HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-12-09~ ~:\FILES\Clients\5844 Mumma Estate\5844. I.Mumma Estate\5844.1.398.response motion in limine/mas
Created: 9/20/04 0:06PM
Revised: 11 / 11 /09 10:32AM
5844. I
C~
~.1I:J ' T.
-~~r ,
_. ~ a
y ° c.~a ,
No V. Otto III, Esquire ~ ' c~ c~.+
~ ~ a~ ~` ~ t `
LD. No. 27763 J~ ~ T;
~
George B. Faller, Jr., Esquire
~ ~
~ F
~- . ~ F ,`
LD. 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
IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Estate of Robert M. Mumma, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Deceased
NO. 21-86-398
ORPHAN'S COURT DIVISION
RESPONSE OF BARBARA McK. MUMMA AND LISA M. MORGAN TO
ROBERT M. MUMMAS II's MOTION IN LIMINE
AND NOW, come Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan, by and through their
counsel, and hereby respond to Robert M. Mumma, II's Motion of Limine as follow:
1. Admitted. By way of further response, Mr. Mumma, II is, upon information and
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. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the subject of a motion in limine
was raised by Mr. Mumma, II. It is denied that Mr. Mumma, II was "advised" by anyone regarding
the propriety or appropriateness of filing such a motion.
5 . Denied. The allegations of these paragraphs constitute statements of relief rather than
factual allegations. Therefore, no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, the
relief requested in paragraph (a) is inappropriate. Per the Auditor's ruling, Mrs. Mumma and
Mrs. Morgan bear the burden of proving the reasonableness of counsel fees paid by the Estate and
the Trusts. They have the discretion to choose the manner in which they attempt to meet that burden
and the evidence and testimony they offer in support. There is no requirement that such evidence
be by way of testimony of the attorney who provided the legal services in question, and
Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan cannot be compelled to call such witnesses in their case.
The relief requested in paragraph (b) likewise is not appropriate. All counsel who were paid
by the Estate or the Trusts have been identified in the accounts filed by Mrs. Mumma and
Mrs. Morgan. In addition, to the extent they have been located in the files of the Estate or the Trusts
or of their current counsel, invoices and other documentation regarding work performed for the
Estate and the Trusts have been produced to Objectors. If additional documents are located or
obtained, copies will be produced. Discovery in this matter has long since concluded and neither
Objector chose to depose any counsel other than Joseph A. O'Connor, Jr. Mrs. Mumma and
Mrs. Morgan need not at this juncture provide additional information on the topic. With respect to
identification of witnesses, Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan identified all attorneys they expect to call
as witnesses at the hearing before the Auditor{months ago and they reaffirmed that identification at
the October sessions of the hearing. To the extent that Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan decide to call
any additional witnesses on this issue, they will notify the Auditor and Objectors.
The relief requested in paragraphs (a) and (b) is improper in a motion in limine. That relief
constitutes essentially apre-determination that certain evidence (not yet presented) would be
inadequate to meet Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan's burden of proof, rather than a ruling on
evidentiary matters that would properly be the subject of a motion in limine. Mr. Mumma, II offers
no authority for the proposition that such relief could be granted in this procedural posture.
Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan do not object to the relief requested in paragraph (c).
6. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Mr. Mumma, II did not seek
concurrence of Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan to the relief requested. It is denied that counsel for
Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan "that [Mr. Mumma, II] would not receive cooperation with respect
to such a motion." Rather, the matter was discussed with the Auditor and, at least with respect to
the relief sought in paragraph 5(c), counsel for Mrs. Mumma and Mrs. Morgan indicated agreement
to the relief requested.
7. Admitted.
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
By
No V. Otto III, Esquire
I.D. No. 27763
George B. Faller, Jr., Esquire
I.D. No. 49813
Jennifer L. Spears, Esquire
I.D. No. 87445
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Brady L. Green
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
1701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 963-5079
Dated: November 12, 2009 Attorneys for Attorneys for Barbara McK.
Mumma 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 Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan's Response to Robert M. Mumma, II's
Motion in Limine was served this date by depositing same in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first
class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to:
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
512 Creekview Drive
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
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)
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
By~~ ~~.
Melissa A. Scholly
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Dated: November 12, 2009 (717) 243-3341