The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-0303rH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. 0.9- -?n ( , ,; NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the rase referenced below. TA FA-N2tC_ CUT LWT . I)AC. - L-coZ ....._Ro?3ERT V• NI"LO46? ADDRESS OF APPELLANT CITY STATE ZIP CODE 415 UosLizo- ? cws L6Moy?sls' PA 11043 DATE OF DGM T IN THE CASE OF (PlaWdn (Defendant)' 12 16 Ot{ ZEQUlI SF-WO-114 Qt:9JP a PA /''? h7 "Ir-OoTLirr 1.1[' C\/ - Oooo +$S- Olif This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 10088. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. Signature of Pmlhonolery or Deputy If appellants Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(6) in action before a Di rict Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after riling the NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa.R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon 's SEc?Ja.l QZ0 up appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appelleets) (Common Pleas No. ?' f?„ _),within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. t - = Signature of appellant or attorney or agent RULE: To 2auok Eeoj(j1'jI CROUP ,appellee(s) Name of appel/eats) ? (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail. (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) fT--h??e date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date: J?j ) f i '..20 ?? ? 0 .? s/ 9'aryl .Jlrr7? YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312-02 COUR1 FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing of the notice of appeal. Check applicable boxes.) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ; as AFFIDAVIT; I hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No. , upon the District Justice designated therein on (date of service) , 20 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) , on , 20 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWORN) (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF , 20 Signature signature of official before whom affidavit was made Title of officol My commission expires on 20 N N C ° fa/ ' ? r T C, T{ 4i c- 1 Fri -0 m ?i G cr) i 1 r -l-'r-- rn n co -c AOPC 312A - 02 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA UF: . Uri Dn,. Iv 09-1-02 DJ Name. Mon. ROBERT V. MANLOVE Mess' 1901 STATE STREET CAMP HILL, PA Teiephave (717) 761-0583 17011-0000 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT PLAINTIFF: CIVIL CASE NAME and ADDRESS fZEPLIN'S SECURITY GROUP 2026 MARKET STREET PO BOX 144 LCAMP HILL, PA 17011 J VS. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS FPA FABRIC OUTLET, INC 7 415 BOSLER AVE LEMOYNE, PA 17043 PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC L J 415 BOSLER AVE DocketNo.: CV-0000485-04 LEMOYNE, PA 17043 Date Filed: 10/11/04 , THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: FOR PLAINTIFF 0 Judgment was entered for: (Name) zppT.TN, G SgrrUgITY GROUp Fi] Judgment was entered against: (Name) PA FARRTC oTyTT,F.m INC in the amount of $ 91,T q 6 _ on on Defendants are jointly and severally liable. (Date of Judgment) 12 1,116 104 (Date & Time) 0 Damages will be assessed on: E This case dismissed without prejudice. ? Amount of Judgment Subject to Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. § 8127 $ Portion of Judgment for physical damages arising out of residential lease $ Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees Total Post Judgment Credits Post Judgment Costs Certified Judgment Total 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 THE 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 DISTRICT JUSTICES, 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 DISTRICT JUSTICE. 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 DISTRICT JUSTICE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL, SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. Date DiAtIP JDgtide, 01( I certify, that this is ?e Wact iaing ie'jutigment. r2.I_ Date ,District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006. 5?AL a AOPC 31503 DATE PRINTED: 12/16/04 11:17:08 AM ?4"^??t•- " COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of 1H NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No. NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the case referenced below. NAMEOFAPPELLANI z ,?„(? r"..q- V. Llt?, l7n' l G' SIC , , }f.. DATE OF JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF (Plan f) ?., J ( r-. (DeJentlanQ' ._ ? )l? i?xi? This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If appellant w 7 as Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(6) in action R.C.P.D.J. No. 10068. This Notice of Appeal, when recetwd by the District Justice, will operate as a before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. (20) days after riling the NOTICE of APPEAL. y PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINTAND RULE TO FILE (This section of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa.R.C.P.D.J.No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary llee file a-complaint Yin this appeal t' - I Enter rule upon PpPe(????. ?G: rl. 'a `? ?- `--•1!? ?' I '.^1!t, .?