J-A28038-24

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37 TIMOTHY R. WELCH AND CYNTHIA L. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WELCH : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1242 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I, PA, : THOMAS E. MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION, EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ROBERT BURNS, RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., AND IZZY : CONSTRUCTION, INC. : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 161100904 MICHAEL A. ZISKIND AND INGRID C. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ZISKIND : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1243 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I, P.A., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : THOMAS E. MANION, EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC., ROBERT BURNS D/B/A : RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., MACK : J-A28038-24

DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : AND IZZY CONSTRUCTION, INC. : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 161101721 STACY BUCKLAW AND DIANE : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF BUCKLAW, ANGELA MARCIANO, : PENNSYLVANIA HASSAN K. PAIGE, DANA N. PAIGE, : RAJESHA PARNERKAR, SHILPA : PARNERKAR, IGOR ZAVALNY, : TAMARA ZAVALNY, CHRISTOPHER : DAUGHERTY, DOROTHEA D. : DAUGHERTY, BOBBY K. JACOB, JULY : B. JACOB, BENJAMIN R. LACSON, : No. 1244 EDA 2023 EVELYN P. LASCON, KEVIN : MARCIANO : : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC., TOLL PA, II LP, TOLL : PA, VI LP, TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I, P.A. : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, ABEL : GARCIA : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023

-2- J-A28038-24

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170600001 DANIEL G. PORTER AND CAROLYN J. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PORTER : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., TOLL : No. 1245 EDA 2023 BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA GP, : CORP., TOLL PA, II, LP, TOLL : BROTHERS, INC., TOLL : ARCHITECTURE I, P.A., DOMINIC C. : DEFRANGESCO, MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC. : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901002 THOMAS DEANGELO AND CAGLAYAN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEANGELO : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1246 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I, P.A., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., MS : BUILDERS, INC., MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., M.A. CARDY : CONSTRUCTION, INC., DOMINIC : DEFRANGESCO :

-3- J-A28038-24

: : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901003 JAMES COY AND DENISE COY : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : No. 1247 EDA 2023 INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, I, PA, : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : THOMAS E. MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION, RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., EXTERIOR : OPTIONS, INC., D/B/A EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC., MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., FRANK : BADOLATO, AQUARIUS SIDING : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901196 BRETT ADAMS AND TAMARA ADAMS, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JILL O'DONNELL, JASON : PENNSYLVANIA TEPFENHARDT, JESSICA : TEPFENHARDT, JAMES WIEGERS, : ANN MARIE WIEGERS, BRIAN : BENTRIM, JEFF CAMPAGNA, : ELIZABETH, CAMPAGNA, CATHERINE : BENTRIM, MATTHEW O'DONNELL : : No. 1248 EDA 2023 :

-4- J-A28038-24

v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC., : TOLL ARCHITECTURE, I, P.A., : THOMAS E. MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION, RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : EXTERIOR OPTIONS, INC., D/B/A : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., PETR JACH : T/A BRICK FRONTS, L.L.C., ELK : CONSTRUCTION : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170101225 MANOJ PRASAD AND CHETANA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PRASAD : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1249 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, I, P.A., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : DOMINIC DEFRANGESCO : : : -5- J-A28038-24

APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901803 ROBERT T. ROSS AND DAWN D. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ROSS : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1250 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I, P.A., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : AND NEW MILLENNIUM : CONTRACTORS : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901815 JULIAN CASTANEDA AND BRENNA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CASTANEDA : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1251 EDA 2023 BROS., INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE, : INC., TOLL ARCHITECTURE I PA, : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, :

-6- J-A28038-24

INC., ABEL GARCIA, EXTERIOR : OPTIONS, INC., D/B/A EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC. : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003533 JOSHUA M. OWENS AND ALLISON R. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OWENS : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1348 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK-DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., NEW MILLENNIUM : CONTRACTING CORP. A/K/A NEW : MILLENIUM, ANDERSEN WINDOWS, : INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901823 MICHAEL MILEY AND JENNIFER : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MILEY : PENNSYLVANIA :

