Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-381811 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : DOCKET NUMBER: V. Plaintiff, MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI, and SILVER SP G T WNSHIP, WX17F CafNle r /cc?/ Defendants. ? &A /'70,5' CIVIL ACTION -LAW IN EQUITY PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF SAID COURT: Issue summons in the above case Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to Attorne heriff. > rn n ? r - =r ? V0 0 rn 5 N N yP o _?c? Q' n -C - GRIEST HIMES HERROLD SCHAUMANN FERRO, LLP ., 1( C ?'X8 SCNAUMANN, FERRO LLP AT o-eys AT LAW t 129 EAST M_ Sneer Y" P?SYL - 17401 j 11=i.raxorie (717) 846-8856 By: ` chaumann, Esquire PA# 16675 129 E. Market Street York, PA 17401 (717) 846-8856 (717-846-3610 Fax dschaumann(a, ghhsl aw. com Attorney for Plaintiff w WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. LCIJ? Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division Dater 11 e. _At? Deputy GRmsr, Hugs, HERRo D, ScmuMA14W, F)mRo LLe An ys AT L- 129 En Afesxer Srnrm Y" Ft snv, 17401 7Yla 0-(717)846-8856 SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson Sheriff FILE vF F IC 9tta at u?nbrr?,? +. Jody S Smith ' i 1= 1? R f T y (' 4 ' ,E k Chief Deputy 2011 MAY -2 AM 11: 29 Richard W Stewart Solicitor OrFf C F "l ' . S-ERIFF CUMBERLAND COU6 It"i' PENNSYLVANIA Marie L. Chomicki Case Number vs. Silver Spring Township (et al.) 2011-3818 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 04/21/2011 12:49 PM - Amanda Cobaugh, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 21, 2011 at 1249 hours, she served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Silver Spring Township, by making known unto Kathy Kramer, Secretary for Silver Spring Township at 6475 Carlisle Pike, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055 its contents and at the same time handing to her personally the said true and correct copy of the same. Q AMANDA COBAU H, DEP 04/26/2011 04:43 PM - Dennis Fry, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 26, 2011 at 1643 hours, he served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Mark A. Rosini, by making known unto himself personally, at 50 State Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17050 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and correct copy of the same. 1 DE S FRY, DEP 04/26/2011 04:43 PM - Dennis Fry, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 26, 2011 at 1643 hours, he served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Holly L. Rosini, by making known unto Mark A. Rosini, Husband of Defendant at 50 State Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17050 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and correct copy of the same. DE IS FRY, D SHERIFF COST: $80.44 April 27, 2011 SO ANSWERS, RON R ANDERSON, SHERIFF icy Caunt,Suite Sneriff. Ieleosott. Inc. DONALD L. CARMELITE,ESQUIRE r-, -: t ID No: 84730 -�G y c�a .,` Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman&Goggin -wy 'mac 4200 Cruets Mill Road r a: Harrisburg,PA 17112 31:c...7., _ -c- -- (717)651-3504 (717)651-9630 dlcarmelite@mdwcg.com Attorney for Defendant MARIE L. CHOMICKI, ▪ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff • CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • v. • CIVIL ACTION-LAW - NO. 11-3818 CIVIL • MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. . ROSINI and SILVER SPRING • IN EQUITY • TOWNSHIP, . • Defendants . ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel on behalf of Defendant, SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP,with respect to the above-referenced matter. Respectfully submitted, MA' fGOGGIN. NNEHEY,WARNER, C. ,Ci / Do,'I'd L. Carmelite, Esquire I.0.No. 84730 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3504 Dated: October 11, 2013 05/1116426.v1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara E. Steel, an employee of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman& Goggin, do hereby certify that on this 11th day of October 2013, I served a copy of the Entry of Appearance, via First Class United States mail,postage prepaid as follows: David Schaumann, Esquire Griest Himes Herrold Schaumann Ferro, LLP 129 East Market Street York, PA 17401 ajaka (-),& C Barbara E. Steel rri DONALD L. CARMELITE,ESQUIRE , ID No: 84730 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman&Goggin 4200 Crums Mill Road Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717)651-3504 (717)651-9630 dlcarmeliteamdwcg.com Attorney for Defendant MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff • CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • v. CIVIL ACTION—LAW • NO. 11-3818 CIVIL MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. • ROSINI and SILVER SPRING • IN EQUITY TOWNSHIP, Defendants PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT Please issue a Rule directed to Plaintiff to file a Complaint in the above-captioned matter within twenty(20)days of service or suffer judgment Non Pros. Respectfully submitted, MAR_ • ►. DENNEHEY,WARNER, C• : GOGGIN Do •eirr• armelite, Esquire I.D. No. 84730 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3504 Dated: October 11, 2013 05/1116433.v1 MARIE L. CHOMICKI, • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff • CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • • • v. CIVIL ACTION—LAW • NO. 11-3818 CIVIL • MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. • ROSINI and SILVER SPRING IN EQUITY TOWNSHIP, • m Defendants • Cu , r- - RULE _ AND NOW, this /6/1 , day of bet , 2013, upon consideration of Defendant's Praecipe For Rule To File A Complaint, a Rule is hereby granted upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint within twenty(20)days of service,or suffer judgment Non Pros. Rule issued this 15th day of Od- ,2013. f124,frf:x. .r.kle Dikvib D. Boca, Prothonotary e _tft2 F:\FILES1Gienls\t50t13 Chomicki1I500),I Praocipe�o m a ier and withdraw appearance f, I LF-1:13L'r010FfrrO' :r Reviled 10/21//113 