Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-1723r C0 ONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT COMMON PLEAS No. 0 ` / 7.;O&IA NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice Is given that the appellant has filed In the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the Dis- trict Justice on the date and in the case mentioned below. NAME OF?? MACS. (MST. NO. OR NAME OF DJ. rnrkOlt% tier,M?ln?ra?k`r,?, arc 0 - . ADDRESS OF APPELLANT CITY STATE ' ZIP CODE q-n N'Ixf(\ b i to q DATE of .N)DOMENT IN THE CASE OF a? 101 A "bx' Pth ? n vs. it 1 twAr?? `thy litt CLAW NO. CV YEAR O 6 ? AI 08 SIGNATURE OF HIS ATTORNEY OR LT YEAR This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under PA. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1008B. This notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as A SUPERSEDEAS to the Judgment for possession in this case. a If appellant wasp"mant (see PA R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(6)) in action before district Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see PA R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary ?/ Q Enter rule upon n Y r?h??h , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of OPPOW(s) (Common Pleas No. within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffe?ry judgment of non pros. of ap&14t or his attomey or agent RULE: To byrN Q t%VAV G , appellee(s) Name of appeNee(s (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty(20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAI .S ((JU UPON PRAECIPE. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date: rth 19 Year9 Sign ary or Deputy White - Prothonotary Copy Green - Court File Copy Yellow - Appelant s Copy Pink - Appellee Copy Gold - D. J. Copy Proth. - 76 swim, Vii' 9GROWGIF NWK* OF '' (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) i DAYS AFTER f the r4tko of app"I. Chess ?b 9 boxes) COMMONVM&TH, OF PI YLVANIA COVNTY OF ; es AFFIDAVIT: I hereby swew or awirm ow I mved 0 a Dopy of the Nodit of Appaal,.CMyf= Plate No. up0 thy. Ml ti ?ir#,;pn (data of service) Y -_ ---?-. V0"(%k OWOW) (M**9d) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name , on . year . ? by penw" swvtoe ? by (osrtillied) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. 0 and turetsr that l served the# to FMe s Complaint acoDmps" the Nbovo N ake of Appeal upon the appelie**) to whom the Rule was addressed on , Yew by personal service [:]by ( ) (registered) mail, sancta's retaaipl.. ,hwuto. SWORN (AFF0401 R) AND SLIBSCRUIlED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF , YEAR sow&#* orA lbw swan oraaww beftm %*M am" ww made 7ft ao1Rd`? s:. My commission expires on , year .rte a ua .1 6 ?} Y, 1COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA r-ni mi- v nG• CUNMZRLMW hag. Dist. No.: 09-3-05 MDJ Name: Hon. KAM K=T1z Address: 507 Z YORK ST URCMUFICBHIIRa, PA Tew,one: (717) 766-4575 17055 CARLXTCO CiotoEVNICATIONS 937 XTTM1I MY C u n r - ROl18TJiII', CRO CBRfICt -, PA 17055 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT CIVIL CASE PLAINTIFF: NAME and AMMESS rD= PRI/Tno 21 PRRBIRi LILAC D DOIm KAY 8!M CT IMS, PA 17319 J VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS rC3JRLZTM COMMICLTIOM' In' 937 NXXOZ DRUM rwnrc ROTEBTR=, CRO LC88UX&I, PA 17055 J Inc Docket No.: CV-0000447-08 Date Filed: 12/30/08 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: D!!7lMT_ JET PLTIr (Date of Judgment) © Judgment was entered for: (Name) DX PRXMTILfO 2/19/09 © Judgment was entered against: (Name) - CAILEM COMMUMICRTI0B' ITC in the amount of $ 3 , 227 • Defendants are jointly and severally liable. F] Damages will be assessed on Date & Time R This case dismissed without prejudice. Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment142 Pa.C.S. § 8127 F1 Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease $ Amount of Judgment $ 3,103.73 Judgment Costs $__?5 Interest on Judgment $ Attorney Fees $ • Total $ 3,227.73 Post Judgment Credits $ Post Judgment Costs $ Certified Judgment Total $ ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARYICLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. District I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings containing the judgment. Date My commission expires first Monday of January, 201 AOPC 315-07 MTW p1ftTli'I'No * 4 /1 a /no I . R6: AA 1W , Magisterial District Judge SEAL .0- --1 C N o 0 ????i ' ? 7a t i - r ? rTl r M r'' v 0 --40 :. - - n cw -G PROOF OF SERVICE OF 'NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF l ?kt-`" ss AFFIDAVIT: I hereby swear or affirm that I served - a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No. U"1- l? a3 upon !aAtrlct Justice designated therein on (dab of service) - -? I? year ?by personal service Y (cep) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name 1'C f?iftillihk I] ? . on year. ? by personal service rZK (ertlflsd) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. U and further that I served the Rule to File t n ft above Notice of Appeal u'.rt the appello whom the Rule was addressed on Year 0 by personal service y (certified) (registered) mad, sender's receipt attached hereto. SWORN (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS ?-? DAY YEAR -W' nu. Of Y . Strohm dMNrN SWOM o/aOIdM b$kn &Ardewr was " do a rrizu'h My commission expires on year COMMONWEALTH ?PENNSYtWNIA a] I?lotarial Se Cathy L. Youngblood, Notary Public Lemoyne Boro, Cumberland Coutxy MY Commission Expires June 22, 2010 Member. Pennsylvania Association of Notaries ? . -. C3 __._.?. 0 (EMOrs?ersle at Pagi? 0 Raw owvwy Fee 0 (ErAbmsmww PAgWmM m m Toad PosGpe & Fees co nr o E3 r- or POBaxAfaL in gb Ln s cr 0 f- m 0 wlp Fm RMwn R c' P ? ,Ad ftbtbdDWWsoyAw D •i? ! i,) - . iCedarseoien< Flst?/redj m m TOWP"Wo pSFess C7.. ?. .. ......... ............................. M1 orPOBwNa f DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing VS. Plaintiff CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed against you and 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff VS. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit COMPLAINT Now comes the Plaintiff, Donna K. Beck, d/b/a DK Printing, pursuant to PA R.C.P.J.P No. 1001(6) and files the Complaint by and through the office of the below signed counsel. 1. Plaintiff is Donna K. Beck, doing business as DK Printing, who is an individual doing business at the address 21 Persian Lilac Drive, Etters, York County, Pennsylvania 17319. 2. Defendant is Chuck Rothstein, CEO, who at all times was authorized to act on behalf of Carleton Communications, Inc., doing business at 937 Nixon Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 3. Defendant Carleton Communications, Inc., is a corporation doing business at 937 Nixon Drive, PO Box 364, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 4. Plaintiff was hired on as a sales representative to provide commission jobs for the benefit of Carleton Communications in September of 2007. 5. Defendant Chuck Rothstein agreed to pay Plaintiff a commission according to the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. Plaintiff did obtain printing orders for Defendant Carleton Communications, Inc., according to the Schedule on Exhibit A. 7. Commission checks were paid by Carleton Communications for the smaller jobs; however, the Fauquier Springs and Bathfitter printing jobs were not paid by Defendant. 8. Since January 2008, Defendant has refused to pay the commissions due which total $2,182.50. 9. Defendant Carleton Communications has stated through its bookkeeping department that the amounts demanded are valid but the company cannot pay without authorization from Chuck Rothstein. 10. Rothstein has stated to Plaintiff that he thought Plaintiff had already been paid for the work. 11. Defendant Rothstein and Carleton Communications are refusing to honor their agreement(s) to pay Plaintiff her commission despite the numerous demands and acknowledgement that the claim(s) are valid. Count I Assumpsit versus Carleton Communications, Inc. herein. 12. The averments of paragraphs 1-11 are incorporated as if set forth in full 13. Defendant Carleton Communications, Inc., did hire Plaintiff as a Sales Representative. 14. Plaintiff performed the sales commission work and is entitled to the commissions outlined on Exhibit A. 15. Defendant Carleton Communications has failed after repeated demand to pay the amounts due Plaintiff totaling $2,182.50. 16. Plaintiff has thus far incurred costs before the Magisterial District Justice in the amount of $124.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff is entitled to judgment against Carleton Communications, Inc., in the amount of $2,182.50 plus interest and costs. Count II Assumpsit versus Chuck Rothstein, CEO herein. 17. The averments of paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated as if set forth in full 18. Defendant Rothstein hired Plaintiff to provide commission sales. 19. Plaintiff did provide the commissioned sales work, and is entitled to payment as outlined on Exhibit A. 20. While Defendant Carleton Communications acknowledged that the funds are due Plaintiff, Defendant Rothstein has withheld payment because according to him the company is having financial difficulties or that he thought he already paid her. 21. These are obvious attempts to obfuscate the issue. 22. Because of Defendant Rothstein's vexatious and obdurate conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to counsel fees in the actual amount due. WHEREFORE, Defendant is entitled to judgment versus Chuck Rothstein, individually or as CEO of Carleton Communications, jointly or severally, plus interest, costs and attorney fees. Respectfully s?mitted, Michael S. Travis ID NO. 77399 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst gmtravislaw.com Date: `.AIL, ja7 DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing vs. Plaintiff CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit VERIFICATION The statements made in this Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Sect. 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Donna K. Beck, d/b/a DK Printing ? > > 0 N N- 0 0 0 0 0 ? N W N N -? O N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 0 aD v v v v v v v v v v-4 < p O O O Y O Cn Y O?p'. m wmmmr-mmo W 'rt ?r t ?F C: S S S S (I) CL + TT,'(n3 C.oo (D D , < 3 " ? (D -' CD (n O ' N n ffl4fl4fl<Affl(?tf1 O C N W N ? N? O ?A W CJ1 N W N 0 0 0 0? W U1 O O O W N 00 OOOONWC) ffl ffl EA ffl <A w EA 0 O 3 3 N 0~0 W 0M0 O O Cn000 W 00 O O O O N O O ? ? n 0 N N N O -?