Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-5573 ~Tf;L~Oi'~` " { ~~I~SEP 10 AI<~!!~ i2 ~1~t~1~RLP~~[l COUfi~i`Y ~'~~`~~SYLVAtdIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER . 331 Allen Street ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, Docket No. ~a- c5 5 Plaintiff vs. GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS To the Prothonotary: Please issue a Writ of Summons directed to Defendant in the above case. The Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to the Attorney for service. S HARPER W LLC By: - ~S~stt A. Harper 1701 W. Market St. York, PA 17404 717-718-8672 Fax: 717-718-1634 Email: sharperlawna,mac.com PA 200461 Attorney for Plaintiff a~~ ~b3.7sl~d a e~~ ~a~~ ~ 8b ~tOS MARY JANE ZEIGLER, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, : NO.: 125573 Civil v. : CIVIL ACTION GARY WILSON, • �7r Defendant, • c y Y, NOTICE TO PLEAD ' e= , 17 CI TO: Mary Jane Zeigler do Scott A. Harper, Esquire 1701 W. Market Street York, PA 17404 Attorney for Plaintiff 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. Dated: October Ly, 2013 By: - 7/y' , i homas A. Archer, �:wire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 73293 Kevin J. Hayes, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 314338 3401 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 - Phone Attorneys for Defendant 673368v1 Thomas A. Archer, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D.No. 73293 Kevin J. Hayes, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 314338 METTE, EVANS &WOODSIDE 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717)232-5000 -Phone (717)236-1816 -Fax taarcher @mette.com MARY JANE ZEIGLER, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, : NO.: 125573 Civil v. : CIVIL ACTION GARY WILSON, • Defendant, ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Defendant, Gary Wilson ("Defendant"), by and through its undersigned counsel, Mette, Evans & Woodside, files this Answer to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff, Mary Jane Zeigler ("Plaintiff'), and in support thereof states as follows: ANSWER 1. Admitted, on information and belief. 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to identify what"letters" Defendant allegedly sent to the recipients stated in this paragraph. Defendant sent no letters during the timeframe alleged by Plaintiff, or at any other time, that refer to Plaintiff in any way. To the extent Plaintiffs allegations in this paragraph refer to Plaintiffs attached Exhibit "A," Defendant did 1 not send the letter attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit"A" (referred to herein as the "Letter"). 4. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute legal conclusions that require no response and which are denied. By way of further response, the Letter is a writing that speaks for itself. To the extent a response is required, Defendant did not send the Letter. Answer to Count I—Invasion of Privacy: Publicity which places the Plaintiff in a false light in the public eye 5. Defendant incorporates his prior averments by reference as if set forth at length. 6. Denied. Defendant is without independent knowledge as to whom the Letter was sent. Defendant did not send the Letter. 7. Denied. Defendant did not send the letter. By way of further response, upon information and belief, Defendant believes at least some of the factual assertions contained in the Letter to be true. 8. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 9. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself By way of further response, the averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 10. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself By way of further response, Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations of this paragraph, which are accordingly denied. 11. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 12. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself By way of further response, Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations of this paragraph, 2 which are accordingly denied. Further, Defendant"referred"to nothing in the Letter because Defendant did not compose or send it. 13. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 14. Denied. Upon reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge as to the averments set forth in this paragraph, and accordingly they are denied. 15. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself. Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 16. Denied. Upon reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge as to the averments set forth in this paragraph, and accordingly they are denied. Additionally, Defendant is not privy to what Plaintiff may or may not have shared with any "defense team." 17. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 18. Admitted in part; Denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff did not serve as a witness at trial, as Plaintiff is aware that a trial never occurred in the referenced criminal matter. Defendant has no knowledge of whether or not Plaintiff was going to or would not have served as a witness if this particular case had gone through to trial. All other allegations and inferences are denied. 19. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself Furthermore, Defendant did not send the Letter. 20. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself By way of further response, the averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 3 21. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 22. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 23. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 24. Denied. Defendant did not send the Letter. The remainder of the allegations set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 25. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 26. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. To the extent a response is required, Defendant is not the cause of Plaintiff's alleged damages, which Defendant denies. 27. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Gary Wilson, respectfully requests judgment in his favor against Plaintiff, together with attorney's fees, costs of suit and any other relief that the Court deems appropriate or to which Defendant may be entitled as a matter of law. Answer to Count II—Invasion of Privacy: Unreasonable Publicity Given to Another's Personal Life 28. Defendant incorporates his prior averments by reference as if set forth at length. 29. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 4 30. Denied. Defendant is without knowledge as to whether Plaintiff was sent a copy of the letter or how she obtained any knowledge of the Letter, and accordingly such averments are denied. The remainder of the averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 31. Denied. The averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 32. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself. By way of further response, Defendant did not send or publish the Letter. The remainder of the averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. 33. Denied. The Letter is a writing that speaks for itself. By way of further response, Defendant did not send or publish the Letter. The remainder of the averments set forth in this paragraph are legal conclusions which require no response. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Gary Wilson, respectfully requests judgment in his favor against Plaintiff, together with attorney's fees, costs of suit and any other relief that the Court deems appropriate or to which Defendant may be entitled as a matter of law. NEW MATTER 34. Defendant incorporates his prior averments by reference as if set forth at length. 35. Defendant did not compose, create, write, send, or publish the Letter attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit"A." 36. Although Defendant did not publish the Letter, Plaintiff's claims are barred because the contents of the Letter are of concern to the recipients of the Letter and to the general public. 5 37. Although Defendant did not publish the Letter, Plaintiffs claims are barred because the Letter was not published to the public at large, only a group of seven individuals. 38. Although Defendant did not publish the Letter, Plaintiffs claims are barred because the factual contents of the Letter are true. 39. Although Defendant did not publish the Letter, Plaintiffs claims are barred because Plaintiff has only alleged general damages. 40. Plaintiff has not suffered damages caused by Defendant. 41. Plaintiff fails to state a cause of action upon relief may be granted. 42. Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages are without any basis in law or fact. 43. Plaintiffs claims and damages are barred because Plaintiff is a public figure. 44. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to allege any malice, motive or ill-will on the part of Defendant. 45. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Gary Wilson, respectfully requests judgment in his favor against Plaintiff, together with attorney's fees, costs of suit and any other relief that the Court deems appropriate or to which Defendant may be entitled as a matter of law. Respectfully submitt , Date: October2Id , 2013 By: '� homas A. Archer, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 73293 Kevin J. Hayes, Esquire Sup. Ct. I.D. No. 314338 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717)232-5000 -Phone Attorneys for Defendant 6 VERIFICATION I, Gary Wilson, verify that the facts set forth therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the foregoing document and/or its language is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4204 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. /� Gary Wilson Date: ©/3 f IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER 331 Allen Street ? ~ ~ ~ Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, Docket No. IOC- S 5 Plaintiff vs. : GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant SUMMONS IN CIVIL ACTION To: Gary Wilson YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PLAINTIFF HAS COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. ` ~ ~~~1 ~ ~ - David D. Buell, Prothonotary of Cumberland County Date: - ` ~ u (a - Deputy J T Cory A. Leshner, Esq. OF 11'"1E PROT ONO TAR'Y