shall be driven into the walls and/or woodwork. Small nails may be used for the purpose of hanging pictures unless other devices are recommended by Lessor. Fixtures used for hanging draperies or curtains are permitted. Painting of any area of the house by individuals other than one designated by the Lessor is prohibited. No colors other than those put on by the Lessor is permitted. Walls and ceilings which are altered by paint or other substances will be restored to the original color. The Lessee will be charged for paint and labor to restore same. tlf'Ei;'ElEf~"~Hii:llnotpIa&ea:i'itwetghts'''!n'any portion of the premises beyond the safe carrying capacity of the structure. If a waterbed is us~d, insurance for such is required and a copy of such insurance shall be provided the Lessor. Lessee shall keep the premises in a good state of preservation and cleanliness. Any maintenance calls are to be called in between 5:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., Monday - Friday and weekends, 737-1812. Only in extreme emergency is Reta Steager, 7)1-2))0, to be contacted Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 4:15' p.m; No heat, broken pipes are emergency. Lessee understands that if they contact any companies withour authorization from Steagers for maintenance purposes, they are responsible for said bill. No noise or loud parties will be tolerated that is disturbing to the neighborhood. Premises are to be left in liveable status when terminating lease. Severe damages will be responsibility of l~ssee to correct or reimburse Lessor for corrected dama~es in full. LIVEABLE STATUS DEFINED AS: Cleaning of stove/oven, frig, cabinets, tub/shower. toilet and sink; all else in broom swept condition. ~,- , -;:"ij;~ r;!;,,;~:;,i>,,;/ Da.le if. stea.ger RULES AND REGULATIONS SCHEDULE "A" (CONT) 24. Lessor reserves the righ~ to inspect premises with one (1) day notice to Lessee. 25. Lessor reserves the right to update the clauses of this contract and Lessee will be notified of any changes. DATE. June 1~, 1990 DALE H. STEAGER 49111 ERD'S BRIDGE RD. MECHANICSBURG, PA 110Sfl ( ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~_/ ROBERT H. CORNMAN )~7f.' ~ SANDRA K. CORNMAN LESSEE(S) :~ HOWARD P & IDA L STEAGER 411 RENO AVENUE NEW C~ PENNSYLVANIA 17070 PHONE: (717 774-4623) October 14, 1998 Mr. and Mrs.Robert H. Cornman 416 Reno Avenue New Cumberland PA 17070 Subj: Arrears of monthly rental payments for property located at 416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cornman: Due to the fact that as of October I, 1998, you are three (3) months in arrears for rental of the property located at 416 Reno Avenue: $500.00per month for three (3) months for a total arrear in tbe amount of $1,500.00, you are hereby advised that if the total amount ($1,500.00) is not paid to HowardP or Ida L Sleager by November I, 1998, evictionproceedin,g5 will be initiated. In addition, you are,h~reby advised that as of December 1, 1998, the rental amou11l wiil be increased to $650.00 per l110lIth payable on the first d;Iy of each month. A new lease will be available for sjgnature November 1, 1998. Please advise of your intentions to either enter into tbe new lease or to vacate prior to that time. Sincerely, ." ~?(~ Howard P. Steager !'I4t/nY fL~$~J# H. Glenn Steager j~Stel.J~ IA' L f6, '", /7~/.)" .' "1,O:~ Marlin D. Steager . CM~g~~ , DaeH.S -' ~~t~(e/ I-'~-"I -"'-"-"' 04/01/1995 10:12 717-240-0924-7 STEAGERS COUNTRY OUT .... , Ark Contracting Services P.D. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 717-728-3222 NAME I AODRE$S Ida Steager 409 Geary Rd. N"", Climber/and Po J 7070 REP C PAGE 01 Estimate 6/ 1 ~,1~Q eSTI'f" TE . P.O. NO. TERMS 10% 40% JO% DESCR/PTION For Properly at 41J R,no Sf. New C"",berland KlTCHEN/I)/NING RM. I. Slrlp wallpaper in kI/chen, r"move flooring ill both rooms, mnov" ceiling tile ill dining rm. 2. Sam coot walls in kilchen, installlaUlln floor oN! vinyl floor ill both rooms, paint walls I" leitch"" with one coat a/flat and on" olsemi-gloss, install "eew 2'>:2' ceiling tile in dining rm. LIVING ROOM. J. Re1IIove plaster and klthe from walls and remove tile from ceiling, 2. IlJ$tQlI onJjinish drywall all Walls and paint with 2 coats offlat paint. ills/all new J2"xJ2" ceiling tile, carpet a/fd pad, bQ8ebaord door o/fd window trim. BATHROOM I, Remove tub, faucets, WIlllpoper, vanity/top /auce'" and exhallJ/lan. Z. llJ$tailnllW tub/slm'OImd and faucets, vanity //oP and/auce/s, skim coot walls alld paint with one CQQt olflat a/fd One a/semi-gloss alld install new ex!Iall8t!an and villylflacr STAIRs AND HAU 1. Patch walls and cemltgS aslleeded andpaint with 2 coats a/flat paint. illStall new carpel and pad WALK IN CLOSET /. Finish electrical wlrillg, pointwaJJs with two coats offlat paint, install alld paint haseboard door and window ,rim and Install carpet and padding BEDROOMII' J. Paint with 2 CQQ/s a/flat poilll 6EDROQM #2 J. Remove plQ8ter /ro", walls and tile from ceiling 2.lIJ$toll andf/nislt d~1l on walls andpaint with two coors offlat paint, Install.l2"xI2" ceiling tile, carpel and pad alld bQle~oo,d, door and willdow trt", JRD FLOOR BEDROOM J.Remove panelingfrom .nd wall, patch walls and C.fling as needed. painl walls and ceilings with 2 coalS off/al paint, Install railing around $fairway, aIId install carpet on floor and steps. Clerm lip and permlls will be prOvided by contractor Allowances Vi/fyJ floor UJ.OO per yd ilJ$tolled, Carpet/pad $20.00 per yd Installed Owner & Co-OWn".s Slgnoture Page' TOTAL PROJECT TorAL 4,7J/.00 6,2$4.00 4,186.00 1,609.00 1,02200 497.00 4.340.00 J,780,00 <:C.'(<U ~Q I+q C 1\ ,'~ "'1 ' ,.' " ,-, .<, '"'"1 04/01/1995 10:12 717-240-0924-7 STEAGERS COUNTRY OUT Ark Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 717-728-3222 NAME I ADDRESS Estimate 6IJ~A~ I I Ida SIeager .I. 0 NO TERMS 409 Geary Rd. '!'... 10% 40% 50% NewCum/)frlandPal7070 ' DES~IPTION The following is an outline of condition of quotall n we propO$e on the referenced project, All material is guaranteed as specified. We reserole, the right to determine the source of ail labor emd materials r/atiVII to emy work that we preform unde~ Ihe quolation . If this quotalion Is accepted, the work covered by same will be performed upon accC!b,ance of this proposal and as wealher conditions cmd our work schedule permlth. Due to the incon.lltenc/es of weather and other COndit/OIlS, cracks may occur and these conditio1lS are considered acceptable iIt Ihe concnte business. All work will be completed in a wor/cman liltt manner according to ~tandard practices. Any alteralions or deviations form llbcve, proj>Q.allnvolving extra cost eill be elecwed only upon written order change, and will become and exl/'Q charge over and above Ihe con~c/., This proposal may be withdrawn by I/J if nol accepted within 30 days ofpropoaal dale. : Paymenl schedule is asfollows. 10% deposit dowk al signing of proposal, 40% a/s/art ofpojeet, and then folluwed with a 50% final paymenl. This /nay vary due 10 project sbee, Refer to (Ierms; listed above for your parllcular project. Amoninalfee will be deductedform deposit /fproject i. canceled by customer for any reason after signing of contract, frhe fee will cover cost for estimate.!, drawings, layout., and scheduling changes. II charge of J 1/1% per month will be charged on any balance post 30 days due beginning with the completion date of project. We wish to thank)IQufor the opportunity of submitting a proposal cmd hope to be of service t"IYou. , REP C , ! i ': ! .1 Owner If Co~'s SlgnQtllre Peg. 2 TOTAL $16,439.UU J , " " PAGE 02 ESTlMA TE .., 7 PROJECT TOTAL VERIFICATION I, Ida Steager, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Civil Complaint are true and correct to the best of my infonnation, knowledge and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. AugustJ,2000 ,1.6, ;f ~ '''"' "1 ,,< -. *I <,.~. '0"'" ,~ ,^ "'"'~"~~"'~"l---~I!!I~'C"'~ , ? '?::> tt"- .....') -...::. (j..) \)J 00 (i l' ':\:t::. 0\ .!: (;' VJ ~ - -C' ,Vi o ~B g d C -0 -<::> ';l.SL C/J.:p ~--T (-, ~ ~~" ,- . :::... ".J ~.j (., CA ~') , :":'_" ~cJ -< >....~~ ~l"ll!i,^",P"_n ,~ f~~r::::;Ji.".,~~"""_Mjl);".l]lflWi!j'--IIIlm'~'wr,*>1l~,e!'l;",~",.:,,,,,*"-i"'r-;',",'''''')''''':';''-1'!'~~_fl~lf;ii~N;i%~i!!J~~ Q11 VI :r- HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, PLAINTIFFS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, DEFENDANTS : 00-5362 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 20th day of June, 2001, IT IS ORDERED THAT the within case IS CONTINUED. Both sides shall file a brief in chambers not later than fifteen (15) days from this date on defendants' motion for summary judgment. At the time of the filing of briefs both counsel shall indicate whether they wish to have oral argument. If oral argument is requested it will be scheduled forthwith in chambers. By the time of the filing of the brief any depositions sought by either party s Edgar B. Bayley, . ;> Peter B. Foster, Esquire For Plaintiffs Arthur K. Dils, Esquire For Defendants Court Administrator :saa . I ,Y ~-- -, - ',~( - - -- . -. < '< " , ~~l!I~~~U' ~ ,~,-c""'iiRmli>~~",*".:,;k""~<}~,_"i!l.*;'8j'I~I~liIii:illit'".....""",o,illiC1''V''''''li/'iIIil_t>: ! J' r1~ ,~. <" FLEG.-O~TjCE OF Tl-1:: r'~~c:T~!.~J!'-,t)1i\RY Oi JUN20 MiiO:b8 CUM8i:=r:iLA\:D COUNTY PENNSYUI.ANIA ) C_",,'" " ~ 07/031.01 Tl.'E 09:56 FAX 717 240 6573 CUMB CO PROTHO~OTARY !4J002 PRAECIPE FOR LISTI~G CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and $utmitted in duplicate) TO 'mE PROl'IlOl'OTARY' OF CUMBERI.J\NO COUNTy Please list the following case: (Check one) for JURY trial at the next teITl1 of civil cow:t. x for trial without a jury. --------------~--------------------~----- Cl\PTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, (check one) (XX) Civil Action - Law Appeal from Arbitration (other) ( Plaintiff) vs. ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, The trial list wi.l.l be called on 8/14/01 and Trials corrrnence on 9/ 1 0/0 1 ( Defendimt) Pretrials will be held on 8/22/01 (Briefs are due 5 days before pretrials. ) VS. (The party listing this case for trial shall provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local ~e 214.1.) No. 2000 Civil 5362 19 Indicate the atto:mey who will try case for the party who files this pr....cipe: Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South St., Harrisburg, PA 17101 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Arthur K. Oils, Esquire, 1017 North Front St., Harrisburg, PA 17102 This case i$ ready for trial. Signed. ~~,~ P . t M__ Peter B. Foster r1n .t.'Cl.IIII;; Date: July 3, 2001 Atto:mey for: Plaintiffs '".. ~I " "-., \, lIB --"""""""',.,..."..,~ o C ?" rBP:' <":. -,-- ~_f~''- f.~'~.:-; < ...G' ~~, w~'" ^ ". "" r:: s, ~'i:J -', ~_~~..,~~IIiI!lI~~:lr~lli\I.Wi-f;j;'i~'!:8I,~~lI!liIDij~~m~~__~_')1II ~~~~ ^ ~"^".-.>~ . HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS, HAROLD AND IDA STEAGER, IN ACCORDANCE WITII LOCAL RULE OF COURT 212-4 1. Plaintiffs, as landlords, seek damages for the damaged condition of the premises at 415 Reno Street, New Cumberland, left by the Defendants, as tenants, when they vacated the premises on May 8, 2000. Plaintiffs contend that this property was in "good repair and good condition" under the terms of the relevant leases when rented to the Defendants on November 30, 1983. Plaintiffs further claim that the premises were not in "good repair and good condition" under the terms of the leases when the Defendants vacated the premises on May 8, 2000. Consequently, Defendants are liable for the cost of repair to the premises to put it in "liveable condition" following the Defendants' removal. The cost of repair and clean-up of the premises is $29,049.00, Plaintiffs also seek damages of $6420.00 for unpaid rent and late fees, $1753.53 for unpaid sewer and trash bills and $34.00 for attorney's fees. 2. Plaintiffs seek damages for the cost of repair to put the premises in "good and liveable condition" to correct the damaged condition of the property left by the Defendants. Contractors, as expert witnesses, will be called to testifY as to this cost of repair. Also, an expert -"";''l'~-~'''-'-1 - , , - ~ ~~- appraisal witness will be called to establish the difference in the Fair Market Value between the damaged property and the property when in "liveable" condition. The cost to repair and clean up the premises is $29,049.00. Plaintiffs also seek damages of$1200.00 for furnishings removed from the premises. Plaintiffs further seek damages of of$6420.00 for unpaid rent and late fees, $1753.53 for unpaid sewer and trash bills and $34.00 for attorney's fees. 3. The principal issue is the condition of the property at the time of rental on November 30, 1983 versus its condition at the time of removal by the Defendants. A related issue are the opinions of the Plaintiffs' expert witnesses as to the cost of repair and the difference in the Fair Market Value of the property due to its damaged condition. 4. A legal issue to be considered by the Court is the admissibility ofthe evidence by the Defendants as to the "improvements" to the property made by the Defendants during their occupancy. Plaintiffs contend that this evidence is inadmissible as being irrelevant because this testimony involves improvements or additions to the premises and not repairs to the premises. See Webb v. Fuller Brush Co... 378 F. 2d 500 (3rd Cir., PA.) (1967) A second legal issue is the admissibility of Plaintiffs' expert appraiser's opinion testimony regarding the difference in Fair Market Value of the premises due to its damaged condition. Plaintiffs argue that this testimony is admissible because it is relevant to show damages. See Dawson v. Pittsburgh, 159 Pa. 317 (1894) 4. Plaintiffs intend to call the following witnesses at trial; LAY WITNESSES: Howard Steager Ida Steager Kevin Steager 2 .'-"--~I -, !~ Dale Steager Glenn Steager Peter Zweig Dolly Zweig Broce Parthemore Eileen Bink Ruth Hartman EXPERT WITNESSES Mark Heckman Bob Bolash James E. Novesal Robert Yordy 6. a) Videotape of the condition of the premises at the 416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, P A, following the Defendants removing themselves from the premises. b) Photographs of the condition of the premises at 416 Reno Ave., New Cumberland, P A, following the Defendants removing themselves from the premises. c) Sewer and trash bills for the premises which Defendants failed to pay. d) Estimates as to costs of the clean-up of the premises by the Steager family. 7. There have been no settlement negotiations between the parties. Respectfully submitted: June 19,2001 ~~~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 234-9321 3 - ".",.,. ,~I ~ -. ""l~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, June 19,2001, I served a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Pretrial Memorandum on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, P A. to the attorney for the Appellees at the following address: Arthur K. Di1s, Esquire Dils and Rupich 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 171 0 1 August 21,2000 ~~l~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs "'~_I'a--,. "~-1~~~"""" ...~ - HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CNIL ACTION - LAW Defendants PRE-TRIAL MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS, ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL RULE OF COURT 212-4 1. Local Rule of Court 212-4 requires the Plaintiffs give a statement of the basic facts as to liability. The Plaintiffs' contend that the Defendants damaged the rental premises. The Defendants, through their pleadings, indicate that they only made improvements to the rental premises, and were in the process of continuing to make improvements and that they did not damage the rental premises. 2. Rule 212-4 requires a statement as the basic facts as to damages: the Defendants contend that they did not damage the premises. The Defendants' evidence will show that the premises were in a very marginal state at the time they obtained occupancy seventeen or eighteen years ago, and that over the period of tenancy, they continued to improve the premises, and indeed expended over $30,000.00 for materials, which were ~'7%1Y,~ , ." ~ , ',- '_I.. ,'"', ,',~ installed in the premises. This matter has previously been heard before your Honorable Court and the Honorable Superior Court of the Middle District of Pennsylvania upheld your Honorable Court's decision that damages should be awarded the Defendants from the Plaintiffs; notwithstanding, the Plaintiffs have filed a Petition of Allocatur to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Allocatur has not been allowed at this point. 3. As to the principle issues ofliability and damages, the Plaintiffs have filed three Complaints. The first two Complaints were preliminarily objected to, and the last Complaint is now before your Honorable Court. In the Wherefore Clause (Subparagraph 2), the Complaint alleges damages in the amount of $29,049.00 for repairs and clean-up of the premises, said repairs and alleged damages in the amount of $29,049.00 were never incurred and paid by the Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager. Paragraph twenty-six (26) of the Complaint, it is alleged that the Plaintiffs will be required to spend $29, 049.00 to restore the condition of the lease hold premises. These funds have never been expended by the Plaintiffs, and hence, are not a proper consideration for damages, and the pleading of same is spurious. 2 ''Wj'i! - r-, . . , , ~., 4. Your Honorable Court requires a summary of the legal issues regarding admissibility of testimony, exhibits and other matter. The Plaintiffs have sold the property in question, and are not the real party in interest and have no right to claim a restoration fee in the amount of $26,439.00. The Defendants will offer testimony through witnesses that they have maintained the rental premises and continually attempted to improve the rental premises as they believed they would be the ultimate owners of the real estate because of representations made by the Plaintiffs. Res judicata was raised as an affirmative defense as the Plaintiffs have previously sued for ejectment and damages. 5. Paragraph five (5) of Local Rule 212-4 requires identity of witnesses to be called: the Defendants intend to call: Michael Gardner, Denise Paine, Vincent Zoorsky, Bernadette Swingle, Timothy Moore, Winfield Deardorff, Dimitri Andriestrsa, Eileen Bink, John Troup, III, Phillip A. Doherty, the Defendants and their children. 6. Addressing Paragraph six (6) of the Local Rule 212-4, since discovery has not been completed, the Defendants request leave of your Honorable Court to add additional witnesses, if appropriate. It may well be necessary to retain real estate appraisers and they will present exhibits at the time of trial. The Plaintiffs disclosed in their Interrogatories that they retained an appraIser. 3 ~ 'I ,-,< L 7. Paragraph seven (7) of the Local Rule 212-4 requires current status of settlement negotiations: Counsel for the Defendants contacted Counsel for the Plaintiffs by telephone after the Defendants were ejected from their premises via Constable action and indicated that he wished to settle all matters. Peter B. Foster, Counsel for the Plaintiffs indicated that he did not wish to discuss settlement because of the claim of over $20,000.00 that he considered as damages done to the rental premises. 8. Rule 213-12 requires that Counsel for the Plaintiffs, at the call of the trial list, shall indicate that discovery has been completed: Counsel for the Plaintiffs filed a Reply to New Matter on AprilS, 2001 and simultaneously therewith, filed the Praecipe listing the matter for trial. New Matter was filed by the Defendants on January 17, 2001; the Plaintiffs failed to respond until AprilS, 2001. On April 24, 2001 Interrogatories were served upon Counsel for the Plaintiffs, and the Answers to said Interrogatories were received by Counsel for Defendants on June 11,2001 at 3: 15 p.m.; the call of the civil trial list was held on June 12,2001 at 9:30 a.m. There has been no opportunity by the Defendants' counsel for a meaningful review of the Answers to Interrogatories, with the Defendants. Counsel for Plaintiffs has disregarded the priviso in Rule 213-12 representing that the case is ready for trial in all respects, when discovery has not been completed. 4 . At the time of the call of the trial list on June 12, 2001, Counsel for the Plaintiffs indicated to The President Judge, The Honorable George E. Hoffer, that discovery should have commenced upon Defendants' receipt of the Complaint filed in August of 2000, which is unreasonable. Discovery is not completed in that the Answers to Interrogatories are vague in some respects, the Plaintiffs have refused to provide documents, requiring the filing of a Request for Production of Documents. In Plaintiffs Answers to Interrogatories received on the eve of the call of the trial list, it was indicated that Plaintiffs will be calling expert witnesses. A Request for Production was included in the Interrogatories. Plaintiffs' counsel refused to provide all documents, stating the request was improper. A separate and formal Request for Documents was served on Plaintiffs' counsel on June 13, 2001. Depositions are necessary in this case; however, the Defendant may not have funds to accomplish this. Respectfully submitted, BY: ~k Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA. 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. NO. 07056 Attorney for Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman Date: June 14,2001 5 , ~ ,,~,- " ". CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Di1s, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Pre-Trial Memorandum has been served upon the following individual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 14th day of June 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A 171 0 1 Respectfully submitted, BY: (2;~~ ~ ~ur K. Di1s, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 Date: June 14,2001 6 HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. No. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please withdraw the Preliminary Objections to Second Amended Complaint filed on behalf of the Defendant, Robert Cornman and Sandra Cornman, and remove the same from the Argument Court list scheduled for January 3, 2001. Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 BY: Date: December 18,2000 '~_,., ,. ~I"'_' <,. .' ....,,'_~_"' ,. -,' "" "_;>,,".0,,, _ - - <, ,. '-, ~" " . ' -.".