vol. lviii allentown, pa friday, september 20, 2019 no....

Vol. LVIII Allentown, PA Friday, September 20, 2019 No. 64

2

THE COURTThe Hon. Edward D. Reibman, President Judge

The Hon. Robert L. Steinberg, Judge The Hon. J. Brian Johnson, Judge The Hon. Kelly L. Banach, Judge

The Hon. James T. Anthony, Judge The Hon. Maria L. Dantos, Judge

The Hon. Michele A. Varricchio, Judge The Hon. Douglas G. Reichley, Judge The Hon. Melissa T. Pavlack, Judge

The Hon. Anna-Kristie M. Marks, Judge The Hon. Carol K. McGinley, Senior Judge

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL (USPS 309560)

Owned and Published by THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF LEHIGH COUNTY

1114 Walnut Street, Allentown, PA 18102 www.lehighbar.org

JAMES J. KOZUCH, President ROBERT P. DADAY, President-Elect

BUDDY LESAVOY, Vice President MICHAEL S. DAIGLE, Secretary

NANCY CONRAD, Treasurer SUSAN G. MAURER, Historian

ZACHARY COHEN, Law Journal Committee Chair RAY BRIDGEMAN, Executive Director

MATTHEW KLOIBER, Case Editor Copyright © 2019 Bar Association of Lehigh County

The Lehigh Law Journal is published every Friday. All legal notices must be submitted in typewritten form and are published exactly as submitted by the advertiser. Neither the Law Journal nor the printer will assume any respon-sibility to edit, make spelling corrections, eliminate errors in grammar or make any changes in content.

The Law Journal makes no representation as to the quality of services offered by any advertiser in this publication.

Legal notices must be received at 1114 W. Walnut St., Allentown, PA 18102, before 4 p.m. the preceding Monday. Telephone (610) 433-6204. Advance issues $100.00 per year. Single copies $2.00. Payment of annual dues to the Bar As sociation of Lehigh County includes year’s subscription to Lehigh Law Journal.

Printed at 206 S. Keystone Ave., Sayre PA 18840Periodical postage paid at Allentown, PA 18102 and

at additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Lehigh Law Journal, 1114 W. Walnut St., Allentown, PA 18102.

4

2001 Market Street, Suite 1100 Two Commerce Square

Philadelphia, PA 19103-7044

Please call (215) 564-1775 or (800) 346-6098 to schedule your ADR matter or go to adroptions.com for more detailed biographies of these and other members of the panel

In 2019, Trust the BestTwenty-Six Years Settling Cases

Pennsylvania & New Jersey

Hon. Tom Wallitsch (Ret.)

Hon. Bill Ford (Ret.)

Hon. Leonard Zito (Ret.)

Phil Hof, Esquire

Hon. Joe Van Jura (Ret.)

Jill Snyder, Esquire

MEDIATION

ARBITRATION

MOCK TRIALS

DISCOVERY MASTERS

NEUTRAL CASE EVALUATIONS

6

CH

AR

ITY

EV

EN

T

FRID

AY

, NO

VE

MB

ER

22

BA

RR

ISTE

R’S

CLU

B

11

14

W W

aln

ut

St

Alle

nto

wn

, PA

DO

OR

S O

PE

N A

T 7P

M •

SH

OW

AT

8P

M$

40 P

ER

TIC

KE

T/$

75 P

ER

CO

UP

LEV

IP T

AB

LES

AV

AIL

AB

LEFO

R T

ICK

ETS

AN

D IN

FOR

MA

TIO

N:

DE

NN

YC

OR

BY

.WE

LLA

TTE

ND

ED

.CO

M

CA

SH

BA

RC

AS

H O

NLY

AT

DO

OR

, $50

PE

R T

ICK

ET

& G

UE

ST

AS

SE

EN

ON

SE

PT

30TH

9

Fitzpatrick, Lentz & Bubba, P.C., a leading Lehigh Valley-based law firm and regularly

recognized as a “Top Workplace” is growing.

The firm is seeking an experienced, quality, committed attorney with a background appropriate for our Corporate,

Business and Banking and Real Estate Law Practice Groups.

The ideal candidate will have a minimum of three years’ experience in transactional law, representing business

entities of all types, handling varied transactions for buyers, sellers, investors and business owners, including

leasing and real estate sales and acquisitions. The candidate should also be experienced in contract drafting,

including entity organizational documents.

Outstanding credentials are required. We offer a competitive compensation and benefits package, a collegial work environment, and the opportunity for

professional growth.

For more information about the firm, go to http://www.flblaw.com.

Please send a cover letter with references along with your resume to [email protected] or to:

Hiring CommitteeFitzpatrick Lentz & Bubba, P.C.

4001 Schoolhouse LaneCenter Valley, PA 18034-0219

www.flblaw.com • 610-797-9000

11

View email online

Pro Bono CLE*—Learn How to Use Your Legal Skills to Help Victims of Animal Abuse and Neglect

Each year in Pennsylvania, thousands of animals are victims of abuse and neglect at the hands of their owners. The fortunate ones are rescued by dedicated animal welfare organizations, who file criminal charges against the abusers—but what happens to the animals after that? Unless an owner willingly surrenders, an abused animal can languish at a shelter for months or even years as the criminal process drags on. Caring for victims of animal abuse places a tremendous strain on the resources of the welfare organizations, especially in large hoarding situations, and remaining in cages at a shelter, ineligible for adoption, places a tremendous strain on the animals themselves.

Pennsylvania’s recentlyenacted Costs of Care of Seized Animals Act is a powerful tool to help rescues recover the costs of caring for these animals while the criminal case is pending and also expedites the forfeiture and subsequent adoption of animals whose owners refuse to pay.

1. Learn the nuts and bolts of investigating reports of animal cruelty and neglect, executing search warrants, taking animals into protective custody, and prosecuting abusive owners.

2. Learn how to file a Pennsylvania Costs of Care Petition and put on an evidentiary hearing.

3. Understand the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct that are implicated in criminal and civil actions, including Rules 1.14, 1.16, 3.1, 3.6, 3.8, and 4.3.

4. Network with representatives of various SPCAs and other animal welfare organizations who need your help.

5. Spend some quality time with adoptable kittens.

Friday, October 25, 2019 8:30 a.m.–noon

Live Location

McCarter & English, LLP 1600 Market Street, Suite 3900 Philadelphia, PA 19103

Simulcast Location

Bar Association of Lehigh County 1114 West Walnut Street Allentown, PA 18102

Speakers

Joann Lytle and Ashley Turner, McCarter & English, LLP Penny Ellison, Adjunct Professor of Animal Law and Ethics, University of Pennsylvania Law School Nikki Thompson, Chief Humane Society Police Officer, Bucks County SPCA

*Approved for 1 ethics credit and 2.0 substantive credits in NY, NJ, and PA. DE CLE credit pending. There is no charge to attend this seminar. Attendees requiring PA CLE credit are asked to provide a check payable to McCarter & English, LLP, in the amount of $4.50 to cover the registration fee charged by the Pennsylvania CLE Board.

Please click here to register online or contact Alyse Pashman at [email protected].

UPDATE INFORMATION | FORWARD | UNSUBSCRIBE

McCarter & English, LLP: 1600 Market Street, Suite 3900, Philadelphia, PA 19103

Copyright 2019. McCarter & English, LLP. All Rights Reserved.

12

Presented by: Hon. Michele Varricchio, Hon. Jennifer Sletvold, Hon. Melissa Pavlack, Hon. Anna-Kristie Morffi Marks,

Joanne Kelhart, Esq., Jessica Moyer, Esq., Miriam Zettlemoyer, Cady Darago and Tanner Urban

Moderated by: Candy Barr Heimbach

Thursday, October 3, 2019 CJE Approved for 2 Ethics & 1 Substantive CLE Credit

(Not approved for Judicial Credit)

Please join us for another Women in the Law Committee program, “Professionalism and Well-Being.” The program will include insights from Cady Darago at ESQuisite Marketing, LLC on marketing for women lawyers. Miriam Zettlemoyer of Mass Mutual will present on financial issues, long-term care and succession planning. Tanner Urban of Tom James Company will share some historical facts on women’s professional attire, and we will then invite our judicial/legal panel to share their thoughts on women’s attire in the courtroom and work-life balance. The program will include a panel of our esteemed local judges, including Judge Michele Varricchio, Judge Jennifer Sletvold, Judge Melissa Pavlack and Judge Anna-Kristie Morffi Marks, as well as local attorneys, including Joanne Kelhart and Jessica Moyer.

Registration and Lunch: 12:00 PM

Seminar: 1:00 PM – 4:00 PM Networking Mixer: 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM

Tuition for All: $50.00 Legal Support Staff: $20.00

To Register Call Nancy @ (610) 433.6401 Ext: 16 E-mail: [email protected]

Networking Mixer Sponsored by:

9-13, 20, 27

13

OFFICE SPACE AVAILABLE

Office space available in Victorian at 1248 Hamilton Street, Allentown. Single offices and office suites available on 2nd floor and ground level with separate entrance from rear park-ing lot available. Fully renovated in 2011, featuring hardwood floors, tile, stained glass, ornamental fireplaces. Conference rooms available on each floor. Ground level with separate rear entrance fully renovated with office, conference and storage space. Handicapped accessible, off-street parking, new gas HVAC, wiring, plumbing. Security building moni-tored security alarm, 4 exterior cameras, smoke and CO2 alarms. Internal security camera to be added. Contact John (866) 200-3745, ext. 402. Video tour available upon request.

7-5—9-27

The BALC Facebook page is updated regularly with meeting reminders and event notices, and includes photo albums, discussion boards, links, and much more. “Like” us at www.facebook.com/BarAssociationLehighCounty

14

OFFICE SPACE AVAILABLE

Office space available in downtown Allentown. Walking distance to the Lehigh County courthouse, the Federal court-house, post office, banks, hockey arena, restaurants, etc. Single office or two-/four-room suite available. Conference room, utilities, Wi-Fi and parking are included. Great for an attorney or business professional. Rent for one room $375.00. Discount for two-/four-room suites. Very affordable rent. Contact for an appointment. (610) 776-8677.

9-20, 27

DeJesus et ux. vs. Mangold et al. 517

Lehigh 7-17 op

15

ROBERT DeJESUS, SHANNON M. DeJESUS vs. GARY O. MANGOLD, MANGOLD EXCAVATING LLC

TRADING AND DOING BUSINESS AS GARY MANGOLD EXCAVATING

Summary Judgment—Workers’ Compensation—Third-Party Liability—Independent Contractor Status—Construction

Workplace Misclassification Act—Negligence.Plaintiff filed a negligence action averring that the Defendants injured him while

he was working on a construction site. Plaintiff ’s spouse sought consortium damages. De-fendants filed for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiffs’ claims were barred under the exclusivity of remedy provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act because Plaintiff worker and Defendants were each employed by the same general contractor. Plaintiffs countered that the exclusivity provision did not apply because Defendants were independent contractors who were not employed by his employer. The Court examined the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and denied summary judgment because factual issues remained as to Defendants’ employment status.

In the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County, Pennsyl-vania—Civil Division. File No. 2015-C 3550. Robert DeJesus, Shannon M. DeJesus vs. Gary O. Mangold, Mangold Excavating LLC Trading and Doing Business As Gary Mangold Excavating.

Ronald E. CiRba, EsquiRE, on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

KEnt H. HERman, EsquiRE, on behalf of the Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

mCCaRtHy, J., June 13, 2017. Before the Court is the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants. This case arises from injuries Plaintiff Robert DeJesus avers he suffered at a construction site when he was struck by heavy equipment operated by Defendant Gary O. Mangold.1 The gist of Defendants’ motion is that Defen-dants were employees of the general contractor just as Plaintiff was, and that, as such, Plaintiffs are prevented from bringing the

1As discussed later, despite what seems to be the obvious connection between indi-vidual Defendant Gary O. Mangold and corporate Defendant Mangold Excavating LLC trading and doing business as Gary O. Mangold Excavating, Defendants’ motion and sup-porting brief are silent as to the relationship between the two Defendants. Further, De-fendants have previously denied what appears to be the clear relationship between the Defendants. For instance, in the Complaint Plaintiffs averred that Gary O. Mangold was “the sole partner of Defendant Mangold Excavating.” (Complaint ¶5.) Defendants’ answer was, “Denied. It is specifically denied that Mangold Excavating, LLC has or had any ‘sole partners.’ ” (Answer ¶5.)

