The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About95-06963 ",'\,1 'I, 1 'I " ,)1 I, I " ,I,: ,I 'I 0" ,I I, '.1, ,I, , ' " " , " , I " ',I I 'I , I, " , ..'i I , I " I' 1 I " I , , :,1 I I " , , " ,,' , , , """'1 .,1.' , " " " " I I' ~l;d' I?)~\, .'/';\\,1'", .,I"..' " ,".'..~~,-, ' "I' ,'I'~"" ': .: . ,., "., , ,a; ,':' , , 1 " " , , , "I ", , ; I' ,II " " I! I I',i", , , I ", , , " ,I' i , " '-'I , ,I " " ,i, " , I' , " " 'I , , , I !i '!, , 1 d , , I 1\, I, I ,1' ;1 ' '1,,':1 " I ,I I ", " 'I " , ' , 'd " " I, j ':i , ii ",1' " i " , " i.) I, , " " , , I , I, , , 'I i' , " ,I 'I " I " , , , , " , , I, " il';! " ,'I" 1'1: , ~: , i' , I' , " 'I,. I ,] 1", II' " I', 'I r ~ L, , " q, 1 Ii "i. '" I,' "II' ,I " " , ,I '( IiI' I , I ,I ,I , , \ " 'I :. "1 " .., " " ",' ii' ',' I I, .i , ~ " oj"~ '!, j'i' ", ., 'i' ',1\ ,.\' , :, I., " 1,1 " 'I "II ,\, I,.':, I 1 n i' " " \ d' I' I, 11'1, I" I,' i' ", " , , i' , ".:: , , , ir: l';) >.. '"; " t_~: t; '5 ,- lU':' r .;... ~2(: .,};,~ ~iJ , ~~1 l.' ';" . "fJ 1_, 1:- '-;.1" ,. ''5 ti; , " '!lJ , :':') 'ff'~ 1J... 1"'.'- ..( " l'" ,,:1 ._5 " , 0 (;" U , , I I I I ,I I I I ~ I , " ,'I I' " N ..:I t A ~i :c QI Q,. r- ~ - ti ~ ~ ,I . J ~ LAW omcES or BARRINGTON, KAUrrMAN .. $HILLING ATI'ORNI:YI Boward D. Kalll1'lDa. Sl1PREME COURT LD. NO.1 3.963 100 PINE STREET, SUm: 300 IIA1UUSBURG. PA 17101 ('71'7) 72"0'700 A TI'ORNI:Y roll D.r..du. KENNETH DUPERT and CArnY DUPERT. Plaintifti IN mE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA VI, JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, : INe,. DOCKET NO, 95-6963 Defendant ~E~TlFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this qfY day of October, 1996.1, Howard 0, Kauftinan. Eaquire, attorney tor Defendant John F, Walter Excavatin& Inc" affirm that llerved 1M Notice of Appeal From Award of Boud of Arbitrator. by depoliting IIIIIlC in the United SlItes Mail, poltlp prepIid. In HarriIbura. Pennaylvania, addreaaed to: Ron Turo. Eaquire LAW OFFICES OF RON TUftO 32 South Bedford Street carUale, PA 17013 . / . .;;::;::-- /) 1'.-- '(,.'- " i.I Howar)l15, 1Cauffinan, Esquire " " , ' " .e ~ ~ - '" <<> '-..Sl ~ I" ,('0 ~ " (I', I" {~: .,' '-Sl ~ ','" ~. " . ~ 16' ,"I ,.:; ", p~ \'1' .,) ~~~, .'i'n ~ ' I ;~,~ ...-!!' I.. : i';J '~ l1-~ ' 1 (. : 'i:k "-' ''\) 1- Co) ~ ' r- 't, , >n .;1 (~ ~ () (/ ) (.) ~ . , ~ ' ''t.., ' !,'i,'l ~."l.,'.. _ ' ; tIt,,; '..1' ~J>l'.,' ' 1"./ ' j \i I' lAW 0ft'ICU or .....INGTON. KAURMAN . SBILUNG AnoaNEYI ........ D. lea..... ."'1lDII COURT LD. NO.1 31963 .OI'IN& STRJ:IT, SVITI_ 1lA11l1'.lJRG. PA 17101 (717) 7....,.. AnoRNIY FOIla Del'tlIdu. " , , '," \";i' KIlNNBm DUPERT IIId CATHY DUPERT, pllintlfti IN nm COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA , 1 'I VI, , .\1 ' JOHNF, WALTER EXCAVATING, : INC" DOCKET NO, 95-6963 Defendant PRAECIPE FOR ~NTRY OF AfP~ARANC~ TOTHEPROmONOTARY: Kindly ..... the Ippolrl/lCe of HowIl'd 0, Kauftinan. Eaquiro on behalf of lohn F, Walter Excavltina. Jnc, in the above-captiolled Iiti8ltion. HARRINGTON, KAUFFMAN & SHILLING ~' . ~" ------,., '.-:r ...-"'- .::;,.' --- Howar . ftinan, Elquir. '. lAW ornca or ILUUUNGTON, KAUFI'MAN . SHILLING ATrOINEYI Bow.... D. Kaull'llaa. IR1PP". COURT LD. NO.1 31M3 I" PINJ: ITIlUT, sum: 300 IlAIUlIUURG, PA 11101 (711) 12N100 ATrORNlY FORI D.feadut KENNll1H DUPERT end CArnY DUPERT. PIaiA&ifti IN TIlE COUllT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA VI. JOHNF, WALTER EXCAVATING, : INC,. DOCKET NO, 95-6963 Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, thi.1J n J.. day of '1J.i!~hil1A//! , 1995. I. Howard D, Kauffinan, ElqUlit, euomey for Defendant John F, Walter Excavating. Inc" affirm that Il<<Ved tbe Praecipe for EMry of Appearance depoliting same in the United State. Mail, polll8e prepaid, In HarrItbura. PeMlylvania, addreued to: Ron Turo, Eaquire LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO 32 South Bedford Street Carliale. P A 17013 v~ H\>warWO, . / E;;~--- " " " 'I , ..a (''> ?:: ,,,. .. ",. , , M d;1i ~J ::r: u:.t1 Q.. q~j ~~ _.0 :>r--; -)' :~ e- N .... I!.: , U:::s ~ (,.l ~~~ ld Q 8 ~ Ifl I I c.;n , 'I , ..; C> ,.,.. r~ t' i., .' \4 \;l..:'. -- )...;}, ( 1'( .' :~t' l~' I I. I'-.'t. I.>,; ~ ::~.~ " C' , " '..n 1..'1 " . \.,1' " ~'.' \ !\I:l , 1~ l' ~ .~1. .j !_J " , " " " , " I " j'\ LAW omcls or BARRINGTON, KAUFFMAN Ie SHILLING A1TORNEYI Howlrd B. KaU"""I. SurUME COURT LB. NO.: 31963 100 PINE STREET, sum 300 BARRISBURG, PA 17101 (717) 720-0700 ATrORNEY FOR: Bere.dl.t KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT. Plalntlfti IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA VI. JOHNF. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ;h AND NOW, thil ~ day of May, 1996, I, Howard D. Kauffinan, Esquire, attorney for Defendant John F. Walter EXClvating, Inc., affirm that I served the Revised Notice ofDepositlon by depolitina lime in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addreued to: Ron Turo, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, P A 17013 H~W~' " I, ' ._,t",.. , .- .;," ,,' " " " ,,' " " , , '- ...n r.' o. r:' .;:; .. " ~1I::' ,.; . ;:r~ ,., - Ir- ..... ~, ::;; J.... " )1",1 ';8 (' '. Gl; I.~'l ,"1 I" ~l r,. ."~ I.' ~.". , ,~ c,:, 1(,) I..c . ..~ , Iu.., l,'.. II'" :.:' u c\ (-) " , ;, " '" " " " " /;. ...:c ~ KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DlJPERT, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PIalnutr. ; CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 911.6063 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW JOHN r. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., Defendant ~TlPULA'l10N OF COUNSEL AND NOW com". KelUleth and Cathy Dupert, Plalntlffl, by and thrOUllh their attorneY, Ron Turo, Eequlre and John F. Walter Excavating, IrlC., Defendant, by and throUih their attomey, Howard D. KAul1'man. Esquire and etlpulat". II followa: 1. The PlalntllTe Ned an Amended Complaint In the aOOve captioned IllAtter on January 17, 1996, requeeting an amount of $10,000.00 to lepelr the concrete block maeonry foundation wall of Plalntur. home II well II the coat IlIld repelr to Plalnture well ellCh In the amount of $10,000.00. 