The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About95-01221 ~.. / ~.~ . ;0 "-.. HAR B II iJl4 AH '95 , f~t ',. (1n'ICe OF >II' , ,..., HOu . CU'i8i.,':';~O ,?r,U,y f'Ei;;;s'~L< ,c'Jd/iTr " ~ I 'It 'tlA Ii (L-lxiA UJ. /. ~ ...- rv-J/J 415C, 7 l!/J su (lr!. ;lpJ- (~;; /D7135 'J/'omoa. 'J/,omoa & %/er ']{I/ornr'l. al .raw 305 NORTH FRONT STREET P. O. BOX 888 HARRISBURG. PA.1710S . . Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Cumberland K~rns Prime ~nd F~ncy Food, Ltd. v. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY St~te Docks Ro~d Euf~ul~ AL 36027 AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC. 1002 Ingersoll Drive Phoenix City AL 36867 LOBAR, INC. LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Old Mill Ro~d, PO Box 50 Dillsburg PA 17019 VICTOR SEGINA 3725 Derry Street H~rrisburg PA 17111 JOHN W. NORTON 611 Holly Drive Euf~ul~ AL 36027-0800 Court of Conunoll Pleas 95-1221 Civil Term 19____ No. In _____~~~~!__~~_~~_~~__:__~~_~______________ Io _~.!'l!:1E.!9}:!!'- ~_l!!}&;l:.I}.[~__~!?_~ '__~!:'E!~~n Buildings Co., Inc., Lob~r, Inc.. ob~r AssocI~tes, Inc., vIctor Segin~ ~nd John W. Norton: You are hereby notified that K~rns Prime ~nd F~ncy Food, Ltd. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- the Plaintiff ., Summons - Civil Action - L~w ha s commenced an acbon 11\ ___________________________________________u___________ against you which you are required to defend or a default judgment may be en",red against you. (SEAL) Date _____MI:1=h._B..._____________ 19_9.5 LAWRENCE E. WELKER '------------------p~th~~~t;-------------------- By -(fW:.-4- ~m 1 . I .; Net. 95-l23..!..~.:..._ 19_ ,'" --------- Karns Prime and Fancy Food, Ltd. v. American Buildings American Buildings Lobar, Inc. Lobar Associates, Victor Segina and John W. Norton Co., Co., Inc. , Inc. ------------------------------------ SllInnlnntl in CIVIL ACTION LAW ------------------------------------ 'DDU\S, 'DDU\S & HAmR By: J'loI1g'- B. Mlmlello, Esq. 305 N. Fmnt st. POBox 999 IIIIaisburg PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7238 --------------jCu;;;;y-------------- ',;, ~~.l.--------- ,";,' "--~-,_.._..-. "<.-,~, .' '.., -- '-'" >"",,, ".', :;. ',- ,-'-'i:_ . ',. ,',' v_~ ",',',", :~::;:!.y,i. ." ',-' -,-' l>," ..'{" ", -,-. ) , I i I ; I '.,; .~ " . +'-'""..,~-- -.~...~. I. '. , .,_.....~~-_._~~ -.i2:;.7~...~----"'-" ~-- <?;; .'S. ~~'~'~-,-:::'~_~_ ~ SHERIF'F"S RETURN CASE NOr 1995-01221 P COMMONWEALTH OF' PENNSYLVANIA. COUNTY OF' CUMBERLAND KARNS PRIME AND F'ANCY F'OOD LTD VS. AMERICAN BUILDINGS CO ET AL R. Thomas Kline to law, says, that he made named defendant, to wit. . Sheriff, who being duly sworn according diligent search and inquiry for the within LOBAR ASSOCIATES INC but was unable to locate deputized the sheriff of to serve the within Them in his bailiwick. He therefore YORK COUNTY WRIT OF' SUMMONS County, Pennsylvania. On March 30th. 1995 . this office was in receipt of YORK COUNTY County, Pennsylvania. the attached return from Sheriff's Costs. Docketing Out of County Surcharge So answers. -~./ . /;/, -::- ~-,~/ ,....':./----:::..J , -- -.. --- -'~~ R. Thomas K~1ne, ~heri11 6.00 .00 2.00 68.00 DOUGLAS MARCELLO 03/30/1995 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3"< day of 'Sn<:ti 19 9{' A. D. ~.. O.~~ t"rotnonota'r -.;--:,:,.-- . I SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO. 1995-01221 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD LTD VS. AMERICAN BUILDINGS CO ET AL . Sheriff, who being duly sworn according diligent search and inquiry for the within LOBAR INC R. Thomas Kline to law, says, that he made named defendant, to wit. but was unable to locate deputized the sheriff of to serve the within Them in his bailiwick. He therefore YORK COUNTY WRIT OF SUMMONS County, Pennsylvania. On March 30th. 1995 . this office was in receipt of Pennsylvania. the attached return from YORK COUNTY County, Sheriff's Costsl Docketing Out of County surchar8e YORK CO NTY So answers: . / ~ ..~ /~;/ 1 >4--<'_. ~/ /..,~ R. Thomas K11ne, ~ner1tt 6.00 9.00 2.00 51. 20 G68.~0 DOUGLAS MARCELLO 03/30/1995 Sworn and subscribed to before me this ::3:'{ day of 19 'I~- A. D. {),u;g I q~",-, C. ~~ ~ Protnonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO. 1995-01221 P COnnONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. COUNTY OF CUnBERLAND KARNS PRInE AND FANCY FOOD LTD VS. AnERICAN BUILDINGS CO ET AL R. Thomas Kline to lay, says, that he made named defendant. to vit: . Sheriff, vho being duly svorn according diligent search and inquiry for the vithin SEGINA VICTOR but vas unable to locate deputized the sheriff of to serve the vithin Him in his bai1ivick. He therefore DAUPHIN COUNTY WRIT OF SUnnONS County, Pennsylvania. On narch 30th, 1995 this office vas in receipt of DAUPHIN COUNTY County. Pennsylvania. the attached return from Sheriff's Costs. Docketing Out of County Surcharge DAUPHIN COUNTY 6.00 9.00 2.00 29.25 $46.2~ DOUGLAS nARCELLO 03/30/1995 So a.ns.ver~: ~ ..' </'. / . ~.:/ ;j ./~.!r::. :;"d:/ . . .<.; H. Thomas K~1ne, Sheriff Svorn and this .:i1.{ 19 q( subscribed to day of a"',.:? i A. D. before me ~,~C.~ ~ t'rot ono ary SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO. 1995-01221 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD LTD VS. AMERICAN BUILDINGS CO ET AL R. Thomas Kline . Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of CUMBERLAND County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, served the within named DEFENDANT. NORTON JOHN W by United States Certified Mail postage prepaid, on the 15th day of March 1995 . at 1200.00 HOURS, at 611 HOLLY DRIVE EUFAULA. AL 36027-0800 . CUMBERLAND County, a true and attested copy of the attached WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge CERTIFIED MAIL So answers: . ~., //. t.~:~:~~t~~ner1U DOUGLAS MARCELLO 03/30/1995 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3,.,t day of n(',.'v 19 1\ A. D. ('\ '-'- () Y/lf..,i;-, ~' ~ lJrotnonotary 6.00 .00 .00 2.00 sli:~~ SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO: 1995-01221 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD LTD VS. AMERICAN BUILDINGS CO ET AL R. Thomas Kline . Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of CUMBERLAND County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, ~ served the within named DEFENDANT. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY by United States Certified Mail postage prepaid, on the 15th day of March 1995 at 1200.00 HOURS, at STATE DOCKS ROAD EUFAULA. AL 36027 . CUMBERLAND County, a true and attested copy of the attBched WRIT OF SUMMONS . Sheriff's Costs. Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge CERTIFIED MAIL So answer~. ~. /t1~~a'/I~';~ <~ H. Thomas Kl~ne, ~heri%f DOUGLAS MARCELLO 03/30/1995 18.00 .00 .00 2.00 $2~:~~ Sworn and subscri.bed to before me thi.s ~ ,.l. day of 0"<,.1 19 q, A.D. g q". C ~J"~~ ~ prot ono al'y I., The Court ci C.::mmO:-i pie:s oi C I d.' '.,.. ,......:\~'J......, I ...,. .--'", ..."..-.......-" .........,,"..,' ?snr:syl'le:ni: Karns Prime and Fancy Food, Ltd. 'IS. Lobar Inc. ~o. 95-1221 Civil Term :?- " March 15, 1995 .;ow, ~9-. !. S~...!:~ OP C~t3~..!..A..'lD COt,~'=~. ?A... co '" . . . . ... '- . ::=-...:sy c:.:::uc:: t::.: ':0=.:% 0: York Cwu:t"f :0 ::::::-.1t.:: '~;'1 .,V:::., .. '" . \". ",' d .. . --... ~::u=:cu ..:::1i -.....- ~ :.:::: ~::: :-...11t ot == ?t.,:_~. r/ // . /.--..;-;;%' r':::1!:~?"'"C..c.~ ./:.o.--~ sa~"1:'! a( C::::!:u'.:u:ci C~u:tT, :3. . _A. ~da.vit Or SemI::! ~ow, M3rd1 21 ~9 95 12:30 o'dea .' P. ~L 1::".-ci .. . -. . . to :.:: W'lf'''''' 9.mJms '.1paa Id:ar In::. ~. 1 Old Mill Ri.. P.O. IDe SO. DillS:1Jrq, PA by ==~:a Rl.dartl EidE~, Jr., FresicEnt 1 Old Mill Ri., P.O. IDe 50 o:=~ '_"'tl Di I1r4-.wg.. PA 3. t:ne am ali=t...l cpr oi ::e ... md -~,.:- c.owa:o him . ,. :.::: .:==:=:s ::::.-:=1. So :u:swc:, ~f/.."j/~e SlERIFF M:A EI-.1 ,,~~~\.~~~ Sl:c:a' of Ycrk CouArr. ?:J. Swot: ;me! s::l::sc-:i:>ed === COSTS SD,'V"ICZ ~aU.AGZ oS 18.00 + 6.00 23.20 4.00 . S 51.20 19...!l5.. '" i7!DA -';17 f_ --, NOTARIAl, 5ff>L , mflNi;~ NOI uy Putlle , '., - I 101... Yo~ C~unlf. rfH'ln~)tv'\j,;.i ~r COlTY1'Vs~n EJTltus March ~S. 19<)5 J I T' 'f" . 'c -I .,. :19 ...OUr! or .::mmO;1 r e=s !''IT' (".... ,,_.:.~:_....-l .....W-...'I ?-e"'r:~yl\I--l'- _ '-__,.._._..._"-........... .....11 -...... .......,..... Karns Prime and Fancy Food 'IS. l~bar Associates. Inc. :-10. 95-1221 Civil Term ::_- ~ow, March 14, 1995 ~9---. !, s:~~~ O~ C':nG.:---..!.A.'iD COt.~T?, ?A.... co h=-~ c...;:u= th:: Sh::-=.s oi York ,,- .. 'V' '-'Olu:ty :0 e.::=.::: :1S . :::., =:s =::u:== =:br -....:- u == ~ ::ci ::.sk ai == :n~:-d. . .// r ..v~~':C.4~ '/ SlJe..~ oJ! C:::=er'..1I:d CJWltY. ?~ . Affida.vit Qr Se..-n~ ~ow, Mm:h 21 ~9 95 .. . .- 12:23 o\:!cc P.~!. !:-.-d . ... == ~c:n 9.mJaB ~pal1 ld:ar Ass::cial:es,' Ire. :1t 1 Old Mill R::l., P.O. Ihc SO, Di1lS:l.lrg, PA -. =~ d!'!'!!p'''''' :..: --;11- 'lere;a M. F.i<+Alh>rnor. ~Irnist 3. tne an:! dl.h:;t...l C?1 ot ::e o:-=~'-"II 4 B:lr'lcw~le. Dil1R-11t'"Q_ PA .. md -~":. !cawa. :0 tel' . " :::.: .:=:t=:s ==--::1. So =sw=. ~rkl{iJ~J fHRmGra:l "','''~~~~~ Shci:i of Yak "'-CoWltT. . ?2. Swot: =d JOIi:sc:-:i:d ee:= . == . 22n:I cv ai M3rd1 /~&; ;// A-Z~ 10 95 ..- COSTS SZA'V1C:Z ~!!U,AGZ :::IDA vrr s f_ .--a ., NOTARIAI..SEAI. RIIINe, ~loL"Y Public Yo.'Jt., 'rorlo: CCIIM), P8MJ~f\<.1ilr.. My Cormi..lon EJp4,oo M.1Ith 2:1, lf10JS 5 . . . COMMONWEALTH OF PENNA: COUNTY OF DAUPHIN: SHERIPF'S RETURN NO. 95-1221 PAGE 136 AND NOW: March 17, III 95 ,ut 11:30 AM. SERVED TilE UPON WITHIN WRIT OF SUt+IONS -----. Victor Segina BY PERSONALLY HANDING TO Victor Segina A TRUE ATTESTED COpy OF THE ORIGINAl, WRIT OF SUMMONS AND MAKING KNOWN TO Him THE CONTEN'rS THEREOF AT 3725 Derry Street. Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Penna. SOA+l~WR~ - t..D' _.~ .. W.:,f!~}N(?f. ~J-VM-' ----------.-.--------. SHERIFF OF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNA BY J;t~-{J~,...,~ DEPUTY SHERIFF Sworn and subscribed to before me this ~st day of March C!-. I +JaWui) PROTHONOTARY 1995 SHERIFF'S COST $ S.lA ~, ,.. t -' Comp"t..lt.m. 1 .nd/or :I: for Iddltlon.1 IIr...lell. I_ Compillt. Itlm. 3, lnet 4. · b. I . Print your name Ind .dd"" on t~ r.....,.. of thi. form 10 tNt w. eln r.tum .hi. c"d to you. . , . AttlCh thll form to 1M front of 'M m.llp~CI. or on tht blCll. il .pICI 0 Addre..e.', Add,e.. doe. not permit. I.... I . Wfltt"Rltuf"Rac:llptR~.t~"O"thlmailpltClbeklwt"..rtk~numblr 2. 0 R..trlcted OeUvery 1::1 _ 11M R.tum Rac:llpt win lhow to whom lhe.nk_ WI' delivered Ind the d.tl I deIIvlrld. Consult oltme.ter for fee. I 3. Artlcl'.Add"".d '0: 4.. Artlel. Numbe, John4it Norton Z 069 875 930 ; Ii 611 U_" Drt 4b. S.rvle. Typ. i 8 "",*",y ve 0 R.gllllI.d OJn~u..d Euf~l~'" AL 36027 -0800. .- B C.rtlll.d ,"0 coD:', .2' .1<., 0 Exp'... M.11 ".0 R...,rn R'c.lp. for g 7. 011. of ~;I~\"y . ~tJ 1.;; ! \. · ." . l 8. Add'...... 'Add.... tQnl.,.lf ,.qu..ted 'I .nd f.. I. P'141...c_:.:/ ~ t alIa wl.h to receive the following ,ervlce. (for an extra f..l: 1. u..... ature (Addr...ae) 8. Slgn.tu,. (Ag.nll Ll Ps Fo,m 81'. D.~.mbe' 1991 tHJ.I. GPO: tla-3U-7t4 DOMESTIC ~.ETURN RECEIPT .a D R: "Ii .. Compit,. h.",. 1 Ind/or :I: for .eSdltlonll .1fV1c1l. . ,.. . Compl.t. It.... 3. .nd .. . b. ,_ Print your nama Ind Iddr... on the rn.r.. of thll form 10 thet w. c.n JltUm thl. Clrd to you. . Attach tN. lorm to tM Iront of the m.llp~cl, or on the bac:1l. If 'pICI doll not permit. J - Writ. "Rltum Rlcllpt Requested" on the mallp61ce beklw thllrtic:1I number _ The RItUm R.cllpt will show to whom thllrtlclt w.. delivered ,nd the dltl S ct.11....rlcl. Consult o.tmllter for f.e. 1 3. Artlel. Add.....d to: 4.. Artlel. Number American Buildings Canpany Ii state Docks Road 4b. S.rvle. Typ. 8 0 R'91.tor.d Eufaula, At 36027 g} C.rtlfl.d _. 0 E.p'... M.n I alia wish to recelvl the following ..rvlce. (for 8n IIxtra f..l: I. 0 Add........ Addr... f .I' J l c! l' !I IS 7. D.t.~ i"V' $"" i >- 8. Add.... .'. Add.... 10nly If ..qu..ted 'I .nd Ie. I. p.ldl ~ 2. 0 R..triet.d D.llv.ry o In.u..d o COD o R.turn R.e.lpt 10' I Slgn.tu,. (Add......1 1.~."_*u.s..QPO;_1eo-az.714^'._,nnMF.ATIt:.PICTIID.1 aet'lCIDT ,.. f E DER: . 4 Corn""t' It.m. lind/or :I: lor Itddlllonll IINIceI. I . CompItte Itl,.,. 3, and 4. . b. _ Prlnt your nIlM Ind Idd,... on 1M r.v.r.. of thl. form 10 thlt WI Cln return thl. clfd to you. _ Att.ch thll form to th. Iront of the mlUpllel, Of on the blck II ,PICI doet not pennlt. -I - Wrhl "RltUm RltCllpt RlqUllted" on the fN~ bek>>w t"'lrtlcle number - _ The Return R,cllpt wilt .how to whom the Inklt WII delivered and thl dlte S d.Uv.rtd. 1 3, Artlel. Add.....d to: t American Buildings Canpany, Inc. E 1002 Ingersoll Drive 8 Phoenix city, At 36867 I .110 wl.h to ,.e.lv. tho following 'Irvlce. (for en extra f..I: " 0 Add'....... Add,... , .:J j, f r.: 2. 0 R..trlet.d D.IIY.ry ] . Consult oatm..ter for fie. 4.. A,tlel. Numbe, Z 069 875 932 g 4b. S.rvle. Typ. ! o R.gl.tor.d 0 In.u..d )!!-c.rtlll.d 0 COD .2' o E.p.... Man 0 R..u,n R.e.lp' far g 7. 011' 01 D.nvory ! j' ~ ? --~ l 8. Addrolloo'. Address (Only If requested 1. end 100 I. p.ldl ~ " 5. Slgneture IAddressoel DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT O",c'" Bu.In... c I~ III ( ~J ". ~;uJiIfoL~~p:e~~m . ~/ OF POSTAGE. $300 - lJSMAIL UNITED BT" TES POST "L SERVICE .. ~ I I 1 I I I . , I I I t I I I. I I ! , Print your name, address and ZIP Coda hara · R. Thanas Kline, Sheriff · ClInberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 tUI1 1...11,..,1111",1,11"11",1',1,111"',1""11,,,,,.,111,,,11 l'ijllTED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ' . . . .u. .']1 I ,\"E.Nr. , ,,,) , , .