Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-1426s E C T I 0 N A Supreme Court.of Pennsylvania Pleas eet County For Prothonotary Use Only: = tST Docket No: /A The information collected on this form is used solely for court administration purposes. This form does not supplement or replace the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law or rules of court. Commencement of Action: Petition ❑ Notice of Appeal Declaration of Taking © Complaint IN Writ of Summons ❑ ❑ Transfer from Another Jurisdiction ❑ Lead Plaintiff's Name: _ Clouse Services, Inc. Lead Defendant's Name: Eugene Hurst ❑ Check here if you are a Self - Represented (Pro Se) Litigant Name of Plaintiff /Appellant's Attorney: Nathan C. Wolf, Esquire Dollar Amount Requested: X within arbitration limits Are money damages requested? : © Yes ❑ No (Check one) outside arbitration limits Is this a Class Action Suit? ❑ Yes © No s 0 N 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) ❑ Intentional ❑ Malicious Prosecution ❑ Motor Vehicle ❑ Nuisance ❑ Premises Liability ❑ Product Liability (does not include mass tort) ❑ Slander/Libel/ Defamation ❑ Other: MASS TORT ❑ Asbestos ❑ Tobacco ❑ Toxic Tort - DES ❑ Toxic Tort - Implant ❑ Toxic Waste ❑ Other: PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY ❑ Dental ❑ Legal ❑ Medical ❑ Other Professional: Pa.R.C.P. 205.5 CONTRACT (do not include Judgments) ❑ Buyer Plaintiff ❑ Debt Collection: Credit Card ❑ Debt Collection: Other ❑ Employment Dispute: Discrimination ❑ Employment Dispute: Other Other: Breach of Contract - Damages REAL PROPERTY ❑ Ejectment ❑ Eminent Domain/Condemnation ❑ Ground Rent ❑ Landlord/Tenant Dispute ❑ Mortgage Foreclosure ❑ Partition ❑ Quiet Title ❑ Other: CIVIL APPEALS Administrative Agencies ❑ Board of Assessment ❑ Board of Elections ❑ Dept. of Transportation ❑ Zoning Board ❑ Statutory Appeal: Other Judicial Appeals ❑ MDJ - Landlord/Tenant ❑ MDJ - Money Judgment ❑ Other: MISCELLANEOUS ❑ Common Law /Statutory Arbitration ❑ Declaratory Judgment ❑ Mandamus ❑ Non - Domestic Relations Restraining Order ❑ Quo Warranto ❑ Replevin ❑ Other: 2/2010 NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717-241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF FiCE HE FGi H 0 N TA P.Y OR MAR 10 PH 1: 44 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENIJSY1 VANIA CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff v. EUGENE HURST, D/B/A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2014 - Yo,M : CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 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 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 717-249-3166 NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717-241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff v. EUGENE HURST, D/B/A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2014 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., by and through its attorney, Nathan C. Wolf, Esquire, and sets forth this complaint averring as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation doing business within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and with its registered a place of business at 615 Doubling Gap Road, Newville, Pennsylvania 17241. 2. Defendant, Eugene Hurst, an adult individual residing at 3408 Orrstown Road, Orrstown, Franklin County, Pennsylvania, 17244. 3. Sometime prior to July 2013, Plaintiff delivered a 14.5 ton Terex RO TC 2863 boom on a1995 Sterling Ford chassis to Defendant to have repairs performed on the hydraulic system of the vehicle. 4. Plaintiff specified the area where the leak was believed to be, namely the extend cylinder inside the boom. 5. Defendant indicated that he was capable of performing the repairs in a good and workmanlike manner. 6. After approximately two months, on or about August 2, 2013, Defendant contacted Plaintiff and told him that the repairs had been completed and that the crane could be picked up. 7. On or about August 3. 2013, Plaintiff picked up the crane and attempted to use the same. 8. When Plaintiff attempted to use the crane, the crane malfunctioned. 9. Once Plaintiff was able to get the crane back to his business location 10. Plaintiff discovered that Defendant had failed to re-attach hydraulic lines, causing copious amounts of hydraulic fluid to flow from the disconnected lines. 11. Plaintiff also discovered that a hole, measuring approximately six inches (6") in diameter had been drilled in the top of the main boom section, presumably to access the extension boom. 12. Defendant. 13. These holes were not present when Plaintiff delivered possession of the crane to Drilling a hole in a hydraulic crane boom results in a loss of integrity to the boom and therefore renders the equipment inoperable. 14. Plaintiff must maintain liability insurance in the course of his business which includes insuring the operation of its equipment. 15. In order to insure the use and operation of a crane, the equipment must conform to standards and regulations established by the federal government. 16. Specifically, operation of crane equipment is governed by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) of the United States Government. 17. OSHA Regulations provide, generally, that any modification to a crane boom must meet manufacturer standards and may not reduce the load capacity of the equipment. 18. After discovering the damage to the boom, Plaintiff contacted a crane repair service to have repairs performed to the damaged sections of the boom. 19. As a result of the damage done to the crane boom, Plaintiff was forced to take the equipment out of service from August 3, 2013 until November 22, 2013 or a period of 111 days. 20. Plaintiff hired Crane Specialists, Incorporated of Manheim, Pennsylvania to perform the repairs which totaled $11,517.78. (A true and correct copy of the invoice for repairs is attached hereto as Exhibit A). 