HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-7590MUNWI=AL IN UI- PhNNSYLVANIA
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
09-3-04 Judicial District, County of Cumberland
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE JUDGMENT
VS
NOTICE OF APPEAL
NOTICE OF APPEAL
FROM
COMMON PLEAS No. QQ - "fQ t7 '
"?
Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the Magisterial District
Judge on the date and in the case referenced below.
NAME OF APPELLANT MAG. DIST. NO. NAME OF MDJ
Dawood Associates 09-3-04 Thomas A. Placey
2020 Good Hope Road
10/15/09
Enola
Strongin Tech. Ent. of Phila. Inc.
CV-0000523-09
This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa.
R.C.P.D.J. No. 10088.
This Notice of Appeal, when received by the Magisterial District Judge, will
operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case.
Dawood Associates
PA
VZ^A
17025
was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1009(6) in action
before a Magisterial District Judge, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED
within twenty
(20) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL.
Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy
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.D.J. No. 1001(7) in action before Magisterial District
Judge. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee.
PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary
Enter rule upon Strongin Tech. Ent. of Phila., Inc.
appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal
Name of appellee(s)
(Common Pleas No.QQ _ within twenty (20) days after service of r le or suffer entry of judgment of non pros.
A
Signature of appellant or attomey or agent
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
RULE: To Strongin Tech Ent. of Phila., Inc. appellee(s)
Name of appellee(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 -Olt wit
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 MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
(3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing.
Date://?_,
2Qn19 r?
? Signatu ot_ ary or Deputy
YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL.
AOPC 312-05
PILED-0F ICE
0F -pr,I;-jrAPY
2009 NOV -3 AM 11: 51
CU Nil,
?,Ye. .2s r-L at w . ? -
Co AIY93
I.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
/ f%I Iw1T\/ f-% C. C!OH8ERLA
?vv-.
Mag. Dist. No.:
09-3-04
MDJ Name: Hon.
THOMAS A. PLACEY
Address. 104 S SPORTING HILL RD
MECHANICSBURG, PA
ielephone (717) 761-8230 17050
DANOOD ASSOCIATES
2020 GOOD HOPE ROAD
ENOLA, PA 17025
THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT:
DEFAULT iUDGKZNT PLTF
Judgment:
NOTICE OFCIVIDLGCASE /TRANSCRIPT
PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS
FSTRONGIN TECH. ENT. OF PHILA., INC.I
100 HIGHPOINT DRIVE APT/STE 104
CHALFONT, PA 18914
L J
vs.
DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS
IDANOOD ASSOCIATES
2020 GOOD HOPE ROAD
ENOLA, PA 17025
L J
Docket No.: CV-0000523-09
Date Filed: 9/09/09
(Date of Judgment)
® Judgment was entered for: (Name)
10/15/09
STRONGIN TECH. MIT. OF PHILA.,
® Judgment was entered against: (Name) DAVOOD ASSOCIATES
in the amount of $ 4,906.02
1-1 Defendants are jointly and severally liable.
Damages will be assessed on Date & Timi
1-1 This case dismissed without prejudice.
Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127
Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of
residential lease $
Amount of Judgment
Judgment Costs
interest on Judgment
Attorney Fees
I Total
Post Judgment Credits
Post Judgment Costs
g,/I01.ai
$ 130.50
$ .06
$ 00
$ 4,906.
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 PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU
MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT 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.
0I Date
I certify that this is a true a corr??t inn of the re .ord of?the_ p
V1 Oq Date "--??
My commission expires first Monday of January, 2010
Magisterial District judge
ings containing the judgment.
, Magisterial District Judge
SEAL
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
PA ID No.: 38904
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
Attorney for or Appellant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES,
Appellant
vs.
No. CI-09-7590 - Civil Term
STRONGN TECH, ENT. OF PHILA, INC.,:
Appellee
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL
AND
RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
ss
AFFIDAVIT:
I hereby swear and affirm that I served a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Cumberland
County Court of Common Pleas Number CI-09-7590, upon Magisterial District 09-3-04,
The Honorable Thomas A. Placey, 104 S. Sporting Hill Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050
on November 5, 2009 by US First Class Mail, Certified, Return Receipt Requested
(domestic return receipt Form 3800 and Return Receipt PS Form 3811) sender's receipts
attached hereto; and upon the Appellee, Strongin Tech, Ent. Of Phila., Inc. 100 Highpoint
Drive, Apt./Suite 104, Chalfont, PA 18914 by US First Class Mail, Certified, Return
¦ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
¦ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
¦ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
The Honorable Thomas A. Placey
A.
