HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-4381IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, NO. ?3?d/ Cl
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT CONDEMNATION PETITION AND BOND
To: Kathryn M. Shover
123 Ladnor Lane
Carlisle, PA 17013
Pursuant to and in accordance with the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988,
Act of December 21, 1988 (P.L. 1444 No. 177(g)(2)(ii)), YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that
the attached Petition has been filed with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and that if you do
not file an Answer or Objections thereto, WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF
THIS PETITION UPON YOU, UGI Utilities, Inc., by and through its counsel, will file a Motion
with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and present it to the Court for approval, seeking
entry of an Order in the form attached as Exhibit "C" to UGI's Petition, directing the filing of
UGI's original Bond.
Kevin T. Foge quire
Attorney for Inc.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT ;
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, NO. 4 1-13 ?? Cal
?INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
PETITION FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER FOR FILING CONDEMNATION BOND
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, UGI UTILITIES, INC., by and through its attorney,
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esquire, and respectfully petitions this Honorable Court as follows:
1. The Petitioner, UGI UTILITIES INC. ("UGI"), is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and is principally engaged in the
business of producing, purchasing, storing, transporting and distributing natural gas. The
Petitioner maintains its principal office and place of business in Valley Forge, Montgomery
County, Pennsylvania, and has as its mailing address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
2. The Petitioner, a public utility, by virtue of the power of eminent domain as
provided in the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988, 15 P. S. Section 1511, and by
resolution duly adopted by the Executive Committee of its Board of Directors on July 8, 2008, as
evidenced by the Secretary's Certificate attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A," has
determined and concluded to enter upon, take and appropriate for a public purpose, an easement
and right of way over and upon a certain parcel of land located in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County, PA, by route surveyed and located-- as per the plan drawings attached as
Exhibit "A" to the Condemnation Bond attached hereto as Exhibit `B"--, for the purposes of
-S:ku t\-Agixshovmkonden flan fomn.dm
constructing, operating, maintaining, replacing and changing a pipeline for the transportation,
transmission and distribution of natural gas with the right in said company, its successors and
assigns to enter upon such easement and/or right of way at such times as may be fit and
necessary for said purposes.
3. Petitioner believes and avers that the only person or entity having an ownership
interest in the property being condemned is the legal and equitable titleholder, Kathryn M.
Shover, being referred to herein as "the Owner." Petitioner alleges and avers that the aforesaid
Owner holds legal title to this property by virtue of a Deed recorded at the Cumberland County
Recorder of Deeds Office, at Deed Book Volume E24, Page 107 (the co-grantee on that Deed,
Ted R. Shover, having passed away, as a result of which sole title to the premises at issue passed
to the Owner).
4. Since in or about February, 2008, the Petitioner, through its agents and
employees, has attempted to secure an agreement for a pipeline easement and right of way over
and through the subject parcel of land from the Owner referenced in Paragraph 3 hereinabove.
In that respect, the Petitioner has attempted to contact the Owner to try and agree as to the
damages properly payable, but to date has been unable to do so for the purpose of entering into
an agreement/contract for such easement and right of way; hence, the Petitioner and the Owner
have not agreed upon reasonable compensation to be paid therefor and to affix the amount of
damages, if any, which would be occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right of way
and the construction of said pipeline.
5. A copy of the Bond of the Petitioner with Safeco Insurance Company of America,
a surety authorized to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which is conditioned
2
rr SAk ntWgikho-\conde tion f-Am
for the payment of all damages arising from the appropriation of said easement and right of way
and the location and construction of the pipeline on the aforesaid parcel of land of the Owner
referenced in Paragraph 3 hereinabove, the original of which is to be presented to this Court, is
attached hereto as Exhibit "B." It is pursuant to this Bond that title to the aforesaid easement and
right of way will pass to the Petitioner, with the attendant right of possession for purposes of its
easement, right of way, and installation of its pipeline.
6. This Petition and the proposed Order seeking approval and directing the filing of
the related Bond, will be presented for approval to the Cumberland County Court of Common
Pleas upon expiration of the ten-day response period set forth in 15 Pa. C. S. A. Section
1511(g)(2)(ii).
WHEREFORE, UGI UTILITIES, INC., respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter
an Order approving the form and substance of the Bond attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and
ordering that said Bond be filed with the Cumberland County Prothonotary.
LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY
By
Kevin T. Foge uire
Attorney for Pe itioner
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Mill Run Office Center
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
610-366-0950
PA Supreme Ct. No. 36667
3
EXHIBIT A
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
SECRETARY'S CERTIFICATE
The undersigned certifies that:
1. She is the duly elected and acting Secretary of UGI Utilities, Inc., a Pennsylvania
corporation (the "Company"), and as such is authorized to execute and deliver this Certificate on
behalf of the Company.
2. Below is a true and correct copy of resolutions duly adopted by the Executive Committee
of the Board of Directors of the Company by unanimous consent dated July 8, 2008:
RESOLVED, the exercise by the Company of its right of eminent
domain as set forth in 15 Pa. C. S. A. Section 1511 as that provision applies to
acquisition of easements and rights of way with respect to the acquisition of
an easement and right of way, and the placement therein of one or more gas
distribution lines, in South Middleton Township, Cumberland County, PA, is
approved.
RESOLVED, any officer of the Company is authorized to execute and
deliver such other agreements, certificates, consents, corporate papers and
other documents, make any payments and take all other action, including
without limitation, exercise of the Company's power of eminent domain as
stated above, that such officer and counsel for the Company may deem
necessary or desirable to carry out the intent and purposes of the foregoing
resolution, including without limitation, the preparation and filing of
Petitions for Approval and Order for Filing Bond, and related Bonds,
relative to the acquisition of any and all easements and rights-of-way in
and/or across certain parcels of land along the route of the aforesaid project,
including but not limited to properties owned by Kathryn M. Shover.
3. These resolutions have not been amended modified or rescinded and remain in full force and
effect on the date of this certificate.
Date: July 16, 2008
[Corporate Seal] ?L,
Margaret . Calabrese
EXHIBIT B
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVII, ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT :
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF : NO.
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
BOND FOR DAMAGES UNDER RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that UGI UTILITIES, INC., a Pennsylvania
corporation, having its principal offices located in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, PA 19482
(hereinafter "Principal" or "Condemnor") and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA (hereinafter "Surety"), a corporation duly authorized under the laws of the State of
Washington, are held and firmly bound unto THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
for the use of Kathryn M. Shover, (hereinafter "Owner/Obligee"), in such sum or sums as the
said Owner/Obligee shall be entitled to receive as damages by reason of the appropriation of a
right-of-way and easement for the purposes of construction, operation, maintenance, replacement
and changing the size of one or more pipelines for the transmission and distribution of natural
gas, and the construction over the property hereinafter described, when said damages shall have
been agreed upon by the parties or shall have been legally awarded to said Owner/Obligee, with
interest and costs, if any may be legally due, for which said Principal is liable, to be made to said
Owner/Obligee, or his/her attorneys, successors and assigns, to whom payment well and truly to
be made by UGI UTILITIES, INC., Principal, and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
Slewsm?eamgim fhmudoc
AMERICA, Surety, and each of them bind themselves, their successors and assigns, firmly by
these presents.
Witness the corporate seal of UGI UTILITIES, INC., by the hand of its Vice President -
Law, attested by its Secretary, and the corporate seal of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA, Surety, by the hand of its Attorney-in-Fact on this 8th day of July 2008.
WHEREAS, UGI UTILITIES, INC., under lawful authority is about to enter upon land in
which the Owner/Obligee has ownership interests and/or rights, to construct a pipeline, together
with such related equipment and structures as may be required for the transmission of natural gas
over and upon said certain land of the Owner/Obligee, situated in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County, PA (with said parcel of land hereinafter being referred to as "the
Premises"), and with the subject easement and right of way being herein taken and condemned
being as depicted on the plan drawings attached hereto as Exhibit "A." The easement herein
condemned by the Condemnor/Principal shall not interfere with said Owner's/Obligee's use and
enjoyment of said Premises except for the purposes of said pipeline, except that no buildings or
permanent non-movable structures shall be placed or erected by the Owner/Obligee or any other
persons on or above the surface of the land encompassed by this easement and right of way.
NOW, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above-bound
UGI UTILITIES, INC., its successors or assigns, or the said SAFECO INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA, Surety, its successors or assigns, or either of them, do and shall
well and truly pay, or cause to be paid unto the said Owner/Obligee, his/her attorneys, successors
or assigns, the damages he/she may sustain by reason of the appropriation of the pipeline right-
2
fh cdec
of-way and easement and the construction of the pipeline over the property herein described,
when damages shall be agreed upon by the parties, or shall have been legally awarded to said
Owner/Obligee, with interest and costs, if any may be due, for which said Principal is liable, then
this obligation is to be void; otherwise, to be and remain in full force and effect.
T: UGI UTILITIES, IN
/0-
By-
Secrot ice P ' dent - Law
(Corporate Seal)
In the presence of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
„Q AMERICA
By: c
itnes to Surety Mau een McNeill
Eliza Marrero Attorney-in-Fact
3
(-f -c 7i
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS:
POWER Safeco insurance companies
OF ATTORNEY PO. Box 34526
Seattle, WA 98124-1526
No. 5014
--------------
That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, each
Washington corporation, does each hereby appoint
*******************SANDRA E. BRONSON; RICHARD A. JACOBUS; ANNETTE M. LEUSCHNER; MAUREEN MCNEILL;
MARY C. O'LEARY; NANCY K WALLACE; DOUGLAS R. WHEELER; DARELLA E. WHITE; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania"
its true and (awful attorney(s)-in-fact, wft h full authority to execute on its behalf fiderdy and surety bonds Or undertaNngs
documents of a ekn4w character issued in the course of Its business, and to bind the respective company thereby. and other
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA have. each executed and attested these presents
3rd day of January 2006
,
-------------------
?fidtltcl ,??,i
CERTIFICATE
Extract from the BY-Laws of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA.
'A
sftorne? rticle President Section 13. - FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS _. the Prat any Vice President, the Secretary. and any Assistant Vice
or unfor der Mgt o purpose by the Vfts officer In
with aeschargetwrftY to to surety operations, shall each have authority other documents of sdrihtar chaff byby the execute on behalf of the company adift and b ty bonds as
such app . the signatures may be atfllcadcon?ny the course of.lks business... On any Mstrwnent or bonds and
undertaking of the company. the seal. or a f affixed b ftcc.?srrriile. On any instrument conferring such authority a? evide
n 9
Provided. however, ttsat the seal shad not be necessary to
#W90. may the validity of impressed or affixed o or in any other mariner re?Ixouced
dY ar>yrsuch Instrument eeant or undertaking
Exhact from a Resolution of the
and of GENERAL Board Of Directors of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF. AMERICA
INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA adapted dtdy 28, 1970. -On anyr tiGcete executed by the Secretary or on assistarhti secretary of the Company setting out.
The provision's Of Article V. Section 13 of the fjyUws, and
(s) A
Cw" Dopy of the powerof-attorney appointment executed pursuant thereto, and
the sig Wre Ihat said power-of4 ttorriey appointment is in fur force and effect,
of #0 oertifytng officer may be by facsirrhle, and the seal of the Company may be a fac elmife thereof.-
1,
COMPANY OF. Stephanie Dft Watson ... , Secretary of SAFEiCO INSURANCE COMPANY OF. AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE
these corporations,, and Of a Pie of certify ffo that the foregoing extracts Of to Bylaws and of a Resolution Of to Board of Directors
and the Power of Atorney are SM in full found eIssued fec f,pursuarht thereto, are. true and correct, and that both the. BY-Laws, the. Resolution
IN WITNESS. WHEREOF, I h70r=day he. hcsimile. seat of said corporation
this of
.. 4Lb4
AP114 t/ W,,t /
STEPHANIE DALEY•WATSON, SECRETARY
Sarew® and the Safeco 1090 are registered. trademarks of Safeco Corporation.
8.0974/DS 4/05
WEB POF
Minsurame
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
FINANCIAL STATF MNT -DECEMFR 31, 2407
Assets
Csah and Hank Deposits......».»..»......»..»..»,».... , S 53,483,126
*Bonds-U.S Ciovermnent....................................... 16,728p67
*Odur onds_....»..»..»..».....,....»..».....»....».. ,. 2,478,711,287
*Stodrs......»..».....»..»..»......»........, ..».,»..»......». 499,235034
Real Estate..»..........»..»....»..»..».»......»..........»...... 0
Agents' Balances or Uncooliedal 625,553,621
Acc uedlate t aadRetsts»... ,.»..»..»..»..».»....... 33,936,490
OdwAdmitted Asrets....».»..»..»..»..........»..»..»..» X9 jSq ass
TOMAdnOteAAsaets....?..,..,......»........... jj=
UstbMties
Unearned Pteminms?._..»..»......»........»..».....».... $ X28,534.002
Reserve ford aims and Claim F.Vanse »..»........... .1,360,913.9so
Funds 13dd Under Reinsurance Trestles .»............ 430.979
Reserve for Dividands to Pdicyhdders»..... »..».......... 2,421,611
Additiand 9htutoty Reserve......................
Reserve for CamadvaltaK Tan and
Otherliabilities.....»..«..».»..«..»..«......»..»... 9';K'LC A41
Tobsl ..w.........?.?.?....................?..»..».... 53,x,637,423
Special Surplus Funds. ..».». $ 226,334
Paaidin s,a?,ta.....»..»....tl.,........275Ao2,873
Uneseigned sutph„s..».....»...,... -ULM V-
Ssuplus to PelcybAders................„......, as :amss.
T*w Lisbnwta awed tbs.......-.........._...... AjAjZjdLW
* Bonds are shred at amattiud or investment value; Simko at Association Markel Values.
Seam" curried of $124,368,976 are depodted m reopired by law
1, MM MMOLATEWSEI, Seder Vice-Preddent of SAFECO hnugance
true. and correct statement of the Assets and Liabilities of said C ? ?' do hereby oacti>ay that the foregoing is a
bdic£ aon, as of Deoeffier 31, 2007, to the best of my knowledge and
w WTIT m WMMwF, I have heramto set my hand and shred the Best of said Corporation at Sesttle, Wad*q$omi, this lot day of
March, 2008.
•
]boo --A
Senior Vice-Presidit
S-1262136
•A nand t?muk of S?fECO
EXHIBIT A
ww m
N? I 1 tvm
>j
,?
QSA P " /% ? ?y ?-?u; ALd3dOed r^ a a .. ? 7l
3VIlyJ1 h%r % " r I !y
IE
LL+ I
6?ND I ?' ; 1 ?-!
?. - ? .
II
PH.
I Q z J' I N Q O?
t 1 n I All o
' z ° C.l Z
t 1
1 0 ? I ?? ? ? W
t
oy
I i ?' W I ? ~ 9 V
c I v W? ((1 I ? W ti FZ- 41 U
^?s? ' ?? 1 fwll¢?06 QC
? Z
wo 3 ? ? a ' Q, '? W
1? o i Fr
+ d' Q a
? N m
IY z ? ' ~ a
n ? Q pC
+ ? 1 O O
1 1
r I q s
O 1
1
?? 1 ILL ' I
I? >L2 1 i ? + ' 1
+ 1 ? + yt 1
t tF ' + tli?i
p z t +
1 {Y a I t+ I 't
-. ' 1 + 1 11
I +I r111
I i I r •t t
' 'r r
I 1 1r
t I ,t
I +
•\ ?? • i i 3N77HJ1 VM +
1 I
---------
,yc } a z NMpLn0, DN2
?''• /' ; 1 NN6cs00
(n N O)Ln OOV NOQ QUO
c I I
W wW W W 33333
102Q3 r,N NGI N
/ ?I,t?'r•,•'`E 3?" tg7 Z H OI N m l0 v+ O ., to m
_.Iyfl??E?? E65' 'Sy Q^OCpOtp lily O?'!O
OE "roE"t`"2 W 01mO2ID M(0InO M
mzc?onzaicmi?c°n2zv?niz
[p
w?-INMCU?cp^wrno
N J J J J J J J J J J
J
-? 9002 - 62 0?0'9L00-9%tu1[d\9tlt[I993.110CN m puvl? 49 - - ]vi M1,1110 I911 9L00-B9\9902\910Y'Md\:z :3ltd
W ?OmmlD mO mromn
Q
H
mW
r M 6
Mg
? e
? N
? N
p o '
U •• Z
Z W
a? o¢
aN v a
1 i ? Z? M 4
J ?
~ ? W V
1 1 , g = ? zz
1 ? VI 2 ? -? ? [V!7 I
I 1 ? oo Q ? ? W
pp : F r' E260
,? 1 i I IC a ? 2?,0
0 1 1 ? ?
N? 1
lSyy?yy I Q a?
ff?fZQQQI y?yy'?? 1 f ' L t l
j?'?2d2W 1 ? ? ?9
pt?? 1 1 a??P V
1
1 i
40
m
a?ip
U O tn O Ot N O N W n ?
