The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About14-2803 COMMONWEALTH DFPENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOTICE OF APPEAL Judicial District, County Of FROM MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE JUDGMENT / /� . COMMON PLEAS No. / 7 ~ ��u `^ ��'",' / Tl�^` 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 Magisterial District Judge onthe date and inthe case referenced below. ME NA,OF APPELLANT MAG,DIST.NO, NAME OF MDJ ACORESS OF APPELLANT CITY STATE ZIPC DATE.0 JUDGMENT This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. if qnp-6ifint—was Claimant (see Pa. R.CP.DJ. No, 1001(6) in action This Notice of Appeal, when received by the Magisterial District Judge, will before a Magisterial District Judge, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED operate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. within twenty (20)days after filing the NO TICE of APPEAL. Signature ofProthonotarl or Deputy PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section ofform urbo used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT(see Pa.R.C.PD.J. No. 1001(7) inaction before Magisterial Distlict Judge /FNOT USED, detach from copy ofnotice ofappeal brbeserved upon appellee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Enter rule upon *v 4 It C.L e�' 2" e(s), to file a complaint in this appeal (Common Pleas No. )within twenty(2O)days +o c~o*`�'o4 � RULE To . appellee(s) Name of appcilec(s) (1) You are noUfiedthat arule iahereby entered upon you 8nfile acomplaint inthis appeal within twenty(2U)days after the date ofservice ufthis rule upon you bypersonal service orbycertified orregistered mail. (2) |(you donot fit|eacomplaint within this time,aJUDGMENT QFNON PROS MAY BEENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The date ofser/ice of'this rule ifservice was bymail iathe date ofthe mailing. ` / 0- A J } Led Date: �// .20 _1 7- r CP Signatur(cfProthonotarl 4� j VyN /[/ ''_ YOU MUST INCLUDE ACOPY OFTHE NOTICE OF JUDGMqWQW4T FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. AoPCo1z�5 �V y— AN W1 4x03.6-0 / «J b^ � / 11) 6A5k. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notice Of Judgment/Transcript Civil COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Case Mag. Dist. No: MDJ-09-1-02 Jason Dadey, Alicia A Dadey MDJ Name: Honorable Elizabeth S. Beckley V. Address: 1901 State Street Connor Construction Camp Hill,PA 17011 Telephone: 717-761-0583 Connor Construction Docket No: MJ-09102-CV-0000039-2014 Attn: David Connor Case Filed: 2/28/2014 114 Juniper Dr Camp Hill, PA 17011 Disposition Summary (cc Cross Complaint) Docket No Plaintiff Defendant Disposition Disposition Date MJ-09102-CV-0000039-2014 Jason Dadey Connor Construction Judgment for Plaintiff 04/10/2014 MJ-09102-CV-0000039-2014 Alicia A Dadey Connor Construction Judgment for Plaintiff 04/10/2014 Judgment Summary Participant Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Amount Alicia A Dadey $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Connor Construction $12,172.36 $0.00 $12,172.36 Jason Dadey $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 JudgmentFinding..("PostJudgment)... ._-.-__.__-._..-..__..........._,..__...._...._-.._.._...........__.._-.__._.__._,,.-_-....__._.__,__. .___...._.._....____._......._�_.,___ .._.......�.___-. In the matter of Jason Dadey;Alicia A Dadey vs. Connor Construction on MJ-09102-CV-0000039-2014, on 4/10/2014 the judgment was awarded as follows: Judgment Component Joint/Several Liability Individual Liability Deposit Applied Amount Civil Judgment $12,000.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 Filing Fees $148.50 $0.00 $148.50 Server Fees $23.86 $0.00_ $23.86 Grand Total: $12,172.36 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 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 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES,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 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE. 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 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE IF THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR PAYS IN FULL,SETTLES, OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. APR 10 2014 Date Elizabeth S.Beckley MDJS 315 Page 1 of 3 Printed:04/11/2014 9:30:27AM Jason Dadey,v.Alicia A Dadey Docket No.: MJ-09102-CV-0000039-2014 Connor Construction Participant List Private(s) William Lewis Grubb, Esq. 3803 Old Gettysburg Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 Plaintiff(s) Alicia A Dadey 57 Brentwood Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 Jason Dadey 57 Brentwood Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 Defendant(s) Connor Construction Attn: David Connor 114 Juniper Dr Camp Hill, PA 17011 MDJS 315 Page 3 of 3 Printed:04/11/2014 9:30:27AM s E C T I 0 N A s E C T I 0 N Supreme Cott' '°of ennsylvania (17--�-�Courf-Comnno'Pleas r Yil'jCW er Sht et Cumberland'!, County For Prothonotasy Use Only: 1 f .S ,i -fp Docket No: / V — ,g4203 Cial2 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 Declaration of Taking X Complaint a Writ of Summons a a Transfer from Another Jurisdiction a Lead Plaintiff's Name: Jason and Alicia Dadey Lead Defendant's Name: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction Dollar Amount Requested: a within arbitration limits Are money damages requested? Yes a No (check one) ltd outside arbitration limits Is this a Class Action Suit? a Yes D No Is this an MDJAppeal? Yes a No Name of Plaintiff/Appellant's Attorney: Ethan K. Stone, Esq. a Self -Represented [Pro Se] Litigant) • Check here if you have no attorney (are 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 O Malicious Prosecution 0 Motor Vehicle 0 Nuisance 0 Premises Liability O Product Liability (does not include mass tort) Slander/Libel/ Defamation El Other: a a MASS TORT • Asbestos O Tobacco O Toxic Tort - DES O Toxic Tort - Implant O Toxic Waste O Other: PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY O Dental O Legal O Medical 0 Other Professional: CONTRACT (do not include Judgments) Buyer Plaintiff O Debt Collection: Credit Card 0 Debt Collection: Other O Employment Dispute: Discrimination O Employment Dispute: Other O Other: REAL PROPERTY 0 Ejectment O Eminent Domain/Condemnation • Ground Rent O Landlord/Tenant Dispute O Mortgage Foreclosure: Residential 0 Mortgage Foreclosure: Commercial 0 Partition O Quiet Title O Other: CIVIL APPEALS Administrative Agencies O Board of Assessment O Board of Elections Dept. of Transportation Statutory Appeal: Other a O Zoning Board 0 J Other: MISCELLANEOUS O Common Law/Statutory Arbitration Declaratory Judgment Mandamus Non -Domestic Relations Restraining Order O Quo Warranto 0 Replevin 01 Other: a Updated 1/1/2011 Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA Attorney ID#: 205458 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STONE, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 EStone@EthanKStone.com (Counsel for Plaintiffs) FiI..E0-0FHCE ,11.: THE PROTHONOTArn 20I4 HAY 27 PH 2:54 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No. I y — a8o3 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded 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 Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. 1 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las demandas que se presentan mas adelante en las siguientes paginas, debe tomar accion dentro de los proximos veinte (20) dias despues de la notificacion de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente o por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de, y objecciones a, las dernandas presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se le advierte de que si usted falla de tomar accion como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demanda o cualquier otra reclamacion o remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin mas aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero o propiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE ;OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 1 Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA Attorney ID#: 205458 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STONE, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 47327052 EStone@EthanKStone.com (Counsel for Plaintiffs) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 No.: CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded Defendant. COMPLAINT AND NOW, this 027 day of May, 2014, come the Plaintiffs, Jason and Alicia Dadey, through and by their attorney, Ethan K. Stone, Esquire, and the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC and file this Complaint, whereof the following is a statement: 1. The Plaintiffs, Jason and Alicia Dadey, (hereinafter individually referred to as "Plaintiff' and/or collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs") are adult individuals and at all times relevant to this action were residents of 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011. 2. The Defendant, David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") now is and at all times relevant to this action was an individual and sole proprietor performing home contracting and remodeling business in this state with a principle place of business located at 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011, HIC# PA050826. 3. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiffs were the owners of a single family dwelling located at 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania (the "Home"). 4. On or about May 29, 2010, Plaintiffs entered into a writtencontract with David Connor and Connor Construction to remodel their 2nd floor master bathroom in the Home. A true and correct copy of the contract (the "Contract") dated May 29, 2010 is served and filed herewith as Exhibit "A". 5. Pursuant to the Contract, Defendant was to perform a complete demolition of the existing bathroom, including removal of all fixtures, plumbing, dry wall, etc. and a complete rebuild of the bathroom (the "Remodel"). The Remodel of the master bathroom included building a shower with custom tile and custom shower door, tiling the floor, installing rock walling, adding recessed lighting, and; installing all fixtures (tub, vanity, cabinets, toilet, granite counter top, 2 sinks, shower and sink fixtures, and radiant floor heating). 6. Pursuant to th'e Contract, the total project cost was $27,000.00. Plaintiffs were responsible for purchasing the materials and providing them to Defendant as part of the aforementioned total cost. Pursuant to the Contract, Defendant would then perform the Remodel at a cost of $15,000.00. 7. Defendant verbally informed Plaintiffs that the Remodel would take approximately four (4) weeks to complete. 8. Despite Defendant's assertion that the Remodel would be complete in approximately four (4) weeks, Defendantj often failed to show up for work or required a phone call to show up, incorrectly installed various portions of the Remodel including construction, alignment, and installation of the vanity and installation of the title floor which caused additional delay, and caused and subsequeritly attempted to fix, without success, various leaks. As a result, the Remodel was not allegedly "complete" until September, 2010. 9. In addition, although the Contract called for payment of $15,000.00 to Defendant, Defendant approached Plaintiffs and requested additional sums totaling approximately $1,500.00 -$2,500.00 in excess of the Contract price to complete the bathroom floor. No new written contract was entered into between the parties and no change order executed by the parties was created. As Plaintiffs wanted the project completed without even further delay and complication, Plaintiffs paid the additional amounts to Defendant. 10. Shortly after alleged "completion" of the Remodel, Plaintiffs began to identify numerous additional issues with Defendant's work in performing the Remodel which Plaintiffs then discussed with Defendant. On October 11, 2010, Plaintiffs followed-up on numerous conversations with an email to Defendant informing Defendant of the various issues and defects that remained, including various leaks to the sink, vanity, and shower, incomplete work including issues with' the faucets, carpet, light switches, grout issues, cracking in the bathroom ceiling, a hole in the kitchen ceiling (where Defendant attempted to fix a leak created during the Remodel), water marks on the kitchen ceiling due to leaking, remaining tools and equipment left in Plaintiffs' home, and uneven heating in the electric radiant floor heating system. A true and correct copy of the October 11, 2010 email is served and filed herewith as Exhibit "B". 11. Plaintiffs attempted to resolve the issues with Defendant on several occasions including granting continued access to the home to allow Defendant the opportunity to resolve the problems. Numerous'telephone calls, written correspondence, and emails were exchanged informing Defendant lof the various issues that remained with the Remodel, including the issue of continued leaking at various spots. Defendant attempted to resolve some of the remaining issues throughout the beginning of 2011, including covering the hole in the kitchen ceiling which had been created due to a leak (the work was poorly performed as the hole was merely patched over and visibly still incomplete), but many of the plumbing issues remained. As a result of Defendant's inability;to resolve the numerous issues, Defendant advised Plaintiffs to contact a plumber. Defendant admitted that the required work was beyond his ability to complete and/or remedy despite Defendant's assurances from the outset of the Remodel that he possessed the knowledge, expertise, and skill to perform the contracted work. At this point, Plaintiffs had almost zero confidence in Defendant's ability to remedy any of the numerous issues; however, Plaintiffs continued to keep Defendant informed updated on the status of remedial measures taken. 12. In August, 2011, after water was found to be leaking from the master bathroom through the flooring into the kitchen ceiling at a new location, Plaintiffs contacted another plumber, Cropf Brothers (hereinafter referred to as "Cropf') to perform an inspection of the likely reasons for the continued leaking throughout the master bathroom and into the kitchen and the ongoing plumbing issues during and after the Remodel work. 13. Upon inspection of the Remodel, Cropf determined that several likely reasons for the continued leaking existed. Cropf indicated that some of the leaking stemmed from the shower drain installation, noting that the drain itself was too small, the drain did not meet building codes, and the drain was not the proper type for the shower. 14. Plaintiffs first lelected to use a conservative approach recommended by Cropf. For a period of time, Plaintiffs attempted to use a plunger to assist with water drainage in the drain as an alternative to completely removing the floor and shower tiles at a much greater expense. 15. Despite attempts of a conservative approach, Plaintiffs continued to experience water leaking and in January, 2012, additional leaking began to occur near the location of the previously removed section of the kitchen ceiling. Further, Plaintiffs also noticed water buildup in the carpet in the spare bedroom which shared a wall with the master bathroom. 16. Plaintiffs then instructed Cropf brothers to open the wall behind the shower to determine the cause of the continued and additional leaking. Cropf was able to determine that not only was the drain improper and insufficient, the shower pan/pan liner of the shower had not been properly installed by Defendant. More specifically, the shower pan was not properly sloped, the pan liner was not properly installed, and the pan liner had not been tacked up to the studs. These compounded issues caused water to freely run out of the liner, across the subfloor, and into the kitchen below and the adjacent bedroom. 17. After this discovery, Cropf expressed major concerns regarding the rest of the Remodel as there were major issues with each of the investigated areas. Both Plaintiffs and Cropf had concerns with what other issues might be present, but not visible. As such, additional invasive inspection was performed. Cropf, with the assistance of a tile contractor, Corey Gallaher (hereinafter "Gallaher"), proceeded to remove tiling to further investigate some of the area behind the tile and below the floor. It was determined that not only was the shower pan/pan liner improperly installed and the drain was the improper size and type, but Defendant had applied a significant amount of silicone in and around the weep holes of the drain additionally preventing water from draining properly and causing even more substantial leaking. 1 18. Plaintiffs continued to keep Defendant informed of the additional leaks and issues that were being discovered as more layers of the onion were peeled back. Further, Plaintiffs continued to give Defendant opportunity to return to the home and inspect issues which were found by other contractors/plumbers. Defendant also continued to insist that he would assist with remedial costs of the project, but never provided such assistance. 