21. Plaintiff incurred losses as a result of the lost use of this piece of equipment during the 111 day period while the equipment was out of service. 22. Plaintiff obtained estimates from two rental companies showing the cost of renting similar equipment for the 111 day period when its equipment was out of service. The lesser of the two estimates totaled $13,687.40. (A true and correct copy of the estimates are attached hereto as Exhibits B and C, respectively). 23. Plaintiff's losses are the direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions. COUNT I — BREACH OF CONTRACT 24. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full herein. 25. Defendant had a duty to perform repairs in a good and workmanlike manner. 26. Defendant agreed to perform the necessary repairs to Plaintiff's equipment and held himself out as being capable of performing such repairs. 27. Defendant breached his duty to Plaintiff by causing damage to Plaintiff's equipment. 28. Defendant's actions required Plaintiff to incur significant repair costs to return Plaintiff's equipment. 29. Defendant's actions caused Plaintiff economic loss as a resulting from lost use of the damaged equipment during the period of time while repairs were performed. 30. Plaintiff's losses occurred as a direct result of Defendant's actions. 31. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to recover its damages from Defendant which arose from Defendant's breach. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d /b /a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of $25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE 32. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full herein. 33. Plaintiff entrusted its equipment to Defendant while repairs were being performed to the hydraulic system on the extend boom of the crane. 34. Defendant agreed to perform repairs and asserted that he had the necessary skills and knowledge to perform said repairs. 35. As a result of Defendant's agreement to perform the required work, Defendant owed a duty of care to Plaintiff as it related to the safekeeping of the equipment to be repaired. 36. Defendant's actions deviated from the accepted standard within the industry of hydraulic system repairs on crane booms. 37. Upon information and belief, prior to drilling the holes in the crane boom sections, Defendant was warned that drilling into the crane boom sections was not an acceptable practice to utilize in the course of repairing the hydraulic system. 38. Nonetheless, Defendant ignored said warnings and drilled the holes into the boom sections. 39. As a result of the warning, Defendant had knowledge or constructive knowledge of the fact that drilling into the crane boom sections was a deviation from acceptable practice. 40. Defendant either knew or should have known that altering the structural integrity of a crane boom by drilling into the boom sections represents a deviation from industry standards. 41. Defendant's knowledge renders his conduct outrageous because his actions occurred despite having been advised not to engage in the course of action which caused the losses to Plaintiff. 42. Defendant's actions constitute a breach of his duty of care to Plaintiff because his actions deviated from the industry standards. 43. Defendant's actions were the direct cause of the harm suffered by Plaintiff. 44. Plaintiff suffered losses in the form of the costs to repair the physical damage done by Defendant to Plaintiff's equipment. 45. Plaintiff also suffered losses in the form of the lost use of the equipment during the period of repairs necessitated by Defendant's actions. 46. Defendant's actions were the direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's losses. 47. Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for said damage by virtue of the duty of care he owed Plaintiff and as a result of Defendant's breach of said duty. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of $25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just. COUNT III — TRESPASS TO CHATTEL 48. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full herein. 49. deliberate choice. 50. Defendant's actions were intentional in that they were the product of his Defendant's actions caused harm to the property of Plaintiff. 51. The harm caused by Defendant's actions interfered with Plaintiff's ability to control or possess its property. 52. Plaintiff avers that said interference resulted in it suffering losses by being without the use of its equipment for 111 days. 53. Plaintiff avers that its property being unavailable caused Plaintiff to lose income as a result of its inability to utilize its equipment in the course of its business activities. 54. Plaintiff relies on its equipment to deliver products to its customers and without having this piece of equipment available for use, was unable to conduct the volume of business it would have otherwise conducted. 55. Plaintiff thus suffered consequential damages as a result of Defendant's actions. 56. Plaintiff seeks an award of punitive damages as a result of Defendant's outrageous conduct in proceeding with a course of action that he knew or should have known would cause Plaintiff to incur significant damages, where such damages did occur. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of $25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just. March 10 , 2014 BY: Respectfully submitted, WOLF & WOL ATHAN C. Supreme Cou 10 West High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 241-4436 Attorney for Plaintiff ESQUIRE No. 87380 VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, hereby verify that I am the President and an authorized representative of Clouse Sevices, Inc. and that the facts stated in the above complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. March / 0 , 2014 President ices, Inc. NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717-241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2014 - EUGENE HURST, D/B/A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I personally served the following party with a copy of Plaintiff's Complaint on this date and in the manner indicated. SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL: Date: March , 2014 Eugene Hurst Hurst Machine & Hydraulics 3408 Orrstown Road Orrstown, PA 17244 Na an C. Wolf, A torney for Pia Joseph A. Macaluso, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. # 38262 Attorney for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532 -4832 ti I: �:Ut PLAND CCL PENNSYLVANIA CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. • EUGENE HURST D /B /A HURST : MACHINE AND HYDAULICS, . Defendant • NO. 2014 -1426 CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Clouse Services, Inc. do Nathan C. Wolf, Esq., 10 West High St., Carlisle, PA 17013 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed preliminary objections of defendant to the complaint of plaintiff within twenty (20) days from service hereof, or a judgment may be entered against you. ph A. Macaluso eme Court I.D.# 38262 A ; rney for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532 -4832 Joseph A. Macaluso, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. # 38262 Attorney for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532 -4832 CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 2014 -1426 EUGENE HURST D /B /A HURST : MACHINE AND HYDAULICS, . Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO THE COMPLAINT Defendant, Eugene Hurst d /b /a Hurst Machine and Hydaulics, by and through his attorney, Joseph A. Macaluso, hereby files preliminary objections to the complaint of plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., as follows: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #1 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 1. Plaintiffs instituted this suit by filing a complaint on March 10, 2014, which was served upon defendant on March 25, 2014. 2. The complaint involves repairs made by defendant to certain equipment of plaintiff. 3. In Paragraph 20 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that plaintiff subsequently hired another company to make additional repairs to the equipment which totaled $11,517.78. 4. In Paragraph 22 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that: "22. Plaintiff obtained estimates from two rental companies showing the costs of renting similar equipment for the 111 day period when its equipment was out of service. The lesser of the two estimates totaled $13,687.40. (A true and correct copy of the estimates are attached hereto as Exhibits B and C, respectively). 5. In the prayer for relief in Count I of the complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 6. However, nowhere in Count I of the complaint or within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 7. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count I of the complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 8. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim for recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 1 and dismissing Count I of the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #2 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 9. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 10. In the prayer for relief in Count II of the complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 11. However, nowhere in Count II of the complaint or within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 12. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count II of the complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 13. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim for recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 2 and dismissing Count II of the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #3 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 14. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 15. In the prayer for relief in Count III of the complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 16. However, nowhere in Count III of the complaint or within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 17. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count III of the complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 18. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim for recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 3 and dismissing Count III of the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #4 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) 19. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 20. In Paragraphs 21, 45, and 52 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that it suffered losses as a result of the loss of use of the equipment, and in Paragraph 53 plaintiff alleges that the "property being unavailable caused Plaintiff to lose income as a result of its inability to utilize its equipment in the course of its business activities ". 21. However, nowhere within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff identify what business was actually lost or what dollar amount was involved. 22. The complaint lacks specificity and this is not fact pleading; therefore, it is insufficient under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 4 and dismissing the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #5 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 23. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 24. In Paragraph 17 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that "OSHA Regulations provide, generally, that any modification to a crane boom must meet manufacturer standards and may not reduce the load capacity of the equipment." 