Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-1620COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT FROM -//,o e, 11>3 DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 0 5. JG-Z6 (? Qom,,,,., NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the case mentioned below. MAG. 01 7 No. OR NAME OF D. . NAME OF APPELLANT f7r Co -ftm C, n , 0 1-Y ? ?STATE ? ?1 ADDRESS OF APPELLANT New + i-k- Dc- p ?J•t/,^I fDe/endantl DATE OF JU GMENT •C/Jl) IN THE CASE OF (Plaaii`nti1R) LL 011 b) CLAIM NO 7GNO OF APPELLANT HIS W Y OR AGENT CV 20??????? ??. LT 20 ?- block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If appellant was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1008B. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as No. 1001(6) in action before District Justice, he a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. I MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee). PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary ?? Enter rule upon ? ur -?iS ? /' t 0 , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appellees) (Common Pleas No. d 3 ' 14 -2Z C1.;J Tu--J within twenty (20) days after service of rule orjs?ff entry of judgment of non pros. I , J Signature of appellant or his attorney or agent RULE: To CU??jS v?Dml?i01'J appellee(s) Ao Name of appellee(s) (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. Date: GQ&j Q , 20-0-3. Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy NOTICE OF APPEAL ^ ?n -- COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY 04/ 3/2003 TUE 15:02 FAg 2156432872 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF• C13MBERLJ0II1 COTTMAN TRANSMISSION 0 002 l,73 COTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT Mag, Olat. No.; 09-3-04 DJ Name-, Hon. THOMAS A. PLACEY Address' 104 S. SPORTING HILL RD. MECHANICSBURG, PA Tei9Phone: (717) 761-8230 17050 COTTMAN TRANSMISSION 240 NEW YORK DRIVE FORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034 P AINTIFFIJUDGMEV? ASE CURT A EaWADDRESS THOM>BON 1 , 325 N WEST ST T CARLISLE, PA 17013 L J VS. DEFENDANT/JUDGMENT C 11 a E?s .9&R 10 ?GOTTMAx TRANSMISS 240 NEW YORK DRIVE FORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034 L J DocketNo.: CV-0000551-02 Date Filed: 11/14/02 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: - - FOR PLA32 +IFF ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) T CIMpBON, C1TR9'TS` V ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) ceT mAN TRA1,rMTSSTON in the amount of $ 4i6 _ i t on: F] Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Damages will be assessed on- This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ (Date of Judgment) 3131103 (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment $ 860.88 Judgment Costs $ 65.50 Interest on Judgment $ .00 Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 926.38 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT JUSTICE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE DISTRICT JUSTICE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. 0-3 Date , District Justice I certify that this is a true a corre UW1 =V ceedings Containing the judgment, Date , District Justice My commission expires first Monday of Januar , 2004. SEAL r^ti1 Ci) a" .= I , mss PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10,) DAYS AFTER filing the notice of appe=i. ChecL applicable, b0Xes) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF_C???? % SS AFFIDAVIT: I hereby swear or affirm that I served a copy of the Notice of ppeal, Common Pleas No. 0 ?- 16 LO, upon the District Justice designated therein on "` \\\ (date of service) I? 20 03 JI b personal servicf, !, rV1 by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's h t i h (name) ellee on the a d i ere o pt attac rece e? , pp an up on 20 0:3 r by personal service X by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. and further that I served the Rule to File a Complaint accompanying the above Notice of Appeal upon the appellee(s) to whom the Rule was addressed on A0 C,20 0:3 L I by personal service by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. SWORN (AFNRMED) AND UBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 20Q?. Sig E o officeal before whore affa t was ma Title of official My commission expires on 20 1/6" /" All-?- Signature of affiant NOTARIAL SEAL LAURA S. LONG, Notary Public Upper Dublin Tmp., Montgomery County My Commission Expireb March 4, 2006 MONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ,COURT OF COMMON PLEAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT 4 NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM /?h4I(?? ; DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMQN PLEAS No. 101- J6,26 NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice s on the date and in the case mentioned below. LC'J??Gij1 /nir?SrhlSSlo? ADDRESS OF APPELLANT (•l? O New - rork ?. DATE OF JU MENT IN TT.EE CASE F (Plaintiff) JtY IS 3?In??ah CLAIM F-V Wov5knc w P,? _ SIGNAT O APPELLANT HIS R Y OR AGENT CV20,XQ047-51- Q7- LT 20 This bl&k will be signed OI> Y when this notation is required under Pa. R C.P.J.P. No. 10086. 1 This Notice of Appeal, when reived by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy If appellant was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(6) in action before District Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAE:CIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section,of form to be used ONLY when appellant'was DEFENDANT"(see Pa, R.C.P.J.P. No.. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice t7f appeal to be served upon appellee). PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon ? V- S • ! ? , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appellee(s) (Common Pleas No. V 3 ' /L o1 U ?`?.1 7- f ju dgment of non pros. 14?within twenty (20) days after rvice of rule oI.Etr-Y-10 nu ??) l _ / Um? Con p Signature of appellant or his attorney or agent t=4 RUL To a ellee(s) no L. Po tNe- It, s b iVame o yppegee($*; (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. /J Date: , 20--L- SJgrretme of Pbou?onaprg or Deputy P COD (Defendant) AOPC 312-90 COURT FILE L - ?N Xo C ..., 1i4 v i (Ja/.aw f r ru ,.t sa= -J rU slat{ d S oF;c od leis rU apj? o (pair ,i.