HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-3952CQM~MON~. E~J.~, *F PENNSYLVANIA NOTICE OF APPEAL
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
JUDICIAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT
COMMON PLEAS No. _~ ~) ~ -- 3~.~,~").-
NOTICE OF APPEAL
~fice is gi~ ~ ~ a~nt ~s find in t~ a~ve Court of C~ ~s ~ ~al f~ t~ j~gme~ m~emd ~ t~ ~stri~ Justice
~ ~ in ~ c~ ~ ~1~.
This bk)ck will be signed ONLY when this notation is required unde~ Pa. P~P~'~."~",~.
,oo8 / /
This Notice of Appeal, when received by the District Justice, will 9~/ota as a
SUPERSEDEAS to the judgment for possession in this case. ~
$~nature of Prothonotary or Deputy
1001 6 in ~ .......
FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days after
filing his NOTICE of APPEAL.
PRAEClPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(This s~ction of form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice.
IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice of appeal to be served upon aopellee).
PRAEClPE: To Prothono~
Enter rule upon /7~'~-~ F ~7~s) . appellee(s), ta file a complaint in this appeal
within twenty (20) days after e ule or entry of ju ment of non pro~
(1) You ore notified that a rule is hereby entered upon you to file a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) days after the date of
service of this rule up(~ you by personal service or by certified or mgisl~-ed mail
.~.~:Common Pleas No. 02-3952 Civil Term
(2) If you do not fiJe a coenp~aint within this time, a JUDGN~NT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
(3) The date of .rvJce of this rule If .vice was by mail is the data of ma~ ~~~~
COURT FILE TO BE FILED WITH PROTHONOTARY
AOPC 312-90
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FiLE COMPLAINT
DAYS AF F£R 'ling the not,ce of appeal, Check app, lc~:o e boxes)
(This proof of service MUST BE FILED Wt~dlN FEN (1Qi ' ' ' "~ t
COM~IONWEALIH OF ?ENNSYEVANIA
COUNTY OF ; SS
AFFIDAVIT: t hereby wear or affirm that I served
[] a copy of the Notice of ApPeal, Co~'nmon Pleas No i ,,pon the District Justice de ignated tho, rein on
(date al service) ' . ........ [] by personal service [] by (certified) (registered) mail, senders
receipt attached hereto and upon the appellee, (r~ame) on
................... [] by personal service ~ by (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto.
[] and further that I served the Rule to File a Complaint accompanying the above Notice oi Appeal upon the appdlee(s) to whom
the Rule was addressed on ~ by personal serv ce [] by (certifed) (registered)
nail, sender's receipt attached hereto.
SWORN (AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME
THIS DAY OF
cc.
c:~ 0
~ ~3 rn
, ¢~:AONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF: CUMBER~
Mag. Dist. No:
09~1-01
CHARLES A. CLEMENT, JR.
Address: 400 BRIDGE STREET
OLDE TOWNE COMMONS -SUITE 3
NEW CUMBERLAND, PA
Telephone: (717) 774-5989 17070
JOHN MARTZ,T/D/B/A AUTO CONNECTION
52OO
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
TIllS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT:
Judgment:
E~] Judgment was entered for: (Name)
[-~"] Judgment was entered against: (Name)
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRiPT
CIVIL CASE
PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS
F-RUTH, PAUL F -~
1113 CHARLES STREET
MHCHANICSBURG, PA 17055
L _J
VS.
DEFENDANT: NAME and ADDRESS
F-JOHN MARTZ,T/D/B/A AUTO CONNECTION-~
520O
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
~CHANICSBURG, PA 17055
Docket No.: CV- 0000284- 02
Date Filed: 6/06/02
FOR PLAIN~I'FF-
RrF'PT*.T: D&TTT, F
in the amount of $ I: 4q4 _ 34 on:
--]Defendants are jointly and severally liable.
[] Damages will be assessed on:
[] This c~se dismissed without prejudice.
(Date of Judgment)
AmOUnt Of Judgment $ 1,421.74
Judgment COsts $ 72.50
Interest on Judgment $ o OO
Attorney Fees $ . O0
Total $ 1,494.24
(Date & Time)
Post Judgmeni Credits
Post Judgment Costs
[] Amount of Judgment Subject to
Attachment/Act 5 of 1996 $.
[] Levy is stayed for days or [] generally stayed.
