The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About95-06490 GIANT FOOD STORES, INC., Plaintiff v. IN THE COUR'l' OF COMMON PLEAS OF ClJMBIiJRLI\NO COtlN'fY, PF.:NNIlYLVANIA NO. 9s- 1.890 Cud '7'iM.nl ALLEN P. SUTTON, t/a SUTTON BROTHERS, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wisb t.lL5l.!lfend aqainst the claims set forth in the followinq paqes. y~u mus~ ~;k; ;~~ion ld.l;.hin twenty (20) days after this comolaint and notice are served. bv ehterinq a written aopearance personally o~ b; attor- nev and filinG in writinq with the court your defenses or obiec- t ions to the claims set forth against vou, You ..iil"..!LJllarned that if vou fail to do so the case may proceed without '~u and a iudgment mav be entered aqainst vou by the court without further notice for an~money claimed JJL\Jl!'L~nplaint or for any other claim or relief requested by t;he plaill!;j ff. You mav lose money QJ; orooerty or other riGhts important to-YQJl. you SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF' YOU 00 NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE. GO TO OR..n;~ O~'FICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FilI.l.l. OUT W!:JEEE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. COURT ADMINISTRATOR 4th Floor Cumberland County Courtnouse Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 AVISO USTED HA SIOO DEMANDADO/A en corte. Si usted desea defenderse de las demandas que 6e presentan mas adelante en lae siguientes paginas, de be tomar accion dentro de loa proximos veinte (20) dias despues de la notificacion de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente 0 por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de. y objecciones a, las demandas presentadas aqui en contra suva. Se le sdvierte de que si usted falla de tomar accion como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier sums de dinero reclamada en la demanda 0 cualquier otra reclamacion 0 remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin mas aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero 0 propiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. d 'I"~ i 'I i' ~:lr;'1f l';i~i;;~r"_ttlJ~t!in'f'!i,liWttitf1'f~~~I~~'ftl'; ! \1' " . USTlilD DlilBlil LLEVAR ES'rE DOcUMENTO A SU ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTlil, SI USTED NO TIF.NE UN ABOOADO 0 NO PUEDE PAQARLlil ^ UNO, LLAMS 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA PARA AVERIGUAR DONDS PUEOE ENCONTRAR ASISTENcIA LEGAL, COUR'r ADMINISTRM'OR 4th Floor Cumberland County courthouse Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6200 McNEES, WALLACE & NURICK By 17108 Attorneys for Plaintiff$ Datedl \\\\O''t( , i I'r,' GIANT FOOD STORES, INC., plaint l. ff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUN'ry, PENNSYLVANIA NO. v. ALLEN P. SUTTON, t/a SUTTON BROTHERS, Defendant CIVIL ACTION " LAW ~OMPLAINT I. PARTIES 1. plaintiff, Giant Food Stores, Inc. ("Giant") is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1149 Harrisburg pike, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 2. Defendant Allen P. Sutton, tla sutton Brothers is a contractor with his principal place of business at 222 Verbeke Street, Marysville, Pennsylvania 17053. I I . YIDillit 3, Venlle is proper in Cumberland County because the transaction out of which the cause of action arises took place in cumberland County, and as acceptance of the contract took place in Carlisle, Cumber.land County, pennsylvania. III, FACTUAL BACKGROUND 4. In June of 1993, in conjunction with renovations Giant wae making to its store in Bloomsburg pennsylvania (the "Store"), Giant sought quotations for the resealing and striping of the parki~g lot at the Bloomsburg facility. 5. On June 15, 1993, Defendant Sutton Brothers submitted a proposal (the "Proposal"), to Giant's main offices in Carlisle., Pennsylvania, to complete the sealing and striping work at the Bloomsburg store. A true and correct copy of this proposal is attaohed hereto as Sxhibit "A". 6. As set forth in the Proposal, the work to be performed inoludedl 3. Power sweeping and thoroughly cleaning the areas to be sealed, b. Treating oil and grease spots for good sealer adhesionl c. Cleaning and filling cracks 3/8 inch with hot pour elastomeric crack filler for application of two coats of rubberized coal tar emulsion sealer, d. Infrared thermal repair of stressed areaSI and e. Painting of traffic lines and markings. 7. The Proposal was signed by Allen P. Sutton, and quoted a price to Giant of $12,450.00 for which Sutton Brothers would complete the work described in the quotation. 8. The proposal also contained the following paragraph I All material is guaranteed to be as specified, all work is to be completed ill a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. 9. On July 9, 1993, the Proposal was accepted by Giant at its Carlisle offices. A true and correct copy of the Proposal signed by Giant's representative, together with a letter transmitting same, is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". - 2 - . , 10. Sutton Brothers subsequently perfor.med the seal coat and related work on the store' e parkj,ng lot in July and August of 1993. 11. Almost immediat~ly after the seal coat was completed, the floors throughout the Bloomsburg store became severely stained and discolored as a result of customers and employees tracking material from the parking lot throughout the store. 12. For over a year following completion of the seal coat work, problems continued to occur as a result of the defective placement of the seal coat by Sutton Brothers. These problems included the continual trackillg of material from the sealed parking lot throughout the store, and the wearing off of the seal coat in heavy traffic areas throughout the parking lot. 13. As a result of Sutton Brothers defective work, and as a result of material constantly being tracked throughout the store, Giant undertook significant efforts to solve the problem. 