HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-4871PENNSY SUPPLY, INC.,
Plaintiff
RVG MANAGMENT & DEVELOPMENT:
CO.; HERSHEY GF LP; and ROBRYCE:
CORP., its general partner,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
No.
CIVILACTION-LAW
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
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 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 OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION
2 Liberty Avenue
Carlisle, PA 17013
Telephone 717-249-3166 or 800-990-9108
HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG
I.D. #322~8 / /
1300 Lingle',~5'wn Ro,,~
Harrisburg, PA 17,/~10
(717) 238-2000/
Attorney for ,~ntiff
PENNSY SUPPLY, INC.,
Plaintiff
RVG MANAGEMENT &
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY GF
LP;andROBRYCECORP.,itsgene~
partner,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Pennsy Supply, Inc., by and through its attorneys,
HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, by W. Scott Henning, Esquire, and makes the within
Complaint against Defendants, as follows:
1. Plaintiff, Pennsy Supply Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Permsy"), is a Pennsylvania
corporation qualified to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having its principal
place of business located at 1001 Paxton Street, P.O. Box 3331, Harrisburg, Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania, 17105.
2. Defendant, RVG Management & Development Co. has a place of business located
at 1000 North Front Street, Suite 500, Wormleysburg, PA 17043.
3. Defendant, Hershey GF, LP is a Pennsylvania limited partnership with a registered
office at 1000 North Front Street, suite 240, Wormleysburg, PA 17043.
4. Defendant, Robryce Corp., is a Pennsylvania corporation with a registered office at
1000 North From Street, Suite 240, Wormleysburg, PA 17043 and which is the General Partner of
Hershey GF, Limited Partnership.
5. At ail times material hereto, Pennsy was a corporation engaged in the business of
selling and supplying construction materiais including, but not limited to, stone, asphait and other
materials related to paving of roadways and driveways.
6. At ail times material hereto, RVG was a corporation engaged as a general contractor
on a construction project known as the "Hershey Giant Store Project".
7. At all times material hereto, RVG had engaged an entered into a subcontract with
Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating & Paving, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Ziegler") to perform
excavating and paving services at the aforesaid project.
8. At all times material hereto, RVG had knowledge that Ziegler subcontracted with
Plaintiff Pennsy to acquire the materiais necessary for Ziegler to perform its excavation and paving
job under the terms of the subcontract between Ziegler and RVG.
9. On or about April 16, 2000, by and through its authorized representative, Dennis J.
Schmidt, Partner of RVG Management & Developmem Co., and also in his capacity as a Partner of
Hershey GF, L.P., entered imo an agreement with Ziegler by and through its controller, Sandra K.
Kreiser, whereby RVG agreed to issue joint checks to Ziegler and Pennsy in an amount not to exceed
the sum of $176,637.00. A copy of the Joint Check Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit "A".
-2-
10. The Joint Check Agreement was executed between RVG and Ziegler by and through
their authorized representatives, with the express intention of benefitting Pennsy, such that Pennsy
would be assured of receiving payment for the materials supplied by Pennsy to Ziegler.
11. The aforesaid Joint Check Agreement was a requirement made by Pennsy for the sale
and supply of goods and materials to Ziegler for the Hershey Giant Store project.
12. In executing the Joint Check Agreement, RVG and Ziegler intended to modify the
standard payment provision of the parties' contractual dealings whereby RVG would pay Ziegler
and then Ziegler would in turn pay Pennsy. The Joint Check Agreement created an obligation on
the part of RVG to issue checks jointly payable to Ziegler and Pennsy.
13. Plaintiff, Pennsy supplied materials to the Hershey Giant Store project in reliance
upon the Joint Check Agreement. The materials sold and tendered by Pennsy to the Hershey Giant
project in reliance upon the Joint Check Agreement have a total invoice value in the sum of
$88,122.17.
14. RVG failed to fulfill its obligations under the Joint Check Agreement by failing to
issue joint checks, but instead issued checks payable solely to Ziegler.
15. As a result, the sum of $88,122.17 remains due and owing to Pennsy Supply, inc. for
materials supplied to the Hershey Giant Store project.
16. Although Plaintiff has made due demand for payment of the aforesaid balance upon
RVG, said Defendant has failed and refused to tender payment to Pennsy Supply, Inc.
