Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-0912 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 Plaintiff, v. BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART 101 Sycamore Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, PA 17065 and No.04-9/~ etuL/~ GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 3314 Market Street - Suite 101 Camp Hill, Cumberland County, P A 17011-4464 and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, Huntingdon County, P A 16652-0577 Defendants. NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND AGAINST THE CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES, YOU MUST TAKE ACTION WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS AFTER THIS COMPLAINT AND NOTICE ARE SERVED, BY ENTERING A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU, YOU ARE WARNED THAT IF YOU FAIL TO DO SO, THE CASE MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOU AND A JUDGMENT MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY THE COURT WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE FOR ANY S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\RhJnehart M GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complajnt.docM03/0112004 MONEY CLAIMED IN THE COMPLAINT OR FOR ANY OTHER CLAIM FOR RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE PLAINTIFF, PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL, INC, YOU MAY LOSE MONEY OR PROPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU, YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE, IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP, Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone: 800-990-9108 LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T, FOGERTY BY:~ Kevm T, Foge Es uire Attorneys for Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d.b.a. Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg 2 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, P A CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 Plaintiff, v. BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART 101 Sycamore Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, PA 17065 and NO. 04 - qrJ... r!.,"oi-L Tf:fl...v,. GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 3314 Market Street - Suite 101 Camp Hill, Cumberland County, PA 17011-4464 and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, Huntingdon County, PA 16652-0577 Defendants. COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg (hereafter "POR"), is a corporation organized pursuant to Pennsylvania law, maintaining a place of business at 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart. GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc.03/02/2004 2, Defendants, Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart (the "Rhineharts"), are adult individuals who own real property located at 198 Shughart Road, Carlisle, PA 17013, and who it is believed are presently residing at 101 Sycamore Drive, Mount Holly Springs, PA 17065, 3. Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc, (hereafter "GAB"), is a corporation conducting business throughout in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having a place of business at 3314 Market Street - Suite lOI, Camp Hill, PA 170ll-4464. 4, Defendant, Mutual Benefit Insurance Company (hereafter "Mutual Benefit"), is an insurance company authorized to transact business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having a place of business at 409 Penn Street, Huntingdon, PA 16652-0577. 5. At all times material and relevant to the claims alleged in this lawsuit, the Rhineharts have been the owners of the property known as and located at 198 Shughart Road, Carlisle, P A 17013 (hereafter "the Property"), 6. At all times material and relevant to the claims alleged in this lawsuit, Mutual Benefit was the insurance company which provided homeowner's coverage to the Rhineharts, for the Property, 7. At all times material and relevant to the claims alleged in this lawsuit, GAB was hired by and acting on behalf of Mutual Benefit, particularly with respect to adjusting the fire- loss/damage claim described more fully in the following paragraphs of this Complaint. 8. On or about Aprill6, 2003, a fire occurred at the Property, which caused substantial damage not only to the house/structure itself, but also to the Rhineharts' personal property, including clothing and other personal effects. 2 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinebart - GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 9. At the time of the fire, the Rhineharts had a homeowner's insurance policy with Mutual Benefit. 10, Following the fire, Mutual Benefit hired GAB to act on its behalf in adjusting the Rhineharts' claims arising out of the fire. II, Dale Fohl was the person within GAB's Camp Hill office who was assigned the responsibility of handling the file relating to the fire at the Property, l2. After the fire occurred, the Rhineharts contacted Keystone Fire Restoration, of Carlisle, P A, to examine the damage and to obtain an estimate of the repair costs. l3. The clothing and other personal effects of the Rhineharts which had been damaged in the fire were not usable --and would end up being discarded as essentially worthless-- ifnot restored in some way (if possible) to their pre-fire condition. 14. Prior to the fire, both GAB and Mutual Benefit were aware of the fact that certain companies, some of them engaged in the same business as Plaintiff, others being dry cleaning companies, perform a valuable service in deodorizing and otherwise salvaging fire-and-smoke- damaged clothing and other personal effects. 15, At some point during the week of June 2, 2003, --most likely Wednesday, Thursday or Friday of that week-- Mr. William Salomone, owner of Keystone Fire Restoration, spoke by phone with GAB's agent and employee, Dale Fohl, regarding adjustment of the Rhineharts' insurance claim, and whether any repair/restoration work could begin at the Property. l6. During the telephone conversation referenced in Paragraph 15 above, Mr. Fohl authorized Mr. Salomone to hire a company --the expense for which Mr. Fohl represented would 3 S;\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart M GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 be covered through the insurance claim--, to remove the Rhineharts' clothing and other personal effects; Mr. Fohl's clear and unequivocal representation was that the bill from this other company --which was the Plaintiff-- would be paid by Mutual Benefit as part ofthe overall adjustment and resolution of the Rhineharts' insurance claim, 17. The telephone conversation--referenced in Paragraphs 15 and 16 above-- in which Mr. Fohl made the representation, and gave the related authorization, regarding removal of the Rhineharts' clothing and personal effects, occurred at a point in time when Mr. Fohl also proposed re-adjusted figures for repair of the damaged portions of the Rhineharts' home, with Mr, Salomone agreeing to those re-adjusted numbers, 18. Mr. Fohl's authorization for removal of the Rhineharts' clothing and personal effects, and submission of the bill therefor to be paid by Mutual Benefit, was consistent with the general thrust of his conversation with Mr, Salomone, to the effect that since they had now both agreed upon and finalized the re-adjusted cost estimate, the Rhineharts' claim was settled, and it therefore made sense to get the clothing and other effects removed from the home and out of the way, so to speak, for Keystone Fire Restoration to commence its work. 19. Following the telephone conversation referenced in Paragraphs 15 and 16 above, Mr. Salomone delivered about a dozen trash barrels to the Property, to be ready and available for the expectedly imminent start of the reconstruction and repair work to be done by Keystone. 20. On Monday, June 9, 2003, Mr. Salomone communicated to Plaintiffs President, Robert Singley, the authorization Mr, Salomone had received from Mr. Fohl the preceding week, and in reliance thereon authorized Mr. Singley's company to immediately go to the Property to remove the Rhineharts' clothing and other personal effects. 4 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 21. Relying on Mr. Salomone informing him ofMr, Fohl's representations and authorizations--as described in Paragraphs 15 through 20 above--, Mr. Singley dispatched a crew on Monday, June 9, 2003, to remove the Rhineharts' clothing and other personal effects. 22. Approximately one to two weeks later, when Mr. Salomone had not heard from Mr. Fohl, he contacted Mr, Fohl regarding this claim; at that point Mr. Fohl said he had not heard anything either, and that he would contact Mutual Benefit to find out what was going on; Mr. Fohl then called Mr. Salamone back and told Mr. Salamone --contrary to Mr, Fohl's prior representations, assurances, and authorizations-- that Mutual Benefit had now supposedly decided to continue investigating this loss, and was therefore not accepting coverage, 23, While Mr. Fohl--during the second telephone conversation referenced in the preceding paragraph ofthis Complaint-- told Mr. Salomone the delay on Mutual Benefit's end was related to investigation of possible arson, Mr. Fohl told Mr. Salamone the likelihood ofthe Rhineharts having been involved in setting the fire to their home on the Property was virtually nil. 24. Plaintiff believes and avers that at some point the Rhineharts believed that their clothing and other personal effects would be removed by Plaintiff, -- which they knew full well would benefit them, by those items being deodorized and restored for their use-- and they knowingly approved of and consented to Plaintiff performing that work for their benefit and improving the condition of their personal property, 25, Acting in direct reliance on the aforesaid promises and authorizations of GAB, and the consent ofthe Rhineharts to the work proposed to be done by Plaintiff, Plaintiff removed, deodorized, stored (and is stiJJ storing) the Rhineharts' clothing and personal effects. 5 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart . GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 26. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's June 18,2003, Invoice No. 305 to the Rhineharts for the aforesaid work; the total of that billing, including sales tax, was $5,093.79. 