Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-0528 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No.05-528 CIVIL TERM 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, tx nrre?u+ni MH . ulSl. NU. NAME OF O.J. ua IE ut- Ju.MtnI IN THE CASE OF(Plarhfl) (DelendaM)' VS d - etw,787-D'f this block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 10068. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. before a District Justice, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED within twenty (20) days after filing the NOTICE of APPEAL. Synature o/Pratlrorotery or OaPtaY 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 /'I &e `v NOTICE OF APPEAL appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal Name of appallee(s) (Common Pleas No. 05-528 CIVIL ) within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. RULE: To 4L Name of appellees) Signature of appellant or attorney or agent appellee(s) (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 MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date: Jan 28 20 05 % +yt - - Signature thonotary or p /JJ YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL, AOPC 312-02 COURI 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 ; ss AFFIDAVIT: I hereby (swear) (affirm) that I served ? a copy of the Notice of Appeal, Common Pleas No. , upon the District Justice designated therein an (date of service) 20 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto, and upon the appellee, (name) , an , 20 ? by personal service ? by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto. (SWORN) (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 120 ?..._.?..?_?._..?.___._?._.. _ ?_.. .?.._ Srgnatwa of aftiant Signature of official bolore whom affidavit was made Title of onoral My commission expires on , 20 ('j rv rr Ll.! C- PV 0 _.,g . ?- - ct J rtt - t -C O %D ^< AOPC 312A - 02 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA nnI INITv nr• CUMBERLAND 'ITT 09-3-05 W Name: Hon. GAYLE,A. ELDER Address: 507 N YORK ST MECHANICSBURG, PA Teiaphone. (717) 766-4575 17055 DANIEL MESCALL DBA SHAMROCK MASONRY L J 166 OLD YORK ROAD Docket No.: CV- 0000287 - 04 DILLSBURG, PA 17019 Date Filed: 10/21/04 THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT: Judgment: - FOR, PT.ATNT3FF.__:. ® Judgment was entered for: (Name) SHARP., MARY LOU Judgment was entered against: :(Name) nANTRT. MF.R .AT.T. AA RHAMROCR MASONRY in the amount of $ , nA2 _5n on: (Date of Judgment) 1 /ns/ns Defendants are jointly and severally liable. Damages will be assessed on: El 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 $ NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRII PLAINTIFF: CIVIL CASE NAME and ADDRESS FSHARP, MARY LOU 119 RIDGE ROAD CARLISLE, PA 17013-9010 7 L J vs. DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS rDANIEL MESCALL D13A SHAMROCK MASONRY 166 OLD YORK ROAD DILLSBURG, PA 17019 (Date & Time) Amount of Judgment Judgment Costs Interest on Judgment Attorney Fees 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 JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT 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 , District Justice I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings containing the judgment. Date District Justice My commission expires first Monday of January, 2006. SEAL AOPC315-o3 DATE PRINTED: 1/04/05 12:26:12 PM 77) r'v r- 11?? tip yc?. ?a ra ss ji1ip VIM L? y T'?t (Y) ?S :w r COMMONWEALTH UI- YtNNb COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLEAS No.l)5-528 CTVTt> TERM NOTICE O APPEAL ? t Notice is given that the appellant has filed in the above Cpurt of Common Pleas an appeal from the judgment rendered by the District Justice on the date and in the case referenced below. N ME OF APPELLANT rngo. rna rvv, c yr u r `11 sfn .- ,::` p rj?1 ADDRESS / r' A- / O O EL AN 'Aft CITY /?. STATE ZIP CODE "S 1 / rd/ DOCKET No DGMENT r IN TH ? F (Planr? e,7 /1L - ' SIGNATURE OF APPELLANT O ?/ (De{soda/ f R ATTORNEY OR AGENT This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. I If appellant was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J. No. 1001(6) in action R.C.P.D.J. No. 10086. This Notice of Appeal, when received 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 filing 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 (Common Pleas No. r' fj'// appellee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal ?- Name of appellee(s) 05-528 CIVIL ) within twenty (20) days after service of rule or suffer entry of judgment of non pros. !,r Signahae ofappellant or attorney or agent RULE: To? appellee(s) Name of appellee(s) (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 lou by personal. service or by certified or registered mail4 (2) If youdo not file a complaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date of service of this rule if service was by mail is the date of the mailing. Date: Jan 28 20 05 SignaturedfPff thonolaryor putyl YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY.OF THE NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AOPC 312-02 y COURT FILE ? ? ll yy 0 rl t o IR , o S?? i ) "( rl Jr 1. em rinlu l ; + ,"; s ru 2.,6 1 ; s 1U/21117! ' ii . . <s aqe I, R All- 171 „to ' iGtl a, iillll: _ tt tI t€=?ll SQ OWN IIIwimI l 101 C1 !31 RVICI: 0 (i h! pro )f c= set r, 1,31 tr- t) :C 1W NW:--AI Tf, t ourvr?o= ?, AF'FIDa;VI-t: I PI9-:NE` "NA }? ;:rvea't {; firm i :Y a [ i r a C u;l l'e ;tic.i.3 or'Ccl: (:a (de )I' `rvne) sa ceip:ar ached no" t se r)ceipt e:*adI "rfr?i jSWOFN (NffIRMI !A%jill ? HIS , I?t DA ° p 57gi1aWWefeNrtT.'.d241f1Si? iim n1dF?t?? /6l' ntnTeF ? $1 ;4L My )TICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT -EN (10) DAYS AF?'ER filing of the notice of appeal check appfieahte boxes ) ss ad Inman Pleas No, dOS-G'w''`bUpon the District Justice designated therein on , 206 El by personal service 'Y?. by {certified} (regis2eredj mart -nd upon the appellee, (name) ,,) ? by personal service by {certified} (registered) mail, C 131,11 FE [_a IyaTk?l E!).fBLIC ;tree', April ?,. 2005 ? _ ' StgnaRtro of etTiaM n N ?3 CA T -S? alt c.id .,. CP AOPC 312A - 62 -'-"^??wwwwr????¦nwoww?www??wnn? u ? In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se, Plantiff vs Daniel Mescall, D/B/A Shamrock Masonry 2005-528 Civil Action - Law Defendant Notice You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the plantiff. 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, PA (717) 249-3166 in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se, Plantiff vs Daniel Mescall, DB/A Shamrock Masonry 2005-528 Civil Action - Law Defendant Complaint 1. The plantiff is Mary Lou Sharp an adult individual residing at 119 Ridge Road, Carlisle, PA 17013. 2. Daniel Mescall, Doing Business As Shamrock Masonry, Defendant, with a business address of 166 Old York Road, Dillsburg, PA 17019. 3. On June 18, 2004, the plantiff and defendant executed a written contract, by which the defendant agreed to build a garage foundation consisting of a footer, block walls and cement pad for a fee of $6,170.00. The dimensions of the garage foundation were to be 24 foot by 30 foot. A copy of the contract is set forth as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. 4. The defendant began construction of the foundation on July 1, 2004 and was paid the following sums on the dates specified: Date of Payment Amount of Payment July 1, 2004 $2,000 July 13, 2004 $2,430 Total $4,430 5. The defendant did not perform the contract in accordance with the contract specifications in that the foundation is not square. The diagonal dimension of one diagonal is 38 feet and the other diagonal is 39 feet as shown in Exhibit B. Exhibit C shows the actual diagonal dimensions in photographs taken by the plantiff. Exhibit C also shows a T- square placed against the foundation corners showing the space between the T-square and the foundation of an out of square structure. 6. On or about August 1, 2004, Daniel Mescall doing business as Shamrock Masonry was notified of the problem and asked for resolution to correct the situation. Mr. Mescall refused to view, acknowledge or rectify the situation of the out of square foundation for over five months until a civil action case was taken with a district justice. On January 3, 2005 the district justice notice of judgment was awarded to the plantiff for $1,082.50. 7. Because of the defective construction of the foundation a 2.4 foot by 30 foot square building can not be erected on the existing foundation walls. New foundation walls need to be erected to align with the original building dimensions. 8. The cement pad was not poured awaiting the correction of the foundation walls. All work remaining on the contract will be cancelled due to the poor workmanship, intentional delay and lack of acknowledgement of a resolution. Request relief so another contractor may be contacted to redo the foundation in a timely manner. 9. Wherefore, the plantiff requests that the court find in her favor in the total amount paid of $4,430.00 plus $82.50 for District Justice fees for a total of $4, 512.50. SHAMROCK MASONRY 166 OLD YORK ROAE) DILLSBURG, PA 17019 (717) 502-1494 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO'. DATE/ / WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT: 4!0 %,+' - D 'rGE f? / ? D/3 DA We hereby propose to furnish the materials and pedorm the labor necessary for the completion of f ??'dt? _ -*°?-e_ _?jy('O.t i/f?9Z?t,r if!,_,a_i,C?' ?sL-,•.p ? r'ir? ??