HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-2989
PERINI SERVICES/
SOUTH HAMPTON MANOR, L.P.
Plaintiff
V.
DENNIS DENNIS, Individually
and as agent for Garnet F. Smith,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 2011-2989 CIVIL TERM W?
PRAECIPE TO ATTACH SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION
Please attach the following Substitute Verification to the Complaint filed in this matter on
March 10, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
BARIC SCHERER
David A. Baric, Esquire
Date: March 15, 2011 I.D. #44853
19 West South Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717) 249-6873
VERIFICATION
I, Allison Klimowicz, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
I hereby ratify the verification previously supplied by my attorney, David A. Baric, Esquire
and execute this verification as a substituted verification.
I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.
§4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities.
Date: ?? M)l .ll?.?r
Allison
SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY a.
Ronny R Anderson - --i
Sheriff L
Jody S Smith
Chief Deputy C0 z'
_ 'em
Richard W Stewart
Solicitor
Perini Services/ South Hampton Manor, LP I Case Number
vs.
Dennis Dennis 2011-2989
SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE
03/15/2011 06:05 PM - Michael Barrick, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on March
15, 2011 at 1805 hours, he served a true copy of the within Complaint and Notice, upon the within named
defendant, to wit: Dennis Dennis, by making known unto Denise Logan, Daughter of Defendant at 20
Bridgewater Lane, Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241 its contents and at the same time
handing to her personally the said true and correct copy of the same.
MICHAEL BARRICK, DEP Y
03/15/2011 06:05 PM - Michael Barrick, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on March
15, 2011 at 1805 hours, he served a true copy of the within Complaint and Notice, upon the within named
defendant, to wit: Dennis Dennis as agent for Garnet F. Smith, by making known unto Denise Logan,
Daughter of Defendant at 20 Bridgewater Lane, Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241 its
contents and at the same time handing to her personally the said true and correct copy of the same.
MICH EL BARRIC , D UTY
SHERIFF COST: $56.44
March 16, 2011
SO ANSWERS,
ROW R ANDERSON, SHERIFF
,.c; Coun' suite Seen,l. 7eleoscft. In;;.
F:\FILES\Clients\14290 Dennis\14290.1.praI
Revised: 3/28/11 4:32PM
David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
I.D. 41722
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Attorneys for Defendant
PERINI SERVICES/
SOUTH HAMPTON MANOR, L.P.,
Plaintiff
V.
DENNIS DENNIS, Individually and as
agent for Garnet F. Smith,
Defendant
OF THELRO THONO TA RY
20/1 MAR 29 pH 1: 52
CUMBERLAND AN1A
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 2011-2989
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PRAECIPE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
Kindly enter the appearance of MARTSON LAW OFFICES as attorneys for Defendant in
the above matter.
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
Y
David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Attorneys for Defendant
Date: A
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Tricia D. Eckenroad, an authorized agent for Martson Deardorff Williams Otto Gilroy &
Faller, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe was served this date by depositing same
in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
David A. Baric, Esquire
BARIC SCHERER
19 West South Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
By
Tri is D. kenroad
Ten East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Dated: I "o? f, ? 0 //
F.\FILESTlients\14290 Dennis\14290.I.ansI
Revised: 8/17/ 11 2:14PM
David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
I.D. 41722
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Attorneys for Defendant
FILED-OFFICE
OF THE PROTHONOTAPA ,'
2011 AUG 18 PM 3: 17
CUMBERLANDVAN COUNTY
PERINI SERVICES/
SOUTH HAMPTON MANOR, L.P.,
Plaintiff
V.
DENNIS DENNIS, Individually and as
agent for Garnet F. Smith,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 2011-2989
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER
TO: PERINI SERVICES/SOUTH HAMPTON MANOR, L.P., Plaintiff and its attorney
DAVID A. BARIC, ESQUIRE
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED
NEW MATTER WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT
MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Dennis Dennis, Individually and as the agent for
Garnet F. Smith (deceased), by and through his attorneys, MARTSON LAW OFFICES, and avers
the following in response to Plaintiff s Complaint:
1. Admitted upon information and belief.
2-5. Admitted.
6. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 6 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. To the extent that a response is
required, the Admission Agreement ("Agreement") is an instrument in writing that speaks for itself
and to the extent the averments of Paragraph 6 of the Complaint are inconsistent therewith, they are
denied.
7. Admitted.
8. Denied. The averments of Paragraph 8 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. To the extent that a response is
required, the Admission Agreement is an instrument in writing that speaks for itself and to the extent
the averments of Paragraph 8 of the Complaint are inconsistent therewith, they are denied.
9. Denied. It is specifically denied that as of February 15, 2011, Garnet F. Smith owed
Shippensburg Health the sum of $13,844.14. To the contrary, Mr. Dennis, as the agent of Garnet
F. Smith, had brought current all billings provided by Plaintiff through December 11, 2010. The
amount alleged in Paragraph 9 of the Complaint was not a balance that had been identified for
payment or requested prior to January 2011, and appears to have been the result of an invoicing
error by Shippensburg Health. The remainder of the averment of Paragraph 9 alleging that Exhibit
"B" is a true and correct copy collecting the balance due is denied as a conclusion of law to which
no response is required. By way of further response, invoices from Plaintiff total only $12,929.03.
