Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-7349JULIE A. BAKER, Plaintiff ) vs. ) RANDALL K. BAKER, ) Defendant ) NOTICE TO DEFENDANT NAMED HEREIN: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 6?-- 73f ? c..N."l crw YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND AGAINST THE CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES, YOU MUST TAKE ACTION WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS AFTER THIS COMPLAINT AND NOTICE ARE SERVED, BY ENTERING A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. YOU ARE WARNED THAT IF YOU FAIL TO DO SO, THE CASE MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOU, AND A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY THE COURT WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE FOR ANY MONEY CLAIMED IN THE COMPLAINT OR FOR ANY OTHER CLAIM OR RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE PLAINTIFF. YOU MAY LOSE MONEY OR PROPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 TELEPHONE: (717) 249-3166 JULIE A. BAKER, Plaintiff ) vs. ) RANDALL K. BAKER, ) Defendant ) COMPLAINT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07- 7 3 Y4 (`. a -7--z-- AND NOW comes the above-named Plaintiff, by her attorney, Samuel L. Andes, and makes the following Complaint in this matter: 1. The Plaintiff is Julie A. Baker an adult individual who resides at 249 Walnut Street in Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Defendant is Randall K. Baker an adult individual who resides at 37 Ashton Street in Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The parties are husband and wife and are the parents of one minor child, Wyatt K. Baker, born 12 August 1997. The child currently resides with Plaintiff. 4. In late 2007, the parties owned a residence at 37 Ashton Street in Carlisle where both of them, and the child, resided. The house had been constructed largely with funds Plaintiff received from an inheritance during the marriage. 5. In late 2007, and for several years prior to that, Plaintiff worked on a part time basis as a bookkeeper for various businesses in the Carlisle area. Her annual income was approximately $3,500.00 from that work. Otherwise, she devoted herself to the family and the parties' child. 6. In late 2007 and for many years prior to that, Defendant was employed by the Hershey Medical Center as a physician's assistant, for which employment he derived income of approximately $95,000.00 per year. Defendant's income provided the financial support for the family. 7. In the second half of 2007, Defendant became romantically involved with another woman. In late 2007, Defendant asked Plaintiff to move out of the house. 8. Following a series of negotiations between the parties, they reached an agreement whereby Plaintiff would purchase a home in Carlisle, the parties would finance the purchase of that home with a mortgage against the Ashton Street property, Plaintiff and the child would move to her new home, and Defendant would pay Plaintiff $1,400.00 every two weeks from which Plaintiff would pay the mortgage the parties took out to finance the purchase of her new home, and the other living expenses of herself and the parties' child in that new home. The parties reduced that agreement to writing and a copy of that written agreement, signed by both parties, is attached hereto and marked as EXHIBIT A. 9. In reliance upon the parties' agreement, and to fulfill her obligations under that agreement, Plaintiff purchased the home at 249 Walnut Street in Carlisle and moved herself and her son into that new home. 10. In June of 2008, the parties further defined and clarified the details of their original agreement a subsequent agreement which specifically defines certain expenses to be paid and set out a method for the payment of $1,400.00 every two weeks to Plaintiff by Defendant. The parties reduced that agreement to writing and a copy of that agreement, signed by both parties, is attached hereto and marked as EXHIBIT B. 11. Plaintiff has well and truly performed her obligations under the agreement between the parties. 12. In November of 2008, Defendant stopped making the payments of $1,400.00 every two weeks to Plaintiff as required by the agreement between the parties. Defendant has not made any further payments as required by the agreement since early November 2008. 13. Without the payments from Defendant, required by the agreements between the parties, Plaintiff is not able to pay the mortgage taken for the purchase of the Walnut Street property and is not able to pay the normal living expenses for herself and her son. 14. Defendant, by his conduct, has injured, and continues to injure Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this court to order and direct Defendant to make payment of $1,400.00 to Plaintiff every two weeks, commencing effective 14 November 2008, and continuing until the parties mutually agree otherwise to award Plaintiff interest on all payments not timely made, and to award Plaintiff her costs of suit. el QLNIA-ridNE6?sF, Attorney for Plaintiff Supreme Court ID# 17225 525 North 12th Street P.O. Box 168 Lemoyne, Pa 17043 (717) 761-5361 I verify that the statements made in this document are true and correct. I understand that any false statements in this document are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 4904 (unsworn falsification to authorities). Date: 0 5? J LIE A. BAKER EXHIBIT A AGREEM:El' T We agree to separate and, to the following terms: 1. Julie will buy a property at 249 Walnut Street in Carlisle. The purchase price of property will be approximately $210,000.00 and she has arranged for a mortgage from American Home Mortgage Company for $210,000.00 to pay for the purchase of the property and the costs of such purchase. That loan will be in the form of a mortgage against the property that Julie and Randy own at 37 Ashton Street. 