26 Pa. D. & C.5th 154
Pennsylvania Court of Common P...2012Background
- Plaintiffs Robert and Janice Matatall purchased a home at 7073 Main Street, Burnside, PA from Kathy Bouch, who acted as seller and realtor for Powell & Associates Real Estate, with Powell as listing agency.
- Codefendants included Fred Day (builder), Guardian Inspection Services (inspector), and Lawrence J. Spritz (ACI/employee) whose firm ACI performed the appraisal.
- Construction was completed in 2009; the home was listed for sale May 18, 2010, with a seller disclosure statement signed by Bouch on that date.
- Plaintiffs moved in and alleged multiple defects: plumbing, electrical, moisture, mold, basement wetness, ice buildup, insulation/window gaps, and questionable fill around the basement.
- Plaintiffs alleged FEMA flood-hazard designation and that Borough advised filling the basement, reducing basement usability and value.
- Plaintiffs asserted RESDL duties and various misrepresentation theories, including UTPCPL violations, against Bouch and Powell, and negligence claims against Guardian and ACI/Spritz.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ellenberger and Howard Hanna must be joined as parties | Matatall argues they are necessary/indispensable. | Bouch says omission requires joinder. | Not necessary or indispensable; joinder not required. |
| Sufficiency of pleadings for specificity | Matatall claims pleadings provide basis to defend. | Bouch argues insufficient specificity and need for special damages. | Pleadings are sufficiently specific; damages are general, not required to be pleaded. |
Key Cases Cited
- York-Adams County Constables Ass’n by Sponseller v. Ct, of Com. Pleas of York County, 474 A.2d 79 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984) (defines indispensible/necessary party concepts)
- Pennsylvania Fish Comm’n v. Pleasant Tp., 388 A.2d 756 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1978) (necessary party rights connection standard)
- Department of Transportation v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, 34 Pa. Commw. 594, 383 A.2d 1314 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1978) (joinder standards for absent parties)
- Sprague v. Casey, 520 Pa. 38, 550 A.2d 184 (1988) (joinder/relief considerations)
- Mechanicsburg Area School District v. Kline, 494 Pa. 476, 431 A.2d 953 (1981) (when to proceed without absent party)
- In re Culbertson’s Estate, 152 A. 540 (1930) (absent party considerations in litigation)
- Kern v. Duquesne Brewing Co., 396 Pa. 279, 152 A.2d 682 (1959) (rights affected by judgment to determine joinder)
- Parsons Trading Co. v. Dohan, 167 A. 310 (Pa. 1933) (damages distinction between general and special damages)