Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-3261J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. Scott Bowser (as agentlemployee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 AVISO LISTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las demandas que se presentan mas adelante en las siguientes p5ginas, debe tomar acci6n dentro de los pr6ximos veinte (20) dias despu6s de la notificaci6n de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente o por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de, y objecciones a, las demandas presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se le advierte de que si usted falla de tomar acci6n como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demanda o cualquier otra reclamaci6n o remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin mis aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero o propiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME O VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO O BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW n C the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. C>b Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : l and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants COMPLAINT AND Now here comes Christina Bowman by and through her attorneys, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, and files the following Complaint and in support states the following: Parties 1. Plaintiff, Christina F. Bowman is an independent owner/operator of three concession stands, the Nachos of Nottingham, The Huntsman, and Banana Stand, and a mobile smoothie cart, (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "concessions"), who resides at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 2. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff owned and operated the aforesaid concessions at the annual Renaissance Faire held in the summer season at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 17545. 3. Defendant, Carmelo J. Claudio, (hereinafter "Claudio"), is an adult individual residing at 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, York County, Pennsylvania 17070. 4. Defendant, Mazza Vineyards, hic., trading as the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and as Mount Hope Estate & Winery, (hereinafter "Renaissance Faire" or "Faire"), is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal offices located at RD 3, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, its mailing address at P.O. Box 685, Cornwall, Pennsylvania 17016. 5. Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of the Faire pursuant to the Merchant Participation Agreement executed by and between herself as owner of the above concessions, and the Faire and renewed annually. 6. Plaintiff, a 54 year old single woman, became an independent concessionaire at the Faire in the 2000 season in order to earn sufficient income for retirement. 7. At times material hereto, Defendant Scott Bowser (hereinafter "Bowser") was the General Manager of the Renaissance Faire, and in such capacity serves as an agent, servant or employee of the Faire, with a business address at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, and was acting within the scope of such agency, service or employment. 8. Defendant Scott Bower is also a concessionaire of several concessions at the Faire and purchased or made offers to purchase concessions like that of Plaintiff in his individual capacity as a participating merchant. COUNTI BREACH OF CONTRACT Bowman v. Claudio 9. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 8 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 2 10. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was the owner/operator of three (3) concession stands above-described, a mobile smoothie cart and a merchant participating in the annual Renaissance Faire. 11. On or about November 7, 2005, Defendant Claudio entered into an Agreement with Plaintiff to purchase the concessions for seasonal use at the Renaissance Faire. A true and correct copy of the Sales Agreement is appended hereto as Exhibit `A.' 12. Pursuant to the Agreement, Claudio was obligated to purchase the concessions for an amount of $170,000.00, comprised of $125,000.00 prior to the 2006 season of the Renaissance Faire for the "sale of the buildings and cart ... machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill," with an additional $45,000.00 to be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 to be paid in three installments for each seasonal month, up to and through October 2007. 13. Defendant Claudio failed to make the payments as agreed under the Sales Agreement. 14. Plaintiff has made repeated demand for payment of the amount agreed upon as the purchase price. 15. Defendant Claudio has advised Plaintiff that he does not intend to perform his obligations under the Sales Agreement and make the agreed upon payments due to representations made to him by Defendant Faire personnel, including by and through Defendant Bowser. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendant, Carmelo Claudio, in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. 3 COUNT II Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 16. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 15 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 17. The Defendants knew that Plaintiff wanted to sell her concessions and has been marketing her concessions for sale and has been in negotiations with prospective buyer(s) like Defendant Claudio. 18. Defendant Bowser was aware that Plaintiff and Defendant Claudio had entered into a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 19. Upon learning of the Sales Agreement and the term of price, Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions sold thereunder were not valued at the amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 20. Defendant Bowser specifically represented that Plaintiff's concessions were collectively worth only $65,000.00. 21. Since December 2005, Plaintiff has negotiatedwith two other prospective purchasers for the sale of her concessions. 22. Defendant Bowser is a representative of the Renaissance Faire who has attempted to thwart Plaintiff's attempts at selling her concessions for a fair market price. 23. Scott Bowser is himself an owner/operator of several concession stands at the Renaissance Faire. 24. As a participating merchant, Defendant Bowser is a competitor of Plaintiff. 4 25. Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Faire, has imposed additional requirements upon independent operators of the Faire concession stands, like Plaintiff, to increase the expense of operating the stands. 26. Defendant Renaissance Faire has permitted U.S. Foods to have exclusive rights to provide concessions to the Faire concession stand owner/operators without consent of Plaintiff and other independent owner/operators. 27. Scott Bowser and Thomas Roy, who as agent for the Faire served as the manager of vendors, have represented to the independent owners of stands that the use of U.S. Foods as the supplier of concessions would yield a cost savings to the owner/operators. 28. Defendant Bowser represented to Mr. Claudio that he would be required to outfit her stands with hood systems, costing approximately $10,000 per stand, above the stove-tops, as a prerequisite to operations. 29. Plaintiff does not sell any concessions that would necessitate the use of a hood system. 30. Defendants should have known that requiring installation of fixtures unrelated to her type of concessions sold would reduce the marketability of her concessions to independent concessionaires and inhibit her ability to sell them for a fair price. 31. It is believed and therefore averred that two other prospective purchasers were discouraged from purchasing the concessions because of Defendant Faire's requirements to purchase from one food vendor, and to install the expensive fixtures above-described. 5 32. Defendant Faire is responsible for the conduct of its agent, Defendant Bowser, in his misrepresentations as to the concessions' value and imposition of conditions that increase operating costs without a benefit to Plaintiff. 33. There was a reasonable probability that Defendant Claudio would have performed his bargained for exchange, and paid the agreed upon $170,000.00 amount had Defendant Scott Bowser not represented that the concessions were not worth the amount Claudio had agreed to pay. 34. Defendants knew or should have known that Defendant Bowser's representations would cause Claudio to reconsider performing his payment obligations under the Sales Agreement. 35. Neither the Faire nor Defendant Bowser had any cause for discouraging Defendant Claudio's purchase of Plaintiffs concessions, nor of other interested buyers. 36. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Defendant Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT III Intentional Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 37. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 36 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 38. In or about November 2005, Defendant Scott Bowser became aware that Defendant Claudio had executed a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 39. Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions were worth significantly less than the amount that Claudio agreed to pay and further represented that additional costs would need to be expended in order to operate the stands. 40. Neither Defendant Bowser nor the Faire had appraised the value of Plaintiff's concessions. 41. It is believed, and thus averred that Defendant Bowser knew that his representations as to the value of the concessions Plaintiff had `sold' would be relied upon by Defendant Claudio and would cause him to not make payment of the agreed upon amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 42. It is believed, and thus averred, that Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Renaissance Faire, knowingly and with the intent to persuade Claudio against purchasing the stands, misrepresented that the stands were valued at less than the agreed purchase price to force a sales price reduction and inhibit independent ownership of the stands. 43. Claudio has represented to Plaintiff that but for Defendant Bowser's interference and disparagement, it is likely that he would have performed the bargained for exchange and paid the agreed upon price stated in the Sales Agreement. 44. Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser had no cause for interfering with the Sales Agreement between Plaintiff and Claudio. 45. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, together with all interest, costs 7 and attorneys' fees, and in addition, punitive damages for its intentional conduct, and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT IV Unfair Competition Violations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 46. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 45 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 47. Defendants' interference with a Sales Agreement for the sale of her Faire stands to other would-be independent owner(s) like Claudio is unfair competition. 48. Defendants made representations disparaging Plaintiff s stands by misleading prospective buyers on matters of fact as to the concessions' value. 49. Scott Bowser represented that Plaintiff s concessions were not worth the amount stated in the Sales Agreement without any appraisal, and with reckless disregard to the falsity of his representation as to the value of the concessions. 50. Defendant Faire is responsible for imposing other obstacles to saleability of Plaintiffs concessions, to wit, the exclusive vendor relationship with U.S. Foods, and additional requirements upon independent concessionaires as to paper product purchases and installation of unnecessary fixtures in an effort to standardize capability of concessions among independent concessions. 51. Such standardization and uniformity benefit Defendant Faire without a mutual benefit to independent concessionaires like Plaintiff. 52. Defendants' conduct constitutes a violation of Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, ("UTPCPL"), 73 Pa. C.S. §§201-1, et seq. for misrepresentation, disparagement and general unfair competition. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser as to her claim for unfair competition in an amount in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT V Commercial/Business Disparagement Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 53. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 52 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 54. With disregard as to its falsity, Defendant Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the purchase price outlined in the Sales Agreement. 55. Defendant Bowser made that representation as a manager of the Faire with whom prospective business owners would be dealing for Faire matters, including merchant responsibilities under the Merchant Participating Agreement. 56. Defendant Bowser should have realized that such representations would result in Plaintiff suffering pecuniary loss, which loss has resulted in loss of prospective purchaser(s) of her concessions. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for commercial or business 9 disparagement, and suffered pecuniary loss as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees and costs, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT VI Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 57. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 56 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 58. Defendant Renaissance Faire entered into a contract with Plaintiff regarding the operation of her concessions during the faire season. 59. The Faire engaged U.S. Foods as the vendor for food and other supplies to its independent concessionaires, like Christina Bowman, without agreement by the independent concessionaires to the exclusive arrangement. 60. The Faire represented to U.S. Foods that it would oversee the accounts for each of its concessionaires, and has intervened on behalf of U.S. Foods regarding account status for food and other products that were agreed to be provided to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 61. There is no provision in the agreement between Plaintiff and the Faire that authorized the Faire to receive credit for all purchases made by independent concessionaires from U.S. Foods on a collective basis. 62. It is believed and thus averred, that Defendant Faire receives discounts, and/or other arrangement with U.S. Foods pursuant to its exclusive arrangement which discounts are not passed 10 on to the independent concessionaires who are the purchasers of the food and other required purchase products. 63. Defendant Faire, through Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented to independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, that they would benefit from the exclusive purchasing arrangement made with U.S. Foods. 64. Defendant Faire, through its agents Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented that it was acting in the best interest and on behalf of the independent concessionaires for whom it was ostensibly contracting for a reduced rate for food and other required goods from U.S. Foods. 65. Defendant Faire did not enter the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods in order to benefit the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, contrary to its representations. 66. Defendant Faire has failed to protect the interests of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, on whose behalf it ostensibly contracted, by ensuring that the quality of food products and of customer service through timely delivery of perishables. 67. Defendant Faire has not protected the quality of food products or other goods and services purchased by Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires as it represented would be of good quality or better than the prior vendor. 68. It is believed and thus averred that Defendant Faire and its agent Defendant Bowser breached their duty to the independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, when it entered the exclusive arrangement for food purchases with U.S. Foods. 69. Rather than acting on behalf of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, who Defendants allegedly represented to make the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods, Defendants Faire and Bowser have acted as the agent of U.S. Foods to require payment for food products and 11 services that did not meet the quality standards in product or service as promised to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 70. Plaintiff, like other independent concessionaires, was originally informed that not all food products would need to be purchased from U.S. Foods and that Plaintiff could purchase food products from its own vendors for a lower price or better quality, particularly for speciality items. 71. Defendant Bowser and Thomas Roy later advised, after the 2005 season commenced, that "cherry-picking" foods from other vendors would not be tolerated and all purchases must be made from U.S. Foods. 72. There is no provision in the contract between the Renaissance Faire and Plaintiff that requires purchase of all food and paper products from a particular vendor to be chosen, without approval or consent, solely by the Defendant Renaissance Faire. 73. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the arrangement Defendant Faire made with U.S. Foods in the form of lower quality food products, inconsistent reliability and poor customer service for ensuring timely delivery of perishable products to Plaintiff's concessions. 74. It is believed, and thus averred that Plaintiff had suffered lower profits as a consequence of the lesser quality of food products that she was permitted to sell, and losses due to poor customer service and delivery of the goods promised. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for violation of their duty of good faith and fair dealing, and suffered damages as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, and the greater costs of operating as a result of the exclusive arrangements Defendants 12 have entered without her consent, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By d' r' J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18"' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: June 7, 2006 13 SALES AGREEMENT This is an agreement on November 7, 2005 between Christina F. Bowman residing at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 herein referred to as the Seller and Carmelo J. Claudio residing at 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, PA 17070 herein referred to as the Buyer. The Seller is selling three concession stands and a refrigerated smoothie cart, which are all on the grounds of the Renascence Faire, which is located at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manhiem, -PA 17545. hicluded in-the sale of the buildings and cart are machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill with a total price of $125,000.00 one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars. Also, the Buyer agrees to pay to the Seller an additional goodwill payment of $45,000.00, which will be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 with a three payment schedule of $7,500.00 per seasonal month with the first payment due on August 30th 2006, and the additional payments due on September 30th 2006, October 30th 2006, August 30th 2007, September 30th 2007 and October 30th 2007. // -()'7-Z>> >-s Notary: s/?- - ct L?( C<c C-?c // ?? NOTARIAL @@AL PHILLIP FARABELLI, Notary Public Lemoyne Boro, Cumberland County My Commission Expires Feb. 6, 2006 EXHIBIT VERIFICATION I, Christina Bowman, make the following statements subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authority, and do hereby state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the Dated: May IL, 2006 w b .. ti i IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. T/DB/A THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, AND SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), AND CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Plaintiff No. 06-3261 Civil Term ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Please enter the appearance of Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. and Susan P. Peipher, Esquire on behalf of Defendants Mazza. Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and in his individual capacity) in the above-captioned matter. Dated: 11 A B NGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan P. Peip er, E quire Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have this day served the foregoing Entry of Appearance upon the persons and in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail as follows: J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Carmelo Claudio 68A Springers Lane New Cumberland, PA 17070 Dated: BL,4KINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan P. Peipher, E uire Attorney I.D. 487580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) (", c...: ??? 1. J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff . PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW ?-7-' the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 3.Z4 ( L t v (, ` ?Lh Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants PRAECIPE FOR REINSTATEMENT OF COMPLAINT To the Prothonotary: Please reinstate the Complaint, a copy of which is attached hereto, in connection with the above-captioned action. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHIISS?SLER? Q& HALL, LLP By 8e".4 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18'hFloor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: July 12 2006 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants : CIVIL ACTION -LAW . No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Praecipe for Reinstatement of Complaint" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Carmelo J. Claudio 68A Springers Lane New Cumberland, PA 17070 Date: July 13, 2006 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 2 ,?- ?` --? ?. $PP:DHM 414212.1 ( 22433.004) 7/17/06 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. Plaintiff MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants No. 06-3261 Civil Term NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Christina Bowman c/o J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Preliminary Objections of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser to Plaintiff s Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. Dated: B NGER, BY R & THOMAS, P.C. By: IL9 Susan P. Peipher, Esq 're Attorney I.D. 487580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) ,SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17106 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants No. 06-3261 Civil Term PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE and SCOTT BOWSER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser by and through their attorneys, Susan P. Peipher, Esquire and Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C., hereby file Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs Complaint pursuant to Rule 1028 of the Pennsylvania Rules of the Civil Procedure and in support thereof aver as follows: Plaintiff commenced this action by Complaint on June 8, 2006. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Complaint is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." 2. Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania pursuant to a Merchant Participation Agreement. A true and correct copy of the Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B." 3. Plaintiff brings the following causes of action against Defendants Mazza Plaintiff Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (hereinafter referred to as "Faire") and SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/08 Scott Bowser as an agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity (hereinafter referred to as "Bowser"): tortious interference with existing and prospective contractual and/or business relations, intentional interference with existing and prospective contractual and/or business relations, unfair competition violations, commercial/business disparagement, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. 4. Plaintiff alleges on or about November 7, 2005 she entered into a Sales Agreement to sell her concessions at the Renaissance Faire to Defendant Claudio. See Exhibit "A" at ¶11. 5. Defendant Claudio failed to perform his obligations under the Sales Agreement allegedly due to representations made to him by personnel of the Faire including Defendant Bowser. See Exhibit "A" at ¶13. 6. Defendants Faire and Bowser allegedly represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions being sold by Plaintiff were not valued at the amount stated in the Sales Agreement. See Exhibit "A" at ¶19. 7. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges Defendant Bowers, as an agent for the Faire, imposed additional requirements upon the Plaintiff in the operation of her concession stands which has increased the expense of operating her stands. See Exhibit "A" at ¶25. 8. Plaintiff further alleges Defendant Claudio and two other prospective purchasers were discouraged from purchasing the concessions due to the Faire's requirements. See Exhibit "A" at ¶31 and 33. 2 $PP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/06 A. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion for Transfer Pursuant to Pa R.C.P. 1028(x)(1) and 1006(e) for Improper Venue. 9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 10. Plaintiff brings her causes of action against Defendants Faire and Bowser by virtue of her position as an independent concessionaire at the Fair pursuant to the terms of a Master Merchant Participation Agreement, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." See also Exhibit "A" at 15. 11. Plaintiff alleges a cause of action for a breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing arising from the Merchant Participation Agreement (Count VI). 12. Paragraph 14(h) of the Agreement provides: In the event a judicial proceeding is commenced, the sole forum for resolving disputes arising under or related to this Agreement shall be the Courts for the County of Lancaster of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The parties hereby consent to the jurisdiction of such Courts and that venue shall be in said Lancaster County. (Emphasis added). 13. The causes of action asserted against Defendants Faire and Bowser "arise under" and "relate to" the Agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant Faire. 14. Defendants Faire and Bowser submit that venue is improper in Cumberland County and hereby requests transfer of the above captioned matter to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County. SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/06 WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this Preliminary Objection be sustained and that the above captioned matter be transferred to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, with costs and fees of such transfer to be paid by Plaintiff pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1006(e). B. Preliminay Objection in the Nature of Motion to Dismiss Count IV for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 102803) and U. 15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 16. Count IV of Plaintiffs Complaint (Unfair Competition Violations) appears to allege a cause of action for violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 Pa. C.S. § 201-1 et. seq., for misrepresentation, disparagement and general unfair competition by Defendants Faire and Bowser. See Exhibit "A" at 152. 17. The Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law is designed to protect consumers and not businesses or business competitors. 18. Plaintiff fails to state a cause of action for unfair competition violations under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law as the law limits private actions to purchasers of goods or services for personal, family or household use. 19. A business competitor cannot maintain a cause of action for unfair trade practices based on an alleged disparagement of business. 20. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim for unfair competition violations under Count IV. 4 SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/08 WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objection and dismiss Count IV of Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.1028(a)(3) and (4). C. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of Motion to Dismiss Count V for Lenyl Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4). 21. Paragraphs 1 through 20 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 22. Count V of Plaintiffs Complaint purports to allege a cause of action for commercial/business disparagement. 23. To maintain a cause of action for commercial/business disparagement, the Plaintiff must plead and prove: the statement is false, the publisher either intends the publication to cause pecuniary loss or reasonably should recognize that the publication will result in pecuniary loss, pecuniary loss does in fact result, and the publisher either knows that the statement is false or acts in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity. Pro Golf Mfg., Inc. v. Tribune Review Newspaper Co., 809 A.2d 243 (Pa. 2002). 24. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege that the statements made by Defendants were false and that the Defendants knew the statements were false or acted in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of such statements. 25. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim for commercial/business disparagement under Count V. PPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7117/08 WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objection and dismiss Count V of Plaintiffs Complaint pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.1028(a)(3) and (4). D. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count VI for Legal Insufficiency and Failure to Conform to Rules of Court Pursuant to Pa R P 1028(a) (2). (3 and (4). 26. Paragraphs 1 through 25 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 27. Plaintiff s Complaint alleges Plaintiff and Defendant Faire entered into a contract regarding the operation of her concessions during the Faire season. See Exhibit "A" at ¶¶5 and 58. 28. Count VI of Plaintiff s Complaint alleges a cause of action for breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. 29. An action for breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing must be brought as a breach of contract claim. 30. Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1019(i) states: When any claim or defense is based upon a writing, the pleader shall attach a copy of the writing or the material part thereof, but if the writing or copy is not accessible to the pleader, it is sufficient to so state, together with a reason, and set forth the substance in writing. 31. Plaintiff has failed to allege whether the contract which she references was either written or oral and, if written, has failed to attach a copy to the Complaint. 6 SVP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7117/06 32. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objection and dismiss Count VI of Plaintiff s Complaint pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(2), (3) and (4). E. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser as Agent/Employee of Faire for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.1028(a)(3) and (Q. 33. Paragraphs 1 through 32 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 34. Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant Scott Bowser as an agent/employee of the Faire and also in his individual capacity. 35. Plaintiff alleges Bowser was the general manager of the Faire and in such capacity, served as an agent, servant or employee of the Faire. 36. Counts II through VI allege Defendant Bowser acted as an agent/employee of the Faire in attempting to thwart Plaintiff s attempts at selling her concessions and in imposing additional requirements upon concessionaires of the Faire. 37. When acting within the scope of his authority, an employee and a corporate employer are considered the same entity and the employee cannot be held separately liable. 38. Plaintiff s Complaint fails to allege Defendant Bowser acted outside the scope of his authority as an employee of the Faire. 7 SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7117106 39. Plaintiff s allegations consistently refer to Defendant Bowser as a representative, agent and manager of the Faire. 40. Plaintiffs Complaint further fails to allege a cause of action for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing even though the underlying contact (Exhibit "B") out of which such cause of action arises is only between Plaintiff and Defendant Faire and not between Plaintiff and Defendant Bowser. 41. Accordingly, Plaintiff s Complaint fails to state a cause of action against Defendant Bowser as an agent/employee of the Faire. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objections and dismiss Counts R through VI as against Scott Bowser as an agent/employee of the Faire. F. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser in his Individual Capacity for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P.1028(a)(3) and (4). 42. Paragraphs 1 through 41 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 43. Defendant Bowser is alleged to have been a concessionaire of several concessions at the Faire and purchased or made offers to purchase concessions like that of Plaintiff in his individual capacity as a participating merchant. See Exhibit "A" at ¶¶ 8 and 23. 44. Counts II, III, IV and V allege representations and actions by Defendant Bowser in his capacity as an agent/employee of Defendant Faire. See Exhibit "A" at IT 22, 25, 27 and 55. SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/08 45. Counts II, III, IV and V fail to allege what representations, if any, were made by Defendant Bowser in his individual capacity, outside his role as an agent/employee of Defendant Faire, which are sufficient to warrant the imposition of personal liability. 46. Count VI (Breach of Implied Covenant Good Faith and Fair Dealing) alleges that Defendant Renaissance Faire had a contract with the Plaintiff concerning the operation of Plaintiff's concessions. 47. No allegation is made that Defendant Bowser individually had a contract with Plaintiff. 48. Nowhere in Count VI are there any allegations as to Defendant Bowser's conduct in his individual capacity. Rather, all allegations relate to actions or statements by Defendant Bowser in his capacity as an agent of the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire or actions and representations made the Faire itself. 49. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a cause of action against Defendant Bowser in his individual capacity. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objections and dismiss Counts H through VI against Scott Bowser in his individual capacity. G. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Punitive Damages in Counts III IV V and VI for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa RC P 1028(a)(3 and (4). 50. Paragraphs 1 through 49 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. S,PP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7/17/06 51. In Counts III, IV, V and VI of the Complaint, Plaintiff requests punitive damages. See Exhibit "A". 52. It is well settled that punitive damages are properly awarded only for "outrageous conduct" which has been defined as acts done with bad motive or with reckless indifference to the interest of others. Feld v. Merriam, 485 A.2d 742 (Pa. 1984). 53. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has observed that the "imposition of damages to punish a civil defendant is appropriate only when the conduct is especially egregious. Punitive damages may not be awarded for misconduct which constitutes ordinary negligence such as inadvertence, mistake and errors of judgment." Martin v. Johns-Manville Corp., 494 A.2d 1088 (Pa. 1985). 54. Moreover, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held that punitive damages are not justified where the defendant's mental state rises to no more than gross negligence. SHV Coal, Inc. v. Continental Grain Co., 587 A.2d 702, 705 (Pa. 1991). 55. A plaintiffs complaint must contain averments of fact that would support an award of punitive damages. Boilerplate allegations that a defendant's actions were willful, wanton, outrageous, grossly negligent or reckless fail to meet this standard. Smith v. Brown, 423 A.2d 743 (Pa. Super. 1980). 56. Plaintiff has not plead any facts which, if true, would meet the applicable standard for imposition of punitive damages against Defendants Faire and Bowser with respect to the claims asserted under Counts III, IV, V and VI. 10 SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433,004) 7/17106 57. Plaintiff s demand for punitive damages under these counts fails to comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1019(a) in that Plaintiff has not alleged in a concise and summary form material facts on which a cause of action for punitive damages could be based. 58. Accordingly, Plaintiff s claim for punitive damages in Counts III, IV, V and VI should be stricken. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objections and strike Plaintiff s demand for punitive damages in Counts III, IV, V and VI. H. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Attorneys' Fees in Counts II III IV V and VI for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa R C P 1028031 and t4). 59. Paragraphs 1 through 58 are hereby incorporated by reference as if more fully set forth herein. 60. In Counts II, III, IV, V and VI of the Complaint, Plaintiff requests attorneys' fees. See Exhibit "A". 61. "[T]he parties to litigation are responsible for their own fees unless otherwise provided by statutory authority, agreement of the parties or some other recognized exception." See Equibank v. Miller, 619 A.2d 336, 338 (Pa. Super. 1993). 62. Allegations asserting or relating to claims for attorneys' fees against Defendants Faire and Bowser in Counts II, III, IV, V and VI must be stricken under applicable law. 63. Plaintiff cites no statute, agreement or recognized exception authorizing an award of attorneys' fees with respect to Counts II, III, IV, V and VI of her Complaint. 11 SPP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.OD4) 7/17/06 64. Accordingly, Plaintiffs claim for attorneys' fees in Counts II, III, IV, V and VI should be stricken. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this court sustain their Preliminary Objections and strike Plaintiffs demand for attorneys' fees in Counts II, III, IV, V and VI. Dated: I V 0 BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan . Peipher, Esq 're Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) 12 SQP:DHM 414212.1 (22433.004) 7117/06 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have this day served the foregoing Preliminary Objections of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser to Plaintiff s Complaint upon the persons and in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail as follows: J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Carmelo Claudio 68A Springers Lane New Cumberland, PA 17070 Dated: I O BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: l; Susan P. Peipher, Esqui e Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) 13 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. . Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t1d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. p(,. _ 3.26 ?' Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : U-",L and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 iY .:ww•Att - .. ! tv knra, AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las demandas que se presentan ma's adelante en las siguientes pa'ginas, debe tomar accio'n dentro de los pr6ximos veinte (20) dias despuds de la notificacio'n de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente o por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de, y objecciones a, las demandas presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se le advierte de que si usted falla de tomar accion como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demanda o cualquier otra reclamacio'n o remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin ma's aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero o propiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME O VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO O BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants COMPLAINT AND Now here comes Christina Bowman by and through her attorneys, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, and files the following Complaint and in support states the following: Parties 1. Plaintiff, Christina F. Bowman is an independent owner/operator of three concession stands, the Nachos of Nottingham, The Huntsman, and Banana Stand, and a mobile smoothie cart, (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "concessions"), who resides at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 2. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff owned and operated the aforesaid concessions at the annual Renaissance Faire held in the summer season at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 17545. Defendant, Carmelo J. Claudio, (hereinafter "Claudio'), is an adult individual residing at 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, York County, Pennsylvania 17070. 4. Defendant, Mazza Vineyards, Inc., trading as the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and as Mount Hope Estate & Winery, (hereinafter "Renaissance Faire" or "Faire"), is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal offices located at RD 3, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, its mailing address at P.O. Box 685, Cornwall, Pennsylvania 17016. Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of the Faire pursuant to the Merchant Participation Agreement executed by and between herself as owner of the above concessions, and the Faire and renewed annually. 6. Plaintiff, a 54 year old single woman, became an independent concessionaire at the Faire in the 2000 season in order to earn sufficient income for retirement. At times material hereto, Defendant Scott Bowser (hereinafter "Bowser") was the General Manager of the Renaissance Faire, and in such capacity serves as an agent, servant or employee of the Faire, with a business address at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, and was acting within the scope of such agency, service or employment. 8. Defendant Scott Bower is also a concessionaire of several concessions at the Faire and purchased or made offers to purchase concessions like that of Plaintiff in his individual capacity as a participating merchant. COUNTI BREACH OF CONTRACT Bowman v. Claudio 9. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 8 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 2 10. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was the owner/operator of three (3) concession stands above-described, a mobile smoothie cart and a merchant participating in the annual Renaissance Faire. 11. On or about November 7, 2005, Defendant Claudio entered into an Agreement with Plaintiff to purchase the concessions for seasonal use at the Renaissance Faire. A true and correct copy of the Sales Agreement is appended hereto as Exhibit `A.' 12. Pursuant to the Agreement, Claudio was obligated to purchase the concessions for an amount of $170,000.00, comprised of $125,000.00 prior to the 2006 season of the Renaissance Faire for the "sale of the buildings and cart ... machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill," with an additional $45,000.00 to be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 to be paid in three installments for each seasonal month, up to and through October 2007. 13. Defendant Claudio failed to make the payments as agreed under the Sales Agreement. 14. Plaintiff has made repeated demand for payment of the amount agreed upon as the purchase price. 15. Defendant Claudio has advised Plaintiff that he does not intend to perform his obligations under the Sales Agreement and make the agreed upon payments due to representations made to him by Defendant Faire personnel, including by and through Defendant Bowser. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendant, Carmelo Claudio, in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. 3 COUNT II Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 16. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs I through 15 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 17. The Defendants knew that Plaintiff wanted to sell her concessions and has been marketing her concessions for sale and has been in negotiations with prospective buyer(s) like Defendant Claudio. 18. Defendant Bowser was aware that Plaintiff and Defendant Claudio had entered into a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 19. Upon learning of the Sales Agreement and the term of price, Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions sold thereunderwere not valued at the amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 20. Defendant Bowser specifically represented that Plaintiff's concessions were collectively worth only $65,000.00. 21. Since December 2005, Plaintiff has negotiated with two other prospective purchasers for the sale of her concessions. 22. Defendant Bowser is a representative of the Renaissance Faire who has attempted to thwart Plaintiff's attempts at selling her concessions for a fair market price. 23. Scott Bowser is himself an owner/operator of several concession stands at the Renaissance Faire. 24. As a participating merchant, Defendant Bowser is a competitor of Plaintiff. 4 25. Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Faire, has imposed additional requirements upon independent operators of the Faire concession stands, like Plaintiff, to increase the expense of operating the stands. 26. Defendant Renaissance Faire has permitted U.S. Foods to have exclusive rights to provide concessions to the Faire concession stand owner/operators without consent of Plaintiff and other independent owner/operators. 27. Scott Bowser and Thomas Roy, who as agent for the Faire served as the manager of vendors, have represented to the independent owners of stands that the use of U.S. Foods as the supplier of concessions would yield a cost savings to the owner/operators. 28. Defendant Bowser represented to Mr. Claudio that he would be required to outfit her stands with hood systems, costing approximately $10,000 per stand, above the stove-tops, as a prerequisite to operations. 29. Plaintiff does not sell any concessions that would necessitate the use of a hood system. 30. Defendants should have known that requiring installation of fixtures unrelated to her type of concessions sold would reduce the marketability of her concessions to independent concessionaires and inhibit her ability to sell them for a fair price. 31. It is believed and therefore averred that two other prospective purchasers were discouraged from purchasing the concessions because of Defendant Faire's requirements to purchase from one food vendor, and to install the expensive fixtures above-described. 5 32. Defendant Faire is responsible for the conduct of its agent, Defendant Bowser, in his misrepresentations as to the concessions' value and imposition of conditions that increase operating costs without a benefit to Plaintiff. 33. There was a reasonable probability that Defendant Claudio would have performed his bargained for exchange, and paid the agreed upon $170,000.00 amount had Defendant Scott Bowser not represented that the concessions were not worth the amount Claudio had agreed to pay. 34. Defendants knew or should have known that Defendant Bowser's representations would cause Claudio to reconsider performing his payment obligations under the Sales Agreement. 35. Neither the Faire nor Defendant Bowser had any cause for discouraging Defendant Claudio's purchase of Plaintiff s concessions, nor of other interested buyers. 36. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Defendant Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT III Intentional Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 37. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 36 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 6 38. In or about November 2005, Defendant Scott Bowser became aware that Defendant Claudio had executed a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 39. Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio thatthe concessions were worth significantly less than the amount that Claudio agreed to pay and further represented that additional costs would need to be expended in order to operate the stands. 40. Neither Defendant Bowser nor the Faire had appraised the value of Plaintiff's concessions. 41. It is believed, and thus averred that Defendant Bowser knew that his representations as to the value of the concessions Plaintiff had `sold' would be relied upon by Defendant Claudio and would cause him to not make payment of the agreed upon amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 42. It is believed, and thus averred, that Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Renaissance Faire, knowingly and with the intent to persuade Claudio against purchasing the stands, misrepresented that the stands were valued at less than the agreed purchase price to force a sales price reduction and inhibit independent ownership of the stands. 43. Claudio has represented to Plaintiff that but for Defendant Bowser's interference and disparagement, it is likely that he would have performed the bargained for exchange and paid the agreed upon price stated in the Sales Agreement. 44. Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser had no cause for interfering with the Sales Agreement between Plaintiff and Claudio. 45. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, together with all interest, costs 7 and attorneys' fees, and in addition, punitive darriagbg for its intentional conduct, and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT rv Unfair Competition Violations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 46. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 45 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 47. Defendants' interference with a Sales Agreement for the sale of her Faire stands to other would-be independent owner(s) like Claudio is unfair competition. 48. Defendants made representations disparaging Plaintiff's stands by misleading prospective buyers on matters of fact as to the concessions' value. 49. Scott Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the amount stated in the Sales Agreement without any appraisal, and with reckless disregard to the falsity of his representation as to the value of the concessions. 50. Defendant Faire is responsible for imposing other obstacles to saleability of Plaintiff's concessions, to wit, the exclusive vendor relationship with U.S. Foods, and additional requirements upon independent concessionaires as to paper product purchases and installation of unnecessary fixtures in an effort to standardize capability of concessions among independent concessions. 51. Such standardization and uniformity benefit Defendant Faire without a mutual benefit to independent concessionaires like Plaintiff. 52. Defendants' conduct constitutes a violation of Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, ("UTPCPL"), 73 Pa. C.S. §§201-1, et seq. for misrepresentation, disparagement and general unfair competition. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser as to her claim for unfair competition in an amount in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT V Commercial/Business Disparagement Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 53. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 52 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 54. With disregard as to its falsity, Defendant Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the purchase price outlined in the Sales Agreement. 55. Defendant Bowser made that representation as a manager of the Faire with whom prospective business owners would be dealing for Faire matters, including merchant responsibilities under the Merchant Participating Agreement. 56. Defendant Bowser should have realized that such representations would result in Plaintiff suffering pecuniary loss, which loss has resulted in loss of prospective purchaser(s) of her concessions. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for commercial or business 9 disparagement, and suffered pecuniary loss as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees and costs, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT VI Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 57. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 -through 56 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 58. Defendant Renaissance Faire entered into a contract with Plaintiff regarding the operation of her concessions during the faire season. 59. The Faire engaged U.S. Foods as the vendor for food and other supplies to its independent concessionaires, like Christina Bowman, without agreement by the independent concessionaires to the exclusive arrangement. 60. The Faire represented to U.S. Foods that it would oversee the accounts for each of its concessionaires, and has intervened on behalf of U.S. Foods regarding account status for food and other products that were agreed to be provided to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 61. There is no provision in the agreement between Plaintiff and the Faire that authorized the Faire to receive credit for all purchases made by independent concessionaires from U.S. Foods on a collective basis. 62. It is believed and thus averred, that Defendant Faire receives discounts, and/or other arrangement with U.S. Foods pursuant to its exclusive arrangement which discounts are not passed 10 on to the independent concessionaires who are the purchasers of the food and other required purchase products. 63. Defendant Faire, through Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented to independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, that they would benefit from the exclusive purchasing arrangement made with U.S. Foods. 64. Defendant Faire, through its agents Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented that it was acting in the best interest and on behalf of the independent concessionaires for whom it was ostensibly contracting for a reduced rate for food and other required goods from U.S. Foods. 65. Defendant Faire did not enter the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods in order to benefit the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, contrary to its representations. 66. Defendant Faire has failed to protect the interests of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, on whose behalf it ostensibly contracted, by ensuring that the quality of food products and of customer service through timely delivery of perishables. 67. Defendant Faire has not protected the quality of food products or other goods and services purchased by Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires as it represented would be of good quality or better than the prior vendor. 68. It is believed and thus averred that Defendant Faire and its agent Defendant Bowser breached their duty to the independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, when it entered the exclusive arrangement for food purchases with U.S. Foods. 69. Rather than acting on behalf of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, who Defendants allegedly represented to make the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods, Defendants Faire and Bowser have acted as the agent of U.S. Foods to require payment for food products and 11 services that did not meet the quality standards in product or service as promised to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 70. Plaintiff, like other independent concessionaires, was originally informed that not all food products would need to be purchased from U.S. Foods and that Plaintiff could purchase food products from its own vendors for a lower price or better quality, particularly for speciality items. 71. Defendant Bowser and ThomasRoylateradvised,afterthe2005seasoncommenced, that "cherry-picking" foods from other vendors would not be tolerated and all purchases must be made from U.S. Foods. 72. There is no provision in the contract between the Renaissance Faire and Plaintiff that requires purchase of all food and paper products from a particular vendor to be chosen, without approval or consent, solely by the Defendant Renaissance Faire. 73. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the arrangement Defendant Faire made with U.S. Foods in the form of lower quality food products, inconsistent reliability and poor customer service for ensuring timely delivery of perishable products to Plaintiff's concessions. 74. It is believed, and thus averred that Plaintiff had suffered lower profits as a consequence of the lesser quality of food products that she was permitted to sell, and losses due to poor customer service and delivery of the goods promised. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for violation of their duty of good faith and fair dealing, and suffered damages as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, and the greater costs of operating as a result of the exclusive arrangements Defendants 12 have entered without her consent, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP Byi C% v l rc. C J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18th Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: June 7, 2006 13 SALES AGREEMIENT This is an agreement on November 7, 2005 between Christina F. Bowman residing at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 herein referred to as the Seller and Carmelo 7. Claudio residing at. 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, PA 17070 herein referred tc as the Buyer. The Seller is selling three concession stands and a refrigerated smoothie cart, which are all on the grounds of the Renascence Faire, which is located at 2684 Lebanon-Road, Manhiem,-PA 17545. Included inthe sale of the buildings-and cart are machinery, equipment, inventory , and goodwill with a total price of $125,000.00 one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars. Also, the Buyer agrees to pay to the Seller an additional goodwill payment of $45,000.00, which will be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 with a three payment schedule of $7,500.00 per seasonal month with the first payment due on August 30th 2006, and the additional payments due on September 30th 2006, October 30th 2006, August 30t1i 2007, September 30t1i 2007 and October 30`' 2007. / l -()7-d D r_ 5 Notary: l//cL.cvi cz LRCc ly?c..'i/ e7 os" PHILLIP FARABELLI, Notary Public Lemoyne Boro, Cumberland County My Commission Expires Feb. 6, 2006 EXHIBIT A VERIFICATION I, Christina Bowman, make the following statements subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authority, and do hereby state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the Dated: May S, 2006 f ,k,6,f 5 MAR-14-2006 1120 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9490 P.10 P.11 Pennsy?tPa paissaittce-faim MERCHANT P/ktiTlCiPATION COVER SHEET You are required to possess the following doooments. duty signed by you and an . xaY'i?ilteyour matC' . participapon in the Penns"nia Renaissance Fairs foe the Fafftmasan noted below: Y, This NERC"A W PAlyf16? Z;i1EET. Mstiraiog Esh7b A 2- MASTER PARYICIPAYM AGREEMENT . 3: UNMEMWPOLKIEW AND Pft0CeDURE6AWTW-PENNSYI"VANIA REMASS:ANCEr-A1REAVad.JanuaMl„2003. ' Tfa tCat, OPOWU Of- J Cam. 0/G (. 20S--?-, the Partieipatior: of the individual named below (hereinafter retenvd to as 'MERCMAf4r) in the ' FattZ I7r.11%, sP--Asdtf irtdt" XK 't? peROf tl+e Master . MERCHANT Agreement dated January 1. 2003. between L49RCHANT and the Faire, and is tFie'ialeotioa Ibefngltbgally bound. Type of Structure: ____ Pennaftnt, owned by Faire ,e fww g Cart lRoving Hand Basket Ffdie:tSi3t?Atsc`EttleiAq'Caet(s} -&treaic . structure (additional fees apply): S Name: Street TV, City act zip= hod R acme Phone. 21 7 - ?Gr G ' Co *2 f . Ceff twee 717 r /fa `?r?w lta? rr'rr ?Cjdkt Websfle: > 2003 Faire season Aak : .? ,Craft , Games -Rides MAR-14-2006 1120 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.12 pee(o?rnaneeseasar*of•ttr:Pdt is T. Faint3letww ihis,Agreerneat•covemthe Renaissance Faire noted above. The Pennsylvania Renais»nce Faire has previously s pae(arsnartfptesl9?T.. 2. Fees/Assessments: The applicable %VS and/or assessments We as follows: A CTrifff _?ff Tool _ ?_.._ ^ r .. _.. Afto Apply Sm3fte- MetdiMk' vp-; wa_ n11 V m"e payments shall be remitted to the Faire on the dates end on 3tx:.4 transr'illat donna¢ata fhF Fa rtsl»N ttiOC:. X *r" MERCHANT has execuled-this document and tres attached hereto as SxNl "A' those items MERCHANT is desirous of yen is'desieabs'oP&Aucti-rgairo Faim. Tne items listed on Exhibit "A' will be approved or revised by the Faire within so days of Fa: ..... or coAdeft0by MERCHANT. 4. Building OCeupaney and Campground Privileges: Living on site. whether in the Faire Ca?mpy?toQae.3?-?ts ?Ywilkr-wdtter•. permission of the Faiie s Assowte ProdocedMERCHANT Coordinstoo and payment Of an F et$0?:9ts<l%ww 4AQzilgge#wta&k ytlte-Faire. never a right of any MERCHANT. Living on site prhriieges may be revoW at ;, y tinier by the Faire On Si0e FtukS and Regulations w defined by the Faire. The Faire may assigns a ?1tTivaistoC to?se<me.Casapn+g. - . OTIaERt 5. ?is1Ra' `?"- a'psrtof•thei. understanding and agreement is a -MASTER MERCHANT PAQTICIPATION F"'aod'dd tC f&V-lAV POY lw.bof +dadSd'Jaruwrg7. 2003. tt is specificaity understood and agreed that the tEfttts and Cdfld SWIS Containeb in PAW Masan patf aE>[e?tdtms ad'cs:ttd6ofts dfMERCMAM"S partietpon in the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire. f Mcrd wat Partkipation Cover Sheen 2" rMiiesn"* !'.5c 2 TOTAL P.12 MAR-114-2006 11:21 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.01i01 & 6cec'A?-FAepeRies,intlAdiagle?efegaLLyebowrdLxveby;.har4 executed this MERCHANT PARTiCIPATiON COVER SHEET as of. the date first above aw4terk MuChrh+rlCreci?rd?wat:a?cr:4trws. 2Ut)3'Fai?Srason.. P:ly.:. 3 TOTAL P.01 .. 717 697 9480 P•04 h>RR-1a-2006 1 1 : i8 M C W A - K E R REALTY P u s Jaewat)r T. 2w. fAitdE ., MASTER MERCHANT PART1taPAT1ON AGREEMINT bra *9ehree", Nfab=.ViweWds, irt_., arid niadm?n Maas Yineyartls Inc pennsywo is Renaissance Faire. and as Mount Hope.EsMte & Winery. P.O. I l3oitBRS Om.?e Pfi 7o.w. ti eborlesr sawtethrr w aftrred "VW'FAIAE' m &*m, MERCHANT whose name appeas on dx MERCHANT ParGcvatbin COVER 8HEET to which this This Agreement pertains to the ?reposed participation in the Faire by MERCHANT held on the peoa110> a?-Mot?Tl1opa1=sW1e8aMie?scf-. f FAIRE and MERCHANT, intending to be legally bound hereby, agree as follows: 1'. Ilk=ytPif;er-aw•a?Ap?reprE9a?afivC-OF1l1o-> MERCHANT vdw has been dischmed to and approved by the Fare.."ll be present each Dehai(ot MERCHANT M ail matters re?ating 1p f=aire particgatfn, I(MERChIANT, wRhoui the:wrlawommilatvtwFAPWtxftVoperateditsp®orptoridgtfhaevrro or One* day that the Faire is open for business, at the election of ft Faire. and sr-OW any NrOw. shelh cease irnrnedierey?, and any tort or pavilion stnhctum which may have been erected b! MERCHANT shall bes and dly4Faee AelwowA I%s-. ERC VW..zUucture not readily removable, the Faire, m its election, may assume ownership and aw" of the theeto and wM no liability of the Faire w MERCHANT inuring by mason thereof, In either case. al?rleaiaei?hla?:drE'amaoe=ubonrwdefrl?R?paNTSstrar?ttee"was erected as well as arty further po ticipoWn in future Faire r : - trrdastands#ws tbe•Fairesarer?oaton 07 a t6 Century Country Faire in Morrie Oide ErghaM and Ow importance of all M ft" 1 1, MERCHAUT.dneraby agrees: , t . Ta P+otxdures" dated Ocwtw 1. 2002. with any additional wppiements, if any. as noted. Copy which is MomCr M=Lbaal PartfcipaUun: Agmemcni page I 2053"Fftrs?e3rorr• .. M C WALKER RERLTY 717 697 9490 MAR-14-2006 11:18 . - . --- ou f3; RtrtaYeb•dneunhentensybEarrhendahi;.borRWnt'to•bhth?-byt:t?Faif¢8ndeRy,shKb. emerhdmeybs shall, likewise, become pan of tw Uniuwsel Policiesand ProCedureS. G fharlhepaReesobaafeediReralet Spatticipabon.in the Faire and are herby made a par! or this Agreement x if r act IoM at length. 0e ' p HpTiZ er agsabt..t to abide•by the terms and provisions therein shall constitute a material breach ¢y CHANT of this AgreWOUL, '. 05 1P.6 3: s? • Awrypreptasarataed•byab?NlpliN7 a dMere:pe sn . the spars provided t0 MER (ANT by this Faire shall be cons. pera?nsl property for arhyrawd eiyurph70es:.Suolrsticraore[t? ahal?bevabjea MahsmgvDy the Faire uaoa . requ" or dom n l as herein provided. MERCHANT acknowledge; that MERCHANT has noiOW. is, •thea?F gatrtran:rNddh.Ohc?grClure ah*Lhw#B-b6Nt•aroaad and OW this Agreement Merely pr4vid" a rightro!•uee to MERCHANT On Fairal perfonnoede days for in 1he+ssitea parbs provhdW that MERCHANT when, at all times. abide by MW be in full compbanoe with the terms and . WndMarrbe(1hia cow aypeergs.. % madrwilh thetains.,, 4• Use afro OmippM. The space so. be used and occupied by MEt4;hWNT than pg used sad oee?hpi[Q#r at?dstinte?rtQ br arxApeapaar iE-am'Wedf?yt•. noted on the Cover Sheet hereto and under such Condhibns 85 are' Sat forth heraln. S. ?®rtieritlic'.1Cforaur Aeaso[r. .W WsV*)edginMtpLthe Faire. b have failed. in a material way. b Wow and abiocbbyy the s and Wndition5 of tYe ', 01e'Fii/e"nfay? et.thea=aie Ratty.. MERCHANT that the Faire is tenthirtating MERCHANT'S right to any hmm . in HASCL.WMZ*ve f ' f riglE.W reOYkeISERCe an of MERCHANTS "pony on the Faire site. incltrdkg any stru a of MERCHANT, at irhehr8rhg.ataaheaandusioq.of we.F.airq; if the Fake, determines that to remove the structure sooner would not be to the Faire.. .Six sh"h4we etaum*rWor enclosed eputprs d from the date notice b remove has been given byrthe ?to MERCHANT. M MANS taitsic-MMW W MERCH&9rSsVAoture.as directed the time provided. M7EWFT Plan Tt A* phystal possession cf rte *ucWe and contents to Faire who sttMFliocaat flit aas+acaQ'at?clr pr0pertr thOreaREr it the.Fa'¦e determines not to produce the Pennsylvania R Faire at any lime in tititaaaatttlprh?ent F Waift-swFairwo a"O.WFIGMUT shall-haft 60 days to remove any structure. attached f%Wm andf enclosed equipment. if IxtYYtT ttte.tlrae provided. MERCHANT shall rodeo physical possession of the structure and all contents to Faire who afiaFli ...merQiraaehercP ?Rprbpafl?tthsKwltsr MERCHANT. when removing ony prdparty ffom the Faire site, agto festore the Faire bellor cVhrCtulE of any of MERCHANTS ?origipN{aorhdlli4rh e•any property existed on the spaoo. The Faire may require . N?tp'tl?i 1hS •the-Faire IO?RSS?wesbsNoorRWiaRet. Ma" Mrst;baat Pa"ipation AgmWncat p hbw y 2NXIMMI&iasiia. 411A2-14,2006 11:20 M C WPLKER REALTY I 717 697 9480 P.09 t. au and the raft. 0):.mv9m@'kFOart rant:sSCUCdacOerCtEr•Fj#WSlte:'#4Ef:tGjk41*2.. 89r6es to PWilli the Faire With A dLliCW copy of 4111 keys to Me 'doom to such bWWing. ?^.4CiC'f9isdSVPdhR'm'C?R'>ny'braYprOrU101fdaaof'LI?IS'A?RNREIRbyr MERCHANT shs[I not Cons Ua a *VftubV usivr, of such bMaeb a violstion or 9 waver -I" wil-WMEACHAMt- (I) unim the context dearly indicates othe4me, the term "MERC imr sw refer to [ha mmf=weti apsryrenvinyver. scam" am arm of WERWANT on the Faire sile. ftltlrEr4rsers?x Zctlra tmtAempnoketweamthe•Faw and MERCiiAfdT will mAnd to ar: 91 the matters cont:hted herein. No a"rwmerds har@t0 s.hatf oS 04111ned-?ottrr28tl p?aoeprtiq a-W*3egpenrWrftklg'slgrlea by'bdm hrERCH MT and by the Faire. APWrrN€S;TVP : *WFMwe-llrld'MG date fast tat fOM above with the intention of ?ItRSEYRRfls: iNt : C herm sgneaaw Agrecrtomas'of dte bound hereby. M WIM Merchant Panicgw6on A fattmenl 25WFa R9Sc.WDIF Page 6 MAR-14-20@6 1120 M C WALKER REALTY I 717 697 9490 P.11 r. ,k!!!??!tl t..2b0.1 L illQltPRLY'----cQE''LIIEPEIMISYtY?Q1?WSSANCE'FYRFi The Fake reserves the apt4m its sole Oscaalion, to diaaries arviParticipMM for Aarlyan:mn, i?a/Pr?y?iar•esila4eeorniwg•con0utl-?R'OR?-F?Ora belfeaae•ts krcorKkgea.? Wihpreyoals and db)scWas of The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire as an artistic and erOrtaimment event - afMse 'gltker. _ Idl g0e eoaooeegrn - - O* or ww twr . Agreement or document relate" to the Faire and the Parliftent shall be taken Wp directly with the A=*CWte.PeodVWIOftWilP awc•failf[ut'eanPlieaerdal!COrKWOOD'of nas. entertainment related Faire participation by all Participants, and is also charged with facilitating td i®x reAtlb re.soas to ensweu+riaeceasiW by or --noarned: Patddpant and Go"fimentary Passes, Parking Permits and Parkins Policies: Attached -. traet?.aer1"we-dotsageelb cap9oned'astvte.a::. Panieipant.Passes, Complimentary Passes and Parking Permit Policies AtbatlrA*?rfPaaaee Form Participant Parking Penfrit Appfocit6on Psue ParwVP0 iow- articipant Parking Permit Application Tnes&AwA=wm fie'sobj 01101118 crust b?ercetartedbyl¢ehterdrfrKvA#MW he Priam lime specified by the Faire for each performance season. - .. with speciCc permission. on site must obtain prior written approval. from the Merchant Coordinator. Pe6, unless a part of a porkonivaactwerma .drug'a`>=a!^S'day:' Anyane-whalgr, specific written pemission to have a pet on the grounds on non-Faire days must keep the animal ap0r* 12ldGaged:O"neoerieashedat-sittimes.'. Participants must assume at rlesilmbility for their pets. Pet droppings fnyo 44 OW. 69d up -c!•prope.*1y:' the wft*pw*VO'pet-pav*ges.. Phone Service: Certain MERCHANT structures and campground locations have been equipped wiat'pQlOAre'.baiplst spolsndat'RistlrE• #WPh9WCompaw*,4je have service installed. The Faire assumes no responsibility for phone line damage from any cause wAa beevc. ... TIIarH'areb'ba<nauOOme?peaon6Fai[t9royrrds'sttlr.tl0dr.t The Mount Hope Estate grounds are private property and are absolutely ctoseff to the WbtiG nept daringpoeten?aeaa?.•ar?tlrlte' spa+aaredgilrreriagsorpertiesof any sort on the faire Grounds. Open fit" are not permitted by the ~ of ate Fire Marshal. ?. W.r C WFlLKER RERLTY 717 697 9480 P.02 MRR-14-2006 11 18 M . aao?r+ya P•3 1 .. a CM1atlpa'Aad Celeelrrcatflist;Pa". ,Ak1MERElMd?iiPiRiciptf4Ssaq}S1 WmmWeyerEa with auffCW t cash and change banks. The Faire does Trot carry extra change and will decline any gPWW-la• C2orgfr:Frrepoacy i7lptteYeF.gah persenaFa SMird Fitly cltecttater YryM fsoP . at any time. irate 9F*711lr -1 ft faictparide Yyslrp draRsFrwes On peftn%aw @, evenugs. All trash nxrst be suftabfy bagged and PftW neXt to MUW faire dash receptacles. The wdgAlrrtsihoFdtar no mite tlga efr0a^d au bash aogsmuct bed sufficient strength so as not to tear. Trash must not be placed outside any building or tent any earlier DWVPOEW -'PC' Any trash hom a Merchant's normal opefations accumulated on a non-Faire day is the responsibility of;tLt sslFd'Aan:-tt>aCrrp:'e,',81fE'difEPHI.ltlradrd:neat plaCGQ1P?a•-flyF-0'?! Duw4wterdesipaledler Stich ptirpose. sglgian?4ldtd?maieriads:. tfaNrmtfsq;neveM De•disposedd in Faire supplied roll off dumpsters or otherwise on #* Faire site. Vioiatws vA% Lace severe pertahies: ANI %dd:7a af!