HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-0184
MONROE TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL
AUTHORITY,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Claimant
vs.
NO.OV./rY
MUNICIPAL LIEN
TIMOTHY R. AUGSBURGER and
JANEL C. AUGSBURGER,
Owners
MUNICIPAL LIEN
MUNICIPAL LIEN FOR SERVICES AND SEWER RATES
AND NOW, comes Monroe Township Municipal Authority, of l220
Boiling Springs Road, Suite 12l, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, by
and through its Solicitors, James D. Bogar, Esquire and Jennifer
B. Hipp, Esquire, and files the following municipal claim against
TIMOTHY R. AUGSBURGER and JANEL C. AUGSBURGER, husband and wife,
adult individuals, owning property located at l288 Boiling
Springs Road, Boiling Springs, Monroe Township, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania, l7007, their last known mailing address
being: l288 Boiling Springs Road, Boiling Springs, Monroe
Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania l7007. TIMOTHY R,
AUGSBURGER and JANEL C. AUGSBURGER are the owners of all that
certain lot of ground, including any improvements thereon, being
more fully described as follows:
ALL THAT CERTAIN tract or parcel of land situate in the
Township of Monroe, County of Cumberland and State of
Pennsylvania, being more particularly bounded and described
according to a survey by John C. Brilhart Surveying and
Mapping Services (Charles W. Junkins, Registered Surveyor),
dated January l7, 1983, as follows, to wit:
BEGINNING at a point marked by a nail in the centerline of
the public road known as Legislative Route 507, (T.R. l74),
at the corner of lands now or formerly of Genevieve A.
Diehl, said point being referenced eastwardly along said
centerline a distance of 546.8 feet from the intersection of
said centerline with the centerline of Zimmerman Road;
thence along the line of said lands now or formerly of
Genevieve A. Diehl North 18 degrees 2 minutes West a
distance of 371.32 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing
along the same North 74 degrees l5 minutes East a distance
of l31.07 feet to an iron pin on the line of lands now or
formerly of John Harbold; thence along the line of said
lands now or formerly of John Harbold South 14 degrees 53
minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 78.79 feet to a post;
thence continuing along the same North 74 degrees 50 minutes
East a distance of 39.93 feet to a point at the corner of a
concrete wall at the corner of lands now or formerly of Ruth
Rinehart; thence along the line of said lands now or
formerly of Ruth Rinehart South l5 degrees 47 minutes East a
distance of 284.43 feet to a point marked by a nail in the
centerline of Legislative Route 507 (T.R. 174) aforesaid;
thence along the centerline of Legislative Route 507 (T.R.
174) along a curve to the left having a radius of 2864.93
feet, an arc distance of 155.39 feet to a nail, the point
and place of BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 1.30 Acres and being improved with a two and one-
half story frame dwelling house and outbuildings.
BEING THE SAME PREMISES which Julie L. Ober and Brian K.
Ober, by Deed dated September l8, 1998 and recorded in the
Cumberland County Recorder of Deeds Office on September 21,
1998, in Deed Book 185, Page 674, granted and conveyed unto
Timothy R. Augsburger and Janel C. Augsburger, owners.
Tax Parcel No. 22-28-240l-005
Monroe Township Municipality Authority hereby files this
Municipal Lien for Services and Sewer Rates levied and assessed
-2-
.
from June l7, 200l through and including December 31, 2003
(Second quarter calendar year 200l through and including fourth
quarter calendar year 2003). Said Authority services and sewer
rates were levied and assessed pursuant to Authority Resolution
No. 02-04, same being known as a Resolution of the Board of
Monroe Township Municipal Authority imposing user charges to be
collected from the owner of each improved property served or to
be served by this Authority's sewer systems; and providing for
payment and collection of such user charges. Attached hereto and
incorporated herein are the statements forwarded by Monroe
Township Municipal Authority to Timothy R. Augsburger and Janel
C. Augsburger for sewerage due to be treated from June 17, 200l
through December 3l, 2003 (Second quarter calendar year 200l
through and including fourth quarter calendar year 2003), which
services total is in the amount of $2,503.76, which sum was duly
assessed against Timothy R. Augsburger and Janel C. Augsburger,
and the real property described herein from the date of said
billing statements as attached hereto, and for which sum, with
interest in the amount of ten (lO%) percent, along with penalties
and all costs, including attorneys' fees, a municipal lien is
claimed against the above-described real property and premises in
-3-
.
accordance with the Act of May l6, 1923, P.L. 207, ~7, as
amended, 53 P.S, ~7l0l, et seq, as amended (Municipal Claims and
Tax Liens) .