25. However, nowhere within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff allege that the repairs made by defendant do not meet the manufacturer standards or how the repairs do not meet the manufacturer standards, and nowhere within the four corners of the complaint does plaintiff allege that the repairs made by defendant reduce the load capacity of the equipment or how the repairs reduce the load capacity. 26. The complaint lacks specificity and this is not fact pleading; therefore, it is insufficient under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 27. Moreover, plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted on grounds that defendant's repairs did not meet manufacturer standards or that defendant's repairs reduced the load capacity of the equipment. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 5 and dismissing the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #6 FAILURE TO CONFORM TO RULE OF COURT - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(2) 28. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1019 (i) requires that : "(i) When any claim or defense is based upon a writing, the pleader shall attach a copy of the writing ... ". 29. In Paragraph 20 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that a true and correct copy of an invoice for additional repairs which plaintiff seeks to recover is attached to the complaint as Exhibit A. 30. In Paragraph 22 of the complaint, plaintiff alleges that a true and correct copy of the estimates for rental costs which plaintiff seeks to recover are attached to the complaint as Exhibits B and C. 31. All claims of plaintiff set forth in the complaint, i.e. the claims to recover the additional repairs costs andihe claims to recover-the rental costs, are-based on these writings, however, no exhibits were attached to the complaint served upon defendant.* 32. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1028(a)(2) provides, inter alia, that: "Preliminary objections may be filed by any party to any pleading and are limited to the following grounds: "(2) failure of a pleading to conform to law or rule of court ..." *Note: At the time the within preliminary objections are filed with the Cumberland County Prothonotary, defense counsel will review the Court file, and if the original complaint filed with the Court contains true and correct copies of the exhibits as alleged, defense counsel will arrange to obtain copies of the exhibits from plaintiffs counsel and defendant will withdraw preliminary objection No. 6. 33. Plaintiff has failed to conform to Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1019 (i). WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 6 and dismissing the complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. e •ectfully submitted, h A. Maca use ey for Plaintiff S • r-me Court I.D.# 38262 P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532 -4832 Date: `‘ HI{ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the94Akday of April, 2014, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the defendant's preliminary objections to the plaintiff's complaint upon the following individual by first class mail postage prepaid: Nathan C. Wolf, Esq. 10 West High St., Carlisle, PA 17013 I further certify that the statements made herein are true and correct, and I understand that if any false statements were made herein, the same would be subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. Sectio 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: �1 1 -G11 oseph A. Macaluso VERIFICATION I, Eugene Hurst, verify that the statements made in the foregoing preliminary objections to the complaint of plaintiff are true and accurate to the best of my personal knowledge, information and belief. I understand that my statements are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 9 9--19 Ronny R Anderson Sheriff Jody S Smith Chief Deputy Richard W Stewart Solicitor SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY FILEO-OFF4 'E. HE PRO] HO NO I '; 2011 APR 2 I PM 3' CUMBERLANQ PENNSYLVANIA QUINT ' Y OF Fi[;;+, OF Clouse Services Inc. vs. Eugene Hurst Case Number 2014 -1426 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 03/10/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Eugene Hurst, but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the Sheriff of Franklin, Pennsylvania to serve the within Complaint & Notice according to law. 03/25/2014 The requested Complaint & Notice served by the Sheriff of Franklin County upon Eugene Hurst, personally, at Franklin County Sheriffs Office at 157 Lincoln Way East, Chambersburg, PA 17201. Dane Anthony, Sheriff, Return of Service attached to and made part of the within record. SHERIFF COST: $37.49 SO ANSWERS, April 16, 2014 ic. Cour , rleosaft.. RONR ANDERSON, SHERIFF SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2014 -00072 T COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF FRANKLIN CLOUSE SERVICES INC VS EUGENE HURST EDWARD C GEBHART SR , Deputy Sheriff of FRANKLIN County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT HURST EUGENE was served upon the DEFENDANT , at 1430:00 Hour, on the 25th day of March , 2014 at FRANKLIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFI CHAMBERSBURG, PA 17201 by handing to EUGENE HURST a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this q/4--- day of Notary A.D. So Answers: EDWARD C GEBHART SR By L ." • Deputy Sheriff 04/04/2014 NATHAN C WOLF ESQ COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAL RICHARD D. McCARTY, Notary Public Chambersburg Boro., Franklin County My Commission Expires Jan. 29, 2015 (.90 , Ronny R Anderson Sheriff Jody S Smith Chief Deputy SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY cp101,1 of ClI1NO ., OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF Richard W Stewart Solicitor Clouse Services Inc. vs. Eugene Hurst Case Number 2014 -1426 0 N • ;Service Details: o Category: SERVICE COVER SHEET `Civil Action - Complaint & Notice Manner: !Deputize J Expires: 3408 ORRSTOWN ROAD, ORRSTOWN, PA 17244 CO N 0 N HURST, EUGENE Notes: f 04/14/2014 Zone: Warrant: [Serve To: Name: Primary Address: Phone: Alternate Address: Phone: !Eugene Hurst 3408 Orrstown Road Orrstown, PA 17244 DOB: lS"1 {,a,.cesG. u..b_AFct C Lc. w-lo o.,.6v+) \ pk 1-1 Q [Final Service: Served: Adult In Charge: Relation: Date: Deputy: ersonally • Adult In Charge • Posted • Other as Akssu- Time: Mileage: Lit [Attorney/ Originator: Name: !Nathan C Wolf [Service Attempts: Date: Time: Mileage: Deputy: ,dE 1305' [Notes / Special Instructions: Lecfr 3 Phone: 717 - 241 -4436 Now, March 10, 2014 I, Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Franklin County to execute service of the documents herewith and make return thereof according to law. Return To: Cumberland County Sheriffs Office One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 tc) CountySuite Sheriff, Teleosoft, Inc. 1('• Ronny R Anderson, Sheriff NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717 - 241 -4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF THE PRO THoHaT1 y 2014 APR 29 AM e: 52 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff v. EUGENE HURST, D /B /A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2014 - 1426 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW 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 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 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 717 - 249 -3166 NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717- 241 -4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF v. Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2014 - 1426 EUGENE HURST, D /B /A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., by and through its attorney, Nathan C. Wolf, Esquire, and sets forth this amended complaint, which has been amended only to the extent that the exhibits referenced in the original complaint but not attached thereto are now attached, averring as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation doing business within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and with its registered a place of business at 615 Doubling Gap Road, Newville, Pennsylvania 17241. 2. Defendant, Eugene Hurst, an adult individual residing at 3408 Orrstown Road, Orrstown, Franklin County, Pennsylvania, 17244. 3. Sometime prior to July 2013, Plaintiff delivered a 14.5 ton Terex RO TC 2863 boom on a1995 Sterling Ford chassis to Defendant to have repairs performed on the hydraulic system of the vehicle. 4. Plaintiff specified the area where the leak was believed to be, namely the extend cylinder inside the boom. 5. Defendant indicated that he was capable of performing the repairs in a good and workmanlike manner. 6. After approximately two months, on or about August 2, 2013, Defendant contacted Plaintiff and told him that the repairs had been completed and that the crane could be picked up. 7. On or about August 3. 2013, Plaintiff picked up the crane and attempted to use the same 8. When Plaintiff attempted to use the crane, the crane malfunctioned. 9. Once Plaintiff was able to get the crane back to his business location 10. Plaintiff discovered that Defendant had failed to re-attach hydraulic lines, causing copious amounts of hydraulic fluid to flow from the disconnected lines. 11. Plaintiff also discovered that a hole, measuring approximately six inches (6") in diameter had been drilled in the top of the main boom section, presumably to access the extension boom. 12. Defendant. 13. These holes were not present when Plaintiff delivered possession of the crane to Drilling a hole in a hydraulic crane boom results in a loss of integrity to the boom and therefore renders the equipment inoperable. 14. Plaintiff must maintain liability insurance in the course of his business which includes insuring the operation of its equipment. 15. In order to insure the use and operation of a crane, the equipment must conform to standards and regulations established by the federal government. 16. Specifically, operation of crane equipment is governed by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) of the United States Government. 17. OSHA Regulations provide, generally, that any modification to a crane boom must meet manufacturer standards and may not reduce the load capacity of the equipment. 18. After discovering the damage to the boom, Plaintiff contacted a crane repair service to have repairs performed to the damaged sections of the boom. 19. As a result of the damage done to the crane boom, Plaintiff was forced to take the equipment out of service from August 3, 2013 until November 22, 2013 or a period of 111 days. 20. Plaintiff hired Crane Specialists, Incorporated of Manheim, Pennsylvania to perform the repairs which totaled $11,517.78. (A true and correct copy of the invoice for repairs is attached hereto as Exhibit A). 21. Plaintiff incurred losses as a result of the lost use of this piece of equipment during the 111 day period while the equipment was out of service. 22. Plaintiff obtained estimates from two rental companies showing the cost of renting similar equipment for the 111 day period when its equipment was out of service. The lesser of the two estimates totaled $13,687.40. (A true and correct copy of the estimates are attached hereto as Exhibits B and C, respectively). 23. Plaintiffs losses are the direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions. COUNT I — BREACH OF CONTRACT 24. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full herein. 25. Defendant had a duty to perform repairs in a good and workmanlike manner. 26. Defendant agreed to perform the necessary repairs to Plaintiff's equipment and held himself out as being capable of performing such repairs. 27. Defendant breached his duty to. Plaintiff by causing damage to Plaintiff's equipment. 28. Defendant's actions required Plaintiff to incur significant repair costs to return Plaintiff's equipment. 