`wtrrF noods to oea otoookiag p?angll.do so ia-aeaxdanoe with prroeedaes established by the Faire. MERCHANTS must pay all costs associated with cooking OifrentovaE ?Zt!'F9lE'refCiQa?rly'•is=ricaegtippad'le'handle'OgptkatgdtZUrdi?ak'rehtse.lo•. remove any roll off eomairung cooit-ing or other oils. oi?draier-To dayawiu sauaregr danwga Acrq do" Wo" the sewage treatment plant. Responsible parties wia pay am, repair bills and be subject to fines and li?'tl+efair?. AS'l? :alercwiflrar2flfeel•of•Hroir Qeildirgelearr.lxfare. during and afle- avey Faire day. Timis includes t' a cleaning up of cigarette blrtts and odrer trash. If FaicestatGiSlarieeflt>l boutl+'lire-MERCl1Ati#wilkbe•biileeklptaddihOraF:: cleanup service. . 'I?•Emesttaaces< 1:Fte;,oonsumNion•oFanl'.wortheNCbevr?.agetiy-*ar? MERCHANT prior to or during a Faye day is strictly prohibited. The legal age for consumption of . yea.soFage age VA%aaww"Wies•alooholic beverages on W. Hope property at any time will immediately lose all Faire privikg@s. Anyone suookrinQ•aleelydic-0e+rereoes to an rederaae-aeraowshalLbkewise De.ounislled with bune6ate loss Tdte ?aRAlagaFSpon let any+l+ltaisst[16t1y ; ft& Any vioWtix of this peragraph will not only result in lire automat c termination of the vltaafors ithe-Fairs; notietotthe ' report w wthe proper legal aLahrorf•ies• Pteriodl?orts _7teeaMl ed1o drawweapon$ GPVd ?are-Faire ecwM who participate in a chfueographed show. All other weapons must be fl fled to period, sheathed and peocf~ataw wnes? Erection of Strtrepaes On Faire Property Detailed drawings must be first wAm-ided and OH wtswudrre•on'Fairapr Deft Y. •AV- any participant. The Fare always reserves the fight m approve or reject any propoucd struwre. S»:tiCirkeiE F?a-bpi'd'?porieies?as.weft-as•aµreie+rant state or beat building codes. .04P z 717 697 9480 P.03 IOAR_14_200G 11?le M C WALKER REALTY -.-- p. ? .. A UR'?1i0?'wKMfs:ro?4Ctf?c7Si.'ed'?€akFPattia„ , .lWia'Oi!?x+{'M?e•. twtanttr;im (17b45j a Crxnwa : (t 7Jt6; Post Ortitxs ?o' receipt o! m- O. {Tr?* Fay oil: accept r-c M80 xattteepatdtttpgs'ICS-arty'P apppliad-faWnkadfarcerServiea or other delivery services. Participants delivery address: m mwniek do Pemnsytvarria Ranalssance Faire Nxm. Ps titoad Pa 17545 d+oPOtFheacttthe ManLenanor8a^r raw the pay phone. Packages shwid be p dwd t* Mx:day th_Mrrgh Friday (ryn 7 AM to 3:30 PM as thudrop:oll'bw imsavily lodtnd-a Oollia tM es= DeliveriatsAnto'The. Fairegrounda: MERCHANTS shay advise all supplierslventWs plat no artsi0ceatl5•tnust•arartge'? thew suppli.rstverreors tt+eetiham txltsida of ttte Faire spe to accept delivery- Faire empbrm arenot perm std so wait beadinga torsi k el.sipr -foralp MEREHwNT,tleiveries. PoOcOarMS are responsible tot any damage done to the grounds, k1doding sod damage, by any vehicles idond>ant's-setdingia?•rioration dt-Lris poky.- YehiG* Weight Restrictions: No Pxrtiepent vehicles over V. lop are al4twed on cha Faire site. Th&NI rierrW U& C-sirs is a?ayaus reuaat?nota.testiaol day n O1de England and vrill be set in a time period from the 1$" Century (War of the Roses and ?4tiat6' fetWnyoaatlu?iog?.itf?Ote.teigttaGQreercFlisabept: ALParacoarmam both encouraged, and t oft-ted.10 baeoma a part of this Illusion. Guidelines for simessful lwdyamerlk -QeDtavidaid.iQallFaire. Patticpants. Sneakers may never be worn. Stroking in coSF?me is new permieed in sight of any polbrls~ Mbgigigpstesi?leetytae63 AsCSansaaEempoyxS brirdd Pipe bandderieg:the Faire season. Pawmciagnlsarleo sk" t¢Ylatle s•4oodiaYce(fee?iAteYoerie9 Eaiee guide tealpt: k0aracting with Faire patrons risk loss of panieipadon in tutus Faire seasons. prat i6'attMrAegrripareef Wo4AASTE R--MERCHANT which sets forth additional terms and conditions of IAG'.{Ilpi{?Ilp .07 The F - Pft?#` 4. .. • -R J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsellor Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff :PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agentlemployee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 Defendants RESPONSE TO PRELMNARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS INC t/d/b/a the PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE. ER AND SCOTT BOWS AND NOW here comes Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, by and through her attorneys, Nauman Smith Shissler and Hall, LLP, and files the following Response to Preliminary Objections filed by Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser as follows: Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 4. Admitted. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 5. Admitted. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 6. Admitted. The averments of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 7. Denied as stated. See 125 of Complaint which is a document that speaks for itself. The averments of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 8. Denied as stated. See 1131 and 33 of Complaint which is a document that speaks for itself. The averments of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. A. Response to Preliminary Objections in the Nature of a Motion for Transfer Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(1) and 1006(e) for hnproper Venue 9. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 8 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 10. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Plaintiff specifically denies that she brings her claims against Defendants Faire and Bowser by virtue of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement, or that any of her claims asserted against Defendant Bowser are related to or arise thereunder. Plaintiff further denies that any claims she has asserted against Defendant Faire through the conduct of Defendant Bowser are in any way related to or arise under that Agreement, and in fact are outside the scope of that Agreement. Each and every claim 2 that Plaintiff has alleged is independent of and should not be governed by any terms of the Agreement. 11. Denied. Plaintiff asserted claims against Bowser in his individual capacity and in the alternative in his capacity as agent for the Faire. Plaintiff's claims against the Faire are by virtue of Defendant Bowser's agency status, and the Defendant Faire's constructive knowledge of its agent's actions. It is expressly denied that the terms of the Merchant Participation Agreement pertain to the claims Plainti£fhas asserted as such claims are not for breach ofthe Master Participation Agreement, nor contingent upon the terms contained in that Agreement. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 12. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the quoted provision has any applicability to Plaintiffs claims because they do not arise from, nor are they related to the Merchant Participation Agreement, but rather are asserted in tort against Defendant Bowser in his capacity as an individual and/or as an agent of Defendant Faire. 13. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that all of Plaintiff's claims asserted against Defendants Faire and Bowser arise under or are related 'to the Merchant Participation Agreement. Rather, as Counts II through' V clearly demonstrate, Plaintiff's claims are asserted in tort against Defendant Bowser in his capacity as an 3 individual and/or as an agent of Defendant Faire, as well as against the Faire directly for its responsibility for the acts of its agents. 14. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, venue is not improper in Cumberland County because there is proper venue over a contract action involving Defendant Claudio for a contract entered into, signed and notarized in Cumberland County. See Exhibit `A' to Plaintiffs Complaint. Moreover, the Plaintiff resides in Cumberland County and has sued parties who are not party to the Merchant Participation Agreement and who cannot be bound by a choice of forum clause therein. Further, the clause pertains to the Merchant Participation Agreement only, not to any and all claims asserted against the Defendant Faire or any of its agents that involve matters that arose outside and despite existence of the Agreement. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests dismissal of Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Transfer for alleged improper venue, because she properly filed her Complaint in Cumberland County, and further requests judgment in her favor against Defendant Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in is individual capacity) for each and every claim set forth against them in her Complaint as outlined therein. B. Response to Preliminary Objection in the Nature of Motion to Dismiss Count IV for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4). 15. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 14 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 16, Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that Count N merely appears to allege a cause of action, rather, Plaintiff's Complaint in Count IV alleges a valid claim for unfair competition against Defendants as asserted in Paragraphs 46 through 52 which are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein in further response hereto. 17. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. Byway of further answer, the facts alleged in Count IV of the Complaint allege a valid claim for unfair competition and unfair trade practices as the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law CIJT?CPU) does not supplant the common law prohibiting unfair or deceptive and/or disparaging trade practices, but rather supplements it. See Gabriel v. O'Hara, 534 A.2d 488 (Pa. Super. 1987). Plaintiff's Complaint alleges sufficient facts for "unfair competition violations" which are not based solely upon the UTPCPL. 19. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Plaintiff sets forth a valid claim for unfair competition and may do so as a competitor. See response to 118 above hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 5 20. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. See response to ¶18 above hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests dismissal of Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count IV for Legal Insufficiency for the reasons above-stated and requests judgment in her favor and against Defendants The Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser, in his individual and/or in his capacity as agent for Defendant Faire as to her claims in Count IV for unfair competition and unfair/deceptive trade practices, for such damages, as outlined in the Complaint. C. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count V for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4Z 21. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 20 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 22. Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that Count V merely purports to allege a cause of action, rather, Plaintiff's Complaint in Count V alleges a valid claim for commercial business disparagement against Defendants as asserted in Paragraphs 53 through 56 which arehereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein in response hereto. 23. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Count V sets forth a valid claim for commercial/business disparagement against Defendant Scott Bowser 6 in his individual capacity and/or his capacity as agent for the Renaissance Faire, for which the Defendant Faire may be held liable as each of the elements of the claim are set forth in the Complaint. The averments ofPlaintifr s Complaint are incorporated by reference in fin-ther response hereto. 24. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege that the statements of Defendants were made in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of such statements. By way of further answer, Defendants failed to recognize that Count V incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through52 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Paragraph 49 of the Complaint expressly states "Scott Bowser represented that Plaintiffs concessions were not worth the amount stated in the Sales Agreement without any appraisal, and with reckless disregard to the falsity of his representation as to the value of the concessions." 25. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Count V sets forth a valid claim for commercial/business disparagement against Defendant Scott Bowser in either his individual capacity, or his capacity as agent for the Renaissance Faire, for which the Defendant Faire may be held liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests dismissal of Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count V for Legal Insufficiency for the reasons above-stated, and requests judgment in her favor and against Defendants The Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser, in his individual and/or in his capacity as agent for Defendant Faire as to her claims in Count V, for damages and such other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. 7 D. Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count VI for Legal Insufficiency and Failure IQ, Conform to Rules of Court Pursuant to Pa R C P 1028(a) (2). (3) and (4). 26. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 25 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 27. Denied. Plaintiff's Complaint is a document that speaks for itself. By way of fnther answer, Plaintiff alleges in Paragraphs 5 and 58 of her Complaint that she is an independent concessionaire pursuant to the Merchant Participation Agreement byway of framing her relationship to the Defendant Faire and Bowser not as the basis of her claim. Moreover, she does not allege a claim against Defendants for breach of the Merchant Participation Agreement, but for binding her to specific restrictions in the absence of any agreement from her that she concurred. 28. Admitted. 29. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. 30. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded. By way of fiuther answer, Rule 1019 is a Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure that speaks for itself. 31. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff has failed to allege whether the covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied in law was based upon a writing or not. By way of finther answer, it was implied within the representations made by Defendant Faire and Bowser that 8 attempt to bind Plaintiff to an exclusive relationship with U.S. Foods and additional requirements not specified in a written agreement with her. 32. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded. By way of further answer, in Count VI, Plaintiff states a valid claim against Defendant Faire and Scott Bowser as alleged through Paragraphs 1 through 74 of her Complaint. The averments of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference in further response hereto. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests dismissal of Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Dismiss Count VI for Legal Insufficiency and Failure to Conform to Rules of Court for the reasons above-stated, and requests judgment be granted in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for violation of their duty of good faith and fair dealing, for damages and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. E. Response to Preliminaa Objections in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser as Agent/Employee of Faire for Legal Insufficienc Pursuant to Pa RCP 1028(a)(33) and (4). 33. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 32 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 34. Denied as stated. Plaintiff asserts claims in Counts II through V against Defendant Bowser in his capacity as an individual, and/or as anagent for Defendant Faire: Plaintiff asserts claims against Defendant Bowser as an agent of the Faire and against Defendant Faire itself in Count VI of her Complaint, and the allegations therein are incorporated in further response hereto. 35. Denied as stated. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Bowser, when acting as General Manager, was acting in his capacity as agent/employee of the Faire. Discovery will need to be undertaken to ascertain whether, when Defendant Bowser made certain representations, he was acting as an agent or was acting in his individual capacity for his own self-interest rather than the interest of the Faire to the extent that such interests are divisible. 36. Denied as stated. The Complaint is a document that speaks for itself, and the allegations set forth in Paragraphs I through 74 are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. The entirety of the allegations contained in the Complaint do not merely allege that Defendant Bowser acted solely in his capacity as an agent or employee of Defendant Faire, but also that he acted in his individual capacity as a competitor of Plaintiff. 37. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 38. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts from which it may be deduced that Defendant Bowser acted outside the scope of his authority. It is presumed as a matter of law that intentional torts cannot be imputed to an employer, as it is presumed that an employer would not authorize nor condone one of its employees intentionally injuring another within the scope of its conduct. However, until discovery is undertaken to ascertain what activities were authorized by the Faire. 10 39. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiffs allegations consistently, understood to mean, exclusively, refer to Defendant Bowser as a representative/agent/manager of the Faire. 40. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is unclear what is meant by the "underlying contact" as there is frequent contact between Plaintiff and Defendant Bowser, in both his individual and agent capacities. The cause of action for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is asserted against Defendant Faire by virtue of the actions of its agent, Defendant Bowser, within the scope of his authority as an agent. 41. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests that Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser as Agent/Employee ofFaire for Legal Insufficiency be dismissed, and requests judgment in her favor as to the claims set forth in Counts H through VI and against Defendant Scott Bowser in his capacity as an agent for the Faire, and includes within her prayer for relief damages, attorneys' fees and punitive damages up to treble damages, and any other relief that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. 11 F. Response to Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser in his Individual Capacity for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4). 42. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 41 above by reference as though fully set forth herein. 43. Admitted. 44. Denied as stated. Count II, which incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 15, alleges in Paragraphs 18 and 19 that Defendant Bowser knew of the sale and made representations regarding the value of Plaintiff's stands. It is fairly deducible from the facts, which include allegations in Paragraphs 23 and 24, that Defendant Bowser is an owner/operator and as such is in competition with Plaintiff, which as a fellow stand owner and competitor would be in his individual capacity. 45. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, the Complaint alleges which representations made by Defendant Bowser were in his capacity as agent, and others are in his capacity as an individual, which, depending on what facts are revealed through discovery, may pinpoint his conduct as either an action while serving the Faire as agent, or as an individual competitor of Plaintiff. 46. Denied as stated. Count VI alleges by way of background the existence of a contract between Defendant Faire and Plaintiff, not as a basis for her claims asserted in her Complaint. 47. Denied as stated. None of the claims asserted against Defendant Bowser in his individual capacity implicate a contract, to necessitate that there be an allegation as to a contract between Plaintiff and Bowser in his individual capacity. 12 48. Denied as stated. Count VI incorporates by reference earlier paragraphs in the Complaint that assert a claim in his individual capacity. It is admitted that the claims asserted in Count VI do not assert a claim against Defendant Bowser in his individual capacity. 49. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests that Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Dismiss Counts II through VI against Scott Bowser in his Individual Capacity for Legal Insufficiency be dismissed, and requests judgment in her favor as to the claims set forth in Counts II through VI and against Defendant Scott Bowser in his individual capacity and includes within her prayer for reliefdamages, attorneys' fees and punitive damages up to treble damages, and any other relief that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. G. Response to Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Punitive Damages in Counts III. IV. V and VI for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4). 50. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 49 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 51. Denied. By way of further answer, in the prayer for relief pertaining to Counts II, III, IV, V and VI of the Complaint, Plaintiff requests punitive damages, and has outlined the reckless disregard, intentional conduct to harm her, in the allegations of her Complaint. 52. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are 13 s r specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, the Complaint contains facts on its face and that are fairly deducible therefrom, that indicate bad motive or reckless indifference on the part of Defendant Scott Bowser in his individual capacity and/or as an agent for Defendant Faire. Punitive damages are intended to punish and deter egregious behavior, see GLD by GLD v. Johnson, 713 A.2d 1127 (Pa. 1998), as has been manifested here. 53. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 54. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of fiuther answer, there has been no allegation merely of "gross negligence." The Complaint sets forth allegations of intention and wilful disregard as to Defendant Bowser's actions, which are believed to be self-interest motivated, to reduce if not eliminate independent concession owners in the Faire as either competitors for his own personal benefit, or contractees for the benefit of the Faire. 55. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff's Complaint consists merely of boilerplate allegations, and that rather the Complaint alleges facts that if true, support an award of punitive damages. 14 56. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 57. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion oflaw to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Complaint does not set forth a basis for a claim for which punitive damages may be recovered. In particular, Count IV Unfair Competition violations, is a statutory claim for which punitive damages in the form of treble damages may be properly claimed. 58. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion oflaw to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Punitive Damages in Counts III, IV, V and VI for Legal Insufficiency, and requests judgment in her favor as to the claims set forth in Counts II through VI, and includes within her prayer for relief damages, attorneys' fees and punitive damages up to treble damages, and any other reliefthat this Court deems appropriate. 15 y H. Response to Preliminary Objection in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Attorneys' Fees in Counts II. III. IV. V and VI for Legal Insufficiency Pursuant to Pa R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) and (4). 59. Plaintiff incorporates her Responses to Paragraphs 1 through 58 above by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 60. Denied. By way of further answer, in the prayer for relief pertaining to Counts II, III, IV, V and VI of the Complaint, Plaintiff lists as one of her damages attorneys' fees. 61. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion oflaw to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 62. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, the prayer for relief does not constitute a an enumerated averment to which a response may be filed and the enumerated allegations do not assert claims for attorneys' fees. 63. Denied as stated. Defendant's response presumes that a statute, agreement or exception needs to be set forth in the body of the Complaint in order for the Plaintiff to seek attorneys' fees as part of the relief. 64. Denied. This averment constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is legally required. In the event this averment is deemed to include allegations of facts, the same are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 16 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendants' Preliminary Objections in the Nature of a Motion to Strike Claims for Attorneys' Fees in Counts III, IV, V and VI for Legal Insufficiency, and requests judgment in her favor as to the claims set forth in Counts II through VI, including within her prayer for relief, damages, attorneys' fees and any other relief that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted, By: Date: August 4, 2006 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP CX GO d-6 ? J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Counsel for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman 17 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date statedbelow, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm ofNauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing Response to Preliminary Objections of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Ina t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Carmelo J. Claudio 68A Springers Lane New Cumberland, PA 17070 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: ucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Dated: August 4, 2006 18 w ? ?? ?C i .,M ?.. s cn;yj .C t'"? t ??' ? . ? iY1 ? ? f? iy 2 (3 7 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 PETITION FOR LEAVE TO DISCONTINUE ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT CARMELO CLAUDIO ONLY Plaintiff, CHRISTINA BOWMAN, by her counsel, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, respectfully petitions this Court pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 229(b) for leave to discontinue the above-captioned action as to Defendant, Carmelo Claudio, and in support thereof avers the following: 1. Plaintiff commenced this action by Complaint against Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (the "Faire"), Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio on June 8, 2006. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Complaint is attached as Exhibit "A." 2. In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that on November 7, 2005, Defendant Claudio entered into an Agreement with Plaintiff to purchase her concessions for seasonal use at the 44 Renaissance Faire and that pursuant to the Agreement, Claudio was obligated to purchase the concessions for an amount of $170,000.00, for the "sale of the buildings and cart ... machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill." 3. Due to the facts that have recently come to light, see Affidavit of Defendant Carmel Claudio, Plaintiff desires to discontinue her claim against him. Claudio's Affidavit is appended hereto as Exhibit "B." 4. No Answer to the Complaint has been filed by Defendant Claudio or any other party 5. The causes of action against Defendants Faire and Bowser (as an agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity), and Defendant Claudio are separate and independent. 6. None of the Defendants has joined the other as an additional defendant and there are no cross-claims by any of the Defendants against the other. 7. The discontinuance of Plaintiff's action against Defendant Carmelo Claudio will not unduly prejudice any of the other defendants. 2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests that this Court enter a Rule upon Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as an agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity) to show cause why the above- captioned action should not be discontinued as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only. NAUMAN SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By. J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 p Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: August /0 , 2006 3 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 c- n Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 n, 200 North Third Street CD -? rn ,c P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 - i Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. OL -.3.21. u c Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 EXHIBIT I A AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las demandas que se presentan ma's adelante en las siguientes paginas, debe tomar accio'n dentro de los proximos veinte (20) dias despues de la notificacion de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente o por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de, y objecciones a, las demandas presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se le advierte de que si usted falla de tomar accion como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demanda o cualquier otra reclamacion o remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin ma's aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero o propiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME O VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO O BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17101 (717) 249-3166 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, No. Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants COMPLAINT AND Now here comes Christina Bowman by and through her attorneys, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, and files the following Complaint and in support states the following: Parties Plaintiff, Christina F. Bowman is an independent owner/operator of three concession stands, the Nachos of Nottingham, The Huntsman, and Banana Stand, and a mobile smoothie cart, (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "concessions"), who resides at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 2. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff owned and operated the aforesaid concessions at the annual Renaissance Faire held in the summer season at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 17545. 3. Defendant, Carmelo J. Claudio, (hereinafter "Claudio"), is an adult individual residing at 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, York County, Pennsylvania 17070. 4. Defendant, Mazza Vineyards, Inc., trading as the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and as Mount Hope Estate & Winery, (hereinafter "Renaissance Faire" or "Faire"), is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal offices located at RD 3, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, its mailing address at P.O. Box 685, Cornwall, Pennsylvania 17016. 5. Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of the Faire pursuant to the Merchant Participation Agreement executed by and between herself as owner of the above concessions, and the Faire and renewed annually. 6. Plaintiff, a 54 year old single woman, became an independent concessionaire at the Faire in the 2000 season in order to earn sufficient income for retirement. 7. At times material hereto, Defendant Scott Bowser (hereinafter "Bowser") was the General Manager of the Renaissance Faire, and in such capacity.serves as an agent, servant or employee of the Faire, with a business address at 2684 Lebanon Road, Manheim, Pennsylvania, 17545, and was acting within the scope of such agency, service or employment. 8. Defendant Scott Bower is also a concessionaire of several concessions at the Faire and purchased or made offers to purchase concessions like that of Plaintiff in his individual capacity as a participating merchant. COUNTI BREACH OF CONTRACT Bowman v. Claudio 9. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 8 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 2 10. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was the owner/operator of three (3) concession stands above-described, a mobile smoothie cart and a merchant participating in the annual Renaissance Faire. 11. On or about November 7, 2005, Defendant Claudio entered into an Agreement with Plaintiff to purchase the concessions for seasonal use at the Renaissance Faire. A true and correct copy of the Sales Agreement is appended hereto as Exhibit `A.' 12. Pursuant to the Agreement, Claudio was obligated to purchase the concessions for an amount of $170,000.00, comprised of $125,000.00 prior to the 2006 season of the Renaissance Faire for the "sale of the buildings and cart ... machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill," with an additional $45,000.00 to be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 to be paid in three installments for each seasonal month, up to and through October 2007. 13. Defendant Claudio failed to make the payments as agreed under the Sales Agreement. 14. Plaintiff has made repeated demand for payment of the amount agreed upon as the purchase price. 15. Defendant Claudio has advised Plaintiff that he does not intend to perform his obligations under the Sales Agreement and make the agreed upon payments due to representations made to him by Defendant Faire personnel, including by and through Defendant Bowser. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendant, Carmelo Claudio, in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. 3 COUNT II Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 16. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 15 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 17. The Defendants knew that Plaintiff wanted to sell her concessions and has been marketing her concessions for sale and has been in negotiations with prospective buyer(s) like Defendant Claudio. 18. Defendant Bowser was aware that Plaintiff and Defendant Claudio had entered into a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 19. Upon learning of the Sales Agreement and the term of price, Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions sold thereunder were not valued at the amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 20. Defendant Bowser specifically represented that Plaintiff's concessions were collectively worth only $65,000.00. 21. Since December 2005, Plaintiff has negotiated with two other prospective purchasers for the sale of her concessions. 22. Defendant Bowser is a representative of the Renaissance Faire who has attempted to thwart Plaintiff's attempts at selling her concessions for a fair market price. 23. Scott Bowser is himself an owner/operator of several concession stands at the Renaissance Faire. , 24. As a participating merchant, Defendant Bowser is a competitor of Plaintiff. 4 25. Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Faire, has imposed additional requirements upon independent operators of the Faire concession stands, like Plaintiff, to increase the expense of operating the stands. 26. Defendant Renaissance Faire has permitted U.S. Foods to have exclusive rights to provide concessions to the Faire concession stand owner/operators without consent of Plaintiff and other independent owner/operators. 27. Scott Bowser and Thomas Roy, who as agent for the Faire served as the manager of vendors, have represented to the independent owners of stands that the use of U.S. Foods as the supplier of concessions would yield a cost savings to the owner/operators. 28. Defendant Bowser represented to Mr. Claudio that he would be required to outfit her stands with hood systems, costing approximately $10,000 per stand, above the stove-tops, as a prerequisite to operations. 29. Plaintiff does not sell any concessions that would necessitate the use of a hood system. 