1:57PM £i i NOV �. { Created 7 ` of 1• �2 Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire �M ERLAND COW, MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY&FALLER PENNSYLVANIA MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 29943 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION—LAW : NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI, : and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants : IN EQUITY PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please enter the appearance of the firm of Martson Law Offices on behalf of the Plaintiff, Marie Chomicki. itiov Dated: er ,2013 Hubert X. Gilroy, Esqu' e Martson Law Offices 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-3341 ID #29943 Please withdraw the appearance of the David Shaumann, Esquire, on behalf of the Plaintiff, Marie Chomicki Dated: October, 2013 S- _ - vid .0 ann,Esquire 129 E Market Street York, PA 17401 (717) 846-8856 ID#16675 r � , Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER ZIG}3 HAY 26 AM 1►; } 7 MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 29943 CUMBERLAND COUNTY 10 East High Street P�N'�SYLVAh'}A Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. CIVIL ACTION—LAW NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI, and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN EQUITY 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 an 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 case may proceed without you and a judgment 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 1-800-990-9108 717-249-3166 Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 29943 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION—LAW NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI, and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN EQUITY COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Marie L. Chomicki, by her attorneys, Martson Law Offices, sets forth the following: 1. Plaintiff is Marie L. Chomicki, an adult individual residing at 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff is the legal owner of real estate at 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, said real estate consisting of a single family home and accompanying lot (the property hereinafter referred to as the `Real Estate'). 3. Defendant, Silver Spring Township, is a Township of the Second Class organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with principle offices located at 6475 Carlisle Pike, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania (Defendant, Silver Spring Township, hereinafter referred to as the `Township'). 4. Defendants, Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini, are adult individuals residing at 50 State Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania (these Defendants collectively hereinafter referred to as the `Rosinis'). 1 COUNT I: MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP 5. Paragraphs 1-4 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 6. Plaintiff's Real Estate is located within Silver Spring Township. 7. The Real Estate consists of Lot No. 30 as shown on a certain subdivision plan of lots entitled "Konhaus Estates" (Section 1) as recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Deed in and for Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in Plan Book 54 Page 12. Said plan hereinafter referred to as the "Subdivision Plan." 8. The Subdivision Plan was approved by appropriate action of the Township after said Subdivision Plan was reviewed by various Township Officials, including the consulting engineer for the Township. A copy of said Subdivision Plan is attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A." 9. Included in the review of the Subdivision Plan was an examination by the Township of a storm sewer system that would be incorporated into the entire development, with detention basins, storm sewer easements, and other municipal easements shown on the Subdivision Plan. 10. After recording of the Subdivision Plan, the developer of Konhaus Estates constructed various public improvements within the development, which included roadways, curbing, storm sewer systems and sanitary sewage systems. 11. Upon completion of the construction of the sanitary sewage system for this development, there existed a storm sewage system within Bourbon Red Drive which collected storm water from Bourbon Red Drive, a public street owned and maintained by the Township, and from other private properties where the storm water flowed onto the street and into storm drains. 12. The storm water system within Bourbon Red Drive exits Bourbon Red Drive immediately in front of Plaintiff's Real Estate, and flows through a storm pipe that is within a storm sewer easement along the northern boundary of Plaintiff's Real Estate. Said storm sewer easement was included on the Subdivision Plan 2 and intended to be part of the publicly owned and maintained storm water system for the Development. 13. The storm pipe within the storm sewer easement area, referenced in paragraph 12 above, is an integral and necessary part of the public storm sewer collection system for the development, and collects water that comes off of the public street and other areas, as set forth in paragraph 11 above. 14. The storm water pipe that is located within the storm sewer easement area, as referenced in paragraph 8 above, has structurally failed directing water into the Plaintiffs Real Estate, causing damage to Plaintiff's Real Estate as set forth below. 15. Plaintiff has, on numerous occasions, given notice to the Township advising the Township of the damage occurring to her Real Estate as a result of the leaking storm water sewer system owned and operated by the Township. Despite said notices, the Township has either intentionally or negligently refused to remedy the dangerous condition that exists by virtue of the structurally failed storm sewer pipe, and the Township has intentionally or negligently failed to remedy the situation to prohibit damage to Plaintiff's Real Estate. 