The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About95-06826 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SALLY ATWATER, Plaintiff No. 6826 Civil 1995 va. 80B WHITMER, t/d/b/a R & R ROOFING, Defendanta NOTICE OF HEARING BY BOARD OF ARBITRATORS YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the Board of Arbitrators appointed by the Court in this case will sit for the purpose of their appointment on Wednesday, March 5, 1997, In the Sscond Floor Hearing Room of the Old Courthouse, Two Courthouse Square, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, commencing at 9:30 A.M. All parties are reminded of the requirements of Pa. R, Civ, P. 1305. Board of Arbitrators Dated: I h/~7 , By: Fred H. Halt, Esquire, air, 2 Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire John W, Weigel, III, Esquire H. Anthony Adams, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff 128 East King Street Shlppensburg, PA 17257 Court Administrator's Office Bulletin Board Prothonotary's Office Sally Atwater 120 W, Big Spring Avenue Newville, PA 17241 bcc: Samuel W. MUkes, Esquire IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SALLY ATWATER, Plaintiff No, 6826 Civil 1996 / VI. 80B WHITMER, tldlbla R 81 R ROOFING, Defendantl / / / / ,I / NOTICE OF HEARING BY BOARD OF ARBITRATORS . I YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the Boerd of Arbitrators appointed by the Court in this case will sit for the purpose of their appointment on Friday, February 2B, 1997, in the Second Floor Hearing Room of the Old Courthouse, Two Courthouse Square, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, commencing at 1 :30 P.M. All parties are reminded of the reqUirements of Pa. R, Civ. P. 1305, Board of Arbitrators , , , i Fre H, Halt, Esqulre,Che r, 249.4500 Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire John W. Weigel, III, EsqUire Dated: 1/3ftr7 H. Anthonhdams, Esquire counsel~r Plaintiff 128 Ees King Street ShiPpel burg, PA 17257 Sally ,Atwater 120'W, Big Spring Avenue Newville, PA 17241 ~'urt Administrator's Office ulletln Board rothonotary's Office j , ~ . ., t ~ :' 'T', .. .. BALLY ATWATER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R & R ROOFING, Defendants . . : NO. 95-6826 CML TERM . . : CMLACTION - LAW . . : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this~ ~ of )')~ r~j,vr... . 1996, in consideration of the foregoing petitionJ;e.. d #PlI .; ,Esq., Chairperson, as well as ...fTJhlrl /,'/d Esq., and~J. AI WlJ -rSq., are appointed Arbitrators in the above-caption action as prayed for. BY THE COURT: Lk.-t F Ii T P.J. / 'I ~~ca Or ill,':, 1'~()W,O\-\01/>.1\'( 1)0 I:lr.C \ a ~\'\ 9: (\3 CUI.\581\,]>tID CO\.lt-l\'l p8'lNS'il,,~~\J\ .. . .. - BALLY ATWATER, PlaintitT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R & R ROOFING, Defendants . . : NO. 95-6826 CML TERM . . : CMLACTION - LAW . . :JURYT~DEMANDED PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS Sally Atwater, PlaintitT in the above action, respectfully represents that: 1. The above-captioned action is at issue. 2. The claim of the PlaintitTin this action totals $25,000, plus $88.00 costs. 8. The Plaintiffs Complaint sets forth three causes of action, for actual dAmAgeS of $1870.00 and for punitive dAmAgeS of $50,000. PlaintitT hereby notifies the Court and Defendants that she limits her total claim of dAmAges to $25,000, thereby bringing this case to within the arbitration limits. 4. The following attorneys are interested in the case as counsel, or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: Tony Adams, Esq., and Samuel W. Milkes, Esq. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner prays your Honorable three (8) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. DATED~'? Ar1'i\feA~~r{ 'r9G ~ lH.l3i-rr ATWATER j 00 M \i\ I ;::)- ,,,.. -&. ~ ~ . " ~ C'J ~ "- M ._~ I~ N a !I: \) '>' I:) - : :"" ( . - '. r: 0- 9~ ~ 0 u:: \D ::s~ ~ u. I '-iE U.! Ei rn . if = ~- ..., l5 U) ::l CI' U . . , .0, .. ..,.-.,.)._-.N._'.--'-.t.;~.. SALLY ATWATER, Plaintl1I' : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. BOB WHITMER, Vd/b/a R & R ROOFING, Defendants . . : NO. 95-6826 CIVIL TERM . : CML ACTION. LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFJCATE OF SERVICE .1, Jennifer L. Coyle, hereby certify that a copy of the Petition for Appointment of Arbitrators in the above captioned matter was duly served upon Tony Adams, Esq., attorney for the Defendant, by depositing it in the U.S. Mail, on November 7, 1996, addrelllled as follows: Tony Adams, Esq. 128 E. King Street Shippensburg, PA 17257 I hereby verifY that the statements made in the foregoing are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 PILC.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: IY-'lql.R !.....-, '....n ( ~ - ~ .:3 .. :J~ Ii M 0.. - u~ .... "- q~ ,... .' ...,. I rR~ :0- D:iE e !9 - -: l:5 It) B en :~. ~~."... "9i '....' '-',. ,"0 "'t-'~.~~:' "i'oti..."",;_.~Jh,'1<'.~'1.I....<OtJ-",...., ,,'It""J~. ',-' ~,- - ~_._.~_.,-,-" <~'''.r''''..~'''__' " SALLY ATWATBR 120 W. BiS Sp~ins Ave. Newville, PI. 17241 Cumbe~l.nd County Penneylvenie PLAINTIPF, IN THB COURT OP COMMON PLBAS OP CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA v. 95 - 6826 civil TenD BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R&R Roofins 117 Welnutdale Rd. Shippen.burs, PI. 17257 DBPBNDANT. JURY TRIAL DBMANDBD AHSVJlIl. '1'0 COUR'I'I!RCLADl COMBS NOW Sally Atwater, Plaintiff-CounterDefendant, who anawera the Counte~claim (pa~ag~aphs in this Answer correspond to the paragraphs in the Counterclaim): 34. Denied. 35. Denied. The remaining cont~act amount of $615.00 is not payable until the completion of the work covered by the Cont~act. Defendant-COunte~Plaintiff has failed to complete said wo~k. 36. Plsintiff-COunterDefendsnt denies any and all allegations not specifically admitted. New Matte~ Pirst Defense. The Contract is null and void as it was procu~ed th~ough f~aud. That is: a. P~ior to entering into the Contrsct, Defendant- Counte~Plaintiff's employee. Melvin Redhead. acting within the scope of his employment by Defendant-CounterPlaintiff, knowingly and false- ly represented to Plaintiff-CounterDefendant that Defendsnt- CounterPlaintiff wss experienced snd expert in constructing and ( r , installing copper spouting systems in a workmanlike manne~ acco~ding . , } to standa~d practices on curved porches like the one on the Plaintiff-CounterDefendant's ~esidence, when in t~uth and in fact Defendant-CounterPlaintiff was not so experienced: b. Prio~ to entering into the Contract, Defendant- Counte~Plaintiff's employee, Melvin Redhead, acting within the scope of his employment by Defendant-Counte~Plaintiff, represented that he was an a~chitect licensed to practice architectu~e in the Com- monwealth of Pennaylvania, when in truth and in fact he was not so licensed. Plaintiff-Counte~Defendant relied on said false representa- tiona made by Defendant-CounterPlaintiff and Defendant- CounterPlaintiff's employee, Melvin Redhead, in deciding to enter into the Contract. Second Defense. Defendant-CounterPlsintiff has materially breached the Contract. That is, Defendant-CounterPlaintiff a) hss fsiled to construct and install a spouting system in a workmanlike manner according to stsndard practices, b) has breached the express warranty contained in the Contract, and c) has breached the implied warranty that the spouting system installed would be merchantable and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it was intended. Third Defense. Pursuant to Section 20, Architect's Licensure Law, Act of 1982, P.L. l227, No. 281, Defendant-CounterPlaintiff is not entitled to recover sny Rum from Plaintiff-CounterDefendant be- cause Defendant-CounterPlaintiff knowingly procured the Contract through false representations that Defendant-CounterPlaintiff's ~ ...._ _. I ~_-_\~.. <" "'...".. ,_....,.".,_.'