14. Notwithstanding the efforts by aiant to correct the problem, material continued to be tracked throughout the store from its installation through October of 1994, when corrective measures were taken. 15. After investigating several alternatives, Giant determined in the Summer of 1994 that the only solution which would solve the tracking problems, and wOllld hopefully obviate the need to completely replace the flooring, was to overlay the existing parking lot with bituminous material. - 3 - 16. Subsequently, aiant contracted with HRI, an asphalt paving oontractor, to overlay the parking lot at the aiant store. This work was performed on in early october of 1994, for which aiant paid HRI the total sum of $48,425.00. Of this amount. a total of $1,700.00 was for unrelated curbing work, and the balance of $46,725 was paid to overlay the lot. 17. In october of 1994, Giant paid to have the store's floor professionally cleaned. For this work. Giant paid in excess of $6,000.00 IV. COUNT I - BREACH OF CONTRACT 113. Paragraphs 1-1.7 above are heL'eby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. 19. In July of 1993, Giant and Sutton Brothers entered into a contract pursuant to which Sutton Brothers was to perform certain seal coat work for aiant at Giant's Bloomsburg store, 20. As part of the contractual agreement between aiant and sutton Brothers. Sutton Brothers agreed to provide material meeting certain specifications, which Sutton Brothers itself developed. sutton Brothers further agreed to perform the seal coat work in a workmanlike manner, and in accordance with standard practices. 21. Upon information and belief, the seal coat work performed by sutton Brothers did not comply with its specifications. and was not performed in a workmanlike manner, nor did it comply with standard practices in the industry. - 4 - 16. Subsequently, Giant contracted with HRI, an asphalt paving contractor, to overlay the parking lot at the Giant store. This work was performed on in early october of 1994, for which Giant paid HRI the total sum of $48,425.00. Of this amount, a total of $1,700.00 was for unr.elated curbing work, and the balance of $46,725 was paid to overlay the lot. 17. In october of 1994, Giant paid to have the store's floor professionally cleaned. For this work, Giant paid in excess of $6,000.00 IV. ~T I - BREACH OF CONTRACT 18. psragraphs 1-17 above are hereby incoI'porated by reference as if fully set forth. 19. In July of 1993, Giant and Sutton Brothers entered into a contract pursuant to which Sutton Brothers was to perform certain seal coat work for Giant at Giant's Bloomsburg store. 20. As part of the contractual agreement between Giant and Sutton Brothers, Sutton Brothers agreed to provide material meeting certain specifications, which sutton Brothers itself developed. sutton Brothers further. agreed to perform the seal coat work in a workmanlike manner, and in accor.dance with standard practices. 21. Upon information and belief, the seal coat work performed by sutton Brothers did not comply with its specifications, and was not performed in a workmanlike manner, nor did it comply with standard practices in the industry. - 4 - 22. Tho seal coat work performed by Sutton Brothers was defective, which defects constitute a breach of contract. 23. As a result of Sutton Brothers broaches of contraot, aiant has suffered certain damages. These damages include I a. Costs to clean/maintain the tloor within aiant's Bloomsburg facilitYt b. Costs to completely strip and rewax the floor once corrective action was taken to the parking loti c. Costs to overlay Sutton Brothers defective work, and d. Damages as a result of the permanent discoloration, and possible reduction in useful life of the store's floor. 24. The damages suffered by Giant. have not been calculated fully, but are in excess of $50,000.00, which is above the limits for compulsory arbitration ill Cumberland County. WHEREFORE, Giant Food Stores, Inc. requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment in its favor, and against Sutton Brothers, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 together with costs and other relief as this Court deems appropriate. V. COUNT II - BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY 25. Paragraphs 1-24 above are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. 26. As part of its agreement with Giant to perform seal coat work at Giant's Bloomsburg store, Sutton Brothers provided an express warranty that the material provided was guaranteed to - 5 - It . i 'i be as specified, and that work was to be completed l.n a workmanlike manner according to standa rd pract ices. 27. Upon infor.mation and belief, the work completed by Sutton Brothers was not completed as specified or in a workmanlike manner, nor was it completed according to standard practices in the industry. 28. Accordingly, Sutton Brothers has breached its express warranty to Giant. 