27. Plaintiffs Invoice No. 305 was forwarded to both the Rhineharts and GAB. 28, The charges set forth on Plaintiffs Invoice No, 305 for work done on the consent of the Rhineharts, and the direction and authorization of GAB, were fair, reasonable and customary, 29. Since Plaintiffs June 18,2003, invoice, Plaintiff has continued to store the Rhineharts' clothing and other effects, the first three months (June 10,2003, through September 10,2003) initially being at no charge (but only if the Plaintiffs bill was timely paid, which it was not, so those months are billable), so for each month the storage charge was $100.00 per month. Attached hereto as Exhibit "B" are true and correct copies of storage invoices dated October 17, 2003, and November 28, 2003. 30. Plaintiff continues to date to store the Rhineharts' clothing and other effects at the same $100,00 per month rate; those storage charges total $800.00 as of the filing of this Complaint, and as of March 10,2004, an additional $100.00 will be due and owing for the period from February 10,2004, to March 10,2004. 31. As of the date of the filing of this Complaint, Plaintiffs recoverable damages total $5,893.79, plus continuing storage charges and interest. 6 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart ~ GAB Robins. Mutual Benefit\compJaint.doc-03/02/2004 COUNT I - PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA. INC. 32. The allegations contained in Paragraphs I through 31 of this Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as though the same were fully set forth at length. 33. When GAB's agent and employee, Dale Fohl, made the representations, assurances and authorizations referenced in Paragraphs l5 through 20 of this Complaint, he did so knowing full well those representations, assurances, and authorization would be communicated from Keystone Fire Restoration to Plaintiff (or to some company performing the same work as Plaintiff), and that Plaintiff (or a similar company) would reasonably rely thereon in rendering and performing substantial work, labor and services, which Plaintiff did, 34. Plaintiff's reliance on Mr. Fohl's representations, assurances, and authorization was reasonable and justifiable under the circumstances, 35. As a direct and proximate result of Plaintiff's reasonable and justifiable reliance on Mr. Fohl's representations, assurances, and authorization, Plaintiff has suffered and sustained the damages and losses referenced in Paragraphs 26 through 31 of this Complaint. 36. On or about October 28,2003, William Salomone, of Keystone Fire Restoration, sent a letter to Joseph Christie (Mr. Fohl's supervisor at GAB), copy attached hereto as Exhibit "C," explaining quite clearly the facts and circumstances entitling Plaintiff to be paid on its billings. 37, On February 6, 2004, Plaintiffs counsel wrote to Mr. Christie, copy attached hereto as Exhibit "D," again explaining the underlying circumstances, and demanding payment. 7 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 38. To date, GAB continues to stonewall, delay, and refuse to authorize payment of Plaintiff s invoices for work, labor, services and storage, notwithstanding that all of those invoices have been timely forwarded to GAB. 39. Based on the foregoing, Defendant, GAB is liable to Plaintiff under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc" dfb/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, demands entry of judgment in its favor and against Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc., in the amount of Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-Three and 79/100 ($5,893,79) Dollars, plus continuing storage charges at the rate of $ I 00.00 per month, interest and costs of suit. COUNT II - BREACH OF IMPLIED CONTRACT PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART 40. The allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 39 of this Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as though the same were fully set forth at length. 41. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that when the Rhineharts consented to Plaintiff removing their clothing and other personal effects, and rendering substantial work, labor and services in connection therewith, they knew Plaintiff would look to them for payment if payment was for whatever reason not forthcoming from any other sources, including Mutual Benefit. 42, Plaintiff believes and avers that the Rhineharts knew --at the time they consented to Plaintiff to removing their clothing and personal effects, to render substantial work, labor and services in connection therewith-- they would be liable and obligated to Plaintiff for its billings for this work, including storage of Defendants , goods. 8 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc.03/02/2004 43. Plaintiff has invoiced the Rhineharts for its work, labor and services --see Exhibit "A" attached hereto--, yet the Rhineharts have failed, neglected and refused to pay that bill. 44, As a direct and proximate result of the Rhineharts' failure and refusal to pay Plaintiff s invoices, Plaintiff has suffered and sustained the damages and losses referenced in Paragraphs 26 through 3l of this Complaint. 45, Based on the foregoing, the Rhineharts are liable to Plaintiff for breach of implied contract. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., dfb/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, demands entry of judgment in its favor and against Defendants, Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart, in the amount of Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-Three and 79/100 ($5,893.79) Dollars, plus continuing storage charges at the rate of $l 00,00 per month, interest and costs of suit. COUNT III - QUANTUM MERUIT/UNJUST ENRICHMENT PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART 46, The allegations contained in Paragraphs I through 45 of this Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as though the same were fully set forth at length. 47. In the alternative to the cause of action alleged in Count II of this Complaint, and in the event it is determined-- which Plaintiff denies would be appropriate under the circumstances-- there was not an implied contract between Plaintiff and the Rhineharts, Plaintiff alleges and avers that the Rhineharts have materially and substantially benefited from the work done by Plaintiff, in that their clothing and other personal effects have been cleaned and deodorized, when those items would have otherwise not been salvageable. 9 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart ~ GAB Robins. Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 48, Plaintiff believes and avers that it would be a violation of public policy to allow the Rhineharts to knowingly receive the benefit of the work performed by Plaintiff-- Plaintiff being prepared to return the clothing and personal effects to the Rhineharts upon payment of Plaintiffs bills--, to allow the Rhineharts to receive the benefit of Plaintiffs work without paying for it. 49, When the Rhineharts consented to Plaintiff picking up the Rhinehart's clothing and personal effects, the Rhineharts knew Plaintiff would perform substantial work and services which would benefit them, as a consequence of which they should not now be allowed to avoid paying Plaintiff after it has performed that work and services, 50. Based on the foregoing, the Rhineharts are liable and indebted to Plaintiff on the theory of quantum meruit/unjust enrichment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, demands entry of judgment in its favor and against Defendants, Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart, in the amount of Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-Three and 79/100 ($5,893,79) Dollars, plus continuing storage charges at the rate of $1 00.00 per month, interest and costs of suit. 10 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart ~ GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc-03/02/2004 COUNT IV - PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (VICARIOUS LIABILITY) PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 5l. The allegations contained in Paragraphs I through 50 of this Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as though the same were fully set forth at length. 52, At all times material and relevant hereto, Dale Fohl and GAB were acting on behalf of, and as duly authorized agents and representatives for Mutual Benefit in adjusting the Rhineharts' fire-loss claim. 53, It is reasonable and customary in casualty loss situations for the adjusting company representing or acting on behalf of the insurance company to verbally authorize work-- without the need to provide a written authorization--to be done to or in connection with the insured's damaged property. 54. In this case, Mutual Benefit's duly authorized agent and representative at GAB specifically authorized performance of the work done by Plaintiff, 55, Based on the foregoing, if GAB did not have the express authorization to act on behalf of Mutual Benefit, it certainly had the implied and/or apparent/ostensible authority to do so. 56. Based on the foregoing, Mutual Benefit is liable to Plaintiff under the doctrines of promissory estoppel and vicarious liability, and it is therefore liable for Plaintiff's resulting damages set forth in Paragraphs 26 though 3l of this Complaint. 11 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart ~ GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit\complaint.doc~03/02/2004 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, demands entry of judgment in its favor and against Defendant, Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, in the amount of Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-Three and 79/100 ($5,893.79) Dollars, plus continuing storage charges at the rate of $100.00 per month, interest and costs of suit. LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T, FOGERTY .~~ ,~ /~ '1-- v/., By: :' . \ -. Kevin T, Fogerty, Esq e Attorneys for Plaintiff, Ozo . s, Inc" d,b.a, Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg Mil! Run Office Center 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite ISO Allentown, PA 18106 Phone 610-366-0950 Fax 610-366-0955 E-Mail ktflaw@fast.net Attorney I.D. No. 36667 12 VERIFICATION I, Robert Singley, do hereby state and verify that I am the President of Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d. b.a. Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg; that as sllCh, I am authori:c:ed to take this Verification on behalf of that Company; that I bave read the foregoing Complaint; and thallhe facts and iIlfonnation alleged therein are true and correct, partly upon personal knowledge. the remainder upon infonnation and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. A. ~904. relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, Date: February Ie. ,2004 .