30. Defendants should have known that requiring installation of fixtures unrelated to her type of concessions sold would reduce the marketability of her concessions to independent concessionaires and inhibit her ability to sell them for a fair price. 31. It is believed and therefore averred that two other prospective purchasers were discouraged from purchasing the concessions because of Defendant Faire's requirements to purchase from one food vendor, and to install the expensive fixtures above-described. 5 32. Defendant Faire is responsible for the conduct of its agent, Defendant Bowser, in his misrepresentations as to the concessions' value and imposition of conditions that increase operating costs without a benefit to Plaintiff. 33. There was a reasonable probability that Defendant Claudio would have performed his bargained for exchange, and paid the agreed upon $170,000.00 amount had Defendant Scott Bowser not represented that the concessions were not worth the amount Claudio had agreed to pay. 34. Defendants knew or should have known that Defendant Bowser's representations would cause Claudio to reconsider performing his payment obligations under the Sales Agreement. 35. Neither the Faire nor Defendant Bowser had any cause for discouraging Defendant Claudio's purchase of Plaintiff's concessions, nor of other interested buyers. 36. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Defendant Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, plus interest, and any consequential damages, including but not limited to the costs of operation and preparations for opening for the 2006 season, costs and attorneys' fees, and any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT III Intentional Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 37. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 36 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 6 38. In or about November 2005, Defendant Scott Bowser became aware that Defendant Claudio had executed a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. 39. Defendant Bowser represented to Defendant Claudio that the concessions were worth significantly less than the amount that Claudio agreed to pay and further represented that additional costs would need to be expended in order to operate the stands. 40. Neither Defendant Bowser nor the Faire had appraised the value of Plaintiff's concessions. 41. It is believed, and thus averred that Defendant Bowser knew that his representations as to the value of the concessions Plaintiff had `sold' would be relied upon by Defendant Claudio and would cause him to not make payment of the agreed upon amount stated in the Sales Agreement. 42. It is believed, and thus averred, that Defendant Bowser, as an agent for the Renaissance Faire, knowingly and with the intent to persuade Claudio against purchasing the stands, misrepresented that the stands were valued at less than the agreed purchase price to force a sales price reduction and inhibit independent ownership of the stands. 43. Claudio has represented to Plaintiff that but for Defendant Bowser's interference and disparagement, it is likely that he would have performed the bargained for exchange and paid the agreed upon price stated in the Sales Agreement. 44. Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser had no cause for interfering with the Sales Agreement between Plaintiff and Claudio. 45. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of Defendants' conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser in the amount of $170,000.00, together with all interest, costs 7 -and attorneys' fees, and in addition, punitive damages for its intentional conduct, and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT IV Unfair Competition Violations Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 46. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 45 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 47. Defendants' interference with a Sales Agreement for the sale of her Faire stands to other would-be independent owner(s) like Claudio is unfair competition. 48. Defendants made representations disparaging Plaintiff's stands by misleading prospective buyers on matters of fact as to the concessions' value. 49. Scott Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the amount stated in the Sales Agreement without any appraisal, and with reckless disregard to the falsity of his representation as to the value of the concessions. 50. Defendant Faire is responsible for imposing other obstacles to saleability of Plaintiff's concessions, to wit, the exclusive vendor relationship with U.S. Foods, and additional requirements upon independent concessionaires as to paper product purchases and installation of unnecessary fixtures in an effort to standardize capability of concessions among independent concessions. 51. Such standardization and uniformity benefit Defendant Faire without a mutual benefit to independent concessionaires like Plaintiff. 52. Defendants' conduct constitutes a violation of Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, ("UTPCPL"), 73 Pa. C.S. §§201-1, et seq. for misrepresentation, disparagement and general unfair competition. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, demands judgment against Defendants Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser as to her claim for unfair competition in an amount in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT V Commercial/Business Disparagement Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Bowser 53. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 52 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 54. With disregard as to its falsity, Defendant Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the purchase price outlined in the Sales Agreement. 55. Defendant Bowser made that representation as a manager of the Faire with whom prospective business owners would be dealing for Faire matters, including merchant responsibilities under the Merchant Participating Agreement. 56. Defendant Bowser should have realized that such representations would result in Plaintiff suffering pecuniary loss, which loss has resulted in loss of prospective purchaser(s) of her concessions. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for commercial or business 9 disparagement, and suffered pecuniary loss as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees and costs, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. COUNT VI Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 57. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 56 of her Complaint as though more fully set forth herein. 58. Defendant Renaissance Faire entered into a contract with Plaintiff regarding the operation of her concessions during the faire season. 59. The Faire engaged U.S. Foods as the vendor for food and other supplies to its independent concessionaires, like Christina Bowman, without agreement by the independent concessionaires to the exclusive arrangement. 60. The Faire represented to U.S. Foods that it would oversee the accounts for each of its concessionaires, and has intervened on behalf of U.S. Foods regarding account status for food and other products that were agreed to be provided to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 61. There is no provision in the agreement between Plaintiff and the Faire that authorized the Faire to receive credit for all purchases made by independent concessionaires from U.S. Foods on a collective basis. 62. It is believed and thus averred, that Defendant Faire receives discounts, and/or other arrangement with U.S. Foods pursuant to its exclusive arrangement which discounts are not passed 10 • on to the independent concessionaires who are the purchasers of the food and other required purchase products. 63. Defendant Faire, through Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented to independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, that they would benefit from the exclusive purchasing arrangement made with U.S. Foods. 64. Defendant Faire, through its agents Thomas Roy and Defendant Bowser, represented that it was acting in the best interest and on behalf of the independent concessionaires for whom it was ostensibly contracting for a reduced rate for food and other required goods from U.S. Foods. 65. Defendant Faire did not enter the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods in order to benefit the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, contrary to its representations. 66. Defendant Faire has failed to protect the interests of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, on whose behalf it ostensibly contracted, by ensuring that the quality of food products and of customer service through timely delivery of perishables. 67. Defendant Faire has not protected the quality of food products or other goods and services purchased by Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires as it represented would be of good quality or better than the prior vendor. 68. It is believed and thus averred that Defendant Faire and its agent Defendant Bowser breached their duty to the independent concessionaires, including Plaintiff, when it entered the exclusive arrangement for food purchases with U.S. Foods. 69. Rather than acting on behalf of the independent concessionaires like Plaintiff, who Defendants allegedly represented to make the exclusive arrangement with U.S. Foods, Defendants Faire and Bowser have acted as the agent of U.S. Foods to require payment for food products and 11 -services that did not meet the quality standards in product or service as promised to Plaintiff and other independent concessionaires. 70. Plaintiff, like other independent concessionaires, was originally informed that not all food products would need to be purchased from U.S. Foods and that Plaintiff could purchase food products from its own vendors for a lower price or better quality, particularly for speciality items. 71. Defendant Bowser and Thomas Roy later advised, after the 2005 season commenced, that "cherry-picking" foods from other vendors would not be tolerated and all purchases must be made from U.S. Foods. 72. There is no provision in the contract between the Renaissance Faire and Plaintiff that requires purchase of all food and paper products from a particular vendor to be chosen, without approval or consent, solely by the Defendant Renaissance Faire. 73. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the arrangement Defendant Faire made with U.S. Foods in the form of lower quality food products, inconsistent reliability and poor customer service for ensuring timely delivery of perishable products to Plaintiff's concessions. 74. It is believed, and thus averred that Plaintiff had suffered lower profits as a consequence of the lesser quality of food products that she was permitted to sell, and losses due to poor customer service and delivery of the goods promised. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants the Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for violation of their duty of good faith and fair dealing, and suffered damages as a consequence to include lost profits, lost customers and/or goodwill, and the greater costs of operating as a result of the exclusive arrangements Defendants 12 have entered without her consent, in excess of Thirty-five Thousand Dollars ($35,000.00), together with interest, attorneys' fees, punitive damages and costs of this proceeding and any other remedy that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP Y J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: June 7, 2006 13 SALES AGREEMENT This is an agreement on November 7, 2005 between Christina. F. Bowman residing at 9 Bishop Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 herein referred to as the Seller and Carmelo J. Claudio residing at 68A Springers Lane, New Cumberland, PA 17070 herein referred to as the Buyer. The Seller is selling three concession stands and a refrigerated smoothie cart, which are all on the grounds of the Reflascenee Faire, which is located at 2684 Lebanon Road, Nlanh em. ,-PA 17545. .LZcluded.in.-the.sale ofthe . buildings..and.cart.ar.e machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill with a total price of $125,000.00 one hundred. twenty-five thousand dollars. Also, the Buyer agrees to pay to the Seller an additional goodwill payment of $45,000.00, which will be paid in two annual payments of $22,500.00 with a three payment schedule of $7,500.00 per seasonal month with the first payment due on August 30th 2006, and the additional payments due on September 301r' 2006, October 301" 2006, August 30th 2007, September 30t" 2007 and October 30"' 2007. S B T_5 Notary: NOTARIAL 8LAL. PHILLIP FARABELLI, Notary Public Lemoyne Boro, Cumberland County My Commission Expires Feb. 6, 2006 EXHIBIT VERIFICATION 1, Christina Bowman, make the following statements subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authority, and do hereby state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the Dated: May 5, 2006 i. •P J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants AFFIDAVIT OF CARMELO CLAUDIO COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND 1. I have been named as a defendant in the above-captioned lawsuit. 2. Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, had asserted a breach of contract claim against me for allegedly breaching a Sales Agreement dated November 7, 2005, for the purchase of her three concession stands known as The Huntsman, the Banana Cart and Nachos of Nottingham. 3. After signing the Agreement, I contacted Scott Bowser of the Renaissance Faire because I knew that the Faire needed to approve any new merchant concessionaires. 4. I also knew that the Faire reserved the right to refuse ownership to any individual who did not appear to have sufficient financing to ensure that the stands would open for business in the Faire season. E EXHIBIT w 5. During my conversation with Mr. Bowser, he represented that Plaintiff's stands for which I had agreed to pay $170,000.00 were not worth any more than $65,000.00, and that each stand would require hood units at an approximate cost of $10,000.00 each. 6. At that time I had only obtained a commitment for financing in the amount of approximately $95,000.00. 7. I had concerns about purchasing the stand when Mr. Bowser, an agent of the Faire who should know what the stands are worth, said they were worth less than one-half of what I was to pay. 8. I also was discouraged from moving forward with the alternative financing when the Faire did not think I could recoup my investment and part of what I was purchasing was goodwill. 9. I was led to believe by Defendant, Bowser that the Faire would not approve my ownership of the stands because I had not located sufficient financing and therefore could not meet their criteria. 10. I advised Plaintiff that I did not intend to perform the Sales Agreement and make the payments due to the representations made by Defendant Faire personnel, including Defendant Bowser. 11. It is for these reasons, in addition to the statement by Mr. Bowser that the stands were not worth nearly the amount that I had agreed to pay, that I did not ensure I had sufficient financing options to perform the Agreement. 2 RUG-17-2006 THU 12:47 PM FAX NO. P. 04 12. I hereby affirm that the facts as set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best my knowledge, information and belief. armelo audio Sworn to and sub bed before me this day of August, 2006. " /// - Notary Public My Commission: NOTARK SEAL M? I M NR Pubk end Co. My Comrnisslon Expires .m 27, 2007 1-0 ?3 1 t.. N .r _ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Petition for Leave to Discontinue Action as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Carmelo J. Claudio Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 717 Market Street, Suite 111 28 Penn Square Lemoyne, PA 17043 Lancaster, PA 17603 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: ?? C.V= Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: August I i , 2006 4 rag o• rrt p- + ? co -c o i AUG 212006 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants RULE AND NOW, this 2 3? day of " 2006, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Petition for Leave to Discontinue Action as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio, a rule is granted upon Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. tldfbfa the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agentlemployee of Faire and in his individual capacity) to show cause why the above- captioned action should not discontinued as to Defendant, Carmelo Claudio only. O do-IJ Rule returnable C. SOP o(b BY THE COURT: i i :s gab ?z onv goon AWDNOXItOHd 3H1 do 331176-03113 w J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 AUG 2 12006 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff' : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 PETITION FOR LEAVE TO DISCONTINUE ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT CARMELO CLAUDIO ONLY Plaintiff, CHRISTINA BOWMAN, by her counsel, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, respectfully petitions this Court pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 229(b) for leave to discontinue the above-captioned action as to Defendant, Carmelo Claudio, and in support thereof avers the following: Plaintiff commenced this action by Complaint against Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (the "Faire"), Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio on June 8, 2006. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Complaint is attached as Exhibit "A." 2. In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that on November 7, 2005, Defendant Claudio entered into an Agreement with Plaintiff to purchase her concessions for seasonal use at the Renaissance Faire and that pursuant to the Agreement, Claudio was obligated to purchase the concessions for an amount of $170,000.00, for the "sale of the buildings and cart ... machinery, equipment, inventory and goodwill." 3. Due to the facts that have recently come to light, see Affidavit of Defendant Carmel Claudio, Plaintiff desires to discontinue her claim against him. Claudio's Affidavit is appended hereto as Exhibit "B." 4. No Answer to the Complaint has been filed by Defendant Claudio or any other party. 5. The causes of action against Defendants Faire and Bowser (as an agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity), and Defendant Claudio are separate and independent. 6. None of the Defendants has joined the other as an additional defendant and there are no cross-claims by any of the Defendants against the other. The discontinuance of Plaintiff s action against Defendant Carmelo Claudio will not unduly prejudice any of the other defendants. 2 I WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests that this Court enter a Rule upon Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as an agentlemployee of the Faire and in his individual capacity) to show cause why the above- captioned action should not be discontinued as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only. NAUMANSMITH SSLER & HALL, LLP By C%HI C J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18" Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Date: August /0 , 2006 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2006-03261 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BOWMAN CHRISTINA VS MAZZA VINEYARDS ET AL R. Thomas Kline I Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT , to wit: MAZZA VINEYARDS INC TDBA THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of LANCASTER County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On July 13th , 2006 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from LANCASTER Sheriff's Costs: So answers: Docketing 18.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline Dep Lancaster Cc 68.40 Sheriff of Cumberland County Postage 6.95 112.35,/ v(, I),.,... 07/13/2006 NAUMAN SMITH SHISSLER HALL Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of A. D. 113440 R 1 OF2 SHERIFF'S OFFICE 50 NORTH DUKE STREET, P.O. BOX 83480, LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA 17608-3480 a (717) 299-8200 to SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN 1 PLAINTIFF/ Christina Bowman PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY. DG NOT DETACH ANY COPIES. 2 COURT NUMBER 3 DEFENDANT/S/ Mazza Vineyards Inc et al 06-3261 civil 4 Notice and Ccmplaint SERVE 5 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ETC. TO BE SERVED Mazza Vineyards Inc t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire 6 ADDRESS (Street or RFD, Apartment No., City, Boro, Twp, State and ZIP Code) AT 2684 Lebanon Road Manheim, PA 17545 7. INDICATE UNUSUAL SERVICE: ? DEPUTIZE ? OTHER Cumberland Now, June 14 20 06 , I, SHERIFF OF COUNTY, PA., do by r b, deputize the of Lancaster County to execute this W!?I?ere to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. 70 SHERIFF Oft C N T Y A. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE: C1mlberland Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under withiwrit may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof 9. SIGNATURE of ATTORNEY or other ORIGINATOR 10. TELEPHONE NUMBER 1 1 DATE AND 1 / L -L 1V 1 C BELOW: (This area must be completed if notice is to be mailed) CUMBERLAND COUNTY SHERIFF ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA. 17013 SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF SHERIFF ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE 3 H n N N 13.1 acknowledge receipt of the writ t NAME of Authorized LCSO Deputy or Clerk 14 Date Received 15 Expiration/Hearing date or complaint as indicated above.I JACKIE MICCICHE 717-390-2309 6/15/06 -7 /i n inc 16. 1 hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that I ? have personally served, UX ve legal evidence of service as shown in "Remarks ? have executed as shown in "Remarks", the writ or complaint described on the individual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the individual, company, cor- poration, etc.. at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COPY thereof, 17. ? 1 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc , named above (See remarks below) 18 Name and title of individual served (if not shown above) (Relationship to Defendant) 19. ?No Service E2 I ! V, C - I-lizi-v Pk I A). /r % hl,-/p "Alit C W_ See Remarks Below (No. 30) R 20 Address of where served (complete only if different than shown above) (Street or RFD, Apartment No . City, Boro. Twp 21 Date of Service 22 Time State and Zip Code) A? - _4EF EOST /? 23. ATTEMPTS Date Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. Data Miles Dep. Int. Data Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. (PCZ9 Zo AA 24. Advance Costs 25. Service Costs 26 Notary Cert 27 Milea eTos e/ .F. 28 Total Costs 29 COST DUE OR REFUND 200,00 , 4a 30. REMARKS ..? _ 1 p coy st?1!LKtil S.T.A.: %_- ACA ict ry Public s '1` d 9nnb ??cq2, LA, 31. AFFIRMED and subscribed to before me this L SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2006-03261 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BOWMAN CHRISTINA VS MAZZA VINEYARDS ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT to wit: but was unable to locate Him in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of LANCASTER serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE County, Pennsylvania, to On July 13th , 2006 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from LANCASTER Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 So answers: ?? --? ?? Out of County .00 ' -- Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 Sheriff of Cumberland County .00 16.00 ? -oV 9•a2 07/13/2006 NAUMAN SMITH SHISSLER HALL Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of A. D. 113440 - ;,.,i i v. /Vf? ?. L :: i a•ti,?: 2OF2 SHERIFF'S OFFICE 50 NORTH DUKE STREET, P.O. BOX 83480, LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA 17608-3480 a (717) 299-8200 3 SHERIFF SERVICE PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY. PROCESS RECEIPT, and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN DO NOT DETACH ANY COPIES. N 1 PLAINTIFF/S/ 2 COURT NUMBER > Christina Bowman 06-3261 civil 3 DEFENDANT/S/ 4 TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT Mazza Vineyards Inc et al I Notice and Complaint SERVE 5 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY. CORPORATION. ETC.. TO BE SERVED Scott Bowser 6 ADDRESS (Street or RFD, Apartment No.. City, Boro. Twp, State and ZIP Code) AT 2684 Lebanon Road Manheim, PA 17545 7 INDICATE UNUSUAL SERVICE: ? DEPUTIZE ? OTHER Now, June 20 I, SHERIFF OF COUNTY, PA., do Web eputize the of LanraGtPr County to execute this Wruto law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. 8. SPECIAL Cumberland Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof 9. SIGNATURE of ATTORNEY or other ORIGINATOR 10 TELEPHONE NUMBER 11 1 DATE s area must to CUMBERLAND COUNTY SHERIFF ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE GAR?JgLg, PA 17013 $P C ELOW FOR USE OF SHERIFF ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE 13 1 acknowledge receipt of the writ l NAME of Authorized LCSO Deputy or Clerk 14 Date Received 15 Expiration/Hearing date or complaint as indicated above. ( JACKIE MICCICHE 717-390-2309 6/15/06 7/10/06 16 1 hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that 10 have personally served, Pfrave legal evidence of service as shown in "Remarks", ? have executed as shown in "Remarks", the writ or complaint described on the individual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the individual, company, cor- poration, etc., at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COPY thereof. 17 ? I hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc , named above (See remarks below) 18 Name and title of individual served (if not shown above) (Relationship to Defendant) 19 C No Service See Remarks Below (No. 30) E I N E . 14r3OJ W. I xJ+.-J 1= S Hr-+P MA,-JA G t?'L_ 20 Address of where served (complete only if different than shown above) (Street or RFD, Apartment No , City, Boro. Twp 21 Date of Service 22 Time State and Zip Code) AM A E - S EDST O• TS' 23 ATTEMPTS D to Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. Date Miles Dep. Int. Qj.a / ? 24. Adva ce Costs 25. Service Costs 26. Notary Cert 27 Mileage/Postage/N F. 28 Total Costs 29 COST DUE OR REFUND n (P 30. REMARKS: ?!?sw9.?ir}hlur?rl}!1 71r1?1ae)??4!" Icf S.T.A.: 4 fev y Commission Expires J+iy iii, 209 31. AFFIRMED and subscribed to before me this 34, day of 32. Sig9nature of pep Sheriff AN 33_Date , SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2006-03261 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BOWMAN CHRISTINA VS MAZZA VINEYARDS ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT CLAUDIO CARMELO J to wit: but was unable to locate Him deputized the sheriff of YORK serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE County, Pennsylvania, to On July 13th , 2006 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from YORK Sheriff's Costs: So answers- Docketing 6.00 - / Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline Dep York County 61.72 Sheriff of Cumberland County .00 86.72 ? e. aa-o? 07/13/2006 NAUMAN SMITH SHISSLER HALL Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of in his bailiwick. He therefore A. D. YORKTOWNE BUSINESS FORMS, INC. Ph. (717) 845-5955 Fax (717) 848-8936 email: ybf@blazenet.net • 7/1? 7 COUNTY OF YORK OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF S(717) ' 7196 45 N. GEORGE ST., YORK, PA 17401 SHERIFF SERVICE 9WIRMTRMS PROCESS RECEIPT and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN 1VPE OWY LINE 1 THRU 12 $? '#' MACH ANY COPIES rue111 i irrrb/ Christina Bowman 3 DEFENDANT/S/ Mazza Vineyards Inc et al 4. TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT 06-3261 civil C I CA SERVE D NAMt Ur INUIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ETC TO SERVE OR DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE LEVIED. ATTACHED. OR SOLD Carmelo .1 a ldi 6 ADDRESS (STREET OR RFO WITH BOX NUMBER, APT NO, CITY, BORO. TWP. STATE AND ZIP CODE) AT 68A jri n? Y S -ane Neal Cti lmht-rl and , PA 17070 7. INDICATE SERVICE O PERSONAL U PERSON IN CHARGE U DEPUTIZE U ERT MAI O 1ST CLASS MAIL U POSTED -I OTHER 14 Ub NOW June 20 I, SHERIFF OF INWMATY. PA do hereby dep tie the sheriff of York COUNTY to execute t make r tur Of cording to law. This deputization being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff.. S. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE Ctxnberland OUT OF COUNTY ADVANCE fif?E aseAmail6 returnBof servDiceO to SC?anli ?rFland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE: ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of le or attachment. without Ylbii herein for any loss, destruction. or removal of any property before sheriff's sale thereof vY y on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff s. . rc 1v,ene arw nuvrceaa 0"'. i VNNti I VIiICiIIVA I UK and SIGNATURE) . STEPHEN, ESQ. 10. TELEPHONE NUMBER 200 NORTH THIRD ST, PO BOX 840, HARRISBURG, PA 17108-0840 1717-236-3010 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COPY TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This area must be completed if notice is to be VIM CUMBERLAND CO. SHERIFF SPACE EW1 MAJ F 11 DATE FILED 6/8/2006 OR U OF THE SW11110wr - DO two THtS LII? 13. 1 acknowledge receipt of the writ 14. DATE RECEIVED 15 Expiration/Hearing Date or complaint as indicated above. M J M C G I L L Y C S O 6/15/2006 17/8/2006 tfi H W SERVED PERSONAL ( ) RESIDENCE ( ) POSTED( ) POE( ) SHERIFFS OFFICE ( ) OTHER( ) SEE REMARKS BELOW 17. 1 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because 1 am unable to locate the individual, company, etc named above. (See remarks below.) 16. kAME AND TITLE OF INDIVIDUAL SERVED / LIST ADDRESS HERE IF NOT SHOWN ABOVE (Relationship to Defendant) 19 Date of Service 20 Time of Service 21 ATTEMPTS Date Ti Miles Int. Date Time Miles Int Da TI_ Miles Ant Date Time Mies Inn Date Time Miles Int Dale Time Miles Int. ak 4,ti %l `•'q ;ti to 3L 22. REMARKS: 0-14 Z- I 7Q 3?o-2L,? 23. Advance Costs Service Costs 25 / 26 Mileage 2 $100.0 I ?1-b0 F. 00 4? .7a. 34. Forsign County Costs 35. Advance Costs 36 Service Costs 41. AFFIRM"t YLVA 42. day TiT V .2N LISA L. BOWMAN, NOT MeTAR CITY OF YORK, YORK COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 12, 2009 2 COURT NUMBER 06-3261 civil ostage 28. Su Total 29. Pound 30 Notary .I 7 ?5- &o 37 Notary Cert. 38 Mileage/PostagdNd Fowl 44. Signature of Dep. Sheriff 46. Signature of York County Sheriff WILLIAM M HOSE,SHER 48 Signature of Foreign r•..,,..w, cwe..w 31. Surchg. 132. Tot. Costsl 33 39 Total Costs 1 40 Costs Due or Refund so 45. DATE 47 DATE 7/7/06 49 DATE SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2006-03261 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BOWMAN CHRISTINA VS MAZZA VINEYARDS ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT to wit: CLAUDIO CARMELO J but was unable to locate Him in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of YORK County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On August 18th , 2006 this office was in receipt of the attached return from YORK Sheriff's Costs: So answe ?,.--- Docketing 6.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas.K in Dep York County 36.80 Sheriff of Cumberland County Postage 2.70 64.50 ? q•aa-?? 08/18/2006 NAUMAN SMITH SHISSLER HALL Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of , A. D. n. /? YORKTOWNE BUSINESS FORMS, INC. Pl(. (717) 845-5955 -Fax (717) 848-8936 email: ybf@blazenet.net V 21 T COUNTY OF YORK RIC 7)771 96 1 OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF S( 1 45 N. GEORGE ST., YORK, PA 17401 SHERIFF SERVICE WSTIMTlOlIIS PROCESS RECEIPT and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN PLEASE TYPE M&Y LIPS 1 THRU 12 DO NOT DETACH ANY COPIES 1 PLAINTIFF/S/ 2 CbWl!:?ygTE C1V,l Christina BC wTnan 4 TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINTt 3 DEFENDANTISI NO T ., C I C A Mazza Vineyards Inc et al Notice & Complaint, reinstated SERVE 5 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL. COMPANY. CORPORATION, ETC TO SERVE OR DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE LEVIED, ATTACHED, OR SOLD Carnlelo Claudio y 6 ADDRESS (STREET OR RFO WITH BOX NUMBER, APT NO ,CITY, BORO. TWP STATE AN I ODD) r ins Lane New CLUnberland, PA 17Q70 AT 68A Spr ge 7. INDICATE SERVICE O PERSONAL U PERSON IN CHARGE U DEPUTIZE U CERT MAIL U 1ST CLASS MAIL U POSTED J OTHER NOW July 20 I, SHERIFF O TY, PA, do hereby deputize the sheriff of York COUNTY to execute thi make return f'cording to law. This deputization being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff.. `- SHERIFF OF COUNTY 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE C(berland OUT OF COUNTY ADVANCE FEE PAID BY CUMBERLAND CO. SHERIFF Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE: ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHUM - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same wi hout a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction, or removal of any property before shentrs sale thereof 9. TYPE NAME and ADDRESS of ATTORNEY / ORIGINATOR and SIGNATURE J. STEPHEN F E I N O U R , E TELEPHONE NUMBER 11 DATE FILED P.O. BOX 840, 200 NORTH THIRD ST, 18th fl. HARRISBURG, PA 717-236-3010 7/13/2006 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COPY TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW- (This area must be completed if notice is to be mailed) CUMBERLAND CO. SHERIFF SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF THE 9F - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LMT Expiration/Hearing Date 13. 1 acknowledge receipt of the writ 14. DATE RECEIVED 012/2006 or complaint as indicated above- M J M C G I L L Y C S O 17/18/200E 16. HOW SERVED PERSONAL( ) RESIDENCE ( ) POSTED( ) POE ( ) SHERIFF'S OFFICE ( ) OTHER ( ) SEE REMARKS BELOW 177 CI hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, etc named above. (See remarks below.) 18. NAME AND TITLE OF INDIVIDUAL SERVED / LIST ADDRESS HERE IF NOT SHOWN ABOVE (Relationship to Defendant) 19 Date of Service 20 Time of Service 21. ATTEMPTSh{e,( Timw 1 tiles I Int_ I Date I Time I Miles I Int I Date I Time I Mies I Mt. I Date I Time I Miles I Int. I Date I Time I Miles I Int I Date I Time I Miles I MARKS.- Int.22. RE'r/h•?+lyr7[ ?I OP P l? I e..-P64:Xf ad?C'a OLO, 23. Advance Costs 24 %qrv1ce Costs NIF 26 ilea a 27 Postage 2JI Sub Trial 29. Pound 30 Notary 31 Surchg. 32 Td. Costs 33 Costs I Checl 100.00 11 .©0 /x"-0 / Iro X30 63.zs? 9q U. Foreign County Costs 35. Advance Costs 36 Service Costs 37. Notary Cert. 36. Mieage/Postage/Not Found 39. Total Costs 40 Costs Due or Refund 41. AFFIRM bed to before this SO ANSWERS 42 day O SgnSh a 45. DATE NOTARIAL S 46. sgnatureofYork ATE LISA L. BOWMAN, NOTARY PUBLIC CITY OF YORK, YORK COUNTY WILLIAM M &E.ISHERIFF 8/7/06 MY COMMISSIONEXPIRESAUG.12,2009 48. Signature Of Foregn 49 DATE County Sheriff CASE NO: 2006-03261 P SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BOWMAN CHRISTINA VS MAZZA VINEYARDS ET AL RICHARD SMITH , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon C7,AUDIO CARMELO J the DEFENDANT at 1505:00 HOURS, on the 11th day of August , 2006 at 717 MARKET STREET SUITE 111 LEMOYNE, PA 17043 CARMELO CLAUDIO by handing to a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: So Answers: Docketing 6.00 Service 14.08 r--r' Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 30.08 ? 08/18/2006 0aAbb (?_ NAUMAN SMITH S SSLER HALL Sworn and Subscibed to `? By: 1 before me this day e ty Sheriff of A.D. J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel or Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants MOTION TO MAKE RULE TO SHOW CAUSE ABSOLUTE Plaintiff, CHRISTINA BOWMAN, by her counsel, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, respectfully moves this Court to make absolute the Rule To Show Cause which was issued in the above-captioned matter on August 23, 2006, upon responding party's failure to answer and in support states the following: 1. Plaintiff Christina Bowman filed a petition to discontinue as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only on or about August 18, 2006. 