Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-31-10IN RE: ESTATE OF ROBERT M. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MUMMA, deceased :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ~..> ORPHANS' COURT DIVISIOI~o ~ -- NO. 21-86-398 >~~ ''' r.,a ti~ r i%+ ~ ~. AUDITOR'S INTERIM REPORT, March 30, 2010 AND REQUEST FOB ORDER r7 To the Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr.: Your Honor has appointed me Auditor in the above captioned matter and charged me with reviewing the existing file and a multitude of prehearing issues raised by the parties and to schedule and hold a hearing as soon as scheduling permitted. Many days of hearings have been held. I have schedule two (2) full weeks of hearings the last two weeks of April, 2010 to hopefully conclude testimony in this matter. On November 11, 2009, a Motion to Dismiss Objections was filed by of Barbara McK. Mumma and Lisa M. Morgan. The motion requested a ruling on whether the Objectors, Barbara M. Mumma and Robert M. Mumma II, had provided evidence in support of her or his various objections. Both Objectors, Barbara M. Mumma and Robert M. Mumma II filed a response to the Motion and Robert M. Mumma II also filed Preliminary Objections to the Motion. During the scheduled hearing on December 15, 2009, I was presented with the arguments from all sides on the Motion to Dismiss Objections and the Preliminary Objections to the said Motion to Dismiss. (An Original Excerpted Portion of the Transcript of the Proceeding is attached to this report.) As I have stated to Your Honor in former reports I do not believe it wise or prudent to delay this matter by making a preliminary ruling on the Objections. If the Executrices/Trustees 1 and their respective counsel believe that the facts presented by the Objectors over the course of the hearings have not risen to a level to necessary to support individual objects, they may proceed accordingly. As the Executrices/Trustees and their counsel were informed, they only bear the burden of proof on certain matters, including the reasonableness of fees. To ask the Court to make a preliminary ruling would not be appropriate at this juncture and this matter, as were many other previous matters, should be deferred until the conclusion of the hearings and the final report of the Auditor. Therefore, I recommend the Motion to Dismiss Objections be denied. If Your Honor does agree with my recommendations, Robert M. Mumma II's Preliminary Objections would be rendered moot and I would recommend Your Honor's order include language to accomplish the same. I recommend that if your Honor agrees with my recommendations, you enter an Order accordingly and I have attached a recommended order to accomplish the same. y submitted, Jo . Bu ley, Esquir upreme Court ID# 38444 1237 Holly Pike Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2448 JoeBLaw(a~aol.com 2