A. Inre
Gj??
? Agent
? Addressee
B. eceived by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from ite 5 Z Xes
If YES, enter delivery address beYow`` ? AI?
iv
104 S. Sporting Hill Road . Service Type
Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Certified Mail ? Express Mail
? stered ? Return Receipt for Merchandise
? Insured Mail ? C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (E tm Fee) ? Yes
2. Article Number
(transfer from service labeo ?003 3110 0000 7777 0625
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540
CERTIFIED MAIL,,., F
(Domestic Mail Only; No Insuran
r-
C
FA
17- Postage $ co ?
r3 Certified Fee
C3
O
Return Redept Fee
(Endorsement Required) J?
Q Q Q Q u tTrtr (?
C3
rl Restricted Delivery Fee c
(Endorsement Require d)
rn
M
Total
The Honorable Thom
tr = p ri,
.?? 60
' 1?Ce
?
°o n
104 S. Sporting Hill y
°'
ice- sreei Mechanicsburg, PA 1
or PO, 7050
¦ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
¦ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
¦ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Strongin Tech. Ent. Of Phila., Inc.
100 Highpoint Drive
Apt./Suite 104
Chalfont, PA 18914
1
A. Signature
? Agent
X ? Addressee
B. ceived by (Prin d Name)
?
f Date of D ivery
?
C"^(„ o v -
D. Is delivery address different froem 1? ? Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ? No
Service Type
rtified Mail ? Express Mail
? Regi red ? Return Receipt for Merchandise
? Insured Mail ? C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ? Yes
2. Article Number - -_j 7003 3110 0000 7777 0618
(transfer from service laben
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540
co
rq
..D
0
r`-
N
f?
f?
C3
O Certified Fee
Q Retum Redept Fee
(Endorsement Required)
E3 Restricted Delivery Fee
rR (Endorsemem Required)
r-q
M
M
0
0
r-
Strongin Tech. Fnt
# 00078
Receipt Requested (sender's receipt For
sender's receipts attached hereto.
3800 and Return Receipt PS Form 3811)
P--?
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
Attorney for Appellant
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED
before me this f day of November, 2009.
.COMMONWEALTH WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
N13TARIA SEAL
Lori A. Backenstoes - Notary Public
L[ower Alien Twp,, Cumberland County
COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT 14, 2011
*oary b lic
2003 NOV 16 P H 2'. 2-4
V 1+1'1,. .._ ._ ? ]?
i??r.?1?1•??LYI U?? ,
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9 '
10
11.
12
13
14
15
16
17
1e
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Strongin Technical Enterprises } CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA
of Pennsylvania Inc. )
Plaintiff ) Docket #: 09-7590
VS.
Dawood Associates,Inc.
Defendant
COMPLAINT
11)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
The Plaintiff, also appellee in this matter, is Strongin
Technical Enterprises of Pennsylvania Inc. with principal
place of business at 100 Highpoint Dr. Suite 104 Chalfont PF
18914. Plaintiff is a professional technical placement firm.
The Defendant, also appellant in this matter, is Dawood
Associates Inc. with principal place of business at 2020
Good Hope Rd. Enola PA 17025. Defendant is a consulting
engineering firm.
The Plaintiff has had a contractual relationship with the
Defendant with regards to supplying qualified technical
applicants for employment since 2004.
The Plaintiff has regularly supplied a bulletin to the
Defendant highlighting the backgrounds of a variety of
available technical applicants. Defendant, as part of its
contract, would pay a fee if Defendant hired a candidate wa:
hired through Plaintiff's bulletin referral service.
On or about September of 2007 the Defendant responded to a
bulletin requesting further information on certain
applicants.
On or about September of 2007 Kenneth Strongin (President of
the plaintiff) supplied an updated fee schedule to the
(Summary of pleading) - 1
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2'I
28
29
30
31
32
?T
17)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
115)
116)
Defendant and had a conversation with the defendants HR
manager Brad Teahl who verbally agreed to the fee schedule.
The plaintiff supplied a resume to the Defendant for Russell
Seig on September 10, 2007.
