Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-4615KENNETH F. LEWIS, ESQUIRE I.D. #69383 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE RICHARD, Plaintiff V. DAVID RICHARD, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 0'9 ` q&1,5 1 rA CIVIL LAW DIVORCE NOTICE TO DEFEND AND CLAIM RIGHTS You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take prompt action. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you, and a Decree of Divorce or Annulment may be entered against you by the Court. A judgment may also be entered against you for any other claim or relief requested in these papers by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you, including custody or visitation of your children. When the ground for divorce is indignities or irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, you may request marriage counseling. A list of marriage counselors is available in the Office of the Prothonotary at: 1 Courthouse Square, Carlisle, PA 17013 IF YOU DO NOT FILE A CLAIM FOR ALIMONY, DIVISION OF PROPERTY, LAWYER' S FEES OR EXPENSES BEFORE A DIVORCE OR ANNULMENT IS GRANTED, YOU MAY LOSE THE RIGHT TO CLAIM ANY OF THEM. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 OR (800) 990-9108 KENNETH F. LEWIS, ESQUIRE I.D. #69383 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE RICHARD, Plaintiff V. DAVID RICHARD, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 0 S- Y& /,S' C& U T? CIVIL LAW DIVORCE COMPLAINT FOR DIVORCE COUNT I Request for a No-fault Divorce Under 53301(c) of the Domestic Relations Code 1. Plaintiff is DANIELLE RICHARD, who currently resides at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, PA 17025. 2. Defendant is DAVID RICHARD, who currently resides at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, PA 17025.. 3. Plaintiff has been a bona fide resident in the Commonwealth for at least six (6) months immediately previous to the filing of this Complaint. 4. The Plaintiff and Defendant were married on September 6, 2003, in Cumberland, PA. 5. There have been no prior actions for divorce or annulment between the parties. 6. The marriage is irretrievably broken. 7. There are no children borne of the marriage. 8. Defendant has not been a member of the armed services. 9. Plaintiff has been advised that counseling is available and that Plaintiff may have the right to request that the court require the parties to participate in counseling. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter a Decree of Divorce pursuant to § 3301(c) of the Domestic Relations Code. COUNT II R_eauest for Equitable Distribution of Marital Property Under 53502 of the Domestic Relations Code 10. Plaintiff hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 9 of her Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 11. The parties are owners of marital property subject to equitable distribution. 12. Plaintiff requests the Court to equitably divide, distribute or assign the marital property between the parties and the marital debts of the parties without regard to marital misconduct in such proportions as the Court deems just after consideration of all relevant factors. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court enter an order of Equitable Distribution of marital property and marital debts pursuant to §3502 of the Domestic Relations Code. DATE: 7/29/08 4 Ita; KEN ET F. LEWIS, ESQUIRE Attorn y I.D. #69383 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 71 a 04 ua?' DANIELLE RICHAR U ib 0 `•r- T w v ? D F () ha f_;J 1 ! 1?J 1 ; i?? Ln r„l. ,i .< KENNETH F. LEWIS, ESQUIRE I.D. #69383 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE RICHARD, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. DAVID RICHARD, Defendant/Respondent C z O y. C= J ! jj A l ; ` ' ` C -- ? .. ? N) c IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-4615 Civil Term CIVIL LAW DIVORCE PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF REQUESTING EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION OF MARITAL HOME 1. The Petitioner is Danielle Richard, the Plaintiff in this matter (hereafter "Wife"). 2. The Respondent is David Richard, the Defendant in this matter (hereafter "Husband"). 3. On July 31, 2008, Wife filed a Complaint in Divorce, with a count for equitable distribution. 4. The parties own a home located at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, PA 17025 (hereafter the "marital home"). 5. The marital home was purchased in October of 2003 (with $31,700.00 down payment paid by Wife). It was purchased during the marriage and is titled in both parties' names. 5. The home has both a mortgage and a home equity loan. 6. The parties are unable to reside together. Husband refuses to leave the marital home and also refuses to pay the mortgage and home equity loans. 7. On June 27, 2008, Wife temporarily moved in with a girlfriend, but will not be able to remain there. 8. Husband initially told wife he would be paying the home equity loan, not the mortgage. Wife paid the mortgage for June of 2008. Husband then told wife he will not pay anything toward either the mortgage or home equity loan. 9. Husband has sufficient funds to pay these loans (he nets $1,500.00 every two weeks as an employee of Highmark). The mortgage is $1,027.00 per month and the home equity loan is $570.66 per month. Both the mortgage and home equity loans are in default. The mortgage has not been paid for July or August of 2008. The home equity loan is also in default (Husband paid only $225.00 toward June's monthly payment and nothing for July or August of 2008). 10. Wife requests exclusive possession of the marital home to prevent foreclosure on the asset as she will ensure the loan payments are made (and cannot afford to make these payment and also pay rent somewhere else). 11. Husband indicated his intention to simply live in the home without making any payments until forced to leave. WHEREFORE, Wife respectfully requests the Court grant her interim sole possession of the marital home pending equitable distribution or further Order of the Court. Respectfully submitted, DATE : 0 II fl, f4 /?f KENNF#H-FJ LEWIS, ESQUIRE Attorney or Petitioner/Plaintiff 1101 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. '?? E 'C'e- ?