Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-3875JOYCE A. CAREY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 2007- ye 7 S CIVIL TERM CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants NOTICE 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 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 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. 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, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-3166 40 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2007- 3 Sr-7 S CIVIL TERM COMPLAINT NOW, comes Plaintiff, Joyce A. Carey, by and through her attorneys, O'BRIEN, BARIC JOYCE A. CAREY, Plaintiff V. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants & SCHERER, and files the within Complaint and, in support thereof, sets forth the following: 1. Plaintiff is an adult individual who resides at One Tee Jay Drive, Mt. Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17065. 2. Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, is an adult individual who resides at 308 Centennial Avenue, Hanover, York County, Pennsylvania 17331. 3. Defendant, Dawn Lockard, is an adult individual who resides at 889 Baltimore Pike, Gardners, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17324. 4. Defendants are husband wife with a divorce action pending in the Court of Common Pleas of York County, Pennsylvania. 5. Plaintiff is the owner of certain residential real property known and numbered as 889 Baltimore Pike, Gardners, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania (the "Property"). 6. Plaintiff acquired the Property from her father through his estate. The Property had been the residence of her father. 7. In the fall of 2004, the Defendants asked Plaintiff if she would be interested in leasing the Property to the Defendants to be used by them as their residence. w 8 restore the Property in return for Plaintiff permitting them to reside in the Property without paying a monthly rent. 9. Plaintiff agreed to permit the Defendants to reside in the Property without paying rent in return for their promise to maintain, renovate and restore the Property. 10. the Property for a total of two (2) years and four (4) months without ever making a rental payment to Plaintiff. 11. The fair market rent value for the property is seven hundred fifty ($750.00) dollars per month. 12. In the late fall, early winter of 2006/2007, Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, left the Property. 13. Upon inspecting the Property, Plaintiff did discovery that the Defendant's had failed to maintain, renovate and/or restore the Property. In particular, but not by way of limitation, Plaintiff discovered the following conditions at the Property: a) Defendants had removed fixtures, tile and flooring from the bathroom for the Property leaving the Property without a functioning modern bath; b) Defendants had failed to replenish the salt for the soft water conditioner in the Property which ruined the soft water conditioner system; and c) by failing to maintain the soft water conditioner, hard water ruined the The Defendants represented and agreed that they would maintain, renovate and The Defendants began to reside in the Property in the fall of 2004 and remained in existing furnace system such that it requires complete replacement. COUNT I-BREACH OF CONTRACT JOYCE CAREY v. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD 14. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs one through thirteen as though set forth at length. 15. Defendants breached the oral agreement made by them with Plaintiff to maintain, renovate and restore the Property. 16. As a direct and proximate result of this breach, Plaintiff sustained and will sustain the following damages: a) loss of rental value of $750.00 per month for a period of twenty-eight (28) months or $21,000.00; b) costs to replace the damaged soft water conditioner of $1,515.00; C) costs to replace the damaged furnace system in an amount to be determined; d) costs to restore the bathroom in the Property of $2,500.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in her favor and against the Defendants for the sum of at least $25,015.00 plus interest, costs and expenses not in an amount exceeding the limits for compulsory arbitration. COUNT II-NEGLIGENCE JOYCE A. CAREY v. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD 17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs one through sixeen as though set forth at length. 18. Defendants had a duty to Plaintiff to maintain, renovate and restore the Property in a workmanlike manner. 19. Defendants breached their duty to maintain, renovate and restore the Property in a workmanlike manner. 20. As a direct and proximate result of this breach of their duty of care, Plaintiff has incurred damages which include, but are not limited to, loss of rent, damages to the Pr including, but not limited to, those damages itemized at paragraph 1 Property 6 heremabove which paragraph is incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment in her favor and against the Defendants for damages, costs and expenses not in an amount exceeding the limits for compulsory arbitration. Respectfully submitted, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER David A. Baric, Esquire I.D. # 44853 19 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiff dab.dir/litigation/caret'/complaint.pld r VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This verification is signed by David A. Baric, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiff and is based upon the statements provided by Plaintiff, as well as documents reviewed by the undersigned as attorney for Plaintiff. This verification will be substituted and ratified by a verification signed by the Plaintiff who is presently unavailable to sign said verification. I undersigned that false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unworn falsificati s to authorities. 