Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-05-04 Part 1 . . ?aula J. McDermott, Esquire Attorney I. D. # 46664 Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 E-mail: pmcdermott@postschell.com IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGE HOFFER MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner, Brian J. Gross through this Motion in Limine, respectfully requests and seeks a Court Order precluding the Respondent, Elizabeth Barth from offering any witnesses (other than herself) as well as the use of documents and exhibits at the time of trial as a result of her failure to timely produce discovery responses, her failure to provide a list of anticipated witnesses and proposed testimony and her failure to provide a list of anticipated exhibits for use at trial. II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Factually, this dispute arises out of the August 17, 2003 death of David Gross, and the proposed distribution of proceeds obtained from a personal injury settlement in 11 '/I 'It: v 4: _' "...., . . J..- ~ a matter currently pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. After Mr. Gross' death, his mother, Ramona Gross, was appointed as Administratrix of the David Gross Estate on December 26, 2003. Ramona Gross subsequently died on February 4, 2004, leaving no personal representative of the David Gross Estate. On or about April 20, 2004, in a clear attempt to obtain possession of the aforementioned settlement proceeds, Elizabeth Barth, posing as Mr. Gross' common law wife, filed a Petition to Revoke Letters of Administration and requested Letters of Administration to be issued to Elizabeth Barth as David Gross' surviving spouse. Based upon the fraudulent misrepresentations contained therein, Elizabeth Barth was ultimately appointed Administratrix of the David Gross Estate. On or about May 11, 2004, Brian J. Gross, the brother of the decedent and the ... son of Ramona Gross, filed this Petition for Revocation of Letters and Removal of Administratrix, Elizabeth Barth, inasmuch as she fraudulently and illegally obtained control of the Estate because she was not the surviving spouse of the late David Gross. On or about April 27, 2004, Elizabeth Barth filed her Response to the Petition, and a hearing/trial was originally scheduled in this matter for Monday, October 4, 2004. However, by Order dated October 1, 2004, the hearing/trial was continued until November 8,2004. Over three and one-half months prior to trial, on June 16, 2004, Brian J. Gross served discovery requests, including a Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories to the Respondent, Elizabeth Barth. Pursuant to the applicable Rules of Civil Procedure, the answers and responses to the discovery requests were due on July 2 -- ) . . 16, 2004. At some point subsequent to July 16, 2004, counsel for Respondent, Elizabeth Barth, requested an extension of time to answer the discovery requests. Not having received the discovery responses as promised and as required, by letter dated July 28, 2004, the undersigned counsel for Petitioner demanded Respondent's counsel to answer properly the outstanding Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Despite not having received the requested discovery answers and responsive documents, Petitioner nonetheless took the deposition of Elizabeth Barth on August 13, 2004. Thereafter, on or about September 30, 2004, only four days prior to the time of the first scheduled hearing, Petitioner filed the within Motion in Limine seeking the preclusion of Respondent's use of documents/exhibits at the time of trial (not including those referenced or otherwise used in her deposition) together with the preclusion of additional witness testimony inasmuch as such information was not provided appropriately. As noted above, by Order dated October 1, 2004, this Honorable Court continued the hearing in this matter until November 8, 2004. Despite being provided an extension of time to respond and despite being provided additional time as a result of the continuance of the hearing, Respondent nonetheless failed to provide and serve her Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents upon the Petitioner until October 20, 2004.1 Respondent produced her discovery responses more than three months after their initial due date and only two weeks prior to trial. Moreover, the substantive information contained 1 True and correct copies of the Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, together with the Answers and Responses thereto are attached hereto and marked as Exhibits "A," "B," "C," and "D," respectively. 3 - , . . .. therein is woefully insufficient in that, among other items, Respondent has failed to identify the names, address and anticipated testimony of her proposed witnesses and has failed to identify what documents/exhibits she anticipates using at trial. Accordingly, as a sanction for her use of such "surprise tactics" and her attempts to conduct a "trial by ambush", Brian J. Gross respectfully seeks the preclusion of any anticipated witness testimony or use of documents/exhibits at the time of trial, except for the testimony of Respondent herself and the documents referred to and used in her deposition. This Memorandum of Law is respectfully submitted in support of the pending Motion in Limine for Sanctions for failure to respond to discovery requests. III. ISSUE PRESENTED WHETHER RESPONDENT, ELIZABETH BARTH SHALL BE PRECLUDED FROM OFFERING ANY DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES AT THE TIME OF TRIAL EXCEPT FOR HER OWN TESTIMONY AND THOSE DOCUMENTS EXCHANGED AND USED DURING HER DEPOSITION AS A RESULT OF. HER PAILURE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT AND TIMELY DISCOVERY RESPONSES PURSUANT TO THE APPLICABLE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE? Suggested answer: Affirmative. IV. DISCUSSION/ARGUMENT Respondent, Elizabeth Barth, should be prohibited from offering any testimony, other than her own, and from offering any documentary evidence, other than the documents referenced in her deposition testimony, as a direct sanction for failing to timely produce sufficient responses to Petitioner, Brian J. Gross' discovery request. As this Court is well aware, Rule 4006 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure requires a party to answer or object to an opposing party's interrogatories within thirty (30) days of service. Rule 4006 further requires that each interrogatory be answered fully and completely unless objected to. In this case, Respondent served her 4 ~ , . . .. Answers to Interrogatories and her Response to Request for Production of Documents only two weeks prior to trial, the same of which were over three months late. Moreover, despite the untimeliness of said responses and the corresponding prejudice caused thereby, the Answers to Interrogatories were factually incomplete and lacked the necessary substance required by the Rules of Civil Procedure to such a degree that appropriate sanctions are absolutely called for. Indeed, in response to Petitioner's Request for Production of Documents, Respondent simply made four banker boxes of notes, cards, memos, letters and other documents available for inspection and when requested to provide a list of her anticipated trial exhibits, Respondent had the audacity to respond, "Elizabeth Barth intends to use as exhibits the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage, and the cards, letters and notes that had been supplied in response to Request for Production of Documents." See, Respondent's Answers to Interrogatories, No.6 attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "C." Certainly identifying one or all documents contained within four separate boxes, the same of which were only produced several days before trial, does not comply with the letter or spirit of the Rules of Civil Procedure which were designed, in part, to dissuade such surprise tactics. Not to limit herself to such a flagrant violation of the Rules of Civil Procedure, when asked to identify her trial witnesses, Respondent stated, "Elizabeth Barth intends on calling herself and cross-examining members of the Gross family. In addition, Elizabeth may call anyone who authored any of the cards or notes that had been supplied in the Response to Request for Production of Documents." See, Respondent's Answers to Interrogatories, No.6, a true and copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "D." Again, Respondent's failure to 5 ,~ .\ . . " provide a sufficient and complete response to the basic question of who she intends to call as a witness at the time of trial cannot be condoned by this Court. After review of the above-noted Answers to Interrogatories, Petitioner, as well as any other person who would review such responses, is completely unaware of what testimony, what witnesses and what documents/exhibits will be offered at the time of trial. Accordingly, as a result of such a failure and outright refusal to provide substantive responses to Petitioner's Interrogatories, Petitioner requests this Honorable Court to use its given discretion and sanction Respondent for such actions by precluding and prohibiting her from offering any testimony or documentary evidence other than herself and those documents referenced or otherwise used during her deposition. Pursuant to Rule 4019 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court is empowered to impose sanctions for failure to answer discovery requests as well as for a ~< failure to properly respond to a request for production of documents. Indeed, under Rule 4019, this Court has the authority to issue an Order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated claims or defenses or prohibiting such a party from introducing in evidence designated documents, things or testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental condition. Petitioner respectfully requests that such a sanction be imposed upon the Respondent, Elizabeth Barth. Moreover, as this Court is well aware, when a discovery sanction is imposed, the sanction must be appropriate when compared to the violation of the rules. Thompson v. Rovallnsurance, 521 A.2d 936 (Pa. 1986). In this regard, Petitioner contends that his request for sanctions, which would effectively prohibit and preclude Respondent from offering any other evidence other than her own testimony and the documents referred to 6 , J . . " and used in her deposition, is reasonably limited in scope and certainly appropriate under the circumstances. This is not a case in which the Petitioner is seeking the outright dismissal of the case as a result of the aforementioned violations. Rather, Petitioner is merely seeking the preclusion and prohibition of witness testimony and documents not previously identified before trial. This Court's review of the several factors that must be considered when determining an appropriate sanction for discovery violations will render abundantly clear that the violation of the applicable rules of procedure was knowing and willful, and that the effect of such violations certainly prejudices Petitioner. At this point, Petitioner is completely uninformed as to whom the respondent intends to call at the time of trial, what proposed testimony will be presented at the time of trial, and what documentary evidence will be presented at the time of trial. Moreover, given the unreasonable delay in providing even this basic information, Petitioner has been, in essence, precluded from seeking any further deposition testimony of any witnesses that may (or in this case - may not) have been previously disclosed. Finally, the effect of the violations of the Rules of Civil Procedure as aforementioned cannot be cured inasmuch as trial is scheduled to take place within only two(2) business days of the date in which Respondent made her document production available for inspection and review. See, Judqe Technical Services. Inc. v. Clancv, 813 A.2d 879 (Pa. Super. 2002); Pioneer Commercial Fundinq CorP. v. American Financial Mortqaqe Corp., 797 A.2d 269 (Pa. Super. 2002). As noted above, Respondent's actions and willful violation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure should not and cannot be condoned by this Court. As a result 7 . . thereof, Respondent should be prohibited from offering any testimony, other than her own, and further precluded from offering any documentary evidence, other than the documents referenced in her deposition testimony, as an appropriate sanction. v. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner Brian J. Gross respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant its Motion in Limine precluding Respondent, Elizabeth Barth from producing any documentation, witnesses or testimony at the hearing in this matter other than her own testimony, and the documents referenced or used in her deposition. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.C. r~?ltu,.~~ AULA .r'MCOERM ,E QUIRE Attorney 1.0. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian J. Gross Date: November 5, 2004 8 EXHIBIT A I ., . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 INTERROGATORIES OF PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH TO: Elizabeth Barth c/o James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that you are hereby required, pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 4006, as amended, to serve upon the undersigned a copy of your individual answers and objections, if any, in writing and under oath, to the following Interrogatories within thirty (30) days after service of the Interrogatories. The Answers shall be inserted in the space provided. If there is insufficient space to answer an Interrogatory, the remainder of the Answer shall follow on a supplemental sheet. These shall be deemed to be continuing Interrogatories. If, between the time of your Answers and the time of the trial of this case, you or anyone acting on your behalf, learn of any further information not contained in your Answers, you shall promptly furnish said information to the undersigned by Supplemental Answers. POST & SCHELL, P.e. Date: June I ~, 2004 f~~l1\i-c~ Paula J. McD ott, EsqUIre Attorney I.D. No. 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 731-1970 Attorneys for Plaintiff . . INSTRUCTIONS/DEFINITIONS The following instructions and definitions form an integral part of these interrogatories, and the interrogatories are to be read in accordance with these instructions and definitions. I. "Document": The term "document" means any written, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, whether sent or received or neither, including drafts and copies bearing notations or marks not found on the original, and includes, but is not limited to: (a) all contracts, agreements, representations, warranties, certificates, OpInIOnS; (b) all letters or other forms of correspondence or communication, including envelopes, notes, telegrams, cables, telex messages, messages (including reports, notes, notations and memoranda of or relating to telephone conversations or conferences); (c) All memoranda, reports, test results, financial statements or reports, notes, transcripts, tabulations, studies, analyses, evaluations, projections. work papers, corporate records or copies thereof, lists, comparisons, questionnaires, surveys, charts, graphs, summaries, extracts, statistical records; compilations, (d) all desk calendars, appointment books, diaries; ( e) all books, articles, press releases, magazines, newspapers, booklets, circulars, bulletins, notices, instructions, manuals, (f) all minutes or transcripts of all meetings; and (g) all photographs, microfilms, phonographs, tapes or other records, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, printouts, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. II. "Communication": The term "communication" means not only oral communications but also any "documents" (as such term is defined above), whether or not such document or the information contained therein was transmitted by its author to any other person. III. "Identify", "Identity" or "Identification": A. When used in reference to a natural person, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) full name; (ii) present or last known business and residence addresses; (iii) present or last known business affiliation; and (iv) present or last known business position (including job title and a description of job functions, duties and responsibilities). B. When used with reference to any entity other than a natural person, state: (i) its full name; . . (ii) the address of its principal place of business; (iii) the jurisdiction under the laws of which it has been organized or incorporated and the date of such organization or incorporation; (iv) the identity of all individuals who acted and/or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to; (v) in the case of a corporation, the names of its directors and principal officers; and (vi) in the case of an entity other than a corporation, the identities of its partners or principals or all individuals who acted or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to. C. When used in reference to a document, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) the nature of the document (~, letter, contract, memorandum) and any other information (~, its title, index or file number) which would facilitate in the identification thereof. (ii) its date of preparation; (iii) its present location and the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of its present custodian or, if its present location and custodian are not known, a description of its last known disposition; (iv) its subject matter and substance or, in lieu thereof, annex a legible copy of the document to the answers ofthose interrogatories; (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (~, author, contributor of information, recipient, etc.) or who has any knowledge; and (vi) if the document has been destroyed or is otherwise no longer in existence or cannot be found, the reason why such document no longer exists, the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of the people responsible for the document no longer being in existence and of its last custodian. D. When used in connection with an oral communication, the terms "identify," "identity": and "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature (~, conference, telephonic communication, etc.); (ii) the time and place of its occurrence; (iii) its subject matter and substance; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IH(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role, or knowledge; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(B) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof. . . IV. "Describe" or "Description": (A) When used with respect to any act, action, accounting, activity, audit, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, negotiation, relationship, scheme, communication, conference, discussion, development, service, transaction, instance, incidence or event, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature; (ii) the time and place thereof; (iii) a chronological account setting forth each element thereof, what such element consisted of and what transpired as part thereof; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (u, speaker, participant, contributor or information, witness, etc.) or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role or knowledge. (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (vi) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(D) hereof) of each oral communication which was a part thereof or referred thereto. (B) When used in connection with any calculation or computation, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) an explanation of its meaning (including the nature, source and meaning of each component part thereof); (ii) an explanation of the manner in which it was derived; (iii) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function with respect thereto and a description of his function; (iv) the identity of each document (as defined in Paragraph IlI(C) hereof) which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(D) hereof) of each oral communication which occurred in the course of the preparation thereof or which referred thereto. V. "Factual basis": The term "factual basis" means (A) set forth each item of information upon which the allegation, contention, claim or demand to which it pertains is based, and (B) with respect to each such item of information, identify each person having knowledge thereof and identity and describe (as defined in Paragraph III and IV hereof) each source thereof including but not limited to each document, oral communication, act, action, activity, accounting, negotiation, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, calculation and computation upon which you rely with respect thereto. . . VI. "Relates to" or "thereto": The terms "relates to" or "thereto," "relating to" or "thereto" when used in connection with any act, action, activity, accounting, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, contractual provision or document, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, etc., means used or occurring or referred to in the preparation therefore, or in the course thereof, or as a consequence thereof, or referring thereto. VII. Answer bv Reference to Documents: If any interrogatory is answered by reference to a document or group of documents, with respect to each such interrogatory answer, identify (as defined in Paragraph Irr(C) hereof) the specific document or documents containing the requested information. VIII. "Person": The term "person" means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships or other business associations, public authorities, municipal corporations, state governments, all governmental bodies, and all other legal entities. IX. "Complaint": Refers to the matter that you filed, as captioned above. X. "Each": "Each" includes both "each" and "every." XI. "And"I"Or": The conjunctive "and" and the disjunctive "or" shall be mutually interchangeable and shall not be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document Request. XII. "Gender": The singular and masculine gender shall respectively include the plural and feminine gender, and vice versa, and neither shall be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document request. XIII. If you claim that an answer to any Interrogatory or subpart thereof, or any document related to any Interrogatory or subpart thereof, or any document requested in the accompanying Requests for Production of Documents is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, provide the following information: (A) Identify each and every person involved in the act, communication, or information, and, if the claimed privilege related to a document, identify each person who prepared or participated in the preparation of the document and who received it, and each person from whom the document was received; and (B) Provide sufficient information concerning the act, communication, information or document and the circumstances thereof to explain the claim of privilege and to permit the adjudication of the propriety of that claim. XIV. Parties: "Petitioner" - The term "petitioner" refers to Brian John Gross. "Respondent" _ The term "respondent" refers to you, Elizabeth Barth. . . INTERROGATORIES 1. Personal Information. -- State: RESPONSE: (a) Your full name: (b) Each other name, if any, which you have used or by which your have been known: (c) The name of any spouses and the dates and place of your marriage to such spouses: (d) The address of your present residence and the address of each other residence which you have had during the past five years: (e) Your present occupation and the name and address of your employer: (f) Date of your birth: (g) Your Social Security number; and (i) The schools you have attended and the degrees or certificates awarded, if any. . . case. 2. State with particularity the factual basis for each claim you are asserting in this RESPONSE: . . 3. Witnesses. RESPONSE: (a) Identify each person who (1) Was a witness to any statements or ceremonies which you claim to have occurred in connection with your assertion that you are the late David Gross' common-law wife; (2) Has knowledge of facts concerning the issues referenced in the Petition and Answer to Petition; (b) With respect to each person so identified, state that person's relationship to the events described in the Petition and Answer, and basis of knowledge with respect to your alleged marriage to the late David Gross. . . 4. Statements. If you know of anyone that has given any statement (as defined by the R.c.P.) concerning this action or its subject matter, state: (a) The identity of such person; (b) When, where, by whom, and to whom each statement was made, and whether it was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded; and (c) The identity of any person who has custody of any such statement that was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded. RESPONSE: . . 