HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-02610
:fi
0_
~
I
l.
~I
~J
<<:1
(.!)
oW"
'"
i
II
)
I
I
~'
......,;---
""
-~
,.-~
;._.~_...___<7-'
J-
;'
i
i
(I
\,,;,
(~
--
o
-
290.._
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK B, ADAMS, t/d/b/a
ADAMS & GARDNER, PARTNERS,
Plaintiffs
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
KAREN L, SMITII and
ROBERT K. SMITII,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
I. Plalnliffs, Mark B, Adams and Mary A. Adams, are adult individuals tldlb/a
ADAMS & GARDNER, PARTNERS, a Pennsylvania general partnership wilh a principal place
of business at 469 E. North Slreet, P.O, Box 273, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013.
2. Defendant I Karen L, Smith, is an adult individual with a residence at 110 Soulh
Hanover Street, Apartment No, 9, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013.
3, Defendant, Robert K. Smith, the falher of Defendanl Karen L, Smith, is an adull
individual wllh a residence at 47 "H" Slreet, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013,
4. On April 19 , 1993, Plainliffs, by written Lease Agreement, leased Apartment 207,
400 S. College Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, 10 Defendants (hereinafter referred to as
Ihe "Lease Agreemenl"), A copy of Ihe Lease Agreemenl Is attached hereto and marked as
Exhibit "A",
5, Pursuanllo Ihe Lease Agreemcnl, Ihc Icml of said lease was to be for a period
of one (I) year, commcncing on May I, 1993, The amount of I'Cnl for this period was
54,560,00, payable in equal advance monlhly installmenls of 5380,001 duc on the first day of
each successive month,
6. On or about May I, 19931 Defeudanls look possession of said premises, subject
to the lemlS of the said Lease Agreement.
7, Despite Plaintiffs' repeated demands, Defendants failed 10 make renl payments
for Ihe monlhs of July and AuguSI 1993,
8. Defendanls breached Ihe lerms of Ihe Lease Agreement by failing to make timely
monthly paymenls of rent as prescribed for In Ihe terms of Ihe Lease Agreemenl.
9. On August 26, 1993, Plalnliffs obtained a judgment from the District Justice
agalnsl the Defendanls for Ihe amounl of rent due for July and August 1993, plus cosls,
10. On Seplember 9, 1993, Plainliffs' obtained an Order for Possession for said
premises,
I I. Defendants vacaled the premises on or before September 27, 1993.
COUNT I
BREACH OF CONTRACT
12. Paragraphs I Ihrough II are incorporaled herein,
13. Despite Plaintiffs' best efforts, Ihey were unable 10 lease the premises to anolher
tenant unlil March I, 1994, six (6) months faler.
14. Plaintiffs have applied Defendanls securily deposit of 5380.00 In partial
salisfaction of the amount owed under the Lease Agreemenl,
15. Plaintiffs have suffered an additional five (5) months of losl renl on said premises,
tolalling 51900,00.
16. Plaintiff has expended an amounl equal 10 5157,501 in advertising costs for the
purposes of releuing the premises.
17. Plaintiff has expended a considerable amount of money for aUorney fees as a
result of Defendants above described breach of Ihe Lense Agreement.
18. Pursuanl 10 Paragraph 13 of Ihe Lease Agreement, Ihe Defendants are to
indemnify and pay Plaintiffs Iheir reasonable attorney fees Incnrred as a result of Defendanls'
breach of the Lease Agreement.
19. As n result of Ihe Defendanls' aforedescribed breach of Ihe Lease Agreement, the
Plainliff has suffered direct and consequential damages in an amounl equal to:
a, Five months lost monthly renl equalling 51900: and,
I!XHIBIT A
IlRS II>ENT I AI, (,RASR
Tide IORRe mRrlo I.hlA 19th rlny of April, 1993 between
AOAMS & OARONRR, PAIlTNRIlS of 469 R. North Rt., P. o. Oox 273
Cn I'll Rl e, I'A 170 13 (" I,nlllll m'd") hl1 1'0 In) An,1 KAREN I.. sm11l nnd
ROOIlRT K. sm11l of 4110 S. Collelle St., Apt. 207, Cnrllsle, PA
("TenAnt" herein), I.ho I'nrl,ll1A Inl.onrllng 1.0 ho ICIlAlly houllfl
hcroh,l' :
IHTNHRRRTII: Thnl. I,nlllllo,'d hel'ohy lonRoA 1.0 TenAnt. nnll TenAnt
10t.A fl'um I,nnrllorrl, t.hnt. I'ort.nln Apnrtment 207
lonnt.ed nl, 400 S, Collelle Street I:nrllsle I'A 17013
CumlmrlAnd Counl.y, l'ennFlylvllIIln ("I'I'cmIAoR" hOI'eln), for t.he I.crm
of one (I) year hcglnnlnl( on t.he 1st rln,v of ~IAY ,1993,
nnd enrllnll on tho 30th dn~' of APRil, ,1994 , at the I'ent of
FOllr thousl1nd five hundred ond sixty dollors nlld no/IOO------($ 4,560.00 )
for the t.P.I'm, pAynhl11 III lIIonl.hly InRI.nlJmnntR of Three hllndred nnd
eillhty dollnrs nnd 110/1011------------- OollnrA (t 380,00 ) eRch on I.hl1
1st dn~' of nnoh monl.h in nrlvnncn.{-TenAnt RllrooB 1.0 pny R lnle
pnympnl. f'hnrlle of fl Vf! pl1l"!enl. (Ii") per month of the Rmount of rent.
not pRld ull.hln flvf! (Ii) ,IRYR nftor rlUI! dnte,'/'. ThlA lenRe iR UpOIl
the foJ Ilmlll(l 001\1111.1 onR, OOVf!nRII I.R nllll Rf(ref!men I.R:
I. IIRI1 of I'I'pmIAI1R: Tpllnlll. nllrl1f!A t.hnl. Tellnnl. nlld all.
perRonR on the Prl!miAI!R ull.h Tl!nnnt.'R conRent. ahall:
(a) URI! t.hl! Prf'IIIIRf!A only nA n AlngJI1 fnmily rlwolllnll;
(h) nnt. onrl'y on nll,l' unlAl'ful, ,IIRI'I1(lIIt,nhlp 01' IIAv.nrdouA
not.lvll.Il!A 01' nn~' 1",1.lvll.lf!A r!OIlRl.Il.llt.1ng n nulRnnoo or
nny h I nIl 011 1.I1l~ 1"'f!III,1 AI'A:
(0) heep the Prl!mlRI!A nlonll nnd RRrO;
(d) dlRpoFlp. from I.he PI'f!IIIIReR nIl trnRh, garhnge, rllhhiRh,
nnd ot.hf!r wnAt,,, In tho mnnne,' eBt.nhliahed hy I,nlllllord
nllll hy nppllnnhl!' )nonl IAI':
(od URe due 1m I'f! I II linn n f t.he I'l'nllll Elf!A, the Rppll nlllHlR
thl1l'l1l II , nllll nl) ot.hf1r (lnrt.a of (,nlld.lnrd's pl'OpArt.y,
III ve (lI'nm)lt. 1l01.Ioo t.o I,nnell or/I 0 f t.he neod fOl' I'epn II'
thereof, nllrl pn,V fOl' nil I'f!(ln II'A t.hnret.o ..Iii ch nro
IlcceRAIt.nt.o,) h,v nllY !neh of ORl'n 011 thc pnl'1. of thc
'rellnnt.. CloJtgerl plumbing Rhnll be oOI'I'ect.~d nt.
TnllRllt'R f!xpf!nFlp rf!Jtnl'rllnAB of COAl.. Thn l,eRaor iR not.
rnRponR I hI f! fOl' I'ppn I rA 1.0 R II' cond 1 tl onnrEl. l.eRRco
Rhnl I 1101.\ r~' I,PRAor ill ..ri llllg of re pn I I' a II 0 nd nd
ulllnAA nil "1II"I.JtP.l"~~' exIRt.A, Nol.lrll1ntlnn Rhnulll UI"n
he by I.n I o(lhollf! 1.0 2~ :1-2217 Of' 24 :1-li!lli7,
(fl 1101. Ilellhn!'nl.f'ly Ill' IIngllllf!IIt.ly deRtr'oy, dnfnnl',
dnmnge, Impnll', Of' I'"move nllY pnrl. or tho PrcmlReR or
I.he prn(lf!I'I.~' f'Oll I,n I np,1 I II till' Prem lAllA;
(Ill nnl. hnllll plr.l.ul'I'R nl' nLhel' nhJr!Ot,s from Ute wnth
ulIlosR hnnlllnj( IR n(~cnmpllshod by ml!nnR of BIIgle Lype
ploLurl! hnlllll!rsj
(h) nOllllunt. hlmnel f nr hnrsl!1 f III a mnllllOl' thaI. wlll not.
Ullt'l!/lRnnnhl J' r! I R 1.II1'h h J R/hor III' Illhhol's' pnnOl! ful
nnJoymnnl. nf I.hl!lr propnl'l.lns. Such prohlblt.ed
dJRt.lldIRIWIl RIIIIlI IlIcJlldo, hul. not hll Ilml ll!d to, lhl!
plnylnll nf mURlnnl InRtr'umenl.R, nlldlo ol1ulpmnnl.,
lolovlR,lnn, nl' the> cl'P./tUon of nny nl.hpr IIolRo 101111
ellflullh tn rllRI.IIl'h IlfdJ(hhnrR hntl~enn !1:OO p.m. nllll R:OO
n,m.
(I) mnlle no n I tnrn t I onR nl' mid 11.1 OIlR I." I.hl' PI'oml SOR
Innludlllll, hill. nnt 1111I1 tOll lo, pnlnl.JIII(, rehllll,II11Il,
rnmovlnl(, nr rpp/lII'IIIIl, Idlhollt. tho prior I~rll.t.en
lllltlRPII t. n f 1.111' (,nlllll Ot'll. Un I eRR I.hn J,nnd J orrl III vnR
'H'I t. t.on pI"'m I RR In/l 1.0 l'I'mo,"e nn n I torn 1.1011, Rllnh
nlt.el'nt.lnn Rhnll hI' t.hn properLy nf the [,nlldlo,'II;
(J) 111'1 Lhp.I' h"I'p IInl' Rt.ore hn?nrdouR or combuRt.lbLn
mntel'lnJR nil 1.1 If'! pl'(~mIReR:
(h) pp.t'mlll,nn,lJol,.1 nl. nllY Ume or timeR 1.0 eroct nlld
mnlnl.aln, Oil or nl'nl' the Premises, "Salo", "Rl!IIt.", or
"Jllforlllnl.lnll" RIIlIIR t.hnt Infnrm I.he Pllbllo t.Ilfll. the
PremlR!'R al'n nvnllnbln alld rlll'net. t.hn publln 1,0 lhe
I,nllll-Inl'rl 01' nllnll\.j /11111
( II Ilnl'p nnrl mn 1111./1111 t.hn P,'"m I RnR III /lR Ilood ,'ellllll' nllll
nlllllll tI Oil nR n I, prnRnn I. nllll nl. P.lepl rn Llnll 01' propl!I'
r!llrlle>I' I.nl'IIIII1/1I.lnll of I.II1R l!'nR", pnnel'fully RIIt'rl!IIlIl'I'
I.III'! PrellllnnR, frllo fl'nm \.I'nRh or "nhdR, III IlIle I'l!llBlr
1111.1' nOllllll.lolI, IIn 1.II1'n I '~on r nlld dnmnlloR hnPPOlllll1l h)'
firn, Rl.oI'11I nl' ollll'!r ('nRllnll.len ollly elwnp\.nd,
2. ^RR 1111111I1'111. nllr! 1;IIh I nnR 1111( Pl'oh I h II.n": 'I'nllnn I. Rhnll no I,
nRRIIlu \.IIIR Ie>nne 01' Rllhl,", \.II" PI'n1nIR"R.