~ ,po- L1 39\1d 053 Ald390j 1 NI^3~ ssse99e:-IH9 8p:9I peel/e:Ille EXHIBIT A PERMANENT ODOR REMOV A.L OF HARRISBURG d.b.a. OZONICS, INC, 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 Billing For RemitTa Brian & Melissa Rhienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Permanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, PA 18102 Claim Number Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax 10 #233050028 Quantity Descnptian 85 Trouser 3 Sport CoallBlazer 13 Sweater 22 Sweatshirt 6 Vest 2 Fanny Vest 16 Shoes 8 Boots 3 Sandals I Leather Glove 1 Leather Belt 15 Baseball Hat I Hat 10 Plain Blouse 49 Knit Cap 7 Bra I Body Suit 3 Coveralls 22 Dress I Gown 7 Glove II Hat 2 Hunting Jackel 2 Hunting Pant 26 Jackel 5 Heavy Jacket 7 Night Gown 22 Pajamas BottomfTop Serving Lancaster, Y orlc, Lebanon, Dauphin, Adams, CUmberland, and Perry Counties, Subtotal Date 61tBn003 Rate 5.75 6,25 6,00 5,75 4,75 5,00 5,25 6,60 3.50 6,00 2,90 3,75 4.00 5,75 2,75 2,25 5,75 12,95 12,75 22,75 3,00 3.75 13,75 ],50 13,75 15,75 7.50 3,25 Sales Tax (6.0%) Total Page 1 Invoice Invoice It 305 Amount 488,75 18,75 78,00 126.50 28.50 10.00 84,00 52,80 10.50 6,00 2,90 56,25 4,00 57.50 134,75 15,75 5,75T 38,85 280.50 22,75 21.00 41.25 27.50 15,00 357.50 78,75 52.50 71.50 PERMANENT ODOR REMOV A.L OF HARRISBURG d.b.a. OZONICS, INC. . 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 Invoice Date Invoice # 611812003 305 Billing Far Brian & Melissa Rhienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle, P A 17013 Remit To Pennanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, PA 18102 Claim Number Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax 10 #233050028 Quantity Description Rate Amount 19 Panties 1.25 23,75 6 Robe 8.50 51.00 3 Slippers 2.25 6.75 I Mittens/Glove 3.00 3,00 I Teddie Night Gown 7.25 7,25 I Scarf 3.50 3.50 102 Polo/Closed KnitfTnrtlenecks 4.50 459,00 8 Shirt Laundry 3,25 26,00 47 Novelty Print T-shirt 2.50 117.50 3 Rain Coat 13,75 41.25 42 Shorts 4,50 189,00 3 Ski Pants 7.50 22.50 11 Skirt 5,75 63,25 2 Snow Suit 16,75 33.50 68 Socks 0,65 44,20 5 Stockings 1.00 5,00 30 Undershorts 1.00 30,00 10 Coat Hood 14.75 147.50 33 Child One Piece Sleeper 2,00 66,00 6 Costome 4.50 27,ooT 1 Santa Hat 3,75 3,75 31 Onsie 2.00 62,OOT 16 Bib 1.25 20,QOT 8 Doll Clothes 1.25 lO,ooT 5 Diaper 1.50 7.50T 2 Car Seat Cover 4.00 8.ooT 1 Jabot Valance 9,75 9,75T I Stroller Cover 7,00 7.ooT Serving Lancaster, York, Lebanon. Danphin. Adams, Cumberland, and Perry Counties, Subtotal Sales Tax (6.0%) Total Page 2 PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG d.b.a. OZONICS, INC. . 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 Billing For Brian & Melissa Rbienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle, P A 17013 Remit Ta Permanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, P A 18102 Claim Number Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax 10 #233050028 Quantity Description 2 Cany BaglDuffel Bag (Large) I Tent I Gun Case I Suitcase I Backpack 3 Bed Pillow 2 Toss Pillow I Extra Long Toss Pillow 6 Stuffed Animal - X-Small 18 Stuffed Animal - Small 25 Stuffed Animal - Medium 10 Stuffed Animal - Large 3 Stuffed Animal - X-Large 2 Afghan - (All Sizes) 3 Comfurter 13 Baby Blanket I Electric Blanket (All Sizes) 6 Blanket (All Sizes) I Golf Club Cover I Headband I Bassinet Cover 10 Pillow Case I Placemat 6 Pot Holder 2 Large Throw Rugs 11.5 Window Curtain - Long 10 Sheet 5 Sleeping Bag Serving Lancaster, York, Lebanon, Dauphin, Adams, Cumberland, and Pony Counties. Subtotal Dale 6/1812003 Rale 4.75 15.00 8.50 10,00 4,00 10.00 5,50 7,00 2,00 3,00 4,00 5.00 6.00 13.00 18.00 8,00 15,00 12,25 3.00 0,75 5,00 0.95 1.25 1.00 9,00 13.75 4.00 17,25 Sales Tax (6.0%) Total Page 3 Invoice Invoice # 305 Amount 9.50T 15,OOT 8.50T lO,ooT 4,OOT 30,OOT 11.00T 7,OOT 12,OOT 54,OOT 100,OOT 50,OOT 18,OOT 26,ooT 54.OOT I Q4,OOT 15,OOT 73.5OT 3.00T 0,75 5,OOT 9.50T 1.25T 6,001 18.ooT 158,I3T 40,ooT 86,25T PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG d.b.a. OZONICS, INC. 5222 Toodle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, PAl 7050 Billing Far Brian & Melissa Rhienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Remit To Pennanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, PA 18102 Claim Number Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax ID #233050028 Quantity Description 2 Canvas Bag 1 Crib Bumper Pad 23 Tieback 6 Bath Towel II Hand Towel 3 Valance - Long 36 Valance -Medium 14 Wash Cloth I Pick Up & Delivery I Clothing Storage 3 Months No Charge Serving Lancaster, Y orlc, Lebanon, Dauphin, Adams, Cumberland, and Pony Counties, Subtotal Date 6/1812003 Rate 3.00 5,00 1.75 1.25 0,75 9,75 7,95 0,75 0.00 0,00 Sales Tax (6.0%) Total p.age 4 Invoice Invoice II 305 Amaunt 6,ooT 5,OOT 40,25T 7.50T 8,25T 29,25T 286,20T 10.50T O,ooT O.ooT S5,005,08 S88,71 S5,093.79 EXHIBIT B . ~t 1 -~~ ;D b'ol ;m,__~~1 fJ! J. ~~" , L PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG d.b,a, 020NICS, lNC, 131 South 13th Street Allentown, P A 18102 Billing For Remit To Brian & Melissa Rhienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Permanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, P A 18102 Claim Number I Quantity Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax ID #233050028 Description Clothing Storage 6/10/03 to 9/10/03 3 Months No Charge Clothing Storage 9110/03 to 10/10/03 Clothing Storage 10/10/03 to 11110/03 Serving Lancaster, York, Lebanon, Dauphin, Adams, Cumberland, and Petty Counties. Subtotal 1011712003 Rale 100,00 100.00 Invoice Date Invoice # 336 Amount 0.00 O,ooT I 100.00T 100.00T I S200.00 Sales Tax (6.0%) Total S12,OO $212.00 Billing For - Brian & Melissa Rhienhardt 198 Shugart Road Carlisle. PA 17013 Claim Number Quanlity PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG d,b.a. OZONICS, INC, . 131 South 13th Street Allentown, PA 18102 Remit Ta Pennanent Odor Removal 131 South 13th Street Allentown, P A 18102 Terms Net 30 Days Federal Tax 10 #233050026 Oescriptian Clothing Storage 11110/03 to 12/10/03 Clothing Storage 12110/03 to 1110/04 Serving Lancaster. York, Lebanon. Dauphin, Adams, Cumberland, and Peny Counties. Subtotal Date 1112812003 ~ li~ Rate 100.00 100.00 Sales Tax (6.0%) Total Invoice Invoice # 353 Amount loo,ooT 100.OOT $200,00 $12,00 $212.00 EXHIBIT C UVI-cO-cUUj DRI UI;q~ PM UIGKINSON COLLEGE IT 717245 1690 p, 01 - KtVS'CON& ~~. ,--...,..~.::'..~:~ -' 1/1(8 K&S'COI(.A 'CION GENERAL CONTRACTOR 559 HIGKlANDAvE.. CARLlSI.e. PA 17013 (717) 243-9595 October 2S, 2003 Joseph Christie Bl'lIIICh Manapr GAB Robins North America Ill(;. 3314 Market Sneet - Suite 101 Camp Hill, PA 17011-4464 Dear Mr. Christie, After having diseussed allength with Bob Singley of of Permanent Odor Removal. Inc. - the subject ~ the outstaDding dry cleaning charges for the Rhinehart claim, Oaim No.; M02Z7115-A. I have decided to write to you directly 88 I have in the past concc:milll odm llUt8tanding charges. I know dlat Bob Sinllley has advised you dlat I authorized him to remove the dry cJetDing only after 1 bad beca authorized by Dale Fohl to do $0. Thia authorizaliOll from Dale Fohl cmne after Dale bad origillally adjUllted the claim and then read)l$tcd it for a second time at the request of Mutual BclIefIl When Dale cmne to me. with the seoond adju&tmeJll, I apeed to the ~ fiaures. and it was at this point that 11I8kcd him if I could now remove the dry cloani1lg. Hill response W88 that it WlS fine with bilJl, and we both agreed dlat given the claim was for all intents and purposes settled now w.th these new figures, it WlS jUBt a matter of a sbort time before I would start tilt job ant. would need die items to be dry cleaned. out of my way. In otIler words.. it w"- .t this I1\QIlIeIlt he. authorlzcd the dry cJ<o""illto be done. The following Monda)'. JU1Ul9.1 advised Bob Slnpey to have tile dry c1ealling _"ed - it wu dOlIe die __ day. Approximately a weelt or two later" when 1 bad DOl heard from Dale Fobl. I COIItacted him to see whether there was any further delay: at this point he advised me that Mutual benefit decided to "continue the invcsti:;atioo". By this tilh!l the dry cle....i'" J-\ been ~ed. At tbat poiJlt, lJllitbcr Dale IIot J mentioned the dry cleaning, I thought about it and I am sllli he did too - probably we were both thiDking and bopins that \his situation would eventually become irrelevant. We both acreed that at that point. 1hat the chances of the Rhineham being involved in arson were almost non-eltiStelll CtIrIIsIe's Only File Restol'tltJon $pecMHst 24 HOUR EMERGENCY SERVICE . COMPLJrre RESTORATION & REMODELING I~SURANCE APPRAISALS ~ , ~ , ~T-25-2003 SAT 01:49 PM . DICKINSON COLLEGE IT 717 245 1690 P. 02 / Thus we are finally at die point, where die investigatioll mn contilllleS; and tIie dry cleaner hll$ lost patience and wants to be paid, after more than 4 montb5. I don't blame him IUd I am sure you dOll't either, The bottom line here is that lie was aurhorized to do the dry cleanlnlJ and tbat @Ilthori:>...tiQn or\cintlly came from Dale Foh!. Let me make something very clear -1 firmly believe that Dale fob acted in good faith when be aurhorilOd this. I know I certainly dealt in goOd faith. But I unfOltUnately have to reflect baCk on a similar problem I had with Dale two years ago - L problem that ultill1lltely had lQ be taIcea to your alleJ\tiOll before it was solved - a problem where the truth was also stretched by Dale FoIlI. That problem only involved approx.m~tely $300.00. this problem involves over $5,000.00, In conclusion. I sUg&CSt that the four of us meet in your office - YO' I, Dale, Bob Singley and myself - and resolve this mailer before it becomes more seriOllS. Since I bave written this letter, and will no doubt become more inVllved in this matter if it goes on. I am requesting that you contact me direc:t1y IS soon as is convenient for you. Cc: Bob Sillgley Sincerely, William K. SlIlomone Owner/Opera;or Keystone fin Restoration EXHIBIT D KEVIN T. FOGERTY WILUAM A. EHRUCH* 'MEMBER OF PA AND NJ BAR LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY MILL RUN OFFICE CENTER 1275 GLENUVET DRIVE, SUITE 150 ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA 18106 610-366-0950 FAX 610-366'0955 E-MAIL ktflaw@fast.net ~~ ~~~XQ)!fjY~ February 6, 2004 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Joseph Christie GAB Robins North America, Inc. 3314 Market Street - Suite 10 I Camp Hill, P A 17011-4464 RE: Insureds. Brian and Melissa Rhinehart 198 Shughart Road, Carlisle, P A 17013 Claim No. M0227115-A Date of Loss - April 16, 2003 Policy No. H000274871 Dear Mr. Christie: Our office represents Permanent Odor