16. The leaking storm sewer pipe and redirected flow of water, has caused failure of the foundation walls and associated structure of Plaintiff's Real Estate with estimated repairs needed to Plaintiff's Real Estate of$65,000.00 or more. 17. Plaintiff has been advised that the estimated cost required to repair the structurally failed storm sewer pipe to be in the neighborhood of$18,000.00. 18. Plaintiff continues to suffer damage as a result of the Township's unwillingness to fix a storm sewer that is clearly used for purposes of the public, and is clearly a publicly owned infrastructure. 19. The Township's unwillingness to repair the storm sewer pipe in question, despite the fact that the Township was aware that the storm sewer pipe had structurally failed and was causing damage to the Plaintiffs Real Estate, constitutes outrageous and reckless conduct on the part of the Township and merits an award of punitive damages. 3 20. The Township's actions in failing to remedy a structurally failed storm sewer pipe that was clearly designed for public purposes and used by the Township for public purposes represents arbitrary and bad faith conduct on the part of the Township and justifies an award of Plaintiff's counsel fees pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 2503(9). 21. The failure of the Township to recognize its liability in this matter after this suit is filed and if the Township continues to unnecessarily defend this matter, constitutes such conduct that would be dilatory, obdurate or vexatious during the pendency of the litigation and would merit the award of attorney's fees pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 2503(7). WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant, Silver Spring Township, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 and in excess of the Compulsory Arbitration Limits for Cumberland County; award punitive damages against Defendant, Silver Spring Township, in favor of the Plaintiff; and award Plaintiff's attorney's fees and costs of litigation. COUNT II MARIE L. CHOMICK V. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 22. Paragraphs 1-21 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 23. The Township has on various occasions suggested that it has no liability for the storm sewer line in question because the storm sewer is located within a storm sewer easement, and that the easement is on Plaintiff's Real Estate. 24. Plaintiff asks this Court to issue a determination under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 7531 et seq. determining that the Township owns the storm sewer system and, in particular, is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the storm sewer pipe that is located within the easement area on Plaintiffs property as referenced in paragraph 9 above and which pipe has in the past and currently continues to cause damage to Plaintiff's Real Estate. 4 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests This Honorable Court to issue a determination as follows: A. Determine the rights and status of the respective parties with respect to the storm sewer line in question. B. Declare that the Township is the owner of the storm sewer system and, in particular, the pipe that traverses Plaintiffs land and is causing damage to Plaintiffs Real Estate. C. Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. COUNT III MARIE CHOMICKI V. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP MANDAMUS 25. Paragraphs 1-24 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 26. The Township has refused to repair the storm sewer pipe in question, and such refusal has continued to allow the storm sewer pipe to leak and cause damage to the Plaintiffs Real Estate as set forth above. 27. The Township, in its capacity as a municipal entity which owns and operates public infrastructure, has owned, operated and maintained the storm sewer system within the Subdivision and, in particular, within Bourbon Red Drive. 28. The storm sewer easement, which is located on the Real Estate of the Plaintiff, was specifically designed for the public benefit and, correspondingly, for the benefit of the Township. 29. As the owner and operator of the public infrastructure within the Subdivision, the Township has the obligation to repair storm sewer lines that have structurally failed and that are causing damage to any of the Township residents or their property. 30. Plaintiff seeks a Mandamus Action requesting this Court to direct the Township to promptly repair the structurally failed storm sewer pipe in questions, and to award damages to the Plaintiff that have been caused by the leaking storm sewer line, and other damages as allowed by law. 5 WHEREAS, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant, Silver Spring Township, as follows: A. The Court direct Silver Spring Township to promptly proceed, at the expense of the Township, with the necessary repairs for the storm sewer pipe in question which is currently leaking and causing damage to Plaintiff's Real Estate. B. Award damages against the Township based upon the damages incurred by the Plaintiff for necessary repairs to her Real Estate, punitive damages, attorney's fees and court costs. COUNT IV MARIE CHOMICKI V. MARK A. ROSINI AND HOLLY L. ROSINI CONTINUING TRESPASS 31, Paragraphs 1-30 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 32. During periods of rainy weather, storm water runoff naturally flowed away from Plaintiff's property, based upon the grading of the land. 33. In or about 2004, the Rosini's, by their officers, agents servants, or employees, conducted, or caused to be conducted, construction activities on the property described as 50 State Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, which is adjacent to Plaintiff's property and which is owned by the Rosini's. 34. The Rosini's construction efforts directly altered the natural flow of surface storm water runoff. 35. The storm water runoff is now diverted directly onto the Plaintiffs property, causing continuous flooding. 