29. As a result of Sutton Brothers' breach of warranty, Giant has suffered certain damages, including! a. Costs to clean/maintain the floor within Giant's Bloomsburg facilitYI b. Costs to complete strip and rewax the floor once corrective action was taken to the parking loti o. Costs to overlay Sutton Brothers defective work, and d. Damages as a result of the permanent discoloration, and possible reduction in useful life of the store's floor, WHEREFORE, Giant Food Stores, Inc. requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment in its favor, and against Sutton Brothers, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 together with costs and other relief as this Court deems appropriate. VI, COUNT III - BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY 30. Paragraphs 1-29 above are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. - 6 - 31. Through its actions, Sutton Brothers impliedly warranted that the goods and services it provided would be fit for their ordinary purposes. ~2. The goods and servioes provided by Sutton Brothers to Giant were defeotive. Accordingly, Sutton Brothers has br~ached its implied war.ranty to aiant. 33 . As a resuJ.t of Sutton Brothers' breach of implied warranty, Giant has suffered damages as aforesaid. WHEREFORE, Giant Food Stores, Inc. requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment in its favor, and against Sutton Brothers, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 together with oosts and other relief as this Court deems appropriate. McNEES, WALLACE & NURICK By ames~:~- .D. No. 47245 100 Pine Street P. O. Box 1166 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166 Attorneys for Plaintiff Giant Food Stores, Inc. Datedl \\\10\" r - 7 . , , I jl,j I ...... A .. .,~I.'IJ~ _'"Ilt.1 WII ..lll...., (i) id 1'1 , , I " Ii I Ii " , , , ' " , 'I " , " " I,i 111/115193 UI12 SUTT~ IFOS. PAGE 81 utton Bros, Spec18J1.taln A.ph.1t Se.1 eo.Ung YI".IICE.TRIIT . MARYIVILLI, I'INNIYL V ANrA '7011 TtLEI'HONI17' 71 117-1047 "LITI ""'''CINO LOT MAINTlNANCI . SIAL C:OATINO VIMINT III'AI'" . roW." 1W11II'lNa · LINII'AINTING I'llOI'Ol"L IUlMlmD TOr DlIC"II'TION 0' _I ANT FOOD STaAE Job SAME LI8I.E, PI' 17013 Add,.. STaRS .eo 11" IlLEKANDm City BLOOMSBURG, 11m Dill JUNE ll5, 1993 MH I'Y 'IIoroll TO DO THI 'ULLOWINQ J POWER BWlEP AND THOROUQHl. V CLEAN ARI:AS TO I!E SEALED TRiAT OIL AND GREASE SPOTS FOR GOOD BEALER ADHESION. CLEAN AND FILL CRAC~S 3/8" OR LARGER WITH HOT POUR ELA6TOMERIC CRAC~ FILLER, l~OO L.F. . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .'1,000.00 j FURNISH AND APPLY TWO CI) COATB OF RUBBERIZED COAL TAR EMULSION SlALIA IFIRIT COAT SQUEEGEE-BRUSH, SECOND CDAT SPRAY) WITH ~~ ENHANCER ADDED TO EXTEND WEARABILITV, SAND AT THE RATE OF ~ LBS. PIA GALLON OF TAft CONCENTRATE AND NURLON FIBERS AT THE AIlTE OF 3 LIS. PER 100 IALLON8 OF TAR CONCENTRATE OVER PAVED SURFACfS. . .'9,300.00 INFRARED THERMAL REPAIR. HEAT DISTRESSED AREAS, ADD RE3UVENATOR, ADD FRESH ASPHALT AS NEEDED AND BLEND INTO ADJACENT SOUND PAVEMENT FOR A SIAttLEBB REPAIR, .. S.Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '1,0150.00 PAINT TR~FIC LINES AND HARKINBS. .." '"0~" TO 'UIIN"H LAIOII I'NO MI"'"II'L11 TI IN ..caOllO..HCI WITH 'HI ..IIOV' ..ICI"CA. 0.. Tt4UUM 0" ill. 4!!l0. 00 'I'M'NT TO II MAOI ,. 'OLLOWI, NET 10 DAVS . . . . . . . . . . . ..1,100.00 ALL MI'TlII'AL ,. lIu......IITI... TO II,. "CI"'O. "LL WOIIIlI. TV .. _'LlT.D IN .. WOIIIl....NLIKlMIoHN... I'CCOIIOINlI TO ITI'NO..II0 'MCTtl1llLI'N" I'LTlIIATtllH Oil DlVIATlON 'II01l1'IIOV. ..a"IOATI_ INVO~V'HCI .IlTII.. COITI WILL .. .1l'CIITID OIlLV \/ION WIIm.N OllOIIl....NOWILL..call. Nf .IlTIlACH..llal OV'" AND "IDV. THI IITIIII'TI. "LI. AlI11I1I1INTI CONTlHCIIHT U'O" IT"III'" ACClIO.NTI 011 DlLA.... IIVOND OUIII OON'"OL. 110ft ... 'II0POtAL lI'"Idl WITHO"AMl IV UI" "OT .... 10 WITHIN 1 e 01'\'1. 1 S/ell LAft ..1Ia1 A'TlII O"Vi 0' AUTHOIIIZlO "ON"TU'" ALLEN P. SUTTON ACCIII'TANCI 0' 'ftOl'OlAL TH' ..IIOYI '111011. '''''''CATtONI ","0 COIIOITIOIltI'II.II\'"'MlTOII" ""0 ...11. H.III.... ""'"'0. "'OU Alii "IITHOII'I'OTO DO TH' WllIIII .... ".CI".... ''''.....NT WILL II .....N .... OUTl.INIO "IOVL IIONI'TU'" DATI ACC'"'O 110""'1111' i d , , , , , ','I L" '1/, FI-, lij.! ,J: f~,. i ;1 :1, I:'"~ hi )~jl " ,., 1.\1 I I ,,' , , IxhIbIt .. ~'_""tl'.'" ""I'~I' 0) ,>> III .f'" 11'11 1~IW,1lI (i) , , , 1 I, , " , j it I ", ,I , , I' 'Sutton Bros, Specialists In Asphalt Seal Coating nz VERBEKE STREET . MARVSVILl.E, PENNSVl.VANIA 170n . COMPLETE PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE . PAVEMENT REPAIRS TELEPHONE (7171 lIIlN047 . 5~AL COATING . POWER 6WEf,PING . LINE PAINTING PROPO$AL SUBMITTED TOI GIANT FOOD STORE CARLISLE, PA 17013 ATTNI JIM ALEXANDER DIICRIPTION 0' JOBI Job SAME Add,... STORE lIeo City BLOOMSBURG, SI.lt 0.1. JUNE 13, 1993 WE HEREBV PROP06F. TO 00 THE FOLLOWING 1 1. POWER SWEEP AND THOROUGHLV CLEAN AREAS TO B~ SEALED 2, TREAT OIL AND GREASE SPOTS FOR GOOD SEALER ADHESION. 3. CLEAN AND FILL CRACKS 3/8" OR LARGER WlTH HOT POUR ELASTOMERIC CRACK FILLER, 1400 L.F. . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . .tl,OOO.OO 4. FURNISH ANO APPLV TWO (2) COATS OF RUBBERIZED COAL TAR EMULSION SEALER (FIRST COAT SQUE~GEE-BRUSH, SECOND COAT SPRAY) WITH 4Yo ENHANCER ADDED TO EXTEND WEARABILITV, SAND AT THE RATE OF 4 LBS. PER GALLON OF TAR CONCENTRATE AND NURLON FIBERS AT THE RATE OF 3 LBS. PER 100 GALLONS OF TAR CONCENTRATE OVER PAVED SURFACES. . ..9,300.00 O. INFRARED THERMAL REPAIRI HEAT DISTRESSED AREAS, ADD REJUVENATOR, ADD FRESH ASPHALT AS NEEDED AND BLEND INTO ADJACENT SOUND PAVEMENT FOR A SEAMLESS REPAIR, b2 S.Y. . . . . . _ , . . , . . , . .1,050.00 NET ~ DAVS ~ . . , . t . . . . . . . .1 , 100.00 ..~~ MAT"""~ II llUA~"NTIIO TO " AI I'.C"I.O. ..LL wo~" II TO II COM'~'TlO IN" Wll~"M"N~IKI M"NN'" "~CO~OINll TO ST"NOA~O '~"CTIC'" ANV ..LTI..ATION O~ OIVIATION '~OM AlaVI .,ICIPlCATIONIINVOLVINO UT~A COlTS WI~~ II IXICUTlO ON LV U'ON W"'TT,N ll~OI~S, AND WI~L IICOMI ..N IXT..A C....~OI OVI" AND ",llVI T..I IITIMATI. ..~~ "O~IIMINTI CONTINOINT U'ON IT~I"U. ..CCIO.NTI O~ OILAVI IIVONO OU" CONT~OL. "UT"O~IZIO S111N"TU~1 Om.:-E'. ~~~ b. PAINT TRAFFIC LINES AND MARKINGS. w, .......v '~O'O.I Tll 'UI'INII.. ~"'O~ AND M"TI~I"LA COM'L.n IN "CCO~O"NC' WIT" T..ft ",OV. .,'C"ICA. TlllN.. 