Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-0210 Supreme Co nnsylvania Cour o&COMMO leas For Prothonotary Use Only: C�vi�Ce'Sh _ et rlrf ,� Docket No: Cu , erI' nd County The information collected on this form is used solely for court administration pzuy)oses. This form does not supplement or replace the filing and service ofpleadings or other papers as required by law or rules of court. Commencement of Action: S x Complaint 0 Writ of Summons — Petition Transfer from Another Jurisdiction =1 Declaration of Taking :E C Lead Plaintiff's Name: Lead Defendant's Name: T Nicholas Knopick Dennis H. Boyle I Are money damages requested? xa Yes 1u No Dollar Amount Requested: — ithin arbitration limits g 9 (check one) ©outside arbitration limits p s N Is this a Class Action Suit? Yes iX, No Is this an MDJAppeal? Yes ;X, No 1 A Name of Plaintiff /Appellant's Attorney: Julie B. Negovan El Cheeli here if you have no attorney (are a Self- Represented {Pro Sel Litigant) Nature of the Case Place an "X" to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately describes your PRIMARY CASE. If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that you consider most important. TORT (do not include Mass Tort) CONTRACT (do not include Judgments) CIVIL APPEALS 0 Intentional E' Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies 0 Malicious Prosecution 0 Debt Collection: Credit Card 0 Board of Assessment j Motor Vehicle 0 Debt Collection: Other .Board of Elections Q Nuisance Dept. of Transportation Premises Liability Statutory Appeal: Other I S 0 Product Liability (does not include mass tort) ©Employment Dispute: E 0 Slander /Libel/ Defamation Discrimination C 0 Other: Employment Dispute: Other E3Zoning Board t T Q Other: I i.=l Other: O MASS TORT { 0 Asbestos N E] Tobacco f l Fil Toxic Tort - DES CI Toxic Tort -Implant Toxic Waste REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS � 0 0 Other: 0 Ejectment a Common Law /Statutory Arbitration B ® Eminent Domain /Condemnation 0 Declaratory Judgment I Q Ground Rent r3 Mandamus 0 Landlord /Tenant Dispute J Non- Domestic Relations Mortgage Foreclosure: Residential Restraining Order f PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY 0 Mortgage Foreclosure: Commercial 0 Quo Warranto p' Dental _. Partition Replevin Legal 0 Quiet Title 0 Other: 0 Medical ® Other: Other Professional: Updated 1/1/2011 7Y IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF L'f X11- PRO HH c`� l� ia�"P CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA ?u f J NICHOLAS KNOPICK, C UMBERLA140 COUNTY Plaintiff NNS YLVANIA vs. NO. a I (V DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE LITIGATION ' Defendants NOTICE TO DEFEND 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 an 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 SHOULD 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 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 1- 800 - 990 -9108 717- 249 -3166 lJ� 2 g g 1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff, VS. NO. DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE LITIGATION Defendants COMPLAINT IN REPLEVIN AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, NICHOLAS KNOPICK, by and through his attorneys, Kutak Rock LLP, and files the following action in replevin against Defendant, Dennis H. Boyle: 1. Plaintiff Nicholas Knopick is has a residence at 151 Idle Road, Marysville, PA 17053. 2. Defendant, Dennis H. Boyle has his principal place of business at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 200, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 3. Defendant Boyle Litigation has its principal place of business at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 200, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 4. Defendants were hired by Plaintiff as his lawyers to investigate and pursue an action against UBS Swiss Financial Services AG, and /or other UBS affiliated entities and individuals (hereinafter "dispute with UBS "). Background -and General Description of the Property at Issue 5. During the course of Defendants' representation of Plaintiff in connection with his dispute with UBS, Defendants provided monthly billing statements describing their work on the matter. 6. Plaintiff received the last billing statement in December 2012. 2 7. After that time, Plaintiff began, personally and through his authorized representatives, to request return of the files, including all electronic data received, reviewed and created by Defendants during the course of the representation. 8. For example, but not exclusively, on or about July 1, 2013, Mr. Knopick sent an email to deboylega,dennisboylelaw.com requesting a copy of the files in the "UBS Swiss/UBS Baltimore/Knopfel matter." 9. As another example, but not exclusively, Jeff Lehman on behalf of Mr. Knopick, send an email to deboylenbo, l�gation.com with a copy to parogers@dennisboylelaw.com on October 7, 2013 again requesting the entirety of the file created, generated, received or reviewed by Defendants in connection with their work for Mr. Knopick. The October 7, 2013 email was sent in reply to Defendants' suggestion after Mr. Lehman's initial inquiry on October 4, 2013, that the entire file was already provided to Mr. Knopick. 10. As a final example, but not exclusively, Julie Negovan, Esq., of Kutak Rock, LLP, counsel in this matter, sent a letter to Dennis E. Boyle by registered mail, return receipt requested dated October 31, 2013 referencing the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct and lawyer's obligation to his client. 11. Defendants have provided only very few documents, such as documents purporting to be Plaintiff's UBS account statements. 12. Defendants have not provided all of Plaintiff's files, electronic data and documents because, as of December 2012, Defendants were continuing to bill Plaintiff for work reviewing and generating information, which information Plaintiff has not received. 3 Defendant's Wrongful Detention of the Property at Issue 13. All of the personal property enumerated herein was intended for Plaintiffs personal use, was acquired or created for his personal use, and was subject to his physical possession and subject to his direction and control. 14. As of December 2012, when Defendants' representation was terminated, Defendants had no right to retain or refuse to provide all of Plaintiff s documents, electronic data and information relating to the representation. 15. It has been at Defendants' direction that these items were not returned to Plaintiff, despite Plaintiffs requests for the same. 16. Plaintiff has made demand for the return of these items of personal property both verbally and as set forth in above but Defendant has refused to comply with his demands. 