Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-2268I NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 FOUR SENTRY PARKWAY, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (610) 862-6522 RONALD and LINDA BRENIZE 27 N. ACORN DRIVE BOILING SPRINGS, PA 17007 Plaintiff(s) V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1170 MAIN STREET NEWINGTON, CT 06111 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL ACTION NO: CY1- a ?t.P? ? c v ?? ??sL?+-1 NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed or any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 1-800-990-9108 717-249-3166 I I NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 FOUR SENTRY PARKWAY, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (610) 862-6522 RONALD and LINDA BRENIZE 27 N. ACORN DRIVE BOILING SPRINGS, PA 17007 Plaintiff(s) V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1170 MAIN STREET NEWINGTON, CT 06111 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL ACTION NO: COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned counsel, now bring this Complaint against Defendant and in support thereof, aver as follows: 1. Plaintiffs are adult individuals who, at all times relevant hereto, owned and resided at the property listed above (hereinafter "subject property") 2. Defendant, the Keeney Manufacturing Company, (hereinafter "Keeney") upon information and belief, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of a foreign state, with a principal place of business at the address listed above. At all times relevant hereto, Keeney was engaged in the business of, among other things, designing, manufacturing, assembling, distributing, testing and otherwise offering for sale plumbing/water supply products, including the pipe fitting and related components at issue in this case (hereinafter "the product'). 3. Plaintiffs purchased the pipe fitting and related components, which were manufactured and/or sold by defendant for use in their home. r 4. On or about July 8, 2005, the product failed and caused a massive water leak at the subject property. 5. As a direct and proximate result of the failure of the product, plaintiffs suffered damages to their real and personal property, along with additional expenses and hardships besides, in an amount not in excess of $50,000.00 as further and more fully described below. COUNTI BREACH OF WARRANTY 6. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference paragraphs I through 5 as though same were fully set forth at length. 7. At the time of the sale and/or distribution of the product, the defendant had reason to know the particular purpose for which the product would be used and knew that their skill and judgment were being relied upon to furnish a suitable product. Thus, the defendant breached the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose as set out in the Uniform Commercial Code (hereinafter "UCC") at 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-315 in that the product was not fit for the particular purpose for which such products are intended. 8. In addition, the defendant breached its implied warranty of merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-314 (c) in that the product was not fit for the ordinary uses for which the product was used. 9. In addition, the defendant breached any and all express warranties made or relating to the product that became part of the basis of the bargain for the sale of the product in derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-313. (Plaintiff is currently not in possession of the written warranty as it has been lost, but Defendant has better access to it and, therefore, no prejudice is sustained by Defendant for not attaching the writing hereto). 10. Plaintiffs' damages as set forth above occurred as a direct and proximate result of the breach by the defendant of its implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose and merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-315 and § 2-314 (c) and as a result of the breach of its expressed warrantees in derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-313. 11 Plaintiffs have met any and all conditions precedent to recovery for such breaches. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment in their favor and against the defendant, in an amount not in excess of $50,000.00, plus interest, costs of suit, delay damages, and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT II STRICT LIABILITY 12. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference paragraphs 1 through 11 as though the same were fully set forth at length. 13. The defendant is engaged, and at all times relevant hereto was engaged, in the business of manufacturing, distributing, assembling and/or offering for sale, inter alia, plumbing/water supply products, including the subject product. 14. The defendant designed, manufactured, assembled, distributed, tested and/or otherwise sold the subject product and the components thereof in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to the plaintiffs and their property. 15. The defendant should have known that the subject product and its components would reach the plaintiffs' property without substantial change from the condition in which sold. 16. The product and components did reach plaintiffs' property without substantial change from the condition in which sold. 17. The aforementioned defects consisted of: (a) design defects; (b) manufacturing defects; (c) component defects; (d) a failure to thoroughly, timely, and sufficiently warn of the design, manufacturing, and/or component defects; and/or (e) a failure to properly instruct as to the appropriate operating procedures for safe use of the product and its components. 18. For these reasons, the defendant is strictly liable to the plaintiffs for their damages under Section 402A of the Restatement (2d) of Torts, the Restatement (3d) of Torts, and the applicable case law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 19. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned defects, plaintiffs sustained and incurred damage to their real and personal property, along with the imposition of additional expenses and hardships besides, in an amount not in excess of $50,000.