>e,iouisaa ??; t eaaH u. , aapu? L7 aad paTtua„ Qb $ s8elsod C3 In ?_ G7 Mall Pcov?c,e?: CeC? died recelpt rnailp1ece A madin9 for yedr 1 Se?ice for two Years identifier M611. A 1UniQue deliveN posta Mad or priority ature upon kept by the t Class • A ?e? rd of deliveN ith Firs- mail. d w atlonal for 0 Reminders?N?Y be combine of intern th Certified Mail. R 0oNant ail may v DViDED w1 aailable for any 11. Gertlf'1ed M nested Pr tt cal ayttrn ed Ma Celtifiied Ma`l 1NCE CpVERAGE l or Register to O 1NSURA lease consider insured pt may be r? plete os?e to cover t?le vacua ipt Is 'a u • N bl additional fee d R e1pt dpadd apply°To wive a?le611; ested • rtified for an To obt2:1 Btil tR°e n Receipts m?tark on Your dCes? or R?,P dorse n'adP TeceiPt a UPS icted to mallpieoe with the {ee. E . e return be restr arkthe d uPl Maine clerk or ise e6%the art deliveN m all a . lease the Ce rtified M ?. an addltlonal fee,rt Adv ees authorized a9DellveN" • . t is desired Irv. on tha Mad. . e For address ement Restnctedrtrf1ad Ms'll 11 a p, osta9 tnQulfy endors mark on the Ce arkln9 ,rig h p making an teb' dre det L h ° and afti `eSenlt it when If a Pt the loo eeded, ?e t and p ?.M-A438 1 ' iQ2595" r reecelPt is n ?" tNIPORtANT: Save 1h?s cesP 380Q, 3u 1Y ?? lRBVetael pg Fotm - 47 xce ... Od C.: (1e/18(!/ ?_ .f 9 PeJa/druo? ?` ? a4 0 11( f u Il `lr7l hays `'0 •11 ? v?? p???l:1 Jt i,ll • d S i :l::Gd fetal aiaH (Pe lint aH aa_ j L 31 i ; `'4ea5 Pu j . +euysod o +o(.tss+j O ?_I ld aal " Uasu pU3) uilat Qa eaj Pal ru- 11 $ etial: O +od a ft-s t.I'1 n stied Mali A availing receip^ ""r mailpiece A pique identifier fo" v= two a upon del' er>' al service for tw Y A gnatur ears ll k,F?t by the Post mail. ord of delivery Class mail or PriontY A combined with First ail. IMPO 9nt RMa1 may ONUC be °f intemational mail. titled class with Certified Mail. For Niai{ is not .available for a1S PROVIDED Mai. Cer-fled -OVERAGE or Registered rovide Proof of INSURANCE be requite to p Nd and atta°h a Return valuables, Please ccnsider lusrnurReceipt may08se comps age to cover the additional leet a Rece?Pt 1ar>d add a o?reeiimve a fee waver for • For an obtain R article oast Mad receipt is t Req Centied delivery. Form 381 i) to the ReceP your Receipt norse madpi',,eipt, USPS postman ddre or a duplicate return restricted to the a m the may be required. delivery - t or mark the mallpiece For an additional . tad, nt. Advise the clerk resent the an"ti" addressee s authorized age livery"• fired, Pl?e p rtdred Mail F eetricted >? is desired- on the endorsement " the Certifi d ail VIng• If receipt a P h postage and mail. If a postmark on an ingUiry an cle at the Post °d a dfor etac h nee it when making receipt is not and affix label w Save this receipt and present 102595-99-M-1938 PS erse) Farm 3889, July 1999 (Rev IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson Plaintiff VS. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION Defendant NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 RESPONSE Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/03, in support of such request, represents as follows: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. a. From October 30, 2001 to November 13, 2001, the following incidents occurred. (1) I went to the appellant's business located at 3600 Carlisle Pike, Camp Hill, PA 17011 and the following took place: (a) On or about October 30, 2001, plaintiff went to Cottman Transmission to negotiate payment for services rendered. (b) When plaintiff was unable to pay the full amount for the service the manager, Joseph Marcin, shouted at plaintiff, was disrespectful, and threatening towards plaintiff. (i) Manager tone was intimidating. (c) Without plaintiffs permission, the Cottman Transmission manager called plaintiff's bank and revealed confidential information regarding plaintiffs checking account to an individual who was unauthorized to access to plaintiffs account. (d) After being notified that the fee for his service would be satisfied, the Manager repeatedly harassed plaintiffs by phone, at their home and place of employment. (e) After being harassed by the manager, plaintiff notified Cottman customer service representative, Carol Iacullo about the service of the manager. She advised that plaintiff did not have to take that kind of treatment and directed plaintiff to John Tipett, a Cottman Transmission franchisee located at 2310 Walnut Street, Harrisburg, PA (f) Upon full payment for the service on plaintiff's transmission to Cottman, the manager held plaintiff's car to exact high and unreasonable storage fees from plaintiff totaling $1,065.00. (g) Cottman Transmission did not verify charges to hold vehicle on property, and refused to give plaintiff a receipt. (h) Cottman Transmission never informed plaintiff of storage charges if they were unable to pay for transmission service upon completion of work. (i) After gaining possession of vehicle, plaintiff discovered that Cottman removed oil and antifreeze from my vehicle, and replaced my car battery with a non serviceable battery. As a result of this neglect, plaintiff paid an additional $59.33. (j) Without permission, Cottman Transmission removed or had removed, the religious symbol on plaintiff's vehicle. (k) As a result of poor and inferior service plaintiff incurred an additional $505.88 in expenses to correct the workmanship of Coffman Transmission. Wherefore, Plaintiff/Petitioner respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgement of rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04 and award the plaintiff $926.38. Respectfully Submitted, Date Aril 28, 2003 Curtis W. Thompson By ? O Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West Street Carlisle, PA 17108-1961 0 c? ? C rty cn IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson Plaintiff vs. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION Defendant NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed with out you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 COMPLAINT Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-304, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/3, in support of such request, represents as follows: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. 