29. Defendant's actions caused Plaintiff economic loss as a resulting from lost use of the damaged equipment during the period of time while repairs were performed. 30. Plaintiff's losses occurred as a direct result of Defendant's actions. 31. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to recover its damages from Defendant which arose from Defendant's breach. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of S25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just„ herein. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE 32. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full 33. Plaintiff entrusted its equipment to Defendant while repairs were being performed to the hydraulic system on the extend boom of the crane. 34. Defendant agreed to perform repairs and asserted that he had the necessary skills and knowledge to perform said repairs. 35. As a result of Defendant's agreement to perform the required work, Defendant owed a duty of care to Plaintiff as it related to the safekeeping of the equipment to be repaired. 36. Defendant's actions deviated from the accepted standard within the industry of hydranlic system repairs on crane booms. 37. Upon information and belief prior to drilling the holes m the crane boom sections, Defendant was warned that drilling into the crane boom sections was not an acceptable practice to utilize in the course of repairing the hydraulic system. 38. boom sections. 39. Nonetheless, Defendant ignored said warnings and drilled the holes into the As a result of the warning, Defendant had knowledge or constructive knowledge of the fact that drilling into the crane boom sections was a deviation from acceptable practice. 40. Defendant either knew or should have known that altering the structural integrity of a crane boom by drilling into the boom sections represent a devi tion from industry standards. 41' Defendant's knowledge renders his conduct outrageous because his actions occurred despite having been advised not to engage in the course of action which caused the losses to Plaintiff. 42. Defendant's actions constitute u breach o{his duty of care to Phintiff because his actions deviated from the industry standards. 43. Defendant's actions were the direct cause of the harm suffered by Plaintiff. 44. Plaintiff suffered losses in the form of the costs to repair the physical damage done by Defendant to Plaintiff's equipment. 45. Plaintiff also suffered losses in the form of thc lost use of the equipment during the period of repairs necessitated by Defendant's actions. 46. Defendant's acuons were the direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs Iosses. 47. Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for said damage by virtue of the duty of care he owed Plaintiff and as a result of Defendant's breach of said duty. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of $25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just. COUNT III — TRESPASS TO CHATTEL 48. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if set forth in full herein. 49. deliberate choice. 50. Defendant's actions were intentional in that they were the product of his Defendant's actions caused harm to the property of Plaintiff. 51. The harm caused by Defendant's actions interfered with Plaintiff's ability to control or possess its property. 52. Plaintiff avers that said interference resulted in it suffering losses by being without the use of its equipment for 111 days. 53. Plaintiff avers that its property being unavailable caused Plaintiff to lose income as a result of its inability to utilize its equipment in the course of its business activities. 54. Plaintiff relies on its equipment to deliver products to its customers and without having this piece of equipment available for use, was unable to conduct the volume of business it would have otherwise conducted. 55. Plaintiff thus suffered consequential damages as a result of Defendant's actions. 56. Plaintiff seeks an award of punitive damages as a result of Defendant's outrageous conduct in proceeding with a course of action that he knew or should have known would cause Plaintiff to incur significant damages, where such damages did occur. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., prays that this Honorable Court enter judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, in the amount of $25,205.18, plus interest and costs of this action and any additional relief the Court deems appropriate and just. April 2014 BY: Respectfully sub ed, WOLF & NATH WOLF, ESQUIRE Suprem Court ID No. 87380 10 West High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 241-4436 Attorney for Plaintiff CRANE SPECIALISTS INC. Construction Equipment - Sales & Service 37 East End Drive — Manheim, PA 17545 (717) 664 -3536 — (717)664 -4575 fax cranedoccranespecialists.com www.cranespecialists.com Invoice 49214 Date. 11/22/13 RO#20063 Sold To:` `Clouse Services Inc. Ship To: Attn: Accounts Payable 615 Doubling Gap Rd. Newville, PA 17241 Miles' Hours. " Via . Terms ': PO Number by Upon receipt Machine Model S/N F.O.B. TEREX RO TC2863 45908961328 Description Unit - "' Extension Job 1 11122/13: Checked into issues with hole in boom. Remove winch assembly from crane. Remove all hoses & wiring. Remove main lift cylinder from machine. Remove boom hinge pin and remove boom. Set boom on boom stands. Remove cylinder retainer & cable retainers. Remove mid section. Remove all cables and pads. Remove tip from mid section. Clean boom sections. Load boom section on trailer. Deliver boom section to be repaired. Repair both boom sections and paint affected area. Reassemble boom. Replace wear pads that were incorrect on tip end. Adjust pads and cables properly. Test run crane & load test. Pressure wash machine. Parts & Labor $ 10,865.83 Subtotal $ 10,865.83 PA 6% Tax $ 651.95 Total $ 11,517.78 Note: Finance charge of 1.5% per month. Annual Percentage Rate 18% on unpaid Items ordered and not included in this Claims and shortages will NOT be considered Our responsibility ceases upon retaining Parts returned will NOT be accepted Requests to return parts will NOT be A minimum charge of 25% for restocking balance after 30 days from invoice date: and will 15 days from be shipped at a later date. receipt of shipment. from receipt of shipment. Return freight charges will be additional. invoice have been back - ordered unless made within receipt from transportation without prior WRITTEN permission. considered unless made within and re- handling is applicable company. 