-L Dated: q I ), I a DANIELLE RICH D CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I have the Petition for Special Relief mailing same, postage prepaid date, at the following address: Mr. David Richard 619 Brisbain Lane Enola, PA 17025 served a true and correct copy of f upon the Respondent/Defendant by at Harrisburg, PA, on the filing DATED : g l) I fog KENNET,k FA LEWIS, ESQUIRE Attor ey for Defendant KENNETH F. LEWIS, ESQUIRE I.D. #69383 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 234-3136 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE RICHARD, Plaintiff V. DAVID RICHARD, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-4615 Civil Term CIVIL LAW DIVORCE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I certify I have served the Complaint in Divorce upon the Defen?d'ant,p David Richard, by personally handing it to him at CS1 "^1 D f ?S bca 'in L n , Enni ct on the y day of August, 2008 at nL? o'clock P.M. I verify the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: f4 6 la /V A. /Q QqA.A NAME : (OP-10N S, O U SEAM AJ ADDRESS: W A SS n +v 7!f ._ 14? C .. L.i-\ ?_. .?? i mo w • ` V DANIELLE RICHARD, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : 08-4615 CIVIL DAVID RICHARD, Defendant/Respondent IN DIVORCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2008, upon consideration of the Plaintiff's Petition for Special Relief Requesting Exclusive Possession of Marital Home, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that: 1. A rule is issued upon the Defendant to show cause why the Plaintiff is not entitled to the relief requested; 2. The Defendant shall file an Answer on or before September 8, 2008; 3. The Prothonotary shall forward said Answer to this Court; 4. If no answer to the Rule to Show cause is filed by the required date, the relief requested by Plaintiff shall be granted upon the Court's receipt of a Motion requesting Rule be made Absolute. If the Defendant files an answer to this Rule to Show Cause, the Court will determine if a hearing, status conference or further Order of Court is required. By the Court, /nneth F. Lewis, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff vPlavid Richard Defendant bas M. L. Ebert, Jr., LlNn 6 ? .g WV 81 9AV ONZ Asli _.! 31HI JCS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVNAIA CIVIL ACTION DANIELLE RICHARD Petitioner/Plaintiff No. 08-4615 VS. DAVID RICHARD Respondent/Defendant PETITION FOR ALIMONY PENDENTE LITE TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: The Petitioner respectfully represents: 1. Petitioner, David Richard, is an adult individual residing at 903 W. Trindle Road, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. Respondent, Danielle Richard, is an adult individual residing at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Pennsylvania 17025. 3. Petitioner and Respondent were married on September 6, 2003 in Trinity Lutheran Church and separated on June 27, 2008. 4. Respondent has not sufficiently provided support for the Petitioner. 5. Respondent is believed to be employed at EDS, 225 Grandview Avenue, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 and her net monthly income shall be determined pursuant to the Guidelines. 6. Petitioner is employed at Highmark and his net monthly income shall be determined pursuant to the Guidelines. 7. Petitioner is not receiving public assistance. 8. The amount asked by Petitioner for Alimony Pendente Lite is the maximum permitted by law. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Court enter an Order of Alimony Pendente Lite against the Respondent, as well as require Respondent to provide medical support for the Petitioner, if appropriate. I verify that the statements made in this Complaint, and attached exhibits if any, are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. a7?6?v By: Date erbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner 55 West High Street Elizabethtown, PA 17022 Telephone #: (717) 367-2800 Supreme Court #: 56304 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVNAIA CIVIL ACTION DANIELLE RICHARD Petitioner/Plaintiff No. 08-4615 vs. DAVID RICHARD Respondent/Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have on this date served the Petition for Alimony Pendente Lite on the person and in the manner indicated below, which satisfies the requirements of Pa. R.C.P. 440. Service by first class, postage paid, United States mail addressed as follows: Kenneth F. Lewis, Esquire 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 DATE: ?-/G?• ? Respectfully Submitted, By: Hebert P. Henderson, II, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner 55 West High Street Elizabethtown, PA 17022 Telephone #: (717) 367-2800 Supreme Court #: 56304 C-A DANIEELE M. RICHARD, THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff/Respondent CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. CIVIL ACTION - DIVORCE NO. 08-4615 CIVIL TERM DAVID R. RICHARD, IN DIVORCE Defendant/Petitioner : PACSES NO: 336110664 ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of February 2009, upon consideration of the Petition for Alimony Pendente Lite and/or counsel fees, it is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before R. J. Shadday on March 12, 2009 at 9:00 A.M. for a conference, at 13 N. Hanover St., Carlisle, PA 17013, after which the conference officer may recommend that an Order for Alimony Pendente Lite be entered. YOU are further ordered to bring to the conference: (1) a true copy of your most recent Federal Income Tax Return, including W-2's as filed (2) your pay stubs for the preceding six (6) months (3) the Income and Expense Statement attached to this order, completed as required by Rule 1910.11© (4) verification of child care expenses (5) proof of medical coverage which you may have, or may have available to you. If you fail to appear for the conference or bring the required documents, the Court may issue a warrant for your arrest. Copies mailed to: Petitioner Respondent Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esq. Kenneth P. Lewis, Esq. Date of Order: February 12, 2009 BY THE COURT, Edgar B. Bayley, President Judge . J. adda , APL Coordinator HAVE THE RIGHT TO A LAWYER, WHO MAY ATTEND THE CONFERENCE AND REPRESENT YOU. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU MAY GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVE. CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013 (717) 249-3166 cc361 ?? ?7? "?i 3 ?' L`% (?? ?- "'C3 '9 t. ? ?i .?... ,.- ?? ? r. "4` ?? ern =? DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff/Respondent VS. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant/Petitioner IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - DIVORCE NO. 0&4615 CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE PACSES CASE: 336110664 ORDER OF COURT AND NOW to wit, this 12th day of March 2009, it is hereby Ordered that the Petition for Alimony Pendente Lite is denied, and the Petition is dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to the parties' incomes and the Pennsylvania State guidelines. This Order shall become final twenty (20) days after the mailing of the notice of the entry of the order to the parties unless either party files a written demand with the Domestic Relations Section for a hearing de novo before the Court. BY THE COURT: M. L. Ebert, Jr., J. DRO: R.J. Shadday xc: Petitioner Respondent Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esq. Kenneth F. Lewis, Esq. Form OE-001 Service Type: M Worker: 21005 r S r Pecht & Associates, PC Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire v PA ID No.: 56304 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA . CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff VS. No. 2008-04615 DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant ACTION IN DIVORCE PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF TO COMPEL SALE OF REAL ESTATE AND NOW comes, your Petitioner, DAVID R. RICHARD, by and through his attorney, Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire, whom, in support of his Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate avers the following: 1. Petitioner herein is the above captioned Defendant, David R. Richard, (hereafter "Husband") 2. Respondent herein is the above captioned, Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, (hereafter "Wife"). 3. On or about June 15, 2008, following the filing of a Petition for Special Relief by Wife, and before the hearing scheduled in front of The Honorable M.L. Ebert, Jr. took place, the parties entered into an agreement whereby Wife was to live in the former marital residence located at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Pennsylvania, exclusive of Husband in exchange for her promise to maintain the home and pay the first and second mortgages on the property. Wife's prior attorney failed to file the agreement, but, nonetheless, Husband vacated the former marital residence and Wife, for a short period of time lived up to her end the agreement. 4. In February 2009, Husband learned that Wife did not pay either the first or second monthly mortgage payments owed on the property for several months. At that time Husband agreed to allow wife to refinance the mortgages and Wife indicate that she would attempt to do so within six (6) months. 5. In August 2009 when Husband inquired of the stats of the refinancing, Husband learned that not only did Wife not attempt the refinancing but that the mortgages were more seriously delinquent than in February 2009. When confronted by Husband, Wife told Husband that she was seeking a modification of the mortgage and that it was being paid. As of February 3, 2010, Wife has yet to submit all information necessary to modify the mortgage and, as set forth below, she is seriously delinquent. 6. Husband believes and therefore avers that the mortgage is not current and that Wife, even if she were somehow able to get the first and second mortgage companies to modify the terms of repayment, it is unlikely that she will be able to refinance or otherwise remove Husband's name form the Notes owed on the respective mortgages. 7. Husband believes and therefore avers that the first mortgage, owed to Chase Bank, was past due $16,011.82 as of February 3, 2010, and this did not include all legal fees, late fees and costs with the last payment being made on August 14, 2009. The second mortgage, owed to PNC, is past due $602.87 with the last payment being made on 2 February 1, 2010 and an additional payment in the amount of $358.64 on February 6, 2010. 8. Husband avers that Wife's living in the property without paying the mortgage is, in effect, a dissipation of a marital asset in that every payment missed will reduce the amount of equity in the property. 9. Husband further avers that Wife's residing in the former marital residence without paying the mortgage is tantamount to Wife keeping for herself the fair market rental value of the property and, as a result, should be held accountable to Husband for one half of the payments she failed or otherwise refused to make. 10. Wife consistently claims that payment arrangements are being made; however, Husband continues to receive collection calls and his credit continues to suffer derogatory reporting on the mortgages. 11. Husband believes and therefore avers the only manner in which to stop the dissipation of the former marital residence and stop the continued negative reporting on his credit is for the residence to be sold which obviously means the house must be listed for sale. 12. Husband has incurred substantial legal fees over the last year in pursuit of his efforts to insure Wife maintained the former marital residence and will incur additional fees in the preparation of and the presentation of this Petition for Special Relief, all of which could have been avoided had Wife simply made the monthly mortgage payments as contemplated at the time he vacated the residence in favor of Wife. 13. Counsel for both parties have attempted to resolve this dispute but are unable to do so. 14. Wife's counsel advised Husband's counsel that she opposes the petition. 