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment in their favor and against the defendant in an amount not in excess of $50,000.00, plus interest, costs of suit, delay damages, and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY Dated: April 16, 2007 I VERIFICATION I, Francis Guillemette, hereby state that I am a duly authorized representative of Erie Insurance Group, the real party in interest, and that the facts contained in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. J (S - ?/I. --LL F NCIS GUILLEMETTE DATED: April 11/9007 T 1 -IF r .s a ra a -v ko 3 r CD ON q 9:0 J ?n ? m 0 \05 A\LIAB\TJMCMAHON\LLPG\252786\JMPARR\03030\50000 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel on behalf of Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, with respect to the above-referenced matter. DATE: MA? Z, ftl Respectfully submitted, MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN BY: 4?? A TIMOTIlY J. P I^WON, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 52918 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3505 Attorney for Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, Plaintiffs V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Joanne M. Parr, an employee of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, do hereby certify that on this 2? day of May 2007, served a copy of the foregoing document via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid as follows: Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire Nelson, Levine, deLuca & Horst, LLC Four Sentry Parkway, Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 1? ??-? ww Joann . Parr p in"l vr j (,} s \05_A\LIAB\TJMCMAHON\CORR\256274\JMPARR\03030\02766 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, Plaintiffs V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Plaintiffs, Ronald and Linda Brenize c/o Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire Nelson, Levine, deLuca & Horst, LLC Four Sentry Parkway, Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a default judgment may be filed against you. Respectfully submitted, MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN DATE: IV W I 2w? BY: YI ?., TIMOTHI' J. Mc1yYI? I.D. No. 52918 ((// 4200 Crums Mill Road, Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3505 ESQUIRE B Attorney for Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company \05 A\LIAB\TJMCMAHON\LLPG\252790UMPARR\03030\50000 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, Plaintiffs V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT, THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiffs are who they say they are. All remaining allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029. 2. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of a state other than Pennsylvania and that The Keeney Manufacturing Company maintains a place of business at 1170 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111 as alleged. It is further admitted that Defendant, The Kenney Manufacturing Company, is engaged in the business of distributing and selling plumbing supply products as alleged. It is specifically denied that Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, designed, manufactured, assembled, distributed, tested, sold and/or otherwise supplied the pipe fitting and related components at issue in this case as alleged. Proof thereof to the contrary is demanded. 3. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, manufactured and/or sold a pipe fitting and/or related components which Plaintiffs used in their home and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded. 4. Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in this Paragraph and accordingly these allegations are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly no further responsive pleading is required and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. COUNT I - BREACH OF WARRANTY 6. Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, incorporates by reference, as if set forth at length herein, its response to Paragraphs 1 through 5 above. 7. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly the allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. By way of further answer, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it sold and/or distributed to Plaintiffs the "product" at issue in this matter and proof thereof is demanded. 8. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly the allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. By way of further answer, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it sold and/or distributed to Plaintiffs the "product" at issue in this matter and proof thereof is demanded. 9. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly the allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. By way of further answer, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it sold and/or distributed to Plaintiffs the "product" at issue in this matter and proof thereof is demanded. 10. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly the allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. By way of further answer, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it sold and/or distributed to Plaintiffs the "product" at issue in this matter and proof thereof is demanded. 11. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly the allegations set forth in this Paragraph are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. By way of further answer, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it sold and/or distributed to Plaintiffs the "product" at issue in this matter and proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court shall deem appropriate. COUNT II - STRICT LIABILITY 12. Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 12 above as if set forth at length herein. 13. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, is in the business of distributing and selling plumbing and water supply products as alleged. It is specifically denied that The Kinney Manufacturing Company manufactured, distributed, assembled and/or sold the subject product which is at issue in this lawsuit. Proof thereof to the contrary is demanded, to the extent relevant. 14. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, designed, manufactured, assembled, distributed, tested and/or otherwise sold the subject product as alleged. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the product, if distributed and/or sold by Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, the same being expressly denied, was sold in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to the Plaintiffs and/or their property as alleged. By way of further answer, the allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and these allegations are denied and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded. 15. Denied. Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, specifically denies that it designed, manufactured, assembled, distributed, tested, sold and/or otherwise furnished to Plaintiffs the "subject product and its components" as alleged. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, should have known that the "subject product and its components" would reach Plaintiffs' property without substantial change from the condition in which sold. By way of further answer, the allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly these allegations are denied and proof thereof is demanded, to the extent relevant. 16. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly these allegations are denied and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded, to the extent relevant. 17. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph, together with its subparts (a) through (e), constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly these allegations are denied and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded, to the extent relevant. 18. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph, together with its subparts (a) through (e), constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly these allegations are denied and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded, to the extent relevant. 19. Denied. The allegations set forth in this Paragraph, together with its subparts (a) through (e), constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Pa.R.C.P. 1029 and accordingly these allegations are denied and proof thereof to the contrary is demanded, to the extent relevant. WHEREFORE, Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court shall deem appropriate. NEW MATTER DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFFS 20. Plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action against Defendant upon which relief may be granted as a matter of law. 21. The Keeney Manufacturing Company did not supply any product, defective or otherwise, to Plaintiffs, Mr. and/or Mrs. Brenize, which caused and/or contributed to Plaintiffs' damages, all such damages being expressly denied. 22. No act or omission on the part of The Keeney Manufacturing Company was a substantial factor and/or the factual cause in bringing about Plaintiffs' damages, all such damages being expressly denied. 23. Plaintiffs' damages, all such damages being expressly denied, were caused, in whole or in part, by persons and/or entities over whom The Keeney Manufacturing Company had neither control, nor right of control as a matter of law. 24. To the extent as may be determined through subsequent discovery in this matter, the product at issue, a plumbing fitting, as is described in Plaintiffs' Complaint, was not designed, manufactured, assembled, tested, sold, supplied and/or otherwise furnished by The Keeney Manufacturing Company to Plaintiffs. 25. To the extent as may be determined through subsequent discovery in this matter, the product at issue, a plumbing fitting, as is described in Plaintiffs' Complaint, was not used in a reasonably foreseeable manner and/or was misused and/or abused by Plaintiffs and/or others acting on behalf of Plaintiffs or for Plaintiffs' benefit and/or at Plaintiffs' direction. 26. To the extent as may be determined through subsequent discovery in this matter, the product at issue, a plumbing fitting, as is described in Plaintiffs' Complaint, may have been substantially and/or materially altered by persons and/or entities other than The Keeney Manufacturing Company, which substantial and material alterations occurred after the original design, manufacture and/or sale of that plumbing fitting by its manufacturer, which substantial and material alterations have relieved the original manufacturer from any and all liability and/or responsibility therefore as a matter of law. 27. To the extent as may be determined through subsequent discovery in this matter, Plaintiffs' damages, if any, were caused, in whole or in part, by acts and/or omissions on the part of persons and/or entities other than The Keeney Manufacturing Company, which acts and/or omissions constitute intervening and/or superseding causes for Plaintiffs' damages, if any, thereby relieving The Keeney Manufacturing Company from any and all potential liability to Plaintiffs in this matter as a matter of law. 28. To the extent as may be revealed by subsequent discovery, Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages as required by law. 29. Plaintiffs' claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by virtue of Plaintiffs' failure to properly maintain and/or use the product described in Plaintiffs' Complaint. 30. If Plaintiffs suffered any damages as a result of the intended and/or foreseeable use of any product attributable to Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, the same being specifically denied, then such product was used in a manner and/or for a purpose not intended by its manufacturer and over which The Keeney Manufacturing Company had no control. 31. The Keeney Manufacturing Company did not extend and did not breach any warranties, either express or implied, to Plaintiffs. 