17. Defendants' wrongful detention of the property enumerated herein has prevented Plaintiff from using, enjoying and having access to the same, all to his damage and injury. The Specific Property as Issue 18. Defendants have and continue to unlawfully hold in their possession Plaintiffs legal files relating to his dispute with UBS, including but not limited to documents, electronic data and information received, reviewed, generated or created by Defendants for Plaintiffs benefit or obtained by Defendants from others for Plaintiffs benefit. The last known location for these items was Defendants' office. 19. Plaintiff reserves the right to request that additional personal property of the Plaintiff be replevied as information concerning further additional personal property of the Plaintiff becomes available through pleadings, discovery and /or any other means. 4 Relief Sought 20. Due to the Defendants' oppressive acts, wrongful taking and willful violations of Plaintiffs rights to his personal property, and Defendants' continued refusal to provide the Plaintiff with his property, the Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages. 21. By reason of the Defendants' willful and unlawful detention of the Plaintiffs personal property, Plaintiff claims the following damages or other relief: a. That an accurate accounting of all of the property listed in the Complaint in Replevin take place immediately; b. The immediate return of all the Plaintiffs property listed in this Complaint in Replevin; C. All costs and fees associated with the recovery of this property; d. All attorneys' costs and fees associated with this litigation; e. Punitive damages; f. Special damages as provided for in Pa. R. Civ. P. 1085; and g. Any other relief, which this Court deems appropriate. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in replevin of the property in her favor and against the Defendants, for all of the above - recited items, and all other relief, which this Court deems appropriate in the circumstances. DATED this January 3, 2014 — 7:77777� lakoRock B Ne ovan rn y I.D. No. 81231 LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16 Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102 -2519 (215) 299 -4384 Attorneys for Nicholas Knopick 5 VERIFICATION I, Nicholas Knopick, verify that the statements made in this Complaint are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S., Subsection 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: /-Z- 3 / - 13 /Nicholas Knopick 4841- 7230 - 3639.1 SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COU,.NTY..., Ronny R Anderson r �T 1 b Sheriff ,`) }H ������:���r'�i"�,il l Jody S Smith 2014 JAN 27 PM 2: 11,6 Chief Deputy r Richard W Stewart � -` CUMBERL Pd 0 Solicitor 0MCEOFTH HERIFr pENt�S1'�VANIA. Nicholas Knopick Case Number vs. Dennis E. Boyle (et al.) 2014-210 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 01/17/2014 01:35 AM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint& Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Kara Horzath, Law Associate, who accepted as"Adult Person in Charge"for Dennis E. Boyle at Boyle Autry&Murphy, 4660 E. Trindle Road, Suite 200, Hampden Township, Camp Hill, PA 17011. I fLIAM CLINE, DEPUTY 01/17/2014 01:50 PM- Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint& Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Kara Horzath, Law Associate, who accepted as"Adult Person in Charge"for Boyle Litigation at 4660 E. Trindle Road, Suite 200, Hampden Township, Camp Hill, PA 17011. tv&CAMCLINE, DEPUTY SHERIFF COST: $60.95 SO ANSWERS, January 22, 2014 RONNY R ANDERSON, SHERIFF c)CountySuito Sheriti,7cleosoft,'nc. icr tf rtil-,tJ lii 1 IF f F� Pi\ 01iU r ZO I w FEP _6 Pty 2: BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire L '�f� F' �-�' � Cfl;}, Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 PENNSYLVANIA 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel For: Defendants Phone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14-210 CIVIL DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants DEFENDANTS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW comes the Defendants,Dennis Boyle and Boyle Litigation,and respectfully files the within Preliminary Objections pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 102.8, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On various occasions over the past several years, the Plaintiff, Nicholas Knopick, has retained Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, to represent him in a variety of matters. 2. One ofthese matters involved an investigation into a matter with UBS stemming from the losses the Plaintiff incurred in the stock market. 3. The investigation into UBS substantially terminated in 2010,although at several times after that date, Plaintiff requested Dennis E. Boyle,Esquire,review various matters and reconsider his decision not to pursue legal action. 4. As of December 2012, the Plaintiff terminated Mr. Boyle's representation on all matters and requested the return and transfer of all files. In fact, Mr. Knopick had already received copies of all documents contained in Boyle Litigation files for all of his cases. 5. With specific reference to the UBS file, all original documents and copies of all documents contained in the file were returned to the Plaintiff. These documents amounted to approximately 1,937 pages. 6. Boyle Litigation does not have any original documents in its possession and has only copies of documents already provided to Mr. Knopick. • FAILURE OF COMPLAINT TO CONFORM TO RULES PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) 7. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1073.1, a Complaint in Replevin "shall"contain a description and valuation of the property sought. 8. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to identify any specific documents which it seeks. 9. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to specify the valuation of the property sought. WHEREFORE,Defendants,Dennis E.Boyle and Boyle Litigation,respectfully request that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed, or, in the alternative, the Plaintiff be directed to file an amended Complaint. 