"--[Objection to levy has been filed and hearing will be held:
Certified Judgment Total
Date: Place:
Time:
ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDG~NT
BY, FILING A NOTICE
OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION :~YOU
MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCR~T FORM WITH:'YouR NoTICE/~¢ APPEAL;
JUL, 9 2OO'Date ~ ~. ~.~i ~'i. 'Distr'ct;ustide
i cer[ify that this is a true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings containin~ th(~ j~dgment.
Date , District Justice
I
My commission expires first Monday of January, 2008 SEAL
AOPC 315-99
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT
(This proof of service MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (I0) DAYS AFTER filing the notice of appeal, Check applicable boxes)
SWORN (AFF RUED)A.D SU.SOR, E
THIS /.c~,.~ DAYOF~,'=~
~igha~fe o. 7 office/~f~m affidaw~s made -- - ~
[ t.ower AJ!e~ Twp., Cumberiand Courtly /
[ M,t COmm~sion Expires Apr. 1~, ~OO~ J
Me.er, Ponn~ama ~s~a~on ~ No~r~a
'CO~IiIMONWEALT.,pI OF PENNSYLVANIA, .o _ :.
AFFIDAVIT.~I hereby swear or affirm that I served
I-R~a,.-:-,/~ cony,-, of the ~,' of,~_.~.a~,/m~al ~men'Pleas. No. 0 ~Z.'~ ~r..~;~. , upon the District Justice designated therein on
-- (date of service) ' ~'/.,~.~.~.~.~.A. · ~.: , ~ persoAal se~ice [] by (certified)(registered) mail, sender's
rec.~ipt~tt.~ch..~,hjFet_o, ~[o,d upoh th~ appellee, (name) /"J~_~ 7'ff on
~' / ,~F..,;/.- ./f. ~ [] by personal service [~t~y (certified) (registered) mail, sender's receipt attached hereto,
[] and f~ther that/l'served the Rule to File a Complaint accompanying the above Notice of Appeal upon the appellee(s) to whom
the Rule was addresseu on ' _, , [] by personal service [] by (certified) (registered)
mail, sender's receipt attached'hereto.
/~ I _/lt~¢~tifled Mail I-I Expmse Mail
r'l Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise
[] Insured Mail [] C.O.D.
Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) [] Yes
· Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Alee complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ,au3ent
· Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
· Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Fic~,le Addmesed to 1? DYes
(Transfer from sen, ice/abe/)
PS Feint 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02.M-103S
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,:
husband and wife, :
Plaintiffs
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/b/d/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., and
JOHN H. MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 02-3952
NOTICE
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set
forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and
notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with
the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you
fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court
without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested
by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other fights important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION
2 LIBERTY AVENUE
CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013
TELEPHONE: (717)-249-3166
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/b/d/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., and
JOHN H. MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
_.
: NO. 02-3952
:
:
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, come the plaintiffs, Paul F. Ruth and Lillian F. Ruth, by and through their
attorney, R. Mark Thomas, Esquire, and bring this Complaint seeking both equitable and legal
remedies and in support thereof respectfully represents:
1. Paul F. Ruth and Lillian F. Ruth are husband and wife currently residing at 1113
Charles Street, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
2. Defendant, John H. Martz, is an adult individual whose last known address was 105
James Lane, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
3. Defendant The Auto Connection, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which operated a place of business located at 5200
Simpson Ferry Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055.
4. At all material times hereto Defendant John H. Martz was acting either in his
individual capacity as the sole shareholder and chief executive officer of Defendant The Auto
Connection, Inc., or in the alternative, was the authorized agent of The Auto Connection, Inc.
5. Defendant The Auto Connection, Inc. is a business that all relevant tim. es hereto was
selling used cars at 5200 Simpson Ferry Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
6. Plaintiff Paul F. Ruth and Defendant John H. Martz were personal friends and on
February 1, 2002, plaintiffs purchased a 1990 Lincoln Continental from defendants at a cost of
Three thousand ($3,000) dollars plus tax and document fees in the amount of Two hundred sixty-
three dollars and fifty cents ($263.50). (A copy of the sales agreement is attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit "A").
7. The car which defendants sold to plaintiffs had been seriously damaged prior to the
sale of the car to plaintiffs.
It is believed and therefore averred that the car had been involved in a serious head
on collision.
9.
The damage to the car caused by the collision was sufficiently concealed so that
purchasing consumers, such as plaintiffs, with little or no knowledge about previously damaged
cars, would not discover the concealed damage at the time of sale.