32. The Keeney Manufacturing Company owed no duty to Plaintiffs as a matter of law under the material and well pleaded allegations set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint. 33. The Keeney Manufacturing Company reserves its right to raise one or more of those defenses set forth in Pa.R.C.P. 1030. WHEREFORE, The Keeney Manufacturing Company demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court shall deem appropriate. Respectfully submitted, MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN DATE: , It *oO BY: K TIMTHY ON, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 52918 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3505 Attorney for Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company VERIFICATION I hereby affirm that the following facts ate correct: The Keeney Manufacturing Company is a Defendant in the foregoing action and I am authorized to execute this Verification on their behalf' The attached Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint is based upon information which has been gathered by my counsel in the defense of this lawsuit. The language of the Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint is that of counsel and not of me I have read the Answer, and to the extent that the responses are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief'. To the extent that the contents of the responses are that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid responses are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: v a 07 BY: -BRIAN ZACKU Title: Controller The Keeney Manufacturing Company \05 A\LIAB\TIMCMAHON\LLPG\25280NMPARR\03030\50000 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Joanne M. Parr, an employee of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, do hereby certify that on this \e day of June 2007, served a copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter of Defendant, The Keeney Manufacturing Company, to Plaintiffs' Complaint via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid as follows: Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire Nelson, Levine, deLuca & Horst, LLC Four Sentry Parkway, Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 1`\ JoT. Parr VERIFICATION I hereby affirm that the following facts are correct: The Keeney Manufacturing Company is a Defendant in the foregoing action and I am authorized to execute this Verification on their behalf' The attached Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint is based upon information which has been gathered by my counsel in the defense of this lawsuit. The language of the Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint is that of counsel and not of me I have read the Answer, and to the extent that the responses are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief'. To the extent that the contents ofthe responses are that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid responses are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C..S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: V 13)0? BY: 4-cwl BRIAN ZACK Title: Controll The Keeney Manufacturing Company \05_A\L IAB\T 1MCMAHON\LLPG\252807UMPARR\03030\50000 fs w ? i"tl -'W .+. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 FOUR SENTRY PARKWAY, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (610) 862-6522 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE Plaintiff(s) V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY Defendant(s) ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL ACTION NO: 07-2268 ANSWER OF PLAINTIFFS TO THE NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT 20-33. Denied. These allegations all contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand that judgment be entered in their favor in accordance with their Complaint. Respectfully submitted, NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: RICHARD J. BO ., ESOtUREI/ ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS Dated: July 2, 2007 -W IV. VERIFICATION I, RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., do hereby state that I am counsel for Plaintiffs in the within action, and as such do hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer of Plaintiffs To The New Matter of Defendant are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. RICHARD J. BO 9 JR. Dated: July 2, 2007 -W 1% NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 FOUR SENTRY PARKWAY, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (610) 862-6522 RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE Plaintiff(s) V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY Defendant(s). ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL ACTION NO: 07-2268 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Answer of Plaintiffs To The New Matter of Defendant was served on July 2, 2007, upon counsel listed below by United States Mail, postage prepaid. Timothy J. McMahon, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17112 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HORST, LLC BY: ix //Ilz wa ? YA 4?) 1;/ / RICHARD J. BOP, JR., ES UI ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS Dated: July 2, 2007 -- ?.- 4,.a? r1 ,?= ? -? r- , G? '` ? c. ? 4 1+ T 4Y r e ?` ` ) t ` V "mow RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, Plaintiffs V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-2268 CIVIL 19 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RULE 1312-1. The Petition for Appointment of Arbitrators shall be substantially in the following form: PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Timothy J. McMahon, Esquire , counsel for the plaintiff/defendant in the above action (or actions), respectfully represents that: 1. The above-captioned action (or actions) is (are) at issue. 2. The claim of the plaintiff in the action is $ less than the arbitration limits. The counterclaim of the defendant in the action is none The following attorneys are interested in the cases as counselor are othe?w* a dis ra!6b$tVit as ar ', a?d?r : Timothy J. McMahon, Esq., Marshall, Dennehey, Warner Coleman ts? t ogT , tL rums i 'A 17' nnri Richard .I Rovd_ Jr__ Eso._ Nelson. Levine. deLuca & Horst. LC, 518 Township Line fed., Suite Sou, blue bell, FA I y4/_Z WHEREFORE, your petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. Respe fully sub , Ti by J ahon, Esq. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, foregoing petition, Esq., and actions) as prayed for. 19 , in consideration of the Esq., Esq., are appointed arbitrators in the above captioned action (or By the Court, P.J. 'rQ ?.a ?`. Wi =n ? ? i`-= ?r-a '« ? r, -?., 3"..^ ? n - ? V A v_ y,? ? (? ? ...,? ? ?- _ - M.. C1'1 '-C' RONALD AND LINDA BRENIZE, Plaintiffs V. THE KEENEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-2268 - CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO MARK CASE SETTLED. DISCONTINUED AND ENDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned action settled, discontinued and ended, with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, DATE: ? 0 BY: NELSON, LEVINE, d4LUCA & HORST, LLC Richard J. Boy`., squire I.D. No. 84035 Four Sentry Parkway, Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Attorney for Plaintiffs T ° C) ~ . ?", ?Y ?ti? ?i`: r r ? "5.7 _ .-S .? ?