Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-2631 Civil COCHRAN INVESTMENT COMP ANY, INC., Substituted Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-2631 CIVIL JAMES W. SAUVE and mDITH A. SAUVE, Defendants IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE HESS, OLER AND EBERT, 1.1. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the court is the motion of the plaintiff for summary judgment. Summary judgment may be granted whenever "there is no genuine issue of any material fact as to a necessary element of the cause of action or defense which could be established by additional discovery...." Pa.R.Civ.P. 1020.2(1). The adverse party, of course, may not rest upon the mere allegations of the pleadings but must file a response to the summary judgment motion. Pa.R.C.P. 1035.3(a). In this case, a response was filed. The respective positions of the parties may be briefly summarized as follows. The plaintiff contends that it is the assignee of a mortgage loan from Chrysler First Consumer Discount Company to the defendants. The original mortgage, executed January 26, 1989, was for the amount of$21,240.00. No payments have been made on the loan since February 2, 1994. The loan was sold and the note and mortgage assigned in 1993, in 2003, and again in 2004. The plaintiff claims to have documentary evidence which will establish conclusively that a principal balance of $7,289.10 remains unpaid, that almost $15,000.00 in interest has accrued and that $11,858.13 in attorneys' fees have been incurred. NO. 04-2631 CIVIL The defendants claim that they paid the loan. They claim, also, that they are unable to document this fact because all of their records were destroyed when their home was gutted by fire. They question the validity of the plaintiff s claim, noting that they received no notice of default for a period of more than ten years. When reflecting upon a motion for summary judgment, our role is not to forecast which party will ultimately prevail at trial. Rather, summary judgment is entered in order to forego trial where material facts are not in dispute. This is not such a case. ORDER AND NOW, this 25th day of April, 2006, the motion of the plaintiff for summary judgment is DENIED. BY THE COURT, Kevin A. Hess, 1. Max L. Lieberman, Esquire Gregory H. Knight, Esquire F or the Plaintiff James W. and Judith A. Sauve, Pro Se Defendants :rlm 2 COCHRAN INVESTMENT COMP ANY, INC., Substituted Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-2631 CIVIL JAMES W. SAUVE and mDITH A. SAUVE, Defendants IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE HESS, OLER AND EBERT, 1.1. ORDER AND NOW, this 25th day of April, 2006, the motion of the plaintiff for summary judgment is DENIED. BY THE COURT, Kevin A. Hess, 1. Max L. Lieberman, Esquire Gregory H. Knight, Esquire F or the Plaintiff James W. and Judith A. Sauve, Pro Se Defendants :rlm