3 WHEREFORE, Petitioner David R. Richard requests this Honorable Court enter an Order directing Respondent Danielle M. Richard to cooperate with the listing and sale of the real estate subject to equitable distribution, 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania with a realtor agreed upon by the parties' respective counsel. Respectfully submitted, PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC BY: I Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff PA ID No.: 56304 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 4 VERIFICATION I, David R. Richard, Petitioner herein, verify that the statements made in the foregoing pleading are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. February 8, 2010 David R. Richard CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire, attorney for Defendant, David R. Richards, hereby certify that I have served the foregoing papers, this date by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Kenneth F. Lewis, Esquire Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire 1101 North Front Street 5000 Ritter Rd, Suite 202 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC Date: I L By: rbert P. Henderson, II, Esqui PA ID #56304 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 Office DANIELLE M. RICHARD, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA O V. DAVID R. RICHARD, r DEFENDANT NO. 08-4615 CIVIL ORDER OF COURT r can AND NOW, this 2"d da y of March, 2010, upon consideration of Defendant' s Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that: 1. A Rule is issued upon the Plaintiff to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted; 2. The Plaintiff will file an answer on or before March 24, 2010; 3. The Prothonotary is directed to forward said Answer to this Court. 4. A hearing on this matter will be held on Wednesday, April 7, 2010, at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom No. 2 of the Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. By the Court, Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 _,,-O-a-nielle M. Richard 619 Brisbain Lane Enola, PA 17025 avid R. Richard P. O. Box 92 Camp Hill, PA 17001 - ?% -?, UA\ - M. L. Ebert, Jr., J. CDC L ?S rYl? l ?4.G`, I 4-11 t6 bas DANIELLE M. RICHARD, THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. : No. 08-4615 CIVIL TERM C-) DAVID R. RICHARD, CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW - f-;; -? Defendant DIVORCE r `= -nrn -tea -,; PRAECIPE TO VVITHDRAW AND ENTER APPEARANCES ,,a c 5 TO THE PROTHONTARY: Kindly withdraw the appearance of Kenneth F. Lewis, Esquire, as attorney for the Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, in the above captioned matter. Dated: •3 /to )L - Kenneth F/Lewis, Esquire 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 Phone: (717) 234-3136 PA S. Ct. ID No. 69383 Kindly enter the appearance of Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire, as attorney for the Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, in the above captioned matter. Dated: 0 -// 0 Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Phone: (717) 221-0900 PA S. Ct. ID No. 68735 R r3C OF ?N-- PFnT'H1a0TAR' 2010 Rc4 PH I: ?2 C a :7 L, JEANNE B. COSTOPOULOS, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 68735 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Telephone No. (717) 221-0900 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff VS. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 08-4615 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW DIVORCE PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF TO COMPEL SALE OF REAL ESTATE AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, by and through her attorney, Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire, and files this answer to Defendant's Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted the parties discussed entering into a Stipulation granting Wife exclusive possession of the marital residence, however it is denied that an agreement was ever reached because Wife refused to accept language in the stipulation which required her to pay $3,815.98 for the mortgage and the home equity loan incurred from the end of June through September 1, 2008, during which time Husband was exclusively residing in the marital home. 4. Admitted in part; denied in part. Wife is without sufficient information to determine when Husband inquired as to whether or not the first and second mortgage payments were being made. It is admitted that the parties had discussions about Wife possibly refinancing the first and second mortgages. It is specifically denied that any formal agreement was reached regarding refinancing by Wife. By way of further answer, Wife was never solely responsible to pay the first and second mortgages, especially the second mortgage which was a consolidation loan for debts that had nothing to do with the marital home. 5. Admitted in part; denied in part. Wife is without sufficient information to determine when Husband inquired about Wife's refinancing efforts since he did not directly discuss the situation with her. By way of further answer, it is Wife's understanding that Husband had discussions with Chase Bank and was told that they were recommending that Wife seek a modification of the mortgage instead of a refinance. It is admitted that Wife told Husband that she was seeking a modification of the mortgage and that it was being paid. By way of further answer, Wife has complied with all directives from Chase Bank as to seeking a modification of the mortgage and has made all payments Chase Bank directed her to make. It is denied that as of February 3, 2010 Wife had not yet submitted all information necessary to modify the mortgage. By way of further answer, Wife received a letter from Chase Bank dated January 28, 2010, which confirmed receipt of her documentation and no additional information has been requested of her since that date. 6. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that the first mortgage is not current. It is denied that Wife is solely responsible for the second mortgage, therefore it is not her sole responsibility to keep it current. Wife denies that it is unlikely that she will be able to refinance the first mortgage after she has demonstrated an ability to pay the modified first mortgage which is expected to be approved in the near future. By way of further answer, the balance on the second mortgage is $57,318.49, for which Wife believes Husband should be equally responsible. Wife believes she can refinance her half of the second mortgage if Husband refinances his half and pays Wife 50% of the payments she has already made towards the second mortgage. 7. Admitted in part; denied in part. Wife is without sufficient information to determine the exact amount past due to Chase Bank for the first mortgage. By way of further answer, once the modification is approved, there will no longer be a past due balance and there will be a fixed rate mortgage with an affordable monthly payment (unlike the balloon ARM that resulted in the principle payment of $780.00 per month suddenly raising to $1,200.00 per month). The second mortgage will be current as of March 15, 2010. Wife modified the second mortgage to a lower amount as of November 25, 2008. Wife paid $570.66 per month from June through August (when Husband was exclusively residing in the home), then Wife paid $570.66 per month for the months of September, October and November of 2008, and Wife has paid a minimum of $358.43 per month from December of 2008 through the present. The second mortgage was a consolidation loan for the parties' joint debt and Husband is jointly responsible for the payments. In total, Wife has paid over $8,800.00 towards the second mortgage for which Wife believes Husband must reimburse her $4,400.00. 8. Denied. The house is currently a liability rather than an asset because the total of the first and second mortgages is greater than its fair market value. The modification is the only way to preserve the house and prevent it from adding to the total debt of the parties. If a foreclosure or sale were to occur, the parties would owe money even though they would no longer own the house. 9. Denied. Wife has agreed to be solely responsible for the first mortgage for the period she has had exclusive possession of the house. She believes Husband should be solely responsible for the first mortgage during the period he had exclusive possession of the house. When the modification is approved, Wife intends to be solely responsible for those payments. Therefore, Wife will have saved Husband from being responsible for the first mortgage and she will also have fixed the credit problem associated with the first mortgage having gone into default. Accordingly, Husband should not be entitled to any fair market rental value consideration. In other words, any such consideration theoretically owed to Husband is canceled by Wife's assumption of the first mortgage. 10. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Wife has claimed that payment arrangements are being made for the first mortgage in that she has complied with all requirements necessary to seek a modification of the first mortgage. It is denied that Husband is receiving collection calls regarding the first mortgage and strict proof thereof is demanded. It is admitted that Husband receives collection calls regarding the second mortgage, because Wife has specifically requested the loan holder to contact Husband to remind him of his obligation since she has been solely making the payments on the second mortgage even though Husband is equally responsible for said debt. It is denied that the only collection calls received by Husband are for the second mortgage, as Wife believes that Husband also receives collection calls for non-marital debts that he has not paid. 11. Denied. Even if the house were sold, the negative credit rating would remain, especially since more is owed than the house is worth. The only way to prevent a negative credit rating regarding the first mortgage, is for the modification sought by Wife to be approved. In such case, the current ARM would show a zero balance and the new modified loan would show= that it was current. In either case, Husband will continue to suffer derogatory credit reporting in the event he is behind on his own separate non- marital debt. 12. No answer required. By way of further answer, any legal fees incurred by Husband are Husband's responsibility as Wife has incurred her own legal fees related to this case. Legal fees are expected since the parties are involved in a divorce proceeding. Wife may had have been able to pay the mortgage if Husband did not leave the house with the mortgage already in arrears and if he had equally contributed payments on the second mortgage. In addition, Wife has requested Husband to sign a Quit Claim Deed to assist with the modification, which he was assured would not be filed unless she were able to remove his name from the obligation, but he refused, thereby again thwarting Wife's efforts to save the residence and to save the parties from owing additional money. Husband has been thwarting Wife's efforts to save the home and both parties' credit rating in that he has tried to get the bank to start foreclosure proceedings and he is now trying to force a sale of a house worth less than the debts it is secured by. Husband obviously does not understand that the only way to save the house as an asset and to negate any derogatory credit rating associated with the house is for Wife's modification to be approved and for him to start paying his share of the second mortgage. This issue is best addressed by the divorce master through equitable distribution, not through a special relief petition to sell the residence. 13. Admitted. 