10. Shortly after taking possession of the car the plaintiffs were advised by their
mechanic that this 1990 Lincoln Continental had been involved in a serious collision.
11. Plaintiffs initially tried to keep the car and make the necessary repairs, but after
having to replace the radio, realign the rear trunk lid, and replace the tie rods, starter, thermostat,
water pump, wires and plugs, electronic instrument panel, heater fan switch, blower motor system,
air conditioner condenser, alternator and steering rack all within a period of three (3) months from
the date of purchase the plaintiffs reasonably believed that the car they had purchased from
defendants was not safe to drive.
12. The total costs of the repairs to the car made by plaintiffs was Two thousand six
hundred and fifty-eight dollars and sixteen cents ($2,658.16).
13. In June 2002 plaintiffs were advised that the radiator also needed to be replaced, but
plaintiffs refused to put additional money into the car.
14. Plaintiffs, after making full disclosure as to the condition of the car, were able to
receive One thousand five hundred ($1,500.00) dollars for the car as trade-in vaiue.
COUNT I
15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 are incorporated herein as if set forth at length.
16. Defendant John H. Martz, in his individual capacity and as the authorized agent of
The Auto Connection, Inc. had either actual or constructive knowledge that this car had been
seriously damaged prior to the sale of the car to the plaintiffs.
17. Defendant John H. Martz, in his individual capacity and as the authorized agent of
The Auto Connection, Inc. intentionally failed to disclose his knowledge of the car's prior serious
damage to the plaintiffs at the time of sale.
18. Defendant John H. Martz, in his individual capacity and as the authorized agent of
The Auto Connection, Inc.'s failure to disclose this knowledge was a material misrepresentation.
19. Had the prior serious damage to the car been disclosed to plaintiffs they would not
have purchased the car.
20. Plaintiffs, as purchasing consumers with limited knowledge and experience to detect
the prior damage justifiably relied upon defendant's representations as to the quality of the car.
21. Plaintiffs suffered damages as a result of defendants' failure to disclose the car's true
condition as follows:
(a) they paid Three thousand ($3,000.00) dollars for a car which had an actual
value of One thousand five hundred ($1,500.00) dollars which resulted in a loss of One
thousand five hundred ($1,500.00) dollars; and
(b) they made repairs to the car in the amount of Two thousand six hundred fifty-
eight dollars and sixteen cents ($2,658.16).
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs seek damages in the amount of Four thousand one hundred fifty-
eight dollars and sixteen cents ($4,158.16), plus costs and pray that this court will enter judgment in
favor of plaintiffs for same.
COUNT II
22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated herein as if set forth at length.
23. Plaintiffs were purchasing consumers at all relevant times during this transaction.
24. Defendants were engaged in the trade of buying and selling used cars.
25. Defendants' actions in failing to disclose material information as to the quality of the
car rose to the level of fraudulent and/or deceptive conduct which led plaintiffs to misunderstand the
true condition of the 1990 Lincoln Continental they purchased from defendants.
26. Defendants' conduct was a violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer
Protection Law, 73 Pa.C.S. §§ 201, et seq.
27. Defendants' conduct, which resulted in a profit to defendants, has caused plaintiffs
to suffer economic damages and to incur legal fees to protect their rights.
28. The Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law authorizes the court to
award treble damages, plus attorneys fees.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray this Honorable Court will find in their favor and award not
only costs, but treble damages and attorneys fees.
COUNT III
29. Paragraphs 1 through 28 are incorporated herein as if set forth at length.
32.
Connection, Inc. and does not operate the business affairs at 5200
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania as a corporation or separate entity.
30. It is believed and therefore averred that Defendant John H. Martz is the sole
shareholder of Defendant The Auto Connection, Inc.
31. At all relevant times hereto plaintiffs reasonably believed that although Defendant
The Auto Connection, Inc. was the name of the business they were making this purchase from John
H. Martz individually.
Defendant John H. Martz holds himself out to the public as the owner of The Auto
Simpson Ferry Road,
33. Due to the manner in which Defendant John H. Martz operates the business of The
Auto Connection, Inc., Defendant John H. Martz is not allowed to insulate himself from personal
liability for plaintiffs damages arising from this transaction.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray this Honorable Court will hold Defendant John H. Martz
personally liable for his personal failure to disclose information the plaintiffs.