.~...---" . employee Melvin Redhead WMa an architect licensed to practice ar- chitecture in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, when in truth and in fact he was not ao licensed. Pourth Defense. The Counterclaim fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Wherefore, Plaintiff-COunterDefendant prays your Honorsble Court enter a judgment in favor of Plaintiff-CounterDefendant. Respectfully submitted, J~~r Sally ~ water 120 W. Big Spring Avenue Newville, PI. l724l 717 776-666l Dated: April 11, 1996 .3 CBRTIFICATB OP SERVICE I he~eby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer to Counterclaim thia 11th day of April 1996 was mailed by first-class U,S. mail, postage prepaid, to the following: H. Anthony Adams, Bsq. 128 B. King St. Shippensburg, PI. 17257 Attorney for Defendant-COunterPlaintiff \ ~~ 1M.n:fv- Sally ~ water .If ~'. ,,-,......~""..,.,....,~...~. ,-,,",...-.~....'-_.,..., ...,----. "___"'~-"".,H"'.-"""...~.,_ . . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY - PENNSYLVANIA Sally Atwater, Plaintiff NO. 95-6826 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. Bob Whitmer, t/d/b/a R & R Rootinq, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Now comes Bob Whitmer, d/b/a R & R Roofing, by and through Melvin Redhead, an employee who is familiar wit the tactual alleqations set froth in the Complaint and Answer: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Denied, on or about April, 1995 a proposal was made to the Plaintiff and the proposal was accepted. 5. Denied that any written contract existed. 6. Admitted that the sum of $1,230.00 was to be paid for the work performed. 7. Denied, no representation was made by Melvin Redhead. 8. Denied, Melvin Redhead at no time told the Plaintiff that he was an architect. The torm used by Defendant unfortunately had a box marked architect in which Melvin Redhead typed his name tor internal business use and unwittingly used that desiqnation, 9. Denied after reasonable investiqation, the Defendant is without knowledge or intormation eufficient to form a beliet as to the truth of the matter averred. 10, Admitted and Denied as set forth in prior answers, 11. Denied, the work was performed in a qood and workmanlike manner. 12. Denied, there are no substantial defects in the spoutinq: a. Proper materials were used. b. The sections of the spouting are properly joined. c. The spouting system is properly installed. d. The spouting system, as closely as possible, conforms to the roof line of the home. e. Denied that the system ever bent or "folded". f. The aesthetic value of spouting is certainly a hot topic of debate but is not an item of damage. 13. Paragraph 13 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleadinq is required. 14. Denied, Plaintiff has not made the required payment. 15. Admitted, that a request was made to remedy the deficiency but is denied that my deficiency exists to remedy. 25. '" :.\ "1 Ce. .~ \r: f' i(; 16. Denied, that any breach or contract occurred or that the Plaintift suffered any damage, 17. Admitted and Denied as set forth in prior answers. 18. Denied, that any implied warranty existed and paraqraph 18 is a conclusion of law to which to responsive pleadinq is required, 19. Denied, no express warranty of the spoutinq system was ever made by Defendant. 20. Denied, that the spoutinq system is not fit. 21. Denied, any necessary repair has been made by Defendant. 22. Paragraph 22 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleadinq is required and further no warranties exist. 23. Denied that any action by the Defendant has caused damages to the Plaintiff. 24. Admitted and Denied as set forth in prior answers. Denied that Melvin Redhead made any representation to the Plaintiff. 26. Denied, Melvin Redhead never told the plaintiff he was an architect. " '.~ 27. Denied, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matter averred. 28. Denied, after reasonable investigation the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matter averred. 29. Denied, that any false or fraudulent representation was made with malice or otherwise, NEW MATTER 30. The Plaintitf seeks damages for water damage to porch fascia, railing, balusters, floor, foundation and foundation plantinqs. 31. All damages sought occur as a result of the forces of water or other elements actinq over time. 32. Defendant avers that the damage is a result of the Plaintiff's failure to repair her upper roof and other roof and spouting problems. 33. Defendant avers that the Plaintiff had a duty to mitiqate damages if property was being damaged by the Defendant's work. COUNTERCLAIM 34. All work to be performed by the Defendant has been completed. 35. The Plaintiff has not paid the remaining contract amount of $615.00. Wheretore, Defendant prays your Honorable Court enter judgment in his favor in the amount of $615,00. Respectfully submitted, ~~ H. Ant ony da , Esqul:4l Attorney for Defendant 128 E. Kinq street Shippensburq,PA 17257 (717)-532-3270 ........."..... .. I verify that the statements made in this Answer are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa, C.S. Section 4904 relatinq to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 8-22--'1(, ~~ Me nRe ad . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day servinq a copy of the foregoinq document upon the persons in the manner indicated below, by depositinq a copy of the same in the United states Mail, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, with first class postage prepaid as follows: Sally Atwater 120 W. Biq Sprinq Avenue Newville, PA 17241 Date: 3/25/96 Dawn M. S oop Legal Assistant for H, Anthony Adams 128 E. King street Shippensburq, PA 17257 (717)-532-3270 C? E ;:t - 0 M ::5.~ ~;;c: ('O):;: ffL '-C :..J~~ 91" ",_:' .:,,-1 @' L.., ';~ry L C'J ];~ Et' Co. (ii ~. :;;,.; 1-:. . .., :"J C C, 1..) . ,I . ,. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY - PENNSYLVANIA Sally Atwater, plaintiff NO, 95-6826 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. Bob Whitmer, t/d/b/a R & R Roofing, Detendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Now comes the Defendant by and throuqh his counsel, H. Anthony Adams, Esquire and sets forth the following: MOTION FOR MORE SPECIFIC COMPLAINT 1. Paraqraphs 7 & 8 of the Complaint of the plaintiff fails to state any relationship or authority between an actor, Melvin Redhead, and Defendant other than employment. 2. Paraqraph 12 of the complaint of the plaintiff fails to plead specific facts. 3. Plaintiff fails in Count 2 to demonstrate the type of warranty upon which claim is made by pleading without specific facts implied and express warranty. MOTION TO STRIKE DEMURRER Count 4 of the Plaintiff's Complaint is spurious and scandalous and should be stricken. Wherefore, Defendant prays your Honorable Court strike Count 4 of the Complaint and order the Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint. . Respectfully submitted, ~~-~ H. An~OnY A ams, Esquire Attorney for Defendant 128 E. Xinq street Shippensburq, PA 17257 (717)-532-3270 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day servinq a copy or the foreqoinq document upon the persons in the manner indicated below, by depositing a copy of the same in the United states Hail, shippensburq, Pennsylvania, with first class postaqe prepaid as tollows: sally Atwater 120 W. Big Sprinq Avenue Newville, PA 17241 ('\\., ^, \\1 Date: 1/12/96 ~~~\~~ Dawn H. Shoop Legal Assistant for H. Anthony Adams 128 E. King street Shippensburq, PA 17257 (717)-532-3270 . . ;,A~ ~ 0' ~ .:r tt c:, 3~ 0 :C u:;' '-~ c- D2 ~9. \D /(:i ...