14. Admitted. Dated: 7/,? e 17ei t J 6 B. Costopoulos, Esquire 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Phone: (717) 221-0900 PA S. Ct. ID No. 68735 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF VERIFICATION I, Danielle M. Richard, hereby verify and state that the facts set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn verification to authorities. Date: S I1 5 d o/o ?. Danielle M. Richard CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire, hereby certify that this day I personally served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person, and in the manner, indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the PA Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of the same with the United States Post Office through first class mail, prepaid, and addressed as follows: Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 By: JE NE B. COSTOPOUL , SQUIRE Attorney 1. D. No. 68735 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Telephone No. (717) 221-0900 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Date: ZZ?ZO/ D DANIELLE RICHARD, Plaintiff V DAVID RICHARD, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 08-4615 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 2010, upon consideration of David Richard's Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate and Danielle Richard's Answer thereto, and after hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the plaintiff, Danielle Richard, will cooperate in listing this property at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, for sale on or before June 30, 2010. The parties will submit to the Court the proposed real estate agent for this transaction on or before April 21, 2010. If the parties cannot reach an agreement as to the listing agent each party will submit two names to the court for the court to determine the listing agent. By the Court, " Jeanne CostoPolous, Esquire For the Plaintiff p Fi M. L. Ebert, J , J. - _r _ -c1 erbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire For the Defendant : mt f nLEG--& uz NOTARY 2010 APR 19 PM 4:13 1 EN' VVr{..YANA , JEANNE B. COSTOPOULOS, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 68735 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Telephone No. (717) 221-0900 Attorney for Plaintiff DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff vs. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No. 08-4615 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW DIVORCE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR RECON§IDERATION OF ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF TO COMPEL SALE OF REAL ESTATE AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, by and through her attorney, Jeann6 B. Costopoulos, Esquire, and files this request for reconsideration and in support thereof avers as follows: Subsequent to the hearing held on April 7, 2010, Plaintiff, Danielle M. Richard, hereinafter referred to as Wife, again contacted Chase Bank regarding the status of her modification request. The representative was not identified prior to the April 7, 2010 hearing. 2. Mr. Brad Freeman, manger in the loss mitigation department for Chase bank, said he does not know why it has taken this long to go through the modification process. Normal procedures with a divorce situation, is Defendant, David R. Richard, hereinafter referred to as Husband, would need to have signed the divorce decree stating he had no interest in the marital home and was transferring it over to Wife. However, since there is no divorce decree or settlement agreement, it may be premature to finalize. 3. Mr. Freeman indicated that he is confused because Wife's file because it states that she was approved in June of 2009 for the modification but there was no other information nor was a packet ever sent to either Wife or Husband with the approval information. 4. Mr. Freeman agreed that Wife has done what has been asked of her and he hoped the judge would reconsider and hold off until final resolution of the case since he may need the Decree or a court order to approve the modification without an agreement from Husband that he does not want the marital home. 5. Mr. Freeman stated that if Husband were to put in writing that he wants nothing to do with the home so long as he is not financially tied to it anymore, he will relinquish his entitlement and Wife would be approved for the modification in her name alone. 6. Mr. Freeman also thought a short sale on the home would not work because the house is not in forclosure status and a modification is in progress. He did not feel that Chase Bank would be willing to negotiate a short sale on the house even with it being an upside/down loan and it is taking "months" to get any of their current loans approved for short sales because of how many they are currently dealing with in our economic status. 7. There is no foreclosure in progress and Husband will not be prejudiced if Wife's modification is permitted to proceed. C CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jeannd B. Costopoulos, Esquire, hereby certify that this day I personally served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person, and in the manner, indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the PA Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of the same with the United States Post Office through first class mail, prepaid, and addressed as follows: Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 By: JE NN?COST?EB.COSojpOULOS, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 68735 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Telephone No. (717) 221-0900 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Date: L 'Z o Yj 7 Herbert P. Henderson, Esquire. T! r T ` `??Y PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. , „ 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 2310 ? ?n i A N 9: Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-4917 (717) 691-9808 CL Lh Y (717) 691-2070 facsimile IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff/Respondent V. DAVID R. RICHARD, No. 2008 - 04615 Defendant/Petitioner DEFENDANT DAVID R. RICHARD'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF TO COMPEL SALE OF REAL ESTATE AND NOW, comes Defendant, David R. Richard, by and through his counsel, Pecht & Associates, PC, and Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire and files this Response to Plaintiff's Request for Reconsideration and in support thereof avers the following: 1. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. 2. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. By way of further response, it is a violation of husband's due process rights to force husband to sign a settlement agreement or a divorce decree simply to allow wife to obtain a loan modification. 3. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. 4. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. 5. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. By way of further response, it is a violation of husband's due process rights to force husband to sign a settlement agreement or a divorce decree simply to allow wife to obtain a loan modification. 6. No answer is required in as much as the allegation sets forth an averment of fact which is not part of the record and therefore it is not properly considered in the Request for Reconsideration. To the extent an answer may be required, same is denied. 7. Denied. It is specifically denied that husband will not be prejudiced by wife's modification. To the contrary, she has continued to fail to pay the mortgage as evidenced by her inability to make anything but nominal payments on the mortgage overall. 8. Admitted. It is admitted this Honorable Court, may, upon receipt of a Petition for Special Relief, exercise its broad discretionary power in any domestic case to effectuate economic justice between the parties. It is denied, however, that it is appropriate to grant reconsideration based upon hearsay from wife, who had full opportunity to call other witness at trial and simply failed and refused to do so. 9. What wife is willing or not willing to do is not germane to the decision as to whether or not this Honorable Court should grant the reconsideration and direct the escrow of future payments. There is no reasonable expectation that Wife will escrow payments if required by this Court; she has had the opportunity to do so over the past twenty- four (24) months and has failed to do so. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiffs Request for Reconsideration. Respectfully submitted, PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC May 3, 2010 HP. Henderson, II., Esquire PA ID No.: 56304 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 (717) 691-2070 (facsimile) . 05/03/2010 13:53 FAX 717 302 1368 HIGHMARK GLS 1a002/002 VERIFICATION I, David R. Richard, the Defendant/Petitioner herein, state that the averments contained in the foregoing pleading are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief Further, I am aware that any false statements made herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa, C.S. Section 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Date: David . Richard CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this the 4th day of May 2010, 1 served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendant David R. Richard's Response to Plaintiff's Request for Reconsideration of Order Granting Defendant's Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate by US First Class Mail as follows: Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire 130 Gettysburg Pike Suite C Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 May 4, 2010 Herbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire PA ID No.: 56304 Pecht & Associates, PC 1205 Manor Drive Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 DANIELLE RICHARD IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DAVID RICHARD, DEFENDANT 08-4615 CIVIL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 11th day of May, 2010, the parties having submitted names of realtors to list the property at 619 Brisbain Lane, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania for sale pursuant to Order of Court dated April 7, 2010; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the property shall be listed with Rita Dallago, Dugan Realty Group, 22 South Market Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. The listing shall be accomplished on or before May 28, 2010. Either party is authorized to have an appraisal of the property done at their own expense. Jeanne Costopoulos, Esquire ?Atttorney for Plaintiff Herbert P. Henderson, 11, Esquire Attorney for Defendant bas ?o «?<<EcL ?'rY1 By the Court, 'N? 11-4? UP M. L. Ebert, Jr., J. ? FC3 a rT'T DANIELLE RICHARD IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DAVID RICHARD, DEFENDANT 08-41615 CIVIL ORDER QF COURT AND NOW, this 11th day of May, 2010, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Request for Reconsideration of Order Granting Defendant's Petition for Special Relief to Compel Sale of Real Estate, and the Defendant's Answer thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the Request for Reconsideration is DENIED. 'Jeanne Costopoulos, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff erbert P. Henderson, II, Esquire Attorney for Defendant bas Ca P t E.r rna t LL? s f z/?d By the Court, \k I,, ?- M. L. Ebert, Jr., J. 4 ? U? N W c II OCT I I PM I PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. WAYNE M. PECHT, ESQUIRE M P 1205 Manor Drive Suite 200 PENNSYLVANIA Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-691-9808 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, VS. DAVID R. RICHARD, Plaintiff No. 2008#4615-CIVIL TERM Defendant AFFIDAVIT OF CONSENT 1. A complaint in Divorce under 3301(c) of the Divorce Code was filed on July 31, 2008. 2. The marriage of the plaintiff and defendant is irretrievably broken and ninety (90) days have elapsed from the date of filing and the service of the complaint. 3. I consent to the entry of a final decree of divorce after service of notice of intention to request the decree. I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. §4909 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Dated: d l 1 C?-r V- Danielle M. Richard C PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Oc, ! Pp1 W SYNManor E M.DPrECHT, ESQUIRE U' pBERL `- Suite 200 BJ? Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-691-9808 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff VS. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant No. 200844615-CIVIL TERM WAIVER OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO REOUEST ENTRY OF A DIVORCE DECREE UNDER § 3301(C) AND § 3301 (D) OF THE DIVORCE CODE 1. I consent to the entry of a final decree of divorce without notice. 