5. Demonstrative evidence. If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, and/or video recordings relevant to the claim, state: (a) The nature or type of such item; (b) The date when such item was made; (c) The identity of the person that prepared or made each item; and (d) The subject that each item represents or portrays. RESPONSE: . . 6. Trial witnesses. Identify each persons you intend to call as a non-expert witness at the trial of this case, and for each person identified state your relationship with the witness and the substance of the facts to which the witness is expected to testify. RESPONSE: . . 7. Expert witnesses. Identify each expert you intend to call as a witness at the trial of this matter, and for each expert state: (a) The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; and (b) The substance of the factors and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. (Y ou may file as your answer to this interrogatory the report of the expert or have the interrogatory answered by your expert.) RESPONSE: . . 8. Trial exhibits. Identify all exhibits that you intend to use at the trial of this matter and state for what purpose they will be used. RESPONSE: . 9. Books. magazines. etc. such writing at trial state: RESPONSE: . If you intend to use any book, magazine, or other (a) The name ofthe writing; (b) The author of the writing; (c) The publisher of the writing; (d) The date of publication ofthe writing; and ( e) The identity of the custodian of the writing. . . 10. Admissions. If you intend to use any admission(s) of a party at trial, identify such admission(s). RESPONSE: "" . . . 11. Since you claim to be the common-law spouse of David Gross, state the reasons why you permitted Ramona Gross to be Administratrix of the Estate of the late David Gross. RESPONSE: . . 12. State why you listed yourself as the fiance of the late David Gross in the obituary attached to the Petition. RESPONSE: . . 13. Identify individuals to whom you held yourself out as the common-law spouse of David M. Gross; state the method in which you held yourself out as the common-law spouse of David M. Gross; and state the date and time of any such representation or communication. RESPONSE: . . 14. State why the late David Gross testified that you were his fiance? RESPONSE: ~ , . . 15. Explain David Gross' testimony in the personal injury lawsuit in Dauphin County that you have never been married. RESPONSE: " . . 16. State why an engagement announcement for yourself and David M. Gross was placed in The Patriot News if you are his common-law spouse. RESPONSE: . . 17. State the date on which you indicate that the common-law marriage took place. As to that date, state the persons present, the nature of the words exchanged, and the place and time of such exchange. RESPONSE: . . 18. Describe your role in the reporting of the death of David M. Gross for purposes of the Death Certificate. RESPONSE: " "1 . . 19. Identify any and all individuals who provided information for the Certificate of Death. State as to why decedent, David Gross, was listed as "divorced with no surviving spouse" on such Certificate of Death to the best of your knowledge, information and belief. RESPONSE: '. .... . . 20. State your role as to the preparation of the obituary for the late David M. Gross which appeared in The Patriot News on Tuesday, August 19,2003. RESPONSE: . . 21. State as to the best of your knowledge, information and belief why you are listed as the fiance in that obituary. RESPONSE: . . 22. Identify any and all documentation which you provided to Social Security to support your position that you were the common-law spouse of the late David M. Gross. RESPONSE: . . 23. You allege that the Social Security Administration conducted an investigation and contacted friends and relatives of David M. Gross. Identify all such friends and relatives of David M. Gross, and describe their position on your assertion that you were the late David Gross' common-law wife. RESPONSE: . . 24. Identify any and all documentation of any type which supports your contention that you were the late David Gross' common-law wife. RESPONSE: . . 25. Describe why you permitted litigation relating to the late David Gross' personal injury claim in Dauphin County to be conducted by Ramona Gross as representative of the David Gross Estate if you were his common-law wife? RESPONSE: . . 26. Describe any and all evidence, including your own conversations which you had with representatives of the Social Security Administration which you believe establish your claim. As to such conversations, state the date of the conversation, the time of the conversation, the parties to the conversation, and the nature of the claims asserted. RESPONSE: . . 27. Identify any and all parties who were afforded the chance to offer testimony or cross-examine you relating to the Social Security claim. RESPONSE: . . 28. State the nature of any and all evidence, documentary or otherwise, presented by you to the Cumberland County Office of the Register of Wills in connection with your appointment as Administratrix d/b/n of the Estate of David Gross. RESPONSE: .J... ' . . 29. As to your Affidavit of Common Law Marriage filed with your employer, state the date which that was filed and advise as to any investigation undertaken by your employer. As so any such investigation, indicate whom was contacted and the nature of statements made by any such individuals, and state the names of any and all individuals at your employer with whom you dealt in connection with said Affidavit, including names, addresses and job titles. RESPONSE: #" "' ' . . 30. Describe any and all conversations between you and Father Sawdy. As to such conversations, state the date, time, means of conversation and the parties present. RESPONSE: Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.e. pawJ)a.~~~~ PAULA J. CDERMOT, ESQUIRE Attorney J.D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: June 15,2004 . . VERIFICATION I, Elizabeth Barth, Respondent in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing Petitioner's Interrogatories Directed to Respondent are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Elizabeth Barth Date: ,2004 '." , . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, p.e., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 7110 POST & SCHELL, P.e. Date: June I G , 2004 CPH 294586vl EXHIBIT B ~ .1 .' IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ~ NO. 2103-1065 PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH TO: Elizabeth Barth c/o James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 INSTRUCTIONS/DEFINITIONS The following instructions and definitions form an integral part of these Requests, and the Requests are to be read in accordance with these instructions and definitions. I. "Document": The term "document" means any written, printed, typed, or other recorded or graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, whether sent or received or neither, including drafts and copies bearing notations or marks not found on the original, and includes, but is not limited to: (a) all contracts, agreements, representations, warranties, certificates, OpInIOnS; (b) all letters or other forms of correspondence or communication, including envelopes, notes, telegrams, cables, telex messages, messages (including reports, notes, notations and memoranda of or relating to telephone conversations or conferences); (c) All memoranda, reports, test results, financial statements or reports, notes, transcripts, tabulations, studies, analyses, evaluations, projections. work papers, corporate records or copies thereof, lists, comparisons, questionnaires, surveys, charts, graphs, summaries, extracts, statistical records; compilations, (d) all desk calendars, appointment books, diaries; ( e) all books, articles, press releases, magazines, newspapers, booklets, circulars, bulletins, notices, instructions, manuals, (f) all minutes or transcripts of all meetings; and (g) all photographs, microfilms, phonographs, tapes or other records, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, printouts, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. . . II. "Communication": The term "communication" means any and all transmissions of information, the information transmitted, the process by which the information is transmitted and the term shall expressly be inclusive of all written and oral communications. III. "Identify", "Identity" or "Identification": A. When used in reference to a natural person, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) full name; (ii) present or last known business and residence addresses; (iii) present or last known business affiliation; and (iv) present or last known business position (including job title and a description of job functions, duties and responsibilities). B. When used with reference to any entity other than a natural gerson, state: (i) its full name; (ii) the address of its principal place of business; (iii) the jurisdiction under the laws of which it has been organized or incorporated and the date of such organization or incorporation; (iv) the identity of all individuals who acted and/or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to; (v) in the case of a corporation, the names of its directors and principal officers; and (vi) in the case of an entity other than a corporation, the identities of its partners or principals or all individuals who acted or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to. C. When used in reference to a document, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) the nature of the document (M,., letter, contract, memorandum) and any other information (~, its title, index or file number) which would facilitate in the identification thereof. (ii) its date of preparation; (iii) its present location and the identity (as defined in Paragraph III (A) hereof) of its present custodian or, if its present location and custodian are not known, a description of its last known disposition; (iv) its subject matter and substance or, in lieu thereof, annex a legible copy of the document to the answers of those interrogatories; (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (M,., author, contributor of information, recipient, etc.) or who has any knowledge; and .' .' (vi) if the document has been destroyed or is otherwise no longer in existence or cannot be found, the reason why such document no longer exists, the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(A) hereof) of the people responsible for the document no longer being in existence and of its last custodian. D. When used in connection with an oral communication, the terms "identify," "identity," and "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature (~, conference, telephonic communication, etc.); (ii) the time and place of its occurrence; (iii) its subject matter and substance; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith or who has any knowledge thereoftogether with a description of each such person's function, role, or knowledge; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(B) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof. IV. "Describe" or "Description": (A) When used with respect to any act, action, accounting, activity, audit, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, negotiation, relationship, scheme, communication, conference, discussion, development, service, transaction, instance, incidence or event, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature; (ii) the time and place thereof; (iii) a chronological account setting forth each element thereof, what such element consisted of and what transpired as part thereof; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (~, speaker, participant, contributor or information, witness, etc.) or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role or knowledge. (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(C) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (vi) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(D) hereof) of each oral communication which was a part thereof or referred thereto. (B) When used in connection with any calculation or computation, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) an explanation of its meaning (including the nature, source and meaning of each component part thereof); . . (ii) an explanation of the manner in which it was derived; (iii) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function with respect thereto and a description of his function; (iv) the identity of each document (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(D) hereof) of each oral communication which occurred in the course of the preparation thereof or which referred thereto. V. "Factual basis"; The term "factual basis" means (A) set forth each item of information upon which the allegation, contention, claim or demand to which it pertains is based, and (B) with respect to each such item of information, identify each person having knowledge thereof and identity and describe (as defined in Paragraph III and IV hereof) each source thereof including but not limited to each document, oral communication, act, actiol1, activity, accounting, negotiation, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, calculation and computation upon which you rely with respect thereto. VI. "Relates to" or "thereto"; The terms "relates to" or "thereto," "relating to" or "thereto" when used in connection with any act, action, activity, accounting, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, contractual provision or document, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, etc., means used or occurring or referred to in the preparation therefore, or in the course thereof, or as a consequence thereof, or referring thereto. VII. Answer bv Reference to Documents; If any request is answered by reference to a document or group of documents, with respect to each such response, identify (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) the specific document or documents containing the requested information. VIII. "Person"; The term "person" means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships or other business associations, public authorities, municipal corporations, state governments, all governmental bodies, and all other legal entities. IX. "Complaint"; Refers to the matter that was filed, as captioned above. X. "Each"; "Each" includes both "each" and "every." XI. "And"/"Or"; The conjunctive "and" and the disjunctive "or" shall be mutually interchangeable and shall not be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document Request. XII. "Gender": The singular and masculine gender shall respectively include the plural and feminine gender, and vice versa, and neither shall be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document request. . .1 XIII. If you claim that an answer to any discovery request or subpart thereof, or any document related to any discovery request or subpart thereof, or any document requested in each and every discovery request is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, provide the following information: (A) Identify each and every person involved in the act, communication, or information, and, if the claimed privilege related to a document, identify each person who prepared or participated in the preparation ofthe document and who received it, and each person from whom the document was received; and (B) Provide sufficient information concerning the act, communication, information or document and the circumstances thereof to explain the claim of privilege and to permit the adjudication of the propriety of that claim. XIV. Parties: "Petitioner" - The term "petitioner" refers to Brian John Gross; "Respondent" _ The term "respondent" refers to you, Elizabeth Barth. e ei REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. Kindly identify and produce any and all documents not privileged in your, your agents', and/or attorneys' possession relating to your claim to be the common-law spouse of the late David M. Gross. 2. Kindly produce any and all documents which are identified in your Response to the Petition. 3. Kindly produce any and all expert reports which you obtained in connection with this matter and/or which you intend to use at the hearing ofthis matter. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.c. P,.~~ PAULA J. DERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: June 16,2004 . , , .' . VERIFICATION I, Elizabeth Barth, Respondent in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Elizabeth Barth Date: ,2004 . '. .1 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.c., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Date: June I ~ 2004 CPH 294609vl EXHIBIT C " , . . " IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS: IN THE ORPHANS' COURT : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2103-1065 ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES OF PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH 1. Elizabeth M. Barth Date of Birth: 02108/69 I was the common law spouse of David Gross. I am a 1987 graduate of Mechanicsburg High School. I also attended schools outlined in my deposition. 2. Elizabeth Barth has not asserted any claims in this action. 3. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. See also documents supplied in Response to Request for Production of Documents. 4. None. 5. None. 6. Elizabeth Barth intends on calling herself in cross examining members of the Gross family. In addition, Elizabeth may call anyone who authored any of the cards or notes that have been supplied in the Response to the Request for Production of Documents. 7. None. 8. Elizabeth Barth intends to use as Exhibits the affidavit of common law marriage and the cards, letters and notes that have been supplied in Response to Request for Production of Documents. " . . . 9. No. 10. No. 11. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 12. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 13. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 14. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. In addition, the deposition was prior to the common law marriage. 15. The deposition was prior to the common law marriage. 16. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. In addition, Elizabeth Barth and David Gross intended to formalize their common law marriage through a religious ceremony. 17. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. In addition, see Affidavit of Common Law Marriage. 18. See deposition of David Gross. 19. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 20. I had little role in preparing the obituary. See also deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 21 See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 22. I provided the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage. In addition I spoke to representatives of Social Security. 23. I believe that Social Security contacted friends and family of David Gross before making a determination. 2 ..,' . . 24. See Affidavit of Common Law Marriage and documents supplied in Response to Request for Production of Documents. 25. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 26. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 27. I believe that the siblings of David Gross were offered an opportunity to voice their opinions in the Social Security review of the matter. 28. I presented the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage. 29. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. 30. See deposition of Elizabeth Barth. Respectfully submitted, By: NEALON & GOVER, P.C. ~III' ~Uire I.D. #: 46457 NEALON & GOVER, P.C. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 717/232-9900 Date: !()1tf-"tfY v I 3 . . VERIFICATION I, James G. Nealon, III, Esquire, make this Verification on behalf of Elizabeth Barth, who is currently unavailable to sign this Verification. I represent that the facts set forth in the foregoing ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES OF PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that this Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. S4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~ ~~~,(~~ Ii- James G. Nealon, III Date: { U - 2 u -C7 I . ... ... .J.. . . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ..2fL day of Oc r ~ ,2004, I hereby certify that I have , served the foregoing ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES OF PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH on the following via Federal Express to: Paula J. McDermott, Esquire Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 ~ James G. Nealon, III, Esquire EXHIBIT D , " ! . . . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS: IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2103-1065 RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH BARTH TO REQUEST OF BRIAN JOHN GROSS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. Elizabeth Barth has previously supplied to counsel a copy of the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage. 2. Counsel for Elizabeth Barth has made available various cards, letters and notes for inspection. 3. Elizabeth Barth is not aware of any other documents responsive to the Request for Production of Documents. Respectfully submitted, NEALON & GOVER, P.C. James G. Nealon, III . , J , . " . . . . ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ~ day of 00T, , 2004, I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH BARTH TO REQUEST OF BRIAN JOHN GROSS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS on the following via Federal Express: Paula J. McDermott, Esquire Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 James G. Nealon, III, Esquire J', . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.C., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Date: Novembeb,2004 9 . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION 21-03-1065 ORPHANS' COURT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 3rd day of November, 2004, upon agreement of counsel, it is ordered and directed that Petitioner's Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure To Respond to Discovery Requests, and of the Response of Elizabeth Barth to Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure To Respond to Discovery Requests, shall be transferred to the Honorable George E. Hoffer, President Judge, and heard on Monday, November 8, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., in Courtroom No.3. The previous hearing before the undersigned scheduled for December 8, 2004, at 2:30 p.m., is cancelled. BY THE COURT, 1(, The Honorable George E. Hoffer President Judge--A dJicfJ.,.(: l~;".f (11)/ uti l~ J. ..4aula J. McDermott, Esq. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Petitioner :rc >4~ ~ 11-()3 -6( Ames Nealon, Esq. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 Attorney for Respondent 1~ ~) V") )- . t~ ......1 ~o e~ %~ ~i?:; (~~p ,......)~ . .':> ~.:::...-':.) -- ,fY .-. ~- U -..-' cr '-..) . ..:::- ......; ::> N"~~ . .....J/l.J <..:;..J -,9 C . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION 21-03-1065 ORPHANS' COURT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 28th day of October, 2004, upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure To Respond to Discovery Requests, and of the Response of Elizabeth Barth to Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure To Respond to Discovery Requests, a discovery conference/hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, December 8, 2004, at 2:30 p.m., in Courtroom No.1, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. BY THE COURT, aula J. McDermott, Esq. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Petitioner James Nealon, Esq. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 Attorney for Respondent :rc -;1' l' I, \ ~ 15 ~~. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DE'PARTMENT OF REVENUE BUREAU OF INDIVIDUAL TAXES DEPT, 280601 HARRISBURG, PA 17128-0601 . . REV-1162 EX(11-96) RECEIVED FROM: PENNSYLVANIA INHERITANCE AND ESTATE TAX OFFICIAL RECEIPT BARTH ELIZABETH M 274 COLD SPIRNGS DR MANCHESTER, PA 17345 h___~n fold ESTATE INFORMATION: SSN: 189-52-7272 FILE NUMBER: 2103-1065 DECEDENT NAME: GROSS DAVID DATE OF PAYMENT: 11/02/2004 POSTMARK DATE: 10/26/2004 COUNTY: CUMBERLAND DATE OF DEATH: 08/17/2003 NO. CD 004570 ACN ASSESSMENT CONTROL NUMBER AMOUNT 03137535 I $83.23 I I I I I I I I TOTAL AMOUNT PAID: REMARKS: CHECK# 667 SEAL INITIALS: JA RECEIVED BY: REGISTER OF WILLS $83.23 GLENDA FARNER STRASBAUGH REGISTER OF WILLS 2Lf . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS: IN THE ORPHANS' COURT : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA NO. 2103-1065 RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH BARTH TO MOTION IN LIMINE FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS 1. It is admitted that a hearing was scheduled on October 4, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. It is denied that Elizabeth Barth was provided Notice of the Hearing. The first Notice that she had of the hearing was on October 1, 2004 when she received the Motion in Limine. The hearing has since been rescheduled. 