-" . ,,' --D:RTIFICATEOF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe has been served upon the following individuals by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, First Class Mail, on the 18th day of December, 2000 to the following addresses: Prothonotary Cumberland County Court House One Court House Square Carlisle, PA. 17013 Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17101 Court Administrator Cumberland County Court House One Court House Square Carlisle, Pa. 17013 BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: December 18, 2000 !".L,.,,_, ,e,_I__/ __"',_ ~-_~i-_>:-"TH_,":~_- Co ,oN .__:-'_'_,_",__~__ ""_~'____' ,-,,":"_'C'" __'_.___~_ __ , I L. r.M.......". ~-~ . ~ .- -1'~_ ,,,,:,;,,,,_:,,q~;:,~ .', ~'"'~w'~ ',_,'" ~-"-." W .~. . iT r .~ 0 c:> 0 c: c:> ~n $~ C7 .-1 ""O('jJ fi1 ~ nljT'j ,-, , Z::J:! 'T~q Zt;,: \.D ~'7 !:~=; ,-'. ~,-- . , , :..-C:' -cj ~-1 ~ J~ ~1 ('') ZC) C l'"';? Om >c~. ::::':' Z W :D =<' U1 -< ,"",-,.. ~~ c_~~f:, j_!~ff'l!:_ l!I!i5I~llQI!Ill~ , - -~ CQ~0 ", * \d- ()\ ~C ~CA \ \\~\- I " '^, ': _1___', ,_ .,.. . - - d - "',' , _ . - -, ' --'' - ".- HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs, NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 2001, upon presentation and consideration of the within Motion for Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the Plaintiffs' action filed to the above term and number is hereby dismissed. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution: Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101 Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Cumberland County Prothonotary, 1 Courthouse Square, Carlisle, PA 17013 I- ,,- .~, -~. ".'" HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND NOW, this /t(r} day of June 2001, comes your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the Attorney for the above named Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, moves your Honorable Court for a Summary Judgment in favor of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, based upon the following: 1. The Complaint of the Plaintiffs, which is now before your Honorable Court, alleges in Paragraph twenty-six (26) that the Plaintiffs will be required to spend the following money amount $26,439.00. The Plaintiffs have never expended this sum of money, nor will they be required to do so. 2. Interrogatories were issued upon the Plaintiffs and in answer to Interrogatory No.3, it was stated that the property was sold on December 4,2000, for the consideration of$55,000.00. "f'!lll '1_ ,,' , -" ~,- 3. Plaintiffs have no legal issue on which to go to trial in that Plaintiffs are not the real party in interest. Once they sold the property to the transferee, the transferee became the real party in interest. 4. The Plaintiffs' Complaint does not present a genuine issue of material fact in that they have transferred the real estate to a third party. 5. The Plaintiffs are not legally entitled to provide a complete and adequate discharge to the Defendants upon performance or non-performance, as they sold the property. The pleadings indicate the Plaintiffs are seeking $26,439.00 for damages to the property, which sum they have not expended. 6. The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 2002 require that only the real party in interest may pursue a claim and the Plaintiffs, upon transfer of the real estate, are no longer able to provide a complete acquiescence or discharge to the Defendants, pursuant to said Rule. In addition, the Defendants' Answer to the Plaintiffs' Complaint raised the issue of res judicata in that, the Plaintiffs had previously filed an ejectment action against the Defendants, and claimed damages for back rent. The issue of the repairs to the property and condition was head in that suit. See Mintz v. Colton House, 407 Superior Court 464,595 A.2d 1240 (1991), where it .,~, .4,""""1 ' , .": 'llllfi"-.- was held res judicata can be addressed III a Motion for Summary Judgment. 7. The Defendants have filed Interrogatories in the above captioned matter, but have not been able to schedule depositions at this time, because of the recent filing of Answers to Interrogatories by Plaintiffs' Counsel, Peter B. Foster, Esquire. 8. As the record now stands, Plaintiffs have no legitimate factual issue on which to go to trial on the majority of their damage claims. 9. The discovery process has not been completed in that there have been incomplete Answers to Interrogatories, and no depositions, but at this point, it is clear there is no genuine issue between the parties and facts deemed essential to proceed to trial. Indeed the Defendants contend that from the pleadings and interrogatories, there are no material issues of fact and that the Plaintiffs must show they are entitled, as a matter of law, to proceed to trial. The interrogatories answered by the Plaintiffs do not indicate that they paid the sum of money, namely $26,439.00. "" - ';' ,< '-I"~ . -:m-, "" , - " WHEREFORE, The Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cormnan, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully request your Honorable Court to grant the within Motion for Summary Judgment. Respectfully submitted, BY: ~~,;; 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Attorney for Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman Date: June 14,2001 '-'~~ r- ,"' "' ~. _ . .0. do" VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in this Motion for Summary Judgment are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. QJI- ~d: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: June 14,2001 O-"'~'__'I_ ,""C'. -~ LJi(~JI" . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion for Summary Judgment has been served upon the following individual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 14th day of June 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A 17101 Respectfully submitted, ~;(' j)~ BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: June 14,2001 :c'J~ I" , < - i!S~#.'~.t~L:S[01~:ii;f:m}~!l1'~it~%~~t;~~~;t-MEi~~j';i;(;Z~l;._ '1 -e,. ,,;,'-,.,d-''c,,' '.'.'.,-,."" I.....)> OJ 0 ::\. - .........~ .., _1 -' - Cii" ~ c = Z....- c- ....=- CO", = "";::::i..' - ~ ::;0= '"'0 " (;;' ~ )> .... - - Om=- .....:=l.cn=- -...J en.rJ =- -Jr.,-+c=- 0'" -, NCDro CD - . x'.":"""'""!'_ "..',,__.+, :I: ,. ~o ~ "'~ "'~ ~ CZ ;00 ";0 r-; ;0 ~ "tl:I: Z m" m Z;o -< Zo '" t "'z ,. ?-; -; );~ '; z;o :;: :x>~ j-l 0 N II '0'-:''''- ~t :~tY;;}:~tl:r~i~f,.%;~2J~:~~$J;i2;;'if~z1&~~--1A-'dJ1:~~~'f.:* HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 2001, upon presentation and consideration of the within Motion for Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the Plaintiffs' action filed to the above term and number is hereby dismissed. BY THE COURT: 1. Distribution: Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, P A 17101 Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Cumberland County Prothonotary, 1 Courthouse Square, Carlisle, P A 17013 ,^~....- ~, ~~ HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND NOW, this M~day of June 2001, comes your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the Attorney for the above named Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, moves your Honorable Court for a Summary Judgment in favor of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, based upon the following: 1. The Complaint of the Plaintiffs, which is now before your Honorable Court, alleges in Paragraph twenty-six (26) that the Plaintiffs will be required to spend the following money amount $26,439.00. The Plaintiffs have never expended this sum of money, nor will they be required to do so. 2. Interrogatories were issued upon the Plaintiffs and in answer to Interrogatory No.3, it was stated that the property was sold on December 4,2000, for the consideration of$55,000.00. ,~ 3. Plaintiffs have no legal issue on which to go to trial in that Plaintiffs are not the real party in interest. Once they sold the property to the transferee, the transferee became the real party in interest. 4. The Plaintiffs' Complaint does not present a genuine issue of material fact in that they have transferred the real estate to a third party. 5. The Plaintiffs are not legally entitled to provide a complete and adequate discharge to the Defendants upon performance or non-performance, as they sold the property. The pleadings indicate the Plaintiffs are seeking $26,439.00 for damages to the property, which sum they have not expended. 6. The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 2002 require that only the real party in interest may pursue a claim and the Plaintiffs, upon transfer of the real estate, are no longer able to provide a complete acquiescence or discharge to the Defendants, pursuant to said Rule. In addition, the Defendants' Answer to the Plaintiffs' Complaint raised the issue of res judicata in that, the Plaintiffs had previously filed an ejectment action against the Defendants, and claimed damages for back rent. The issue of the repairs to the property and condition was head in that suit. See Mintz v. Colton House. 407 Superior Court 464,595 A.2d 1240 (1991), where it -- I~ -- was held res judicata can be addressed III a Motion for Summary Judgment. 7. The Defendants have filed Interrogatories in the above captioned matter, but have not been able to schedule depositions at this time, because of the recent filing of Answers to Interrogatories by Plaintiffs' Counsel, Peter B. Foster, Esquire. 8. As the record now stands, Plaintiffs have no legitimate factual issue on which to go to trial on the majority oftheir damage claims. 9. The discovery process has not been completed in that there have been incomplete Answers to Interrogatories, and no depositions, but at this point, it is clear there is no genuine issue between the parties and facts deemed essential to proceed to trial. Indeed the Defendants contend that from the pleadings and interrogatories, there are no material issues of fact and that the Plaintiffs must show they are entitled, as a matter of law, to proceed to trial. The interrogatories answered by the Plaintiffs do not indicate that they paid the sum of money, namely $26,439.00. -"-.",<" I'" "- ~ ,- WHEREFORE, The Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully request your Honorable Court to grant the within Motion for Summary Judgment. Respectfully submitted, aL~[g BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Attorney for Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman Date: June 14,2001 ."~'l'~"I!!1 ~~- ~, '''~I __~_I_ -" VERIFICA TION .I verify that the statements made in this Motion for Summary Judgment are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. tJt'/d~ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: June 14,2001 ~ , , , - . "~ ," - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion for Summary Judgment has been served upon the following individual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 14th day of June 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Respectfully submitted, BY: ak'c!L Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: June 14,2001 """""I ---I~ \~!~sg.:R'rJ1I';Ya:;,~~1,:t',t~3e:)~~_(:i:fG~Y-;t:iM;~~Y::i0~gSf{jrI;t'i2~,~;-:!"j;"_ n,,_ I--"""O: OlI\.)CD=- -, -Jr...-+ = -. CD- (ii' U> -. :.... o-OOJ= c c. = -,g:TI=- ~ 0 = .....,U>en= v.-+,......- ~CilCD= CD 0-' - -Jr..'-+m- -...J en --" ..0 o C --" -. CD F~ -:i'.. ,'+<--- ~ ~~ "'~ "'~ c:z ;00 Gl;o , .... "O:J: m." Z;o Zo "'z ~.... ~~ Z;o ;;m ~m :j.... o " ~ ~ ~ R" -< "'I "< ~ . II ~;-"_Ji.1-;ii; :'-i::i:$;,!f,\fst'E~;);E:k~ii{~V,:1!:J:~kf;~ti;?,';:~~8i;Y')~V;: I'ii HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 2001, upon presentation and consideration of the within Motion for Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the Plaintiffs' action: filed to the above term and number is hereby dismissed. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution: Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, P A 17101 Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Cumberland County Prothonotary, 1 Courthouse Square, Carlisle, P A 17013 '''''''''', , =.,., HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND NOW, this f L( A day of June 2001, comes your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the Attorney for the above named Defendants, Robert and Sandra COl1lQ1an, moves your Honorable Court for a Summary Judgment in favor of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, based upon the following: 1. The Complaint of the Plaintiffs, which is now before your Honorable Court, alleges in Paragraph twenty-six (26) that the Plaintiffs will be required to spend the following money amount $26,439.00. The Plaintiffs have never expended this sum of money, nor will they be required to do so. 2. Interrogatories were issued upon the Plaintiffs and in answer to Interrogatory No.3, it was stated that the property was sold on December 4,2000, for the consideration of$55,000.00. "'" ~ 3. Plaintiffs have no legal issue on which to go to trial in that Plaintiffs are not the real party in interest. Once they sold the property to the transferee, the transferee became the real party in interest. 4. The Plaintiffs' Complaint does not present a genuine issue of material fact in that they have transferred the real estate to a third party. 5. The Plaintiffs are not legally entitled to provide a complete and adequate discharge to the Defendants upon performance or non-performance, as they sold the property. The pleadings indicate the Plaintiffs are seeking $26,439.00 for damages to the property, which sum they have not expended. 6. The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 2002 require that only the real party in interest may pursue a claim and the Plaintiffs, upon transfer of the real estate, are no longer able to provide a complete acquiescence or discharge to the Defendants, pursuant to said Rule. In addition, the Defendants' Answer to the Plaintiffs' Complaint raised the issue of res judicata in that, the Plaintiffs had previously filed an ejectment action against the Defendants, and claimed damages for back rent. The issue of the repairs to the property and condition was head in that suit. See Mintz v. Colton House. 407 Superior Court 464,595 A.2d 1240 (1991), where it ""..~-I .. was held res judicata can be addressed III a Motion for Summary Judgment. 7. The Defendants have filed Interrogatories in the above captioned matter, but have not been able to schedule depositions at this time, because of the recent filing of Answers to Interrogatories by Plaintiffs' Counsel, Peter B. Foster, Esquire. 8. As the record now stands, Plaintiffs have no legitimate factual issue on which to go to trial on the majority of their damage claims. 9. The discovery process has not been completed in that there have been incomplete Answers to Interrogatories, and no depositions, but at this point, it is clear there is no genuine issue between the parties and facts deemed essential to proceed to trial. Indeed the Defendants contend that from the pleadings and interrogatories, there are no material issues of fact and that the Plaintiffs must show they are entitled, as a matter of law, to proceed to trial. The interrogatories answered by the Plaintiffs do not indicate that they paid the sum of money, namely $26,439.00. '''''-I" '~ ~-'"~ H~ WHEREFORE, The Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully request your Honorable Court to grant the within Motion for Summary Judgment. Respectfully submitted, BY: a'~Eit 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Attorney for Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman Date: June 14,2001 .,:-'~1 - I r_ ~'-~",-~' VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in this Motion for Summary Judgment are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penal~ies of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authotities. ~/2 Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: June 14,2001 "'''''1'-" , ~ - , , , ~~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion for Summary Judgment has been served upon the following indivitlual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 14th day of June 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A 1710 1 Respectfully submitted, t2~k BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: June 14,2001 "'''"'''1 "" . ~~ " " SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2000-05362 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STEAGER HOWARD ET AL VS CORNMAN ROBERT ET AL DAVID MCKINNEY , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon CORNMAN ROBERT the DEFENDANT , at 0016:05 HOURS, on the 2nd day of Auqust , 2000 at 504 THIRD ST NEW CUMBERLAND, PA 17070 by handing to SANDRA CORNMAN 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 Aff idavi t Surcharge 18.00 10.54 .00 10.00 .00 38.54 S~f?2~~~f R. Thomas Kline 08/04/2000 PETER FOSTER day of By: L3~$~j ~ Deputy Sheriff ~ Sworn and Subscribed to before me this 9tz::. o~ .2b(KJ A.D. O.~.~ Prothonotary I"~, '--I , , - .... ~ SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2000-05362 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STEAGER HOWARD ET AL VS CORNMAN ROBERT ET AL DAVID MCKINNEY , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon CORNMAN SANDRA the DEFENDANT , at 0016:05 HOURS, on the 2nd day of August , 2000 at 504 THIRD ST NEW CUMBERLAND, PA 17070 by handing to SANDRA CORNMAN 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 6.00 .00 .00 10.00 .00 16.00 So Answers: ~~~ :r-K.. ~A€:~t R. Thomas Kline 08/04/2000 PETER FOSTER Sworn and Subscribed to before me this 9 ~ day of Q; ~~ AD L_ tJ nu~;.., ~ rothonotary By: J'2,/f~ @~ - Deputy Sherif~ -''''"'I''!I' HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS , Irtl6 AND NOW, this II - Day of August, 2000, comes the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully avers the following: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY OF THE COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO THE PA. R.C.P.I028 (a)(3) 1. The Plaintiffs' Complaint attempts to allege damages to rental premises commencing at Paragraph 12 of the Complaint. The averments contained in the -1- '~~~'- -1- '.- __, 'c, -',-" -,-, , . subparagraphs allege damage. The Complaint avers that the Defendants were tenants in the property for approximately seventeen years. Without specifying, the Complaint claims that the lease premises were not returned in the same condition in which the premises were seventeen years prior. 2. Most of the subparagraphs of Paragraph twelve, merely state, ".... were damaged." 3. There is no description of the damage. There is no allegation of what the Defendants did that resulted in the damage. There is no averment as to the condition of the damaged property as it now allegedly exists compared to when the Defendants took possession. 4. Such general and vague allegations amount to mere suppositions. The complaint fails to describe material facts sufficient to enable the Defendants to understand the alleged claim so that they may present their defense. 5. The Defendants are further prejudiced and impaired in that the Complaint's -2- ',= ,- ~~-I ' . ,- ~ ,. f ~ vagueness does not permit them to mow how they are allegedly responsible for damage to wallpaper, flooring, window, trim, bathroom facets, exhaust fan, ceiling tile, stairs, window trim, carpeting, etc. Explanation is needed and a factual basis provided. 6. Paragraph twelve, subparagraph (f), avers that the walk-in closet electrical wiring was incomplete. This averment is so vague that the Defendants who are the tenants, cannot comprehend this averment. 7. Paragraph thirteen of the Complaint seems to take a different tact in that the allegation is the Defendants are some how responsible for broken and missing items. This type of general averment needs amplification. 8. The Plaintiffs attach to the Complaint Exhibit "C", which purports to be an estimate of repairs; however, the various items of repair are not itemized, but lumped together for, what appears to be, remodeling of the various rooms of the premises. For example, the Exhibit sets forth living room, "... to remove plaster and lathe from -3- <---,- , ,.,~ " --~ the walls. How is this item connected to the averments in the Complaint? What did the Defendants do to the lathe of the living room walls? This is merely an example of the type of pleading that is exhibited throughout Exhibit "C" and the Complaint. 9. As to the bathroom, the Complaint does not specify the need for facets and exhaust fan, other then the broad conclusionary averment that they were damaged. A good part of Exhibit "C" refers to painting and the Complaint does not indicate how the Defendants are responsible for this painting in the various areas above and beyond normal wear and tear. 10. The Complaint fails to aver, in its body and in conjunction with its Exhibits, the exact factual basis for liability upon the Defendants. WHEREFORE, Defendants, through their attomey, respectfully pray your Honorable Court to require the Plaintiffs to allege a sufficient factual basis and to specify said basis and legal liability to enable the Defendants to understand the claim and prepare their defense and answer thereto. -4- -~l PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF MOTION FOR DEMURRER PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P. 1028 (a)(4) 11. The above paragraphs are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference thereto and demurrer is made to the entire Complaint in that it has failed to specify and sufficiently aver a cause of action against the Defendants. WHEREFORE, Defendants, through their attorney, respectfully pray your Honorable Court to dismiss the cause of action filed against them. Respectfully submitted, BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg,Pa.17l02 (717) 232-9724 J.D. NO. 07056 -5- ~ -~- , _.,~ I ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Preliminary Objections has been served upon the following person, by handing a copy of the same to said person, at the office of District Justice Charles A. Clement, Jr., 1106 Carlisle Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 on this 21 st day of August, 2000: Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: August 17,2000 """"--~ ~" . , . HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. No. 2000-5362 Civil ROBERT CORNMAN AND, SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~OTICE TO PLEAD TO: Howard Steager and Ida Steager c/o Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17101 You are hereby notified to plead to the within Preliminary Objections to Amended Complaint within twenty (20) days after date of service hereof. Respectfully submitted, BY, /I ii' //7, / ~ ur K. Dl s, Esqmre 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: September 27,2000 "O'~ HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, this c?