Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-056640 7 y l:? y P , I IM `i 1 h {.y I 1 S h ?l L ?l t t' 4 ' M ' n 4V .0 L. iJ?Qi , :4! ? STC, a , Ln COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY JUDICIAL DISTRICT 9th NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 99 NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the case mentioned below. • Yr Y.r. ..o..:. F112arlee ; Inc. --- - -- 09 1- f? •,I CYO. PA 17025 CV 19 -(Nl(l(125_?9 AT This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If appellant was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. R.CP.J.P. No. 10088. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will opewtc as No. 1001(6) in action before District Justice, he a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within Twenty (20) _ (lays after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. Signature of Prorlronotary of Deputy PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appelleel. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon Barbara tbrgan , appeffee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal ?-?Nam? a of appepeehl (Common Pleas No, 9 ??u1L-L?8C1i1 wnh in twenty (20) days after service f rule ur so r entry figment of non pros. S/gnature of appellant orhlrarrornay m RULE: To Barbara Nlor?al Name of appellce(s) apocllee(s) (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU UPON PRAECIPE. (3) The date of service of :his rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. ?yL? r Date: 19 Aa=- z tn ^' _? Signature o! othonotaryor Deputy While •--- Prothonotary Copy Green --- Court File Copy Yellow--- Appellant's Copy Pink ----- Appellee Copy Gold ----- - D. J. Copy r • y N ? =S Ir- --Ir s9 r 7ueyle /o ainwu6ss r ++ vJ uosaaldxauolss(wwoaAyy lY V 0 O 1JU J I a4rw srm unepyle wogm aio/ep play/o/o emlwdls 1. -6l' d0AV0--SIHl 3N 3HOA36 038IHOSHns ONV (0311YHIjjV) NHOMS -olaia4 pag3eue sdla30a s,lapuas'Ilew (paaolsl60:) (palpuaa) Aq ? a3lAlas leuosmd Aq n '--61 ' ----uo passaippe semolnH 041 w04m of (s)aalladde a41 uodn ?eaddV In 031loN anoge a41 6wAuedwo3oe )uicldwo0 a ali j nl alnH aql paAaas 1 1941 /a4Unl pue •oleaay pa4aeue idlaoal s,lapuas'pew (pamisi6ai) (paijom) Ag n a3lnaas IeuuzrN MI ?-6l uo' - -' -- a06adda asp uodn pue'ula:a4 pailmle ldl@3ai s,/apuas glew (palalsl6aal (pagluaa) Aq ? aalAms jellos.wd Aq El '-6I ' /aMmaslo Mop) uo ulaiagl paleu6lsop aolssnr lolrlsl0 asp uodn '- ON seald uowwo0 'IeaddV 10 03110N aqs to Ado3 a paA w{ I legl swglu ao ieams M1ga104 I :11AV01:JJV '• ss: 10 A1Nn00 VINVAIASNN3d 40 H1lV3MN0WW00 (sexoq elgeopdde ryoeg0 leedde to e3pou 0416upp H31dV SA VO (01) N31 NIM11M 03714 3H 1SI1W eolmas to looid 8141) 1NIVl0400 3113 Ol 31f1H ONV 1V3ddV' 40 301ION d0 301AHBIS 30 d00Hd 'f t COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: CUMBERLADID NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT M" Ow INV CIVIL CASE 09-1-02 PLAINTIFF: NAMF.ro ADDRESS a Nw No kORGAN, BARBARA 1 ROBERT V. MANLOVg 141 S SNOLA DR 1901 STATE STREET ?O?• PA 17025 CAMP BILL, PA L VS. J DEFENDANTS. MAMRSroloDRESS .. (717) 761.0583 17011-0000 rPUGLES, INC -I ATTORNEY DSP PRIVATE 125 N SNOLA DRIVE SNOLA, PA 17025 NILLIM T. SMITH, ESQ. L J 3747 DERRY ST DocketNo.: CV-0000253-99 HARRISBURG, PA 17111 Date Filed: 7/28/99 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FO*PpT PP LT Judgment was entered for: (Name) MORGAN, AARigmm Judgment was entered against: (Name) pnar.tap, rNrt in the amount of $ r, nor, sn on: (Date of Judgment) _g/m/oo Defendants are jointly and severally liable. (Date & Time) Damages will be assessed on: ? This case dismissed without prejudice. n Amount of Judgment Subject to -- AttachmenUAct 5 of 1996 $ (J^' Levy is stayed for_ days or ? generally stayed. J Objection to levy has been tiled and hearing will be held: Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total Date: I Place: Time: ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARYICLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLU A COPY OF THIS OTTILE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUII•NOTICR OF APPEAL. Date 1'a 31: If; D•istidet dbstice I certify that this is a true a correct copy of the recprd of the proceedings c ` -r 10' the judgment. 9 7 ?9 Date /,?'•; l,i'FIalJ ° > ,•District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January. 2000 SEAL AOPC 315.99 BARBARA A. MORGAN PLAINTIFF COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY V FUGLEE, INC. DEFENDANT 99-5664 CIVIL TERM NOTICE TO DEFENDANT(S) NAMED HEREIN; YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND AGAINST THE CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES, YOU MUST TAKE ACTION WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS AFTER THIS COMPLAINT AND NOTICE ARE SERVED, BY ENTERING A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. YOU ARE WARNED THAT IF YOU FAIL TO DO SO, THE CASE MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOU, AND A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY THE COURT 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 CLAIM OR RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE PLAINTIFF. YOU MAY LOSE MONEY OR PROPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE 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 COURT ADMINISTRATOR South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240.6200 }y? BARBARA A. MORGAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY V. FUGLEE, INC. 99_5664 Defendant Civil Term COMPLAINT AND NOW, this ljm day of A , 1999, cores Barbara A. Morgan, (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff'), and files this Complaint at law whereof the following is a statement, to wit: 1 • Plaintiff is an adult individual presently residing at 141 South Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff formerly resided and owned a unit located at 234 Brian Drive, Westwood Village Condominium, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania from approximately November, 1996 through September, 1998. 3. Fuglee, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") is a Pennsylvania Corporation with its principal place of business at 125 N. Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsbom Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Fuglee, Inc. was incorporated during the month of January, 1996. 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter as the conduct on which the Complaint is based occurred in Cumberland County, East Pennsboro Township, Enola, Pennsylvania. 5. The Plaintiff, at all times mentioned herein, owned a unit in Westwood Village Condominium As such, Plaintitf paid monthly condominium fees for the upkeep of the common elements such as lawn care and painting of the exterior of the units. 6. The Defendant, at all times mentioned herein, performed lawn care services and painting services. Said contracts were awarded to Defendant during the month of March, 1996 by the Council of Westwood Village Condominium for five (5) year terms each. The Defendant's President, Mr. William Homer Hicks, at all times mentioned herein, was also either the president or vice-president of the Westwood Village Condominium Council, a body of 5 individuals elected by the unit owners and charged with the responsibility to maintain the common elements in a manner to maintain the integrity and value of the units and common grounds in accordance with the governing documents.. Defendant, at all times mentioned herein, did not, to Plaintiffs knowledge, own a unit in Westwood Village, nor pay monthly condominium fees. 8. Westwood Village Condominium is governed under the Unit Property Act of 1963, a Declaration, and a Code of Regulations. Council is one of two governing bodies of Westwood Village Condominium The other governing body is the Westwood Village Community Association, Inc., the Board of Directors. 9. Upon Plaintiffs ownership at Westwood Village Condominium, serious problems existed in the community associated with complaints about the various maintenance services and the government of the Condominium, and a concern of a conflict of interest due to the Defendant's dual role as Council president and a contractor hired by Council. Anotlwr serious conflict existed during the same time that was associated with a power struggle between Council and the Board of Directors. 10. On or about January, 1997, a special meeting was requested by the unit owners to address their concerns. Council conducted the meeting, but did not resolve the on-going issues of the unit owners. Plaintiff did not attend this meeting. II. Another meeting was held on or about March, 1997 which Plaintiff did attend to find out what was going on and how her monthly fees were being spent. Approximately 60 - 70 unit owners attended this meeting and raised numerous complaints. Complaints directed at Defendant were noted but not addressed as Defendant refused to speak. Plaintiff did not raise any complaints at this meeting. 12. On or about May, 1997, Council held its Annual Meeting, but refused to conduct new business because it knew or should have known that the unit owners intended to make a motion to remove William Homer Hicks from Council 13. On or about June, 1997, a class action lawsuit was filed against Council for non- compliance with the governing documents and other on-going problems in the community. Plaintiff, along with three (3) other unit owners signed the lawsuit on behalf of approximately twenty-three (23) other unit owners. Vs 14. On or about July 21, 1997, Defendant did tell Plaintiff that the rotten wood on Plaintiffs unit, shed and patio would be painted. 15. Plaintiff halted the painting of the rotten wood by contacting PMI, the property manager, and another member of Council which resulted in wood replacement. 16. On or about August, 1997, Plaintiff began escrowing her monthly fees, along with approximately twenty-eight (28) other unit owners This action was authorized and initiated through legal counsel who provided to Council and PNG, the property manager, written notice of the unit owners' intent to escrow their fees until resolution of the pending lawsuit. 17. Two months later, during the month of October 1997, Defendant filed a lawsuit against Plaintiff and another co-defendant Anne Nisson 'for Defamation and Intentional Interference with a Contractual Relationship. The Complaint alleged that Plaintiff, through community publicity, defamed Defendant and interfered with contractual relationships. 18. On or about May 18, 1999, Judge Bayley dismissed Defendant's suit No. 97-5332 against Plaintiff via Summary Judgment based on "truth and vigorous epitaph" and Defendant's "failure to prove actual pecuniary loss". 19. By admission under oath during deposition proceedings , Defendant used the legal system as a means to "to take the "ringleader" to task". This malicious abuse of process was intended to deprive Plaintiff of her rights as a Condominium unit owner; intimidate her into silence; and force her to remove herself from the community. This action brought by Defendant against Plaintiff was motivated with malicious intent because Plaintiff: a. escrowed her monthly maintenance fees pending resolution of the unit owners' lawsuit against Council; b. asserted and maintained her unit-owner rights as guaranteed by PA law; c. was a co-signer on the class-action lawsuit against Council; d. was elected by the unit owners to the Board of Directors; e. was a candidate for an elected seat on Council. In fact, in 1998, Plaintiff was elected to Council but was arbitrarily removed by Council because she had escrowed her fees. She was subsequently replaced by another ex-escrower who was also a co-signer on the lawsuit against Council. 20. In conducting her defense against this prosecution, Plaintiff was forced to prematurely and permanently withdraw funds from her retirement account to retain a lawyer. 21. Paaintiff was forced to sell her unit in Westwood Village Condominium to repave herself from the source of the mental, emotional and physical distress and additional financial drain caused by this malicious and intimidating act. 22. Plaintiff was denied credit because of the lawsuit. ' Anne Nissan was president of the Board of Directors at this time. 23. Plaintiff lost wages (leave time) from her employment to attend meetings associated with this civil proceeding. 24. Plaintiff suffered anxiety attacks because of the emotional distress associated with the lawsuit. WHEREFORE, for all the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff requests that Judgment be entered in its favor and against the Defendant as follows:: 1. Attorney fees in the amount of 54,800.00; 2. Punitive damages for emotional and mental anguish in the amount of 54,000; 3. Costs of this action, if incurred; 4. Court costs and costs of $95.00 on the Judgment entered by District Justice on September 7,1999; 5. And such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted, Date: Barbara A. Morgan, pro se Plaintiff 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 717-732-7952 AFFIDAVIT Personally appeared before me, Barbara A. Morgan, who deposes and states that the facts set forth in the within Complaint are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. 1 Barbara A. Morgan Subscribed and sworn to before me this -Zg?%f October, 1999. Notary Public Notenal Seal Colleen M. Kline. Notary Public Harristang, Dauphin County ` My ConuNSSlon Expires July 4, 20M Mendw. Pemsovula ASW.Jellon of Notaries CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint was served concurrently upon the following person(s) by depositing the same in the United States mail in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on this date. Mr. William H. Hicks, President Fuglee, Inc. (Defendant) 125 North Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 Date: /D /s 99 William T. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Defendant 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg PA 17111 Barbara A. Morgan, P intiff 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 BARBARA A MORGAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY V. FUGLEE, INC. 99-5664 DEFENDANT CIVIL TERM rr ti. VERIFICATION 3 1, Barbara A. Morgan, Plaintiff, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to be the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. subsection 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Dated: /o t f ?