1- Dated: U/ ? 11 David A. Baric, Esquire ?. N GJ G7 v ? if f„? ?.... c:-: ? 7 Z) ; CD < W r { /V ? p ~ v 0 SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2007-03875 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND CAREY JOYCE A VS LOCKARD CHRISTOPHER E ET AL 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: LOCKARD CHRISTOPHER E but was unable to locate Him in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of YORK County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On August 7th , 2007 this office was in receipt of the attached return from YORK Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge Dep York County Postage So answe -' 18.00 - r 9.00 10.00 R. Thomas Kline 104.48 Sheriff of Cumberland County 1.55 143.03 f `7?f l UlU? 08/07/2007 OBRIEN BARIC SCHERER Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of A. D. SHERIFF'S RETURN - NOT FOUND CASE NO: 2007-03875 P COMMONTWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND CAREY JOYCE A VS LOCKARD CHRISTOPHER E ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT LOCKARD DAWN but was unable to locate Her in his bailiwick. He therefore returns the COMPLAINT & NOTICE , NOT FOUND , as to the within named DEFENDANT LOCKARD DAWN 889 BALTIMORE PIKE GARDNERS, PA 17324 ALTHOUGH NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS WERE MADE, WE WERE UNABLE TO SERVE PRIOR TO EXPIRATION. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 17.28 Not Found 5.00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 g?lorp. ?! 38.28 So answer ..^..r?,?' R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County OBRIEN BARIC & SCHERER 08/07/2007 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of , A. D. COUNTY OF YORK OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF 45 N. GEORGE ST., YORK, PA 17401 SERVICE CALL (717) 771-9601 SHERIFF SERVICE NSTIMTYONS PROCESS RECEIPT and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN PLEASE TYPE ONLY ME 1 THRU 12 DO NOj„Qg'lAq" r9C PIES 1 PLAINTIFF/S/ J A. 3 DEFENDANTS/ Christopher E. Lockard et al 2 COURT NUMBER 07-3875 civil 4 TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT N 0 T I C E & Notice a n d Complaint C I C A SERVE 5 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ETC TO SERVE OR DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE LEVIED, ATTACHED, OR SOLD Christopher E. Lockard 6 ADDRESS (STREET OR RFO WITH BOX NUMBER, APT NO ,CITY. BORO, TWP STATE AND ZIP CODE) AT 308 Centennial Avenue Hanover, PA 17331 7. INDICATE SERVICE' U PERSONAL O PERSON IN CHARGE DEPUTIZE CEL;T MyIL U 1ST CLASS MAIL U POSTED :3 OTHER NOW July 3 , 20 07 I, SHERIFF OF ?}COUNTY, PA, do reby deputize th heriff of York COUNTY to execute a return th ording to law. This deputization being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. tSHERIFF OF 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SE5i1 ff OF COUNTY Cunberland ADVANCE FEE PAID BY CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF Please mail return of service to Cunberland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE: ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction, or removal of any property before sheriffs sale thereof 9. TYPE NAME and ADDRESS of ATTORNEY / ORIGINATOR and SIGNATURE) Q 10. TELEPHONE NUMBER 11. DATE FILED 19 WEST SOUTH STREET, CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-6873 6/27/2007 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COPY TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This area must be completed if notice is to be mailed) CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF THE SHERIFF - DO NOT WRITE BELOW TM LNE 13. 1 acknowledge receipt of the writ ?/5/2007 4. DATE RECEIVED 15 Expiration/Hearing Date or complaint as indicated above. M J M C G I L L Y C S O 17/27/2007 16. HOW SERVED PERSONAL RESIDENCE ( POSTED( ) POE ( ) SHERIFF'S OFFICE ( ) OTHER ( ) SEE REMARKS BELOW 17. O eby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, etc named above. (See remarks below.) C F:Ir TIT O DIV AL SER ED ?+LIST A REST HERE s?TO SHOWABOVE (Relationship Gto Defendant) 19. ocfOService 20 Ti ; of I 1. A EMPTS D'a T,me Miles 'ale"_s1 Miles `-?17 Da1? ?simeYl`f+le'sInt. _ Date LTime Int. Date Time Miles Int`i?TDale Time Miles / Int 22 23. Advance Costs 24. ?ervice Costs 25. N/F 26. Mileage 27 Postage 28. Sub Total 29. Pound 30. Notary $100.00 111,00 ?1. 6-oa 34. Foraipn Courtly Costs 35. Advance Costs 36 Service costs 37. Notary Cert. 38. Mieage/Postage/Not Found 41. AFFIRMED and subscribed to bet a me this U 1 ri 42. day of s0iffo F 44. Dep. SSheririf / -o* 4 uA NOTAR!AL S )jOTARY 46. Signatureof York LISA L. r? vlJI.AN, NOTARY PUBLIC County Sheriff CITY Or YC ;,, YORK COUNTY FOR WILLIA M HC MYCOMF;.",SSIC"d_,-,31RESAUG.12,2009 48. Signature of Foreign County Sheriff 50. 