Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-25520- COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 07 - A,5r 0_1y,1 Term 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 referenced below. Art 0A ec.6,6Ut u'e, iwA "'"I M9 -- 1 - ot i A. C eole-r -I- V_- D,ATE F JUDG NT I IN THE CASE OF (PA0,M) (Defendant)' / `f 14Y410 I M %Xsen 14v Ak %'A "IN. vs 0A _Pr1A1E A'wxi A 1` , ^? i . ^ ,.. This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1008B. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy No. 1001(6) in before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL. 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.D.J. No. 7001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon Name of appellee(s) appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal (Common Pleas No. 87_ a55A t_:iyi I Term ) within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of j dgment of non pros. Si ure of appellant or akomey or agent RULE: To appellee(s) Name ofa flee(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 MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date: M 9N 03 20 07 Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312-02 WHITE -COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY GREEN - COURT FILE YELLOW- APPELLANT'S COPY PINK -COPY TO BE SERVED ON APPELLEE GOLD -COPY TO BE SERVED ON DISTRICT JUSTICE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OFAPPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER riling of the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes.) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ; ss AFFIDAVIT: I hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas , upon the District Justice designated therein on (date of service) 20 , ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) on ,20 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWORN) (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 20 Signature of afant Signature of official before whom affidavit was made Title of official (? a C3 My commission expires on 20 , M r'-? m-n ! -am - T 1 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL CASE 1 COUNTY OF: C0 RLAND "PI I (TIFF: NAME and ADDRESS - -7] rAdd,ess ag. Dist. No.: NILSZN, CYNTHIA D 07-AS501 09-1-01 416 RENO AVE CiviVrerm DJ Name: rton. NEW C??B?, PA 17070 J . 4 00 CSARLBS A. CLEMENT, NEW BRIDGE ST L OLDS TOWNE COMMONS -SUITE 3 VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS CVMZRLAND, N PA 17070 f-AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASS DOCTOR ? Telephone: X771 17 )) 774 774--595989 89 2421 WYANDOTTE ROAD WILLOW GROVE, PA 19090 J L AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR - 2421 1iYAMDOTTB ROAD Docket No.: CV-000010 WILLOW GROVE, PA 19090 Date Filed: 2/22 4/04/07 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: PLTF (Date of Judgment DEFAULT .7DDaNZNT Judgment: ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) NILSEN, CYNTHIA D ® was entere d aga inst: (Name) AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR Judgment ,126.0 6 in the amount of $ Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Damages will be assessed on Date & Time This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127 F] Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease $ Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs $ 6,000.00 $ 126.00 $ 6,126.001 Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES, IF THE COME DISTRICT JUDGE. JUDGEMENT THHOLDER ELECTS TO ENTE THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF E COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE (ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL C FROM STED IN THE JUDGMENT UNLESS EST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH OTHE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THEEJUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS NYFULL, A REQUEQU SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. 4/4/07 Date Magisterial District Judge I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings containing the judgment. Date Magisterial District Judge 2008 SEAL My commission expires first Monday of January, AOPC 315-06 DATE PRINTED: 4/09/07 12:27:00 PM N_ CJ 0 f .- MM t1_ U) ?• -{ ? ? ?? ¦ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ¦ Print your name and address on the reverse "so that we can return the card to you. ¦ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: ??? ?um,bP2 G•?NC? ?? / _7U-70 A. Si nature X o p.n., Agent .. ddressee livery B. Received by (Printed ake oT ?? I =cA , &w-, , I D. Is delivery address di rent 1? Q If YES, enter delivery a dp?Sa b ow: No ' 4,'i/ `i6 ? 3. Service Type ? Certified Mail ? Express Mail ? Registered ? Return Receipt for Merchandise ? Insured Mail ? C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ? Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service labe 7007 0710 0002 6223 6232 PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE T LE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing of the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes.) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ! , V 0= i er, ; ss AFFIDAVIT: I hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ,upon the District Justice designated therein on ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas L)I-jr (date of service) M 20 4p+ ? by personal service Ud by (certified) (registered) mail, INV sender's receipt attach d hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) C' A4 N'6 VS tR , , on 2007- ? by personal service by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWORN (A=AY-OF ED) AN UBSCRIBED BEFOR ME I 20 ure of o cial before hom 9madeL as made Title of official r IF My commission expires on _ 20. NOTARIAL SE CLAUDIAO BREWBAKER NOTARYPUBLIC My Corrinmion Expires Apd 4.2009 Signature ofaffiant ? 