~. l,nnrllonl'R nil I,)' I.n I?npnll': Ruh,ll'OI. I." Ilnl'n,o'n(lh I(f) nf
I.hlR lellRn, (,nllllllll',J "III Innll" IInl'''RRnl',V I'nllllll'!l 1.0 the PI'"mlnnR
nltrll,nndlllrd'R np(lIIIlI1l'"n I.h"I'1'11I III II l'nnRouahlo !.1m" nfl.el' 'l'llunul.
IInl.lflnR l,nll,Jlol'r! of I.h,. 111'1',1 for' 1'!!(lnlrR,
L I.nltrllol',l'R Illllhl, of EIII.I',V: (,nudlol',j nl' nllY pl'rRolI
nlll.hnrh:nll by I.nlldI OI',J, "I t.h \.I", prlnl' Rpenl fil: nnllROIIL of TllUBIII.,
,~h loh nnURnul. nhn I J UO I. III' unl"lnRnunh I y 1<1 I.hhnld, Rhn 11 hnve the
rlllhl. I.n r.nl.l'!r I.hl'! PI'"mIRI'R nl. 1'l'!nRonnllln \.ImeR 1,0 IIIRpnol., mRllP
l'llPlllt'R nl' nlt.I'I'nt.loIlR nR lIe".lor!, I.n llnforcn I.hlR lenRn, nud 1.0
Rhlll~ I.hn PrnmlRnR 1.0 pr-oRponl.lvn 1.I'II11111.R "" JllJrnhnRnl'R, InRllrnrR nr-
nppl'nlRI'I'Rj provldp.,J. hn"o\'ol', l.hnl. 1'f!Unnt.'R enllRnllt. Rhnll not "0
lIeceRRn ry III ellRI' 0 f I!Inl'l'Ill'III',\'.
Ii. :'llleurlly Ilr'p"RIt.: Tnllolll. nlll'onR 1.11 poy R BflolJrHy
rll'I'lIRII. of . 380.011 Ul'"ll I.hll 1'1111111111 Ill' t./lIR lp.nRp.. The Rflourlty
dnpoRl1. Rholl Ill' hl'ld hy 1,IIIUllfll'll III' Rnllurlty for the pnymellt of
nil 1'0111. 01111 ol.hnl' /1111011111.1' rhll' 1'1'0111 1'nllnlll. 1.0 (.nndlord, for thl!
Tl'IlIllIl.'R porfol'mnlwo Ill' thin lonRl', nllcl nllnlnRI. nll,v IInmnllAR o!luRed
1.0 I.hn I'I'nmlneR, '('1'1111111. lII11II'I'Rl.nlulR nllll nlll'OOR I.hnt I.hl! Rcn\ll'll.y
cll'I'oRII, mny 1101. hI' npplll'.1 nR l'l'nl. or' n/tnlnRI nlly ol.hor nmllulIl. 11110
from I.ho 'I'l'nnnl. 1.0 I,nlullol'II, Hll.hollt. l,nlllllorcl'R IH'll.l.lln OOIlRI!III.,
nlul I.hlll. 1II0nl.hb' 1'1'111 nR Rpllnl flncl hnrlllll Id II hn pnld Ilneh month
IlIol",llnll I.h,' InRI, 11I0111.11 of I.hlR Il'nRIl I.cl'm. Wlthlll lhll'l.y (301
rln)'R follcmlllll I'xplroUolI 01' thlR InnRI', I,nlullorrl !lhnll I'I'I.UI'II I.ho
1'00111'11.)' rll'I'oRII, II'RR nll,v rll'lIl11:l.lolIR 1'1'011I II. IIR rll'Rol'lhl'rl nhovo,
hy dwnh pn~'nh II' 10 nil pl'rRlllIR 1'1111111111 I.h I I' IllnRn nR '('nnnn 1,1',
mnlll'd 1.0 n forl,"l'Illnll ndrh'!!RR I~hlnh mllRt. hll flll'lIlRhlld hy 'I'nllnn!..
:'lrmul'II.)' ClllpORl1. pnlrll41lh (11'101' 10nRn:
6. Lnlullol,.I'R Ill'ml'dll'R: If TOllnlll. Rhnll fnll 1.0 pny rntll. or
OilY ol.hl!l' Rum 1.0 1./1 lull 01'11 l~h(!1I rllln, Rhnll IIl!foull. 011 /lny 1I1.hnl'
Ilf'lIv I R 10nR of Ih I I' Il'nRn, Rhn II fn II 1,0 I.nlll! (HlRSnRR lOll of I.hn
PrnmlRI!R on I.he I,nl'lII OOIllIllCllnOIl1('!II1. dnl.l!, I' I III I I vnnnl.l! or nhnlldoll I.hl!
PI'cmlsl!R, or Rhnll 1'l'mOVI! or nl.tl!lIIpl. lo l'1!1I10VP. hiI' pORRI!RR\OIlR fl'om
t./II! I'rnmlRI!R heforl! pnY\1I1l 1,0 l.nlullol'.1 niL l'l!lI1. IlIln 1.0 Ihn Illlel of
I.hp. InnRI! 1.Ill'm I.nllrllol'd, III mlell UOII 1.0 nil olhlll' 1'p.lI1lldll!R Pl'ovlrll!d
hylnll, mny:
n, Tm'lI1ll1nl.p. l,hlR IllnRI!;
h. 111'11111 no t.l01I 1.0 rl!l'n\'e I' (lIlRRIlRR Ion 0 r t.hll rl'ellll RP.R :
O.
"I'Inl( net.lon
nlld 01.111'1'
IIp.fnul t..
t.o I'p(~n\'r.r
"'lnl'I(I'R 01'
t./Ill Hhllll! hnlnnnll of lhl! rl!nt.
dnmnllf!R nnIlRf"" hy 'I'P.IIAII I.' R
7. '",IIII,II'R 1111.1 Tn:<I'R: RIllel.I'I", t.1! I r!(lholll! , llnel nnhll'
t.1' Il!v I I' 1011, nl' nil)' 0 t.hr'l' RI' I'\' Irll' I'xc:l'(lt, I.hoRp. RpOld 1'11''1111 y II Rt.nd
I". I nil 1'01' I.hl' I'RI' n I' 'l'r' II 11 II I n I, Ihf" 1'I'I'ml RnR cllll'lIIII I.hl! Rn 1 rl 1.I!I'111
"hnll hI! 1'111.1 1'01' h,l' Ihl' 'I'llnnnl. 1I11lnRR Ot.hl'l'ldRO (lrovlcll!ll hpl'l!llI,
In pnRI! of 'l'pllnlll'R I' All 111'1" 1,0 llIl)' 1.111" nhovp. r1oRel'lhl'd I'IlRlR t.hn
I,nlllllord mn,l' rlol 11'1'1, nR 1'0111, clllp III nl'I'pl1l'" douhll! t./Ill Rntrl eORI.R.
Ill!n I f"R I.n In I.n :<1''', n I I, IIn I.PI' n lid RI'HI! I', nllll IIn l'hnl(l! 1'l!mllVn I shn I 1
hll I'" 1.1 fill' h)' I.hl' I,nllllllll'd.
..
R. FIII.hp.n l'III1"I~ - (,n I. I! 1'11)'1111'11 1,1': ^l'ep.IJl.~J/hY I.hl! I,nlllllonl 1\
nllr of I.hl' Rnlrl I' f" II I III, III1Y 1111111 nftl'I' UtI' Rnmp. "hnll hlwomll e1Up.,
111'1.01' rll'fnul I, hilI' hl'plI nllllll' III I,hp pn,\'l11llnl, l,hl!l'l!nf, nr nil)' fnlllll'l1
I.n I!nfol"'1! nll,l' 01' till' I'Il(hl.R IIl1l'pln 1'p.Rllrvnd I,ll UtI! I,nlllllol'cl, nl'
nn)' of I.hl! (lollnll.ll'R, I'nl'I'I'II,III'I!R or nlllllllt.lnnR hl!l'oln cOlllnlnorl,
Rhn.!1 lint. III nn,v IIIRp hn 1'lInRI,Ip.I'"rJ n IIn I \'P.I' of I.hl! rlllht. 1.11
I'nfOl'IlO Uln "nmo Ill. nnr t.Il11l' IIll,hnlll. 1111)' 1I11t.lnn IIhnl.Rnl'Vpl' nllll nn~'
nt.t.l!mpt t.n l'nllol'l Ihl' I'l'nl. h~' ntlo 11I'IIeollcllnll ,,1\1111 not hI!
c'llIlRlcll'l'l'rJ nn 0 Imll'I'I' "I' Ihr. dllhl. III ,,"llonl, Ulll nllll1l' hI' nn~'
nl.hl'l' (lI"Il,p.l'd '1111 I hnt. nl I III' IIII' 1'111111,1' 01' I.hl! (,l1lllllnl'rll 1111;1 1111
fnl'l'nlt,III'I'R, (lp.llnll,II'01 nllll c'nlldIU""R IIIn,\' 1m I'nl'lll'llOrJ 101l,'I,hl'l' Ill'
RIII'I'''RRI\'..I~' nt. tI". "1"llIn "I' Ih,. (,nllltllll'd. 11.101 1'111'1111'1' nl(l'l'l'c\
Ihnl. II' Ihn 'l'n 1111 II I, Ahnll IIn"III111' IIIHIIII'I'1I1 I II1l1hf! 1111 nRAIIlI,"IPIII, 1'111'
till' 1"'11,,1'11 III' c'I'l'ellllll'n, "11,,",,11 '"1~' rlf'l III' IInllhl'IIl'lr'~', 1'110 II
1'0111111111') 1',,1.111,," III ","11"'111'11',1', 111' II' IIl1r .JII"llmf!1I1, ,~hnll 110
"liI'''l'I',I 111'1111 1111'11111111,111',1' 1',,1,11.11111 III IInllhl'lIpl,I'~' 1'1 Inri nllnlllAt thl!