Removal, Inc. ("POR"). You previously received a letter from William K. Salomone, of Keystone Fire Restoration, dated October 28, 2003, regarding the above-referenced matter. That letter very clearly explained how your employee, Dale Fohl specifically authorized the removal of dry cleaning from the Rhineharts' residence. Mr. Fohl did so knowing full well Keystone had lined up my client, POR, to do that work. Mr' FoW also knew POR would only do that work after obtaining GAB Robins' approval, which also necessarily entailed an assurance from GAB Robins that POR would be paid for that work. POR promptly performed all of the work it was requested; indeed, it is still storing the items which were removed from the Rhineharts' home. I am not certain at this point what is going on between Mutual Benefit Group and the Rhineharts. Presumably, that insurance company is giving the Rhineharts some type ofrun around on their loss claim. What is of more direct concern to me is the fact that your company's employee made a representation which he knew would induce POR to expend time and money --which it did-- in connection with this fire loss. POR is presently owed $5,941.79 plus interest. In addition, storage charges are continuing to accrue at the rate of$IOO.OO per month. Absent your company's immediate attention to this situation, and arrangements being made for payment of this claim, I will file suit against GAB Robins for misrepresentation and estoppel. I will file that suit within two weeks of the date of February 6, 2004 Page 2 this letter in have not heard from your company with a plan to pay POR what it is owed on this job. The other Defendant in that suit would be Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, which Mr, Fohl and your company were purportedly representing, and acting on behalf of, at the time these misrepresentations were made. V~~_ JIO Kevin T; Fogerty ~ ~ KTF/kc pc Mark E. Russell, CPCU, AIC, ARe (') ....., c = (') ~ <C~ ):.) ~ ;;:. ...- -, Crt ::JZ: :;:1 1t- J;:.. ~ = n'i::!:: .... I -om .......... 1I1 (,.) :DC? ~ \) :~('~l 1:) () , --':) ~~~g 8 ( --p ..J." ~ -V ~-:- r:':) "' " .T.': (} F ----, en -< o. -1- OZONICS. INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff, vs. BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART; GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION NO, 04-9l2 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Brian p, Downey, Shannon C. Gierasch, and the law firm of Pepper Hamilton, LLP, on behalf of GAB Robins North America, Inc, Dated: March ll, 2004 Shann PEPPER LP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Streets P,O, Box Il8l Harrisburg, P A 17108-ll8l Phone: (717) 255-ll55 Fax: (717) 238-0575 Email: downeyb@pepperiaw.com gierascs@pepperlaw.com Attorneys for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Brian p, Downey, hereby certify that on March ll, 2004, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance was served via First Class, U.S, Mail, postage prepaid upon the following: Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite l50 Allentown, PA 18016 Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart 10l Sycamore Drive Mount Holly Springs, P A l7065 Mutual Benefit Insurance Company 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, P A 16652-0577 - ......, =, c;.:t ,,,"" ::?: ~;;'; r-.:' ":J (~, -, .. w o -n ...; -r __". h"'l~.1 -n~ ~;~ ~~~. ;:-~? ~~.5 :--c;~ r' ii :::~~ Todd B. Narvol, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Identification No.: 42136 305 N, Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 tnarvol@tthlaw,com (717) 237-7133-direct dial (717) 237-7105-fax Attorneys for Defendant TNT Cleanouts & Lite Hauling, Inc. OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No, 04-912 v. BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART and GAB ROBINS NORTH : Jury Trial Demanded AMERICAN, INC. and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants : Civil Action - Law ENTRY OF APPEARANCE To the Prothonotary: Please enter the appearance of Todd B. Narvol and Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP as counsel for Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company in the above matter. Respectfully submitted, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP by ~~ Todd B, Narvol, J.D. No, 42136 305 N. Front Street POB 999 Harrisburg, P A l7108-0999 Date: 3/ z. " { II 'f CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire l275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150 Allentown, PA 18106 Brian p, Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and market Streets POB 1181 Harrisburg, P A 17108-118l Brian and Melissa Rhinehart lOl Sycamore Drive Mt. Holly Springs, PA l7065 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP by Todd B. Narvol, I.D, No. 42136 305 N, Front Street POB 999 Harrisburg, P A 17108-0999 Date: >( 1..~ ( 11 . (") '" <= 0 ~ <=> ..., or- "t)("I:1 :x ~:n m,t7, >- z:x! :::0 ~~ t;1'" N J";:": 0'> ~....,._, ~C; -0 "l>_ ~(;~~ 3: -~~ >e om ~ -.... &" ~ CD -< SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-00912 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND OZONICS INC DBA PERMANENT ODOR VS RHINEHART BRIAN ET AL R. Thomas Kline , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT , to wit: MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick, He therefore deputized the sheriff of HUNTINGDON County, pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS On March 15th , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from HUNTINGDON Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge Dep Huntingdon Co 6.00 9.00 10.00 25.00 .00 50.00 03/15/2004 KEVIN FOGERTY So answ.ers..:... ~ ;; /.::/./. ........ ,/:::::.<~/ .:.;:;:"~~?--:-::-?~ R. Th~line .- .' Sheriff of Cumberland County Sworn and subscribed to before me Iu :l.'/~ day of ~ this AJo'f A,D. "\ l. J,.u.~ Q ~~ /l~ 1, Prothonotat-yT 7' SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-00912 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND OZONICS INC DBA PERMANENT ODOR VS RHINEHART BRIAN ET AL GERALD WORTHINGTON Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon RHINEHART BRIAN the DEFENDANT , at 1702:00 HOURS, on the 11th day of March 2004 at 138 OLD STATE ROAD GARDNERS, PA 17324 by handing to BRIAN RHINEHART a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge So Answers: 18.00 6.90 .00 10.00 .00 34.90 rfJd"~~ R. Thomas Kline 03/15/2004 KEVIN FOGERTY Sworn and Subscribed to before me this :1'1::- day of By :A-,,~ t..)",u,~-k.. Deputy'" s1ledf'i ~ ;(0lJ'j A.D, C-)~b-DJM'fi,~, ~ Iprothonotary T7 SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-00912 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND OZONICS INC DBA PERMANENT ODOR VS RHINEHART BRIAN ET AL CPL. TIMOTHY RETIZ , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA INC the DEFENDANT , at 1539:00 HOURS, on the 4th day of March , 2004 at 3314 MARKET STREET - SUITE 100 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to JOE CHRISTIE, MANAGER, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 6.00 10.35 .00 10.00 .00 26.35 So Answers: 1-:;~'7;?<-:'~<,~ ':Jau' R. Thomas Kline 03/15/2004 KEVIN FOGERTY me this ).'I~ day of BY:T~/l~ De;t.:ty Sherjff Sworn and Subscribed to before ~ -:2,IJ()'f A,D. (J " 0. )n,-;t~,- _'I.A;;;, ~ot!i:~'notary I SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-00912 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND OZONICS INC DBA PERMANENT ODOR VS RHINEHART BRIAN ET AL CPL. TIMOTHY RETIZ Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE RHINEHART MELISSA was served upon the , at 1855:00 HOURS, on the 5th day of March , 2004 DEFENDANT at 101 SYCAMORE DRIVE MOUNT HOLLY SPRINGS, PA 17065 MELISSA RHINEHART by handing to a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof, Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 6.00 4,14 .00 10.00 .00 20.14 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this .2'/~. day of ~ ;l1lV,/ A.D. ( Lu~ (J "1hJIL ~, "--1'Wrothonotary " So Answers: i"~~~~ .', R. Thomas Kline 03/15/2004 KEVIN FOGERTY By: ;J~ ~ / JfJ!" Dity She~ Iltt'The Court of Common Pleas of-Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Ozonics Inc d/b/a Pennanent OOor Removal of Ha=isburg . ~S. BrJ.an Rhmehart et al SERVE: Mutual Benefit Insurance Canpany No. 04-912 civil Now, March 4, 2004 , I, Sf-IERlFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, P A, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of HlIntingrkm County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. h)J ~' ,<" ~./'? "",," """.,",-;/ ~~- ..,/:"'''''''',... .. ,,;.or~~~~'l:(..t." -J#''' ,.y~"'--r...~ .. '~r ~,,~,...... .' Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Affidavit of Service Now, ,20_, at o'clock M. served the within upon at by handing to a copy of the original and made known to the contents thereof So answers, Sheriff of County, PA SV,lorn and subscribed before me this _ day of 20 '- COSTS SERVICE MILEAGE AFFIDA VIT $ $ SHERIFF'S OFFICE HUNTINGDON COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA 241 Mifflin Street Huntingdon, PA 16652 Telephone: 814-643-0880 William G. Walters, Sheriff Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg No. 912 Terrn:2004 Vs. Mutual Benefit Insurance Company Now, the 9th day of March ,2004 at 0947 A.M./P.M. I served the within , Notice and Complaint, and Reg for Production of Documents Mutual Benefit Insurance Company 409 Penn Street, Huntingdon, PA 16652 by handing to Terri Knode, receptionist one true and correct copy/copies of the within Notice and Complaint, Reg for Production of Documents and made known to Terri the contents thereof. upon at So Answers, Sworn and subscribed to before me this jO'111- day of 'tI1CM..l'.f~ 20 L, A.D, LJ6, /1U1U ['or/'AD _urr;;lOt 7Not~, Pnhlic na Seal ~ m S. Coons. Notary Public Huntm d n 8oro. Huntingdon CQunt My Commission Expire, Oct. 21. 