The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-1186COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA --'~ ~ COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT 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 District Justice on fha date and in the case mentioned below LT 19 Th~ ~ck will be ~g~d ONLY ~n this ~tion is required u~er P~ R.C?J?. N~ 1008~ This ~t~e of A~al. ~ mcei~d by t~ Dis~ict Jus~ce. ~11 ~te as ~ ~PERSEDEAS ~ ~e ]~gm~t ~ ~sses~ in ~is case Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy If appellant was CLAIMANT (son Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1 O01 ( 6 ) in action before District Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAEClPE 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 (ComrnonPleasNc~ ()1 - I171. RULEz To , appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal (1) You am notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days af~' the date of service of this ru~e 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 AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of mailing. COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT COmmOnWEAlTH OF P~NN~YLVANIA COUNTY OF ; ss ~ ~py fte tqo ceofAppea~,O~mmo Peas N) p,r t e Ds~r~ ~ {cedcs~gnated th~ ~ r tdat~ofservce) ~)ypersonaJservce /3 by(c~tt~ed) mgstered~maLtenderS ece~ a~ c~edhe~to up(r ~eappele: or 9 (} by pets r~al service[ by certfied) (registered) ma~ sendeFsreceipt attached hereto (~j a~dfurtherthat ser,~edtheR~tetof:leaCo lan ~c t~eab,>~(NotceofA[ }eap n heappel~ees)tr w c' SWORN (AFF ~MED A'~DSLJB{~C~BED BF~ORE M~ C ...... COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 'COUNTY OF: COI~ERL~-N-D Mag Oist NO 09-3-05 DJ Name HOn GAYLE A. ELDER ^dd ..... 507 N. YORK ST. MECItJ~I CSBU'RG, PA (717) 766-4575 17055 JOHN SOPHNSKY PROPERTIES 105 EAST MAIN STREET MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: ~ Judgment entered for: was (Name) Judgment was entered against: (Name) NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT CIVIL CASE PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS ~HEARER, SCOTT ~ 301 NEWPORT ROAI~ DUNCAN-NON, PA 17020 VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS FJOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES 105 EAST MAIN STREET MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 L Docket No.: CV- 0000402- 00 Date F ed: 12/15/00 J _1 FOR pT,ATNTIFF RRRARRR, RI~O~P"P A JOH~I SOPR~ISKY PROPRR'PIES in the amount of $ on: (Date of Judgment) 1/'~1/D1 ~ Defendants are jointly and severally liable. ~] Damages will be assessed on: ---]This case dismissed without prejudice. ~] Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ ~-] Levy is stayed for days or E3 generally stayed. [~ Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment $ 3,194.00 Judgment Costs $ 66.50 Interest on Judgment $ o 00 Attorney Fees $ .00 Total $ 3,260.50 Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total $ $ Date: Place: Time: 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. ' t~'~I' / ()j Date ~ d' ~/dJo/'7 , District Justice I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings containing the judgment. Date , District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, AOPC 315-99 2006 SEAL NOTICE OF APPEAL FKOM JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT /? COMMON PLEAS No. ~ ~ !~ ~.~(~ NOTICE OF APPEAL ~e is gi~ t~t ~e a~nt ~s find in t~ a~e Court of C~ Heos an a~eol f~ the j~gment m~emd ~ the Distri~ Just~e ~ ~ ~ a~ in ~ c~ ~ ~1~. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLSAS CV19 0 r.;~ 0 ~ "-/D Z LT 19 This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.J.R 1008& This Notice of Appeal. when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this cas~ Signature of Prothonotary or Deputy ff appellant was CLAIMANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1 O01 (6) in action before District Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAE~I~TO~EIL~I'ER RULE TO FILE CO~PLA~NT ANI~ RU, ~IE~,O FILE ~ s~t~ of f~ ~ ~ ~ ONLY wh~ a~llant ~ DEFENDANT (s~ ~. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001 (7) in ~i~ before Dis~ict Ju~ce, IF ~T USED, de~h f~ c~y of notice of ~al to ~ ~ u~ a~ll~). ', - L' ' ~ (C~ Pleas ~ (~ ~ ' //" ~: ~¢~t ( (~wi~in t~nty (20)~s a~ ~v~e of rub or suf~ entry of ju~m~ of (1) You om 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 seevice or by certified or registered mail. 2) If you do not fiJe,~' cOmpla nt w~'~ia, th s t me a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date ~,ser~ic~ of this rule ~f se~y~ce ~vas by mail is the date of mailing. COURT FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FiLE COMPLAINT (This proof of ~et~x~ce ?4UST ~E F] /: ) WT.'tN TEN ~ C ~A ~D~V(~: h~ ebyswear or afl m that served !9 .... [i'} by personal service OUI~C~HHO~ PI~ 17020 ert[fJed po~tage [$~ Fee Retum Rece[p Fee (Endorsement ~.i,~a) L (Restricted De~ive~ Total posla~e & Fees~ SCOTT A. SHEARER Plaintiff V. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. o/_ CIVIL ACTION- LAW 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 ease may proceed without you and a judgement 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 OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICES SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 1-800-990-9108 CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIALEGALSERVICES 213ANORTHFRONTSTREET HARRISBURG, PA 17101 1-800-932-0356 SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES :: :: Defendant :: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. CIVIL ACTION- LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, SCOTT A. SHEARER, by his attorney, Barbara Wevodau, Esq., pursuant to Pa.R. CP.J.P. 1001(6) and asserts the following: 1. Plaintiff, SCOTT A. SHEARER, is an adult individual residing at 310 Newport Road, Duncannon, Perry County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, JOHN SOPENSKY, is an adult individual doing business as John Sopensky Properties at 105 East Main Street, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County Pennsylvania. 3. On or about September, 2000, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an oral contract in which the Plaintiff would install replacement windows and siding on the Defendant's rental properties. 4. Plaintiff enmpleted the installation job for the Defendant on or about November of 2000. 5. Upon completion ofthe installation job for the Defendant, Plaintiff did not receive the agreed upon payment for his services rendered· 6. On December 15, 2000, Plainfifffiled action against the Defendant in District Justice Gayle A. Elder's Office. See Exhibit "A'. 7. On January 31, 2001, judgment was entered in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $3,260.50. 8. On or about February 6, 2001, Plaintiff received correspondence fi.om Defendant and enclosed was a check made to Plaintiff in the amount of eleven hundred dollars ($1,100.00). See Exhibit "B". 9. On February 17, 2001, Plaintiffreceived correspondence fi.om Defendant with a check enclosed in the amount of fourteen hundred dollars ($1,400.00). See Exhibit 10. Defendant owes $760.50 on the remaining balance on the judgment rendered on January 31,2001. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands damages in the amount of $760.50, plus costs, interest, lost wages and attorney's fees. Respectfully submitted: Barbara Wevodau, Esquire [ Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 582-8883 SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY :: PROPERTIES :: Defendant :: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL ACTION- LAW VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the attached COMPLAINT are tree and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. (SIGNATURE) Scott A. Shearer SCOTT A. SHEARER Plaintiff V. $OHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. CIVIL ACTION- LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara Wevodau, Esquire, hereby certify that, on this date, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint was served upon John Sopensky Properties, Defendant in the above-captioned matter, by mailing a copy of said Complaint fi.om the New Bloomfield Post Office via first class mail postage prepaid to the following address: John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Barbara Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 834-5554 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF: 'CUMBERLAND Mag, OisL NO~; 09-3-05 DJ Name: Hon GAYLE A. ELDER A~d~e,,: 507 N. YORK ST. MECHANICSBURG, PA Telephone: (717) 766-4575 17055 SCOTT A. SHEARER 301 NEWPORT ROAD DUNCANNON, PA 17020 THIS iS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: ' [] Judgment was entered for: (Name) Judgment was entered against: (Name) NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT CIVIL CASE PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS [-SHEARER, SCOTT A 301 NEW~0RT ROAD DUNCAITNON, PA 17020 VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS F-JOHN SOPENSK~f PROPERTIES 105 EAST MAIN STREET MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 h 3 Docket No.: CV-0000402- 00 Date Filed: 12/15/00 FOR Pf,ATN'~IFF JOR3q SOP~SKY PROPRRTTRS in the amount of $ on; ] Defendants are jointly and severally liable, E~] Damages will be assessed on: [] This case dismissed Without prejudicel [] Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $ r-'-] Levy is stayed for days or [] generally stayed. (Date of Judgment) 1/':11/D1 (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs $ 3,194.00 $ 66.50 $ .0o $ .00 $ 3,260°50 Certified Judgment Total ~ Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held: Date: Place: --7'~' '"~ I~ ~. E;'~/ Time: ':~ 7~,3, 5(._3 $ $ 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. I cedify that this is a true and correct co. gpy of~e recq,~of the '~)' ~..3' O/ Date My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006 proceedirjgs containing ' AOPC 315-99 p~ d~e AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACTOF19~ The Perry County Branch of the Court of Common Pleas for the 41 ~ Judicial District is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the Court, please contact my office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the Court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. SCOTT A. SHEARER Plaintiff V. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW IMPORTANT NOTICE YOU ARE 1N DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE TO A LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Central Pennsylvania Legal Services 213A North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Telephone: 1-800-932-0356 OR Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone: 1-800-990-9108 Barbara Wevodau, Esq. P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 Telephone: (717) 582-8883 Atorney for Plaimiff SCOTT A. SHEARER Plaintiff V. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERL~ COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara Wevodau, Esquire, hereby certify that, on this date, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice was served upon Jacqueline M. Verney, Esq., attorney for Defendant John Sopensky Properties in the above-captioned matter, by mailing a copy of said Notice from the Carlisle Post Office via first class mail postage prepaid to the following address: Jacqueline M. Verney, Esq. 44 S. Hanover St Carlisle, PA 17013 DAn: ey for Plaintiff Barbara Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (7t7) 834-5554 IN TI~ COUP. T OF COMMON I~EAS OF THE ~ra IUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PBIqlqSYI..¥AN~ crv~, ACTION. LAW NOTICE YOU HA,V'S l~'maq SU~ 1~ COUR.T. Ii':you wis~ to de~d t~inst the ohinu set flxt. h in the ~ollowins pqu, ~ nmst take action witl~ twenl7 (20) d,,~ slier this comph, i,~ ,,,d ,~. m ~ b~ ~e,4~, ,~itt,,, ,pp~,,,,~ .pe,,o.~.ly or .~ attorney and filins in writi~t~ with the Court your defenses pr objections to the claims set foflh a~ainst you, You are warned that ifyou f~il to do so the c~se may prooeed without any money olaimed in the Complaint or for any other claini or relief'requested by the Plaintiff, You may lose money or prope~y or other rlshts i~portant to you, YOU SHOULD TAI~ THIS PAPER. TO YOUR. LAWYER. Al' ONCll. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER. OR. CAI, iNOT AFFORD O1',~ GO TO OR. TEL~HO~ THE OFFICES SET FOR.TH BELOW TO ,FIND OUT ~ YOU CUi~ERI, AND COUI~Y' BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLe, PA 17013 (717~ 24~2166 CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA LEG~ SERVICES 21~A NOR,TH I~,ONT ~TItFIP. T HAI~I IBUI~O, PA 17101 1.800-932-0356 ,n Testimony wMreof.'l here unto set my Moo SCOTT A. SHEARER, Plaintiff VS. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, John Sopensky, doing business as John Sopensky Properties, pro se, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.J.P. 1001(6) and asserts the following: 1. Plaintiff, SCOTT A. SHEARER, is an adult individual residing at 310 Newport Road, Duncannon, Perry County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, JOHN SOPENSKY, is an adult individual doing business as John Sopensky Properties at 105 East Main Street, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff commenced work without specifying a price. 4. Plaintiff failed to complete the job. 5. Plaintiff failed to complete the job in a reasonable time frame - 2½ months. 6. Plaintiff improperly installed two windows causing the windows to crack. 7. Plaintiff performed work in a careless manner strewing nails in parking area causing residents tires to puncture. 8. Plaintiff used Joe Ciccocioppo to do 50% of work who as a salaried employee of Plaintiff should not be compensated his work. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Honorable Court to dismiss the Plaintiff's complaint. Respectfully submitted, Jo~So~pensk~y, ro se John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-4440 JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES, Plaintiff VS. SCOTT SHEARER, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, comes the Defendant, John Sopensky, doing business as John Sopensky Properties, pro se, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.J.P. 1001(6) and asserts the following: 1. Plaintiff, JOHN SOPENSKY, is an adult individual doing business as John Sopeusky Properties at 105 East Main Street, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, SCOTT A. SHEARER, is an adult individual residing at 310 Newport Road, Duncannon, Perry County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiffasks damages for loss of good will from residents of apmtment community for presenting a dangerous parking lot filled with rusty nails and for punctured tires or residents' cars in the amount of $5,000.00. 