HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-6039 Civil
HITESH SUR!, RAMA SUR! and
SATISH SUR!,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
vs.
NO. 04-6039 CIVIL
UMAKANT DASH, KAL Y ANE
DASH, C.M. DETWEILER, INC.,
Individually and trading as
HOWARD HANNA DETWEILER
REALTY, HILLARY BITTING,
JACK GAUGHEN, INC. trading
And doing business as JACK
GAUGHEN REAL TOR ERA and
KEITH SEALOVER,
Defendants
IN RE: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Despite the fact that a complaint has not yet been filed in this case, there is already a
substantial procedural history. On December 2, 2004, the plaintiffs filed a praecipe for a writ of
summons against the captioned defendants. On December 30, 2004, counsel for the plaintiffs
noticed the depositions of the two real estate licensee defendants, Hillary Bitting and Keith
Sealover. On March 2, 2005, defendant Bitting filed a praecipe requesting that a Rule to File
Complaint be issued against plaintiffs. On March 4, 2005, defendant Sealover filed a Motion for
Protective Order seeking to bar the aforementioned deposition. A rule to show cause was issued
against the plaintiffs who, subsequently, filed a motion to stay proceedings pending disposition
of the motion for protective order. Defendant Bitting thereafter filed a motion to compel
mediation which was joined in by defendant Sealover. It is the motion to compel mediation
which is now before the court. The motion for mediation seeks participation by all parties to this
action even though they were not parties to the original real estate purchase agreement which
appears to be the subj ect of this law suit.
NO. 04-6039 CIVIL
There is a dearth of appellate case law with respect to mediation clauses although there
are numerous cases interpreting arbitration clauses. In two recent cases from the Court of
Common Pleas of Adams County, Bell v. Land Games, No. 04-S-898 (C.P. Adams, February 11,
2005), and Molloy v. Martin, No. 04-S-346 (C.P. Adams, February 23,2005), that court, in
granting the defendants' motions to compel mediation, relied upon appellate court decisions that
interpreted arbitration clauses, noting the substantial similarities between arbitration and
mediation. The court reasoned that the court's role of interpreting the parties' contractual
relationships is consistent regardless of the nature of the alternative dispute resolution at issue.
Under Pennsylvania law, a party cannot compel arbitration of a disagreement between
parties who have not contracted to arbitrate that disagreement. See Cumberland-Perry Area
Vocational Technical School Auth. v. Bogar & Bink, 396 A.2d 433 (Pa.Super. 1978).
Notwithstanding, a nonparty may fall within the scope of an arbitration clause if that was the
intent of the parties. See Smay v. E.R. Stuedner, Inc., 864 A.2d 1266 (Pa.Super. 2004). In the
matter sub judice, a complaint has not yet been filed. The court, therefore, has no understanding
whatsoever of the alleged relationship between the parties to this litigation. Moreover, the
existence of an agreement for alternative dispute resolution is more properly raised by
preliminary objection to the complaint. Pa.R.C.P. 1028(6). In summary, we are satisfied that the
pending motion to compel mediation is premature.
AND NOW, this
ORDER
day of July, 2005, the motion of the defendants to compel
mediation is DENIED. Argument on the Gaughen defendants' motion for protective order is
2
NO. 04-6039 CIVIL
herewith set for Thursday, September 8,2005, at 2:15 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland
County Courthouse, Carlisle, P A.
BY THE COURT,
Kevin A. Hess, 1.
Albert 1. Hajjar, Esquire
F or the Plaintiffs
Douglas Marsico, Esquire
For Defendants C.M. Detweiler Inc., Howard Hanna
Detweiler Realty and Hillary Bitting
Paige MacDonald-Matthes, Esquire
For Defendants Jack Gaughen, Inc. and Keith Sealover
Umakant and Kalyane Dash
310 Connor Circle
Sacramento, CA 95835
:rlm
3
HITESH SUR!, RAMA SUR! and
SATISH SUR!,
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
vs.
NO. 04-6039 CIVIL
UMAKANT DASH, KAL Y ANE
DASH, C.M. DETWEILER, INC.,
Individually and trading as
HOWARD HANNA DETWEILER
REALTY, HILLARY BITTING,
JACK GAUGHEN, INC. trading
And doing business as JACK
GAUGHEN REAL TOR ERA and
KEITH SEALOVER,
Defendants
ORDER
AND NOW, this
day of July, 2005, the motion of the defendants to compel
mediation is DENIED. Argument on the Gaughen defendants' motion for protective order is
herewith set for Thursday, September 8,2005, at 2:15 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland
County Courthouse, Carlisle, P A.
BY THE COURT,
Kevin A. Hess, 1.
Albert 1. Hajjar, Esquire
F or the Plaintiffs
Douglas Marsico, Esquire
For Defendants C.M. Detweiler Inc., Howard Hanna
Detweiler Realty and Hillary Bitting
Paige MacDonald-Matthes, Esquire
For Defendants Jack Gaughen, Inc. and Keith Sealover
Umakant and Kalyane Dash
310 Connor Circle
Sacramento, CA 95835
:rlm