( .., ':::\'- - .'-;1i1 i--rt~; rr::~l; ~ 1.jrt'"J r: r.;: L~=- -, tl. ~ ,.1 ~? .:> 0" U \ ~ ...' . .,', ~c 'h'''~-."'.~7:J.'' ."",~'~ '~""")":~"'~' ,',.' "-"""'''~~;'-' 1l'tP 0'5 '% ()SlID 0'0.... pO.? ':'1 T"o' 1u I, .-.[""'t~ 1..\\\ ')l....~.CE @) H. .A.N'.I'HOl"Y ADAMS I~~ '::.\~T '''''11 :-\TRJtCT ttl_ITa:.;.\ ~IJIP1'Ir;st'1It IU. J't~;'IriNtt'.I.\'.\'1 \ 'H,)"; '1'.:1 1"1'IIt'lSI!': ~3~',"~7n \1." \ ('..,nF:717 March 4, 1996 Thomas Cheffins Court Administrator Cumberland County Courthouse Ca~lisle, PA 17013 Dear Mr. Cheffins: I have not filed a brief in the above captioned matter and do not intend to do so. It is my intent to request the right to withdraw the preliminary objcntlons and fila either an amended preliminary objections, if allowed, or answer the complaint. Please advise the Court of thir development. cl~~~/d~(\ II. Anthony Adab/ . . 11M: dms cc: Sally Atwater I'U' 0'3 '% 09.IZ All,' ICH, AtoHl I:. 07.1 FOr ,. ^N'J'IION~ 1ID1I1'fl, EUVU 1 II ,: .'; It ", KING G1'JlFt:'I', Ill' "1'1: 1\ 6~IPP~NSnURG, VA 1725? n~~,F:""ONE: ('/J~." ',]2-32'/0 ."~ >ll'MBER (71'1 -532 ',i673 oll\RCII 5, 1996 T" CrWIlT IIDMI.... 1-~"kAT()~ FIO~ IJI\W>l fllll.' U:T . WIIIT/H.'" '. ~'I'W/lTER Pi m;. ,NCLUDI:Nr -.,,:, ')I'll;: 2 @ FEa 2B \~'UtfI . SALLY ATWATBR 120 W, 8ig Spring Ave. Newville, PI. 17241 Cumbe~land County Pennsylvania PLAINTIPP, IN THB COURT OP COMMON PLBAS OP CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA v. : 95 - 6826 civil Term BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R&R Roofing 117 Walnutdale Rd. Shippensburs, PI. 17257 DBPBNDANT. JURY TRIAL DEMANDBD .IIBIIl COMPLAINT Plaintiff is Sally Atwater, an adult individual who resides at 120 W. Big Spring Ave., Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Defendant is Bob Whitmer t/d/b/a R&R Roofing, an adult individual with a principal place of business at l17 Walnutdale Rd., Shippens- burg, Pennsylvania l7257. In or about April 1995, Plaintiff and Defendant signed a writ- ten Contract, a copy of which is attached to Plaintiff's Complaint as Bxhibit A. In the Contract, Defendant agreed to install a new copper spouting system in a workmanlike manner according to atsndard prac- tices on the curved front porch of Plaintiff's residence. Plaintiff agreed in ~he Contract to pay Defendant $l,230.00, half to be psid before installation and half to he paid on completion of the in- stallation of the spouting system. Pursuant to the Contract, Plaintiff paid Defendant $615.00 before instellation. Prior to entering into the Contract, Defendant's employee, Melvin Redhead, represented to Plaintiff that Defendant was too expe~ienced in the installation of copper spouting systems and could install auch a system in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Defendant's employee, Melvin Redhead, alao represented to Plaintiff that he waa an architect licensed to practice architecture in the Commonwealth of Pennaylvania and signed the Contract as "Architect," (See Complaint, Bxhibit A.) Plaintiff relied upon the representationa of Defendant and Defendant's employee in agreeing to ente~ into the Contract. Plaintiff's Complaint consists of three counts: breach of con- tract, breach of warranty, and fraud. OOUIft'l:IIIIRACIIOFCONTRACl' Defendant failed to construct and install the spouting syatem in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. The spouting aystem constructed and installed by Defendant contains numerous material defects, including but not limited to the following: it is conatructed of improper materials, it is joined improperly (thereby causins leaks and gaps between sections), it is improperly graded (thereby causing water to overflow the system at various points), it does not conform to the roofline (thereby preventing the system from collecting all water from the roof), it is improperly installed (thereby causing the system to bend and fold), and it is improperly installed so as to be unsightly and to have an undesirable ap- pearance. (See Complaint, Paragrah 12.) As a result of the aforesaid errors, omiasions, and deficien- cies, Defendant breached the Contract in a material way. Plaintiff ") .. fulfilled all of her obligations under the Contract. Plaintiff re- quested that Defendant ~emedy the deficiencies in the spouting syatem and Defendant failed to remedy the deficiencies. As a result of Defendant's breach of the Contract, Plaintiff will have to expend $530.00 in order to remove the deficient spouting syatem constructed and installed by Defendant and replace the spout- ing ayatem in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices, plua $840.00 to remedy damage to the porch caused by the deficient spouting system installed by Defendant. Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against Defendant in the amount of $1,370.00, plus interest and court costs. 00UIlT2:RRRAr.ROFlfARRAHTY An implied provision of the Contract was a warranty by Defendant that the spouting system to be installed would be merchant- able and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it was intended. In addition, in the Contract, Defendant expressly warranted the spouting system for one (1) year. (See Complaint, Bxhibit A.) The spouting system installed by Defendant is not merchantable and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it is intended. Defendant has failed to repair the spouting system and to make it merchantable and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it was in- tended. Defendant therefore breached his warranties to Plaintiff. As a result of Defendant's breach of warranties, Plaintiff will have to expend $530.00 in order to remove the deficient spouting system con- structed and installed by Defendant and replace the spouting system -, in a wo~kmanlike manner according to atandard practices, plus $840,00 to remedy damage to the porch caused by the deficient spouting system inatalled by Defendant. Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against Defendant in the amount of $1,370.00 plus interest and court costa. 0CUft' 3: PRAIJD Prior to entering into the Contract, Defendant's employee Mel- vin Redhead knowingly and falsely represented to Plaintiff that Defendant was experienced and expert in constructing and installing copper spouting systems in a workmanlike manner according to standard p~actices on curved porches, and that he himself was an architect licenaed to practice architecture in the Commonwealth of Pennsyl- vania. Melvin Redhead made such repreaentation within the scope of his employment by Defendant. Plaintiff relied upon and was justified in ralying upon the false representations made by Defendant and Defendant's employee in deciding to enter into the Contract. The false and fraudulent representations of Defendant and Defendant's employee to Plaintiff have resulted in damage to Plaintiff and Plaintiff will have to expend $530.00 in order to remove the deficient spouting system constructed and installed by Defendant and replace the spouting system in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices, plus $840.00 to remedy damage to the porch caused by the deficient spouting system installed by Defendant. In making the false and fraudulent repreeentations, Defendant and Defendant's employee acted with actual malice toward Plaintiff . and acted with willful and wanton diaregard of Plaintiff'a rishta. Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against Defendant in the amount of $1,370.00, punitive damages in the amount of $50,000.00, plus interaat and court costs. DBPBNDANT'S PRBLIMINARY OBJBCTIONS and PLAINTIPP'S ANSWHR Defendant complains that Plaintiff has not established the relationship between Defendant and Defendant's employee. In answer, Plaintiff ~efers Defendant to paragraph 26 of the Complaint, which statea that Defendant's employee acted within the scope of his employment. Plaintiff also refera Defendant to the Contract (Exhibit A), which his employee signed. Purthermore, under the doctrine of respondeat auperior, Defendant is responsible for the acts of an employee committed within the scope of his employment. Defendont next complains that Plaintiff fails to plead specific facts. In answer, Plaintiff refers Defendant to paragraph 12 of the Complaint, which sets forth in specific detail the deficien- cies of the apouting system. Plaintiff also cites Pennsylvania Rule of civil Procedure l019(a), which requires that U[t]he material facta on which a cause of action is based shall be stated in a concise and sWllD8~y fOnD. U Plaintiff believes her Complaint complies with this requirement and givea Defendant more than adequate notice of the deficiencies in the spouting aystem. Defendant appears to complain that Plaintiff fails to specify the type of warranty. In onswer, Plaintiff refers Defendant to para- graphs 18 and 19 of the Complaint, which specify implied and express . " - :'~.,->: >"'$U,~,:;_.;;"".,,,,:,,,;<_,,,_. . wa~rantiea, and to the Contract (Bxhibit A), in which the expreas warranty ie printed. Pinally, Defendant complains that Plaintiff's "Count 4" is scandalous and spurious. In answer, Plaintiff refers Defendant to Count 3 of the Complaint (there is no "Count 4") and assures Defendant that she is prepared to prove her allegations of Defendant's falae and fraudulent misrepresentations. Plaintiff agrees that such misrepresentations by Defendant are indeed scandalous. However, Defendant cannot escape the consequences of those mis- representations by asking the Court to strike the count of the Com- plaint seeking damages for Defendant's misconduct. CONCLUSION Plaintiff prays your Honorable Court to deny Defendant's Preliminary Objections and allow Plaintiff's suit to proceed. Date: 26 Pebruary 1996 Respectfully submitted, J' '5. /f!1.w1u/ Sally Atwater 120 W. Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA 17241 717 776-6661 r:) "- SALLY ATWATBR 120 W. Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA 17241 CWDberlanc! County Pennsylvania, Pla1ntUf IN THB COURT OP COMMON PLBAS OP CtlMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNHSYLVAHIA 95-6826 CIVIL TBRM v, BOB WHITMBR, t/d/b/a R&R Roofing 117 Walnutc!ale Rd, Shippensburg, PA 17257, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IN RB I PRBLIMlNARY OBJECTIONS ORDER OP COURT AND NOW, this 6th day of March, 1996, the preliminary objections filed by the Defendent are dismissed, end the Defendant is directed to file an answer to the complaint within 20 days after receipt of this order. By the Court, e-~ / Sally Atwater, Pro Se e~tU4- ~L,'3/"lq". ..J.' f' . H. Anthony Adams, Esquire Por the Defendant mal t~ ~ C) F; 0 7' ....' .. ..- ~~~ - (~$ :5~ ~; ~ ~1. to: :,~~ ( ll) . . ('. ,. LU'--'. I 1-.- ct~: C~ U..:eo, "J~ . .: J f-. :;: tl, ll) B G en PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT lJollst be typewritten and subnitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Arg\m!nt Court. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE I entire ClIPtion IlLIllt be sblted in full) SALLY AnJATER 120 W. Big Spring Ave. Newille, PA 17241 Cumberland County PeMsylvania (Plaintiff) (") '-n 0 C 0'" ....1 -- -oed -., ~~ ,-~ 0') [C; COI ;;:(' I -,., CI?.~ c:l .,) ~4__. .-) ::<c; .." ~~ ~o -. ;.:> ..... ~Cl .~ .-.- .;> ,'- ~ .,.. :3 r. ?5 -, C) -.; VB. BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R&R Roofing 117 Wa1nutdale Rd. Shippensburg, PA 17257 I Defendant) No. 95 - 6826 Civll 1995 1. State matter to be argued I i.e., plaintiff's motion for new trial, defendant's dBrurrer to carplaint, etc.): Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint and Plaintiff's Answer Thereto 2. Identify counsel who will argue case: Is) for plaintiff: pro se I\ddress : Ib) for defendant: H. Anthony Adams Address: 128 E. King St. Shippensburg, PA 17257 3. I will notify all parties in writing within bIo days that this case has been listed for argunent. 4. Arg\Jrent Court Date: March 6, 1996 Dated: 8 February 1996 At~!1 ~ """""'~"""".;;17,~.~~"'"rh~':'" ... SAl.LY ATWATBR l20 II. Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA l724l Cumberland County Pennsylvania PLAINTIPP, IN THB COURT OP COMMON PL~~ OP CUMBRRl.AND COUNTY, I'BNNSYLVANIA v. 95 - 6826 civil Term 808 III1ITMRR, t/d/b/o R&R Roofing 117 Wolnutdall! Rd, Shippensburg, PA 17257 DEPENDANT. JURY TRIAL DBMANDED ANSWER TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIPP'S COMPl~INT NOli COMBS the Plaintiff. Sally Atwater, and !let6 forth the following: OPPOSITION TO MOTION POR SPBCIPIC COMPLAINT 1. DI!fendant <:omplains t.hat in Paragraph" 7 nnd 8 of the Com- I,Iaint "Plaintiff [nils t.o fit.at.- any re]al.ionnhip or authority be- tween an actor, MC!l v in Redhead, anet Ol~[f!ndallt other than employmont. It This comp.luint by Derl!ndunt is merit!""!l, Puragraphs 7 and 8 must hI! reud in conjulll,tion with Paragraph 26. which clearly 6tutes that Mr, Redhl!ad mode tlu, rl!presentation" t.hot. he was a I iCl'nsed archi tl!ct and that Defl!ndont WIJ!l eXI",rielleed in construct.ing IJnd inRtallinll coppl!r spouting systl!mn (the r"prl!sI!nt.atioIl6 of Mr. Rl'dhl!IJd which aro thl! 6ubject of PIJragraph6 7 and Il) within the seopl! of his employmont hy DI!fl!l,dDnt. In addit.ion, Mr. R"dlu,ad 6igll<'d till' "ropo611l on hohaH of Defendant (Exhi hi t A). which bl-came the contract h"tw"en t.hl! part il!1I whl!n it was accl!pt.l!d by PllIint.ilf. lJlIlh-r tho' duet.dlll' of rl!spondeat. fillporior. O(!i:endanl iH rnspol1s i bIp 101. th~ /leU; of an emploYtH~ ~. <:olll1li lted withill tho ncope o[ hia OInploymullt. Oo[ulI<1allt' a coulIsol nurely known this and, tl",rl!fore, thin anpoct of Dl'fllndllnt's motion is [riv010UR. 2. Defendant complaina that "I'arallraph 12 of the Comr,laint of the Plaintiff failn to plead specific factn." EVI!n II curnory reading of ParaBraph l2 r('Voala tlmt thin complaint of lJofondant. in false and that Plaintiff in Parallraph 12 hns provid(!d Defendant with 0 Ilreat many detailn as to how the npout.ine nyntem in defoct.ive. Ilriefly sum- marizl!d, Paragraph l2 informs the Dofondllnt through tlm allellation of specific factn t1111t. the Dubject spoutine nyst.m" is connt.ructed of im- proper materialn, in joined impropl!rly (tlll!reby causing leaks Bnd llapB betwel!n Bections). improperly uraded {therl!by (:lIIlUinll watl!r to overflow the system at vurinus lJoints) f cloml not conform to the roofline (thereby prl!ventine the SYBtl!m from colll!ctinll all water from till! roof), impropl!rly installl!d (thl!rl!hy cBuning the syntem to bend and fold). IInd improperly installed no liB t.o be unsightly and to have an l1tuhudrable app~arancH. PennHylvanilJ Rule of Civil Procedure 10l9(a) requiren that "[ t.]h.. mllterilll fllctn on which a conne of ac- tion in haaed shall be ntlltl!d in Il concisl! and sUlllllllry form." The Complaint clearly compli(~fi with thili rcquir(!mlmt nnd eives Dt'Cendunt morc than ndequilte notice of the dHficicncil!fi in tlw npoutinc system imprormrly innt.aUll<1 hy Dnll'ndllnL 3. D(!fl~n<<Jalll'~ t.hird I~nmplaint ahout lilt:' alll!Cl'd dl!ficiellcim; or t.ho Complnin is iuc'omJlrt>hmltiihlpo f)('{PlUtllllt. appl'lIrfi t.n be ntntillC that Plaint.iff han fail"d to "tal.l' 1.1", I.yl''' of "arranty IIp,,n whio:h Plnint irf in rf'lyiug. In Cae1. COUllt 2 ~i1lf~ei('i(::dl)' stat!'