2 DEMURRER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) 10. The information sought by Plaintiff's Complaint is not"property"within the meaning of Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1073 et seq. 11. It appears that Plaintiff seeks recovery of"data"and"information", Complaint¶18, which by its very nature, may not have a physical form. 12. Since "information" is not"property", it may not be secured pursuant to Replevin. WHEREFORE,Defendants,Dennis E.Boyle and Boyle Litigation,respectfully request the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Boy e, Esquire Supreme Court . . No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants Dated: February 4, 2014 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date written below, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections was served by United States First Class Mail,postage pre-paid,upon those person(s) listed below: Julie B. Negovan, Esquire Kutak Rock, LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 -7/ Penny A. Rogers, Pa.C.P. 'r Senior Paralegal Dated: February 6, 2014 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff, C) vs. NO. 14-210 Civil rrr3 t t rt a „ DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE E '. LITIGATION '� �', Defendants t< • - NOTICE OF MOTION FOR WRIT OF SEIZURE PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 7th day of February, 2014, Plaintiff, NICHOLAS KNOPICK, by and through his attorneys, Kutak Rock LLP, will move this Court pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1071 et seq. for an Order for a Writ of Seizure. DATED this February 7, 2014 J ie . egovan P . Attorney I.D. No. 81231 Kutak Rock LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 (215) 299-4384 Attorney for Nicholas Knopick 4d8.5o PbA1'►1 Loa8535' 301(050 4833-0878-7223.1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff, vs. NO. 14-210 Civil rn -n r-rt m FT r- - DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE _< c� LITIGATION r— Defendants <,. v - r• ; MOTION FOR WRIT OF SEIZURE AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, NICHOLAS KNOPICK, by and through his attorneys, Kutak Rock LLP, and pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1071 et seq. and moves this Court for an Order for a Writ of Seizure and avers as follows: 1. Plaintiff Nicholas Knopick has a residence at 151 Idle Road, Marysville, PA 17053. 2. Defendant, Dennis H. Boyle has his principal place of business at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 200, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 3. Defendant Boyle Litigation has its principal place of business at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 200, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 4. Defendants were retained and engaged by Plaintiff as his lawyers to investigate and pursue an action against UBS Swiss Financial Services AG, or other associated UBS entities and individuals (hereinafter"dispute with UBS"). Background and General Description of the Property at Issue 5. During the course of Defendants' representation of Plaintiff in connection with his dispute with UBS, Defendants provided monthly billing statements describing their work on the matter. 4820-3070-4151.1 6. Plaintiff received the last billing statement in December 2012. 7. After that time, Plaintiff began, personally and through his authorized representatives, to request return of the files, including all electronic data received, reviewed and created by Defendants during the course of the representation. 8. For example, but not exclusively, on or about July 1, 2013, Mr. Knopick sent an email to deboyle @dennisboylelaw.com requesting a copy of the files in the "UBS Swiss/UBS Baltimore/Knopfel matter." 9. As another example, but not exclusively, Jeff Lehman on behalf of Mr. Knopick, send an email to deboyle @boylelitigation.com, with a copy to parogers @dennisboylelaw.com on October 7, 2013 again requesting the entirety of the file created, generated, received or reviewed by Defendants in connection with their work for Mr. Knopick. The October 7, 2013 email was sent in reply to Defendants' suggestion after Mr. Lehman's initial inquiry on October 4, 2013, that the entire file was already provided to Mr. Knopick. 10. As a final example, but not exclusively, Julie Negovan, Esq., of Kutak Rock, LLP, counsel in this matter, sent a letter to Dennis E. Boyle by registered mail, return receipt requested dated October 31, 2013 referencing the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct and lawyer's obligation to his client. 11. Defendants have provided only very few documents, such as documents purporting to be Plaintiff's UBS account statements. 12. Defendants have not provided all of Plaintiff's files, electronic data and documents because, as of December 2012, Defendants were continuing to bill Plaintiff for work reviewing and generating information, which information Plaintiff has not received. 4820-3070-4151.1 Defendants' Wrongful Detention of the Property at Issue 13. All of the personal property enumerated herein was intended for Plaintiffs personal use, was acquired or created for his personal use, and was subject to his physical possession and subject to his direction and control. 14. As of December 2012, when Defendants' representation was terminated, Defendants had no right to retain or refuse to provide all of Plaintiff's documents, electronic data and information relating to the representation. a 15. It has been at Defendants' direction that these items were not returned to Plaintiff, despite Plaintiffs requests for the same. 16. Plaintiff has made demand for the return of these items of personal property both verbally and in writing, but Defendants have refused to comply with his demands. 17. Defendants' wrongful detention of the property enumerated herein has prevented Plaintiff from using, enjoying and having access to the same, all to his damage and injury. The Specific Property as Issue 18. Defendants have and continue to unlawfully hold in their possession Plaintiff's legal files relating to his dispute with UBS, including but not limited to documents, electronic data and information. The last known location for these items was Defendants' office. 19. Plaintiff reserves the right to request that additional personal property of the Plaintiff be replevied as information concerning further additional personal property of the Plaintiff becomes available through pleadings, discovery and/or any other means 20. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Complaint filed in this matter. All of the facts averred herein were verified in the Complaint. 