Respectfully submitted,
R. Mark Thomas, Esquire
ID# 41301
101 S. Market Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 796-2100
VERIFICATION
We verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are tree and correct.
We understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.
§4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities.
Date:
YR. MAKE
5200 SI~IPSOI'~ FERRY
COF{I'.IEn OF SIMPSON tERRY
~' WESLEY DRIVE
(7 ! 7)
DATE
ZIP
YR. MAKE
TRIM
MODEL
IMILEAGE
TYPE
TITLE NO.
EXP. DATE
LOAN #
LIENHOLDER I PHONE
ADDRESS SPOKE WITH
AMOUNT GOOD TILL VERIFIED BY
Cash, Pdce olNeh~ &~sserJes
[] FACTORY WARRANTY - 3he factory wananty c~sflutes all of the warranties ~,ith respect to the sale of this
iten~'~ems. The seller hereby expressly disclaims all warran~e$..e~er expressso or i~plied including any
implied warranty of men:haofability or f~sss for a pe~ticuier purpose, a~l the ss~er neither assumes
authe~zes any other person to assume for it any liability in cor~neciton with the sale
[] USED CAR WARRANTY - Used car
; rS - This mofor vehicle ~urcnassr
occur
the vehicle.
PURCHASER'S
Mes~nge~ Fe~
THE INFORMATION SEE ON THE WINDOW FORM FOR THIS
VEHICLE IS PART OF THIS CONTRACT. INFORMATION ON THE
WINDOW FORM OVERRIDES ANY CONTRARY PROVISIONS IN THE
CONTRACT OF SALE.
If you cancel this pumhase agreement or refuse to take delivery of the vehicle
ordered, except as permitted by law, you shall, at our option, forfeit as damages
the amount of $
PURCHASER'S
SIGNATURE X
Net ~ s" Cssh on
Purchaser agrees that this order includes all of the terms and conditions on both the face and reverse side hereof, that this order cancels and supersedes any
prior agreement and as of the date hereof comprises the ~mpl~ete and exclusive statement ~)f the terms of agreement relating to the subject matters covered
hereby. This order shall not bec,erOe binding u~pt.ed bY He de~ler or his authorized representative. You, the buyer may cancel this contract and receive
a ful refund any tme before-J~'e~ll'3t of a gOpy-O~his~v~..e~'r~igl~t~by an authorized dealer represel tiy,~by givil written notice o[ cancellation to the dealer.
Purchaser by h,s executlo~r~e.r-~now/b~g; ~t. ~'~l~s'dr~''l{s terms and cond,t,ons and has r( ~ ,d ~e
PURCHASER'S
SIGNATURE X
Exhibit "A"
II
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
VS,
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/d/b/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., and
JOHN H. MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 02-3952
NOTICE
TO PLAINTIFFS NAMED HEREIN:
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO RESPOND TO THE ENCLOSED ANSWER AND NEW
MATTER COUNTERCLAIM WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A
DEFAULT JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
Attorney for Defendants
Supreme Court ID 17225
525 North 12th Street
Lemoyne, PA 17043
(717) 761-5361
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
VS.
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/d/b/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., and
JOHN H. MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 02-3952
ANSWER AND NEW MATTER
AND NOW come the above-named Defendants, by their attorney, Samuel L. Andes,
and make the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint:
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted except that Mr. Martz resides in East Berlin, Pennsylvania.
3. Admitted.
4. Denied as stated. At all times relevant to this action, Mr. Uartz acted in his
capacity as an officer and employee of The Auto Connection, Inc. (hereinafter
"Corporation").
5. Denied. Mr. Martz did not act in any individual capacity in the matters related
to this claim.
6. Admitted except for the statement that Mr. Ruth and Mr. Martz were "personal
friends" which is denied. They were acquaintances familiar with each other because of
their mutual interest in automobiles.
7. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or accuracy of the statements
contained in this paragraph and, since the vehicle in question is in the possession of the
Plaintiffs and not accessible to Defendants, Defendants deny same and demand proof
thereof at trial. By way of further answer, Defendants state that they had no knowledge,
at the time of the sale of the vehicle to Plaintiffs, that the vehicle had been damaged prior
to that sale.
8. Denied for the reasons set forth in the answer to Paragraph 7 above.
9. Denied. Defendants deny that the vehicle was damaged for the reasons set
forth in the answer to Paragraph 7 above. By way of further answer, Defendants state
that Plaintiffs had ample opportunity to inspect the vehicle and to have it inspected by
experts of their choice, prior to their purchase of it.