Da te : J'H\ II tl' ("'1 J", 70"'1
MON~OE OWN~P MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
By: CUb~
ames D. ogar, Esquire
Attorney .D. No. 19475
One West Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA l70ll
(717) 737-876l
By, ~J ::t6tw E.quice
Atto ney I.D. No. 86556
One est Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA l70ll
(717) 737-876l
Solicitors for Monroe Township
Municipal Authority
-4-
,
MONftOE TOWNSHIP
MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
1220 Bolling Springs Road, Suite 121
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-9794
(717)258-6642 or (717)697-4613 Extensions 250 & 251
FAX (717)258-0220
December 29, 2003
Mr. &. Mrs. Timothy R. Augsburger
1288 Boiling Springs Road
Boiling Springs, P A 17007
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Augsburger:
I write to you on behalf of the Monroe Township Municipal Authority relative to your
sewer account #1268. This account is delinquent. As of the last billing notice, same
being dated 11/15/03, the delinquency is in the amount of $2,503.76. The purpose of this
letter is to request that this account be brought current. If the account is not brought
current within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter, a Municipal Lien will be placed
against real estate owned by you, same being known and numbered as 1288 Boiling
Springs, Boiling Springs, P A. This will result in :tiling fees, service costs and attorney's
. fees. Attorney's fees that are inCUlTCd with respect to the collection of this delinquent
account will be assessed. Attorney's fees will be charged at the current rate. Attorney's
fees will be imposed and/or assessed if this amount remains delinquent after thirty (30)
. days from mailing of this notice (ifby certified mail) or within ten (10) days after mailing
of this notice (ifby regular mail). The imposition of assessment of attorney's fees may be
avoided by your making payment in full of the delinquency- within ten (10) days of
receipt of this letter as set forth herein.
Yout prompt attention to this matter is requested.
Sincerely,
Joanne E. Hollister
Operations Manager
cc: J. Bogar, Esquire
Certified Mail #7000 0520 0021 0350 3400
~::_('.,,:?('\,~.__'./~':('..; I r- ,)l L.il,~ In.rn~ l"A'rru
_ , "" . "" ~: t ':;:", )"""",-:" '" JIG
'IJIl' 1 () c; 'F r~,~ ,'\
a I I ~ \J I. ',.' ~.:. oJ
p, C:J3
MONROE TOWNSHIP MUNIGlPAL AUTHORITY .'
1220 Bolling Springs Road, Sulto 121
Mech.nlcsllurg, PA 17055--9794
(717) 25e-e642 Ex! 200 or 251
(717) 61l7-4613 Elrt 250 orZ51
www.mtma.us
Statement of ACCollnt for Sewer Services
Account Number:
1268
Due /late
12/31/03
Sefore Due Date
$2,493.74
After Due pat.:
$2,515.04
ServIce Addrass:
1288 BOILING SPRINGS ROAD
Billing Period
From
To:
10/0112003
1213112003
Prevtoue Balance:
Current Charge:
other Charges:
Outstanding Balance:
Pay this amount on or before due date: [.
Pay this amount after due d..: r
2,280,74
$213.00
Total Consumption:
$2,493.74 \'
$2,515.04
Hours: The Authority office is open 1:1:30 .4:30 dally, or hours by appointment if necessary, The Authority
affern a mail drop in the foyer area If you should visn when we are unable to open our offic8.