DeJesus et ux. vs. Mangold et al.518

Lehigh 7-17 op

present negligence suit against them. As we conclude that it is not clear and free from doubt that Plaintiffs are unable to recover, we deny summary judgment.

I) Standard

Summary judgment is warranted after the relevant pleadings are closed and discovery has been completed under the following circumstances:

(1) 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 or expert report, or

(2) if, after the completion of discovery relevant to the motion, including the production of expert reports, an adverse party who will bear the burden of proof at trial has failed to produce evidence of facts essential to the cause of action or defense which in a jury trial would require the issues to be submitted to a jury.

Pa. R.C.P. 1035.2. Summary judgment is to be granted only in a case that is clear and free from doubt. Washington v. Baxter, 553 Pa. 434, 441, 719 A.2d 733, 737 (1998). In passing upon a motion for summary judgment the court must examine the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Pocono Interna-tional Raceway, Inc. v. Pocono Produce, Inc., 503 Pa. 80, 82-83, 468 A.2d 468, 470 (1983). “[A]ll doubts as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact must be resolved against the moving party.” Sokolsky v. Eidelman, 93 A.3d 858, 861 (Pa. Super. 2014) (citation omitted).

II) Background and Arguments

Plaintiff Robert DeJesus was employed by Kay Builders, Inc. (hereinafter “KBI”). KBI was the general contractor for the site. Defendant Gary O. Mangold (hereinafter “Mangold”) was operat-ing an excavator at the same site. On March 23, 2015, Mangold caused the bucket portion of the excavating equipment to strike Plaintiff on the back of his head and caused him injuries. Plaintiff avers these injuries have diminished his enjoyment of life, caused

16


Lehigh 7-17 op

financial distress, and emotional suffering, all of which he is seek-ing compensation for. His spouse seeks damages for loss of con-sortium.2

KBI had entered a “Contractor Agreement” with “Mangold Excavating, LLC” (hereinafter “Mangold LLC”). The Contractor Agreement provided that:

Contractor is, and will continue to be, an independent contractor and is not to be considered in any way subject to KBI. Contractor is not, and is never to be an agent or em-ployee of KBI, and Contractor shall have no power [sic] au-thority to pledge or attempt to pledge or bind or obligate KBI in any manner or purpose or vice versa.

(Contractor Agreement, ¶1.a.i. at 1.) Additionally, a paragraph titled “Workmanship and Materials” contains provisions that hold Mangold LLC financially responsible for damages Mangold LLC causes and that requires Mangold LLC to obtain the permits nec-essary to complete the work it would be doing:

a. General

i. Contractor is responsible for obtaining all state and local contractor’s or business licenses prior to working for KBI.

ii. KBI has the right to Backcharge the Contractor for the cost of damages resulting in any breach of this Agreement.

iii. All Work performed by the Contractor shall meet all requirements of all state and local [laws. ... ]

* * * *

g. Damage

i. Contractor is directly responsible for any damage to their own Work or to other contractors work including by [sic] not limited to streets, curbs, open space, and homes. KBI retains the right to withhold payments to Contractor in order to pay for repair of damages by Contractor.

2References in this memorandum opinion to the singular “Plaintiff ” are references to Robert DeJesus.

17


Lehigh 7-17 op

* * * *

h. Warranty

* * * *

iii. If any Work is found to be installed incorrectly or cause damage to other work, the Subcontractor is responsible for all costs and damage incurred.

(Contractor Agreement ¶3.) The Contractor Agreement also con-tained a paragraph titled “Payment Terms” which discussed how Mangold LLC was required to submit invoices for its work within a certain time frame, and that KBI would not be required to make payment for that work if the invoices were not timely submitted:

a. All invoices submitted shall include all applicable taxes itemized specifically on invoice.

b. All invoices shall be submitted within 60 days of work being completed[...]. Failure to submit in this time period shall relieve KBI of obligations to pay for such work.

c. Contractor is solely responsible for any monies owed by it for any Work completed for KBI.

d. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold KBI harmless for any liabilities, losses, damages and costs, arising from or connected with any liens furnished by Con-tractor’s subcontractors, suppliers, and employees in connec-tion with work completed for KBI to this Agreement

i. KBI has the right to withhold 200% of any lien claim against work performed by Contractor for KBI for any pay-ment due to Contractor

(Contractor Agreement ¶4.) Additionally, the Contractor Agree-ment required Mangold LLC to maintain various types of insurance as set forth in a paragraph titled “Insurance Requirements:”

a. Contractor, its agents and employees and their Con-tractors shall at their own expense, shall procure, carry, and maintain on all of its operations for all and any ongoing work, Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability insurance

18


Lehigh 7-17 op

covering all its employees; Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance; and Automotive Liability insurance. Cover-age limits shall be in accordance with the requirements listed below. Contractor is required to name KBI’s and related entities as additional insured’s on Subcontractor’s General Liability policy. ...

(Contractor Agreement ¶5.) The policy limits that were required included CGL limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence with a general aggregate limit of $2,000,000 and “Minimum Umbrella/Excess Liability Coverage” of 1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 Aggregate. (Contractor Agreement ¶5ii, iv.)

Defendants argue that Mangold was an employee of the general contractor just as Plaintiff was. Since both were employees of the general contractor, Plaintiffs are prevented from bringing an action against Defendants. Defendants base this argument on the exclusivity of remedy provision of Section 303(a) of the Work-ers’ Compensation Act (WC Act), Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P.S. §481(a).3 Defendants argue that they qualify as an employee of KBI under common-law principles for evaluat-ing employer-employee status. Defendants also argue that the Construction Workplace Misclassification Act (CWMA), Act of Oct. 13, 2010, P.L. 506, 43 P.S. §933.1-933.17 applies to the pres-ent case. Defendants argue that the terms of the CWMA require the Court to find that Mangold was an employee of the general contractor. At argument, Defendants also referenced Patton v. Worthington Associates, Inc., 625 Pa. 1, 89 A.3d 643 (2014), a case not included in their written submissions, as supporting their posi-

3Preliminarily, we note Defendants’ arguments are challenging to discern. Defen-dants style their brief with the following four issues:

A. WHETHER DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE DEFENDANT WAS A CO-EMPLOYEE OF THE PLAINTIFF AND NOT AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR?

Suggested Answer: Yes.

B. THE CONSTRUCTION WORK PLACE MISQUALIFICAITON ACT IS LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY THAT MANGOLD WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF KAY BUILDERS?

Suggested Answer: Yes.19


Lehigh 7-17 op

tion. Defendants in their motion do not address the relationship between Gary O. Mangold and Mangold Excavating, LLC.4

Plaintiffs challenge Defendants’ motion. Plaintiffs aver Man-gold is the sole shareholder of Mangold LLC. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants were independent contractors on the site such that the exclusivity provision of the WC Act does not apply. Additionally,

C. BECAUSE EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATTONSHIP EXISTED BETWEEN KAY BUILDERS AND MANGOLD MANGOLD IS IMMUNE FROM SUIT BY A CO-EMPLOYEE PLAINTFF ROBERT DEJESUS?


D, BECAUSE EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP EXISTED BETWEEN KAY BUILDERS AND MANGOLD MANGOLD lS IMMUNE FROM NOT SUBJECT TO SUIT BY CO-EMPLYEE BY THE CO EMPLOYEE PLAINTFF ROBERT DEJESUS


(SJ Br. at 2-3; Issues Presented (grammar, spelling and format retained from the original).) The organization and phrasing of these issues reduces the clarity of Defendants’ arguments. Further challenging our review is that, as discussed later in this opinion, the Defendants reference incorrect courts when discussing authority, and seem to attribute principles of law to particular cases that do not contain those principles. Additionally, Defendants further fail to provide a citation to one of the two statutes they rely on. The crux of Defendants’ argument is that the exclusivity provision of the WC Act precludes Plaintiffs’ recovery from Defendants. Indeed, it appears this statutory section is the underlying, necessary premise to each of Defendants’ other issues. Nonetheless, Defendants do not reference this section, by name or citation, until their fourth issue. The effect of this is that it is not entirely clear if these preceding issues are based on some other, unstated, legal premise. The sum of these deficiencies suggests to the Court that these arguments have not been adequately, let alone fully reviewed and developed. Defendants’ arguments were clarified at oral argu-ment. We have reframed the issues for clarity.

4In the prefatory paragraph to their motion, Defendants indicate that they will refer to all Defendants collectively as MANGOLD in their motion: “AND NOW, comes Defen-dant Gary O. Mangold and Mangold Excavating, LLC t/d/b/a Gary O. Mangold Excavating (hereinafter MANGOLD.” (SJ Mtn. at I.) Defendants do not explain how they are con-nected and why they should be referred to collectively. Additionally, at times in the motion, Defendants seem to depart from using this previously established abbreviation by using it, seemingly, to refer to Gary O. Mangold individually. For instance, in a paragraph which comes closest to describing the connection between the parties, Defendants state “On the date of the incident the Defendant MANGOLD worked as an excavator operator. A ‘Con-tractor Agreement’ dated January 7, 2015 was entered between Kay Builders and the Defendant Mangold Excavating, LLC (Mangold).” (SJ Mtn. at ¶3.) In this paragraph Defendants seem to set up an abbreviation for the LLC but then do not use that abbrevia-tion in the remainder of the motion. Throughout the motion the Defendants speak of how MANGOLD was an employee of KBI. Defendants do not explain how an entity, Mangold LLC, was or could be an employee of KBI. They seem to limit their argument to Gary O. Mangold being an employee of KBI, yet only use the collective abbreviation MANGOLD when discussing their argument.

20

NewsLine ______________September 20, 2019

Back by Popular Demand! BINGO Night to benefit the Lehigh County Lawyer’s Charitable Trust

Brought to you by The BALC Community Service Committee in conjunction with

YLD Committee

Thursday, September 26th, 2019 Doors open at 5:30 PM…BINGO starts at 6pm

The Barristers Club 1114 W. Walnut Street Allentown, PA 18102

All BALC Members and Guests are Invited for a Night of Entertainment

Don’t play BINGO? No worries! Feel free to Mix and Mingle while you watch the action!

BINGO Player Cost: $20 for Advanced Admission or

$25 at the Door (Includes 1 Player Card per Game, $1

for each additional card)

Cash and Basket Prizes Additional Activities and Raffles

For advanced ticket reservations, contact Karen at 610-433-6204 x12

[email protected]

Sponsored by:

mailto:[email protected]

http://hello-son.blogspot.com/2011/12/call-300-scribble-scribble.html

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

NewsLine 2

LEHIGH COUNTY PARALEGAL ASSOCIATION

PRESENTS LUNCH AND LEARN

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW 101

One important subject area that eludes a general legal education is

intellectual property law. Legal practitioners in all fields can find

themselves, wittingly or not, in a close encounter with copyright,

trademark, or patent law issues, and not have any familiarity with

basic legal concepts in these areas. Even if intellectual property

does not form a central focus of a law practice, all practice areas,

from business to litigation, would benefit from a primer in

intellectual property law.

In this session, Ryan Fields, Esquire, of King Spry Herman Freund

and Faul LLC, will review the following issues:

• A history of intellectual property in the United States

• What are copyrights, trademarks, and patents?

• What rights do the owners of copyrights, trademarks, and

patents have?

• Common ways intellectual property intersects with other

areas of the law

• How to spot whether intellectual property issues may be

involved in a matter.