+ N N N? N N 'N.. CD N ' DD CJ'1 OD N O 3 N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 W -4 W -4 -4 -4 00 ? C CD O > > O W v W v W W N ? N O N O W O W CD U7 O ,A O O 00 w 00 S d (D n (D N N N N N N N X O W N W N O W O U M ? W ? W O ? O Efl {t1 Efl -4 m O A a) A W O O O 0 O 3 69 ea 3 N -? N ? ffl CO N. N OD -4 0 A O ? 6 Un O O tO O O D 7 v D Z ;D 7 S (D n x 3 N a CD. O C_ O O N S O 3 3 0 (D C7 (7 O 3 3 11 O O 3 3 00 O co 0 0 O p N N O EYE DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing vs. Plaintiff CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on the below persons by first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid: Benjamin D. Andreozzi, Esquire PO Box 554 Camp Hill, PA 17001 Carleton Communications, Inc. Chuck Rothstein, CEO 937 Nixon Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 ?l6/y ichael S. Travis 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Plaintiff cri f ,1 :? Benjamin D. Andreozzi P.O. BOX 554 CAMP HILL, PA 17001 717-926-1192 Ben@midstatelaw.com DONNA K. BECK, d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff, VS. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 Nixon Drive PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendants. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NO: 09-1723 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIMS WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. Date: April , 2009 By: J ID# 27 P. 554 p Hill, PA 17001 (717) 926-1192 Counsel for Defendants Benjamin D. Andreozzi P.O. BOX 554 CAMP HILL, PA 17001 717-926-1192 Ben@midstatelaw.com DONNA K. BECK, d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff, vs. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 Nixon Drive PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendants. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NO: 09-1723 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW come the Defendants, Carleton Communications, Inc. and Chuck Rothstein, by and through their counsel and file the following Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim, alleging as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. By way of further answer at all times relevant Defendant Chuck Rothstein (hereinafter "Rothstein") was acting in his capacity as employee of Carleton Communications, Inc (hereinafter "Carleton"). 3. Admitted. 4. Denied. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment, since it is unclear what is being alleged. By way of further answer, Plaintiff was hired as a salaried employee of Carleton in November 2007. 5. Den, Exhibit "A" is a document which speaks for itself, and any characterization of AV ocument is denied. By way of further answer, Rothstein in his capacity as employee of C fleton, did not agree to make any payments for commission after Plaintiff became an employee of Carleton. In fact, Plaintiff agreed that she would no longer be entitled to commissions after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. 6. Denied. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment, since it is unclear what is being alleged. By way of further answer, it is admitted that Plaintiff did assist with obtaining some of the printing orders set forth in Exhibit "A". It is denied that Plaintiff was solely responsible for obtaining all of the printing orders set forth in Exhibit "A". 7. Admitted. By way of further answer, Carleton made payments to Plaintiff for commission jobs before she became an employee of Carleton. 8. Admitted. By way of further answer Carleton does not owe this commission to Plaintiff as set forth in greater detail herein. 9. Denied. Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment, and thus it is denied. By way of further answer, Rothstein is the only representative at Carleton authorized to "validate" such payment requests. 10. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Rothstein has stated that Plaintiff has been paid for certain work set forth on Exhibit "A". It is denied that Rothstein has stated that Plaintiff has been paid for all of the work set forth on Exhibit "A." 11. Denied. This paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. By way of further answer, Plaintiff was not entitled to commission for jobs after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. COUNT I ASSUMPSIT VERSUS CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC 12. Defendants incorporate paragraphs 1-11 as if set forth at length. 13. Denied. Carleton hired Plaintiff as the Operations Manager. 14. Denied. Plaintiff was not entitled to commission for jobs after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. 15. Admitted. By way of further answer, Plaintiff is not entitled to commission for jobs after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. 16. Denied. Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment, and thus it is denied. WHEREFP$E, Defendants request that judgment be entered in their favor for an amount within the mand*Vty arbitration limits COUNT H ASSUMPSIT VERSUS CHUCK ROTHSTEIN CEO 17. Defendants incorporate paragraphs 1-16 as if set forth at length. 