Emergency For 24/7 Emergency Service after business hours:
Northern District 691-3320
Southern District 487-2809
Failure of any ~wner to receive a bill for chfltpes due and payable shall not be consldflllJd an ""cuse
for nCHI payment, nor shall"such falllH'G'r&Sult'ln'anextenslon'offlrfpfr/ot!.o(.tlme during which' the"
net bill shall be payable. 2001-5, Section 2.09
T..,Hcno
TsarHlire
TQ;U Hew
Tear Here
Monroe Township Municipal Authortty
1220 BolIJng Springs Road. Suite 121
Mechanlcsburg, PA 17055.9794'
Mak. chock payablalo; Monroo Township Municipal Authority
Romll to: 12<10 Bolling Springs ROlld, Sullo 121
Machanicsburg, PA 1705lHJ7V4
South
TIMOTHY It AUGSBERGI:Il,
1288 BOILING SPRINGS ROAD
Account #:
I nvoic8 #:
Due Date:
Amount By Due Oat.:
Amount AAar DUll Dete:
1268
20079
12/31/03
$2,493.74
$2,515.04
BOILING SPRINGS, PA
17007
lOr. ".,nolly on ,.e.. paym8l1/s
After is! dfiys/nterest Bccrul!~ dally at ine rato of 111% per month
~
~~
'-'--'
'-J
'-
......
'-
-{::
<"-
-c:
'"
c:,
~
]'
..
'-
"
i3
r)
f\,)
r-..,~
<,;.:-::)
,
o
-r,
(-
....,
~fj2]
-~'}iT/
~3l
- '.,-i
'~~I ,~C)
.':-1
"'0
MONROE TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL
AUTHORITY,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Claimant
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 04-l84 MUNICIPAL LIEN
V.
TIMOTHY R. AUGSBURGER and
JANEL C. AUGSBURGER,
Owners
MUNICIPAL LIEN
IN RE: SCHEDULE FOR MEMORAND,11.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this l3th day of Feb:::uary, 2004, this matter
having been called for hearing, and certain matters of fact
having been agreed upon, counsel for the petitioner is given
twenty days within which to file a memorandum of law in response
to the brief filed on behalf of Monroe Township Municipal
Authority. The Township shall be given ten days thereafter
within which to request time to file a response brief. At the
end of the period allowed for briefing, this matter will be
decided on briefs alone unless one side cr the other requests
oral argument.
By the Court,
Don Bailey, Esquire
For the Augsburgers
--1/~. /l J
Kevin;A. Hess, J.
/
Jennifer B. Hipp, Esquire
James Bogar, Esquire
For Monroe Township
-C~~t.
.:2 /7~a'f
:bg
9-
\:i\'(,,\\;tl\:I),~;:<'\'< ~d
JJ.Nrr~'.-C (T:: " --, :,,,:~':~.\~n8
GO: II f\V L \ G33 ~~uI
1 P''1 ",. ..." \10" I :J"l '0
I\O~.l-'.)i~'..}r _ CO ~n j
38Ij:\O-c\:llH
MONROE TOWNSHIP
MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY,
claimant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
NO. 04-184 MUNICIPAL LIEN
TIMOTHY R. AUGSBURGER
and JANEL C.
AUGSBURGER,
Owners
MUNICIPAL LIEN
IN RE: TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
proceedings held before the
HONORABLE KEVIN A. HESS, J.,
cumberland county courthouse,
Carlisle, pennsylvania,
on Friday, February 13, 2004,
ln Courtroom Number 4.
APPEARANCES:
DON BAILEY, Esquire
For the Augsburgers
JENNIFER B. HIPP, Esquire
JAMES BOGAR, Esquire
For Monroe Township
62 :01 Wi
1_ \!:IIJ ~~n7
' "-J l,. 'tUui.J
j\UVLCi:\}CJ~~lC(:/d :JoY1 ::10
:'/:):'J::)O~{ljT:J
1 MR. BAILEY: Good afternoon, Your
2 Honor.
3 THE COURT: Good afternoon. okay.
4
5
6
7
8
9 My understanding is that Mr. Augsburger
10 and his wife have filed this action, that there has
11 been quite a history to the litigation, which
12 obviously I won't go through, because I know this
13 Court is familiar with it.
14 My cursory review indicates, and we
15 just got the brief -- he just got the brief today in
16 the mail, for today's hearing, is a jurisdictional
17 problem in part. The pleadings that I have had an
18 opportunity to look at, and what papers I have been
19 able to review indicates that there was an action
20 that I believe was void ab initio by Monroe Township.
