Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-00481 , .~ ERIC LEPORE, Plaintiff, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 97-481 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MISSY MCGEE, Defendant. Deposition of: ERIC LEPORE Taken by: Defendant Before: Jan L. Bucher Court Reporter-Notary Date: Thursday, March 19, 1998 at 10:35 a.m. Place: Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania ) APPEARANCES: SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE BY: KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE FOR - PLAINTIFF GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS BY: ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE FOR - DEFENDANT ALSO PRESENT: MISSY MCGEE ... ..~.- is ARCHIVE REPORTING SERVICE 2336 N. Second Street (717) 234-5922 Harrisburg, PA 17110 FAX (717) 234.6190 2 1 2 DEPONENT 3 Eric LePore 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 FOR DEFENDANT 15 A Diagram 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X EXAMINATION By Ms. Grab By Mr. Brenneman PAGE 3 63 EXHIBITS MARKED IDENTIFIED 64 18 3 ~ 1 STIPULATION 2 It is hereby stipulated by and between the 3 respective parties that signing, sealing, certification 4 and filing are waived; and that all objections except as 5 to the form of the question are reserved until the time of ( trial. 7 8 ERIC LEPORE, called as a witness, being duly 9 sworn, was examined and testified as follows: 10 EXAMINATION 11 BY MS. GRAB: 12 Q Mr. LePore, my name is Maggie Grab, and I 13 represent Ms. McGee. Before we begin, I just want to give 14 you a couple of brief instructions, Because the court 15 reporter is taking down everything that is said, you need 16 to let me please complete my question before you begin 17 your response. Okay? 18 A Okay. 19 Q The other thing that you just need to be 20 cognizant of is that because she's taking everything down, 21 you need to verbalize your res~unses to all my questions. 22 All right? 23 A All right. 24 Q And if you don't understand my question either 25 because I have misstated something or I'm speaking too """ 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 o Oldsmobile Cutlass? A Yes. o What color was it? A It was a couple different colors. It was primered. It was like a primered red, primered gray, like a silverish color, I think it was, o Do you know what the tag, license number was on that vehicle? A No, I've had too many cars to remember which one was which. o Do you know whether the Oldsmobile Cutlass was insured when this accident occurred in January __ 13 A I 14 0 - - of 1995? 15 A When everything was happening, I believed it 16 was. And then I found out that it wasn't. 17 0 Okay, You need to let me complete my 18 questions. ( 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A I'm sorry. o And so for purposes of the record, I want to restate that question, My question was whether or not the vehicle, the Oldsmobile Cutlass, was insured on January 31, 1995. And your response was that you thought it was, but you found out that it was not? A Yes. ) 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q On January 31, 1995, what was your address? A 624 Wayne Drive. Q And who resided there with you? A My mom and my stepdad. Q What's your mother's name? A Linda A. Vertison, Q And your stepfather's? A Robber E. Vertison. Q Did anyone else reside in the household? A No, Q What is your current address? A Right now it is -- I just moved in with my girlfriend. It's 107 East Main Street, Shiremanstown. Q And what is your girlfriend's name? A Michelle Sollenberger, Q Anyone else reside there besides yourself and Michelle Sollenberger? A I have a little boy. Q Howald? A He just turned a year, And she also had two kids before mine. One is three and the other one's seven. Q Do I understand you to be saying that besides yourself and Michelle there are three children living in the home? A Yes, ) ~-- 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Are you currently employed? A Yes, I am. Q Where? A Mitrani and Company. Q What do they do? A It's a little pottery place. Q Where is it? A Right down -- what's that? I think Slate Road. Q Give me a town. A Me~hanicsburg. It's right here in Mechanicsburg. Q And what do you do for them? A I just basically sit on a chair and stain old wood pieces and once in a while box pottery. Q And how long have you been employed there? A Four and a half months. Q And are you salaried or hourly? A Hourly. Q How much do you make an hour? A $7 an hour. Q Is that how much you made when you started four and a half months ago? A No, it was six and a quarter. Q Who's your supervisor? A His name is Albert Mitrani, He's the owner of 8 .~" , 1 the company. It's a small -- 2 Q How do you spell Mitrani? 3 A M-i-t-r-o-n-i, I do believe. 4 Q How many employees does the company have? Do 5 you know? 6 A Five, I think, altogether. 7 Q Did you graduate from high school? 8 A No. 9 Q Did you attend high school? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Where? 12 A I attended Cumberland Valley and also 13 Mechanicsburg. 14 Q Did you obtain aGED? 15 A No, not yet. 16 Q Are you currently involved in that process? 17 A I was involved with it in the beginning of the 18 fall. And then with work and -- it intertwined with the 19 one test. And I had missed the test. So I have to go 20 back to it next year and retake the one test. 21 Q At the time of this accident in January of 22 1995, were you employed? 23 A Yes, I was. 24 Q Where? 25 A It was the arcade that was there. 1 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q What was the name of that arcade? A I don't even remember what the name of it was. Can I look in this? Q It's not necessary. If it's in the document, I'll be able to find it. A I think it is. Q When did you start working at the arcade? A October of '94. Q So you'd been there about three months -- A Yeah, about three months. Q -- when the accident occurred? A Yes. Q And what did you do there? A Just sat there and gave change and also just made sure there was no damages from the kids and kept the kids under control, Q Hourly? A Yeah. Q Paid hourly? A Yes. Q What was your hourly rate? A I think it was only four and a quarter an hour. Q Currently do you work full-time with Mitrani and Company? A Part-time, 10 . --- , Q What hours? A They're going to change. It's going to be like now they're going to be two to, like, six. Q Have you ever worked full-time for Mitrani and Company? A Q A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Yes. When did you work full-time for them? From the time I started up until three weeks ago. Q Why did it change? A My boy was real sick and I had to take off of work for it. Q Was there a period of time when you were off work completely because of your son's illness? A Yes. Q And when you went back to Mitrani and Company they put you on a part-time position? A I asked to be on a part-time position because of my son's health, Q And you said that that was about three weeks ago? A Yeah. Q Do you intend at some point to go back to work 24 full-time? 25 A Hopefully, yes, ....., \ 11 Q At this point do you have any idea when that could occur? A No. Q Does the fact that you work part-time have anything to do with the injuries that you sustained in this incident in January of 1995? A No, because most of the time I'm sitting down. I'm not standing. Q So that but for the illness to your son, you would be working full-time at Mitrani and Company? Yes. What were your hours at the arcade back in 1991 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A 12 Q 13 [sic] ? 