Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-7487a 140 • , GUMMUNVtrtAL I M Vr rtNNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of CLtMber1o_414 NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. (3 -7 --741?1 Cam' I 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. S Al P l ate Q63 -r5y", RJ csbcx-? P+q i?dsz? uA1C l`Jf JVWiwrjm Iry_I zl-,lutF("wimn V TO&V (? ?' ?V- C60 4 _15-- o? This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 10088. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDERS to the judgment for possession in this case. If appellant in action before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL. Si 0k-ofProal Wmy-Dep* PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of Than 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 4r`hA i21i? & ec_6_4y ? (Common Pleas No. 07- RULE: To 1, \tar? 6e.6' ('r ' , appellee(s) Name of appeftgs) (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. &4IMOIRL&_ Date: )99Ci 43 2007 ofPmNronotary or YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312-02 appeilee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appellee( ) z/ " 4 Uthin twenty (20) days after service of or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. U 'i t k-=-?> Signature of appellant -aff-y or agent WHITE - COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY GREEN - COURT FILE YELLOW - APPELLANTS COPY PINK -COPY TO BE SERVED ON APPELLEE GOLD -COPY TO BE SERVED ON DISTRICT JUSTICE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE 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 ; 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 official before whom affidavit was made Title of official My commission expires on 20 Signature of af(iant Q om' C-0 ± t W COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: COND11RU•AM Wq D N., 09-3-94 K N,- r, TSOQA9 A. FL&CRT 104 S SPORTINQ SILL RD K3122MCriIMa, PA r.•->,::.717 ; 761-0230 17050 'AT NOTICE OF IVL M NT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: •.0& 1• INAU 1030 SSLLS VXXTA OR MOLIL, PA 17025 L J VS. DEFENDANT NAV:- a .- 4 Nf s rya, Tim 263 TXXAM 2D SSCSAS=C/SM, PA 17050 L J TOM Laws 263 TRZ&'O RD Docket No.: CO-0000475-07 KMC01AZXCXXUS0, PA 17050 Date Filed: 7/27/07 AA& 193 MCIP THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment- FOIR PLAXNTIFF (Date of Judgment) 11/16/07 __ Judgment was entered for (Narne) o © Judgment was entered against: (Name) tLSl1IS • TOIL in the amount of $ 366.31 Amount of Judgment $ J249.01 F1 Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Judgment Costs E Damages will be assessed on Date & Time Interest on Judgment S L J Attorney Fees S This case dismissed without prejudice. Total S 366.3 D Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ LJ Portion of Judgment for physical damages ansing out of residential lease S CertMied Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE INGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILNMG A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHOWTARYIGLFYIK OF THE COURT OF cowsoN PLEAS, C11011. Walm. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMEWMtAlNCRIP I FORM WIT" YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROYNED IN THE RULES OF CNX PROCEDURE FOR MARMSTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JWOM W IN Tt1E C0%W QF CO MM "PLEAD, ALL FURTHER MCM MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMM PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE WtiWMMAL DISTRICT JUDGE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN TIME COURT OF COMM PLEAS. ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE WGSSTEFAAL DISTRICT JUDGE M THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL. SETTLES. OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WRTH THE JUDGMENT. L f 4 i :, -Date (certify that this is a true Date My commission expires first Monday of January, 2010 AOPC '?I S-07 Magisterial District Judge jngs containing the judgment. Magisterial District Judge SEAL DATS PRMn=: 11/16/07 12t53t00 PS COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (AUNTY OF: COK52111"D 69-3-01 Tsouas s,. PLC 101 S SPO=TI1.0 HILL 11D MaCSAMCSS=01 PA ..;717 761-8230 17050 TOT L=5 263 TlQAM ROAD XXCZAWCSSti G, PA 17050 NOTICE OFCIVQGCAST /TRANSCIl PLAINTIFF. -r.n - --? r-tuns, TOM 263 TUALCO =DAD KaCghalcsama, PA 17050 L_ J VS- DEFENDANT, NAMI - - + f, KLRK 1030 ssrss VISTA D=. MOLA, PA 17025 L J Docket No.: Co-0000175-07 Date Filed 9/07/07 CROSS COMPLAINT 001 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT. 11/16/07 Judgment PD= D=!!?T (Date of Judgment) Judgment was entered for. (Name) 9203OM"I Judgment was entered against: (Name) I,>ZKlB, T01[ . in the amount of 5 Amount of Judgment F] Deferdants are jointly and severally liable. Judgment Costs $ Interest on Judgment Damages will be assessed on Date R Time_ --- Attorney Fees $_ ,.. ?J This case dismissed without prejudice. Total $ -- Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127 Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease S 0 .0 75 ._D Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs Coalfled Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY)CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL pYI&ION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDQMEW"ANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED W THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAONSTERIAL OMTRICT JUDGES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDOMEW IM THE COURT OF Comm PLEAS. ALL FURTHER PRINCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE . UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REOMST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL. SETTLES. OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. 1 Date Magisterial District JL" I certify that this is a true a correct cop of the record of the P906eedings containing the judgment. 164 Date ?r ? Magisterial District Judge My commission expires first Monday of January. 2010 SEAL A(WC 315-D DATZ P;1;mmi: 11/16/09 1:04s00 PS k GUMMUNWtAL I M OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of G L) I-VN ivy DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 0-7 "-7461 ?'r?• 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. NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM Q63 -T?ec.?o Rc1 ` e????csbcx Pd1 - ?-?pSG: ,nc yr krMUNI l (D )- ' faa - d 7 B J V_N /) _E' 5 n&4,.?,,6V6CKe'rthc,A DOCKET No. C-' (X1 L4 ` ,yti .? ? 2 RE OF OR ATTORNEY OR AGENT This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If appellant s Claimanf (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(6) in action R.C.P.D.J. No. 10088. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. (20) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL. sonaft- or Profboenh y -D.pur PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE v (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 j Enter rule upon ?-aRk ? eC.V_CVVAr? -' appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal NNalm of aw. ) (Common Pleas No. Q "7- -7z/ Q ! ?) within twenty (20) days afterr service of role or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. srgnah,?e of appellant oraNOmey or ageiM RULE: To N\.wV- appellee(s) Name of appe#Ws) (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-riot file s.'opmplaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. k. 4 (3) The date of service of th'krule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date:. 2007"-. Of P?omwWary or Y"OU'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- APPELLANTS COPY PINK -COPY TO BE SERVED ON APPELLEE GOLD -COPY TO BE SERVED ON DISTRICT JUSTICE THE TF ?TARY 2007 DEC f 7 FM 1: 2p CUMQE ??- - C GJVTY ?n-?'ANEA PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing of the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes.) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYL ANIA COUNTY OF t:.VYV??-e1 IG1V? ; ss AFFIDAVIT: I hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas 0-2 -7457 , upon the District Justice designated therein on (date of service) 'Dec , t-? , 20 07 , ® by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) (r? I?XoGLtr on 17eG \S-- 200? sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWOR (AFFIRMEQ) AN SUBSCRIBED BEFORE-ME THIDAY OF , 20 . Signature of official before whom affidavit was made Title of official ?- My commission expires on 20. NOTARIAL SEAL CLAUDIA A. BREWBAKER, NOTARY PUBLIC Carlisle Boro. Cumberland County M Commission Expires April 4, 2009 ? by personal service 3 by (certified) (registered) mail, Signature of affiant U.S. POSTAL SERVICE CERTIFICATE UP MAIL-w DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL MAIL, DOES NOT MAY BE USED FOR PROVIDE FOR INSURANCE-POSTMASTER Received 8? O D ; CD NO Cz p N f ? Y Itr v - Z m o n E One piece of ordinary mail addressed to: CCnoC>? N C? J 30 1 f?? (?rS?a. ?r otp ?-t Ji ( P>4 ??bas .? Z ! 7X] lG? - - D PS Form 3817, January 2001 U.S. Postal Service CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.coma; Ll7 e .7' Postage $ Certified Fee r f 04 C3 C3 Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Plostm , HP(I C3 Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) . ?. 1 O - T t l P _ o a ostage & Fees ra Sent To ???,'/? -_-_ VC4?-?/71Gth l' Y f3 . , S°rPO Apt. N Box No. or PO . ° -°-•- ,,,°?...-- City, State, ZlP+4 i{ //'' ??l.?6 Y'7T PS Form 3800 Au, --•------7° -'---°----...-°°-------° 1 _2M . ;e for Instructions Q V !6 ? > OD > W CD O dp Oi Pr's DD r- LO NaC?v GOr-ODO M M ri OD Z ? r+ m ? LL d m U + d y ?Y m i?-? T C3 in 0 31- Z O O N I`{ 1 N l ? Y ?(y U 0 U) N N N ii 1[7 ?4W r ii F/) p it lf) t' V r-t O O 0) rr fo 1? LO T i O O ri U r.. r ? m M ow N C7 N --& F, Q ? a ¢• N - f1 U O L T ? Gr I ¢+'O 3 LQ N ` L C' ~ 1 Z W ??-- A 41 C O ¢ S2 4. ? A ? it ixt ? 34 34 N '? C O x fA ?-Secbtc OONjc # x ? 0U(0¢ it(n(aic -W ? Z x , Sti 0ED t?4> N it 4, W WV Z it m 4 ]c -X O U - Q. tlf it it O Z U N N Lit it 0 cc O Cr M 10 N (n 3 oa -a 7 Ic i T 0) LU pit a- 4J ID 0 0=)U) M0 0+10 >' ic> x QW Zit U W CC(-- U , W p a rt it its \ d¢ pis 3t O¢ tC0 O O(LO? i ?COS pR O3 C 0)0 i< ic _ I O? O it it 41 _C_ p T it is 0. y it it g. O N O .1 it it J J it it 0.*.. C) C 4t 4C LLI N N = p m i? ?•• i< i< [2flL? O x x ?` 0 ?c )t O too) # N % >1 jc IC apt 'A -0 j-C3 L- 0 -x N -X m it it it r C ®O CL i< > Cc& C) D U THOM LEWIS IN THE COURT OF COMMON Plaintiff PLEAS, CUMBERLAND GOUTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. No.: 07-7487 CIVIL MARK BECKERMAN JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally of by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses of objections to the claim set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the petition 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 Lawyer Referral Service Court Administer Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Plaintiff V. MARK BECKERMAN Defendant COMPLAINT No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, this 5th day of January, 2008 comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking actual and punitive damages from Mark Beckerman for Quantum Meruit, Fraud, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Abuse of Process, Wrongful use of Civil Proceedings, Civil Conspiracy and Defamation and in support thereof Plaintiff avers the following: 1. Plaintiff Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 2. Defendant Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual with an address of 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States 3. Prior to June 2006 when Beckerman first contacted Mr. Lewis, Plaintiff had never met defendant Beckerman. 4. In June 2006, Beckerman sought out Mr. Lewis by calling him on 1 the phone and asking Mr. Lewis if he would work for Beckerman. 5. When Mr. Lewis asked Beckerman how he had gotten his number, Beckerman stated that former PA Auditor General and US Congressman Don Bailey had given it to him, and also claimed Bailey had recommended Mr. Lewis to him for work. COUNTI QUANTUM MERUIT 6. Paragraph 1 through 5 are hereby incorporated by reference. 7. Between June 2006 and June 2007, Mr. Lewis performed work on Beckerman's property, pet-sat, and performed other services for which Beckerman is currently indebted to Mr. Lewis for over $17,000. Mr. Lewis performed all work satisfactorily and was repeatedly asked by Beckerman to return for additional work. 8. Beckerman had agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $20 per hour, in turn Mr. Lewis performed over 720 hours of work for Beckerman, during that time. ($14,400) Additional, Beckerman agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $50 per day to pet sit his two dogs, which Lewis did for a total of 52 days. ($2600) for a total of $17,000 owed, for which Beckerman received both services. 9. As further proof, Beckerman repeatedly requested Mr. Lewis to return to perform additional work, and at no time made any complaints or asked Mr. Lewis to correct any work. 2 WHEREFORE, Beckerman requested and received the above referenced services with a value of $17,000, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff $17,000 in actual damages or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT 11 DAMAGES TO PLAINTIFFS CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 are hereby incorporated by reference. 11. On or around May 7, 2007 Beckerman damaged Lewis' parked car by hitting it with his car, causing over $1200 damage. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman was intoxicated at the time. 12. Beckerman asked Lewis not to report the accident; Beckerman agreed he would pay all damages. Beckerman left the scene, and then reneged on payment, when Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work on Beckerman's property. Beckerman refuses to provide his required Insurance information to Mr. Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman admits under oath to damaging Plaintiffs vehicle on or about May 7, 2007, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT Plaintiff $1200 to repair the damage, or in the alternative any relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT III FRAUD 12. Paragraphs 1 through 11 are hereby incorporated by reference. 13. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct that was meant to deceive the Plaintiff for the benefit of Beckerman's various schemes. 14. Over roughly 6 months beginning at the end of 2006, Beckerman slowly become obsessed with Mr. Lewis and began calling him 3, 4 and 5 times a day, asking him to come back over to his house to do additional work for him. He also began to reveal information that leads Mr. Lewis to refuse to associate with Beckerman after May/June 2007. 15. This began to include bizarre requests like asking Lewis to repeatedly returning to change the same light bulb several times a day or walking the dogs because Beckerman claimed his dogs "missed Thom". 16. Around November 2006 Beckerman began offering Lewis money to fire Attorney Bailey and hire Beckerman's friend, Attorney Doug Goldhaber in Bailey's place. 17. Around the same time Beckerman began telling Mr. Lewis he had received permission from local Police to kill Attorney Don Bailey. 18. Beckerman offered Mr. Lewis money to drive him to another Harrisburg attorney's home, so Beckerman could stalk him. Beckerman had 4 previously filed false reports and frivolous lawsuits against the individual and was angry the attorney had refused to pay Beckerman off. All of Beckerman's false claims against the attorney have been thrown out. Mr. Lewis declined to help Beckerman. 19. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to gather information from the internet on several of Beckerman's other targeted victims. Mr. Lewis declined. 20. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis that he currently has an estimated dozen frivolous lawsuits he's filed against individuals he's conned, including at least 2 (two) for fake auto accidents. 21. In January 2007 Beckerman asked Lewis to commit perjury on his behalf in front of District Justice Dougherty. Mr. Lewis declined 22. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis until May 2007 that he had hired Lewis to pet sit so that Beckerman could leave the country to hire prostitutes, (for a total of 52 days) on several occasions. 23. Eventually, by May 2007, Beckerman had revealed that he was a convicted felon who would pretend to be both deaf and mentally retarded in order to deceive local attorneys, businesses and individuals. (Beckerman currently owns a digital hearing device that gives him perfect hearing, and claims he holds several degrees including a Doctorate of Medicine). He 5 would hire the services of these individuals then file false suits against them. Anyone who refused to pay him would be falsely reported to various law enforcement agencies. Beckerman's history of this practice is a matter of public record. Plaintiff respectfully submits the practice is plain and simple fraud and extortion, and should be treated as such by the Court. 24. Between 2004 and present, Beckerman attempted to run the scam on multiple attorneys, businesses and individuals, including Mr. Lewis. 25. Subsequently, Mr. Lewis learned that Don Bailey had never given Beckerman Lewis' phone number, and Beckerman had simply targeted Lewis because Lewis was a personal friend and client of Don Bailey. Bailey and his family were one of Beckerman's targeted victims. 26. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was contacted by a detective from the Dauphin County District Attorneys Office, regarding other individuals Beckerman was targeting. 27. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was also contacted by an agent from the FBI, regarding a Federal Judge and her employees that Beckerman had targeted. 28. In late May/early June Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because Beckerman had not paid Mr. Lewis what he was owed and Beckerman was involved in illegal activities to an extent well 6 beyond anything Lewis had previously believed. 29. During the time Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman, Beckerman made claims that he is a Medical Doctor, an auto mechanic, an Israeli war hero, a Veteran of the "7 day war," a professional boxer and Israeli boxing champion, owns a degree in electronics, a degree in agriculture. He claims he is a personal friend of Mohamed Ali, Larry Holmes and former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Dyan. Also a "Hell's Angel", a professional hit man, professional horse trainer, professional dog trainer who raises seeing eye dogs, and that he works in the field of physics. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman is none of the above, and has never received any of those honors, and that he simply claims so in order to commit fraud. 30. Beckerman claims to be living as a Pennsylvania Lottery Winner, but as of July 2007, he is not receiving any monies from the PA Lottery, and has no discernable income. Beckerman borrowed $60,000 against his home in April 2007, a small double wide modular. According to multiple statements, Beckerman claims he received over $280,000 between June 2006 and July 2007, including the $60,000 loan. However, according to all documents filed in the frivolous lawsuits he has, he can not account for more than $220,000 he claims he has received in the same one year span. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct that was 7 meant to deceive the Plaintiff into helping Beckerman in both his legal and criminal schemes, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court Award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be determined later, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT IV CIVIL CONSPIRACY 31. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman coerced Peggy Moniesmith to give false and/or misleading testimony against Mr. Lewis through an implied threat she would become his next target if she did not. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman lied to other parties in order to solicit their help in harassing Lewis and submits other names may be shown through discovery. 32. Around Dec 2006, Peggy Moniesmith, (Moniesmith) told Lewis that she had stolen Beckerman's previous dog, "Hunny Bunny" and sold it to a neighbor, because of Beckerman's violent and unstable condition. Moniesmith told Beckerman the dog had died in her care, but it is still alive with Moniesmith's neighbor. 33. Upon information and belief, Moniesmith was angry at Beckerman for supplying drugs to Moniesmith's daughter. She is currently committed to the Harrisburg State Mental Hospital as a result of drugs. 34. Moneysmith, who doesn't work, and her husband, (who Plaintiff believes was collecting Workman's Compensation at the time), relied on 8 Beckerman to supply them with cash to pay bills, buy TV's, Play Stations and other items. 35. Moneysmith is in bankruptcy proceedings during the time in question, and upon information and belief did not report the income. 36. Mr. Lewis later learned Moniesmith's husband was also working "under the table" on a construction site in Selinsgrove while he was also on Workman's Compensation. 37. In April/ May of 2007, Beckerman attempted to induce Mr. Lewis to take Moniesmith's place at the work site in Selinsgrove because "Workman's Comp had become suspicious" and he had to return to his documented job before he was caught. Mr. Lewis declined 38. Plaintiff alleges that Beckerman and Moniesmith ran a scam where Moniesmith writes checks for Beckerman on his personal checking accounts in her handwriting. Beckerman then signs the checks, turns them over to the people he owes money, Beckerman then accuses the people that cash the checks of stealing the checks. Beckerman falsely accused Doug Goldhaber (under oath), of stealing and writing checks that were, in fact, written by Moniesmith with Beckerman's assistance. 39. Plaintiff alleges that because of the questionable relationship described above, between Moniesmith and Beckerman, Beckerman was able 9 to coerce Moniesmith to later lie under oath, and testify to things of which she had no knowledge relating to Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman solicited Moniesmith to help harass and defraud the Plaintiff through the filing of frivolous, abusive lawsuits and false criminal allegations, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award punitive damages in an amount to be determined later, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT V ABUSE OF PROCESS 40. Paragraphs 1 through 39 are hereby incorporated by reference. 41. In June 2007 Beckerman was caught criminally trespassing on Mr. Lewis' property. When he was caught, Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced state, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine. After Lewis threw him off the property, Beckerman contacted Silver Springs Police and filed a false police report against Lewis with the bizarre claim that "Lewis doesn't have a puppy door". 42. In July 2007 Beckerman filed false reports against Lewis with the PA State Police, (Officer Hurley) which falsely claimed Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. 43. In July 2007, Beckerman filed a false report with the PA State 10 Attorney Generals Office, Consumer Affairs, (Karen Wilkenson) claiming Lewis was selling "puppy fencing" online and that Mr. Lewis' lived in a home "without any doors". 44. In July 2007 Beckerman filed another false report with PA State Attorney Generals Office falsely claiming he had been in an auto accident caused by Lewis. No such accident ever occurred or had been reported at the time he alleged the accident occurred. Beckerman now claims the accident occurred at a Wal-Mart, but the store has no record of Beckerman having the accident at their store. Beckerman then waited over two (2) months until late July to suddenly remember he had been in an accident on May 27, 2007. None of the other reports Beckerman filed previous to that mentioned any accident. Beckerman claims there were no witnesses and no police reports regarding his "accident", even though it allegedly occurred in a parking lot full of people. 45. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false report with the PA Dept of Environmental Resources, claiming Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. A claim they have summarily dismissed after state Police reported that Beckerman's inspection was performed by Pep Boys Automotive on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA on January 29, 2007. Beckerman himself had driven the car there for the inspection. 11 46. In July 2007, Beckerman filed false police reports in East Pennsboro Township (Lt. Mark Greene) claiming Lewis and attorney Doug Goldhaber were stealing and forging his checks. 47. The alleged stolen checks turned out to have been written by Moneysmith, as part of the scam run by Beckerman described in paragraph 39 of this complaint. 48. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false animal cruelty report with the Harrisburg Humane Society (William Soderton) against Lewis. 49. In support of Plaintiffs position that Beckerman's report was knowingly false, during the same month of July 2007 the same Harrisburg Humane Society asked Mr. Lewis to help them rescue a dog because of his long history of outstanding service to animal welfare. To date, Mr. Lewis has assisted multiple Humane Societies in hundreds of animal rescues. 50. Beckerman has never seen Mr. Lewis' dogs, or been in his home, yet repeatedly files false police reports claiming he was in the home. 51. Upon information and belief, in July 2007 Beckerman attempted to file a baseless report with The PA Disciplinary Board, (Patty Bedneric) an agency with no jurisdiction over Lewis whatsoever. Bedneric has a long personal history with Beckerman. 52. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice 12 Thomas Placeys Office that falsely accused Lewis of Reckless endangerment and Animal Cruelty, and other unsubstantiated claims and charges. 53. In Aug 2007, Mr. Lewis was contacted and advised by Federal Agent Chris Nawrocki, that Beckerman was posing a threat to Mr. Lewis' personal safety, and Mr. Lewis should immediately contact him and local authorities anytime Beckerman attempted to harass or approach him. 54. In September 2007 Beckerman appeared at a restaurant in Camp Hill where Mr. Lewis was having dinner. Beckerman, (in an obviously unstable and unclean condition), entered the Diner, sat staring at Mr. Lewis for ten minutes, then harassed the waitress, caused a scene, and then stumbled out of the Diner's entrance. Beckerman then proceeded to slowly circle the restaurant for 20 minutes, trapping at least 20 people in the establishment while terrorizing the waitress and customers. The Owner was forced to call the police when Beckerman was caught hiding behind the building. The witnesses acknowledge to Hampden Township Police that Beckerman was lying in wait for Lewis to exit the restaurant. 55. Upon information and belief, in Dec 2007 Beckerman attempted to file false a false charge against Mr. Lewis with Silver Springs Township (DiFillipo, Hall) several days after Beckerman learned of this lawsuit. 13 56. In all cases, Beckerman's charges and claims were found to be baseless ramblings. 57. In support of Plaintiffs position, it is a matter of record, that Defendant Beckerman waited over 12 (twelve) months, until after Plaintiff demanded Beckerman pay him for the legitimate work he had performed, (and only after Lewis refused to participate in Beckerman illegal activities), before Beckerman began stalking Lewis and filing multiple false reports with various agencies against Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the malicious Abuse of Process, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VI WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 58. Paragraphs 1 through 57 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the Wrongful Use of Civil Process, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. 14 COUNT VII DEFAMATION 59. Paragraphs 1 through 58 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman repeatedly defamed the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VIII INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 60. Paragraphs 1 through 59 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman's conduct was so outrages and malicious that it shocked the conscious and was meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. Plaintiff respectfully submits the above complaint with a request for damages, both actual and punitive for an amount in excess of $50,000 against the defendant Mark Beckerman. tfully ubmitted: Red w Thom Lewis 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 15 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Plaintiff V. MARK BECKERMAN Defendant No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on January 7, 2008, as follows: Mark Beckerman 1030 Belle Vista Drive Enola, PA 17025 16 riaintitt 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 CK) F,3 t3 A IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION PRAECIPE FOR STRIKING APPEAL FROM THE RECORD Thom Lewis, Plaintiff V. Mark Beckerman Defendant No.: 07-7487 Civil TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: The appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter was not timely filed. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004A states "If the appellant was the claimant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal." Appellant-plaintiff filed his notice of appeal on December 13, 2007. See Exhibit A. Appellant-plaintiff did not file his complaint until January 8, 2008. See Exhibit B. The filing of the complaint is more than twenty (20) days after the notice of appeal was filed. THEREFORE, in accordance with Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006, please mark the appeal of the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter as STRIKEN FROM THE RECORD as it is the designated sanction for failure to timely file an appeal. Respe y sub ed, Dat Eric J. Wiener, sq. ID No. 18046 Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener, LLC. 2407 Park Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-657-7701 (phone) 717-657-2556 (fax) ejw@ejw-law.com COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOTICE OF APPEAL Judicial District, County Of FROM CLtM berI "`"" ? 14 DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. (5 -7 -7 4/(y/ 0 t C11? 1 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. ,,4. j7I ACC Q163 The"a ?e •o?h?cs6urc P?} i']OS? ,.-_..., / o•? ewes "'«?°"" 0-7 e: V- OX 0 4- IS o? This block will be signed ONLY when On 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 0d9nent for possession in this lose. of yarDspb (see in action before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after O V the NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of forum to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 10010 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 Qk e.G lfhf? appellee(s), to No a complaint in this appeal tram. Of SAW" (Common Pleas No. Q -7 - < 4/" ?n twenty (20) days after service of rvile or sugar entry of judgment of non pros. Sfyrwfura dappaMrM oraeonay depart RULE: To ?q,? ter-?6t/1n^ay? , appellee(s) Name Of NA MWS) (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: 2007 a? /I- . / Al 4ac stf o/PmOanotary or YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. ExttiQa A AOPC 312-02 WHITE - COURT FIE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY GREEN - COURT FILE YELLOW - APPELLANTS COPY PINK -COPY TO BE SERVED ON APPELLEE GOLD -COPY TO BE SERVED ON DISTRICT JUSTICE 3'AN-9-2008 04:24P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN THOM LEWIS Plaintiff V. MARK BECKERMAN Defendant 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COURY, PENNSYLVANIA No.: 07-7487 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally ofb??r}hig in writing with the court your defenses of objections to the claim set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the petition 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 Lawyer Referral Service Court Administer Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA° r'l !Exl-i?51-T fS TAN-9-2008 04:24P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN ti 7177289686 TO:6572556 P•2 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -- LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Plaintiff JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Defendant COMPLAINT AND NOW, this 5th day of January, 2008 comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking actual and punitive damages from Mark Beckerman for Quantum Meruit, Fraud, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Abuse of Process, Wrongful use of Civil Proceedings, Civil Conspiracy and Defamation and in support thereof Plaintiff avers the following: 1. Plaintiff Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual- residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 2. Defendant Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual with an address of 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States 3. Prior to June 2006 when Beckerman first contacted Mr. Lewis, Plaintiff had never met defendant Beckerman. 4. In June 2006, Beckerman sought out Mr. Lewis by calling him on JAN-9-2008 04:25P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.3 the phone and asking Mr. Lewis if he would work for Beckerman. 5. When Mr. Lewis asked Beckerman how he had gotten his number, Beckerman stated that former PA Auditor General and US Congressman Don Bailey had given it to him, and also claimed Bailey had recommended Mr. Lewis to him for work. COUNTI QUANTUM MERUIT 6. Paragraph 1 through 5 are hereby incorporated by reference. 7. Between June 2006 and June 2007, Mr. Lewis performed work on Beckerman's property, pet-sat, and performed other services for which Beckerman is currently indebted to Mr. Lewis for over $17,000. Mr. Lewis performed all work satisfactorily and was repeatedly asked by Beckerman to return for additional work. 8. Beckerman had agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $20 per hour, in turn Mr. Lewis performed over 720 hours of work for Beckerman, during that time. ($14,400) Additional, Beckerman agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $50 per day to pet sit his two dogs, which Lewis did for a total of 52 days. ($2600) for a total of $17,000 owed, for which Beckerman received both services. 9. As further proof, Beckerman repeatedly requested Mr. Lewis to return to perform additional work, and at no time made any complaints or asked Mr. Lewis to correct any work. JAN-9-2008 04:25P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.4 WHEREFORE, Beckerman requested and received the above referenced services with a value of $17,000, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff $17,000 in actual damages or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT II DAMAGES TO PLAINTIFFS CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 are hereby incorporated by reference. 11. On or around May 7, 2007 Beckerman damaged Lewis' parked car by hitting it with his car, causing over $1200 damage. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman was intoxicated at the time. 12. Beckerman asked Lewis not to report the accident; Beckerman agreed he would pay all damages. Beckerman left the scene, and then reneged on payment, when Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work on Beckerman's property. Beckerman refuses to provide his required Insurance information to Mr. Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman admits under oath to damaging Plaintiffs vehicle on or about May 7, 2007, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT Plaintiff $1200 to repair the damage, or in the alternative any relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. JAN-9-2008 04:25P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 _ TO:6572556 COUNT III FRAUD 12. Paragraphs 1 through 11 are hereby incorporated by reference. 13. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct that was meant to deceive the Plaintiff for the benefit of Beckerman's various schemes. P.5 14. Over roughly 6 months beginning at the end of 2006, Beckerman slowly become obsessed with Mr. Lewis and began calling him 3, 4 and 5 times a day, asking him to come back over to his house to do additional work for him. He also began to reveal informati nAhat leads Mr. Lewis to refuse to associate with Beckerman after May/June 2007. 15. This began to include bizarre requests like asking Lewis to repeatedly returning to change the same light bulb several times a day or walking the dogs because Beckerman claimed his dogs "missed Thom". 16. Around November 2006 Beckerman began offering Lewis money to fire Attorney Bailey and hire Beckerman's friend, Attorney Doug Goldhaber in Bailey's place. 17. Around the same time Beckerman began telling.Mr. Lewis he x had received permission from local Police to kill Attorney Don Bailey. 1.8. Beckerman offered Mr. Lewis money to drive him to another Harrisburg attorney's home, so Beckerman could stalk him. Beckerman had 4 JAN-9-2008 04:25P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.6 previously filed false reports and frivolous lawsuits against the individual and was angry the attorney had refused to pay Beckerman off. All of Beckerman's false claims against the attorney have been thrown out. Mr. Lewis declined to help Beckerman. 19. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to gather information from the internet on several of Beckerman's other targeted victims. Mr. Lewis declined. 20. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis that he currently has an estimated dozen frivolous lawsuits he's filed against individuals he's conned, including at least 2 (two) for fake auto accidents. 21. In January 2007 Beckerman asked Lewis to commit perjury on his behalf in front of District Justice Dougherty. Mr. Lewis declined 22. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis until May 2007 that he had hired Lewis to pet sit so that Beckerman could leave the country to hire prostitutes, (for a total of 52 days) on several occasions. 23. Eventually, by May 2007, Beckerman had revealed that he was a convicted felon who would pretend to be both deaf and mentally retarded in order to deceive local attorneys, businesses and individuals. (Beckenman currently owns a digital hearing device that gives him perfect hearing, and claims he holds several degrees including a Doctorate of Medicine), He JAN-9-2009 04:26P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 70:6572556 P.7 would hire the services of these individuals then file false suits against them. Anyone who refused to pay him would be falsely reported to various law enforcement agencies, Beckerman's history of this practice is a matter of public record. Plaintiff respectfully submits the practice is plain and simple fraud and extortion, and should be treated as such by the Court. 24. Between 2004 and present, Beckerman attempted to run the scam on multiple attorneys, businesses and individuals, including Mr. Lewis. 25. Subsequently, Mr. Lewis learned that Don Bailey had never given Beckerman Lewis' phone number, and Beckerman had simply targeted Lewis because Lewis was a personal friend and client of Don Bailey. Bailey and his family were one of Beckerman's targeted victims. 26. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was contacted by a detective from the Dauphin County District Attorneys Office, regarding other individuals Beckerman was targeting. 27. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was also contacted by an agent from the FBI, regarding a Federal Judge and her employees that Beckerman had targeted. 28. In late May/early June Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because Beckerman. had not paid Mr. Lewis what he was owed and Beckerman was involved in illegal activities to an extent well 6 ZAN-9-2008 04:26P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.8 beyond anything Lewis had previously believed. 29. During the time Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman, Beckerman made claims that he is a Medical Doctor, an auto mechanic, an Israeli war hero, a Veteran of the "7 day war," a professional boxer and Israeli boxing champion, owns a degree in electronics, a degree in agriculture. He claims he is a personal friend of Mohamed Ali, Larry Holmes and former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Dyan. Also a "Hell's .Angel", a professional hit man, professional horse trainer, professional dog trainer who raises seeing eye dogs, and that he works in the field of physics. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman is none of the above, and has never received any of those honors, and that he simply claims so in order to commit fraud. 30. Beckerman claims to be living as a Pennsylvania Lottery Winner, but as of July 2007, he is not receiving any monies from the PA Lottery, and has no discernable income. Beckerman borrowed $60,000 against his home in April 2007, a small double wide modular. According to multiple statements, Beckerman claims he received over $280,000 between June 2006 and July 2007, including the $60,000 loan. However, according to all documents filed in the frivolous lawsuits he has, he can not account for more than $220,000 he claims he has received in the same one year span. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct that was 7 JAN-9-2009 04:26P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.9 meant to deceive the Plaintiff into helping Beckerman in both his legal and criminal schemes, Plaintiff respectfully request this .Honorable Court Award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be determined later, or in the altemative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT IV CIVIL CONSPIRACY 31. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman coerced Peggy Moniesmith to give false and/or misleading testimony against Mr. Lewis through an implied threat she would become his next target if she did not. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman lied to other parties in order to solicit their help in harassing Lewis and submits other names may be shown through discovery. 32. Around Dec 2006, Peggy Moniesmith, (Moniesmith) told Lewis that she had stolen Beckerman's previous dog, "Runny Bunny" and sold it to a neighbor, because of Beckerman's violent and unstable condition. Moniesmith told Beckerman the dog had died in her care, but it is still alive with Moniesmith's neighbor. 33. Upon information and belief, Moniesmith was angry at Beckerman for supplying drugs to Moniesmith's daughter. She is currently committed to the Harrisburg State Mental Hospital as a result of drugs. 34. Moneysmith, who doesn't work, and her husband, (who Plaintiff believes was collecting Workman's Compensation at the time), relied on SAN-9-2008 04:27P FROM: MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.10 Beckerman to supply them with cash to pay bills, buy TV's, Play Stations and o ' ems: ' 35. /, MoneYsmith is in bankruptcy Proceedings during the time in q esfl, and upon information and belief did not report the income. 36. Mr. Lewis later learned Moniesmith's husband was also working "under the table" on a construction site in Selinsgrove while he was also on Workman's Compensation. 37. In April/ May of 2007, Beckerman attempted to induce Mr. Lewis to take Moniesmith's place at the work site in Selinsgrove because "Workman's Comp had become suspicious" and he had to return to his documented job before he was caught. Mr. Lewis declined 38. Plaintiff alleges that Beckerman and Moniesmith ran a scam where Moniesmith writes checks for Beckerman on his personal checking accounts in her handwriting. Beckerman then signs the checks, turns them over to the people he owes money, Beckerman then accuses the people that cash the checks of stealing the checks. Beckerman falsely accused Doug Goldhaber (under oath), of stealing and writing checks that were, in fact, written by Moniesmith with Beckerman's assistance. 39. Plaintiff alleges that because of the questionable relationship described above, between Moniesmith and Beckerman, Beckerman was able 9 SAN-9-2008 04:27P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 71772096% TO:6572556 P.11 - to coerce Moniesmith to later lie under oath, and testify to things of which she had no knowledge relating to Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman solicited Moniesmith to help harass and defraud the Plaintiff through the filing of frivolous, abusive lawsuits and false criminal allegations, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award punitive damages in an amount to be determined later, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT V ABUSE OF PROCESS 40. Paragraphs 1 through 39 are hereby incorporated by reference. 41. In June 2007 Beckerman was caught criminally trespassing on p> I&. Lewis' property. When he was caught, Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced state, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine. After Lewis threw him off the property, Beckerman contacted Silver Springs Police and filed a false police report against Lewis with the bizarre claim that "Lewis doesn't have a puppy door". 42. In July 2007 Beckerman filed false reports against Lewis with the PA State Police, (Officer Hurley) which falsely claimed Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. 43. In July 2007, Beckerman filed a false report with the PA State 10 JAN-9-2008 04:27P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 70:6572556 P.12 Attorney Generals Office, Consumer Affairs, (Karen Wilkenson) claiming Lewis was selling "puppy fencing" online and that Mr. Lewis' lived in a home "without any doors". 44. In July 2007 Beckerman filed another false report with. PA State Attorney Generals Office falsely claiming he had been in an auto accident caused by Lewis. No such accident ever occurred or had been reported at the time he alleged the accident occurred. Beckerman now claims the accident occurred at a Wal-Mart, but the store has no record of Beckerman having the accident at their store. Beckerman then waited over two (2) months until late July to suddenly remember he had been in an accident on May 27, 2007. None of the other reports Beckerman filed previous to that mentioned any accident. Beckerman claims there were no witnesses and no police reports regarding his "accident", even though it allegedly occurred in a parking lot full of people. 45. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false report with the PA Dept of Environmental Resources, claiming Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. A claim they have summarily dismissed after state Police reported that Beckerman's inspection was performed by Pep Boys Automotive on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA on January 29, 2007. Beckerman himself had driven the car there for the inspection. 4AN-9-2008 04:27P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.13 46. In July 2007, Beckerman filed false police reports in East Pennsboro Township (Lt. Mark Greene) claiming Lewis and attorney Doug Goldhaber were stealing and forging his checks. 47. The alleged stolen checks turned out to have been written by Moneysmith, as part of the scam run by Beckerman described in paragraph 39 of this complaint. 48. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false animal cruelty report with the Harrisburg Humane Society (William Soderton) against Lewis. 49. In support of Plaintiffs position that Beckerman's report was knowingly false, during the same month of July 2007 the same Harrisburg Humane Society asked Mr. Lewis to help them rescue a dog because of his long history of outstanding service to animal welfare. To date, Mr. Lewis has assisted multiple Humane Societies in hundreds of animal rescues. 50. Beckerman has never seen Mr. Lewis' dogs, or been in his home, yet repeatedly files false police reports claiming he was in the home. 51. Upon information and belief, in July 2007 Beckerman attempted to file a baseless report with The PA Disciplinary Board, (Patty Bedneric) an agency with no jurisdiction over Lewis whatsoever. Bedneric has a long personal history with Beckerman. 52. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice 12 JAN-9-2008 04:28P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 P.14 Thomas Placeys Office that falsely accused Lewis of Reckless endangerment and Animal Cruelty, and other unsubstantiated claims and Aug 2007, Mr. Lewis was contacted and advised by Federal Agent Zhris Nawrocki, that Beckerman was posing a threat to Mr. Lewis' personal safety, and Mr. Lewis should immediately contact him and local authorities anytime Beckerman attempted to harass or approach him. 54. In September 2007 Beckerman appeared at a restaurant in Camp Hill where Mr. Lewis was having dinner. Beckerman, (in an obviously unstable and unclean condition), entered the Diner, sat staring at Mr. Lewis for ten minutes, then harassed the waitress, caused a scene, and then stumbled out of the Diner's entrance. Beckerman then proceeded to slowly circle the restaurant for 20 minutes, trapping at least 20 people in the establishment while terrorizing the waitress and customers. The Owner was forced to call the police when Beckerman was caught hiding behind the building. The witnesses acknowledge to Hampden Township Police that Beckerman was lying in wait for Lewis to exit the restaurant. 55. Upon information and belief, in Dec 2007 Beckerman attempted to file false a false charge against Mr. Lewis with Silver Springs Township (DiFillipo, Hall) several days after Beckerman learned of this lawsuit. 13 JAN-9-2008 04:28P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 T0:6572556 P.15 56. In all cases, Beckerman's charges and claims were found to be baseles blings. 57. 'In support of Plaintiffs position, it is a matter of record, that Defendant Beckerman waited over 12 (twelve) months, un ' after PI intiff demanded Beckerman pay him for the legitimate work he had performed, (and only after Lewis refused to participate in Beckerman ille al activities before Beckerman began stalking Lewis and filing multiple false reports with various agencies against Lewis. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the malicious Abuse of Process, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VI WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 58. Paragraphs 1 through 57 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the Wrongful Use of Civil Process, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. 14 JAN-9-2008 04:28P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 T0=6572556 P.16 COUNT VII DEFAMATION 59. Paragraphs 1 through 58 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman repeatedly defamed the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VIII INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 60. Paragraphs 1 through 59 are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Beckerman's conduct was so outrages and malicious that it shocked the conscious and was meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff damages in an amount to be later determined, or in the alternative, any other relief this court may deem just and appropriate. Plaintiff respectfully submits the above complaint with a request for damages, both actual and punitive for an amount in excess of $50,000 against the defendant Mark Beckerman. Res tfully ubmitted: I Thom Lewis 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 15 JAN-9-2008 04:29P FROM:MARK BECKERMAN 7177289686 TO:6572556 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Plaintiff . JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on January 7, 2008, as follows: Mark Beckerman 1030 Belle Vista Drive Enola, PA 17025 P.17 16 Platntitt 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 co t 74 C. to t"? ? ?i, c ? `'-'' .--? f._. T -ra ? ..- ? i. "f? } ?? 7 -l .. {?,:? W, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION PRAECIPE FOR STRIKING APPEAL FROM THE RECORD Thom Lewis, Plaintiff V. Mark Beckerman Defendant No.: 07-7487 Civil TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: The appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter was not timely filed. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004A states "If the appellant was the claimant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal." Appellant-plaintiff filed his notice of appeal on December 13, 2007. See Exhibit A. Appellant-plaintiff did not file his complaint until January 8, 2008. See Exhibit B. The filing of the complaint is more than twenty (20) days after the notice of appeal was filed. THEREFORE, in accordance with Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006, please mark the appeal of the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter as STRIKEN FROM THE RECORD as it is the designated sanction for failure to timely file an appeal. Resp y sub tted, Dat Eric J. Wiener, sq. ID No. 18046 Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener, LLC. 2407 Park Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-657-7701 (phone) 717-657-2556 (fax) ejw@ejw-law.com January 11, 2008 Appeal ricken in accordance with above Praecipe By: rtis ng, ,Prothonotary a IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant : JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Appellee To the Prothonotary of Said Court: Please take note that Appellee Beckerman has filed an improper "Praecipe for Striking an Appeaf' under PA RCP 1046. As a matter of record, the above referenced appeal has been timely and properly filed under the provisions of PA RCP 1004(b) and Appellee Beckerman was properly served with his "Notice of appeal and Rule to file Complaint" in a timely fashion. Praecipe for Striking of the appeal under PA RCP 1006 by the Prothonotary is not a remedy available to Appellee Beckerman, since the above referenced appeal was clearly and specifically filed under the guidelines and restrictions of PA RCP 1004(b). Any attempt by Appellee Beckerman to now have Appellant Lewis' appeal AMENDED to be included under PA RCP 1004(a) should have been filed as a motion with the Court, NOT as a Praecipe to Strike with you office. Additionally, because Appellee Beckerman is the one required under the PA Rules of Civil Procedure to file a complaint within 20 (twenty) days, or SUFFER JUDGMENT NON PROS, filing of the complaint by Appellee Beckerman within 20 (twenty) days was the only remedy available to Appellee Beckerman at this point. THEREFORE, in accordance with both the PA RCP and above stated reasons, please take no action on Appellee's improper Praecipe for striking, and leave Appellants appeal intact. 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Y IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant TORY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Appellee _ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the NOTICE TO PROTHONOTARY was served by first class mail on the Defendant on January 15, 2008, as follows: Eric Weiner 2407 Park Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 Thom E. Le Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 -n m v r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO REINSTATE STRICKEN APPEAL AND NOW, this 18th day of January, 2008, comes the Appellant, Thom Lewis, seeking reinstatement of his properly filed and served Appeal,, which was stricken from the record by the Prothonotary on Jan. 11, 2008, without order or prior review by this Honorable Court. PA RCPDJ 1006 allows Appellant to seek reinstatement of this appeal by Common Pleas Court: In support of his Motion to Reinstate, Appellant Lewis avers the following: . STATEMENT OF FACTS AND MOTION TO REINSTATE 1. Appellant Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. 2. Appellee Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual 1 with an address of 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States. 3. On or about Dec 13, 2007 Appellant Lewis properly and timely filed a "Notice. of Appeal from District Justice Judgment" and "Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint and Rule to File " on the required form supplied by the Court. (Attachment A). The required "Notice of Judgment" from DJ Placey's Office labeled "Beckerman v. Lewis" was also filed. 4. The Appeal was assigned docket Number 07-7487 by the Prothonotary, who placed multiple appeals on the same docket number. 5. The above referenced "Notice of Appeal and Rule to File Complainf' was filed under, and governed by PA RCPDJ 1004(b), which controls appeals filed where the Appellant is the Defendant in the original District Justice Hearing. 6. Appellant Lewis is the Defendant in the original District Justice Hearing and is appealing that ruling. 6. The Appeal and Praecipe were timely served on Appellee Beckerman, and an Affidavit of Service was Notarized and filed with this Honorable Court on Dec. 17, 2007, as required under PA RCPDJ 1005(b) 7. The date of mailing was Dec 15, 2007 by First Class Certified mail and signed for by Appellee Beckerman. By Rule, Appellee Beckerman 2 was required to file a complaint no later than Jan. 4, 2008 8. Appellee Beckerman failed to file the required complaint within the twenty (20) day time limit required under PA RCPDJ 1004(b) 9. Subsequently, on or about Jan. 5, 2008 Appellee Beckerman was served by first class mail, with a " 10 DAY NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE JUDGMENT NON PROS" and other related papers. 10. On or about Jan 8, 2008 Appellant Lewis filed.a Counter Claim' to Appellee Beckerman's as-yet un-filed complaint. Appellant Lewis asserts that a Counter claim is allowed under PA RCPDJ 1007(b). By doing so, he believed his counter Claim would have continued after the Judgment Non Pros, was entered against Appellee Beckerman under PA RCP 232. (PA RCP 232, re: Counterclaim; Termination of Plaintiff s Claim). 