The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-2692 FX "'~~' '. ,i. ' - ,~ '''"''--'-, "'U~'I<. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE . ' , ' JANET 1. KINGS BOROUGH and WALTERE. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001,2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRlAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2002 upon consideration of Defendants' Motion For Partial Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of the Defendants and against the Plaintiffs with respect to the causes of action set forth in Counts IV, V and VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. BY THE COURT: 1. II 'I -. .~ lAW OFF1CES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ..""' I~ JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants AND NOW, this day of I J ~ L JU~" ~:\ JUN 0 ~02 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER , 2002 upon consideration of Defendants' Motion For Partial Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of the Defendants and against the Plaintiffs with respect to the causes of action set forth in Counts IV, V and VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. I: BY THE COURT: 1. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE , . " ''" ..".' , '''i~'', ....~...... " /5lr JUN 0 3 2002 JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2002 upon consideration of Defendants' Motion For Partial Summary Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of the Defendants and against the Plaintiffs with respect to the causes of action set forth in Counts IV, V and VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. BY THE COURT: 1. ii II ,j "i 'J I ,'" :) i{ il. t~ G 1\ a , " , l ~ I I I ~}~r~:W:'&:1{%~fJt&I,;~:~~:&~b':M~;t)\t;;;:i~i:g;~~';.0~?I~.~ :J'" ", ',~, " "C '^~" "^ " '_iY' ,,,'> I'"'''' 3:""';=- m""m~ O:E:::j:- :z:. :z: ~ >3:0:- z >. = ozm: en en ::0 = m-lm~ C::oZ= ::OmZ: G'>mm== . -13: ~ .~ .... m ~ en en D en 5; ::0 m ;;:: rn () ~ ~ t c::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lA ~ ~ (~ s: ~ (]I (]I , ,1~<" ,,",-,,' U'> Z rn ~ i J O~t:P ~ g ;ll ~ ~ ~ 2i ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ U'> ~ {~.~ \ .'tc (: ;,. ''Y;~ :J .. ,- ';;' I::::: \ c:./ '"" ~)tJr\:/ -~--- !~ ~:\\\ S~;\~~~/~ ~~ lJ'""yif:~;:) ~~ ~j ;oj c::) .' '" "- Ui (~,; '0 c:) (p-,J c ~., ." C) ::1 3'/; ('.1 m .z:-- .'.,,:-fr~;'}~}~ ">(>:~ -~--~-............... ~I, ~J;;;g;i;,;f~rMt~11r~~"NA~l4~(&t5ilif:&!M~li-*~&*~I~i:t~iH~I'i~~ ;;$~~'ll}WE:]gt~~~\'tiw']\\t...l4:-~tM:~\":tiT~il'1~?R:;;~,71 ,--.,,",; ~ ! I , I I I ! I :'t ! , ! , " :,1 :':' "' ~1 II " !~ ~t ii ,1 Iii ~j ~ , I I I i I I I I I I I I ! ~,;' .'r. " ~""'~' ; ~~: ,,:. L;.,~',-,~:i "". : /,,::,~ ' " ~~"["m;" "h'" ,', ~ V1 Z t'T1 ;t .... ~ > ~ Q t ~ g '" ?J c:: ~ . :<' ~ 0 rn tp 0 ~ ~ :<J '" 'tl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ 0 t'T1 '" S . ~ iii ~ . ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;: V1 <;;j ~ 0 U1 U1 t'T1 O"'os:=- )>..... --= ;;U:elXlO- rm2:!:r::= cnCllm)>= -IZm- r . r = m - - CIl OJ )> =-- ,,0)>. =- )>C;;UCll= -I-O=- ...:r::O:r::=-- (:lClll/Om=- ...-ICIl;;U c.>;;UOm m:r::;;U m - -Imm ;;UCll mD ;;Uc ;ij m ~A l'U ~l ? :;~ \ (, ., r;.,. ~~/' ~~\.~~~ ~ 1i-'1f& 01 'J .., " '" U; CO IV c:) = Cr-.! c ~n i'! .r;-- ~ (cl '" t:f-:;'*l!(-~'l}** """'~~'tMf!:fjj~E?1i~~"\'!f~~~~~1 "".".""",,,C'/ "';: ~ r , Taryn N. Dixon Court Administrator OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 1 Courthouse Square. Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone Melissa H. Calvanelli (717) 240-6200 Assistant Court Administrator (717) 697-0371 (717) 532-7286 (717) 240-6460 FAX MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley FROM: Melissa H. Calvanelli, Assistant Court Administrator DATE: March 19,2004 INRE: 01-2692 Civil Term Janet L. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough v. Geneva L. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford 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 - .. j J _ ~ --, ",~ ~~:;c PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must [)e typewritten and submitted in duplicate) MAR 1 7 2004 tl -, " TO THE PROI'HOI'Ul'AR'i OF aJMBERLAND COUNI''i Please list the following case: (Check one) ) for JURY trial at the next term of civil court. (x> for trial without a jury. JANET L.KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH _ (') ~ a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -E:.::- ~ _11 -.,-c;;::-': ; ::;-J ,-',-~t'" ~~ ri1:!J .,.-"J r -om 6:, ~;::IY Civil ActioR ,.: Law' 8~!, 2~l=;' 2::~ c5Fl l'weal frcni~it-" ti6ii{'" ::2 ~ ,,', (x) Equity :~ ~ ::::~ (other) (check one) --------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption rn.Jst be stated in full) . , ( (Plaintiff) vs. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD The trial list will be called on and Trials cornrence on (Defendant) Pretrials will be held on (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 Rule 214.1.) . No. 2692 Civil Term 2001 Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: - Mich~e1 A. Scherer, Esquire, 19 West South Street~ Carlisle, PA 17013 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Keith Brenneman, Esquire, 44 West Main Street, Mechanicsburq, PA 17055 This case is ready for trial. Signed: Jf.fi1/~ML-- Date: 3 .It,. ~'1 Print ~:M;cnnPl A. Scherer. Esquire Attorney for: Plaintiff -- LAW OFFICES SNE::LBAKER, BRe:NNEMAN & SPARE ~"' JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM MAY 0 7 200 GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY 1. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM Defendants Gregory 1. Frankford and Geneva 1. Frankford submit this Pretrial Memorandum in accordance with C.C.R.P. 212-4 as follows: I. STATEMENT OF FACTS RE: LIABILITY The matter before this Court arises out of the efforts of Plaintiffs Janet 1. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough to recover both (I) funds loaned to their daughter and son-in-law, Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford; and (2) funds contributed by Plaintiffs to Defendants for the construction of a new home which would provide Plaintiffs living accommodations with Defendants and Defendants' children.! Beginning in 1993, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough expressed to members of her family, including Defendants, that her husband Walter Kingsborough was becoming difficult for her to take care of and handle due to Walter's health and increasing dementia. Family members discussed Plaintiffs moving to a smaller home, an assisted living arrangement for Walter Kingsborough and having Plaintiffs move in with one oftheir three children. The only solution agreed to be acceptable among them was for the Plaintiffs to move in with the Defendants. At the time it was agreed that Plaintiffs would move in with Defendants, Defendants I Plaintiff Waiter E. Kingsborough has died since the initiatiou of this suit. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~, resided in a residence located on Bonnybrook Road in Carlisle which was built in 1989 and substantially improved by Defendants in anticipation of permanently residing and raising their family there. Defendants explored the option of renovating their Bonnybrook Road home to accommodate the Plaintiffs; however, the residence could not be easily modified and if a separate addition were constructed for Plaintiffs' use, the steps required for access would pose a danger and difficulty to Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough who had difficulty with steps and walking. Defendants also explored locating and purchasing an existing residence to accommodate the Plaintiffs' needs as well as Defendants' family, but such residences were rare and none were on the market in the general area. After exploring the options described above, a decision was made by the Plaintiffs and Defendants that Defendants would construct a new residence in order to accommodate the Plaintiffs as well as Defendants' family. Plaintiffs agreed to contribute the amount of $72,000 to Defendants for the construction of Defendants' residence from the sale of Plaintiffs' house on North Middlesex Road in Carlisle. Plaintiffs and Defendants placed their agreement in a signed writing on April 26, 1994. Pursuant to the April 26, 1994 agreement, the Defendants agreed, inter alia, "to provide a home for Walter and Janet [Plaintiffs] for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence." Defendants proceeded with constructing a home at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg with a first floor level design to accommodate a handicapped person with such features as oversized doors, a handicap accessible shower and a two bedroom master suite. All of these features were constructed to accommodate Plaintiffs living with Defendants and in order for Defendants to help and assist in Plaintiffs' care. It was understood by Plaintiffs that their -2.. "I " ~' ';~ "" '",' ,~i,L.,:~,.k'~ ,;,~,;,,, '" " contribution of $72,000 toward the cost of a new residence would offset the additional costs of the new Tesidence's special features, the costs incurred by Defendants in selling their Bonnybrook Road property and the additional mortgage payment and real estate taxes Defendants would be solely responsible to pay as the property owners. The parties moved into the Dewberry Court residence in February 1995. Defendant Geneva Frankford did the majority of grocery shopping and cooking for the Plaintiffs and attended to the Plaintiffs' needs, particularly those of her father, Walter Kingsborough. While at the Dewberry Court residence Defendant Janet Kingsborough's assistance and involvement with her husband's care diminished and she became increasingly less concerned about her husband's condition and effects of his actions and behavior. The ability of the Plaintiffs to live on their own, to assist each other in the daily tasks of living and to permit assistance by Defendants greatly diminished. Accordingly, the conditions under which both the Plaintiffs and Defendants lived, including Defendants' two young children, increasingly became intolerable and unsafe. Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough became increasingly difficult to handle. He refused to wear protective undergarments and as a result, frequently soiled himself and the residence, tracking urine and waste through the first floor where Defendants' young children played. Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough gave her husband medication against physicians' orders, over- medicated her husband and increasingly failed to assist in confirming whether Walter was or was not taking prescribed medications. Mrs. Kingsborough would leave medication in locations easily accessible to Defendants' children, leave the gas stove burners on unattended and leave the kitchen for extended periods of time with the stove on. Walter Kingsborough would get up at LAW OFFICES SNEO:LBAKER, BRECNNEMAN 8: SPARE night, cause noise and wander through the house waking up Defendants and their children. On an occasion when he fell at night in his bedroom, Janet Kingsborough would not get out of bed -3- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~,--' to assist him. In an effort to see what services existed to help in the deteriorating situation, Defendants contacted the Cumberland County Office of the Aging in the Summer of 2000. The Office of the Aging did an evaluation of the parties'living arrangement and recommended that Plaintiffs be placed in an assisted living/nursing facility. In spite of this recommendation, Defendants made arrangements for a visiting nurse and a nurses' aid to come to the residence and assist in Walter Kingsborough's care. In December 2000, a geriatric specialist and physician treating Walter Kingsborough along with a social worker from the Office of the Aging advised Defendants they could not provide to the Plaintiffs the level of care Plaintiffs' required and recommended that Plaintiffs reside in an assisted living/nursing care facility. Plaintiffs, Defendants and Plaintiffs' daughter Joann Soulier all agreed that assisted living or nursing home care was best for the Plaintiffs. Although all family members initially participated in locating suitable assisted living arrangements for Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs, with the assistance of Joann Soulier, moved out of Defendants' home at Dewberry Court and moved into Mrs. Soulier's home, on March 10, 2001. Less than two months later, this suit followed to recover the $72,000 contributed to construct the Dewberry Court home as well as to recover amounts Plaintiffs loaned to Defendants. II. STATEMENT OF FACTS RE: DAMAGES. Plaintiffs claim with respect to the April 26, 1994 agreement that they are entitled to receive back their $72,000 contribution together with interest. With respect to the Plaintiffs' claims that they are owed amounts in repayment of loans given Defendants, Defendants agree they have been given loans of money. Plaintiff Janet -4- ,,~ LAW OFFICES $NELBAKER, BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE "I ~~; Kingsborough acknowledges that all sums loaned were loaned with no repayment deadline and that the amounts loaned could be repaid whenever Defendants were able to repay the loans. It is not disputed that Defendants have been paying Mrs. Kingsborough $100.00 each month since March 2000, one year before the Plaintiffs moved from the Dewberry Court home. Presently, $6,700.00 is owing Plaintiff on the loans. III. STATEMENT OF ISSUES RE: LIABILITY AND DAMAGES. A. Liabilitv. I. Liability under the April 26, 1994 agreement. The primary issue relating to liability surrounds whether the Defendants breached or did not breach their obligation under the April 26, 1994 agreement to provide a home for the Plaintiffs as long as they were each able to live in a private residence. Due to the unsafe, unsanitary and intolerable living conditions that eventually developed and the inability to provide for the care necessary for the Plaintiffs at the Dewberry Court house and in further consideration of the recommendations and observations of geriatric healthcare professionals, Defendants assert they did not breach the April 26, 1994 agreement. 2. Liability for unpaid loan balance. The primary issue on this aspect of Plaintiffs' claim is whether Defendants are in breach oftheir obligation to repay the loans to Plaintiff. Due to the terms of the repayment of the loans hich are not in dispute, Defendants assert there has been no breach of their obligation to repay he loans. They have made consistent monthly payments to Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough since arch 2000 to present !ffid will continue to do so. -5- ,I,;", ~/i-di'< , ., ~ HAiIIlliliillit;" B. Damages. I. Damages respecting the April 26, 1994 agreement. Plaintiffs claim that due to Defendants' breach of the April 26, 1994 agreement, they are entitled to $72,000 plus interest and costs. Plaintiffs have asserted causes of action for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit in the alternative to their breach of contact claim. Since the parties' agreement with respect to the $72,000 contribution is governed by an express contract, Defendants contend Plaintiffs cannot maintain the alternative claims for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. Accordingly, Defendants note there is an issue pertaining to damages (and liability) as to whether Plaintiffs can maintain their alternative claims relating to the $72,000 contribution. Defendants contend Plaintiffs received an adequate benefit in return from their contribution of $72,000. Based on Plaintiffs' contribution of that amount and their proportionate contribution toward utility expenses, Plaintiffs in essence expended only $577.13 each per month for the 78 months they resided at the Dewberry Court home. 2. Damages respecting the unpaid loans. As noted above, Defendants contest liability for the breach of any obligation to repay the loans given due to the terms described above and the fact that they have regularly paid $100.00 each month without objection from Plaintiffs since March 2000 up to the present time. Accordingly, the issue exists as to whether Plaintiff can now accelerate all amounts due. It should be noted that Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough readily admits loaning money (more than $12,000) to her daughter, Joann Soulier, on the same terms as the loans to Defendants, that no effort since July 1997 has been made by Joann Soulier to pay on the loans and no effort was ever LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE made by Plaintiffs to collect on the loans to Mrs. Soulier. -6- ,i _--.lJ LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~!,; IV. SUMMARY OF LEGAL ISSUES RE: ADMISSIBILITY. Defendants are unaware of any unusual evidentiary issues that require any particular resolution by this Court. V. IDENTITY OF WI1NESSES. Defendants identify the following witnesses who they may call at the time of trial: I. Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford 2. Defendant Gregory J. Frankford 3. Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough as on cross-examination 4. Joann Soulier 5. Daniel Soulier 6. David Kingsborough 7. Dr. Hal S. Fineburg 8. Vicki Morley 9. Dr. Rodney Hough 10. Dr. Lawrence Zimmerman I 1. Dr. Bruce Gronkiewicz 12. Dr. Chris Zeigler 13. Any witness listed on Plaintiffs' Pretrial Memorandum. -7- " _.a, VI. IDENTIFICATION OF EXHIBITS. Defendants identify the following exhibits that they may utilize at time of trial: I. April 26, 1994 agreement 2. Tabulation of common/shared expenses for 16 Dewberry Court 3. Tabulation ofloans made to Defendants and payments made on those loans 4. Tabulation of loans made to Souliers and payments made on those loans 5. Settlement sheets for sale of Bonnybrook Road property and purchase of Dewberry Court 6. Swnmary of mortgage, real estate tax, insurance and other expenses for Dewberry Court property for which no contribution was made by Plaintiff 7. Calculation of monthly amounts contributed by Plaintiffs 8. Records/medical records from the following doctors/sources: witnesses identified in V., 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 9. Records from Cumberland County Office of the Aging 10. Notes of Joann Soulier II. Any documents provided to Plaintiffs by Defendants through discovery 12. Any documents utilized as Exhibits in depositions 13. Any documents provided to Defendants by Plaintiffs through discovery 14. Written report of Dr. Hal S. Fineburg LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE -8- .','-'" LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~~\ VII. STATUS OF SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS. The parties attempted to achieve a settlement after completion of a substantial portion of discovery but were unable to reach an agreement. Respectfully Submitted, SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 14rvYL--- BY: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Date: May 7, 2004 -9- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ; . I~:: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have, on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Pretrial Memorandum to be served upon the persons and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID. ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P.C. ~ By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorney for Defendants Date: May 7, 2004 , ;=,,,.... '; JI"-"'~~' ~ ~,~ "'~'"'~i" "..~" , ~ tdil.li~"j :1 ~ ~~".''5''' MAY 0 7 2004 ~ JANET L. KINGS BOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM OF JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH 1) Basic facts as to liability: This case is about an elderly couple who were faced with planning for their future living arrangements in the face of declining health. They agreed to give their daughter and son-in-law $72,000.00 in 1994 in exchange for a place to live, and the arrangement failed in March, 2001. The mother, who is now a widow, seeks her money back, along with additional monies the daughter and son-in-law borrowed from her. The action sounds in both law and equity, and the case has been listed for an equity trial. In the early 1990's, the Kingsboroughs lived independently in Middlesex Township, but because of Walter Kingsborough's health problems and cognitive concerns, they sought to find a living environment which met their needs at a safe, comfortable location. The Kingsboroughs have three adult children, named Joann Soulier, Geneva Frankford and David Kingsborough, and each are married. The children and spouses met sometime prior to April 26, 1994, to try to assist the Kingsboroughs in identifying their best option for future living arrangements. 1 ~"."""", ~._ J " "'~""":!i!ici!