2. The PlalntllTe have recently obtained an updated estimate Incllcatlng coati of repeln of the horne will be approWnately $25,000.00. 3, Without admitting liability the reepectlve cowuoel lIIP'eed to IUbmlt thle IllAtter to arbltntlon up to the maximum Umlt of $211,000.00 without the need to amend the pleadInP Ned In the above captioned matter. , ' ! t . ~ 'w'" .. The JWt\n forcouneelllP'" and etlpu1ate that the mulmum ~ cIaInapa punuant to arbltnllon would be '211,000.00. ~'):?(/9(/ I54ie Reepectl\dly lubmllted, LAW OFFICES OF RON TUM twr?/ Ron Turo, Eequlre 82 South Bedford Street Carlle1e. PA 17018 (717) 248-9688 Attomey for PlalntllTl )- ~/-r'> Dete RelpectCul\y lubmltted, LAW OFFICES OF HARRINGTON, KAUFFMAN . SHILLING H~-~ 82 South Bedford Street Carllele, PA 17018 (717) 248.9688 Attomey for Defendant r I ReCE.IVED APR ] f, l!l~8 LAW Offa ~_.: .rl ,- i c.; \' ., ~.l~ 1I.1~' (-J , . (.)\ "j. p" I..,.. ", ,;:1 ',) .1 " r: , l'.' .. .~ .\J b~ ~.,:- I.~ I' .. ! '- ,,"j <; ~..: " 0 .... .. . , , , LAW OFFICES 0' IlAlUUNGTON, KAUFFMAN a SHILLING ATrORNEYI Howlrd B. Kaulrmln SUPREME COtJRT LB. NO.1 31963 100 PINE STREET, SUITE 300 HARRISBURG, PA 17101 (717) 720-0700 ATTORNEY FOR: Dere.dlnt KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OP CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. JOHNF. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., DOCKET NO. 9S.6963 Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERlVICE fr- AND NOW, this 2/ day of June, 1996, I, Howard 0, Kauffinan, Esquire, attorney for Defendant John F. Walter Excavating, Inc., affirm that I served the Interrogatories Set II by depositing aame in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PeMlylvania, addressed to: Ron Turo, Esq. Law Offices of Ron Turo 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, P A 17013 ., 'I , , ~ CXJ b ~ M t:~ ;,;; .J.-! l~: :e; :~~ t; 0.. ';~ , " 1.11 .... S~ u '" rev, 1 rF "j~ [" .- II} .. -, 3 \JotO l(,j .. 0 (1' " " ,: . " , " , '" , ' , SUBERSIDLE PUMP INSTALLATION - PROPOSAL .' ............................................~................a..............~ From: FUNKS DRILLINO. INC. R 0 2 Box 131 Newville. PA 17241 customer Bite KEN DUPERT 463 OAK FLAT RD. NEWVILLE, PA 17241 SA~IE Number: 001065 Date: 10/31/95 ................................~............................................ Description PUMP. AERMOTOR T12/50. 1/2HP 5 YR. PUMP WARRANTY TANI<. WX202 COMPLETE TANK TEE W/ CONTROLS COIL PIPE, 160 PSI. PER FT. ELECTRICAL WIRE. 12/2W/GRND PITLESS ADAPTER MISCELLANOUS FITTINGS (ADAPTERS. SPLICE KITS. ETC.) aACKHOE, /HR. (IF NEEDED) LABOR AND INSTALLATION Quantity l. 00 1.00 1.00 200.00 200.00 1. 00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Sub Total: Saler; Tax: Totill: Price 486.00 146.00 97.50 0.48 0.43 52.00 50.00 45.00 120.00 1223.50 0.00 1223.50 Extended 486.00 0.00 146.00 97.50 96.00 86.00 52.00 :0.00 0.00 90.00 120.00 THE ABOVE ESTIMATE IS AASED ON WHAT WE EXPECT TO ENCOUNTER BASED ON PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE. ALTHOUGH THE ACTUAL DEPTH AND AMOUNTS OF MATERI~LS USED MAY VERY. PRICES ARE BASED ON CURRENT CONDITIONS AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Submitted by: ~4 ,q-~,... ..8...............~..*.*.a..===*==Q~=a~=~==a==m==a..*.....=.....aa........... Date: ~...A>,.. THE ABOVE PRICES. SPECIFIC~TIONS ~ND CONDITIONS ARE SATISF~C- TORY AND ARE HEREBY ~.CCEPTED. YOU .:I.,.RE .:I.,.UTHORIZED TO DO THE WORK AS SPECIFIED. ~OTE - THIS PROPOSAL MAY BE WITHDRAWN BY US IF NOT ACCEPTED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS. Customer: Siqnature: Date: . ............................................a................................ From: FUNKS DRILLING. INC. R 0 2 Box 1 J 1 Newville, PA 17241 Number: 001065 Datil: 10/31/95 Customer Site KEN DUPERT 463 OAK FLAT RD. NEWVILLE. PA 17241 SAME ............................................a................................ Description Quanti ty Pl'i.:e Extended 6" DRILLING. PER FT. 250.00 5.00 1250.00 6 5/6" CASING. PER FT. 80.00 6.00 480.00 6" REAMING, PER FT. 60.00 3.00 240.00 IoIELL CAP 1. 00 17.90 17.90 BENTONITE WELL SEAL 1. 00 27.00 27.00 2% DISCOUNT IF PAID W/IN 10 DAYS Sub Total: 2014.90 Sales Tax: 0.00 To tal : 2014.90 Submitted by: THE ABOVE ESTIMATE IS BASED ON WHAT WE EXPECT TO ENCOUNTER BASED ON PREVIOUS DRILLING EXPERIENCE. ALTHOUGH THE ACTUAL DEPTH AND AMOUNTS OF NATERIA1,fl USED ~IAY VERY. THE OWNER MUST SECURE ALL ERMITS AND NOTIFY FUNKS OF ANY SPECIAL REQUIRENENTS Date: AJ....J~r ...... .........a..=*~====~~=~=~~=~==~=~~===========.~~=..a=~.............a......... THE ABOVE PRICES, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS ARE SATISFAC- TORY AND ARE HEREBY .\CCEPTED. YOU .\RE .\UTHORIZED TO DO mE WORK AS SPECIFIED. WE ITHE OWNER) WILL PROVIDE THE DRILLER WI A COpy OF THE TOWNSHIP REQUIRnlE:-ITn (WHERE APPLICABLE) . Customer: _Signature: Date: K~nn~t.h Dupert b cathy Dupen, PlaInt! Uo, IN THE COURT OF COIIIION PLEAS OF CUlIDERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVAX 1/\ NO. 95-6963 CIVIL 19 v, John l". Wd I t.er E.xcavat\ nq, Inc., Def.endant RULE 1312-1, The Petition for Appolntm~nt of Arbitrators shall be substantially in the fOIlo'ling t"rm: PETlT1".. FOR APPOlNTltENT OF ARBITRATORS "'0 THE ""NORABLE. THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: ~(in "'tIt'O , counse. for che plaintiff/IIlJe:(Jt~lIl1lt" in the abov" l. 2. action XX>ltXltlCXllIllll):, respectfully represents that: The above-captioned action mx~ )~ ~ at issue. The claim of the plaintiff in the acticn is $ 1$,000.00 The counterclaim of the defendant in the action is 0.00 The tollo~ing sttorneya are interested in the caae(s) as counselor are other- wise disquaLUied to si' 6S arb trators:' i!