4. Plaintiff asks that Defendant pay for completion of job in the amount of $966.00. 5. Plaintiff demands that Defendant pay for cost of replacing windows that were improperly installed in the amount of $1,135.00. 6. Plaintiff asks that Defendant pay for portion of work performed by Joe Ciccocioppo, a salaried employee of Plaintiff at the time in the amount of $1,500.00. WHEREFORE, Plaimiff demands damages of $ 8,601.00. Respectfully submitted, Jo~Sope~nsly~, pro se John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-4440 SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES :: Defendant :: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Scott A Shearer, by and through his Attorney, Barbara L. Wevodau, Esq., pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1034 makes the following Motion: 1. The pleadings in this matter are closed. 2. Plaintiff filed a Complaint in response to an appeal from a District Justice's award on March 20, 2001. 3· Plaintiff's counsel was notified by Defendant's counsel that an Answer and Counterclaim would be filed. 4. Plaintiff's counsel phoned Defendant's counsel to inquire about the Answer and Counterclaim and sent out a Ten-day notice on May 14, 2001. 5. Defendant filed an Answer and Counterclaim on May 24, 2001. 6. Pursuant to Pa.R.CP. 1029, any averment not specifically answered is deemed admitted· 7. Defendant's answer has failed to comply with the Pa.R.C.P. 1029. 8· With respect to Defendant's counterclaim against Plaintiff, no cause of action has been stated for which relief can be granted. 9. Defendant's counterclaim makes demands for monetary relief upon which no basis has been asserted. 10. With all relevant pleadings now closed, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1034, Plaintiff motions for Judgment on the pleadings WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that the Honorable Court enter judgment in his favor and against Defendant. Respectfully submitted: / Barbara Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. $5673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 582-8883 SCOTT A. SHEARER Plaintiff JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara Wevodau, Esquire, hereby certify that, on this date, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion tbr Judgment on the Pleadings was served upon John Sopensky Properties, Defendant in the above-captioned matter, by mailing a copy of said Complaint from the New Bloomfield Post Office via first class mail postage prepaid to the following address: John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 DATE: /Attorney for Plaifit~Tf Barbara Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 834-5554 THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, CUMBERLAND COUNTY No. 01-1186 Civil Action - Law SCOTT A. SHEARER, Plaintiff VS. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES, Defendant DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Brief in Support of Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings John Sopensky, pro se John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 BRIEF I. This Court should allow this case to go to arbitration or go to trial insofar as Defendant has complied with the Rules of Court and answered all of Plaintiff's points. 2. This is a denovo court and any reference to another court are not germane, 3. The Plaintiff never completed the job, performed the work in an unsatisfactory manner, and performed the job with the assistance of a salaried worker in the employ of the Defendant. The Plaintiff refused any settlement acknowledging these issues. 4. By accepting compensation from the Defendant the Plaintiff forfeited his fight to collect the balance of the judgment. 5. The Defendant paid the Plaintiffthe amount that he was willing to pay, flhe Defendant subtracting for other issues in this case. Respectfully submitted, John Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, CUMBEKLAND COUNTY No. 01-1186 Civil Action-Law SCOTT A. SHEARER, Plaintiff JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES, Defendant BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFF Brief in Support of Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Barbara L. Wevodau, Esquire Attorney for Appellant Attorney I.D. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 Telephone;(717) 582-8883 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................... 1 TABLE OF CITATIONS ........................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .............................................. 