Z O Q O U? n O n ?? (0 4)
u> m rn o n o m m n Q ?n
H n Q N n n Cu Q N
W i W 3 W it 3 W 3 W
N W n m h m l? m n aD
z m N Q O in o in o Q N
''+ co m Q to Q U? Q ? Q m
Q ;u c.+? o ci? ;u m ;u
? m o N m in m ? m N o
m ? ? O o 2
tn t
n c
n c
i? [[
n ai Z Z 2
lu n N m Q ? ?D n f70 0 o
Z J J J J J J J J J '+
J
H
J H?
warz <i llooi •an bZ am-glpp'gp?aagl?911S11I1tl3! 10Ql13d m Ovel? 19 aJld - •JII 53ilIllt/i [9I1 9L00-B01Kb2\SLTN't1tlA\ Y :3lii
EXHIBIT C
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
NO.
ORDER
AND NOW, this day of
2008, upon consideration of the Motion
for Entry of Order Approving Filing of Condemnation Bond, and it being established that the
ten-day response period under 15 Pa. C. S. A. 1511(g) has passed without the filing of any
objections or other response to UGI's Condemnation Petition which was served on Condemnee,
Kathryn M. Shover,
IT IS ORDERED that said Motion is GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that UGI Utilities, Inc., be and is hereby authorized to and
directed to file its Condemnation Bond with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and that the
amount of security provided in and by that Bond is hereby approved by this Court.
BY THE COURT:
J.
VERIFICATION
I, Thomas M. Jackal, hereby state and verify that I am the Vice President - Law of UGI
Utilities, Inc., that I am authorized to take this Verification on behalf of said Petitioner, and that
the facts set forth in the foregoing Petition are true and correct, partly upon personal knowledge,
the remainder upon information and belief.
I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S.
A. Section 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities.
Dat , 2008
omas M ckal
Vice President - Law
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Q
C7 N
c-a
(
Ai
Z? -iry
i
1,k
?t?
Q
? ?o
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF NO. l 3 ??
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
The undersigned, Brian K. Shomper, being an adult individual, does hereby swear and
affirm that on Tue,
, July 22 , 2008, at approximately 11',10 q m, I did serve a true
and correct copy of the Petition for Approval and Order for Filing Condemnation Bond filed in
this case on Kathryn M. Shover, at her residence located at 123 Ladnor Lane, Carlisle, PA
17013, by hand delivery to Kathryn M. Shover.
Brian K. Shomper
Sworn to and subscribed
before me this aa"?-a day of
July, 2008.
- 1? L -,a"
o ary Publi
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Notarial.Seal
Joanne B. Archlield, Notary Public
City Of Harrisburg, Dauphin County
My Commission Fires Dec. 19, 2010
Member, Pennsylvania Association of Notarise
TJ ; ?'7
CZ)
C?o
James D. Hughes, Esquire
Attorney ID # 58884
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY
ACROSS LANDS OF KATHRYN M.
SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, INC.,
FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
Attorneys for Kathryn M. Shover
Private Landowner and Condemnee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
q3S I
CIVIL NO: 2008.4391-
PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
BY KATHRYN M. SHOVER, LANDOWNER
AND NOW, comes the private landowner, Kathryn M. Shover, by and through her
attorneys, SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C., and petitions this court injunctive relief averring as
follows:
PARTIES
1. The Condemnor is UGI Utilities, INC ("UGI" ), a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, maintaining its principal office
and place of business in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, and has as its mailing
address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
2. The landowner is, Kathryn M. Shover ("Owner"), an adult individual residing at
123 Ladnor Drive, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, and is the legal and equitable title holder to a
certain parcel of land located in South Middleton Township, Cumberland County, upon which
UGI desires to enter upon, take and appropriate an easement and right-of-way.
FACTS
3. On July 22, 2008, UGI filed a NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT
CONDEMNATION PETITION AND BOND, along with a PETITION FOR APPROVAL AND
ORDER FOR FILING CONDEMNATION BOND with this court at Docket No: 2008-4381
Civil as referenced above.
4. In its Petition, UGI alleged that it is principally engaged in the business of
producing, purchasing, storing, transporting and distributing natural gas.
5. In its Petition, UGI alleges that as a public utility, and by virtue of the power of
eminentdomain as provided in the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988, 15 P.S.
Section 1511, and by resolution duly adopted by the Executive Committee of its Board of
Directors, has determined and concluded to enter upon, take and appropriate for a public
purpose, an easement and right-of-way over and upon a certain parcel of land located in South
Middleton Township, Cumberland County, PA (the "Property"), by route surveyed and located
as per the plan drawings attached to UGI's Condemnation Bond, and attached hereto as Exhibit
"A", for the purposes of constructing, operating, maintaining, replacing and changing a pipeline
for the transportation, transmission and distribution of natural gas.
6. Owner is, as alleged by UGI, the only person or entity having an ownership
interest in the Property, and is the legal and equitable titleholder to the Property by virtue of a
Deed recorded at the Cumberland County Recorder of Deeds Office at Deed Book Volume E24,
Page 107.
2
7. In its Petition, UGI alleges that since February of 2008, UGI has attempted to
secure an agreement for a pipeline easement and right-of-way over and through the Property
from the Owner.
8. In its Petition, UGI alleges that UGI has attempted to contact the Owner to try and
agree as to the damages properly payable, but to date has been unable to do so for the purpose of
entering into an agreement for such easement and right-of-way, and therefore, UGI and the
Owner have not agreed upon reasonable compensation to be paid for damages which would be
occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right-of way and the construction of said
pipeline.
COUNTI
PRAYER FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth.
10. UGI is proceeding with this condemnation pursuant to the Pennsylvania Business
Corporation Law at 15 P.S. Section 1511.
11. Owner's proper course of action to respond to UGI's Petition is to proceed in
equity and request injunctive relief. See In Re Carnegie Natural Gas Company, 157 Pa. Commw.
217, 629 A.2d 256 (1993). See also 6 Summ. Pa. Jur. 2d Section 11:135 (2008).
12. The requested relief is necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable harm, and,
greater harm may result by refusing the requested relief as opposed to granting it.
13. The requested relief will maintain the status quo as it exists, and, the activity
sought to be restrained is properly the subject of the relief requested. Furthermore, the relief
requested is reasonably suited to abate such activity.
3
14. UGI has not been properly granted the power of eminent domain, and/or UGI is
improperly exercising its power of eminent domain to acquire the proposed easement and right-
of-way across the Property of the Owner.
15. Owner has not yet been given the opportunity to be heard with regard to the
relevant and material issues regarding the proposed condemnation and taking, and Owner has
therefore been denied Owner's due process rights.
16. The actions of UGI regarding the proposed condemnation and taking of portions
of the Property for the placement and maintenance of the proposed natural gas pipeline will not
serve a public purpose.
17. The actions taken by UGI regarding locating the proposed natural gas pipeline on
the Owner's Property were arbitrary and capricious.
18. The location and the width of the proposed condemnation and taking for the
proposed natural gas pipeline are overly broad in scope and unnecessary.
19. The amount of reasonable compensation to be paid by UGI to the Owner for the
damages that would be occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right-of-way; and the
location and construction of said pipeline have not been determined nor agreed upon.
20. The Bond attached to UGI's petition is insufficient to cover the amount of
reasonable compensation necessary to reimburse the Owner for the damages that would be
occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right-of-way; and the location and
construction of said pipeline.
21. The amount of reasonable compensation to be paid by UGI to the Owner for the
damages that would be occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right-of-way; and the
4
location and construction of said pipeline must be determined by this court after a hearing on the
matter.
22. The Owner of Property raises meritorious and material questions regarding the
scope and validity of the proposed condemnation and the requested taking of the easement and
right-of-way over the Owner's Property.
WHEREFORE, landowner Kathryn M. Shover respectfully requests that this honorable
court issue a preliminary injunction enjoining UGI from proceeding with its Notice of Intent to
Present Condemnation Petition and Bond and its Petition for Approval and Order Filing
Condemnation Bond until such time as Kathryn M. Shover is afforded her due process rights and
until such time as this matter can be fully heard on its merits.
Respectfully Submitted,
HUGHES, P
Dated: d?
J,xhles D.-H es squire
Attorne ID 58884
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
Attorneys for landowner Kathryn M. Shover
5
VERIFICATION
I, Kathryn M. Shover, hereby certify that the facts set forth in the foregoing petition
Injunctive Relief by Kathryn M. Shover are true and correct to the best
information and belief, and that false statements herein of my knowledge,
are made subject to the penalties of 18
Pa.C.S.A. §4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities.
Date:
Kathryn M. over
EXHIBIT "A"
I
x
cc
to
31
,zi
I
psi
;o 0 0
6
N
file
tj;v ?,
a
3Vjyr?1?
W-, wi
?
1 el.
, A?
em'',
aIIN i
low-
QZ? ? ? , f
T i
a
r
R=
a
? m
I la-.
? r
I
a
V ?s
i
!
Y
a
iz-14
?sN^
a
a
s
,
`b
A v`1
`! I
!
t !
[ t j1
.
LIJ
n
ry
2
N
i ti O l? f
? N of
? Q
toWL,
t (a N
a
V t
Z
i
2 0)
Ofr
cc
m61fh0
O
2
R
m
U ^ ?
Q 4
?p4
gill
a Y?
hill
9 s?
c ?
? 3 I
[o N
d °o
i
v °o
9 2
Z ?
? W
03
a ? ? o a
2 Q
W ? JW CO) f
O ?1 m
N
y
ti Z
O p
v
IIW2II;1 °0°'' ,
?? lalN]m m Rei.?Tn] 1II X
x.t c,unun [an stop-aa?aaoa?a.]arau?x ?ixa
i
II
o'
loll Z
a
K
4
N
r?
l
?bi
?p
a
Q
z
L
co
?0 A9:
40
Pb A
P
kdm;, •.. v.
i
a
e ?
I N
a o°
? N
y? 2 g
aT V,• wwW
y
4 ? ? `1 Y
ti V J U
lU YOa2 Qz
Wo??W yF
p qo a
~ N to
?Lq aft
O D
100My 03 p1°1 '?°'"? if i•ne - ]ar 'a?I!ltiN [art 9[0p-b\
+oma 3w-w x :ittf
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this 1st day of August, 2008, I, Scott B. Granger, Esquire, hereby certify
that I served a copy of the within PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BY KATHRYN M.
SHOVER, LANDOWNER this day by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage
prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed to:
Kevin Fogerty, Esquire
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Mill Run Office Center
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite. 150
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18106
Attorney for UGI
AttorneYID #58884
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
Attorneys for Kathryn M. Shover, Landowner
' j 71
.,..
., .1
4
ti?
r ? `S
I
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY
ACROSS LANDS OF KATHRYN M.
SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, INC.,
FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
X1351
CIVIL NO: 2008
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
AND NOW, this S` day of 2008, upon consideration of the
PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BY KATHRYN M. SHOVERS, it is hereby
ORDERED that:
(1) A rule is issued upon the non-moving party to show cause why the petitioner is
not entitled to the relief requested;
(2) The non-moving party shall file an answer to the petition within z c, days of
this date;
(3) The motion/petition shall be decided under Pa.R.C.P. No. 206.7;
(4) A hearing on disputed issues and disputed material fact shall be held on the
Z,,& day of 2008, at Q . 3 d R M before the undersigned Judge in the
Cumberland County Courthouse, R m
1
{ h 1 j 7?")r"t
s :z !,r ? s` 9. nv B oy
2 Hi ?r i
(5) All proceedings shall stay in the meantime;
(6) Notice of the entry of this Rule/Order shall be provided to all parties.
BY THE COURT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF NO. 4381
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
MOTION OF UGI UTILITIES INC. FOR EXPEDITED
HEARING AND CONSIDERATION RE PETITION OF UGI
UTILITIES. INC. FOR FILING CONDEMNATION BOND
AND NOW, comes undersigned counsel for UGI Utilities, Inc., and respectfully moves
this Honorable Court based upon the following:
This civil action is an underground gas distribution line easement condemnation
proceeding instituted by UGI Utilities, Inc. ("UGI").
2. The Condemnee/Property Owner in this case, Kathryn M. Shover, is one of five
property owners across whose land UGI must run its gas distribution line in order to provide
sufficient service capability (this is a pressure reinforcement project) for this coming winter.
3. UGI has reached or is very close to reaching agreement with the other three
landowners (Land O'Lakes, Marhefka, Morret and the South Middleton School District) to gain
access to their properties to install its gas distribution line.
4. UGI attempted to negotiate a right-of-way/easement with the Condemnee, but
was met with considerable delays and frustration, as a result of which it filed its Condemnation
Petition on July 22, 2008, a copy of that Petition being served on the Condemnee on that same
date.
1:ku-1kugi\sh-erUlm- fix Fxpvlifod Bearing m
5. On Friday, August 1, 2008, the Condemnee's counsel, Scott B. Granger, Esquire,
filed a document titled "Petition for Injunctive Relief by Kathryn M. Shover, Landowner, and a
related Rule to Show Cause.
6. The injunction Petition filed by Condemnee's counsel is based on boilerplate
legal-conclusion averments, and also seeks to challenge UGI's decision to locate its gas facilities
on the Condemnee's property.
7. For example, Condemnee alleges that UGI's gas distribution line "will not serve a
public purpose" (Injunction Petition, Paragraph 16, which is completely false, as this line is
necessary to provide reinforced service capacity for the coming winter, for businesses and
residences served by UGI).
In that regard, Pennsylvania case authority supports a far more expansive view of
what qualifies as a "public purpose," than the Condemnee implies. See e.g. Carnegie Natural
Gas Company v. Keener, 157 Pa. Commw. 217, 222, 629 A.2d 256, 259 (1993) (because service
to the prison is a `use to benefit the public,' and because the gas distribution line for which
Carnegie condemned the easement would serve not only the prison (22% of the capacity of that
line) but also the general public," the condemnation "is for a public purpose and complies with
the constitutional and statutory requirements for a condemnation by a public utility"); Borough
of Big Run v. Shaw 16 Pa. Commw. 623, 626,627, 330 A.2d 315, 317 (1975)("public use is a
use to benefit the public," which is reflective of the "the modern rule that a use for a public
purpose meets the public use requirement of our state and federal constitutions), and that (taking
by eminent domain does not lose its public character merely because there may exist therein
some feature of private gain, for, if the public good is enhanced, it is immaterial that a private
interest also may be benefited"); Vernocy v. T. W. Phillips Gas and Oil Co., 118 Pa. Commw.
2
ti:kurtumlugi\hovaNlroion 1x Hxpnldnd H=.9A.
370, 545 A.2d 969 (1988), the gas company had signed a contract to provide natural gas to a
cogeneration plant being constructed by Indiana University of Pennsylvania; held, because the
customer was a state-owned educational institution, providing gas to its facilities clearly served a
public purpose.
8. As another example, the Condemnee alleges that UGI's location of its gas line
was "arbitrary and capricious," and that the location and width of the easement "are overly broad
in scope and unnecessary." (Id. Paragraph 18). However, these statements are not true, in that
UGI goes out of its way to minimize the impact on property owners when siting its gas facilities,
and it also attempts to condemn the minimum easement width necessary to install and provide
maintenance and service to its facilities, particularly in compliance with its obligations as a
regulated entity under the Pennsylvania Utility Commission.
It is a well-recognized rule of law in this Commonwealth that when an entity, whether
municipality, administrative body or private corporation, properly exercises the power of
eminent domain granted by the legislature, and follows the appropriate procedure, the courts are
forbidden from interfering with the condemnors' judgment in determining the need for the
condemnation and/or location of the property to be condemned. See Stitt v. Manufacturers'
Light and Heat Company, 432 Pa. 493, 248 A.2d 48 (168); Redevelopment Authority of Erie v.
Owners, 1 Pa. Commw. 378, 274 A.2d 244 (1971).
Further, it is also well-established that the expansion, extension or replacement of a
public utility's facilities lies solely within the discretion of company management, absent a
showing of palpable bad faith or clear abuse of discretion or power. See Eways v. Reading
Parking Authority, 385 Pa. 592, 124 A.2d 92 (1956); Duquesne Light Company v. Upper St.
Clair Township, 377 Pa. 323, 105 A.2d 287 (1954).
3
SALumnl\ugi\ hove Nmtm for Expediled Heanng.du
9. As another example, Condemnee alleges that the Bond attached to UGI's
Condemnation Petition is "insufficient to cover the amount of reasonable compensation
necessary to reimburse [Condemnee] for the damages that would be occasioned by the taking of
said easement and said right-of-way, and the location and construction of said pipeline." (Id.
Paragraph 20). However, this allegation is patently incorrect, and indeed, specious, since UGI's
proposed Condemnation Bond is for an unlimited amount.
10. The Condemnee further alleges that damages payable to Condemnee "by the
taking of said easement and said right-of-way, and the location and construction of said pipeline
must be determined by this Court after a hearing on the matter." (Id. Paragraph 21). However,
this allegation disregards the well-settled law and procedure in this Commonwealth, under the
Pennsylvania Eminent Domain Code, to the effect that damages in an eminent domain
proceeding are taken subsequent to condemnation of the property, and oftentimes subsequent to
installation of the condemnor's facilities, through Board of Viewer proceedings.
11. There is relative urgency to the installation of UGI's facilities for the utility to be
able to meet its obligation to provide adequate gas utility service this coming winter.
12. The rule returnable date for a hearing on the Condemnee's Injunction Petition is
October 1, 2008.