<Mara D. Kauffman, h.;glll rp W1fE~EFORE, your petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the caae shall be submitted. OlUlER OF COURT rSpeC~llY submitt~<J, \J /VL_14, ____, 19~, in consideration of the AND NOW, ULulll d.,k foregoing petition, \d'A h1" J: J<.-fAIt... Esq., ~Iql:f. and, 'Ph/'I, 'f? JI'r1iLL ,ESq.: are appointed arbitrators in the IJ, ., ILI\;~boi.,-capt\~med action (or actions) as prayed for. 0',. ' fc . 1..,- I... '-{">; C)r UtI. (~I ,--:) By T tourt' . , . L" .\ \ ~/~../ P. J. .,' .::, ,'L. I'. e' 0, l-~ . . u ...' PRAECIPE FOR LISTI:'4G CASE FOR ARGl.:'IE:'lT 1~lust be typ.wnllen .IIId submllled in duplic3lel TO THE PROTHONOT,\RY OF Ct.:'IBERL.\."D COC:-<T'i. PlUM :isl the wltlun tnQu.r f~r :h. next: -- t P:e. Tn;u .u,um.m C ~u[\ IX' .UiUment C~urt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- CAP'tION OF CASE (.n\lrl clpllon mUll b, stat.d In full) n " , , , 0 .jl -;, , I 0 I' , I,::"J , , , I) ,\rj .1 ,'.,) , t(~ " ,; j , .- , 'r) ~:: 1-';1 .' I ':r .' , .1.:") ~ (n :'~I'fl ~! .' ~,;;, J';'" ,,' ~d C:J ...,; Kl'nnp.th DUp<'.rt and cathy DUp<'.rt, (l'l~ uiti VI. John F. Wal tl'.I' F:xcavating, Inc. (Ct{lndllll) VI. s~. 95-6963 ~9_ (lOlil 1. SIal. matter to bl :lliU.d n, ~.. pl~tifrl motion for new mal. dle.nelant'l demurrer to ,0mpWnI. atc.): ~fp.ndant's prl',liminary Objl'.ctions " .. Identify cO\lllllll who willuiU' ,:u" (a) for illallllUf: lIoward D. Kauffman, Esq. of lklrrirgl'rn, ((aJffum & S1l.lliqJ Address ~ 00 pine stre.".t, Suitl'. 300, Harrisburg, PI'. l7J OJ ('0) for defendanl: !lon '1\lro, Esq.. LdW Offic".8 of Ron Turo Address: 32 south BedfOl."d stn'.".t, carlisiI'., PAI70J3 3. I willnolify ill punll In 'vlltin~ 'v,:hin tWO J1Y' :hQt :tu3 "131 h:u ':..n Ulled for 1IIum.m. _ 4. Argument Court Date: March 6, J996 l.\ttorney t"o OIled: "--.~. . ,', i, LAW omcu or HARRINGTON, KAUFFMAN" SHILLING ATrORNEY: Boward D. KauOinaD SUPRJ:ME COURT LB. NO.: 31963 100 PINE STREET, SUITE 300 BARRlSBURG, PA 17101 (717) 720.0700 ATIORNEY fORI W..dut {, KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, Plaintifti IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLV ANIA VI. JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, : INC.. DOCKET NO. 95-6963 Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERlVlCE tJ" AND NOW, this ,;>q day of January, 1996, I, Howard D. Kauffinan, Bsqulre, I&toraey for Defendant John F. Walter Excavating. Inc., affirm that I served the Praecipe for Ua&ina for Argwnent by depositing same in the United States Mail, postaae prepaid, In . 1larNbura. Pennsylvania, addressed to: Ron Turo, Esq. Law Offices of Ron Turo 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Howard . I. I , , , . , LAW OJl'ICU or BARRINGTON. KAUrrMAN A SHILLING ATrORNEYI Seward B. Klumn.. SUfUMJ: COURT LB. NO.1 31963 100 PM STUET, StJITJ: 300 BAJUUSBURG, PA 17101 (717) 72~700 ATrOllNJ:Y FORI Del...... I t ! KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPfRT, PIaIntiffI IN THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS OP CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VI. JOHN F. W ALTER EXCAVATING.: DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 INCo, Defendant CERTIFICATE or SERlVlCJ: AND NOW. thi. ~ day of January, 1996, I, Howard D. Kauft\nan, Esquire, attorney for Defendant John F. Walter EXClvating, Inc., affinn that IlCrVed the Request for Production of Documentl and Intenogatories by depositing same in the United States Mail, poltlp prepaid, in Harriaburs, Pennsylvania. addressed to: Ron Turo. Esq. Law Offices of Ron Turo 32 South Bedford Street Carlille, PA 17013 d::- ----. " , , " ! \,Q ~, 0 " ~:1 fr M :r:: (J:~ 0_ Cl::j ~ "-.C;: <n :;~"?,:3 ,U- N :;;J!J I" 'n.: I 'Fa r.,: ";1. c~ 0.. -, 1,1.. '0 :lij 0 ell 0 " , KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PlalntllTe : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 911. GiJl;; j CML TERM JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., Defendant : CML ACTION. LAW NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you with to defend agalnat the clalml eet forth In the followlnll peaee, you must take action within twenty (20) days after thle Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appellJ'ance personally or by attorney and ftllng In writing with the Court your defentel or objectione to the claims set forth aplnet you, You are wllJ'\1ed that il' you fan to do 10 the caee IIIIlY proceed without you and a judgment IIIIlY be entered ap\net you by the Court without l\1rther notice founy money claimed In tbe Complaint or for any other claim or reUefrequested by the Plaintiff. You IIIIlY 1011 money or property or other rillhts important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYl!:R OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FiND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Court Adminlatrator Cumberland County Courthouse Fourth Floor Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240.6200 KENNETH DlJPERT and CATHY DUPERT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plalntl& : CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 9ft- : CML ACTION. LAW CIVIL TERM JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., Defendant COMPLAINT 1. PlalntllTl are Kenneth Dupert and Cath,y Dupert, adult indlvlduale, who eurrently reelde at 0663 Oak Flat Road, N ewvil1e, Cumberland County, Penneylvanla. 2. Defendllnt Ie John F. Wlllter Excavating, Inc., a corporation organlxed and exllotlna under the IawI of the State of PelllllYlvanla, with a regletered ol1\ce at RD*2 NewvWe, Penneylvanla. 3. The eventa herelnal\er complained of occurred on or about June 13, 199ft at the reeldence of the PlalntllTl 463 Oak Flat RoKd, Newville, Pennsylvania. 4. At eald time and place, Defendant, In an eITort to excavate It one and rock, in the area or Oak Flat Road, did initiate a blatt by detonating explOllv-el. ft. SaId olxpJolivel were detonated within approximately 76 feet of the PlalntllT'l home. 6. The blaat Wit actually felt throU8hout the neiHhborhood, and by nelihbon Iltuated further from the orlsin of the blatt than Plalntiff'1 location. 