Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-5842D WILLIAM O'KEEFE and TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and wife, Plaintiffs GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. d 4 -5V y °t- CIVIL : 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, PENNSYLVANIA 17013 TELEPHONE: (717)-249-3166 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. WILLIAM O'KEEFE and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA wife, Plaintiffs : NO. 0 1 -6-9 Y-7- CIVIL GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant COMPLAINT I. Plaintiffs, William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe, husband and wife, are adult individuals residing at 22 West Maplewood Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Gene Dunning, Jr., is an adult individual trading and doing business as Dunning Quality Builders, with a place of business located at 22 Ivy Terrace, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. On or about July 20, 2003, plaintiffs and defendant executed a certain written agreement for the construction of an addition to plaintiffs' residence. A true and correct copy of the agreement is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A". 4. The plaintiffs have fulfilled all the provisions of the agreement which are required on their part to be performed as of the date of the filing of this Complaint. 5. The defendant has not fulfilled the provisions of the agreement on his part to be performed. 6. Defendant has performed in a poor, improper, and unworkmanlike manner certain things which were expressly or by necessary implication required by the agreement to be done and performed in a proper and workmanlike manner as follows: a. Footings for the addition were not built to correct size and were improperly poured with only twelve (12) inches in depth in some areas; b. The area on the second floor, where the existing roof was modified and trusses cut, leave the bearing of the existing roof insecure in regards to practices that are standard within r the industry; C. The defendant failed to use mechanical joist hangers to insure that the roof is securely attached to the walls which results in the ceiling joists of the second floor carrying the load of the roof, which is structurally unsound; d. Several roof rafters, where they are attached to the ridge board, are undercut and regular wood shims were used between the roof rafters and ridge board which is structurally unsound; e. Previously existing garage framing was altered by the defendant and his reframing of those walls was not done according to the specifications agreed upon with the plaintiffs in that he did not use 2 x 6 boards and the new window was installed improperly making the walls structurally unsound; f. Due to the low slope on the newly installed roof the manufacturer's warranty requires the underlayment to be doubled or of a heavy material which the defendant did not do and the result is that the manufacturer's warranty is not in effect; g. Newly installed ladders which were installed to extend the existing roof are not level with the existing roof and not securely attached to the roof and walls; h. The defendant used notching in the exterior wall framing members of the second floor which were overcut and now additional framing must be installed to give the walls proper support and stability; i. The 2 x 6 wood framing to support the fourteen (14) inch trussed floor joists are not secured properly; j. The headers for the windows that were installed in the new garage by the defendant were improperly installed and have shifted out of level; k. The new roof line was to be of equal height with the existing structure, but defendant incorrectly calculated angles and the gable roof such that the new roof addition sits six (6) inches higher than the rest of the roof, 1. Defendant used non-treated material in some areas on the floor for shimming out the wal l and these non-treated materials are open for infestations of termites and dampness; M. There are two (2) large gaps between the new construction and the existing construction which is caused by the defendant's failure to properly bring footer to override existing footer which would have allowed new brick to overlap these gaps; n. The defendant installed a steel beam in the existing garage without properly taking into account the continued carrying of loads on the second floor, and in addition the beam posts installed by the defendant in the existing garage were not installed correctly; o. The exterior siding was installed directly over plywood without the required layer of Tyvek underneath the siding which is the standard in the industry and has the exterior siding is wavy, twisted, hangs off in some areas and is obviously patched in other areas; P. Several areas in the framing have gaps and allow air to enter into the wall cavity; q. The double 2 x 10 floor joists that were installed by the defendant along the stairwell are not nailed correctly which has resulted in gapping and twisting; r. The flashing and drip edge were not properly installed which has resulted in numerous gaps leaving wood exposed; S. The egress windows in the new bedroom do not meet the minimum unobstructed opening requirements pursuant to current codes; t. The floor slab in the garage is sloped to a floor drain rather than being sloped toward the door so that fluids run out of the garage as is required by current codes; U. The overall workmanship of the defendant and/or his agents and employees is not up to the standards in the industry and lacks attention to detail and good workmanship; V. The framing in the second floor in the area of the air conditioner appears to have been cut with a chain saw and the roof of the existing home is left hanging without sufficient support and bracing; W. The roof is, as installed by defendant, structurally unsound and lacks the ability to hold snowfall which is normal for this area; 7. Due to the poor, improper and unworkmanlike manner in which the defendant has performed under the terms of his contract with plaintiffs, plaintiffs are forced to expend additional sums of money over and above the original contract price to complete the construction of their new addition. 