1 ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE SHERIFF'S RETURN SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED ISSUING AUTHORITY AND TITLE 31. Surchg. 32. Tot. Costs 3K?a 0 )44 39. Total Costs 40. WERS SHERIFF ue Refund Check No. sts Due or Refund I ? F "-Tt': ? -,-) 3 A4T' TE-- 7/30/07 49 DATE 51 DATE RECEIVED 1. WHITE - Issuing Authohly 2. PINK - Attorney 3. CANARY - Sheriffs Office 4. BLUE - Shenfrs Office Yd NISOA W8 S - Iff LOOZ 331'83HS 3H1 30 301330 Q3A130H IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, VS. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION-LAW ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, thisa VI-t-, day of , 2007, comes the Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, by and through his attorneys, Mooney & Associates, by John J. Mooney, III, Esquire, files the within Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim, wherein the following is a statement, to wit: ANSWER 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants asked the Plaintiff if she would be interested in leasing the property to them to be used as their residence. By way of further response, the Plaintiff offered the property to the Defendants on the conditions that they would occupy the same and would become the eventual owners of the property. It was agreed after paying $280.00 per month for a period of ten (10) years time the i property would be owned by the Defendants. At no time were there any discussions amongst the parties that the property would be leased or rented. 8. Admitted in part denied in part. It is admitted that the Defendants agreed they would reside in the property as it had been vacant for a period of approximately two (2) years and that they would attempt to clean up, renovate and improve the property while residing at that location. It is denied that the Defendants were to reside in the property and do anything in lieu of a monthly rent, as rent was never agreed to be paid. 9. Admitted in part denied in part. It is admitted that the Plaintiff permitted the Defendants to reside in the property without paying any rent because no rent was to be paid nor was there any agreement that renovations or restorations would occur in lieu of rent. By way of further response, the property was to become owned by the Defendants after a ten (10) year period of time. 10. Admitted. 11. Denied that the fair rental value of the property is $750.00. By way of further response, the same is not relevant to the within action and denied that the figure of $750.00 represents fair rental value. Strict proof that there is demanded. 12. Admitted in part denied it part. It is admitted that the Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, left the property. This occurred after the Plaintiff demanded that rent in the amount of $500.00 be paid. The Defendant was locked out of the house shortly thereafter without any of his clothing, medications, or personal property. It took over two (2) months for the Defendant to receive his personal property from the property. 13. With respect to the allegations made the Defendants respond as follows: a) it is denied that the Defendants have removed fixtures, tile, and flooring from the bathroom leaving it without a functioning modern bathroom. By way of further response, the bathroom was only partially finished because the Plaintiff failed to remove the debris from adjoining rooms so that the work could be completed. Plaintiff specifically indicated that the bathroom needed to be renovated and expanded into another room but the Plaintiff never cleaned out the adjoining room hence the project never went any further; b) Denied that the Defendants failed to replenish the water softener conditioner, which ruined the water softener. By way of further response, the water softener hadn't been used for a period of two (2) years and never was in working condition. Strict proof thereof demanded; c) Denied that the Defendants failed to maintain the water softener or that the water softener caused the furnace to require complete replacement. Strict proof thereof demanded COUNT I - Breach of Court 14. Defendants incorporate by reference responses one through thirteen above as though set forth at length. 15. Denied. It is denied Defendants breached any oral agreement. By way of further response, no oral agreement existed with respect to maintenance, renovations, or restoration. 16. It is denied that the Plaintiff has sustained any damages or losses. To the contrary, the Plaintiff has been greatly improved as per the reasons set forth in this New Matter as well as the Counterclaim hereof and the Defendants specifically answer as follows: a) Denied there is a loss of rental fair rental value; b) Denied that the water softener has a cost of $1550.00; strict proof thereof is demanded; c) Denied that the furnace system needs to be replaced; strict proof is demanded; and d) Denied that the bathroom would cost $2500.00 to restore and denied that the same is due and owing to the Plaintiff. Strict proof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper. COUNT II - NEGLIGENCE 17. Defendants incorporate by reference responses one through thirteen above as though set forth at length. 18. Denied that the Defendants had a duty to maintain, renovate and restore the property in a workmanlike manner. 19. Denied that Defendants breached their duty as alleged. 