2 18. Denied. Carleton hired Plaintiff to perform multiple services and agreed to pay Plaintiff a salary in exchange for these services. 19. Denied. This paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. By way of further answer, Plaintiff was not entitled to commission for jobs after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. 20. Denied. It is specifically denied that Carleton ever acknowledged that funds are due to Plaintiff. By way of further answer, Plaintiff was not entitled to commission for jobs after she was hired as an employee of Carleton. 21. Denied. This paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. 22. Denied. This paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. WHEREFORE, Defendants request that judgment be enter in their favor in an amount within the mandatory arbitration limits. NEW MATTER 23. Defendants incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-22 as if set forth at length. 24. Plaintiff is precluded from recovery under the theory of accord and satisfaction. 25. Plaintiff is precluded from recovery under the theory of unclean hands. 26. Plaintiff is precluded from recovery under the theory of fraud. 27. Plaintiff became and employee of Carleton in November 2007. 28. Plaintiff filled out an application for employment. 29. Carleton withheld taxes from Plaintiff's paychecks. 30. Plaintiff agreed to an employment agreement whereby she would be paid a salary and not commissions. 31. When she agreed to become an employee of Carleton, Plaintiff agreed that Carlton was assuming all of her business contacts and good faith. 32. Under the terms of the agreement, Plaintiff was not permitted to conduct business which would compete with or take away from Carleton's business. 33. Under the terms of the agreement, Plaintiff was not authorized to "mark up" any bills submitted to customers, and profit from the mark up. 3 34. Plaintiff did mark up bills beyond the price Carleton sought to charge clients and retained the difference of funds Carleton sought to charge and that which was actually billed under the direction of Plaintiff. 35. Plaintiff has clearly failed to state a claim against Rothstein upon which relief can be granted. 30. Plaintiff has failed to allege that Rothstein was acting outside the scope of his employment with Carleton or in any other fashion that would make him liable. 31. Rather than pleading facts which set forth the basis of a claim against Rothstein, Plaintiff pleads conclusory allegations which purportedly describe his conduct, but are completely void of factual support. COUNTEKLAIMS Count I -Breach of Contract/Promissory Estoppel (Carleton Communications, Inc. v. Donna K. Beck) 32. Defendants incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-31 as if set forth at length. 33. Carleton enter into an employment agreement with Donna K. Beck d/b/a DK Printing (hereinafter "Beck") whereby it was verbally agreed that Carleton would pay Beck a salary in exchange for her providing it with business contacts, good faith, and efforts to secure new and existing printing business. 34. At all times relevant Carleton paid a salary to Beck and upheld its obligations under the agreement. 35. Beck breached the employment agreement by, among other actions set forth herein, failing to provide Carleton with business contacts, good faith, and efforts to secure new and existing printing business. 36. Beck breached the employment agreement by marking up invoices which were delivered to Carleton customers and retaining funds in excess of that which Carlton sought to bill its clients. 37. Beck's breach caused a loss of profits to Carleton and damaged business relationships with its clients. WHEREFORE, Carleton requests that judgment be entered in its favor in an amount within the mandatory arbitration limits. 4 Count II - Fraud (Carleton Communications, Inc. v. Donna K. Beck) 38. Defendants incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-37 as if set forth at length. 39. Beck represented that she would act in good faith and perform the many duties set forth herein and described above, in exchange for a salary. 40. Beck made these representations with an intent to induce Carleton to hire her as an employee and pay her a salary. 41. Carleton justifiably relied upon these representations to its detriment after Beck failed to perform the duties and marked up its invoices without authorization to do so. WHEREFORE, Carleton requests that judgment be entered in its favor in an amount within the mandatory arbitration limits. Count III - Unjust Enrichment (Carleton Communications, Inc. V. Donna K. Beck) 42. Paragraphs 1-41 are incorporated by reference as if set forth at length. 43. Beck marked up invoices which were delivered to Carleton customers and retained funds in excess of that which Carlton sought to bill its clients. 44. The acceptance of these funds was not authorized by Carleton and under the circumstances retention of such funds would be inequitable. 