0 C 7r ? ? ^ r1 r- t vc WMMUNVYCAL 1 M VI- PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 67 ° a55a tVi i T erm 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 referenced below. • mA .. u.? i . n V. NAME OF D 0A -hkS&1V#'4 .ESS OF APPELLANT CITY STATE Z OF JUDG NT IN THS CASE OF (Plain ' r (patandeq) 4qyj 4 A-s-eii. A, 't. V5 "L-)A "V - boabl ao -- 6 This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1008B. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. r77- (1"-, . If a pelt t was Clai ant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after riling the NOTICE of APPEAL. Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon ` C A ?V '-Z? . appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appellee(s) (Common Pleas No. 67-,A65a Clyi i Ter wr+ ) within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of j dgment of non pros. S tore of appellant or attorney or agent RULE: To ?_. A-? appellee(s) Name of a lee(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 MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. ??? l?(S i? • ?!e Date: M0.y D3 , 2007 Signature o/Prothonotary or Deputy YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312-02 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC By: Shane B. Kope, Esq. I D 92207 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff CYNTHIA D. NILSEN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA U7- A5507 V. NO-12007--05432-(Civil Term) AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED WATERPROOFING COMPANY, Defendant. N O T I C E TO DEFEND AND CLAIM RIGHTS 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 rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC By: Shane B. Kope, Esq. ID 92207 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff CYNTHIA D. NILSEN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA V. NO. 2007-0552 (Civil Term) AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED WATERPROOFING COMPANY, Defendant. COMPLAINT AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Cynthia D. Nilsen, by and through her attorney, Shane B. Kope, Esq., and files this Complaint and in support thereof, avers the following: INTRODUCTION 1. This is a civil action brought by Plaintiff Cindy Nilsen (hereinafter "Plaintiff' and/or "the Owner") against Defendant Aqua Technology Basement Doctor (hereinafter "Defendant" and/or "Aqua Tech") for damages resulting from the actions, errors and omissions of Defendant committed while waterproofing the basement of Owner's residence located at 416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Cynthia D. Nilsen is an adult individual residing at 1416 Reno Avenue, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Aqua Tech is a Pennsylvania corporation with its corporate headquarters located at either 3133 Lincoln Highway, Trevose, Pennsylvania, and / or 2421 Wyanotte Road, Willow Grove, Pennsylvania. 4. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant was doing business in Pennsylvania and was providing home and basement waterproofing/water management systems, including the system provided to the Plaintiff 5. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant was acting through its agent, broker, servants, workmen, contractors, and employees who were acting within the scope of their authority, in furtherance of Defendant's business and within Defendant's control or right of control. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. This action arises under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is within the subject matter jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. 7. Venue is proper in the Court of Common Pleas for Cumberland County under Rules 1006(b) and 2179(a) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, in that Defendant regularly conducts business in Cumberland County. Further, the property at issue is located in Cumberland County. FACTS 8. On or about April 13, 2006, the Defendant's representative, Alex Zanjar, visited the Owner's residence to provide an estimate for waterproofing services in the Owner's basement. After visually inspecting the basement, Mr. Zanjar indicated that Aqua Tech could provide Owners with $19,973.00 worth of waterproofing services for $16, 973.00. Page 2 of 16 This same representative showed Owner pictures of what her completed basement would look like. 9. On or about April 19, 2006, the Owner and Aqua Tech entered into a written contract for the waterproofing of Plaintiffs basement and related construction work, which contained therein the following in relevant parts: a. That all customer items would be covered during waterproofing; b. That debris would be removed after waterproofing; C. That there would be full containment of all debris in the basement area; d. That 600 square foot of space would be caste with waterproofing material; e. That Aqua Tech expressly warrants that all work shall be of workman like quality, and that all material shall be of merchantable quality, and be fit for the use for which it was intended. f. That Aqua Tech guaranteed its workmanship and materials for the entire time in which the customer holds title to the property against controlling water penetrating the entire sub soil wall and floor area where a pressure relief system has been installed; in addition, that Aqua Tech offered a lifetime guarantee on Sump Pumps. (hereinafter "the Contract"). Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct copy of the Contract, which is signed by the Owner and a representative of Aqua Tech. 10. In addition to the express language of the Contract, and in response to Plaintiffs concerns of how her son's asthma would be affected, the Defendant, through its Page 3 of 16 representative, verbally assured Plaintiff that the debris would be contained in the basement. 11. Also in addition to the express language of the Contract, the representative verbally assured Plaintiff that the appliances in her basement would be covered, which included her washer, dryer, furnace and water heater. 12. Plaintiff, therefore, paid the amount of $16,973.00 in accordance with the terms of the contract. 13. In executing the Contract, Aqua Tech expressly agreed and promised to perform the work described in the Contract. 14. In executing the Contract, Aqua Tech expressly and impliedly agreed and promised to perform its obligations under the Contract in a professional and workmanlike manner. 15. In showing Plaintiff pictures of what the completed project would look like, Aqua Tech expressly and impliedly agreed and promised to leave her basement as cosmetically pleasing as that which was represented in the pictures. 16. Notwithstanding these promises, the work performed by Aqua Tech was defective and deficient; it was also destructive of Owner's residence and household items; for example: 17. After Aqua Tech finished working, the entire first floor of Plaintiffs residence was covered in debris, the cleaning of which required Plaintiff to incur substantial costs. 18. Plaintiffs washer and dryer were not adequately covered, which resulted in damage to both units; neither appliance, both of which were relatively new and in perfect working Page 4 of 16 condition before Aqua Tech began working, has functioned improperly since Aqua Tech finished working. 19. Prior to beginning the project, Aqua Tech assured Plaintiff that work would begin between 8:30 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. However, during construction, Aqua Tech's workers did not arrive until 11:00 A.M. and did not leave until 7:00 P.M. 20. Aqua Tech sealed one of Plaintiffs basement windows shut during construction. 21. Aqua Tech pulled down a shelving unit during construction; not only did Aqua Tech fail to reinstall the unit, but also sealed over the bracket holes so that Plaintiff could not reinstall the unit herself. 22. Aqua Tech coated with cement the fencing that lines Plaintiffs walls for certain drainage units. 23. After Aqua Tech finished working, the basement did not cosmetically represent the examples of Aqua Tech's finished work as shown to Plaintiff in pictures by Aqua Tech's representative. 24. There is severe and noticeable cracking in the coating that Aqua Tech installed on Plaintiffs interior basement walls; these cracks continue to grow in length. 25. There remain wet marks in Plaintiffs basement where Aqua Tech installed certain drains. 26. Aqua Tech did not properly install / look after Plaintiffs sump pumps, as they stopped functioning properly after Aqua Tech finished working. The damaged / defective sump pumps caused Plaintiffs basement to incur water damage, which was the very thing Aqua Tech was hired to prevent. Page 5 of 16 27. Plaintiff called Aqua Tech on a number of occasions concerning the above to no avail. Most of the time when Plaintiff calls, she is forced to leave a voicemail, which is never returned. Other times, she has to contend with poor customer service. 28. During one phone call regarding the cracks in the walls, Aqua Tech informed Plaintiff that the cracks were her problem. 29. On June 29, 2006, Plaintiff called Aqua Tech to complain that her sump pumps were not working properly. Although Aqua Tech agreed to look at the pumps, Aqua Tech informed Plaintiff that the first available appointment was not until July 10, 2006. Until then, she was told to use a battery back up that was not installed by Aqua Tech in the first place. When Plaintiff informed Aqua Tech that they failed to install a battery back up, Aqua Tech told Plaintiff to buy one. Aqua Tech then cancelled the appointment scheduled for July 10, 2006, and has not, despite Plaintiff's repeated attempts, called to reschedule. 30. Plaintiff has incurred substantial costs in remedying Defendant's defective, deficient and destructive work. COUNTI BREACH OF CONTRACT 31. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 32. On or about April 13, 2006, as stated, Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant in which the Defendant would install a waterproofing/water management system in Plaintiffs' basement and make other structural repairs. 33. The Plaintiff paid the amount of $16, 973.00 to Defendant as part of that agreement. Page 6 of 16 Defendant breached this agreement and has failed to provide adequate and effective remedial measures. 34. Defendant negligently, knowingly, recklessly and improperly installed the waterproofing/water management system. 35. As a proximate result of the Defendant's breach of the agreement, the Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount to be determined plus interest at the statutory rate from the date of the breach and further, as a proximate result of Defendant's breach, Plaintiff has been damaged in the amounts, as follows: 36. As a direct and proximate result of the breach of contract, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiffs basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiffs basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment in her favor against the Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, costs, interest, and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Page 7 of 16 COUNT II FRAUD/INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION 37. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 38. Defendants intentionally, recklessly, and fraudulently misrepresented known material facts to the Plaintiff, thereby causing the Plaintiff to act and rely upon those facts in entering into an agreement to purchase Defendant's system of basement waterproofing/water management. 39. The facts which Defendants fraudulently misrepresented are outlined in the preceding paragraphs and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. The system that Defendant was offering to install would be installed correctly, in a manner that would result in the walls and floor of their basement remaining dry; b. That the debris would be contained in the basement c. That Plaintiffs appliances would be covered. d. The system that Defendant was offering to install would manage and direct water away from the walls and floor of the basement of the Plaintiffs residence; e. The system that Defendant was offering to install would render the basement floor and walls dry and the covered area of their residence safe and habitable for the Plaintiff and her family members; f. The system that Defendant was offering to install would leave the basement looking as cosmetically pleasing as those in the pictures showed to Plaintiff by Defendant's representative; Page 8 of 16 g. That if the Plaintiff signed the contract immediately, she would receive a substantial discount on the true value of the system being sold by the Defendant, when in truth and fact, said system as installed by the Defendant, had no value and was worthless. 40. These representations were made by Defendants with the intention of misleading Plaintiff into relying upon them, in that the Defendants intended to induce Plaintiff to pay for a system which Defendants did not install adequately, was not fit for the purpose represented, and which would ultimately be worthless. 41. Defendants made these representations falsely, with knowledge of their falsity or recklessly as to whether they were true or false. 42. Plaintiff justifiably relied on the information provided by the Defendants in determining whether to purchase the system from the Defendant. 43. Plaintiffs damages were proximately caused by Defendant's misrepresentations regarding the waterproofing/water management of Plaintiffs' basement. 44. Plaintiff reasonably and justifiably relied on the representations made by the Defendant who purported to be experts in the basement waterproofing/water management industry, and if they had known the Defendant's system was not going to be adequate from the beginning, they would not have invested their initial $16, 973.00 for the Defendant's substandard waterproofing/water management services. 45. As a direct and proximate result of the fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions of material facts, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: Page 9 of 16 a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiffs basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiff's basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment in her favor against the Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, costs, interest, and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. COUNT III NEGLIGENT REPRESENTATION 46. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 47. The Defendant made representations to Plaintiff regarding the ability and qualifications of the Defendant in providing basement waterproofing/water management services. 48. These representations were material to the Plaintiffs decision to purchase the services of the Defendant in that the Plaintiff would not have retained the services of Defendant had they known of the Defendant's ineptness and that the system installed Page 10 of 16 would ultimately be useless and its installation would cause damage to Plaintiff's personal items. 49. When these representations were made to Plaintiff, Defendant knew or had reason to know that they were not truthful and accurate. 50. Defendant failed to exercise reasonable care and competence in assessing, evaluating, and attempting to waterproof Plaintiff's basement. 51. These representations were made by Defendant with the intention of inducing Plaintiff into relying and acting upon them, in that the Defendant intended to induce Plaintiff to purchase their system. 52. Plaintiff justifiably relied upon these misrepresentations in that Plaintiff relied upon the only information available to them and provided by the Defendant in determining the qualifications and suitability of the Defendant. 53. Plaintiff suffered damages, as detailed in preceding paragraphs, as a proximate result of its reliance upon Defendant's misrepresentations, in that Plaintiff would not have purchased the Defendant's system. 54. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's misrepresentations, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiffs basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and Page 11 of 16 e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiffs basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment in her favor against the Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, costs, interest, and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. COUNT IV VIOLATION OF THE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 73 P.S. §201-1, et seq. 55. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 56. Defendant engaged in a series of unfair and deceptive acts and practices directed against the Plaintiff under Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. §201-1, et seq. 57. These unfair and deceptive acts and representations are outlined in this Complaint's foregoing paragraphs, which are incorporated herein by reference. 58. Defendant concealed and failed to disclose known workmanship defects to Plaintiff. Defendant made these misrepresentations with the intention of inducing Plaintiff to rely upon them, in that Defendant intended to induce Plaintiff to purchase Defendant's system. 59. Plaintiff reasonably and justifiably relied on the misrepresentations made by Defendant who purported to be qualified in the field of basement waterproofing/water Page 12 of 16 management systems, and if Plaintiff had known the truth, Plaintiff would not have retained Defendant's services or purchased their system. 60. Defendant's misrepresentations and failure to disclose material facts to Plaintiff proximately caused damage to Plaintiff as detailed in the preceding paragraphs. As a result of Defendant's unlawful acts, Plaintiff suffered an ascertainable loss of money and real property value. 61. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's misrepresentation of its ability and knowledge about waterproofing/water management basements, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiffs basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiffs basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. 62. Plaintiffs are entitled to treble damages in the discretion of the Court under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. §201-9.2, et seq., and this would be an appropriate case for the maximum damages allowed by law given the conduct of Defendants. 63. Plaintiffs are entitled to attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §201-9.2 Page 13 of 16 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demand that this Court enter judgment in her favor and against Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, interest, costs and such further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. COUNT V BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE 64. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth. 65. The Defendant held itself out as an expert in the waterproofing/water management business and knew the exact purpose for which the Plaintiff was purchasing the Defendant's waterproofing/water management system and was fully aware that the Plaintiffs was totally relying on the Defendant to install a system which met their needs and effectively managed and removed water from their basement rendering it habitable, thereby impliedly warranting to the Plaintiff that their system would, in fact, be suitable to the Plaintiffs needs. 66. The Defendant produced a system which did not manage and remove the water from the Plaintiffs basement, caused further damage to Plaintiffs household items, and breached the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. 67. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; Page 14 of 16 b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiffs basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiffs basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment in her favor against the Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, costs, interest, and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. COUNT VII BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY 68. The averments set forth in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth. 69. Defendant impliedly warranted that their waterproofing/water management system would be functional. 70. The Defendant's waterproofing/water management system was not functional, and, further, caused damage to Plaintiffs household, and the Defendant thereby breached the foregoing warranty of merchantability. 71. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, the Plaintiff has been damaged. Plaintiffs damages include, but are not limited to: Page 15 of 16 a. Loss of approximately $17,000.00 initially spent by Plaintiff for waterproofing/water management services; b. Loss of personal property in an amount exceeding $3,000.00; c. Continued water seepage into the Plaintiff's basement; d. Continued expenditure of time; and e. Continued monetary loss spent to try and remedy the Plaintiffs basement water problems and attorneys' fees and costs, and the anticipated cost of securing an expert report. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment in her favor against the Defendant in an amount to be determined, together with compensatory damages, costs, interest, and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Plaintiff prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant on the foregoing Counts for the full amount of Plaintiff's damages in connection with her retaining the basement waterproofing/water management services from the Defendant, plus interest, costs, and attorney's fees, and grant such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and equitable. Respectfully Submitted, KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC Date: A4, V Z 3 Zz S e B. Koe s q. '/ l Page 16 of 16 VERIFICATION I, Cynthia D. Nilsen, Plaintiff in this matter, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. § 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. , r, Ar - (-,,, ?- -,, -1 ?- ( ?- ? " J Cynthia D. Nilsen Date: May 23, 2007 ti i+ATEA 00ffMii , BnsEmERT DOCTOR C H d uarters WRTERPROOFIA CO?PflI1Y ea o P. M Penn nnsylvani a N4W RC" 3133 Lincoln Hwy. ?l` Trevose. PA 19053 AND6tRUC7 RAL_EP AMIRCONTRACTOR6,FNC- 215-633-1133 Maryland Pennsylvania 825 Hammonds Ferry Rd. 3620 Old Lincoln Hwy. Linthicum,,NID 21090 Trevose, PA 19053 1-800.921-5133 1-800-785-0714 Pennsylvania 3800 Walnut St. Harrisburg, PA 17109 1-800-962-8&18 New York 3048 Jericho Turnpike E. North Port, NY 117 31 1-8(0865-7775 New Jersey 50 S. Essex Ave. Orange, NJ 07050 866-629-1600 x • q • Delaware 1283 College Parl Dover. DE 199(.'Y- -302478-8807 Name: ! 