3 STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED .................................. 4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..................................................... 5 CONCISE STATEMENT OF REASONS RELIED UPON ................... 7 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ..................................................... 8 ARGUMENT ......................................................................... 9 CONCLUSION ....................................................................... 13 TABLE OF CITATIONS CASES: Styer v. Hug 422 Pa. Super. 262, 619 A.2d 347(1993) ..................................... 11 Chesney v. Stevens 435 Pa. Super, 7I, 664 A.2d 1240(1994) ...................................... 12 Schott v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. 436 Pa. Super. 71,259 A.2d 443(1969) ...................................... 12 Huntingdon Finance Corp. v. Newton Artesian Water Co. 442 Pa. Super. 406, 659 A.2d 1052 (1995) .................................. 13 Cole v. Lawrence 701 A.2d 987 (Pa. Super. 1997) ............................................... 13 STATUTES: PA.R.C.P. 1029 .................................................................... 4, 9, 10 PA.R.C.P 1031 ........................................................................ 4,10 PA.R.C.P. 1006 ........................................................................... 3 PA.R.C.P. 1030 ......................................................................... STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION This Honorable Court has jurisdiction of this matter pursuant to Sections 42 Pa.C.S.A. 1006 and Pa.R.A.P. 1006. STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED II. 1II. IV. Whether this Honorable Court should grant Plaintiff' s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and rule in Plaintiff's favor based on Defendant's failure to Answer Plaintifffs Complaint in compliance with Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1029. Whether this Honorable Court should grant Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and rule in Plaintiff's favor based on Defendant's Counterclaim that fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1031. Whether this Honorable Court should grant Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and rule in Plaintiff's favor based on the Doctrine of Estoppel. Whether this Honorable Court should grant Plaintiff's Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings and rule in Plaintiff's favor based on the Equitable Doctrine of Unjust Enrichment. STATEMENT OF THE CASE This brief arises from Plaintiff's filing a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Plaintiff, Mr. Scott A. Shearer is an adult individual in the business of contracting. Defendant, Mr. John Sopensky is an adult individual d/b/a John Sopensky Properties. On or about, September of 2000, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an oral contract in which the Plaintiff would install replacement windows and siding on the Defendant's rental property. Plaintiffhad performed the service and completed the installation job for the Defendant on or about November of 2000. Upon completion of the installation job for the Defendant, PIaintiffdid not receive the agreed upon compensation for his services rendered. On or about December 15, 2000, Plaintiff filed an action against Defendant in District Justice Gayle A. Elder's office. On January 31,2001, after a hearing before the District Justice, a judgment was entered in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $3,260.50. On or about February 6, 2001, Plaintiff received correspondence from Defendant and enclosed was a payment in the form of a check in the amount of eleven hundred dollars. ($1,100.00). Then on or about February 17, 2001, Plaintiff received additional correspondence from Defendant enclosed with payment in the form ora check in the amount of fourteen hundred dollars. ($1,400.00). Defendant still owes an amont of $760.50 the remaining balance on the judgment rendered in Plaintiff's favor on January 31, 2001. On March 1,2001, Defendant appealed the District Justice's judgment. On March 20, 2001, Plaintiff filed a Complaint upon the Defendant for the balance of the judgment rendered by the District Justice, costs, interest, lost wages and attorney fees. Plaintiff's counsel had received a phone call from Attorney J. Vemey who stated that an Answer and Counterclaim would be filed. On or about May 13, 2001, Plaintiff's counsel contacted Attorney Verney's office to inquire on the status of the Answer. Attorney Vemey stated that she had been waiting on the 10- day notice to be filed. On May 14, 2001, Plaintiff's counsel filed a 10-day notice upon Attorney Verney. Upon which Defendant, acting pro-se, filed an Answer and Counterclaim on May 24, 2001. On June 1, 