Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-1305 civilCHARLES W. CARELOCK and · ERIC C. CARELOCK, ' Plaintiffs, ' V~ FAMILY FORD, : MARK DANOWITZ, MODEL : MOTORS, PETE MILLER, : MARK SITES, RICHARD : A. LEBO, STEVE FILES, : and BRENNER NISSAN, : Defendants : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 97-1305 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW AND NOW, this ORDER OF COURT day of JULY, 1998, after argument, Defendant's Preliminary Objection in the nature of a Demurrer is SUSTAINED and this action, as against Family Ford and Mark Danowitz, is DISMISSED. The Motion to Strike for improper service as to the remaining Defendants is GRANTED. By the Court. E. Guido, J. Charles W. Carelock, Pro Se 4075 Rawleigh Street Harrisburg, PA 17109-4136 Eric C. Carelock, Pro Se 1535 South Thirteenth Street Harrisburg, PA 17104 John F. Lyons, Esquire For the Defendants Family Ford and Mark Danowitz CHARLF~ W. CARELOCK and ERIC C. CARELOCK, Plaintiffs, Ve FAMILY FORD, MARK DANOWITZ, MODEL MOTORS, PETER MILLER, MARK SITES, RICHARD A. LEBO, STEVE FILES, and BRENNER NISSAN, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 97-1305 CIVIL TERM CIVIL AcrION - LAW IN RE: DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS BEFORE BAYLEY, J., GUIDO, J. OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT The Carelocks initiated this suit for damages resulting from an automobile purchase they purport to have rescinded. The claim stems from a contract entered into March 13, 1996 by both Charles Carelock and his son Eric Carelock for the purchase of a Nissan Pathfinder from Defendant Model Motors. The Carelocks allege that they rescinded the contract because the monthly payment for the vehicle was higher than what they were led to believe it would be. In addition there was a significant amount of damage to the vehicle's paint at the time of delivery. Defendants Family Ford and Mark Danowitz have filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer. The remaining Defendants filed a motion to strike based upon improper service of the complaint. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On March 13, 1997, the Plaintiffs filed a claim of "fraud in vehicle sale" against Family Ford (a car dealership) and Mark Danowitz (alleged owner of Family Ford and NO. 97-1305 CIVIL TERM alleged former owner of Model Motors). Original process was properly served upon the Defendants pursuant to Pa. Rule of Civil Procedure 401. Subsequently the Plaintiff~ filed what appear to be three amended complaints which joined the additional Defendants.~ All Defendants filed Preliminary Objections on April 28, 1997. Argument was held before this Court on May 27, 1998. This matter is now ready for disposition. DISCUSSION FAMILY FORD'S AND DANOWITZ'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER The test in reviewing preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer is whether it is dear and free from doubt that the pleader will be unable to prove facts legally sufficient to establish his fight to relief. Firing v. Kephart, 466 Pa. 560, 563, 353 A.2d 833, 835 (1976). In determining whether to sustain preliminary objections, this Court must consider as tree all of the well-pleaded material facts set forth in the Plaintiffs' complaint. Feingold v. Bell of Pa., 477 Pa. 1, 4, 383 A.2d 791, 792 (1977). Nothing in the complaint even remotely links Family Ford or Danowitz to the transaction which was between the Plaintiffs and Defendant Model Motors. Therefore, their demurrer must be sustained. B. MOTION TO STRIKE FOR IMPROPER FORM OF SERVICE Original process must be served personally upon an additional Defendant as if he XThe amended complaints were filed in violation of Pa. Rule of Civil Procedure 1033 in that the Carelocks never requested leave to amend. See Spain v. Vicente, 315 Pa. Super. 135, 142, 461 A.2d 833, 837 (1983). NO. 97-1305 CIVIL TERM were an original Defendant. Pa.R.Civ. P. 425. The record indicates that the Plaintiffs attempted to serve the additional Defendants by marling a copy of the amended pleadings to John Lyons, Esq., attorney for the original Defendants. To effectively join the additional parties the Plaintiffs must have the sheriff serve original process on those additional parties. Pa.R.Civ. P. 400, 402. As Defendants Brenner Nissan, Model Motors, Pete Miller, Mark Sites, Richard A. Lebo, and Steve Files were never properly joined to · this litigation, their motion to strike for improper service must be granted. AND NOW, this ORDER OF COURT day of JULY, 1998, after argument, Defendant's Preliminary Objection in the nature of a Demurrer is SUSTAINED and this action, as against Family Ford and Mark Danowitz, is DISMISSED. The Motion to Strike for improper service as to the remaining Defendants is GRANTED. By the Court, Charles W. Carelock, Pro Se 4075 Rawleigh Street Harrisburg, PA 17109-4136 /s/Edward E. Guido Edward E. Guido, J. Eric C. Carelock, Pro Se 1535 South Thirteenth Street Harrisburg, PA 17104 John F. Lyons, Esquire For the Defendants Family Ford and Mark Danowitz