(-1 Name of appelleefs) Common Pleas No.1(`' d r)c within twenty 20 days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. RULE: To i0 Q .appellee(s) Name of appellees) (1) You are notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this, appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this rule upon you by personal service or by certified or registered mail (2) If you do not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. _ Date. 20 Sig ture of Prot ono3."; poly' YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312.02 COURT FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT (This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER filing of the notice of appeal, Check appficabte boxes.) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ??d,.... ;ss AFFIDAVIT: 1 hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No. C6 -,30 -1, upon the District Justice designated therein on (date of service16)vv.v1rJ'r,,, 20 t.?-. El by personal service by (certified) (registered) mail, 1?.. sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (nafne) 20 ?? _ ? by personal service by {certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWORN) (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF??,?ti, _ 201 S+.}notaro ofe€hant Signature of 7rkial bofore whom aMdavlt was made TAW of officio! My commission expires one j,,, A rc , 211D f] . O*hwAe D. HKWM NO" Pd* EldM M"W AKIII7 AOPC 312A - 02 ZEPLIN'S SECURITY GROUP, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, V. PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC., Defendant. NO. 05-303 CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 Les han demandado a usted en la corte. Se usted guiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y Is notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archbivar en la cone en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en coma de su persona. Sea avisado qui si usted no soe defiende, la corte tomara mmedidas y purde entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notoficacion y pro cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDO A UN ABODAGO WMEDIATEMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME FOR TELEFONO A LA OFICIAN CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVENUE Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 ZEPLIN'S SECURITY GROUP, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, v. NO: 05-303 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC., Defendant. COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Zeplin's Security Group, Inc., by and through its attorneys, Mancke, Wagner & Spreha, and files the following Complaint: 1. The Plaintiff, Zeplin's Security Group, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation having as a business address 2026 Market Street, P.O. Box 144, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Defendant, PA Fabric Outlet, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation having as an address 415 Bosler Avenue, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. On or about September 26, 2002, the parties entered into an Agreement captioned "An Alarm System Agreement," a copy of which is attached hereto, incorporated herein by reference, made a part hereof, and marked as Exhibit A. 4. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff certain sums of money for a five (5) year period. 5. On or about September of 2004, Defendant discontinued making the monthly payments pursuant to the terms of the Agreement without cause, without justification, and without a reasonable basis. 6. Despite repeated demands from Plaintiff, Defendant has refused to abide by the terns of the Agreement. 7. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, for five (5) years, the Defendant owes the Plaintiff the sum of $3,240.00, of which the Defendant has paid $1,296.00, leaving a balance of $2,052.00. 8. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys' fees. 9. Plaintiff has an Agreement with the attorneys at $175.00 per hour, plus costs, which is being sought from Defendant. -2- WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests this Court to grant judgment against the Defendant in the amount of $2,052.00, together with costs and attorneys' fees. Respectfully submitted, Mancke, Wagner & Spreha By. P. agner, Esquire D.#23103 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: -3- I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: /:J51C f- ' ? 4) ?'.7 ? u ? ?? ?. i? ^- ' ` l _.... _:, l?Y (.nl (\l ?w'i }? A ? NT?t_'t= ? M ???-6LLl?O CC ?! N tti? ??- ((( i X10 _ S - c3 oo-Dc"-I t ?Jc AFFIDAb7TOFSERVICE State of Pennsylvania ) CiJ v !?? z«ti _ (/} ) S.S. Cumberland County ) CHARLES PLATKIN, being duly sworn, deposes and says: deponent is not personally a party to this action, is over 18 years of age, and resides in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. On February 24, 2005, deponent served a copy of the within ANSWER and NEW MATTER /COUNTERCLAIM upon the following: Mancke, Wagner & Spreha 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Zepfrn's Security Group, Inc. 2026 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 at the address designated by them for such service, by depositing a true and correct copy of same in a proper United States Mail wrapper in a United Sta Post Office Post Box, duly marked as same, affixed with the proper postage' fgrthe a of mailing by first class mail such papers to the addressees identified a ove. CHARLES PLATKIN Sworn to before me on February 24, 2005 Notary Public NotaaaisEa? Ll die o. Hwrlon, Notary P&k: East Pennsboro Twp., Curnbedend Cqur MyGomrnhsswnExpiresJatn.Bry29.F_(k77 Member, Peoms t w Cat ".r,! ?, 5o r ? ? u, ZEPLIN'S SECURITY GROUP, INC., Plaintiff, VS. PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC., Defendant. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 05-303 CIVIL ACTION - LAW ANSWER PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC., ("PA Fabric") pro se, answers the February 4, 2005 Complaint ofZeplin's Security Group, Inc. ("Zeplin") as follows: Admits the allegations in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3. Denies the allegations in paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to respond to the allegations in paragraph 9. NEW MATTER AND COUNTER-CLAIM 4. The July 26, 2002 Alarm System Contract between PA Fabric and Zeplin (the "Contract') required Zeplin to install an upgraded security control panel for $900.00, and also provided that for $300.00, Zeplin would install a sprinkler supervisory system for both water flow and air pressure monitoring. Zeplin invoiced PA Fabric for these charges, which were timely paid by PA Fabric. Page I of 11 5. The Contract further provided that Zeplin would monitor signals, observe, and check the water flow and air pressure signals in the PA Fabric sprinkler system for a period of five (5) years for $54.00 per month, broken down as: (A) Monitoring Fee: $23.75; (B) Open/Close Report: $20.25; and (C) Sprinkler Report: $10.00. 6. As part of its duties, Zeplin was required under the Contract to monitor all pressure switches on the Firelock Dry Valve, a picture of which is annexed as Ex. A. The pressure switches on the Firelock Dry Valve include the air pressure switch, and two water flow switches (Ex. A). 8. The Firelock Dry Valve was not originally installed by Zeplin, but Zeplin agreed pursuant to the Contract to monitor the pressure switches on the Firelock Dry Valve. 9. Zeplin was obligated to perform the wiring on, of, and about the pressure switches to the alarm control panel (as part of its contractual $300 fee). 10. At all relevant times, Zeplin was aware that the sprinkler system at PA Fabric was maintained by a third-party vendor, Fritz Fire Protection Co., Inc. ("Fritz"). 11. The sprinkler system at PA Fabric operates as a `dry system,' meaning that the system is pressurized with air supplied by a dedicated air compressor. The air pressure in the system blocks the water supply from filling the system when sprinkler dispatch is not required due to a fire condition. 12. Should a sprinkler head activate due to a fire or heat (an element of the sprinkler head melts creating on opening in the system), the air pressure in the system decreases Page 2 of 11 to the point that water is allowed to enter the system and extinguish the fire. Zeplin was aware of the performance and operation specifications of the PA Fabric system. 13. Zeplin knew and was aware at the time of the Contract that the sprinkler valve is the main component of the operation of the PA Fabric system. 14. Zeplin knew and was aware at the time of the Contract that air pressure in the system is monitored by one pressure switch, and that Zeplin was required by the Contract to monitor any decrease in the air pressure in the system. 15. Zeplin knew and was aware at the time of the Contract that water flow in the system is monitored by two pressure switches. 16. Zeplin knew and was aware at the time of the Contract that at a predetermined low air pressure point, the air pressure switch sends a signal to the security alarm box indicating the air pressure is falling. 17. On or about June 30, 2004, PA Fabric learned from Zeplin that water flow occurred in the system, which Zeplin knew had to be caused by a decrease in air pressure in the PA Fabric sprinkler system. 18. Zeplin knew that water flow in the PA Fabric system was caused by a loss of air pressure below a predetermined pressure point. When this occurs, the water flow switch sends a signal to the security alarm box indicating that water has entered the system, which Zeplin knew and understood. 19. PA Fabric was notified by Zeplin at or about 9:08 a.m. on June 30, 2004 that the alarm had engaged and that the monitor indicated the water flow switch had tripped. Page 3 of 11 20. By this time, due to Zeplin's failure to monitor the air pressure in the system and failure to generally discharge its duties under the Contract, the system had been flooded by water, there was no fire condition, and the alarm system could not be reset on its own. 21. PA Fabric reported the incident to Zeplin, who dispatched a service technician to reset the system. 22. The Zeplin service technician informed Charles Platkin, General Manager of PA Fabric, that the air pressure switch and the water flow switches were incorrectly connected by Zeplin to the same terminal. The Zeplin service technician further stated that he reconnected each switch to the proper terminal in the control panel and that, because of this correction, the system would properly function. 23. On or about July 8, 2004, PA Fabric received Zeplin invoice Z0503-6656 in the amount of $112.50, which bill included charges relating to the July 6, 2004 service call required because of the failure of Zeplin to monitor the system and failure of Zeplin to properly wire the system as required under the Contract. 24. Upon receipt of this Zeplin invoice, Mr. Platkin contacted Zeplin, contested the charge because the Zeplin technician attributed the PA Fabric system problems (failure of air pressure drop warning and improper wiring) to the original installation of the sprinkler system switches by Zeplin. 