Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-13 � IN RE: : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Estate of Phyllis L. Renninger : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Deceased : N0. 21-13-0324 : ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION KELLY PETERSHEIM'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF STEVEN MABEN 63. No reply is necessary. 64. Denied. Petitioner never exerted control over Decedent's finances and Petitioner did not take large amounts of Decedent's money. To the contrary, any monies Petitioner received from Decedent were given to Petitioner by Decedent voluntarily and knowingly, at a time when Petitioner was one of two people who were emotionally the closest to Decedent; and at time when Petitioner provided substantial care to Decedent; and at a time when Petitioner was the sole beneficiary of Decedent's estate by virtue of Decedent's Will. 65. Denied. Decedent knew the amount of each check which was drawn on her account and Petitioner did not withdraw cash from Decedent's account. 66. Denied. Decedent's gifts to Petitioner and her family were the natural expression of Decedent's love and appreciation for Petitioner and her family. Denied that Petitioner reached out to Respondent due to any inappropriate actions of Petitioner. 67. - 68. Denied as a legal conclusions. KELLY PETERSHEIM'S REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIM � �' � 69. No reply is necessary. � o `�' ,� ��' � �, c- � � p �7 �-_ � � _` n � Cf? �"3 70. - 71. Admitted. � ;.,� �_ �, �_E: r�,, � � ��� cn , :.� 72. No reply is necessary. �;' "� � _,� �� ��� � c�a �-a 3 `�° �:� .=� c�. . -.: . r�� c�a � s� --o s"_' � i1> Kd� � "`'� O '�1 73. - 76. Denied. Petitioner's responses to paragraphs 64., 65. and 66. above are incorporated herein by reference. 77. Denied. This is a legal conclusion to�which no reply is necessary; and further Petitioner denies the allegation of Decedent's financial damages and demands strict proof at the time of trial. 78. No reply is necessary. 79. Admitted that Petitioner does not intend to return any funds to Decedent's estate; denied that any such funds were taken without Decedent's knowledge or authorization. 80. Denied as a legal conclusion. 81. Denied as a legal conclusion. 82. Denied as set forth in Petitioner's reply to paragraph 79 above. 83. No reply is necessary. 84. -86. Denied. Petitioner's responses to paragraphs 64., 65. and 66. above are incorporated herein by reference. Furthermore, Petitioner's conduct has been neither wanton or outrageous. Respectfully submitted, BARIC SCHERER LLC Michael A. cherer, Esquire Baric Scherer LLC 19 West South Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-6873 ... . , ,: .�.� , .��.�,.� rF� ,� �- �.�, �, .� �,��„�. �.� ..�� . VERIFICATION The statements in the foregoing Kelly Petersheim's Reply To New Matter Of Steven Maben are based upon information which has been assembled by my attorney in this litiga#ion. The language of the statements is not my own. I have read the statements; and to the extent that they are based upon information which I have given to my counsel, they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. , DATE: elly Peter eim � �, , ,� -� . ..4� � . �.,�r�����, _ .,� � �.. �,�,� ��.. �,� .� , . z w CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July �� , 2013, I, Andrea M. Ramos, secretary at Baric Scherer LLC, did serve a copy of Kelly Petersheim's Reply Ta New Matter Of Steven Maben, by first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, ta the parties listed below, as follows: Brian W. Nlains, Esquire William R. Kaufman, Esquire Skarlatas Zonarich, LLC 950 Century Drive 17 South Second Street, 6th Floar Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17050 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 171 Q1 Andrea M. amos