7. Defendant'l initiation of Mid blatt caUled an explOlive reaction, eeiemlc Impu1let!wavel, lP'ound motion, and vlbrationa in and 1U'0und the lOil, rock, and foundation of PlalntllT'l home and property, thereby caueing lubstantial clam8ge to Mid home and property. 8. DllIIUIp to Plalntiff'1 property WII directly and proximately cauted by Defendant'. conduct, while Defendant wit engaged in the ultra-hazardoUl activity of detonating exploalv". to blatt rock, pnerally and lpeclIlca1ly with regard to the followinll: (a) Concrete block maeonry foundation waJJe in the PlalntllT'l home lu\Tered new craclr.e, and old cracke were opened up, II wen. . (b) 'lbe Plalnwrl weD .utTered IUbetantlal danulae to Ita walle and foundation and NtraUon eyetem which contaminated the weD water contained therein and rendered eaid weD and water Ulllultable for PlalntllT'l houeehold COIIIIIIDPtIun. 8. Nia dUeet and proJdmate reeult or the reckleu, wanton, care\eee, and Jlel\lpnt eondUllt ol Def'endant, PlelntllT hat lutTered e\inl.IlCant and permanent Iou and ~ury to the ro11ow\ni. ror which Defendant IIltrtctly liable at law: .. home; b. e. d, e. COlt of replllr of damare to concrete block muonry foWldatlon waIlI or PlaInwrl coat of replllr of structural demage to PlalntllT'l well, coat of replllr of damare to the Ntratlon eyetem contained In PlaIntllT'l _Uj COlt of purification of well wator contained In PlalntllT'l wellj coat of this action. WHEREFORE, PlaIntllTs requeet the Honorable Court to enter judgment epIrwt Defendant, John F. Walter EmlY1Itlng, Inc. In an amount not to eltCe<ld Twenty'Five TholllWld DoUare ('211,000.00), plua coate and Inlel'llt. -1J.!(p!tfY' Date RespectlUlly submitted, LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO ~_.. Ron Turo, Elqulre 82 South Bedl'ord Street CarUete, P A 17013 (717) 2411-8688 Attomey for PlIlIntllTI , . ~t '1 N ~ til ~ ~ CO') 'Il ~ S~ *- r( f . ( I"<') II \0 ~ Q .~ '1t~ I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ., ~ V) ~ " \R ~ , , "'wu.. .. ".. -r, ~l.I"ri,pi~ illt,,\d.,;._,'I'f' " 1-,1 ',,' ",r! , I._e,'<+l ,."~.lmtll~~<,j,,, , .. .," ,""'<1' I~~;''''~'',!",,,,, " .' " , , . . KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Pla1ntllTI : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 96.6963 CML TERM : CML ACTION. LAW JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., Defendant AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. PlalntllT! lI1'e Kenneth Dupert and Cathy Dupert, adult Indlviduale, who currently raids at 463 Oak Flat Road, Newville, Cwnberland County, PelUlllYlvan\a. 2. Defendant la John F. Walter Excavating, Inc., a corporation orpnlzed and ex\etlni Wlder the lawe of the State of PeMeylvanla, with a regletered oll1l:e at RDllf2 Newville, PeMeyIvan\a. 8. The event! hereinafter comp1alned of occurred on or about June 13, 19911 at the relidence of the Pla1ntllTI 463 Oak Flat Road, Newville, Pennsylvania. 4. At IS8Id time and place, Defendant, In an elTon to excavate !tone and rock, In the area of Oak Flat Road, did initlate a blaat by detonating explo!ivel. II. Said explo!ivea were detonated within approximately 76 feet of the Pla1ntilT'l home. 6. 1'he b1allt WII actually felt throughout the neighborhood, and by neighbor! !Ituated further from the origin of the b1allt than PlalntllT'! location. 7. Defendant'! initiation of IS8Id blaat caused an explOllive reaction, lelamic impuiHelwavee, 8I'ound motion, and vibrations In and around the 1lO1I, rock, and foundation of PlalntilT'l home and property, thereby causing !ubatantial damage to IS8Id home and property. 8. Defendant f,wed to take adequate safelJUll'da to eneure that no damap would reeu1t from initiation of eald blaet. 9. Defendant'! falJed to make any !l8i!mographic readings or the area prior to initiating IIld b1allt, delpite the fact that the explOllion would be detonated within approximately 76 feet orthe PlaintllT'l home. 10. The actual cMrgll/expIOlllve! used to create the blaet were unreaeonably exee_lve. , '~ In ~. . , (., , ' .. - (3:$ l~ :c ~ ~ " I', u.. ()~ fr r- :.:~;1 ~\I:O' - I,J"1 :r.- '~~ ~ .;.: r:' .., ~ \0 , (,P 1'1 " , ,'I I', 'i , , .. " iil LAwomCJ:SOF IlAlUUNGTON, KAUFFMAN A SHILLING An'ORNIYI Boward D. Kaurrml. SU,UM! COURT LD. NO.1 31963 100 ,INE STREET, SUITE 300 BARRlSBURG, PA 17101 (717) 72~700 . " ATI'ORNEY FORI Berendaat IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KENNETII DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, plllntift's VI. JOHN F. W ALTER EXCA V A TING, INC., DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S AtlSWER A~D NEW MA TIER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. After reasonable investigation, 4. Admitted, S. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admilled that a measurement of 76 feet tom the blast to the front oflhe house is one measurement. All other averments are denied. 6. D~ni:d. After rea~cr.able inve~!igl1tion. 7. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that defendant's initiation of the blast caused an explosive reaction, seismic impulses/waves, ground motion and vibration. in and around the soil and rock, but denied that any damage was done to plaintiffl. As to those a1leptiona relatins to the foundalion of plaintift" a home and property and thereby causing substantial damage to said home and property. plaintiffs are without sufficient information or knowledSCl with which to form a believe u to those averments and they are accordingly denied. , .. dIcumItanca. 9. cIrcumIaanca. 10. cinlumIlanCeI. II. DenIed. On the contrary, defendant acted rcuonably and pNdOlltly under those cIrcwnItanceI, The remaining avernlents in this para8Faph contain conclusions of law to which no rupollllll required. a) b) Denied. On the contrary, defendant ICted reasonably and prudently under those DenIed. On the contrary, defendant acted rcuonably and pNdently under tho.. DenIed, On the contrary. defendant acted rcuonably and pNdently under those Denied. After reasonable investigation. Denied. After reasonable investigation. 