11. On or about Jan. 16, 2008 Appellant Lewis learned that Appellee Beckerman 2 had incorrectly informed the Prothonotary that Appellant Lewis, NOT Beckerman, was the one required to file a complaint within twenty (20) days, and Beckerman had filed a Praecipe to Strike the Appeal, based on PA RCPDJ 1006. ' Appellant Lewis' counter claim specifically raises additional claims not brought before the District Justice in the original action, that would survive any "striking" by the Prothonotary, and as such he reserves the right to raise them in a separate civil action 2 Appellee Beckerman is a "professional litigant" who files repeated lawsuits and complaints to harass local residents. As recently as Jan. 11, 2008 he was sanctioned $4000 by a Federal Judge.for his misuse of the court system. In the 6 month between June 2007 and present, Beckerman has filed roughly a dozen false complaints against Lewis with various state and local authorities. RULE 1006 states: "Upon failure of the appellant to comply with rule 1004(a), Prothonotary shall strike the appeal. RULE 1004(a) states: "If the apppfllant was the claimant in the action before the District Justice, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal. 12. However, in this particular appeal, the Appellant, Lewis, was the Defendant in the original action before the District Justice. The properly filed and served ""Notice of Appeal from District Justice Judgment" and "Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint and Rule to File" clearly and specifically identified Appellant Lewis as the DEFENDANT in the original District Justice action. Please see "Attachment A" where it reads: (This section of the form to be used ONLY when the appellant was the DEFENDANT in thee action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon Appellee. (emphasis in original) 13. The Appeal filed.by Appellant Lewis under PA RCPDJ 100 has no provision which would allow the Prothonotary to "strike" the appeal from the record. RULE 1004(b) states: "If the appellant was the defendant in the action before the District Justice, he shall file with his notice of appeal, a praecipe requesting the Prothonotary to enter a rule as of course upon the Appellee to file a complaint within twenty (20) days after service of the rule or suffer entry of judgment non pros. 12. On Jan. 16, 2008, Appellant Lewis immediately filed with the Prothonotary a notice informing him of the impropriety of the Praecipe filed by Beckerman. (Attachment B). 13. Appellant Lewis then learned that the Prothonotary had already 4 stricken, not just one, but all of Appellant Lewis' appeals from the Record on January 11, 2008, based on the information incorrectly supplied by Appellee Beckerman. 14. Appellant Lewis further asserts that because of the "Notice of Appeal and Rule to File Complaint" properly served on Appellee Beckerman one month before, Beckerman's only allowable remedy would have been the filing of the required complaint, not the Praecipe to Strike. WHEREFORE, For the above stated reasons and others; Appellant Lewis request this Honorable Court order the Prothonotary to REINSTATE the Appellants appeal, as if it had not been stricken, STRIKE the Praecipe of Appellee Beckerman filed on Jan 11, 2008 and further order Appellee Beckerman to either File a Complaint within ten (10) days of January 17, 2008 or suffer entry of Judgment Non Pros. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, Appellant Lewis requests this Honorable Court Schedule a hearing for the above referenced Motion, or in the alternative any other order this Honorable Court deems just and appropriate. Respectfully Submitted m Le s 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 5 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the MOTION TO REINSTATE was served by first class mail on the Defendant on January 18, 2008, as follows: Eric Weiner 2407 Parr Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 6 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 r • COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District. County Of C?cmberi? NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. V 0 t Chn NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is Wm that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Cmomon Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the dale and in the case rofarencW below. .*• )P1 otee asw.e ?{.Z7OE a6 ? ?d (1^ezl•AV??csbcx 2PA ('1pSU 07 s?l.?iia^ r/e,.Jr?3 1r?r+s a r e-Y- CXO 4nS- 07 i rm amm wet us uwm umLT when srs fmason ra r"xm unoar rya. a appame r Was crW=W (see Pa. R.C.P.O J. MD. 1007(6) in sdbn R.C.P.D.J. No. 10008. Tfris Notice of Appall. when received by the Distrkst Justice. will operate ss a bak m a Disafd Jusdoa, A COMPLAINT MUST HE FILED wi0rhr two* SUPERSEDERS to •o judgment for poasssion in tits case. (20) days afar!IA'irrp Me NOTICE ofAPPEAL. 94rYwdAoNa?WlxD,p4 PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (Tt" section of Ann to be used ONLY when appow was DEFENDANT (see Ps.R CP.D.J. No. 1001(7) in acibn belbre DbW Justice. IF NOT USED, detach bom copy of, a dce of appeal to be served upon appMMs. PRAECIPE: To Prottmnotery Enter rub upon ec,6-4y? appaNee(s), to ft a compleint in this appeal Nr,r aI (Common Pleas No. Q -7 •-'7'1 r7 mL twenty (2o) days alter service of or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. ?. ` stlrnhn dapp?ntaraeon,gwsy?r,t RULE: To t 1 •?Ov?? ?[ ?IMq/V1nD?r? . aPV?(s) Ar?„u dspp?IM?i? (1) You me ndi0ed 61st a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of Oft rule upon you by personal service or by c:ertiRsd or registered mai. (2) 1 you do not file a oomplaint w gn this time. a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The data of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the ffmNkV. Date: .20 07 &441-elll d a YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL AOPC 312-02 WWM- (70 W Fa.E TO 8E MW V M PROTHONOTARY GREEN - Co M FILE YELLtriY - APPfttANrs C[fFv IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PEN'NSYLV AN[ A CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant JURY TRIAL c3 o V. DEMANDED c - ter -n MARK BECKERMAN -' Appellee 1:1 To the Prothonotary of Said Court: - - r _ Please take note that Appellee Beckerman has fil ed an improper "Praecipe for Striking an Appeaf' under PA RCP 1006. As a matter of record, the above referenced appeal has been timely and property filed under the provisions of PA RCP 1004(b), and Appellee Beckerman was properly served with his "Notice of appeal and Rule to file Complaint" in a timely fashion. Praecipe for Striking of the appeal under PA RCP 1006 by the Prothonotary is not a remedy available to Appellee Beckerman, since the above referenced appeal was clearly and specifically filed under the guidelines and restrictions of PA RCP 1004(b). Any attempt by Appellee Beckerman to now have Appellant Lewis' appeal AMENDED to be included under PA RCP IW4(a) should have been filed as a motion with the Court, NOT as a Praecipe to Strike with you office. :Additionally, because Appellee Beckerman is the one required under the PA Rules of Civil Procedure to file a complaint within 20 (twenty) days, or SUFFER JUDGMENT NON PROS, filing of the complaint by Appellee Beckerman within 20 (twenty) clays was the only remedy available to Appellee Beckerman at this point. THEREFORE, in accordance with both the PA RCP and above stated reasons, please take no action on Appellee's improper Praecipe for striking, and leave Appellants appeal intact. Iv Submitted T"hdm l.e?'v' 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 ?? A?cVrYlnev-'T +'' ?? C3 ? ? `?" r,?a - .. ? .?, . cxz t:.? ? , -?_, °-> '?. _._ •i_.. ....-- , ,,-; _? ?.-? THOM LEWIS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Appellant CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7487 CIVIL MARK BECKERMAN, Appellee IN RE: APPELLANT'S MOTION TO REINSTATE STRICKEN APPEAL ORDER AND NOW, this 3o ` day of January, 2008, argument on the appellant's motion to reinstate stricken appeal is set for Thursday, February 14, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA. BY THE COURT, , (?4 J?' Kevin . Hess, J. t14 0m Lewis, Pro Se Appellant vrric Wiener, Esquire For the Appellee rlm VrAu±id S Z .£ Wd dE N Z 1Wt?,UW 30114 :4 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW Thom Lewis, Plaintiff-Appellant No. 07-7487-Civil v. Mark Beckerman, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant-Appellee APPELLEE'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO REINSTATE STRICKEN APPEAL BY APPELLANT AND NOW COMES, Appellee, Mark Beckerman, by and through his undersigned counsel, responding to Appellant's Motion and maintaining such appeal was properly stricken by the Prothonotary of this Court. Further, Appellant's Motion suffers from numerous procedural errors that are fatal to his claim. STATEMENT OF FACTS and PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Plaintiff-Appellant Thom Lewis (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. 2. Defendant-Appellee Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual residing at 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025. 3. On July 27, 2007, Mr. Beckerman filed suit against Mr. Lewis in the Cumberland County Magisterial District Court. On September 7, 2007, Mr. Lewis then filed a suit against Beckerman. In the Civil Complaint form, Mr. Lewis listed himself as the Plaintiff and Mr. Beckerman as the defendant. See Mr. Lewis' Civil Complaint attached as Exhibit A. 4. On November 16, 2007, the Honorable Thomas A. Placey of the said court entered judgment for Mr. Beckerman on both Beckerman's Complaint and Lewis' Complaint. The judgments were separately entered. The Notice of Judgment captioned as Lewis (plaintiff) v. Beckerman (defendant) was listed as a cross-complaint. See judgments collectively attached as Exhibit B. 5. On December 13, 2007, Lewis filed a Notice of Appeal, together with a Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint, with the Prothonotary of this Court. In his Notice of Appeal, although Mr. Lewis wrote his name down as the defendant and Mr. Beckerman's as the Plaintiff, he also wrote down "counter" beside both names. See Exhibit C. 6. On or about January 7, 2008, Mr. Lewis filed a document with the Prothonotary. Underneath the caption, Mr. Lewis typed "Complaint." This is the document that was later stricken by the Prothonotary. 7. On or about January 11, 2008, counsel for Mr. Beckerman properly filed a Praecipe for Striking an Appeal from the Record. In accordance with the Praecipe, the Prothonotary properly struck Mr. Lewis' Appeal. See Praecipe, with Notation of Prothonotary's action, attached as Exhibit D. 2 8. On or about January 16, 2008, Mr. Lewis filed a Motion to Reinstate Stricken Appeal. This Response now follows. GROUNDS FOR DENIAL OF APPELLANT'S MOTION 9. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each and all of the averments contained in paragraphs 1 through 8 of this Response as if fully set forth herein. 10. Mr. Lewis' appeal was properly stricken from the record by the Prothonotary because he listed himself as a Plaintiff in the Civil Complaint form and was also listed as such in the Notice of Judgment. Further, the fact he filed a document that was denominated as a "Complaint" contradicts his claim that he is a defendant. 11. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004 A & B states: A. If the appellant was the claimant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal. B. If the appellant was the defendant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file with his notice of appeal a praecipe requesting the prothonotary to enter a rule as of course upon the appellee to file a complaint within twenty (20) days after service of the rule or suffer entry of a judgment of non pros. 12. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006 states: "Upon failure of the appellant to comply with Rule 1004A... the prothonotary shall, upon praecipe of the appellee, mark the appeal stricken from the record. The court of common pleas may reinstate the appeal upon good cause shown." 13. Although Mr. Beckerman filed suit against Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lewis is also appealing the judgment in which he is listed as the Plaintiff. This is evidenced by the fact that he wrote down "counter" beside both his and Mr. Beckerman's names in the Notice of Appeal. 14. Mr. Lewis, for the purposes of his appeal, is the Plaintiff in that action as he filed a cross-complaint against Mr. Beckerman. 3 15. As stated by Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004A, if the appellant was the claimant in the action, he shall file a complaint within twenty days after filing his notice of appeal. His filing of a document that he entitled as a "Complaint" contradicts his argument that he is a defendant under the action. 16. As Mr. Lewis was the claimant for the purposes of his appeal, his failure to timely file within twenty days renders his claim fatal. 17. Mr. Lewis, now being fully aware of his mistake, tries to argue that he is a defendant in an attempt to circumvent the rule that an appeal that is filed late must be stricken under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006. WHEREFORE, Appellant failed to timely file his appeal upon this Honorable Court and failed to show good cause thereof, Appellee respectfully asks this Court to mark Appellant's Motion as DENIED. ALTERNATIVE GROUNDS FOR DENIAL (FAILURE TO FILE PRAECIPE FOR NON PROS) 18. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each and all of the averments contained in paragraphs 9 through 17 of this Response as if fully set forth herein. 19. In the alternative, Appellant's Motion should be denied based on numerous procedural deficiencies. 20. Mr. Lewis wrongly claims that his appeal falls under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004B. He claims that he is a defendant and thus would only need to file a Notice of Appeal and Praecipe. (Lewis Mot. 15 & 6). However, even if Mr. Lewis falls under 1004B, his Motion still fails because there is nothing in the record that evidences his compliance with that rule. 4 21. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004B states that after the filing of a Notice of Appeal and Praecipe to enter complaint, a judgment of non pros against the Appellee may be had for a failure to file a complaint. 22. The Rules of Civil Procedure govern the filing of judgment non pros. Under Pa. R.C.P. 1037(a), "the prothonotary, ppon praecipe of the defendant, shall enter a judgment of non pros." But Pa. R.C.P. 237. 1 (a)(2)(i) requires that the praecipe for entry shall include a certification that a "written notice of intention to file the praecipe was mailed or delivered... ten days prior to the date of the filing of the praecipe to the party's attorney of record or to the party if unrepresented." (emphases added). 23. Appellant never filed or served a praecipe upon the Prothonotary to enter judgment non pros against Mr. Beckerman as required by Pa. R.C.P. 1037(a). Appellant's Motion does not allege that he filed such Praecipe, nor are there any exhibits to show compliance with the rule. 24. To the best of Appellee's knowledge, a ten-day notice of intent to file judgment non pros and "other related papers" was not sent to him as alleged in Appellant's Motion. (Lewis Mot. ¶ 9). Such notice should have been served upon undersigned counsel. Appellant did not attach any exhibits to show such compliance with the rule. Further, the fact that Mr. Lewis is now petitioning this Honorable Court to "order the Appellee to either [fJile a Complaint within ten (10) days of January 17, 2008 or suffer Judgment Non Pros" is a procedurally improper attempt to give notice. (Lewis Mot. 115). 25. Therefore, even if Appellant falls under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004B, his Motion still fails for failure to follow the procedures outlined therein and related provisions under the Rules of Civil Procedure. 5 WHEREFORE, Appellant failed to give Notice to the Appellee, nor did he file a Praecipe upon the Prothonotary for a Rule to enter judgment non pros, Appellee respectfully asks this Court to mark Appellant's Motion as DENIED. ALTERNATIVE GROUNDS FOR DENIAL (FAILURE TO FILE A PROPER PLEADING) 26. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each and all of the averments contained in paragraphs 18 through 25 of this Response as if fully set forth herein. 27. Appellant's Motion should also fail because he is not allowed to file a "Counter Claim" because this cannot be asserted independent of an Answer to a Complaint. 28. Although Appellant titles his filed document as a "Complaint," he also alleges that he filed it as a "Counter Claim to Appellee Beckerman's as-yet un-filed complaint." (Lewis Mot. ¶ Par 10). 29. Pa. R.C.P. 1017 states pleadings are limited to: "a complaint and an answer thereto; a reply if the answer contains new matter, a counterclaim or a cross-claim...." (emphasis added). 30. Based on the above rule, the Appellant is not allowed to plead a counter-claim without an Answer to a Complaint. Mistick. Inc. v. Pittsburgh, 646 A.2d. 642, 643 (Pa. Commw. 1994) (holding that by explicit language, a counterclaim is not permitted as a separate pleading). 31. Appellant does not have an Answer attached to his supposed Counter Claim. Even if he did, he has nothing to answer as there was no Complaint filed by the Appellee. In fact, Mr. Beckerman has chosen not to file a Complaint. 32. Appellant is apparently trying the "shotgun approach" to pleading hoping that he would hit the mark to compensate for his failure to timely file his appeal. WHEREFORE, Appellant failed to file or even clearly state what type of document he is actually filing, Appellee respectfully asks this Court to mark Appellant's Motion as DENIED. 6 ALTERNATIVE GROUNDS FOR DENIAL (FAILURE TO OBTAIN CONCURRENCE OF OPPOSING COUNSEL) 33. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each and all of the averments contained in paragraphs 26 through 32 of this Response as if fully set forth herein. 34. Appellant's Motion should also fail because he did not obtain concurrence of opposing counsel and his motion did not state that such concurrence was sought. 35. C.C.R.P. 208.2(d)l states that "[a]ll motions and petitions shall contain a paragraph indicating that the concurrence of any opposing counsel of record was sought and the response of said counsel...." 36. Appellant failed to obtain concurrence of the opposing counsel of record. The Motion does not state that such concurrence was sought. WHEREFORE, Appellant failed to obtain the required concurrence under the local rules of court and state such in his Motion, Appellee respectfully asks this Court to mark Appellant's Motion as DENIED. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Appellee Mark Beckerman respectfully requests this Honorable Court to UPHOLD THE STRIKING OF APPEAL BY THE PROTHONOTARY and to mark the Appellant's Motion as DENIED. ,?- -Cx10a Date pectfully s bmitted, Eric J. yier, Esq. Atto Va orAppellant ID N 8046 24k Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-657-7701 (phone) 717-657-2556 (fax) ejw@ejw-law.com ' The Cumberland County website lists the local rule number as Rule 208.3(a)(9), but is otherwise verbatim. 7 90-119.129-07 0 9: ?5 DISTR 7177376779 COMMONWEALTH OF PE; SYLVANIA r,r"ii INTY Op. CMMZRIAW I' I Map. Dist. No.: 09-3-04 MQJ Nama: HCA. THGtM" A. PLACZY 104 9 SPOILTIRG HILL R3D txC W11CSDi7 G1 PA 1'7050 Teinphone: (717) 761-5230 AMOUNT DATE PAID FILING COSTS $ 1 POSTAGE $ 011071 07 SERVICE COSTS $ ?._.L? CONSTABLE ED, S ? f - TOTAL $ - Y"b 4? 6 t C3 COURT 99304 PAGE CIVIL COMPLAINT PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS LY?*Q??+n ?s?cx? ? ? } `? 6s o vs. DEFENDANT: Nine and ADDRESS L_ FA? 0 Docket No., 0,U-00U0H45-07 Date Filed: 84- 67-gaq 00 Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 246 sets forth those costs recoverable by the prevailing party.. C rrnq? `? ?x ?? 5 Pa.a . 4 20_:30 'TCC?tiac"a5 )A?S -&64? k4ao'., ri5 ? ,?r? ?ii? a pt+„s It }'jd dera c > `,r , '?hr 1 e+.. r??s4' eke rna, aw?c't o? ' 9 ?t?d -1? crs? I, 7 o verify that the facts set forth in this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief-This statement is made subject to the penalties of _ Section 4904 of the Crimes Code (18 PA. C.S. § 4904) related to unsw Isifi on to authorities. Contact Phone No.: -) )-7 - 6111. 7a 13 atu Jlain ' or Authorized Agent) TO THE DEFENDANT: The above named plaintiff(s) asks judgment against you for $ 15, D 0 _ together witf costs upon the following claim (Civil fines must include citation o he statute or ordinance violated):> ?.y 1 3} t rrv o,,., t? 1 ?o P `4oA6 pe,- raj (rer a &3) ^4o brv t l ?\.s a ? ca? 5 e?rsr 5 A'?A . -Erna lr ' $?c' ? mot, ? .2Q 1 ?r 1,?.d? i~+ark ? ZX 5, b 7 r QA-1-k o? 22C +1 cwaa t ttOQ Plairtirrs Att© T ey Address; Telephone: IF YOU INTEND TO ENTER A DEFENSE TO THIS COMPLAINT, YOU SHOULD NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATEL AT THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING AND PRESENT YOUR DEFENSE. UNLESS YOU DO, JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY DEFAULT. If you have a claim against the plaintiff which is within magisterial district judge jurisdiction and which you intend to assert M the hearing, you must file it on a complaint form at this office at least five days before the date set for the hearing. It you are disabled and require a reasonable accommodation to gain access to the Magisterial District Court and its services, please contact the Magisterial District Court at the above address or telephone number. We are unable to provide transportation. AOPC 348A-o5 COMMONWEALTH OF PENN VANIA NOTICE ( JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAZ6 :. CIVIL CASE 09-3-04 MDJ Name: Hon. THOMAS A. PLACEY AddlOSS 104 S SPORTING. HILL RD MECHANICSBURG, PA re?ev'`one 1717 ? - 761-8230 17050 ATTORNEY DEF PRIVATE : ERIC J. WIENER 2407 PARK DR HARRISBURG, PA 17110 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: FOR DEFENDANT -- Judgment: in the amount of $ PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS rLENIS, TOIL ? 263 TEXACO ROAD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17050 L J vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS r88CXZRX- N, GLARE 1030 BELLE VISTA DR. ENOLA, PA 17025 L J Docket No.: CST-0000475-07 Date Filed: 9/07/07 CROSS COMPLAINT 001 (Date of Judgment) - 11/16/07 _ Judgment was entered for: (Name) BECESBMAN, MARK ® Judgment was entered against: (Nam LEIPIS, TOM e 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 Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease $ Amount of Judgment $ .00 Judgment Costs $ 06 00 Interest on Judgment $ . Attorney Fees $ IID Total $ .00 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $_ 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 MIDST 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 JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. U4 NO V ,a Date Magisterial District Judge I certify that this is a true an c ings containing the judgment. /? d ? Date 4-r- , Magisterial District Judge My commission expires first Monday of Jan ry,' 2010 SEAL AOPC 315-07 DATE PRINTED: 11/16/07 1:27:00 PM COMMONWEAL T H OF PENN VANI.A COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAZIL f' Mao Dist No.: 09-3-04 MDJ Name. Hon. THOMAS A. PLACBY Address: 104 S SPORTING HILL RD MECHANICSBURG, PA Te!eph:ore: (717) 761-8230 - 17050 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF : ERIC J. WIENER 2407 PARS DR HARRISBURG, PA 17110 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FOR PLAINTIFF in the amount of $ NOTICE ( JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT ?:IVIL CASE PLAINTIFF:. NAME and ADDRESS MARS rBECKRRKAN ? , , 1030 BELLE VISTA DR ENOLA, PA 17025 L J vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS rLENI S , TOM 263 TEXACO RD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17050 L J Docket No.: CV-0000475-07 Date Filed: 7/27/07 _ (Date of Judgment) 11/16/07 Judgment was entered for: (Name) BECXZRMAN, MARS T Judgment was entered against: (Name) LEWIS, TOM 366.3 17 Defendants are jointly and severally liable. C Damages will be assessed on Date & Time F This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127 $ Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease Amount of Judgment $ 249.81 Judgment Costs $ 116.50 Interest on Judgment $. To Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 366.31 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ 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 JUDGMENT. HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER. THE. JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COM E FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE - A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. rial District Judge AOPC 315-07 DATE PRINTED: 11/16/07 1:27:00 PM My commission expires first Monday of January, 2010 SEAL I' COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL -'mot FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 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. NAME OF APPELLAN I www. uw . ,..,. ..._ ?t - (o.. y ?11n>/h t5 CY - 3 - u Li ' ADDRESS OF APPELLANT CITY STATE ZIP CODE Rte ?ct?kv ?sb PA DATE OF JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF (PbmkT) lDelnwanfl• 11 -(6 07 0. DOCKET No. - c SIGNATURE OF APPELLANT OR ATTORNEY OR AGENT GLf - xJ? This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If appellant ivet Claimant see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(6) in action R.C.P.D.J. No. 1008B. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a before a District Justice, A COMPLAI in twenty SUPERSEDERS to the judgment for possession in this case. 0) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL Sigrwu? dF?aswoarY ar D?pty 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.RC.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 N\ N Q-1L 2) ?Lk ?r t ` . appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Nwne of apps0eet3) (Common Pleas No. within twenty (20) days aftetserv' of le or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. Slg Wvm of appellant or attorney oragent RULE: To J W L b cf C, Cay -A-&- , appellee(s) Name of appeows) (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. ` J (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: , 20 Stgnatwe of PmMonatary 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- APPELLANTS COPY PINK -COPY TO BE SERVED ON APPELLEE GOLD -COPY TO BE SERVED ON DISTRICT JUSTICE 0 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION PRAECIPE FOR STRMNG APPEAL FROM THE RECORD Thom Lewis, Plaintiff No.: 07-7487 Civil V. Mark Beckerman Defendant TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: The appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter was not timely filed. Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004A states "If the appellant was the claimant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal." Appellant-plaintiff filed his notice of appeal on December 13, 2007. See Exhibit A. Appellant-plaintiff did not file his complaint until January 8, 2008. See Exhibit B. The filing of the complaint is more than twenty (20) days after the notice of appeal was filed. THEREFORE, in accordance with Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006, please mark the appeal of the appellant-plaintiff in the above captioned matter as STRIKEN FROM THE RECORD as it is the designated sanction for failure to timely file an appeal. Dat Iq UIAM"` i, I h rl uns sd WN h Caw pe said D11 Respe y sub ed, Eric J. Wiener, sq. ID No. 18046 Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener, LLC. 2407 Park Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-657-7701 (phone) 717-657-2556 (fax) ejw@ejw-law.com January 11, 2008 Appeal Stricken in accordance with above Praecipe By : Curtis ng, Prothonotary 4230 THOM LEWIS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Appellant CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7487 CIVIL MARK BECKERMAN, : Appellee IN RE: APPELLANT'S MOTION TO REINSTATE STRICKEN APPEAL BEFORE HESS J. ORDER AND NOW, this /$' day of April, 2008, the Motion of Appellant, Thom Lewis, to Reinstate Appeal is GRANTED. BY THE COURT, ? Thom Lewis, Pro Se Appellant V '-'Eric Wiener, Esquire For the Appellee :rlm y/t s/oe 4 ` ?' 1 ? .?? /'? 4 i? s ?,..-, ? ?3=3}? v"?? ?, ? y"v ?1? ?? t? ,l }?C'?,. ?? ?r??i ' 5-???;?"