13. UGI is seriously concerned about its ability to meet the deadline for installing its
gas facilities for this winter if the hearing does not take place earlier than that date.
14. UGI greatly respects and understands the Court's busy schedule, and it therefore
would not make this request unless this was truly a situation of relative urgency.
4
S:k,.-1\.gA\ ho ,\MM - fiu E, pedswd I1-g.dlx
15. Further, UGI respectfully brings to this Court's attention that the Condemnee's
Injunction Petition does not contain any truly meritorious challenges to UGI's Condemnation
Petition, particularly considering the heightened standard applicable to challenges to a public
utilities condemnation rights, as well as to the utilities decisions regarding location of its
facilities, and the size of parcels or easements needed to be acquired for those facilities. Indeed,
to prevail in her Injunction Petition, the Condemnee must establish that UGI acted arbitrary and
capriciously in evaluating and adopting the route chosen, the size of the easement, its placement
through Condemnee's property, and the decision to condemn. See Byers v. Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission, 176 Pa. Super. 620, 109 A.2d 232 (1954); (held; a public utility's selection
of a route for its transmission line should not be disturbed unless it is shown that the utility
proposes to exercise its eminent domain power in a wanton or capricious manner, and approval
should not be withheld simply because another route might have been taken which would have
lessened the damage or inconvenience to the protesting land owner); Duquesne Light Company
v. Upper St. Clair Township, supra, 377 Pa. at 338, 105 A.2d at 293-94 (held; a utility
possessing the power of eminent domain may determine the location of land to be acquired and
that decision may not be tampered with by the courts if it is not found to be capricious or
wantonly injurious); Fayette County Commissioners Petition, 289 Pa. 200, 207, 137 A. 237, 240
(1927) ("... [t]he landowner cannot raise the objection that there is no necessity for condemning
the property because some other location might be made." One court has succinctly noted the
sound judicial reasoning behind this rule of law, i.e. if it were otherwise, "... the determination of
the character of pipeline construction would be channeled from utility management to the courts
with resulting chaos." Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. v. Blank, 121 Pitts. L.J. 283, 286
(1973).
5
S:\ 1\ugilchnverUltvim fix Expedited }learing.dix
16. UGI further believes and avers that the Condemnee has filed the Injunction
Petition solely for the purpose of delaying this project, to obtain some perceived leverage in
attempting to force UGI to relocate its facilities, or to extract a greater than fair-value-
compensation payment from UGI.
17. For all the foregoing reasons UGI respectfully requests this Honorable Court
reschedule the hearing on the Condemnee's Injunction Petition to the soonest reasonably
possible date, and in that regard, UGI respectfully advises the Court that the evidentiary hearing
in this matter should not last more than an hour to an hour-and-a-half at most, and further, UGI
would request that the parties be directed to submit Briefs on all relevant legal issues and
standards prior to that hearing, so that this Honorable Court can rule upon conclusion of the
evidence and record.
6
S:\,. Augi\sh-W,xu n for Esprdiwd 11-mg.d-
WHEREFORE, the Condemnor, UGI Utilities, Inc. respectfully requests this
Honorable Court enter an Order rescheduling the injunction hearing in this matter, and directing
the submission of Briefs in advance of that hearing; a proposed form of Order is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A."
Respectfully submitted,
LAW O ICES O V FOGERTY
Date: August 13, 2008 By:
Kevin T. Fogerty e
Attorneys for Coff'sWi
mnor, UGI Utilities,
Inc.
Mill Run Office Center
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
(610) 366-0950
Fax: (610) 366-0955
E-mail: kfo2erth@fogertvlaw.com
PA Supreme Court ID No. 36667
7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Kevin T. Fogerty, Esquire, counsel for Condemnor, UGI Utilities, Inc., in this
proceeding, hereby state and certify that on Wednesday, August 13, 2008, I served by first class
mail, a true and correct copy of the Motion of UGI Utilities, Inc. for Expedited Hearing and
Consideration Re Petition of UGI Utilities, Inc. for Filing Condemnation Bond, upon the
following:
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Salzmann Hughes, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, PA 17015
Counsel for Condemnee, Kathryn M. Shover
Date: August 13, 2008
ONN ?2-
Kevin T. Fogerty, s uire
EXHIBIT A
C?
,
17
_ .
y
?. co
J
AUG 1 5 Z008
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, N0.4381
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
ORDER
AND NOW, thisay of August, 2008, upon consideration of the Motion of UGI
Utilities, Inc. for Expedited Hearing and Consideration Re Petition of UGI Utilities, Inc. for
Filing Condemnation Bond,
IT IS ORDERED that said Motion is GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing scheduled in this matter on the Petition for
Injunctive Relief filed on behalf of the Condemnee, Kathryn M. Shover, is rescheduled to be
held on the L9? ay of A?' 2008 at 16%36 a.m.45-.?, before the undersigned Judge in
the Cumberland County Courthouse, Courtroom No. Y• -
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for each of the parties shall submit a
Memorandum of Law at least two days in advance of that hearing, addressing the applicable
legal issues.
N
?-
`? ?_
??i-Lk i ? r'`'?
L ??
? ? .. A `
r
v
\
.
'
k.r ?
}
y .
.C.....?.
{?Y i.3
?
(^??
?..•'
James D. Hughes, Esquire
Attorney ID # 58884
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
Attorneys for Kathryn M. Shover
Private Landowner and Condemnee
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY
ACROSS LANDS OF KATHRYN M.
SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, INC.,
FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL NO: 2008-4381
HONORABLE KEVIN A. HESS
REPLY TO MOTION OF UGI UTILITIES INC. FOR EXPEDITED HEARING AND
CONSIDERATION RE PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BY KATHRYN M.
SHOVER, LANDOWNER AND PETITION OF UGI UTILITIES FOR FILING
CONDEMNATION BOND
AND NOW, comes the private landowner, Kathryn M. Shover, by and through her
attorneys, SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C., and replies to the motion of UGI Utilities, Inc for an
expedited hearing and consideration averring as follows:
Admitted.
2. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Kathryn M. Shover ("Shover")
is one of five property owners across whose land UGI chose to run its gas distribution line.
However, after reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or information sufficient to
form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments in this paragraph and the same are
therefore denied. It is specifically denied that UGI "must" run its gas distribution line over five
specific properties inferring that it has absolutely no other options. It is also specifically denied
that the gas distribution line is needed "in order" to provide "sufficient" service capabilities for
this coming winter, inferring that without the new gas distribution line UGI would not be able to
service its existing customers. Strict proof of the above is demanded at a Hearing.
3. Denied. After reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in this paragraph and the
same are therefore denied. Strict proof thereof is demanded at a Hearing.
4. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that UGI and Shover entered into
negotiations for a right-of-way/easement affecting Shover's property as the burdened property. It
is also admitted that ultimately UGI filed a Condemnation Petition with this Court that was
served on Shover on or about July 22, 2008. However, it is specifically denied that UGI was
"met with considerable delays and frustration." To the contrary, UGI's desire to unilaterally
select the path for the gas distribution line across the Shover property that placed the least
amount of burden and expense on UGI and the greatest burden and expense upon the Shover
property adversely affected the negotiations. UGI was unreasonable, uncompromising and
unwavering in its negotiations and demands.
5. Admitted.
6. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the injunction petition filed by
Shover attempts to challenge UGI's decision to locate its gas facilities on the Condemnee's
property. By way of further response, the injunction petition also attempts to challenge the
location unilaterally chosen by UGI to locate its gas facilities across the Shover property. UGI
has chosen a location that essentially bisects the Shover property (the shortest distance between
two points) when there exists other more reasonable alternatives. For example, skirting the edge
of the property thereby maintaining the unfettered continuity of the vast majority of the burdened
property. This alternative would more evenly distribute the burden on both UGI and the Shover
2
property, keeping in mind that UGI is a "for profit" company, and Shover is a private tax paying
landowner.
Furthermore, it is specifically denied that the injunction petition is based on
boilerplate legal-conclusion averments. To the extent that these allegations are conclusions of
law, no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and the
same are therefore denied.
7. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Shover raises the issue of
whether the proposed condemnation serves a public purpose, as opposed to the private interests
of a "for profit" company. To the extent that the remaining allegations contained in this
paragraph are conclusions of law, no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania
Rules of Civil Procedure and the same are therefore denied. Furthermore, it has always been the
role of the court, and not the Condemnor, to determine whether a proposed condemnation will
serve a "public purpose." And, in this case, Shover asks this Court to determine whether UGI's
desire to "provide reinforced service capacity" regarding customers that are already receiving
service from UGI enhances the public good, or rather, simply advances the private interests of a
"for profit" company by placing an unreasonable burden on a privately owned piece of real
estate.
8. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Shover alleged that the
unilateral selection of the location for the gas line by UGI was arbitrary and capricious and that
the location and width of the easement are overly broad in scope and unnecessary. It is
specifically denied that UGI "goes out of its way to minimize the impact on property owners
when siting its gas facilities. To the contrary, UGI unilaterally selected a "shortest distance
between two points" approach when siting its gas facility across the Shover property. By way of
3
further response, after reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments in this paragraph and the
same are therefore denied. Additionally, to the extent that the remaining allegations contained in
this paragraph are conclusions of law, no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania
Rules of Civil Procedure and the same are therefore denied. Furthermore, the location of the
proposed gas distribution line unilaterally selected by UGI was selected in bad faith and is a clear
abuse of discretion and power in that the location of the gas distribution line places an
unreasonable, unnecessary, and unshared burden on the Shover property. Finally, the Easement
Plats attached as Exhibit "A" to UGI's Petition for Approval and Order to File a Condemnation
Bond are visually deceptive in that they do not provide this Court with a "big picture" view of
how the proposed location of the gas line bisects the Shover property.
9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Shover raised the issue
regarding the sufficiency of the proposed bond and its ability to cover the damages that would be
occasioned by the taking of said easement, said right-of-way and the location of the said
pipeline. It is specifically denied that the proposed bond is for an "unlimited" amount, but rather,
the proposed bond is for an "unspecified" amount. Furthermore, the bond states "in such sum or
sums as the said Owner/Obligee shall be entitled to receive as damages by reason of the
appropriation of a right-of-way and easement ... when said damages shall have been agreed
upon by the parties or shall have been legally awarded to said Owner/Obligee," indicating that
the parties shall agree to or the court shall award damages. Finally, after reasonable investigation
the Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of
the averments in this paragraph and the same are therefore denied.
4
10. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Shover alleged that damages
payable to Shover by the taking of said easement, said right-of-way, and the location and
construction of the said pipeline, must be determined by this Court after a Hearing on the matter.
By way of further response, to the extent that the remaining allegations contained in this
paragraph are conclusions of law, no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania
Rules of Civil Procedure and the same are therefore denied. Furthermore, UGI chose to proceed
according to the alternative condemnation procedures for public utilities set forth in the
Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law (15 Pa. C.S.A. Section 1511(g)(2)), and therefore, it is
DENIED that it is well settled law and procedure in this Commonwealth to proceed under the
Eminent Domain Code to the effect that damages in the instant case are properly taken .
subsequent to condemnation of the property, and often times subsequent to installation of the
Condemnor's facilities. But rather, it is well settled law that preliminary objections are the
exclusive method of raising objections to a Petition for Approval and Order for Filing a
Condemnation Bond pursuant to 15 Pa. C.S.A. Section 1511(g)(2). See In Re Carnegie Natural
Gas Compan y, 157 Pa. Commw. 217, 629 A.2d 256 (1993). See also 6 Summ. Pa. Jur. 2d
Section 11:135 (2008).
11. Denied. After reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in this paragraph and the
same are therefore denied. Strict proof thereof is demanded at a Hearing. By way of further
response UGI alleged in paragraph 7 of its Motion that this gas distribution line is necessary to
provide "reinforced" service capacity to an already existing service capacity. However, and to
the contrary, UGI now alleges in this paragraph that there is "relative urgency" for UGI to be
able to "meet" its obligation to provide "adequate" service. Based on these contradictory
allegations by UGI it is therefore relevant for Shover to raise the issue with this Court as to
whether this proposed distribution line is "necessary to meet an obligation," or simply "desired
to reinforce" an already existing ability to meet its obligations.
12. Admitted.
13. Denied. After reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in this paragraph and the
same are therefore denied. Strict proof thereof is demanded at a Hearing. By way of further
response, UGI's contradictory statements regarding whether the proposed gas distribution line
fills a need to "meet" an obligation to provide service, or "reinforces" an already existing ability
to meet its obligations to provide service draws into question the relative "urgency" regarding
this request for an expedited Hearing.
14. Denied. After reasonable investigation Shover is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in this paragraph and the
same are therefore denied. Strict proof thereof is demanded at a Hearing. By way of further
response, UGI's contradictory statements regarding whether the proposed gas distribution line
fills a need to "meet" an obligation to provide service, or "reinforces" an already existing ability
to meet its obligations to provide service draws into question the relative "urgency" regarding
this request for an expedited Hearing.
15. Denied. It is specifically denied that Shover's Injunction Petition does not contain
any truly meritorious challenges to UGI's Condemnation Petition. To the contrary, Shover
incorporates its responses to paragraphs 2 through 14 above by reference as if fully set forth. To
the extent that the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law, no
6
responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and the same
are therefore denied.
16. Denied. It is specifically denied that Shover filed its injunction petition solely for
the purpose of delaying this project, to obtain some perceived leverage in attempting to force
UGI to relocate its facilities, or to extract a greater than fair-value-compensation payment from
UGI. To the contrary, Shover is exercising her legal rights as a private landowner and property
tax payer as set in forth in Pennsylvania statutes, regulations and existing case law. Furthermore,
Shover is simply asking this Court to review UGI's attempted exercise of its condemnation
powers set forth in the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law, and UGI's unilateral selection
of the location of the proposed gas distribution line across the Shover property. Also, Shover is
asking this Court to consider Shover's request for a preliminary injunction so that Shover can re-
assert her request that UGI go out of its way to minimize the impact on the property owner in
this ease when siting its gas facility in question, just as UGI stated that it already does in
paragraph 8 of its Motion for Expedited Hearing and Consideration. By way of further response,
to the extent that the allegations contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law, no
responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and the same
are therefore denied.
17. Denied. It is specifically denied that there exists sufficient urgency in this matter
to warrant an expedited Hearing and consideration, and Shover incorporates its responses to
paragraphs 13 and 14 above. To the contrary, UGI has stated in its own Motion that the gas
distribution line in question will serve the purpose of "reinforcing" an already existing
distribution network. The inference can be drawn that the customers that will be serviced by the
"reinforcement" distribution line are already receiving service by the existing distribution lines.
7
In fact, nowhere does UGI allege that this is NOT the case. It is also denied that the Hearing will
take an hour-and-a-half at most. To the contrary, it will be necessary to present testimony
regarding the unilateral selection of the proposed location of the gas distribution line and the
failed negotiation process (3 witnesses), the impact the proposed location and route of the gas
distribution line, and resulting right-of-way and easement will have on the property value of the
burdened Shover property (2 witnesses), and viable alternatives to the proposed location such as
"skirting" the property line (1 or 2 witness). Finally, there is also no urgent need to adjust the
briefing schedule or to ask this Court to rule upon the conclusion of the Hearing thereby
preventing this Court's from exercising its discretion to review and consider all of the evidence
and testimony presented prior to issuing its ruling.
WHEREFORE, landowner Kathryn M. Shover respectfully requests that this honorable
court DISMISS UGI's Motion for and Expedited Hearing and Consideration and ORDER the
parties to continue to proceed as set forth on the Rule to Show Cause issued by this Court on the
5th of August, 2008.
Respectfully Submitted,
HUGHES 7.C.
Dated: ?U 690
dames D. u , EsquireQ
Atto ey # 58884
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
Attorneys for landowner Kathryn M. Shover
8
ATTORNEY VERIFICATION
I/We the undersigned hereby verify that I/We are the Attorneys for the
defendant/s in this action. I/We are authorized to verify that I /We have read the foregoing
document, and, that the statements made therein are true and correct to the best of my/our
knowledge, information and belief, and are based on information provided by my/our
client during face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews.
I/We understand that false statements made herein are made subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
This Verification is made pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure Rule
1024(c).
By
Dated: C?fJ Zoo/
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this 28th day of August, 2008, I, Scott B. Granger, Esquire, hereby certify
that I served a copy of the within REPLY TO MOTION OF UGI UTILITIES INCYOR
EXPEDITED HEARING AND CONSIDERATION this day by depositing the same in the
United States mail, postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed to:
Kevin Fogerty, Esquire
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Mill Run Office Center
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18106
Attorney for UGI
Scott B. Granger, Esquire
Attorney ID # 63641
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015
Phone: (717) 249-6333
Attorneys for Kathryn M. Shover, Landowner
r?
(?,? ?...:x
??
?n? ?
??
? j `s 7 r_..
? , ?..,
R.J 4;.?
G?
.. ^ r.' ,
?_ ,
a_- `l?
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC., FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBELRAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 08-4381 CIVIL
ORDER
AND NOW, this 11o' day of September, 2008, hearing in the above-captioned
matter set for September 19, 2008, is continued to Wednesday, October 1, 2008, at 10:30 a.m. in
Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA.