-O:c, Of paramount concern to all involved was the notion that the Kingsboroughs were very opposed to entering a nursing home facility. The Frankfords offered to allow the Kingsboroughs to reside with the Frankford family, and it was at some point determined that the Kingsboroughs would sell their home and give a substantial portion of money to the Frankfords to construct a new home, where the Kingsboroughs, Frankfords and the Frankford's child would live. A "Note of Agreement" (hereinafter "Agreement") was prepared by Gregory Frankford and set forth the terms of the agreement between the parties. The Agreement is attached hereto as "Exhibit A." The operative phrase in the Agreement is that the Kingsboroughs were permitted to reside with the Frankfords "for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence." It called for the Kingsboroughs to contribute two-fifths of the purchase price of the home, amounting to $72,000.00. The new home would be located at 14 Dewberry Court, in Mechanicsburg. The Kingsboroughs were given no ownership interest in the home, and the Kingsboroughs paid two-fifths of the common expenses of the home, including food and utilities. In 2000 and 2001, the Frankfords asked the Kingsboroughs to leave 14 Dewberry Court because of the declining health of Walter Kingsborough. In March, 2001, the Kingsboroughs left 14 Dewberry Court and began to reside with their other daughter, Joann Soulier and her husband and children. Walter Kingsborough died in August, 2001, in the Soulier's home. Prior to his death, Mr. Kingsborough received treatment from Comfort Care and Hospice. Janet Kingsborough will be 77 years old this month and lives independently in 2 , "" .1. ~. IJ'._ .I:l1i!llra I. , _.~r.'~~~ '"~,, , low income housing in Camp Hill, manages her own affairs and is licensed to drive an automobile. She has few assets and a low monthly income. During the time that the Kingsboroughs lived with the Frankfords, the Frankfords borrowed money from the Kingsboroughs, totaling $10,300 at the time of the Kingsboroughs departure from 14 Dewberry Court. At present, approximately $6,700 is still owed to Janet Kingsborough, and the Frankfords refuse to repay it except in monthly installments of $100, without interest. This action was commenced by Walter and Janet Kingsborough in May of 2001 and seeks return of the $72,000 and the return of the outstanding balance of the loan from the Frankfords. 2) Basic facts as to damages: Count I alleges that the Frankfords breached the "Note of Agreement" when they asked the Frankfords to vacate their property at 14 Dewberry Court, and asks for the return of the $72,000 plus interest and costs. Counts II and III are equitable claims of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit, respectively, and allege that it would be simply unjust to allow the Frankfords to retain the monies collected from the Kingsboroughs under the circumstances in this case. Counts II and III ask that the court decree a constructive trust and that Janet Kingsborough is a two-fifths owner of the fair market value of the real estate at 14 Dewberry Court or in the alternate award her $72,000 plus interest and costs. Counts IV, V and VI are claims for a loan made by the Kingsboroughs to the Frankfords and are in breach of contract, unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. Janet 3 ._~~- "' - J, , 't """ ~~M-". Kingsborough seeks repayment of the loans in full at this time. 3) Principal issues of liability and damages: The issue in the breach of contract set forth in Count I will be whether Walter Kingsborough was able to live in a private residence. The answer to this question is yes, since he moved from the Frankfords to a private residence, where he passed away. The issue in equity in Counts II and III will be whether the Frankfords are unjustly enriched if they are permitted to keep the entire $72,000. The issue with respect to the loans will be whether Janet Kingsborough can now demand repayment of the loans in full, and whether the Frankfords will be unjustly enriched if they are permitted to withhold payment in full on the loans, where no interest is being paid and Janet Kingsborough is in advanced years and is in need of the money. 4) Legal issues: Undersigned counsel is not expecting that the Court will be faced with any unusual legal issues. 5) Witnesses: a. Janet Kingsborough b. Joann Soulier c. Dan Soulier d. David Kingsborough e. William Bassett 4 ~. -~~ ~, 2003. ~-~"~ , _~w, I , " . .,. j 'w ~ ."" "~ ,--.J. "~~"~ .i:Wrl~; f. Carol Adams, Donna Fink, Robert Smeltz, Eleen Taylor, Connie Wonder or April Sechrist. All were formerly employed with Hospice, and on or more may be called if located. 6) Exhibits: a. Note of Agreement date April 26, 1994. b. Ledger showing loans made and payments received. c. Proposed HUD-1 from planned refinance of 14 Dewberry Court in 7) Status of settlement negotiations: Discussions have occurred but have not been fruitful. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER 1tfJ1d~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 717.249.6873 ID # 61974 Attorney for Janet Kingsborough 5 ~ - ~ ..',1' .'~. _ .. ,,. ~" ~j ""'" ' ~l!it;,,,,, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing brief to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: First Class Mail, Postage Prepaid, To: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 May 7, 2004 ~,~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 717.249.6873 10 # 61974 Attorney for Janet Kingsborough ~" j , . . . ~QTE OF (AGREEMENT ,. This document represents an ~greement between Gregory and Gene9a Frankford and Walter and Janet Kingsborough.' This'agreement:is bind~n~ on sll parties in acco:~~nce with the following pro,~slons unless mutually rec~nded by all parties. .~. , . :'/ G~egory and Geneva have agreed to provide a home for walter;'and ." . ... Janet for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence. Due to Walter's physical condition, living quarters on the first floor are required. To accommodate this, and necausetheir current home is not suitable, Gregory and Geneva will 'build a new home. This home will be a Cape Cod designwithi;! 1:wobedroomMaster suite on the first floor for Walterando."Janet'sexclusive'use. Walter and Janet will also have full accesslto all of the common areas in the housa with no restrictions. . In exchange for this arrangement, Walter and Janet have agreed to apply $72,000.00 from the sale of their current home towards the cost of the new home. This is 'approximately two fifths of the purchase price. Walter and.Janet shall continue to be responsible "for their personal debts and liabilities (private phone, . carinsurapce, etc). They mav also be asked to pay not more than two fifths of the common expenses (gas, electric, sewer, etc.) if needed. For legal purposes, they will not have part ownership of the real estate. In the event that Gregory a~d Geneva die before Walter and/or Janet, a minimum of two fifths of the value of the house/property shall be made available for their continued care. Details are described in Gregory and Geneva's Last Will and Testament. .. I.....! witness: .Date: (.c<~-fr Signed: 'i - ~(.- "t 'I f-~~-f'<,L j,..:?tf-lf 5'-2'-:' fy . --;-;lV..c7~ Soulier , '. EXHIBIT "A" JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001- 2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _ day of , 2002, upon consideration of the within Response of Plaintiff to Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, the Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED. By the Court, J. II = ~.,. ., ". " ",,'~"",,' .., ''''~',~..''~ ' ',~ ^~' ",""h ,. --" ,..--" ',;;," ',"" I. t '. ,c,,'.;.. "''- "" ... -- h:,.,.","'>__ ",,', ""''''~__'~''''''" y,,,,..'.,) ,~>_:'""<'.',n---,.',,., '~"';"'''';?''''~'!l1('",%i', ".';':"',,_ '''"'''''1;;'' JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGS BOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants NO.2001- d)(p ~d< CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 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 THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-3166 II ""," ,,~. JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001- .;l (.9.<. CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW, come Janet L. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough, by and through their attorneys, O'Brien, Baric & Scherer, and respectfully represent as follows: 1. The plaintiffs are Janet L. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough (hereinafter "Kingsboroughs"), husband and wife, who are adult individuals who reside at 435 Lewisberry Road, New Cumberland, York County, Pennsylvania. 2. The defendants are Geneva L. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford (hereinafter "Frankfords"), husband and wife, who are adult individuals who reside at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The defendant Geneva L. Frankford is the daughter of the Kingsboroughs. 4. On April 26, 1994, the parties entered into a written agreement (hereinafter "agreement") whereby the Kingsboroughs would pay the Frankfords $72,000.00 in exchange for the Frankfords agreement to provide the Kingsboroughs a home for as long as the Kingsboroughs are able to live in a private residence. A copy of the agreement is attached hereto and marked as "Exhibit A" and is incorporated herein. 1 , '~--"", ~"',,,_,,-, "..--', , '", '>C -' ",..'."',~ ,.,"',~ ,",""," ','>",,' 5. The agreement was drafted by the defendant, Gregory J. Frankford. 6. The agreement provided that the $72,000.00 was to be applied to the purchase of a new home located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, which real estate was to be titled in the name of the Frankfords alone. 7. The $72,000.00 payment from the Kingsboroughs to the Frankfords represented approximately two-fifths of the cost of the new home located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg. 8. In or about September, 1994, the Kingsboroughs paid the Frankfords $72,000.00 pursuant to the agreement. 9. In or about February, 1995, the Kingsboroughs began to reside at 14 Dewberry Court according to the terms of the agreement. 10. The real estate situate at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania was titled in the names of the Frankfords alone after the Frankfords purchased it. 11. The Kingsboroughs resided at 14 Dewberry Court pursuant to the agreement for the period beginning in or about February, 1995 and ending in March, 2001. 12. During the period the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Kingsboroughs paid the Frankfords approximately two-fifths of the various charges for food and utility services which were supplied to the residence at 14 Dewberry Court. 2 II .' ,~~ "~ .'" ~.'-' ., .- -'-- I.. ~.'" ^ ,-' '^,', L',,~ "'.' ". '., "'-'0 "',~ ''''''oh '.,f,,'---''''''''''~0i,',;.,' ,'^",,^^ ,00,,;;;.;,',,/,__1. , ;",,' ""',~, 13. In May, 2000, the Frankfords advised the Kingsboroughs that they would have to leave the residence located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania on or before January 1, 2001. 14. On March 10, 2001, the Kingsboroughs left the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania at the insistence of the Frankfords. 15. The Frankfords have refused to return the $72,000.00 to the Kingsboroughs. COUNT I BREACH OF CONTRACT April 26, 1994 Agreement 16. Paragraphs one through fifteen above are incorporated herein by reference. 17. All conditions precedent to the agreement have been fulfilled by the Kingsboroughs. 18. The Frankfords have breached the agreement by ejecting the Kingsboroughs from the residence at 14 Dewberry Court in violation of the express terms of the agreement. 19. The Kingsboroughs have sought a refund of the sums they paid the Frankfords pursuant to the agreement, and the Frankfords have refused to refund the payment. 3 II " Ii ~ "",. ,- ~'. .- '~'< ,"'. I ",,, . ",' _" '..".. M'__' .".';'c',;' , t'. .,""",~.'~.><-~' ",;~,"",,~, ,< 'k'-',',,"-,,.,,~~,,;.,--:~,,~,,,,-,,,;,;,.;,,,,~~.,,:,. i6~" WHEREFORE, Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords for the sum of $72,000.00 plus interest, expenses and costs of suit. COUNT II UNJUST ENRICHMENT/QUANTUM MERUIT IN EQUITY April 26, 1994 Agreement 20. Paragraphs one through nineteen above are incorporated herein by reference. 21. The Kingsboroughs paid $72,000.00 to the Frankfords pursuant to the terms of the agreement. 22. The Frankfords accepted $72,000.00 from the Kingsboroughs and have retained it and refused to repay it to the Kingsboroughs. 23. The Kingsboroughs have few assets remaining and are presently forced to live with their daughter and son-in-law, Joann K. Soulier and Daniel R. Soulier. 24. It is believed and therefore averred that the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court has increased substantially since the Kingsboroughs payment of $72,000.00 towards the purchase of this home in September, 1994. 25. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to keep the $72,000.00 paid to them by the Kingsboroughs. WHEREFORE, Kingsboroughs respectfully request this Honorable Court enter a Decree creating a constructive trust in the ownership equity of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, PA for the benefit of the Kingsboroughs, and: 4 ~ . ~ ~"~ '",', ,"'" ~ '~,.","'- ",',,,",,r,,~ ","",'.' "..""",'.,__.'"'~~~ """'""'"',,"5.'~""~"'''' "..,~""'""~'~ ""'~,~ """'. jjj~!?;, a) award the Kingsboroughs two-fifths of the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania; or, b) award the Kingsboroughs, the sum of $72,000.00 plus interest, expenses and costs of suit. COUNT III BREACH OF CONTRACT Loans 26. Paragraphs one through twenty-five above are incorporated herein by reference. 27. During the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Frankfords, together or individually, borrowed sums of money from the Kingsboroughs which remain unpaid. 28. The loans mentioned in preceding paragraph were made orally and with no provision for interest or terms of repayment to the Kingsboroughs. 29 At present, the Frankfords owe the Kingsboroughs $10,300.00 in connection with sums of money the Frankfords borrowed from the Kingsboroughs during the time the parties resided with one another. WHEREFORE, the Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords in the amount of $10,300.00 plus interest and costs of suit. 5 II "I "'~. "'-',. ". ,",'~ "'"""~''-;;';'''''''">''''~''"'''~''''''''',";~,o~o.-JN'''';"" '~",&:,,!:Ei~~"<'.>""";'_"\"" .__. ' I~, COUNT IV UNJUST ENRICHMENT/QUANTUM MERUIT Loans 30. Paragraphs one through twenty-nine above are incorporated herein by reference. 31. During the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Frankfords, together or individually, borrowed sums of money from the Kingsboroughs which remain unpaid. 32. The loans mentioned in preceding paragraph were made orally and with no provision for interest or terms of repayment to the Kingsboroughs. 33. At present, the Frankfords owe the Kingsboroughs $10,300.00 in connection with sums of money the Frankfords borrowed from the Kingsboroughs during the time the parties resided with one another. 34. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to return the sums borrowed from the Kingsboroughs. WHEREFORE, the Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords in the amount of $10,300.00 plus interest and costs of suit. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER ~.;;~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiffs mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/complaint.pld II " ,~ .. " ,'I' '.,-~ ,'.i,,"""" 'H' ".', ~". O,V -" '~'" 'oN ~".""'''-''''.c..",;,,,,~,,,,,~'~c-""'~''''''''~''~--. ',' """-""""""")",,',",,,,,"; 0" '.-'~, .",," "b''- ';'~'C';, VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. ~ 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~~/~ . Walter E. gsb ugh ~. / :L ~=~u:tf Janet L. ingsborou DATED:Lf' ;:;&-(' ..ROO! i! II ""~ " .r"",, "., '" '''''~''".~~o I " ~ ) , (" 'J. e NOTE OF (AGREEMENT " This document represents an ~greement between Gregory and Geneva Frankford and Walter and Janet l{j.ngsborough.' This agreement" is binding on all parties in accordance with the following provisions unless mutually recinded by all parties. Gr?gory and Geneva have agreed to provide a home for Walter; and I'{ ,," --,'I Jqnet for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence. Due to Walter's physical condition, living quarters on the first ,floor are required. To accommodate this, and hecause their current home is not suitable, Gregory and Geneva will build a new home. This home will be a Cape Cod design with a two bedroom Master suite on the first floor for Walter and Janet's exclusive use. Walter and Janet will also have full access/to all of the common areas in the housa with no restrictions. .i/ " In exchange for this arrangement, Walter and Janet have agreed to apply $72,000.00 from the sale of their current home towards the cost of the new home. This is 'approximately two fifths of the purchase price. Walter and Janet shall continue to be responsible for their personal debts and liabilities (private phone, car insurance, etc). They may also be asked to pay not more than two fifths of the ,common expenses (gas, electric, 1 sewer, etc.) if needed. F01' legal purposes, they will not have part ownershjp of the real estate. In the ~vent that Gregory and Geneva die before Walter and/or Janet, a minimum of two fifths of the value of the house/property shall be made available for their continued care. Details are described in Gregory and Geneva's Last will and Testament. Witness: .Date: r:~~-?( Signed: "i - 'J..(. ~ '7 'I f~A-~-/c? f~:t~-ff 5'-o;;.Y-fY <::;-;J.V-7~ "EXHIBITA" - .... 'C'h' .,. ^.~'~ ~ '>~'~,_~,"~.C'",__~~'__."',~..~""",~'~~ . ~ ~'~<~.,,,,~,,." "" d JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGS BOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 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 THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-3166 il ~, ~ 'V"" ~..,""~ '-., ,. , 0____ ~ " '. ",,"'",,~'"-- ,~,~,'" .""",,""""" ~~,. ,.. '~~- ~ JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, come Janet L. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough, by and through their attorneys, O'Brien, Baric & Scherer, and respectfully represent as follows: 1. The plaintiffs are Janet L. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough (hereinafter "Kingsboroughs"), husband and wife, who are adult individuals who reside at 435 Lewisberry Road, New Cumberland, York County, Pennsylvania. 2. The defendants are Geneva L. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford (hereinafter "Frankfords"), husband and wife, who are adult individuals who reside at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The defendant Geneva L. Frankford is the daughter of the Kingsboroughs. 4. On April 26, 1994, the parties entered into a written agreement (hereinafter "agreement") whereby the Kingsboroughs would pay the Frankfords $72,000.00 in exchange for the Frankfords agreement to provide the Kingsboroughs a home for as long as the Kingsboroughs are able to live in a private residence. A copy of the agreement is attached hereto and marked as "Exhibit A" and is incorporated herein. 1 < ~.. .~,~ "'~"'''''-' ",~~""e,~"~">,~.~".>~",,__~,,"~,,,,,, "0' ~ 5. The agreement was drafted by the defendant, Gregory J. Frankford. 6. The agreement provided that the $72,000.00 was to be applied to the purchase of a new home located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, which real estate was to be titled in the name of the Frankfords alone. 7. The $72,000.00 payment from the Kingsboroughs to the Frankfords represented approximately two-fifths of the cost of the new home located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg. 8. In or about September, 1994, the Kingsboroughs paid the Frankfords $72,000.00 pursuant to the agreement. 9. In or about February, 1995, the Kingsboroughs began to reside at 14 Dewberry Court according to the terms of the agreement. 10. The real estate situate at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania was titled in the names of the Frankfords alone after the Frankfords purchased it. 11. The Kingsboroughs resided at 14 Dewberry Court pursuant to the agreement for the period beginning in or about February, 1995 and ending in March, 2001. 12. During the period the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Kingsboroughs paid the Frankfords approximately two-fifths of the various charges for food and utility services which were supplied to the residence at 14 Dewberry Court. 2 Ii ., -, ~"V " <" ... ~ .~~'" ,~ ~."~ " ..,",~,~ -'''''--~''''~'=''-'''~~''~''''''~''', '!Ai!lIIl',;" 13. In May, 2000, the Frankfords advised the Kingsboroughs that they would have to leave the residence located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania on or before January 1, 2001. 14. On March 10, 2001, the Kingsboroughs left the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania at the insistence of the Frankfords. 15. The Frankfords have refused to return the $72,000.00 to the Kingsboroughs. 