When: October 2, 2019 at 12:00 noon

Where: Bar Association of Lehigh County

1114 W. Walnut Street

Allentown, PA 18102

No charge for LCPA members, $25 for guests, and $10 for students.

Please RSVP to Judy Gentile by September 25, 2019:

(610) 758-6234

[email protected]

This presentation is approved by the Keystone Alliance of Paralegal Associations

for one substantive Paralegal CLE credit


NewsLine 3

Support the Lehigh County Lawyers’ Charitable Fund

Comedy Night at

Wisecrackers Comedy Club

Friday, October 4

Starring Dave

Cooperman

Doors open

8pm, Show starts at

9pm

Admission: $20

Contact Ray for tickets and information

610-433-6204 x15 or [email protected]


NewsLine 4

The Criminal Law Committee of the Bar Association of Lehigh County

Cordially Invites you to Attend CRIMINAL LAW

DINNER

Thursday, October 10th, 2019

5:00 pm Hors d’oeuvres & Complimentary Beer, Wine & Soda

6:00 pm Buffet Dinner & Dessert $40 per person

We look forward to hosting a Dinner Meeting and a Program regarding Criminal Law matters of interest with Committee Members, Criminal Law Attorneys,

BALC Officers & Directors, Prosecutors, Public Defenders, Judges and Magisterial District Judges

RSVP to [email protected] Or 610.433.6204 ext. 12

NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, OCT. 4th, 2019


NewsLine 5

Hosted by: The BALC Community Service Committee in Conjunction with The

Young Lawyers Division

$10 Advanced Reservation, $15 at the Door

All Net Proceeds to Benefit The Lehigh County Lawyer’s Charitable Trust

This Year’s Theme: Animal and Pet Related Charities Throughout the Lehigh Valley

Wednesday, October 30th at 5:30 PM

It’s a Doggie Halloween Costume Party! People & Pet Hors D’ oeuvres and Music!

The Barrister’s Club Outside Courtyard 1114 W. Walnut Street Allentown, PA 18102

RSVP to Karen [email protected] or 610-433-6204 X 12

*YLDs-This will be your October Happy Hour! Please come out and enjoy the evening.

Sponsored by:


NewsLine 6

The Fall Ball Better known as “Lawyer Prom” is back by popular demand!

FRIDAY, November 15, 2019

6 PM Cocktails and

Hors d’oeuvres

6:45 PM Dinner & Remarks

7:45 PM Music and Dancing

The Barrister’s Club

1114 W. Walnut Street

Allentown, PA 18102

$45 Per Person

RSVP to Karen by 11/8

[email protected] or at 610-433-6204 X12

Music by Local Favorite, DJ Freddie Frederick, Jr.

Catering by Karen Hunter Valet Parking


CLE UPDATE for the week of: September 20, 2019

PBI Simulcast Seminar “A Day on Employment Law” Tuesday, September 24, 2019

6 informative and thought-provoking sessions Take this opportunity to experience the highlights from PBI’s Employment Law Institute 2019. In just one information-packed day, you will be updated on key employment law topics and litigation trends.

Take away practical solutions for tackling today’s tough workplace problems

PBI’s stellar faculty will make sure you know the legal underpinnings of tricky employment law issues. Just as importantly, they will share with you practical tips for making sure that your clients have proper processes and procedures in place to minimize their legal exposure.

3 reasons you will want to attend A fascinating ethics hour – it’s a great way to pick up an ethics credit and make sure you’re not crossing ethical boundaries. Convenient one-day format with a short break between each hour – the day will fly by. Engaging faculty – PBI’s faculty understand what it is you want to know. They will make sure your day is well spent.

Registration: 8:30 AM; Tuition: $279.00 Seminar: 9:00 AM – 4:10 PM

5 Substantive & 1 Ethics Credits To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637

PBI ANNOUNCEMENT:

Beginning September 1, 2018

Breakfast or Lunch Will Not

Be Provided for Attendees

At PBI Half-Day Seminars

PLEASE READ ADVERTISEMENTS CAREFULLY

BALC CLE Seminars will continue to serve Breakfast / Lunch as usual

CLE Update 2

BALC SPECIAL 3-HOUR LUNCH SEMINAR WITH SOCIAL MIXER TO FOLLOW

“Professionalism and Well-Being” Thursday, October 3, 2019

Presented by: Hon. Michele Varricchio, Hon. Jennifer Sletvold, Hon. Melissa Pavlack, Hon. Anna Kristie Marks,

Joanne Kelhart, Esq., Jessica Moyer, Esq., Miriam Zettlemoyer, Cady Darago and Tanner Urban

Approved for 2 Ethics & 1 Substantive CLE Credit (Not approved for Judicial Credit)

Please join us for another Women in the Law Committee program, “Professionalism and Well-Being”. The program will include insights from Cady Darago at ESQuisite Marketing, LLC on marketing for women lawyers. Miriam Zettlemoyer of Mass Mutual will present on financial issues, long term care and succession planning. Tanner Urban of Tom James Company will share some historical facts on women’s professional attire, and we will then invite our judicial/legal panel to share their thoughts on women’s attire in the courtroom and work-life balance. The program will include a panel of our esteemed local judges, including Judge Michele Varricchio, Judge Jennifer Sletvold, Judge Melissa Pavlack and Judge Anna Kristie Marks as well as local attorneys, including Joanne Kelhart and Jessica Moyer.

Registration and Lunch: 12:00 PM Seminar: 1:00 PM – 4:00 PM

Networking Mixer: 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM Tuition for All: $50.00

Legal Support Staff: $20.00 To Register Call Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16

E-mail: [email protected]

Networking Mixer Sponsored by:

MassMutual Eastern Pennsylvania


CLE Update 3

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“Environmental Due Diligence and the Real Estate Deal”

Presented by: Chris Kotch and Jamie Kleinle Friday, October 4, 2019

Approved for 1 Substantive CLE and CJE Credit

Mr. Chris T. Kotch, a Pennsylvania Licensed Geologist, and Mr. Jamie Kleinle, Environmental Department Manager, both of Barry Isett & Associates, Inc. will review some of the common tools for due diligence in real estate transactions including Transactions Screens, Phase I and Phase II Assessments and remediation. They will discuss the key aspects and definitions and will include actual case studies with photos. Chris and Jamie will explore the basics of the PA Land Recycling Program “Act 2,” and its key advantages.

A look at “What’s Hot” in the Environmental Industry will be discussed including how the PA Department of Environmental Protection processes NPDES permits where environmental issues have arisen. Chris and Jaime will touch on the topic of vapor intrusion assessment and how it is now required as part of due diligence. Discussion will also include liability reduction and other key aspects of environmental due diligence and its impact to the economics and schedule of the deal.

Chris Kotch, P.G. joined Barry Isett & Associates, Inc. in 1996 and was named Department Head of Environmental Services in 2008. Mr. Kotch has been a Pennsylvania Registered Professional Geologist since 2002, and also holds several certifications related to asbestos. Mr. Kotch manages the activities of the environmental department, which is comprised of numerous professionals, including: PA Registered Professional Geologists; a Ph.D. Biologist; PA Registered Professional Soil Scientists; Environmental Scientists; Sewage Enforcement Officers, and several asbestos professionals.

Mr. Kotch is a shareholder of Barry Isett & Associates, a multi-discipline engineering firm with offices in the Delaware Valley, Lehigh Valley, and Wyoming Valley. He earned his B.S. in Earth Science (Geology) in 1996 from Penn State University.

Jamie Kleinle joined Barry Isett & Associates, Inc. in 2005 and was named Environmental Operations Manager in 2015. He is an Environmental Professional that focuses on completing Phase I and Phase II Environmental Assessments, Storage Tank Closures and PA DEP Act 2 Release of Liability projects (Chapter 245 and 250).

Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM; Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM Tuition: Members $40.00; Non-members $55.00




CLE Update 4

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Family Law Update”

Monday, October 7, 2019

The Family Law Update provides fresh perspectives and insightful analysis that enables nearly everyone to take home something they can use to make an immediate impact on their practices. This annual program includes the latest trends, the newest case law, legislation and procedural rules. Realizing that knowing the most recent developments can make all the difference in litigation strategy and settlement negotiations, gives an edge over your opponents.

Each of PBI’s panels includes a sitting judge who offers important insight as to what courts in their area have noted within the last twelve months.

Pick up valuable practice tips on: • Support • Custody • Equitable Distribution • Alimony

Registration: 8:30 AM; Tuition: $249.00 Seminar: 9:00 AM – 12:15 PM; 3 Substantive Credits

To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637

PBI COURSE MATERIAL NOTICE

Included in the tuition fee, attendees who attend PBI simulcast seminars will receive the course book as a digital download. A download link will be emailed to those who have pre-registered prior to the course. You can print out a hard copy of the material and bring it with you or bring a laptop or tablet to follow along.

A printed copy of the course book will be available, at a discount to attendees with additional printed copies available at full price. If you wish to purchase the printed version of the course book call PBI Customer Service at 800.932.4637. Printed versions of the course book will not be distributed at the seminar. Please allow up to two weeks after the program for the printed versions of the course book to be shipped to you.

CLE Update 5

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“Business Appraisal Process for Marital Dissolutions”

Presented by: Mr. Joseph Egler Tuesday, October 8, 2019


A business valuation incorporates reasoned judgement substantiated by fact. The valuation process is comprised of three main stages:

1. Data Gathering 2. Analysis 3. Application of Valuation Approaches

An appraisal for marital dissolution can have a number of issues including, but not limited to, personal expenses put through the business, valuation dates, forensic accounting issues and preparation for trial or a master hearing. Many of these topics will be addressed at this one-hour presentation.

Mr. Joseph Egler, is a Senior Financial Analyst at Value Management Inc. He is responsible for financial analysis, economic analysis, industry analysis and valuation of privately held companies. He has prepared appraisals of businesses for stockholder dissolution, estate tax, ESOP’s and marital dissolution. Mr. Egler specializes in the valuation of Executive Stock Options.

Mr. Egler is a Chartered Financial Analyst and has a master’s degree in Business Administration from La Salle University with a concentration in Finance. He also received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Biology from Temple University. Mr. Egler has completed Business Valuation Courses I – III of the American Society of Appraisers. Member of the CFA Institute (formerly the Association of Investment Management and Research and Institute of Chartered Financial Analysis) and is a member of the Financial Analysts of Philadelphia. Mr. Egler has testified in numerous counties in Pennsylvania including Lehigh, Carbon, Monroe, Wayne and Pike Counties. In addition, he has written several articles on Business Valuation topics.

Registration and Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

Tuition: Members $40.00; Non-members $55.00 Legal Support Staff: $20.00

To Register Call Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16 E-mail: [email protected]

PLEASE SUPPORT YOUR BAR ASSOCIATION’S LIVE SEMINARS


CLE Update 6

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Guardianship Practice and Procedure:

The Rules Have Changed” Tuesday, October 15, 2019

Professor Katherine Pearson and experienced practitioners and Orphans’ Court litigators Thomas Dempsey, Jr., and David Jaskowiak will provide an update on the law, practice and procedures for guardianships. Get the most up-to-date information on the new guardianship reporting forms and changes to the Orphans’ Court rules. PBI’s presenters will highlight best practices for attorneys to follow in light of recent adult guardianship and fiduciary reform efforts in Pennsylvania and beyond.

Come away with valuable insights into: The law; The parties; Best practices for attorneys to follow; New Orphans’ Court rules, forms, procedures and requirements

Registration: 11:30 AM; Tuition: $249.00 Seminar: 12:00 PM – 3:15 PM

2 Substantive & 1 Ethics Credits (Integrated) To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Productivity Bootcamp”

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

While none of us can ‘get’, ‘have’, or ‘make’ more time, we can learn to manage our environment, routines, boundaries and choices more wisely as we move through our day. Take away practical tips on how to prioritize, organize, delegate and minimize interruptions so you can devote more time to serving clients and developing new ones – while being less stressed and more effective in the process.