36. The continuous flooding of the Plaintiff's property has caused extensive annoyance and inconvenience to the Plaintiff in depriving Plaintiff of reasonable use of her property, and has also caused damage to various shrubbery and plantings of the Plaintiff. 6 37. The continuous flooding of Plaintiff's property is a continuous trespass, which has caused damages to Plaintiff's property, and will continue to damage the property during periods of rainfall in the area and has created a risk of the creation of sink holes on Plaintiff's property WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini, as follows: A. The Court direct Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini to promptly proceed, at the expense of the Rosini's, with the necessary corrections of the grading of the property to return the storm water runoff flow as it was before the construction undertaken by the Rosini's. B. Award damages in favor of Plaintiff against the Rosini's as a result of the annoyance and inconvenience suffered by Plaintiff from the flooding and the damages to Plaintiff's property caused by the flooding. COUNT V MARIE CHOMICKI V. MARK A. ROSINI AND HOLLY L. ROSINI VIOLATION OF 32 P.S. X680.13, DUTY OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND 38. Paragraphs 1-37 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 39. The Rosini's were required to implement measures consistent with the provisions of the applicable watershed storm water plan as reasonably necessary to prevent injury to other property. 40. The Rosini's failed to uphold the duties of persons engaged in the development of land, as per 32 P.S. §680.13. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini, as follows: 7 A. The Court direct Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini to promptly proceed, at the expense of the Rosini's, with the necessary corrections of the grading of the property to return the storm water runoff flow as it was before the construction undertaken by the Rosini's. B. Award damages in favor of Plaintiff against the Rosini's as a result of the annoyance and inconvenience suffered by Plaintiff from the flooding and the damages to Plaintiff's property caused by the flooding. MARTSON LAW OFFICES By � Gf tV " Hubert X. Gilro Esquire 10 East High S eet Carlisle, PA 013 (717) 243-33 1 r Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: November tO , 2013 8 v,. x It c a go rit ° a 7 'n 8 Ow S = R- ��i t a LOU i 33 Ln 0 � za 4 w � LtJz r G eeom { t1'\ .a irno es�'w0 batp c— st a8 $ LL � J a8=&' ac°H " 1 $g, fl jy\la8 R A2 1 Y H 0 im j0,, 4q- MdG- r uc'o a +S g a'G 2 lot RK'/ oo ` ,� °yoo 4 \t� A pg • O1 $ o Y Ug 'ia � t a a f-, s.jo oo4ca4amo9 61,n.—Id W .^°a. d3anaJ P°at NanJ aqi dq PM.RS eH € d 2.1 «gS •✓ �^ q,�, - E�Fiad4a4unK enoN lvtd � 3R 9 ., 2i '> 3� EXHIBIT� VERIFICATION The foregoing Complaint is based upon information which has been gathered by my counsel in the preparation of the lawsuit. The language of the document is that of counsel and not my own. I have read the Complaint and to the extent that the document is based upon information which I have given to my counsel,it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge,information and belief. To the extent that the content of the document is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. This statement and verification are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false averments,I may be subject to criminal penalties. Marie L. Chomicki SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson • Sheriff d 0c ;,. r��y, DI C:ptNFitae�.�r�� ,,.J i�1."1 c Jody S Smith 2013 Chief Deputy a r DEC I ati lc, Q t` Richard W Stewart LA r„ • Solicitor r:� W THE-_ .r this� giUA • Marie L. Chomicki vs. • Case Number • Mark A. Rosini (et al.) 2011-3818 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 12/03/2013 07:36 PM - Deputy Brian Grzyboski, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by"personally" handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be the Defendant, to wit: Mark A. Rosini at 50 State Road, Silver Spring Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. • BRIAN GRZY:OSKI .4!EPUTY 12/03/2013 07:36 PM - Deputy Brian Grzyboski, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint &Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Mark A. Rosini, Husband , who accepted as"Adult Person in Charge"for Holly L. Rosini at 50 State Road, Silver Spring Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. , % • f/_„ BRIAN GRZ :0 IIEPUTY SHERIFF COST: $55.76 SO ANSWERS, December 05, 2013 RON R ANDERSON, SHERIFF (c)CountySuite Sheriff,Te;eoso ,ie . I r sl t Ur t L A. DEC 2 7 � E Scott A.Dietterick,Esquire Q t!. Supreme Court I.D.#55650 ��' �� My Kathryn L.Mason,Esquire Q Supreme Court I.D.#306779 PEMNS yL VAN�,4 t ' JSDC Law Offices PO Box 650 Hershey,PA 17036 (717)533-3280 Attorneys for Defendant Silver Spring Township MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA V. NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI,HOLLY L. ROSINI, CIVIL ACTION- LAW and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANTS INEQUITY NOTICE TO PLEAD 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. JSDC LAW FIC BY: Sc . Diette ' quire Suprem rt I.D. # 55650 Kathryn L. Mason, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #306779 Attorneys for Mark & Holly Rosini P.O. BOX 650 Hershey, PA 17033 (717) 533-3280 Date: MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA V. NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI,HOLLY L. ROSINI, CIVIL ACTION-LAW and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANTS INEQUITY NOTICE TO PLEAD 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. JSDC LAW OFF ES BY: Scott ck, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #55650 Kathryn L. Mason, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #306779 Attorneys for Mark& Holly Rosini P.O. Box 650 Hershey, PA 17033 (717) 533-3280 Date: Scott A.Dietterick,Esquire Supreme Court I.D.