21 In fact, Mr. Augsburger showed me, and
22 I have for the Court here, the Court probably hasn't
23 had a chance to see this, I know the Court is
24 familiar with the issues and the details, quite a
25 bit, because I know the Court has been put through a
This is on Mr. Augsburger's motion, the petition?
MR. BAILEY: Your Honor, yes, it is.
May it please the Court, my name is Don Bailey. I am
sort of brand new to this. I hope the Court will be
patient with me, and opposing counsel al so.
2
1 lot on this.
2 It is Monroe Township, respondents, in
3 the supreme Court of pennsylvania, signed by Mr.
4 Bogar, with a supreme Court ID number, as solicitors
5 for Monroe Township. what papers I have been able to
6 see, it is sort of difficult sometimes to get
7 cooperation from the municipal entities involved,
8 because they don't move very quickly. To my
9 knowledge, I believe, there is a municipal authority
10 that should have been the party in the actions below,
11 that did not bring an action. And we are trying to
12 get ahold right now, and, again, Judge, I know it is
13 very late, and I apologize to the Court for that.
14 But my understanding is that by virtue
15 of resolutions and creation of the municipal
16 authority, which is the sewage authority, they should
17 have been the ones bringing the action. I do
18 understand Mr. Bogar is attorney for both of the
19 entities, but that has nothing to do with them being
20 the proper person or proper aggrieved party to bring
21 an action in this Court. I don't think anyone
22 actually caught it until I looked at this thing here.
23 But Mr. Augsburger, I think, caught it late on in the
24 process.
25 And Mr. Bogar probably made an error
3
1 there, but, you know, we have had all this
2 intervening litigation. And this hearing, as I
3 understand it, is about a municipal lien filed at NO.
4 04-184, and this is the second thing I have seen
5 where there is a municipal authority in the caption,
6 which makes it brand new.
7 And I had -- we would like this
8 Court -- I would make some suggestions on how to
9 resolve this, but I think that we are back to square
10 one on the issue of the authority of the
11 municipality, which the municipal creature, which in
12 this case, is a corporation, the authority.
13 THE COURT: well, they might be,
14 depending on how I deal with the matter before me,
15 but the matter before me is whether or not the lien
16 ought to be stricken. And I think I need to limit
17 myself to that. And the very reasons that you cite
18 may be a basis for striking the lien. It may not.
19 But the issue before me is whether any lien that is
20 filed should be stricken, if I am correct.
21 So I would suggest that we at least
22 make a record of who did what, when and where, and
23 then we will take our time to sort it out. It is
24 probably particularly advisable, inasmuch as you are
25 new to the case, you can sit back, take a look at the
4
1 brief that they filed, perhaps file something
2 yourself, and I will look at the whole matter.
3 Now, my guess is that the salient facts
4 are not terribly in dispute, are they?
5 MS. HIPP: No.
6 THE COURT: Can we be agreed on some
7 things?
8 MS. HIPP: We would like to, Your
9 Honor, yes.
10 THE COURT: Go ahead.
11 MS. HIPP: May it please the Court, my
12 name is Jennifer Hipp. I am here with Jim Bogar. We
13 represent the Monroe Township Municipal Authority, on
14 whose behalf we are here today. We also represent
15 the Township of Monroe.
16 Mr. Bailey is new to this case. We
17 have not an opportunity to cooperate with him. In
18 fact, we just met him moments before today's hearing.
19 I will note that there was initially a connection fee
20 lien filed on behalf of Monroe Township as the
21 claimant against the Augsburgers. That was a lien
22 that was a hearing was conducted before Your
23 Honor. And you upheld the validity of the lien. And
24 then that lien has been appealed by the Augsburgers
25 all the way to the pennsylvania Supreme Court, with
5
1 the pennsylvania judiciary system in each instance
2 upholding the validity and merit of that lien.
3
4
5
6
7
8 lien was initially filed, that being what we will
9 call the connection fee lien, the Monroe Township
10 Municipal Authority did not exist as an independent
11 operating authority. That authority was created
12 pursuant to provisions in the municipality's planning
13 code, the Municipality Authority's Act, and other
14 relevant statutes, with an effective date of December
15 31st, 2001.