Defendant requested an interview with applicant Russel Teig.
The Plaintiff arranged an interview of Russell Teig with the
Vice President of the Defendant (Pam Fisher) at the
Defendants place of business on September 13, 2007.
The Defendant made a bonafide job offer to Russel Teig.
Russell Teig accepted the Defendant's job offer for an
annual salary of 42,000 with a start date of November 7,
2007.
Upon acceptance, an invoice for $6,300 (to be paid in 6
equal monthly payments) was generated by Plaintiff to
Defendant in keeping with the schedule of fees that had beer
submitted, discussed, and agreed upon.
COUNT I
BREACH OF CONTRACT
Plaintiff incorporates the averments of the foregoing
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
Defendant ultimately paid two installments of the invoice or
May 30th and June 30th, 2008 (a total of $2,226.00) .
Despite demand, Defendant has failed and/or refused to pay
Plaintiff the balances of its invoices due and owing, which
failure constitutes a breach of contract.
After numerous communications requesting payment the
defendant was considered delinquent and by the plaintiff's
process, late fees began to accrue.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and
against Defendant in the sum of $6,321.05, plus pre- and post-
(Summary of pleading) - 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
3.1
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2.9
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
17)
18)
judgment interest, attorney's fees, costs and such other
relief as the Court deems appropriate.
COUNT II
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Plaintiff incorporates the averments of the foregoing
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
By its failure to pay Plaintiff for work performed,
Defendant has been unjustly enriched thereby, having
received the benefit of the services furnished by Plaintiff,
without payment for said work.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and
against Defendant in the sum of $6,321.05, plus pre- and post-
judgment interest, attorney's fees, costs and such other
relief as the Court deems appropriate.
119)
COUNT III
QUANTUM MERUIT
In the alternative, Plaintiff is entitled to compensation
for the value of work performed and services provided in
quantum meruit and/or quasi contract.
[Summary of pleading) - 3
2
:3
n
..J
42
3
f.
]. 7
78
19
20
22
e 3
4
s`, a
26
27
28
2)
I
31.
'2
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and
against Defendant in the sum of $6,321.05, plus pre- and post-
Judgment interest, attorney's fees, costs and such other
relief as the Court deems appropriate.
Dated this November 23, 2009
FLAMM, BOROFF & BACINE, P.C.
794 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell., PA 19422
Telephone: 267-41.9-1500
Facsimile: 267-419-1_560
By :
Robe R. Watson, Jr.
Robert J. Krandel.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
[Summary of pleading] 4
It
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2.3
24
25
26
21
28
29
30
31
32
VERIFICATION
am authorized to make this verification,
have read the foregoing Complaint and verify that all of the
information contained therein is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge, information and belief. I make this
verification pursuant to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904
relating to the unsworn falsification to authorities.
(Summary of pleading] - 5
FILE"
-ITAP
2009 NOV 24 AM i 1: 09
CU uF? : .,ivy,`
Flamm, Boroff & Bacine, P.C.
Robert R Watson, Jr.
Robert J. Krandel
794 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422
(267) 419-1500
Attorney for Appellee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -LAW
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES,
Appellant
vs. No. CI-09-7590-Civil Term
STRONGIN TECH, ENT. OF PHILA, INC.,
Appellee
PROOF OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
AFFIDAVIT:
ss
I hereby swear and affirm that I served a copy of the Complaint, Cumberland County Court of Common
Pleas Number CI-09-7590, upon the appellant Dawood Associates, 2020 Good Hope Road, Enola, PA
17025 on November 25, 2009 by US First Class Mail, Certified Return
. i .. 1_"{-- ~~~
n; :~~5:
t
Wayne M. Pecht
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Phone: 717-691-9808
Fax: 717-691-2070
Email: wpecht(a,pechtlaw.com
STRONGIN TECHNICAL
ENTERPRISES OF
PENNSYLVANIA INC.,
Plaintiff
v.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
2~ I0 FC~3 22 Vii` (I ~ 1-
.,, ,
till. i . __ ,"~~/
r_ ,. !
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
:CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.09-7590
NOTICE TO PLEAD
To: Strongin Technical Enterprises of Pennsylvania, Inc.
c/o Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire
Robert J. Krandel, Esquire
FLAMM, BOROFF & BACINE, P.C.