2. Julie and Randy will sign all the documents necessary for the mortgage against the Ashton Street property to obtain the funds required to purchase the house on Walnut Street, in Julie's name alone. Those documents will include a Waiver in which Randy agrees that the property belongs only to Julie. 3. After the purchase of the property on Walnut Street, Julie and Wyatt will move to that residence. Once Julie moves to that residence, Randy will pay her $1,400.00 from each of his paychecks. 4. As long as Randy is making the payments of $1,400.00 per Pay to Julie, Julie will pay the monthly mortgage payment to American Home Mortgage. 5. Julie will pay the expenses of the household in the properly on Walnut Street. Randy will pay the expenses of the household for the home on Ashton Street. 6. The arrangements coRtained in this agreement shall rem* n effect until change by the mutual agreement of both pies. We 7have Z signed this agreem? on the -30 day of A. Baker EXHIBIT B Agreement This agreement is supplemental to the agreement we signed on January 30, 2008, and is intended to update and clarify the arrangements agreed to between Julie A. Baker and Randall K. Baker as of this date. 1. We agree that the household expenses on Ashton Street will include utilities, the line of credit payment that we currently pay to American Home Bank, the homeowner's insurance premium, real estate taxes, property maintenance and yard care, and that Randall is responsible for these expenses. 2. We agree that a direct deposit in the amount of $1;400.00 will be made into Julie's account at Sovereign Bank (Account Number 0431105472) from Randy's account every two weeks within three business days after he is paid. This represents the support payment to Julie and Wyatt Baker. 3. Everything else in the previous agreement shall remain in effect ? J 'e A. Baker Randall K. Baker Di C) r.+ co r' O. ?u 7 f t?i Y ,? t... 0 r JULIE A. BAKER, Plaintiff ) vs. ) RANDALL K. BAKER, ) Defendant ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 08-7349 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE Please enter my appearance for the Defendant, Randall K. Baker in the above matter I hereby accept service of the Complaint effective this date. Date: /,2 116 106 Lee E. Oe Attorney for Defendant Supreme Court ID # 7/3zp 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 241-6070 Q6 N t.n IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JULIE A. BAKER Plaintiff No. 08-7349 V. Civil Action - Law RANDALL K. BAKER Defendant NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Julie A. Baker c/o Samuel L. Andes, Esquire P. O. Box 168 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: January 20, 2009 Respectfully submitted, Rominger & _Associate Lee E. Oes1er1ibgEwq'uire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 71320 Attorney for Defendant r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9th JUDICIAL DISTRICT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JULIE A. BAKER Plaintiff No. 08-7349 V. RANDALL K. BAKER Defendant Civil Action- Law ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, comes Defendant Randall K. Baker, by and through legal counsel, Lee E. Oesterling, Esquire and answers Plaintiff's Complaint in corresponding numeric paragraphs as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff worked as a bookkeeper. It is further admitted that Plaintiff devoted time to the parties child, however, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief regarding Plaintiff's actual income. By way of further answer, Plaintiff managed the household finances, managed the marital income and payment of bills, handled the taxes and to date continues to hold the pertinent documentation in this regard. By way of further answer, in addition to bookkeeping work, Plaintiff managed a printing business which she sold for approximately, $40,000.00 and to which payment was received on an annual basis. 6. Admitted in part Denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant was and still is employed by the Hershey Medical Center as a physician's assistant. It is also admitted that Defendant's income was a source of financial support for the family, however, and by way of further answer, Defendant believes and therefore avers that his income was not the sole financial support for the family and to the extent this is implied by the averment in paragraph 6 it is denied. 7. Denied. The averments in paragraph 7 are specifically denied. By way of further answer, Defendant was never romantically involved with another woman at the time in question or thereafter he further denies that he asked Plaintiff to move out of the house and submits that she did so voluntarily. By way of even further answer, Plaintiff left the home of her own volition after she had surreptitiously been searching for a new home and had committed to purchase of a residence without informing Defendant. 