2001, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS RELIED UPON FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court review the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Plaintiff asserts that Defendant has failed to comply with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure in Answering Plaintiff's Complaint and for failing to state a cause of action in the Counterclaim. Further, Defendant has tendered two substantial payments on the judgment rendered by the District Justice to the Plaintiff. In so doing, Defendant is estopped from raising issues as to the viability or amount of the judgment, The Defendant has been also unjustly enriched by the Plaintiff's services upon which he has not tendered payment in full. For the reasons set forth above, Mr. Shearer respectfully requests that this Court rule in his favor regarding the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and order the Defendant to tender $760.50,the amount owed from the District Justice's judgment, costs, interest, lost wages and attorney fees. II. III. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT This Honorable Court should rule in PlaintifFs favor regarding the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings because Defendant has failed to comply with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure regarding his Answer and Counterclaim. Defendant has been unjustly enriched by the PlaintifFs services for which Plaintiff has not been fully compensated. Defendant is estopped from raising his claim due to his acknowledgment of the District Justice's judgment and the tendering of two (2) substantial payments to Plaintiff in satisfaction of said judgment. ARGUMENT WHETHER THE DEFENDANT HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1N HIS ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM. Mr. Shearer filed a Complaint on March 20, 200l, in response to the Mr. Sopensky's appeal from District Justice Elder's judgment on January 1,2001. Plaintiff's counsel had received a phone call from Attorney Jacqueline Vemey regarding the complaint filed upon the Defendant. Plaintiff's counsel was informed that an Answer and Counterclaim would be filed in response to the Complaint. Upon which PlaintifFs counsel awaited reply· On or about May 13, 2001, Plaintiff's counsel called Defendant's attorney and inquired on the status of the Answer and Counterclaim. PlaintiWs counsel was informed that the Answer and Countemlaim were awaiting the ten-day notice. Upon which a ten-day notice was filed on May 14, 2001. An Answer and Counterclaim was filed on June I, 2001. Defendant's Answer fails to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029. Pursuant to Pa.R.CP. 1029(a), "[al responsive pleading shall admit or deny each averment of fact in the preceding pleading or any part thereof to which it is responsive.. · [a]dmissions and denials in a responsive pleading shall refer specifically to the paragraph in which the averment admitted or denied is set forth." Further, pursuant to Pa.R·C.P. 1029 (b), "[a]verments in a pleading to which a responsive pleading is required are admitted when not denied specifically ·..'. Defendant's Answer fails to comply with PaR.CP. 1029. The Answer provided Plaintiff does not address or refer specifically to the paragraph in which the allegation is alledged. (Answer, p. 1). In fact, Defendant's Answer raises different averments not in correlation or response to Plaintiff's Complaint. (Answer, p. 1). In so doing, Defendant's Answer fails to conform to the Rule 1029 of the Pa.R.C.P.; therefore, in failing to address each averment of fact, the averments in Plaintiff's complaint are deemed admitted. Defendant's Counterclaim fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 103 l (a), "defendant may set forth in the answer under the heading "Counterclaim" any cause of action heretofore asserted in assumpsit or trespass which the defendant has against the plaintiff at the time of filing the answer." Defendant's Counterclaim has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Defendant alleges a loss of good will, however, the rest of the counterclaim consists of averments that request damages. (Counterclaim, p. 1). Defendant has not based these damages on a cause of action of the Plaintiff recognizable in the Counterclaim. Therefore, Defendant's counterclaim should be dismissed. WHETHER THE DEFENDANT HAS BEEN UNJUSTLY ENRICHED BY THE PLAINTIFF'S SERVICES On or about September, 2000, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an oral contract in which the Plaintiff would install replacement windows and siding on the Defendant's rental property. Plaintiffhad completed the installation job for the Defendant on or about November of 2000. Upon completion of the installation job, Plaintiff had not received compensation for his services rendered to the Defendant. Plaintiff