Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-3204BUTLER LAW FIRM Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 09826 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 lawyers abutlerlawfirm.com RITNER STEEL, INC., Plaintiff V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07 - CIVIL ACTION - LAW 01(A 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 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 claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE OR KNOW A LAWYER, THEN YOU SHOULD GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 or (800) 990-9108 NOTICIA LE HAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita or en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO INMEDIATEMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEQUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 (800) 990-9108 BUTLER LAW FIRM Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 09826 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 lawyers butlerlawfirm.com RITNER STEEL, INC., Plaintiff V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. Off'- 32 by ee?jj CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Ritner Steel, Inc., by and through its attorneys, Butler Law Firm, and files this Complaint against Defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. The Plaintiff, Ritner Steel, Inc., is a corporation registered to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 131 Stover Drive, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17013. 2. The Defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., is a corporation registered to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 1225 Saxonwald Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15234-2319. On or about August 2, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a written agreement whereby Plaintiff was to furnish various materials and labor (fabrication only) for the WPXI Broadcast Facility project in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The total contract price was $582,279.00 plus tax. A true and correct copy of said written agreement is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". 4. Plaintiff performed all labor and fabricated all materials pursuant to the terms and specifications of the agreement at their place of business in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The aforementioned agreement (Exhibit "A") included a fee in the amount of $18,000.00 for freight with delivery being the responsibility of Plaintiff. 6. Defendant elected to pick up the materials at Plaintiff's place of business in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and deliver to the project site. 7. Plaintiff gave a credit to Defendant in the amount of $18,000.00 representing the amount allocated for freight and delivery costs. Despite numerous requests, Defendant has failed and refused to pay the total amount due under the contract. A balance is currently due and owing in the amount of $25,026.19. 9. Plaintiff provided to Defendant the materials and services described herein in a timely and workmanlike manner. 10. The prices charged for said materials and services are reasonable and the market prices therefor. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ritner Steel, Inc., respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment for Plaintiff and against Defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., in the amount of $25,026.19 plus interest and costs of this suit and grant all such other relief as it proper and just. Respectfully submitted, BUTLER LAW FIRM Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Ronald D. Butler, Esquire I.D. #09826 Jana Butler Toole, Esquire I.D. #80574 P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 safer t00W Fainter` C%ISL'h e?! RTTl1TER ST=o INC.'. 131 99TOM R DJt=. P. 0. BOX 616 RLMZK 7 Pd 17013 PffOJIX (7177 ?49`1449 FA$ (?17) 9f9-6W9 AISC Quality Certified 1. Scab Ind wtHes Atbt. Mark Seech O]ECT. WT= DATE: 7fft CA7101V: Pituburglt, Pa. EST #: 070610 cu aeab: Fer attached ds whig lfat dated 718.06. ?pe of Work: Furnhb: Per drawings referenced above; Total $ 582,279.00 plus tax. tFACEPRM$SPCSP*`PRIMER *)COAT OFNON-UNEVBRSALRTDOXlV%l.O%UL9.D.i? JWCO.) us o Engineer of Record (Design); Fir 'Seal; Test*8 and inspection Coat (ShotyFieta): Layout mid Swmeyrr luidated Damages; Con inuous A. Hots for Sfll Ylates, Bond Bevms, Shear Walls & Parapets; Fvcposed Ardkftechtrnl -eb Field [1+fessn?+eneMs. Don+eWC Only,. Union Dvive"; Column A. Bolts; L. Plabes; Shop tad Field Bo#?; Calvan3zlag ecfal Coatings; Retainage; L,etallationr nr icATioNs ; AU f enished items are the mpoasibility of the contractor to unlosad; loaditS at site: Additlenal wailing time beyond two houn for unloading will be billed at $100:0 YM If it becomes :e± ) for ddver to spend .the nit lodging and meal eupenee is billable: Dtawhtgs must be staosped " For osL _. tion" per AISC SUmdatds in ender to hbdcate: Any dewAtag eta, exclusions or claWkatiom that result W irkation delays are not the zesponsibflity of Ratner Steel, 1w. Delays as a result of detailing will not be held agabW ner Steer,1Ac. fabrication and delivery schedule; Schedule to be smbndtted and agreed to by all paMes. s quotation is based on ewracid cost and availability. Because of the volatr7ity of steel prates this quote hmy bt subject to ; juturr steel prior increases. Ribw Stet4 Inc rasemes the right to `enure the sche&k prior to acceptance of aWard. Slut 121U 14 will treed to be ven)led anal confirmed aeon wriltex acaptancc. Alt offm are subject to prior sate of shop Pricdtion boars. rows: Wolk will psaceed nn it Is apprvved. Once approved, all material will be unvoiced whm ordered, and Fnnent is due in 9evert M days. ece will be invoked upon delivery and payment is due within tbiaty (30) days. PRICE GOOD FOR 15 DAYS FROM ABOVE DATE _Ie KPAM-. M. b• 2-01.0 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: BY: JOSEPH DORMAN COMPANY. RITNER STEEL ING Oita ?1A"s Any Owmdona, Please CAU Thank You RITNERSTEEL. COM ilk F EXHIBIT "All VERIFICATION I, BABETTE FREUND, Chief Financial Officer of the Plaintiff herein, hereby certify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct according to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Babette Freund Dated: 51-Z47 N CAI) t An Fn "p f77 Gn too I of iY IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RITNER STEEL, INC., CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, Case No.: 07-3204 V. PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. Filed on Behalf of: Defendant, Seech Industries, Inc. Counsel of Record for this Party: Kenneth W. Lee PA I . D. No. 50016 Christopher E. Fisher PA I.D. No. 201395 TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 Telephone: 717-234-4121 Facsimile: 717-232-6802 -r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RITNER STEEL, INC., CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, Case No.: 07-3207 V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE TO MICHAEL LAMB, PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., Kenneth W. Lee and Christopher E. Fisher on behalf of defendant Seech Industries, Inc. Respectfully submitted, TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. /Kenneth W. Lee I.D. No. 50016 Christopher E. Fisher PA I.D. No. 201395 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 Telephone: 717-234-4121 Facsimile: 717-232-6802 Counsel for Defendant Seech Industries, Inc. 94881.1 (018116-132710) r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this-7-7 -i day of June, 2007, I, Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire, for the law firm of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., attorneys for Defendant, hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing Praecipe To Enter Appearance, by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Butler Law Firm 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 Kenneth W. Lee 0 LIN ? RITNER STEEL, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. D7-3aor? NO.-9?-3-26? SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jana Butler Toole, Esquire, hereby certify that on the 26th day of June, 2007, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Ten Day Notice by depositing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seech Industries, Inc. 1225 Saxonwald Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15234-2319 Kenneth W. Lee, Esq. Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 N. Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Cana B96er Toole, Esquire Attom/ey for Plaintiff I.D. #80574 500 North Third Street, 12th Floor P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 BUTLER LAW FIRM Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 09826 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 lawyers ???butlerlawtirm.com RITNER STEEL, INC., Plaintiff V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant TO: Seech Industries, Inc. 1225 Saxonwald Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15234-2319 DATE OF NOTICE: June 26, 2007 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-3207 CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 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 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 or (800) 990-9108 C N P o "C1 . -? 1 T? -` V r i ,y±t C,J1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RITNER STEEL, INC., Plaintiff, V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., : CIVIL DIVISION Case No.: 07-3204 ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC. Defendant. Filed on Behalf of: Defendant, Seech Industries, Inc. Counsel of Record for this Party: Kenneth W. Lee PA I.D. No. 50016 Christopher E. Fisher PA I.D. No. 201395 TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 Telephone: 717-234-4121 Facsimile: 717-232-6802 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RITNER STEEL, INC., : CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, : Case No.: 07-3207 V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC. AND NOW, comes defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., by and through its attorneys, Tucker Arensberg, P.C., who files this Answer, New Matter and Counterclaim, and in support thereof states: A. ANSWER 1. Upon information and belief, the averments in paragraph 1 of the Complaint are admitted. 2. The averments in paragraph 2 of the Complaint are admitted. 3. The averments in paragraph 3 of the Complaint are denied as stated. On or about August 2, 2006, plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement whereby plaintiff agreed to fabricate and deliver structural steel for the project known as the WPXI Broadcast Facility, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, ("Project"). Plaintiffs work was to be performed in accordance with the various plans and drawings, including the Structural Steel Shop Drawings, for the Project with plaintiff to fabricate and deliver the structural steel in the sequence set forth in the Erection Drawings. The price for which - 1 - defendant was to pay was $582,279.00 plus applicable tax. By way of further response, it is admitted that the document attached to the Complaint as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct copy of one page of the voluminous set of documents constituting the parties' agreement. 4. The averments in paragraph 4 of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. Upon information and belief, defendant admits that plaintiff fabricated the structural steel at its facility in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. However, as more fully set forth in the within New Matter and Counterclaim, it is specifically denied that plaintiff performed in accordance with the terms and specifications of the parties' agreement, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 5. Except for the representations of plaintiff as to its freight charges and the credit of $18,000.00 which plaintiff furnished therefore, defendant is without information, knowledge or belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 5 of the Complaint. 