_ fl Barbara A. Morg Plaintiff Y *.t ? ' t alt: _ i: c Z, s .; w .-% fib d ?y BARBARA A. MORGAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY V No. 99-5664 FUGLEE, INC. Civil term Defendant TO: William Horner Hicks Date of Notice: November 8, 1999 125 N. Enola Drive Enola Pa 17025 IMPORTANT NOTICE YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO TAKE ACTION REQUIRED OF YOU IN THIS CASE. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE TO A LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP: Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle Pa 17013 (717) 249-3166 Date f Barbara A. Morgan 141 S. Enola Drive Enola Pa 17025 (717) 732-7952 W Cc CD C _ w?' I G m L BARBARA A. MORGAN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. FUGLEE, INC., NO. 99-5664 CIVIL TERM Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT FUGLEE, INC-S., PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'C COMPLAINT AND NOW, this IS" day of November 1999, comes Fuglee, Inc., the defendant in the above captioned matter by its Attorney William T. Smith, to file these Preliminary objections in the nature of a Demurrer and Motion for a More Specific Pleading in the above captioned matter, for the reasons hereinafter set forth: DEMURRER OR ALTERNATIVELY MOTION FOR A MORE SPECIFIC PLEADING 2. The Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state facts constituting a cause of action against this Defendant in that the facts so alleged fail to set forth a basis for a claim of malicious abuse of process required by the rules of Civil Procedure and accordingly the Complaint should be dismissed or alternatively, the Plaintiff should be compelled to file a More Specific Pleading setting forth the factual basis for this claim. On grounds of insufficient specificity of Pleadings the Defendant above named makes this objection pursuant to Rule 1028 (A)(3) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure [Pa R.C.P] and on the ground that the defendant is unable to ascertain from the Pleading L in its present state, the nature of the claim asserted with sufficient precision to prepare a responsive pleading. This objection is based on the record, papers, pleadings and files of this action. WHEREFORE, the defendant Fuglee, Inc., respectfully requests that the Preliminary Objections be sustained. Respectfully submitted, QaaQ ?- William T. Smith Attorney I.D. No. 06887 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 561-2677 Attorney for Defendant I BARBARA A. MORGAN, Plaintiff V. FUGLEE, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 99-5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections was served upon the following person by depositing the same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid on this date, Dated: November 16, 1999 Barbara A. Morgan 141 S. Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 U` =Z- William T. Smith Attorney I.D. No. 06887 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 561-2677 Attorney for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ATTACHED NOTICE OF DEFAULT WAS SERVED CONCURRENTLY UPON THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BY DEPOSITING THE SAME IN THE UNITED STATES MAIL IN ENOLA, PENNSYLVANIA, ON THIS DATE. MR WILLIAM HOMER HICKS FUGLEE, INC., Defendant 125 NORTH ENOLA DRIVE ENOLA PA 17025 DATE: a WILLIAM T SMITH ESQ Counsel for Defendant 3747 DERRY STREET HARRISBURG PA 17111 BAR ARA A MOR AID PLAINTIFF, pro se 141 SOUTH ENOLA DRIVE ENOLA PA 17025 (717) 732-7952 cc: thonotary's Office Cumberland County wQ M, cn iLL.! F; C: BARBARA A. MORGAN IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 99-5664 CIVIL TERM FUGLEE, INC. Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF BARBARA A. MORGAN'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND FOR MOTION FOR A MORE SPECIFIC PLEADING THE FOLLOWING SETS FORTH MORE SPECIFIC FACTS CONSTITUTING A CAUSE OF ACTION (MALICIOUS ABUSE OF PROCESS) AGAINST DEFENDANT AND IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FILED IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S APPEAL TO THE DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT RENDERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF. THIS SPECIFIC PLEADING AND NEW MATTER ARE BASED ON THE RECORD, PAPERS, PLEADINGS AND FILES OF THIS ACTION. Defendant Fuglee, Inc. sued Plaintiff in a manner contrary to the moral law, or to justice. It was a groundless suit, without merit, as subsequently determined by the Court .............................................................................EXHIBIT A 2. Defendant committed perjury at the District Justice hearing in denying two statements contained in his deposition taken during litigation of Fuglee, Inc. vs Barbara A. Morgan. 3. Defendant Fuglee, Inc. sued Plaintiff for retaliation and revenge because Plaintiff maintained and defended her rights (as provided in the Governing Documents) as a Condominium owner in Westwood Village Condominium a. Plaintiff became a Unitowner in Westwood Village Condominium in late November, 1996. After receiving many letters of propaganda at her door step and in the U.S. mail, she realized there was a serious problem associated with her ownership which would adversely affect the preservation of her real estate and cause maintenance fees to escalate. Subsequent to reading the Code of Regulations and various newsletters of the Council of Westwood Village Condominium, she wrote to the President of Council, William Hicks on February 23, 1997 ...................................EXHIBIT B b. On March 24, 1997, Mr. Hicks responded to Plaintiffs Febnmry 23rd correspondence not as President of Council, but as an private individual residing at 827 Lee Lane which is located within Westwood Village Complex .................................................................EXHIBIT C 1. You will note in this March 24s' correspondence, Mr. Hicks, as an individual and not president of Council, threatens Plaintiff with legal action, i.e., "I have turned your letter over to my atorney for review. Any further response will be made in the legal arena". c. On March 21, 1997, Plaintiff wrote to Westwood Village's property manager, Property Management, Inc., hereinafter referred to as PMI, concerning matters of concern to her as a unitowner. The issues contained in this letter dealt with violation of the Code of Regulations, PA 1-Call regulations and total disregard for the preservation of common elements, the cost of which is passed on to the unitowners in the form of increased monthly fees and/or special assessments added on to the monthly fees. As a property manager, hired by Westwood Village Council, PMI's involvement is controlled by the Council ................................................................... EXHIBIT D d. On March 20,1997, Plaintiff wrote to the Council of Westwood Village with questions on the 1997 Elections of Council Officers ............ EXHIBIT E 1. On March 27, 1997, Mr. William Hicks, as president of Council, responded to Plaintiff ..................................................EXHIBIT F a. On page 3 of Exhibit F, Mr. Hicks, in the capacity of Council president, refers to legal action against Plaintiff. In the last paragraph on Page 3, he states, "You should be very careful about accusations and name calling unless you are sure you can prove what you are saying in a court of law." In October, 1997, Mr. William Hicks, as president of Fuglee, Inc., sued Plaintiff, in a groundless lawsuit wrongfully intended and with a malicious motive to injure Plaintiff to obtain revenge against her to "silence" her, a motive admitted to by Mr. Hicks during his deposition. e. On August 5, 1998 (following Fuglee's filing of the lawsuit against this Plaintiff), Fuglee's attorney wrote to the co-defendant's attorney (on the Fuglee suit). This attorney was also representing an individual in a lawsuit against the Westwood Village Board of Directors on which Plaintiff Morgan served at the time she was sued by Fuglee. She was named, along with others serving on the Board of Directors, in the suit of Bopp vs. Board of Directors. Attorney Smith, as legal counsel for both suits did, on several occasions, plead to simultaneously settle both suits, which appeared to indicate one suit was was contingent upon the other, or both, when the two suits were not related in nature other than both suits named this Plaintiff as a co-defendant. ................................................................................FM BIT G Respectfully submitted, ar-a Barbara A. -J prose Plaintiff 141 South Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 (717) 732-7952 Dated: /--? .00 NEW MATTER Subsequent to Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendant continues to make malicious unfounded threats against Plaintiff to inflict additional emotional distress on her. 1. Letter dated November 27, 1999 from Defendant's attorney indicates an intention to take Plaintiffs deposition and advises Plaintiff that W. Hicks intends to file a Counter claim against her for $60,000 for the loss of a contract which occurred subsequent to Judge Bayley's dismissal of Defendant's suit against Plaintiff ...........................................................................E)MBIT 1 During the two years of litigation of the Defendant's action against Plaintiff; Fuglee, Inc, did not request Plaintiffs deposition. Plaintiff is without any knowledge of any cancellation or loss of any contract of Defendant as she moved from Westwood Village Condominium on October 1, 1998. THEREFORE, Defendant continues his retaliatory and malicious revenge against Plaintiff devoid of merit for the purpose of delay and to intentionally and maliciously cause further harm and damage to Plaintiff. Respectfully submitted, °?-`? Barbara A Morgan, pro se Plaintiff 141 South Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 Dated: - ? - 00 4 THEREFORE, Plaintiff withdraws the settlement offer made to Defendant on October 7, 1999 Via fax to which there was no response, and WHEREFORE, for all the foregoing reasons contained in Plaintiffs Complaint, a More Specific Pleading to Complaint and now, New Matter, the Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against the Defendant as follows: 1. Attorney fees incurred in her defense on action Fuglee, Inc. vs. Morgan in the amount of $4,800.00; 2. Puntive damages for emotional and mental anguish in the amount of $5,000; 3. Costs of this action, if incurred; 4. Court costs and costs of $95.00 on the Judgment entered by District Justice on September 7, 1999; 5. And, such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper, after considering the facts associated with the Complaint and the facts contained in the foregoing. Date: A -00 Respectfully submitted, ?6B.A. Morgan, pro Plaintiff 141 South Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 (717) 732-7952 BARBARA A. MORGAN IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 99-5664 CIVIL TERM FUGLEE, INC. Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION 1, Barbara A. Morgan, Plaintiff, verify that the statements made in the foregoing More Specific Pleading and New Matter are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 PA C.S. subsection 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Date - _oo fy?Nl Barbara lit. Morgan Plaintiff, pro se CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Barbara A. Morgan, pro se, hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs More Specific Pleading and New Matter on this date by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid, addressed to; Mr. William H. Hicks, President Fuglee, Inc. (Defendant) 125 North Enola Drive Enola Pa 17025 William T. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Defendant 3747 Derry street Harrisburg PA 17111 Dated: ,/,,v or Barbara A. Morgan Plaintiff pro se (717) 732-7952 (717) 255-6514 s 9 FUGLEE, INC. PLAINTIFF V. ANN NISSAN and BARBARA STODDART-MORGAN, DEFENDANTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 97-5332 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTIONS OF DEFENDANTS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this l0 day of May, 1999, IT IS ORDERED: (1) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED against defendant Ann Nissan. (2) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED against defendant Barbara Stoddart-Morgan. William T. Smith, Esquire For Plaintiff Kevin C. McNamara, Esquire For Ann Nissan Mark W. Allshouse, Esquire For Barbara Stoddart-Morgan :sea By the Edgar B. i exR A FUGLEE, INC. PLAINTIFF V. ANN NISSAN and BARBARA STOODART-MORGAN, DEFENDANTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 97-5332 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTIONS OF DEFENDANTS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT BAYLEY, J., May 18,1999:.- Plaintiff, Fuglee, Inc., is a corporation that performs lawn maintenance services and painting. Defendants, Ann Nissan and Barbara Stoddart-Morgan, are condominium owners in the Westwood Village Condominium community. Plaintiff provides lawn care and related services and painting under contract to Westwood Village. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint against defendants alleging defamation and the intentional interference with its contractual relations. The parties took the deposition of William Hicks, the president of Fuglee, Inc. The record is closed and both defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment. The issues were briefed and argued and are ready for decision. In Washington v. Baxter, 719 A.2d 733 (Pa. 1998), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania set forth the standard for deciding a motion for summary judgment: [w] a must view the record 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. Pennsylvania State University v. County of Centre, 532 Pa. 142, 143-145, 615 A.2d 303, 304 (1992). In order to withstand a motion for summary judgment, a non-moving party 'must adduce sufficient evidence on an Issue essential to his case and on which he bears the burden of proof such that a jury could return a verdict in his favor. Failure to adduce 97-5332 CIVIL TERM this evidence establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.' Ertel v. Patrlot-News Co., 544 Pa. 93, 101-102, 674 A.2d 1038, 1042 (1996). Finally, we must stress that summary judgment will be granted only in those cases which are free and clear from doubt. Marks v. Tasman, 527 Pa. 132, 589 A.2d 205 (1991). (Emphasis added.) COUNT I DEFAMATION In defamation a plaintiff has the burden of proving (1) the defamatory character of the communication; (2) its publication by the defendant; (3) its application to plaintiff; (4) the understanding by the recipient of its defamatory meaning; (5) the understanding by the recipient of it as intended to be applied to the plaintiff; (6) special harm resulting to the plaintiff from its publication; and (7) abuse of any conditional privilege. 42 Pa.C.S. § 8343(a); Kryeski v. Schott Glass Technologies, Inc., 426 Pa. Super. 105 (1993), Communications are defamatory if they would harm reputation so as to lower plaintiff in the estimation of the community or deter third persons from associating or dealing with plaintiff. Zartman v. Lehigh County Humane Soc., 333 Pa. Super. 245 (1984). This centers on the effect the communications would be fairly calculated to produce and the impression they would engender in the minds of those among whom they were intended to circulate. Petula v. Mellody, 138 Pa. Commw. 411 (1991). Whether communications are capable of having a defamatory meaning is a question of law for the court. If we find that communications by any defendant are capable of a defamatory meaning, it is the jury's function to determine whether they were so understood by the recipients. If we determine that any such communications are not capable of a defamatory meaning -2- they are subject to summary judgment. Livingston v. Murray, 417 Pa. Super. 202 0992). Each of plaintiffs claims of defamation will be evaluated in accordance with these principles. A. Statements Pertaining to Conflict of Interest Plaintiff alleges that defendants made and published false accusations that William Hicks as president of Fuglee, Inc., performed work for Westwood Village with a conflict of interest, and that defendants made statements that Fuglee, Inc., charged inflated and unreasonable prices.' Westwood Village has a council of five persons who are elected by the Westwood Village condominium owners. The Council is responsible for the preservation of the equity of the unit owners of Westwood Village which includes all exterior maintenance of the buildings, maintenance of the grounds and capital improvements. William Hicks first became involved as a member of the Westwood Village Community Council in 1994 as a member at large. In 1995, he became president through 1996. In 1997, he reverted to vice president. In 1998, he again became president. Property Management, Inc. is a property manager for Westwood Village. PMI solicits bids for work needed to be done in Westwood Village. PMI presents the bids it receives with its recommendations to the Council. Hicks, as council president, communicated regularly with Sue Brightbill, a PMI representative who is in charge of obtaining the bids. In 1995, PMI sent approximately ten invitations for bids for 1. Interestingly for a defamation case, Fuglee's president, William Hicks, testified in a deposition that he took the name "Fuglee" for his corporation knowing that the term was generally understood to mean 'lucking ugly." -3- 97-5332 CIVIL TERM - . •• - landscaping, lawn care, and exterior painting. One of these invitations was sent to plaintiff Fuglee, Inc., that was not yet incorporated at that time. Hicks incorporated Fuglee, Inc., in January, 1996, after retiring from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania where he was employed for 32 years. He had no training or experience in the field of lawn care and painting other than he mowed lawns for neighbors when he was a teenager. When Hicks became the president of the Westwood Village Council in 1995, the Council was experiencing problems with its landscaping and painting contractors. The work of the previous contractors influenced Hicks in his decision to start a company to do landscaping, lawn care, and painting work. PMI received only two bids for the landscaping work at Westwood Village, and only Fuglee's bid for the painting. When PMI presented the bids to Council, Hicks recused himself from the Council's discussions and the vote on awarding contracts. When the contracts for lawn care and painting were awarded to Fuglee, Inc., there were four other council members. Two were Hicks' personal friends'who did not recuse themselves from voting. All previous contractors that had done landscaping for Westwood Village had been working on one year contracts. Commercial Lawn Care, the other bidder for the lawn care, made a bid for one year. Plaintiff's bid was for five years although the bid invitation did not seek a five year bid. The Council asked Fuglee, Inc., if it would agree to a one year contract. Plaintiff refused. Notwithstanding, the Council -4- accepted the bids for five years for the landscaping and painting and plaintiff's attorney wrote contracts in excess of $250,000 which Council signed. The alleged defamatory comments of defendants that Fuglee, Inc., obtained Its five year contracts at inflated and unreasonable prices through a conflict of interest constitutes opinion. In Kryeskl v. Schott Glass Technologies, supra, the court stated: [E]xpressions of opinion are not actionable. Baker v. Lafayette College, 350 Pa.Super. 68, 78, 504 A.2d 247, 252 (1986), aff'd, 516 Pa. 291, 532 A.2d 399 (1987). Likewise, statements which are merely annoying or embarrassing or "no more than rhetorical hyperbole" or "a vigorous epithet" are not defamatory. Redding v. Carlton, 223 Pa.Super. 136, 139, 296 A.2d 880, 881 (1972). Defendants' statements constitute elements of both truth and "vigorous epithet." When the Council was deciding to award contracts, two of plaintiff's close personal friends participated in the vote. Plaintiff himself was the president of Council. The statements of defendants are opinions relating to the hiring of plaintiff for what was an unusually long period at what defendants opined were inflated and unreasonable prices. B. Statements Pertaining to the quality of Fuglee, Inc.'s Labor Force Plaintiff alleges that defendants made false accusations that plaintiff hired and utilized untrained, substandard labor. Hicks testified in his deposition that both defendants on separate occasions complained to him about the performance of Fuglee, Inc. Before April, 1996, Hicks had never done any professional painting or lawn care work. Hicks acknowledged that in April, 1996, he and some persons in his -5- -9- '(pauiwo suOi;ello) •lagil Jo; UOlloe limo a o; asualap a;njosge ue sl ylnJl •asuago leulwuo a yIIM pa6Jeyo sum ay leyl pue 'lsaJJe sly Jol penssl uaeq pey lueneM a leyl paweal ay uayM dn;laswly 9Ae6 pue pawnlaJ 'AasJar MaN of ;uaM 'saluow luaJ ayl paloalloo ay leyl suolllsodap sly ul palliwpe luepaddy •loe;;o anssl ou lieelo sl aJayl AasJap MaN of luaM uayl pue saluow;usi ulelJao pa;oalloo luelladde;eyl loe; ayl uo saloppe JadedsMau ayl;o uollJod ayi 6ulpJe698 :pa;els elueAlAsuuad;o >Jnoo JouadnS ayl -AesJap MaN ul AlpelJodmd sum pue Aeuow;uaJ 6ulloalloo of iuanbesgns pejeaddesip elgelSUoo UOUaV4 JaMo"l a leyl pelels yoigm JadedsMau IeoOI a UI alo,IJ2 Ue woJ; lied ul pallnsaJ uouewelep pa6alle ayl !wepeq ul '(EL60 SL •JadnS Td 922 'uosw14 •n lwepeg •UOlleuJe;ap Jo; uoil0e IIAio a of asualep a;nlosqe ue si ylnJl •gnJys and;eJOOap e JanO sJaMow umul ay; ;o auo ueJ aaAoldwe Jaylouy •sseJ6 aJam Aegl ly6noyl ay asneoaq 6ulpeaM uayM paq JaMog a;o ino swnwaylueskgo pallnd Woldwe auo eldwexe ue sy •flJadoJd 9BUINA pooMlsaM o; 96ewep pue se?ajslw awos ul paunsaJ aouauadxaul nayl parry uayM ?JoM ejeo uMel pue buguled ul peouauadxaul ejaM saaAoldwe sly ;o lsow le4l pailllsal sNolH wagl Aoldwa pinoM ay 'ajgellene MJOM;o adf%4 ayl ul palsaJalul sum pue ylinn MJoM of alge aq pinoM ay leyl euoawos eq of peLueas uosJad a;I leyl pagllsal aH •sluawannbei LJules Jlayl lno a pug pue suosied ayl mewalul pinoM ay 6uuly uayM leyl pagusal sMolH •UOilewJO; sll aouis seeAoldwa pZ of 9l AlalewixoJdde pay sey Puleld •wayl 96ewep of lou se os sgnJys wul of JeaA;o awll ly6u ayl of luena1aJ a6paiMOU?aney;ou pip Jloldwo.. MR IIAIO Z£ES-L6 97.5332 CIVIL TERM employ did not have knowledge relevant to the right time of year to trim shrubs so as not to damage them. Plaintiff has had approximately 15 to 20 employees since its formation. Hicks testified that when hiring he would interview the persons and find out their salary requirements. He testified that if a person seemed to be someone that he would be able to work with and was interested in the type of work available, he would employ them. Hicks testified that most of his employees were inexperienced in painting and lawn care work when hired. Their inexperience resulted in some mistakes and damage to Westwood Village property. As an example one employee pulled chrysanthemums out of a flower bed when weeding because he thought they were grass. Another employee ran one of the lawn mowers over a decorative shrub. Truth is an absolute defense to a civil action for defamation. Badami v. Dimson, 226 Pa. Super. 75 (1973). In Badaml, the alleged defamation resulted in part from an article in a local newspaper which stated that a Lower Merion constable disappeared subsequent to collecting rent money and was purportedly in New Jersey. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania stated: Regarding the portion of the newspaper articles on the fact that appellant collected certain rent monies and then went to New Jersey there is clearly no issue of fact. Appellant admitted in his depositions that he collected the rent monies, went to New Jersey, returned and gave himself up when he learned that a warrant had been issued for his arrest, and that he was charged with a criminal offense. Truth is an absolute defense to a civil action for libel. (citations omitted). .6- Hicks has admitted in his deposition that the statements pertaining to the quality of Fuglee, Inc.'s labor force are true because, in fact, Fuglee, Inc., hired and utilized some untrained labor. Defendants' statements concerning the quality of plaintiff's labor force constitute an expression of opinion. Statements of opinion not founded on defamatory facts are not actionable. Baker v. Lafayette College, 350 Pa. Super. 68 (1986). Based upon their experience with plaintiff's labor force, defendants opined that it provided substandard services as a result of their lack of experience and training. C. Statements Pertaining to the Contracts Being Awarded on a Noncompetitive Basis Plaintiff alleges that defendants made false accusations that contracts between Westwood Village and plaintiff were awarded on a noncompetitive basis. Those statements pertain to the action of the Westwood Village Council. In order to properly state a cause of action for defamation, a plaintiff has the burden of proving that the statement applies to the plaintiff. 42 Pa.C.S. § 8343(a). D. Statements Pertaining to the Use of Watered-Down Paint Plaintiff alleges that defendants falsely accused it of using watered-dawn paint. Hicks testified in his deposition that he believed that Ann Nissan may have made statements about plaintiff using watered-down paint but had no proof that she did. Plaintiff has the burden of proving specific defamatory communications by a defendant. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 8343(a). Hicks testified that Barbara Stoddart-Morgan falsely accused him of using watered-down paint by writing a document stating: .7. 97-5332 CIVIL TERM FOOD FOR THOUGHT: When I called Mr. Maxwell at PMI, he told me that my wood would be replaced next year since it wasn't deemed critical to be done this year (plus they ran out of $$$). 1 suggested to him that we could save $$ on paint by not wasting paint on rotten wood. Think about this for a minute. Fuglee (Bill Hicks) gets paid for painting over rotten wood this year. Next year, after the wood is replaced, he gets paid AGAIN, for painting it again. That's almost as bad as "watering down" the paint. What a waste and squandering of our money!!!!II (Emphasis added.) The document does not accuse plaintiff of watering down paint. E. Statements Pertaining to Fuglee, Inc.'s Intentionally Painting Over Rotten Wood Plaintiff alleges that defendants falsely accused it of deliberately and intentionally painting over rotten wood so as to create additional work. This allegation arose as a result of a picture with accompanying text that was posted on the Westwood Village bulletin board. The text stated: THIS IS WHAT FUGLEE, INC. WAS GOING TO PAINT!!! (Bill Hicks told me, 'he'll paint anything that's there') UNTIL I NOTIFIED SHERRI AKENS WHO HALTED THE PAINTING UNTIL THE ROTTED WOOD WAS REPLACED ON THE SHED AND ON 2 SIDES OF MY FENCE, BUT THE SAME WARPED GATE WAS REINSTALLED. LOOKS MUCH BETTER NOW SINCE PAINTED - BUT THE WARPED GATE CAN'T BE CLOSED? 