Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-09F:\FiLES\C6ents\Mwnma 5844.1 (estate) 8747 (Kim)\5844.1.Mttmma Estate\5844.1.resp tax sale 2.doc Revised: 8/7/09 George B. Faller, Esquire LD. Number 49813 ~ ~; No V. Otto, III, Esquire ~c~ I.D. Number 257763 _ ~,. '..+tl ~• f i ~~ ~,,. ~.... Jennifer L. Spears, Esquire : ~~ rn LD. Number 87445 c.~ .~ ~;~ ~ '-•..1 MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER ~ ~ ~~ ~~: '~ c.^> ---~=~ MARTSON LAW OFFICES i -~ .~-- 10East High Street ,~ - ~ ~, Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Estate of Robert M. Mumma, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Deceased N0.21-86-398 ORPHAN'S COURT DIVISION ANSWER OF BARBARA MCK. MUMMA AND LISA M. MORGAN TO MOTION TO PREVENT PUBLIC SALE OF REAL ESTATE BY TAX CLAIM BUREAU DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF DELINQUENT TAXES BY THE EXECUTRICES/TRUSTEES AND NOW, Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan respond as follows to the Motion to Prevent Public Sale of Real Estate by Tax Claim Bureau Due to Nonpayment of Delinquent Taxes by the Executrices/Trustees: 1. Admitted. By way of further response, Mr. Mumma, II is, upon information and r:.~-, - ~~ r-~ - , ~~ . T. 9 "~ ") r._ ~~ _: ..:, ._ _; ~ _ .f belief, being assisted by James G. Gault, Esquire, though Mr. Gault has not entered his appearance of record on behalf of Mr. Mumma, II. 2. Denied. To the contrary, a disclaimer was filed in this matter on or about January 12, 1987, whereby Mr. Mumma, II disclaimed any interest under the will of Robert M. Mumma. No court has issued a final ruling on the effect of the disclaimer. The validity of the revocation of the disclaimer was referred to the Auditor for a report and recommendation to the Court. 3. Denied. To the contrary, a disclaimer was filed in this matter on or about January 12, 1987, whereby Mr. Mumma, II disclaimed any interest under the will of Robert M. Mumma. No court has issued a final ruling on the effect of the disclaimer. The validity of the revocation of the disclaimer was referred to the Auditor for a report and recommendation to the Court. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny that any actions taken by them with respect to the estate of Robert M. Mumma or the trusts established under his will have been inconsistent with or in violation of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's "legal and fiduciary duties." On the contrary, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan have at all times attempted to protect the estate and the trusts against repeated attacks and litigation by Mr. Mumma, II that have had, and continue to have, an adverse financial impact upon the estate and the trusts. 7. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny that any actions taken by them with respect to the estate of Robert M. Mumma or the trusts established under his will have been inconsistent with or in violation of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's "legal and fiduciary duties." On the contrary, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan have at all times attempted to protect the estate and the trusts against repeated attacks and litigation by Mr. Mumma, II that have had, and continue to have, an adverse financial impact upon the estate and the trusts. 8. The allegations in this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent any response is required, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny the allegations. Further, the Responses to Paragraphs 2 and 3 above are incorporated herein by reference. 9. Admitted. 10. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny that any actions taken by them with respect to the estate of Robert M. Mumma or the trusts established under his will have been inconsistent with or in violation of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's "legal and fiduciary duties." 11. Admitted in part; denied in part. Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan admit that legal title to this property is currently held by Mumma Realty Associates II, an entity in which the estate is a majority owner. By way of further response, pursuant to the documents governing the development of the property in question and the surrounding properties under the same plan, the owners of the other lots in the development are responsible for the maintenance of, and, implicitly, the real estate taxes attributable to, the property at issue. These third party lot owners have been, or will be notified of their obligations, and efforts will be made to absolve from Mumma Realty Associates II from these obligations. Moreover, the lot in question has no value beyond its mandated use as storm water management facility. In addition, the maintenance obligations create potential liabilities for the owner, and exposing it to tax sale would not prejudice the estate. 12. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny that any actions taken by them with respect to the estate of Robert M. Mumma or the trusts established under his will have been inconsistent with or in violation of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's "legal and fiduciary duties." To the contrary, see Answer 11 above. 13. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that a "Notice of Public Sale" was issued by the Cumberland County Tax Claim Bureau on or about August 6, 2008. However, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan timely paid the taxes. This was the subject of a similar motion filed by Mr. Mumma, II on September 8, 2008, a copy of which was attached to his current motion as Exhibit B. An Answer to that original motion was filed by the Executrices, and an Order was issued denying the motion as moot, copies of which are attached to his current motion. 14. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that a "Notice of Public Sale" was issued by the Cumberland County Tax Claim Bureau on or about August 6, 2008. However, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan timely paid the taxes. This was the subject of a similar motion filed by Mr. Mumma, II on September 8, 2008, a copy of which was attached to his current motion as Exhibit B. An Answer to that original motion was filed by the Executrices, and an Order was issued denying the motion as moot, copies of which are attached to his current motion. 15. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that a "Notice of Public Sale" was issued by the Cumberland County Tax Claim Bureau on or about August 6, 2008. However, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan timely paid the taxes. This was the subject of a similar motion filed by Mr. Mumma, II on September 8, 2008, a copy of which was attached to his current motion as Exhibit B. An Answer to that original motion was filed by the Executrices, and an Order was issued denying the motion as moot, copies of which are attached to his current motion. 16. Admitted. 17. Admitted. 18. Admitted. 