The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-04-15 RE '.0 pE0 CUFFIGE J KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP X015 ("l► Y `1 P1 33 William R. Church, Esq. Attorney ID No. 318955 a r {; .T P.O. Box 11963 0 � ' Harrisburg, PA 17108-1963 BEFORE THE REGISTER OF WILLS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA: Estate of Benjamin B. Bower, Deceased No. 21-15-0082 PETITIONERS' REPLY TO NEW..MATTER Petitioners, Dana Bower, Hiliary Bower, and Wesley Bower(collectively, "Petitioners"), by and through their attorneys, Keefer, Wood, Allen& Rahal, LLP, hereby file this Reply to New Matter of Sylvia Bower("Respondent"), and in support thereof aver as follows: 26. Decedent's Last Will and Testament dated July 16, 2009 is being filed to this matter simultaneous with this Answer. REPLY: No reply to this paragraph is necessary as it does not contain any allegations or averments of fact. 27. Decedent's Will was executed according to Pennsylvania law and is valid in all respects. REPLY: Denied. Regardless of execution, Petitioners deny that the alleged Last Will, dated July 16, 2009 (the "Alleged Will"), is valid in all respects. By way of further reply, Petitioners re-allege and incorporate the averments set forth in paragraphs 1-25 of their Petition to Show Cause, as though fully set forth herein. 28. Decedent's Will was executed in the presence of William Duncan, Esquire, a skillful and experienced Cumberland County attorney of high repute. REPLY: Denied, for the reason that the Alleged Will is a document that speaks for itself. By way of further reply, Petitioners aver that, after reasonable investigation, they lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the validity of Respondent's opinions regarding the skill, experience and/or reputation of William Duncan,Esquire. 29. Decedent's Will makes no reference to his natural children, the Petitioners herein. REPLY: Denied, for the reason that the Alleged Will is a document that speaks for itself. Petitioners deny the necessary implication of Respondent's averment in this paragraph that the Alleged Will accurately represents Decedent's actual testamentary intent. By way of further reply, Petitioners re-allege and incorporate the averments set forth in paragraphs 1-25 of their Petition to Show Cause, as though fully set forth herein. 30. In fact, Decedent struck his children from his Will dated February 6, 2008, as shown in Exhibit A. REPLY: Denied, for the reason that the prior Last Will, dated February 6, 2008 (the "Prior Will"), is a document that speaks for itself. Petitioners deny the necessary implication of Respondent's averment in this paragraph that Decedent's alleged alterations or revisions to the Prior Will (collectively, the "Alleged Revisions") evince Decedent's actual testamentary intent. By way of further reply,Petitioners re-allege and incorporate the averments set forth in paragraphs 1-25 of their Petition to Show Cause, as though fully set forth herein. Moreover, Petitioners believe, and therefore aver,that the Alleged Revisions actually reflect Respondent's prolonged and concerted efforts to alienate - 2 - Decedent from Petitioners, specifically, and from Decedent's family, generally; for instance,Decedent not only allegedly removed any and all references to Petitioners,he also allegedly removed the innocuous reference to his "family's" burial plot in Blain Cemetery. By way of further reply,Petitioners believe, and therefore aver, that,when viewed in the context of all the surrounding circumstances, the Alleged Revisions actually reflect, and are the product of, Respondent's overmastering influence and control over Decedent, which Respondent exercised in order to enhance and protect Respondent's personal financial interests, and in support thereof Petitioners further aver as follows: (a) In or about 2008, and before Decedent executed the Prior Will, Respondent began to pressure Decedent to marry her; (b) Consequently, in 2008, presumably in an effort to mollify Respondent,Decedent and Respondent applied for no less than two (2) separate marriage licenses in Cumberland County,yet both times Decedent ultimately never followed through with the marriage, as established by the Register's Response to Research Request, dated November 19, 2014, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is fully incorporated herein by this reference; (c) Then, in February, 2008, presumably in an effort to mollify Respondent other than through marriage, Decedent executed the Prior Will; (d) However, presumably because Petitioners were included in the Prior Will, Respondent continued to pressure Decedent to modify the provisions of the Prior Will; - 3 - (e) As a result, in June, 2009, Decedent purportedly made the Alleged Revisions, and thereby allegedly excised even the most tangential and inconsequential references to any of Decedent's blood-related family,yet, at the same time, inexplicably preserved all references to, and even purportedly enhanced the beneficial interests of,Respondent's adult children,Richard Davis and Donald Davis, even though Decedent did not have any legal.nor personal relationship with Richard Davis and/or Donald Davis, as Respondent has tacitly admitted to be the case; (f) The purported fact that Decedent placed his initials and the date next to the Alleged Revisions does not in any way reflect Decedent's actual testamentary intent, because, as a layman,Decedent probably would not have.undertaken such "formal" procedures if he simply wanted his attorney, i.e., William Duncan, Esquire,-to revise/update the provisions of the Prior Will as a matter of routine estate planning; (g) Instead, by adding a modicum of"formality" to the Alleged Revisions, the purported fact that Decedent placed his initials and the date next to the Alleged Revisions merely reflects yet another effort by Decedent to appease Respondent other than through marriage; (h) Nevertheless, Respondent continued to pressure Decedent,and, as a result, in July, 2009, Decedent executed the Alleged Will,which conveniently maximizes the beneficial interest(s) of Respondent and, inexplicably, Respondent's adult children. [30.