2. I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division or property, lawyer's fees or expenses if I do not claim them before a divorce is granted. 3. I understand that I will not be divorced until a divorce decree is entered by the Court and that a copy of the decree will be sent to me immediately after it is filed with the Prothonotary. I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. r Dated: a (Q i 1 S?) Danielle M. Richard Try PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. OCT I I PM !: WAYNE M. PECHT, ESQUIRE UM8ERLAi° LD u0U.^4? 1205 Manor Drive PENINSYLVAWA Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-691-9808 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, vs. DAVID R. RICHARD, Plaintiff No. 2008-#4615-CIVIL TERM Defendant AFFIDAVIT OF CONSENT 1. A complaint in Divorce under 3301(c) of the Divorce Code was filed on July 31, 2008. 2. The marriage of the plaintiff and defendant is irretrievably broken and ninety (90) days have elapsed from the date of filing and the service of the complaint. 3. I consent to the entry of a final decree of divorce after service of notice of intention to request the decree. I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. §4909 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: \?)\A\X.\ avid R. ichard r E .D 1 ?C? I I P? !; PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 2w ! ! WAYNE M. PECHT, ESQUIRE CUMBERLAND' COuN11 1205 Manor Drive PENNISYE.VA1411 Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-691-9808 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff vs. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant No. 2008-04615-CIVIL TERM WAIVER OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO REQUEST ENTRY OF A DIVORCE DECREE UNDER § 3301(C) AND § 3301 (D) OF THE DIVORCE CODE 1. I consent to the entry of a final decree of divorce without notice. 2. I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division or property, lawyer's fees or expenses if I do not claim them before a divorce is granted. 3. I understand that I will not be divorced until a divorce decree is entered by the Court and that a copy of the decree will be sent to me immediately after it is filed with the Prothonotary. I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 10? \0\\-V avid R. Richard c IL Hi - 1:1 C TNI- PECHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. WAYNE M. PECHT, ESQUIRE PAID NO.: 38904 1205 Manor Drive Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 ?L A t'3D 1:(.? n r 111116 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIEL LE M. RICHARD, VS. DAVID R. RICHARD, Plaintiff Defendant No. 2008-04615-Civil Term PRAECIPE TO TRANSMIT RECORD TO: David Buell, Prothonotary, Cumberland County Transmit the record, together with the following information, to the court for entry of a divorce decree: 1. Ground for divorce: Irretrievable breakdown under § 3301 (c) of the Divorce Code; -2. Date and manner of the service of the Complaint: Personal service on Defendant by Orion S. Houseman, on August 6, 2008. 3. Date of execution of the Affidavit of Consent required by § 3301 (c) of the Divorce code by Plaintiff. September 26, 2011. 4. Date of Execution of the Affidavit of Consent Under Section 3301(c) of the Divorce Code by Defendant: October 10, 2011. 5. Date of execution of the Waiver of Notice of Intention to Request Entry of a Divorce Decree required by § 3301 (c) of the Divorce code by Plaintiff: September 26, 2011. Date of execution of the Waiver of Notice of Intention to Request Entry of a Divorce Decree required by § 3301(c) of the Divorce Code by Defendant: October 10, 2011. 6. Related claims pending: None 7. Plaintiff's Waiver of Notice was filed with the Prothonotary: October 11, 2011. Defendant's Waiver of Notice was filed with the Prothonotary: October 11, 2011. October 13, 2011 Wayne M. Ocht, squire PAID No. 38904 Pecht & Associates, PC 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this the 13th day of October 2011, 1 served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Transmit Record by US First Class Mail, postage prepaid, as follows: Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire 130 Gettysburg Pike Suite C Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 October 13, 2011 Wayne M. echt, Esquire PA ID No.: 38904 Pecht & Associates, PC 1205 Manor Drive Suite 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 691-9808 IN TILE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Ws. Plaintiff No.2008-04615-Civil Term DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant DECREE AND NOW, this I SY day of N ovlJMb6r , 2011, it is ORDERED and DECREED that DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff and DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant, are divorced from the bonds of matrimony. Any existing spousal support order shall hereafter be deemed an order for alimony pendent elite if any economic claims remain pending. The court retains jurisdiction of any claims raised by the parties to this action for which a final order has not yet been entered. Those claims are as follows: NONE. By the Court, Prothonotary G CosclCas l1,2 ??- C'e/? ?oP d/-/o /?? /,)e cif obi ? ? A cv Na,l? LE0- PROTHA' TX_ I I NOV 30 PM I: 53 CUMBERLANO COUdJT Y PENNSYLVANIA DANIELLE M. RICHARD, Plaintiff vs. DAVID R. RICHARD, Defendant THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 08-4615 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW DIVORCE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO RESUME PRIOR NAME NOTICE is hereby given that I, Danielle May Richard, Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, having been granted a Final Decree in Divorce on November 1, 2411, hereby elects to retake and hereafter use her previous name of Danielle May Frye, and gives this written notice avowing her intention in accordance with the provisions of the Act of December 16, 1982, P.L. 1809, 54 Pa. C.S.A. §704. Date: i 1 1 I 1 9 c? ,. z ,? ?. 'UrD Danielle May Richard TO BE KNOWN AS: Danielle May Frye V11-66-?Lp-ttf etc ??vg t?-a?7ga