~ t. " - I ..... .......\ t I , , I I , I , 1 I I I I I, -- ~~ . -------.. Offlc... BUlin... PENAUY"FCiiI PRlVA1C'-~ USE TO AlIOtO PAYMENT- OF POSTAGE. $300.- -- -.--- - uS MAIL -~ Carl ' Print your nama. address and ZIP Code here . . R. ThanaB Kline, Sheriff CUnberland County Sheriff's Dept. One Courthouse Square CArlisle, PA 17013 I I I I I , I , I IIlIn ,,,.11I.,,11I,,"11111111 .1111 ".11 11.1.11.1.11 1 "",,11I.,,11 uNrreB STATES POSTAL SERVICE /0 , " II. -'-. ,.... -~- X - US.M.'\IL "-...-' ---- ...- Offlc... Bu.In... PENALlYFClR' PRIVATE-- USE TO AVOIO PAYMENT ' OF POSTAGE. $300 Print your neme. eddress and ZIP Code here . R. Thanas Kline, Sheriff · CUnberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 1111I 1'1.111...1111""111..11.1..1.1 1"111..11""1111",1,1,,11".11,,,".11.1,1,1 "_. ... .'...~ -. I .-' i"" . . C . n I n9 ...ourr CT .::mmO:1 :: !.:::1....r.::: . --- _ .. t, .1 or \..:.Jr.::"-::.::t'~=n= ,-,.::t.::-;~'Y I ?snr:syl'l::r:i :: Karns Prime and Fancy Feed, Ltd '''-5. Victor Segina ~o. 95-1221 Civil JEm :~- ;';ow, March 15, 1995 :9---. !. S:~.z::: 03' c~tS..:..:'.!.A...'lD CO~~':Y. ?A... co h=-.by li.:=u= = Sh=5' oi Dauphin U:lu:t'f :0 ==:-.::.: .:';01 ',V:::., :!::s =::u::cu =6i -....:- u == ~ ::a. ::2 of :.::e ;n..:_:::i. - ...-;,' ~ r'.--r; .- , ,./,,/ .. .." ("".'~~... .-,.....- ..... ..'.' .'.;",." .;f......,:..._..: -. .~..L..._. ...~,...,......_....'~ '" _"'-- -to .. SlJe.."'l:f at C::::!:er'..:u:ci C~WlQ'. ::1. . ASdavit or Se..-nce ;';ow, ~9 -- o\:!c= ~L 1=-_-= ::: wi":':" '.1paa :1t :y ==~ :0 .. c::py ot = ot~.-..r ,. :md -~,;. . :0 ' . cowu ::: .::::.t=:s ==-=t. So =sw=. Shc:a' 01 CalIA"" ?:l. 5_::: ;me! saCs=-::d == =: ::::s by of 19_ cosrs ::.c..-<....rlcz ~a:U.AGE .~ : Ll.JA. "'iIT s s :-..~ H.IY 3 3 110 iil'95 ,~^IC!; ,.!~.f;';' ~^ '~:,11:1;.H\'r' ',_._ .... .i,.. 1" .1 ~ 't !" r, 1'1 '~. ~ '~':; ':!..t MARSHALL & FARRELL. P.C. 1323 NORTI' FRONT STREET HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17102 KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LID.., : IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNIY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 95-1221 AMERICAN BUIlDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUIlDINGS COMPANY, INC., : LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., : VIcrOR SEGINA and JOHN W. NORTON, : CML AcnON . lAW Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RULE TO PILE A COMPLAINT TO: Karns Prime and Fancy Food, Ltd., Plaintiff and Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff You are hereby ruled to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days of receipt of this Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. Dated: 7 /.-t. ~/~] l1r.j- u )'11.-1-.1 J /JnaA~ '~(J~ . . . Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer 305 NOM Front Street P. O. Box 999 Hanisburg, PA 17108.0999 Attorney for Plaintiff Mr. Victor Seglna 3725 Derry Street Hanisburg, PA 17111 Lobar, Inc. Lobar Associates, Inc. 1 Old MI11s Road P. O. Box 50 D11Jsburg. PA 17019 r I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 2nd day of May, 1995, I, Charles E. Haddick, Jr" Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE OF DEFENDANT AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY FOR RULE TO FILE A COMPlAINT upon all coWlSel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same In the U.S. mall, postage prepaid, at Hanisburg, PeIUlSylvanla, addressed as follows: Bv Flrst-ctass Mall: Mr. John W. Nonon 611 Holly Drive Eufaula, AL 36027.0800 American Buildings Company, Inc. 1002 Ingersoll Drive Phoenix City, AL 36867 ([1/ II "\ ,.M J 3 Iii) .il '95 LI .1 /,.. " , ''':,\;,) .(i Y MARSHALL & FARRELL. P.C. 1929 NORTII FRONT STREET IIARRISJlURG. PF.NNSYLVANIA 1710'~ IwVdoc.Ilnprogno.vrf> nOlI I KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD.,: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 95-1221 AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC.,: LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC.,: VICTOR SEGlNA and JOHN W. NORTON,: CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF MOTION TO: Fred C. Gwen, Clerk of Courts Pursuant to Rule 301 of the Pennsylvania Bar Admission rules, you are hereby notified that the within Motion for Admission Pro Hac VIce of Robert Benjamin Hill, Esquire, as additional counsel for Defendant, American Buildings Company, in this action, will be presented to the Court on or about June 16, 1995. Date: " ~n Charles E. Haddick. Esquire Attorney for Defendant CERTlPICATE OP SERVICE AND NOW, this I 2- fl.. day of June, 1995, I, Charles E. Haddlck, Jr., Esquire, hereby cenlfy that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE OP MOTION upon all counsel of record by depositing. or causing to be deposited, same In the U.S. mall. postage prepaid, at Camp HIiI, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Bv Pirst-Class Mall: Douglas B. Marcello. Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer 305 NOM From Street P. O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Attorney for Plaintiff Lobar, inc. Lobar Associates, Inc. 1 Old Mliis Road P. O. Box 50 Dliisburg, PA 17019 Mr. VIctor Seglna 3725 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 Mr. John W. Nonon 611 Holly Drive Eufauia, AI. 36027-0800 American Buildings Company, inc. 1002 Ingersoll Drive Phoenix City. AI. 36867 se~1~,. ~ Ju,~ /3 3 s~ fH '95 : i ~: I' 11;- r, ,:, '.- ,i_lC;;';;:'!rMiY ,.,"::'1') 1.>'Virr 1. -:~ ",~.If, i MARSHALL & FARRELL. P.C. 1'2' NORTII FRONT STREET IIARRISnURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17102 kaVdo</Inf'lOlll"ulc6n.mll KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD. L TO.,: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 95-1221 I i , I :' I , Plaintiff AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC.,: LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC.,: VICTOR SEGlNA and JOHN W. NORTON,: CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, thI, A ~y ofJune, 1995, upo. .........don of tho wi"" Motion, and after consideration of the matters stated therein, Roben Benjamin Hi11, Esquire, of the law firm of McLain & Merrit, of Atlanta, Georgia Is admitted to the Bar of this Coun t ~ oro hac vice for the purpose of representing Defendant, American Buildings Company, in the above action. BY THE COU iI': ,~ .;2~ <- c z ...... c:::> ,,~ J. :.,> 00 . - "--' '~ t.~~ "I~' .z: _:;':'}~~ -J ,..;; '~'i '1' s;: -' .. ...,.?; - ..." ..,., kaVdoclllll""ll"'ulronml1 KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD.,: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUN1Y, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 95-1221 AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC.,: LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC.,: VICTOR SEGlNA and JOHN W. NORTON,: CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF ADDITIONAL COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS Charles E. Haddlck, Jr" Esquire, a member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1.0. No. 55666, files this Motion for the admission oro hac vice of Robert B. Hili, Esquire, as additional counsel for Defendant, American Buildings Company, and In support thereof states the following: 1. This Motion Is presented pursuant to Rule 301 of the Pennsylvania Bar Admission Rules as promulgated by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 2. The applicant, Robert Benjamin Hill, Esquire, Is a member of the State Bar of Georgia (1.0. No. 354450), having been so admitted since November 1973, and having practiced continuously since that time In the State of Georgia. Mr. Hill Is also a member of the State Bar of Alabama (1.0. No. 243-7825-15), having been so admitted since September 8, 1988. - _.- .---:""....----.-.-~---~- ~.._..::J..~. katldcrJlnJllOlll"u/c6n.mtl 3. Mr. Hill is presently In active practice with the law firm of Mclain & Merrit, which maintains an office at 3340 Peachtree Road, N.E., Suite 1250, Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1075, and is in good standing before the Georgia Bar Association. 4. The law firm of Mclain & Merrit is counsel to American Buildings Company and are actively involved in various litigation throughout the country defending American Buildings Company. 5. Mr. Hillis also admitted to the United States District Coun for the Nonhern District of Georgia since November 1973, and the United States District Coun for the Nonhern District of Alabama since November 1992. 6. Mr. Hill is a graduate of the University of Georgia and a graduate of the University of Georgia Law School, Class of 1973 7. Mr. HlI1ls a member in good standing with both the Georgia Bar Association and the Alabama Bar Association. 8. Mr. Hill currently resides at 1168 Daventree Way, Atlanta, Georgia 30319, (404) 261-3678. 9. Plaintiffs attorney, Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire, has concurred with this Motion and has no objection to Mr. Hill's admission pro hac vice. \wlldoc/lnJ1l'l8T"ulr6n.mtl WHEREFORE, motion is made that Robert Benjamin Hill, Esquire, be admitted Dro hac vice to the Bar of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County so that he may furnish representation to Defendant, American Buildings Company, in this action. Respectfully submitted, MARSHALL & FARRELL, P.C. Date~ \ ~, ,q9.j Charles E. Haddlck, 1.0. No. 55666 3461 Market Street, Suite 304 Camp Hili, PA 17011 (717) 731-4800 Attorney for Defendant .. CERTIFICATE OP SERVICE AND NOW, this /6 "''4Iay of June, 1995, I, Charles E. Haddick, Jr., Esquire, hereby cenlfy that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION POR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same In the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hili, Pennsylvania. addressed as follows: Bv Plrst-Class Mail: Douglas B. Marcello. Esquire Thomas; Thomas & Hafer 305 North Front Street P. O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Anomey for Plaintiff Lobar, Inc. Lobar Associates, Inc. 1 Old Mll1s Road P. O. Box 50 Dll1sburg, PA 17019 Mr. Victor Seglna 3725 Derry Street Harrisburg, PA 17111 Mr. John W. Norton 611 Holly Drive Eufaula, AL 36027-0800 American Buildings Company, Inc. 1002 Ingersoll Drive Phoenix City, AL 36867 Q- KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD. Plaintiff ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) IN THE COURT OF COHHON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENN8YLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 95-1221 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED I vs. I I ;AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, IAMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., ILOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATBS, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON, i i Defendants !I II PRABCIPB TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendant, Victor Segina, in the above-captioned action. ANDES, VAUGHN & BANGS B&._gfU~.~ e1 L. And Attorney for Victor Hegina Supreme Court ID 17225 jl' ! ,~, 1, , ~. ! '~ ': tv' / {': jl';','j "t.;l:, ,.'!, ",', ~Jj I"~ .l'ti l,-L\j{\{ ',,- ':,c ., " ,,'i n'_:.~. HlJ' 'I,">" ' Ii, ',I Ic.l.. C :z: ~ c:> .:, g"T1 .""t)-C:"~ - MU,-"f\ :r:ITl('l,- ;;:;;::}::': _.,;:0..- l:_~ ;; ;1 ~~- ;.- ;:.~ C-J .." ..r; ::.e ,- I; - C)::; J-'..t -".. -< ,. ..., ...; ..,., , " .' I ~ i' ':1 o.n .., :0:- ::JC ii 11 ~ i, -'I, ., _'I ~. ': ;~ t i' ~ , I. ~. ". . A, , AMERICAN BUILDINGS AMERICAN BUILDINGS LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON, KARNS PRIME AND PANCY POOD, LTD, . IN THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS OP Plaintiff I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 1 I . CIVIL ACTION - LAW . INC.,. . 1 NO. 95-1221 CIVIL TERM . 1 v. COMPANY, COMPANY, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICIA LE RAN DEMANDO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plaza al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrito e en persona 0 por obogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas 0 sus objectiones alas demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no Be defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demand a . Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus propiedades 0 ostroB derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN OBAGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIBNB ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUPICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA OR LLAME POR TELEPONO A LA OPICINA CUYA DIRBCCION SE ENCOENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Court Administrator 4th Floor Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 240-6200 oil "'. . , AMERICAN BUILDINGS AMERICAN BUILDINGS LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON, KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTC, I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff . CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA I I . CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPANY, I COMPANY, INC.,. . . NO. 95-1221 CIVIL TERM I I Defendants I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v. i , " i. , i ,I I COMPLAINT 1. KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD., is a business with its principal place of business at 675 Silver Springs Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, and was at all times in question engaged in the business of food and grocery sale. 2. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, is a corporation with a principal place of business in Eufaula, Alabama, and was at all times relevant hereto engaged in the business of planning, designing, and manufacturing commercial structuring, including but not limited to metal buildings. 3. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., is a corporation with a principal place of business in Phoenix City, Alabama, and was at all times relevant hereto was engaged in the business of planning, designing and manufacturing commercial structures, including but not limited to metal buildings. ,.. -' ", 4. LOBAR, INC., is a business with its principal place of business in Dillsburg , Pennsylvania, and was at all times relevant hereto waB engaged in the business of planning, designing, constructing, and erecting commercial structures, including but not limited to metal buildings. 5. LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., is a business with its principal place of business in Dillsburg, Pennsylvania, and was at all times relevant hereto was engaged in the business of planning, designing, constructing, and erecting commercial structures, including but not limited to metal buildings. 6. VICTOR SEGINA, is an individual, with a principal office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and was at all times relevant hereto was engaged in the business of planning, designing, and serving as architect with regard to commercial structures, included but not limited to metal build~ngs. 7. JOHN W. NORTON, is an individual, with a principal office in Eufaula, Alabama, who was at all times relevant hereto was an engineer and was as such engaged in the business of planning and designing commercial structures, including but not limited to metal buildings. 2 ... ...., .. 8. A contract was entered into by KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD., and LOBAR, INC., for the construction of an addition to the KARNS facility at Silver Springs Road and Carlisle Pike. 9. plaintiff was the direct and intended third party beneficiary of all agreements between the defendants in this case with respect to the planning, designing, manufacturing, constructing and erecting of the building. 10. The Defendant, JOHN W. NORTON, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, or AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., assisted in the designing, planning, and manufacturing of the building. 11. Defendants LOBAR, INC., and/or LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., assisted in the planning, designing, construction, and erection of the building and in supervising its construction. 12. Defendant, SEGINA, assisted in the design, planning, and supervising of the construction of the building. 13. Plaintiff reasonably relied on the expertise of AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, INC., LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON, in the planning, designing, manufacturing, supervision, construction, 3 .. ,. .. building and the building addition. i. Violating the provisions of applicable national standard with respect to the plan, design, manufacture, construction, and/or erection of the building; j. Failing to use reasonable care in performing services on behalf of Plaintiff, which care defendant recognized, or should have recognized, as necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and in violation of the provisions of the Restatement of Torts 2d, !i323; k. Failing to properly supervise the planning; designing, construction, and erection of the building; 1. Failing to specify, plan, design, construct, and/or erect the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient bracing, bridging, or supporting of the purlins, including but not limited to implementation of purl in bracing or bridging to ensure purling stability; Failing to inform co-defendants of the geographical conditions of the area and the extent of the difference in heights between the existing building and the building addition; m. '. 18. Negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness described above was the legal cause of the damages suffered by the Plaintiff. -', WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR, INC. in the amount of Thirty-Seven 6 -, .. ". Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT II: BREACH OF CONTRACT PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 19. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 18 as if set forth in full herein, and made a part hereof. 20. Plaintiff was the direct and intended third party beneficiary of all agreements between LOBAR, INC. and the co- defendants with respect to the planning, design, construction, erection, and supervision of the erection of the building. 21. LOBAR, INC., breached its contract in that it planned, designed, and supervised the construction and erection, constructed, erected the building such as not capable of supporting snow loads in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition and/or provide for 7 ... .. .. sufficient bracing, bridging or supporting of the purlins. 22. Said breach of contract caused the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR, INC. in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT III: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR, INC. 23. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 22 herein as if set forth in full, 24. Pursuant to the contracts between the parties of this litigation, LOBAR, INC., has warranted its building that it was planning, designing, construction and erecting would be merchantable. 8 . .. ~ 25. LOBAR, INC., breached its implied warranty by planning, designing, constructing and erecting a building in a manner that was not merchantable because the building was not able to support snow loads in the geographical location of the building, to the extent that the snow loads were created by the different heights of the building, and as the building lacked the proper purl in stability. 26. Said breach of the implied warranty of merchantability caused damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR, INC. in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. . COUNT IV: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 9 . . . 27. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 26 herein as if set forth in full. 28. Defendant, LOBAR, INC., impliedly warranted to Plaintiff that the building would be designed, constructed, and erected to be reasonably fit for its particular and intended purpose. 29. LOBAR, INC., breached its implied warranty because the building was not reasonably fit for its particular and intended purpose in that the building was unable to support snow loads in the geographical area of the building, unable to support snow loads created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition, and lacked purl in stability. 30. The said breech of implied warranty caused the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR, INC. in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem 10 . appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT V: BREACH OF CONTRACT AND WARRANTY PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 31. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 31 herein as if set forth in full. 32. Plaintiff contracted with LOBAR, INC., planning, design, construction and erection of the pursuant to the contract attached hereto as Exhibit "A". for the building 33. Pursuant to said contract, LOBAR, INC. warranted that its services with respect to the construction and erection of the building would be completed in a good and workmanlike manner. 34. LOBAR, INC. breached its contractual obligations and its express and implied warranty by construction and erection of a building in a manner not sufficient to support snow load in the geographical area of the building, not support the snow load created by the differing heights between the pre-existing building and the building addition, in failing to provide sufficient purl in 11 . . .. a. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow loads in the geographical location of the building; b. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow loads created by the differing heights of the building and the pre-existing building; c. Failing to construct and erect the building in a manner sufficient to support snow loads in the geographical location of the building; d. Failing to construct and erect the building in a manner sufficient to support snow loads created by the differing heights of the building and the pre-existing building; e. Failing to specify, plan, design, construct, and/or erect the building in a manner so as to withstand the loading and conditions at the time of the roof failure; f. Failing to specify, plan, design, construct and/or erect the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient and adequate dead load, snow load, and live load; g. Failing to sufficiently advise Plaintiffs and co-defendants of the appropriate and actual deal load, live load, and snow load; h. Failing to advise or warn Plaintiff and co- defendants that the building as planned, designed, manufactured, constructed, and/or erected could not support the snow loads in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the differing heights between the existing building and the building addition. i. Violating the provisions of applicable national standard with respect to the plan, design, manufacture, construction, and/or erection of the building; 13 . , j. Failing to use reasonable care in performing services on behalf of Plaintiff, which care defendant recognized, or should have recognized, as necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and in violation of the provisions of the Restatement of Torts 2d, 5323; k. Failing to properly supervise the planning; designing, construction, and erection of the building; 1. Failing to specify, plan, design, construct, and/or erect the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient bracing, bridging, or supporting of the purlins, including but not limited to implementation of purl in bracing or bridging to ensure purling stability; m. Failing to inform co-defendants of the geographical conditions of the area and the extent of the difference in heights between the existing building and the building addition; 38. Negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness described above was the legal cause of the damages suffered by the Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. 14 " 47. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 46 herein as if set forth in full. 48. Defendant, LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., impliedly warranted to Plaintiff that the building would be designed, constructed, and erected to be reasonably fit for its particular and intended purpose. 49. LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., breached its implied warranty because the building was not reasonably fit for its particular and intended purpose in that the building was unable to support snow loads in the geographical area of the building, unable to support snow loads created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition, and lacked purl in stability. 50. The said breach of implied warranty caused the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, 18 delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances, COUNT X: BREACH OF CONTRACT AND WARRANTY PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 51. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 50 herein as if set forth in full. 52. Plaintiff contracted with LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., for the planning, design, construction and erection of the building pursuant to the contract attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 53. Pursuant to said contract, LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. warranted that its serviceB with respect to the construction and erection of the building would be completed in a good and workmanlike manner. 54. LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. breached its contractual obligations and its express and implied warranty by construction and erection of a building in a manner not sufficient to support snow load in the geographical area of the building, not support the 19 '. snow load created by the differing heights between the pre-existing building and the building addition, in failing to provide sufficient purl in support. 55. The said breeches of contract and warranty plus the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in their favor and against LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC. in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with prejudgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney fees and other such relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XI: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 56. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 55 herein as if set forth in full. 57. The building damage resulted from the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 20 60. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY implied the warranty to Plaintiff that the plan, design, and manufacture of the building would be merchantable. 61. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY breached its implied warranty by planning, designing, and/or manufacturing the building in a manner that was not merchantable because the building was not able to support the snow load from the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow loads created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition and/or have sufficient purl in stability. 62. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY brp,eches implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not sufficient to protect against the risk of damage. 63. Said breaches of implied warranty and merchantability caused damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY for damages in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment 23 70. Plaintiff was the direct and intended third party beneficiary of all agreements between AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY and co-defendants with regard to the planning, design, manufacture and erection of the building. 71. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY breached its contract in that it planned, designed, manufactured and erected a building which was not capable of supporting snow load in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the differing heights between the existing building and the building addition, and/or provide for sufficient purl in stability. 72. The said breach caused the damage suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY for damages in the amount of Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 26 '. COUNT XV: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY. INC. 73. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 72 herein as if set forth in full. 74. The building damage resulted from the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, INC. and/or its agents, servants and/or employees, said negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness consisting of: a. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow loads in the geographical location of the building; b. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow leads created by the differing heights of the building and the pre-existing building; c. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to withstand the loading and conditions at the time of the roof failure; d. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient and adequate dead load, snow load, and live load; e. Failing to sufficiently advise plaintiff and co-defendants of the appropriate and actual dead load, live load, and snow load; 27 " 81. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 80 herein as if set forth in full. 82. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, INC. implied their warranty to Plaintiff that the building as planned, designed and manufactured would be reasonably fit for this particular and intended purpose. 83. Defendant, AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, INC., breached its implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose by planning, designing and manufacturing the building which is not able to support the snow loads in the geographical location of the building, and/or support the snow load created by the different heights between the existing building an/or the building addition and/or provide sufficient purl in stability. 84. Defendant, AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY, INC., breached its implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not sufficient to protect the risk of damage such as that suffered by Plaintiff. 85. The breaches of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose caused the damages suffered by 31 erection of the building; h. Failing to use reasonable care in performing services on behalf of Plaintiff, which care defendant recognized, or should have recognized, as necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and in violation of the provisions of the Restatement of Torts, 2d, 5323; i. Failing to properly supervise the planning, designing, construction, and erection of the building; j. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient bracing, bridging, or supporting of the purlins, including but not limited to implementation of purlin bracing or bridging to ensure purl in stability; k. Failing to inform co-defendants of the geographical conditions of the area and the extent of the difference in heights between the building and the building addition. 92. The negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness described above was the legal cause of the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against VICTOR SEGINA, for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such reli~f as the court 35 deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XX: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY PLAINTIFF V. VICTOR SEGINA 93. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 92 herein as if set forth in full. 94. VICTOR SEGINA implied the warranty to Plaintiff that the plan, design, and manufacture of the building would be merchantable. 95. VICTOR SEGINA breached his implied warranty by planning, designing, and/or manufacturing the building in a manner that was not merchantable because the building was not able to support the snow load from the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow loads created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition and/or have sufficient purl in stability. 96. VICTOR SEGINA breached its implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not 36 sufficient to protect against the risk of damage. 97 . Said breaches of implied warranty and merchantability caused damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, PlaintiIf demands judgment be entered in their favor against VICTOR SEGINA for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XXI: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. VICTOR SEGINA 98. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 97 herein as if set forth in full. 99. VICTOR SEGINA implied his warranty to Plaintiff that the building as planned, designed and manufactured would be reasonably fit for this particular and intended purpose. 37 100. Defendant, VICTOR SEGINA breached its implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose by planning, designing and manufacturing the building which is not able to support the snow loads in the geographical location of the building, and/or support the snow load created by the different heights between the existing building an/or the building addition and/or provide sufficient purl in stability. 101. Defendant, VICTOR SEGINA breached his implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not sufficient to protect the risk of damage such as that suffered by Plaintiff. 102. The breaches of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose caused the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against VICTOR SEGINA for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 38 COUNT XXII: BREACH OF CONTRACT PLAINTIFF V. VICTOR SEGINA 103. plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 85 herein as if set forth in full. 104. Plaintiff was the direct and intended third party beneficiary of all agreements between VICTOR SEGINA, and co- defendants with regard to the planning, design, manufacture and erection of the building. 105. VICTOR SEGINA, breached his contract in that it planned, designed, manufactured and erected a building which was not capable of supporting snow load in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the differing heights between the existing building and the building addition, and/or provide for sufficient purlin stability. 106. The said breech caused the damage suffered by Plaintiff. 39 , , WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against VICTOR SEGINA, for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XXIII: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 107. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 106 herein as if set forth in full. 108. The building damage resulted from the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of JOHN W. NORTON and/or his agents, servants and/or employees, said negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness consisting of: a. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow loads in the geographical location of the building; b. Failing to specify, plan and/or design for the building sufficient to support snow leads created by the differing heights of the building and the pre-existing building; 40 c. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to withstand the loading and conditions at the time of the roof failure; d. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient and adequate dead load, snow load, and live load; e. Failing to sufficiently advise plaintiff and co-defendants of the appropriate and actual dead load, live load, and snow load; f. Failing to advise or warn Plaintiff and co- defendants that the building as planned, designed, manufactured, constructed, and/or erected could not support the snow loads in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the differing heights between the existing building and the building addition; g. Violating the prov1s10ns of applicable national standards with respect to the plan, design, manufacture, construction, and/or erection of the building; h. Failing to use reasonable care in performing services on behalf of Plaintiff, which care defendant recognized, or should have recognized, as necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and in violation of the provisions of the Restatement of Torts, 2d, 5323; i. Failing to properly supervise the planning, designing, construction, and erection of the building; j. Failing to specify, plan, and/or design the building in a manner so as to provide sufficient bracing, bridging, or supporting of the purlins, including but not limited to implementation of purlin bracing or bridging 41 to ensure purl in stability; k. Failing to inform co-defendants of the geographical conditions of the area and the extent of the difference in heights between the building and the building addition. 109. The negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness described above was the legal cause of the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against JOHN W. NORTON, for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XXIV: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 110. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 109 herein as if set forth in full. 42 111. JOHN W. NORTON applied the warranty to Plaintiff that the plan, design, and manufacture of the building would be merchantable. 112. JOHN W. NORTON breached his implied warranty by planning, designing, and/or manufacturing the building in a manner that was not merchantable because the building was not able to support the snow load from the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow loads created by the different heights between the existing building and the building addition and/or have sufficient purl in stability. 113. JOHN W. NORTON breached its implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not sufficient to protect against the risk of damage. 114. Said breaches of implied warranty and merchantability caused damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against JOHN W. NORTON for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, 43 " delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XXV: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 115. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 114 herein as if set forth in full. 116. JOHN W. NORTON implied his warranty to Plaintiff that the building as planned, designed and manufactured would be reasonably fit for this particular and intended purpose. 117. Defendant, JOHN W. NORTON breached its implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose by planning, designing and manufacturing the building which is not able to support the snow loads in the geographical location of the building, and/or support the snow load created by the different heights between the existing building an/or the building addition and/or provide sufficient purl in stability. 44 '. " 118. Defendant, JOHN W. NORTON breached his implied warranty by planning, designing and manufacturing the building in a manner not sufficient to protect the risk of damage such as that suffered by Plaintiff. 119. The breaches of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular and intended purpose caused the damages suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREPORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against JOHN W. NORTON for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT XXVI: BREACH OF CONTRACT PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 120. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 85 herein as if set forth in full. 45 121. Plaintiff was the direct and intended third party beneficiary of all agreements between JOHN W. NORTON, and co- defendants with regard to the planning, design, manufacture and erection of the building. 