200l I Member, Pennsyfvanl8AssociationofNotaries /iI~&/d~ W~~;~eriff D;:J; Amy M. Sneath Chief Deputy jDeputy Costs: Rec, & Doc. Service Mileage/Postage Surcharge Affidavit Miscellaneous Total Costs $9.00 $9.00 $4.00 $3.00 $25.00 Paid Todd B. Narvol, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Identification No.: 42136 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PAl 7 108,0999 tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7133--<1irect dial (717) 237-7105-fax Attorneys for Defendant TNT C1eanouts & Lite Hauling, Inc, ORZONICS, INC" dfb/a PERMANENT REMOVALOFH~SBURG Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No, 04-9l2 v, Civil Action - Law BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART and GAB ROBINS NORTH Jury Trial Demanded AMERICAN, INC, and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants To: Plaintiff c/o Kevin T. Fogerty, Esquire 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150 Allentown, PA 18106 NOTICE TO PLEAD You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days of service hereof or the relief requested may be entered against you. Date: PI /01 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: ~i4 .8;(;cU/ItJ/ , O/;J Todd B. Narvol LD" No. 42136 305 North Front Street P.O, Box 999 Harrisburg, P A 17108 Todd B, Narvol, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Identification No.: 42136 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7133--<lirect dial (717) 237-7105,fax Attorneys for Defendant TNT Cleanouts & Lite Hauling, Inc. ORZONICS, INC" dfb/a PERMANENT REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff v, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLA:t\D COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No, 04-9l2 Civil Action - Law BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART and GAB ROBINS NORTH Jury Trial Dem,mded AMERICAN, INC. and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants To: Brian and Melissa Rhinehart 10 I Sycamore Drive Mt. Holly Springs, PA 18016 GAB Robins North America, Inc, c/o Brian p, Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and market Streets POB 1181 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1181 NOTICE TO PLEAD TO NEW MATTER CROSS-CLAIM You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter Cross-daim pursuant to Pa.R,Civ.P, 2252( d) within twenty (20) days of service hereof or the relief requested may be entered against you. Date: 6/3} /01 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP B~ t3 Aatpo! /k; (j%J Todd B. Narvol LD. No. 42136 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Todd B. Narvol, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Identification No.: 42136 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, P A 17108-0999 tnarvol@ttWaw.com (717) 237-7 1 33---direct dial (717) 237-7105-fax Attorneys for Defendant TNT eleanouts & Lite Hauling, Inc. OZONICS, INC., dfb(a PERMANENT REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 04-9l2 v, Civil Action - Law BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART and GAB ROBINS NORTH Jury Trial Demcmded AMERICAN, INC, and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants ANSWER AND NEW MATER OF DEFENDANT MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, by and through its attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, files this Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs Complaint, and in support thereof avers the following: l. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, 2. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 1 ofthe Complaint, and proofthereofis demanded, 3, Admitted on information and belief. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted upon information and beliefthat the Rhineharts owned and lived at the subject property at the time of the fire. 6, Denied, Mutual Benefit specifically denied the Rhinehart's insurance claim with regard to the April l5 and April l6, 2003 fires at the subj ect residence. 7. Denied as stated, Admitted that Mutual Benefit hired GAB initially to act as its independent adjuster in connection with the Rhineharts' fire loss claim. Denied that Mutual Benefit authorized GAB to approve any work by Plaintiff at th,e subject residence, 8. Denied as stated. Admitted that there were fires on April l5 and l6, 2003 at the subject property. However, any and all claims of damage are dlenied pursuant to Pa,R.Civ,P, l029(e), 9. Admitted that prior to the fires the Rhineharts had an insurance policy, but denied that Mutual Benefit owed any benefits under that policy to the Rhineharts as a result ofthe fires on April 15 and 16, 2003, lO. Admitted, ll, Admitted upon information and belief, l2. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph l2 of the Complaint and proof thereof is demanded, 13. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph l2 of the Complaint and proof thereof is demanded, l4, Denied as stated, Admitted only generally that Mutual Benefit is aware that there are contractors who perform fire restoration services. 2 l5, Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, l6. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph l6 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demand,~d, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. l7. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph l7 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, l8. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph l8 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demand(:d. By way of further answer, at no time was the Rhinehart's claim "settled," and at all relevant times Mutual Benefit was proceeding under a reservation of rights, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subj ect property. 19, Neither admitted nor denied. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 19 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, 3 Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 20. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe matters averred in Paragraph 20 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded. By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 2l, Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 2l of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded. By way offurther answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 22. Neither admitted nor denied. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 22 ofthe Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 23. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 23 ofthe Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subj ect property. 4 24, Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 24 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demand,:d. By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. 25. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 25 ofthe Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 26, Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 26 of the Complaint, and proofthereofis demand,:d. By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible 110 pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. 27. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded, By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 28, Neither admitted nor denied. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 28 ofthe Complaint, and proofthereof is demanded, By way of further answer, 5 Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. 29. Neither admitted nor denied, After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe matters averred in Paragraph 29 ofthe Complaint, and proofthereof is demanded, By way offurther answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property, 30, Neither admitted nor denied. After reasonable investigation, Mutual Benefit is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matters averred in Paragraph 30 ofthe Complaint, and proof thereof is demanded. By way offurther answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and would not be responsible to pay for any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. 3 I. Denied that Plaintiff has any damages that are reeoverable against Mutual Benefit. COUNT I-PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., dtb/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG v. GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA. INC, 32, Mutual Benefit incorporates as though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph l-3l ofthis Answer and New Matter. 33-39. These allegations are directed toward a Defendant other than Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, and therefore, no response on the part of Mutual Benefit is required. By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit denies that it authorized or is otherwise obligated to pay for any work performed by Plaintiff at the subject property, WHEREFORE, Mutual Benefit demands judgment in its favor, together with all applicable Court costs, 6 COUNT II-BREACH OF IMPLIED CONTRACT PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART 40, Mutual Benefit incorporates at though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph l-39 of this Answer and New Matter. 4l-45, The allegations contained in Paragraphs 4l through 45 of the Complaint are directed toward parties other than Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, and therefore, no response on the part of Mutual Benefit is required. By way offurther Answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and is not otherwise responsible to pay for any work allegedly performed by Plaintiff at the subject property. WHEREFORE, Mutual Benefit demands judgment in its favor, together with all applicable Court costs, COUNT III-QUANTUM MERITIUNJUST ENRICHMENT PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. BRIAN RHINEHART AND MELISSA RHINEHART 46. Mutual Benefit incorporates at though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph l-45 of this Answer and New Matter. 47-50, These allegations are directed toward parties other than Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, and therefore, no response on the part of Mutual Benefit is required. By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit did not authorize and is not otherwise responsible to pay Plaintiff for any work that it allegedly performed at the subject property. WHEREFORE, Mutual Benefit demands judgment in its favor, together with all applicable Court costs, 7 COUNT IV-PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (VICARIOUS LIABILITY) PLAINTIFF, OZONICS, INC. d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG V. MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 51. Mutual Benefit incorporates at though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph 1-50 of this Answer and New Matter, 52, Denied. Dale Fohl and GAB were not authorizt:d by Mutual Benefit to authorize Plaintiffto perform work at the subject residence, nor to approve the hiring of Plaintiff by the Rhineharts to perform work at the subject premises. Thus, in fI~gard to that work, Dale Fohl and GAB were not acting on behalf of nor as duly authorized agents and representatives for Mutual Benefit in adjusting the Rhinehart's fire loss claim. 