8. The following is a list of repairs and replacements which plaintiffs are compelled to make due to the defendants improper and unworkmanlike performance; a. All shingles installed by the defendant need to be removed and a proper application of underlayment installed followed by the reinstallation of all shingles; b. Many of the roof rafters and trusses need to be removed and reinstalled with proper mechanical joist hangers and hurricane clips to insure that the roof is securely attached to the walls; C. The ceiling joists on the second floor need to be reinforced to insure sufficient strength to carry the load of the roof, d. The previously existing framing in the garage area, which was altered by the defendant, now needs to be removed and the framing needs to be rebuilt with proper framing members as well as properly nailed and attached to the floor plate; e. The newly installed ladders which are not level with the existing roof and which are not securely attached to the roof and walls need to be removed and properly installed; f. Additional framing needs to be installed in the second floor to give the walls the needed support and stability; g. The 2 x 6's running perpendicular to the fourteen (14) inch trussed floor joists in the new garage need to be properly secured; h. The windows that were installed by the defendant have to be removed and reinstalled with proper headers; i. The roof height needs to be re-established though the proper calculation of angles and the gable roof so that the new roof is level with the existing roof as per the original plans; j. All of the non-treated material used by the defendant on the floor for shimming out of walls needs to be removed and either replaced or reconstructed by treated materials; k. Due to the improper footings that were installed by the defendant corrections will need to be made to allow for the installation of new brick which will overlap gaps caused by the defendant's improper installation of the footers; 1. The steel beam installed in the existing garage along with the beam post need to be correctly installed and calculations made to insure that they can carry the load of the second floor; M. The siding on the exterior of the new construction needs to be removed and reinstalled correctly' n. The double 2 x 10 floor joist installed along the stairwell needs to be correctly installed; o. The flashing and drip edge need to be removed and reinstalled to insure that all exposed wood is covered; P. The egress windows in the sleeping area of the new construction need to be increased with a size consistent with current codes; q. The floor slab in the garage needs to be removed and repoured providing for a slope draining to the exterior of the structure as required by code. 9. Due to the defendant's refusal and/or inability to properly perform under the contract, the plaintiffs stopped the defendant from doing any further work pursuant to the contract on or about August 5, 2004. 10. Prior to stopping the defendant from performing any additional work the plaintiffs paid the defendant a total of $26,436.87. l l . The total cost as set forth in the contract, which is attached hereto, for the work to be performed and completed by the defendant was $54,775.00. 12. To date, plaintiffs have incurred additional costs in the amount of $3,000.00 for the excavation of the improperly poured footers, additional concrete, and the rebuilding of the footer for a brick ledge. 13. Additional expenses for repairs to the improperly installed garage door, repairs to the yard and structural engineer's fees come to $735.24. 14. The current cost to repair the structural and cosmetic problems caused as a result of the defendant's poor, improper and unworkmanlike performance is $39,665.90. 15. The total cost to complete the contract as was originally to be performed by the defendant is an additional $43,113.00. 16. Based on these estimates, the plaintiffs will have to pay $86,514.14 in addition to the $26,436.87 they have already paid to the defendant. 17. The total costs which the plaintiffs will have to expend in order to have the addition as previously contracted for with the defendant is now $112,951.01. 18. The damages caused to the plaintiffs is $58,176.01, which is the difference between the total costs now to be expended by the plaintiffs and the original contract price of $54,775.00. 19. But for the poor, improper and unworkmanlike performance of the defendant the plaintiffs could have had a completed addition to their home as per the plans as set forth in the original contract at a price somewhere between $48,000.00 and the $54,775.00, which is the original contract price. WHEREFORE, plaintiffs seek damages and pray that this Court will enter damages in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant in the amount of $58,176.01. Respectfully submitted, a laeo R. Mark Thomas, Esquire ID# 41301 101 S. Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 796-2100 VERIFICATION We verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. We understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Date: 1/ /,P-l1 Date: / f / P/,? 7 O U.,/ 1J; -UUJ -J. 4- i 1 i c4UU?UU UL11L UUIAJ Ijj+_1 i IJHUE 02 Dunning Quality Builders 22 Ivy Terrace Gene Dutwung Carlislc, PA 17013 256 -1540 July 7, 2003 Mr. & Mrs. Sill o'keefe 22 West Maplewood Ave. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Dear Mr. & Mrs. O'Keefe We are please to offer our reviard proposal for the construction,of a new addition to be attached to the rear of your existing property. Our budget pricing is based upon our site visit of Tuesday, June 3, 2003, and our conversation at that time, we include the following: 1. Finish the existing 22'x23'garage interior. Install subfloor, insulation, .and new hardwood flooring. Rough-in electrical wiring for new receptacles, switches, and lights. Lights to be purchased by owner. Insulate existing walls and ceiling. Hang and finish new li" drywall on walls and ceiling. Install wood trims on windows and doors as necessary. Frame in and enclose two existing garage door openings and build one interior wall to create a room under the stairs. Install a pocket door in the wall for entry in the new living room. Install ceramic tile on the floor of this new mud room. Move the window from under the staircase into new mud room. Construct a new 42" wide finished staircase to access the 2nd floor. Install a steel beam and posts to support second floor load requirements. Install a new twin window in the east wall of the living room. Remove the existing door from the house and create a finished opening. 2. Construct a new 22' x 23' two car garage to be attached to the existing. Finished floor level shall be approximately 24" below the existing garage finished floor. Excavation, grade beam foundation, floor slab, backfill necessary for construction is ,included. Foundation/floor slab shall be a monolithic pour. Three couxses.of 8" block shall be laid up by othera around the perimeter. Construct new walls with 2x4's and a new ceiling with 2x10's to meet all load requirements. Install a steel beam and posts. Reuse the existing overhead door for this new garage. Install 2 new windows and one walk-in door. Exterior to be vinyl siding to match existing. Brick wainscoat by others. 3. Construct a 2nd floor over the new garage and a portion of the existing garage to create a space for a new master bathroom, master bedroom, walk- in closet. Construct two 14' long dormer walls with 2x4's and rafters as required to meet design load requirements. New roof line for this area shall be perpendicular to the existing roof line and shall include large dormers in-both sides as discussed on-site. Gable end shall have vinyl siding. Shingles.to match existing. Install 5 windows in this space. Construct 2x4 interior walls to create a bathroom and walk-in closet. Electrical system in this space shall include the rough-in for the required number of receptacles, lights, and switches, as well as rough electric for heating and air-conditioning. Heating and air-conditioning for this space shall be provided and installed by others. Insulate exterior walls and ceilings. Hang and finish ?4" drywall for painting by others. Rough plumbing for bathroom. Exhibit "A" U:1/ 1:1/ LCJtI:I 1?: 41 f l f14?Jb1bU uENE UUhIN11J6 ` PAGE 03 4. Install a new 100 amp electrical panel in the closet underneath the staircase. All electric for the existing garage, new garage and 2" floor shall come from this 100 amp panel. 5. All labor, material, and equipment, required for the completion of the project are included in this estimate. TOTAL COST . . $54,775.00 To assist you in your decision making, we have budgeted these monies for the following items: Stair material $2,000- Hardwood Flooring $1,500 Second floor drywall $3,200 Living Room Window $1,000 Ceramic Tike $ 150 Permitting shall be secured from the Borough of Mechanicsburg by the owner. We have not included any staining or painting but we are capable of performing this work. Owner has the right to complete as much of the work as desired during construction. Should any additional work be required or requested, our charge shall be labor at $20 per man per hour plus material plus ten percent. All labor and material is recorded such that billing could be done on a time & material basis. At the completion of the new garage and second floor addition exterior, weekly updates of coats shall be provided to the owner. Administrative time shall be included in the time and material updates. 'berms: A deposit of $5,000 shall accompany the acceptance of this proposal. A progress payment of 50% shall be made when the structure is under roof. Final payment shall be made within 10 days of the completion of the work. Dunning Quality Builders shall provide a Certificate of Insurance prior to the start of the work. All'work is warranted for a period of one year after completion. We are very interested in the timely and successful completion of the project and look forward to working with you in the future. Very truly rs, ene Dunnin , Jr. Proposal Accepted Date . 