? ? THOM LEWIS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Appellant : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7487 CIVIL MARK BECKERMAN, Appellee IN RE: APPELLANT'S MOTION TO REINSTATE STRICKEN APPEAL BEFORE HESS, J. OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is a Motion to Reinstate a Stricken Appeal. Appellant, Thom Lewis, is seeking reinstatement of an Appeal from two Magisterial District Justice Judgments, on both Appellee Mark Beckerman's complaint and Appellant Lewis's cross-complaint. On November 16, 2007, judgment was entered in favor of Appellee Beckerman on both Beckerman's original complaint, and Appellant Lewis's counterclaim. Less than a month later, on December 13, 2007, Appellant Lewis filed a Notice of Appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint with the Prothonotary, attaching both the notice of judgment on Appellee Beckerman's complaint and the notice of judgment on Appellant Lewis's counterclaim. Appellant filed his complaint on January 8, 2008. Two days later, Appellee Beckerman filed his Praecipe for Striking Appeal from the Record, asserting that Appellant failed to file his complaint within the twenty-day period in accordance with Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1004A. On January 11, 2008, the appeal was stricken in accordance with Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006. As noted above, Appellant is now seeking reinstatement of that appeal. Rule 1004(A) of the Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. requires an appellant to file a complaint within twenty days after filing his notice of appeal. If the appellant fails to do so, Rule 1006 provides NO. 07-7487 CIVIL that "the prothonotary shall, upon praecipe of the appellee, mark the appeal stricken from the record." Pa.R.C.P.M.D.J. No. 1006. The Rule further states that "[t]he court of common pleas may reinstate the appeal upon good cause shown." Id. This requirement of a showing of good cause mandates that, in order to for the appeal to be reinstated, an appellant must "proffer some legally sufficient reason for the trial court to reinstate its appeal." Anderson v. Centennial Homes, Inc., 594 A.2d 737, 739 (Pa. Super. 1991). Under Pennsylvania law, however, Rule 1006 is not self-enforcing. See Friedman v. Lubecki, 524 A.2d 987, 989 (Pa. Super. 1987). Friedman concerned an appellant who timely perfected an appeal of a judgment entered against him. See id. at 988. He filed his complaint twenty-four days later. Four days after he did so, the appellee praeciped to strike appellant's appeal for failure of appellant to file his complaint within twenty days of the filing of his notice of appeal. See id. Appellant then filed a petition to reinstate his appeal, alleging that a shortened holiday work period prevented timely preparation and filing. The petition was denied. See id. On appeal from this denial, the Pennsylvania Superior Court found that "the Rule 1006 procedure must be triggered before an appellant files his Complaint in Common Pleas Court .... [T]he filing of the [c]omplaint by appellants pursuant to Pa.R.C.P.D.J. 1004A barred appellee from thereafter invoking her remedy under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. 1006." Friedman, 524 A.2d at 989. Appellee argues, conversely, that Friedman does not apply to the instant case, contending that the Notice of Appeal failed to adequately notify Appellee of the nature of the appeal being taken. Appellee states that he was provided with absolutely no notice that Appellant was appealing from the judgment against Appellant as Plaintiff until the complaint itself was filed, as Appellant did not provide separate notices of appeal when appealing from the judgments as both 2 NO. 07-7487 CIVIL Plaintiff and Defendant. Under American Appliance v. E. W. Real Estate Management, Inc., 769 A.2d 444, 448 (Pa. 2001), however, "[t]here is no language ... [in Rule 1004] that expressly requires the filing of a separate notice of appeal when an appellant (as opposed to an appellee) appeals from judgments on a complaint and cross-complaint." (Emphasis in original.) In American Appliance, plaintiff American filed a complaint in district justice court against defendant E.W. for breach of contract, attempting to recover payment for various household appliances purchased pursuant to various sales contracts. See id. at 445. The following year, E.W. filed a cross-complaint against American, alleging property damage arising from American's improper installation of a washing machine; both the complaint and the cross- complaint were given the same docket number. See id. When E.W. did not appear at the hearing, the district justice entered two separate default judgments; one in favor of American on its complaint, and the other in favor of American on the cross-complaint. See id. E.W. filed a timely notice of appeal with the common pleas court, attaching to such notice of appeal both the notice of the judgment on the complaint and the notice of the judgment on the cross-complaint, as well as a praecipe to enter rule upon American to file a complaint. See American Appliance, 769 A.2d at 445. American filed its complaint, and E.W. filed an answer, new matter and counterclaim. American then filed preliminary objections, in the nature of a motion to strike E.W.'s counterclaim, contending that E.W. was simply reasserting the cross-complaint it previously filed in the district justice court and, as E.W. never appealed that judgment as required by 1004, E.W. could not pursue the claim in a court of common pleas. See id. The common pleas court sustained American's preliminary objections, striking the counterclaim solely on the ground that E.W. failed to preserve the claim asserted in the cross- 3 NO. 07-7487 CIVIL complaint, as it did not file a separate notice of appeal from that judgment. The Superior Court affirmed on appeal, holding that "when separate judgments on a claim and counterclaim are entered at the district court level, the rules require that the adverse judgment on the counterclaim be appealed separately in order to preserve the issues raised therein." Id. at 446. On appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed, finding that "there is no language ... that expressly requires the filing of a separate notice of appeal when an appellant (as opposed to an appellee) appeals from judgments on a complaint and cross-complaint." American, 769 A.2d at 448. E.W.'s attachment of the notices of judgment from the complaint as well as the cross-complaint, the court reasoned, sufficiently satisfied Rule 1002's requirement concerning appeals. See id. The rules do not treat claims and cross-claims independently. See id. Complaints filed by the defendant are given the same docket number as those filed by the plaintiff, and a defendant may bring a claim before the district justice that does not arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim, and a single hearing is held for all claims. See id. Finally, the court found that "[i]nterpreting the rule to require preparation of a separate notice of appeal, along with the payment of an additional filing fee, does not serve the intended simplicity of district justice proceedings." Id. at 448-49. The holdings of American are clearly applicable to the instant action. Like E.W., the Appellant in the case at bar attached both notices of judgment as required by Rule 1002, and included a praecipe to enter rule upon Appellee Beckerman to file a complaint. Finally, Appellant Beckerman contends that "Mr. Lewis' Complaint fails to provide any facts establishing a cause of action, is slanderous, appalling, and thus any continuation of this case will only serve to waste the court's time with several preliminary objections to dismiss the 4 NO. 07-7487 CIVIL Complaint[`s] palpably frivolous claims." Appellee's Br. in Opp. To Appellant's Mot. To Reinstate the Stricken App. 7-8. A brief in opposition to the pending motion is not the proper vehicle by which to raise such allegations. Though Appellee asserts that the filing of preliminary objections will only waste the court's time, it nevertheless remains the proper method by which to raise such issues. ORDER AND NOW, this "9 day of April, 2008, the Motion of Appellant, Thom Lewis, to Reinstate Appeal is GRANTED. BY THE COURT, --?- 4. Kevin X. Hess, J. Thom Lewis, Pro Se Appellant Eric Wiener, Esquire For the Appellee rim 5 Y IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW Thom Lewis, Appellant-Plaintiff No. 07-7487-Civil v. Mark Beckerman, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Appellee-Defendant PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO APPELLANT'S COMPLAINT AND NOW comes Appellee, Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) which by and through his attorneys, the Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener LLC and files the following preliminary objections to Appellant's alleged Complaint. Background 1. On or about December 13, 2007, Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal, appealing from one or both Magisterial District Court rulings in the case of Beckerman v. Lewis. 2. Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 1004(A) provides "If the appellant was the claimant in the action before the magisterial district judge, he shall file a complaint within twenty (20) days after filing his notice of appeal." Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 1004(A) (2008). 3. Appellant filed a document entitled "Complaint" on or about January 8- over 20 days past the December 13, 2007 Notice of Appeal. 4. Thereafter, Appellee had such appeal stricken by praecipe on or about January 11, 2008- such procedure being provided for in Pa.R.C.P.D.J. 1006. 5. Appellant then sought reinstatement of his appeal, both by pleading to the Prothonotary and via motion to the court. Appellant's Pleading to Prothonotary 6. Paragraphs 1 through 5 are herein incorporated by reference. 7. Appellant's Pleading filed on or about January 16, 2008 claimed his appeal was improperly stricken as Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 1006 procedure was inapplicable since Appellant was appealing under Pa.R.C.P.D.J. 1004(B)- where the Appellant was the Defendant in the action before the magisterial district judge- and thus not under 1004(A) as claimed by Appellee. 8. Appellant's pleading explained Appellant had acted properly under 1004(b) by providing Appellee with a Notice of Judgment Non Pros. 9. Appellant further explained that it was Appellee who had an obligation to file a Complaint. Appellant's Motion to Court 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 are herein incorporated by reference. 11. Appellant's Motion to Reinstate Stricken Appeal provided in paragraph 5: "The above referenced `Notice of Appeal and Rule to File Complaint' was filed under, and governed by PA RCPDJ 1004(b), which controls appeals filed where the Appellant is the Defendant in the original District Justice Hearing." 2 12. Paragraph 6 of that motion provided: "Appellant Lewis is the Defendant in the original District Justice Hearing and is appealing that ruling' (emphasis added). 13. Paragraph 10 of that motion claimed the document filed by Appellant on January 8, 2008 was "a Counter Claim to Appellee's as-yet un-filed complaint." 14. Appellant's prayer for relief in the motion requested this Court to reinstate the appeal, strike Appellee's Praecipe to Strike, and order Appellee to file a complaint. 15. The Court granted Appellant's Motion to Reinstate in an Order dated April 10, 2008. 16. Appellant's pleading and motion each provided that Appellant was appealing as a Defendant. 17. Therefore, Appellant's "Complaint" is not a Complaint as Appellant has pled and should not be construed as such. 18. However, to the extent that this Court deems Appellant's "Complaint" an actual Complaint, the following Preliminary Objections are provided: COUNT I MOTION TO STRIKE APPELLANT'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P.1028 (a)(4) Count I of Appellant's complaint purports to set forth a cause of action based on quantum meruit against Appellee for the value of work performed on Appellee's property. Quantum meruit is an implied contract remedy based on payment for services rendered and in prevention of unjust enrichment. Appellant's pleading fails to set out with adequate particularity what services were rendered and when. Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3),(4) (2007). Furthermore, to the extent Appellant pleads the existence of a contract- i.e. "Beckerman had agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $20 per hour"- Appellant fails to state whether the alleged contract 3 is oral or written as required under Pa.R.C.P. 1019(h) and quantum meruit is not available if an actual, valid contract exists. Wherefore, Appellee therefore requests this Court to enter an order dismissing Count I of Appellant's complaint due to legal insufficiency under Pa.R.C.P. 1019 and 1028(a)(3),(4). COUNT II Count II of the Complaint alleges a cause of action based on damages to Appellant's car caused by Appellee. Appellant fail to set out with specificity what vehicle was damaged by Appellee and the extent of such damage. In addition, the pleading is unclear as to whether the vehicle was owned by Appellant and fails to state with adequate particularity what damages were incurred and any payments made as required by PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1028(a)(4). Wherefore Appellee requests that Count II of Appellant's complaint be dismissed for failure to conform with Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) and requests the Court to enter an order dismissing Count II of Appellant's complaint. COUNT III Appellant alleges fraud in Count III but fails to specify any damages as a result of any of the allegations in paragraph 12 through 30, in clear violation of PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1028 (a)(4). Furthermore, the above-numbered paragraphs not only fail to state a cause of action, they are scandalous, libelous, false and untrue. In addition, the allegations fail to state a cause of action in accordance with Pa.R.C.P 1019 and are in violation of Rule 1021 for failing to specify the relief sought. Wherefore, Appellee requests that pursuant to PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), Appellee requests this Court enter an order dismissing Count III of 4 Appellant's complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. COUNT IV Appellant alleges in paragraph 31 through 39 a series of scandalous, fraudulent and false allegations without stating a cause of action or damages. Wherefore Appellee requests that pursuant to PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), requests that Court enter an order dismissing Count III of Appellant's complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. COUNT V Appellant in paragraph 40 through 57 makes a series of false, scandalous and untrue allegations and fails to allege any damages. Wherefore, Appellee requests that pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), Appellee requests that Court enter an order dismissing Count III of Appellant's complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. Wherefore, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1028 (a),(2),(3),(4), and 1021 (a) Appellee requests the Court dismiss Count III of Appellant's Complaint. COUNT VI 5 Appellant fails to set forth in paragraph 1 through 58 any wrongful use of civil process or any damages resulting therefrom. Wherefore Appellee requests pursuant to PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), the Court enter an order dismissing Count VI of Appellant's complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. COUNT VII Appellant alleges defamation at the hands of Appellee in paragraph 59. Appellant, however, fails to allege any facts supporting a claim for defamation and fails to list any damages as a result of any defamation. Wherefore Appellee requests that pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), requests the Court enter an order dismissing Count VII of Appellant's Complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. COUNT VIII Appellant alleges in paragraph 60 (by incorporating 1 through 59) that Appellee's conduct resulted in the intentional infliction of emotion distress upon Appellant. However, Appellant fails to plead with any adequate particularity, any conduct on the part of Appellee that is legally sufficient to show any intent to inflict emotional distress on Appellee or anyone else. In addition, Appellant fails to allege any actual emotional distress and the numbered paragraphs contain false, scandalous, impertinent and untrue statements with no legal sufficiency. 6 Wherefore, Appellee, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1019, 1021, and 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4), requests the Court enter an order dismissing Count VIII of Appellant's complaint and further requests sanctions against Appellant for filing a purely harassing and scandalous pleading with no legal or legitimate purpose other than to aggravate and upset Appellee. Appellee further requests that the Complaint be dismissed for Appellant's failure to comply with Rule 1024 verification. There is not a verification attached in conformity with the PA Rules of Civil Procedure 1024. Wherefore, pursuant to Rules 1019, 1021, and 1024, Appellee requests the Court enter an order dismissing the entire Complaint for failure to comply with the aforementioned rules. In addition Appellee requests sanctions be entered against Appellant for causing Appellee to engage an attorney to file this action to dismiss a clearly frivolous, impertinent, untrue, scandalous complaint with is also unverified in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure and should be dismissed in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1024. Date: y? Respectfu ed, Eric J. Wiener, Es ire Supreme Court ID #18046 LAW OFFICES OF ERIC J. WIENER LLC 2515 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 909-9999 (717) 909-9009 FAX Attorney for Appellee 7 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA THOM LEWIS, ; Appellant-Plaintiff : No. 07-7487-Civil vs. MARK BECKERMAN, Appellee- Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 30th day of April 2008, I, Nicholas J. Knapek certify that I am an employee with the Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener LLC, attorney for the Appellee-Defendant, and do hereby certify that on this day I served the Preliminiary Objections to Appellant's Complaint upon the person(s) indicated below, by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure: Thom Lewis 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, Pa 17050 LAW OFFICES OF ERIC J. WIENER LLC /Z By: qkk" /4 Nicholas J. Knape Law Clerk Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener, LLC 2515 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Phone: 717-909-9999 Facsimile: 717-909-9009 ?a F5 THOM LEWIS IN THE COURT OF COMMON Plaintiff PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COUTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. No.: 07-7487 CIVIL MARK BECKERMAN JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses of objections to the claim set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the petition 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 Lawyer Referral Service Court Administer Cumberland County Courthouse CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Carlisle, PA 717-2493166 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant/Plaintiff No. 07-7487 Civil V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, this 20th day of May, 2008 comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking damages from Defendant Mark Beckerman for Quantum Meruit, Fraud, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Abuse of Process, Wrongful use of Proceedings, Malicious Prosecution, Civil Conspiracy and Defamation. Defendant's campaign against Plaintiff was particularily malicious and in support thereof Plaintiff avers the following: PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, filed an appeal with this Court from a District Justice Ruling on December 15, 2007. (The original District Justice action was filed in DJ Thomas Placey's Court, by defendant Beckerman on July 27, 200 and contained multiple baseless complaints against Mr. Lewis.) On Jan 8, 2008, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on qppeal in this court. The appeal was temporarily stricken when Defendant, Beckerman filed an untimely praecipe to strike with this court on Jan 11, 2008. On Jan 16, 2008 Plaintiff praeciped the Prothonotary with a notice re: Beckerman's untimely praecipe and Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reinstate on or about Jan 18, 2008. On Jan 30, 2008 the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess issued an Order that set a hearing for Feb. 14, 2008 on Plaintiff's Motion. Defendant filed a Response to Motion I on Feb 13, 2008, and a hearing was held on Feb 14, 2008 before the Honorable Judge Kevin Hess. Briefs were tiled after the hearing A few days after that hearing, Defendant filed a false police report to harass Plaintiff and another witness. Police found his reports to be baseless, and this Honorable Court was asked to take note of Defendants attempts to harm Plaintiff outside the courtroom in a brief filed on March 15, 2008. On April 18 2007, Plaintiffs appeal was reinstated, with an Opinion and Order written by Judge Hess. On May 1, 2008 Beckerman filed what was ostensibly labeled Preliminary Objections to Complaint. The filing did not conform to PA Rules of Civil Procedure or to the documented facts in this case. The objections incorrectly focused on the praecipe that Judge Hess had already ruled on, were filed eighty nine (89) days after the required due date, and made several baseless, unfounded motions for sanctions that Defendant is not entitled to. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the tiling of the First Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff at this time renders Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. 2. Defendant Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual residing at 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States 3. Prior to June 2006 when Beckerman first contacted Mr. Lewis, Plaintiff had never met defendant Beckerman. 2 4. In June 2006, Beckerman sought out Mr. Lewis by calling him on the phone and asking Mr. Lewis if he would work for Beckerman. 5. When Mr. Lewis asked Beckerman how he had gotten his number, Beckerman stated that former PA Auditor General and US Congressman Don Bailey had given it to him, and also claimed Bailey had recommended Mr. Lewis to him for work. 6. Mr. Lewis began working for Beckerman in June of 2006. There was no personal friendship established outside of work done for Beckerman. 7. In late May/early June 2007, Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because Beckerman had not paid Mr. Lewis what he was owed and it had become clear Beckerman was involved in unlawful activities. COUNTI QUANTUM MERUIT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, UNJUST ENRICHMENT 8. Paragraph 1 through 7 are hereby incorporated by reference. 9. Between June 2006 and June 2007, Mr. Lewis performed work on Beckerman's property, pet-sat, and performed other services for which Beckerman is currently indebted to Mr. Lewis for over $17,000. Mr. Lewis performed all work satisfactorily and was repeatedly asked by Beckerman to return for additional work. 10. Beckerman told Lewis he would be paid $20 per hour, a decent living wage for his services. Mr. Beckerman issued checks that reflected the $20/ hr. rate. 1 1. Beginning in June 2006, Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman 3-4 days per week, shortly thereafter in July 2006, Beckerman upped the time to 5-6 days per week. By September 2006 Beckerman was calling Mr. Lewis to work 6-7 days per week, on occasions calling several times a day. Mr. Lewis worked between 2-8 hours per day. 3 13. During that time Mr. Lewis performed over 720 hours of work for Beckerman, for a total of $14,400, for which Beckerman has not paid. Beckerman stated he had previously paid $501 hr to another individual for the same type work, and Mr. Lewis' work and hourly rate was much better. 14. Additional, during that time, Beckerman offered to pay Mr. Lewis $50 per day to pet sit his two (2) dogs, when Beckerman was out of the country on several occasions, (in June of 2006, Dec/Jan 2007 and April 2007) of which Lewis did for a total of 52 days. ($2600 for pet sitting) for a total of $17,000 owed, for which Beckerman accepted all services without complaint. 15. In late May/early June 2007 Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because he had not been paid what he was owed and Beckerman was involved in illegal activities to an extent well beyond anything Lewis had previously believed. 16. At no time before Mr. Lewis demanded payment and refused to do any more work for Beckerman in June 2007, did Beckerman complain or ask Mr. Lewis to correct any work. Just the opposite, Beckerman repeatedly stated how good the work was and asked Mr. Lewis to do more work. 17. In June/ July 2007, after Mr. Lewis stopped working for Beckerman, Beckerman contacted the PA Consumer Affairs Bureau to file false complaints against Lewis (attachment A). Beckerman claimed he was a consumer who had hired Mr. Lewis. The complaint was dismissed as baseless. 18. Between June/July 2007 and present, Mr. Beckerman then tiled multiple false police reports with various agencies, and baseless civil suits to harass Mr. Lewis 4 into allowing Mr. Beckerman to retain the services he received, without paying for them. All have been dismissed as baseless, and all contradicted each other. It is well established that Beckerman has repeatedly done this to various individuals and business. 19. In Beckerman's multiple claims, he stated he had only paid Lewis $2030 towards the $17,000 he allegedly owed Mr. Lewis. 20. In February 2008, after this suit was filed, Beckerman again altered his claims, and filed false police reports to East Pennsboro Police Dept claiming checks made out to Lewis, were not for services, but were stolen and forged. The complaint was dismissed as baseless, and again contradicted his previous complaints. 21. In the alternative, Plaintiff asserts a claim for Unjust Enrichment, because he is entitled to reimbursement for the value of his services in order to prevent Beckerman from being unjustly enriched. 22. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman requested and received the above referenced services with an agreed value of $17,000, and for the reasons stated above, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff $17,000 in actual damages and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT II FRAUD 23. Paragraphs 1 through 22 are hereby incorporated by reference. 24. Plaintiff asserts that PA Courts allow for recovery for fraud if someone hires a person or purchases services with the intent of not paying for all services, or otTers work to someone under false pretense, with the intent of using their time or service for a different reason. 25. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman hired Lewis with ulterior motives, and never intended to pay Lewis for the services he received. There is an extensive record of this behavior by Beckerman- 26. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman sought out and hired Lewis' as part of a scam he has run on former US Congressman Don Bailey and his family. However, the scam backfired when Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas awarded the Bailey's $20,000 as a result of Beckerman's behavior, and the Court subsequently ordered the $20,000 judgment paid to the Baileys. Beckerman blamed Lewis for the $20,000 loss, because Lewis refused to commit perjury against Bailey. 27. Mr. Beckerman is a professional and vexatious litigant who attempts to get free goods, services and money from various individuals and business, by misusing the courts and filing false reports against people he hires. According to records on file in Cumberland, Dauphin and Federal Courts, there are sixty (60) complaints filed by Beckerman and at least twelve (12) lawsuits since year 2000. 28. Mr. Beckerman targeted Lewis because of his association with Mr. Bailey. He first hired Lewis for handy work, and then began to ask Lewis to "look at" various police reports and lawsuits Beckerman was filing. He also began asking Mr. Lewis to write various legal papers and police reports for him. Mr. Lewis declined. Since Beckerman started harassing Mr. Lewis in June 2007, he has learned there is a well established record of Beckerman using third parties (who are not attorneys) to "write`' his 6 legal papers, presumably so Beckerman can deny liability. 29. Around November 2006 Beckerman began offering Lewis money to fire Attorney Bailey and hire Beckerman's friend, Attorney Doug Goldhaber in Bailey's place. 30. Around the same time Beckerman began telling Mr. Lewis he had received permission from _local_Police to kill Attorney Don Bailey, 31. Beckerman used Lewis' legitimate work time to try and make Lewis a witness for Beckerman's frivolous lawsuits and false police reports he was filing against others. 32. When Mr. Lewis refused to be a part of Beckerman's scam, he retaliated against Mr. Lewis. 