WINDOW WORLD

    ENTERTAINMENT FOR MARK
   I HAVE TO STOP WITH THE LAWSUIT STORY FOR AWHILE BECAUSE OF WORK, BUT EVERYBODY HAS TIME TO LAUGH.  

A WATERSHED MOMENT

   WE RECEIVED CATHERS AMENDED COMPLAINT ON FRIDAY SEPT. 8TH 2006 AND HAD TILL THE 26TH TO ANSWER.  WHAT I MAY HAVE THOUGHT HALF-HEARTILY, WOULDN'T HAPPEN, DID IN FACT HAPPEN.  AFTER READING THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS OF SIR WALTER SCOTTS FAMOUS QUOTE, " OH, WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE, WHEN FIRST WE PRACTICE TO DECEIVE! "  THERE WAS NOW NO DOUBT THEIR LAWSUIT COULD SHUT DOWN OUR DRIVEWAY.  OBVIOUSLY WHEN FACED WITH THAT FACT, IT IS UPSETTING.  BUT, I ALSO LOOKED AT IT FOR WHAT IT WAS.  A BIG LIE. AND THEY JUST MADE A BIG MISTAKE......A GAME CHANGER .
   READING NO. 11, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THEIR AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND COMPARING IT WITH THEIR EXHIBIT "C", I HAD TO DO SOME GUESSING.  WHY WASN'T THESE DIMENSIONS LAYED-OUT  BY A SURVEYOR ?  AND PUT ON EXHIBIT "C"?  OH , I REMEMBER, I HEARD AT THE COURTHOUSE DURING ORAL ARGUMENTS.......THEY COULD  MEASURE THEMSELVES AND SAVE MONEY.    SO, I'LL TRY TO EXPLAIN THIS BY WORDS, AND HOPEFULLY I CAN MAKE IT UNDERSTANDABLE. CATHERS SURVEYED PROPERTY AND THESE DIMENSIONS  ARE NOT ONE AND THE SAME.  THESE DIMENSIONS START AT AN EXISTING MAG NAIL IN THE DRIVEWAY, AND GO 7 FEET ACROSS THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY, FOLLOWING THE SURVEYED BOUNDARY.  THEN, 43 FEET, TAKES YOU THROUGH THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE PAVEMENT OF GREEN STREET , WHICH IS NOW CALLED EAST DONORA RD.  THAT DIMENSION TAKES YOU BEYOND THE ACTUAL SURVEYED BOUNDARY OF THE CATHERS PROPERTY.  CATHERS SURVEY, LOOKING AT THEIR EXHIBIT "C", SHOWS A MUCH SMALLER, TRIANGULAR SHAPED, ENCROACHMENT.  EVEN I CAN SEE THERE ARE SOME OBJECTIONS IN THIS AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND THAT'S NOT ALL.  IN ANY CASE, CATHERS NEXT DIMENSION, 26 FEET- 10 INCHES, RUNS SOUTH ALONG GREEN ST., THEN FROM THERE 15 FEET-6 INCHES TO THE EXISTING MAG NAIL.  BECAUSE OUR DRIVEWAY MEETS EAST DONORA RD. AT A SHARP ANGLE THE 26 FEET- 10 INCHES REFLECTS THE LENGTH OF ASPHALT OF OUR DRIVEWAY TOUCHING EAST DONORA RD.
   NOT UNTIL MUCH LATER DID I EVEN BOTHER GOING OUT TO MEASURE THIS, I JUST TOOK AN EDUCATED GUESS.  I FOUND THIS UNBELIEVABLE.  I REMEMBER HOW PRECISE  MR. SHIRE REQUIRED ME TO BE WITH THOSE SHRUBS.  HERE WE ARE IN A LEGAL BATTLE AND THEY CAN'T PAY TO PUT DIMENSIONS DOWN LEGITIMATELY .  MAYBE THEY WANT ME TO PAY?  OK, I'M GAME, BUT LITTLE DID THEY REALIZE HOW ME THINKING WHAT DIMENSIONS NEEDED PUT DOWN, WOULD COME BACK TO HAUNT THEM AT TRAIL.  BESIDES THE ACTUAL SURVEYED PROPERTY THAT MY DRIVEWAY CROSSES, THE TRIANGLE, WHAT ELSE MIGHT BE IMPORTANT?  WELL, IF THEIR CLAIMING I MOVED MY DRIVEWAY WHEN I REPAVED IT, THEN THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THEIR GARAGE AND MY DRIVEWAY WOULD CHANGE.  MAYBE, THAT DISTANCE TODAY WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO KNOW.  THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ENIGMAS WITH THIS AMENDED COMPLAINT.  TO THIS DAY I CAN'T FIGURE OUT 26 FEET - 10 INCHES?  WHEN THE DISTANCE IS FINALLY SURVEYED BY ME PAYING TO HAVE IT PUT ON PAPER, THE MEASUREMENT IS 25.26'.........DID I LOSE SOME ASPHALT SOMEHOW?    
   ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 I WENT TO THE SURVEYOR TO HAVE HIM PUT DOWN ON PAPER THE DIMENSIONS THAT I FELT WERE IMPORTANT. THEN I TOOK 2 VIDEOS FROM A CAMCORDER THAT MIGHT HAVE A SECOND OF VIDEO THAT COULD BE HELPFUL TO SHIRE LAW FIRM.  I TALKED TO KEN ABOUT THEIR AMENDED COMPLAINT.  HE SAID WE COULD FILE OBJECTIONS AGAIN, BUT WHY WASTE THE MONEY, WE WILL ANSWER WITH A CLAIM FOR "QUITE TITLE".  YES!!!!!!!  I ASKED KEN TO SEE THE ORIGINAL 1994 APPRAISAL PICTURE, I NEVER REALLY  GOT A GOOD LOOK AT IT.  HE GOT IT AND WE BOTH LOOKED AT IT, KNOWING NOW THE DISTANCE IS 7 FEET, NOT INCHES.  NOW THE PICTURE LOOKED SO TELLING.  AS I WAS LEAVING I SAID TO KEN, '' WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, DO WE."  KEN HAD THE BIGGEST SMILE AND SAID, " NO".  