~ of September, 2000, comes the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully avers the following: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY OF THE COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO THE PA. R.C.P.I028 (a)(3) 1. The Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint attempts to allege damages to rental premises commencing at Paragraph 12 of the Amended Complaint. The averments contained -1- "1t~_~, in the subparagraphs allege damage. The Amended Complaint avers that the Defendants were tenants in the property for approximately seventeen years. Without specifying, the Amended Complaint claims that the lease premises were not returned in the same condition in which the premises were seventeen years prior. 2. Most of the subparagraphs of Paragraph twelve describe generally damage. 3. There is no allegation of what the Defendants did that resulted in the damage. There is no averment as to the condition of the damaged property as it now allegedly exists compared to when the Defendants took possession. 4. Such general and vague allegations amount to mere suppositions. The complaint fails to describe material facts sufficient to enable the Defendants to understand the alleged claim so that they may present their defense. 5. The Defendants are further prejudiced and impaired in that the Amended -2- "l_ ~""^ , , Complaint's vagueness does not permit them to know how they are allegedly responsible for damage to wallpaper, flooring, window, trim, bathroom facets, exhaust fan, ceiling tile, stairs, window trim, carpeting, etc. Explanation is needed and a factual basis provided. 6. Paragraph twelve, subparagraph (f), avers that the walk-in closet walls, ceiling and floor are rough and unfinished, and the "...hearing duct has not been installed..." This averment is so vague that the Defendants who are the tenants, cannot comprehend this averment. 7. Paragraph thirteen of the Amended Complaint seems to take a different tact in that the allegation is the Defendants are some how responsible for broken and missing items. This type of general averment needs amplification. 8. The Plaintiffs attach to the Amended Complaint Exhibit "C", which purports to be an estimate of repairs; however, the various items of repair are not itemized, but lumped together for, what appears to be, remodeling of the various rooms of the premises. For example, the Exhibit sets forth living room, "There are several holes -3- in the walls..." How is this item connected to the averments in the Amended Complaint? What did the Defendants do to the living room walls? This is merely an example of the type of pleading that is exhibited throughout Exhibit "c" and the Amended Complaint. 9. A good part of Exhibit "c" refers to painting and the Amended Complaint does not indicate how the Defendants are responsible for this painting in the various areas above and beyond normal wear and tear. 10. The Amended Complaint fails to aver, in its body and in conjunction with its Exhibits, the exact factual basis for liability upon the Defendants. 11. The Amended Complaint is not sufficiently clear as to enable the Defendants to prepare a defense. The Amended Complaint as to allegations of damage to the rental property does not set forth any time frame. The Defendants, Cornmans, occupied the -4- h, premises for over seventeen years and without a time frame, the Defendants cannot prepare the affIrmative defense of Statute of Limitations. 12. The averments as to damages in some areas conflict with the Exhibit attached to the Amended Complaint, being a contractor's itemization of alleged damages and costs of replacement. For example, Paragraph 12(e) alleges certain defIciencies in the bathroom, but does not allege removal of the tub. The contractor's estimate sets forth removal of the tub and installation of a new tub. Yet, the Amended Complaint is silent as to the tub. The Amended Complaint should specify damages to the tub and the responsibility of the Defendants. Likewise, in Paragraph 12(b), the Amended Complaint alleges that a plastic fixture for a light was ripped off and the dining room fan was off balance. The Exhibit "C" does not include these alleged defects. Paragraph l2(c) ofthe Amended Complaint alleges the dog scratched the floor of the living room. Under the heading, living room on Exhibit "C", there is no mention of scratched floor, but does provide for installation of carpet and pad. Paragraph 12 (d) of the Amended Complaint alleges mats were stripped off the steps. Exhibit "C" charges for installation of new carpet and pad and doesn't mention anything about -5- ,-~ ~ ,--;;,..~ I , I I I I i I ~'~"- ~'><;-~I railing, which was set forth in the Amended Complaint. Paragraph 12 (g) of the Amended Complaint, bedroom number one, sets forth missing door and door frame, but Exhibit "c" merely says paint. Such inconsistencies are rampant in the Amended Comph;lint. WHEREFORE, Defendants, through their attorney, respectfully pray your Honorable Court to require the Plaintiffs to allege a sufficient factual basis and to specify said basis and legal liability to enable the Defendants to understand the claim and prepare their defense and answer thereto. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY OF PLEADINGS ( DEMURRER) PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P. 1028 (a)(4) 13. The above paragraphs are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference thereto and demurrer is made to the entire Amended Complaint in that it has -6- - ,- , ." ,----'=-- failed to specify and sufficiently aver a cause of action against the Defendants. 14. The Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint fails to state facts constituting a cause of action against the Defendants in that the facts so alleged concerning damages do not show any causal connection between the alleged acts or omissions by the Defendant and the damages alleged sustained by the Plaintiffs. The Defendants were in the premises for seventeen years, and the Amended Complaint fails to delineate between normal wear and tear and actionable damages. 15. The allegations in the Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint involve the tenancy by the Defendants of the Plaintiffs' property. All issues, including damages, should have been raised in the previous ejectment proceedings filed to No. 99-2894 Civil in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. The Plaintiffs had a right to inspect the property over seventeen years and failed to allege any damages in the initial ejectment action and also, failed to give the thirty day notice required under the Landlord/Tenant Act. The issues now raised in the Amended Complaint alleging damages of the Plaintiffs is res judicata. -7- 01 <;...' i I:; n i~ ii It II !:i ii iJ :i 11 Ii IJ " 11 Ii !~ I: I I i-I I' ;:: "I , ;'~I "'I ;\i ,', iN 1;:<-, . I WHEREFORE, Defendants, through their attorney, respectfully pray your Honorable Court to dismiss the cause of action filed against them. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION: PENDEN(:Y OF A PRIOR ACTION 16. On the 28th day of May, 1999, the above named Plaintiffs instituted an action against the above named Defendants in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, docket number 99-2894 Civil; said action being a Complaint in Ejectment. Subsequent to the date aforesaid, Plaintiffs instituted the above entitled action against the Defendants. The parties are identical in both actions. 17. The actions are identical also, in that they involve the tenancy by the Defendants of the Plaintiffs' property. The initial action by the Plaintiffs failed to allege any damages, even though the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure permit damages to be included in an ejectment action. The initial action is now pending before the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, No. 699 MDA, 2000 and could very well be remanded for further action by the Court of Common Pleas of -8- - -, ,.-~ ,""" eo,' i:'! ':'1 :, ;il ;--! , :'! ;1 ;1 ':1 1 ~I Cumberland County. 18. The subject matter of both suits involve the same rental premises occupied by the Defendants and the issues are the same in that the prior action sought ejectment from which an appeal was taken to the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and Counsel for the Plaintiffs filed in the Superior Court, a document alleging that the Defendants had damaged the real estate, and submitted pictures to the Superior Court of the alleged damages, hence, incorporating the element of damages in the pending appeal before the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, docket number 699 MDA, 2000. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Sandra and Robert Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully prays your Hon Ie Court to dismiss the above captioned action. BY Arthur K. Dils, squire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. NO. 07056 -9- I--~ , . " ,-, - .--~- .,- . . '-",-' - ~ " - VERIFICA TION The undersigned, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby verifies and states that: 1. He is the attorney for Sandra and Robert Cornman. 2. He is authorized to make this verification on their behalf. 3. This verification is made by counsel pursuant to Pa. R.C.P., Rule 1024(c). 4. The statements set forth in the foregoing Preliminary Objections to Amended Complaint are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. 5. He is aware that false statements herein are e subject to the Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: September 27, 2000 ,j , ,.i ;:: --I -, '" ~~ I I 1'---, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Preliminary Objections has been served upon the following individual by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, First Class Mail, on the27th day of September, 2000 to the following address: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA. 17101 BY: hur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: September 27,2000 . - - -" "'__7'~ '''. _." ~_ HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. No. 2000-5362 Civil ROBERT CORNMAN AND, SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~OTICE TO PLEAD TO: Howard Steager and Ida Steager c/o Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17101 You are hereby notified to plead to the within Preliminary Objections to Second Amended Complaint within twenty (20) days after date of service hereof. BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: October 31,2000 *,-il> -~ -,~ I ~~ - ~ ,~,''''''.' 0'","" HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT d".fr AND NOW, this J / :/ Day of October, 2000, comes the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully avers the following: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION: PENDENCY OF A PRIOR ACTION 1. On the 28th day of May, 1999, the above named Plaintiffs instituted an action against the above named Defendants in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, docket number 99-2894 Civil; said action being a Complaint in Ejectment. Subsequent to the date aforesaid, Plaintiffs instituted the above entitled action against m; "- -'<0 -< -"" ~ , . "" the Defendants. The parties are identical in both actions. 2. The actions are identical also, in that they involve the tenancy by the Defendants of the Plaintiffs' property. The initial action by the Plaintiffs failed to allege any damages, even though the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure permit damages to be included in an ejectment action. The initial action is now pending before the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, No. 699 MDA, 2000 and could very well be remanded for further action by the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. 3. The subject matter of both suits involve the same rental premises occupied by the Defendants and the issues are the same in that the prior action sought ejectment from which an appeal was taken to the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and Counsel for the Plaintiffs filed in the Superior Court, a document alleging that the Defendants had damaged the real estate, and submitted pictures to the Superior Court of the alleged damages, hence, incorporating the element of -2- J~II'1 . , . damages in the pending appeal before the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, docket number 699 MDA, 2000. 4. Preliminary Objections in the form of Pendency of a Prior Action were filed upon Counsel for the Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, after filing of same on September 27,2000 along with a Notice to Plead as required by law. Counsel for Howard Steager and Ida Steager, Plaintiffs, has failed to respond to the Notice to Plead and the averments concerning the Preliminary Objection of a pendency of a prior action. Attached to these Preliminary Objections is a Notice to Plead as required. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY OF PLEADINGS (DEMURRER) PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P.I028 (1)(4) 5. The Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint fails to state a cause of action, in that the allegations seem to contend that the Defendants have failed to properly remodel the premises. Paragraph twenty-one (21) (f) avers that the light fixture is not properly -3- r",wl""~, ,--,- -, I " ".I" -~-". mounted, the heating duct has not been installed, the floor is rough and unfinished. 6. Paragraph twenty-one (21) (k) alleges that the flashing on the outside of the windows has not been folded and attached properly. 7. Paragraph twenty-one (21) (i) avers the wall paneling is loose and unglued, by inference, indicating that it was not installed properly. 8. Paragraph twenty-one (21) (f) avers that the walls, ceiling and floor of the walk-in closet are rough and unfinished and that the ceiling light has not been properly mounted and that the heating duct has not been installed. 9. All of these allegations and averments do not go to normal wear and tear, but complain that the Defendants did not perform remodeling. The gist of the Complaint alleges that there is alleged damages caused by the Defendants from the time of occupancy until their illegal ejectment. The above allegations are inconsistent in that the Plaintiffs are attributing complaints as to remodeling of the -4- ,~ 'Ji~""~""-I , "'-.- " c_,> ~ premises. 10. The Defendants filed a Counterclaim to ejectment proceedings filed by the Plaintiffs and received an award of damages in the approximate amount of $32,000.00. This suit by the Plaintiffs is now an attempt to recoup that damage award, and the action is improper. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully pray your Honorable Court to dismiss the Plaintiffs' Complaint. Respectfully submitted, 4U BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 -5- "":--"""1 ,_.~ ,0'_ "' VERIFICA TION The undersigned, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby verifies and states that: 1. He is the attorney for Robert and Sandra Cornman. 2. He is authorized to make this verification on their behalf. 3. This verification is made by counsel pursuant to Pa. R.C.P., Rule 1024( c). 4. The statements set forth in the foregoing Preliminary Objections to Second Amended Complaint are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. 5. He is aware that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relaf Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: October 31, 2000 1-":' I "._~ .1 '" ., CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Preliminary Objections to Second Amended Complaint has been served upon the following individual by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, First Class Mail, on the 31 th day of October, 2000 to the following address: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A. 17101 BYZZ'~ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: October 31, 2000 '---~-'"--'I .. ".--.'-', HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Plaintiffs v. NO. 2000-5362 Civil ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTION: PENDENCY OF A PRIOR ACTION AND NOW, this 20th day of November, 2000, come the Plaintiffs and answer Defendant's Preliminary Objections, as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is denied that the actions are identical. On the contrary, the action at 99-2894 Civil is an eviction action with a claim for unpaid rent. The instant action is a suit for damages against Defendants as tenants for damages for leaving the property in a state of disrepair and not maintaining it in a reasonable condition as required by the two leases between the parties. Admitted that the first action is now pending before the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Further, it is denied that the case at No. 699 MDA 2000 could be remanded for further action by the Court of " .. ~. Common Pleas of Cumberland County. Said avennent states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Plaintiffs could not bring the instant action until the Defendants vacated the premises and Plaintiffs could observe the damage to the property. 3. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that the subject matter of both suits involve the same premises occupied by the Defendants. Denied that the issues are the same. On the contrary, the action at 99-2894 Civil is an eviction action with a claim for unpaid rent. Whereas the instant action is a suit for damages against Defendants, as tenants, for damages for leaving the property in a state of disrepair and not maintaining it in a reasonable condition, as required by the two leases between the parties. Admitted that Plaintiffs filed the appeal at 699 MDA 2000 a pleading opposing a stay ofthe Lower Court's possession order alleging damages to the rental property. Denied that this pleading involved the substantive issues on appeal in the first cause of action. On the contrary, said pleading involved Defendant's request for a stay ofthe Lower Court's possession order and not any of the substantive issues involved in the first action or the Appeal ofthat action. Denied that said pleading by Plaintiffs incorporated the element of damages in the pending appeal at 699 MDA 2000 for the previously stated reasons. 4. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that Defendants previously filed a Preliminary Objection in the fonn of Pendency of a Prior Action with a Notice to Plead in this action. Admitted that Plaintiffs did not answer said Preliminary Objection. Denied that r-, ~,= " ~ ," Plaintiffs have waived their right to oppose said Preliminary Objection by not answering it. On the contrary, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint within the applicable twenty (20) day period which acted as a response to Defendants' previous Preliminary Objections. Admitted that a Notice to Plead is attached to Defendants' current Preliminary Objections. ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE FORM OF LEGAL SUFFICIENCY OF PLEADINGS PURSUANT TO PA. RULE CIV. PROC. 1028(1)(4) 5. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Denied that the Second Amended Complaint failed to state a cause of action in that the allegations seem to contend that the Defendants have failed to properly remodel the premises. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs have stated a valid cause of action, Plaintiffs have averred that the Defendants did not leave the property in "good condition", as required by the two leases between the parties. Plaintiffs contend that Defendants did not complete their remodeling efforts and did not maintain the property in a reasonable fashion. The cited averments of Plaintiffs in said Preliminary Objection show that the Defendants did not leave the property in "good condition", as required by the leases, and, therefore, Plaintiffs have stated a valid cause of action. Admitted that Paragraph 21 of the Second Amended Complaint avers that the light fixture is not is not properly mounted, the heating duct has not been installed and the floor is rough and ~'"i," \" - unfinished. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. Denied. It is denied that all of these allegations and averments do not go to normal wear and tear, but complain that the Defendants did not perform remodeling. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs have stated a valid cause of action. Plaintiffs have averred that the Defendants did not leave the property in "good condition", as required by the two leases. Plaintiffs contend that Defendants did not complete their remodeling efforts and did not maintain the property in a reasonable fashion. The cited averments of Plaintiffs in said Preliminary Objection show that the Defendants did not leave the property in "good condition", as required by the two leases and, therefore, Plaintiffs have stated a valid cause of action. Denied that the gist of the Complaint alleges that there are alleged damages caused by the Defendants from the time of occupancy until their illegal ejectment. On the contrary, Defendants voluntarily agreed to vacate the premises. There was no illegal ejectment. There is no gist of the complaint; the complaint speaks for itself Denied that Plaintiffs' allegations are inconsistent in that the Plaintiffs are attributing complaints as to remodeling of the premises. On the contrary, Plaintiffs contend that Defendants failed to leave the premises in "good condition", as required by the two leases, by not completing their remodeling efforts and by not maintaining the premises in a reasonable fashion. 10. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that Defendants filed a Counterclaim to ejectment proceedings filed by the Plaintiffs and received an award of damages in the approximate amount of $32,000.00. Denied that the instant suit by the Plaintiffs is now an attempt to recoup that damage award and that the action is improper. On the contrary, Plaintiffs have stated a valid cause of action and are not attempting to recoup the damages verdict against them. November 20, 2000 ~h'~. Peter B. Foster Attomey for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South St. Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 234-9321 j~,l;n-r_~ , , . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifY that on this date, November 20, 2000, I served a copy of the foregoing Answers to Preliminary Objections on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, P A to the Attomey for Defendants at the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire DILS & RUPICH 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 November 20, 2000 ~~~ Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for PlaintiflS 'i'lc" " > I I Ii 0 Q Ci " 'I r~ -n I C -' -'l"" j I -(JU! ,~ ~ ~ -j "\ I-rH~- , -'"~ Zoo, r-...) .:'.;, ;:-, ,~ (/~ ! -^'-. -- r; ""(1 -, I ~~;C ~.::. , i't, ~; 2~~: c> I 7" ~~, <:__4 '2 -~-' !I ,:) -< Ii ~i 'I , I I i ::1 I I "'I II "[ li~ -'~""",, ,," I!v~iil'i!.