You will learn specific strategies, tactics and tools that will help you get far greater control of your email inbox and to avoid shoddy record keeping, missed deadlines and angry clients.

Take control of your schedule – including hourly and daily planning, effective calendaring and using do-not-disturb project time. Minimize interruptions; Prioritize and delegate Optimize your case and information flow systems Conduct efficient meetings; Organize your physical space Organize e-mail and other electronic information Comply with relevant Ethics/RPC requirements


3 Substantive & 1 Ethics Credits To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637

CLE Update 7

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“Healthcare Liens in Personal Injury Cases: Mastering the Fundamentals of Subrogation”

Presented by: Christopher Reid, Esq. and Isaac Hof, Esq.

Thursday, October 17, 2019


Whether you take on the occasional auto law case, or your practice is focused on personal injury, there is no escaping healthcare subrogation. This program will focus on the fundamentals of subrogation in Pennsylvania auto law cases, while also exploring subrogation in other areas of personal injury, including medical malpractice, slip and falls, and products liability. The panel will discuss what you must do to protect your client’s rights, manage client expectations, and provide effective strategies for negotiating and settling healthcare liens. The written materials will include subrogation flowcharts, sample letters to lien holders, and a summary of controlling case law.

Attorney Christopher Reid, a Partner at Hof & Reid, LLC in Bethlehem, PA, is an experienced trial attorney. He has successfully tried over one hundred jury trials and arbitrations.

Mr. Reid received his Bachelor of Arts degree, cum laude, from the University of Toledo in 1996. Prior to attending law school, Mr. Reid worked on Capitol Hill as a legislative intern for United States Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WVA) and as a legislative intern for the American Bar Association. Mr. Reid went on to Vermont Law School where he earned his Juris Doctor degree in 1999.

After several years of practicing law in Philadelphia, Attorney Isaac Hof moved back to his roots in the Lehigh Valley and joined the firm of Hof & Reid, LLC. Mr. Hof focuses his practice on personal injury litigation. Mr. Hof graduated summa cum laude from Temple University Beasley School of Law in 2012. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Maryland in 2008, with honors. Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Hof served as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Legrome D. Davis in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and subsequently practiced civil litigation at Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP in Philadelphia.

Mr. Hof is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, the U.S. District Court District of New Jersey, U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit, and the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM; Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM Tuition: Members $40.00; Non-members $55.00




CLE Update 8

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Entertainment Law”

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Get tips on how to balance your clients’ varied and conflicting needs such as publicity vs. privacy rights, honoring a contract vs. freedom of creativity and copyright protection vs. artistic license Master the critical details you need to know about intellectual property assets, established and emerging media, financing, labor requirements, conflicting state regulations and more.



PBI Simulcast Seminar “Title Insurance 101”

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

The most important step to take before closing the deal is to obtain title insurance. Join a panel of attorneys and title insurance experts as they walk you through the title insurance process to get a better understanding on how to protect your client. Find out who the players are, their roles and responsibilities and why you need Title Insurance. Walk away with a complete checklist on how to get this done.



If you would like to see an up-to-date schedule of CLE courses being held at BALC, log on to:

www.lehighbar.org At the top of the home page point on ‘CLE Seminars’ On the drop-down menu click on ‘CLE Seminar Listing’ Open the file and see what’s scheduled. For more course information, go to our ‘Calendar’ and click on the date of the course you are interested in for full information. It’s that easy!

http://www.lehighbar.org/

CLE Update 9

BALC AFTERNOON SEMINAR

“Leading the Way: The Benefits of Civic and Community Involvement”

Co-hosted by: The Pennsylvania Institute of Certified Public Accountants (PICPA) – Lehigh Valley Chapter and

The Bar Association of Lehigh County Presented by: Lori Molloy, Esq., Tara Bender, CPA,

and Madlen Miller Moderated by: Rose Lamaestra. CPA, CFE

Monday, October 28, 2019 Approved for 1 Substantive CLE Credit

(Not Approved for CJE Credit)

Please join us for this one-hour, fast paced program starting with Rose Lamaestra defining what a not-for-profit organization is and why they are important. Hear why small non-profits are ripe for fraud. Next, Lori Molloy will lead the discussion from the point of view of an Executive Director:

• What should the Mission and Vision look like? • What does an ED look for in a Board member? • What are the legal standards of the Board -

o Duty of Care o Duty of Loyalty

Attorney Molloy will discuss the functions of the Board – governance and interaction with the Executive Director. Learn methods to promote an engaged, educated and active Board.

Madlen Miller will talk about why it is important to become a Board member and how to juggle work, volunteering and personal time. Tara Bender will wrap it up from a perspective of an Auditor/Board Member. What should the books and records portray and what financial components the Board should monitor. Hear what the responsibilities to the Board and potential liabilities are.

Registration: 3:30 PM Seminar: 4:00 PM – 5:00 PM

Special Tuition Fee: $20.00 for All Who Attend All are invited to stay for the Networking Social

to begin immediately after the program To Register Call Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16



CLE Update 10

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Consumer Financial Services and

Banking Law Update” Tuesday, October 29, 2019

This seminar is your guide to the new and revised regulations impacting the banking and consumer financial services industry. A lot has changed in the three years since PBI last offered this update. Although many of the federal agencies are now controlled by appointees of President Trump, those agencies are still vigorously enforcing federal banking and consumer protection laws.

Join an experienced panel of industry, banking, bar and government attorneys as they cover the latest important developments with respect to:

• The Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities • The Bureau of Consumer Protection, PA Attorney General • The CFPB, FTC, DOJ, FCC and Federal banking regulators • Data Security and Privacy developments • Fair Credit Reporting Act and Debt Collection • The rapidly evolving landscape for FinTech (Artificial

Intelligence, Big Data) • Fair Lending



CHANGE OF PBI POLICY

Because of low attendance at many PBI Simulcast seminars, PBI has adopted a policy to cancel programs when the registration does not justify the direct costs.

To avoid cancellation of seminars which you would like to attend, please pre-register.

Call the PBI Registration Number at: 1.800.932.4637 before the program rather than registering “at the door”

CLE Update 11

BALC BREAKFAST SEMINAR

“The Protection Orders: Pro Bono Attorney Training” Presented by:

Danni Petyo, Esq., Moderated by: Lori Molloy, Esq. Panelists: Hon. Douglas Reichley, Hon. Melissa Pavlack

Thursday, October 31, 2019 Approved for 1 Ethics & 2 Substantive CLE Credits

(Not Approved for CJE Credit)

Would you like to provide pro bono help to domestic violence victims, but need a refresher and update on the law, court procedures and the dynamics of domestic violence? North Penn Legal Services, Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Turning Point are teaming up to present training for attorneys who are new to the practice or need a refresher. Learn about statutory updates related to firearms, current appellate issues, and resources that are available in our community. Overview of the law from PCADV expert and panel discussions of representation, resources, and pro bono process.

Attorneys who sign up for pro bono referrals can earn up to 3 CLE credits during a calendar year – 1 credit for every 5 hours of pro bono service

Danni Petyo is the Civil Legal Representation Project (CLR) Attorney for the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence. She oversees PCADV’s eighteen Civil Legal Representation sites that provide no-cost, high quality, civil legal representation to domestic violence survivors. Prior to coming to PCADV, Danni worked as a CLE Attorney in Luzerne, Carbon and Wyoming counties litigating civil cases on behalf of domestic violence survivors. Danni has a passion for advocating for survivors and changing the way we talk about gender-based violence, trauma, and legal services. Danni received her B.A. in Global Policy Studies from Chatham University and her J.D. from New England Law/Boston. She is admitted to practice in Pennsylvania.

Lori Molloy, Esq. is the Executive Director of North Penn Legal Services, the regional civil legal aid provider for 20 counties in Northeast Pennsylvania. She has worked at NPLS for over twenty years, and is committed to expanding legal services, by staff and pro bono attorneys, for the low income and most vulnerable. She is a graduate of Johns Hopkins University (B.A. Psychology) and Temple University School of Law (J.D.).

Registration and Breakfast: 8:00 AM Seminar: 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM

Special Tuition Fee: $25.00 for All Who Attend To Register Call Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16



CLE Update 12

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“Berks County Family Law Practice” Presented by: Judges of Berks County

Thursday, October 31, 2019 Approved for 1 Substantive CLE Credit

Approval Pending for CJE Credit

Please join us for this one-hour seminar chock full of useful tips you can immediately utilize to improve or expand your practice of Family Law in the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County.

Presented by some of the Family Court Judges on the Berks County Bench as well as the Family Court Administrator, this fast-paced seminar will cover the basics of handling uncontested and contested divorce, support, custody, and PFA cases in Berks County from filing through representation at the conference/hearing/trial and beyond. Additional topics such as motions practice, local rules, unofficial ‘rules of thumb”, and the perspective of the Bench will also be covered.

Registration and Lunch: 12:00 PM Seminar: 12:30 PM – 1:30 PM

Tuition Fee: $40.00 for All Who Attend To Register Call Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16


PBI Simulcast Seminar “Elder Law Update”

Friday, November 1, 2019

This is the perfect course for catching up on the latest developments in Elder Law. Get a quick refresher of the most significant developments. In three short hours the faculty will fill you in on the year’s highlights. You will get the latest word on decisions from the courts and regulations from legislators and agencies.

Make sure you know the significant developments – • Top 10 case decisions from the courts • Implementation of Managed Care for Medicaid Long Term

Services and Supports • Community HealthChoices update • New Orphans’ Court rules and forms • New VA final rules concerning benefits • Medicare coverage for seniors

Registration: 8:30 AM; Tuition: $249.00 Seminar: 9:00 AM – 12:15 PM; 3 Substantive Credits

To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637


CLE Update 13

PBI Simulcast Seminar “Winning at Trial”

Monday, November 4, 2019

Lessons pulled from the O.J. Simpson and George Zimmerman trials

Shane Read uses innovative techniques to teach the art of presenting a clear and compelling case in order to win at

trial Best-selling and award-winning author D. Shane Read, comes to Pennsylvania with a unique program that provides innovative trial strategies that can immediately improve your practice. From years of courtroom and teaching experience across the country, he is an expert who clearly, concisely, and memorably teaches litigation techniques that work every time. Join Shane as he uses the transcripts and videos of famous trials to demonstrate well-executed (and some not so well-executed) trial techniques that you can employ in your practice.

Develop Your Trial Skills by Analyzing Real Trials Shane has spent countless hours analyzing actual trials to bring the best teaching examples to your fingertips. You will join him as he studies the transcripts and videos of noteworthy trials such as the O.J. Simpson criminal and civil trials and the George Zimmerman trial to see how trial techniques have been applied in the courtroom. Some of the techniques are so well executed – and some so badly performed – that you will never forget the techniques after analyzing them.

5 reasons to make this your indispensable guide to succeeding at trial:

Deliver opening statements that win every time Conduct direct examinations that tell your story – why you don’t want to let your witness do all of the talking! Succeed on Cross by keeping it simple, powerful and captivating Defeat the expert at trial Deliver a persuasive and memorable closing


5.5 Substantive & .5 Ethics Credits To Register Call PBI @ 1.800.932.4637

ALL BALC COURSES LISTED IN THE GREEN PAGES OF THE LAW JOURNAL QUALIFY FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT (CLE), BUT NOT ALL PROGRAMS QUALIFY FOR CONTINUING JUDICIAL EDUCATION CREDIT (CJE). PLEASE READ EACH ADVERTISEMENT CAREFULLY.

CLE Update 14

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“The Electoral College: Past, Present and Future”

Presented by: John P. Servis, Esq. Tuesday, November 5, 2019

Approved for 1 Substantive CLE & CJE Credit

The Electoral College has been in the news quite often lately. Opponents of it argue that it thwarts the will of the people and is unacceptably anti-democratic. Supporters of it respond that the Electoral College prevents larger states and cities from imposing their will on the rest of the nation. The debate on the continuing usefulness of the elector method of choosing presidents flared up in 2000 after George W. Bush’s election. The debate really picked up speed after Donald Trump’s election in 2016. In both of those elections, the winning candidate won the electoral vote while losing the popular vote.