11-1f) , , ?,Home # Address: i, ?J Work # City/State: ..L,., it., A .7 ) Cell # Install containment to protect areas outside the contaminated area. Provide trained workers in ;Microbial Remediatiofi who have current fit testi and medical clearance. Place the entire basement under containmant using Hepa-Filtered Negative Air machines, Cut a channel opening according to depth and width specified by a level system around the perimeter of the basement or crawl space flc areas specified below. These measurements can vary depending on the thickness of the floor and the size of the footing. Walls that are constructed with hollow core blocks will have weep holes installed on the first course of block cores to allow the water to drain fro the walls into the system. This procedure is not done to solid or stone walls. Oval point mira-drain panels may be used for high weep holes. The trench will first receive a membrane that prevents mud, silt. and sand from entering the perforated PVC pipe that is installed. Next, the trench w be filled with crushed store and be cemented over with Portland cement. The cement will be finished level to the existing floor, unless a monolith foundation is discovered. In the event, the floor will be finished with a slope back to the wall or squared off. The PVC pipes will terminate into--_-_%-sump containers with lids and 3 clean out(s). They will have at the bottom of these container ' heavy duty automatic submersible_sump pumps with check valves. The discharge line(s) will exit through the wall feet from the hous, _ residential System Commercial System ?? hack Mold Other Mold # H.D. Effluent Pump Radon Sealed System Battery Backup E _.-5anndd &-Silt Filter FP Fiber (70,000 PSI) Spec. Iron Ore System Window Wells Tap(s) Wall Stitch (Poured) Wall Pins (Block) Vertical Crack Repair Underpin Footer If Nec. "I" or "H" Beams Threshold drain (4") Job Pictures Written Report Testifying If Needed Air Sampling ? j r ,1--, t , - :r ,lr t Y11 S I Tear Out Wall Tear Out Floors Tear Out Ceilings Tear Out Carpet Tear Out Misc. Tear Out Toilet/Sink Debris to Curb Debris Removed Move Cust. Items Cover Cust. Items Mold & Mildew Blocks Hepa Vacuuming Afiti-microbial Spray Surface Wipe Wire Brush Soda Blasting Concrete Hydro Gel Threshold Drain (4") `Y(>? 7 _!Job Pictures 1 + . Written Report s > j ?.. 4 Testifying If Needed .' - Air Sampling Swab Sampling c Negative Airflow Full Containment ,t Respirators - _ Ant-microbial Spray Surface Wipe Wire Brush Soda Blasting Concrete Hydro Gel ' Sq. R. Rough Casting Sq. Ft. Wall Wp. Coatin± Sq. Ft. Wall Mold Coatir Hn Dehumidifier Environment Suits Notice to Owner. Do not sign this Agreement in Blank. ou are entitled to a copy of this Agreement at the time you sign. YOU THE BUYER, MAY CANCEL TIS TRANSACTION AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO V? L MIDNIGHT OF THE THIRD BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DAY OF THIS TRANSACTION. SEE THE ATTACHED NOTICE OF CANCELLATION. >< Approximate Start Date: Total Price of Job ?? 174 No Deposit Required BDWC Rep. BDWC Initials EMERGENCY SERVICE Owner's Initial r Approximate Completion Date: V , Balance Pazable to Forman r Owner `•.-' Owner L_/ Basement Doctor represents that workers compensation and public liability insurance are carried and applied to this contract. Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company does not guarantee agair conditions over which we have no control, such as pre-existing structural damage, conditions of masonry, buried oil lines, damage caused by others, fire, floods, or backing up of sewer systeir sweating pipes, condensation. porous or mud titled blocks, iron or residue or damp walls or wet under block walls. Methods may vary as to the system installed based on the obstacles encounter on the job. Walls that are stone, brick, mud tilled block or simply wet may need rough casting done now or at a later time for an installation cost of $12.00 per square foot. The customer responsible for electrical outlet installation. If less than the entire basement is being waterproofed and additional work is ever needed, the price will be based on the 1997 pricing for future wor Basement Doctor hereby expressly warrants that all work done pursuant to this contract shall be of workmanlike quality, and that all materials shall be merchantable quality, and be fit for the u: for which they are intended. Although a professional job will be done on your project, there is no guarantee that mold may not reappear. Moisture, a food source and temperature play an important part in the growth of mob In the unlikely event that mold grows back within one month, we will make one follow up visit at no additional charge after that, prevailing charges will apply. The Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company guarantees its workmanship and materials for the entire time in which the customer holds title to the property against controlling water penetrating the entire sub soil wall and floor area where a pressure relief system has been installed. Guarantee is automatically transferable to = subsequent owner at no charge. Lifetime Guarantee on Sump Pump, Excluding labor. • If any mold removal or duct cleaning is needed outside of the basement, please contact MD Environmental at 1-800- 897-4033 • If home remodeling is needed for any in-home upgrades, please