21. No judge has ruled upon any other issue in this or any related matter. No attempt to conference with Defendants regarding this motion has been made. 4820-3070-4151.1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter the attached proposed Order for issuance of a Writ of Seizure to the Defendants, for all of the above-recited items, and all other relief, which this Court deems appropriate in the circumstances. DATED this February 7, 2014 rO J - :. Nei ovan '. Attorney I.D. No. 81231 utak Rock LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16t" Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 (215) 299-4384 Attorney for Nicholas Knopick 4820-3070-4151.1 f tR tr THE PRO TH.L'„it ' 231 ft FEB 18 PM 2: 29 BOYLE LITIGATIONlBEL # Di Dennis E. Boyle,Esquire PENNSYLVANIA Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel For: Defendants Phone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle(aboylelitigation.com NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14-210 CIVIL DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE • LITIGATION, Defendants DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR WRIT OF SEIZURE, PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SEIZURE, NOTICE OF MOTION FOR WRIT SEIZURE, WRIT OF SEIZURE, PROPOSED ORDER FOR ENTRY AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF SEIZURE AND NOW comes the Defendants,Dennis Boyle and Boyle Litigation,and respectfully files the within Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure,Praecipe for Writ of Seizure,Writ of Seizure,Notice of Motion for Writ of Seizure,proposed Order for Entry and proposed Order for Issuance of Writ of Seizure, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On January 8,2014,the Plaintiff,Nicholas Knopick,filed a Complaint in Replevin. 2. On February 6, 2014, Defendants filed Preliminary Objections to the Complaint, a copy of which is appended hereto as Exhibit"A". 3. On or about February 12, 2014, Defendants received Plaintiffs Praecipe for Writ of Seizure and other documents requesting the Sheriff break into Defendants office, peruse various client files and seize the files related to Mr. Knopick. 4. All files in Defendants' possession have been turned over to Mr. Knopick. 5. Permitting the Sheriff to enter Defendant's law office and conduct searches of all electronic and other files for documents related to Mr.Knopick would violate the Fourth,Fifth,Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the attorney-client and attorney- work product privileges. 6. The Praecipe for Writ of Seizure and the Motion for Writ of Seizure fails to comply with Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedures 1075.1, 1075.2, 1075.3 and other Rules of Civil Procedure. 7. An ex parte Writ would not be authorized in this case. Specifically,there have been no allegations that the property in question would be"adversely affected"by Defendants possession pending a hearing, or that the property would be "concealed, disposed, encumbered, wasted" etc., nor would any such allegations be made in good faith. 8. Pa.Rule of Civil Procedure 1075.1 specifically requires a hearing before a Writ could be issues. 2 • WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure, Praecipe for Writ of Seizure,Writ of Seizure,Notice of Motion for Writ of Seizure,proposed Order for Entry and proposed Order for Issuance of Writ of Seizure be stricken. BOYLE LITIGATION 4—** Dennis E. Bo ,Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle @boylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants Dated: February 4, 2014 3 EXHIBIT "A" • 20(4 FEB -6 F1i 2: 4 b BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E.Boyle,Esquire CUMBERLAND COUNTY Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 PENNSYLVANIA 4660 Trindle Road,Suite 102 Camp Hill,PA 17011 Counsel For: Defendants Phone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle(a�boylelitigation.com • NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14-210 CIVIL DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants DEFENDANTS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW comes the Defendants,Dennis Boyle and Boyle Litigation,and respectfully files the within Preliminary Objections pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 102.8, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. On various occasions over the past several years, the Plaintiff, Nicholas Knopick, • has retained Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, to represent him in a variety of matters. 2. One of these matters involved an investigation into a matter with UBS stemming from the losses the Plaintiff incurred in the stock market. 3. The investigation into UBS substantially terminated in 2010,although at several times after that date,Plaintiff requested Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire,review various matters and reconsider his decision not to pursue legal action. 4. As of December 2012, the Plaintiff terminated Mr. Boyle's representation on all matters and requested the return and transfer of all files. In fact, Mr. Knopick had already received copies of all documents contained in Boyle Litigation files for all of his cases. 5. With specific reference to the UBS file, all original documents and copies of all documents contained in the file were returned to the Plaintiff. These documents amounted to approximately 1,937 pages. 6. Boyle Litigation does not have any original documents in its possession and has only copies of documents already provided to Mr. Knopick. FAILURE OF COMPLAINT TO CONFORM TO RULES PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) 7. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1073.1, a Complaint in Replevin. "shall"contain a description and valuation of the property sought. 8. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to identify any specific documents which it seeks. 9. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to specify the valuation of the property sought. WHEREFORE,Defendants,Dennis E.Boyle and Boyle Litigation,respectfully request that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed, or, in the alternative, the Plaintiff be directed to file an amended Complaint. DEMURRER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) 10. The information sought by Plaintiff's Complaint is not"property"within the meaning of Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1073 et seq. 11. It appears that Plaintiff seeks recovery of"data"and"information",Complaint 1[18, which by its very nature, may not have a physical form. 12. Since"information" is not"property", it may not be secured pursuant to Replevin. WHEREFORE,Defendants,Dennis E.Boyle and Boyle Litigation,respectfully request the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Bo e, Esquire Supreme Court . . No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com boylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants Dated: February 4, 2014 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date written below, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections was served by United States First Class Mail,postage pre-paid,upon those person(s) listed below: Julie B. Negovan, Esquire Kutak Rock, LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 --7 /7 Penny A. Rogers, Pa C'.P. Senior Paralegal Dated: February 6, 2014 NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14-210 CIVIL • DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants ORDER AND NOW this day of ,2014,upon consideration of the Defendants Preliminary Objections, the Preliminary Objections are hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. BY THE COURT: J. • • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date written below, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Strike was served by United States First Class Mail, postage pre-paid, upon those person(s) listed below: Julie B. Negovan, Esquire Kutak Rock, LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 /1-' ' Penny A. Rogers, Pa.C.P. Senior Paralegal Dated: February 18, 2014 J NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA..., V. q'.�.y. :1 „PI Errtb'1 „PI DENNIS BOYLE AND BOYLE • fir- ry LITIGATION • _ DEFENDANTS : NO. 14-210 CIVIL __^ i ORDER OF COURT r tip; AND NOW, 20th day of February, 2014, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that: 1. A Rule shall issue upon Defendants to show cause why the relief requested by the Plaintiff should not be granted. 2. Defendants shall file an Answer to the Motion for Writ of Seizure on or before March 7, 2014. 3. A hearing on the matter will be held on Thursday, April 17, 2014, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 2 of the Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The Defendants are directed to bring all of their legal files pertaining to the Plaintiff's dispute with UBS Swiss Financial Services AG and related UBS entities with them to the hearing. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND DIRECTED that pending the hearing, the Defendants shall not transfer, alienate, or destroy any of the legal files pertaining to Plaintiff's dispute with UBS Swiss Financial Services AG and related UBS entities, 1 including all documents and electronic data received, reviewed, and created by Defendants during the course of their representation of the Plaintiff in this dispute. By the Court, \\KK t M. L. Ebert, Jr., J. Julie Negovan, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff -nis Boyle Boyle Litigation Defendants 4660 Trindle Road Suite 200 Camp Hill, PA 17011 bas 0.-CT 6 Qs fV2 t tc cL afao/ fY NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • V. • DENNIS BOYLE AND BOYLE • LITIGATION DEFENDANTS : NO. 14-210 CIVIL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, 21St day of February, 2014, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure and the Court having already set a hearing in the matter for April 17, 2014, at 9:00 a.m., IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that Defendants Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure will be considered at the hearing scheduled for April 17, 2014. Again, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND DIRECTED that pending the hearing, the Defendants shall not transfer, alienate, or destroy any of the legal files pertaining to Plaintiff's dispute with UBS Swiss Financial Services AG and related UBS entities, including all documents and electronic data received, reviewed, and created by Defendants during the course of their representation of the Plaintiff in this dispute. By the Court, ► AA_ A M. L. bert, Jr., J. ulie Negovan, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff `a- r1 ern rri x33 co --r 3> c°D�... ter" ., ;...1: ennis Boyle Boyle Litigation Defendants 4660 Trindle Road Suite 200 Camp Hill, PA 17011 bas 1CS Mai L 02 7x1/N KUTAK ROCK LLP Notice to Plead: Take notice that Julie Negovan, Esq. (No. 81231) you have 20 days from the date Two Liberty Place, Suite 28B o ervice of this pleading 50 S. Sixteenth Street to r;spond. Philadelphia, PA 19102 215-586-4586 Julie.Negovan @kutakrock.com •tto eys for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KNOPICK, I. Plaintiff, r-1 (— I) ., j;Y vs. NO. 14-210 CIVIL DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE ";~ LITIGATION -- Defendants PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, NICHOLAS KNOPICK, by and through his attorneys, Kutak Rock LLP, and files the following Preliminary Objections to Defendant's Preliminary Objections pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1026 and 1028, and in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. Plaintiff Nicholas Knopick filed his Complaint in Replevin on or about January 6, 2014 to obtain his legal files from Defendants relating to their representation of him in connection with disputes with various UBS entities. 2. On February 6, 2014, Defendant filed Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint. 3. Defendant's Preliminary Objections contained additional facts, not set forth in the Complaint and contained no Notice to Plead pursuant to Rule 1026. 1 4823-0884-9432.1 4. Defendant's Preliminary Objections contained no verification of the additional facts set forth therein as required by Rule 1024. 5. Plaintiff's Complaint describes the property to the best of his knowledge as Defendants have had sole and exclusive possession of the property. As set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint, Plaintiff seeks the legal files relating to his dispute with UBS, including but not limited to documents, electronic data and information received, reviewed, generated or created by Defendants for Plaintiff's benefit or obtained by Defendants from others for Plaintiff's benefit. 6. The property has no monetary value, its intrinsic value is to Plaintiff in the pursuit of his legal claims. 7. The property Plaintiff seeks is in physical form or can be converted to physical form by Defendants. To the extent Defendants received, reviewed, created or generated any documents, including electronic documents, relating to Plaintiff's legal representation, they can and have represented to Plaintiff that they did copy them to either paper form or digital form (CD or thumb drive). FAILURE OF PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO CONFORM TO RULES PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(2) 8. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth herein at length. 