The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-4934*I1-gg3,4 civiI COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notice of Judgment/Transcript Civil COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Case Mag. Dist. No: MDJ-09-3-04 MDJ Name: Honorable Thomas A. Placey Address: 5275 East Trindle Road Suite 110 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-697-2201 Enchanted Hills Homeowners Assoc. 19 Keystone Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Disposition Summary Docket No MJ-09304-CV-0000642-2010 MJ-09304-CV-0000642-2010 Judgment Summary Participant Amy Orozco Frank Orozco Plaintiff Defendant Enchanted Hills Homeowners Frank Orozco Assoc. Enchanted Hills Homeowners Amy Orozco Assoc. Enchanted Hills Homeowners Assoc. V. Frank Orozco, Amy Orozco L sit c4 rn.eth. ?A 171)66 Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Docket No: MJ-09304-CV-0000642-2010 Case Filed: 10/11/2010 Disposition Disposition Date Default Judgment for Plaintiff 03/28/2011 Default Judgment for Plaintiff 03/2812011 Amount $207.04 $0.00 $207.04 $207.04 $0.00 $207.04 Judgment Detail (*Post Judgment) In the matter of Enchanted Hills Homeowners Assoc. vs. Frank Orozco; Amy Orozco on 3/28/2011 the disposition is Default Judgment for Plaintiff and judgment was awarded as follows: Judgment Component Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Deposit Applied Amount Civil Judgment $125.54 $0.00 $125.54 Filing Fees $69.50 $0.00 $69.50 Costs $12.00 $0.00 $12.00 Grand Total $207.04 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 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES, IF'fHE JUDGMENT HOLDER ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE. UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE JUDGMENT MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. p 029 rim aDl? ? ?, 4 +? 411 ?:n" y Date Magisterial District Judge Thomas A. Placey I certify that this is a true and correct copy of tqa r cord the pr ce? ' aining the judg a t. of 'ft &T Date Magisterial District Jug Thomas A. Placey MDJS 315 Page 1 of 1 Printed: 03/28/2011 11:38:02AM OF 7NE %C*ARY 2811 JIgV 14 AM Ip: 48 C?ANNTY YL am4 r& a).0S p d P)AP C Iol p a # 0(0 0 Lf9 I tyu' u Mated ENCHANTED HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Plaintiff v FRANK AND AMY OROZCO Defendant District Court 09-3-04 CV-0642-2010 SUMMARY OF FACTS Defendants are homeowners in the Enchanted Hills development, a planned community with covenants and restrictions of use attached to the deed of the property. The operations of the development, including enforcement of restrictions, are vested in Plaintiff. Enforcement is sought of Article II, Section 2, subsection (o) of the Declaration for overnight parking on the street of a trailer. Specifically, it was a trailer used in commercial tile work applications by Defendants. In August 2008, the trailer was viewed beyond the business day parked outside Defendants' residence. This continued through September 2008. Plaintiff sent a letter to Defendants requesting compliance and when it did not occur the township was contacted in an attempt to bring about compliance. Defendants eventually ended up storing the trailer elsewhere at a cost of $600.00 per month. In August 2009, the same trailer was back overnight through October 2009. Defendant asserts that it was not there overnight and acknowledges that it had been there approximately three weeks in 2008. Plaintiff sent notice of violation for the trailer on October 19, 2009 and seeks enforcement for three days, October 25th-27th, until it was removed. DISCUSSION The burden in every civil case in on a plaintiff to show that a defendant has breached an owed duty that has resulted in measurable damages. The duty in this case is found in the covenants and restrictions, which are notoriously imperfect making enforcement difficult. True in this case is that the covenants and restrictions lack guidance and procedure to make the enforcement efficient. However, the covenants are specific in parking and violation penalties are provided for in the reasonable fines and late fees (subsection bb). The covenants may be unenforceable in other areas but not in the area of overnight parking of non-passenger vehicles. Defendants' reliance and protest over the minor nature of the violation is misplaced. This is a civil suit and Plaintiff is not bound to the three days requested in the suit. Defendant acknowledges 21 days of violation in 2008, which is a $420.00 penalty but Plaintiff is only asking for three days in October 2009. It was Defendants choice to park at the residence at a $20.00 per day fee. A choice that will be enforced albeit for only three days and late fees. Judgment is in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $125.54 together with the cost of this action. All parties have been previously advised of their appeal rights and the original exhibits have been returned to the presenting party. By the Court, 28 Mar 2011 Date Thomas A. Placey M.D.J.