HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-08-14 RECORDED OFFICE OF
REGISTER OF VIILLS
ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC 2914 f1�� 8 Pfd 12 15
Thomas P. Gacki, Esquire (PA I.D. #44864) CLERK OF
213 Market Street, 81" Floor ORPHANS' COURT
P. 0. Box 1248 *iD CO.. PA
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1248 CUMBERLA
Phone: 717.237.6093
Email: tgacki(n.eckertseamans.com
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: ESTATE OF ROBERT ADLER, ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION
DECEASED
21-12-00252
RESPONDENT, NATALIIA ADLER'S ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF
PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT'S NEW MATTER
AND NOW comes Respondent, Nataliia Tykhonova Adler, and answers
Petitioner's Preliminary Objections to Respondent's New Matter as follows:
1. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
2. This averment states conclusions of law that require no response.
3. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
4. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
5. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
6. Denied as a conclusion of law. By way of further answer, pursuant to Rule
1030, a Respondent is entitled to raise in new matter, "any other material facts which
are not merely denials of the averments of the preceding pleading", which is exactly
what Respondent has done.
7. Requires no response.
(L0547078.1)
8. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
9. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
10. Denied. Paragraphs 2 through 5 of Respondent's New Matter are highly
relevant to the background of the Pre-Nuptial Agreement on which the Settlement
Agreement, which precludes all but the breach of contract claim based on the
Settlement Agreement in Petitioner's Complaint, is based. The gravamen of Petitioner's
Complaint, repeated over and over again in various iterations, is that Respondent
somehow concealed various assets of the estate from Petitioner. Paragraphs 27 is a
material and specific averment as to the access that Petitioner had to the property of the
estate prior to execution of the Settlement Agreement. Paragraphs 41 through 45, 49,
52 through 56, and 66 are material and specific averments as to the efforts of the
Respondent to fully comply with the Settlement Agreement and Petitioner's abuse and
bad faith during the course of Respondent's efforts to perform her duties under the
Settlement Agreement.
11. Respondent incorporates herein Respondent's response to averment
number 10 of the Preliminary Objections.
12. Denied as a conclusion of law.
13. Denied as a conclusion of law.
14. Requires no response.
15. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
16. Denied as a conclusion of law.
17. Denied as a conclusion of law.
18. This averment states a conclusion of law that requires no response.
2
19. Denied as a conclusion of law.
20. Denied as a conclusion of law.
21. Requires no response.
22. Denied as a conclusion of law.
23. Admitted.
24. Denied as a conclusion of law.
25. Denied as a conclusion of law. By way of further answer, a separate
motion for sanctions will certainly be forthcoming against Petitioner and her counsel.
26. Denied as a conclusion of law. By way of further answer, Respondent has
provided Petitioner's counsel with the notice required by Rule 1023.1 and 1023.2 that a
motion for sanctions will be forthcoming if various allegations and claims in Petitioner's
Complaint are not withdrawn.
27. Denied as a conclusion of law.
28. Requires no response.
29. Denied. To the contrary, the Respondent has no desire to litigate the
validity of the Pre-Nuptial Agreement since the Settlement Agreement resolved that
issue. The cited paragraphs of Respondent's New Matter set forth the grounds that
Respondent could have raised to show the invalidity of the Pre-Nuptial Agreement
which were part of the consideration for the Settlement Agreement.
30. Denied as a conclusion of law. Respondent incorporates herein her
response to averment 28 of the Preliminary Objections..
31. Denied as a conclusion of law.
32. Denied as a conclusion of law.
3
WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that Petitioner's Preliminary
Objections to Respondent's New Matter be dismissed.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas P. Gacki, Esquire (PA I. . #44864)
Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC
213 Market Street, 8th Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Telephone: 717-237-6093
Facsimile: 717-237-6019
E-mail: tgacki()eckertseamans.com
Date: May 7, 2014 Counsel for Respondent, Nataliia Tykhonova
Adler
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
G
I hereby certify that on this 7th day ofAprit, 2014, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing RESPONDENT, NATALIIA ADLER'S ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY
OBJECTIONS.OF PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT'S NEW MATTER was served upon
the following via United States First-Class mail, postage prepaid, as follows:
Paige McDonald-Matthes, Esquire
Obermayer Rebmann
200 Locust Street, Suite 400
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Thomas P. Gacki, Esquire
Counsel for Nataliia Tykhonova Adler