!; that. .""'..... .,,'''',.".~-':: ..- Defendant has broached both exprelln and implied warrllnties, Thl! im- plied warranty is that the lIysl.om would .'" merchontoblll and reasonah- ly fit for the purpose for which it woo intCl\lllld. The eXl'reSIl war- ranty is the warranty set forth in Defendant'n own Proposal, which bl!came the contract hetwllen Plaint; ff and Def.!Odant when Plaintiff accepted Defendant's Proposal. Thill contract ill attached to the Com- plaint as Bxhibit A. In Bxhibit A Defendant agreed to "Provide a one year warranty on all workmanship" and further IIgreed that "All work to be completed in a workmanl ike lMnner according to standard prac- tices," See also Paragraph 5 of tho Complaint. In effect. Defendant is claiming to be mYlltified by the wording of ils own PropoRal which became the contract between lhe partil!s. Since any ambiguity in Il contract is construed allainllt till> drafler of the contract, any am- biguity hl!re is the faull. of Defendant, who cannot now he heard to complain. In addition, Counl 2 speci fically states exactly what war- ranties Plaintiff is relyinG on. OPPOSITION '1'0 MOTION TO STRIKE DIlMURRBR '.. Defondonl. complai I"', wi I.hout stating any facts in supporl thereof. that "Count '. of Plainliff'n Complainl. is IIpurious and scondaJoulI and IIhould bl! stricken," The irony here is I.hal. in a case complaining about sloppy workln.1nship by Dl!fl!nd.~nl, Defllndant would file a sloppy pleadinG which refom to a nonl!xiul.l'nt "Count '." of the Complaint. The Complaint has only thr"" Countu. Plaintiff aUBum'-/I that Defendonl meanl to <.Iir,'c\. I.hi/l parI. of itll pleading to Count. 3 of the Complaint. Dl!fl!ndllnl ill "orr,-ct thal thl! facts SI't forth in Counl 3 allege conduct by ()f~f(OlUlalll. 'f. em()IOYl'H wit.hin tlU' Gcnpn of . ..' his employment which is s,,"ndalons: fraudulently and untruthfully claiming to Plaintiff thllt he was 011 architect when in truth he was not, and fraudulently and untruthfully cluiming that De('mdllnt was an expert at installing copper IIpoutinll aystonlS when in truth Defendant waR not. Plaintiff is pr"pared to prOVf' at trial the allellations con- tained in Count J. Defendant cannot ovoid the conse'luencea of its own employee's conduct conmilled within the scope of his employment simp- ly by statinc. through its attorney and not under oath, t.hat the al- legations arc "spurious and ucnndaJous." CONCLUSION Def"ndant has filnd II frivolous pleadinc which refers to a nonexistent count. of the Complaint mId which IISlll!rt.. that. various parts of the Complaint. III"k lIpecificity when the Complaint is very specific and delailed in its allecation6. Defendant clearly has filed his Preliminary Obj'!I:tions to oppress Pl..irltiff and to delay a deci- sion on the merits of Plaintiff's Complaint. WIIEREPORE. Plaintiff Sally Atwater prays your Ifonorable Court to deny Defendant's Motion for Speci fie Complaint and Motion to Strike Demurrer. Rellpectfully Sllhmil.l."d. ~~ S..l1y Atwllter 120 W. Dic Sprinc Ave. 717 77(,-(,6(,1 Nl!wvill,., I'A 172',l .... C) r U: .:r t:; '-" :... N .:>~ n ().. ~.-. ( h .- (,j...: ..... Li::L ~ r:,::J -If: -;.s;: ~(' ro :"!!'J r: ij' . I ;)f... r;;'" n3 ilil'J Lo.' t' .lu.. [. Lo.. ::; >!. I'.. '.'=' -' Q CI\ U "" ~ . .' .. '~'~~":' -r-' 'ra<,,,..,,,,:..-..,.~.__.:'-C" ....'1.. -... ._.~_.. .- SALLY ATWATBR l20 W. Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA 1724l Cumberland County Pennsylvania PLAINTIPF, IN TIIIl COURT OP COMMON PLllAS 01' CUMBIlRLAND COUNTY. PBNNSYLVANIA v. 95 - (.. y;t., C,vll7er-N.., BOB WHITMBR, t/d/b/a R&R Roofing l17 Walnutdole Rd. Shippensburg. PI. l7257 DBPBNDANT JURY TRIAL DBMANDBD NOTICE You hove bel!D sued in court. If you wish to Ilefend againRt the claims set forth in the following pages, you must toke action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are nerved, by en- tering 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 caoe may proceed without you and a judgml!ut IIUIY bl! entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the com- plaint or for any other claim or relief requeated by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKB TillS PAPIlR TO YOUR LAWYBR AT ONCB. IP YOU DO NOT HAVB A LAWYER OR CANNOT APPORD ONP., GO TO OR TRLBPIIONB TIIB OFPICB SBT PORTH BBLOW TO PIND OUT WIIBRB YOU CAN GilT LBGAL 1I1l1,P. CUMBBR1.AND COUNTY COURT ADMINISTRATOIl CUM8BRloAND COUNTY COURTHOUSB 1 COURTIIOUSI'. SQUAIlIl CARLISLB, PIlNNSYI.YANIA 17013 717 249-6200 By:-.JUJI.~ Sall~ater, Plaintiff 120 W. 8ig Spriug Ave. Newville, PA 17241 717 776-6661 .' :. .. . SALLY ATWATI!R 120 W. Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA 1724l Cumberland County Pennsylvania PLAINTIPP, lN Till! COURT OP COMMON PLEAS Of CUM81!RLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYI.vANIA v. 95 - r;,82~ t.u.J.. Tt-~ BOB WlnTHBR, t/d/b/a R&R Roofing l17 Walnutdale Rd. Shippenoburg, PA l7257 DBPENDANT JURY TRIAL DI!MANDI!D COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Sally Atwater, pro se, and fileR this Com- plaint against the named Defendant, Bob Whitmor t/d/b/a/ R&R Roofing, and in support thereof, avers as follows: l. Plaintiff is Sally Atwater, an adult individual who cur- rently resides at l20 W. Big Spring Ave., Newville. Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant is Bob Whitmer t/d/b/a R&R Roofing, an adult in- dividusl with a principal place of business at 117 Wnlnutdale Rd., Shippensburg, Pennsylvania 17257. 3. Defendant operates a roofinll business trading and doing buoiness as R&R Roofing, at the address set forth in Paragraph 2. 4. In or about April 1995. Plaintiff and Defendant signed a written contract entit.led "Prol'ooal" (her"inaftcr referred to os the "Contract"). a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A. ~ .. .~ 5. In the Contract. Ilefendant agroed 1.0 ins\.all a new copper spouting system in II workmanlike lI1IlIlIIer /J!:cordinG to Htandard prac- tices on the curved front pord. of Plni nti ff' s residence at the address set forth in Paragraph I. 6. In !:onsiderlltion of Defendant's contractual agreement 1.0 install said spouting syntem described in Paragraph 5, Plaintiff agreed in the Controc\. to pay Ilefendant One Thounand Two Hundred and Thirty Dollars ($l,230,OO), half to be paid before installation and half to be paid on completion of the ins\.allation of the spoutinG system. Pursuant to the Contract, Plaintiff paid Ilefendant six Hun- dred Pifteen Dollars ($6l5,OO) bofor" instllllation. 7. Prior to ontl.!ring into the Contract, Defendant's emploYHc, Melvin Redhead, represented to Plaintiff that Defendant was experi- enced in the installation of !:opper spoutinG systems and could in- stall such a system in a workmanlike mann"r according to standard practices. 8. Prior to entering into the Contra!:t, Defendnnt's employee. Melvin Redhead, represented to Plaintiff that he was an archite!:t licensed to practi ce nrchi t.l!cture j n the COImnonweul th of P~nn6yl- vania. 9. Plaintiff relied upon \.he reprnsentations of Defendant and Defendant's employ,,!! S!!t forth in Paragrllphs 7 and 8 in agreeing to enter into the Contract. "L I " - I COUNT 1 BRRACH OP CONTRACT lO. Paragraphs 1 - 9 ore illcorporatP.l1 herein by reference as if set out in full. 11. During all phases of construction and in~tollotion of tho spouting system under the Contract, Defendant foiled to construct and install the spouting system in 0 workmanlike manner according to standard practices, 12. The spouting system constructed and in"tolled by Defendant contains numerous material defects, includi ng but not limi ted to the following: o. Tho spouting systl'm is constructed by De[l'ndant with improper materials: b. 