16 We understand that the subject of
17 today's hearing, as requested by the Augsburgers, is
18 a municipal lien for services and sewer rates, which
19 I will commonly refer to as a service fee lien. That
20 lien was brought in the name instead of the Monroe
21 Township Municipal Authority. We think there may
22 have been some confusion on behalf of the
23 Augsburgers, in that they captioned their objection,
24 which was filed with this court, to the docket number
25 for the connection fee lien.
THE COURT: And who was the captioned
plaintiff there?
MS. HIPP: It was Monroe Township.
THE COURT: Monroe Township.
MS. HIPP: I will note that when the
6
1 Based upon the title of their
2 objection, being an objection to the municipal lien
3 for services and sewer rates, also specific
4 references to the amount of the user fee lien
5 included in their objection, we understand their
6 objection to the service fee lien. And that is why
7 we believe we are here today, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: The service fee lien?
9 MS. HIPP: That's correct. The service
10 fee lien is a lien that has become due and owing by
11 the Augsburgers for service fee rates that they are
12 obligated to pay as individuals whose home is deemed
13 to be required to be connected to the Monroe Township
14 sewer. They failed to make that connection. But we
15 are prepared today to discuss statute, township and
16 authority resolutions and ordinances and also case
17 law, which sets forth the proposition that a property
18 owner who is required to but fails to connect to the
19 township sewer must still pay service fee charges.
20 THE COURT: So can we agree on those
21 facts anyway, that he has not connected? As a matter
22 of fact, I think he says as much in his petition, he
23 is saying one of the reasons why he doesn't owe
24 anything is because he is not using the sewer
25 service.
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
connected.
litigation.
MR. BAILEY: That's correct. He lS not
And it is because of the pending
THE COURT: okay. So we can be agreed
on that. And the sewer line was installed pursuant
to -- I mean it runs by his house?
MS. HIPP: That's correct, Your Honor.
THE COURT: we can be agreed on that.
okay. I am just thinking, what else do we need to be
understood about factually before we
MS. HIPP: I would like to
THE COURT: -- grapple with the fact or
with the law.
MS. HIPP: I would like to note, Your
Honor, that the matter of the connection fee lien was
upheld by this Court. It was also upheld by the
Commonwealth Court. The Augsburgers filed a petition
for allowance of appeal with the pennsylvania supreme
Court. That petition was denied, I believe back in
mid November. We have received no notification from
the Augsburgers, or from any other court, that they
have elected to appeal that denial of the petition
for allowance of appeal.
THE COURT: And it was in the context
of a lien, it wasn't a declaratory judgment action or
8
1 anything like that?
2 MS. HIPP: Correct.
3 THE COURT: It was a lien. okay.
4 MS. HIPP: A connection fee lien, yes.
5 THE COURT: So now are here on -- that
6 matter is then resolved?
7 MS. HIPP: We would assert that it is,
8 and that any challenge to that matter, or any
9 opportunity for a legal challenge, that matter has
10 been missed by failed -- by failing to raise any
11 issues in a timely manner.
12 THE COURT: okay. And, Mr. Bailey,
13 your understanding of the lien that was being sought
14 to be stricken here is the service fee?
15 MR. BAILEY: It is now, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: The service fee. okay.
17 MR. BAILEY: sir, may I -- if the Court
18 would indulge me -- just a couple more minor facts
19 here?
20 THE COURT: Sure.
21 MR. BAILEY: That there was a fifteen
22 foot lateral that came off that main line. And that
23 physically was put in by the -- I guess the authority
24 or the township. I think they would agree with that.
25 MS. HIPP: I would have to make an
9
objection to any line of argument pursuant to
placement of the lateral or any connections --
THE COURT: well, we are not talking
about argument.
MS. HIPP: okay.
THE COURT: I am talking about whether
we can be agreed on facts.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 MS. HIPP: okay.
9 THE COURT: whether they are of any
10 importance, whether they are relevant or not, that we
11 can sort out later in the context of legal argument.
12 But was a lateral put on? Can we be agreed on that?
13 MR. BAILEY: It was placed
14 across initially there had been a disagreement, I
15 think, Your Honor, over exactly where the boundary
16 line was. It was never surveyed in. The fifteen
17 foot lateral was put in. And then it was -- the man
18 was pro se at the time.