-7- J-A28038-24

: v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1349 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellant : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., NEW MILLENIUM : CONTRACTING CORP. A/K/A NEW : MILLENIUM, ANDERSEN WINDOWS, : INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901824 JOSEPH A. SAMARCO AND LORI : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LYNN SAMARCO : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1350 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellant : : : : : v. : : : -8- J-A28038-24

M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901903 TODD ELLIOTT AND JUDITH ELLIOTT : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1351 EDA 2023 : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170901907 ROBERT KASPROW AND LAURA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF KASPROW : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1352 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : :

-9- J-A28038-24

Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC., MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., THOMAS E. : MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION, PETR JACH, ELK : CONSTRUCTION Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170902048 JAMES COOKE AND TRACY COOKE : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1353 EDA 2023 : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : CONNOLLY STUCCO AND : PLASTERING, NEW MILLENNIUM : : - 10 - J-A28038-24

CONTRACTORS, MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., MD SOUTH Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170903045 KEVIN MARCIANO AND ANGELA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MARCIANO : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1354 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., NEW MILLENNIUM : CONTRACTORS A/K/A NEW : MILLENNIUM, ANDERSEN WINDOWS, : INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 170903704 BRIAN G. BENTRIM & CATHERINE S. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF BENTRIM : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : : : No. 1355 EDA 2023

- 11 - J-A28038-24

TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., THOMAS E. : MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E.

MANION, IZZY CONSTRUCTION, INC., FRANK BADOLATO Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171002359 IGOR ZAVALNY AND TAMARA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF VOLKOVA : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1356 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : - 12 - J-A28038-24

: M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003433 VENKA REDDY SUNKARA AND : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ANITHA BADVELU : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1357 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., DOMINIC DEFRANGESCO, : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003549 FURRUKH MUNAWAR AND AAIYSHA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MUNAWAR : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : : : No. 1358 EDA 2023

- 13 - J-A28038-24

TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., NEW MILLENNIUM : CONTRACTORING CORP. A/K/A "NEW : MILLENIUM, ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003571 ANDREW TURK : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC., THOMAS E. MANION : No. 1359 EDA 2023 T/A MANION CONTRACTORS AND/OR : THOMAS E. MANION, ANDERSEN : WINDOWS, INC., ROBERT BURNS, : RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., ELK : CONSTRUCTION, EXTERIOR : OPTIONS, INC. : : : APPEAL OF: TOLL BROTHERS, INC., : TOLL PA II, L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., : AND TOLL BROS., INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023

- 14 - J-A28038-24

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003572 RICHARD ORLANDO AND KRISTIN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORLANDO : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1360 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., HENRY : NUSSER Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003573 RAJESH PARNERKAR AND SHILPA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PARNERKAR : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1361 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : :

- 15 - J-A28038-24

v. : : : M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003574 BENJAMIN LACSON AND EVELYN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LACSON : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1362 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., THOMAS E. : MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION, ELK CONSTRUCTION : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 171003576 JAMES WOJNICKI AND KIMBERLY : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WOJNICKI : PENNSYLVANIA : :

- 16 - J-A28038-24

v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1363 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC., MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., THOMAS E. : MANION T/A MANION : CONTRACTORS AND/OR THOMAS E. : MANION Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180202349 MENG KOUCH AND LISA C. KOUCH : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1364 EDA 2023 : Appellants : : : : : v. : - 17 - J-A28038-24

: : NEW MILLENNIUM CONTRACTORS : CORP., A/K/A NEW MILLENIUM, : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180302432 JAMES MCFADDEN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1365 EDA 2023 : Appellant : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., ROBERT : BURNS D/B/A RSB CONSTRUCTION : CO., THOMAS E. MANION T/A : MANION CONTRACTORS AND/OR : THOMAS E. MANION, ELK : CONSTRUCTION : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180502212 AJITH JOHN MANJAMATTATHIL AND : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MARINA JOSEPH : PENNSYLVANIA : :