The Law Offices of Cory A. Leshner, LLC r 2023 N. 2nd Street, Suite 201 2013 JUL 30 AM 11: 10 Harrisburg, PA 17102 CUMBERLAND. COUNTY 717-909-9999 € ENNSYLVANIA cal(d�corvleshner.con IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Mary Jane Zeigler Plaintiff, Docket No. 2012-5573 (Civil) vs. CIVIL ACTION- LAW GARY WILSON Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance in the above captioned matter on behalf of Defendant Gary Wilson. Re lly submitted, Date ory eshner q_ rney for Defendant D No. 310377 Law Offices of Cory A. Leshner, LLC. 2023 N. 2nd Street, Suite 201 Harrisburg, PA 17102 717-909-9999 (phone) 717-909-9009 (fax) cal @coryleshner.com IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Mary Jane Zeigler Plaintiff, Docket No. 2012-5573 (Civil) vs. CIVIL ACTION- LAW GARY WILSON Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Law Offices of Cory A. Leshner LLC, and that I served the foregoing Entry of Appearance by depositing in the US MAIL a true and correct copy thereof to the following: Scott Harper, Esq. S. Harper Law LLC 1701 W. Market Street York, PA 17404 Dated: Le er, Esq. F 11„x10-0,F ICS. HE PR0T1-10) l]0TAIR 2013 JUL 30 AM 11: ( 0 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLV IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMA&LAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION Mary Jane Zeigler Vs. File No. 2012-5573 (Civil) Gary Wilson PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE ® A COMPLAINT ❑ A BILL OF PARTICULARS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Issue rule on Mary Jane Zeigler to file a Complaint in the above case within twenty days after service of the rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. DATE: 7129113 Signature: Print Name Address: 2023 N. 2” Street, Suite 201 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Attorney for:- Defendant Telephone: 717-909-9999 Supreme Court ID No.: 310377 NOW, 30 , �� ; RU E ISSUED AS ABOVE. Pmthon By: Deputy PROTHON.- 12 r r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION Mary Jane Zeigler File No. 2012-5573 (Civil) Vs. GARY WILSON rr, TO: Mary Jane Zeigler h T F: Plaintiff G� Date Of Notice: August 22 2013 �--� �C.-) C7"rk IMPORTANT NOTICE Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P.No. 237.1(a)(2) ' YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO FILE A COMPLAINT IN THIS CASE. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR RIGHT TO SUE THE DEFENDANT AND THEREBY LOSE PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE 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 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 _ (717) 249-3166 Signature: Signatur Defendant or Atty. Address: 2023 N. Street, Suite 201 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Attorney for: Olary Wilson Telephone: 717-909-9999 Supreme Court ID-No.: 310377 NOTE: SERVE ON UNREPRESENTED PLAINTIFF OR ON PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY (Judgment of Non Pros) (Eff. 7/95) Proth.-80 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Law Offices of Cory A. Leshner LLC, and that I served the foregoing 10 day Notice of Intent to Take judgment Non Pros by depositing in the US MAIL a true and correct copy thereof to the following: Scott Harper, Esq. S. Harper Law LLC 1701 W. Market Street York, PA 17404 Dated: ory er, o IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER : 331 Allen Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, Docket No. 125573 Civil r7 c - , Plaintiff zz . VS. :)-rn G-5 r, GARY WILSON , 4 118 Calder Streety Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action _fir_3 Defendant M' r"3 NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take prompt action within(20)twenty 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. THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO 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 ST., CARLISLE, PA TELEPHONE NUMBER 249-3166 1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER 331 Allen Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, Docket No. 125573 Civil Plaintiff VS. GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant COMPLAINT AND NOW, to wit, this 3D day of August 2013, comes Mary Jane Zeigler, the Plaintiff, by and through her attorney, Scott A. Harper, Esquire, and avers the following statements in support of her Complaint against the Defendant, Gary Wilson: 1. Mary Jane Zeigler, the Plaintiff [hereinafter, Plaintiff], resides in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Gary Wilson, the Defendant [hereinafter, Defendant] resides in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. 2 3. Starting in late November or early December 2011 and extending to April 2012, the Defendant sent letters to all of the County Commissioners of Cumberland County and Perry County, as well as to Jim Gurreri, Executive Director of the Arch of Cumberland & Perry Counties, [hereinafter, CPARC] and perhaps others, too. 4. Said letters sent by the Defendant about the Plaintiff contained false information which the Plaintiff avers was an invasion of her privacy rights. COUNT I — INVASION OF PRIVACY: PUBLICITY WHICH PLACES THE PLAINTIFF IN A FALSE LIGHT IN THE PUBLIC EYE 5. Paragraphs one (1) through four (4) are hereby incorporated into this section as if fully enumerated and transcribed. 6. Persons to whom the letter was sent were public officials and/or members of the MH & IDD Advisory Board, along with a corporate officer of a private MH/MR enterprise which conducts business in Cumberland County; specifically the following: a. Gary Eichelberger, Cumberland County Commissioner and member of the MH & IDD Advisory Board; b. Rick Rovegno, Cumberland County Commissioner; c. Barbara Cross, Cumberland County Commissioner; 3 d. Brenda K. Benner, Perry Commissioner and member of the MH & IDD Advisory Board; e. Stephen C. Naylor, Perry County Commissioner; f. John J. Amsler, Perry County Commissioner; g. Jim Gurreri, Executive Dirctor of CPARC; h. Other important public officials. 7. Said letter contained numerous falsehoods, addressed in separate paragraphs below. 8. Defendant stated in the letter that the Plaintiff"has chosen to defend a recently convicted sex offender, citing her involvement with the advisory board as her source of information." 9. Plaintiff never "defended" said alleged sex offender because she was never his attorney nor legal advocate. 10. Plaintiff never cited "her involvement with the advisory board as her source of information" regarding the alleged sex offender. 11. Defendant states in the letter that the Plaintiff was "openly disparaging two residents of a Cumberland County group home who are victims of indecent assault[.]" 12. Plaintiff never "openly disparaged" the alleged victims, to which the Defendant had referred to in his letter. 4 13. Defendant states in the letter that the Plaintiff had "openly critiz[ed] the staff of this same group home[.]" 14. Plaintiff never "openly critiz[ed] the staff of this same .... group home." 15. Defendant alludes in his letter that the Plaintiff may have shared proprietary information with the alleged sex offender's "defense team" and with the "members of the local organization" (an experimental aircraft club.) 16. Plaintiff never shared any "proprietary information" with said "defense team" nor with members of the "local organization." 17. Defendant alludes in his letter that the Plaintiff may have served as "a witness for the defense in this particular case" and further alludes to whether said service constituted a conflict of interest." 18. Plaintiff never served as a witness for the alleged sex offender and Defendant knew that full well because he knew a plea was reached prior to trial thereby relieving anyone from testifying as a witness or victim. 19. Defendant in his letter again refers to the Plaintiff as "defending a convicted sex offender of the mentally disabled" 5 20. Again, Plaintiff never "defended" said alleged sex offender because she was never his attorney nor legal advocate; Attorney Lauer was the alleged sex offender's defense attorney, not the Plaintiff. 21. Plaintiff avers the letter sent to these public officials was highly offensive to her and would also be highly offensive to a reasonable person in her position, as well. 22. The offensiveness to which Plaintiff refers would be the Defendant's false accusations and his alluding to her connection to a "convicted sex offender of the mentally disabled," as if she were somehow assisting with his defense of said charges. 23. Also, the offensiveness to which Plaintiff refers would be Defendant's false accusations that she was disparaging the mentally disabled alleged victims, and/or criticizing the staff of said group home where the alleged incidents took place. 24. Plaintiff avers the Defendant had knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed, wherein he had first-hand knowledge of the above-listed matters in which he referred falsely about, and if he didn't have first hand knowledge then he recklessly disregarded the falsity of his statements by stating half-truths, innuendo, or complete fiction. 6 25. Moreover, Defendant knew or had reckless disregard as to the false light in which the Plaintiff would be placed because he published the letter to the top-decision makers of Cumberland County — persons with whom had the power and discretion to remove the Plaintiff from her post on the MH / MR advisory board, and were also closely involved with the Plaintiff in her community. 26. As a result of Defendant's action of placing Plaintiff in false light she has suffered mental anguish by the humiliation, lies and offensiveness of Defendant's letter being sent to persons with whom she often and directly deals with both on a personal and professional basis. 27. Plaintiff seeks damages to compensate her for her mental suffering directly caused by Defendant's falsity and reckless disregard for false light in which he put her. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from this honorable Court in the form of a monetary judgment for her losses as well as punitive damages for Defendant's outrageous conduct and as incentive not to spread falsehoods again in the future. COUNT II — INVASION OF PRIVACY: UNREASONABLE PUBLICITY GIVEN TO ANOTHER'S PERSONAL LIFE 7 28. Paragraphs one (1) through twenty-two (22) are hereby incorporated in this section as if fully enumerated and transcribed. 29. Defendant's letter published and sent to the previously-listed public officials was not of a legitimate concern to the public. 30. Plaintiff was never sent a copy of the letter that was sent to the officials, yet gained knowledge of said letter through third-parties with whom never received said letter from the Defendant therefore Plaintiff avers the public at-large became aware of the letter and it's contents after being received by the seven (7) persons cc:'d on the letter. 31. Plaintiff's personal support of her dear old friend, the accused sex offender, was not a legitimate concern to the public despite the Plaintiff's false attempts to make her look like she had somehow abused her position as board member, disparaged the mentally disabled, and/or openly criticized the group home staff. 32. Defendant's publication of Plaintiff's personal association with the alleged sex offender was distorted to sound as if she were associated with the alleged offensive criminal acts in some type of conspiracy that.did not exist. 33. The Defendant's published letter exposed Plaintiff's private matters by proffering a false connection between her personal support of the 8 alleged sex offender and the crimes that may have been committed against the mentally disabled persons under the county's care by calling into question her role as a board member. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from this honorable Court in the form of a monetary judgment for her losses as well as punitive damages for Defendant's outrageous conduct and as incentive not to give unreasonable publicity to Plaintiff's private life again in the future. Respectfully submitted, BY: S. HARPER L L Date: ___ _ SCOTT A. , ESQ., FOR PLAINTIFF 1701 W. MARKET ST. YORK PA 17404 PH. 718-8672 & FAX 718-1634 sharperlaw @mac.com VERIFICATION I, MARY JANE ZEIGLER hereby state that the facts contained in the attached document(s) set forth are true and correct (or are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief) and that I expect to be able to prove the same at a hearing held in this matter. I understand that the statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.§4904 (relating to unsworn falsification to authorities). 4��tzA) Date: °\ - \ A M R JANE ZE LER 9 ,t �{/! {Y114�, �Mn � NNV 7MV�1!K.Y YYRlM. 7'f4ial . lad sin k! y^ q x t[�!!!r!",�:";.. .... . �: ..••+rR".'.�+w�': Win.: !,r�!�ii�iraa'' ... .: ...• . -. t o • ,� #�#�.1 �+E3�;��'w"�',1.�,�1t;1�' :.� '#�tt8'34�fC:.�;'--IA'fflE' �Q'Lt�tt�` : �, "�; ....�..... .ix�m�cm �d t�S �# : wee' iht � '• : xi . • .sex a�dr�td nth. �:,v�:t :'�:���oaki�t ���'a'��;h: tb bird :A _,'is t 7aax#ri+ `' t e. ftim, atiler D iir#:did 44tow of IN d w ,. �J rypt� • :t�ar� �i�ia1 � `��tt. .f�+�':�1�`��`1.I± ±Isc�y' .: ' 9r 4 t .,. Norric3; A3; - EXHIBIT ,�. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DENNIS CARNEY 1360 Swope Dr. Boiling Springs, PA 17007, Docket No. 2012-CV-7993-CV Plaintiff vs. GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving upon the person and in the manner indicated below. The document delivered today is: COMPLAINT Delivered by: FIRST CLASS MAIL, PRE-PAID Delivered to: CORY LESHNER,ESQ, 2203 N. 2ND ST. SUITE 202 HBG., PA 17102 Date: 1 BY: S A. HARP ATTORNEY FOR LAINTIFF,DENNIS CARNEY Mette, Evans and Woodside r t:0 T„ By: Thomas A. Archer, Esquire �'� 3401 North Front Street 2O!3 SE 30 Pc ,. 3S P.O. Box 5950 17110 CUMBERLAND Harrisburg, PA 17110 COUNTY 717-232-5000 PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Mary Jane Zeigler Plaintiff, • Docket No. 2012-5573 (Civil) vs. • • CIVIL ACTION- LAW GARY WILSON Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL-SUBSTITUTION OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE Kindly substitute my appearance on behalf of Gary Wilson in the above-captioned matter with the undersigned counsel, Thomas A. Archer, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF CORY A. LESHNER Date: q1 f� 13 By: er, Esquire ENTRY OF PPEARANCE Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of Gary Wilson in the above-captioned matter in place of Cory A. Leshner, Esquire. METTE, EVANS and WOODSIDE Date: 9/Z-7,//3 By: • ••. • • rc r, Es• Date : q/77//3 By, ` evin J. Hayes esquire CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica R. Porter, Paralegal, hereby certify that on the date set forth below I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Withdrawal-Substitution of Appearance, upon the person stated below, via U.S. First Class Mail, addressed as follows: Scott Harper, Esquire S. Harper Law, LLC 1701 West Market Street York, PA 17404 Date: September 27, 2013 J sica R. Porter, Parale g al OF THEL O THOP OTARY 2013N0y15P! 3., 15 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE'ZEIGLER 331 Allen Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, .Docket No. 125573 Civil Plaintiff vs. : GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street 1 Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER AND NOW, to wit, this 14 day of November 2013, comes Mary Jane Zeigler, the Plaintiff, by and through her attorney, Scott A. Harper, Esquire, and avers the following statements in support of her Reply to the Defendant's New Matter: • 1. Regarding Defendant's New, Matter paragraph 34, no response is a necessary. 2. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 35, Plaintiff denies Defendant's assertion that he did not compose, create, write, send, or publish the Letter attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit A because there is circumstantial evidence from similar 1 contemporaneous writings and internet postings that would prove that the anonymous letter sent to the officials were the work of the Defendant. 3. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 36, Plaintiff denies the content of the letters were of concern to the general public because the general public was not effected by conduct alleged by the Defendant in this letters to the officials. 4. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 37, Plaintiff denies the letters not sent to the public at-large because the individuals who received the letters were all public officials who answer to the public. 5. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 38, Plaintiff concedes that some of the statements are true however Plaintiff isn't suing for slander, but suing under the causes of action related to invasions of privacy with are not barred by truthful statements. Moreover, if the Defendant knows whether or not the facts were true in the letters then it's likely that he was the author of said letters. 6. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 39, Plaintiff denies she has not alleged damages of mental anguish and mental suffering, among others. 2 7. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 40, Plaintiff denies she has not alleged damages of mental anguish and mental suffering, among others. 8. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 41, Plaintiff surely stated several causes of action for which relief may be granted in her Complaint. 9. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 42, Plaintiff denies punitive damages are without basis in law or fact. There's plenty of case law on punitive damages related to invasions of privy. 10. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 43, Plaintiff is merely on the board of advisors and is not a publicly elected official. 11. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 44, Plaintiff does not know if the Defendant's conduct resulted from malice, motive or ill- will, or if he wrote the letters out of concern, stupidity or insanity. The Defendant was refused to submit for a deposition in order to seek out his purpose in writing the letters. 12. Regarding Defendant's New Matter paragraph 45, Plaintiff filed a writ of summons in a timely fashion upon discovering the actions taken by Defendant therefore the statute of limitations is not barred. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from this honorable Court in the form of a monetary judgment for her losses as well as punitive damages for 3 Defendant's outrageous conduct and as incentive not to give unreasonable publicity to Plaintiff's private life again in the future. Respectfully submitted, BY: S. H , `.a: . .. C . Date: j_1711-1 3 - - ilk A--SC C T A PER, ESQ., k'' PLAINTIFF 1701 W. MARKET ST. YORK PA 17404 PH. 718-8672 & FAX 718-1634 sharperlaw @mac.com VERIFICATION PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P. 1024(c) I VERIFY that the averments of fact contained in the foregoing Petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief,based upon information provided to me by Mary Jane Zeigler, whose verification cannot be obtained within the time allowed for filing. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relat.• : to unworn falsification to authorities. Date: l\ ‘A- Scott A. Harper,Esq. Attorney for Mary Jane Zeigler 4 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER 331 Allen Street • Carlisle, PA 1 7013-3102, • Docket No. 125573 Civil Plaintiff vs. GARY WILSON • 118 Calder Street • Harrisburg, PA 17102, • Civil Action Defendant • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving upon the person and in the manner indicated below. The document delivered today is: REPLY TO NEW MATTER Delivered by: FIRST CLASS MAIL,PRE-PAID Delivered to: KEVIN J. HAYES, ESQ METTE, EVANS AND WOODSIDE 3401 N. FRONT ST. HBG., PA 17110-0950 • Date: �� ~ ^ C ;. SCOTT A. HARPER,ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF,MARY JANE ZEIGLER J4 -� C '8 4N11'. 5 PF��S YL[D�� COUNTY IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND C� TY, PENNSYLVANIA MARY JANE ZEIGLER 331 Allen Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3102, Docket No. 125573 Civil Plaintiff vs. GARY WILSON 118 Calder Street Harrisburg, PA 17102, Civil Action Defendant PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE To the Prothonotary: Please mark the above-entitled case as discontinued without prejudice. Respectfully submitted, BY: S. H RP R L LLC Date: 63 _ SCO T A. PER, ES OR PLAINTIFF 1701 MARKET ST. YORK PA 17404 PH. 718-8672 & FAX 718-1634 sharperlaw @mac.com Scott A. Harper, Esq. Attorney for Mary Jane Zeigler 1