20. Denied that the Plaintiff has suffered any damages by reason of their occupancy, to the contrary, Plaintiff has substantially benefited for reasons set forth in this New Matter and Counterclaim. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff s Complaint with prejudice and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper. NEW MATTER Joyce A. Carey v. Christopher E. Lockard and Dawn Lockard 21. The prior paragraphs of this Answer are incorporated by reference. 22. Plaintiff is barred by the defense of consent. 23. Plaintiff is barred by the defense of release. 24. Plaintiff is barred by the Doctrine of estoppel. 25. Plaintiff is barred by the defense of waiver. 26. Plaintiff is barred by the defense of lathes. 27. Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon relief can be granted. 28. Plaintiffs claim is barred by the Statue of Frauds. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper. COUNTERCLAIM I - UNJUST ENRICHMENT Joyce A. Carey v. Christopher E. Lockard and Dawn Lockard 29. The prior paragraphs of this Answer are incorporated by reference. 30. Defendant Christopher E. Lockard believed that the property would be owned by he and his wife, Dawn Lockard, based upon the conduct and statements of Plaintiff. 31. For reliance upon conduct and statements of Plaintiff, Defendant Christopher E. Lockard expended $23,000.00 for the erection of a pole building upon the real property. 32. The erection of the pole building substantially increased the value of the property. 33. Defendant Christopher E. Lockard has been evicted and is barred from use of the real property. 34. Defendant Christopher E. Lockard also expended considerable hours of labor at said property and should be compensated for the same. The value of said labor is $4,825.00. 35. Said events have resulted in an unjust enrichment of the Plaintiff in the amount of $27,825.00 which Plaintiff refuses to pay to Defendant. WHEREFORE, Defendant Christopher E. Lockard respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter an award in his favor and against Plaintiff in the amount of $27,825.00. COUNTERCLAIM II - Breach of Contract 36. The prior paragraphs of this Answer are incorporated by reference. 37. Plaintiff and Defendants agreed that Defendants would own the property after paying $280.00 p/m for a period of ten (10) years or one hundred twenty (120) months. 38. As the property was full of miscellaneous items belonging to Plaintiff's father to such a degree that no renovations could be started by Defendants, Plaintiff waived these required payments until Plaintiff had removed these items. 39. Plaintiff failed to remove these items and failed to request Defendants pay Plaintiff under their agreement. 40. In reliance upon said agreement, Defendant Christopher E. Lockard invested approximately $23,000.00 in erecting a pole building and other improvements to the property. 41. Defendant Christopher E. Lockard, in contemplation of the parties' agreement, also paid the taxes relative to the subject property for the years of 2005 and 2006, the value of which was $4,000.00. 42. Plaintiff has breached the contract in that Plaintiff now refuses to transfer the subject property to Defendant Christopher E. Lockard pursuant to the parties' agreement. 43. Defendant seeks specific performance of the parties' agreement and to have Plaintiff be required to sell the property for the price agreed upon by the parties. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard respectfully requests this Honorable Court Order the following: a.) Plaintiff, in the interim, be enjoined from transferring or encumbering real property otherwise known as 889 Baltimore Pike, Gardners, Pennsylvania. b.) Plaintiff be required to transfer the real property otherwise known as 889 Baltimore Pike, Gardners, Pennsylvania, to Defendants as per the parties' agreement. c.) Such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, MOONEY & ASSOCIATES By: Awx John J. noo ey, III, Esquire Attorney for Defendants I.D. # 39137 230 York Street Hanover, PA, 17331 (717) 632-4656 AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA I COUNTY OF YORK SS. Before me, a Notary Public, in and for said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared Christopher E. Lockard, who, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that facts contained in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. Christ her E. Lockard Print Name: Q kr.64c, pk,?e- C'; ( cja j" SWORN and SUBSCRIBED to before me, a Notary Public ihis-Dtt Play of 2007. AO M L. Prb1c Y ,?1nuGi.> 7f1K?i Y 1?(, ? :S? F. iy W" wtiqx3 mull, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, Plaintiff, VS. NO. 2007-3875 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John J. Mooney, III, Esquire, attorney for the above Defendants, hereby certify that on this day of , 2007, I have forwarded a copy of the Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim, in the above-captioned action to the following individual(s) by regular U.S. Mail as set forth below: David A. Baric, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Respectfully submitted, MOONEY & ASSOCIATES By: ..? John J. Mooney, III, Esquire Attorney for Defendants I.D. # 39137 230 York Street Hanover, PA, 17331 (717) 632-4656 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, VS. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION-LAW NOTICE TO PLEAD Joyce A. Carey c/o David A. Baric, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim and within Twenty (20) days from service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. Respectfully submitted, MOONEY & ASSOCIATES Dated: By: w Fdic John J. Mooney, III, Esgwre Attorney for Defendants I.D. # 39137 230 York Street Hanover, PA, 17331 (717) 632-4656 r. I-Ei JOYCE A. CAREY, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2007- 3875 CIVIL TERM V. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Christopher E. Lockard c/o John J. Mooney, III, Esquire Mooney & Associates 230 York Street Hanover, Pennsylvania 17331 You are hereby notified that you have twenty (20) days in which to plead to the enclosed Reply, Answer and New Matter or a Default Judgment may be entered against you. Date: ill 5BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERE I David A. Baric, Esquire I.D. # 44853 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiff JOYCE A. CAREY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 2007- 3875 CIVIL TERM CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY. ANSWER AND NEW MATTER NOW, comes Plaintiff, Joyce A. Carey, by and through her attorneys, O'BRIEN, BARIC & SCHERER, and files the within Reply, Answer and New Matter and, in support thereof, sets forth the following: PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO THE NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT. CHRISTOPHER E LOCKARDD Joyce A Carev v. Christopher E Lockard and Dawn Lockard 21. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) of Plaintiff's complaint as though set forth herein. 22. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 23. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 24. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 25. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 26. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 27. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. 28. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Defendant's New Matter and grant judgment in favor of Plaintiff. PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO THE UNJUST ENRICHMENT COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANT. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD Joyce A Carey v. Christopher E. Lockard and Dawn Lockard 29. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference Paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) of Plaintiff's complaint and Paragraphs twenty-one (21) through twenty-eight (28) of this pleading as though set forth herein. 30. Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Defendant's averment regarding his belief. As such, it is denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff, at any time, offered statements or conduct that would have led Defendants to reasonably believe that an agreement had been reached that the Defendants were to become the legal owners of Plaintiffs real estate. 31. Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Defendant's purported reliance. As such, it is denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff, at any time, offered statements or conduct that would have led Defendants to reasonably rely upon the suggestion that Defendants were to become the legal owners of Plaintiffs real estate. It is specifically denied that Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, expended $23,000.00 to erect a pole building on Plaintiff s property. Strict proof thereof is demanded. 32. Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Defendant's averment. As such, it is denied. Strict proof of any increase in the value of plaintiff s property is demanded. 33. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Christopher E. Lockard was evicted from the property. To the contrary, Mr. Lockard abandoned the property. Since abandoning the property, Plaintiff has not allowed Mr. Lockard to return to her property. 34. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants made any improvements or repairs to Plaintiffs real estate. Strict proof thereof is demanded. On the contrary, Defendants devalued Plaintiff's real estate by tearing apart a bathroom and neglecting to fill the water softener with salt, thereby ruining the soft water conditioner system and existing furnace. 35. Defendant states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. Insofar as a response may be required, it is denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss the counterclaim of unjust enrichment pleaded by Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, and grant judgment in favor of Plaintiff. PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO THE BREACH OF CONTRACT COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANT. CHRISTOPHER E LOCKARD Joyce A. Carey v. Christopher E. Lockard and Dawn Lockard 36. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference Paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) of Plaintiff's complaint and Paragraphs twenty-one (21) through thirty-five (35) of this pleading as though set forth herein. 37. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff and Defendants ever reached any type of agreement or terms thereof to transfer title of the property to Defendants. The only agreement reached was that Defendants would maintain, renovate and restore the property and in exchange, Plaintiff would forgo collecting monthly rent. 38. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff required any monetary rental payments from Defendants. It is also denied that miscellaneous items prevented Defendants from fulfilling their obligations of maintaining, renovating and restoring Plaintiff's property. 39. Denied. It is specifically denied that miscellaneous items prevented Defendants from fulfilling their obligations of maintaining, renovating and restoring Plaintiff s property. Plaintiff also denies the existence of Defendant's purported agreement and terms thereof in paragraph thirty-seven (37) of Defendant's counterclaim. 40. Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Defendant's purported reliance. As such, it is denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff and Defendants ever reached any type of agreement to transfer title of the property to Defendants. It is specifically denied that Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, expended $23,000.00 to erect a pole building on Plaintiff's property. Strict proof thereof is demanded. 41. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants jointly paid the real estate taxes on Plaintiff's property. It is denied that Christopher E. Lockard paid them without the help of co-Defendant and spouse, Dawn Lockard. It is also denied that the amount of the taxes was $4,000.00. Strict proof thereof is demanded. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff and Defendants ever reached any type of agreement to transfer title of the property to Defendants. 42. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff and Defendants ever reached any type of agreement to transfer title of the property to Defendants. 43. Defendant does not plead anything in Paragraph forty-three (43). Insofar as a response is required, it is denied that specific performance is an available or warranted remedy for Defendant. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss the counterclaim of breach of contract pleaded by Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, and grant judgment in favor of Plaintiff. NEW MATTER TO THE COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD Joyce A Carey v Christopher E Lockard and Dawn Lockard 44. Plaintiff hereby incorporates Paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) of Plaintiff s complaint and Paragraphs twenty-one (21) through forty-three (43) of this pleading as though set forth herein. 45. Defendants are barred by estoppel. 46. Defendants are barred by lack of consideration. 47. Defendants are barred by the Statute of Frauds. 48. Defendants are barred by laches. 49. Defendants are barred by the statute of limitations. 50. At no time did Plaintiff agree to sell her property to Defendant for the sum of $33,600.00. 51. Defendant lacks justifiable reliance. 52. Defendant fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 53. Defendant's claims fail for lack of consideration. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Defendant's counterclaims of unjust enrichment and breach of contract and grant judgment in favor of Plaintiff. Respectfully submitted, N. BARIC S David A. Banc, Esquire I.D. # 44853 19 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION The statements in the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply, Answer and New Matter are based upon information which has been assembled by my attorney in this litigation. The language of the statements is not my own. I have read the statements; and to the extent that they are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. d:OVX ` DATE: Joyce A. Carey CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 120 , 2007, I, David A. Baric, Esquire, did serve a copy of Plaintiff's Reply, Answer and New Matter by first class, U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to the party listed below, as follows: John J. Mooney, III, Esquire Mooney & Associates 230 York Street Hanover, Pennsylvania 17331 Attorney for Christophe Lockard David A. Baric, Esquire C 0-1 CIO =;I i$- n r*t ? C/ 1 N T ,- C) r x -10 A t [J7 C4 "'[ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, Vs. CIVIL ACTION-LAW CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendant. ANSWER TO NEW MATTER TO THE COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT, CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND NOW, this 16 (?fl day of ( CZ 1, , 2007 comes the Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, by and through his attorneys, Mooney & Associates, by John J. Mooney, III, Esquire, files the within Answer to New Matter to the Counterclaims of Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, wherein the following is a statement, to wit: ANSWER 44. Defendant hereby incorporates paragraphs 1-43 of Defendant's Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim as though set forth here 45. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants are barred by estoppel. 46. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants are barred by lack of consideration. 47. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants are barred by the Statute of Frauds. 48. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants are barred by laches. 49. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants are barred by the statute of limitations. 