HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-00159
Farming (hereinafter referred to as the "Partnership"),
4
The l'laintiffs indebted themselves through two mortgages with the Defendant, which
mortgages secured Partnership lines of credit and Partnership loans for the purpose of purchasing
equipment and supplies, One mortgage is in the amount of $75,000 and is recorded in the office
of the Recorder of Deeds for Cumberland County, Pcnnsylvania at Mortgage Book 1251, page
26, The second mortgagc is in the amOllllt of $60,000 and is recordcd in the same office at
Mortgage Book 1251, page 30,
5
The collateral for these loans included, Inter alia, real estate which is the personal
residence of the Plaintiffs, The Defendant recorded two mortgages in its favor against the real
estate of the Plainti ffs.
6
The business and personal relationship of the partners Deputy and the plaintiff Bream
deteriorated to a point beyond reconciliation,
7
Because of the deterioration in the partners' relationship, the Defendant perceived the
Plaintiff, A. Larry Bream, to be a hinderance to the business onhe Partnership and to the ability
of the Defendant and Deputy to enter into a satisfactory work out arrangement.
II
On May 13, 1997, the Defcndant filed a Complaint in foreclosure against the PlaintifTs
and Deputy on one of the two mortgages, being the mortgage recorded ill the officc of the
Recorder of Deeds ill' Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in Mortgage Book 1251 at page 26,
This Complaint is docketed in the office of the Prothonotary of Cumberland County.
Pennsylvania. at No. 97-2550 Civil.
9
In 1997, lhc Defbndunt, by and through its Vice I'rcsident, Ronald L. HolTman, attempted
to ncgotiale a solution to thc financiul problem thatthc parties to this action und Deputy found
themselves in.
10
The Defendant, by und through its Vice President, Ronald L. Iloffmnn. encouraged the
Plaintin~ A, Larry Breum, to rclinquish all rights to the Partnership, to allow the Defendant to
deal directly and solely with Deputy.
I}
The Defendant, by and through its Vice President, Ronald L, Hoffman, assured the
PlaintilT, A, Larry Bream, that if he relinquished his interest in the Partnership, that the bank
would release the Pluintiffs from their obligatiolls to the. Defendant, including, satisfying the
mortgages against the PlaintitTs' property,
12
The Defendant, by and through its Vice President, Ronald L. Hoffman, negotiated with
the Plaintiff: A. Larry Arellm, in the druf\ing of a Mutual Release agreement with Deputy,
13
On October 9. 1997, the Defendunt, by und through Its Vice President, Ronald L,
Hoffman, contacted the Plaintift~ A, Larry Bream, and told the PlaintifT that he had a copy of the
completed Mutual Release ugrcement, and us ked the l'laimiffto come to the Defendunt's otlice to
sign the agreement.
14
On October 23, 1997. with the understanding that the Plaintlff.~ were to be rekased by
the Defendant for the liabilities of the Partnership, the Plaintiff, A, Larry Bream, executed a
Mutual Release agreement with Deputy, This agreement is attached hereto and is marked as
Exhibit "A" (hereinafter "Mutual Release"),
15
Pursuant to the Mutual Release, the Plaintiff, A, Larry Bream, relinquished all interest in
the Partnership, as well as, Ilny claims that he had against Deputy,
16
By letter dated April 2, 1998, the PlaintitTs were notified by the Defendant that the
Defendant was claiming nn outstanding principal balance 01'$ 71,410.47 with an additional
balance, representing interest and late charges, of $ 3,309,83; this letter is attached hereto and
marked as Exhibit "B",
17
Despite agreement to the contrary, the Defendant has refused to satisfy the two mortgages
on record against the Plaintiffs' property.