1 0. Denied for the reasons set forth in the answer to Paragraph 7 above, which
are incorporated herein by reference.
1 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge as
to any repairs Plaintiffs may have made to the vehicle or the necessity or reason for such
repairs, because all of that information is within the possession and control of Plaintiffs,
Accordingly, Defendants deny the averments set out in Paragraph 1 1 and demand proof
thereof at trial.
1 2. Denied for the reasons set forth in the answer to Paragraph 1 1 above.
13. Denied for the reasons set forth in the answer to Paragraph 1 1 above.
14. Denied for the reasons set forth in the answer to Paragraph 1 1 above.
COUNT I
15. No answer required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendants
incorporate herein the averments set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 14 above.
16. Denied, John Martz had no actual or constructive knowledge that the vehicle
in question had been seriously damaged prior to its sale to Plaintiffs. Defendants deny
that the vehicle was involved in a serious accident and demand proof of that claim at trial.
17. Denied. John Martz had no such knowledge to disclose. By way of further
answer, John Martz denies that the vehicle was seriously damaged prior to .its sale to
Plaintiffs.
1 8. Denied. Mr. Martz had no knowledge which he failed to disclose and made no
material misrepresentation to Plaintiffs about the condition of the vehicle.
1 9. Defendants deny that there was prior serious damage to the vehicle in
question. As to the statement that Plaintiffs would not have purchased the vehicle if
such damage had occurred and they had knowledge of it, Defendants are not able to
determine the truth and accuracy of that statement because the information regarding it is
within the exclusive control of the Plaintiffs and so Defendants deny those averments and
demand proof thereof at trial.
20. Denied. Plaintiff Paul Ruth has held himself out to Defendants as an
experienced automobile purchaser and owner. Defendants made no representation as to
the condition or quality of the car on which Plaintiffs justifiably relied.
21. Denied. Defendants did not fail to disclose any information they had about the
condition of the car. Defendants did not cause Plaintiffs any damage. By way of further
answer, Defendants state:
(a) Defendants deny that the vehicle was worth $1,500.00 or that the
Plaintiffs paid more for the vehicle than it was worth.
(b) Defendants have no knowledge of the cost of repairs made to the
vehicles by Plaintiffs, whether those repairs were necessary, or whether any
of those repairs related to the Plaintiffs' claim that the vehicle had been
involved in a prior collision.
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray this court to enter judgment in their favor and
against the Plaintiffs.
COUNT II
22. No answer required. To the extent an answer is required, the averments set
out in the preceding paragraphs of this answer, and of the New Matter, are incorporated
herein.
23. Admitted.
24. Admitted with the clarification that John Martz was so engaged only as a
disclosed and known representative and agent of Corporation.
25. Denied. Defendants did not fail to disclose material information to Plaintiffs,
are not guilty of fraudulent or deceptive conduct, and did not lead Plaintiffs to
misunderstand the true condition of the vehicle by any of Defendants' conduct.
26. Denied. Defendants conduct was proper and did not violate the statute as
claimed by Plaintiffs.
27. Denied. Defendants conduct has not caused Plaintiffs any loss and has not
caused Plaintiffs to incur legal fees. Defendants have not violated Plaintiffs' rights.
28. The statements in this Paragraph are conclusions of law to which no answer is
required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendants deny that they owe any
obligation or damages to Plaintiffs at all.
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray this court to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and enter
judgment in favor of Defendants.
COUNT III
29. No answer required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendants
incorporate herein by reference the averments set forth above and in their New Matter.
30. Admitted.
31. Denied. Plaintiffs knew they were dealing with the Corporation from the
documents which were exchanged and from statements made by the parties.
32. Denied. John Martz operated the business of the Corporation in such a way
as to observe, in accordance with law, the separate status of the Corporation and to
make known to all parties that the business was a corporation.
33. Denied. The Corporation operated the business in a lawful fashion and neither
it nor John Martz took any action which would deprive Mr. Martz of the protection of the
law.
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray this court to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and enter
judgment in favor of Defendants.
NEW MATTER
In addition to the above, Defendants set forth the following New Matter:
34. Plaintiffs purchased the vehicle in question from Corporation, which owned
and operated the used car business with which Plaintiffs dealt.
35. Plaintiffs knew, or should have known, that they were dealing with
Corporation when they purchased the vehicle from Corporation.