795 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED to file a written response to the within New
Matter and Counterclaim within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may
be entered against you.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: February 19, 2010
PECHT & ASSOCIATE , PC
By:
Way e M. Pecht, Esquire
PA Attorney No. 38904
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-4917
(717) 691-9808 Phone
(717) 691-2070 Facsimile
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
PA ID No.: 38904
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
Attorne f~ Appellant
STRONGIN TECHNICAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
ENTERPRISES OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA INC.,
Plaintiff No. 09-7590
vs.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.
Defendant
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER WITH NEW
MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM
AND NOW, comes Defendant, by its attorneys, Pecht & Associates, PC, and
makes the following Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim:
1. (corresponding to numbering of Plaintiff's Complaint) Admitted in part. The
identity and address of Plaintiff are admitted. Any other information contained in
paragraph 1 is hereby denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if relevant.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. Paragraph 3 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if relevant.
4. Denied. Paragraph 4 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if relevant.
5. Admitted.
6. Denied. On the contrary, no fee schedule was agreed upon by Defendant, and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if relevant.
7. Admitted.
8. Admitted with clarification. Defendant notes that Mr. Teig's name is spelled
incorrectly in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff s Complaint.
9. Denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a
belief as to the truth of the averments asserted in paragraph 9 and proof thereof is
demanded at trial, if relevant. By way of further answer, it is denied that Pam Fisher was
ever an officer of Defendant.
10. Admitted with clarification. Again, Mr. Teig's name is spelled incorrectly in
paragraph 10 of Plaintiff s Complaint.
11. Admitted.
12. Denied. It is denied that any fee is due from Defendant to Plaintiff, and strict
proof of any allegations to the contrary is demanded at trial, if relevant.
13. The averments of paragraphs 1 through 12 of Defendant's Answer with New
Matter and Counterclaim are incorporated herein as if fully set forth at length.
14. Admitted.
15. Denied. Paragraph 15 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if relevant.
16. Denied. Paragraph 16 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. It is specifically further denied that Defendant ever agreed to pay late fees or
otherwise owes Plaintiff any money.
2
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss
Plaintiff s Complaint and to enter judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff.
17. Paragraphs 1 through 16 of Defendant's Answer with New Matter and
Counterclaim are incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length.
18. Denied. Paragraph 18 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. Strict proof of the allegations of paragraph 18 are demanded at trial, if relevant.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss
Plaintiff s Complaint and to enter judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff.
19. Denied. Paragraph 19 states a legal conclusion to which no response is
required. Strict proof of the allegations of paragraph 19 are demanded at trial, if relevant.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss
Plaintiff s Complaint and to enter judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff.
DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER
20. (continuing numbering of Plaintiff s Complaint) Plaintiff's claim is barred by
accord and satisfaction in that Defendant has paid all amounts due to Plaintiff.
21. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant for unjust
enrichment because it does not aver how Defendant has been unjustly enriched at
Plaintiff s expense.
22. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant for quantum
meruit because it does not aver how Defendant has been given value at Plaintiff s
expense.
23. Plaintiff did not provide Defendant with a suitable employee for Defendant's
needs, and accordingly, no fees are due from Defendant to Plaintiff.
3
24. Plaintiff s claim is barred by failure of consideration because Plaintiff did not
provide a suitable employee to Defendant, and, therefore, no fees are due to Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss
Plaintiffls Complaint and to enter judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff.
COUNTERCLAIM
COUNT I -BREACH OF CONTRACT
25. (continuing the numbering of Defendant's Answer with New Matter)
Defendant justifiably relied upon Plaintiff to furnish a competent and suitable employee
for its business, and Plaintiff agreed to do so.
26. Defendant has paid Plaintiff $2,226.00 for said service.
27. The employee provided by Plaintiff to Defendant, Russell Teig, was not
suitable and could not perform the work as outlined by Defendant to Plaintiff.
28. Plaintiff did not fulfill any of its obligations to provide a suitable and
competent employee to Defendant.
29. Plaintiff wrongly collected the $2,226.00 from Defendant because it did not
fulfill its obligations under the agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant.
30. Plaintiff owes Defendant $2,226.00, which it wrongly collected from
Defendant.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter
judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff in the amount of $2,226.00, plus interest and
costs of suit.