50. Denied. As stated in Defendant's Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim, the parties agreed that Defendant would purchase from Plaintiff the subject property for the sum of $33,600.00 51. Denied. It is denied that Defendants lack justifiable reliance. 52. Denied. It is denied that Defendants fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 53. Denied. It is denied that Defendants' claims fail for lack of consideration. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter an award in his favor and against Plaintiff in the amount of $27,825.00, or, in the alternate, order the following: a) Plaintiff, in the interim, be enjoined from transferring or encumbering the subject property; b) Plaintiff be required to transfer the subject property as per the parties agreement; c) Such other relief this Honorable Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, TES / Jo V on J. oney, II , At of ey for De n I. 39137 ?2 0 ork Stree anov PA 7331 17)632- 6 56 AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA SS. COUNTY OF YORK Before me, a Notary Public, in and for said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared C? ? e0 _oJ<,CX('C1 , who, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that facts contained in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of '% 5 knowledge, information and belief. Print Name: Ch r) S TO pke SWORN and SUBSCRIBED to before me, a Notary ubli this day of 007. Notary Public My Commission Expires: (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notarial Seal Pamela L. Rockwell, Notary Public Hanover Boro, York County My Commission Expires Oct. 31, 2009 Member, Pennsylvania Association of Notaries IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, vs. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John J. Mooney, 111, Esquire, attorney for the above Defendant, hereby certifies that on this day of &/-b , 2007, I have forwarded a copy of the Answer to New Matter to the Counterclaim of Defendant, Christopher E. Lockard, in the above-captioned action to the following individual(s) by regular U.S. Mail as set forth below: David A. Baric, Esquire O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Respectfully submitted, M'OONEY & ASSOCIATES By. J. Mommy, III, E 1. 3k9 137 0 Str et a over, PA 17331 (71 ) 632-4 56 O ) ,. W __ 1 {,, - -x ,%•. NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 (717) 241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT JOYCE A. CAREY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD NO. 2007 -3875 CIVIL TERM and DAWN LOCKARD , Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL OF RECORD TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQUIRE, as attorney for the Defendant, Dawn Lockard, in this matter. JANUARY 2008 ESQUIRE High Street PA 17013 717-241-4436 SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 ?ft NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 (717) 241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT JOYCE A. CAREY, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD , Defendants NO. 2007 -3875 CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Nathan C. Wolf, Esquire, hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance upon the following person and in the matter indicated: SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL: David A. Baric, Esquire O'Brien Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 John J. Mooney, Esquire Mooney & Associates 230 York Street Hanover, PA 17331 Respectfully submitted, WOLF & WOLF JANUARY Z8' , 2008 ESQUIRE F 1g St reet TleCs,'P W A 17013 3 717-241-4436 SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, vs. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendant. CML ACTION-LAW BENCH Trial Demanded PRAECIPE TO LIST FOR PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please list the above-captioned matter for Pre-Trial Conference. Respectfully submitted, MOONEY S.OCIATES B John . Mo ey, II Atto e for Defe d I.D. 9137 230 ork Street ano er, PA, 1 31 (717) - 6 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOYCE A. CAREY, NO. 2007-3875 Plaintiff, vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD AND DAWN LOCKARD, Defendant. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John J. Mooney, III, Esquire, attorney for the above Defendant, hereby certify that on this day of 2008, I have forwarded a copy of the Praecipe to List for Pre-Trial Conference, in the above-captioned action to the following individual(s) by regular U.S. Mail as set forth below: David A. Baric, Esq. O'Brien, Baric & Scherer 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Nathan C. Wolf, Esq. Wolf & Wolf 10 West High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Respectfully submitted, M TES By: ,>? / N --- ey, III, Es uire Defendant J (kStreet Hanov 17331 (717) 6 6 JOYCE A. CAREY, Plaintiff V. CHRISTOPHER E. LOCKARD and DAWN LOCKARD, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2007- 3875 CIVIL TERM PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly mark the above-captioned action and counterclaim asIhaving been settled and discontinued. a,OIKEN BARIC & SCHE y r David A. Baric, Esquire 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-6873 Attorney for Plaintiff MOONEY & ASSOCIATES !John J. M n , III, Esqui 230 Yor eet r, A 17331 (717) 632 656 Attorney for`D fend stop her E. Lockard FILE) , 2 0 0 ., UN 24, PH 3: 4