'O~ T..I'UM 0" 12.430.00 W'TH 'AVM.NT TO " 101..01 AI 'O~~llWl, NOTlI THII '~O'O'''~ M"i1tJ. WIT"O~"WN IV U. " NOT ..cc.,nOWIT..,N ).111' O"VI. 1 1/2'/. LAT' CHA~OI"'TI~ O"Vlll, ~ ~D ALLEN P. SUTTON ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL TH' "'OV' '~ICII. .,.C" IC..T'ON' "NO CONOIT'ONI "~I '''TII'''CTll~V "NO ..~. "I~UV ..CC.,TlO. VOU "~I "UTHQ~IZlO TO DO T..I WO"" AI "IC"'ID)' ...,NT WIL~ II ""01 ... OUTL'NID ..,OVI, c.) S10NATU~1 O"TI ..CC.,TlO 7/q!Q3 S10NATU~1 , . ( , . .--' "", ...... I ".', ". \. __ . , __ ._ I C--~~\':~r I>,;: -':~I._'L t -cJ ~ July 9, 1993 Hr. Allan sutton sutton Bro.. 222 Verbeke street Hary.ville, PA 17053 all Giant Food 120 Parkinq Lot BloolllsDurq, PA Cear Allan I Enclosed ",loase find a signed copy ot your proposal. As I understand, you have schedule the work for the last week of July. I have also included a set ot plans for the parking area. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. sincerely, Jim Alexander Real Estate aepresentative I, ," i, Giant Food Stor... Inc. 1149 Harrisburg Pike Carlisle, ?A 17013-0249 {~, AICYCI.ID ,.'11l 'Oil ~. UITTIIlI/MIlONIlIlf1' Phone I (717) 245.7474 Fax: (717) 249-5871 ," , " tll! l,1 ,I ,I 1 ,;,: II; I' , ;1 !A n~ .aj~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~~ ~ , ':f. U I I' I' , , ~ !' .t ,.. ,::cr .. .. i~ u.~II"" II) I ""~t' ", ::, ,rs'iIr :J" 'tit' ""'. ,.. ~;);~, rilt .::;:::;t' ' I" I,l. ..I,n ~ ,.....1,;... ........ ~"J~JI". '~,':' .'i'~ . '..! ....... .~ 0" t5 'I') ~ --.. M I' , Ii ; (i;Q\ i V " " I' ~ , ~ " H: " " Li li. ", 1 " , "II. , , j', , 1.1 " "( , , ,-I' , I " " " )' "i " " I ,'" , , , " I:, ~~_I/ 'II ,. n' /,:!"',r,1 I.', H.', 1.'rl,'>I i !;'I ". \,' ;IIT-,"" Il,-,:.! .; J ~ " ! ~;;,/,.:. ';ly';J'J( .l,\/,{'.r, if'l". 1.' I'!l\~l,:tll ;1; ~p,,_,_1 I I ,!~ i' il,; ,u;.\,,:.-r," f,ti~~;'::'\ ,."jrW,I'" " ,')'1;/ ,',1,/,':1\1.,' t'", ;';,1,:,1 '.., ., ", " I. , , I" " ", ,I ,,, '" , ' , I 1,-\' , ii' I, " " .1', I I,': ," , " '" , :;. I'" , " .. "'111'1111, WALLACI . NURIClC 100 PlHI ITIlIIT " ., "" J... ".""I'IU"I. 'A I TI.I I,,' .,' ~ " ",L.. , ."..,.....~._u.T..; ,....._"._~-I-.., , , 'I t I ,I' I " ili I , " ii , 11'1 " -1'1 " " , , , , , , I'" " , , " , ,ii, , , ", , , "i " " '" , , " ;, " ,I I I " ~iI " " ,I I" I I' II, ,I .' " " " , ' " , " , " " :1 , , " , " , , , , , ,'I " , " " " ,> " " " I, , , " " I, I' " I' , ' " I', '-'''1' ,~.. SHERI"'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NOI 199!5-06490 P 88nA~'W~~~~tlMi~R[fn~SY~VANIAI GIANT rOOD STORES INC VB_ SUTTON ALLEN P ET A~ R. "hOIlIl. Klin. . Bh.riff, vho bwing duly evorn IIccording to lllV, .ay., thet he mild. II diligent .ellrch IInd inquiry for the vithin na.ed d.f.ndllnt, to viti SUTTON ALLEN P TIA SUTTON SIlOTHERS but ve. unllble to loallte Him in hie bllilivick, H. th.refor. County, Penn.ylvllnia, d.putiz.d the .h.riff of PERRY to .erve the vithin COMPLAINT On November 29th. 199!5 the ettllahed r.turn from PERRY thi. offio. VII. in r.a.ipt af County, Penn.ylvllnill. Sheriff'. CO.t.1 So IIn.ver., /' '/ //,- , ' . /- ,,/// / ~ ..' . . ..A'(" .'. .cr..... ,,- (." ~ R, Tom.. ~~1n., ~..r1%% DOl;lk.ting Out of County Burohars. PERRY C UNTY 18,00 9,00 2.00 32.00 .61.~~ MCNEES WALLACE' NURICK 11129/19915 Sworn IInd .ubecrib.d to b.fore m. thi. /I r!- dllY of J..L" ". (,t.--' I 19 1,\ A. D. ~ .. ta . It..... 1 9rJ~nol!~ " true and attested C-:::P1 01 :!:.= ori;'.::nI Complaint ,.. ,. ....,.. n"~"."""_. I ...,.WlI........ ...." _,.......i.'"..I.,'., ,. h ., . ','......--............ . '.'\' In l'f2f) Court cT C.:mmO:1 Plec::s of C:.Jr.'::':'~tt'l:md C.:Ju';",-.'/, Pann:sylvc::nla . Giant Pood Stores. Inc. 'IS. ^11~n P. Sutton, tIe ~utton Brothera :"fo. q '1... (lIP](l C i v. i 1 'l'erJ)\ .----, :9_ :-low, lIIm",mhA" 1 II 1 qq'l. ~9_ It SH::::R!~"F O~ C~r3:E:lU.A.'fD COt.~'r", i'A.. do , ' ClW1"1 10 acalUl = Wrl~ Is==r cicpu= dut Shr::l.:i 01 pnrry I :!:!s l!cpuC70Ccn bc!:lc ~ u :!:= ~ :::d :l.Jk of t!:= ?!:r.!:::!:i. ~/'l / /."~ ,~ './..J'_"'~~~~'( ~.~,,-,f! 1 /;,':1..".., ............, r' ..... Sh~ o~ Cw::!IuUnci c~wu,.. Pll. - Afiida.vit or Sem= :-low, Nnvnmber 28 ~9 95 "t . - 1111B o'doa A' ~[. 1C".-d. :!:.owit!:in , ~nmplA.i..n"'l \~a Allen P. sutton. t/a sutton Brothers u 222 verbeke st.. Marvsville Bora, Marysville, p~rry County, PA by ~~ 10 Allen P. sutton md cw:ic r.:.owu :J:I him :he .::Cte:ts ~~c:=l. So 1I.C.1W~ /.Y ~. ~ h4 . /t'~..;', Deputy Shci!f 01 Perry . CourT. Pll. Swor: md Nbsc:::I'.ced bdoro == :!:!s ..J.J!!... by at Ai~" ,,~L fa 19.tL- COSTS SD. 'VIe::: ~au:AGZ ,.>..::mAVIT oS -l-k1f"'.~'-f-._. --- !. , , ,I. I . - _, : . ' , t' .ro.r,'1 , t_:-..-. " ... '.... ,. "- - s . , ' q . ClItTIPlCAT' all IIRVICI I, stephen .. oeduldlg, or thellw firm or Thomls, Thomls .. Hirer, do herebY certlrv that on this dlY I served I tNelnd correct copy or the foregoing PIAIC". POIINTIV OP APPPItANCI on the fOllowing bY depositing I true Ind correct copy In the unIted &Utes Mill, at HlrrlsbUrg, pennsylvanIa, addressed as follows: i:,! , ) Jam" W. Kutl, IlQulr' MeNIII, WALLACI . HURICK 100 Pin, Itr. P.O. 101 1111 Harralburl, PA 17108-1111 " , Attorneys for Defendant, Allen p, sutton tia sutton Brothers Dated: December 12, 111115 I' ,II /, " , , , " i, , , en ~ , ,., , I, t-:J g~ :lC ~~ 0.- n~~ ."1' :~, '1 - I~~~ ~ " It.l r:;1 a '.fA 'I, il " ,i' I , " , , . . .. GIANT rOOD STORES, INC. plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMB2RLAND COUNTY, P2NNSYLVANIA NO. 915-6490 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL D2MANDBD v. ALLEN P. aUTTON, tla SUTTON ' BROTHERS, Defandant .ITBDIAW.t OJ .,'.~CI TO THE PROTHONOTARY I Rindly withdraw the appearanoe of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant, with respect to the above-oaptioned action. Respeotfully submitted, Datede I f/t~ Bye ~./ ,J {'l.