14 A 15 Q 16 A 17 Q 18 January 31 They varied. Do you recall what time this incident occurred? Not offhand. I don't remember the exact time, Do you recall whether or not you had worked on 19 A Yes. 20 Q -- of 1995? 21 A Yes. 22 Q You answered before I completed my question. 23 A I know. I'm sorry. 24 Q And the answer to that question is, yes, you 25 had worked on January 31, 1995? '"""1 12 1 A Correct. 2 Q Is that why you were in the parking lot behind 3 the arcade? 4 A Yes. I just got done closing. 5 Q So the arcade had closed? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What time did it close? Do you know? 8 A I do believe that evening I think it was around 9 6:00 or 7:00, I think. 10 Q P.m.? 11 A Yeah, I don't really recall. 12 Q But the arcade was closed when the incident - - 13 A Yes. 14 Q -- occurred? 15 A Yes, I'm sorry. 16 Q The arcade was closed when the incident 17 occurred? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes, it was. Q And do you recall what the lighting was in the parking lot behind the arcade in January of '95? A I do believe it was still somewhat daylight. Q Do you know whether or not Missy McGee's vehicle had its lights on? A No, it did not. Q Did not. And I'm talking about the point that ~ l 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you're sitting on it. A Yes. Q What were you doing in the parking lot? A I was talking with friends that showed up there when I was closing the arcade, Q How many friends? A I think it was only three or four. Q Male or female? A One male, I think -- no, two male and two female. Q Do you recall their names? A Dan Bricker, Casey Hamilton. Q Is Casey male or female? A Male. Jona Aldis and I don't recall the other girl's name. Q Had you driven to work at the arcade that day? A Yes. Q What were you driving? A I think it might have been the Cutlass. Q The '88 Oldsmobile Cutlass? A Trying to think, I know it wasn't an '88, I think it was the '83 Cutlass, Q I have the year wrong. A Yeah, I do believe that's what I was driving that day. ~ 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 o Where was your vehicle parked? A There in the parking lot in the back. o How big is this parking lot? A It holds, I think, about 20 cars. o How do you enter the parking lot? Do you know the name of the streets? A No, not offhand. I think it's Strawberry Avenue. o Is there more than one entrance? A No. o Is that the same way that you exit the parking lot? A Yes, o So there's only one way to get in and out of that lot? A Urn hum, o And that's from Strawberry Street? A No, I know it's on the side of Strawberry. And I can't recall the other alley, It's the entrance part. I aon't recall the alley. o But is it the same alley that you enter and 22 exit from? 23 A Yes, 24 0 And is the parking lot for the arcade only? 25 A No, it's also for the Gingerbread Man. ~ 1 Q Are there any other businesses whose patrons 2 use this parking lot? 3 A Subway and the laundromat and the skateboard 4 shop. I don't recall the -- Funtastik's. 5 Q And the Gingerbread Man? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Where is this parking lot located in relation 8 to these businesses? 9 A Right behind them and right beside the 10 Gingerbread Man. 11 Q Do you have any idea how long you had been off 12 work prior to the vehicle that Missy McGee was driving 13 getting to the parking lot? 14 A Maybe only 15, 20 minutes. 15 Q And what were you doing during that 15- or 16 20-minute period? 17 A Just standing and talking to my friends, 18 Q Were there any other people in this parking lot 19 standing around talking? 20 A No. 21 Q So the only group standing around talking was 22 the one that you were in? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Did anyone that you were with have any alcohol 25 that evening? 15 t r 16 ') 1 A No, they did not. 2 Q Had you had anything of an alcoholic nature? 3 Let's talk about during the 12 hours before the incident 4 on January 31 -- A No. Q -- of 1995? A No. Q Did the arcade serve alcohol? A No, they did not, Q You've described the parking lot as holding 20 Prior to Missy McGee arriving, do you know how many 12 cars were in the lot? ]3 A No. 14 Q Would you describe the lot as full or empty or 15 half full, or can you in any way describe the lot? 16 A Maybe half full at the most. 17 Q Were you standing speaking with these four 18 friends that you've described at a vehicle? 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 cars. 19 A I think we were standing behind our vehicles. 20 Q Were these four people together in a car? 21 A No. 22 Q Who of the four had cars? 23 A Casey Hamilton and Dan Bricker, 24 Q So that in your group there were three cars, 25 yours, that of Casey, and that of Dan? -') 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 A Yes. o And were they parked in a row? A Dan's was parked in the alleyway there, Strawberry Avenue, And Casey's was parked, I think, three cars down from mine. o So whose vehicle, if any vehicle, were you standing around when you were talking to your friends? A I think we were in between mine and Casey's. o What direction was your vehicle facing? A I don't know how to answer that. o Let's talk about in terms of the arcade. You said the parking lot is behind the arcade, Was your vehicle facing the arcade? A No. The way the parking lot goes, it goes in, like, a "U". And there's only, like, two parking spaces that are dead behind the arcade. And they are for the apartments that are upstairs above them. And mine was to the left. It would have been facing the alleyway, Strawberry Avenue or whatever it's called. o The front of your car is facing the alley? A Yes. o And what's the rear of your car facing? A The rear of my car would have been facing Market Street. o Did you say Market Street? \ 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1:'. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes. I guess that's what -- MR. BRENNEMAN: Could we go off the record for a second? (A discussion was held off the record.) MS. GRAB: Let's let him draw a diagram and he can just mark where he was. BY MS. GRAB: Q Maybe that's the easiest thing to do and we will attach it as an exhibit to your deposition. A The G-Man would be right there. And that would be the alley and another alley back here. Game Room would have been right here. MR. BRENNEMAN: Stop right there. That "G" means G-Man; is that correct? THE DEPONENT: Yes. BY MS. GRAB: Q And you said that there's an alley? A Yes, Q Do you know the name of that alley? A This one, no. I guess I thought it was Strawberry Alley, but I guess to my knowledge I'm wrong. Q Just write alley in it then. A (Complied. ) Q And the other roadway that you've identified, is that an alley, too? 19 1 1 A Yeah, it runs behind all the businesses. 2 Q And do you know the name of that alley? 3 A No. 4 Q Then just write alley. 5 A (Complied.) 6 Q Now, you started to identify what you called a 7 game room? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Is that the arcade? 10 A Yeah, that's the name of the arcade. 11 Q Would you write it in there, please? 12 A (Complied. ) 13 Q And would you draw the parking spaces as you 14 recall them being in this lot? 15 A (Complied.) Here would be the entrance. It's 16 a little bit bigger than that. 17 Q Would you write entrance? 18 A (Complied,) And the parking spaces go right 19 from the road there right down to right to the back of the 20 Game Room. 21 Q Okay. 22 A And then you would also have parking spaces 23 over here, And then there was two, maybe, three right up 24 against the back of it. 25 Q Where is Subway and the laundromat? 20 '\ 1 A Subway would be right here. I have this - - the 2 Game Room is a little up too far, Subway would be right 3 here. 4 Q Where's the laundromat? 5 A Laundromat - - then we go Subway, Funtastik's, 6 and then the laundromat, And then going down the street 7 you'd have the bank on the corner, And the Game Room 8 would be directly behind Subway, 9 Q Do these parking spaces that you've indicated 10 abut the back of a building here? 11 12 13 can 14 A Let me move this. Here would be the complete 15 building with the Game Room door right there. 16 Q What's over here? 17 A This would be the bank, Mellon Bank. 18 Q Is there -- 19 A There's another parking lot right here, Right 20 here's another parking lot. 21 Q Can you get into that -- let's mark that 22 Parking Lot B. 23 A (Complied,) 24 Q Can you get into what you identified as Parking 25 Lot B from the same entrance? A Q Yes. Would you draw the back of the building so I 21 ') 1 A If there is no cars right here, you can get 2 over to it. But there's some -- in some spots there's 3 metal poles and then there's the light pole. 4 Q So you're not supposed to? 5 A No. 6 Q How do you enter Parking Lot B? 7 A There's two entrances to it. There's one right 8 here and then another one right -- well, actually, 9 three -- no, four. Four altogether because of the bank 10 entrance and exit. 11 Q Okay. Now 12 A I'll mark them. I don't know if that's an exit 13 or entrance. And then this is an exit and this one's an 14 entrance. 15 Q Now, can you put an "L" in the space where your 16 vehicle was parked? 17 A I guess it would have been right about here 18 (indicating). 19 Q And tell me again what direction was your __ 20 what was the front of your vehicle facing? 21 A Front of my vehicle would have been facing the 22 Gingerbread Man, 23 Q What was the rear of your vehicle facing? 24 A It would have been facing Parking Lot B, 25 Q Okay. Now, do you recall whether or not it was 22 ') 1 daylight or dark when Missy McGee arrived? 2 A I think it might have been dusk. I know it was 3 still bright enough out that nobody needed their 4 headlights or anything. 5 Q What was the temperature like? 6 A I think it was fairly -- it was mild. It 7 wasn't really cold out, 8 Q Did you have a coat on? 9 A I don't remember. 10 Q What kind of shoes were you wearing? 11 A Sneakers. 12 Q Was there snow piled up anywhere in this 13 14 15 16 parking lot? A I don't recall. I don't think there was, actually. Q Can you tell me what you recall about how the 17 incident occurred? 18 A I remember walking over to the car, and I 19 hopped up on the hood. 20 Q Let me interrupt you. 21 A Sorry. 22 Q What color was the car? 23 A Like a - - I'd say like a bluish silver. 24 Q Do you know what kind of car it was? 25 A It was - - I don't recall the exact make, no, I 23 '\ 1 know it was a four-door. 2 Q Who was driving it? 3 A Missy was. 4 Q And when it pulled up, did it stop? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Show me on your diagram where the vehicle 7 stopped. Can you draw her car and put an "M" in it? 8 A (Complied. ) 9 Q Now, her vehicle is not in a parking space? 10 A No. 11 Q How many people were in it? 12 A I do believe three, 13 Q Male or female? 14 A Two female, one male. 15 Q Who was the other female? 16 A Jen, 17 Q Do you know her? 18 A Yes. 19 Q That's Jennifer Bentz? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And do you know who the male was? 22 A No. 23 Q Who was in the front seat? 24 A Jen, 25 Q And the driver, Missy? ) 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A Yes. Q Now, tell me what happened. A I walked over to her -- Q Her who? A Missy, on the driver's side -- well, Missy and Jen -- and sat up on the car. And I was talking to them. I don't remember for how long. Q What about? A I think we were just talking just regular conversation. I don't remember exactly what about. Q What happened? A We were sitting up there. And I do remember joking around with her. 14 Q Her who? 15 A Missy. 16 Q About what? 17 A Because they said they had to go. 18 Q Did Missy and Jennifer both say they had to go? 19 A I only remember hearing Missy saying it. 20 Q And what were you joking about? 21 A I remember saying, No, you can't go yet. And 22 then they said that they had to go. 23 Q They both said it, Missy and Jennifer? 24 A Yes. Then I heard Jen say it also the second 25 time. t 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 o And then what did you do? A And then I jumped off the hood. Well, I pushed myself from the hood of the car off. o What side of the vehicle were you sitting on? A Driver's side. o Did Missy have her window up or down? A Down, o Did Jennifer have her window up or down? A I don't know. o Do you know whether or not the radio was playing in the vehicle? A I can't recall. o When you were sitting on the hood of the vehicle, do you know whether or not it was running? 