36. At the time of the sale, Defendants made no representations to Plaintiffs as to
the condition of the vehicle or its prior history.
37. At the time Plaintiffs purchased the vehicle from Corporation, they accepted
the vehicle without warranty and agree that they would pay all costs for repairs and that
Defendants would assume no responsibility for any repairs, regardless of any oral
II
statements about the vehicle. Attached hereto and marked as Defendant's Exhibit 1 is a
copy of the document Plaintiffs signed to that effect.
38. Neither Defendant had any knowledge that the vehicle in question was
involved in a collision prior to the time that Corporation sold the vehicle to Plaintiffs.
39. Defendants have no proof or valid information supporting Plaintiffs' claim that
the vehicle was damaged in a prior collision and deny that claim by Plaintiffs.
40. Plaintiffs took no steps to advise Defendants of the alleged damage to the
vehicle or give Defendants any opportunity to correct those defects or to inspect the
vehicle to determine the validity of Plaintiffs' claim prior to the time that Plaintiffs had the
repair work done and subsequently sold the vehicle.
41. Plaintiffs failed to properly mitigate their damages.
Plaintiffs have destroyed evidence with the Defendants needs to defend this
42.
action.
43.
At all times relevant to this action, John Martz was an agent of Corporation
and his status as such an agent was known to Plaintiffs and was disclosed to Plaintiffs by
Mr. Martz.
44. To the extent there is any liability on the part of the Defendants, it is a liability
of Corporation and not of Mr. Martz who was a disclosed agent of the Corporation and
acted, at all times, within the scope of his employment.
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray this court to dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint and enter
judgment in favor of Defendants in this matter.
Attorney for Defendants
Supreme Court ID # 17225
525 North 12th Street
Lemoyne, Pa 17043
(717) 761-5361
II
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in this Answer and New Matter are true and
correct. I understand that any false statements in this Answer and New Matter are
subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 4904 (unsworn falsification to authorities).
.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICF
I hereby certify that I served an original of the foregoing Answer and New Matter
upon counsel for the Plaintiffs herein by regular mail, postage prepaid, addressed as
follows:
R. Mark Thomas, Esquire
101 South Market Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Date:
3 October 2002
Amy M~larkir{s
Secretary for Samuel L, Andes
BUYERS 'GUIDE
IMPORTANT:Spoken promises are difficult to enforce. Ask the dealer to put all promleee in writing.
Keep this form.
DEALER STOCK'NUMBER (Optional) VIN NUMBER
WARRANTIES FOR THIS VEHICLE:
/ AS IS- NO WARRANTY
YOU WILL PAY ALL COSTS FOR ANY REPAIRS, THE DEALER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY
FOR ANY REPAIRS REGARDLESS OF ANY ORAL STATEMENTS ABOUT THE VEHICLE.
WAR*RANTY
[] FULL
[] LIMITED WARRANTY, The dealer will pay ~ff/~/~-of the labor and ..~_~%
of the parts for the covered systems that fall during the warranty period. Ask the
dealer for a copy of the warranty document for a full explanation of warranty
coverage, exclusions, and the dealer's repair obligations. Under state law,
"implied warranties" may give you even more rights.
SYSTEMS COVERED: DURATION:
[] SERVICE CONTRACT. A service contract ~'aVailableat~n extra arge on this vehicle: Ask for
details as to coverage, deductible:,prl~~%_tf~-o bUy ice COntract
days of the tira~<-af~l~;~atat(~law Im~3~=~,~'~%~.'. ~o, ~. ~ within 90
~ _ _~ ~~~ ,[ve~~l rights
PRE PURCHASEfNSP~CTION. ASK '~-~;~---
, ~ ..~ .n~ u~L~H IF YOU MAY HAVE ~I~'~ICLE INSPECTED
BY YOUR MECHANIC EITHER ON OR OFF THE LOT.
SEE THE BACK OF THIS FORM for important additional Information, Including a list of some
major defects that may occur In used motor vehicles.