16. The Kingsboroughs are each able to live in a private residence. COUNT I BREACH OF CONTRACT April 26, 1994 Agreement 17. Paragraphs one through sixteen above are incorporated herein by reference. 18. All conditions precedent to the agreement have been fulfilled by the Kingsboroughs. 19. The Frankfords have breached the agreement by ejecting the Kingsboroughs from the residence at 14 Dewberry Court in violation of the express terms of the agreement. 20. The Kingsboroughs have sought a refund of the sums they paid the Frankfords pursuant to the agreement, and the Frankfords have refused to refund the payment. I li.1 .1 " , 3 II J : ""'c' WHEREFORE, Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords for the sum of $72,000.00 plus interest, expenses and costs of suit. COUNT II UNJUST ENRICHMENT April 26, 1994 Agreement 21. Paragraphs one through twenty above are incorporated herein by reference. 22. The Kingsboroughs paid $72,000.00 to the Frankfords pursuant to the terms of the agreement. 23. The Frankfords accepted $72,000.00 from the Kingsboroughs and have retained it and refused to repay it to the Kingsboroughs. 24. The Kingsboroughs have few assets remaining and are presently forced to live with their daughter and son-in-law, Joann K. Soulier and Daniel R. Soulier. 25. It is believed and therefore averred that the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court has increased substantially since the Kingsboroughs payment of $72,000.00 towards the purchase of this home in September, 1994. 26. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to keep the $72,000.00 paid to them by the Kingsboroughs. 4 ii ,='=" ,." ~~,~ ~ ~ -~ ~W " > .0 > ~l WHEREFORE, in the alternative to Count I, Kingsboroughs respectfully request this Honorable Court enter a Decree creating a constructive trust in the ownership equity of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, PA for the benefit of the Kingsboroughs, and: a) award the Kingsboroughs two-fifths of the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania; or, b) award the Kingsboroughs, the sum of $72,000.00 plus interest, expenses and costs of suit. COUNT III QUANTUM MERUIT April 26, 1994 Agreement 27. Paragraphs one through twenty-six above are incorporated herein by reference. 28. The Kingsboroughs paid $72,000.00 to the Frankfords pursuant to the terms of the agreement. 29. The Frankfords accepted $72,000.00 from the Kingsboroughs and have retained it and refused to repay it to the Kingsboroughs. 30. The Kingsboroughs have few assets remaining and are presently forced to live with their daughter and son-in-law, Joann K. Soulier and Daniel R. Soulier. 5 if - ~, --, ~,- .,. ,', -,~O"""' ~ ,',',"~, .,' '",-'-l '. ",J",0.,."",,,',,,,,, ,;oN"''''5'.~ ~'._"",~'Q'~""""""-"'''''''',"",,;O~~-C'',_ ~_~, 31. It is believed and therefore averred that the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court has increased substantially since the Kingsboroughs payment of $72,000.00 towards the purchase of this home in September, 1994. 32. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to keep the $72,000.00 paid to them by the Kingsboroughs. WHEREFORE, in the alternative to Count I, Kingsboroughs respectfully request this Honorable Court enter a Decree creating a constructive trust in the ownership equity of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, PA for the benefit of the Kingsboroughs, and: a) award the Kingsboroughs two-fifths of the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania; or, b) award the Kingsboroughs, the sum of $72,000.00 plus interest, expenses and costs of suit. COUNT IV BREACH OF CONTRACT Loans 33. Paragraphs one through thirty-two above are incorporated herein by reference. 34. During the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Frankfords, together or individually, borrowed sums of money from the Kingsboroughs which remain unpaid. 6 I , 'I I! it *~.,'~'O'"" 'C 0'_' h"", . ~",="".",",,,,,-~..>-,,,,, -"'^"~'''^~'''~''''W,,,"'''''''''C'~'''if'~<'O&t;.X;,~,,,,.' ~ "'(i/iil~'" 35. The loans mentioned in preceding paragraph were made orally and with no provision for interest or terms of repayment to the Kingsboroughs. 36. The loans were made to the Frankfords in the following amounts on the dates indicated: February 13, 1997 March 3, 1997 May 18,1997 May 29, 1997 July 14,1997 February 29, 2000 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,400.00 $5,000.00 $1,400.00 $3,500.00 37. The Frankfords have repaid $7,000.00 of the above sums. 38. At present, the Frankfords owe the Kingsboroughs $10,300.00 in connection with sums of money the Frankfords borrowed from the Kingsboroughs during the time the parties resided with one another. WHEREFORE, the Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords in the amount of $10,300.00 plus interest and costs of suit. COUNT V UNJUST ENRICHMENT Loans 39. Paragraphs one through thirty-eight above are incorporated herein by reference. :'i II 7 " ~. ,_ L" ," .~'''. ;.;..... ""->,".' .., "."'"",,,,~ '0' "'''~,'';"'''--~'> ,,,,", ''''''''-' '''"''~'''-'''''''''..-.'"",,:1:2-'',' "~ 40. During the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Frankfords, together or individually, borrowed sums of money from the Kingsboroughs which remain unpaid. 41. The loans mentioned in preceding paragraph were made orally and with no provision for interest or terms of repayment to the Kingsboroughs. 42. At present, the Frankfords owe the Kingsboroughs $10,300.00 in connection with sums of money the Frankfords borrowed from the Kingsboroughs during the time the parties resided with one another. 43. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to return the sums borrowed from the Kingsboroughs. WHEREFORE, in the alternative to Count IV, the Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords in the amount of $10,300.00 plus interest and costs of suit. COUNT VI QUANTUM MERUIT Loans 44. Paragraphs one through forty-three above are incorporated herein by reference. 45. During the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords, the Frankfords, together or individually, borrowed sums of money from the Kingsboroughs which remain unpaid. 8 Ii II ~"=, ~~ ~ ,~,""" ,,"', ""~' ,C<~ '~'. ,',~. ,'j;,~"",."'",~"...-',.'"~~'.~""~~",--"",,,,, .'~'. ~';,j 46. The loans mentioned in preceding paragraph were made orally and with no provision for interest or terms of repayment to the Kingsboroughs. 47. At present, the Frankfords owe the Kingsboroughs $10,300.00 in connection with sums of money the Frankfords borrowed from the Kingsboroughs during the time the parties resided with one another. 48. The Frankfords would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to return the sums borrowed from the Kingsboroughs. WHEREFORE, in the alternative to Count IV, the Kingsboroughs demand judgment against the Frankfords in the amount of $10,300.00 plus interest and costs of suit. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER ~a<;;4 Michael A. Scherer, Esquire J.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiffs mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/amended.com 1IIi.' , " '., ~ ,,~, > ,',," "~""'H" -' ~ ,<' "~.q".', "~,'''~"~'"~-,,, "~"~:_~"_"-"~M '-"'.4, .'~"h.. ',' ~"-'~I:i'~',7,' VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Amended Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~/ , \.. . ..' 'l ./CP< if;; /(;0 ..--t~~r-/~ Walter E...' gsboro# /,f ~f 't ~4.~v/ / JanetL. ingsboroug DATED: 1- 'J - 0 I II " , :'1 II ,c:i_ - '>""-- ,l,..i: ,', l "" 1,0 ,...J, \M'~'" " '~i, I I cJ ( .( . NOTE OFrAGREEMENT This document represents an ~greement between Gregory and Geneva Frankford and Walter and Janet KJ.ngsborough. This agreement is binding on all parties ill accor-:':ance with the following provisions unless mutually recinded by all parties. G~egory and Geneva have agreed to provide a home for Walter and Janet for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence. Due to Walter's physical condition, living quarters on the first floor are required. To accommodate this, and hecause their current home is not suitable, Gregory and Geneva will build a new home. This home will be a Cape Cod design with a two bedroom Master suite on the first floor for Walter and Janet's exclusive use. Walter and Janet will also have full access/to all of the common areas in the house with no restrictions. In exchange for this arrangement, Walter and Janet have agreed to apply $72,000.00 from the sale of their current home towards the cost of the new home. This is approximately two fifths of the purchase price. Walter and Janet shall continue to be responsible for their personal debts and liabilities (private phone, car insurance, etc). They may also be asked to pay not more than two fifths of the common expenses (gas, electric, sewer, etc.) if needed. For legal purposes, they will not have part ownership of the real estate. In the event that Gregory and Geneva die before Walter and/or Janet, a minimum of two fifths of the value of the house/property shall be made available for their continued care. Details are described in Gregory and Geneva's Last will and Testament. "-.,", signed: Date: ~076.ff "i - 'J.(" - 'N Geneva L. Frankio ~A' f ~:{0' -I <,L f~:?j'--If witness: Walter E. Kin sbor~gh ~(I- 'ell .1U<?1jl.;f) .{#-t;tl ~Janet . Kingsborou ~L 5--;).r--fy . <:;..:lV.7v- "EXHIBIT A" "' . LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and W ALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Janet 1. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough, Plaintiffs and Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 You are hereby notified that you have twenty (20) days in which to plead to the enclosed Preliminary Objections or a Default Judgment may be entered against you. Date: June 11,2001 SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. ~t!f1M~ By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford LAW C)FFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~;;, JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and W ALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford, by their attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C. submit the following Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint: I. MOTION TO STRIKE. A. Failure to Conform with Rule of Court (Counts II and IV) 1. Counts II and IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint each purport to set forth causes of action for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. 2. Unjust enrichment and quantum meruit are separate and distinct legal bases for causes of action. 3. Pa.R.C.P. 1020(a) requires that each cause of action shall be stated in a separate count containing a demand for relief. 4. Both Counts II and IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint fail to conform to Pa.R.C.P. 1020(a). WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to strike Counts II and IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2). LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE -.... ., B. Failure to Conform with Rule of Court (Count IV) 5. Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action against Defendants based on loans of money alleged to have been made by Plaintiffs to Defendants. 6. Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that there were oral "loans" made by Plaintiffs to Defendants with no provisions for interest or terms of repayment. (Complaint, Paragraph 28) 7. The purported failure by Defendants to pay Plaintiffs on anyone loan made would give rise to a cause of action for breach of contract. 8. Pa.R.C.P. 1020(a) requires that each cause of action shall be stated in a separate count containing a demand for relief. 9. By asserting a cause of action on the basis of breach of contract under Complaint Count IV for more than one loan, Plaintiffs are impermissibly joining more than one cause of action in one Count. 10. Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to conform to Pa.R.C.P. 1020(a). WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to strike Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint pursuant to Pa.R.c.p. 1028(a)(2). C. Failure to Conform with Rule of Law (Count II) 11. Count I of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action based upon the breach of an express written contract attached to Plaintiffs' Complaint as Exhibit A. 12. Count II of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action upon claims of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit on the basis of the $72,000 Plaintiffs claim they paid -2- II' . LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE '-.. Defendants pursuant to the terms ofthe written agreement. (Complaint, Paragraph 21) 13. As a matter of law, causes of action based upon unjust enrichment and quantum meruit are unavailable when the relationship of the parties is founded upon an express contract or written agreement. WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to strike Count II of Plaintiffs' Complaint pursuant to Pa.R.c.p. 1028(a)(2). D. Failure to Comply with Rule of Law (Count IV) 14. Count III of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action based upon breach of contract with respect to loans alleged to have been made by Plaintiffs to Defendants. 15. Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to recover amounts loaned by Plaintiffs to Defendants based upon claims of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. 16. For Plaintiff to maintain a cause of action for breach of contract under Count III separate from the claims raised in Count IV, an express oral contract must exist with respect to each loan upon which Plaintiffs claim damages of Defendants. 17. As a matter of law, causes of action based upon unjust enrichment and quantum meruit are unavailable when the relationship of the parties is founded upon an express contract or written agreement. WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to strike Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2). -3- ., LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE II. DEMURRER. A. Count I - Breach of Contract, Apri126, 1994 Agreement 18. Plaintiffs claim in Count I of their Complaint that Defendants breached the terms of a written contract dated April 26, 1994 by ejecting Plaintiffs from the subject residence in violation of the express terms of the contract. (Complaint, Paragraph 18) 19. The term of the parties' agreement pertaining to Plaintiffs' continuing right to live at the subject residence provides as follows: Gregory and Geneva [Defendants] have agreed to provide a home for Walter and Janet [Plaintiffs] for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence. (Complaint, Exhibit A, emphasis added) 20. Plaintiffs fail to aver in their Complaint that they are each able to live in a private residence. 21. If Plaintiffs are unable to live in a private residence, Plaintiffs, by the terms of their written agreement with Defendants, are unable to maintain a cause of action against Defendants for breaching the parties' contract. 22. Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for breach of contract due to the absence of any allegation in Plaintiffs' Complaint that Plaintiffs are each able to live in a private residence. WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs' Complaint and enter judgment in their favor pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4). -4- LAW OFFICES SNE:LBAKER, BRE:NNEMAN & SPARE _. B. Breach of Contract (Count III, Loans) 23. Count III of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action based upon breach of contract with respect to loans alleged to have been made by Plaintiffs to Defendants. 24. Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to set forth any allegations of fact describing how or when Defendants breached anyone or more of the loan agreement or contracts with Plaintiffs. WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' Complaint and enter judgment in their favor pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4). III. MOTION FOR MORE SPECIFIC COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(3). (In the alternative to I.D. and II.B.) 25. The averments of Paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, above, are incorporated by reference herein. 26. Plaintiffs fail to specify when each loan was made, the amount of each loan and the amount, if any, for each loan that remains unpaid. 27. Plaintiffs fail to allege whether the amount of $1 0,300.00 set forth in their Complaint represents an amount Plaintiffs claim are due them on one or more loans and if more than one loan, the amounts of each loan that comprise the total amount of $1 0,300.00. 28. More specific allegations concerning the dates, amounts and balances of each loan upon which Plaintiffs claim damages are essential for Defendants properly to respond and defend Count III. WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to order Plaintiffs to allege with more -5- LAW OFFICES SNEL~AKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE -';"","'''-- . 't' specificity the dates, amounts and balances of each loan Plaintiffs claim they have made which remains due. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 14tUu-t-- BY: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford Date: June 11, 2001 -6- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ;o""j i~; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID, ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 /i:'lit~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva L. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford Date: June 11,2001 II ':i<_~~~'j;oo~\i"~''''~'''''-'i!fj')jj.lIi~~il;Ul!~~~~liij}j,~~I'*~'I'>1;\~V.4~!tH!t.g....~~' ~. ~ "",~W.J,~;.J~)~!I:jt~.!;;~U"",,,,,,,,,,,,Jl____~ ~ N~_""'''''~."<.,<,''_'''''''_"'.'~___ , ;.~ '" ~'. -,.-. -.-,~:. i""""'iiif'~"M"~"illi!.i:i.w , ~~ ;...' 1- ~ (") c: ? -0-'" n..{)-' If'n 2-')'1 Z--- 0) ~: ~~-::: !--c:.;; '$ ~O ..:;:::;.{... >~' ~ :< ,"",. ,-. C~ o .-" ~:: c._ ...- ..,~ V ::J"':" -;) ill i:~(rt ,;!~ =n 7;;C~; .:~~~ in ~ :JJ -<: 0} ''0 (.,) iii , ~ LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE " JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants ~, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ; NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Janet 1. Kingsborough and Walter E. Kingsborough, Plaintiffs and Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 West South Street Carlisle,PA 17013 You are hereby notified that you have twenty (20) days in which to plead to the enclosed New Matter or a Default Judgment may be entered against you. Date: July 30, 2001 SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. l~JMt~ By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 West Main Street . Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frarik[ord ,~,~" LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION ~ LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford, by their attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C., submit the following Answer with New Matter in response to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint: ANSWER 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that on April 26, 1994 the parties entered into a written agreement, a copy of which is attached to the Amended Complaint as "Exhibit A" (hereinafter the "Agreement"). The Agreement, being in writing, speaks for itself; therefore, Plaintiffs' sunnnary or characterization of the Agreement in Paragraph 4 of the Amended Complaint is denied. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. It is denied that the Agreement sets forth the provisions as alleged in Paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The Agreement, being in writing, speaks for itself; " Ii " li LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE .~[ therefore, Plaintiffs' summary or characterization of the Agreement in Paragraph 6 of the Amended Complaint is denied. 7. Denied. It is denied that the $72,000 payment from Plaintiffs to Defendants represented or was intended to represent two-fifths of the cost of a new house located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg. To the contrary, the aforesaid amount represented an amount necessary to reduce the principal required to finance the construction and/or purchase of a house required to accommodate the Plaintiffs, which would result in a monthly mortgage payment affordable to the Defendants based upon their financial circumstances. By way of further answer, Defendants' resulting monthly mortgage payment was higher than the monthly mortgage payment Defendants paid for their previous residence on Bonnybrook Road, Carlisle. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted, with the qualification that Plaintiffs moved in with Defendants (and at that time Defendants' one son) in September 1994 at Defendants' residence at Bonnybrook Road at the time $72,000 was given to Defendants. 10. Admitted. 11. Admitted. 