15 A Yes. 16 0 Which? It was running? 17 A Yes, it was running. 18 0 And you said you were sitting on the driver's 19 side? 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes. o Were you sitting in front of or behind the wheel? A I think it was right -- I guess it would be right halfway in between the wheel and the window but more towards the wheel. ..-) 26 1 2 3 4 Q You mean the windshield? A Yes. Q Were you actually leaning against the windshield as you spoke to Missy and Jennifer? 5 A No. 6 Q And where were your legs? 7 A My legs were hanging over the side of the car. 8 Q Were they touching the ground? 9 A No. 10 Q You were completely sitting up on the hood of 11 the vehicle? 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Yes. A Q When you jumped up on the hood, did anybody say anything about that to you? A I don't remember. Q At some point, however, you recall Missy saying, Get off; we got to go? A Yes, Q And you said, No, you're not going to go, And then you recall Missy and Jennifer both saying, Get off the hood; we got to go? A Urn hum, Q A hop off. And then how did you get down? With both my hands pushing down beside me to 27 , 1 Q And what happened? 2 A And then all I remember is, like, going down to 3 the ground quick, and then I popped back up because I 4 thought I tripped. And then I remember limping over to my 5 car. And then -- 6 Q Stop for a second, 7 A Sorry. 8 Q You said that you put your hands down beside 9 you on the hood of the car? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Lifted your rear end up off the car and then 12 put your feet down on the ground? 13 A I actually, like, pushed myself off the car 14 with my arms, 15 Q Okay. Did both feet hit the ground? 16 A No, I think -- I think my left one hit the 17 ground first, what I believed was the ground. 18 Q What did you find out that it was later? 19 A I guess it was the tire that my foot actually 20 hit first. That's why I ended up going down palm first on 21 the ground. And then I jumped back up quick and then went 22 over to my car, 23 Q You have completely lost me, so I want to go 24 through this again, 25 A Sorry. 28 -~ 1 Q 2 A 3 Q 4 A 5 Q 6 ground? 7 A 8 Q 9 A You put both hands on the hood -- Yes. lifted yourself up -- Urn hum. and were going to put yourself onto the Yes. Did you actually get both feet on the ground? No. 10 Q What direction were your feet facing at that 11 point? 12 A My feet would have been facing out towards my 13 car. I guess it would have been the alley. 14 Q So your feet were facing out away from the 15 tire? 16 A Yeah. 17 Q Okay. And then tell me again what happened. 18 A When I went to push myself off the car, what I 19 believed was the ground or tire or whatever it was, I 20 21 22 23 24 25 don't know, I ended up going palm first onto the ground, And then I got up quick because, I mean, it didn't really faze me that anything happened. And then I hopped over to my car. Q When you -- MR. BRENNEMAN: Now I'm confused. 29 1 1 BY MS, GRAB: 2 Q When you hopped off the car, your feet are 3 facing out away from you? 4 A If my feet were dangling down over the side, 5 the ends of my shoes would have been facing 6 Q Were sticking out. So you go to land; is that 7 correct? 8 A Um hum. 9 Q How did your foot get under the tire is what I 10 don't underst3nd. 11 A When I pushed off -- if you go to push off 12 something, your feet push back when you lean forward. And 13 I think that's what happened was the tire grabbed my foot 14 and pulled it down because the car was rolling. 15 Q And you're -- but you were sitting, though, 16 didn't you tell me, between the wheel aLd the windshield? 17 A That's where I -- it might have been a little 18 bit up farther, might have been a little back farther. I 19 don't recall exactly on the car where I was sitting. 20 Q As you were sitting there with your feet 21 dangling, were they hitting the wheel? 22 A I think I was bouncing my foot off the wheel, 23 yes. 24 Q After you pushed yourself off, did you actually L 25 hit the ground before the wheel going over your foot? "\ , 1 2 A Q 30 No, I don't think so. Okay. The first time that you hit the ground, 3 was it with your feet or your palms? 4 A Well, this would have been like all four of 5 them at the same time is what it would have been ended up 6 being. I don't recall exactly the way I ended up landing 7 at the time. 8 Q 9 rolling? 10 A 11 Q 12 A 13 14 What direction -- you said the vehicle was Urn hum. What direction was it rolling? Out towards the alley. MR, BRENNEMAN: Which alley? THE DEPONENT: The far back alley. 15 BY MS. GRAB: 16 17 18 19 20 Q Where was the vehicle facing? A Out towards the alley. Q So the vehicle was rolling forward? A Yes. Q And you're saying that as you got off the 21 vehicle, whatever happened to your left foot caused you to 22 fall? 23 24 25 A Yes. Q And you got up? A Urn hum. 31 ~ 1 Q And what did you do? 2 A And then I hopped over to my car. 3 Q Do you know 4 A No. I just thought I might have sprained it or 5 something because it was the first time I ever had an 6 injury done to my feet. 7 Q -- did you know when you stood up that the 8 vehicle had run over your left foot? 9 A That's what I thought happened but I wasn't for 10 sure. 11 Q Why? 12 A I sprained myself -- for some reason I'm 13 real I wouldn't say I'm prone to pain, but it doesn't 14 bother me as much, I guess, as most people. 15 Q I understand that. But my question is, Why 16 didn't you know whether or not the tire had run over your 17 foot? 18 A Because of how quick it happened. It happened 19 real quick. It was, like, split second, 20 Q When did you come to believe that the wheel had 21 run over your foot? 22 A When I tried to drive home, 23 Q How long -- 24 A Or when I was standing there, actually, behind 25 my car after she left because I couldn't stand on my foot ) ( 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whatsoever. And then on the drive home I basically felt every bump and every little nook and cranny in the road from the pain. o When you left there and got in your car to leave the parking lot that evening A Yes. o -- did you believe that she had run over your foot? A That's what I thought had happened, but I wasn't sure. I thought I might have just sprained my ankle getting off or something, I wasn't sure exactly what it was. I was in a lot of pain. I didn't know __ o At some point did you become sure that the vehicle had run over your foot? A Yes. o When? A When I actually saw the X-rays, then I knew because of how badly it was broken. o But you don't recall as you sit here today the vehicle going over your foot? A No, because of how quick it happened, o And you weren't sure when you left the parking lot to go home that that's what had occurred? A I thought it might have been what had occurred, but I wasn't definitely sure because I didn't have any ") 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 proof of what was actually wrong with me at the time. Q Or any recollection of the vehicle actually going over your foot? A No. Q Do you recall saying to anybody in the parking lot, She just ran over my foot? A Yes. Q Who did you say that to? A Dan and Casey. Q Are you aware of anybody else in the parking lot who saw the vehicle go over your foot? A Dan. Q Dan did? A Yes, 15 Q You've spoken with Dan since the accident? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And he has said to you, She ran over your foot, 18 or something like that? 19 A Yeah. 20 Q In the parking lot after this had occurred, did 21 you have any conversation with Missy? 22 A Afterwards -- the only time after that I saw 23 her was when I was working at the Uni-Mart. 24 Q You didn't speak with her afterwards on January 25 31 of 1995? 34 1 A No. The only time of that evening after she 2 left was when I ended up going down and she came out while 3 I was hobbling over to my car. 4 Q Was that January 31 of '95? 5 A January 31st -- 6 Q I'm not trying to -- that's the night it 7 happened. 8 A Yeah. 9 Q My question was, Did you have a conversation 10 with her after it happened before she left? 11 A The only thing that was said, she asked if I 12 was all right. And I said, You ran over my foot. I don't 13 know if I said it sarcastically or whatever. And she 14 asked me again, Are you all right? And I was, like, 15 Yeah. And then she left. 16 Q So after the event with your left foot occurred 17 she got out of the car? 18 A Yes. 19 Q The two of you spoke? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And she left? 22 A Yes, yes, 23 Q Do you have any idea how fast the vehicle was 24 going when it went over your foot? 25 A No. 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q Did you hear the engine rev or hear anything at all that would indicate how fast the vehicle was going? A No. Q Did you hear the vehicle shift from Park to Drive? A Yes. Q You do recall that? A Yeah. Q And when did that happen in relation to when you started to get yourself off the vehicle? A That happened before I got off the vehicle. Q Was there a period of time when you were sitting on this vehicle before you tried to get off that it was rolling? A Yes; might have been rolling for about 15 16 seconds before I decided to jump off, 17 Q Fifteen seconds? 18 A Urn hum, 19 Q That's a long time. 20 MR. BRENNEMAN: Objection. 21 BY MS. GRAB: 22 23 24 25 Q At any rate -- A I don't know exact Q In fairness, that is a long time, But you do recall, though, that you're sitting on the vehicle? '. 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Urn hum. A Q You hear the vehicle shift from Park to Drive. A Yes, I also felt it shift. Q And you're still sitting there. A Urn hum. Q And the vehicle starts to roll. A Urn hum. Q Or is she accelerating? A I don't know if it was exactly accelerating unless the car had a high idle, I don't know. 11 Q But the vehicle, is it definitely moving? 12 A Yes, 13 Q And it's moving before you started to get off? 14 A Yes. 15 Q It's moving when you started to get off? 16 A Yes, it was in the process of rolling when I 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 went to jump off. Q And you're saying rolling, And I'm trying to understand whether -- do you think that it was idling or do you think that Missy had her foot on the gas or do you know? A I'm not really sure, Q Was there any difference in the movement of the car while you were sitting on it and you said that it was moving and when you went to hop off? 38 t 1 sure if I got it ran over or not. And then she took off 2 my shoe and she went to put ice on it because it was 3 already swollen. And it hurt even for her to put the ice 4 on it. And then she told me to go down to the emergency S room down at Seidle, and I did. 6 Q 7 A 8 Q 9 A 10 Q 11 hospital? 12 A 13 Q . h \ Did you drive yourself? Yes. she didn't take you? No, You went from the arcade home and then to the Yes, Do you have any idea what time you arrived at 14 the hospital? lS A I don't remember the exact time. 16 Q How long were you at the hospital? 17 A I was there at least hour and a half. 18 Q Were you admitted to Seidle Memorial Hospital 19 at that point? 20 A I wouldn't call it admitted. They had X-rays 21 done of my foot. 22 Q 23 A 24 Q 2S hospital? And sent you home? Yes. And they put me in a temporary cast. Did they give you any medication at the -, ( 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A I think they only gave me Tylenol 3 to take for when I got home for the pain. o And did they tell you to do anything else? A Put ice on it and keep it elevated. o Put ice on it through a temporary cast? A The temporary cast only covered the bottom, around the back, and then just like an Ace bandage around it. o So you're supposed to take that off? A No, keep it on and just, like, put ice around it. 12 0 Did you do that? 13 A Yes. 14 0 Now, did they ask you what happened at the 15 emergency room? 16 A Yes. 17 0 What did you tell them? 18 A At first I didn't want to get anybody in 19 trouble, and I told them that I dropped a cinder block on 20 my foot. 21 22 23 24 25 Why did you think that anybody would be in o trouble? A I wasn't sure at the time. I didn't know how to go about doing it because I didn't want to get anybody in trouble. I) 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q At that point when you were telling them at the emergency room what happened did you know -- or did you believe, I guess is a better question. Did you believe that Missy had run over your foot? A Yeah. Q You did? A Yeah. Q But you didn't tell the emergency room people that? A No. Q Did you ever drop a cinder block on your left foot? A No, Q You just completely made that up? A Yes. 16 Q How long were you to wear the temporary cast? 17 A Until the next day, 18 Q And what were you supposed to do the next day? 19 A I went to see Dr. Lippe. 20 Q Had you seen him before this incident? 21 A No. 22 Q How did you get to Dr, Lippe? 23 A I do believe my mom drove me down to him. 24 Q Did the emergency room people tell you to go 25 see Dr, Lippe? 1 A Yes. They scheduled an appointment for me to 2 see him and have a regular cast put on. 3 Q And when you went to see Dr. Lippe, what did 4 you tell him happened? 