2. Admitted. 3. Ad mitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. It is admitted that Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of a July 28, 2004 letter of Paula J. McDermott, Esquire. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. Admitted. 11. The averments contained in paragraph 11 of the Motion are conclusions of law to which no response is required. '21 23 ~t: . . 12. Admitted. 13. Admitted. 14. It is admitted that the Court has discretion in dealing with failure to respond to discovery. However, a Court normally should not grant sanctions unless there has been a failure to obey an Order compelling discovery. See Linker v. Churnetski Transportation, Inc. 360 Pa. Super. 366, 520A.2d, 502 (1987). 15. It is admitted that the Court has discretion to deal with discovery violations. However, sanctions are not appropriate in the instant case. 16. Admitted. 17. Admitted. However, sanctions should normally not be awarded absent a violation of a Court Order. 18. Admitted. 19. Denied. The failure to respond to discovery was an oversight. 20. Denied. Elizabeth Barth had previously supplied documents In support of her position. In addition, contemporaneously with the filing of this response, Answers to Interrogatories and Response to Request for Production of Documents will be served upon counsel. 21. See paragraph 20 above. 22. See answer to paragraph 20 above. 23. Denied. No prejudice has occurred as the documents have been supplied and the deposition has been taken of Elizabeth Barth. 2 . . NEW MATTER 24. Paula J. McDermott, Esquire was notified by the Court of the hearing scheduled for October 4,2004. 25. Paula J. McDermott, Esquire was counsel for the moving party requesting the hearing. 26. Paula J. McDermott, Esquire never informed counsel for Elizabeth Barth of the scheduled hearing. 27. From the time of the deposition of Elizabeth Barth until the time of the scheduled hearing, Paula J. McDermott, Esquire never contacted counsel for Elizabeth Barth to inquire as to the outstanding discovery requests. 28. No request for an Order compelling the discovery was sought by Paula J. McDermott, Esquire. 29. Normally a Court should not enter sanctions unless there has been a violation of a Court Order. See Linker v. Chumetski Transportation, Inc., 360 Pa. Super. 366, 520A.2d, 502 (1987). 30. Elizabeth Barth has supplied Answers to Interrogatories and a Response to Request for Production of Documents contemporaneously with the filing of this response to the Motion. 3 . . WHEREFORE, Elizabeth Barth respectfully requests this Honorable Court to deny the Motion in Limine and Request for Sanctions. Respectfully submitted, NEALON & GOVER, P.C. BY/- . James G. Nealon, III Attorney 10# 46457 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 232-9900 4 . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, thisc2C day of Gcr?/:3C'K2004, I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH BARTH TO MOTION IN LIMINE FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS on the following via Federal Express: Paula J. McDermott, Esquire Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 " ~ James G. Nealon, III, Esquire \;" . ." . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION 21-03-1065 ORPHANS' COURT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 6th day of October, 2004, upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure To Respond to Discovery Requests, a Rule is hereby issued upon Respondent to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 10 days of service. BY THE COURT, J. Paula J. McDermott, Esq. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorney for Petitioner James Nealon, Esq. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 Attorney for Respondent :rc 2~ . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN RE: HEARING DATE . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORPHANS' COURT : 21-03-1065 ORPHANS ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, October 1,2004, hearing in the above matter, originally set for October 4,2004, is continued to MONDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2004, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom No.3. Paula J. McDermott, Esquire 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 P.J. "l '\ . -,' . Paula J. McDermott, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 46664 Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 E-mail: pmcdermott@postschell.com IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT i'v CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 MOTION IN LIMINE FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGE HOFFER 1. This matter is scheduled for hearing before this Honorable Court on October 4, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. 2. The Citation in this matter was filed on May 11, 2004. 3. On June 16, 2004, a Request for Production of Documents directed to Respondent Elizabeth Barth, was served upon her attorney, James Nealon, Esquire. A true and correct copy of that Request for Production of Documents is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 4. On June 16, 2004, Interrogatories of Petitioner Brian John Gross directed to Respondent Elizabeth Barth were served upon her attorney, James Nealon, Esquire. A true and correct copy of those Interrogatories is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 10 2(j . -' . 5. Answers to those discovery requests were due on July 16, 2004. 6. At some point, subsequent to July 16, 2004, Brian Gross' counsel, Paula J. McDermott received a telephone call from James Nealon, counsel for Respondent, requesting an extension of time to answer the Interrogatories due to failure to obtain certain documents he alleged he was seeking to obtain from the Social Security Administration. 7. On July 28, 2004, Petitioner's counsel, Paula J. McDermott, wrote Attorney Nealon demanding that all documents not pertaining to Social Security be produced and that the Interrogatories be answered. A true and correct copy of this correspondence dated July 28, 2004 is attached hereto as Exhibit "C." 8. No further extension has been sought, nor have any of the Interrogatories or Requests for Production of Documents ever been objected to by Respondent's counsel. 9. Petitioner's counsel took the deposition of Elizabeth M. Barth, Respondent herein, on August 13, 2004. 10. During that deposition, Petitioner's counsel made a statement in the record indicating that no responses to either the Requests for Production of Documents or Interrogatories had been received. A true and correct copy of Page 6 of the Deposition Transcript of Elizabeth M. Barth dated August 13, 2004, is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 11. Pursuant to Rule 4019 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court is empowered to impose sanctions for failure to answer discovery requests. 2 . . -.# . 12. Rule 4019(a)(1) indicates, "The court may on motion make an appropriate order if (i) a party fails to serve sufficient answers or objections to written interrogatories under Rule 4005. . ." 13. Pursuant to Rule 4019(a)(1 )(vii), the Court may make an appropriate order if a party in response to a Request for Production or Inspection made under Rule 4009, fails to respond. 14. Pursuant to Pa. RCP 4019(c) ~~1 and 2, this Court has the authority to issue an Order that the matters regarding which the questions were asked, or the contents of papers, or any other designated facts not responded to shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action in accordance with the claim. 15. Furthermore, this Court is empowered to issue an Order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated claims or defenses or prohibiting such party from introducing in evidence designated documents, things or testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental condition. 16. This Court is also empowered pursuant to Rule 4019(c)(5) to make such order as is just with regard to the failure to make discovery. 17. The imposition of specific sanctions is largely within the discretion of the trial court. Ironworkers Savina & Loan Association v. WIS, Inc., 424 Pa. Super. 255, 622 A.2d 367 (1993). 18. When a discovery sanction is imposed, the sanction must be appropriate when compared to the violation of the rules. Thompson v. Royal Insurance, 361 Pa. Super. 78, 521 A.2d 936 (1986). 3 . -AI . 19. No reasonable justification exists for the failure to answer any discovery whatsoever in this matter. Hutchison by Hutchison v. Luddy, 417 Pa. Super. 93, 611 A.2d 1280 (1992), appeal qranted 533 Pa. 660, 625 A.2d 1193 (1993). 20. Since Respondent has not produced any documents relating to her claim to be the common law spouse of the late David M. Gross pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the Request for Production of Documents, nor any and all documents identified in response to the Answer to the Petition pursuant to Request 2 of the Requests for Production of Documents, Respondent should not be permitted to introduce any such documents at trial. 21. Since Respondent has failed to identify witnesses pursuant to Question 3; witness statements pursuant to Question 4; demonstrative evidence pursuant to Question 5; and trial witnesses pursuant to Question 6 of the Petitioner's Interrogatories, Respondent should be precluded from presenting any such witnesses or demonstrative evidence. 22. Additionally, since Respondent has failed to answer any questions pursuant to the written discovery requests attached hereto as Exhibit "B" relating to her claim, she should be precluded from presenting any evidence whatsoever of her claims at trial. 23. Petitioner Brian John Gross has been prejudiced by the failure to answer discovery since Petitioner Brian John Gross is not informed as to what claims or defenses will be presented; no opportunity has been afforded to depose witnesses. 4 . -. . WHEREFORE, Petitioner Brian John Gross respectfully requests this Honorable Court to sign an Order in the form attached, precluding Respondent from producing any documentation, witnesses or testifying at the hearing in this matter. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.C. F~ &1 ftJ.S-~ PAULA J CDERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian J. Gross Date: ~ s.er~ ,2004 5 - EXHIBIT A . . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH TO: Elizabeth Barth c/o James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 INSTRUCTIONS/DEFINITIONS The following instructions and definitions form an integral part of these Requests, and the Requests are to be read in accordance with these instructions and definitions. I. "Document": The term "document" means any written, printed, typed, or other recorded or graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, whether sent or received or neither, including drafts and copies bearing notations or marks not found on the original, and includes, but is not limited to: (a) all contracts, agreements, representations, warranties, certificates, OpInIOnS; (b) all letters or other forms of correspondence or communication, including envelopes, notes, telegrams, cables, telex messages, messages (including reports, notes, notations and memoranda of or relating to telephone conversations or conferences); (c) All memoranda, reports, test results, financial statements or reports, notes, transcripts, tabulations, studies, analyses, evaluations, projections. work papers, corporate records or copies thereof, lists, comparisons, questionnaires, surveys, charts, graphs, summaries, extracts, statistical records; compilations, (d) all desk calendars, appointment books, diaries; (e) all books, articles, press releases, magazines, newspapers, booklets, circulars, bulletins, notices, instructions, manuals, (f) all minutes or transcripts of all meetings; and (g) all photographs, microfilms, phonographs, tapes or other records, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, printouts, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. . - '" . II. "Communication": The term "communication" means any and all transmissions of information, the information transmitted, the process by which the information is transmitted and the term shall expressly be inclusive of all written and oral communications. III. "Identify", "Identity" or "Identification": A. When used in reference to a natural person, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) full name; (ii) present or last known business and residence addresses; (iii) present or last known business affiliation; and (iv) present or last known business position (including job title and a description of job functions, duties and responsibilities). B. When used with reference to any entity other than a natural person, state: (i) its full name; (ii) the address of its principal place of business; (iii) the jurisdiction under the laws of which it has been organized or incorporated and the date of such organization or incorporation; (iv) the identity of all individuals who acted and/or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to; (v) in the case ofa corporation, the names of its directors and principal officers; and (vi) in the case of an entity other than a corporation, the identities of its partners or principals or all individuals who acted or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to. C. When used in reference to a document, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) the nature of the document (~, letter, contract, memorandum) and any other information (~, its title, index or file number) which would facilitate in the identification thereof. (ii) its date of preparation; (iii) its present location and the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of its present custodian or, if its present location and custodian are not known, a description of its last known disposition; (iv) its subject matter and substance or, in lieu thereof, annex a legible copy of the document to the answers of those interrogatories; (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (~, author, contributor of information, recipient, etc.) or who has any knowledge; and . _to . (vi) if the document has been destroyed or is otherwise no longer in existence or cannot be found, the reason why such document no longer exists, the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of the people responsible for the document no longer being in existence and of its last custodian. D. When used in connection with an oral communication, the terms "identify," "identity," and "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature (~, conference, telephonic communication, etc.); (ii) the time and place of its occurrence; (iii) its subject matter and substance; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role, or knowledge; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(B) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof. IV. "Describe" or "Description": (A) When used with respect to any act, action, accounting, activity, audit, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, negotiation, relationship, scheme, communication, conference, discussion, development, service, transaction, instance, incidence or event, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature; (ii) the time and place thereof; (iii) a chronological account setting forth each element thereof, what such element consisted of and what transpired as part thereof; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (~, speaker, participant, contributor or information, witness, etc.) or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role or knowledge. (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (vi) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(D) hereof) of each oral communication which was a part thereof or referred thereto. (B) When used in connection with any calculation or computation, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) an explanation of its meaning (including the nature, source and meaning of each component part thereof); . ~ ,. . (ii) an explanation of the manner in which it was derived; (iii) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function with respect thereto and a description of his function; (iv) the identity of each document (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(D) hereof) of each oral communication which occurred in the course of the preparation thereof or which referred thereto. V. "Factual basis": The term "factual basis" means (A) set forth each item of information upon which the allegation, contention, claim or demand to which it pertains is based, and (B) with respect to each such item of information, identify each person having knowledge thereof and identity and describe (as defined in Paragraph III and IV hereof) each source thereof including but not limited to each document, oral communication, act, actioIl, activity, accounting, negotiation, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, calculation and computation upon which you rely with respect thereto. VI. "Relates to" or "thereto": The terms "relates to" or "thereto," "relating to" or "thereto" when used in connection with any act, action, activity, accounting, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, contractual provision or document, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, etc., means used or occurring or referred to in the preparation therefore, or in the course thereof, or as a consequence thereof, or referring thereto. VII. Answer by Reference to Documents: If any request is answered by reference to a document or group of documents, with respect to each such response, identify (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) the specific document or documents containing the requested information. VIII. "Person": The term "person" means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships or other business associations, public authorities, municipal corporations, state governments, all governmental bodies, and all other legal entities. IX. "Complaint": Refers to the matter that was filed, as captioned above. X. "Each": "Each" includes both "each" and "every." XI. "And" l"Or": The conjunctive "and" and the disjunctive "or" shall be mutually interchangeable and shall not be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document Request. XII. "Gender": The singular and masculine gender shall respectively include the plural and feminine gender, and vice versa, and neither shall be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document request. . -' ~ . XIII. If you claim that an answer to any discovery request or subpart thereof, or any document related to any discovery request or subpart thereof, or any document requested in each and every discovery request is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, provide the following information: (A) Identify each and every person involved in the act, communication, or information, and, if the claimed privilege related to a document, identify each person who prepared or participated in the preparation of the document and who received it, and each person from whom the document was received; and (B) Provide sufficient information concerning the act, communication, information or document and the circumstances thereof to explain the claim of privilege and to permit the adjudication of the propriety of that claim. XIV. Parties: "Petitioner" - The term "petitioner" refers to Brian John Gross; "Respondent" - The term "respondent" refers to you, Elizabeth Barth. . ~ ,. . REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. Kindly identify and produce any and all documents not privileged in your, your agents', and/or attorneys' possession relating to your claim to be the common-law spouse of the late David M. Gross. 2. Kindly produce any and all documents which are identified in your Response to the Petition. 3. Kindly produce any and all expert reports which you obtained in connection with this matter and/or which you intend to use at the hearing of this matter. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P .C. p~, fl\I-L~ PAULA J. DERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: June 16,2004 . ,. . VERIFICATION I, Elizabeth Barth, Respondent in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Elizabeth Barth Date: ,2004 . ,. . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.e., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Date: June I ~ 2004 CPH 294609vl EXHIBIT B , ' . " . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 INTERROGATORIES OF PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO RESPONDENT ELIZABETH BARTH TO: Elizabeth Barth c/o James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that you are hereby required, pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 4006, as amended, to serve upon the undersigned a copy of your individual answers and objections, if any, in writing and under oath, to the following Interrogatories within thirty (30) days after service of the Interrogatories. The Answers shall be inserted in the space provided. If there is insufficient space to answer an Interrogatory, the remainder of the Answer shall follow on a supplemental sheet. These shall be deemed to be continuing Interrogatories. If, between the time of your Answers and the time of the trial of this case, you or anyone acting on your behalf, learn of any further information not contained in your Answers, you shall promptly furnish said information to the undersigned by Supplemental Answers. POST & SCHELL, P.e. Date: June I (p, 2004 f~~Il\i-~~ Paula J. McD ott, EsqUIre Attorney J.D. No. 46664 240 Grandview A venue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-1970 Attorneys for Plaintiff . . INSTRUCTIONSffiEFINITIONS The following instructions and definitions form an integral part of these interrogatories, and the interrogatories are to be read in accordance with these instructions and definitions. I. "Document": The term "document" means any written, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, whether sent or received or neither, including drafts and copies bearing notations or marks not found on the original, and includes, but is not limited to: (a) all contracts, agreements, representations, warranties, certificates, OpInIOnS; (b) all letters or other forms of correspondence or communication, including envelopes, notes, telegrams, cables, telex messages, messages (including reports, notes, notations and memoranda of or relating to telephone conversations or conferences); (c) All memoranda, reports, test results, financial statements or reports, notes, transcripts, tabulations, studies, analyses, evaluations, projections. work papers, corporate records or copies thereof, lists, comparisons, questionnaires, surveys, charts, graphs, summaries, extracts, statistical records; compilations, (d) all desk calendars, appointment books, diaries; (e) all books, articles, press releases, magazines, newspapers, booklets, circulars, bulletins, notices, instructions, manuals, (f) all minutes or transcripts of all meetings; and (g) all photographs, microfilms, phonographs, tapes or other records, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, printouts, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. II. "Communication": The term "communication" means not only oral communications but also any "documents" (as such term is defined above), whether or not such document or the information contained therein was transmitted by its author to any other person. III. "Identify", "Identity" or "Identification": A. When used in reference to a natural person, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) full name; (ii) present or last known business and residence addresses; (iii) present or last known business affiliation; and (iv) present or last known business position (including job title and a description of job functions, duties and responsibilities). B. When used with reference to any entity other than a natural person, state: (i) its full name; . . (ii) the address of its principal place of business; (iii) the jurisdiction under the laws of which it has been organized or incorporated and the date of such organization or incorporation; (iv) the identity of all individuals who acted and/or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to; (v) in the case of a corporation, the names of its directors and principal officers; and (vi) in the case of an entity other than a corporation, the identities of its partners or principals or all individuals who acted or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to. C. When used in reference to a document, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) the nature ofthe document (~, letter, contract, memorandum) and any other information (~, its title, index or file number) which would