19. Admitted. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. Furthermore, see Answer 11 above. 20. Admitted. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 21. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer and its Exhibit referenced and quoted from are in writing and speak for themselves, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 22. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer and its Exhibit referenced and quoted from are in writing and speak for themselves, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 23. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer and its Exhibit referenced and quoted from are in writing and speak for themselves, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 24. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 25. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 26. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 27. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 28. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 29. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 30. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 31. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 32. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. 33. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. 34. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. 35. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. 36. Admitted. 37. After reasonable investigation, the answering parties are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of these averments. 3 8. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny them. By way of further response, the allegations of this paragraph are vague and ambiguous and are not susceptible of a meaningful response. To the extent that a further response is required, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny the allegations of this paragraph. 39. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Answer and its Exhibit referenced and quoted from are in writing and speak for themselves, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 40. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Notice referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 41. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Notice referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 42. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Notice referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 43. Admitted in part, denied in part. By way of further response, the Notice referenced and quoted from is in writing and speaks for itself, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny all characterizations thereof and all remaining allegations of this paragraph. 44. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny that any actions taken by them with respect to the estate of Robert M. Mumma or the trusts established under his will have been inconsistent with or in violation of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's "legal and fiduciary duties." To the contrary, see Answer 11 above. 45. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute a request for relief to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. Byway of further response, see Answer 11 above. 46. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute a request for relief to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, see Answer 11 above. 47. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute a request for relief to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, see Answer 11 above. 48. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute a request for relief to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan therefore deny them. By way of further response, see Answer 11 above. 49. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny them. By way of further response, the allegations of this paragraph are vague and ambiguous and are not susceptible of a meaningful response. To the extent that a further response is required, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny the allegations of this paragraph. 50. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no responsive pleading is required, and Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny them. By way of further response, the allegations of this paragraph are vague and ambiguous and are not susceptible of a meaningful response. To the extent that a further response is required, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan deny the allegations of this paragraph. 51. Admitted in part, denied in part. Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan admit that Mr. Mumma, II did not seek concurrence of their counsel prior to the filing of the instant motion. They admit that, had concurrence been sought from their counsel, it would not have been given. Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegation that Mr. Mumma, II did not seek concurrence of other counsel or interested parties, or as to Mr. Mumma, II's motions in not seeking concurrence. 52. Admitted. WHEREFORE, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan respectfully request that Mr. Mumma, II's Motion to Prevent Public Sale of Real Estate by Tax Claim Bureau Due to Nonpayment of Delinquent Taxes by the Executrices/Trustees be denied. Respectfully su fitted, By: No V. Otto, II squire I.D. No. 27763 George B. Faller, Jr., Esquire I.D. No. 49813 Jennifer L. Spears, Esquire I.D. No. 87445 MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Joseph A. O'Connor, Jr., Esquire Brady L. Green, Esquire MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1701 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921 (215)963-5212, 5079 Attorneys for Barbara McK. Mumma Date: August 7, 2009 and Lisa M. Morgan CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melissa A. Scholly, an authorized agent of Martson Law Offices, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer of Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan to Motion to Prevent Public Sale of Real Estate by Tax Claim Bureau due to Nonpayment of Delinquent Taxes by the Executrices/Trustees was served this date by depositing same in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Mr. Robert M. Mumma, II Box F Grantham, PA 17027 Mr. Robert M. Mumma, II 840 Market Street, Suite 164 Lemoyne, PA 17043 Mr. Robert M. Mumma, II 6880 S.E. Harbor Circle Stuart, FL 34996-1968 Brady L. Green, Esquire MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1701 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921 (Attorney for Estate and Executrixes) Ms. Linda M. Mumma 212 North Duke Street Durham, NC 27701 Pro Se Ms. Barbara Mann Mumma 541 Bridgeview Drive Lemoyne, PA 17043 Pro Se Joseph D. Buckley, Esquire 1237 Holly Pike Carlisle, PA 17013 (Court Appointed Auditor) B ARTS N LAW IC Y ~ Melissa A. Scholly 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Dated: August 7, 2009 (717) 243-3341