6. The averments in paragraph 6 of the Complaint are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. At or near the time for which the structural steel was required for the Project, plaintiff advised defendant that plaintiff was unable and/or unwilling to fulfill plaintiffs obligations to deliver the structural steel to the Project. 7. The averments in paragraph 7 of the Complaint are admitted. 8. The averments in paragraph 8 of the Complaint are admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that plaintiff has made demands upon defendant for the payment of $25,026.19. Defendant denies that defendant is liable to plaintiff for any amount as more fully set forth in the within New Matter and Counterclaim. -2- 9. Defendant is advised that the averments in paragraph 9 of the Complaint constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. If a response is deemed required, defendant incorporates herein by reference the within New Matter and Counterclaim as though fully set forth at length. 10. Defendant is advised that the averments in paragraph 10 of the Complaint constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., requests this Court to dismiss the Complaint and demands judgment against plaintiff as requested in the Counterclaim. B. NEW MATTER 11. The Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. 12. Defendant has paid plaintiff in full for all work and/or materials furnished by plaintiff pursuant to the parties' agreement. 13. Plaintiffs inability or unwillingness to fulfill its obligations to deliver the fabricated structural steel was a breach of the parties' agreement which caused defendant to incur $26,496.25 so as to fulfill these obligations which plaintiff had agreed to perform. 14. To date, plaintiff has reimbursed defendant only $18,000.00 (through a credit to the original contract price) for plaintiffs breach of its obligations to deliver the structural steel thereby causing plaintiff to be liable to defendant in the amount of $8,496.25. -3- 15. Pursuant to the parties' agreement, plaintiffs fabrication work was to be performed in accordance with the plans and drawings, including the Shop and Erection Drawings ("Project Drawings"), prepared for the Project. 16. Plaintiff failed to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project's plans and drawings. 17. Plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings caused the structural steel to be delivered in an improper sequence, and required the steel to be resorted prior to erection. 18. Plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings required that plaintiffs fabrication errors be remediated or repaired at the Project site. 19. Defendant has incurred $16,529.94 in damages which were directly and proximately caused by plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings. 20. Because of (a) plaintiffs inability or unwillingness to deliver the fabricated structural steel to the Project site pursuant to the parties' agreement and (b) plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings, defendant has properly and with justification withheld $25,026.19 from the balance previously due and owing to plaintiff. WHEREFORE, defendant, Seech Industries, Inc., requests this Court to dismiss the Complaint and demands judgment against plaintiff as requested in the Counterclaim. -4- C. COUNTERCLAIM 21. Defendant incorporates herein by reference paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint. 22. Pursuant to the parties' agreement, plaintiff agreed to: a. deliver the fabricated structural steel to the Project site; b. fabricate the structural steel in a sequence so it could be delivered to the Project site in accordance with the Project's Erection Drawings; and c. fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project's Shop Drawings. 23. The American Institute of Steel Construction Specifications were a part of the agreement between plaintiff and defendant. 24. Plaintiff informed defendant at a crucial time of the Project that plaintiff was unable or unwilling to deliver the fabricated structural steel to the Project site. 25. Plaintiffs inability or unwillingness to fulfill its obligations to deliver the fabricated structural steel was a breach of the parties' agreement which caused defendant to incur $26,496.25 so as to fulfill these obligations which plaintiff had agreed to perform. 26. To date, plaintiff has reimbursed defendant only $18,000.00 (through a credit to the original contract price) for plaintiffs breach of its obligations to deliver the structural steel thereby causing plaintiff to be liable to defendant in the amount of $8,496.25. -5- 27. Pursuant to the parties' agreement, plaintiffs fabrication work was to be performed in accordance with the plans and drawings, including the Shop and Erection Drawings ("Project Drawings"), prepared for the Project. 28. Plaintiff failed to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project's plans and drawings. 29. Plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings caused the structural steel to be delivered in an improper sequence, and required the steel to be resorted prior to erection. 30. Plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings required that plaintiffs fabrication errors be remediated or repaired at the Project site. 31. Defendant has incurred $16,529.94 in damages which were directly and proximately caused by plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings. 32. Because of (a) plaintiffs inability or unwillingness to deliver the fabricated structural steel to the Project site pursuant to the parties' agreement and (b) plaintiffs failure to fabricate the structural steel in accordance with the Project Drawings, defendant has properly and with justification withheld $25,026.19 from the balance previously due and owing to plaintiff. 