45. Carleton was entitled to the full amount of any invoice delivered to its clients. WHEREFORE, Carleton requests that judgment be entered in its favor in an amount within the mandatory arbitration limits. Date: April 2009 By: ID# 8 P.O. 554 CamlrHill, PA 17001 (717) 925-1192 Counsel for Defendants 5 VERIFICATION I, Chuck Rothstein, verify that the Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim is based upon information known and gathered by me and my counsel or upon facts that are likely to have evidentiary support. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and is not mine. I have read it and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent the contents are that of counsel, I have relied upon him in making this Verification. I understand that intentional false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsifications made to authorities Dated: 'a 41 " Chuck Rothstein CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Benjamin D. Andreozzi, Esquire, hereby state that I have this day caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter and Counterclaims upon the persons and at the addresses below named, by U.S. Mail, First-Class, postage prepaid: Michael S. Travis, Esq. 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Dated: ? I M 1?? By: D. dreozzi, Esq t or Defendant nunication. Inc. OF Pr," 11VO9 APR 24 Pi? 3 t ?, 1, Michael S. Travis ID No. 77399 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst@mtravislaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff VS. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Donna K. Beck, by and through the office of the below signed counsel, and Replies to the New Matter and Answers the Counterclaim as follows: 23. Plaintiff incorporates her Complaint paragraphs 1-22 as if set forth in full herein. 24. It is denied that Plaintiff agreed to settle the amounts claimed in her underlying suit by accord and satisfaction. 25. It is denied that Plaintiff has unclean hands in her underlying claims against Defendant(s). 26. It is denied that Plaintiff has committed fraud in her underlying lawsuit. 27. Admitted. 28. Admitted. 29. Admitted. 30. Admitted. 31. Denied. When Plaintiff became an employee of Carleton, Plaintiff was to be paid a salary of $40,000.00. If Defendant wanted to assume all of her business contacts, the fee was to be an additional $20,000.00. Defendant declined to purchase the contacts. 32. Admitted. 33. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is denied that Plaintiff profited in any way from "marking-up" any invoice. It is admitted that after her employment began, Plaintiff billed certain customers as DK Printing, because it was feared that if the customer was sold through Carleton directly, the customer would go to a different printer. All of this was done with the knowledge and consent of Carleton. Carleton did invoice directly and received directly from these contacts. 34. It is denied that Plaintiff marked up any invoice beyond what Carleton charged. Plaintiff retained no difference. Plaintiff used this practice to retain the customer for Carleton and for its benefit, and with its consent. 35. It is denied that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Rothstein. on which relief may be granted. This averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that the averment is factual, it is denied. Second Paragraph Numbered 30. It is denied that Rothstein was acting outside the scope of his employment with Carleton. To the contrary, Rothstein was personally denying payment to Plaintiff which action is ultra vires. Second Paragraph Numbered 31. It is denied that the claims against Rothstein are devoid of facts. Rothstein personally chose not to pay the valid claims of the Plaintiff for his own gain which have no business basis to deny payment. The company was having difficulty paying it's bill, Rothstein is personally obstructing payment to Plaintiff for his own gain. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court to grant judgment in favor of Plaintiff in the amounts stated in the complaint. ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS BREACH OF CONTRACT / ESTOPPEL CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. V. DONNA BECK Second Paragraph Numbered 32. Plaintiff incorporates her original Complaint and reply to New Matter as it set forth in full, including the mis-numbered paragraphs. Second Paragraph Numbered 33. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the Defendant was hired in November 2007 to secure new and existing printing business. It is denied that an employment agreement was verbally created to provide business contacts. See first Numbered Paragraph 31. Second Paragraph Numbered 34. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Carleton paid Beck a salary. It is denied that Carleton upheld its obligations. Specifically, Carleton did not uphold its obligation to pay commissions for sales September, October and November 2007 before she was hired as an employee. Second Paragraph Numbered 35. It is denied that Plaintiff breached her agreement to provide business contact, and failed to secure new and existing printing business. There was no agreement for Plaintiff to provide her contacts. Plaintiff did in good faith seek and obtained new business for Defendant. All claims relate to commissions for sales before she was hired as an employee. 