facilitate in the identification thereof. (ii) its date of preparation; (iii) its present location and the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of its present custodian or, if its present location and custodian are not known, a description of its last known disposition; (iv) its subject matter and substance or, in lieu thereof, annex a legible copy of the document to the answers of those interrogatories; (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III (A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (~, author, contributor of information, recipient, etc.) or who has any knowledge; and (vi) if the document has been destroyed or is otherwise no longer in existence or cannot be found, the reason why such document no longer exists, the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) ofthe people responsible for the document no longer being in existence and of its last custodian. D. When used in connection with an oral communication, the terms "identify," "identity": and "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature (~, conference, telephonic communication, etc.); (ii) the time and place of its occurrence; (iii) its subject matter and substance; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith or who has any knowledge thereoftogether with a description of each such person's function, role, or knowledge; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph III(B) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof. . " . IV. "Describe" or "Description": (A) When used with respect to any act, action, accounting, activity, audit, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, negotiation, relationship, scheme, communication, conference, discussion, development, service, transaction, instance, incidence or event, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature; (ii) the time and place thereof; (iii) a chronological account setting forth each element thereof, what such element consisted of and what transpired as part thereof; (iv) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith (M, speaker, participant, contributor or information, witness, etc.) or who has any knowledge thereof together with a description of each such person's function, role or knowledge. (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IlI(C) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (vi) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IlI(D) hereof) of each oral communication which was a part thereof or referred thereto. (B) When used in connection with any calculation or computation, the terms "describe" or "description" mean to provide the following information: (i) an explanation of its meaning (including the nature, source and meaning of each component part thereof); (ii) an explanation of the manner in which it was derived; (iii) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IIl(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function with respect thereto and a description of his function; (iv) the identity of each document (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof; and (v) the identity (as defined in Paragraph IlI(D) hereof) of each oral communication which occurred in the course of the preparation thereof or which referred thereto. V. "Factual basis": The term "factual basis" means (A) set forth each item of information upon which the allegation, contention, claim or demand to which it pertains is based, and (B) with respect to each such item of information, identify each person having knowledge thereof and identity and describe (as defined in Paragraph III and IV hereof) each source thereof including but not limited to each document, oral communication, act, action, activity, accounting, negotiation, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, calculation and computation upon which you rely with respect thereto. . '. . VI. "Relates to" or "thereto": The terms "relates to" or "thereto," "relating to" or "thereto" when used in connection with any act, action, activity, accounting, practice, process, occurrence, occasion, course of conduct, contractual provision or document, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, etc., means used or occurring or referred to in the preparation therefore, or in the course thereof, or as a consequence thereof, or referring thereto. VII. Answer by Reference to Documents: If any interrogatory is answered by reference to a document or group of documents, with respect to each such interrogatory answer, identify (as defined in Paragraph III(C) hereof) the specific document or documents containing the requested information. VIII. "Person": The term "person" means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships or other business associations, public authorities, municipal corporations, state governments, all governmental bodies, and all other legal entities. IX. "Complaint": Refers to the matter that you filed, as captioned above. X. "Each": "Each" includes both "each" and "every." XI. "And"/"Or": The conjunctive "and" and the disjunctive "or" shall be mutually interchangeable and shall not be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document Request. XII. "Gender": The singular and masculine gender shall respectively include the plural and feminine gender, and vice versa, and neither shall be construed to limit any Interrogatory or Document request. XIII. If you claim that an answer to any Interrogatory or subpart thereof, or any document related to any Interrogatory or subpart thereof, or any document requested in the accompanying Requests for Production of Documents is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, provide the following information: (A) Identify each and every person involved in the act, communication, or information, and, if the claimed privilege related to a document, identify each person who prepared or participated in the preparation of the document and who received it, and each person from whom the document was received; and (B) Provide sufficient information concerning the act, communication, information or document and the circumstances thereof to explain the claim of privilege and to permit the adjudication of the propriety of that claim. XIV. Parties: "Petitioner" - The term "petitioner" refers to Brian John Gross. "Respondent" _ The term "respondent" refers to you, Elizabeth Barth. . . INTERROGATORIES 1. Personal Information. -- State: RESPONSE: (a) Your full name: (b) Each other name, if any, which you have used or by which your have been known: (c) The name of any spouses and the dates and place of your marriage to such spouses: (d) The address of your present residence and the address of each other residence which you have had during the past five years: (e) Your present occupation and the name and address of your employer: (f) Date of your birth: (g) Your Social Security number; and (i) The schools you have attended and the degrees or certificates awarded, if any. . , . . 2. State with particularity the factual basis for each claim you are asserting in this case. RESPONSE: . . 3. Witnesses. RESPONSE: (a) Identify each person who (1) Was a witness to any statements or ceremonies which you claim to have occurred in connection with your assertion that you are the late David Gross' common-law wife; (2) Has knowledge of facts concerning the issues referenced in the Petition and Answer to Petition; (b) With respect to each person so identified, state that person's relationship to the events described in the Petition and Answer, and basis of knowledge with respect to your alleged marriage to the late David Gross. . . 4. Statements. If you know of anyo~e that has given any statement (as defined by the R.c.P.) concerning this action or its subject matter, state: (a) The identity of such person; (b) When, where, by whom, and to whom each statement was made, and whether it was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded; and (c) The identity of any person who has custody of any such statement that was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded. RESPONSE: . . 5. Demonstrative evidence. If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, and/or video recordings relevant to the claim, state: (a) The nature or type of such item; (b) The date when such item was made; (c) The identity of the person that prepared or made each item; and (d) The subject that each item represents or portrays. RESPONSE: . . 6. Trial witnesses. Identify each persons you intend to call as a non-expert witness at the trial of this case, and for each person identified state your relationship with the witness and the substance of the facts to which the witness is expected to testify. RESPONSE: . . 7. Expert witnesses. Identify each expert you intend to call as a witness at the trial of this matter, and for each expert state: (a) The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; and (b) The substance of the factors and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. (Y ou may file as your answer to this interrogatory the report of the expert or have the interrogatory answered by your expert.) RESPONSE: . . 8. Trial exhibits. Identify all exhibits that you intend to use at the trial of this matter and state for what purpose they will be used. RESPONSE: . 9. Books. magazines. etc. such writing at trial state: RESPONSE: . If you intend to use any book, magazine, or other (a) The name of the writing; (b) The author of the writing; (c) The publisher of the writing; (d) The date of publication of the writing; and (e) The identity of the custodian ofthe writing. . . 10. Admissions. If you intend to use any admission(s) of a party at trial, identify such admission(s). RESPONSE: . . 11. Since you claim to be the common-law spouse of David Gross, state the reasons why you permitted Ramona Gross to be Administratrix of the Estate of the late David Gross. RESPONSE: . . 12. State why you listed yourself as the fiance of the late David Gross in the obituary attached to the Petition. RESPONSE: . . 13. Identify individuals to whom you held yourself out as the common-law spouse of David M. Gross; state the method in which you held yourself out as the common-law spouse of David M. Gross; and state the date and time of any such representation or communication. RESPONSE: . . 14. State why the late David Gross testified that you were his fiance? RESPONSE: . . 15. Explain David Gross' testimony in the personal injury lawsuit in Dauphin County that you have never been married. RESPONSE: . . 16. State why an engagement announcement for yourself and David M. Gross was placed in The Patriot News if you are his common-law spouse. RESPONSE: . . 17. State the date on which you indicate that the common-law marriage took place. As to that date, state the persons present, the nature of the words exchanged, and the place and time of such exchange. RESPONSE: . . 18. Describe your role in the reporting of the death of David M. Gross for purposes of the Death Certificate. RESPONSE: . . 19. Identify any and all individuals who provided information for the Certificate of Death. State as to why decedent, David Gross, was listed as "divorced with no surviving spouse" on such Certificate of Death to the best of your knowledge, information and belief. RESPONSE: . . 20. State your role as to the preparation of the obituary for the late David M. Gross which appeared in The Patriot News on Tuesday, August 19,2003. RESPONSE: . . 21. State as to the best of your knowledge, information and belief why you are listed as the fiance in that obituary. RESPONSE: . . 22. Identify any and all documentation which you provided to Social Security to support your position that you were the common-law spouse of the late David M. Gross. RESPONSE: . . 23. You allege that the Social Security Administration conducted an investigation and contacted friends and relatives of David M. Gross. Identify all such friends and relatives of David M. Gross, and describe their position on your assertion that you were the late David Gross' common-law wife. RESPONSE: . . 24. Identify any and all documentation of any type which supports your contention that you were the late David Gross' common-law wife. RESPONSE: . . 25. Describe why you permitted litigation relating to the late David Gross' personal injury claim in Dauphin County to be conducted by Ramona Gross as representative of the David Gross Estate if you were his common-law wife? RESPONSE: . . 26. Describe any and all evidence, including your own conversations which you had with representatives of the Social Security Administration which you believe establish your claim. As to such conversations, state the date of the conversation, the time of the conversation, the parties to the conversation, and the nature of the claims asserted. RESPONSE: . . 27. Identify any and all parties who were afforded the chance to offer testimony or cross-examine you relating to the Social Security claim. RESPONSE: . . 28. State the nature of any and all evidence, documentary or otherwise, presented by you to the Cumberland County Office of the Register of Wills in connection with your appointment as Administratrix d/b/n of the Estate of David Gross. RESPONSE: . . 29. As to your Affidavit of Common Law Marriage filed with your employer, state the date which that was filed and advise as to any investigation undertaken by your employer. As so any such investigation, indicate whom was contacted and the nature of statements made by any such individuals, and state the names of any and all individuals at your employer with whom you dealt in connection with said Affidavit, including names, addresses and job titles. RESPONSE: . . 30. Describe any and all conversations between you and Father Sawdy. As to such conversations, state the date, time, means of conversation and the parties present. RESPONSE: Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.C. P~J2. ~/'r.A7~ PAULA J. CDERMOT, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: June 15, 2004 . . VERIFICATION I, Elizabeth Barth, Respondent in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing Petitioner's Interrogatories Directed to Respondent are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Elizabeth Barth Date: ,2004 . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.e., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Date: June/ G, , 2004 CPH 294586vl EXHIBIT C .po~ SCHEILpc ATTORNEYS AT LAW FILE e e'\ Paula J. McDermott Direct Dial: 717-612-6012 Fax Number: 717-731-1985 pmcdermott@postschell.com File No.: 1752/120940 July 28, 2004 James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 RE: Estate of David M. Gross Cumberland County Orphans' Court No. 2103-1065 Gross v. Archibald Builders Dauphin County CCP No. 2601 CV 1999 PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA PITTSBURGH Dear Jim: HARRISBURG PRINCETON When we talked, you indicated you were waiting for information from Social Security to complete your responses to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Kindly produce whatever does not pertain to the Social Security and answer the Interrogatories, subject to your right to supplement when you receive your information. Meanwhile, I would like to schedule your client's deposition for Friday, August 13 in our office. I enclose a Deposition Notice for that purpose. It seems to me that it would be advisable for the parties to have taken your client's deposition prior to the Status Conference on the 19th with Judge Hoover. LANCASTER AllENTOWN NEW JERSEY I will look forward to hearing from you in this regard. Very truly yours, ~~~.*-(~ Paula f McDermott PJM:djs Enclosure cc: Brian Gross Thomas Brenner, Esquire Johnna J. Kopecky, Esquire 240 GRANDVIEW AVENUE CAMP Hill, PA 17011 717.731.1970 WWW.POSTSCHELL.COM A PENNSYLVANIA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION EXHIBIT D "- \.- " ~.--- . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DAVID GROSS, Plaintiff No. 2601 S 1999 vs. ARCHIBALD BUILDERS, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Deposition of: ELIZABETH M. BARTH Taken by Counsel for Brian Gross Date August 13, 2004; 9:10 a.m. Place Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, pennsylvania Before Susan D. Kashmere, RPR Reporter - Notary Public APPEARANCES: POST & SCHELL, P.C. By: PAULA J. McDERMOTT, ESQ. For - Brian Gross NEALON & GOVER, By: ANDREW C. P.C. LEHMAN, ESQ. For - Elizabeth Barth FILIUS & McLUCAS REPORTING SERVICE, INC. Harrisburg 717-236-0623 York 717-845-6418 PA 1-800-233-9327 '-' '-' '-' . 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 A. . Exam./McDermott - Barth 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 No alcohol or drugs. MR. LEHMAN: Ms. McDermott, usual stipuations okay? MS. MCDERMOTT: Yes. MR. LEHMAN: She's going to reserve the right to decide if she's going to read and sign after completion. MS. MCDERMOTT: Now, the other thing I wanted to put on the record in that regard also is that we have not received answers to either our request for production of documents or to our interrogatories, the answers to which were due on or about July 15th. At that point I did give Mr. Nealon an extension to answer, but in subsequent correspondence requested that he do go ahead and answer them and he hasn't, which may, you know, depending on the answers this morning, require at some future point another deposition after we've received those answers. And I wanted to just put that in the record as a statement. I don't know if anyone else has anything to add to that. 24 BY MS. MCDERMOTT: 25 Q. We've got most of the preliminaries out of the FILIUS & McLUCAS REPORTING SERVICE, INC. Harrisburg 717-236-0623 York 717-845-6418 PA 1-800-233-9327 . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.C., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Dafoe. /1i /1217,) yJ!-tl :yJ, 2004 ..' '" \ / \ I I .. \ ("" )' \ !~ ", tl/t1. -c ........ . . Dena. mp, Se~retary 6 . . , Paula J. McDermott, Esquire Attorney 1.0. # 46664 Post & Schell, P.C. 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 E-mail: pmcdermott@postschell.com IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 BRIEF OF BRIAN JOHN GROSS IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REVOCATION OF LETTERS AND REMOVAL OF ADMINISTRATRIX TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGE HOFFER I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This dispute arises out of the August 17, 2003 death of David Gross and the proposed distribution of proceeds obtained from a personal injury settlement in a matter currently pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.1 After Mr. Gross' death, his mother, Ramona Gross, was appointed Administratrix of the David Gross Estate on December 26, 2003. Ramona Gross subsequently died on February 4,2004, leaving no personal representative of the David Gross Estate. . I The personal injury action docketed to No. 260 I-S-1999 was filed by David Gross as Plaintiff arising from a work-related incident during the pendency of which Mr. Gross died. The case was ultimately settled for $450,000.00. The amount of $156,255.26 is being held in escrow by Post & Schell pending a determination of the true beneficiaries of David Gross. ~~ . . On or about April 20, 2004, in a clear attempt to obtain possession of the aforementioned settlement proceeds, Elizabeth Barth, posing as Mr. Gross' common- law wife, filed a Petition to Revoke Letters of Administration and requesting Letters of Administration to be issued to Elizabeth Barth as David Gross' surviving spouse. Based upon the fraudulent misrepresentations contained therein, Elizabeth Barth was appointed Administratrix of the David Gross Estate. On or about May 11, 2004, Brian J. Gross, the brother of the decedent, David Gross, and the son of Ramona Gross, late Administratrix of the David Gross Estate, filed the within Petition for Revocation of Letters and Removal of the Administratrix, Elizabeth Barth, inasmuch as she has fraudulently and illegally taken control of the Estate and as a result was not entitled to the grant of letters pursuant to 20 Pa. C.S.A. ~~3155, 3181. On or about April 27, 2004, Elizabeth Barth filed her response to the Petition. A hearing has been scheduled in this matter before this Honorable Court on Monday, October 4, 2004. This Brief is respectfully submitted in support of Brian J. Gross' Petition for Revocation of Letters and Removal of Administratrix. II. ISSUE PRESENTED A. WHETHER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATRIX, ELIZABETH BARTH, SHOULD BE REMOVED AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE DAVID GROSS ESTATE INASMUCH AS SHE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE GRANT OF LETTERS WHEN THE UNCONTROVERTED EVIDENCE REVEALS THAT SHE WAS NEVER THE COMMON LAW WIFE OF DAVID GROSS AND AS SUCH, FRAUDULENTLY AND ILLEGALLY ASSUMED SUCH A ROLE? Suggested answer: AFFIRMA T1VE. 2 . . III. ARGUMENT ELIZABETH BARTH SHOULD BE REMOVED AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE DAVID GROSS ESTATE INASMUCH AS, DESPITE HER REPRESENTATIONS TO THE CONTRARY, SHE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE GRANT OF LETTERS WHEN THE UNCONTROVERTED EVIDENCE OF RECORD REVEALS THAT SHE WAS NEVER THE COMMON LAW WIFE OF DAVID GROSS. AND WAS APPOINTED THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE DAVID GROSS ESTATE THROUGH FRAUDULENT AND/OR DECEPTIVE MEANS. Elizabeth Barth is not entitled to serve as the Administratrix of the David Gross Estate. inasmuch as she is not the surviving spouse of David Gross. See, 20 Pa. C.S.A. &&3155. 3181. Any statement or contention that she is or was the common-law wife of David Gross is simply inaccurate at best and a blatant misrepresentation of fact at worst. Indeed, Elizabeth Barth is not, nor was ever married (legally, civilly or under common law) to David Gross. The facts of record clearly establish that she was nothing more than a long term girlfriend and/or fiance with an intent to be married to David Gross at sometime in the future. Simply put, Elizabeth Barth was not as she represented to this Honorable Court, the common law wife of David Gross, and as a result thereof has fraudulently and illegally taken control of the David Gross Estate. Accordingly, she should be removed as the Administratrix of the Estate since she was not properly entitled to the grant of letters pursuant to 20 Pa. C.S.A. ~~3155, 3181. As this Court is well aware, marriage in Pennsylvania is a civil contract which can be established through ceremony or common law. See, In re: Estate of Manfredi, 159 A.2d 697 (Pa. 1960). Moreover, because claims for the existence of a marriage in the absence of a certified ceremonial marriage present a "fruitful source of perjury and fraud," Pennsylvania Courts have long viewed claims of common law marriage with hostility and although tolerated, such claims are not encouraged. Staudenmaver v. Staudenmaver, 714 A.2d 1016 (Pa. 1998). Indeed, in recent years, the Pennsylvania 3 . . Supreme Court has reaffirmed its position that claims of common law marriage are disfavored and has gone so far as to discuss (if not completely implement) the absolute abolition of the doctrine. kl The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in PNC Bank Corporation v. WCAB (Stamos), 831 A.2d 1269 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) has reviewed the long history of common law marriages, addressed the overwhelming negative effects of such a principle, and held that, ". . .henceforth, this Court will recognize as valid only those Pennsylvania marriages entered into pursuant to the marriage law procedures." PNC Bank Corp., 831 A.2d 1269 at 1282. To say the least and in light of the foregoing, it is a heavy and overwhelming burden to prove the establishment of a common law marriage. Elizabeth Barth has, without question, failed to sustain this burden. In Pennsylvania, it has been consistently held that a common law marriage can only be created by the exchange of words in the present tense (verba in praesentI) spoken with a specific purpose that the legal relationship of husband and wife be created through such an exchange. Staudenmaver, 714 A.2d at 1020. The Staudenmaver court further noted that the common law marriage contract does not require any specific form of words; all that is essential is proof of an agreement to enter into the legal relationship of marriage at the present time. lQ.; See also, Estate of Gavula, 417 A.2d 168 (Pa. 1980). As noted above, words in the present tense are generally required to prove a common law marriage. The Courts have imposed an additional requirement that when applicable (i.e., no evidence of verba in praesenti or death of one of the parties), the party claiming a common law marriage must establish: (1) constant cohabitation; and, (2) a reputation of marriage in the community (which is not partial or divided but is broad and general). It 4 . . is essential to note, however, that constant cohabitation even when coupled with a general reputation in the community is not marriage, but merely circumstances which could give rise to a rebuttable presumption of marriage. Staudenmaver, 714 A.2d 106 (Pa. 1998); Estate of Manfredi, 159 A.2d 697 (Pa. 1960). In this case, Elizabeth Barth, as the party with the burden to prove the existence of a common law marriage, has failed to establish the exchange of words in the present tense spoken between her and David Gross with the specific purpose that the legal relationship of husband of wife be created thereby. Ms. Barth has also failed to establish a reputation of marriage between her and David Gross in the community and as such, cannot satisfy any of the elements necessary to establish a common law marriage in Pennsylvania. Specifically, although Elizabeth Barth claims to have lived with David Gross for approximately seven years, there is no evidence to suggest that the two regarded themselves or were generally regarded as being married to one another in any sense of the term. Indeed, in her deposition testimony, Ms. Barth testified that people did not refer to her and David as husband/wife, but rather "everyone knew us to be represented as David and Beth." (Barth depo. at p. 27). Moreover, Ms. Barth testified that neither she nor David Gross referred to one another as husband and wife, but rather introduced one another or introduced each other as "this is my David and this is my angel." (Barth depo. at p. 27). Ms. Barth further testified that although, on occasion, she may have been referred to as "Mrs. Gross," she took exception to this denomination and in fact would correct the speaker by saying, "My name is Elizabeth Barth." (Barth depo. at p. 72). She never introduced herself nor referred to herself as the wife of David Gross, 5 . . Mrs. Gross or any derivation thereof. (Barth depo. at pp. 27, 73). Indeed, Ms. Barth also testified that they never referred to themselves as husband and wife nor mentioned any asserted marriage to any members of Mr. Gross' family, including Mr. Gross' mother. (Barth depo. at pp. 27,28). The deposition testimony of Elizabeth Barth further establishes that any discussion of marriage was always addressed as a future occurrence. Ms. Barth and David Gross made wedding plans which had to be scheduled and rescheduled on numerous occasions, always with the intent to ultimately be married at sometime in the future. (Barth depo. at p. 31). Moreover, the deposition testimony reveals that David Gross asked Ms. Barth to marry him and gave her an engagement ring for a marriage that would occur, again, some time in the future. (Barth depo. at pp. 54-55). Indeed, David Gross' obituary, based upon information supplied by Ms. Barth, referenced Ms. Barth as his fiance. (Exhibit "B" to Petition). At the deposition of David Gross taken in his personal injury lawsuit, David Gross indicated that Elizabeth Barth was his fiance. (Barth depo. at p. 63; Exhibit "0" attached to Petition). Indeed, based on information provided by Ms. Barth, David Gross' Death Certificate notes that at the time of his death he was divorced with no surviving spouse - - not currently married as Ms. Barth would like this Honorable Court to believe.2 (Exhibit "A" attached to Petition). Clearly, Elizabeth Barth has been unable to establish that she and Mr. Gross had a reputation within the community of being husband and wife and in fact, Ms. Barth has only been able to produce evidence to suggest that, although the two were indeed a couple, any marriage between Ms. Barth and David Gross was to take place in the . 