33. All conditions precedent have occurred or been performed. WHEREFORE, plaintiff, Seech Industries, Inc., demands judgment against plaintiff in the form of a set-off in the amount of $25,026.19. -6- Respectfully submitted, TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. Kenneth W. Lee PA I.D. No. 50016 Christopher E. Fisher PA I . D. No. 201395 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 Telephone: 717-234-4121 Facsimile: 717-232-6802 Counsel for Defendant Seech Industries, Inc. 94991.1 (018116-132710) -7- n 28 07 07:12a Mark E. Seech VERIFICATION 412-833-1819 AND NOW, comes Mark E. Seech, President of Seech Industries, Inc. and verifies that the facts contained in the foregoing Answer, New Matter and Counterclaim are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities, which provides criminal penalties if a person with intent to mislead makes a written false statement which he does not believe to be true. Date: Mark E. Seech President, Seech Industries, Inc. P.1 94962.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this day of June, 2007, I, Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire, for the law firm of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., attorneys for Defendant, hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing Praecipe To Enter Appearance, by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Jana Butler Toole, Esquire Butler Law Firm P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 4 Kenneth W. Lee -9- t'? a' C? C ? -n ? ? ? ? ? ? ? L? _ -? ?-'' ;"? ? '? -? ?.. SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2007-03204 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND RITNER STEEL INC VS SEECH INDUSTRIES INC R. Thomas Kline , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT to wit: SEECH INDUSTRIES INC but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of ALLEGHENY County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 13th , 2007 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from ALLEGHENY Sheriff's Costs: So answers: _ Docketing 18.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 Thomas Kline Dep Allegheny Co 50.00 Sheriff of Cumberland County Postage 1.16 ? t, /? goo ? ?,,, 88.16 06/13/2007 BUTLER LAW FIRM Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of A. D. In fhe Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Ritner Steel Inc VS. Seech Industries Inc No. 07-3204 civil Now, May 30, 2007 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Allegheny County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. Affidavit of Service Now, M "" 54?1- , 20_L7, at Z? ti s o'clock.-_ M. served the within tom ?O/a P n 4- upon.SCCLk e5 Irjc at 1j)-S7 -S"onw4z-o 4vr- PGA, P,4 1:5--l.39 by handing to MAR K J jPt I w I S-cf a copy of the original and made known to A Inn the contents thereof. So answers, Sheriff of Sworn and subscribed before me this day of , 20 COSTS SERVICE _ MILEAGE _ AFFIDAVIT vh ?c wvk) County, PA BUTLER LAW FIRM Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 09826 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 (717) 236-1485 1awvcrs(cibuttcrla«- firni.com RITNER STEEL, INC., Plaintiff V. SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 07-3204 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER ANDANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, by and through its attorneys, Butler Law Firm, and files this Reply to New Matter and Answer to Counterclaim, and in support thereof avers the following: Reply to New Matter 11. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. 12. Denied. As stated in Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant owes Plaintiff the sum of $25,026.19 plus interest and costs of suit for work and/or materials furnished to Defendant pursuant to the parties' agreement. 13. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff failed to fulfill its obligations pursuant to the parties' agreement. Plaintiff is without sufficient information or knowledge to respond to the allegation that Defendant "incurred" $26,496.25 and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. The allegation that Plaintiff breached the parties' agreement is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. 14. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff credited Defendant $18,000.00 for freight charges. The parties mutually agreed that Defendant would pick up materials thereby excusing Plaintiffs obligation to do so. The allegation that Plaintiff is liable to Defendant in the amount of $8,496.25 is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. The allegation that Plaintiff breached the parties' agreement is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. 15. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. 16. Denied. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. Defendant's allegations lack sufficient specificity to allow Plaintiff to properly respond. As such, the allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. Defendant's allegations lack sufficient specificity to allow Plaintiff to properly respond. As such, the allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 19. Denied. Plaintiff is without sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averment that Defendant incurred said amount. As such said allegation is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. The allegations made in this paragraph also constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. 20. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendant's New Matter with prejudice and grant all such other relief as is reasonable and just. c_- Answer to Counterclaim 21. No response is required. 