BY THE COURT,
Kevin)
ZKevin Fogerty, Esquire
For the Petitioners
Scott Granger, Esquire
For Kathryn Shover
:rlm
4 41t-,
Hess, J.
ff INVA-VSiNN9
S C ; I 1 WV 91 d3S 8081
KdViGav+JH-1,: ? Ni JCS
in! 1-0
=0 r-CITIH
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC., FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBELRAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 08-4381 CIVIL
IN RE: PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
BY KATHRYN M. SHOVER, LANDOWNER
ORDER
AND NOW, this 7 day of October, 2008, following hearing, the petition for
injunctive relief by Kathryn M. Shover, landowner, is DENIED.
Kevin Fogerty, Esquire
For the Petitioners
/ Scott Granger, Esquire
For Kathryn Shover
rlm
120 1?fS'm11tLL,
ID/??dS
BY THE COURT,
mi l,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF NO. a o 0 8 - `-f3 g
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
BOND FOR DAMAGES UNDER RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that UGI UTILITIES, INC., a Pennsylvania
corporation, having its principal offices located in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, PA 19482
(hereinafter "Principal" or "Condemnor") and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA (hereinafter "Surety"), a corporation duly authorized under the laws of the State of
Washington, are held and firmly bound unto THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA.,
for the use of Kathryn M. Shover, (hereinafter "Owner/Obligee'), in such sum or sums as the
said Owner/Obligee shall be entitled to receive as damages by reason of the appropriation of a
right-of-way and easement for the purposes of construction, operation, maintenance, replacement
and changing the size of one or more pipelines for the transmission and distribution of natural
gas, and the construction over the property hereinafter described, when said damages shall have
been agreed upon by the parties or shall have been legally awarded to said Owner/Obligee, with
interest and costs, if any may be legally due, for which said Principal is liable, to be made to said
Owner/Obligee, or his/her attorneys, successors and assigns, to whom payment well and truly to
be made by UGI UTILITIES, INC., Principal, and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
&%MM40AWAA v M00kn"f0d MMMAOe
AMERICA, Surety, and each of them bind themselves, their successors and assigns, firmly by
these presents.
Witness the corporate seal of UGI UTILI'T'IES, INC., by the hand of its Vice President -
Law, attested by its Secretary, and the corporate seal of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA, Surety, by the hand of its Attorney-in-Fact on this 8th day of July 2008.
WHEREAS, UGI UTILITIES, INC., under lawful authority is about to enter upon land in
which the Owner/Obligee has ownership interests and/or rights, to construct a pipeline, together
with such related equipment and structures as may be required for the transmission of natural gas
over and upon said certain land of the Owner/Obligee, situated in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County, PA (with said parcel of land hereinafter being referred to as "the
Premises"), and with the subject easement and right of way being herein taken and condemned
being as depicted on the plan drawings attached hereto as Exhibit "A." The easement herein
condemned by the Condemnor/Principal shall not interfere with said Owner's/Obligee's use and
enjoyment of said Premises except for the purposes of said pipeline, except that no buildings or
permanent non-movable structures shall be placed or erected by the Owner/Obligee or any other
persons on or above the surface of the land encompassed by this easement and right of way.
NOW, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above-bound
UGI UTILITIES, INC., its successors or assigns, or the said SAFECO INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA, Surety, its successors or assigns, or either of them, do and shall
well and truly pay, or cause to be paid unto the said Owner/Obligee, his/her attorneys, successors
or assigns, the damages he/she may sustain by reason of the appropriation of the pipeline right-
2
$1ou?or4yldprehordemndon fenncdee
of-way and easement and the construction of the pipeline over the property herein described,
when damages shall be agreed upon by the parties, or shall have been legally awarded to said
Owner/Obligee, with interest and costs, if any may be due, for which said Principal is liable, then
this obligation is to be void; otherwise, to be and remain in full force and effect.
ST: UGI UTILITIES, IN , Z,,/, A/. ? By:
Secret ice P dent - Law
(Corporate Seal)
In. the presence of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA
e
By:
itnes to Surety Mau een McNeill
Eliza Marrero Attorney-in-Fact
3
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS:
POWER Safeco Insurance Companies
OF ATTORNEY PO. Box 34526
Seattle, WA 98124-1526
No 5014
That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, each a
Washington corporation, does each hereby appoint
*******************SANDRA E. BRONSON; RICHARD A. JACOBUS; ANNETTE M. LEUSCHNER; MAUREEN MCNEILL;
MARY C. O'LEARY; NANCY K WALLACE; DOUGLAS R. WHEELER; DARELLA E. WHITE; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania*
its true and lawful abomey(s)-inrfact, with 6A authority to execxne on its behalf fidelity and surety bonds or undertakings and other
docurnerds of a simAa character issued in the course of its business, and to bind the respective company thereby.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA have. each executed and attested these presents
this
3rd
day of
January
2006
91EPHAN1E DALEY-WATSON.SECRETARY MIKE PETERS. PRESIDE r. URETY
CERTIFICATE
Extract from the By-laws of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA:
•Artice V. Section 13. - FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS ... the President any Vice President, the Secretary, and any Assistant Vice
President appointed for Shat purpose by the officer in charge of surety operations, shall each have authority to appoint individuals as
aftwneys4n4ad or under other appropriate bites with audw tty to execute on behalf of She company weky and surety bonds and
other documents of skydw character issued by the company in to course o(Its business... On any Instrument making or evidencing
such appok, fie signatures may be affixed by facsimile. On arty instrument conferring such authority or on any bond or
undertaking of the company. the seat, or a facsimle thereof. may be impressed or attired or in any other manner reproduced:
provided, however, that tie seal shah not be necessary to the validity of any such instrument or undertaking
Extract from a Resolution of the Board of Directors of SAFECO. INSURANCE COMPANY OF. AMERICA
and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. OF AMERICA adopted JWy 2e, 197o.
t
,on any cer9kate executed by the Secretary or an assn fttseaetary of the Company setting out,
(') The provisions of Article V, Section 13 of the ByAAws, and
(fi) A copy of the power-of-attorney appointment, executed pursuant thereto, and
(ifyh Certifying that said power-of4domay sppolntrnent Is in full force and effect,
the signature of the cerfifjing officer may be by fac simie, and to seal of the Company may be a facskr se thereof.'
1, StapFiarttie Daley-Watson . Secretary of SAFECO.INSURANCE COMPANY OF. AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY. OF AMERICA, do hereby certify that the foregoing extracts of to By-laws and of a Resolution of dw Board of Directors
of these corporations, and of a Pourer of Attorney Issued pursuant t eto, are true and correct, and that both the. By-taws, On Resolution
and the power of Alfomey are stI in felt force and effect.
IN WITNESS. WHEREOF, t have hereu et y. hand and affixed the. facsimile. seat of said corporation
this day of
,-'? wlr
STEPHANIE DALEY-WATSON, SECRETARY
6.09741)S 4105
Safeco® and the Safeco ago we registered tradem ft or Safew CorporaWn.
WES PDF
'Minsurance
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
MANCUL STATEMENT--DECD 34 2007
Assets
I.tabMes
CaahandBook Deposiits.........«..»..«..»..«..«.»..«.. S 53,483,126
*Banda--U.S Oovevxud
*Oder Bonds«..»..«..»..«..»..»..»..«..».»..«..»..«..».. 2,478,711387
*Stocb .................................................... 499;M,934
Red F.atate..»........«..»..«........«..«.....»..« .............. 0
Ate' Balances or UnoollecdedPremhx ns...«......«....625,553,621
Aeccuedlitavit andRerss»....«..«........«.«..«... 33,936r490
Oda Admitted Assets»..».»......»..«......«....«..».... 359.399572
UttatnedPreaiimms.»..»......«..»..«..«..«..».«........ $ 728,534,002
Reserve far Claims and CWM Expanse....»..«...... ... 1,560,913,950
FumdaUddUnder R Insu nce 430,979
Reserve for Dividenda toPolicyholders.......«..«..«. ....«. 2,421,611
Additional Statutory Reserve .»..«.«......«..»..«.«... _
Reserve for C s iians, Taxes and
Oderuabihineia..»..«., ..«.«..«,.«., ..«.,..,.»... 936336.881
T"d ...»........................,.,..»,................ S394a7,423
Special Surplus Funds. ..«.... S 226,334
Capital Stock....».»..«..»..........«.. 5p0op00
Paid in Surplus ........«......»............275,p02,873
Un"dred Smplua..».»..«..»..» 558 381 A87
S"bu to ftle7ulden ULSM.04
Tstat Lubstles aaN 8asrpits..............._..,........ st try
* Bonds are stated at smatized or investment valor, Stools at Mrodation Market Values.
Sec rNes ca rded at $124,3U,976 are deposited as required by law
I, TIM M KOLAFEWSICI, Sailor Vice-President of SAFECO Insurance Compay of Annatca, do havq eerdfy that the faregaing is a
true, and correct statement of the Aaseh and Liabilities; of std Corporation, as of Deoember 31, 2007, to the best of my kw viedge and
bdiaf
IN WITNESS Yi MWF, I have heramto set my hand and affixed the sat of old Caparstion at Seattle, Washington, dais lot day of
March, 2008.
Senior lOwe .Presideart
Tatnl Adulated Ands ....? ............._...,.......,. SLA 124LI 2
S•178h308 ®An kWW tnd*n" of SVE000apo "n
EXHIBIT A
avr#x31vx
o?
Q,r o %
r '
??roo
Jt? Z
y1? a
i?
4z
M
e
o0
s?
6
r-3z 3?
` 6 65.i
E'p ? p?fLp" t -
Qi'!
a
0
I Z CC"
,
1 I 1
;y y oa
1 1__2' Altl?tld CA
.r ,
1 ?
m ?0 3
W
, m 4 0 0
.? ,
tWy J ? O O.
Y2 \ ? O m Q
f? a tt z K
a
MI&
v?- 'PQo a
Z _' w 1' iu r,
Z. ?
m Z tom- o O c4.> a
U'l
(n d6 n a
y w
+ W o ? ? No
a I 1• ? ?
? z
00
't t
t ?
1
i1/ ? t 1
7 1 t ,
O t
t '??" l t t \
Y ? 1 t
I IZ } f 9 } \ Y
''?? \ iJ}\ l \ it it
t t t
i *? t}
t i
2 t f 1 t ? tt li li
f }f
i t t1
11 i t
t
Y t ' 1 1
1 f
1
l3NS "tH?1 VN
U W- h.. N r m
0
?O ?h O
OQNQ01
to cu 01 3
{l 3
Co
W W llJ eL TL ti.,? N N {Nj2 N
03 N N N lt'y to
z !E! t0 tri
y. im Q'~ O ZN
mplt? ?pa'1 Z
Q? W rn m N Z
Ctl Z ? O
[i"l
m W<„ ?JJ? -1 -3
H 3'II!
_i 5M'd+e?:Y
ston-e°?e°0zva+
a,i 531iittt? 19?
l9 t? -
?sd ? ?ipyw,?
qu\td??iL1I1\f3. ?~
WOE.
Q o
W ?OmmID?OQINm
m y
Q
Z°
v? ?q
^Q??jW
m "aa? W ?
Ur C
? N
n
? N
p o
V •2
Z W
a ?
2
D to
N
QO o¢
ao?Z? "Q
i F- ¢ ~ •M V
1 I 2 J W? w=
I ? a C ?.I U
W ~ ? °? v
I o Q W 4SJW ?I
i I cm W ° 4 ?
Q?
i N WUWX? hl 03
1 WZw ?
W t I 1 ( ?yQj y W?
All Q R
p ? O
z
m I i I R a ??z?p2?
I 1?
I ll Q
w V
??o I I
c
1 ?
G ,?
.J
Of SIX
d
(Wj O 11) m o) N O N 41 n ?
Z O Q O Iq I? O n ^ (O N
cn m rn o ?-I o m m ?-I Q Cn
1-I ••I Q N ? ?'+ N Q N
W 3 W 3 W 3 3 W 3 W
Z N
m W
N •-I
Q m
O N
in M
o N
?n m
o ?
Q m
N
1'I
Q to
c
\, m
m Q
o ?n Q
;u U)
;n Q
;u U)
m 14,
o (1)
m
w ,
m o N m ? m ?a m N o
m m 1q ? O ? O m
tn [n tn cn m cn 2 2 2 2
W ?^+ N m Q ln tD n ?D 0? O
Z J J J J J J J J J "+
H J
J
41d2E? 4332 A'/ 42 Os'3[00-B014u1[dVNI11IM13d t0pM13d W Ou1? 13 a.nd - SII 53llil[1(1 [Sfl 9[00-BO\8002\41]3"OW\:X .31I1
cry
gn
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
CIVIL NO.08-4381
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
PETITION FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A BOARD OF VIEWERS
This petition of Kathryn M. Shover (Condemnee) by her undersigned counsel,
Salzmann Hughes, P.C. represents:
1. On July 22, 2008, condemnee Kathryn M. Shover ("Shover" or
0
c
w
3
O
v
"Condemnee") was the fee simple owner of property located at 123
Ladnor Drive, South Middleton Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania. The land is described in two deeds, one recorded at Deed
Book Volume E24, Page 107 consisting of forty-five (45) acres and the
second deed being recorded at Deed Book Volume L20, Page 57
consisting of seventy-nine (79) acres (the co-grantee on both Deeds, Ted
R. Shover, having passed away, as a result of which sole title to the
premises at issue passed to Condemnee, Kathryn M. Shover).
2. On July 22, 2008, condemnor UGI Utilities, Inc. ("UGI" or
"Condemnor"), filed a NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT
CONDEMNATION PETITION AND BOND, along with a PETITION
FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER FOR FILING CONDEMNATION
BOND with this Court at Docket No. 08-4381 Civil as referenced above.
A copy of said filings is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3. The Condemnor is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, maintaining its principal office and
place of business in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania,
and has as its mailing address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
4. The subject property is more fully described as follows:
ALL those two certain pieces, parcels or lots of land situate in
the Township of South Middleton, County of Cumberland and
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, being more particularly bounded
and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a stake on the Southern line of other land of the
Grentees herein, said point being the Northwestern corner of land
heretofore conveyed by the Grantors herein to Hempt Brothers,
Inc., by Deed recorded in the office of the Recorder of Deeds for
Cumberland County in Deed Book "Z", Vol. 21, Page 601; thence
by bearings and distances previously compiled by Tom O. Bietsch,
R.S., and by the Southern line of said other land of the Grantees,
North 83 degrees 30 minutes West 406.35 feet to a point; thence by
the same, North 81 degrees 45 minutes West 1039.50 feet to a
point in the center of Mountain Creek; thence upstream, by the
center of said Creek, in a Southwestemly direction, 891 feet, more
or less, to a point; thence by land now or formerly of the Estate of
Phillip Lutz, North 64 degrees 30 minutes East 33 feet, more or
less, to a post; thence by the same, South 7 degrees 30 minutes
West 504.9 feet to a point in a pond; thence by the same, South 11
degrees 30 minutes East 95.64 feet to a point; thence by bearings
and distances surveyed by Thomas A. Neff, R.S., by land of
Richard L. Sherman, North 84 degrees 12 minutes East 155.65 feet
to a point on the Western side of a proposed street 50 feet wide;
thence by the Western side of said proposed street, by land of the
same and land now or formerly if the Township of South
Middleton, H. Wayne Sheaffer, et. al, and Michael A. Marhevka,
South 5 degrees 48 minutes East 700 feet to a point on the
Northern side of L.R. 21008; thence by the Northee side of said
Road, and in an Easterly direction crossing said proposed street, 52
feet, more or less, to a point on the Eastern side thereof; thence by
the Eastern side of said proposed street, by land now or formerly of
the Township of South Middleton, North 5 degrees 48 minutes
West 700.21 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing by said land
now or formerly of the Township of South Middleton, North 84
degrees 12 minutes East 387.83 feet to an iron pin; thence by the
same, South 5 degrees 48 minutes East 648.35 feet to an iron pin
on the Northern side of L.R. 21008 aforesaid; thence by the
Northern side of said Road, North 72 degrees 25 minutes East
603.2 feet to a stake; thence by land now or formerly of H. Wayne
Shaeffer, et. al, North 15 degrees 18 minutes West of 171.3 feet to
a stake; thence by land of Hempt Brothers, Inc., North 6 degrees 45
minutes East 1426.1 feet to the Place of BEGINNING; containing
50 acres, more or less.
SUBJECT, HOWEVER, to a right-of-way granted to Metropolitan
Edison Company by instrument dated July 29, 1965, and recorded
in the office aforesaid in Misc. Book 173, Page 279; and the rights
of previous Grantees, their heirs, successors and assigns, in and to
the proposed street 50 feet wide leading Northwardly from L.R.
21008, herein referred to; and the condition, appurtenant to the
land herein conveyed that the mining of gravel or sand on said land
shall be prohibited for a period of 50 years from the date hereof.
BEING part of, and all of the remaining land of, the property
conveyed to Mervin G. Coyle by Rutillus H. Allen and Betty B.
Allen, his wife, by Deed dated January 3, 1962, and recorded in the
office aforesaid in Deed Book "K", Vol. 20, Page 377.
