Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-2345IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSTLVANIA DAMSON BROME, V. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS : : : : : Case No. APPLICATION TO PYOC66D IN FORMA PAUPRRIS The petitioner, DAMEON BROME, hereby petitions this court to allow him to proceed in this matter in Forms Pauperls and presents the following in support thereof= that in support of my Application to proceed without bet" required to prepay fees, cost, or give security therefore, I state that because of my poverty, I am unable to pay the cost of said proceeding or to give security therefore= that I am entitled to relief. 1. The petitioner is presently employed in the prison system earning a wage of .20? an hour. 2. The petitioner has not and does not received any money in the past twelve months from a business, profession, or any self employment, gifts or inheritances. 3. The petitioner does not receive any payments, interest or dividends. 4. The petitioner holds no pensions, annuities or life insurance. 5. The petitioner presently has approximately $30.00 in his inmate account and is presently paying a fine of $19,544.00 where any contributions or earned wages is deducted by 50% and set said* for said fine. 6. The petitioner does not hold any bank account, checking account, real estate, stocks, bonds, notes, automobiles, or other valuable property or commodity. 7. The petitioner has no dependents and any funds earned or received as gifts by the petitioner is solely for the upkeep of the petitioner. WHEREFORE, the petitioner hereby request that this court grant his Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and wave any filing fee associated with this action. I DAMSON BROME, hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Respectfully, ??0? QME PROOF OF SERVICE On this day, I have deposited copies of the attached Application to Proceed In Form Pauperis in the US Mail system and forwarded copies of the attached to the parties listed below pursuant to PA.R.C.P. 121,122. SERVICE VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL: Department of Corrections 2520 Lisburn Rd POB 598 Camp Hill, Pa 17001 Cumberland County Court Honorable Judge E. Bailey 1 Courthouse Sq. Carlise PA 17103 DAMEON BROME AS-2316 175 Progress Dr. Waynesburg, PA 15370-8090 Datet 4. k6'ob IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAMSON BROME, : s V. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTONS I Case No. 3q:) PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS JURISDICTIONS Jurisdiction is imposed upon this court through, Title 42 PA.C.S.A 721, 726 PARTIES: 1. The Petitioner in this action is identified as DAMSON BROME, 175 Progress Drive, Waynesburg, PA 15370-8090. 2. The respondents in this action are the Department of Corrections, 2520 Lisburn rd, P.O.Bo:,.598, Camp Hill PA 17001-0598. FACTS: 3. On July 28, 2005, the Petitioner initiated action before the Cumberland County Court seeking relief from a debt of $19,544.00 imposed by the respondents. 4. The case was logged in under Case No. 2005-03853 BROME v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. , 5. The respondents have been notified and provided all documents pursuant to said case via certified mail. 6. The Petitioner has alleged in his matter before the Cumberland County Court that the respondents have failed to provide any Proof of Claim pursuant to their assessment on the Petitioners account. 7. The respondents have failed to state a verifiable, authorized, and certified claim against the Petitioner. 8. The respondents are also unable to provide any factual documents certifying that Petitioner is indeed liable for said debt claimed by the respondents. 9. The Petitioner obtained an Administrative Judgment, and Notorial Default in relation to said case. 10. The respondents have consistently failed to reply to all presentments made to them. 11. The respondents have consistently failed to answer or respond to any filings set forth before the court by the Petitioner. 12. Due to their default /dishonor the respondents have admitted via tacit agreement that the facts presented within the Petitioners claim are true and factual. 13. Through their tacit agreement, the respondents have acquiesced, admitted to the facts presented by the Petitioner. 14. Through tacit agreement, the respondents have waived all rights, arguments, and claims in this matter. 15. On March 8, 2006, the Petitioner filed an Application for an Immediate Restraining Order to Cease Respondents Assessments on Plaintiffs Account. (See Exhibit A) 16. To data, the court has not replied or decided on the matter. (See Exhibit A) 17. Despite the filing of the Petitioners action, the respondents have continued to assess his account without authority or contractual agreement to do so. 18. The Cumberland County Court has remained stagnant and has failed to render any decision on any of the unchallenged motions/ petitions filed by the Petitioner. (See Exhibit A). 19. The courts failure to move on any of the motions/petitions filed by the Petitioner has allowed the respondents to continue their harmful actions unchallenged. RRLIRP 2EQU&4TBDt 20. The Petitioner has a clear right to the relief requested. 21. The Petitioner, hereby seeks to have this court Order the Cumberland County Court render a decision on his Application for an Immediate Restraining Order to Cease Respondents Assessment on Plaintiff's Account. 22. The Petitioner hereby request that this court grant this Mandamus, and Order the Cumberland County Court to issue forth a Restraining Order, to halt the respondents assessment of his account. 23. The Petitioner hereby request that this court also Order that all funds assessed by the respondents be returned to the Petitioner until the termination of this matter and any subsequent appellate review that follows. 24. The Petitioner is only seeking a Mandamus judgment or order for his request for Injunctive Relief which is before the Cumberland County Court. The Petitioner is not seeking Mandamus intervention for a ruling on the merits of the action, or enforcement of any other right or request put before the Cumberland County Court. Respectfully, PYS511 Cumberland County Prothonotary's Office Page 1 Civil Case Print 2005,03853 BROME DAMEON (vs) DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Reference No..: Filed........: 7/28/2005 9 03 Case Type.....: MOTION 00 Time.........: Execution Date : 0/00/0000 Judgment..... . Judge Assigned: osed Desc : Dis Jury Trial.... Disposed Date. 0/00/0000 . p mments - C ------------ Higher Crt 1.: o ------------ Case Higher Crt 2.: General Index Attorney Info BROME DAMEON (AS-2316) PLAINTIFF 175 PROGRESS DRIVE WAYNESBURG PA 15370 8090 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DEFENDANT 2520 LISBURN ROAD POB 598 CAMP HILL PA 17001 ******************************************************************************** * * Date Entries ******************************************************************************** FIRST ENTRY - - - - 7/28/2005 MOTION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT'S FROM PRESENTING ARGUMENT CHALLENGING PALINTIFFS ISSUES ------------------------------------------------------------------- 7/28/2005 MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERS ------------------------------------------------------------------- 7/28/2005 AFFIDAVIT OF WAGES ------------------------------------------------------------------- 7/28/2005 PETITION FOR JUDGMENT UPON DEFAULT OR ADMISSION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT JURISDICTION ------------------------------------------------------------------- 8/03/2005 ORDER OF COURT - DATED 8/2/05 - THE MOTION OF PLFF TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS IS DENIED - BY THE COURT EDGAR B BAYLEY J COPIES MAILED ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1/17/2006 MOTION FOR WRIT OF PRAECIPE QUOD REDDAT - BY DAMEON BROM ------------------------------------------------------------------- 3/08/2006 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY DAMEON BROME ------------------------------------------------------------------- 3/08/2006 APPLICATION FOR AN IMMEDIATE RESTRAINING ORDER TO CEASE RESPONDENTS ASSESSMENT ON PLAINTIFFS ACCOUNT BY DAMEON BROME - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LAST ENTRY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * Escrow Information * Fees & Debits Beg Bal Pmts/Adj End Bal ******************************** ******** ****** ******************************* COMPLAINT 35.00 35.00 .00 TAX ON CMPLT .50 .50 .00 SETTLEMENT 5.00 5.00 .00 AUTOMATION 5.00 5.00 .00 JCP FEE 10.00 10.00 .00 ------------------------ ------------ 55.50 55.50 .00 ******************************************************************************** * End of Case Information ******************************************************************************** IE7xvw? \ ?\- PROOF OF SERVICE On this day. I have deposited copies of the attached Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the US Mail system and forwarded copies of the attached to the parties listed below pursuant to PA.R.C.P. 121.122. SERVICE VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL: Department of Corrections 2520 Lisburn Rd POB 598 Camp Hill. Pa 17001 Cumberland County Court Honorable Judge E. Bailey 1 Courthouse Sq. Carlise PA 17103 DA N R ME AS-2316 175 Progress Dr. Waynesburg. PA 15370-8090 Date: - l - Ob DAMEON BROME, PLAINTIFF V. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 06-2345 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this pauperis, IS DENIED.' Ov- day of May, 2006, the application to proceed in forma ameon Brome, AS 2316, Pro se 175 Progress Drive Waynesburg, PA 15370-8090 :sal J rr?o? EdgarB.4yley, J. 1 The proposed petition for a writ of mandamus IS FRIVOLOUS. u a s d6 a ; ?? y b ? y2 n U„ V vs ? f T OF CoeE ?Ttb S Case No. 06 12 3`t'S Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: intends to proceed with the above captioned matter. Print Name 1Agk-_oA ? R Sign Name 6Q, "?e_ Date: Attorney for Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. CF TNc P„ l.irtP,110TARY 2009 OCT --6 PM 3: 25 ul"lly IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAMEON BROME Plaintiff V. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Case No. '43y-?:s Respondent NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, to the Prothonotary of the Commonwealth Court on this date that the plaintiff in the above mentioned action has changed address. The new mailing address for the plaintiff is: DAMEON BROME AS-2316 1000 Follies Dr. Dallas, PA 18612 Please correct address to avoid future complications. Date: /0 vs CasePJo.''~-~~.~ -~- '``> ,, ~ '~' ~~ r r ~`t'~ ,,~. -~,- , ~.~,~ ~_~ ~ ter. ~-• Statement of Intention to Proceed ~ ~ c=: N -'•- To the Court: ss ~~ ;, _,..~ 3 ~« -'' ~ ~~>z~~~.%E ~~;-yj,~- intends to pro~ec~ with the above capt ~ mar. `"° -~° `% .a~ N ~' 1 ~ ~' Print 1`Jame ~-~?~1,1(%'~'l_ ,~(~~:sc,,~.,~ Sign Name _ `~ r ~ _ __-._~.,._ [late: ~ :..%' ~~~ E. ~ Attorney for Explanatory Comment "The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspect., of the recommendation merit comment I. Rule o/civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive c<~ses within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of .iudicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. 'this rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 5~ 1 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1 104 (1998) in which the court held that '`prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution i~ required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial hdministration 190fl." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to he applicable. II Inactive Cases ~fhe purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the ciiurt. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is wuth the parties. :`-the par*,see de -^.:~: ~.~ish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she Nill file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a there the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Ru1e230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did ru~1 timely file the notice of intention to proceed. flhe liming of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within. thirty days of the envy of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2; provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a showing to the court that t:he petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivi;:~ion (,d)(2). B Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the, remedy of a cr>mmen law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2.