~~~'-~Jr."['''''''~'Iffi!i~~~!!IQIlill ....'...'/vv "A'" .i."S~'<JV oil1l.A, ..-aVV'tV" ",,",.1"'" "'IV," P...., ,..~\JJ-l,:L~ 't:::lvv... ------ PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and sumutted ill duplicate) 1'0 THE PRO'l'HONOTARlr OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the wi thir! IlIatter for the next ArglJ:netJt Court. --------------.......----- .-...-------------.-----.....-----------........--- - -----------....-...-----------.- CAPTION OF CASE (entire capt.ion ImlSt tx. stated .in full) HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER (Plaintiffls VB. ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN ( Defendant) No. 5.3..6.2_ civ:i.l 7000 19 1. State matter b~ be ~ (i.e.. plaint.iff'" IlDtion for 0001 trial., defendant's dE!llllIl:rer to canpla;int, etc.): Defendants' Preliminary Objections 2. Identify 00UJlS(~ who will argue case: (al for plolintiff: Addrel;;s: Peter B.Foster,Esq. 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 (b' for defendant: ilddre;;s : Arthur K. Dils,Esq. 1017 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17102 3. I will notify all patties in writing within tIoo days that this <:a$e has been 1i.sted for argument. 4. l\rgl.mmt Court nate: January 3, 2001 ~?J,~ Dated: Attorney far ..' Plalntlffs NOVember 20, 2000 ~ ;i ,! ,) I :i ii I I ,I ",- C) CJ () c: 0 -T1 ~ ~ :,".". r1~ CL: 25 z: ~ , - z C r~'.J U) -< ~ " ~"O "1:;'- C"', ~ , , :;....--., C~ 2~ '::;1 -~ =2 5J r:;, -< L [/'T)Iil~fI!'*lW_~'l>f''''1';0,''''''~''~mr1l:f''WH_,._.~....~.,."" ~ '"I' <~ ''!'''\'''"'! HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, PLAINTIFFS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, DEFENDANTS : 00-5362 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this -27'1-- day of December, 2000, the case is removed from the list for argument on January 3, 2001. Counsel shall abide by the argument briefing schedule and the case shall be argued before this judge in Courtroom Number 2, at 2:00 p.m., Monday, January 8, 2001. Peter B. Foster, Esquire For Plaintiffs Arthur K. Dils, Esquire For Defendants ~ ~ /,l_ :L?_/J1J f'-' Court Administrator :saa , ,~'---_ '1 "", ,.- - ",~, iililit""""" -'_~"'""~""'~ij;i__IIIM1!\~~f~jiKMl\!~_!b__1I!.",,,"iiIlId~iIIlIiI!IIli. . m.. - - .t.-.. ' cr (j7",A,t'l\ . fit'lilY (:') r"" ,J;.; .'1'" ?~. 11 \ ~ '.- '-' {~.~ Ad! {; f~ rJ ._,'.... CUI"tC'C--,'" , 'Vi ~,--hi.J~'\IU ()(", ~ PI=N'\iQ\JL' \ "VN,jUI~TY - "'JI VA 14 .' ~,- ~"..- 'Ill 1 II., " i PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE POO'l'HOl'UI'ARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Please list the following case: (Check one) ( ) for JURY trial at the next tenn of civil court. xx for trial without a jury. ----------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) (check one) HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAClER (X Civil Action - Law Appeal from Arbitration (other) ( Plaintiff) vs. ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN The trial list will be called on.f1lJ. (0 I and (Defendant) Trials conmence on ~ 0 I Pretrials will be held on Co r 1 1'\ r /'I r (Briefs are due 5 clays bef~ VEl. (The party listing this case for trial shall provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local Rule 214.1.) No. 5'3\,d- 5,:16 Civil 2000 19 Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: Peter B. Foster. Eso.. 121 South St.. Harrisburo. PA 17101 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: lIrt-hnr K ni 1" F"q 1017 N. Front St.. Harrisburg, PA 17102 This caE>e is ready for trial. Signed: ~3~ \6-~ Print NaIre: Peter B. Foster Date: n.pri 1 " ?(](1l Attorney for: Pl rlint; 'FrS c~-;..",.~..._.,~ 1"'"" " - " jR'.'.'''''''''''' .~=~~O~" _ .._ _ _ "'" "I >= -rill <~ " ",~<. ,,"O<':'.'."",-'y,->,.' ".- - ~'""t_-'J- "1''''' C?H"""inW:'Ii'>.~I~:,vri ; ;,-.,,; -, ";.14" o s=: lJ_~:; fnp~ 2::; t,~ 2:5:" :1>~ ~ - j ~JMi,~IIWW"i!)~ .v_~ ." ""~I~W~,_"~".nji1'"c,-W~"'11f:";:.-n'--p, r'N([;;:l'I';'l!l"__'f,,"~~J,f"''''','''''!;!'lfe'?!jjom!l';:'''JqlH,.~%-':nm?,!f''':('<1l-~~ff~W<ll- ['." c:' ,~ :r:;;... .? ~--J L.Ft 3':;1"'> ~ j;;- " HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' ANSWERS TO DEFENDANTS' INTERROGATORIES '~rAr, . 1110 , , _"_o."'1't" . ~ ~ , INTERROGATORIES 1. Set forth the details of your educational background, including, but not limited to, highest level of education achieved, name of school and date of termination or graduation from all schools attended, graduate and post-graduate degrees or courses completed, major subjects pursued, and certificates received. Ida Steager completed the eighth grade of The Aultz Grade School, MeV eytown, Mift1in County, Pennsylvania in 1926. Howard Steager completed the fourth grade of York Springs Grade School, RD. # 1, York Springs, Pennsylvania in approximately 1928. 8 ""I""'~I'. ~,? - 2. State the age of the residence at 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland. The residence at 416 Reno Street was built in approximately 1914. (a) When did you obtain title? For what price? The Steagers purchased the property on July 5, 1983 for $27,500.00. (b) Did you rent the residence to any other tenants besides the Cormans? If so, name and address of the former tenants and dates of occupancy. The Steagers did not rent the residence to any other tenants besides the Commans. (c) Since purchase, who has occupied the residence? The only tenants of the premises have been the Commans. Peter and Dolly Zweig purchased the premises in 2000. 9 '11-"", _ I I ~ - .~~"~, ~ - ""' 3. When was the residence sold? To whom? What consideration? The property was sold to Peter and Dolly Zweig for $55,000.00 on December 4, 2000. (a) What repairs and improvements were made in order to sell the real estate? Trash and junk was removed from the property. A number of drums of oil were removed from the property. Oil and fluids bad been dumped or spilled onto the ground. This contamination was cleaned up. 10 '~ r ~" 4. Identify all rentals you claim the Defendants owe you. In addition to the judgment against the Cornmans, rentals are owed for the period from September 1, 1999 through April, 2000 at $650.00 per months which equals $5,200.00 amount owed. (a) Cite and produce copies of your records so indicating; See the lease documents attached to the Second Amended Complaint. (b) Cite and produce records of what you contend to be the current rental rate for time periods of any alleged rental arrearages; See the lease documents attached to the Second Amended Complaint. (c) Cite and produce documents establishing any alleged late fees owed by the Defendants, with time frame for same. See the lease documents attached to the Second Amended Complaint. The claimed late fees are at the rate of$5.00 per day for the period from September 1, 1999 through April, 2000. 11 "",,~lfIIIII'frWl' ~,~ ,"^""" 5. Name and give current addresses for all witnesses who you claim could testify to any alleged damage to the rental premises that you contend that the Defendants are responsible for. Howard and Ida Steager Glenn Steager 411 Reno Street 625 Mountain St. New Cumberland, P A Enola, PA Dale Steager 4978 Erb Bridge Road Mechanicsburg, P A Kevin Steager 2701 Patton Road Linglestown, P A Mark Heckman 1309 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA James E. Novesal 2417 New York Ave. Camp Hill, PA 17011 See attached page for additional witness. (a) Give substance and facts of each witnesses' testimony. See the avennents in the Second Amended Complaint. In addition, the detached garage and the area surrounding the garage had been contaminated from leaking oil cans and barrels. Many cans of oil and unidentified fluids were stacked around the garage, and there were puddles of oil and other fluids saturating the soil and covering the walkways around the garage. Also, there was trash and refuse left on the premises by the Cornmans which had to be cleaned up. Also, the electrical system had been tampered with. There is exposed wiring in the walk-in closet. It is necessary that wiring and switches in the second floor hallway be replaced. It is necessary to repair the electrical system in the living room and dining room. 12 ,;- "":' -I~ l-, . I - ~ " ~ ., - - ",'~~ I 5. Bob Bolash Ark Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, P A 17093 I . ~ - 7. Name and give correct addresses for all witnesses who know of the condition of the rental premises before the Defendants obtained occupancy. Bruce Parthemore 1303 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA Eileen Bink 418 Reno Avenue New Cumberland, P A Howard and Ida Steager Ruth Hartman 411 Reno Avenue 526 Linwood Street New Cumb}':rja,nd, P A New Cumberland P.A . ~a) (jIVe substance and facts or each WItnesses' testImony. The rental premises were in good condition prior to the Defendants taking occupancy. 13 5~^'~"=":T""" ~ ~ ~ 7. Name and give correct addresses for all witnesses who know of the condition of the rental premises after the Defendants were ejected from the premises. Howard and Ida Steager 411 Reno Street New Cumberland, P A Glenn Steager 625 Mountain St. Enola, P A Dale Steager 4978 Erb Bridge Road Mechanicsburg, P A Kevin Steager 2701 Patton Road Linglestown, P A Mark Heckman 1309 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA Bob Bolash Ark Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 James E. Novesal 2417 New York Avenue CampHill,PA 17011 14 '~ . < I ~"""""t ! i:l ,^~"..",",~." 8. Describe exactly the damage you contend the Defendants' did to: (a) The kitchen; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (b) The dining room; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (c) The living room; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (d) The bathroom; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (e) Stairways; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. 15 ~- (f) Hallways; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (g) Bedroom No. 1; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (h) Bedroom No.2; See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. (i) Bedroom No.3 (third floor); See the averments in the Second Amended Complaint. ,) , 16 >,- ~,' -~, ,~ - 1,' j, '-;~'I ", 9. Dates for the periods oftime you claim the Defendants did not pay the sewer bill. Provide copies of their bills. Plaintiffs believe that the Defendants did not pay the sewer bills from April, 1999 through April of 2000. Plaintiffs are not producing copies of the sewer bills because it is not required that documents are produced in answering Interrogatories. 17 r~ ..~,...~,..,~.1J!!t" 10. Names and give addresses of all expert witnesses who have examined the residence since the Defendants were ejected. Mark Heclanan 1309 Bridge Street New Cumberland, P A Bob Bolash Ark Contracting P.O. Box l7l Summerdale, P A 17093 James E. Novesal 2417 New York Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (a) What was the subject matter they examined? See the attached reports from the experts. (b) Substance of facts and opinion they will testify in detail? See the attached reports from the experts. (c) Grounds for each opinion. See the attached reports from the experts. 18 :1;;"~ , ,< ~-" .>"....".,-..,,"~~ ~, 737-8144 James E. Novesal flIT J1;:7/~ PROPOSAL AND ACCEPTANCE Novesal m m Construction Co. 2417 New York Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 rREET 409 Dear Ave. ITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE New Cumberland PA 17070 .CHITECT DATE OF PLANS PHONE 717-774-4623 JOB NAME Rental JOB LOCATION 416 Reno Ave. New Cumberland PA 1707 JOB PHONE DATE 02 June 2000 'lOPOSAL SUBMITTED TO e hereby submit speclficallonl and estimates for: REPAIRS TO HOUSE Clean up & remove all trash $600.0 3rd Floor: Holes in walls, paneling, railing at top of stairs, electric plate covers, carpet and paint. Small bedroom closet: Paint & trim Carpet Electric $375.00 $400.00 $125.00 $1,845.00 2nd Floor Bath: Fan Wallpaper Trim & finish paneling $150.00 $375.00 $200.00 2nd Floor: Electric Walls repair Paneling Paint Carpet Master Bedroom $25.00 $200.00 $1,200.00 $200.00 $1,100.00 Livingroom & Dining Room: Repair wall with trim & paint $2,500.00 $275.00 paint ceiling $350.00 $2,200.00 Electric Repair & Carpet , ~'i i Hall - Repair walls & paint Paint trim Drywall Wiring - replace wire & $650.00 $150.00 $475.00 switches $300.00 Eat-In Kitchen: Repair ceiling Vinyl floor Wallpaper Rear storm door $800.00 $1,200.00 $425.00 $125.00 We Propose hereby to furnish material and labor - complele In accordance with above specifications. ror the sum of: TwentyOneThousand FiftySix --------------------~----------- yment to be made a. tollows: dollars ($ $21,056.00 ). -, "I IDITIONAL CHARGE FOR ABOYE WORK IS: $ j "'1 Aq matertat .. guarent..d to be IS speclfled. AU work to be completed In a workman. like menne, according to stendarel practices. Any altereUon or deviation from above Authorized epecIRcetlons InvoMng exlnl COlts wfll be executed only upon written orders, and Signature wtn become an extra charge over and ,boYe the e.tlmate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, acckfente or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire. lomado and Note: This propo may be other nee....ry lnaurence. Our workers are fuHy covered by Workmen's Compen. withdrawn by us " not accepled wllhln ..tlon Insurance. days. i':;; , ~.~ ,::1 '''j ::.i Acceptance of Proposal -The above prlc",lIJlOCIIlCellona and condhlone ere Atlaractory and Ire hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work a. apecmed. Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature 'jMR_~ r' - ,~"~- <-~,,~ i :-! Ii -'I " " :1 :1 :1 'i ',,,. ~," ~ 'I DE:Sc:l/iPTION For Properly at ./ 11 R,no St, Nell' Cu",berland KfFCHEN/DINING RM, 1. Strip wallpaprr in kitchen, remove/Ioorlng in bOlh rooms, remove ceiling tile in dining rm. 2. Skim coat walls in kitchen, ins/all lauC/h floor anti vinyl floor in bmh rooms, painl walls III kitchen with one coo/ a/flat and one ~fselt1i.gloss. install "'.ew 2'x2'ceilingtile in dining rm. LIVING ROOM. J. R'lf/ove plasler and lathe from walls and remove lile from ceiling, 2. Inslall andjinish dl'yllla/lon walls and paim wilh 2 coats offlat paim. install new 12":>:12" ceilillg tile, Carpel and pad. baseboord door and wiT/dow Irim. BATHROOM I. Remove tub.jaucets, wallpaper, vanity/lopfaueel. and I!.XhaWilforl. 2. Install new lub/ SUr1'OIIIld anafaucels, vanity /Iop and faucets, skim coal walls and palnl wilh one coat offlal ancl one of semi-gloss and install new ex/tausl!an alld villylfloor STAlkS AND HALL 1. Palch walls and ceilings as needed and paim wilh 2 coals a/flat painl, install new carpel and pad WALK IN CLOSEt 1. Finish eleClrlcal wiring, pain/wails with two COllt. offlat pailrl, inslall and pailll baseboard door a/ld window ,rlm and Inslall carpel and padding BEDROOMI/J J. Pailll wilh 2 CQQls r;fflat pallll IEDROOM #2 J. Remove plaster from walls and lile from ceiling , 2. Install andjllllsll drywall on walls andpaill/ with two coats off/at painr. Ilfslall f2"x]2" ceiling Ii/e, carpel and pad and basehQard, door and window tritlr 3JW FLOOR BEDROOM I. Remove paneling/rom end wail, patch walls and c~i1ing as needed. painl walls and ceilings wilh :; (1)(11$ of flal paint. Install railillg around stairway, and install carpel on flr;or and ,,'eps Clean up and permits will be provided by Con/rae/or Allowances Vinyl floor $2j.OO per yd installed, Carpel/pad $20.00 per yd instof/ed . Ark (:ontracting Services f.o. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 717-728-3222 NAME I ADDRESS Ida Sleager 409 Geary Rd. New Cumberland Pa 17070 p.o. NO. TERMS /0% 40% 50% Owner & Co-Owners Signature Pag. , .~ Estimate DATE eSTlMATE'n 6!J 3/2000 7 RI3P C PROJECT TOiAL 4,751.00 6, ZS4. 00 4,J86.()O /.609.0(J /,02200 49700 4,340.00 Usa.oo TOTAL CCy.u'~@ Itl/ C 1\ ~q/~l/l~~O l~;~L 1.1 /-L'-f';)"' f;)_',[..'1 t '-" .................,~.....' .............", ,~, ~~, . . Ark Contracting Services P.O. Box 171 Summerdale, PA 17093 717~728.3222 NAME I ADDRESS Estimate DATE 6f 1 3/2000 I k,O.NO 7'ERMS JO% 40% 50% REP C Ida Steager 409 Geary Rd. N~ Cumbtrla/ld Pa17070 DESrJrlPTJON The following is an outline of comIition of qUQtatl~n we propose on the referenced project AlImattrial is guaranteed as specified. We reserVel the right to determine the source of aI/labor and materials rlaI/ve to ony work that we pr~rorm undet the quotalion , !fthls quotation Is accepted, the worl covered by same will be performed upon accl!btance of this proposal and as weather corldltlollS and Our work schedllle perMlth. Due to the inconslttencles of weather arid other conditions, crach may occur and these conditions are considered acceptoble in/he concrete business, AI/ work will be completed ill a worlcrtlan like manner according to bUl/ldard practices, Any alterations or deviations form Qbove, proposal Involving extrQ cost eill be decured only upon written, order change, and will become and extra charge over and above the COrlw\7ct., This proposal may be withdrawn by m tf flQl accepted within 30 days of proposal dote. : , PG)I",ent sch~dule is as follows. lO% deposit down at signing of proposal, 40% at start Qjprojecl, and then followed with 0 50% final payment. This Inay vary due 10 projeot sixe, Refer to (terms) listed above for your parllculor project. Amoninal fee w;\'/ be deductedform deposit ((project is canceled by cuslo"'tf for any reason ofter signing of contract. The fee will cover cost for estimates, drawings, layouts, and scheduU1Ig changes. A charge of J 1 t1% per month will be charged Oil any holonce past 30 days due beginnIng with the complelion date of,Projecl, We wish ro thank YOllfor the opportunity of subm/lllng a proposal and hope to be of servi(Je t!)[you. i i i I ! ,j P,g.2 ESTIMATE ... 7 PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL $16,439,UU awller 6' Co-01lN!rs Slgnorure J '!!r~~~, "r~ ",," '. " " ~ MARK HECKMAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS 1309 BRIDGE STREET, NEW CUMBERLAND, PENNSYLVANIA 17070 (717) 774-7202 June 29, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Howard Steager 409 Geary street, Apt. B New cumberland, PA 17070 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Steager: At your request I have performed a complete appraisal of your property located at 416 Reno street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania to determine its market value in "as is" condition. Enclosed is my appraisal report with an e;stimated market value of $45,000. As you know, I had testified on August 30, 1999, regarding your property at a hearing in Cumberland County Court. In my testimony I estimated that the market value of your property were it in just average condition as of June, 1999, would be $74,000. That value estimate was based on my analysis of the sale of fourteen semi-detached, 2 story similar residential dwellings which had sold in your immediate neighborhood within the previous 24 months. Based on recent statistics on appreciation in your market area I would estimate that as of June;, 2000 the value of your property in average condition would be approximately $76,000. Therefore it is my opinion that the value of your property has suffered by as much as $29,000 due to its present fair-to-poor condition. This fair-to-poor condition is the result of deferred maintenance of repairs which should have been completed, incomplete remodeling, incompetent renovating, and apparent vandalism. The present "as is" value of $45,000 is well supported based on the comparable sales selected and presented in the Sales Comparison Analysis on Page 2 of my report. Note that two of the comparable ~ale;s are within the same block of the subject, and the third 1S only three blocks away. All three of these comparable sales are in similar condition and in need of substantial repair and updating. Page 1 of 5 '-",,",", 'I , . Some of the repairs are ordinary items that need maintenance on any house, however I observed numerous other items of concern which are not typical of the condition of most houses in average, or even less than average condition. These items include the following: 1. The electrical system has been tampered with and does not appear to have been done in a professional manner. I highly recommend a professional electrical inspection. 2. There are numerous holes in interior walls throughout the house. Refer to the attached photos for examples. 3. There is substantial damage to the walls of the staircase leading to the basement. 4. There is an unfinished walk-in closet in the middle bedroom with exposed wiring. 5. The bathroom shower faucet assembly is missing. 6. Large holes have been cut in the walls and the ceiling of the Level 2 hallway. 7. The attic has been finished as a fourth bedroqm or family room, however access to it is unsafe because there is no railing system surrounding the stairway, and because there is insufficient headroom to enter the room without contorting oneself. It is nearly impossible to put furniture in this attic room, and it is not heated. 8. Most of the screens and the rear screen door have been damaged beyond repair and must be replaced. 9. The detached garage and the area surrounding the garage have been contaminated from leaking oil cans and barrels. Many cans of oil and unidentified fluids were stacked around the garag~, and there were puddles of oil and perhaps other fluids saturating the soil and covering the walkways around the garage. The cost to cleanup this contamination may prove to be substantial. Page 2 of 5 ~,'1 ~, ,,~ . . You have asked also for my opinion regarding a list of repairs allegedly performed by the recent tenants who occupied this property for many years. My opinion regarding these alleged improvements is based on appraising properties which have undergone various levels of renovation and improvements over the past twenty years. Here are m~ comments regarding the stated costs of these renovatlons: 1. Underground pipe $367.24. Comment: I did not observe any underground pipe on the subject property. Even if there were such a pipe it would have no effect on market value. 2. Drainage pipe $761.51. Comment: I did drainage pipe on the subject property. such a pipe it would have no effect on not observe any Even if there were market value. 3. Front porch and walk $1,848.44. Comment: The only improvement to the porch was the construction of a new concrete slab floor. The walkways may also have been replaced. It is my opinion that the cost for performing this work would be less than half that stated. 4. Kitchen and dining room $10,897.33. Comment: This work was allegedly performed in 1983. It is my experience that the cost in 1983 of the remodeling which I obse:rrved during my inspection would be approximately $3,000 to $4,000. At the time of my recent inspection of the property these rooms were in less than average condition and the remodeling done in 1983 would add no additional value at present. 