I
Bdl6W i li t of o/h'e.*m jor-: defeet! .,that ¥ bbcu:t ih,U ed mbt pV hlijles,(:
Frame & Body r
Frame--cracks, corrective welds, or rusted through
Dogtracks--bent or twisted frame
Engine ·
Oil leakage, excluding normal seepage
Cracked block or head
Belts missing or inoperable
Knocks or misses related to camshaft lifters and push rods
Abnormal exhaust discharge
Transmission & brive Shaft· -
Improper fluid level or leakage, excluding normal seepage
C[~acked ~/~[e..F~:led case which is y~sible
Manual clutch slips or chatters
Differential
Improper ~t~ level o[~l~kage excluding no~a se~ge~
Cracked `or da~ag~ housing wh ch F visible '
Abnormal noise br vibration caused by fauffy diffetentiaY
Cooling System
Leakage including radiator
BrakeSystem
. Failure warning light broken, ,,
Pedal not firm under pressu*:~ (DOll' specs.)
Not enough pedal reserve (DOT specs.)
. Does not stop yehicle in straight (DOT specs )
Drum or rotor too thin (Mfgr, Specs.)
Lining or pad thickness less than %2 inch
' POWer~ u~llt not e/perati~3O, Or lea'king?~ ·
S{ructur~l or m~e~hanical parts damaged
Steering System ...........
Too much free play at steering whee (DOT s ecs.
~:~ ~ee~playielinkage. merethan V4~..~h , P )
:~ ~t~e~ng gear binds o~Ja~
- FrOnt whee s a geed i~p~'i3perl~(D~)T s'l~eEs )
Power'unit belts cr~(~k~d ~i~ slip~i~i~'
Power unit fluid level improper
Suspe,neion System
'~ Bait joint seals damaged
Struotu;-al parts bent ~)~damaged
Stabilizer bar disconnected
Spr~ng brOke~
Improp6fly functioning water pump Shock absorber mounting loose
~ Rubber bushings damaged or miss
Electrical System ,~:~/ .-: ~' ..~adlus rod
eatte~ leakage ~'~ ~ b~ :¢ :~8h~ .abso~et~ak
Improperly functioning alternator, generator, ba~e~, or starter Tires
Fuel System Tread depth less than ~ tach
V!sib e leakage Sizes mismatched
Visible damage
Inoperable Accessories .... ~ "~ ' '~; '~ ~ ~ ' .....
Gauges or warning devices ..' ~isible oracks, dar~age or repa rs
Air conditioner ...... .~; ':" · ...... M(J~htin~ b(;It~ Joos~'or missing
H~af~r & ~tir0ster ~ ' ~.:~ ......
Exhaust System .
" i-eakage
'~EE FOR COMPLAINTS
IMPORTANT: The'information on this form is part of any contract to buy this vehicle. Removal of this label
of lng)is a violation ! f (16 C.RR. 455).
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/b/d/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, 1NC., and
JOHN H. MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
34. Denied.
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
: NO. 02-3952
:
:
:
_.
:
DEFENDANTS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER
Plaintiff is without sufficient information following reasonable
investigation to either affirm or deny this allegation and therefore same is denied and strict proof
thereof demanded at time of trial.
35. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that plaintiffs knew that the
corporation was the name of the business from which they purchased the automobile, but due to a
personal relationship with Defendant John H. Martz they felt as though they were dealing
specifically with him.
36. Denied. Defendant John Martz made representations to plaintiffs that he had driven
the car for a period of two (2) years and that the car was in excellent condition. By way of further
answer, by failing to advise plaintiffs as to the true condition of the automobile the defendants
concealed information from the plaintiffs which was material to their decision to purchase the
automobile.
37. Denied. Plaintiffs however do admit that the Defendants' Exhibit 1 was signed by
the plaintiffs.
38. Denied. Both defendants knew and/or had constructive knowledge of the true
condition of the vehicle in question and particularly that the vehicle in question had been in a
collision prior to the time that the vehicle was sold to the plaintiffs.
39. Denied. Defendants had ample opportunity to examine the vehicle and in fact were
specifically shown the prior damage on July 17, 2002. By way of further answer, plaintiffs had the
vehicle over to the defendant's place of business on at least two (2) occasions prior to July 17, 2002
and the defendant had the opportunity to examine the vehicle on those occasions.
40. Denied. Defendant's recommendation to repair the air conditioner was that he would
just fill it up with freon, defendant's recommendation to repair the blower fan was that he would not
repair it, but that plaintiffs should just drive with the blower fan on full at all times. Further, the
defendant had the opportunity to fix the instrument panel lights, but made no effort to do so.
4I. Denied. This allegation is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. By
way of further answer, there was nothing additional that plaintiffs could have done that could have
properly mitigated their damages.