25. After being informed by Mr. Platkin of the problems attributed to Zeplin and acknowledged by a Zeplin employee, Mr. Platkin was informed by Tammy Walker of Zeplin to disregard the invoice. 26. Had PA Fabric been properly notified that the alarm was for low pressure warnings instead of water flow, PA Fabric would have been able to respond immediately to the lowering air pressure problem, which was caused by a failed air compressor, returned the system Page 4 of 11 to the proper air pressure level, and avoided the flooding of the system and concomitant cost to drain and reset the system. FIRST COUNT - BREACH OF CONTRACT 27. PA Fabric repeats the allegations in paragraphs 4-26 as if set forth in full. 29. Zeplin breached the Contract by improperly installing and wiring the security control panel and sprinkler supervisory system for water flow and air pressure monitoring. 29. Zeplin breached the Contract by collecting from PA Fabric monitoring and other fees under the Contract, but not delivering any monitoring service or improperly delivering monitoring services, and failing to provide accurate and timely monitoring services, open/close reports, and or sprinkler system reports all as required by the Contract. 30. Zeplin breached the Contract by failing to properly wire and/or monitor, or properly wiring or monitoring the switches on the Firelock Dry Valve, and by failing to properly wire and install the Firelock Dry Valve. 31. Zeplin breached the Contract by installing or wiring the Firelock Dry Valve in a manner that prevented it from properly sending a signal to the security alarm box, indicating a loss of air pressure. 32. Zeplin breached the Contract by failing to timely notify PA Fabric, as it was obligated to do under the Contract, of a loss of air pressure in the system, causing PA Fabric to incur, among other things, expenses from Fritz and from this lawsuit. 33. Zeplin breached the Contract by failing to provide the contracted-for monitoring services, causing the PA Fabric system to become flooded and causing PA Fabric to incur expenses and costs to drain, reset, and fix its sprinkler system, as follows: Page 5 of 11 (A) $600.00 for service call to repair air compressor fuse and drain system and reset system; (B) $570.00 paid to Zeplin for 24 months of improperly monitoring the PA Fabric sprinkler system and actually providing no useful monitoring services and/or monitoring services in violation of the Contract; (C) $300.00 paid to Zeplin for improper installation of the PA Fabric Sprinkler Monitoring System; (D) $1,500.00 for time expended by Franklyn B. Levy (President) and Charles Platkin (General Manager) responding to Fritz and Zeplin and handling fallout from Zeplin's breach of the Contract; and (E) $2,000.00 for legal advice and consultation furnished by New York law firm, Wuersch & Gering LLP in the preparation of this Answer and New Matter and general litigation consultation. WHEREFORE, PA Fabric requests damages for Breach of Contract from Zeplin in the amount of $1,470.00 for Breach of Contract plus $3,500 in costs and expenses incurred by PA Fabric in having to defend against Zeplin's lawsuit and for having to bring this Breach of Contract claim. PA Fabric also requests the costs and expenses incurred in this appeal. SECOND COUNT- NEGLIGENCE 34. Pa Fabric repeats the allegations in paragraphs 4-33 as if set forth in full. 35. Zeplin had a duty to PA Fabric to perform its obligations under the Contract. Zeplin breached this duty by improperly installing the security control panel and sprinkler supervisory system for water flow and air pressure monitoring. Page 6 of 1 I 36. Zeplin further breached its duty to PA Fabric by collecting from PA Fabric monitoring and other fees under the Contract, but negligently or not delivering monitoring services, and negligently failing to provide accurate and timely monitoring fees, open/close reports, and or sprinkler system reports all as required by the Contract. 37. Zeplin breached its duty to PA Fabric by failing to monitor or properly monitor the switches on the Firelock Dry Valve, and by failing to properly wire and install the Firelock Dry Valve. 38. Zeplin breached its duty to PA Fabric by installing or wiring the Firelock Dry Valve in a manner that prevented it from properly sending a signal to the security alarm box, indicating a loss of air pressure and causing the flooding of the system. 39. Zeplin failed to discharge its duty to PA Fabric by notifying late PA Fabric of a loss of air pressure in the system, causing it to flood. This breach of duty caused PA Fabric to incur, among other things, expenses from Fritz and from this lawsuit. 40. Zeplin breached its duty to PA Fabric by failing and neglecting to take actions which proximately caused and resulted in the PA Fabric system to become flooded, causing PA Fabric to incur expenses and costs to drain, reset, and fix its sprinkler system, as follows: (A) $600.00 for service call to repair air compressor fuse and drain system and reset system; (B) $570.00 paid to Zeplin for 24 months of improperly monitoring the PA Fabric sprinkler system and actually providing no useful monitoring services and/or monitoring services in violation of the Contract; (C) $300.00 paid to Zeplin for improper installation of the PA Fabric Sprinkler Monitoring System; Page 7 of 11 (D) $1,500.00 for time expended by Franklyn B. Levy (President) and Charles Platkin (General Manager) responding to Fritz and Zeplin and handling fallout from Zeplin's breach of the Contract; and (E) $2,000.00 for legal advice and consultation furnished by New York law firm, Wuersch & Gering LLP in the preparation of this Answer and New Matter and general litigation consultation. WHEREFORE, PA Fabric requests damages for Negligence from Zeplin in the amount of $1,470.00 for Negligence plus $3,500 in costs and expenses incurred by PA Fabric in having to defend against Zeplin's lawsuit and for having to bring this Negligence claim. PA Fabric also requests the costs and expenses in this appeal. THIRD COUNT- UNJUST ENRICHMENT 41. Pa Fabric repeats the allegations in paragraphs 4-40 as if set forth in full. 42. Zeplin collected from PA Fabric fees to install and monitor the security control panel and sprinkler supervisory system for water flow and air pressure monitoring. 