'rhe sections of the spouting system lire joined improperly, thereby causing leaks and wide gaps between s",ctions; c. The spouting system is improperly graded to direct water into the downspout, thereby causing water to overflow the spouting system at various I'oints and resulting in water damage to the porch fascia, railing, balusters, floor, foundation, and foun- dation plantinga: d. The "pouting sy"tem doe" not conform to tho roofline, thereby preventing the spoutinG system from collecting all the water from the roof; 3 '. e. Tho npoulin/l nyutu", wan improperly inn\.alled. thereby cauRing the spouting systl!m to bend and fold, thoreby making the syntem unsightly and inefficient: Eo The npoutinK nystem wns improperly installed in 0 manner which is unoightly and failu to mee\. the utllndllrdn of '1ua1.ity and workmanlike conRtruction and which han reRulted in tho spouting system's having an undesirable appearance. l3. As a result of the aforesaid errors, omissions, and deficiencies, Defendant has breached tI", Contract. in a moterial way. 11,. Plaintiff has fulfilled all of her obligstions under the Contract. l5. Plaintiff has requested that Defl!ndant remedy the deficiencies in the spouting syntem and Defendant has fsiled to remedy the deficiencies. l6. As a result of Defendant's breach of the Contrllc\., Plaintiff will have to expend an amount of Five lIundred Thirty Dol- lars ($530.00) in order to remove the deficient spouting system con- structed and installed by Defendant and roplace the spouting syntem in a workmanlike manner accordinll to standard procticen, plus Bight Hundred Forty Dollars ($81,0.00) to remedy damage to the porch fascia, railing, balusters. floor, foundation. and foundation plantingR. WlmRBPORE, Plaintiff demands judll1llent against De(endant in the amount of One ThouRnnd Three lIundred Seventy Dollars ($1,370.00). plus intermit and court conts, mu.1 t.hat an Order hl! enll~rl!d di rOI:t ins that the abovll-captioned mat.ter bl' ref"rr",! 1.0 arbi trllli'lI\ und"r the local rules o( Court. .If '. COUNT 2 BlU!ACH OF WARRANI'Y 17. Paragraphs 1 - l6 are incorporated horllin by roforollco as if set out in full. 18. An implied provision of the Contract was a warranty by Defendant that the spouting system to be installed would be merchant- able and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it waR intended. 19. In addition, Defendant expressly warranted the spouting system for one (1) year. 20, The spouting system io not merchantable and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it is intended, 21. Defendant has failed to repair the spouting system and to make it merchsntable and reasonably fit for the purpose for which it was intended. 22, Defendant has breached his warranties t.o Plaintiff. 23, As a reRult of Defendant's breach of warranties, Plaintiff will have to expend an amount of Pi ve lIundred Thirty Dollars ($530,00) in order to remove the deficient spouting system con- structed and installed by Defendant and replocl! the npouting syntem in a workmanlike manner according to standard practicl!s, plus Bight lIundred Porty Dollars ($840.00) to remedy dOIM8" to t.he porch fascia, roiling, halusters, floor, foundation, and foundation pl:lIItings. 't '- ,: 1, .;] ;j H " . . WIIIlRB('ORIl, Plaintiff demands judllment againot Ilefendant in the amount of One Thousand Three lIundred Seventy Dollars ($1,370.00) plus interest and court costs, and that an Order be entered directing that the above-captioned matter be referred to arbitration under the local rules of Court. COUNT 3 nwm 24. Paragraphs I - 23 are incorporated heroin by reference as if set out in full. 25. Prior to entering into the Contract. Defendant's employee Melvin Redhead knowingly and falsely represented to Plaintiff that Defendant was experienced and expert in constructing and installing copper spouting systems in a worklMnlike manner according to utllndard practices on curved porches like the one on the Plaintiff's residence, when in truth and in fact Defendant was not so experienced or expert. 26. Prior to entering into the Contract, Dofendant'" employee Melvin Redhead knowingly and falso(y represented to Plaintiff that he was an architect licensod to practice architecture in the Com- monwea1th of Pennsylvania, whlln in truth and in fact he wall not so licensed. Melvin RedhQlld made Guch repro"ontation within the scope of his employment by Defendant, 27. Plaintiff relied upon and wall jnlltified in relyinll upon the false representat ions mnde by Defendant .,nd Defendant' s employee in deciding to (lnlc!r into the Contrllct. ro " 28. The falue alld fraudulent repreuelltatiollu of Defendant and Defendallt's employoe to Plaintiff hove resulted ill damage to Plaintiff and Plaintiff will have to expelld an amount of Pive lIundred Thirty Dollars ($530.00) in order to remove the deficient spouting syotem constructed and illotalled by Defendant and replace the IIPOUt- ing system in a workmanlike m:lOner accordinll to standard practices. plus Eight lIundred Porty Dollars ($8110.00) to remedy damalle 1.0 the porch fascia, railing. baluRtero, floor. foundation. and foundation plantings caused by the deficient spoutillg oyntem inutal led by Defendant. 29. In moki ng the false and fraudulent representations, Dl'fendant and Defendant' s employ"e acted with IIctual malice toward Plaintiff and acted with willful and wont.on disrecord of Plaintiff's rights. WIIEREPORE. Plaintiff demands judcment against Defendant in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Dol1..rs ($l,370.00). punitive damages in the amount of Pifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00). plus interest and court <:OlltS. Date: l8 December 1995 Respectfu I I y submi t.l:ed, .... fJJJ 0 M-JtJ:Ir:/ Solly A'twater. Plaintiff 120 W. Bill Spl"ing Ave. Newv i 110, I'A 172/01 717 77f,-/,6r,( 7 . 'ropo!iul {)eIujli---8 . R & R ROOFING 117 Walnuldale Road Shfppensburg, Pennsylvania 17257 (717) 243-4440 (717) 532.2053 (717) 263-8024 (717) 233.5675 Fax (717) 532.6466 I'ttOPOIAL IUIWlnlO TO .. JOI LDCAflON AACHITICT [.1elvin Redhead w. hereby submit IptCiflCltlonl Ind ..liml'" lor: DAn 0' PUNI JOI ItHONI 1. "l!move._ \!J~hj:inJLsut_t_ers_!Il).Q...A()JorI1.~p_Q\t~B-1IJ~.!LU_ng.~~~.J~_O.!lL.2..orcil.!..____..._ _..__. 2. I n!!.~_aJ..LI1_e__w _~() tlp'e..1: .... gl,l~..t._er:_L!I.l1_c:L..4.().!l.l1l!P..!l_!_!..~l!.ll..r:.!l U!ld._ .t.!!e_l;. ()nt.~~h!. . ..__.__ .3.__<:al!..I!..1L!1..P_an..lLJJa_1,1,1.._awl!Y.. f!.ll debris caused ~y__~or~_,-__. 4. _..l'..ro.YJ.de_II....one_yea Lll.a_r.l.:.al1..t.Y......9J!...-'!..l.L~Q r..:t!!\a.n 1I.h1I1...._..___.. __.._____..__..__.._ .--~--_.. -.--.. ~-_. ..--....... ....--..---....-.-....-.--.-------.---..-.-.---.-.. ..___5:_N~ ~.tc I ~ " 1.1,]. --&-~.y.zL ----..---' O""%..--QJL.."(5t:)./Y-a.~ cI <: '--~(.C--~~..-LO:~-_?c..Nc.i:.....e4. 1".1, ,L..)..... ...-----~O~fo-..a...:I:.--~//\~_..d...-I-oJ.-.....-- _......_. ... .__..._....._....__.. ---- _J::O.._~_aJl_.__C-nAAA".Ik..4_ __________..__ __ "______. _0._. ___'_"'_ .. __...,--'.~ 11.- .-....-_il:2L 1..I.J1.....(;.4......uJu A... 4.4-....:c....bt......~L...i:'k....f'boJtJ-r:. '~_4.._..J. J..o ..I. I!. .. ----fu--d.:h:1..+,JIl.-~--.xl.l.Al-)-A...o....~-~'-'lA....\lu.."J. A . .. ~-_..._---_._-------_..._--_._-"_..._- ,._.._...._-.~-----_.._------,_._.._- .-. Ck-eX/Uc4:L ~ lL~dr:.