7- ?? -li, v t'... c. ?.'s T7 o r IA4 0 WILLIAM O'KEEFE and : IN THE COURT OF COMMOIN rLhAJ ur TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and wife, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFFS CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. NO. 04-5842 CIVIL TERM GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe, and their attorney, R. Mark Thomas, Esq. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that you must responsively plead to the within Answer with Counterclaim to Plaintiffs Complaint, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 2252(d) within twenty (20) days after service, or a default judgment may be entered against you. By: IRWIN & McKNIGHT w Marc A. McKnight; 91,Esquk Pomfret Street CarlisPennsylvania 17013-3222 60 W19-2353 (717) Supreme Court ID. No. 25476 Attorney for Defendant Gene Dunning, Jr. t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders Date: January 26, 2005 WILLIAM O'KEEFE and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and wife, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFFS CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. NO. 04-5842 CIVIL TERM GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLANTIFFS' COMPLAINT WITH COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, this 26th day of January 2005, comes the Defendant, GENE DUNNING, JR., t/d/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, by his attorneys, Irwin & McKnight, and makes the following Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint: 1. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one (1) of the Complaint are admitted. 2. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one (1) the Complaint are admitted. 3. The averments of fact contained in paragraph three (3) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the contract of July 20, 2003, was cancelled by the Defendants and the Plaintiffs returned their deposit. 4. The averments of fact contained in paragraph four (4) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs have failed to make payment for the work performed by the Defendant. 2 5. The averments of fact contained in paragraph five (5) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Defendant has in good faith strived to complete the work. The Plaintiffs have prohibited the Defendant from completing his work or correcting items which the Plaintiffs claim to be unsatisfactory. 6. The averments of fact contained in paragraph six (6) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the following are items which the Defendant was prepared to corr4ect or were not problems which needed corrected: a. Two small areas of footing were easily corrected by the owner at minimal expense. The rest of the footings were acceptable. b. The Defendant agreed to correct his item. C. This is incorrect. The design of the structure did not permit the use of joist hangers as described by the Plaintiffs. The Defendant agreed to correct this problem. d. The Defendant agreed to correct this problem. e. Additional studs were added for installation of insulation. f. The Defendant agreed to correct this problem. g. The Defendant asserts that the roof extension was performed in a satisfactory manner as approved by the Plaintiffs. h. The Defendant denies that additional framing is needed and proof thereof is demanded. i. The Defendant was not given the opportunity to correct or complete this item. j. The Defendant was not given the opportunity to correct or complete this item. k. The new roof was intentionally made higher as required by the Plaintiffs to permit the ductwork the Plaintiffs required. 3 1. The Plaintiffs asked the Defendant not to complete work in order to save money. Plaintiffs wanted to complete it themselves. in. The Plaintiffs did not permit the Defendant to :investigate this problem. n. The beam was sized by Agar Steel. The additional work to secure the posts was not permitted by the Plaintiffs. o. The Plaintiffs did not permit the Defendant to address or correct this issue. P. The Plaintiff did not permit the Defendant to address or correct this issue. q. The Plaintiffs did not permit the Defendant to address or correct this issue. r. The Plaintiffs did not permit the Defendant to address and correct this issue. S. The Plaintiffs purchased these windows and required the Defendant to install them. t. The Plaintiff did not permit the Defendant to investigate and correct this issue. U. The work was not completed and the Defendant was prepared to correct those items which need to be addressed. V. The mechanical contractor installed its ductwork and the Defendant was not given the opportunity to correct the framing after installation of the ductwork. W. The Defendant agreed to do corrective work on the roof but was unable to do so. 7. The averments of fact contained in paragraph six (6) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs have caused the costs to increase by not permitting the Defendant to correct his own work and by increasing the scope of the work beyond the contract. 8. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eight (8) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the list of repairs and replacements (a, through q.) which plaintiffs made were not due to the Defendant's improper and unworkmanlike performance: 4 a. The Defendant had agreed to do this work but the Plaintiffs did not permit him to do so. b. The Defendant was prepared to do this work but the Plaintiffs refused to let him continue to work on the site. C. The Defendant was prepared to do this work but the Plaintiffs refused to let him continue to work on the site. d. The work in the garage was to be performed by the Plaintiffs in order to save money. This was not work that the Defendant was to perform unless Plaintiffs agreed to pay him to do this work. e. The new plywood and shingles on the existing roof were not part of the contract and were an additional cost which the Plaintiffs required. f. The Defendant denies that additional framing was required in the second floor for strengthening or support. g. The Defendant was not permitted to investigate or address this issue. h. It is denied that the windows need to be moved. The Defendant had moved the windows at the Plaintiffs request to match the uneven brickwork. i. The roof level as constructed was required in order to supply sufficient room for the ductwork which need to be installed beneath the roof. j. The Defendant was not required to install treated work on the first floor at that costs was not included in the contract. k. The Defendant denied the footings were improperly installed. 1. The steel beam was designed was designed for this project and does not need significant changes. M. The siding on the exterior was properly installed. Any concerns the Defendant was not permitted to adjust before he was barred from the construction site by the Plaintiffs. n. The floor joint were correctly installed. The Defendant was prepared to do some additional nailing but was prohibited from doing so by the Plaintiff. 5 o. The Defendant was not permitted to investigate and correct this issue. P. The new state wide building codes do not apply to this project since the building permit was secured before the new building code was enacted. q. It is denied that the floor slab in the garage needs to be removed and repaired. The building code may not apply to this area. The Defendant was barred by the Plaintiffs from investigating this issue. 9. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nine (9) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs expressed unspecific concerns and then barred the Defendant from the job site without giving him the opportunity to investigate and explain or correct the issues which concerned the Plaintiffs. 10. The averments of fact contained in paragraph ten (10) of the Complaint are admitted. 11. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eleven (11) of the Complaint are admitted. 12. The averments of fact contained in paragraph twelve (12) of the Complaint are beyond the scope of knowledge and information available to the Defendant. They are therefore denied and proof thereof is demanded. 13. The averments of fact contained in paragraph thirteen (13) of the Complaint are beyond the scope of knowledge and information available to the Defendant. The Defendant never was notified of a problem with the garage door. They are therefore denied and proof thereof is demanded. 6 14. The averments of fact contained in paragraph fourteen (14) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the work specified is not required and exceeds in some cases the original scope of the work. 15. The averments of fact contained in paragraph fifteen (15) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs increased the scope of the work from the original contract and then refused to sign the charge orders prepared by the Defendant. 16. The averments of fact contained in paragraph sixteen (16) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs are increasing the additional costs by their own choice and the Defendant is not obligated to pay for the new work they now desire. 17. The averments of fact contained in paragraph seventeen (17) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the Plaintiffs have elected to breach the contract, not pay the Defendant for the work he performed and seek Defendants payment for additional work they elected to perform. 18. The averments of fact contained in paragraph eighteen (18) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the sum being sought is not the obligation of the Defendant. The Defendant needs to be paid for the work he has performed for which the Plaintiff refuses to pay. 7 19. The averments of fact contained in paragraph nineteen (19) of the Complaint are specifically denied. On the contrary, the sum being sought is due to the increased work sought by the Plaintiffs beyond the original contract for which they do not want to pay. The Plaintiffs refused to permit the Defendant to work on the project he began. They have elected to pay additional costs for a larger project. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Gene Dunning, Jr., t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter a judgment in his favor and against Plaintiffs, William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe, in this matter, together with reasonable costs and attorney fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just. COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, this 26`' day of January 2005, comes the Defendant, Gene Dunning, Jr., t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders, by his attorneys, Irwin and McKnight, and makes the following Counterclaim against the Plaintiffs, William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe: 20. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one (1) through nineteen (19) of the Defendant's Answer are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this Counterclaim. 