AND
BEGINNING at a point in the line of land of Hempt Bros. and a
corner of lands about to be conveyed to Mervin G. Coyle which
point is marked by a white oak in the fence line; thence by a fence
line North 78 %i degrees West 856 feet to a post; thence continuing
by the line of said lands to be conveyed to Coyle, North 76 3/
degrees West 1,040 feet to a point in the center line of the Creek;
thence down said Mountain Creek by the center line thereof and by
the various courses thereof and along the lines of lands of Mervin
G. Coyle in a northerly direction 1900 feet, more or less, to a point
in the center line of the bridge across Mountain Creek; thence by
the line of lands of William J. Coyle, South 75 degrees 20 minutes
East 30.2 feet to a point in the center line of the road; thence by a
fence line North 17 %2 degrees East 520 feet to a point; thence
continuing by a fence, North 71 degrees West 180 feet to a point
on the west bank of the Creek; thence by the west bank of the
Creek, in a northerly direction 202 feet, more or less, to the line of
lands of F.E. Masland, Jr; thence by a fence line and lands of
Masland, South 74 degrees East 1343 feet to a post; thence by the
line of lands of Hempt Bros., which line is marked by a fence,
South 11 3/ degrees West 2386.5 feet to a white oak, the Place of
BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING FROM THE SAME,
NEVERTHELESS, two (2) separate lots, the one on the northerly
side of the township road, and the other on the southerly side of the
township road adjacent to Hempt Bros. land, each of which lots are
100 feet in width, and of even width throughout, and 200 feet in
depth, one of which is presently owned by Markley and the other
by Marhevka.
CONTAINING approximately 79 acres.
This description is from a survey made by Thomas O. Bietsch,
Registered Surveyor, based on magnetic bearings of 1961.
BEING part of the land conveyed to the grantors by Mervin G. Coyle
and Mildred B. Coyle, his wife, by Deed dated May 15,1953, and
recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds in and for Cumberland
County in Deed Book "H", Vol. 15, Page 209, and also part of the land
which William J. Coyle and wife by Deed dated September 30, 2950,
and recorded in the Office aforesaid in Deed Book "T", Vol. 16, Page 1,
granted and conveyed to the grantors.
5. On October 7, 2008, Condemnee's petition for injunctive relief was
denied.
6. By virtue of the filing of UGI's Condemnation Bond, it is believed that
UGI became the owner of a right-of-way across Condemnee's property.
7. It is believed that sometime in 2008 or 2009, Condemnee installed an
underground utility line upon Condemnee's property in the area shown on
Exhibit B hereto.
8. Condemnee and Condemnor have been unable to agree upon the just
compensation for the property.
WHEREFORE, Condemnee request that this Court appoint three (3)
viewers to ascertain just compensation to which Condemnee is entitled by reason
of the condemnation.
Respectfully submitted,
SALZMANN HUGHES, P.C.
I/
Kurt E(/Wiams, Esq.
Attorney ID 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
Attorney for Condemnee Kathryn M. Shover
EXHIBIT A
Copy
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL, ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
-/
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES, NO. to) 197
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT CONDEMNATION PETITION AND BOND
To: Kathryn M. Shover
123 Ladnor Lane
Carlisle, PA 17013
Pursuant to and in accordance with the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988,
Act of December 21, 1988 (P.L. 1444 No. 177(g)(2)(ii)), YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that
the attached Petition has been filed with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and that if you do
not file an Answer or Objections thereto, WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF
THIS PETITION UPON YOU, UGI Utilities, Inc., by and through its counsel, will file a Motion
with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and present it to the Court for approval, seeking
entry of an Order in the form attached as Exhibit "C" to UGI's Petition, directing the filing of
UGI's original Bond.
Kevin T. Foge quire
Attorney for U I Utilities, Inc.
TRUE C'7- g I
In Testimony whereof, ! hand
and the seal of said Court at Carlsle, Pa.
This .... .... day of.f..
.N
NN..........1. • r .... .
P
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT ;
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF NO.
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
PETITION FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER FOR FILING CONDEMNATION BOND
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, UGI UTILITIES, INC., by and through its attorney,
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esquire, and respectfully petitions this Honorable Court as follows:
1. The Petitioner, UGI UTILITIES INC. ("UGI"), is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and is principally engaged in the
business of producing, purchasing, storing, transporting and distributing natural gas. The
Petitioner maintains its principal office and place of business in Valley Forge, Montgomery
County, Pennsylvania, and has as its mailing address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
2. The Petitioner, a public utility, by virtue of the power of eminent domain as
provided in the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988, 15 P. S. Section 1511, and by
resolution duly adopted by the Executive Committee of its Board of Directors on July 8, 2008, as
evidenced by the Secretary's Certificate attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A," has
determined and concluded to enter upon, take and appropriate for a public purpose, an easement
and right of way over and upon a certain parcel of land located in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County, PA, by route surveyed and located-- as per the plan drawings attached as
Exhibit "A" to the Condemnation Bond attached hereto as Exhibit "B"--, for the purposes of
-S:%curtem\uSAsF vcrAcorAe tiw f-d«
constructing, operating, maintaining, replacing and changing a pipeline for the transportation,
transmission and distribution of natural gas with the right in said company, its successors and
assigns to enter upon such easement and/or right of way at such times as may be fit and
necessary for said purposes.
3. Petitioner believes and avers that the only person or entity having an ownership
interest in the property being condemned is the legal and equitable titleholder, Kathryn M.
Shover, being referred to herein as "the Owner." Petitioner alleges and avers that the aforesaid
Owner holds legal title to this property by virtue of a Deed recorded at the Cumberland County
Recorder of Deeds Office, at Deed Book Volume E24, Page 107 (the co-grantee on that Deed,
Ted R. Shover, having passed away, as a result of which sole title to the premises at issue passed
to the Owner).
4. Since in or about February, 2008, the Petitioner, through its agents and
employees, has attempted to secure an agreement for a pipeline easement and right of way over
and through the subject parcel of land from the Owner referenced in Paragraph 3 hereinabove.
In that respect, the Petitioner has attempted to contact the Owner to try and agree as to the
damages properly payable, but to date has been unable to do so for the purpose of entering into
an agreement/contract for such easement and right of way; hence, the Petitioner and the Owner
have not agreed upon reasonable compensation to be paid therefor and to affix the amount of
damages, if any, which would be occasioned by the taking of said easement and said right of way
and the construction of said pipeline.
5. A copy of the Bond of the Petitioner with Safeco Insurance Company of America,
a surety authorized to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which is conditioned
2
nnS:kumiWW&lshover%condem icn fo dm
for the payment of all damages arising from the appropriation of said easement and right of way
and the location and construction of the pipeline on the aforesaid parcel of land of the Owner
referenced in Paragraph 3 hereinabove, the original of which is to be presented to this Court, is
attached hereto as Exhibit "B." It is pursuant to this Bond that title to the aforesaid easement and
right of way will pass to the Petitioner, with the attendant right of possession for purposes of its
easement, right of way, and installation of its pipeline.
6. This Petition and the proposed Order seeking approval and directing the filing of
the related Bond, will be presented for approval to the Cumberland County Court of Common
Pleas upon expiration of the ten-day response period set forth in 15 Pa. C. S. A. Section
15 11 (g)(2)(ii).
WHEREFORE, UGI UTILITIES, INC., respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter
an Order approving the form and substance of the Bond attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and
ordering that said Bond be filed with the Cumberland County Prothonotary.
LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. FOGERTY
By
&__
e. i_:
uire
Attorney for Pe 'tioner
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Mill Run Office Center
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
610-366-0950
PA Supreme Ct. No. 36667
fax 0//0)
3
EXHIBIT A
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
SECRETARY'S CERTIFICATE
The undersigned certifies that:
1. She is the duly elected and acting Secretary of UGI Utilities, Inc., a Pennsylvania
corporation (the "Company"), and as such is authorized to execute and deliver this Certificate on
behalf of the Company.
2. Below is a true and correct copy of resolutions duly adopted by the Executive Committee
of the Board of Directors of the Company by unanimous consent dated July 8, 2008:
RESOLVED, the exercise by the Company of its right of eminent
domain as set forth in 15 Pa. C. S. A. Section 1511 as that provision applies to
acquisition of easements and rights of way with respect to the acquisition of
an easement and right of way, and the placement therein of one or more gas
distribution lines, in South. Middleton Township, Cumberland County, PA, is
approved.
RESOLVED, any officer of the Company is authorized to execute and
deliver such other agreements, certificates, consents, corporate papers and
other documents, make any payments and take all other action, including
without limitation, exercise of the Company's power of eminent domain as
stated above, that such officer and counsel for the Company may deem
necessary or desirable to carry out the intent and purposes of the foregoing
resolution, including without limitation, the preparation and filing of
Petitions for Approval and Order for Filing Bond, and related Bonds,
relative to the acquisition of any and all easements and rights-of-way in
and/or across certain parcels of land along the route of the aforesaid project,
including but not limited to properties owned by Kathryn M. Shover.
3. These resolutions have not been amended modified or rescinded and remain in full force and
effect on the date of this certificate.
Date: July 16, 2008
[Corporate Seal] Margare . Calabrese
EXHIBIT B
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT ;
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF : NO.
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
BOND FOR DAMAGES UNDER RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN
KNOW ALL MEN BY TB ESE PRESENTS, that UGI UTILrMS, INC., a Pennsylvania
corporation, having its principal offices located in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, PA 19482
(hereinafter "Principal" or "Condemnor") and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA (hereinafter "Surety"), a corporation duly authorized under the laws of the State of
Washington, are held and firmly bound unto THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
for the use of Kathryn M. Shover, (hereinafter "Owner/Obligee"), in such sum or sums as the
said Owner/Obligee shall be entitled to receive as damages by reason of the appropriation of a
right-of-way and easement for the purposes of construction, operation, maintenance, replacement
and changing the size of one or more pipelines for the transmission and distribution of natural
gas, and the construction over the property hereinafter described, when said damages shall have
been agreed upon by the parties or shall have been legally awarded to said Owner/Obligee, with
interest and costs, if any may be legally due, for which said Principal is liable, to be made to said
Owner/Obligee, or his/her attorneys, successors and assigns, to whom payment well and truly to
be made by UGI UTILITIES, INC., Principal, and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
S?hryLtaveMnnkmertlm fhmudoe
AMERICA, Surety, and each of them bind themselves, their successors and assigns, firmly by
these presents.
Witness the corporate seal of UGI UTILITIES, INC., by the hand of its Vice President -
Law, attested by its Secretary, and the corporate seal of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA, Surety, by the hand of its Attorney in-Fact on this 8th day of July 2008.
WHEREAS, UGI UTILITIES, INC., under lawful authority is about to enter upon land in
which the Owner/Obligee has ownership interests and/or rights, to construct a pipeline, together
with such related equipment and structures as may be required for the transmission of natural gas
over and upon said certain land of the Owner/Obligee, situated in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County, PA (with said parcel of land hereinafter being referred to as "the
Premises"), and with the subject easement and right of way being herein taken and condemned
being as depicted on the plan drawings attached hereto as Exhibit "A." The easement herein
condemned by the Condemnor/Principal shall not interfere with said Owner's/Obligee's use and
enjoyment of said Premises except for the purposes of said pipeline, except that no buildings or
permanent non-movable structures shall be placed or erected by the Owner/Obligee or any other
persons on or above the surface of the land encompassed by this easement and right of way.
NOW, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above-bound
UGI UTILITIES, INC., its successors or assigns, or the said SAFECO INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA, Surety, its successors or assigns, or either of them, do and shall
well and truly pay, or cause to be paid unto the said Owner/Obligee, his/her attorneys, successors
or assigns, the damages he/she may sustain by reason of the appropriation of the pipeline right-
2
We uum4 %*OfteOftd=ne bn femcdee
of-way and easement and the construction of the pipeline over the property herein described,
when damages shall be agreed upon by the parties, or shall have been legally awarded to said
Owner/Obligee, with interest and costs, if any may be due, for which said Principal is liable, then
this obligation is to be void; otherwise, to be and remain in full force and effect.
T: UGI UTILITIES, INCA By: _
Secret, ice P dent - Law
(Corporate Seal)
In. the presence of
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA
By: of M''I
F a zoa.'4?
to Surety Mau e
en McNeill
Marrero Attorney-in-Fact
3
POWER Sa%w Insurance Co
OF ATTORNEY PO. Box 34526 "'Z'anies
Seattle, WA 98124-1526
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: Ne 5014
That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, ea
Washington Corporation. does each hereby appoint
ch a
*******************SANDRA E. BRONSON; RICHARD A. JACOBUS; ANNETTE M. LEUSCHNER; MAUREEN MCNEILL,
MARY C. O'LEARY; NANCY K. WALLACE, DOUGLAS R. WHEELER; DARELLA E. WHITE, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania*
its true and Iawful attomey(spri-fact, with RA authority to execute on its
befiar documents of a skniar charader Issued in the course of ks business, and to bind t ? and surety bonds o weby. and offer
IN WITNEW WHEREOF. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA he" each executed and attested these Presents
this 3rd
day of January
2006
?4 W
N.SFCRPTeov * el;rl?
Extract from the -Laws of CERTIFICATE
find of GENERAL aWD of SAFECO ?SURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
'Aside V. Section 13. • FIDELITY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA:
A
RvWW f" V. apP?d for that purpose D rBONDS _. the Presided, any Vice President, the "O
attortheys-Mh.tad or r'r' o purpose
aPFro)by the rfate tkles wMhdaW of surety opera, shah each have fY. and any Assistant vim appoint other doc uinorrts of similar character Issued by the Corr p in the Oxm" oa bbuin s the ooany in h men mamv or ? s
such, appointment, the signatures may be affixed by ?r>ie. On course asqu ? on
such raoevidencing
? °f the ?nr. the seal. or a sac kMO ix such any ofie(y or on
provided, however, tied fie seat Shall not be necessary to tl e fd aoY be used or affixed or in any other mannerroProdbond uoed
`q'tr of any such inafrument or undertaking •
Extract t
01nd Of GENERAL INSURANCE a Resolution of the Boacd of Directors of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
COMPANY. OF AMERICA adopted. Wy 25.1970.
*On anYe executed by the Serxethuy or an
The FWASIons Of A" V. Section 13 of fie By.1„a" Wid ry of the company iettlng out,
(1) A copy of the powerof-atto ney ? wed pursuait
(I,) c4rofft that am
the
8VAture Of 11110 W11(ft officer may be by ya appok*rad is in iWIca* ? Viand
. and the Seat of the Company may be a facsimie i here0 f ¦
L Stephanie Daley Watson .:. of SAFECO: WSURIWCE COMP
COMPANY. OF. AMERICA, do hereby cerfty that the ANY OF.AMERICA and oM Akm of INSURANCE
and to Paton, and of a Powerof Atorney lasved vw eb t tw a wc and a a Reslon d to Board of D(r ps Power of
Attorney are alit in full force and effect. . and that both the k Ls", an Res"M
IN Vin INESS. WHEREOF, t h7M=day he hasimke seat of said
corporation
this
or
STEPHANIE DALEY•WATSON, SECRETARY
$-W41DS 4105 Safes acct me Safm logo are reglsiwW.Uadonwks of adaoo. Curpomthn.
WEB PDF
mimumce SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
FINANCIAL STA LENT-DECD 31, 2007
Assets
Cash and Bank Deposits ..»..».»..»..».,»..».......... S 53,483,126
+Bands-U.S .»...16,728,067
*Otbtt Bonds....»......»..»..»..» .................»......».,».. 2,478,711,287
R,ed F.atate................................ ...........»..........»...... 0
Agents' Bslmww or Uncoitected Premiums. ..»..»..»..» 62511"1621
ArccmdkdeneetandRenta_.. ,.»..».......».»....... 33,936,490
Total Admitted Assets ...........,„.....,„,.„.,,,.,. &"2"=
UsbMtles
t 728,534,002
Reserve for admo and Clalms Expense »..»..»..... .».1 60,913y30
Rends Held Under Reinscance Treaties.....»......» 430,979
Reaave for Dividend: to Poltcyhdders....».».....,..
' ..».». 2,421
611
Add
it[anA SbWtmy Reseve........................ ,
Reserve for Comm{mims, Taxes sad `
C»erLiabtliflea..»......»..».....»..» ..............»... 936 z?c ??1
Totnt.........».......................................... _
S3,2tg.6a7,423
Special Sugft Funds. ..».„. t 226,334
Capiht Stock....».»......».........».. 5,000,000
Paldin 9aphts....»..»..»......»......... 273,002,873
UnasrignedStuplur..».»......»..» 1383st 427
Owpiw to PsNgbdda's......................„.
TotatLlddHttes wd 8 s......._....._.._._.._
'? Bonder are stated tt amact(yed a invathie? vsinr, S at Aasoatat[an Market Veluea.
SftwMes corded at $1246 pm are deposited as regidredby law.