-... B, 'tapas, hereby to lurnish material and Isbor - complete in accordance with above specifications. lor the sum of: I One Thousand Two hundred and thirty doUars ($1,230.00 ) :, Plyment 10 be madt II follOWI: . l! ~ upon acceptance of the contract; Balance upon completion of the job. : . All rntterl8l It "'ltlnlMet to be '1 specified. AU .... to 1)1 com~td In . woRm.nll'. mtlftMt KCOnIIn. to Itlndatd ptKtk... Arty tttetltlotl Dr dnietiolI from above IPKlf\cII. Uonl IlMlfvln. mil COIlS wtU" laecutld on" upon ...ltttn onSe.... 1M '"" Mcome .n tdni Chara. ~ Ind _bow Ute nUmlte. AN "rHfM"l. COfl"npt'lt Upoft 1m,", ICddftnt, Of dN)'S ~ our cotItroI. 0wMt to cany fin. totNdo and ather ,*nN'Y '"lUt.ne.. Ou, wortlerI I.. fulIJ covetI>d bY' Wortm,n', ComptftUlkMt l"~,.nc', Authorl,ed Slan.ture Not.: This propoul may tw wtthdrlWn by UI If not ICC.pted within dlYs. Acceptance of 'roposal- Tho .bov. prlClS. '1>I<,llcollon. Ind condition' Ir. satisfactory Ind Ir. tMr.by accepted. You.re authorized to do the work " specUiId. Plym.nt will be mId, II outlined lboY.. Oil. of Acc.pllnce: .s:- Atr-l/ /9'1 <f s,"n"uro-:..J. (j' 4f. '" ..J. /" SilMtutl ,: , ,I ,I )J / ~ :3<! n;;;J ~~~ .,. co .", :; ~~ ~ ~ 0'\ ,;r N ~ i~ lun yJ_ ...,. ft'i <>: ~t\ @S: CUI ,:; ~ , f;'I.'(~ ~,:...' . L.1 - \ \ \ '~ ",.., CO~MONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA -t$UNTV OF: CUMBERLAND ..... 000l No, no ~ ~ (. 1'4 e..;,.:.c .,. "- COMMON PLEAS NOTIFICATION REQUEST FORM PLAINTIFF NAME ond AOOlIE" !ATWATER, SALLY .., 120 BIG SPRING AVENUE NEWVILLE, PA 17241 L ~ VS. DEFENDANT; ......... AOOflEllII IR & R ROOFING .., 117 WALNUTDALE ROAD OWNER, BOB WHITMER ~HIPPENSBURG, PA 17257 ~ Docket No.: CV-0000149-95 Date Filed: 9/15/95 09-3-02 DJNMw:Hort HELEN B. SHULENBERGER ~. P.O. BOX 155 27 W. BIG SPRING AVENUE NEWVILLE, PA r_, (717) 776-3187 17241 HELEN B, SHULENBERGER P.O. BOX 155 27 W. BIG SPRING AVENUE NEWVILLE, PA 17241 Disposition Date: 11 / 02/95 PI.... be edvl..d thai an .ppeal h.. bo.n m.d In Ih. .bov. c.pllon.d c.... KIndly u..thl. lorm 10 Indlcol.lh. ro.utto In thll cue, and return to thelllulng authority tlislod above), RESULT OF APPEAL Common Pleas Judge SUMMARY APPEAL APPEAL STRICKEN. .ppeol h.. bo.n dllOllow.d. APPEAL DISCONTINUED. .ppe.1 h.. bo.n dl.onUnu.d by .ppell.nl. DISTRICT JUsnCE DECISION UPHELD. court h.. ro.ched 10m. docl.lon .. origin.' dl.lrict Jus1Jc, deel.lon. _ dlllrlct lus1Joe onlc. 1.10 coll.ct romolnlng fln.I/co.I.. APPEAL SUCCESSFUL. court h.. ro.ch.d d.cl.lon f.vor.blo 10 dol.nd.nl. lull ro'und to be INueel by dl.trlct JU'Uc, offic.. partJ.lrolund 10 be INU.d by dl.lrict ju.Uc. offic.. REVISED DISTRIBUTION OF FINES AND COSTS " dlolrict lus1Jc. offlc. 1"0 I..u, . parll.1 rofund. pl....lndlc.l. any new dl.trlbutlon In tho .mount(.) of fine. and COtta al a retutt 01 tho court', docillon. FINE COUNTY CRT COST STATE CRT COST STATE CST1 HEARING COST EMS CAT JCP evc evc CCD OTHER(p'.... .peclly) CIVIL APPEAL APPEAL STRICKEN. .ppe.1 h.. b..n dl..llowed. APPEAL DISCONTINUED. .ppe.' h.. b..n dl.conllnu.d by .pp.lI.nl. DISTRlCT JUsnCE DECISION UPHELD. court h.. ...chod the 10m. deel.lon .. Iho dl.,rlct lu.llc. Judgm.nL DISTRICT JUSTICE DECISION DISMISSED. court h.. ro.ch.d . deel.lon Ih.1 doe. not concur with the dl.trlct ju,Uc'ludgm.nL WRIT OF CERTIORARI _ WRIT STRICKEN. eppeol h.. bo.n dl..llow.d. WRIT DISCONTINUED. writ h.. bo.n dl.conllnu.d by .ppell.nl. _ DISTRICT JUSTICE DECISION SET ASIDE. tho c..o will bo r.ho.rd du.lo '''.g'''."Iy. '.ck 01 Jurl.dlctlon. or Impropor v.nu.. _ WRIT DISMISSED. district lu,tlco doclslon was nolfound 10 be flawed, lacking lunadlction , or having Impropor venue. STATEMENT OF OBJECTION (PIa... glv" g.nor'llummary 01 tho r"ull.) OBJECTION DISCONTINUED. objocllon h.. bo.n di.contlnuod by Ih. .ppoll.nt OBJECTION DENIED. objeellon h.. boon donlod by tho Court 01 Common Plo... OBJECTION UPHELD. .ppell.nr. objection h.. bo.n uphold by Iho Court 01 Common Pl.... ImAM PRTN'l'F.n: l2/05/95 9:54:35 COMMON PLUI N. q 5 - ~ ~ ;;I." ~:::I.mv.- NOTICE OF APPEAL :.i ~ ~ .- ~ ... :-.. Notb II giwn that the appellant haI filod In the abow Court 01 CorMlon PIeo. on appeollrom the judgment ...~ by ~ DiI~*tic. on the claNondlntheCGMh..~loIl8dbeIcM .:'" .' l )::;1 ...... ;!e I.-~ 57 C__T" Of PINNITLVANIA COUIIT Of C__ PUAI NDICW D1IT1ICT CV II! LT 19 ThiI block wiI be s9I8d ONLY when thll notalion II requinKl under Po. R.C.PJP. No. loo8B. ThiI Notb 01 AppeoI. when rwcelwd bY the Diltrict Ju.tic., will opeRIIe 01 0 SUPE..xoEAS to the Judlpnent for poIMIIIon in IhII COle. Sil1JaILre 01 ~ ex Deputy NOTICE OF APPEAL fROM DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT \'S ~ If appellant was C NT (see Pa. R.c.P.J.P. No. 1001 (6) In action befcxe DIstrict Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT wl/hln twenty (20) days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (ThIs section of fotm to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001 (7) In action befote DIstJIct JustIce. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of noIice of appeal to be served upon appellee). P.":::'~~:i! ~ :vA-e L (CorMlon PIeos No. 'I!';' _ l' ;^;..L -:: 1II'::~ twenty 120) cloy. ofter RULE, To \ _'r. 11.'>'....__ .h...\ \ 1. \c-. ~r . opp.l.e(.~ "~oI~" ,- ,oppellee(l), to file 0 _........." In thIo oppeoI his etfcmoy or __ } (I) You are notified thot 0 rUe II heleby entered upon you to file 0 c.....,laint in thIo appeal within "",,"ty 120) doyo after the date 01 MIfVice 01 thIo rUe upon you by peroonoI oervic. 01 by certified 01 regbtered moot (2) If you do not file 0 _,.,.Lint within thb flme, 0 JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. (3) The claN of MIfVice of IhII rUe If ....lee woo by mool II the date 01 moiling. Dote: l;Jjl ,19...95 I t AOPC 3t2-lM COURT FILE J.Ju:J,} ~ '~~'9~orDtpJ1y i '. t-'_ Z F23 '1L2 37b ....... R~celPt for - x:. ~o I~~~~~O ~~~~OgO Providod as Do not ute for Inlern,uona' Mail es.. Re,,"'" '~'a'll Atwater Str~A.ndN" l.w IIi S lril P~e~(rr~("^ l ?2~ '1L2 3bll ...._ Rec pI for ~ Cert led Mall I--.ii No 'n,uranu Coverage Provided .Gar""", 00 nol u.e for InlllnlUonl1 Mill ,s.. nav.,.,. 'I.. .l; ,:-, :.' , fC~:_ \ ,~1 i'/\'-:~' - . ,f' ;, . .. . RVICE OF NOTICE OF APtlEAL AND RULE TO FILl! COMPLAINT T BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) DA YS AFTER tiling fh. "of Ie. o( 'PPlel. CII.C. .pp/lc.bl. ball.) COUNTY OF j:) ; I' AFFIDAVIT: I hs.eby swear or olflrm IhslI se.ved ~Opy o( Ihs NOI~'6A'{/'ot1..2ll!!.'mo1f~s~ No. q'j . bi;J (f ' upon Iho..Pt't.lel JUlllcs dSllgnolod Uls.sln on (dole 01 .sT.'ee) I ,19 0 by ~"Or.OI "IVieS aHJy les.lIllod) (llI4~m'II, send.r'l .ees s Isch herelo, ~Jl\!..llpon the sppellos, ("ome) III ffJ 'fIffi ,on , 10t.'!.:2...0 by peraonslservlcs G:HiY (corllllsdl (~moll, londs,'1 recelplolloehod herolo. snd 'u,ther thsllssrvsd Ihe Rulelo Fils S co~olnlocCOmpSnYln~hS obovs Nolics 01 Appo.1 upon Ihe spp.II..(I) 10 whom Ihe Rule wssoddrslled on ))ec... . 19~ 0 by psrlonollorvlco !ZHl((csrIIlISdllroglllerodl msll, sender's .scelpt sllschsd hsrslo. SWORN (AFFIRMED) AND SUB '1J, :n 0" 0' S,gn,tullJ ot oftlc,,1 i....IOt. .hom .II,d"I/'." mid, RIBED BEFORE M~ 19Q5. -~ ' -", ~._' ~ . ~ janllort ul.II,.nI T/lI.o/ortit;I': r NOTARIAL SEAL IlJAWtl MAAIIi SHOOP, NeI.ry Publlo '\GhiPPOn$bU'!J, Cumborland County, PA My ('nn;, 'inion e.plr.. Feb. 5, lOllS --. , " My comml"ion eJlpll.' on 19_. s "~:[f:" '!iox J 55 fN'e\~l 1"1 ~" 11"1~^ """'~ 'Il- ""'... 17241 $ 17241 . ,. C.."'oedh. I.........".. 5Pk~1 0.1_. f.. ..,...',.'{.IoII.....,'.. A..tIlCltd o.w-,_, ,.. f4."'.lltOllJet_".. ~_ A.",," RK~l ~~1ftQ 10 Whom . 0.,. ~" t: A.tuI"fte(",I~t&lMlono. ; o.l...nd ......... .~.n 1.10 ~ fl.""nJll.....'I!.h;,,,"'G ... lol~.