-i~.LR--<. stephen E. GedUldlg- Attorney 1.D. No, IjJr7,c THOKAS, THOKAS " Dl'la 305 N. Front street, 6th Floor P.O_ Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 ~Y 01' ~"I.RANCI TO THE PROTHONOTARye R\ndly enter the appearanoe of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant, with respect to the above-captioned action. Respectfully submitted, I ' -;' . -::'~~ri'DJffi'n ' .It., . /Attorney 1. D. No, 29563 Date~'1/( ~,. Bye --J,., ~f,. 1(- ,--~ . -";"1 / "f (, ,,' ,- ,. JIHBS/ SKITH " DURal. P.O. Box 650 Hershey, PA 17033-0650 (717) 533-3280 , , , , <::) ~ - Gl ~~ ::r:: ., ., ~ 2~ _1" ;52 I l'J :r; r (.:: """ .., \5 .0 o~ " " , , " I ' , i' , I )1;1 ,"" " " , , , , , " , GIANT FOOD STORES, INC. Plaintiff v, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 95-6490 ALLEN P. SUTTON, t/a SUTTON BROTHERS, Defl'indant CIVIL ACTION - T.AW JURY 'I'RIAL DEMANDED DZ'INDAHT'8 AN8.IR 'ITK HI. KATTB~ AND NOW, oomes the Defendant, Allen P. sutton, t/a Sutton Brothers, by and through his attorneys, James, Smith and Durkin, to answer the Complaint filed in the above matter as followsl 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted in part, It is admitted that Defendant sutton Brothers submitted the proposal attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" to the Plaintiff on or about June 15, 1993. As the dooument attachl'id to Plaintiff's complaint as Exhibit "A" speaks for itself, any attempts to interprE>t or characterize same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 6. Denied. As the dooument attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" speaks for itRolf, any attempts to interpret or oharacterize same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, 7. Denied. As the document attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit "A" speaks for itself, any attempts to interpret or characterize same are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 8. Denied. As the document attllched to PlaintiU's comphint as Exhibit "A" speaks for itself, any attempts to interpret or charaoterize same aro specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 9. Admitted in part, It is admitted thet on or about July D, 1993, the plaintiff accepted the Defendant's propooal. AS thl/ dooument attached to plaintiff's complaint as Exhibit "n" IIpeaks for itself, any attempts to l.nterpret or characteriu Hame nre speoifioallY denied and strict proof thereof iB demanded at trial. 10. Admitted. It is admitted that the lJefendant pel'formed the work required undflr the terms of the propolll1l in Auqullt of 1993. By way of further answer, Defendant's full performanno was delayed as the plaintiff halted Defendant's work as to allow the floorinCj tile finish to cure in the interior of tho store at iUBue. 11. Denied_ After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficiont to form a beliof as to the truth of the averments of paragraph eleven (11) and IItr ict proof of the lIame is demanded at trial. It ift speoifioally denied that said material allegedly tracked throughout the Vlaintiff's store was that applied to the parking area by the Ue,endant. 12. Denied. It is specifically denied that said material allegedly tracked throughout the Pia inti tt' s store was that IlppUfld to the parking area by the Defendant. 13. Denied, The avermentM in paragraph thirteen (13) an to liability and causation are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, Defendant denies that the material. allegedly tracked throughout plaintiff's store was that applied to the parking lot by the Defendent, and it further denied that plaintiff took significant efforts to solve this alleged problem. 14. Deniad. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the avermonts of paragraph fourteen (14) and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. 15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant io without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph fifteen (15) and strict proof of the samo is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph sixteen (16) and strict proof of the samo is demanded at trial, 17, Denied, After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph seventeen (17) and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial, COUNT I - BRBACH or CONT~ 18. The answers in paragraphs one (1) through seventeen (17) are incorporated herein by reference. 19. Admitted. J'.,. The terms and conditions of the pllrti.., 20. Denied. , j, agreement are oontained in EXhibits "A" and "B" of the plaintiff's " Ii complaint. All attempts to interpret or oharDoterhe same are speoifioallY denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial. 21. Denied, The work performed by the Defendant undur the terms of the parties' agreement was in oomplianoe with the standard praotioelS of the industry and the speoifioations of the Defendant. The work waD performed in II workmanlike manner. 22. Denied, The averments in parDgraph twenty-two (22) are oonolueions of law to which no responsive plODding is required and strict proof thereof is demanded Dt triAl, 23. Denied. The averments in parllqrllph tw.mty-t,hree (23) as to Defendant's alleged breaoh of contract IUld rllllultinq dl,mages are denied liS oonclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and striot proof thereof is demande~ lit trial. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, tho Defendant is without knowledge or information suffioient to form a bolief as to tho truth of the averments of parllgraph twent,y-three (23) and strict proof of the same is demanded at triol. 