Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-01378 )'1 ~! 4 \~ ~ \,~ -'~ ~'~""+ J J c.. \' ~ ~,I -...:1, ()-j I ..3! r-- I , f t ~. Y,. '0 tlJ ... .11 t: J . k t: , , <II ltJ .1] , , , . ~ , o 01 e 1 g I c: .rot tlJ ::l ....kt: I I .... tlJ I f ~ . CU'r1 :II ...O::...l .S k ,111 , ... '.....'0 ...l, , '.. 0.11'" J , if > t: 0.... > I !ult;i~f~ ... 0 - en t: ,11 I u en t:tlJC t: I t: .11 t: 0 1< '" .&:: k '.. '0 '.. I i!!iU , ... 0 ......t: ... , r>'l ,., t: .11 0 I , ... >>0 <I I I '0 :0 U . I 1 ..:> ... :I en en ...' ...1 , '" ,11 'oC tlJ , C 0.11 t: >1 , I =- g Ok,,, ... I I t:l......l U, I , - I T' C . C -. . ... , 1., Pl' ... ..~ ...U.....-T -m-....- ..,"'-- ...~i · .,~ ,.. ;,,.,-...... (.,..-.-." -........y'I--I- ,. -..:.- ......1.... __.j JJ,A.w,1 I ._-~ ....-.;..._........_.,_ .........,..11/ ':....... ....,.... Donald Johnson vs. Goodway Transport. Inc. ~o. 96-1]78 Civil T~rm ---. :?- :i'ow, M~r~h 14 1 QQ,; :9---. !. S~~? O~ C~r3z:?..!....A.'i!) COt.;'{-:'Y, ?A...,. ::. :==by cL.:=u= ~ S'~~ oi Vnrk C.;Iu:q :~ ==::-.::= = '.V:::. .l.J. .: ., .:.... . .:. ,.- ci' . J _ -=::U=:.cu ::~ -""*- u :.::.: :::;u-.:.: :-.a~.. :.:: ?!===. .".,/.::4 ~ .- .../l"'..d r .!.~ ," . .,/ ,':....... ........... s:a..-~ ~t C;z::::,u'..=d COW1rr. ?:. . Affida.vit or S~:-n~ ~ March 22. "ow, :996 .. 2:00 o' .:!cc:: P. "t. 1:-.-= :.:: ~..:..~ Sumnons '~5=C1l Goodway Transpor't. Inc. :l~ 40 Willow Springs Ln., York, York County, PI'. :r ::u:.~:<:I Karen OVerrein, Operator/Receptionist and person in charoe ~ true and attested c::pr ci == ~:".;::...t at 40 WillaN Sorin.,,,, r"'nA. Yorl<, Yorl< county, PI'. .. ma _1'" Ccwts :J:) her . " == .:::t:::s :.:::=t. So :L:.SW~ d/: // /f//-:J-( . ~.l York C;UIALT. :'2. 3wc:: :cd s:.:~..c.:=:::d :c:e:: =::::s 121:.h Q?,~i ADril 19~ COSTS :::..:...(V1C ~m:::.'_CZ .-\.::wA'y7: .3 18.00 5.58 2.00 . --- 5 25,,58 2< / ,. t. !" '. Moli';::hl.J \~l~' :'l, PUbl,C y.:/.", "." M'I C':.Jr'1'1'" h .: ,-'1 1 '~<1~ r_.~ COUNT I-NEGLIGENCE Donald Johnson v, Goodwav 'Transport. Ine, 15 Plaintiff' incorporates and makes part of this Counl, Paragraphs I, through 14, as if fully set forth below 16. The aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to Plaintiff, Donald Johnson, were Ihe direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant. Goodway Transport, Inc , generally and more speciticaIly as set forth below (A) In allowing its driver-employee to operate iu vehicle in a manner that was not reasonably and sufficiently vigilant to observe the Plaintitl's vehicle; (B) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle under proper and IIldequate control so that he could avoid striking the Plaintiff s vehicle; (C) In allowing its driver-employee to operate his vehicle in such a manner so as to be unable to apply his brakes to avoid the collision with the Plaintiffs vehicle; (D) In allowing iu driver-employee to operate its vehicle in such a manner so as to not properly and adequately observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; (E) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle at a speed that was not safe for conditions then and there existing, as required by 75 Pa, C.S.A. ~ 3361; 4 25, The aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to Plaintitl: Donald Johnson, were the direct and proximate result of the gross negligence of Defendant, Goodway Transport, lnc, generally and more specilically as set forth below: I A) In allowing ils driver-employee to willllllly, wantonly and with careless disregard lor the health and safety of the Plaintlll'and others. 