21. The contract proposal which was used by the parties was dated January 6, 2004. On March 30, 2004 and on May 22, 2004 the Plaintiffs changed the scope of the work as reflected by the charge orders numbered one (1) and two (2) prepared for the project. A copy of said contract and the charge orders is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A". 8 22. Without notice or any specific reason, the Plaintiffs barred the Defendant from completing his work in August 2004. At the time the Defendant was owed $25,586.45 by the Plaintiffs for work he had performed on the project for which he had not been paid. A copy of the invoice is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "B". 23. The Plaintiffs have repeatedly refused to pay the Defendant for work he had performed on their project. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Gene Dunning, Jr., t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter a judgment in his favor and against Plaintiffs, William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe, in this matter, in the amount of $25,586.45 together with interest at the rate of 1.5% per month and reasonable costs and attorney fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just. Respectfully submitted., IRWIN Esquire 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 170 (717) 249-2353 Mme Court I.D. No. 25 Date: January 26, 2005 9 Dunning Quality Builders 22 Ivy Tenace Gene Dunning Carlisle, PA 170 i 3 258-1540 January 6, 2004 Mr. & Mrs. Bill O'kee£e 22 West Maplewood Ave. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Dear Mr. & Mrs. O'Keefe we are please to offer our revised proposal for the construction of a new addition to be attached to the rear of your existing property. Our budget pricing is based upon our site visit of Tuesday, June 3, 2003, and our conversation at that time. We include the following: 1. Finish the existing 221x231garage interior. install subfloor, insulation, and new hardwood flooring. Rough-in electrical wiring for new receptacles, switches, and lights. Lights to be purchased by owner. Insulate existing walls and ceiling. Hang and finish new ;a" drywall on walls and ceiling. Install wood trims on windows and doors as necessary. Frame in and enclose two existing garage door openings and build one interior wall to create a room under the stairs. Install a pocket door in the wall for entry in the new living room. Install ceramic tile on the floor of this new mud room. Move the window from under the staircase into new mud room. Construct a new 42" wide finished staircase to access the 2" floor. Install a steel beam and posts to support second floor load requirements. Install a new twin window in the east wall of the living room. Remove the existing door from the house and create a finished opening. 2. Construct a new 22' x 23' two car garage to be attached to the existing. Finished floor level shall he approximately 24" below the existing garage finished floor. Excavation, grade beam foundation, floor slab, backfill necessary for construction is included. Foundation/floor slab shall be a monolithic pour. Three courses of 8" block shall be laid up by others around the perimeter. Construct new walls with 2x4's and a new ceiling with 2x101s to meet all load requirements. Install a steel beam and posts. Reuse the existing overhead door for this new garage. Install 2 new windows and one walk-in door. Exterior to be vinyl siding to match existing. Brick wainscoat by others. 3. Construct a 2nd floor over the new garage and a portion of the existing garage to create a space for a new master bathroom, master bedroom, walk- in closet. Construct two 14' long dormer walls with 2x4's and rafters as required to meet design load requirements. New roof lire for this area shall be perpendicular to the existing roof line and shall include large dormers in both sides as discussed on-site. Gable end shall have vinyl siding. Shingles to match existing. Install 5 windows in this spare. Construct 2x4 interior walls to create a bathroom and walk-in closet. Electrical system in this space shall include the rough-in for the required number of receptacles, lights, and switches, as well as rough electric for heating and air-conditioning. Heating and air-conditioning for this space shall be provided and installed by others. Insulate exterior walls and ceilings. Hang and finish 4" drywall for painting by others. Rough plumbing for bathroom. 4. Install a new 100 amp electrical panel in the closet underneath the staircase. All electric for the existing garage, new garage and 2"O floor shall come from this 100 amp panel. 5. All labor, material, and equipment, required for the completion of the project are included in this estimate. TOTAL COST . . $54,775.00 To assist you in your decision making, we have budgeted these monies for the following items: Stair material $2,000 Hardwood Flooring $1,500 Second floor drywall $3,200 Living Room Window $1,000 Ceramic Tile $ 150 Permitting shall be secured from the Borough of Mechanicsburg by the owner. We have not included any staining or painting but we are capable of performing this work. Owner has the right to complete as much of the work as desired during construction. Should any additional work be required ar requested, our charge shall be labor at $22.50 per man per hour plus material plus ten percent. All labor and material is recorded such that billing could be done on a time & material basis. At the completion of the new garage and, second floor addition exterior, weekly updates of costs shall be provided to the owner. Administrative time shall be included in the time and material updates. Terms: A deposit of $5,000 shall accompany the acceptance of this proposal.. A progress payment of 508 shall be made when the structure is under roof. Final payment shall be made within 10 days of the completion of the work. Dunning Quality Builders shall provide a Certificate of Insurance prior to the start of the work. All work is warranted for a period of one year after completion. We are very interested in the timely and successful completion of the project and look forward to working with you in the future. Very truly yours, Ge Dunning, r. Proposal cce to _ L///i2?t ? C_ Dat r e r /? Dunning Quality Builders 22 Ivy Terrace Gene Dunning Carlisle, PA 17013 (7117) 258 - 1540 April 26, 2004 Mr. & Mrs. Bill Okeefe 22 West Maplewood Ave. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 CHANGE ORDER #1 Description of Work: Make the following changes from our original signed agreement dated January 26, 2004. These items were discussed at a meeting on March 30, 2004. ¦ Change floor structurals over garage to truss joists, removing the need for a steel beam. Truss joists are 14" deep and will drop ceiling height in garage 4" ¦ Install wall framing on the east side of the second floor to create a 7'6" high second floor wall back into the existing second floor. Wall on west side will also be 7'6". Install a header between the walls to remove a portion of the existing roof. ¦ Make 2 dormers on the east side 5' wide for new layout. ¦ Install 7 new windows by Lowen. Windows to be purchased by owner. Use existing windows in the new walk-in closet. • Install a pocket door to walk-in closet. ¦ Install rough-in plumbing for second floor bathroom fixtures chosen. • Install new roof fan with a thermostat and a half moon gable end vent. ¦ Install gable end ladders on east side of existing garage roof. Install overhang to create a soffit on the east sidewall of new garage. Install overhang on rear endwall of new garage. ¦ Install new interior wall layout for second floor and doors. Estimated Cost ... S 13,315.00 Original Cost ... 54.775.00 NEW ESTIMATED COST S69,090.00 Authorization of Change Order The above specifications, pricing, and conditions of the work are hereby accepted. Dunning Quality Builders is authorized to perform the work. I/we accept charges as per the original contract and payment will be made within 10 days of the invoice. Signature Dunning Quality Builders 22 Ivy Terrace Gene Dunning Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 258 - 1540 May 24, 2004 Mr. & Mrs. Bill Okeefe 22 West Maplewood Ave. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 CHANGE ORDER #2 Description of Work: Make the following change from our original signed agreement dated January 26, 2004. These items were discussed on May 22, 2004. • Change foundation design to separate grade beam and floor pours. ¦ Additional form work to pour grade beam Install additional reinforcing bar to tie beam to floor. Install longer anchor bolts in grade beam ¦ Form floor over grade beam with a brick ledge. ¦ Additional concrete charge for 2 trips. Estimated Cost ... S 950.00 Original Cost ... 68.090.00 NEW ESTIMATED COST $69,040.00 Authorization of Change- Order The above specifications, pricing, and conditions of the work are hereby accepted. Dunning Quality Builders is authorized to perform the work. I/we accept charges as per the original contract and payment will be made within 10 days of the invoice. Signature Dunning Quality Builders 22 Ivy Terrace Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone # Fax # 717-258-1540 717-240-0260 Bill To 1 13i11 O'Keefe 22 West Maplewood Ave. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 ! ! lnvoic Date Invoice # 9/27/2004 j 292 Terms Job Addition Net 10 Item Description Amount Labor & Material For work completed to date up to August 5, 2004. 3,873.60 Labor & Material Past Duc amount trom Invoice #271 dated July 26, 2004. 21,712.85 it II I i I I I I I ? i Please remit to above address. Balance Due j $25,586.45 A FINANCE CHARGE OF 1 1l2% PI.K MONTH WILL BE CHARGED ON ALL UNPAID BILLS OVER 30 DAYS. VERIFICATION The foregoing document is based upon information which has been gathered by counsel and myself in the preparation of this action. I have read the statements made in this document and they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. b'KNING Date: January 26, 2005 WILLIAM O'KEEFE and TERESA OWEEFE, husband and wife, PLAINTIFFS V. GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, DEFENDANT CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-5842 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire, hereby certify that a copy of attached document was served upon the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, First Class, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on the date referenced below and addressed as follows: R. Mark Thomas, Esquire 101 South Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 IRWIN & By: Marcus A.?McKni II, Es ree, 60 West P E3_ Carlisle, PA (71 7) 249-23 Supreme Court I.D. No. 25476 Date: JANUARY 26, 2005 : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 11 [f a 7 `? SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-05842 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND O'KEEFE WILLIAM ET AL VS DUNNING GENE JR T/B/A DUNNING JASON VIORAL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon DUNNING GENE JR T/B/A DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS the DEFENDANT , at 1540:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of December-, 2004 at 22 IVY TERRACE CARLISLE, PA 17013 GENE DUNNING JR by handing to 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 18.00 Service 5.18 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 nn .J ..J 1 V So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 12/06/2004 R MARK THOMAS Sworn and Subscribed to before me this 7 - day of l bD? A.D. By: D puty Sheriff rothonotary WILLIAM O'KEEFE and TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and wife, Plaintiffs GENE DUNNING,11R., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 04-5842 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW this 19th day of April, 2005, come the Plaintiffs, William O'Keefe and Teresa O"Keefe, husband and wife, and make the following reply to the Counterclaim of the Defendant. Gene Dunning, Jr., t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders. 20. No answer required. 21. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that there was a second contract proposal signed by the parties,. but the Plaintiffs have no copy of that second contract proposal and were never provided with a copy of that second contract proposal despite repeated requests for same. Since the Plaintiffs do not have a copy of the second proposal they are not aware of the date on which it was signed. It is denied that the Plaintiffs increased the scope of the work. They were presented with Change Orders No. I and No. 2, but did not agree with the Change Orders as written and therefore did not sign and agree to those Change Orders. 22. Denied. Plaintiffs were advised by the Building Codes Inspector to not allow any work to continue on their project as of August 5. 2004. It is further denied that Plaintiffs owed Defendant $25.586.45 as of August 5, 2004 when Plaintiffs stopped the work. By way of further answer, according to the terms of the Contract. Plaintiffs had paid Defendant more than he was entitled to under the terms of the Contract as of August 5, 2004. 23. Denied. Plaintiffs paid the Defendant for all work completed and in fact, had overpaid the Defendant at the Defendant's request. WI IF.RI-FORE, Plaintiffs William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe pray that this Honorable Court will enter a judgment in their favor and against the Defendant on the Defendant's Counterclaim. In addition, Plaintiffs pray for such other relief as the Court deems just in this matter. Respectfully submitted, R. Mark Thomas, Esquire ID4 41301 101 S. Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 796-2100 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, R. Mark Thomas, Esquire, hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy of the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the U.S. Mail at Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, First Class Postage pre-paid, addressed to: Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esq. 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Date: 4/ 19/2005 R. Mark Thomas, Esq. 7i PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY r•? ° n Please list the following case: c? c'- T -n ";r : (Check one) ( x ) for JURY trial at the next term of civil cdurt. ( ) for trial without a jury. .- c, ----------------- ------- ---------------<-- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) (check one) WILLIAM O' KEEFE and ( x) Civil Action - Law TERESA O'KEEFE, husband wife, ( ) Appeal from Arbitration (other) (Plaintiff) VS. GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, The trial list will be called on and August 23, 2005 VS. (Defendant) Trials commence on September 19, 2005 Pretrials will be held on Aug. 31 , 10 0 5 (Briefs are clue 5 days before pretrials.) (The party lusting this case for trial shall) provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local Rule 214.1.) No 04-5842 civil 19 Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: R. Mark Thomas, Esq. Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esq. This case is ready for trial. Signed: Date: July 26, 2005 Print Name: R. Mark Thomas Attorney for: Plaintiffs 18 William O'Keefe and Teresa O'Keefe, husband and wife IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLA114D COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. Gene Dunning, Jr., t/b/a Dunning Quality Builders NO. 04-5842 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, August 30, 2005, by agreement of counsel, the above captioned case is continued from the September 19, 2005 trial term. Counsel is directed to relist the case when ready. By the Court, A r Gear . offer, P.J. R. Mark Thomas, Esquire For the Plaintiff 0/ Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire CJ ZAY, For the Defendant Court Administrator jhk u, ? : . . co ti; -,3C7 " ?, 'er n ? i 1_ ?r q WILLIAM O'KEEFE and TERESA O'KEEFE, husband and wife, Plaintiffs v. GENE DUNNING, JR., t/b/a DUNNING QUALITY BUILDERS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 045842 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SETTLE. DISCONTINUE AND END To Curtis R. Long, Prothonotary: Please mark the above-captioned case as settled, discontinued and at end since the parties have reached an amicable resolution to this matter. Respectfully submitted, R. Mark Thomas, Esquire ID# 41301 101 S. Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 796-2100 Date: September 11, 2007 T .F, ?ww O ?1 ? Q L