HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-01-13 (2)IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION
EDITH S. RIFE TRUST
NO. 21-11-0325
NO. 21-10-1006
NO. 21-83-0773
JUDGE ALBERT H. MASLAND
ANSWER TO MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENTS
ON THE PLEADINGS
AND NOW COME, Steven A. Maxwell, Sherri Maxwell, Douglas Maxwell, and Barry
Maxwell, by and through their undersigned counsel, answering the Motions for Judgmen ts on the
Pleadings as follows:
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted.
5. Admitted.
.
~ .,
~
~.
c~
6. Admitted. c ~ m ~
7. Admitted. ~ ~, r"-- ~::r'
8. Admitted. ;~ ~ 'F` -~ -~ _.n
`'
9. Admitted. ~
~
-~, ~ --~' r: ~
~ a
rya
-.~
10. Admitted.
11. Admitted.
12. Admitted.
13. Admitted.
14. Admitted.
15. Admitted.
16. Admitted.
17. Admitted.
18. Admitted.
19. Admitted in part, denied in remainder. It is admitted that the Court issued a
Memorandum Opinion and Order of court sustaining the Preliminary Objections of Petitioner
and dismissing the Executor's Preliminary Objections. It is denied that the Motion and its
averments have become the functional equivalent of the Complaint in the Trust case.
20. Admitted.
21. Admitted.
22. Admitted.
23. Admitted.
24. Admitted.
25. Admitted.
26. Admitted.
27. Admitted.
28. Admitted in part, denied in remainder. It is admitted that the other remainder
beneficiaries of the Trust filed an Answer to the Motion and to the New Matter raised by the
Executor. It is denied that the original Motion had become the Complaint in the Trust matter.
29. Denied. The remainder beneficiaries intend to seek leave of Court to amend their
Answer filed in the Trust matter so any suggestion that the pleadings are now closed is premature
and specifically denied.
30. Admitted in part, denied in remainder. It is admitted that the specific pleadings
mentioned have been filed in this proceeding. It is denied that this list is complete as the other
remaining beneficiaries shall seek leave of court to amend their Answer.
31. Admitted.
32. Admitted.
33. Denied. The other remainder beneficiaries of the Edith S. Rife Trust have filed a
Motion for Leave of Court to Amend their Answer despite their requested relief to find that
Charles I. Rife breached his fiduciary duty as Trustee of the Edith S. Rife Trust.
34. Admitted.
35. Admitted in part, denied in remainder. It is admitted that the other trust
beneficiaries answered the motion with a denial. This was an inadvertent error and a Motion for
Leave to Amend has been filed to remedy this despite their requested relief to find Charles I.
Rife breached his fiduciary duty as Trustee of the Edith S. Rife Trust.
36. Denied. Petitioner does not recognize or acknowledge the relief requested by the
other remainder beneficiaries. Answering parties further deny that the Motion filed on October
27, 2011 should constitute a Complaint as other Court filings have occurred in this matter.
37. Denied. The other remainder beneficiaries of the Edith S. Rife Trust have filed a
Motion for Leave of Court to Amend their Answer despite their requested relief to find that
Charles I. Rife breached his fiduciary duty as Trustee of the Edith S. Rife Trust.
38. Denied. The other remainder beneficiaries of the Edith S. Rife Trust have filed a
Motion for Leave of Court to Amend their Answer despite their requested relief to find that
Charles I. Rife breached his fiduciary duty as Trustee of the Edith S. Rife Trust.
WHEREFORE, the other beneficiaries of the Trust respectfully request that judgment be
denied in favor of Petitioner and for such other relief that this Court deems just and reasonable.
3 9. Admitted.
40. Denied. It is unclear whether this narrow issue was adjudicated by the Court.
41. Denied. The averment contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required.
42. Denied. The averment contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, the other beneficiaries of the Trust respectfully request that the requested
relief by Petitioner be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES OF CRAIG A. DIEHL
By:
Date: 1 3 ~ ~ ~'~ ~ f~ '
Craig A. iehl, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 52801
3464 Trindle Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Tel: (717)763-7613
Fax: (717)763-8293
Attorney for Steven A. Maxwell, Sherri Maxwell,
Douglas Maxwell and Barry Maxwell
VERIFICATION
I, CRAIG A. DIEHL, ESQUIRE, Attorney for Petitioners, Steven A. Maxwell, Sherri
Maxwell, Douglas Maxwell, and Barry Maxwell, who is authorized to make this Verification on
Petitioners' behalf, verify that the information contained in the foregoing document is true and
correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. I understand that false statements
herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to
authorities.
Date: ~ .d ~ C ~ '
CRAIG .DIEHL, ESQUIRE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, the 1St day of February, 2013, the undersigned hereby certifies that a true
and correct copy of the foregoing Answer to Motions for Judgments on the Pleadings was served
upon the opposing parties by way of United States first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as
follows:
Murrell R. Walters, III, Esquire
54 East Main Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Attorney for Fred H. Junkins
Wayne F. Shade, Esquire
53 W. Pomfret Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Co-counsel for Fred H. Junkins
James D. Cameron, Esquire
1325 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
Attorney for John W. Maxwell
David A. Fitzsimmons, Esquire
Martson Law Office
10 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Co-counsel for John W. Maxwell
D a A. Fike, Legal Secretary