1\liI to stop and idemily himself after being involved in the collision, in violation ofPa. C.SA ~ 3743; (B) In allowing its driver-employee to willfully, wantonly and with careless disregard for the health and safety of the Plainrill'and others, lailto stop and identitY himself after being called via CB radio to return to the scene of the collision; (C) In allowing its driver-employee to willlully, wantonly and with careless disregard for the health and safety of the Plaintiff and others, fail to stop and return to the scene of the collision when the driver-employee had actual knowledge that he had struck another vehicle. 26 As a direct and proximate result of the gross negligence of the Defendant, Goodway Transport, Inc, the Plaintiff sustained serious il~uries including, but notlirr.ited to, injuries to his lumbar, thoracic and cervical spine. 27 As a result of the gross negligence of Defendant, Goodway Transport. Inc., the Plaintiff has been, and will be in the luture, be hindered from attending to his daily duties and chores, to his loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 7 COl'NT III-NEGLlGENCI; Donald JClhn~on v. TranSfonlinental Refrillerated Llne~ ,Jj Plaintiff incorporates and makes part of this Count, Paragraphs I, thrcugh 32, lI!I if fully ~et tonh below H The aturelllenlloned collision and the resultant mjuries to Plaintitt: Donald Johnson, wen: the direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, TRL, generally and more specitically as set forth below: (A) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle in a manner that Wll!l not reasonably and sufficiently vigilant to observe the Plaintiffs vehicle; (B) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking the Plaintit}' s vehicle; (e) In allowing its driver-employee to operate his vehicle in such a manner so as to be unable to apply his brakes to avoid the collision with the Plaintiff's vehicle; (D) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle in such a manner so as to not properly and adequately observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; (E) In allowing its driver-employee to operate its vehicle at a speed that WlI!I not safe tor conditions then and there existing, as required by 75 Pa, CS.A ~ 3361, <) ..3 The aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to Plaintitf. Donald Johnson. "ere the direct and proxlnhlle result of the neglJgel1\:e of Defendant, David Lienemann, generally and lIlore specilkallv as set f\lrth bdm, (AI In failing to be reasonably ,'igilantto observe the Plaintitfs vehicle: (B) In failing to operate the TRL vehicle unlter proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking the Plaintiffs vehicle; (C) In failing to operate his, ehicle in such a manner so that he could apply his brakes to avoid the collision with the Plaintilfs vehicle; (D) In failing to properly and adequately observe the traffic conditions, then and there existing; <<E) In tailing to operate his ,ehicle at a speed that was safe for conditions then and there existing, as re'.jUlred by 75 Pa, C S A ~ 3361, (F) In failing to operate his vehicle within the posted speed limit on Pennsylvania Interstate 81, as required by 75 Pa. C.SA ~ 3362; and (G) n tailing to operate his vehicle under such control that he could always stop within the distance he could clearly see ahead of him, as required by Pa, CSA ~ 3361. 4.. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, David Lienemann, the Plaintill'sustained serious injuries including. but not limited to, injuries to his lumbar. thoracic, and cervical spine I~ >- ;>- ,,- 11-, ,. ~ , ,.r'! C': Lt. ~'. (J"'--. C.( t.e 1-., ;;.i ~f ; , . r..:;. " ~~. N :-~ ('-- , _~'-4 .-'. ! ~ ~-- :0:: . 1:- n.:" S 0 0' U -- '.:'-1 ~ -" i::- \'-1 wI: (.) ~-. C.: u.. I' (.) . , ' ., C I 1.1.;. L;:l. )- 'j :;J:: l:. C., ) <.:) (Jl C) -~ l, " , c l', '. l', r (: { .-' IX I.J Z I.J ~ ~ W U ;; . o ~ j . W W ~ ~ ! ~ - o ~:. ~ i( IX 10 I.J ... .J '" o z ( 1: --.c-- - G o ~ N m . N . , ;:; : - r