'1'1'1111111, nil 1',,"1 1'''AI'I'I'I'el 1',", Ihl' 1'1111 tonn III' IhlA 10nAn Ahnll
IH"!OIl1" ,111,,'nll" 1'011""111111' 11I1111"rllnl.I'I,I' II~' c"AII'C~AA or ol.h"I'uIA",
R. l.'I1I1I'''AAIIIII III' ,IlIrI!lIlll'III.: "1'011 hr"n'''1 111' nll.v III' I,hn
('III'r'III1I1I,A nl' 11111'1'''111,,"1 A nl' IhlA IpnH" "I' IIpnll II.A l.nl'lI1ll1nl.loll h,v
1'0I'f'r-lI.III''', rlp.l'nl/lI III' ":<1'1 I'nl.l 1111 , I.h" 1'l'l1tholllll.nry 01' ^I,I,OI'II1',V IA
h"I'I'''~' nlll hrll'Iv;,.,I I II 01'1'<'111' 1'01' IIl1rl 1.0 (HlIII'I'AA .J1/r1l(mOlll, III nil
nnden"Io ne\.loll or I'.Jr'r' 1,111"" I lI.tnlnAI I.ho Anld 'I'ollnlll, nil" III I'nvnr
III' I.hl' 1,1111"101'" I'nl' Ihl' "I'pmlnnA hf!I'pllI rloHr.I'lho" nlltll.o "Irl!"t tho
I mill"" 1 II I." InAIIIII/l "I' II ul'l I, or pOAAOAAlolI 'lll.h I'nnl,A nllrl 1'''111, ,111",
1m "'11I1l nil 11'I'I',orllll'il,II'''. 'lllhlll/l. 1101.11'1' nllrll/ll.hnlll, IIAhllll( II!II"r'
n I' rolllll'l.,
fl. Nol.I.!" or 'l'r'l'mlllnllllll: LI';flSI\E Ahnll lIoUl'y 1,IlRROn, In
Ill'Il,III/(, nl, Inllfll, :10 rlllrA pt'lrll' 1,0 1,IlSRF.I!'fl I'nnntl.,1I nl' I.hn
pl'I'mIA"A, Ilh"l,hrr nl II.., 1,1'1'1111 IIn 1.1 1111 or 1,IrlA n,o'ncmolll. 01'
nl.h"I',dA", Rn I.hnl I,EflROll II1n,l' hnl'I' I.hn OPIHll'll/IIll.y 1,0 I",:nln n
AII"""RRflI' (,ERRIlR rill' I.hr 1'I'"mIRr'A, II' I,ERSF.1l "onA 1101 nol.ll'y
1,IlRROIl 1111,1 rl""A 11111. c'IIl1tllll/l' nR I.IIRRIIF. nR nl,hondnn hnt'rln
PI'OV I clnel, J,liRRon II1n,l' "I'r'ol'''I' , JIll ,I'mI'll I. 1'1'0111 1,IlRRliIl' S AI','lIr I I.~'
clrJloRl1. 1'01' "n..h .In~' rllIl'llIl{ uhldl Ihl' 1"'I'II1IAI'A IlI'n 1101, o..nllJlII'II h,l'
n n"'" I.HRRRH.
10. NoI,kn 111' c~1I1 I.: 14n"'nl': 'I'nllnlll, hl!l'chy Imll'nA I.hn Uotl,...
10 qllll. 1'f'lJult'Crnnlll,R or 1,111' I'l'nnA,\'lvnllln l,nI1l1l0I'<I nmll'l!nnl1t ^,:t, or
11I!i11 nA nml'llIlml, liA P,R. 2!ill.IOI nl ANI.. uhlnh prnvl,lnA 1'<11'
1'11'1,1'"" (lfi), I.hll'I.,I' (:Jill, III' nIIlI'I.~' (flll) ,lrl)' I1nl.len 1.0 lJlllt. III
<'I'rl.nln nl r'~lIn1Al.lll1nr'R, In 11,,11 l.I"'I'nol', In I.hn ''''l!nl, 'I'cnnnl, I'nllA
I.n pny I,hl' 1'1'111. 'lhf'1I ,hi", 01' hr"'If'hnA nn)' nl.hnl' I.fl"mA or Olillrll I I nnA
of' l.hlA InnRn, I.lIl1ol10l',1 Ahnll hI! 1'l'lJult'!:',1 1.0 l(lvn '1'01111111. ol1ly I'IvP.
l!i' rln~'A nol.Il~f' 1'1'''"' 1.0 ImrnrnI'IIf:\n/l 1I'l(nl nnl.lol1 lI/lnII1AI. ',h..
'1'1'111\111. Thn IInt.lf~" Ahnll III' R"rI'f'r1 h,\' IIl1r nl' I.hn roll nul III( mnnllA:
11,\' I1nll 1',1' 11111 'I,hl' '1'''l1l1nl III JI"I'ROn, h,l' rip II vol'll1/l II nopr or t,hn
Ilfltl!'!'! h~' Cl!I'I.\I'II'rI 01' l'I'/lIAl.nl'OII mnl I, or hy pOAl.Il1f( Anlllnnl.lcn
1111 Ihn I'rnmlAl'A,
: 1I111~~'~ I ~':H1ol_:t'.{1,'~I.'lr:~lr-'_'~ ..I_~~: pnl'nl(I'nph Ill. 1'nnnnl,' R
II, ^l1lnUlIR: ^"lrnoIA Rhnll not II<! pnl'mll.l.rll ull,hfllll
J,nlullnl'll'A pl'lnl' ul'llt,"n f'OIIArn'" flholllrl 1,1I11<1I0r,1 pnrrn", nl1lmnlA
1.0 hI' hl'I'1. 11,\' '1'1'1111111 I I.nnollll..d l'nRI'I'I'I'A 1.1\11 l'll(hl. 1.0 "fH)IIII'n 'l'nl1nnl,
1.11 hnl''' ""f'h nnlrnn 1 n 1'1'''"11''''' I'rom 1 h.. pl'or)f'rl~' <lr 1.<1 rl1'1111 rn '('''nnnl.
III l'nr'lIl.. Ihl' 1'1'lIfll'..I~' II' 1I01A", ,I I nl.III'hnlH'n, III' 1I1l.~I,'nl1llllnAA
1'''fllllt.. I'I'n", hn"pIIH! Rnlol 1I111111nlA, 01' II' lulJnlnlll/( 1'!'!RIlI""I.A
c~"mfll n III 0 I' R11f~h ..011011 I I III1R,
12. 1I..."I....."'lIlnl,I,'II" h~' I.'1Iullol''': ^I. Ihl! ronnn..."...nmnl1l, 01' I.hp.
1"1'111 '1"'1111111, "hol I I1r..,,,,,1 Ih" 1'1'''1111''''0 I" IIR "~;I,,IIIIll f.'",,,III.lo,, olld
..101,,, 01' 1'...1'011'1 01111 '1'''1If11l1 "111'..."0 I,hnl, IIn l'nl"'...R"l1lol,loI1R,
RI 111,"/11"111 ". Ill' '.'111'1'111111.'''' 1'':''1'''''" 01' 1111,,11,,<1, hovn hnr'l1 mo<ln h~' 111'
0111..,111111' "I' 1,lIl1dl"I'd III 1''''''''''1,1 Ih"I,,'lo 1')"'0,,1. IIR 1'1111lnlll",1 111 Iho
III'0vhdllllR III' Ihl" 1."'"'''.011111.111111101''' Rhllll 111 110 f.'vnlll. hI' 1I0hl"
rill' 1111,\' III 1,.,,1. <1,,1'''1'1 R.
l:t. III"Il/llIIll.~': '1'''''''111, "hllll 111I1"l11l1ll'y I,olullnl'" 0110111.11. 1111
"X""'I1R"R, IllIhllll.l"", "lid 'll"lm" nl' ..."...ry 11111", Irwlll"IIIll
1"'O"ollllhl... r'olllIR,'1 1'""", I<~' 01' nIl Ill.III,1 I' nl' II11Y pnl'RIII1 01' ,,'11.11.)'
01'1011111 0111. or ...ll.h",,' (I) II I'll II IIt'r' hy 'l'nlllllll. I." "rwl'nl'm nllY 01' 1.11...
I.nl'nl(' 01' 1'0l1d 11.101'" or I hi" 1,"'0111' I 1111<1 (21 OilY Ildlll'~' 01' rlrllno~"
hll",,"'III111l 1111 Ill' 111<11111 I.h,' 1'1,.../111"...".
fol. Iolllhllll..v "I' I.lIl1dll1l''': '1'01111111, "hllll h" 111 nxnllIRI"...
"1I11l.rol 111,,1 "nRR""RIII" or Ihn P.'nI11IRIlR, IIl1d I.nlllllo..rl Rhnll 11111. hn
IllIhll' 1'01' nll~' II1.JIII'~' III' ,llImoll...R In "",V p"oJl"I'I,~' 01' 1.0 nllY pel'Rnll
1111 01' ohnllt 1.11'" "'....1111 R(O" 11'11' rnl' 011,\' II1.!IIt.,v or' ,Iomollp. 1:0 OI1~'
III'o"nl'I,\' or 'I'''"I1"t. Th... ",'ovl RIIltIR 01' Illll'n~r'oph .1 h...I'nl1r
"nl'/III t.l111~ 1.111111101'11 10 ""1....,. 111111 IIIIlP"'''1. I,h" I'I'nl1111lnR IlI'n 1'01' I.hn
1"It'"nR"'R "l.ol.n.1 I.h"n.llI. 1.01111101'11,,1111111101. hn Iloh]f! 10 'l'nllfll1l.
1'01' 011,1' "'111.ry Oil I.h... 1'''I'I11IR'''R 1'01' 1'11t'llll""'R p"rlllll.tod "lIde.' I.hl~
r.f"'n~e.
Iii. lI1R'''''"I''<1: '1'0"""1, I'h1111 )lrn'llll'l' OIl,IIIII11111.oln R RI,ollllorrl
1'...III.nl"R II1~III'11I"'<1 1'011",1'1 pith I'OI'Rnlllll pr'''pnl'ty Olllt 1I0hllll.y
C'n\,('I'I1Il'" 111 rnrlll "II" 1111I",,"1 11C'r....pl,ohl... 1.0 I,ol1,llord. 1,011r1lnrrl Rholl
mnl,lI.1I111 rlrl' 11I"III'nl1...... ..00."..lnll Ih" Alrllr.tll..... In l~hl(Oh I.h,!
pI'...'nIR<'" 111'1' Inr.ol.!'!". "'1'1111111, "holl "" nnthlllll on U.n I'rnmlRoR
('nnl,rol'~' 1.0 I.hp (Onl"II II"n" 01' I.h" p"llnll'R "r InR"rollee nl' I'hnl'nh~'
IIIn hO?'I1I'" rno,l' h... 11IC''''''"A...d "r III... InRtll'nlllJP 1r1l'0Iidol.n<l.
Iii, Tol.nl ^1l.."PlIIplIl.; "l'plIl'l1l1l... I." SlInnp!1ROrR: ThlR I.!'!ORP.
cOI1I.nIIlR th" nnl:l.." OJ! rnnlllnll I bnll~,.,m I.hn pOI'I.loR nll.1 nOllnol. 110
"'lnlll/nR 01' 1.00'mlllolnd "'x""'(11. h~' 0 I'l'It.I.f!11 IIIRI.l'lImnnl, RllhRp.'1"...nt.ly
nx...'!III....,1 h~' 'Utp 11I1I'1.I"'R h(','...I". ThlR 1,,,,oRn onrl Uln l.nt'mR 01'"
nondll,lolIR hor"or 0)11'1,,' I,n o"d or.. hll1rlllll( "11 Utn hnlrR, Inqnl
,'r'llI'll"nlll,nl,II''''R, "\If'''!'RROI'R, "'lllnRRI,I(IIR nr hnl.h 11"I'I:I!'!R.