19 THE COURT: I understand. But I found
20
21
22
23
24
25 that to him, sir. Just for the record, if we could
that his house was close enough. And there was a
factual finding. And that matter is --
MR. BAILEY: Res judicata.
THE COURT: Res judicata.
MR. BAILEY: Yes. I have explained
10
1 establish that, because it might relate to other
2 things later on, and I have a duty to represent him.
3 THE COURT: I understand.
4 MR. BAILEY: So that fifteen foot
5 lateral was put in there, we can agree on that. And
6 we would agree as to the issue of it being close
7 enough, the Court has ruled. I was able to catch
8 that. And that's res judicata.
9 And I also believe the Court found that
10 he was not, and I think this is something that when
11 we get to argument, if you will give us some time, I
12 am sure you probably will.
13 THE COURT: of course.
14 MR. BAILEY: That I would argue for
15 mitigation. It goes to one of the reasons why, he,
16 as a non-lawyer, I think, worked at this and did very
17 well, is -- I understand it is res judicata that he
18 was close enough. But I also believe that you have
19 held that there is no law which says you must hook
20 up. The issue then becomes, of course, liability for
21 service fees, where the municipal creature was not
22 burdened, but which I understand from looking at the
23 brief very quickly, case law seems to support an
24 argument that they have presented that you still
25 could be liable for it. And I guess that's up to
11
1 your discretion, your judgment of the facts of the
2 case.
3 THE COURT: well, I have to be bound by
4 what the law is. But if you think the law is
5 different than that, I will certainly entertain your
6 argument on that.
7 MR. BAILEY: That I don't know, you
8 see, sir. I admit to not being as sure of that, what
9 circumstances, in other words, what latitude may be
10 in there as to whether or not they are liable there.
11 I was sort of hoping that what we could
12 do is simply sit down with the court, stop burdening
13 the legal system with all of this, come up with some
14 agreement, assuming eventually these folks may be up
15 against it, as the common metaphor holds, and try to
16 save costs and convenience, and just get this thing
17 resolved.
18 THE COURT: I have no problem with
19 that. That is something the two parties are going to
20 need to do. I am actually not permitted under the
21 ethical rules to mediate.
22 MS. HIPP: Your Honor, we, when I say
23 we, the authority is not permitted to mitigate fees
24 or do anything else. Doing that would be treating
25 the Augsburgers differently than other residents of
12
1 Monroe Township have been treated. And we would
2 advise our clients that unless all delinquent fees,
3 interests, and the like are made current and
4 owing -- that are owing are made current by the
5 Augsburgers, we would advise them against doing that,
6 for fear that such an arrangement would open our
7 clients up to some type of civil rights violation
8 lawsuit by another resident.
9 THE COURT: well, let's look at it this
10 way. AS long as we are satisfied that we have a
11 factual record fleshed out today, this lS the first
12 time, and, indeed, my first time that I have seen
13 their brief, so why don't I give you some time to
14 respond to it. You can also --
15 MR. BAILEY: We would indeed be
16 grateful for that, Judge.
17 THE COURT: You can also, Mr. Bailey,
18 once again approach -- you have heard what MS. Hipp
19 had to say about the possibilities of negotiations.
20 They don't look good. But who knows, when you step
21 outside the courtroom, something else may happen.
22 MR. BAILEY: Right.
23 THE COURT: So we will give you, what,
24 fifteen days, twenty days?
25 MR. BAILEY: I would deeply appreciate
13
1 it, sir.
2 THE COURT: And you could, of course,
3 if you feel you need to file a response brief, that's
4 fine.
5 MS. HIPP: Absolutely.
6 THE COURT: If there appears to be any
7 factual holes anywhere, then we can reconvene. But
8 can we at least incorporate for the factual record
9 the record of the case before? That pretty much set
10 out
11 MS. HIPP: Yes, Your Honor.
12 THE COURT: -- where the sewer lines
13 were. And I think it had the contents of the
14 ordinance in there.
15 MS. HIPP: Yes, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: And so forth. So the only
17 other thing that we have to take I don't want to
18 say notice of, but treat as a fact, is that the
19 municipal authority came into being on september
20 31st, 2001 --
21 MS. HIPP: We understand December 31st
22 of 2001. And we would be happy to provide copies of
23 relevant ordinances and resolutions, which officially
24 formalized the authority becoming an independent
25 operating entity.