122. JOHN W. NORTON, breached his contract in that it planned, designed, manufactured and erected a building which was not capable of supporting snow load in the geographical location of the building and/or support the snow load created by the differing heights between the existing building and the building addition, and/or provide for sufficient purl in stability. 123. The said breach caused the damage suffered by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment be entered in their favor against JOHN W. NORTON, for damages in the amount of Thirty- Seven Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($37,591.39), together with pre-judgment interest, costs, delay damages, attorney's fees and other such relief as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 46 , THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER By: ~ J... 9 f!;, -:htG. _ _ c;::;2. D~gras B. Marcello Attorney I.D. No. 36510 P.O. Box 999 305 Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 755-7238 Attorney for Plaintiff 47 f~; j,- UJ!~': u(' fF: c.5 ;. ( . p~ il: I j-- L'_ f':') C) .:r js ..,'-" .J:;:.:o -, :~~-j 'r;; t J;"::; ._~ : / ~:1 ,1....... L_ .:.:') c'.,: C1 l.'J L.. '''1 G') ::") t..) III ICC ~ r<I . >t ... ..:l i :2: ~ p. " Z II-< P- ...., ~ P. II-< :;: s= 0 >t .n 0 nl t; ~ ~ CJ .... CJ 'tl ~ !l ... co >t :2: s= s= 0 ~ ~ IX 0 0 .. E E-t ..: .n u: Ql f>l VI co CJ :2: r... III t!l II-< 0 .. .. co ~ r-l :2: Ql ~ :s ~ ... z co r<.r...=> . II 0 0 P- H 0 .. d 000 > ~ IX 0 ~ 0 ~ Q .. IX CJ co " o-:l f>l ~ E z ci ID E-t 0 H 0 .. .. p:: a: ii :2: ril 0 -l! 0 0: => :s :;: ~ IQ :i! Ii ~ z a: 0 .. ... CJ HO tl 0 z p:: ll:E-t ~ H ... f>l f>l P-..:l p:: Ii: :<: IQ CJ . E-t Q 5 en ~ Hr-l ~ E-t :2:0 P:: nl >t CJ ~g f>l P:: Z :U: => H to<:r<. I"J . . ,: '. L. r .~. ... - I A ~' . ,A' - . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA i CIVIL ACTION - LAW KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOODS, LTD Plaintiff vs. No. 95-1221 Civil Term AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of the Praecipe to Enter Appearance upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirement of Pa. R.C.P. 440: Service by First Class Mail Addressed as Follows: Attorney Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER P.O. Box 999 305 Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17108 for Karns Prime and Fancy Food, Ltd. Samuel L. Andes, Esquire ANDES, VAUGHN & BANGS 525 North 12th Street P.O. Box 168 Lemoyne, PA 17043 Attorney for Victor Segina "ARMON" DAVIES. P,C, AnORNfYS.A'.lAW Z)Ot.COlUMRIA AVF.NUF. l.ANCASTFR. PA mOl 1 ('1 r: ~;. r~ t.-:") Gl '. ,.~'1 -n ..1 d::] --,1-., ,0 :.'.1- ..:::J '<0 'j:!J . ~ C"") ~;.)rrl .,:, ....,.. :J] -. :;'"J I c.:> -" .. , c..'J.,k -" . ~:~ :~.. ~~.~ - "' - .. -j -. (Al N I ! t I . KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA Plaintiff NO. 95-1221 v. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGlNA and JOHN W. NORTON, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTR.Y OF APpEARANCE Please enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel for Defendant, John W. Norton, In the above-captioned matter. Respectfu\1y submitted, MARSHALL & FARRELL, P.C. G Charles E. Haddick, Jr Attorney 1.0. No. 5566 Atrium West, Suite 304 3461 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)731-4800 Attorneys for Defendant John W. Norton \ I \ Date: March 13, 1996 " '. ,.-.-..-----~~~._..-....-- --:..... -..:",' - -- _. ~ ~., " CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 13~ day of March, 1996, i, Charles E. Haddick, Jr., Esquire, hereby cenlfy that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mall, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Bv First-Class Mall: Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer 305 North Front Street, P. O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Samuel L. Andes, Esquire Andes, Vaughn & Bangs 525 North Twelfth Street, P.O. Box 188 Lemoyne, PA 17043 John H. Frymyer, Jr., Esquire Harmon & Davies, P.C. 2306 Columbia Avenue Lancaster, PA 17603 , MARSHALL Be FARRELL. P.C. ATRIUM WEST OFPICE BUILDING SUITE 004 0461 MARKET STREET CAMP HII.L. PA 17011 - (717) 701.4000 F.Lr:O-O~CE _ ,..~ l' d' ."",""W'II'!W \. 'I" ,'" > ....., I.~ IV I""., I': f'II?:S1 ..; ~i ~ ,.,', oJ I ... "-, "",.",', .'-'. ... i"".: -.",'1' C" , ":' ; 'oi.... ,: ,.L' ..,..,'",,'. i . ~"'t:',,} ."..,'1 '" \11;\ i~t::I\I'.J' L.1/"\l ,.. KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, I IN THE COURT OF COMMON LTD. . ) PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintift ) PENNSYLVANIA ) VS. I CIVIL ACTION - LAW ) AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, ) AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, ) NO. 95-1221 CIVIL TERM INC.. LOBAR, INC. , LOBAR ) ASSOCIATES. INC., VICTOR ) SEGINA. and JOHN W. NORTON, I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Detendant ) NOTTC!R TO PLAINTIFF NAMED HEREIN: YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO RESPOND TO THE ENCLOSED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A DEFAULT JUDGMENT I MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. ,I I' II .y~~ mu;l L. ndes Attorney for Victor Segina Supreme Court ID 17225 525 North 12th Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 (717) 76l-5361 II I 1 II i I I KARNS PRIME AND FANCY FOOD, LTD. , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY, INC., LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON. Defendant NO. 95-l22l CIVIL TERM ANSWER AND NRW MATTRR OF nRPRNDANT. VICTOR REGINA AND HOW comes Victor Segina, by his attorney, Samuel L. Andes, and makes the fOllowing Answer and New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint: 1 through 7. Admitted. 8. Denied. Segina is without sufficient information to determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in this paragraph because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. 9. Denied. Segina is without sufficient information to determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in this paragraph because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. Segina was not a party to any "agreement" with any of the other Defendants relating to the building in question. 10 through ll. Denied. Segina is without sufficient information to determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in these 2 paragraphs because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. l2. Denied. Begina did not assist in the design, plan, or supervision of the construction of the building as alleged. He prepared one drawing for a very limited purpose. The averments set out in .' Begina's New Matter are incorporated herein by reference. l3. Denied. Plaintiff did not rely upon the expertise of Begina as alleged. Begina did not participate in the planning, designing, manufacturing, supervision, construction or erection of the building. 14 through 15. Denied. Begina is without sufficient information to determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in these paragraphs because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. Begina , I!denies, however, that he planned, designed, manufactured. supervised, II constructed or erected the building in question. ! " , ii II COtJNTR T THROnGH XVTTT ii I i: 16 through 89. Denied. Begina is without sufficient information to i determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in these paragraphs because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. COUNT XIX NEGLIGENCE 90. No answer required. 3 91. Denied. Segina was not negligent, careless or reckless in any way. Specifically: a-d. Segina did not specify, plan or design the building. e. Segina did not determine such loads, was not hired or contracted to determine such loads, and was under no obligation to determine those loads or advise any party of them. f. Segina did not determine such loads, was not hired or contracted to determine such loads, and was under no obligation to determine those loads or advise any party of them. g. Segina did not violate any national standards and did not plan, design, manufacture, construct or erect the building. h. Segina did not perform services on behalf of the Plaintiff and owed Plaintiff no obligation with regard to the work done by others for the Plaintiff. i. Segina did not supervise the planning, designing, construction or erection of the building, was not hired or asked to do so, and was under no obligation to do so. j. Segina did not specify, plan or design the building, was not asked or hired to do so, and was under no obligation to do so. k. Segina was under no obligation to inform the other I I I I I Inothing i i Defendants or any other party of the geographical conditions of the area where the building was to be erected. 92. Denied. Segina was not negligent, careless or reckless and did to cause the damages claimed by the Plaintiff. 4 COlIHT XX BRRA.CH OF IMPIITRD WARRANTY 93. No answer required. 94. Denied. Segina never dealt with Plaintiff. never planned. designed or manufactured the building in question, and never gave any warranty, express or implied. to Plaintiff or any other party. 95. Denied. Segina gave no such warranty. Segina breached no such warranty. Segina did not plan, design or manufacture the building. 96. Denied. Segina gave no such warranty. Segina breached no such warranty. Segina did not plan. design or manufacture the building. 97. Denied. Segina did not breach any warranty and did not cause any damage to Plaintiff. COUNT XXT BRRACH OF' TMPIIIED WARRANTY ,I 98. No answer required. 99. Denied. Segina did not plan. design or manufacture the building and did not deal or contract with Plaintiff at all. Segina gave no warranty, express or implied, to Plaintiff or any other party. 100. Denied. Segina did not plan, design or manufacture the building and was not engaged or asked to do so or to calculate loads for the building. Segina did not breach any implied warranty of fitness and , I Igave no warranty, express or implied. " II 10l. Denied. The averments set forth in Paragraph 100 above are incorporated herein by reference. s 102. Denied. Begina did not give a warranty of fitness, express or implied, and did not breach any such warranty. Begina did not cause in any way the damage which the Plaintiff claims to have suffered. COUNT XXTT BRRACH OF CONTRACT 103. No answer required. 104. Denied. Begina had no contract with any party relating to the subject of this action. Plaintiff was not the third party beneficiary, direct or intended, of any alleged agreement between Begina and any other party. Begina did not plan, design, manufacture or erect the building or contract with anyone for such services. 105. Denied. Begina had no such contract. Segina breached no such contract. Begina did not plan, design, manufacture or erect the building in question and did not, and was not obligated to, calculate the loads the building would have to carry. 106. Denied. Segina did not breach any warranty and Begina did not in any way cause the damages claimed by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE. Begina prays this Court to dismiss all counts and claims made against him in this matter and to enter Judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff and all Defendants dismissing their claims. COUNTS XXIII THROUGH XXVI l07 through 123. Denied. Segina is without sufficient information I Ito I , , determine the truth or accuracy of the averments set out in these 6 paragraphs because that information is within the control of adverse parties and so he denies same and demands proof thereof at trial. WHEREFORE, Begina prays this Court to dismiss all counts and claims made against him in this matter and to enter judgment in his favor and against the plaintiff and all Defendants dismissing their claims. NRW MATTRR 124. Defendant Begina had no dealings, contracts, agreements, or understandings with the Plaintiff. 125. Defendant Segina was not engaged, hired, or requested by the Plaintiff to do any work for Plaintiff with regard to the subject matter of this litigation. 126. Defendant Segina was requested by Lobar, Inc., to prepare a plan showing the location of foundation and footing units for a building. I 127. Defendant Begina was not engaged at any time by any party to i ildO any other design or planning work beyond the request that he prepare a drawing showing the footing and foundation components. 128. Defendant Segina properlY prepared the drawing showing the I' I footing and foundation components and supplied that drawing to Lobar, I Inc. Thereafter, Segina had no knowledge of, participation in, or involvement with the planning, design, or construction of the SUbject building. 129. The failure of the building of which Plaintiff now complains did not result from and was not caused in any way by any failure of the foundation or footings of the building. 7 130. The damages claimed by the plaintitt in this action were not caused in any way by any detect in or problem with the toundation or tootings ot the building. 131. The damages claimed by the Plaintitt in this action were not caused in any way by the limited work done by Detendant Segina. 