
    David WILLIAMS and Jaimi Williams, H/W v. TRUGREEN LANDCARE L.L.C., Tru-Green Lawncare, TruGreen Limited Partnership,. TruGreen Corporation, TruGreen, Inc., the TruGreen Companies LLC, Service Master Consumer Services Limited Partnership, Service-Master Consumer Services Inc., ServiceMaster Holding Corporation, the ServiceMaster Company, Dickinson Fleet Management LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Pennsylvania LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Inc. LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Inc., Dickinson Fleet Services LLC, Mann’s Garage d/b/a Manns Garage, Brooks Auto Repair, Randy’s Auto Repair d/b/a Randy’s Auto, Bob McCormick Ford Inc., Bob McCormick Ford, Dunkie Transport LLC, Petition of TruGreen Limited Partnership d/b/a TruGreen Chemlawn (Also Incorrectly Sued as “TruGreen Lawncare” and “TruGreen Corporation”), TruGreen, Inc., and TruGreen Companies LLC, (Collectively Hereinafter The “TruGreen”), Defendants David Williams and Jaimi Williams, H/W v. TruGreen Lawncare, TruGreen Limited Partnership, TruGreen Corporation, TruGreen Inc., The TruGreen Companies LLC, Service Master Consumer Services Limited Partnership, Service-Master Consumer Services, Inc., ServiceMaster Holding Corporation, The ServiceMaster Company, Dicldnson Fleet Management LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Pennsylvania, LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services INC., LLC, Dickinson. Fleet Services Inc., Dickinson Fleet Services, LLC, Brooks Auto Repair Petition of Dickinson Fleet Management LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Pennsylvania, LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Inc., LLC, Dickinson Fleet Services Inc., Dickinson Fleet Services, LLC.
    Nos. 58 EM 2016, 61 EM 2016.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    May 20, 2016.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of May, 2016,. the May 5, 2016 single Justice Order temporarily staying, the proceedings before the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in these matters pending this Court’s review is VACATED, and, upon review, it is ordered: the “Application of the TruGreen and ServiceMaster Entities for Leave to File a Reply” is GRANTED; the emergency applications for a stay are DENIED; and “Plaintiffs’ Request for Expedited Review” is DISMISSED as moot.

Justice BAER did not participate in the consideration or decision of these matters.  