4
COUNTERCLAIM
COUNT II -UNJUST ENRICHMENT
31. Paragraphs 1 through 30 of Defendant's Answer with New Matter and
Counterclaim are incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length.
32. By failure to provide Defendant with a suitable and competent employee,
Plaintiff has money which it has not earned and to which it is not entitled.
33. Plaintiff has collected money for which it has not performed a service and to
which it is not entitled.
34. Plaintiff would be unjustly enriched if it is not required to return said money
($2,226.00) to Defendant.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter
judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff in the amount of $2,226.00, plus interest and
costs of suit.
Respectfully submitted,
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC
Date: February 19, 2010 By:
Way e M. Pecht, Esquire
PA Attorney No. 38904
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-4917
(717) 691-9808 Office
(717) 691-2070 Fax
5
VERIFICATION
I, Bony R. Dawood, hereby acknowledge that:
1. I am the President of Dawood Associates, Inc. and am authorized to sign this
Verification on behalf of the Company; and
2. The facts set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge, information and belief; and
3. I am aware that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18
Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated: February 19, 2010 Dawood Associatesd Inc.
R. Dawood, President
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire, the attorney for Defendant Dawood Associates, Inc., hereby
certify that I have served the foregoing Defendant's Answer with New Matter and
Counterclaim upon all parties this date by depositing a true and correct copy of the same
in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire
Robert J. Krandel, Esquire
FLAMM, BOROFF & BACINE, P.C.
795 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422
Dated: February 19, 2010
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
FLAMM WALTON, PC
By: Robert R. Watson, Jr./Robert J. Krandel
PA Atty. ID Nos. 83787/89485
794 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422-1669
(267) 419-1500
You are hereby notified to file a written
respgrtse~to thep~ Qo
within twenty (20) days from service
hereof or a judgment ma be entered
against
Attorney for Q ~ Q i• ~ ~~
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STRONGIN TECHNICAL
ENTERPRISES, INC.
Plaintiff
v.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION
No. 09-7590
cn a ,.~~
c~ ---
-, -~,
-~, `,Y
r-ii
_ -~ rn
-- ~ c
_ - -,~
~
..
_ -~ _~ ~;
Y.; - : --= ~ ~-;
<= ~
__ --
w
:.~
PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND
ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM WITH NEW MATTER
Reply to New Matter
29. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of Plaintiff's Complaint, as if set forth
herein at length.
21-24. Denied. Defendant's allegations in paragraphs 21 through 24 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. If and to the extent they constitute
allegations of fact, they are denied as stated with specific proof demanded at trial, if
relevant.
Answer to Counterclaim
25. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of Plaintiff's Complaint and its Reply
to New Matter, as if set forth herein at length.
26. Admitted.
27. Denied. The employee was suitable and could perform the work. Specific
evidence and proof to the contrary is demanded of Defendant.
308752 v1
28-30. Denied. Defendant's allegations in paragraphs 28-30 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. If and to the extent they constitute
allegations of fact, they are denied as stated with specific proof demanded at trial, if
relevant.
31. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of Plaintiff's Complaint, its Reply to
New Matter, and paragraphs 25-30 of its Answer to Counterclaim as if set forth herein at
length.
32-34. Denied. Defendant's allegations in paragraphs 32-34 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. If and to the extent they constitute
allegations of fact, they are denied as stated with specific proof demanded at trial, if
relevant.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands entry of judgment in its favor and against
Defendant, both on Plaintiff's complaint and on Defendant's counterclaim.
New Matter to Counterclaim
1. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of its Complaint, Reply to New Matter
and Answer to Counterclaim as if set forth at length herein.
2. Defendant's Counterclaim fails to state a claim against Plaintiff upon which
relief can be granted.
3. At all times, Plaintiff complied with its allegations under the contract with
Defendant, and the employee provided was suitable and capable for Defendant's
needs.
4. Defendant's Counterclaim is barred by the doctrines of license, payment,
waiver, laches and estoppel.
308752 v1
5. Defendant has breached its contract with Plaintiff.
6. Defendant's Counterclaim is barred by a failure of consideration.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands entry of judgment in its favor and against
Defendant, both on Plaintiff s complaint and on Defendant's counterclaim.
FLAMM WALTON PC
/J
By:,
'i2C BERT R. WATSON, JR.
