HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-2943
GRACE SAGE,
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
: NO. ()L-:J.'i'l.J ('~~l ~~
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/kJa AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
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.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE
A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE
Cumberland County Bar Association
2 Liberty Avenue
Carlisle, P A 17013
(717) 249-3166
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
: NO. 01. 29'1...3 Cux.e /~
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/kJa AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
COMPLAINT
AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Grace Sage, by and through her attorneys, Caldwell &
Kearns, and files the within Complaint, and in support thereof avers the following:
1. The Plaintiff, Grace Sage, is an adult individual residing at 15 Charles Court, Ocean, New
Jersey 07712.
2. Defendant William McCarthy is an adult individual with a last known address of 1071-6
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
3. Defendant Amy Buhrman a/kJa Amy McCarthy, is an adult individual with a last known
address of 4626 South Cobia Way, Nagshead, North Carolina 27959.
4. On or about September 19,1996, the Defendants entered into a Rental Agreement with
the Plaintiff to rent a condominium located at 1071-6 Lancaster Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
1
5. The terms of the Rental Agreement are memorialized in the Agreement dated September
19, 1996, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference.
6. The original Agreement called for the Defendants to rent the property for $500.00 per
month.
7. It was also agreed upon that Defendants would pay all utilities and the condominium fees.
8. Pursuant to the Lease Agreement, the Defendants would rent the property until September
1,2001.
9. It was also verbally agreed by the Plaintiff and Defendants that the Defendants would
purchase the property at the end ofthe five-year term.
10. In fact, the property was purchased by the Plaintiff as a favor to the Defendants with the
understanding that the Defendants would eventually purchase the property.
11. During the course of the rental agreement, the Defendants were often delinquent with the
rental payments and condominium association fees.
12. In May 2000, the Defendants surrendered the property and advised that they would not be
purchasing the property.
13. The Defendants owed rent and condominium fees for June, July, August, September,
October and November.
14. The Defendants breached the Lease Agreement.
15. The Plaintiff did not accept the surrender of the property, but immediately demanded
from Defendants all rents that were due until the property was sold or re-rented.
2
16. The Defendants failed to keep the premises in clean and sanitary condition or maintain
the property in good repair.
17. The Defendants allowed pets to live in the property which caused extensive damage,
including urination on the carpets.
18. The Defendants failed to keep the property in substantially the same condition in which it
was leased to Defendants, absent normal wear and tear.
19. The Plaintiff has been forced to replace the carpet and vinyl due to damage caused by the
Defendants.
20. The Plaintiff was forced to carry special insurance for a vacant unit from June 2000 to
November 2000.
21. The Plaintiff was forced to pay property management fees from June 2000 to November
2000.
22. The Plaintiff was forced to replace the mailbox key which was lost and/or not
relinquished by the Defendants.
23. The Plaintiffwas forced to repaint the walls of the property and make other repairs due to
damage caused by the Defendants.
24. The Plaintiff has made demand on the Defendants for payment of outstanding rent and for
the damages, but the Defendants have failed to pay the same.
3
25. As a result ofthe Defendants breach of the Lease, the Plaintiff has suffered the following
damages:
(a) Loss ofrent, six months at $500.00 per month
(b) Loss of condo fees, six months at $154.00 per month
(c) PP&L for a vacant unit, six months at $22.00 per month
(d) Special insurance on vacant unit
(e) New carpet and vinyl
(f) Repairs and painting
(g) Property management fees
(h) Replacement of mail key
TOTAL:
$3,000.00
$924.00
$132.00
$600.00
$3,100.00
$2,000.00
$200.00
$50.00
$10,006.00
26. The Plaintiff has mitigated her damages by re-renting the property in December of2000.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants in the amount of
Ten Thousand and Six ($10,006.00) Dollars, which amount is within the arbitration limits for
Cumberland County.
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
Dol," f j J;
I
00-446/22800
4
This Agr.eeinent
Made this /~ dlyof A~
v'
between 0~ J. ;S ~
hereinafter styled the party of the fll'St part, and
;:# .((,
A.D. 19 Y t.
~91v~'?Je-~
hereinafter Slyled the party of Ibe second pan.
WTmESSETH. ThaI the said party 0{ the fD'St pan. in CIllIlSidention of the reot and covenants hcmnafta-
mentioned. dodI demise and lease unto the said party of the second part to be UJCd as a ~ die
premises situated in the
Countyof ~ /(/'7/- t A~ 4L-v-,/.
and CcmmonweaJth 0{ pennsylvania. described as foUowl: ~ ~ -r V"'k.~
10 HAVE AND 10 HOLD unto the said party 0{ Ibe second part, subject 10 the conditions of Ibis
agreement for lcnn beginning on the / t:j't::h...; clay 0{ .5.J./JIt. ,197' ,and endiD, OIl
clayo{ q~1 'j - ,i9'..<"o/, 7-
IN CONSIDERATION OF WlDCH the said party 0{ the second part agees to pay to the said party of the
flJ'St part for the use and occupancy of the said premises, the sum 0{ .sot:>'F dollars, payable ~ '.- ~ /
foUows,viz: (7)"'- ~?:2;./~~ ~~ r~~~~
AS A RJRnZi CONSIDERATION for the use and occupancy 0{ said premises the said ~ of the ~~~
second part hereby agrees 10 faithfully keep and be bound by the following covenants, conditions and
agreements. viz:
The said premises are 10 be kept and maintained in as good repair and condition as at present and at the
expiration of lhe lease. they are to be swrendered in lite repair and oondition. Dalural wear and damages
happening by fJre. stonn or other casualties only exceJ*d
The premises are to be kepi in a clean and sanitary oondition and all ashes or other garbage which may
accumulate thereon during the tenn are 10 be removed. and in case of failure to remove the same the party
of the flISt part may collect as rent due and in arrears double the cost of removal: the waler. lighting or
other service for the use of lhe occupants of the said pemises furnished by aoy Public Service Company
during the said tenn shall be paid for by the said party d the second part unless ochenvise provided benin,
or the same may be collected by the said party of the first part as rent due and in arrears,
Nothing shall be done upon said premises CODtraI)' to the conditions of the policies of insurance upoo the
buildings thereon whereby the hazard may be increased or the insurance invaIidaJed; neither the whole nor
any portion of the said premises shall be sublec, nor shall this lease or any interest therein be assigned. nor
shall the party of the second part remove or anempl to remove from said premises d~ the lenD or this
lease. without the wntlen consent of the said party of Ibe flJ'St part; and 110 unlawful buSl.lleSS shall II any
time be carried on upon said premises.
The removal of any goods from the premises. whether by clay or by night. without the written coosent d
the pany 0{ the first part, shall be deemed a clandesline and frauduJenl removal and sucb goods sha1I
remain liable to distress for a period of thirty days after such removal wherever they may be found.