17. Th... T"'l'In '''1'''"11"1'': 'I'll" I...I'm 'I'''"nnl, IIAml hnrnll1 Rholl
I'nl'nl' "nlirH'lIv('I,I' I" 1111 fI""A""0 WIIII"d nh"vn, onrl RllllrllU! I.hlR
l...nRn n" '1''''"11111.,1111'' I.h" llnhllll.~' nr nllr.h RII"II [lnrR"n Rholl h...
,1,,1111. nl1d RllI'l'l'n I. Nflt,l ,." /( 11'('11 II,\' Lnlldlnt'd I,() nny 1"H'Rnn nllmnll I1R
'1''''l1l1nl, "" h,\' IIn~' A""h "1'1'''011 1.0 1.0ndllll',1 Rhol.! hll1,l oil JlnrRnl1R
RI/(lIlnll I.IrI~ 11'0,,1' nn II '1''''"0"1..
IR, '\l1pll,,"hln I,nl':
"'''''II.I'lIlld In o('nOI',I'"I""
l'r'I1IIR~'.! 1'0111 o.
'l'hlH nJ(I'np.IIIIlI1I, Rhnll ho llo\,p.rnnrl h~' 0.,,1
'~ll.h I h!' I OI~R "I' lhp. l'omrnnlllo'f.'n I th 11 r
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK B. ADAMS t/d/b/a
ADAMS AND GARDNER PARTNERS,
Plaintiffs
Defendants
I IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I
I
I
I
I
I NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
I
I
I CIVIL ACTION - LAW
V.
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
IN RE: DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
BEFORE: SHEELY. P.J.. OLBR. J.
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Defendants have filed preliminary objections to plaintiffs'
complaint in the nature of a demurrer regarding a landlord-tenant
issue. Plaintiffs elected the remedy of retaking possession of
the premises when defendants breached their lease. Defendants
claim that plaintiffs are estopped from ~ecovering any rent after
possession was secured. Defendants further aver that plaintiffs
should not be permitted to recover any costs associated with
reletting the rental premises. We heard argument on December 6,
1995.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Defendants, father and daughter, entered into a written
lease agreement with plaintiffs on the 19th of April, 1993.1
According to the terms of the lease, defendants were to take
possession of the premises on May 1, 1993, with rent in the
lComplaint, !2, !3, '4.
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
amount of $3S0.00 due on the first day of each successive month.2
Defendants took possession on or about May 1 as agraed.J When
defendants failed to make rent payments for the months of July
and August of 1993 pursuant to the lease, plaintiffs obtained a
judgment from District Justice Paula Correal for the amount of
rent due for July and August, plus costs, totaling $864.00..
Plaintiffs were granted an Order of Possession on september 9,
1993, and as a result, defendants vacated the premises on or
before September 27, 1993.s
Thereafter, plaintiffs allegedly were unable to lease the
premises to another tenant until March of 1994, six (6) months
later.' Consequently, plaintiffs filed a second civil complaint
with District Justice Correal, seeking to recover $2280.00 for
the time the apartment was claimed to remain vacant, in
accordance with clause six (6) of the lease.7 When judgment was
entered for plaintiffs and against defendant Raren L. smith in
the amount of $1900.00, plus costs,' defendant appealed.
2Complaint, !5, !6.
IComplaint, !6.
.Complaint, !9i Affidavit of Defendant Robert R. Smith
Submitted in Support of His Preliminary Objections, Ex. B.
sComplaint, !10, '11.
'Complaint, !13.
7preliminary Objections of Defendant Robert R. Smith, Ex. Ai
Complaint, Ex. AI.
.preliminary Objections of Defendant Robert R. Smith, Ex. B.
2
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
Plaintiffs filed a timely complaint alleging breach of contract
seeking to recover for the loss of five months rent (having
retained defendants' security deposit for the sixth month),
advertising costs of $157.50, and reasonable attorney's fees
pursuant to paragraph thirteen (13) of the lease.' Defendants
filed preliminary objections, claiming plaintiffs have failed to
state a claim for which relief can be granted.1o
DISCUSSION
We first begin our analysis on a point to which both parties
agree I a landlord may not recover rent after retaking
possession,1I irrespective of the terms of the lease.12 In the
present case, the primary issue centers upon whether plaintiffs'
claim of damages for the loss of income from the vacant apartment
constitutes the recovering of rent, which is barred under
Pennsylvania law when possession is secured. Also at issue is
whether plaintiffs are entitled to the cost of advertising the
vacancy caused by defendant's breach, as well as reasonable
attorney's fees incurred for litigating the breach of contract
claim.
'Complaint, '14, '15, '16, '18.
IOpreliminary Objections of Defendant Karen L. Smith, '4,
Preliminary Objections of Defendant Robert K. Smith, '4,
Pa.R.c.p. No. 1028(a)(4).
IIGreco v. Woodlawn Furniture Co., 99 Pa. Super. 290, 292
(1930).
I2Pusev v. Sipps, 56 Pa. Super. 121, 130 (1914).
3
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
In order to rule upon defendants' preliminary objections
regarding these claims, we note that all well pleaded facts ae
well as inferences which are fairly deducible therefrom are
deemed admitted. W~cks v. Milzoco Buildere. Inc., 503 Pa. 614,
623, 470 A.2d 86, 91 (1983). Conclusions of law are not
admissible. Mudd v. Hoffman Homes for Youth. Inc., 374 Pa.
Super. 6,6, 528 A.2d 988, 989 (1987). Additionally, a demurrer
should be sustained only where the plaintiff has failed to state
a claim on which relief may be granted. Mull v. Kerstetter, 373
Pa. Super. 228, 229-230, 540 A.2d 951 (1988). A demurrer should
not be sustained, however, if there is any doubt as to whether
the complaint adequately states a claim for relief under any
theory of law. wicks, 503 A.2d at 623, 470 A.2d at 91.
Keeping in mind the aforementioned law, we now address
defendants' preliminary objections. Defendants argue that it is
well established in the Commonwealth that a landlord who secures
possession upon the eviction of a tenant may not recover rent
coming due during the remainder of the lease term. Because
defendants perceive plaintiffs' request for the lost income of
the apartment until it was relet to be virtually the same as
collecting rent, defendants maintain that all costs associated
with reletting the premises are also barred.u
IIDefendant Robert Smith further avers that plaintiffs are
estopped from recovering the damages they seek based upon the
theory of pendency of prior action. In light of our decision, we
need not address this defense.
4
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
On the other hand, plaintiffs direct us to Homsrt
DeveloDment Co. v. Sarenci, ____ Pa. Super. ____, 662 A.2d 1092
(1995) in support of the argumunt that they are entitled to the
lost rental value of the apartment until a new tenant could be
found, as well as advertising costs and attorney's fees.
Plaintiffs acknowledge that Homart stands for the proposition
that "a landlord must elect whether to confess judgment for
possession and for all monies then due, or to confess judgment
for all monies due for the entire term." Id. at ____, 662 A.2d at
l101. However, they argue that they seek not to recover rent,
but damages, and point to this additional statement found in the
Homart case as proof of the legality of their claiml
When the judgment is entered for possession,
the landlord is, of course, entitled to
recover, as damages in a civil action, those
losses which he suffers in attempting to
relet the premises for the terms of the
lease.
l5l.
Our reading of this language indicates that plaintiffs are
entitled to pursue the cost of advertising the premises, not the
recovery of the rental valne. Giving rent payments the term
damaaes does not change the outcome here; rent payments and
damages in the form of rental value are one and the same. To
read the language otherwise would unjustly give the landlord the
opportunity to receive a double recovery, which is exactly what
the case law prohibita. For instance, under the facts of this
case, plaintiffs could have allowed family or friends to stay at
5
.
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
the apartment, thus receiving the benefit of possession, yet
plaintiffs would recover the rental value from defendants.
Landlords must make a choice whether to retake possession Q[ to
collect monies due for the entire term, not both. This choice
has been imposed upon landlords and may not be circumvented when
years of case law dictate the results. We do find, however, that
plaintiffs are not estopped from attempting to recover their
alleged costs of advertising to relet.
Turning to the issue of attorney's fees, we find that
plaintiffs initiated their complaint primarily to recover the
lost rental value of the premises after defendants were evicted,
which is contrary to case law. Thus, plaintiffs may not recover
those attorney's fees associated with the claim to recover the
rental value of the vacant apartment during the term of the
lease. Plaintiffs are not estopped at this point from seeking to
prove attorney's fees related to the claim for advertising costs,
minimal though they may be.
6
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS t/d/b/a
ADAMS AND GARDNER PARTNERS,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -LAW
V.
NO. 94-2610 CIVIL TERM
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT R. SMITH,
Defendant
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
COMES NOW Defendant Karen L. Smith, by counsel, Philip C.
Briganti, Legal Services, Inc., and raises the following
preliminary Objections to PlaintiffS' Complaint:
Demurrer
1. In Paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, Plaintiffs aver
that on september 9, 1993, plaintiffs obtained an Order for
possession of the rental premises.
2. In Paragraph 11 of PlaintiffS' Complaint, Plaintiffs
allege that Defendants vacated the premises on or before
September 27, 1993.
3. As a consequence of evicting Defendants from the rental
premises, and obtaining possession thereof on or about September
27, 1993, Plaintiffs are estopped from recovering rent accruing
thereafter for the balance of the lease term, or any costs
associated with reletting the rental premises. See e.g. Markeim-
Chalmers-Ludinaton. Inc. v. Mead, 140 Pa. Super. 490, 14 A.2d 152
(1940); Greco v. Woodlawn Furniture co., 99 Pa. supp.r. 290
(1930) .
4. Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which relief
can be granted.
196-l.onaf"dp
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS. t/d/b/a
ADAMS & GARDNER, PARTNERS.
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBBRLANDCOUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
. ,
,...
"
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
l.
:..:..:..
-
. u.>
PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO pRPI.lM1NARY OBJECTIONS FILED TO -Co
PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT BY DEFENDANT ROBERT K. SMITH
\
AND NOW COMBS, the Plaintiffs, Mary A. Adams and Mark E. Adams, t\d\b\a Adams
and Gardner Partners, through and by its attorneys MARTSON, DEARDORFF, WILUAMS
& OTTO, and files the within answer to the Preliminary Objections filed by the Defendant
Robert K. Smith, as follows:
DEMURRER
I. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. TIle avernlents contained in paragraph 3 constitute conclusions of law to which
no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a responsive pleading to such averments is
required, thc samc are specifically denied.
4. TIle avcrnlents contained in paragraph 4 constitute conclusions of law to which
no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a responsive pleading to such avenllents is
required, the same are specifically denied.