had to file a claim with the District Justice on December 15, 2000. At the hearing, no issues were raised by the Defendant in regards to the quality or quantity of work tendered by the Plaintiff The District Justice rendered a three thousand two hundred sixty dollars and fifty cent ($3,260.50)judgment in the Plaintiff's favor. (Complaint, Exhibit '~A"). Unjust enrichment is a principle by which % person who has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another is required to make restitution to the other." Restatement, Restitution Section l. When one receives a benefit, the retention of which would be inequitable, the law will impose a duty to pay compensation in order to prevent unjust enrichment. Unjust enrichment is essentially an equitable doctrine. Stver v. Hug, 422 Pa. Super. 262, 619 A2d 347 (1993). The application of this doctrine depends on the facts and circumstances of the case at hand. The most important factor to consider in applying this doctrine is whether the enrichment of the Defendant was unjust. Styer, supra at 267, 619 A.2d at 350. Where unjust enrichment is found to exist, the law implies a contract. In so doing, under quasi contract, the Defendant is required to pay the Plaintiffthe value of the benefit conferred. Chesney v. Stevens, 435 Pa. Super. 71,644 A.2d 1240 (1994); Schott v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 436 Pa. 279, 290, 291,259 A~2d. 443,449 (1969). In this ease, Defendant has received and accepted the Plaintiff's services of installing replacement windows and siding on his rental buildings. The Plaintiff had completed the installation job, on or about November of 2000. Upon which, the Plaintiff had to file a claim to receive any amount of compensation for his services rendered to the Defendant. In fact, Defendant began tendering payment to Plaintiff for Plaintiff's services. Defendant had paid two large payments on the Judgment granted the Plaintiff, but has failed to fully compensate Plaintiff for his services rendered. In so doing, the Defendant has been unjustly enriched by the Plaintiff's services. WHETHER THE DEFENDANT IS ESTOPPED FROM RAISING ISSUES REGARDING TENDERING PAYMENT FOR PLA INTIFF'S SER¥'ICES O~ January 31. 2001. ~tjudg~ncnt was c~atercd i~/ Plail~tii'Fs favor ]n tim amount of three thousand two )~undred sixty dotJars an~ ~ty cents ($3~260 50). Upon which on February 6~ 200I~ Defendan~ sent l~Jaintiff correspondence witlq a check in the amount eleven hundred dollars ($I~ 0O00) (Complaint, Ext~b~t ~'B"). Ttsen 2001, DeJbndant sen~ Plaintiff additional correspondence with a check in the amount fouqeen }~undred dollars. ($]~400 00} (Complaint, Exhibit Under rl~e Doctrine of'Estoppel, also referred to as a bar or issue preclusion, "precludes a person f~om fi'om denying the truth ora fact that has, in contemplation of law, become settled by the facts and proceedings of judicial or legislative officers, or by the act of the pa~y himself, either by conventional writing, or by representations, expressed or implied Fu~her, the courts have recognized that there can be no more clear and unequivocal acknowledgment of the debt than payment. Huntingdon Finance Co~:p. v Newton A~esian Water Co, 442 Pa. Super. 406, 410, 659 A2d 1052, 1054 (1995); Cole v. Lawrence~ 70] A.2d 987. 990 (Po. Super I997). Also, under the Doctrh~e of Payment, once one has rendered payment, i~ is viewed as an affirmative defense. PA ¢.C.P. 1030. In this situation, by his own actio~s~ Defenda~at }~as acknowledged the anaou~at owcd the ?lainfif/'f~r I]is services ~endcrcd ;ruder thc oral comract Dct~dant l:as made two substantial payments on the amount owed to Plainti~X' (Complaint, Exhibit "B' and Exhibit '~C"). It was not until offer Defendant tendered payments to Pla~ntii'P did he file the Notice of Appeal notably on the last day possible. No issue was raised at the District Justice regarding the se~'vices rendered by the Plaintif'fto Def'endant. Def'endant by his own actions unequivocally acknowledged the amount awarded Plaintiff in the ii, dement. The~-efore, Delkndant is estopped ti'om 1-aising issues t'egarding the judgment rendered Plaintiff. By and through De[kndant's own actions of tendering payment, De~kndant has waived his fight ~o contest thejudgment t,'L~i'tl~e~', ~nde~' tl~e Doctrine of Payment, once Delkndant lqas tendered payment, ti~e PlaintilT now bas an aflSm~ative - defense to the suit at hand. CONCLUSION Fei' thc reasons set ~'ortb above, Plaintiffrequests that th}s Honorable Com't award Plaintiff the balance of bis Judgment rendered by the District J~s~ice. costs, lost wages, interesl and Attorney fees Dated: July/f_, 2001 Respectfully submitted. ,~'Barbara L. Wcvodau, Esq. /,Attoraey for ~he Appellant Attorney 1D. 85673 PO. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 Telephone (717) 582-8883 SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES Defendant 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving a copy of the Plaintiff's Brief in support for Motion on Judgment on the Pleadings upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements ofPa. R.AP. 121: Service by mailing first class, postage prepaid from the United States Post Office in New Bloomfield, Pennsylvania, as follows: John Sopensky Properties c/o John Sopensky 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 DATE: Barbara L. Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 582-8883 PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and sutmitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please ]~-~t the within matter for the next Arc3ument Court. CAPTION OF CASE (entir~ caption must be stated in hill) Scott A. Shearer ( Pla {ntiff) John Sopensky Properties (Defendant) No. 01-1186 Civ~lAction X~) 2001 State mattertobear~3ued (i.e., plaintiff's motion for newtr4a], defendant's d~nu~£~r to c~,~]a~nt, etc.): Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 2. Identify counsel who wi ] ] argue case: (a) for plaintiff: ~dr~ss: (b) for defendant: Address: Barbara L. Wevodau, Esq. P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 John Sopensky, Pro Se ,105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 I wJ]l notify all parties in writing within two days that this case bas been listed for arc3um~nt. 4. Ar~3tm~ent Court ~ate: July 25, 2001 #30 SCOTT A. SHEARER V. JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : NO. 2001-1186 CWIL TERM IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BEFORE HESS, GUIDO, JJ. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 30TM day of JULY, 2001, after argument, and by agreement of the parties, Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED. The amount of said judgment is $760.50. Barbara L. Wevodau, Esquire P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, Pa. 17068 For the Plaintiff John Sopensky, Pro Se 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pa. 17055 Byt Edward E. GuidO,,c~ :sld SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES :: Defendant :: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW PRAECIPE TO SATISFY JUDGMENT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff,, Scott A, Shearer, by and through his Attorney, Barbara L. Wevodau, Esq,, files the following Praecipe: 1. Judgment on the Pleadings in this matter was rendered on July 30, 2001. 2~ Plaintiffreceived payment of the above-mentioned judgment on or about October 15, 2001. Respectfully submitted: Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 582-8883 SCOTT A. SHEARER :: Plaintiff :: JOHN SOPENSKY PROPERTIES :: Defendant :: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE 9TI~ JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 01-1186 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION- LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara Wevodau, Esquire, hereby certify that, on this date, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Satisfy Judgment was served upon John Sopensky Properties, Defendant in the above-captioned matter, by mailing a copy of said Complaint fi.om the New Bloomfield Post Office via first class mail postage prepaid to the following address: Johil Sopensky Properties 105 East Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 DATE: /'~ttorney for Plaintiff Barbara Wevodau, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 85673 P.O. Box 264 New Bloomfield, PA 17068 (717) 834-5554 PYS510 Cumberland County Prothonotary's Office Page ] Civil Case Inquiry 2001-01186 SHEARER SCOTT A 'vs) SOPENSKY JOHN PROPERTIES Reference No..: Case TV]De ..... : APPEAL - DJ Ju~gmeh% ..... % .00 Judge Assignea: Disposed Desc.: ............ Case Comments ............. Filed ........ : Time ......... : Execution Date Jury Trial .... Disposed Date. Higher Crt 1.: Higher Crt 2.: 3/01/2001 11:02 0/00/0000 0/0o/00oo General Index Attorney Info SHEARER SCOTT A PLAINTIFF 301 NEWPORT ROAD DUNC~2qNON PA 17020 SOPENSKY JOHN PROPERTIES DEFENDANT PRO SE 105 EAST MAIN STREET MECH. ANICSBURG PA 17055 * Date Entries * 3/01/2001 3/01/2001 3/20/2001 5/14/2001 5/24/2001 6/01/2001 7/03/2001 7/19/2001 ............. FIRST ENTRY .............. APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT - BY BARBARA WEVADAU IMPORTANT NOTICE FILED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT - BY JOHN SOPENSKY PRO SE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BY BARBARA WEVODAU ESQ PLEADINGS - BY BARBARA L WEVODAU ESQ FOR PLFF .............. LAST ENTRY .............. * Escrow Information * * Fees & Debits Beg Bal Pymts/Adj End Bal * APPEAL D.J. 35.00 35.00 .00 TAX ON APPEAL .25 .25 .00 SETTLEMENT 5.00 5.00 .00 JCP FEE 5.00 5.00 .00 45.25 45.25 .00 ******************************************************************************** * End of Case Information *