-3-
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands Judgment against the Defendants in the amount of
$88,122.17, plus interest and the costs of suit.
Date:
Respectfully Submitted,
HANDLER, HENN1NG & ROSENBERG
(717) 238-2000
Attorney for Plaintiff
-4-
04/20/2000 23:45 FAX
~-20-2000 ~ THU 07:37
-> PENNSY SUPPLY; Page 3
F~X N0, ?,,,318457 P. O1
Bryan A. Ziegler ExGavating & Pavlng',"lr ?
?
R.R. ,e3, BOx 362 · Palmyra, PA 17078-9751
(717) 83B-~848 · 1-800-734-777B · Fax: (717) 838-9811
Mandt 28, 2000
Dannil S~hmidt
I~VO Management & Development C~tpany
1000 N Front ~treeL Suite 500
Werml..eytburg. PA 17043 .... .
RE: Hershey Giant Store
Dear Dennis:
This letter serves es notice filet you are authorized and requested to pay Pennsy
Supply Co, leo by joint oheck fT~m any fund due Bryan A Ziegler Ex¢avating &
Paving, II10 for paving subcontracting by Penney Supply Co, Ina for the above
job, as ia apeoh'lcally approved and submitted to your efl~ee. This amount ~hould
not exceed $170,657.00 for the above project. Hemhey GF, L.P should be
noti~ in writing of any Increases or d~reese~ to this ortginal amount.
Any joint checi~ so drawn will be endorse;I first I~y aryan A Ziegler Excavating
& I~ving, Inc at Hershey GF, LP Corporate Offioe and then forwarded by
I.lemhey GF, LP to: F~nn,y Supply Co, In~.
Bryan A Ziegler Ex~aveUng & Paving, Inc agrees that the sole purpose of this
document i~ to authorize Hershey GF, I.P to issue a joint ~he~k when requested
by the subeo.~ctor, Bryan A Ziegler ExeaveUng & Pavir~, In=.
If thi~ arrangement meets your approval, please s'~n below and return one (~)
copy.
8incemJy,
Sandra K Krel~er
Con. teller p~
ADproved by Hemhey GF, L
_. (signature) / /
TEAMWORK
Together Fie Ach~e The F. xtraordinary
VERIFICATION
The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document
are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and
information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit.
The language of the document is of counsel and not my own. I have read the
document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to
counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To
the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon
my counsel in making this Verification. The undersigned also understands that the
statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section
4904, relating to unsworn fals~~ .t_h~
---.~ohn J~S~war,~/, Jr
Date: 9~ ~_~ 0
C re~l~ M ~¢r/a/g e r
SHERIFF'S RETURN -
CASE NO: 2001-04871 P
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
PENNSY SUPPLY INC
VS
RVG MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT
REGULAR
CPL MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of
Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law,
says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon
RVG MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT CO the
DEFENDANT , at 1145:00 HOURS, on the 27th day of August
at 1000 N FRONT ST STE 500
, 2001
WORMLEYSBURG, PA 17043
DOUG LEHMAN
a true and attested copy of
by handing to
ATTORNEY FOR BUSINESS
COMPLAINT & NOTICE
together with
and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing
Service
Affidavit
Surcharge
18 00
9 75
00
10 00
00
37 75
Sworn and Subscribed to before
me this /~- day of
~~ --3¢,~/ A.D.
/ /Prothonotary ' '
So Answers:
R. Thomas Kline
08/28/2001
HANDLER HENNING & ROSENBERG
By: ~
~ Deputy F~ri[f ~
SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR
CASE NO: 2001-04871 P
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
PENNSY SUPPLY INC
VS
RVG MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT
CPL MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law,
says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon
HERSHEY GF the
DEFENDANT , at 1145:00 HOURS, on the 27th day of August
at 1000 N FRONT ST
, 2001
WORMLEYSBURG, PA 17043 by handing to
DOUG LEHMAN ATTORNEY FOR BUSINESS
a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with
and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing 6.00
Service .00
Affidavit .00
Surcharge 10.00
.00
16.00
Sworn and Subscribed to before
me this /3? day of
~ ~( A.D.