132. Plaintitf's complaint in this matter is barred by the statute of limitations. WHBRBFORB. Segina prays this Court to dismiss all counts and claims made against him in this matter and to enter judgment in his tavor and against the plaintiff and all Defendants dismissing their claims. Attorney tor Victor Segina Supreme Court ID 17225 525 North 12th Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 (7l7) 761-5361 8 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ) VICTOR SEGINA, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that the facts set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief. V~GIN~;: - Sworn to and subscribed before me this 20-+1, day of IY1 c;V1 ,.I. , 1996. ~_~ l2.~" Notar Public I l)m1(l.~NlIo !-BI!'l7ine Ilcro, Ciiro.;"'d c:;w., My Ceo........, E>l*usAio. 17. IllOll II I I I " 9 RlEo-O;:r-;Cr: ~... -,',,;, '~""""'l"'"",r.:"( '..1;' ; ... " ':.-:,,!;\uli-:"'t c" ,t~n 1\') f'o, ,.., 58 :J I"i.-.\ t:.,{. 'ti u:. - CU.'.-, . ' / ~~;t~U,-':n)' l~c:'J;\:SYL\'l~\~~\ SAMUEL L.ANDES ATTORNBY AT LAW saD NORTH TWBLr'J'H STIfBBT P, 0, BoX 100 LBMOYNB, PBNNSYLVANIA 17043 ( C{)77.III1S . buildings, and is not responsible for erection, site design, or placement of buildings, including the subject building. 3-6. Pamgraphs 3-6 of the Plaintiff's Complaint refer to panles other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 7. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that John W. Nonon is an Individual with a place of business in Eufaula, Alabama, and that at all times material hereto, he was an engineer engaged in the business of pre-engineering commercial structuring, including metal buildings. It is specifically denied that John W. Nonon is In the business of "planning and designing" such structures to the extent such allegation and Its implications are understood by answering Defendants. To the contrary, John W. Nonon was at no time material hereto responsible for erection, site design, or placement of buildings, including placement or Integration of the subject building at the subject site. 8-15. Denied. Paragraphs 8 through 15 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to patles other than answering Defendants consequently which no responsive pleading Is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of funher response, these Pamgraphs contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Pamgraphs 8 through 15 are deemed to allege facts, and to penaln to answering Defendants, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. I029(e). In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, since Plaintiff fails to Identify any agents, servants or 2 . c6n.RItI employees of American Buildings Company and/or John W. Nonon, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that any such agents, servants or employees caused any losses to the Plaintiff in any way. To the extent these Paragraphs of the Plaintiffs Complaint carry with them the Implication, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that answering Defendants were responsible for planning and/or designing the subject building at the subject site and were responsible for the quality and workmanship of its erection. To the contrary, responsibilities of answering Defendants were limited to the express terms and conditions of the purchase order with Co-Defendant Lobar, Inc., attached hereto as Exhibit "A", along with any other purchase documents, including, but not limited to change orders. By way of fun her response, answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as if fully set fonh herein their New Matter which appears below. COUNT I: NEGUGENCE PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 16-18. Paragraphs 16 through 18 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to panles other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylwnla Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 16 through 18 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(c). 3 , ctJ77.1lT1$ . COUNT II: BREACH OF CONTRACf PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 19-22. Paragraphs 19 through 22 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to panles other than answering D~fendant; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 19 through 22 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT III: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANlY OF MERCHANTABILl1Y PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR. INC. 23-26. Paragraphs 23 through 26 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to panles other than answering Defendant; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvunla Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternutlve, wulvlng none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 23 through 26 are deemed to allege facts, they ure denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 4 , r61?8111 COUNT VI: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 36-38. Pam graphs 36 through 38 of the Plaintlfrs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response Is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Pamgraphs 36 through 38 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. l029(e). COUNT VII: BREACH OF CONTRACI' PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 39-42. Pamgmphs 39 through 42 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Pamgraphs 39 through 42 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. l029(e). 6 . c6n.llI1s . COUNT VIII: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABIUTY PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 43-46. Paragraphs 43 through 46 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 43 through 46 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT IX: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 47.50. Paragraphs 47 through 50 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 47 through 50 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 7 . ctJn.anJ . . COUNT X: BREACH OF CONTRACI' AND WARRANTY PLAINTIFF V. LOBAR ASSOCIATES. INC. 51-55. Paragraphs 51 through 55 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 51 through 55 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT XI: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 56. Answering Defendant hereby incorporate by reference as If fully set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 55 above. 57-58. Denied. Paragraphs 57 through 58 of the Plaintiff's Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, Paragraphs 57 through 58 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, including subparts (a) through (k) of Paragraph 57, are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). Since Plaintiff fails to identify any agents, servants or employees of American Building Company, it is specifically and unequivocally 8 din.ol15 denied that any such agent, servant or employee was negligent, careless or reckless In any way. To the contrary, at all times material hereto, American Building Company acted reasonably, properly, and prudently under the circumstances. By way of funher answer, answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as If fully set fonh herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant American Building Company respectfully requests that this Honorable Coun dismiss Count XI of the Plaintiffs Complaint, and enter judgment In fdvor of answering Defendant American Building Company, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. COUNT XII: BREACH OF IMPUED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABIUTY PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 59. Answering Defendant hereby incorporate by reference as If fully set fonh herein paragraphs 1 through 58 above. 60-63. Denied. Paragraphs 60 through 63 of the Plaintiffs Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the avernlents contained In Paragraphs 60 through 63 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that answering Defendant breached any warranties owed to the Plaintiff, if any, at any time 9 , < ('677.nns material hereto. By way of fun her response, any and all warranties between answering Defendant and and any other pany, the existence of which being specifically and unequivocally denied, were limited to any warranties contained in the written purchase documents. By way of funher answer, answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as if fully set fonh herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant American Building Company respectfully requests that this Honorable Coun dismiss Count XII of the Plaintiffs Complaint, and enter judgment in favor of answering Defendant American Building Company, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. COUNT XIII: BREACH OF IMPUED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 64. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set fonh herein paragraphs 1 through 63 above. 65-68. Denied. Paragraphs 65 through 68 of the Plaintiffs Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the avernlents contained in Paragraphs 65 through 68 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that 10 rb71.uns answering Defendant breached any warrnnties owed, if any, at any time material hereto. By way of further response, nny nnd nil wnrrnnties between Plnlntiff nnd any parry, the existence of which being specificnlly nnd unequivocnlly denied, were limited to those warrnnties contnlned In the written purchnse documents. By way of further answer, answering Defendants hereby Incorpornte by reference as if fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant American Building Company respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XIII of the Plaintlrrs Complaint, and enter judgment in favor of answering Defendant American Building Company, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. COUNT XIV: BREACH OF CONTRACT PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY 69. Answering Defendant hereby incorporntes by reference as If fully set forth herein parngrnphs 1 through 68 above. 70-72. Denied. Paragrnphs 70 through 72 ofthe Plaintirrs Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the avernlents contained in Parngrnphs 70 through 72 of the Plalntirrs Complaint are denied in accordnnce with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, answering Defendant denies there was any contract between itself and 11 r.677.IUlI Plaintiff at any time material hereto, and/or that Plaintiff was a third-pany beneficiary of any contracts between answering Defendant and any other Co-Defendant at any time material hereto. By way of further response, to the extent that Plaintiff is recognized as a third-pany beneficiary to any contract between answering Defendant and any other Co- Defendant, it Is specifiC'dlly and unequivocally denied that answering Defendant breached any contract whatsoever. To the contrary, answering Defendant fulfilled any and all contractual duties owed to any pany llt any time material hereto. By way of further response, any duties owed by answering Defendant, whether contractual or warranty in nature, were limited to the written purchase documents and any written amendments thereto. By way of further answer, answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant American Building Company respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XlV of the Plaintiffs Complaint, and enter Judgment in favor of answering Defendant American Building Company, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. COUNT XV: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY. INC. 73. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set forth herein paragraphs I through 72 above. 12 rb77.ntls 74-75. Paragraphs 74 through 75 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendant; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 74 through 75 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT XVI: BREACH OF IMPUED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABIU1Y PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY. INC. 76. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 75 above. 77-80. Paragraphs 77 through 80 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendant; consequently, no response Is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 77 through 80 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 13 r1Jn.RIII COUNT XVII: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY. INC. 81. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fulIy set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 80 above. 82-85. Paragraphs 82 through 85 of the Plaintiff's Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendant; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 82 through 85 are deemed to alIege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT XVII: BREACH OF CONTRACf PLAINTIFF V. AMERICAN BUILDING COMPANY. INC. 86. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set forth herein paragraphs I through 85 above. 