12. Denied. It is denied that during the period of time Plaintiffs resided with the Defendants, the Plaintiffs paid approximately two-fifths of the various charges for food and utility services which were supplied to the residence at 14 Dewberry Court. To the contrary, the Plaintiffs paid less than thirty-three percent (33%) of applicable utility and food costs and expenses. By way of further response, the parties' shared expenses did not include real estate -2- .. "<"'" ,'0 ~ . _d',. taxes, maintenance, improvements, insurance on the residence and wear and depreciation of furniture, furnishings and appliances, which expenditures and costs were incurred solely by the Defendants during the six year period the Plaintiffs' resided at 14 Dewberry Court. 13. Denied. It is denied that Defendants in May 2000 or at any other time advislld Plaintiffs that the Plaintiffs would have to leave the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg on or before January 1,2001. To the contrary, Defendants have never advised Plaintiffs that they were to leave the residence by any specified date. By way of further answer, Defendants did at one point advise Plaintiffs that Defendants would have to make arrangements to move from the residence if Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough would not wear a protective undergarment to prevent his waste from being deposited throughout the residence. The averments set forth in New Matter incorporated by reference herein in further answer to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. 14. Admitted in part; denied in part. Although it is admitted only that that the Plaintiffs left the subject residence on March 10,2001, it is denied that Defendants insisted that Plaintiffs leave on that date or any other specified date. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs were eventually requested to make other living arrangements since Plaintiffs ultimately refused the recommendations of the Cumberland Count Office of the Aging and a medical professional that Plaintiffs have competent, professional care in an assisted living environment. Further, Plaintiffs moved out only after Defendants made every effort possible and practical to assist Plaintiffs and provide for their care at 14 Dewberry Court. 15. Admitted, with the qualification that Plaintiffs have asked only for their money back LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE and have not specifically demanded $72,000. By way offurther answer, the averments set forth -3- i :I II , , , , L , 'u ,,-,,,',,- ~)o"', -,'-0< , , "J>. , , . ""~.-", LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE in New Matter are incorporated by reference herein. 16. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiffs are each capable ofliving in private residences as contemplated in the parties' Agreement for the reasons set forth in New Matter, the averments of which are incorporated by reference herein. 17. The averments of Paragraph 1 through 16, inclusive, of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. 18. Denied. Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by the Defendants; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d). 19. Denied. Paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by the Defendants; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Defendants have breached the Agreement or were in any way in violation of the express terms of the Agreement. It is further denied that that Defendants have at any time ejected the Plaintiffs from the residence at 14 Dewberry Court for the reasons set forth in the preceding Paragraphs ofthis Answer and the New Matter, the averments of which are incorporated by reference herein. 20. Admitted. The averments contained in Paragraph 15, above, are incorporated by reference herein. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs of this action. 21. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 20, inclusive, of this Answer are -3- j: IJ ~L; LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~ incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. 22. Admitted. 23. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that the Defendants accepted $72,000 from the Plaintiffs and they have not paid that sum to the Plaintiffs upon Plaintiffs' request for their money back. It is denied that the sum noted has been retained by the Defendants. To the contrary, the $72,000 has been properly utilized by the Defendants as required and agreed to by the parties in their Agreement. 24. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment which characterizes the Plaintiffs' remaining assets as being "few"; therefore, same is denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, it is denied that the Plaintiffs are forced to live with their daughter and son-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. Soulier. To the contrary, it is believed and therefore averred that Plaintiffs qualify or are able to reside in an assisted living environment that will provide them with the competent and professional care that they need. By way of further answer, it was the Plaintiffs' mutual decision with Mr. and Mrs. Soulier that the Plaintiffs would reside with Mr. and Mrs. Soulier. 25. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment ofthe characterization made by Plaintiffs that the fair market value of 14 Dewberry Court has "substantially" increased since September 1994; therefore, same is denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way offurther response, any increase in the fair market value of the property has occurred in whole or in part by -4- I: ji :1 Ii LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ;;.;,;, the Defendants making substantial improvements to the home for which no contribution was made by the Plaintiffs. 26. Denied. Paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by the Defendants; therefore, same is deemed to be denied. By way of further response the averments of New Matter are incorporated by reference herein. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs of this action. 27. The averments of Paragraph 1 through 26, inclusive, of this Answer are incorporated herein in their entirety. 28. Admitted. 29. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 23 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 30. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 24 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 31. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 25 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 32. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 26 ofthis Answer are incorporated by reference herein. Further, Count III of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint duplicates Count II of the Amended Complaint and should be stricken. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs of this action. -6- !I ~ .1_--',,- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE iiIIiIilillliilk 33. Denied. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32, inclusive, of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. 34. Admitted with the qualification that the Plaintiffs have also made numerous loans to Plaintiffs' daughter and son-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. Soulier, which loans also remain unpaid as of March 2001 and for which Plaintiffs have not initiated legal action to collect. By way of further answer, although a balance exists on the loans made by the Plaintiffs to the Defendants, Defendants have made regularly monthly payments to Plaintiffs without any objection at any time as to the amount being paid starting in March 2000. 35. Admitted, with the qualification that the same manner of loans were made by the Plaintiffs to Mr. and Mrs. Soulier. 36. Admitted. 37. Denied. It is denied that the Frarikfords have repaid $7,000.00 ofthe above sums. To the contrary, the Frankfords have repaid $7,300.00 of the above sums. By way of further answer, the Defendants unilaterally and without any request or demand by the Plaintiffs commenced regular monthly payments in March 2000 to Plaintiffs in the amount of $1 00.00, which monthly payments Plaintiffs continue to accept even after the initiation ofthis action by them against the Defendants. 38. It is denied that the Defendants owe the Plaintiffs $10,300.00. It is also denied, to the extent it is implied, that Defendants are in breach of any contract or agreement with respect to the loans made by the Plaintiffs to the Defendants. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended -7- II II LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE - . .-- Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs of this action. 39. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 38, inclusive, of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. 40. The averments of Paragraph 34 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 41. The averments of Paragraph 35 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 42. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 38 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein. 43. Denied. Paragraph 43 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by the Defendants; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.c.p. 1029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that the Defendants would be unjustly enriched if they were permitted to return the sums borrowed from the Kingsboroughs. To the contrary, there would be no unjust enrichment if the sums borrowed were repaid. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs ofthis action. 44. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 43, inclusive, of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. 45. Paragraph 35 of this Answer is incorporated by reference herein. 46. Paragraph 35 of this Answer is incorporated by reference herein. 47. Paragraph 38 of this Answer is incorporated by reference herein. 48. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 43 of this Answer are incorporated by reference herein with reference to Paragraph 48 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. By way of -8- I Ii LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE . , ,~i further answer, if the Defendants were permitted to return the sums borrowed from the Plaintiffs, there could be no unjust enrichment. Finally, Count VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint should be stricken as duplicating Count V of the Amended Complaint. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request the Court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and enter judgment in favor of the Defendants together with costs of this action. NEW MATTER 49. Plaintiffs are estopped from maintaining this action and the claims raised against the Defendants. 50. All actions taken by the Defendants with respect to the subject matter of the claims raised and the suit brought are justified. 51. Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint and each claim set forth therein fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 52. Beginning in 1993, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough began expressing to her family, including the Defendants, that Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough was becoming difficult for her to take care of and handle. 53. After discussions among the family members, which included Plaintiffs, Defendants and Mr. and Mrs. Soulier, the only solution agreed to be acceptable among them was for the Plaintiffs to move in with Defendants. 54. At the time it was agreed that Plaintiffs would move in with Defendants, Defendants were the owners of a residence on Bonnybrook Road in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, which residence was built in 1989 and subsequent thereto, had been substantially improved by Defendants in -9- \1 ',I!!. 'Cco' .-.;, anticipation of permanently residing there and raising a family. 55. Prior to the discussion and understanding reached among the family as made reference to in Paragraph 53, above, Defendants had no intention of moving from the residence they had built in 1989. 56. Prior to Defendants' decision to construct the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Defendants explored the options of renovating their residence on Bonnybrook Road; however, their residence could not easily be modified to accommodate Plaintiffs and if a separate addition were constructed for that purpose, the steps required for access would pose a danger and difficulty to Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough who had difficulty with steps and with walking. 57. Prior to Defendants' decision to construct the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Defendants explored the option of locating and purchasing an existing residence that would accommodate the needs of the Plaintiffs, but discovered that such residences were rare and none were on the market in the general area. 58. After exploring the options described in Paragraphs 56 and 57, above, a decision was made by Defendants, with the knowledge and approval ofthe Plaintiffs, that Defendants would build a new residence in order to accommodate the Plaintiffs in furtherance of the family's understanding reached that the Plaintiffs would live with the Defendants. 59. Defendants sold their residence on Bonnybrook Road, where they were comfortable and established in the local community, in order to help and accommodate the Plaintiffs. 60. The residence constructed at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg was built with a LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE first floor level designed to accommodate a handicapped person with such features as oversized -10- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE "'; doors, a handicap accessible shower and a two-bedroom master suite. 61. The design features made reference to in Paragraph 60, above, were required solely to accommodate Plaintiffs and were features that Defendants would not otherwise have or choose to have in a residence but for the need to accommodate Plaintiffs living with Defendants in order for Defendants to help and assist in Plaintiffs' care. 62. The decision to construct a residence in Mechanicsburg was made so that Plaintiff would be closer to other family members; namely Mr. and Mrs. Soulier, than they would be in the Boiling Springs/Carlisle Area. 63. Plaintiffs and Defendants mutually agreed that Plaintiffs would contribute $72,000.00 toward the cost of the new residence. 64. It was understood that the contribution made by Plaintiffs to Defendants toward the cost of the new residence would offset the additional cost of the new residence's special features for accommodating Plaintiffs, the cost and/or loss Defendants incurred in selling their residence on Bonnybrook Road and the additional mortgage payment and real estate taxes Defendants would be responsible to pay. 65. Plaintiffs at no time have paid or made any contribution to the payment of the mortgage, real estate taxes or maintenance of the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg. 66. During the more than six (6) year period that Plaintiffs lived with Defendants at the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Plaintiffs' daughter, Defendant Geneva Frankford, did the majority of grocery shopping and cooking for the Plaintiffs and attended to the -11- il II . ........1 I 'II Plaintiffs' needs, particularly the needs of her father, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough, on almost a daily basis. 67. During the more than six (6) year period that Plaintiffs lived with Defendants at the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Plaintiffs contributed no more than thirty-three percent ofthe utility and food expenses due to Defendants' second son being born after the parties entered into the April 26, 1994 Agreement, thereby reducing Plaintiffs' combined proportionate share of the expenses to one-third. 68. For a seven month period beginning in September 1999, Joann Soulier and her three children moved into the residence at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg due to the abusive behavior of her husband, Daniel Soulier. 69. During the seven month period made reference to in Paragraph 68, above, Plaintiffs' combined proportionate share of the utility and food expenses was reduced to one-tenth. 70. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court with Defendants and Defendants two children, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough's health increasingly deteriorated. 71. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough's assistance and involvement with the care of her husband diminished. 72. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough became increasingly less concerned about her husband's condition and the effects of his actions and behavior. 73. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, the ability of the Plaintiffs to live on their own, to assist each other in the daily tasks of living and to permit LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE assistance by Defendants greatly diminished. -12- !, Ii ___J ") ,,~i,< 74. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough increasingly urinated and defecated while fully dressed, causing his urine and his waste to be deposited throughout the first floor of the residence. 75. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough would not wear and/or refused to wear a protective undergarment on a regular basis to prevent his bodily waste from soiling himself and the residence. 76. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough frequently would not check her husband to see ifhe was wearing a protective undergarment, would not assist in ensuring he was wearing such a garment, would not insist upon his wearing such a garment and at times denied the need for him to wear such a garment in spite of the increase in frequency of the times her husband was soiling himself and the residence. 77. Despite the diligent efforts of the Defendants to prevent and assist in the prevention of Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough from soiling himself and the residence due to his failure to wear a protective undergarment, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough soiled himself and the residence and tracked his urine and waste throughout the first floor of the residence in areas where Defendants' young children played. 78. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough increasing failed to check, confirm and assist Defendant Geneva Frankford in checking or confirming that Defendant Walter Kingsborough was or was not taking his prescribed medication. 79. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE -13- [ \1 Kingsborough gave her husband medication against the orders of his physician. 80. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough overmedicated her husband. 81. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough would leave medication out in view and easily accessible to the Defendants' children. 82. The actions and incidents made reference to in Paragraphs 79 through 81, above, occurred and continued despite repeated efforts by Defendants to monitor the storing and dispensing of Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough's medication and assist his wife in these matters. 83. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough would leave the gas stove burners on unattended, burn food she was preparing and leave the kitchen for extended periods of time while the stove was on. 84, During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough would get up during the night, cause noise and wake up Defendants and their children by entering their bedrooms. 85. During the time that Plaintiffs resided at 14 Dewberry Court, Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough feU during the night, striking his head against the nightstand in his bedroom. Although Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough who was also on the frrst floor of the residence heard her husband fall, she did not get out of bed to assist him. 86. In the summer of 2000, Cumberland Count Office ofthe Aging after an evaluation of the parties' living arrangement recommended that the Plaintiffs be placed in an assisted LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE living/nursing facility. -14- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE ~, _1 _co 87. In spite of the recommendation made by Cumberland County Office of the Aging, the Defendants were not ready to accept the recommendation and made arrangements for a visiting nurse and a visiting nurse's aid to come to the residence to assist in the care of Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough. 88. In December 2000, a geriatric specialist and physician treating Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough, along with the Social Worker from Cumberland County Office of the Aging, advised Defendants that they could not provide to the Plaintiffs the level of care the Plaintiffs required and recommended that Plaintiffs reside in an assisted living/nursing care facility. 