PENDENCY OF PRIOR ACTION
5. Admitted in part, denied in part. Although Defendant has not set forth specific
averments under his Pendency of Prior Action Objection in paragraph fonll, Plaintiffs, for the
purpose of responding to Defendant's narrative, has treated such as constituting paragraph
number 5 of thc Defendant's Preliminary Objections. II is admitted that the Plaintiffs filed a
but they may not avail themselves of double remedies in so
far as they are conflicting or antagonistic." See e.g.
Markeim-Chalmers-Ludinaton. Inc. v. Mead. 140 PA. Super. 490,
14 A.2d 152 (1940) t Greco v. Woodlawn Furniture Co. ,99 PA
Super (1930).
4. Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which
relief can be granted.
PENDENCY OF PRIOR ACTION
Plaintiff's filed a civil complaint against the
Defendant in Magisterial District Court No. 09-2-01 before
District Justice Paula P. Correal on March 24, 1994,
( Docket No. CV-131-94) seeking payment of rent for the
balance of the lease term after the eviction of Defendants
and repossession by Plaintiffs in the amount of $2,280.
After a hearing, judgment was entered by the District
Justice against Defendant Karen L. Smith for the sum of
$1,963.00 but no judgement was entered against Defendant
Robert K. Smith. Therefore, under the doctrine of res
judicata the fundamental matter in controversy and dispute
before this Court has been authoritatively and finally
settled by the decision of the said District Court, and the
present action by the Plaintiffs should be dismissed.
A true and correct coy of the said civil complaint and
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND
CIVIL COMPLAINT
09-2-01
PIJIINTlFF
r
...... ... ADOnIII
.
......UIIlHo.I
Wtllll'lf:lklfl
ADAMS & GARDNER PARTNERS
P.O. BOX 273
CARLISLE,PA 170t3
VS.
PAULA P. CORREAL
^"""": 16 W. HIGH ST. 2ND FLOOR
MERIDIAN BANK BUILDING
CARLISLE, PA
r_ (717) 24J-'0292 1701J-000ti
L
OEFENOANr:
r
NAIoIE .nd AlXlI1EIIS
KAREN L. SMITIl
110 S .IIANOVER ST
APT.9
L CARLISLE,PA
Docket No.: CV-13 1-94
Dale Flied: )-21.-94
.
AMOUNr
flUNG COSTS $ 53.00
SERVING COSTS' 10.00
TOTAL $ 63. 00
OA TE PAlO
1 1
1 1
3 124 194
TO THE DEFENDANT:
The above nallled plalnllll(s) asks Judgment against you for $ 2280.00 togstherwilh
costs uponths following claim (Civil fines must Include cllallon of the statule or ordinance
violated):
ACCORDING TO CLAUSE 6 IN A LEASE GIVEN TO TilE ABOVE DEFENDANTS IT STATES
IF TENANT SIIALL DEFAULT ON ANY LEASE PROVISION, LANDLORD MAY BRING ACTION
TO RECOVER TilE WIlOLE BALANCE OF TilE RENT AND OTIIER CHARGES OR DAMAGES
CAUSED BY TilE DEFAULT. ON PAUE I OF TilE LEASE, TENANT AGREES TO LEASE
APARTMENT FOR I YEAR AND PAY TOTAL RENT OF $4560.00, FOR THE TERM. PAYABLE
IN MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS OF $380.00 EACH ON TilE FIRST DAY OF THE MONTH IN
ADVANCE. SAID RENTAL PROPERTY IS LOCATED 400 S.COLLEGE ST.,APT.207.
TENANT DEFAULTED BY NOT PAYING RENT WHEN DUE. LANDLORD RECOV.ERED POSSESSION.
OF PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 27,1993 BUT WAS UNABLE TO FIND A SUCCESSqR TENANT
UNTIL MARCil I, t994. THE LANDLORD HAS ALREADY BEEN AWARDED RENT FOR JULY AND
AUGUST 1993. THE LANDLORD IS SEEKING PAYMENT OF RENT FOR TilE REMAINING
6 MONTHS TilE APARTMENT REMAINED EMPTY TOTALING $2280.00.
I. MARY ADAMS verify thai the facls sel forth In lhls complaint are true and
corrocllo Ihe best of illY knowledge. Informallon. and belief. This statement Is made subject to the penall !l'ol
Secllon 4904 olllle Crimes Code (18 PA. S.C.A. S4904) relaled to unswom falslflcallon to aulhorltles.
A
Plllnllfl'.
Anorney:
Add....:
Tlllphone:
IF YOU INTEND TO ENTER A DEFENSE TO THIS COMPLAINT. NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE
TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING AND PRESENT YOUR DEFENSE. UNLESS YOU DO,
JUDGMENT WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY DEFAULT.
II you have a claim agalnstlhe plalnll" whlt:h Is wllhln district Justice Jurisdiction and which you Intend
to assert at ths Ilearlng, you must file II 011 n complaint form at this olllce at least five (5) days before
the date set for the hearing. II you have a claim agelnstllle plalnllll which Is nol wllhln dlstrlctlustlce
Jurisdiction. you may requeslllllormallon lrom Ihls olllce as 10 Ih~ procecJures you may follow.
I' , I
e ~/I (;{b I r ~
AOPC 306M2
NOTlCI 0' APPIAL
c..-wW'H Of '.....lnvAHtA
COllI' Of c_ 'LIAI
fROM
AlDtCIAL DIIYlIU
DISTRICT JUSTlCI JUDGMINT
q'f - 2(,10 ~ ~
COMMON'UAIN..
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Notice I. g1Y1f1 lhat the appeIlanl has liled in the above COUfI 01 Common Plea. on oppeollrom Ihe judgmenl rend....d by the Di.trlct Ju.tie. 011 the
doN and In the case mentioned below
:;~lth
01v
I we. [)ISl ~ 01 HAM( 01 DJ
Paula 1'. Correal
l A (
I. COOl
aJ1Mq-q~
'" Karen L Ilnd Hobert K. Smith
. 9 /I"",,,~ ..,
CV 19 9~ CV-13l-94 ~' J (tl,./,s/~ ~A 1,?t>I.f'
LT 19 )... oIl St'('/I(P.!" 1,,(, 711)..)-'1 i- :t'~D
TWI bloclc win be ~g>ed ONLY when this nololion i. '1'qui",d under Po. R.cPJP. No. II appel/ant was CLAIMANT (see Pa. R.c.P.J.P. No.
10088.
Thi. Nolie. o.f Appeal. when received by the Di.tricl JUltice, will operate o. 0 1001(6) In action belcxe District Justice, he MUST
SUPERSB>EAS 10 the Judgment for polle.slon in this CO'1l. FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days afler
filing his NOTICE of APPEAL.
St. Apt. 9
t:n:Yn:~::'rdner
~illHle
pA
17013
~10v'''r
fOMmiriJ
P'lrtncrH
Signaturo 01 Prothonotary 01 OcI>uly
PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(This section of Iotm to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (sea Po, RCPJ.P. No, 1001(7) in action before Dislfict Justice.
fF NOT USED. detach from c~y of no/ice 01 appeal to be served upon appcllea).
PRAECIPE, To. Prothonotary
Adams and Gardner Partners
Enter rule upon . oppell..(.), to. file 0 complaint In this oppeaI
NiNno nI awc1lrro(s,
(Common Plea. No. Qt(-2C,IO Civ-ii l.vvrvv ) within lwenly (20) day. Oller~. 01 rule 01' .uff" enlry 0.1 Judgment af non ~
~~ (4~.~aogn
Adams and Gardner Partners
. appellee(.).
RULE, To
NNoo 01 /fWOIIoo(./
(1) You ore no~fied that a rule i. hereby entered upon you to. file 0 c~oint In IhI. appeal within twenty (20) day. after the dole af
....vIc. af thI. rule upon you by penonol.erviee 01' by certified 01' "'gi.t....d moil
(2) II you do nol file a comploint within Ihl. lime. a JUDGMENT Of NON PROS Will BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
(3) The doN o.f ""vIc. 01 this rule If ."vice was by moil I. the date 0.1 moiling.
DaIe:~f(~ ,19jJ. ~;J.aLd.)i(:~~~
AOPC312-14
COURT FilE TO BE FilED WITH PROTHONOTARY
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS t/d/b/a
ADAMS AND GARDNER PARTNERS,:
Plaintiffs :
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION- LAW
V.
NO. 94-2610 CIVIL TERM
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
Defendant
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRAECIPE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PAl
Please attach the enclosed Verification of the
Defendant, Robert K. Smith, to the Preliminary Objections
filed by me, Mandell K. Shanken, Esq. on behalf the
Defendant, Robert K. Smith with you on June 24, 1994 upon
payment of your costs, if any, only. Also, please
send time stamped copy of this Praecipe enclosed to me
in the self addressed envelope. Thank you.
Date: Jc''''''''- 3.:- 1'1'11
I
',/ ' ' 1i J.!--
L ,(.;:--. ,_L_
.-' .L'R .-
DELL K. SHANKEN
Attorney for Defendant
( Robert K. smith)
1624 Mitchell Road
Harrisburg, PA 17110
(717) 233-3383
.
.
VERIFICATION
The Above-named defendant, Robert K. smith, verifies
that the statements made in the above Preliminary Objections
are true and correct. The defendant understands that false
statements herein are made subject to the penalties of
18 Pa, C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification
to authorities.
Datet'( .;JUl,'! )., "1'1'/'
)'" k~tl;:/ N ..1;#
Robert K. smifh
-::r ): ,..
en
- "- i ~
:C .,
0.-
.....
.:r
('I')
If>
-' :J
11." ~
~ '-" .
..-,
II&IY A. ADAKI an4
11&I1 I. ADAKI, t/4/b/a
ADAKI , OARDIOlR, PARTIOlRB,
Plaintiff.
IN THI COURT or COKMON PLIAS
or CUMBIRLAHD COUNTY,
PIlHNSYLVAHIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 2'10 CIVIL 199.
IARIH L. SMITH an4
ROBIRT I. IMITH,
Def.n4anh
JURY TRIAL DIlKAHDID
WITHDRAWL or APPEARANCIl
TO THE PROHONOTARY:
Please enter my withdrawl as counsel for the Defendant,
Robert K. Smith, in the above captioned matter.
Thank you.
,
-----,I. L 'J
// tV C:
.-
/' ndell R. Shanken
A torney At Law
1624 Mitchell Road
Harrisburg, PA 17110
717-233-3383
....
----
, ,
NOTICE OF APPEAL
C_NWIALTH or PINNIYlVANIA
COUIT or COMMON PUAI
fROM
JUDICIAL DIIl.leT
DISTRtCT JUSTICE JUDGMENT
1'-1- 26/0 tt~J r~
COMMON PUAI No.