87-89. Paragraphs 87 through 89 of the Plaintiff's Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendant; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that 14 ron.ans Paragraphs 87 through 89 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT XIX: NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF V. VICfOR SEGlNA 90-92. Paragraphs 90 through 92 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to parties other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. in the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 90 through 92 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT XX: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILI'IY PLAINTIFF V. VICfOR SEGlNA 93-97. Paragraphs 93 through 97 of the Plaintiffs Complaint refer to panles other than answering Defendants; consequently, no response is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, to the extent that Paragraphs 93 through 97 are deemed to allege facts, they are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 15 c677.nns COUNT XV: NEGUGENCE PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 107. Answering Defendant hereby incorponltes by reference as If fully set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 106 above. 108-109. Denied. Paragraphs 108 through 109 of the Plalntltl's Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, Paragraphs 108 through 109 of the Plalntltl's Complaint, including subparts (a) through (k) of Paragraph 108, are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). Since Plaintiff fails to Identify any agents, servants or employees of John W. Norton, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that any such agent, selVant or employee was negligent, careless or reckless in any way. To the contrary, at all times material hereto, John W. Norton acted reasonably, properly, and prudently under the circumstances. By way of further answer, answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as if fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant John W. Norton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XXIII of the Plalntitl's Complaint, and enter judgment In favor of answering Defendant John W. Norton, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. 17 c6n.aul COUNT XXIV: BREACH OF IMPUED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY PLAIN'nFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 110. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 109 above. 111-114. Denied. Paragraphs III through 114 ufthe Plaintiffs Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the avennents contained in Paragraphs 111 through 114 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are denied In accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that answering Defendant breached any warranties owed, If any, at any time material hereto. By way of further response, any and all warranties between Plaintiff and any other pany, the existence of which being specifically and unequivocally denied, were limited to any warranties contained in the written purchase documents. By way of further answer, . answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as if fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant John W. Norton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XXIV of the Plaintiffs Complaint, and enter judgment In favor of answering Defendant John W. Norton, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. 18 c677.nns COUNT XXV: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRAN1Y OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 115. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as If fully set forth herein paragraphs 1 through 114 above. 116-119. Denied. Paragraphs 116 through 119 of the Plalntllrs Complaint contain conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the averments contained in Paragraphs 116 through 119 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). In the alternative, waiving none of the foregoing, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that answering Defendant breached any warranties owed, if any, at any time material hereto. By way of further response, any and all warranties between Plaintiff and any other party, the existence of which being specifically and unequivocally denied, were limited to any warranties contained In the written purchase documents. By way of funher answer, answering Defendants hereby incorporate by reference as if fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant John W. Norton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XXV of the Plaintllrs Complaint, and ellter judgment in favor of answering Defendant John W. Norton, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. 19 r671.nlls COUNT XXVI: BREACH OF CONTRACI' PLAINTIFF V. JOHN W. NORTON 120. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference as if fully set fonh herein paragraphs 1 through 119 above. 121-123. Denied. Paragraphs 121 through 123 of the Plaintiffs Complaint contain conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, the avennents contained in Paragraphs 121 through 123 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of funher response, answering Defendant denies there was any contract between itself and Plaintiff at any time material hereto, and/or the Plaintiff was a third-pany beneficiary of any contracts between answering Defendant and any other Co-Defendant at any time material hereto. By way of funher response, to the extent that Plaintiff is recognized as a third-pany beneficiary to any contract between answering Defendant and any other Co-Defendant, it is specifically and unequivocally denied that answering Defendant breached any contract whatsoever. To the contrary, answering Defendant fulfilled any and all contractual duties owed to any pany at any time material hereto. By way of funher response, any duties owed by answering Defendant, whether contractual or warranty in nature, were limited to the written purchase documents and any amendments thereto. By way of funher answer, 20 r677.nns answering Defendants hereby Incorporate by reference as If fully set forth herein their New Matter which appears below. WHEREFORE, answering Defendant John W. Norton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Count XXVI of the Plaintiffs Complaint, and enter judgment in favor of answering Defendant John W. Norton, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. NEW MATIER OF DEFENDANTS, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY AND JOHN W. NORTON 124. Answering Defendants specifically and unequivocally deny any allegation not specifically admitted above. 125. Some or all of the Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrines of estoppel amI/or laches. 126. The Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against answering Defendants upon which relief can be granted. 127. The Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statutes of limitation. 128. Plaintiff Karns Prime and Fancy Food, Ltd. was contributorily negligent, and such contributory negligence was the sole and proximate cause of the accident and injuries to the Plaintiff. 21 cb71.nns 129. The above-mentioned contributory negligence of Plaintiff was comparatively higher than the negligence of answering Defendants, if any Is found to exist, therefore, Plaintiffs recovery is barred, or in the alternative, any recovery must be diminished In accordance with the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 130. Plaintiff voluntarily assumed known, open, and obvious risk of Injury, thereby barring recovery. 131. The alleged accident and injuries to the Plaintiff was proximately caused by parties other than answering Defendants. 132. At all times relevant to the Plaintiffs Complaint, the subject building materials may have been materially altered and rendered unsafe after It left the care, custody and control of answering Defendants by someone other than an agent, servant and/or employee of answering Defendants. 133. lfit is determined that building materials distributed by answering Defendants was involved as alleged In the Plaintiffs Complaint, the materials were reasonably fit for their Intended uses when they left the care, custody, and control of answering Defendants. 134. If the Plaintiff was damaged by the acts or omissions of answering Defendants, such allegation being specifically denied, the damages were caused or contributed to, either in whole or In pan, by panies other than answering Defendants, and answering Defendants are entitled to have their relative degree of fault, if any, compared to the relative degree of fault In those panles including those not named In this lawsuit so as to reduce or eliminate 22 c671.aIl5 answering Defendants' liability to the Plaintiff or entitle answering Defendants to contribution and/or indemnity from those third panies. 135. If it is detennined that a product distributed by answering Defendants were Involved as alleged in the Plaintiffs Complaint, the Instructions, directions, and warnings were wholly adequate in all respects. By way of funher avennent, answering Defendants had no control over the placement or use of the subject product at the subject site. By way of funher avennent, answering Defendants, upon infonnation and belief, avers that at all times relevant to the Plaintiffs Complaint, the Plaintiff did not heed the instructions, directions, and warnings on the subject product, nor would the Plaintiff have heeded any instructions, directions, or warnings. 136. Answering Defendants acted reasonably, properly, and prudently at all times material hereto. By way of funher response, since Plaintiff falls to Identify any agents, servants or employees of American Building Company, Inc., it is specifically and unequivocally denied that any such agent, servant or employee was negligent, careless or reckless in any way. 137. The subject building materials were reasonably fit for their intended uses at the time it left the care, custody, and control of answering Defendants. 138. To the extent obligated to do so, answering Defendants complied with any and all warranties, express or implied. 23 ctJ77.nnl 139. Any warranties between answering Defendants, such warranties being denied, were limited to those warranties contained In the original purchase documents for the subject product. 140. In the event it is determined that any warmnties existed between answering Defendants and the Plaintiff, then It Is specificaliy denied that said warranties were breached by answering Defendants. 141. No privity of contmct exi~'ted between the Plaintiff and answering Defendants at any time material hereto. 142. The Plaintiff at all times material hereto failed to provide proper notice of any alleged breach of warranty as required by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) as adopted in Title 13 of Pa.C.S.A. 143. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff failed to advise answering Defendants of the intended mechanical and/or live loads intended for the ~'tructure by the Plaintiff. Such failure constitutes a complete bar to any of Plaintiffs claims for any alleged defect, negligence or breach of warranty relating to the subject building. 144. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims are barred by the Economic Loss Doctrine. 145. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff failed to advise answering Defendants of the prevailing conditions and environment of use of the sul.lJect building, including, but not limited to, roof height differentials. Such failure constitutes a complete bar to any of Plaintiffs claims for any alleged defect, negligence or breach of warranty relating to the subject building. 24 ronAnl WHEREFORE, Defendants American Buildings Company and John W. Norton respectfully request that this Honornble Court dismiss PlaintlfPs Complaint as it pertains to Defendants American Buildings Company and John W. Norton, find Co-Defendant Lobar Associates, Inc. solely liable, liable over, and/or jOintly and severnlly liable, and enter judgment thereon In favor of Defendants American Buildings Company, and John W. Norton, together with all allowable costs and attorney's fees. NEW MATl'ER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 2252(0) OF DEFENDANTS, AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY AND JOHN W. NORTON v. VICfOR SEGINA 153. Answering Defendants hereby Incorpornte by reference as if fully set forth herein their answers to Parngrnphs 1 through 152 of their Answer with New Matter. 154. Answering Defendants, without vouching for its accurncy, hereby Incorpornte by reference as If fully set forth herein the PlaintlfPs Complaint as It pertains to Co-Defendant Victor Segina, and avers that if the Plaintiff is entitled to any recovery, which entitlement Is specifically denied, the liability is the sole liability of Lobar, Inc.. 155. In the alternative, Victor Segina Is jointly and/or severnlly liable to the Plaintiff and/or liable over to the answering Defendants for contribution and/or Indemnity. WHEREFORE, Defendants American Buildings Company and John W. Norton respectfully request that this Honornble Court dismiss PlaintlfPs Complaint as It pertains 27 EXHIBIT A '~ Purchase Order DAn 2-; -7ZtL ~ ~ IUllllP ',0, NO. ~//t;; IV /1#~ ~~-,~~A.&IAJl.A.... de QUOTE NO. - . ....~ ~~.~ ...,~..i I , r~r" AMERICAN BUILDtHGI COfl1Pl\HY ~. ,... ..'"......""'cr.. 0ftliSl ,"ru;;;'&;'i;a:~ ~-~-' # ;e L..:--.:': .A~- };' ; 3 .11: . -:", ./."- .1:!II\.'l<" gry.. ,: lUll[ '* .. ,? cnY c:mrt'ACf ......tf _lMn -- \ ) '" , -' ~,,~ L. ~.,.-,,,.:~~, ., 1 .,. :,... OlIDfIl oelal~ -- -- 'cOcE .".,....~~_l5LEI'ClUC'II*_. _ ". ... .. -H::I 0' C( '''IF'CA',Olrf 0 PUNS FOfIIIIPItOiAL " i ..VI.... :. 015 Sf. A.L 0 CAlCULATlONS CJ ATSI _ ""5..Pl.l..:;FCI09UII..O'",CP(AMfT/. C........"'AVu ...... .vu~ ." <liP~ OF :)RY.(.Cj.wa .......