234 BRIAN DRIVE Hicks testified in his deposition that it is his policy to paint what is there -8- regardless of its condition. He testified that Fuglee, Inc., has painted over rotten wood and that it would paint over such wood before it was replaced. He stated that he was going to repaint the wood in Barbara Stoddart-Morgan's area of Westwood Village regardless of when the wood was to be replaced because he was not responsible for replacing the wood or determining when it should be replaced. Truth is an absolute defense. F. Statements Pertaining to Grass Clippings on the Sidewalk Plaintiff maintains that defendants committed defamation by posting a photograph depicting grass clippings on a sidewalk. The photograph shows a significant amount of grass clippings on a sidewalk of Westwood Village with a writing accompanying it that states: "THE WESTWOOD VILLAGE 'SIDEWALK TREATMENT' NO SWEEPING, NO CLEANING, NO BLOWING: AS PER CONTRACTH" In his deposition, Hicks opined that the photograph was taken during the day while work was in progress in either the late morning or early afternoon. He based that opinion on the appearance of shadows in the pictures. When asked whether the photograph could have been taken the day after the area depicted was mowed, Hicks responded, "Possibly." Hicks could not be certain that his crew left the site without blowing the sidewalk clear on the day before the photograph was taken. The actions of defendant constitute both the truth and vigorous epitaph. G. Statements Pertaining to Unprofessional Techniques Employed by Fuglee, Inc. Plaintiff alleges that defendants made statements to other residents of the .9- 97-5332 CIVIL TERM Westwood Village community to the effect that the work of plaintiff was faulty, unsatisfactory and unprofessional. These statements included criticism of painting over rotten wood, unprofessional techniques used in applying the paint, inappropriate painting techniques, bushes being trimmed at the wrong time of the year, damage caused to vegetation and shrubs, insecticides and fertilizers applied at inappropriate times, maintenance and tan barking of beds in an unprofessional and unsatisfactory manner, and that plaintiff was inappropriately insured. Such statements represent defendants' opinions as to the quality of plaintiff's work. For the foregoing reasons, summary judgment must be entered as to all of the allegations in plaintiff's counts alleging defamation. COUNT II •- INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS In Triffin v. Janssen, 426 Pa. Super. 57 (1993), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania set forth the elemenis of the tort of intentional interference with contractual relations: (1) the existence of a contractual relationship, (2) an intent on the part of defendant to harm the plaintiff by interfering with that contractual relationship, (3) the absence of a privilege of justification for such interference, and (4) damages resulting from defendants' conduct. A party that cannot prove actual pecuniary loss cannot prevail on a count of intentional interference with contractual relations solely on the basis of alleged harm to that party's business reputation. Shiner v. Moriarity, 706 A,2d 1228 (Pa. Super. 1998). Hicks testified in his deposition that he is not aware of not having been awarded any contracts because of -10- the alleged conduct of defendants. None of his existing contracts, Including the 'WestWood Village contract, have been cancelled or altered. He knows of no loss as a result of the allegations he has made against defendants. Accordingly, summary judgment must be entered on the count alleging intentional interference with contractual relations. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _R day of May, 1999, IT IS ORDERED: (1) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED against defendant Ann Nissan. (2) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED against defendant Barbara Stoddart-Morgan. By the,.Court, Edgar B. 84j y, J. William T. Smith, Esquire For Plaintiff Kevin C. McNamara, Esquire For Ann Nissan Mark W. Allshouse, Esquire For Barbara Stoddart-Morgan :sea 11 -11- a d a 234 Brian Drive Enola PA 17025 y February 23, 1997 Mr. William Hicks, President Council of Westwood Village 650 Westwood Drive Enola PA 17025 Dear Mr. President: In response to your letter of February 20, 1997, this is to advise that, as a new owner at Westwood Village, I regret my decision to purchase into this Condominium Association which represents not only total disregard for the law, but for the unit owners. As far as I am concerned, what is happening is criminal and, in good conscience, you should resign or be prosecuted for what you have done to this Association. As you state in the February 20, 1997 letter, all of this fighting among the two governing bodies will result in considerable cost - regardless of the outcome - an additional expense to the unit owners. This is outrageous to say the least and that is why I, personally, intend to pursue a personal lawsuit against both entities for violating my rights as an owner in this Condominium Association. Since you have temporarily suspended all exterior maintenance except where structural integrity is at issue; all exterior painting for 1997, and limited lawn care to only the mowing of the lawns - the resumption of which is subject to the availability of funds upon resolution of this Association "war," I, too, am suspending payment of any association fee until I am assured that your deliberate attempt to destroy this community will not result in extraordinary costs to the homeowners who should not be penalized for your criminal behavior. Therefore, please consider this a written dispute associated with payment of my association fee until this matter is resolved in a manner that is not detrimental to the homeowners. Sincerely, Barbara A. StoddZart ?` cc: Sherri Akens, V. President, Westwood Village Council Mary Dean, Secretary, Westwood Village Council William Bopp, Treasurer, Westwood Village Council Anne Nisson, President, Westwood Village Community J Association Property Mgt., Inc. (Westwood Village) Richard Freeburn, Esq. Fxf+ 3 K 't E/HIBr . r ,. l`- March 24, 1997 ' Ms. Barbara A. Stoddart 234 Brian Drive Enola, Pa 17025 Dear Ms. Stoddan: I am responding to your letter of February 23, 1997, a copy of which is attached. I have thought long and hard about whether or not I would respond and the exact content of my response. I find it beyond comprehension that, without any discussion with the person involved, such personal attacks would be committed to writing. 1 have turned your letter over to my attorney for review. Any further response to this letter will be made in the legal arena. Sincerely William H. Hicks 828 Lee Lane Enola, Pa 17025 .i..E EXH R i 234 Brian Drive Enola, PA 17025 March 21, 1997 Westwood Village Condominium Assoc. % Property Management Inc. P.O. Box 522 Lemoyne PA 17043-0622 Dear PMI: Enclosed is my check for March's monthly assessment of $64.00 and $33.00 for a special assessment, for a total of $97.00. The $33.00 special assessment is being paid under protest since Council, by its own admission, has earmarked this special assessment to rebuild the "reserve funds" which have unexplainably been exhausted. I am also waiting on certain repairs which were contingent on my decision to purchase this unit in November, 1996, namely, repair or replacement of the concrete on the patio, rotten wood on my shed, and a warped gate that cannot be latched, not to mention the roof. You were also notified that there appears to be a blockage in the sewer drainage pipe. When are these repairs goings to be accomplished? As a property management agency, it appears that "the tail is wagging the dog." Last Saturday, a NEW sidewalk was constructed just a few doors from my unit, while 234 Brian Drive's exterior maintenance (as well as many others) continues to be grossly neglected. I have the following questions: 1. Was PA One Call notified for approval from the various utility companies involved prior to digging which is a , state law when any digging is to be done, whether on private or public property? 2. Why was the new sidewalk installed? Was it an emergency (since a deadline of March 18th was given to the contractor to have this job done). Who benefitted from the new sidewalk? 3. Who authorized the new sidewalk and under what code of regulation was the new construction authorized? 4. What was the cost of the sidewalk installation? 5. Were competitive bids solicited and received? 6. Is the work guaranteed (since the temperature was below freezing when the concrete was poured)? 7. Were overtime wages paid since the work was done on a Saturday (not a normal work day)? S. Is the cost of this new sidewalk being borne by the party for whom it was installed, or considered a common expense to be paid by all unit owners? XH J F Property Management, Inc. March 21, 1997 Page Two Further, I understand that, on many occasions in the past, extensive damage to utility lines has resulted from unlawful digging on this property as well as the deliberate and willfull damage to lawns and landscaping caused by construction vehicles. In all of these cases, were the costs of such repairs considered common expenses and passed onto the unit owners? If so, this could be construed as gross negligence on the part of all persons responsible for this waste and squandering of homeowners, assessment fees, WHICH WILL NOT CONTINUE TO BE TOLERATED. I respectfully request and expect answers to these questions. Very truly yours, Barbara Stoddart-Morgan Attachment CC: Council Members 44chard Freeburn, Esq. lt,7 +vi Homeowners PLEASE POST THIS COMMUNICATION IN THE BULLETIN BOARD AT THE MAIL KIOSH. THANK YOU. ,J } ??`;;t r X 234 Brian Drive Enola, PA 17025 March 20, 1997 Council of Westwood Village 650 Westwood Drive Enola, PA 17025 Subject: 1997 Election of Council Officers Dear Council of Westwood Village: Since I am interested in serving on this Council, I am writing for clarification of what Council seats are up for election this year. flow many seats are on Council? Please identify each one. Your November, 1996 Newsletter states that there will be three (3) seats up for election - 1. the I-year (remaining) seat of Vice President; 2. Secretary (3-year term), and 3. Treasurer (3-year term). With reference to the 1-year (remaining) seat of Vice President, does that mean the Vice President term expires upon the 1997 election - or that the 1-year remaining includes 1997, thus expiring upon the 1996 election? What was the term of office at the time Mr. Schader was elected as Vice President? I note that Ms. Akens is currently filling the seat of Vice- President. Was she appointed to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Shader and, if so, when was this appointment made? Then in your March, 1997 Newsletter, you state that there are 2 seats up for election - the Secretary and the Treasurer--one less than there was in November. So I can have a better understanding of this matter, please provide me with the 1994, 1995, and 1996 election results including the seats that were elected and their terms of office for each year's election. I would also appreciate receiving any information on "appointed" (as opposed to elected) members of Council during 1994, 1995, and 1996 and what unexpired terms the appointees filled. Your cooperation regarding this request will be appreciated. Very truly yours, Barbara A. Stoddart-Morgarf F_? f '_?) March 27, 1997 Ms. Barbara A. Stoddart 234 Brian Drive Enola, Pa 17025 Dear Ms. Stoddart: I am responding to your letters of March 20 and 21 1997, copies of which are attached. The copies attached will facilitate your cross referencing responses to questions or comments. I would suggest you reads the "Code of Regulations" in your condominium documents. The Code is the underlying document governing Councils actions. 1 also recommend the reading of the "By-laws of Westwood Village Community Association, Inc," which are the governing documents of the Board of Directors. These two documents provide considerable insight into the operations of the two governing bodies. In the Code Article V covers the offices, removal and ^*? process for filling vacancies within the Council. Article IV covers the number of Council seats +•? and the election process to Council. It also covers removal ofa Councilperson and the meeting processes, Of particular interest at this time is Article VII in its total with Paras 2, 3, 4, and 5 of special note. The 1996 election was for two seats for three year terns. The candidates were Sherri Akens, Lois Allender, and William Hicks. The results of the vote were Sherri Akens 67 votes, William Hicks 54 votes and Lois Allender 42 votes. Ms Akens and Mr Hicks were elected to three year terms ending in 1999. Council than adjourned and the new Council convened and organized itself by electing William Hicks president, Jack Shader vice president, Mary Dean secretary and William Bopp treasurer. When vice president Shader passed away Council elected Sherri Akens vice president. Council appointed Grace Lovell to fulfill Jack Shader's term at it's March 1997 meeting. The current terms of office are: William Hicks 1999 Sherri Akens Grace Lovell William Bopp Mary Dean After the election to be held o itself. 1999 1998 1997- 1997- n May 1, 1997 the newly elected Council will meet and organize The 1995 election saw the election of Jack Shader to a three year term, William Bopp and Mary Dean to two year terms. Mr Robinson continued to serve his last year. Only WilUam F0 F_', Hicks continued as appointed to complete his one year term. In 1994 Mr Ronald Dli soon was president of Council and to my knowledge no election was held. When Mr Nysso/n appointed me to Council the only elected Councilperson was Mr Daniel Robinson who had one year remaining on his term. With Mr Nisson's resignation from Council in January 19961(copy attached) and the resignation of Mr George Bailos Council initiated a process that provided for the election of all Council persons in 1995 and 1996. The apr.