CATHERS AMENDED COMPLAINT

THE LONGEST SUMMER- ALMOST OVER

   AT THE END OF AUGUST 2006 AND THE BEGINNING OF SEPTEMBER, BESIDES BRINGING WOOD DOWN TO THE BACK PORCH FOR WINTER AND INSTALLING CONDUIT AND CABLE FOR SECURITY CAMERAS I CONTINUED MY SEARCH FOR EVIDENCE. ON THE 28TH OF AUGUST I WENT TO THE ROSTRAVER MUNICIPAL BUILDING AND ASKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. I WILL FOREVER BE INDEBTED TO THE KIND SECRETARY WHO POINTED ME TO THE WESTMORELAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE.  I ALSO TALKED TO THE ROSTRAVER ROAD SUPERINTENDENT ABOUT EAST DONORA RD. AND THE ASPHALT BERM.  THE NEXT DAY HE CALLS BACK AND SAYS HE CAN'T FIND ANYTHING ON THE BERM, BUT HE RECALLS A PIPE AND DRAIN PUT IN, AND WILL TRY TO LOCATE SOMETHING ON THAT.  HAD A LONG TALK WITH A GOOD NEIGHBOR.  CALLED THE ASPHALT CONTRACTOR ABOUT THE BERM AND HE DIDN'T RECALL TOUCHING THE BERM.  ON SEPT. 12, 2006 I CALLED AND TALKED TO A PREVIOUS OWNER OF OUR PROPERTY.  SHE SAID SHE CAN'T REMEMBER THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY.  SHE SAID SHE KNOWS OF NO SURVEY.  SHE SAID THE DRIVEWAY WAS PUT THERE IN 1966, MAYBE.   
   