10. Denied. The averment of Paragraph 10 is a conclusion of law to which no response
is required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
COUNT I - BREACH OF CONTRACT
SHIPPENSBURG HEALTH v. DENNIS DENNIS
11. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 10 of the preceding Answer are incorporated
by reference as though fully set forth.
12. Denied as a conclusion of law. The averments of Paragraph 12 constitute conclusions
of law to which no response is required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. To the extent
that a response is required, the Admission Agreement is an instrument in writing that speaks for itself
and to the extent the averments of Paragraph 12 of the Complaint are inconsistent therewith, they
are denied.
13-17. Denied as a conclusion of law.
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Dennis Dennis, respectfully requests that Your Honorable Court
dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and enter judgment in his favor, together with such relief as the Court
deems just and reasonable under the circumstances.
NEW MATTER
18. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the preceding Answer are incorporated
by reference as though fully set forth.
19. Garnet F. Smith, deceased, was a resident of the state of Florida in a home health care
circumstance until her admission to Shippensburg Health on or about January 26, 2010.
20. Garnet F. Smith, deceased, was in her late 90s when she was admitted to
Shippensburg Health and had until that time, maintained her long time Florida residence.
21. Mr. Dennis, as Garnet Smith's agent, expended considerable funds of his own to
maintain Garnet Smith's account at Shippensburg Health as billed by Shippensburg Health, current.
22. Shippensburg Health failed to accurately invoice Garnet Smith during her residency.
23. When Shippensburg Health presented an invoice in excess of $12,000.00 in costs,
those costs had not previously been invoiced to Garnet Smith or Mr. Dennis.
24. Prior to Shippensburg Health's discovery of its error, all accounts had been current
and all of Garnet Smith's available income had been contributed toward Shippensburg Health's
invoices.
25. Mr. Dennis brought the Shippensburg Health invoices current through 2010, and in
addition, expended $4,246.00 of his own funds, beyond Ms. Smith's income, to maintain her
property.
26. Mr. Dennis made several efforts by telephone and through visits to Shippensburg
Health and called its headquarters in Hagerstown, Maryland, to address the billing errors by
Shippensburg Health.
27. Prior to filing this Answer, Mr. Dennis, through his counsel, provided complete
copies of documentation in response to Shippensburg Health outlining the details of the situation.
28. Despite receiving through their counsel substantial documentation from Mr. Dennis,
Plaintiff failed to even acknowledge receipt of said documentation.
29. Plaintiff, Perini Services/South Hampton Manor, LP., through its agents, has
consistently failed to conduct itself in good faith in response to Mr. Dennis's attempt to provide an
explanation of the status of the account of the late Garnet F. Smith.
30. There was no Breach of Contract on the Agreement between Garnet Smith and Perini
Services/South Hampton Manor, LP.
31. Plaintiff has waived any claim for additional services through its failure to accurately
invoice Garnet F. Smith during her lifetime.
32. Based upon the facts and circumstances raised in this Answer with New Matter,
Plaintiff Perini Services/South Hampton Manor, LP is estopped from claiming funds from Dennis
Dennis.
33. Plaintiff has been fully paid for all services provided to Garnet F. Smith in accordance
with the Agreement.
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Dennis Dennis, respectfully requests that Your Honorable Court
dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and enter judgment in his favor, together with such relief as the Court
deems just and reasonable under the circumstances.
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
By
David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Attorneys for Defendant
Date: ?? ""Sx \(."
VERIFICATION
I, Dennis Dennis, hereby verify that I have reviewed the foregoing document and state that
to the extent that the foregoing document contains facts supplied by or known to me, they are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A.
§4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dennis Dennis
Date: ? - / 7 /I
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Tricia D. Eckenroad, an authorized agent for Martson Deardorff Williams Otto Gilroy &
Faller, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer was served this date by depositing same
in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
David A. Baric, Esquire
BARIC & SCHERER
19 West South Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
MARTSON LAW OFFICES
CBjy
Tricia . Eckenroad
Ten East h Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-3341
Dated: f// 7 //[
Perini Services/South Hampton Manor, L.P.
vs Case No.
2011-2989 Civil Term
n ry
Dennis Dennis, individually and as agent for Garnet F. Smith "1:7.�
rn c v)
=r1 rri
't7
vir—
STATEMENT OF INTENTION TO PROCEED < c)
=c)
To the Court:
Plaintiff, Perini Services/South Hampton Manor, L.P.
-
r-
intends to proceed with the above captioned matter.
David A. Baric, Esquire
Print Name Sign Na
09/04/14 Plaintiff
Date: Attorney for
IMPORTANT NOTE
In the event that this is a second or subsequent filing of a Statement of Intention to
Proceed, this matter will be referred to the President Judge for the purpose of
conducting a status conference involving all counsel. The goal of the status
conference will be to set the matter for trial or other final disposition within a time
certain. Prior to the status conference, Counsel will be expected to submit to the
court, in writing, a proposed schedule for the completion of discovery, the filing of
dispositive motions and a report as to whether alternative dispute resolution has
been used or discussed.