2. On August 23, 2006, this Court issued a rule on Defendants Scott Bowser and Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (collectively hereinafter the "Defendants"), returnable within 20 days, the 130' day of September, 2006 at Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas. 1 3. On August 24, 2006, a copy of the rule to be served on counsel for Defendants was sent by regular mail by the Court. See copy dated and initialed by `RKS' attached at Exhibit `A.' 4. Defendants' counsel acknowledged receipt of the Rule on or about August 30, 2006. 5. Defendants have failed to answer Plaintiff's Petition to date. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests that this Court make the rule to show cause absolute and grant the petition to discontinue the action as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: September 25, 2006 2 AUG 3 J. glop]" F+ j"w, melee Supremo Cart II} No. 240H I.udmu C. Gdon,14wr* Sup mm Gown ID No. 84137 2W North 7bird wrest P. 0. Sax 840 Harr+sburS, PA 17108.0840 Tfthooor (M) 236.3010 C7aTITL18O+14'AdAN y : CIN THE CotaT (w UWMTAND COIN PLEAS 14WRO s p LVAW t w%m Vlnsyw*d Inc. Vd/Wa ; am ACl< GN -LAW darawylvanlaRaffibuw? mrv' : No. 00Jd1 ftAs wlec (10 gpzue gftes of vale r w in hk Imdi kbml + v"Oh a rnd Caromb Claudio 11?eodm'? 1?i.N? ??i titlb ?'? Eby Od ?S"??i r upon CCnlt?e?fA16 q? PlelodtC'e Petiliom iozl.asrs 4v Dlecenlirnaal?ctiav4 ee to L,sfendNntCentn?a pruAlo, amlaie BZa Ud np=DdYesdim bQ Vioeywdr Im tJ YLA tba PanneylvwiaRwullw=Pohlo, SWC Bowrw (as ftmv=moyw of Rdm acrd M hie tmbklaal capeAlty) In chow cam why the 6mo. aVdawd aetiva 6uld wA ftooatlnued as io Defendeat. CKmelo Cld9410 019y. pl}r?a Mfr -+.e.wlti. 7•0 Rule mtmwbla ?. - - 3r +a aYr' --- By Tim {r<3V$'I% 1. EXHIBIT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Motion to Make Rule to Show Cause Absolute" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Carmelo J. Claudio 717 Market Street, Suite 111 Lemoyne, PA 17043 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP ezy?-?- By: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: September 25, 2006 '3 'r{ i Tl VIA PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Argument Court. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff V. No. 06-3261 Civil Term MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. T/D/B/A THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, AND SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), AND CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants 1. 2 3 4. Date: I)Li6 The matter to be argued is Defendants' Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff s Complaint. Counsel who will argue the case: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Counsel for Plaintiff Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Counsel for Defendants I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. October 25, 200 . SusanP. Peipher, Esq ire Attorney for Defendant Argument Court Date: #417881.1/22433.004 rf ?ti SEP 9, F /utih J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Y Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants ORDER AND NOW this Zq"' day of September 2006, upon Plaintiff Christina Bowman's motion, it is hereby ORDERED that the rule which was issued on Defendants Scott Bowser and Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire in the above-captioned matter on August 23, 2006, to show cause why the petition to discontinue as to Carmelo Claudio only should not be granted, is made absolute, that Plaintiff's Petition to discontinue as to Carmelo Claudio only is granted. ?0" 1t: l Ali 07 :C? I;J. Z- 1-D 9 3,Z J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counselor Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants MOTION TO MAKE RULE TO SHOW CAUSE ABSOLUTE Plaintiff, CHRISTINA BOWMAN, by her counsel, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, respectfully moves this Court to make absolute the Rule To Show Cause which was issued in the above-captioned matter on August 23, 2006, upon responding party's failure to answer and in support states the following: 1. Plaintiff Christina Bowman filed a petition to discontinue as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only on or about August 18, 2006. 2. On August 23, 2006, this Court issued a rule on Defendants Scott Bowser and Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (collectively hereinafter the "Defendants"), returnable within 20 days, the 13' day of September, 2006 at Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas. 1 3. On August 24, 2006, a copy of the rule to be served on counsel for Defendants was sent by regular mail by the Court. See copy dated and initialed by `RKS' attached at Exhibit `A.' 4. Defendants' counsel acknowledged receipt of the Rule on or about August 30, 2006. 5. Defendants have failed to answer Plaintiff's Petition to date. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests that this Court make the rule to show cause absolute and grant the petition to discontinue the action as to Defendant Carmelo Claudio only. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP l - By J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: September 25, 2006 2 AUG 2 J. lytapbw F$Ltim, F plre Supra CanrEID No. 24W Lucinda C. Ollon, X"llrv gnaw C'aw%ID No. 114137 2w Noath Third 3DVK P. 0. Box 840 Mffisbur8, PA 17108-1840 Tclqtwne, (717) 23+6-MIO C,AR7STINA BOWMAN :1NTEM COURT OF COWWN PLSA9 CLIPON,RLAND CCK24 Y, PIW30 tP 'LVAMA F. M4= Vlnayardi?Zuc- Mtl/h,+i ; QV1L A=ON - LAW da pe onlylvawU. R4 , : No. 0WMI l1kOl4$0wwr (" "eo Of ?iTI'e ! oxd In bu ldml ovwkdh a and Carom& CIA K110 ! peilendmik A1@ NOW, tiile m? dey of - - " M, upon congdentiion of Mjudfr a POW= foss pw to Dinowt Ax-t w ee to DdandaetCwAWQ Clrudfo, A MIS is granted up=Ddendsatt Mow VimywdF hr., tkVb atht?cAne}?lvw" Reuaiolw= ?Rhlc?. 8oott Bnwear (es fteetlmmoyce ofFaim mid In his tmhkua capwAty) to show MM Vi ythe ebo+ra- npt cmd wtim phouid mAdleooatlnuodas b Def clAnt. CKnWQ CIWAto onlp, 2.6 °#q Rule MUMPbta u rti +. BY um {,=Tl EXHIBIT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Motion to Make Rule to Show Cause Absolute" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Carmelo J. Claudio 717 Market Street, Suite 111 Lemoyne, PA 17043 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: September 25, 2006 ?' C7 !r ??1 -fie 1 t? 1,13 D CHRISTINA BOWMAN, PLAINTIFF V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/ EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), AND CARMELO CLAUDIO DEFENDANTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-3261 CIVIL IN RE: DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT BEFORE HESS AND EBERT, J.J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 27th day of October, 2006, upon consideration of the Defendants' Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint and after review of the pleadings and briefs submitted on behalf of the parties, and argument of counsel; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the Defendants' Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint are DENIED. By the Court, X. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff ,,Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Attorney for Defendants bas N\ -k, ?" \/ M. L. Ebert, Jr., 0J. O? J tt +1 ' 4 i 41 . ?I r.? !??} 111Z :0' TV LZ 1 30 900Z SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11/22/06 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants No. 06-3261 Civil Term NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Christina Bowman c/o Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed New Matter and Counterclaim within twenty (20) days from service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. Dated:_ 1 & Plaintiff BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P. C. By:-,, Susan P. Peipher, Esq ire Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) I SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11/22/06 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants No. 06-3261 Civil Term ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE and SCOTT BOWSER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM 1. Admitted upon information and belief. 2. Admitted upon information and belief. 3. Denied. Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments set forth in paragraph 3 and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 4. Admitted. 5. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that Plaintiff was an independent concessionaire of the Faire pursuant to the Merchant Participation Agreement which Agreement Plaintiff terminated at the conclusion of the 2006 Faire season and will not be renewed. SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11122106 6. Denied. Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments set forth in paragraph 6 and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. COUNT I - BREACH OF CONTRACT Bowman v Claudio 9. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 8 of Plaintiff's Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 10.-15. Paragraphs 10 through 15 are directed to individuals other than Answering Defendants. To the extent the allegations of paragraphs 10 through 15 are directed to Answering Defendants, Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNT II - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH EXISTING AND PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTUAL AND/OR BUSINESS RELATIONS Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 16. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 2 I SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433,004) 11122/06 17. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants knew that Plaintiff wanted to sell her concessions and has been marketing her concessions for sale and has been in negotiations with prospective buyer(s) like Defendant Claudio. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser was aware that Plaintiff and Defendant Claudio had entered into a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 19. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser learned of the Sales Agreement and that he represented to Defendant Claudio that the value of the concessions were not as stated in the purported Sales Agreement. Strict proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Answering Defendants were never informed of the Sales Agreement between Plaintiff and Claudio and Defendant Bowser never made any representations to Claudio. 20. Denied. The averments of paragraph 20 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser made any representations to Claudio. 21. Denied. Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments set forth in paragraph 21 and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 22. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant Bowser is a representative of the Renaissance Faire. It is specifically denied that either the Faire or Defendant Bowser have attempted to thwart Plaintiff s attempts at selling her concessions for a fair market price. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 3 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11/22/06 23. Admitted. 24. Denied. The averments of paragraph 24 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 24 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 25. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Defendant Bowser is an agent for the Faire and that the Faire does maintain certain requirements, rules and regulations governing the operation of concession stands at the Faire. Any implication that the requirements imposed upon independent operators are imposed to increase the expense of operating the stands is specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 26. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that the Faire has permitted U.S. Foods to provide concessions to the stand operators. It is specifically denied that the Plaintiff and/or other independent owner/operators needed to consent to such arrangement or that Defendant Faire has required Plaintiff to obtain concessions solely from U.S. Foods during the time frame set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint. Vendors still purchased food from other food suppliers throughout the year. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 27. Admitted. 28. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser made any representations to Mr. Claudio. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 29. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff does not sell any concessions that would necessitate the use of a hood system. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 4 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11/22/06 30. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants should have known that requiring installation of fixtures would reduce the marketability of Plaintiff s concessions and/or inhibit her ability to sell them for a fair price. It is further denied that Defendant's requirements are unrelated to Plaintiffs concessions. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 31. Denied. Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments set forth in paragraph 31 and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 32. Denied. The averments of paragraph 32 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 32 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 33. Denied. The averments of paragraph 33 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 33 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 34. Denied. The averments of paragraph 34 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 34 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 35. Denied. The averments of paragraph 35 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 35 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 5 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11/22106 36. Denied. The averments of paragraph 36 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 36 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNT III - INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH EXISTING AND PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTUAL AND/OR BUSINESS RELATIONS Bowman v Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 37. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 36 of Plaintiff's Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 38. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser became aware that Claudio had executed a Sales Agreement to purchase the concessions for $170,000.00. Strict proof of these averments is demanded at trial. 39. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser made any representations to Defendant Claudio concerning Plaintiff's concessions. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 40. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser or the Faire had appraised or not appraised the value of Plaintiff's concessions in connection with a purported sale of the concessions. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 41. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant made any representations to Defendant Claudio. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 41 is demanded at trial. 6 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11122/06 42. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant made any representations to Defendant Claudio. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 42 is demanded at trial. 43. Denied. Answering Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 43 and, as such, such averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 44. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire and/or Bowser interfered in any manner with the purported Sales Agreement between Plaintiff and Claudio. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 44 is demanded at trial. 45. Denied. The averments of paragraph 45 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 45 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNT IV - UNFAIR COMPETITION VIOLATIONS Bowman v Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 46. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 45 of Plaintiff's Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 47. Denied. The averments of paragraph 47 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 47 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 7 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11/22/06 48. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants made any representations disparaging Plaintiff's stands or made any misleading statements to prospective buyers on matters concerning value. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 48 is demanded at trial. 49. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants made any representations disparaging Plaintiff's stands or made any misleading statements to prospective buyers on matters concerning value. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 49 is demanded at trial. 50. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire imposed any obstacles whatsoever to the saleability of Plaintiff s concessions. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 50 is demanded at trial. 51. Denied. The averments of paragraph 51 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 51 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 52. Denied. The averments of paragraph 52 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 52 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNT V - COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS DISPARAGEMENT Bowman v. Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 53. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 52 of Plaintiffs Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 8 SPP:DHM 426800.1 ( 22433.004 ) 11/22/06 54. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the purchase price outlined in the Sales Agreement. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 55. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Bowser represented that Plaintiff's concessions were not worth the purchase price outlined in the Sales Agreement. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 55 is demanded at trial. 56. Denied. The averments of paragraph 56 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 56 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNT VI - BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING Bowman v Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 57. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 56 of Plaintiff's Complaint as if set forth more fully herein. 58. Admitted. 59. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that the Faire engaged U.S. Foods as the vendor for food and other supplies for the Faire including the concessions. It is specifically denied that such engagement was an "exclusive arrangement" or that agreement by 9 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11/22/06 the independent concessionaires was required or necessary. Strict proof of these averments is demanded at trial. 60. Denied. The averments of paragraph 60 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 61. Denied. The agreement between the Plaintiff and the Faire is a written document, the terms of which speak for themselves. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 61 is demanded at trial. 62. Denied. The averments of paragraph 62 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, the engagement with U.S. Foods has yielded benefits which have been shared by all concessionaires. 63. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that Defendant Faire representatives have represented to concessionaires that they would benefit from the arrangement with U.S. Foods. The characterization of the arrangement as "exclusive" is denied as concessionaires have been allowed to purchase food and supplies from other sources in certain circumstances. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 64. Denied. The averments of paragraph 64 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 65. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire did not enter the arrangement with U.S. Foods in order to benefit the independent concessionaires. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 10 SPP:DHM 426800.1 ( 22433.004 ) 11/22/06 66. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire has failed to ensure the qualify of food products and customer service offered by U.S. Foods. It is further denied that it has failed to protect the interests of independent concessionaires. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 67. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire has not protected the quality of food products or other goods and services. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 68. Denied. The averments of paragraph 68 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 68 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 69. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants Faire and Bowser have acted as an agent of U.S. Foods and not on behalf of the independent concessionaires in connection with the arrangement with U.S. Foods. It is further denied that the food products and services did not meet the quality standards in product or service. Strict proof of the averments of paragraph 69 is demanded at trial. 70. Denied. The averments of paragraph 70 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, vendors were notified that if U.S. Foods did not carry comparable products, they would be allowed to obtain specialty products from outside sources. 71. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted Faire representatives Bowser and Roy notified concessionaires to stop "cherry-picking" foods from other vendors as the pricing of items was fixed at a certain percentage over cost thereby yielding overall cost savings rather than 11 SPP:DHM 426800.1 ( 22433.004 ) 11122/06 individual product savings. It is specifically denied that Faire representatives advised that all purchases must be made from U.S. Foods. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 72. Admitted in part; denied in part. While it is admitted the contract does not have an express provision relating to the purchase of food and paper products, such a provision is implied by the terms of the contract and the parties prior course of dealing. The contract does incorporate the Universal Policies and Procedures of the Faire which are amended from time to time. Plaintiff has consented to other marketing and proprietary agreements which were entered into benefit the Faire and its merchants generally. It is denied that Plaintiff had to approve or consent to the agreement entered into between the Faire and U.S. Foods or that Plaintiff sustained any damages as a result of the agreement. Strict proof of these averments is demanded. 73. Denied. The averments of paragraph 73 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 73 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 74. Denied. The averments of paragraph 74 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, the averments of paragraph 74 are denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. NEW MATTER 75. Answering Defendants incorporate by reference their Answers to paragraphs 1 through 74 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 12 SPP:DHM 426800.1 ( 22433.004) 11/22/06 76. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 77. Plaintiff s claims may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 78. Individuals other than Answering Defendants are responsible for Plaintiff s alleged losses. 79. Plaintiff has not mitigated her damages. 80. Plaintiff contributed to the conditions described in her Complaint. 81. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement between the Faire and the Plaintiff, the Faire is permitted to approve any new merchant concessionaires. 82. At no time did Answering Defendants ever speak with Carmelo Claudio. 83. Upon information supplied by Plaintiff during the course of this litigation, Carmelo Claudio did not have sufficient financing for the full amount of the contract with Plaintiff. 84. Plaintiff has suffered no damages proximately caused by any conduct of Answering Defendants. 85. Answering Defendants announced a new Foods Code with respect to the concessions on the Faire grounds effective March 4, 2005 which required certain upgrades be made to the stands. 86. As the owner of the property, Defendant Faire has the right to impose safety rules and regulations with respect to operation of the stands. 87. The equipment upgrades were necessary to comply with NFPA-96 regulations and Department of Agriculture Food Service rules and regulations. 13 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004) 11/22/06 88. The Foods Code has been applied to all concessions on the Faire grounds. 89. Plaintiff has benefitted from the arrangement with U.S. Foods. 90. Defendant Faire has not required Plaintiff to purchase food and supplies exclusively from U.S. Foods. WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser request judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Christina Bowman. COUNTERCLAIM Mazza Kneyards. Inc. t1d1b1a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire v Christina Bowman Count I - Breach of Contract Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania pursuant to a Merchant Participation Agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant Faire. A true and correct copy of the Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." 2. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, a fee/assessment is charged for each booth maintained by Plaintiff. 3. In addition to the fee/assessment charged for each booth, percentage payments apply to all sales made by the Plaintiff. 4. Percentage payments are to be made to the Faire on the dates and on such transmittal forms as the Faire shall prescribe. 5. Specifically, fifteen percent of all merchant sales are to be paid to the Faire. 14 SPP:DHM 426800.1 ( 22433.004 ) 11/22/06 6. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff has been misreporting the sales made by her during her tenure as a participating merchant and, as such, she has underpaid her percentage payments. 7. Plaintiff s failure to accurately report the total sales is a breach of the terms of the agreement with the Faire. 8. Defendant Mazza Vineyards has suffered a loss as a result of Plaintiff s breach of the contract and misrepresentation. WHEREFORE, Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against Christina Bowman in an amount in excess of $35,000.00. Dated: )I la?aa BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, AC. By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire ) Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) 15 111,2212006 16: 05 PAGE 02/03 17176643466 SPPAHM 420600.1 (22433.004) 11/22106 MTHOPE VERMC,A,TTON I, Scott Bowser, verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint with New Matter and Counterclaim are true and correct. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. cott Bowser Dated.: November ? 2006 11/?2/2006 16:05 17176643466 MTHOPE PAGE 03/03 SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11/22/06 VERMCATION I, verify that I am the (7iP?11''?fiON? orMazza Vineyards, Inc. and, as such, k am authorized to make this verification on its behalf and that the statements made in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint with New Matter and Counterclaim are true and corrcet. This Verification is subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4404, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: November. , 2006 MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire By: Jame: Title: SPP:DHM 426800.1 (22433.004 ) 11/22/06 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have this day served the foregoing Answer, New Matter and Counterclaim of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser to Plaintiffs Complaint upon the persons and in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail as follows: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Dated: BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: 1 Susan P. Peipher, Esquir Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) E X ?,,vi+ A t W-14-2006 1120 M C WALKER REALTY _ 717 697 9480 P.10 •7 'M P.11 C enn T-W rtVe' '1 MFRCFt W i RT IPATION COVeR SHEET You we required to possess the foffowiog documents. duty signed by your and an • " .rtafi"d?.your fish' . Participation in the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire for the Farr'e ason now befoe?: - t; P/i 16fP14T1EiF? SFtEE"i; t?rdiirdiln E4xh- ' A 2- MASTER PA"CfPATfON AGREEMENT X UNNERM'POWNEB AND PROCEDt"W"l; THE-ENNSVLiVAN1A RENA AMEAIated..lanwrt1.,2003. i This? adsiettt; Q !'aS.tlf _„ • ;t `• A G 20 cavm the participation. of the hWmiduai named below (We rafter referred Io as *MERCMA r) in the _ _ - F2E?re= t : staS tee t•? Dart of ft -Maslen . ME:RCHAW Agreemerit dated January 1.200'3, between M PIANt' and the Faire, and we er itfs'?fie'i as jbi*gT6w1ty b6br?d Type of Structure: 'ef'pmn??. emoodift 0 .E TIVA- E• fen3p?efa st rw Perrr%&i*nt owned by Faire Roving Cart ?ovic?g Hand Basket tt?it?• -S.•beaic . structure (add'eiottal fees appty): a MERCHANT First "e:, -Last Name: S1ree!'r , d. City: At .. rte: f zod tteff re Phoeee: 7_17- J7(i ?i - to ? 7 9 Weesite: , 2003 E:aim Sr awn POW, Craft _ Cmms -Rides MAR-14-2006 11:20 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9490 P.12 t•. ?e:$Ri9? Rga?ets'tt?epece•1Gasnn*Oftbe:Penecater&. Realm saltce Faire Hated above. The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire has pWWousiy 's p?faeexearxactf rtes: to-•i?EL'f, . 2. Fees/Assessrttents: The applicable teas aadlor assessments are as follows: Boom- - r ACT1Yi T _ FEE '-? - -- ..... Tool 116 --T pacon"w- Mw#*ft M-1 POMP. t.. tt Yes, peres:ntage payments shag be remitted to the Faire on the dales WO on 3Lrh transmittal tar:egEccshat{ 3- or. !_Fr r. . MERCHAW hm exevuted-fts document and has att 3 hereto as Exhibit "f." those immms MP-RC T is desirous of sew; a es o is desiratz& of -tg-at•". Faire. The items fisted on Exhibit "A" wilt be awed or revised by the f=aire wlthin W days of " raee??S?eEt?Ca?Qiii'?te;se ap¢t vet b? file Faire nhe-ssidcled t3y MERIT. 4. BuWMg Omupancy and Cam round Privileges: t_;4ing on site, whether in the Faire ildKXIVEV?P i+svp ILRiblearot riorwrittet'. penfnission of the rake's AssoWte Prod~ i' M-r_RCW%NT Coordinato land payment of all pi, g; lb .l:iaPda#?g car ,a +il nt?the`-Fake.-never a ca q right of-any MERCHANT. hiving on site privileges may be revoked at y time by the Faire f40- >r • " - " • of 1" , IF I ff rd; ti , abide by mirt:iving On Site Mules and Regulations as defined by the Faire. The Faire may aft jr1 a G pgrotNat#_90este , tie pwPing : of MERCHANTS. 1tt?r?•?R•E-l?tt?ttecfit?etrsa?-rr:a•part-?afthe•?rdes?, understanding and agreement is a -MASTER MERCHANT PA ICIPATION , V" Irr, I E T*W & ' -WrdV0W-P0*0W. bo#•48W-Janva f=+, 2003. k is specifitally understood and agreed that die terms arid Woditiom COntainedi in tAe" as act pew 4& .- eons. ard-camli S df MERCMAN t"S partkgo ion in the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire. J Mcmhant t'?rt 6p2titm C:ovar 5ttwlt Pasc 2 20"- - -- TOTAL P.12 MAR-14-2006 11:21 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.01/01 & 6cec.o#??•?ped?e9, ilg!@.-l?e{ega((yebOurK! taeiebyNave OXOCO ed this MERCHANT PARTiCtPATiON COVER SHEET as of, the data fist at*ve wftes? 2003-FakeSom ou--• t':ISQ3 TOTAL P.01 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.04 t iW-14-2006 11:18 Y a,? -? 9 Pr S jwWary T. 2 , bilk 111 A. Russ 6118SAWENUME MASTER VAERCHAW PARMIPATION AGSSEMEUT @ya"01391wehaev - Wla =-Vinewds, Inc., and 'Ft ONOW. is-bY'aa eers•MazzWv ,. Inc. trading as gW Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and as Mount mope.Estate & Winery. P.O. i Illy tSM.ahh?ft; VW O% fOW -1wrebwttier sOer rnres rek"W am -FMW mt4hw MERCHANT whose name appears on the MERCHANT Pafficipatio COVER SHEET to vfiich this AV^e #is --- died, Kwe'raft"re% 'Was--"h1E4XX4Wf . . This Agreement pertains to the proposed participaton in the Faire by MERCHANT held on the Ope V.state• S-W+rre?cg -. FAIRE and MERCHANT. intending to be legally bound hereby, agree as follows: t >r E bw:Re* wff-. 0 at-30#00=*'s re Live of vw1o- MERCHANT who has been dis o to and approved by the. Faire..shas be present each FBinc awrt as 11119.1 11 --pawn theact*k behat of MERCHANT M all matters rebating to Faire participation, I1:MERCHANT, wt xxA tbe: mnsertt rrt tt'l t'y41E ; .tom t1te` spa ?taef# clay that the Faire is open for business, at tht eLVjon d the Faire. and yrthout any fvtther "afte'W :f fitly +~ceave•wwftdW1ee r. and any tent or pavilion sf xgure which nvy have been erected by MERCHANT shalt be- few . -- fiy_#AER a_diweted-by4tm Fair,-, 1 NERCHAA17 slmAcltlm not readdy removaM. the Faire. M IN election. may assume ownership and col of the ixFwtr AOKI s or.inMegesst thereto and with no liability of the Fare to MERCHANT knunng by mason thereof. In either casa; l 'f' 's oosWtdC1v W.RCNAN'Pg was erected as wen as any further parficipation in futute Faire Qerforman&s. of a .16a Century Country Faire In Merrie Olde ErVanp and thv importance d ali agrees, +?. Tir Pn?edures" datE!ct October 1. 2W2. with any additional supplements. if any. as noted, copy which is afth?A?cranheh?•• . Mbeut' Mcruhart Participaties: Ah? vmcrht Rabe t 2t 3F7. rc-3 = *sr- .. Mf#t-14-2006 1l 18 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.05 .. ,-roo F.6 8: ?t18fSi?•?bd'Mndltrsne?rbe•?6+ha[il't1Rte•tOtirC1C-'b???Cl=aife•8r1E??3Fly.,SMC?t, amendme tt; shell. Likewise, beoome part of the Universal Policies and Procedures. C.'FhYE'tt?pts{iCreS ?"paEEOE-1?RSi??AtY$ peMlp?Or?.4'? the Faire and are herby made a part of ttas Agreement as if textuary set font at length. 0' ThWVER04At ' na=a :•falum to abidt.by the teerms and provisions therein shag constitute a material breach by MERCHANT of Otis 3: Stri gf Eness?te : ltrry wDome Wooed-by MGW4-"a or 91"V4e on.. the spats provided to MERCHANT by the Faira shag be vonsjdere# personal property for seuy?aened ?:.Srsdrs es aftiftesubjed teapaovatby.•the Faim won . request or dQmand as herein provided: melk wWT acknowledges that MERCHANT has e+er esra>ta*rwhi&t tht? she shall-t#owboa kareMd anathat this Agreement merely provides a right-d-use to MERCHANT on Faire performance days for the Qt -%F&oA4hP-* its pattim-provided that MERCHANT shad, at an times, amde by and be in $Af complianpe with the terms and • • oxodbMicrat 0092fta#e ag eempoW nadr: with th& FaWL,, 4. Use and Occupancy. The space to. be used and OCCU led by MMHANT shall oe used aRdwae a U d F am W W, 3 uck-ptatp9sesi&;am s?e0ka01s noted on the Cover Sheet hereto and under such conditions as are so forth "In. S. "f".tC'b?ryasoa; Ilea G?ire i? irtt sole jtst3gllnec+t.QE the Faft to have failed. in a material way, q follow and abide by the twrrps and Comdr m of f?? fise-Eaft rrtays`&llfe-optgaa .ft.faire tataify MERCHANT that rue Faire is terminating MERCHANT'$ right to Mt-pate in any ftatura t= eeigbt.t? .??RCkIAPLT. Wreauove all or MERCHANT'S property on Ow Faire site, including any svueuxe of MERCHANT, at ttp-Eiire a Gin if Vve Eaim.. determines that to remove tt,e structure sooner would not be atceptabl0 to the Fan.. adwd fortunm and/or enclosed equlpmetnt from the date nulioe 10 reemvve has been giverr by'the Fake to MERCHANT. If c su ctufe. as directed within the dune: provided. MERCHANrstan tgrfei4 phystcat paasessiu rrof ft- sbuetu a and ag contents to Faire who str3e1ieaoese. ttie oa?ro>tad?tr pr?r, It the-Faire. determines not to produm the. Pennsylvania ReAmssanpe Faire at any time in tl?'at<F ' •Ai1fcRGI?iMFE an¢•MEi=iCMAt?ti. shallft t 60 days to remove any sftmAvre. attaaheed fe Wre* and/or enclosed equipment. If MEROW6' ir?ted-weiotLin•tt+e tirsoc pw ideo, MERCHANT shay forted Opiol ponession of the structure and all cordents to Faire who ao .'lt c erOf.stt A prape?rtgthersaw.. . MERCHANT, when removing any promrty from the Faire site, agregs to restore they Faire sib we . leaped space-ta Q€iginral ow+diiipn befae?,a y strvqure of any of MERCHANTS property existed on the space. The Faire may require . ? teF apettha Fsi?e a such-comptiamr. Maate r Mc Rant Pankipation Agavnknt rob-,: Z .2W rabeadas4a• M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.06 MAR-14-2006 11:19 ra 1496 0.7 Tlne:g ?:itr ad?ivartts"aay:'olf?