2 It is undisputed that David Gross was previously married and divorced from his first wife in or about 1992. 6 . . future. Indeed, they did not refer to one another as husband and wife; Ms. Barth did not refer to herself as Mrs. Gross; family and friends, including Mr. Gross' own mother, referred to Ms. Barth as either his girlfriend or fiance; and David Gross himself, while alive, referred to Ms. Barth as his girlfriend or fiance. For all intents and purposes, Ms. Barth and David Gross lived with one another but acted and held themselves out as two single individuals. In fact, Ms. Barth testified that their taxes were always filed as single persons - not married. The only shred of evidence in support of her position that Elizabeth Barth is the common law wife of David Gross was a self-serving Affidavit of Common Law Marriage which was executed by Mr. Gross and Ms. Barth. In her deposition at Pages 35 and 36, Ms. Barth indicates the joint decision to file an affidavit of common law marriage with Coventry Health Care (Health America) was only to purchase supplemental health insurance for David Gross for purely financial considerations, not to establish a common law relationship with David Gross. As this Court is well aware, although such an Affidavit is admissible and constitutes probative evidence of the existence of a common law marriage, it is not irrebuttable evidence and as such, is not conclusive proof of the relationship. Indeed, in Bell v. Ferraro, 849 A.2d 1233, the Pennsylvania Superior Court stated that, "we recognize [that an affidavit of common law marriage] is admissible and probative evidence. It is not, however, irrebuttable evidence. The statute which allows the contents of a notarized document to be admitted as proof of the facts stated therein, also recognizes that a litigant 'may be permitted to contradict by other evidence any such certificate.''' lQ. at 1235. 7 . . As in the Bell decision, the facts presented herein clearly contradict and outweigh any probative value of the self-serving Affidavit of Common Law Marriage inasmuch as Elizabeth Barth herself testified that the Affidavit was intended solely to allow David Gross to be added to her health insurance. (Barth depo. at p. 33). It is quite evident in this case that the execution and use of the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage was simply to allow David Gross to receive health benefits. Ms. Barth herself testified as much, and a basic review of the contents of the Affidavit, together with the contents of Ms. Barth's deposition testimony, reveals significant discrepancies between the two. Specifically, in her deposition testimony, Ms. Barth testified that, in her opinion, she and Mr. Gross were married as of the day they met (i.e., September 8, 1995), whereas the contents of the Affidavit reveal that she and Mr. Gross were married when the two began to reside with one another (i.e., March 1, 1996). She also testified that the date was February of 1996. Normally, married persons have only one anniversary. Given the purpose behind the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage, together with the self- serving nature of the same, the document and any facts offered in support or as history concerning the document lack any probative value for this Honorable Court's inquiry and ultimate decision. Indeed, this case is strikingly similar to a case recently decided by the Honorable Judge Bayley of this Court. In that decision issued this month, Ewinq v. Ickes, docketed to 04-1887 in the Court of Common Please for Cumberland County, Judge Bayley found that the parties were not married despite their having executed an Affidavit of Common Law Marriage in order to obtain health insurance. A copy of Judge Bayley's decision is appended hereto as Exhibit "A." 8 . . It is possible that Mr. Gross and Ms. Barth cared for one another very deeply. However, simply caring for another person does not entitle Ms. Barth to the same rights, obligations and entitlements of a spouse. The record in this matter is abundantly clear that Ms. Barth and Mr. Gross were not common law husband and wife, did not hold themselves out as husband and wife, did not refer to themselves as husband and wife, did not tell any friends or family that they were married. In fact, at all times material hereto, Ms. Barth and Mr. Gross intended to get married at some point in the future. The fact that the parties intended to be married in the future is evidenced by the fact that Ms. Barth and Mr. Gross, on several occasions, scheduled and rescheduled their wedding nuptials and referred to one another as fiance, not as husband and/or wife and produced an engagement announcement in The Patriot News indicating a wedding to take place in the summer of 2004. Mr. Gross had purchased an engagement ring and the announcement listed Elizabeth Barth as David Gross' fiance. After David Gross' death, there was a letter of condolences issued to David's mother depicting a phone call made by Elizabeth Barth, who introduced herself to Father Sawdy as David's fiance after David's death. Surely, two married individuals do not call one another a fiance and schedule a wedding ceremony if in fact they are already married. Any statements to contentions to the contrary constitute an outright misrepresentation of fact to this Honorable Court. For these reasons, as well as for the reasons set forth above, Petitioner, Brian John Gross, requests that Elizabeth Barth be removed as the Administratrix of the Estate of David Gross, and that he be granted Letters of Administration for the Estate of David Gross. 9 . . IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner, Brian J. Gross, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant his Petition, remove Elizabeth M. Barth as the Administratrix of the Estate of David Gross and appoint Brian J. Gross as the Administrator of the same. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.C. J~:pr ~c ~. PAULA . MCDERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney I. D. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Date: September 30, 2004 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian J. Gross 10 EXHIBIT A . . AMY M. EWING, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DANIEL R. ICKES, DEFENDANT 04-1887 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DECLARATION AS TO MARRIAGE BEFORE BAYLEY. J. OPINION AND JUDGMENT Bayley, J., September 2,2004:-- On April 28, 2004, plaintiff, Amy M. Ewing, filed a complaint in divorce against defendant Daniel R. Ickes. Plaintiff avers that the parties were married on July 28, 1992, in Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Defendant filed an answer denying that he and plaintiff are married. He then sought a declaratory judgment that he is not married to plaintiff.1 A hearing was conducted on August 23, 2004. Amy Ewing and Daniel R. Ickes never had a ceremonial marriage. They started dating in April, 1991. On July 28, 1992, they moved into a residence that he purchased. On February 13, 1995, they had a daughter, Cayenne Ickes. On June 30, 1999, they purchased and moved into a property in Newberry Township, York County. The deed was titled: 1 The Divorce Code, at 23 Pa.C.S. 3306, provides: When the validity of a marriage is denied or doubted, either or both of the parties to the marriage may bring an action for a declaratory judgment seeking a declaration of the validity or invalidity of the marriage and, upon proof of the validity or invalidity of the marriage, the marriage shall be declared valid or invalid by decree of the court and, unless reversed upon . . 04-1887 CIVIL TERM "DANIEL R. ICKES and AMY M. EWING, As Joint Tenants With The Right Of Survivorship." On October 24, 1999, they had a son, Daniel Ickes. The parties had joint financial accounts. They have, for many years, employed an accountant to prepare their tax returns which they have always filed as single persons. In numerous documents executed over the years they are identified as single persons except for one signed by both of them on February 12, 2001. They both testified that a notarized document was used to obtain medical insurance for her through his employment. It sets forth: AFFIDAVIT OF COMMON-LAW MARRIAGE We, Daniel R. Ickes and Amy Ewing, the undersigned, being duly sworn, do hereby state that on 7/28/92, being freely able to contract, we entered into the relationship of husband and wife under common-law at EnolalEast PennsborolWest Fairview, PA, intending to be legally bound thereby and in full recognition of the rights, duties, obligations associated therewith. At that time we had the present intent to be married, evidenced by words in the present tense uttered with a view and purpose of establishing the relationship of husband and wife. Daniel Ickes testified that although they have discussed getting married over the years neither he nor Amy have ever agreed that they were married. They have not spoken words in the present tense to that extent. He does not introduce her to others as his wife. Amy Ewing testified that she has considered herself the wife of Daniel Ickes since July 28, 1992, when they moved into this property. When asked why there was no formal ceremony at that time, she testified: "Just the expense at the time with buying the new house and he just never formally asked me to marry him at that time." She testified that since they started living together, they have considered each other husband and wife and are known as such to their appeal, the declaration shall be conclusive upon all persons concerned. -2- . . 04-1887 CIVIL TERM families and friends. Her mother testified that she has considered Daniel Ickes as her son-in- law since 1992. No friends of either party testified. When Amy was asked why the Affidavit Of Common Law Marriage which was signed by both of them on February 12, 2001, listed July 28, 1992 as the date of a common law marriage, she testified: 'That is the date that we moved in together and began a monogamous relationship together." She was questioned: Q Is it your testimony that since this date then you considered yourself married to Mr. Ickes? A Yes. a And you believe that he considered himself married as well? A Yes. In Bell v. Ferraro, 849 A.2d 1233 (Pa. Super. 2004), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently stated: A common law marriage can only be created by an exchange of words in the present tense, spoken with the specific purpose that the legal relationship of husband and wife is created by such exchange. Staudenmayer v. Staudenmayer, 714 A.2d 1016 (Pa.1998). The burden to prove a common law marriage rests on the proponent of the marriage and such a claim must be reviewed with great scrutiny. Id. (Footnote omitted.) In Bell, Debra Bell appealed from an order of a trial court finding that no common law marriage existed between her and Edward Ferraro.2 The facts were: 2 The Superior Court noted: We recognize that the Commonwealth Court has purported to prospectively abolish common law marriage in the context of Workers' Compensation Claims. PNC Bank Corp. v. W. C.A.B., 831 A.2d 1269 (Pa.Cmwlth.2004). We point out, however, that (1) we are not bound by decisions of the Commonwealth Court, and (2) both this Court and our Supreme Court have declined the invitation to abolish common law marriage, deferring such action to the legislature. See e.g., Staudenmayer, 714 A.2d 1016 (Pa.1998); Interest of Miller, 448 A.2d 25 -3- . . 04-1887 CIVIL TERM ~ ' 1 Both parties testified and also presented documentary evidence to support their respective positions. Appellant presented an "Affidavit of Common Law Marriage" which was signed by both parties, as well as correspondence referring to the parties as married. Appellee presented deeds executed subsequent to the affidavit which evidenced the parties' purchase of real estate as single individuals as well as tax returns in which Appellant's status was listed as "Head of Household" and Appellee's status was listed as "Single." Regarding the "Affidavit of Common Law Marriage," Appellant testified that the parties did indeed exchange the requisite verba in praesenti and that they informed their friends and relatives of the marriage. Appellee testified that the affidavit was executed solely to enable him to add Appellant to his health insurance and that they did not present themselves to the community as married persons. Appellant had children from a previous relationship. The Superior Court stated: Regarding the Affidavit of Common Law Marriage, we recognize that it is admissible and probative evidence. It is not, however, irrebuttable evidence. The statute which allows the contents of a notarized document to be admitted as proof of the facts stated therein, also recognizes that a litigant "may be permitted to contradict by other evidence any such certificate." 42 Pa.C.S.A. S 6105(a). That is precisely what happened in the present case when Appellee testified that the affidavit was intended solely to allow Appellant to be added to his health insurance. As the trial court made a specific determination that this testimony was more credible than Appellant's, we cannot find error or an abuse of discretion in the trial court's finding that the affidavit was not dispositive. In the case sub judice, both parties testified that their Affidavit Of Common Law Marriage was used to add Amy to Daniel's health insurance provided by his employer. All other documents referring to the parties and executed by them over the years identify them as single persons. In 1999, almost seven years after they started living together they purchased property titled as joint tenants with right of survivorship, not as tenant by the entireties. While Amy maintains that she considers herself married she did not testify that she and Daniel ever (Pa.Super.1982) -4- ..;"....,.' - 'I" ( ". ' . 04-1887 CIVIL TERM exchanged words in the present tense, spoken with a specific purpose that a legal relationship of husband and wife was created. Daniel testified that no such words were ever spoken. His testimony is credible and is supported by other credible evidence. The Affidavit Of Common Law Marriage was only executed for the purpose of her obtaining health insurance. The parties are not married at common law. Accordingly, the following judgment is entered. JUDGMENT AND NOW, this day of September, 2004, IT IS DECLARED THAT Daniel R. Ickes and Amy M. Ewing ARE NOT MARRIED. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Linda A. Clotfelter, Esquire For Plaintiff Andrew C. Spears, Esquire For Defendant :5al -5- . . ' I .. . :' AMY M. EWING, PLAINTIFF V. DANIEL R ICKES, DEFENDANT . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 04-1887 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DECLARATION AS TO MARRIAGE AND NOW, this BEFORE BAYLEY, J. JUDGMENT day of September, 2004, IT IS DECLARED THAT Daniel R Ickes and Amy M. Ewing ARE NOT MARRIED. Linda A Clotfelter, Esquire For Plaintiff Andrew C. Spears, Esquire F or Defendant :sal By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.C., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.C. Date: SeptemberSC!2004 ,) CPH 298833vl 11 . . CI OCT 0 1 2004 \.1 IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 ORDER AND NOW, this _ day of , 2004, for good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Respondent is precluded at trial from: (1) testifying as to any matters contained within the Interrogatory questions; (2) producing any witnesses at the trial of this matter; and (3) producing any documentary evidence at the trial of this matter. BY THE COURT: Hoffer, J BUREAU OF INDIVIDUAL TAXES INHERITANCE TAX DIVISION DEPT. 280601 HARRISBURG, PA 17128-0601 . COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE . NOTICE OF INHERITANCE TAX APPRAISEMENT~ ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION~, AND ASSESSMENT OF TAX ON JOINTLY HELD OR TRUST ASSETS REV-1548 EX AFP (01-0ll ELIZABETH M BARTH 601B MALLARD RD CAMP HILL PA 17011 DATE ESTATE OF DATE OF DEATH FILE NUMBER COUNTY SSN/DC ACN 09-20-2004 GROSS 08-17-2003 21 03-1065 CUMBERLAND 189-52-7272 03137535 Amount Remitted DAVID M MAKE CHECK PAYABLE AND REMIT PAYMENT TO: REGISTER OF WILLS CUMBERLAND CO COURT HOUSE CARLISLE, PA .j;f013 CUT ALONG THIS LINE ~ RETAIN LOWER PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS ..... :~-:: RtEv=is4-S-E)f-AFFI-fo-i:03i---------------------------------------------------------------~~------------------- --' NOTICE OF INHERITANCE TAX APPRAISEMENT, ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE ~ DEDUCTIONS, AND ASSESSMENT OF TAX ON JOINTLY HELD OR TRUST ASSETS - DATE ~J-20-2004 ESTATE OF GROSS DAVID M DATE OF DEATH 08-17-2003 COUNT~ CUMBERLAND FILE NO. 21 03-1065 TAX RETURN WAS: S.S/D.C. NO. 189-52-7272 (X) ACCEPTED AS FILED () CHANGED JOINT OR TRUST ASSET INFORMATION ACN 03137535 FINANCIAL INSTITUTION: PENNSVLVANIA STATE BANK ACCOUNT NO. 10400448 TVPE OF ACCOUNT: () SAVINGS (X> CHECKING ( ) TRUST ( ) TIME CERTIFICATE DATE ESTABLISHED 02-12-1998 X 1, 093.55 0.500 546.78 .00 546.78 .15 82.02 NOTE: TO INSURE PROPER CREDIT TO YOUR ACCOUNT, SUBMIT THE UPPER PORTION OF THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR TAX PAVMENT TO THE REGISTER OF WILLS AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS. MAKE CHECK OR MONEV ORDER PAVABLE TO: "REGISTER OF WILLS, AGENT." Account Balance Percent Taxable Amount Subject to Tax Debts and Deductions Taxable Amount Tax Rate Tax Due X TAX CREDITS: PAVMENT RECEIPT DISCOUNT (+) AMOUNT PAID DATE NUMBER INTEREST/PEN PAID (-) INTEREST IS CHARGED THROUGH 09-28-2004 TOTAL TAX CREDIT .00 AT THE RATES APPLICABLE AS OUTLINED ON THE BALANCE OF TAX DUE 82.02 EVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM INTEREST AND PEN. 1.21 TOTAL DUE 83.23 dV\ ~" ~ * IF PAID AFTER THIS DATE, SEE REVERSE FOR CALCULATION OF ADDITIONAL INTEREST. * ( IF TOTAL DUE IS LESS THAN $1, NO PAYHENT IS REQUIRED. IF TOTAL DUE IS REFLECTED AS A "CREDIT" ( CRJ, YOU HAY BE DUE A REFUND. SEE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORH FOR INSTRUCTIONS. J \~ " . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS ?J~ AND NOW, this _ day of . -\\ JUL 1 3 2004 ~. IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 , 2004, for good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered and decreed that the Petition for Hearing is GRANTED. This matter has been / scheduled for Hearing on /(~ (~~~_,~!<),k_k/A, 2004, at 9' _?L-fl:M. in Courtroom?> _ at the Cumberland County Courthouse, One Courthouse Square, Carlisle, P A before the Honorable~c n :r f: JJ['-Ifv 1.::-. '""f-..-' -.-h..) . ....... ('tit} .;; . ~;.-f, , --:::d ... .---,' - :;;L::=:: .....J ~ " .~ <:J..-/, '~-'~ _/ -B '- :::;.. . ___/ '---.J ..JrO ../ -...0 -~~j ,- v BY THE COURT: 1. e" . d J::;-.. L c:: r'" N \0 -c i'"J ".,n vJ \1 it ~. ...., . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA NO. 2103-1065 PETITION OF BRIAN J. GROSS TO LIST MATTER FOR HEARING AND NOW, comes Petitioner Brian 1. Gross, by and through his attorneys, Post & Schell, P.c., and hereby petitions this Honorable Court to schedule the above-captioned matter for hearing as follows: 1. The pleadings in the above-captioned matter are closed. 2. Written discovery and depositions will be completed on or before July 30, 2004. 3. Petitioner requests Your Honorable Court to schedule this matter for hearing in August, 2004, or at the first available time and date thereafter. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant this Petition and schedule this matter for hearing. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.c. ~;./)I€~ PAULA . MCDERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney J.D. # 46664 240 Grandview A venue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: July 8, 2004 - JUI, i~04 Y ,. -. I . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.c., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.c. Date: July 8, 2004 - / ( . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 ORDER AND NOW, this _ day of , 2004, for good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered and decreed that the Petition for Hearing is GRANTED. This matter has been scheduled for Hearing on , 2004, at .M. in Courtroom at the Cumberland County Courthouse, One Courthouse Square, Carlisle, P A before the Honorable BY THE COURT: 1. \~ ........ . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 PETITION OF BRIAN J. GROSS TO LIST MATTER FOR HEARING AND NOW, comes Petitioner Brian J. Gross, by and through his attorneys, Post & Schell, P.C., and hereby petitions this Honorable Court to schedule the above-captioned matter for hearing as follows: 1. The pleadings in the above-captioned matter are closed. 2. Written discovery and depositions will be completed on or before July 30,2004. 3. Petitioner requests Your Honorable Court to schedule this matter for hearing in August, 2004, or at the first available time and date thereafter. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant this Petition and schedule this matter for hearing. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.e. ~,.'lte~ PAULA . MCDERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney LD. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: July 8,2004 , " .. . . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena 1. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.c., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 POST & SCHELL, P.c. Date: July 8, 2004 , ~ . . VERIFICATION I, ELIZABETH M. BARTH, verify that the statements made in the foregoing RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH M. BARTH TO PETITION FOR REVOCATION OF LETTERS AND REMOVAL OF ADMINISTRATRIX are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. S4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. The Verification of Elizabeth M. Barth could not be obtained in the time prescribed by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Date: 7 /110 Lf ~ James G. Nealon, III \S \ N "\1""" o , ,. . . NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Respondent You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter of Petitioner within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a default judgment may be entered against you. J~~. ~c~- Attorney f Petitioner IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 PETITIONER BRIAN JOHN GROSS' REPLY WITH NEW MATTER TO NEW MATTER OF ELIZABETH BARTH 23. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that long after the death of David M. Gross, Respondent applied for survivor benefits with the Social Security Administration. It is specifically denied that this application or the granting of it has any probative value. By way of further answer, Elizabeth M. Barth acquiesced in decedent's mother acting as administratrix of his estate and took no court action until after the death of decedent's mother, Ramona Gross. 24. Denied. The answer to the averments of Paragraph 23 are incorporated hereby as if set forth fully and at length. By way of further answer, an ex parte proceeding by the Social Security Administration in which evidence was neither taken or cross-examination permitted, is in no way probative that Respondent is the surviving spouse of David M. Gross. 25. Denied. Petitioner is unaware of an evidentiary investigation relating to the approval of the claim of Respondent Barth. By way of further answer, the Answer is unverified \l\ . . and accordingly, does not correspond with the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 26. Denied. Petitioner is unaware of any relatives or friends who confirmed that Barth was the common law spouse. By way of further answer, the answer to the averments of Paragraphs 23, 24 and 25 are incorporated hereby as if set forth fully and at length. 27. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the Social Security Administration made an ex parte decision based upon misrepresentations made by Respondent Barth. Any probative value as to that determination for the purpose of these proceedings is specifically denied. 28. Denied. The answers to the averments of Paragraphs 23-27 are incorporated hereby as if set forth fully and at length. By way of further answer, the Social Security Administration's determination was ex parte, not based upon any evidence of record, and, accordingly, is not probative for the purposes of these proceedings. 29. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Petitioner received a questionnaire from Social Security. As to what the other siblings may have received, after reasonable investigation, Petitioner is without information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of this averment, and proof is demanded at the time of hearing. By way of further answer, Petitioner has never informed Social Security or anyone else that Respondent was his late brother's common law spouse. 30. Denied. It is specifically denied that Social Security afforded any venue for objection to its ex parte decision. By way of further answer, Petitioner has subsequently objected vociferously to Social Security's ex parte determination in this matter. . . 31. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Petitioner is without information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of this averment, and proof is demanded at the time of hearing. By way of further answer, Anthony Gross, who lives at some distance, would be the least able of any of the siblings to have any knowledge as to the relationship between the late David Gross and Respondent. 32. Denied. It is specifically denied that the doctrine of estoppel is in any way implicated ill these proceedings. By way of further answer, Petitioner has vigorously and forcefully objected to the determination made on an ex parte basis by the Social Security Administration. By way further answer, Respondent Barth concealed material facts and made misrepresentations to the Social Security Administration in order to obtain survivor benefits. NEW MATTER OF BRIAN JOHN GROSS DIRECTED TO ELIZABETH BARTH 33. The answers to the averments of Paragraphs 23-32 are incorporated hereby as if set forth fully and at length. 34. The Answer and New Matter should be stricken for failure to conform to the Rules of Civil Procedure, since it is unverified. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully urges this Honorable Court to grant the Petition. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.c. ~d'~~ P A LA J. MCDERMOTT, ESQUIRE Attorney LD. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Date: June 14,2004 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross ~ . . VERIFICATION I, Brian Gross, Petitioner in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. ~4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~ \ , ~an rss ' Date: June \ 4, 2004 . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena 1. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.c., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 POST & SCHELL, P.C. 1/ Date: June\~ 2004 . . . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS: IN THE ORPHANS' COURT : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2103-1065 RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH BARTH TO PETITION FOR REVOCATION OF LETTERS AND REMOVAL OF ADMINISTRATRIX 1. Denied. Elizabeth Barth properly presented evidence of a common law marriage between herself and David M. Gross. As a result, she is the surviving :;pouse of David M. Gross and the properly authorized Administratrix of his Estate. 2. Admitted. J. The averments contained in Paragraph 3 of the Petition are :oncllEilons of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is Jeemeo required, they are denied. On the contrary, Elizabeth Barth is the surviving ;pouse or David M. Gross and, therefore, is entitled to be the Administratrix. 4. Denied. Elizabeth Barth properly presented evidence that she is 118 cClnmon law spouse of David M. Gross. ~). It is admitted that a true and correct copy of the death certificate of :Javid 1Vl. c3ross IS attached to the Petition as Exhibit A. It is denied that Ms. Barth ;)ro\jloed any information for the death certificate. On the contrary, the first time she .:,aw th(~ death certificate was some time after the death of David M. Gross. 0. It is admitted that a true and correct copy of the obituary is attached lS t:Xll1DII 8 to the Petition. It is denied that Elizabeth M. Barth prepared the obituary. ?attle!. tile obituary was prepared primarily by the funeral director with input from all of \3 . . :vlr. ClOSS relatives including Elizabeth Barth. It is admitted that the obituary lists :::Iizaoeth M. Barth as 'fiance." The reason for this was that Elizabeth Barth and David ';ross IllTended to have a religious ceremony and celebrate their religious marriage with rlemj',mcJ relatives. Regardless, David M. Gross and Elizabeth Barth were common 'JW spouses. ( . Denied. On the contrary, friends and relatives recognized ::.iiL::1C.;l!l t3arth as the common law spouse. q J. It is admitted that Exhibit C to the Petition is a true and correct copy 11 ;i Ii ,Uer Vllrltten by Father Wallace Sawdy. Elizabeth Barth has no knowledge as to [he SOlHce of Father Sawdy's information. :J. Admitted. By way of further averment, the deposition was taken .mm ',i file time that Elizabeth Barth and David M. Gross became common law ;I)OUSC,S. 10. Admitted. By way of further averment, the deposition was taken ,JrICJr I,! tile time that Elizabeth Barth and David M. Gross became common law .;pouses. : 1. It is admitted that Exhibit D to the Petition is a true and correct copy If i)()I[I()n~; ot the deposition of David M. Gross. It is further admitted that he testified 'hat hl~; tw;t and only marriage ended in divorce. However, by way of further averment, 'Ill:; cJc'lJosltlon took place before David M. Gross and E!izabeth Barth became common aw spouses. 12. It is admitted that Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of an Jnqac,;ment announcement. By way of further averment, David M. Gross wanted to . . ilave ;1 religious ceremony due to the religious beliefs of him and his family to formalize the wedding between him and Elizabeth Barth. The religious ceremony in no way ,;nanqed the fact that they were common law spouses. 13. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition are ;OIlClli lUllS of law to which no response is required. 14. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition are ;()nCIU~"IOI1S ot law to which no response is required. 15. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition are ;onclu~3Iolls of law to which no response is required. 16. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition are r;oncluslons of law to which no response is required. 17. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition are ;ollclu:310ns of law to which no response is required. 18. It is denied. On the contrary, the Affidavit was merely a further 3tatement of the common law marriage between Elizabeth Barth and David M. Gross. 19. Denied. There is no requirement that a surviving spouse notify any Hlf~ ()] .1 rRquest to be appointed personal representative of the Estate. 20. Denied. On the contrary, the sole heir to the Estate is Elizabeth M. i3arth 21. Denied. The actions of Ms. Barth are to ensure her proper role in the i:.~:)lclte of DaVid M. Gross. ~22. Denied. The Estate will be administered In accordance with 1ppllc;mle law. . . NEW MATTER 23. Subsequent to the death of David M. Gross, Elizabeth M. Barth .lpplieo tor Survivor Benefits with the Social Security Administration. 24. The only survivor benefits that Elizabeth M. Barth would be entitled o WOUICl iJ8 as surviving spouse of David M. Gross. ')!:: c0. The Social Security Administration conducted an investigation and :ontClcwCl tl"lends and relatives of David M. Gross. 26. All friends and relatives confirmed that Elizabeth M. Barth was the ;ommon law spouse. 27. On February 3, 2004, the Social Security Administration awarded ;urvlvm hRnefits to Elizabeth M. Barth. A true and correct copy of the determination is lttacl"I~;(1 !lereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. 28. The Social Security Administration has recognized Elizabeth M. 13arth ~lS the common law spouse of David M. Gross. 29. Brian J. Gross, Petitioner herein, Anthony Gross and Maryellen :3rouse wme all contacted regarding Elizabeth M. Barth's request to be named common IW sp()use for purposes of Social Security benefits. )0 Neither Anthony Gross, Maryellen Brouse nor Brian J. Gross )bjectea to the request. 31. Elizabeth Barth believes and therefore avers that Anthony Gross ,1ctuallV Drovided a statement that Elizabeth M. Barth was the common law spouse. ::iz~lIJ'tn iV1 Barth is currently attempting to obtain a copy of the statement. . . 32. Petitioner IS estopped from challenging the status of Elizabeth i3arth ;IS the common law spouse as he failed to object in the Social Security .,\dminlstration proceedings. WHEREFORE, Elizabeth M. Barth, urges this Honorable Court to dismiss i 1 e IJ \ ; till () Il . Respectfully submitted, q- By: James G. Nealon, III, Esquire 1.0. #: 46457 NEALON & GOVER, P.C. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 717/232-9900 Date: ~!~1{()i EXHIBIT A ~ . . Social Security Administration Retirement, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Important Information 1629 Mid-Atlantic Program Service Center 300 Spring Garden Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19123 Date: February 3/ 2004 Claim Number: 189-52-7272G1 0130 MAD,PC2,I,PH,T009,ns8 ELIZABETH M BARTH 20435 MOSS BEND CT LUTZ FL 33558-5139 000001671 01 MB 0.389 1..11...11..1.1..1.1.1111..1.1....11..11.1.111..11111.1.1111.1 We are sorry to learn of your recent loss. Please accept our sincere sympathy. The amount of the check is $255.00. - .. - ~ .. !! ! - 5 You are entitled to a Social Security payment because of the death of D M GROSS. You will receive this payment soon. This payment will go to the financial institution you selected. - ~ - ~ ~ ;; !! What We WiD Pay You will soon receive a check for $255.00. This is a one-time payment we make because of a worker's death. It is the only money you are due now. Other Social Security Benefits The benefits described in this letter are the only ones you can receive from Social Security. If you think that you might qualify for another kind of Social Security benefit in the future, you will have to file another application. Do You Think We Are Wrong? If you disagree with this decision, you have the right to appeal. We will review your case and consider any new facts you have. A person who did not make the first decision will decide your case. We will correct any mistakes. We will review those parts of the decision which you believe are wrong and will look at any new facts you have. We may also review those parts which you believe are correct and may make them unfavorable or less favorable to you. ENCLOSURE: PUB. NO. 05-10058 C SEE NEXT PAGE 189-52-7272G1 . . 1629 2 . . . You have 60 days to ask for an appeal. . The 60 days start the day after you get this letter. We assume you got this letter 5 days after the date on it unless you show us that you did not get it within the 5-day period. . You must have a good reason for waiting more than 60 days to ask for an appeal. . You have to ask for an appeal in writing. We will ask you to sign a form SSA-561-U2, called "Request for Reconsideration". Contact one of our offices if you want help. Please read the enclosed pamphlet, "Your right to Question the Decision Made on Your Social Security Claim". It contains more information about the appeal. If You Have Any Questions We invite you to visit our website at www.socialsecurity.gov on the Internet to find general information about Social Security. If you have any specific questions, you may call us toll free at 1-800-772-1213, or call your local Social Security office at 1-813-269-0223. We can answer most questions over the phone. If you are deaf or hard of hearing, you may call our TTY number, 1-800-325-0778. You can also write or visit any Social Security office. The office that serves your area is located at: SOCIAL SECURITY SUITE 120 14497 N DALE MABRY HWY TAMPA FL 33618 If you do call or visit an office, please have this letter with you. It will help us answer your questions. Also, if you plan to visit an office, you may call ahead to make an appointment. This will help us serve you more quickly when you arrive at the office. C r.t.~~~ Steven G. DeMarco Assistant Regional Commissioner, Processing Center Operations ", .; . . Ci,UVl be:rlo..nd IN THE COUNTY OF lJAUPlltN, PENNSYLVANIA ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS REGISTER OF WILLS FILE NO. 21-03-1065 SUB P 0 E N A TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Attn: Mrs. Dastillo 555 Walnut Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Within twenty (20) days after service of this Subpoena, you are ordered by the Court to produce the following documents or things: All copies of applications, documents, statements, affidavits, correspondence, memorandums or other documents pertaining to the request of Elizabeth M. Barth to receive Survivors Benefits due to the death of David Gross, Claim #189-52-7272 G1 at the offices of Nealon & Gover, 2411 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this Subpoena, together with the Certificate of Compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this Subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this Subpoena may seek a Court Order compelling you to comply with it. '1 wi' . . This Subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: DATED:.51::Zllo1 Seal of the Court ;:-'-,1 -,,:' .""-~ James G. Nealon, III, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #46457 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 717 -232-9900 Attorney for Elizabeth M. Barth BY THE COURT: /1 ' '~ ~.~ /j L' I... ~ .. ';,'1'. I "d/ 12' .- . /#--, -" -P~OTH~N6T AR:/ (J }<~I~r 0+' I/J;II~ "*' LIL~ no I I'll . ~< 0-'" . rp na.-I\:5 L .f)/...urt H 10",.qno:; RF\'.rOl/O\' This is to certify that this is a true ~.! the record which with Act 66, P.L. 304, approved by t,~,eral Assembly, June WARNING: It is illegal to duplicate this copy by photostat or photograph. is on file in the pennsyl... Division of Vital Records 29, 1953. In accordance 3151035 No. ~I/~ Charles Hardester State Registrar MAY 03 2004 Date ~105, 144 Rev 1/91 TYPEIPRINT IN PERMAN!NT BLACK INK COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. VITAL RECORDS CERTIFICATE OF DEATH (Coroner) 019489 ~.AM(.<AEmo1 ;:rA:l) AGE (Last Birthday) UNDER 1 YEAR Days 2004 ~;:SI~Y) 0 ~ ~ V twp city/bora lications of co DUE m (OR AS A CONSE~UENCE OF) estive heart failure 23b. ~S CASE REFERRED m MEDICA Yo~ 26. : ~~:Z:,i~~en PART II: i onset and death 23<. tNERlCORONER? NoD her significant conditions contributing to death, but not resulting in the underlying cause given in PART I DUE TO (OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF) fJJ fJJ S Ul to ~ p::: DUE TO (OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF) d WERE AUTOPSY FINDINGS MANNER OF DEATH A\.lo\ILABLE PRIOR 10 COMPLETION OF CAUSE OF DEJITH? Natural D,6;TE OF INJURY (Mont!"'., Day, Year) TIME OF INJURY M. INJURY AT WORK? DESCRIBE HOW INJURY OCCURRED Yes 0 No 0 Accident IXJ Homicide 0 0 Pending )nvestigaliOn 0 0 Could not be determined 0 30.. 30b. PLACE OF INJURY - AI home, farm, streel, factory, office building. elc, (SpeCify) '00. 28a. 28b. CERTIFIER (Check only one) "CERTIFYING PHYSICIAN (Physk;'a~, certifying cause ot death whe~ another pt1ysician has pronounced death and completed It err 23) To the best ot my knowledge, duttl occurred due to the cauee(a) and manner.. .'-ted. , SuicIde 2.. o I- ffi fil o w " u. o w :> <: z "PRONOUNCING AND CERTIFYING PHYSICIAN (Physiclar both pronouncing death and certifying to cause of death) To the best of my knowledge, death occurred at the ttme, dilts, end piKe, end due to the cauee(e) and manner e. atated.. o 2004 "MEDICAL EXAMINER/CORONER On the basi. at examination and/or InvHtlgation, In my opinion, death occurred at the time, date, and place, and due to the causae.) and manner a. .ated.. . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31a. REGISTRAR'S SIGNATURE AND NUMBER PA 17111 1~~..:l..:::a...1 DATE FILED (Monlh, Day, Year) 34. 02 - //-v> \\ . . . .. . . CITATION Orphans' Court Division Court of Common Pleas Cumberland County, Pennsylvania IN RE: Estate of David M. Gross Deceased No. 21-03-1065 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA SS. COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND TO: J ames Nealon, Esquire, Counsel for Elizabeth Barth On Petition of Brian John Gross for: Revocation of Letters and Removal of Administratrix GREETINGS: THE REGISTER OF WILLS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMANDS that you, laying aside all business and excuses whatsoever, file in the office of the Clerk of Orphans' Court Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, a full and complete Answer, under oath, to each and every of the averments of the aforementioned Petition within ten (10) days from the date of service of this Citation, and that you Show Cause why such Petition for Revocation of Letters and Removal of Administratrix should not be granted, and that you further abide by any Order of our said Court in this matter. If you fail hereof to answer and show cause why such petition should not be granted, the petition may be taken pro confesso and a decree made against you. DATE: May 14, 2004 Glenda Farner Strasbaugh Clerk of the Orphans' Court Cumberland County ,() ~f ,'.' . . IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID M. GROSS IN THE ORPHANS' COURT CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2103-1065 PETITION FOR REVOCATION OF LETTERS AND REMOVAL OF ADMINISTRATRIX AND NOW, comes Brian John Gross, by and through his attorneys, Post & Schell, P.C., and files this Petition for Removal of Administratrix and Revocation of Letters of Administration pursuant to 20 Pa. C.S. 993181 and 3182. Brian John Gross, Petitioner, petitions this Court to remove Elizabeth M. Barth as Administratrix of the Estate of David M. Gross for cause and avers as follows: 1. Elizabeth Barth, Administratrix of the Estate of David M. Gross, has fraudulently and illegally taken control of this Estate. 2. Petitioner, Brian John Gross is the brother of Decedent, David Gross, and the son of Ramona B. Gross, late Administratrix of the David Gross Estate, who died on February 4, 2004. 3. Elizabeth M. Barth, current Administratrix of the Estate should be removed since she was not entitled to the grant ofletters pursuant to 20 Pa. C.S.A. 93181. 4. Administratrix Barth was not as she represented to this Honorable Court, the common law wife of the late David M. Gross. 5. Ms. Barth, who was the informant for the late David M. Gross' death certificate, listed him as divorced. A true and correct copy of the death certificate of David M. Gross is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "A." q \/1; ,'.' . 6. Elizabeth M. Barth prepared the obituary for the late David M, Gross. In that obituary, she listed herself as "his fiance." A true and correct copy of the obituary is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 7. Ms. Barth has never held herself out to be the common law spouse of David M. Gross, other than as part of her fraudulent effort to obtain health insurance for the late David Gross. 8. A true and correct copy of a letter from Father Wallace E. Sawdy indicating that Barth identified herself as David Gross' fiance is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "C." 9. At the deposition of David Gross taken in his personal injury lawsuit in Dauphin County, he indicated that Elizabeth Barth was his fiance. 10. He further indicated that Elizabeth Barth has never been married. 11. David Gross further testified his first and only marriage ended in divorce. A true and correct copy of Pages 6, 7, 8, and 9 of the deposition of David Gross taken on May 12,2000 is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 12. Elizabeth M. Barth caused an engagement announcement for herself and David M. Gross to be placed in the Harrisburg Patriot News. A true and correct copy of that announcement is incorporated hereby and attached hereto as Exhibit "E." That announcement indicates that the two were to be married in the summer of 2004. 13. In order to create a common law marriage, there must be an exchange of words in the present tense spoken with the specific purpose that the legal relationship of husband and wife is created by such exchange. '.' . 14. The burden to prove a common law mamage rests on the proponent of the marriage, and such a claim must be reviewed with strict scrutiny. 15. In Pennsylvania, common law marriages are tolerated but not encouraged, and claims for the existence of common law marriage present a fruitful source of perj ury and fraud. 16. While an Affidavit of Common Law Marriage is admissible and probative evidence, it is not irrebutable evidence. 17. A litigant is permitted to contradict it by other evidence any such certificate. 18. A so-called Affidavit of Common Law Marriage prepared by Elizabeth M. Barth and David Gross was intended to procure health insurance for David M. Gross, and not to establish common law marriage. 19. Elizabeth Barth's assumption of the Administratorship of this Estate was improper in that the heirs of David Gross - Anthony Gross, MaryEllen Brouse and Petitioner Brian John Gross, were not notified of the appointment. 20. The current Administratrix has no interest in the Estate and has only assumed its administration to waste or mismanage the Estate. 21. Ms. Barth's intervention in this matter is a clear attempt to get possession of the proceeds of a personal injury settlement in a matter pending currently in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, docketed at No. 2601-S-1999. 22. The Estate of David Gross is likely to be jeopardized by continuance of Elizabeth Barth as Administratrix of the Estate. .,.' . WHEREFORE, Petitioner Brian John Gross respectfully requests this Honorable Court to remove Elizabeth M. Barth as Administratrix of the Estate, and appoint Brian John Gross as Administrator. Respectfully submitted, POST & SCHELL, P.C. p f~:-J.<t'c~~e;~~SQU1RE Attorney LD. # 46664 240 Grandview Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 612-6012 Attorneys for Petitioner, Brian John Gross Date: May 11, 2004 '.' . VERIFICATION I, Brian Gross, Petitioner in the foregoing action, hereby affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing Petition for Revocation of Letters and Removal of Administratrix are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. c.s. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: May' I, 2004 "., . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dena J. Stump, an employee of the law firm of Post & Schell, P.c., do hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following persons at the following addresses indicated below by sending same in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid: James Nealon, Esquire Nealon & Gover 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, PAl 711 0 POST & SCHELL, P.C. I i I \\,.,f\.. (i I ( /i ,I -' , . I Dena J. Stump, Secretary ,/ Date: May' , 2004 EXHIBIT A Thi;; is to ccrufv (ku (he informatic.'c: giyen i:; ccrrcc'-dy I"f,i(:'(i hurl< all ur,.gll.,.JTiii:~'lC \)} Clc:Jtl, duly filed L(),~;J Registrar. The ilflgina! cerrifico, ,ill he kl1w~u'ded rl, the :'[;}[(' \-'ita] Record;; . .nee to; perrniinerit iilin!!, \;'.> .i r I', Li \ !.~ ai., WARNING; It is illegal to duplicate this copy by photostat or phot~)gr(jph,(" j'.,,)o. .. -'fj;!':'11'~1f1~:t:'~f;~~~'";: ",'" r' ,\, r r t . ., l/~>>'- < "7;~, ~~\I )~~! >.: 'tr \" . ! 11' ~. ~~\1.~~>j}.m' ,,~'c:~,t/'I '''':0,"' 'Ii?rw h\ ":;"l' "':'22:::[~;~~_:':c~~;;!t(! I:' .......--, L ", /' /'/ . / .A'/? {~>:/-. .. ~'--~'Y~.L~:"'L'U~r-/'_--'-- ,.~ .JI,T-~r"~l/3 >. !'c~!-1<e[':;srral .- ';/ I Fee flH rhi:; certificate, $2.00 r-.> r:': r .....,.~ ...{ ____.___,__Q~_~?__:L~~~::~~~___ F: S -j () J~ t~: -/ E:: :;U( H10!,143 R.v. 2J8? COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH' VITAL RECORDS CERTIFICATE OF DEATH STATE FilE NUMBER n'PElPRINT IN I ';RMANENT SLACK INK -~ ~,D RACE. American Indian, Bteck. White. e: 15oeciIy) WHiTE SURVIVING SPOUSE ("wI6o.O'ftm~_) lWf' dtyil>o<'o PA 1101 1111 I lilll TlME OF DEATH '1';' Q 23b. 23c. WAS CASE REFERRED TO A MEDICAL EXAMINER /CORONER? 26. Y.. D No ~ : Approxirrwne ,Interval between : onset and death PART II: Other signiflCanl conditions ccnuibuUng \0 68.th, but nol resultino in the underty;ng (;8U$e given in PART I. ~ fV-. c!or welo'; /" h'~~ ~ 2.. 27. PART I: IEn'" 11\. d......, ...."m.. .f c:.",,\lullonll wf\lCh uu..d IN d..U,. W" onl, 0_ ~u.. 0" ..ell un.. SaqUtlnually Usl condltton. if any, lII.ding 10 Immediale cause. Emet UNDERLYING CAUS E (Disuse Dr in;ury lhM ntU.lled eyenlS ,.autllog on d..th ) LAST WAS ~ AUTOPSY WERE AUTOPSY FINDINGS PERFORMED? ,o,VAlLABLE PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF CAUSE OF OEA TH1 l: DUE TO lOA AS A CONSEOUENCE Oft: DUE TO lOR AS A CONSEOUf.NCE Of I; Suocido ~ D D D,o,TE OF INJURY (Monlh. Day, Ya.,) TIME Of INJURY INJURY AT WORK? DESCRIBE HOW INJURY OCCURRED. MANNER OF DEATH NI\ul1Il .Accident Homicide D D 30a 3Gb. M. o PLACE Of INJURY. Al home, 'arm, IlrHl.laesory, otIice tIulldng, 'It.lsp.tllyj 30.. Yes D No D Yes 0 No iZJ Yo. D NoD Ptl'nchntilln....slig.UOl'l Could nol be determined REGISTRAR'S SIGNATURE AND NUMBER W~ f ,(-1 ". 21a. 21b. CERTIFIER (Check only one) "~~~J~FJ:l~,GOr~~S~~~~~e~~~s:.~:~,C:~~~~cf't~: I~ r~~~:::~(:~~~(':~~~l~~a~a h:t~r:~~~~~.:?~ .~~~~~, ~~~ .~~.~~~~~,~.'.t~.~ .~~.). 2.. "PRONOUNCING AND CERTIFYING PHYSICIAN (Physician both pronouncing dealh and certifying 10 CtlUIO 01 death) To lhe be"t 01 my lI.nowllidge, (:Io..th Qccurn(:l at the Urn., date, and placa, and dua lo Ute ciI',JIooa(a) iI"tI ma"".r in ..t..led... "MEDICAL EXAMINER/COROHER On th, ball. of oJlilmlnaUon .n(:l/or In.....Ug..llon. In my opInion. Qoath o~curred .t tn. Urn., d..te, ami pllc.. and due to Ih, cau".(sl and manner as slated 31&. EXHIBIT B '. . L., TUESDAY, AUGUST 19,2003 it I David M. Gross David M. Gross, 45, of Camp Hill, cliQd Sunda.y, August 17, 2003 in the Holy Spirit Hospital., Camp Hill. ,-, Bom in Harrisburg, h~ ljl'ad. uated from Central Dauphhl High Sellool, Class of 1975; , He ha.d vari- ous sales posi- tions in the Harri-sburg area, Was a lo- cal Model, and a fonner em. ploYf!e of the Harrisburg GROSS Stat~ Hospital. He was kind. sensitive and loved all people:: He Was a member of st. Cath. erine LaboUre Catholic Church, st. Joseph Cathoi1c Church. Mechanicsburg, Knights of C0- lumbus and Cosmopolitan In- ternational. , Surviving are his lnother, Ra- I mana B. Zelinski Gross of Harrisburg; a brother; Antllony Gross ofPhlladelphia; a sister, Mary Ellen Brouse of Marysville; a brother, Brian Gross of Dillsburg; nieCGs, Dan- ielle Brouse. Celeste and DoOO- nque Gross; a nephew; Joel Gross; his flancee' ,Elizabeth Barth. with whom he lived; nu- 'I ~nerous aunts, uncles and cous- IDS. I Mass of Christian Burial Will be C>!lebrated at 11 a.m. Thurs: " day, at St. Catherine LaboWe Catholic Church,400Q Derry Street, Harrisburg. Burial. \Yill be in Holy Cross Cemetery. Viewing will be held from ~;z;.9 p.rn.. Wednesday, at the Ne.l.1l Funeral Home, 3501 Der.x:y Street; Harrisburg. Recitau,Q!l of the Rosary will ,be at 8,:90 p.m. Wednesday at the funer.al home. . Memorial contributions may be made to the Disabled Ameri. can Veterans, 4219 Trindle Road, Camp Hill, PA 17011... www.neillfh.com . .:c: www.pennlive.com/obits ::: EXHIBIT C . .~atherWaUaCeE.SaWdY . 115 North Street Apartment 109 Harrisburg, P A 17101 Phone: (717) 238-5380 August 25, 2003 r-1y dear l"lrs. Gross, I was deeply moved by the telephone call I received from David's fiance-, inf9rming me of David's death. I knew that David was in great pain after his accident but never thought that it was life-threatening. And" corning so, ,soon ,after your husband's death has: brought you.a doublemeasure.of sorrow. I returned home fronthe' rehab hospitalyeste:fday. ,This morn- ing I offered my Mass for David and his fathei~ As I recall her telephone conversation, David's fiance identified herself as Elizabeth Vars. \Vas she a relative of Elizabeth "Sarge" Vars who died about twenty years ago? I knew her well from her many trips to Holy Spirit Hospital shen I \Vas Chaplain. there. I attended her funeral service at the Neumeyer Funeral Home at Second and Calder Streets. Again, mt deep~st sympathy to-you and Elizabeth. May God comfort you in your sorrow! - In His love, fI,g ~ ',. ..... .i' ,. -,..... ~.~ h EXHIBIT D ,..' · r(rJ)O'[p'o ~ " .' LI <::::/ ~\. J DAVID GROSS, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEP.S DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V NO. 2601 S 1999 ARCHIBALD BUILDERS, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEPOSITION OF: DAVID GROSS TAKEN BY: DEFENDANT BEFORE: DIANE F. FOLTZ, RMR NOTARY PUBLIC DATE: MAY 12, 2000, 11:36 A.M. PLACE: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, 320 MARKET STREET HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVN~IA p C' .. . 1......-. F...PPEARANCES: LITVIN, BLUMBERG, MATUSOW & YOUNG BY: DONALD E. MATUS OW , ESQUIRE FREDRIC S. EISENBERG, ESQUIRE FOR - PLAINTIFF GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & ~HIPMAN, P.C. BY: JOHN A. STATLER, ESQUIRE FOR - DEFENDANT 2080 Linglest0wn Road · Suite 103 · Harrisburg; PA 171] 0 717.540.0220' fax 717.540.0221 · Lancaster 717.393.5101 Page 6 Page ~ I A We moved into there the 4th of July weekend, I been married? 2 1998. 2 A Yes. i 3 Q So it's corning up on two years? 3 Q Okay. When were you married? 4 A Yes. 4 A November the 9th, 1985. 5 Q And where did you and Elizabeth live before that? 5 Q And did that marriage end in ruvorce? 6 A We lived at 2524 South Market Street, 6 A Yes. 7 Mechanicsburg. 7 Q When were you divorced? , 8 Q How long has Elizabeth Barth been your fiancee? 8 A In the spring of either' 9 I or '92. 9 A Since carly 1996. 9 Q Was that your first and only marriage? 10 Q Okay. How long have you been dating Elizabeth 10 A Yes. II Barth? II Q And who were you married to? 12 A Since 1995. 12 A Wendy Kay. 13 Q Is she employed? 13 Q K as in the initial K? 14 A Yes. 14 A K -a-yo Do you want her maiden name') 15 Q Where does she work? 15 Q Yes. 16 A Capital Recovery Associates. 16 A Felker, F-e-l-k-e-r. 17 Q Is that a collection agency? 17 Q Okay. Is she remarried? 18 A Yes. ] 8 A I'm not sure. 19 Q And what does she do for them? 19 Q Did you have any children to that marriage? 20 A Oh, she just got a promotion. She's an upper 20 A No. 2] level manager. 21 Q Do you have any children? 22 Q How long has she worked for Capital Recovery 22 A No. 23 Associates') 23 9 Do you know where Wendy Kay Felker lives? 24 A Either earlier this year or late last year, 24 A Presently? 25 somewhere around the holidays. 25 Q Yes. -- Page 7 Page 9 ] Q Okay. Where was she employed before Capital I A Somewhere in York County. 2 Recovery Associates? 2 Q Is she employed? 3 A Mornson-Voss Eye Associates. 3 A I don't know. 4 Q And what did she do for them') 4 Q Was she ever employed while you were married? 5 A Office manager. 5 A Yes. 6 Q And how long -- approximately how long did she 6 Q What was -- to your knowledge, where did she last -. work for Morrison Eye Associates? 7 work? I 8 A A couple of years. 8 A I'm not sure, but I believe she worked for an 9 Q Is that where she was working when you met her') 9 I11surance company. ]0 A No 10 Q Like in an agency or -- I 1] Q Where was she working when you met her? ]] A She was a clerk in an insurance company. That's 12 A She worked for White Pines Banquet and Catering. 12 all I know. 13 Q And what did she do for them? 13 Q You don't know what insurance company it was? 14 A She was the banquet and catering manager. ]4 A No. It's been awhile, and we were separated ] 5 Q Okay. Has Elizabeth Barth ever been married? 15 Q All right. Let me start with some questions ]6 A No 16 about your education. You graduated from Central Dauphin 17 Q How old is she? ]7 High School? ]8 MR. MAllJSOW And we're not going to tell her you 18 A Yes. 19 had to stop and think about it. I mean, Fred might, but 19 Q What year? 20 I'm not g0111g to. 20 A 1975. 21 THE WITNESS Somewhere around 30 years old. 21 Q And did you have any schooling heyond high 22 MR STATLER Okay. 22 school? 23 MR. MATUSOW: Now she's going to know. 23 A Yes. I attended Harrisburg Area Community 24 BY MR. STATLER 24 College in ] 976. 25 Q We won't send her the transcript. Have you ever 25 Q Okay. DA VID GROSS MAY 12,2000 Page 6 - Page 9 - ..' Multi - Pane ™ b ." HUGHES, ALBRIGHT, FOLTZ & NATALE 717-540-0220\717-393-5101 EXHIBIT E .,. ,."~;:fo.~" --':): - - "~~;'-ri . c:,;;,j'i'."BARTH';GROSS'~1~,~~~> ::; "\' I' ';'tt." -'q ,~; ",: '.<{:.;::(,:' .'. ' :~NGAGEMENT-': ' : MechaIl1c:~pl.lI:g'Area'Hlgh."."'" Schpol~Ild:attende.I' 'Ti~~' :..r~r, "i\.~j~,;~~:,;,,= ':." . ~'\.-" .It . -23-2004 16: 07 NEALON & GOVER . . 717 236 9119 P.01/04 April 23, 2004 2411 N. Front 5t Hanisburg. PA 17110 717-232-9900 717-236-9119 NEALON & GOVER Fax 101 Glenda - Register of Wills, CUmberland Co. 240-7797 cc: Elizabeth Barth Re: Elizabeth M Barth & the Estate of David Gross From: JAMES G. NEALON, ESQUIRE NEALON & GOVER Fax: Pages: 4 induding cover DATE: 4123104 . Comments: Please see attached. . Page 1 B r ~EAWNil 122~~~~' · . . 717 236 9119 P.02/04 ---, - /' (;-j iOu'S 2411 NolITlt FRONT S~ HAIooSBUIl.G. PA 17110 RPR-23-2004 16:07 NERLON & GOVER TEl..:EPHONE (717) 232.9900 FACSIMILE (717) 236-9119 JAMES G. NEALON, HI jnealon@nealon-gover.com DELIVERY VIA FAX 240..7797 April 23, 2004 ;{!- ()~) - j()l5 Glenda F. Strausbaug Cumberland County Register of Wills One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 RE: Elizabeth M. Barth & the Estate of David Gross Dear Ms. Strausbaug: This will selVe as a follow up to the telephone conference that we had earlier this morning. As I advised youj I do have in my possession a copy of the letter that the Administration issued regarding the Estate of Ramona B. Gross. I am enclosing a copy for your review. As you can see, she died on February 4, 2004, and letters of Administration were issued on March 12, 2004. As I explained to you, I have not yet received the original Death Certificate from the Commonwealth but will forward it to you upon receipt. In the meantime, I understand that you will issue Letters of Administration to Elizabeth Barth provided that I give you the Death Certirficate upon receipt. I assure you that I will. Also, please allow this letter to confirm that we will withdraw the Petition to Revoke Letters of Administration issued to Ramona B. Gross. r .. NEALON & GOUER . 717 235 9119 P.03/04 APR-23-2004 15:07 . Glenda F. Strausbaug April 23, 2004 Page 2 If you could mail the Letters of Administration to me, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, NEALON & GOVER, P.C. ~=i$?/cC James G. Nealon, III JGN/nl cc: Elizabeth M. Barth (via U.S. Mail) NEALON & GOVER 717 236 911,:,.., ...P:.04/04 ..... ,...._. '."'. -....,.., ._~ ~''''''''!'~.J'-'"~J.....''a~",~.::,.,..~.~~.... : . '''':''-'.~f'';':~'~f''''~'''~:1lf",.~~li:,:.:;,..l<''~MWi~,..lC::;'1,...... , ; . :~.... '~:}';'I.:f-'"~"';'~"'l": c,.!~..~'(~r')~~~;:t~:.:... ~:~f-.?~~>~~.g::;,"~"::>"'~.:.-.~.~j>'~~'l;}\' . Certificate"af..Grant ~f Letters ~Testamentiiry . . ":...:: '. ~ "':" f APR-23-2004 16:07 ~ ... ... . ~'. '. No. 0251-2004 . E'State of RAMONA B. GROSS r.... " .. .. H' o' f r ";(. SociJ Security No.217 24 6331 Whereas, on the 12TH l' dayof MARCH. 2004 instknent(s) dated p was (were) admitt~ to probate as the last I . DECEMBER 17. 2003 will of RAMONA B. GROSS late of LOWER PAXTON TWP. " , who died on the 4~ ~~ day ~f FEBRUARY, 2004 and Whereas, a true copy of the will as probated is annexed hereto. Therefore, I, Sandra C. Snyder , Regi_st.~ o(:Wills in and for the . . ':'~".':.:.'::/ :,:' oj-:. "-." :.~,:::::'..r:~ '.~:' '::;~';'" -: '~I..";i;i' ....~' - ,')' : . (, County of Dauphin, in the CommonwCalth ofPennSylvimia, hereby certify tliat"lhavethis day granted Letters Testamentary to MARY ElLEN ANDREA BROUSE BRIAN JOHN GROSS ')~ ~'''. ;..' who has duly qualified as Personal Representative(s) and has agreed to administer the estate according to law, all of which fully appears'ofrecord in my Office at Dauphiri. County Court House, Ramsburg. . Pennsylvania. . In Testimony Whereof; I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the sef of~y Office on the 12TH day of MARCH. 2~04 vkntLt<<. e ~~ . ...o.,l:lty Register of. ills ., , I ~ II . . LITVIN, BLUMBERG, MATUSOW & YOUNG By: Donald E. Matusow, Esquire/Fredric S. Eisenberg, Esquire Identification Nos.: 13170/58243 The Widener Building, 18th Floor 1339 Chestnut Street Attorneys for Respondents Philadelphia, P A 19107 (215) 557-3300 IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID GROSS REGISTER OF WILLS CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYL VANIA NO.: 21-03-1065 ANSWER OF RESPONDENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE PETITION OF ELIZABETH M. BARTH TO REVOKE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND REQUESTING THAT LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION BE ISSUED TO ELIZABETH M. BARTH The respondents, Mary Ellen Andrea Brouse and Brian John Gross, as Co-Executors of the Estate of Ramona Gross, deceased, by and through their attorney, Fredric S. Eisenberg, Esquire, respectfully object to the Petition of Elizabeth M. Barth and answer as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. - 7. Denied. It is specifically denied that Ms. Barth was married to David Gross at the time of his death by virtue of a Common Law Marriage. By way of further answer and background, the respondents' counsel represented Mr. Gross is a negligence action filed with the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County (David Gross v. Archibald Builders, Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County, Civil Action No. 2601 S 1999), which stemmed from the 'l . . " severe and permanent injuries Mr. Gross suffered when he fell through an uncovered stairway hole at a house under construction by Archibald Builders. Mr. Gross fell through one story of this exposed hole and landed on the structure's concrete basement floor. This case was mediated before The Honorable Albert Blakley on January 12,2004 and after substantial negotiations the parties agreed to a settlement. A Petition to Approve the Settlement of the Survival Action is presently pending before the Honorable Todd A. Hoover in Dauphin County. After settlement, plaintiff s counsel was notified by counsel representing Ms. Barth that she intended to be appointed as the personal representative of the Estate of David Gross and assert a claim as David Gross' common law wife and beneficiary of the proceeds payable to the Estate. (Counsel for Ms. Barth simply attached a Health America form and asserted that this established a Common Law Marriage). Contrary to this healthcare form, Mr. Gross at his deposition, succinctly testified that he was not married to Ms. Barth (attached hereto as Exhibit "A" are relevant excerpts of the deposition transcript of David Gross at p. 7 line 25 - p. 8 line 12). Additionally, Ms. Barth and Mr. Gross announced their engagement in a local paper and announced a summer 2004 wedding in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. (Attached hereto as Exhibit "B" is the announcement in the local newspaper of the Barth-Gross engagement). Further, attached hereto as Exhibit "c" is David Gross' obituary which was drafted by Ms. Barth and indicated that she was his "fiance." Moreover, attached hereto as Exhibit "D" is a August 25,2003 letter from Father Wallace Sawdy expressing his sympathies to Mrs. Gross for the loss of her son David and describing Ms. Barth as David's "fiance." Finally, attached hereto as Exhibit "E" is the death certificate of David Gross. A review of the death certificate indicates that Elizabeth Barth was the "informant" and 2 . . she indicated that Mr. Gross' marital status was divorced and that there was no surviving spouse. (Mr. Gross was previously married and divorced). 8. - 10. Denied. Respondents incorporate by reference answers to paragraphs 6-7 above. Accordingly, the Letters of Administration were properly issued to Ramona Gross since Elizabeth Barth was not married to David Gross at the time of his death and is not of a class of higher priority. WHEREFORE, respondents, Mary Ellen Andrea Brouse and Brian John Gross urges the Register of Wills to revoke the Letters of Administration D.B.N. recently issued to Elizabeth M. Barth and reissue the Letters of Administration to Ramona Gross and her surviving children, Mary Ellen Andrea Brouse, Brian John Gross and Anthony Jerome Gross. Respectfully submitted, LITVIN, BLUMBERG, MATUSOW & YOUNG By: -7. ~s. EISENBERG, E Attorney for Respondents 3 . . VERIFICATION I, Fredric S. Eisenberg, attorney for respondents herein, hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer in Opposition to the Petition of Elizabeth M. Barth to Revoke Letters of Administration and Requesting that Letters of Administratoin be issued to Elizabeth M. Barth are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief; and, that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. FRE RIC S. EISENBERG, Attorney for Respondents EXHIBIT A . . i~gO.. [po.,... (... i {, -. i ' , \. \, ,c. t \,' '\..=::~~.,,:-- \~ "'-- DAVID GROSS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V NO. 2601 S 1999 ARCHIBALD BUILDERS, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEPOSITION OF: DAVID GROSS TAKEN BY: DEFENDANT BEFORE: DI~~E F. FOLTZ, RMR NOTARY PUBLIC DATE: K~Y 12, 2000, 11:36 A.M. PLACE: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 ~~~KET STREET HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVAl~IA F_PPE.A...RANCES : LITVIN, BLUMBERG, l~TUSOW & YOm~G BY: DONALD E. MATUS OW , ESQUIRE FREDRIC S. EISENBERG, ESQUIRE FOR - PLAINTIFF GOLDBERG, KATZK~ & SHIPMAN, P.C. BY: JOHN A. STATLER, ESQUIRE FOR - DEFENDANT 2080 Linglestown Road · Suite 103 · Harrisburg, PA 17110 717.540.0220. fax 717.540.0221 · Lancaster 717.393.5101 , . DA'lID GROSS MAY 12,2000 . Page 6 I A We moved into there the 4th of July weekend, 2 1998. 3 Q So it's coming up on two years? 4 A Yes. 5 Q And where did you and Elizabeth live before that? 6 A We lived at 2524 South Market Street, 7 Mechanicsburg. 8 Q How long has Elizabeth Barth been your fiancee? 9 _A Since early 1996. 10 Q Okay. How long have you been dating Elizabeth II Barth? 12 A Since 1995. 13 Q Is she employed? 14 A Yes. IS Q Where does she work? 16 A Capital Recovery Associates. 17 Q Is that a collection agency? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And what does she do for them? 20 A Oh, she just got a promotion. She's an upper 21 level manager. 22 Q How long has she worked for Capital Recovery 23 Associates? 24 A Either earlier this year or late last year, 25 somewhere around the holidays. Page 7 I Q Okay. Where was she employed before Capital 2 Recovery Associates? 3 A Morrison-Voss Eye Associates. 4 Q And what did she do for them') 5 A Office manager. 6 Q And how long -- approximately how long did she 7 work for Morrison Eye Associates? 8 A A couple of years. 9 Q Is that where she was working when you met her? 10 A No. II Q Where was she working when you met her? 12 A She worked [or White Pines Banquet and Catering. 13 Q And what did she do [or them? ] 4 A She was the banquet and catering manager. 15 Q Okay. Has Elizabeth Barth ever been married? 16 A No. 17 Q How old is she? ]8 MR. MAllJSOW: And we're not going to tell her you 19 had to stop and think about it. I mean, Fred might, but 20 I'm not going to. 21 THE WITNESS: Somewhere around 30 years old. 22 MR. STATLER: Okay. 23 MR. MATUSOW: Now she's going to know. 24 BY MR. STATLER: 25 Q We won't send her the transcript. Have you ever Page 6 - Page 9 Multi- Paae ™ l:> . Page 8 I been married? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Okay. When were you married? 4 A November the 9th, 1985. 5 Q And did that marriage end in divorce? 6 A Yes. 7 Q 'When were you divorced? 8 A In the spring of either '91 or '92. 9 Q Was that your first and only marriage? 10 A Yes. II Q And who were you married to? 12 A Wendy Kay. 13 Q K as in the initial K? 14 A K-a-y. Do you want her maiden name? 15 Q Yes. 16 A Felker, F-e-I-k-e-r. 17 Q Okay. ]s she remarried? 18 A I'm not sure. 19 Q Did you have any children to that marriage? 20 A No. 21 Q Do you have any children? 22 A No. , Do you know where Wendy Kay Felker lives? 123 Q 24 A Presently? 25 Q Yes. Page 9 A Somewhere in York County. Q Is she employed? A I don't know. Q Was she ever employed while you were married? A Yes. 6 Q What was -- to your knowledge, where did she last 7 work? 8 A I'm not sure, but I believe she worked for an 9 msurance company. 10 Q Like in an agency or -- ] 1 A She was a cierk in an insurance company. That's 12 all I know. 13 ]4 15 16 17 ]8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 Q You don't know what insurance company it was? A No. It's been awhile, and we were separated. Q All right. Let me start with some questions about your education. You graduated from Central Dauphin High School? A Yes. Q What year? A 1975. Q And did you have any schooling beyond high school? A Yes. I attended Harrisburg Area COlmnunity College in 1976. Q Okay. HUGHES, ALBRIGHT, FOLTZ & NATALE 717-540-0220\717-393-5101 EXHIBIT B - EXHIBIT C . .'''';:.;r-~' :'::i~ ..,'".::,\i.. .'BA'R'I"H' ':. "G'.R'''()'''SS:;~~c':i';:,." ,i; :-,:~:>/.~~ '. ,.' ~. ", "~;:,i,/: :',' " I ",,:.'1""EN""'G"'A'G"E"'M"'E'N"T""" ',;'. ',,.. .,...... ':-.,;."::. ',.......'" -," ...."',...,.'.'.::,':-,...;:-:,'.:'.:.;.. ....... -"'" "'. -".. ."',', , , ~. :', ;" : Mec:hamcsburg'Ar e aHlgl1 Schooland'attended'Harris~ ' >~HE~fGo,~.~iiGii!"i ;,:';,pt,;c"''Ii,iJ:, .. .isH 'to.,~""'s.;t . . . L-... TUESDAY, AUGUST 19,2003 a,7 I David M. Gross David M. Gross, 45, of Cmnp Bill, died Sunday, August 17, 2003 in the Holy Spirit Hospital, Camp Hill. .., Born in Harrisburg, h~ gra1J.. uated from Central Dauphin High School, ClaSs of 1975; . He ha.d vari. ous sales posi- tions in the Harrisburg area, Was a lo- cal Model, and a former em- ploy~e of the Hatri s burg GROSS State Hospital. Be was kind. sensitive and loved all people~: /. He Was oS member of Si. Cath- I erine Laboure Catholic Church, . St. Joseph Catholic Church, Mechanicsburg, Knights of C0- lumbus fu"'1d Cosmopolitan In- ternational. Surviving are his :mother, Ra- mona B. Zelinski Gross of Harrisb1ll'g; ~ brother; Anthony Gross ofPhlladelphia; a sister, Mary Ellen Brouse of Marysville; a brother, Brian Gros..~ of Dillsburg; nieces, Dan- ielle Brouse. Celeste and Do.tni. . nque Gross; a nephew, Joel Gross; his fiancee' ,Elizabeth Barth, with whom he lived; nu- merous aunts, uncles and cous- ms. Mass of Christian Burial will be c~lebrated at 11 a.m. Thurs- day, at St. Catherine LaboWe Catholic Church,400Q Derry Street, Harrisburg. Burial' iVJll be in Holy Cross Cemetery. Viewing will be held from j:g p.m. Wednesday, at the Ne.jll Funeral Home, 3501 Der.l:Y Street, Harrisburg. Recitat~Q,Il of the Rosary will .be at 8,:90 p.m. Wednesday at the funel:,.aJ. home. . Memorial contributions may be made to the Disabled Ameri. can Veterans, 4219 Trind~e Road, Camp Hill, PA 17011. '.'