- 18 - J-A28038-24

v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1366 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : NEW MILLENNIUM CONTRACTORS : CORP, A/K/A NEW MILLENIUM, MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180701242 BILLY ERNEST FLURRY AND MISTY : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LAW FLURRY : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1367 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : - 19 - J-A28038-24

MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180701953 ANDREW BONAS AND LAURA BONAS : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1368 EDA 2023 : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., ANDERSEN : WINDOWS, INC. : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180701954 THOMAS LEVIEN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1369 EDA 2023

- 20 - J-A28038-24

: Appellants : : : : : v. : : : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, : INC., BREFFNI CONTRACTING, INC., : RSB CONSTRUCTION CO., : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : ARCAMONE CONSTRUCTION : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180703136 ANDREW L. PALSKY AND CHRISTINA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF M. PALSKY : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1370 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., MACK : DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., : MICHAEL ANTOLINO : CONSTRUCTION, RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., MICHAEL : KLYSINSKI D/B/A PRESTIGE HOME : IMPROVEMENT : - 21 - J-A28038-24

Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 180703480 JOSHUA STONE AND JESSICA STONE : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : No. 1371 EDA 2023 : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC., : ANTOLINO CONSTRUCTION, INC., : EXTERIOR WALLS, INC., RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., THOMAS E. : MANION T/A MANION CONTRACTORS : AND/OR THOMAS E. MANION, : AQUARIUS SIDING, FRANK : BADOLATO : Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 190703049 DANIEL TEISLER AND ROBERTA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TEISLER : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : : : No. 1372 EDA 2023

- 22 - J-A28038-24

TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : ROBERT S. BURNS A/K/A RSB : CONSTRUCTION CO., EXTERIOR : OPTIONS, INC., D/B/A EXTERIOR : WALLS, INC., MACK DONOHOE : CONTRACTORS, INC., MAURICE J. : HAUGEL, INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 190703055 SHOU BAI CHAO AND HELEN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF HUIHUA MAO : PENNSYLVANIA : : v. : : : TOLL BROTHERS, INC., TOLL PA II, : L.P., TOLL PA GP CORP., AND TOLL : No. 1373 EDA 2023 BROS., INC. : : Appellants : : : : : v. : : : : : - 23 - J-A28038-24

M.A. CARDY CONSTRUCTION, INC., : MACK DONOHOE CONTRACTORS, INC., ANDERSEN WINDOWS, INC. Appeal from the Order Entered April 20, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 190703948

BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J.E., STABILE, J., and NICHOLS, J.

MEMORANDUM BY NICHOLS, J.: FILED MAY 22, 2025 In these consolidated cases, Appellants Toll Brothers, Inc., Toll PA II, L.P., Toll PA GP Corp., and Toll Bros., Inc., (collectively, “Toll Bros.”) appeal the order denying their motion to disqualify Appellees’ counsel, Horn Williamson, LLC (Horn Williamson). We affirm.

Horn Williamson represents Appellee homebuyers in suits alleging that Toll Bros. “induced homebuyers to purchase [] homes that [] were defectively designed and constructed in violation of building code.” See, e.g., R.R. 162a (Appellees Julian Castaneda and Brenna Casteneda Compl., 10/27/17, at 5 (unpaginated).1 In the course of litigation, the trial court held a discovery conference on May 10, 2022 “in an attempt to encourage the parties to work cooperatively and to complete all outstanding discovery[.]” See Trial Ct. Op., 4/20/23, at 3 (unpaginated) (emphasis in original).

The trial court summarized the procedural history of this matter as follows:

____________________________________________

- 24 - J-A28038-24

During the May 10, 2022 conference, [the trial court] specifically prohibited further discovery related to [Toll Bros.’] settlements with other homeowners.[fn2] Following the May 10, 2022 conference, [the trial court] issued an order that was meant to act as a final discovery order governing all remaining discovery. Per the May 10, 2022 order, [the trial court] directed that the parties shall not file any additional discovery motions without an accompanying motion for extraordinary relief granted by [the trial court] setting forth the exact parameters of the motion to be filed.