5 A The first thing -- when I first told him I told 6 him exactly what I told them in the emergency room. And 7 then he said, Well, it's real bad. And then I told him 8 exactly what happened. 9 10 Q A You told him your cinder block story, too? Yeah, and then I corrected it and told him I 11 had my foot ran over. 12 Q Did you correct it that day? 13 A No, I think it was the next visit. 14 Q Was your mother there when you saw him? 15 A Yes, 16 Q Was she there when you told him the cinder 17 block story? 18 A No, I do believe she was out in the waiting 19 room. 20 Q Did you tell your mother you were going to tell 21 this cinder block story? 22 A Yes, 23 Q And she was okay with that? 24 A No, not really, 25 Q So you told Dr, Lippe that you dropped a cinder 41 ! ~, I . f-; 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 block on your foot? A Um hum. o And he didn't believe you? A No. o What did he say? A Because of how bad the injuries were, he said there's no way a cinder block dropped on my foot. o And what did you do at that point? A I didn't know what to say because he caught me off guard. I was, like, maybe this will work. I knew at the time that she didn't have a license -- or a learner's permit she had. And I didn't want to get her into trouble and lose her license and all that for driving on it. And then I didn't know what to do when he said that. I was, like I just, like, left it go. o Spilled your guts? A Yeah. o Okay. Did Dr. Lippe do X-rays in his office? A Yes. o And did he put a cast on? A Yes. o How long were you casted? A I had two different casts on, The first one was on for a week, but it was too tight. And then they put on another one, And I had that on for, I think, maybe ~ , 43 1 six weeks after. 2 Q During the period of time that you were in the 3 cast, were you able to do your job at the arcade? 4 A 5 Q 6 crutches? 7 A 8 Q 9 A 10 Q Yeah, because I just sat down in the chair. Once you got the cast off, did you walk on Yes. For how long? For two weeks. And then what happened? Were you able to walk 11 on the foot again? 12 A Yeah, on and off, And how was your foot once you stopped walking 14 on the crutches? You had it casted and you used the 13 Q 15 crutches. And how was your foot when -- 16 A At first I had a lot of pain in my foot when I 17 was walking, There was like a popping noise from the 18 joints popping, 19 Q Did you tell Dr, Lippe about it? Yes, What did he say? He told me I was going to have problems with it 23 from then on, And he told me that I had a 25-pound weight 20 A 24 restriction, that I couldn't lift anything over 25 pounds 21 Q 25 and I couldn't be on my feet for a long period of time, 22 A , I 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 o For how long? A I don't remember the exact time he gave me for how long to stay off my foot. o How long were you to have the 25-pound weight restriction? A He said indefinitely. o You don't currently have a 25-pound weight restriction, do you? A I don't know if it's still on or not. o When was the last time you saw Dr. Lippe? A Four months ago. o What were your complaints at that point? A At that time I was working at another place. It was called American Furniture, I was basically just a stock guy, I was just putting stuff together for them. And every once in a great while I'd go and help them deliver. o Which required lifting in excess of 25 pounds? A No, most of the times it did not. o Most of the time A It was just o Let me finish my question. A Sorry. o Most of the time that you were lifting furniture with American Furniture you're saying it was ") , 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 furniture that weighed less than 25 pounds? A Yes. Q How about the couch that fell? A That was the first time I went out on a delivery with something heavy, Q And what happened with the couch? A It was two of us holding it up and there was one guy on top. They had to take it out of a second-story window. That's why they asked me to help so I could just help hold it back. And I was doing so. And then the one 11 guy let go of it that was helping me in the back part. 12 And it slid down and hit my foot, 13 Q Your left foot? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Did it hurt your left foot? 16 A Yeah, 17 Q And that was, you said, four months ago? 18 A Four, four and a half months ago. 19 Q Prior to that, when had you last seen 20 Dr. Lippe? 21 A I don't remember exactly. 22 Q Had your treatment with Dr, Lippe for the left 23 foot stopped? 24 A No, I've seen him various times after I had 25 the cast off and everything else. ~ \...J 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q A Q More than five times? I don't recall if it was more than five or not. Have you treated with anyone else other than Dr. Lippe? A No. Q Who's your supervisor at American Furniture? A It was -- his name was -- we always called him Pasky. He's Spanish. I don't know his full name. Q Tell me again what your job was at American Furniture. A Basically just stock, warehouse guy. I just put together -- I wouldn't say tables, but, like, end tables and then the little metal stands and that. Q How long did you work for American Furniture? A I worked for them for about five months. Q Why did you leave? A There just wasn't enough hours or anything, They were cutting back a lot, Q And this was in 1997? A Yes. Q Where had you worked prior to working for American Furniture? A I don't recall offhand, I don't recall offhand exactly where it was. Q I want to start in 1995. At the time of this ') 47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 accident you were employed at the arcade? A Yes. o When did you leave the arcade? A I left the arcade in May. o Of 1995? A Yes. o Why? A Because they closed down. o Did you get another job? A Not right away, no. o At some point did you get another job? A Yes. o Where? A I do believe it was the Uni-Mart on Lisburn Road. o When did you start there? A I don't know exact dates. o Was it in 1995? MR. BRENNEMAN: I'm sorry to interrupt. Are you talking about after the accident? MS. GRAB: Yes, I'm talking about 1995. THE DEPONENT: I do believe it was in 1995, I think, BY MS, GRAB: o What did you do at Uni-Mart? -) ...