3. On March 31, 2003, District Justice Thomas A. Placey (09-3-04) entered an Order of judgment against the Defendant in the amount of $926.38. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"4. Defendant refuses to pay said judgment in the amount of $926.38. 5. Defendant is in contempt regarding judgment entered by District Justice Thomas A. Placey. 6. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. 7. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin enterprises, LLC (DBA Cottman Transmission)., in September 2001. 8. Defendant provided inferior quality and unprofessional services and charged a unreasonable storage fee to Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff experienced problems with the transmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. Total costs of these repairs was $505.88. 10. At trial this defendant did not appear and by default a judgment was ordered in favor of the Plaintiff. 11. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important and none was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. 12. Defendant charged the Plaintiff a storage fee of $1,065 or $15.00 per day for 71 days, which by application of case law is unreasonable. 13. The defendant failed to support a storage fee that was reasonable although specifically requested. 14. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid by $355.00. 15. Judgment by default was ruled in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgment rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-3-04 and award the Plaintiff $926.38. Respecfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson By I W ?? DateJuly 19, 2003 Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013-1961 ? ? ? u -, - c._ ni-? ?_ _ _- ;.a 1: ?i > - ? ? 1_.e Y I"1 3' _ '1 ?J -? 1? J. ?? <. Curtis W. Thompson Plaintiff VS. Cottman Transmission Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL 19 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 RULE 1312-1. The Petition for Appointment of Arbitrators shall be substantially in the following form: PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Curtis W. Thompson Pro Se counsel for the plaintiff/defendant in the above action (or actions), respectfully represents that: I. The above-captioned action (or actions) is (are) at issue. 2. The claim of the plaintiff in the action is $ 926.38 The counterclaim of the defendant in the action is 0 The following attorneys are interested in the case(s) as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: WHEREFORE, your petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. Respectfully 1submitted , w-?yvr? Cu tis W. Thompson d ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, foregoing petition, Esq., and ?F ??? actions) as prayed for. I in consideration of the Esq., Esq., are appointed arbitrators in the above caption action (or By the C , P.J. ff J- -? O W ?s',h'N! -7d m ?* .? t r. \) S ySS 7- o r ?) p-?- i_??--- t?a2©a? of S??J?C ? ¦ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ¦ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ¦ Attach this'eard to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: ?goLk w tO --000 U S 1- o A. Signature X Agent 17 ? Addressee B. ved by (Printed Name) C. to of Delivery D. Is delvery address different from item 11 O Yes If YES. Ater delivery address below: O No 3. Service Type ? Certified Mail O Express Mail ? Registered ? Return Receipt for Merchandise b Insured Mali ?b.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? jV, Fee) 1] Yes 2. ?Iufromsen4cekfto lit49i 0.75t 006:? SW R 144( 7 [}UjL? 5 Q 0002 8068 2456 eceipt 102595.02-M-1540 .?, ' :,.- , . ;,1' , ? = N ?"?? A ?? ' :. ? w?' ? ?'? , ? . .?» l ` .. A...a ,. tit ? -=i ?Y? ,r_. (µ...? L.}.^ CURTIS W. THOMPSON Plaintiff V. COTTMAN TRANSMISSION Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO: 2003-1620 CV 551-02 : CIVIL ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW, this 1s? day of December 2004, the Defendant, Cottman Transmission by and through its counsel, Coyne & Coyne, P.C., avers the following in support of the Preliminary Objections: COUNTI IMPROPER SERVICE 1. The Plaintiff, Curtis W. Thompson, filed a Complaint with the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County on or about July 21, 2003 and served the Defendant by Certified Restricted Mail on or about November 18, 2004; 2. The Plaintiff, Curtis W. Thompson, has executed improper service on the Defendant, Cottman Transmission. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint. COUNT II PRELIMINARY OBJECTION TO LACK OF UNIFORMITY OF PLEADING TO LAW OF COURT 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are incorporated by reference. 4. The Defendant requests this Honorable Court to affirm and or uphold the judgment rendered by District Justice Thomas Placey. 5. The Plaintiff, Curtis W. Thompson filed a Complaint as a result of an appeal from a District Justice's decision requesting this Honorable Court to uphold the District Justice decision. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff's Complaint fails to conform to the Pa. Rules of Civil Procedure and the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint. COURT III INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY OF A ]PLEADING 6. The Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a cause of action. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable court to compel the Plaintiff to file a more specific pleading. COURT IV FAILURE TO JOIN A NECESSARY PARTY 7. Paragraphs 1 through 6 are incorporated by reference. 8. The Plaintiff, Curtis W. Thompson, avers he contracted with Cottman Transmission a business trading and doing business at 240 New York Drive, Fort Washington, PA working through a franchise., J. Marcin Enterprise, LLC in September 2001. 9. The Plaintiff fails to identify J. Marcin Enterprise, LLC as an indispensable party. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss the Plaintiffs Complaint. COUNT V LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION 10. The Plaintiff avers he contracted with Cottman Transmission at 240 New York Drive, Fort Washington, PA. 11. The Plaintiff fails to specify jurisdiction over Defendant, Coffman Transmission WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss the Plaintiffs Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over the Defendant. Date y/o i / o -f COYNE & COYNVir Austi n F. Grogan, 1e 3901 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 737-0464 Attorney for Defendant ID #59020 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Austin F. Grogan, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the attorney for Defendant, J. Marcin Enterprises, LLC, t/d/b/a Cottman Transmission Center, and that he did mail a true and correct copy of the Defendant's Preliminary Objection in the above matter, by first class mail, to the Plaintiff's Attorney on November 3, 2003, at the following address: Curtis Thompson 325 N. West Street Carlisle, PA 17013 which satisfied the requirements of service by mail pursuant to Pa..R.C.P.403. Date a I( 0q Austin F. Grogan, Esqu' e 3901 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)737-0464 Attorney for Defendant ID #59020 C-) -n rn ro `r7 N -... CL- Tzs W. I?{orn??? bV1 vs Case No. Cv-o55 I- oa, Co}t M tniAtectsm=ssto n Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Cu axs W, I KOMD SS OA intends to proceed with the above captioned matter. Print Name Cl tyyts yi . I tib1Nl?,USign Name /-A -L . 'S hAnr h?? Date: QAAAA Attorney for Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This role was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local roles implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or site will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Curtis W, Thompson, herby certify that on October 11, 2005, I served copies of a Statement of Intention to Proceed, Civil Complaint, Notice of Judgement, and Statement of Facts from the District Court 09-3-04 CV-0551-02 to the following parties by way of United States Mail: Austin F. Grogan, Esq. 3901 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Cottman Transmission, LLC Attn: Legal Department 201 Gibraltor Rd Suite 150 Horsham, PA 19044 October 11, 2005 w . Date s W. Thompson ? n> r- ?_? O ui _i,I T? i ?i •-{ i:z,- ,? -n , ro ;jYJ' -!, •• , ?n ' ? , -a ?; IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson Plaintiff M VS. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 r -_ Coffman Transmission CIVIL ACTION - CID r - Defendant NOTICE ?r. YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, if you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 RESPONSE Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31103, in support of such request, represents as follows: Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. a. From October 30, 2001 to November 13, 2001, the following incidents occurred. (1) 1 went to the appellant's business located at 3600 Carlisle Pike, Camp Hill, PA 17011 and the following took place: (a) On or about October 30, 2001, plaintiff went to Cottman Transmission to negotiate payment for services rendered. (b) When plaintiff was unable to pay the full amount for the service the manager, Joseph Marcin, shouted at plaintiff, was disrespectful, and threatening towards plaintiff. (i) Manager tone was intimidating. (c) Without plaintiffs permission, the Cottman Transmission manager called plaintiffs bank and revealed confidential information regarding plaintiffs checking account to an individual who was unauthorized to access to plaintiffs account. (d) After being notified that the fee for his service would be satisfied, the Manager repeatedly harassed plaintiffs by phone, at their home and place of employment. (e) After being harassed by the manager, plaintiff notified Cottman customer service representative, Carol lacullo about the service of the manager. She advised that plaintiff did not have to take that kind of treatment and directed plaintiff to John Tipett, a Cottman Transmission franchisee located at 2310 Walnut Street, Harrisburg, PA (E) Upon full payment for the service on plaintiff s transmission to Coltman, the manager held plaintiffs car to exact high and unreasonable storage fees from plaintiff totaling $1,065.00. (g) Coffman Transmission did not verify charges to hold vehicle on property, and refused to give plaintiff a receipt. (h) Cottman Transmission never informed plaintiff of storage charges if they were unable to pay for transmission service upon completion of work. (i) After gaining possession of vehicle, plaintiff discovered that Cottman removed oil and antifreeze from my vehicle, and replaced my car battery with a non serviceable battery. As a result of this neglect, plaintiff paid an additional $59.33. (j) Without permission, Cottman Transmission removed or had removed, the religious symbol on plaintiff's vehicle. (k) As a result of poor and inferior service plaintiff incurred an additional $505.88 in expenses to correct the workmanship of Cottman Transmission. Wherefore, Plaintiff/Petitioner respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgement of rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04 and award the plaintiff $926.38. Respectfully Submitted, Date April 28.2003 Curtis W. Thompson By W Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West Street Carlisle, PA 17108-1961 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NTY OF: . Dist. No., 09-3-04 DJ Name: Han. THOMAS A. PLACEY AGdms. 104' S. SPORTING HILL RD. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone:(717) 761-8230 17050 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF/JUDGMECNT %0q..AS E NAME and ADDRESS rTHOMPSON, CIIRTIS W 325 N WEST ST CARLISLE, PA 17013 L VS. J DEFENDANT/JUDGMENT C IaT an DRESS [COTTMAN TRANSMISSION 240 NEW YORK DRIVE FORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034 CDRTIS W. THOMPSON L J 325 N WEST ST DocketNo.: CV-0000551-02 CARLISLE, PA 17013 Date Filed: 11/14/02 9% THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FOR PLAINTIFF ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) _PmnmPRnN rmurPTa w ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) - COTTMAN mRANSMraaTON in the amount of $ gig _ ig on: (Date of Judgment) 31 /n --A ? Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Y (Date & Time) 7 Damages will assessed on: ? This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $_ Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT JUSTICE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE DISTRICT JUSTICE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. 3 U_DDate District Justice I certify that this is a true a correct c a recor o ceedings containing the judgment. ?3- 1-D j Date District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2004. SEAL AOPC 315-03 CURTIS W. THOMPSON, Plaintiff V. DISTRICT COURT 09-3-04 COTTMAN TRANSMISSION, Defendant CV-0551-02 FACTS FROM TRIAL This is a reprise of Thompson v. Marcin, CV-0389-02, and the facts from that case are incorporated into this action. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin Enterprises, LLC., in September 2001. Plaintiff complained of the inferior quality and unprofessional services to franchisor (Defendant), Coffman Transmission Systems, LLC., who referred Plaintiff to another franchisee for prepaid maintenance and any warranty work. Plaintiff experienced problems with the tfansmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. The total cost of these repairs was $505.88. In the initial suit Plaintiff sued only Joseph Marcin, as an individual, and it was found that this individual had no liability in the case. In this case Plaintiff brought suit against only the franchisor. At trial this Defendant did not appear' and by default judgment will be entered against it. The only issue to be discussed is damages. DISCUSSION Plaintiff's present action seeks damages for inferior work and unreasonable storage fees. Plaintiff again did not bring suit against the appropriate defendants; however, the Defendant in this case did not appear, which requires a different outcome. It is of no moment that Plaintiff has not ever shown by acceptable evidence that this Defendant or any other potential defendant was negligent or breached some warranty duty. Defendant did not appear and by operation of Rule 319 judgment against this Defendant only for the sum certain in claimed inferior work damages of $505.88.1 ' Pa.R.C.P.DJ. No. 207 provides that "corporations may be represented by their officers or counsel." Only Mr. Marcin appeared pursuant to his obligation under the franchise agreement. Under the Court Rules Mr. March cannot represent Defendant, which corporate counsel should have known, prior to ill advising franchisee to appear and defend. ' It is understood that Defendant is indemnified by the franchise agreement; however, this judgment would not be entered but for the failure of this Defendant to appear as per the Rules promulgated by our The remaining issue of damages is the storage fees. It was expressly noted at the initial trial that additional testimony was necessary. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important. None was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. The storage fee of $1,065.00 or $15.00 per day for 71 days is by application of case law unreasonable. The amount that is reasonable has not been shown even though specifically requested. The default in appearance requires the damages be a sum certain. The parties have not provided guidance on this damage. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the, higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid tfy $355.00.3 Judgment by default is in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. The parties have previously been advised of their appeal rights and the original exhibits have been returned to the presenting parry. By the Court.,, _? 31 MAR 03 P acey D.J. Date 4omA' Supreme Court. Thus, mindful of the agreement, it is expressed that this liability is solely the responsibility of Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC. 3 This amount ultimately will and should be borne by the franchisee. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St Carlisle, PA 17013 Plaintiff VS. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION 201 Gibraltor Rd Suite 150 Horsham, PA 19044 Defendant NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed with out you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 COMPLAINT Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-304, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/3, in support of such request, represents as follows: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. 3. On March 31, 2003, District Justice Thomas A. Placey (09-3-04) entered an Order of judgment against the Defendant in the amount of $926.38. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "A„ 4. Defendant refuses to pay said judgment in the amount of $926.38. 5. Defendant is in contempt regarding judgment entered by District Justice Thomas A. Placey. 6. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. 7. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin enterprises, LLC (DBA Cottman Transmission)., in September 2001. 8. Defendant provided inferior quality and unprofessional services and charged a unreasonable storage fee to Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff experienced problems with the transmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. Total costs of these repairs was $505.88. 10. At trial this defendant did not appear and by default a judgment was ordered in favor of the Plaintiff. 11. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important and none was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. 12. Defendant charged the Plaintiff a storage fee of $1,065 or $15.00 per day for 71 days, which by application of case law is unreasonable. 13. The defendant failed to support a storage fee that was reasonable although specifically requested. 14. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid by $355.00. 15. Judgment by default was ruled in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold thejudgment rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-3-04 and award the Plaintiff $926.38. Respecfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson A DateJuly 19, 2003 By W V1?? Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013-1961 Cua?.i S W 11Ab I n?so n vs Case No. (33- 1 `8U Co??.nn?wc? 1R????M??S1e? N c? C=l 0 Statement of Intention to Proceed cl, -rt 71 (T C/1) -! r1m = rn To the Court: w -r- M u0. ?? 1 ?'t o m ??e intends to proceed with the above captio c-matte= 5 =- n-a \ t\S Print Name -0- y?;AJS UJ • ? ?? Sign Name ..,,c Date: Ci `ag a oo g Attorney for via A-b Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. I. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St Carlisle, PA 1701; Plaintiff VS. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION 201 Gibraltor Rd Suite 150 Horsham, PA i9044 Defendant NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed with out you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out 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 vou. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 i COMPLAINT Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-304, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/3, in support of such request, represents as follows: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. 3. On March 31, 2003, District Justice Thomas A. Placey (09-3-04) entered an Order of judgment against the Defendant in the amount of $926.38. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "A„ 4. Defendant refuses to pay said judgment in the amount of $926.38. 5. Defendant is in contempt regarding judgment entered by District Justice Thomas A. Placey. 6. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. 7. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin enterprises, LLC (DBA Cottman Transmission)., in September 2001. 8. Defendant provided inferior quality and unprofessional services and charged a unreasonable storage fee to Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff experienced problems with the transmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. Total costs of these repairs was $505.88. 10. At trial this defendant did not appear and by default a judgment was ordered in favor of the Plaintiff. H. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important and none was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. 12. Defendant charged the Plaintiff a storage fee of $1,065 or $15.00 per day for 71 days, which by application of case law is unreasonable. 13. The defendant failed to support a storage fee that was reasonable although specifically requested. 14. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid by $355.00. 15. Judgment by default was ruled in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgment rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-3-04 and award the Plaintiff $926.38. Respecfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson DateJuly 19, 2003 By ?, Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013-1961 CIVIL ACTION - LAW MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CIVIL COMPLAINT Court of Common Pleas Civil Division Cumberland County No. 03-1620 Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Plaintiff v5. Cottman Transmission 201 Gibraltor Rd Suite 150 Defendant MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting a summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. District Justice Thomas A. Placey, 09-3-04, 104 S. Sporting Hill Rd. Mechanicsburg, Pa ruled in favor of a judgment for the Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 on March 31, 2003. FACTS FROM TRIAL Plaintiff was the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. Cottman Transmission provided transmission service to that car in September 2001. Plaintiff complained of the inferior quality and unprofessional service to Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC. Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC referred Plaintiff to another franchisee for prepaid maintenance and any warranty work. Plaintiff experienced problems with the transmission and took it to two non- franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. The total cost of these repairs was $505.88 At this trial Defendant did not appear and by default judgment was entered against them. 2. Plaintiff alleged in complaint inferior work and unreasonable storage fee charges. 3. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant did not appear at hearing. 4. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant was negligent and breached some warranty duty. 5. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant did not appear at the hearing and by operation of Rule 319 judgment ordered that Plaintiff be awarded partial damage of $505.88 due to inferior workmanship. 6. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant was given ample opportunity to provide testimony deemed important in their defense against unreasonable storage fees in the amount of $1,065.00 or $15.00 per day. 7. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant provided no testimony in defense against unreasonable storage fees. 8. Plaintiff alleges that a storage fee of $1,065 or $15,00 per day for 71 days is by application of case law unreasonable. 9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant did not provide a storage amount for vehicle that was reasonable even though specifically requested by District Justice Placey. 10. Plaintiff alleges that local penal law provides punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. 11. Plaintiff alleges that the-maximal tolerable charge for reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. Therefore, reducing the amount of storage costs to $355.00 to the Defendant and paid by the plaintiff. 12. Plaintiff alleges that in view of the District Justice's findings, the Defendant was ordered to pay Plaintiff $860.88. WHEREFORE, Curtis W. Thompson, Plaintiff in above captioned matter respectfully prays that he be granted summary judgment in this case. Plaintiff further prays that this Honorable Court up hold the judgment rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-3-04 and award the Plaintiff $926.38. Date t, a rJOR Respectfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013 2 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St Carlisle, PA 1701; Plaintiff VS. NO. 03-1620 CV-0000551-02 Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION 201 Gibraltor Rd Suite 150 Horsham, PA 19044 Defendant NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed with out you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 COMPLAINT Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-304, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/3, in support of such request, represents as follows: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. 