42. Denied. Plaintiffs are without sufficient information to either affirm or deny this
allegation in as much as the allegation does not state any specific conduct on the part of plaintiffs
which led to the destruction of evidence.
43. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that The Auto Connection, Inc. was a
corporation and that John Martz was believed to be the sole shareholder of that corporation. There
were no representations made by Defendant John Martz to the effect that he was acting as an agent
of the corporation. By way of further answer, to the extent that John Martz claims that he is
insulated from liability because he was an agent of a corporation it is alleged that the actions of
Defendant John Martz rose to the level of fraud and/or misrepresentation and therefore he is not
entitled to any insulation from personal liability for his actions.
44. Denied, for the same reasons set forth in the reply to Paragraph No. 43.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court will enter judgment in favor of
plaintiffs and against defendants in this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
R. Mark Thomas, Esquire
ID//41301
101 S. Market Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 796-2100
Certificate of Service
day of
that I have served the ~oregoing document on the following by depositing a true and correct copy of
same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to:
Samuel L. Andes, Esquire
525 N. 12th Street
PO Box 168
Lemoyne, PA 17043
R. Mark Thomas, Esquire
ID# 41301
101 S. Market Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
(717) 796-2100
PAUL F. RUTHand LILLIANF. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
Vo
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC.,
JOHN H. MARTZ, t/b/d/a
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., and
JOHN Ho MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 02-3952
PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS
TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:
R. Mark Thomas, Esquire, counsel for the plaintiff in the above action, (or actions) respectfully represents that:
The above-captioned action is at issue.
The amount sought in damages is less than $20.000.00.
The counterclaim of the defendant in the action is $0.00.
The following attorneys are interested in the case (s) as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: R~
Mark Thomas, Esquire. Samuel L. Andes, Esquire and Christopher J. Keller, Esquire.
WHEREFORE, your petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be
submitted.
R. MARK THOMAS, ESQUIRE
ORDER OF COURT
r AND~ NOW, GA,~ ~ ~ 2003, in consideration of the foregoing petition,
/3., ~/(~-~ ~ ~/~ ~/?~x..~ ~ Esq., and
,~~ ~/"~9 Esq., are appointed arbitrators in the above-captioned action (or actions) as
prayed for.
By the Court,
CUN/~.~r~ ,:',i., ,~.;bu, NP(
pENNSYB/A;"~;,k
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1, R. Mark Thomas, Esquire, hereby certify that 1 have on this date served the within Petition for
Appointment of Arbitrators on the following by delivering same through the U.S. Mail at Mechanicsburg,
Pennsylvania, Postage pre-paid, with one copy being sent via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested
and one copy being sent via Regular, First Class Mail, addressed to:
Samuel A. Andes, Esquire
525 N. Twelfth Street
Lemoyne, PA 17043
Date:
R. Mark Thomas, Esq.
l~drU ¢~uyCc:.rr
We do solemnly sw~
United States and th~
our office with fideli
We, the undersi
the following award
.A
Date of Hearing:
Date of Award:
Now, the _~i~
was c-ntered upon tl
Artibitrators'comp~
Paid upon appeal:
$ 290.00
1N THE COLE~.T OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND cOUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
e .v c, NO.
fc,.,d, r,s OATlt
~ (or affix) ~at we will suppo~, obey and defend the Constitution of the
Constitution of this Co~onweal~ and that we Mll dischgge the duties of
C~i~
AWARD
led arbitrators, having been duly appointed and sworn (or affirmed), make
zrf damages for delay a)e awarded, they shall be separately stated.)
bitrator, dissents. (insert name if applicable.)
NOTICE OF ENTRY OF AWARD
. day of ~, 20j02}_., at ~__:~L~, ~f.M., the above award
~e docket and notice thereof given by mail to the pa~ies or their attorneys.
nsafion to be PIl.h h X ~).
PAUL F. RUTH and LILLIAN F. RUTH,
husband and wife,
Plaintiffs
VS,
THE AUTO CONNECTION, INC., JOHN H.
MARTZ, t/d/b/a THE AUTO
CONNECTION, INC., and JOHN H.
MARTZ, individually,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 02-3952
PRAEClPE
TO THE PROTHOTONOTARY:
Please enter judgment on the Award of Arbitrators entered in this matter on 29
October 2003 in favor of the Defendants, and dismissing the Plaintiff's claim.
DATE:
15 December 2003
Attorney for Defendant
Post Office Box 168
Lemoyne, PA 17043
(717) 761-5361