14
1 THE COURT: And does it say anywhere in
2 those ordinances, not that that may be even
3 important, that the authority then somehow becomes a
4 successor in interest?
5 MS. HIPP: That will be made clear,
6 yes.
7 THE COURT: well, we will have to look
8 at them. why don't you furnish a copy of those to
9 Mr. Bailey, and he can have those in his possession
10 as he prepares any memorandum of law.
11 MS. HIPP: certainly. We would also
12 ask the court, Your Honor, if we could have
13 incorporated into the list or resume of facts the
14 fact that the authority filed its user fee lien with
15 the Court of Common pleas of cumberland county. And
16 we would be happy to provide a copy of that lien as
17 an exhibit for the court's files.
18 THE COURT: well, the records of our
19 own court are something that we can take notice of
20 with little difficulty at all.
21 MS. HIPP: Thank you.
22 MR. BAILEY: A point of inquiry, Judge,
23 at some point I believe there was an effective date
24 where the Court said that there was either not a duty
25 to hook up, I guess, but that he had an
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
obligation -- that factual distance there. whenever
the Court said you are close enough, you are
within that was an initial factual dispute I
think.
Do you know the date, if I might
i nqui re?
MS. HIPP: I am not quite certain I
understand the point of your question --
MR. BAILEY: Sure. At some point the
court made a decision, an initial determination -- it
might have been the one, I think, perhaps --
THE COURT: My original ruling that was
subsequently appealed?
MR. BAILEY: Yes.
THE COURT: I don't know how long ago
that was.
MR. BAILEY:
THE COURT:
Thank you, sir.
I don't know, I really
don't.
MR. BAILEY:
THE COURT:
I will dig that out.
I don't have that file up
here.
MS. HIPP: I have copies of all the
court's decisions here today, and I would be happy to
provide them to Mr. Bailey.
16
1 MR. BAILEY: It would be very much
2 appreciated. Thank you.
3 THE COURT: All right.
4 And NOw, this date, this matter having
5 been called for hearing, and certain matters of fact
6 having been agreed upon, counsel for the petitioner
7 is given twenty days -- thirty days?
8 MR. BAILEY: I have a U.S. supreme
9 Court argument due 31 March. Any amount of time you
10 can give -- I have a brief due -- twenty days will be
11 fine, sir.
12 THE COURT: -- will be granted twenty
13 days within which to file a memorandum of law in
14 response to the brief filed on behalf of Monroe
15 Township Municipal Authority. The Township shall be
16 given ten days thereafter within which to request
17 time to file a response brief. At the end of the
18 period allowed for briefing, this matter will be
19 decided on briefs alone unless one side or the other
20 requests oral argument.
21 And you can do that informally through
22 my office. Just call my secretary and say Judge Hess
23 let me request oral argument. I am requesting it.
24 And Mrs. March will set a date. If not, I will
25 decide it on the briefs alone.
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HIPP: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MS. HIPP: Thank you very much.
MR. BAILEY: Thank you, Judge.
(End of proceedings)
18
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the proceedings are contained fully
and accurately in the notes taken by me on the above cause
and that this is a correct transcript of same.
~t4A~
Barbara E. Graham
official stenographer
-----------------------------
The foregoing record of the proceedings on the hearing of
the within matter is hereby approved and directed to be
filed.
"7~. ~7 z- 'I
Date
J.
District
19
MONROE TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL
AUTHORITY,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Claimant
vs.
NO. 04-l84 MUNICIPAL LIEN
TIMOTHY R. AUGSBURGER and
JANEL C. AUGSBURGER,
Owners
MUNICIPAL LIEN
PRAECIPE TO SATISFY
To the Prothonotary:
Please mark the above-captioned matter settled, discontinued
and satisfied.
Monroe Township Municipal Authority
By:
Jenni e ipp, Esquire
One West Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA l70ll
Telephone: (7l7) 737-876l
February 24, 2006
Solicitor for the Monroe Township
Municipal Authority
j,
"""
'~ ~ ~\
~ l'\
~. %
-------.. -.".-.
~ ---~
~ '-!\
.c <:::; ,
.~ ~
R..., "S'---.
CJ ~
<-~
""\