contact Basement Doctor Remodeters at 1-800-865-7775 Notice Of Cancellation Date of Transactions: You may cancel this transaction, without any penalty or obligation, within three business days form the above date. If you cancel, any property traded in. any payments made by you under the contract or sale, and any negotiable instrument executed by you will be returned within ten business days following receipt by tln seller or your cancellation notice, and any security interest arising out of the transaction will be cancelled. If you cancel, you must make available to the seller at your residents in substantially as good condition as when received, any goods delivered to you under this contractor sale; or you may, if you wish, compl! with the instructions of the seller regarding the return shipment of the goods at the seller's expense and risk. If you do make the goods available to the seller and the seller does not pick them up within twenty days of the date of your notice of cancellation, you may retain or dispose of the goods without any furthe obligation. If you fail to make the goods available to the seller, or if you agree to return the goods to the seller and fail to do so, then you remain liable for performance of all obligations under the contract To cancel this transaction. mail or deliver a signed and dated copy of this cancellation notice or any other written notice, or send a telegram, to Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company at 1133 Lincoln Highway, Trevose, PA 19053 not later than midnight of date). I hrrchy c.dtcel this transaction. f Date) tBuyer's Signature) Waiver of Right of Recision acknowledge that I have been advised of my right under the law to cancel rhis contract with Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company within three hu,mess days. I hereby waive the right as 1 require basement Doctor Waterproofing Company's serv ices of to meet a bona fide immediate personal emergency. Vnture of enter?rney nr situation requiring immediate remedy: Date: Buyer: __. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Shane B. Kope, Esq., of Kope and Associates, LLC, attorney for the Plaintiff, hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Complaint was served this date upon the below-referenced individual at the below listed address by way of certified mail, which is an adequate form of service pursuant to Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No.1005: Aqua Technology's Basement Doctor 3133 Lincoln Highway Trevose, PA 19053 Aqua Technology's Basement Doctor 2421 Wyandotte Road Willow Grove, PA 19090 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC Shan a sq. 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 I.D. 92207 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Date: May 24, 2007 ,,.?,,???. -?i f,+. ,,,,? J +? ? ;,._ :. f KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC By: Shane B. Kope, Esq. I D 92207 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff CYNTHIA D. NILSEN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA V. : NO. 2007-2552 (Civil Term) AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR WATERPROOFING COMPANY : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. DATE OF SERVICE: June 28, 2007 IMPORTANT NOTICE YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGEMENT 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 CANNNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP: Cumberland County Bar Association 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC 104 - Date: June 28, 2007 Sh . Kope, Es CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Shane B. Kope, Esquire, hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Ten Day Notice of Intent to Enter Default Judgment was served this date upon the below- referenced individuals at the below listed address by way of first class mail, postage pre-paid: Aqua Technology's Basement Doctor 2421 Wyandot Road Willow Grove, PA 19090 A 8- 8- C T S, LLC S B. Kope, sq. 4660 Trin a ad, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 I. D. 92207 Date: June 29, 2007 Attorney for Plaintiff a U - ri VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI BY: MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB ATTORNEY ID# 36678 319 SWEDE STREET NORRISTOWN, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW o'LSS?. CYNTHIA D. NILSEN NO. 2007-(Civil Term) VS AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR WATERPROOFING COMPANY ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Kindly enter my appearance for Aqua Technology, Inc. in the above captioned matter. VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI BY : MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB 319 Swede Street Norristown, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 Attorney for Defendant Aqua Technology, Inc. ? ? Q `'? c..._ _'?. S"r C'?'. - _ ? _ , ?-; ? ; . ? :a C?3 . . ? _ i i J, ^e7 ?? s ?? ; ^ f t1 ? t e y .? IN , i . VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI BY: MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB ATTORNEY ID# 36678 319 SWEDE STREET NORRISTOWN, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT N IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSY?zVADa CIVIL ACTION - LAW F- t7 ' CYNTHIA D. NILSEN t NO. 2007-0552 (Civil Term) 1 ? L.J J _> VS AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR WATERPROOFING COMPANY PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER TO ALL COUNTS 1. Plaintiff has filed a lawsuit naming as the defendant in the caption an entity titled "Aqua Technology's Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company" 2. In the introductory clause, plaintiff then goes on to allege that the defendant is Aqua Technology Basement Doctor. 