-:emsdiestt:at ^lagh'e' aaaita b?•aao+r to ttte•f?+?. T. Ir poWpation ttW- apply to Faire WERCHANTS Removal V Agree-m-'. It is tt =roter.W o! the Faire and M ER - A ;4T for r .s Ayreerr- w 2;11 arx-wrw,tttuinr s , itrthw 201rjadlpnent-atVw Fairmi isi , runt compliance with all the terms ?nd provis !n of this Agree!!?eett..Harlever. MERCNANT lMIERCHANT haeli be submit to wevailing booth feesssand?de sics?as aW?blee fu each as 1.0 .7?w. r j v r,• •g 'Fi tIm ri,wi-iara zrW'w. o ffaim, brad-lor t lt;wRV.4AKO.r'3 poficoatiC, to evzowdowd, beVmv!•%I?v date s??t'fotw';'ifl' c -emt COVER SHEET. MERCHANT and the Fege must execute a new MERCHANT Of •CC'."E"P--M-T ilm make any mquftd rental deposit for the Succeeding year that the Fq!e strap trnft4S0 on ' .,? ..k'?.a.-'3!:^?..!•t?t1?:?!-l:r :r.•?ra'-dep^st•w? faire may rea MERCHANT. wift 60 days !-ar.^ :tom daft Ohm . me is st^t v; Fare *.: &1&,,cwftT7tu. .. '.ss.s..' a a:SVS-d m et oK of !drrPw! ? rs mi prf+:+?+rt r;.?+? A.Athhif, s??! s+tme. if MI=RG-HA1A14T fads/rtoo?l??!*!ove ME4?y.C•?MP4 rs pay Y' i?i ? ;tr sessiw.t 1 the $t.w. v •.v'Ctuna YaU ro.!cmt I C??.e •w OWL' +•An i v.. /.WaV V.•.V• ^r ?. Mn ". +,..N iw:?•Pir Otte e*r at tRLf"i 'fit: ?n?,.f??ctar?i?ka+lee•wrtA••?'?e!r?•ceetdit+?fs of this Ag.,.•?-er. m". k -RE•?ANT shall {..?Hv ahe r'yttt arm Mr=-:1V. ee 0.1 "Satjn..'•+•y w km ad irs. 00-rAm. . . t;ent#i?vrf s#aa= Ire xssgnment is that the wrtftn permission o` the Fair®bCt:: si oI- med and lfift- faire, -,: it sale j%ft iaeN16 %ds 1asthe ; 8S we1?aB !! It s t4 Sae sold or adlAies to be condueAd by the proposed MERCHANT satisfactory to C. retativ?h4p between the Farce and MERCHANT is that of an Mdspepdent Cam. NailtleF# t6*1Ai?F nAFt??e F eks 0" h" ?ta? for OM i*d W*_- whatsgover, as tW of enwloyederrptoyee or oVwwiw thaR;as tr4epencient 8# te-Mfebyado te+er..ftiffe of any materi8l fed or circumstance, whether or not adverse, reiati ig to the Dusiheas of ?'aEtla+e?•FaRe? 97-AMIMOM fi+tER04PAT-'ate-f%l;-MWZl* a 5W-eGva** the-4mll•--aw*• note tesponsibitittr for injury to Ole person or property of aftf%. kbCkWOg employees, agents. Vie=amebarn- ws-whd t3: stwil, .•ocsm- W-mow of- mmcw rs owohwnem- or participadon in the Faire. It is &is intention, underling and agreement of MERCHANT the- FswirQ- Dbag• t-m. 146iliEtr-whalsoew• to- or. am a ccow* of MERCHANT or MERCHANT'S employees or agents, ari¢iing otft of MERCHANTS pd!!id}lAtiee-iek ee tih- Faiea: MER£UANT-t?es,., ume me: agreed. to MAstcr Mcrdant Tnrticiprtivn Rbrconu:nt t'28: 3 MAR-14-2006 11:19 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9490 P.O? :?aa p. 8 Ma?1+-4+? arit-?a:ee?t'irtlr? des, ti?a'+age cf tl?n?• aE.iaiElg, let any my whatsoevef, tram MERCHANTS patiMpation in or invoMm ant with the Fafte. 14t70oerll gly: the Faswst?lt=txt . ' f AjW; W M. +#i[W'f'S fan*..iACit" any minor children, nor to MERCHANT'S employxs. agents, nor, to any other person. . t?Qr E' att;tat t<of orby 4ERC. WXT or MERCK M S employees or agwAs on f=aire property, whether or not in the COtrdLct of the adWies I On, 11 V In tat ttefel?' o!-( -tta Moss d'- v-rov, property. owFaire property, or (3) for damages or kisses suffered by reason of the cortfuct of any person on Faiw 01 Opcil), mdudie.Ovbanak of I RCr FSt ?.:Faire.pattors and any Oftf 061`501l Or p@rson5 who may be On Faire property, q (4) for damages or 1 0 tO?AERCHAt '3't?ers?ssarprdp yrvrtl+e?pe??orrtx propeityof arty 'agent or employee of MERCHANT from any other cause whatsoever. to ptdr yrapd t101? harr»ie$"110=0 %A00"1149: l1%t.'Jw OffiftrS. directM. CMDWew aM agents ifom any and aft claims or,pt w I'rabdfties arising oat`oftb taregoitt ~1111 911125 !egabiea %ft t ,4naytvv)ptrhiedby.-. Malta VMW.Ords. inc.. delendirtg any such Oatrns or threelrened,kabUities. fv?tber ataetirriLoepbty ttsled 4? Ma= Vineyards. Inc. and. in any gase. not less then $W.OW per ajcideM and btanket•• aattea -a{i'?:DEff:Ef?ty' p s arfQ-intemo v" Pagvmph..-Stmt Woe "I name it ma Vlneyara,, Inc. as an WdditioRai jnsuted. Sixty days prior to Ow4u taf -any FOSO r12 4P-Rid! e smsr, *C44%Tv=% of=testFence?ring thew erIS of tale Paragraph 8 shah be delivered to the Faire WhiCh Certificate 4talt stye that %A=a lnr~ t rttr toe! of MERCHi4WS;_ Wc3ticy.6y ft insurer. MERCHANTS failure to provide such insurance shall temiinate tiF.iaaticl?ie? ttae Faft.- 10. Tom. MFRGMANT is responsible for any pa", sociat Security. sales or ottrrsr tames that ?:ntag wum oUthe activitistr Contemplated hereutwer. r 4•'Nv w_ieh_-A1?tt-t+n?e??AEER T MERCHANT'S tyus rn W any 60019053itiRS granted hereby in a safety-brsi and surer ett?s• ; irrevery vosped. hr Aill 6omphance Om an local, UM and federal lanes and tegulauons. i? Br• t Ott t: during ttaccoaese of the Faire. Me MERCHANT r"ht appear in pttatogmPhs, video. frlrrij recordings and the W t1ltffitlt?E?iia L*RCK4XT-twr+avr-. ccnoeats to the use of any such audio at visual portraysi of Vw MERCMVT or the Fetes.a g. pvmwww -of anX'ww PWPDS" and agrees tl;at any of such pornyats shit, %hereafter. become Itle sole property of the Fain!- `f? ip wt?ttc any re?onabte , requests of the Faire for MERCHANT to assist ir the public relatbns activities of the'Faire wt4tle. oa?Fe.3itir ?Ift" Pace 4. 2@f?3°F•?- MAR-14-2006 11:19 M C WALKER REALTY 717597 9480 P.08 P.8 MEPICA 1Atk? wi% I Od un. •pt*ioh or di3pk) -thaim nni-a w,&fwy-k*M trAdmarksw sera*, mafks 09. the Fans. or any natures, logos. tradcmarks or service marks which are similar thenelk•wit hint the -express wtiNee-90fty eion"4 Vw FSkV, 13. Pamsissitsl6 Sste_Iterr. MERCHANT snap not offer for sate any item that has W. been pra?et?9yR.•.lulln?fitted-IOGapptetire?-.by?F+iii+c•..?Fset ict?9n th??MERf?E;al?T: CC34?62 SHEET ?tachEtf to this Agreernertt. If MERCHANT is propwing to operate a gasses. rides or ?siorr,-no suet?•apeeat ,.%& ahetk be corsmeac®d +•hiClr has.r+ot 9eett . prdviat}sly subffAkd to, approved by the Fairc and set fofth`o:•+ the. MERCHANT CbVER 514EE1-0111locW-FA ft&Agrecw&ff ., fat-'ff?e?rsbrsratioFS oott<airre?hta r emiect•irratt-respect; (b) This Agreement shatl be binding upon and inure to the ;benefit of the parties hereto anti tfieir'r re MCC==: revs 3130 pesmat:reprfsestd?res'as't??s permitted (c) Only a duly authorized representative of the Faire is exiled to provide ratite or give aog• t?•a?ott+ez a?osroa t?fsadE af•theFaire. (d) MERCHANT Shall, prior to the, ere0on of any posters. squ, decorations and any cow. fOt of a 1?B°t? erlaterial:'vb?irt a6 fe0etr{t Fa fmrsuc" dispta wohk premises. Papoe Oa cardboardsigns.aeestfiety prohib-ted ; 6*idEREftAWageeev0iat-attrtssaorssnder'l6ytatsa a?efot?t?rtsarul?IfERCHJIt is, responsible shalt be supervised at all, times by a r esponsle aduk!white on ft f=aire site. ( T ' ttpOR#I acre nnfivaccepted BF4. executed by an officer of the Faire on behalf e. the Faire and duty rctpmca to MERCHANT. 'MFfi strailgiitse f=aogrannivc any. Or revaove; trirsr?! . otherwise interfere Mirth any of the landscaping on the Faire site. r} .ithovt the express written t}? the'P? • (b3- "i?s-lrsterp?teo'orrdei: ands ?r aooerdar+ce vw4tft Me taws of the CornffVw"aith of Peontovansa. In woe event a iciv promed+ng is aiernsr?er.oF:related 1tr1t atetfrpeta; t>7e soiefon so -two-va Agreement shalt be the Coups for the County of t_ancaster"lo` the ComrnonweaRhco`, wisd i ads xEaca?s and that'w„r+ue Atm-impl-Imm! TwootastmeWmmatt Asti be in said Lancaster County. t?iER?•pp9a+rsvifdtiaa f6?n tt faire: ete ll&pad"aW on say e0w Fairs pmpduced event on the Mount Hope wire ft. except to the.extent that the parties haue?lferarfS?e' agr?E3elc#•hfwr:arl?oF•t?re?C9ctts<. "carnditfo?r+d' brs+rtalior+s•ooMai¢rE? •. herein shall apply !o Such parWipation by MERCHAW in such other event(s). A Separate ??.?:ire:f':?ftie:ip?tinn.hgra:rntnt_ r?g?-5 2IDD312im Swm tIhR-14-2006 1120 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.09 be; srgned by-MEROV AITj and the Faire. (?:.?i CM RdaT ?pnt? c r t? ne o Faire site;'#AER?WI agrees to provide the Faire, with a dopiicate copy of all k@ys to the'doors to such DwIding. . Ryeaara"swvrfaitb'a001.0 -0-801 ryttraaprors°vf'tMs'AgreenWtb)?, MERCHANT shall not consilme a contirwaiver of such br"O or violation or a waiver ? -txyre+?RGM • (1) Unless the context Clearly indicges other%ri-. the term `MERC+IANT' SW refer to the Ana-Man tser weisasaran ?s wrants am'ammu of MERCHANT. on the False sse. ? 1s era - no etw?e+en file Fie aksd MERCHANT with m-4;eCt to at W. "m matters contained herein. NO "namerds hereto Shot (REs' ?1@Q"?ttOttLf?'•AC't-by"8?b??nty?r?yt?' bYtrDth'IGIi;RG'HANT W4 by the Faire. WWffNESWVff9iVEOF ; ttiWFaite-Srtl'!'R7tERCM date fit W. fvrtt: abcwe with the intention of being '?1t?•1RARflS: itt? ' B' hence' SlgneT V" AgrECRieflt• W-Of ttsc bound hereby. MILF409senow- Page [f MAR-14-2006 1120 M C WALKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.11 4mmu- Ey 1,.20M ?i€tPEf?ENEPEkW$1ft1tA!!w1>1RI?SANCE' '? IV MAW-" The Faire reservers the not?in its solo discretie7?n. f4o dismiss * t>YPartr*vd for dangerous, Ntapl? ? believe" lnconsista?n VAwtbe.yoals and otejeithres of The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire as an artistic and enWrtainment evonrt _ AlF glte tiverq -- - -'e'ung Oft or any SOW Agreement or dmrnent relating to the Faire and the Particloont shat be taken up erectly with the Ikswciate•Praduo? acbelsiea tt>e•faittt?4,1••oorr•af•all•?nd??lior+s•t?f ns7as, entertairunemt neta".,ed Faire participation by ah Participants, and a also charged with facilitating rchanrreWkwo.sexas to enwwu Lsw?l, a"d herrrmreieaus'parYecipation by or conowne6. ParWpaet and Complimentary Passes, Pw*ing Permits and Parking Policies: Attached treret?aM+t~FTrae donaeots catv9vrrad'a6•fr#,aS;,. Panicipant•Passes, Complimentary Passes and Parking Permit Policies AddttiF cipant txsssee t=o+r- Participant Parking Permit Apprication aae: y'adeing- Participant Parking Permh.Application T -cmar,thu' 1_0 i wwwr .4-M am be eseeaed`by"• aM withirrthe time specified by the Faire for each performance season. -get wdfta-- . win speck permission. p _ tE>e Palm:groernds: Any Pani?e?°wistsieegta •a pea, on site must obtain prior written approval. from the Merchant Coordinator, Pds, unless a part of a pertoomir,+g - - a?g-afa!w?`ttay:- ?y?OreC• whA'1sa? Specific written permissm to have a pet on the grounds on non-Faire days must keep the animal . •p?lnere:4?teashed;aR-alk •. Participants must assume all re' sponsibilo for their vets. Pit df9Dpogs must pe ?w . Phone SeNice: Certaiin MERCHANT structures and campground locations have been eRtipped wiist i>nrOl p?antl9k fit ism t lE" Pt• WWCMpW y_Ie have servc* a instalted. The Faire assumes no responsibility for phone line damage from any cause _.. There- -ber rim u mere# pE ns tt Fei groernds alter-!lows Tree Mount Hope Estate grounds are pnvaee property and are absolutely clow lo the public except Mime ;00 l be -?por?oe,Fcl?eriega'orpeiroftof any sort on the Faire Grounds. Open firers are not permitted by tft onder of ttee Fire Marshall. ew•t rW-14-2006 1118 M C wpLKER REALTY 717 697 9480 P.02 e v,7o^1+40 p.3 4UhN s'A"CheCkdaljiWR fly. "AWiu?El?ftbl?liiPartic?per!tte St cOrne;ptepare?v i sufficient cash and change banks. The Faire does not carry extra charge and will decline any MgogF W =NWd r+ge : Fir epo?icy is !p ne+rer.g5n peESCsr+aF or WA d: p3tYdMCU fOr any OMW at any time. Fsa a of Gr air 01t; ?Fde-FNote ""Ww Ofthras picletdt:siervier: ol?petioamama$ evenings. A!1 trash must be suitably bagged and placed next to regular Faire trash receptacles. The w n8 mpre tEs?n5• pedn0&a ml. as bash.lags must be. of s1.ltfrCient strength so as not to tear. Trash must not be placed outside any building or tent any earlier ztwarposa Wis. 9oaeesmasbbe-bro err down WA p4ed featly for retaral. Ar?y trash from a Mer&anCs normal operations accumutatrC o^ a non-Faire day is the responsibility of=tt .at> acts:paesa:.. take-di e ft ana, t-W a--n*o . Dul%Wter des*~ for such purpose. ?p1rart?a;.?dACbtg•?eri?:•a?f: - eri=tcai?r-mwE;e?beot ir. Fain supplied roll oft dum„ sters or o!herwise on the Faire sOe. Violators will tare severe penalties: Ate r> ti5po61`,tainers at` oool?g a± t da so is ?eeOrdaCe with.pcoeed%;Ms established by"Faire. MERCHANTS must pay all costs a$sociated with cooking EfiC fOKe - lie'•CAE''tdtAt a ris:. d-te:havle COr3kit oiFd wilt eetttse. . remove any ro.4 off containing cooki.?lg or other oft. AN cmjyrlm=?--k ?drai To fip,.wwill se?retel?t datiiage the sewage treatment plant. Responsible parties will pay any repair bills and be subiect to fines and . fa,+Eiplrfre-l?rth?Farne? raWtWW 'tcta,Nirt?lr few oFS t?sitding cleaa a eter+e. during. and after every fairs day. T!--s includes the ciee." up of cigarette bytts and other trash. K Ei ee It iS Bk k?o?alli; tl iMEqChANT. •w* be•triMeektor. a irp?4 cledmm serves '11 926 sit to T*&..a*nsumvow" *9not.Ok hOficb"Wag0:bV:amc KRI CHANT Prior to or during a Faze day is strictly prohibited. The 16$41 age for consumption of 3't' peaes of ?e s vtps aoeua?es $toot?o4c beverages or W. Hope property at any time will im *0iately lose all Faire privaeges. Anyone scrp*W,W ro # re?age?ta aA uedesa?e @arsaa sttat?likewise_bre.vunisNedwith immediata toss o! Faire Privileges. Fife ilkegaf cat oa I tt• aeeie tiara is-s?stiy 000h bftd. Any viWO*n of *Us paragraph win not only result kcr the automab.c terrminM+on of the vlMWE Vw aim net oe: *iha volatior-v& beInm ptly reported.wi tte pro r "al au her ies. :-TttAmW draw weapons es+ a?air•etta?r firs Faire actors who pa,- eipate in 8 Chuneogiaphed shaw. AN otht~ weapons trust be limited to period, sheathed and Ereatson of Struv, res On Faire Prop": Detailed drawings must .be first subnutted and altin-r?ngbrtaef • ' to1tie-eicellkiin oFaat?-shtae«+ Face-pn,perty:a as M. The Faire always reserves the 6CM to approve or rei?ect any proposed structure. 3tt?rdl?s.blE< wittx-arN•Faioe•?n?d'+ergt•.pMiCiest as.w?eN-a6•a?rate+?t state or local building codes. ftse 2 717 697 9480 P.03 ' t*Q-14-2006 11.18 M C WALKER REALTY P. Y •1M?ti: ?C'?Sr.?'a1F€ai? ra::et!n:'?e' CiEI???'? . Ma rd*in (1754 5) or Cornwal: (17016) Pos: Otfcrs V receipt of --ai17, Faire Wei aceapt w M.a0 tx a .p taramr•Patbom)t if -sup •iQc Unriten#••Parce servi0e or other ee N*q services. Participants deWvery? address: r c/v Pan-sylvarAa nvissance Faire N1sr Famed.` Pa 17-545 • S c'rvff bwcathg Maisnfe?r?oe9a?^, nearfe pay phone. Packages shovid be picked tp Monday through Friday frgrrt 7 AM to 3:30 PM as thw*w ff-lawris•Eesagwy lid- 811.E tMiverias.Onto ' The. Fairegmunds: MERCHANTS shah advise all suvViers/ver4m that ne ' •Eair? e+usraer.>lreir sup<plisra+!vdr?0ors tr. MW-them autWe of the Faire site to a=p: dwivery. Faire employees are lot permined !o wait . . ocsip =V M- EftHAW deliveries: PaMaparos are responsible for any damage done to the grounds. including sod damage. 111 t!Y any vehicles ? tCr &WOWS hafip" ikwiar$tion OFthis porW- Vshilge Weighs Restrictions: No PP-I;Ops:lt vehicles over. 1Y, tor- are allgwCd on the Faire site. TM. N!-- iouD- a,.Gessi w day in Oide England and will be set in a lime perrod from the 1Vh Century (War of the Roses and son d ogtri tie. ?•s?Q?ae??: AN-Pwtiripantsm both encouraged, and emoted. lo bewmie a part of this illusion. (;W t<!irtes for su oessfu? ' •ge-Paa?atEFaise Participants. Sneakers may new be worn, Srwking in costama is never peed in sight of any ;00c fs-N OA#i pe;%r-fAerd%anW&rAe+os 0esw*bfthWVioctoanddwiegm-w- Fake season. P?ic?l?-sr?o-t?twalorarpood-Etot'kie?fo}lo?ag . ?nEeEacEing with Facie patrons risk loss of pattiopation in t'1itum Faire seasons, a{0 - -* PBW"itWwiIFam integi.al'imEBf #w6RS-' ER-MERCk AR i lGIPATION AGREEMENT which sots forth saditionai terms and condi ens of The Fa' pavr-3:? t?'? i? _ e. .--? " ' r `4 u.? v S ? i 1`-- 'i ?,?1 " ? ? w? ..-.. '?'. ?? ? .n? I Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. : Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants PETITION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW This petition of J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire and Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the law firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP (hereinafter "Petitioners"), respectfully requests the following: 1. On June 8, 2006, Petitioners filed a complaint on behalf of the plaintiff, Christina Bowman, whose address is Box 34, Bowmansdale, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17008, in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. 2. On Ms. Bowman's behalf, Petitioners successfully opposed Preliminary Objections filed by Defendants. 3. After oral argument on October 25, 2006, before The Honorable Kevin A. Hess and The Honorable M. L. Ebert, Jr., Judge Ebert issued an order denying the preliminary objections on October 27, 2006, thus requiring Defendants to answer. 4. Defendants filed an Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim on November 27, 2006. 5. Despite a fee arrangement requiring payment by Ms. Bowman for Petitioners' services on an hourly basis and the submission of invoices, Petitioners have received only $800.00 when in excess of $12,000.00 in fees have been billed to Ms. Bowman. 6. We have continued to represent her despite her continued non-payment to date. 7. Petitioners provided written notice by letter to Ms. Bowman on October 2, 2006, that due to the growing outstanding legal bills, they would be compelled to withdraw as counsel for non-payment of fees for services rendered through September, unless she paid same by October 31, 2006. 8. When Ms. Bowman failed to pay the outstanding fees by October 31, 2006, a letter dated November 14, 2006, was sent to her advising that Petitioners would proceed to withdraw should she continue her refusal to pay and she should search for alternate counsel immediately so as to prevent prejudice to her rights; she again failed to remit payment. 9. Ms. Bowman thus has deliberately disregarded her agreement to pay her lawyer as to expenses or fees, which is grounds for withdrawal. See Com. v. Scheps, 523 A.2d 363 (Pa. Super. 1987); Code of Professional Responsibility, DR2-110(B); Explanatory Comment [8] to Rule 1.16(b)(5). 2 t 10. The Petitioners continued representation has been rendered unreasonably difficult by virtue of Ms. Bowman's failure to pay her legal fees, and good cause exists therefore under Rule 1.16(b)(4) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct for Petitioners' withdrawal of appearance in the case. 11. The continued representation of Ms. Bowman without payment of Petitioners' fees, or the prospect of such payment, has resulted and will further result in an unreasonable financial burden on the Petitioners, and good cause exists therefore under Rule 1.16(b)(5) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct for Petitioners' withdrawal. 12. Petitioners shall file a Reply to the New Matter and response to the Counterclaim within the time frame prescribed by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure so as to preclude prejudice to Ms. Bowman. 13. Accordingly, the case is not at a critical stage and withdrawal by the Petitioners will not result in any prejudice towards Ms. Bowman, nor will she suffer any other material adverse effect on her interests, thereby satisfying Rule 1.16(b) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct. 14. Counsel for the Defendants has been contacted, and while it is believed they have no position, concurrence of the Defendants could not be obtained by the time of the filing of this Petition. 3 .1% WHEREFORE, Petitioners requests that this Court grant Petitioners' leave to withdraw their appearance for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, in this action. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP B J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`'' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Date: December 1, 2006 4 . t J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants CERTIFICATION IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1012 that there is no outstanding motion to compel discovery, or for sanctions for failure to provide discovery. By J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing Petition of Plaintiffs Counsel for Leave to Withdraw by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Christina Bowman Box 34 Bowmansdale, PA 17008 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP I By Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Dated: December 1, 2006 AJ C._. er `rl 1 wt (!? C7 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street c cz:z . O. Box 840 P CZ, Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840. _ Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ATTACHMENT OF RULE To the Prothonotary: Please attach the Rule to Show Cause to the Petition of Counsel to Withdraw in connection with the above-captioned action. AS c_1 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP J P ' Byrom s.. T. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID 924580 Lucinda C. Glim1, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18"' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 0 --r Date: December 6, 2006 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. . Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. -3 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Praecipe to Attach Rule to Show Cause" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Christina Bowman Box 34 Bowmansdale, PA 17008 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP j. B y Date: December 6, 2006 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 2 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants RULE AND NOW, this Y - day of December, 2006, upon consideration of Petition of Plaintiffs Counsel for Leave to Withdraw, a rule is granted upon Christina Bowman and/or Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) to show cause why the Plaintiffs Counsel should not be granted leave to withdraw. Rule returnable - - ?006, in Court Room No , at BY THE COURT: uP Ty. z R ; CLI?v- J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Praecipe to Attach Rule to Show Cause" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Christina Bowman Box 34 Bowmansdale, PA 17008 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP J'(//JI?n 1 By. 4 /? Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: December 6, 2006 2 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ATTACHMENT OF RULE To the Prothonotary: Please attach the Rule to Show Cause to the Petition of Counsel to Withdraw in connection with the above-captioned action. NAUM/AN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Date: December 6, 2006 r J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), Defendants, and Susan P. Peipher, Esquire, Attorney for Defendants You are hereby notified to plead to the within New Matter within twenty (20) days from the service hereof or a default judgment may be entered against you. NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP B \ Y• J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18' Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Dated: December 12, 2006 Counsel for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a the PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, AND SCOTT BOWSER AND NOW here comes Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, by and through her attorneys, Nauman Smith Shissler and Hall, LLP, and files the following Reply to New Matter and Answer to the Counterclaim filed by Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser (hereinafter "Defendants") as follows: REPLY TO NEW MATTER 75. Plaintiff incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 74 of her Complaint. 2 76. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. 77. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. 78. Denied. It is specifically denied that individuals other than Defendants are responsible for Plaintiff's alleged losses. By way of further answer, Defendants are responsible for their tortious actions in maligning the value of Plaintiff's concessions to buyers and/or respective buyers and thus causing Plaintiff to suffer damages in excess of $125,000.00. 79. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. 80. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff contributed to the conditions described in her Complaint. By way of further answer, Plaintiff has worked diligently to sell her concessions and had secured a purchaser, who was then advised that the concessions were not worth near the amount that he was to pay. Moreover, Plaintiff did not contribute to any of the tortious and reckless conduct of Defendants who had made representations and imposed obstacles to Plaintiff selling her concessions such that she could not sell them at the contract price. Defendants caused Plaintiff's damages without any contribution from Plaintiff. 81. Admitted. 82. Denied. It is specifically denied that Scott Bowser did not speak with Mr. Claudio in fact, as set forth in the Complaint. By way of further answer, Defendant Bowser did speak with Mr. Claudio regarding the purchase of the concessions and advised him that the concessions were not worth more than less than half the price agreed to, and no more than $65,000.00. 3 83. Denied as stated. The Affidavit of Carmelo Claudio is a part of the record and is a document that speaks for itself; any characterization thereof is specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. 84. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff suffered no damages proximately caused by any conduct of Defendants. By way of further answer, as alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint, Plaintiff suffered damages in excess of $125,000.00 as a proximate result of Defendants' conduct. Defendant Bowser made statements to a purchaser devaluing Plaintiff's concessions without cause, and further has made sale of Plaintiff's concessions difficult by imposing additional obstacles as alleged in the Complaint. 85. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants announced a new "Foods Code" that became part of any agreement with the Faire. By way of further answer, there is no Foods Code appended to the Merchant Participation Agreement, and there was no copy provided to Plaintiff prior to becoming a participating merchant in 2005. It is further denied that the "Foods Code" as it is called by Defendants required upgrades to be made to Plaintiff's concessions. Moreover, Plaintiff performed certain upgrades at the request of Defendant Faire that were deemed acceptable by the Faire. 86. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted only that Defendant Faire has the right to impose safety rules with respect to its property and not the property of Plaintiff. It is specifically denied that Defendant has the `right' to impose obligations to make expensive upgrades to concessions that are not necessary according to the Department of Agriculture. It is further submitted that Defendants would request unnecessary upgrades in order to standardize the existing 4 concessions without any benefit to the concessionaires like Plaintiff as further explained in Plaintiff's Complaint. 87. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. Moreover, the NFPA-96 and the Department of Agriculture Food Service rules and regulations are documents that speak for themselves and any characterization thereof is specifically denied. By way of further answer, it is denied that there were "equipment upgrades" with which Plaintiff did not comply that were deemed necessary by the Department Agriculture Food Service rules and regulations and strict proof thereof is demanded. 88. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. It is specifically denied that the Foods Code is applicable to all concessions at the Faire grounds, and further is denied that it has been applied to all concessions in a uniform fashion. 89. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff has benefitted from the arrangement with U.S. Foods. By way of further answer, Plaintiff has not benefitted and has suffered losses due to the requirements to purchase from U.S. Foods both in food quality and customer service that have led to perishables degrading and other losses as further outlined in the Complaint. 90. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant Faire had not required exclusive purchasing of food and supplies from U.S. Foods and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests judgment in her favor and against the Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for the relief as outlined in her Complaint. 5 COUNTERCLAIM Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire v. Christina Bowman Count I - Breach of Contract 1. Denied. It is expressly denied that Plaintiff is an independent concessionaire of Defendant Faire. By way of further answer, Plaintiff had been a concessionaire through the season ending in October 2006. Defendants have terminated Plaintiff's Agreement and Plaintiff is no longer subject to its terms. Because of the termination, Defendant Faire has also threatened to forfeit Plaintiff's concessions. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. By way of further answer, Plaintiff has made percentage payments to Defendant Faire as required. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff has been misreporting her sales or has underpaid her percentage payments and strict proof thereof is demanded. By way of further answer, Plaintiff has complied with all of her obligations under the agreement and has paid her percentage payments in full. 7. Denied. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial is demanded. By way of further answer, Plaintiff did not fail to accurately report her total sales and did not misrepresent said sales to Defendant. 8. Denied. This averment constitutes a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent it is deemed to contain facts, they are denied and strict proof thereof at trial 6 is demanded. By way of further answer, the response to Paragraph 6 above is hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendants' Counterclaim for breach of contract for which no facts are of record and requests judgment in her favor as to the claims set forth in her Complaint, including her prayer for relief, damages, attorneys' fees and any other relief that this Honorable Court deems appropriate. NEW MATTER 1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference as though fully set forth herein the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 74 of her Complaint, and Paragraphs 1 through 8 of her Answer to the above Counterclaim. 2. Defendant fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 3. Defendants fail to state a claim for breach of contract. 4. Defendants fail to state a claim for quantum meruit. 5. Some or all of Defendants' claims are barred by the doctrine of release and waiver. 6. Some or all of Defendants' claims are barred by the doctrine of accord and satisfaction. 7. Some or all of Defendant's claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. 8. Some or all of Defendant's claims are barred by the statute of limitations. 9. Some or all of Defendant's claims are barred by the statute of frauds. 10. Defendant's claims are barred by failure of consideration. 11. Defendant's claims are barred by the doctrine of estoppel. 7 12. Enforcement of all terms of the Merchant Participation Agreement is unconscionable and against public policy. 13. Either all or some of the provisions of the Merchant Participation Agreement are invalid and/or unenforceable as a matter of law. 14. The Merchant Participation Agreement is void for lack of consideration. 15. Ms. Bowman did not draft the Agreement and had no input into the terms, nor ability to negotiate them. 16. The Merchant Participation Agreement is inconsistent with law and unconstitutional and it deprives Ms. Bowman of her property without due process. 17. Ms. Bowman complied with the enforceable provisions of the Merchant Participation Agreement. 18. The provision in the Merchant Participation Agreement regarding forfeiture of concessions without compensation upon termination is void. 19. The Merchant Participation Agreement is void for lack of mutuality of obligation. 20. Ms. Bowman did not specifically agree to a choice of forum clause. 21. The Merchant Participation Agreement exacts payment from concessionaires without providing exchange in return of equal value. 22. Because the Merchant Participation Agreement is a form contract drafted by Defendant Faire, Ms. Bowman had less bargaining power. 23. Defendant Faire did not advise Ms. Bowman to confer with an attorney prior to signing the Merchant Participant Agreement. 8 24. Defendant Faire did not provide a copy of its alleged "Foods Code" to Ms. Bowman as a policy under the Merchant Participation Agreement. 25. Ms. Bowman expended considerable sums upon her concessions and maintenance therefor, abiding by the applicable terms of the Agreement. 9 WHEREFORE, the answering Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, Christina Bowman, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in her favor and against Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) and to grant Ms. Bowman such other relief as this Court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted, NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`h Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Counsel for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: December 12, 2006 10 Dec 11 06 04:00p Christina F, Bowman 717-7S6-1718 p,2 4 DEC-08-2006 FR1 04;31 PM FAX NO, P. 09 .? j14 1, Christina Bowman, make the following statements subject to the penalties'of 111 Pa:C:Sr 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authority, and do hereby state thatthelb Mset far ft in the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply to Now Matter and Answer with New ]Matter to C6tmtftrhrh& of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania JUnaiqjgee Pairs and Sco*. now= are mw awd correct to the best of my knowledge, Dated: December-/ I , 2006 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply to New Matter and Answer with New Matter to Counterclaim of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: L Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Dated: December 12, 2006 r? ? " ' C? c ? 1 S C",., ca ? C? •--1 'T: "? 'i°`7 y '^t? ;"5 ,.?..- ,?-, '^ ?tilf1 ? ? s ?::G ..-- J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsellor Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. - Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION -LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity). Defendants PETITION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff, CHRISTINA BOWMAN, by her counsel, Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, respectfully petitions this Court for leave to stay all proceedings in the above-captioned action pending Plaintiff's retention of new counsel, and in support states: 1. Ms. Bowman commenced this action by Complaint against Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (the "Faire"), Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of the Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio on June 8, 2006.' 2. Ms. Bowman asserted claims primarily based in tort regarding the Faire Defendants' interference with her existing and prospective contractual/business relations relating to the intended sale of her concessions, Nachos of Nottingham, The Huntsman and the Banana Stand,/smoothie cart ("concessions") that she has operated during the Renaissance Faire season. ' The action was discontinued against Mr. Claudio on September 29, 2006, such that Defendant Faire and Bowser are the only remaining defendants (hereinafter "Faire Defendants") 3. Defendants filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and for other grounds, on or about, July 17, 2006,which were denied by this Honorable Court after briefing and oral argument, by Order entered October 27, 2006. 4. Defendants advised Ms. Bowman that the Merchant Participation Agreement ("Agreement") was terminated as of the end of the Faire season, at the end of October 2006. 5. Due to non-payment of legal bills and other reasons represented to this Court, the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP has filed a Petition to Withdraw as Counsel on December 1, 2006. 6. The Petition to Withdraw has been assigned to The Honorable Kevin A. Hess, and a Rule to Show Cause was issued, returnable on December 28, 2006. 7. Faire Defendants filed their Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim on November 27, 2006; the Counterclaim asserts claims under the Agreement. & Ms. Bowman filed a Reply to New Matter and Answer to Faire Defendants' Counterclaim on December 13, 2006. 9. Despite attempts to do so, Ms. Bowman has been unable to secure substitute counsel to date; her date to respond to the Petition to Withdraw does not elapse until December 28, 2006. 10. Defendants have stated their intention to forfeit Ms. Bowman's concessions if she has not removed them from Faire property by December 28, 2006, which is the same date of the threatened forfeiture. 11. Defendants have raised a contractual claim regarding enforcement of the Agreement, including its provision regarding forfeiture of personal property, i. e., Plaintiff's concessions, within sixty (60) days of the termination of the Agreement. 2 12. As is evident by Plaintiff's Answer and New Matter to Counterclaim, Plaintiff contends that the Agreement is not enforceable and void ab initio such that it, and in particular its forfeiture provisions, are unconscionable, invalid and cannot be enforced under public policy. 13. It is believed that a stay of proceedings is necessary in order to permit Plaintiff to secure counsel in sufficient time to review the case and assess it for further action. 14. It is further believed and averred that Defendants will not be prejudiced by a limited stay of proceedings, including enforcement of the alleged forfeiture provision under the Agreement, because the Faire does not open for the season except for one weekend in late June for the Celtic Fling, and then continuously on Saturdays and Sundays starting August 11, 2007. 15. Attorney Susan Peipher was contacted regarding the within Petition for Stay and she was unable to be reached for her concurrence. 16. It is believed that Defendants will have sufficient opportunity to either retrofit or remodel, or if necessary, remove the concessions, were this Court to utilize its equitable jurisdiction and impose a stay for a period of no more than an additional sixty (60) days, or until February 28, 2007. 3 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Christina Bowman requests that this Court immediately enter an Order staying all proceedings in the above-captioned case, including precluding Defendants from taking any action against Plaintiff s concessions currently located upon Faire property and staying enforcement of any provisions of the Agreement to that effect, pending Plaintiffs retention of substitute counsel, or for a period of no more than sixty (60) days. By NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18`h Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman Date: December 21, 2006 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing "Petition to Stay all Proceedings" by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 By: NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: December 21, 2006 SPP;SLB/dhm 429910.1 (22433.004) 12/22/06 BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants No. 06-3261 Civil Term REPLY OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. T/DB/A THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE AND SCOTT BOWSER IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S PETITION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser, by and through their counsel, Susan P. Peipher, Esquire and Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C., hereby file the following Reply in Opposition to Plaintiff s Petition to Stay All Proceedings and in support thereof state as follows: It is admitted only that Plaintiff commenced this action by Complaint on June 8, 2006. Defendants deny any liability to Plaintiff. SPP:SLB/dhm 429910.1 ( 22433.004) 12/22106 2. Denied. Defendants deny the characterization of Plaintiff's claims. The Plaintiff's Complaint is a written document, the terms of which speak for themselves. By way of further answer, the particular causes of action brought against Defendants include: Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations, Intentional Interference with Existing and Prospective Contractual and/or Business Relations, Unfair Competition Violations, Commercial/Business Disparagement, and Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. By way of further answer, pursuant to a letter from Defendants' counsel dated September 11, 2006 to Plaintiff's counsel, Defendant Faire terminated the Master Merchant Participation Agreement effective October 29, 2006. A true and correct copy of counsel's letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. By way of further answer, the Counterclaim asserts a claim for breach of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement. In particular, the Counterclaim asserts that Plaintiff has misreported the sales made during her tenure as a participating merchant and she has underpaid her percentage payments to the Faire. 8. Admitted. 2 SPP,SLB/dhm 429910.1 (22433.004) 12/22106 9. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that the date to respond to the Petition to Withdraw expires on December 28, 2006. Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to whether or not Ms. Bowman has been able to secure substitute counsel to date. 10. Denied as stated. Defendants have terminated the Master Merchant Participation Agreement for the reasons set forth in Exhibit "A." Under Section 5 (Termination) of the Agreement, Plaintiff has sixty days from October 29, 2006 to remove any of her structures, attached fixtures and/or enclosed equipment from the Faire grounds. If she fails to remove these items on or before December 28, 2006, she is deemed to have forfeited possession of those items to the Faire who shall become the owner of the property thereafter. A true and correct copy of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement is attached to Defendants' Answer with New Matter and Counterclaim as Exhibit "A." 11. Denied as stated. The Counterclaim raised by Defendants relates to the misreporting of sales made by Plaintiff and the underpayment of percentage payments to the Faire. Defendants have not asserted a Counterclaim regarding the provision in the Agreement addressing forfeiture of personal property sixty (60) days after termination of the Agreement. Such issue is outside the scope of the instant lawsuit and is a matter that has not been brought before this Court by the Plaintiff or the Defendants. 12. Denied. It is denied that the Agreement is not enforceable and void ab initio and that the forfeiture provisions are unconscionable, invalid and cannot be enforced under public policy. 13. Denied. It is denied that a stay of proceedings is warranted or necessary in order to permit Plaintiff sufficient time to secure new counsel to review the case and assess it for further 3 SPP,:SLB/dhm 429910.1 ( 22433.004) 12/22/06 action. Pursuant to the Petition of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, Plaintiff's counsel notified Plaintiff back on October 2, 2006 that they would be compelled to withdraw as counsel for nonpayment of fees rendered through September unless payment was made by October 31, 2006. Plaintiffs counsel filed their Petition for Leave to withdraw on December 4, 2006. Defendants submit that Plaintiff has had more than sufficient time to secure alternative counsel. Furthermore, at all times Plaintiff has been adequately represented by her counsel who have had notice of the termination of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement and the forfeiture provisions since September 11, 2006. Plaintiff has failed to cite any compelling reason for a stay of these proceedings. 14. Denied. It is denied that Defendants will not be prejudiced by a stay of these proceedings. To the contrary, the Faire needs adequate time to retrofit, remove or remodel Plaintiff's stands. Furthermore, "enforcement of the alleged forfeiture provision under the Agreement" is not at all relevant or at issue in the instant lawsuit. A stay of proceedings which prohibits the Defendant Faire from proceeding under the terms of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement and its September 11, 2006 letter is improper. 15. It is admitted that the undersigned counsel was contacted with regard to the Petition for Stay on the day of its filing. Counsel for Defendants informed counsel for Plaintiff that Defendants do not concur with the Petition for Stay. 16. Denied. It is denied that Defendants will not be prejudiced by a stay of these proceedings. To the contrary, the Faire needs adequate time to retrofit, remove or remodel Plaintiff's stands. Furthermore, "enforcement of the alleged forfeiture provision under the Agreement" is not 4 SPP..SLB/dhm 429910.1 (22433.004) 12/22/06 at all relevant or at issue in the instant lawsuit. A stay of proceedings which prohibits the Defendant Faire from proceeding under the terms of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement and its September 11, 2006 letter is improper. WHEREFORE, Defendant Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request that this Court deny Plaintiff's Petition to Stay all proceedings. 4 s vw Dated: I a BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquir Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) SPP:SLB/dhm 429910.1 ( 22433.004 ) 12/22/06 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have this day served the foregoing Reply of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser in Opposition to Plaintiffs Petition to Stay All Proceedings upon the person and in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail as follows: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Dated: 2-0aA0 BL,4KINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P. C. By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Attorney I.D. #87580 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 (717) 299-1100 Attorneys for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) 6 4, kjo- 4 Blakinger,Byler&Thomas, P.C. Attomeys at Law James H. Thomas Frank P. Mincarelli Stephen M. Kraybill Dan A. Blakingcr Barry A. Solodky Susan E. Grosh Frank J. Vargish, III George T. Cook Jesse C. Robinson Kim Caner Paterson Theresa A. Mongiovi Richard B. Posey Aaron S. Marines Susan P. Peiphcr Aaron D. Hollis Jonathan R. Hofstetter Or Counsel Edward L. Miller Michael D. Bull -1 Retired Richard J. Blakinger 7 Charles B. Grove, Jr. (1958-1985) Samuel S. Wenger (1938-1989) M. Elvin Byler (1965-1992) 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 717-299-1100 Fax 717-299-9529 hLtp://www.bbt-la%v.com September 11, 2006 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire 200 North Third Street P.O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Writer's Direct Dial Number: (717) 509-7239 E-MAIL: spp@bbt-law.com Re: Termination of Master Merchant Participation Agreement Between Mazza Vineyards, Inc. and Christina Bowman Dear Ms. Glinn: Please be advised that pursuant to Section 5 (Termination) of the Master Merchant Participation Agreement between our clients, my client has elected to terminate Ms. Bowman's participation in the Faire effective October 29, 2006, the last day of the Faire season. The termination is based upon Ms. Bowman's material failure to follow and abide by the terms and conditions of the Agreement and the Universal Policies and Procedures of the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire. In particular, but without limitation, your client has conducted herself during the current Faire season in a discourteous, uncooperative, and inappropriate and unbecoming manner which is inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Faire. In particular, it has been noted that Ms. Bowman has attempted to garner support for her lawsuit and agitate the merchant community by speaking to other vendors at the Faire about the alleged bases for the lawsuit and in doing so has made defamatory remarks about the Faire and Mr. Bowser. Her conduct has been so egregious that one vendor has been forced to block her number from incoming calls. Furthermore, Ms. Bowman has consistently run out of products during the course of the Faire season which has resulted in a loss of business to Ms. Bowman and the Faire and become an inconvenience and disappointment to Faire patrons. Should Ms. Bowman continue to engage in such conduct from this point forward, the termination of her participation in the Faire shall take effect immediately and not as of the end of the Faire season. Finally, Ms. Bowman has failed to make the required improvements and modifications to her concessions which modifications and improvements have been mandated by the Faire, and in each case, made by all merchants except for Ms. Bowman. September 11, 2006 Page 2 Please advise your client of the contents of this letter immediately. In addition, you should advise Ms. Bowman that her presence on the grounds of the Faire must be strictly limited to Faire business during normal business hours. Upon the effective date of termination of Ms. Bowman's concession agreement with the Faire, be it October 29 or sooner, Ms. Bowman will not be permitted on the Faire site at any time for any purpose, except as shall have been arranged by me through your office. Very truly yours Susan P. PeiPher SPP:dhm cc: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. #419888.1=433.004 -77 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire : and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio . Defendants MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW Plaintiff's counsel respectfully request this Honorable Court to make absolute the Rule To Show Cause regarding the Petition for Leave to Withdraw of J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire and Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the law firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP (hereinafter "Petitioners") which was issued in the above-captioned matter on December 8, 2006, upon responding parties' failure to answer and in support states the following: 1. Petitioners filed a Petition to Withdraw as Plaintiff's counsel on December 1, 2006. 1 2. On December 8, 2006, this Court issued a rule on Christina Bowman and/or Defendants Scott Bowser and Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire (collectively hereinafter the "Defendants"), returnable within 20 days, the 28`' day of December, 2006 at Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas. 3. On December 8, 2006, a copy of the rule to be served on counsel for Defendants was sent by regular mail by the Court. See copy dated and initialed by `RKS' attached at Exhibit `A.' 4. Both Defendants and Ms. Bowman have failed to answer Petitioners' Petition to Withdraw as Counsel to date, despite the day for a response passing on December 28, 2006. 5. On December 27, 2006, Ms. Bowman filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy without Petitioners' knowledge, listing the claim for attorneys' fees; her counsel in the bankruptcy is Dorothy L. Mott, Esquire. 6. To date, upon information and belief, gained in part from Ms. Mott, and based upon information from defense counsel Susan Peipher, Attorney Mott has been attempting to devise a global resolution of the bankruptcy and this action pending in Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas. Petitioners were not involved in the negotiation as Attorney Mott has been serving as Ms. Bowman's counsel in that regard. 7. Upon information and belief, making absolute the Rule upon the Petition to Withdraw is permissible under the automatic stay provisions under the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §362, because the withdrawal does not seek collection of a debt nor any interests of the bankruptcy estate, and therefore is not an action subject to the automatic stay. 2 WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, Petitioners J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire and Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the law firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP hereby request that this Court make the rule to show cause absolute and grant Petitioners' leave to withdraw their appearance for Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, in this action. Respectfully submitted by: NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP B J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID #24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 200 North Third Street, 18th Floor P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Phone: 717-236-3010 Fax: 717-234-1925 Date: March 21, 2007 3 J. Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a : CIVIL ACTION - LAW the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, : No. 06-3261 Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire TR,k!F 'A ?+CORD and in his individual capacity), my hand and Carmelo Claudio In tIe, Pa. and he sf;ai of . Defendants Th's ••.•• da • ` • .w A I1fYRULE AND NOW, this F r day of December, 2006, upon consideration of Petition of Plaintiffs Counsel for Leave to Withdraw, a rule is granted upon Christina Bowman and/or Defendants Mazza Vineyard, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) to show cause why the Plaintiff's Counsel should not be granted leave to withdraw. Rule returnable 2006, in Court om I?Io at-- a r t. a r,,,,,.,+, r rt- r-- -!-' Aisle; PeHnsyluan.ia.--- BY THE COURT: RECVCIEU PAPER i NECYCEABII A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, on the date stated below, I, Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire, of the firm of Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, LLP, hereby certify that I this day served the foregoing Motion to Make Rule Absolute Regarding Plaintiff's Counsel for Leave to Withdraw by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to the following: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Christina Bowman Box 34 Bowmansdale, PA 17008 NAUMAN, SMITH, SHISSLER & HALL, LLP By: Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID # 84737 Date: March 21, 2007 C ?. C=1 -n .f MAR 2 3 2007 / I Stephen Feinour, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 24580 Lucinda C. Glinn, Esquire Supreme Court ID No. 84737 200 North Third Street P. O. Box 840 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0840 Telephone: (717) 236-3010 Counsel for Christina Bowman CHRISTINA BOWMAN : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, Scott Bowser (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and Carmelo Claudio Defendants : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : No. 06-3261 ORDER AND NOW, this Z V day of /h 4_44 , 2007, upon consideration of the foregoing Motion to Make Rule Absolute Regarding Plaintiff's Counsel for Leave to Withdraw, that the aforesaid Motion is HEREBY GRANTED, and as of the date of this Order, Petitioners are acknowledged to no longer be counsel of record in the above-captioned action. Ms. Bowman may elect to seek alternate counsel or continue pro se. BY THE COURT: J. Distribution List: The Honorable Kevin A. Hess ` /°Usan P. Peipher, Esquire orothy Mott, Esquire A?ecinda C. Glinn, Esquire 6stma Bowman 6 Z: I P R 6 ZR Loot CHRISTINA BOWMAN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 06-3261 MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC, tldlbla CIVIL ACTION - LAW the PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and CARMELO CLAUDIO Defendants TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND NOW, this day of December 2007, comes the undersigned counsel, Joseph L. Hitchings, Esquire and r spectfully requests that his appearance be entered on behalf of the Plaintiff, Christina Bowman, in the above-captioned case. Respectfully submitted, MCSHANE & MTCHINGS, LLC 3 eph L. Hitchin Esquire Attorney Identification No.: 65551 4807 Jonestown Road, Suite 148 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109 Telephone: (717) 657-3900 Fax: (717) 657-2060 Attorney for Plaintiff CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff V. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC, t/d/b/a the PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and CARMELO CLAUDIO Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-3261 CIVIL ACTION - LAW TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Joseph L. Hitchings, Esquire, hereby certify that the following service has been completed in compliance with the Rules of Civil Procedure: Via first class mail Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Blyer, & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Respectfully submitted, MCSHANE & HITCHINGS, LLC ph L. Hitchings, Es ' e Attorney Identification No.: 65551 4807 Jonestown Road, Suite 148 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109 Telephone: (717) 657-3900 Fax: (717) 657-2060 Attorney for Plaintiff I°v-3 T`u FT1 Robert E. Kelly, Jr. PA ID No. 21925 Anthony W. Parker PA ID No. 81251 KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP 300 North 2nd Street - 10th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 717-920-2220 FAX 717-920-2370 rkellya,kK-law.corn aparker@knc-law.com CHRISTINA BOWMAN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC., t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE NO. 06-3261 FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER (as agent/ employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter our appearance on behalf of Plaintiff Christina Bowman. We are authorized to accept service of all documents in this matter. Respectfully submitted, R ert E. elly, Jr. PA . 21925 Anthony W. Parker PA ID No. 81251 KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP 300 North 2"d Street, 10`h Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 717-920-2220 FAX 717- 920-2370 rkellyAkpc-law.com gparker@,kDc-law.com Dated: March 25, 2009 Counsel for Plaintiff Christina Bowman CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 25 h day of March 2009, I, Pamela L. Russell, a legal secretary with the law firm Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid in Harrisburg, PA: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Counsel for Defendants N C" ?s k f ? h ` of a L` f ? «{ } PO Y Robert E. Kelly, Jr. PA ID No. 21925 Anthony W. Parker PA ID No. 81251 KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 717-920-2220 FAX 717-920-2370 rkelly@kpc-law.com aparkergkpc-law.com CHRISTINA BOWMAN, V. Plaintiff MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC., t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER (as agent/ employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 06-3261 PRAECIPE FOR LAW FIRM AND COUNSEL CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please change the address for the law firm of Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP and the following counsel: Robert E. Kelly, Jr. (PA ID No. 21925) Anthony W. Parker (PA ID No. 81251) Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP 5425 Jonestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 The telephone number, facsimile number, and e-mail addresses remain as before. Respectfully submitted, PA ID No. 81251 KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 717-920-2220 FAX 717-920-2370 rkellyna nc-law.com aparker kkpc-law.com Dated: September 18, 2009 Counsel for Plaintiff Christina Bowman 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 18'' day of September 2009, I, Pamela L. Russell, a legal secretary with the law firm Kelly, Parker & Cohen LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR LAW FIRM AND COUNSEL CHANGE OF ADDRESS upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid in Harrisburg, PA: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Counsel for Defendants !CF THE 2009 SEP 2 l C i 2: 4 7 ?.Lr,,a N i..; BLAKINGER, BYLER&THOMAS, P.C. By: Susan P. Peipher,Esquire ROT"" T HO 0 R-Y Attorney I.D. #87580 2013 3 (717) 509-7239 AH 11. Email: sppkbbt-law.com CUMBERLAND COUNTY 28 Penn Square PENNSYLVANIA Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff V. No. 06-3261 Civil Term MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY) Defendants MOTION OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS,INC., t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE AND SCOTT BOWSER FOR NON PROS Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser,by and through their attorneys,Susan P. Peipher,Esquire and Blakinger,Byler&Thomas, P.C., hereby move this Court for an Order of Non Pros against Plaintiff Christina Bowman and, in support thereof, avers the following: 1. This action was instituted by Complaint filed on June 8, 2006. 2. On December 27,2006,Plaintiff filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Consequently, further action in this matter was stayed. 3. On, January 23, 2008, Plaintiff received her discharge in bankruptcy. 4. On March 29, 2009, counsel for Plaintiff, Kelly,Parker& Cohen, LLP,entered its appearance on behalf of Plaintiff. 5. Other than documents relating to the appearance of counsel, no substantive filings have been made since Plaintiff received her bankruptcy discharge. 6. Plaintiff engaged in limited discovery in December 2010 by serving Interrogatories and Requests for Production on Defendants. 7. No further substantive action has taken place in this matter since Defendants' discovery responses were served in January 2011. 8. In August 2012,this case appeared on the Court's termination list. 9. On September 18,2012,Plaintiff avoided automatic termination of her case by filing a Statement of Intention to Proceed. 10. No additional proceedings have taken place in this case since September 18, 2012. 11. Counsel for Defendants has recently inquired of Plaintiffs counsel about the whereabouts of a critical witness for a deposition. Plaintiffs counsel has not responded to those inquiries. 12. This action has been pending for nearly seven(7)years. 13. There has been a lack of due diligence on the part of the Plaintiff in failing to proceed with reasonable promptitude. 14. The Plaintiff has no compelling reason for the delay. 15. Plaintiff's delay in pursuing this action has caused actual prejudice to the Defendants. 16. Upon information and belief,a material witness critical to Plaintiff's prosecution of her claims against Defendants cannot be located and is not within the jurisdiction of this Court. 17, The Honorable Kevin A. Hess previously entered an Order in this matter. 2 WHEREFORE, Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire,and Scott Bowser respectfully request this Court to enter a judgment of non pros in their favor and against the Plaintiff dismissing Plaintiff s action in its entirety. BL INGER, B THOMAS, P.C. Dated: By: I u n P. Peipher, Esquir Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: Vp@bbt-law.com 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing Motion of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc., t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for Non upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Service by First Class Mail Addressed as Follows: Anthony W. Parker, Esquire KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 BLA NGER, B THOMAS,P.C. Dated:_ �()316 l3 By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquir Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: spp&bbt-law com 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants 00666618/ (22433.004) FILED-OFFICE BLAKINGER, BYLER& THOMAS, P.C. OF THE PROTE-EONoTAE,y By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Attorney I.D..#87580 2813 MAY _9 AM I I_ �6 (717) 509-7239 CUMBERLAND COUNTY Email: sppQbbt-law.com 28 Penn Square Lancaster,PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff/Respondent V. No. 06-3261 Civil Term MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY) Defendants/Petitioners PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly withdraw the Motion of Defendants Mazza Vineyards,Inc.t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for Non Pros which was filed with the Court on May 3,2013. BLAKI GER,BYL THOMAS, P.C. Dated: By: 1 Susan P. Peipher, Esquir Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: sspl2@bbt-law.com. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing Praecipe to Withdraw upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Service by First Class Mail Addressed as Follows: Anthony W. Parker, Esquire KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 BLAKIN ER, BYLE HOMAS,P.C. J%. I� Dated: 1--/ By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: spp&bbt-law.com 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants r Gr T! � R0-T 'C f° BLAKINGER, BYLER& THOMAS, P.C. Any By: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire 20 1 3 tm IV Attorney I.D. #87580 pt-1 f' � (717) 509-7239 UrPENNSYLVA OUNTY Email: sppnbbt-law.com NIA 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff/Respondent V. No. 06-3261 Civil Term MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY) Defendants/Petitioners PETITION OF DEFENDANTS MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC., t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE AND SCOTT BOWSER FOR NON PROS Defendants/Petitioners Mazza Vineyards,Inc.t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser, by and through their attorneys, Susan P. Peipher, Esquire and Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C., hereby petition the Court to enter a judgment of non pros against Plaintiff Christina Bowman and, in support thereof, aver the following: 1. This action was instituted by Complaint filed on June 8, 2006. 2. On December 27, 2006, Respondent filed for Chapter-13 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Consequently, further action in this matter was stayed. 3. On,January 23,2008,Respondent received her discharge in bankruptcy. A true and correct copy of the Discharge Order issued by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on January 23, 2008 is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"A." 4. On March 29, 2009, counsel for Respondent, Kelly,Parker& Cohen, LLP, entered its appearance on behalf of Respondent. 5. Other than documents relating to the appearance of counsel, no substantive filings have been made since Respondent received her bankruptcy discharge. 6. Respondent engaged in limited discovery in December 2010 by serving Interrogatories and Requests for Production on Petitioners. A true and correct copy of the December 13, 2010 letter serving discovery requests upon counsel for Petitioners is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit`B." 7. No further substantive action has taken place in this matter since Petitioners' discovery responses were served in January 2011. A true and correct copy of the January 13, 2011 cover letter serving Petitioners' responses to the discovery requests upon counsel for Respondent is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"C." 8. In August 2012, this case appeared on the Court's termination list. 9. On September 18, 2012, Respondent avoided automatic termination of her case by filing a Statement of Intention to Proceed. 10. No activity has taken place in this case since September 18, 2012. 11. This action has been pending for nearly seven(7)years. 12. There has been a lack of due diligence on the part of the Respondent in failing to proceed with reasonable promptitude. 13. The Respondent has no compelling reason for the delay. 2 14. Respondent's delay in pursuing this action has caused actual prejudice to the Petitioners. 15. Upon information and belief,a material witness critical to Respondent's prosecution of her claims against Petitioners cannot be located and is not within the jurisdiction of this Court. 16. When this action was originally filed, an individual named Claudio Carmello was named as a defendant. 17. Respondent alleged that Mr. Carmello entered into an agreement to purchase her business but failed to consummate the sale based on statements by Petitioners. See, Complaint,¶¶ 11-13, 18-20. 18. Specifically, Respondent contends that Petitioners advised Mr. Carmello that the business was worth approximately$105,000.00 less than Mr.Carmello had agreed to pay for it. See, Complaint, ¶¶ 18-20. 19. Mr.Carmello was dismissed as a party to this suit by Order of Court dated September 29, 2006. 20. Mr.Carmello's testimony is essential to the claims and defenses raised by the parties. 21. Counsel for Petitioners has been unable to locate Mr. Carmello. 22. Counsel for Petitioners has repeatedly inquired of Respondent's current counsel and prior counsel about the whereabouts of Mr. Carmello for a deposition. 23. By letter dated March 13, 2008, Petitioners' counsel inquired as to whether Respondent's prior counsel had a current address for Mr. Carmello. A true and correct copy of the March 13, 2008 letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"D." 3 24. By letter dated January 21, 2011, Petitioners' counsel inquired as to whether Respondent's counsel had a current address for Mr. Carmello. A true and correct copy of the January 21, 2011 letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"E." 25. As part of an email dated March 13, 2013, Petitioners' counsel requested that Respondent's counsel provide Mr. Carmello's current address so that he could be subpoenaed for a deposition. A true and correct copy of the relevant portions of the March 13, 2013 e-mail is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"F." 26. By letter dated March 27, 2013, Petitioners' counsel again requested that Respondent's counsel provide Mr. Carmello's current address so that he could be subpoenaed for a deposition. A true and correct copy of the March 27, 2013 letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"G." 27. By letter dated April 9,2013,Petitioners' counsel again requested that Respondent's counsel provide Mr. Carmello's current address. A true and correct copy of the April 9,2013 letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit"H." 28. To date,Respondent's counsel has not provided a current address for Mr. Carmello and, as a result, his deposition cannot be scheduled. 29. In the absence of such testimony,Respondent cannot proceed on her claims against Petitioners. 30. The Honorable Kevin A. Hess previously entered an Order in this matter. 31. Petitioners' counsel sought the concurrence of Respondent's counsel with respect to the filing of this Petition and the relief requested and Respondent's counsel has indicated that he does not concur with the relief requested. 4 WHEREFORE, Petitioners/Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser respectfully request this Court enter a judgment of non pros in their favor and against the Respondent/Plaintiff dismissing Plaintiff's action in its entirety. BLAK GER, BYLER& THOMAS, P.C. Dated: �� By: Susan Peipher, Esquire Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: sppkbbt-law.com 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants 5 VERIFICATION I, SUSAN P. PEIPHER, ESQUIRE, do hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Petition of Defendants Mazza Vineyards,Inc.t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for Non Pros are true and correct. I further verify that I am making this verification because Defendants lack personal knowledge regarding the facts contained in the Petition and I,as counsel,have personal knowledge of the facts based on my communications with counsel for Respondent. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. BLAKINGER, BYLER& THOMAS, P.C. Dated: SJ1 U By: _ _ Susan . Peipher, Esqui e CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing Petition of Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc., t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for Non Pros upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Service by First Class Mail Addressed as Follows: Anthony W. Parker, Esquire KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 BLAK LAGER, BYL THOMAS, P.C. Dated: ( By: Sus eipher, Esqtiir e Attorney I.D. #87580 (717) 509-7239 Email: spp@.bbt-law.com 28 Penn Square . Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorneys for Defendants 00684525/ (22433.004) 6 • `� ti wr� rY i f �. � f _ �. � a ,,..; � l:. 1N'Date/Time MAR-05-2008 (WED) 16: 45 717 232 0477 P. 001 , Mar ,05 2008 4: 49PM Dorothy L Mott, Esquire 717-232-0477 P. 1 BISW(06107) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA In re:Debtar(s)(name(s)used by the debtmf s)in the last 8 ycros,including married,maiden,end wade): Christina Fortney Bowman Chapter 13 dba The Huatsman,dba Nachos of Nottingham,dba Case No. 1:06—bk-02993—RNO Frozen Banana& Smoothie Cart,dba Frozen Banana Stand PO Box 34. Bowrnansdale,PA 170M Last four digits of SociaFSecurity,Individual Taxpayer—Identification,Employer Tax—Identification No(s)(if any): )0x—xx-9064 25-1889434 DISCHARGE OF DEBTOR AFTER COMPLETION OF CHAPTER 13 PLAN It appearing that the debtor is entitled to a discharge, IT IS ORDERED: The debtor is granted a discharge under section 1328(a)of title 11,United States Code,(the Bankruptcy Code). BY THE COURT Dated:hmum 2,2M8 Honorable Robert N.Opel United States Bankruptcy Judge SEE THE BACK OF THIS ORDER FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION. This document is electronically signed andf led on the same date. Rx Date/Time MAR-05-2008 (WED) 16: 45 717 232 0477 P. 002 Mar 05 2008 4: 49PM Dorothy L Mott, Esquire 717-232-0477 p. 2 FORM B 18W continued(08/07) EXPLANATION OF BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE IN A CHAPTER 13 CASE This court order grants a discharge to the person named as the debtor after the debtor has completed all payments under the chapter 13 plan.It is not a dismissal of the rase. C'olloction of DLcharged Debts Prohibited The discharge prohibits any attempt to collect from the debtor a debt that has been discharged.For example,a creditor is not permitted to contact a debtor by mail,phone,or otherwise,to file or continue a lawsuit,to attach wages or other property,or to take any other action to collect a discharged debt from the debtor.[In a case involving community property:][There are also special rules that protect certain community property owned by the debtor's spouse,even if that spouse did not file a bankruptcy case.]A creditor who violates this order can be required to pay damages and attorney's fees to the debtor. However,a creditor may have the riot to enforce a valid lien,such as a mortgage or security interest,against the debtor's property after the bankruptcy,if that lien was not avoided or eliminated in the bankruptcy case.Also,a debtor may voluntarily pay any debt that has been discharged. Debts That are Discharged The chapter 13 discharge order eliminates a debtor's legal obligation to pay a debt that is discharged.Most,but not all,types of debts are discharged if the debt is provided for by the chapter 13 plan or is disallowed by the court pursuant to section 502 of the Bankruptcy Code. Deltas that are Not Discharged, Some of the common types of debts which are aDl discharged in a chapter 13 banlauptcy case are: a.Domestic support obligations; b.Debts for most student loans; c.Debts for most fines,penalties, forfeitures,or criminal restitution obligations; d.Debts for personal injuries or death caused by the debtor's operation of a motor vehicle,vessel,or aircraft while intoxicated; e.Debts for restitution,or damages,awarded in a civil action against the debtor as a result of malicious or willful injury by the debtor that caused personal injury to an individual or the death of an individual(in a case filed on or after October 17,2005); f.?debts provided for under section 1322(b)(5)of the Bankruptcy Code and on which the last payment is due after the date on which the final payment under the plan was due; g.Debts for certain consumer purchases wade after the bankruptcy case was filed if prior approval by the trustee of the debtor's incurring the debt was practicable but was not obtained;and h.Debts for most taxes to the extend not paid in full under the plan(in a case filed on or after October 17, 2005);and i. Some debts which were not properly liter by the debtor(in a case filed on or after October 17,2005). This information is only a general summary of the bankruptcy discharge.There are exceptions to these general rules.Because the inw is complicated,you may want to consult an attorney to determine the exact effect of the discharge in this case. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5425 JONESTOwN ROAD SUITE 103 HARRISBURG,PA 17112 TELEPHONE(717)920-2220 FACSIMILE(717)920-2370 Anthony W.Parker Extension 115 aparker @kpc-law.com December 13, 2010 Susan P.Peipher, Esquire Blakinger, Byler& Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Re: Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, Inc., t/d/h/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, et al. No. 06-3261 Dear Ms.Peipher: Enclosed please find for service Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents of Plaintiff Christina Bowman Directed to Defendant Mazza Vineyards, Inc., t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire—First Set. Please respond in the time permitted by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Very truly yours, Anthon W. Parker AWP/plr Enclosures x E 1'"n (Ji=C Z) NI T; .. , r 28 Penn Square Writer's Direct Dial Number: . . i Lancaster,PA 17603 (717)509-7239 . . I 717-299-1100 E-MAIL: spp@bbt-law.com Fax 717-299-9529 Blakinger,Byler&Thomas,P.C. http://www.bbt-law.com 4 1 Attorneys at Law James H.Thomas January 13 2011 Frank P Mincarelli , Stephen M.Kraybill Dan A.Blakinger Barry A.Solodky Susan E.Grosh Frank J.Vargish,III George T.Cook Anthony W. Parker, Esquire Jesse.C.Robinson Kim Carter Paterson KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP Theresa A.Mongiovi 5425 Jonestown Road Richard B.Posey Edward L.Miller Suite 103 Aaron S.Marines Harrisburg, PA 17112 Susan P Peipher Aaron D.Hollis' Jonathan R.Horstetter Re: Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d1h1a Pennsylvania Brian R.Wilson Angela H.Sanders Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser(as agent/employee of Faire and in his Jill M.Lasko"n` individual capacity) 1 Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas `LL.M.in Taxation Docket No.: 06-3261 Civil Term Dear Mr. Parker: Retired Richard J.Blakinger Michael D.Bull Enclosed please find Defendants'Answers to Interrogatories and Reply to the Requests M for Production of Documents of Plaintiff. Charles B.Grove,Jr. (1958-1985) Very truly your Samuel S.Wenger (1938-1989) ! \\\r M.Elvin Byler (1965-1992) / Susan P. Peipher SPP:crh Enclosures cc: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. #579739.1/22433.004 �, / � J 1 28 Penn Square Writer's Direct Dial Number: . . Lancaster,PA 17603 (717)509-7239 . . 717-299-1100 E-MAIL: spp@bbt-law.com bbt-law.com Fax 717-299-9529 Blakinger,Byler&Thomas,P.C. http://www.bbt-law.com Attorneys at Law James H.Thomas March 13, 2008 Frank P.Mincarelli Stephen M.Kraybill Dan A.Blakinger Barry A.Solodky Susan E.Grosh Frank J.Vargish,III George T.Cook Jesse C.Robinson Kim Carter Paterson Theresa A.Mongiovi Richard B.Posey Edward L.Miner Joseph L. Hitchings, Esquire Aaron S Marines s McShane & Hitchings,Susan P.Peipher g � Aaron D.Hollis" 4807 Jonestown Road, Suite 148 Jonathan R.Hostetter Randall M.Justice Harrisburg, PA 17109 Brian R.Wilson Re: Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire, and Scott Bowser and Carmelo Claudio `LL.M.in Taxation Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas No. 06-3261 Civil Term Retired Dear Mr. Hitchings: Richard J.Blakinger Michael D.Bull Thank you for your letter of March 11, 2008. I would appreciate if you would E-:: specifically identify those individuals you wish to depose so that I can provide you Charles B.Grove,Jr. with dates that they are available. Initially, however, I think it would be prudent for (1958-1985) us to begin by deposing Carmelo Claudio. Please advise whether you or your client Samuel S.Wenger have a current address for Mr. Claudio so that we can issue an appropriate subpoena. (1938-1989) M.Elvin Byler Thank you for your assistance with this matter. (1965-1992) Very truly yours;., S'us;an P. Peip her SPP:dhm cc: Mazza Vineyards #473389.1/22433.004 28 Penn Square Writer's Direct Dial Number: . . Lancaster,PA 17603 (717)509-7239 . . 717-299-1100 E-MAIL:spp @bbt-law.com Fax 717-299-9529 Blakinger,Byler&Thomas,P.C. http://www.bbt-law.com Attorneys at Law James H.Thomas January 21, 2011 Frank P.Mincarelli Stephen M.Kraybill Dan A.Blakinger Barry A.Solodky Susan E.Grosh Frank J.Vargish,III George T.Cook Anthony W. Parker, Esquire Jesse C.Robinson KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP Kim Carter Paterson Theresa A.Mongiovi 5425 Jonestown Road Richard B.Posey Suite 103 Edward L.Miller Aaron S.Marines Harrisburg, PA 17112 Susan P.Peipher Aaron D.Hollis" Jonathan R.Hofstetter Re: Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a Pennsylvania Brian R.Wilson Angela H.Sanders Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser(as agentlemployee of Faire and in his Jill M.Laskowitz individual capacity) W Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas LL.M.in Taxation Docket No.: 06-3261 Civil Term Dear Tony: Retired Richard J.Blakinger Michael D.Bull Please let me know if you have a current address for Carmelo Claudio so I may 0 subpoena him for a deposition in the above referenced matter. Charles B.Grove,Jr. Thank you for our courtesy in this matter. (1958-1985) Y Y Y Samuel S.Wenger (1938-1989) Very truly yours M.Elvin Byler \ 1 (1965-1992) u Peipher SPP:crh cc: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. #580727.1/22433.004 Susan P. Peipher From: Susan P. Peipher Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 4:02 PM To: 'Anthony W. Parker' Subject: RE: Christina Bowman Tony, REDACTED Please provide me with Mr. Claudio's current address so we can make arrangements to subpoena him for his deposition. Thanks. Susan . r REDACTED 28 Penn Square Writer's Direct Dial Number: 1 . `. Lancaster,PA 17603 (717)509-7239 11"NA 717-299-1100 —v— E-MAIL:spp @bbt-law.com Fax 717-299-9529 Blakinger,Byler&Thomas,P.C. http://www.bbt-law.com . Attorneys at Law March 27, 2013 James H.Thomas Frank P.Mincarelli Stephen M.Kraybill Dan A.Blakinger Susan E.Grosh VIA E-MAIL aparkerkhpc-law-com Frank J.Vargish,III and FIRST CLASS MAIL George T.Cook Jesse C.Robinson Kim Carter Paterson Theresa A.Mongiovi Anthony W. Parker, Esquire Aaron S.Marines KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP Susan R Peipher Aaron D.Hollis* 5425 Jonestown Road D.Mark Grimm,Jr. Suite 103 Edward L.Miller Jonathan R.Hofstetter Harrisburg, PA 17112 Angela H.Sanders Jill M.Laskowitz Charles H.Rieck,IV Re; Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County Docket No. 06-3261 *LL.M.in Taxation Ge Dear Tony: Retired Richard J.Blakinger Please provide me with Carmelo Claudio's current address before the end of this month Michael D.Bull Richard B.Posey so we can be in touch with him to arrange for his deposition. Thank you for your anticipated courtesy in this matter. Charles B.Grove,Jr. (1958-1985) Samuel S.Wenger ery truly yours (1938-1989) M.Elvin Byler (1965-1992) `� 4 n P. Peipher SPP:crh cc: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. 00677772/ (22433.004) 28 Penn Square Writer's Direct Dial Number: . Lancaster,PA 17603 (717)509-7239 717-299-1100 Fax 717-299-9529 E-MAIL:spp @bbt-law.com Blakinger,Byler&Thomas,P.C. http://www.bbt-law.com Attorneys at Law April 9, 2013 James H.Thomas Frank P Mincarelli Stephen M.Kraybill Dan A.Blakinger Susan E.Grosh VIA E-MAIL aparkerka,kpc-law.com Frank Cook Varok 111 George T.Coo and FIRST CLASS MAIL Jesse C.Robinson Kim Carter Paterson Theresa A.Mongiovi Anthony W. Parker, Esquire Aaron S.Marines KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP Susan P.Peipher Aaron D.Hollis` 5425 Jonestown Road D.Mark Grimm,Jr. Suite 103 Edward L.Miller Jonathan R.Hofstetter Harrisburg, PA 17112 Angela H.Sanders Jill M.Laskowitz Charles H.Rieck,IV Re: Christina Bowman v. Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a Pennsylvania W Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser 'LL.M.in Taxation Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County Docket No. 06-3261 0 Dear Tony: Retired Richard J.Blakinger I have now requested on multiple occasions that you provide me with the current Michael D.Bull q p y P Richard B.Posey address for Mr. Claudio. May I assume that you do not have a current address and your W client is unable to proceed with litigation of her claim? Please let me hear from you Charles B.Grove,Jr. upon receipt of this letter. (1.958-1985) Samuel S.Wenger Thank you for your anticipated courtesy in this matter. (1938-1989) M.Elvin Byler AY truly yo (1965-1992) Su a . Peipher SPP:crh cc: Mazza Vineyards, Inc. 00679624/ (22431004) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff V. rnQ7 E_ No. 06-3261 Civil Term MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE � ,L=, PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY) �= C') Defendants ORDER AND RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this 16 day of t� , 2013, upon consideration of the Petition of Defendants Mazza Vineyards,Inc.t/d/b/a The Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser for Non Pros, it is hereby ordered that (1) a Rule is issued upon the Respondent to show cause why the Petitioners are not entitled to the relief requested; (2) the Respondent shall file an answer to the Petition within 2 C3 days of the date of this Order; (3) the Petition shall be decided under Pa.R.C.P. No. 206.7; urge ss 4`1,-, --, oi, ' -� (4) � this matter shall be submitted to the Court on briefs rather than oral argument $,16«,: �- +c, ch&.-bars (a) the Petitioners shall fi4c a brief ,,within 30 days of the filing of Respondent's answer to the Petition; and snb M,1 -1-% CA a,l-k-1 (b) the Respondent shall file a brief within `i S' days of the filing of Petitioners' brief; and (5) notice of the entry of this Order shall be provided to all parties by the Petitioner. BY THE COURT: J. Attest: Copies to:_ '"Susa P :ipher, Esquir7(2) 011 TEiE-­ i,.i lR 0 T f i ON 0TARY Anthony W.Parker,Esquire I81251 Kelly, x. Kelly,,Parker&Cohen LLP '113 ;A 21 N11: 58 MAY 5425 Jonestown Road,Suite 103 Harrisburg,PA 17112 CUMBERLAND COUNTY 717-920-2220 PENNSYLVANIA FAX 717-920-2370 apgrker u�,k S-law;com CHRISTINA BOWMAN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC.,t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE NO. 06-3261 FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER(as agent/ employee of Faire and in his individual capacity), and CARMELO CLAUDIO, Defendants ANSWER OF RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF CHRISTINA BOWMAN TO DEFENDANTS' PETITION FOR NON PROS Respondent/Plaintiff Christina Bowman by and through her attorneys, Kelly Parker& Cohen, LLP,respectfully files her Answer to Petitioner/Defendant's Petition for Non Pros and, in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. ADMITTED. 2. ADMITTED. 3. ADMITTED. 4. ADMITTED. 5. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that motions for summary judgment or other dispositive motions have not been filed. As set forth in more detail below, it is DENIED that substantive action has not taken place since March 29, 2009. 6. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that on December 13, 2010 Respondent/Plaintiff served Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on Petitioner/Defendant. 7. DENIED. As set forth in this Answer,there have been substantive activities in this case since 2011. In addition, there has been another and parallel action in which issues very similar to those in this case have been litigated in the past few years to which the parties have been focusing their attention and resources which also serves to demonstrate that the Respondent/Plaintiff has not been refusing to attempt to proceed with and resolve this action. In June, 2009,the Petitioner/Defendant was sued in the Lancaster Court of Common Pleas by David Kirchner and Jon Jon at PRF, Inc., Docket No. 1086 MDA 2009, in which a cause of action similar to the one pending before this Court was asserted("Lancaster County Action"). Counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff also represented Mr. Kirchner and Jon Jon at PRF, Inc. Because many of the issues in the Lancaster County Action were similar or identical to those pending before this Court,Respondent/Plaintiff actively monitored the Lancaster County Action for developments in that case which may be applicable to this case or which may even operate to create a collateral estoppel effect. In fact, counsel for Responderit/Plaintiff even suggested to counsel for Petitioner/Defendant that the parties submit this matter to alternate dispute resolution in conjunction with the Lancaster County Action in order to avoid duplicative and unnecessary litigation costs for all parties. On August 14, 2012, David E. Lehman, Esq.I was appointed to serve as the arbitrator in the Lancaster County Action. At that time, counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff inquired of counsel for Petitioner/Defendant2 whether her client would agree to arbitrate this matter at the same time or with the same arbitrator as the Lancaster County Action. Ms. Peipher declined the suggested resolution at that time. As a result,counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff informed counsel for Mr.Lehman is now the principal of Lehman Mediation Services,LLC and formerly was a member of McNees, Wallace&Nurick,LLC, 2 The defendant in this action and the Lancaster County Action is represented by the same counsel, Susan P. Peipher,Esq. 2 Petitioner/Defendant that the Respondent/Plaintiff wanted to depose Karen and John Vucetik and Glenn Dettra:3 and requested that counsel provide convenient dates. However, counsel for Petitioner/Defendant never provided any deposition dates. The Lancaster County Action was scheduled for arbitration in December 2012 but settled shortly before Thanksgiving 2012. During the course of the settlement negotiations in the Lancaster County Action counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff again inquired about utilizing the scheduled arbitration for both actions but was informed by counsel for Petitioner/Defendant that her client preferred to complete the Lancaster County Action prior to discussing arbitration of this action. Accordingly, counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff refrained from further action in this action until completion of the Lancaster County Action. The Lancaster County Action settlement was completed in February 2013. On March 5, 2013, counsel for Respondent/Plaintiff communicated (via e-mail)with counsel for Petitioner/Defendant indicating that Respondent/Plaintiff wanted to proceed with the remaining discovery in this case and inquired whether the Petitioner/Defendant wished to discuss an amicable resolution before commencing the final discovery necessary for trial. See App. A. The parties briefly engaged in settlement discussions from March 5, 2013 to March 13, 2013 when Petitioner/Defendant abruptly terminated them. See App. A4. Shortly thereafter, Petitioner/Defendant filed a Motion for Non Pros which it later withdrew. Petitioner/Defendant subsequently filed the pending Petition. 8. ADMITTED that this case appeared as of course on the Court's termination list. 'Mr.and Mrs.Vucetik and Mr.Dettra are non-party witnesses with information relevant to this case as well as the Lancaster County Action. I Appendix A is the exchange of e-mails between counsel between March 5,and 13,2013,only the briefest portion of which was attached to the Petition as Exhibit F. Obviously,the redacting efforts of Petitioner/Defendant served to eliminate all of the substantive exchange between counsel creating the misleading impression on which Petitioner/Defendant relies in its Petition. 3 9. DENIED. Respondent/Plaintiff timely and properly filed a Statement of Intention to Proceed which was not opposed or objected to by Petitioner/Defendant. 10. DENIED as stated. Respondent/Plaintiff incorporates the remainder of her Answer, specifically including Paragraph 7, as if set forth at length. 11. ADMITTED that this action was filed in 2006, was delayed by operation of law for a number of years because of the Respondent/Plaintiff's Chapter 13 filing, and since 2009 the Respondent/Plaintiff has made regular and consistent efforts to resolve this matter. 12. DENIED as stated. Respondent/Plaintiff incorporates the remainder of her Answer, specifically including Paragraph 7, as if set forth at length. 13. DENIED as stated. There has been no unreasonable delay in this matter and,to the extent there has been delay, Petitioner/Defendant is equally responsible for any delay. Further, Respondent/Plaintiff incorporates the remainder of her Answer, specifically including Paragraph 7, as if set forth at length. 14. DENIED as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, Petitioner/Defendant has suffered no prejudice and has not provided the specific prejudice required by law. 15. DENIED. Respondent/Plaintiff is capable of establishing the elements necessary for her prima facie case through the testimony of four(4) witnesses other than Carmelo Claudio. Specifically, Petitioner/Defendant was presented with three (3) offers to purchase the concession stands at issue in this matter: one from Carmelo Claudio, one from Mr. Dettra and another from Mr. and Mrs. Vucetik. Mr. Dettra and Mr. and Mrs. Vucetik and Respondent/Plaintiff are all within the jurisdiction of this Court and are available to testify in support of Respondent/Plaintiff's claim. 4 Further, the availability or unavailability of Carmelo Claudio, a non-party witness, is not the responsibility of Respondent/Plaintiff and Petitioner/Defendant has the equal ability and equal obligation to locate Mr. Claudio if it wishes to take a deposition or to subpoena Mr. Claudio for trial. Further, Respondent/Plaintiff has a last known address for Mr. Claudio and is attempting to locate his current address. Finally, if Petitioner/Defendant sincerely believes that the testimony of Mr. Claudio is necessary for the Respondent/Plaintiff's prima facie case, then the proper process is to file a motion for summary judgment and not a petition for non pros. 16. ADMITTED. 17. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED Respondent/Plaintiff and Mr. Claudio entered into a contract for the sale of the concession stands. It is also a key fact in this case that Petitioner/Defendant interfered with the completion of that sale of the concession stands by asserting to Mr. Claudio and two other prospective purchasers (Mr. Dettra and Mr. and Mrs. Vucetik)that the concession stands were worth far less than the contracted for prices. See Complaint, Count II. It is further alleged in the Complaint the Petitioner/Defendant discouraged prospective buyers from purchasing the concession stands. See Complaint, ¶31. 18. ADMITTED. By way of further Answer, Petitioner/Defendant also conveyed this information to two other prospective buyers, who offered to buy the concession stands for this price but were told the stands would not be conveyed to any entity other than the Faire. 19. ADMITTED. 20. DENIED. Respondent/Plaintiff is able to establish her prima facie case through other testimony and documents. 5 21. DENIED as stated. Respondent/Plaintiff has a last known address for Mr. Claudio and is actively looking for an updated address. Further, Petitioner/Defendant has always has the equal opportunity and equal right to locate Mr. Claudio. 22. DENIED as stated. Petitioner/Defendant recently made a few requests for Mr. Claudio's address, however Petitioner/Defendant at all times has possessed Mr. Claudio's last known address but, apparently, has made no effort to locate Mr. Claudio. 23. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Petitioner/Defendant requested in March, 2013 Mr. Claudio's address. However, Petitioner/Defendant has possessed Mr. Claudio's last known address during the proceedings in this case but, apparently, made no efforts to locate Mr. Claudio. 24. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Petitioner/Defendant has made a few requests for Mr. Claudio's address. However, Petitioner/Defendant has possessed Mr. Claudio's last known address at all times during the course of this case. 25. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED the March 13, 2013 email requested Mr. Claudio's address. However, counsel for Petitioner/Defendant redacted material, significant and relevant portions of the e-mail in which the parties engaged in settlement, thereby providing a misleading summary of the e-mail exchange for the Court. An accurate copy of the March 13, 2013 email, with the settlement numbers redacted, is attached as App. A. 26. DENIED as stated. Petitioner/Defendant has made several requests for Mr. Claudio's address. However, Petitioner/Defendant has possessed Mr. Claudio's last known address at all relevant times. 6 27. DENIED as stated. Petitioner/Defendant has made several requests for Mr. Claudio's address. However, Petitioner/Defendant has possessed Mr. Claudio's last known address at all relevant times. 28. DENIED as stated. If Petitioner/Defendant sincerely wished to depose Mr. Claudio it could have, and should have, taken action to depose Mr. Claudio at any time during the course of this litigation. Further, if Petitioner/Defendant believes that Mr. Claudio's testimony is necessary for the prima facie case of Respondent/Plaintiff(which it is not)then the proper action for Petitioner/Defendant to take is to file a motion for summary judgment, not a petition for non pros. 29. DENIED. Respondent/Plaintiff is capable of making its case through the testimony of four (4) witnesses other than Mr. Claudio. Specifically, Petitioner/Defendant was presented with three (3) offers to purchase the concession stands at issue in this matter; one from Mr. Claudio, one from Mr. Dettra and another from Mr. and Mrs. Vucetik. Mr. Dettra, Mr. and Mrs. Vucetik and Respondent/Plaintiff Christina Bowman are all within the jurisdiction of this Court and are available to testify in support of the claim. Further, if Petitioner/Defendant sincerely believes that Mr. Claudio's testimony is necessary for Respondent/Plaintiff's prima facie case, the proper procedure is to file a motion for summary judgment and not a petition for non pros. Further, the last known address of Mr. Claudio is, and, at all times relevant hereto, has been in possession of Petitioner/Defendant which has always had the means and opportunity to subpoena Mr. Claudio for a deposition but has failed to do so. 30. ADMITTED. 31. Plaintiff does not concur in Defendant's Petition or the relief requested. 7 i WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Christina Bowman respectfully requests this Honorable Court deny Plaintiff's Petition for Non Pros and enter a scheduling order listing this matter for trial in the Fall/Winter of 2013. Respectfully submitted, ntho .-Parker PA ID No. 81251 KELLY, PARKER& COHEN LLP 5425 Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 717-920-2220 FAX 717-920-2370 aparker(ii -law.co.m Dated: May 20, 2013 Counsel for Plaintiff Christina Bowman 8 VERIFICATION I, Anthony W. Parker, hereby state that I am counsel for Plaintiff Christina Bowman and that I have read the foregoing ANSWER OF RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF CHRISTINA BOWMAN TO DEFENDANTS' PETITION FOR NON PROS. The factual information contained therein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief based upon information provided by the Defendant. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. Date A ony . Parker t i 1 � � � � � � - r� � •� � | . � , ` Anthony W. Parke From: Susan KPeipher <SPP@bbt-|awzom> Sent: Wednesday, March l], 2OI34:82PM To- Anthony VKParker Subject, RE: Christina Bowman Tony, I've reviewed this demand with my client and am writing to advise the offer is rejected and no counteroffer will be extended. Please provide me with Mr. Claudio's current address so we can make arrangements to subpoena him for his deposition. Thanks. Susan From: Anthony W. Parker [nOaiKo:aparker@kpc-|aw.conn] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 1:42 PM To: Susan P. Peipher Subject: RE: Christina Bowman Susan— I conveyed the offer to Ms. Bowman and, needless to say,she was less than receptive. However, \allowed the past week to go by so as to remove emotion from consideration and then readdressed the issue. Needless to say,the initial mom fferis not acceptable. That being said, Ms. Bowman is willing to accept one-time payment o4112M in full and final settlement of all claims. I believe this demand is fair in light of the contract to purchase that was entered into between Ms. Bowman and Claudio and in light of the two other offers from Glenn Dettra and the Vucetics. Both of these offers,which were conveyed to Mr. Bowman,were in excess of$100,000. Please review this demand with your client and get back tome with aresponse. Tony 5425 Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 Office: (717)920-2220 Ext. 115 Cell: (717) 576-3532 FaxL (717) 920-2370 0 94 01 Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain information that is confidential and protected by the attorney/client or other privileges, It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the | . � ` intended recipient who iaresponsible for delivering bhothe intended recipient, or you believe that you have received this ' communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner.The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Receipt by anyone other than the | intended recipient(s)is not a waiver of any attorney/client or other privilege. From: Susan P. P2ipher [rnai|to:5PP@bbt-|aw.com] Sent: Tuesday, March U5, 2O13S:44PM To: Anthony W. Parker Subject: RE: Christina Bowman Tony, I spoke with my client and he is willing to offerl�as full and final settlement of all claims. Please advise whether Ms. Bowman is willing to accept this offer. Susan Susan P. Peipher B\akinger. By|er8 Thomas, p.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17803 Phone(717) 5UQ'723y Cell (717) S4U-4535 Fax(717) 2@A'052Q Email: This message \ma private communication. It, and any files or text attached to it, contain confidential and privileged information, and are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, �you may not read, copy, use, or disclose btoothers. If you received this message in error, please notify,the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. From: Anthony W. Parker ] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:02 PM To: Susan P. Pcipher Subject: Christina Bowman Susan— Christina has given me the go ahead to start discovery and spend what is necessary to move this matter along. As such vve expect to notice depositions shortly. However, before the parties start expending attorney fees and other litigation costs I figured I would see if Scott has any interest in trying to resolve the last piece of litigation out there. Christina is reasonable in her expectations. Please let rneknow. Tony KELLY, & COHEN, lJP 542G Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA17112 2 ' ^ ^ ' Office: (717)S20-222O Ext. 115 Cell: (717) 570-3532 Fax (717)y20-2370 N����� n�m�*� Notice:This communication, including attachments, mayoontan |nfonnaUunthotisconfidenUe| and protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended reoipient, or you believe that you have received this communication in error, p|eoaa notify the sender immediately byreturn e-mail and promptly delete this e'mo||' including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner.The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is p rohibited and may be unlawful. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney/client or other privilege. � o CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 20th day of May 2013, I, Kristine F. Hendrix, a legal secretary with the law firm Kelly, Parker&Cohen LLP,hereby certify that I have,this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER OF RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF CHRISTINA BOWMAN TO DEFENDANTS' PETITION FOR NON PROS on the person(s) and at the address(es)below named by United States First Class Mail,postage prepaid in Harrisburg,PA: Susan P. Peipher,Esquire Blakinger, Byler&Thomas, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Counsel far Defendants Kristi e f. Hendrix CHRISTINA BOWMAN, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff/Respondent : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION—LAW NO. 06-3261 CIVIL MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA : RENAISSANCE FAIRE, and SCOTT BOWSER (AS AGENT/ EMPLOYEE OF FAIRE AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY), Defendants/Petitioners IN RE: DEFENDANTS' PETITION FOR NON PROS ORDER AND NOW, this R` day of August, 2013, in consideration of the Defendants' Petition and the Answer filed thereto and the brief filed on behalf of the Respondent, the Court noting that the Petitioners did not file a brief, the Petition of the Defendants for Non Pros is DENIED. BY THE COURT, /4IL Kevi, A. Hess, P. J. /Anthony Parker, Esquire 5425 Jonestown Road, Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 M For the Plaintiff/Respondent �/ /Susan P. Peipher, Esquire . • c)y Blakinger, Byler& Thomas, P.C. OQj 28 Penn Square �'- CO ` ;�' r Lancaster, PA 17603 For the Defendants/Petitioners O c., :rim IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION — LAW CHRISTINA BOWMAN, Plaintiff v. MAZZA VINEYARDS, INC. t/d/b/a THE PENNSYLVANIA RENAISSANCE FAIRE, SCOTT BOWSER (as agent/employee of Faire and in his individual capacity) and CARMELO CLAUDIO Defendants PRAECIPE No. 06-3261 Civil Term rn.(73 r r", 1 Fri ":"- r— — CD T."" -•,1,* • • zi C TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly mark the docket in the above matter settled, discontinued and ended with prejudice. Date: gkvilotij KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP W. Parker, Esquire onestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 Attorney for Plaintiff Christina Bowman DISCONTINUANCE CERTIFICATE AND NOW, this C2tiday of , 2014, thiuit h ed as abov PROTHONOTARY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I am this day serving the foregoing Praecipe to Settle, Satisfy and Discontinue upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Service by First Class Mail Addressed as Follows: Susan P. Peipher, Esquire BLAKINGER, BYLER & THOMAS, P.C. 28 Penn Square Lancaster, PA 17603 Attorney for Defendants Mazza Vineyards, Inc. t/d/b/a the Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire and Scott Bowser Date: 4/P7i?i/1,1 N KELLY, PARKER & COHEN LLP 2 ny . Parker, Esquire Jonestown Road Suite 103 Harrisburg, PA 17112 Attorney for Plaintiff Christina Bowman