-',,ntment of Ms Lovell in accordance with Article V Para 9 restores Council to five active members ers and reestablishes the appointment process as a viable option. In your letter of March 21, 1997 you indicate your assessment is being paid under protest. It is my understanding that the Condominium Laws of Pennsylvania do not provide for a protest process such as is found in the Renters Laws. I am not a lawyer and would recommend you discuss this with your attorney as withholding of payment will lead to the implementation of the collections process adopted last year (copy attached) which is automatically followed by PMI as our management and collections agent. This Council has taken its collections responsibilities very seriously and was forced to proceed to Sheriffs's Sale against one unit owner who would not continue to carry their fair share of the burden as outlined in Article VII of the Code. I'm not sure who provided you with the assurances that repairs to your patio, shed, gate, and sewer, or any other work, would be completed to secure the sale of the Unit at 234 Brian. I am sure it was not any member of Council or PMI. We all know better than to make promises we may not be able to fulfill. You should, again, consult your attorney to determine who you have a claim against, if one exists. I can tell you that you live in Zone 3 and that, to the extent funds are available, wood restoration will be concentrated in Zone 3 in 1997. Zone 3 is also scheduled to be repainted in 1997. I do not know if the specific repairs you list are included in that work effort as PMI is still in the process of evaluating the scope of the job so that it can be placed out for bid. 1 do know that Council has not receiycd a request to evaluate your concrete work and place it in the listing of concrete work to be done. Sever ro Pmr eud 4cKN0WL6eyedJyA1Vl You are quite correct in noting a new sidewalk has been installed. Council deliberated for five months in 1996 before approving the construction of that walk. Some residents were strongly opposed to the wqk so Council was doubly cautious in its' review. The recommendations of the real estate sales agents listing those properties that a sidewalk would increase the overall salability and value of those units (resulting in higher 'comparable' for the entire community); the recommendation of the East Pennsboro Fire Marshall and the Summerdale Fire Company that a sidewalk would improve emergency access to these units; and the listing of these Units as having a Brian Drive address by the U. S. Post Office were all factors in the decision. The decision by Council was pass bcl'ore you bought your unit and the contract was let in the fall of 1996. Council believed the work needed to be done as soon as possible and, therefore, told the contractor to do the work. If the work is unsatisfactorily preformed or the workmanship is not acceptable, Council and/or PMI will take those steps necessary to protect Westwood Village's interests. The contract was a fixed price contract. The sidewalk is, in Councils view, in the best interest of all 181 unit owners and was completed out of Council's regular budget. I'm not sure of the source, though I could probably guess, of your information concerning ? "extensive damage to utility lines","unlawful digging",'deliberate and willful damage to lawns" I? etc but a person who has been a resident for only four months should be careful about believing and acting upon such information. I know you have not discussed any of your concerns with any Council person. You have not made specific allegations that can be investigated. You have, therefore, seriously discredited yourself with Council by your accusations without so much as a single contact or investigatable action, You may believe what you wish. You should be very careful about accusations and name calling unless you are sure you can prove what you are saying in a court of law. Council members take their responsibilities and their good names very seriously. You asked to be considered to serve on Council. Given your lack of effort in contacting current Council,persons, your obvious high level of misinformation, andihe obvious conclusion that you haven't read the Code or B Laws I'm not sure what you bcliwr rccumiiiends ou to the --- - --- y nominating committee. In spite of these efforts by yourself to discredit yourself I'm sure the nominating committee of Council will give your request for consideration it's full consideration. You might find it informative to contact current Council members and get their views on those issues that concern you. All Council members find a discussion of the issues face to face has a much better effect than a series of written missiles. If I can provide further information please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely Yours William H. Hicks President of Council AUG 61898 WILLIAM T. SMITH ATTORNEY AT LAW 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 561.2677 FAX (717) 561.2682 August 5, 1998 Kevin McNamara, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer 305 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 RE: Fuglee, Inc. v. Nissan and Morgan Dear Kevin: Please find enclosed a copy of the July 21, 1997 memo to the Westwood Village homeowners by your client, Barbara Morgan. Apparently the lawsuit hasn't stopped her, and I am therefore enclosing her May 19, 1998 letter to the Westwood Village homeowners. •'? Also enclosed are three letters, written in 1996, from Property Management, Inc. to the Council of Westwood Village, indicating that they are monitoring the work of Fuglee, Inc. Also, in his deposition Mr. Hicks was unsure as to whether or not the opinion letter of March 12, 1997 from Richard Rubin was distributed before the meeting. He has since, upon reviewing his files, established that it was so included. Also find enclosed pictures of the bulletin board which is used in an electioneering effort against Mr. Hicks. You will note that the percentages on the results are totally in error. I would suggest you and I sit down without our clients and see if we can't work out this case and the Bopp case. --1 I will await your reply. Sincerely, William T. Smith J WTS/jab Enclosures C:\aalce dac3T1ienu\Fu81ee\MeNa=m Ictter98-08.05.wpd EX [4 ?'' WILLIAM T. SMITH ATTORNEY AT LAW 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 561.2677 FAX (717) 561.2682 November 27, 1999 Barbara A. Morgan 141 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 IN RE: Barbara A. Morgan vs Fugl Inc Dear Ms. Morgan: Last week I sent you Preliminary Objections to your Complaint in connection with the above captioned matter. Prior to the disposition of my Preliminary Objections I am writing to seek dates from you as to your availability at the end of March or beginning of April when we take your deposition in this case. As you know, Mr. Hicks is not available for depositions in January, February and the first two weeks in March. Also, it is my charge to tell you that Fuglee, Inc. and Mr. Hicks intend to file a Counter- claim against you for $60,000.00 because of the loss of the contract that he had which you caused to be terminated. You will recall that one of the reasons Judge Bailey found in your favor was, at that point, Fuglee had no real damage. However, since the time of his decision you have, in fact, caused Fuglee's contract to be canceled and caused him a loss in excess of $60,000.00. He fully intends to file a Counterclaim in this matter to recover that amount. If you have any questions on the above or the intentions of my client, kindly feel free to contact me. Sinnccerely, L1a ) . William T. Smith WTS/cac t A? r-• N F cS;- C%i = ? ? U.. .S .TJ(L C:j o U { l BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff VL FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIM TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IMPORTANT NOTICE TO: FUGLEE, INC., Attn: DATE: June 13, 2000 William H. Hicks, President Pursuant to Rule 237-5 of Civil Procedure Rules, you are in default because you have failed to respond to the Plaintiffs "More Specific Pleading and New Matter" within the thirty (30) day deadline from service thereof on January 24, 2000. Unless you act within ten (10) days from the date of this notice, a judgment may be entered against you without a hearing and you may lose your property or other important rights. Date: 6- -rC Respectfully subrnitted, 411 L -LS-IA rbara I ;r ?yc'U Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 717-732-7952(ID 717-255-6514(W) v LLI C1 1 (, 11 a. z.^1 I ` i BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff VS. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99-5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara A. Morgan, pro se, hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Default on this date by placing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid, Registered Mail, Restricted Delivery, addressed to: Mr. William H. Hicks, President uglee, Inc. (Defendant) Enola PA 1702 125 North Enola Drive A copy was also placed in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid, addressed to: William T. Smith, Esq Attorney for Defendant 3747 Deny Street Harrisburg PA 17111 Barbara A. Morgan Date: li /?-CO Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 1702 BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff va. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99.5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION I, Barbara A. Morgan, Plaintiff, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Notice of Default are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 PA C,S. subsection 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Respectfully submitted, Date: i - 13• nG " 4ar&A.'Mir- 6M//l "li Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 717-732-7952(H) 717.255-6514(W) Lr lJ? J ?c 7= .IJ ? tl_IQ I Q O C? BARBARA A. MORGAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY V. FUGLEE, INC. 99-5664 Defendant Civil Term AMENDED COMPLAWT AND NOW, this 27th day of November, 2000, comes Barbara A. Morgan, (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff'), and files this Amended Complaint at law whereof the following is a statement, to wit: Plaintiff is an adult individual presently residing at 141 South Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff formerly resided and owned a unit located at 234 Brian Drive, Westwood Village Condominium, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania from approximately November, 1996 through September, 1998. 3. Fuglee, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") is a Pennsylvania Corporation with its principal place of business at 125 N. Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Fuglee, Inc, was incorporated during the month of January, 1996. The President of Fuglee, Inc. is William H Hicks. 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter as the conduct on which the Complaint is based occurred in Cumberland County, East Pennsboro Township, Enola, Pennsylvania. 5. The Plaintiff, at all times mentioned herein, owned a unit in Westwood Village Condominium. As an owner of real estate in Westwood Village Condominium, Plaintiff paid monthly condominium fees to the Council of Westwood Village Condominium, a governing body on which William H. Hicks, also President of Fuglee, Inc., served at all times mentioned herein. The fees paid by Plaintiff were for various upkeep of the common elements such as lawn care and painting of the exterior of the units. Defendant Fuglee, Inc. held a five (5) year contract for the lawn care and painting services at all times mentioned herein. 6. The Defendant, at all times mentioned herein, performed lawn care services and painting services. Said contracts were awarded to Defendant while he held the position of Vice-President of Council during the month of March, 1996 by the Council of Westwood Village Condominium for five (5) year terms each. 7. The Westwood Village Condominium Council is a body of 5 individuals elected by the unit owners and charged with the responsibility to maintain the common elements in a manner to maintain the integrity and value of the units and common grounds in accordance with the governing documents. 8. Westwood Village Condominium is governed under the Unit Property Act of 1963, a Declaration, and a Code of Regulations. Council is one of two governing bodies of Westwood Village Condominium. The other governing body is the Westwood Village Community Association, inc., the Board of Directors. 9. Upon Plaintiffs ownership at Westwood Village Condominium, serious problems existed in the community associated with complaints about the various maintenance services and the government of the Condominium, and a concern of a conflict of interest due to the Defendant's dual role as Council president and a contractor hired by Council. Another serious conflict existed during the same time that was associated with a power struggle between Council and the Board of Directors. 10. On or about January, 1997, a special meeting was requested by the unit owners to address their concerns. Council conducted the meeting, but did not resolve the on-going issues of the unit owners. Plaintiff did not attend this meeting nor was Plaintiff aware of this meeting as Plaintiff moved into Westwood Village Condominium in November, 1996. 11. Another meeting was held on or about Mauch, 1997 which Plaintiff did attend to find out what was going on and how her monthly fees were being spent. Approximately 60 - 70 unit owners attended this meeting and raised numerous complaints and allegations. Complaints directed at Defendant were noted but not addressed as Defendant refused to speak. Plaintiff did not raise any complaints at this meeting. 12. On or about May, 1997, Council held its Annual Meeting, but refused to conduct new business because it knew or should have known that the unit owners intended to make a motion to remove William H. Hicks from Council. 13. On or about June, 1997, a class action lawsuit was filed against Council for non- compliance with the governing documents and other on-going problems in the community. Plaintiff, along with three (3) other unit owners signed the lawsuit on behalf of approximately twenty-three (23) other unit owners. 14. On or about July 21, 1997, Defendant did tell Plaintiff that the rotted wood on Plaintiffs unit, shed and patio would be painted. 15. Plaintiff halted the painting of the rotted wood by contacting PMI, the property manager, and another member of Council which resulted in wood replacement. 16. On or about August, 1997, Plaintiff began escrowing her monthly fees, along with approximately twenty-eight (28) other unit owners This action was authorized and initiated through legal counsel who provided to Council and Phu, the property manager, written notice of the unit owners' intent to escrow their fees until resolution of the pending lawsuit. 17. Approximately two months later, during the month of October 1997, Defendant filed a lawsuit against Plaintiff and another co-defendant Anne Nisson'for Defamation and Intentional Interference with a Contractual Relationship. The Complaint alleged that Plaintiff, through community publicity, defamed Defendant and interfered with contractual relationships. No other unit owners were sued by Defendant. 