! /Prothonotary
So Answers:
R. Thomas Kline
08/28/2001
HANDLER HENNING & ROSENBERG ~-~
Deputy ~rif f
SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR
CASE NO: 2001-04871 P
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
PENNSY SUPPLY INC
VS
RVG MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT
CPL MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law,
says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon
ROBRYCE CORP the
DEFENDANT , at 1145:00 HOURS,
at 1000 N FRON ST
WORMLEYSBURG, PA 17043
DOUG LEHMAN
on the 27th day of August , 2001
by handing to
ATTORNEY FOR BUSINESS
a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE
together with
and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing 6.00
Service .00
Affidavit .00
Surcharge 10.00
.00
16.00
Sworn and Subscribed to before
me this /3 ~ day of
~ J~! A.D.
'P~oth-onotary
So Answers:
R. Thomas Kline
08/28/2001
HANDLER HENNING & ROSENBERG /~
~' ' ~ Deputy --S~eri f f
PENNSY SUPPLy, INC., :
Plaintiff :
V.
RVG MANAGEMENT & :
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY GF, :
LP; and ROBRYCE CORP., its :
general partner,
Defendants :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANiA
NO. 01~4871 CIVIL
CIVIL ACTION q LAW
NOTICE TO PLEAD
TO: Pennsy Supply, Inc., Plaintiff
W. Scott Henning, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiff
You are hereby notified to file a written response to the
enclosed PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS within twenty (20) days from
service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you.
LAW OFFICES STEPHEN C. NUDEL,
Stephen C. N~del~ Esquire
ACtorney ID #41~03 -
Mark W. Allshouse, Esquire
Attorney ID #78014
219 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 236-5000
Attorneys for Defendants
PC
PENNSY SUPPLy, INC.,
Plaintiff
RVG MANAGEMENT &
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY GF,
LP; and ROBRYCE CORP., its
general partner,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANiA
NO. 01-4871 CIVIL
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PRELIMINARy OBJECTION~
AND NOW, Come Defendants, RVG Management & Development Co.;
Hershey GF, LP; and Robryce Corp., its general partner, by and
through their attorneys, Law Offices Stephen C. Nudel, PC and
respectfully file these Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff,s
Complaint as follows.
1. Plaintiff as an alleged third party beneficiary, has
filed a Breach of Contract action based upon an alleged Joint
Check Agreement between Defendants and Bryan A. Ziegler
Excavating & Paving, Inc. ("Subcontractor,,) for the performance
of excavating and paving services on a project known as "Hershey
Giant Store Project,, ("Project,,.)
I. D]/~RRER
2. Paragraph 1 is hereby incorporated by reference as if
set forth at length.
3. Defendant has attached a copy of
Check Agreement ("Agreement,) as an Exhibit
reference.
the alleged Joint
to its Complaint for
4. Paragraph 3 of the Agreement states that the purpose of
the document "is to authorize Hershey GF, LP to issue a joint
check when rec~ested by the subcontractor, Bryan A. Ziegler
Excavating & Paving, Inc.,,
5. The Agreement does not obligate or require Defendants
to issue joint checks without the-request of the Subcontractor.
6. Nowhere in Plaintiff,s Complaint has Plaintiff alleged
that the Subcontractor ever requested joint checks to be issued
by Defendants to Plaintiff.
7. Plaintiff has failed to plead that all conditions
precedent have been met which would require Defendants, payment
to Plaintiff.
8. As a result, Plaintiff has failed to plead facts upon
which the relief requested may be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, RVG Management & Development Co.;
Hershey GF, LP; and Robryce Corp., its general partner,
respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter an Order on
behalf of Defendants and against Plaintiff dismissing Plaintiff,s
Complaint.
II. DE~IRRER-FAILURE TO PLEAD IN CONFORMITY WIT~ RULE OR LAW
9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are hereby incorporated by
reference as if set forth at length.
10. Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff,s Complaint alleges that RVG
Management & Development Co. was engaged as a general contractor
on the Project.
11. Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff,s Complaint alleges that RVG
Management & Development Co. engaged and entered into a
subcontract with Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating & Paving, Inc.
12.
against RVG Management & Development Co.
13. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1019(i) states
that when a claim or defense is based upon a writing, the pleader
shall attach a copy of the writing or the material part thereof,
but if the writing or copy is not accessible to the pleader, it
is sufficient to provide such statement together with the reasons
and set forth the substance of the writing.
14. Plaintiff has failed to attach copies of any
documentation which would support its basis that RVG Management &
Development Co. is a general contractor for the Project or that
RVG Management & Development Co. entered into a subcontract with
Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating & Paving, Inc. or its claims against
RVG Management & Development Co.