36. It is denied that Plaintiff marked up any invoice for Carleton customers and retained excess funds. Carleton directly billed and received payments for all customers. 37. It is denied that Plaintiff caused any loss of profits to Defendant. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim. ANSWER TO COUNT II CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS V. DONNA BECK 38. Plaintiff incorporates her original Complaint and reply to New Matter and Answer as it set forth in full, including the mis-numbered paragraphs. 39. Admitted. 40. Admitted. 41. It is denied that Plaintiff failed to perform her duties, and marked up invoices without authorization to do so. See first numbered Paragraph 33 answer. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendant's Countercciam. ANSWER TO COUNT III UNJUST ENRICHMENT CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS V. DONNA BECK 42. Plaintiff incorporates her original Complaint and reply to New Matter and Foregoing Answers as it set forth in full, including the mis-numbered paragraphs. 43. It is denied that Plaintiff marked up invoices delivered to Carleton customers and retained any funds in excess of that which Carleton billed to its clients. See first numbered Paragraph 33 answer. 44. It is denied that any funds were received by Defendant; as such it is denied that there were any unauthorized funds to Plaintiff or inequitable action on the part of Plaintiff. 45. It is denied that Carleton is entitled to receive any funds claimed in Plaintiff's original complaint. Those funds were due while Plaintiff was employed as an independent contractor and not as an employee. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable C to dismiss Defendant's counterclaim. ae . ravis 3 904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst@mtravislaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Date: !5-.1.0? DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing VS. Plaintiff CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ) NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit VERIFICATION The statements made in this Reply to New Matter and Answer to Counterclaim(s) are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Sect. 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities., Donna K. Beck, d/b/a DK Printing Date: 5- ? ,Q1 GAD DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing vs. Plaintiff CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on the below persons by first class U. S. Mail, postage prepaid: Benjamin D. Andreozzi, Esquire PO Box 554 Camp Hill, PA 17001 icha . Travis 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Plaintiff F??4.?VIj?? iJ4 OF THIS " ,".,-l "NTNPY 2009 MAY I I k, 9: t4 3 viv!_ _ Michael S. Travis ID No. 77399 3904 Trindle Road Camp HII1, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst@mtravislaw Attorney for Plaintiff DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff VS. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Michael S. Travis, counsel for the Plaintiff in the above action, respectfully represents that: 1. The above captioned action is at issue. 2. The claim of the Plaintiff in the action is $2,182.50 plus interest, costs and counsel fees. The counter-claim of the Defendant in the action is "an amount within arbitration limits." The following attorneys are interested in the case(s) as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: Michael S. Travis, Esquire, Benjamin Andreozzi, Esquire. WHEREFORE, your petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff vs. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on the below persons by first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid: Benjamin D. Andreozzi, Esquire PO Box 554 Camp Hill, PA 17001 Michael S. Travis 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 ?/W7 Attorney for Plaintiff AL 4 l.i OF THE P,71 2009 J UL -6 AIJ : 3 ?TY *aq.oo Po ATff &* a4ma 2,14 A&'154A w , ichaei S. Travis 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst0mtravislaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Date: ?/'toy ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, , 200 in con 'deration &heprepoing petition, , Esquire, Esquire, and Esquire, are appointed ar ' rators m the above captioned actions as prayed for. By the Court: G HILL, I I'- OF T?q L 1UL _8 Ft i I/Q/af - Goe I£s envI( , Michael S. Travis ID No. 77399 3904 Trindle Road Camp HIII, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mst@mtravislaw Attorney for Plaint DONNA K. BECK d/b/a DK Printing Plaintiff vs. CARLETON COMMUNICATIONS, INC CHUCK ROTHSTEIN, CEO 937 NIXON DRIVE PO Box 364 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 09-1723 CIVIL Assumpsit PRAECIPE TO MARK JUDGMENT SATISFIED TO THE PROTHNOTARY: Please mark the judgment in the above matter satisfied. Michael S. Travis 3904 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-9502 mstC mtravislaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Date: ~ ~~ U 2~J1 ~r ~~ 6..V 1'~i4 1 ~~~ 4i .% _I. .. ... t.~, V ~ \~ ~ \~. I ~' ,