18. On or about may 18, 1999, Judge Bayley dismissed Defendant's suit No. 97-5332 against Plaintiff via Summary Judgment based on "truth and vigorous epitaph" and Defendant's "failure to prove actual pecuniary loss" .....................EM I 19. By admission under oath during deposition proceedings , Defendant used the legal system as a means to "to take the "ringleader" to task", a statement he denied while under oath during the District Justice proceeding. 20. This malicious abuse of process was intended to deprive Plaintiff of her rights as a Condominium unit owner; intimidate her into silence; and force her to remove herself from the community. This action brought by Defendant against Plaintiff was motivated with malicious intent because Plaintiff- a. escrowed her monthly maintenance fees pending resolution of the unit owners' lawsuit against Council; b. asserted and maintained her unit-owner rights as guaranteed by PA law; c. was a co-signer on the class-action lawsuit against Council; d. was elected by the unit owners to the Board of Directors; e. was a candidate for an elected seat on Council. In fact, in 1998, Plaintiff was elected to Council but was arbitrarily removed by Council because she had escrowed her fees. She was subsequently replaced by another ex-escrower who was also a co-signer on the lawsuit against Council. 21. In conducting her defense against this prosecution, Plaintiff was forced to prematurely and permanently withdraw funds from her retirement account to retain a lawyer. ' Anne Nisson was president of the Board of Directors at this time. 22. Plaintiff was forced to sell her unit in Westwood Village Condominium to remove herself from the source of the mental, emotional and physical distress and additional financial drain caused by this malicious and intimidating act. 23. Plaintiff was denied credit because of the lawsuit. 24. Plaintiff lost wages (leave time) from her employment to attend meetings associated with this civil proceeding. 25. Plaintiff suffered anxiety attacks because of the emotional distress associated with the lawsuit. Subsequent to Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendant continued to make malicious unfounded threats against Plaintiff to inflict additional emotional distress on Plaintiff. Letter dated November 27, 1999 from Defendant's attorney indicates an intention to take Plaintiffs deposition and advises Plaintiff that Fuglee, Inc. intends to file a Counter claim against Plaintiff for $60,000 for the loss of a contract which occurred subsequent to Judge Bayley's dismissal of Defendant's suit .................... EXH 2 2, During the two years of litgation of Defendant's action against Plaintiff, Fuglee, Inc. did not request a deposition of Plaintiff. To date, no additional attempt has been made by Defendant to schedule a deposition. 3. Plaintiff is without any knowledge of any cancellation or loss of any contract of Defendant subsequent to Judge Bayley's dismissal of Defendant's suit as Plaintiff moved from Westwood Village Condominium on October 1, 1998. THEREFORE, Defendant continued its retaliatory and malicious revenge against Plaintiff devoid of merit for the purpose of delay and to intentionally and maliciously cause further harm and damage to Plaintiff. THEREFORE, Plaintiff withdraws the settlement offer made to Defendant on October 7, 1999 via fax to which there was no response, and THEREFORE, all of the claims against Plaintiff made by Defendant were either 1) contradicted by Defendant during his deposition or, 2) true, by his own admission during his deposition. WHEREFORE, for all the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against the Defendant as follows: 1. Attorney fees in the amount of $4,800.00; .................................. EXH 3 2. Punitive damages for emotional and mental anguish in the amount of $4,000; 3. Costs of this action, if incurred; 4. Court costs and costs of $95.00 on the Judgment entered by District Justice in favor of Plaintiff on September 7,1999; 5. And such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted, Date: '1 -60 - d L e-- / Barbara A. Morgan, bro?ge Plaintiff 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 717-732-7952 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Amended Complaint was served concurrently upon the following person(s) by depositing the same in the United States mail in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on this date. Mr. William H. Hicks, President Fuglee, Inc. (Defendant) 125 North Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 Date: William T. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Defendant 3747 Deny Street Harrisburg PA 17111 dt..' ? ? a - vt arbara A. Morgan, lAntiff 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 BARBARA A MORGAN PLAINTIFF V. FUGLEE, INC. DEFENDANT COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99-5664 CIVIL TERM I, Barbara A. Morgan, Plaintiff, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Amended Complaint are true and correct to be the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. subsection 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. ? Dated: 14 Barbara A. Morg n Plaintiff AFFIDAVI'T' Personally appeared before me, Barbara A. Morgan, who deposes and states that the facts set forth in the within Amended Complaint are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. Barbara A. Moig Subscribed and sworn to before me this d, 1 "4- of November, 2000. W e-?? '&' - No Pub is NOTARIAL SEAL MICHAEL G, BOWLES, Notary Public Harrisburg, Dauphin County. PA My Commission Expires March B. 2004 0 FUGLEE, INC. _ PLAINTIFF V. ANN NISSAN and BARBARA STODDART-MORGAN, DEFENDANTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 97.5332 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTIONS OF DEFENDANTS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 10 day of May, 1999, IT IS ORDERED: (1) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED against defendant Ann Nissan. (2) Summary judgment IS GRANTED and plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED V against defendant Barbara Stoddart-Morgan. William T. Smith, Esquire For Plaintiff Kevin C. McNamara, Esquire For Ann Nissan Mark W. Allshouse, Esquire For Barbara Stoddart-Morgan :sea By theCourf, Edgar B. Bay ey, J. i ExN, 1 C 0 E X N 0 ?C WILLIAM T. SMITH , ATTORNEY AT LAW 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717)561.2677 FAX(717)561.2682 November 27, 1999 Barbara A. Morgan 141 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 IN RE: Barbara A. Morgan vs Fug . In Dear Ms. Morgan: Last week I sent you Preliminary Objections to your Complaint in connection with the above captioned matter. Prior to the disposition of my Preliminary Objections I am writing to seek dates from you as to your availability at the end of March or beginning of April when we take your deposition in this case. As you know, Mr. Hicks is not available for depositions in January, February and the first two weeks in March. Also, it is my charge to tell you that Fuglee, Inc. and Mr. Hicks intend to file a Counter- claim against you for $60,000.00 because of the loss of the contract that he had which you caused to be terminated. You will recall that one of the reasons Judge Bailey found in your favor was, at that point, Fuglee had no real damage. However, since the time of his decision you have, in fact, caused Fuglee's contract to be canceled and caused him a loss in excess of $60,000.00. He fully intends to file a Counterclaim in this matter to recover that amount. If you have any questions on the above or the intentions of my client, kindly feel free to contact me. ISincerely, \ William T. Smith ?-? WTS/cac H 0 L X 3 Jul 8/1999 Saidis, Shuff 6 Masland Client Ladner Page 1 Entt 1 Explanation General Bid Trust Rc t4 Rc is Disbs Fees Inv# Acc Rt is Disbs Balance C t• 1839 - Stoddart-Morgan, Barbara M r: 97-474 Nov 7/1997 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Hrs X 110.00 100820 Office conference with Barbara Morgan re: review of case and discussion of how to proceed, Nov 10/1997 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Mrs X 110.00 100821 Prepared preliminary objections; conducted research on privilege; set up file; memo to file. Nov 10/1997 BARBARA BTODOARO MORGAN 160189 PET - Retainer NOV 10/1997 BARBARA STODDART MORGAN 160192 PIT - Retainer ADJUSTMENT Nov 17/1997 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 110.00 100822 Telephone conference with client re: recent far re: letter to PMI. Nov 19/1997 BARBARA 140RGAN 160195 RET - Retainer Jan 26/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 firs X 110.00 100823 Reviewed complaint; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara; letter to client, Feb 17/1998 Lawyer: OB 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100824 Telephone conference with Barb re: status Of civil action. `.> Mar 4/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 100825 Telephone conference with Barb Morgan re: status; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara; memo to file; called Atty. Smith. MI/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.40 Mrs X 110.00 100826 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara. Mar 20/1998 Lawyer: 15 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 100827 Phone conference with Scott Moore re: evidence. Mar 20/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.70 Mrs X 110.00 100828 Reviewed complaint; letter to client; Prepared interrogatories; memo to file; research on privilege re: int.int. with contract. Mar 21/1990 Lawyer: 08 0.40 Mrs X 110.00 100829 Reviewed contracts and other documents relating to dispute, Mar 25/1998 Lawyer: 08 0,30 Mrs X 110.00 100830 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara re: discovery; revised discovery. Mar 26/1998 TRANSFER FROM MATTER H97-31 115520 Transfer from Trust TRANSFER PER KML/SDM Mar 26/1998 TRANSFER TO MATTER h97-31 115526 CORRECT ENTRY Apr 9/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.80 Hrs X 110.00 100831 Office conference with Barb re: answer and new matter. Apr 10/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.80 Mrs X 110.00 100832 Began preparing answer to complaint; reviewed correspondence from client. Apr 13/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Hrs X 110.00 100833 Preparing first draft of answer. Af" x/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 110.00 ?LA00834 Reviewed answer filed by Anne Nissan, Apr 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.70 Hrs X 110.00 100835 Revisions to answer. Apr 15/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Hrs X 110.00 100836 Revisions to answer. Apr 16/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.70 Hrs X 110.00 100837 Office conference with Barb re: Answer; revisions to Answer; letter to counsel. 110.00 12727 165.00 12727 500.00 12727 -500.00 12727 22.00 12727 1000.00 12727 33.00 12727 22.00 12727 55.00 12727 44.00 12727 55.00 12727 187.00 12727 44.00 12727 33.00 12727 TT 16149 1 -500.00 500.00 TT 16149 1 500.00 0.00 198.00 12727 198.00 12727 165.00 12727 22.00 12727 77.00 12727 110.00 12727 77.00 12727 Exbl 3 Jul 8/1999 Saidis, Snuff 6 Masland Page 2 Client Ledger ALL DATES Date• Received From / Paid To Che4 General Bid Trust Entr/Y Explanation RcptB Rcpts Diana Fees Inv# Acc Rcpts Disbs Balance 1 3/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 12727 12781 FEES 1617.00 RCPTS 1000.00 May 13/1998 Fees To Lawyer 08 100838 ADJ Nay 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100839 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara's office re: deposition of Hicks. May 26/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100840 Letter to Barb Morgan; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara's office. Jun 12/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 13129 13181 FEES 44.00 Jun 15/1998 BARBARA MORGAN 160198 PMT - Client Paying Bill Jun 16/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100841 Reviewed correspondence; letter to Atty. McNamara; letter to Atty. Smith re: discovery. Jun 24/1998 Lawyer; 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100842 Telephone conference with Barb re: discovery and other matters of concern to her; revisions to discovery; called Atty. McNamara. Jun 79/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100843 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: deposition of Hicks. Jul 10/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 13247 13299 FEES 88.00 Jul 28/1998 BARB MORGAN 160201 PHI - Client Paying Bill A06/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100844 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: deposition. Aug 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100845 Reviewed correspondence; letter to client. Aug 20/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100846 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara re: setlement demand. Aug 25/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100847 Reviewed correspondence; letter to Barbara. Sep 15/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100848 Reviewed letter from Barb; telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: transcript of deposition. Sep 21/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 100849 Began reviewing deposition transcript for motion. Sep 22/1998 Thomas, Thomas 6 Hafer 14767 119756 Deposition transcript of William Hicks Sep 30/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 14087 14134 FEES 110.00 Nov 6/1998 Lawyer: 09 1.50 Mrs X 110.00 100850 Reviewing deposition transcript of Bill Hicks; began preparation for motion; telephone conference with Barb Morgan. Nov 9/1998 Lawyer: 08 5.80 Mrs X 110.00 100851 Finished reviewing deposition transcript; preparing motion; research. U /1998 Lawyer: 08 3.50 Mrs X 110.00 00852 Completed first draft of motion for summary judgment; telephone conference with Kevin McNamara. Nov 12/1998 Lawyer: 08 2.20 Mrs X 110.00 100853 Revisions to Brief. Nov 13/1998 Lawyer: 08 5.50 Mrs X 110.00 100854 Continued revisions and additions to Brief. 