33. Mr. Beckerman and unnamed co-conspirator Eric Weiner then used the false reports to harass and in an attempt to collect monies they were not entitled to, by filing baseless lawsuits against Lewis. (attachment "B") 34. This included false claims for things like "child endangerment", "forging checks" and for a "car accident" that never occurred. 35. As part of Beckerman's attempts to draw Mr. Lewis into Beckerman's unlawful activities, Beckerman: A. Beckerman offered Mr. Lewis money to drive him to another Harrisburg attorney's home, so Beckerman could stalk him. Beckerman had previously filed false reports and frivolous lawsuits against the individual and was angry the attorney had refused to pay Beckerman off. All of Beckerman's false claims against the attorney have been thrown out. Mr. Lewis declined to help 7 Beckerman. B. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to gather information from the internet on several of Beckerman's other targeted victims. Mr. Lewis declined. C. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis that he currently has a dozen frivolous lawsuits he's filed against individuals he's harassing, including at least 2 (two) for fake auto accidents, and over sixty (60) false reports he's filed. D. In January 2007 Beckerman asked Lewis to commit perjury on his behalf in front of District Justice Dougherty. Mr. Lewis declined E. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis until May 2007 that he had hired Lewis to pet sit so that Beckerman could leave the country to hire prostitutes, (for a total of 52 days) on several occasions. F. Eventually, by May 2007. Beckerman had revealed that he was a convicted felon who would pretend to be both deaf and mentally retarded in order to deceive local attorneys, businesses and individuals. (Beckerman currently owns a digital hearing device that gives him perfect hearing, and claims he holds several degrees including a Doctorate of Medicine, see attachment "A"). He would hire the services of these individuals then file false suits against them. Anyone who refused to pay him would be falsely reported to various law enforcement agencies. Plaintiff respectfully submits the practice is plain and simple fraud and extortion, and should be treated as such by the Court. G. Subsequently, Mr. Lewis learned that Don Bailey had never given Beckerman Lewis' phone number, and Beckerman had simply targeted Lewis because Lewis was a personal friend and client of Don Bailey. Bailey and his family were one of Beckerman's targeted victims. 36. In summer of 2007, after he had refused to help Mr. Beckerman, Mr. Lewis was contacted by a detective from the Dauphin County District Attorneys Office, regarding other individuals Beckerman was targeting. 37. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was also contacted by an agent from the FBI, regarding a Federal Judge and her employees that Beckerman had targeted- 3 8. During the time Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman, Beckerman made claims that he is a Medical Doctor, an auto mechanic, an Israeli war hero, a Veteran of the "7 day war," a professional boxer and Israeli boxing champion, owns a degree in electronics, a degree in agriculture. He claims he is a personal friend of Mohamed Ali, Larry Holmes and former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Dyan. Also a "Hell's Angel", a professional hit man, professional horse trainer, professional dog trainer who raises seeing eye dogs, and that he works in the field of physics. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman is none of the above, and has never received any of the honors he claims, and that he simply claims so in order to commit fraud. 39. As further proof Mr. Beckerman hired Mr. Lewis under false pretenses, when Mr. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to do work, Mr. Lewis asked how Beckerman could afford to pay him. 40. Beckerman claims to be living as a Pennsylvania Lottery Winner from the 1990's, but as of July 2007, he is not receiving any monies from the PA Lottery, and has no discernable income. Beckerman borrowed $60,000 against his home in April 2007, a small double wide modular. Beckerman claims he received over $280,000 between June 2006 and July 2007. 9 41. Mr. Lewis since learned, that as part of his scams Beckerman files his frivolous lawsuits by petitioning to proceed in forma pauperis, by using third parties to write the forms, and those parties are not attorneys. (attachment "C') 43. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, Plaintiff asserts Beckerman deceived Plaintiff into helping him, with both the intent of not paying, and with the intent of using Plaintiff's time and services for other purposes, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court Award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT III CIVIL CONSPIRACY 44. Paragraphs 1 through 43 are hereby incorporated by reference. 45. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman conspired with unnamed co-conspirators Peggy Moniesmith and Eric Weiner to give false and/or misleading testimony against Mr. Lewis to both the Courts and to Police. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman lied to other parties in order to solicit their help in harassing Lewis and submits other names may be shown through discovery. 46. In November 2007. Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to provide false testimony at the hearing that was held before District Justice 'Thomas Placey. 47. At that hearing. Moniesmith and Weiner offered testimony to matters of 10 which she had no knowledge, to incidents that had never occurred. (Beckerman had fabricated false claims of "child endangerment" and false claims of an auto accident for that hearing and those incidents had never occurred. (see attachment "B") There were additional false claims). 48. In Feb 2008, Beckerman filed false police reports against Lewis, claiming he had accessed Beckerman's Commerce Bank Account in Jan. 2007, while Beckerman was out of the country. The police investigation found that it was Moniesmith who was using Beckerman's account while he was out of the country, and she had conspired with Beckerman to do so. Beckerman then filed the false report, knowing it was Moniesmith who had accessed his account. 49. Plaintiff alleges that Beckerman and Moniesmith ran a scam where third parties write checks on Beckerman's personal checking accounts in her handwriting. Beckerman then signs the checks, turns them over to the people he owes money. Beckerman then accuses the people that cash the checks of stealing the checks. Beckerman and Weiner falsely accused Doug Goldhaber and Plaintiff (under oath), of stealing and writing checks to himself. Those claims have been proven false. 50. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to help harass and defraud the Plaintiff through the filing of frivolous, vexatious and abusive lawsuits and false criminal allegations, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IV DAMAGES TO PLAINTIFFS CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 51. Paragraphs 1 through 50 are hereby incorporated by reference. 52. On or around May 7, 2007 Beckerman damaged Lewis' parked car by hitting it with his car, causing over $1200 damage. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman was intoxicated at the time. 53. Beckerman asked Lewis not to report the accident; Beckerman agreed he would pay all damages. Beckerman left the scene, and then reneged on payment, when Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work on Beckerman's property. Beckerman refuses to provide his required Insurance information to Mr. Lewis, or to pay. 54. Beckerman has admitted under oath to causing the damage, admitted to agreeing to pay for the damages in full, and admitted he has not paid. WHEREFORE, Beckerman did cause the above referenced damage, then subsequently reneged on paying for damages, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT Plaintiff $1200 to repair the damage, or in the alternative any relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT V ABUSE OF PROCESS 55. Paragraphs 1 through 54 are hereby incorporated by reference. 56. In June 2007 Beckerman was caught criminally trespassing on Mr. Lewis' property. When he was caught, Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced state, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine. Alter Lewis threw him off the property, 12 Beckerman contacted Silver Springs Police and filed a false police report against Lewis with the bizarre claim that "Lewis doesn't have a puppy door". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 57. In July 2007 Beckerman filed false reports against Lewis with the PA State Police, (Officer Hurley) which falsely claimed Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 58. In July 2007, Beckerman filed a false report with the PA State Attorney Generals Office, Consumer Affairs, (See attachment "A") claiming Lewis was selling '`puppy fencing" online and that Mr. Lewis' lived in a home "without any doors". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 59. In July 2007 Beckerman filed another false report with PA State Attorney Generals Office falsely claiming he had been in an auto accident caused by Lewis. No such accident ever occurred or had been reported at the time he alleged the accident occurred. Beckerman now claims the accident occurred at a Wal-Mart, but the store has no record of Beckerman having the accident at their store. Beckerman then waited over two (2) months until late July to suddenly remember he had been in an accident on May 27.2007. None of the other reports Beckerman filed previous to that mentioned any accident. Beckerman claims there were no witnesses and no police reports regarding his "accident". even though it allegedly occurred in a parking lot full of people. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless 60. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false report with the PA Dept of Environmental Resources, claiming Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. A claim they have summarily dismissed after state Police reported that Beckerman's 13 inspection was performed by Pep Boys Automotive on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA on January 29, 2007. Beckerman himself had driven the car there for the inspection. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 61. In July 2007, Beckerman filed false police reports in East Pennsboro Township (Lt. Mark Greene) claiming Lewis and attorney Doug Goldhaber were stealing and forging his checks. This was according to the Sworn testimony of Beckerman himself. Beckerman's claim was dismissed as baseless 62. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false animal cruelty report with the Harrisburg Humane Society (William Sandstrom) against Lewis. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 63. In support of Plaintiffs position that Beckerman's report was knowingly false, during the same month of July 2007 the same Harrisburg Humane Society asked Mr. Lewis to help them rescue a dog because of his long history of outstanding service to animal welfare. To date, Mr. Lewis has assisted multiple Humane Societies in hundreds of animal rescues. 64. Beckerman has never seen Mr. Lewis' dogs, or been in his home, yet repeatedly files false police reports claiming he was in the home. 65. Upon information and belief, in July 2007 Beckerman attempted to file a baseless report with The PA Disciplinary Board, (Patty Bedneric) an agency with no jurisdiction over Lewis whatsoever. Bedneric has a long personal history with Beckerman. His baseless report was refused. 66. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office that falsely accused Lewis of Child endangerment and Animal Cruelty, 14 and other unsubstantiated claims and charges. Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 67. In Aug 2007, Mr. Lewis was contacted and advised by Federal Agent Chris Nawrocki, that Beckerman was posing a threat to Mr. Lewis' personal safety, and Mr. Lewis should immediately contact him and local authorities anytime Beckerman attempted to further harass or approach him, 68. In September 2007 Beckerman appeared at a restaurant in Camp Hill where Mr. Lewis was having dinner. Beckerman, (in an obviously unstable and unclean condition), entered the Diner, sat staring at Mr. Lewis for ten minutes, then harassed the waitress, caused a scene, and then stumbled out of the Diner's entrance. Beckerman then proceeded to slowly circle the restaurant for 20 minutes in his car, trapping at least 20 people in the establishment while terrorizing the waitress and customers. The Owner was forced to call the police when Beckerman was caught hiding behind the building. The witnesses acknowledge to Hampden Township Police that Beckerman was lying in wait for Lewis to exit the restaurant. 69. Upon information and belief, in Dec 2007 Beckerman attempted to a false charge against Mr. Lewis with Silver Springs Township (DiFillipo, Hall) several days after Beckerman learned of this lawsuit. His claims were determined to be baseless. 70. In all cases, Beckerman's charges and claims were found to be baseless ramblings. 71. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. 72. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, 15 reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the malicious Abuse of Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the Court, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable jury may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VI WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 73. Paragraphs 1 through 72 are hereby incorporated by reference. 74. Beckerman and co-conspirators engaged in a campaign aimed at Plaintiff and described above, to maliciously prosecute and harm the Plaintiff. 75. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office. (see attachment "B") Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 76. All of Beckerman's false claims have ended in Plaintiff's favor. 77. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the Wrongful Use of Civil Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Ilonorable Court may deem just and appropriate. 16 COUNT VII MALICIOUS PROSECUTION 78. Paragraphs 1 through 77 are hereby incorporated by reference. 79. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. The false police report was also in retaliation for Mr. Lewis successfully exposing the behavior of Weiner and Beckerman at a hearing on Feb 14, 2008. 80. Plaintiff asserts that through the behavior described above, Beckerman maliciously prosecuted the Plaintiff with a campaign of harassment through the filing of false police reports and baseless civil suits, that was meant to bring false criminal charges against the Plaintiff. 81. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff through the filing of false police reports and false civil claims, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VIII DEFAMATION 81. Paragraphs 1 through 80 are hereby incorporated by reference. 82. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman slandered and defamed the Plaintiff by repeatedly issuing false statements described above to various agencies and individuals 17 that were meant to harm the Plaintiffs reputation, good name., and to inflame those individuals to retaliate against the Plaintiff. 83. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE Beckerman repeatedly defamed the Plaintiff, Plaintiff- - - - respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IX INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 84. Paragraphs 1 through 83 are hereby incorporated by reference. 85. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman's campaign of harassment was so outrages that it shocks the conscious. 86. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman's intended to inflict emotional harm onto the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. 18 Plaintiff respectfully submits the above complaint with a request for damages, both actual and punitive for an amount in excess of $50,000 against the defendant Mark Beckerman. Respectfully Submitted: ) ..... ..... Tho Lewi 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 19 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant/Plaintiff V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant VERIFICATION No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED I, Thom Lewis, hereby verify that the facts and information set forth in the foregoing FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made with knowledge of the penalties set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. JlS\\\ Thom -- Petitioner 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-2629 21 ATTACHMENT "A" ' J U, L di -- t I"17!???L'??r r .. ? r , , ' i r 1 n r ! ' t ii- 4-4 l 'l ? r f 1141 ?r7 -S /- f i t I oi r . ?y_ _.! ?` I;r'? 1. C_-} i f'-r tl'?-G?---J i? •f t• ? ? ? (r l?._...' - ? / 16;?? Ll`?7l !'? ?. -i• - ,-? v -4- 44- l ? !'? ._?_?' ,.-1-?-%-? _ / ?? ?-1`?-? ?' , ?' ?;` _ ??--? ?` _r'=? err ? c: ?! '1 ,--• - --?-;:= -? , ? , ?? i .. _? _ ?. /?.. ? r ? ./ `. t / ? 1-+i // ?? ? ? A " r r?_? ? . ' ter- _ ' .. / . 111 ? /^? ( ? /( ? ,l? /?? ? ??. ? ? ? r ?..?. ?. ? ? ? ?_-r*... ! . '? ' ,? _,. _ _,- ? , ,, /_ ? .?.??- '- i ? ? ? i i 7.?- ?/ . / / - _ - /?. ? / .? %r i f I / ?; ?- ? ^~ ? , ? i ?..../ ..,-?'?/? `-'? , ,a ?/`? ? ? .rte .l'' i? ( ^?' ,. ?Ji (r ?. /' - ice. .?_ _ .. _ ??L /??r //' v,. ..?? '(" /'? Y' /? ? _ ? / ?- ? '/ ?? , ? ?? "?. ?^ r ,•. ? - ?? i ,. '? ? `I ? / S ?? ? , ??? C ? PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL CONsumwu TOIA CDROETT °s,? ?' ' wwwononeygenerul gd? I. ;" 99. ATTORNEY GREM mft an 00 Mnoslyran +! ', 066 1 r "2 ConikiM f f ? F /t_ tl•• I ' ]OS 17101 {71Tj 787-TiMl •Q3&U =13" ItIE WmK MIT NONEi'NONENUM19t?I'??:?1t-4.?} agtNUMMMLo=rUERff -=G!' komm cm STM Zrml* t0" nmUCIM M SERUM ft [i1 M ! ftu o PUffim PURCNA6E MM r r r - a , f_ Ls e f ie? 275 tom- ru To v?.aa4 vftt ng,rrc:cs ;.;vt you emavFaim.. . y'F.fh..: Aimi Rn vns is A:c :'s i : 7'? 1 s lij•?' - •?•r' >?{,}7 -. ti -m ym ",y"r 4 -j ?_ ;... ... tobeb?batbc PWMOoxphmYoir?aint Yanmaytmesdditiaof?lehcdelfna ? a[. ?aastCstaoeos tDbeb Kbut d° sureto tnllNllAT MtIBI ithi?ponedaudlYHEREit• Bcspccif?a to E4EdN1Ydwwibatinnumnd you to dml whhdie any 1 cvmb in &e otdwin wbkh dv.Y ha td. AttwhCQPIpSof3ACOWn%ctk "CMrc cdctreci®(f tdcbnck).adverdaaaen?oraapiotberpspasIhsttdsio fJb youraomptamt r, 4 Y _ c _.ratitsrc-uc aiiCMiF _n 0 e7'p.4's€r L:4 1 1, ;{¢ _ m ?r -, .'.'.,,_.f .1 n.:Tt'•a.. _?:717YtCtt/a.a,.•-,__ '.- : :: t,,.. .K::.;i•t5 L'. .. ':" ',. _: ";5" ?-.??'.V.''?'`:: '. - ?"?.:`{ , IFSiN?. -. ant 3 l? Y. ` .Fx1 ? 4 R 1 14-, 2 y?i! ? y ( ? y " - t Mr4E B+E a * ; : A 28e`.!;43 +.ft , at .41f1CS} r i.- ""i1'F +2?.? kr >? q v d? -f? .?i 'r4 .? f 'tvj'„t'Tali 'N f, .5. 71 sr 1 yt 7 7-7- o v t t o Itttd ut 1144 77 7 7 - 7, ,.r' A41 h nn •? tLr L am' ---r?-t-t-?--r? Q ?C i ' u IL ATTACHMENT "B" I __ i COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY,OF: CUMBERLAM CIVIL COMPLAINT Mag. Dist. Na.:. PLAINTIFF: 09 - 3 - 0 4 I- y/?1 NAME and ADDRESS MDJ Name: Hon. - //v THOMAS .A... PLACEY Address: .3.04 .. S SPORTING HILL 'RD / 30- `.. ?. MECBANICSBMG, PA L 42b L 7q- _ f70.2-? vs. 17050 DEFENDANT: Teiepnone: (717) 761-8230 NAME and ADDRESS 1-46 14 r L.Mi7c 0C) A_ Pt J AMOUNT D T AIp Docket No:: c OObO ?f'[S-o7 FILING COSTS $ _ 43 (. Sa?/ 07 Date Filed: POSTAGE ••-- y SERVICE COSTS $ O. Ob oZ? CONSTABLE ED. $ S.'b TOTAL $ I "t 4444- P a.R:C.P.D.J. No.'206 sets forth those costs recoverable by the prevailing party. TO THE .DEFENDANT: The above named plaintiff(s) asks judgment against you for $ ? costs upon the following claim -.(Civil fines must include citation of the statute or ordinanceher with violated): j v D GCS M lij! fl U1'': ?Mo c .,? cam,, ' ?r4L?, 2/ lfc ,Vl w: V o k"- ; / c QUA C nil .#- L C r 6,1?e-4 a_r)*C e4v verify that the fac set forth, in -this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, ;information, and belief..This statemP f t is - lade subject to the Derialties of Section 4904 of the Crimes Code. (.18 PA_. C• c A *9,0?; related :o unswo falsification to anti jol'itiES. Contact Phone No.: (Signature of Plaintiff or Authorized Agent) Plaintiff's Attorney: t _ Address: - Telephone: -------- - ------------- IF YOU INTEND TO ENTER A DEFENSE TO THIS COMPLAINT, YOU SHOULD NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU-MUST APPEAR. AT THE HEARING AND .PRESENT YOUR D UNLESS YOU DO, JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU H DEFAULT. EFENSE. If you have a claim against the plaintiff which is within magisterial district judge jurisdiction and which you intend to assert at the hearing, you must file it on acomplaint format this office five days before the date set for the hearing. at least If you are disabled and require a reasonable accommodation to gain access to the Magisterial District Court and its services, please contact the Magisterial District court at the above address or telephone number. We are unable to provide. transportation. AOPC 30BA-D5 ATTACHMENT "C" ITNII'ED STATES DISTRICT COURT ZQ(Jj FOR THE MT17IyLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA pq ° . ?qls X1`'1(\Y? __60 C: K. /r_ t-- iry?.•? c>.'t?, ?Ptar Y ?LtaK (plaintiff) AFFIDAVIT I DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST V. TO PROCEED to Z FO 2MMA_PAUPERIS 000349 (Dcfendant) CV V5 u ?. t I, E1 t('t Y ' C Vii' V l ,'f- n') certify that I am the plaintiff in the above entitled case; that in support of my motion to proceed without being required to prepay fees, costs or give security therefor, I state that because of my present financial condition T am unable to pay the costs of said proceMng or to give security therefor; that I believe I am entitled to redress. I further suite that the responses which I have made to questions and instructions below are true and correct. 1. Are you presently employed`? Yes No a. If the answer is yes, state the amount of your salary or wages per month, and give the name and address of your employer. b. if the answer is no, state the date of last employment and the amount of the salary and wages per month which you received. 1 I Y Lk on t' ??n,?,v 2. Have you received within the past twelve incr?ths any money from any of the following sources`? a. Business, profession or form of self-employment? Yes __ No h. Rent payments, interest or dividends? Yes __ No c. Pensions, annuities or life insurance payments? Yes No d. Gifts or inheritances'? Yes No e. Any otter sources? Yes , No If the answer to any of the above is yes, describ each source of money and stt{ate the amount received from each daring the past twelve months. L- 6W% NL t v,?A_t.k. 'I tirtl -1M ti -e e c 4v t'?4 4? 3. Do you own any cash, or do you have money in a checking or savings account: Yes -A- No (Include any funds in prison accounts.) http://www.pamd.uscouiis.gov/does/pauperis.htm 12/22/2004 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Plaintiff JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on May 21, 2008, as follows: Eric Wiener 2515 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Thom E. Lewi Appellant/Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 20 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA . CIVIL ACTION - LAW Thom Lewis, Appellant-Plaintiff No. 07-7487-Civil v. Mark Beckerman, Appellee-Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO APPELLANT'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW comes Appellee, Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) which by and through his attorneys, the Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener LLC and files the following preliminary objections to Appellant's First Amended Complaint: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION: PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Appellant's First Amended Complaint contains a procedural history. 2. Such procedural history is neither permitted by the law nor pertinent. 3. Therefore, including a procedural history is inclusion of an impertinent matter in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2). 4. In addition, because no law permits or requires the inclusion of a procedural history in a Complaint, the inclusion of such is a failure of the pleading to conform to law in direct contravention of Pa.R.C.P. 1028 (a)(2). PRELIMINARY OBJECTION- COUNT 1 OF COMPLAINT SOUNDING IN QUANTUM MERUIT 1 5. Paragraphs 1-4 are hereby incorporated by reference as if stated herein. 6. Appellant's claim for quantum meruit fail to specify with particularity the work performed by Appellant for Appellee for which Appellant seeks payment. 7. Appellant claims he has "performed work on Beckerman's property... and performed other services for which Beckerman is currently indebted." (Appellant's 1 Sr Am. Complt. 3.) 8. Furthermore, to the extent Appellant pleads the existence of a contract- i.e. "Beckerman had agreed to pay Mr. Lewis $20 per hour"- Appellant fails to specify whether a contract existed between the parties and, if so, the form of the contract - i.e. written or oral as required by Pa.R.C.P. 1019(h). 9. In addition, paragraphs 18 and 19 of Appellant's 1St Amended Complaint alleges Appellee had filed multiple police reports and claims against Appellant. 10. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1019 requires "[a]verments of time, place, and items of special damage [] be specifically stated." Pa.R.C.P. No. 1019 (2008). 11. Appellant has failed specify when Appellee made such alleged reports or claims against Appellant. 12. Appellant has also failed to indicate where such complaints against Appellant by Appellee were made. 13. Therefore, Appellant has failed to conform to law or rule of court and Appellee objects. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 14. Furthermore, Appellee objects on the ground that Appellant's 1St Amended Complaint is insufficiently pled since it fails to specify the time and place of complaints lodged by Appellee against Appellant. Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) (2008). 2 15. In addition, Appellant claims to have performed over 720 hours of work for Appellee, but fails to specify when such work was performed and where. 16. Therefore, Appellee objects on the ground that Appellant has insufficiently pled his I" Amended Complaint. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3). 17. Appellee objects to paragraph 15 of Appellant's l t Amended Complaint on the ground that the same contains impertinent material for a claim of quantum meruit and such claim is also scandalous since Appellant claims he refused to perform work for Appellee and that Appellee allegedly engaged in illegal activities neither of which is relevant to Appellant's claim. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 18. Paragraph 17 of Appellant's I" Amended Complaint is also objected to since whether Appellee lodged a complaint against Appellant and that such claims was dismissed has no import regarding Appellant's claim of quantum meruit and should be stricken as impertinent. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 19. Paragraph 18 of Appellant's I" Amended Complaint contains impertinent and scandalous material as it states "It is well established that Beckerman has repeatedly [received services from various individuals and businesses without paying for them]." 20. Appellee objects to paragraph 18, therefore. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 21. Paragraph 19 is also objected to which claims "Beckerman's mutlple claims.. stated he had only paid Lewis $2,030 toward the $17,000 he allegedly owed Mr. Lewis." 22. Appellee objects on the ground that Appellant has failed to specify the time and place such statements were made and thus has insufficiently pled his Complaint. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) (2008). 3 Wherefore, Appellee therefore requests this Court to enter an order dismissing Count I of Appellant's complaint due to legal insufficiency under Pa.R.C.P. 1019 and 1028(a)(3),(4). COUNT II: FRAUD 23. Paragraphs 1-22 are hereby incorporated by reference. 24. Pa.R.C.P. 1019(b) requires averments of fraud to be averred with particularity. 25. Appellant has failed to provide with particularity how Appellee has committed fraud against him and, therefore, Appellee objects to the sufficiency of this claim. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) (2008). 26. In addition, Appellant's fraud claim alleges several facts in paragraphs 25-43, none of which are relevant to a claim of fraud and thus, Appellee objects to Appellant's claim of fraud as containing several impertinent and scandalous facts. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) (2008). COUNT III: CIVIL CONSPIRACY 27. Paragraphs 1-26 are hereby incorporated by reference. 28. Appellant's claim of civil conspiracy is insufficient and Appellee objects under Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3). 29. "[T]o state a civil action for conspiracy a complaint must allege [among other things], actual legal damage." McKeeman v. Corestates Bank, N.A., 2000 PA Super 117, 131, 751 A.2d 655, 660 (Pa. Super. 