89. In December 2000, the Plaintiffs, Defendants and Mrs. Soulier reached the conclusion that assisted living and/or nursing care were best for the Plaintiffs after the family met with a representative of Cumberland County Office of the Aging and Plaintiff Walter Kingsborough's physician. 90. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs posed a risk to their own health, safety and wellbeing. 91. For the reasons set forth in Paragraphs 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs posed a risk to Defendants' health, safety and wellbeing. 92. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs posed a risk to the health, safety and wellbeing of the Defendants' two minor children. 93. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs' actions placed themselves, the Defendants and Defendants' children at risk for sickness and bodily injury. -15- , II LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE 94. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs' actions placed Plaintiffs' and Defendants' personal property and the Defendants' residence at risk for damage or destruction by fire. 95. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 70 through 85, inclusive, above, and others, Plaintiffs created and maintained an unhealthy, unsafe and unsanitary environment for themselves, Defendants and Defendants' children. 96. The risks and conditions noted in Paragraphs 90 through 95, inclusive, above, continued and existed due to Defendants' best efforts to instruct, assist and aid Plaintiffs to eliminate and avoid such risks and conditions. 97. For all the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs and each of them, are unable to live in a private residence. 98. The circumstances, such as, but not limited to the actions, risks and conditions stated above, were in the contemplation of the parties to the April 26, 1994 Agreement as constituting the kinds or types of conditions that would render the Plaintiffs unable to live in a private residence. 99. Plaintiffs made loans of money to their daughter, Joann Soulier, and son-in-law, Daniel Soulier, without any terms of repayment. 100. Joann Soulier and Daniel Soulier have not made regular or monthly payments to Plaintiffs although they owe to Plaintiffs a sum in excess of$12,000.00. 101. Plaintiffs have made no demand upon or brought suit against Joann Soulier and Daniel Soulier to collect the outstanding loan balance due. 102. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintiffs never advised Defendants or claimed -16- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE "~it'l!b., that Defendants were in violation of any term or agreement for the repayment of the loans. 1 03. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintiffs never asked or demanded that any money loaned to Defendants be repaid. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. ~~~~ BY: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford Date: July 30, 2001 -17- 1_ LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE - ;' 1- ~; . , VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer with New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. 'l ~ C '* ~)M91~~ ~ ,e{ Geneva 1. Frankford Date: July 30, 2001 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer with New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: July 30, 2001 -"'" ~ " L.AW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing New Matter to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 ~~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford Date: July 30,2001 ;~!lI'l>\&I~IM~;;~~t\~~M~!4;,wM"~'!f<~,>{j,~\'!'i~_~liIiliIliIii;li'^ .... , ~ ~ J,~f:.",,!t~J,~MI..l '_'J,,~),J~L[,)\h..J ,IT-,,.J ."".[l_,J,Lb.,__. ,-,,','~>". " . .,~ ..' " ~ "~, - "~, ,;.,' , L~ n'1 '. "".,. "~,. ('~ ". .' Cj, ~ ., , ,i,', ..." '. . . " ~ .rr .... JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants No. 2001- ~'l:J.. CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE FOR LIS PENDENS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please index the above action as a Lis Pendens against the following real property: All that certain tract of real estate and improvements thereon located at 14 Dewberry COurt, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. Recorded in Deed Book 107 Page 1187 I hereby certify that this action affects the title to or other interest in the above- described real property. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER DATE: 5. /.0\ ~a5~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 ii / .'~ " " , ~"~:Jll1ill'-lm,",; (-~. - "i,1ii""_~,,,;r.,;w""""',I'!l~ ~'~u~o .- ~. ~ I ' , ""__.";,Lo , ~~,,:~, " , -... SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2001-02692 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KINGS BOROUGH JANET L ET AL VS FRANKFORD GENEVA L ET AL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon FRANKFORD GENEVA L the DEFENDANT , at 0017:37 HOURS, on the 21st day of May 2001 at 14 DEWBERRY COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 by handing to GENEVA L. FRANKFORD 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 18.00 7.44 .00 10.00 .00 35.44 So AnS~~'l_ ~~A!. ~~l'~";'f'..(' ~ . ~ ~ . --< R. Thomas Kline me thi s ;J. <f 1!:: day of OS/22/2001 O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER By: \J~ {. ~ll Deputy Sheriff Sworn and Subscribed to before ~ ~{ .A.D. Q~hoS-t~yPfl",~, :.o!l,~.'-ili'M~'"'"~ ~H . - > .I-~I d .u.:. "~ "' _ ,J ' , '~'W, '" . .. ""'\. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2001-02692 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KINGS BOROUGH JANET L ET AL VS FRANKFORD GENEVA L ET AL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon FRANKFORD GREGORY J the DEFENDANT , at 0017:37 HOURS, on the 21st day of May , 2001 at 14 DEWBERRY COURT MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 by handing to GENEVA L. FRANKFORD 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. Thomas Kline OS/22/2001 O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER Sworn and Subscribed to before By: \J<lliYY\ ~ ~ Deputy Sheriff me this ;i.,/~ day of 71, ~Of .:ko I ( I~t/fl-o /2 1u.1P#~. I rothonotary A.D. ,~- .",," '-' , . LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE , . JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and W ALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY 1. FRANKFORD, Defendants TO: Janet 1. Kingsborough, Plaintiff and Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 17 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 " L '~~ '"" . , , . : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO RESPOND NOTICE is hereby given that you have thirty (30) days after service of the attached Motion to file a response in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1035.3(a). Date: Hay 30, 2002 I! II SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. ,{&Jl1f z t.1A/L.---> By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Prankford and Gregory 1. Frankford ~" LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE 'II' -" ~ ~.~"'.-'~,.;: , ' , ' JANET 1. KINGS BOROUGH and W ALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY 1. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford by their attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C. submit this Motion For Partial Summary Judgment and in support thereof state the following: 1. Count IV of Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action against Defendants on the basis that Defendants breached an oral contract with Plaintiffs with respect to the loan of various sums of money made by Plaintiffs to Defendants. 2. Plaintiffs claim that various loans were made to the Defendants with no provisions for interest or terms of repayment. (See Amended Complaint, Paragraph 35). 3. Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough testifIed during her deposition on April4, 2002 that all sums of money loaned were loaned by Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough to Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford. (April 4, 2002 Deposition of Janet Kingsborough (the "Kingsborough Deposition") pp. 116-120. Copies of pages 114 to 124 of the Deposition are attached hereto as "Exhibit A") 4. Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough testified that the sums loaned to Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford were loaned with no repayment deadline and that amounts loaned could be repaid by II Ii -" 'I ) II LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE ,. -- ",i,~ the Defendants whenever they were able to repay the loans. (Kingsborough Deposition, pp. 117- 120) 5. Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough acknowledged that beginning March 2000, $100.00 each month, up to and including March 2002, was paid to Janet 1. Kingsborough by Defendants on the various loans that were made to Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford. (Kings borough Deposition, p. 120) 6. The payment of$100.00 by Defendants each month beginning March 2000 is acceptable to Plaintiff Janet Kingsborough. 7. Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough never advised Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford that the loans had to be paid back in full or that more than $100.00 each month needed to be paid in repayment of the loans. (Kingsborough Deposition, pp. 120-121). 8. Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough believes that Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford has abided by the agreement she had with her to pay the loaned money back. (Kings borough Deposition, p. 121) 9. Plaintiffs nowhere in the Amended Complaint allege that the terms of any agreement to loan money to Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford or the Defendants were breached. 10. In Count V of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs purport to set forth a cause of action against the Defendants on the basis of unjust enrichment with respect to the loans made reference in Count IV of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. 11. In Count VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs purport to set forth a cause of action against the Defendants on the basis of quantum meruit with respect to the loans made reference in Count IV of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. -2- :i II ".,,,,,,,"" LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE .r I , l~l 1,-- . ' 12. As a matter of law, causes of action based upon unjust enrichment and quantum meruit are unavailable when the relationship ofthe parties is based upon an express contract or agreement. 13. Defendants do not contest the terms of the agreement reached between Plaintiff Janet L. Kingsborough and Defendant Geneva 1. Frankford with respect to the loans that were made by Plaintiff Janet 1. Kingsborough as testified to by her. 14. The pleadings in this action are closed. 15. As a matter of law, there is no genuine issue of any material fact as to any necessary cause of action or defense relating to the matters raised in Counts IV, V and VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint which could be established by additional discovery or expert report. WHEREFORE, Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford request this Court to enter judgment in their favor with respect to the claims made in Counts IV, V and VI of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. Date: rJ111ft{ 2-~, 2002.. BY: Yhtft!/~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford -3- II Ii LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN &: SPARE J ':.., ".:--" . , VERIFICATION I verify that .the statements. made in the foregoing Motion are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. WOMQ~ ~.~~ . .' Geneva 1. Fnmkford ' Date: 111~ $5; ,;>a)-O VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Motion are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~. -' 6&o~.B'.,~iJ Date: S - ,/.-,;-, 0 'a-- '" il ,"~'. ,~, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~-~ .1', . ~ IlIli. .. ..i>r:; , . ~-~ 114 . , BY MR. BRENNEMAN: Q. I want you to turn to the last page. It's marked W at the bottom. A. (Complying.) Q. Do you recognize that as a document that Geneva or Greg prepared? A. Yes. Q. And that document notes loans to them and payments made on those loans. Is that correct? A. Um-hum. Q. And this is another copy of a document that I received from your attorney. Does that document, to your knowledge, accurately represent the amounts borrowed by Greg or Geneva and the payments made by them up to January 30, 200l? A. I wasn't sure of how much they had borrowed, but I know Geneva had paid me back $100 a month. And I haven't figured out how long it had been and how much she had paid in that $100 back. Q. So you're saying you don't know if this accurately represents the amount you loaned and the amounts that they paid up to January 30, 200l? A. Yes, I wasn't sure how much they borrowed. Q. Let me ask the question again. Perhaps I can ask it a different way. Do you believe this correctly EXHIBIT A ,,'"~<= "' ,1-, .'. 115 A. Q. of them? A. Q, A. Q. that was loaned to them? A. No. Q. Did you keep any records of the amount of money that were paid to you? A. No. Q. But you believe this record to be correct as of that date. Is that correct? ._~"",," 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~ - .,1 ':-~'_'l!J.iK'; I ~' . - 116 that? A. Urn-hum. Q. Do you know to whom that money was loaned, or put another way, who borrowed it? A, I imagine -- Geneva, I imagine. Q. Do you remember what that was for? A. No. Q. And who agreed to loan her that amount of money, was that you? A. Yes. Q. And what understanding did you have with her with respect to when that money would be paid back? A. Whenever they could pay it back. There was no pressur~. Q. There was no pressure or a deadline. Is that correct? A. Right. Q. The next date has March 3, 1997 and it shows $5,000 was borrowed. Do you see that? A. Urn-hum. Q. And was that a sum that was borrowed by Geneva? A. Yes. Q. And do you know what that amount was for? A. No, I have no idea. I don't remember now. I don't know if it was for the camper or what. I don't know. '.~~ ~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .~ , I .1 ~ r"<' .L - J. 117 , , . , Q. Are you the one that approved the fact that she could borrow that money? A. Yes. Q. And what was your understanding with her as to when that amount would be paid back? A, The same as with all the payments, whenever they could, Q. There was no deadline. It was whenever they could. Is that correct? A. Right. Q. I see there was a payment made in May '97 of 5,600. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Now, underneath that there's a date of May 18, 1997 and $1,400 was borrowed. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And was that $1,400 that Geneva borrowed? A. Yes, she borrowed -- she took care of all this work. Greg, I don't remember him borrowing anything. Geneva did all the paperwork. Q. And do you recall what that $1,400 was borrowed for? A. No, I don't. Q. And what understanding did you have with Geneva as to when that should be paid back? ~.. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 " ""l_\ ""'""""'"1:; " . . 118 . . A. Just like I said with the other ones, whenever they could. Q. With no deadline. Is that correct? A. No, no deadline. Q. Underneath that, May 29th, 1997, $5,000 was borrowed. A. Urn-hum. Q. And Geneva borrowed that. Is that correct? A. Urn-hum. Q. And that amount, do you know what that was borrowed for? A. No, I don't. I was just very lenient with the money because I appreciated their help in being there. Q. That $5,000, that's something you approved to loan to her. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q, And the same with the $1,400 from May 18, 1997, you approved that? A. Right. Q. Walter didn,'t have any say in that? A. No. Q. What understanding did you have with her about paying back the $5,OOO? A. Same as -- yes. Q. Same as before with the other amounts? - .i ~'"""- l '1~',,; 119 . , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Right. Q. After that there's two amounts, one for $1,400, July of 1997. Do you see that? A. Yes, um-hum. Q. That's an amount that Geneva borrowed from you. Is that correct? A, Yes. Q. And you're the one that approved that amount? A. Yes. Q. Do you know what that was used for? A. No, I don't. Some of them were campers. I really don't know what it was. Q. What understanding did you have with her as to when that would be repaid? A. Whenever they could. The same as the other ones, no deadline. Q. Next one is February 29, 2000, $3,500. Now there is a notation there, it says loan for Matthew's braces. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. Now, is that accurate, that's what the purpose of that loan was for? A. Um-hum. Q. Is that something Geneva asked? A. Yes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~.~... I "\ir; ,I," .~ " '. 120 , . Q. Did you ever say to her that you would give that to her as a gift as opposed to a loan? A. No. Q, You're the one that approved that loan to her. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And what was your understanding as to when that would be repaid? A. The same as whenever they could. No deadline. Q. Now, it appears that beginning in March of 2000, the month after that $3,500 loan was given to Geneva, $100 was paid? A. Urn-hum. Q. And thereafter, at least up to this document up to January 11, 2001, they paid you $100. Is that correct? A, Yes. She's been paying, I just got a check from her about a week ago, Q. So after January 11, 2001, Geneva's continued to pay you on a monthly basis $100? A. Urn-hum. Q. Is that acceptable to you? A. Yes. Q. Now, did you ever tell Geneva that the amounts that you had loaned to her had to be paid back in full ? A. I never said how or when. That was the '-"~' "-~ ~ ,. , ~'--';-, 121 ) ~ I . 1 agreement they would pay them back. 2 Q. And they're doing that. Is that correct? 3 A. For the braces, yeah. 4 Q. Well, aren't they as well paying back the other 5 loans too? 6 A. I would appreciate it if they could. I don't 7 know what to say. 8 Q. Did you ever ask her to make -- 9 A. No. 10 Q. -- more of a payment than $100? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Do you feel that she's abided by the agreement 13 that you had with her to pay this money back? 14 A. Quote it again. 15 Q. Do you believe she's abided by the agreement 16 that you had with her to pay it back, that is to pay it 17 back when she's able? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you know if Walter ever requested that loans 20 be paid back in full? 21 A. Yes, he had asked Greg several times, three 22 times 1 remember. Greg, when are you going to pay us the 23 money back. And Greg says, I don't owe you anything. 24 Q. Well you just indicated that you're the one, not 25 Walter, that loaned the money to Geneva .^.".' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .L.~ ,~.,,- ".,.'1 "l~I"~ 122 . .. , , . A. Yes. Q. -- not Greg? A. But he knew -- yes. But Walter knew that I was loaning them the money. He was always the one that was in charge of financing when he was capable of doing it. Q. Was Walter capable of being in charge of finances in 2000? A. No. Q. Was he capable of being in charge of finances in 1999? A. No. Q. 1998? A. Huh-uh. Q. '97? A, No. Q. '96? A. No. Q. '95? A, There was times when he understood and could reason. It would vary'on his condition. So I can't really say when. Q. So you're not sure about 1995? A. No, I don't know. Q. Were you aware that Walter was going to ask Greg to pay back the loans? "'~' ~ - I ~-" , I . L' i:lWW',ruYic 123 , " , , . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Because he realized we didn't have that much of an income. Q. Well, you had not asked Geneva to pay back the loans at any time, did you? A, No, only when they could. Q. And you believed that she was doing that. Is that correct? A. Yeah. Q. And it's your understanding that Walter never agreed to loan the money. You're the one that agreed to loan the money? A. Yeah. Because he just couldn't reason at times that they needed, or he would give them an argument why they needed it or whatever. So she dealt with me. Q. But you'd agree with me that Walter wasn't aware of the terms of the understanding that you had with Geneva? A. Yeah. Q. You say he was not aware? A. At times he was not aware. Sometimes he understood it quite well and there was other times he was all mixed up that she would have to explain to him what was going on and what was happening. Q. And did you explain to Walter -- A. I couldn't. Q. -- what was going on and what was happening? -" ~. -'-' " , . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I ~ - . ~""""'. . 124 , ,. I ! I,. j , " ' A. I couldn't get through to him. He wouldn't listen to me. Q. SO you let her do that? A. Yeah, right. Q. Now you also made loans to Joann and Dan. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. I want you to turn to Exhibit 2, the page that's marked G at the bottom. A. (Complying.) Q. The one that says G, I'm sorry, not v. A. I'm sorry. Q. Do you recognize that docurnent as being one you've seen before today? A. I don't remember seeing this one, no. Q. Does your handwriting appear on that document in any location? A. I wrote Greg and Geneva down here, and the figures on the bottom. Q. The figures'being 462.18, and then it says 7/2/99? A. Q. Yeah. A. It says Joann and Dan for car. Um-hurn. Q. That's your handwriting? ,-'-'~~..~ , , LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE ~ .'"--,~,, , . . , , , . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID, ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 17 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 14~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 , Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Date: May 30, 2002 ~~~__!iJ~~ffii&1!llii;~M~l!il*~II%&$.!'U!l'I8>--"'<A;_6';;,,~""-1iiH~~Ht$j:IQf.i$ti'f'm'lJl.;Z:3'.'f~......!2::Iiil-r~ ~ !--;. ~~ .n~A~,k~",,^,,<"_ .<O".,"~_" .,<,'""' ,~".",,< ,,,,, , >.', '" o_,"-'.'~ . . . ,,-~,~, "" ",~ ~, _ .~, 'W'__ j~; .~ () ,~ :S',. [f~ f{ ~:: ~"'h'- G~\> 0":" ,.' ~Cj ~!:~~ -". -< ~< , "" . ".~ "-0 1'-) ')1 -.,J ~ . . .~ :.:-" :".) " ' "':~j ~ =< I~ > '<>' ';, ,,~,;;C JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO STRIKE LIS PENDENS Defendants Gregory 1. Frankford and Geneva 1. Frarikford, by their attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C., submit this Motion to Strike Lis Pendens and in support thereof state the following: 1. Plaintiffs Walter E. Kingsborough and Janet L. Kingsborough initiated this action at law by Complaint filed on May 3, 2001. 2. Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint containing six (6) Counts on July 10,2001. 3. Plaintiffs claim in Count I oftheir Amended Complaint that Defendants breached the terms of an April 26, 1994 written agreement concerning a financial contribution made by Plaintiffs to Defendants for the construction of a new home that would provide Plaintiffs living accommodations with Defendants and Defendants' children. A true and correct copy of the aforementioned April 26, 1994 agreement (the "Agreement") is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as "Exhibit A". 4. In the alternative to Count I, Plaintiffs in Counts II and III ofthe Amended Complaint raise claims of unjust enrichment artd quantum meruit, respectively, with respect to the funds they gave Defendants. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE 5. In Count IV of the Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs claim the Defendants owe the sum ,,'",,0-' ~-- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE -~; of $1 0,300.00 representing various amounts loaned by Plaintiffs to Defendants. Counts V and VI, in the alternative to Count IV, raise claims of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit with respect to the loans made. 6. On May 3, 2001 Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Lis Pendens in this action, directing the Prothonotary to index this action as a lis pendens against the property owned by Defendants located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg (the "Property"). 7. The lis pendens was not served upon Defendants with the Complaint or otherwise and Defendants had no notice or knowledge of the lis pendens until June 2003, when the matter arose in a title search done as Defendants attempted to refinance their mortgage on the Property. 8. Plaintiffs, through their counsel, have been asked to remove the lis pendens but have refused to do so. 9. The Property at all times has been titled in only Defendants' names. 10. The title to the Property is not at issue in this action. 11. Plaintiffs, who pled the written Agreement (Exhibit A hereto) upon which their claim of breach of contract relies, specifically agreed that for "legal purposes, they will not have part ownership of the real estate" (the Property). See Exhibit A hereto. 12. As a matter of law, a lis pendens has no application except in cases involving the adjudication of rights in specific property. 13. Title or specific rights in the Property are not being litigated; rather, Plaintiffs claim only economic loss and damages in each of the six Counts they raise. 14. Although in Count II of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs request the Court to "create a constructive trust in the ownership equity" of the Property for the award of damages, there is no cognizable legal or jurisdictional basis for such relief and the filing of the lis pendens -2- LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE does not elevate a request for a constructive trust to a request for an adjudication on the merits of rights in the Property. 15. Plaintiffs' filing of the lis pendens has prevented Defendants from refinancing their current mortgage and jeopardizes their ability to save substantial loan interest at a time when mortgage rates are favorable and at historically low levels. 16. As a matter of law, Plaintiffs are not entitled to have the action indexed as a lis pendens against the Property. WHEREFORE, Defendants Gregory and Geneva Frankford request this Court to issue an Order striking the Lis Pendens filed in this action on May 3, 2001. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. [ /rYYL--- BY: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Gregory J. Frankford and Geneva L. Frankford Date: August. 28, 2003 -3- I """'~~,--" ~ . '''-'~'-''''''''o-oJ_~'W~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..J,.~~~o. Tal'"-' ~.~.. ~ "'Il'iillll'f'<' ,~-~~.~'"~ o'~,"_A";'f'''':'.i:' ....., "..-;,,"" ."",,,,.,,. ".' "".'.'," ...... ,.... ..... . 4 . ,,,^. """*"~,,\o1'!'..~"'l..~lt,r""~'~"ll1fii(Ti":'..tlU 'TIE.l~Lb{~r1ffrt "lil'Jn' '" ". ..... ..... ~,.,JI..., .'. . ',' -- ",:,-" _._"'~.~:;" ::'->_.'~<.', --", '~:! '/"~'~:-::::~'S'I;t~?f~<Wb\,;~>".~ n . -', '. ;-~" . NOTE OF (AGREEMENT This document represents an ~greement between Gregory and Geneva Frankford and Walter and Janet K5.ngsborough. .. This agreement. is binding on all parties in accord;mce with the following pro~isions unless mutually recinded by sl1 parties. G~egory and Geneva have agreed to provide a home for walterjand Janet for as long as they are each able to live in a private residence. Due to Walter's physical condition, living quarters on the first floor are required. To accommodate this, and hecause their current home is not suitable, Gregory and Geneva will build a new home. This home will be a Cape cod design with a two bedroom Master suite on the first floor for Walter and Janet's exclusive use. Walter and Janet will also have full accesslto all of the common areas in the housa with no restrictions. . . In exchange for this arrangement, Walter and Janet have agreed to apply $72,000.00 from the sale of their current home towards the cost of the new home. This is approximately two fifths of the purchase price. Walter and Janet shall continue to be responsible for their personal debts and liabilities (private phone, car insurance, etc). They mav also be asked to pay not more than two fifths of the common expenses (gas, electric, t~ sewer, etc.) if needed. For legal purposes, they will not have part ownership of the real estate. In the event that Gregory and Geneva die before Walter and/or Janet, a minimum of two fifths of the value of the house/property shall be made available for their continued care. Details are described in Gregory and Geneva's Last Will and Testament. Witness: Date: !-';6-fy Signed: 'i-~c.-'7'1 Geneva ~ f -~~ -f'(,L f~:?t':ff 5'--;). r:.. f y . ,,>-;2V-7<;, Soulier , , "EXHIBIT A" - LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Motion are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~:ev~.t~ Dme: August 28. 2003 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Motion are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~(o 3 ~.~ (ft1i:~ . Fr . ord'/ ,;,." LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID, ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 17 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 I~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford Date: September 2, 2003 ~~W!II'!ig,:.I!'h(f&4-'i,WI"~h~~~'.!!I\!!!a&"4i!;);;'i'i!&~.\fMh,",'''"'''a!~i;'';ill~~!i:MII i .""''''Yh__',",' ""(1,^., ,,~.~,"~"< ^''''''''''''",''c n, -,,,,-,,,,,,, ""~" ~ ,,, .., "' --~, ~'JI~ -- ~ " 'Ill~ " < irilMl:fllii[! o c:: 2" -oi:.":~ [lJ [~ ~..~: ZC' ~;;[ ~LJ )?:l.....~ L" ,.-C )o-C:: -? ~- --I -< ',1 c:::> Lv o -" u'} ("'\"1 .'0 I W ,.:,'; :f-.:fIJ ;~~{~!; ~~ :J-J .< ::;: _'h co +- ~ LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants >"':: : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~ ~+- AND NOW, this S" day of q' ,2003, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion to Strike Lis Pendens, it is hereby ORDERED that the lis pendens filed in this action on May 3, 2001 with respect to the property at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania is STRICKEN. J. . ~~~~,100:'-~j<E.0;,H;;'~~''''-'i''''''f1]$~t:.;i",1;;;;\,,~.~M'~'i.4&';lli1lm'Jfi~~-':M'JM~~~~'JI "";--i~1Jl' zr ~>f , - ~,-=~ ~'~"='<,' '", ~"-<- ,~.,~"" ","_ ","" ";,;:""_'"~~_"" c., ~~, "",."'-" - ~'~lfIIJkill' "~~--jlji."'" 'ilINV/'\, iC"I' "" ~ j ~ I'"''''';' _' I/\',:!'.I -.: -1("/ tl.,L.i\! JI~.',: ,: '~;i '~~:~:l\.f'I""" ..-,1;....) 9~.:S II' ~J~d c_ qjS (,..,~\ ;,11 '-,j~-, 1lJ",'I"',' JlLi\!-LUJ\l/ ;,'.. ;1'-:,,_ _i -:', -i/,\\." ;....V,.-d :;i'LL :fO. :Jvl+'~'-'-;-';I' I -~-,...... '-.j:J L.::t _"""-,<'V_, if ~ .,' ,-~ 0_' ., f-! ,_~~ h ~~ JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED I JA .ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ~ Jay of September, 2003, upon consideration of the Plaintiff's Answer to Defendants' Motion to Strike Lis Pendens, it is hereby Ordered that the Lis Pendens with respect to the property at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania is REINSTATED, and the matter shall be listed by either party to be heard at a future argument court. By the Court, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 ~ Cf,J.9.0.3 '~ Q. Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 I, , ~~~ . . ~~Md~'~ J~L';~f_~..',:Q!t,_,,_~,>_, ,"-", .'0"""_" """",,""'_v,~.'f'" O''''~''''1_'_'" .., .",_~"", .,_ ,-,.'",'~-~ , " ':-', ,~\~~, ' , -. ... u VlNIif\lA8NN3d "'INriO::) iJ~,r\nY38\"lro tj'] :z 14d 6;; d3S SO . U\11' n'\i"':'"" l' HA :}' t i ~o t\c:ni .......l .....\ '~'... ~.,;J ~",1". ..,:' 3:JL:HO~"{JJjfj ~~ JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE LIS PENDENS AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Janet L. Kingsborough, by and through her attorney, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, and responds to the Defendants' Motion to Strike Lis Pendens as follows: 1. - 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. Plaintiff was unaware that the lis pendens had not been served upon Defendants until Defendants brought it to Plaintiffs attention in connection with Defendants' efforts to refinance their mortgage. 8. - 9. Admitted. 10. Denied, as more fully set forth in the New Matter, below. 11. Admitted. By way of further Answer, the Note of Agreement speaks for itself, and the interpretation of the language of that document will be a question of fact for the jury. 12. Admitted. 13. Denied, as more fully set forth in the New Matter, below. ~ diI!ii),~,}'; 14. Denied. The prayer for a constructive trust allows Plaintiff to lodge a lis pendens relative to the real estate in question. 15. Admitted in part and denied in part. Admitted that Defendants' cannot refinance, but Plaintiff does not know how much interest Defendant may save. 16. Denied. NEW MATTER 17. Paragraphs one through sixteen above are incorporated herein. 18. Plaintiff gave Defendants' $72,000.00 as set forth in the "Note of Agreement" which is attached to Defendants' Motion as "Exhibit A" 19. Plaintiff's $72,000.00 was to be used by Defendants' "towards the cost of the new home" pursuant to the Note of Agreement. 20. As such, Plaintiff directly contributed to the purchase of Defendants' home and the Note of Agreement provides that the Defendants' "agreed to provide a home for (Plaintiff)..." 21. Plaintiff has included in her Complaint at Count II an equitable claim for unjust enrichment/quantum meruit wherein Plaintiff prays for a constructive trust in the ownership of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. 22. Plaintiff has made a claim raising the issue of ownership and title to the subject property, and a lis pendens was appropriately filed in this case. 23. Defendants' attempted to refinance their mortgage recently and in connection therewith sought to increase the indebtedness on the property and remove in excess of $25,000.00 in cash from the equity in the subject property. 1 ,I II - '" . -~I _ ~'_ ',.,'" c 24. Plaintiff is 76 years old believes the ownership interest which she seeks to prove she has in the subject property will be lost if the Defendants are permitted to remove the lis pendens, refinance the mortgage and increase the debt on the property. 25. Plaintiff does not object to Defendants' refinancing the property provided the current indebtedness is not increased. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER ~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/lispendens,ans ,.'~ "'#'''~ r VERI FICA TION The statements in the foregoing Plaintiffs Answer To Defendant's Motion To Strike Lis Pendens are based upon information which has been assembled by my attorney in this litigation. The language of the statements is not my own. I have read the statements; and to the extent that they are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. S 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: 9.... / $-'-' 0_ r ~t /~t-rD~GfVT/( , Janet L. gsborough I ,I II .Mj CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 18, 2003, I, Jennifer S. Lindsay, secretary to Michael A. Scherer, Esquire did serve a copy of Plaintiffs Answer To Defendant's Motion To Strike Lis Pendens, by first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to the party listed below, as follows: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 ~~"~ , ;1 ii-lu~~~j!fI~Mril~l'Jiiiif~lifd.~~iijj'~~'J4.J~~Jl<~""';' ,,' f:) LF .~ =_,-<~" ,"~'" _~ =...I;>,',^ ,'T.~ ,,", ", ,0", _3' .,_,~. ","~"",,," r\'~ ~":: :~:~- ~-,;-- " E__ 0~~ ~-::, [, c C :::"'" C:i (,;) :j) ~71 --0 "':-: );0- l-:) 'Tt \,p n ....." --~"i , ',--- . -r ~:-) <__~In . , ::~! 'J) '--'-'j :< ~ ~. .~~ ". -I Coco '" ",. ,",-,,-:1;;, PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and sutmitted in m1pl ;,."te) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Argm1ent COUrt. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption llIllSt be stated in full) JANET L. KINGSBOROUGIl and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, (Plainti:ff) vs. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, (Defendant) 2001-2692 No. Civil. Term 19r 1. State matter to be argued (i.e.. plainti:ff's I1I)tion for new trial, defendant's danurrer to canplaint. etc.): Defendants' Motion For Partial Summary Judgment 2. Identify cxnmsel who will. argue case: (a) for plainti:ff: Address: Michael A. Scherer 17 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (b) for defendant: Address: Keith O. Brenneman 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17013 3. I will. notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argtII1ent. 4. Argunent COurt Date: August 28, 2002 i~~ C\3ted: July 8,2002 Attorney for Defendants _iIii{-o';n:";;-"'~<<~~i~~fiiim&~~~~:3cl~~a~i1-JI' ~~!,,"~'''',. ,",., ".,.,_",._,~,~.~~, ",,_.'="~K.~._>_. .!"".t",,,,-Z_, , ..,,,or-~' "."",., __~" ~'~,., "'.' ~"' -~. '. . ,"" "". 'Ji"~. ~- " <o,~ , ~__~ -~, ,~~-~ - -' ............,...... """U (") 0 0 C N ...., s:: t- ----1 l)J.::f) c:= :Ct'j rnrn . m- Z-:I:' Ue:J ZC 0 -,J . m~' <~.?t6, ::.c:C' r::c; :::s :'i::r4 ,-:: d.~C; ~ Qo ~Cl ~ (~fn ~C:: ~ ~ 1'.) ~ ,0 ~ - ~ I , I..' I'" , .1- ,~. - ---, ~ .--, ,:, , ~c.": JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH , Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, : PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION -- LAW : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED In Re: DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before HOFFER. P,J.. OLER. J, and GUIDO, J. ORDER OF COURT And now, November 25, 2002, after careful consideration of the briefs and arguments of counsel, it is hereby ordered that defendants' motion for partial summary judgment is denied .1 By the Court, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire .~ P.J. 11_ :u.,.OZi tf-. I The standard for summary judgment in Pennsylvania is well established. Summary judgment is granted properly when the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with any affidavits, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Pa. R.C.P. 1 035(b). The record must be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubts as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact must be resolved against the moving party, McConnauahev v. Blda. Components. Inc., 536 Pa. 95, 98, 637 A.2d 1331, 1333 (1994) citing Marks v. Tasman, 527 Pa. 132,135,589 A.2d 205, 206 (1991). Because there are genuine issues of material fact yet to be resolved in this case, the motion for summary judgment is denied. ~~~~;lI~!lf<M~fiim~llii!~iM'AA~ia4'-m~i;$:~~J.l~~~"1'llV'---'~ok."'-';""'- I VINVlCUSNN3d JJ.NnO.J GN\/]f:!3i:i1IVm LZ :'1lo/,j SZ "ON ZO Al:J'iLnl\!(Wi', ~ v iv/ w...Uri.:J :JI -! I -":0 30W()-CI3l[J'1. ~ ,." ,_. ._""._"",,'."""'_ _, "~ ",'c-'."" .',,,",.,,<,, "','.,,"" '" _'"c ," """""' ,,,.,,,,__ ".""C,.' . '..' ^ . _ .__ "~" ,-, "-lll"'~~' ~, . " "' ':1 . d f' -t~1 . ~ ~" ".,." 1'- ,I.. -,_" , ; ,I' PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten am subnitted in "'11;'1 irate) ,~.-" ,';;'~;",;,j. l.'. j." 'L;-, TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Arg\Inen.t COUrt. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption IIR.ISt be stated in full) JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, ( Plaintiff) VB. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, (Defendant) No. 2692 Civil JUa 2001 1. State matter to be argued (i.e.. plaintiff's IIDtion for new trial. defendant's demurrer to canplaint. etc.): Motion to Strike Lis Pendens 2. Identify counsel who will. argue case: (a) for plaintiff: Address : Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (b) for defendant: Address: Keith O. Brenneman. Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 3. I will. notify all parties in writing within tlIO days that this case has been listed for argment. 4. ArglInent Court Date: October 22, 2003 Dated: September 3. 2003 ~f~ Attorney for Defendants . , ~~mtM~I.H!l<i';;I@j;~;j!:'J>ii&~~"W~~~""""'.-<'-"--~"";~'" t?; ~ ~JLJJ, C~, ~,~,~",'""_,, ~=,_~. .~.~'"",~ ,~, ,,~._ ',~ ,,-, ' _~, ,,> ,_~, ~,',". -'"'" ~~ -" ". "'.-- .'lillilill~ ,,"" ~ ~ . 11O.J. - .,--~ ~? ,',~ ,,=, ,~^ ~ ."-."""'-",", "~ .- - ~~~ ~ 0 0 0 C (..) ...,., S" U') .~ v(;:; mrr. r>1 ""r.; ~:J;: "U ;"11 f!J t}S):'- , '" rrl <-, :-:Ur, -< ~~:' o:j ~c,' ;t:lT~ -<, En _~'O -ri 3: ,:''":u z: . 5'0 >~i 0) ~~5m ___J '-'--1 :;....,,; --.:: (11 :0 -< ,.- Jrr . ~ t , LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ). 1- v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED f CERTIFICATE PREREOUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 . , i (, .' " !i : i:' i t-' As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, the undersigned certifies that i i' ! (1) a notice of intent to serve the subpoena with a copy of the subpoena attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena is sought to be served, , r., I. f. (2) certificate, a copy of the notice of intent, including the proposed subpoena, is attached to this f_ I 'I , b (3) no objection to the subpoena has been received, and (4) the subpoena which will be served is identical to the subpoena which is attached to the notice of intent to serve the subpoena. Dme: June 10, 2002 Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Attorney ID #47077 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorney for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford I, II II ~~ ,," ~r_L"''''~'''1~'; -"'~~ >~ , " LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE , lo'~ I, J'..-r;... .~'..',.i.~ ~" ,1_ "J JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGS BOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford intend to serve a subpoena identical to the one that is attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. Date: May 16, 2002 By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford II II '~"'.'1> ., LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE , ,~ '~ - "-ri. ".-.~- "\ JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTERE. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM v. GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Dr. Chris Zeigler Rehab Options 3 Landis 2501N. third Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Any and all notes and records pertaining to any and all interviews, meetings with or counseling provided to Janet Kingsborough, Geneva Frankford and/or Walter Kingsborough. All such documents are to be delivered to the undersigned at the law offices of Sne1baker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C., 44 W. Main Street, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things requested by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Attorney ID #47077 Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C. 44 W. Main St., Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 ('iI7) 697-8528 Attorney for Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford Date: _fYl';:Jy ~ I, ;;(06",- BY THE COURT: Seal of the Court By (Prothonotary) \ ~~.8. 7'l~()~ Ii ... JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY 1. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE PREREOUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, the undersigned certifies that (1) a notice of intent to serve the subpoena with a copy of the subpoena attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena is sought to be served, (2) certificate, a copy of the notice of intent, including the proposed subpoena, is attached to this (3) no objection to the subpoena has been received, and (4) the subpoena which will be served is identical to the subpoena which is attached to the notice of intent to serve the subpoena. Date: April 8, 2002 i~~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Attorney ID #47077 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorney for Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory 1. Frankford LAW OFFICES 5NELBAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE i il !j~-"'~ ~ ... LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE - I ~ ;.WH~,' , ,I, ~ ." ~&~~ JANET 1. KINGS BOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGS BOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO: Addus Health Care You are required to complete the following Certificate of Compliance when producing documents or things pursuant to the Subpoena. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.23 I, , (person served with subpoena) certify to the best of my knowledge, information and belief that all documents or things required to be produced pursuant to the subpoena issued on , 2002 have been produced. Date: Person served with subpoena I! II ~.........-~. ~"~ I J ~ I' l,' 'r-l!~' ... JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTERE. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Addus Health Care 401 E. Louther Street, Suite 306 Carlisle, PA 17013 Within twenty (20) days after service ofthis subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Any and all notes and records made or prepared by any aides providing personal care or assistance to Walter E. Kingsborough, including, but not limited to, those notes and records prepared by aides having the first names of Tammy and Julie, which in any way relate to Walter E. Kingsborough. All such documents are to be delivered to the undersigned at the law offices of Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C., 44 W. Main Street, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things requested by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request ofthe following person: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Attorney ID #47077 Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C. 44 W. Main St., Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorney for Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE Date: I dt6~ BY THE COURT: ! Seal of the Court og~~1~~~~~'!!ijMj'1.~1'!w'"'-';;M''''*,~''''Jl>!i!J!!'iliri'/!i!~{.'ll~~- -.,~~~-,."",""....- ~ n ^ ..~_"~." ",~O 0 ""M~~_,~W~,~<~_ _,.,',,~_ .~"_~' ,~, ',",",,, ,~ "lltlMliiiI -&&;J ~ ~- (") 0 0 C Nt -n ~ "1> ~~ -oCt"_! -0 rrtrn :;0 Z:n zrH I --,fTl CD -'" ..0 :J)9 ~t, ::~(~ ;po ::e:H ~D ::0: 00 -~O Zm ),">C '8 0 z <::> ~ -:J --- v:> -< r ~ .. . . , Ii " .. ,- ." ,,,<", ,- ^ - ,~,--",,'-' - :-.< "",' 4C__";..'iC'__';;' ", ",'~'-, 'Ahlhiti!f/:~.i JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants No. 2001-2692 CIVil TERM CIVil ACTION - LAW REPLY TO NEW MATTER 49. Denied. This allegation is a conclusion of law and no respo!,\se is required. 50. Denied. Justification is not a defense to a claim for breach of contract or quantum meruit/unjust enrichment. 51. Denied. This allegation is a conclusion of law and no response is required. 52. Denied. Janet Kingsborough did not express any specific concern regarding taking care of Walter Kingsborough in 1993 aside from general discussions about both Janet Kingsborough and Walter Kingsborough's advancing ages. 53. Denied. At a family meeting in 1994, living options were discussed for the Kingsboroughs. At that meeting, Gregory Frankford was adamant that the Kingsboroughs would not be placed in any type of nursing care facility, but rather, would move into his household where there would be an extended family environment and in which the Frankford family would assist in the care of Walter Kingsborough and Janet Kingsborough. 1 II --~ ", . "'<'" -~-~ ,- ''''-,,~"'--~'''-'~ '., -~~~'""'-l!lili.h~~ 54. Admitted and denied. It is admitted that the Frankfords were owners of a property on Bonnybrook Road. The remainder of the allegations in this paragraph are denied, as answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to their truth. 55. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 55. 56. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 56. 57. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 57. 58. Denied. The Frankfords decided to build a new house of their own volition. The written agreement entered into by the parties speaks for itself. 59. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 59. 60. Admitted. 61. Admitted. 62. Admitted in part and denied in part. The residence at 14 Dewberry Court was also closer to the Kingsboroughs places of employment and church, which was a benefit to them. The remaining allegations are admitted. 63. Admitted. II 2 '^ " ' ,'-c --,,-, ""'"'-~"'~"'--"''''''"'''~"",,''' ',- WIS:: 64. Denied. The Frankfords told the Kingsboroughs how much money it :i; '; would cost the Kingsboroughs to reside at 14 Dewberry Court. 65. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 65; the Frankfords assessed the Kingsboroughs a monthly fee for expenses, and the Kingsboroughs are not certain what bills were paid with that money. 66. Denied. Geneva Frankford did the activities mentioned in paragraph 66 largely for the benefit of her own family, and not primarily for the benefit of the Kingsboroughs. Janet Kingsborough provided daily care to Walter Kingsborough. 67. Denied. The Kingsboroughs believed they contributed two-fifths towards various expenses relative to 14 Dewberry Court. 68. Admitted and denied. It is admitted that Joann Soulier and her three children moved into 14 Dewberry Court in September, 1999 for a seven month period. The remaining allegations in paragraph 68 are scandalous and impertinent, and should be stricken from the New Matter. 69. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 69. 70. Admitted. 71. Denied. Janet Kingsborough's assistance and involvement with the care of her husband has always been at a high level, including the time that the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords. 3 II < --~,~" ~ ", -, ~o-'~ o,_.,~ ^ rllM~w,- 72. Denied. Janet Kingsborough's concern for her husband and his behavior did not diminish during the time the Kingsboroughs resided with the Frankfords. 73. Denied. The ability of the Kingsboroughs to live on their own and to assist each other did not greatly diminish during the time the Kingsboroughs resided at 14 Dewberry Court. 74. Admitted and denied. It is admitted that Walter Kingsborough became incontinent intermittently and that sometimes he urinated and defecated while fully dressed. It is denied that the waste was deposited throughout the first floor of the residence on an ongoing basis. 75. Admitted and denied. On occasion, Walter Kingsborough would resist wearing protective undergarments. On most occasions, Walter Kingsborough would wear a protective undergarment. 76, Denied. Janet Kingsborough regularly checked on the condition of her husband while they resided at 14 Dewberry Court and she always insisted that he wear protective undergarments. 77. Denied. It is admitted that Walter Kingsborough became incontinent intermittently and that sometimes he urinated and defecated while fully dressed. It is denied that the waste was deposited throughout the first floor of the residence on an ongoing basis. 78. Denied. Janet Kingsborough was always vigilant in ensuring that her husband took his medications properly. 4 II " 'I i il husband took his medications properly. .'-~ .~~ ~~._~_. "'~"~.e~",<._~,'",_~ "~_,,;_I 'j I ., .1 I , , I , .1 J 'I 'I i'i II :'-1 I 79. Denied. Janet Kingsborough was always vigilant in ensuring that her 80. Denied. Janet Kingsborough was always vigilant in ensuring that her husband took his medications properly. 81. Denied. Janet Kingsborough always properly stored the medications which were in her control. 82. Denied. The Frankfords promised that they were going to assist in the care of the Kingsboroughs when the Frankfords accepted the $72,000.00 in 1994, and the Frankfords failed to assist in the matters set forth in paragraph 82 of the New Matter as they had promised. 83. Denied. Janet Kingsborough always acted safely while preparing food. 84. Admitted. 85. Admitted and denied. Answering plaintiff is without information to form a belief as to what Walter Kingsborough hit his head on, if anything. It is admitted that Janet Kingsborough allowed the Frankfords to attend to her husband, as was promised by the Frankfords when the April 26, 1994 agreement was signed. 86. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 86. 87. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations in paragraph 87. 5 I! Ii , . ~ ~,. _, r _ ____~-H--',-'. , , ~~',:' , I,': 88. Denied. Answering plaintiff does not have sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 88. 89. Denied. In December of 2000, the Kingsboroughs were being evicted from 14 Dewberry Court, and as such, considered admission to an assisted living facility. 90. Denied. 91. Denied. 92. Denied. 93. Denied. Frankfords. The Kingsboroughs did not pose a risk to themselves. The Kingsboroughs did not pose a risk to the Frankfords. The Kingsboroughs did not pose a risk to the Frankford children. The Kingsboroughs did not pose a risk to themselves or the 94. Denied. The Kingsboroughs did not pose a risk to real or personal property. 95. Denied. The Kingsboroughs dld not create or maintain an unhealthy, unsafe or unsanitary environment for themselves or the Frankfords. 96. Denied. It is denied that the conditions alleged by the Frankfords existed. 97. Denied. The Kingsboroughs are able and continue to live in a private residence. 98. Denied. The conditions cited by the Frankfords, but not admitted by the Kingsboroughs, were not expected or contemplated by the parties at the time of the signing of the April 26, 1994 agreement to be conditions which would allow the Frankfords to evict the Kingsboroughs from 14 Dewberry Court. 6 if ,-.." 99. -101. Admitted. ,~ ~, ",-<>,< <, '" ~,~ .~'- >=,~'.,--=-,.- ~~ ',-- ""'~0"~J: 1 02. Denied. Walter Kingsborough demanded repayment of the loans, but the Frankfords refused. 103. Denied. Walter Kingsborough demanded repayment of the loans, but the FrankfQrds refused. mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/newmatter.rep I, " il Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER .~~~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiffs ",~.-.-~ ,~-'d"~"'''<'''~.'', "-."d'_.">"g._,'=.'~~;__",<~~,.., '''-c>-'''''-'"'~__ii VERIFICATION The statements in the foregoing Reply To New Matter are based upon information which has been assembled by my attorney in this litigation. The language of the statements is not my own. I have read the statements; and to the extent that they are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. S 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: R- I b - 0 I ~/i- ~~~<<,9/ / Janet L. ingsborough ' II 'I 'I Ii ~. " ~ ~ ;'. " C'," -,.,._~ ~',.'~~'" ". '0 ,. ,_ -,,,,,,, ':_ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on August 20,2001, I, Jennifer S. Lindsay, secretary to Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, did serve a copy of the Reply To New Matter, by first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to the party listed below, as follows: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 Ii .I_~~__~~- _u ;'-""'-''';'-''''''~'j(' TI"'I~~Il!:~nllli. ;""~Ii~ ,-' Ef , .J<< ~J",~,Jj_,,<.~f~~'t, ,,,.,.m,,_,,,J.4,,,,,,,,,.,.. _""'" ,c_" .-_~~'~", ~, ~ "-''''''''' '" ,.,-,',0, .. _.,",,-,,",",~- "-"~ -~ " 0 Ci ,~ C " -.;0- ~-I '; "T) :,-;". J:::- rT: r:: U) [1- 1 G") ",:"__1..' (~~.' I"> -< " t=) s:(:,~, ~C' ~C~, . , ..... C~: -V 2J .,,-> 0 :-;!. ~-;::'1 r.~ -' )111 i Iii -',,' .,,- ~ '",'._",',C"h__',,_ """-'< ,,""'"' ,__. '''''; """"_': JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001- 2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND NOW, comes Janet L. Kingsborough, by and through her attorney, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, and respectfully responds to the Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as follows: 1. In the above-captioned action, Plaintiffs Walter E. Kingsborough and Janet L. Kingsborough seek, at Counts I, II and III of the Amended Complaint the return of the sum of $72,000.00 which they paid the defendants in order to reside with the defendants, and at Counts IV, V and VI the return of the sum of $10,300 which they loaned to the defendants while they resided with the defendants. (See Amended Complaint). 2. Count IV of the Amended Complaint sets forth an action for breach of contract, Count V sets forth an action for unjust enrichment and Count VI sets forth a claim of quantum meruit 3. The defendant, Geneva Frankford, testified at her deposition on November 15, 2001, that several different loans were made to her by the plaintiff, including loans for two campers and braces (for a child's teeth). (November 15, 2001 , i! II M" c',_, ~'_ -,,-,- h', r " ,b'.. -,,_"-Ct'f4 ,_;'''~''_',_ -,- ,,' '~'''~' "'\:'; Deposition of Geneva Frankford ("Frankford Depostion" pp. 101- 105). Copies of pages 101 to 105 of the Deposition are attached hereto as "Exhibit A"). 4. The defendant Geneva Frankford testified that nothing was worked out for the terms of the repayment of the loans at the beginning. (Frankford Deposition, p. 102). 5. The defendant Geneva Frankford testified that no interest accrues on the loans. (Frankford Deposition, p. 102). 6. The defendant Geneva Frankford testified that, when a loan was made to her for Matthew's braces, she offered to pay the plaintiff $1 00.00 per month. (Frankford Deposition, p. 102). 7. The plaintiff, Janet Kingsborough, has accepted these payments. 8. The plaintiff, Janet Kingsborough, is uncertain as to whether the $100.00 per month payments only relate to the loan made to the defendants for braces, and she has not been advised that she will receive $100.00 per month payments for the other loans made to the defendants. (Kingborough Depostion, p. 121, attached to Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as "Exhibit A"). 9. A question of fact exists as to what, if any, amounts the defendants will pay for the loans other than for the braces. 10. A question of fact exists as to whether Janet Kingborough is now required to continue to accept $100.00 per month from the defendants for the loans for the braces, since no repayment terms were agreed upon when the loans were disbursed. 11. A question of facts exists as to whether, as a matter of law, and under the II ,-~. >"' "" " '--< '" , .." ""-~ -,',-" ''''''''"'''',;{,I''-_j;;~ oj"~ ,"" ~':~""-i!~if.< circumstances of this case, the defendants have been unjustly enriched as a result of their receipt of these loans, from Janet Kingsborough, interest free, at a time when Janet Kingsborough is in need of the repayment of these sums of money. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER ~u~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-6873 I.D. # 61974 Attorney for the plaintiff, Janet L. Kingsborough 'I II "'" ,'"",,- ^<- -,;",-,.' ~", " "v-"'_-""""''''''':-'_''')''\'''"" ~\':i VERI FICA TION The information in the foregoing Answers To Request For Production Of Documents are based upon information which has been assembled by my attorney in this litigation. The language of the statements is not my own. I have read the statements; and to the extent that they are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. S 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: /'" '1, 0 t...- /~ 14wf4~p1 Janet L. Kingsborough !' II ~ ~ ,_ " ,~, ", r ^ -_ "f -;..".!', ..,,"_1 -".,0""_'.__,':;'1"" . ""C'__,- " ._'"';''' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 3,2002, I, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire did serve a copy of Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, by first class U,S. mail, postage prepaid, to the party listed below, as follows: Keith Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 !&i~ . Mic ael A. Scherer ! II -~."" - I ! . ,,-~,' ~ _li~_*iell!l,.'\'!~r I ~'~ ' 101 1 them. I'm okay. The medication problem was a 2 concern. Some of it was, you know, the confusion that 3 was going on here. 4 The safety around the stove, be 5 forgetting to turn the burner off or turn it up and 6 walk away. And like I said, I did not write down 7 every incident that happened and that it was happening 8 more and more, 9 My sister also saw that when she was 10 living with us. She mentioned it to me. And she had 11 a lot on her, too. I know that. But it was 12 definitely a concern. 13 (Frankford Deposition Exhibit #7 was 14 marked for identification) 15 Q I'm going to show you what has been 16 marked as Deposition Exhibit Number 7. Can you 17 identify that, please? 18 A Yes. This is the amount that Greg and I 19 borrowed from my parents. 20 Q Is this a sheet that you prepared? 21 A I had a pen and pencil type of thing on 22 tablet paper. My husband took it from that and put it 23 into the computer. I'm trying to be real accurate on 24 what you're saying. 25 Q Okay. Well, that's what we're here for, EXHIBIT A ~ 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 13 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 " j, "- allii' ...ilili='M"'~tili.U, - 102 1 2 3 is to be accurate. 2001? And it's dated September 17th, A Yes. Q Has anything changed with respect to this analysis since September 17th, 2001? A We paid $100 in October. Other than that, no. Q Is there any interest that is charged by your mom for the loan? A No. Q What are the terms of repayment for the loan or loans? A At the beginning, nothing was worked out. When I.borrowed for Matthew's braces, I said mother, what if I pay -- is it acceptable if I give you $100 a month. 4 She did not ask. But I offered, would it be acceptable to give you $100 a month. She said yes. Q You haven't made any payments since October of this year. Is that right? A I did not write the check out for November yet. Q So you intend to continue to pay? A Yes. And I can give her a check today, ,"""""..~- " '''"' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ", 1.',-, "~'-"_~~_~ . 103 if you wish. Q So the balance due as of this moment is what? A 9,700. Q How did these loans occur? Did you approach your mother, or did you approach your father when he was still alive? A I know I approached mother. I don't recall about father's involvement. Dad could not understand David's accounts and CD's. And if it wasn't his checkbook, he couldn't comprehend putting them both together. The first loan there, we said we would like to go camping together as a family. We need to get away a little bit. Mother said yes, you need to get away. So we borrowed money for the camper thing that went on the back of the pickup truck. And that turned out it didn't work right. But anyway, the first thing was the camper. And then the next one was the braces. But we discussed it with her. Q And essentially, how does that conversation go? Morn, can I borrow some money? A Yes. Basically. We would like to get a j' - 6.~ " ......""".-.;..' iL i'l.'itii.- ~ '''''~tJ-i- 104 1 camper, could we borrow some of your money. Well, 2 sure, you've been taking care of our money, you can 3 borrow'that. Said I'll keep track of it. 4 Matthew needed braces really bad. She 5 could see that. And she said sure, it's no problem. 6 Prior to that, my sister and brother-in-law had 7 borrowed money on numerous occasions. 