24. Denied. After reasonable invest iql,t ion, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief a8 to the truth of the averments of paragraph twenty-tour (24) and strict proof of the same is demanded ot trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant Allen 1', outton, t/a sutton Brothers, respectfully request,s that this f1onorable Court enter judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff, together with costs. COUNT II - BRIACK or IX'RI.. WARRANTY 25. The ~nswers in paragraphs one (1) through twentY-four (24) are inoorporated herein by referenoe. 26. Denied. The terms of the parties' ~greement are oontained in EXhibits "A" and "B" of Plaintiff's Complaint, and all attempts to interpret or characteri~e same are Bpecific~lly denied and striot proof ther.eof is demanded at trial. 27. Den,led, The work performed under the terms of the parties' contraot was performed in accord with the terms of that contraot and the standard practices in the industry. 28. Denied. The averments in paragraph twenty-eight (28) are conolusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 29, Denied. The averments in paragraph twenty..nine (29) as to liability and oausation are conclusions of law to Which no responsive pleading is required and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph twenty-nine (29) and strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant Allen p, Sutton, tla Sutton Brothers, respeotfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff, together with costs, co un III - JlBDCH or IlJtLIID WARIlUITY 30. The answers in paragraphs one (1) through twenty-nine (29) are inoorporated herein by reference. 31. Denied. The averments in paragraph thirty-one (31) are oonolusions of laW to which no responsive pleading i$ required and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way ot further answer, while it is speoificallY denied that the goods and services at issue were impliedly warranted, the goods and services provided were fit for their ordinary purpose. 32. Denied, 'rhe avermentEl in paragraph thirty-two (32) as to the nature of the goods and services provided and an alleged breach of an implied warranty are oonclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is requl.red and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 33, Denied. The averments in paragraph thirty-three (33) as to broach of an alleged implied warranty and reSUlting damages are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, By way of further answer, it is specifioallY denied that any damages the plaintiff has alleged to have suffered were the result of the Defendant's performance under the terms of the parties' contract. WHEREFORE, Defendant Allen p, sutton, tla sutton Brothers, respectfully requests that this Honorable court enter judgment in his favor and against the plaintiff, together with costs, Ifl" MATTIR 34. The answers in paragraphs one (1) through thirty-three (33) ere inoorporated herein by reference. 35. Any damages sustained by the Plaintiff were not caused or oontributed to by the Defendant but were cauaed by the negligent aotions or omissions of individ~als and/or entities other than the answering Defendant. 36. The Plaintiff failed to take proper measures by which to mitigate its damages such as are alleged, 37. The ~laintiff did not provide the Defendant with reasoneble notice of the alleged defective condition and provide Defendant with the opportunity to remedy the alleged defects or mitigate Plaintiff's alleged damages. 38. Plaintiff has unclean hands as it wil fully spoiled evidence of the condition which provides the basis of its cause of action and the Defendant has been prejUdiced b}' such spoilation as warrants the preclusion of evidence relative to the condition alleged, 39, The Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of aotion upon whioh relief may be granted. WHEREFORE, Defendant Allen P. Sutton, tla Sutton Brothers, respeotfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff, together with costs. , Datedl /I.;/~~ Hit rl \1 " ~ I r " ,j , , 1" Respeotfully submitted, JaKIS, SKITH . DUalII IYI ~D~~>~Q~IRE ~ttorney I.D. *29563 JOHN J. MCNALLY, III, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. *52661 P.O. BoX 650 Hershey, PA 17033-0650 (717) 533-3280 Attorneys for Defendant 'I , " , ' , ' 'I, !I " Y.",UIC.'1'IOH The undersigned, ALLEN P. SUTTON, as representative of sutton arothers, hereby verifies that the faots set forth in Defendant's Answer with New Matter are true /lnd correot to the best of his knowledge, information and belief and further states that false statemente herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. c.S. seotion 4904 relating to unsworn falsifioation to authorities. ~~.~ ALLEN P. SUTTON , , , I " p'R~I'IO.~1 O. .laVIOI I, RARIN CURRIN, ESQUIRE, do hereby oertifY that I served a true and oorreot oopy of the forogoing AnsWer with New Mntter upon the following below-named individual(s) by depositing same in the u. s. Mail, postage pre-paid at Hershey, Dauphin county, Pennsylvania thil1t::J~,j'i',--. day of January, 1996. SERVED IJPONI James W. Rut~, Esquire MoNees, Wallece & Nuriok 100 Pine street P.O. Box 1166 Harrisburg, PA 17100-1166 -; /L; . -( 'Our n, Esquire JAMIS, 8KI~H , DURKIN ,I @ - '~ ~2~ C") I.j: c'l> ~r~rli ". I).... FL' e::.: ,- t., .,., 1:1 en 1,::_;:'.. ~I" ~" I,." ,I l'f' :; N : l.:.: :r: i!FLI ....:.. I" ....~ t!., tL.. i:j V, C} \:') ~ j Q :; ~ olJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ j~.;~ J j 'r " , , . . , oon,ideration of the within Petition, Defendant Allen P. sutton', Petition for ~ate Joinder is hereby GRANTED. ) ) By the~OI,l. r ~ I " / . '- \AIL J. ALLEN P. SUTTON, tie SUTTON BROTHERS, Dofendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 9&-6490 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED , GIANT rOOD STORES, INC. Plail,tiff v. AND NOW, thi, ORDIR j~ day of --v-W _, 1996, upon " i' , 1\ .