12. Denied. On the contrary, defendant acted reasonably and pNdently under those c1rcumstlllCel. Further. the remaining averments in this paragraph contain conclusions of law to whld\ no reaponse il required. a) Denied. After reasonable investigation. On the contrary, defendant acted reasonably and pNdently under those circumstances. b) Denied. After reasonable investigation. c) Denied. The averments in this plIragraph contain conclusions of law to which no relponse is required. WHEREFORE.. answering defendant respectfully requests judgment in its favor and defendant demandl jury trial.. t1EW MATTER I. No action or inaction on part of the defendant wu the substantial factor in cauaIna pIainlift'1 dama.ll. , 2, The alIesed actions of defendant were not the CllijM of plalntift" I claimed 1oeseI. f),1 -;'j\' " ~ t.. ,~ On the 1lOIIIIIry, defendant acted reasonably and prudenlly under tho.. cIrc:umstInceI. 3. o.tindaat reserves the rlaht to chall""e any award of delay damIps In IhIs cue. ... o.tindaat demand, that appropriate hearinp be conducted In IhIs cue prior to aay award ol delay damaps. I. 5. Rule 23. oflhe PeMSylvania Rul~ of Civil Procedure, on itl lice, and u applied II vIoII&Ive olthl Due Process and Equal Protection CIauMI oflhe Fourteenth AmendmeDt to die COIlIt~" oflho United States. 11983 ofTitle 42 of the UnltecI Stat.. Code and ArtlcIe I, 'I, cs, lllllld 26 and Artl. V, I100c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution and Impo... a c:bIllina eft'ec:c 011 the IX<<CIae by Defendant of it. constitutional rights. Respectfully submitted, Harrington, Kauffinan 01: Shillina ~-- , ' " . ( I~ ' ij \'~""'__'41' 1111""",''''11 ",'jfllll""'\,"';1;,,.,-;'i ", '!'''-''',;'=i,jl''''' I, - 'I "1,iI-'-"'\!"iY,\!!.l.;f~~r('I"'.~)I''''J~''I~''~''! ',; '. I. , LAW ODICII or BA..PlGTON, KAUFFMAN Ie SHILLING ATI'OllN&Yz Boward D. Kaumaa. SURJ:MJ: COUllT LD. NO.: 31963 108 .INE STRJ:ET, Sum: 300 ILUIUSBUIlG, PA 17101 ('U '7) 7:JO.0700 ATfOIlNEY roaz Ber.ada.t KENNEnI DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, Plaintift't IN THE COURT OF COMMON.LIAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ,~ I I',. VI. " JOHN,. WALTER EXCAVATING, : INC., DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 Defendant , " \',: CERTIFICATE OF SEBVICE AND NOW, !hill:!!! day of March, 1996, I, Howard D. Kaufftnan, Elqulre, attorney for Defendant John F. Walter Excavatins. Inc" affirm that I served the ANwer and New Matter to Amended Complaint by depositing same in the United States Mail, poltqe prepaid, In HatriIburJI, Pennsylvania, addressed to: r \,'t " I"~ , /'1 .' ':'1 I.' , , ",J\ '.\' :il '!j! Ron Turo. Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 ~/ " , , " " '.. - '- f,.. 1l0J 0- , '. " , r~~ .. . ~,';; "'r" ~(' '- j' ;.:-:} - (.'-- ...... )-., " ' . .,.., . ::.1. fT- . ...: : ~.:l ,'jr. I') I, (, i \.:') J J' .., C'J Ill.. '.j':- Ii". r..: ,,0\1 '.,L.. , ; I' .,') , l,...-' 0.. , , ) " .' - VEIDnCA'l10N I, Ron Turo, Eequlre, an the attomey for the PlalntllTl In the above _, and I verIfY that the flll:tl eet forth In the fllfliOlnlr Answer to New Matter Mve been prepared by me a10na with information provided to me by 11I1 cUent and they are true and correct to the belt of 11I1 knowled8e, information and belief, and I further underetand that ltatementa made herein al'e made lubje<:t to the penalties of 18 PL C.B. Section 4904 relating to unawom fallll1cation to lluthoritlel; / l. ' f'" / S J". fy' (,'t-l C/ Date Rnrl Turo, Eequlre ~ - . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby c:ertl(y thallaerved . true and correct copy of the lwlwer to New Matter upon Howard D. Kaufllnan, Eequlre, by depoeltlni lIIIle In the United Statee MaD, Ilnt c..... poItap pre-paId on the ) )> clay of //1 Aile If , 1996, !rom earlllle, Pennaylvanla, addrtued u foUowe: Howard D. KaulTman, Eequlre 100 Pine Street, Suite 300 HarrlabW'lf, PA 17101 LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO / , . /1-1, Ron Turo, Eequlre 32 South Bedford Street earlllle, PA 17013 (717) 2411.9688 Attomey for Plalntlfti " I' , , " , ' , , co ('-l t ..'l' 1-- ~lf; !.t\. l~:':,c C> I. iJ ~I. ~~I ,,' I I' 0;., "- .. - - :' ~ ...... ,~~ .;, ~.;J . :',C ";.':l -(), 'l;,~ ,J(I) ,'\u. ".) o I' - . ..~ l- e.... r.' ,0 <..' " I', " " . " , . " ," I,i, " ., " I' , , 1\ " r Ii U) ~ M g~ ,~ M " " ~ ~! \.0 N U ~u. " t.J C ~ In '" ',' " H, ij I)' " " , !I: , , '.,''''''. .,.,..,' 'l.o.;-"'IU,;\ ., . LAW OFnCES or BARRINGTON, KAUrFMAN II SHILLING AttoRNEY, Boward D. Kaurrman SUPREMa: COURT LD. NO,: 31963 100 PINE STRUT, SUITE 300 BARJusBURG, PA 17101 (717) 720.0700 ATTORNEY FOR: Derendant KENNEm DuPERT and CATHY DuPERT, Plalntlfti IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V ANlA VI. JOHNF. WALTER EXCAVATlNG. INC.. DOCKET NO. 95.6963 Defendant J)EFENDANT'S PREUMINARV OBJE~'ONS TO PLAINTIFFS' .AMENDED COMP J~I A. DEMlIRRJ:1B, I. Plainti/f.homeowners tiled an Amended Complaint alleging that Defendant_ excavating company caused damage to their home and property when blasting nearby. 2. Plaintiffs' damages consist entirely of property damage. 3. In paragl'aph 12 ofPlaintitrs' Complaint, Plaintitrs describe Defendant's actions.. reckless and wanton in addition to careless and negligent. 4. Plainti/fs set forth no averments which could support a linding of reckless or Wanton behavior on the part of Defendant, and therefore, these allegations should be dismis~ with prejudice. " I' !!o. \Q .~ !i;; C) ~- ,. ~~ r:. 7~~.. lo.jl't;J ~r:: c ..., 2: ~ .,~~ 1'''t_J F ~ :5~ '. . '- N , I ~ . /./ :U~ i:,lTi..l ,:~ ", r!