8 And I started keeping track of that 9 because when I didn't and it would be mentioned, Dan 10 wouldn't remember what we did. So we tried to make 11 some accountability there. And I kept track, and I 12 gave them copies of the papers, too, so they would 13 have it. 14 Q Do you remember what the other two 15 amounts were for that you borrowed? I mean, you show 16 there 1,400, but what was it used for? 17 A The first time was a camper that fit on 18 the back of the pickup truck. And then we ended up 19 selling that and getting a pull-behind camper. And so 20 it was the two different campers. 21 MR. BRENNEMAN: I'm sorry. Could you 22 clarify that, the first thousand was for the-- 23 THE WITNESS: The first thousand, I 24 don't remember what that one was. It might have 25 been connected with the camper. I'm not sure ," ~ "" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 1 2 13 14 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 - I' _ - ~5!il'f;'" ,.~ :.i..- . , 105 because the date is not that far off. I'm not sure. MR. BRENNEMAN: I interrupted. He had asked you what those other amounts were for, what loans, for what purpose. THE WITNESS: The ones over here-- BY MR. SCHERER: Q May of 97 was for 1,400, and July of 97 was for 1,400. I was just curious if you recall what those sums were used for. A It's possible that one was a down payment and the other was the final payment. It's a possibility. Q On the camper? A Yes. Q If you don't remember, that's fine. It doesn't sound like you really remember? A It's a possibility. And you have the other amount. I'm not sure. I definitely know the braces because I have that down there. (Frankford Deposition Exhibit #8 was marked for identification) Q Last, but not least, Frankford Exhibit Number 8. A Okay. ,"!li!I!l>&!l~&ffic,ib1~a~0M'~!'r",'M~e~';aI&jj.;:U~t;ii\.)b~'i~";hA~;'~~"\;;'""'::;"1"'~1i!j,;.bc;,)Jl&bkir,,~~~fi~~ij(i$;LJli' li1iif'J!!lj;_~ E$(" ~~ ~"""~~'<;"""""'";"-ill. 'v'IIVfl,~,'l! QI\ 1\ j"""t I { ! ~J(-'-' ,JJ \ I',.', '-( \-i-:::C /\JJ\ I iL'::-! (':1< - ,',;," !:i~,1r'\'1 ',,, hj L2' :c )\tJiiC -}:L:" ,T);_,:_:,,,.~~U _I, [[1'!]lIJ{[LJ-"_-,;~,,,, cC' ,,,,- Jl1_ 'C.,,~ ,,' _ "?,,,_,,-,,- _~.'.- '_0",,,,- _~,,~_,_ <_~. ." ~,co '.""_ -"~ I' , :i',!j C'_ In;, ~, .- -"ll , , ~" - ,-, '_',','^,'",," 'e',-', iWfi':: JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v, No, 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J, FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO ATTACH EXHIBITS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the following exhibits into the record, 1, Proposed settlement sheet from attempted refinance of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania on June 10, 2003; and, 2, Commitment letter from National City Mortgage for refinance of 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, Respectfully submitted, O'~~CHERER Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D, # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/exhibit.pra " Ii 11- IJ.1YPIt lOAN, '0- ~O- 3. X C(lNV,UNlNS, ..OvA 6. F1LENUMBER: 7. LOANMJt4EA: _,NCA _"" 8, ~n;~'NSCASI!NU~ ~MCRTGAGEI""CMEM.IM8ER: TM","",&:IIJm"'fDgMj/OUlJ.mstlJmttJto1OGflJoI~cv.st:l ~PllifltDtJNIbylbelltllfemtnfll!JOllf_.thMn. ~~1POCrwre~paid~lM~lkY~aII6'Ml""'for~putJICYllIwuf"'notlndudttdill"'lofI:lt. 1.o:Ml6 ~ F. ~ AND ADDReSS 0= LiNeE "_n A, U.S. IlI!<'AllTMEMT Ql' HOUSING & UR8A1llllML SETTLEMENT STATEMeNT 'c. NOTE: D. NAMt:: NIO.-ooRess go 8ORRQWER: E. NAME AND GAEGQRv J. fRANt<FORD:r1ld GENEVAL.FAANKFORO 14 OEWeERRVCOlAr MECHAHICSBURG. PA 1'7055 G. PROPeRTY LOOATtON: 14 DeW8l!!RRVCOUItT MECHMlIC$8URG. PA 110M CUMDEJU.ANOCoutlty. P~la , S[]<:oNv.INS. ~a:SELLeR.: NATIONAl em MORTGAGE co. H. SI:m.EMENT ....GENT: M'1IS$ta18AbsYacl:~ PlACE OF sl!TTl.EMENT 2331 M31f(&t SIl'eel C-,mp Hill, PA, 110'\1 ... 10, 2003 0II~Q6/16JD3 ""'/tams old. ..., to to fo 15-1857'12 I. SlTT1..E.\tENT DATE: SUM 'lION GROSS,AMOUNr OUt TO SE\.LER: 401 CClnnctSRIas fIrM .." I a lnaanct .. to 151.126.70 50'. 17&,200. 5 ,- 1503: 175l.CO so..; ",", 50. - ..., . %10, 'Ml"" 211. Taaaie 212. Setfool TaKati 213. 21<. 215. 2'8. 211, ,,. 211. 220, T'OTAL p~1O eV,$OR BOAAOWfR MIll. A'T' ' MiiNT,FROMlTO 3C1. ArnGunt.oue'fTOiTtBdft'oWer 120 1'1 '26.10 302:. ~ Amount J T'Bi:imIwt' Uft!l220 1 .&.00: 31)3, CASH { MOM" ( )( 10 J BORROINER 2fi.835.30 The ~ hl'.mbyaetnCNofed;e ~ofl comptefIld omdPl!Jt$ t&2 ottltis flM8/rlenl & snydIdlmena.,*,," m Nrrin. O,OQ -- 10 .. .. 17'T,te2.00 -~6~ '~b S~' -~-:-- .~ L _TT1.EMENT CHARGES 700. TOTAl.. tOllliUM1C\N BIRd on Price S .. " ,. to ommb2l9tl .t ~\hmefIt to q-Rt coNNEcTIoN wmt LOAN "FiI; 1.00000 10 W.TIO CITY " to co. .... to to to to \/I 1'0. 11, , toe, ITEIIlUma1J1REO-QY-LENDn'TOBE PAlO (N ADVANCE ,90t.~~~""i6'03' 1D",01J01AD $ 26~'d t 15_ 102.' 'Jn$u/il1CtP 10 : 9Q3. HaDttlIi\si,lr..llt6 p~ bI' 1.0 STATE FAAM INSllRANCE COMP1II'N' ..., .... 100a; R!SIflVES-~ W1TH,L.91DER 1001,1-tUatd:lrmJiarIea, 3. $ I 02. IM~,* 1 ~ T.... T_ T.... " to to to 10 to 10 NAllONAl. CtTY IIBSTRA.CT u.e to -, CllYA8 "" 1 .2 1,11U8 11 "" rrv 112. "1. 11'.. '1'. tH. , 118, 1200. GOV&RNIIENT AND SFER t:HARGes 1101~: ,_~:'DMd, I ;U J G4-~: ReletfIGS S 1 OU- I: tm. IlIe t Rtivenua ; Mol' '204, 1205, i!Of. ADDmONAi,; SI:r1La11ER1' RGM 1 1.$ ~ 1302. tlntl c;tlon 10 1303, .- 1305, 1400. TOTAL I!NT CHARGES Eftt8I On unu _1 Sedioft J 8ftd 10:2. S k*"""pllOIl1a(""'............~~rwIIIIIl(ll.~ClIfJrCII'Illl~2'11...t>4..'P1-- -- -- !V<<lS4" ""'-'- 1162.90 m, .., ..___Tf'fJ ..., 2,705,51 . 5JIOll52 Mldlltate Abshct: company 5e~'AQent C.nified~bellln,/.~ ~ .~ ' ""''';;"~I~' rrfM 'iwO~1OIo ....- ......." -~ ,..... 3OO.2J ~ ..... 30,.. ,.... .... ". 30." ouo ,~~''"''''."..... oj . , - ,-;:. ,,--,-, 11-," "'JI.I_"'1I1I1 -----... c.-mfA'1OU"- ___ 'l_r_ h:r:Tl7."1_J_ _ 3. 20In _IF_ o-.L-. 14 DewMnY Ct. u-a.-1-bl.q. PA 1m' A...:l307910 1'nlperQo,1'~a. M -L_w,,", PA I1OS' 0-..... "MIs. F_..t w. 1ft! pIaIed: tD iafixm J'OIl tUt }'OClI' .......1. . I far & &It IPftp&e .. OQ Ibe .~ pnperty _ beat. ...,..-oo!lJo<<......""'" ""'_..._la1bb. . ...._10...._..._....'... sip . dos1Dc. A. \.000 AInouo. 1176,2OC,oo 360_ __ $,875% B. LoUl T<<D\: l..oIft1')tt: ~... 1'W'1 \.ooow.,pc: ,iud C, DiIcoaDt PoiDtr.: .1.00% D. 0ripIali00 I'w. LOOO% .. M....1y _, tbr priocIpoI ad -... SI04:U9 ,Iv 1112 vi _1uoaoI _ _ ...J _ ,......(fopp_k,1112ol___....-___pnmium. ':.DluoIli'AL IlAZAlU> INStlRANCE POLICY WITH EVIDENCE OF COVJ!1lAGli,'Oll AT LEAST THE AMOUNT 0' t1lIILoAN IS ro III JmNISlII!D AT TlNEOP CL06ING. ' Lots P&y...t. r&,u_. _, _ Cily......... Co, llS -.1Il4Ass\p1s p, 0.1Im< UXIA o.,..,..OH 4540HOU 1'1.... ,..,..w..... ro_1llI ioComloIioa .. ..... os poo<iblo, _^-_ T~II: A ""PYofl!ul__ ODdpaiclRCeipllllllSlbeNOClwdpriol'lOcJosia&. G_ CoIa.ptildct widt aU ~.. of rnl ... tbIo ~ $D 1hM we may secure I wiid. fira _1ieo.........bjecC_. H. AcldIli~_afllli>.. ;, -lIltobt_aodlO: __ I. PloYldepleo/'of__.. NCM.. tIIe_ .UI05,l17,QO IIldto MBIS_.. lbe""""ofS41-'21.oo 2..hmri4a 'filii r. .b..... :;, PrcNi""O*___........ ifoppl1cable. #' ..Pnm4e....ortpal......-.."..Iilr..Tidoc.a.a.Jn.... " "'""'4e-~'ll,YSllIbs_lO.l'Sof'_I, -. '--__...IZII,OOO'oo T1Us commitment e:xpira 6JS/OJ. If we G& DOt ~ bIt'on 1WI ~....'--' tIIlpira, we".., ltamiDlto tis -----, To aaswer my qlUlStitmJ 1't1&lM.1O our ~ pIAso;alL CIosIo&A_' ~"'AdIor 2331__ Camp !llIUA 17011 (717) 76].13&3 Sioeaoly, fl/dt,...: 11.~;;' _ k.1'I=o';. I' r'tN- lIr>oeh.Maoaoor PleNe lip we wpy I!IId rcnam Ul Lender. "'_ ClI,yMaltpp Co. "2$ Simpooo PaIl'1l.d., sr., 203 ~HiD,PA l'!OlI-44O$ ~1_ _L I!'nokIbrd ".,. Dae ~ ~.' ""''"----'if,,;,!,'" .;., ,'^ - '<'"0 '-,-,'''", ~c:_, " " ,,", -''''',,', ~"<, . _,,'fl_.-, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 16 ,2003, I, Jennifer S. Lindsay, secretary to Michael A. Scherer, Esquire did serve a copy of Praecipe To Attach Exhibits, by first class U.S, mail, postage prepaid, to the party listed below, as follows: Keith Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 ~~;..:.- ~~"---j ~ilifjlll!iit....;~- t~ 'MJ .ULl!lJ[..lJ".~I~II.1 . . ~~-,-~ -.i_:jj~~~_~e!ll!lm. _ ,JIJI!II[.tlJt,~" ,'r~ _~. ,___,",~~\__"",,,___'_,,,,""',,'< ,,.. - ~"--,>;' ,'''_1 --,-r,. ." ~' ,".-" 'r' ",:~ -.-~ --, --'''' '>>',," '-,,--- () [; ~ Iii ;:p ?J~;~/-' :!} ~\, ~,-,- .;;;" ,;;,.C 5;-~.~ .";;:--- ,~, ::;j .. ii' o w o .:-.> -f o "1 :.71 ' ~ ::i ,~J1 U"i -.::~fn }~~ ~2C) lsrn :;::! 0:::;., =< :s ~~ :11 (Ai '" ,... ii " Ii Ii II .t " I I, Ii II JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants " -,,, ~ .- ... IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~ ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, thiS}o day of October, 2003, the argument in this matter is ii [I I' I i I , I I I, II , I I hereby removed from the argument court list and a special argument is set in this matter for Monday, October 27, 2003 at 10:30, a.m. vMichael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 17 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 II I II, ,;f<eith O. Brenneman, Esquire ! Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, PC I 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 " Ii > ~'3Q~1 RK~ J(} - )JJ . CG> ~--~'rof, ~ -'--.~.~~.- I I I .. ~_~~ ---...ki~fl~l~~m~~W!2~dlftl1'-"""",,-~,&iJ0i>'!b"":,'~"'lli.~l&ia,j:i14i:~t'* C"~"'" ~~ , li!T [ r ,- -~-~"' - ".....,,"",., - ," ~. " . ... " 'n'vJ!~I\!Al,\SNN3d ,/J ,'\,' I n,''./'_'''' "". . "I" '''''''''/1 '-"' \, ,i'::I,~!dJrti 0 ~:ml'l: ,,~,,", ~,~" ",",,, " ,- ~ " ~, . -~ ~, ~, ~ "" ,"~"._.~.~,.itlIlIIIII \fl!\l\ii\lASNN:ld A1Nr:-'( j'l .-,; ,'" ~"~~l~nJ c/ 'PI U;1 ....\.> '~,1 .'H -'71"'0 "n Uv ...;' t,,-., AbliJ..l>\\~,! :jO :l~j!.:l:K)- (Bl::i - .".~ ~~ . ~ j '" '1 'J -~ ~ " ,,- ,.'." - ,) ," ",- - 'T~lililiilllA'~j'__' JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF and : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH: Plaintiffs : 01-2692 CIVIL TERM V. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and: GREGORY.J~ .FRAN'KFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE LIS PENDENS ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, October 27,2003, after careful consideration of the arguments presented, defendants' Motion to Strike Lis Pendens is refused. vfv1ichael A. Scherer, Esquire 17 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 For the Plaintiffs ...Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 West Main Street PO Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 For the Defendants By the Court, > L#.l R)\~ J6-!{g-03 ~M~~~M-ifii!\LOj,i~C'-tv-t;'!iil!!l~!".\i"'hi':lf!-ili~)&!2~'J'-I'-'iiy!!.,,~.\r"&*,,w.i~~.,..w:.nr I;,~,~W~-~!,~;::JJ..: J ~\)t ""'""._ ,_~^,""""",_.,.."""".",."~_,,,.q,,~,,,,,"_ ", n I".'~.,~, ""''!'~,~_, ,~,..,,_r co" ",_y... "''''''~ ~~,,~, ' _" ,. ,._C.~e "~ 'I!OJJ!J --- W'NA'1ASNN3d A.I.NflOO dHif'11J'S8V'ffl IS IE \old 1.2 DO 80 Al:fVlONOH.LOjd :3Hl :i0 3~l:l:iO-G31itl ~, ,.~~ "re._." klti; ~' '"' , u n[ ", <\ ,._,- J """'_, .. 'I;. ,~-~ "rJ<'fl.l ilf!n~; PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and sutmitted in duplicate) TO THE PIDrHON:JI'ARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Please list the following case: (Check one) for JURY trial at the next term of civil court. (~) for trial without a jury. ----------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE , (entire caption must be stated in full) , (check one) Civil Action - Law JANET L.KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH Appeal from Arbitration (x) Equity (other) (Plaintiff) V$. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD The trial list will be called on and .. Trials comnence on (Defendant) Pretrials will be held on (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 Rule 214.1.) . No. 2692 Civil Term 2001 Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: Michael ~. Scherer, Esquire, 19 West South Stre~t~ Carlisle, PA 17013 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Keith Brenneman, Esquire, 44 West Main Street, Mechanicsburq, PA 17055 This case is ready for trial. Signed: Jt!it~ Print Narre: Mi ("na,,1 A. Scherer, Esquire Date: 3 .f(,' IPIj Attorney for: plaintiff c ~~_~.lllli!~'iile}.~'lti!>l!;~:K"j!;i&lf:f'Alil;i~~-UW;;:Mi:J[;"'J'i'H')'Y-Hi"""H',_--J~-,if,~",;j,'_~t!b<i;_'lk<L~i~~J!l\i;lil..lIt!i!!_ -'1iL't9ilM~Iil1lit,~~~I'r' "~-~~iil' ,-, - - "-~ ~ ....... ....., ~~ = 0 = 11 oi..-- .-1 ~ I-.., ::;'::J rn~ -o,h:t -..J i'N ",,0 ::Pn ...,- -., ?';:D ;c:;,.C) CO ;:~rn '_/ ~~! ~, >; :::0 W .< ~" '" - . ,~ . " JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH AND WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, PLAINTIFFS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD AND GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, DEFENDANTS : 01-2692 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 15th day of April, 2004, upon request of counsel, a pretrial conference is scheduled for Wednesday, May 12, 2004, at 11 :00 a.m., in Courtroom Number 2, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Counsel for the parties shall file pretrial memorandums in the chambers of this judge three days prior to the pretrial conference. BY~(;1J ~vif\(&~~ Edgar B. Bayley, J. AChael A. Scherer, Esquire For Plaintiffs ~ ..tith O. Brenneman, Esquire For Defendants :sal ()~-15-{)V ~ ~~~flJe\W~~1f-m'~~ii*<j';d;;Hk.'\!'''P:'IW.j;IiIt'M~1JI&jitJjW~_~''''~!--'~~''':'~ ii" - '/.H;:; 'I'" t' I '''''...'' 01 'Ull"'" C \ \\ ..., hnn1 .J tr.::'1J 'Ili)(, .. "('''d -'L" ~O ,. '1".\. '.1' q , '"-,, -.. lJ. -' \ ~ ",', 'v -,.,. vW' ...1\. f\.,J!.:~\.,r. .,)f ,,~ J-'1I~ :;~)H:\O--l:1l ..' ,'_" ".,~~. _<'"f-' ",", ""W.. _, __~r"~,~_ '"~>,,, ..,,"~"_"'~'",'''_ ":"',""-""'''''"'~~''"'~^'_.o;--",,,'' x-, -~~,' _, ' ~_c__~ , '0 ",". ,,~_~_ ,,', ,,_ '.2;J;L "~-"'-l ~.-i '~i "I ~ II Ii il II I !. i 'I " , I' I I I I I I ., , "~ - -, ---- --^"~ '" JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH AND WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, PLAINTIFFS V. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD AND GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, DEFENDANTS ~ ,. , -,-, ' , ;;;', --, ' , - , '. ;j', "' -' ," .-,.'.'-'-;.'-,<-, .k'_~ ' k<'" -,~.:,: d ,:.: : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 01-2692 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of May, 2004, following a pretrial conference, IT IS ORDERED that a non-jury trial will be conducted in Courtroom Number 2, at 9:00 a.m., Friday, June 11, 2004. ..-Michael A. Scherer, Esquire For Plaintiffs >- /Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire For Defendants Court Administrator :sal '_""':IldI/lJJ ",.'.1,..;"",,,,.. ~~--<' ~-- 0:cp l , ~''''-.'~ ~~ ~I!Ilitlf 1M-fuAib!ili~IlOl-W,. _9l1UM!~IMj~, " "~oioDil!.lIf.ii.' -~ ^-", ", "" "iA1 "'" '1'/'" I '11),/\,/\ '/\0J\I \:':10 'U\ln,~'''' I,' '"","~ '--",1';<"", ~ I. i'.."..- ',,"" " I',,:~ <:;J,'IIV ...C' 'II u,~ t'~J' H,; Z I ,{ iffl ~DDZ 'i-V1'1fdiJ'.JLO'U I ::J"I -leI A'-I._\.,- ~ It., tJq ..../1_ _ , :::JOI:J:/O-o:n!.~1 , 'jjj" , -~~.~, ~ \ ' LAW OFFICES S N E::LBAKER. BRESNNEMAN & SPARE ,- JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this ~ day of June, 2004, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion, it is hereby ORDERED that Dr, Christopher 1. Ziegler shall release information including records pertaining to any and all interviews, meetings with and counseling provided to Janet Kingsborough, Geneva Frankford and Waiter Kingsborough. BY TI;JECOURT: 1. Ii . -. . ^ ~- .~=-" FILED...oFFIC[; OF Th'EI'HOTHONOTi\RY 2004 JUH -2 M.l 9: 59 CJ j~l4L::'." : ", t'(":\ jr>.r:'\1 \"II-i,;,.,:".~ J--,' ',_."',iv)'II f ; PC !\!i'~SYLV/~j\i/\ b/~D4" Copy f~oo~[ty 9/ty:.V --Ie /JI.1yS)aAL. Copy m'01tls.cC -to IJJIy ~ ~ I . I, t. , [lr"~ J"Un'.!<il'J~1!i'JI ~. -'''!!Ill''''. '__, ..~,,,,,.~.JII<:1\IjI.~!l-!~!i!"l'W-W'J%"li.nJ.~1M~i\iWi~.~~1~~~ -- , . LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE JANET 1. KINGSBOROUGH and WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v, : NO. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA 1. FRANKFORD and GREGORY 1. FRANKFORD, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE RELEASE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS RECORDS Defendants Geneva 1. Frankford and Gregory J. Frankford, by their attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare,. P. C., hereby submit this Motion and in support thereof state the following: 1. A bench trial in the above-captioned case is scheduled before the Court on June 11, 2004. 2. On May 21, 2004 Defendants' attorney served upon Dr. Christopher 1. Ziegler a subpoena requiring his attendance at the time of the hearing and producing documents specified in the subpoena; namely, all office notes and records pertaining to any interviews and counseling rovided to Janet Kingsborough, Geneva Frankfotd and/or Walter Kingsborough, 3. In response to receiving the subpoena identified above, Dr. Ziegler advised efendants' counsel that although he is willing to cooperate in providing the records requested d possible testimony at time of trial, he feels that due to his profession and ethical constraints s a licensed psychologist as well as federal law, a court order is necessary to communicate with ounsel and release records as requested by the subpoena. 4. Plaintiffs counsel, Michael Scherer, consents to the issuance of an order permitting e1ease of information and documents as requested herein. 1iIil.~ ~ 1 . LAW OFFICEi:S SNEL8AKSR, BRENNEMAN & SPAR~ "~ ~'lj WHEREFORE, Defendants requests this Court to issue an Order directing Dr. Christopher 1. Ziegler to release information as well as notes and records pertaining to interviews, meetings with or counseling provided to Janet Kingsborough, Geneva Frankford and Walter Kingsborough. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, p, C. v~ BY: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, P A 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants Date: June I, 2004 -2- I LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN & SPARE VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Motion 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. ~ Keith O. Brenneman Date: June 1,2004 r"." " , LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN Be SPARE ~ " CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have, on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL POST AGE PREP AID. ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Michael A. Scherer, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, P A 17013 SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P.C. ~ By: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Defendants ate: June 1, 2004 ~1~\Il\~!f'H.ilI!jL~~'Ui'lg'\1<t';"""lHh-'!l\"jk-!;tJ~~~~!M<f.ilj""'J.mfl'l."J,,-i~~ ,,"Ii'&,8li.M'Wi;111~I~lil~l ~ ~,' .~~-~~~- ,",- =.,,," ~.~- "....;_IlIiittif;ilMlIiiilIIlIiii-Wllmiiill;:~0'~ '-:Ui'Y'''''r~_ -..d I '.iJ.IIll- ~ H --.-,-- "-- ~ ~M " / C,.c.l .-..-' C-~:C: >,----.. ,(,,-/"', :;." --j ~- o C- ,":"7' 'it: "-' = = .;:- L.. c= ;Z o -n --t :~_ ::r: ,. n1,a:;) rc '"Om :lJ'y 9,0 -'e-'f' -:;!---n Yo :?,:f\l U -,-~ 5J .~ I N ~~ ~. ro C.,) t, ',~ , " _1,,1' .1_ . .' ' ",' , ..ili;L'i~* ~ .f -oM. JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE TO STRIKE LIS PENDENS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please strike with prejudice the lis pendens previously filed in this matter and indexed against the following real property: All that certain tract of real estate and improvements thereon located at 14 Dewberry Court, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. Recorded in Deed Book 107 Page 1187 Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER DATE: 7.7.0'-/ ~~~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street - Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 mas.dir/genlitlkingsborough/lispendens.pra """"",,"~-~ . , " -~ J" "..",j __.0" '" . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Strike Lis Pendens to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: First Class Mail, Postage Prepaid, To: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 July 7,2004 ~(Iit Michael A. Scherer, Esquire '~~ii~~~JJi&~:<iliJO~i\iIi~~,Ig1l'~~~0ilii,~ili;_~;;.~i',,:,ii~:o.M~lMlIrfiMIilI!m'rj!Ulllilllll:i;~"-'~~~~,f.IiW:IIiII~j~!IiI ~ .. ~ D ....., ~ = C = <" ..::- -oi(.5 <- ~ mfr. c: ~~ -',.- 'I") .- ".;:;..._~" --;0',-- ....:~J,.... I ~~~; -.l k--O ::r;'T. j>,..., :r>o - -n 0- 6(~ :x zfrl J>c. ~ ~ :r> N :u W -< _ ~,_ ~ ~T _~_. ". =,.,~~ " '<~~" ," - "" ,-.' -~- "' . '-,,~ ~" ',... <' ~ ~ 1I!l~:fl\!Mnt~',., l JANET L. KINGSBOROUGH and: WALTER E. KINGSBOROUGH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GENEVA L. FRANKFORD and GREGORY J. FRANKFORD, Defendants No. 2001-2692 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly mark the above-captioned action as having been settled and discontinued. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER Date: 7' 7. 0'1 1tA~~ Michael A. Scherer, Esquire I.D. # 61974 17 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiff mas.dirtgenlitlkingsborough/discontinue.pra ,~" J. ~ ~. "~'il'~" .' ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michael A. Scherer, Esquire, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Discontinue to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: First Class Mail, Postage Prepaid, To: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 July 7,2004 ~. Michael A. Scherer, squIre