~ GIANT POOD STORES, INC. plainti U I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA I I NO. 95~6490 I I CIVIL ACTION - LAW I I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v. ALLEN P. SUTTON, tla su~rON BROTHERS, Detendllnt pl.INDaKT aLLIN P. BUTTON'S PITITION .08 LaTI JOINDIR AND NOW, comes Defendant Allen P. sutton, tla sutton Brothers, by hi. attorneys, James, Smith and Durkin, and respectfully submits as follows I 1. This is a property damage suit arising from an alleged defeotive application of sealant on the parking lot of a Giant Food store located in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, on or about July and August, 1993. 2. A complaint was filed on or about November 10, 1995 in which Plaintiff, alleges, inter AliA, that sealant the Defendant Allen P. sutton applied to plaintiff'S parking lot was carried into the store on the shoes of patrons and the wheels of shopping carts, causing damage to the floors of the store. 3. On or about January 2. 1996, the law firm of James, smith and Durkin entered its appearance on behalf of Defendant Allen P. Sutton. 4. On or about January 29, 1996, an Answer with New Matter was filed on behalf of Defendant Allen p, sutton. 5. Upon information and belief, HRI, Inc. contracted with plaintiff to spread and roll a 50-foot-wide section of new asphalt in the Plaintiff's parking lot at the Bloomsburg location directly in front of the entrance of the store shortly before Defendant sutton applied .ealant to the remaining portion of plaintiff's parking lot. 6. Upon information and belief, HRI, Ino. removed existing asphalt and saaled the seam between the remaining existing asphalt and the ~ew asphalt it had spread and rolled. 7. It is believed, and therefore averred, that stains and discoloration the Plaintiff complains of were caused by the joint sealant applied by HRI, Inc. and not by the sealant applied by Defendant Sutton. 8. As such, Defendant Allen P. sutton requests that he be permitted to join HRI, Inc. as an Additional Def",ndant in this matter. 9. The Defendant respectfully submits that no prejudica will result in the granting of tho instant petition for Late Joinder. 10. The Court's granting of the instant petition would promote judicial economy and not delay trial particularly since discovery by way of interrogatorieG and prOduction of documents request has recently begun. WHEREFORE, Defendant Allen P. sutton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant his Petition so that he may file a joinder complaint in accordance with the applicable Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. ., , , I ae.peotfully lub~itted, aNMI./ .KITH . Duall. I, Dlate." 11/#,(1 d )1'f If/I- IYI ESQUIRE P.O. Box 650 He~shey, PA 17033-0650 (717) 533-n80 I Attorneys for Defendant , I " , " , , II " I " " , \ c,aTI.IC.T. or ...vle. I, ~!N DURRIN, ESQUIRE, do herebY oertity that I sQrved a true an4 oorreot oopY ot the toregoing petition tor Late Joinder upon the following below-named individual(e) by depositing s.me in th. U. s. Mail, postage pre-paid at Hershey, Dauphin county, pennsyLvania this ,:<.;-1..- day of Maroh, 1996. SERVED UPONI James W, Kutz, Esquire McNees, Wallace & Nurick 100 pine street P.O. Box 1166 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166 , " ,.,;, ",,,,,,.j'1J~jH~~llw.lifAhi.wfl~,;,;-"'~"""1"1'i-' I' .l)l. ',. I-'_J ~~ f', l'.: l \..' t', 1'-" IJ, , I', ". 1 .'1 T , " r;'i: ';_J (, i . ~ .. . " I' , I J . , ~,l .. ~' I I' 'I /~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ > j ~ ~ ~ J ! , I . , . . . ' . . . v' 'Wi ? 9 _"II'''' . i,ll " " " " I, , , , " I , 'I 'I' 1,1 ,I " I , ' 1,1' " , " , , " ' ,,' " \, , . , , GIANT FOOD STORES, INC., Plainll if f IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO . ? j ({ If ri (\ fl I ,r', ( ,J I I ~r'-- v. ALLEN P. SUTTON t/a SUTTON BROTHERS, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW ~.PLY TO NBW MATTIR AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, through its counsel, McNees, Wallace & Nurick, and hereby replies to the New Matter of Defendant Sutton Brothers as followsr 34. Paragraphs 1-33 of Plaintif.f's Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference. 35. Denied. Paragraph 35 avers conclusions of law to which no response is required. Nevertheless, the same are denied. It is specifically denied that any damages austained by the Plaintiff were not caused or contributed to by the Defendant, and it is further denied that such damages were caused by the negligent acts or omissions of individuals other than the Defendant. By way of further answer, the damages sustained by Plaintiff, as set forth in the complaint, were caused by Defendant's negligence. By way of further answer, Paragraphs 1-33 of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference. 36. Denied. Paragraph 36 avers conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a reE/ponse is deemed necessary, said averments are denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff failed to take proper measures to mitigate its damages. To the contrary, plaintiff took several steps to mitigate its damages. Indeed, Plaintiff attempted to solve the problem of material being tracked onto its floor from the asphalt , pavement placed by Defendant through (1) the placement of numerous "area" rugs near the entrance to the store, (2) the continual scrubbing and cleaning of the store floors, and (3) other remedial measures. Plaintiff also performed tests to determine the nature of the material being tracked in, and waited a significant period of time in hopes that the problem of the material being tracked in would eventually dissipate, When it did not, Plaintiff investigated several possible courses of action which would alleviate the problems it was experiencing. Ultimately, plaintiff haa no choice but to repave the parking lot. By way of further answer., Paragraphs 1-33 of plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. 