/.Tj% r/1'n Je. Fr ,r?iKN Iz? -._c%??r e--T1?''`?' ifs ???t'.C ?;,?? z'.G1lrlJ?F?__?/P1!? `?1 ..?1TZ ?t?1?/.r ?!/. /?i/?i ?.?i? -r?f-"t r•',?!? ine%; j -- yT4, 4e} T ,Irk All material is guaranteed to be as specified. and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and speclhcations submitted for above work and complefted ?a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of ?JI??'-e'r? with payments to be as follows) / CALL ??`C?? `?-M?`?yLl.? (1F ?[°}/ ?,,¢Jf ....... '. i.°" . ., ,•.,? Respectfully submffie Per Nole This pnlposal may be withdmmt by u, i1 not acrepfed within days ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL flip above, paces spccihcalions and conditions fire satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are aulhon, eU fn do the work ae spectlied. Payments will be made as outlined above. SICNATI/Fit' UAIE ..'..?. lJ __.. __ SIGNATURE Exhibit A N N O u- M C O N O U O L E m VJ C O N C O O U- O N L Q? CE C '? Vl d' N a? N P oC W In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se, Plantiff vs Daniel Mescall, DB1A Shamrock Masonry 2005-528 Civil Action - Law Defendant Verification I verify the information provided in this document is true and correct. February 14, 2005 0 Date Plantiff, Pro S In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se, Plantiff vs Daniel Mescall, DBIA Shamrock Masonry Defendant 2005-528 Civil Action - Law Certificate of Service I, Mary Lou Sharp, verify that I served a copy of foregoing complaint on Monday, February 14, 2005 via USPS First Class Mail, postage prepaid to: Daniel Mescall/Shamrock Masonry 166 Old York Road Dillsburg, PA 17019 ti ., " ' : , ,: . < "? Mar 07 05 01:10p p'2 In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se Plaintiff Vs. Daniel Mescall DB/A/ Shamrock Masonry Defendant Answer 2005-528 Civil Action 1.The hereby answers each of the foregoing allegations numbers 1.-8. as follows ; 2. Defendant is an individual doing business as Shamrock Masonry. 3. Defendant and Plaintiff did enter into a written contract that is attached to Plaintiffs Complaint. Said contract was orally modified by the parties and additional block work performed by Defendant at Plaintiffs request which gives rise to a case of quantum merit as Plaintiff has reused to pay for the services which she requested which were agreed upon by both parties to be in the amount of $500.00. 4. In addition to not paying for additional work, Plaintiff converted building materials to her own use and benefit without notice to Defendant. Defendant paid for these materials.These materials were on the job site and Plaintiff admitted to removing them. 5. The sums of money alleged as paid were received by Defendant. 6.Defendant did perform in accordance within the usual and customary commercial standards for masonry contractors in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania in all respects on this contract.The Plaintiff is confused as to the terms "square " and "level" as those terms are used in the masonry industry. 7.Plaintiff had an active part in the performance of the contract by doing all the excavation of the job site on her own. In a vain attempt to save money she used a 16 inch width trench instead of a 24 inch that would have been commercially acceptable. Plaintiff was put on notice before the job began that the 16 inch trench would be difficult to work with. 8. Despite the minor problems of the foundation project, Defendant has offered to complete the project but has been prevented from doing so by Plaintiff. It was Mar 07 05 01:10p p.3 Plaintiff who refused to pay for additional work that she requested and is attempting to prevent the completion of this project by a frivolous lawsuit. 9.Defendant reserves the right to further plead his additional defenses and counterclaims against this Plaintiff as this slab can be poured, finished, and her garage erected if she is willing to pay for the services she has contracted for. I O.The services already performed by Defendant exceed the funds for which he has been paid. 11. Wherefore, Defendant prays that the court dismiss Plaintiff s claim in it's entirety or in the alternative appoint a mediator to oversee the completion of the contract providing the Plaintiff escrow the balance of funds due Defendant into the registry of the court. ?Respectfully Submitted, Daniel Mescall, Defendant 166 Old York Road Dillsburg, Pa. 17109 (717)502-1494 ,., ., .: ;' In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Mary Lou Sharp, Pro Se Plaintiff Vs 2005-528 Civil Action - Law Daniel Mescall, DB/A Shamrock Masonry Defendant Motion by Plaintiff for Judgment on the Pleadings - Sham and Frivolous Defense 1. The above-named Plaintiff hereby moves the court for its order directing judgment for Plaintiff on the pleadings, in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for $4,512.50. 