3. On March 31, 2003, District Justice Thomas A. Placey (09-3-04) entered an Order of judgment against the Defendant in the amount of $926.38. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit «A„ 4. Defendant refuses to pay said judgment in the amount of $926.38. 5. Defendant is in contempt regarding judgment entered by District Justice Thomas A. Placey. 6. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. 7. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin enterprises, LLC (DBA Cottman Transmission)., in September 2001. 8. Defendant provided inferior quality and unprofessional services and charged a unreasonable storage fee to Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff experienced problems with the transmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. Total costs of these repairs was $505.88. 10. At trial this defendant did not appear and by default a judgment was ordered in favor of the Plaintiff. 11. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important and none was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. 12. Defendant charged the Plaintiff a storage fee of $1,065 or $15.00 per day for 71 days, which by application of case law is unreasonable. 13. The defendant failed to support a storage fee that was reasonable although specifically requested. 14. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid by $355.00. 15. Judgment by default was ruled in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgment rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No. 09-3-04 and award the Plaintiff $926.38. Respecfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson Date July 19.2003 By Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013-1961 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Curtis W. Thompson Plaintiff c v `' VS. NO. 03-1620 _. " CV-0000551-02- - :? - Cottman Transmission CIVIL ACTION - - ?? -_ - CD Defendant ' = - NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a . judgment may be entered against you by the Court with out further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL SERVICES INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717)243-9400 RESPONSE Plaintiff Curtis W. Thompson respectfully requests that this Honorable Court uphold the judgement of $926.38 rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04, CV-0000551-02 on 3/31/03, in support of such request, represents as follows: i . Plaintiff/Petitioner is Curtis W. Thompson, an individual currently residing at 325 North West Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Defendant/Appellant is Cottman Transmission, a business located at 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034. a. From October 30, 2001 to November 13, 2001, the following incidents occurred. (1) I went to the appellant's business located at 3600 Carlisle Pike, Camp Hill, PA 17011 and the following took place: (a) On or about October 30, 2001, plaintiff went to Cottman Transmission to negotiate payment for services rendered. (b) When plaintiff was unable to pay the full amount for the service the manager, Joseph Marcin, shouted at plaintiff, was disrespectful, and threatening towards plaintiff. (i) Manager tone was intimidating. (c) Without plaintiffs permission, the Cottman Transmission manager called plaintiff's bank and revealed confidential information regarding plaintiffs checking account to an individual who was unauthorized to access to plaintiffs account. (d) After being notified that the fee for his service would be satisfied, the Manager repeatedly harassed plaintiffs by phone, at their home and place of employment. (e) After being harassed by the manager, plaintiff notified Cottman customer service representative, Carol Iacullo about the service of the manager. She advised that plaintiff did not have to take that kind of treatment and directed plaintiff to John Tipett, a Cottman Transmission franchisee located at 2310 Walnut Street, Harrisburg, PA (f) Upon full payment for the service on plaintiff s transmission to Cottman, the manager held plaintiff's car to exact high and unreasonable storage fees from plaintiff totaling $1,065.00. (g) Coffman Transmission did not verify charges to hold vehicle on property, and refused to give plaintiff a receipt. (h) Cottman Transmission never informed plaintiff of storage charges if they were unable to pay for transmission service upon completion of work. (i) After gaining possession of vehicle, plaintiff discovered that Cottman removed oil and antifreeze from my vehicle, and replaced my car battery with a non serviceable battery. As a result of this neglect, plaintiff paid an additional $59.33. (j) Without permission, Coffman Transmission removed or had removed, the religious symbol on plaintiff's vehicle. (k) As a result of poor and inferior service plaintiff incurred an additional $505.88 in expenses to correct the workmanship of Cottman Transmission. Wherefore, Plaintiff/Petitioner respectfully prays that your Honorable Court will uphold the judgement of rendered by District Justice, Thomas A. Placey, Magistrate District No.09-3-04 and award the plaintiff $926.38. Respectfully Submitted, Curtis W. Thompson Date April 28.2003 By , Curtis W. Thompson 325 North West Street Carlisle, PA 17108-1961 CURTIS W. THOMPSON, Plaintiff V. .Air DISTRICT COURT 09-3-04 COTTMAN TRANSMISSION, Defendant CV-0551-02 FACTS FROM TRIAL This is a reprise of Thompson v. Margin, CV-0389-02, and the facts from that case are incorporated into this action. Plaintiff is the owner of a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. Transmission service was provided to that car by franchisee, J. Marcin Enterprises, LLC., in September 