37 Denied. Paragraph 37 avers conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed nece~sary, said averments are denied. It is specifically denied that plaintiff did not provide Defendant with reasonable notice of defective conditions, or provide Defendant an opportunity to remedy alleged defects or mitIgate plaintiff's damages. To the contrary, Defendant had both actual and constructive knowledge of the material being tracked in to the interior of the store, and took no steps to alleviate the problem. By way of further - 2 - answer, Paragraphs 1-33 of Plaintiff's complaint, and Paragraph 36 above are hereby incorporated by reference. 38. Denied. Paragraph 38 avers concluflions of law to which no response is required. '1'0 the extent a response is deemed necessary, said averment~ are denied. 'It is specifically denied that Plaintiff has "unclean hands", or has wilfully spoiled evidence of the oondition which provides the basis of the complaint. It is further denied that Defendant has been prejudiced by any alleged spoliation, for that evidence relative to the condition incurred should be precluded. By way of further answer, as a result of the defective paving work performed by Defendant, Plaintiff was left with no choice but to repave its parking lot. The "evidence" of the conditions was not "spoiled", but rather a defective condition was corrected out of. necessity. Had plaintiff not taken steps to correct the defective condition, PlaintHf's damages would have continued to accrue, and ultimately the store's interior floor may have had to have been completely removed and replaced. Therefore, Plaintiff's actions in repaving the parking lot mitigated its damages. Moreover, the "evidence" of the condition which provides the basis of Plaintiff'a cause of action is still apparent. Indeed, plaintiff conducted tests on the nature of the material being tracked into the store, and results of these tests are available for review. Moreover, plaintiff has retained a sample of the defective - 3 - L material. By way of further answer, Paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint, and Paragraph 36 above are incorporated by reterence. 39. Denied. Paragraph 39 av~rn a conclusion of law to '",hich no response is required. To the extent 11 responne is deemed necessary, said averment is denied. By way of further anawer, Paragraphs 1-33 of the complaint are hereby incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment in ita tavor und against Defendant. McNEES, WALLACE & NURIcK "Y}m;~PL I.D. No. 47245 100 Pine Street P.O. Box 1166 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorneys for plaintiff . 'Datedl 1.(1 ~'l~ 'I - 4 - V~RIFICAT!ON Subject to tne penalti~s of 18 pa. C.S.A. 84904 relating to unsworn falsifioation to authorities, I her~by certify that I am Clyde Miller, Mana9~r, Maint~nanc~ and Equipment Installation, and that the facts uet forth in the foregoing document are true and correot to the best ~f my information and belief. Date I I ' , , I' '-'Viii I,l'l: /"1 r,,',t, ( , I.i, ~; 'f If);,I' :}1;J1 ~,;\ 41':, i ('I!,I' -!~-;JV-"_I i!,\:",!" ~IIII!f " 1\,J)'n; ~'ili~_d,','_,\l 1~;~'I'rq , ,'Jt 1. t", in!n\~'!\.',-! ",II.. " fhi2,1,r-'.1 ilhi/;).' \,'\_'i,d Ili/'I;:. ~c. ,I :V:I'U 'I; _,Ifin d' ,I I.'I,!, q " I I , " , ~} "j"r.\ , S.- F, " r,I,',' ,l., II ,''fl, , . ~tif rr'''' , "1 t)' Ijlll; II" , -',: " ,I 'I Ii ',' " I " 'Ii , , " '11)1 'I " " ,I ,I 1 " , ("I '/' I " I' , , 1[1, oil , , I' II, ; ,I I' I, " PI, I, , , , 'II I, " " " " , I Ii , " I, , ,>11 /1' , , ,I, I 'i ;1' ill , , {J 1 , ,I " , i. 1', '"I "1 'I I I I' 'I " , "I " I, , J 11 , '1,1 " , " ,I " I, , , " , , ,'I' , , ..:j! II'> i.i" I'~ !'>) , \~5 j' )::"', ~'i I ...,~ ':'1 , .J;:~ 'II;'~'J,' I')';),; ~_ ,!e ,..I I.J 1..1 , " " i, ;1:: u.. l'o:l ,', 0,: ~! " ::R, , :, " I " ", " ;, , , , , " , I " , , " ,,' 1'1' !_I , , , " ," ,1.'i' " , I' !I , , , , , , , I , , ,,' I, j, i , " I' I' I " , I;! , " " ":11' ',' ','1 Fi' :1 " " ,', " ", ~1I~"1. WAL.l.Acl . NU"ICIC IIHI ~I"I ITIII" ,. I. It.. ".. H_""'"U"e. ,,, .".. Ii I, ,,:,- I .. 't ,I . ,!ri,L .~,-~;...,.--~,.... "-j '-I""""~'''''''''~~ I.,'~ ' , J " . , ' '1j , , ,I , " "! I' ,I: ,;;/ '\ ):j', f ,':f\' , , 'I I' ,'J.,'" I.Ii ,I 'irif);i,i:I'l'l: ., -I h', " "11'1 ' -';1': .', I ; ~_ I 'I , ' ",' ,'I i' " , " 'i ,,' t! \j ,\,' 'I 1'/ " " 'I i;: ,1;'1' .'.i , ,'i , 'I 1'1 ,'i , " " , ';1 I iii, ; 1';I'll-'ilJ .1 I, , "I ,t" 'I , , , '" ,I , , , , ,I " '1' '," , " 'I , .. IN THE COURT OF COMMON ~~EAS OF CUMBER~AND COUNTY, ~mNNSY~VANIA CIVI~ DIVISION - LAW GIANT FOOD STORES, INC., ~laintiff NO. qJ' 0 4{;o (I'~ v. ~~EN ~. SUTTON, tla SUTTON BROTHERS Defendant PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARYt pursuant to Rule 229 of the pennsylvani.a Rules of Civil ~rocedure, please mark the above-captioned matter settled and discontinued. McNEES, WAJ,LACE & NURICK By 17108-1166 Attorney for Plaintiff Giant Food stores, Inc. Dated I April 23, 1997 ..r , p~.T%.ICAT. o. a..VIe. The undersigned hereby cGrtifies that a true and correot copy of the foregoing praecipe to Discontinue was served, by fir.t alas8 mail, postage prepaid, upon the following I John J. McNally, III, Esquire James, smith and Durkin ~O Box 650 Herohey, pA 17036 ~~jt Of counsel to Plaintiff Giant Food Stores, Inc. April 23, 1997 , , , Ii, ,,', , I' , , ,