-sic] Undersigned counsel met with the Decedent in or about August, 2014, for purposes of reviewing his circumstances and estate plan in light of his serious - 4 - illness. Decedent wanted no changes made to his July 16, 2009 Last Will and Testament. REPLY: Denied. After reasonable investigation,Petitioners lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the validity of Respondent's legal counsel's averments regarding his alleged meeting with Decedent in or about August, 2014. By way of further reply, the contents and particulars of Decedent's alleged meeting with Respondent's legal counsel constitute privileged information subject to the attorney-client privilege,which can only be waived after Decedent's death by Decedent's duly appointed personal representative; however, due to Respondent's unexplained refusal to offer the Alleged Will for probate, neither Respondent nor anyone else has yet been appointed as Decedent's personal representative, and therefore the contents and particulars of Decedent's alleged meeting with Respondent's legal counsel continue to be protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege. 31. Decedent had a relationship with"Thrivent Financial"prior to his death. REPLY: Admitted. 32. While Decedent was residing in Forest Park, Decedent met with Ronald L. VanSteenaker and Michael P. Gallagher from Thrivent Financial for purposes of investment review. Decedent expressed no interest to these men to change any of his beneficiaries and it remained Decedent's interest at that time that Decedent's children should not inherit any of his assets upon Decedent's death. REPLY: Denied. After reasonable investigation, Petitioners lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the validity of the averments in this paragraph - 5 - regarding the alleged meeting between Decedent and Messrs. VanSteenaker and Gallagher, the purpose of such alleged meeting, and/or the particular matters discussed during such alleged meeting. By way of further reply, Petitioners deny the necessary implication of Respondent's averment in this paragraph that Decedent would naturally have expressed to Messrs. VanSteenaker and Gallagher Decedent's alleged testamentary intent that his "children should not inherit any of his assets," and/or that Messrs. VanSteenaker and Gallagher would naturally have elicited from Decedent such statements of testamentary intent, during an alleged meeting"for purposes of investment review." WHEREFORE, Petitioners respectfully request that the Register find that Respondent has failed to show sufficient cause why Letters of Administration should not be issued to Petitioners, and that the Register permit Petitioners to file a Petition for Grant of Letters of Administration for the Estate of Benjamin B. Bower, deceased. A proposed Decree is submitted herewith. Respectfully submitted, KEEFER, WOOD, ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP Dated: no,y , 2015 By: William R. Church, Esquire Attorney I.D.No. 318955 417 Walnut Street, 4th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17108-1963 (717) 255-8065 Attorney for Petitioners - 6 - i VEjZMCATION.'. The undersigned,DANA BOWER.,I ILIARY BOWER;and WESLEY BOWER,hereby verify and state that: 1. They are the Co-Petitioners in the foregoing Reply to New IVlatter, 2. The.averments set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true and correct to the best of'their knowledge,information and belief, and 3. They are aware that false statements herein are made subjectto the;penalties of 18,PaC.S.A. § 44904,relating to unsworn falsification to Wffiorities. r Z A BOWER,Co-Petitioner HILIARY BOWER,Co-Petitioner WESLEYBOWER,Co-Petitioner Dated-, I N VERIFICATION The undersigned, DANA BOWER,HILIARY BOWER, and WESLEY BOWER,hereby verify and state that: 1. They are the Co-Petitioners in the foregoing Reply to New Matter; 2. The averments set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true and correct to the best of their knowledge,information and belief; and 3. They are aware that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4904,relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DANA BO , Co-P itioner HIL ARY BO R, - etitioner WESLEY BOWER,Co-Petitioner Dated: I I i -- i i VERIFICATION The undersigned, DANA BOWER,MILIARY BOWER, and WESLEY BOWER,hereby verifv and state that: 1. They are the Co-Petitioners in the foregoing Reply to New Matter; € 2. The averments set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true and correct � to the best of their knowledge,information and belief; and 3. T ney are aware that false statements herein.are made subject to the penalties of 18 P&C.S.A.. § 4904,relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. r DANA BOWER, Co-Petitioner HILIA.RY BOWER, Co-Petitioner a �7-EBOW R. Co-Petitioner � Dated: j CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, WILLIAM R. CHURCH, Esquire, attorney for the Petitioners, hereby certify that I have served a true and correct copy the foregoing paper upon the party below-named this date by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Baric Scherer LLC Attn: Michael A. Scherer, Esq. 19 West South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP By _ WIL William R. Church Dated: May I , 2015 Lisa M. Grayson,Esq. Register of Wills& Clerk of Orphans'Count rr_ One Courthouse Square, Suite 102 Carlisle, PA 17013 Marjorie A. Wevodau First Deputy fR j'a'r .e J Phone: (717)240-6345 Wayne M. .Pecht,Esq. Fax: (717)240-7797 Solicitor OFFICES OF Ji t" of W itb & ee"k of the UV atw l eco" RESPONSE TO RESEARCH REQUEST November 19, 2014 ❑ A MARRIAGE WAS LOCATED. ❑ A COPY IS ATTACHED. NO MARRIAGE RECORD WAS FOUND. ❑ NEED MORE INFORMATION TO CONDUCT SEARCH. ❑ FEE REQUIRED. Please forward a check in the amount of$5 per name to be searched. Make check payable to Register of Wills and included a self-addressed stamped envelope. '. ] YOUR RECEIPT IS ENCLOSED. COMMENTS: � Pt�e� �i c c n �� - INC) r urn i�c�rrl a acs b *--�-� V-Cc6ve_d ' \b Yef� rd a - may-na _ W C-ow)'nas-tco-)d Czo-Ln--'�/. INT EXHIBIT A