9. Defendant's Preliminary Objections contain no notice to plead as required by Rule 1026. 10. Defendant's Preliminary Objections contain no verification as required by Rule 1024. 2 4823-0884-9432.1 WHEREORE, Plaintiff requests an Order in his favor and against Defendants dismissing Defendants' Preliminary Objections and requiring Defendants to Answer the Complaint within 20 days. DEMURRER TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY OF PLEADING PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(5) 11. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth at length herein. 12. Defendants' Preliminary Objections allege a failure of the Complaint to confirm to the rules because allegedly, the Complaint fails to identify any specific documents and the Complaint fails to specify the value of the property sought. 13. The Complaint does identify the documents sought—those documents received, reviewed, created and generated by Defendants in connection with their representation of Plaintiff in his disputes with the UBS entities. Complaint, ¶ 10. 14. The value of the property is not objectively ascertainable, and until Plaintiff obtains the documents, the value cannot even be estimated. 15. Defendants' Preliminary Objections allege a failure of the Complaint to state a cause of action because "data" and "information" are not "property" and may not be secured by Replevin. 16. Plaintiff's Complaint seeks possession of the physical manifestation of the data and information Defendants' reviewed, received, created and generated in connection with their representation of Plaintiff in his disputes with the UBS entities. The physical manifestation of the data and information exists or can be generated by Defendants simply by providing copies of documents or a digital copy of the information in the form of a CD or thumb drive. Defendants admit such physical manifestation exists, stating in Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the unverified 3 4823-0884-9432.1 Preliminary Objections, "Mr. Knopick had already received copies of documents contained in Boyle Litigation files f o r all of his cases . . . These documents amounted to approximately 1,937 pages." 17. Counsel for Plaintiff has counted the number of pages received from Defendants, which are limited to account statements for Mr. Knopick UBS Swiss Financial Advisors accounts and they total 1,152 pages. Thus, by Defendants' own admission, there are 785 missing pages. Further, Defendants' invoices refer to drafts of pleadings and research and communications with others, which Defendants must be compelled to provide pursuant to the Complaint in Replevin. 18. Finally, it should be noted that Defendants' in their Preliminary Objections gratuitously disclose alleged communications with Mr. Knopick, which, if they actually occurred, would be privileged: "Plaintiff requested Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, review various matters and reconsider his decision not to pursue legal action." Defendants' Preliminary Objections, If 3. Since Plaintiff's only claim was in replevin, Defendants have no justification for divulging any privileged communications and must be admonished to adhere to their professional responsibilities. 19. Since Plaintiff's Complaint meets all legal requirements and states a cognizable claim for Replevin, Defendants' Preliminary Objections should be dismissed with prejudice and Defendant be ordered to Answer the Complaint within 20 days. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests an Order in his favor and against Defendants dismissing Defendants' Preliminary Objections with prejudice and requiring Defendants to Answer the Complaint within 20 days. 4 4823-0884-9432.1 DATED this February 26, 2014 Jul'e : Ne;.ovan Pa. •tto e I.D. No. 81231 Kuta ock LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 (215) 299-4384 Attorneys for Plaintiff Nicholas Knopick 5 4823-0884-9432.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Julie B. Negovan, Esq., hereby certify that on February 26, 2014, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections to Defendant's Preliminary Objections via U.S. Mail, and upon: Dennis Boyle Boyle Litigation 4660 Trindle Road Suite 200 Camp Hill, PA 17011 B. egovan, Esq. BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 737 -2430 Facsimile: (717) 737 -2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com OF THE PRO 1 HOHU It'':i 211 ii HMM 13 PM 3: 15 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA Counsel For: Defendants NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff v. DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 14 -210 CIVIL DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR WRIT OF SEIZURE AND NOW comes the Defendants, Dennis Boyle and Boyle Litigation, by and through their counsel, Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, and respectfully submits the following answer to the Plaintiffs Motion for Writ of Seizure and avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Denied. Defendant's correct name is Dennis E. Boyle, and has a principal place of business located at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 3. Denied. Defendant, Boyle Litigation, has its principal place of business located at 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. The last billing statement that the Plaintiff received regarding the UBS matter was dated October 8, 2012. 7. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted that the Plaintiff requested a copy of his file. It is denied that the Plaintiff specifically requested all electronic data received, reviewed and created by the Defendants. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. Denied. Defendant has no recollection or record of receiving any such correspondence from Julie Negovan, Esquire. 11. Denied. The Defendants provided the Plaintiff with approximately 1,937 pages of documents, which were the original statements received from UBS. Defendants also provided drafts of various correspondence, as well as a rough draft of the Complaint that Defendants had prepared. 12. Denied. The Defendants have provided Plaintiff with all original documents contained in his file. It is also specifically denied that the Plaintiff was continuing to be billed for any work regarding the UBS matter as of December 2012. The final statement for work performed by the Defendants was dated October 8, 2012, with the last fee entry being September 19, 2012. 