~~ -, lJ. \0 {J 0 (J, , " , KENNETH and CATHY DUPERT, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v, NO. 9S-6963 CIVIL TERM . <, JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC.. Defendant CIVIL ACTION. LAW fl.AJNTIFFS' BRIE'" IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT~ PRELIMINARY OBJECII~ TO PLAINTIFFS' A~tEND.EI>"COMPLAINI . ; ,. ;' And now comes lh~ PlaintitTs, Kenneth and Cathy Dupert, by and through their attorney, Roger R. Laguna. Jr,. Esquire. and tiles this Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Detcndant's Preliminary Objecllons to Plaintiffs' Amend~'<I Complaint , , , " f.' L....HlSIQRY OF THE CASE I'. The Plainliffs arc Kenneth and Cathy Dupert (hereafter "Homeowners"). who currently reside at 463 Oak Flat Road. Newville. Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Defendant is John F, Walter Excavating, Inc. (hereafter "Excavator"). a Pellnsylvania corporation located at RD#2 Newville. Pennsylvania, F On or about June 13. 1995. the Excavator attempted 10 excavate stone and rock by initiating a '\ powerful blast by detonating explosives within approximately 76 feet of the Homeowners residence The blast directly caused substantial damage to the Homeowners residence and other property as well, Homeowners filed a Complaint against Excavator to recover the cost of such damages. Excavator filed Preliminary Objections to the Complaint. In response. Homeowners filed an Amended Complaint to which Excavator filed the most recent Preliminary Objections. Now. Homeowners respond by filing this Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. B. ~s' Amended CollUllilintsels fo.rtlu~U1lllMial facls sufficient to sustain thiS ne"lillencc cause of aclion for damalles caused by _Illastinv., Defendant sllltes that Paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs' Amendc4 Complainl should be stricken for lack of conformity to Pa.R.C.P, IOl9(a) since the allegations I1re "vague and generally otherwise neglig~'Ilt" Defendant's Brief ciles sevcral cases 10 support the general propositionlhat "(dlefendants cannot prepare to def,~nd if differenllheones arc advwlced throughout the case" The general rule is Ihat complaints wId other pleadings arc required 10 contain "material facts on which a cause ofaclion ,. is based, . ,stated in a concise and summary fonn." l'a,RC.P, 1019(a). The material facts requirement of Pa.R.C.P. No 101'I(a) requires that a pleading contain all the ultimate facts necessary to support the clements of a cause of action or defense in order to (I) Give the defendant notice ofthe plaintiff's claims. (2) State the grounds upon which the claims rest and (3) Fornlulate the issues by summarizing those facts essential to support the claims. Alpha T(\u Omev.a fraternilv v. Uniwr.llilY..2f pennsvlYlVllil. 318 Pa, Super 2'13.464 A,2d 1349.1352 (1983). Consistent with this requirement. however. "(ilt is nolnecessary that a plaintitT identify the specitic legallheory underlying the complaint" Standard PA Practice 2d. Section 21.36. Furthermore. the complaint nccd not be an all.inclusivc narrallVC of events underlying the claim. General S~9rity v. SlI!M-~' 6'1 Pa. Cmwlth. 504. 452 A.2d 75. 78 (1982). In Pcnnsylvama. blasting is recognized as nn ultrahazardous activity. McSparrin v, Hannillan. 225 F.Supp. 628 (1963). Consequently. a person engaged in blasting is strictly liable for any damage caused to the property of another evcn when ne3ligence is not allegc4 or proven. If damage results from blasting, it is tortious and a cause of action may be brought for recovery. lIll!QMlLL!ilil,\;llrni!!<<!. 263 A.2d 432 ( 1 '170) Accordingly. a contractor is liable for property damage that results from blasting on a roadway despite the fact thaI due care may have been e"erclso:d without fault l&l1.~. Jd ~) . ~ ,,_ I': , 1(196 tY LAW OFFICES or BARRINGTON, KAUFFMAN Ie SHILLING ATfORNEY: Howard D. KautrmaD SUPREME COURT LD. NO.: 31963 100 PINE STJU:ET, SUITE 300 BARRlSBURG, PA 17101 (717) 7Z~700 A1TORNEY FORI Ber.IId..t KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, PIaintift'1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VI. JOHNF. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC., DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 Defendant pRIEr IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S PRELWUII,4.RY OBJECTlO~1l TO PLAINTIFF'S AME~QItP COMPLA~T I. WSTORY OF CASE: PlUntitf.homeowners filed a Complaint against Defendant-exClwtina company allesina that Defendant'. blasting caused property damage to Plaintift'.homeownerl. Defendant filed Preliminary Objections. Plaintitfs filed an Amended Complaint to which Defendant filed these Preliminary Objections. Plaintitfs allege that Defendant's conduct wu reckleu and wanton but set forth no facti to substantiate those allegations. Further, Plaintitfl allege that Defendantl vli\lClyand pnerally "failed to take adequate safeguards to insure that no damqe would result 1I'0m initiation of slid blast." II. STATEMENT OF OUESTIONS INVOl,..YEl: A. Whether Plaintitfs have set forth sufficient material facts to subltantilte the claim for reckleu and wanton behavior? B. Whether Plaintiffs have set forth material facts or pleaded generally and vquely in ParaarSPh 87 III. AROUMENI: A. Absent Iny material facts. "material" and "wanton" should be stricken from Plaintiffs' COmplaint. It is abundantly clear that Pennsylvania is a fact pleading alate. PeMsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1019(a) states that a complaint must give lhe defendant notice of what the plaintiffs claim II and the grounds upon which it rests musl be let forth in concise summary fonn. Baker v. Ranios, 229 Pa. Super. Ct. 333, 324 A.2d 498 (1974). In Pennsylvania, the essential fact needed to support a claim for punitive damages is thatlhe defendant's conduct must have been outrageous, wanton or willful. Outrageous conduct has been equated with "acts done with bad motive or with reckless and indifference to the interest of others." ~,283 Pa. Super. Ct. 93, 423 A,2d 743 (1980), citing Focht v. Rabada, 217 Pa. Super, Ct. 35 at 38, 268 A.2d 157 (1970). Smith further explains that 'reckless indifference, to the interests of others' or as it is sometimes referred to, 'wanton