2. This motion is made on the ground that Defendant's answer, filed herein on March 7, 2005, is utterly sham and frivolous and does not constitute or represent a valid or meritorious defense to Plaintiff's complaint, as more particularly shown in the memorandum of points listed below. Memorandum of Points to Defendants Answer: Paragraph 3 claims an additional $500 is owed to the Defendant. The hand written estimate from the Defendant states $405 is owed for the additional row of block. This amount was added to the second payment. The three payment schedule was as follows: Footer $2,000. Block walls $2,025, plus the extra $405. Cement Pad $2,145 Paragraph 4 claims Plaintiff converted building materials to her own use. There were 12 (8 in x 16 in x 8 in) cement blocks remaining from the block wall construction. These blocks were moved out of the way to use as steps to enter the new garage. The said blocks cost less than one dollar per block. The Defendant promised the plaintiff $60 would be deducted from the amount owed for helping to move the cement blocks. Paragraph 6 claims the structure is within Cumberland County standards. Contacting experts in masonry education and building inspections found this not to be true. The tolerance sited by the experts in both masonry education and building standards is to be within''/2 inch difference. The Defendant constructed structure has a 12 inch difference. The term "square" refers to a right angle or 90 degree angle as defined by the dictionary and the masonry experts. The term "level" refers to even with the horizon, does not have a vertical variation but stays horizontally the same distance from the center of Earth. The structure built by the Defendant is level but not square. Paragraph 7 claims the trench was not wide enough. The Plaintiff performed all excavation using an 18 inch bucket. The Defendant estimated the job without visiting the job site. He arrived two hours before the cement delivery, reduced the amount of footer cement to be delivered then proceeded to pour the footer. The Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to widen the trench. When the block wall portion began, the Defendant complained there was not enough room to move in the trench but his assistant laid most of the block without any complaints. Paragraph 8 claims the Defendant wants to complete the project. The Defendant has only offered to complete the project after delaying over five months and a District Justice judgment for the Plaintiff. Paragraph 9 claims a cement pad can be poured to correct the foundation. The existing foundation walls can not support a 24 foot by 30 foot square building. The masonry experts verified the existing block walls must to be removed and new block walls must be constructed to create a square (90 degree angle) foundation. Paragraph 10 claims services performed exceed funds paid. A rough estimate of the materials used is under $1,000 but over $4,400 has been paid to the Defendant. Paragraph 11 requests a mediator to oversee completion of the contract. Plaintiff does not have confidence the Defendant can or would complete the construction as required for a 24 ft by 30 ft square building. The cost to completely rebuild the block walls exceeds the amount requested by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is currently requesting only a refund of funds expended. 3. The Plaintiff can provide the detailed documentation associated with this case if requested by the court. The Defendant admits all the relevant facts averred in the complaint but denies liability. Dated May 13, 2005. Mary Lo harp, Plaintiff F? ?..., C 1'• .? ..., '.. -r? _?,. G.. ???? ?' ?? ".\ }: ?,? .. :t r u. \,s k& vs Case No. C) 0,5 - 5? g layAltl ftesca l 1)18/A 's horn roCX Ma5lb1) r Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: 6A_ intends to proceed with the above captioned matter. Print Name May-q Sign NaA Q _ Date: 1 ?f Attorney for Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff' must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. ?' `?° ?.. s?-r t rr ? gy ?::',: - p } t.?_ "" !? c, :c- ;- ° - ,. ?? --, t ? d . ? ?? C'7 ?; ? ?'? . r„?7 -t ??` N David (D. Bueff 'Pro thonotary XirkS. Sohonage, ESQ S06citor C Knee X. Simpson 1'` Deputy (Prothonotary Irene E. Morrow 2nd Deputy ftothonotag office of the Prothonotary Cumberland County, Pennsylvania (_)S -?5 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES AND NOW THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011, 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, DAVID D. BUELL PROTHONOTARY One Courthouse Square • Suite 100 • Car(isle, PA 17013 a (717 240-6195 • Fa,? (717 240-6573