. \\rww.neillfh.com . :~: www.pennlive.com/obits .:::: EXHIBIT D . Father Wallace E. Sawdy 115 North Street Apartment 109 Harrisburg, PA 17101 Phone: (717) 238-5380 ~. August 25, 2003 [''1y dear Hrs. Gross, ! I was deeply moved by the telephone call I received from David's fiance" inf~rming me of David I s death. I knew that David was in great pain after his accident but never thought that it was life-threatening. And,. comingso.soonafter your husband's death has; brought you a double'meastlreof sorrow. I returned home fronthe-rehab hospitalyesterciay.This morn- ing I offered my Mass for David and his f~the~~ As I recall her telephone conversation, David's fiance identified herself as Elizabeth Vars. Was she a relative of Elizabeth "Sarge" Vars who died about twenty years ago? I knew her well from her many trips to Holy Spirit Hospital E;rhen I \Vas Chaplain.! there. I attended her funeral service at the Neumeyer Funeral Horne at Second and Calder Streets. Again, rnt deep~st sympathy. to.you and Elizabeth. May God comfort you in your sorrow! In His love, ft,gJJ " ..... EXHIBIT E -- .~'r:4j,,~ is ru c(Tt:d~/ r.h;:.n [he inforrn.t:.1)[:rl.:' givelJ is cGrr\.'~cTjy L~ocal .Registrar. '"fhe ongIna.I cerci..e ',MLll he f01"'vvarded f"C, rJ-L frum Cl.l! u;'. Cej'::1fi':~'::" uf Geraci; duly filed v~irh en,"' dO, '..,'ca~:~-: \'~ila! [':',:;:'c.o. _,~ C)Hlc(:' f~:--;i pr:~::rl'".l~-i"rl~~nt Flii.n1:~' WARNING: It is illegal W f.IUprjcatfc this GOD'}! by prlotnstat D" photogreph:. (~. r-. [,,: "'., ..-., (" ,,I'i 'l"~ / l ~ ,~", ~ ,,'...l_ -., l'~~ ~", f r."'" ...../ t \...... -----~l / , /:" -"/1,/ /" ./ !..~"f,l .,"'1/(1 ';,:~::::~.c:'" /' ___m__~#-..)h-r.~~-~_._,.,___ J ! : /i.. ,7-l.~ .'~/}C~J' .l-:.t:p",tSrr':lf /" l, ,. ~ / Fee for rhi:; certificate, $2.00 1-)" ,._ r;.-t t~C Hl05 143 Rev. 2/8'7 10'''8 ..,rw 01 WOnt ClC'" DIIII119mOll . n, :s'A':;S"E:';~M~'~::~ f1b. LiGHritlG- DECEDENT'S MAILING ADDRESS (Sties\. Cllynown. Slalt!, Zip COde) DECEDENT'S GOl6 !?1I1L1-AR.D 'Rl>. ~~~~DAfh"CE Hi, Cltrn P HiL.I..- I f'f1. 17DII ~~U~lt~~~Ir;:rJ~lfns FATHER'S NAME tFl(51. MiddlE!, Las!) 18. If/llTHoNV :T. GRDSS. INFOHMANT'S NAME rTypeiPnfll'l 20. Et..iZAt3E:rH m. METHOD OF DISPOSITION Burial CE Clemallon O:iflmoval from Slate 0 Other (Specl'\,.1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA' DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH' VITAL RECORDS CERTIFICATE OF DEATH STATE FILE NtJMSER r,. PElP RINT IN r .; RMANENT ~L.ACK INK ur y~. s. 7.:/ BIRTHPLACE ICny and Stalo or ~OIelgn Country) H"'~R.;$e."A(i, Pfl. 7. =~lO ~~~y~ncaf1 inCltan, a~Dcr., While, et'l (.V H i'Tf. ~ COUNTY OF DEATH Bb. Ct.fr>'l6<:RLANb DECEDENrs USUAL OCCUPATION eo. 17e. Stale 'fA. G./rnREA~lAN]) MARITAL STATUS - Maniod, Nevor Married, Widowed, DiVorced (Spocrty) " 'DjVOR.~()> 17t. ~ Yes, doceoenllived in 1:. SURVIVING SPOUSE (lfwl'~.QIV1l m8idfln name) 17b. County Did detedonl live In a lowns~lip" 17 d. 0 ~~jl~e~~l~~~\j~~i~!;d or lwl' ! c11yJboro I PA !( 0' /711 I 17", 24 ZJa. TIME OF DEATH '1';' .5.d TM 23b. 23<:. WAS CASE REFERRED TO A MEDICAL EXAMINER ICORONEWI 2G. y" 0 No fiSl 27. PART I; En"r au dl....u.IIlJ.mu or campllUlIon. "'hI':" Uu..lllh. duth. O~ I'Dt .,It., Ih. mOU8 01 OJ/lng, "uc~..((t,..c or rUlIlritory .nuL .hock 01 he'l1 I.Hur. . ApprO,lUmille Lilt only 0". u...u on uch Irn.. : intorval between : onset and dealh PART II: DIner slgniftcant condilions contributing La death, but not resulting In the undeny;ng cause gNnt1 in PART l. 11\ './ ~I'; ~p~ cf;;{' r.vdA.A /' iJ DUE TO lOR AS A CON6EOU!:NCE OF): DUE TO lOR A.S A CONSEOUENCE OF) REGISTRAR'S SIGNATURE AND NUMBER W~r-..tJ 34. MANNER OF Oi:ATH Natural IE o o Homidde DATE OF INJURY IMOl'1l/I, aey. 'I'e~lI) TIME Of INJURY INJURy AT WORI<:7 OESCRIBE HOW INJURY OCCURRED, Yo.o NoD SUIcide Pt!nding Investigation Coulu nol be determined o o -D~D )Oa. JOb. M. 30e. o PLACE OF INJURY - At home. /arm. slreet, laCIDr)'. ameli Dl.1dlJtnll, Ill';. {S~eclfyl JOII. ACdden! 2a.. 2!1b. CERTIFIER (Check only onG) .~ ~~,;~FJ~~IGOr~; t.I;~~~'~~~SdC~:~hc~g~~ri~J~U~: l~ ~:~~ ~~:~(:)~~arJ~X~I;~il~. h:l~r~~~~~~:~.~ .~,~~.l~ ~~~ .~~.~~:~~.~ .i.l~.~?~.)... 29. 'PRONOUNCING AND CERTIFYING PHYSICIAN (PhYliician both pronouncing oelillh anu cenitying to caullo of death) TD the bosl 01 my knowhHlg8. death occ:urrat1l11llho limtl, dale, and PlolClI, and due 10 lhe caLl.us(J) anu '"a"ner at staled, .MEDICAL EXAMINER/CORONER On tl,. bini, of "Il.amlnolllon andlor Invosllgallon. In my opInion, dllalh occurtod ..llhl Ume, dllto. and place. and dUG to fhll cauus{s) ."d manner at slaled ...................... 31.. II I ~ .. . . '.- I! LITVIN, BLUMBERG, MA TUSOW & YOUNG By: Donald E. Matusow, Esquire/Fredric S. Eisenberg, Esquire Identification Nos.: 13170/58243 The Widener Building, 18th Floor 1339 Chestnut Street Attorneys for Respondents Philadelphia, P A 19107 (215) 557-3300 REGISTER OF WILLS IN RE: ESTATE OF DAVID GROSS CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYL VANIA NO.: 21-03-1065 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Fredric S. Eisenberg, attorney for respondents, hereby certify that I have served a tme and correct copy of the foregoing Answer in Opposition to the Petition of Elizabeth M. Barth to Revoke Letters of Administration and Requesting that Letters of Administratoin be issued to Elizabeth M. Barth via first-class mail, postage prepaid on the 23rd day of April, 2004 to the following: James G. Nealon, III, Esquire Nealon & Gover, P.c. 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 Christopher J. Marzzacco, Esquire Wiley, Lenox, Colgan & Marzzacco, P.C. 130 W. Church Street Suite 100 Dillsburg, P A 17019 Fredric S. Eisenberg, Esqui Attorney for Respondent PETITION FoARANT OF LETTERS OF AIINISTRATION Estate of also known as fJ I/- \J (cl ~ ."-u <;; ) No. To: ~ \ - C ~ - ) C, tS>) Deceased. Social Security No. I ~ 9 - ~<) - (2r'l ir Register of lillS fo] th<1 ) County of <.J \.-..........~( 01 ~"c~ in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania The petition of the undersigned respectfully represents that: Your petitio~r(s), who is/are 18 years of age or older, appl (~ ') b,L<l. /'J (d.b.n.; pendente lite; durante absentia; durante minoritate) the above decedent. Decendent was d?micile~ at. death ~n tL~ 6~~(CJ, ~ 40},mty>>pennSYlV~i"\\jif~ h ('5 last famIly or pnnclpal reSidence at ,oIlS ,.,,;Y <<~ I /,. ,~d &-. L ~ ,7 I \ f-J. ." (list street, number and municipality) /1 -f' .;;> C)D :) Hv~ ,,~. /-:; , 't9-__, for letters of administration on the estate of Decenden7t then If l). years of age, d,ied at /f6 I) ~ (.J > .~,+ /'<; "'j'Pi -f.", / (' , Decendent at death owned property with estimated values as folllows: (If domiciled in Pa.) All personal property $ (If not domiciled in Pa.) Personal property in Pennsylvania $ (If not domiciled in Pa.) Personal property in County $ Value of real estate in Pennsylvania $ situated as follows: Petitioner_ after a proper search ha_ ascertained that decedent left no will and was survived by the following spouse (if any) and heirs: ".f. 'f J~ a~ 1'9 .."5.f,,, RelatJ.m1ship L ..;-::..e ..y, ^'O~ (.4.,; ~; jJ r l ...4_ OJ'J..; ) THEREFORE, petitioner(s) respectfully request(s) the grant of letters of administnttion III the appropriate form to the undersigned. ~ C/O 'ir u C <l.I ~3 <l.I .... ~<l.I C -00 1::.';:: roo;: ~<l.I ~o.. <l.I<+- :;0 Ol c co Vi E(.("", /(L,Lt-d!.' /:.:2. /: /cr-L ) ~ / .f2. 7'"1 d!/,,/ ~t(/c&: (, A-~ ILVZ/ /(l A..t s z( 1.. ,)/);. / /.3 C/S 5, 6 OA T' OF PERSONAL REPRESENtTlVE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ~u.'C'r\~_\'C\rc\ } ss The petitioner(s) above-named swear(s) or affirm(s) that the statements in the foregoing petition are true and correct to the best of the knowledge and belief of petitioner(s) and that as personal representative(s) of the above decedent petitioner(s) will well and truly administer the estate according to law. Sworn to. or affirmc:d and subscribed J before Ale this. . \<1 t:~. day of '-'~ ~DC;Y W J:1vo("'c\, ).. m~.\\.cv~j .~. r 6' .G...L""^ Registe-,' l ' f~\..b..! c..:..../ / // /) ~ / ~. "--L//S::b~ /6d0(~ . '"'"" '" '-' Q) .... ;:l ..... ell l:: OIl i:i5 No. ~I-O~-Itl()~ Estate of ~o~ ~-o< <" ~~ .} , Deceased GRANT OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND NOW ~~ c::2 0 ..:f9-d,W+, in consideration of the petition on the reverse side hereof, satIsfa 0 pr,oof having bee~ented before me, IT IS DECREED that L ~ ~~ is/are entitled to Letters of Administra lOn, and in accord with such finding, Letters of Administration are hereby granted to ~ 'hr;a-\c, ~ in the estate of~O-. C~SS b~(~\.--......... $~5. 00 $ C;. 00 $ $ TOTAL _ $"(~.OO Filed.. Y.~~C.~ .C"i.... A.D. 19_ FEES Letters of Administration Short Certificates( ).......... Renunciation ................ ~~""k.~u~~ "'~~~ ",g;",,~ ~~~I o-j/ / AI / - U .f-') . y''+vV2..e? U / V -e <.0... ,~-'V tU i(,;; '-(.J / A TTORNEYS1P:-Ct. LD. No.~_ . d-cj 1/ IG 0~yu-r ~~f-- / ) 1DDRESS ~r\ )6v,-~ {J4 } ?((~\ PHoNE J-"?J- 99o~ . . IN RE THE ESTATE OF DAVID GROSS : REGISTER OF WILLS :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 21-03-1065 PETITION OF ELIZABETH M. BARTH TO REVOKE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND REQUESTING THAT LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION BE ISSUED TO ELIZABETH M. BARTH 1. On August 17, 2003, Decedent, David M. Gross, died at the Holy Spirit Hospital, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. At the time of his death, David M. Gross was a resident of Cumberland County. 3. On or about December 26, 2003, Ramona B. Gross filed a Petition for Grant of Letters of Administration. The Petitioner alleged that David M. Gross was not survived by a spouse and that Ramona Gross was entitled to have Letters of Administration issued to her as the surviving mother. 4. On December 26, 2003, the Register of Wills of Cumberland County issued Letters of Administration to Ramona B. Gross. 5. On February 4, 2004, Ramona B. Gross died at the Community General Osteopathic Hospital, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. 6. As of the date of his death, David M. Gross was married to Elizabeth M. Barth by virtue of a Common Law Marriage. 7. On about April 8, 2002, David M. Gross and Elizabeth M. Barth executed an Affidavit of Common Law Marriage. A true and correct copy of the Affidavit hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. 1 l\ . . 8. Elizabeth M. Barth is of a class of higher of priority entitled to the issued Letters of Administration. 9. The Letters of Administration were improperly issued to Ramona Gross. 10. Ramona Gross is unable to continue to administer the Estate due to her death. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Elizabeth M. Barth, urges the Register of Wills to revoke the Letters of Administration previously issued to Ramona B. Gross and to issue Letters of Administration to Elizabeth M. Barth. Respectfully submitted, NEALON & GOVER, P.c. By: ~. ~ .// //01'7371 ~#t>~6~- James G. Nealon, II, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 46457 2411 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 (717) 232-9900 Dated: 04/02104 2 EXHIBIT A !~ r A r 0 VI:' n t r IJ H I:' 0 I t h r 0 r I:' P Ion AFFIDAVIT OF COMMON LAW MARRIAGE H E A L T HAM E R l'A HEALTHAsSURANCE We, the undersigned, being of lawful age, attest to the following facts: 1. We have lived together continuously as husband and wife from ~/~/Jqq~ to the present time. During this period we have professed to be husband and wife and we have held ourselves out to the community as being married. 2. That we are 18 years of age or older or, if between the ages of 16 and 18, have obtained appropriate parental or guardian consent. 3. There is no legal impediment to our marriage, including, but not limited to, a prior marriage of either party that has not been legally terminated by death or divorce. 4. We intend to be legally bound as husband and wife and in full recognition of the rights, duties, obligations associated therewith. We have evidenced by words in the present tense, uttered with a view of purpose of establishing the relation- ship of husband and wife. 5. The following children have been born to us and we hereby acknowledge such children to be our lawful children. NO ['1,'ztLbe+-L M. furi-l Name of Employee 1~ a.-vr'd NL. (Jr()SS Name of Spouse tliw~ fX-. Sigd~~ Date Date Subscribed and sworn before me this ~~xf~ -'I-j-2. ?~ If-g-2 day of ~ . I 20 () :2 My commission expires: (~ -//-Oy Date ' NOTARIAL SEAL Judy S. Grdjan, Notary Public Lemoyne Borough, County of Cumberland My Commission F.xpires Jun. 7, 2004 ---.o'J:_<w.,.'",,--.t 2575 Interslale DriH~, Harrisburg. PA 17110 800-788-6445 . 717-540-4260 . w\Nw.hcctllhamenca.cvl)'.com ~ . l .. . . VERIFICATION I, ELIZABETH M. BARTH, verify that the statements made in the foregoing PETITION OF ELIZABETH M. BARTH TO REVOKE REQUESTING THAT LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION BE ISSUED TO ELIZABETH M. BARTH are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. ~4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: / ) -7;"/<5- .,' ' i I / J ,,/) ',-. /' ) / c. ,.~.t{.6< 71~ 11', /-:-) I{J.]'!L ELlZAEf~TH M. BARTH WEL aN, WEINBERG & REIS CO..P.A. ATTOR'IEYS AT L\ w 323 W. Lakeside Avenue, Suite 200 Cleveland. Ohio 44113-1099 21 6.6S5.1 000 \I "'\I. \I eltllla n.l'O III CI'iCl'i:'olATI,OH 51:, 723 2200 COLlJI\IBl!S,OH 614.2287272 DETROIT, :\11 24k162.6100 \Hll!:\'T HOLL Y, :\J 6()l) 914.0437 PHILADELPHIA,PA 2! '5')') 1.'00 PITTSBlRCH,PA 412.4347955 h:,oruarv 2-1. 2()()4 CumoerlamL Register Of Wills One ( 'uurtlwuse Square Carlisle. P.\ ()l'OI~ Re FstatL' of David ivl Cirnss Case .'.n. 21-03-1065 Om Client: Bank of America. \1.,\. Account No. 4319041022443081 Balance Due: $938.53 Om Ftle No. 3341084 Dc'ar ('Ink uf Comls: ThiS bw firm reprL'senh Bank of America. N.A. in connection with its claim which we wish to file on our client's behalf into the estate 01 I )avld M (lm;;s. deceased rnclosed is om check III the amount of $5.00 which we understand is the filing fee for thl' claim () lIr c lien t 's lid 1111 IS hdSc'd 11J'\!I) I t',k'~l)llril I IlImon -I.; I l)U-I I U224:UUf\ I 1I1 the amount 0 f $9 J f\ 53 As of the date of this letter, thiS is thc' amount duc'. 111,:luckd 1\lth tillS letter is the claim form which \Ie wish to present to this court and which we are forwarding to the attorney.lI1c! or fidUCiary uf this t:'state It II uuld he apprt:'C1ated II all correspondence and disbursements With respect to this matter be forwarded to our office and to tht:' attention of the underSigned. Addllionally. it would be appreciated if any notices of any hearings also be forwarded to the undersigned. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. ~:I1~~ Veda Flowers Legal Assistant (216) 685-1171 ....."',-.. ... ..4 \, ~ .... . ::.:.: ti' o J:>,. Vf.Fiar Ene!usures IT Ramuna B t iross S (ierald Lltlll1 2": ",; "M.'."I -' :" j r....j a. 3 . ~ ,,-- . 'v\'v'vRii03_\-+ I OX4 10R\1 93-0.C. DI\'ISI0l\: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS of CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION IN RE: ESTATE OF No.21-03-1065 of Va\JQ.M (jross~______ Deceased (joods and servIces purchased on visa Bank of America :\ .A_ Account No_ 431904102244308 I ... ''\ -,!"~' I'. ..... d L'" :TJ fJ) :-) ",,\ CLAIM To thc Clerk of OqJhans' Court Division: 0'\ Illdn and mclke pmpcr clltry In your official records of the claim of Bank of America N.A_ l'_~~~ltmalJ~Yvell1ber,=" & Rels Co, L.P.^-. 323 West Lakeside Avenue. Suite 11-200, Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1099 (Claimant) 111 the amount of $93~.5_1 against the estate of the above named decedent. I IllS clcul11 IS liled under SectIOn 3532 (b) (2) of the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code. rhe Semi decedent. who resided at 601 Mallard Rd. CilnmJiILl.. P!\J]QJJ___ ( Address) . died on N/A 20 Written notice oftl1JS claim was given to Ramona B. Gross, Fiduciary 5007 Virginia Ave Harrisburg, PA 17109 S ()..L'lidltUL\ lll.o.l:C81lliLf.J \3 Chestnut Street PhIladelphia. P A 19107 on - - . I P""""I "p""o""" .f ""~ :~:ltJ ~ )~ ou-6-J~ ( Claimant) Veda Flowers. Agent for the Claimant c/o Weltman. Weinberg, & RelS Co_. L.P.A. 323 W_ Lakeside Ave_. Suite200 Cleveland. OhIO 44113 (Claimant's Address) . .#1' - . WWR # 3341084 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS FOR: Bank of America, N.A. DECEDENT'S NAME: David M Gross ADDRESS: 601 Mallard Rd CSZ: Camp Hill, FA 17011 SSN: 189-52-7272 000: 11/11/11 ACCOUNT #: 4319041022443081 BALANCE DUE: $938.53 EXHIBIT A i~/05/03 FRI 11:34 FAX 92552749 REGISTER OF WILLS [lZ] 002 .1 . l Oath of Personal Representative Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin The Petitioner(s} above-named swear(s) and affirm(s) that the statements in the foregoing Petition are true and correct to the best of the knowledge and belief of Petitioner(s) and that, as personal representative(s) of the Decedent, Petitioner(s) will well and truly administer the estate according to law. ~ 11(L'vrt~~ I Sworn to and affirmed and subscribed 13 - /~-7 -- before me this i (f:t...h...- day of o fU'- ~W~:L-____ 20.Q3 ~rlJt1Q f0 t:DD.~ G Estate of DAVID GROSS DECREE OF REGISTER No. also known as Deceased 21-2003-1065 Social Security No: 189-52-7272 Date of Death: ~ugust 17, 2003 AND NOW, DecemhPr ?fit-h , 20~, in consideration of the Petition . on the reverse side hereon, satisfactory proof having been presented before me, IT IS DECREED that Letters 0 Testamentary CZ of Administration LitigaTion Pllrpnc:::PC::: only are hereby granted to lC'.l.H.; d.b.Il_r..r.; pendenre hie; dUHmll! abiienlin; d\JHmt~ miooritllW' Ranona B.GroRR in the above estate and that the instrument(s), if any, dated described in the Petition be admitted to probate and filed of record as the last Will of Decedent. FEES 9.00 Letters........................... $ 18.00 Short Certificate (5).......... Renunciation................. . Affidavit ( )................. Extra Pages ( )............ Cad i c i I. . . .. ... .. . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. JCP Fee....... ............ ..... Inventory & Tax Forms... Othp~' 0'~dJ\"""""" TOTAL............... . $ $ $ $ $ $ 10.00 $ $ 1- is' 00 S.Gerald Litvin Attorney: 1.0. No: $ 37.00 Address: The Weidner Bldg. 18th Floor t D h' f 1339 Chestnut Street a aup ill County or oath PhiladRlphi Fl, PA 1 ql 07 (215) 557-3349 DATE FILED: December 26th, 2003 Telephone: RW-7a MaileJ letters on 12/26/2003 :l r FRI 11:34 FAX 92552749 Register t W;IIS of Dauphin County. pe~SYIVania PETITION FOR GRANT OF LETTERS C~~d~ ,- REGISTER OF WILLS 1:i/05/03 Estate of ~-~) No. J../-() 3.-10&.:.) also known as , Deceased : <; (7-" 71 7 J-. Social Security No( /) 7 .i:::z. . Pelition~I(>>). who is/aul' 1 B ye,lIrlil 01 age Of older. appJvlies) 1m: <COMPLETE "An OR "B" BELOW:) r:I A. Probate and Grant of Letters and aver that Petitioner(s) is/are the execut_ named in the Last Will of the Decedent, dated and codicil(s} dated Stall!! relevant eilcUlT\.&tanC8'B, t.g., Illlnuncimion, dealh of executor, etc. Except as follows, Decedent did not marry, was not divorced, and did not have e child born or adopted after execution of the documents offered for probate; was not the victim of a killing and was never adjudicated incompetent: Q B. Grant of Letters of Administration Ic.t.o,. d.b_n.c.t.o.: pendenle lite; d\Juuue Ablilentia; UUlmlle ,niflQ,iHne) Petitioner(sl after a proper search has/have ascertained that Decedent left no Will and was survived by the following spouse (if any) and heirs: Residence 03 (1~-l I 1 jL1JJ ~ I ALL AS S:) Attec aa Itional shaets I necessary. L~.r.e-:z-4~ 1f' Decedent was d~miciled at d~ath}~ . '.- u~~. ,_ Cou'"ntY:-Pennsylvania, with his/her last family or principal residence at V C I 11 )-r l~ ff..:..~ .,- 6./ / / I I I _ , _ _ _ II..' '''.e'. "umb., .". mU">Qp I ~ ) /~ 1/- tJh~'--r- ~>; 'hP Decedent. then ~-I)' years of age, died f) ..-I-'V'..;1' A,(A-Y /,7 .2011.3, at fJ-1,~ .><::2 - .c ..::..~-=--=-_ 'J 7 I oci'lllonl Decedent at death owned property with estimated values as follows: (If domiciled in PAl All personal property _... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ (If not domiciled in PA) Personal property in Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ (If not domiciled irl PAl Personal property in County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Value of real estate in Pennsylvania ............................................ $ Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Real Estate situated as follows: Wherefore, Petitioner(s) respectfully requestls) the probate of the last Will and Codicil(s) presented with this Petition and the grant of letters in the appropriate form to the undersigned: Signature {\NItJ't ..-,.v<;~ r3 ~ Typed or printed name and residence ,." /.f {::. L j7/()! DM_7 /7 -is 5 - {; 1- ! 11(1')\':/1') In \ This IS to certifv thai the I!1fl)rrnari(Jn!~ re given is conl'l~ti "',"1., '['JII, ," I: ','" ...,,' Local Registrar. The original cerrificdt I be fC>r\vardcd II' ,he " I,' \ Ii "!~'c'":i;'.' ' ~ARNING' It is lIegal to duplicate this copy by photostat 0' pho!owap,' ) Ie! P" chi, !md'we. "O(),i~Z~C1iiDfp{';:.;:<, ~t1 ~~... .l=1~" " 'J!~,'F~\\ ?: I ." _ ' _'i I::::'w, a'" A::" \'\ :~{~ "'~,, '-- ;' -/: \~ <j:C ,..~~,\':' '.~~ .1..f)" ", ~ ~v \\~/ C~_~ l#EN"I ~\+\."", "-!"-::'<:-:!..'::.!<'~::t~t_r.:.,-;.n.ll" () r.: ,.... i~ '; i; t ..J '-.1 p '" /1. V ?I. ,/ L /~ ~~7 '-...,t '",' No. 111l;:J 1-13 r~oo.' ;:..-13 I COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA' DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH' VITAL RECORDS ~t,PRINT IN i.MANt:Nl A(I\ iN'" CERTIFICATE OF DEATH ~TATE FilE NUMijER SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER 3. I 8'1 - 5). - 7:Z 7 ;L '-/' L 'y.~ , J BIRTHPLACE (Cily and Stale or FOIeign Counl/y) HARl'lise....Jlli. PA. 1 RlliK)lll>C. 0 ~~:~tt) 0 RACE - Amencanlndian, Black, WhIte, t:( (Spt.:~if).) WHiTE 10. C:OUN ry OF OEA TH '" CI.4IY1(3C::RLAN D MARITAL STATUS. Mdrned, SURVIVING SPOUSE Never Married. Widowed, \~ ""II.. g.". maJ<Jan n"m.} Divorced (Specify) 14 'D i v'ORet:J> 11e. ill Ye,. decedenll"ed In i:, PC:""5801<0 '.p Clt'y/bofO PA. /101/ /7/1 I /7", :It::m~ 24-26 ml;)( be ;::01J\~le!ed :'f pt'::f~(.)n ...tlO l"lonOl../l>':t;) <.Ie-din 23a, TIME OF DEATH cr'Q 23b 2Jc WAS CASE REFERRED TO A MEDICAL EXAMINER !CORONER? 26. Yt:s 0 No ~ 24 27, PART I: fnlu Ill. ",......, ''',''f,'' u, c,;,mpl"IUu". "'''1'" (';;I.....d Ih. d..Ul l,l; ",I,', "". ~~"" "" ...~h I,,,. .,dille Of '.'1''' ''''1 l(f.,t. .huc. ", h.." '...j",. : A~pruJ(irn..te : u\lerVdl b~rv.tlen I onset drld dth:llh /: PART II: Other "igolficilnl coc,dilJQ(ls contnbuting 10 death, bul not resulting in the under1;ing cause 9i..-en in PART I 0,',Jk,"J ~e,"'(~(~dA.J/ I: DUE TO (OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF) OUE TO (OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF) WERt AUTOPSY FINDINGS AVAILAbU:. PHIOR TO COMPLE TION OF CAUSE GF DEA 1,-1'; MANNER OF OEA Hi OA rE OF INJUHY iMvr)th, 0.." Ylla'l riME OF INJUHf INJURY AT WOFtK'I DESCRIBE HOW iNJURY QCCURRED (<::) D tiu{(J '" 0 " 0 Natural ~ ACLiOenl 0 SUlcloe 0 2. HomiCide o o D ~~CE OF INJUR'( t...."lcJon.... IIt~ : Sj.JII~,ffJ 30, 30b M Ye, 0 No 0 30e Pending In\le~119at.on CoulO nul be deli;!rlOlneO At tlome laml, s:red, ladory, 0Hice 34 28b ~EkT.F'ER ICh"u" ",-.I, ,-w,e) "\ ~ ~t:~F bY~~tGor~~11~~~~",~~j, sdC~~~h C~~~~I~~J~U~: t~ s,eltd~~~~:~(:r~~JI~~~~';~a~\stl:t~t~d~.10_Ufl,:t.:.~ _Jcaltl dr,a c;0rllplcted rlelTI '1 j! "PHOt-lQUNCING AND CERTIFYING PHYSICIAN (Ph,~ICldn buth pronounCln9 cleath .:;lld coortltylny tu cause 'll ,-,"dtll) T v H." 0,,:;,1 01 lnjl kl1owl'Hl~", uvalh OCCUH"'U al the tUTle, did"" oIInu plollce, afld dulol 10 thtil cau:;,til:>>($) amJ m.IlfIU, dll lltaluu. "Mt.OICAL !:::XAMINI::H1CQH.l)NEH U" Ill" 0.$101 vi ...."111111.110'1 ,,"ulo, 11l""..liij.II0l1, in Uly opinion, uu",lh Oo.;CUHtHJ at tlUt lim.., ual", ",nO plaUt, ,uuJ due 10 UH;. L"u::li"~l"'l afld Ill.or\l\"r..tlist<llu,j 31. RtGIS THAH':j ::>IGNA TURE AND NUMBt::R 1J~)~__~1J /~ ~", pOST& \\ SCHELL,,( ATTOHNf:-f:-; AT LA\.... Paula J. McDermott Direct Dial: 717-612-6012 Fax Number: 717-731-1985 pmcdermott@postschell.com File No.: 1752/120940 November 5, 2004 VIA HAND DELIVERY Orphans' Court Division c/o Register of Wills Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, P A 17013-3387 PENNSYLVANIA RE: In Re: Estate of David M. Gross PHilADELPHIA Cumberland County No. 2103-1065 PITTSBURGH Dear Sir or Madam: HARRISBURG LANCASTER Enclosed for filing please find the original and two copies of Petitioner, Brian J. Gross' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion in Limine for Sanctions for Failure to Respond to Discovery Requests. Would you please time-stamp the extra copy of this document and return it to our office. By copy of this correspondence, the same has been served on Respondent's counsel and The Honorable George E. Hoffer. ALLENTOWN NEW JERSEY PRINCETON If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, ~."""\ .r .,.,,~~. "~l \) \.. ( __ \ \ '- -~ \ 1...' rh.' \,~ ~ (" ..-.. Paula J. McDermott PJM:djs Enclosures Cc: James Nealon, Esquire (w/enclosure) The Honorable George E. Hoffer (w/enclosure) (Via Hand Delivery) 240 GRANDVIEW AVENUE CAMP Hill, PA 17011 717.731.1970 WWW.POSTSCHEll.COM A PENNSYLVANIA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION