Preview
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SV CONTRACTING LLC :
:
Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION – LAW
: CASE NO. 2023-SU-001878
v. :
:
JASON NORVILLE, and :
KRISTINA NORVILLE :
:
Defendants :
NOTICE TO PLEAD
TO: SV Contracting, LLC
c/o Kirk E. Mentch, Esquire
5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE
ENCLOSED NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM
SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
COMPASS LEGAL GROUP LLC
By: /s/ Jill N. Weikert___________
Jill N. Weikert
Attorney ID No. 208055
2205 Forest Hills Dr., Suite 10
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 836-7377
Attorneys for Defendants
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
Dean F. Piermattei, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 53847
Jill N. Weikert, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 208055
COMPASS LEGAL GROUP LLC
2205 Forest Hills Drive, Suite 10
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717)836-7377
dpiermattei@compasslegal.net
jweikert@compasslegal.net
Attorneys for Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
SV CONTRACTING LLC :
:
Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION – LAW
: CASE NO. 2023-SU-001878
v. :
:
JASON NORVILLE, and :
KRISTINA NORVILLE :
:
Defendants :
DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
WITH NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIMS
NOW COME Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville (hereinafter referred to as
“Defendants” or the “Norvilles”), by and through their attorneys, Compass Legal Group LLC, and
file the within Answer to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint with New Matter and
Counterclaims, and in support of the same, aver as follows:
1. Admitted, based upon information and belief.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that this Court has jurisdiction
over Defendants. York County is the proper jurisdiction for this dispute because the Defendants
are residents of York County, and they hired Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC (“SV”) to perform
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
construction and renovation work on their residence. Defendants do not conduct business in York
County.
4. Admitted. However, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial
District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in
accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything
that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action.
5. Pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge
decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the
Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the
Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action.
6. Pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge
decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the
Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the
Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action.
7. Admitted. However, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial
District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in
accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything
that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action.
8. Admitted.
9. Admitted.
10. Admitted.
11. Admitted.
12. Denied.
2
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
13. Denied.
14. Denied.
15. Admitted.
16. Admitted.
17. It is admitted that SV filed an Amended Complaint on September 25, 2023.
However, it is denied that the Amended Complaint resolved the preliminary objections filed by
Defendants.
18. Admitted.
FACTS
19. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 18 as
though fully set forth herein.
20. Denied. The Norvilles initially hired SV on or about August 15, 2022 to perform
various home renovation projects at their home.
21. It is admitted that there was no “general contractor” hired to supervise SV for the
work performed at the Norvilles’ home. In fact, SV held himself out to Defendants and others to
be the general contractor on the project.
22. The Norvilles incorporate by reference their response to Paragraph 21. The
Norvilles were present in their home to observe the work being performed by SV, but the Norvilles
were not responsible for telling SV how to complete the work requested.
23. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Norvilles had responsibility for acting as
general contractor and managing contractors. Proof of this allegation is demanded at trial.
3
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
24. It is admitted that the Defendants hired SV to perform various remodeling projects
at their Home. A copy of the Contract entered into on August 30, 2022 for a limited scope of work
is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
25. Denied. The averment is extremely vague, as there is no description of what “all
work” refers to in this Paragraph. By way of further answer, SV performed work that was not
requested by Defendant, failed to complete certain projects that were requested by Defendants,
and also performed certain work in a deficient and unworkmanlike manner.
26. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants were responsible for directly
supervising SV. On the contrary, according to the Contract between Defendants and SV, SV stated
that it is a “professional” that “has not and will not receive training from the Recipient regarding
how to perform the services.” Ex. A at p. 1.
27. Denied. It is specifically denied that SV timely completed all work requested by
Defendants. In fact, SV left work unfinished or improperly completed all throughout the
Norvilles’ Home. Specifically, SV failed to properly frame the back exterior wall and kitchen
window, did not finish the band board, did not repair floor joists, did not hang or finish drywall
throughout the Home, did not properly install flooring on the second floor, did not complete the
baseboard and trim, failed to reframe and finish the landing at the staircase, and did other work
that was unauthorized. SV also double-charged the Norvilles for work he allegedly did at their
Home.
28. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants were required to provide SV with
a deficiency list. Defendants made their issues known to SV both verbally and in writing.
4
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
29. It is admitted that SV invoiced Defendants for work performed at their Home. It is
denied, however, that the invoices are accurate or that the work allegedly performed was completed
or done in a workmanlike manner.
30. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants owe the sum of $15,915.00 to SV.
Proof is demanded at trial.
COUNT I
BREACH OF CONTRACT
31. Defendants incorporate by reference their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 30 as
though fully set forth herein.
32. It is admitted that, after the first three jobs performed by SV, the remaining work
was not performed pursuant to a written agreement.
33. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the statute of frauds, 13 Pa.
C.S. § 2201, is in any way applicable to any claims alleged by SV.
34. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the statute of frauds, 13 Pa.
C.S. § 2201, is in any way applicable to any claims alleged by SV.
35. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Norvilles contracted with SV for the “sale
of goods,” and proof of this allegation is demanded at trial. By way of further response, the
invoices attached to the Complaint are for construction services and not the sale of goods.
36. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. It is specifically denied that SV specially manufactured any goods for the Norvilles.
37. It is admitted that the Norvilles paid SV a total of $28,845.74 for the work
performed at their Home.
5
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
38. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
39. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied and proof is
demanded at trial.
40. Denied. As set forth above, the Norvilles paid SV a total of $28,845.74 for work
performed at their Home. Much of the work performed by SV was deficient and/or incomplete,
and the Norvilles incurred expenses to complete and repair the work.
41. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
42. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
43. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
44. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
6
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
45. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
46. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this
Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC.
COUNT II
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
47. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 46 as
though fully set forth herein.
48. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
49. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
50. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
51. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
7
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
52. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
53. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
54. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial. As set forth herein, the Norvilles paid SV an amount of $28,845.74 for work
he performed, most of which was defective, deficient, and incomplete.
55. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that Defendants retained
material without paying for it, and proof is demanded at trial.
56. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
57. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
58. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
8
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
59. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
60. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
61. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable
Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC.
COUNT III
DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE
62. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 61 as
though fully set forth herein.
63. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants hired certain
contractors to perform work in their residence. It is denied that Defendants are a general contractor
or that Defendants directed SV in its work.
64. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants “directed” SV in all of the work
allegedly completed at their residence. By way of further response, SV performed some work that
Defendants did not request.
65. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that
9
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or
materials.
66. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that
Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or
materials.
67. Denied. This allegation is vague and provides no description of what work and
material SV allegedly was directed to provide. To the extent a response is required, the averment
is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain
tasks undertaken by SV that Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay
for these services and/or materials.
68. It is admitted that Defendants paid SV for certain work that was authorized and
performed. By way of further response, some of the work paid for by Defendants was incomplete
and/or defective and had to be corrected.
69. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that
Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or
materials. It was not reasonable for SV to expect payment for services that were not authorized or
requested by Defendants.
10
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
70. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
71. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
72. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
73. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
74. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
75. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
76. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
11
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
77. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
78. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
79. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this
Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC.
COUNT IV
QUANTUM MERUIT
80. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 79 as
though fully set forth herein.
81. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
82. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no
responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
12
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
83. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
84. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
85. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
86. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
87. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
88. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or
information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any
particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is
required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
13
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
89. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
90. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
91. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
92. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
93. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
94. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading
is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is
demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable
Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC.
COUNT V
DEFAMATION
95. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 94 as
though fully set forth herein.
14
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
96. The documents attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 2 speak for themselves.
97. Defendants do not know whether Nextdoor is considered a public website.
Participation on Nextdoor requires a verified account and the geographical location is limited to
the home residence of the user. Accordingly, content is limited to a certain “neighborhood” or
geographical region. See www.nextdoor.com.
98. Defendant Kristina Norville made this statement because it is true that SV
performed work in the Norville Home without prior authorization or approval.
99. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that one of the Defendants was
usually present in the home for most of the work. It is specifically denied that one of the
Defendants was present during all of the work done by SV.
100. Denied. It is specifically denied that “all work” done by SV was at the direction
of Defendants. By way of further answer, SV performed work without being told to do so, and
he admitted this on at least one occasion in a text message to Kristina Norville on October 17,
2022.
101. Denied. Kristina Norville knew this statement to be true, as set forth above in
Paragraph 100.
102. Kristina Norville made this statement because it is true.
103. It is admitted that Defendants selected the windows, but Defendants did not order
the windows. SV ordered the windows and did not order the correct sizes.
104. Denied. Kristina Norville knew or believed this statement to be true, as set forth
above in Paragraph 103.
105. Admitted. By way of further response, this statement is an expression of opinion.
106. The pictures referenced in Exhibit 2 speak for themselves.
15
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
107. Denied. The pictures posted by Kristina Norville were taken on November 19,
2022 and represent the condition of the drywall at that time. The pictures of the drywall were
from the second floor, and SV did not do any work on the second floor during that week. SV
hung approximately 12 sheets of drywall in the kitchen, dining room, and one bedroom of the
Norvilles’ home. SV did not apply mud or finish the drywall; however, he invoiced the
Norvilles for all of this work.
108. SV did not finish the drywall work, nor was SV hired to perform any drywall
work after November 22, 2022.
109. Denied. It is specifically denied that the photos posted by Kristina Norville were
false or inaccurate. Proof of this averment is demanded at trial.
110. The photo in Exhibit 2 at page 9 speaks for itself.
111. Denied. This picture depicts flooring that was improperly installed by SV. By way
of further response, SV demanded that the Norvilles purchase underlayment for the luxury vinyl
plank flooring. The manufacturer of the flooring did not recommend using underlayment. The
floor was also not leveled properly.
112. Denied. The photo was taken on January 25, 2023 and was intended to depict the
issue with the flooring as installed by SV.
113. Denied. It is specifically denied that the photos posted by Kristina Norville were a
false representation of how SV installed the flooring in their home.
114. The photo attached as Exhibit 2, page 6, speaks for itself. By way of further
response, this photo showed a floor joist that was not replaced by SV in the den of the Norvilles’
home.
16
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
115. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the damage to the joist
existed in the Norvilles’ home prior to SV’s work. However, this picture was taken after SV had
allegedly repaired the damage. The picture shows that SV did not replace the damaged joist in
the den of the Norvilles’ home.
116. Denied. This photo represents how SV left the floor joist in the Norvilles’ home.
117. Denied. This picture represents the condition in which SV left the Norvilles’ home.
118. Denied. For the reasons set forth above in paragraphs 115 to 117, this allegation is
specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
119. The photo attached as Exhibit 2, page 7 speaks for itself. The photo represents the
work done by SV.
120. Denied. This picture was taken on November 23, 2022 and it shows the joist that
was not repaired by SV in the den closet. The subfloor, insulation, and vapor barrier were not
installed. The Norvilles paid SV for this work twice, and it was not completed by SV.
121. Denied. This averment is specifically denied for the reasons set forth in Paragraph
120.
122. The photo in Exhibit 2 at page 8 speaks for itself.
123. Denied. This picture was taken by Kristina Norville on November 23, 2022 to show
the incomplete work on the exterior of the home. SV failed to install sheathing on the upper deck
behind the Tyvek except in the left corner.
124. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 123, this averment is specifically
denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
125. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 123, this averment is specifically
denied, and proof is demanded at trial.
17
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
126. The picture at Exhibit 2 page 11 speaks for itself.
127. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that one of the Defendants was
usually present during most of SV’s work. It is specifically denied that one of the Defendants
was always present during all work performed by SV.
128. Denied. It is specifically denied that all work done by SV was under the direction
of Defendants. By way of further answer, SV’s initial agreement with the Norvilles stated that
they had “no right or power to control or otherwise interfere with” SV’s work.
129. Denied. It is specifically denied that SV only charged the Norvilles for joist work
that was completed. By way of further answer, most of the joist work SV charged the Norvilles
for was not completed or was completed improperly.
130. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 129, this averment is specifically
denied.
131. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 129, this averment is specifically
denied.
132. The referenced exhibit speaks for itself.
133. It is specifically denied that any of the statements published by Kristina Norville
were false.
134. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina
Norville were inaccurate or false.
135. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina
Norville were inaccurate or false.
136. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina
Norville were inaccurate or false.
18
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
137. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina
Norville were inaccurate or false.
138. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina
Norville were inaccurate or false.
139. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
It is specifically denied that Kristina Norville owed any duty to SV.
140. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
It is specifically denied that Kristina Norville owed any duty to SV.
141. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
Proof is demanded at trial.
142. It is admitted that others made comments on Kristina Norville’s post. The exhibit
speaks for itself.
143. The exhibit speaks for itself. It is denied that this post caused any damage to SV.
To the extent SV suffered any damages arising from this post, SV bears the burden of proof at
trial.
144. The exhibit speaks for itself.
145. It is denied that this post caused any damage to SV. To the extent SV suffered any
damages arising from this post, SV bears the burden of proof at trial.
146. It is specifically denied that this thread went “viral,” and proof thereof is
demanded at trial. It is further denied that anything posted by Kristina Norville was false. Mrs.
Norville has a Constitutional right to express her opinions about the work performed by SV and
her interactions with him.
19
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
147. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied.
148. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
149. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
150. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
151. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false or that there was a “public response” to the statements.
152. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false or that there was a “public response” to the statements causing special harm
to SV. Proof of any “special harm” is demanded at trial.
153. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
20
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
154. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of any alleged reckless conduct is demanded at trial.
155. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of actual malice is demanded at trial.
156. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
157. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of injury to reputation is demanded at trial.
158. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of public contempt is demanded at trial.
159. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of public ridicule is demanded at trial.
160. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false. Proof of any alleged damages is demanded at trial.
21
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
161. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
162. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the
statements were false.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this
Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC.
NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS
163. Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville, incorporate by reference their
responses to the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
164. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
165. Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim is barred by the terms of the Home
Improvement Consumer Protection Act., 73 P.S. § 517.7(a).
166. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
167. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by failure or lack of consideration.
168. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in substantial part, by the statute of
frauds.
169. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of waiver.
170. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of limitation of
remedies.
171. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of estoppel.
172. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of laches.
22
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
173. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of unclean hands.
174. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the economic loss doctrine.
175. Plaintiff has been paid in full for the work he performed at the Norvilles’ home.
176. Plaintiff has not suffered any damages.
177. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate its damages, if any.
178. In the event Plaintiff has suffered damages, such damages were caused, in whole
or in substantial part, by the acts of Plaintiff.
179. In the event Plaintiff has suffered any damages, Defendants are entitled to a setoff
for work that was not completed by Plaintiff.
180. Plaintiff has not been damaged, nor will Plaintiff be damaged, by any conduct of
Defendants.
181. Any postings on Nextdoor made by Kristina Norville on the Nextdoor site were
true, which is a complete defense to a claim for defamation.
182. Any postings made by Kristina Norville on the Nextdoor site regarding the quality
of work performed by SV were expressions of her opinion.
183. Defendants reserve the right to amend their New Matter to assert any other defenses
that may be available to it based upon facts that may become known during discovery and prior to
hearing in this matter.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville, respectfully request that
this Honorable Court enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff SV Contracting,
LLC in an amount set forth below, plus attorney’s fees, interest, costs, and any other relief that this
Honorable Court should deem equitable and just.
23
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
COUNTERCLAIM OF JASON NORVILLE AND KRISTINA NORVILLE
184. Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville (the
“Norvilles”), incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 183 of their Answer with New Matter
as though fully set forth herein.
185. SV has engaged in trade or commerce within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
by advertising, marketing, offering, selling, and/or performing home improvements as that term is
defined in Section 517.2 of the Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73
P.S. § 517.1, et seq. (“HICPA”), specifically including, but not limited to, framing, demolition,
flooring, installation, drywalling, painting, and other general construction work for Pennsylvania
consumers.
186. SV, doing business as SV Contracting, is registered as a home improvement
contractor pursuant to HICPA at HICPA registration number PA150044.
187. At all times relevant hereto, SV advertised and entered into contracts for home
improvement services using either his individual name, Sakima S. Vongphakdy or SV Contracting.
188. On or about August 30, 2022, the Norvilles entered into a written contract with SV
to perform a specific task of demolishing and installing an LVL load bearing beam for $5,000.00.
A true and correct copy of this contract is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
189. The value of the work to be performed under the contract was $5,000.00, plus
supplies to be purchased by Kristina Norville. See Ex. A; see also Inv. #0063, attached to
Plaintiff’s Complaint as Ex. 1.
190. SV did not include his HICPA registration number on the contract or any of the
subsequent estimates or invoices provided to the Norvilles for work to be performed at their home.
24
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
191. In entering into this written contract, SV failed to use a contract that:
a. contained the approximate starting date and completion date;
b. included a description of the work to be performed, the materials to be used
and a set of written specifications that cannot be changed without a written
change order signed by the owner and the contractor;
c. included the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all subcontractors on
the project;
d. included the current amount of the insurance coverage maintained by the
contractor at the time of signing the contract, representing his agreement to
maintain liability insurance coverage covering personal injury in an amount
not less than $50,000 and insurance covering property damage caused by the
work of a home improvement contractor in an amount not less than $50,000;
e. included the toll-free telephone number for the Commonwealth of PA, Office
of Attorney General, Bureau of Consumer Protection; and
f. included a separate notice of the consumer’s right to rescind the contract
within three business days.
192. After the first two jobs were completed pursuant to the written agreement, SV
continued to perform construction and renovation services at the Norvilles’ home that far exceeded
the value of $500.00.
193. SV did not perform any of the additional work pursuant to a written agreement and
did not present the Norvilles with a written agreement prior to undertaking additional work at their
home in compliance with the HICPA.
194. SV failed to provide the Norvilles with a fully completed receipt or copy of a
written contract containing the notice of their three-day right to cancel as required by Section 201-
7(b) of the Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-7(b)(1).
195. SV failed to provide the Norvilles with a proper Notice of Cancellation form in
duplicate, as required by Section 207-1(b)(2) of the Consumer Protection Law.
25
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM
196. SV made direct or implied representations to the Norvilles that all work or services
would be performed in a skillful, careful, diligent, and workmanlike manner.
197. SV made direct and implied representations that he would commence and
eventually finish the work requested by the Norvilles.
Preview
York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SV CONTRACTING LLC : : Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION – LAW : CASE NO. 2023-SU-001878 v. : : JASON NORVILLE, and : KRISTINA NORVILLE : : Defendants : NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: SV Contracting, LLC c/o Kirk E. Mentch, Esquire 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. COMPASS LEGAL GROUP LLC By: /s/ Jill N. Weikert___________ Jill N. Weikert Attorney ID No. 208055 2205 Forest Hills Dr., Suite 10 Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 836-7377 Attorneys for Defendants York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM Dean F. Piermattei, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 53847 Jill N. Weikert, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 208055 COMPASS LEGAL GROUP LLC 2205 Forest Hills Drive, Suite 10 Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717)836-7377 dpiermattei@compasslegal.net jweikert@compasslegal.net Attorneys for Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SV CONTRACTING LLC : : Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION – LAW : CASE NO. 2023-SU-001878 v. : : JASON NORVILLE, and : KRISTINA NORVILLE : : Defendants : DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIMS NOW COME Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville (hereinafter referred to as “Defendants” or the “Norvilles”), by and through their attorneys, Compass Legal Group LLC, and file the within Answer to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint with New Matter and Counterclaims, and in support of the same, aver as follows: 1. Admitted, based upon information and belief. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that this Court has jurisdiction over Defendants. York County is the proper jurisdiction for this dispute because the Defendants are residents of York County, and they hired Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC (“SV”) to perform York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM construction and renovation work on their residence. Defendants do not conduct business in York County. 4. Admitted. However, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action. 5. Pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action. 6. Pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action. 7. Admitted. However, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure with respect to Magisterial District Judge decisions in civil matters, the proceeding on appeal is conducted de novo in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R. M. D. J. 1007(a). Accordingly, anything that occurred before the Magisterial District Court is irrelevant to the instant action. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. Admitted. 11. Admitted. 12. Denied. 2 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 13. Denied. 14. Denied. 15. Admitted. 16. Admitted. 17. It is admitted that SV filed an Amended Complaint on September 25, 2023. However, it is denied that the Amended Complaint resolved the preliminary objections filed by Defendants. 18. Admitted. FACTS 19. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully set forth herein. 20. Denied. The Norvilles initially hired SV on or about August 15, 2022 to perform various home renovation projects at their home. 21. It is admitted that there was no “general contractor” hired to supervise SV for the work performed at the Norvilles’ home. In fact, SV held himself out to Defendants and others to be the general contractor on the project. 22. The Norvilles incorporate by reference their response to Paragraph 21. The Norvilles were present in their home to observe the work being performed by SV, but the Norvilles were not responsible for telling SV how to complete the work requested. 23. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Norvilles had responsibility for acting as general contractor and managing contractors. Proof of this allegation is demanded at trial. 3 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 24. It is admitted that the Defendants hired SV to perform various remodeling projects at their Home. A copy of the Contract entered into on August 30, 2022 for a limited scope of work is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” 25. Denied. The averment is extremely vague, as there is no description of what “all work” refers to in this Paragraph. By way of further answer, SV performed work that was not requested by Defendant, failed to complete certain projects that were requested by Defendants, and also performed certain work in a deficient and unworkmanlike manner. 26. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants were responsible for directly supervising SV. On the contrary, according to the Contract between Defendants and SV, SV stated that it is a “professional” that “has not and will not receive training from the Recipient regarding how to perform the services.” Ex. A at p. 1. 27. Denied. It is specifically denied that SV timely completed all work requested by Defendants. In fact, SV left work unfinished or improperly completed all throughout the Norvilles’ Home. Specifically, SV failed to properly frame the back exterior wall and kitchen window, did not finish the band board, did not repair floor joists, did not hang or finish drywall throughout the Home, did not properly install flooring on the second floor, did not complete the baseboard and trim, failed to reframe and finish the landing at the staircase, and did other work that was unauthorized. SV also double-charged the Norvilles for work he allegedly did at their Home. 28. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants were required to provide SV with a deficiency list. Defendants made their issues known to SV both verbally and in writing. 4 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 29. It is admitted that SV invoiced Defendants for work performed at their Home. It is denied, however, that the invoices are accurate or that the work allegedly performed was completed or done in a workmanlike manner. 30. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants owe the sum of $15,915.00 to SV. Proof is demanded at trial. COUNT I BREACH OF CONTRACT 31. Defendants incorporate by reference their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 30 as though fully set forth herein. 32. It is admitted that, after the first three jobs performed by SV, the remaining work was not performed pursuant to a written agreement. 33. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the statute of frauds, 13 Pa. C.S. § 2201, is in any way applicable to any claims alleged by SV. 34. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the statute of frauds, 13 Pa. C.S. § 2201, is in any way applicable to any claims alleged by SV. 35. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Norvilles contracted with SV for the “sale of goods,” and proof of this allegation is demanded at trial. By way of further response, the invoices attached to the Complaint are for construction services and not the sale of goods. 36. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. It is specifically denied that SV specially manufactured any goods for the Norvilles. 37. It is admitted that the Norvilles paid SV a total of $28,845.74 for the work performed at their Home. 5 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 38. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 39. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied and proof is demanded at trial. 40. Denied. As set forth above, the Norvilles paid SV a total of $28,845.74 for work performed at their Home. Much of the work performed by SV was deficient and/or incomplete, and the Norvilles incurred expenses to complete and repair the work. 41. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 42. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 43. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 44. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 6 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 45. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 46. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC. COUNT II UNJUST ENRICHMENT 47. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 46 as though fully set forth herein. 48. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 49. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 50. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 51. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 7 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 52. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 53. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 54. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. As set forth herein, the Norvilles paid SV an amount of $28,845.74 for work he performed, most of which was defective, deficient, and incomplete. 55. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that Defendants retained material without paying for it, and proof is demanded at trial. 56. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 57. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 58. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 8 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 59. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 60. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 61. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC. COUNT III DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE 62. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 61 as though fully set forth herein. 63. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendants hired certain contractors to perform work in their residence. It is denied that Defendants are a general contractor or that Defendants directed SV in its work. 64. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants “directed” SV in all of the work allegedly completed at their residence. By way of further response, SV performed some work that Defendants did not request. 65. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that 9 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or materials. 66. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or materials. 67. Denied. This allegation is vague and provides no description of what work and material SV allegedly was directed to provide. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or materials. 68. It is admitted that Defendants paid SV for certain work that was authorized and performed. By way of further response, some of the work paid for by Defendants was incomplete and/or defective and had to be corrected. 69. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, there were certain tasks undertaken by SV that Defendants neither requested nor authorized and did not agree to pay for these services and/or materials. It was not reasonable for SV to expect payment for services that were not authorized or requested by Defendants. 10 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 70. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 71. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 72. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 73. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 74. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 75. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 76. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 11 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 77. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 78. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 79. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC. COUNT IV QUANTUM MERUIT 80. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 79 as though fully set forth herein. 81. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 82. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 12 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 83. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 84. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 85. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 86. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 87. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “work” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 88. Denied. This paragraph is so vague that Defendants are without knowledge or information to provide a response because the term “material” is not defined or described with any particularity. To the extent this paragraph states a conclusion of law, no responsive pleading is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 13 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 89. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 90. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 91. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 92. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 93. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 94. Denied. This paragraph states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC. COUNT V DEFAMATION 95. Defendants incorporate by reference their answers to Paragraphs 1 through 94 as though fully set forth herein. 14 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 96. The documents attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 2 speak for themselves. 97. Defendants do not know whether Nextdoor is considered a public website. Participation on Nextdoor requires a verified account and the geographical location is limited to the home residence of the user. Accordingly, content is limited to a certain “neighborhood” or geographical region. See www.nextdoor.com. 98. Defendant Kristina Norville made this statement because it is true that SV performed work in the Norville Home without prior authorization or approval. 99. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that one of the Defendants was usually present in the home for most of the work. It is specifically denied that one of the Defendants was present during all of the work done by SV. 100. Denied. It is specifically denied that “all work” done by SV was at the direction of Defendants. By way of further answer, SV performed work without being told to do so, and he admitted this on at least one occasion in a text message to Kristina Norville on October 17, 2022. 101. Denied. Kristina Norville knew this statement to be true, as set forth above in Paragraph 100. 102. Kristina Norville made this statement because it is true. 103. It is admitted that Defendants selected the windows, but Defendants did not order the windows. SV ordered the windows and did not order the correct sizes. 104. Denied. Kristina Norville knew or believed this statement to be true, as set forth above in Paragraph 103. 105. Admitted. By way of further response, this statement is an expression of opinion. 106. The pictures referenced in Exhibit 2 speak for themselves. 15 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 107. Denied. The pictures posted by Kristina Norville were taken on November 19, 2022 and represent the condition of the drywall at that time. The pictures of the drywall were from the second floor, and SV did not do any work on the second floor during that week. SV hung approximately 12 sheets of drywall in the kitchen, dining room, and one bedroom of the Norvilles’ home. SV did not apply mud or finish the drywall; however, he invoiced the Norvilles for all of this work. 108. SV did not finish the drywall work, nor was SV hired to perform any drywall work after November 22, 2022. 109. Denied. It is specifically denied that the photos posted by Kristina Norville were false or inaccurate. Proof of this averment is demanded at trial. 110. The photo in Exhibit 2 at page 9 speaks for itself. 111. Denied. This picture depicts flooring that was improperly installed by SV. By way of further response, SV demanded that the Norvilles purchase underlayment for the luxury vinyl plank flooring. The manufacturer of the flooring did not recommend using underlayment. The floor was also not leveled properly. 112. Denied. The photo was taken on January 25, 2023 and was intended to depict the issue with the flooring as installed by SV. 113. Denied. It is specifically denied that the photos posted by Kristina Norville were a false representation of how SV installed the flooring in their home. 114. The photo attached as Exhibit 2, page 6, speaks for itself. By way of further response, this photo showed a floor joist that was not replaced by SV in the den of the Norvilles’ home. 16 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 115. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the damage to the joist existed in the Norvilles’ home prior to SV’s work. However, this picture was taken after SV had allegedly repaired the damage. The picture shows that SV did not replace the damaged joist in the den of the Norvilles’ home. 116. Denied. This photo represents how SV left the floor joist in the Norvilles’ home. 117. Denied. This picture represents the condition in which SV left the Norvilles’ home. 118. Denied. For the reasons set forth above in paragraphs 115 to 117, this allegation is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 119. The photo attached as Exhibit 2, page 7 speaks for itself. The photo represents the work done by SV. 120. Denied. This picture was taken on November 23, 2022 and it shows the joist that was not repaired by SV in the den closet. The subfloor, insulation, and vapor barrier were not installed. The Norvilles paid SV for this work twice, and it was not completed by SV. 121. Denied. This averment is specifically denied for the reasons set forth in Paragraph 120. 122. The photo in Exhibit 2 at page 8 speaks for itself. 123. Denied. This picture was taken by Kristina Norville on November 23, 2022 to show the incomplete work on the exterior of the home. SV failed to install sheathing on the upper deck behind the Tyvek except in the left corner. 124. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 123, this averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 125. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 123, this averment is specifically denied, and proof is demanded at trial. 17 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 126. The picture at Exhibit 2 page 11 speaks for itself. 127. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that one of the Defendants was usually present during most of SV’s work. It is specifically denied that one of the Defendants was always present during all work performed by SV. 128. Denied. It is specifically denied that all work done by SV was under the direction of Defendants. By way of further answer, SV’s initial agreement with the Norvilles stated that they had “no right or power to control or otherwise interfere with” SV’s work. 129. Denied. It is specifically denied that SV only charged the Norvilles for joist work that was completed. By way of further answer, most of the joist work SV charged the Norvilles for was not completed or was completed improperly. 130. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 129, this averment is specifically denied. 131. Denied. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 129, this averment is specifically denied. 132. The referenced exhibit speaks for itself. 133. It is specifically denied that any of the statements published by Kristina Norville were false. 134. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina Norville were inaccurate or false. 135. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina Norville were inaccurate or false. 136. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina Norville were inaccurate or false. 18 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 137. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina Norville were inaccurate or false. 138. It is specifically denied that any statements or photographs published by Kristina Norville were inaccurate or false. 139. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. It is specifically denied that Kristina Norville owed any duty to SV. 140. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. It is specifically denied that Kristina Norville owed any duty to SV. 141. Denied. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. Proof is demanded at trial. 142. It is admitted that others made comments on Kristina Norville’s post. The exhibit speaks for itself. 143. The exhibit speaks for itself. It is denied that this post caused any damage to SV. To the extent SV suffered any damages arising from this post, SV bears the burden of proof at trial. 144. The exhibit speaks for itself. 145. It is denied that this post caused any damage to SV. To the extent SV suffered any damages arising from this post, SV bears the burden of proof at trial. 146. It is specifically denied that this thread went “viral,” and proof thereof is demanded at trial. It is further denied that anything posted by Kristina Norville was false. Mrs. Norville has a Constitutional right to express her opinions about the work performed by SV and her interactions with him. 19 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 147. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averment is specifically denied. 148. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 149. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 150. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 151. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false or that there was a “public response” to the statements. 152. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false or that there was a “public response” to the statements causing special harm to SV. Proof of any “special harm” is demanded at trial. 153. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 20 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 154. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of any alleged reckless conduct is demanded at trial. 155. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of actual malice is demanded at trial. 156. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 157. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of injury to reputation is demanded at trial. 158. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of public contempt is demanded at trial. 159. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of public ridicule is demanded at trial. 160. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. Proof of any alleged damages is demanded at trial. 21 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 161. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. 162. Denied. This paragraph contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, it is specifically denied that any of the statements were false. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Kristina Norville and Jason Norville, request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff, SV Contracting, LLC. NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS 163. Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville, incorporate by reference their responses to the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 164. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 165. Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim is barred by the terms of the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act., 73 P.S. § 517.7(a). 166. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 167. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by failure or lack of consideration. 168. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in substantial part, by the statute of frauds. 169. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of waiver. 170. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of limitation of remedies. 171. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of estoppel. 172. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of laches. 22 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 173. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of unclean hands. 174. Plaintiff’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the economic loss doctrine. 175. Plaintiff has been paid in full for the work he performed at the Norvilles’ home. 176. Plaintiff has not suffered any damages. 177. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate its damages, if any. 178. In the event Plaintiff has suffered damages, such damages were caused, in whole or in substantial part, by the acts of Plaintiff. 179. In the event Plaintiff has suffered any damages, Defendants are entitled to a setoff for work that was not completed by Plaintiff. 180. Plaintiff has not been damaged, nor will Plaintiff be damaged, by any conduct of Defendants. 181. Any postings on Nextdoor made by Kristina Norville on the Nextdoor site were true, which is a complete defense to a claim for defamation. 182. Any postings made by Kristina Norville on the Nextdoor site regarding the quality of work performed by SV were expressions of her opinion. 183. Defendants reserve the right to amend their New Matter to assert any other defenses that may be available to it based upon facts that may become known during discovery and prior to hearing in this matter. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville, respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff SV Contracting, LLC in an amount set forth below, plus attorney’s fees, interest, costs, and any other relief that this Honorable Court should deem equitable and just. 23 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM COUNTERCLAIM OF JASON NORVILLE AND KRISTINA NORVILLE 184. Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, Jason Norville and Kristina Norville (the “Norvilles”), incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 183 of their Answer with New Matter as though fully set forth herein. 185. SV has engaged in trade or commerce within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by advertising, marketing, offering, selling, and/or performing home improvements as that term is defined in Section 517.2 of the Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 P.S. § 517.1, et seq. (“HICPA”), specifically including, but not limited to, framing, demolition, flooring, installation, drywalling, painting, and other general construction work for Pennsylvania consumers. 186. SV, doing business as SV Contracting, is registered as a home improvement contractor pursuant to HICPA at HICPA registration number PA150044. 187. At all times relevant hereto, SV advertised and entered into contracts for home improvement services using either his individual name, Sakima S. Vongphakdy or SV Contracting. 188. On or about August 30, 2022, the Norvilles entered into a written contract with SV to perform a specific task of demolishing and installing an LVL load bearing beam for $5,000.00. A true and correct copy of this contract is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” 189. The value of the work to be performed under the contract was $5,000.00, plus supplies to be purchased by Kristina Norville. See Ex. A; see also Inv. #0063, attached to Plaintiff’s Complaint as Ex. 1. 190. SV did not include his HICPA registration number on the contract or any of the subsequent estimates or invoices provided to the Norvilles for work to be performed at their home. 24 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 191. In entering into this written contract, SV failed to use a contract that: a. contained the approximate starting date and completion date; b. included a description of the work to be performed, the materials to be used and a set of written specifications that cannot be changed without a written change order signed by the owner and the contractor; c. included the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all subcontractors on the project; d. included the current amount of the insurance coverage maintained by the contractor at the time of signing the contract, representing his agreement to maintain liability insurance coverage covering personal injury in an amount not less than $50,000 and insurance covering property damage caused by the work of a home improvement contractor in an amount not less than $50,000; e. included the toll-free telephone number for the Commonwealth of PA, Office of Attorney General, Bureau of Consumer Protection; and f. included a separate notice of the consumer’s right to rescind the contract within three business days. 192. After the first two jobs were completed pursuant to the written agreement, SV continued to perform construction and renovation services at the Norvilles’ home that far exceeded the value of $500.00. 193. SV did not perform any of the additional work pursuant to a written agreement and did not present the Norvilles with a written agreement prior to undertaking additional work at their home in compliance with the HICPA. 194. SV failed to provide the Norvilles with a fully completed receipt or copy of a written contract containing the notice of their three-day right to cancel as required by Section 201- 7(b) of the Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-7(b)(1). 195. SV failed to provide the Norvilles with a proper Notice of Cancellation form in duplicate, as required by Section 207-1(b)(2) of the Consumer Protection Law. 25 York County Prothonotary Civil E-Filed - 2 Nov 2023 02:52:21 PM 196. SV made direct or implied representations to the Norvilles that all work or services would be performed in a skillful, careful, diligent, and workmanlike manner. 197. SV made direct and implied representations that he would commence and eventually finish the work requested by the Norvilles.