15. As a result of Plaintiff,s failure to attach a copy of
the writings or provide sufficient explanation as to why they are
not attached, Plaintiff has failed to plead in conformity with
the Rule of Law as required by Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1028.
These two documents form the basis of Plaintiff,s claim
WHEREFORE, Defendants, RVG Management & Development Co.;
Hershey GF, LP; and Robryce Corp., its general partner,
respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter an Order on
behalf of Defendants and against Plaintiff pursuant to
Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1028(2).
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES STEPHEN C. NI/DEL, PC
en C. Nud~l, Esquire
ney ID #~1703
Mark W. Allshouse, Esquire
Attorney ID #78014
219 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 236-5000
Attorneys for Defendants
PENNSY SUPPLY, INC.,
Plaintiff
Vo
RVGMJkNAGEMENT &
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY GF,
LP; and ROBRYCE CORP., its
general partner,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANiA
NO. 01-4871 CIVIL
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly
served upon the following, by depositing a copy of the same in the
United States Mail, first-class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania, as follows:
W. Scott Henning, Esquire
Handler, Henning & Rosenberg
1300 Linglestown Road
P.O. Box 1177
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1177
M~k W. Allshou/e, Esquire
Attorney ID #78014
219 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 236-5000
Attorney for Defendants
U
W. Scott Henning, Esquire
iD #32298
HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG
1300 Lingtestown Road
Harrisburg, PA 17110
(717) 238-2000
~or Plaintiff
PENNSY SUPPLY, INC.,
Plaintiff
RVG MANAGEMENT &
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY GF
LP; and ROBRYCE CORP., its general
partner,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 01-4871
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Pennsy Supply, Inc., by and through its attorneys,
HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, byW. Scott Henning, Esquire, respectfully replies
to the Defendant's Preliminary Objections as follows:
1. Admitted with clarification. The Defendant refers to the Complaint in
Paragraph 1. To the extent that the Complaint is a writing, it speaks for itself and should
be read and interpreted in its entirety.
I. DEMURRER
2. Paragraph 2 is an incorporation paragraph to which no responsive pleading
is required.
3. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 3 is somewhat garbled, however, to the
extent that the Defendant is simply endeavoring to make reference to the attachment of
the Joint Check Agreement as an exhibit to the Preliminary Objections, there is no need
to admit or deny Paragraph 3. By way of further answer, the Joint Check Agreement was
not attached to the copy of the preliminary Objections received by Plaintiff's counsel.
4. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 4 is a recitation of a portion of
the Joint Check Agreement. The Agreement being a writing, speaks for itself and should
be read and interpreted as a whole.
5. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 5 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff asserts that the Agreement, read as a whole,
does not obligate the Defendants to issue a joint check only if there is a specific request
of the subcontractor. By way of further answer, even if the Court determines that this is
a reasonable interpretation of the Agreement, the Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that
the subcontractor, Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating, Inc. by and through its employees, agents
and representatives made requests upon the Defendant to issue joint checks upon the
submission of billing statements.
6. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 6 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff asserts that the Agreement, read as a whole,
does not obligate the Defendants to issue a joint check only if there is a specific request
-2-
of the subcontractor. By way of further answer, even if the Court determines that this is
a reasonable interpretation of the Agreement, the Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that
the subcontractor, Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating, Inc. by and through its employees, agents
and representatives made requests upon the Defendant to issue joint checks upon the
submission of billing statements.
7. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 7 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff asserts that the Agreement, read as a whole,
does not obligate the Defendants to issue a joint check only if there is a specific request
of the subcontractor. By way of further answer, even if the Court determines that this is
a reasonable interpretation of the Agreement, the Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that
the subcontractor, Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating, Inc. by and through its employees, agents
and representatives made requests upon the Defendant to issue joint checks upon the
submission of billing statements.
8. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 8 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff asserts that the Agreement, read as a whole,
does not obligate the Defendants to issue a joint check only if there is a specific request
of the subcontractor. By way of further answer, even if the Court determines that this is
a reasonable interpretation of the Agreement, the Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that
the subcontractor, Bryan A. Ziegler Excavating, Inc. by and through its employees, agents
-3-
and representatives made requests upon the Defendant to issue joint checks upon the
submission of billing statements.