COUNT I - SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
18
Paragraphs 1 through 17 arc incorporated herein by reference, as though textually set
forth at length,
19
The Defendant. by and through its Vice President, Ronald L. Hoffman, promised the
Plaintiff: A. Larry Bream, that if Bream agreed to execute the Mutual Release with Deputy, that
the Delendant would release th(~ Plaintiffs lromliability for the indebtedness of the Partnership;
this release from the Partnership liability being the consideration and inducement for the
Phlintiff, A, Larry Bream, executing the Mutual Release,
20
As consideration for the Defendant's promise to release the Plaintitls from all partnership
liabilities, the Defendant led the Plaintiffs to believe that the Defendant anticipated that the
Defendant would, then, occupy a position in which the Defendant would be able to work directly
with Deputy in an attempt to salvage the business of the Partnership and better selmre the
payment of past and future loans to the former Partnership and to Deputy individually, as well as,
to develop other business with Deputy,
21
The Defendant has breached its contract with the Plaintiffs by not releasing the Plaintiffs
from all liability with respect to the Purtnership,
22
The reul estate of the ('Ialntiffs that the Defendant holds a mortgage against is the family
home of the Plaintiffs,
23
The substunce of the agreement between the parties is unique and, if the Delendant is
ullowed not to perform the Agreement, damages will not fully compensate the Plaintifffmm the
hurm incurred due to the Plaintiff's breach,
WHER"~"'()RE, the Pluintlll's pruy thut this Court grunt them the following relief:
A) the [)efendunt he enjoined from pursuing any uctions in foreclosure uguinstthe
Plalnti ffs;
B) t1ultthe I)efendunt he required to specitlcally pcrform its contruct with the
PllIintiff.~; thut is, thlltthc Defendunt be required to releasc the Plaintiffs from all liability for the
indehtedness of the Purtncrship, including. hut not limited to, the satisfaction of all mortgages
recordcd against the property of the Plaintiffs; and
C) any other relief the Court deems equitable and appropriate,
COl1NT II - PROMISSORY I<:STOPPEL
24
Puragruphs 1 through 17 arc incorporatcd herein hy reference, as though textually set
forth at length,
25
The Defendant, by and through its Vice Prcsident, Ronald L. Hollman, on numerous
occasions, madc represcntations to thc Plaintiff, A, Larry Brealll, that the Defendant would
reloase the Pluintifls from all liability for the Partnership's indebtedness with the Defendant.
26
The Plaintiffs reusonably relied upon the represcntations madc by the Defendant that they
would he rei cased from Iiahility for thc indebtedness of the P1II1nership and executed the Mutual
Release with Deputy hased upon the represcntations mudc hy the Dclcndant.
27
The Defcndant refuses to rcleasc the Plaintiffs from liability for the indebtedness of the
Partnership,
28
The Plaintiffs' relied upon the Defendant's representations to their detriment, as the
Plaintiff, A, Larry Bream, would not have executed the Mutual Rclease with Deputy, but for the
assurances of the Defcndunt that the Plaintiffs would be released from liability, for the
Partnership, by the Defendant. Further, as a result of executing the Mutual Release, the Plaintltf,
A. Larry Bream, has relinquished all inMest in the Partnership and any and all claims that he had
against Deputy with regard to the business of the Partnership,
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs pray that this Court grant them the following relief:
A) that the Defendant be ordered to remove the Plaintiffs from all liability for the
indebtedness of the Partnership, including, but not limited to, the satisfaction of the two
outstanding mortgages against the Plaintiffs' property;
B) damages in the amount of the attorney fees incurred by the Plaintiffs in furthering
this action; and
C) any other relicf that thc Court deems appropriate,
COlJNT III - BREACH OF CONTRACT
29
Paragraphs I through 23 lire incorporated herein by reference, liS though textually set
forth at length,
30
Because of thc Defcndnnt's breach of its agreement with the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs are
subject to the Defendant's attcmpts to foreclose upon the mortgages of the Plaintiffs alld the
distress and humiliation attendant to thcse attempts; further, the PlaintltlS have experienced harm
to their reputation which hus. and will in the t\lture, impact their ability to obtain credit.
WHER~:FORE. the Plaintlfts pray thut this Court grunt them the following relief:
A) an Order enjoining the Defendant from further eftorts at foreclosure against the
Plaintiffs;
B) damages in an amount to be detemtlncd by the Court, to Include, hut not
necessarily limited to:
i) an amount equal to the Plaintiffs' liability to the Defendant due to the
liability of the Partnership;
Ii) an amount equal to the attorney fees Ihe Plaintiffs huve incurred in their
pursuit of this action;
iii) interest on the damages from October 23, ] 997, the date thaI the
Plaintiff, A, Lany Bream, executed the Mutual Release;
Iv) consequentiul and incidental damages as proven by the Plaintiffs;
C) any other relief thut the Court deems appropriate,
COUNT IV - NEGUm:NCE
31
Paragraphs I through 17 are incorporated herein by reference, as though textually set
forth at length,
32
The Defendant held a duty to the Plaintiffs, as sureties for the Partnership, of good faith.
and reasonable care in its dealings with the P8I1nershlp,
33
On or before December 5, 1995, Deputy informed the Defendant that the Partnership
between Deputy lInd Bream wns irretl'ievubly broken and that Bream would no longer be
involved in the operation of the business of the Partnership,
34
Aner being notified that Bream was no longer involved in the business of the Partnership,
the Defendant continued 10 make 10lln udvances to Deputy, ostensibly for the Partnership, but,
while knowing that the Plaintiff, A. Larry Bream, was no longer involved as a partner,
35
The Defendllnt applied proceeds from the sales of Partnership property to the debts of
Deputy, the individual; the Plaintiffs expect to determine the dates and dollar amounts of such
transactions through discovery,
36
The Defendant breached its duty of good faith and reasonable care to the Plaintiffs by the
Defendant's advllncement of funds to Deputy, aner being placed on notice that the Plaintiff, A.