If default shaIl be made in !he payment of any part of the said rent after the same becomes due, 0' in case of
a breach or evasion or any a!tempt to break or evade my of the covenants or conditions ollhis agRement.
the entire rent reserved for the full tenD of this Icase remaining unpaid shaD become due and payable at
once and may forthwith be collected by distress or otherwise, and at the same time the party of the first pan
may forfeit and annul the expired portion of this lease and enter upon and repossess the said premises with
or without process of law. and without giving any notice wbatsoever.
Acceptance by the party of the fU'S( part of any of the said rent at any time after the same shall become due.
after default has been made in the payment thereof. or any failure 10 enforce any of the rights herein
reserved to the pany of the filst part. or any of the penalies. foneitures or conditions herein contained. shall
not in any way be considered a waiver of the right to enforce the same at any times without any notice
whatsoever. and any allcmplto coIlect the rent by one JWOCeeding sbaU not be considered as a waiver of the
right to coIleet the same by any other proceeding. but aU of the rights of the party of the fU'St part. and all
forfeitures, penalties and conditions may be enforced lOgether or successively at the option of the party of
the first part,
II is futhcr agreed thai ilthe party of the IeCCOd part sha1J become insolvent. mate . assipment for die ,-It, . Y
. benefit of creditors, canmit .y ICI of blntnlpecy. file a voIui1lWy petition in bIntJuPcy. or if any ,.
judgmenl shaD be entered or and involuntary petition in bInbuptcj (lied apiDst die aid I*lY of die
second pan. all the reAl reserved for the rub term 0( this \else shaD become clue and collectable
immcdialdy by disrress or ClIberwiJe.
The prothonoIary or any anouney or any Court or Record of Pennsylvania is hereby IUIhorized 10 appear
for and to confess a judgmenlagainsl!he said party or !he sccood pan and in favor 01 !he said party or die
fU'St pan for the whole amount of said rent as bereinbefore set fath.
And the said party of tbe second pan bereby waives Ibe usuaJ ~ to quit. and Igrees 10 surrender said
premises II the expiration 0( said tenn. or the rennination 01 this lease. without any nodcc wbaIsocver. And
upon any proceeding instilUle.d for die recovery 01 said relll, either by distress or otherwise. the said party
of the second pany waiVes the benefit of aU appraisement. slay and exemption laws. the right of inquisition
on real estate, and all bankruptCy or insolvency laws now in force or Ilereafler passed.
Upon the breach of any of !he covenants or agreements 0( this lease or upon its tennination by forteilure.
default or expiration. tbe ProchonoIary or any a1touney IS afORsaid is hereby aulhorized \0 appear for and
10 confess judgment in an amicable action 01 ejectment against the said party or the secoocl pan and in
favor of the said pany of tbe fUS( part for lbepremises herin described and 10 direct the imme4...te issuing
of I wreit of habere facias possessionem with clause 0( fieri facias for costs. waiving aD inqularitieS,
without asking leave of court.
II is futher agreed thai tbe terms and CondliOllS of this agreement and lease shall in no way be changed or
allered excepl by a writing signed by aU ollbe parties here1o: and if Ibe said pari)' ollhe IeCond pari shaD
continue in possession Ii Ibe said premises afIa' the expiration of said tenn. lithe option of the said party
of the fU'St part, such holding over may be beId and deemed a renewal or this agreement for anodIer like
term. the same IS though a new agreemenl or leasing. idenlical with \his, had been executed and delivered
by the said panics hereto for succeeding tenD..
L~<<:.,\...... ~-.;)\~~
'Z>C:a-~,,\Q-g~Q,,&
~'-\ '""S,=>,--\ Q~
The conditions of Ibis agreement shall extend 10 the adminislralOrS and executors of all the parties
hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. The panics aforesaid have heleunlO set their hands and seals the day and
year fUS( above wilen,
in the presence of
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
~
~
~
~
~
)
~~'" ,Itl \:
~ ~ ~ ~ ...
~ ~ ~t f ~
't
~ ~ ~ ~
~ "\ '"
co~ ,~ ~
""'" ~ '\)
~
~ ~
.., c>
E 'B i
e c >.
II.. {!. ti ~
.., .., "" "" ~ "" .., .., .., .., .., ""
i. >. ~
< ~ ~
..
.8
;; E
:J B
>. DO Q.
:; :J c>
... < Ci'l
..JJ".i
~ I J ~ ~ J
. .
VERIFICATION
I, Grace Sage, verify that the averments in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct. I
understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904,
relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
By:
~::::;$a:=
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this /5+1'\ day of May, 2001, I hereby certify that I have served a copy of
the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy ofthe same in the
U.S. Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, certified mail/return receipt requested, postage prepaid,
addressed to:
Amy Buhrman
aIkIa Amy McCarthy
4626 South Cobia Way
Nagshead, NC 27959
CALDWELL & KEARNS
BYU~~
GRACE SAGE,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
Plaintiff
v.
NO. 01-2943
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/kJa AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE PURSUANT TO Pa.R.c.P. 237.1
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
: ss:
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
Personally appeared before me, a Notary Public in and for said Commonwealth and County,
DOUGLAS K. MARSICO, ESQUIRE, who, being duly sworn according to law, states that he served
a copy of the Complaint upon the Defendant, Amy Buhrman a/kJa/ Amy McCarthy, pursuant to
Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1930.4 by mailing to the said Amy Buhrman at 4626 South Cobia
Way, Nagshead, North Carolina 27959, by certified mail, return receipt requested, said certified mail
piece being Article No. 70993400001289736673, that service ofthe foregoing was made on May 22,
2001, and that attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference is the return receipt, bearing the
signature of the Defendant's agent, acknowledging receipt of the aforementioned document by the
Defendant.
c::--~
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 0 ~ Esquire
';?f'~ay of ,~r ' 2001.
-
HOTARW..SEAl
TAMARA s. HAIR. NoIBry PullIc
CIty of ~.~Ccll*r
My Commission . 28, 2004
00-446/25003
.
. Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
. Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
. Attach this card to the back of the mail piece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Amy Buhrman
Amy McCarthy
4626 South Cobia Way
Nagshead, NC 27959
3. Service Type
~ertified Mail
o Registered
o Insured Mail
o Express Mail
o Return Receipt for Merchandise
DC,Q.D,
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
DYes
2, Article Number (Copy from service label)
7099 3400 0012 8973 6673
PS Form 3811, July 1999 Dome<:tic Return Receipt
SA6E
102595.QO.M.0952
..