In this seminar we will look at the provisions for the Electoral College in the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes and Pennsylvania’s Election Code. We will also look at the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016 as examples of how the Electoral College determined the winning candidate. Finally, we will discuss the August 2019 Tenth Circuit decision in Baca vs. Colorado Department of State which held that Colorado’s presidential electors are not legally obligated to vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote. We will consider whether that decision has potentially nationwide application or is limited by specific provisions of Colorado law.

John Servis is a solo practitioner in Orefield who limits his practice to estate planning. He has presented more than 30 seminars at the Bar Association of Lehigh County on a wide variety of topics and is currently chairman of the Bar Association’s CLE Committee. John graduated from Cornell University with a B.A. in classics, from American University with a J.D., and from Villanova University with an LLM in taxation. He also received an M.A. in history from Lehigh University with a focus on John Dewey and American intellectual history.





CLE Update 15

BALC LUNCH SEMINAR

“Lincoln at Gettysburg – The Gettysburg Address Lincoln’s Changed Rationale for the Civil War and Promotion of the Declaration of Independence at

Gettysburg” Presented by: Malcolm Gross, Esq.

Wednesday, Novembery 6, 2019 Approved for 1 Substantive CLE and CJE Credit

Join us for a fact-packed and entertaining hour as Attorney Malcolm Gross takes you back in time to July 1863 and the battle at Gettysburg. See pages of pictures taken on the battlefield just two days after the battle and hear what happened that led up to President Lincoln speaking in Gettysburg for his famous speech.

Attorney Malcolm J. Gross is a founding partner of Gross McGinley, LLP, headquartered in Allentown, where he has long represented media interests, including representing them in their pursuit of access to government records. Malcolm J. Gross was born in Allentown, PA. He graduated from Muhlenberg College, cum laude in 1962, with a Bachelor’s Degree in History and Political Science. He earned his J.D. from Villanova University School of Law in Philadelphia in 1965 and was admitted to the Pennsylvania Bar that year. While at Villanova, he was an editor of the Law Review. Mr. Gross also is admitted to the United States District Court for the Eastern District and Middle Districts of Pennsylvania, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States.

Attorney Gross has written on a wide range of topics, and his articles have appeared in such national publications as Social Work, Case & Comment, and Communications and the Law. He also has published work in the Pennsylvania Bar Quarterly and the Pennsylvania Law Journal Reporter. Some of his articles cover press law including defamation, subpoenas, and freedom of information issues. He also writes about general-interest issues such as custody and domestic relations.

In 2004, 2006, and 2012, Attorney Gross was named a Pennsylvania Super Lawyer, reserved for the top 5 percent of Pennsylvania attorneys, and holds an AV Rating by Martindale-Hubbell Legal Directory.





CLE Update 16

BALC CLE REGISTRATION FORM

Name:___________________________________________

PA Sup.CT.ID_____________________________________

Member of the Bar Association of: [ ] Lehigh [ ] Northampton

[ ] Other_______________________ [ ] Legal Support Staff

To Register for any BALC Seminar Call: Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16 (or)

E-mail: [email protected] (or) Fax the Registration form to: 610.770.9826

[ ] October 3: “Professionalism and Well-Being” Registration & Lunch: 12:00 Noon Seminar: 1:00 PM – 4:00 PM Networking Reception: 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM

[ ] October 4: “Environmental Due Diligence and the Real Estate Deal” Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

[ ] October 8: “The Business Appraisal Process for Marital Dissolutions” Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

[ ] October 17: “Healthcare Liens in Personal Injury Cases: Mastering the Fundamentals of Subrogation” Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

[ ] October 28: “Leading the Way: The Benefits of Civic Leadership and Community Involvement” Registration: 3:30 PM Seminar: 4:00PM – 5:00 PM

[ ] October 31: “The Protection Orders: Pro Bono Attorney Training” Registration and Breakfast: 8:00 AM Seminar: 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM

[ ] October 31: “Berks County Family Law Practice” Registration and Lunch: 12:00 PM Seminar: 12:30 PM – 1:30 PM

[ ] November 5: “The Electoral College: Past, Present and Future” Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

[ ] November 6: “Lincoln at Gettysburg – the Gettysburg Address – Lincoln’s Changed Rationale for the Civil War and Promotion of the Declaration of Independence at Gettysburg” Registration & Lunch: 11:45 AM Seminar: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED $______________________________

For payments in advance, please make checks payable to BALC & mail to:

Attn: Nancy; BALC, 1114 W. Walnut St., Allentown, PA 18102


NewsLine 7

The Lawyers Lunch Table

A treasured tradition is returning for all

Lawyers and Judges. There is a standing

reservation for Lunch at Bell Hall, 612 W.

Hamilton St, on the 1st Thursday of the month,

12PM. Please come out enjoy some

camaraderie with other colleagues.

NewsLine 8

~Announcement~

Lehigh County Lawyer’s Charitable Fund

The BALC Community Service Committee is

now accepting applications for the 2019-2020

Lehigh County Lawyers’ Charitable

Fund. Any Lehigh Valley 501(c)(3) is able to

apply. This year’s theme is: “Animal and Pet

Related Charities Throughout Lehigh

Valley”. Please keep this in mind when

applying. Application deadline is

10/31/19. Please see lehighbar.org under

News & Updates for complete guidelines and

application.

Please support our charity fundraising for this

year’s campaign by attending the following events:

BINGO 9/26 5:30PM @ The Barristers Club

Comedy Night 10/4 @ The Ramada Inn, Whitehall

YAPPY Hour 10/30 @ The Barristers Club

Courtyard

NewsLine 9

September

September 26: Board Meeting 4:30pm and BINGO Night

October

October 2: Paralega Lunch & Learn 12pm

October 4: Comedy Night at the Ramada Inn

October 10: Criminal Law Dinner

October 14: BALC office Closed

October 16: Barristers Inn 5:30

October 17: Board Meeting 4:30PM

October 29: New Member Welcome Breakfast 8am

October 30: Yappy Hour in the BALC Courtyard

November

November 11: BALC Office closed

November 15: Fall Ball

November 20: Barristers Inn

November 21: Board Meeting and Membership Meeting 4:30pm

November 28-29: BALC Office closed

NewsLine 10

NOTES

NewsLine 11

NOTES

NewsLine 12

NOTES


Lehigh 7-17 op

Plaintiffs argue the CWMA does not apply to third-party negligence cases.5 Additionally, Plaintiffs challenge Defendants’ reliance on Patton.

III) Discussion

A. Exclusivity Provision

Defendants argue the exclusivity provision of the WC Act applies here and prevents injured workers from bringing tort claims against their employers. Plaintiffs agree that the exclusivity provi-sion prevents claims against an employer, but does not prevent claims against a third party. Plaintiffs argue an independent con-tractor working on the site would be a third party subject to tort suit. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants were an independent contrac-tor for KBI, and were not KBI employees.

Section 303(a) of the WC Act provides that: “(a) The liability of an employer under this act shall be exclusive and in place of any and all other liability to such employes[] ... [for] damages in any action at law or otherwise on account of any injury or death ... .” 77 P.S. §481(a) (footnote omitted). An exception to this exclusiv-ity provision allows an injured worker “to receive damages ... ” against a third party for workplace injuries caused by the third party. 77 P.S. §481(b). This exception further prohibits employer contribution or indemnification of the third party “unless liability for such damages, contributions or indemnity shall be expressly provided for in a written contract entered into by [the third-party

From all of this, it is not entirely clear what Defendants’ theory of non-liability is. It is unclear if Defendants are arguing that Gary O. Mangold was hired by KBI independent of the Contractor Agreement KBI entered with Mangold Excavating. It is unclear if Gary O. Mangold was hired by Mangold Excavating to perform the work for which it contracted with KBI. It is unclear if Gary O. Mangold is an owner, sole or otherwise, of KBI. Neither their motion nor their brief directs the Court to any record evidence to substantiate or explain the relationship. This absence of a clear delineation as to how these Defendants relate to each other, is itself a sufficient basis to deny the relief Defendants request in this motion. Plaintiffs have more than adequately established a basis for allowing this case to proceed to a trier of fact.

5As an alternative argument, Plaintiffs argue that even if the CWMA applies to third-party cases, it only applies to cases involving construction. Plaintiffs contend the work Mangold was doing, digging ditches, does not constitute construction such that the CWMA would not apply. Based on discussion that follows, we need not address this alternative argument and we decline to do so.

21


Lehigh 7-17 op

tortfeasor with the employer] prior to the date of the occurrence which gave rise to the action.” 77 P.S. §481(b). “Thus, an injured employee cannot maintain a tort action against his or her em-ployer if the injury is compensable under the provisions of the [WC] Act.’’ Gertz v. Temple University—of Commonwealth Sys-tem of Higher Education, 443 Pa. Superior Ct. 177, 181, 661 A.2d 13, 15 (1995).

Although not cited by Defendants, we also note that Section 205 of the WC Act provides that “a person shall not be liable to anyone at common law or otherwise on account [of a workplace injury] for any act or omission occurring while such person was in the same employ as the person [injured].” 77 P.S. §72; Bell v. Kater, 943 A.2d 293, 297 (Pa. Super. 2008) (noting that 77 P.S. §72 provides that “A defendant is immune from liability for negli-gence against a fellow employee if the parties are in the same employ.”).

Both parties agree that Plaintiff was employed by the gen-eral contractor and was acting within the scope of his responsi-bilities to employer. As previously referenced (footnotes 1 and 4), Defendants do not identify how they are related. Plaintiffs aver that Mangold is the sole owner of the Defendant corporation, but Defendants have denied this averment. In Mangold’s deposition, he acknowledged that “the business that [he] worked for [at the time of the incident] in March 2015 [was] Mangold Excavating, LLC.’’6 Plaintiffs’ counsel asked him “If I contacted you and wanted to do excavating work for me, would I be signing a contract with you individually or would I be signing a contract with Mangold Excavating, LLC?”7 Mangold replied, “It would be with the com-pany Mangold LLC.”8 Defendant Mangold was also asked if, “[b]ack in March of 2015 [he] was the sole employee of Mangold Excavating LLC?”9 Mangold replied that he was the only em-ployee of Mangold LLC at that time.

6(SJ Mtn., Ex. A—Deposition of Gary O. Mangold (hereinafter “Mangold Dep.”) at 9.)

7(Mangold Dep. at 9.)8(Mangold Dep. at 10.)9(Mangold Dep. at 10.)

22


Lehigh 7-17 op

Defendant corporation has not clearly identified any author-ity that would support the premise that a corporation can be an employee of another corporation. In the absence of such author-ity, it is unclear how the exclusivity provisions of the WC Act would prevent Plaintiffs’ claims against Mangold LLC. Accordingly, we must deny summary judgment as to Mangold LLC.

Additionally, Mangold’s deposition testimony identifies him as an employee of Mangold Excavating LLC. This testimony con-trasts with Defendant’s position in his motion that he was actually an employee of KBJ. This contrast is itself an issue of material fact requiring resolution by a fact-finder. Accordingly, we must deny summary judgment as to Gary O. Mangold.

Nonetheless, for purposes of completeness, we address the remaining arguments.