misconduct,' meanslhat the actor has intentionally done an act of unreasonable character in disregard of a risk known to him or so obvious that he must be taken to have been aware of it, and so great as to make it highly probable that hann would follow." Sa Smith v. Drown, 423 A.2d at 74S, citing Evans v. Philadelphia Transportation Co" 418 Pa. 567, 574, 212 A,2d 440,443 (1965), An award of punitive damages must be supported by evidence of conduct by the defendants more serious than mere commission of a tort, Negligence alone will not support or be a sufficient basis for awarding punitive damages. Punitive damages may be awarded by conduct that is outrageous due to defendant's evil motive or reckless indifference to the rights of others. ~ Hollinan v. Memorial Osteopathic Hospital, 342 Pa. Super. Ct. 375,494 A.2d 1382 (198S). In the instant case, Plaintiffs have alleged that Defendant excavated stone and rock by blasting approximately 76 feet from Plaintiffs' home. Plaintiffs fail to allege anything that would tend to show bad motive, that an act was intentionally done or that the potential for injury was so highly probable that it could be characterized as reckless indifference to the interests of others, 2 " I "In addition, plaintiffs must show ICtUal malice on the part of the defendanto Walder v. Lobel. 339 Pa. Super. Ct. 203, 488 A.2d 622. 626 (198S). 1901 (2) of the Restatement (Second) of Torts and Pennsylvania cue law 'require .....a10l11 conduct and a high dearee of culpability on the part of the defendant to support a claim for punitive damages.' Wolaernuth v. HershllY Medical Center, III Dauph. 3SS, 368 (1992). Punitive damages may not be ordered by ordinary nqliaence such u inadvertence, mistake or errors of judgment. Martin v. Johns. Mansville Cotp.. 494 A.2d at 1097." NICe v. Dental Care Associates, 112 Dauph. 48 at S2 (1992). In~, the court sustained preliminary objections to a punitive damage claim because, "the conduct alleged against Dr. Porvunik doel not amount to an intentional act in disregard vf a risk so obvious that he must have been aware of it nor so great as to make it highly pl'Obable that hllm would follow, . " [I]n Chambers v. Domino Pi77~, 110 Dauph, 1, 3 (1989), the court stated '[t]he concept of punitive damagel seems to be getting out of line.' We see it more alleged in cases that ordinary or, at the belt, arou negligence ".. We wish to reiterate and emphasize that it is reserved for rare instances ofextrerne behavior." ~ at S2. So too, this Court should strike "reckless" and "wanton" from Plaintiffs' Complaint which seekl punitive damages. B. Parairaph 8 of Plaintiffs' Complaint should be stricken because it only va~ely and aenerally pleads nealiaen~e. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant "failed to take adequate safeguards to insure that no damage would result from initiation of said blast." Under current Pennsylvania case law, if Plaintiffs fail to amend their Complaint to state more lpeciflc, material ticts, this allegation must be stricken. In Connor v. A1leiheny Gelleral Hospital, 501 Pa. 306, 461 A.2d 600 (1983), the Court found the allegation "[i]n otherwise failing to use due care" sufficient to preserve an unpleaded theory of negligence liability against a Defendant, notwithstanding the running of the Statute of Limitations. However, in footnote 3 the Supreme Court stated that the Defendant "could have filed a Preliminary Objection in the nature of a request for a more specific pleading or could have moved 3 to Itrlkethat portion oflppellant's Complaint." Conner at 602, n.3 Quoting Amer v. Sokol 373 Pa. Sl7, S92.93. 96 A.2d 8S4, 8S6 (l9B), citing Kill" v, Brillhart, 271 Pa. 301,114 A. SIS, SI6 (1921) the Court reiterated that (T)he [Plaintiff I statement) may not be a statement in a concise and summary fonn of the material facts upon which the PlaintitT relies..,; but, if not, it was waived by Defendant's Affidavit to, and going to trial upon the merits.... A Defendant may move to strike otT an insufficientstatc:ment, or if it is too indefinite, may obtain a Nle for one more specific. Failing to do either, he will not be entitled to a compulsory non-suit because of the general character of Plaintilr s statement. Continuing in the same footnote, the Supreme COllrt added that In this case, however, [Defendant) apparently understood this allegation of (Plaintiff's) Complaint well enough to simply deny it in its Answer. Thus, (Defendant] cannot now claim it was prejudiced by the late amplification of this allegation in [Plaintiff's] Complaint. Judge Shughart stNck similar allegations in Keller v. II S Saint John's Inc" 34 Curnb, 3 (1983) when he stated "the PlaintitTis not perrnilled to make a general charge that the Defendant wu negligent and then hope that facts supporting that claim will come to light in the course of discovery." KtU.er at 8. See also Wallner v. Fritchley, 40 D&C 3d 73 (Cumb. 1986) and Rommel v. Perna, 38 Curnb, L.J. 27 (1987). The Common Pleas Court of Greene County sustained the Defendant's objections to the Plaintiffs allegation that Defendant "otherwise fail[ ed] to exercise that degree of care or caution required", under the circumstances," Marlinll v. Grcene County Memorial Hospital, S Greene R.l (No.8) (1986). The Court first referred to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1019 that requires the Plaintiffs to state material facts upon which a cause of action is based and to do so in a concise and summary fonn. The Court then reviewed !:.omw:, In a footnote to that case, Mr. Justice Larsen noted that the proper approach for the Defendants would have been to file Preliminary Objections to the Complaint in the form of a Motion to Strike or for a more specific pleading. It is this footnote which the Defendants used to allack this allegation against each of the Defendants", . 4 SIIII It IS5-S7. See also Estate ofBair v. Harrisbufa Hunters and Analera Assoclstions. 