2000). 30. Appellant has failed to provide any damage whatsoever received by the alleged conspirators alleged actions. 31. Furthermore, "absent a civil cause of action for a particular act, there can be no cause of action for civil conspiracy to commit that act." Pelagatti v. Cohen, 370 Pa. Super. 422, 432, 536 A.2d 1337, 1342 (Pa.Super. 1987). 4 32. Appellant fails to state any civil action regarding a particular act which the civil conspiracy arises from. 33. Therefore, Appellant has failed to sufficiently plead a civil conspiracy action and Appellee objects under Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3) COUNT IV: DAMAGES TO APPELLANT'S CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 34. Paragrahs 1-35 are hereby incorporated by reference. 35. Appellant fails to plead with particularity the vehicles he and Appellee were operating and thus has failed to sufficiently plead his claim for damage to Appellant's car. 36. Therefore, Appellee objects to the sufficiency of Appellant's pleading. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3) (2008). 37. In addition, Appellant avers "Beckerman has admitted under oath to causing the damage," but Appellant fails to specify where or when such admission was made. 38. Therefore, Appellee objects to Appellant's I" Amended Complaint as failing to plead averments of time and place with particularity as required under Pa.R.C.P. No. 1019(a). 39. In addition, Appellant fails to state the time and place Appellee allegedly agreed to pay for any of the damages alleged. Wherefore Appellee requests that Count II of Appellant's complaint be dismissed for failure to conform with Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) and requests the Court to enter an order dismissing Count II of Appellant's I" Amended Complaint. COUNT V: ABUSE OF PROCESS 40. Paragraphs 1-41 are hereby incorporated by reference. 5 41. Appellee objects under Pa. R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) to the averment "Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced stated, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine," as such statement is scandalous and impertinent to Plaintiffs claim. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 42. Furthermore, nearly every paragraph in Appellant's abuse of process claim contains impertinent and/or scandalous material and Defendant objects under Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2). Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) (2008). 43. In addition, a claim for abuse of process requires harm to have been caused to the Plaintiff by Defendant. McNeil v. Jordan, 586 Pa. 413, 437-438, 894 A.2d 1260, 1275 (Pa. 2006). 44. Appellant's claim fails to state what, if any, harm was caused to Appellant by Appellee. 45. Thus, Appellee objects to Appellant's claim of abuse of process as being legally insufficient to state a claim for abuse of process. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) (2008). COUNT VI: WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 46. Paragraphs 1-47 are hereby incorporated by reference. 47. Appellant also fails to indicate if he is suing under the statutory cause of action of "wrongful use of civil process" or the common law cause of action for malicious use of civil process. 48. Therefore, Appellee objects to Appellant's Vt Amended Complaint as being pled with insufficient specificity. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) (2008). 49. Furthermore, under either theory of misuse of process, Appellant's claim is legally insufficient in that it fails to provide what damages were caused to Appellant. 6 50. Therefore, Appellee objects to Appellant's wrongful use of civil process claim as being legally insufficient. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) (2008). COUNT VII: MALICIOUS PROSECUTION 51. Paragraphs 1-50 are hereby incorporated by reference. 52. As explained by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, a cause of action for malicious prosecution requires "a previous unsuccessful civil or criminal proceeding which was prosecuted without probable cause and with malice." Byers v. Ward, 368 Pa. 416, 421, 84 A.2d 307, 310 (Pa. 1951). 53. Appellant's malicious prosecution claim fails to aver any civil or criminal proceeding in which he had been prosecuted. 54. Furthermore, Appellant's claim rests solely on a police report filed by Appellee. (Plaintiffs Complt. at 17.) 55. Such activity is insufficient to use as a basis of a claim for malicious prosecution. 56. Therefore, Appellee objects to Appellant's claim of malicious prosecution on the ground that it is legally insufficient. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(4) (2008). COUNT VIII: DEFAMATION 57. Paragraphs 1-56 are hereby incorporated by reference. 58. Appellant states in his Complaint, "Beckerman slandered and defamed the Plaintiff by repeatedly issuing false statements described above." (Appellant's I 't m. Complt. at 17.) 59. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1019(f) requires averments of time and place to be specifically pled. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1019(f) (2008). 7 60. As Appellant has failed to indicate when and where Appellee defamed and/or slandered him, Appellee objects to Appellant's defamation claim on the ground that such fails to conform to law or rule of court and is insufficiently pled. Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 1028(a)(2),(3) (2008). COUNT IX: INTENTIONAL OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 61. Paragraphs 1-60 are hereby incorporated by reference. 62. Appellant's claim for damages due to emotional distress lacks specificity, is insufficiently pled, and fails to conform to the law of the state of Pennsylvania and Appellee objects on those grounds under Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4). Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 1028(a)(2),(3), and (4) (2008). 63. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has stated: "One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress, and if bodily harm to the other results from it, for such bodily harm." Hoy v. Angelone, 554 Pa. 134, 150, 720 A.2d 745, 753 (Pa. 1998). 64. First, Appellant's claim fails to state that he has suffered any emotional distress or damage as a result of what Appellant terms "Beckerman's campaign of harassment." (Plaintiff s Complt. at 18.) 8 WHEREFORE, Appellee requests Appellant be ordered to amend his answer so as to conform with the law or this honorable Court dismiss Appellant's Complaint with prejudice. Date: Res lly submitted Li Eric J. Wiener, Esquire Supreme Court ID #18046 LAW OFFICES OF ERIC J. WIENER LLC 2515 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 909-9999 (717) 909-9009 FAX Attorney for Appellee 9 THOM LEWIS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Appellant-Plaintiff No. 07-7487-Civil vs. MARK BECKERMAN, Appellee-- Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 5th day of June 2008, I, Arnold S. Bituin, certify that I am an employee with the Law Offices of Eric J. Wiener LLC, attorney for the Appellee-Defendant, and do hereby certify that on this day I served the Preliminiary Objections to Appellant's First Amended Complaint upon the person(s) indicated below, by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure: Thom Lewis 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, Pa 17050 Arnold S. Bituin ? - ? .. ?; A t ,?• ti`' ? ? ?- ? ,; ?%? ?? ? r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant/Plaintiff JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, this 25th day of June, 2008 comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking damages from Defendant Mark Beckerman for Quantum Meruit, Fraud, Intentional Infliction of emotional Distress, Abuse of Process, Wrongful use of Proceedings, Malicious Prosecution, Civil Conspiracy and Defamation. Additionally, Plaintiff seeks Punitive Damages for the particularly outrageous and malicious conduct of the Defendant and in support thereof Plaintiff avers the following: COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. 2. Defendant Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual residing at 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States 3. Prior to June 2006 when Beckerman first contacted Mr. Lewis, Plaintiff had never met defendant Beckerman. 4. In June 2006, Beckerman sought out Mr. Lewis by calling him on the phone and asking Mr. Lewis if he would work for Beckerman. 5. When Mr. Lewis asked Beckerman how he had gotten his number, Ir Beckerman stated that former PA Auditor General and US Congressman Don Bailey had given it to him, and also claimed Bailey had recommended Mr. Lewis to him for work. 6. Mr. Lewis began working for Beckerman in June of 2006. There was no personal friendship established outside of work done for Beckerman. At no time did Plaintiff offer free services or offer to do work on a "volunteer" basis for Beckerman. 7. In late May/early June 2007, Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because Beckerman had not paid Mr. Lewis what he was owed and it had become clear Beckerman was involved in unlawful activities. 8. Shortly after, Mr. Beckerman began stalking and harassing the Plaintiff which included Beckerman filing multiple false police reports and baseless civil claims against Lewis. 9. Plaintiff filed an appeal from a District Justice Ruling on December 15, 2007. (The original District Justice action was filed in DJ Thomas Placey 's Court, by defendant Beckerman on July 27, 2007 and contained multiple baseless complaints against Mr. Lewis.) On Jan 8, 2008, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on appeal in this court. The appeal was temporarily stricken when Defendant, Beckerman filed an untimely praecipe to strike with this court on Jan 11, 2008. 10. On Jan 16, 2008 Plaintiff praeciped the Prothonotary with a notice re: Beckerman's untimely praecipe and Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reinstate on or about Jan 18, 2008. On Jan 30, 2008 the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess issued an Order that set a hearing for Feb. 14, 2008 on Plaintiff s Motion. Defendant filed a Response to Motion on Feb 13, 2008, and a hearing was held on Feb 14, 2008 before the Honorable Judge Kevin Hess. Briefs were filed after the hearing 11. A few days after that hearing, Defendant filed a false police report to harass Plaintiff and another witness. Police found his reports to be baseless, and this Honorable Court was asked to take note of Defendants attempts to harm Plaintiff outside the courtroom in a brief filed on March 15, 2008. 12. On April 18 2007, Plaintiff's appeal was reinstated, with an Opinion and Order written by Judge Hess. 13. On May 1, 2008 Beckerman filed what was ostensibly labeled Preliminary Objections to Complaint. The filing did not conform to PA Rules of Civil Procedure or to the documented facts in this case. The objections incorrectly focused on the praecipe that Judge Hess had already ruled on, were filed eighty nine (89) days after the required due date, and made several baseless, unfounded motions for sanctions that Defendant is not entitled to. 14. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the filing of the First Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff rendered Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. 15. On June 6, 2008 Beckerman again filed Preliminary Objections, that again did not conform to the Pa Rules of Civil Procedure. 16. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the filing of the Second Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff at this time renders Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. COUNTI QUANTUM MERUIT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, UNJUST ENRICHMENT 17. Paragraph 1 through 16 are hereby incorporated by reference. 18. Between June 2006 and June 2007, Mr. Lewis performed work on Beckerman's property, pet-sat, and performed other services for which Beckerman is 3 currently indebted to Mr. Lewis for over $17,000. Mr. Lewis performed all work satisfactorily and was repeatedly asked by Beckerman to return for additional work. 19. Beckerman told Lewis he would pay $20 per hour, a decent living wage for his services. Mr. Beckerman issued checks that reflected the $20/ hr. rate. 20. Beginning in June 2006, Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman 3-4 days per week, shortly thereafter in July 2006, Beckerman upped the time to 5-6 days per week. By September 2006 Beckerman was calling Mr. Lewis to work 6-7 days per week, on occasions calling several times a day. Mr. Lewis worked between 2-8 hours per day. 21. During that time Mr. Lewis performed over 720 hours of work for Beckerman, for a total of $14,400, for which Beckerman has not paid. Beckerman stated he had previously paid $501 hr to another individual for the same type work, and Mr. . Lewis' work and hourly rate was much better. 22. Additional, during that time, Beckerman offered to pay Mr. Lewis $50 per day to pet sit his two (2) dogs, when Beckerman was out of the country on several occasions, (in June of 2006, Dec/Jan 2007 and April 2007) of which Lewis did for a total of 52 days. ($2600 for pet sitting) for a total of $17,000 owed, for which Beckerman accepted all services without complaint. 23. In late May/early June 2007 Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because he had not been paid what he was owed and Beckerman was involved in illegal activities to an extent well beyond anything Lewis had previously believed. 24. At no time before Mr. Lewis demanded payment and refused to do any more work for Beckerman in June 2007, did Beckerman complain or ask Mr. Lewis to correct 1+ any work. Just the opposite, Beckerman repeatedly stated how good the work was and asked Mr. Lewis to do more work. 25. In June/ July 2007, after Mr. Lewis stopped working for Beckerman, Beckerman contacted the PA Consumer Affairs Bureau to file false complaints against Lewis (attachment A). Beckerman claimed he was a consumer who had hired Mr. Lewis. The complaint was dismissed as baseless. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman filed the false complaints to intimidate the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain the services he had received without paying for them. 26. Between June/July 2007 and present, Mr. Beckerman then filed multiple false police reports with various agencies, and baseless civil suits to harass Mr. Lewis into allowing Mr. Beckerman to retain the services he received, without paying for them. All have been dismissed as baseless, and all contradicted each other. 27. In Beckerman's multiple claims, he stated he had only paid Lewis $2030 towards the $17,000 he allegedly owed Mr. Lewis. 28. In February 2008, after this suit was filed, Beckerman again altered his claims, and filed false police reports to East Pennsboro Police Dept claiming checks made out to Lewis, were not for services, but were stolen and forged. The complaint was dismissed as baseless, and again contradicted his previous complaints. Plaintiff asserts this was meant to intimidate the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain the services he had received without paying for them. 29. Plaintiff also asserts the false report was retaliation against a witness or party in a civil suit. 30. In the alternative, Plaintiff asserts a claim for Unjust Enrichment, because he is entitled to reimbursement for the value of his services in order to prevent Beckerman from being unjustly enriched. 31. Plaintiff alleges the services referenced above where conferred upon Beckerman by Lewis, there was an appreciation of those benefits by Beckerman and Beckerman accepted and retained those benefits under circumstances where it is inequitable for Beckerman to retain those services without payment of value. WHEREFORE, Beckerman requested and received the above referenced services with an agreed value of $17,000, and for the reasons stated above, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff $17,000 in actual damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT II FRAUD 32. Paragraphs I through 31 are hereby incorporated by reference. 33. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman acquired Mr. Lewis' services through fraud and misrepresentation that: A. Former US Congressman Don Bailey had given Mr. Beckerman Mr. Lewis contact information, and had referred Mr. Beckerman. B. Mr. Beckerman intended to use the personal and contractual relationship between Lewis and the Bailey family to further Beckerman's unlawful activities, rather than the handy work Mr. Lewis was hired for. C. Mr. Beckerman withheld payment and retaliated against the Plaintiff when he refused to participate in Beckerman's unlawful activities. 34. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman hired Lewis with ulterior motives, and never 6 intended to pay Lewis for the services he received. 35. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman sought out and hired Lewis' as part of a scam he was running on former US Congressman Don Bailey and his family (and several other victims). However, the scam backfired when Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas awarded the Bailey's $20,000 as a result of Beckerman's behavior, and the Court subsequently ordered the $20,000 judgment paid to the Baileys. Beckerman blamed Lewis for the $20,000 loss, because Lewis refused to commit perjury against Bailey. 36. Plaintiff asserts that had he known Beckerman's actual motives in seeking him out, he would have never associated with Beckerman. 37. Mr. Beckerman is a professional and vexatious litigant who attempts to get free goods, services and money from various individuals and business, by misusing the courts and filing false reports against people he hires. According to records on file in Cumberland, Dauphin and Federal Courts, there are sixty (60) complaints filed by Beckerman and at least twelve (12) lawsuits since year 2000. 38. Mr. Beckerman targeted Lewis because of his association with Mr. Bailey. He first hired Lewis for handy work, and then began to ask Lewis to "look at" various police reports and lawsuits Beckerman was filing. He also began asking Mr. Lewis to write various legal papers and police reports for him. Mr. Lewis declined. Since Beckerman started harassing Mr. Lewis in June 2007, he has learned there is a well established record of Beckerman using third parties (who are not attorneys) to "write" his legal papers, presumably so Beckerman can deny liability. 39. Around November 2006 Beckerman began offering Lewis money to fire Attorney Bailey and hire Beckerman's friend, Attorney Doug Goldhaber in Bailey's 7 s place. 40. Around the same time Beckerman began telling Mr. Lewis he had received permission from local Police to kill Attorney Don Bailey. 41. Beckerman used Lewis' legitimate work time to try and make Lewis a witness for Beckerman's frivolous lawsuits and false police reports he was filing against others. 42. When Mr. Lewis refused to be a part of Beckerman's scam, he retaliated against Mr. Lewis. 43. Mr. Beckerman and currently unnamed co-conspirator Eric Weiner then used the false reports to harass and in an attempt to collect monies they were not entitled to, by filing baseless lawsuits against Lewis. (attachment "B") 44. This included false claims for things like "endangering children", "forging checks" and for a "car accident" that never occurred. 45. As part of Beckerman's attempts to draw Mr. Lewis into Beckerman's unlawful activities, Beckerman: A. Beckerman offered Mr. Lewis money to drive him to another Harrisburg attorney's home, so Beckerman could stalk him. Beckerman had previously filed false reports and frivolous lawsuits against the individual and was angry the attorney had refused to pay Beckerman off. All of Beckerman's false claims against the attorney have been thrown out. Mr. Lewis declined to help Beckerman. B. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to gather information from the internet on several of Beckerman's other targeted victims. Mr. Lewis declined. 9 C. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis that he currently has a dozen frivolous lawsuits he's filed against individuals he's harassing, including at least 2 (two) for fake auto accidents, and over sixty (60) false reports he's filed. D. In January 2007 Beckerman asked Lewis to commit perjury on his behalf in front of District Justice Dougherty. Mr. Lewis declined E. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis until May 2007 that he had.hired Lewis to pet sit so that Beckerman could leave the country to hire prostitutes, (for a total of 52 days) on several occasions. F. Eventually, by May 2007, Beckerman had revealed that he was a convicted felon who would pretend to be both deaf and mentally retarded in order to deceive local attorneys, businesses and individuals. (Beckerman currently owns a digital hearing device that gives him perfect hearing, and claims he holds several degrees including a Doctorate of Medicine, see attachment "A"). He would hire the services of these individuals then file false suits against them. Anyone who refused to pay him would be falsely reported to various law enforcement agencies. Plaintiff respectfully submits the practice is plain and simple fraud and extortion, and should be treated as such by the Court. G. Subsequently, Mr. Lewis learned that Don Bailey had never given Beckerman Lewis' phone number, and Beckerman had simply targeted Lewis because Lewis was a personal friend and client of Don Bailey. Bailey and his family were one of Beckerman's targeted victims. 45. In summer of 2007, after he had refused to help Mr. Beckerman, Mr. Lewis was contacted by a detective from the Dauphin County District Attorneys Office, 11 regarding other individuals Beckerman was targeting. 46. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was also contacted by an agent from the FBI, regarding a Federal Judge and her employees that Beckerman had targeted. 47. During the time Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman, Beckerman made claims that he is a Medical Doctor, an auto mechanic, an Israeli war hero, a Veteran of the "7 day war," a professional boxer and Israeli boxing champion, owns a degree in electronics, a degree in agriculture. He claims he is a personal friend of Mohamed Ali, Larry Holmes and former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Dyan. Also a "Hell's Angel", a professional hit man, professional horse trainer, professional dog trainer who raises seeing eye dogs, and that he works in the field of physics. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman is none of the above, and has never received any of the honors he claims, and that he simply claims so in order to commit fraud. 48. As further proof Mr. Beckerman hired Mr. Lewis under false pretenses, when Mr. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to do work, Mr. Lewis asked how Beckerman could afford to pay him. 49. Beckerman claims to be living as a Pennsylvania Lottery Winner from the 1990's, but as, of July 2007, he is not receiving any monies from the PA Lottery, and has no discernable income. Beckerman borrowed $60,000 against his home in April 2007, a small double wide modular. Beckerman claims he received over $280,000 between June 2006 and July 2007. 50. Mr. Lewis since learned, that as part of his scams Beckerman files his frivolous lawsuits by petitioning to proceed in forma pauperis, by using third parties to write the forms, and those parties are not attorneys. (attachment "C') 10 51. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and therefore Plaintiff requests punitive damages be awarded in an amount to be determined. WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, Plaintiff asserts Beckerman deceived Plaintiff into helping him, with both the intent of not paying, and with the intent of using Plaintiff's time and services for other purposes, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court Award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT III CIVIL CONSPIRACY 52. Paragraphs 1 through 51 are hereby incorporated by reference. 53. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman conspired with unnamed co-conspirators Peggy Moniesmith and Eric Weiner to give false and/or misleading testimony against Mr. Lewis to both the Courts and to Police. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman lied to other parties in order to solicit their help in harassing Lewis and submits other names may be shown through discovery. 54. In November 2007, Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to provide false testimony at the hearing that was held before District Justice Thomas Placey. 55. At that hearing, Moniesmith and Weiner offered testimony to matters of which she had no knowledge, to incidents that had never occurred. (see attachment "B"). 56. In Feb 2008, Beckerman filed false police reports against Lewis, claiming he had accessed Beckerman's Commerce Bank Account in Jan. 2007, while Beckerman was Ii out of the country. The police investigation found that it was Moniesmith who was using Beckerman's account while he was out of the country, and she had conspired with Beckerman to do so. Beckerman then filed the false report, knowing it was Moniesmith who had accessed his account. 57. Plaintiff alleges that Beckerman and Moniesmith run a scam where third parties write checks on Beckerman's personal checking accounts. Beckerman then signs the checks, turns them over to the people he owes money. Beckerman then accuses the people that cash the checks of stealing the checks. Beckerman and Weiner falsely accused Doug Goldhaber and Plaintiff (under oath), of stealing and writing checks to himself. Those claims have been proven false. 58. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and asks that he be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be determined. WHEREFORE, Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to help harass and defraud the Plaintiff through the filing of frivolous, vexatious and abusive lawsuits and false criminal allegations; Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IV DAMAGES TO PLAINTIFFS CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 59. Paragraphs 1 through 58 are hereby incorporated by reference. 60. On or around May 7, 2007 Beckerman damaged Lewis' parked car by hitting ra. it with his car, causing over $1200 damage. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman was intoxicated at the time. 61. Beckerman asked Lewis not to report the accident; Beckerman agreed he would pay all damages. Beckerman left the scene, and then reneged on payment, when Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work on Beckerman's property. Beckerman refuses to provide his required Insurance information to Mr. Lewis, or to pay. 62. Beckerman has admitted under oath to causing the damage, admitted to agreeing to pay for the damages in full, and admitted he has not paid. WHEREFORE, Beckerman did cause the above referenced damage, then subsequently reneged on paying for damages, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT Plaintiff $1200 to repair the damage, or in the alternative any relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT V ABUSE OF PROCESS 63. Paragraphs 1 through 62 are hereby incorporated by reference. 64. In June 2007 Beckerman was caught criminally trespassing on Mr. Lewis' property. When he was caught, Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced state, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine. After Lewis threw him off the property, Beckerman contacted Silver Springs Police and filed a false police report against Lewis with the bizarre claim that "Lewis doesn't have a puppy door". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 65. In July 2007 Beckerman filed false reports against Lewis with the PA State Police, (Officer Hurley) which falsely claimed Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 13 66. In July 2007, Beckerman filed a false report with the PA State Attorney Generals Office, Consumer Affairs, (See attachment "A") claiming Lewis was selling .'puppy fencing" online and that Mr. Lewis' lived in a home "without any doors". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 67. In July 2007 Beckerman filed another false report with PA State Attorney Generals Office falsely claiming he had been in an auto accident caused by Lewis. No such accident ever occurred or had been reported at the time he alleged the accident occurred. Beckerman now claims the accident occurred at a Wal-Mart, but the store has no record of Beckerman having the accident at their store. Beckerman then waited over two (2) months until late July to suddenly remember he had been in an accident on May 27, 2007. None of the other reports Beckerman filed previous to that mentioned any accident. Beckerman claims there were no witnesses and no police reports regarding his "accident", even though it allegedly occurred in a parking lot full of people. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless 68. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false report with the PA Dept of Environmental Resources, claiming Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. A claim they have summarily dismissed after state Police reported that Beckerman's inspection was performed by Pep Boys Automotive on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA on January 29, 2007. Beckerman himself had driven the car there for the inspection. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 69. In July 2007, Beckerman filed false police reports in East Pennsboro Township (Lt. Mark Greene) claiming Lewis and attorney Doug Goldhaber were stealing and forging his checks. This was according to the Sworn testimony of Beckerman 14- himself. Beckerman's claim was dismissed as baseless 70. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false animal cruelty report with the Harrisburg Humane Society (William Sandstrom) against Lewis. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 71. In support of Plaintiffs position that Beckerman's report was knowingly false, during the same month of July 2007 the same Harrisburg Humane Society asked Mr. Lewis to help them rescue a dog because of his long history of outstanding service to animal welfare. To date, Mr. Lewis has assisted multiple Humane Societies in hundreds of animal rescues. 72. Beckerman has never seen Mr. Lewis' dogs, or been in his home, yet repeatedly files false police reports claiming he was in the home. 73. Upon information and belief, in July 2007 Beckerman attempted to file a baseless report with The PA Disciplinary Board, (Patty Bedneric) an agency with no jurisdiction over Lewis whatsoever. Bedneric has a long personal history with Beckerman. His baseless report was refused. 74. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office that falsely accused Lewis of Child endangerment and Animal Cruelty, and other unsubstantiated claims and charges. Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 75. In Aug 2007, Mr. Lewis was contacted and advised by Federal Agent Chris Nawrocki, that Beckerman was posing a threat to Mr. Lewis' personal safety, and Mr. Lewis should immediately contact him and local authorities anytime Beckerman attempted to further harass or approach him. is 76. In September 2007 Beckerman appeared at a restaurant in Camp Hill where Mr. Lewis was having dinner. Beckerman, (in an obviously unstable and unclean condition), entered the Diner, sat staring at Mr. Lewis for ten minutes, then harassed the waitress, caused a scene, and then stumbled out of the Diner's entrance. Beckerman then proceeded to slowly circle the restaurant for 20 minutes in his car, trapping at least 20 people in the establishment while terrorizing the waitress and customers. The Owner was forced to call the police when Beckerman was caught hiding behind the building. The witnesses acknowledge to Hampden Township Police that Beckerman was lying in wait for Lewis to exit the restaurant. 77. Upon information and belief, in Dec 2007 Beckerman attempted to a false charge against Mr. Lewis with Silver Springs Township (DiFillipo, Hall) several days after Beckerman teamed of this lawsuit. His claims were determined to be baseless. 78. In all cases, Beckerman's charges and claims were found to be baseless ramblings. 79. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. 80. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman's described actions were meant to harass and intimidate Lewis through the filing of baseless actions against Lewis, not to accomplish any legitimate proper purpose. Beckerman's actions were particularly malicious. 81. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and that punitive damages be awarded. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the 16 most harm on the Plaintiff through the malicious Abuse of Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the Court, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable jury may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VI WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 82. Paragraphs 1 through 81 are hereby incorporated by reference. 83. Beckerman and co-conspirators engaged in a campaign aimed at Plaintiff and described above, to maliciously prosecute and harm the Plaintiff. They instituted a lawsuit with malicious motive and without probable cause, for the purpose of intimidating the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain services for which he had not paid, as described above. 84. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office. (see attachment "B") Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 85. All of Beckerman's false claims have ended in Plaintiff's favor. 86. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and asks that punitive damages be awarded. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the Wrongful Use of Civil Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. 1-7 COUNT VII MALICIOUS PROSECUTION 87. Paragraphs 1 through 86 are hereby incorporated by reference. 88. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. The false police report was also in retaliation for Mr. Lewis successfully exposing the behavior of Weiner and Beckerman at a hearing on Feb 14, 2008. 89. Plaintiff asserts that through the behavior described above, Beckerman maliciously prosecuted the Plaintiff with a campaign of harassment through the filing of false police reports and baseless civil suits, that was meant to bring false criminal charges against the Plaintiff. 90. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the. Plaintiff, and asks the Court award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff through the filing of false police reports and false civil claims, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VIII DEFAMATION 90. Paragraphs 1 through 90 are hereby incorporated by reference. 92. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman slandered and defamed the Plaintiff by repeatedly issuing false statements described above to various agencies and individuals I that were meant to harm the Plaintiffs reputation, good name., and to inflame those individuals to retaliate against the Plaintiff. 93. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman repeatedly defamed the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IX INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 94. Paragraphs 1 through 93 are hereby incorporated by reference. 95. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman's campaign of harassment was so outrages that it shocks the conscious. 96. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman's campaign caused physical and emotional injury to the Plaintiff. 97. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and asks the Court award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman's intended to inflict emotional harm onto the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. Iq SUMMARY Plaintiff respectfully submits the above complaint with a request for damages, both actual and punitive for an amount in excess of $50,000 against the defendant Mark Beckerman. Respectfully Submitted: Tho Le 's 263 Texaco ad Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 AO IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Plaintiff JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on June 26, 2008, as follows: Eric Wiener 2515 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Tho E. Le Appellant/Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant/Plaintiff V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION I, Thom Lewis, hereby verify that the facts and information set forth in the foregoing SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made with knowledge of the penalties set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Thom LewiV Petitioner 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-2629 ATTACHMENT "A" ALJr-.r J U_ 3 - _ f F: -r`=i ?I t, ?v j !(?a tip- i YS -{--t r i'? ?? Sr ( --?"? f c> ? ? r ? ??-?? ?? ?y ?'? ??` ?? ? ? :? ?;? ?: ? ? ? ? ?,'-rte,,-?,-_ tl_ ;?`;?'?? I, / "l ?. r ? C. , 11?. I ?" ? G"''Cz??,,, ? ?s-r'?L ?- '?? ???/J l? / S?l ?.'i L. ' J `-' ? ? .. (?iC'_? ? % J j(...' ?' / J /?? c?-!_ % ? ? t( a/f / r ? II1 ?`- ?: ? ? -G •, ! ? .Y ?j,?' i - 77 kxi J l^ ? ?'? ? ="i, ' ,?_ ? L• ? / f "?.? ? /- ? ,i" ?j 1?..;/ ,? ! ?'/ %?. <" j; 1. , ?? -? ' t r i f l ,• 71- 1J f. / ? ? !.. 111 _ _? r/•... ? l = `- t• _ /t:? ? ?- , .. / (/- / ? . , / / f._ `??? f- /? 7 ./sue' ? • /? i AIL C ? _• 2?P PENNSYLVANIA ,? OFFICE OF AMRNEY GENERAL CONSUM"LU TOM CORK" AITORNl1't+?IENAt w e4,,.a ' i r ? Yw?a f0iob 17101 ,` } 707-TM e2 oge'A&45? 10 9 o r? y fS f* T 211-A noo msenrc gnulrsul 16tM1lOT"K= I rM?nnaol To wfW od w addtmcs hm yon oompWaaC c' What mdaft *as taloa ? ' Vv Hm yon :ei f an mmimi? G Ya if ^ plmw wwv*k yew altooWit . addewa and mig* wa n dw Awe yon R1ad a cow aotim? O yo E16 ` If ya, pkaw some WdW Y and MIAT daalal" T m tads? - PLEW COIMIIIETW KMEE56 SIDE NF 1NE (bil UMf ME - y PkMmOwYomr=Whint. MmnWtreaddWmdsbDMffnwmwryc Pieuooftoropcotm* 7tra,biobd4 be Maio UIIWAATbmFpoaod,OMithq,penedandM kbWp@m&Baq iliodm*wgadskww=ttdwbwjwwnv& top% lEOlXiftnd%t*dhmoadywtadadwit &*,plag-o) Aaa,fiocvandiai>wwd*riv?Mchdioyhg4wo& AM A(MafaYooattsca loners,tmok*csta Wchwks(fmotkbaftadvatkmaamoraogadwpspKsiWtdam ioyowmgAaint gum, j," A. C a, ;d dl ?..1r , Ud< oifrf/ 1lc Ard -rx('?, `?' i f/ 6-0 Ak& , ?- rid *,boa en.. - g" s?aN Me" OW?a? S"VIOtook N? fj'75 ?l-DrCYtJ? j.i! r? 41 - ter; s S ;4? s c,r? 4v 4t a AoAA- j .......?. ._-? . r.... COO , ,9rNy uJ(Tf • 1? L. GAS •f- ? ? J Z*a Itg9y r-4 " L'k- .. ATTACHMENT "B" COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY, :OF: camERLA I.' a Meg. DIeL No.; 09-3•-04 MDJ Nude:. Hon. TH6ww .A.. Pwky Addmu:.104 - S SPORTIWG BILL •'SD ICSSUBG, • P11 17050 Telephone: (717) '761-8230 A OUNT FILING COSTS POSTAGE $. SERVICE COSTS $ O Ob' CONSTABLE ED. $ b /If /AT, 1 / 17 a1007 TOTAL $ l I (D? . Pa.R:C.P.D.J. No: 206 sets forth those costs-recoverable CIVIL COMPLAINT PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS /0 36. U . ?. vs. I DEFENDANT: NAME and .ADDRESS id rN Z? >G?/??s L _J Docket No:: C ??da'f'tS'4? Date Filed: the prevailing party., TO THE .DEFENDANT: The abovenamed plaintiff(s) asks judgment against you for $ v ' -together with costs upon the following claim `(Civil fines must•inF.lude citation o -the statute or ordinance violated): it ?e 141 HJM ,-? ?? ?ur?' ??c ?I r?? '?d9 ,mss , /' c_ ct,?ev?`f ' verify that the fa • set'forth. in -this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, ;information, and belief..This•stateme t is -made•subje& to the ppnalties of Section 4904 of the Crimes Code. (.18 PA. C.S. § 4904).related, to unswo falsification to authorities. Contact Phone No.': ( ignature of Plain or Authorized Agent) Plaintiffs Attomey: Address: T Telephone: " IF YOU INTEND TQ ENTER A DEFENSE TO THIS COMPLAINT, YOU SHOULD NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU.MUST APPEAR. AT THE HEARING AND.PRESENT YOUR DEFENSE. UNLESS YOU DO, JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY DEFAULT. If you have a claim against the plaintiff which is within magisterial district judge jurisdiction and which you intend to assert at the hearing, you must file it on a'complaint format this office at least five days before the date set for the hearing. If you-are disabled and require a reasonable accommodation to gain access to the Magisterial District Court and its'services, please contact the Magisterial District Court at the above address or telephone number. We are unabie'to provide. transportation. AOPC 30BA-05 ATTACHMENT "C" 6- U 41 1 ]Nfl'ED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TIIE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PLNNSYLVANI ? 8 20053 mills, P (Plaintiff) AFFIDAVIT / DECLARATION CRk IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST V. TO PROCEED 1Ly FQ IA.PAUPPRIS (1)cfendant) CV v 5? 0 3 4 9 I, r F-.. P ' C gve t t??,i? R: certify that I am the plaintiff in the above entitled case; that in support of my motion to proceed without being required to prepay fees, costs or give security therefor, I state that because of my present financial condition I am unable to pay the costs of said proceeding or to give security therefor; that I believe I am entitled to redress. I further state that the responses which I have made to questions and instructions below are true and correct. 1. Are you presently employed`? Yes ._ No a. If the answer is yes, state the amount of your salary or wages per month, and give the name and address of your employer. b. If the answer is no, state the date of last employment and the amount of the salary and wages per month which y ?Yre?eived. 11 A. h., I 2. Have you received within the past twelve months any money from any of the following sources? a. Business, profession or form of self-employment? Yes _ No h. Rent payments, interest or dividends? Yes No c. Pensions, annuities or life insurance payments? Yes No d. Gifts or inheritances? Yes No e. Any other sources? Yes X , No If the answer to any of the above is yes, describ each source of mono ands to the amount rcceived from each during the past twelve months. L' 6 NL I M+tV.rt fZ ; rtl - , i tom. iC 3. Do you own any cash, or do you have money in a checking or savings account? Yes -Ar- No (Include any fumlr; in prison accounts.) http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/docs/rauperis.htm 12/22/2004 t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Plaintiff = JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on May 21, 2008, as follows: Eric Wiener 2515 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Tho . Le s Appellant/Pl ' iff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 20 . n ? `° -TI rs Gay COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS No. 07-7487-CIVIL TERM Plaintiff, V. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN, Defendant AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Thom Lewis, Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Second Amended Complaint was served by first class mail on the Defendant on June 28th, 2008, as follows: Eric Weiner, Esquire 2515 Front St. Harrisburg, Pa. 17110 By: Thom Lewis Appellant/Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, Pa. 17050 (717) 691-7213 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS No. 07-7487-CIVIL TERM Plaintiff, V. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN, Defendant CERTIFICATE OF S RVICE_FOR I, Thom Lewis, Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of a Certificate of Service for Amended Certificate of Service was served by first class mail on the Defendant on June 28th, 2008, as follows: Eric Weiner, Esquire 2515 Front St. Harrisburg, Pa. 17110 By: Appellant/Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, Pa. 17050 (717) 691-7213 1 7S En IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, Appellant/Plaintiff No. 07-7487 Civil V. MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION OF PLAINTIFF FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking permission of this Honorable Court pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1033, for Leave to Amend his First Amended Complaint. On June 27, 2008 Plaintiff filed with this Honorable Court a Second Amended Complaint, which Plaintiff had intended to attach this Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. By error, the Second Amended Complaint was filed without this Motion for Leave to Amend attached. Plaintiff now seeks to correct that error, through this Motion and re-service of the Second Amended Complaint. (The corrected Second Amended Complaint has been attached as Plaintiff's Exhibit "A") PROCEDURAL HISTORY, 1. Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, filed an appeal with this Court from a District Justice Ruling on December 15, 2007. (The original District Justice action was filed in DJ Thomas Placey's Court, by defendant Beckerman on July 27, 200 and contained multiple baseless complaints against Mr. Lewis.) On Jan 8, 2008, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on a al in this court. The appeal was temporarily stricken when Defendant, Beckerman filed an untimely praecipe to strike with this court on Jan 11, 2008. 2. On Jan 16, 2008 Plaintiff praeciped the Prothonotary with a notice re: Beckennan's untimely praecipe and Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reinstate on or about Jan 18, 2008. On Jan 30, 2008 the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess issued an Order that set a hearing for Feb. 14, 2008 on Plaintiff's Motion. Defendant filed a Response to Motion on Feb 13, 2008, and a hearing was held on Feb 14, 2008 before the Honorable Judge Kevin Hess. Briefs were filed after the hearing 3. A few days after that hearing, Defendant filed a false police report to harass Plaintiff and another witness. Police found his reports to be baseless, and this Honorable Court was asked to take note of Defendants attempts to harm Plaintiff outside the courtroom in a brief filed on March 15, 2008. 4. On April 18 2007, Plaintiff's appeal was reinstated, with an Opinion an d Order written by Judge Hess. 5. On May 1, 2008 Beckerman filed what was ostensibly labeled Preliminary Objections to Complaint. The filing did not conform to PA Rules of Civil Procedure or to the documented facts in this case. The objections incorrectly focused on the praecipe that Judge Hess had already ruled on, were filed eighty nine (89) days after the required due date, and made several baseless, unfounded motions for sanctions that Defendant is not entitled to. 6. On or about May 20, 2008 Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the filing of the First Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff rendered Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. x 7. On or about June 7, 2008 Defendant filed Preliminary Obiections to First Amended Complaint, which again, did not conform to the PA Rules of Civil Procedure, but did ask the Court that Plaintiff should be required to amend his First Amended Complaint. 8. On or about June 10, 2008 Plaintiff sought concurrence from Defendant's Counsel, Eric Wiener, for an agreement to amend the First Amended Complaint. Defendant did not respond to Plaintiff's request for Concurrence. 9. On or about June 27, 2008 Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint but errantly did not attach a Motion for Leave to Amend. The Certificate of Service also had a typographical error, which Plaintiff is seeking to correct at this time. 10. Defendant has not filed a response to the Second Amended Complaint. 11. No case Management order has been issued 12. This action is not listed for trial GROUNDS FOR AMENDMENT 13. Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 1033 provides that a party, by leave of court, may at any time change the form of action or amend its pleading. The amended pleading may aver transactions or occurrences which have happened before or after the filing of the original pleading, even though they give rise to a new cause of action or defense. Pa. R.C.P. Rule 1033. 14. Plaintiff moves to amend in order to correct typographical errors on the Certificate of Service, address issues raised in Defendant's Preliminary Objections of the First Amended Complaint, and attach a Notice to Defend/ Plead 15. Plaintiff also moves to amend in order to correct an error, when the Second 3 Amended Complaint was filed without this Motion for Leave to Amend attached. 16. The amendments which Plaintiffs seek leave to make are not contrary to any rule of fact, and they do not prejudice Defendants. WHEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully request that this Honorable Court grant his motion and permit him to amend his First Amended Complaint with the Second Amended Complaint that has been attached as Plaintiff's Exhibit "A" Respectfully submitted, Thom Lewis, pro se 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-2629 717-795-9248 Dated: July 11, 2008 q IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN : Appellee CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Thom E. Lewis, Appellant, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the MOTION OF PLAINTIFF FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT was served on the Appellee by first class mail on July 11, 2008 addressed as follows: Eric Weiner 2515 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Tho E. Le is Appellant 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 717-795-9248 PLAINITFFS EXHIBIT "A" Corrected SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT That will be filed upon Leave of the Court THOM LEWIS Plaintiff v. . MARK BECKERMAN Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COUTY, PENNSYLVANIA No.: 07-7487 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses of objections to the claim set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the petition 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 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 17013 - telephone number 717-249-3166 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, No. 07-7487 Civil Appellant/Plaintiff JURY TRIAL V. DEMANDED MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, this 1 Ith day of July, 2008 comes the Plaintiff, Thom Lewis, seeking damages from Defendant Mark Beckerman for Quantum Meruit, Fraud, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Abuse of Process, Wrongful use of Proceedings, Malicious Prosecution, Civil Conspiracy and Defamation. Additionally, Plaintiff seeks Punitive Damages for the particularly outrageous and malicious conduct of the Defendant and in support thereof Plaintiff avers the following: COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff Thom Lewis, (Lewis) is an adult individual residing at 263 Texaco Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. 2. Defendant Mark Beckerman (Beckerman) is an adult individual residing at 1030 Belle Vista Drive, Enola, PA 17025, who is not a legal citizen of the United States 3. Prior to June 2006 when Beckerman first contacted Mr. Lewis, Plaintiff had never met defendant Beckerman. 4. In June 2006, Beckerman sought out Mr. Lewis by calling him on the phone and asking Mr. Lewis if he would work for Beckerman. 5. When Mr. Lewis asked Beckerman how he had gotten his number, Beckerman stated that former PA Auditor General and US Congressman Don Bailey had given it to him, and also claimed Bailey had recommended Mr. Lewis to him for work. 6. Mr. Lewis began working for Beckerman in June of 2006. There was no personal friendship established outside of work done for Beckerman. At no time did Plaintiff offer free services or offer to do work on a "volunteer" basis for Beckerman. 7. In late May/early June 2007, Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because Beckerman had not paid Mr. Lewis what he was owed and it had become clear Beckerman was involved in unlawful activities. 8. Shortly after, Mr. Beckerman began stalking and harassing the Plaintiff which included Beckerman filing multiple false police reports and baseless civil claims against Lewis. 9. Plaintiff filed an appeal from a District Justice Ruling on December 15, 2007. (The original District Justice action was filed in DJ Thomas Placey'.s Court, by defendant Beckerman on July 27, 2007 and contained multiple baseless complaints against Mr. Lewis.) On Jan 8, 2008, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on appeal in this court. The appeal was temporarily stricken when Defendant, Beckerman filed an untimely praecipg to strike with this court on Jan 11, 2008. 10. On Jan 16, 2008 Plaintiff praeciped the Prothonotary with a notice re: Beckerman's untimely praecipe and Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reinstate on or about Jan 18, 2008. On Jan 30, 2008 the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess issued an Order that set a hearing for Feb. 14, 2008 on Plaintiff's Motion. Defendant filed a Response to Motion on Feb 13, 2008, and a hearing was held on Feb 14, 2008 before the Honorable Judge Kevin Hess. Briefs were filed after the hearing I 11. A few days after that hearing, Defendant filed a false police report to harass Plaintiff and another witness. Police found his reports to be baseless, and this Honorable Court was asked to take note of Defendants attempts to harm Plaintiff outside the courtroom in a brief filed on March 15, 2008. 12. On April 18 2007, Plaintiffs appeal was reinstated, with an Opinion and Order written by Judge Hess. 13. On May 1, 2008 Beckerman filed what was ostensibly labeled Preliminary Objections to Complaint. The filing did not conform to PA Rules of Civil Procedure or to the documented facts in this case. The objections incorrectly focused on the praecipe that Judge Hess had already ruled on, were filed eighty nine (89) days after the required due date, and made several baseless, unfounded motions for sanctions that Defendant is not entitled to. 14. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the filing of the First Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff rendered Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. 15. On June 6, 2008 Beckerman again filed Preliminary Objections, that again did not conform to the Pa Rules of Civil Procedure. 16. Under PA RCP 1028(c)(1) the filing of the Second Amended Complaint by the Plaintiff at this time renders Defendant's Preliminary Objections moot. COUNTI QUANTUM MERUIT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, UNJUST ENRICHMENT 17. Paragraph 1 through 16 are hereby incorporated by reference. 18. Between June 2006 and June 2007, Mr. Lewis performed work on Beckerman's property, pet-sat, and performed other services for which Beckerman is 3 currently indebted to Mr. Lewis for over $17,000. Mr. Lewis performed all work satisfactorily and was repeatedly asked by Beckerman to return for additional work. 19. Beckerman told Lewis he would pay $20 per hour, a decent living wage for his services. Mr. Beckerman issued checks that reflected the $20/ hr. rate. 20. Beginning in June 2006, Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman 3-4 days per week, shortly thereafter in July 2006, Beckerman upped the time to 5-6 days per week. By September 2006 Beckerman was calling Mr. Lewis to work 6-7 days per week, on occasions calling several times a day. Mr. Lewis worked between 2-8 hours per day. 21. During that time Mr. Lewis performed over 720 hours of work for Beckerman, for a total of $14,400, for which Beckerman has not paid. Beckerman stated he had previously paid $50/ hr to another individual for the same type work, and Mr. . Lewis' work and hourly rate was much better. 22. Additional, during that time, Beckerman offered to pay Mr. Lewis $50 per day to pet sit his two (2) dogs, when Beckerman was out of the country on several occasions, (in June of 2006, Dec/Jan 2007 and April 2007) of which Lewis did for a total of 52 days. ($2600 for pet sitting) for a total of $17,000 owed, for which Beckerman accepted all services without complaint. 23. In late May/early June 2007 Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work for Beckerman because he had not been paid what he was owed and Beckerman was involved in illegal activities to an extent well beyond anything Lewis had previously believed. 24. At no time before Mr. Lewis demanded payment and refused to do any more work for Beckerman in June 2007, did Beckerman complain or ask Mr. Lewis to correct 1+ any work. Just the opposite, Beckerman repeatedly stated how good the work was and asked Mr. Lewis to do more work. 25. In June/ July 2007, after Mr. Lewis stopped working for Beckerman, Beckerman contacted the PA Consumer Affairs Bureau to file false complaints against Lewis (attachment A). Beckerman claimed he was a consumer who had hired Mr. Lewis. The complaint was dismissed as baseless. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman filed the false complaints to intimidate the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain the services he had received without paying for them. 26. Between June/July 2007 and present, Mr. Beckerman then filed multiple false police reports with various agencies, and baseless civil suits to harass Mr. Lewis into allowing Mr. Beckerman to retain the services he received, without paying for them. All have been dismissed as baseless, and all contradicted each other. 27. In Beckerman's multiple claims, he stated he had only paid Lewis $2030 towards the $17,000 he allegedly owed Mr. Lewis. 