B. Common-Law Factors

Defendants ask the Court to apply the common-law standards for whether a party is an independent contractor. Defendants direct the Court to appellate authority in support of their argument.10 Our Supreme Court has identified several guidelines to consider in

10We note Defendants rely primarily on what they cite as “Hollen v. WCAB, 14 Pa Cmwlth. 209, 321 A.2d 733 (1974)” for the proposition that, “In Hollen the Pennsylvania Supreme Court set forth the following guidelines to determine” the issue of whether an individual is an independent contractor. (SJ Br. at 3.) Defendants then list ten factors that they state the “Pennsylvania Supreme Court” set forth in Hollen to evaluate this issue. We first note that Defendants provide a Commonwealth Reporter cite for this case which they then, in the text of their argument, attribute to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. From our review, the case is a Commonwealth Court case and not a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case. Additionally, the case does not set forth ten factors as suggested by the Defendant. Rather, the case notes that the common-law factors for “determining an employer-employe relationship [under the WC Act] are the same as the common law rules of ascertaining a master-servant relationship.” Hollen v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 14 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 209, 212, 321 A.2d 733, 735 (1974). The court did not list factors other than to say “Although this relationship must be developed from the peculiar facts of each case and no one factor is determinative of the issue, certain indicia stand out and are evident here: 1) the payment of remuneration for services rendered on a regular basis ... ; and more importantly 2) the right to control the terms and manner of performance of the work done by a claimant.” Id. (citations omitted). We note that Defendants cites several other cases following the Hollen case, one of which is a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case, Hammermill Paper Company v. Rust Engineering Company, 430 Pa. 365, 370, 243 A.2d 389, 392 (1968). The Hammermill case does identify the factors Defendants attribute to Hollen.

23


Lehigh 7-17 op

evaluating “whether a particular relationship is that of employer-employee or owner-independent contractor.” Hammermill Paper Company v. Rust Engineering Company, 430 Pa. 365, 370, 243 A.2d 389, 392 (1968). Those factors are:

[1] Control of manner work is to be done; [2] responsi-bility for result only; [3] terms of agreement between the parties; [4] the nature of the work or occupation; [5] skill required for performance; [6] whether one employed is en-gaged in a distinct occupation or business; [7] which party supplies the tools; [8] whether payment is by the time or by the job; [9] whether work is part of the regular business of the employer, and also [10] the right to terminate the employ-ment at any time

Id. (quoting Stepp v. Renn, 184 Pa. Superior Ct. 634, 637, 135 A.2d 794, 796 (1957) (brackets added); see also, Sandusky v. Penn-sylvania State Employees’ Retirement Board, 127 A.3d 34 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) (applying the same Hammermill factors to deter-mine if an individual was an employee for purposes of pension forfeiture).

Defendants identify several of the above factors as supporting a finding that Defendants were employees of the general contrac-tor: 1) KBI set the hours of work; 2) KBI provided all the employ-ees to do the work; 3) KBI provided the excavation equipment Mangold LLC was using; 4) KBI gave Mangold LLC specific in-structions as to where to dig; and 5) KBI paid Mangold LLC on an hourly basis.

In response, Plaintiffs argue the following factors indicate that Defendants were an independent contractor and were not employees of the general contractor: 1) the contract between KBI and Mangold LLC makes clear payment is not just $40 an hour but that Mangold LLC is at risk of losing money; 2) Mangold LLC was responsible for obtaining and incurring the costs associated with all state and local contractors or licenses prior to work com-mencing; 3) KBI had the right to back-charge Mangold LLC for the cost of damages resulting in any breach of Agreement by Mangold LLC; 4) Mangold LLC was responsible for any damage to its own work or other contractor’s work, including but not lim-ited to, streets, curbs, open space and homes; 5) KBI had the right

24


Lehigh 7-17 op

to withhold payment to Mangold LLC in order to pay for dam-ages; 6) Mangold LLC had 60 days after completion of work to submit invoices to KBI or else KBI was relieved of its obligation to pay Mangold LLC; 7) KBI had the right to withhold 200% of any lien claim against work performed by Mangold LLC; 8) KBI had the right to delay payment for disputed invoices; and 9) Man-gold LLC was required, at its own expense, to procure, carry and maintain on all of its operations for all and any ongoing work, workers’ compensation and employee’s liability insurance covering all of its employees, as well as commercial general liability insur-ance and automobile liability insurance.

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to a non-moving party as we are required to do, the Court is unable to say that resolution of this case is clear and free from doubt in Defen-dants’ favor. While Defendants have presented factors that suggest Mangold may have been an employee of the general contractor, Plaintiffs have identified more factors in number and possibly in evidentiary weight that suggest neither Defendant was an em-ployee of the general contractor. In addition to the factors discussed earlier, among the critical factors that remain unclear to the Court is the degree of control the general contractor maintained over the Defendants. Accordingly, based on application of the common-law factors, we must deny summary judgment.

The degree of control goes to the heart of whether Defendants are independent contractors or employees. See generally, Pa. SSJI (Civ.) 6.130 (Subcommittee Note) (quoting Fuller v. Palazzolo, 329 Pa. 93, 105, 197 A. 225, 231 (1938) for the premise that “The fact that the contractor employs, pays and has full power to control the [workers] is practically decisive of his independence.”); see also, Section 3(a)(2) of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.3(a)(2). “Where the conflicting evidence relating to the [employer/independent contractor] relationship presents a question of fact, ‘it is the exclu-sive function of the jury to determine [the issue], after proper in-structions by the court as to the matters of fact to be considered, ... [however,] where the facts are not in dispute and the evidence is direct and certain, presenting no question of credibility and leaving no sufficient ground for inconsistent inferences of fact,’ the court must determine the relationship as a matter of law.” Pa. SSJI 6.130 (Subcommittee Note) (quoting Joseph v. United Workers

25


Lehigh 7-17 op

Ass’n, 343 Pa. 636, 23 A.2d 470, 472 (1942)). Additionally, our law recognizes that “one who entrusts work to an independent contrac-tor, but who retains the control over any part of the work, is subject to liability for physical harm to others caused by [his][her] failure to use [his][her] control with reasonable care.” Pa. SSJI (Civ.) 6.140; Beil v. Telesis Construction, Inc., 608 Pa. 273, 291, 11 A.3d 456, 467 (2011) (noting that “the question of the quantum of retained control necessary to make the owner of the premises liable is a question for the jury.”).

Here, the evidence is neither direct nor certain as to the degree of control exercised by the general contractor over the manner in which work was performed by Defendants. Accord-ingly, we must deny the motion for summary judgment.

We do not find that Patton alters this analysis. In Patton, an employee (Patton) of a subcontractor was injured while on the job. The injured subcontractor employee brought a negligence action against the general contractor. The general contractor argued it was a statutory employer of the subcontractor employee, and thus was immune from suit under the WC Act. The trial court rejected this argument and allowed the case to proceed to trial and gave the jury an interrogatory asking if the subcontractor’s employee was an independent contractor or employee with respect to the general contractor. The jury ruled for plaintiff and found that Pat-ton was an independent contractor with respect to the general contractor. On appeal, the Superior Court affirmed. The Supreme Court reversed. The Supreme Court rejected the interrogatory used by the trial court because the facts did not show that Patton contracted with the general contractor. Rather, the facts clearly showed that Patton was an employee of the subcontractor and that it was the subcontractor that had contracted with the general con-tractor. The court noted that “Pursuant to Section 302(b) of the [WC Act], 77 P.S. § 462, general contractors bear secondary liabil-ity for payment of workers’ compensation benefits to injured work-ers employed by their subcontractors.” Patton, supra at 4, 89 A.3d at 645. Accordingly, the court reversed the lower court decisions. The court criticized the trial court for not disposing of the case on this basis at the summary judgment level because of what the court

26


Lehigh 7-17 op

suggested was the trial court’s disregard for the precedent. The Court noted that precedent clearly established that this secondary liability also afforded the general contractor “a measure of immu-nity from liability in tort pertaining to work-related injuries for which they bear secondary liability under the [WC] Act.” Id. at 5, 89 A.3d at 645.

The present case is distinguishable because it does not involve a claim against a general contractor. Additionally, Defendants do not contend that they are secondarily liable for payment of Work-ers’ Compensation benefits for Plaintiff as the defendant in Patton was, such that “the measure of immunity” discussed in Patton should apply to them. Accordingly, we find Patton distinguishable from the present situation.

We find support for our analysis in Grant v. Riverside Cor-poration, 364 Pa. Superior Ct. 593, 528 A.2d 962 (1987). In a case of what the Superior Court described as one of first impression, the court concluded that a subcontractor was not immune from suit under the WC Act for injuries one of its employees caused on the employee of a second subcontractor. Both subcontractors had been separately hired by a general contractor. Each subcontractor hired its own employees. The court noted that the first subcontrac-tor “was not obligated under Section 302(a)[] of the [WC] Act to provide compensation insurance [for the employees of the second subcontractor], and cannot now claim the right to stand in the [general contractor’s] shoes.” Id. at 601-602, 528 A.2d at 966. Ap-plying this rationale to the present case, a party who was not re-sponsible for providing compensation insurance for Plaintiff cannot now claim the right to stand in KBI’s shoes, who did pay such compensation insurance, for purposes of applying the exclusivity remedy provision of the WC Act.

For all the above reasons, we are compelled to deny Defen-dants’ motion.

C. Construction Workplace Misclassification Act

Defendants argue the CWMA “is legislative authority that Mangold was an employee of ” the general contractor. (SJ Br. at 5)

27


Lehigh 7-17 op

(all caps formatting removed).) Defendants note that Section 3 of the CWMA defines independent contractor. Defendants argue they do not meet this definition because: “he[, Mangold,] was completely under the control and direction of ‘the general contrac-tor; the essential tools for performing the work belonged to the general contractor; and Defendants’ “performance was not based on profit or loss rather he was only paid on an hourly basis.” (SJ Br. at 6.) Defendants also cite to a concurring opinion in Staron v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Farrier), 121 A.3d 564 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) in support of their position.

In response, Plaintiffs argue the CWMA does not apply to third-party liability claims. Plaintiffs note that Defendants provide no authority in support of applying the CWMA to a third-party claim.

We first note our agreement with Plaintiffs that Defendants’ arguments and authority on this issue are sparse. Defendants do not offer any support for why the CWMA applies in this, a third-party negligence action. Based on the arguments presented, it is not clear and free from doubt that the CWMA applies. Rather, it appears it does not.

We are persuaded by Plaintiffs’ argument that the terms of the CWMA suggest it is only applicable to workers’ and unemploy-ment compensation proceedings, and not to third-party negligence claims. Plaintiffs note that Section 3 of the CWMA indicates that its provisions are intended “for purposes of workers’ compensation, unemployment compensation and improper classification of em-ployees provided herein ... .” 43 P.S. 933.3(a); (Pltfs’ Br. at 14). Defendants argue that this language suggests it applies to one seeking compensation under the Workers’ Compensation Act or unemployment. In the absence of contrary authority from Defen-dants, we are persuaded by this argument. The sole authority Defendants cite for application of CWMA, Staron, involves an individual seeking workers’ compensation benefits. Claimant ar-gued he was an employee of defendant employer and defendant employer argued there was no employment relationship. The court applied the CWMA terms to determine if claimant was an em-

28


Lehigh 7-17 op

ployee and therefore eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. The case arose from an appeal of a workers’ compensation decision brought within the workers’ compensation system. The language of the CWMA suggests that its terms are to be used by the Secre-tary of Labor and Industry (Secretary) for cases brought before the administrative agencies within the Secretary’s domain, in particular the workers’ compensation and unemployment compen-sation agencies.11 From our review, it is not clear the terms of the CWMA were intended to be used outside the administrative do-main; it is not clear these provisions are applicable in a third-party

11We note that the General Assembly enacted CWMA specifically for the purpose of “providing for criteria for independent contractors in the construction industry ... .” 2010 Pa. Legis. Serv. Act 2010-72 (H.B. 400). From our review of the CWMA, it is not clear to this Court, absent other authority, the CWMA is intended to apply in the present context. Rather, the provisions of the CWMA suggest a statutory intent to provide the Secretary with criteria in ensuring that workers are properly classified for purposes of ensuring that employers are properly paying workers’ compensation and unemployment compensation fees and taxes. We also note that the definitions section of the CWMA defines the terms “Employee” and “Employer” by referencing the definitions for those terms in the WC Act and the Unemployment Compensation Law (UC Law), Act of December 5, 1936 (2nd Sp. Sess., 1937 P.L. 2897, NO. 1). Section 2 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.2. Additionally, Section 4 of the CWMA penalizes employers who

(1) fails to properly classify an individual for purposes of the [WC] Act[] and fails to provide the coverage required under the [WC] Act; or

(2) fails to properly classify an individual as an employee for purposes of the [UC] Law[] and fails to pay contributions, reimbursements or other amounts required to be paid under the [UC] Law.