5. Bathroom $5,282.98. Comment: The quality of improvement to the bathroom is average at best and my experience is that the cost to do the remodeling which I had observed would have been at most $2,000. 6. Replacement windows $4,979. Comment: It is not mentioned how many windows were installed, however if all windows in the house were replaced the cost would be far less than the amount stated. 7. Coat closet $824.90. Comment: I did not observe a remodeled coat closet, and the cost to perform such work would be minor, certainly not any were near the amount presented. 8. Attic: $3,511.94. Comment: Because of the unsafe condition in accessing the attic and the inability to furnish this space, the amount invested in finishing this room was in my opinion wasted. It is not specifically stated what work had been done in the attic. Page 3 of 5 I" ~, , -,- --. --,.' . ~ ~ . . 9. Chainlink fence $600. No comment. Bedroom No.2 $1,337.60. Comment: There is description of what this sum was spent on. improvement which could have been performed amount of money. 11. Front door and lock $445.25. Comment: Does this mean a new front door had been installed? 10. no I saw no for this 12. New 200 amp electric service $1,576.16. Comment: This sum seems extrodinarily high for this work. 13. Water heater $357. No comment. 14. Interior wall front to top of steps $509.67. Comment: I do not understand what is referred to here. Most of the walls within the interior are in deplorable condition. 15. Sidewalk (re-positioned) $805.97. Comment: The sidewalk had been re-positioned to accommodate the tenant's above ground pool. If the pool had not been installed in this narrow lot, the sidewalk would not have needed repositioning. 16. Privacy fence $1,916.56. Comment: Only one side of the rear yard had a privacy fence, and the cost to install such a fence would be less than one-third of the amount stated. 17. Dryer hook-up $178.49. No comment. 18. Macadam at garage $394.81. Comment: If such a specific sum is presented, one would expect a copy of a receipt to verify that this exact amount had been paid. 19. Miscellaneous repairs $1,726.02. Comment: What specifically are the "miscellaneous repairs"? Are there receipts to substantiate these repairs? The tenants are alleged to have spent $38,319.87 on the above ~entione~ ~epairs during their occupa~cy of the property. It 1S my op1n1on that these alleged repa1rs and renovations, if done at all, would have been performed at a cost significantly less then the amount shown. Because of the present deplorable condition of the sUbject.property, the effect On value of all of these alleged repairs is nil. Indeed, because of the damage done to the property the value is siqnificantly less than it would be if it had been maintained in only average condition. Page 4 of 5 "~ T - 4_~"'---' '-1"""- 1 ~ ".. , ;;l>'/:iIft 'I ,"'-~ Thank you for using the services of Mark Heckman Real Estate Appraisers. If I may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact me. ~~ Mark W. Heckman, General Appraiser Certification No. GA-000666-L Page 5 of 5 rill 11. Name the expert witnesses you intend to call at trial and give their qualifications. James E. Novesal 2417 New York Avenue CampHill,PA 17011 CQntractor Mark Heckman 1309 Bridge street New Cumberland, P A 17070 appraiser Bob Bolash Ark Contracting Services P,O. Box 171 Sumrnerdale,PA17093 contractor Robert Yordy 1430 Riegle Road Linglestown, PA 17112 disposal expert 19 'Ir"~""'111 , , " 1<__ 12. Did you ever complain about any damage to the residence to the Defendants before your current suit? If so, when? What were your complaints? Plaintiffs made no complaints to the Defendants before filing the instant lawsuit. (a) How often did you inspect the residence after Defendants took occupancy? During the period of occupancy and rental by the Defendants, the Plaintiffs observed the premises on three occasions. They were: 1) when the Defendants did work to the attic, 2) when the kitchen was remodeled, and 3) when the Defendants cemented the steps to the front porch. (b) State dates and what each inspection revealed. When the Plaintiffs came on the premises on these three occasions, they did not notice anything unusual. 20 ~~'_. - ~~ I~." ~ 13. When you ejected the Defendants, did you not inspect the residence and point out any damages you felt were the Defendants' responsibility? The Defendants voluntarily left the premises. The Plaintiffs did not point out any damages to the Defendants that they felt were the Defendants' responsibility when they left the premises. 21 ~'" ..) I ~ l,,:,L[ .. ,. ,. - "' 14. Why did you not forward a list of the alleged damages in writing to the Defendants within thirty (30) days after the ejectment? There is no specific reason why the Plaintiffs did not forward a list of the alleged damages in writing to the Defendants within thirty (30) days after they left the premises. 22 ;~. I ~" C_, 15. When was the electrical wiring installed at 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, prior to the Defendants' occupancy? Plaintiffs do not know when the electrical wiring was installed at 416 Reno Avenue prior to the Defendants' occupancy. (a) When was the electrical wiring last inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard Steager inspected the electrical wiring at the premises between the time of purchase and the Defendants' occupancy. (b) By whom? Howard Steager (c) For what reasons? Pan of an inspection of the premises. (d) What, if any, electrical work was performed after the inspection prior to Defendants' occupancy? None. 23 '! ;~"';~~""""'i ~~ 0" ~~~ -, 1. By whom? Not applicable. 2. Why? Not applicable. (e) Was the electrical wiring inspected by your or your agents, servants, or workmen after Defendants' occupancy? 1. When? June 6, 2000 by Mark Heckman, appraiser, and by Jim Novesal, electrician, at an unknown time. 2. By whom? Mark Heckman and Jim Novesal 3. For what reason? For appraisal of damages and for inspection of the electrical wiring. 4. What work was performed? None. 24 ""l111\'."lll"l"T" , - ~- 16. When were the walls for the living room, kitchen, bath, and bedrooms of 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the property several times before the Defendants rented the rental premises. (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) For what reason? General inspection (c) When were the walls in each room last painted before Defendants' occupancy? Unknown (d) By whom? Unknown 25 '"'!'ro"'l'llfl~{<'~', ,~ ^ . --, ~, - '~- (e) What colors were the walls painted by you prior to Defendants' occupancy for each wall area? If not painted by you, the color when Defendants took occupancy? Dark wallpaper of a floral design. (f) When was the wallpaper last installed, by you or previous owner, before Defendants occupancy? Unknown (g) Describe work performed to the walls in the middle bedroom before Defendants occupancy and after Defendants left? No work was performed to the middle bedroom before Defendants' occupancy and after Defendants left. 26 ,~~ , , '-I , "~....,.", 1 17. When were the ceilings for the 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the pmperty several times before the Defendants rented the rental premises. (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) For what reason? They were never painted. The ceiling consisted of brown block ceiling tiles that were one foot square. (c) When were the ceilings last painted before Defendants' occupancy? (d) By whom? Not applicable. 27 .~ ~ I , ",~~~,~ I' " . (e) What colors were the ceilings painted by you prior to Defendants' occupancy for each ceiling area? Ifnot painted by you, the color when Defendants took occupancy. Not painted. The ceiling consisted of brown blocks of ceiling tile. None. (f) Describe work performed to the ceiling in the middle bedroom by you at any time? (g) Describe all other ceiling work performed after ejectment and by whom? The Zweigs put in new ceilings after they purchased the property. 28 .- "'1 ""~.. .~-- . 18. When were the floors of 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the property several times before the Defendants rented the rental premises . (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) For what reason? General inspection. (c) When were the floors last carpeted before Defendants' occupancy? 1. When? Unknown 29 '"",:il!l'!!lr.__, _ ~_.., ^' " I .~ -~ ". 'C;'~._~"I Unknown . 2. By whom? 3. Describe the carpet as to colors, material used and padding? Green wool carpeting with padding underneath it. (d) What floor areas were covered with other than carpet? The kitchen had a linoleum covered floor, Linoleum Unknown 1. With what material? 2. Color of material? 30 '," T - 3. When? Unknown 4. By whom? Unknown 5. Any work to the floors performed after ejectment? No 6. Any new carpet or other floor covering after ejectment? No 3l ~',,,~- ~~~~"" .>r-""..'.' 19. When were the basement beams of 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the basement beams of 416 Reno Avenue prior to Defendants taking occupancy. l. By whom? Howard and Ida Steager 2. What did the inspection reveal? No evidence oftennite damage. 3. Any work to the beams after ejectment? The beams were sprayed with anti-tennite repellant in order to comply with local regulations for sale of the property. 32 P,,,.=~ r'1 " ,-" ...~,~ ~ ... 1 --j ::i ! j I I i :i :1 " 'I ]! :ii . i='-:~'r! -r-""~ 20. When were the windows of 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the windows oftbe premises prior to Defendants' occupancy. (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) What was their condition? They were in good condition (c) Do you know if the Defendants' replaced any windows? The Defendants replaced windows on the flTSt floor. (d) What were the conditions of the windows after ejectment? There was one window under the porch which was broken. Also, there was a broken window along the side of the dining room. (e) Who inspected the windows and when? Following the Defendants removing themselves from the premises, the following individuals inspected the property which included the windows: Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Kevin Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Mark Heckman, Bob Bolash and James E Novesal. 33 'i E-. "I"___~~" ,~ .. _l~_ ,-, ~ :j ':1 :\ ., , 'I " " i,;~_F,l!ii!II__ "_I 21. When were the doors of 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the premises several times before the Defendants took occupancy. (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) After ejectment, who inspected the doors? Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Kevin Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Mark Heckman, Bob Bolash and James E. Novesal. (c) What were their condition at that time? They were in adequate condition. The door is missing from bedroom # 1 and there is no trim around the door. (d) Any work on doors performed by you after ejectment? No 34 oj"~ 'I""~..,, . ^ <~n~"" - '1'41il~I'" ~,"" 1- 22. When were the ceiling lights in the living room installed in 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, prior to Defendants' occupancy? Unknown 35 ~ ~~ "~~ 23. You claim the carpet in the living room was relatively new and not worn at the time the Defendants took occupancy: (a) When was the carpet installed? Unknown (b) By whom? Unknown (c) What carpet material was used? Wool worsted carpet (d) What color was the carpet? An off-green or beige carpet ( e) What padding was used? Padding was used under the carpeting. 36 ',~- ~ru" r ' IT~ 1l! i 'i i -;~ , '-"-~~r 24. As to the removal of an old coal furnace: (a) Who removed the furnace? Mike Spivey and a Mr. Oldham removed the old coal furnace. Unknown Unknown Unknown ~~ (b) Was there an inspection for damage after removal? (c) When? (d) Who did the inspecting? 37 .' - 25. When was the plumbing inspected prior to Defendants' occupancy? (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager observed the plumbing before the Defendants' occupancy. (b) What work was performed at that time? None. (c) Who inspected the plumbing after ejectment? Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Kevin Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Mark Heckman, Bob Bolash and James E. Novesal. (d) When? After the Defendants voluntarily left the premises. (e) What did the inspection reveal? The faucet and faucet plate were missing from the bath stall and the faucet pipe was incorrectly mounted. The head piece for the shower was missing in the bathroom. (f) What, if any, work was performed? None (g) What plumbing work was done after ejectment? None 38 '-.'-"~ r, .. . - ~ 26. When was the garage area inspected after ejectment? Glenn Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Kevin Steager and Dale Steager inspected the garage area immediately after the Defendants voluntarily left the premises. (a) By whom? Glenn Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Kevin Steager and Dale Steager. (b) What work was performed at that time? Trash and junk were removed from the property. A number of drums of oil were removed from the property. Oil and fluids had been dumped or spilled onto the ground. This contamination of the ground was cleaned up. 39 ,'" '. <, , '_1 27. In Paragraphs 53, 62, and 63 of your Reply to New Matter, you make a distinction between improvements and repairs, in light of work performed by the Defendants; explain the factual basis for this distinction. Defendants made improvements to the premises such as remodeling. They did not make repairs. 40 ;,' , . , F~ _r_ ~, 28. When was the plaster applied to the premises prior to Defendants' occupancy? Unknown (a) Did you repair any plaster prior to Defendants' occupancy? No (b) When? Not applicable (c) By Whom? Not applicable (d) Who inspected the plaster after ejectment? Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Ida Steager, Howard Steager, Kevin Steager, Mark Heckman Bob Bolash and James E. Novesal. (e) When? After the Defendants voluntarily left the premises. (f) What did the inspection reveal? There is a large hole in the wall next to the steps leading to the basement. There are several holes in the wall in the livingroom area at least 18 inches deep. There are holes in the wall in the front bedroom. (g) What plaster work was done after ejectment? None 4l ,~,~,J." ~r' "'- I ~- - fI"j ~ .,.,- 29. When was the wood work applied to the premises prior to Defendants' occupancy? Unknown. The tenn "wood work" is vague and indefinite. (a) By whom? Unknown (b) What work was performed at that time? None (c) Who inspected the wood work after ejectment? Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Kevin Steager, Howard Steager, Mark Heckman, Ida Steager Bob Bolash and James E. Novesal. (d) When? After the Defendants voluntarily left the premises. (e) What did the inspection reveal? Mats were stripped off the steps to the second floor which left large bare spots. The railing to the second floor had paint chipped off of it. There were holes drilled in the floor of the (see attached sheet) (f) What repairs on wood work was performed after ejectment? None 42 'J>.~_, p., 29. e) continued living room area. There are scratch marks from dogs on the living room floor. The dining room floor is stained from dog urine. There is no trim around the door to bedroom no. 1. The walls in the kitchen are marked. Paint is missing from the stripping around the windows in the living room area. the floor in bedroom no. 2 has a large bare spot which needs to be stained. The stripping around the windows in bedroom no. 2 has paint chipped from it. :::,~_r t' . 30. When were the bath fixtures inspected to the premises prior to the I>efendants' occupancy? Howard and Ida Steager inspected the bath fixtures prior to the Defendants taking occupancy of the premises. (a) By whom? Howard and Ida Steager (b) What work was performed at that time? None (c) Who inspected the bath fixtures after ejectment? Howard and Ida Steager, Glenn Steager, Dale Steager, Kevin Steager, Mark Heckman, Bob Bolash and James E. Novesal. (d) When? After the Defendants removed themselves from the property. (e) What did the inspection reveal? The faucet and faucet plate were missing from the bath stall and the faucet plate was incorrectly mounted. The shower head was missing. The bathtub was corroded and needed to be replaced. (f) What work or repairs were done after ejectment? None 43 '~~~~-I , , ~"~ - 31. Since Defendants have been ejected from the premises, detail all work on the property performed by yourselves, relatives, others, workmen, agents, servants and employees: (a) Describe the work? Trash and junk were removed from the property. A number of drums of oil were removed from the property. Oil and fluids had been dumped or spilled onto the ground. This contamination of the ground was cleaned up. (b) Who performed the work? Glenn Steager, Kevin Steager and Dale Steager (c) What were the costs of material? Not applicable (d) What was the cost oflabor? See the attached estimates. 44 -':_" , Robert Yordy 1430 Riegle Road Linglestown, PA 17112 717-979-1975 INVOICE 99069 DATE 7/23/00 Bill To: Howard and Ida Steager 411 Reno street Newcumberland, Pa. DUE DATE ~filll 6flf{/IM J;tJ~ (9.. Vo+C- Terms 30 DAYS GARAGE; DISPOSAL OF USED MOTOR OILS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description Amount DISPOSAL OF: 23 EACH FIVE GALLON BUCKETS 1 EACH 55 GALLON DRUM 1 EACH APPROX. 35 GALLON DRUM FILLED W/ USED MOTOR OILS/ UNKNOWN CONTENTS MINIMUM COST BUT NOT LIMITED TO TILL TESTED AND DISPOSED OF THE ABOVE TO PAY ANY ADDITIONAL COST FOR HAZMAT DISPOSAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 375.00 MILEAGE RATE Subtotal 375.00 ------------- ------------- Total $375.00 Amount Paid $0 Amount Due $375.00 '11l#'li_ Robert Yordy 1430 Riegle Road Linglestown, P A 17112 717-979-1975 INVOICE 99069 DATE 7/23/00 Bill To: Howard and Ida Steager 411 Reno Street Newcumber1and, Pa. DUE DATE , vpON CdlV/.p/-lltffcJN 6tvo+i7" Terms 30 DAYS Estiment for sand removal/repair yard --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description Amount Skid Loaderw/ opperator 8 hrs@ 45.00 per Hr Dump truck 2 laborers 8hrs eachx 35.00per hr 16 @35.00 approx. 14 cu. yards sand to remove / replace w/ top soil rake and seed as needed 360.00 200.00 560.00 275.00 MILEAGE RATE Subtotal 1,395.00 ------------- ------------- Total $1,395.00 Amount Paid $0 Amount Due $1,395.00 !~~.~,. " Robert Yordy 1430 Riegle Road Linglestown, P A 17112 717-979-1975 INVOICE 99069 DATE 7/23/00 Bill To: Howard and Ida Steager 411 Reno Street ~ewcumberland, Pa. DUE DATE tfOtV LcJ/IIIfkA'J..-/dN &Vd-tt Terms 30 DAYS GARAGE; CLEAN UP AND DISPOSAL OF TRASH ---------------------------------------------------------------~----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description Amount OLD CARBERATORS, BROKEN TOOLS, AIRCLEANERS, MISLANOUS PCS OFF OLD CARS,DILAPADATED WORK BENCH DISPOSAL, FLOOR COVERED WITH TRASH, BROKEN BOLTS,SCRAP STEEL, USED OIL FILTERS, AND GENERALLY A FILTHY CONDITION OVERALL 2 MEN 6 HRS. EACH, 12 WORK HRS. @ 42.00 PER HR. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 504.00 MILEAGE RATE Subtotal 504.00 ------------- ------------- Total $504.00 Amount Paid $0 Amount Due $504.00 if "',;>;l!'!~"""', 1~~ ' , ,! <"i.~_~ Robert Yordy 1430 Riegle Road Linglestown, PA 17112 717-979-1975 Bill To: Howard and Ida Steager 411 Reno Street Newcumberland, Pa. Terms 30 DAYS DUE DATE INVOICE 20000603 DATE 6/05/00 JUNE 3; CUTTING/DISPOSAL OF GRASS -------~------------------------------------------------------------------- -------~------------------------------------------------------------------- Description CUTTING OF GRASS APPROX 15 INCHES IN HEIGHT 2 MEN 4 HOURS EACH CUTTING, BAGGING/ DISPOSAL OF WASTE 8 HOURS TOTAL @ 42.00 EA. MILEAGE RATE Amount Paid $0 Amount Due $336.00 Amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 336.00 0.00 Subtotal 336.00 ------------- ------------- Total $336.00 , T" ~<.b> ,. , !\ I' 32. Your Complaint dated October l6, 2000, in paragraph 27, claims removal of a carpet: (a) Where was the carpet in the residence removed? The dining room carpeting was removed. (b) What color was it? It had an off-green coloring. (c) What size was it? Wall to wall carpeting of approximately 12 feet by 13 feet. (d) Who removed it? Defendants 45 33. Your Complaint dated October l6, 2000, in paragraph 27, claims loss of venetian blinds: (a) Where were they installed in the residence? They were installed on the windows on the first and second floors. (b) What color were they? They were off-white in color. (c) When purchased? Unknown 46 "~~ r ~ ~ >-~'" '. 11 'r:~--\;;4 '1'<" , 34. You claim $2,6l0.00 for removing trash, sand and oil and to cut grass. Was this work performed? The work was perfonned. the $2610.00 figure represents estimates by Robert Yordy, 1430 Riegle Road, Linglestown, PA 17112. (a) By whom? (b) When? Approximately July 23,2000. ( c) Cost for removing trash? $504.00 (d) Cost for cutting grass? $336.00 (e) Cost for removing oil? $1,395.00 (f) Cost for removing drums from garage? $375.00 47 , , L , Documents Requested: (a) Estimates for repairs; (b) Photographs; (c) Billings for repairs to premises after ejectment; (d) Diagrams, if any, of areas of damages or repair. - - -------- - Plaintiffs are not responding to this request because there is no requirement that a party produce documents in response to Interrogatories. Respectfully submitted, JUne 11,2001 ~\6J~ Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs PlNSKEY & FOSTER 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Phone: (717) 234-9321 Fax: (717) 234-7832 -~.J ";!,lllI,~~l - - '1 ,~ ~ ~=." ~~ . , ' , " . VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in these Interrogatories are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~dAJ~~ HOWARD STEAGER Date: ''"' "''i!;t!J;1~j_c+~ - ;'1 :'1 ~~"I , , , . . . , '" ;- (- VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in these Interrogatories are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ,~ ~L~ / IDA STEAGER Date: - ~~ - - ~ , I ,~ . . . . " . . .. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifY that on this date, June 11,2001, I served a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories by mailing said copy by u.s. Mail at Harrisburg, P A. to the attorney for the Appellees at the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 June 11,2001 \(~~.~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs -- - ~ ~- " =:"~~.., 1\llI$!_~f'f!""''!O!>>~_~-_'';;_1'i'I~~ .,ft""Wtf'''''\':'IJ'Wi!fl$0i~J~~'~,*,j!OOlj~''''II~IIili~illr~_;;::''':,''!'''''"",~;"I!'_o"~,,:_",<,:-_,, .. -~,- ,.. 'c. ~,_", _ .""'