15 days on all returns. (, f 12/0./2013 10:43 Stephenson Equip - Rental office 7201 PAXTON STREET, HARRISBURG, PA 17111 PHONE: 717-558-7254 FAX: 717 - 558.7262 TOLL FREE: 800.221 -4995 Branch Locations: Lancaster, Pittsburgh, Wilkes- Barre, PA Albany, Syracuse, NY Fax (FAX)717 558 7262 P.001/001 Stephenson Equipment, Inc. To: John Clouse From: Tom Orris Fax: 241 -4437 Pages: 1 Phone: 226 -1476 Date: 12/5/2013 Re: Crane rental CC: ❑ Urgent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment jg Please Reply D Please Recycle John, Thank you for your call regarding the possible crane rental. The rental rate for the National 1560 is $3900.00 per month or $1300.00 per week or $650.00 per day plus tax. The cost to rent the machine for 111 days would be 14,430.00 plus tax. We only have one of this model so please let me know as soon as you can if you are going to need it. Please call me if you have any questions. Thank you, Tom Orris Stephenson Equipment, Inc.,Driven By Customer Satisfaction Since 1957 12/06/2013 13:54 FAX 7176644575 [21002 SPECIALIST , Clouse Services 37 East End Drive — Manheim, PA.17545 (717)664.3536, (717)664-4575 fax www.cranespecialists.cam • 1111•11111.....■01111111111111111111.■mr Attn. John Clouse AIIM111•1•1•111I ..•■■ John, Please see below for rental rates on the following size crane Small Class (14-22 ton) $3800.00 Per Month Large Class (22-32 ton) $4950.00 Per Month Let me know if you have any questions or comments. The Monthly fee is based on 8hrs a day / 40hrs per week & 160 !its per month. Thank You Justin Weaver VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, hereby verify that I am the President and an authorized representative of Clouse Sevices, Inc. and that the facts stated in the above complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. March / 0 , 2014 , President ouse ices, Inc. NATHAN C. WOLF, ESQ. SUPREME COURT ID NO. 87380 WOLF & WOLF 10 WEST HIGH STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 717-241-4436 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 2014 - 1426 EUGENE HURST, D/B/A HURST MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I personally served the following party with a copy of Amended Plaintiff's Complaint on this date and in the manner indicated. SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL: Date: A • , 20 4 Joseph Macaluso, Esquire P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 Na At • Wolf, Esquire y for Plaintiff Joseph A. Macaluso, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. # 38262 Attorney for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532-4832 ' THE PRO MONO TAR' OAR'Y �� 291'1robr 16 PP !: /9 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff v. EUGENE HURST D/B/A HURST : MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, : Defendant • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2014-1426 CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Clouse Services, Inc. do Nathan C. Wolf, Esq., 10 West High St., Carlisle, PA 17013 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed preliminary objections of defendant to the amended complaint of plaintiff within twenty (20) days from service hereof, or a judgment may be entered against you. Jos Supr or h A. Macaluso me Court I.D.# 38262 ey for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532-4832 Joseph A. Macaluso, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. # 38262 Attorney for Defendant P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532-4832 CLOUSE SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS • ▪ OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • NO. 2014-1426 EUGENE HURST D/B/A HURST : - CIVIL ACTION - LAW MACHINE AND HYDRAULICS, : Defendant • DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, Eugene Hurst d/b/a Hurst Machine and Hydraulics, by and through his attorney, Joseph A. Macaluso, hereby files preliminary objections to the amended complaint of plaintiff, Clouse Services, Inc., as follows: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #1 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 1. Plaintiffs instituted this suit by filing a complaint on March 10, 2014, to which defendant filed preliminary objections on April 9, 2014, and plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 29, 2014, which was served on April 30, 2014. 2. The amended complaint involves repairs made by defendant to certain equipment of plaintiff. 3. In Paragraph 20 of the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that plaintiff subsequently hired another company to make additional repairs to the equipment which totaled $11,517.78. 4. In Paragraph 22 of the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that: "22. Plaintiff obtained estimates from two rental companies showing the costs of renting similar equipment for the 111 day period when its equipment was out of service. The lesser of the two estimates totaled $13,687.40. (A true and correct copy of the estimates are attached hereto as Exhibits B and C, respectively). 5. In the prayer for relief in Count I of the amended complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 6. However, nowhere in Count I of the amended complaint or within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 7. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count I of the amended complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the amended complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 8. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim for recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 1 and dismissing Count I of the amended complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #2 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 9. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 10. In the prayer for relief in Count II of the amended complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 11. However, nowhere in Count II of the amended complaint or within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 12. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count II of the amended complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the amended complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 13. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim for recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 2 and dismissing Count II of the amended complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its amended complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #3 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 14. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 15. In the prayer for relief in Count III of the amended complaint, plaintiff seeks judgment in the amount of $25,205.18, being the total of the costs of the additional repairs (i.e. $11,517.78) and the estimate of costs of renting similar equipment (i.e. $13,687.40). 16. However, nowhere in Count III of the amended complaint or within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff allege that it actually rented the rental equipment. 17. Nor does plaintiff allege in Count III of the amended complaint or anywhere within the four corners of the amended complaint that plaintiff actually paid any rental for rental equipment. 18. Plaintiff has failed to plead its claim f9r recovery of rental costs incurred with sufficient specificity and has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted to recover the costs of rental and to obtain judgment against defendant for the amount of $25,205.18. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 3 and dismissing Count III of the amended complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #4 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) 19. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 20. In Paragraphs 21, 45, and 52 of the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that it suffered losses as a result of the loss of use of the equipment, and in Paragraph 53 plaintiff alleges that the "property being unavailable caused Plaintiff to lose income as a result of its inability to utilize its equipment in the course of its business activities". 21. However, nowhere within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff identify what business was actually lost or what dollar amount was involved. 22. The amended complaint lacks specificity and this is not fact pleading; therefore, it is insufficient under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 4 and dismissing the amended complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its amended complaint, as the Court deems proper. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION #5 INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(3) AND LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY - PA. R.CIV. P. 1028(a)(4) (DEMURRER) 23. Defendant repeats the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 4 above, inclusive, as though the same were set forth in extenso. 24. In Paragraph 17 of the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that "OSHA Regulations provide, generally, that any modification to a crane boom must meet manufacturer standards and may not reduce the load capacity of the equipment." 25. However, nowhere within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff allege that the repairs made by defendant do not meet the manufacturer standards or how the repairs do not meet the manufacturer standards, and nowhere within the four corners of the amended complaint does plaintiff allege that the repairs made by defendant reduce the load capacity of the equipment or how the repairs reduce the load capacity. 26. The amended complaint lacks specificity and this is not fact pleading; therefore, it is insufficient under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 27. Moreover, plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted on grounds that defendant's repairs did not meet manufacturer standards or that defendant's repairs reduced the load capacity of the equipment. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting preliminary objection No. 5 and dismissing the amended complaint, or alternatively, requiring plaintiff to amend its amended complaint, as the Court deems proper. Respectfully submitted, h A. Macaluso A, orn -y for Defendant Sup - e Court I.D.# 38262 P.O. Box 83 Orrstown, PA 17244 (717) 532T4832 Date: VERIFICATION I, Eugene Hurst, verify that the statements made in the foregoing preliminary objections to the amended complaint of plaintiff are true and accurate to the best of my personal knowledge, information and belief. I understand that my statements are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. 02- 44ineA Eugene urst Dated: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 16th day of May, 2014, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the defendant's preliminary objections to the plaintiffs amended complaint upon the following individual by first class mail postage prepaid: Nathan C. Wolf, Esq. 10 West High St., Carlisle, PA 17013 I further certify that the statements made herein are true and correct, and I understand that if any false statements were made herein, the same would be subject to the penalties of 18 Pa_ C. S. Se tion 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: lG—1 1 A. Macaluso