>QfI...I"I.lI..,.....,t ~c "I'.,... ""::~IIO ~~...., lie" ~. ..... I_ 10'.1.......11. "'" . . 'J , 1010\1 Pottage o .rH' o I!J e o "- on n $ "2 '.' ) " .""h'NI'. (If 0.'" I'"~,,.,,~ ,,' !I..h. ,.. \'1 \'1 .. " OJ, " uaf;. COMMONWIALTH 0' PINNSYLVANIA COUIT 0' COMMON PLlAS NOTICE OF APPEAL fROM JUOICIAL DISTIICT DISTRICT JUSTICE JUDGMENT COMMON PLlAS Ne. q 5 - ~ 'dtl" d.~::r...w.- NOTICE OF APPEAL Notic. i. 9i_ that the appellant ha. filed in the above Court of Cammon Plea. an appeal fram the judgnwmt t.ndered by the Di.trict Justic. an the date and in the case mentioned belovo< " ~d . Nt -Od p ;r.S? y """ CV 19% - .\--( LT 19 Thi. block win be signed ONLY when this nofation i. required under Po. R.cP JP. No. 1008B. Thi. Notic. of Appeal. when received by the Di.trict Ju.tic.. will operat. a. a SUPERSEDEAS fa the judgment far pa.....ian in this ca... ~ Signature at Prothanolary or Deputy If appel/ant was CL NT (see Pa. RCP.JP. No. 1001 (6 1 in action befexe District Justice, he MUST FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (201 days after filing his NOTICE of APPEAL. PRAECIPE TO ENTER RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE (This section 01 form to be used ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. RC.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) in action before District Justice. IF NOT USED, detach from copy of notice 01 appeal to be selVed upon appel/ee). PRAECIPE. To Prothonotary Enter rule upan c, '0 -., 0I_5J within twenty (20) day. aft~ :~ of judgment of non pro. &fTlaO.ro 01 ~li' "'" .r....... Of --' , appellee(.), to f~. a complaint in this appeal (Cammon Plea. No. RULE. To Sr. JIG' ~ u...JCo. +.._r- " _01 51 , appellee(.). ~'- . (1) You.OR! notified tho! a-rule i. hereby entered upan you to fil. a complaint in this appeal within twenty (20) day. after the date of service of ~ ,rUle upon You by personal .ervic. or by certified or regi.tered maiL .. " ~ (2) ~ iaa do tpl fiIe,a;camplaint within this time, a JUDGMENT OF NON PROS WILL 8E ENTERED AGAINST YOU. ..._ l.:,> .._.. (3) The date of service of this rule if .ervice was by mail i. the date of mailing. Date: 1.::;>/ J ,19~ '~d' G .~tF~~Of"""/Y AOPC31:ll-84 ~ 1 ~ '~ i: 0 ~i. IIJ ~ :. .. ,~ - :IE: Q. ,~ ~I - I I .~ ~ Q l.) ~ ~. If) C1' '-et' uo .."dlf' UO,II,WWOO ,(w 1";)IIlO,O'/lIJ .,I,IU ,.. 114".'", IUOI4'" .IO,.q ,":J'1I0,O ."".utI,s IU"III" JO 8Jn,IIULJ,S -01 ' :10 AVO SIHl 3Vj 3UOHO 0301U:Jsons ONV (03Vjlll:l:lVI NllOMS 0'0101' POlIOUIIU ,dIOOO' I./OPUOI 'IIUW (pO/Ols,OO/) (pO'lIl/oo) Aq 0 OOI"OS IUUOI,od Aq 0 -01 . -------,--- UO pO",O/ppU SUM Ol"ll 0'1' WOulolOI (I)OOllodds 0'11 uodn IS odd V ,0 OOIlON oAoquouI6uIAuuduJOJJU'"lUldUlCl:J U "IIJ 01 "Inu 0111 PO.,olllslIl louun, pUS 0 '010/011 POuOSIISldlOOOI I./OPUOI 'IIOW (po'OI"Bo/llpol"IIOO' All 0 '>O'A'OI''''''19,od Aq 0-61 ' uo' (OWt1fJ) 'uol!(Hldu 41tH uodn puu 'Ulo/04 POLl~UUU IdIO~8J ',/OPUO' '1I0W (pO/OISIBo/) (pOll!lJOO) Aq 0 OOIA'O' Iuuouod All D '-01 . (O"MOI/O s,opl uo u'o/Oul pOleuBI'Op OOIl,nr 10"1"0 0111 uod" . -, ON .UOI</ IlOlIUU'OO 'Iooddv 10 OOIlON 0111'0 Adoo 0 0 POAIO",UIII Ulllllu 10 IUOM' Aqo/ou I :~IAVOI.:t.:tV II' .- ~O A!NnO:l YINY^1ASNN3d ~O Hl1Y3MNOI'II'IO:l (SO.oq o/qo,,/ddu ~oou:J /uoddo,o 0"'01191/' nUl/'/1I1J IV SA vn (0' I N1J NIHJ /M 01111 19 Jsnw OO!MO',O /oold S!ull ~NIV1dWOO 311.:t O~ 31ml ONV 1V3ddV .:to 301~ON .:to 30lAI:l3S .:to .:tOOl:ld ;.: SALLY ATWATER, PlaintitY V. BOB WHITMER, t/d/b/a R & R ROOFING, Defendants : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS :CUMBERLANDCOUNTY,PENN~V~ : NO. 95-6826 CIVIL TERM . . : CMLACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO DISMISS w.'.'" PIJ~~E TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above case settled and dismissed, with prejudice to the claims presented by Defendant, based upon a mutually acceptable agreement having been reached by the parties. Respectfully submitted, BY: H. Anthon Adams, Esq. 128 E. King Stre t Shippensburg, PA 17257 (717) 532-3270 Attorney for Defendant ~ lO ~ M Z C 8 3~ ~",. 1ft:: T- '. ;:;: ~g' "'" CI~ LI") <'(f) \....... N _~z -~ en di~ l..Ll :.0 I.>- :;;;: ~ .... ::l 0'1 U ~ ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SALLY AlWATER, PlaIntiff No. 95-6828 Civil Tenn VI. Civil Actlon-Law BOB WHITMER, tIdlb/a R & R ROOFING, Defendants ORDER AND NOW, this _( 2-- fif day of , 1997, the Court having been advised that this matter has been settled, the vlous order of 12116/97 In which arbitrators were appointed Is vacated. The Chainnan of the arbitration panel. Fred H. Halt, Esquire, shall be paid the sum of $50.00. By the Court, cc: FIlId H. HIlI, EIq. H. ~AdIms, EIq. SIeP*ll1ey. EIq. llaIIy AlwIter Cu<<,,:.. ~ .:I.lr~l'fI' ...t.t? a.:- ,., .FllfD.",,",- 'ti~ PR(I';ft.~ 9'1 F',.'Il.f\!J~,., l;"/J/J ~6i 411/1:01, ~~~n- \ .'\ '. " 0?,-as-1937 a2la~ .RO~ GRI""IE ~ ~;SJCI~TES p.1l3 . ~ SALLY ATWATER. PlalptUl' v, BOB WHITJ4ERi ilW.. a.:. R ROOPJNQ, : . DecendaDti ..!i .1' I' I' , T'J 2492411 : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS . : CUNBlmLAND COUN'1'Y, PENNSYLVANIA . . : NO. 9ft.6680MLTERM I OEVlL AarION . LA.W I I ! I i ,. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~IPISTO,DIAMnuI w..~PRE.mDICR' : . , .' ;'::'!" '!',I"'" '.., .' . 'j' !' ~otfultr eahmitted, ' j .. ~ , I I ;'l'()THB nQ'l'HONO~: i . . . ~) . I . I ., ,': ;::. 'P1e-~ib ~.CUt MttleclaDd .v....,~i, witb..~4Ict&C) ~:~,!.a",:,_ . . I . ~ .! ~~ .",:nJ,~:baaedl1pon a ml1tuall1 acceptable aereemeDi ba1iDg ~ '., ! :~~"'t1Ie~. I ,...., 1..1 \ I I ,.....;:" .::.:'. I' '" i .:j'.: I ....;.i.,L:!; ~ l :~ ;::. '. ,; .j , . I:~ , . I I ." "",' I \. a 'j. .' I ... ," ....::. ,:;"...... ' ." . i,.' .. ,., I . . ~: ~ ,.!. , " ~.. """.1 r , " : ;' i I ,ji,:i{~;;I"i!,J,iit;:) J ;" ! : ,!d';\' >"\.I""-'!' ,:..."j')':i';:;t>.':. ;r!~;?Cij!;i"'lj:Kll)r::;:j:r'i';" : .....,..,.. .. ""...\...., I' .. ci;i":/~!J'i')~~..:';'.'...i.!\;}:;jl':;'::: :;':::. ," 'ji';' . ':". ,', -.' .,:..'.... '. l' .:~, 'i,~ ..i"; ';"j"':: =: :..~: .... I;' .: " j .' ,,' r: /,j\:' ' "',:': ';;:" . ....: .....:'. ~.J.'j'~~..;..;. .~~~ ......'. ...'i.' I.:' " !.~..: " '.-\ '1"..../\..:"1. '. ,'. .f ,;. . ",J.t:., I. '. '. .l.>.i' :';"";f'.,l":",;:-;,~,,,..,.. ! ~.I \. '.\1:.:, ~'.:::.',_'.,~ r. . :...'1'....'\.::.'.::,.......,::...,......"...,:..,.. .. "'_"'4.' ,',.. .:, .." ., t .,.. . . . ..'~, t. " . ~ . :.:. '.'. .... . ':...... .~'~, >. ',' ....'.,. ,.~' '. :. II' ' .". \ . .. ~ ,1 ',;' '.'1. ... -, :".' '.' -- . . J I' .'; I ... .; ~. - '-:.: I '\"' {. .""::"';.' ",. . . .' .' .:.. '~"f' :, ....'....'.~~, ;:: ;. . . .:.. .: 1 !. ~ ,; . . .tJ" '. .,' . " ,'. ",. . h. I. '" .: ':, ;:v:I::.::~~;}i;/JiJ.{~~,(iL~ .}i ~~ :.-~;!~:r.::~:~fXl.,..-/,~;..,~'lL.. ~,': ,:...l-"..,._i.~. '.' N'i LV v,l/E- /11 I '. , .j. I I ~. T':l . ,.':. 1. . i~ ~ : '.: ::","::."i.':::..]';.:.. !."' ..;, - :>!,~ :.~::::nl(; . ,I :'.' \ ,:' _ :.;: . . ,:0 -.; _ ~ ~ . :,'. I,: .-:' ',' 1 :; . ;." .': . ',",j j'I'l": '.', .,'.. "oj ", ,,::i.\'-,!-":.:,;:.: '.':.j':;, '.' ,..r ; . '..' .";' ': l~ ".:'.:.' (~. :.'.:'..',.~.-' ;.: '::~,':'. ' '. ~. , . .. I ' . '.' ' .' ,..,. ~:. : '::'~:~{;'.- J. ...,,"":":'~:',:J, 1"'\ .;, ,.. ., :)~. ';';:'\i',j::~'~~j:?;:r -'>j;i;:/; ;.' .. ',' ...., . . .l. '. , :. ; . iBY: ,'H; ADtho 'A~ Eaq. . ......... ..., 1ft."' ' ,. '~; , :'. ,. ~~:)>>A ,i!72St:.. :(717)m,aa'ltW '.', .. ,'. '~toaD,'ibr~' . . ,: : - . ,,' : . . ~,. .' :... ~ .-;. '.' .~ . .' .' 'Ol,j, . , , . '. ; . i I ~ . -.' ..' ',. '; ~; . :";: . ....(O.<;':.p . . ~ .. \':., , .. ':~h';:'\';;,:,i; , '. '.' ~,' , ;' j .::, p{ i..' I,:~::, ;.:: ,~. : !; . '.' , 0,' .O'.'j ':, 't; ~'. ~..o, 'iJ ;.~o .. DT"t.. p.;)?, .." c:- cr. ~ <' ~ ~ .~