ROBERT J. KRANDEL
Attorneys for Plaintiff
308752 v1
VERIFICATION
I, Jeffrey Smith, Vice-President of Strongin Technical Enterprises of
Pennsylvania, Inc., verify that the statements of fact made in the foregoing
document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge or information and
belief. I understand that false statements hereia.are made subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904, relating to unswom falsfication to authorities.
Date: 3 ~ 1 ~ O
STRONGIN TECHNICIAL ENTERPRISES
OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.
'~~
i
ay:
Jeffrey m Vice-P ident
FLAMM WALTON, PC
By: Robert R. Watson, Jr./Robert J. Krandel
PA Atty. ID Nos. 83787189485
794 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422-1669 Attorneys for Plaintiff
(267) 419-1500
STRONGIN TECHNICAL
ENTERPRISES, INC.
Plaintiff
v.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
CIVIL ACTION
. No. 09-7590
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was
served via first class mail, postage prepaid upon the following:
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
Pecht 8~ Associates, PC
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
FLAMM WALTON PC
DATE: ~ l ~
/",.
By:
ROBERT R. WATSON, JR.
ROBERT J. KRANDEL
Attorneys for Plaintiff
308752 v1
CAIAL
PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT
(Must be typewritten and submitted in triplicate)
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: (List the within matter for the next
Argument Court.) STRONGIN TECHNICAL ENTERPRISES, INC. V. DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.
CAPTION OF CASE
(entire caption must be stated in full) n ~;
STRONGIN TECHNICAL ENTERPRISES OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. ~`~ ~ '~
Plaintiff ~ ~ ' ~ `'~
~_.,~. ~. rite,`-r'
vs. - rv ~ -
rJ -
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ '.
Defendant.
09-7590 July 2010 F c - ---
No. ~ Term
1. State matter to be argued (i.e., plaintiffs motion for new trial, defendant's demunert~i ~ ~~<
complaint, etc.):
Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs New Matter to Counterclaim
2. Identify all counsel who will argue cases:
(a) for plaintiffs:
Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire; 794 Penllyn Pike, Blue Bell, PA 19422.
(Name and Address)
Robert J. Krandel, Esquire; 794 Penllyn Pike, Blue Bell, PA 19422.
(b) for defendants:
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire; 1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055.
(Name and Address)
3. I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for
argument.
4. Argument Court Date: Aueust 18.2010
7-19-2010
Date:
Print your name
Plaintiff
Attorney for
INSTRUCTIONS:
1.Original and two copies of all briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR
(not the Prothonotary) before argument.
2. The moving party shall file and serve their brief 12 days prior to argument.
3. The responding party shall file their brief 5 days prior to argument.
4. If argument is continued new briefs must be filed with the COURT
ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) after the case is relisted.
Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC ~ ?+:
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire
r
PA ID No.: 38904 `l~l ~ i~,~.~~ ~ °; ~' ° `' 4` '
Rob Bleecher /jvG' ~ PIN ~' ~Y
/,,, ~;
PA ID No.: 32594 C`u~ `~'- `-'; '~° ` '
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200 '~~ ",L j~<
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
Attorne s for Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CNIL ACTION -LAW
STRONGIN TECHNICAL,
ENTERPRISES OF PENNSYLVANIA,
INC.
Plaintiff
vs.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
To: David Buell, Prothonotary
No. 09-7590
PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
Kindly withdraw Defendant's Preliminary Objections with regard to the above referenced
matter.
TES, PC
By:
~dVa~e`'46~. Pecht, Esquire
PA Id No.: 38904
Rob Bleecher, Esquire
PA ID No.: 32594
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1205 Manor Drive
Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
•~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Rob Bleecher, Esquire, the attorney for Defendant Dawood Associates, Inc., hereby
certify that I have served the foregoing Praecipe to Withdraw Defendant's Preliminary
Objections to Plaintiff's New Matter to Counterclaim upon all parties this date by
depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, first-class
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire
Robert J. Krandel, Esquire
FLAMM, BOROFF & BACINE, P.C.
795 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422
August 9, 2010
Rob Bleecher
- vOTAPY
PECHT & ASSOCIATES, PC TM
Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire A11C, 25 P 3: 41
PA ID No.: 38904
Rob Bleecher WUNU
PAID No.: 32594 0? "Wv"
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
Attorneys for Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
STRONGIN TECHNICAL,
ENTERPRISES OF PENNSYLVANIA,
INC.