22. Denied. The agreement speaks for itself. 23. Denied. The agreement speaks for itself. 24. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff failed to fulfill its obligations pursuant to the parties' agreement. Plaintiff is without sufficient information or knowledge to respond to the allegation that Defendant "incurred" $26,496.25 and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. The allegation that Plaintiff breached the parties' agreement is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. 26. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff credited Defendant $18,000.00 for freight charges. The parties mutually agreed that Defendant would pick up materials thereby excusing Plaintiff's obligation to do so. The allegation that Plaintiff is liable to Defendant in the amount of $8,496.25 is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. The allegation that Plaintiff breached the parties' agreement is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegation is specifically denied. 27. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. 28. Denied. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. Defendant's allegations lack sufficient specificity to allow Plaintiff to properly respond. As such, the allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 29. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 30. Denied. Plaintiff agreed to fabricate materials pursuant to the structural steel shop drawings only. Plaintiff did not receive any other plans and/or drawings prior to the agreement dated on or about August 2, 2006. Defendant's allegations lack sufficient specificity to allow Plaintiff to properly respond. As such, the allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 31. Denied. Plaintiff is without sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averment that Defendant incurred said amount. As such said allegation is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. The allegations made in this paragraph also constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. 32. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. 33. Denied. The allegations made in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, said allegations are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Plaintiff's Counterclaim with prejudice and grant all such other relief as is proper and just. Respectfully submitted, BUTLER LAW FIRM Attorneys for Plaintiff By: J 2 J 44:: Ja - - Ronald D. Butler, Esquire I.D. #09826 Jana Butler Toole, Esquire I.D. #80574 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 236-1485 VERIFICATION I, BABETTE FREUND, Chief Financial Officer of the Plaintiff herein, hereby certify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter and Answer to Counterclaim are true and correct according to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Babette Freund Dated: /0 05-0--:7- RITNER STEEL, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 07-3204 SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jana Butler Toole, Esquire, hereby certify that on the A a4k day of October, 2007, 1 served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to New Matter and Answer to Counterclaim by depositing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 WBu ole, Esquire aintiff I.D. #80574 500 North Third Street P.O. Box 1004 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 236-1485 Ol v ,. RITNER STEEL, INC., In the Court of Common Pleas of Plaintiff Cumberland County, Pennsylvania V. : No. 07-3204 SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE Kindly withdrawal the appearance of Ronald D. Butler, Esquire and the Butler Law Firm for Plaintiff, Ritner Steel, Inc. Ronald D. Butler, Esquire Butler Law Firm 500 North Third Street P. O. Box 1004 / Harrisburg, PA 17108-1004 Dated: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Kindly enter the appearance of Anthony W. Parker, Esquire and the firm of Kelly, Parker & Cohen, LLP, as counsel for Plaintiff, Ritner Steel. Dated: j / -?7 l ds hony V. Parker, Esquire Kelly, Parker & Cohen, LLP Commerce Towers, l0 h Floor 300 North Second Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 29th day of January, 2008, I, Patricia Z. Glusko, a secretary in the law offices of Kelly, Parker & Cohen, LLP, hereby certify that I have served this day, true and correct copies of the foregoing document in the above matter, by depositing the same in the United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to those person(s) and address(es) indicated below: Seech Industries, Inc. 1225 Saxonwald Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15234-2319 Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P. O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Patricia Z. usko I a SIN .a C ©R 51 RITNER STEEL, INC., In the Court of Common Pleas of Plaintiff Cumberland County, Pennsylvania V. No. 07-3204 SEECH INDUSTRIES, INC., . Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAEC'fPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly discontinue the above-captioned civil action with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, Dated: p o Dated: 9 ?? a 8 Z2?la An on W. Parker PA I. o. 81251 Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP 300 North 2"' Street, 10" Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 717-920-2220 FAX 717-920-2370 aparker(akpc-law.com Counsel for Ritner Steel, Inc. Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P. O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 717-234-4121 FAX 717-232-6802 Counsel for Seech Industries, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 15`h day of August 2008, I, Pamela L. Russell, a legal secretary with the law firm Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid in Harrisburg, PA: Kenneth W. Lee, Esquire Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P O Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 i Xo- f `o