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Notice I. 01- lhat lhe appellant ha. filed In lhe above Co..1 of Comroon PleOl on oppeol from the judgment ,enderod by Ih. Oi.lrict Ju.llee on the
dote and In the case mentioned below
.JIw ,M;..ii'ni th
---~-_._..-
_._-- .--IM~ D1~' NO oa u"MrNtij
_u_ __ .-!'auJ:.J" Correal
lPCOOI
1lAMl Of tHllIANl
~~~_nov.r
St. Apt. Y __\;I!rti~!~-_n__ __ PA
~ n. CA.51 Ollila....'''' -_.__.~~-_. ... ------;r"ll;;j')l~..tfl
~nms ..ud Garduer l'J!.nn~J! ____ ___' ___~ IU!re!, 1-'.. Smith and Hobert K. Smith
I!lG,..;r~'''~;';;\llj.N1Jlil'' 'll~ii~,' N~ /n",,," j:'co'"
,Ift'!y; (, fj..otr'" I H>p, (.,.'/,</<" "J,I/l<'r
CV 19. 94 cV-131-94 / (J ( 07
LT 19 _~~~S"'~/~~~ /')( (7/l)..)~ s-7"re.o
Th4 block will be ~gned ONLY when thl. notation i. required under Po. RCP.JP, No. /I appelf,lnl was CLAIMANT (see Pa. HCP.JP. No.
10088. .' ",
ThI. Notlee of Appeal. when received by the Oi.lrlcl Ju.liee, will uperote a. 0 '001 (6 ) III action before Dlst"ct Justice, he MUST
SUPERseDEAS to the judgment fa< pollellion In thi. COle. FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20 ) days after
filing his NOTICE of APPEAL.
17013
.-.
Signalure 01 /'tolhonol'uy 01 Dcriiiy----~-'--m-
PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(This section of loon /0 be used ONLY when awcl/ant IVas DEfENDANT (sco /"J, HCPJP No
IF NOT USED, detach from CqJY 01 liD/ice of awcaf to be smvel! IIpOO appel/co).
PRAECIPE, To Prolhonotary
-Adama and Gardnersl'artllcrs
Enler rule upon
100lf7} III aclioo before District Justice.
, appellee(.), 10 file a complaint In Ihi. appeal
RULE, To
Adamo aud Gardner l'artncrs
/lwr;JoI_.!
Mrno 01 il/'k'lk'f:'(s!
T l/l"t''V ) within twenty (20) day. after 'Il{vice of ,ule or .uffer entry of judgment of non pros.
, ,/ /-, ./ j ~
(/'d'!, J ( . r~"..,C/,-
( Sl{1101t(1'u1 8(.f>c1fM1 a M aJ~' Of IQMf
(C~Plea'Nn q'l-2~/O CWJ
, oppelleel'),
(II You ore notified that 0 rule I. hereby entered upon you to file 0 complaint in Ihi. appeal within twenly (20) day. after the dole of
""vice of thI. rule upon you by penonoll",vke or by certified or regillered mail
(2)11 you do not file 0 complaint within thi.tl",", a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WilL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
(3) The date of service of thl. role If .",vlce was by muill. the dote 01 mallll1G
Dote: '1)1ti4 Ifn ,'9!!.i. Ca1~j<f1L // )l6f!1(;'1"". ){tfUl~
T tI SlgnIh6e oI_y~Doputy
, ,
NJrC3,,,.ft4
COURT III I
"
011 IHIA Dill,
Receipt for
Certified Moll
No InsUfom:o (O\lfllBue PfUvtdcd
Uo nol use fur Inlolllotlol1ul Moil
lSol! Bcvuftwl
'-'''^~ralllt; ~ (;ardnL'" Parllll'rH
<"Fii'ii;,x 2 7 J
"
~~'
--
:.':a.'\~':::\
I' 'Cl~~'~1 r~ f~l' IliA
170lJ
$
1'<I""Cj..
LI"I,t,,"lfl"
!"""'.I_I1I"""II,.,'
R,,~I!.. If',lllt''''''l ""
en n,.lurn 11,.< I''l'! ',I>;l""'l!
en lu \\'1-,1''' t.IJ,I'" D,.".f"''''
~
~
.,
o
~
~
o
u.
1('
.
;
, ,
I.,
\.-
~.4tr"""
-,
,
i.....
.
p
IJ11 408 087
Receipt for
Certified Moll
No InSUfom:u CovotOOO Provided
On 1101 UliO for I"lelllotional Mail
150u Revonol
1
I
,
t
I
~'
-
~;LtI.\~\
11'1"l. Jl1~licL' l'ulIla llorl'l!n
g.
lb
1'" ",1",1.' ,.'1,'
$ '1'1
'<"
';G )
tJ
$ J.;JL,
I"""'i'
,,'\I..,j''''
',I' 1""..".+,-,
1o'''O>,I''li'".,,,,I...
en ,",.,...I",I,r.' -..,...."';1
Dl ".\',' "/1"'""110,,,,,,,,,,
"
..
5
.,
g _?y
CIO
M
~
u.
Vl "
Q.
....
.
\
.
j'
.
.
.
ADAMS & GARDNER PARTNERS,
Plaintiff
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94- 2~/()CIVIL TERM
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
Defendants
PRAECIPE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
To the Prothonotary:
Kindly allow, Karen L. Smith, Defendant, to proceed in forma
oauoeris.
I, Philip C. Briganti, attorney for the party proceeding in
forma oauDeris, certify that I believe the party is unable to pay
the costs and that I am providing free legal services to the
party. The party's affidavit showing inability to pay the coets
of litigation is attached hereto.
//:
~~?~
ilip . Brig i
Attorney for Defendant
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
a Irvine Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-9400
Salary or wages per month:
Type of work:
(c) Other income within the past twelve months
Business or profession:
o
Other self-employment:
o
Interest:
o
Dividends:
o
Pension and annuities:
o
Social Security benefits:
o
Disability payments:
Sl20.00/month
o
Support payments:
Unemployment compensation and
supplemental benefits:
o
Workman's compensation:
o
Public Assistance:
o
o
Othe r :
(d) Other contributions to household support
(Wife)(Husband) Name:
N/A
If your (husband) (wife) is employed, state
Employer:
Salary or wages per month:
Type of work:
Contributions from children:
(e) Property owned
Cash:
S60.00
~ ,.
IX.-:
5 -."-
Ii ,.. ;; ,,'
':---.1''';;'')'
.., ...,:~ '.Lt
N ~I-.'.:j
s; I' '.
,'.1 ',-,
'1' ~ ~
- ~J, I "J J:
'..... ' . ,..1
.' 1. .l.
>- '.~ ~
c;o
:z :'" .
H
l/l
l/lH .l/l1Cll [:l
~~ l/l t><:HP 0
P: tIll/l -
..:l:> ~ E-<1><~N H _
Pl~ oqo ~ ~!~
01 P:OPO
Zl/l 01 ~~ fLl <Xl
~~ .-l 1tlE-<l/lN
.cPo Op:ZO
..:l , 'tl P:OO..... ~a ~ ~ ~ :
OPo H 'tl'tl~ I:: PlH
U ~ 1::, III E-< Po E-< .
1><~ IIl....Z tIl~ ZpUPo oq",~a
U Q ICll l/l fLl .
05 l/l~~ E-<H Q I-)U l/l~ ~'" E
0 ~ l!J . H:t Z ZIll . .:5< l!i ~
E-<O .-l :> :till fLlHOp:
~u lO ~~Q l/l 1>< :t g~~
N . fLl Q>< .
8~ ..~ .1><: QfLl~1Il l/l VI O!!l
..:l ~E-< Po H :::I'"
. ICllH E-< E-<Z U '"
0 ><t><:~ ~~ OHHO Z <(
~~ Z E-<:tl!:E-< ~ ~
Z~ ~~~ HItlH
t><:P: :>5l..:l
H Po
~
11/21/85 1e:~0 FAX 717 2~0 esee
:>MMONWEAl.TH OF PENNSYlVANIA
COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND
D.J, (08-Z-01)
09-2-01
PlAIN1'IFF
r
LANDLORD AND
TENANT COMPLAINT
.....-.....
-......-
ADAMS & GA1lIlNEB.
P.O. BOX 273
469 !.NORTIi 5T
L CARLISLE,PA 170L3
vs.
DEFENDANT:
r
i
DJ_..
Paula P. CORREAL
~ 401 East Louther st.
Suite 23
Carlisle, PA
T......... (717) 243-0292 17013-0000
..J
KAREN SMITH:
400 S.COLLEGE 5T
APT. 207
L CARLISLE,PA 17013
Docket No.LT-S04-93
Dale Flied: 8-11-93
_;IIld~
ROBERT SMItH
'47 H stREET
CARLISLE,PA
i
17013
.J
TO THE DEFENDANT: the abovl named plaJntlII(s)
uka judgment togllher with costs agaInst you for
thl poflaeelon 0/ l'Ial property and lor:
o Damaglllor Injury to the real Propeny, to wft:
Filing Costa $
Service Cost! $
Toli! S
Amount
46.50
19.50
66.00
0.. PlIId
I I
~ ~
o Damages lor the unjult dltlnUon or the rIlal propeny In the amounl 01
I!J Rent remlinlng due and unpllld on nllng dale In Ihl amounl 0/
iii And addlllonaJ I'Inll'lmalnlng due and unpaid on hearing dale
Inthllmountol; I_
I
,798.00
I
Total: S
THE PLAINTlFF FURTHER AlLEGES THAT:
1. The Iocatfon and u,. address, If any, olthl real properly Ia: 400 s. COLLEGE ST ,APt 207,CAB.LISLE,PA
2. The pIaIrdf Is the landlord 0/ thBl property.
-
3. Heleued or rented the prop8l1y to you Of to
.. .. 'f
4. /iJ Nodel to rlmove wes given In accordance wnh law, or
[] No notlce Is requlrld under the terms 0/ the leasl.
6. 0 The term lor which thl property was leued or rented Is fully ended, or
G?l A 1000efture has resulted by re 0/ a b~ thl conditions 01 th~ lease, to wtl:
(-0 . C ~ _ I . ( h /, b L'" . tl.
under whom you cIIIm.
.&~
-.c.- or,
[] RlI1ll'11lrved and due has, upon demand. remained unsatJsfled.
II. You I'ItaIn the real property and I'IIusI to givI up _I p08BBSBlon.
I, IWl.Y ADAMS verffy that thelacls set forth In thlI comlJl*
II"IllI.Ie and correct to the best 01 my knowledge, infonnltion and blllef. This Is made subject to
of Seetlon 4904 0/ the Crimes Code (18 PA, C, S, S 04904) rlla to unsworn falsltlcatlon aut
PO,&027.
I AlIamoy)..., onel
IF YOU HAVI! A DEFENle 10 11111 CClmplolnt you moy _Ill h "' 11I0 hoonng.1F YOU HAVE A CUlM laolnll \he plolnlllr otfoJne out of lIMo
~ ef tho pro~ wItIoh loin 1111 dlolrfd 1_ jurildlCllon IlId "'INch yCMllntond 10 ...." 0\ the hoe,llIG. YOU MUST AlE. on I
oompIolnllo"" II"''' offici BEFORE THE TIME III lor Ihe hlllina. "YOU 00 NOT' "PPEAR AT THE HEARING, _judgmerw lot .......on
end cooto. and "" damla.. ond lint 1/ ell/mad, moy _11th..... be Intatod oaoiMl you. A Judgmlllt IiIlnll yOU rot pooo"'on m~
'null '" YOlll 1!VlCT10N I,om lito ptemltlL
.' 'nt1 ~'n&.clQ RomOlD llrld IUIMlIIIY olllllllmom !MY be --'0<1 on _ oIda.
.