110 Dauphin S7 (19119). Pennsylv.ml is a fact pleading state. Defendants cannot properly defend if different theoriel are advanced throughout the case. If Plaintiff discovers new theories durlna the pendency of the case, Plaintiff can amend his pleading at that tirnc. The aIIeption that the Defendant "failed to take adequate safeguards" is a legal conclusion u auggelled by Marlini. and not a material or specific fact. Plaintiffs' allegation is ~imilar to "otherwise failed to exercise due care under the circumstances" which was struck down in Geo~e v. Ayol\b. 70 West L.J. 87 (1988) and hardly different from "fail(ed] to adequately care for" which was struck down in PAckrall Y...fBJ:K, 47 Fay. Leg. 1, 68 (1984). Parlit.ph 8 should be stricken. To hold otherwise would require the Defendants to prepare to defend against every possible cause ofaction it fall within the ambit of the language failed to take adequatc safeguards. This is an impossible burden for Defendants. Respectfully submitted, UFFMAN & SHILLINO ~ Ho 6 .., KENNETH DUPERT and CATHY DUPERT, Plaintiff. 116 OLER I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : I v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING, INC. , Defendant 95-6963 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PRETRIAL CQH[ERENCE A pretrial conference was held in the chambers of Judge Oler in the above-captioned case on Thursday, January 2, 1997. Present on behalf of the Plaintiffs was Ron Turo, Esquire. Present on behalf of Defendant was Howard D. Kauffman, Esquire. This is a strict liability action for blasting damage to Plaintiffs' ~ome and well. The defense is that the blasting did not cause the damage. This will be a jury trial (Defendant is unwillingly to waive a jury trial, although Plaintiffs are) in which each side will have four peremptory challenges, for a total of eight. The estimated duration of the trial is one and a half days. An issue expected to arise at trial is whether the Plaintiffs will be able to prove causation. The evaluation of Plaintiffs' case in this respect will be left to the trial judge, but this judge has indicated to counsel on the basi. of Mazza v. Berlanti Construction ComDany, 206 Pa. Super. 505, 214 ,. , , , , ~ (\1 ~ N ~ I~ .. 9 'l': '1'IZ x: ~. ~ ou; .~~ 8, ~ :i'~ I ..I. Ii' ;-<. Ifi") r--' . I,,~ " .. .. a 'J; ~ r.. 0" <~', , " " , .' , @ nF C 3 n Iggfltt LAW ornca or II......INGTON, KA~ A SHILLING ATI'OIlNI:Y: ....anI D. KadIs.u lAJPIlIME covaT LB. NO.: 31M3 ... PINI: 1TIlUT, SVITI:_ 1IA......lIaG, PA 1'7111 (717) 7...,.. ATrORNEY roll: ........t DNNBm DUPBIlT and CATHY DUPERT, PIIlaIi8i IN THE COURT OF coMMoN PLEAS OF CUM8.ERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VI. JOHN F. WALTER EXCAVATING,: DOCKET NO. 9S-6963 INC., Defendant VIRNDANT'S PRE-TRIAL MEMORANDUM L STATDD:NT or rAcrs AS TO LIABILITY Defeadaat WII bIutina Itone and rock in the area of Oak Flat Road near (lIaintIfr1 residence 011 or about June 13, 1995. Plaintiff claims the bIutina caulled clamIaea to their JlI'OI*t)'. Defendant's expert. dmied liability. D. STATJ:MENT OF' FAcrs AS TO DAMAGES Defendant denies any damlges caused by b1ulina. m. PRINCIPLE ISSUES OF LIABILITY AND DAMAGES A. LiabUlty I. U1trahuardou. activity 2. Negliaence .. o--a.. LAwomcuo, BAlUUNGTON, KAUffMAN A SHILLING ATrOaNlYI Howard D. K,aumaa. aU'UMI couaT LD. NO.1 31963 ... 'UCIITUIT, lum JOO BAp....uaG,rA 17101 ('711) ,....,.. ATrORNEY FOR: DereDda.t -.~'--".- KBNNBnI DUPUT IIId CATHY DUPUT, P\alntlft'l IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Of CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLV ANlA VI. JOHN'. WALTElUXCAVATINO,: OOCKETNO.9S-6963 INC., DelIndInt {;JRTlFICA TE 0' SERVICE AND NOW, thil ~ day of 1997, I, Howard 0, Kauftinan. ins. Inc., affinn that IleI'Ved the Notice Blqul...,lltomlY for Defendant John F. To TIIk. Videotape Deposition by depositing SII1lll in the Ulliled States Mail, poltaae prepaid, In Harrllbura. PeMlylvania, addressed to: lloIl Turo. Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RON TURO 32 South Bedford Street CarlllIe, PA 17013 , , .. ~ IN .~ '.. lr. L,.. ...;.- I~ .. ,)~-r; IN 'l~~/ , , \ ::c. ' "i: a.. , ~~ I" -)1,>_ ~) Cl "1 \l) "- .:i~ I, - .- n\!:! :1. ..:: ,. -J :.. tJ.. r- 'j 0 (j1 (J , " w.tlA~t'\~ ~\.Lt~Aj.,~ ~u.'''1f l1u~J, 1'1t\,,,("~I'~ !n The Court Qt Common ~l.al ot ) ) ) ~ c/ ~o. ) ~o,^,r'\ r. wailtt.. ~='). ('~..f1~ ~L.-l'. ) IU ~...;.....k OATH Cumberland County, ?ennay1vlnia qC; , (:,',t~3 19---' \1. We do 'OlcmDly Iwear (or affirm) the CODlcitution of the Unitld Statal wealth and that we will dilcharia tha that wa will support, oblY and dltend and the Constitution ot this Common- dutias of our otfice with fidelity. //.- / AWARD We, che undarligDad arbitrators, having been duly appointld and sworn (or affirmed). makl the fo1lowins'award: (~otl: If damasel for delay ara awardad, thay shill be leparately stated.) C\I. .' Ii I c~ . {\-u.,..,....t-d h I' '<<.~'" h tit '.~I t1;"i ,l.......<~,;t ..l.<9,19f!)fJ,l<J(j . Arbitr3tor, dissants. (Insert name i! applicable.) Data of aeariDs: "ll~ll/(", ctt 1.. II "'" r.nan ? Dati of Award: ~OTIC! OF ENTRY OF AWARD ~ow, the J 1 (t. day of it""",'.."" . 19..2;;;... at '(._u".' ,L.lI.. the above av.rd wal antarad upon the docket aDd notica chere~t 3iv4D ~y ~il to cha parti.. or their attornIY'. Arbitratorl' compentation to be paid upon appeel: $ .J(, G. (!lJ ,j ,.......,......_.......1.,.- -. ,1. (Vel k.~.-.,l >'-- Pro chona uary By: --.;.~,. Ct ~)~lf 1"'. O.?ut~, ,) - 6: en I:: co-; ~~, 6; ~t;:~~ ~~., 31r :l':: ilt. ) -' t", ~,.,!: . ~\ .:....j .' r-. 'u'j ''1'- <~J !!-"'.; CJ.~ f llt'l l1:lj u. , 16.. r.. ,,: '';: I' \(.') :5 () VI (.) I" . .-S' ~ .~ C~t' ':i \J J ~, J .I " ~ ~ ... IJ'I. , , " '" I .4'1'. ~! ~ t , , " , , ., " , , " , , " , " '~ ..:t ?-; , ~~ c;-, f'.' , , .. '~ ~\,:, -- f'l"l' - TJ H~:; "1' \:r' ~ "1 .~ ~k ...:... ,),"! ..n 0<1) ''1'.. I " Yo c.:... '111U {J'\ ~':~:: " L\. " I' ..I.. , "~.'i 'Q r- 0' q ,~ I; , , . " , '\' .. ' " 'i, :1 , ;' .'), ", '.' 'II