8. Admitted in part, Denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff as reflected in Plaintiff's Exhibit "A', however, (and as outlined in Defendant's New Matter herein), it is denied that the agreement is valid as it arose from circumstances where there was no full and fair disclosure of pertinent financial information in Plaintiff's control. Furthermore, the agreement purports to contractually fix child support in contravention of public policy. 9. Admitted in part, Denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff and the parties son moved into the home at 249 Walnut Street in Carlisle. By way of further answer, the Defendant is unable to ascertain the subjective state of mind of the Plaintiff in her claim that she relied on the agreement to purchase the home at 249 Walnut Street Carlisle and therefore to the extent that an answer to that averment is required it is hereby denied. By way of even further answer, Defendant, became aware of Plaintiff's surreptitious search for a new residence after the fact and after Plaintiff had already committed to a contractual obligation to purchase the property. 10. Admitted in part, Denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant entered into the subsequent agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as exhibit "B." However, and by way of further answer, to the extent that the averment purports that execution of the agreement suggests its validity, the averment is denied. By way of even further answer, the subsequent agreement is tainted as it stems from the initial agreement which lacked full and fair disclosure, was based upon Defendant being in a position where he had no meaningful choice due to Plaintiff's unilateral commitment to the purchase of the home. 11. Denied. Paragraph 11 contains conclusion of law as substantial performance is a legal determination by the application of contract law and therefore no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, the averment in paragraph 11 is denied. 12. Admitted in part, Denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant stopped making the $1400.00 bi- weekly payment in November of 2008, however, it is specifically denied that Defendant has not made payments to the Plaintiff, in fact Defendant has sent support payments to Plaintiff which she claims were never received or lost in the mail. 13. Denied. Plaintiff has failed to disclose and continues to make unavailable the financial information that Defendant would need to reasonably investigate the truth of the averment in paragraph 13. Therefore, Defendant is without sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averment in paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 14. Denied. Paragraph 14 contains Plaintiff's conclusion as to law and fact and is therefore denied. By way of further answer, Plaintiff has failed to disclose and continues to make unavailable the financial information that Defendant would need to reasonably investigate the truth of the averment in paragraph 14. Therefore, Defendant is without sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averment in paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays this court dismiss Plaintiff s complaint with prejudice. NEW MATTER I. The Agreements entered into by Plaintiff and Defendant are void, invalid or in the alternative unenforceable as Plaintiff failed to provide full and fair disclosure of the parties financial position and failed to disclose her interest in assets that would've allowed Defendant to negotiate a fair settlement upon separation. 15. The previous paragraphs of this Answer numbered 1 through 14 are incorporated by reference thereto. 16. At all times pertinent hereto and throughout the parties marriage. Plaintiff managed the parties marital finances, including but not limited to managing bank accounts, bookkeeping, maintenance of statements, ledgers, payment of bills, preparation and payment of income taxes and payment of costs and expenses associated with the marital residence and continues to have the majority of the parties records as to financial position in her possession. 17. Defendant believes and therefore avers that for a period of at least two years, Plaintiff was seeking to leave the marital residence and was searching for real property with the intent to separate from Defendant. 18. In 2007, Plaintiff executed a sales agreement to purchase a home at 249 Walnut Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania without Defendant's knowledge or agreement and with the intent of leaving the marital residence. 19. Upon being made aware of Plaintiff's intentions Defendant felt as if he had no meaningful alternative regarding compliance with the contractual and financial commitment that Plaintiff had entered into with a third party. 20. Defendant executed the Agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" believing he would be liable for any repercussion in the event of Wife's default on the signed sales agreement and in the absence of meaningful knowledge of the parties financial affairs. 