2001. Plaintiff complained of the inferior quality and unprofessional services to franchisor (Defendant), Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC., who referred Plaintiff to another franchisee for prepaid maintenance and any warranty work. Plaintiff experienced problems with the tfansmission and took it to two non-franchise shops for diagnosis and repair. The total cost of these repairs was $505.88. In the initial suit Plaintiff sued only Joseph Marcin, as an individual, and it was found that this individual had no liability in the case. In this case Plaintiff brought suit against only the franchisor. At trial this Defendant did not appear' and by default judgment will be entered against it. The only issue to be discussed is damages. DISCUSSION Plaintiff's present action seeks damages for inferior work and unreasonable storage fees. Plaintiff again did not bring suit against the appropriate defendants; however, the Defendant in this case did not appear, which requires a different outcome. It is of no moment that Plaintiff has not ever shown by acceptable evidence that this Defendant or any other potential defendant was negligent or breached some warranty duty. Defendant did not appear and by operation of Rule 319 judgment against this Defendant only for the sum certain in claimed inferior work damages of $505.88.2 ' Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 207 provides that "corporations may be represented by their officers or counsel." Only Mr. Marcin appeared pursuant to his obligation under the franchise agreement. Under the Court Rules Mr. Marcini cannot represent Defendant, which corporate counsel should have known, prior to ill advising franchisee to appear and defend. z It is understood that Defendant is indemnified by the franchise agreement; however, this judgment would not be entered but for the failure of this Defendant to appear as per the Rules promulgated by our The remaining issue of damages is the storage fees. It was expressly noted at the initial trial that additional testimony was necessary. In the present case all persons present were given an opportunity to provide any additional testimony they deemed important. None was given on the reasonable value of storage fees. The storage fee of $1,065.00 or $15.00 per day for 71 days is by application of case law unreasonable. The amount that is reasonable has not been shown even though specifically requested. The default in appearance requires the damages be a sum certain. The parties have not provided guidance on this damage. A review of the local penal law provides some guidance of punitive amounts for daily over time parking fines of $5.00 and $10.00 per day. Using the, higher day rate as the maximal tolerable charge the maximum reasonable amount of storage fee is $710.00. This reduces the amount charged and paid ty $355.00.3 Judgment by default is in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $860.88 plus the costs of this action. The parties have previously been advised of their appeal rights and the original exhibits have been returned to the presenting party. r By the Court- 31 MAR 03 Date Thom A Placey D.J. Supreme Court. Thus, mindful of the agreement, it is expressed that this liability is solely the responsibility of Coffman Transmission Systems, LLC. 3 This amount ultimately will and should be borne by the franchisee. 'COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA c OUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND Mag. Dist. No.: 09-3-04 DJ Name: Hon. THOMAS A. PLACEY Address: 1044` S. SPORTING HILL RD. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone: (717 ) 761 8230 17050 NOTICE OF J?U/IDLGASE/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF/JUDGMET?P1' DEBTOCR: -? rTHOMPSON, CURTISEaWADDRESS 325 N WEST ST CARLISLE, PA 17013 L_ J VS. DEFENDANT/JUDGMENT C 19ZDRESs FCOTTMAN TRANSMISSION -1 240 NEW YORK DRIVE FORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034 CURTIS W. THOMPSON L -I 325 N WEST ST DocketNo.: CV-0000551-02 CARLISLE, PA 17013 Date Filed: 11/14/02 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FOR PLAINTIFF ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) TWWPGAN.' CIMTlg W ® Judgment was entered against: (Name) mTTMAN TRANRMTRSTAN in the amount of $ 929 1A on: (Date of Judgment) Defendants are jointly and severally liable. x (Date & Time) F Damages will be assessed on: This case dismissed without prejudice. ? Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ Amount of Judgment $ 860.88 Judgment Costs $ 65.50 Interest on Judgment $ .00 Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 926.38 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT JUSTICE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE DISTRICT JUSTICE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. '-? '" 3 1 "un--late District Justice I certify that this is a true a correct c recor o oceedings containing the judgment. Date District Justice -I My commission expires first Monday of January, 2004. SEAL AOPC 315-03 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Curtis W. Thompson, hereby certify that on November 4, 2008 1 served copies of my Motion for a Summary Judgment on the following parties by way of United States Mail: Cottman Transmission 201 Gibraltor Road Suite 150 Horsham, PA 19044 2. Cottman Transmission 240 New York Drive Fort Washington, PA 19034 ? q'm Date tQ - 44, Curtis. Thompson 325 North West St. Carlisle, PA 17013 ...v ?r! 4.'..1 .? ^'? Yom--?-y?Ti David D. Bueff Prothonotary XirkS. Sohonage, ESQ, Solicitor z Al r z vi\` ? of Renee X Simpson 1'` Deputy Prothonotary Irene E. 94orrow 2" Deputy Prothonotary Office of the Prothonotary CumberfandCounty, Tennsy(vania 63 f COQ CIVIL TERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES AND NOW THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011, AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PROCEED AND RECEIVING NO RESPONSE -THE ABOVE CASE IS HEREBY TERMINATED WITH PREJUDICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA R.C.P 230.2 BY THE COURT, DAVID D. BUELL PROTHONOTARY One Courthouse Square 9 Suite 100 • Carfsle, PN 17013 0 (717 240-6195 * T'aX (717) 240-6573