Plaintiff
vs.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
No. 09-7590
DEFENDANT'S REPY TO NEW MATTER TO COUNTERCLAIM
NOW COMES Defendant, by its Attorneys, Pecht & Associates, PC, and makes the
following Reply to Plaintiff's New Matter to Counterclaim:
1. (corresponding to numbering of New Matter to Counterclaim) Defendant
incorporates the allegations in its Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim as
though set forth more fully at length.
2. Denied. Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's New Matter to Counterclaim states a legal
conclusion to which no response is required, and strict proof thereof is demanded
at trial, if relevant.
3. Denied. Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's New Matter to Counterclaim states a legal
conclusion to which no response is required, and strict proof thereof is demanded
at trial, if relevant. To the contrary, the employee provided to Defendant by
Plaintiff was not suitable or competent to perform the duties which had been
specifically outlined to Plaintiff.
4. Denied. Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs New Matter to Counterclaim states a legal
conclusion to which no response is required. and strict proof thereof is demanded
at trial, if relevant.
5. Denied. Paragraph 5 of Plaintiffs New Matter to Counterclaim states a legal
conclusion to which no response is required, and strict proof thereof is demanded
at trial, if relevant.
6. Denied. Paragraph 6 Plaintiffs New Matter to Counterclaim states a legal
conclusion to which no response is required, and strict proof thereof is demanded
at trial, if relevant.
WHEREFORE. Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment
in its favor and against Plaintiff as to all pending claims, and to grant other and further relief as
the Court deems appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
PECHT & ASSOCIA S, PC
1
By:
Wayrle M. Pecht, Esquire
PA Id No.: 38904
Rob Bleecher, Esquire
PAID No.: 32594
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1205 Manor Drive
Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 691-9808
VERIFICATION
I, Bony R. Dawood, hereby acknowledge that:
1. I am the President of Dawood Associates, Inc. and am authorized to sign this
Verification on behalf" of the Company; and
2. The facts set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge, information and belief, and
3. I am aware that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18
Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated:} Dawood Associates Inc.
By.
Bo .y R. Dawood, President
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Wayne M. Pecht, Esquire, attorney for Defendant Dawood Associates, Inc., hereby
certify that I have served the foregoing Defendant's Reply to New Matter to
Counterclaim upon all parties this date by depositing a true and correct copy of the same
in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid. addressed as follows:
Robert R. Watson, Jr., Esquire
Robert J. Krandel, Esquire
FLAMM, BOROFF & BACINE, P.C.
795 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422
August, 2010 _
Wayne M. Pecht
STRONGIN TECHNICAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
ENTERPRISES OF PA, INC., CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
VS. NO. 09-7590 CIVIL
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
ORDER
AND NOW, this 8 day of December, 2010, the appointment of a Board of
Arbitrators in the above-captioned case is VACATED. George B. Faller, Jr., Esquire,
Chairman, shall be paid the sum of $50.00.
BY THE COURT,
Kevin . Hess, P. J.
,,-?George B. Faller, Jr., Esquire
Court Administrator
f
:rlm
'26ry rylMu
zqec?ltc)
?i783
PC-L
??,lq l co
':Z-111
C o a
'n
c-) r-
te Mo
- z
r ?o ? ,
o
x v o a.
a =
°-n
z
-i cn D
STRONGIN TECHNICAL
ENTERPRISES OF
PENNSYLVANIA INC.,
Plaintiff
vs.
DAWOOD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
No. 09-7590
PRAECIPE TO SETTLE, SATISFY and DISCONTINUE
To: David Buell, Prothonotary
C'?
r*?
z
1
M'
w a
rri
Please mark the above-captioned action, including the counterclaim, settled,
satisfied, and discontinued with prejudice.
Respectfully submitted,
FL W
7
December 2010
Y7
Robert R. Watson, Jr.
PA Attorney ID No.: 83787
794 Penllyn Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422-1669
(267) 419-1500
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1-1
December 2010
PECHT & ASSOCIAT S, P
By: 1??
Wa e M. echt, Esquire
PA Attorney ID No. 38904
1205 Manor Drive, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-4917
(717) 691-9808 Office
Attorneys for Defendant