19. Despite installation of a proper drain by Cropf, the liner and shower pan continued holding too much water due to the other issues that had been discovered, and therefore, in October 2012, Cropf elected to remove a section of the kitchen ceiling to investigate the plumbing issues not visible from above. Cropf determined that the plumbing under the shower and in the kitchen ceiling that Defendant had placed during the Remodel was of an inadequate size and structure, including complete misplacement of various pipes and drain lines. This additionally contributed to the drainage issues and leaks. Further, and quite alarmingly, it was determined that Defendant had compromised the structural integrity of a support joist in the home by cutting out a greater than 50% portion of the joist when installing the plumbing and the joist was now not up to code. 20. On or about January 23, 2013, Joe Cline, of AnS Company, Inc., an independent home inspection company, inspected the quality of work performed by Defendant including a safety and sustainability inspection. Mr. Cline came to the same conclusion as the other professionals who had reviewed Defendant's work. The Remodel exhibited poor craftsmanship, use of substandard and inappropriate parts/materials, and nature and quality of work performed by Defendant was inferior, all of which fell well below industry standards. 21. In May, 2013, another leak began in the master bathroom, leaking down into the kitchen below at a completely new location. Investigation, by cutting more of the kitchen ceiling, revealed additional improper plumbing connections used on supply lines causing a leak which was slow and had been taking place over a long period of time. Mold and mildew were discovered. 22. The various contractors and inspectors who investigated the work performed by Defendant, including those who had already attempted remedial work, agreed that the Remodel work performed by Defendant was well below acceptable levels. Further, the consensus of all was that the issues discovered to date were potentially only the beginning of the issues as these were merely the items that were visible after tearing apart tiles in the bathroom and parts of the kitchen ceiling. There was also major concern regarding the floors ability to bear the extra weight as a result of the structural damage to the joist done by Defendant (a 2nd joist was later determined to also have been compromised). The only remaining recommendation and option for Plaintiffs was a complete redo of the Remodel due to the substantial inadequacies, incompleteness and failures of Defendant's work. 23. Plaintiffs received an initial estimate to redo and remedy the Remodel from Alone Eagle Remodeling. The estimated cost of the project was an $18,531.27. A true and correct copy of the Alone Eagle estimate is served and filed herewith as Exhibit "C". 24. As of June 24, 2013, Plaintiffs had expended $2,075.83 in remedial measures for various worked performed by, Cropf, Gallaher, and others, as indicated herein, before concluding that a complete redo of the Remodel would be necessary. A true and correct copy of the Cropf and Gallaher bills are served and filed herewith as Exhibit "D". 25. Plaintiffs continued to inform Defendant of the issues and recommendations of the various contractors grid inspectors and to provide updates as to the ongoing additional costs associated with work being performed. Despite being constantly kept up to date, Defendant continued to refuse to provide any assistance or reimbursement. 26. In October, 2013, Plaintiffs signed a proposal with Melhorn Builders to completely tear out and re -do the master bathroom in accordance with the various contractors and inspectors recommendations. On February 12, 2014, the contract was executed by Plaintiffs and Melhorn 1 builders at a cost of $16,050.00 to Plaintiffs (hereinafter the "Melhorn Contract"). Of the $16,050.00 Melhorn Contract price, $13,516.16 was attributable to remedial work performed to redo the Remodel. Pll intiffs were responsible for purchasing replacement tile at a cost of $413.08. Plaintiffs also needed to hire a painter at a further cost of $1,895.95 related to the remedial work. Further, various fixtures were unable to be reused by Melhorn because of their improper initial installation by Defendant. As a result, Plaintiffs lost the value of certain materials and fixtures already purchased, which were now incorporated into the Melhorn Contract including a vanity costing $890.40 and a replacement glass panel for the shower door costing approximately $496.00. 27. Upon completion of the bathroom remodel performed by Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn, President, outlined some of the various issues he discovered with the Remodel performed by Defendant in April 9, 2014 correspondence. He indicated that it was "disheartening to find workmanship and business dealings like those we found in your master bathroom." He further noted "it is discouraging to see work of this quality. Such work only lends to the poor name than has been given to the building and remodeling industry. Many of these items are not only poor craftsmanship, but also International Residential Building Code (IRC) violations. The IRC is the basis that the building industry uses to govern any work in 1 and 2 family residences." "Standard practice is to construct projects in compliance with the IRC." A true and correct copy as Exhibit "C". of the Melhorn April 9, 2014 correspondence is served and filed herewith COUNT I BREACH OF CONTRACT 28. Paragraphs orie (1) through twenty-seven (27) are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully hereunder. 29. As aforesaid, Plaintiffs entered into the Contract with Defendant on May 29, 2010. 30. Pursuant to the Contract, Plaintiffs agreed to pay $15,000.00 to Defendant in exchange for Defendant performing all labor necessary for the complete demolition and remodel of the master bathroom in their Home as aforesaid. 31. Plaintiffs made payment to Defendant in the amount of $15,000.00 pursuant to the Contract in addition to additional payment of, at minimum, $1,500.00 not specifically contemplated in the Contract and not pursuant to any change orders, but to "finish" the Remodel. Plaintiffs therefore performed all of their conditions pursuant to the Contract -and then some. 32. Defendant breached the Contract as follows: a.) b.) c.) d.) e.) f.) g.) h.) Failed to complete the Remodel to the contracted specifications; Inadequately performed the contracted work as set forth herein; Performed the work with poor craftsmanship below the reasonably accepted level in the industry; Used substandard parts and materials; Attempted to perform work beyond the scope of his ability without informing Plaintiffs and without success or completion resulting in the issues and damages set forth herein; Failed to complete the Remodel in the timeframe set forth by Defendant; Failed to complete the Remodel and perform work to code; and Failed to perform his duties pursuant to the contract without defects in workmanship, quality, craftsmanship, and completeness. 33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's aforesaid breach, Plaintiffs sustained damages according to proof at trial which include the following: a.) Remediation costs paid to Cropf Brothers totaling $1,430.83; b.) Remediation costs paid to Corey Gallaher totaling $565.00; c.) Remediation costs paid to handyman Johny Casagra totaling $80.00; d.) Additional sums paid to Melhorn Builders over and above the Contract price paid to Defendant totaling $13,516.16 related to the Melhorn Contract; e.) Expenses incurred by Plaintiffs related to the replacement materials, fixtures, and parts which had already previously been purchased and provided to Defendant pursuant to the terms of the Contract and which were torn out, destroyed, or lost as a result of the required subsequent remodel performed by Melhorn Builders including the following: i. Replacement tile - $413.08; Painting and paint - $1,895.95; iii. Replacement vanity - $890.40; and iv. Replacement glass panel for the shower door - $496.00. As a result, Plaintiffs sustained damages in the amount of $19,287.42. 34. Plaintiffs contacted Defendant on numerous occasions requesting payment of the aforesaid sums incurred by Plaintiffs due to Defendant's breach of the Contract and Defendant refused and continue to refuse to pay said amounts. 35. Plaintiffs have fully complied with and performed all the terms and conditions required by them in the Contract. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and ag; inst Defendant in the amount of $19,287.42, together with delay damages, interest, court costs, attorney's fees and costs, and any other such further relief this Honorable Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT II VIOLATION OF THE HOME IMPROVEMENT CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT - 73 P.S. & 517.1, et seq. (the "Act") 36. Paragraphs one (1) through thirty-five (35) are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully hereunder. 37. Defendant is a "contractor" pursuant to the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act (the "Act") and therefore subject to the Act as a person who owns and operates a home improvement business or who undertakes, offers to undertake or agrees to perform any home improvement according to the Act with Home Improvement Contractor (HIC) # PA050826. 38. Plaintiffs are;,"owners" pursuant to the Act as they are the owners of a private residence and persons entitled to performance of the work of a contractor pursuant to a home improvement contract. They are therefore individuals which the Act's goal is to protect. 39. Pursuant to 73 P.S. § 517.7(a) Home improvement contracts - Requirements, no improvement contract shall be valid or enforceable against an owner unless it: a.) Is in ;writing and legible and contains the home improvement contractor registration number of the performing contractor (emphasis added) 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(1); b.) Contains the entire agreement between the owner and the contractor, including attached copies of all required notices (emphasis added) 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(3); c.) Contains the name, address and telephone number of the contractor (emphasis added) 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(5); d.) Contains the approximate starting date and completion date 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(6); e.) Includes a description of the work to be performed, the materials to be used and a set of specifications that cannot be changed without a written change order signed by the owner and the contractor (emphasis added) 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(7); f.) Contains an indication that contractor agrees to maintain liability insurance covering personal injury in an amount not less than $50,000.00 and insurance covering property damage caused by the work of a home improvement contractor in an amount not less than $50,000.00 and identifies the current amount of insurance coverage maintained at the time of signing the contract. g.) h.) Contains the toll-free telephone number under 73 P.S. § 517.3(b); and Contains a notice of the right of rescission under 73 P.S. § 517.7(b). 40. Defendant violated the Act as follows: a.) The Contract did not contain Defendant's home improvement contractor registration number in violation 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(1); b.) The Contract did not contain the entire agreement between the owner and the contractor as additional sums, not pursuant to a change order, were missing from the Contract in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(3); Defendant did not attach copies of all required notices to the Contract in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(3); The Contract did not contain the name, address and telephone number of the contractor (emphasis added) 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(5); The Contract did not contain the approximate starting date and completion date of the Remodel in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(6); The Contract did not contain a description of all materials to be used in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(7); Defendant changed various specifications without a written change order signed by the owner and the contractor in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(7); The Contract did not contain an indication that Defendant agreed to maintain liability insurance covering personal injury in an amount not less than $50,000.00 and insurance covering property damage caused by the work of a home improvement contractor in an amount not less than $50,000.00, and the Contract did not identify the current amount of insurance coverage maintained at the time of signing the contract in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a)(11); The Contract did not contain the toll-free telephone number of the Bureau of Consumer Protection in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.3(b); and The Contract did not contain a notice of the right of rescission in violation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(b). 41. Pursuant to the Act 73 P.S. § 517.10, a violation of any of the provisions of the Act shall be deemed a violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (the "UTPCPL"). 42. As a result of the aforesaid violations of the Act, and pursuant to 73 P.S. § 517.7(a), the Contract shall be deemed invalid and not enforceable and therefore Plaintiffs are entitled to the full value of the Contract and subsequent remedial measures totaling $19,287.42 as set forth above. 43. Further, as a'result of the aforesaid violations of the Act, and pursuant to 73 P.S. § 517.10, Defendant is deemed to have violated the UTPCPL. 44. Pursuant to the UTPCPL73 P.S. § 201-9.2, any person who suffers loss of money, real or personal, as a result of violation of the UTPCPL, may bring a private action to recover actual damages or one hundred dollars ($100), whichever is greater. The court may, in its discretion, award up to three times the actual damages sustained, but not less than one hundred dollars ($100), and may provide such additional relief as it deems necessary or proper. The court may award to the plaintiff, in addition to other relief provided in this section, costs and reasonable attorney fees. 45. As a result of Defendant's violation of the Act, and resulting violation of the UTPCPL, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover treble damages in this matter totaling $57,862.26 in addition to costs, attorney's fees, and any other relief the court deems appropriate. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant in an amount of $57,862.26 which is in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, together with delay damages, interest, court costs, attorney's fees and costs, and any other such further relief this Honorable Court deems just and appropriate. COUNT III BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS 46. Paragraphs one (1) through forty-five (45) are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully hereunder. 47. As aforesaid, Plaintiffs entered into the Contract with Defendant to perform a complete master bathroom remodel. 48. At the time of entering into the Contract, Defendant was in the business of home remodeling and made various implied warranties as to the final product, i.e. the master bathroom remodel. Defendant was aware of the bathroom's intended and ordinary use and Plaintiffs were justified in expecting a minimum level of quality, workmanship, and completeness of the Remodel, free of defects. 49. Plaintiffs relied upon the skill and judgment of Defendant in entering into the Contract. 50. Defendant breached his implied duty of merchantability and fitness as follows: a. The Remodel was not of the quality generally acceptable in the home remodeling trade; 1 b. The Remodel was not fit for the ordinary purposes for which it was to be used; c. The Remodel did not measure up to the promises and assurances contained in the Contract; d. Defendant used materials of inappropriate type, size, or use to fulfill his duties pursuant to the Contract; e. The quality of work was so far below the generally acceptable standard that Plaintiffs needed to hire another company to redo all of Defendant's work. 51. Plaintiffs gaffe reasonable and adequate notice to Defendant of the aforesaid breach of warranty, but Defendant failed to cure the numerous issues and, in fact, instructed Plaintiffs to hire a plumber to dothe work as Defendant was unable to resolve the issues. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's breach of said warranty, Plaintiffs sustained damages according to proof at trial which include the following: a.) Rem I diation costs paid to Cropf Brothers totaling $1,430.83; 52. b.) Remediation costs paid to Corey Gallaher totaling $565.00; c.) Remediation costs paid to handyman Johny Casagra totaling $80.00; d.) Addii ional sums paid to Melhorn Builders over and above the Contract price paid to Defendant totaling $13,516.16 related to the Melhorn Contract; e.) Expenses incurred by Plaintiffs related to the replacement materials, fixtures, and parts which had already previously been purchased and provided to Defendant pursuant to the terms of the Contract and which were torn out, destroyed, or lost as a result of the required subsequent remodel performed by Melhorn Builders including the following: i. Replacement tile - $413.08; ii. Painting and paint - $1,895.95; iii. Replacement vanity - $890.40; and iv. Replacement glass panel for the shower door - $496.