Larry Bream, was no longer involved in the business of the Partnership,
37
The Defendant bl'eucht~d its duty of good faith and reasonable care to the Plaintiffs by
misapplying I'artncrship proceeds to the individual debts of Deputy,
;'
I
~/ ;
I, :,~
2:56 PM
.'::~: ADAMS COUNIY
NATIONAL BANK
Ronwld L Huffmall
VI(:~' I'resldt'nl
April, 2, 1998
Eatl L. Deputy, Jr.
Roxanne H. Deputy
828 Baltimore Pike
Gardners, PA 17324
Adam L. Brearo
Cynthia C. Bream
877 Baltimore Plko
Oi.l'd.nen, PA 17324
Deai' Mr. and Mrs. Deputy and Mr. and Mm. Bream:
On March 24,1998 we received $31.954.60 from Kling's Auctions,lnc. which was
applied to your B & 0 Fanning loans as follow5:
I, Loan 11612210802671-1n/tre$1 $892.35, Princ/pal $23,892,25. Interest Is
paid through Aplill. 1998. The principal balance on the loan is $U. 610.47.
The collateral for this loan was machinery and real ostate. This loan matured
on Febnlary I, 1998. The loan Is presently past due because we are past the
maturity date.
2. Loan #612210802672 - Infert$! $2,142.50. LAlechargts $J 74. 98, Interest is
paid through April 1, 1998. The principal balance ofthi.loan is $59,800 and
the collateral for this loan was machinery and real estate. This loan has a
maturity date of 2101/00. The Interest Is payable monthly and is next due for
May I, 1998.
I hAve a copy of the sale slips from Kling's Auction, Inc. which have been placed In your
loan file. At this time the bank is WaIting for y(lU to take further actions to resolve the
mailers regarding the partnership debt.
If you hllve any questions relating to this specific mutter yom C\1I1 contac,t me ,.t 632-4333.
CC: Marcus McKnight
Hubert Ollroy
EXHIBIT
I I'S"
YlIck Sprin/l5 omG~ . P.Q, I:Iox 185. York Sprllllls, I'A 17~72. (717) 528.4141
Plaintiffs' Complaint.
COUNT III - BREACH OF CONTRACT
29, No response required,
30, Denied, l'laintitls' alleglltion that Defendunt breached its ugreement with
Plaintiffs 01' that the harm claimed by Plaintiffs was cuused by Defendant. To the extent thut a
response is deemed necessary 01' advisable, Defendant denies that it breached any agreement
with Plaintiffs and fmiher denies tlUlt Defendant caused "the distre!ls and humiliation"
Plaintiffs clllim they have suffered fromuttempts, on pal1 of Defendant, to collect the
partnership's delinquent loans,
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests the Court to dismiss Count III of
Plaintiffs' Complaint
COUNT IV - NEGLIGENCE
31, No response required,
32, Denied, The ullegation that Defelldant "held R duly,,, as sureties for the
Partnership" is a conclusion of law to which no response of pleading is required to the extent a
response is deemed necessary or advisable, Defendant denies the same and strict proof
thereof is denllmded at trial.
33. Denied, Defendant denies that on or before December 5. 1995, Plaintiff
informed Defendant that the partnership was "irretrievably broken" and that Bream would no
longer be involved in the operntion of the pllt1nership,
34, Denied, For reasons stated in Paragraph 32 above, Defendant denies it knew
Plaintiff was no longer involved as of Decem her 5, 1995, Onlhc contrnry, Defendant only
learned of Plaintiffs withdrawal in mid-Janullry 1996, when PIRintiffs partner, MI'. Deputy,
),~).
ft'; ~ ~
("1"'1
....,i " ".;<
I,,' ~:5
()
l.U~>
fL~r'i' ii:
~/.-}t\ )
.:/'
f:''' ('J
..I(~:
,1'1 ......
''''l!1
1....1 C,,)
f-' <..:;.J
u... .,. :~l
(',.;:,
0 ~I D
'"
,~ c.n
(.fd Co.'?
;.('
i:-:~ c.',
l;'()
(")" ~ ,.....
\'r: Sf;~j u..
{j~- 1
t .' In
:'1,J: (l-.J
"'0111 r,~
11- 'l' r",.~
f.' "4..(
u_ , "
("t~'l
() I;;',')
....,