43. Zeplin collected from PA Fabric monitoring and other fees under the Contract, but failed to deliver the contracted-for service or delivered them negligently. 44. Zeplin became unjustly enriched at the expense of PA Fabric by collecting from PA Fabric fees for installation and monitoring, which installation was improper and monitoring services were either not provided or provided negligently, causing PA Fabric to incur substantial expenses and costs. 45. Zeplin became unjustly enriched at the expense of PA Fabric, as follows: Page 8 of I 1 (A) $600.00 for service call to repair air compressor fuse and drain system and reset system; (B) $570.00 paid to Zeplin for 24 months of improperly monitoring the PA Fabric sprinkler system and actually providing no useful monitoring services and/or monitoring services in violation of the Contract; (C) $300.00 paid to Zeplin for improper installation of the PA Fabric Sprinkler Monitoring System; (D) $1,500.00 for time expended by Franklyn B. Levy (President) and Charles Platkin (General Manager) responding to Fritz and Zeplin and handling fallout from Zeplin's breach of the Contract; and (E) $2,000.00 for legal advice and consultation furnished by New York law firm, Wuersch & Gering LLP in the preparation of this Answer and New Matter and general litigation consultation. WHEREFORE, PA Fabric requests damages for Unjust Enrichment from Zeplin in the amount of $1,470.00, plus $3,500 in costs and expenses incurred by PA Fabric in having to defend against Zeplin's lawsuit and for having to bring this Unjust Enrichment claim PA Fabric also requests the costs and expenses in this appeal. Respectfully Submitted, PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC. By: 1=yn . Levy, President Page 9 of 11 EXHIBIT A - FIRELOCK VALVE To: Mancke, Wagner & Spreha (by mail) 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Zeplin's Security Group, Inc. (by mail) 2026 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Page 10 of 11 VERIFICATION I verify and affirm that the statements made in this pleading are true and accurate to the best of my recollection and are based upon the facts of the subject matter of this action. I am aware that false statements are punishable under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904. Dated: Lemoyne, Pennsylvania February 24, 2005 Page 11 of 11 ?, ?, ="- 4ri. ZEPLIN'S SECURITY GROUP, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PL?AS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO.: 05-303 CIVIL TERM PA FABRIC OUTLET, INC. CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant ANSWER TO NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff and files the following Answer to Ne?jMatter and Counterclaim of the Pennsylvania Fabric Outlet, Inc. as follows: 4. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is denied that the contract &ovided for Zeplin to install a sprinkler supervisory system. 5. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that $54.00 p4k month for a period of five years was due and owing, however, it is denied that the $54.0§ per month was for the monitoring fee, sprinkler report and open and closed report as 6. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin was required under the contract1to monitor pressure switches on the Firelock Dry Valve. 7. Denied. It is denied that any obligation of Zeplin had to do witli fair flow switches. 8. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin agreed to monitor the pressure swi?ches on the Firelock Dry Valve. 9. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin was obligated to perform wiringlbn or about the pressure switches to the alarm control panel. 11). Denied. Plaintiff is without knowledge to form an answer to th# averment and therefore the same is denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of 11. Admitted. 1:2. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin was aware of the performance a4d operation specifications concerning any air pressure or air system. 13. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew or was aware that the sprinRler valve is the main component of the system. 14. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew or was aware of the air pr4ksure in the system is monitored by one switch and it is further denied Zeplin was require4lby contract to monitor the air pressure in the system. 15. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew or was aware that the wate?jflow in the system is monitored by two pressure switches. 16. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew and was aware that at a low pressure point, the air pressure switch sends a signal to the security alarm idpicating air pressure falling. 17. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew anything about any decre4ke in air pressure or water flow occurring in the system. 2 18. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin knew water flow in the system caused by a loss of air pressure. 19. Admitted. 20 21 system. 22 Denied. It is denied that Zeplin had an obligation to monitor the pressure. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin dispatched a service technician 0 reset the Denied. It is denied that a Zeplin service technician made any as set forth in Paragraph 22 and it is further denied that a technician to the terminal and made any representation concerning the system properly a result of any alleged reconnection. 23. It is admitted that an invoice was received, however, it is invoice related to the alleged service call contained in Paragraph 22 above. 24. Admitted. 25. Denied. It is denied that any representative of Zeplin problem was related to Zeplin or that the bill could be disregarded. 26. Denied. This is a conclusion which requires no response, response is required, Zeplin denies that they had any obligation concerning as set forth in Paragraph 26. switches as the that the ,if a 3 FIRST COUNT - BREACH OF CONTRACT 27. No answer is required. 28. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin breached a contract by a wiring and service control panel. 29. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin breached the contract by monitoring and fees under the contract and failing to deliver service. 30. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breached the contract by failing to and/or monitor, or properly wire or monitor the switches on the Firelock Dry failing to properly wire and install the Firelock Dry Valve. installing wire and by 31. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breached the contract by installing * wiring the Firelock Dry Valve in a manner that prevented it from properly sending a 32. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breached the contract by failing to PA Fabric as it was obligated to under the contract. 33. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breach the contract by failing to contract: for monitoring service causing the system to be flooded. It is PA Fabric incurred any expenses for service calls for the $570.00 paid to for improper installation; $1,500.00 for time expended by the President; or legal advice and consultation. mely notify ide the denied that in; $300.00 :,000.00 for 4 WHEREFORE, Zeplin requests the Court to dismiss the Defendant's breach of contract. SECOND COUNT - NEGLIGENCE 34. No answer required. 35. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin had a duty to perform its contract as it related to any air pressure monitoring. 36. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breached its duty to PA Fabric by but negligently or not delivering services or negligently failing to provide monitoring fees. for a under the fees timely 37. Denied. It is denied Zeplin breached his duty by failing to monit4 or properly monitor the switches on the Firelock Dry Valve. It is further denied it failed to troperly wire and install the valve. 38. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin breached its duty to PA Fabricj?by installing or wiring the Dry Valve in a manner that prevented it from properly sending 11signal to the security alarm box. 39. Denied. It is denied Zeplin failed to discharge its duty by of a loss of air pressure in the system causing it to flood. 40. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin breached its duty by failing PA Fabric to 5 take action which caused or resulted in expenses it being expressly denied that toe expenses contained in Paragraph 40 (a)(b)(c)(d) or (e) was caused by Zeplin. WHEREFORE, Zeplin requests the Court to dismiss the claim of the D#endant for negligence. THIRD COUNT - UNJUST ENRICHMENT 41. No answer required. 42. Admitted. 43. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin failed to deliver contracted-for Prv ice or negligently delivered service. 44. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin became unjustly rich by collecting fees. 45. Denied. It is denied that Zeplin became unjustly enriched at t* expense of PA Fabric and it is further denied that any unjust enrichment occurred a# a result of Paragraphs (a)(b)(c)(d) or (e) in the Unjust Enrichment Count. It being expres+ denied that Zeplin was unjustly enriched. WHEREFORE, Zeplin requests the Court to dismiss the Claim for unju# enrichment. submitted: P. Rigii4 agner, Esquire ID #23103 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 6 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foreg ing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 1? Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: h+ =gr r. fV r-: -n Vic` '': rn w -< Curtis R. Long Prothonotary Office of the Protbonotarp Cumberlanb Countp Renee K. Simpson Deputy Prothonotary John E. Slike Solicitor S - Q3 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES AND NOW THIS 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2008 AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PROCEED AND RECEIVING NO RESPONSE - THE ABOVE CASE IS HEREBY TERMINATED WITH PREJUDICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA R C P 230.2 BY THE COURT, CURTIS R. LONG PROTHONOTARY One Courthouse Square • Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 • (717) 240-6195 • Fax (717) 240-6573