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant in the amount of $19,287.42 together with delay damages, interest, court costs, attorney's fees and costs, and any other such further relief this Honorable Court deems just and appropriate. 5-07 -aory Dated than K. S I.D. #2054 Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES N K. STONE, LLC Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 VERIFICATION 1 verify that the statements made in this Complaint are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit. The language is that of counsel and not my own. To the extent that the contents are based upon information which 1 have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief To the extent that the contents are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this verification. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 PA C,S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. . - Date Alicia Dade CO NOR MCT* 'David ammor, ON,vher 717.645,413s Adress oi project Sese,, and Alicia Lady S,:eante wott*,:e • - ttitttplett rentoitt.t. of 012tVttk,Ir bath Cost and ptayntent toms: $27,000 1,1M COsi, Thte reySare,';:t,,,r,pomible fOr matedais pmiciing the. =dell labor for the paoxtmatelieSsbcbeen diactmed us to teiate un With the 'law msts 5-29-2010 Det.Thri Viit bitth foiturcs,tokshevier,toilet,:vnity,Ao OTA Oh facie and deckighmlo the otttside wag that *lin the closets on both. shim oftlbdtk'oftathe and drywall IrttriV Wail adding a/,Aox., 1 coot of Space on hotdoosXdocate any deetrical tKelltels 'a? nkritr,lis demo ova aprox of the ';.v.a2il besde the vatrIty seperalliq the shawnt and rekacate any ;switacalinish dcywall *Ed paint -0110)1*.i: Will pick out Ce4.0FS 2 Wild i 4 ft in Sairle 10Zath.10 bIlt adding about 1 ft of space in front shown,and adding a sto41:heaCti wt. the aide by vattity.the 11.(AV dlOWer hati.a a fUti body ah.ov,,er Lai& inatesied,And tte from floor to Cding tih! ilaCq WO 6in tritS.:iivaag 1.2itA set a also pamtn.Acustcon Shower door -tsil! also be ingiatif4. The files w. &led: Oa by i1i Dade at Thmag summre co:the Anew, have Et 7rt onkt bnilt Par bath products 3 The he floor apea a& the tub deck anii4X1 Vath t iles Dieketi ma' by ialstemits 4 inStall rock wail at:mud the kit side of nib d bchi.i4vahityAis is !ming done by ;Woo and rdysc.T iii ttte evening 41,7r on: the weekend Eti no neat in tabor 3 add 4 Ma4's-4 lights in ceiling on a dimino switch, 6 install ai fixtures pic14 cut by the Dadeys tubcvattity,tned., ctibries 2, talleigianite tor.4 vanity„undermount silks :2 tileng with an fictw thb,shower and sir& fixtures 7 wb have discussed adding radiant floor id kuthamettt disecned th: 'tabor vest hwolved if custom= tme still imemated via go over costs litt thin add ch at a later tiine 1.41Seri Md. Alicia am ordering the, matedals and will be paying tbr them at the time of order latter wst.i nem, bath items in the &stip disomed are Si.5.000 3 paymeats doe one IArhen,mie start the job ttolix!oild when die wok is complete and tho final when job is finished, 1 ,.: / .., . f . , i i .„ ,, ,. f .k*.',_ '' A • ;. ...,*? /. — 7 ... t, Af ,.• , ::. 7, : • l' „---- - ee / . IV. Contidf Coestiaction Sawn .tall Alicia Datthy Print Subject: Outstanding Items List From: Alicia Dadey (a.dadey@yahoo.com) To: dconnor36@gmail.com; Cc: jason.dadey@yahoo.com; Date: Monday, October 11, 2010 1:41 PM Page 1 of 1 Hi Dave, Last week, we talked about concerns with the bathroom and some other areas that stili need completed. We put together the attached list. I printed it and will give it to you when you're here, but in the meantime, I wanted you to have it. Thanks, Alicia & Jason 1-.. _ I..- .___. /' _:i•..��+�� ...., ..,., � �.� //-..,M..h') M1 H,4 .. 7rn Lrlf(1-r 4eifQ'G /1 Toni Outstanding Items as of Monday, October 11, 2010 Outstanding Bathroom Items 1. Left sink leak 2. Vanity and tank topper scratches/issues — Fagers is coming on Tues, 10/12 3. Vanity bottom problem due to leak 4. Uneven radiant heat (hot in front of shower, cold in front of tub & sinks) 5. Light switch plate & dimmers 6. Crack in bathroom ceiling 7. Shower grout issues 8. Clean screens on shower faucets 9. Hot/Cold on right faucet is backward 10. Carpet leading into bathroom 11. Shower door leak — back right near toilet Other Outstanding Items 1. Master bedroom ceiling 2. Kitchen ceiling hole 3. Water mark around recessed light in kitchen 4. Access panel in spare (blue) bedroom 5. Tools/equipment in spare bedroom (compressor, ladder, etc) Print Page 1 of 2 • Subject: Bathroom Remodeling From: Todd Stull (aloneeagleremodeling@yahoo.com) To: a.dadey@yahoo.com; Date: Thursday, May 30, 2013 12:27 PM Hi Alicia, I've come up with an estimate for the project to replace the shower and build a proper functioning unit and replacing the floor with properly installed radiant heat. I will provide a full tear out, rebuild, proper shower floor slope and installation, a fully waterproofed and flood tested unit, proper flange drain for the application etc... As for your shower door enclosure, you'll most likely have to figure on purchasing a new one. After further thought and review of the existing conditions, here are the reasons why: The mud bed is not sloped properly and as far as I can tell does not have a preslope. While reconstructing the shower floor with the proper thickness and slope, I'm almost positive that the shower floor can be anywhere from 3/4" to 1 1/2" higher (including tile) which will force the curb to be raised higher. The only other option is to drop the framing which is not possible with your kitchen below and the existing structure damage from the past contractor. Unfortunately, a shower floor replacement (only) will fail. I would also provide: *A full inspection on plumbing and electric from companies that I use and have dealt with in the past just to be sure that everything is up to par before rebuilding and will persue replacing the feed lines to the cast iron tub and replumbing the existing mistakes shown. *Drywall patching and finishing of the existing openings, patching in bathroom and prep for paint but additional drywall work may be subject to a change order if more of your kitchen ceiling etc... would need removed to do any work. *You would need a suffient amount of tile, bull nose trim, transition strip for doorway and matching grout for any repair at the tub deck. As we discussed, the shower door would have to be removed before my services begin. In these situations where a contractor has completely ruined a project showing many failures, there are always intentions of using my knowledge and proposals with lawyers, courts, inspectors and the original contractor. Because of this I can only offer this email for now. My proposal would be approximately 4 - 6 pages long with all the information in detail. At the time of a contract and down payment I would offer all the information. In other instances where a homeowner would like to just have a report, I do offer that for a non refundable fee of $500.00 which is not including what I charge to testify in a court of law. The project would take 4-5 weeks The estimated cost of this project is: $18,531.27 Feel free to call me with any questions or if you'd like to move forward with the project. http://us-mg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=emnsf515499h4 6/24/2013 Print Page 2 of 2 Respectfully submitted, Todd A. Stull Owner/Operator Alone Eagle Remodeling, LLC. 113 Bungalow Road Enola, PA 17025 717-620-9420 http://www.aloneeagle.com/ PA060767 Like Us on www.facebook.corniAloneEagleRemodeling http://us-mg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=emnsf515499h4 6/24/2013 CROPF B.R.OS.i5 INC P..O. :BOX 2.43 CAMP HILL, PA 17001 Voice: 717/761-2124 Fax: 717/591-1239 Sold To*: Work At: Dadey, M. Jason same 57 Brentwood Road CAST H111, PA 1.7011 sV3.- A 211.13 Invoice Invoice Number: 15867 Invoice Date: May 2, 2013 Page: 1 .. • •• . . . m er ID _iiiReference,, Payincilt Terro. Net 1-5 Days bacly .Same Sales Rep ID \r Done ----- — cc 1 Misc. repairs Quantity Description , . [jClear sinks & shower drains, Order new manual operated brUshed nickel pop-up drains for bathroom s.in.ks 2 kcissier brushed nickel manual operatred pop -.up rain assemblies labor & service call (3/18/13) • Job Date Due bate 3/18/13 5/1'7/13 Unit Price 51 .8.5 129 .0.0! "TOTAL Ni)TAG-ASOt11ON PiILYIVIENT •Custmeriri Dadey nactey, Mr. Tason 57 BtentwocXi Road CaMp PA 17011 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE THIS INVOICE Extension 103.70i 129.001 232.76 Invoice Number: 15667 Invoice Date: May 2, 2013 232.70 CROPF BROS., INC Invoice ,• BOX 243 Invoice Number: 14852 CAMP HILL, PA 17001 Invoi▪ ce Date: Oct 9, 2012 Page1: ‘\\\-L- 9(k, 33" 15A-tt Sold To: Work At: Dadey, Mr. Jason Same 57 Brentwood Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Voice: 717/761-2124 Fax: 717/591-1239 r . I QuRefeee omer11) T. Ravinent Terms rncst,. .._..__ Dadey i SameNet 15 :Days I , a es ep... ..._ 'kDone one Job Date i . . _ . .._ ..—. ____.... 1)Lie Q#4e .---.. cn Misc . repairs •' • 10/5/1.2 • ! • 10724/12 Quantity ID—1 escription - UnitPrice rut -out ceii.i.ng in kitchen, Remove 1-1/2" "P" :trap• & extra 90 ells, & Install required 2" "P" Itrap, etc. - Clean weep holes in shower drain 1 & 2" PVC sch. 440 pipe & fittings 24.081 1 3" fernco fitting with double stainless steel 15.90 straps 1 2" fernco fitting 6.75, 1 FVC solvent/primer 8.5U 1 2" fernco cap 4.901 1 Saws -all blade 6.751 1 Service call 35.00 1 11,abor & misc. - 3.5 hrs@ $129.00/hr. 451.501 TOTAL DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION W'571-1 PAYMENT Customer ID Dadey Dadey, Mr. Jason 57 *Brentwood Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE THIS INVOICE Extension 24.081 15.901 6.751 8 . 50, 4.901 6.751 35 451.50' 553.38 Invoice Number: 14852 Invoice Date: Oct 9, 2012 553:38 CROPF BROS., INC P. a BOX 243 CAMP HILL, PA 17001 Voice: 717/761-0.24 Fax: 717/591-1239 Sold To: Daday, Mx. Jason 57 Brentwood Road Camp Hill, PA 11011 tistomor Reference Dacley Same. Sales. Rev ID Work Done 0n Misc. repairs Quantity Description Misc.. repairs - Check & clean Clean master bath sink drains, & New garbage disposal 1 ISE pro -Series 3/4 H.R. stainl disposal Putty, wicking & sealer a 1 'Chrome areator Seryice call 1 Labor & misc. Work At: Same shower drain, Replace areator ess steel garbage hiVOiCe Invoice Number: 19279 InvoiceRate: May 24, 2012 Payment Terms Net 15 Days Job. Datc 5/21/12 Unit Price Page: 1 Dote • 6/8/12. Extension H +Vs Okcide- 6A-kuk.. uvo-e_W-e-ek c.1221—ilfct e OY\ ),(z1(91 -k -S el_ft 6,42, t ifr cd:4 t\vocfy\ s si/otki‘e* 04,sk vokKe, S^10,15+17.4 tdef fLt _56Wet 5NiCs oc-C 56,444Z 4__sa cdso, imyf L& V&Old 0,4.e vepc A)0,/. , tt.-• ckrus4t3,--1-3kQ ''sra-vice cza( d1/4is( Itstto;-( ._cc)ikcswS 4.75- 35.00xS.:- IVD 35.00 178.50 1733,--5-0 17.415 TOT A if . e-sc_ 496.10 cLaccrs L, 6-0670 (f/z_) LL4111Ck s (Kt — 4 m,.9„5---106,7 VOiCe: 717/761-2124 Fax: 717/591-1239 Sold To: Dadey, W. Jason. 57 Brentwood Road Capp Hill, PA 170.11 —RIL Work At Sane Invoice Number, 13995 IrrirOice Date: Feb 1, 2012 Page: 1. Customer ID Reference Flwitnt1770Ths r- - siii6-- ....- —.. •--------7-- ---- isi-E-I: figiri- Sale. iwp ID Work Done job Date - , Due Date _._ q. Shower pan liner 3/13/12 2/16/12 QuantityDescription . Uniarice Extension 1 Replace buckeye shower pan drain, etc. Labor z mdse. • • - .. 245..00 • ___ • 245.09 - • _ . • _. ....- . . . . • - .______ rifs.-ntr2-L-E CugtOmer ID Dadey Dmear, Js," 57 S=smtwpod Cacgc: 1'..! TOTAL , .2400. lityokuninalcr: ' 13995 Invoke Date: Feb 1, 2012 ' gg:A0 CROPF iLROS,, P. . ,BOX 243 CAMP hILL, PA 17001 Voice: 717/763.-2124 Fax: 717/591-1239 Sold To: Dadey, Mr. Jason 57 Brentwood Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Woik At Sane , Invoice InvoiceNumber: 13694 Invoice Date: Jan 6, 2012 Page: 1 Customer ID Reference Payment Terms _ — Sales.Rep ID Work Done Job Date Due Date cn Check leak 1/6/12 1/21112 Quantity Description Unit Price Extension 1 tut -out drywall & locate leak at .corner of shower pan liner & Make repairs to corner of • an material -rice Av1_2!"2-c‘ u --IN- OVA 129.00 129.00 TOTAL 129.00 CROPF 4:ROS.11NC. , OX 243 CAMP HILLy PA 17001 Voice: 717/761-2124 Fax: 717/591-1239 Sold To: rh. Work At: Dadey, Mr. Jason Sane 57 Brentwood Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Invoice Nurnivr: 13079. invoice Date: Aug 20, 2011 Page: Customer:ID. . Reference PaymentTents Sales Rep ID . ' ' Work Done Job Date Due Date cc. - Open shower drain S/19/11 9/4/11 Quantity Description . Unit Price Extension 1 lean shower & sink drains, Check leak & Repair ressure. issues with shower & spa tub . • abor & service. call 164.00 . I64.00 • TOTAL. 164 00 DATE; ADDRESS: COREY J. GALLAHER CERAMIC TILE 1701 Chatham Rd., Camp HIM, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 737-0984 CONTRACT SHEET /2CUSTOMER NAME: PHONE: (H) 93o G I 9n— 9A:32 - INSTALLER: AREA MAKE STYLE acT5144..c: . COLOR °/- ea4 46,4 SQ. FT UNIT PRICE 1,614/1e1 TOTAL EXTRA.S;- <fkto Q 0-Pcvc Grand TotaI: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, Husband and wife, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiff, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drivel Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 14-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Complaint upon the Defendant in the following manner. 5--a7 — as►y Dated Certified Mail and Regular First Class Mail David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 AN K. STONE, LLC Ethan K. I.D. #2054 Attorney for Plaintiff 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 .mater.. dvl.s TA7� nits JUL _ j PM 2: 7 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND •ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded Defendant. PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter judgment by default in favor of the Plaintiffs and against Defendant, David Connor d/b/a, Connor Construction, for Defendant's failure to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint in this action within the required time. This matter arises out of Defendant's appeal from Magisterial District Justice Dkt #: MJ -09102 -CV - 0000039 -2014 in which Judgment was entered against Defendant. Defendant thereafter filed an appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint in the present matter on May 7, 2014. Plaintiffs filed their timely Complaint on May 27, 2014. The Complaint contains a notice to defend within 20 days from the date of service thereof. Defendant was served with the Complaint by regular mail pursuant to MDJ Rules of Civil Procedure 1004 and 1005 which allow for service of the Complaint upon the Defendant/Appellant by mailing a copy of the Complaint to Defendant at his address as shown in the magisterial district judge records. Further, Plaintiffs also attempted service of the Complaint by Certified Mail; however, despite the Complaint being mailed to Defendant's address as identified by Defendant in the magisterial district judge records only twenty (20) days earlier, the Certified Mailing was unclaimed. As Plaintiffs served the Complaint by regular mail on Defendant on May 27, 2014, Defendant's Answer was due on or before June 16, 2014. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237 (Notice of praecipe for final judgment or decree), I certify that a copy of this Praecipe has been mailed to each other party who has appeared in the action or to his attorney of record. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237.1, I certify that written notice of the intention to file this Praecipe was mailed or delivered to the party against whom judgment is to be entered and to his Attorney of Records, if any, on June 19, 2014. Said written notice was sent after the default occurred and at least ten (10) days prior to the date of filing of this Praecipe. A copy of the notice is attached as Exhibit «A» Please assess damages in the amount of $57,862.26, being the amount demanded in the Complaint. Date: t , 2014. than K. Stone Attorney for Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 220-3529 Supreme Court ID No.: 205458 NOW, 7/1/ , 2014, JUDGMENT IS ENTERED A Prothonot ry7it 'vision By: Deputy IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Plaintiffs, Defendant. TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded IMPORTANT NOTICE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 AVISO IJPORTANTE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 USTED ESTA EN REBELDIA PORQUE HA FALLADO DE REGISTRAR COMPARECENCIA ESCRITA POR SI MISMO 0 A TRAVES DE UN ABOGADO Y SOMETER CON LA CORTE SUS DEFENSAS U OBJECCIONES A LOS CARGOS QUE SE HAN PRESENTADO CONTRA USTED. A MENOS QUE USTED ACTUE DENTRO DE DIEZ DIAS DE HABER RECIBIDO ESTE AVISO, LA CORTE PUEDE TOMAR UNA DECISION EN CONTRA SUYA SIN TENER DERECHOS A UNA VISTA Y USTED PUEDE PERDER SU PROPIEDAD U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 Date: (v_ 99® /9 By: ✓�i Ethan . Stone, Esnf Attorney ID #: 205458 Law Offices ofEthan"1(. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Ten Day Notice of Intent to Take Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. Regular First Class United States Mail, Postage Prepaid Dated David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 LAW OFFICES,OF ETIAN K. STONE, LLC than K.rrEsqui)e LD. #205458 AttoCrt� y r Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATION OF MAILING NOTICE UNDER RULE 237.1 The undersigned hereby certifies that a Written Notice of Intention to File a Praecipe for the Entry of Default Judgment was mailed to the defendant and to his, her, their attorney of record, if any, after the default occurred and at least (10) days prior to the date of the filing of the Praecipe. Said Notice was sent on the date set forth in the copy of said Notice attached hereto, June 19, 2014 to the following Defendants: 7 1- 1( Dated David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 O FI HAN K. STONE, LLC Ethan d ire I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. Dated Regular First Class United States Mail David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 OFF OF ET AN K. STONE, LLC Ethan K. St I.D. #205 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, vs. THE PRG THONG 2014 JUL 30 PM I : 19 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, • CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO STRIKE/OPEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND NOW comes the Defendant David Connor, d/b/a, Connor Construction, by and through his attorney, David C. Dagle, Esquire, and the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C., and avers the following in support for his Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment, pursuant to Rule 237.3 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure; 1. Plaintiffs/Respondents are Jason and Alicia Dadey, (hereinafter individually referred to as "Plaintiff/Respondent and/or collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs/Respondents") are adult individuals and at all relevant times to this action resided at 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011. 2. Defendant/Petitioner is David Connor, d/b/a Connor Construction and at all times relevant to this action was sole proprietor of Connor Construction with a principal place of business located at 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011. 3. On April 10, 2014 a hearing was held before MDJ Elizabeth S. Beckley in the matter of Jason Dadey, Alicia Dadey v. Connor Construction. 4. Following the hearing judgment was entered on behalf of Plaintiffs in the amount of $12,172.36. 5. Defendant, Connor Construction was represented by Attorney William Grubb with a business address of 3803 Old Gettysburg Rd, Camp Hill, PA 17011. 6. Defendant filed an appeal of the judgment in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County on May 7, 2014. 7. The appeal filed by the Defendant was timely. 8. On May 27, 2014 Plaintiffs/Respondents filed a Complaint in the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas alleging Breach of Contract, violation of the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act and Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability and Fitness. 9. Defendant/Petitioner continued to be represented by Attorney Grubb. 10. Defendant/Petitioner notified Attorney Grubb that he received a complaint based on the appeal filed. 11. Attorney Grubb advised Petitioner/Defendant that he would handle the matter. 12. Attorney Grubb failed to file an answer to the complaint on behalf of Petitioner/Defendant. 13. On July 1, 2014, a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default was entered by the Court due to the alleged failure to respond by the Defendant. A true and correct copy of the Praecipe is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 14. Defendant/Petitioner alleges that he did not receive the notice of intent to enter judgment by default. 15. Upon receipt of Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default, Defendant/Petitioner immediately contacted Attorney Grubb to inquire about the matter. 16. Defendant/Petitioner spoke with Attorney Grubb on July 14, 2014 at which time Attorney Grubb informed Defendant/Petitioner that he was unable to continue representing Defendant/Petitioner. 17. Until July 14, 2014 Defendant/Petitioner was under the impression from conversations with Attorney Grubb, that he was diligently representing his interests in the present matter. 18. Immediately following the July 14, 2014 discussions with Attorney Grubb, Defendant/Petitioner contacted the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. to discuss representation. 19. On July 22, 2014 following a meeting, the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. and the Defendant/Petitioner entered into an agreement for representation. 20. Defendant through counsel has prepared an answer and new matter to the complaint which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 21. Defendant/Petitioner understands the ramifications of his failure to reply to the Complaint, and at no time desired to ignore the matter or permit judgment in the Plaintiffs' favor. WHEREFORE, Defendant/Petitioner, David Connor, d/b/a Connor Construction, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to strike/open the default judgment entered against the Defendant on July 1, 2014, and all for the Defendant to proceed with newly appointed Counsel to defend against this suit. BY: Date: %-) - /y Respectfully submitted, The Law Offi es of Peter J. Russo, P.C. Davi,Qagle, Esquire P.A.I.D. No. 201707 /006 E. Trindle Road, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 591-1755 Attorney for Defendant/Petitioner EXHIBIT A JUL t t U --1 P? 2: 7 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded Defendant. PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter judgment by default in favor of the Plaintiffs and against Defendant, David Connor d/b/a, Connor Construction, for Defendant's failure to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint; in this action within the required time. This matter arises out of Defendant's appeal from Magisterial District Justice Dkt #: MJ -09102 -CV - 0000039 -2014 in which Judgment was entered against Defendant. Defendant thereafter filed an appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint in the present matter on May 7, 2014. Plaintiffs filed their timely Complaint on May 27, 2014. The Complaint contains a notice to defend within 20 days from the date of service thereof. Defendant was served with the Complaint by regular mail pursuant to MDJ Rules of Civil Procedure 1004 and 1005 which allow for service of the Complaint upon the Defendant/Appellant by mailing a copy of the Complaint to Defendant at his address as shown in the magisterial district judge records. Further, Plaintiffs also attempted service of the Complaint by Certified Mail; however, despite the Complaint being mailed to Defendant's address as identified by Defendant in the magisterial district judge records only twenty (20) days earlier, the Certified Mailing was unclaimed. As Plaintiffs served the Complaint by regular mail on Defendant on May 27, 2014, Defendant's Answer was due on or before June 16, 2014. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237 (Notice of praecipe for final judgment or decree), I certify that a copy of this Praecipe has been mailed to each other party who has appeared in the action or to his attorney of record. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237.1, I certify that written notice of the intention to file this Praecipe was mailed or delivered to the party against whom judgment is to be entered and to his Attorney of Records, if any, on June 19, 2014. Said written notice was sent after the default occurred and at leas ten (10) days prior to the date of filing of this Praecipe. A copy of the notice is attached as Exhibit «A» Please assess damages in the amount of $57.862.26, being the amount demanded in the Complaint. Date: --ao1,w 3 .2014 than K. Stone Attorney for Plaintif Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 220-3529 Supreme Court ID No.: 205458 NOW, , 2014, JUDGMENT IS ENTERED AB& ro ioiiotaryl.C:lerk,. Civil.Division By: Deputy /EN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Plaintiffs, Defendant. TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded IMPORTANT NOTICE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. 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 MAYBE 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 AVISO IMPORTANTE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 USTED ESTA EN REBELDIA PORQUE HA FALLADO DE REGISTRARCOMPARECENCIA ESCRITA POR SI MISMO 0 A TRAVES DE UN ABOGADO Y SOMETER CON LA CORTE SUS DEFENSAS U OBJECCIONES A LOS CARGOS QUE SE HAN PRESENTADO CONTRA USTED. A MENOS QUE USTED ACTUE DENTRO DE DIEZ DIAS DE HABER RECIBIDO ESTE AVISO, LA CORTE PUEDE TOMAR TJNA DECISION EN CONTRA SUYA SIN TENER DERECHOS A UNA VISTA Y USTED PUEDE PERDER SU PROPIEDAD U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMEN T E. SI USTED NO 1'IhNE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 By:r,,r` f• Ethan 1Stone, Es r J Attorney ID #: 205458 Law Offices of Et aff 1(. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) Date:c (c it/ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Ten Day Notice of Intent to Take Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. -r� Pit Dated Regular First Class United States Mail, Postage Prepaid David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 LW OFFIC'EF ET AN K. STONE, LLC Ethan K.SEsquhe I.D. #205458 _.�`"` Attorney `y`ror Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATION OF MAILING NOTICE UNDER RULE 237.1 The undersigned hereby certifies that a Written Notice of Intention to File a Praecipe for the Entry of Default Judgment was mailed to the defendant and to his, her, their attorney of record, if any, after the default occurred and at least (10) days prior to the date of the filing of the Praecipe. Said Notice was sent on the date set forth in the copy of said Notice attached hereto, June 19, 2014 to the following Defendants: 7 e ly Dated David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 O FI ( SOF THAN K. STONE, LLC Ethan . Stone Esq ire I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. 7-1`(( Dated Regular First Class United States Mail David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 S OF ET AN K. STONE, LLC Ethan K. St I.D. #205 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 EXHIBIT B JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • vs. : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED • NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, P.C. 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: Respectfully submitted, Law• : ,F,EfC r` Russo, P.C. David C. Dagle, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, Pa 17050 Attorney for Defendant LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : No. 14-2803 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, David Connor, d/b/a (hereinafter referred to as "Connor"), by and through his attorneys David C. Dagle, Esquire and the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. and hereby avers the following in support of this Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint. 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. Defendant informed the Plaintiffs that the Remodel could take six (6) to eight (8) weeks. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 8. The averments contained in paragraph 8 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. To the extent that a response is required the averments are Denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. a. It is denied that Defendant stated the remodel would be complete in approximately four (4) weeks. Defendant stated the remodel could take six (6) to eight (8) weeks. b. Defendant denies that he failed to show up for work. Defendant appeared for work on the days he was to be at Plaintiffs' house. c. Defendant denies that he required phone calls to show up. Defendant appeared at the times he advised he would be there. d. Defendant denies that he incorrectly installed portions of the remodel. Defendant's work met installation guidelines. e. Defendant denies that he was unsuccessful remedying any issues that arose during the remodel. f. Defendant denies that the remodel was not done until September 2010. Defendant asserts that the remodel was completed in August 2010. 9. Admitted in part and Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 9 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. It is admitted that contract called for payment of $15,000.00 to Defendant. b. Denied that Defendant requested additional sums. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Admitted no new written contracts were entered into. d. Admitted no change order was executed by the parties. e. Denied that Plaintiffs made any additional payments to the Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. The averments contained in paragraph 10 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response; a. Defendant lacks sufficient information to properly respond to the Plaintiffs' averment as to when they noticed issues with Defendant's work. b. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs and Defendant had numerous conversations about the issues. c. Defendant admits receiving an email outlining issues. d. Defendant denies any allegations that the issues contained in the email are the fault of the Defendant. 11. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 11 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs attempted to resolve the issues with Defendant by granting him continued access to the property. Defendant asserts that Plaintiffs denied him continued access to the home. b. Defendant denies that he would have been unable to resolve any issues had he been granted access to the property. c. Defendant denies that he advised the Plaintiffs to contact a plumber to resolve the issues. d. Defendant denies that he admitted the work required was beyond his ability to complete. Defendant maintains that he was not permitted to attempt to remedy any issues. e. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs continued to keep him updated on the status of the remedial measures being taken. 12. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 12 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments in paragraph 12 and therefore strict proof is demanded at trial. 13. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 13 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 13 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 14. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 14 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 14 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 15 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 15 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 16 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 16 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 17 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 17 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 18 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to keep Defendant informed of additional leaks and issues. b. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to give Defendant opportunity to return to the home to inspect issues. Plaintiffs refused to grant Defendant access to the property to inspect and cure any defects. c. Denied that Defendant insisted that he would assist with costs of the project. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 19 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 19 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 20. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 20 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 20 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 21. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 21 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 21 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 22. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 22 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. The averments contained in paragraph 22 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 23. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 23 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 24. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 24 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 25 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to update Defendant as to additional costs. b. Denied that Defendant refused to provide any assistance. Defendant was denied access to the property to cure any defects. 26. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 26 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 26 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 27. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 27 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 27 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further response paragraph 27 refers to and incorporates Exhibit "C" as a copy of a letter by Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn, however after inspection of the exhibit, Exhibit "C" is a copy of an email correspondence from Todd Stull. COUNT 1— BREACH OF CONTRACT 28. Denied. The Rules of Civil do not require a response to the averments contained in paragraph 28. 29. Admitted. 30. Admitted. 31. Admitted in part Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 31 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Admitted that Plaintiffs made payment to the Defendant in the amount of $15,000.00. b. Denied that additional payment of, at minimum $1,500.00, not contemplated in the contract or pursuant to any change order was made by Plaintiff. Additionally, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has failed to maintain accurate records regarding payments to Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Remaining averments contain conclusions of law to which no response is required. 32. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 32 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 33. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 33 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 34. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 34 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs contacted Defendant on numerous occasions requesting payment for sums incurred. b. Statements concerning Defendants breach of contract is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 35. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 35 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. COUNT II VIOLATION OF THE HOME IMPROVEMENT CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT — 73 P.S. 517.1 36. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 36. 37. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 37 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 38. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 38 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 39. Denied. Paragraph 39 is quotation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a) of the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act to which no response is required. 40. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 40 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 41. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 41 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 42. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 42 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 43. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 43 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 44. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 44 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 45. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 45 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS 46. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 46. 47. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 47 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 48. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 48 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 49. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 49 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 50. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 50 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 51. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 51 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 52. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 52 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. NEW MATTER 53. Defendant hereby incorporates the responses in Paragraph 1 through 52 by reference as if stated at length herein. 54. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages. 55. Defendant was notified of several issues with the Remodel. 56. Defendant attempted to remedy and cure the defects in the Remodel. 57. Defendant was denied access to the property to inspect or remedy issues raised by Plaintiffs. 58. Plaintiffs' claim(s) may be limited by the doctrines of contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence 59. Injuries and/or damages claimed by the Plaintiffs, if proven, were caused, in whole or in part, by persons other than the Defendant. 60. Plaintiffs were responsible for picking out the fixtures to be installed during the remodel. 61. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the fixtures to be installed during the remodel. 62. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the materials to be used in the remodel. 63. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs for the remodel did not fit the specifications required for installation. 64. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs needed to be replaced before installation could be completed. 65. Replacement of the tub, prior to installation, caused a delay in the completion of the remodel. 66. Plaintiffs' actions directly caused the remodel to be delayed. 67. Plaintiffs' claim(s) for recoverable damages is contrary to the law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 68. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 69. Plaintiffs are seeking treble damages for violation of HICPA regulations concerning the content of a home improvement contract. 70. Plaintiffs' complaint has misrepresented evidence and exhibits contained in their complaint. 71. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint refers to and references a correspondence from Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn. 72. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint states a true and correct copy of the correspondence is filed with the complaint as Exhibit "C". 73. Exhibit "C" of the Complaint is an email correspondence with Todd Stull. 74. Exhibit "C" does not coincide with the allegations contained in Paragraph 27 as stated. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed and judgment entered in Defendant's favor and against the Plaintiffs without cost to Defendant together with such costs, expenses and fees as authorized by law in which the Court deems necessary, just and appropriate under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. FILE COPY David C. Dagle, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. No.: 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd., suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 591-1755 VERIFICATION I, David Connor, verify that the statements made in the foregoing document(s) are true and correct. I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: FILE COPY David Connor LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ashley R. Malcolm, Paralegal, hereby certify that I am on this day serving a copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter upon the person and in the manner indicated below and addressed as follows: United States First Class Mail: Date: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 FILE COPY Ashley R. Malcolm, Paralegal VERIFICATION I, David Connor, verify that the statements made in the foregoing document(s) are true and correct. I understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 7/0// avid Connor LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : No. 14-2803 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ashley R. Malcolm, Paralegal, hereby certify that I am on this day serving a copy of the foregoing Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment upon the person and in the manner indicated below and addressed as follows: United States First Class Mail: Date:9 130 ict Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 Ashley alcolm, Paralegal JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : No. 14-2803 • DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. AND NOW, this eday of ORDER 2014, after consideration of the Defendant, David Connor's, d/b/a, Connor Construction, Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that a rule is issued upon the Plaintiff to explain why said relief should not be granted. /14 dso/A ?6 ILL r:30p. . Rule returnable w . hill da.. °3 c� s BY THE C' Distribution: Judge David C. Dagle, Esquire, Law Offices of Peter Russo, P.C., 5006 Trindle Road, Suite 203, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, Attorney for Defendant. Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, 3400 Trindle Road, Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Plaintiffs 8fspy Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA Attorney ID#: 205458 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STONE, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile. (717) 473-7052 EStone@EthanKStone.com (Counsel for Plaintiffs) FILED -OFFICE OF THE PROTHONOTARY 201' AUG 19 P11.12: 33 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION -. LAW Jury Trial Demanded PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO STRIKE/OPEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND NOW, this 17 day of August, 2014, come the Plaintiffs, Jason and Alicia Dadey, through and by their attorney, Ethan K. Stone, Esquire, and the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC and file this Answer to Defendant's Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment, whereof the following is a statement: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. To the contrary, a hearing was held before MDJ Elizabeth S. Beckley in the matter of Jason Dadey, Alicia A. Dadey, v. Connor Construction on or about April 7, 2014. MDJ Beckley entered judgment on behalf of Plaintiffs on April 10, 2014. 1 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Paragraph 8 references a document which speaks for itself. Therefore, no response is required. 9. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. Although Plaintiffs acknowledge that Attorney Grubb represented Defendant during the Magisterial District Justice hearing on this matter, Attorney Grubb's representation of Defendant ceased upon entry of judgment. On May 7, 2014, Defendant, not represented by counsel, filed an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County from the judgment entered against him. Defendant personally filed the Notice of Appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint and Rule to File on May 7, 2014 as evidenced by Defendant personally executing the aforesaid documents. A true and correct copy of the Notice of Appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint and Rule is served and filed herewith as Exhibit "A". Nowhere does Attorney Grubb's signature appear on the appeal documents and at no time did Attorney Grubb enter his appearance in this matter on the subject docket. Further, Plaintiffs' counsel contacted Attorney Grubb by telephone on May 16, 2014, after Defendant had filed his appeal. Attorney Grubb indicated that he did represent Defendant during the Magisterial District hearing but was not currently representing Defendant with regard to Defendant's appeal to the Court of Common Pleas. In addition, Defendant has not provided any evidence to suggest that Attorney Grubb 2 represented Defendant in the subject matter. No fee agreement between Defendant and Attorney Grubb has been produced. 10. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 11. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 12. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. By way of further response, as previously set forth, it is denied that Attorney Grubb was counsel of record for Defendant. Defendant filed his pro se appeal to the Court of Common Pleas and Defendant subsequently failed to file an answer to the Complaint. Even if it is determined that Attorney Grubb was counsel for Defendant, Defendant has still failed to provide a reasonable excuse for failing to file a responsive pleading. 13. Admitted. 14. Denied. To the contrary, Plaintiffs' counsel, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.1 mailed Notice of Intent to Enter Judgment by Default to Defendant on June 19, 2014. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.1, notice must be in writing, need only be given once, and certified or registered mail is not required. Further, Notice should be in the form set forth in Pa.R.C.P. 237.5. Proper Notice, in writing in the form set forth by Pa.R.C.P. 237.5 was sent by regular U.S. mail, after default had occurred and at least ten (10) days prior to the date of filing of Default Judgment on July 1, 2014. Plaintiffs' counsel certified that proper Notice of Intent to Enter Judgment by Default was provided in Plaintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Default Judgment. Despite Defendant's allegation that Notice was not received, proper ten-day Notice of Intent to Enter Judgment was 3 provided to Defendant pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.1 and the ten-day period began to run from the date of mailing on June 19, 2014. Further, despite alleging that he had no knowledge of the Notice of Intent to Enter Judgment, Defendant, in his Brief in Support, page 6, asserts that "Attorney Grubb and Defendant discussed the matter and Defendant was assured that it would be handled. No further communication was made between the Defendant and his attorney concerning the matter until Defendant contacted Attorney Grubb to inquire about the notice of default that was entered against him" (emphasis added). Defendant asserts that he did not receive notice but also states that he contacted Attorney Grubb about the notice. 15. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 16. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 17. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. By way of further response, Defendant asserts that he was under the impression from conversations with Attorney Grubb, that he was diligently representing his interests in the present matter. This is again in contradiction to page 6 of Defendant's Brief in Support in which Defendant asserts that "no further communication was made between the Defendant and his attorney". 18. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 19. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. 4 20. Paragraph 20 references a document which speaks for itself and therefore no response is required. 21. Plaintiffs are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of said paragraph and therefore the same are denied. By way of further response, at no time in Defendant's Petition to Open/Strike Default Judgment does Defendant set forth the standard for the Court to address opening default judgment. He merely sets forth a variety of alleged facts not sufficient for the Court to open the judgment. The court will only exercise the discretion (to open a default judgment) when (1) the petition has been promptly filed; (2) a meritorious defense can be shown; and (3) the failure to appear can be excused. Schultz v. Erie Ins. Exchange, 505 Pa. 90, 93; 477 A.2d 471, 472 (1984). Assuming that Defendant's Brief in Support is incorporated in his Petition, Defendant still fails to allege facts sufficient to show that his Petition was promptly filed. Further, Defendant fails to allege facts sufficient to establish a legitimate reason for his failure to file an Answer to the Complaint. Both are required for this Honorable Court to grant Defendant's Petition. Defendant filed his Petition twenty-nine (29) days after judgment was entered against him. Case law strongly supports that filing twenty-nine (29) days after the entry of judgment is not prompt filing and therefore Defendant's Petition should be denied. See B.C.Y., Inc. Equipment Leasing Assocs. v. Bukovich, 257 Pa. Super. 121, 390 A.2d 276, 278 (Pa.Super. 1978)(a twenty-one (21) day delay was not prompt); McCoy v. Public Acceptance Corp., 451 Pa. 495, 500, 305 A.2d 698 (1973)(a delay of 2 1/2 weeks before filing the petition to open was considered "hardly prompt."). Similarly, Defendant has not asserted a legitimate excuse for the failure to file a responsive pleading. Instead, he merely states facts that there was alleged miscommunication between Defendant and his prior counsel. This miscommunication is in no way sufficient to explain no 5 action by Defendant in this matter from May 7, 2014, when he filed his appeal to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, until he filed the subject Petition to Open/Strike Default Judgment on July 30, 2014, nearly three (3) months later. Even assuming Defendant's facts as true, there is no excuse for Defendant to not follow-up with Attorney Grubb when an Answer was not filed, when Defendant was served with the Notice of Intent to Enter Judgment by Default, and when Default was actually entered against Defendant as provided by the Prothonotary. Judgment was properly entered against Defendant on July 1, 2014. Despite Defendant's contention that he "immediately" contacted Attorney Grubb upon receipt of the Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default, no date is set forth. In fact, according to Defendant's Petition, Defendant waited another two (2) weeks, until July 14, 2014, when a conversation was had between Attorney Grubb and Defendant regarding the status of this matter. This complete inattention to the subject matter and the inexcusable delay by Defendant is not a legitimate excuse. As a result of Defendant's failure to establish two of the three prongs of the Schultz, the Court should deny Defendant's Petition to Open/Strike Default Judgment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court deny Defendant's Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment. Respectfully submitted, LA OFFICES OF ET N K. STONE, LLC P -o I(( Dated Ethan K. Sto I.D. #2054 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 6 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Judicial District, County Of NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGE JUDGMENT / 3 COMMON PLEAS No, NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is given that the appellant has Ned in the above Court of Common Pleas an appeal from the judament rendered by the Magisterial District Judge on the date and in the case referenced below. NAME, OF APPE...1_,N; ‘rt,4%-t.Lc../JOIDA ADDRESS OF APPELLANT DATE JuDGmENT iN CASE OF (PEirAf; 10 1-,•••6,,scx-t. A11 DOCKET Ng, 144 :I <>4s, %./ MAG. OST. NO. NAME O MDJ M -1 E CITY k s )64 STATE ZIP CO'DE 3C patindanzy 41• • -• IORNEY OP. AGENT c) I This block will be signed ONLY when this notation is required under Pa. If ac,oellent was Claimant (see Pa. R.C.P.D.J, No. 1001(6) in action I R.C.P.D.J. No. 10086. This Notice of Appeal, when received by the Maciste7ial District Judos, will before. a Maoisteriel District Judce, A COMPLAINT MUST BE FILED i cos -rate as a SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. within twenty (20) days enter filing the NOTICE of APPEAL Signature cf Pfrk-:cnctari 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) Th action before. Magisterial Distnct Judge. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon ebbe/tee. PRAECIPE: To Prothonotary Ener rule upon 4 Nm cf eppelie.efs) (Common Pleas No. / 3 6,,," ) within tiverity (20) days after Service or rule or suffer entry of judgrrient of non pros. appairee(s), to file a complaint in this appeal RULE: To \ u IV,irne :fag-pet/ee(s) appellee(s) Signature of epos ar, agent 0 v, (1) You are notified :that a rule is hereby entered upon you to fie a complaint in his 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 sent ce of this rule if service ,11E.S *Dy mat is the date of the mailing. -a:&.i-J.; c &Le Date: /7 20 / Signe tur of Prothoncf,:ty or ep (Prerife%'; VINV/CIASW cJ )_Nno3 Ci cqYjapa-1.. c.71-Kri-T FORM WITH THIS NOTICE OF APPEAL. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THE NOTfCE OF JUDGMtN AOFC 317.-05 WV L- AVW —bo -H 4 / 3=s 0 /( IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, vs. No: 14-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Jury Trial Demanded Defendant. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing. Plaintiffs' Answer to Defendant's Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment upon the Defendant in the following manner. Dated Regular First Class Mail David C. Dagle, Esquire Law Office of Peter Russo, P.C. 5006 Trindle Road, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Attorney for Defendant OFFICETHAN K. STONE, LLC 1 Ethan K. • quire I.D. #205458 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 Attorney for Plaintiffs JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant NO. 14-2803 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PETITION TO STRIKE DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 26th day of August, 2014, after hearing argument we are satisfied that the judgment is facially defective in that it was for the amount of three times the actual damages and is therefore stricken. By the Court, 4 1 Edward E. Guido, J. Ethan K. Stone, Esquire For the Plaintiffs David C. Dagle, Esquire For the Defendant : lfh c m r-= .0 CD C, -+ a Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA Attorney ID#: 205458 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STONE, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 EStone@EthanKStone.com (Counsel for Plaintiffs) Fit EL ~' TI1tL Pr O HO -OFFdOTAP' 2014 SEP I 0 Pf*1 12: 5 CUMBERLAND COUNTY 8 P ENNSYLVANI IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Plaintiffs, Defendant. No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded PLAINTIFFS' PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT Please enter judgment by default in favor of the Plaintiffs and against Defendant, David Connor d/b/a, Connor Construction, for Defendant's failure to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint in this action within the required time. This matter arises out of Defendant's appeal from Magisterial District Justice Dkt #: MJ -09102 -CV - 0000039 -2014 in which Judgment was entered against Defendant. Defendant thereafter filed an appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint in the present matter on May 7, 2014. Plaintiffs filed their timely Complaint on May 27, 2014. The Complaint contains a notice to defend within twenty (20) days from the date of service thereof. Defendant was served with the Complaint by regular mail pursuant to MDJ Rules of Civil Procedure 1004 and 1005 which allow for service of the Complaint upon the Defendant/Appellant by mailing a copy of the Complaint to Defendant at his address as shown in the magisterial district judge records. Further, Plaintiffs also attempted service of the Complaint by Certified Mail; however, despite the Complaint being mailed to Defendant's address as identified by Defendant in the magisterial district judge records only twenty (20) days earlier, the Certified Mailing was unclaimed. (04'3 ,-4:,:/lriQ As Plaintiffs served the Complaint by regular mail on Defendant on May 27, 2014, Defendant's Answer was due on or before June 16, 2014. No responsive pleading has been filed to date. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237.1, I certify that written notice of the intention to file a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment was mailed or delivered to the party against whom judgment is to be entered on June 19, 2014. Subsequently, Plaintiffs filed a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment on July 1, 2014. The prothonotary then entered judgment against Defendant in the amount of $57,862.26 pursuant to the Praecipe. Defendant proceeded to file a Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment on July 30, 2014. This Honorable Court, by Order dated August 28, 2014, struck the judgment as facially defective in that it was for three times the actual damages. As the judgment was stricken, but notice of Plaintiffs' intention to file a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.1 was properly and timely served on Defendant on June 19, 2014, Plaintiffs' now file this Praecipe for Entry of Judgment. Written notice of the filing of a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment was sent after the default occurred and at least ten (10) days prior to the date of filing of this Praecipe. A copy of the notice is attached as Exhibit "A". Again, no responsive pleading has been filed to date by Defendant. Please assess actual damages in the amount of $19,287.42, as set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint in Count I and Count III, other damages being waived. Date: _4k4 e /v 2014 NOW, f` /0 / , 2014, JUDGMENT IS ENTERED AB Ethan K. Stone Attorney for Plaintiffs Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011. (717) 220-3529 Supreme Court ID No.: 205458 erk notary , veil Division By: Deputy IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATION OF MAILING NOTICE UNDER RULE 237.1 The undersigned hereby certifies that a Written Notice of Intention to File a Praecipe for the Entry of Default Judgment was mailed to the defendant and to his, her, their attorney of record, if any, after the default occurred and at least (10) days prior to the date of the filing of the Praecipe. Said Notice was sent on the date set forth in the copy of said Notice attached hereto, June 19, 2014, to Defendant in the following manner: 9 -to- /}/ DAVID CONNOR d/b/a CONNOR CONSTRUCTION 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STON Dated an K. Sto • -, 'sdujt I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Plaintiffs, Defendant. No. 2014-2803 TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded IMPORTANT NOTICE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH TIE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 AVISO I PORTANTE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 USTED ESTA EN REBELDIA PORQUE HA FALLADO DE REGISTRAR COMPARECENCIA ESCRITA POR SI MISMO 0 A TRAVES DE UN ABOGADO Y SOMETER CON LA CORTE SUS DEFENSAS U OBJECCIONES A LOS CARGOS QUE SE HAN PRESENTADO CONTRA USTED. A MENOS QUE USTED ACTUE DENTRO DE DIEZ DIAS DE HABER RECIBIDO ESTE AVISO, LA CORTE PUEDE TOMAR UNA DECISION EN CONTRA SUYA SIN TENER DERECHOS A UNA VISTA Y USTED PUEDE PERDER SU PROPIEDAD U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 Date: — 19- $ / er€6t ' Y: Ethan`'. Stone, Essif Attorney ID #: 205458 Law Offices of`Etl►ice. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, , Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Ten Day Notice of Intent to Take Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. Regular First Class United States Mail, Postage Prepaid (�-a? m /Y Dated David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 L W OF,ICES OF ET)IAN K. STONE, LLC Ethan K. _ a e, Esqui .e I.D. #205458 Atto ey or Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. c -10 -/LI Regular First Class United States Mail David C. Dagle, Esquire Law Offices of Peter Russo, P.C. 5006 Trindle Road, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 (Counsel for Defendant) LAW OFFICES OF ETH • K. STO r E Dated Ethan K. Sto I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 JASON and ALICIA DADEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. • NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, P.C. 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 rr CD -7 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: /p( Respectfully submitted, Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. David- . Dagle, Esquire preme Court ID No. 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, Pa 17050 Attorney for Defendant 8. The averments contained in paragraph 8 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. To the extent that a response is required the averments are Denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. a. It is denied that Defendant stated the remodel would be complete in approximately four (4) weeks. Defendant stated the remodel could take six (6) to eight (8) weeks. b. Defendant denies that he failed to show up for work. Defendant appeared for work on the days he was to be at Plaintiffs' house. c. Defendant denies that he required phone calls to show up. Defendant appeared at the times he advised he would be there. d. Defendant denies that he incorrectly installed portions of the remodel. Defendant's work met installation guidelines. e. Defendant denies that he was unsuccessful remedying any issues that arose during the remodel. . Defendant denies that the remodel was not done until September 2010. Defendant asserts that the remodel was completed in August 2010. 9. Admitted in part and Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 9 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. It is admitted that contract called for payment of $15,000.00 to Defendant. b. Denied that Defendant requested additional sums. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Admitted no new written contracts were entered into. d. Admitted no change order was executed by the parties. e. Denied that Plaintiffs made any additional payments to the Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. The averments contained in paragraph 10 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response; a. Defendant lacks sufficient information to properly respond to the Plaintiffs' avellnent as to when they noticed issues with Defendant's work. b. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs and Defendant had numerous conversations about the issues. c. Defendant admits receiving an email outlining issues. d. Defendant denies any allegations that the issues contained in the email are the fault of the Defendant. 11. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 11 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs attempted to resolve the issues with Defendant by granting him continued access to the property. Defendant asserts that Plaintiffs denied him continued access to the home. b. Defendant denies that he would have been unable to resolve any issues had he been granted access to the property. c. Defendant denies that he advised the Plaintiffs to contact a plumber to resolve the issues. d. Defendant denies that he admitted the work required was beyond his ability to complete. Defendant maintains that he was not permitted to attempt to remedy any issues. e. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs continued to keep him updated on the status of the remedial measures being taken. 12. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 12 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments in paragraph 12 and therefore strict proof is dernanded at trial. 13. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 13 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 13 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 14. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 14 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 14 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 15 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 15 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 16 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 16 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 17 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 17 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 18 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to keep Defendant informed of additional leaks and issues. b. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to give Defendant opportunity to return to the home to inspect issues. Plaintiffs refused to grant Defendant access to the property to inspect and cure any defects. c. Denied that Defendant insisted that he would assist with costs of the project. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 19 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 19 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 20. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 20 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 20 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 21. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 21 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 21 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 22. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 22 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. The averments contained in paragraph 22 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 23. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 23 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 24. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 24 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 25 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to update Defendant as to additional costs. h. Denied that Defendant refused to provide any assistance. Defendant was denied access to the property to cure any defects. 26. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 26 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 26 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 27. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 27 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 27 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further response paragraph 27 refers to and incorporates Exhibit "C" as a copy of a letter by Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn, however after inspection of the exhibit, Exhibit "C" is a copy of an email correspondence from Todd Stull. COUNT 1 — BREACH OF CONTRACT 28. Denied. The Rules of Civil do not require a response to the averments contained in paragraph 28. 29. Admitted. 30. Admitted. 31. Admitted in part Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 31 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Admitted that Plaintiffs made payment to the Defendant in the amount of $15,000.00. b. Denied that additional payment of, at minimum $1,500.00, not contemplated in the contract or pursuant to any change order was made by Plaintiff. Additionally, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has failed to maintain accurate records regarding payments to Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Remaining averments contain conclusions of law to which no response is required. 32. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 32 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 33. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 33 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 34. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 34 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs contacted Defendant on numerous occasions requesting payment for sums incurred. b. Statements concerning Defendants breach of contract is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 35. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 35 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. COUNT II VIOLATION OF THE HOME IMPROVEMENT CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT — 73 P.S. §517.1 36. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 36. 37. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 37 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 38. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 38 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 39. Denied. Paragraph 39 is quotation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a) of the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act to which no response is required. 40. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 40 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 41. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 41 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 42. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 42 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 43. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 43 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 44. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 44 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 45. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 45 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS 46. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 46. 47. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 47 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 48. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 48 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 49. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 49 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 50. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 50 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 51. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 51 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 52. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 52 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. NEW MATTER 53. Defendant hereby incorporates the responses in Paragraph 1 through 52 by reference as if stated at length herein. 54. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages. 55. Defendant was notified of several issues with the Remodel. 56. Defendant attempted to remedy and cure the defects in the Remodel. 57. Defendant was denied access to the property to inspect or remedy issues raised by Plaintiffs. 58. Plaintiffs' claim(s) may be limited by the doctrines of contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence 59. Injuries and/or damages claimed by the Plaintiffs, if proven, were caused, in whole or in part, by persons other than the Defendant. 60. Plaintiffs were responsible for picking out the fixtures to be installed during the remodel. 61. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the fixtures to be installed during the remodel. 62. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the materials to be used in the remodel. 63. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs for the remodel did not fit the specifications required for installation. 64. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs needed to be replaced before installation could be completed. 65. Replacement of the tub, prior to installation, caused a delay in the completion of the remodel. 66. Plaintiffs' actions directly caused the remodel to be delayed. 67. Plaintiffs' claim(s) for recoverable damages is contrary to the law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 68. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 69. Plaintiffs are seeking treble damages for violation of HICPA regulations concerning the content of a home improvement contract. 70. Plaintiffs' complaint has misrepresented evidence and exhibits contained in their complaint. 71. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint refers to and references a correspondence from Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn. 72. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint states a true and correct copy of the correspondence is filed with the complaint as Exhibit "C". 73. Exhibit "C" of the Complaint is an email correspondence with Todd Stull. 74. Exhibit "C" does not coincide with the allegations contained in Paragraph 27 as stated. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed and judgment entered in Defendant's favor and against the Plaintiffs without cost to Defendant together with such costs, expenses and fees as authorized by law in which the Court deems necessary, just and appropriate under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. David agle, Esq, e e Court I.D. No.: 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd., suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 591-1755 VERIFICATION 1, David Connor, verify that the statements made in the foregoing document(s) are true and correct. 1 understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 490 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: David Connor LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Derek M. Strouphauer, Paralegal, hereby certify that I am on this day serving a copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter upon the person and in the manner indicated below and addressed as follows: United States First Class Mail: Date//?/Q Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 Strouphauer,PTgiii ' • t LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, VS. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. F t hONO KUL+ SEP 18 PH 3: 1 1 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No. 14-2803 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED JOINT PETITION TO STRIKE DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND NOW comes the Defendant David Connor, d/b/a, Connor Construction, by and through his attorney, David C. Dagle, Esquire, and the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C., and Plaintiffs, Jason Dadey and Alicia Dadey, by and through their attorney Ethan Stone, Esquire and aver the following in support for this Petition to Strike Default Judgment, pursuant to Rule 237.3 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure; 1 This Petition is being filed within ten (10) days after the entry of judgment on the docket. 2. Plaintiffs/Respondents are Jason and Alicia Dadey, (hereinafter individually referred to as "Plaintiff/Respondent and/or collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs/Respondents") are adult individuals and at all relevant times to this action resided at 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011. 3. Defendant/Petitioner is David Connor, d/b/a Connor Construction and at all times relevant to this action was sole proprietor of Connor Construction with a principal place of business located at 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011. 4. On August 26, 2014 this Honorable Court entered an order striking the default judgment previously entered on behalf of the Plaintiff. A true and correct copy of the Order is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit A. 5. On September 10, 2014 Defendant mailed to the Prothonotary of Cumberland County its Answer and New Matter to the Plaintiffs Complaint to be filed. 6. The Answer and New Matter set out a meritorious defense to the claims by the Plaintiffs. 7. Prothonotary of Cumberland County received and docketed the Defendant's Answer on September 11, 2014. A true and correct copy of the time stamped Answer is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit B. 8. On September 10, 2014 Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default which was entered with the Court. 9. Attached to Plaintiffs' Praecipe for the Entry of Default Judgment was a certification that Defendant was provided with notice under Rule 237.1 at least ten (10) days prior to the entry of judgment. 10. The notice of intent to enter default judgment was the notice on the original judgment dated June 19, 2014. A true and correct copy of Paintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibt C. 11. No notice of intent to enter default judgment was provided after the Order dated August 26, 2014. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Defendant, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to strike/open the default judgment entered against the Defendant on September 10, 2014. Respectfully submitted, BY: The Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. David C- Dagle Esquire • PA -'LD. No. 201707 -5006 E. Trindle Road, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 591-1755 Attorney for Defendant/Petitioner Date: The La Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA LD. No. 205458 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Attorney for Plaintiffs an K. Stone VERIFICATION I, David C. Dagle, attorney for David Connor., verify that I am an adult individual; authorized to execute this verification on behalf of David Connor, and that I am familiar with the facts in this matter; that I have read the foregoing document; and that the facts set forth in the foregoing document are true to the best of my knowledge, or 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. David C..Da-g-le, Esq. Date: Thursday, September 18, 2014 JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant NO. 14-2803 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PETITION TO STRIKE DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 26th day of August, 2014, after hearing argument we are satisfied that the judgment is facially defective in that it was for the amount of three times the actual damages and is therefore stricken. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. Ethan K. Stone, Esquire For the Plaintiffs David C. Dagle, Esquire For the Defendant :lfh EXHIBIT B JASON and ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, vs. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, P.C. 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: 9 /5 // Respectfully submitted, Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. Davi - .. DEs quire Dagle, S preme Court ID No. 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, Pa 17050 Attorney for Defendant LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney 1.11 No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : No. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, David Connor, d/b/a (hereinafter referred to as "Connor"), by and through his attorneys David C. Dagle, Esquire and the Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. and hereby avers the following in support of this Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint. 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. Defendant informed the Plaintiffs that the Remodel could take six (6) to eight (8) weeks. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 8. The averments contained in paragraph 8 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. To the extent that a response is required the averments are Denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. a. It is denied that Defendant stated the remodel would be complete in approximately four (4) weeks. Defendant stated the remodel could take six (6) to eight (8) weeks. b. Defendant denies that he failed to show up for work. Defendant appeared for work on the days he was to be at Plaintiffs' house. c. Defendant denies that he required phone calls to show up. Defendant appeared at the times he advised he would be there. d. Defendant denies that he incorrectly installed portions of the remodel. Defendant's work met installation guidelines. e. Defendant denies that he was unsuccessful remedying any issues that arose during the remodel. f. Defendant denies that the remodel was not done until September 2010. Defendant asserts that the remodel was completed in August 2010. 9. Admitted in part and Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 9 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it-contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. It is admitted that contract called for payment of $15,000.00 to Defendant. b_ Denied that Defendant requested additional sums. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Admitted no new written contracts were entered into. d. Admitted no change order was executed by the parties. e, Denied that Plaintiffs made any additional payments to the Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. The averments contained in paragraph 10 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response; a. Defendant lacks sufficient information to properly respond to the Plaintiffs' averment as to when they noticed issues with Defendant's work. b. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs and Defendant had numerous conversations about the issues. c. Defendant admits receiving an email outlining issues. d. Defendant denies any allegations that the issues contained in the email are the fault of the Defendant. 11. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 11 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs attempted to resolve the issues with Defendant by granting him continued access to the property. Defendant asserts that Plaintiffs denied him continued access to the home. b. Defendant denies that he would have been unable to resolve any issues had he been granted access to the property. c. Defendant denies that he advised the Plaintiffs to contact a plumber to resolve the issues. d. Defendant denies that he admitted the work required was beyond his ability to complete. Defendant maintains that he was not permitted to attempt to remedy any issues. e. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs continued to keep him updated on the status of the remedial measures being taken. 12. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 12 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments in paragraph 12 and therefore strict proof is demanded at trial. 13. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 13 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. .By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 13 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 14. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 14 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 14 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 15 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 15 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 16 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 16 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 17 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. 13y way of further response. Defendant Tacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 17 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 18 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. * Denied that Plaintiffs continued to keep Defendant informed of additional leaks and issues. b. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to give Defendant opportunity to return to the home to inspect issues. Plaintiffs refused to grant Defendant access to the property to inspect and cure any defects. c. Denied that Defendant insisted that he would assist with costs of the project. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 19 arc in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 19 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 20. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 20 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 20 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 21. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 21 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 21 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 22. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 22 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. The averments contained in paragraph 22 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 23. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 23 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 24. Denied. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 24 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 25. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 25 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs continued to update Defendant as to additional costs. b. Denied that Defendant refused to provide any assistance. Defendant was denied access to the property to cure any defects. 26. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 26 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 26 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 27. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 27 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to respond to the averments contained in paragraph 27 and therefore strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further response paragraph 27 refers to and incorporates Exhibit "C" as a copy of a letter by Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn, however after inspection of the exhibit, Exhibit "C" is a copy of an email correspondence from Todd Stull. COUNT 1 — BREACH OF CONTRACT 28. Denied. The Rules of Civil do not require a response to the averments contained in paragraph 28. 