1, 77M MMOI.AJEWSEI, Seder Vico-Preddant of 9AFECO inaaranoe C004My of Amedoa, do hu MW cad* that the forte
trde, and correct statement of the Assets andIdaMilles of said C ap is a
belie ataitm, as of December 31, 2007- to the best of my kaowtece and
> iWmmw WSERF.OR, I have heramto set my hand and affixed the sal of said Carparation at Saattle, Withingion, WE 1st
m 2008.
day of
SWicr Vice-Pre ddart
57762t3?
s? nawwaa r.em?c a s+?co
EXHIBIT A
' U
FI , ; i$
Ole
Q a? /? I I I
Q1 ?r' ' /: 1 ? ?? 1??'?all At1i3dONd O M x
'?17W?167y ? / ; I ( ? o
9
eI
. I
et? : g
a ?
' I
[
? b N
' a H ? 2 a
V -1
w '
'y ? I a a{ ?i ? W
a.. W o ci ? GD
? o
oil!
I o?
I ;
.
.
I q ;
[
.
I + , ;
I I ,
1.4 ;
I ¦
--1 I z•.cQi?r`mov?cuco
.% ''t I ?tiN?rnu?QN`oP Ro??
:u Wto:uW ?t ?t t
4 N N U try cu p N N
for
T ?- u7
b,,.s9? Z H 01 n m ttpp .v lp lp fi
cc in
fp 4?? Is P?l+ 2 R 1p? 2NN CR Z 1N1[?z
lu"?cLmRLL'1?Of? WOio
Z J J J J J J J J J a
H J
J
.....oa uuww w Pa[agn9 ii f.lY - ilt '4I111IU1 Ifll fI00-O,?MDLNL'AI'OI,\ Y T
i i
a i 1
1
N
)4?
g
M
Q
Q
2
U O Ig co
Of
N
O
N
?
n
Iq
2 0 0 0 In ? 0 , l? tp N
0; a). M ?
cn m rn o
o
?+
Q cu
N
r+ cu
N
It
Q
N
W 3 W 3 W 2 3 W 2 W
2 m N Q O ? 0 ig 0 Q N
"' In m Q rn Q ?n Q ?n Q m
Q 2 ;1) O ? ;V ? N n1 0 M
m m uoi NN O ? O C c n N Q,
tn tn tn tn (n tn 2 2 2 2
W ^ N m Q Io w N m M O
? J J J J J J J J J
J
J
do ,,oSAi=
PSG J?ii??
I
; P " S
?4
?
3
rw?
PSG
a i5
b N
n
? N
O oo
gU •• 2
Z z W
0
0
a ?z
z log W
ceC? z J
V12 X06 y 2
WOE co
o
Y
,7y N E?0
0
Y
?Y315 Nil'" 12 "'W -M E-mrarwim laftw co "f-*] u a - ]ui '"fa um [M f/AO-iMY00[1t1'li'OW\a Tis
EXHIBIT C
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF WAY ACROSS LANDS OF NO.
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY UGI UTILITIES,
INC., FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
ORDER
AND NOW, this day of , 2008, upon consideration of the Motion
for Entry of Order Approving Filing of Condemnation Bond, and it being established that the
ten-day response period under 15 Pa. C. S. A. 1511(g) has passed without the filing of any
objections or other response to UGI's Condemnation Petition which was served on Condemnee,
Kathryn M. Shover,
IT IS ORDERED that said Motion is GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that UGI Utilities, Inc., be and is hereby authorized to and
directed to file its Condemnation Bond with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, and that the
amount of security provided in and by that Bond is hereby approved by this Court.
BY THE COURT:
J.
VERIFICATION
I, Thomas M. Jackal, hereby state and verify that I am the Vice President - Law of UGI
Utilities, Inc., that I am authorized to take this Verification on behalf of said Petitioner, and that
the facts set forth in the foregoing Petition are true and correct, partly upon personal knowledge,
the remainder upon information and belief.
I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S.
A. Section 4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities.
Dat , 2008
Thomas Mfikkall
Vice Pres ent - Law
UGI Utilities, Inc.
EXHIBIT B
yO Q 1
q s0 , ?? LLI f ' • 'y?r ?.
Q ?1 ?¢u ? O 4
? °q
11
Y ?? ;"iii Ai&]doae ? p 4- h u ? ?
n ???3+ W n
m
N
N'? O
IOW
All
a
'too'.
i
a z, ? WN `a o 0
¢ I ? ? ?o U 2
r
n? ?w
??? ? aQ ?zU c
a
1
if
A ?OF
ZJ ?
J pQ?w ??
_
? O CA2 J
i , I
1
i i
n
f? m
? O
[?
¢
r
y i x
0
In
i
3
3
. t
l
r- Q
00
`
i . r
r I
I ` r
I ? .
r "
r
r
r
I r
i 1 .
r ? =
r
r
r I
1
r
r
t
r
1
w
m
sl
U 1? O nI m U7 0 ? Ol U) IU
Z `" N m h m o v ap (v I
?
O
N
N
N
ID
O
ID
Ol
IU .
N
Cu O1 Q C\j C Y
ti (31 In 17 )
0
w w w w W a s ? 3 3
2 (0
4
N
N
Ia
N
IU
W
IU
U)
?
IU
N
Ui
N
u)
W
ti
N
ti
O
n'1
O
l(?
U)
V) to
O (n
:) r,
O
W O1 m O N [O m w UI O m
m ti l0 1(1 m O Ql 03 Ul LO
z co z m trl IA z z w z
tl1 N m Q U) U) n OJ Or o
z - -j J J J J J ^?
H 1 1 1 J
J
I
4 1
a
.N
C 6na L .2
W
CQza c
b N
n
' R o 0
N
co
0
(El
Z Z W
? O =
w
• a ? ? z v <
f wW ?? w?
W o p a
CJ
' n Q W .to s
w p p 0
o
j I i a p
p
I n N
i
i
R ?? pf ?Ot p'Y 4 O
e A
`:4 t I ,?
' LI
'Wei
I ' I
?\ N Q
U o ln m ol N O N m K U)
Z O ?i G ln h O h n ?O m
Fa-. O m m (D O) O QI O m ?
fn
?-, m Cg
?+ O
v "
N O
p+ m m
?r
N R
Q tD
N
O
W 3 W 3 W 3 2 W i W
Z N
m m
N ?+
R m
O m
Itl m
O ?
lg ?
O ?
R m
N
'`? ?n m v ?ci c• ?n v ?n c m
Q :U Ch o .+? N m N m o ;+i
W rn o N M ?o m ca m N o
m m in m o m o m o m u?
cn [n [n cn cn cn z Z Z z
w ? N m V 1q (D f? m m o
J J J J J J J J J
J
H
J
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify and acknowledge that I have read the information set forth in the
foregoing Petition for the Appointment of Viewers; and that the facts stated therein are
true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that any false statements contained herein are subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities.
for Condemnee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 0 day of 4 2010, I served a true
and correct copy of the foregoing document via United States mail, first class mail,
postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
Law Offices of Kevin T. Fogerty
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Attorney for Condemnor
Timothy Angstadt
UGI Utilities, Inc.
1500 Paxton Street
Harrisburg, PA 17104
Operations Manager for Condemnor
t
Kfrt E. Williams, Esq.
Attorney ID 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
AUG 2 4 2010
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
ORDER
AND NOW, this ,x77 " day of 2010, upon
consideration of the petition of Kathryn M. Shover, the Court appoints:
-fir
N
j'n.2.9 rr.. cn
?r lit as a board of viewers to assess damages in the condemnation and further orders the
board of viewers perform its duties in accordance with the law and Acts of Assembly and
grants leave to the board of viewers to issue an interlocutory report or interlocutory
reports covering such properties or claims as the board of viewers determines
appropriate.
C-0 r 6?s ry14V1W-
R (.ub
4A" uzt?
S?zsl?o
J.
v
By the Court:
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
CIVIL NO. 08-4381 nn rte;
EMINENT DOMAIN cs?
PROCEEDING
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess,
. ?
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
PETITION FOR DELAY COMPENSATION PURSUANT TO 26 Pa C S A 4713
This petition of Kathryn M. Shover (Condemnee) by her undersigned counsel,
Salzmann Hughes, P.C. represents:
1
2.
On July 22, 2008, condemnee Kathryn M. Shover ("Shover" or "Condemnee")
was the fee simple owner of property located at 123 Ladnor Drive, South
Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The land is described
in two deeds, one recorded at Deed Book Volume E24, Page 107 consisting of
forty-five (45) acres and the second deed being recorded at Deed Book Volume
L20, Page 57 consisting of seventy-nine (79) acres (the co-grantee on both Deeds,
Ted R. Shover, having passed away, as a result of which sole title to the premises
at issue passed to Condemnee, Kathryn M. Shover).
On July 22, 2008, condemnor UGI Utilities, Inc. ("UGI" or "Condemnor"), filed a
NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT CONDEMNATION PETITION AND
BOND, along with a PETITION FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER FOR FILING
CONDEMNATION BOND with this Court at Docket No. 08-4381 Civil as
referenced above.
3. The Condemnor is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, maintaining its principal office and place of
business in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, and has as its
mailing address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
4. By virtue of the filing of UGI's Condemnation Bond on October 14, 2008, it is
believed that UGI became the owner of a right-of-way across Shover's property.
5. On August 23, 2010, Shover filed a Petition for the appointment of a Board of
Viewers.
6. By Order dated August 24, 2010, the Court appointed William A. Duncan, Esq.,
Chairman, James P. Sheya and R. Gary Sausser as members of the Board of View
in this matter.
7. A site review was held by the Board of View on December 14, 2010.
8. The Board of Viewers held a hearing on May 16, 2011.
9. 26 Pa.C.S.A. §713 states: Delay compensation
(a) General rule.-Compensation for delay in payment
shall be paid at an annual rate equal to the prime rate as
listed in the first edition of the Wall Street Journal
published in the year, plus I%, not compounded from:
(1) the date of relinquishment of possession of the
condemned property by the condemnee; or
(2) if possession is not required to effectuate
condemnation, the date of condemnation.
(b) Exclusion.-
(1) No compensation for delay shall be payable with
respect to funds paid on account or by deposit in
court after the date of the payment or deposit.
(2) During the period the condemnee remains in
possession after the condemnation:
(i) the condemnee shall not be entitled to
compensation for delay in payment; and
(ii) the condemnor shall not be entitled to
rent or other charges for use and
occupancy of the condemned property
by the condemnee.
(c) Award or judgment.-Compensation for delay shall
not be included by the viewers or the court or jury on
appeal as part of the award or verdict by shall, at the time
of payment of the award or judgment, be calculated under
subsection (a) and added to the award or judgment. There
shall be no further or additional payment of interest on the
award or verdict.
10. No amount has been paid on account or by deposit in court by UGI in this
matter.
11. On July 15, 2011, the Chairman of the Board of View served a Notice of Filing
of Report of Viewers (the "Report"), which Notice stated that the report shall be
filed in the Office of the Prothonotary of Cumberland County on August 15,
2011 and that the report shall become final unless an appeal therefrom is filed
within thirty (30) days from the date the report is filed. The Report of Viewers
stated that the award of damages was in the amount of $25,200.00.
12. Page 15 of the Report cites the language from 26 Pa.C.S.A. §713(c) that states
that delay compensation shall not be awarded by the viewers, but shall, at the
time of payment of the award or judgment, be calculated and added to the award
or judgment.
13. Page 16 of the Report states "[d]elay damages should not at this time be
included in the Viewers' Report."
14. The taking by UGI was effective as of October 14, 2008, the date UGI filed its
Bond for Damages Under Right of Eminent Domain.
15. The following U.S. prime rates were published in the Wall Street Journal (See
Exhibit A):
January 2, 2008: 7.25%
January 2, 2009: 3.25%
January 4, 2010: 3.25%
January 3, 2011: 3.25%
16. The calculation or exclusion of delay compensation pursuant to 26 Pa.C.S.A.
§713 is not within the jurisdiction of the Board of View. Matter of
Condemnation of a Certain Parcel of Land in South Park Tp. by South Park Tp.,
96 Pa.Cmwlth. 59, 506 A.2d 511(1986).
17. Shover respectfully submits that delay compensation should be calculated as
follows based on $25,200 in just compensation:
October 14, 2008 to December 31, 2008 (78 days) (8.25%)
All of 2009 (4.25%):
All of 2010 (4.25%)
January 1, 2011 to August 1, 2011 (212 days) (4.25%):
Total delay compensation through August 1, 2011:
Per Day after August 1, 2011 to Date of Payment
$444.28
1,071.00
1,071.00
622.06
$3,208.34
$2.93
WHEREFORE, Condemnee request that this Court order Condemnor UGI to
pay Shover $3,208.34 plus $2.93 per day for each day after August 1, 2011, until the date
of payment of the just compensation for delay compensation pursuant to 26 Pa.C.S.A.
§713.
Respectfully submitted,
SALZMANN HUGHES, P. c
Junes D. Hughes, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 58884
Kurt E. Williams, Esq.
Attorney I.D. No. 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
Attorney for Condemnee Kathryn M. Shover
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify and acknowledge that I have read the information set forth in the
foz•egoing Petition and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best ol.'m},
knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that any false statements contained herein are subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the IS" day of August 2011, I served a true and correct
copy of the foregoing document via United States mail, first class mail, postage prepaid,
and addressed as follows:
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
Law Offices of Kevin T. Fogerty
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Attorney for Condemnor
William A. Duncan, Esq.
1 Irvin Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
Chairman, Board of Viewers
Kit E. Williams, Esq.
Attorney ID 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
•
EMINENT DOMAIN c4?:
PROCEEDING
M
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess,
IN RE: CONDEMNATION"QF,,
EASEMENT AND RIGHT 71
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
I\)
u7
d?
C'7W
_,.j
rn
PETITION FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF APPRAISAL ATTORNEY AND
ENGINEERING FEES PURSUANT TO 26 Pa C S A 4710
This petition of Kathryn M. Shover (Condemnee) by her undersigned counsel,
Salzmann Hughes, P.C. represents:
1. On July 22, 2008, condemnee Kathryn M. Shover ("Shover" or
"Condemnee") was the fee simple owner of property located at 123
Ladnor Drive, South Middleton Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania. The land is described in two deeds, one recorded at Deed
Book Volume E24, Page 107 consisting of forty-five (45) acres and the
second deed being recorded at Deed Book Volume L20, Page 57
consisting of seventy-nine (79) acres (the co-grantee on both Deeds, Ted
R. Shover, having passed away, as a result of which sole title to the
premises at issue passed to Condemnee, Kathryn M. Shover).
2. On July 22, 2008, condemnor UGI Utilities, Inc. ("UGI" or
"Condemnor"), filed a NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT
CONDEMNATION PETITION AND BOND, along with a PETITION
FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER FOR FILING CONDEMNATION
BOND with this Court at Docket No. 08-4381 Civil as referenced above.
3. The Condemnor is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, maintaining its principal office and
place of business in Valley Forge, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania,
and has as its mailing address P.O. Box 858, Valley Forge, PA 19482.
4. By virtue of the filing of UGI's Condemnation Bond on October 14, 2008,
it is believed that UGI became the owner of a right-of-way across
Shover's property.
5. On August 23, 2010, Shover filed a Petition for the appointment of a
Board of Viewers.
6. By Order dated August 24, 2010, the Court appointed William A Duncan,
Esq., Chairman, James P. Sheya and R. Gary Sausser as members of the
Board of View in this matter.
7. A site review was held by the Board of View on December 14, 2010.
The Board of Viewers held a hearing on May 16, 2011.
9. 26 Pa.C.S.A. §710 states: Limited reimbursement of appraisal, attorney
and engineering fees.
(a) General rule.-The owner of any right, tile or interest in
real property acquired or injured by an acquiring
agency, who is not eligible for reimbursement of fees
under section 306(g) (relating to preliminary
objections), 308(d) (relating to revocation of
condemnation proceedings) or 709 (relating to
condemnee's costs where no declaration of taking
filed), shall be reimbursed in an amount not to exceed
$4,000 as a payment toward reasonable expenses
actually incurred for appraisal, attorney and engineering
fees.
(b) Attorney fees.-In determining reasonable attorney fees
under sections 306(g), 308(d), 709 and this section, the
court shall consider all of the circumstances of the case,
including, but not limited to, time records if available.
10. Shover is not eligible for reimbursement of fees under section 306(8)
(relating to preliminary objections), 308(d) (relating to revocation of
condemnation proceedings) or 709 (relating to condemnee's costs where
no declaration of taking filed). Shover is eligible for reimbursement under
26 Pa.C.S.A. §710.
11. On July 15, 2011, the Chairman of the Board of View served a Notice of
Filing of Report of Viewers (the "Report"), which Notice stated that the
report shall be filed in the Office of the Prothonotary of Cumberland
County on August 15, 2011 and that the report shall become final unless
an appeal therefrom is filed within thirty (30) days from the date the report
is filed. The Report of Viewers stated that the award of damages was in
the amount of $25,200.00.
12. Page 16 of the Report states that "[t]here is no record basis for inclusion of
[appraisal, attorney and engineering fees] in this Board's Report."
13. Shover's actual appraisal, attorney and engineering fees incurred exceed
$4,000.00. See Exhibit A attached hereto.
14. The limited reimbursement of appraisal, attorney and engineering fees
pursuant to 26 Pa.C.S.A. §710 is not within the jurisdiction of the Board
of View, but is within the jurisdiction of this Court. Matter of
Condemnation of a Certain Parcel of Land in South Park Tp. by South
Park Tp., 96 Pa.Cmwlth. 59, 506 A.2d 511(1986).