D.J. (08-2-011
. NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT
PLAINTIFF: _.... AOO/US
lADAMs , GARDNER
469 E.NORTH S'1'
P.O.BOX 273
~ARLISLE" PA 11103
vs.
OEFENOANT: NAIll! ,,,,, AlXlfO!lIa
!SMITH, MREN L, ET AL.
400 s.COLL~GE 5'1' APT.t 207
CARLISLE, PA 17013
L
DockBt No,: LT-0000S04-93
Date Flied: 8/11/93
.OMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
.:: . COUNTY OF: CUMBEIUAND
.....DIa....:
09-2-01
tu_:_
paula P. CORREAL
~ 401 East ~outher st.
suite 23
carlisle, PA
''''-; (7171243-0292 17013.0000
Paula P. CORREAL
401 East Louther st.
Suite 23
Carlisle, PA 17013-0000
THIS IS TO NOTIFY yOU THAT:
.,
.J
.,
.J
~ Judgment was entered for: (Name) ADAMS' GARDNER
00 Judgment was Bntered against: (Name) SMITH, KAREN L
In Ihe emount of $
864.00
on:
o Dameges will be assessed on:
D This case dismissed w~h prejualce.
D This case dismissed without preJualce.
[!] possession granted.
O Possession llrlOted If money judgment Is not
. satisIIed within thirty days.
o possesston not granted,
D Levy Is Slayed for days orD generally stayed.
o ObjeCllon 10 levy has been nled ana hearing wID be held:
Oll'le: Pllce:
11ml:
(Date) 8/2.v93
(Date & 11me)
Amounl of Judgment
Judgment CoslS
Interest on Judgment
Attomey Fees
$798.00
$66.00
,.00
,.00
$864.00
TOTAL
\
ANY PARTY HAS THE RIOHT TO APP~WTTHIN 3O~F THE DATE OF JUDO!,,~~,": BY FILING A
NOllCE ~F APPEAL WITH THE COU~O 4 ..t':~ P :. <' ' ' " \'.
(. ..,/ --,"* . oj"', '
. 'd"-. J Dete '"'".... .. . District Justice
I "''",....." "a"" ~d '""""~~,,~. ~,,,,~,;,,-,,~- ":
Dale ~~ , . , DIstrict Justlce'
/.# . , . "
MycommlaaionexPlresflratMondayofJanUary,1Q1 . ": . SEAL,.,. ....
" . '\.'
" .
. \\..,....
EXIIIOIT wOw
AOPe 315-ar2
.
.
(90
NOV 2 2 1995~
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS, t/d/b/a
ADAMS & GARDNER, PARTNERS,
Plaintiffs,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
Defendants
.
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT KAREN L. SMITH'S
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT
Defendant Karen L. Smith, by counsel, Philip c. Briganti,
Esquire, Legal Services, Inc., files the following brief in
support of her Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint.
Procedural Historv
On March 24, 1994, Plaintiffs filed a civil Complaint before
District Justice Paula P. Correal, seeking a judgment against
Defendants for rent Plaintiffs claimed Defendants owed under the
pat~i.s' lease agreement. On April 19, 1994, following a hearing
on that date, District Justice Correal entered a judgment in
favor of Plaintiffs, awarding them a jUdgment in the amount of
$1900.00, plus costs. Defendant Karen L. Smith filed a timely
appeal from this jUdgment on May 16, 1994. On June 6, 1994,
Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in the above-captioned case, to
Which both Defendants filed separate Preliminary Objections on
June 24, 1994. Plaintiffs filed a Praecipe for Listing Case for
Argument on November 6, 1995.
Statement of Facts
On April 19, 1993, the parties entered into a written lease
agreement providing that Plaintiffs would rent to Defendants an
apartment for a term of one year, commencing on May 1, 1993.
Complaint, Paragraphs 4, 5. The rent was to be paid in
installments of $380.00 per month. complaint, Paragraph 5. When
Defendants failed to make rent payments for July and August,
1993, Plaintiffs commenced eviction proceedings and obtained an
Order for Possession of the rental premises, pursuant to which
Defendants vacated the apartment on or before September 27, 1993.
Complaint, Paragraphs 7, 9-11.
Thereafter, Plaintiffs aver that they were unable to relet
the rental premises until March 1, 1995. complaint, Paragraph
13. Accordingly, as a result of Defendants' alleged breach of
the lease agreement, Plaintiffs aver that Defendants caused them
to suffer five months lost rent in the amount of $1900.00, which
accrued after Plaintiffs evicted Defendants from the premises.
complaint, Paragraph 15. Moreover, Plaintiffs aver that
Defendants owe them $157.50 in advertising costs Plaintiffs
allegedly incurred for the purpose of reletting the premises, as
well as their attorney fees. complaint, Paragraphs 16, 17. In
Defendants' Preliminary Objections, Defendants contend that
because Plaintiffs evicted Defendants from the apartment,
Plaintiffs are estopped from recovering from them any rent
accruing thereafter for the remainder of the lease term, or the
costs associated with reletting the premises. Preliminary
Objections, Paragraph 3.
statement of Question Involved
After evicting Defendants, are Plaintiffs estopped from
recovering from Defendants any rent payments coming due during
the remainder of the parties' lease term, or any costs associated
with reletting the rental premises?
suggested answer: Yes
Araument
~!!~~~ICTING DEFENDANTS. PLAINTIFFS ARE ESTOPPED FROM
RECOVERING RENT PAYMENTS ACCRUING DURING THE REMAINDER OF
THE PARTIES' LEASE TERM. OR ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
RELETTING THE RENTAL PREMISES.
In their Complaint, Plaintiffs aver that Defendants vacated
the rental premises on or before September 27, 1993, after
Plaintiffs had filed an eviction action against Defendants and
obtained an Order for Possession of the dwelling. Plaintiffs now
seek to recover rent accruing during the unexpired portion the
lease term followina Defendants' eviction.
However, because
Plaintiffs elected the remedy of retaking possession of the
premises, they cannot also recover from Defendants rent accruing
thereafter.
Under Pennsylvania law, "[a] landlord having the right to
retake possession of the premises during the term cannot both
resume possession and recover rent as well for the balance of the
term." P.L.E., Vm. 22, LANDLORD AND TENANT, section 312, p. 92.
In Greco v. Woodlawn Furniture Co., 99 Pa. Super. 290 (1930), the
superior Court held that where a landlord terminated a lease by
confessing a judgment in ejectment, and thereafter confessed a
judgment for unpaid rent accruing for the balance of the lease
term, the judgment for rent would be stricken:
The landlord may cumulate remedies provided in the lease
[citations omitted], but he may not avail himself of double
remedies in so far as they are conflicting or antagonistic.
He can eject the tenant and at the same time enter judgment
for the rent accrued when the tenant was evicted (citations
omitted]; but he can not recover both possession and the
rent for the balance of the term. 99 Pa. Super. at 292.
See also Markeim-Chalmers-Ludinaton. Inc. v. Mead, 140 Pa. Super.
490, 14 A.2d 152 (1940); Huestis v. c~, 34 D. & C. 2d 375
(1964) .
This is true even if the lease contains an acceleration
clause purporting to make the rent accruing for the balance of
the lease term due upon the tenant's default. "Having elected to
terminate the term, the lessor can not also enter jUdgment for
the rent for the balance of the term which accrued after the
jUdgment in ejectment but became sooner payable under an
acceleration clause." DeLona Hook and Eve Co. v. VoauG Silk
UgJjerv Co., 108 Pa. Super. 369, 373, 164 A. 848, 849 (1933).
Moreover, a landlord cannot recover rent accruing under a lease
after the tenant is evicted, even if the lease specifically
purports to protect the landlord's right to do so. In Pusev v.
SiDDs. 56 Pa. Super. 121 (1914), the Superior Court stated as
follows:
The plaintiff having terminated the lease, and the defendant
having surrendered the possession under compulsion of the
plaintiff's proceeding for that purpose, the court Was right
in hOlding that the latter could not recover rent for the
period after removal, either by virtue of the general
covenant to pay rent or by virtue of the special agreement
that "no such determination of this lease, nor taking or
receiving possession of the premises shall deprive the
lessor of any action against the lessee for the rent or for
damages." 56 Pa. Super. at 130.
Because Plaintiffs had no legal right to collect post-
eviction rent from Defendants, it follows that attorney'S fees
incurred by Plaintiffs in pursuit of this claim cannot be
recovered. Likewise, Defendants should not be liable for any
funds Plaintiffs may have expended in attemptinq to re-let the
premises. As established by the case law cited above,
Defendants' obligation to pay rent ended upon their eviction.
Accordinqly, because Defendants are not themselves liable for
rent accruing after they were removed from the premises, they
should not be responsible for expenses Plaintiffs may have
incurred to lease the dwelling to other tenants.
A preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer "should
be sustained only in cases that clearly and without a doubt fail
to state a claim for which relief may be granted." Countv of
Alleahenv v. Commw., 507 Pa. 360, 490 A. 2d 402, 408 (1985);
Schott v. Westinahouse Electric CorD., 436 Pa. 279, 259 A. 2d
443, 449 (1969). In their Complaint, Plaintiffs aver that they
evicted Defendants, and now seek rent accruinq thereafter for
part of the unexpired lease term, as well as expenses for re-
letting the premises and attorney's fees.
Under Pennsylvania
law, as set forth in this brief, Plaintiffs clearly are not
entitled to recover these amounts. Accordinqly, Defendant Karen
L. Smith respectfully requests that this court sustain her
demurrer.
Respectfully submitted,
u~
Philip c. Briqant
Attorney for Defendant
Karen L. Smith
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
8 Irvine Row
carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-9400
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS t/d/b/a
ADAMS AND GARDNER PARTNERS,
plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
.
.
.
.
V.
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K. SMITH,
Defendant
.
.
I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
DEFENDANT ROBERT K. SMITH'S BRIEF
IN SUPPORT OF HIS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
I. STATEMENTS OF THE FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 19, 1993, Plaintiffs, Mark E. Adams and Mary A.
Adams, t/d/b/a Adams and Garner, Partners, by a written Lease
Agreement, leased Apartment 201, 400 S. College Street, Carlisle,
pennsylvania l7013, to Defendants Karen L. Smith and Robert K.
Smith, her father. According to the terms of the Lease Agreement,
the term of the lease was for a period of one (1) year, to commence
on May l, 1993. The agreed amount of rent was $4,560.00, annually,
payable in equal monthly installments of $380.00, due on the first
day of each successive month.
On or about May l, 1993, Karen L. Smith took possession of the
premises, subject to the terms of the Lease Agreement. Karen L.
smith defaulted on rent payments for the months of July and August
of 1993.
On August 11, 1993, the Plaintiffs filed a landlord-tenant
complaint in the Office of District Justice Paula Correal seeking
possession of the premises plus rental payments for the months of
July and August 1993. Judgment was awarded on August 24, 1993
behalf of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant in the amount of
$798.00 plus costs. Plaintiffs were also given possession of the
premises.
Subsequently on March 24, 1994, the Plaintiffs filed a second
civil complaint with District Justice Correal, seeking damages in
the amount of $2280.00 for an additional six months rent. Judgment
was awarded against both Defendants in the amount of $1,963.00. On
April 19, 1994, an appeal was taken from this action and the
present complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs on June 6, 1994.
In the present complaint, Plaintiffs allege that they were
unable to lease the premises to another tenant until March 1, 1994,
six (6) months after the Defendant Karen L. Smith vacated the
premises. Plaintiffs also seeks advertising costs for the purposes
of reletting the premises in the amount of $l57.50, and, payment of
attorney fees, for consequential damages amounting to $2,057.50,
due to five monthe lost rent equalling $1900.00.
On June 24, 1994, the Defendants filed preliminary objections
to the Plaintiff's complaint. On July 11, 1994, the Plaintiffs
filed their answer to the preliminary objections.
2
III. ARGUMENT
1. flAlntiffs have failed to state a cl~m UDon wh~
relief can be aranted.
A court, when ruling on preliminary objections in nature of
demurrer, may sustain preliminary objections and dismiss complaints
in cases which are clear and free from doubt that ths law will not
permit recovery by plaintiff. A.E.V.. Inc. v. Commonwealth. Liauor
Control Board, 163 Pa.Cmwlth. 292, 641 A.2d 30 (1994).
A preliminary objection in the form of a demurrer challenges
the pleadings as failing to set forth a cause of action upon which
relief can be granted under any theory of law.
Balsbauah v.
Rowlanq, 447 Pa. 423, 290 A.2d. 85 (1972).
Plaintiff's previously filed a civil complaint against the
Defendant in Magisterial District Court before District Justice
Paula P. Correal seeking delinquent rent and the eviction of
Defendant, Karen L. Smith.
In their pending complaint, Plaintiffs now seek rent accruing
thereafter for the remainder of the unexpired lease term, as well
as expenses for reletting the premises and attorney's fees.
The Pennsylvania law relating to the right of a landlord to
evict a tenant and also recover rent for the balance of the lease
Was set forth in Markeim-Chalmers-Ludinaton. Inc. v. Mead, 140
Pa.Super. 490,14 A.2d 152 (1940); Greco v. Woodlawn Furniture Co.,
99 Pa.Super. (1930): "Plaintiffs may accumulate remedies provided
in the lease but they may not avail themselves of double remedies
in so far as they are conflicting or antagonistic." In Greco, the
4
Superior Court held that where a landlord terminatod a lease ~y
confessinq a judqment in ejectment, and thereafter confessed a
judgment for unpaid rent accruing for the balance of the lease
term, the judgment for rent would be stricken. See also, HuestiR
v. Cohen, 34 D. , C. 2d. 375 (l964).
The above case law is true even if the lease contains an
acceleration clause purporting to make the rent accruing for the
balance of the lease term due upon the tenant's default. Delona
Hook and Eve Co. v. Voaue Sild Hosierv Co., 108 Pa.Super. 369, 373,
164 A. 848, 849 (1933), holds thatl "Havinq elected to terminate
the term, the lessor cannot also enter judgment for the rent for
the balance of the term which accrued after the judgment in
ejectment but became sooner payable under an acceleration clause."
!!L.. at 849. Moreover, a landlord cannot recover rent accruing
under a lease after the tenant is evicted, even if the lease
specifically purports to protect the landlord's right to do so. In
Pusev v. SiDDs, 56 Pa.Super. 121 (l914), the Superior Court statedl
"The plaintiff having terminated the lease, and the defendant
having surrendered the possession under compulsion of the
plaintiff's proceeding for that purpose, the court was right
in holding that the latter could not recover rent for the
period after removal, either by virtue of the general covenant
to pay rent or by virtue of the special aqreement that 'no
such determination of this lease, nor taking or receivinq
poseession of the premises shall deprive the lessor of any
action against the lessee for the rent or for damages.'" !!L..
at 121.
Pursuant to Pennsylvania law, Plaintiffs are clearly not
entitled to recover additional rent after having evicted the
Defendant and secured possession of the property.
"A landlord
having the right to retake possession of the premises during the
5
term cannot both resume possession and recover rent as well for the
balance of the term." See P. L. E., Volume 22, LANDLORD AND TENANT,
section 312, p. 92. Accordingly, Defendant Robert K. Smith
respectfully requests that this court sustain his demurrer.
Base~ o~ t~e Pendency of Prior Action. Plaintiffs
~hou!d ~e ~stQD~ed from recoverina rent accruina
thereafter for tihe balance of the lease term. or
a!!v cost!!, ~S!!oc_~ted with relettina the rental
Drem1ses.
In order to sustain preliminary objections on the basis of
2.
pendency of prior action, the court must determine that, in each
case, the eame parties were involved, the same rights were
asserted, and the same relief was sought. In Meinhart v. Heaster,
424 Super.ct. 433, 622 A.2d l382 (1993), the appellants claimed
that the trial court erred in dismissing their contract action
against appellees on the basis of pendency of a prior action. The
appellants had filed a quiet title action and a subsequent separate
action in equity seeking specific performance of the lease
agreement arguing that the doctrine of pending prior action did not
apply. The Superior Court agreed that the actione did not seek the
same remedy as that requested in the instant action for money
damages, and that the trial court erred in sustaining the
preliminary objections of appellees on the basis of pendency of a
prior action.
In the instant case, the Plaintiffs recovered possession of
the rental property, and the amount of rent due for July and
August. As a result, Plaintiffs are estopped from recovering rsnt
accruing thereafter for the balance of the lease term, or any costs
6
f\flLEI\UATARU,'\I.IAkUNU IXX"\296-Ukll\wdpl!M
l'mlld Ilf>>'''OJl'U'M
kMNd 1It1O"" OUI 20 I'M
lOX 291
MARY A. ADAMS and
MARK E. ADAMS, tldlb/a
ADAMS & GARDNER PARTNERS,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 2610 CIVIL 1994
KAREN L. SMITH and
ROBERT K, SMITH.
DefenJants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PLAINTIFFS' BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS
1. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND PROCEDURAl. HISTORY:
On April 19, 1993. PlaintilTs, Mark E. Adams and Mary A. Adams, tldlb/a Adams and
Garner Partners, by a written lease agreement, leased Apartment 207, 400 S. College Street, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania 17013, to Defendants Karen L. Smith and Robert K. Smith. her father. According to
the lease agreement, the tenu of the lease was for a period of one (I) year, to commence on May I,
1993. The agreed amount of rent was $4.560.00, annually, payable in equal monthly installments
of $380.00, due on the first day of each successive month. Shortly after taking possession of the
premises, the Defendants failed to make the monthly rental installments for July and August 1993.
despite repeated demands therefore. Accordingly, on August II, 1993, the Plaintiffs filed a
landlord-tenant complaint in the Office of District Justice Paula Correal seeking recovery of the then
due back rent and possession. Judgment was awarded on August 24, 1993 in favor ofthe Plaintifls
and against the Defendant in the amount of $798.00 plus costs. As payment was still not
forthcoming, an Order For Possession was issued on September 9, 1993. Thereafter, Defendants
vacated the premises.
Subsequently on March 24, 1994, the PlaintilTs filed a second civil complaint with District
Justice Correal, seeking to recover damages in the amount of $2280.00 incurred as a result of
Defendant's breach of the lease. On April 19. 1994 judgment was awarded against both Defendants
in the amount of$I,963.00. Thereafter Defendants filed an appeal of this judgment. PlaintilTs'then
filed the Complaint seeking damages incurred as a result ofthe Defendants' breach. As a result of
the Defendants' breach of the lease, Plaintiffs incurred 5157,00 in advertising costs, attorney fees,
and 51900 due to the live months lost rental income.
On June 24, 1994. the Defendants filed preliminary objections in the nature of demurrers to
the Complaint. These preliminary objections are presently before this Honorable Court.
II, ISSI1ES:
1. Whether the Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted.
2. Are the Plaintiffs estopped from recovering damages based on the defense of
pendency of prior action?
Ill. ARGI1MENT:
I. PLAINTIFFS HAVE STATED A CLAIM FOR WHICH RELIED CAN DE
GRANTED.
.
The present matter is simply an action for recovery of damages arising from Defendants'
breach of a lease. The paramount rule in assessing damages in contract actions is that every person
unjustly deprived of his rights should at lease be fully compensated for the injury he sustained.
Ecksel v Orleans Construction Co., 360 Pa. Super. 119, 519 A.2d 1021 (1987). Thus, in awarding
compensatory damages, every effort is made to put the injured party in as good a position as he
would have been in had the contract been fully perfonued. Denby v. Northside CaqJet Cleaninll Co.,
257 Pa. Super. 73, 390 A.2d 252 (1978); Restatement, Contracts 2d ~347, comment a (\ 981).
Accordingly, Plaintiffs should be penuitted to recover their damages resulting from Defendants'
breach of the lease.
Despite this well established law, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs should not be pemtitted
to recover their damages. In support of this argument, Defendants cite to Greco v. Woodlawn
Furniture Co., 99 Pa. Super. 290 (1930). and other cases which stand for the proposition that a
landlord may not recover n:n1 from a tenant after retaking possession. Defendants apparently urge
this Court to extend this limitation on collecting rent after possession to a prohibition against
Plaintiffs' recovery of damages. The Superior Court recently reiterated the rule of law embodied
in these cases in Homart v Svrenci. 662 A.2d 1092, 1101, 1995 Pa. Super LEXIS 1880,25:
2
Thc principle for which these cases stand is not complex . a landlord must elect
whether to confess judgment for possession and for all monies then due, or to confess
judgment for alimonies due for the entire term.
However, thc Homart court continued:
When the iudllment is entered for possession the landlord is. of course entitled to
recove(. as dama~es in n civil action. those losses which he suffers in attempting to
relet the premises for the tenn of the lease.
1l1.(emphasis added).
In the instant action, thc Plaintiffs seek oot to recover rent accruing after the relinquishment
ofposscssion but only damagcs incurred as a result of Defendants' breach so as to make them whole.
As such Dcfendants' preliminary objections should be denied.
A preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer "should be sustained only in cases that
c1carly and without a doubt fail to state a claim for which relief may be granted." County of
Alh:llheny v. Commw., 507 Pa. 360,490 A.2d 402, 408 (1985); School v. Westinllhouse Electric
!Jl.ql., 436 Pa. 279, 259 A.2d 443, 449 (1969). In the instant case, Pennsylvania case law statcs that
thc Plaintiffs have a claim for which relief may be granted. As such, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover
the damages they incurred as a result of Defendants' breach of the contract in order to be made
whole and Defendants' preliminary objections should be denied.
2. TilE PRESENT ACTION IS NOT BARRED BY THE CLAIM OF PENDENCY OF
PRIOR ACTION.
In order to sustain preliminary objections on the basis of pendency of prior action, the court
must detennine that, in each case, the same parties were involved, the same rights were asserted, and
the same relief was sought. In Meinhart v. Heaster, 424 Pa. Super. 433. 622 A.2d 1382 (1993), the
appellants claimed that the trial court erred in dismissing their contract action against appellees on
the basis of pendency ofa prior action did not apply. The Superior Court agreed that the actions did
not seek thc samc rcmedy as that requested in thc instant action for money damages, and that the
3