HomeMy WebLinkAbout13-1359 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notice Of Judgment/Transcript Civil
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Case
Mag. Dist. No: MDJ- 09 -2 -02 Saidis, Sullivan ,& Rogers
MDJ Name Honorable Jessica Brewbaker V.
Address: 18 North Hanover Street, Suite 106 Pamela R Black
Business Central Building
Carlisle, PA 17013
Telephone: 717- 240 -6564
Robert Benjamin Hamilton, Esq. Docket No: MJ- 09202•-CV- 0000162 -2012
Saidis Sullivan & Rogers Case Filed: 10/25/2012
26 W. High Street
Carlisle. PA 17013
Disposition Summary
Docket No Plaintiff Defendant Disposition Disposition Date
MJ- 09202 -CV- 0000162 -2012 Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers Pamela R Black Judgment for Plaintiff 01/28/2013
Judgment Summary
Participant Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Amount
Pamela R Black $0.00 $5,153.00 $5,153.00
Saidis. Sullivan & Rogers $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Judgment Detail ( "Post Judgment)
in the matter of Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers vs. Pamela R Black on 1/28/2013 the judgment was awarded as follows:
Judgment Component Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Deposit Applied Amount
Civil Judgment $0.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Costs $0.00 $153.00 $153.00
Grand Total: $5,153.00
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 THE 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. V�
Date isterial District Judge Jessica Brewbaker
I certify that this is a true and correct copy ot the r cord of the procee in con' fining t he lu gment.
Date Ma fist vial District Judge
— --- - - - - --
MDJS 315 Page 1 of 2 Printed: 01/29/2013 8:52:
Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers Docket No.: W- 09202 -CV- 0000162 -2012
V.
Pamela R Black
Participant List
Private(s)
Robert Benjamin Hamilton, Esq.
Saidis Sullivan & Rogers
26 W. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Plaintiff(s)
Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers
26 West High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Defendant(s) w
Pamela R Black M :C " r"
1788 N Meadow Dr
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 F D .. -, .
o lc 3e��q i
1 U- � ss
C) f lea '
MDJS 315 Page 2 of 2 Printed: 01/29/2013 8:52:06AM
Opinion: Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers v Pamela Black
The testimony and the exhibits provided at the hearing on January 28, 2013
indicate that Pamela Black had retained the law firm of Saidis, Sullivan & Rogers in
order for the firm to represent her is a divorce proceeding. Specifically, Ms. Black hired
Mary Lou Matas, Esq. to represent her (after discovering that Mr. Saidis was no longer
practicing this type of law). A fee agreement was signed, and Ms. Black paid a $2000
retainer.
While the Court understands that Ms. Black believed her ex- husband would be
paying her legal fees, the evidence does not support that belief. The only legal document
presented was a transcript in which both Ms. Black and her ex- husband, on the record,
agreed to each waive their claims for counsel fees. Furthermore, Ms. Black never made
any efforts to clarify this matter with the firm. While the Court understands that Ms.
Black was frustrated by the outcome of her case, and by some mistakes that she believed
had been made, she was represented by Ms. Matas, in several Court proceedings (and is
now divorced and receiving alimony). If she was dissatisfied with her representation,
there are other means to address that issue; however, the contract she had with the firm
requires payment for services rendered. Thus, she is liable for most of the expenses
incurred. Because it appears that the firm did not discuss this issue with Ms. Black, but
rather continued to bill, and because the court cannot find any explanation for a charge
from July of 2012, Court will be slightly reducing the overall amount due.
Judgment is therefore awarded for the plaintiff in the amount of $5000.00 plus
filing fees, for a total amount of $5153.00.
r
(Seal)
Je sica E. Brewbaker
Date: l t. -` ! Magisterial District Judge