<'''"0"1111 ~ 0 0 c: " ?' . "1'; -~ ~ =j ~-. r'-' ?T\ ~- ,'-:" :~ z :::0 2': roo' '-r: CJ (.!J'> ~ ,..~ C. ~); r~;:-3 <- ..", . ~ -". c~ :,-J d:::: (~l ~~" #~(~.) :.7 ,")' .J>(~ [".,.) C) r-rl -. :;;..': j;;"' ;;i :;;$ (0 :a . ~ . -'''''''-'{-';'I-';irml'l1l1l$!J!i;l''W'l:''f.<!~''~i'i'-~i''':l'~_~~~lii''''~'R$j.,~_~~j;" HOWARD AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND NOW, this 19th day of June, 2001, come the Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, by their attomey, Peter B. Foster, Esquire, and answer Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, as follows: 1. Admitted in part and denied in part. Admitted that Paragraph 26 of the Complaint alleges that the Plaintiffs will be required to spend $26,439.00 to restore the property to its condition at the commencement of the parties' two leases. Denied that the Plaintiffs have never expended this sum of money, nor will they be required to do so. On the contrary to bring the property up to good and liveable, the Plaintiffs would have been required to spend $26,349.00 and other amounts indicated in the Complaint. 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiffs have no legal issue to go to trial in that the Plaintiffs Me not the real party in interest. It is further denied that once the Plaintiffs sold the property to the transferee, the transferee became the real party in interest. On the contrary the Plaintiffs are the real parties in interest. A cause of action for damages accrued to the Plaintiffs as ~~r .. , . landlords when the Defendants as tenants left the premises in a damaged condition. The buyers of the property were not a successor in interest to the claim. The cause of action accrued to the Plaintiffs before the sale and was not lost to Plaintiffs because of the sale. 4. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiffs' Complaint does not present a genuine issue of material fact in that they have transferred the real estate to a third party. On the contrary Plaintiffs' Complaint does present a genuine issue of material fact. Plaintiffs' cause of action for damages to the premises caused by the Defendants stays with the Plaintiffs irregardless of the subsequent sale of the property. 5. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is denied that the Plaintiffs are not legally entitled to provide a complete and adequate discharge to the Defendants upon performance or non- performance, as they sold the property. On the contrary a cause of action for damages accrued to the Plaintiffs, as landlords, when the Defendants, as tenants, left the premises in a damaged condition. The mere fact that the Plaintiffs did not spend money to repair the damaged premises does not invalidate their cause of action. Admitted that the pleadings indicate the Plaintiffs are seeking $26,439.00 (and other damages), which sum they have not expended. 6. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiffs are not the real party in interest in this action for the reasons stated in Paragraph 3 of this Answer. It is further denied that the issue of "res judicata" is before the Court. On the contrary the prior action between the parties at No. 99-2894 Civil involved different issues. It involved unpaid rent for a different time period. It involved alleged improvements made to the property during the Defendants' occupancy; not the difference 2 between the condition of the property at the time of rental and at the time of removal from the premIses. Furthermore, the claim of "res judicata" is not timely raised. 7. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants have filed Interrogatories in the above- captioned matter, but have not been able to schedule depositions at this time, because of the recent filing of Answers to Interrogatories by Plaintiffs' counsel, Peter B. Foster, Esquire. This averment makes no sense and, therefore, no answer is required. 8. Denied. It is denied that as the record now stands, Plaintiffs have no legitimate factual issue on which to go to trial on the majority of their damage claims. Said averments states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 9. Denied. It is denied that the discovery process has not been completed in that there have been incomplete Answers to Interrogatories, and no depositions, but at this point, it is clear there is no genuine issue between the parties and facts deemed essential to proceed to trial. On the contrary Plaintiffs' Answers to Interrogatories are complete and Defendants have failed to schedule depositions. The averment that there are no genuine issues between the parties and facts deemed essential to proceed to trial states a conclusion oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required. Plaintiffs further deny the averment that the Defendants contend from the pleadings and Interrogatories, there are no material issues and that the Plaintiffs must show they are entitled, as a matter oflaw, to proceed to trial. Said averment states a conclusion oflawto which no responsive pleading is required. Defendants' contention that the Interrogatories answered by the Plaintiffs do not indicate that they paid the sum of money, namely $26,439.00 is correct. However, said 3 "~I'*" ....,...,.."""'~'" .~-~~ ~ '1 ) I , <"'I" " t,.-. \. II" ,;:, ,.._@l~_~ ~~~";!'_;~"_'''''~W'~~!lWil:'l~ml!Ww$t*j&_':;~'''-0'I\- - - '<' ,,- ~ d ~o ~-"" ,,_"'~',~, ~^_" .",~.{",,~ .. h""'''''-,'' , . averment by Defendants is irrelevant to defeating Plaintiffs' cause of action. PLAINTIFFS' NEW MATTER AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, by their attomey, Peter B. Foster, Esquire, and submit New Matter to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, as follows: 10. Defendants filed their Motion for Summary Judgment on June 14,2001 and trial in this case is scheduled for July 9,2001. 11. Rule 1035.2 of the Rules of Civil Procedure states, in part, as follows: "After the relevant pleadings are closed, but within such time as not to unreasonably delay trial, any party may move for summary judgment in whole or in part as a matter oflaw." 12. Said Motion is untimely in that it would "unreasonably delay trial". Argument Court is scheduled after the applicable trial date. There is insufficient time before trial to brief the issues raised and to have oral argument on the issues raised. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to dismiss Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment June 19,2001 ~~~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A 17101 (717) 234-9321 4 ~f\1Ill1!7l ~ " , - . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, June 19, 2001, I served a copy of the foregoing Answer to Motion for Summary Judgment on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, P A to the attorney for the Appellees at the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Dils and Rupich 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 August 21, 2000 ~.t~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs -,~ I " ~-~ II ""iIIIIil!1ilU ~'LL" ~~~_~"'"~#~~'~~~~~~'#l~':iI:'!"dll:t,-,;~.,,,,(:':--,'''':}Y,,,-~e"-~- ,~ 'C - .~~,~" .~ '''- <',""~"-~_~'_"""'~ ,''<<\-.' =" 1 () C;i \~,~ C '"T) S, (:::::: (j , , rr\ ,-' . Z f:' Z ,-- (J) :._ , ~. < " ~~~: """0 Z~ J -',~ ~=C) (-.::' J>'c: --1 :-2: j"...., 5.i -' -< _-.l -< -';'i_""""i"1''''~JWfKif~'Hl'\i:~m~~",W!l1\\~~~~ *r~ ~<;,ald G1Y'c. it>..Jh 1- __ (n.\\ , -__~v-_,- <_ -~ " - - HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CNIL ACTION - LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 2001, upon presentation and consideration of the within Objections to the Praecipe Listing the above captioned matter for trial, it is hereby ORDERED that the above captioned action is stricken from the Civil Trial List to commence on July 9, 2001. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, P A 17102 Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101 -JYl~__ I ~ I HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CNIL ACTION - LAW MOTION TO OBJECTION TO PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL AND NOW this k~ay of June 2001, comes Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, and respectfully avers the following: I. Your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney of record for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, whose office is located at 1 0 17 North Front Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania l7102. 2. The Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, are represented by Attorney Peter B. Foster, whose office is located at 121 South Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17101. 3. The Plaintiffs, the Steagers, filed a Complaint against the Defendants, Cornmans, on August 1,2000. 4. Preliminary Objections to said Complaint were filed by Your Movant on behalf of the Defendants, Cornmans, and as a result of the same, an Amended Complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs, Steagers, on September 8, 2000. - ,-" ". ,-, -1" ., , ' 5. Preliminary Objections were filed by the Defendants, Cornmans, to the Amended Complaint and as a result of the same, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Second Amended Complaint on or about October 13,2000. 6. Preliminary Objections were filed to the Second Amended Complaint by the Defendants, Commans, and then withdrawn and an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint with New Matter on behalf of the Defendants, Commans, about January l7, 2001. 7. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Reply to New Matter on April 5, 2001. 8. On April 5, 2001, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Praecipe for Listing the Case for Trial. 9. As a result of the filing of said Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the call of the Civil Trial List is scheduled for June l2, 2001, with Pre-Trials to be held on June 20, 200l, and the Trials to commence on July 9,2001. 10. The Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial filed and the Steagers' Reply to Commans' New Matter were filed simultaneously with Your Honorable Court on April 5, 200 l. 11. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, certified to Your Honorable Court that the case is ready for trial, indicating that the Plaintiffs did not desire any discovery whatsoever. 12. The Plaintiffs did not confer with Your Movant as to any discovery requests prior to filing the Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial. 13. On or about April 24, 2001, Interrogatories Directed to Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, were hand delivered to the Plaintiffs' Attorney, Peter B. ~~I Foster, Esquire, at his office located at l2l South Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania l7101. 14. As of the date of the filing of this Objection to the Filing of Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the Plaintiffs have failed to answer said Interrogatories. l5 . Your Movant respectfully avers that the above captioned matter is not ready for trial as indicated by Plaintiffs' Counsel. 16. Your Movant respectfully requests that the above captioned matter be stricken from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9, 2001. WHEREFORE, Your Movant, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, on behalf of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to strike the above captioned matter from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9, 2001. BY: Date: V /~ /1/ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 ~-'~:'!!'I;I .' , VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in this Motion to Objection to Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: ~/(?/cr 1 ~- ". - ; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion to Objection to Praecipe Listing Case for Trial has been served upon the following individual by hand delivery on the~y of June, 200l, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 Date: ~/6~/ , ~-'I <, , .7 _<" ,-, ,~_ , ~ -, ~, t;V;;S~flt2!11li"-'iljCflj!t;t'i;1~',,;:,tl'f,;::,:%Y::U:~-;i;'';:Q.::;~~""''f II",'.' , - , i i I I , , , 1 , 'j I ~i R ,& '" ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~t i I I 1 ,!~ I I c! , HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 200l, upon presentation and consideration of the within Objections to the Praecipe Listing the above captioned matter for trial, it is hereby ORDERED that the above captioned action is stricken from the Civil Trial List to commence on July 9, 2001. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, P A 17101 f"" -" ~ , - - . . HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CNIL ACTION - LAW MOTION TO OBJECTION TO PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL AND NOW this ~y of June 200 l, comes Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, and respectfully avers the following: 1. Your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney of record for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, whose office is located at 1 0 17 North Front Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17102. 2. The Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, are represented by Attorney Peter B. Foster, whose office is located at l2l South Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 1710l. 3. The Plaintiffs, the Steagers, filed a Complaint against the Defendants, Cornmans, on August 1,2000. 4. Preliminary Objections to said Complaint were filed by Your Movant on behalf of the Defendants, Cornmans, and as a result of the same, an Amended Complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs, Steagers, on September 8, 2000. . "1- - . . . 5. Preliminary Objections were filed by the Defendants, Cornmans, to the Amended Complaint and as a result of the same, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Second Amended Complaint on or about October 13, 2000. 6. Preliminary Objections were filed to the Second Amended Complaint by the Defendants, Comrnans, and then withdrawn and an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint with New Matter on behalf of the Defendants, Commans, about January 17,2001. 7. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Reply to New Matter on April 5, 200l. 8. On April 5, 2001, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Praecipe for Listing the Case for Trial. 9. As a result of the filing of said Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the call of the Civil Trial List is scheduled for June 12, 200l, with Pre-Trials to be held on June 20, 200l, and the Trials to commence on July 9, 2001. 10. The Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial filed and the Steagers' Reply to Commans' New Matter were filed simultaneously with Your Honorable Court on April 5, 2001. 11. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, certified to Your Honorable Court that the case is ready for trial, indicating that the Plaintiffs did not desire any discovery whatsoever. 12. The Plaintiffs did not confer with Your Movant as to any discovery requests prior to filing the Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial. l3. On or about April 24, 2001, Interrogatories Directed to Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, were hand delivered to the Plaintiffs' Attorney, Peter B. . . Foster, Esquire, at his office located at 121 South Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1710 1. l4. As of the date of the filing of this Objection to the Filing of Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the Plaintiffs have failed to answer said Interrogatories. 15. Your Movant respectfully avers that the above captioned matter is not ready for trial as indicated by Plaintiffs' Counsel. 16. Your Movant respectfully requests that the above captioned matter be stricken from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9,2001. WHEREFORE, Your Movant, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, on behalf of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to strike the above captioned matter from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9, 2001. BY: Date: ~;iP/ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 ,--~~.,-- .., ~ ~ < , VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in this Motion to Objection to Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: 6/?ft/ ., :..: ~- -" ~ ~ . , . . . , . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certifY that a true and correct copy of the within Motion to Objection to Praecipe Listing Case for Trial has been served upon the following individual by hand delivery on the -4th day of June, 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire 12l South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Respectfully submitted, BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 Date: vft/O/ -O''''i<f".._.....~~ ~4~!t,*-~1~;gf,;~;~~~~.tf~1~tj~4~;it1l!r(!!i~J"[Qit~iQt,vr II ~ ~ . ~ ~~~ ~\Y)~ ~1" ~~ ~~~ -" " ~ =,/ijf.''1li;,;~0;ij2J!.,j-di'=~li;;Z;7Z;U,;510-"~~,,,,'',;~),\-'K*~;;)CSR;<.Rr,,>' ~""-I~ '" . , ,~ HOWARD STEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CNIL ACTION - LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW this day of , 200l, upon presentation and consideration of the within Objections to the Praecipe Listing the above captioned matter for trial, it is hereby ORDERED that the above captioned action is stricken from the Civil Trial List to commence on July 9,2001. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PAl 71 02 Peter B. Foster, Esquire, 121 South Street, Harrisburg, P A 1710l . , - ~ , HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CNIL ACTION - LAW MOTION TO OBJECTION TO PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL AND NOW this {;Jv1yday of June 200l, comes Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, and respectfully avers the following: 1. Your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney of record for the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, whose office is located at lOl7 North Front Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania l7l02. 2. The Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, are represented by Attorney Peter B. Foster, whose office is located at l2l South Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17101. 3. The Plaintiffs, the Steagers, filed a Complaint against the Defendants, Cornmans, on August 1,2000. 4. Preliminary Objections to said Complaint were filed by Your Movant on behalf of the Defendants, Cornmans, and as a result of the same, an Amended Complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs, Steagers, on September 8, 2000. -~- . , ~ . , 5. Preliminary Objections were filed by the Defendants, Commans, to the Amended Complaint and as a result of the same, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Second Amended Complaint on or about October 13, 2000. 6. Preliminary Objections were filed to the Second Amended Complaint by the Defendants, Cornmans, and then withdrawn and an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint with New Matter on behalf of the Defendants, Commans, about January l7, 2001. 7. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Reply to New Matter on April 5, 2001. 8. On April 5, 200l, the Plaintiffs, Steagers, filed a Praecipe for Listing the Case for Trial. 9. As a result of the filing of said Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the call of the Civil Trial List is scheduled for June 12, 200l, with Pre-Trials to be held on June 20, 2001, and the Trials to commence on July 9, 2001. 10. The Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial filed and the Steagers' Reply to Commans' New Matter were filed simultaneously with Your Honorable Court on April 5, 2001. 11. The Plaintiffs, Steagers, certified to Your Honorable Court that the case is ready for trial, indicating that the Plaintiffs did not desire any discovery whatsoever. 12. The Plaintiffs did not confer with Your Movant as to any discovery requests prior to filing the Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial. 13. On or about April 24, 200l, Interrogatories Directed to Plaintiffs, Howard and Ida Steager, were hand delivered to the Plaintiffs' Attorney, Peter B. -.- Foster, Esquire, at his office located at l2l South Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania l71 0 1. 14. As of the date of the filing of this Objection to the Filing of Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial, the Plaintiffs have failed to answer said Interrogatories. l5 . Your Movant respectfully avers that the above captioned matter is not ready for trial as indicated by Plaintiffs' Counsel. 16. Your Movant respectfully requests that the above captioned matter be stricken from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9, 2001. WHEREFORE, Your Movant, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, on behalf of the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to strike the above captioned matter from the Civil Trial List scheduled to commence on July 9,2001. BY: Date: it/till! Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 '-r - , .- VERIFICA TION I verify that the statements made in this Motion to Objection to Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ?/~/q 'l,r'_~ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire -,. . . , CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion to Objection to Praecipe Listing Case for Trial has been served upon the following individual by hand delivery on the ~th day of June, 2001, addressed as follows: Peter B. Foster, Esquire l21 South Street Harrisburg, PA 1710l Respectfully submitted, BY: hur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 J.D. No. 07056 Date: ?~;o/ ~ ~ . -, HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO OBJECTION TO PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL AND NOW, this 8th day of June, 2001, comes Peter B. Foster, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiffs and respectfully avers the following: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. Admitted, 11. Admitted. ");jW;I',t"'m.",- ~ ~,....,,,,,,"-- 12. Admitted that Plaintiffs did not confer with Defendants' attorney as to any discovery requests prior to filing the Praecipe Listing Case for Trial. However, there is no requirement that a party confer with the opposing party regarding potential discovery requests before listing a case for trial. 13. Admitted that on April 24, 2001, Defendants served Plaintiffs with Interrogatories directed to Plaintiffs. However, Defendants could have conducted discovery significantly earlier in this case, i.e. thirty (30) days after the filing of the Complaint on August 1,2000. 14. Admitted that as oftoday, Plaintiffs have not answered Defendants' Interrogatories. However, Plaintiffs intend to file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories as of June 1 1,2001. 