29. Admitted. 30. Admitted. 31. Admitted in part Denied in part. The averments contained in paragraph 31 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Admitted that Plaintiffs made payment to the Defendant in the amount of $15,000.00. b. Denied that additional payment of, at minimum $1,500.00, not contemplated in the contract or pursuant to any change order was made by Plaintiff. Additionally, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has failed to maintain accurate records regarding payments to Defendant. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. c. Remaining averments contain conclusions of law to which no response is required. 32. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 32 arc conclusions of law to which no response is required. 33. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 33 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 34. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 34 are in violation of Pa.R.C.P. 1022 as it contains multiple material allegations. By way of further response. a. Denied that Plaintiffs contacted Defendant on numerous occasions requesting payment for sums incurred. b. Statements concerning Defendants breach of contract is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 35. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 35 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. COUNT 11 VIOLATION OF THE HOME IMPROVEMENT CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT — 73 P.S. §517.1 36. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 36. 37. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 37 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 38. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 38 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 39. Denied. Paragraph 39 is quotation of 73 P.S. § 517.7(a) of the Home improvement Consumer Protection Act to which no response is required. 40. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 40 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 41 . Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 41 arc conclusions of law to which no response is required. 42. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 42 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 43. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 43 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 44. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 44 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 45. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 45 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS 46. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a response to the averments contained in Paragraph 46. 47. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 47 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 48. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 48 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 49. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 49 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 50. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 50 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 5 L . Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 51 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 52. Denied. The allegations contained in Paragraph 52 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. NEW MATTER 53. Defendant hereby incorporates the responses in Paragraph 1 through 52 by reference as if stated at length herein. 54. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages. 55. Defendant was notified of several issues with the Remodel. 56. Defendant attempted to remedy and cure the defects in the Remodel. 57. Defendant was denied access to the property to inspect or remedy issues raised by Plaintiffs. 58. Plaintiffs' claim(s) may be limited by the doctrines of contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence 59. Injuries and/or damages claimed by the Plaintiffs, if proven, were caused, in whole or in part, by persons other than the Defendant. 60. Plaintiffs were responsible for picking out the fixtures to be installed during the remodel. 61. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the fixtures t� be installed during the remodel. 62. Plaintiffs were responsible for the purchase and acquisition of the materials to be used in the remodel. 63. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs for the remodel did not fit the specifications required for installation. 64. The tub purchased by the Plaintiffs needed to be replaced before installation could be completed. 65. Replacement of the tub, prior to installation, caused a delay in the completion of the remodel. 66. Plaintiffs' actions directly caused the remodel to be delayed. 67. Plaintiffs' claim(s) for recoverable damages is contrary to the law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 68. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 69. Plaintiffs are seeking treble damages for violation of HICPA regulations concerning the content of a home improvement contract. 70. Plaintiffs' complaint has misrepresented evidence and exhibits contained in their complaint. 71. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint refers to and references a correspondence from Melhorn Builders, Jerrold Melhorn. 72. Paragraph 27 of the Plaintiffs' Complaint states a true and correct copy of the correspondence is filed with the complaint as Exhibit "C". 73. Exhibit "C" of the Complaint is an email correspondence with Todd Stull. 74. Exhibit "C" does not coincide with the allegations contained in Paragraph 27 as stated. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed and judgment entered in Defendant's favor and against the Plaintiffs without cost to Defendant together with such costs, expenses and fees as authorized by law in which the Court deems necessary, just and appropriate under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, Law Offices of Peter J. Russo, P.C. David .. M agle, Esq. S creme Court I.D. No.: 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd., suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: (717) 591-1755 VERIFICATION 1, David Connor, verify that the statements made in the foregoing document(s) are true and correct. 1 understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.�§ 499 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.. Date: 7/.e.�% David Connor LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. : No. 14-2803 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Derek M. Strouphauer, Paralegal, hereby certify that I am on this day serving a copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter upon the person and in the manner indicated below and addressed as follows: United States First Class Mail: Date:9)h kG/ Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road • Camp Hill, Pa 17011 •Strouphauer, Pai7.1-e-R EXHIB TC Ethan K. Stone, Esquire PA Attorney ID#: 205458 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STONE, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 EStone@EthanKStone.com (Counsel for Plaintiffs) f :LLD OF ICE THE i'i OTIiO O T.^_.ii'( SEP 10 PM 12: 53 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Plaintiffs, Defendant. No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded PLAINTIFFS' PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT Please enter judgment by default in favor of the Plaintiffs and against Defendant, David Connor d/b/a, Connor Construction, for Defendant's failure to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint in this action within the required time. This matter arises out of Defendant's appeal from Magisterial District Justice Dkt #: MJ -09102 -CV - 0000039 -2014 in which Judgment was entered against Defendant. Defendant thereafter filed an appeal and Praecipe to Enter Rule to File Complaint in the present matter on May 7, 2014. Plaintiffs filed their timely Complaint on May 27, 2014. The Complaint contains a notice to defend within twenty (20) days from the date of service thereof. Defendant was served with the Complaint by regular mail pursuant to MDJ Rules of Civil Procedure 1004 and 1005 which allow for service of the Complaint upon the Defendant/Appellant by mailing a copy of the Complaint to Defendant at his address as shown in the magisterial district judge records. Further, Plaintiffs also attempted service 1 of the Complaint by Certified Mail; however, despite the Complaint being mailed to Defendant's I address as identified by Defendant in the magisterial district judge records only twenty (20) days earlier, the Certified Mailing was unclaimed. As Plaintiffs served the Complaint by regular mail on Defendant on May 27, 2014, Defendant's Answer was due on or before June 16, 2014. No responsive pleading has been filed to date. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 237.1, I certify that written notice of the intention to file a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment was mailed or delivered to the party against whom judgment is to be entered on June 19, 2014. Subsequently, Plaintiffs filed a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment on July 1, 2014. The prothonotary then entered judgment against Defendant in the amount of $57,862.26 pursuant to the Praecipe. Defendant proceeded to file a Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment on July 30, 2014. This Honorable Court, by Order dated August 28, 2014, struck the judgment as facially defective in that it was for three times the actual damages. As the judgment was stricken, but notice of Plaintiffs' intention to file a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.1 was properly and timely served on Defendant on June 19, 2014, Plaintiffs' now file this Praecipe for Entry of Judgment. Written notice of the filing of a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment was sent after the default occurred and at least ten (10) days prior to the date of filing of this Praecipe. A copy of the notice is attached as Exhibit "A". Again, no responsive pleading has been filed to date by Defendant. Please assess actual damages in the amount of $19,287.42, as set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint in Count I and Count III, other damages being waived. Date:,kpleidoe.A 2014 Ethan K. Stone _4 r Attorney for Plaintiffs Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 220-3529 Supreme Court ID No.: 205458 NOW, %//G/ , 2014, JUDGMENT IS ENTERED A S, BO P>retho : aryl er , Civi Division By: Deputy IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATION OF MAILING NOTICE UNDER RULE 237.1 The undersigned hereby certifies that a Written Notice of Intention to File a Praecipe for the Entry of Default Judgment was mailed to the defendant and to his, her, their attorney of record, if any, after the default occurred and at least (10) days prior to the date of the filing of the Praecipe. Said Notice was sent on the date set forth in the copy of said Notice attached hereto, June 19, 2014, to Defendant in the following manner: 9 -to- /)" DAVID CONNOR d/b/a CONNOR CONSTRUCTION 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 LAW OFFICES OF ETHAN K. STON/1.1 Dated an K. Sto I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN tilt: COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Plaintiffs, Defendant. No. 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 IMPORTANT NOTICE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 TO: David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, PA 17011 DATE OF NOTICE: June 19, 2014 AVISO IMPORTANTE Pursuant to Pa R.C.P 237.1 USTED ESTA EN REBELDIA PORQUE HA FALLADO DE REGISTRAR COMPARECENCIA ESCRITA POR SI MISMO 0 A TRAVES DE UN ABOGADO Y SOMETER CON LA CORTE SUS DEFENSAS U OBJECCIONES A LOS CARGOS QUE SE HAN PRESENTADO CONTRA USTED. A MENOS QUE USTED ACTUE DENTRO DE DIEZ DIAS DE HABER RECIBIDO ESTE AVISO, LA CORTE PUEDE TOMAR LINA DECISION EN CONTRA SUYA SIN TENER DERECHOS A UNA VISTA Y USTED PUEDE PERDER SU PROPIEDAD U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES. LISTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEERINFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone Number: 717-249-3166 Date: (9- Y By: Eth. ' . Stone, Essia Attorney ID #: 205458 Law Offices oi' Eth. 1 (. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 220-3529 Facsimile: (717) 473-7052 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 JImiper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 . Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Ten Day Notice of Intent to Take Default upon the Defendant in the following manner Regular First Class United States Mail, Postage Prepaid G, ---ti- 1'! Dated David Connor d/b/a Connor Construction 114 Juniper Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 L -W OF 10F ET K. STONE, LLC Ethan K. I.D. #205458 Atto e or Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, 57 Brentwood Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, 114 Juniper Drive, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Defendant. No: 2014-2803 CIVIL ACTION - LAW Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ethan K. Stone, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, attorneys for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Praecipe for Entry of Judgment by Default upon the Defendant in the following manner. Dated Regular First Class United States Mail David C. Dagle, Esquire Law Offices of Peter Russo, P.C. 5006 Trindle Road, Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 (Counsel for Defendant) LAW OFFICES OF ET K. STO ► E Ethan K. Sto s =, squ e I.D. #205458 Attorney for Plaintiffs 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 717-220-3529 LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 201707 5006 East Trindle Road Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone: 717-591-1755 Attorney for Defendant JASON and ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs, vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, D efend an t. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : No. 14-2803 • • JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, David C. Dagle, Esquire, hereby certify that I am on this day serving a copy of the foregoing Joint Petition to Strike/Open Default Judgment upon the person and in the manner indicated below and addressed as follows: Via Hand Delivery: Date: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Office of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 Did C. Dagfe, Esquire JASON and ALICIA DADEY, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant. 1.144 AND NOW, this°' day of : No. 14-2803 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 2014, after consideration of the Joint Petition to Strike Default Judgment filed by the parties, the motion is GRANTED. The default judgment entered on September 10, 2014 in favor of Plaintiff is hereby STRICKEN. BY THE COURT Judge Distribution: VDavid C. Dagle, Esquire, Law Offices of Peter Russo, P.C., 5006 Trindle Road, Suite 203, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, Attorney for Defendant. Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC, 3400 Trindle Road, Camp -- '-r-, • pe6 Ma ,. lea i rr. CD -11 CR ---- -3,72 PA 17011 Attorney for Plaintiffs LAW OFFICE OF PETER J. RUSSO, P.C. BY: David C. Dagle, Esquire Attorney 1.D. No.: 201707 By: David C. Dagle, Esquire I.D. No. 201707 5006 E. Trindle Rd., Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 (717) 591-1755 JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant CIVIL ACTION — LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please withdraw the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant in the above -captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF PETER J. RUSSO, RC. By: Date: Novemberl— , 2014 David C gle, Esquire AjfI1y I.D. No. 201707 006 E. Trindle Rd., Suite 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Telephone (717) 591-1755 Attorneys for Defendant JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: Wade D. Manley, Esquire I.D. No. 87244 301 Market Street P. 0. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 wdm@jdsw.com JASON AND ALICIA DADEY, Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendant • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 14-2803 DAVID CONNOR d/b/a, CONNOR CONSTRUCTION, Defendant CIVIL ACTION — LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant in the above -captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER 4JN( By: Date: November 20, 2014 661326 Wade D. Manldy, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 87244 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Withdrawal of Appearance and Praecipe for Entry of Appearance has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on November 20, 2014: Ethan K. Stone, Esquire Law Offices of Ethan K. Stone, LLC 3400 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (Attorneys for Plaintiffs) David C. Dagle, Esquire Law Office of Peter J. Russo, P.C. 5006 East Trindle Road, Ste. 203 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: Wade D. Manle