0.00 12127 -200.00 12727 22.00 13129 22.00 13129 0.00 13129 417.00 33.00 13241 33.00 13247 22.00 13247 0.00 13247 37.50 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 55.00 15189 49.80 15189 0.00 14087 165.00 15189 638.00 15189 385.00 15189 242.00 15189 605.00 15109 Jul 8/1999 Saidis, Shuff 6 Masland Page 3 Client Ledger ALL DATES Date Received From / Paid To CheX General Bid Trust Entry4 Explanation Rcpt4 Rcpts Disbs Fees Inv# Act Repts Disbs Balance 7/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100855 Revisions to brief. Nov 18/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100856 Revisions and additional research. Nov 19/1998 Lawyer: 08 2.00 Mrs X 110.00 100857 Revisions to brief and motion; drafted affidavit. Nov 24/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100858 Revisions to affidavit; brief and motion; letter to Barbara. Dec 31/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100859 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: brief. Jan 4/1999 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Mrs X 110.00 100860 Revisions to Brief. Jan 8/1999 Lawyer: 08 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 100861 Revisions to motion; affidavit and brief. Jan 11/1999 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100862 Office conference with Barb Morgan re: signing affidavit and verification. Jan 12/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15189 15226 FEES 2162.00 DISBS 49.80 Jan 12/1999 Fees To Lawyer 08 100863 ADJ Jan 12/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.40 Mrs X 110.00 100864 Review motion and letter to client; entry of appearance. Feb 5/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15511 15548 FEES 297.D0 F 2/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100865 Letter to client. Fe 19/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100866 Telephone call to client on oral argument. Feb 28/1999 Lawyer: 21 2.00 Hrs X 110.00 100867 Prepare for Oral Argument; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara. Mar 2/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100868 Finalize preparations for hearing. Mar 3/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100869 Oral argument on summary judgment motion. Mar 9/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15863 15899 FEES 264.00 Mar 15/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.30 Hrs X 110.00 100870 Review District Justice Rule and telephone conference with client re: counsel matter. Mar 17/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100871 Conference with client on District Justice matter. Mar 17/1999 BARBARA STODDARD MORGAN 160204 PMT - Client Paying Bill Mar 17/1999 BARBARA STODDARD MORGAN 160207 PMT - Client Paying Bill Apr 9/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 101913 Telephone conference re: case status of Fuglee and District Justice. Apr 13/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16149 181123 FEES 363.00 A,""^{9/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 182434 Telephone call re: procedure question. May 14/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16451 185986 FEES 55.00 Jun 9/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16810 189584 Jul 2/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 125.00 192975 Review case law on abuse of civil process and begin transcripts. 110.00 15189 110.00 15189 220.00 15109 110.00 15189 22.00 15189 165.00 15511 55.00 15511 33.00 15511 0.00 15189 -500.00 15189 44.00 15511 0.00 15511 22.00 15863 22.00 15863 220.00 15863 110.00 16149 110.00 16149 0.00 15863 33. OU 16149 110.00 16149 500.00 110.00 33.00 16451 0.00 16149 22.00 16451 0.00 16451 0.00 16810 125.00 Jul 8/1999 Saidis, Shuff 6 Masland Page 4 Client Ledger ALL DATES Date Received From / Paid To Chep General Bid Trust Entry# Explanation RcptN Rcpts Disbs Fees Inv1 Acc Rcpts Disbs Balance J /1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 125.00 U0693164 Review Hick's deposition (24R, pgs.) for possible action. 125.00 I __________________ UNBILLED __________________ I_____________ ______ BILLED - --------- ----------- -- I_______ BALANCES ------- TOTALS CHE+ RECOV FEES+ TOTAL DISBS + FEES + TAX - RECEIPTS - A/R TRUST PERIOD 0.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 49.80 4800.00 0.00 2064.50 2785.30 0.00 END DATE 0.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 49,80 4800.00 0.00 2064.50 2785.30 0.00 I _____________ _____ UNBILLED ________ __________ I_ _______ ___ __BILLS _ ______ __ __ ______,B ANCES ------- TOTALS CHE+ RECOV FEES+ TOTAL DISB + FEES + TAX r / RECEIPTS A/R TRUST 0.00 0100 250.00 250.00 4 .BO 4800.00 0.00 2064.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 250,00 250.00 4 .B 4800.00 0.00 2064.5 0.00 Report: Finished: Date Range: Matters: Clients: Major Clients: Responsible Lawyers: Introducing Lawyers: Assigned Lawyers: Types Of Law: Sort by Reap Lawyer: New page for each Lawyer: New page for each Matter: Tot is Only: Fotals Only: EnYYYYYn as Shown - Billed: Entries Shown - Disbursements: Entries Shown - Receipts: Entries Shown - Trust: Entries Shown - Time or Fees: Working Lawyer only: Include matters with retainer bal: Ver: Ctlent . Le9g2r Thursday, July 08, 1999 at 10:49:31 AM ALL DATES 97-474 All All All All All All No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 4.05.990426 V 0 a. ?F ? l1?0. . v o V A, 4OX V 1. 1? BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff VS. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99-5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT TO: FUGLEE, INC., Attn: William H. Hicks, President DATE: April 9, 2001 Pursuant to Rule 237-1 of Civil Procedure Rules, you are in default because you have failed to file in writing with the Court your defenses or new preliminary objections to the claims set forth against you in the Amended Complaint which was filed by Plaintiff on February 9, 2001. Unless you act within ten (10) days from the date of this notice, a judgment may be entered against you in the amount of $5,895.00 without a hearing and you may lose your property or other important rights. Notice of Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default Page Two April 9, 2001 The amount of $59895.00 represents the following: $4800.00 paid to attorney (copy enclosed) $95.00 District Justice Filing Fee for Judgment entered in my favor (copy attached) $500.00 in wages lost due to my attendance at District Justice and Court Hearings. $500.00 interest lost due to early withdrawal of retirement monies to pay attorney to defend a groundless lawsuit dismissed by Judge Bayley on May 18, 1999. Respectfully submitted, Date: 'T?9-0/ 717-732-7952(H) Barbara A. Morga Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enoln Drive Enola PA 17025 .J yb 5,\ N `- a ? p ee p ?? N R P ?M r ? r I ? yy x f9 ? 8 e g§ ? O :g y g LL b 3 :? 'y 12 0529 2hhE 2000 H hE 6604 0 ni ti ru - S m ti 0 O O mm tr 0 r uw NW 1 I O f MO MN a . om g'?_° ry ' '- '- =; 0 1 s ? e ;g X f: R ? J a U a U? zr ?Y 0 n? Jul 8/194 Saidis, Shuff a Masland Client Ledger Page 1 Date Received From / Paid To ALL DATES Che4i General BIG Entryl Explanation Rcptl Rcpts Diabs Fees Invl Ace Trust Rcpts Disbs Balance Client: 1839 - Stoddart-Morgan, Barbara Matter: 97-474 Nov 7/1997 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Mrs X 110 00 . 100820 Office conference with Barbara Morgan 110.0 0 12727 re: review of case and discussion of how to proceed. Nov 1011997 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Mrs X 110 00 . 100821 Prepared preliminary objections; 165.00 12727 conducted research on privilege; set up file; memo to file. Nov 10/1997 BARBARA STODDARD MORGAN 500.00 12727 160189 RET - Retainer Nov 10/1997 BARBARA STODDART MORGAN -500.00 12747 160192 RET - Retainer ADJUSTMENT Nov 17/1997 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 22.00 12727 100822 Telephone conference with client re: recent fax re: letter to PHI. Nov 19/1997 BARBARA HORGAN 1000.00 12727 160195 RET - Retainer Jan 26/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 33.00 12727 100823 Reviewed complaint; telephone conference with Arty. McNamara; letter to client. Feb 17/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 130.00 22.00 12727 100824 Telephone conference with Barb re: status of civil action. Mar 4/1998 Lawyer: 08 0,50 Mrs X 110.00 55.00 12727 100825 Telephone conference with Barb Morgan re: status; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara; memo to file; called Atty. Smith. Mar 4/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.40 Hrs X 110.00 44.00 12727 100826 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara. Mar 20/1998 Lawyer: 15 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 55.00 12727 100827 Phone conference with Scott Moore re: evidence. Mar 20/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.70 Hrs X 110.00 187.00 12727 100828 Reviewed complaint; letter to client; prepared interrogatories; memo to file; research on privilege re: intAnt. with contract. Mar 21/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.40 Mrs X 110.00 44.00 12727 100829 Reviewed contracts and other documents relating to dispute. Mar 25/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 33.00 12727 100830 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara re: discovery; revised discovery. Mar 26/1998 TRANSFER FROM MATTER H97-31 TT 16149 1 -500.00 500.00 115520 Transfer from Trust TRANSFER PER XML/SDM Mar 26/1998 TRANSFER TO MATTER h97-31 TT 16149 1 500.00 0.00 115526 CORRECT ENTRY Apr 9/1998 Lawyer: OB 1.80 Hrs X 110.00 198.00 12727 100831 Office conference with Barb re: answer and new matter. Apr 10/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.80 Mrs X 110.00 198.00 12727 100832 Began preparing answer to complaint; reviewed correspondence from client. Apr 13/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Mrs X 110.00 165.00 12727 100833 Preparing first draft of answer. Apr 13/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 110.00 22.00 12727 100834 Reviewed answer filed by Anne Nissan. Apr 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.70 Mrs X 110.00 77.00 12727 100835 Revisions to answer. Apr 15/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 110.00 12727 100836 Revisions to answer. Apr 16/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.70 Hrs X 110.00 77.00 12727 100837 Office conference with Barb re: Answer; Jul 8/f$99 Saidis, Shuff i Masland Page 2 Client Ledger ALL DATES Date Received From / Paid To Chel General Bld Trust Entry) Explanation RcptM Rcpts Disbs Fees Inv# Ace Rcpts Disbs Balance May 13/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 12727 12781 FEES 1617.00 RCPTS 1000.00 May 13/1998 Fees To Lawyer 08 100838 ADJ May 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100839 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara's office re: deposition of Hicks. May 26/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100840 Letter to Barb Morgan; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara's office. Jun 12/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 13129 13181 FEES 44.00 Jun 15/1998 BARBARA MORGAN 160198 PMT - Client Paying Bill Jun 16/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100841 Reviewed correspondence; letter to Atty. McNamara; latter tc Atty. Gmith re: discovery. Jun 24/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100842 Telephone conference with Barb re: discovery and other matters of concern to her; revisions to discovery; called Atty. McNamara. Jun 29/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100843 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: deposition of Hicks. Jul 10/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 13247 13299 FEES 88.00 Jul 28/1998 BARB MORGAN 160201 PMT - Client Paying Bill Aug 6/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100844 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: deposition. Aug 14/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100845 Reviewed correspondence; letter to client. Aug 20/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 110.00 100846 Telephone conference with Atty. McNamara re: setlement demand. Aug 25/1998 Lawyer: 00 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100847 Reviewed correspondence; letter to Barbara. Sep 15/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Hrs X 110.00 100848 Reviewed letter from Barb; telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: transcript of deposition. Sep 21/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.50 Hrs X 110.00 100849 Began reviewing deposition transcript for motion. Sep 22/1998 Thomas, Thomas a Hafer 14767 119756 Deposition transcript of William Hicks Sep 30/1998 BILLING ON INVOICE 14087 14134 FEES 110.00 Nov 6/1598 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Hrs X 110.00 100850 Reviewing deposition transcript of Bill Hicks; began preparation for motion; telephone conference with Barb Morgan. Nov 9/1996 Lawyer: 08 5.80 Hrs X 110.00 100851 Finished reviewing deposition transcript; preparing motion; research. Nov 10/1998 Lawyer: 08 3.50 Hrs X 110.00 100652 Comoleted first draft of motion for , mary judgment; telephone conference with Kevin McNamara. Nov 12/1998 Lawyer: 08 2.20 Hrs X 110.00 100453 Revisions to Brief. Nov 13/1998 Lawyer: 08 5.50 Hrs X 110.00 100854 Continued revisions and additions to Brief. 