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this ZQ-l-h day of May, 2001, I hereby certify that I have served a copy of
the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy ofthe same in the
u.s. Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
Amy Buhrman
a/k/a Amy McCarthy
4626 South Cobia Way
Nagshead, NC 27959
F. Stephenson Matthes, Esquire
III North Front Street
Harrisburg, PAl 710 1
Attorney for Defendant, William McCarthy
CALDWELL & KEARNS
By lM~~~
,='
c""':,'
(;: \
t-."
f_:
-',
C) U
0
III i'
Z z f- -<
0 "'
0: I- ~ "' Z
<{ ~ -< ll: -<
0: f-
W 0 .J '" >
~ ~ I- .J
0: f- >-
0 -< z III
L6 u III I 0 Z
..J ll:
~ >- ... z
.J z w W
.J I D-
O Z f-
W Ul II: ll: C)
~ Ul 0 0
"' II:
0 ~ I- z :>
0 I- -
.J 0: -< l'l m
<{ ~ 1O III
U ~ l'l II:
II:
-<
:I:
HM-9Sl L9' ^~.ss lL9 ...,S-€S lL9' .::lS-l"S IL9
'ON r-lI::lO:l -00 Alddns 1'f'f)313.Llf.lS-TW
06/06/01 WED 15:08 FAX 717 232 6802
T.A & S - Hbg, PA
I4J 002
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
: NO. () I - 2 I( 'iJ
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN alkla AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE
I do hereby accept service of and acknowledge receipt of a filed copy of the Complaint in
the above case.
Date: t, 6 - 0/
F. t henson Matthes, Esquire
III orth Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Attorney for Defendant, William McCarthy
00-446/24480
>- r-. ~
~ ~
tJJ ~-=2 N ::J<(
0---
U.r~7 ~= (.):?
._'-C,J
~~~" a.. ....
r.:l:::;;:
eO'5;=!
63E:" r- "-, (/)
I "5z
....J ,:J::Z
i'l:. ~ LlJLU
--,
~ COo-
-J 2
l.l-_ :;)
0 0 0
0
II) i'
Z z >- <(
0 w
It ... ~ w Z
<( . <( a: <(
0: >-
W 0 ...J 1Il >
:::( ~ I- ...J
0: >- >-
0 <( z CIl
t.6 u CIl I 0 z
-' >- a: Z
. ...
...J z III III
...J I D-
o Z >-
W !/l a: a: Cl
~ !/l 0 0
"' a:
0 ~ I- z ::l
0 I- - m
...J 0: <( l'l
<( ~ ID CIl
U . l'l a:
a:
<(
1:
f.!M'9S l L9' A~HiS l L9' ,S-ES l L9' .:/S-Z!O l L9
'ON W~O.::l'O::> AlddOS l't'~313.1\l'J.S"''o'
"
.'
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
GRACE SAGE
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
WILLIAM McCARTHY, and
AMY BUHRMAN, a/k/a
AMY McCARTHY,
NO. f)oo 1 - 0 2-'1 ~ ~
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE TO PLEAD
TO: Grace Sage
c/o Douglas K, Marsico, Esquire
Caldwell & Kearns
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg,PA 17110-1533
Attorney for Plaintiff
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.
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C.
By PJ#/JI~ - ~
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 84127
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
AttorneysfurDeren~~
Dated: June 1"1,2001
Document #173211
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
GRACE SAGE
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
WILLIAM McCARTHY, and
AMY BUHRMAN, a/kJa
AMY McCARTHY,
NO.
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
DEFENDANT BUHRMAN'S ANSWER TO
PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NEW MATTER
Defendant, Amy McCarthy, by and through her attorneys, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss
& Erb, P.C., answer the corresponding numbered paragraphs of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint
as follows:
I. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Buhrman is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph I of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
2. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant McCarthy is an
individual. The remaining allegations are denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant
Buhrman is without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the remainder of the
averments in paragraph 1 of Plaintiff s Complaint. Strict proof therefore is demanded at time of
trial.
3. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that the address given for the
defendant is correct. It is denied that the name given for the defendant is correct in that it is not
current. By way offurther answer, Defendant Buhrman has taken the name of Amy L. B.
Brabrand. (Defendant Buhrman is hereafter referred to as "Defendant Brabrand")
Document #: 208678,]
4. Denied.
5. Denied.
6. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants paid $500 in rent
per month to Plaintiff. It is denied that rent was paid pursuant to any formal rental agreement,
either written of oral.
7. Denied.
8. Denied.
9. Denied.
10. Denied.
11. Denied.
After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
12. Denied, After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 12 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
13, Denied, After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
14. Paragraph 14 contains a conclusion oflaw to which no responsive pleading is
required. To the extent that a responsive pleading is required, Paragraph 14 is denied.
Document #173211
15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
16. Denied. Denied outright with respect to Defnendant Brabrand, with respect
Defendant McCarthy, after reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 16 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time oftrial.
17. Denied. Denied outright with respect to Defnendant Brabrand, with respect
Defendant McCarthy, after reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 17 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
18. Denied. Denied outright with respect to Defnendant Brabrand, with respect
Defendant McCarthy, after reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 18 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 19 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
20. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 20 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
Document #173211
21. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 21 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereofis demanded at the time of trial.
22. Denied. Denied outright with respect to Defnendant Brabrand, with respect
Defendant McCarthy, after reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
23. Denied. Denied outright with respect to Defnendant Brabrand, with respect
Defendant McCarthy, after reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 23 of Plaintiff s
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
24, Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff has made demand for
payment which payment was not made. It is denied that Defendant Burhman "failed" to pay
Plaintiff is so much as the averment suggests that Defendant Brabrand was under some
obligation to pay Plaintiff. Paragraph 24 is denied with respect to Defendant McCarthy, after
reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as
to the truth of the averments in paragraph 24 of Plaintiff s Complaint. Strict proof thereof is
demanded at the time of trial.
25. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 25 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial.
Document #173211
26. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Brabrand is without sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 26 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time oftrial.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Brabrand avers that she is not liable to Plaintiff in any amount
whatsoever and prays that the Complaint against them be dismissed and that they be awarded
costs of defense and such other relief as may be just and appropriate.
NEW MATTER
By way of further answer and defense, Defendants aver the following New Matter in
accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1030:
27. Paragraphs 1 through 26 of this Answer and New Matter are incorporated herein
by reference.
28. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,
29. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statutes oflimitation.
30. Plaintiff's claim is for the enforcement of a contract for an interest in real
property .
31. There is no written contract signed by Defendant Brabrand.
32. Plaintiff's claim to enforce a contract is barred by the statute frauds.
33. Plaintiff's claim is to enforce an oral lease agreement of more than three years in
duration.
33. Plaintiff's claim to enforce the contract is barred by the Landlord Tenant Act.
34. Defendant Brabrand moved out of Plaintiff's property on or about July 4, 1998.
Document #173211
35. Defendant Brabrand has not entered Plaintiffs since she moved out on or about
July 4, 1998.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Brabrand, avers that she is not liable to Plaintiff in any
amount whatsoever and prays that the Complaint against them be dismissed and that they be
awarded costs of defense, reasonable attorney fees and such other relief as may be just and
appropriate.
COUNTER CLAIM - VIOLATION OF PLAIN LANGUAGE CONSUMER
CONTRACT ACT AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW
36. Paragraphs 1 through 35 ofthis Answer and New Matter are incorporated herein
by reference.
37. The contract Plaintiff claims to exist is a consumer contract under the Plain
Language Consumer Contract Act.
38. To the extent that Plaintiff is able to show that any oral contract did exist, it is in
violation of the Plain Language Consumer Contract Act.
39. It is believed and therefore averred that the Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint is a
lease form that has not been approved by the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
40. Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint contains language that is confusing in that
contains:
a. long words and sentences.
b. references to the parties as "party of the first part" and "party of the
second part" rather by personal pronouns.
Document #173211
c. sentences with more than one condition.
39. To the extent that Plaintiff is able to show that Exhibit A to Plaintiff s Complaint
memorializes an agreement between the parties, Exhibit A is in violation of the Plain Language
Consumer Contract Act.
40. Any violation of the Plain Language Consumer Contract Act is a violation of the
Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Brabrand prays this Honorable Court to enter judgment in her
favor and for damages in the amount provided for by statute, reasonable attorney fees, and any
other remedy that the Court finds just and appropriate,
Respectfully submitted,
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C.
By: z::::::?/, -'~
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 84127
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, P A 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
Attorneys for Defendants
Date: June n, 2001
Documenl #173211
VERIFICATION
I, Amy L. B. Brabrand, hereby certify that the following is correct:
The facts set forth in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiff s Complaint with New Matter are
based upon information which we have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has
been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on my behalf in this matter. The language of the
Answer to Plaintiff s Complaint with New Matter is that of counsel and not my own, I have read
the Answer to Plaintiff s Complaint with New Matter, and to the extent that it is based upon
information which we have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of our knowledge,
information, and belief. To the extent that the content of the Answer to Plaintiff s Complaint with
New Matter is that of counsel, I have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby
acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Answer to Plaintiff s Amended Complaint with
\
New Matter are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S.A. ~4904 relating to unsworn
falsification to authorities.
~~~~~o-~~D-~
. B. brand
Date: ~ - 'IS - cl.~~ \
Document #173211
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this II-day of June, 2001, I, David H. Martineau, of Metzger, Wickersham,
Knauss & Erb, P.C., attorneys for Defendants, hereby certify that I served the foregoing Answer
with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint this day by depositing the same in the United States mail,
postage prepaid, addressed to:
Douglas K. Marsico, Esquire
Caldwell & Kearns
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg,PA 17110-1533
By:
~:H'~~~
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Document #173211
I
.
,>
GRACE SAGE
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
WILLIAM McCARTHY, and
AMY BUHRMAN, a!kIa
AMY McCARTHY,
NO. dcx)( - 6l... 9 \.()
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Kindly enter the appearance of undersigned counsel on behalf of Defendant Buhrman.
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C.
By p-/ ;#'e:(~~
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Attorney J.D. No. 84127
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
Attorneys for Defendant
Dated: ~ "'o;c., ''t 2.... I
Document #: 209033,}
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this 19th day of June, 2001, I, David H, Martineau, Esquire, of Metzger,
Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., attorneys for Defendant, hereby certify that I served a copy of
the within Praecipe for Entry of Appearance this day by depositing the same in the United States
mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to:
Douglas K. Marsico, Esquire
Caldwell & Keams
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg,PA 17110-1533
7;:2/~/ ~~
David H. Martineau
Document #: 209033,]
GRACE SAGE,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
NO. 01-2943
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/k/a AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NOTICE TO PLEAD
TO: Ms. Amy Brabrand
c/o David H. Martineau, Esquire
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C.
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, that the New Matter to Counter-Claim set forth herein
contain averments against you to which you are required to respond within twenty (20) days after
service thereof. Failure by you to do so may constitute an admission.
CALDWELL & KEARNS
Dated:
G-/CC/U J
~
o . Mar~qUlre
Attorney ID# 69804
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, P A 1711 0-1533
(717) 232-7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
,.
GRACE SAGE,
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
: NO. 01-2943
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN aIkIa AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT
AMY BUHRMAN a/kla AMY MCCARTHY a/kla AMY BRABRAND
AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Grace Sage, by and through her attorneys, CALDWELL &
KEARNS, and files the within Reply to New Matter of Defendant Amy Buhrman aIkIa/ Amy McCarthy
aIkIa Amy Brabrand, and in support thereof avers the following:
27. No answer required.
28. Denied. Paragraph 28 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
29. Denied. Paragraph 29 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
30. Denied. Paragraph 30 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
31. Admitted.
32. Denied. Paragraph 32 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
33. Denied. Paragraph 33 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
33. (Misnumbered) Denied. Paragraph 33 (misnumbered) is a legal conclusion to which no
answer is required.
34. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiffis without knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truthfulness of this averment, and therefore, the same is denied.
35. Denied. Afterreasonable investigation, Plaintiffis without knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truthfulness of this averment, and therefore, the same is denied.
Counter Claim - Violation of Plain Lanl!:ual!:e Consumer Contract
Act and Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law
36. No answer required.
37. Denied. Paragraph 37 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
38. Denied. Paragraph 38 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
39. Denied. Paragraph 39 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
40. Denied. Paragraph 40 is a legal conclusion to which no answer is required.
39. (Misnumbered) Denied. Paragraph 39 (misnumbered) is a legal conclusion to which no
answer is required.
40. (Misnumbered) Denied. Paragraph 40 (misnumbered) is a legal conclusion to which no
answer is required.
New Matter to Counter-Claim
41. Plaintiff, Grace Sage, hereby incorporates Paragraphs 27 through 40 (misnumbered) as
though the same were set forth in length hereunder.
42. Defendant's Counter-Claim fails to state a cause of action to which relief can be granted.
2
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands Judgment as prayed for in her Complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
Dated: ~ Ie.. ? / ;) (
00-446/26229
~~-
Do . Marsico, Esquire
Attorney ID# 69804
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533
(717) 232-7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
3
CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this ~~ntl day of June, 2001, I hereby certify that I have served a copy ofthe
within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy ofthe same in the U.S.
Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
David H. Martineau, Esquire
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C.
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, P A 17110-0300
Attorney for Defendant. Amy Buhrman aIkIa
Amy McCarthy a/k/a Amy L.B, Brabrand
F. Stephenson Matthes, Esquire
III North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Attorney for Defendant, William McCarthy
CALDWELL & KEARNS
Lhw~
By:
o
t:
I1Iz roO{
Z 0 w -
a:;:~ ~~
C(~~ r>
~~I- ~~
~"'oO{ ZUl
.J( 8 Ul \ ~ z
"U..J> u...Z
.-I ~ W I ~
.JOZ r.
W;;;o:: ~C)
>~O zO::
... ... I- ::l
Dol- c;j1D
.J"'oO{ wUl
c(~ l'lji
U ~
:t
.'._-,"-
"
"'''t
GRACE SAGE
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 01-.;(943
WILLIAM McCARTHY, and
AMY BUHRMAN, a/k/a
AMY McCARTHY,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
DEFENDANT BUHRMAN'S REPLY TO
PLAINTIFF'S NEW MATTER
Defendant, Amy Brabrand a/k/a Amy Buhrman a/k/a Amy McCarthy ("Defendant
Brabrand"), by and through her attorneys, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., answers
the corresponding numbered paragraphs of Plaintiffs Reply to New Matter of Defendant Amy
Buhrman a/k/a Amy McCarthy a/k/a Amy Brabrand. Defendant Brabrand hereby addopts and
incorporates in to this Reply all responses and new matter set forth in Defendant Brabrand's
Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint and New Matter filed with the Court June 19,2001 and
responds,now to the Plaintiffs New Matter as follows:
41. No response is required.
42. Denied. Paragraph 42 contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent that a responsive pleading is required, Paragraph 42 is
denied.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Brabrand demands judgment as prayed for in her Answer to
Plaintiffs Complaint and New Matter.
Document #173211
.
~
Respectfully submitted,
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.c.
By:
P///~~
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 84127
3211 North Front Street
P.O, Box 5300
Harrisburg, P A 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
"'-
Attorneys for Defendants
Date: June li, 2001
Document #173211
"
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this7...1 ~ay of June, 2001, I, David H. Martineau, of Metzger, Wickersham,
Knauss & Erb, P.C., attorneys for Defendants, hereby certify that I served the foregoing Answer
with New Matter to Plaintiff s Complaint this day by depositing the same in the United States mail,
postage prepaid, addressed to:
Douglas K, Marsico, Esquire
Caldwell & Kearns
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg,PA 17110-1533
F. Stephenson Mattbes, Esquire
111 North Front Street
Harrisburg, P A 171 0 1
By:
D//#~~
-
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Documem #173211
GRACE SAGE,
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
: NO. 01-2943 Civil Term
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/k/a AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
ANSWER, NEW MATTER OF COUNTERCLAIM OF
DEFENDANT WILLIAM MCCARTHY TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
AND NOW comes the Defendant, William McCarthy ("McCarthy"), by and through his
attorneys, F. Stephenson Matthes, Esquire and the law firm of Tucker Arensberg & Swartz, P.C.
and files the within Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint and in support thereof avers as follows:
1. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
2. Admitted in part. It is admitted that Defendant William McCarthy is an adult
individual, however it is denied that Defendant McCarthy resides at the address stated in
Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendant has not resided at that address since Plaintiff terminated
Defendant's lease in May of2000.
3. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
- 1 -
4. Admitted in part. It admitted that Defendants entered into a verbal rental
agreement with Plaintiff to rent to condominium at 1071-6 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg,
P A 17055, however to the extent that the same is implied it is denied that any such terms were
ever reduced to a writing or that specific terms were ever agreed upon other than a monthly
rental amount.
5. Denied. It is denied that terms of any rental agreement were ever memorialized in
writing or that any agreement was ever executed by the parties. By way of further answer, it is
denied that the terms contained in Plaintiffs' Exhibit "A" constitute an agreement between the
parties.
6. Admitted in part and denied in part, it is admitted that Defendants initially paid a
rental amount of $500.00 per month for the Premises, however, any characterization to the
"Agreement" as constituting the written document attached as Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint
are denied as no such other terms were ever agreed upon between the parties.
7. Admitted.
8. Denied. It is denied that a written Lease Agreement memorializing the terms of
any rental agreement between the parties exists or that the original agreement for tenancy was
anything other than a month to month tenancy with a fixed termination date in advance.
9. Denied. It is denied that Defendants made a binding verbal agreement or
commitment to purchase the Premises at end of period of time. To the extent that any discussion
was made, any such agreement would be invalid under the Statute of Frauds.
10. Defendant is without sufficient and information as to the truth or veracity of the
averments contained in paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs Complaint, to the extent that an answer is
- 2 -
required, it is denied that Plaintiff purchased the property as a favor to Defendants or in reliance
that Defendants would purchase the property.
11. Defendant is without sufficient and information as to the truth or veracity of the
averments contained in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint. To the extent an answer is
required the averment are denied. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
12. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants surrendered the
Property to Plaintiff in May of 2000, however, it is denied that there was still any understanding
or expectation that Defendants would be purchasing the Property. By way of further answer,
Defendant McCarthy surrendered the property at the specific request of Plaintiff.
13. Denied. Defendants were not responsible for any charges for rent or
condominium fees for the premises beyond May of 2000, the date that Defendant surrendered the
Property to Plaintiff.
14. The averments contained in paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs Complaint are a conclusion
of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required it is denied that
Defendants breached the lease agreement, but rather, by way of further answer, it is averred that
Defendant McCarthy surrendered the premises to Plaintiff at Plaintiffs request after thirty (30)
day notice to vacate was given by Plaintiff.
15. Denied. It is denied that Plaintiff did not accept surrender of the property or
immediately demanded rents due as Plaintiff made no demand for additional rent until a period
oftime after the surrender of the Premises by Defendants. By way of further answer, Plaintiff
requested that Defendants vacate the property in April of 2000 providing notice to Defendant
McCarthy of her wishes to have him leave the property, thus terminating the Lease.
- 3-
16. Denied. It is denied that the premises were not kept in clean and sanitary
condition or maintained in good repair by Defendants. By way of further answer, the premises
were subject to reasonable wear and tear during the time that Defendants were in possession of
the property.
17. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants had pets at the
property, however, it is denied that these pets caused "extensive damage."
18. Denied. It is denied that the property was not kept in substantially similar
condition as it was leased to Defendants, short of normal and acceptable wear and tear.
19. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
20. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 20 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
21. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
22. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's
Complaint. By way of further answer, it is denied that Defendant McCarthy did not return any
mailbox key to Plaintiff. Defendant's mailbox key was left in Premises when Defendant
McCarthy surrendered the Premises to Plaintiff at Plaintiff's request.
- 4 -
23. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 23 of Plaintiffs
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
24. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff has made demand on
Defendant for payment of rent and damages, and that Defendants have failed to pay charges
demanded, however, it is denied that any outstanding rent or damage amounts exist.
25. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 25 of Plaintiffs
Complaint. By way of further answer, it is denied that Plaintiff has suffered any loss of rent, loss
of condominium fees or other damages as listed in paragraph 25 as Plaintiff terminated the
month to month lease giving proper thirty (30) day notice to Defendant McCarthy.
26. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
belief as to the truth or veracity of the averments contained in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs
Complaint. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendant McCarthy respectfully request this Honorable Court to
dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice and award to answering Defendant attorneys' fees
and costs and any such relief as is deemed just and fair.
NEW MATTER
27. Answering Defendant McCarthy hereby incorporates his answers to paragraphs
1 - 26 as if set forth in full herein.
28. The parties never executed a written lease with respect to the rented premises. As
there was no executed lease between the parties, the specific terms contained in the document
- 5 -
attached as Exhibit "A" to Plaintiffs Complaint are not binding upon Defendants as they do not
reflect terms agreed upon by the parties.
29. Defendants had an oral agreement for rental of the Property with Plaintitffor the
sum of $500.00 per month.
30. In approximately January, 1999, Plaintiff informed Defendant McCarthy that she
would be changing the rental terms for the Property to require monthly rental payments of
$700.00 from Defendant McCarthy. Defendant McCarthy began making payments under the
new lease terms with Plaintiff of $700.00 per month.
31. By increasing Defendant McCarthy's rent without other notice, Defendant thereby
created a new month to month lease for the Property.
32. Plaintiff voluntarily increased the monthly rental amounts, thereby materially
changing any existing original rental terms that may have existed.
33. In August of 1999, Plaintiff changed the terms of rental by decreasing Defendants'
rent from $700.00 a month to $500.00 per month.
34. Defendant McCarthy began paying rent at the modified rate of $500.00 per month
thereafter.
35. Plaintiff again changed the terms of rental in January, 2000, when she increased the
rent to $700.00 per month.
36. Defendant McCarthy paid this new monthly rental amount.
37. F or a forth time, Plaintiff changed the terms of the rental in April of 2000 by
reducing Defendants' rent to $500.00 per month.
38. Defendant paid this reduced rate through the end of his rental period.
- 6 -
39. In April of2000, Defendant McCarthy timely made rental payment to Plaintiff.
40. Despite timely rental payment by Defendant McCarthy, Plaintiff apparently lost
or misplaced Defendant McCarthy's rental check and telephoned McCarthy demanding a
replacement check.
41. McCarthy immediately complied with Plaintiffs request for a replacement check
for the April, 2000 rent.
42. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff telephoned McCarthy and requested that he vacate the
premises within thirty (30) days, thus, terminating the month to month rental between the parties.
43. As a result of Plaintiffs termination notice, Defendant McCarthy sought and
secured alternative housing.
44. Several days after Defendant McCarthy had secured housing for himself, Plaintiff
contacted him, asking him to reconsider leaving and asked ifhe would be willing to continue to
rent the premises from her.
45. No writings whatsoever exist stating that Defendants would be bound or
otherwise agreed to purchase the Property from Plaintiff.
46. No written agreement or any other such writing memorializing terms of any lease
agreement between the parties was ever prepared.
47. Any sale of the Premises to Defendants would have exceeded the sum of $500.00.
48. Any rental term between the parties other than the month to month rental during
the period oftime when rent was set at $500.00 per month was ever reduced to writing between
the parties.
- 7 -
49. The carpet in the Property was in excess of twenty-five years old and was not in
good condition when Defendants moved into the Property.
50. The vinyl flooring in the property was also similarly aged approximately twenty-
five years and was not in good condition when Defendants took possession of the Premises.
51. It is believed and therefor averred that Plaintiff made no attempts to relet the
Property until December of2000.
52. There is no mention in any writing or alleged verbal conversation reference to any
obligation on the part of the Defendants for payment of property management fees.
WHEREFORE, Defendant McCarthy avers that he has no liability to Plaintiff for any
amounts claimed as damages in Plaintiffs Complaint and prays that the Complaint against him
be dismissed and he be awarded reasonable costs of defense including attorneys fees and any
other such relief as may be just and fair.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
By way of further answer and defense, Defendant McCarthy avers the following
affirmative defense;
53. Paragraphs 1 - 52 of this responsive pleading are incorporated herein by
references as set forth in full.
54. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
55. Plaintiffs claim to enforce an oral contract is barred by the Statue of Frauds.
56. Plaintiffs claim is barred by the applicable Statue of Limitations.
57. Plaintiffs claim is barred by accord and satisfaction.
58. Plaintiffs claim to enforce a contract is barred by the Landlord Tenant Act.
- 8-
59. Plaintiffs claim is barred to the extent that Plaintiff has failed to properly mitigate
her damages.
60. Plaintiff is attempting to enforce an oral lease agreement claimed to be greater
than three years in duration.
61. To the extent Plaintiff has suffered any damages, which is denied, these damages
have been caused by the negligence of Plaintiff.
62. Any loss or damage which Plaintiff claims to have suffered are the sole and
exclusive result of Plaintiffs conduct and not as a result of acts and/or omissions by Defendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant William McCarthy hereby respectfully requests this
Honorable Court to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice and award to Answering
Defendant reasonable attorneys' fees, costs of defense and such other relief has may be just and
fair.
COUNTER CLAIM - Violation of Plain Language Consumer
Contract Act and Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law
63. Paragraphs I - 62 ofthis Answer and New Matter are incorporated herein by
reference.
64. The contract Plaintiff claims to exist is a consumer contract under the Plain
Language Consumer Contract Act.
65. To the extent that Plaintiff is able to show that any oral contract did exist, it is in
violation of the Plain Language Consumer Contract Act.
66. Although it is denied that a written memorialization of Contract terms exists or
that the document attached as Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint reflects agreed-upon terms
between the parties, it is believed and therefore averred that the Exhibit A to Plaintiffs
- 9-
Complaint is a lease form that has not been approved by the Attorney General of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
67. Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint contains language that is confusing in that
contains:
a. long words and sentences.
b. references to the parties as "party of the first part" and "party of the second
part" rather by personal pronouns.
c. sentences with more than one condition.
68. To the extent that Plaintiff is able to show that Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Complaint
memorializes an agreement between the parties, Exhibit A is in violation of the Plain Language
Consumer Contract Act.
69. Any violation of the Plain Language Consumer Act is a violation of the Unfair
Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.
- 10 -
WHEREFORE, Defendant McCarthy prays this Honorable Court to enter judgment in his
favor and for damages in the amount provided for by statute, reasonable attorney fees, and any
other remedy that this Court finds just and appropriate.
Respectfully Submitted:
TUCKER ARENSBERG & SWARTZ P.c.
F. St h nson atthes, Esquire
Attorne ID # 67408
III North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 234-4121
Attorney for Defendant, William McCarthy
- 11 -
VERIFICATION
I, F. STEPHENSON MATTHES, attorney for the Defendant, William McCarthy, in the
within action, make this verification on behalf of the Defendant, who is not available at this time,
and affirm that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.
~4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Dated: f....... '1 f ~ J)
GRACE SAGE,
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
: NO. 01-2943 Civil Term
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/k/a AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this 2,rA day of August, 2001, I, F. Stephenson Matthes, hereby certify
that I have served a copy of The Answer Of Defendant William McCarthy To Plaintiff's Complaint by
u. S. mail, postage prepaid to the following addressees:
Douglas K. Marsico, Esquire
Caldwell & Kearns
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533
David H. Martineau, Esquire
Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & ERB, P.C.
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-
~
\
42593
<) c;' ,- )
f,: ,
"r-,'"
(:} en
~l: I .. ')
...--::' r,-,)
ef) '..0
-<
r::: .'"11
"';:"
~~:
-<c (,-\
5> ~~~ f'-l ::_:j
4:._. 1::- :0
~ ( .) -,
;,,'[..1,',
;',l.'!'!
GRACE SAGE,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
v.
NO. 01-2943
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/kIa AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF
DEFENDANT WILLIAM MCCARTHY
AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Grace Sage, by and through her attorneys, CALDWELL &
KEARNS, and files the within Reply to New Matter of Defendant William McCarthy, and in support
thereof avers the following:
27. No answer required.
28. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that there is no executed written lease. Exhibit
"A" to the Complaint was a lease agreement provided by Defendant Amy Buhrman a/kIa Amy
McCarthy, and memorializes in part the oral lease between the Plaintiff and Defendants.
29. Admitted in part. It is admitted that the Defendants had an oral agreement to rent the property
for a period of five (5) years at the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per month. Byway
of further answer, while the amount of the lease was modified per agreement between the
parties, the remaining terms ofthe lease remained unchanged.
30. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 30 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial. Defendant William McCarthy agreed to a change in the amount of rent. The remaining
terms of the lease remained unchanged including the term. Defendant William McCarthy
subsequently asked the Plaintiffto reduce the amount ofthe rent when he had problems making
the payments. This reduction was agreed upon by the Plaintiff.
31. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 31 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required.
32. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 32 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required.
33. Admitted in part. By mutual agreement, the Plaintiff and Defendant McCarthy agreed to
reduction ofthe Defendants' rent because of alleged financial difficulties of Defendant William
McCarthy.
34. Admitted.
35. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 35 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
36. Denied as stated. The allegations in Paragraph 36 are specifically denied and strict proof is
demanded at trial.
37. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 37 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
38. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 38 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
39. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 39 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
2
40. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 40 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
41. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 41 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
42. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 42 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
43. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 43 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
44. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 44 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
45. Admitted.
46. Admitted in part, denied in part. Exhibit "A" to the Plaintiff's Complaint was provided to the
Plaintiff by Defendant Amy Buhrman a/k/a Amy McCarthy.
47. Admitted.
48. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that the parties did not execute a written lease.
49. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 49 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
50. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 50 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
3
51. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 51 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial.
52. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 52 are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded
at trial. By way of further answer, the Defendants, during the course of the lease, paid the
property management fees.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
53. No answerrequired.
54-62. These allegations are conclusions of law to which no answers are required.
COUNTER-CLAIM - Violation of Plain Laneua2e Consumer
Contract Act and Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law
63. No answer required.
64. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 64 are legal conclusions to which no answers are required.
By way of further answer, an oral contract is not covered under the Plain Language Consumer
Act. In addition, Exhibit "A" ofthe Complaint was provided by Defendant Amy Buhrman a/k/a
Amy McCarthy.
65. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 65 are legal conclusions to which no answers are required.
By way of further answer, the Plain Language Consumer Contract Act does not apply to oral
contracts.
66. Denied for reasons set forth above.
4
67. Denied for reasons set forth above.
68. Denied for reasons set forth above.
69. Denied. The allegations in Paragraph 69 are legal conclusions to which no answer is required.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands Judgment as prayed for in her Complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
/O/D;{,;
,
arsico, Esquire
t ey ID# 69804
631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533
(717) 232-7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
Dated:
00-446/30947
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this' day of October, 2001, I hereby certify that I have served a copy of
the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the U.S.
Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
David H. Martineau, Esquire
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.e.
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PAl 711 0-0300
Attorney for Defendant, Amy Buhrman alk/a
Amy McCarthy a/kJa Amy L.B, Brabrand
F. Stephenson Matthes, Esquire
111 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PAl 71 01
Attorney for Defendant, William McCarthy
CALDWELL & KEARNS
By:
""H"co"
".,libld"!
",t;"'itL"j,~ihlj~ili;i;~,
i.LIi:..ih,I'.
Q
,..
-r~
c;~ ~~i
/ ,
cr':"
,-;:':
~--
~~i~:~
p' ~;~
~
."r;,
CJ
".,
"~
,-)
p ~,
.~
-rJ
:,,'1
(j',
("'_i
,n
L::
l"l
l"l
III
-
,
1Il 0
Z Z f- -
Q w t::
0:: r- 3: w
<l: ~ <( <r <(
<r ...J r-
W 0 III Z
~ a. f- r- ~
<r
0 <( Z
I.(l u I 0
-' l/J <r >-
~ >- LL l/J
..J z W I Z
..J 0 Z f- Z
W Ul a: <r W
3: Ul 0 0 a.
w
LL f- z (!j
C 0 f- -
..J cr <( f') a:
<l: a. <D ::J
U ~ f') al
l/J
a:
a:
<(
I
HM-99LLO. AD-99ll0 "S-t9LLO. :lS.l9LlO :'ON W~O:l
?Nl .,...NOU....N~3.J.N1 &....18.'1'9':10 NOlS'AIO Y ""'~31 :;UYJ.S-"...
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN aJk/a AMY MCCARTHY,
Defendants
NO. 01-2943
CIVIL ACTION-LAW
ORDER
ANDNOWthiS~YOf, ~~//' ,20Q9 ;.inconsiderationoftheforegoing
Potition, Md ~ ,&quire,;I~J xf.Lu-'J~ ,
Esquire and ~ iLJaJ&z;-- , Esquire are appointed Arbitrators in the above-
captioned action as prayed for.
BY THE COURT:
pJ.
I
~. "\'~
. , <, , \','...
,\,t .... .~'" \ ....~, "l, \ '\
" ",,; '\ ,\\ '
v"' "'. t \
'.... \4)-
"
,'.
-
.
,.-z:i/'JI -f' ~ ~
,
'IlNY^1J.SNN3d
MNn08 Or.l'f1lj38\~n~
t;S :6 \.IV 9283.:120
Ab'V10lj:.:H.U...idc :10
301:Hy-(jT:!d
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
v.