~ A"~'~'",' _ .--",rU-!., ' ~h." , "''5" I WUf4 UL.IOCDn'.' __ ...n: I ......"T ~'f'I ," "' . .... _~..=.:-....1--. ----- j'" nn. ctM" "'IE .... c __ ._.1. X wa""'-'-- '";.....' ~J ~ --~'-.- ~ ..... cc.-, (. -r ""'<...- , .?<-. _ ,-1 0_' -- I,......., i :'1 ...,,'.~ .' - ~ ...... . '~~~'7~: . . .........ACtUlED .... TEIlSAU _.-.AC1UlfO ....~ _ camuocT TOW. PIIa ~. ----... :v .. PttICINQ , . """ NIC( Foe p'_AHT FRflGHT ~_ i.O.AOS U 1ft/I" STAn saUS U... ~ .. l~l~TM .. AX C~ "'fIGHT .U: ..,..",tCAalfl TOTAL /JJJJICXJHT OF COHTUCT ~ - , ,.. -i CONDITIONS OF SALE All DrOVlltOns cl me ;lrcs.nlly ene'::I,". Oaill.' IBu"u.." 54l., COnltlCt Dv.na Detween ,,,. 0....' IBu,kltl/ IIIIn'n9 on tne ,e.ersel.de ".'eoland AMERIC ~~ BUILDINGS COMPANY are, by l"'&reference. lncorporl.ed In rhls gU',".Jse ouler as fully .\ If Ihey "".'e ..tolted her"n and Slid EJrOVlllonl Will be- com. Ind be . Din 01 .n. COnltict 0' QUfCnJI. ana SJle wnlt" tn'I orcler 'I ,ce'Dled by AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY This order Ina Ihe (enU.)CI ,. 't~JIII"q . Deale'IBu,klt,1 AMERIr.AN BUILDINGS COMP^'/Y ..,",..,. I'" tlon or 10 SubSfltut. m'I'r1al tf)uill h.: superl"r to I" ~ 'IS J.:.:egld: -:e ar. nol l'ans'IIabl, 01 IUtVn." try ;''1 I,hdngllt VI ,... OOdv tn. deslQn .nd ,.bllC:... )tOel'- . "I"eb,;, The Code 01 Stannetto p. JClIcei 0' 1'", MBMA rI ",r'DY Inco':.:?' 'o'4d InlO tn, terms of thl' ."... men. unl"llhelerms '......eat tor.rhc: -"llil I Cil'1l"' ....S. UI""" "'lflons wn"."pon .he.erml fOUnd In the Gener'l c",.~ '11" ~. l' ........11 '" ran"" sell I;.... '''e e~1 . ,orHmant of thecynln hereto Ind no lerms or ~ '"III.l)n\ '-' Ora" :u . ~ :..":' '''iitt OlOt- OlOlr,to of unl,u IC)eClflCllfy m.. I Din tI.r.o'. snail b~ ..,alla ". a.r . .,~ IJ"Ie'!s :Jt!"!erw":: ..; ".!..-., . ..'O Ihereln All prices i'f' ,~,.,,... .. .... locllla.n. use or ..,"'-,e Ida f't\"'s".:-:l IS a r, ..' ,... 'n:. :.uel.ll.~..uy ,nown ln, h~If'1. Sllle ,,, , "",; .. n., In- amou'" ,,' ......~. .1' '..fl' ~n Terms 01 P"Y"','''I d'" ,.~ .... 1\ "UI t~t. . ..,to.' '," el." .. '.'.is cca.~f'.:.t..( Pili due ,cr.n,s,.,,>> ....,." . mOnlnly In aadl! .-, In the evenl COllectlr '-:.. "'Q' '']., ..... ......" '. '1. 'Oft '. ..., 1; .,..... '''ii'.''\- : '. ., 'I.' ,,... .:'HandIM9 bal.nce 'n'I' n' "'':'''-='' .! "'-: ':::Q~n''''1 ,.., Prices In ,.""CI .. ("I'" ')' '1"'0" .....: .t..Il\- ProduClS Idor f'al~'J rv... ...."(,1... ~ ;'''J nQ .l:c''!''OQ.......C'. "1er li't' warrant eo aoalnst "lIur. due only 10 detecl,ve m,l~ ... I 'h .. rroln~'~ [' '~r .1 .... <JC ')! l. .~,: , .. ,.." f,om \Jale at alllW'ry of luen produ':1S and InCludes '. .'.~:'." .... ,-orpSSed 0' -= -a " '~':'vl.d' ,'"."ant; L''''loca must be specified Ind Dlld lor as nol~ I'" 10.,1\' OolQP 1)1 r",c; ora~r' 4.,"1.'.... ;.... '5 "llenl 01 I.abllltv VIt.11 be gover"td by the Wlrrlnh Pnlocy tJ' !nP . p...." . ':,ouk INSTRUCTIONS FOR r:OMI ET.:"IG PlJnCHASE ORDER FORM .. ,~'I""""~'" The order should be oalpo '"f1 .. '. M- - - ..... Ame,lC'an" C..,]I'" :: - nirne of the bUlldlnQ n"","'., (\' C''.I!o' .,m Include CC'unty. CI~ -,f' 1"rl" ':I mar a/Iould be d",..", poa,eb&e. Plelse ,..,... . PI.. ntght phone numr~r 'i' ....Ot-d. 1 . . deliYef'.ng your bu.,J.nq Ple.,e use Ame'lcan au' a"a\....Od.~ . "I!,l ~ ! ";"J 1t."ro;:~ ojeselloe bUilding type such.S LRFC. GCE. SSFH LP2EMJ. . n Jlnq..., t'" ,~ "....asurea Dulto out of gin hne The .,ve helghl.s uSUIIlv i, "oJmlfl;: 1.1.., I an f. "~: ., heIlJilf'" 's rfQu.red OU!as.e IOdl~te with' note_ Any odd bay S~Clnqs dno " . ~. e" ''n' 5"OUI" Df t]~I.1'lfd 0" oaq. 5 The De.ler CBullderl' P.tJ,,~, 'S r.st. 'nsl,'le ',r sc.t:I'..:rq tnt! orcoe, aeslgn 10101 ana bUIId'ng cod4ts wh,ch govern the strUC1\.lf tJ, .'qn '), r 'e bUllttlOo r,... :"'c. er hv~ '10 and 'Annd load Should be spec,. fied, Any other mechlOlcal, 'uullar, -:~.:t.-" I mnnorll' loa05 snOUII.. bI! c..,.rlv nOleo al'\d shown nn I sILItctl. Unless otherwise 50.1,;.,...;1 ai, ! J. "Imbu"ol',ons ...,11 be .n accordance Vltllh the MBMA Metl' BuildirlQ SYltems Manu. ." .... :: ,~. ,. BII..er s ou'c"'ase order number. ., "''T1[ ... I!'a a oli:Jaress .no Ihe A. ... ;"14:1,, ~"~' ...."'.. ,s; a'! -lIve'" i"":lsaddresssnould " .. ('."" ~.- ...., -: ,j .: .,.., 1.1nal1'a'. When necesSlr:, a lD .. .. ..,oue......o aCh..r, aa:es NIl! be ,....t when , .. ~.. ...pl,Jr .. 'lev lot '....,'af""'! aell\ferv dlte ,A .J' -,...,-.. rJ" .-ol,ld th~", ""re,.pnce a dellY In ) J ABC 0004 . l,f ~r SIOIW...... . ENOWAlL M)()f OVIIIIHAhG 1'tlOJ, ~ '~, '(, ..1', ....c... ._~:c-- _. ;..~.... .":''';t-,,~'.':- .'t-.:.~-=" -, .~;-::.., r~ ~~rJ -- ..----= -~ , .. ~ ~ ,- cyy: '<HALl. DODAS L~_, \.. OVtfllr4EAD A OOUBlE SLIDE DOORS Mt.....~ ; w I "11) HeM' 'AM( "OW T'tI'lE Lsw 11II_.= _~ - ,... / " /.~. .. . ' QIT. -'" HllGHT ;N tv. (N(;o ->All ~~I~ .\ , I I I I ~ FAAMED OP'E~I""GS QIT, 0Vl-..c OlIl,SUD( one ~~ ? LOW'EAS ~,.;& 11II " .... ..':'Of ",AC"S LOrY I SIll \."'*".....e ) ""j --- r..r, ,:It , "' , , ) ." .......,. ./ '- IICSUtATlOlI ~;.-::,+ nta $ItYUGHTS . w...... UGK'S ~~.....- - ~ ~~'~-"'-~ .... ~~- :',~~- ....,.,:.~I I ,.....c '-:l ;" IIOC' $W' iW JiI(t~&_" sw [W ~a"''''1 1'W-" . " ~ :-~,;: -J j ,.... .. , J ~ fU!NtlG lIT ,".If 1!.lt ()()()~ ~="==~ ODe" at.... m.~"'.hO'" ,"(I ,"Ih ,... ,'I .,..",. ", .If( L . .0""1' ,r.op, ...."'n.ncn C"nao... '......101. ale Sh.., JIILO LOCATED ace.",....., ..,,,.' "'. .......! _.' . "'I"""" ....,~ (,', .11' ..... . ....."" ,","" lne uut\.1N lil')Ol'"t " D...... "'.....nq ~~~ ""mOt'f "' h.I" ,,,., '0', ,", ,""11" ," ... ," ," .\ "",.. ..,'\1" "r,' '.~..Q. ,.u".... ...IC"" '''' eddtl"'~.1 D"~' 01 .,..",'. ., ........,....,., "'I''''...... ...., ..... .. . .,,,.. ...... '.' " l ~ \ f ~~ " ~~. \ I ~~~ ~ .. j ~.). \ "') CO \~~~~-: .,'~..,. '- . r---' J!i' ,,-~.. '~O~ ~".", \ l./../ ..''''If/ 7/"7 j_:?", r/~ ...I" ~ I. . I ~1tI?' I ~ ~ \ , . . .; , " , , .~ , " . . " '. ~ z ~ " . ~ c ~ a ... 0 '. I;,~ S , 0 .. ~ ~ '" ~ ). ; A. ~ ~ '\ ,:.' ~ iil , ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ .. q! ~ ~~ ~~~I \,~. '-' I. .08 ~U ..1 ..l.. "'-'11..0'" I .j'"'' 'JA'1 .~ :.... 4 "" I" i... ,. \).: , " J. ~., ,\l' '" ~I;'*~"'''~ ~ '( .. \I \oj. ~ ~ ~ I" ~ ~~t~~~~" ~~,,)i,",\, ~'Ic ~ ':' ~ ".' 1 '\, " " " ::,~ . ~....., , .... 4 . 'W '" ~I ,.-..; ?7',. V .........-.AJ1.'../ .-' ..,. ('"'77"""""',-~ ''''''''''t- ~ , ....: , " ..... T , ~I -I I I .:L- , ~~ , , _\ .; ~ ~~ K: ,~ ^ l' " . , , J ~I ~ .' " : " .. - . - ... ,- - , '. "- : " " ~ ", . : ~ " , , , .. -, -- ~, ., , , - ~ A ~, \ , " , " .. , ,- --- . .. , , -, .. , , " .' l( , < . ~ .. , " " . r '.. .- .. . 't .. ... . , I . ,", '.. ; .. '< , ~ . .~- , I; -7 ~I \". .' ..-'- .' r I ./ , .l' ~ . , ." ,"\ ... , ~ ..., I..; \ i I ~ .1i. CI"L_ A:i<- - '" ..., r:J' , 7-' : z . < - ~=: ~ c to,; I C)(,.s rn"/(, 6'~06. c - z~~ ->t.: :1<(- QWW Z Z I#. ' ........ WID"" _. - ,our 'OOUIO'G'.'S,I loll T>I'. ...i' ~ J .30' r; ABC 0007 ~ - ""\.1"" o;:Jn~... I PAGE ~ OF .2:- ~ 7i_ ~-....,. ~ ~llf n I ' Jo},. ..., QUOTE NUMBER llUIUl(R I L.. ~A... '-9"4,lfO U~~ri 0 K-~ ~Cl!N ,U::R rfI/II1-'.~ ..... 0lY DlSCIl_ SO FT MIGHT '0'.... V.loGH: PlIOCE . , I 1"".-9 fr< (1"'<1' (,;:: L) ~WA"V ''''0-;-: ,41 7. tiS Z- V I / ~'/?1I&C- ...r!'", - FJF-/ ~'.1..........F4t+' -r'- lI' OJ / I%~ ", 8SIoF ~ ~s... ,...r.l>>n" r..~A....F..'-J!_ -~;::., '- ./' l. D r lJlS'o-r ...w .5ID, ........ J~nr^, ! 0 tJ ~ ::>, -..L ..,. L,r PrD..r u.." " " , I --<.t (. II :>" I 15 ':...i ./ ~ Nl.:... $...... ,-s. 4'.-"~ lil~lIr}i ,'io' 1 ?_O : (1,'1:01_ ~'1'" g r.s_ C#L ... T-.;' e"O ........ I I Z 0 I . ~,G.- 0 I . 4t1~,j./f:S J , ..e.r/N,ol.u..r""J ~.CJ. o;.c. r-.. F..,."plf' I ,~O _ .: I. " \ "1h~ ! '-" .. ,-- / ..; 1j1S-.;rr _1'.!/_..o;::':'~,/,#"'~r.u,.,.,r- ~"r .JI':~ /:O~f.".~~r$) / v , T-.5' . ~ I~o~ ...),t'I...r.s.NiI ~ /.I' e'~o ~~... (SF~ r...) J..4 S'; S:~_:'/~~~_~"IC. s_ 4-. 'i.,' ~(J ""'",5 5.w. ,Z,I ~/' ~"'S c",OJ:::'.""', ~ '''t, ,r:..-,I c"'<"C'I1f U_,.-~. (;If'- 4'".CJr~LJ..;1(...J --, . ~ -- . . . . '11;7 ~~6. u' __~L.. ' 1.77 _: / 6'CJ/ I?~S" / I~ 7 a / /8r/ .s~'f' 7'(."1 ~ L 3 ^ '7 r.c, ...,/T.A:I'" I ~." , '1::r t' ,"~ ._ .__ J __.__._ . 5'z. 2~39// , 05110./ ~ , I ~-:--- -,S/-'4CNf.... .",t)- OVERHEAD DOOtI I SUDE DOO~ LOUVER WAU. UTE SXYUGHT CLSI'! SICYUGHT lSSIIl WIHOOW YDmATOII 7 VBmATOII/ 1.'-10/ aocx . IlHT I'AICf I 0 -- i I , , ! . TOTAL '''\ /iOTALBu'LC.M;'-'CE . ,";1. Z~. ~..... _ TOTAL <(CESS OR. PROC( . I. 41 /if'? ~ / TOTAl.WlHR...... FOB PUNT ...3 2. 7.If!!' J dAtIGKT ! z.. ~LOA05 Clt I g-",CJ", / /. frD _ ~ TAXi ,'." t:;:: I :~~ " ;i ~ / OIY. I ACCiSSOR\'" .. ' <I: _..~ r Q.iUATSElf l!flIU .e,-,;:: < Pi" .1115 ' V;' _ ~ /OTY ! ACCESSOR' '_ IwAl.Jl.OOOll '!... G ; PANIC HAROW.ME I fill P2 . . 3' . ..,"/ 3'. -;;7a. ~oarr . ~~ PANEL ~ Q fT.1lOOf' i!1t. em, /ttt(J Ifn.wAU. Cn.,,,, .2.1- .7'1- I CWl.f.S ,/,f') ~ ~, (,0 ./. '1'7.(; s.,,,r,~. #r ~ -i1''j ,. II II '" t!I U ~ 2. 't- / '7/ _ - ~ ~-=- '..?,.~4)lr. (J'~""',) ,'" z~...:::::: ~ sct,n.W/oIINoMTY I ) F.. '. . TOTAl. ~/'_;- .....,....... ..";T" . .. .~ ..,..,~ r.IO' 20"0 '7 IT .-a.ATION sa. n. IlOOF --/./ ~,", / sa. n. WAl.l II ~ nlAT CIIIAImnD 011I_."'" olOIlU "'"' GlIDeR I .,;., 1\IlC 0009 . ~ -- " . . ~ . .,.; ~~ ... ....Of IY ~ -"/1 .1-" ~ .1r15tJ (t.),...) 10 "T ..", _ IJI #. E US' "z. t. 0 t/j r-:- ""-1 :J. J'~"J c: .S',,~..) ss/- 30 n. 'i1S ! (II T-3 I z..", 2'- '0' d47J 1/.1 /'1 '?,Pl.rIIO I , ..sw.4,f1 "'.'/./"'" " ~.. I /JII'J-I"'" ;(2.,.,-. W"It- ,S",,...,-. T-' E...... %0' "S.W' I/J ~.:1~ Lr-.s r.'. c:.."'.._..... /JEJJ-,.r "'. pJII"cu n. .ctc:,:::." p~ ~.c.r l'''rJp.~ ,.. Il' r",,,,r J}L.!'....' e".....,...... I"IS II.' trlV.- J .c.. , ~Q I Lu i I. /I /, ., /e- .(,' !..:.C..... Z7f~ , .z 7' SJ,>"/t' 30 It.. "" I .]. /1.. ...S AP~ L.' ",., n .,1" 4_ ~-.' 5.1-1. e.w. I ,~ 1-- ~ . .:> 90 ! Mal TOT.... TaTM,_....-.tt..... . .. c " pz fOUL - '. .6. . ~.. x __,.cu,fUM - - . . . . ~ 9 .. .. .- t -~ r .. - . .- . ~~.. ~ ...__a_ ._..__.. . . 1..;;;," '~ -;: ".... '~ .. . .. r: ,"" --; I ,!. 'A b .....:SJl , 1\ ~ ~~A~~ c:'AI..... _ _ .1_ d , " .... I.~ '" 1,,' 100... ,~ ~ . ~ ,- -! I , AM , 0/ i iii .: '2'J i I I , .....1- : I I .! : , , i -; : " i I j i i i I I i I I i ! ; , .': I I I I o . , i , i I I ! ; I ' : : I ! . ~ ! I : I I . I i , ! -1 : ~- , , : j ! , ; i -....- " n _._9 -- I I I , o - , , i I ! I I --I --" - ! i : I r I I I I I ' i,: ! ! : I , : : : ; I I ; I I : I ! ! I ! ! , I I I I ! I I I I . I I I I 0 i I I ! I 1 I , I ! i -1-- I I I I : ! I ! I I I I : : I I I I I I T I I 1 i I i i , I ! I I I T ! , : I 1 I I I I r I IT ; i : I 'T, ..~ _i-L . ,d"l....' .-1 . ~ '. . -:. '. . .0" " '. , -:4};" AIJC 0011 . ~ . \. - .- . F~ ~.,~~..._~.~...7'" : 1I;h .-., . ~ '" t.. ' .....,j ~ ,~~~, I LL " for, ....1. '- . I.. ~ : ,~ .#' ~u wJ. .~ I 7 _ ~ ~..~.L ~.- " ~ "'. A. J... d,,,, _ u.,. ....- : I I ~ . t,,, 144 '7 -#. h.. . 1... 7" ~ ,. '''''.. A-or - " ,./ A ~ "'-. _.0, -, i.- i... ~ -' Iz ":J - ',I{~ 9, . ~, L C. ...., I;:::' ~ !- .- 1 11""71 .. ~ ... ... !/. .. - -' - ,. J'J j-V _, ; , ~_ :.r-.- I" C!: .1, _ , : J. L. ,I ~J 1'.1._' -r ~) I '~i.-. 1 :". ~. n ..J. i: r;:; , - , ~... ~. J r-L1 I , , I , I : I : I ! I , i , , : I i I I , I I I I 1 I I 1 , ; I I , , I 1 I - , 1 , : : 1 ' : i I I I I I I I I I ! ,: I 1 I , I I " IIC . . :t:.. . ... :A:..i'~' .." ..... ..... S'I:..' '.. ... .~_.:! - ....~ " ,\Be Oill'/, . . . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ?A day of April, 1996, I, Charles E. Haddick, Jr., Esquire, hereby certify that 1 did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER WITH NEW MA'ITER upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mall, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Bv First-Class Mail: Douglas B. Marcello, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer 305 North Front Street, P. O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Samuel L. Andes, Esquire Andes, Vaughn & Bangs 525 North Twelfth Street, P.O. Box 188 Lemoyne, PA 17043 John H. Frymyer, Jr., Esquire Harmon & Davies, P.C. 2306 Columbia Avenue Lancaster, PA 17603 C~~_ Charles E. Haddlc . Jr. MARSlIALL & FARRELL. P.C. ATRIIDI WEST OFfICE BUILDING SUITE 004 0401 ~L\RKET STREET C,\}IP HILL. PA 17011 - (717) 701-4800 rn:,"'!j..- " f"'~ ~., ',_.-'.-';~...\..~rF1C:: ~ I, j" , 1 ',"~,!, :.t~...., 'r ,,' ~,"": f ('" !~,'1 .'..J '" l\ , "'. <'j f~' , Iii 1/: 20 C.L':,....".!,'! ," . ". h" -' .. I. "" ;",~ "..I.,',!\,..'\......,,: '."'<r"', I ~".,;.lII.t,...fI!f "'1114 ..~, \ KARNS PRIME AND PANCY POOD, LTD, I IN THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS OP Plaintiff I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA I I I CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPANY, I COMPANY, INC., I I I NO. 95-1221 CIVIL TBRM I I Defendants I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v. AMERICAN BUILDINGS AMERICAN BUILDINGS LOBAR, INC., LOBAR ASSOCIATES, INC., VICTOR SEGINA, and JOHN W. NORTON, PRAECIPB TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned matter settled, satisfied and discontinued. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS 1& HAPER Date: I ?-/ V{ /4& -- ~~~ By: \ ~ DO~9' s B. Marcello Attorney I.D. No. 36510 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 (717) 255-7238 Attorney for Plaintiff, Karns Prime and Fancy Food Ltd. , ! (') u:> 0 c; -I -" ~'.. '- ~:!J "'Of':; :w:-- ~Jq! :J: .~~ e..~t- I en ~t; "1..: 'J ~C -J -0 J~ ~.~;C' :::: .:,~ l-~ :..> ;'3m ><..:.: .. ~ " "'ll .., U'\ :.; ~