WHEREFORE, Condemnee request that this Court order Condemnor
UGI to pay Shover $4,000 to reimburse her for appraisal, attorney and
engineering fees incurred as a result of UGI's condemnation of her property.
Respectfully submitted,
SALZMANN HUGHES, P. C.
Jades D. Hughes, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 58884
Kurt E. Williams, Esq.
Attorney I.D. No. 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
Attorney for Condemnee Kathryn M. Shover
FFi ii?1 } [ _d HF?F?r3.1 :: -
a1 c f .t ii; 1l0.
IJ?iversifieI Appraisal Services
Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants
35 East High Street
Suite; 101
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 170133052
Tel: 717,249.2758
Fox: 717,2SS.4701
INVOICE
Nuinbcr 0531115
DATE: May 31, 2011
TO: Kathryn M. Shover AMOUNT: $2,100.00
FUR: Appraisal report, meetings with Jim Hughes and Kurt Williams, and heari rig appearajicr;,
CIGI easement damages
43.88-acre industrial tract of land on Mill Street
Mt, Holly Springs, Pennsylvania
TERMS: Due upon receipt
Thank You,
L,ar F, Foote
Certified General Appraiser
GA-0000141,
EXHIBIT
A
A
AEEIEVANS ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
2793 Old Post Road, Harrisburg, PA 17110-3669 e (717) 541-1580. Fax (717) 541-1563. evanseng@evanseng.com
?nvOlcB
June 29, 2011
Project No: 111078.A0
Invoice No: 1
SALZMANN HUGHES
354 ALEXANDER SPRING ROAD
CARLISLE, PA 17013
Project 111078.A0 Salzmann-Shover/UGI easement
Professional Services through June 25, 2011
Professional Personnel
Project Manager
Total Fee
Total Reimbursables
Hours Amount
13.50 $ 1,633.50
1.0 times 30.60
Total this Invoice
Civil Engineering
Land Development
Hydrology
Structural Engineering
Building Structure Design
Transportation
Survey
1,633.50
30.60
$1,664.10
S ALZMANN
HuGAttorneys aPtL, c,354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
Kathryn Shover
C/O Nina Shover
24 Woodview Drive
Mount Holly Springs PA 17065
DATE INVOICE #
6/1/2011 21365
Hrs/Rate Amount
5/4/2011 KEW Confer with SK re: prep for file for Bd. of View hearing. 0.25 56.25
225.00/hr
SMK Confer with KEW re UGI easeemnt; Board of View hearing; RF re same 1.20 150.00
125.00/hr
5/5/2011 KEW Draft follow-up letter to K. Fogerty re: UGI appraisal request. Confer
with JDH. 0.30
225.00/hr 67.50
SMK RF re Corr; RF re Board of View hearing 0.90 112.50
125.00/hr
5/6/2011 JDH Confer w/ KEW / Apprasial 0.25 68.75
275.00/hr
5/10/2011 KEW Telephone call with Wm. Duncan re: UGI appraisal. 0.25 56,25
225.00/hr
5/14/2011 SMK RIP re appraisal report; confer with KEW re same 0.40 50.00
125.00/hr
5/18/2011 KEW Prepare for Bd of View Hearing. Review proposed exhibits, prior filings,
maps, etc. 1.50
225.00/hr 337.50
5/19/2011 KEW Visit condemnation site. Take photos. Telcon with EEI re: piles of dirt
and frak container. Confer with ELS re: hearing prep. 1.20
225.00/hr 270.00
LS DRAFT Questioning Outlines/RF re: Exhibits 1.40 245.00
175.00/hr
5/20/2011 SMK RF re appraisal report for UGI easement
0,40
50.00
125.00/hr
LS DRAFT Outlines/RF re: Appraisal/RF re: CVs/RF re: exhibits/EDIT
Outlines/DRAFT Memo to KEW outlining strategy re: UGI appraisal 2.90
175.00/hr 507.50
5/22/2011 KEW Review Q&A for Bd of View Hearing
0.50
112.50
225.00/hr
Kathryn Shover Page 2
Hrs/Rate Amount
5/2312011 KEW Correspondence with B. Evans, P.E. and Larry Foote re: prep meeting. 0.50 112
50
Confer with JDH re: UGI appraisal. Confer with ELS re: UGI appraisal. 225.00/hr .
SMK RF re valuation report and B.O.V. exhibits; prep same for KEW 0.40 50.00
125.00/hr
LS RF re: UGI Appraisal report/RF re: Foote Appraisal/RES re: permitted 1.70 297
50
uses in zoning districts/RES re: physical adaptability standard 175.00/hr .
5/24/2011 KEW Prep for hearing. review exhibits, Send copy of appraisal to Fogerty. 3.30 742
50
Telcon with Larry Foote. Correspondence with B. Evans, P.E. Rsch 225.00/hr .
eminent domain code.
LS RES re; Section 7051CONFR with KEW re: same 0.80 140.00
175.00/hr
5/25/2011 DHM Assist KEW with hearing preparation 3.50 787.50
225.00/hr
SMK RF re exhibits, confer with KEW re same; prep exhibits 0.80 100.00
125.00/hr
KEW Prep for Bd. of View hearing. Prep with Larry Foote and Brian Evans, 6.00 1
350
00
P. E. 225.00/hr ,
.
JDH Meeting w/ KEW / L. Foote / B. Evans / Hearing prep / RF Re: same 3.60 990.00
275.00/hr
5/2612011 KEW Appearance for Bd. of View Hearing re: UGI condemnation 4.00 900.00
225.00/hr
JDH Confer w/ KEW / Hearing issues / expert testimony / prep / RF 1.60 440.00
275.00/hr
5/27/2011 JDH Rev of correspondence/confer with KEW/findings of fact 0.45 123.75
2.75.00/hr
5131/2011 KEW WIP Draft Board of View report. Review exhibits and appraisals. Rsch 2.00 450
00
legal issues to incorporate into proposed report. 225.00/hr .
For professional services rendered 4010 $8,567.50
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify and acknowledge that I have read the information set forth in the
foregoing Petition and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that any f,ilse statements contained herein are subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities.
na hover, PO 1Or Condemnce
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
V.
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the L!c day of August 2011,1 served a true and correct
copy of the foregoing document via United States mail, first class mail, postage prepaid,
and addressed as follows:
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
Law Offices of Kevin T. Fogerty
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Attorney for Condemnor
William A. Duncan, Esq.
1 Irvin Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
Chairman, Board of Viewers
IWrt E. Williams, Esq.
Attorney ID 75963
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
(717) 249-6333
/5:\surrent\u6i\thover\vgi.shover-Dd-M-view-rapt-propos-06271Ldoa
KATHRYN M. SHOVER
Plaintiff/Condemnee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
V.
Civil Action No. 08-4381
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
Defendant/Condemnor.
In re: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER BY UGI
UTILITIES, INC. FOR PUBLIC
PURPOSES
NOTICE OF FILING OF REPORT OF VIEWERS
Kurt E. Williams, Esquire
Salzmann Hughes, P.C.
354 Alexander Spring Road
Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
Attorney for Plaintiff/Condemnee
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
Law Offices of Kevin T. Fogerty
1275 Glenlivet Drive
Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Attorney for Defendant/Condemnor
Mr. R. Gary Sausser
1306 Bosler Place
Carlisle, PA 17013 --' -
Mr. James P. Sheya a r - -- r-
433 Mooreland Avenue -< >
r ?
_ cn
Carlisle, PA 17013 t
?
r;
?
William A. Duncan, Esquire = a
1 Irvine Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
Prothonotary's Office
Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
Enclosed herein please find the report of the Board of View dated `C
\
2011, concerning the determination of the granting of damages in Cumb)rand NCounlpursuant to the Pennsylvania Eminent Domes bode. The report shall be filed in the Office of
the Prothonotary of Cumberland County on l? [ , 2011. The report shall
become final unless an appeal therefrom is filed hin thirty (30) days from the date the report
is filed.
Board of Viewers,
By:
Willie A. uncan, Chairman
Board of View
2
/S:kurrent\uel\shover\u6•shover-td-o(-vkw-rept•propos-"2711.dom
KATHRYN M. SHOVER
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS of
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
Civil Action No. 08-4381
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
In re: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT
Defendant/Condemnor. AND RIGHT-OF-WAY ACROSS LANDS
OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER BY UGI
UTILITIES, INC. FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
REPORT OF CHAIRMAN OF VIEWERS
TO THE HONORABLE. THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:
The undersigned Chairman of Viewers respectfully reports:
PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF THE VIEWERS
1. By Order of Court dated August 24, 2010, the Court appointed William A. Duncan,
Esquire, Chairman, James P. Sheya, and R. Gary Sausser as members of the Board of Viewers to
determine damages pursuant to the Pennsylvania Eminent Domain Code, 26 Pa. C.S. Section 502. See
Exhibit "A" hereto.
2. On August 25, 2010, a letter and calendars to schedule a View were sent to counsel
and members of the Board of View. See Exhibit "B" hereto.
3. On October 5, 2010, a Notice of View was transmitted to counsel and members of
the Board of View scheduling a view of the property for December 14, 2010. See Exhibit "C"
hereto.
4. The Viewers, along with counsel, viewed the property on December 14, 2010.
5. A Notice of Hearing was provided to counsel and members of the Board of View
scheduling a Hearing on March 29, 2011. However, due to a trial-attachment conflict in the
schedule of counsel for Defendant/Condemnor, the hearing was continued.
6. On April 6, 2011, a Notice of Hearing was provided to counsel and members of the
Board of View scheduling a Hearing on May 26, 2011. See Exhibit "D" hereto.
7. The Board of View held a hearing on May 26, 2011, at which counsel for both parties
were present and testimony was taken.
3
/S:larrmt1u6i1shoverlugishover-bd•of-vievrrept•propos-062711.doa
KATHRYN M. SHOVER
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
Defendant/Condemnor.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
Civil Action No. 08-4381
In re: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER BY UGI
UTILITIES, INC. FOR PUBLIC
PURPOSES
I. HISTORY OF THE CASE AS TO THE TAKING.
1. On July 22, 2008, the Defendant/Condemnor, UGI Utilities, Inc. ("UGI"), filed
with the Cumberland County Prothonotary a Notice of Intent to Present Condemnation
Petition and Bond, with UGI's proposed Petition for Approval and Order for Filing
Condemnation Bond ("Petition for Filing Condemnation Bond") attached thereto. UGI
sought to file the Condemnation Bond in order to construct and operate a natural gas
pipeline at the location in question. The Prothonotary docketed the Notice of Intent at the
above-referenced docket number. The Notice of intent and proposed Petition for Filing
Condemnation Bond were directed to, and served upon, the Plaintiff/Condemnee in this
action, Kathryn M. Shover, who was and is the owner of land in South Middleton Township,
Cumberland County.
2. In response to UGI's Notice of Intent and proposed Petition for Filing
Condemnation Bond, Plaintiff/Condemnee Kathryn M. Shover ("Shover") filed a Petition for
4
/S.Ncurrent%u&hover\ugi-shover-6drot•viewveptpropos-061713.dax
Injunctive Relief on August 1, 2008, seeking to prevent UGI from filing its Condemnation
Bond.
3. After a hearing, Shover's Petition for Injunctive Relief was denied by Order
dated October 7, 2008 issued by the Honorable Kevin A. Hess.
4. On October 14, 2008, UGI filed its Bond for Damages Under Right of Eminent
Domain with regard to the Shover property.
5. On August 23, 2010, Shover filed a Petition for the Appointment of a Board of
Viewers.
6. By Order dated August 24, 2010, the Court appointed William A. Duncan,
Esquire, Chairman, James P. Sheya, and R. Gary Sausser as members of the Board of Viewers in
this matter.
7. The taking was effective as of October 14, 2008, which was the date that UGI
filed its Bond for Damages Under Right of Eminent Domain.
8. A site review was conducted on December 14, 2010.
9. The Board of Viewers held a hearing on May 26, 2011.
10. At the Board of Viewers hearing, UGI presented the testimony of the
following individuals:
Robert G. Myers, a Pennsylvania Certified General Appraiser, and one of the
authors of the appraisal report prepared by A.R. Hughes & Company; and
Thomas Witt, the Manager of Area Engineering for UGI and a Pennsylvania-
licensed Professional Engineer.
5
/S:kurrent%udAshover\uohoverbd-of-New-Mt-propos-061711.doa
11. Shover presented the testimony of the following individuals at the Board of
Viewers hearing:
Brian T. Evans, P.E., a Registered Professional Engineer employed by Evans
Engineering, Inc.; and
- Larry E. Foote, a Pennsylvania Certified General Appraiser, and the author of
the appraisal report prepared by Diversified Appraisal Services.
II. SUMMARY OF UGI'S CASE:
Testimony of Robert G. Myers (Appraiser for UGO
12. Myers testified as follows, his testimony also being reflected in various
portions of his appraisal report:
12.1. Shover is the owner of two adjacent parcels of land in South Middleton
Township. Cumberland County. The two parcels are east of Holly Pike (Route 34) and north
of Mill Street. The northern parcel (Tax Parcel No. 40-11-0288-032) straddles Ladnor Lane.
(These facts are undisputed.)
12.2. The northern parcel is approximately 79 acres in size, and is zoned AC
(Agricultural and Conservation District). (Undisputed.)
12.3. The southern parcel (Tax Parcel No. 40-11-0288-033) is approximately 43.88
acres in size, and is zoned 1-2 (Industrial-Manufacturing District), which at the time of the
hearing was acknowledged by each party's appraiser.
12.4. UGI's permanent easement is 20 feet wide and 1,972 feet long, and is located
on the southern parcel. In the location where the easement runs parallel to Mountain
Creek, the easement is right next to the wooded area which flanks the creek. In the
6
/S:\kurrent\ugnshover\ugi-shover-bd-oW WA-rept-propo"627 i].dom
location where the easement runs parallel to the common boundary between the northern
and southern parcels, the easement abuts the boundary line on the southern parcel side.
12.5. With the exception of (i) the Shover residence (which sits close to Ladnor
Lane on the northern parcel), (ii) some land immediately surrounding the residence, and (iii)
the wooded area which abuts Mountain Creek, the property is currently used for
agricultural purposes.
12.6. The total area of the easement is 39,448 square feet (20 feet wide x 1,972
feet long), which is equal to 0.906 acres. (A.R. Hughes report, p. 1.)
12.7. In addition to the permanent easement, UGI also obtained a 20 foot wide
temporary construction easement which ran along side the permanent easement.
12.8. The property at issue is located 5 miles from the nearest 1-81 interchange.
(A.R. Hughes report, pp. 18, 20.)
12.9. Mr. Myers testified that in his opinion, the geographic area in which to obtain
comparable sales data is the greater Harrisburg area and the 1-81 corridor.
12.10. Mr. Myers opined that because of the Shover property's distance from 1-81,
and the availability of other large sites much closer to 1-81 and 1-76 interchanges,
warehousing or distribution use would not be the highest and best use for the Shover
property.
12.11. Mr. Myers testified that the highest and best use of the property would be to
subdivide five (5) 3-acre lots with Ladnor Lane frontage for use as single-family home sites,
maintain 64 acres for agricultural use, and maintain 43.88 acres (the southern parcel) for
7
/S:\currert\ugiW"r\uS4hover-bd-of-view-rapt-propot-062711.daa
agricultural use on an interim basis pending a build-to-suit industrial user or owner-user.
(See A.R. Hughes report, p. 1.)
12.12. Mr. Myers testified that (i) because the taking was only an easement, and not
a fee-simple taking, and (ii) because the land within the easement area could be used by the
property owner (Shover) for any purpose (such as agriculture, landscaping, a roadway or
parking lot), with the exception of erecting a building on it, he opined that the easement
would have a minimal effect on the use, and hence the value, of the property. Mr. Myers
further pointed out that the twenty (20) foot wide easement, which is along the perimeter
at the rear of the southern parcel, is no wider than the set-back requirements of this zoning
district (1-2), which fact further minimizes the easement's impact on the use of the southern
parcel. (See A.R. Hughes report, p. 25 (set back requirements), pp. 51, 54.)
12.13. Mr. Myers testified that when appraising a property to determine its market
value, there are three methods an appraiser can use: the Income Capitalization Approach;
the Sales Comparison Approach; and the Cost Approach. (A.R. Hughes report, p. 29.)
Because of the type of property being appraised, Mr. Myers testified that only the Sales
Comparison Approach was appropriate. Therefore, the Sales Comparison Approach was the
only methodology used to determine the market value of the Shover property. (See A.R.
Hughes report, p. 50.)
12.14. After analyzing the sales of comparable properties zoned the same as the
southern Shover parcel (Industrial-Manufacturing District), and after making adjustments to
the price per acre received for these "comp" properties based upon considerations such as
(i) the market conditions on the date of the sale, (ii) the locations of the "comp" properties,
8
/S-\awent\ugAshover\u*shover-bd4-vkw-rapt-propos-M7lLdoa
(iii) the physical characteristics of the "comp" properties, (iv) the zoning approvals already
received (or not) for the "comp" properties, and (v) the site sizes of the "comp" properties,
Mr. Myers concluded that the indicated value for the southern Shover parcel (zoned
Industrial-Manufacturing) is $34,779 per acre. (See A.R. Hughes report, pp. 37-39.)