#55650 Kathryn L.Mason,Esquire Supreme Court I.D.#306779 JSDC Law Offices PO Box 650 Hershey,PA 17036 (717)533-3280 Attorneys for Defendant Silver Spring Township MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA V. NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI,HOLLY L. ROSINI, CIVIL ACTION-LAW and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANTS INEQUITY DEFENDANS MARK A. ROSINI & HOLLY L. ROSINI'S ANSWER& NEW MATTER TO PLAINTFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini ("Answering Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, JSDC Law Offices, and files this Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint as follows: 1-3. Admitted in part and Denied in part. Answering Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraphs 1-3 of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent supported by the public record. To the extent such allegations are not supported by the public record, Defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments and, therefore, said averments are denied. Strict proof of same is demanded. 4. Admitted. COUNT I: MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP 5. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-4 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 6-21. The averments in Paragraphs 6-21 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are not addressed to Answering Defendants. COUNT IL• MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 22. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-21 of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 23-24. The averments in Paragraphs 23-24 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are not addressed to Answering Defendants. COUNT II: MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP MANDAMUS 25. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-24 of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 26-30. The averments in Paragraphs 26-30 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are not addressed to Answering Defendants. COUNT IV: MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. MARK A. ROSINI and HOLLY L. ROSINI CONTINUING TRESPASS 31. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-30 of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 32. Denied. Answering Defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the averments in Paragraph 32 of Plaintiff's Complaint, and, therefore, said averments are denied. Strict proof of same is demanded. 33. Denied. Answering Defendants strictly deny that any construction activities were conducted on their property on or about 2004. To the contrary, their land was graded and home constructed by Fogarty Homes in 2000. 34. Denied. Answering Defendants specifically deny that they engaged in construction that in any way related to the flow of surface storm water runoff. To the contrary, Plaintiff is the one who added dirt mounds and planted shrubbery on her property after the new construction grading of Fogarty Homes in 2000 of Answering Defendants' property. Consequently, Answering Defendants believe, and therefore aver,that it was the Plaintiff's activities that altered the natural flow of surface storm water run-off. 35. Denied. Answering Defendants are without specific information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment of Paragraph 35 of Plaintiff's Complaint and,therefore, said averment is denied. Strict proof of same is demanded. 36. Denied. Answering Defendants are without specific information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment of Paragraph 36 of Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore, said averment is denied. Strict proof of same is demanded. 37. Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff's Complaint constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, all averments are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants demand that Plaintiff s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT V: MARIE L. CHOMICKI v. MARK A. ROSINI and HOLLY L. ROSINI VIOLATION OF 32 P.S. 4680.13, DUTY OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE DVELOPMENT OF LAND 38. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-37 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 39. Denied for reasons more fully set forth in Answering Defendants' prior Answers. 40. Denied. Paragraph 40 of Plaintiff's Complaint constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Answering Defendant's specifically deny that there were "persons engaged in the development of land" under said statute. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants demand that Plaintiff s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER OF ANSWERING DEFENDANTS DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF 41. Answering Defendants' Answers to Paragraph 1-40 of Plaintiff s Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 42. Plaintiff s claim for continuing trespass is barred by the 2-year statute of limitations under 42 P.a.C.S.A.§5524(4) and (7). 43. Plaintiffs claim for violation of 32 P.S. §680.13 duty of persons engaged in the development of land is barred by the 2-year statute of limitations. 44. 32 P.S. §680.13 does not apply to Answering Defendants since they are not "persons engaged in the development of land." 45. Plaintiff s equitable claims are barred by the doctrine of laches. 46. Plaintiff s Complaint fails to state a claim against Answering Defendants upon which relief can be granted. 47. Any alleged damage sustained by Plaintiff was contributed to or wholly caused by Plaintiff s own activities on her property. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants demand that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. JSDC LAW OF BY: i 4 ott A. Dietterick, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. # 55650 Kathryn L. Mason, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #306779 Attorneys for Mark&Holly Rosini P.O. Box 650 i Z ZC Hershey, PA 17033 Date: (717) 533-3280 MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNA V. : NO.2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI,HOLLY L. ROSINI, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANTS : INEQUITY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the Answer and New Matter,was served on the following this 26`b day of December, 2013, via First Class U. S. Mail, Postage Pre-paid: Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire 10 E. High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Steve Stine, Solicitor Silver Spring Township 23 Waverly Drive Hummelstown, PA 17036 JSDC L7W'/'L BY: Scat . Brick, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. # 55650 Kathryn L. Mason, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #306779 Attorneys for Mark&Holly Rosini P.O. Box 650 Hershey, PA 17033 (717) 533-3280 Date MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA V. NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI,HOLLY L.ROSINI, CIVIL ACTION-LAW and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANTS INEQUITY VERIFICATION We, Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini,hereby verify the facts contained in the foregoing Answer to Complaint and New Matter are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. We understand that false statements herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. e Mark A. Rosini 011 . Rosin DATE: Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire MARTSON LAW OFFICES JAN -7 El I: 5 I.D. 29943 10 East High Street n,i/.1BERLAND Carlisle, PA 17013 PENNSYLVMUt (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION—LAW : NO. 2011-3818 MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI, : and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants : IN EQUITY PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT'S MARK A. ROSIN! AND HOLLY L. ROSIN! 41. No response required. 42. Denied. Said claim is a conclusion of law and no responsive pleading is required. 43. Denied. Said claim is a conclusion of law and no responsive pleading is required. 44. Denied. Said claim is a conclusion of law and no responsive pleading is required. 45. Denied. Said claim is a conclusion of law and no responsive pleading is required. 46. Denied. Said claim is a conclusion of law and no responsive pleading is required. 47. Denied. Plaintiff has not conducted any activities on her property which contributed in any way to the water problems and the damages sustained by the Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgments against the Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini as set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint. MARTSON LAW OFFICES By " Hubert X. Gilroy Esquire 10 East High Str-et Carlisle, PA 17113 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: January j7, , 2014 `ts { a "34 z sa'w � 11i1�14 ` tt) t ii111tt�t p 61714,9 s ORIGINAL �JAN 7 Ph 3' 0 UNBER+ YtId1D,�'AC`OC1VT�, 4r(AINIA Joseph G. Muzic, Jr., Esquire NIKOLAUS & HOHENADEL, LLP 212 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-3726 (717) 299-1811 fax jmuzic @n-hlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 55919 Attorney for Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini MARIE L. CHOMICKI IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION—LAW MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. NO. 2011-3818 ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini in reference to the above matter. NIKOLAUS &HOHYNADEL, LLP Date: /' - J Lf By: Joseph G Muzic, Esquire Attorney for Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini No. 2011-3818 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance was sent by first-class mail, postage prepaid on the date set forth to the following: Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire Martson Law Offices 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Scott A. Dietterick, Esquire Kathryn L. Mason, Esquire JSDC Law Offices P.O. Box 650 Hershey, PA 17033 Donald L. Carmelite, Esquire Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman& Goggin 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg,PA 17112 NIKOLAUS &HOHENADEL, LLP Date: / L( L/ Josep�Vluzic, Jr., Esquire Attorney for Defendants Mark A. Rosini and Holly L. Rosini 2 D -OFF .+'E THE PROTHONU'iA r" 2 1 MAY -6 PM 2: 28 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA MARIE L. CHOMICKI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION — LAW NO. 11-3818 CIVIL MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN EQUITY STIPULATION Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI and Defendant, SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, by and through their respective counsel, Martson Law Offices and Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages as against Silver Spring Township are withdrawn with prejudice. 2. Count III of Plaintiffs Complaint, seeking mandamus relief, is withdrawn without prejudice. 3. Plaintiff and Defendant Silver Spring Township jointly request the Court's approval of this Stipulation as an Order of Court. MARTSON LAW OFFICES Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire Ten East High Str:--t Carlisle, PA 1701 Counsel for Plaintiff 05/1142214.v1 EHEY, WARNER, IN Don.1 L. Carmelite, r ire 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Defendant Silver Spring Township DONALD L. CARMELITE, ESQUIRE ID No: 84730 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 651-3504 (717) 651-3707 dlcarmelite@mdwcg.com Attorney for Defendant F, 4 CUP1BERL ANt PENNS YL VA COU'?NT " MARIE L. CHOMICKI, Plaintiff v. MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION — LAW NO. 11-3818 CIVIL IN EQUITY NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Marie L. Chomicki c/o Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire Ten East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a default judgment may be filed against you. Dated:. - 9- 05/1213095.v1 MARSH • DENNEHEY, WARNER, COL GOG Don. rL. Carmelite "Esquire I.D. No. 84730 I.D. No. 84730 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 651-3504 DONALD L. CARMELITE, ESQUIRE ID No: 84730 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 651-3504 (717) 651-3707 dlcarmelite@mdwcg.com Attorney for Defendant MARIE L. CHOMICKI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION — LAW NO. 11-3818 CIVIL MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN EQUITY ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 1. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff is who she says she is. All other remaining allegations are specifically denied in accordance with Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 2. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent such is deemed required, said averments are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. COUNT I MARIE L. CHOMICKI V. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP 5. Paragraphs 1 through 4 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 6. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that the property located at 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania is located within Silver Spring Township. With regard to the balance of the averments set forth in this paragraph, said averments constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 7. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the property located at 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania is Lot Number 30 as shown on a certain Subdivision Plan of lots entitled, "Konhaus Estates (Section 1)" as recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds in and for Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in Plan Book 54, Page 12. All remaining allegations constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 8. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further response, Exhibit "A" is a written document which speaks for itself and as such, any averments set forth in this paragraph inconsistent with the same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 9. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further response, Exhibit "A" is a written document which speaks for itself and as such, any averments set forth in this paragraph inconsistent with the same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 10. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that the developer of Konhaus Estates constructed various public improvements within the development, which included roadways, curbing, storm sewer systems and sanitary sewage systems. With regard to the balance of the averments set forth in this paragraph, said averments constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied in accordance to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further response, Exhibit "A" is a written document which speaks for itself and as such, any averments set forth in this paragraph inconsistent with the same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 11. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that Bourbon Red Drive is owned and maintained by Silver Spring Township. All remaining allegations are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 12. Denied. It is specifically denied that Answering Defendant owns or maintains a storm water system located at 4 Bourbon Run Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania along its northern property boundary. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that storm water pipe is within the storm sewer easement along the northern boundary of the property located at 4 Bourbon Run Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The term "Real Estate" is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required and with regard to the balance of all remaining averments in this paragraph, said averments are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 13. Denied. Answering Defendant incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth at length its full and complete response to paragraphs 11 and 12. By way of further response, the averments set forth in this paragraph are denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 14. Denied. Answering Defendant incorporates herein by reference its full and complete response to paragraph 8. By way of further response, the averments set forth in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 15. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff has contacted Answering Defendant about the problems which give rise to this litigation. It is specifically denied that the storm water sewer system on 4 Bourbon Run Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania is owned and operated by Answering Defendant. With regard to all remaining allegations contained in this Complaint, said allegations constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 16. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 17. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 18. Denied. Answering Defendant specifically denies that it owns the storm water pipe located on 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania as more specifically described in paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 19. Per the Stipulation of Answering Defendant and Plaintiff, paragraph 19 is withdrawn. See Stipulation attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 20. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 21. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff together with such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT II MARIE L. CHOMICKI V. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 23. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that Answering Defendant has no liability for Plaintiffs claims. By way of further response, Plaintiffs claims are barred by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8541. It is also admitted that a storm water pipe is located on the northern boundary of 4 Bourbon Red Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. It is specifically denied that the storm water pipe is located within an easement. 