The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-29-15 F�.�FILES\ClientsU4474 BlakeV 4474.1.response.motion.summary.judgmencwpd rv , Seth T. Mosebey, Esquire � � � � I.D. No. 203046 �' �' �' �' David A. Fitzsimons, Esquire �? -�c� � cn � r� � c� _.� c-� I.D.No. 41722 �sa ._,. r— rJ ,...,:d rn MARTSON LAW OFFICES ` "� "' `� =� j��' 10 East High Street } � •�•�, -,-; �i Carlisle, PA 17013 � � `�i � _ � (717) 243-3341 � " ..a � ��. rn Attorneys for Movant "-� � �; c� . � -�r IN RE: ESTATE OF : IN THE COURT UF COMMON PLEAS OF Ernest H. Blake, Deceased : CUMBERLAND CO[JNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Late of Lower Allen Township : ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION Cumberland County, PA : NO. 21-12-0088 RESPONSE OF PAMELA VAZQUEZ,EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF ERNEST H. BLAKE TO THE NEW MATTER OF �'ATRICIA BOWSER AND NOW,comes the Movant,Pamela Vazquez,ExecutriY oftlle Estate ofErnest H.Blake, by and through her attorneys,Martson Law Offices,and hereby submits her Response to Patricia A. Bowser's New Matter as follows: 39. The averments set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 38 of Movant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment are incorporated herein by reference. 40. Denied. The Decedent's Will speaks for itsel£ Any characterization of the Will is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 41. Denied. The Decedent's Will speaks for itsel£ Any characterization of the Will is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 42. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the PennsylvaniaRules of Civil Procedure. To the extent that a response is required,circumstances exist under the relevant statute that restrict Patricia Bowser's authority to dispose of Decedent's remains. 43. Denied. Section 305(c)of the Probate,Estates and Fiduciaries Code speaks for itself. Any characterization of the statute is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 44. Denied. Section 305(d)ofthe Probate,Estates and Fiduciaries Code speaks for itself. Any characterization of the statute is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required ,� under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. �j � � 45. Denied. Section 305(d)ofthe Probate,Estates and Fiduciaries Code speaks for itself. Any characterization of the statute is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. To the extent that a response is required, it is admitted that a petition was not filed within 48 hours of Decedent's death. It is denied that the failure to file such a petition requires reimbursement of the expenses claimed in the Objections. 46. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 47. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Movant did not file a petition seeking to prevent the cremation. It is Movant's position that the parties reached an agreement regarding disposition of the remains and payment therefore. The remainder of the averment is denied as a conclusion of law to which to no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 48. Denied. The objections filed by Objector speak for themselves. 49. It is admitted that Movant did not file an Answer to Objector's Objections. By way of further answer, Movant was not required to file an Answer to Ubjector's Objections. 50. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further response,no answer to the Objections was required. 51. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 52. Denied. The statute cited in this paragraph speaks for itsel£ Any characterization of the statute is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 53. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 54. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 55. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 2 i 56. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 57. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 58. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 59. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 60. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 61. Denied. The docket speaks for itself. 62. Admitted. 63. Denied. The record also consists of the First and Final Account,the Will, and other documents filed of record in this matter. 64. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 65. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, Movant, Pamela Vazquez, Executrix of the Estate of Ernest H. Blake, demands that partial summary judgment be entered in her favor and against Objector, Patricia Bowser, and that Movant shall not be required to reimburse Objector for the expenses set forth in Paragraph 15 of the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. MART LAW OFFICES By: - �/i...Y �/�^ Seth T. Mosebey, Esnu' -; .D. No. 203046 David A. Fitzsimons, s uire - I.D. No. 41722 Ten East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Dated: y I ��1 ��J Attorneys for Movant, Pamela Vazquez, Ex ecutrix for the Estate of Ernest H. Blake 3 � CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melissa A. Scholly, an authorized agent for Martson Deardorff Williams Otto & Faller, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Response to New Matter was served this date by depositing same in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Stacy B. Wolf, Esquire WOLF & WOLF 10 West High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Counsel for Objector, Patricia A. Bowser MARTSON LAW OFFICES C � B �, �� -;�� , y:_ � . Melissa A. Scholly Ten East High Street � Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Dated: `-I �S�� I <�� 1`J 1 4