21. Defendant executed the Agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" without information or access to all of the parties financial records or as to Wife's sources of income including the availability of any funds from inheritances, employment, personal loans or derived from any other source. 22. Defendant executed the Agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" in reliance upon Plaintiff's representations that she had paid all bills and liens against the marital residence which in fact Defendant later discovered were not paid. 23. In November of 2008, Defendant became aware that the property taxes on the marital residence and numerous utility bills were unpaid and were delinquent in an amount in excess of $8,000.00. Accordingly, Defendant has had to incur costs for debts that he had not anticipated and in which Plaintiff deliberately withheld information or provided false information regarding the status thereof. 24. Neither of the agreements attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit"A" or Exhibit"B" state that there has been full and fair disclosure of all the assets, debts, or other obligations of the parties though Plaintiff purports that the agreements constitute a valid contract in the form of a postnuptial agreement. 25. Neither of the agreements attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit"A" or Exhibit"B" were executed by Defendant with any prior assistance of counsel. 26. Defendant would not have entered into the agreements given the information which he later discovered but was withheld or misrepresented at the time the agreements were executed. 27. Full and fair disclosure of financial positions is the sine qua non of a valid post nuptial agreement. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays the court find that the agreements attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" and "B" be declared invalid and Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. II. The post nuptial agreements between Plaintiff and Defendant are void as contrary to public policy in that they attempt to contractually fix child support despite the existence of a pending support proceeding. 28. The previous paragraphs of this Answer numbered 1 through 27 are incorporated by reference thereto. 29. The agreements attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" and "B" purport to create a contractual support obligation to Plaintiff and the minor child Defendant. 30. Plaintiff voluntarily absented herself from the marital residence and therefore is not entitled to spousal support. 31. A proceeding is presently pending for January 26, 2009, in the Domestic Relations Section for Cumberland County for the adjudication of Defendant's obligation for child support. 32. The collateral proceedings will determine the entitlement to spousal support and the obligation for child support in accordance with the applicable law as expressed through the support guidelines. 33. The attempt to fix an obligation for spousal support when there exists no legal entitlement is contrary to public policy. 34. The attempt to enforce an agreement for child support in the face of a proceeding to set support is contrary to public policy and ultimately is subject to the doctrines of collateral and judicial estoppel. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays the court find that the agreements attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" and "B" be declared invalid as contrary to public policy and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully Submitted, TES Date: January 20, 2009 Lee E. Oe'9tei£,quire Supreme Court ID#71320 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 241-6070 VERIFICATION I verify that upon personal knowledge or information and belief that the statements made in this Answer and New matter are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. 00 Randall K. Baker Date: 9 {"1 ? C_i ' r-' C-? `°F E i.__ :? ;, : N - 's:"1 . : _ r_, , . . _,, .:'- ? _'s ?? JULIE A. BAKER, Plaintiff vs. RANDALL K. BAKER, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 08-7349 PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER AND NOW comes the above-named Plaintiff, by her attorney, Samuel L. Andes, and makes the following Reply to Defendant's New Matter: 15. No answer required. To the extent that a factual answer is required, however, Plaintiff incorporates herein, by reference, the averments set out in her Complaint. 16. Denied as stated. Plaintiff admits that, during most of the marriage, she wrote checks to pay the family's bills and expenses. She denies, however, that she "managed the parties marital finances" or that she was in control of the finances and the expenditures made by the parties. 17. Denied. Plaintiff did not wish to leave the marital residence until Defendant developed a romantic relationship with another woman and requested that Plaintiff leave the marital residence. 18. Denied. After Plaintiff discovered that Defendant was romantically involved with another woman, the parties had discussions about a separation during which Defendant requested Plaintiff to move out of the house. Following those discussions and that request, Plaintiff started to look for another residence. She denies that she executed a sales agreement to purchase a new home in 2007 or that she entered into any arrangement to purchase the property at 249 Walnut Street in Carlisle without Defendant's knowledge or agreement. To the contrary, Defendant was aware of Plaintiff's plan to purchase the home and assisted her in arranging financing for that purchase. 19. Denied. Although Plaintiff cannot speak with the certainty about Defendant's beliefs or feelings, she can state that Defendant asked her to move out of the house, agreed to assist her in the purchase of a new home, and never suggested that there was any problem with the arrangements to which the parties agreed for that move. 20. Denied. Defendant executed the agreement because Plaintiff advised Defendant that she would not move out of the marital residence without having the security of such an agreement so that she would be able to pay the living expenses for herself and the parties son after the parties separated. Defendant is the party that wanted the separation and wanted Plaintiff to move out of the marital residence. Plaintiff denies that Defendant did not have "meaningful knowledge" of the parties' financial affairs. To the contrary, Defendant, at all times relevant to this action, had full access to the joint account from which the parties' expenses were paid, had full access to the bills and other documents which reflected the expenses, debts, and obligations of the parties. 21. Denied. All of the parties' financial information was kept in or on a desk in the family home and was available at all times to Defendant. The household bills were paid from a joint checking account to which both parties have full access. All of the parties' financial records, including the availability of any funds available to each of the parties, was available to both parties at all times. 22. Denied. Plaintiff made no such representations to Defendant. By way of further answer, however, Plaintiff states that she had paid all of the expenses, bills, and obligations of the parties up to the time she left the marital residence on or about 10 July 2008, with the exception of some of Defendant's personal credit cards, for which he alone was obligated, and a fuel oil bill, on which the parties had a substantial credit at the time. 23. Denied as stated. Plaintiff does not know when Defendant became aware of unpaid bills but denies that those bills existed at the time she vacated the marital residence in July of 2009. The bills and other obligations, including property taxes on the marital residence, to which Defendant refers in this paragraph were all incurred or created after the date of the parties' separation. Plaintiff denies that she withheld information, deliberately or otherwise, or that she provided false information regarding the status of the payment of bills. To the contrary, she made available to Defendant all information about the household expenses up to the time of separation. 24. Denied. First, Plaintiff denies that the agreements signed by the parties require "full and fair disclosure of all assets, debts, or other obligations of the parties" because they do not represent marital settlement agreements in which the parties waive any of their rights to II such items. Second, Plaintiff states that Defendant was fully aware of the financial assets, debts, and other obligations of the parties, or could have been aware of them by inspecting records kept by both parties in the family residence, at the time he signed the agreements. 25. Denied. Plaintiff does not have sufficient information, after reasonable investigation, to admit or deny the averments in this paragraph as to whether Defendant consulted with an attorney, and so she denies those averments and demands proof thereof at trial. 26. Denied. Defendant entered into the agreements because he wanted Plaintiff to vacate the marital residence to pay the mortgage on the Ashton Street property. Plaintiff denies that she withheld or misrepresented any pertinent information. 27. The statements in this paragraph represent a conclusion of law and no factual answer is required. Plaintiff states, however, that the agreements signed by the parties are not "post nuptial agreements" because they do not involve the waiver of any rights. By way of further answer, Plaintiff states that she did not withhold or conceal any financial information from Defendant prior to his execution of the agreements and that Defendant was fully aware, or could have been fully aware, of the parties' financial condition prior to signing those agreements simply by reviewing information readily available to him in the family home. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in her favor in accordance with her complaint in this matter. gAnni?el L. Andes Attorney for Plaintiff Supreme Court ID # 17225 525 North 12" Street P.O. Box 168 Lemoyne, Pa 17043 (717) 761-5361 I verify that the statements made in this document are true and correct. I understand that any false statements in this document are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 4904 (unsworn falsification to authorities). Date: . i qq rr r ULIE A. BAKER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served an original of the foregoing document upon counsel for the Defendant herein by regular mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Lee E. Oesterling, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pa 17013 Date: 12 February 2009 Amy M. rkins Secretary for Samuel L. Andes n C=l 0 c? -Ti