13. Denied. The Plaintiff has been provided with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 14. Denied. Defendants specifically deny that at any time they "refused" to provide the Plaintiff with a copy of his file as requested. Defendants have, in fact, provided the Plaintiff with 2 copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 15. Denied. ' Defendants specifically deny that at any time was direction given not to provide Plaintiff with a copy of his file. Defendants have, in fact, provided the Plaintiff with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 16. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted that the Plaintiff has made a request for a copy of this file. It is specifically denied that at any time Defendants "refused" to provide the Plaintiff with a copy of his file as requested. Defendants have, in fact, provided the Plaintiff with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 17. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants have wrongfully retained any property belonging to the Plaintiff. Defendants have, in fact, provided the Plaintiff with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 18. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is admitted that the Plaintiffs file is located at the Defendants' office. It is denied that the Defendants have, hold or continue to hold any property belonging to the Plaintiff. Defendants have provided the Plaintiff with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 19. Denied. It is denied that the Defendants have wrongfully retained any personal property belonging to the Plaintiff. Defendants have provided the Plaintiff with copies of all correspondence and documents that Defendants have prepared. 20. Denied. It is unknown to the Defendants as to the identification of Exhibit A to Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure, as no Exhibit A was attached to the copy received by the Defendant. 21. Admitted. WHEREFORE, the Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court deny the Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure. Dated: March 12, 2014 BOYLE LITIGATION 2.. Dennis E. Boy gr squire Supreme Court No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 737 -2430 Facsimile: (717) 737 -2452 Email: deboyle @boylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date written below, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer to Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure was served by United States First Class Mail, postage pre -paid, upon those person(s) listed below: Julie B. Negovan, Esquire Kutak Rock, LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102 -2519 Penny A. Rogers, Pa.C. Senior Paralegal Dated: March 12, 2014 BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com :'THE PROTHiJjj-. 2I11R 18 PH 1:23 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA Counsel For: Defendants NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff V. DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants TO: NICHOLAS KNOPICK o/o Julie B. Negovan, Esquire : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 14-210 CIVIL • • NOTICE TO PLEAD YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED to file a written response to the enclosed Amended Preliminary Objections within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. BoSTle, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 Counsel For: Defendants BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyleboylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14-210 CIVIL DENNIS BOYLE, and BOYLE LITIGATION, Defendants • DEFENDANTS AMENDED PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW comes the Defendants, Dennis Boyle and Boyle Litigation, and respectfully files the within Preliminary Objections pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 102.8, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1 On various occasions over the past several years, the Plaintiff, Nicholas Knopick, has retained Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, to represent him in a variety of matters. 2. One of these matters involved an investigation into a matter with UBS stemming from the losses the Plaintiff incurred in the stock market. 3. The investigation into UBS substantially terminated in 2010, although at several times after that date, Plaintiff requested Dennis E. Boyle, Esquire, review various matters and reconsider his decision not to pursue legal action. 4, As of December 2012, the Plaintiff terminated Mr. Boyle's representation on all matters and requested the return and transfer of all files. In fact, Mr. Knopick had already received copies of all documents contained in Boyle Litigation files for all of his cases. 5. With specific reference to the UBS file, all original documents and copies of all documents contained in the file were returned to the Plaintiff. These documents amounted to approximately 1,937 pages. 6. Boyle Litigation does not have any original documents in its possession and has only copies of documents already provided to Mr. Knopick. FAILURE OF COMPLAINT TO CONFORM TO RULES PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(21 7. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1073.1, a Complaint in Replevin "shall" contain a description and valuation of the property sought. 8. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to identify any specific documents which it seeks. 9. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to specify the valuation of the property sought. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Dennis E. Boyle and Boyle Litigation, respectfully request that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed, or, in the alternative, the Plaintiff be directed to file an amended Complaint. 2 DEMURRER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1028(a)(4) 10. The information sought by Plaintiffs Complaint is not "property" within the meaning of Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1073 et seq. 11. It appears that Plaintiff seeks recovery of "data" and "information", Complaint ¶18, which by its very nature, may not have a physical form. 12. Since "information" is not "property", it may not be secured pursuant to Replevin. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Dennis E. Boyle and Boyle Litigation, respectfully request the Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Dated: March 18, 2014 BOYLE LITIGATION Dennis E. Bye, e Supreme Court I.D. No. 49618 4660 Trindle Road, Suite 102 Camp Hill, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 737-2430 Facsimile: (717) 737-2452 Email: deboyle@boylelitigation.com Counsel For: Defendants 3 VERIFICATION I, DENNIS E. BOYLE, ESQUIRE, make the following statements subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authority, and do hereby state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Amended Preliminary Objections are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. Dennis E. Boyle, E Dated: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date written below, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections was served by United States First Class Mail, postage pre-paid, upon those person(s) listed below: Julie B. Negovan, Esquire Kutak Rock, LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16t1 Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 Penny A. Rogers, Pa C( Senior Paralegal Dated: March 18, 2014 KUTAK ROCK LLP Julie Negovan, Esq. (No. 81231) Two Liberty Place, Suite 28B 50 S. Sixteenth Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 215-586-4586 Julie.Negovan@kutakrock.com :THE FR0THOT -AR? 201ii APR -9 AM CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KNOPICK, Plaintiff, VS. DENNIS BOYLE, AND BOYLE LITIGATION Defendants NO. 14-210 CIVIL PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, NICHOLAS KNOPICK, by and through his attorneys, Kutak Rock LLP, and submits the following Answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objections and in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3 Denied. It is specifically denied that the investigation into UBS substantially terminated in 2010. To the contrary, until recently, Plaintiff understood Boyle continued to actively pursue and prosecute claims against UBS, and in fact, continued to bill for such services. 4. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff terminated Boyle's representation and requested return and transfer of all files. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff had already received copies of all documents contained in the Boyle Litigation files for all of his cases. To the contrary, in connection with the UBS matter, Plaintiff received approximately 1500 pages of what appear to be internally generated UBS account statements. No other file materials were provided, despite repeated requests and indications in Boyle's billing records that additional documents existed. 5. Denied. See response to Paragraph 4, which is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 6. Denied. See response to Paragrpah 4, which is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 7. Denied. The allegations of this pargraph are conclusions of law to which no response is required, and therefore, they are denied. 8. Denied. Plaintiff's Complaint describes the property to the best of his knowledge as Defendants have had sole and exclusive possession of the property. As set forth in Plaintiffs Complaint, Plaintiff seeks the legal files relating to his dispute with UBS, including but not limited to documents, electronic data and information received, reviewed, generated or created by Defendants for Plaintiff's benefit or obtained by Defendants from others for Plaintiff s benefit. 9. Denied. The property has no monetary value, its intrinsic value is to Plaintiff in the pursuit of his legal claims. 10. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are conclusions of law to which no response is required, and therefore, they are denied. To the extent the allegations ofthis paragraph are deemed to be factual in nature, they are specifically denied. To the contrary, the property Plaintiff seeks is in physical form or can be converted to physical form by Defendants. To the extent Defendants received, reviewed, created or generated any documents, including electronic documents, relating to Plaintiff's legal representation, they can and have represented to Plaintiff that they did copy them to either paper form or digital form (CD or thumb drive). Plaintiff's Complaint seeks possession of the physical manifestation of the data and information Defendants' reviewed, received, created and generated in connection with their representation of 2 Plaintiff in his disputes with the UBS entities. Defendants admit such physical manifestation exists, stating in Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Preliminary Objections, "Mr. Knopick had already received copies of documents contained in Boyle Litigation files for all of his cases ... These documents amounted to approximately 1,937 pages." Counsel for Plaintiff has counted the number of pages received from Defendants, which are limited to account statements for Mr. Knopick UBS Swiss Financial Advisors accounts and they total 1,152 pages. Thus, by Defendants' own admission, there are 785 missing pages. Further, Defendants' invoices refer to drafts of pleadings and research and communications with others, which Defendants must be compelled to provide pursuant to the Complaint in Replevin. 11. Denied. See response to Paragraph 10, which is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 12. Denied. See response to Paragraph 10, which is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREORE, Plaintiff requests an Order in his favor and against Defendants overruling Defendants' Preliminary Objections and requiring Defendants to Answer the Complaint within 20 days. DATED this April 7, 2014 3 egovan rney I.D. No. 81231 Rock LLP Two Liberty Place 50 S. 16th Street, Suite 28B Philadelphia, PA 19102 -2519 (215) 299 -4384 Attorneys for Plaintiff Nicholas Knopick CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Julie B. Negovan, Esq. hereby certify that on April 7, 2014, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objections via U.S. Mail upon: Dennis Boyle Boyle Litigation 4660 Trindle Road Suite 200 Camp Hill, PA 17011 NICHOLAS KNOPICK, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DENNIS BOYLE AND BOYLE LITIGATION DEFENDANTS : NO. 14-210 CIVIL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, 17th day of April, 2014, after argument in the above-captioned matter and the Defendants having provided the Court with what they maintain is the entire file related to this matter, that file will be provided to the Plaintiff to allow for review of the materials. If anything can be identified that the Plaintiff gave to Boyle Litigation that has not been returned, we will reschedule hearing in this case. ACCORDINGLY, the Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Seizure will be held in abeyance pending Plaintiff's review of the provided case file. By the Court, /Julie Negovan, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Suite 28B Two Liberty Place 50 South 16th Street Philadelphia, PA 19102-2519 J Dennis Boyle Boyle Litigation Defendants 4660 Trindle Road Suite 200 Camp Hill, PA 17011 mlc/bas