53, Denied that "it is reasonable and customary in casualty loss situations for the adjusting company representing or acting on behalf of the insurance company to verbally authorize work-without the need to provide a written authorization-to be done to or in connection with the insured's damaged property," By way of further answer, Mutual Benefit incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein its response in Paragraph 52 ofthis Answer and New Matter. 54, Denied that "in this case, Mutual Benefit's duly authorized agent and representative at GAB specifically authorized performance of the work done by Plaintiff." Moreover, Mutual Benefit incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein its response in Paragraph 52 of this Answer & New Matter. 55. Denied that "based on the foregoing, if GAB did not have the express authorization to act on behalf of Mutual Benefit, it certainly had the implied and/or apparent/ostensible authority 8 to do so." To the contrary, Mutual Benefit incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein its response in Paragraph 52 of this Answer and New Matter. 56. Denied that Mutual Benefit is liable to Plaintiff under the doctrines ofpromissory estoppel and vicarious liability, Denied that Mutual Benefit is liable for Plaintiffs damages, To the contrary, Mutual Benefit incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein its response contained in Paragraph 52 of this Answer and New Matter. WHEREFORE, Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company demands judgment in its favor, together with all applicable Court costs, NEW MATTER 57. Mutual Benefit incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph 1-56 of this Answer and New Matter. 58. Mutual Benefit did not authorize any work by Plaintiff at the subject property. 59. Mutual Benefit is not responsible in any way to pay Plaintifffor any work allegedly performed at the subject property. 60, Mutual Benefit had no obligation to pay any insurance benefits to the Rhineharts for any fire loss damage incurred at the subject property on March l5, 2003 or March l6, 2003. 61. Even if Defendant GAB acted in some capacity as Mutual Benefit's independent adjuster at the subject property following the March l5 and 16,2003 fires, GAB did not have the authority to authorize or approve any work on the subject property by Plaintiff and/or GAB exceeded its authority given to it by Mutual Benefit in GAB's role as independent adjuster with regard to the fire loss claim, 62, There was no contract, express or implied, between Plaintiff and Mutual Benefit that would obligate Mutual Benefit to pay Plaintiff for any work performed at the subject property. 9 63. Mutual Benefit made no promises or other representations to Plaintiff on which Plaintiff could have reasonably relied to its detriment. Pending the outcome of discovery, Mutual Benefit provisionally pleads the affirmative defenses of accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, consent, estoppel, failure of consideration, release, volunteerism and waiver. NEW MATTER CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST BRIAN AND MELISSA RHINEHART AND GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA. INC. 64. Mutual Benefit incorporates at though fully set forth herein the averments and denials contained in Paragraph l-63 of this Answer and New Matter. 65, If Plaintiff is entitled to recovery, then it is entitled to recovery only against the Rhineharts and/or against GAB, 66, Mutual Benefit did not authorize or approve the Rhineharts' and/or GAB's hiring of Plaintiff to perform work at the subject property, 67. The Rhineharts and/or GAB are solely liable to the Plaintiff, or liable over to Mutual Benefit for indemnity, if Mutual Benefit would be found liable to Plaintiff, which liability is strictly denied, 68, In regards to Plaintiffs claims, GAB was neither the apparent, ostensible nor actual agent of Mutual Benefit. 10 WHEREFORE, Mutual Benefit demands judgment in its favor, or in the alternative Mutual Benefit demands judgment against Brian and Melissa Rhinehart and/or against GAB Robins North America, Inc, for indemnity, Respectfully submitted, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Date:3p/ /~1- by ~d;{~ 6!;;,~u~~ C/ftu 305 N, Front Street POB 999 Harrisburg, P A 17l08-0999 11 L VERlFICATION I, James Jacobs, an authorized representative of Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, hcreby verify that the averments made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S,A, 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, 3-3/- "1 Date ., CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: Kevin T. Fogerty, Esquire 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite ISO Allentown, P A l8106 Brian p, Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and market Streets POB 1181 Harrisburg,PA 17l08-ll81 Brian and Melissa Rhinehart 101 Sycamore Drive Mt. Holly Springs, PA l7065 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP by Date: %1 P( "T~1~-:::{~/ i!3CdJ 305 N, Front Street POB 999 Harrisburg, PA l7108-0999 ~;: j. L ,~~ :S~ =< (') ~:~ l~~) A. "" C:;;.l ~:J ,J:.'- );~ :;;'-J ~ ::;.l f;l ;TI '.JITl -']C; r~'} L ~'tC} ~X; ;t~ , , 11 .:~+ "D .."., N ',,-,," IV " ::<;: OZONICS, INC" d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Plaintiff, vs. CIVIL ACTION NO, 04-912 Civil Term BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART; GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please withdraw the appearance of Shannon C. Gierasch in the above-designated matter on behalf of defendant GAB Robins North America, Inc, Brian p, Downey, and Pepper Hamilton LLP remain counsel for GAB Robins North America, Inc. Dated: August 23, 2004 ~ c:... ~ Shannon C, Gierasch (PA 84l48) PEPPER HAMILTON, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Streets P.O. Box Il8l Harrisburg, P A l7108-ll81 Phone: (7l7) 255-1155 Fax: (7l7) 238-0575 Email: gierascs@pepperlaw.com Attorney for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Shannon C. Gierasch, hereby certify that on August 19,2004, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Withdrawal of Appearance was served via First Class, U,S, Mail, postage prepaid upon the following: Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire l275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite l50 Allentown, PA l8016 Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart lOI Sycamore Drive Mount Holly Springs, PA 17065 Mutual Benefit Insurance Company 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, PA 16652-0577 Y--- c.._~ Shannon C, Gierasch ('. . () : i"'-) (, OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. NO, 04-912 Civil Term BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART; GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants, PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA. INC. TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Pursuant to Pa, R,C.P. 1028, Defendant GAB Robins North America, Inc. ("GAB Robins"), by its undersigned attorneys, makes the following preliminary objections to Plaintiff's complaint: Backl;round On or about March 3, 2004, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against GAB Robins and several other defendants demanding compensation for actions it took regarding a fire that occurred at 198 Shughart Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania ("Property"), (Complaint'll'l! 5, 21, 26- 3l), The claim against GAB Robins, Count I of the Complaint, alleges that GAB Robins is liable on the theory of promissory estoppel for services Plaintiff performed. (Complaint 'Il'l! 32- 39), Plaintiff alleges that Keystone Fire Restoration ("Keystone") retained Plaintiff to remove clothing and other personal effects from the Property, (Complaint'![ 20), Keystone allegedly represented to Plaintiff that GAB Robins had authorized Keystone to undertake this task. (Complaint'll'l[ 20, 2l). Plaintiff does not claim that it had any contact with GAB Robins prior to undertaking the work or that it relied on any representation made to it by GAB Robins, (See Complaint 'I!'I! 20, 21), Preliminary Obiection Pursuant to Pa, R.C,P, l028(a)(5) l. Count I of Plaintiff s Complaint purports to set forth a cause of action based on promissory estoppel against GAB Robins, (Complaint 'I!'I! 32-39), 2, Plaintiff alleges that GAB Robins authorized Keystone to remove clothing and other personal effects from the property. (Complaint'l!'l! l6,I7, 20, 21), 3, Plaintiff alleges that Keystone then authorized Plaintiff to remove those items, (Complaint 'I! 20), 4. Based on the allegation in the complaint, Keystone Fire Restoration is the party who directly corresponded with and requested Plaintiff to perform the services at issue, (Complaint 'I! 20), 5, Any resolution of this issue will determine the rights and liabilities of Keystone with respect to its relationship with Plaintiff and GAB Robins, 6. Therefore, Keystone is an indispensable party to this lawsuit. WHEREFORE, Defendant GAB Robins requests that this Court dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Pa. R,C.P. 1028(a)(5) for Plaintiffs failure to join an indispensable party. Preliminary Obiection Pursuant to 1028(a)(4) 7. Plaintiff requests relief of $5,093,79 for work it performed based on the theory of promissory estoppel. (Complaint 'I!'I! 26,32-39), -2- 8, Plaintiff furthermore requests storage charges of $800,00 through the date of the filing of the Complaint and additional storage charges of $l 00,00 per month thereafter. (Complaint'll'l! 29, 30, 32-39), 9, Sometime in or about June 2003, approximately three (3) months before any storage charges were incurred, Plaintiff learned that GAB Robins was not accepting any coverage and would not pay, (See Complaint 'll'l! 2l-23, 27, 29, 38). 10, Promissory estoppel, in part, requires reasonable reliance on a representation, ll. Despite being informed that it would not be paid, Plaintiff continued to incur additional storage costs, (Complaint 'II 30). 12. Plaintiff could not reasonably incur and demand payment for additional storage charges that it incurred after it became aware that payment would be denied, WHEREFORE, Defendant GAB Robins requests that this Court dismiss with prejudice any request for storage charges based on Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Pa. R.C,P, 1028(a)(4), Respectfu~lY l;mitt~ Bria p, Downey (PA 5989l) in G, Weber (PA 89266) PEPPER HANIILTON LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Streets Post Office Box ll8l Harrisburg, PA 17108-118l (717) 255-1155 (717) 238-0575 Dated: July 27, 2005 Attorneys for Defendant GAB Robins North America, Inc, -3, CERTIFICATE OF SERVIClf I hereby certify that on July 27, 2005, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on counsel of record by United States mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite l50 Allentown, PA l80l6 Counselfor Plaintiff Todd B, Narvol, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA l7108-0999 Counsel for Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company Brian and Melissa Rhinehart 101 Sycamore Drive Mt. Holly Springs, PA17065 Defendants ~h~ ~Veber (PA 89266) ":".j -<. "" = c..:.:. U' ("d' e;;:: , p,) \..9 o -n .