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN a/k/a AMY MCCARTHY,
Defendants
NO. 01-2943
CIVIL ACTION-LAW
PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS
To the Honorable Judges of Said Court:
Douglas K. Marsico, counsel for the Plaintiff in the above action respectfully requests that:
(1) the above-captioned is at issue;
(2) the claim of Plaintiff in this action is $10,006.00
(3) the following attorneys are interested in the case as counselor are otherwise
disqualified to sit as Arbitrators: any attorney in the law firm of CALDWELL
& KEARNS; METZGER WICKERSHAM; and TUCKER ARENSBERG &
SWARTZ.
WHEREFORE, your Petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three Arbitrators to
whom the case shall be submitted.
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
Dated:
00-446/36147
~J31o;).
I
~~/
' . Marsico, Esquire
ey ID# 69804
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, P A 17110-1533
(717) 232-7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this IUth day of February 2002, I hereby certify that I have served a copy of
the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the U.S.
Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
J. Stephenson Matthes
TUCKER ARENSBERG & SWARTZ
111 North Front Street
P.O. Box 889
Harrisburg, PAl 71 08
David Martineau, Esquire
METZGER WICKERSHAM
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PAl 711 0
CALDWELL & KEARNS
By:~hJct~
(}
~
~~
1~
~
;0
V-
-4q
~
o
~
&J
r--.
1-
-OC.
rni,:;
~'''7 ;
~~{,:;-
..c.
r..:.
~~::' f:
S~~
=<
,',',,'
j ~_1 i
L"dt;il,~;j;;~&I,-i;j:jt.iHt.:j'l::i
(1
\;
C::J
r....:'~
~~",;
-r'\
r-q
;J7
N
.:;:>
"".~1'"
:::..-~
:::>
.J
'-~
--~
?P
--'-..
'1.i'"
In The court of common pleas of
cumberland county, pennsylvania
()J i t.ki' k>"'-
v.
t<A e.. (! pe. rv-r'1
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No:
0; ~,
;Vr/
r9C).<f3
k h"tFYt ~
20
-
GIO~
\.-4 &, c:
-'
~
WO do ,0,0"'Y ,vo" (0' ",'.m' C"C vo .", ,uppo,C, ob'Y ,nd dofond cho
constitution of the united states and the constitutio,n,,_~ .. :h" c~m,monwealth and
c"C " v,U d,"0".9' c" dUC'" 0' ou. """ .J.'b" ' cY
./'-// --~
// ,
"-
~f
tfu if f!.(I1 /tfJ 2/ I<. / f)
;1k Ct1<A~ ' I
) ;:>/A)
OATH
Chairman
W', chO undo."9n,d ,.b'C,'CO." h,.'n9 b"O dU'Y ,ppo'nC,d ,nd ,vo.n (0'
affirmed), make the following award:
~il.,.)~
~ (l 8"-(S
AWARD
(Note: If damages for delay are awarded, they shall be
separatelY stated.)
.. 1,",,,,,0, ;>,,"0"- Dr- :::. '::...':~),~
A I<. ' r.... "l - .. A_ ,,~ ..
/ RU~'\ "" \I
><",,,,COL d,,,on" '/""'~R H aPl'"O'b'O:
/ '--- Chairman
-j;~:~;;~
Date of Hearing:
~/on'~7
/
Date of Award:
NOTICE OF ENTRY OF AWARD
NOW, "0 ~Y of {)^q'"~t- . ,oQ,L.' .C 2::&-' i:C.M.. "0 ,bOve
,v,.d V" onCo.od upon ch' dookoC and n'c'oo ch'.oo' 9,.on by ma" co Ch' p,.c'o,
o. Cho', aCCopOoy" :. .J?
..b'C,'Co.' , oOmPon"cion C, hO ~'~ ~,
p"" upon 'PI''''' ..' ~ ~ot onotary
$ ;EO,OO · - ,[' ~ /,,'0 r
D puty
~OJJ'I '-f-c) 0.~ {J ~
Q op Y ">t" '&c( --{" 4+J..{ u. /ii:J--cJ, 0c~ '-<..
fJ-;..y..y O. !?7.dr<.r1tc
LV. le",,,,- "lc,4:/"!
'~~4%te ~h ch.e-<--k.--tV
7 .s..... ~ ( S'ro,o>" '~e R. , L, N "'-', ""
ALL
o\\.+c~
~lc ~~-+
~~..r~(y
-
'lL>
)1\)0>V' ~JIL/
~
~
""OO:J
mm
2.::l:::
zt;,:
C/),;.::.:.,.
-< "'::.-
~Cj
'l"c,
6;0
)>c:
Z
:;!
C>
N
""'
c=
G')
N
-'
o
-n
::,~~ ."
:,1=
-Oh1
';?y
.:,){..)
:::~-j --;-,
~ L:'5~
:;"'-"';1
So? 2:l
N 3J
U1 -<
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
v,
NO, 01-2943
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN alkla AMY MCCARTHY
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PRAECIPE TO ENTER JUDGMENT
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT:
Please enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against Defendant William McCarthy
in the amount of $4,000,00 pursuant to the Notice of Entry of Arbitration A ward dated August
27,2002,
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
, Marsico, Esquire
At ey ID# 69804
3631 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533
(717) 232- 7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
Dated:
/o///c>~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
h 0 ' ,
AND NOW, this ~ day of 0to bo r
, 2002, I hereby certify that I have
served a copy of the within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of
the same in the U,S. Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
F, Stephenson Matthes, Esquire
111 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
David Martineau, Esquire
3211 North Front Street
Harrisburg, P A 17110
CALDWELL & KEARNS
By ~ {~ fJ~
00-416/46495
p
~
~
.t:.
U'
o-kl
...0
()
o
(::)
~
tv
-.,,)
~~
1
0 CJ 0
C f'v ", 1
" 0 4
~?\:i,; C>
., il.' ,-I
:;:::>:: ~ I , ;-:-,
:.;:: i::1
:::~2 ) _1 ,
r- C:)
c --"J -,'\
-'
( " ::.h~ ")
.
r.-:-::l "'j r 'I
;;.-~ C' ....":' -'.
~ ::> ~iS
-<
GRACE SAGE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
v.
WILLIAM MCCARTHY and AMY
BUHRMAN aJk/a AMY MCCARTHY
NO. 01-2943
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
PRAECIPE
TO THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY:
Please mark the above-referenced judgment entered in favor ofthe Plaintiff and against
Defendant, William McCarthy, satisfied and paid in full.
Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL & KEARNS
arsico, Esquire
e # 69804
3 orth Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533
(717) 232-7661
Attorney for Plaintiff, Grace Sage
Dated:
II If /Od-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this ~'r1 day of --.1J. oJQY\t be V ,2002, I hereby certify that I have
served a copy ofthe within document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of
the same in the U.S. Mails at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, addressed to:
F. Stephenson Matthes, Esquire
111 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PAl 71 01
David Martineau, Esquire
3211 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PAl 711 0
CALDWELL & KEARNS
,
By ~ c--f~
00-416/48020
o
s:::
i<)
'-J
c:::-