II. DEMURRER- FAILURE TO PLEAD IN CONFORMITY WITH RULE OR LAW
9. Paragraph 9 is an incorporation paragraph to which no responsive pleading
is required, however, to the extent applicable, the Plaintiff incorporates its reply to
Paragraph 1 through 8 as those set forth at length herein.
10. Admiffed.
11. Admitted.
12. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 12 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, it is denied that it is necessary for the two documents
impliedly referenced in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint and Paragraph 7 of the Complaint
to be attached to the Complaint in order to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1019. By way of further answer, the Plaintiff asserts that the two documents
in question are not within the possession and custody of the Plaintiff, but rather are
documents that are clearly within the possession and/or custody of the Defendant. The
absence of the attachment of those two documents to the Complaint does not in any way
effect the Defendant's ability to understand the nature of the cause of action being
asserted against it or to prepare a proper defense to the cause of action. If in fact the
Defendant is not the general contractor on the subject Project, they can simply deny that
-4-
allegation. Further, if the Defendant did not have a subcontract relationship with Bryan A.
Ziegler Excavating and Paving, Inc., that fact can simply be denied also.
13. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 13 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, it is denied that it is necessary for the two documents
impliedly referenced in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint and Paragraph 7 of the Complaint
to be attached to the Complaint in order to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1019. By way of further answer, the Plaintiff asserts that the two documents
in question are not within the possession and custody of the Plaintiff, but rather are
documents that are clearly within the possession and/or custody of the Defendant. The
absence of the attachment of those two documents to the Complaint does not in any way
effect the Defendant's ability to understand the nature of the cause of action being
asserted against it or to prepare a proper defense to the cause of action. If in fact the
Defendant is not the general contractor on the subject Project, they can simply deny that
allegation. Further, if the Defendant did not have a subcontract relationship with Bryan A.
Ziegler Excavating and Paving, Inc., that fact can simply be denied also.
14. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 14 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, it is denied that it is necessary for the two documents
impliedly referenced in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint and Paragraph 7 of the Complaint
to be attached to the Complaint in order to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
-5-
Procedure 1019. By way of further answer, the Plaintiff asserts that the two documents
in question are not within the possession and custody of the Plaintiff, but rather are
documents that are clearly within the possession and/or custody of the Defendant. The
absence of the attachment of those two documents to the Complaint does not in any way
effect the Defendant's ability to understand the nature of the cause of action being
asserted against it or to prepare a proper defense to the cause of action. If in fact the
Defendant is not the general contractor on the subject Project, they can simply deny that
allegation. Further, if the Defendant did not have a subcontract relationship with Bryan A.
Ziegler Excavating and Paving, Inc., that fact can simply be denied also.
15. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 14 is a conclusion of law to
which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court
deems a response necessary, it is denied that it is necessary for the two documents
impliedly referenced in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint and Paragraph 7 of the Complaint
to be attached to the Complaint in order to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1019. By way of further answer, the Plaintiff asserts that the two documents
in question are not within the possession and custody of the Plaintiff, but rather are
documents that are cleady within the possession and/or custody of the Defendant. The
absence of the attachment of those two documents to the Complaint does not in any way
effect the Defendant's ability to understand the nature of the cause of action being
asserted against it or to prepare a proper defense to the cause of action. If in fact the
Defendant is not the general contractor on the subject Project, they can simply deny that
-6-
allegation. Further, if the Defendant did not have a subcontract relationship with Bryan A.
Ziegler Excavating and Paving, Inc., that fact can simply be denied also.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Honorable Court to deny and dismiss the
Defendant's Preliminary Objections and order the Defendant to file an Answer to the
Complaint within ten (10) days.
Date:
Respectfully submitted,
By:
W. Sc
-7-
PENNSY SUPPLY, INC.,
Plaintiff
RVG MANAGEMENT &
DEVELOPMENT CO.; HERSHEY
GF, LP; and ROBRYCE CORP., its
general partner,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 01-4871 Civil Term
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
C ERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE,,
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of. the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply
to Preliminary Objections was served on this .~/~ day of March, 2002, by First
Class U.S. Mail, upon the following:
Stephen C. Nudel, Esquire
219 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Date: March
~:2~,2002
HANDLE~iirR~~ENBERG
W. ScottH~ ~