0.00 12727 -200.00 12727 22.00 13129 22.00 13129 0.00 13129 417.00 33.00 13247 33.00 13247 - 22.00 13247 0.00 13247 37.50 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 22.00 14087 55.00 15189 49.80 15189 0.00 14087 165.00 15189 638.00 15189 385.00 15189 242.00 15189 605.00 15189 I Saidis, Shuff i Has land Page 3 Jul 8/109 Client Ledger Nov 11/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Nis X 110.00 100855 Revisions to brief. Nov 18/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Hrs X 110.00 100856 Revisions and additional research. Nov 19/1998 Lawyer: 08 2.00 Hrs X 110.00 100851 Revisions to brief and motion; drafted affidavit. Nov 24/1998 Lawyer: 08 1.00 Hrs X 110.00 100858 Revisions to affidavit; brief and motion; letter to Barbara. Dec 31/1998 Lawyer: 08 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100859 Telephone conference with Kevin McNamara re: brief. Jan 4/1999 Lawyer: 08 1.50 Hrs X 110.00 100860 Revisions to Brief. Jan 8/1999 Lawyer: 08 0.50 Mrs X 110.00 100861 Revisions to motion; affidavit and brief. Jan 11/1999 Lawyer: 08 0.30 Mrs X 110.00 100862 Office conference with Barb Morgan re: signing affidavit and verification. Jan 12/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15189 15226 FEES 2162.00 DISKS 49.80 Jan 12/1999 Fees To Lawyer 08 100863 ADJ Jan 12/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.40 Mrs X 110.00 100864 Review motion and letter to client; entry of appearance. Feb 5/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15511 15548 FEES 291.00 Feb 12/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 100865 Letter to client. Feb 19/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Hfs X 110.00 100866 Telephone call to client on oral argument. Feb 28/1999 Lawyer: 21 2.00 Mrs x 110.00 100867 Prepare for Oral Argument; telephone conference with Atty. McNamara. Mar 2/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100868 Finalize preparations for hearing. Mar 13/1999 00869 Oral argument on summary judVent motion. Mar 9/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 15863 15899 FEES 264.00 Mar 15/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.30 Kra X 110.00 100870 Review District Justice Rule and telephone conference with client re: counsel matter. Mar 17/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 110.00 100871 Conference with client on District justice matter. Mar 11/1999 BARBARA STODDARD MORGAN 160204 PMT - Client Paying Bill Mar 11/1999 BARBARA STODDARD MORGAN 160201 PMT - Client Paying Bill Apr 9/1999 Lawyer; 21 0.30 Hrs X 110.00 181913 Telephone conference re: case status of Fug lee and District Justice. Apr 13/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16149 181123 FEES 363.00 Apr 19/1999 Lawyer: 21 0.20 Mrs X 110.00 182434 Telephone call re: procedure question. May 14/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16451 185986 FEES 55.00 Jun 9/1999 BILLING ON INVOICE 16810 189584 Jul 2/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Mrs X 125.00 :r 192975 Review case law on abuse of civil arocess and begin trans Crints. 11C.00 15189 110.00 15189 220.00 15189 110.00 15189 22.00 15189 165.00 15511 55.00 15511 33.00 15511 0,00 15189 -500.00 15189 44.00 15511 0.00 15511 22.00 15863 22.00 15863 220.00 15863 110.00 16149 113.00 16149 0.00 15863 33.00 16149 P-3.00 16149 500.00 110.00 33.00 16451 0.00 16149 22.00 16451 0.00 16451 0.00 16810 -;5.00 .Jul '0/109 Saidis, Shuf£ a Masland Page 4 Client Ledger ALL DATES Date Received From / Paid To CheM General Bid Trust Entry# Explanation RCpt# Rcpts Gists Fees Inv4 Act Rcpts Disbs Balance Jul 6/1999 Lawyer: 21 1.00 Nrs X 125.00 193164 Review Nick's deposition (248 pgs.) for possible action. 125.00 I--- ----------- ---- UNBILLED -------- ---------- I------------------- BILLED - -------- ------------- - I------- BALANCES _ ---_-- TOTALS CHE+ RECOV FEES+ TOTAL DISBS + FEES + TAX - RECEIPTS • A/R TRUST PERIOD 0.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 49.00 4900.00 0.00 2064.50 2785.30 0.00 END DATE 0.00 0100 250.00 250.00 49.80 4900.00 0.00 2064.50 2785.30 0100 TOTALS CHE+ RECOV 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 __________________ I________ BI FEES+ TOTAL DISB + FEES + 250.00 250.00 4 .80 4800.00 250.00 250.00 49.8 4800.00 TAX / RECEIPT ` A/R TRUST 0.00 f 2064.50 2785.30 0.00 0.00 2064.5 X2185.,30 0.00 Report: Finished: Date Range: Matters: Clients: Major Clients: Responsible Lawyers: Introducing Lawyers: Assigned Lawyers: Types Of Law: Sort by Resp Lawyer: New page for each Lawyer: New page for each Matter: Totals Only: Finn Totals Only: Entries Shown - Billed: Entries Showr - Disbursements: Entries Shown - Receipts: Entries Shown - Trust: Entries Shown - Time or Fees: Working Lawyer only: Include matters with retainer bal: ver: Client Lelge: Thursday, July 00, 1999 at 10:49:31 AM ALL DATES 97-474 All All All All All All No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 4.05.990426 rR0 N WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT F. CUMBERLAND CIVIL CASE PLAINTIFF: NAME AM ADDRESS 09 1 02 rMORGAN, BARBARA " 141 S ENOLA DR BERT V. MANLOVE ENOLA, PA 1702 5 A0IMI: 1901 STATE STREET CAMP BILL, PA I_ vs. DEFENDANT: NAME AM ADDRESS T.Npeo"p:(717) 761-0583 17011-0000 rFUGLEE, INC 125 N ENOLA DRIVE ENOLA, PA 17025 BARBARA MORGAN L J 141 S ENOLA DR Docket No.: CV-0000253-99 ENOLA, PA 17025 Date Filed: 7/28/99 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FOR PLATNT'r FP ?X Judgment was entered for: (Name) _ mnunAw., nAgi;ARA R Judgment was entered against: (Name) Frtr:T.P.F._ TA - in the amount of $ s, nos _ sn on: (Date of Judgment) - o/n7 /aa Defendants are jointly and severally liable. (Date & Time) Damages will be assessed on: This case dismissed without prejudice. E:i Amount of Judgment Subject to AttachmenNAct 5 of 1996 $ 7 Levy is stayed for days or F-1 generally stayed. Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attornev Fees Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total $ Date: Place: Time: ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARYICLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDrrA COPY OF THJS t)Tt OF,I,4IDGMENT/ R-ANSPRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. Date District Justice I certif thQthis is a true an c re, cop other ?of proceedings containing the judgment. z? Date , District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2000 SEAL WILLIAM T. SMITH ATTORNEY AT LAW 3747 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 561.2677 FAX (717) 561.2682 December 7, 2000 Ms. Barbara A. Morgan 141 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 IN RE: Barbara A. Morgan - Fuglee, Inc. No 99-5664 (Cumberland Countvl Dear Ms. Morgan: This letter will serve to inform you that I am in receipt of your Amended Complaint and cover letter under date of November 27, 2000. I am sure that I indicated to you previously that I no longer represent Fuglee, Inc. in this matter, therefore, I am sending a copy of this letter to Mr. Hicks asking that he contact you or have his new attorney contact you concerning this matter. Sincerely William T. Smith WTS/cac cc: William H. Hicks BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY V. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant 99-5664 Civil Term AMENDED COMPLAINT O S7 C7 i'n o ?n ? ? t 2 '? r y G r0 rn r AND NOW, this 27th day of November, 2000, comes Barbara A. Morgan, (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff'), and files this Amended Complaint at law whereof the following is a statement, to wit: 1. Plaintiff is an adult individual presently residing at 141 South Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff formerly resided and owned a unit located at 234 Brian Drive, Westwood Village Condominium, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania from approximately November, 1996 through September, 1998. 3. Fuglee, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") is a Pennsylvania Corporation with its principal place of business at 125 N. Enola Drive, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Fuglee, Inc. was incorporated during the month of January, 1996. The President of Fuglee, Inc. is William H Hicks. 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter as the conduct on which the Complaint is based occurred in Cumberland County, East Pennsboro Township, Enola, Pennsylvania. The Plaintiff, at all times mentioned herein, owned a unit in Westwood Village Condominium As an owner of real estate in Westwood Village Condominium, Plaintiff paid monthly condominium fees to the Council of Westwood Village Condominium, a governing body on which William H. Hicks, also President of Fuglee, Inc., served at all times mentioned herein. The fees paid by Plaintiff were for various upkeep of the common elements such as lawn care and painting of the exterior of the units. Defendant Fuglee, Inc. held a five (5) year contract for the lawn care and painting services at all times mentioned herein. ± N ?- ?` . _? LV: i_i ` ' L ;:] ?._J' ?.. CJ a. Cl S"? _ 1' ? ! J lJ •. •. i 1 \ BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff Va. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99-5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF DEFAULT TO: FUGLEE, INC., Attn: William H. Hicks, President DATE: February 9, 2001 Pursuant to Rule 237-5 of Civil Procedure Rules, you are in default because you have failed to respond to the Plaintiffs "Amended Complaint within the thirty (30) day deadline from service thereof deposited in the U.S. mail on November 27, 2000 and recorded in the Prothonotary's Office on November 30, 2000. Unless you act within ten (10) days from the date of this notice, a judgment may be entered against you without a hearing and you may lose your property or other important rights. Date: ?-?4/ Respectfully submitted, ?6 Z ro-K, '-Barbara A. Morganv Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 b" BARBARA A. MORGAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY va. 99-5664 FUGLEE, INC. CIVIL TERM Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION I, Barbara A. Morgan, Plaintiff, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Notice of Default are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 PA C,S. subsection 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Respectfully submitted, Date: -/ a ? ?c,Qux- Barbara A. Morgdh Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 717-732-7952(1-1) 717-255-6514(W) BARBARA A. MORGAN Plaintiff Vs. FUGLEE, INC. Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99-5664 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara A. Morgan, pro se, hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Default on this date by placing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid, Registered Mail, Restricted Delivery, addressed to: Mr. William H. Hicks, President Fuglee, Inc. (Defendant) Enola PA 17025 125 North Enola Drive I have received written notification that William T. Smith, Esq., is no longer Representing defendant and I have not received subsequent notice as to who the defendant's attorney may be at this time. d4) rx . C Barbara A. Morgans Date: Plaintiff, pro se 141 S. Enola Drive ` Enola PA 1702 1?4 ?'rv ra / ?M1 2; r. : ? ? _ u:, ?- '? `r c ;- - <_if ::)- '? J 1.1 ` ?f Vii: '?? 4? , ! U ? ? U. ? 1 CURTIS R. LONG -Iof-------- Prothonotary_. oy.. Cumberland County o _ One Courthouse Square RAT I a'1 I? =' .3 4 Carlisle, PA 17013 PB MBTF.q 7158334 U & ??STAOE _ ??Y caS?/ ?a5 Nom. ?? ?? ? INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS O OTHER Q 0 ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN A 'AV\tn/.f May R T. NO SUCH NUMBER/ LE STREET NUNABLETOFORWARD DREPSED OS 1 -01 L.,IIIMiIII„ ?ILNI r II ?rIL J 1 dI LlidJrdiLil I; OFFICE PR?TttONU Carl?--' PN 1"1013 eCouts,this is to notify yp° Court Kouse ivaniasaptem a ainstyouinthisofCtce. 1e 236 of the Pennsy was entered' g GUdzment? Inacco?ncewtRo ?6 that the following Plaintiff Date ??G ? ecoa oae uc AHVIOAIOH.L02Id 3.LVQ 'Q3,LVJIQNI SV Q3SS3SSV AHMM 3NV S39dWt+a as oid',Ol;ulgld 19 ugllow •v whgaeg - /o-?/ •pagn4v Adoa 'I-L£Z aing qj M aauepaoaag ul uanl8 uaaq seq aal;ou (Z) pug'aAOge unwgs se 0.1e;uepuagaQ pug33!2u!eld aq;3o ssa.ippg aq; (I);uqa Ajgrao Cgajaq I 004968'SS 10101, 00'00& pa,d m0a31eMeapgllAj, 91na uo;saaa;ui IsOZ 00'00& saSeM Jwl 00'56 aa3 Rugl3 aopsnp Gala;sy j 00'0086& saa3 CauloOd mMollo; so 1;tu IdmoO popuauro ul q"o;;as so sa8emep s?;,Iyulsld ssasse pug ';oaaaq; aalA.ias mo.?; s,Cgp 0Z u!q;!M `i00Z'6 ,Cagnjga3 uo gyuleld ,(q pal!I •;olgldmo' Papuamd s?yulgld o; Ja ?suV U13 a10 0; a?nlle; Jo;';uepualaQ ONI 33'IJII3 isu!eSe pug 3.1!7uleld aq;;o aoARJ ul;uam8pnf ja;ua 11pu.rA :AHV,LONOH OHd 3H.L OZ S30Va 0WIN3V QNV aaamsNV OZ 32If1'IIV32103 LN3WJQf21 2I033d103t'2Id r- _a . ?IU 3aepaaJaQ SZOLI Vd 91003 aeuQ elou3 q;joN SZI soaplsaad'sgalH •H we1111M WV3 b 9 A 'am 133'I0n3 9-66 1(.LNn00 awrm3sWno SV3'Id NOWWOJ 30 lHaOJ 'SA ' ,IIl7o!Bld SZOLI Vd N003 awa eloo3'S in NVDHOW IV VHVffHv9 BARBARA A. MORGAN 141 S. Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 v8. FUGLEE, INC. William H. Hicks, President 125 North Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 Defendant TO THE PROTHONOTARY: r_ _.J Kindly enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against FUGLEE. INC. Defendant, for failure to file an Answer to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on February 9, 2001, within 20 days from service thereof, and assess Plaintiffs damages as set forth in Amended Complaint, as follows: Attorney Fees $4800.00 District Justice Filing Fee 95.00 Lost Wages 500.00 Lost Interest on Early Withdrawal from Retirement Fund am Total $5,895.00 1 hereby certify that (1) the address of the Plaintiff and Defendant are as shown above, and (2) notice has been given in accordance with Rule 237-1, copy attached. \\=% Barbara A. Morgan Plaintiff, pro se DAMAGES ARE HEREBY ASSESSED AS INDICATED. DATE: _ PROTHONOTARY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY C: 99-5664 C C° CIVIL TERM -i{ , Plaintiff BARBARA A. MORGAN 141 S. Enola Drive Ennis PA 17025 Plaintiff VS. FUGLEE, INC. William H. Hicks, President 125 North Enola Drive Enola PA 17025 Defendant COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 99.5664 CIVIL TERM PRAECIPE FOR JUDGMENT FOR FAILURE TO ANSWER AND ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against FUGLEE, IN C. Defendant, for failure to file an Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on February 9, 2001, within 20 days from service thereof, and assess Plaintiffs damages as set forth in Amended Complaint, as follows: Attorney Fees $4800.00 District Justice Filing Fee 95.00 Lost Wages 500.00 Lost Interest on Early Withdrawal from Retirement Fund 500.00 Total $5,895.00 I hereby certify that (1) the address of the Plaintiff and Defendant are as shown above, and (2) notice has been given in accordance with Rule 237-1, copy attached. \?!"?' Barbara A. Morgan Plaintiff, prose DAMAGES ARE HEREBY ASSESSED AS INDICATED. DATE: PROTHONOTARY =J v U ZVI M - 40 O? ? v