THE LONGEST SUMMER- SOME HOPE

   THROUGH- OUT AUGUST I CONTINUED SEARCHING FOR EVIDENCE.  I MANAGED TO GET CATHERS PRE-BLAST PICTURES AND HAD THEM ENLARGED.  I WAS DISAPPOINTED TO FIND OUT YORK REALITY COULD NOT LOCATE ANY PICTURES FROM 1978.  I FOUND OUT AT WESTMORELAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE THE COMMON SOURCE OF OUR DEEDS.  THEY GO BACK TO BOYD/ WALKER , CO-OWNERS OF LOTS 21,22, ETC., AND THEN THEY DIVIDED THEM UP.  WALKER WAS THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF OUR PROPERTY AND BOYD WAS THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THE CATHERS PROPERTY.  SO, MAYBE THAT'S WHY?
   ON AUGUST 9TH 2006 I WENT TO THE LIBRARY AGAIN, ONLY THIS TIME, I GET ON THE INTERNET FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE.  NOT VERY PRODUCTIVE, I  HAD TO LEARN FROM SCRATCH.  ON AUGUST 15TH THERE WAS A MEETING AT MY DRIVEWAY WITH THE ASPHALT CONTRACTOR, KEN AND MR. SHIRE.  THEY WENT OVER THE ISSUE OF ANY POSSIBLE MOVEMENT OF THE DRIVEWAY.  I TOLD MR. SHIRE AND KEN THE COMMON SOURCE OF THE DEEDS.
   ON AUGUST 22ND I WROTE ON MY CALENDAR.........WENT OVER SABO'S .  THIS WAS PROBABLY THE DAY JIM SAID,  "THERE'S GOT TO BE AERIAL PHOTO'S SOMEWHERE".   ON AUGUST 24TH WE RECEIVED THE JUDGES ORDER ON PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS.  THEY HAVE TO REDO THEIR COMPLAINT.  LATER IN THE DAY MR. HASSON AND THE CATHERS ARE IN THE DRIVEWAY.
   ON SATURDAY AUGUST 26, 2006, AFTER NOT MENTIONING WHAT SHE SAW BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T RECOGNIZE IT AS MEANINGFUL WHILE CUTTING GRASS ON WEDNESDAY, ARLENE MENTIONS TO ME ," LOOK AT THE BERM" .  WE BOTH WALKED AND DROVE OVER IT FOR YEARS WITHOUT  GIVING IT A THOUGHT.  ARLENE, WITH A PUSH-MOWER, IS STARING RIGHT AT IT, BUT, DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE .  SOMETHING TELLS HER TO TELL ME AND I GO RIGHT OUT AND LOOK.  I COME BACK IN THE HOUSE AND TELL HER, " YOU JUST FOUND THE BEST EVIDENCE YET."  THE BERM WAS FLATTENED IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY AND I WAS PRETTY SURE IT PRE-DATED THE 2002 REPAVING.  I REMEMBER BEING ON THE DRIVEWAY WHEN ROSTRAVER TWP INSTALLED THE ASPHALT BERM.  I REMEMBER TELLING THEM, AFTER THEY ASKED, TO FLATTEN  THE BERM IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY.  NOW I HAD TO POSITIVELY DATE THAT BERM.  

ORDER ON PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

ORAL ARGUMENTS ON PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

                                          WHAT A GRAND OLD BUILDING.

   AUGUST 17, 2006 AT THE WESTMORELAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE.  I GET THERE AT 10;15 AM , 15 MINUTES LATE, ROAD CONSTRUCTION.  JUDGE CARUSO IS THERE, AS ARE MY TWO ATTORNEYS, MR. SHIRE AND KEN BALDONIERI. AFTER THE PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEY , MR. HASSON, GETS THERE , MR. SHIRE GOES FIRST, STATING OUR FOUR OBJECTIONS.   MR. HASSON GOES NEXT AND SAYS HE'S TRYING TO SAVE THE CATHERS MONEY, THAT HE MIGHT HAVE TO GO BACK 200 YEARS TO DO AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE. HE FEELS THAT A DEED SHOWS OWNERSHIP.  MR. SHIRE PULLS OUT THE PLOT PLAN OF EAST DONORA  AND SHOWS THAT MR. HASSON ONLY HAS TO GO BACK TO 1919.  MR. SHIRE ALSO POINTS OUT THAT A DEED DOES NOT SHOW AN UNCLOUDED TITLE.  MR. SHIRE ALSO POINTED OUT TWICE, " ADVERSE POSSESSION" BEING THE ONLY CASE WHERE YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE AN " ABSTRACT OF TITLE".  JUDGE CARUSO OPENS RULES OF COURT, AND READS, " ABSTRACT OF TITLE UPON WHICH PLAINTIFFS RELY AT LEAST FROM THE COMMON SOURCE."
   FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AS A LAY-PERSON, THIS WAS A FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO SEE YOUR ATTORNEY AGAINST THEIR ATTORNEY.  I WAS VERY HAPPY WITH WHAT I SAW. THEY WERE WELL PREPARED.  AND,  I WAS DUMBFOUNDED  BY THE FACT THAT THE PLAINTIFFS DID NOT ATTEND.   THIS IS THEIR LAWSUIT.