28. In February 2008, after this suit was filed, Beckerman again altered his claims, and filed false police reports to East Pennsboro Police Dept claiming checks made out to Lewis, were not for services, but were stolen and forged. The complaint was dismissed as baseless, and again contradicted his previous complaints. Plaintiff asserts this was meant to intimidate the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain the services he had received without paying for them. 29. Plaintiff also asserts the false report was retaliation against a witness or party in a civil suit. 30. In the alternative, Plaintiff asserts a claim for Unjust Enrichment, because he is entitled to reimbursement for the value of his services in order to prevent Beckerman from being unjustly enriched. 31. Plaintiff alleges the services referenced above where conferred upon Beckerman by Lewis, there was an appreciation of those benefits by Beckerman and Beckerman accepted and retained those benefits under circumstances where it is inequitable for Beckerman to retain those services without payment of value. WHEREFORE, Beckerman requested and received the above referenced services with an agreed value of $17,000, and for the reasons stated above, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court award Plaintiff $17,000 in actual damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT II FRAUD 32. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are hereby incorporated by reference. 33. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman acquired Mr. Lewis' services through fraud and misrepresentation that: A. Former US Congressman Don Bailey had given Mr. Beckerman Mr. Lewis contact information, and had referred Mr. Beckerman. B. Mr. Beckerman intended to use the personal and contractual relationship between Lewis and the Bailey family to further Beckennan's unlawful activities, rather than the handy work Mr. Lewis was hired for. C. Mr. Beckerman withheld payment and retaliated against the Plaintiff when he refused to participate in Beckerman's unlawful activities. 34. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman hired Lewis with ulterior motives, and never b intended to pay Lewis for the services he received. 35. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman sought out and hired Lewis' as part of a scam he was running on former US Congressman Don Bailey and his family (and several other victims). However, the scam backfired when Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas awarded the Bailey's $20,000 as a result of Beckerman's behavior, and the Court subsequently ordered the $20,000 judgment paid to the Baileys. Beckerman blamed Lewis for the $20,000 loss, because Lewis refused to commit perjury against Bailey. 36. Plaintiff asserts that had he known Beckerman's actual motives in seeking him out, he would have never associated with Beckerman. 37. Mr. Beckerman is a professional and vexatious litigant who attempts to get free goods, services and money from various individuals and business, by misusing the courts and filing false reports against people he hires. According to records on file in Cumberland, Dauphin and Federal Courts, there are sixty (60) complaints filed by Beckerman and at least twelve (12) lawsuits since year 2000. 38. Mr. Beckerman targeted Lewis because of his association with Mr. Bailey. He first hired Lewis for handy work, and then began to ask Lewis to "look at" various police reports and lawsuits Beckerman was filing. He also began asking Mr. Lewis to write various legal papers and police reports for him. Mr. Lewis declined. Since Beckerman started harassing Mr. Lewis in June 2007, he has learned there is a well established record of Beckerman using third parties (who are not attorneys) to "write" his legal papers, presumably so Beckerman can deny liability. 39. Around November 2006 Beckerman began offering Lewis money to fire Attorney Bailey and hire Beckerman's friend, Attorney Doug Goldhaber in Bailey's 7 place. 40. Around the same time Beckerman began telling Mr. Lewis he had received permission from local Police to kill Attorney Don Bailey. 41. Beckerman used Lewis' legitimate work time to try and make Lewis a witness for Beckerman's frivolous lawsuits and false police reports he was tiling against others. 42. When Mr. Lewis refused to be a part of Beckerman's scam, he retaliated against Mr. Lewis. 43. Mr. Beckerman and currently unnamed co-conspirator Eric Weiner then used the false reports to harass and in an attempt to collect monies they were not entitled to, by filing baseless lawsuits against Lewis. (attachment "B") 44. This included false claims for things like "endangering children", "forging checks" and for a "car accident" that never occurred. 45. As part of Beckerman's attempts to draw Mr. Lewis into Beckerman's unlawful activities, Beckerman: A. Beckerman offered Mr. Lewis money to drive him to another Harrisburg attorney's home, so Beckerman could stalk him. Beckerman had previously filed false reports and frivolous lawsuits against the individual and was angry the attorney had refused to pay Beckerman off. All of Beckerman's false claims against the attorney have been thrown out. Mr. Lewis declined to help Beckerman. B. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to gather information from the internet on several of Beckerman's other targeted victims. Mr. Lewis declined. 9 C. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis that he currently has a dozen frivolous lawsuits he's filed against individuals he's harassing, including at least 2 (two) for fake auto accidents, and over sixty (60) false reports he's filed. D. In January 2007 Beckerman asked Lewis to commit perjury on his behalf in front of District Justice Dougherty. Mr. Lewis declined E. Beckerman withheld telling Lewis until May 2007 that he had hired Lewis to pet sit so that Beckerman could leave the country to hire prostitutes, (for a total of 52 days) on several occasions. F. Eventually, by May 2007, Beckerman had revealed that he was a convicted felon who would pretend to be both deaf and mentally retarded in order to deceive local attorneys, businesses and individuals. (Beckerman currently owns a digital hearing device that gives him perfect hearing, and claims he holds several degrees including a Doctorate of Medicine, see attachment "A"). He would hire the services of these individuals then file false suits against them. Anyone who refused to pay him would be falsely reported to various law enforcement agencies. Plaintiff respectfully submits the practice is plain and simple fraud and extortion, and should be treated as such by the Court.. G. . Subsequently, Mr. Lewis learned that Don Bailey had never given Beckerman Lewis' phone number, and Beckerman had simply targeted Lewis because Lewis was a personal friend and client of Don Bailey. Bailey and his family were one of Beckerman's targeted victims. 45. In summer of 2007, after he had refused to help Mr. Beckerman, Mr. Lewis was contacted by a detective from the Dauphin County District Attorneys Office, 11 regarding other individuals Beckerman was targeting. 46. In summer of 2007 Mr. Lewis was also contacted by an agent from the FBI, regarding a Federal Judge and her employees that Beckerman had targeted. 47. During the time Mr. Lewis worked for Beckerman, Beckerman made claims that he is a Medical Doctor, an auto mechanic, an Israeli war hero, a Veteran of the 67 day war," a professional boxer and Israeli boxing champion, owns a degree in electronics, a degree in agriculture. He claims he is a personal friend of Mohamed Ali, Larry Holmes and former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Dyan. Also a "Hell's Angel", a professional hit man, professional horse trainer, professional dog trainer who raises seeing eye dogs, and that he works in the field of physics. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman is none of the above, and has never received any of the honors he claims, and that he simply claims so in order to commit fraud. 48. As further proof Mr. Beckerman hired Mr. Lewis under false pretenses, when Mr. Beckerman asked Mr. Lewis to do work, Mr. Lewis asked how Beckerman could afford to pay him. 49. Beckerman claims to be living as a Pennsylvania Lottery Winner from the 1990's, but as of July 2007, he is not receiving any monies from the PA Lottery, and has no discernable income. Beckerman borrowed $60,000 against his home in April 2007, a small double wide modular. Beckerman claims he received over $280,000 between June 2006 and July 2007. 50. Mr. Lewis since learned, that as part of his scams Beckerman files his frivolous lawsuits by petitioning to proceed in forma pauperis, by using third parties to write the forms, and those parties are not attorneys. (attachment "C ") 10 51. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and therefore Plaintiff requests punitive damages be awarded in an amount to be determined. WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, Plaintiff asserts Beckerman deceived Plaintiff into helping him, with both the intent of not paying, and with the intent of using Plaintiff's time and services for other purposes, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court Award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate COUNT III CIVIL CONSPIRACY 52. Paragraphs I through 51 are hereby incorporated by reference. 53. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman conspired with unnamed co-conspirators Peggy Moniesmith and Eric Weiner to give false and/or misleading testimony against Mr. Lewis to both the Courts and to Police. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman lied to other parties in order to solicit their help in harassing Lewis and submits other names may be shown through discovery. 54. In November 2007, Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to provide false testimony at the hearing that was held before District Justice Thomas Placey. 55. At that hearing, Moniesmith and Weiner offered testimony to matters of which she had no knowledge, to incidents that had never occurred. (see attachment `B"). 56. In Feb 2008, Beckerman filed false police reports against Lewis, claiming he had accessed Beckerman's Commerce Bank Account in Jan. 2007, while Beckerman was out of the country. The police investigation found that it was Moniesmith who was using Beckerman's account while he was out of the country, and she had conspired with Beckerman to do so. Beckerman then filed the false report, knowing it was Moniesmith who had accessed his account. 57. Plaintiff alleges that Beckerman and Moniesmith run a scam where third parties write checks on Beckerman's personal checking accounts. Beckerman then signs the checks, turns them over to the people he owes money. Beckerman then accuses the people that cash the checks of stealing the checks. Beckerman and Weiner falsely accused Doug Goldhaber and Plaintiff (under oath), of stealing and writing checks to himself. Those claims have been proven false. 58. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and asks that he be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be determined. WHEREFORE, Beckerman conspired with Moniesmith and Weiner to help harass and defraud the Plaintiff through the filing of frivolous, vexatious and abusive lawsuits and false criminal allegations, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IV DAMAGES TO PLAINTIFFS CAR CAUSED BY BECKERMAN 59. Paragraphs 1 through 58 are hereby incorporated by reference. 60. On or around May 7, 2007 Beckerman damaged Lewis' parked car by hitting 1;_, it with his car, causing over $1200 damage. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman was intoxicated at the time. 61. Beckerman asked Lewis not to report the accident, Beckerman agreed he would pay all damages. Beckerman left the scene, and then reneged on payment, when Mr. Lewis refused to do any more work on Beckerman's property. Beckerman refuses to provide his required Insurance information to Mr. Lewis, or to pay. 62. Beckerman has admitted under oath to causing the damage, admitted to agreeing to pay for the damages in full, and admitted he has not paid. WHEREFORE, Beckerman did cause the above referenced damage, then subsequently reneged on paying for damages, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT Plaintiff $1200 to repair the damage, or in the alternative any relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT V ABUSE OF PROCESS 63. Paragraphs 1 through 62 are hereby incorporated by reference. 64. In June 2007 Beckerman was caught criminally trespassing on Mr. Lewis' property. When he was caught, Beckerman appeared to be in a drug induced state, was rambling, incoherent, and smelled of urine. After Lewis threw him off the property, Beckerman contacted Silver Springs Police and filed a false police report against Lewis with the bizarre claim that "Lewis doesn't have a puppy door". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 65. In July 2007 Beckerman filed false reports against Lewis with the PA State Police, (Officer Hurley) which falsely claimed Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his 'car. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 13 66. In July 2007, Beckerman filed a false report with the PA State Attorney Generals Office, Consumer Affairs, (See attachment "A") claiming Lewis was selling "puppy fencing" online and that Mr. Lewis' lived in a home "without any doors". Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 67. In July 2007 Beckerman filed another false report with PA State Attorney Generals Office falsely claiming he had been in an auto accident caused by Lewis. No such accident ever occurred or had been reported at the time he alleged the accident occurred. Beckerman now claims the accident occurred at a Wal-Mart, but the store has no record of Beckerman having the accident at their store. Beckerman then waited over two (2) months until late July to suddenly remember he had been in an accident on May 27, 2007. None of the other reports Beckerman filed previous to that mentioned any accident. Beckerman claims there were no witnesses and no police reports regarding his "accident", even though it allegedly occurred in a parking lot full of people. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless 68. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false report with the PA Dept of Environmental Resources, claiming Lewis had put a fake inspection sticker on his car. A claim they have summarily dismissed after state Police reported that Beckerman's inspection was performed by Pep Boys Automotive on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA on January 29, 2007. Beckerman himself had driven the car there for the inspection. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 69. In July 2007, Beckerman filed false police reports in East Pennsboro Township (Lt. Mark Greene) claiming Lewis and attorney Doug Goldhaber were stealing and forging his checks. This was according to the Sworn tesCimony of Beckerman i'- himself. Beckerman's claim was dismissed as baseless 70. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a false animal cruelty report with the Harrisburg Humane Society (William Sandstrom) against Lewis. Beckerman's report was found to be baseless. 71. In support of Plaintiffs position that Beckerman's report was knowingly false, during the same month of July 2007 the same Harrisburg Humane Society asked Mr. Lewis to help them rescue a dog because of his long history of outstanding service to animal welfare. To date, Mr. Lewis has assisted multiple Humane Societies in hundreds of animal rescues. 72. Beckerman has never seen Mr. Lewis' dogs, or been in his home, yet repeatedly files false police reports claiming he was in the home. 73. Upon information and belief, in July 2007 Beckerman attempted to file a baseless report with The PA Disciplinary Board, (Patty Bedneric) an agency with no jurisdiction over Lewis whatsoever. Bedneric has a long personal history with Beckerman. His baseless report was refused. 74. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office that falsely accused Lewis of Child endangerment and Animal Cruelty, and other unsubstantiated claims and charges. Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 75. In Aug 2007, Mr. Lewis was contacted and advised by Federal Agent Chris Nawrocki, that Beckerman was posing a threat to Mr. Lewis' personal safety, and Mr. Lewis should immediately contact him and local authorities anytime Beckerman attempted to further harass or approach him. 1 b' 76. In September 2007 Beckerman appeared at a restaurant in Camp Hill where Mr. Lewis was having dinner. Beckerman, (in an obviously unstable and unclean condition), entered the Diner, sat staring at Mr. Lewis for ten minutes, then harassed the waitress, caused a scene, and then stumbled out of the Diner's entrance. Beckerman then proceeded to slowly circle the restaurant for 20 minutes in his car, trapping at least 20 people in the establishment while terrorizing the waitress and customers. The Owner was forced to call the police when Beckerman was caught hiding behind the building. The witnesses acknowledge to Hampden Township Police that Beckerman was lying in wait for Lewis to exit the restaurant. 77. Upon information and belief, in Dec 2007 Beckerman attempted to a false charge against Mr. Lewis with Silver Springs Township (DiFillipo, Hall) several days after Beckerman teamed of this lawsuit. His claims were determined to be baseless. 78. In all cases, Beckerman's charges and claims were found to be baseless ramblings. 79. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. 80. Plaintiff alleges Beckerman's described actions were meant to harass and intimidate Lewis through the filing of baseless actions against Lewis, not to accomplish any legitimate proper purpose. Beckerman's actions were particularly malicious. 81. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and that punitive damages be awarded. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the 16 most harm on the Plaintiff through the malicious Abuse of Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the Court, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable jury may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VI WRONGFUL USE OF CIVIL PROCESS 82. Paragraphs 1 through 81 are hereby incorporated by reference. 83. Beckerman and co-conspirators engaged in a campaign aimed at Plaintiff and described above, to maliciously prosecute and harm the Plaintiff. They instituted a lawsuit with malicious motive and without probable cause, for the purpose of intimidating the Plaintiff into allowing Beckerman to retain services for which he had not paid, as described above. 84. In July 2007 Beckerman filed a baseless lawsuit in District Justice Thomas Placey's Office. (see attachment "B") Beckerman's baseless and false claims have all been dismissed. 85. All of Beckerman's false claims have ended in Plaintiff's favor. 86. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and asks that punitive damages be awarded. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant to inflict the most harm on the Plaintiff through the Wrongful Use of Civil Process, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. 11 COUNT VII MALICIOUS PROSECUTION 87. Paragraphs 1 through 86 are hereby incorporated by reference. 88. In Feb 2008 Beckerman filed false Police report with East Pennsboro Police claiming Lewis was stealing checks. The report was determined to be baseless. The false 11 police report was also in retaliation for Mr. Lewis successfully exposing the behavior of Weiner and Beckerman at a hearing on Feb 14, 2008. 89. Plaintiff asserts that through the behavior described above, Beckerman maliciously prosecuted the Plaintiff with a campaign of harassment through the filing of false police reports and baseless civil suits, that was meant to bring false criminal charges against the Plaintiff. 90. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct aimed at the Plaintiff, and asks the Court award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman engaged in a course of conduct meant maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff through the filing of false police reports and false civil claims, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT VIII DEFAMATION 90. Paragraphs 1 through 90 are hereby incorporated by reference. 92. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman slandered and defamed the Plaintiff by repeatedly issuing false statements described above to various agencies and individuals i`? that were meant to harm the Plaintiffs reputation, good name., and to inflame those individuals to retaliate against the Plaintiff. 93. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and the Court should award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman repeatedly defamed the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. COUNT IX INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 94. Paragraphs 1 through 93 are hereby incorporated by reference. 95. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman's campaign of harassment was so outrages that it shocks the conscious. 96. Plaintiff asserts that Beckerman's campaign caused physical and emotional injury to the Plaintiff. 97. Plaintiff asserts Beckerman's described actions rise to the level of intentional, reckless and malicious conduct, and asks the Court award punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Beckerman's intended to inflict emotional harm onto the Plaintiff, Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court award damages in an amount to be determined by the jury, and an amount to be determined by the jury in punitive damages, or in the alternative any other relief this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate. 1q SUMMARY Plaintiff respectfully submits the above complaint with a request for damages, both actual and punitive for an amount in excess of $50,000 against the defendant Mark Beckerman. Respectfully Submitted: Thom ewis 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 A0 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW THOM LEWIS, V. Appellant/Plaintiff MARK BECKERMAN Appellee/Defendant No. 07-7487 Civil JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION I, Thom Lewis, hereby verify that the facts and information set forth in the foregoing SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made with knowledge of the penalties set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Thom Lew Petitioner 263 Texaco Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-2629 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA THOM LEWIS, Plaintiff Defendant No. 07-7487 Civil v. MARK BECKERMAN CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT I, Thom E. Lewis, Plaintiff, in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT was served by first class mail on the Defendant on July 11, 2008, as follows: Eric Wiener 2515 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Thorn E. Lewis Appellant/Plaintiff 263 Texaco Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 ATTACHMENT "A" (NN oov ice.. S r ? ,/ r (?- 6o' L_ rvI ,h '? s It -u n-•. s . l 1 {J 7 ? 'Ic l% ?.' j ?, > ?-?? "?? 1 -? l? ? ? ? L,1- 1. `}• i t ?, ,lam ,.?,_. ? c ? f r ??.L:l d` •? a L t ry r` /1, 0 Ily, _, I / Yl Y _ I L FD aAF PENNSYLVANIA rte' OFFIa OF ATTORNEY GENERAL CONSUM? TOM COBWEB °? wWrraltane?ellerulpd?' AITORM G`OIQAI. 4 ARGrow ` ! l?C Jklimmeam We Rxw e?s?l, r CatpMYS 1 Mnmtlyttsn rl '? CA 1 TI103 ?A 17101 r?? o yomwx cow C" AM 2F00E alum nr ! -7- 724r Ta nlasto?simse??lnx?tu I tl?o><r I N?umto n? To what other asmicm nerve you mompfa mC e'• What sodas *xx taken? Vv Have yft tmisfeed an alUm ey? Q Yu If ^ Plwum Pmvi& yon Momsy'm name, address and tek *wie nssnbos r. Rom you filed s eomt aodoat a ym ewo- AW Irym, plasm some WHIK OW and WIMIT dad" vws made? - ?^? PIEAS?Ca11P1EiETHE1EV8e5?51DPGF1I?ODMPI?NPFFd?II . .7.....: SWAI "i Pltmap4nmyo woawgAvc Yon mormaddkbWobaebffnecoury Pteaeeptlntor"eckwly, Tfybbobridbutbe imtoteltMTboppmred,WMitlgipmredandlM=itiI %; 21 A.Beapocs dmutmwmdskWobm*doeburins.node byoq?SiiE?AlLTtt+oactI+rtinfhuewodyoutodadwithAreaomtpettX Tyr?o?oavont?inth?adatmwbkhttkytiy??+ad. Amnh tb1?S ofait oormwda, lgten, reoctlfM, wed etiecio (f =dt bw k), advwdm=w or aay o&w g pees (Wtc ata b youro?tanrt. /Z?..,,? o ,.?-?! c H1:6. 41- 51 D -1 hY.F- n 06.::g 4612 6 ,&6 i.•r ~ T ?t,?wfM ?i :yif ''",lt^ '+??. M. H NOW (All -•?' 1P C?- 45f - Car11' ,/?;/vl- • ttJ('fifij rl1L-rC ?'? S'E''?c' /-?.? G?,9? ,? G- s u r?i R 1 mar _ It1? W te ' s ?.... ATTACHMENT "B" COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA rni INTV.raF- CUMERLA ass Mao. DfaL Nw 09-1-04 MDJ Name:. Hon. TBOX&S . A.. PL$Gm y Address: .104 -S SP08TIXG HILL .2D HBCHJMf -3SU8G, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 7 61- 8 2 3 0 FILING COSTS A OLINT $• ?•Sa POSTAGE $ SERVICE COSTS $ O. 0 CONSTABLE ED. $ TOTAL $ CIVIL COMPLAINT PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS 0 o -U vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS rid Z G??•s ,ik 5 4kl'>' if 0 AAt Docket No:: 61\4- Q4bb?S-4? Date Filed: Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 206 sets forth those costs'recoverable by the prevailing parry., 7 J J TO THE .DEFENDANT:' The above named plaintiff(s) asks judgment against you for ,$ Vu ' together with costs upon the following ciaim`•(Civii fines must•inFlude citation o -the statute or ordinance violated): r rD A) ?vA, . Cry `'• r? : 1/?9--?`? L wo. .. ?? f, . verify that the fa • set forth. in •this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.,This stater t is ?made-subject to the ppnalties of Section 4904 of the Crimes Gode.(.18 PA. C. S. § 4904) related to unswo falsification to authorities. Contact Phone No.: (Signature of Plaintiff or'Authorized Agent) Plaintiffs Attorney: Address: -, Telephone: IF YOU INTEND TO ENTER A DEFENSE TO THIS COMPLAINT, YOU SHOULD NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY kT THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU.MUST APPEAR. AT THE HEARING AND .PRESENT YOUR DEFENSE. JNLESS YOU DO, JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY DEFAULT. If you have a claim against the plaintiff which is within magisterial district judge jurisdiction and which you intend to assert at the hearing, you must file it on a-complaint format this office at least five days before the date set for the. hearing. if you•are disabled and require a reasonable accommodation to gain access to the Magisterial District Court and its'services, please contact the Magisterial District Court at the above address or telephone number. We are unable'to provide, transportation, AC CPC 308A-05 ATTACHMENT "C" Wrl'ED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TIE: M DDI..E DISTRICT OF PE NNSYLV. (Plaintiff) V. AFFIDAVIT / DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST TO PROCEED I F RMA.PAi, 2aM f-S -? (Defendant) V~ u 5 mw0 3 49 V nNij X _ certify that I am the plaintiff in the above entitled case; that in support of my motion to proceed without being required to prepay fees, costs or give security therefor, I state that because of my present financial condition T am unable to pay the costs of said proceeding or to give security therefor; that I believe I am entitled to redress. I further state that the responses which I have made to questions and instructions below are true and correct. 1. Are you presently employed`? Yes .,_ No a. If the answer is yes, state the amount of your salary or wages per month, and give the name and address of your employer. b. If the answer is no, state the date of last employment and the amount of the salary and wages per month which oll eived. --- l t Yot y ; e dry o t?nr?v? `,?4 2. Have you received within the past twelve months any money from any of the following sources? a. Business, profession or form of self-employment? Yes _ No X, h. Rent payments, interest or dividends? Yes No c. Pensions, annuities or life insurance payments? Yes No d. Gifts or inheritances'? Yes No e. Any other sources? Yes , No If the answer to any of the above is yes, descr7b each source of money and state the amount received from each during the past twelve months. ~ 3. Do you own any cash, or do you have money in a checking or savings account.? Yes -A- No (Include any funds in prison accounts.) http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/docs/pluperis.htm 12/22/2004 Cam, 1 r - f 4 ? rt ? THOM LEWIS, Plaintiff VS. MARK BECKERMAN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7487 CIVIL IN RE: MOTION OF PLAINTIFF FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT ORDER AND NOW, this 14 day of July, 2008, a rule is issued on the defendant to show cause why the relief requested in the motion for leave to amend complaint ought not to be granted. This rule returnable twenty (20) days after service. BY THE COURT, i ?x A. Hess, J. } C17 C s :I I WV 91 IN BUZ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW Thom Lewis, Appellant-Plaintiff No. 07-7487-Civil v. Mark Beckerman, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Appellee-Defendant ORDER TO SETTLE. DISCONTINUE AND END To the Prothonotary: Kindly mark this action settled, discontinued and ended, with prejudice, upon payment of your costs only. Date: t> - Y - Q&225 Thom Lewis, pro se 42IJ :13 t ? _70 co :3C 2:{(9 . r y