Additionally, [the trial court] denied the extension of discovery deadlines in all of the above-captioned coordinated cases.

Notably, on May 10, 2022, the third-party subpoenas that led to the production of the at-issue confidential settlement materials were [] not brought to [the trial court’s] attention as an item of outstanding discovery.[fn4] [fn2]All counsel were instructed to bring forward any/all outstanding discovery issues at this omnibus conference.

Horn Williamson sought the production of pricing and settlement documents, which [the trial court] denied. [fn4] Rule 234 subpoenas to produce documents and appear at a deposition were sent out April 29, 2022 and May 2, 2022 to third-parties Sperrin and 4Glen, respectively. [Pa.R.Civ.P.] 234 requires notice on the docket [of these subpoenas] and such notice was not provided by Horn Williamson. On or around June 3, 2022, third-parties Sperrin and 4Glen produced the documents.[2]

____________________________________________

R.R. at 891a-92a, 924a. Counsel for Toll Bros. described the extent of Sperrin’s production as approximately 20,000 pages of documents. Id. at 801a. Based on Ms. Abate’s testimony, the trial court found that Horn Williamson had failed to comply with the requirements for subpoenas for production of documents from third parties pursuant to Pa.R.Civ.P. 4009.21.

Id. at 958a-59a, 967a-68a (“it appears that, regardless of motivation, that the wrong subpoena rules were used. . . . There is [Pa.R.Civ.P.] 400[]9.21, and then there is [Pa.R.Civ.P.] 23[4].1. And it appears that there was a sort of cross pollination of what was going on[]”).

- 25 - J-A28038-24

On July 7, 2022, [Toll Bros.] filed an emergency motion to claw back the at-issue confidential documents.[fn5] [The trial court] immediately scheduled a hearing for July 25, 2022 and further ordered that the at-issue documents, including any marked for upcoming arbitrations, not be used in any litigation pending [the trial court’s] hearing. At the request of the parties, the hearing [of] July 25, 2022 was rescheduled to August 24, 2022. . . . [fn5][The confidential documents were shown to the trial court in camera and the trial court reviewed them and determined that they contained pricing, prior repairs, and related conduct performed pursuant to confidential settlements with other homeowners. The actual documents indicated that they are confidential and were clearly marked in such a manner.]

Following the hearing on August 24, 2022, [the trial court] ordered that all confidential documents be clawed back, be precluded from use in any other litigation, and be returned to [Toll Bros.]. At the request of Horn Williamson, [on October 18, 2022, the trial court] amended the August 24, 2022 order [to] stat[e] that the claw back [provision] applied to all parties, including [Toll Bros.], and that the clawed back documents were to be returned to third- parties Sperrin and 4Glen.

On September 20, 2022, [Toll Bros.] filed the instant motion to disqualify Horn Williamson and all of its attorneys from acting as counsel adverse to [Toll Bros.]. After extensive filings and briefing, [the trial court] scheduled a hearing on the motion to disqualify to occur on December 2, 2022. Further, [the trial court] ordered that the parties were permitted to use the documents subject to the claw back motion in their litigation of the instant motion to disqualify under terms of confidentiality. Following [Toll Bros.] presentation on December 2, 2022, the hearing was further continued to January 31, 2023. In the interim of the two hearings, the parties continued their pattern of extensive motion practice.

Following the hearing on January 31, 2023, [the trial court] ordered that all of the above-captioned coordinated cases be stayed pending [the trial court’s] decision on the instant motion to disqualify and any appeal therefrom. [The trial court] then set a briefing schedule for post-hearing briefs.

- 26 - J-A28038-24

Id. at 3-5 (unpaginated) (emphases in original, some internal citations and footnotes omitted, and some formatting altered).

Both Toll Bros. and the trial court describe the confidential documents at issue produced by Sperrin, which the trial court reviewed in camera, as “contain[ing] pricing, prior repairs, and related conduct performed pursuant to confidential settlements with other homeowners.” Id. at n.1 (unpaginated) (emphasis added); see also Toll Bros.’ Brief at 13 (same). The trial court also described these documents as containing information such as “commonality of repairs.” Trial Ct. Op., 4/20/23, at 8 (unpaginated) (emphasis added).

On April 20, 2023, the trial court entered an order denying Toll Bros.’ motion to disqualify. Therein, the trial court “precluded [Horn Williamson] from admitting into evidence, at any proceedings related to these cases, any document or testimony . . . that relates to pricing, prior repairs, and/or related conduct performed pursuant to any confidential settlement with other homeowners who are not [Appellees] themselves.” Trial Ct. Order, 4/20/23, at 3 (unpaginated). The trial court also “precluded [Horn Williamson] from including in their fee petition any charges related to any discovery after May 10, 2022” unless specifically permitted by the trial court, related to Toll Bros.’ motions to claw back confidential materials or disqualify counsel, or related to “the procurement of any of the confidential information from third-parties that was not expressly allowed in the May 10, 2022 order[.]” Id. (some formatting altered). This fee-limiting directive imposed a financial sanction on Horn - 27 - J-A28038-24

Williamson related to its improper procurement of documents from Sperrin, in addition to the claw back and preclusion provisions set forth in the trial court’s order of August 24, 2022, as amended on October 18, 2022.

Toll Bros. filed a timely notice of appeal.3 The trial court did not order Toll Bros. to comply with Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) and did not issue a Rule 1925(a) opinion.

On appeal, Toll Bros. presents the following question for our review: Is disqualification required where (i) counsel improperly acquired confidential information concerning an adversary’s pricing and settlement strategies in violation of court orders, discovery rules, and ethical obligations; and (ii) counsel’s knowledge of the confidential information makes it impossible to ensure a fair trial?

Toll Bros.’ Brief at 7.

Toll Bros. argues that the trial court erred in denying the motion to disqualify because Horn Williamson had “pressured [Sperrin] into producing the very settlement-related documents the trial court had ruled were not subject to discovery.” Id. at 27. Toll Bros. alleges that the Sperrin documents ____________________________________________

R.R. at 1387a (Trial Ct. Order, 5/19/23). “An order denying a motion to disqualify a law firm from a litigation is immediately appealable as a collateral order.” Mertis v. Oh, 289 A.3d 532, 535 n.1 (Pa. Super 2022) (citing Rudalavage v. PPL Elec. Utilities Corp., 268 A.3d 470, 478 (Pa. Super. 2022); Pa.R.A.P 313).

- 28 - J-A28038-24

contain “the terms on which Toll [Bros.] settled similar claims, the scope of the repairs performed in connection with those settlements, [and] the amounts that Toll [Bros.] ultimately paid for those repairs[]” and also alleges that these documents contain “confidential and proprietary information.” Id. at 26-27. In support of this characterization, Toll Bros. notes that “Sperrin [] produced tens of thousands of pages of documents, which the trial court observed were ‘clearly marked’ confidential and described as ‘contain[ing] pricing, prior repairs, and related conduct performed pursuant to confidential settlements’ with third-party homeowners.” Id. at 13, citing Trial Ct. Op., 4/20/23, at 1, n.1 (unpaginated); R.R. at 926a-27a (N.T. Mot. Hrg., 8/24/22, at 135-36);4 R.R. at 940a-41a (N.T. Mot. Hrg., 8/24/22, at 149-50). 5

____________________________________________

A: There were work orders, and, basically, any job that had the work order for – it was a work order. What’s behind that work order and specifics, is it called a repair agreement or not, I honestly do not know.

R.R. at 926a-27a.

A: Right.

R.R. at 940a.

- 29 - J-A28038-24

Toll Bros. notes that the trial court concluded that “if used, the information [from confidential settlement documents] would give Horn [Williamson] an unfair litigation advantage over Toll [Bros.]” Id. at 33; see also id. at 24 (Toll Bros. asserts that based on the Sperrin production Horn Williamson now knows “exactly how Toll [Bros.] values a settlement of the asserted claims and how it analyzed damages issues in similar cases”).

Toll Bros. argues that the trial court’s remedies of clawing back the documents and precluding Appellees from using any information from those documents in the instant litigation is inadequate because these directives “would not prevent Horn [Williamson] from using the information it learned from the confidential documents against Toll [Bros.]” Id. at 24-25. Toll Bros. further contends that disqualification is appropriate because Horn Williamson acquired “confidential information about an adversary[, i.e., Toll Bros.] that will inform the lawyer’s litigation strategy to the disadvantage of the adversary.” Id. at 31. Therefore, Toll Bros. concludes that disqualification of Horn Williamson is necessary to ensure that Tolls Bros. obtains “the fair trial that due process requires.” Id. at 24 (citations omitted).

Horn Williamson responds that Toll Bros. “fail[ed] to make an adequate record” to establish that the documents which Horn Williamson obtained from Sperrin contained confidential documents such as Toll Bros.’ settlement agreements with other homeowners and points out that Toll Bros. has not produced any of the confidential documents that it alleges warrant disqualification. Appellees’ Brief at 31-34. Horn Williamson further contends - 30 - J-A28038-24

that this omission “deprives this Court of the ability to perform [our] review, because unlike the trial court this Court cannot see and review what information those documents actually contain.” Id. at 32-33.

Horn Williamson also argues that the alleged production of confidential settlement agreements would provide it with little to no litigation advantage against Toll Bros. Id. at 34-38. Specifically, at the time Toll Bros. filed its motion to disqualify, Horn Williamson had already “settled 300 to 400 separate cases with Toll Bros.” and, accordingly, was already “knowledgeable . . . concerning the types of settlements that Toll [Bros.] is willing to make in water intrusion cases.” Id. at 35 (citing S.R.R. at 586b (“Chart by disposition and development” from Horn Williamson’s Mot. for Reconsideration, 7/14/23)).

Horn Williamson further contends that any procurement of confidential settlement agreements from Sperrin was inadvertent and that this “inadvertent disclosure of confidential or even privileged material” does not warrant disqualification, particularly where, as here, the trial court issued a “sweeping preclusion order . . . to ensure a fair trial in these cases.” Id. at 30-31, 42-48.

In “reviewing a trial court’s order on disqualification of counsel, we employ a plenary standard of review.” Weber v. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc., 878 A.2d 63, 80 (Pa. Super. 2005) (citing Vertical Res., Inc. v. Bramlett, 837 A.2d 1193, 1201-02 (Pa. Super. 2003)).

Our Supreme Court addressed who has authority to disqualify counsel in In re Estate of Pedrick, 482 A.2d 215 (Pa. 1984), and concluded that trial - 31 - J-A28038-24

courts do not generally have the power to “regulate the conduct of attorneys practicing before [them]” but may disqualify counsel “for violations of the Code [of Professional Responsibility] where disqualification is needed to [e]nsure the parties receive the fair trial which due process requires.” Estate of Pedrick, 482 A.2d at 221. This Court subsequently explained that [c]ourts may disqualify attorneys for violating ethical rules. [Vertical Res., 837 A.2d at 1201-02.] On the other hand, courts should not lightly interfere with the right to counsel of one’s choice. Id. Thus, disqualification is appropriate “only when both another remedy for the violation is not available and it is essential to ensure that the party seeking disqualification receives the fair trial that due process requires.” Id. (citation omitted); see also, Pa.R.Prof.Conduct 1.7, [Cmt] (“Where the conflict is such as to clearly call in question the fair or efficient administration of justice, opposing counsel may properly raise the question. Such an objection must be viewed with caution, however, for it can be misused as a technique of harassment.”)

Weber, 878 A.2d at 80; see also Mertis, 289 A.3d at 537 (stating that “disqualification is appropriate only when ‘another remedy . . . is not available and it is essential to ensure that the party seeking disqualification receives the fair trial that due process requires’” (citation omitted)); and Vertical Res., 837 A.2d at 1201 (stating that disqualification of counsel “is a serious remedy which must be imposed with an awareness of the important interests of a client in representation by counsel of the client’s choice”) (citation and quotation marks omitted).

Further, this Court has explained that ”[d]isqualification of counsel is a serious remedy that the court should use only when due process so requires.”

Sutch v. Roxborough Memorial Hospital, 151 A.3d 241, 254-57 (Pa. - 32 - J-A28038-24

Super. 2016) (holding that disqualification was proper where counsel attempted to tamper with expert’s testimony). “[I]f an attorney’s conduct disrupts or threatens to disrupt the fair trial which due process requires, the trial court should disqualify [counsel].” Id. at 255 (citation omitted).

Here, the trial court found that Horn Williamson did not comply with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 234.1 when it failed to “docket and file the proof of service” of its “subpoenas to produce and appear at deposition” on Sperrin and 4Glen, and that this omission resulted in Toll Bros. not receiving notice as required by Rule 234.1. Trial Ct. Op., 4/20/23, at 5 (unpaginated). Ultimately, however, the trial court concluded that “the record is not strong enough to support the conclusion that Horn Williamson violated the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct[]” and, further, that it had sufficiently responded to Horn Williamson’s “questionable conduct” by entering a preclusion order “tailored . . . to ensure the parties receive the fair trial that due process requires.” Id. at 7-8 (unpaginated). Therefore, the trial court concluded that this alternate remedy to disqualification was appropriate.

Id. Based on our review of the record, we agree with the trial court that disqualification is not warranted here. First, while the trial court found that Horn Williamson exhibited “questionable conduct,” it declined to find that this conduct amounted to a violation of any ethical rules. See Trial Ct. Op., 4/20/23 at 7 (unpaginated) (“the record is not strong enough to support the conclusion that Horn Williamson violated the [Rules of Professional - 33 - J-A28038-24

Conduct]”). Toll Bros. does not contest this finding of fact. See Toll Bros.’

Brief at 33 (stating that “[t]he trial court’s factual findings are unassailable”).

As stated above, a trial court should impose the serious sanction of disqualification where the moving party has shown that “another remedy for the violation is not available and it is essential to ensure that the party seeking disqualification receives the fair trial that due process requires.” Weber, 878 A.2d at 80 (citation omitted); see also Estate of Pedrick, 482 A.2d at 221; Mertis, 289 A.3d at 537; Sutch, 151 A.3d at 254-55. Although we are mindful that disqualification was warranted in Sutch where a moving party demonstrated that opposing counsel’s conduct “disrupts or threatens to disrupt [a] fair trial[,]” we agree with the trial court that Toll Bros. has not demonstrated a commensurate risk here. See Sutch, 151 A.3d at 255.

Additionally, the record reflects that the information disclosed by Sperrin to Horn Williamson concerned the cost and price of repairs performed by a third party in other settled cases, including in cases where Horn Williamson represented the plaintiffs. We therefore conclude that, when considered together, the trial court’s directives – claw back of the improperly obtained documents, preclusion of use of the documents in the instant litigation, and preclusion of any charges related to the improper production of documents in Horn Williamson’s fee petition – form an appropriate remedy to ensure the fair trial that due process requires. See Weber, 878 A.2d at 80; see also Estate of Pedrick, 482 A.2d at 221; Mertis, 289 A.3d at 537; Sutch, 151 A.3d at 254-57.

- 34 - J-A28038-24

We emphasize that Horn Williamson’s misconduct as a legal professional in this matter, albeit “questionable,” is troubling to this Court. While we do not condone Horn Williamson’s conduct in procuring this production from Sperrin, we conclude that the trial court’s carefully crafted remedy adequately addressed the misconduct and that the serious sanction of disqualification was not appropriate here. See Weber, 878 A.2d at 80; see also Vertical Res., 837 A.2d at 1201. Accordingly, Toll Bros. is not entitled to relief.

Order affirmed. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Date: 5/22/2025

- 35 -