-, -1::"........1 r-d ~::;, ....,..,," '.'jr::.:.: 'C,") :.~,~ -...'"' c') U} IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Plaintiff, v. BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART 101 Sycamore Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, P A 17065 and NO. 04-912 GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 3314 Market Street - Suite 101 Camp Hill, Cumberland County, PA 17011-4464 and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, Huntingdon County, PA 16652-0577 Defendants. PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. FILED IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT BACKGROUND The allegations contained in the "Background" section ofthe Preliminary Objections filed on behalf of Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc. ("GAB") are denied, to the extent they misrepresent or distort the allegations contained in Plaintiff s Complaint, which speaks for itself. S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robin'l- Mutua] Benefit 04_9]2\Answers,po.doc 081605 By way of further response, Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in its Complaint, filed in this case more than sixteen (16) months ago. Plaintiff notes the prejudicially untimely filing of GAB's Preliminary Objections, Preliminarv Obiection Pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1028(a)(5) l-3, Denied, To the extent GAB's allegations attempt to characterize the averments and claims in Plaintiffs Complaint they are denied, since that document speaks for itself, 4, Admitted that Keystone Fire Restoration communicated directly with GAB's representative, as alleged in Plaintiff s Complaint. Any other attempts to characterize the allegations in Plaintiffs Complaint are denied, 5, Denied as conclusions oflaw. To the extent a r'esponse is deemed necessary, the litigation of Plaintiffs claims in this case will not and need not determine the rights andfor liabilities of Keystone Restoration, particularly since Plaintiff has no claims against Keystone, nor does GAB, 6, Denied as conclusions of law. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, Keystone is not an indispensable party, and GAB has filed these extremely untimely Preliminary Objections solely for the purpose of further delaying the scheduling of the arbitration hearing in this case. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc" d/b/a P,ermanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss and deny the Preliminary Objections filed on behalf of Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc, Preliminarv Obiection Pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1028(a)(4) 7-9, Denied. To the extent GAB's allegations attempt to characterize the averments and claims in Plaintiffs Complaint, they are denied, since that document speaks for itself. 2 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart. GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit 04_912\Answcn<,po.doc 081605 lO. Denied as conclusions oflaw, To the extent a rl~sponse is deemed necessary, Plaintiff denies it is not entitled to recover all of the storage charges it seeks in its Complaint, since had it not been for the misrepresentations of GAB's employee-- as alleged in Plaintiff s Complaint-- Plaintiff would not have removed and placed into storage, at its cost and expense, the belongings of GAB's insured, the Rhineharts. II. Admitted that Plaintiff has continued to store the Rhinehart's belongings. Denied that GAB is not and cannot be responsible for those ongoing storage costs, particularly since GAB is the party whose employee's misrepresentations led to the items being placed in storage to begin with, and by refusing to reasonably resolve this matter by paying Plaintiff on its initial Invoices, and leaving Plaintiff in possessions of these items, in Plaintiffs storage facility, GAB continues to be responsible for the storage charges which are accruing, l2. Denied as conclusions oflaw, To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of Defendant, GAB's Preliminary Objections are specifically denied. By way of further response, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference its response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc" dfb/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss and deny the Preliminary Objections filed on behalf of Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S NEW MATTER DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. PURSUANT TO PA. R. CIV. P. 1030 13, Plaintiffs Complaint was filed in this case in early March, 2004, 14. Plaintiffs counsel never granted GAB's counsd a more than sixteen-month extension of time to file a response to Plaintiffs Complaint. 15. In fact, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct copy ofa letter from GAB's counsel to Plaintiffs counsel, dated March l2, 2004-- more than sixteen months before 3 S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins. Mutual Benefit 04_912\Answers,po.doc 081605 GAB filed its meritless Preliminary Objections in this case--, in which GAB's counsel acknowledged and confirmed that he only had an extension of time until April]], 2004 to file a response to Plaintiffs Complaint. 16, The Preliminary Objections filed by GAB's counsel are very untimely, being filed more than l5 months after the deadline by which GAB was to file a response to Plaintiff s Complaint. l7. Neither GAB or its counsel had permission to fiile such untimely Preliminary Objections in response to Plaintiffs Complaint. 18. As far back as January, 2005, GAB's counsel threatened to join Keystone Fire Restoration and/or its principal, William Salamone, as Additional Defendants, (See the January 6, 2005 letter from Plaintiffs counsel to GAB's counsel, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B"). Yet, GAB's counsel dragged its feet and delayed filing these Preliminary Objections until late July, 2005, 19. GAB has known from the outset of this case of the nature ofthe involvement of Keystone Fire Restoration; as such, if GAB felt Keystone was a potentially responsible party, it could have and should have long ago joined Keystone as an Additional Defendant. Plus, the 60- day time period for such a joinder expired more than a year ago. 20, GAB has been dragging its feel in this case from the outset. For example, while Plaintiff promptly served discovery in this case, GAB and its eounsel delayed in answering. (See Plaintiffs counsel's June 19, 2004 letter directed to GAB's counsel, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C"), 21. GAB's Preliminary Objections have been filed solely for the purpose of delay, annoyance and harassment, and to prevent Plaintiff from listin.g this case for an arbitration hearing, 4 S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhineharl- GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit 04-912\Answers.po,doc 081605 22. GAB is now disingenuously attempting to rely on the "indispensable party" argument to try to belatedly drag Keystone Fire Restoration into this case, when GAB and its counsel know full well they have no excuse for their failure to timely join Keystone as an Additional Defendant ifthey thought Keystone had some actionable involvement in this matter (which it doesn't). 23, GAB knows full well that Keystone Fire Restoration has no liability whatsoever in this proceeding to GAB, and furthermore, GAB and its counsel also know-- having been told long ago-- that Plaintiff does not believe it has a claim against Keystone, and that's why Plaintiff has no desire to sue or otherwise drag Keystone into this litigation, 24. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff requests entry of an award of attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 42 Pa, C.S.A, Section 2503(7) and (9), for having to respond to these outrageously untimely and purposefully vexatious Preliminary Objections. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc" dfb/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss and deny the Preliminary Objections filed on behalf of Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc., and Plaintiff also requests entry of an award of attorneys' fees and costs for having to respond to and litigate GAB's meritless Preliminary Objections. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY By: sqUIre 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, in this proceeding, hereby state and certify that on Wednesday, August 17,2005, I served by first-class mail, a true and correct copy of Plaintiff s Answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objections in Response to Plaintiffs Complaint, upon the following: Brian P. Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Stree:ts P.O. Box 1181 Harrisburg, P A l7108-1181 Attorneys for Defendant, GAB Robins North America, Inc, Todd B, Narvol, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, P A l7108-0999 Attorneys for Defendant Mutual Benefit Insurance Company Brian and Melissa Rhinehart 101 Sycamore Drive Mt. Holly Springs, PA l7065 Defendants Date: August 17, 2005 ~~. Pepper Hamilton UP Attomeys at Law 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Marker Smers P.O. Box 1181 Hartisburg, PA 17108-1181 717.255.1155 Fax 717.238.0575 Brian P. Downey direct dial: 717.255.1192 direct fax: 866.422,1305 downey b@pepperlaw.com March 12, 2004 ---- ---~ --- .......... Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire Mill Run Office Center l275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150 Allentown, P A 18106 Re: Ozonics, Inc. v, Rhinehart, GAB Robins North America, Inc" and Mutual Benefit Insurance Company No, 04-912 Civil Term (CCP Cumberland County, PA) Dear Kevin: It was a pleasure to talk to you today regarding this matter. As we agreed, GAB Robins North America, Inc.' s response to plaintiff s complaint will be due on April ll, 2004, thirty (30) days from today, Additionally, I will touch base with you again within the next twenty (20) days regarding the status of this matter. Thank you for your cooperation. Please call me with any questions about this matter. BPD/kjt Ve~rtruly~your5,? -"-"'/-'- ,..' ~"""~ ;:/ <:,"," ....,.. ....) ~p~x -- ,c,....,_...." ) Philadelph.ia Washington, D.C. Deuoit New York Pittsburgh Berwyn Harrisburg Princewn Wilmington www.pepperlaw.com KEVIN T. FOGERTY WILLIAM A. EHRLICH" 'MEMBER OF PA AND NJ BAR LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY MILL RUN OFFICE CENTER 1275 GLENLIVET DRIVE, SUITE 150 ALLENTOWN. PENNSYLVANIA 1810!i 610.366-0950 FAX 61 0.366.0955 E.MAIL KFOGERTY@FOGERTYLAW.COM January 6, 2005 VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL Brian P. Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Streets P. O. Box 1181 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1l81 RE: Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg v. Briau Rhinehart, Melissa Rhinehart, GAB Robins North America, Inc., and Mutual Benefit Insurance Company - Civil Action No. 04-912 (C. C. P. Cumberland) Dear Brian: You have our client's settlement proposal. If you want to spend time and money trying to drag Keystone Fire Restoration and/or Bill Salamone into this case, that's your choice. Since the Plaintiff has no claim against them, that's yOur decision. If you're not going to settle the case, then fine, just tell me and I'll go ahead and schedule the case for arbitration. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other. Very truly yours, Kevin T. Fogerty KTF/rm bpc Mr. Robert Singley S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit 04-912\correspondence\downey.b04.doc KEVIN T. FOGERTY WillIAM A. EHRLICH" 'MEMBER OF PA AND NJ BAR LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY MILL RUN OFFICE CENTER 1275 GlENllVET DRIVE. SUITE 150 AllENTOWN. PENNSYLVANIA 1810Ei 610.366-0950 FAX 610-366-0955 E.MAll KFOGERTY@FOGERTYLAW.COM June 19,2004 VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL Brian P. Downey, Esquire Pepper Hamilton, LLP 200 One Keystone Plaza North Front and Market Streets P.O.BoxI181 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1181 RE: Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg v. Brian Rhinehart, Melissa Rhinehart, GAB Robins North America, Inc., and Mutual Benefit Insurance Company - Civil Action No. 04-912 (C. C. P. Cumberland) Dear Brian: I am still looking for the responses to Plaintiffs discovery requests in this case, Please promptly forward them to me, to avoid the need for me: to file a Motion to Compel. Thank you. Very truly yours, Kevin T. Fogerty KTF/rm bpc Robert Singley S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal,lnc\Rhinebart - GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit 04.912\correspondence\downey.bOl.doc (') ~;; ...., = <:.::::;:. <"., :P- c: C;) ~......, N -0 ::Jl; '-:? Co,' 0> o -n T.':o n'r.~ -OfTl -JY ~~~ I ~~q ~.~f;~ .-i .~ "ll '< nn.ktt\S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit 04-9 I 2\Entry of Judgment.doc IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff, v. NO. 04-912 BRIAN RHINEHART, MELISSA RHINEHART, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendants. NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT To: Brian Rhinehart 138 Old State Road Gardners, P A 17324 Melissa Rhinehart c/o Cumberland County Prison 1101 Claremont Road Carlisle, P A 17013 You are hereby notified that judgment was entered against you in this proceeding in the amount of $8.435.07 on December~, 2005, Enclosed herewith are copies of all documents filed in connection with the entry of that judgment. Cumberland County Prothonotary By IZh~ ./. j This notice is given in compliance with Pa, R. Civ, p, No. 236 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff, v. NO. 04-912 BRIAN RHINEHART, MELISSA RHINEHART, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendants. PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT To the Cumberland County Prothonotary: Please enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg and against Defendants, Brian Rhinehart and Melissa Rhinehart, on Counts II and III of Plaintiffs Complaint, for failure to file a response to Plaintiffs Complaint. Principal Debt (as per Paragraph 31 of Complaint) $5,893,79 Additional Storage Charges (from April, 2004 through December, 2005 as per Paragraphs 30 and 31 of Plaintiff's Complaint) 2,100.00 Accrued interest (6% on base invoice, Paragraph 26 of Complaint of$5,093,79 from July 18,2004 through December 1, 2005)- 441.28 Total $8,435.07 (XX) 1 certify that the foregoing assessment of damages is for specified amounts alleged to be due in the Complaint and is calculable as a sum certain from the Complaint. ( ) Pursuant to Pa, R, C. P. 237 (notice of praecipe for final judgment or decree), I certify that a copy of this Praecipe has been mailed to each other party who has appeared in this action or to hislher Attorney of Record, nn-ktf\S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins ~ Mutual Benefit04-912\Entry of Judgment.doc (XX) Pursuant to Pa. R. C. P. 237.1, I certify that written notice of the intention to file this praecipe was mailed out or delivered to the party against whomjudgrnent is to be entered and hislher Attorney of Record, if any, after the default occurred and at least ten days prior to the date of the filing of this praecipe, and a copy of the notice is attached, LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY Date: December 27, 2005 By Kevin T, Fogert E uire Attorneys for Plamtiff, Ozonics, Inc" d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg Now, December a, 2005, JUDGMENT IS ENTERED AS ABOVE. Cumberland County Prothonotary B, tlvAi;?fLl 2 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND'COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG 5222 TrindIe Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, PAl 7050 Plaintiff, v. BRIAN RHINEHART and MELISSA RHINEHART 101 Sycamore Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, PA 17065 and NO. 04-912 GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 3314 Market Street - Suite 101 Camp Hill, Cumberland County, PA 17011-4464 and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, Huntingdon County, PA 16652-0577 Defendants. IMPORTANT NOTICE Date of Notice: August 16,2004 To: Brian Rhinehart 138 Old State Road Gardners, P A 17324 Melissa Rhinehart c/o Cumberland County Prison 1101 Claremont Road Carlisle, P A 17013 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU, UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE TO A LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP: Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Telephone: 800-990-9108 LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY B :, Kevin T. Fogerty, Attorneys for Plai 'f, Ozonics, Inc., d,b,a, Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg BY CERTIFIED MAIURETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS MAIL 2 nn-ktf\S:\current\Pennanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit 04-912\Entry of Judgment.doc IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff, v. NO. 04-912 BRIAN RHINEHART, MELISSA RHINEHART, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendants. CERTIFICATION OF PLAINTIFF'S AND DEFENDANTS' ADDRESSES I hereby certify that Plaintiff s address is as follows: Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg 5222 Trindle Road, Suite D Mechanicsburg, P A 17050 I hereby certify that Defendants' last known addresses are as follows: Brian Rhinehart 138 Old State Road Gardners, P A 17324 Melissa Rhinehart c/o Cumberland County Prison 1101 Claremont Road Carlisle, P A 17013 GAB Robins North America, Inc. 3314 Market Street - Suite 101 Camp Hill, PA 17011-4464 Mutual Benefit Insurance Company 409 Penn Street Huntingdon, PA 16652-0577 Date: December 27, 2005 qg.~ "'" nn-ktf\S:\current\Permanent Odor Removal, Inc\Rhinehart - GAB Robins - Mutual Benefit04-912\Entry of Judgment.doc . ' IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plain tiff, v. NO. 04-912 BRIAN RHINEHART, MELISSA RHINEHART, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendants. AFFIDAVIT OF NON-MILITARY SERVICE The undersigned, Kevin T, Fogerty, Esquire, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the attorney for Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg, in the above captioned matter, that Defendants, Brian Rhinehart, Melissa Rhinehart, GAB Robins North America, Inc., and Mutual Benefit Insurance Company, are not active members of the military of the United States of America or its allies, and hence are not entitled to relief under the provisions of the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act of 1940,50 U, S, C, A. 9520, Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2ib day of December, 2005, Date: December 27,2005 Not NOTARIAL SEAl. KAREN Cl'lMER Notary PublIc: AlLENTOWN CllY. lEIIIGH COUNlY My Commlulon ExP4fea Sep 1, 2008 I G ~ P' ~ \lJ r: ;::)0 1t-~ -- --D Vl ~ ~ ~ ...c:: ?v --- r , i \ \ --- ~-'''-~:~-~,<., 4 ... ...~",.",,_.,_._-t I \ I ~:~J C_'l r'~:! I,'i C~ h) \..0 o "11 ,..., :L"., n'I:::::: 1-;"1 <.:J .- (" ....;:J _.~~ :i_~ C) .,i! r~:) ,...) -:'.; ~L7 -< IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL ACTION - LAW OZONICS, INC., d/b/a PERMANENT ODOR REMOVAL OF HARRISBURG Plaintiff, v. NO. 04-912 BRIAN RHINEHART, MELISSA RHINEHART, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., and MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendants. PRAECIPE FOR PARTIAL DISCONTINUANCE TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY: You are hereby requested and directed to enter, as indicated, the following on the records thereof: The within suit is Settled, Discontinued, Ended and costs paid, The within suit is Settled, Discontinued, Ended, WITH PREJUDICE and costs paid, but only as to Defendants, GAB Robins North America, Inc" and Mutual Benefit Insurance X Company. The within suit is Settled, Discontinued, Ended, WITHOUT PREJUDICE and costs paid, Satisfaction of the Award in the within suit is acknowledged, Satisfaction of Judgment, with interest and costs, in the within matter is acknowledged, LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T, FOGERTY Date: December 27, 2005 By: Kevin T. Fogert ,E Attorneys for Pl 'n!" , zonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg ., . COST PAYMENT VERIFICATION I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ABOVE ACTION CANNOT BE FILED AND DOCKETED UNTIL ALL COSTS HAVE BEEN PAID, INCLUDING SHERIFF'S COSTS; AND I HEREBY VERIFY THAT ALL COSTS HAVE BEEN PAID. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENAL TIES OF 18 Pa. C. S. SECTION 4904 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY ~ By:'- Kevin T. Foge squire Attorneys for Plaintiff, Ozonics, Inc., d/b/a Permanent Odor Removal of Harrisburg -- ..~--