43 P.S. §933.4(a)(1)-(2) (footnotes omitted). An intentional failure to comply with Section 4 of the CWMA is a misdemeanor criminal offense. Section 5 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.5. Violations of the CWMA are also subject to civil penalties up to $2,500. Section 6 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.6. Section 4(c) and Section 6 provide that averred violations of this Act are to be brought before the Secretary who is charged with investigating the violations and with imposing civil penalties. Section 8 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.8. The Secretary is directed to inform the Attorney General of suspected intentional, criminal violations. Additionally, the Secretary is authorized to petition courts of competent jurisdiction to issue stop-work orders to prevent improperly classified individuals from continuing to work, Section 7 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.7, and to petition to the Commonwealth Court to enforce “any order or subpoena issued under” the CWMA. Section 8 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.8. Any person who “require[s] or demand[s] ... an individual enter into an agree-ment or sign a document which results in the improper classification of that individual as an independent contractor” is subject to an administrative fine up to $2,500. Section 9 of the CWMA, 43 P.S. §933.9. In summary, in the CWMA, the General Assembly seems to have afforded the Secretary with authority to enforce the terms of the CWMA in fulfilling the Secretary’s duties of executing the provisions of the WC and UC Laws. Defendants have not persuasively developed their argument as to why these provisions might apply in this case.

29


Lehigh 7-17 op

negligence case brought in a court of common pleas. Based on the arguments and authority Defendants raise in their motion and brief, Defendants have not established that the CWMA is appli-cable in this case.12 Accordingly, we are compelled to reject this argument.

IV) Conclusion

For the above reasons, we deny summary judgment.

ORDER

NOW, this 13th day of June, 2017, upon consideration of the Motion for Summary Judgment on Behalf of Defendant Gary O. Mangold and Mangold Excavating, LLC t/d/b/a Gary O. Mangold Excavating and supporting brief and exhibits, which motion, brief and exhibits were filed January 27, 2017; upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Answer to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and supporting brief and exhibits, which answer, brief and exhib-its were filed February 27, 2017; upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Amended Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Sum-mary Judgment which brief was filed April 10, 2017; following argument before the undersigned on April 11, 2017 that was at-tended by counsel for both sides, and for the reasons expressed in the attached Memorandum Opinion,

IT IS ORDERED the motion is DENIED.

12Our determination as to this issue in this motion does not preclude Defendants from providing the Court in a motion in limine or other appropriate means, a more fully developed argument to address the application of CWMA. However, based on the argu-ments Defendants raise at this time as the application of the CWMA, and from our own limited review of the CWMA in addressing the arguments raised by Defendants, we are compelled to deny summary judgment.

30

31

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

ESTATE AND TRUST NOTICESNotice is hereby given that, in the

estates of the decedents set forth below, the Register of Wills has granted letters testamentary or of administration to the persons named. Notice is also hereby given of the existence of the trusts of the deceased settlors set forth below for whom no personal represen-tatives have been appointed within 90 days of death. All persons having claims or demands against said estates or trusts are requested to make known the same, and all persons indebted to said estates or trusts are requested to make payment, without delay, to the executors or administrators or trustees or to their attorneys named below.

FIRST PUBLICATION

Balliet, James C., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Lisa M. Walker, 29 N. Franklin Street, Allentown, PA 18102.Attorneys: Curtis C. Creveling, Esq., Creveling, Creveling & Cappellini, 123 North Fifth Street, Allentown, PA 18102, (610) 435-8711.

Cenegy, Elsie Marie a/k/a Elsie Marie Patala a/k/a Elsie Pa-tala Cenegy a/k/a Elsie M. Cenegy, dec’d.Late of Bethlehem.Executor: William F. Cenegy, Sr. c/o Joseph P. Yannuzzi, Esquire, 211 W. Broad Street, Bethlehem, PA 18018-5517.Attorney: Joseph P. Yannuzzi, Esquire, 211 W. Broad Street, Bethlehem, PA 18018-5517.

Collazo, Oscar Juan, dec’d.Late of Whitehall Township.Executrix: Kathy Collazo-Aviles.Attorney: Erv D. McLain, Es-quire, 559 Main Street, Suite 214, Bethlehem, PA 18018.

Furmansky, Louis, dec’d.Late of 2575 Houghton Lean, Macungie.Executor: Stewart Furmansky c/o Stuart T. Shmookler, Es-quire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.Attorneys: Stuart T. Shmookler, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.

Iovine, Regina A. a/k/a Regina Anne Iovine a/k/a Regina Iovine, dec’d.Late of 210 Kristin Lane, Allen-town.Personal Representative: Nikki-Marie Iovine c/o R. Nicholas Nanovic, Esquire, Gross McGin-ley, LLP, 33 South 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.Attorneys: R. Nicholas Nanovic, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 South 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.

Loch, Ruth E., dec’d.Late of Coopersburg.Executor: Edward T. Loch a/k/a Edward Tilghman Loch c/o Sally L. Schoffstall, Esquire, Schoffstall Elder Law, 2987 Corporate Court, Suite 200, Orefield, PA 18069.Attorneys: Sally L. Schoffstall, Esquire, Schoffstall Elder Law, 2987 Corporate Court, Suite 200, Orefield, PA 18069.

Mohr, Robert P., dec’d.Late of Germansville.Administrator: Ryan M. Mohr c/o Rebecca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.

32

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Attorneys: Rebecca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.

Murray, James W. a/k/a James Walker Murray, dec’d.Late of Center Valley.Co-Personal Representatives: Donna Lou Yarasavage, Bar-bara Ann Klipple and Joanne A. Konold c/o Peter P. Perry, Es-quire, 1600 Lehigh Parkway East, 1E, Allentown, PA 18103-3097.Attorney: Peter P. Perry, Es-quire, 1600 Lehigh Parkway East, 1E, Allentown, PA 18103-3097.

Pieffer, Althea F., dec’d.Late of Allentown City.Executrix: Kathleen D. Cooper, 1-5 Red Maple Acres, 1190 Grange Road, Wescosville, PA 18106.Attorneys: Mark R. Sprow, Esq., Derr, Hawman & Derr, 9 East Lancaster Ave., Shillington, PA 19607.

Smith, Rodney J., dec’d.Late of Bethlehem.Administrator C.T.A.: Jeffrey R. Hoffmann, 636 Old York Rd., 2nd Fl., Jenkintown, PA 19046.Attorneys: Jeffrey R. Hoffmann, Esquire, Law Offices of Jeffrey R. Hoffmann, LLC, 636 Old York Rd., 2nd Fl., Jenkintown, PA 19046.

Symons, Michael J., dec’d.Late of the Township of South Whitehall.Executor: Barry C. Weiner c/o Gail Weiner Shearer, Esquire, 70 E. Broad Street, P.O. Box 1426, Bethlehem, PA 18016-1426.

Attorney: Gail Weiner Shearer, Esquire, 70 E. Broad Street, P.O. Box 1426, Bethlehem, PA 18016-1426.

Turzanski, Elizabeth, dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Mary Konek, 101 Washington Ave., Oakmont, PA 15139.Attorney: Vaughn Terrinoni, Esquire, 3976 Township Line Rd., Bethlehem, PA 18020.

Werner, Helen Marie a/k/a Helen Werner a/k/a Helen M. Werner, dec’d.Late of Whitehall.Executor: John Meleschuk c/o Santanasto Law, 210 E. Broad Street, Bethlehem, PA 18018.Attorneys: Lisa A. Bartera, Es-quire, Santanasto Law, 210 E. Broad Street, Bethlehem, PA 18018.

Wert, Mary Louise, dec’d.Late of Whitehall.Executrix: Nancy A. DeJesus c/o Charles W. Stopp, Esq., Steckel and Stopp LLC, 125 S. Walnut Street, Suite 210, Slat-ington, PA 18080.Attorneys: Charles W. Stopp, Esq., Steckel and Stopp LLC, 125 S. Walnut Street, Suite 210, Slatington, PA 18080.

SECOND PUBLICATION

Adler, Joann M., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executors: Michael Francis Adler and Paul Albert Adler.Attorneys: Gladys E. Wiles, Esquire, Snyder & Wiles, P.C., 7731 Main Street, Fogelsville, PA 18051, (610) 391-9500.

Bachman, Joyce M., dec’d.Late of Macungie.

33

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Executor: Earle W. Bachman c/o Rebecca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.Attorneys: Rebecca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.

Flores, Diane G., dec’d.Late of the Borough of Slating-ton.Personal Representative: Brett E. Gunther.Attorneys: Scott R. Steirer, Es-quire, I.D. No. 306977, Pierce & Steirer, LLC, 124 Belvidere Street, Nazareth, PA 18064.

Hersh, Nancy A., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Administrator C.T.A.: Joseph J. Hersh, Jr. a/k/a Jay Hersh c/o Jeffrey F. Hussar, Esquire, 946 Third Street, Whitehall, PA 18052.Attorney: Jeffrey F. Hussar, Esq., 946 Third Street, White-hall, PA 18052.

Koch, Mark R., dec’d.Late of Lower Milford Township.Administratrix: Sally J. Keglo-vits, 6121 Valley Forge Drive, Coopersburg, PA 18036.Attorneys: Rachuba Law Offi-ces, P.C., 196 W. Ashland Street, Suite 308, Doylestown, PA 18901.

Kramer, Betty E., dec’d.Late of Whitehall.Executor: Michael P. Combs c/o Traud Law Offices, 3055 College Heights Blvd., Suite 2A, Allen-town, PA 18104.Attorney: Andrew C. Traud, Esquire, 3055 College Heights Blvd., Suite 2A, Allentown, PA 18104.

Kuncio, Joseph, dec’d.Late of Upper Milford Township.Executrix: Helen Bauman c/o John O. Stover, Jr., Esquire, 537 Chestnut St., Emmaus, PA 18049.Attorney: John O. Stover, Jr., Esquire, 537 Chestnut St., Em-maus, PA 18049.

Novak, Edwin G., dec’d.Late of Upper Saucon Town-ship.Executrix: Kathryn C. Novak, 1655 Jonathan Lane, Bethle-hem, PA 18015.Attorney: Ralph J. Bellafatto, Esquire, 4480 William Penn Highway, Easton, PA 18045.

Riola, Olga M., dec’d.Late of 1107 Sherwood Drive, Laurys Station.Executrices: Rosemary A. Noc-tor and Kathleen I. Schroeder c/o Linda S. Luther-Veno, Es-quire, 2204 Walbert Avenue, Allentown, PA 18104.Attorney: Linda S. Luther-Veno, Esquire, 2204 Walbert Avenue, Allentown, PA 18104.

Rowlands, Charles E., dec’d.Late of Slatington.Co-Executrices: Susan E. Ben-ninger and Janice M. Sears c/o David B. Shulman, Esquire, Shulman Law Office PC, 1935 Center Street, Northampton, PA 18067.Attorneys: David B. Shulman, Esquire, Shulman Law Office PC, 1935 Center Street, North-ampton, PA 18067.

Scheffy, Raymond K., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executor: Karl R. Scheffy, 5786 Buckeye Road, Macungie, PA 18062.

34

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Attorney: E. Keller Kline, III, Esquire, 731 W. Turner Street, Allentown, PA 18102.

Stires, Elaine Rosamond a/k/a Elaine R. Stires, dec’d.Late of Bethlehem.Executrix: Paulette Nonne-maker c/o Daniel G. Dougherty, Esq., 881 3rd St., B-3, White-hall, PA 18052.Attorney: Daniel G. Dougherty, Esq., 881 3rd St., B-3, White-hall, PA 18052.

Sysak, Mary E., dec’d.Late of 1904 Rockingham Drive, Bethlehem.Executrix: Suzanne Mulhern c/o Stuart T. Shmookler, Es-quire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.Attorneys: Stuart T. Shmookler, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.

Traupman, Glenn D., dec’d.Late of the Township of Lower Macungie.Executrix: Sandra Beth Yanders-Gackenbach c/o Nor-ris, McLaughlin, P.A., 515 West Hamilton Street, Suite 502, Al-lentown, PA 18101.Attorneys: Judith A. Harris, Esquire, Norris, McLaughlin, P.A., 515 West Hamilton Street, Suite 502, Allentown, PA 18101.

Walton, Mary E., dec’d.Late of the Township of White-hall.Executrix: Diane Richter c/o Gail Weiner Shearer, Esquire, 70 E. Broad Street, P.O. Box 1426, Bethlehem, PA 18016-1426.

Attorney: Gail Weiner Shearer, Esquire, 70 E. Broad Street, P.O. Box 1426, Bethlehem, PA 18016-1426.

Werley, Donald R. a/k/a Donald Robert Werley, dec’d.Late of South Whitehall Town-ship.Executors: Jeffrey L. Werley, 4000 Rio Road, Apt. 73, Carmel, CA 93923-8634 and Donna L. Harris c/o Robert V. Ritter, Jr., Esq., P.O. Box 178, Orefield, PA 18069-0178.Attorneys: Robert V. Ritter, Jr., Esq., Robert V. Ritter, Jr. Law Office, LLC, P.O. Box 178, Ore-field, PA 18069-0178.

Wislocky, Fern D., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Co-Executors: Michael C. Biery and Doris F. James c/o Law Office of Michael Prokup, 2030 West Tilghman Street, Suite 201, Allentown, PA 18104.Attorney: Michael Prokup, Es-quire, 2030 West Tilghman Street, Suite 201, Allentown, PA 18104.

Womer, Gary P., dec’d.Late of Kempton, Berks County.Executrices: Stephanie Watson a/k/a Stephanie M. Watson and Jessica L. Waidelich f/k/a Jes-sica Womer c/o Charles A. Waters, Esq., Steckel and Stopp LLC, 125 S. Walnut Street, Suite 210, Slatington, PA 18080.Attorneys: Charles A. Waters, Esq., Steckel and Stopp LLC, 125 S. Walnut Street, Suite 210, Slatington, PA 18080.

Xander, Esther K., dec’d.Late of Whitehall Township.Executrix: Carol A. Voorhees, 11 Fox Chase Rd., Marlton, NJ 08053.

35

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Yurkovic, John A., dec’d.Late of the City of Allentown.Executrix: Debra Ann Budd c/o Mary Ann Snell, Esquire, 4510 Bath Pike, Suite 201, Bethle-hem, PA 18017.Attorney: Mary Ann Snell, Es-quire, 4510 Bath Pike, Suite 201, Bethlehem, PA 18017.

THIRD PUBLICATION

Angst, Kermit A. a/k/a Kermit Angst, dec’d.Late of Bethlehem City.Executrices: Karen Hanzelman, 529 5th Ave., Bethlehem, PA 18018 and Dawn Smith, 2032 Ridgelawn Ave., Bethlehem, PA 18018.

Calissi, Paul A., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executor: Paul C. Calissi, 130 Aspen Court, Allentown, PA 18104.Attorneys: William G. Mal-kames, Esq., Malkames Law Office, 509 W. Linden Street, Allentown, PA 18101.

Donat, Harry L., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Olga Donat c/o Re-becca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.Attorneys: Rebecca M. Young, Esq. and Lia K. Snyder, Esq., Young & Young, 119 E. Main Street, Macungie, PA 18062.

Eckrode, Wanda S., dec’d.Late of S. Whitehall Township.Trustee: John F. Eckrode, Jr., 2420 Dawes Street, Allentown, PA 18104.Attorney: Michelle L. Sanginiti, Esq., 166 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406.

Farina, Steve, dec’d.Late of 1612 W. Wood Street, Emmaus.Personal Representative: Ros-anne Farina c/o R. Nicholas Nanovic, Esquire, Gross McGin-ley, LLP, 33 South 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.Attorneys: R. Nicholas Nanovic, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 South 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.

Kaufman, Adrienne a/k/a Adri-enne L. Kaufman, dec’d.Late of Allentown.Co-Executors: Richard C. Kaufman and Jeffry L. Gilbert, 1132 Hamilton Street, Suite 201, Allentown, PA 18101.Attorney: Jeffry L. Gilbert Es-quire, 1132 Hamilton Street, Suite 201, Allentown, PA 18101.

Kulhamer, Larry V., dec’d.Late of Whitehall.Executors: Jenna Pettinelli and Derek Kulhamer c/o Christo-pher T. Spadoni, Esq., 1413 Easton Ave., P.O. Box 522, Bethlehem, PA 18018.Attorney: Christopher T. Spa-doni, Esq., 1413 Easton Ave., P.O. Box 522, Bethlehem, PA 18018, (610) 867-3938.

McClafferty, Florence Marion a/k/a Florence M. McClaf-ferty, dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executor: Patrick McClafferty c/o Denise L. Wester, Esq., 881 3rd St., Ste. B-3, Whitehall, PA 18052.Attorney: Denise L. Wester, Esq., 881 3rd St., Ste. B-3, Whitehall, PA 18052.

36

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Parish, James J., Sr., dec’d.Late of South Whitehall Town-ship.Executrix: Kelly L. Berfield c/o Christopher H. Kenyon, Es-quire, 835 West Fourth Street, Williamsport, PA 17701.Attorney: Christopher H. Ken-yon, Esquire, 835 West Fourth Street, Williamsport, PA 17701.

Pipan, Mariestelle C., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Paula Reifinger.Attorneys: Gladys E. Wiles, Esquire, Snyder & Wiles, P.C., 7731 Main Street, Fogelsville, PA 18051, (610) 391-9500.

Rhoads, Robert E., Sr., dec’d.Late of 140 S. 16th Street, Em-maus.Executrix: Donna M. Diehl c/o Stuart T. Shmookler, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allen-town, PA 18105-4060.Attorneys: Stuart T. Shmookler, Esquire, Gross McGinley, LLP, 33 S. 7th Street, P.O. Box 4060, Allentown, PA 18105-4060.

Schmidt, John Robert a/k/a John R. Schmidt, dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Merrily Weld, 4260 Winchester Road, Allentown, PA 18104-1952.

Williams, Winifred M., dec’d.Late of Allentown.Executrix: Donna L. Kent.Attorneys: Gladys E. Wiles, Esquire, Snyder & Wiles, P.C., 7731 Main Street, Fogelsville, PA 18051, (610) 391-9500.

Zerpa, Michelle T., dec’d.Late of Lower Macungie Town-ship.

Executor: Christopher Groves c/o Fitzpatrick Lentz & Bubba, P.C., 4001 Schoolhouse Lane, P.O. Box 219, Center Valley, PA 18034-0219.Attorneys: Fitzpatrick Lentz & Bubba, P.C., 4001 Schoolhouse Lane, P.O. Box 219, Center Val-ley, PA 18034-0219.

ORPHANS’ COURT DIVISION AUDIT LIST

JUDGE J. BRIAN JOHNSON

9:00 A.M.—OCTOBER 4, 2019

Estates/Trust of: Atty.Exr. & Adm. Accts.Herbert S. Meeker; J. BartholomewIrene Halkias; D. TkacikWilliam Paul Hamilton; M. BreslowColin Michael Horvath; K. UprightAnn T. Simmons; W. FriesTrust/Gdn./Agent Accts. Atty.The William Paul Hamilton Living

Trust; M. BreslowWendy A. W. Parr

C. of O.C. DivisionS- 20, 27

INDIVIDUAL FICTITIOUS NAME NOTICE

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur-suant to the provisions of Act 295 of 1982, as amended, of intention to file, or the filing of, in the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, Pennsyl-vania, a certificate for the conduct of a business in Pennsylvania, under the assumed or fictitious name, style or designation of

Name: SENIOR CARE RIDES with its principal place of business at: 554 Evergreen St., Emmaus, PA 18049.

The name and address of the per-sons owning or interested in said business are: Zacharie A. Grim, 554 Evergreen St., Emmaus, PA 18049.

The certificate will be filed on or after May 16, 2019.

S-20

37

LEHIGH LAW JOURNALCORPORATE FICTITIOUS

NAME NOTICE

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur-suant to the provisions of Act 295 of 1982, as amended, of intention to file, or the filing of, in the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, Pennsyl-vania, a certificate for the conduct of a business in Pennsylvania, under the assumed or fictitious name, style or designation of

Name: RED BALLOON CIDER with its principal place of business at: 525 Jubilee Street, Emmaus, PA 18049.

The name and address of the en-tity owning or interested in said busi-ness are: Switchback Pizza Company, LLC, 525 Jubilee Street, Emmaus, PA 18049.

The certificate will be filed on or after August 2, 2018.

S-20

NOTICE OF NONPROFIT INCORPORATION

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Articles of Incorporation were filed with the Department of State of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on Septem-ber 3, 2019, for the purpose of incor-porating a nonprofit corporation or-ganized under the provisions of the Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as amended.

The name of the nonprofit corpo-ration is:

PANCREATIC CANCER HOPE FOUNDATION, INC.

The purposes for which it has been organized are as follows:

Purpose: To raise money to fund pancreatic cancer research, to pro-vide support for individuals undergo-

ing treatment for pancreatic cancer, and their families, and to perform any lawful acts which are necessary, desirous, convenient and proper in connection with the Articles of Incor-poration and in accordance with the Pennsylvania Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988, as amended.

The corporation is organized ex-clusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes as defined by Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Rev-enue Code of 1986 (or the corre-sponding provisions of any future United States Internal Revenue Law).PAUL S. FRANK, ESQ. KING, SPRY, HERMAN, FREUND& FAUL, LLCOne West Broad StreetSuite 700 Bethlehem, PA 18018

S-20

NOTICE

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the shareholders and directors of Robert A. Hauke Funeral Home, Inc. (also possibly indexed as Hauke, Robert A. Funeral Home, Inc.), a Pennsylvania Corporation with an address of 327 Chestnut Street, Co-play, PA 18037 and/or 959 Lawrence Way, Allentown, PA 18104, has ap-proved a proposal that the corpora-tion voluntarily dissolve, and that the Board of Directors is now engaged in winding up and settling the affairs of the corporation under the provisions of Section 1975 of the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988, as amended.STEPHEN A. STRACK, ESQ.STECKEL AND STOPP, LLCAttorneys for Corporation125 South Walnut StreetSuite 210 Slatington, PA 18080(610) 760-1644

S-20

38

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

Alzheimer’s disease takes away his independence.

A lawyer protects his rights.

His family doesn’t want him to live alone.

A lawyer says he doesn’t have to.

Medicare won’t cover him.

A lawyer sees to it that it will.

His finances are a mess.

A lawyer organizes them.

Alzheimer’s disease took away his independence.

A lawyer protected his rights.

You have rights. Lawyers protect them.Pennsylvania Bar Association

Bar Association of Lehigh County

39

LEHIGH LAW JOURNAL

ClassicalElegance

1114 W Walnut StreetAllentown | 610-433-6088 ext.12

www.thebarristersclub.com

A gracious facility for your social and business events....

weddings banquets parties exclusively partnered caterers

DELI TO: VER

PERIODICAL PUBLICATION* Dated Material. Do Not Delay. Please Deliver Before Monday, September 23, 2019

vol. lviii allentown, pa friday, september 20, 2019 no....

Documents