24. Denied. Answering Defendant's response to paragraph 23 is incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. By way of further response, the averments set forth in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, said averments are specifically denied and denied in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e) and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT III MARIE L. CHOMICKI V. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP MANDAMUS 25-30. Pursuant to the Stipulation entered into between Defendant Silver Spring Township and Plaintiff, Count III is withdrawn without prejudice. See Stipulation attached hereto as Exhibit "A". WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT IV MARIE L. CHOMICKI V. MARK A. ROSINI AND HOLLY L. ROSINI CONTINUING TRESPASS 31. Paragraphs 1 through 30. are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 32-37. The averments set forth in this paragraph are directed to a Defendant other than Answering Defendant and as such, no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff together with such relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT V MARIE L. CHOMICKI V. MARK A. ROSINI AND HOLLY L. ROSINI VIOLATION OF 32 P.S. §680.13, DUTY OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND 38. Paragraphs 1 through 37 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 39-40. The averments set forth in this paragraph are directed to a Defendant other than Answering Defendant and as such, no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township respectfully requests in its favor and against Plaintiff together with such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. NEW MATTER DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF 41. Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted as a matter of law. 42. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the statute of limitations. 43. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8541, et seq. 44. No act or omission on the part of Answering Defendant was a substantial or contributing factor in bringing about Plaintiffs alleged damages, all such damages being expressly denied. 45. Any and all damages described by Plaintiff in her Complaint, the same being expressly denied, were caused in whole or in part by the acts of omissions on the part of Plaintiff and/or others over whom Answering Defendant had no control or right of control. 46. Answering Defendant breached no duty of care owed to Plaintiff under the circumstances. 47. At all times material hereto, Answering Defendant acted in a safe, legal and non - negligent manner. 48. Plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages. 49. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the Doctrine of Laches. 50. Plaintiff has a duty to maintain storm water management facilities pursuant to Silver Spring Township Storm Water Management Ordinance 402.21. WHEREFORE, Defendant Silver Spring Township demands judgment in its favor and against Plaintiffs together with such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. Respectfully submitted, MARSHADENNEHEY, WARNER, COLE ► ' • : GOGGIN Donald L. Carmelit:;, Esquire I.D. No. 84730 I.D. No. 84730 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 651-3504 Dated: 314 10111 f F :LLJ-OF F IC_ C THE PROTHONO TAIY 2014 MAY —6 PM 2: 28 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA MARIE L. CHOMICKI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION — LAW NO. 11-3818 CIVIL MARK A. ROSINI, HOLLY L. ROSINI and SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, Defendants IN EQUITY STIPULATION Plaintiff MARIE L. CHOMICKI and Defendant, SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP, by and through their respective counsel, Martson Law Offices and Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages as against Silver Spring Township are withdrawn with prejudice. 2. Count III of Plaintiffs Complaint, seeking mandamus relief, is withdrawn without prejudice. 3. Plaintiff and Defendant Silver Spring Township jointly request the Court's approval of this Stipulation as an Order of Court. MARTSON LAW OFFICES Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire Ten East High Str= -t Carlisle, PA 1701 Counsel for Plaintiff O5/1142214.v1 EHEY, WARNER, COL ( IN Don • W L. Carmelite, • 'ire 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Defendant Silver Spring Township EXHIBIT VERIFICATION I hereby affirm that the following facts are correct: Silver Spring Township is a Defendant in the foregoing action and I am authorized to execute this Verification on their behalf. The attached is based upon information which has been gathered by my Counsel in the defense of this lawsuit. The language of the Document is that of Counsel and not of me. I have read the Document and to the extent that the contents of the Document are that of counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the contents of the objections and answers are that of Counsel, I have relied upon Counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid objections and answers are made subject to the penalties of 18 PA C.S. § 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities. SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP BY: 'f I'°' Name; Teresa Eberly 4` Title: ,�j,, w '7'7t CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara E. Steel, an employee of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, do hereby certify that on this 9th day of May, 2014, I served a copy of the Answer with New Matter, via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid as follows: Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire Ten East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Joseph G. Muzic, Esquire Nikolaus & Hohenadel, LLP 212 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17603 Barbara E. Steel