15. Denied that the above-captioned matter is not ready for trial as indicated by Plaintiffs' counsel. On the contrary said case was ready for trail when Plaintiffs listed it for trial on April 5, 2001. Furthermore, discovery will be completed on June 11,2001 when Plaintiffs file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories. 16. Admitted that Defendants desire to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List. Denied that said case should be stricken from the Civil Trial List. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendants' Motion to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List be denied. PLAINTIFFS' NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Peter B. Foster, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiffs and respectfully avers 2 '~~, 'I'" - ~.~-- the following: 17. Defendants could have conducted discovery significantly earlier than April 24, 200 I, i.e. thirty (30) days after the filing of the Complaint on August 1,2001. 18. Plaintiffs intend to file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories as ofJune 11,2001. 19. Discovery will have been completed as of June 11,2001, when Plaintiffs will file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendants' Motion to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List be denied. Respectfully submitted, June 8, 2001 ~~~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South Street Harrisburg, P A 1710 1 (717) 234-9321 3 'o;~'iilrel"""_''i'''';:~F,".,~ . r T t_ ~" I!I'I""'II ' .lm " VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in this Answer to Objection to Praecipe for Listing Case . for Trial are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. June 8, 2001 ~\?~ Peter B. Foster 4 ',1~WlIRml'l!".T'''-.~ r ' - o~~= CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifY that on this date, June 8, 2001, I served a copy ofthe foregoing Answer on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. mail at Harrisburg, P A to the Attorney for Defendants at the following address: Arthur K. Oils, Esquire Dils & Rupich 10 17 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 June 8, 2001 ~~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs -~''f'l'''1'';<''''''''1-- ~","f ~~ Rr I.ll ~'l!" . r:I1lT~ll1l'IIU_~ '" -c.'~ L<.--" -_~ ",- no ",-,,, .='~d'.t,.",,__, . '''-~-4.&N "-"~'. ;'\. . ~ '.' ., ,'I, l'" r:, C'" C- O C ~. -q "1:J '0>. '- ..~-:l h' nlfR c: ~ " Z :';j"7 L :T' Z ..1 "1'-':;: ," cJj "'-. CO ~-~~ F:J ~tj- " -to '--_:i:~J :!"C' ~~~ z .' ::.t~ ---CJ >e: J:"'; Z ~ ::< :::> --./ :n -< ,..~_ ,~~_.lilr~~'"!!!1Nl~-""''''!I4~'''Wfl:~If:lm~Il'WI,<!\j!i!'-"''.'; '--""',1'-""'" "'m'T;-!,~;y;,CQj!HJ'iijidifl;l~l'WI~~~I'l~~,,~,.~"!"'~~ HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA Plaintiffs vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION -LAW () 0 0 ~ -if s... ~ ""Om :~! ~qj ~ i~h;::: (J)l:;::. I -"in -< .::;,~ co -,;_' ~:J ~ c5 v ~:~! ~~~1 ~l""") 3:~ ). -n j;: 0 ':.,\! C) c ry cyn 3; 0 );! -< --.I :::0 AND NOW, this 8th day of June, 2001, comes Peter B. Foster, Esquire, Attorney for< PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO OBJECTION TO PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL Plaintiffs and respectfully avers the following: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. Admitted, 11 Admitted. 'i"""fP,"'1"'f' 12. Admitted that Plaintiffs did not confer with Defendants' attorney as to any discovery requests prior to filing the Praecipe Listing Case for Trial. However, there is no requirement that a party confer with the opposing party regarding potential discovery requests before listing a case for trial. 13. Admitted that on April 24, 2001, Defendants served Plaintiffs with Interrogatories directed to Plaintiffs. However, Defendants could have conducted discovery significantly earlier in this case, i.e. thirty (30) days after the filing of the Complaint on August 1,2000. 14. Admitted that as of today, Plaintiffs have not answered Defendants' Interrogatories. However, Plaintiffs intend to file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories as ofJune ll, 2001. 15. Denied that the above-captioned matter is not ready for trial as indicated by Plaintiffs' counsel. On the contrary said case was ready for trail when Plaintiffs listed it for trial on April 5, 2001. Furthermore, discovery will be completed on June ll, 2001 when Plaintiffs file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories. 16. Admitted that Defendants desire to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List. Denied that said case should be stricken from the Civil Trial List. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendants' Motion to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List be denied. PLAINTIFFS' NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Peter B. Foster, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiffs and respectfully avers 2 ~",il!l~JlfJlIJlll , . -, y , ~ "_.,.,." the following: 17. Defendants could have conducted discovery significantly earlier than April 24, 200 1, i.e. thirty (30) days after the filing of the Complaint on August 1,2001. 18. Plaintiffs intend to file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories as ofJune 11,2001. 19. Discovery will have been completed as of June 1 I, 2001, when Plaintiffs will file Answers to Defendants' Interrogatories. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendants' Motion to have the case stricken from the Civil Trial List be denied. Respectfully submitted, June 8, 2001 ~-c~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 234-9321 3 '.,~-I!\l--r- ~ VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in this Answer to Objection to Praecipe for Listing Case for Trial are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. June 8, 2001 ~~,~-( Peter B. Foster 4 I'~~~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, June 8, 2001, I served a copy of the foregoing Answer on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. mail at Harrisburg, PA to the Attorney for Defendants at the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Dils & Rupich 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 June 8, 2001 ~~,~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs 't''''1!''!''F''''.''''''''r~ ~~ r~~-; "n~~ __" HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, IN TIIE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. NO. 2000-5362 Civil ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER AND NOW, this 7 );A., day of April 2001, come the Plaintiffs and Reply to Defendants' New Matter, as follows: 33. Denied. It is Denied that the Defendants were illegally ejected from their premises in violation of the stay order issued by the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. On the contrary, the Defendants were not illegally ejected from the premises. Furthermore, the stay order was not known to the Plaintiffs at the time of the ejectment. Also, said averment states a conclusion oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required. Said averment is not relevant to the instant action and should be stricken. It is Denied that the Plaintiffs had been put on notice that a stay order had been requested and proceeded with the ejectment. Said averment is not relevant to the instant action and should be stricken. It is Denied that after the illegal ejectment, Plaintiffs failed to notify the Defendants of any alleged deficiencies within thirty (30) days of said illegal ejectment, in violation of the landlord/tenant act. On the contrary, said ejectment was not illegal. Plaintiffs were not required to notify the Defendants of alleged deficiencies within thirty days of the ejectment. On the contrary, 68 P.S. Section 250.512 only applies to damages claims when the security deposit is in dispute. Furthermore, said averment is not relevant to the instant action and should be stricken. 33. Admitted. 34. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that the Plaintiffs had every opportunity to inspect the premises and raise any claims for damages at the time of their ejectment action. It is Denied that Plaintiffs have a legal obligation to inspect the premises and raise any claims for damages at the time of their ejectment action. 35. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that at the time of the de novo appeal hearing before the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley, no claim for rental premises damages was submitted. Denied that the Plaintiffs presented expert testimony that the premises were appraised at $75,000.00 and worth the same. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs' expert appraisal witness testified that the premises were appraised at $75,000.00. 2 ">.1: ~ ~ , . ,,' 36. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that in the prior court action, Plaintiffs did not raise any claims for damages. Denied that since the Rules of Civil Procedure permit damage claims in ejectment actions, this was the proper time for said claims to be made. On the contrary, there is no requirement under the Rules of Civil Procedure that damages claims have to be made pursuant to an ejectment action. Denied that since the Plaintiffs did not make damages claims pursuant to the ejectment action, that the current action is res judicata. On the contrary, there is no requirement that damages claims have to be made pursuant to an ejectment action. Consequently, the current action is not res judicata. Furthermore, said averment states a conclusion oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required. 37. Denied. It is Denied that at the time the Defendants moved into 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, all walls and ceilings were cracked and deteriorating. On the contrary, the walls and ceilings of said premises were not cracked and deteriorating at the time Defendants moved in. 38. Denied. It is Denied that at the time of moving into said premises all floors were uneven and sinking. On the contrary at the time Defendants moved into said premises the floors were even and not sinking. 39. Denied. It is Denied that at the time the Defendants took possession of the 3 :4\11,"-= 1""1,~' , . ~~, premises, the basement beams and other areas had termite damages and all windows were unsuitable and weathered. On the contrary, at the time the Defendants took possession of the premises, the basement beams and other areas did not have termite damage. Further- more, the windows to said premises were not unsuitable and were not weathered. 40. Denied. It is Denied that at the time the defendants took possession of the prernises that on all, or most wall areas, the paint was peeling off as well as the wallpaper. It is Denied that most doors were warped in all rooms. On the contrary, at said time the paint was not peeling off all or most wall areas. Furthermore, the wallpaper was not peeling off all or most wall areas. Also, the doors were not warped in the rooms. 4 I. Denied. It is Denied that at the time of possession the wiring was completely inadequate. On the contrary, at said time the wiring was completely adequate. Furthermore, said averment states a conclusion oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required. 42. Denied. Plaintiffs have no knowledge that at the tirne of possession the Defendants experienced fuses that kept blowing and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. The premises did not have low amp service which was hazardous at the time of possession. The amp service was not hazardous. Following possession, the Defendants installed a washer and dryer. The premises needed heavier wiring to accommodate 4 -'::;~_~~'~I_'l""l greater electrical requirements for these appliances. The Defendants installed heavier wmng. 43. Denied. It is Denied that at the time of possession, the living room had ceiling lights which were hazardous and the ceiling was dark brown from age and sagging. On the contrary, at the time of possession, the living room did not have ceiling lights which were hazardous. Furthermore, the ceiling was not dark brown from age and was not sagging. 44. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted at the time of possession there was a piece of plywood covering a hole in the floor. The piece of plywood covered a small hole which was the heating vent. Denied that the carpet in the living room was old and rotten. On the contrary, the carpet was relatively new and not Wam' 45. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that prior to possession, a coal furnace had been remove from the premises. Denied that there was damage in the basement area and in other areas of the house caused by the removal. On the contrary there was no such damage. 46. Denied. It is Denied that plaster from all the walls was falling and the front . door was rotten and glass panels were falling out at the time of possession. On the contrary, at the time of possession plaster from all the walls was not rotten and glass 5 '.~---.,,- -I ~- ~" panels were not falling out of the front door. 47. Denied. At the time of possession the middle bedroom was not in dismal shape with numerous coats of wallpaper and paint. This room did not have numerous coats of wallpaper and paint. The floors of this room were not in bad condition. Admitted that the windows were old, but they were not weathered. Air did not seep through any of the windows in the house, except in the attic. 48. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that there was no direct heat to bedroom number three at the time of possession. Denied that the window was broken and taped with masking tape. The window was not broken and not taped with masking tape. Denied that the floor was brownish and not level and that the wiring in the premises was completely inadequate. On the contrary, the floor was not brownish and was level and the wiring in the premises was adequate at the time of possession. 49. Denied. At the time the Defendants took possession the bathroom fixtures were adequate. There were no worms in the toilet. The waster pressure was adequate. The plumbing throughout the premises was workable. SO. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that in the attic the wiring was exposed. Denied that this wiring caused a hazard. On the contrary, the wiring did not cause a hazard. Denied that the steps leading to the attic were cracked and broken. 6 '. On the contrary, the steps leading to the attic were not cracked and broken. Denied that the windows were non-functional. On the contrary, the windows did work. Admitted that air and light came through around the edges ofthe windows in the attic. 51. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that a trailer cord had been utilized to hang a light in the area of the basement steps. Denied that this situation was inadequate and dangerous. On the contrary, this arrangement was not inadequate and dangerous. Denied that the walls were cracked and not level in the basement area and that the wall covering was falling off. On the contrary, the walls in this area were not cracked and were level and the wall covering was not falling off. 52. Denied. It is Denied that the garage area was damaged and in disrepair at the time of possession and that the walls had rotten areas from floor to ceiling. On the contrary, the garage area was not damaged and in disrepair at the time of possession. Furthermore, the walls of the garage area did not have rotten areas from floor to ceiling. 53. Denied in part and Admitted in part. Denied that at the time the Defendants took possession they believed they would ultimately have the residence as their own because of the representations made by the Plaintiffs. On the contrary, Plaintiffs have no knowledge as to any beliefs held by Defendants and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. Denied that the Defendants made substantial repairs to the premises. Defendants 7 'j1~<" ~'1 " " " ," ~,,- made improvements to the premises but they were not substantial. Admitted that Defendants submitted receipts of over $38,000.00. Admitted that Judge Bayley ordered that Plaintiffs owed Defendants $32,523.00 for improvernents to the premises. Denied that this award was for repairs, but rather it was for improvements. 54. Denied. It is Denied that the Defendants completely renovated this bedroom area and installed drywall. On the contrary, the Defendants did not completely renovate this area. Furthermore, the Defendants installed plaster in this area and not drywall. It is denied that the door trim was not installed because of the commencement of litigation by the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs have no knowledge as to why door trim was not installed and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 55. Denied. It is Denied that in bedroom number two there were holes in the wall at the time of possession. On the contrary, there were no holes in the wall of bedroom number two at the time of possession. It is denied that there were holes caused by areas of old and rotten plaster at the time of possession. On the contrary, at the time of possession there were no areas of old and rotten plaster in the walls of bedroom number two. 56. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that at the time of possession old cabinets and an old sink were present in the kitchen. Denied that the walls 8 ......,.," 'I . and ceilings were not cracked. On the contrary, the walls and ceiling were not cracked. Admitted that the ceiling light was old. Denied that present in the kitchen at the time was an apartment size stove using a propane tank which was inadequate. On the contrary, no propane stove was present in the kitchen at the time of possession. Energy for a stove was provided by city gas. 57. Denied. It is Denied that the kitchen floor was not level and was sinking in areas caused by the beam in the basement being termite infested. On the contrary, the kitchen floor was level and not sinking. Furthermore, no beam in the basement was termite infested. 58. Denied. It is Denied that the woodwork in the kitchen was rotten and cracked. On the contrary, at the time of possession the woodwork in the kitchen was not rotten and cracked. It is Denied that curtain rods could not stay in the wood and that paint was falling off the walls. On the contrary, curtain rods stayed in the wood and paint was not falling off the walls in the kitchen. 59. Denied. It is Denied that the dining room on the first floor had inadequate wiring and that the walls were in bad shape and that the wallpaper was peeling and the painted areas were also peeling. On the contrary, the dining room area had adequate wiring. Furthermore, the walls were not in bad shape and the wallpaper was not peeling. 9 ;)~ " ,- The walls in the dining room had not been painted. It is Denied that the walls had been papered and painted many times. On the contrary, the walls only had wallpaper on them. They had not been previously painted. 60. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that the windows in the house were old. Admitted that some of the windows in the house were replaced by the Defendants. Denied that the windows in the house were weathered. On the contrary, the windows were not weathered. Denied that the windows in the house were replaced by the Defendants. Only some of the windows in the house were replaced by the Defendants. 6 I . Denied. It is Denied that the bathroom floor at the time of possession was rotten, that the toilet had to be replaced and that the plumbing and other fixtures in the bathroom had to be replaced. On the contrary, the bathroom floor at the time of possession was not rotten; the toilet did not have to be replaced and plumbing and other fixtures in the bathroom did not have to be replaced. The Defendants made changes in the bathroom for cosmetic reasons. 62. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Admitted that the Defendants presented a claim at trial previously that they expended over $38,000.00 for improvements to the premises. Denied that Defendants expended over $38,000.00 for 10 ";':~" J ," - '1 " '~ improvements to the premises. On the contrary, Defendants have not verified that they spent any money for improvements to the premises. Denied that Defendants made repairs to the premises. On the contrary, Defendants only made improvements to the premises. 63. Denied. It is Denied that the Plaintiffs are aware from the previous court proceedings, that hundreds of man hours were involved in utilizing the J'Tepair and remodeling materials and installing it in the premises of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are aware that Defendants testified to these facts at the prior proceeding, but do not believe these facts to be true and do not believe that they were verified in the prior proceeding. Plaintiffs are aware that Defendants made some replacements on the premises, but deny that all the claimed replacements were made. Plaintiffs deny that repairs were made to the property but that only improvements were made. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pay that Defendants' New Matter be dismissed and judgment entered in favor of Plaintiffs. April 4, 2001 ~~.~ Peter B. Foster Attorney for Plaintiffs Pinskey & Foster 121 South St. Harrisburg, PAl 710 1 (717) 234-9321 11 VERIFICATION I, Ida Steager, hereby verifY that the statements made in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of I 8 Pa. C.S.A Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. April 4, 2001 j~ Ida Steager ,J~~ :'-"""'''''''''=-'"1-~ , CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date, April 4, 2001, I served a copy of the foregoing Reply to New Matter on the Defendants by mailing said copy by U.S. Mail at Harrisburg, PA to the Attorney for Defendants at the following address: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire DILS & RUPICH 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17102 April 4, 2001 ~~.~ Peter B. Foster, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs ''-;< -, lift<.,.. ~ 1_ .. ~~ iii ". ,. "!!'I' " ~m!P~, !llijR__.;,,,,,,,,,~\~~," A'i.1\i.;I~""~"MIiiI"~'_I<1I'I/S~i"~"".;!!iP~';';"'<\,-""'-'-"''"'" < '''- ~''''''.''< ,,,. ---"'l1flr -':.'-'I~'~'~-';,~- '~'-"T4-"( (") ~;; ~-',' ~il;: ~: ""',~ c: !o'" .,.;:::-. >- :_.J ()-'j ,--.,; o l'j '-. ' -, "f"kC"!,v".I;"---'-;""I'C~;"O"-"'R'~W-,H\0~""'""."""_'4)"""'~iiW_'li!",!Wil~'~~(!!l'j~ !UJ_ljlJIC ~-T~ ~ . t .i , " r '.. HOWARD STEAGER AND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. No. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, CIVIL ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Howard and Ida Steager c/o Peter B.Foster, Esquire l2l South Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17101 You are hereby notified to plead to the within New Matter within twenty (20) days after date of service hereof. BY: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17 I 02 (717) 232-9724 LD. No. 07056 Date: January 17, 200l ~ > -,""'" , "J.. 11 , . --tu') r ~ H , , . . . ., , 'r r'_ HOWARDSTEAGERAND IDA STEAGER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2000-5362 ROBERT CORNMAN AND SANDRA CORNMAN, Defendants JURY TRiAL DEMANDED CIVIL ACTION - LAW ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER AND NOW, this /1ffi Day of January, 200l, comes the Defendants, Robert and Sandra Cornman, by their attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully Answers the Second Amended Complaint as follows: 1. Paragraph one (1) is admitted. 2. Paragraph two (2) is admitted. -1- ~---"-~ l ~" ,-~"-- '<-, .-, , , , d ,<y ,', 3. Paragraph three (3) is admitted in part and denied in part. It is denied that the initial agreement was simply a lease agreement; the agreement between the parties provided for purchase of the premises. 4. Paragraph four (4) is admitted. 5. Paragraph five (5) is admitted. 6. Paragraph six (6) is denied. Paragraph six indicates that there was an agreement for an increase in rent and Robert and Sandra Cornman did not agree nor were their signatures evident on Exhibit "B". 7. On May 8, 2000, Robert and Sandra Cornman were ejected from the premises by Constable Paul McCauley. No documentation or evidence of any proper ejectment was delivered to the Cornmans and indeed and in fact, the Superior Court had issued a stay on the ejectment the day before the Cornmans were ejected. Prior to the ejectment, the Cornmans had filed an Appeal to the Superior Court contesting the -2- -"''''''- - ~ ~ I ,_._ 'W . __ . . , , ., . 'r ,', action. After the ejectment, so that the Commans would not be charged with rent, they withdrew their claim to possession. 8. It is denied that the Commans owe $5,200.00. The current rental amount according to the last agreement signed by the parties was $500.00 for eight months. Proof is demanded for any allegation for rental now due as this information is within the exclusive knowledge and control of the Plaintiffs and Defendants deny said allegation. 9. It is denied that the Defendants, Commans, owe late fees as Howard Steager had forgiven any charges for late fees and in addition, the Plaintiffs failed to ever collect or charge the Commans for late fees since 1983; Howard Steager indicated there was no back rent due. 10. Plaintiffs attorney's fees of $321.00 is denied and disputed, because of the responses in Paragraph eight and nine above. -3- "-- " , ., ,', ,", 11. Paragraph eleven (11) is denied. It is denied Plaintiffs have made repeated demands. The parties hereto have had multiple actions involving the issue of rent, ejectment and sums of money due to the Defendants, Commans, from the Plaintiffs, Steagers. Said money issue for repairs and alterations to the property is currently pending before the Superior Court and the parties are awaiting a decision. 12. Paragraph twelve (12A) is admitted in part. The written agreement also provided for a provision for purchase of the property. l3. Paragraph thirteen (13) is denied. It is denied the premises were in good repair and in good condition and it is further averred that the premises were in deplorable condition as follows: (A) Kitchen wall paper was peeling off the wall and had scotch tape as adhesive in places; (B) Kitchen floor was sagging, damaged and there was termite damage throughout the house; (C) Dining room wall paper was peeling off; -4- i ";:?"~~' -~~ __I ~ , <' - ~ - - ~ . ~--. " ~ ,- - .'n!' ~~. ,- , ., . . , , (D) Dining room ceiling had cracks in it; (E) Windows in the entire premises were unfit and had to be replaced and the Defendants replaced l5 windows throughout the house; (F) Living room ceiling was falling down; (G) Living room paper and plaster coming offthe walls; (H) Second floor bedroom was rotten; the wood steps were rotten and unsafe, and holes were in it; (I) Bathroom walls wallpaper peeling; (J) Bathroom wiring was brittle, had to be replaced; it was defective and old; (K) Front bedroom - plaster was coming off the walls and ceiling; (L) Heat vent was dislodged and inoperable in the front bedroom; (M) No heat was in the second bedroom; plaster was peeling. (N) Attic - no insulation, no flooring and only had sub flooring, which was pitted and infested; (0) Wiring in the house was inadequate and outdated and had to be replaced; (P) Plumbing throughout the house was inadequate and had to be replaced; the home was in deplorable condition. -5- " ,~- .,' ' .' -1_' .. - ~.<.. ~-' - - ,~ "'- ,. ,~ -,' - ,., >"T- '-]11'- . ., ", 14. Paragraph fourteen (14) is admitted. 15. Paragraph fifteen (l5) is admitted. l6. Paragraph sixteen (l6) is admitted. 17. Paragraph seventeen (17) is admitted. 18. Paragraph eighteen (l8) is admitted. 19. Paragraph nineteen (19) is denied. It is denied that there was a second lease that was renewed in that, the Plaintiffs did not present any documentation to the Defendants, nor did the Defendants execute any second lease. 20. Paragraph twenty (20) is denied. It is denied that the premises were damaged. It is averred to the contrary, that the Defendants maintained the property and made considerable improvements and additions to the property. -6- ;~\'- -'I '''-,-~,;' ,-'":;-;,. ~,,' '- - ^.,-- ,c' ,. ,~-~ ,r ,--' , .. " '" 21. Paragraph twenty-one (21) is denied. It is denied that the Defendants damaged the premises and breached any lease: (A) Kitchen Area - Defendants were in the process of re-wallpapering the kitchen at the time they were ejected. The wallpaper was not stained and the walls were not marked. The kitchen floor had been replaced twice by the Defendants and at this point, it was only evidencing wear and tear; (B) Dining room area - It is denied that any dogs stained the dining room floor. The wallpaper had one strip that was being replaced and the rest of the wallpaper was in good condition. The ceiling tile was stained because the drain pipe broke; however, the Defendants had installed all new tile in the ceiling. The plastic fixture , was off because the wallpaper was being replaced in that area. Dining room fan was installed by the Defendant as was the ceiling tiles and they were stained because of the break of the pipe. The wallpaper was also installed by the Defendants, and the premises had been wallpapered twice; (C) Living room area: There was one hole in the living room wall which was utilized for the electrical wiring; The Defendants installed new windows throughout the house and was in the process of painting the stairs. The holes could possibly be -7- ,.,,, . --,-, -'" "' ,," c;, " ,', '."f where the wiring cable was utilized in the premises. There were no dogs that scratched any flooring in that the flooring was originally covered with the carpet and this was the condition of the floor at the time the Commans took possession; (D) Steps to Second Floor - Dry rotted carpet was removed from the steps because it was unsightly and was leading to dangerous conditions; the carpet was torn; the bare spots were there because the carpet was removed; (E) Bathroom - The Defendants maintained the wallpaper; however, the moisture and lack of an exhaust fan caused the paper to become loose, but the Defendants attempted to fIx the paper. The Defendants did install the vinyl floor and the same was installed in a good and proper workmanlike manner. The Commans were fIxing the fIxtures, but at the time ofthe ejectment, the materials were removed. The fan was placed in the premises by the Commans and is now old, as the Cornmans installed the fan on or about 1983. The bathtub is in good and proper condition, and it is denied that it is corroded and needs to be replaced; (F) Walk-in Closet: The allegations of subparagraph (f) are denied. The complaint reads that the walls, ceiling and floor are rough and unfinished. Upon entry into the premises, these items had to be remodeled and were unserviceable at -8- ~-- - -~ - , , , ., . , , , the time the Defendants took possession. The complaint alleges the ceiling light has no fixture, and then complains that it is not properly mounted. The Defendants had nothing to do with the mounting of the ceiling light, nor with the installation of the heating duct; (G) Allegations of subparagraph (g) are denied, in that the walls of the bedroom were not in adequate shape at the time of possession. Walls contained wallpaper that had been painted over many times. The Defendants were in the process of replacing the door which was inadequate when they were illegally ejected from the premises as well as the door trim; (H) Subparagraph (h) is denied. The stain on the floor was there at the time the Defendants obtained possession. The wallpaper was peeled off at the time of possession, as well as the holes. The Defendants did nothing more then normal wear and tear and were in the process of remodeling this area. The complaint says that the carpet was ruined from "paint urine". This allegation is absurd. The Defendants maintained the property and this area in a good and proper manner; (1) It is denied that the Defendants permitted any dogs to stain carpeting. The paneling was properly installed after the Defendants took possession; -9- ',,,,., 'I -"- ,. - .'~ "^-~ " ~ -, -.., - ~, - ." (J) Paragraph 21(1) is denied. At the time the Defendants took possession, the basement steps and walls were cracked. The wall on one side was pushed out and the plaster was falling out. The paint was peeling off the basement area around the windows and the walls. The steps were loose; (K) The windows on the premises had to be replaced, and were completely inadequate at the time the Defendants took possession. The windows were installed properly, both for interior and outside flashing. The Defendants by attending to the windows protected from additional rotting; there was rotting around all windows at the time the Defendants took possession. 22. Paragraph twenty-two (22) is denied. The Defendants improved the premises and left the premises in a better shape then when they took possession. See New Matter. 23. Paragraph twenty-three (23) is denied and further contains conclusionary averments, which do not require an answer. 24. Paragraph twenty-four (24) is denied and further contains conclusionary -10- "~"'-;-,.) I - - -,,~,'V ~ _ ',' ,_ " , ,_ ~ , '. averments, which do not require an answer. 25. Paragraph twenty-five (25) is denied. Said Paragraph twenty-five has an averment concerning, "elements". This averment is vague and conclusionary. Are the Plaintiffs contending weather elements? If so, it is denied that the Plaintiffs caused any substantial damage and it is further averred that the "elements", other than through the windows and outside areas, had any damage to the premises. 26. Proof is demanded for the allegations contained in Paragraph twenty-six (26) as said allegations are within the exclusive knowledge and control of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants deny that they caused any damage and a request for $26,400.00 is not proper. 27. Proof is demanded for the allegations as to carpet valued at $l,OOO.OO and the blinds valued at $200.00, as the Defendants are without knowledge and any basis to conclude that this is proper damage, and deny that they caused any damage such as set forth. -11- ',' ,"- +,,.' ,'~ " .~- ',- "" '" - -,"",~ --.. '-' ~. ~-- - -,~_. ,,- '" "', t J "1 ,q 28. See Answer to Paragraph twenty-seven. 29. The Defendants were forcibly ejected from their premises after the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania had stayed the ejectment proceedings. (A) Because of the illegal ejectment, the Defendants may not have been able to remove all items, and after the illegal ejectment, no trespassing signs were placed on the premises by the Plaintiffs. (B) The Plaintiffs ceased the above ground swimming pool of the Defendants and the sand was utilized as ballist; at the time of the illegal ejectment, the Defendants were not able to remove their swimming pool and the ballist because of the forcible removal. (C) Subparagraph (c) is denied in that the Defendants removed what they were able to remove within the time constraints of the illegal ejectment. (D) The Defendants deny that there was 15 inches of grass in height at the time of the illegal ejectment. 30. Proof is demanded for the allegations contained as they are in the exclusive -l2- ,"",.'>'c:-' . -"'_',,-. . "___~,_,,"'",,',.' .'~" " '~",- ,,<-'~~ ~, , " ~, . ", , ) ."' . I' .... control ofthe Plaintiffs, and Defendants are without knowledge of the same. Further, by the Constable forcibly ejecting the Defendants, the Plaintiffs did not permit the Defendants to remove their property. 31. Proof is demanded for the allegations as to sewer and trash bills, as the Complaint fails to set forth copies of same as required by the Rules of Civil Procedure, and further, the Defendants deny liability because of the illegal ejectment. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully pray your Honorable Court to dismiss the Complaint filed against them. NEW MATTER 32. The Defendants were illegally ejected from their premises in violation of the stay order issued by the Superior Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The Plaintiffs had been put on notice that a stay order had been requested and proceeded with the ejectment. After the illegal ejectment, Plaintiffs failed to notify the -13- "- ,~~." tn" _ ." +_. , ~ ~~ . ..~, , ., l , J , . . I. '... Defendants of any alleged deficiencies, within thirty (30) days of said illegal ejectment, in violation of the landlord/tenant act. 33. The Plaintiffs filed an ejectment action in the District Justice Office, which was appealed and heard before The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. No claim for damages was raised, either at the District Justice level, nor before the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. 34. The Plaintiffs had every opportunity to inspect the premises and raise any claims for damages at the time of their ejectment actions. 35. At the time of the de novo appeal hearing before The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley, no claim for rental premises damages was submitted; indeed, the Plaintiffs presented expert testimony that the premises were appraised at $75,000.00, and worth the same. 36. In the Court action involving the ejectment, Plaintiffs failed to raise any claims for damages. The Rules of Civil Procedure permit damage claims in ejectment -14- :'"k''' - , _ ",-" ~ --~'>-- "1-,:-'--, , " j ", I ) '.. . J. .. actions; this was the proper time for said claims to be made. Since the Plaintiffs did not make these claims, this current action is res judicata. 37. At the time the Defendants moved into 416 Reno Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, all walls and ceilings were cracked and deteriorating. 38. At the time of moving into said premises, all floors were in bad condition and were uneven and sinking. 39. At the time the Defendants took possession of the premises, the basement beams and other areas had termite damage and all windows were unsuitable and weathered. 40. At the time the Defendants took possession of the premises, at all or most wall areas, the paint was peeling off as well as the wallpaper. Most doors were warped in all rooms. 41. At the time of possession, the wiring was completely inadequate. -l5- ~ .". - - ,,- , , >-. - , , . , , "" ~ '.' " .l 42. At the time of possession, the Defendants experienced fuses that kept blowing and it was discovered, that the premises had low amp service, which was hazardous. The Defendants corrected this electrical wiring by upgrading. 43. At the time of possession, the living room had ceiling lights which were hazardous and the ceiling was dark brown from age and was sagging. 44. At the time of possession, the carpet in the living room was old and rotten and when it was replaced, there was a piece of plywood covering a huge hole in the floor. 45. The Defendants found that the house at one time was heated by an old coal furnace, which had been removed, causing damage in the basement area and in other areas of the house. 46. Plaster from all the walls was falling and the front door was rotten and glass panels were falling out, at the time of possession. -l5- \""~' " _',' _ ,,,. ~, ,~_O> .' _ _ n.<<"",,, '-'" .. .. ., I 47. The middle bedroom was in dismal shape with numerous coats of wallpaper and paint. The floors were in bad condition. The windows were old and weathered. Air seeped through, as well as all other windows in the house. 48. In bedroom number three, there was no heat in this room; the window was broken and taped with masking tape; the floor was brownish and was not level and the wiring was completely inadequate, as was in the rest of the premises, at the time of posseSSiOn. 49. At the time that the Defendants took possession, the bathroom fixtures were inadequate; there were worms in the toilet; the water pressure was inadequate; the plumbing in all aspects ofthe premises was not workable. 50. In the attic, the wiring was exposed and caused a hazard. The steps leading to the attic were cracked and broken. The windows were nonfunctional in that they did not work and air and light came through around the edges. -l6- ~~- """ . . ,~, i_ :-'''1_ ',' ~-" , -"- . , " '. ,. , 51. In the basement steps area, the walls were cracked and not level, wall covering was falling off, a trailer cord had been utilized to hang a light over this area, which was inadequate and hazardous. 52. The garage area was damaged and in disrepair at the time of possession, the walls had rotten areas from floor to ceiling. 53. The Defendants at the time they took possession, believed that they would ultimately have the residence as their own because of the representations made by the Plaintiffs. Over the years, the Defendants made substantial repairs to the premises, and submitted to Judge Bayley receipts of these repairs, approximating $38,000.00, and Judge Bayley ordered that the Plaintiffs owed the Defendants approximately $32,000.00 for the repairs to the premises. 54. Bedroom number one, the Defendants completed renovated this area, installing drywall. The door trim was not installed because of the commencement of litigation by the Plaintiffs. -18- !~,,-~'':'" , - .c' ,~- ~ .-~ ""-' .."" -, ^ _'.'r . ~ -,- '.- . . ~- ,~' - ~ . _,v _~ "'., , '. .,', 55. Bedroom number two, at the time of possession, the Defendants found gold carpet on the floor, which was covering the area and they have no knowledge of the condition of that floor; however, the holes in the wall were present at the time of possession and caused by areas of old and rotten plaster. 56. At the time of possession, the Defendants found the kitchen with very old cabinets and an old sink. The walls and ceiling were cracked and the ceiling light was very old. There was an apartment size stove using a propane tank, which was inadequate. 57. The kitchen floor was not level and sinking in areas caused by the beam in the basement being termite infested. 58. The wood work in the kitchen was rotten and cracked. Curtin rods could not even stay in the wood. Paint was falling off the walls. 59. The dining room on the first floor had inadequate wiring, the walls were in bad -19- . ." _7,,_ ., , . : I . , ,f., . . #. " . shape in that the wallpaper was peeling and the painted areas were also peeling. The walls had been papered and painted many times. 60. All the windows in the house were old and weathered and were replaced by the Defendants. 61. The bathroom floor at the time of possession was rotten; the toilet had to be replaced; the plumbing and other fixtures in the bathroom had to be replaced. 62. The Plaintiffs are aware that the Defendants purchased material to repair and remodel the premises in an amount over $38,000.00, as copies of invoices were provided to the Plaintiffs at the time of previous trial evidencing that this money was expended by the Defendants for the Plaintiffs' residence. 63. In addition, the Plaintiffs are aware from the previous court proceeding, that hundreds of man hours were involved in utilizing the repair and remodeling materials, installing it in the premises of the Plaintiffs. -20- . . "'. J , ", ..' I WHEREFORE, the Defendants respectfully pray your Honorable Court to dismiss the Complaint filed against them. Respectfully submitted, BY: p. -~ " 0_. ,'--.-.=. ,""p,,,-,, '-, "" ''''-"---' --, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA. 17102 (717) 232-9724 LD. No. 07056 -21- " ..- I " ,-','" , ~, ;' :"1'1~_ ,_~,,_" ." .,....'.. " . J .~ . ... 'l" ~ .:.,,! . · with ' . I verify &hat the statements made in this Answer __ New Matter llfe true and correct. I understllndth~ttidl!l:l!tutementl! herein ure made subject' . '- ., to the penalties of 18 Pa. e.s. Section 4')04 reluling to unsworn fulsitication to ~tborities. . ~fdt~ ROBERTH. CORNMAN Q~~: January 17, 2001 , , . . i) ~- " .. I" .'::t 'l'~!I!"" .!;,. _~ . D~te: ;"'-': , . ...... r 'I " .... 'I .. . .i" : ~ ': i~~'~ . .' .,.jJ, I verity iliat the statements made in iliis Answer~ New Matter . llfe true and correct. I understand th.ll tiillll: lllutements herl:in arl: made subject " ""', . to the penalties of 18 Pa. e.s. Section 4'>04 r~laling to unswoOl falsification to ~tborities. ~~~&~-"j SANDRA .K. CORNMAN JANUARY 17, 2001 , , . . --, " . - .~ ! , . . . . , "." ' . . " "" . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Answer to Second Amended Complaint with New Matter has been served th fi 11 ' 'd' 'd 1 b ~#n.,j 4e/lve'i{b 't tf' d~ upon e 0 owmg m IVI ua s y fl8s1tml?, it ,",up)' b' e ~1Hfi" 111 l11;; mll;; latos Mail, First Class Maa, on the 1j/.:1::6 day of January, 2001 to the following addresses: Peter B, Foster, Esquire 121 South Street Harrisburg, PA. 17101 Respectfully submitted, vWd Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 LD. No. 07056 BY: Date: JanUaryif2001 1;,.~__ ~,'lI'!I '''i,._. ,.r '"'."_''''" 1- , I I .. HOWARD STEAGER and IDA STEAGER, PLAINTIFFS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V, ROBERT CORNMAN and SANDRA CORNMAN, DEFENDANTS : 00-5362 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /0 day of August, 2001, the motion of defendants for summary judgment, IS DENIED. Peter B. Foster, Esquire For Plaintiffs . ~~~ L-6)jI.\o'O\ ~ Arthur K. Dils, Esquire For Defendants Court Administrator :saa "~- ,- -""","._,- - ", -", .v, _~'" " . -~ .,,,-,1;;'"'.>0.- ..<iatil~~~~~!lllll"llillliihu"""'_~-""iH~ol\<;~liifbJ1imM "~ ~-~ Illll \--'-\ _';:',r:. ,j,--- nV -'\\~(..)\r'\n \ '" "j"O n \.} l,l,I'-j . \,.i.... f'" t,IL, '. u \ ~._):.. "auNT'< C\j\IA~€~~~~tV~~If\. L,"~d,. ,,-,~,~ ___~.J~.,.. _ _ '.~,_=."_~. ,.~o -, - -'- ~, - -- ~"-'- [i 1" IJ J , J il6