12.15. After analyzing the sales of comparable properties zoned the same as the
northern Shover parcel (Agricultural and Conservation District), and after making
adjustments to the price per acre received for these "comp" properties based upon
considerations such as (i) the market conditions on the date of the sale, (ii) the locations of
the "comp" properties, (iii) the existence of, and condition of, a farm house on the "comp"
properties, (iv) the amenities (barns, garages), and the physical characteristics of the
"comp" properties, and (v) the site sizes of the "comp" properties, Mr. Myers concluded
that the indicated value for the northern Shover parcel (zoned Agricultural/Conservation) is
$9,005 per acre. (See A.R. Hughes report, pp. 46-47.)
12.16. In order to determine the value of the Shover property after the easement,
Mr. Myers testified about A.R. Hughes & Co.'s methodology. A.R. Hughes personnel
interviewed brokers, agents and an appraiser who deal with industrial, residential, and
agricultural properties, and A.R. Hughes found no evidence or opinions that a gas pipeline's
presence would adversely impact value. A.R. Hughes also did a search of relevant peer-
reviewed literature on the topic of the affect of a gas pipeline on property values, and
located a 1999 study which found a 1% to 2% negative impact on home values for
properties "with pipeline easements within 10 miles of a well-publicized, substantial
pipeline rupture". (A.R. Hughes report, p. 52.) Because this study addressed home values,
9
/S:ku_ntkw tshover\uai-shover-bd•ok4ew_Mt-propos-M711doa
rather than industrial property values, and because the evidence suggests that the impact
of a natural gas pipeline on industrial property values is even less than on residential
property, and because there had been no rupture of this new gas pipeline, Mr. Myers
concluded it was appropriate to make a downward adjustment -- from the comparable
values -- of 0.5 percent for Shover's industrial-zoned land on which the easement was
located (i.e., the southern parcel). Mr. Myers also concluded that the UGI easement and
gas pipeline therein had a de minimis effect on the value per acre of the northern lot, zoned
Agricultural-Conservation, even taking into consideration that the land might be used for
residential lots someday. Mr. Myer's reasoning was that the potential residential lots,
which would front on Ladnor Lane, were not even close to the pipeline. (See A.R. Hughes
report, pp. 52-53.)
12.17. Mr. Myers' final conclusions of value for the taking were as follows:
Scenario
Before and as unaffected by the easement
After and as affected by the easement
Compensation for the easement and damages
to the remainder
Temporary construction easements(for a
more-than-conservative one-year period)
Total:
Value
Estimate
$2,450,368
$2,437,693
13,000 (rounded)
4,500
7 500
10
/5:\curreut\UgNhover\u#'shover-bd-01-vlnv4ept-propo$,M71Ldom
Testimony of Thomas Witt.
13. Mr. Witt testified as follows:
13.1. Witt is employed as a Manager of Area Engineering for UGI. He has been so
employed for thirteen years. Witt has a B.S. degree in civil engineering, and
he is licensed in Pennsylvania as a Professional Engineer.
13.2. Witt was involved with the site selection and installation of the natural gas
pipeline which now runs through the easement on the Shover property.
13.3. The pipeline is an 8-inch diameter steel pipe. It also has a protective
coating/wrap around it. The pipeline is three feet or more below the surface.
13.4. After the installation of the pipeline, Witt testified that the landowner could
do virtually anything on or near the easement except construct a building in
the easement. Witt testified that the landowner could farm in the easement,
could plant landscaping there, and could install a roadway or parking lot
within the easement.
III. SUMMARY OF LAND03UNER KATHRYN M. SHOVER'S CASE.
Testimony of Brian T. Evans, P.E.
14. Mr. Evans testified as follows:
14.1. Of the 43.88 acres in the southern parcel, which is zoned 1-2 (Industrial-
Manufacturing), only approximately 29 acres are developable. The remaining
15 acres (approximately) are not developable because they are located in the
floodway (of Mountain Creek). Furthermore, the majority of the developable
11
/S:\curtent\ueWwver\u`MShover6dat vletrrepbpropos•062711.doa
29 acres are located in Zone AE, which is a 100-year flood plain. (See Shover
Hearing Exhibit 3)
14.2. Of the 79 acres in the northern parcel, which is zoned AC (Agricultural and
Conservation), only approximately 23 acres are developable. All 23 of these
acres are located in Zone AE, which is a 100-year flood plain. The remaining
56 acres (approximately) in the northern parcel are not developable because
they are located in the floodway (of Mountain Creek). (!d.)
14.3. Mr. Evans also testified that, in his opinion, if not for UGI's 20-foot wide
easement located in the southern parcel, just to the south of and abutting the
common boundary of the two Shover parcels, a developer could have
constructed in the future an industrial or commercial building right up to the
southern parcel's northern boundary, in conjunction with which the
developer would have had to successfully petition the Township to subdivide
the adjoining northern parcel, zoned AC, to add land to the southern parcel to
satisfy the set-back requirements for such a building.
Testimony of Larry E. Foote (Appraiser for Mrs. Shover).
15. Mr. Foote testified as follows:
15.1. Mr. Foote's report and testimony only addressed and considered the
southern parcel, which is zoned 1-2 (Industrial-Manufacturing). (See Foote
report, p. 5.)
15.2. Mr. Foote acknowledged that the southern parcel is located in a FEMA-
identified 100-year flood hazard area. (See Foote report, p. 5.)
12
/S:\current\usi\sMver\ugi-shover-bdo/wlew-rep"mpa4.OU711.dod
15.3. Mr. Foote appraised the value of the easement taken as follows:
• Before the UGI easement taking:
43.880 acres x $77,078 = $3,382,183
Rounded to: $3,382,000
• After the UGI easement taking:
42.974 acres x $77,078 = $3,312,350
Rounded to: $3,312,000
• Damages resulting from the easement: $ 70,000
• Plus 8% damages from temporary easement $ 5,600
• Total damages resulting from easement: $ 75,600
Rounded to: $ 76,000
(See Foote report, pp. 35-38.)
15.4. Although he characterized it as being an easement, Mr. Foote's methodology
of calculating damages effectively treated this as a fee-taking condemnation,
in that, as described in Paragraph 15.3 above, he performed all of his per-acre
calculations on a fee basis, and made no adjustment whatsoever for the fact
that only an easement was condemned, and that the property owner had
retained considerable rights to use the surface of the ground even following
the condemnation. (See Foote report, pp 35-38.)
IV. UGI'S POSITION R GADDING LEGAL ISSUES RAISED.
The property owner's witnesses in this case, particularly Mr. Evans, suggested that the
placement of this easement, in the current setbacks, could impact the extension of a building
into that area. His theory in that regard was premised on two events occurring at some point in
the future, to create conditions which did not exist on the date of the taking.
13
(S:?curtenNu{??shover\ueFShover•bdof-vkw•rpt•propoi-062711. doac
Specifically, Mr. Evans opined that Shover would be allowed by the Township to relocate
the lot line currently dividing her Agricultural-zoned parcel from her Industrial-zoned parcel, to
shift that sliver into the Agricultural zone, to allow for a somewhat larger building on the
Industrial side. His opinion in that regard also presumed the local municipality would then
rezone that narrow strip of land from Agricultural to Industrial, since that land would then be
supporting an industrial use. UGI has disputed this premise, relying on the following legal
points and authorities.
"It is a fundamental principle of eminent domain law that fair market value for damages
is determined as of the date of condemnation." In re: Taking in Eminent Domain of Certain
Parcels of Real Estate by the City of Easton, 97 Pa. Cmwlth. 495, 497, 509 A.2d 1374, 1375
(1986), citing Frontage, Inc. v. Allegheny County, 400 Pa. 249, 162 A.2d 1(1960). The date of
taking is the date the court approves the bond presented to it by the public utility. In re:
Philadelphia Electric Co. Right of Way. Taking of Ground of Carl Giesler and Anne Giesler, 154
Pa. Cmwlth. 48, 53, 622 A. 2d 408, 410 (1993).
In Gilleland v. New York State Natural Gas Corporation, 399 Pa. 181, 184, 159 A.2d 673,
675 (1960), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court explained the law regarding assessing damages in
a condemnation case:
The general rule is that what must be assessed is the market value of the
property as affected by the taking. This is done by determining the market value
of the property as a whole immediately before the taking and unaffected by it
and the market value immediately after the taking and affected by it.
The Court in Gilleland continued,
"They [a jury assessing damages in a condemnation case] are not to inquire
what a speculator might be able to realize out of a resale in the future, but what
a present purchaser-would be willing to pay for it in the condition it is now in." . .
14
/S:\CU-At\UgNhover\L*4o*ver6d-o 4aw-rept-propos-M711.dou
. A property owner may expect compensation for reasonable certainties
inherent in the present, not for chances or future possibilities. The date of the
taking remains the basic reference point.
399 Pa. at 186-187, 159 A. 2d at 675-676 (quoting Pennsylvania Schuylkill Valley R. Co. v. Cleary,
125 Pa. 442, 17 A. 468, 470 (1889)).
A second legal issue centered on Mr. Foote's testimony, and his corresponding report,
that the damages resulting from the easement taken were actually based on a fee-simple
valuation. However, it is undisputed that UGI only acquired an easement across Shover's
property. In that regard, the Commonwealth Court recently discussed the significant difference
between the taking of a fee simple interest and a mere easement:
We further note that regardless of how expansive or invasive it might be, an
interest in the nature of an easement never indicates an interest in the nature of
a fee simple. An easement is a non-possessory interest in land in the possession
of another entitling its holder to a limited use or enjoyment of the land in which
the interest exists.
In re: A Condemnation Proceeding by South Whitehall Township Authority, 940 A. 2d 624, 628
(2008) (emphasis in original).
Based on this well established authority, UGI submits to this Board that Mr. Foote's
valuation method is incorrect, and, respectfully, should be disregarded.
V. UGI'S POSITION REGARDING
DELAY COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL FEES
Delay compensation is payable pursuant to 26 Pa. C. S. A. Section 713, subsection (c)
of which provides as follows:
(c) Award or judgment. -- Compensation for delay shall not be included by
the viewers or the court or jury on appeal as part of the award or verdict, but
shall, at the time of payment of the award or judgment, be calculated under
subsection (a) and added to the award or judgment ..."
15
Based on this language, delay damages should not at this time be included in the
Viewers' Report.
Under 26 Pa.C.S.A, section 710, a Condemnee is entitled to reimbursment of appraisal,
attorney and engineering fees"...in an amount not to exceed $4,000.00 as a payment toward reasonable
expenses actually incurred...," Here however, the Condemnee offered no evidence of any actual fees and
expenses incurred in that regard. As such, there is no record basis for inclusion of this item in this Board's
Report.
BOARD OF VIEWERS AWARD OF DAMAGES FOR THE TAKING
(1) $ 20,700.00 for the taking
(2) 4,500.00 for the temporary construction easement
(3) $ 25.200.00 total award, including just compensation, delay damages and
professional fees and costs
COMMENT
The Board adjusted the appraised value of the subject acreage to arrive at the Award.
The Board was not persuaded by Plaintiff Condem nee/Condem nee's arguments and found them to be
speculative and not founded in the facts existing at the date of the taking.
16
/S:\eur tlu$AshowrVqt-sho"f6bd-of-vk w rept•Propos06 ?ll.doix
VIEWER'S DUTIES
As set forth in the Report, the Viewers executed their duties by Views and Hearings
and rendering an Award of Damages.
The Board Is submitting its Bill of Costs as the duties of the Board have been
discharged.
Resp ctfu ly S bm' ed
Dater By: "**?
William A. Duncan, Esquire
Chairman, Board of View
Date:
By: /94:? 4944?
Gary Sau er
Viewer, Bo rd of View
Date:
Ja heya
Viewer, B d of View
17
BILL OF COSTS
The Board of View having performed duties related to its appointment prior to said decision. An invoice
and Bill of Cost is hereby submitted to the Court.
William A. Duncan, Chairman 5 days @ $ 375.00 $ 1,875.00
Postage Certified 4 x $ 5.54 22.16
Postage Mail Report 2 x $ 1.90 3.80
Postage First Class 30 x $ .44 13.20
Subtotal $ 1,914.16
Gary Sausser, Viewer 3 days @ $250.00 750.00
Subtotal $ 750.00
James Sheya, Viewer 3 days @ $ 250.00
$ 750.00
Mileage 20 x.50 cents per mile 10.00
$ 760.00
TOTAL COST OF VIEWERS $ 3,424.16
Date:
William A. Duncan, Chairman
Date: 3
_AGa eij_se , Viqtver
Date: 1 _T1
AUG 2 4 2010
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Kathryn M. Shover
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI Utilities, Inc.
Defendant/Condemnor
ORDER
CIVIL NO. 08-4381
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
Assigned to Kevin A. Hess, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN M. SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES, INC. FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
AND NOW, this ,79'-4f' day of 2010, upon
0
consideration of the petition of Kathryn M. Shover, the Court appoints:
?i
as a board of viewers to assess damages in the condemnation and further orders t the
board of viewers perform its duties in accordance with the law and Acts of Assembly and
grants leave to the board of viewers to issue an interlocutory report or interlocutory
reports covering such properties or claims as the board of viewers determines
appropriate.
(20l£S i'nzilf14
A
sfzs??o
J.
v
By the Court:
William A. Duncan
Susan J. Hartman
Duncan & Hartman, P.C.
Attorneys at Law
One Irvine Row
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
August 25, 2010
Kurt E. Williams, Esq.
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
1275 Glenlivet Srive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Timothy Angstadt
UGI Utilities, Inc.
1500 Paxton Street
Harrisburg, PA 17104
RE: Petition of Kathryn M. Shover v. UGI Utilities, Inc.
For Board of View to Premises
Civil No. 08-4381
Dear Attorney Williams;
(717) 249-7780
FAX (717) 249-7800
dhlaw@pa.net
We would like to schedule a View in September or October 2010. The Viewers
prefer dates on either Tuesdays or Thursdays, preferably during the morning.
Please mark dates on the enclosed calendars that you would not be available for
the View as soon as possible and return it to my office via mail or fax.
Our goal is to schedule this View in an efficient manner which is hindered by
slow or non responses to requests for available calendar dates. If we cannot arrive at
an acceptable date for the View, we will choose a date convenient to the Board.
As always, we are seeking to discharge our duties in a timely fashion, so be
prepared for a Hearing within a short period of time after the View. Thank you for your
cooperation.
Yours truly,
DUNCAN & HARTMAN, P.C.
VA44????
William A. Duncan, Esq.
WADl?da
CC: James Sheya
R. Gary Sausser
Enclosures
,0 v
U
00 0
KATHRYN M. SHOVER O
. CIVIL NO. 08-4381
Plaintiff/Condemnee EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
V.
ASSIGNED TO KEVIN A. HESS, J.
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
Defendant/Condemnor EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN, SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
NOTICE OF V/EW
TO:
Kurt E. Williams, Esq. Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1 1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Carlisle, PA 17015 Allentown, PA 18106
Mr. R. Gary Sausser Prothonotary's Office
1306 Bosler Place Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013 One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
Mr. James P. Sheya William A. Duncan, Esq.
433 Mooreland Avenue 1 Irvine Row
Carlisle, PA 17013 Carlisle, PA 17013
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an Order of the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland County has been issued to William A. Duncan, Esquire, James Sheya and
Gary Sausser, directing them to determine a just compensation for the condemnation of
said premises. The Viewers will meet at the premises on Tuesday, December 14,
2010, at 9:30 A. M. for the performance of their duties under said Order. All parties
interested may attend at said time and place to accompany the said Viewers and
present their objections.
Date: 2010
By:
William A. Duncan, Esquire
Chairman, Board of View
WADlda
KATHRYN M. SHOVER CIVIL NO. 08-4381
Plaintiff/Condemnee
V.
UGI UTILITIES, INC.
Defendant/Condemnor
TO:
EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDING
ASSIGNED TO KEVIN A. HESS, J.
IN RE: CONDEMNATION OF
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF
WAY ACROSS LANDS OF
KATHRYN, SHOVER, BY
UGI UTILITIES FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES
NOTICE OF HEAR/N
Kurt E. Williams, Esq.
354 Alexander Spring Road, Suite 1
Carlisle, PA 17015
Kevin T. Fogerty, Esq.
1275 Glenlivet Drive, Suite 150
Allentown, PA 18106
Mr. James P. Sheya
433 Mooreland Avenue
Carlisle, PA 17013
Mr. R. Gary Sausser
1306 Bosler Place
Carlisle, PA 17013
Prothonotary's Office
Cumberland County Courthouse
One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
William A. Duncan, Esq.
1 Irvine Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an Order of the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland County has been issued to William A. Duncan, Esquire, James Shea an
R. Gary Sausser, directing them to determine a just compensation for the y d
condemnation of said premises. The Viewers will meet in the Second Floor Court
Room of the Old Cumberland County Courthouse on Thursday, May 26, 2011,
at 9:30 A.M., for the performance of their duties under said Order. All parties interest
may attend at said time and place to accompany the said Viewers and present their
objections.
Date: ONl,0 60
2011
By: Lt??
William A. Duncan, Esquire
Chairman, Board of View
WADrda