3. The answering defendant herein is Aqua Technology Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation incorporated on or about October 13, 2005. A true and correct copy of the printout from the Pennsylvania Corporation Bureau is attached hereto, incorporated herein and marked Exhibit "A". 4. Plaintiff has served the answering defendant at either 3133 Lincoln Highway, Trevose, Bucks County and/or 2421 Wyandotte Road, Willow Grove, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. 5. The Complaint alleges breach of contract, fraud/intentional misrepresentation, negligent representation, an alleged violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law and breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose directed at the entity known as Aqua Technology's Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company. 6. The answering defendant Aqua Technology, Inc. is not a signatory to the contract which was entered into on April 14, 2005. 7. The contract in question is between the plaintiff Cynthia D. Nilsen and an entire other legal entity known as Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company which is not the answering defendant who was served with the instant Complaint. 8. Plaintiff's complaints, if any, should be directed to the proper legal entity, Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company. 9. Defendant has searched the Pennsylvania Department of State Corporation Bureau and has located a corporation known as Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company created on June 28, 1999 with an office at 1536 DeKalb Pike, Blue Bell, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. 10. Moreover, the Department of State Pennsylvania Corporation Bureau lists numerous entities utilizing the name Basement Doctor. 11. Aqua Technology, Inc. is not Basement Doctor Waterproofing Company. -2- 12. The plaintiff has sued the wrong entity as there is no contract or connection between plaintiff and Aqua Technology, Inc. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court grant their demurrer and dismiss the Complaint against them. VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI 12- BY : k;4-,Cj 00-4tc&- MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB 319 Swede Street Norristown, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 Attorney for Defendant -3- . Business hntrty Page 1 of 1 P&NNSYLVANJA Tepartment of State f _ , 4 Corporations Corporations I Forms I Contact Corporations I Business Services Search Business Entity Filing By Business Name By Business Entity ID Date: 7/5/2007 History Verify (Select the link above to view the Business Entity's Filing History) Verify Certification Business Name History Name Aqua technology, Inc. Name Type Current Name Business Corporation - Domestic - Information Entity Number: Status: Entity Creation Date: State of Business.: Principal Office Address: Mailing Address: 553681 Active 10/13/2005 PA 3133 Lincoln Highway Trevose PA 19053 No Address Home I Site Map I Site Feedback I View as Text Only I Employment U ?? 4 Home Copyright ® 2002 Pennsylvania Department of State. All Rights Reserved. Commonwealth of PA Privacy Statement EXHIBIT "A" http://www.corporations.state.pa.us/corp/soskb/Corp.asp?2406311 7/5/2007 VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI BY: MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB ATTORNEY ID# 36678 319 SWEDE STREET NORRISTOWN, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CYNTHIA D. NILSEN NO. 2007-0552(Civil Term) VS AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR WATERPROOFING COMPANY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 6, 2007, I served a true and correct copy the foregoing Preliminary Objections in the Nature of a Demurrer upon the following individual, which service was made postage prepaid regular first class mail to: Shane B. Kope, Esquire KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC 4660 Trindle Road, Ste. 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 VANGROSSI AND RECCHUITI ar MICHAEL P. GOTTLIEB 319 Swede Street Norristown, PA 19401-4801 (610) 279-4200 Attorney for Defendant DATE: 07/06/07 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC By: Shane B. Kope, Esq. ID 92207 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com CYNTHIA D. NILSEN, Plaintiff, V. Attorney for Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 2007--455;k(Civil Term) AQUA TECHNOLOGY'S BASEMENT DOCTOR : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED WATERPROOFING COMPANY, Defendant. PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter Plaintiffs voluntary discontinuance of the within action pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 229. Date: October 3, 2007 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC ane B. Kope Esq. I. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Shane B. Kope, Esq., of Kope and Associates, LLC, attorney for the Plaintiff, hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Discontinue was served this date upon the below-referenced individual at the below listed address by way of first class mail: Michael P. Gottlieb, Esq. Vangrossi and Recchuiti 319 Swede Street Norristown, PA 19401-4801 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC Sh B. Kope, Es 4660 Tnn , uite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 ID 92207 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Date: Octoberk 2007 ? ? ? .--.? - i'? ?' r?P ?; ? s- ? i?,??... -? .....a -, -"" - i ;'a - z, . :° r.` :?: