HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-00601
..
SHERIFF'S OFFICE
~o NORrH OU~E SfflEET, LANCASrUl.
PENN5Yl VANIA l!bl)j , 1/111 ;JIll) HjOt)
[. ,..,
INSIRUCTIONS FOR SlAVIC I 0' PHOCIIIB"" 111. ,,,.....,, NIQllNo/
_ 6!.~~~~ ~f_~I. .'UlIJI ,PI"'" Iyp. llr ~'I'~t 1~"'LM~ DlJ, '~II ~'ll&I;h .~y_~~pl~._.
I.) (tJUln NIJMHfll
qc,-f)O l Civil Tmm
.\ 1't'i'1 III WIIIIIIIllllMI'1 AltH
HUll110rltJ
,.
.HEAI" IIERVICI
'flOC.1I fllCIIPT, .nd AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN
t'rlATN"il'-ii6,'--' -.---...-..,.---.. ....---<----.. ...-.... .-...-
3 ~~~$~81,-.:!:c.~llra
H.M. StaUffer ~ Bons Inr.
.,.. f' ." .."01"""",,",,,,,,",.,,,,,,,,,," ", """,, ''''''
.... IhM~. A~.all.U.~I. .~.~.n.'!L }nr 1 ,
11 AllDRf.6R r61,",,1 or f1f{) AplUt/llQnl N'l CII.,. t1tllll ,."." f';llllu .lnll III' CIJlll'l
A 3:1 Glenoltl Drive I1m.:lH Leola, P^ 17'i40
__. '___'_"__"h.._.,. __I....,. ,_J . ....,.. ...
7 INOICME UNU8UAL 81nVICE II CO/,O/,OON OF I'A 10 DEl'lJrllE 'I ')I liE II Cunber lllOti
Now, ._F'fj\), '9.!L"':~~~='1995:.='_~:'~iiHER'iFF'OFli~ COUNTV:PA, do herou, opulllO Ihu Shorlft 01
I lIIla..tll~ _._._..___________.... County to execute this ~ turn tho:;;=eC) ng
to lew, This deputallon being made at tho request ond risk 01 the plalnllft. ..... . ;k-.."r"tC... ~
I.. It '11 I~M.' --.-
., e'lclAL 1!f4ff100lOli. OiiOT"'~ Ijf;olfll~ffoHTHAT wiLi. Ai.iilfiNif~jii.Diji/ioiiii ICI . ...... c.ll l l' .,........
.\1111(/1' nne
Non ONLY A"UCAILI ON W"" 0' UICUTIONt M,I. WAIV... 0' WATCHMAN - ^n~ tlap1lly IShllnll hJ\lylrlQ Upl\11 ." IIlIlI..:hlllU 1I11y propurty lllUhn
within Wtll m.v 1'11.\1' 11m. Wflh()uld. wolchman. I" Cllllodyol whom'v"r III h'ljtl!j 111 plllUllll'lllliln, llller 1ll)IIIYII1U ll,lrlllll1 Il' 111\1"1 II' 111111..:hll1unl. WllhllUllllJhllilV 1111
Ih. p.rt 0' luch d.puly or the Shl,l" III ony phunllll h"llllllor lIny Iou. tJeshucllun .It Ultlll)'flllt)I /lily IUJch 1)/I)I)I)lIV hoh"" IIlhHlII'III",'., IhUtonl
., tloIiAtU~' 01 AtyO~HIV or olher O~IGIHAtcjr-..-..-._..~...--.--.rhfELE;;H()NE.NijMiij,-n. . -- ['.,-1Mlr.....
,.T~~t~:tl:.8talliW~nHD)Djjj\..liilOW:-IThll....i m.'.-I tgm~~~i?i~~~~,ili-i. 'bi -m"i~aitl!) ~'!~
OFFIC~: O~' TilE SIIEIUFF 1 COURT 1I0USE SQUARE, CARl.ISl.E. l'A, 17013
.._.._..._.~'Acli IILQW '0" !.I.I.~.'-Jttl.~).F.!..!m.!-1 DQ~.Q!W1'l!ri 'IMtWlHJHm._r=.,..,,-..----
13 I.clmowl.dg, "cllpl 0111'1. wrlll N~MI ,,' ^""",,,,,,,, LCSO "".PlIIV nr (.;llltlo.. ,~ O.'.'.hl nOtlJI\toll , f) wi _JlI'lll.lon/HOIUIIlQ 110.."
0'compl'lnl"'I1d"'''dBb~__----'l.'lliQTIIE.1'-,_"'.9g_0jl,J._9J.-)6.0?.... ... .. . _2{9/95 .U~/?5 . ..
16 I h."bV C."""Y dnd IItITUfltN thlllll ) 11I'YII uerllLllHllly lI11vOO, 1~'Vd lug"llf\tlrJOIlCI) 01 IHlt'lICO lU ~h'l......tllll 'rhllllllfk~".1 I hlllll11J)1I11;uhlll rlllllhllWll III
"h'ml'),I~, 11'1. Wrll<lrCONlphW'll d.armb.f' on th'Ir'UJ'''idIJdl, tnmpony ~Orll()nHlf)Il, .,If;: ,fllthe illlrJ,U'llll'lhlll/f,' flh,)\tl' n'l)1l Ihllllllll'llrhllll. ,:umllrllly, I;l)f
po/aIIOll, ele .1IIh" addlti'" lfllu!rled bolllW hy 11ntl1Ju1\J II TRUI.nd ATTUTlO COPY 1I11111'Or
.__~_______._._+_U__n.__."_, _
17 {} I h.r.b~ C.rtl'~ dnd ,.Iurn II NOT 'OUND b,cl)lJl\IJ Intll IJIl(jtJhJ II) h)C,lht IhQ IlliH....IlJUIII, r;rHlllHltly r;'Hl1nrullllll. Jlh. ,rliltl1llfllllltl\lfl nhw 'IJtIlnr~" IJlJh>W)
18 Nii~"iiir.to~jdiSe'\lrtd (II nol "ho;ri'llbr)~i;)inlijOiiorll\t\~tIITinriJ;l~jnl'-i)-- ,... .,. .- -. [ 'I} ^ plHhll1l or ~'f1"lhl" "'1" '11111 '11~':rrl'''HI
111111\ 111"111"1 III 11111 .11I'.rul,lll' ~ "~'HII
_ I(Al'dJMIJ.&-_Bs.d!.~L,__f)BI.1.JD.(f>/.J:_.n.. ..n...._ d """'-"''''':'.'''"'H ,- ,-.,
:mAddrllao' where ..'.....d ICQmplele o(jl~ .,.filIi'ltnllhiUl anllwn Ilbo....lJ) ,STrlJlllllflftn..AllIH""III1HI,) Clty.I)'lI'l 'wP ~, hntn l)i-(f;;~j~'Q '~~"iljll-"
SI.I. lI(jd lip Cod.)
U ATtllm. lD~i II.. OIP'TriiTili'I'-r lrlTli-l[irti>i;'ij iiiii'r lrliiii -[ii'Plni, [
U ~d'."r.. CI1.JML Lti!._. '~:.!}.~;U-.- co'i'T~' No,",;;c.,i' . r' ,J"i;,;jo'Ji,j;',;"j.ii'lr .
30 Am~.~OO .!l.!IJJt4.L_... _.J9.~_!L._m .___m_........_ -.--/f-,-CO. .
Doli.
)j;I1/;bn
["'il.'I o."r"+.,-[Dir.- Mii,. -ol"p,'j"rn.
.. [~.:i'i;'Ir.';j", Tt~Dg~
~.~3D.~2.~' /I ~;~7
47l-
.~,IS
l
srA
[".th.-
31 MFIRMF.O I""J alllltcnbltd Ir) beh". ,n, It'l,, _ ',.}___..._. .. .____ __~_ "..___+__
I~ "'W'III""1 n!
34 dllY 01 ~-1.:5:. t l.Jl.~~_.___. ___. ___, .__.!.~L~b_==~___..__.,___ J_'~~_~_~~:~~ --'-C'-"
C (Ii). .,.; }~ "".1",11. , 'l~fI,1!
j7 )e ~J)""_~~~~~'~~:".~_U:~:'_':I1;;:..t__..... n_ _... __ ____ _.
I"'jl".'''.:ld',1'JlJT!ljr-,''UT.lI,I'ljIiT,r
~SOM~!.ttI.2.tu~PIH~~.~___. ____ _.._'._+. ..____..__. .___ .n'n _u ....
II I AC.N<lI'lLECl'Jf I1EC~11'1 <" H'E '"I~"'" ~ITURN SIGNATUAE t
-2L~+l!.r}.l~~!?!:'~.~,~,~'-!.I_f'.4~~~n~~l_~!_r_:(~r~~).',I..~.E.,...__ _, J
. -, ....." A'/i'iwEA
.J.t1r.,f.~~. :~'
{c,/L
r 'j"1 ij4'1~' .. ,.,_. "-
1':1-i~.>~
I,., """'"'''' d" . },'1 ,
., ' ~
,/~i I,'
.4 ?:&/.
-~..
'G~~
1"'1' "I:^. !oj'",
~
'I
i.
"
"
I
'"
"
.,),
;1 "
"ji :1,
I "1 .~
I
.'
"
"
'II
'1':1
, ,
, " I I,
,'I
,',
,) I
,,';
" " 11' '. I; ,\ ),; .i,
'.1
II ,"-
" " " ,
, ,
I
"
" "
,
, ,I
, ,
I' .
. '~ ..
- ~< Ii Ii
C':l "
,.
U,l ~~ 'MCJ.. "
....., :11 "'s
.... II.. I'f) "
... , f.
t! I "'1 ~d I I
0 I t~;S "I
LJJ C'i ,
, ,'I I'
0' l~_,
I,'J 1./1
<" ,
I,
,
I
I'
1\1
"
"
"-
'l..I\I......~.......-...--l..L--
.. .1.. '4.
., ~O'NORnIIllJK~ STflrf r. I ANCAlI I fl:' Pltlll',VI VANIA I (UlI:' . 11111 ~1)1)8~()1)
tHIR'I'F IIRVICI !,N"rtlUCTlONB Fon SI,,*E OF P"OCi8B 1111 1/1. "",.. ", IholllliN.
PRQClt' RICEIPT, Ind AFFIDAVll OF RETURN L ", "P~ 111,1/'" '""n I',,,,,. 'w. ,"'-P'"'' '.'I'''~. u'~n"'~~.'~~~.~~'-_
IPL~INfIF,i6."---_._- - .-.--. '" \J t tllJlll NIIMIlHI
1'.1.1,'" I',' 'I...", ' ,'," I"
3 OlFlNoIfITIiii " I "'L ," Will' on CoM!'1 AIN'
ll.r-l. '1"llr1, I /" '11\", II). 11)" ,
"VI r--- ~ ~-N~ME()F\Nlll'lIWJi\'L (;OMPt\NY t 1l1'-I'11lIAllotlll1 I(JIII\ blllVlll
\,.'1, I 1'1 1'1 I' "I , II ,
, _, ii A'llllRERU ',Hi;.., ;,r'Mo Ap,,,,,,,,,nl N" (,'" I'"'" fwp Hili'" "",'/1/' <:11""'
It ,1 II< .1 l' 1\' I I', , l'fI \1
7. INDIC"'F. ljNUOUAi.- SERVlc;r.-\ l'C'O~M()-N Of P~-I:1 UEplJUn I' OIHHI 1\
,_...~.-"..___...,~.._.-:._o--".~.m.o" 0'" ,,__" " ..'I". .. ' ,." ,...
Now, _JJ,;,!...:.'..""..... 19"~~---,.. ,I, SHERIFF OF L"lIIC~a1'ER COUNTY, PA, do horetJy deputl/e the !Sheriff 01
I 1'1. '.t' ,,' ,,_._o,..___"_--"--~"'''--~'''''''' County to e~,cute this Wrll and mako return thereol according
10 law, Tnls depulatlon being maljo AI tho requeat and risk 01 the plaintiff ".' -:,~. ,..... ,,' _~__.___....,o,-..._..m'."""o'
nliCI~L IliiT"ijCT\ON.ijjnnHi~'fHjioIiM/lTiO',nii/lT WILL ~liIlIT'ui '-IIPioITING SIi\Vlcl' ..."'!'''' '1 "'lIYlt'.'l'J'!"!l!!.o.,,, .".~_...----..-..~" ..
'1.'111, I,d\'!
,;
"
"
QHt::.Mlr-r
o
OFFICE
"
,
.
,
"
. ------.--- -.---
1I0TJ OIlLY A"LICAILI Oil W"IT 0' ..lCUTION, N,I, WAIVl" 0' WATCtt"'AN" ^,,' ".pul, ,h."III"V"'O u""" ,,, ,,,,,,ch,no ",'V ",o"",v und"
wll~'n ~"I nlev loe,. .omo Wlltln"I" WAlchmon, '" cu.lod~ ", wh",no,o," ,"",", If' "0".""'" oil", ",,,,'v'''o ""''''' nil"" '" AIIAchln""L w,/h".III.blll'V on
Iho port 0' .uch depuly or Iho .ho"II'o .nv plo"'hll ho'.'" ,,,, ."V ,,'" "..""eh'''' ,,, """,,"1 01 ,,"V ,uch "'"'''''' h.I",o .h."'I" ."IA 1h'''O'
" . .' IIOII~'lIif1 01 AlTO"NlY orOiii.,OiiToTHATO..----.----'-'-.,. ,,,... .---"J. IQ'TfiEPiiiiNENUMBiR---YI DAlE _~_____o_--
,,' '1'" I'" /'. "''\ : , ' ' .' "",
It, 'IND NOTICI Q",...\ilc'{@no N~'iiA1iD-"-OO"....iUi'W~"(Thl' oi,.',;;u'" b'.;inijiiiloliHn.'I;;oi.ic;i,;"olr'dj'-'~'-"'-'_._--'-
1,1:1 lll,JI\ ,\~ \. I Ill!!: J I
, I" I' I "I' 11'1' ,I, I ! II ' ,,'! I" '" ' I , " ' , I.. ' I
. . ~ _." 0 . .tP..A,g BILgXFQJLI,I.8E 0' 8t!i~)F" .9~1Y._.))O~9fW1!!lir ,-,LOW THf! LIHllr'''''' . -" ,,---
"I . '0 Il'h "I NA"'I",^""."",,,ILCIOIl"'H"'''''''''' 14 D"'enoce,,." '~E'P''''''OIlI'''A,'nQ''.'o
~ .c"now" QII recdlp 0 "wr
~~~~~,,-d,:?~~~bO':".._ .~:' '.' -' ,. '. ! ".'~~._." !' n'. " :!L .--'. -'-,.JI:-'L,.. ...--
16 'hmb, CI"T"V Alld "ITU"N ""'" I h,lY" P."''''''"V ,,,,,,e,' ,~...!'v" '"Q'" ""oj,"H:O "I "",''';0 "" """W" ,,,II A""""" : '''''B .,,,,,"',, A' .hllW" '"
'Aom.,,,', Ih. w"t '" Co",plOIIlI oooc"h.<I Oil /h. "",,,"1"" ';'''H"AII, ,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, o'e ""'" ,',','''''' ,,,,,w,, """", '" ,," ,"" "",,,,,,,,AI ,;,,,,,"A"', "''',
pOlll11011, t!h;, nllho nl!lJ!UIIS II'lIlHhllJ hehlW lly 11;11'.1111'1 it TAUE IInd ATTI6TEO COPY 1I1OI1I1tll
iT'Ii'ih;;;b;".;;;llly'~Od".!~~'o~,~~Tjo"Nlfi;~~~~;;i,,;~ ""","";, '1;;;~;i~'hn."~'.'V"h';;',';''''''''''';
I' Nilm. ilnd ttll. 01 Ind1\l1LJlI1l1 81\lt\lud 111 not l'IhOhll ;\IlIIYtljlllnl;\lII)l\1I11l!l III Doll!ll,llllltl
.:Illpr)lllhnll ~~~['.: _'~;I.rn~.~J .~h~v~_.~.S!.Q..I_II.'!_'.~_~_~.~.~~J_ ,---
... .. -.., rF1- :,',,','.'~l),,", '.",,',,',',","hl," IllJ. '111'1 111~':lllh'lI\
L :~\Ill\ t'~lllll\\1 In tin, htht"IIIIII\ ~ 'l'IllBI
io ~~~,':::,::' ~~~~~:;,.;jiCoiIlP'I;;'-;iii~fufr;,~f,tlii;,il~'~~'':;~I:;i",fi;~;t,;, lifr,tio',i:i,', n;";'ti ,i . c"vTi,,;n i ~'i-""\~TT)-;iill(Xa"N;CQ .22 TjiTiit.-~-.M,-
,)/I,,:"I-i' ,'/$ ~
2flmlffi""ei"'l~:o t~~~~:tI lil'io 1Mi,.. loop int 1 01'01 M'III. LiP '.'10.... 'lMlli'l DOP.~'J~i"'. ~~~~~I~iT,"~o ,
21"Ad;;;;\ctCO'" . i.ijJi, .'" ~~"llOlYI':'C;".I' T,ntot"vc.r, fY M".~ilwi,,,.,71~;;'N F 0 1:2* {nyj.l CrJlII" 1~ CJ:1 O~I ,or,Il.'l.IND ,I I
~~~~~_!,:,!__,,':'-L- ..,__~:~,.____... ___......-.. -- __..~-L K.[J. ' <.~2~_,ULl:D.'-jL --~JW'rl
( , (I I). \
'11., ' ')
".''''' I" I "
,"'_ " ' "','. '" I
'.' " '. .. ,i' ,;'
. ., '
--.."-. ._.-_._~.-_._-_._.._-
BTA
,," . .
,
-..---...-4--...----
--..-.----.....--..---
,,,.." '''lol)j'WI"~'~ .....-.-..-.-..
3' ,\FFIRMEl) i\nd !oll~I:'lbed 10 Ilt8ll>te 11"l' tt1I' ~'~ I - ,. ..-..-.....
34 de, ",J-.-....:.'~'...r.....o._._--...!.~.-j_.._,....
37 W\.'~...-._- '.., .J.;~~_::..,L-- ..--""
Pt~t"'llllltM~, oQ\l'JTf,fiotill~ rllt-hl,;
ML<t.q~,,,,~.~'(),".F. ~P!'!F. ~~...._, ..0..... ._", ," ,..'.
, 31 It.c:SNt')'',~rm I~rl:jr,:i,r ilrll\~)M~I~~';,MUUAN IIGNATOAII
__.._.~_....._.--....-.. __ . __.... ...._I...._-..A_.___..._._. . .0.
I"
1 ~ ..!\.;~~;.~I-;;..Q- ~X
Oup '1"'f,l!
,
.../A-r.~-"
---~: ...~'~'~-."-_.__... \i1.'6fti~---.'..~--
., 'I" - "il$"i",t:..,:..o_..
.' l I,..')
... ..-- _.._.--..-f.r-~.-#._-
----.--.-----..---
liti.T):";'-lill'..I;;-;"~ -_
1.'Ii' 'I .,1""'11,,1"1')1
,
'i '
,
"
'I "
",
iI\
"
'1),,',
,',',
"'l
,
"
','1,
i
q
: ~
I
'"
,
, '
"
" ,
" ,
"
'I ,
'i" ,
,
'I I
'Ii ,
, I
'Ii )i , " 'I
I
" , "i
'" I 'I
, , , ,..,',1 I,
Ii " " , ,
i ,), Ii
"
I
,',
'1, I ,
,
I.',' " )' ,
,
",:1,,1' ,
,',' " , ,
I I, , "
, I 'I ,I I";' " ',I ,
, , ;;\ i I
j' , I'.. " ,
, "
, I i'
i:l, "
,', 'I,
,
I)'
I i! I
" I ,I
"
,
,'.." , I, ,I
, , ,
,"I ')11' I " 'I'
I! , I
,\.1',1 I I " , ;;
, '"
" , " ,il
I,i
'.\ " "ll' 'I
, '-1
"',
" I' "
" " " ld,
I "I'
" I
"
"1
"
. '-'f~,_,
-'
"
I
'.21.,21.,"'.
~f ~il~Lr~;\~~'a':F..~~
lU~~~~\AJt~:3~~ '
"
"
"
/;
I,
,I
!
" I
"
"
'I'r'
,I
I
I,! ,I , II
I' I "
I
, I "
" I , , , "
'I "
,1'1
"
" l\ ,
, 'I I it
,to I I,
, "
, " " I
, ", I
,
;\
" ,
,I
'1'1'1
'I ,',
i'
II
I'
'I
,
,
, ,
'r~
-
'I
-
,
, '
q. ',iI
,'1,1
"
Ii
,'I'
,I'.,
,)
'I
1'1- i,'
i, "
II,
"
<I(i
,
,
:d
,I
I
i:
i'
'I
,
I I
,
,
"
"
"
,
'\,
:;1
'.,
,.)
"
"I
"
,
')1
"!
,
"
.'
,I'
'.1'
1./;.,
II'
'I' I
"
J' j'
\,
"
" ,
"
,
I'
;)1
q:
...,
EPISCOPAL TOWERSI
SHIPPENSBURO, PENNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PIiNNSYLVANIA
v.
.
.
: NO. 95-601
H.M, STAUFFER II. SONS, INC.,
Defendant
.
.
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NOTICE
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend qainst the claims set
forth in the followina PlIes, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this
Complaint and Notice are served, by enterlna a written appearance personally or by attorney
and fillna in writlna with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth qainst
you. You are warned that If you fall to do 50 the case may proceed without you and a
jUdament may be entered qainst you by the Court without further notice for any money
claimed In the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiffs. You
may lose money or property or other rlahts Important to you,
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, 00 TO OR TELEPHONE
THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN OET LEOAL
HELP.
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6200
I;
I
I
,I
,
1,.1
,
, .
WHEREFORE, EpllCopal Towers re.pectfully reque.ts this Court IQ enter
Jud,mentln It. favor and ..alnst Stauffer In an amount In excess of $20,000, interest It the
ippropriate rate thereon, the cosll of this action and any other l'Cllef the Court deems Just
and appropriate. The amount demanded exceeds the limit for mandatory arbitration pursuant
to the Rules of this Court.
COUNT U .. 'REACH OF IMPLJlm CONTRACT
18. The averments set forth in paralraphs 1.17 are incorporated by
reference herein, IS If set forth In full.
19. At all times relevant hereto, Episcopal Tower. and Stauffer conducted
themselves as If a contract exi.ted between them, 1Q wiI:
a. Episcopal Towers paid Stauffer for the Firex plywood;
b. Stauffer IIl:Ied IS the supplier for all the plywood sheathln, tor the
Paclllty's roof at Episcopal Towers~ and
c. Stauffer inspected the defective plywood when the lealdn, beaan In
1993, and notified the manufacturer of the plywood that it Will defective.
.,.
20, Purauant 10 the implied contnet whh Episcopal Towers, Stauffer was
obllaated 10 sell plywood 10 Episcopal Towers which was fit for hs intended purpose, and
whic" would have a normll "life expectancy" for plywood used under normll conditions in
similll' situations. Further, pursuant to hs contract with Episcopal Towers, Stauffer had an
obllaatlon 10 repair and replace any non-conformina and/or defective plywood it sold to
Episcopal Towers.
21. By refusin,lO repair and replace the defective Firex plywood, Stauffer
has breached the terms and conditions of hs contnet with Episcopal Towers, thereby
clamllin, Episcopal Towers.
22. Episcopal Towers has performed any and all conditions precedent to
Stauffer's obllaatlons under the contract.
WHEREFORE, Eplscopll Towers relpectfully requests this Court to enter
Jlldament in its favor Uld lIainlt Stauffer in an amount in excess of $20,000, Interest at the
Ippropriate rate thereon, the COlts of this luh, and any other relief the Court detms Just and
appropriate. The amount demanded exceeds the limit for mandatory arbitration pursUUlt to
the Rula of this Court,
, I
-6-
COWl' JII .. 'J'HIRD J'NlTY "~~f1CIARY
23, Tho Iverments set forth In ~raphs 1.22 are Incorpc>rated by
,.terence herein, as If set forth in full.
24, If there WIU not I direct contract between Stauffer and Episcopal
Towers, Episcopal Towers was It least an intended third-party beneflcilry of any contract 10
which Stauffer was I party In connection with the construction of the Episcopal Towers
Faclllty,
25. By retuslna to repair and replace the defective Flrex plywood, Stauffer
has breached It. OOllaltlons 10 Episcopal Towers as an Intended third-party beneficiary, and
such breach WI' I substantial factor in clusina damaae 10 Episcopal Towers In the amount
necessary to repair and replace the defective rooflnl material.
, i
, ,
" ,
"
I
,
i-I
,
d , ,
.7. .,'i I
, ,
I
,',t, .
, ',', v, . .1
"~
i ' , 'H;" -".' \", I ! ,I " ..
, '. , I
~. "! I
j, I ,'J ,. , , .;
,',,' ~',i , ,;~ I "
,,"P ,I 1,/ .: ;, .', I
" , ,'"~ "~
i"".! , : ,:11.' ,i, . ,)
"
~, "I ",I " :" , , /'
, IJrt .:,'1 ,~:11 ' " :,v a',: ~\:~ 'I ,. 'I
,
I, . I' I
;.
"
:', f
,,','
'"', ~ ",~:~ ~..~
... ,."
, .' ,'!":' ; . ,t , .'
. : ,J"~' " ,:
, (j'))lfl
1> ') r:.. ~'.p'
": ,~,., "',j~:"
:',. 'jHI-.
" '. . ..,(1,'
II: I ~'I Wi .~~ 1\
" ',,',1, I'
'"{,',,l',
" 7";::~~;::~~~~;-,;'...-~", t -'(1 "1'~ ' ,'" i, ~~~";"":~1 ,'"w ,. \:--;";;,~~~'.t";: ~ ,.930, ,378. :':"'<~r',~.
I....,. ~.l.~, r,~" i'\' 'j " ' J' 'I', ,"'.r' 'rl" . ." ,.' "f"" ".'....' l
.' . ., '., ", ", \ \ - . , " .' '."' ',,'. " ~ ,I r. 'J"'" \ ':' I '. ,", .",. ," . . 'I
" ~\.,i..',".,. .,...1...,,__(. " ':'J ,~,w\, ",',"-.#\" I ," ' .', ',,'..' I .,.
I..t. ',., 'f ".... .. ....... ~I,.,;",,', ;_~,~.~,...,,,,,_, ",.,,'\'. ~'~'I .',..,...'!.,'.' -,-JJ-io .,\,'....
.. 'II
, . "I' t:-", ,q If J., , J, :'1 ,": j';, 'I')
'I ' ,; -"", ;(1 " I , '" 1, '.' " I I' ,
,lJ'e;mt and Condi'lon~tJl'Sllle' "
" , ," .1 " , .j
. ", II'! I .
, , ! ",;rl' "
,."
"
,1,..\ . J'.;...) '.1'-:.\ ~ .", I ' . I, ".'
AIl.ar..'. by H. M. Stou"" ."d Bonl.lnc'-IH.roln 'cill,lorJ Stau""rla" ,,,blectt. t~1f 'ollowlng term. .nd
condition..
. - --...
f. St.~''-fe' Ihall notbeU'ebl."or a~Y';lolilY In ;""'o'I11"nc,, or filllu" 10 p~rlorm.Yr the del.y
or 1.lIure I. caulall by an .vant bayond III ","onable c,"'troL
.' ,
1. Whl,. avo;'" .flort wUI btJ m.de to """n a cUIl"m"r'. doUvery ~at._ delivery .t a .peclflc
hour cannot be guaranl.ell, c , I
'I:~f~':o. . 3. Stauffer rot.ln. a securltv Inter~llln .U gooll..hlpp.d to CUllom" lIntll payment In full
\'h.'i~~....h.'be.n".col.ued""""1 '.' ,",' ; . I.',il':'" ",,;.;". .,f", " '"
Jc.:~'.':: ~.' ~"""'",~.. "''')0.' I '
~'~~ .~~.~, :,:'>}~i1,.:,-i. '..~' /~j T~t cu.ttlrnttjtlall notlfv Sta~"~; 1~~;~J'..eIY of .hor.taQe :10 ,ny deUver~. whereupon,
I '" \ 5ltuffll, .h.lI, e~ III option, elthar make good U-t'lhortoge or give thecullom.M credrc'I,o, llie price of the
I, ._". , good.thel.r. .hlm. ~.' " "'1 .',
, .
.:'l..i\."
6. Th, cullomar .h.U notify 511"fler Immediately 011 ,ecelpt 01 eny non,conformlng goods,
wher.upon 5110llar .h.II, at III option. .Ither rapelr the gooll._ rapllce \ha good., (1/' give the ClIllomer I
cradlt lor tha p,lcI of the good., Thl cUllomer'. repllr of goodl without Sta"ffer'. o><pro.. .pprov.1 co,,,lI.
, tutti acceptonc,' o! the Qood. a. If they w.ra conforming, .nll Slollff.r I. notl'lbla lor th, upon.. 01'
rapal,. ':
6, C""om made good. c.nnot b. relurn.d, Otho, good, cen be ,pturn"rJ only at the cu..
comlr'.e><pans. a,ld with St.ull.r'. .><p,... .pp,ov.l, Whon good. .ra ratu,nad with luch approVII, 5t."lIer
Will give the Cllllomer cr.dltlor the price or th. good.la.. e reslocklng charg. M l~%. '
1. The custom!)r', remQdl~$ Mt r)ljt In \h1:511 tlHlnl and c(mdlt!on, orFl tha t:lutomer', nch...
11'1' ,.mddls" and undor 110 circumsunces shJl1 Strluffi!r 1m IIJLJIII f"lr .11lY lnbr.)r dJlml Qr tor any other
IpeclII, Incldentl' or con..quantlel d.m.ge arl.lng Ollt of e lal. 01 good. or I del.y In th, d,Uvery 0' goodl.
"
-" '.
, ,
'r:"
, '
,", "1'
).." .."...~-' ,.-.~',"
"-I~ "
, "
lj.
','
I'. '
\'
"
., ~,
,.,.
L
"
,'~ . \
'n
"
II
'.
PROOUCERS OF:
~
,..."..,.... L...-.
~
,.-lBER - PI.. YWOOO
TREATEO LUMBER
ROOF TRUSSES
FI.OOR TRUSSES
COMPONENTS
MILL WORK
BUIL.OINCl MATERIALS
Drico~
'"
CII' nlll ILl" . IT IS THI ONLY ITEMIZED SIL'" YOU WILL. BE RIClIIVING. NO CLAIMS FOlllln4fJW1'"
)f! OAMAOIO SHIPMENTS WILL all. CONSloeReo UNL.&SS' NOTID ON THI oeLIVERY R&CIIPT Al" T1ME
"OIL.IVERY. THIS SL.IP MUST BE A&TtJANlD' WIT", ANY CLAIM.
<<IN.SHIPl'&O ITIMS WILL. REMAIN ONI B'ACI<' OADIR' UNL..EIl&.CANCEL.L.EO.
RICIIVID BY'
SOLD TO
SHI...ro
IjtN"F.LD I'lt" 1~1'''P
~ t.. Mnt'f AOJlI~
L.M~C;\STEJt"~ \ 7i)~h
iMSCOPAI. roWERS
:h't"~DlnURO
GLj)Q "
l.lINHolC
ilotoI... , 1).11....
J:
TCt,..
You.'
,
,'~:f.,.'~" :,
. '~loo'i'~ I
'"II,
." ~, r ... ....~I.~\~
. ,'~~'''''~'r.i~~;t.~''::' ,':'~. ~*';....,~..
"""'._~'" ;" i.I~..' .,~',~'''.
. ", ..;.~,.t,.. '~'''. _. , ... '/. ..;'{.;".,
~.
" ..,'....
PACKING SLIP-CUSTOMER COpy
" .
.
.,'
MtlII n, '914
.
f\
, ...
PtllMut CO"'.t\uetLOIl ',.
m6 OtUJr.1/ Rd.
L4/1U6tfA. PA 77601
REI E".uc.I1"4l. TllII/eM
ATTN I S41ll H',~"fA
ChfUl9'- QlltJ.fA , 7
~. Ch/L\9t 60'" C.u.ttl."9 plfJIJood 60'\ bu.Ur.U."9 'A' I c.ut 4pp...ox1muUfI tOO "4.4.",,,,",,110.00
t. Cuttl"9 plfJIJood dut to mi4plaetd 4tud4 4"d ~~lp4.~"""""""~.45.00
3. Ch/L\9t to "'tC.Olt4tJlLlt!.t tAuUU OUIA th,. t.l.tuuo... 4h46t.~....~.....60.00
v' 4. Build LIP L\L1U l1t 4to.UwJa.lj. (T.51."..............$70.00
5. Ex.ttlUi. ttUl.4 Oil r..3 4tuL r..5 t.\u6.4U to 4U0IIJ 60,\ bJtl.c.h..~~~".,.".OO
6. Chah.gt to 6la.6h t.l.tutlto.t,4h46t a.t pol~ 06 ilo06 ptnUAo..ti.o"'."..."",,~~30.00
HOrf: I A"IJ pitoblU114 wUh dltlJN4l.t l"'t4U.dUo" dut to th.Lt44 ptaet1llt~ .4h4U ~ .
bt au.t; ...upolt4.lb.u.Lt1j but .4h4LI. bt .4IIlt.l.1J bOllt blJ tht PtUtU 64b.t.l.C4.to.'tT41.
, ,
ACCEPTANCE OF CIIANGE O~OERI
COLLEGE VlLLAGE BUlLVERS. fHC.
. .
, .
/k:U...:'1 ~ ) tJ7. ..17'
d~,-rJJ If;!
Out. ~ -ij~rfC'
/;;.WJ~~~ f,
OIAI.l"B. o~
m"V\A1.J
~ulr1t1'1t
~ "/~~ 1//.5-
-
(t.. k \1.:1 \ \ \\ ~\V\ \ '-\
r--c ~ '~s \, -..
V 13..1~ tt.1N.. s rr
s,1Ii
"
..-----."
~,
\
"
-to
l\''''
.( (.e1
.. ()w~ ~
~q. ~(" \'-
,,J\ ' (,v-'
1.1
'1 () . 0 t:J
'~\..,
\.
......~_.-
"
I
.
'I
I
.,
I'
"
"
, '
"
"
"
'\
@
I
i
I
"
,
:j
i
!
!
I,
\li
,
"
I'
"
'I
,I
,
'Ii
.,
I
I.
Ii',
tJ~
"
", 'I
,"
"
"
'~. ~ 'i,' fI'.I'
1 'I
'I
i,
_~ Ill'". "."".. ,.,.,.... r.
\'Ii' I..' ' _III
, ...V, " ".v., .....,
.. ~ "'1Ill~T /lI"M~," ".... II
IIlTIIIII ~~" ~~. "" .. \
,
~"."N..,
LAW o"tCII
fltIKOL.AUI. HOHlENAr.lIL.
.. 4r,('INHA~I"
.11 ~O~T" O~"N ""IIT
a.ANCAlnlt, ..~,I.,.ot
I. ",I ,
I. m~ .'~T1" TII~T TIll ~
~I~~ ~':"'':' :;:':'''''
, '
\;"'~"YlO~ ' "
'I
h',.dltJ,H' P' /'111'
".' ll",'
,.~1I '
"t.'" ,I
,I..
'.
,
I,
,
,
II t'
"
I'
,"
,
"
"
"
,I
II
...,
'I
CIITI'ICATI 0' SlaVICI
I hereby certify that I have thiB day served a true and
correct copy of the foregoing document upon the following person (a)
and in the following manner, which service satisfied the
requirements Of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
Service by First Class Mail Addressed as rollowsl
JOfleph D. Shelby, Esquire
Eckert, Seam~ns, Cherin & Mellott
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street, P.O. Box 1248
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1248
H.M. Stauffer & Sons
33 Glenola Drive
Leola, PA 17540
NIKOLAUS, HOHENADEL & UMBENHAUER
'I' '
BYl
Je
A
2 2 Nort Queen Stl.eet
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717) 299-3726
I,D. *47136
Date I
"
,
'I
I ,
;.
"I
., ",'
,,'
,
I
" ......1"
, .",_,,.,,1;\',;
."-' .'~ .~.~~Ir'~ ,~:;~.._~\,
, .!. .,-,
";'J."t"i'!ri;.I'II,I\',!\I~II~l/!fI\lIIMl11,i !~WII~
"
j'........
",'1
.,..\.,
.,
.,-
,
J!, . . . _.'. '/'l!!l,,\"l'l'ii\;;
IlIt....,\/M.~A-1-~\M\"'\/nl(J'!1jl'rf\lI-H~.''i't.41!'~. ; I ~. ,;;
iF.;,,',:I,'\'CI:o,
",. !'~l 'J I
l'p.i.
,
I'
N..: 9il.,p1 l;1yU Term_ T... It_
.' I
,
If',"
II,'
:,
"
'I
"
,I''''
-'I'
'llpt_,,?, '_.../~.~_~''''q
"
"
PeM~lvln1e
',-1
"
,
!
I' "
"
"
'"
..'
\'I. " )'1
, ,
'I
II ~ ~t'"'.~''' " 1t1'W\_, Y...... ...,.
JlltI .1_, , , ,
,
~_Woad 1n1~ h'l?4Ull~ , Inc.
~~ ~F-t. Knac But ~r4~ "~I'
,
I,', , , ,
" ,
~, ~ }om
---
AiWI...... ~....
,
,
"
...
warr TO JOINI., AN
',ADomONAL DEFENDANT
,"
"1"
'.' ,I
"
I
':1 'I
,
'.,1
Jlffrey ~llIn ,.,U1I. laq. Atty far: Deft
21i1 North Queen Street
t.ancuter, PI. 17603
(711) 29N726
':1 "',,'
"
,
1'.'
AlllWIIty
d.
1
,I
....1oI.,....._.~I'......H "..."."". ~1'':. ~.,..----..." 'r~.,' ,.~v..P_.j',
, ,
H""
J"'.~>!"~.~I't"i'>.'l'~'M~Nt~I~-M"\,~~"'''''''~I~~~.''t''~
, I' I'
",1
""._1'"
1.,1
,
,
"
'I,'
",
, ~ !
..,- ,
,,'
"
,
i.'t.'d'\i;,~i
'." ;'~'il11i~-
"'0.1',\"(1
!Ii~:,-! J
,Wi
,I""
I' ":-.c,: __,
1.":il\o',H'i
"',:Mip1
, ,'(Il,
'l-.:,
IL,'
, .i;Jt,~
\;\\;'_11:
/"-;1\1;\
1"1 ;;".~
!';,;~kjl
, ')1\1'"
'I',i.f;-I!/
,\ .. i' ~L /'1
I ':t;P),;\liI;'I,11
1'\}iIIlJr[ \1
",IIJI'\,;;~i". '"
!,,-~rfJr;~!G
r',:;hil
11:"""'11"
, ! ",,, /,'11111
, "MIl> ";1 ,
,,'JI\ ,1.,~f'!IPI\'i'~~1
I,IL'I j" J"'11~hV; f
/. ~\'Vl'I'~ip')I\:~'1
:I' "','I f'\ r"lt1j-\
',,',' 'f1/j"" il~:111
, ;,,),11 j,hi I"'
II' \,:,('j~\'l,IIJi'll1\
I' , 'ill, or) nl\.'~j
I'" !;.(: i'\~\'fi~1
.II 'L\' \~) , \! ~fj1:~
,Ii I~'I "I~\' II mr\l
.!:,.;":liJ ~IS,
'. ,. ,i(IW:). '"a(\
11.F11\'\\I~I~tJ' ,
! I, IjH,I~ 1/"
, ". \''', I "','1
t. ) l'r-' 'I"lli}
"~" l,lbl',t )~I
') I "II v ':\!' "
',<: ~j:ib:d \~fi!li
1.1 .'". 'ffl>>.~f1.\ ,~~
" I ., ,\,I[ '/,"\""'\
: ,( J\,i:r~ :~I~:~;~~~~)lg~!':
l'I'-j'-"-"j'<f.ti\1".
-'I"I.""~:; .j--".. "f.
i_",q';';:')!'i'W'H!i<'J
, \'(.i!,:I,;'~I~'IV~I,~~ll"\
J'" ~\; il(:;Jt1~1';-
d,':, ,,,;,.;!.-f.
',\} jt:, ,.[' )',Ilrl fj'
", """".I,'I,iJ!l'I'I\
-'f'-,~_!i_L ''iJ. !<<i,!
". dt;-,.V.li, 1'1
'. '"'" "."..c 1~".1.'l;. _ . _
'I ".1"1';1.,.1 -~.
;- :"(~. \1
'I
"
I,.;
"
, ,
, '
1
I
,
II
'.j,
, I
,I,
,I
"
,
,
,
u
"
:11
It
"
"
! , ,
" , ,
,
"
"...."
" 'q
'I , ""'7
t.(:.)
'I "-,
, '-..
, ", ~)
Ib".
,1 ~
" tii1
,\
"
, ,
J
, '
"
liJ h J ~ ( ~
f. ~
...
~I~ ~ ~ ~ I:l
~s ~ ~,
sf; ~ R.
I) f ~ ~
.!.!l
.
. I, ,t 1 J
a
J ~~ r
~
~
",
" ,
'1,
I ..
J 'I . , '
, I'
,
, "
" ,
I'
, .'
,
i \,' I, I
I,
..
"
~" ' I'
~j;\"
1,r,I' ,I
I~ j ,
I'f";' \,
,I,
'I f II I
\
I,''"'" "
~"
f/' '
oj!! I
,
iil
,
:1
'I
1_/
,-,
I) ,. 11:,1,'"
"
,
Ii
\'
1'-1'
,l!
" d
,
,'I
1;1
"
"
0'
,],
"
"
,,'
,
"
'il'll
"
,
311~Y ~....."a. ,. ""IO'~
;~"'Jt:~ er.Jt':::1 if"
=,J'-~.,.VW'" I. ,
"
......,~
:,;'.1-"'\"."
" ~AW lI'rlll~'
NIICOI..AUe, HO....~AD.I.'
.. UMlII.Nf1AU."
III NO"TH IlIlIlN ""lIT
1.~,NC~.'.", jt~. .1tOI
,
,
~i.,a1rf:lm
',1' I
'~~......, ,~~
,p.,.,.",/., !.tl_
1,'"
I'
I
~.
"
"
,
"
"
,
,
"
~~
"
r
,I
1-.'"
~'
. ~,
',-
IN ~HE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPP2NSaURG
PBNNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff
NQ. 95-601
vs.
H. M. STAUFFIilR & SONS, INC.,
Defendant
DI'INDANT' S ANS"'R ~ Nq MATTIR
TO PLAINTI"'S C9MPLAINT
1. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 1 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
:.!. I\dmitted.
3. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 3 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Striat
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
4. Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that
Episcopal Towers purchased from Stauffer plywood sheathing.
Rather, Winfield Development Corporation of 2316 Dairy Road,
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601 purchased certain plywood sheathing
from Defendant Stauffer to be shipped to Episcopal Towers/
Shippenspurg, Pennsylvania. As regards all other allegations
oontained in Paragraph 4 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, after
reasonable investigation the Defendant is without suffioient
information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments.
They are, therefore, denied.
5. Denied as stated. To the contrary, the Plaintiff did
not purchase plywood oheathing from the Defendant Stauffer. The
Defendant did, however, oell plywood sheathing to Winfield
Development Corporation and, on belief, a portion of that was
manufactured and/or sold to StaUffer by Hoover Wood Treated
products, Inc. As regards the balance of the averments in
Paragraph 5 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, after reasonable
investigation, the Defendant Stauffer is without suffioient
information or belief as to the truth of those averments. They
are/ therefore, denied. Strict proof is demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial.
6. Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that
StaUffer sold firex plywood to Episcopal Towers or issued an
invoice to Episcopal Towers, To the contrary, Stauffer sold
firex plywood sheathing to Winfield Development Corporation and
the invoice referenced as Exhibit "A" to the Plaintiff's
complaint clearly indioates that the plywood was sold to Winfield
Development Corporation. By way of further answer, no
contractual relationship existed between Defendant StaUffer and
2
,-.....
{I
Episcopal Towers at any time relevant to the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
7. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant,
H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 7 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
8. Denied. Paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
9. Denied as stated. The Defendant Stauffer did not sell
firex plywood to the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers. As regards the
balance of the averments in Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff's
Complaint, after reasonable investigation the Defendant Stauffer
is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the
truth of those averments and they are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
10. While it is admitted that Episcopal Towers afforded the
Defendant Stauffer an opportunity to replace the deteriorated
plywood, Stauffer believes and therefore avers that they had no
contractual obligation to do so.
11. Paragraph 11 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that
Episcopal Towers has been damaged by any act or omission of
I
~.
3
,I
Stauffer, To the oontrary, Stauffer had no business relationship
with Plaintiff and therefore had no duty to take any aotion with
respeot to the Plaintiff's oomplaints. As regards all other
allegations, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is
without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth
of the averments. They are, therefore, denied. strict proof is
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
COUNT I . B..ACH 0' .XP..88 CONTRACT
12. The Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1 through 11
of the Plaintiff.'s Complaint are in~orporated herein by
reference.
13. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant
had an agreement with Episcopal Towers for the sale of plywood
sheathing. To the contrary, Defendant Stauffer's contract was to
supply plywood sheathing to Winfield Development Corporation.
Defendant Stauffer had no agreement or contractual relationship
with the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers.
14. Denied, It is opecifically denied that a contract
exists between Stauffer and Episcopal Towers. To the contrary,
Stauffer's agreement was to supply plywood sheathing to WinfieJ,d
Development Corporation and not Episcopal Towers. It is further
specifically denied that the terms of the business relationship
are embodied in order/invoices sent by Stauffer to Episcopal
4
Tow6r~, To the contrary, tho~e order~ and invoices outline the
relationship between Stauffer and Winfield Development
Corporation for materials 'to be shipped to Episcopal Towers. By
way of further answer, Paragraph 14 of the Plaintiff's Complaint
is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading i~
nece~lilary.
15. Denied. It is specifically denied that a contract
exist~ between StaUffer and Episcopal Towers. To the contrary,
Stauffer had no business relationship with at any time relevant
to the Plaintiff/s Complaint with Episcopal Towers. As the
invoices clearly indicate, Winfield Development Corporation is
the party with whom Stauffer contracted, By way of further
answer, provisions of the invoices to which the Complaint
referred has to do with goods rejected by the purchasers, as non-
conforming, at the time of delivery. It does not create an
obligation for Stauffer to replace goods subsequently found or
alleged to be defective by a non-customer, such as Episcopal
Towers, not in privity with Stauffer. By way of further answer,
paragraph 15 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a conclusion of law
to Which no responsive pleading is required.
16. Denied. It is specifically denied that Stauffer sold
firex plywood to Episcopal Towers. To the contrary, StaUffer did
not sell f.irex plywood to Episcopal Towers but rather sold
plywood to Winfield Development Corporation. The balance of the
5
allegations oontained in Paragraph 16 of the Plaintiff's
Complaint are conclusions of law to whioh no responsive pleading
is required.
17. Paragraph 17 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. respectfully
requests this Honorable Court dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint.
COUNT II . BRIACH or IMPLIID CONTRACT
18. The Defendant's Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through 17 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by reference as though set forth at length.
19. Paragraph 19 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
oonclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
By way of further answerl
a. Denied. It is specifically denied that Episcopal
Towers paid Stauffer for plywood, To the contrary, Winfield
Development corporation paid Stauffer for plywood pursuant
to the contract and business relationship between Stauffer
and Winfield Development Corporation.
b. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is
admitted that Stauffer sold certain plywood sheathing to
Winfield Development Corporation to be shipped to Episcopal
Towers. However, as regards all other allegations contained
6
in Paragraph 19(b), including the allegation that
Stauffer provided all of the plywood to Episcopal
Towers, the Defendant is without sufficient information
to form a belief as to the truth of those averments and
they are therefore denied. Strict proof of the same is
demanded, if relevant, at. the time of trial.
c. Admitted in part and denifjd in part. It is
admitted that a Stauffer sales representative inspected
certain plywood at Episcopal Towers ana that Stauffer
notified Hoover Wood Treated Products, Inc. that certain
Hoover Treated Plywood used to construct the roof of a
building at Episcopal Towers was deteriorating, It is
deni~d, however, that this action reflects a contract.ual
relationship between Defendant StaUffer and Episcopal
Towers. To the contt'ary, Stauffer
was merely investigating a complaint about a product claimed
to have been supplied by StaUffer pursuant to a contract
with Winfield Development Corporation. As regards the
balance of the allegations contained in paragraph 19(c) of
the plaintiff'~ Complaint, the Defendant is without
sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of
those aVerments and they are therefore denied and strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
20, The averments contained in paragraph 20 of the
7
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is
denied that any contract exists between Episcopal Towers and
Stauffer. See the Defendant's Answers to Paragraphs 18 and 19 of
the Plaintiff's complaint.
21. The averments contained in Paragraph 21 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is
specifically denied that any contract exists between Epiecopal
Towers and Stauffer. See the Defendant's Answers to paragraphs
18 through 20 of the Plaintiff's Complaint.
22. The averments contained in Paragraph 22 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is
specifically denied that any contract exists betweon Episcopal
Towers and Stauffer. See the Defendant's Answers to Paragraphs
18 through 21 of the Plaintiff's Complaint.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant I!.M. Stauffer & sons, Inc.
respectfully request this Honorable court dismiss the Plaintiff's
complaint.
COUNT III " TRIaD PARTY ..NlrICIARY
23. The Defondant's Answers to the averments of paragraph 1
through 22 of the Plaintiff's complaint are incorporated herein
8
by reference as though set forth at length.
<14, The allegations contained in Paraguph <14 of. the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to whioh no
responsive pleading is required.
25. The allegations contained in Paragraph 25 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
r~sponsive pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant H.M, Stauffer & Sons, Inc.
respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss the
Plaintiff's Complaint.
NIW MATTia
26. The Plaintiff's Complaint may have failed to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.
27, In the event it is determined that a product supplied,
distributed and/or sold by Defendant Stauffer was involved as
alleged in the Plaintiff's Complaint, said product may have been
substantially altered after it left the possession of Stauffer.
28. The injuries and/or damages allegedly sustained by the
Plaintiff may have been due to the negligent act and/or omissions
of other individuals and/or entities.
29. The Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable
Statute of Limitations.
30. No contractual relationship exists between the
Defendant Stauffer and the Plaintiff Episcopal
9
Towers/Shippensburg Pennsylvania.
31, If a oontractual relationship exists, whioh is
specifically denied, the Plaintiff failed to notify Defendant
Stauffer of the receipt of allegedly non-conforming goods as
required by the terms and conditions of sale.
32. If a contractual relationship exists, which is
sp~cifically denied, the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers/Shippensburg
Pennsylvania made repairs without Stauffer's express approval
which Gonstitutes acceptance of the goods as if they were
conforming and the Defendant Stauffer is therefore not liable for
any expense of repair as outlined in the terms and conditions of
I
lIale.
33. No implied contract existed between the Plaintiff
Episcopal Towers/Shippensburg Pennsylvania and the Defendant
Stauffer.
34. No implied warranties inured to the benefit of
Plaintiff.
35. To the extent that it may be shown that any implied
warranties existed, which are expressly denied, all implied
warranties were limited or excluded.
36. The Plaintiff has failed to mitigate any damage it may
have suffered.
37. The Defendant H,M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. reserve the
right upon COMpletion of its investigation and disoovery to file
10
"
such additional defenses, orossclaims or oounterclaims and/or
third party complaints as may be appropriate and to plead any
release that may have been or may be executed by the Plairytiff BS
an affirmative defense,
WHEREFORE, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc.
respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss the
Plaintiff's Complaint.
Patel
s
Respectfully Submitted,
NIK?LAUS, HOHENAP.~&-::BENHAU~R
~,. ~ \ \
By I ----....-
Je rey A an Mills
Att ney for Defendant
Atto ney I.D. #47136
212 rth Queen Street
Lanca ter, PA 17603
(717) 299-3726
, ,
,Ill
'I
I Ii
,
,I
,I
, ,
,
,
I,
",
~ I
, a,
CIRTIrICATI or SlaVICI
I hereby certJ.fy that I have thill day Ilerved a true and
correct oopy of the foregoing document llpon the following perllon (s)
and in the following manner, which Ilervice Ilatisfied the
requirements of the Pennsylvania Rulell of Civil Procedure.
~ervice by Firllt Clalls MaJ.l Addrelllled as Follows I
Joseph D. Shelby, F.llquire
Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street, P.O. Box 1248
Harrillburg, PA 17108-1248
H.M. Stauffer & Sons
33 Glenola Drive
Leola, PA 17540
NI~N
Eli -~rBENHAUI!lR
)0
Datel
./1 /1':. ('
I' f...,'H~ 7 I
! I
,
I,'
"
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
60 NUIWllJIJKf 11IIIU f. I MICMilfll l'INNiiYIVMIIA I "")~ . '/III ~!j!JIJ~OI)
SHERIFF IERVICE I'NaTll\JCII<JN~ FIlJ16ERV'Cf. OF P~OCE~I"""hO"'~""'"~~I~~';~~ "
PROCEIS RICIIPT. Ind AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN . ~),'"I'Y"Ii~"'1'~:rn "1""~"....:'~"~lilll'Q'bl'U~I~"~d~I,.e~.~'~coP~':]
,piATNTTFF/s-iU-.~.-. ..-.-...--- ... j t:(llJIII tjt/MIIl-I'
_...Jl....M".RLau.Xfar &.S'Jnll II\<:. ' 15"(101 Civil'Iarm ..,. .., ,.
3 bl'-FII';;DANf,-ol ., rY If 01 WIUI 011 COMlitAINr
-_Jil~l;lrIOOd -'rn:ltILad l'r;oduct.1l Inc. I~L. Ill. Wr it t'l. Jot" .DafJlndan.L ~
',VI 6NAME 0,. INliiVIIJLJAl. Cl)M~NY COllr'(HlAllt)N '1(, 10 lllrlVtCf. {JIII)1 I\CllUllUlN ()f flflOPEI1IY () 111: I VI~J) ^mC~l~'n"()RBOlo- ~
h.1!JlImcf.eat Cona tru,: tion CQUltlllny . . . "'11!
Ii ADtlRHI 1f\I'lJlJl m Il~O, AplltlJllu/l1 Nil City Ol)/l} twll -~11l11I1Hld Iljl {'Willi ~
7 /!AI~~r7.;~~:~;J~~~~;~~~~s~~~;~:~~~"~:g~~~~, l;~'~(~o, hQ;ebili'epuil'i;iheB"--o""~':'~~~:~=:
(,IIRC 1111 t4hr____..''h._____._...._..__,.. Counly 10 exec lite this WI!lr'II<t,~"" 'elurn Ihele~nll
10 law, this deputallon being mado allhe request alld rlek ollhe plalnlllt... .f......-i:~~'t.1.~1Z'f;!l' ";, .~,_._-
I, "ICIAI. INITftUCTIOjj.-o" OrKlft ljj,oIiMA1'jijjnHATWilOiilif ilflxliioirllfo-..,Wici,"'.' -- --,-,... , -
NOY. ONLY .."L1eAILI ON WRIT 0' ."CUlION: N.'. WAIYlft 0' WATCHMAN - AllY l'ellllly "hen" IUY'j'If1U IJllvnl)f nUIlc:hlll\J 1)11V propil1V under
within Wr1! may 1e-lIlto 10"111 wllhoLl1 B wntchman, III ClJlIlOlJy 0' Whllmll~Qr 11\ 10111111 ill III)psI\QPSnhltl A1ll1r 1\I)IIIyl/1" piHlliHl I)IIBYV IlrBtlar.hmlll1l, Wllhoutllohllltvol1
the pl!lrt oJ !SLICh deputy or Iho ShQfllllll Ilt1y plllll1lll1 hC/rol" 1m lIny lilIut r!OllllllCIII)fl tH WIlIl)"",1 tllIH'V IIIJI:I\ prOl-Hu1y tlelel/v IIhllt1lh ,,,I,lhereo'
"T.iiQNAfijj\j-", ATTO~Niy-;,r-,;Ih.rOiiiiliNArO~-'-<----'" ."'h".nu' .." ""'.Ii'O'TftTP'HONENUMiiER " 0 IE ' .
II, "N:~::I::~~~'~~i ::;;;':~A;;:~o~::'~Eiii~~~~~rhi.i"iin;uij .'i;;~,~fo~\r.,~Tli'll\.jji'mll ~d~--:!.~'::~'._''''-'''-'.u-
_ JI:I'Fl\~bl1A1LMJ;I.~li'-i=~-!i-~:t~...LAN" 1'A-l7~_ _
tPM;1 'IL9~ . 1..9.uJ1111Jff..9~'!'y_:, DQJ!Q!JYJmIiiLO T __
13.1 k I d I 'II 110 A ". or AlJlh')flllJtI LeaD 0.,)111.,. 'H Chllk nM tlllo l'" OIlIQ IlI)CQI'illiJ 11\ Explrnlloll/Hoarmg IIBle
IIC flllW I) Q' ,eClflpl I} 110 Wfl
o'eo,"r~~~~B,"~~'~~'~b~:'~.,. ,...JUDy, M.OlllUflu 2~) 3,609" ., ' . .,... IO-24~.9.5u m ",.' ",.. J'-..J7...?L._
1& I h'''hV C."TIPY 1111,1 "ITU"N U'o.llll ] Illl'JU IJlJl1lHlJlfly ~lHvrllJ ,rtr.'Yll III\I'II IIVIIJOI1l:(I 01 l'ltlj!l;t1lJl\ IlhqW"ltl 'Ilartllltkrj" I i hIIVIlI)HICUIQIJ RlllthOWfl lI\
'n,mark"",lhlJ Writ or~lJmplnll1l rJIHIr.:/llJ('IJ Oil Iho IrllllVhJuul. ';')'111,l-,1I1Y, ':ll'floUOllljl!..llh; ,llllhll ill/d/l!!11\ "")<lWflllh')vI}Of rH1II1UH1I1IVllllllll C<Hnpntly, 1';1",
J)orBlh>n, tHe, Illth. I1fhl,UIUllfllUHhHI bQI()w lJ~ hn'lIJ1u'l) 1\ TAUI .nd A Tl6T1u COPY !llIlrlln/
___u_.__~..__._.._._.... .._____.....__.._.._ ,...___.___._",. __ ... ,. _ ... ..n.___'.'_,._,., ._._ ..._....___...
~ll hl'.!.~)' Cetl~!:_~~ ,~!_l,l~!.t~ .~~ NO!!_~~!!~_.~)~.I)~!~~_I._~~'.I.I~!'_I,I~Jll!..t.q__I~~'_:!lll'hll_H~ .In_'I_I_...~'_I_~:J.I_,_ (IHl",J.,I'_'.Y. f_;'}'_I.II,).r~ltll!_I!, ~t,: ' n~I,~l,'~!1 !1~l.'l~1J ,~.~!~~ .r~~!.~~ l.l.~II.)~__.___
~mlt ,'",illlte 0' ~""llllllllllllI"'~1I1l1l1 Ah,)....Il~11l II) Inl!~ltIlHH\I1IP III 0,,11/111111111) I'" ^ I"'~'II\' I ~"II,III"'1111t tI,I'f'I>B(llItIIHI
~J~~Ly_~_._(:i~/d*!l~ ~L__-:_. ._~~!.g~lIJe_. - _d" ',...._____. ___.-_ _..__ l:;'i'llurln~~l~:j~1~1~;I~~~~~I~rlll,~n~~..I~:IlB.1
~A'h.hQlli III WhOrl) Mu...e,IIClJltlllhJIIl f)l11y II dllllJrun Illllll I\I11l~n 1\1)1)\/11) 1811l)l)I 1)1 11Ft), f\llllflrlllJntNlJ Clly.Bllr'} ,....P 'J 1 Dohllit (\mvh IJ 2:1 11nul "
611)11 Md lip Code)
Ir:~i~ II.!!."
Q3 ATTlM'~]:'i~1~~~~4~'11 O'~]M'~:]~:p.~".:.I.~"~i l~h~_e~.:: I..D.;:'. [Mili. t~.P.''''J DO'." ~~i..l:Do'P'~~~~
14 A~'.ne. C."" ~ 2~ ~.",,:u (',,,,, l'Jll NIJlo,y Cnrl [27 MIII1"O"/P')~Il\'l"'N F II "..1'.11 thll I;1B ~rllill ('lst!! [:ill) r.QIr OUI O~~lJHD ~\
==>!:l!.?~~~.. .!~~.,.OO. .3.0~59 __.. . . ., .", ,,' u L::J D.o..". _ ... .....:.;"J, eu "S.,(.J0....n._
.0 REMARKS
aT A (. J .(,d r:>,., 7((
! (1) (./) ')
3' AFFIR~~~:'::\:''''''':'':''''':'I.:''''-'~:::.:''~-Ihl~d'''~'..C}~~~:~~~~ A~'i,;;;?;;,~~"..'d~.~~/.W.)F .. ,~-- 'f"i)~%:' ..',,":'.=
3< dBygl(:'lclA.";-:>..n ,.._,_'Lr'.~~n..."".~'.'~:'"., ~~:<< ..~~lLt.. .,~. }~/.. ..._
\,'-1) , ~' { 1'1 '\001 II ,,";':',r----- ".,',,/ -"-(' I'll) fI f"~ -; _
37 _._.--"....J__!..'~.. .'--'-~'i,~ii;:;~:'-'-~')'\;~!:>~";-}j';lrY'<,i;i;( .. . .-.. .. . I~ANtilSff<<~~N ,. I() -, f,' . .~ .!.. ...
MY COMMISSIUN P:PII1ES
38 I ACIC.N')W'Li_rj'o.F.niiE'c(111r +I~:F l'tlE ,'U-'''''''' ';.i-'U'AN IIONATUAI .~ [ 1'1' 1-"11" ,in _.: ~'''T,
OF AUnlOf_1L?!!~...I~!~Y!!~9__~~J_~~~(.~_~I_!X ~,:!.rJ.~.llul E _ ___1.
1,1
I
lj'
1
I
,
,,'
'I
!.
"
"
,
I,
I
II '.
'---114
"
,k~~'=~lttJf
'")1. 'I '." ,',I"'.,
I: Cl ~"I""',"MJ"': ,/
"'Clll~~,,:,',,,
6,~n 5:#
"r4
O,~'",!I:
OC~" .
.O~
"
I II I
,
'I
"
,
EPISCOPAL TOWERSI
SHIPPENSBURO, PENNSYLVANIA,
Plllntiff
: IN THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v,
.
.
: NO. 9HlOl
H.M. STAUFFER" SONS, INC.,
Defendant
.
.
: CIVIL ACTION. LAW
,EPLY TQ l'i~W ~ATJ'EJl Of DEFENDANT, II,M. STAUFFER ~ SONS, INC.
Plalnliff, EpIICOpll TowerslShippcnsbura, Pennsylvania, by and throuah Its attorneys,
Eckert Seamans Cherln " Melloll, flies the followina Reply to Defendant, H.M. Stauffer"
Sons, Inc. 's New Matter as follows:
1. The alleaalions contained in paraaraph 26 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleadlna is required. To the extent such a
response Is deemed to be required, the alleaalions are denied.
2. The alleaatlons contained in paraaraph 27 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusions of Ilw to which no relponllve pleadlna il required. To the extent such a
response Is deemed to be required, the alleaatlons are denied. By way of further answer,
after reasonable invesliaation, Plalnliff Is without knowledae or Information sufflcientlO
forma belief as to the truth of the alleaalion that the product "may have been substantially
altered", the alleaalion Is, therefore, denied and strict proof thereof Is demanded.
3. The alleaallons contained in paraaraph 28 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusions of law to which 1'10 responsive pleadinals required.
4. The alleaalions contained In paraaraph 29 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusions of law to Which 1'10 responsive pleadlnals required.
".~_, I'
5. The IIlel.don. conlllned In pll'llraph 30 of Defendant's New Mltltr are
conclu.lon. of law III which no re.pon.lve pleadlnlls required.
6. The IIleptlon. conlllned in pll'llraph 31 of Defendant's New Matltr are
conclusions of law to which no respon.lve plwlin,ls required. By way of further answer,
after reuonlble Inveltl,.don, Plaintiff Is withoutlufflcient knowled,e or information and II
unable to determine what II meant by · notify. . The a1leaations are, therefore, denied and
proof thereof II demanded. By way of further answer, Defendant, H.M. Stauffer was mllde
aware that roonnl materials which it sold and which came to con.truct buildlnls for Plaintiff
were defective. Defendant w~ notified of the cost of repair and alven an opportunity to
mpond.
7. The IIlqltlon. contained In paraaraph 32 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusion. of Ilw to which no responsive plwlinlls required. By way of further answer,
Plaintiff I. unlble to determine what Is meant by "acceplince" and .conformlna" loods. The
a1leaatlon. are, therefore, denied and proof thereof I, demanded. Further, to the contrary,
H.M, Stauffer w.. specifically notlfed of the non-conformlnlloods and alven the
opportunity to lither repIIr or replace the aoods pur.uantto the terms of the contract.
8. The IIleption. contained In paraaraph 33 of Defendant'. New Matter are
conclualon. of law to which no re.ponsive plwlina I. required. To the extent such a
reaponae I. deemed to be required, the a1leaations are denied.
9. The IIleptionl contained In paraaraph 34 of Defendant's New Matter are
conclusion. of law to which no respon.lve plwllnlls required. To the extent such a
reaponae I. deemed to be required, the a1leptions are denied.
IN THE COur.T OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION . LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURG
PENNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff
vs.
No. 95-601
H.M. STAUFFER & SONS, INC.,
Defendant
vs.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
Additional Defendant
HOTJ:C.
yoq HAVI BIIN SUlD IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the alaims
set forth in the following pages, you must taka aation within twenty (~O) days
after this complaint and Notice are eervQd, by ~ntering a written appeerance
pereonallt or by attorner and HUng in writing with the Court your defens..
or object ons to the ala ms set forth against you. You are warned that if you
fail to do so the cese may proceed without you and a judgement may be entered
against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the
compleint or for any other nlaim or ralief reque~ted by the Plaintiff. You
may lose money or property or other rights important to you.
YOU SHOt1LO TI\KI THIS PAPBR TO YOUR LAWYBR AT ONCIl. IF YOU 00 NO'1' HAVB A
~NYIR OR CANNOT AFFORD ONI, GO '1'0 OR TIlLBPHONI THI OFFICI SIT FORTH BILOW TO
FINO OUT WHIRl YOU CAN GIT LBGAL HBLP,
Court Administrator
4th Floor, cumberland county courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
en7) ~40-6~O~
Respectfully SUbmitted,
NIKOLAUS, HOHENADEL & UMBENHAUER
DlAte I
, ?J41J~
........-
M s
At rn for Defendant
Atto n y 1.0. #47136
212 th Queen Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717) 299-3726
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLV~I~
CIVIL ~CTION - LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURG I
PENNSYLVANI~, I
Plaintiff I
I
vs. I
I
H.M, STAUFFER & SONS, INC. , I No. 95.601
Defendllnt I
I
va. I
I
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS, I
INC. , I
Additional Defendant I
COMPLAINT JOINING ADDITIO~L DI'IHQ~
ROOVI. WOOD TRIATID PRODUCT8.~~
1. Episcopal Towers/Shippensburg, Pennsylvania
(hereinafter "Episcopal Towers") is a non-profit organization
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, having its principal place of busi~ess at 101 North
Prince Street, Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
2. H.M. Stauffer & sons, Inc. (hereinafter "Stauffer") is
a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having its principal place of
business at 33 Glenola Drive, Box 38, Leola, Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania.
3. Additional Defendant Hoover Wood Treated Products, Inc.
is a corporation with offices located at Main Street, Knox
Building, Thomson, Georgia 30824 who in 1984 was in the business
of treating and manufacturing wood products including CDX Hoover
Firex Plywood. In 1984 Additional Defendant Hoover regularly
sold wood treated products in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
4. Plaintiff Episcopal Towers has filed a Complaint
against Stauffer, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
"A".
5. Defendant Stauffer incorporates by reference Paragraphs
3,4,5 and 7 of the 11la.intiff' s Complaint as though the same were
set forth herein nt Length.
6. Defendant S':.allffer has filed an Answer and New Matter
denying llny and all liability. A copy of the Ans~er and New
Matter La attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
7, Plaintiff Episcopal Towers has alleged that the
Det ehdant Stauff e r breached either an express contract or implied
contraut or an obligation to a third party beneficiary in
connect ion with the sale of 1/2" CUX Hoover Firex Plywood
manufactured by Hoover Wood Treated Produots, Inc. causing the
roof to leak resulting in damages to .its facility in excess of
$HI,OOO.OO.
8. The cause of the leaking roof in the Episcopal Towers
facility was deterioration and/or delamination of the Firex
Plyw()od lI,upplied by Additional. Defendant Hoover.
9. Additional Defendant Hoover manufactured the 1/2" COX
2
Hoover Firex Plywood alleged by Epillcqpal Towen to be non"
conforming, not fit for its int~nded purpose and defective.
10. Additional Defendant warranted that the 1/2" Firex
Plywood was of merchantable quality and fit for the purpose and
use for which it was intended.
11. Additional Defendant had reason to know the particular
purpose for which the 1/2" CDX Hoover Firex Plywood was req:uired,
12. Stauffer relied on Hoover's skill and judgement 1n
purchasing and supplying the 1/2" COX Hoover Firex Plywood.
13. At the time of the sale the 1/2" CDX Hoovar Firex
Plywood was in a defective condition in that it had been treated
with certain chemicals which when exposed to certain
environmental conditions caused the plywood to deteriorate and
degrade.
14. When sold by Hoover, the 1/2" CDX Hoover Firex Plywood
was expected to reach its ultimate user and consumer without
substantial change in the condition in which it was sold, and it
did, in fact, reach the ultimate user and consumer without
substantial change.
15. If Episcopal Towers sustained damages as alleged, said
damages are the result of Hoover's Breach of Warranty and Breach
ot Implied Warranty as set forth above.
16. The 1/2" CDX Hoover Firex Plywood supplied by Stauffer
to the Plaintiff was manufactured by Hoover Wood Treated
3
"A
~., ~1.11",q~1 .llm.JO", II'" "",""Ill @
I
'I
,
Ii
,
,
, ,
,
"
"
"
,
,
Ii,
,
'I
,I
I'
"
I,
, i
..\
,
"
'I
,I
I j,
II
,
,
"
,
"
"
J I
"
,
,
"
, '
"
"
"
"I
"
,It
'I
"
,,'
I'
I"
,II
WP';Jl' 'W lV/JoInT ','l'rffllljU
~lU'I H,I'I, liTJlJo'Jo1i1l"
r'",:#n.,-."'"
"
m~ JII- ~n p.-ny BIl'NUICI",y
23. Tbe IVIn1I8IIlIIIl forth ill puqrIJ)IlIl.22 11'0 IIlcorpora/ed b1
_.. ,.., u It let tortb II flIll.
24. U Ibm wu not . diIIct contract betw.. SlaUt.lW and ""...,
Towers, IIpiIcopIl Towen wu It IIIIt ID iI'~d"" Iblrd-puty ~ of Il\~ conIIId lIO
wbJdl SlIlltftr wu & party In COIIIlIlClioll with the ~ of the I!p/.Icopal ToWWl
FMIIity .
", 8y retuailllllO repIlr IUd repla the dlfecdve P111ll plywood, SIIIlII'er
bu b,.,..... Ita obJlptl'illl' lIO BpIacop&1 Towers II an lnlellded d1ltd-puty bIaIIIdar1. IIId
'D bnIch wu I IUbttIIltial &ctor In e&\lllll' damIp lIO ~ Tcmn ill ... IIJIIIUIIl
-""Y II) ..., IlId "'*' dle deClcllve rootIq nw.riaI.
" 'I
,
" I
"
<I "
"
I
I ,
,Ii ' I
i ,I I
-1-
~ 011 ''ie l~IJa TO 717ol'J9Ul1l
FI'QI H. M. !lTfU"FER
T-911 P. 14
. .
'" '"'
'."" ..,
,
. , '
"'{lI)');' :"j
. .-, 1,1, ..
. ' .' ',:t,'''~,
" p' 'I " '" 'tl, "'..
.'.t, ,I~ t, ...., "_" .i w,'
~',~, f' I . ':'\
I' '~~",lo Il> \,',.11 , !t' ,/.;.
,~ :1 "f"'''{~''''''''~# J."
'I' ,l,','m"- 5 ,"". "Il', ',' y,""
,'/1'.1 ~",~~'i' ,',
" ," '" I
'.Jrr ,;,'1 I ~~""
!~';\f, "~'''' I.: "I,il.' I
" :'.''.) , , ;'1 't,''''{
,
"
).
, '1',
",\. ~'.;, ',' 'f
. ..~ ..,.,"'."".....,.
to M"
'''1,'''11.; ,,"fIt.. .,
;:, :,., ,'I t '"ll I
,~". ,1.1'" 10;':);.1
/I,"I',.~ ,','~.l
,,',"01 I ;'~
U,:;\~t1~J i":"M ;' Ilq,,11 ,)
..
" .
.~. ". :oJ"'''l "',
"i~lf"i~ "t'..;
,,'tJ~. /1 '
I .:. \' ;"
, .--,-.-.... -. .. -......- -----.---. ..-.............,-.-...---....-..' ... . ._,-, -- ~..,."'._'
tf:!a.r;,~\.:~:. .,~~ T7,/'I'.~C~~:~ :~-...')I'.f\;'''."'./f,~, ~~r ~jj;:;:' .,.:.~~ ;1 r ...,I:,):~n:1:;;';f:I.-;;r~!~~~.~ ~ ~y/l.,,~it~f~.~,,;,'~,~,,~ ~'~,1\!"~rQ
"I.:;r;".~. ' '..., .;" " r ). .,..' '. 1,....J,.. "'....' ,',' ," "~I ',.V,"o> iI" '.'" ' ',' "Jj" 4
,~.. ~.t.,~,:... i'I,' .Wfi .';"'d .... I" .'~,"'.'f~,......:r.M J.\io. \"'YW~_C"I'\otoI"N~ ,~,."''''', ,....h.,....,~,,' "Io".~","",.t M.,.toI...,-
, 'f:' ;'-1' .\) "\ ,'I"":I:;""!j~J.l,, 1',/ J~;:d"J:'iI,Vli': ..t';rt '..,1";' ,I .~ '11'"",..,.
I ' I~:h 1.'-. .1\: "":. 10 '.I~".~ 11:,:'~ I '/'..J."'.tC') .;:: '. 'I, '''J\;~~,h~I' "If' . I . 'I
.Il'itmhnd Condi'l~lIf15111tt j') ,'. li'l "', ,I ~i,tt " II' ,I" ,(,
, '".11 J ,';'1,'" . ~'t ",:. ~J'Jf') ~";J"j ,It) ~ I ":i.~,,' , 'P ,'\ .~ > '1 I, ,.".)',1
,-- "..,.-,.. ..." AW'..I6I bOY' If.' 1\1: SC.u"" inll lSW '1~.1Kfrt1t\ ll('td"sm""r... IOllltCt t.'lI>>rfolfowillt ..~ ..... .. -
concll~oM.
,--..,.. ... -. - - I.'Sl.lu"" ;"~'Ijnol bl'iiiiiI.;i;;;;;;d;i.~,f;;.;..ot';iii~...iO._;;..;I; Ill. ~.ir; --.,
or ''''uJI II ClUlld by 11\ mnl beyond III ,._lbI. conlrol,
,I . ,h.'" " .~,~.., '; 1 'I ., , I. I. :.
2. Whll"my .~ will,.... mflll 10 mut . cU'lOme,', d'lIvery lje18.Il.'lvtrf .1,' """".
hOU'CIIllllllbe,UI,lr\llId. I . , ',I ,. I' \"1: 'I'
.
i~ 3. SlIuf", ,.,.,"' . 1IOU,1\y l~lIrtlt I~ III toadl IhIPPld 10 011I101'1'0I' UIIIIIIIIYIllIII1III lull
, . ., ~,\,,,,,~.bIIII"'~' ~..,~." ,,,:,:r ~'I'j"'-.r;';"l":':ii" ');;1" ,rr-''lr.~.\',i~~.lh~m.,r.;T'..~.:'.r.. ',- "H rS5..it"..
. .. ,'''' ,-...,,~~. .\~; , .
J ~ \"l'i~.r.iJ.'..'ic"!~).: . I;" '" ."\1 -, "H \ ." :';
I--'''~ _:.. .~- ~';, ": .....J:" JI\& CIlIIP-.lb"".~ol\1v Ih.ilt!.Vlltll1ll<l...wlxJl1.I/Illt'.IM Q ~"'UYll~.rlUllOO.. " ,.
1- ."~~,:~ .' "~~':':';' 1~_~rfO~!~I~~ ~~_. ~~~~I,! o~.~'~~.I~ ~I~~;r:"~~~:~.'p' ~. .~ .~'''f'
I \.' .,'\ ,t, ,'.,,', I I .~':f" "'d".',~" it. "; '-!, i .
~ T/II IlUIIO",., 1htI11I011'V Sltuft., Immedl.lIly 011 "./P! of IllY ~OII-ctl11fo1mllle .e, ,
I "'"'''U''"''' SIIll"" 11I111, II lit optllll\, "lilt, "",II, the ,oodt, ",pi... I/loI .1, 01' ,,~ tilt C1111011l1, I
, endll 101' Iht Prla of the good., The aUl",,",r'. re".I, 01 good, wllllouIIl.luffl,'I ..pnllllPPr.w1l connl.,
111I11II _PI'" of Ill. lOOde II II ...., MIt ClII\formlne, Ind SIIUl,. Ie /lOt filii' tor lhI..I*\It of I
. repel', : !' I I
"f. , I :
I .. CullOm m.. 11000?I unnol be rtlllm.d. 011I" 9QQdI' CIrI be "1Il"*, 0II1~ " lilt 1M>
lOIIII"e UPltllllllld wlth Stlllflt,'I'WlWIIIlIJlllmtl. Wh.n ODOdl.,. ,.tUmId \YI~ IlIch .'j'I, '''''fIt, ,
, Will _lilt 011I1011II' Il'ICllllo, lIl.llfIct of 1lll1OQd.,... . ,.nllll<ln, ch'", Of 1 g,
( I I
7,: TIl. oUllOm.,r""IIIIIdI,,,,"oul,ln, th.1I ~'I'mI.1flIf OO"dlllolll'~ th.llIln_,....lIOIu.,
~. rIlllIdlll, IIId under no clrtlll'ftlllll\L'll' If\til $lIulftr be iI.bl. '0' lilY l.bo'l clllml or fill' lilY OIN,!
IPIOIII, 11IIld.lltll 0' llOnltCUlrltlll d.". .,.III1t OUI 01 I "" Of \IOOd1 0' . dlley ,II lilt dlUvel'V of.... '
I . i
, ,
I
,
r"
" I
~ , "
'. 1,1
'.
I .
, "
.\ . ,,'f#. . "....,
'~"7;"'~/"i'~,,'.;, ,
111'J'~~~.';,'tll_.
"" " I'J ,.', \11.' '....
I' '.
I ~ f..l ~, \, ';' . ~
, , '. ~ .\ , " I , If l~ ~ '\. ,
.
I't.,....i ',.' . 'r . ,I \ll~
'I"
:;l.lt t I~.t". " 1, " , it. .~~
, "
. 1'1
,
II' .1'
'.'
\ '.....1"..
"."'w .,.."....
~........l.'._.....,'__...,..,
,
'"
, . ~ . i' I ~ I
'I, ,',," J~~ \A
I ,.
. .
.\,' 'I" .
<"
.1
.. .
"
"
1'1
, ,
, " I,
ili
, ,
, "
I ,
"
, "
,
,
,
,
, ,
Ibhlblt .
H' U~I""'I~l MIll! .'. HIll 1I1f.l,:./1I (i)
,
,
" , "
,
"
,
"
,
,
II
;il
"
,
,
, ,
,I
,I
I
,
,
,
I,"
,
"
1;11
",
;1
I >I ,I
Ii;
, \
"
"
II,
'I
, ,
,
"
"
"
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENW~YLVANrA
CIVIL ACTION . UAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURQ
PENNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff
No. 96-601
vs.
H.M. STAUFFER' SONS, INr..,
Defendant
DmPENDANT'S ANSwmR AND NEW MAtTm~
TO PLAINTIPP'S CQMPLAINT
1. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 1 of
the Plaintiff/s Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Striat
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 3 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Striat
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial,
". Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that
Episcopal Towers purchased from Stauffer plywood sheathing.
Rather, Winfield Development Corporation of 2316 Dairy Road,
Lancaster, Jilennsylotania 171501 purchased certain plywood .he.thing
from Defendant Stauffer to be shipped to Episcopal Tower.;
Shippensburg, ~enn$y~vania. As regards a~~ other a~legations
contained in ~aragraph 4 of the ~laintiff/s Complaint, after
reasonable investigation the Defendant is without sufficient
information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments.
They are, therefore, denied.
5. Oenied as stated, To the contrary, the ~laintiff did
not purchase plywood sheathing from the Defendant Stauffer. The
Oefendant did, however, sell plywood sheathing to Winfield
Development Corporation and, on belief, a portion of that was
manufactured and/or sold to Stauffer by Hoover Wood 'rreated
Products, Inc, As regards the balance of the averments in
Paragraph 5 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, after reasonable
investigation, the Defendant Stauffer is without sufficient
information or belief as to the truth of those averments, They
are, therefore, denied. Strict proof is demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial,
6. Denied u stated. It is specifically denied that
Stauffer sold firex p~ywood to Episcopal Towers or issued an
invoice to Epi8copa~ Towers. To the contrary, Stauffer sold
firex plywood sheathing to Winfield Development Corporation and
the invoice referenced as Exhibit "A" to the ~laintiff's
Complaint clearly indicates that the plywood was sold to Winfield
Dev..lopment Corporation, By way of further answer, no
contractual relationship existed between Defendant Stauf.fer and
2
~pi'copal Towers at any time relevant to the Plaintiff',
Complaint.
7. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer & Sone, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averment in Paragraph 7 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
e. Denied. Paragraph e of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
9. Denied as stated. The Defendant Stauffer did not sell
firex plywood to the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers. As regards the
balance of the averments in Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff's
Complaint, after reasonable investigation the Defendant Stauffer
is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the
truth of those averments and they are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
10. While it is admitted that Episcopal Towers afforded the
Defendant Stauffer an opportunity to replace the deteriorated
plywood, Stauffer believes and therefore avers that they had no
contractual obligation to do so.
11, paragraph 11 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that
Episcopal Towers has been damaged by any act or omission of
,,'
3
Stauffer. To the contrary, Stauffer had no business relationship
with Plaintiff and therefore had no duty to take any action with
resp~ct to the Plaintiff's complaints. As regards all other
allegations, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is
without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth
of the averments. They are, thertfore, denied. Strict proof is
demanded, if relevane, at the time of trial.
COUNT I . BREACH or EXPRESS CONTRACT
12, The Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1 through 11
of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by
reference.
13. D~nied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant
had an agreement with Episcopal Towers for the sale of plywood
sheathing. To the contrary, Defendant Stauffer's contract was to
sU~ply plywood sheathing to Winfield Development Corporation.
Defendant Stauffer had no agreement or contractual relationship
with the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers.
14, Denied. It is specifically denied that a contract
exists between Stauffer and Episcopal Towers. To the contrary,
Stauffer's agreement was to supply plywood sheathing to Winfield
Development Corporation and not Episcopal Towers. It is further
specifically denied that the terms of the business relationship
are embodied in order/invoices sent by Stauff$r to Episcopal
4
Tower.. To the cont~a~y, those order. Ind invoices outline the
relation.hip between Stauffer and Winfield Development
Co~poration for materials to be shipped to Episoopal Towere. By
way of further answer, Paragraph 14 of the Plaintiff's Complaint
ie a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is
necessary.
15. Denied. It is specifically denied thlt a contract
exist. between Stauffer and Episcopal Towers. To the contra~y,
Stauff.er had no business relationship with at any time relevant
to the Plaintiff's Complaint with Episcopal Towers. As the
invoices clearly indicate, Winfield Development Corporation is
the party with whom Stauffer contracted. By way of further
answer, provisions of the invoices to which the Complaint
referred has to do with goods rejected by the purchasers, al non.
conforming, at the time of delivery. It does not create an
obligation for Stauffer to replace goods subsequently found or
alleged to be defective by a non-customer, such as Epilcopal
Tower., not in privity with Stauffer. By way of further answer,
Paragraph 15 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a conclulion of llw
to which no re.pon.ive pleading is reqUired.
16. Denied. It i. specifically denied that Stauffer lold
firex plywood to Epilcopal Towere. To the contrary, Stauffer did
not sell firex plywood to Episcopal Towers but rather lold
plywood to Winfield Development Corporation. The balance of the
5
I I
,
allegations containe4 in Parlgrapn ~6 of tne Plaintiff',
Complaint are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading
is required.
~7, paragraph ~7 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, Defendant H.M, Stauffer & Sons, Inc. respectfully
requests t:nis Honorable Court di.smiss the Plaintiff's Complai,nt.
cOVNT II . BREACH or IMPLIED CONTRACI
~a. The Defendant's Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through 17 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by reference as though set forth at lengt:h.
19. &laragraph 19 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
By way of further answert
a. Denied. It is specifically denied that Episcopal
Tower. paid Stauffer for plywood. To the contrary, Winfield
Development Corporation paid Stauffer for plywood pur.uant
to the contract and bu.ines. relationship between Stauffer
and Winfield Development Corporation.
b, Admitted in part and denied in part. It is
admitted that Stauffer sold ~ertain plywood sheathing to
Winfield Development Corporation to be shipped to Epi.copal
Towers. However, as regards all other allegations contained
I;
1n Paragraph 19 (b) / including the allegat10n that
Stauffer prov1ded all of the plywood to Episcopal
Towers, the Defendant is without sufficient informat1on
to form a belief as to the truth of those averments and
they are therefore denied. Strict proof of the same is
demanded, if relavant, at the tims of trial.
q. Adlnitttld in part and denied in part. It ill
admitted that a Stauffer sales representative ins~ected
certain plywood at EpisGopal Towers and that Stauffer
notified Hoover Wood Treated Products, Inc. that certain
Hoover Treated ~lywood used to construct the roof of a
building at Episcopal Towers was deteriorating. It is
denied, however, that; thill action reflects a contractual
relationship between Defendant Stauffer and Episcopal
Towers. 10 the contrary, Stauffer
was merely investigating a complaint about a product claimed
to have been supplied by Stauffer pursuant to a contract
w1th Winfield Development Corporation. As regards the
balance of the allegations contained in ~aragraph 19(c) of
the Plaintiff's Complaint, the Defendant ill without
sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of
those averments and they are therefore denied and strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
20. the averments contained in Paragraph 20 of the
7
, .
Plaintiff's Complaint a~e conclusion$ of law to which no
~esponsive pleading io ~aqui~ed, ay way of further answer, it is
denied that any contract axists between Episoop~l Towers and
Stauffer, See the Defendant's Answers to ~aragraphs 18 and 19 oe
the Plaintiff's Complaint.
21. The ave~ments contained in Paragraph 21 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is
specifically denied that any contract ~xists between Episcopal
Towers and Stauffer. Se~ the Defendant's Answe~s to Paragraphs
18 through 20 of the ~laintiff's Complaint,
22. The aver.ments contained in ~aragraph 22 of the
Plaintif~'s Compiaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is
specifically denied that any contract exists between Episcopal
Towers and Stauffer. See the Defendant's Answers to ~aragraphs
18 through 21 of the ~laintiff's Complaint.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc.
respectfully request this Honorable Court diamiss the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
COUNT III . THIRD PARTY BINErICIARt
23. The Defendant's Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through 22 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
8
, .
by reeerence as though set forth at length.
24. The allegations contained in ~aragraph 24 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required.
25. The allegations contained in Paragraph 2S of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required.
miEREFORE, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, !nc.
re~pectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss the
Plaintiff's Complaint.
NEW MATTER
26. The Plaintiff's Complaint may have failed to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.
27. !n the event it is determined that a product supplied,
distributed and/or sold by Defendant Stauffer was involved as
alleged in the Plaintiff's Complaint, said product may have been
substantially altered after it left the possession of Stauffer.
28. The injuries and/or damages allegedly sustained by the
Plaintiff may have been due to the negligent act and/or omission.
of other individuals and/or entities.
29. The Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable
Statute of Limitations.
30. No contractual relationship exists between the
Defendant Stauffer and the ~laintiff Episcopal
9
. .
II
Tower'/~hipp.nsburg Penn'ylvania.
31. It a contractual r.lati~"ship exilts, which is
specitically denied, the Plaintiff failed to notify be!endant
Stauffer of the receipt of allegedly non-conforming goods as
required by the terms and conditions of salt.
32. If a contractual relationship exists, which is
Ipecifically denied, the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers/Shippensburg
Pennsylvania made repairs without Stauffer's express approval
which constitutes acceptance of the goods as if they were
conforming and the Defendant Stauffer is therefore not liable for
any expense of repair as outlined in tjl~ terms and ~onditions of
sale.
33. No implied contract txisted between the Plaintiff
Episcopal. Towers/Shippensburg Pennsylvania and the Oefendant
Stauffer.
34. No implied warranties inured to the benefit of
Plaintift.
35. To the extent that it may be shown that any implied
warranties existed, which are expressly denied, all implied
warranties were limited or exclUded.
I
I
I
I
~.
,
36. The Plaintiff has failed to mitigate any damage it may
have suffered.
3? The Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. reserve the
right upon completion of its investigation and discovery to file
10
. .
.uch additional deten.e., c~o..claim. or counterclaim. and/or
third party complaint. a. may be appropriate and to plead any
relea.e that may have been or may be executed by the Plaintift a.
an attirmative defense.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant H.M, Stauffer' Son., Inc.
re.pecttully request. this Honorable Court dismiss the
Plaintitt's Complaint.
Respecttully Submitted,
NIKOLAUS, HOHENADEL}& UMBENHAOER
,
<
i
--
Oat.~
By~
...... -' ~_. "-"
Jeffrey Alan Mills
Attorney for Defendant
Atto~ney I,D. ~47l36
212 Nprth Queen Street
Lancaster, PA l7603
(717) 299-3726
, I
I,) I
'I .f
. I
. I
1\ 'I
I I
I
,
:,
,/ ,
11
, ,
I
('
"
.,'
,"
"
"
,I
,
I
','
,
,
il_i
"
,
"
,
, ,
I,
"
, '
I,
'I
,
"
, /,
, ,
"
"
"
ii
:1
'j
~
"I ) I
I,
,
,
,
i'
,
, ,
,
C".l
~I'
'\;h\
IJ; '~.'
~.'~ t.~
I , I ~ .
":\r'
[. "
" ~: r" - \
1-";,,)
\ ' ~',
~'>" '''''~
~,\
-.
, ,
~
, I
"'~
,I:\~~
,
~"l " Ill) ~
",' 'f
.. '1'\
t.,' ::.
r 'r
1,\ ~\~
oil"
l.'')
C/\
, ."
".
:', ~.t
-
~
"
.
.Utl
POST' SCHELL, P.C.
SYI ANDREW J. CONNOLLY, ESQUIRE
I. D. 160086
1800 JOHN F. ~ENNEDY BOULEVARD
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
(216) 587-1000
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
HOOVER TREATED WOOD PRODUCTS,
INC.
EPISCOPAL TOWERS
I COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
I CUMBERLAND COUNTY
I
I NO. 9 !I-IIO 1
I
I
I
I
I
v.
H.M. STAUFFER' SONS, INC. &
HOOVER TREATED WOOD PRODUCTS, INC.
ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT
...... Q. KOOV.. T..aT.D .OQD ..ODUOT8. !RO. TO T..
Jo!n.. oOll.Lanrr O. ..11. .TaU.... I .OR.. IRO.
1.
Denied.
Atter reasonable investiqation, anewerinq
detendant, Hoover Treated Wood ProduotB, Inc., is without knowledqe
or intormation eutticient to torm a beliet ae to the truth ot the
av.rm.nt. ot paraqraph 1 ot plaintitt'. complaint and .ame are
th.retor. deem.d to be denied. Strict proot is demanded at time ot
trial.
2.
Deni.d.
Atter reasonable inve.tiqation, anawerinq
detendant, Hoover Treated Wood PrOducts, Inc., is without
auttioi.nt intormation to torm a beli.t .. to the truth ot the
av.rment. ot paraqraph 1 ot the joinder complaint and 8alll. are
there tore d.emed to be denied. Strict proot is demanded at time ot
trial.
3. Denied a8 .tated. Hoover Treated Wood Produot., Ino.,
not Hoover Wood Treated Product8, Inc., sold tire retardant plywood
in the commonw.alth ot Pennsylvania in 1984.
~
4. Admitted.
6. Additional det.ndant, Hoover Treated Wood Product., Inc.,
incorporate. by reference the preceding paraqraphs ot the joinder
oomplaint as thouqh .ame were .et torth herein at lenqth.
6. Admitt.d in part, denied in part. an8werinq detendant
admit. that det.ndant, H.M. stautter & son8, tiled an an8wer and
new matter deny1nq all liability. However, atter reasonable
inv..tiqation, an.werinq detendant i. without knowledge or
intormation sutticient to torm a beli.t as to the truth ot the
matter. oontained in detendant's, H.M. stautter & sons, answer and
new matt.r.
7. Deni.d.. stated. plaintiff's complaint spllaks tor
iteelt.
a. Oolnted. An8werinq detendllnt is without knowledqe or
intormation sutticient to torm a beliet as to the truth ot the
matters contained in paraqraph 8 at the joinder complaint and same
are th.r.tore d.emed to b. denied. strict proot is demanded at
tillle ot trial.
9. D.nied. An8w.ring defendant is without knowledq. or
intormation sutt icient to torm a belief as to the truth ot the
matt.r. oontain.d in paragraph 9 ot the joinder complaint and 8am.
are ther.tor. d..med to be denied. Strict proot is demanded at
time ot trial.
10. Denied. The alleqations in paragraph lOot the joind.r
complaint con.titute conolusions of law tor which no re.pona1ve
pleadinq is required.
11. Deni.d. Anawerinq d.tendant is without knowledqe or
intormation .utticient to torm a beliet aa to the truth ot the
matter. oontain.d in paraqraph 11 ot the joinder complaint and ..m.
are theretore d..med to be denied. strict proot ie demanded at
time at trial.
12. Denied. Anawerinq defendant is without knowledqe or
information .utticient to torm a beliet as to the truth ot the
matters oontained in paraqraph 12 ot the joinder complaint and lamQ
are there tore deemed to be denied. Strict proof is demand.d at
time of trial.
13. D.nied. The alleqations in paraqraph 13 ot the joinder
complaint constitute conclusions ot law tor which no responsive
pleadinq is required.
14. Deni.d. Answerinq detendant is without knowledqe or
intormation lIutticient to torm a beliet as to the truth ot the
matters oontained in paraqrftph 14 ot the Joinder Complaint and aam.
are ther.tore d.emed to be denied. strict proof is demanded at
time ot trial.
l6. D.ni.d. Answ.r inq defendant is without knowlldq. or
intormation lutticient to form a beliet as to the truth ot the
matters oontain.d in paraqraph 15 ot the joinder complaint and sam.
are ther.tor. de.med to be denied. Strict proof is demand.d at
time ot trial.
16. Deni.d. Answerinq defendant is without knowlldq. or
intormation .uttioient to torm a beli.t al to the truth ot the
3
matter. contain.d in paraqraph 16 ot the joinder complaint and asm.
are th.r.tore de.med to be denied. strict proot i. demanded at
time ot trial.
17. Oeni.d. The alleqations in paraqraph 17 ot the joind.r
oomplaint constitute conclusion. ot law tor which no l'.spone!v.
pleading i. required.
0....0.., Detendant, Hoover Tr.ated Wood Produot., Ino.,
demand. jUdqm.nt in its tavor toqether with oosts, attorney t...
and any other reliet deemed appropriated by the Court.
H., MaTT..
18. The plaintitt's oriqinal complaint and the detenda~t"
joinder complaint may have tailed to state a oau.e ot action upon
which r.li.t may be qranted.
19. The plaintitt's olaims and the claims ot the original
O.tendant are barred by the applicabl. statute of Limitation..
20. In the .vent it is determined that a product supplied,
di.tribut.d and/or Bold by the additional detendant, Hoover Treated
Wood Produota, Ino. w.. involved .. alleged in the plaintitt'.
oomplaint, .aid produot may have be.n substantially alt"r.d or
miau..d atter it l.tt the possession ot Hoover.
21. The plaintitt and oriqinal detendant may have tailed to
mitiqat. any damaqe. all.gedly sUffered.
22. To the .xtent that the pldntitts sUff.red any lo.s.a or
damaqe. .. alleq.d in the plaintitt' oomplaint, tho.e lo.... and
damaqe. w.re cau.ed by the neqliqence ot the plaintitts and th.ir
servant., agent. and oon.ultants or by the n.qliqenoe ot other
4
peraon., parti.., or entiti.s over whom Hoov~r had no control, int
h. deaign, .uperviaion of oonstruction, construotion and/or
op.ration and maintenanoe of Episcopal Towere. Thus, the olaim. ot
the plaintitts .hould be barred, limited or reduced, in whole or
part by the laws ot Pennsylvania, inoludinq, but not limited to,
the oomlllon law, tho applicable provisions ot the Pennaylvania
Comparative Neqliqenoe statute and/or the Unitorm Contribution
Amonq Tortteasers Act.
23. The occurrence referred to in Episoopal Towers' complaint
and any injuries, losses, and damaqes alleqed to have result.d
theretrom were caused in substantial part by the plaintitts', or
othflr persons', parties', or entities', misuse of plywood and other
material. and/or knowinq use ot plywood and other materials in a
d.t.ctive condition by the plaintitfs and their aqents servant.,
employees, and consultants, or by other persons, parties, or
entities over whom Hoover had no oontrol, and thus Beaver court's
olaims should be barred, limited, or reduced, in whole or in party
by the laws ot P8nnsylvania, inoluding but not limited to, the
common law, the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania
comparativ. Negligence Statute and/or the UnJ.torm Contribution
Amonq TortteaBers Aot.
24. Episoopal Towers is barred trom bringinq this complaint
and/or from seekinq any or allot the reliet requested beoause ot
applicabl. prinoiples ot equity, incLUding, but not limited to,
laohes, waiver, and .stopp.l.
6
26. There WIUf I\Q privity ot contract b.tween Hoov.r and
plaintitf. .
26. Hoover did not ow. any duty to plaintitt..
37. Hoover i. .ntitled to have it.. .hare ot liability, it .0
tOllnd, reduoed by the share ot liability to any part whioh h..
a.ttl.d and/or by the .u~ of any .ettlement amount which that party
ha. paid and/or by the reduotion permitted by the law. ot
p.nn.ylvania, includinq, but not limited to, the Unitorm
contribution Amonq Tortteasors Act and the comparative Ne9liq.no.
Act.
28. Hoover pleads all settlements and rel.a.es ent.r.d into
b.tw..n the plaintiffs and any detendante includinq any third-party
detendants, as a deten.e to plaintitts' claims and tllrther pl.ads
that it i. entitled to the tull ben.tit ot any release. whioh may
have b..n or which are entered into, whether or not .uoh
..ttlem.nt. have b..n oompl.ted or disclo.ed at the time ot
.verdiot.
39. Hoover adopts and inoorporated by reterenc. the
attirmativ. de tens.. of each ot the other detendants in thi. oa...
30. Hoover deni.s that its produot was Ilsed in the
oon.truotion ot the condominium projeot in qu.stion and .triot
proot ot lame i. d.manded.
31. Th. plaintitte may have tail.d to join indi.penaable
partie. .
33. Hoover denie. that any product, proved to have b..n .old
by it, wa. in any way d.teotiv..
6
~,
-'
...-_.~........... ._-_.. ~
'I" ,. , . , ..,... j
~3. Any acta or omil.iona ot anlwerinq def.ndant w.re not a
aub.tantial caU.e or tactor ot the aubject incid.nt and did not
r..ult in the damage a alleqedly .u.tained by the plaintitt.
34. Th. damaq.. alleqed in the complaint may have been csu.ed
or oontribut.d by .ith.r the plaintitta, the build.r/developer, or
oth.r oontractor. or luboontractor. employed by plaintitt or the
,
build.r/developer.
315. The neqliqence and/or omissions ot other individual.
and/or entiti.. may have constituted interveninq supereedinq oau.es
ot the damaqe or injurie. alleqed to have been _u.tained by the
plaintitt.
36. Any damaqe. .ustained by the plaintitt w.ru eauaed by an
untor.seeable, indep.ndent interveninq oause which neqate. any
liability attributable to Hoover.
37. The aocident and damaqes alleged are due to the
n.ql1geno. ot third persons, includinq but not limited to 00-
defendant_, or any additional detendants, over whom thi_ d.t.ndant
exerei.ed no control.
38. An_werinq detendant avers that at the time ot the
inoident, the produot in question may have been alte~.d, mOdifiad,
or aub.tituted, or waa in aome torm or tashion other than it we. at
the time it lett the poa.es.ion and control ot anaw.ring defendant.
39. The damaq88 or injuries alleqad to have been .u.tained by
the plaintitt may have been caused by the misuse, abua., or
. 7
alter1ng ot the product atter it lett the ouetody and oontrol ot
Hoover, it it 18 proved that anewer inq detendant'. produot. waa
indeed ue.d in the oondominium project in queution.
40. An.wering d.tendant avera that the damaqea, it any, a.
oontended by the plaintitts were oau.ed by the acts, omiesion., and
other liability produoinq conduct by .ntities not yet identitied
but over whom an.wering detendant exercised no oontrol or riqht ot
oontrol.
41. Th.re were no warranties, expressed or implied, made by
thie defendant.
42. There hae been no breach ot warranties, expresl\ed or
illlplied.
43. The acts alleged in the complaint were pertormed by an
indep.ndent oontraotor and not by an aqent or servant ot thia
d.f'ndant.
44. Any damaqes sustained by the plaintitt were caused by
aote ot God.
4!S. The plaintitt continued to use the product tOllowlnq
di.oov.ry ot a deteot or atter they should have known ot a detect.
46. Anew.rinq detendant denied that any produot ot it. wu
det.ctive, or unreaeonably dangerou., or was other than supplied in
a aate, prop.r, and workmanlike manner tit for safe, proper and
intend.d us. thereot.
47. An.wering detendant avers that it it be proved that the
plaintitt'a damaqes, as alleqed, were oaused in whole or in part by
8
a produot manutactul;'ed or lold by it that, at the time ot
manutacture or aale, it i. averred that the product complied with
all applioable .tandards and speciticationa.
48. At all time. herein and plac.s lnentioned, Hoover compli.d
with all leqal obliqationl, applicable law., requlation8 and
atandard..
49. Plaintittl are barred trom recovery and/or are limited in
th.ir recovery under the statute or Repose by virtue ot the
prevailinq atate ot the 8cientiUo Clr industrial knowledq.
available to detendant Hoover Treated Wood Produots, Ino. at all
times material and relevant hereto.
50. Any products ot detendant Hoover Treated Wood product.,
Ino. which plaintitt claims oaused damaqe to plaintitt's property
w.r. .old or supplied to a sophisticated purchaser, at least a.
knowledqeable about the Itate ot the acientitic indu.trial
knowledqe at wood preservinq producto as Hoover Treat.d Wood
Product., Ino. The actions or inaotions ot this sophistioated
purchaa.r oonltitut~ a lup.rsedinq cau.e ot any damaqes which the
plaintitt olaim. and there tore precludes liability on the part ot
d.t.ndant Hoover Treated Wood PrOducts, Inc.
"...'0.1, detendant, Hoover Tr.ated Wocd producta, Ino.,
demanda judqment in it. tavor toqether with oOlt., attorn.y t.e.
snd anY other reliet deemed appropriated by the Court.
9
III ~T.. oaO..-qLl!K .U..U~ TO .a..,o.,. IIIIID)
aGa!.,T p....D&MT. ~._, .T~U.'.. , .0.'. r.o.
COMES NOW, additional detendant, Hoover Treated Wood
Product., Ino., by its attorney., Post & Schell, P.C., and .et.
torth the tollowinq New Matter in the nature ot a cro..claim under
Pa. R.C.P. 2~6~(d) aqain.t det.ndant, H.M. Stautt.r , Son., Ino.
61. An.w.rinq detendants deny any and all liability to any
party in thi. action.
62. It the plaintitt su.tained injuries and damaqe., as
alleq.d, and it the answerinq detendants are tound liable, suoh
liability beinq .xpre.sly denied, then H.M. stautter , Sons, Ino.
i. direotly liable to the plaintitt or is jointly and severally
liable with the answerinq detendants by way ot oontribution or
liable over to the answerinq defendants by way ot indemnity tor any
sum that may be recovered by the plaintiff in this aotion.
Answ.rinq detendants incorporate herein by ret.renoe allot the
aUeqations aqain.t H.M. stautter & Sons, Inc. whioh al'e oontained
in the plaintitt'. complaint tor the purpose ot the croeeolaim
joinder a. thouqh those alleqations were set torth tully herein at
lenqth.
63. It Answ.rinq detendant is tound to be B tortteasor, th.n
it is averred that the oriqin&1 defendant may &1.0 b. a joint
torttea.or throuqh whom answerinq detendant would b. entitled to
reoeive oontribUtion and/or indemnifioation in the peroentaq.
amount ot their responsibility.
10
"
,
,
"
, ,
. " ,1
I, 1,\\
( ,I
, :
. , ",lor , .,
r.~ ' ,~ I .)
~, 1 I "~,
V ,,0 ,)
, r' , ,'\
I ,\ ,. I
~ ' \
f,' , 'II'
t, J ~.. I
I
I' .. ,
",") 1,
.... .'.
"
"
,II
IIIII
"
,.
,I
, ,
..
II'
'.
,
'i' '\
'I
~. 1.1
i
li/'
;il
;1: n
I'!
',,)'
.'
I
I,
"
Iii
, ,
'j';-
YO -.._ . _
), i .,.U Ml.. HI"."" Jt~""'. TO ,....... TO'
I ,".~~G~'.' , WI,"I"
tw,"W "ql I~Y' ._ ,..YI.. H....'
.~ ~ Im"~t ,\lh".~' M~Y .1
~"'~_.. ......t ~pU.
"'--
,
l'Tf......~
,-.--
~~w 0"'0.'
NJlCOL.AL,JI, HOHINAD.L.
81 UMI.NHAUlft
II. NOlltH Q~IIN ttllllT
L.ANCA.TI",~A. I~
. .
.
, I '.':m, .~_t"y ~~. T"I ~'"
" ~ '_UI AH' ....llIl' iIOII\I ., ""'
O."'HA~ ""I '" THI. .""".it. "
1h..~.y "",
.'
l,-~'
,
"
I'
,'.. II
,"
I:
...
!I
,\
~
"
, ,
r
-,..
. ,
~.
,~ -.
, .,
.ame ba.ic faot. and ciroum.tanoe., the proposed counts in the
amended oomplaint set forth new oau.es of aotion, as the
amendment otfers a different theory or b$sis for reoovery.
9. Admitted in part, denied in part. Any inference that
amandment pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1033 should be permitted at any
time i. .peoifioally denied, as amendment is not permitted after
the .l1.atute of limitations has expired where it raises a new
oause of action. Furthermore, Pa. R.C.P. 1033 speaks for
it.elf,
10. Admitted.
11. Denied. It is speoifically denied that granting
Plaintiff leave to amend its complaint would not prejudioe
Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons/ Inc., or serve the interests of
judioial efficienoy and eoonomy. To the contrary, both of the
propo.ed oount. in the amended complaint involve implied
warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC"), and are
barred by tha four (4) year statute of limitation. set forth
under 13 P.S. 12725. Defendant H.M. Stauffer & sons, Ino. will
therefore be prejudioed by permitting Plaintiff leave to amend
it. complaint, where the statute of limitations has expired and
the amendment introduoe. a new oau.e of aotion.
Furthermore, judicial effioienoy and economy will not be
.erved as Plaintiff is barred from filing a a.parate aotion, and
permitting Plaintiff leave to amend will neoes.itate the filing
2
of motion. for judgment on the pleading. and .ummary judgment to
have the count. di.mis.ed for violating the .tatute of
limitations, and only cause delay in having any real dispute.
re.olved by a fact-finder.
12. Denied. Both of the proposed counts in the amended
complaint involve implied warranties under the ucc, and are
barred by the four (4) year statute of limitations set forth
under 13 P.S. 12725. Section 2725(b) provides in relevant part
that lIa caU.e of action accrues when the breach occurs,
regardle.. of the aggrieved pat'ty's lack of knowledge of the
breach. A breach of warranty occurs when tender of delivery is
made. . II As the plain meaning of this language indicates, lack
of knowledge i. not relevant. The discovery rule does not apply
to breach of warranty claims .. be they express or implied, aA&
Patton v. Mack Trucks. Inc, 360 Pa, Super. 1, 519 A.2d 959
(1986), Northa~pton Ctv. Co.~eae v, Dow Chemioal, 389 Pa. Super.
11, 566 A.2d 591, aff'd 528 Pa. 502, 598 A.2d 1288 (1991), ~
I1JQ Nationwide Ins. v. General Motors, 533 Pa. 423, 625 A.2d
1172 (1993).
Defendant H.M. Stauffer' sons, Inc. will therefore be
prejudiced by permitting Plaintiff leave to amend its complaint,
where tha statute of limitations has expired and the amendment
introduces a new cause of action.
13. Admitted,
3
.,
,
,
';1
,I
./
~ \
"
" I
,
,
"
"
" , "I
, I 1,-1
'I " "
i,I'
'" I
,: .\
,
I , Ii'
,
"
,
J
1,'-11
",'I
)
1',:1
I
I
I
",1\
I
'I
-"
"
..
~d
.~. ..
"
'j,
"
ill
"
,
" ,
" ,
" .
, ,
,
(, '
..
"
.'11,\"
";,
'1""
,
"
"
'i'
,
"
'1.,
"
"
,I'
,
,
,
"
"'I
"
,
",
"
, ,
.
.
\ .,
.
':
TO' , .f
~ .. MI~ 1f.0.. Y HO"'J. "0 '''A. '0 .
~" ~CLG",. WITHI,.
, "''I ~'Ol .AY' 0' .."Vlal ""'10'
. ~..,.u~t JUUM.H' MA' ..
IIN'.JII'ID~'"I~''' YOU,
.
"
L;IlW O"'CII
N'KOl.AUI, ,HO.,IINADIIL.
. .. UMIIINHAUII..
III NO"'H QUIIN 1'''11'
l.ANCA'TI". ~A, I~
.
" H..~.V, '.~TI'r nI~' rHI ~1It
~. ~ 'oVI ~. ......, 0.'" '" "'"
.O'VIH'L"~.. ,~ ,",. ~t\.'" ,
l~"'.H.' ...
~
---
..".aN..,
"
"
"
,
"
"
,i
il
"
,
,
~. ~J
\.
, -,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLBAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PmNNBY~VANIA
CIVI~ ACTION . LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURG
PENNSYLVANIA,
PlaintiU
v.
H,M. STAUFFER & SONS, INC.,
Detendant
No. I nM6C)1
v.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
Additional Defendant
DI'INDAHT R.N. STAU".. . 80Na. INC.'.
AHIWWR TO PITITION O'
PLAINTIr' TO AMIND COMPLAIIIT
Detendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc., by its attorneys,
Nikolaus Hohenadel, file the following Answer to the Petition of
Plaintiff to amend its Complaint, pursuant to the Rule to Show
Cause issued on May 6, 1996~
1, Admitt,ed.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted.
5. Denied, Defendant H,M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc.'s Answer
to the complaint filed of record speaks for itaelf.
6. Admitted.
7. Admitted.
8. Admitted in part, denied in part. While it is admitted
the proposed counts in the amended complaint arise out of th~
.ame basic faots and c!rcumstances, the propo.ed counts in the
amended complaint set forth new causes of action, as the
amendment offers a different theory or basis for x'ecovllry.
9. Admitted in part, denied in part. Any inference that
amendment pursuant to Pa. R.C.P, l033 should be permitted at any
time is specifically denied, as amendment is not permitted after
the statute of limitations has expired where it raises a new
cause of action. Furthermore, Pa, R.C,P. 1033 speaks for
itself .
10. Admitted,
11. Denied. It is specifically denied that granting
Plaintiff leave to amend its complaint would not prejudice
Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc., or serve the interests of
judicial efficiency and economy, To the contrary, both of the
propo.ed counts in the amended complaint involve implied
warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC"), and are
barred by the four (4) year statute of limitations set forth
under 13 P.S. 12725. Defendant H.M. StaUffer & sons, Inc, will
therefore be prejudiced by permitting Plaintiff leave to aMend
it. complaint, where the .tatute of limitations has expired and
the amendment introduces a new cause of action.
FUrthermore, judicial efficiency and economy will not be
served as Plaintiff is barred from filing a separate aotion, and
permitting Plaintiff leave to amend will necessitate the filing
2
ot motions tor jud~ment on the pleadin~s and summary judgment to
have the Counts dismis.ed for violating the statute of
limitation., and vnly cause delay in having any real disputes
re.olved by a fact-finder.
12. Denied. Both of the proposed counts in the amended
complaint involve implied warranties under the UCC, and are
barred by the tour (4) year statute of limitations Bet forth
under l3 P.S, 82725. Section 2725(b) provides in relevant part
that "a cause of action accrues when the breach occurs,
regardless of the aggrieved party's lack of knowledge of the
breach. A breach of warr,anty occurs when tender of delivery is
made,. " As the plain meaning of this language indicates, lack
of knowledge is not relevant. The discovery rule does not apply
to breach of warranty claims -- be they express or implied, ~
Patton v. Mock Trucks. Inc, 360 Pa. Super. l, 519 A.2d 95~
(1986l I Northamcton Cty. Colleae v, Dow Chemical, 389 Pa. Super.
11, 566 A.2d 591, atf'd 528 Pa. 502, :598 A.2d 1288 (l9H) I a.u.
&lag Nationwide Ins. v, General Motors, 533 Pa. 423, 625 A.2d
1172 (1993).
Defendant H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Inc. will therefore be
prejudiced by permitting Plaintiff leave to amend its complaint,
where the statute of limitations has expired and the amendment
introduces a new cause of action.
l3. Admitted.
I
3
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/
SHIPPENSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
PLAINTIFF
V,
H,M, STAUFFER & SONS, INC"
DEFENDANT
V.
HOOVER TREATED WOOD
PRODUCTS,INC,.
ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
9~1 CIVIL TERM
08P.lR Of COURt
AND NOW, this 30th day of May, 1996, having examined the petition to amend
. complaint and the anlwer fllee by defendant, H,M, Stauffer & Solll, Inc,. It Ie
ordered that plaintiff flle. brtef In chambers not later than flfteen (15) daye from thle
date In r..pon.. to the averment of defendant that the propoeed amended complaint
Ie barred by the etatute of IImltatlonl,
JOleph D. Shelby, E~ulre
, For Plaintiff
r,(;. Jeffrey Alan Mille, Eequlre
~~\o For Defendant
<:,~~t Andrew J. Connolly, Eequlre
" For Additional Defendant
:-
By the court;;'!
. /
\
Edgar B. Bayley J,
/
IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLBAS OF CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, P~SYJ.VANJA
. CIVIL ACfION . LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERSfSHIPPENSBURO
PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff,
VS.
H.M. STAUFFBR It SONS, INC.,
Defendant,
No. 95-601
Petition of Pla1nti<< 10
Amend Complaint
VI.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
INC. and PENNCREST CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY
Additional Defendant,
Filed on Behalf of:
EpIICOptl TowerllShlppenllblll'l. 'A
,falnti<<
COlInsel of Record for
this Party:
Bruce J. Warshawlky. Eaqlllre
PI. 1.0. 158799
Joseph D. Shelby, Eaqlllre
PI. to. 169399
, "
"
Ecbrt Seamans Cherin It Mellott
One South Market Square Bulldlnl
213 Market Street
Harrlllbllrl, PA 17101
(717) 237-6000
,,'
If
3. Stauff.r med Ita Anlw.r 01\ or about October 19, 1995.
4. Stauffer lublOqucntly med I Complaint jolnln, addltlonal defendant Hoover 011
lanuary 17, 1996.
5. In Ita Anlwer, stauffer admitted ..mna ,uodl 10 the ,eneral contrllllOr of the
EplICOpll TC)werl project, but denied that It hid brelChed the alle,ed wamntlea.
6. Plalntlff'1 clalml....nlt Stauffer and Hoover, U let forth In the Complalnt, Item
from the laIe C)f plywood Iheathlna for the COI'lltrUCtlon of I roof.
7. Plalntiff lubmltllhat the First Amended Complaint (Exhibit A) seta fC)rth c:ol1aln fKta
not reflected In the orI,inal CC)mplalnt and alieN new countl for vlolltlon of the Uniform
Commorclal Code ("UCe"), u applied In Pennlylvanll throu,h 13 PI. C.S.A. 121011l. ..
B. Plalntlff'1 now clalml for violation of 13 PI, C.S,A, 12314 and 13 PI. C.S.A. 12315
arI.. out of the aame fKIa and circuml~' relatin, 10 Plalntlff'1 orl,inal claim..
9. Penn.ylvanll Rule of Civil Procedure 1033 providea thlt~ "i party, either by filed
conlSCllt of the adverse party or by leave of court mlY It any time.,. amend Ita pleadln,". COlIN
have Interpreted Pennlylvanll Rule of Civil Procedure 1033 10 allow amendmenlllO pleadln,. It
any timo, lncludln, before, durin, and after trial. In Pennlylvanlllt hil lon, been the Ilw 10
liberally ,rantl_ve 10 putla 10 amend their pleadln,. pursuant 10 PI. R.C,P. 1033.
10. Thl. I. tho firlt I1lqIlClt by EpIICOpll Towers for leave 10 amend III Complaint.
11, Orantln, Episcopal Towers leave 10 amend It I Complaint In the lforementioned
manner would not be prejudicial 10 Defendanlland will serve the IntlllUta of judicial efficiency and
economy.
2
VBRIPICATIOIi
, hereby verify and .Iale that the f&(lI.lCt forth In
the fo",oln, document are lrue and correct 10 tho be.t of my Information, knowledle and belief. I
I,
under.lIIld that falle .lilCmcnl. herein are made .ubjcclto the penaltle. of 18 Pa, C,S,A, 149Q.4
rel.llnllO un.worn verl/lcaUon 10 lIuthorllle.,
ltt. ~,,~,
-
, ,
"
q
,'I
"
"
I
,\
, , ,
, ,
,
"
, I
'I "
"
"
, '
, ,
I'
,
I'
,'I
"
I
"1
, ,
"
1'\
I
,
II II
I d f'
, ,
, ,
,
"
II
Ii
"
.... A
,I
8. The caUIe of \he lealdn, In the Facility's roof WII deterioration IIId/or
cIelamlnatlon of \he Fir.. plywood. 'fbl. CQl\cluslan WII arrived at, 1nIOIl8 othen, by I
repIUllIIW1ve of Stauf.'er, II Indicated on the letter attached hereto u Exhibit "8" IIId Incorporated
by reference herein,
9. No other plywood ua.ed In \he Facility" roof hu deteriorated except the Flrex
plywood sold to Eplacopal Tower. by Stauffer.
10. EpIICOp1l Towetllfforded Stauffer III opportunity to replace the deteriOl1ted
plywood, but Stauffer declined the opportunity,
11. In order to prevent I collapllC of the deteriorated roof, Eplacopa1 Towera hu
been compelled to ren\ove the deteriorated plywood and replace It It I COlt of approxlmltely
135,000,00, As I result of Stauffer'. refulll to remove IIl\d replace the deteriorated plywood,
EpIacopa1 Towen has been damqed In the Iforesald amount.
12. Upon removinl the deteriorated plywood and replacln, It 01\ bulldlnl A, the
CQl\tn.ctor notIeed that the plywood on bulldln, 8 had also deteriorated and would need replaced.
The plywood 1beath1na 01\ bulldlnl 8 WII allO IOId to Episcopal Towers by Stauffer IIId wu one.
half Inch CDX Hoover Flrex plywood, which WII maJ\uflll:tured IIl\d/or sold to Stauffer by Hoover.
.30
),,; ,',\
, , , "'I ..,.
,il",.'-..", ,i ..,
, ':J...,,".' i
'9 't,t"
:,. . , .~;..;' t.'.r~ ' :"" ~.
," \ .
, '\ I . '\
'I.', ., r.. . " ~ I I"
..-, , . ,.'..~ I'
"" ;".".,." .
II ,; 4ry:~ , " I' "^. :.~
,','''-,' ,1,1 .:11,'
'....,:v, "" 1 .,'.'
I'.,"I! ','1 ','P','
;.
.. , ;~" .: i
.~ '. '
'.. ~.I.~~ iJ ,.~
,,' -I., ,'..,.
..
,.. ..'I
'.-, '.
fl'))I',1 J
L I",. I
. I~r: ,,'1" , ~:') l'
) ", '4 f'~ ;, :...J I
,', ,t:.: .', .... "
.',..../ ,I '",'
;!,:,t,:;1:': ,,:,:..1 , "I l,!' 'i
r '" \' I
,'-,~,-;.i'~~; :: ,.: ,,.:~,;;, ., ::;;;:;';-:'~?i'r!r: ;"'-,;" ';';;:;~;f' ';:, '~',.:'7 :'~m---'-.;;.;."\-:";"''' ":-;-:';;;''1.';' ;:1',..~~37..;;..,':>:.r' ;~'-'
',.......'X .,....,.,. '1."1"", ,I "J""I:'\' ~I"" '.Q1.", ',' IT~,.. ~ \'f.' ''/"' '.~., 1'...."'\',
,..",.....,..,l.:..,.e., "r"'..'." '. "i\'~"I' ,__ "'\""";')""~'11" ""i..,...l\" I.", '.,,"J,' ,"'.\ ,o" '.
:.......,.(,''1!.'.,. '''It,.,~ ,'\ ;.',' " ,".~~,,~ '!'J..i~": ",'.'1'''1''\ ',L..", ,',.' .'.....'.' .,
.".'... :..~,~..' .~^, .,"" 1.1. " 'II .:.I,.,.~. ~l.&:A.:.A',II' ."w'., ,'f ~...\ .::IN;:o.a",,,,:i~i.;...,.:. .,p"... .....,~.~, ~ ,,,').i. .;..\l...;.I
'I : "1
.' I
,'rll
\ \ .,~",,.~ It,;R J' J... JI, -' J.:;~ '1J:\t.~:.J" .. "i'~
I' "1 , p,: !1I':' ;0', ~ , ~,' 1 t ,','. ' ,I' 1 " C I ,';:
.rrlt~ Ind Condlllona:lJl'Sbllt1 j' ",
I,tl' '..I ,I
',' , '~ ,,~, ~ '" II ~ I
~ "1 '1!. :~ ~ I ,11
'~ 'tl' I' 'I:",.
". " J
. ~ " ' ':'
~ -~-, ..-. -...,
',I.:' i' "I, ' .,..., ~,J'J;;:'I '.l')~d ,I"~ .: " ,.:.i ,,' I ".. "', ':
All IIlfl bY' H, M; Sf",,"","nd Sell'&; Inc, 'IH"'111l 'CI\I,'<fSli'Un"r-,," 1~IlJ'CII.'1I11r fAlllowlng Il,ml Ind
condlllo""
, 'I, ~',I
"'---
..-.. --. , . .-....--,., ...,-.....---- ,-. "" .-,. ,..-...... 'r' '''-'",--,
I. SlIufflllhall nol be.lllbll1fo, Iny d,IIY In p"formlncl or fallurI 10 po,lor",.I' Ihl dillY
or flllu'l II clulld by In IVlnl b'yond III '"Ionabll control,
. . .,.' .,' I
2. Whlll IVlry IUpn will be, ml~1 10 mill. cUllomll', dlllvlry 1/1", \lllIv.,y al.l'Pfclflc
hou, unnol be gUlllntted, : . , , ' " , j ~ I'
\'tf.fir)o. 3, SI.uff., '11.lnl . IIcurlty Inllllllln .11 goo'lIlhlppod 10 CUllom., until paymlnt In lull
""..~.~-- kll....n.~' "~'''' '''1' "....-.~-" "... )'-r'r-"i.\-' .._,......,.~.".-'_.'.'-....I'.-r5---.
'f1lffl" .;..4~ ~~,"'O" UlI" I l,",h 'I' ",f' :,,1 .1" \., ~\I,.. 'I >i1,I,.:,t'. 'r rf.,..."
I " r. " ' ','J> .'v,{.. ~ \).; ,
.~~~ ~\ .I>.~'A' 'II' :"'.'/:'1: ~, , "1\1 "" I, {I l. ' :',
f----'.. -'- '.' ..:"~":'" .,,_1: .~J .Tilt cU'IIlIll.dbaIJ,nolllY S,a...,.f.v )mnlldltUIV-Rf.'ho,."" IQ 'I\V,dIUm~...~rtupo~,.. .
1_,_' ~~ .~:~ :' =~~:::~ :~~:~~IIO,o\.' Ilth.~ ~~~_g~~o~~.~ o',~I,Y~th," ~u'~omtn~t~~~~I,PrlCUI ~,' '.' ;
, , " ' , I , \ ! I. i . .. '. I '. I', ". I, ~
5" Thl CU'lOrna, Ih.1I nOllIY SlIuff., Immldlltlly OllrtCO!pI 01 Iny non<Olllormlng good" .
whlllupon SlIull., Ihlll, It III option, lither rlpalr Ihl goodl, repl.co 1/1. good" 0' glY' Iha cUllomer I
credit lor Ihl P'lct of Ih, goodl, Thl cUlloma,', rep,lr of good' wllhoul Slluff.,', IMPrtIlIPIlfOVI' conlll,.
I Mil .ccapllnco 01 thl goodl II If IhlY Wlrt confo,mlng, .nd 6l1uff., II nOI r"bll for Ihl IMPfnll of'
. repIl" ' .' I '
, , ,
I 6. CUllom mad. goodl COMOI be retu,nld, Olh., goodl con be "Iu,nld only II thl CU"
IOmer', IMplnll Ind with 611ulI,,', IMp,.u.pp'Oy.I, Whln gOOd'I,. ,nurn.d wl\lllUch IPP'Or,l, IlIulIo,
, will glYI thl CUIl~m., clldll 10' Iha p,lca 0' Ihl gOOdllm , IIlIocklng ch.," 01 , ~,..
. ,
I
7, Thl cullon,,,'1 rlmldl" III oUlln Ih..1 I"m, Ind condition. lrelhl CUllom.,', IMclu.,
,IY. remadlu, .nd under no cl,cumll.nul th.1I Situ Iter be Il'bll fo, Iny Ilbor c1llm, 0' for Iny OIM,:
Iptcf.l, Incld.nlll 0' conllqulnll.1 d.ml" .rlllng oul of I IIfl 01 good' 0' I dll,y In thl dIIlYI\"f 01 good" .
I I
I
I
I
I
" J " ., , . ,
, . ,
."'1'). . '" ..
.
.' ,I, . . ',' " " " '\' .. , r
I. ,'I...~ . ~.J
.'. , '" ~
, " , " '. , \.. ", .,
"f:" .,
, '( 1 ..~, ' I "
;1," .'\ 't"
"
: "
.
r ',.
()
'''l
/tl/1.ll ~!, 1914
PtllCAut CI)~tMtl tio/l
m 6 rJa.lJt.v Rd..
'llllllllUtfA. PA 1160 I
.-\
, ...
, .
REI Ep,u(!.Qpat TOIIIw
ATTN' SfJIIl Ht'"fA
ChlUlQt OlLdfA , I
v1. Cha.JlQt '0'\ CJLttl.IlQ p/.rpood. '0,\ bu.Ud.lItQ 'A' II!.U.t llppll.owllttlV 200 Pe4.",.,..",flO.OO
2. Cu.tt..LnQ pl.rp004 411.I. t.o ml4piAetd 4t.wU 4114 c.l..lp4.,...,."........".45.00
3. C/ulAQt t.o .\r.eo~.tJl.uet .tJl.u4.6U OVfA. tilt tl.tva.tOIt 4h4,t. ....'1'..1"...60 .00
V 4. I!l.l.l.l.d up .tAu44 IU 4.tdlJwJ4I/, (T..51."...............,O.OO
.,
5. exttnr/. u.J.h. o~ r..3 alld.. T"l5 tAu.4.4u to tLl.J.ow '0.\ bh1clt.'lmtllM$".OO
6. C/t4.tse. to ,L.ult tl.e.VIUO,l(. 4ha'.c ~ poW 0' 1lO0' ptlu..tAa.ti.o"'..".II"""""'SO.OO
~OTE I All" p.tobl.fJ114 w.l,t.It dltlJJldU .L~t.aLl.l1tl01l 411.I. .co tAu.4.4 pUll.U1t/lt 41ttiU..I!!! '
be. ou.t '\upo~.Lb.i.U.t/l but .4/ta.U bt ,ul.tl./1 bo.tl. bl/ .cite. pIUlf1. 4db.UcAtMI41.
, .
ACCEPTANCE OF CHANGE OllrJERr
COllEGE VTlLAGE BUJlrJERS. THC.
, ,
/t.u.1/J!..:. 'l /J ) d7- Jr:-;
:::~/lf-/fj
IJWJ~~~~if
11IN4t B. 0 ~~
, .
~ '/IM ~13-
-
~ \3\d.<;:i \'\ ~"'\~
of [3..1.~ J.J. ~. S r
s, Iii'~
/...-----::::::~
/' '
/'
1/
'10,QQ
.It.
r<' ,,..
\ " .sl.t
~ .( o.-~ h
/ C\.'1 ~~\ (- <;;~rv..
-.'
Stauffer IIllwered the Complaint on October 19, 1995 IIld Juined Hoover U III
Iddlllonal Defendant by wlY of I third party Complaint. Hoover IIllwered the Complaint
Iplnltll on MIY 7, 1996.
Plaind" now ..kilO file III Amended Complaint by addin. counts for breach of
Implied warranty of merchan'-blllly and breach of Implied warranty of fltne.. (or I particular
purpoll. The new ClUIII of aclion arlll out of the lIIJ\e facti IIld clrcumslIIlcel U pled In
the orlalnal Complaint.
II. p'nAL ~TANDARD
AI applicable 10 thll cue, Pennlylvlllil Rule of Civil Procedure 1033 provides thlt:
A party, either by flied conlCnt of the adverse
party or by leave of court, may at anytime chlllle
the form of action, comet the name of a party or
amend hll pleadllll. The amended pleadinl may
aver lranllClions or occurrencel which have
happened belOre or after the fillnl of the orlalnal
pleadlna, even thouah they live rill 10 a new
ClUII of action or defenlC.
PI. R. Clv. P. 1033.
The specific IlIlluaae of thll rule mUlt be lIlalyzed in IIlht of the lenem proVillonl
of Pl. R. Clv. P. 126:
The rulel "'all be liberally conltrued to secure the
JUII, speedy and lnexpenllve determination of
every action or proceedlnato which they are
appJlcable. The coun It every ltaae of any luch
r.c:lIon or proceedlna may dllreprd any error or
detect of procedure which doel not effect the
IIlbatantial rlaht of the parties.
, "
.2.
Applylnllheu Iwo, ru'-a, III. well Clllbllahed thai the decl.ion 10 permit an
amendmenllO pleldlnl.l. ullhnltely I matter 01 Judicial diacrellon. Tanner v. AII $1.11.1I.
321 PI. Super. 132, 467 A.2d 1164 (1983), In 1'JDDIr. the Superior Court .talel:
The polley of ~:t;lvanla courta I. thaI
amendmenlllO 111I1 Mould be liberally
allowed In o.r 10 lICure I determination 01
CUll on their meritl .11. In tho.. In'lance.
whm I IUrprh. or prejudice 10 th. other party
would l1Iull or the propolled amendmenlll
apInat I poaitlv. rul. of law.
Tan~, 33.5 PI, Super. at 137. 0484 A.2d 111167.
Stauffer haa ....rted thIIll would be prejudiced by permluina Epiacopal Towen leave
10 amend lit Complalnl for the followlna rwon.: (I) Ihe .taIUt.e of limitation. for the new
claim. have ellplred; (2) the lIIlendmenllnlrodllCCl new cau... of acllon; and (3) the
amendmenl will delay the relOluUon or the real dl.put.e. by a facl finder. because Stauffer
will have 10 nle a Motion for ludament on the Pleadina' and Summary ludamenl. <a&I
Stauffer'l Anlwer 10 Petllll)l\ of Plalnllff 10 Amend Complalnl, " II " 12). Time alone,
however. Iffont. no buI. lor th. denyln. of an lIIlendmenl, A. ooaerved In RIlta v.
CMlrIl.PMn N'JIItl"",al JU~ of Phllad~l$ia, ....8 Pa, 3.5.5, 380, 293 A.2d 3043, 3.57 (l972)t
All amendmenll have thl. In common: They are
offered liter In IIJ1l1lthan the pleadlna which Ihey
leek 10 amend, If th. amendmenl contain.
allqatlon. which would hive been allowed
Inclualonln the Mllna! pleadlna (the u.ual CAlI),
then the queatlon of prejudice I. pre..nkd by the
IimI II which II I. olfered rather than by the
IUbatance of what i. offered. The polllble
preJudice, In other word.. mUll Item from the
flet thIlthe new 1I1"lllon. are offered 11II rather
IMn In the orlalnal pleadln., and nOI from Ihe
.3.
fllCllhal lhe opponenl may loll hia cue em the
.meric. If the pleldin.11 allowed..,
In SaJWI v, J'orrut. 290 Pa. Super 41, 53, 434 A,2cJ 122, 125 (1982), the court explained,
"prejudice lhal would prevenlthe 'l'II11 of III lII\endmenl mUll be ... IOmethln. more than a
detrlmenllo the other party' IIId "the prejudice mull '0 beyond thaI which would normally
now from allowlllce of IIIl11\enclmenl". Prejudice, which potenUally arlsea from a time
delay, II not eatablllhed by the delay IlIe1f, nor doeIll have to do with a normal relult of III
amendmenl, namely the potenUalllrenJlhenl1ll of the lII\endlnl party'l cue 0.&., lIuln.
forth new c:aUIII of IICUon).
111. u'r.U ARGUMENT
The Pennlylvlllla Supreme Court recently held thaI an IICtlon for nellilenee, brtoch
ofuprtlJ and Implltd WtlrrtJlllltI, and brach of contracl based on construction of a bulldlnl
Will Umely med IIId not bamd by the ltatute of limitations when suit was tlIed within the
IppIlc:able IImltationl period after tilt ow/ltr ./Irst bleamt QWtlrt qf strueturtJ/ dt/tels In lilt
bu//d/n,. RQmm" $onl. Inc:. v, P.C. Yezbak " SOO, Inc., 539 Pa, 390, 652 A,2d 830
(1995) (emphula added). In Rom!!)" Sonl, the plaintiff entered into a wrilten contract with
the defendanl for the conltnlCUon of a warehoulC/office buildlnl. The construction of the
bulldlna bepn on AuaUII 13, 1979 IIId Will completed in 1uly, 1980. Subsequently, In
September, 1980, the Plaintiff noticed llruc:lural defccta in the bulldlnls floor, lutters IIId
downlpOUc., Id., 652 A.2d at 831. The Complaint Will med by Plaintiff on May 30, 1986.
Ill. In holdlnllhalthe PlalnUff had med thll Complalnl within the ltatUte of IImltaUon Ume
period (lix yeat'a), the CO\Irt reasoned thaI the action had ICCrued In September, 1980, when
-4-
IIIe Pla1nllff IeIrned of \/Ie defecta. Therefore, In Ifflrmlnlthe Superior Court deelllon
(which overturned th. declalon of the Court of Common Pleu), the Supreme Court held that
. thellllllpnu, bl'llCh of expma Illd applied wamnllel, and breach of contract had been
timely fllId and I'NIOIICd u followl:
In IhIlnllrllt of fair play Illd In IIlht of the
'llpeeted lona-1Mm IIfllplll of I houle Illd/or
commorclalltnlCture and the bullder'l Ittendant
IIhlcaland 11&11 reaponaiblllllll to Itl CUllOmera,
[the Complaint wu llmoly filed). To find
oIherwlae would be lrouly unfair 10 the buyer,
who roullnely expend a larle luml of money In the
hope of _urinll Itructurally Illd financially
IlIUM Invlltment,
III. 652 A.2d at 830, q\lOlln, Superior Court declllon, Roml!O " Sonl. IDe, Y. P.C. Y""hllk
"Son. 11Ul., 421 PI. Super 333, 338-339,617 A.2d 1320, 1323 (1992). Further, the court
In holdlnlthat the atatute of IImltallonl had not been violated for the nellll.nee, brtat:It of
IXprtll or Impllld wo/7tWltS, and b"*h of contract atated:
In the cue of I latent defect In construction, the
atatute of IImltatlonl will nOl atart 10 run until the
Injured party becomea aware, or by the exertl..
of reuonlble dllllence should have become
aware, of that defect.
11- ... SM~I IN!, 652 A.2d It 832, clt/fI' A.J. Ab&!I'IlIllI\, 278 Pa, Super, 385, 39.5, 420
A.2d 594, 599 (19BO)(emphullldded),
The holdlnl of the Pennlylvlllla Supreme Court In Roml!O &. Sons perm Ita EpIICOpll
Towerl 10 ....rt IIIe two new counta of breach of Implied WlJTlJltlel without belnl precluded
by the ItalIIte of IImltatlonl. ThUI, any contemplated dlspoaltlve motion by Stau"er must
fall.
..5.
EpIICOJlll Towen, In facl, did acl timely upon learnlnl of the defeclive roonnl
material IOld by Stauffer, Whll. the bulldlnla were .rected In 1984, Ihe earlieal EpilC:opal
Towera leamed thai anythinl wu wronl wU when leakI/'Il from the roof waa discovered In
1uly, 1993. (Complaint113,?), Upon Inapec:tlon, conlultallon and even thelnpul of
Stauffer, the reuon for the leaklnl wu not discovered until September, 1993, (Complalnt1
12, Exhibit B). Eplacopal Towera timely pruclped thil Court for a Wrll of Summona on
Febl'lllt)' 2, 199' and med III Complaint on AUlual 22, 199',
The atalUIeI of Iimltatlona appliCible 10 the pl1lSCnl cue do nol bar the causca of
action allqed In the propoled amended Complalnl u the limitations periods are four yeara ..
42 Pa. C.S,A. 1"25 and/or 13 P.S, 2725.
In It. Anlwer 10 Episcopal Towera' Petition 10 Amend Complaint, Stauffer cites three
cues for the propollllon thai Episcopal Towen ahould be precluded from filinl an amended
complaint, cla1minlthalthe Iwo new causc. of action are barred by Ihe statule of limitations:
Pallt.n v. ~k Trueka. W., 360 PI. Super. 1, '19 A,2d 959 (1986); Northllll\ptDn Coun~
ColI~11ll v. Dow ChIllml~l, 389 Pa. Super, 11,566 A.2d 591, aff.d, 528 Pa. 502, '98 A.2d
1288 (1991); N.ll~wide InsUl'll\ce v, General Motors, '33 Pa, 423, 62' A,2d 1172 (1993).
All three cuea were decided prior 10 the Pennlylvanla Supreme Court's decision In RDml!O
&L Sona. Inc.
"
/ ,
,
q.
"
.6-
C~TIF~ATE QF SERVICE
I henby certify \hat . ll'UI and comet copy o( the (orelolnl Brle( In Support o(
Plaintiff. PetItion to Amend Complaint wu llerVed by nnt clll' mall, po.tqe prepaid, thl.
1</f1o day of lune, 1991S, upon the followlnl counlCl of record:
leffrey Alan Mill., Eaqulre
Nlkolau. HohMadel " Umbenhauer
212 N. Queen Street
Lanculer, P A 17603
Andrew I. Connolly, Eaqulre
Poat It. Schell, P.C,
1800 lohn F. Kennedy Boulevard
Philadelphia, PA 19103.7480
Jr~-
I.
llOMU
I '
,
"
I' "
'II II
il '
, ,
, 'II
I'I I
,I'
"
, '"
I,
-II
"
,
1(_,' '~;;';:I,_,
"!;til..! (q,:'I'1
.~L:r ' Vi
!"'i.I,L.:r:-\\iil, \:
\\,',:_\/\)I~I '
H) ,,I; "i'
f 'i~ r, 1 " _ I' ,', ,I. i
ile::',;', 1,1. ,1;1
, .
"
,',
,
"
.,
':1, I
"
'I,
I'"
111"
Ii'
"_1,1
"
.,
,
1
,
''I,
''', ~
"
""IItr-J1I+
i,l
"
'j
'II,
'I;
i,1
,
i,I'II)I;I'
).
PI)'
"
'I"
"
,
,I', I
,
"
'I
I'.
"
.
~~w i1~~IOI'
N'lCOLAUI, HOHI~ADIi.
. UM,IINHAUI"
, 1'1 NO~'" Q~IIN .r~.1l:
LANOA'TI",~A, ,~
1 ,
. ~.~..v e~~11~r yH~r '"'~, . ...'
II ~ IIll/I ~ ..""~ ,"".,'1\i~
..,.,"...." . 'III '''" ~ '
,., ..;.,. I,.,
1~~~.1IY ',...
'~":~r.~\.ll'I~,".\fUo#4U...,..~HUfJ-'...w,.., ..".
"
...~
" .
I,
, ~
,"
I,
'I
"
'I,
r
1
,
I.
') ,I
I,
I,
"
.'
,r
"
, ,
'I
,
~
. -
"
!
,
1
I
. ,
"
\..-
.
'.0'
.
Stauffer recognizes that the right to amend a pleading is to be
liberally construed, it is a well settled rule in this
Commonwealth that "amendment. will not be allowed after t.he
statute of limitations has expired if it. introduces a new cause
of action." American, Motorist" Ins. v. f'armers Bank, 435 Pa.
Super. 54, 644 A.2d 1232, 1235 (1994), To permit such amendment
would "unfairly prejudice the opposing party." Aet.na Cas. , Sur.
Co. y. Roe, 437 Pa, Super. 414, 650 A.2d 94, 103 (1994). An
amendment states a new cause of action where the amendment rests
on a different legal theory, basis for recovery or relationship
between the parties than did the original pleading. American
Motoris~, 644 A.2d at 1235.
In the instant case, Plaintiff is seeking to amend its
complaint to include two different COUllts involving implied
warranties under the Uniform commercial Code, ~ 13 Pa. C.S.A.
12314 and 13 Pa, C.B.A. '2315. These counts raise new causes of
action not raised in the original complaint.
The proposed amendments under the Uniform commercial COde
are banned by the four (4) year Statute of Limitations . set
forth under 13 P.B. '2725. '2725 provides in pertinent partl
(a) General rule. An action for breach of any
contract for sale must be commenced within Cour years
after the cause of action has accrued. By the origillal
agreement the parties may reduce the period of
limitation to not less than one year but may not extend
it.
(b) Accrual of cause of action. A cause of aotion
accrues when the breach occurs. regardless of the
2
,
d
aqqTievQd party's lack of knowledqe of the breaoh. ,.,
breach of warranty occurs when tonder of delivery is
made.
According to the factual allequtions in the complaint,
construction of the "facility" occurred in 1984. Furthermore,
I;ho complaint allegos that plywood sheathinq was purchased from
Defendant II.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. to construct the roof. iISl
paraqraphs 3 and 4 of original complaint. Therefore, it follows
that delivery of the plywood was tendered sometime durinq 1984.
Plaintiff failed to file an action within four years of the date
of delivery on a breach of implied warranty claim under the UCC.
Any arqument by Plaintiff that it did not have knowledqe of
the alleged defective goodS until 1993 is without merit. The
plain meaninq of tho lanquaqe in Section 2725(b) clearly states
that lack of knowledqe of the breach is not relevant, unless the
warranty "explici tly extends" to future performance. No such
explicit warranty exists here as the warranty claim is for
"implied" warranties. Furthermore, pennsylvania courts have held
that the di~covery rule does not apply to broach of warranty
claims .. be they express or implied. See Patton v. Mack Trucks.
lng, 360 Pa. Super. 1, 519 A.2d 959 (1906), NorthamDton Ctv.
ColleQe v. Dow Chemical, 389 Pa. super. II, 566 A.2d 591, aff'd
528 Pa. 502, 598 A.2d 1288 (1991), See also Natiqnwide Ins. v.
General Motors, 533 Pa. 423, 625 A.2d 1172 (1993). The statute
of limitation for Plaintiff's implied warranty olaims elapsed
around 1988 and are now barred,
3
Plaintiff relies upon RQmeo & Sons. Inc. v. P.c. Ye~bak ,
Son. Inc., 539 Pa. 390, 652 A.2d 830 (1995), in support of its
petition to amend the complaint. In Romeo, defendant contractor
entered into a written contract to construct a warehouse/office
building for plaintlff. construction was completed in July 1980,
and plaintiff noticed structural defecttl in September 1980. The
question before the court was what statute of limitations was
applicable and when did the statute begin to run. The court
determined that the action was timely filed under the six (6)
year statute of limitations in effect when the owner first became
aware of structurdl defects in the building. Plaintiff now
wishes to apply a similar holding and measure the statute of
limitations from the date it became aware of the defect.
It is submitted the instant case is not factual analogous to
the decision in Romeo. First, Romeo involved construction ..
specific services rendered. The instant case involves goods ..
the plywood sheeting sold by Defendant Stauffer to the
contractor. Defendant H.M. Stauffer did not build the church, it
merely provided the plywood materials utilized to construct the
church by a third party. Second, the Romeo decision did ~
involve implied warranties under the UCC. Third, as noted above,
the legislature specifically provided that the four (4) year
statute of limitations "accrues when the breach occurs,
regardless of the aggrieved party's lack of knowledge of the
breach." The Romeo decision is not applicable to the instant
,4
'"
CI.TIrICAT. 0' '..VIC.
:r hereby cert,ify that I have this day eerved a true and
oorrect copy of the foregoing document upon the following person (.)
and in the following manner, which .ervice satisfied the
requirement. of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
service by Fir,t Class Mail Addre.8.d a. Fo110W8t
The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley
cumberland County Courthou8e
One Courthouso Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
,
Joseph D. Shelby, Bsquire
Rckert, Seamans, Cherin , Mellott
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street, p,O, Box 1248
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1248
Andrew J. Connolly, Bsquire
po.t , Schell, P.C.
1800 John F. Kennedy Boulevard
Philadelphia, PA 19103-7490
BYl
UOHINMJBIj"--:'
.- .
.. , -
,.-
e re an a
:: Attor y for Defendant
212 N rth Oueen Str.et
Lanca ter, PA 17603
(717)1- 299-3726
I.D, jj47136
Datal
,I. ~'
......1.". I~~~ I.:>~""" .;
/!. ,) ~ 1'1 '; 1>
,,1 i
I,
IN THB couaT OP COMMON PLEAS OP CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYL VANIA
CIVIL AcrlON . LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWBllS/SHIPPENSBURO
PBNNSYLV AN1A
Plaintiff,
VI,
No. 95-601
H,M. STAUFFER" SONS, INC.,
Defendant,
VI.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
INC. and PENNCIlEST CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY
Additional Defendant.
t1qT AMI'.NQ,n COMPLAJ,NI
P1ainti<< EpIICOplJ TowenlShlppenlbur., Pennlylvlllla, by III itlOmeYI, BcaJ1
Seamanl Chlrln . MelIou, hereby complalnl u follOWlt
I. EpIICOpl1 TowerllShippenlbura, Pennlylvlllla (hereinafter "EpIICOpll
Towen") II a IIOII-proflt curporation orpnlzcd and ellltln.under lhe lawl of lhe CommonweailJl of
PennlylVlllIa, havlna III principal place of bUllnell at 101 North PrInce Street, Shlppenlbul'J.
Cumberland CowIty, Pennlylvanla.
.. ,The cauae of the Ieakln, In the Facility'. roof wu deterioration and/or
cIe1amlnadon of the PI,.. plywood. Thll conclu.lon wu arrived at, amon, other., by a
npnIIIltativ. of Stauffer, u Indicated on the letter attached h.reto u Exhibit "8" and Incorporated
by ref.renc:I hereln.
9. No other plywood Llaed In the Facility'. roof hat deteriorated eXQqlt the Flrex
plywood aoId to SplICOpll Tow.,. by Stauffer.
10. Epiacopa1 Towera afforded Stauffer an opportunity to replau the deteriorated
plywood, but Stauffer declined the opportunity.
11. In order to proven I a collapse of the d.teriorated roof, BpllCOpal Towen hu
been CO/lIpe1led to remove the deteriorated plywood and replau It at a co.t of approximately
S35,ooo.00. A. a ruult of Stauffer'. refuulto remove and replace the deteriorated plywood,
l!9lacopa1 ToWll'l hu been danvl&ed in the aforeuld amount,
12. Upon removln. the deteriorated plywood and replacin, it on bulldin, A, the
COIItraclOr noticed that the plywood on bulldlna B had allO deteriorated and would need repl.ced.
1'11I plyWood ahIaIhlna 011 bulldlna B wu .lao IOld to EpIICOpll Tower. by Stauffer and wu one-
half IncII CDX Hoover Flrex plywood, which wu manufactured and/or IOld to Stauffer by Hoowr.
.3-
17. 5111(1I 1993, 5lallff.r hu been awar. that die Plrex plywood ItlOld 10
EptICO()ll Towen I' non-conformln" IIQt fit for lhe PUI'JIQIC for which U wu Intended, and
defectiv., but hu nev.rthe.... refulCd 10 repair and replllA:e die wood, all 10 the damq. of
IlpIICO()II Towen.
II. EpIICOp8l Towen hu performed any and all c:ondhlon. prec:edentlO Stauffer',
obllpt1onl IIIlder the c:onlnCt.
WlIEREPOllB, EpIICOpll Towen reapec:tt'ully rcqueats dlls Court 10 enter Jwl.ment
In III favor and qain.t Stauff.r In an amount In exce.s of $20,000, Interest at the appropriate rate
thereon, the COllI of dll. action and any other relief die Court deem. Juslllld appropriate. The
amount dellllllded exceed. the IImU for mandalOry arbitration punuant 10 the Rulli of dll. Court.
CO~ u - BREACH OF IMPLIED CON~CT
19. The av.rmenll ..t forth In parqraph. 1-17 are Incorporated by reference
herein, u If let forth In full.
20. At all time. relevant herelO, Episcopal Tower. IIId Stauff.r conducted
tllemae.lvu u If. IlOIItr'Il:t .xllled between them, lQ lW:
.. EpIac:opa1 Towen paid Stauffer for die Flrex plywood;
-5-
, I
COIJN1JY - .R~~CJl Q, IMPLlIlP WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY
27. The avermenlllet forth In parqraphl I throu.h 26 are Incorporated by
...ference hmIn, II If let forth In full.
21. The lIle of the Hoover PI...x plywOQd lheathinalO Eplacopal Towe,. wu a
tranllCtIon In podl u defined In the Uniform Commercial Code and 13 PI. C,S.A. ,210111. ..
29. The loodl we... unmerchantable In that they we... unfit for an ordinary
purpollll for which IUCh aoodl are uNd. The plywood Iheathlna deteriorated and WII unable 10
IUppol't the roof, a PUrpollll for which It wu Intended.
30. The loodl were unmerchantable In that they we... of luch a low qualityand/or
defective that they WI'" unt1t for their ordinary PUrpGlIll. The plywood Iheathln. deteriorated and
wu unable 10 IUJIPOI't the roof, a pUrpole for which It was Intended.
31. A c&U1Ill of action for breech of an Implied warranty of mercllanllbllity II
permllllble III Pennlylvanla under 13 Pl. C.S.A. 12114.
.1.
IahIIlIt A
....""'.,,,. ....,,,'.,, II" ,,,.,,,/1, (V
, ,
"
'II
,
"
"
"
"
I III
"
,
, ,
I "
",
. ',It
,-
... .." ....,
, ,'",,;.. .~\,. . t . ,
r :. '. "',:
..1\', , ,
.. ....~ ~
.' """l.:."'''.'
,. '". (" . ...... a.,:
,', \, I . ' \
,,, '1.. " 'l-,.,!, 1(,'
I',} :.," Jt;1 \ .:~ -.; ....
't .: I~.. ~,'!. "1\,. : ,J
j',,".l .~ I ,: ~ ','
:L "1.. I
',Jrr .;,'1, \:'1'
:~'~'Il' ",,"
,",11,1 r
1:.j'4'l
','r ',,'f",
).
_.1,' ti, .~ ~ .
"'I ....1h:J......".
,,' .... ,'.". .,
~':, . .' I
'I I,
!;' ~ I... j'~'
:. . I' . .:
" 'f" I
:\ 'I...J ,
,', ~.")
: .,1
"n,) h/l
" I'
;! :;;.',i1~Ji.,~~,.' . .,IL." "r
fl. ~, 'I
.- --.-. -., , .-.. - --.---- --. ....... " .. , -.. .- ---- - -., " . .-.-., -,- ~3Q3Je - ... . _.,
.1'), 7.',\~.fr' ";.I:',,"r"~:'\ '1..'".r.~'''''':l-~ ~.:r.:~:""',..,t:~:; -, (',~~I."'~~'.~<~~"~"l~~' '.r'~-,';.~,"f~ J.h" '~II.' )~;,~~f"~
""~f''''',l:iV:'' ",""'"'''' '. i~t~.;""":ll;, :.~ ".\.., "';;l\''ii'''!'r{l'~;-'r(';J''''(\'''' l."t., ~."". __.Of. :1. ''''': '"
'~'". . r.,'",'. '. "'-,:, ,"/", ~ : '.""1"- "j',~.t._'~ L~':\J..i_~\'-' "'L,_;'I....I"r' t '.i..'..",.' ,'. : ",'," ".' '"
'/I. '.... .... ""1\ \, . "_1\-. ,..I.. r ". .' Q ~.It...tt!; ."';'.11'..... '...~. ~'r J.,:4I" ~ ~~h '" ,"'~",.i, ,',' ;, -.#' j .,.... ~,.,;;J. " I' .. ....,~. L ;',\'.. t' j/
~ : "1 ,',I \, .';"'i~ri,"R:.I'J J.;, I J',' J.::d '-:J:;~,v:i ': ",' if: ',.1 '~I ,I '~ '!I'" 'f.'..
..'d, 1'''I,i'.:~'''~' :0,,1..... 11,~r.j:ril.?"C).':: ,',-/':~..II"'I' T"', J
.:rellM end ConiJItlona:lIl'SDlti j' ", :',. 'j,.! "i'" ,. :" ,'>
~-- ':
'.1.:1 i'~I,' ..."'" -,J'JF~ '.1')..\: ,I,) ~I I,...; I 'p,", ,~",:
All IIlti' by' H: M; 5fl""" 'Ind 6bnl, In'c. 'IImlln cil\lla51IUfI..,r..e 1~~llel to' ,1~lllollowlnv IIrme ,nd
condlllonl.
-- - - ',,' StIU"" ;h~li ;;;-b..li'bl';'~ ~ny d;i;Vin Plr;';;;;'~~~e'~, ;;il~r;t;p;'r~rm:l; thl d.i~y ---.
0' 1.lIure II CIUlld by In IYlnl beyond Itl rlllonobll conlrol.
,",.r,1
.._--,
I," '.';- I I
2. Whll. IYliv etip" will 1M, ml~1 10 mill I CUllomlr'1 dlllyery ~II', \l.IIYIrY II, I lP4clllc
hour connol b. gU"lntlld, : . I I . "I I' I .
-', :r~~1.~'~' ..... hRI be.n rl<ib,:~. ~.~I~I~.e:~:{,"~I.nll' :!~~;~~ ,~,~,~,e~UI ~~ ,~I~forOdl,~~P~~;~~~1 ~O~I~~~!;~~,.n~ 1~.'~llr j-,:5.ii'"
, ',' . .,.;.' t, ./~ ::". .'.'..~ ~'lo,-:'1.)....1 ' .
.J~~~ ','-:,^-,'A ;'.1,./ .\1....'.-.,:' . i, ',.,'1"1 ...~ \, ~ I, l ., :",
,-- _..:~ :""" \.'..:" ~'~ .~. ..._L4J Jilt CUIlPmaUb411,nollry 511uJ.l.v J/TIflUdI4ULv .R.l.Ihof.1J1lt 10 .'W .lIll)y_t:'4wh.rtupo~ ...
1__ ,'~~'~:~ : ,:~:::~~:::~;:X~;?~tiO~: ~I~hl~ ~~~~I~~~O~~I~ o~.~I~~.th,' ~UI~o~'~~:r~'~~~"prIC',o' th~ ,'_,." ,:'
" .,.. . , '.1 ~ f!, I " . ,:. " ~ '. , , I
&" Th. CUllom.r Ihlll Milly 6tlUllar Imm'dllllly on ,.ca!pl 01 .ny nono(onlormlng VOodl, ,
, wh.r.upon 6I1uff., Ihlll, 11111 option, 11th., rlpll, Ih. good I, rlpllca tII. VOOdl, or Vi". th. CUllom., .
c,.dlllor th. prlc. olth. good I, Thl cUllom.r'l repllr 01 goodl without SIIUff"'1 up,... .pprovtl conld..
, "
IIUIII ,cc'Pllnct 01 tho good I II IIlhlV Wire conlormlng, .nd SlIulI..r II not rlbl. lor Ih. ..ptn.. of
. ,.p.lr. ' ,. I '
, I '
6. CUllom mid. goodl clnnot be rlturn.d, Oth" good I cln be '~Iurn.d only II th. CUI'
tom,,'1 uP4nll .nd with 5t.ulI,,'IOP'III.pprOYlI, Wh.n loodl... rtlu,n.d willi IUch .pp,oyel, ISlIuller
, will glye th. cUII~mer cr.dlt 10' Ih. prlcl 01 the eOodllell . r.llocklnv ch.rv. 011 MI. I
, ,
, I
7. Th. cU,lom.r'l ,.mldl" III out In Ih.1I I.rml Ind condltlonl .r. th. cUllomer'I..clu.
Ily. r.m.dlll, .nd und.r no cl,cumlllnc.. Ihlll 6l1uff.r b. IIlbl. 10' .ny '.bar cl.lme or 10' .ny olher:
IP.cl.l, Incld.ntal 0' conllqu.nllll d.mlll .rhlng 0111 01 . III. 01 goodl 0' . d.l.y In the dellYlryol good., .
. I ;
I
I
I
I
....." .
. ' I
. .1. . ," '
,.', \,"'. "oJ
,!..):.~. ~,.....
", :".
j . ~
, ~ I'" . ,:
','." .,.
, I 'f,'"
"J
,. .
,.,1'...
. ,
\( 1\.,'
::t~ ",
,. .
,,.
'.'
,', .
'.
, .'
. ..
", .\
,
'.
"
,,' "',
. .
,-
I,
.'-
PROOUl:ERS OFI
.....
~r,.....~
~@
Orico~
..1SER - PL YWOOO
TREATED LlJMI3ER
ROOF TRUSSES
FLOOR TRUSSES
COMPONENTS
MILL. WORK
BUILDING. MATERIALS
N_
11 I I \ I J I I I II I I I j 1'.1', 1\ I\J I) << I II' J I ~ I ] 11) I' J', Ii) II I ]'1', ., \ I, ,. i I I" 111\11 ] ]) '11\1 I III III \/1 II ',I '111ll
I 1)1 1111,1'/",1 1'11/\',1 1(1,\1) . J\llt 11'11',
(I" 11UI 11.'1" . IT IS THE ONI.Y ITEMIZED SILl:. YOU WILl. BE RECEIVING. NO CLAIMS FORUlI,tl'lm'"
,.. D~M~GED SHIPMENTS WII.L BE. CONSIDERED UNLESS' NOTED ON THIf OELIVERY RECEIPT Ai TIME
'I' DELIVERY. THIS SLIP MlJ5T' BE R.Iil'tJRtaa WIT.... ANY' Cl.AtM.
ION.SHIPPIlD ITEMS WII.L REMAIN ON. I)'ACI<' ORDEl'l' UNLEllS.CANCELLED.
"Et;IIVID /IV' l DMI!-
501..01'0
SHlno
~tN~eL.D QF.'I ~O~p
'!Zt~ OAfft'l" ReAD-
L.ANCASTER p~ \ 7';4)\
EPf$COPAI.. TQIoIS;RS
:I'f 1 ..,.o.nlJRG
OLDG ~
o 0
I.INtfiIE: F'06I&4 O.U""'. t
.'H,'I'..'....1l~.41..'l4l 'IL. 1l'.~"""I.~lO'
I
TftaMk
You.f
,." ,..
. ','
-
(
..-
\
/.I/1.f/ U, 1914
Pf."-CJI.ut Co"".tAw!.t:l.ort.
W6 rJlLlIuJ Rd.
, LlWaAttA, PA /760/
I'
r) '. ,_
Re, EpL6c.op" TQUlw.
ATTN' SIIIII 1If.'''1Jl.
Ch1Ul9f. Oh.d.fJI. , /
v1. Cht1Jl9', '011. ~"9 pJ.tpJood '011. buLLrU"9 'A' I c.u.t appAoWnllttLV roo p~'''''''Il'''~IO.OO
t. Cutting pt~ood duf. to miApt4lltd ~tudA /Utd c.tlp~.~""""""""~45.00
3. Cht1Jl9f. to 1l.f.C.O't.UAUc.t .tA.u.6~u OVIJl. thf. d.f.wJ.t.OIl. ~h/l,'t,"""'"j",,$60.00
V' 4. BuLLd up .tIl.~~ a.t U.a1JwJI1l,/. (T-51."""""'""'"$IO.OO
..
5. Ex.tw t4.ll.J. olt'T"3 4/td.. T"5 ~u to aLLow '011. bILl.c.k..",.".,,,.,$,,.OO
6. Cht1JlrJt. to ,t4.4/t d.t.VIltO~.~h4't II:{; poW 0' Il.DO' p'-"f.tAcI..t.Lo""~".""",,"~30.00
NOTE I All" pitobtVIW w.i,.t/t dJr.1}>>4ll. J.~t/J.UlLt:lo" du.f. to .th.u44 pLat:.Uf./tt ~h4U ~ .
bf. OUJl: Il.Upo~J.b.LUt/l but ~ltaLL bf. ~otd.v boll.r. bv thf. pl1ltd. '4b.t.Lc!.Ilt.Q;tlJ. I.
ACCEPTANCE OF CI/ANGE OROERr
COLLEGE VILLAGE BUILOERS, INC.
. .
. .
6.u.iJJl':'11J ) th Jr:;-
::7~~{f1
h . !,
~t:1:ilo~ ~~ ..
- '~/~~~15-
-
~ 8\ ~(~ ,"" c'" \~ ,
(,G~~ N.ft. S r
s, #i
~\""'-
/' .
,-
fI
9'O.OCl
~
.Ie.
;(I. ,r\
,. (.e
~.(
l(o...f ~("~ \.L..
,\ \ v..'
'J-I (-'
..
I
;
I
. (\."
.......---.
.,
"
I,
,
IJIhlblt I
'''"I'''''''''.'
..", (f)
'.""
, ,
.,
I
'I
'1
I,
!J
, ,
I
\.
.}
I
,I
"
1 ;
I,i
;.t
"
I"
I'i
"
, I
Ii'
'.
..
.~
Staal'ea-
r
September 20, 1993
Mr. Tim Sorrls
Hoqver Wood Treated Producu, me.
PO Box 290
MllCord VA 22514
Dear Mr. Sorrls,
Thla leller fa to Inform you of 0. situation rllprdina defective flre retardant plywood
menufactured by Hoover.
In May of 1984 my company, H.M. Stauffer " SOI1l, luppUed fire retardant plywood to
PeMcrest Construction for roof Ibellthlng on their Eplacopal Square jobslte locatcd In
Ship'pensburs, PA. ApprOldmatcly 350 sbccts of 1/2" COX Hoover Flrex plywood were
Installed on Suild\ng A at that time.
In July of 1993 residents of Building A began complaining of roof laW. Upon Inspection
of the roof by PCD1lc:rcst Construction cmployees, It WIll diacovered thBt the FIrcx plywood
Will deterioratiDg.
Obviously thla Is a situation whicb rcquires a prompt response to eUmfnatc the posslbWty of
further damage. Pleuc respond III soon III posslblc.
Sincerely,
H.M. STAUFFER '" SONS, 1Ne.
/i:.j ;( ~.d"..-
Rick 1.. Gehman
Purchllllna
"
, ,
,
,I I ,I
.
.,
"
H. M. SlAIJ"fJl . SONS. INC:. I .l.3 GllINOlA 0flI\tI ' lOX ~ . Llo.A. PlNNG'YLVANIA 17~ . om 6&0\.2811
"
, ;
II,
"
'Ii
,.
,.
,
"
II
" ,I
,
"
'.
I,
,
.\
I,
"
,
.11 I'
.,
I
,
,
I
I "I
"
I I
,
, II
"
,
I
, ,
.
f
,'1
I.
. .
I
'.
" G:)
"
Ii);
q I;, :.1
" 'I'
i'i
.'t)t;' , ~ I
I, t?~l. ,.f, "~
,
~j, '''.)
I., 'i!
;~ I -h
" ~':, ~)~. ")/
-'1,;
~ I; t.) U'1
; /1 ..
I in ~
",
I
"
I,
I,
I'
,
,
"
I,'
.'
I;
'I
,
.1
I,
"
"
"
,
d
"
"
J.
"
.
,"
SHE'RIFF'S OFFICE
1 OF 2
~o NORTH PU~E amEET. .ANCASTllI.
I'lNNl;Yll'~:;~:~:',:: :~I ~:::I:~I:;)'~CJCIBB on ';;, r...~'~ ~;I'M ~._~
6) r~~ 0' thll lonn. fII,... tVJN 0( pl1nl '''l;JlbIV, 00 I'm dNch lilY eopIH,
____. _.___u___m._'__ _.~.___"_.._____.__._,_.___.__..,_". ....... ..~l.~.._._h____.~__...r:;,
-; ClHmT NlJMUEI~ ~
)5-601 Civil Term
,I IYP~ 01; WHir on cnMPI~^iN-r .._-...,_..~
Writ to Join Addt1 Deft
. --., -..----....- w
~
VI
.iJl
il'I
N
SHIRlfF SIRVICI
PROCESS AECIIPT, Ind AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN
i~ fiLAINTiFFiiii-
H.M. Stauffer & Bons, Inc. at ill
3-il~FENb^NTliii ... -.. ,
Wynnefie1d Development Corp. et 01
o,'-.yi-n{_......'id~;..MEOFINllIV,blJAI... COMI'ANY Clllll'llllA1lllN. lilC III IlE IIf1lVl'1l
-, --""~-~~O~i~6: t6~;;~)I' fe~~~1~1~t~~;;.-?:,~- -I)~;-~ ~Et?i~;~I~J-~i~~i'i:IJ"rll
A 2316 Dairy Road, [,ancaster, P/\ 17601
i.I~iiiCATE-I;Nui;uAl6Ei1vlii -Cl.lMMl)N <lII'A' XIlII'IJI'/I 01""'11 t;:umtle.l,tlnd
NoW, ../l.Ul}..., 14, .. 199610 . I. SH~fUFF OFIJll~IlR COUNTY, PA.. <10 horoby dopullla Itla B orlll 01
.... n_J,.lI,IlCll.ll t.er Counly 10 axacllla Ihl~".~nko ralurn 111 cordlnij
~~ ~:~~;~~:T~~~I~: ~~:~~~:I:~'~R::f;~~~:~T'~~:I:~Q~~:111: :~~~~:~ING~~ll'-~~'" n, -" ..
.............--. .-,.--
,NOTI ONLY APPLICABLI ON WRIT 0' nECUTION: N,8, WAIVER OF WATCHMAN ^"Y 'Jppllly l,Iumll 10\'Y,11\J UP')ll l)f 1llllll:I1illlJ nnv pll}Plllly LHllflJr
Ihllhln wnlllluylQllvfJ 8Utll.! Wt1l1l,1l11 II Wllkhmnll, 111 I llhlody 1\1 .....ll01ll1l....H Iii hl'JtlrJ 11\ 1I1j1,IlI)!ir,IIH1, ,\111'1 11l)1i'~Ul11 jlllHiIl/l 0111'',1'1 ,)t 1llIllrllllllltll, wiltlll1llllnhlhly 011
the port QI ,Ut:h depl/ly or thl! ~lllHlII hlll!lY plllll\ltll !l'lrHUl 'Ill 1lI1y Inti II .IIlI,llljCltllr\ nl wnlll.....IlI,ll any ~\I,,:h Pl'llllllly 11lIIrlllll'ilHlnllll ~ill!f) 111/lrlllll
~'~-II~~~~:~~~:~N:~ ~{'~" O;~~:ORAT .~~MB ~:r~AN~~C~~ SH~~'~ ~~'.I'~(~~ ~':~~~ 7 _ ~Qb~~)~T;4~-96 ...
til, IJNO NOTI~. ~llS1-"Ylc;l CQPV TO NAMe. AND z4DDlUSQ B~~OW; (Tllla orep mUll b. l;Oll1plllltd If 111,)llc. I, to bt mulled)
POST AND SCIlELL, P.C., 1800 JFK BLVD" PHILA PA 19101
---, , ... ..'..8P.01 IILOW FOR USE OF SHERIFF ONl.Y - 00 NOT WRITE 'BELOW THI81.JNj.---.....--.---
1~:""1-":" ", ,-" .. '1' .','.',' ~__4}.'__"__L_" -. -"'''H''-Me'';,; A;;rllli.li/";l'lC"SO "hoP'IIly .;, (':II\'~ ,. - - - , - - - - - '~l'I--i')llil) jOllil:'j,jV"J;j- '.'-"-'~-"'.r'i6~'-E+.~i.itiliiio;,/.~i;;n,1-.r;\illal.
:, cll:"lll)Vwt"lCUIlW.:IllP 'I IUlwnl
,,,,,,,mp'''''''"' ""'",,",'' ""'''0 . JUDY MORRI~. 295 3609 -19-96. ~:-t~:-~li_____,
III I hlHl.'lJV CIRTI'Y IItHl RITURN 1111111 IIllV'l PJlth')I11llly HHVI).1 111l\i'~ 11"1,11 1)"1111"11'" .,1 ",t,~II:'1 ,I" '1111""1\ III '11I!llIoI'~I;" 1111"1.1 1l)lIlCI/IllrlU8 ahnwn II'
"flnl1llltk5", tlln Wilt III C0I11I1"1Inl dl'llflllll.'d Illl 11111 IJIIII\lII)1I1I1 fll/l' )c\ y, '-'lIPlllllllllll, 1'1<: .11 t11" ,ldlll"II, 1,1111'1111 1111,1....0 'lJ 'J!) lilt) Il1dlVlrJlJlll, U)l1lpIiIlY, 1:1)f-
PllIIlMIl, 1111; 1\llIlrlll'hUruw 111IUH"Jd 11th)1't hy I1lUl111111j II fRU!: IMd ,ATU.SUO COPY Ih.t.of
17:.. 1 t1llrIJIly clJlllly lH.'d lolilHl11 NQT."OU~D ImllllJliI! 111m IJnnllllll11 1II';i1ln HllIll1'liy,ljIJlll '1llnpI'l\y "IIP"hltllll\ l!l,; nlHnlld illHlyn lSI)I} IllnllUka Imlflwl .._n___.___
:~_,~~~II~~t"nl:;r.d[,I""~t-F;:t;;,"';""'n','~:" ~''''''I''''1i ['"' ~;::!',::'::(,,;,'::;l;:':::"~:::' ":I::'~::"I~",',":",:~::':I I
" 1ilI:....,f,'/,,~-"'''.."' d, ,,,.,,,,,,,,,,, ",," "'''''' , "",,". '" ",,' .,."",,,,, "" '" ",," '" "IV;' ;Z~2.1',..i - :
" i_>ti l~i S' I ~ ,.. .''1'''' ..r....T~.. i
:-';~I":' ~~O. 00 F.7,1;;, I '5o:t,ol>~~ I
BrA ~,1,6 '('
I MII"j Cop 1"\ I
I "'l rl,,""y (,,,,
0.1. [ Mil.. I D,p Inl [0'1' I
j:1I MtlnIH)"7":"II"$:.s.
1\ AF~1I1MEt) l\tl.l alllHI~lIllf1d 1\1 /)I'h)1I! mil tlllll't)() J/(.)
:l< dll~ a(.(...~.L.I.t:-. :.. '" '/If'
37.. . ~/-td:fjjlilJ. ()I:..
1J'l)th'I'Hlh~~I'~
My_~.q,"'.~!~~!9,N~~PJR.S . . _.., ... ,.. .
3.8 I A.CI<NOWLE.OIJE. nrCEIP.' OF THE.I. ~IRI"'I ~!TURN SIGNATURl}
....()F .A~!flO!!I~EO IS~UINO AlJfHORIfY ANn nm. .
'1'
I.
j
'"
"
,.
If I,....:
r.:.
C~ (,;\ ....,i
IJ.l ::r: ~,~j 0.:
w. ,n';;)
. I'...l
'./ II,. ,
',A.(,..)
" ...",
,;' ' ....
! I ;; i..,
.., ': ....J "
1.1. f,)
t,,',
,,,"',,
.,
,'I
, ,
.\
i'l
','
"
,I i
.X
"
Lil
, I
,
I
I
,;\ II
"i
,I
"
'II
.,'
, I
I'
/.
"
".11
I,
"
SHERIFF'S OFFICE
,
_l._OL2
&0 NORm DUKE eTnfEf.lANCASIHI
PfNNliYLVANIA 1I111l~ . III/) ~t)t).u~oo ....;!l
IINBTRUCTiONB FIlR BlAVIC, Il, PROCIIB';' V1t '~I~.iV1tI~'::---~
~, copy II' thll fC'ltm. PI.,., Iyptl Qr print I_V tJo not MV '
: ' , ;; l-:-()Ijjir NiJMi.JfH..._.......~--'--~..__.m._.___----~
9~-601 Civil Term
,I ''I'PI. 1lI WI II r Oil cUMPI.AIN"r
Writ to Join Arldtl Deft
,.~
SHIRl"" SERVICI!
PROC.SS RI!CIIPT, Ind ",,.'IDAVIT OF RETURN
r'PL:AiNfIFFiiii-' .
H.M. Stauffer & Bona, lne. et ill
ij--iiem.i6Aiiiiiii
Wynnefie)d Development Corp. et al
.-,--Vi-_{'d ~:~~og~,~,~uA~~~~'~~u(~J~I;~'~r"~~:'. IOIlII/IIIVIIl
, 6 ALllfm'=f:H1 iSlrllOI';Jf IWIJ, Apmlll1Unl Nil, Clly, UI)lI), Iwp l,llllu ,11\d liP 1;0<1111
/Ii 2316 Dairy Road, Lancaster, PA 17601
rINDlcA-re'iJN'UBUAI,B<IIVICE. coMMON Of /'^ X i H'1j II/I III III II Cum~)erlanrl
Now~-AU~~ 14.1996 10 ,I. SHERIFF ol'lUHat4lSnn COUNTY, f']l~' /lily dOP~JII1~~~O'
--'dl..noaat8l' . Coullty 10 U'Il""ln~""'~';JN!1l 110
~~I~~~_~~~_~~_~.~.t~t.I~I~ b~.lnonllld~ 111 ~~oreqlUll)t llnd rlBk ~t t1ll1 r.>lnlnhll" 7 ~~'llld",\1 ~~I!''''')ljn,,;,H ,; ,,', ' ..
.. ."CI~~ INBTRUCTIONB OR orH'R INPORM~TlON TH~T Will ~BSIST IN UPEOITING BERVICE,
.1>1
~
VI
bl
i'l
"N
Nor. ONL.Y APPL.lC,ABLI ON WRIT OF E)(ECUTlON~ N,D, WAIVER OF W,\TCm~AN AIl'l dUplll'l ~IIlIIIII hlY'IIIlIJ 1I1)11l1 Ilt IIItHdl111\J lIny pllll'IlllY lJIlIJur
WIlI'Ul wnl Il1lly 10(lVll tllUl\ll WI"'1l111 II wnldlllllill, In r:llhllJ1ly ,)1 WIl(HI11)""1 Ih IIJlJlld III 1I')hl"'1u,iol1 IL!!I!! Ihllllylll!' l'IIH;OIl 1111 IYY Ilr 1I1l,ldlt\1IU,I, Wllllllljl hllhtlily Iltl
lhlt pOlloI such dOplJly l)t IIHlli)lIJ1tU It) (lilY 1l1t11t111t1 11111.'1l1 lo( ,111'1 ")1;'\ dmll"dl'lJ1 ')I 1,",\,ly,\I'11 .lny li\il h P1I111l'11V hl'lnlll -;hlll'l,I'11 ~llli'J 1111",11\1
"~:::RI::TTO:::~':':'FORlGINATOR '. \ "~~I'~'~'~:N~;~:'~~OO I " ";1~14_96
;1, RND"R"O'rICf"O'F.S'IFMtI't'Ml'O NAME ANO ADOAESa BeLOW: (Till. aten mUIIll)lJ c;ompllllod II 1\0111:. lit h) h.mnlled) ",' ,
POST AND SCHELL, PC (ANDREW CONNOLLY, ESO) 1800 JFK B~VD., PHI~A p~ 1910l
~13~'---..'.' . "'.-1"- ...-. I ...I$P~C .I} a.LOW "Q~M~~i~\,~I~,~~~!f,~p~~~~, :-00 NOT WR.ITI~I~~t~'~I!,~\SLj~I~" f;/l""ii'ii1iil;J"'''JII;I''i~~
lIr:~nl)W IJI \l~ llKlllp r) 11m WIll
..._'" """IlI"'."I."R "HI'''''",J ",,,,,''. JUDY MORRI ~95 3609 . 8-19-96 . 9-13-96
16 I I\lllelly CERTIFY ill\tl ".TURN 1111\1 I tlllVlJ 11I'IHII10111y :,1111,111" ~1;\"1l 11";111 l'\-'Ih'lI, " ,,! .,.'IV" t' ,\'0 ~1"IVltl 'II HHll,III'~,' 11(1"'" il~".:Ijt"d UIl III1'jWIl Ifl
'nllll1(ukti", Iho Wilt III \:lltllplilllll 'hl~"ldll'd 'Ill nUl 'lltIIVI'ltu\( '"1I11{:i;y '"q)<)I;III'1I', I't, .It HII> ,1<1,11":,,; ',III)\'.n Iljlll\l'l '11 '\11 tllfl "1diVlthllll <:'Jml.liUly-, (Ill.
P~~~II~I~l~~,_ ~h:, (1Ilho (\l1dIIHHllI1lilllhld ,11I'1l)W by t11111d<ll1J il TRlJl! pnd ATtEBTEO COPY Ih.rool
17 I tllllllby Clllllly 1l1l1110hUlll\ NOT FOUND 1)1)':11I11;1' IILll1I11IUllhll,)Io)':III,! tllIlIlH!tIjI,IiJ;LI '_')1111"111'1 "111"(,111'111 pI,
l'if"Na~;ln;"tt-itQOI Illlill,ol1llJ'11 !i1J1\'u,l I'll Il,it 'r.llllWII (\h')~'I1) 1111!ln11lH tll'lll't'!l1dIUII) r~ C
_..~_\l~/U J' ~d (r::>I.~~~8 I" ~~~" 1)';1 t" C.
:lO Md,lllll\ 01 Wt1lJIl.! filll\,q., ((,)1\11)111111 nnly 1I,Ir,'11lmlllllllll hll')VYII H 'v1l\IGllll,'I'JIIIFll ^IJilllI1HIl'l Nl) l:'ty P'JI'J Tw))
6h,h, JIM III' Cudl) "
Il(lIll"d 11111)"-" (~,]J) H'IlllUkll ImhlW)
I'"
^ 1)''''''''\ 'II ',"i!nlll., llllll ,111'1 ,11:\'-111111\11
1t'~11 ""'h1l1'lj III .111' '"I!iw,l,ml ~ U~'''II
1.10"" "j ,.11<)'11
;.II llllh) 1)1 fl"'\I(OI ;}t,I rlnll)
'(-17. 'It..
1.J.}.
Jt
~~-'AdV;lrl;:'il 'Crl'~'I'U
~;1\S
~:~:J ~RII
2O~n"H"'I:"H'"
I MIIIII DI~ Int.I 0"" I Mil.. I DI~ IIlI.\ORII I 1.11111\
1:"'. ""I",y e"" \ n Mr'!f.:J;"I'"" I' 1:111
OIP.IIl"j
Tollll C'lRhl
0.'. ~lil' [ofP' In'i.
I ill co., DUI O"~''.UN~:
2ij'Ai'Tjl,i'p'rii
30 f.\U,!~4
**
**
B'~
)/1 VJ)
:1' AFFlflMHJ 1,,\rJ ~lJlll\Ulblld Ii) 1)1110/'/ ml', 11111\ ~.- ~)
j' ""YR _(a~l~,t{J . ",rj '/'
31 . d' ~\t- ij ./"R.t1 C\,
PI')tt\I"\IjIIlI~'llWr'fttlihlll'
r..{Fft."~g~fE~)~J~~.:C~li;r ill' 'HE BH,.uAIf"$ AIlORN SIGNATURE)
_..9.F.~Ur,HO.~I.ZEl1mB!"NQ AU I H:l'"rv AND 1m,
.6\>.... ,fe:., ,.,. f! ~ ~~_ ,:-,-(
. -t) '^- '~:'/9 -It
IIl~r<lp
1"'1 i )oltn ,il,,:i;i~"'l
'.
'.
.
"
\itl.!.'
,:
il
';,"1
\
it
I"
"
'I "1
,'11
'1"1' .
11
!r!
.1
I I 'J d
'\'1,,""1
'11,\
'. ~
"
~
'II
"
.,
",.lJO:,
"jl,,, ,., "'~
"
"l"
..
., .
\'
;:" ~I ~I"I~ HI". ,. ~~ '"
"'.".....-i --, WIYH~
'rWoiI"" ,.. hTfl ~~.~V"'. HI._O
'0111' III' ~1 ~ Iii\' Io~~'
lIll'r"P I. ~ I '
m.~iiiT' .
.
""w Om~'"
tolIKO"'''U', HOHKN~gK'"
. U,.,.IHH~UK"
~ I ~ tiO",tI Qunl! IT"'"
",~"C~'T.n. ,~. ,,101
J,
I M.."V' i""'''' T~~~ TH' WITHIll
I' ~ '1lII. 0'.."" ..,., or ~HI
.~" . ill ~H" ~T1oH.
..., ~ +
,,"011I:"'" ,IJ"
.'
"
. ,.
I
I ~
, '
II
i Ii
'I
,
.
1,/1
,
,
"
.t
~~~I
\,
, ~,
"
. .'.~
IN THB COURT 0' COMMON PLIAS OF CUMBIRLAND COUNTY, PBNN8Y~VANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWIRS/SHIPPINSBURG
PBNNSYLVANIA,
Plaintift
VS.
No. 95-601
H.M. STAUFFER & SONS, INC.,
Oetendant
VS.
"
HOOVER TREATED WOOD PRODUCTS,
Additional Detendant
"OTIC. TO nOD
TO PLAINTIFF I
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED to tile a written responae to the
enolosed dooument within twenty (20) days of s&rvioe hereot, or a
detault judgment may be entered against you.
Respeotfully Submitted,
NIKOLAUS & HOHENADEL
Date I
an s
for Defendant
ey 1.0. U7136
rth Queen Street
Lanoa ter, PA 17603
(717) 299-3726
IN THE COURT OF COMMON p~IAa OF CUMBBR~D COUNTY/ PENNSY~VANIA
CIVI~ ACTION - LAW
BPISCOPAL TOWERSIBHIPPENSBURG
PENNSY~VANIA,
Plaintiff
No. 95-601
VS.
H.M. STAUFFER & BaNS, INC.,
Dehndant
1l...ND~" AN.MII1 AND Nn MATT".
TO PLA!NT!..'. .!18T ANlHDID COMPLA!NT
1. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer & Bons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 1 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer & sons, Inc. is without sufficient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averments in Paragraph 3 of
the plaintiff's Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
4. Denied as stated. It is specifically denied that
Bpiscopal Towers purchaled plywood sheathing from Stauffer.
Rather, Winfield Development Corporation of 2316 Dairy Road,
~ancast.r, Pennsylvania 17601 purchased certain plywood sheathing
from Defendant Stauffer to be .hipped to Episcopal Towersl
Shippen.burg, Penn.ylvania. A. regard. all other allegation.
contained in Paragraph 4 ot the Plaintitt'. Complaint, atter
rea.onable inve.tigation the Detendant i. without sufficient
information to form a belief as to the truth of these averment..
They are, therefore, denied.
6. Denied a. stated. The ~laintiff did not purchase
plywood sheathing from the Defendant Stauffer. The Defendant
Stauffer, however, sold plywood .heathing to Winfield Development
Corporation and, on belief, a portion of that was manufactured
and/or sold to Stauffer by Hoover Wood Treated Product., Inc. As
regards the balance of the averments in Paragraph 6 of the
Plaintiff'S Complaint, after reasonable investigation, the
Defendant Stauffer is without sufficient information or belief as
to the truth of those averments. They are, therefore, denied.
Strict proof is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
6. Denied a. .tated. Defendant Stauffer did not sell
firex plywood to Episcopal Towers nor did it issue an invoice to
Episcopal Towers. To the contrary, Stauffer sold firex plYwood
sheathing to Winfield Development corporation and the invoice
referenced IS Exhibit "A" to the Plaintiff's Complaint clearly
indicates that the plywood was sold to Winfield Development
Corporation. By way of further answer, no contractual
relationship existed between Defendant StaUffer and Epi.copal
Towers at any time relevant to the Plaintiff's Complaint.
2
Finally, by way of further answu, Exhibit "A" whioh 11 attached
to the Plaintiff'. Complaint speaks for it.elf.
7. Penied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant
H.M. Stauffer' Son., Ino. is without .uffioient information to
form a belief as to the truth of the averments in Paragraph 7 of
the Plaintiff'. complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Striot
proof i. demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
8. Denied in aocordanoe with penn.ylvania Rule of Civil
Prooedure 10~9(e).
9. Denied. The Defendant Stauffer did not sell firex
plywood to the Plaintiff 2pisoopal Towers. As regards the
balance of the averments in Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff's
Complaint, after reasonable investigation the Defendant Stauffer
is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the
truth of those averments and they are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof i. demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
10. While it is admitted that Episcopal Towers afforded the
Defendant Stauffer an opportunity to replace the deteriorated
plywood, Stauffer believes and therefore avers th~t they had no
obligation, legal or otherwise, to do .0.
11. Paragraph 11 of the Plaintiff'Q Complaint is a
conolusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
By way of further answer., it i8 .peoifically denied that
Episoopal Towers has been damaged by any aot or omission of
3
ataufter. To the contrary/ Stauffer had no bu.iness relationship
with Plaintiff and th~refore had no duty to take any action with
respect to tho Plaintiff/s complaints. As regards all other
allegations, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is
without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth
of the averments. They are, therefore, denied. Strict proof is
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
12. Denied as stated. The Defendant Stauffer did not sell
firex plywood to the Plaintiff Episcopal Towers. As regards the
balance of the averments in Paragraph 12 of the Plaintiff/s
Complaint, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is
without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth
of the averments and they are/ therefore, denied. strict proof
is demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
COUNT 1 - ..IACK 0' .X'..88 CONTRACT
13. The Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1 through 12
of the Plaintiff/. Complaint are incorporated herein by
reference.
14. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant
had an agreement with Episcopal Tower. for the .ale of plywood
sheathing. To the contrary/ Defendant Stauffer/. contract was to
supply plywood sheathing to Winfield Development Corporation.
Defendant Stauffer had no agreement or contractual relationship
with the Plaintiff Bpiscopal Towers.
4
15. Denied. It il Ipeoifioally denied that a oQntraot
exiltl between Sta~ffer and Bpiloopal Towerl. To the oontrary/
Sta~ffer/e agreement wal to lupply plywood Iheathing to Winfield
Development Corporation and not Bpiloopal Towero. It i8 further
8peoifioally denied that the terml of the bU8inel8 relationdhip
are embodied in order/invoioe8 lent by Stauffer to Bpi800pal
Tower8. To the oontrary/ thole orderl and invoioeo outline the
relation8hip between Stauffer and Winfield Development
corporation for materiall to be 8hipped to Bpiscopal Towere. By
way of further anlwer/ Paragraph 15 of the Plaintiff'8 complaint
ie a oonclu8ion of law to whioh no relponsive pleading i8
neoellary.
16. Denied. It il Ipeoifioally denied that a contraot
exilt8 between Stauffer and Bpi8copal Towerl. To the oontrary/
Stauffer had no bueine81 relationlhip with Epi8copal TOWer8 at
any time relevant to the Plaintiff/I complaint. A8 the invoioee
clearly indicate, Winfield Development Corporation i8
the party with whom Stauffer oontracted. By way of further
.newer/ provieion8 of the invoioel to whioh the complaint
referred hal to do with good I rejeoted by the puroha8ere, as non-
conforming/ at the time of delivery. It doee not oreate an
obligation for Stauffer to replaoe goods lubsequently found or
alleged to be defeotive by a non-oustomer, 8uoh al Bpisoopal
Towers, not in privity with Stauffer. By way of further andwer/
5
Paragraph 16 ot the Plaintitf's Complaint is a conclusion of law
to which no responsive pleading is required.
17. Denied. It is specifically denied that Stauffer sold
firex plywood to EpiBcopal Towers. To the contrary, Stautfer did
not sell firex plywood to Episcopal Towers but rather sold
plywood to Winfield Development Corporation. The balance ot the
allegations contained in Paragraph 17 ot the Plaintift's
complaint are concluaions of law to which no responsive pleading
is required.
lB. Denied. Paragraph 18 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, Defendant H.M. Stautfer & sons, Inc. respeotfully
requests this Honorable Court dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint.
aoUNT II . .RakCR 0' !KPLIID aONTRACT
19. The Defendant's Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through 18 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by referenoe as though set forth at length.
20. Paragraph 20 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conolusion of law to whioh no responsive pleading i. required.
By way of further answerl
a. Denied. It i. specifically denied that Bpisoopal
Towers paid Stauffer for plywood. To the contrary, Winfield
bevelopment corporation paid Stauffer for plywood pursuant
to the contraot and businels relationship betwften Stauffer
6
and Winfi~ld Development Corporation.
b. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is
admitted that Stauffer sold certain plywood sheathing to
Winfield Development Corporation to be shipped to Episoopal
Towers. However, as regards all other allegations contained
in Paragraph 20 (b), including the allegation that Stauffer
provided all of the plywood to Episcopal Towers, the
Defendant is without sufficient information to form a belief
as to the truth of those averments and they are therefore
deniod. Strict proof of the same is demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial.
c. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is
admitted that a Stauffer sales representative inspected
certain plywood at Episcopal Towers and that Stauffer
notified Hoover Treated Wood products, Inc. that certain
Hoover Treated ~lywood used to construct the roof of a
building at Illpisoopal 'rowers was deteriorating. It is
denied, however, that this action reflects a contraotual
relationship betwe~n Defendant Stauffer and Episcopal
Towers. To the contrary, Stauffer was merely investigating
a complaint about a product claimed to have been supplied by
Stauffer pursuant to a contract with Winfiold Development
Corporation. As regards the balanoe of the allegations
contained in Paragraph 20(c) of the Plaintiff'. Complaint,
7
,
the Defendant i. without .ufficient information to form a
belief al to the truth of tho.e averment. and they are
therefor. denied and .trict proof i. demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial.
a1. The averment. contained in Paragraph a1 of the
Plaintiff'. complaint are conclu.ion. of law to which no
re.pon.ive pleading is required. By way of further an.wer, it is
denied that any contract exists, expre.., implied or otherwi..,
I
between Epi.copal Tower. and Stauffer. See the Defendant's
Answer. to Paragraphs 19 and 20 of the Plaintiff's Complaint.
aa. The averment. contained in Paragraph aa of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusion. of law to which no
responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it i.
specifically denied that 'any contract existo, expre.s, implied or
otherwise, between Episcopal Towers and Stauffer. See the
Defendant'. Anlwers to Paragraphs 19 through ao of the
Plaintiff's Complaint.
a3. The averments contained in Paragraph a3 of the
Plaintiff" Complaint are conclusion. of law to which no
respon.ive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it i.
specifically denied that any contract exists, expres., implied or
otherwi.e, between Episcopal Towers and Stauffer. See the
Defendant's Anlwers to Paragraphs 19 through 21 of the
Plaintiff', Complaint.
8
WHIR.FORI, the Defendant n.M. Stauffer' Sons, Inc.
respeotfully request this Honorable Court dismiss the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
COUH'l' In . THIIU) ,AI.'1'Y .~HIl.ICIAl.Y
~.. The Defendant's Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through ~3 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by reference a. though set forth at length.
~5. The allegations contained in Paragraph ~5 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required.
~6. The allegations contained in Paragraph ~6 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are conclusions of law to which no
responlive pleading is required.
WHIR.FORI, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc.
re.pectfully request. thi. Honorable Court di.miss the
plaintiff'. Complaint.
COUH'l' IV . 1.~~nH O. IK,LIID WlIlANTY O. KlRCHAN'l'AlILlTY
~7. The Defendant'. Answers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through ~6 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by referenoe as though set forth at length.
~S. Denied. Paragraph ~8 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
~9. Denied. Paragraph 29 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is a
concluaion of law to which no responsive pleading is required.
9
30. Denied. Paragraph 30 o~ the Plaintiff', Complaint i. .
oonclu.ion of law to whioh no re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
31. Denied. Paragraph 31 of the Plaintiff's Complaint i. .
oonclu.ion of law to which no re.pon.ive pleading is required.
WHEREFORE, Defendant H.M. Stauffer & Son., Inc. respectfully
reque.t. thi. Honorable Court di.mi.. the Plaintiff's Complaint.
CO~ v - ..aACR O. !MPLI.D WARRANTY
o. .ITHW.. .oa A PARTICULAR Po.PO..
32. The Defendant'. An.wers to the averments of Paragraph 1
through 31 of the Plaintiff's complaint are incorporated herein
by reference a. though set forth at length.
33. Denied. It is .pecifically denied that Stauffer .old
plywood .heathing to Episcopal Towers. A. regards the balanoe of
the averment. in Paragraph 33 of the Plaintiff'. Complaint after
rea.onable investigation, Defendant Stauffer is without
,uffioient information to form a belief as to the truth of those
averment.. They are, tharefore, denied. Striot proof is
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
34. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant
StaUffer ie without .ufficient information to form a belief I' to
the truth of the avermant. in Paragraph 34 of the Plaintiff',
Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict proof is
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
35. Denied. It i. specifically denied that Stauffer sold
plywood .heathing to Bpiscopal Towers. By way of further an.wer,
10
Paragraph 35 of the Plaintiff'. Complaint i. a oonolu.ion of law
to whioh no re.pon.ive pleading i. requ~red.
36. Paragraph 36 of the Plaintiff'. Complaint is a
oonolu.ion of law to which no responsive pleading i. required.
WHE~EFO~E, the Oefendant H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Ino.
re.peotfully requests thi. Honorable Court dismi.. the
Plaintiff', complaint.
lmf 1lAT'l"~
37. The Plaintiff's Complaint may have failed to .tate a
claim upon which relief may be granted.
38. The Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applioable
Statute of Limitation..
39. In the event it ia determined that a produot .upplied,
di.tributed and/or sold by Defendant Stauffer was involved a.
alleged in the P~aintiff'8 Complaint, said product may have been
.ub.tantially altered after it left the po..es.ion of Stauffer.
40. The Plaintiff ha. failed to mitigate any damage. it may
have .uffered.
41. No oontraotual relation.hip exi.ts between the
Oefendant Stauffer and the Plaintiff Episoopal
Towers/shippen.burg Pennsylvania.
42. If a oontractual relationship exists, whioh is
.pecifioally denied, the Plaintiff failed to notify Defendant ".
StaUffer of the reoeipt of allegedly non-oonforming good. a.
11
required by the term. and oondition. of .ale.
43. If a oontractual relation.hip exist., which i.
.peoifically denied, the Plaintiff Epi.copal Tower./Shippen.burg
Pennsylvania made repairs without Stauffer's expre.s approval
which constitutes acceptance of the good. as if they were
oonforming and the Defendant Stauffer is therefore not liable for
any expen.e of repair as outlined in the terms and conditione of
sale.
No implied contract existed between the Plaintiff
Towers/Shippensburg Pennsylvania and the Defendant
44.
Episcopal
Staufftr.
45. No implied warranties inured to the benefit of
Plaintiff.
46. The injurie. and/or damages allegedly suetained by the
Plaintiff may have been due to the negligence, act and/or
omis.ions of other individuals and/or entities.
4? ipiscopal Towers i. barred from bringing this complaint
and/or from..eking any and all of the relief requested becaus.
the applicable principles of equity, including, but not limit.d
to, lache., waiver and estoppel.
48. There is no privity or contract between Episcopal
Tower. and H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc.
49. H.M. Stauffer & Sons, Inc. did not owe any duty to
Episcopal Towers.
12
I.
50. The Plaintiff may have failed to join indi.pen.able
partie..
51. H.M. Btauffer , Son. denie. that any produot it .old
wa. u.ed in the oon.truotion of the oondominium projeot in
que.tion and .triot proof of .ame ie demanded.
52. H.M. Btauffer , Son. denie. that any produot it .old,
etriotly denying that any produot wa. eold to Bpieoopal Towere,
wae in any way defective.
S3. Any act. or omieeione of H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Ino.
were not a eubetantial oauee or factor of the eubjeot inoident
and did not reeult in the damagee allegedly .uutained by
Ipiecopal Towere.
54. The damage. alleged in the Plaintiff'e Complaint may
have been cau.ed or oontributed to by either thft Plaintiff, the
builder, developer, or other oontractore or euboontractor.
employed by the Plaintiff or the builder/developer.
55. The Plaintiffe are barred from recovery and/or are
limited in their recovery under the Statute of Repoee by virtue
of the prevailing etate of the eoientifio or indultrial knowledge
available to H.M. Stauffer' Bone, Ino. at all timee material an~
relevant hereto.
"
1 .
"
1 I
1
13
i "
WHEREFORI, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer' Son., Inc.
re.pectfully reque.t. thi. Honorable Court diemi.. the
Plaintiff'. Complaint.
Re.pectfully Submitted,
N
-~-
US , HOHIllNADJill.
Datil
j s",',,,
. '.'---7:::>
~'
.. B v'"
~-y.
I re
Attor
Attor
:n:l N
Lanea
(717)
an .
ey for Defendant
ey 1.0. ..71315
rth Queen Street
ter, fA 17603
:199-37:16
I
,
I
,I II
"
,
Ii I
I
, ,
,.
"
',.
,
"
"
,
"
u
"
, I
, ,
VlaUZCATZON
I, Na,.cy J. Frullh, verify that I am Vice pr..ident of
Admini.tration at H.M. Stauffer , Son., Inc. and a. .uch, I am
authoriled to give the verification on it. behalf, and further
verify that the fact. .et forth in the attached Anewer and New
Matter to Plaintiff'. First Amended Complaint are true and correct
to the be.t of my knowledge, infox'mation and belief. I acknowledge
that, had I knowingly made false statements in thi. document, I
would be subject to the penalti.. of a misdemeanor of the third
ala.. pur.uant to 18. Pa. C.B.A. Section 4909 regarding unsworn
falsification to authoritie..
H.M.
)
.T...... :'/ "IN ,).'t_
-"'"
, II
(
\
,
,
,,'
I
I,;
, I
,
i'
','j
,\
,,,,.
CI.TI'ICATI 0' I..VIOI
I;.
I henby certify that I have thi. day ...rved a true and
correct copy of the foregoing document upon the fOllowing per.onl.)
and in the following manner, which .ervice .ati.fied the
requirement. of the penn.ylvania Rul.. of Civil Procedure.
,>>
S.rvice py Pi~.t cIa.. Mail Addre...d .. Follo~.E
.>
Jo.eph D. Shelby, I.quire
Ick.rt, Seaman., Cherin , Mellott
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street, P.O. Box 1248
Harri.burg, PA 17108-1248
Andrew J. Connolly, I.quire
po.t , Schell, P.C.
1800 John F. Kennedr Boulevard
Philadelphia, PA 9103-7480
Datel q ~9t,
, HOHINADIL
.,
, ,
.'
.,
L
"
'I,: , I,
,
.,
i n .1'\ (!1
[ , (,n .,
. ,f) "'I
"11il' . '"'J Inl
l1' , "r
/. (:.j': I ,~q
" !'(I. 1:;\ "
~~ I ""l 'I1~1
I: .e.
~ iI' ~,;.; ,,)( I
I' (,If ..... t.'.)I\'
;,)'.1 " ,'I
I'" ,..
~
'f) .'
"
"
"
II
I'
. ,
rlJ
'I I,
i',
, ,
,'1
I
, ,\
"
Ii \
.,
.
,
'I-,j
"
, "i
' d-:,
"II.
, ..,....','
II,
!I,
,Ii
\'11
1,.--',
..
"
"
"
'I I
"
"
.,
'I'
.,
"
'I
,\\1_1;," I
lilll (I
"
."
o !;
"'1),\;,,
'Ii,
,\1
, q
"I
, . "'~,
"
"
,/
"
11'1
\~( I,.
I
^"
,
-t]l
.. '
~w~ ~Jt::::y ~~TI~~" '1oa~~JI;
',i ~~ "'" '~T' ., """., H"'O,
~J' ~j1"'M l~'~'N' MAT ..
, ~H'il' ~''\.'"'' '.Vi . '
.;
~AW 0"'0.1
~~OL~U.i HOMJNADJ~
. UM.INH~U'" .
illl' 110"'" Q~il.1I ""1111'
~ANC~.TI", flA. I~
4' .
. "....y II."" TltA''''' \YlTll1II
lOW. ",~I ".. ....,., .,., ,OW Tltl
dOIOlNAI. '11."1 IN 'Nil ~'H.
, '
t~.. ,.'
I
,
.
I
I'.
','/"
"
,\'"'~."
,,'
"
, ,
I'
'.
, '
il
I'
I
f
" ~,
I,
. -
'.
of treating and manufacturing wood products including cox Hoover
Firex Plywood. In 1984 Additional Defendant Hoover regularly
sold wood treated products in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
4. Plaintiff mpiscopal Towers has filed a complaint
again.t Stauffer and there~fter amended it. Complaint to a
documont titled First Amended Complaint, a copy of which i.
attached hereto as Iilxhibit "A". The allegations contained in the
complaint of mpi.copal Towers/Shippen.burg Pennsylvania are
incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length.
5. Defendant Stauffer ha. filed an Answer and New Matter
to the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint denying any and all
liability. A copy of the An8wer and New Matter is attached
hereto a8 Iilxhibit "B".
6. To the extent the allegations of the Plaintiff"
Complaint are true, the Plaintiff's damage8 were caused by the
deterioration and/or delamination of Firex Plywood manufactured
and .upplied by Additional Defendant Hoover.
WHBRBFORB, Defendant Stauffer demand8 judgement again.t
Additional Defendant Hoover on the ground. that Hoover i8 801ely
liable, jointly and severely liable or liable over to the
12
Vlal'ICATION
I, NaMY J. Frush, verify that I am Vice pre8ident ot
Administration at H.M. Stautter , Sons, Inc. and as such, I am
authoriled to give the verification on its behalt, and turther
verity that the tacts set torth in the attached Complaint Joining
Additional Detendant Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc. are true
and correct to the best ot my knowledge, intormation and beliet.
I acknowledge that, had I knowingly made talse statement. in this
document, I would be subject to the penalti.s ot a misdemeanor ot
the third class pursuant to lB. Iila. C.S.A. Section 4909 regarding
unsworn talsitication to authoritie..
)
,
I
'1
, .
il
I' ,
,
,
, .
'\1
"
'.
IbhIbIt A
~H .1.1I'.h', .. .,;,.'"
(.~
101"",,, .v
.1
,I
I I
'I
"
I
,
"
,
"
"
'i"
I,
, '
J\ I
,I
"
'I'
8. The cau.. of the IeaJdnl in the facility's roof was deterioralion lIId10r
delamination of Ibe Firell plywood. This conclusion wu arrived Ilt, amonl olbers, by a
representative of Stauffer, u indicated on Ibe letter attached hereto u Exhibit "B" and incorporated
by reference herein.
9. No other plywood used in the Facility's roof haa deteriorated except the Pirex
plywood sold to Episcopal Towers by Stauffer.
10. Episcopal Towers afforded Stauffer III opponunity to replace the deteriorated
plywood, but Stauffer declined the opponunity.
11. In order to prevent a collap.. of Ibe deteriorated roof, Episcopal Towers hu
been compelled to remove the deteriorated plywood IIId replace it at a cost of approximately
S3',000.00. As a mult of Stauffer's refusal to remove and replace Ibe deteriorated plywood,
Episcopal Towers has been damaaed in Ibe aforesald amount.
12. Upon removinllbe deteriorated plywood and replacinl it on buildinl A, Ibe
contractor noticed that the plywood on buildinl B had also deteriorated IIId would need replaced.
The plywooclllbulbinl on bulldinl B wu also sold to Episcopal Towers by Stauffer IIId wu 011I-
lIaIf inch CDX Hoover Firex plywood, which wu mlllufactured and/or sold to 5tau{{er by Hoover.
-3.
.
~QVNT v - BREACH 0" IMPLED W AJlRANTY OF n:J:N.Q~
FOR A PART1CJlLrU PURPOSi;
32. The avennenll lit (orth in puaaraphs 1 throuah 31 are incorporated by
,.(ennce Iwein~ as If lit (orth In full.
33. Stauffer, when 11l1ina the plywood sheathlnalo Episcopal Towers, knew that
the plywood'. intended PUrpoll was for use in construct!na a roo((s).
304. Episcopal Towers relied on Stau((er, as an expert in the fumlshlna o( certain
bulldlnl materla1s, incllll1lnl thOIl needed (or the construction o( a roo((s).
35. The plywood shclathinl sold 10 Episcopal Towers by Stauffer was not fit tor
the purpose for which It was IOld -. 10 construct a roo((s).
36. A callll o( II:tlon (or breach of Imp1ltd warranty o( fitness (or a particular
purpose I. permlulble In PennsylvllI)ia under 13 Pa. C.S.A. 12315.
-9.
I .
VERIFTCATIQN
J, \N\\\\~~~. M~ tt~l'lerebY verify and Slate that the faeu set forth in the
forelolnl document are true and correct to the best of my infonnlltion, knowledlll and belief. I
understand that false Slat.emenu herein are mllde subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. 14904
relaUnI to unsworn verification to authorities.
, ,
"
, ,
"
, '
,
, I"
"
"
"
, ,
, ,
I 11\
,
"
-.t.
,..
'"
JMBER -' PL YWOOO
. TREATED LUMBER
RQOr- TRlJSSES
FLOQR TRUSSES
COMPONENTS
MIL.L WORK
BUILDING MATCRIALS
,-
PRODUC:IRS OPt
Sta: er
It."" STAUFfD... SONS'. INe:.
U' Gl.EXO... DRIVE
~a. SOIt 3.
LfDU.. p~ n1J4G
In7l en.zaM'
~
,......,...... .......
~@
Dricon@
...---
\ .,
, "
, ',,,
..-
""(11) );..n
,",-",.~
'.'.'. '.:.. t' ;, ,L.";'U,~' :'v
,:.'\t'l I .. '"
.. , . I..', /lI." ~ I I .'
- I -',,} ;,." ....;, ,~.~".J >.
II <.up ~ ,'I' "1\,': : ,J
1',1" .1 .~ I ,~ 11,' , "
:l, '" "I
'IFr ,i,'j ,\:1"
:'7':'1, ",," "0, I:.i".' J
}.
',.
.,It' , 11. t. .0"
... ~:.l,~:J"""
<1',"'1.. ,,',.,. ,
I' ,\''..11 t,'r '.,'P',
".' "
~ " '. '. " I " ,'. :
"
, " ...., ,." .....,
, ,~~,,' '. '~\.I .'" ..'
, -~~'.)1.,/',\ t'
J;'" IJ i'~ :t.'t..~J I
'I ,II" . ''\
, "~ '" ' , .....,
.,'1"1.1 : .1
;!:~.,d~~Ji~:~1 . ,,'1.,1' "1
"
( . ~ ~ \' "
~r-r:--;:1i"~r-' :; ,..,. ';::':~\-:I :;~:-;::JI"'~ ;.0,"."':';;:;;;'''~~:' -::':'-;-::71.,.. ,.,~- ,~:'I":~'~ \; r'.~~;;:f~rI'I'I,.9~ .~V~::;I'~~~;';~'-'
, "r".~, t' '-.'.."... . "". " ";,~," .'\' t,,,,,, '0 ' J!.' "f '\' I ., \_ I'. I 'I'" '~ l,' '1""''\,
I"...,..,.'u..,:.... ."" """" " ... 'i "~.r.' ",." '"'.. ~'.\o" "", li'\",; ~''''r)' ,'" ,'"' ,...I.t" ,,'. ,", ,,' ,"'.'.' ,,,.'f, . ~: ,.,.,
, :'.,,;'t..."!:~, t, "'.., . ~ " ',' I. :,.'''' ,,' '~:l .~',J', ~ 't~'!'J.I~I(:. .."L~l'IJ',;,,!'.\, 'i..'", '.' ',', , ' '! '7' "..,' .;
, " If,'..', ,'.,,~'lo \, . '.i'\', .,.J.; t ..... " q J..,.~ ..~.. ...",:a""',JI\ 'W.' n~... ~ ~l N .-.,......lo.;.....- I, ~-~ ~../.. '..,;;1. ,1" ~ ,"~.,~.L. .:..,\~ ..,rI
. ,
'" ,\i "\ ,.,."I;~f:-;,",l J'J J,;., )1,' J.::d '':J:)(.'y:i': ""'It: 1,II'~l ,I
..'r" ~"'I,I,.;!t":' :CI',lj"" It,',I;.:ljl.?'~C~:,:,, 'I,'~,\,~r."h'l
.Irar~ and Corl(llllon~IlI'Slrot1 i~: ", :',j 'j'. ..1 -.1,11
'~ '11'1 I' "~ 'I .
'I':'" " J
1"1/1, " .,:'
.,.__" ._,_.' .._u.
'..I,; t ,I ',I," ;"1 ", ~'J')F;\ '''~JJ.: .") ~: r;,:t ,.' , '1' ,'1 ~:' ,;
All ..Iei bY If; M: St'.iJlf.r.nlf 5ll1U~ 1n'c: .(If.....l~ !'1I.1"d" Sl11l n"rru. \ll~f.tt t.'I~1( loll owing 11m" .M
condition.,
,1.J','
....---''''...,..-
--- -"."-.' ---,..---.-...-.-........,...-,.. ._,-'..,. 't" .,.----"
1. SlIuHer .h.1l not bf,1I.IlICllor .ny d,l.y In p,rlorm.nc, or I.llurlto p.rlurm;H th. d.I.y
or '.lIur. II CQu..d by .n ,v.nt b.yond III rUlon.bl, control.
. ,h. " ,'.': -, I t
2, Whll. ev.;" .rfplt will be; m'Il' to mut . CUllom.r'. d,"very ~.t., o.lIv.ry ",..p.clflc
hour Clnnot b. gu.r.ntud, . . "I I',. ,. i ~ .,'.
", ;}"i',;;'r:... 3. SI.uff.r r.ltln. . ..curll'( Int.rutln .11 gQod.,hlppold to cUllom.r until p.ym~nt In lull
.:"",,;~__ ".1 "-,n ,_l~,.#..,.. ""\' n' .-.-..-_.....-..-T."~.rr-"".. """-". .~,.......-.... --.. ...-'S ..-
'~r' ,'''',. '''""p """ r'"llllf .... ,.,\,.,1" II ".I,l :.11 .I-'ll, ...~ '''\I,04rJ i.~,l~\;"'.;.",.r Ill.,..."
,. ''-i " ,"'"; .'Vl "'"" ""~l I I' ' ,
.Ji' 'i\,'" ;.~;~:..'\.-.,/","Y:../...t: ' I; '. "1"1 ..~ ~ I iI, l ., "~
I___.~~'~ ..:::" \.',_..:.~~,~ .:-,...-1..4J.T1It cU'Ulrnu1balJ.no,tlfy SlIuIJ.vlmFUdl4UI!tAfJhormIIQ 'l\V.daIIY..~vm'r,uPo~r' .: ..
t-.' ~~'''::~. : ",:~:~~:::~.,:~~;~tIO~:~.I~~~;~~~_8~~~~~ag~ O~!I~~.t~,' ~u..~o,~~~~td!~'~~~~',P~I~.~, th, ,.:;.";,
" , . ,', .. , ' I I ~l, j t I 1',,4 ,. ' , , I':" I, I
5., Th. cUltom" .h.1l notify 5t,uII,r Imm.dl.t,ly an r,cI/pt 01 .ny non-conforrnlng 80od., .
, whl"upon St.ulflr .h.ll, tl lu option, ,Ith,r r'Pllr th, 8ood., r.pl.Cf 1/1. gClCld., or 81v, th. cUllom,r .
cr.dlt 'or thl prlc, 01 Ihe 80od.. Th' cUllom.r'l r,p.lr or 800dl without SI.ulf,r'. uprlll 'PPfov.1 conlll.,
I tUtti Icc'Pt.not of th, goad. I. If th,y I'Itr' ccnlormln8, .nd 5t.ufl..r I. not flbl' for thl 'kpoln.. of'
. rep.lr, ' " I !
. I '
I e. CUllom m.d, goad. canna, bt r'turn'd, Othlr gClCld. tAn be rpturn'd only .t thl cu..
tOmer'..kPln.. .nd with 5uuHtr'. Ikprt.1 .pprovll. When goodl.rt rllurn,d wI\lIlUdI .ppror.I, Slluffer
, 1'111I give th. cu.tom,r crtdlt lor thl prlc. of the 80od. II" . rtllocklng ch.ftI of 1611.
,
I
,
,
. I
7, Th. CUllnm,r'. r,m.dlu In aut In th... ttrm. Ind condlllon. .r, th. cUIlCllll,r'l 'kclu. .
.1". r,m,dl.., Ind und,r no clrcum.unCII Ih.1I 51.uff,r Il. IIlbl, la, Iny l.bclr,\cl.,m. or lor .ny oth,r i
.pecl.l, Incldentel or conlfqu,ntlal d.m.V' .rI.lng aut 01 . III. 01 good. a' . d,l.y . n ilia d.llvlry of good.. .
,
I '
I
I
I
,
I
I
-
,
.
;', \
" "J '.." ~ , . . I
,. .
,l"," ..
, 1 .,.:' ,I "'" 'r
" \,
......- "..,.. -. .
" . , .. 'I I ,
'- ,
. '
),
',' "f,:' ',r
\1 '\,,'
" . tt.. ,",
,. .
,,'
......., :
,':,1.' "1 ." ,
'., . J
' ,.'~ ,;1 t.~'" , ":,'.. '.
'.'
"
,," "I,
, . ,
,.16ER - PLYWOOD
TREATED LUMBER
ROOP TRUSSES
FLOOR TRUSSES
COMPONENTS
MILL WORK
BUILDING. MATERIALS
,-
I
,
(~
.....
-'--
~
PROOUCERS OFI
Sta.. er-
N.IIt. STAUfflR' .. SONS. IHe.
n QLlftOlAo IlRIVE
, PlOt.._
, WL:A;. p~ Ia4lI '"
,.. .."', ,',
m7I ....m:r
Drico~
-
1111 ',I,\IJllllllrlllll'II\I\J11111i'Jl'lllrll'I',lilll "111', ,\1, ~ld 11111111111)')1\11111 III 'JI Il'd 'dill
t 11 1111", I',\ld (Ill I\'d III ,\1) i J~ll r I l!l I '(
. :.., 11i11' ILII" . IT IS THE ONI. Y ITEMIZID 811.1:. YOU WILL BE RECEIVING. NO CI.A1MS' FOIft Sll6Wl'"
III O.AM.AOID SHIPMIINTlS WI 1.1.. B/l. CONSIDeRED UNL.E5S' NOTED ON THE DELIVIfRY REClllPT Ai TIME
II'DeLIVERY. THIIJ SLIP MIJI5T-' BE RIiI'tlRNmWI.mAN'Y' CI.AlM.
ION. SHIPPllD ITIMS WIU. REMAIN.' aNI B'ACI<' ORDEAl UNl:.ESS.CANCELLIiD.
A~IlVID IV'
10Ul1'O
IHlfO'TO
~tN~elD ijl[ll I~O~P
'!3'U \)~fft'l" RlMD-
LANCASTER ~ \ 7,0)4)1.
EPfSCQPAL rOloliRS
:MJl..o.ftlJRG
OLDlJ ~
~ :1061.... O.UM.
" . ",'.
. '.
,.-.
\
,-
I,
"'/1.f/ U, '9U
Pf."-CJI.ut Co/U.tNu!.t:l.Olt
W 6 rJtLi.JuJ Rd.
, LlWaAtf-t. PA 17601
ATTH' SIIIII Hf.'''1Jl.
Ch/Ut9t. Oll.dfJI. "
v1. Cht1Jl9f. '011. C."tt1"9 pJ.lJNood IDA' buLLcf.l..,tg 'A' I c.u.t II.ppll.oWnllttLl/ 200 p~ . """.JII#U . 00
t. CuttlK9 ptlplood duf. to ml4pLac.td ~.tud4 4Kd c.tlp~.~"""""~""~45.00
3. ChdJlQf. to ll.f.c.o~.tIl.uc.t ~..u OVM .thf. d.f.vIltOIl. ~h/l,'.t. "....."t"Il~60 .00
V' 4. BuLLd up ~~ lit ~~. (T-51.n,,""",,"-$10.00
5. Ex.tf.lld..t4.Lt.J. 01\' T"5 4Kd. T"5 ~f.4 .to 4l.I.'QUI '011. bJr.l.clt.":lTIt,,""$1".00
6. Cht1JlrJt. to 'La.6/t tLf.vlltolt, ~h41.t a+ po.lJtt 0' /l.DO' Pvtf.tAA.ti..oll'.I"lIIallln""rt450. 00
Nore '.. A"" pltDbJ.fJf14 w.l,tIt dJtIp14l.1. J.~.toaa.<<o" aLII. to .t.\.c.t.4.4 pLac.tmvtt ../tAU ~ '
bf. ou.t ll.f.4po~.lbJ.LLtv bu.t. ..ha.Lt. bt. ~otd.v boll.t. b" .tht. PaJtd. la.b.t.l.e4to.\:l"l.
I'
f)
,\ , ..
RE' EpL6c.l1p41. TQUlw,
, ,
ACCEPTANCE OF CIIANGE ORI1ER'
COLLEGE VTLLAGE BUTLrJERS, INC.
. .
, .
Izu'e/!..:., ~ J th--Lr;-
d~~ ~I
Ulltf. ~ - -'I ~ r..y'
/;;. . f,
4JN~~O~ llJr:::r
- '~/M ~~3-
-
~ 8\ A~ ,"" 01'\ \~ ,
V ,G~~ ft · "IN.. S ~fL
s, I#~ .
/'....-::-~.
~. \
tI I
9Q,QCl !
,
~
~
tf\ ,f"
-l ",e
0.."'::.' 0
~4...( -:,(lJ \L.
,~\ \ c..,V/
"
(\."
.'
..-
---'
, I
,.
".
"
"
IIlllllbIt .
,,, ;!lll "h" ".. 01, ,." 'I.. H' t1," (f)
,
"
",
:'
!I
"
,I
, I
I ,
"
I,
.,
,
.,1
,I
1.,1
,
,
, '
"
d
I
'/
.'
. ,
"
"
"
"
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PL2AS OF CUMBERLAND GOUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPiNSBURG
PIlNNSYLVANIA,
Plaintiff
No. 9$-601
VI.
H.M. STAUFFSR 'SONS, INC.,
Dehndant
g..IHDAN'l". ANln.. ~ Nmf NATU"
TO PLA%HTt..'s .%IIT ~ID COMP~AIHT
,
1. Denied. Arter reasonable investigation the Dehndant
H.M. Staurrer , Sons, Inc. is without Burricient inrormation to
rorm . belier as to the truth or the averments in Paragraph 1 or
the Plaintirr's Complaint. They are, thererore, denied. Strict
proor is demanded, if relevant, at the time or trial.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. Arter reasonable investigation the Der~ndant
H.M. Staurrer , Sons, Inc. is without surricient inrormation to
rorm a belier as to the truth or the averments in Paragraph 3 or
the Plainti~f's Complaint. They are, thererore, denied. Strict
proor i. demanded, ir relevant, at the time or trial.
.. Denied as stated. It i. specirically denied that
Episcopal Towers purchaled plywood sheathing rrom Stauffer.
Rather, Winfield Development Corporation or 2316 Dairy Road,
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601 purchased certain plywood sh.athing
rrom Defendant Staurrer to be shipped to Episcopal Tower./
Shipp.n.bur9, Penn.ylvania. A. re~ard. all other all'9ation.
contained in Paragraph 4 of the Plaintiff', Complaint, after
rea.onabl. inv..tigation the Defendant i. without .uffioi.nt
information to form a b.lief a. to the truth of the.. averments.
Th.y ar., ther.fore, denied.
5. D.nied a. .tated. Th. Plaintiff did not purcha..
plywood .h.athing from the Defendant Stauffer. The Defendant
Stauffer, however, .old plywood .heathing to Winfield Development
Corporation and, on belief, a portion of that was manufactur.d
and/or .old to Stauff.r by Hoover Wood Treated product., Inc, A.
regard. the balance of the averments in Paragraph 5 of the
Plaintiff'o Complaint, aft.r rea.onable inve.tigation, the
Defendant Stauffer i. without sufficient information or belief a.
to the truth of tho.e averment.. They are, therefore, denied.
Strict proof i. demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
6. Denied a. .tated, Defendant Stauffer did not .ell
firex plywood to Epi.copal Tower. nor did it i..ue an invoice to
Epi.copal Tower.. To the contrary, Stauffer .old fir.x plywood
.heathing to Winfi.ld D.v.lopment Corporation and the invoice
referenced a. Exhibit "A" to the Plaintiff', Complaint clearly
indicate. that the plywood wa. .old to Winfield Development
Corporation. By way of further an.wer, no contractual
relation. hip exi.ted between Defendant Stauffer and Epi.copal
Tower. at any time relevant to the Plaintiff'. Complaint.
2
Finally, by way of further an.wer/ Exhibit "A" which i. attached
to the Plaintiff'. Complaiut .peak. for it.elf.
7. Cenied. After rea.onable inve.tigation the Cefendant
H.M. Stauffer' son., Inc. i. without .ufficient information to
form a belief a. to the truth of the averment. in Paragraph 7 of
the Plaintiff/. Complaint. They are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof i. demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
8. Cenied in accordance with penn.ylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1029(.).
9. Cenied, The Cefendant Stauffer did not .ell firex
plywood to the Plaintiff Bpi.copal Tower.. A. regard. the
balance of the averment. in Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff',
Complaint, after rea.anable inve.tigation the Cefendant Stauffer
i. without .ufficient information to form a belief a. to the
truth of tho.e averment. and they are, therefore, denied. Strict
proof i. demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial,
10. While it i. admittad that Bpi.copal Tower. afforded the
Cefendant Stauffer an opportunity to replace the deteriorated
plywood, Stauffer believe. and therefore avers that they had no
obligation, legal or otherwi.., to do '0.
11. Paragraph 11 of the Plaintiff/ Complaint is a
conclusion of law to which no re'PQn.ive pleading i. required.
By way of further an.wer, it i. .pecifically denied that
Epi.copal Tower. ha. been damaged by any act or omi..ion of
3
Stauffer. To the contrary, stauffer had no busin.ss relationship
with Plaintiff and therefore had no duty to take any action with
respect to the Plaintiff's complaints. As regards all other
allegations, after rea.onable inveetigation the Oefendant is
without .ufficient i,nformation to form a belief ae to the truth
of the averments. They are, therefore, denied. Strict proof is
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
1~. Denied ae etated. The Oefendant Stauffer did not .ell
tirex plywood to the Plaintiff Spiecopal Towere. A. regard. the
balance of the avermente in Paragraph 12 of the Plaintiff'.
Complaint, after reasonable investigation the Defendant ie
without eufficient information to form a belief as to the truth
of the averment. and they are, therefore, denied. Strict proof
ie demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
COUNT % . ..tACH O. IX'..SS CONTaACT
13. The Answer. to the averment. of Paragraph 1 through 1~
of the Plaintiff's Complaint are inoorporated herein by
reference.
14. Denied. It ie epeoifioally denied that the Oefendant
had an agreement with Episoopal Towere for the eale of plywood
sheathing. To the contrary, Oefendant Stauffer'. oontraot was to
supply plYWOOd .heathing to Winfield Oevelopment Corporation.
Oefendant Stauffer had no agreement or contraotual relationehip
with the Plaintiff Epieoopal Towers.
4
15. Denied. It il Ipecifically denied that a contract
exiltl betwe.n Stauffer and Epilcopal Tow.rl. To the contrary,
Stauff.r'l agr..m.nt WII to lupply plywood Ih.athing to Winfield
D.v.lopment Corporation and not Epilcopal Tow.rl. It i. furth.r
Ipecifically denied that the terml of the bUlinel1 r.lationlhip
ar. embodied in ord.r/invoic.1 I.nt by Stauff.r to Epilcopal
Tow.rl. To the contrary/ thole ord.rl and invoicel outline the
r.lationlhip betwe.n Stauffer and Winfield D.v.lopm.nt
Corporation for materiall to be shipp.d to Bpilcopal ~ow.rl. By
way of furth.r anlw.r/ Paragraph 15 of the Plaintiff/. complaint
i. a conclu.ion of law to which no r..pon.iv. pl.ading i.
n.c....ry.
16. Denied. It i. .pecific.lly deni.d that a contract
.xi.tl betw.en Stauffer and Epilcopal Tow.rl. To the contr.ry/
St.uffer h.d no bUline.1 relationlhip with Bpilcopal Tow.r. .t
.ny time r.levant to the Pl.intiff/. Co~plaint, AI the invoice.
cle.rly indic.te, Winfield Dev.lopm.nt corpor.tion is
the p.rty with whom Stauff.r contracted. By way of further
.n.w.r, provilion. of the invoic.1 to which the Complaint
ref.rr.d hal to do with good I r.j.ct.d by the purcha.ers, al non-
conforming/ at the time of delivery. It do.. not create .n
obligation for Stauffer to replace goods subs.qu.ntly found or
all.g.d to be d.fective by a non-cultom.r, .uch .1 Episcop.l
Tow.r., not in privity with St.uffer. By way of further .nlwar,
5
Par~iraph 1. of the Plaintiff', Complaint i. a aonolu.ion of law
to which no re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
17. Cenied. It i. .pacitically denied that Stautter .old
firex plywood to Bpi,copll Tower.. To the contrary, Stauffer did
not .ell firex plywood to Bpi.copal Towers but rather .old
plywood to Winfield Development Corporation. The balance ot the
allegation. contained in paragraph 17 ot the Plaintiff'.
Complaint are conolu.ion. ot law to which no re.pon.ive pleading
i. required.
lB. cenied. Paragraph lB ot the Plaintiff'. Complaint i. a
conalu.ion ot law to which no re.pon.ive pleading is required.
WHEREFORB, Detendant H.M. Stauffer' Son., Inc. re.pecttully
requests thi. Honorable Court di.miss the Plaintiff's Complaint.
COUNT II . ..IACK O. INPLIID CONTRACT
19. The Oefendant'. An.wer. to the averments ot Paragraph 1
through 18 ot the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein
by reference a. though .et torth at length.
20. Paragraph 20 of the Plaintiff', Complaint i. a
conclu.ion of law to which no re.pon.ive pleading is required.
By way of turther an.werl
a. Denied. It i. spacifically denied that Epi.copal
Tower. paid Stautter tor plywood. To the contrary, Winfield
Oevelopment Corporation paid Stalltfer tor plywood pur.uant
to the contract and bu.ine.. relation.hip between Stautfer
6
, ..
and Winfield Development Corporation.
b. Admitted in part and denied in part. It i.
admitted that Stauffer .old certain plywood .heathing to
Winfield Development Corporation to be .hipped to ipi.copal
Tower.. However, a. regard. all other allegation. contained
in Paragraph 20(b), including the allegation that Stauffer
provided all of the plywood to ipi.copal Tower., the
Defendant i. without sufficient information to form a belief
a. to the truth of tho.e averment. and they are therefore
denied. Strict proof of the .ame is demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial.
c. Admitted in part and denied in part. It i.
admitted that a Stauffer sales repre.entative inspected
certain plywood at Episcopal Tower. and that Stauffer
notified Hoover Treated Wood Producte, Inc. that certain
Hoover Treated Plywood u.ed to con.truot the roof of a
bUilding at ipi.copal Towers wa. deteriorating. It is
denied, however, that thi. action reflect. a contractual
relation.hip between Defendant Stauffer and Epiecopal
Tower.. To the oontrary, Stauffer wa. merely investigating
a complaint about a product claimed to have been supplied by
Stauffer pur.uant to a contract with Winfield Development
Corporation. A. regards the balance of the allegation.
contained in Paragraph 20(c) of the Plaintiff', complaint,
7
the Pefendant i. without .ufficient information to form a
belief a. to the truth of thoee averment. and they are
the~ofore denied and .trict proof i. demanded, if relevant,
at the time of trial.
~1. The avermente contained in Paragraph ~1 of the
Plaintiff'. Complaint are conclu.ion. of law to which no
re.pon.ive pleading i. required. By way of further anewer, it i.
denied that any contract exi.t., expre.e, implied or otherwiee,
between Epi.copal Towere and Stauffer. See the Defendant'.
An.were to Paragraph. 19 and ~o of the Plaintiff'a Complaint.
22. The avermente contained in Paragraph ~2 of the
Plaintiff'a Complaint are conalu.iona of law to which no
re.ponaive pleading i. required. By way of further anawer/ it ia
.pecifically denied that any contract exiate, expreaa, implied or
otherwiae, between Epiacopal Tower. and Stauffer. See the
Oefendant'a Anawers to Paragrapha 19 through 20 of the
Plaintl,H' a Complaint.
'a. The avements contained in Paragraph 23 of the
Plaintiff' a Complaint are conclusion. of law to which no
responaive pleading is required, By way of further answer, it ia
apecifically denied that any contract exists, exprea., implied or
otherwi.., between Episcopal Towera and Stauffer. See the
Oefendant/. An.wera to paragraph. 19 through 21 of the
Plaintiff', Complaint.
8
. "
II
,
WHIR.FORI, the Detendant H.M. Stautter 'Son., Ino.
rl.pectfully reque.t thi. Honorable Court di.mi.. the Plaintiff'.
Complaint.
C!ODH'l' ;II . HIe pun BmnI.Ie:rAl.Y
~4. The Defendant'. An.wer. to the averment. of Paragraph 1
through 23 of the Plaintiff'. Complaint are incorporated herein
by reference a. though aet forth at length.
25. The allegation. con~ained in Paragraph 25 of the
Pl$intiff'. Complaint are conclusion. of law to which no
re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
26. The allegations contained in Paragraph 26 of the
Plaintiff', Complaint are conclu.ion. of law to which no
re.pon.ive pl.ading i. required.
WHIRIFORI, the Defendant H.M. Staufter , Son., Ino.
re.pectfully reque.t. thi. Honorable Court di.mi.. the
Plaintiff', Complaint.
aomrr J:V . ..IACK O. J:IOLJ:ml -....M'rY O. ....CJIA!I'l'uJ:L:J:n
~7. The Oefendant'. An.wer. to the averment. of Paragraph 1
through ~6 of the Plaintitt'. Complaint are inoorporated herein
by reference a. though .et forth at length.
28. Oenied. Paragraph 2B of the Plaintiff', Complaint i. a
conclu.ion of law to which no re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
~9. Cenied. Paragraph 29 of the Plaintift'. Complaint i. a
conclu.ion of law to which no re.pon.ivl pleading i. requirad.
9
~O. Denied. Paragraph 30 of the Plaintiff'e Complaint ie a
conclu.ion of law to which no reeponeive pleading ie required.
31. Denied. Paragraph 31 of the Plaintiff'e ComplMint ie a
conclu.ion of law to which no reeponei.ve pleading ie required.
WHEREFORE, Defendant H.M. Stauffer' Sone, Inc. respectfully
requeete thie Honorable Court diemi.e the plaintiff" Complaint,
~~~M~~~
I I. '9- A 'ARTICULAa ,oa,o..
32. The Defendant" Anewers to the avermente of Paragraph 1
through 31 of the Plaintiff's complaint are incorporated herein
by reference ae though eet forth at length.
33. Denied. It ie .pecifically denied that Stauffer sold
plywood .heathing to Bpi.oopal Towers. AI regarde the balance of
the avermente in Paragraph 33 of the Plaintiff's Complaint after
reaeonable inve.tigation, Defendant Stauffer i. without
euffioient information to form a belief ae to the truth of those
averment.. They are, therefore, denied. Strict proof i.
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
3., Denied. After reaeonable inveetigation, the 06fendant
Stauffer ie without eufficient information to form a belief ae to
the truth of the averment. in Paragraph 3. of the Plaintiff'e
complaint. they are, therefore, denied. Strict proof i.
demanded, if relevant, at the time of trial.
35. Denied, It i. .pecifiCally denied that Stauffer eold
plywood .heathing to Bpi.copal Towers. By way of further anewer,
10
, '.
"
Paragraph 35 of the Plaintiff'. Complaint i. a conclu.ion of law
to which no re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
36. paragraph 36 of the Plaintiff', Complaint is a
conclu*1on of law to which no re.pon.ive pleading i. required.
WHEREFORE, the eefendant H.M. Stauffer' Son., Inc.
r.e.pectfully reque.t. thi. Honorable Court di.mi.. the
Plaintiff'. Complaint.
Nmf NA~JlI
37. The Plaintiff'. Complaint may have failed to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.
38. The Plaintiff'. claim. are barred by the applicable
Statute of Limitations.
39. In the event it i. determined that a product supplied,
di.tributed and/or .old by eefendant Stauffer wa. involved a.
alleged in the Plaintiff'. Complaint, .aid product may have been
.ub.tantially altered after it l~ft the po..e..ion of Stauffer.
40. The Plaintiff ha. failed to mitigate any damage. it may
have .uftered.
41. No contractual relation.hip exi.t. between the
eefendant Stauffer and the Plaintiff Epi.copal
Tower./Shippen.burg Penn.ylvania.
42. If a contractual relation.hip exists, which is
.pecifically denied, the Plaintiff faited to notify Cefendant
Stauffer of the receipt of allegedly non-conforming good. a.
11
, "
required by the term. and condition. of .alo.
43. If a contractual relationehip exi.t., which i.
.pecifically denied, the Plaintiff Epi.copal Towerl/Shippen.burg
penn.ylvania made repair. without Stauffer'. expre.. approval
which aon.titute. acceptance of the good. a. if they were
conforming and the Defendant Stauffer i. thftrefore not liable for
any expen.e of repair a. outlined in the term. and condition. of
.ale.
44. No implied contract existed between the Plaintiff
Episcopal Towers/shippensburg Pennsylvania and the Defendant
Stauffer.
45. No implied warranties inured to th~ benefit of
Plaintiff.
46. The injurie. and/or damages allegedly .u.tained by the
Plaintiff may have been due to the negligence, act and/or
omis.ion. of other individuals and/or entitie..
47. Epi.copal Tower. i. barred from bringing thi. complaint
and/or from .eeking any and all of the relief reque.ted becau.e
the applicable principle. of equity, including, but not limited
to, lache., waiver and e.toppel.
48. There i. no privity or contract between Epi.copal
Tower. and H.M. Stauffer' Sons, Inc.
49. H.M. Stauffer' Son., Inc. did not owe any duty to
Epi.copal Tower..
12
, ,
" ,
50. Tne Plaintitt may have tailed to join indispensable
partie..
51. H.M. atautter , Son. denie. that any product it .old
wa. u.ed in the con.truction ot the condominium project in
que.tion and .trict proof of .ame is demanded.
52. H.M. Stautfer , Son. denie. that any product it .old,
.trictly denying that any product we. .old to Epi.copal Tower.,
was in any way detective.
S3. Any act. or omi..ion. ot H.M. Stauffer' Son., Inc.
were not a .ub.tantial cau.e or factor of the .ubject incident
and did not re.ult in the damage. allegedly .u.tained by
Epi.copal Tower..
54. The damage. alleged in the Plaintiff'. Complaint may
have been cau.ed or contributed to by either the Plaintiff, the
builder, developer, or other contractor. or .ubcontractor.
employed by the Plaintiff or the builder/developer.
S!. The Plaintiff. are barred from recovery and/or are
limited in their recovery under the Statute of Repo.e by virtue
of the prevailing .tate of the .cientific or indu.trial knowledge
available to H.M. Stauffer' son., Inc. at all time. material and
relevant hereto.
11
, "
.. ,
WHIRlrORl, the Defendant H.M. Stauffer' Sona, Inc.
reapeatfully requeat. thia Hor.~rable Court di.miaa the
Plaintiff" Complaint.
Re.peetfully Submitted,
N US , HOHENADIL
Date I
j
B
an a
for Defendant
Atto ey I.D. *47136
212 N rth Queen Street
Lanea ter, PA 17603
(717) :199-3726
I
I"
, I ,
I' ,
,
,I ,
'.')
,
"I
, I
, ,
I
, I
.,
14
, ,
IN THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS OP
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURO
PBNNSYLV ANlA
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION.. LAW
No. 95.601
v..
H.M. STAUPfER " SONS, INC.,
Defendant,
VI.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
INC. and PBNNCREST CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY
Additional Defendanll,
RI'.~Y TO DEFEND4N1, JI.M. ~l'~Uf>>'Jl" SONS, INC.'..
WWM A!lQ) NEW PtJA'J'TM 'Jl) PLAII\jTIFF'S FJRS'r. AMENDED COMPJ.q4.1NT
Plaintiff, EpilCOpll TowerllShlppcnsbura, Pennsylvania, by and throuah Its attorneys,
Ec:brt Seamanl Cherln " Mellott filel the followlna reply to Defendant H.M, Stauffer"
SOlII, Inc. 'I ("Stauffer") New Matter II follows I
37. The IlIlept\ons contained In pmaraph 37 of Defendant's New Matter are
c:onc:lulion. of law to which no reapon.lve pleadina I. required. To the extent such a
mponll II deemed to be required, the IlIleptions are denied,
31. The IlIlqationl contained in pmaraph 38 of Defendant'l New Matter are
conclulionl of law to which no relpOlllive pleadina Is required.
39. The IlIlqationl contained in pmaraph 39 of Defendant's New Malter are
conclualonl of law to which no reaponlive pleadina II required. To the extent such.
response II deemed to be required, the IlIleption. are denil'd. By way of further an.wer,
IftIt raIOIIIbIIlnveatlpllon, Plaintiff I. without knowled.. or InfQrmatlon .ufficl.ntlO
form I belief as 10 the truth of the a1Jeption that the product "may have been .ub.tantlally
a111n1d", tho 1'''1100 I., therefore, denied and .trIct proof thereof I. demanded.
40. The a1~,,110'l' contained In JlII'IIraph 40 of Defendant'. New Mauer are
conclullOll. of Jaw 10 which no reapone1v. pleadln. I. required. To the exlentluch a
l'IIpOI\" I. deemed 10 be nlqulred, the aIleptlon. 11'I denied,
41. 1110 a1lepllQl\I contained In JlII'IIraph 41 of Defendant'. New Matler 11'I
conclu.lonl of Jaw 10 which no reaponlive pleadln. II required,
42. The a1l.ept1on. contained in pmaraph 42 of Defendant'l New Mltler 11'I
conclullon. of Jaw 10 which no reaponliv. pleadln. II required. By way of further anlwer,
aftu reuonable Inveatlptlon, Plaintiff II without .ufficlent knowled.e or Information and I.
IIIIIbIe 10 determine what II meant by "notify". The a1le.atlonl 11'I, therefoR, denied and
proof thereof I. demanded, By way of further answer, Defendant, H.M. Stauffer was made
IWIIe that roofllll material. which had been wid by Defendant and which came 10 conltruct
blllldllll' for PlaIntiff were defective. Defonclant was notilled of the cost of repair and .Iven
III opportunity 10 reapond.
43. The a1lept1on. contained In pmaraph 43 of Defendant's New Matler 11'I
conclullon. of law 10 which no reapon.lve pleadln. II required. By way of further anlwer,
PlaIntiff I. lIIlIble 10 determine what I. meant by "~ce" and .conformin.. loodl. The
a1leptlonlll'l, therefore, denied and proof thereof II demanded. Further, 10 the contrary,
H.M. Stallffer WQI specifically notified of the non-conformln. .oodl and liven the
opportUnity 10 either repair or replace the .ood. purluant 10 the terms of the contract.
-2-
44. 111111'.....100. contained In JlIIIInp/I 44 01 Delendant's New Mllter are
conclllllon. 01 law to whidl no mponlive pleadlnll. required, To the elltent .uch I
1IIpOII. Ie cIeIIlIId to be Nqulred, the Illopllon. are denied.
45. 11II1I1....llon. contained In JlII'IIraph 45 of Defendant'. New Mllter are
concIulion. 01 law to which no mponlive pleadlnll. required, To the elltent .uch I
reapon.l. deImId to be required, the IIJeplion. are denied.
46. The 1I,..'lon. contained In JlII'IInp/I 4601 Defendant's New Mltter are
conclu.ion. 01 law to which no mponlive pleadlnlls required, To the elltent .uch I
rup'JIllJ I. clecmed to be required, the a1lelllions are denied. By wlY of further answer,
after reuonablo inve"lptlon, Plalnlillls without knowledle or Inlormation sutncient to
form I bellel u to the truth ollhe llleplion that the injurle. and/or damlllea sustained by
PIaInlill "may have been due to the nqlllence, let and/or omllllon. 01 other Individuals
and/or llllitlel", tile IIleptlon I., therelore, denied and strict proof thereof II demanded.
47. 11II1I1eptIon. contained In JlII'IInp/I .47 of Delendant'. New Mltter are
conclulion. 01 law to which no mpon.lve pleadlnlls required. To the utent such I
reapon. I. deemed to be required, the IIlqllion. are denied.
4'. 1111 1I1..,lIon. conlllned In pananp/l 48 of Delendant'. New Matter are
conchllion. 01 law to which no mpon.lve pleadlnlls required. To the elltent .uch I
reapon. I. clecmed to be required, the IIIJlllion. are denied.
49. 1111 llleptJOII. conlllned In ptraaraph 49 of Delendant'. New Mltter are
conclullon. of law to which no reaponlive pleadlnll. required. To the elltent .uch I
reapon. I. deemed to be required, lhe llleallions are denied.
.3.
50. The alloptlons contained In pal'IIrap/l50 of Defendant's New Matler are
CClCICluUons of law 10 which no responllve pleadlna is required, To the elltent such a
nspon.. Is deemed 10 be required, the alleaations are denied.
51. The ",,,lions are denied. To the contrary, all such roallna materials, II
WIll purcllued from Stauff.r, were used In the construction of said buildlnas.
52. The all,,'lons contained In pal'IIraph .52 of Defendanl's New Matter are
CClCIClullons of law 10 which no responsive pleadlna is required. 1'0 the extent such a
respon.. is cIeomed 10 be required, the alleaations are denied. To the contrary, all products
IOld by Stauffer 10 Epir.copa1 were defective and in deroaatlon of the Implied warranties of
Iltness at Issue.
53. The allcaatlons contained In parqraph 53 of Defendant's New Matler are
conclusions of law 10 which no responsive pleadina Is required. To the elltent such a
mponsels cIeomecl 10 be required, the ancaations are denied.
54. The alleaatlOlls contained In pal'IIraph .54 of Defendant's New Matter are
CClCICluUons of law 10 which no responsive pleadinals required, To the elltent such a
response Is deemed 10 be required, the alleaations are denied.
55. 'I'he aI\eptIons contained In pal'IIraph " of Defendant's New Matter are
CClCICluUons 01 law 10 which no responsive pleadlna is required. To the elltent such a
raponse Is deemed 10 be required, the all.ptions are denied.
-4- .
II
..
.il,
','I
,
,
, '
. ,
'i/'I .,
.,
" "
,
, "
" .
.,
, ,
(..,
,..
"H~', I
':J
,,'
, I
,
,
"
.\)
!,\,
" "
I
,..
'..'
I .
;s~ .
~..
...
..
I..'.
"
,
"
"
t'~
..
'1
~rt
tJl
.,
,I
;. I
"
"
)
"
"
"
",
"
. '
.,
')
"
I
.;.'1
'lh
',J ,~r)
).,1,
:1
. ,
I
.lj
....
, ,
parallraph 101' the Joinder complaint and sanle are therefore deemed to be denied, Strict proof's
demanded at time oftriul.
3. Denied lIS stated. Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc., not Hoover Wood Treated
Products, Inc., sold fire retardant plywood In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1984.
4, Admilled, Additional defendant, I loover Treated Wood Products, Inc" incorporates
by reference the preceding paragraphs of the Answer to the Joinder Complaintlllthoullh same were
set forth herein at length.
S, Admitted in pill1, denied In pill1. Additional Defendant admits that defendant, H,M.
Stauffer & Sons. flied an answer and new mailer denyinll all liability, However, aller relllonable
investigation, Additional Defendant is without knowledlle or InfoMation sufficient to fonn a belief
III to the truth oflhc mailers contained in defendant's, HoM, Stauffer & Sons, answer and new maller,
6, Denied. Additional Defendant is without knowledlle or infonnation sufficient to fonn
a belief III to the truth of the mailers contained in paragraph 8 of the Joinder complaint and same are
therefore deemed to be denied, Strict proof is demanded at time of trial.
WIIEREf'ORE, Defendant. Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc" demands judgment In ita
favor together with costs. allomey fees and any other relicI' deemed appropriated by the Court.
NEW MATTER
7. The plaintill's amended complaint and the defendant's joinder complaint may have
failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted,
8, The plaintill's claims and the claims of the amended Defendant are bilTed by the
applicable Statute ()fLimitatlons,
-2.
'), In the event it Is detennlned that a product supplied, dlstributcd and/or lold by the
additional defendllllt, Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc. WII8 involved 118 allc/ilcd In the plalntlll's
amendcd complaint, said product may have been substantially altcred or misused aller it Icft the
possession of Hoover,
10, The plaintiff and original dcfendant may have failed to mitigate any damagcI
allegcdly suffercd,
11, To the extent that the plaintiffs suffered any losscs or damages 118 allc/ilcd in tM
plalntill' comphlint, those losses and damages were caused by the rv:gligenee oflhe plaintiffs and
their servants, agents and consultants or by the neglil!ence of othcr persons, parties, or cntitics ovcr
whom Hoover had no control, Int he design, supervision of construction, construction and/or
operotion alld maintenance of Episcopal Towers, Thus,the claims 01' the plaintiffs should be blllTed,
IImltcd or reduced, in whole or part by the laws ol'Pennsylvania, includinll, but notlimltcd to, the
common law. the applicable provisions 01' the Pennsylvania Comparativc NCl!lIgencc Statutc and/or
thc UniConn Contribution Among Tortl'ell8ors Act.
12. The occull'Cnce referred to in Episcopal Towers' eomplalntlU1d any Injuries, losscs,
and damages alleged to have resulted therefrom were caused In substantial part by the plaintiffs', or
other pcrsons', parties', or entities', misuse of plywood and other materials and/or knowing usc 01'
plywood and other materials In a defective condition by the plaintiffs and their agents servants,
employees, and consultants, I)r by other persons, parties, or entities over whom Hoover had no
control, and thus Defendant H,M. Stauffer & Sons' claims should bc barred, limited, or reduccd, in
whole or In party by the laws of Pcnnsylvania, includinll but notllmitcd to, thc common law, the
.3.
applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Nelllillence Statute and/or the Uniform
Contribution Amonj Tortfeasors Act.
13. EpiscoplIl Towers is barred ll'Om brinllinll this complaint and/or Ii'om seekinll any or
all of the relief requested hecause of IIpplicl1ble principles of equity, includlnll, but notlimittd to,
IlIChes, wlliver, IInd estoppel.
14. Therc was no privity of contrllCt between Hoover and plllintifTs.
IS. Hoover did notlJwe any duty to plaintiffs,
16. Hoover is entitled to have its share of liability, if so found, reduced by the shore of
liability to IIIIY part which hos settled and/or by the sum of any settlementlllllount which that party
has paid and/or hY the reduction pennitted by the laws of Pennsylvania, includinll, but not limited
to, the Vni/ann Contribution Amonll Tortfeasors Actlllld the Comparative Nelllillence Act.
17, Hoover pleads all seulements and releases entered into between the plalntill's and any
defendants including any third.party defendants, as a defense to plaintill's' claims and further pleads
that It is entitled to the full benellt of any releases which may have been or which arc entered inLo,
whether or not such settlements have heen completed or disclosed iltthe time of verdict,
18, Hoover adopts and incorporates by reference the affirmative defenses of each of the
other defendants in this cose.
19, Hoover denies that its product was used in the construction of the ell'ected oreas In
question and strict proof of same is demanded,
20. Thc plaintiffs may have failed to join indispensable parties,
.4.
21. Hoover denies that any product, proved to have been sold by It, was In any way
dcfective,
22, . Any acts or omissions of Additional Defendant were not a substantial cause or factor
oflhc subject incldcnt and did not result In the damagcs allegedly sustained by the plaintiff,
23, The dwnages alleged in the complaint may havc been caused or contributed by either
the plaintiffs, thc builder/developer, or other contractors or subcontractors employed by plalntilT or
the builder/developer
24, The negligence and/or omissions of other Individuals and/or entities may have
constituted Intervening superseding causes of the dwnage or Injuries alleged to havc been sustained
by the plaintiff,
2S, Any damages sustained by the plalntllTwere caused by an unforeseeable, independent
Intervening cause which negates any liability allrlbutable to Hoover,
26, The accident and dwnages alleged are due to the ncgligence of third persons,
inclUding but not limited to co-defendants, or any additional defendants, over whom this defendant
exercised no contro\.
27, Additional Defendant avers that at the time of the incident, the product in question
may have becn altered, modified, or substituted, or WIlS in some form or fashion other than it was
at the time it left the possenlor. and controlllf Additional Defendant,
28, The damages or Injuries alleged to have been sustained by the plalntilTmay havc been
caused by the misuse. abuse. or altering of the product after It left the custody and control of Hoover,
-s-
ifit is proved that Additional Defendant's product Will indeed used hI the condominium projc<:t in
question,
29, Additional Defendant avers that the damaaes, if any, III contended by the plaintiffs
were caused by the acts, omissions, and other liability producing conduct by entitles not yet
identified but over whom Additional Defendant exercised no control or right of control,
30, There were no warranties, expressed or implied, milde by this detendant which lire
applicable herein,
31, There has been no breach of warranties, expl'essed or Implied,
32, The acts alleged in the Complaint were perfonned by an independent contractor and
not by an agent or servant of this defendant.
33, Any damages sustained by the plaintiff were caused by acts ofOod,
34, The plaintiff continued to use the product following discovery of a defect or after they
should have known of a defect,
3.5, Additlonnl Defendant denied that any product ofit Will defective, or unreaaonably
danaerous, or was other than supplied in a safe, proper, and workmanlike manner fit for safe, proper
and intended use thereof,
36, Additional Defendant avers thatlnt be proved that the plaintill's damages,lII alleied,
were caused in whole or In part by a product manufactured or sold by it that, at the time of
mllllufacturc or sule, It Is averred lhut the product complied with all applicable standards and
specifications,
I ..6..
37. At all timcs hcrcin and plllCcs mcnlloned, Hoover complied with alllellat obllllation.,
applicable laws, rellulations and standards.
38. Plaintiffs are burred from recovery and/or are limited in their recovery under tho
Statute of Rcpose by virtue of the prevailing stale ofthe scientific or industrial knowledllo avllllablo
to defendant Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc. at all times material and relevant hereto,
39. Any products of defendant Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc. which plaintiff
claims caused damalle to plaintiffs property were sold or supplied to a sophisticated purchaser, at
least as knowledgeable about the state of the scientific industrial knowledlle of wood preservinll
products as Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc, The IlCtions or inactions of this sophisticated
purchaser constitute a supersedlnll cause of any dlU1lalles which the plalntilT claims and therefore
precludes liability on the part of defendant Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc.
WHEREFORE, defendant, Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc" demands Judl101ent in it.
favor together with costs. attomey fees and any other relief deemed appropriated by the Court.
NEW MATTER CROSS.CLAIM PVRSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 215Z(d)
AGAINST DEFENDANTS,II.M. STAUFFER" SONS, INC. AND
PENNCREST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
COMES NOW. additional defendant, Hoover Treated Wood Products, Inc., by III attomey.,
Post" Schell, P,C" and sets forth the following New Matter in the nature of a Cross claim under
Pa, R.C.P, 22S2(d) against defendant, H,M, Stauffer & Sons, Inc,
40. Additional Defendants deny any and all liability to any party in this action.
41. If the plaintiff sustained injuries and damages. as alleged, and if the Additional
Defendant is found liable. such liability being expressly denied, then H.M. Stauffer & Sons,lnc. and
.7-
,
I
r 'of' . '~1
\i >, ..\
. ,. I
.,-1, " 1'1]
'I Ii I " ")1
\ I 'J
I J
t,
"
I
L'i " .'}
'I ,)
HI ...-. -.
I,
,
. .
,
"
,
,
,
II
1';1
"I
,',I
li',
.,
,00
"
'1
I
"
, ,
'1,1
,I
I' .
,
,
>
"
> '
~
~~
~:
IJ\" ,
\ ' ' ,
1)\
~
\l.'
~
ll.
C
. ,
"
,.
i
"
,
,
"
"
.,
, .
I'
, ,
~l
~
~
.,
'~ '
" .
:;
,.' "
n "
t~.
~~ \',',
\l~~
~~ .. .
~j
~ 0 "
~
(,
t'l
"
"
Iii
Iii,'
., ,
."
"
"
, .
,
,1.0
.
" ,
"
.,
-
\
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
EPISCOPAL TOWERS/SHIPPENSBURO
PBNNSYLVANI^,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION - L^ W
No. 95-601
VI.
H.M. STAUFFER" SONS, INC.,
Defendant,
VI.
HOOVER WOOD TREATED PRODUCTS,
INC. and PENNCREST CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY,
Additional Defendants.
MOTION FOR DISCONTINUANCE
Plaintiff, EpIICOpl1 Towers/Shlppensbura, Pennsylvania ("EpillCOpaI Towers"), by and
throup ita atlOmeys, Eckert Seamans Cherin " Mellott, LLC hereby mes thll Motion for
Discontinuance pursuant 10 Vennsylvanla Rule of Civil Procedure 229:
1. Thll IICtlon was Initiated by a Praecipe for Writ of Summl)ns on February 2,
19951
2. Orialnal defendant H. M. Stauffer" Sons, Inc, was later ICrved with a
Complaint on or about Auaust 22, 1995,
3. Plaintiff now wishes 10 dlllCOntlnue thislICtion by voluntary termination
pursuant 10 Pennlylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 229,
"
~,
CERTIFICAT~ OF SE~VICE
I hereby certify Ibat a true and corrett copy of the fore,oln, Motion for
DllCOndnuance WII ICrved on the followin, persons by first clm malllbll a day of lune,
1997.
leffrey Alan MiIIl, Esquire
212 North Queen Street
Lancuter, PA 17603
Andrew 1. Connolly, Esquire
POll " ScheU, P.C,
Nineteenth Ploor
1800 loon P. Kennedy Boulevard I
Philldelphla, PA 19103.7480
, I
PennCfelt Construction Company
2316 Dairy Road
Lancucer, PA 17601
~~. -
.,
.,
, ,
" if
"
, I
,r
"
1,1
"
",
II,;
"
I,
"
"
I,
"
II) I'
,,'
~ I'
I I
~ ", "
,
"
1 D >l) ":1
1:". ~,
~ ,-. t
'I "nr ..
O)}' I ~.IJl I"')
" . ,"\.) ,f,)
" i,l/
~ ~~; " .."
J:;- (~. I'." :':ft 1.(
I"
I ':l":t") ...t. I ;:r
.-
I, , ,r'''''j ~. 'n
~ .J.. ~~;" - y
..
~~ ~ ~.n
o- r,)
. ~
~, I,
"
"
,
I I >"
,
,
;1'
"
"
"
,
, '
1;') v:l ')1
, , (~ ...J
,il L. ~.~ I
.1'lli I 'n
li'l , . .,1,1.
,.,
',' i I ' "'J
, ",
i,1 ..,J ),11
I"
", 1.-,
, 1M
" ,
C.1 ' '.'j
" .. ".\
'"' '10
"J IQ ~la
.',
.,
, ,
,II
, ,
"
1'1
,
"