} 48 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S A Cashier. That was it. Q Who was your supervisor? A Her name was Pam. I don't know her last name. Q Why did you leave there? A I was working third shift and I just couldn't handle it. It was too late. Q Did you get another job? A Yes, but I don't remember where. I've had a few various jobs in between. Q Like what? A I worked at Texaco. Q Where? A Simpson Ferry Road. Q Doing what? A Cashier. Q And how much did you make there? Do you know? A I think six and a quarter an hour. Q Why did you leave? A Their hours got cut back big time. Q Where else? A I think I tried going back to Carpet Mart. Q When you say going back, when had you been at Carpet Mart? A I worked at Carpet Mart prior to the accident. Q Prior to January of '9S? ") 4 t,; 49 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S A Yes. Q Which Carpet Mart? A Mechanicsburg. Q What were you doing at Carpet Mart after the accident? A I was cutting the carpet for installers. Q How long did you do that? A I did that for three months. Q Why did you leave? A I couldn't lift because of my foot. The stuff was too heavy. Q Where did you go next? A I think I went back to Texaco, Q How much did you make at Carpet Mart? Do you recall? A $6 an hour. Q And you went back to Texaco as a cashier? A Yes. Q And that's the one on Simpson Ferry Road? A Yes. Q How long did you work there the second time? A Second time I only worked there a month and a half, Q A Why did you leave? Because they wouldn't give me more hours. ~\ ~ 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 o They wouldn't give you more hours? A Yeah, they wouldn't give me more hours. I wanted more hours and they wouldn't give them to me. o And where did you go then? A Then I think I was off for a little while. I didn't work for a while. o How did you support yourself? A At the time I was living with my mom. o Okay. Then did you get another job? A Yes, and I'm trying to remember where. I don't exactly remember where I was. Q Let's go at it another way. You said that currently you're employed at Mitrani and Company? A Yes. o Where did you work before you went to work there? A It was American Furniture. Q And how long were you with American Furniture? A I was with them five or six months. Q In 1997? A Yeah, It was, I think, June of '97 when I started it. Q Do you know where you had worked just before working at American Furniture? A No, I don't remember, 51 ~ 1 Q Do you know whether or not you went from Texaco 2 the second time to American Furniture? 3 A No, there was a period in between that. I 4 don't remember. I tried one job at ADW. 5 Q What's ADW? 6 A It's a trucking place. It was right down here, 7 Arnold Logistics, That's the name for it. 8 Q Arnold Logistics? 9 A Yes. And it was packing books into boxes. 10 Q Why did you leave there? 11 A I was on my feet too long and my foot started 12 to hurt too much. It would swell up. 13 Q Any other places of employment that you can 14 recall? 15 A No, not offhand, no. I have them all written 16 down at home. I don't remember, 17 Q And is it your testimony that you don't know 18 whether or not currently you have a lifting restriction 19 from Dr. Lippe? 20 A Currently I don't remember. I know he did say 21 I will have problems with my foot indefinitely, but I 22 don't know if right now at this point the weight 23 restriction is on. 24 Q Was there a period of time after the incident 25 in January of '95 in which you were unable to work at all? 52 ") 1 A No, not really because I was sitting down at 2 the arcade. I worked right after it. 3 Q Are there any other physical restrictions that 4 Dr. Lippe has imposed? 5 A He said I have arthritis in it. If I still 6 have problems, he wants to try some sort of injections in 7 it. But I don't know exactly what they are called. 8 MR, BRENNEMAN: I think her question was what 9 physical restrictions he's put on you. 10 BY MS. GRAB: 11 Q Restrictions. 12 A I can't stand on my feet for a long amount of 13 time, and I can't lift a lot. I know that. 14 Q Now, has Dr. Lippe ever said to you, for 15 instance, I don't think that you should have a job that 16 requires you to be on your feet for more than three hours 17 at a time? 18 A Yes. 19 Q He has? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Has he ever provided you with something written 22 that says that so that you could provide it to an 23 employer? 24 A I think at first he did, but I don't recall. I 25 don't know if I still have it or not. " ,-,/ 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q What was the amount of time that he said you could stand -- A He didn't put a time on it. Q He said that you should limit your standing? A Yes. Q And you should limit your lifting? A Yes. Q Anything else that you should limit? A I just can't do strenuous activities. Other than that, I don't remember. Q Any strenuous activities? A Well, I don't know what he meant exactly. I guess with walking and standing and lifting and all that, all types that you do with your legs and feet. Q Had you ever injured your left foot before January 31 A No. Q -- of 1995? MR. BRENNEMAN: Let her finish her question. THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry. BY MS. GRAB: Q Had you injured your left foot prior to January 31 of 1995? A No, I have not, Q Since January 31 of 1995, other than the couch 1 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that we talked about while you were working with American Furniture in 1997, have you had any other injuries to your left foot? A No, I have not other than the continuing problems with it. o What are the continuing problems? A My foot swells up a lot. o How often? A I'd say a couple times a month my foot swells up. o What other continuing problems? A I have pain in it and it pops every once in a while. o Is that pain constant pain? A Yeah. o Your left foot hurts right now? A No, not at this moment. o Okay, But then it's not constant, is it? A I wouldn't say that it's constant, but it's I'm trying to think of the word for it. Not constantly, but most of the time. Not all the time, no. o Okay. So it doesn't hurt every day? A No. o There are days that go by that it doesn't bother you? -~ l; 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes. a Are there weeks that go by that it doesn't bother you? A No. a So at least once a week you are aware that you got this pain in your left foot? A Yes. a More than once a week? A Yes. a What do you do for the pain? A I usually take Ibuprofen. a Does that help? A Sometimes but not all the time, a Is there anything else that you do for the pain? A No, other than put it up. And that's about it. a And does putting it up help? A Sometimes. a Have you missed any time from work at Mitrani and Company as a result of this pain that you've described to your left foot? A No. a Let's talk about 1997, How often did you treat with Dr, Lippe for the left foot? A In '97, I think it was only maybe two times. ) 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q How about 1996? A 1996, it was a good many times. I don't remember how many exactly, though. Q How about thus far in 1998? Have you seen Dr. Lippe? A Q No. Do you have an appointment scheduled to see Dr. Lippe? A No. Q The last time you saw Dr. Lippe, what did he tell you in terms of coming back? A Just as needed. Q Are there activities, recreational activities or activities that you engaged in before January of '95 that you don't do now? A Yeah. Q Like what? A Weight lifting. I can't press some weights with my legs anymore. Q Press weights with your legs? A Do leg presses. Q How often did you do that before January of '95? A I used to go to the gym once or twice a week. Q What gym? ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A Q A Q A Q A B Q 9 1994? 10 A 11 Q 12 A 13 Q 14 A 15 Q 16 incident? 17 A 1B Q 57 At the time it was Gold's Gym. Where was it? The one over in Harrisburg. Is it still there? Yes. Did you have a membership? No. And you were there once or twice a week in Yes. By yourself? No, I would go with Casey. Anything else? I can't do bike riding anymore. How long did you ride a bike before the Few times a week. Have you ever talked to Dr. Lippe about riding 19 a bike and whether or not that was something that you 20 could do? 21 A No. I tried doing it once and I couldn't do it 22 because I started having pain immediately from putting 23 pressure down on it. 24 Q When was that? 25 A That was last year. " I 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Have you played football since January '95? A No, I ha~e not. Q Any other impact that thp. injury's had on your day-to-day life? A Just walking around. I can't hold the kid -- I can't hold my boy very long if I'm holding him standing. Q Anything else? A No. Q How much does your son weigh? A Twenty-two pounds. Q Is it your girlfriend Michelle? A Urn hum. Q You're not married? A No. Q Have you ever been married? A No. Q Is she employed? A Yes. Q Where? A Book-of-the-Month. Q Full-time? A Yes. Q Have you given any statements to anybody about the incident involving Missy McGee in January of '95? A No. ......., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 60 Q Have you ever been contacted by anybody that said they wanted to take a recorded statement? A No. Q Are you aware of anybody who witnessed what occurred? A Yes. Q Who? A Dan and Casey. Q What's Dan's last name? A Bricker. Q Do you know where he lives? A : don't know his exact address, no. Q Do you know his phone number? A Not offhand. I have it written down at home. Q When was the last time you talked to him? A A month ago. Q Are you and he friends? A Yes. Q How often do you see him? A We used to see each other all the time. But with the different work schedules and that, I haven't seen him all that much lately. Q What's Casey's last name? A Harnil ton. Q Where does he live? ') 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A He lives out in Dillsburg somewhere now. Q Do you still speak with him on a regular basis? A No. Q When was the last time you talked to him? A Maybe about three months ago. Q At the time of this accident in January of 1995, did you have a driver's license? A Yes. Q How old were you? A Eighteen, nineteen. Q What's your date of birth? A 1/9/76. Q January 9, 1976? A Yes. Q And your social security number? A 163-68-0783. Q Does your license have any restrictions on it? A No. Q You're wearing glasses. Are you required to wear glasses to drive? A No. Q Ever have your license suspended or revoked? A Yes. Q When? A I don't remember when the first time was. "1 1 2 3 4 Q Are we talking about revocation or suspension? A Suspension. Q More than once? A Yes. Well, the second one was for points 5 accumulation. 6 7 8 9 10 Q What was the first one for? A First one was for transporting alcohol. Q When was that? A I think I might have been 17. Q I may have asked you and, if so, I apologize. 11 I think you said you haven't treated with anyone as a 12 result of this accident other than Dr. Lippe? 13 14 A Yes. Q And you went to the Seidle Memorial Hospital 15 emergency room? 16 17 18 19 20 left foot? 21 22 23 24 , -~ 25 A Yes. Q Who is your family doctor? A Dr. Zimmerman. Q Did you see Dr. Zimmerman for injuries to your A Yeah, once. Q When? A It was eight months after it happened, I guess. Q Why did you go see him? A Because I had -- at the time I was going there 62 t r: f ) l~ 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just for a sinus infection, plus I was also having pain in my foot. And he also had a copy of the records of what happened. Q Does he have the cinder block version or the other version? A The car. He has the car. MS. GRAB: I don't think I have anything else. MR. BRENNEMAN: I may have a few. MS. GRAB: Why don't you go ahead? BY MR. BRENNEMAN: Q Mr. LePore, you said you were on the hood of the car for approximately 15 seconds while it was rolling; is that correct? A It might have been even less. I mean, 15 seconds, that was just a quick guess at how long it was rolling. Q Do you have a watch on? A Not at this moment. Q Do you see the second hand on my watch? A Okay. I know it wasn't no 15 seconds. That would have been too long. Q So you believe it's less than 15 seconds? A Yeah. Q Considerably less? A Yeah. Maybe at the most, I guess, it would ~ 1 have been maybe five seconds at the most. 2 Q Now, when you went off the hood of the car, do 3 you recall your left foot hitting something? 4 5 6 or the road? 7 8 9 correct? 10 11 A Yes. Q Do you know whether your left foot hit the tire A I don't know if it was the tire or the ground. Q But you do recall it hitting something; is that A Yes. Q Do you recall as you sit here today the wheel 12 of the car running over any part or portion of your foot? 13 14 A I don't recall it exactly. Q How soon after you got off the hood of the car 15 did you have the sensation of pain to your left foot? 16 17 A Immediately when I first got off. Q Where was this pain? Was it on the top of the 18 foot, the side of the foot, the bottom of the foot, the 19 back of the foot? 20 21 22 23 24 25 --' A On the top of the foot. MR. BRENNEMAN: That's all I have. MS. GRAB: I don't have anything further. (E. LePore Deposition Exhibit A was marked.) (Whereupon, the deposition was concluded at 11:46 a.m.) 64 t . , \ (\ w o R o I N o E X Eric lePore v. Missy McGee Condcnsclt '"~ $6 - confused "'\ , $6111 49:16 9[11 61:13 ANN[III:21 17:8 25:24 29:16 CIIllCll11 13: 12 $7[11 7:20 97-481111 1:3 anSWCrj21 11:24 48:9 51:3 13:1 16'23 16:25 '83121 4:25 13:22 a.mpl 1:11 64:25 17:10 biglll 14:3 48:19 )J.9 57: 12 6lI:8 '84(11 4:25 ablc 1]1 9:5 43:3 answcred III 11:22 biggcrjl( 19:16 Cascy's I'I 17:4 '88121 13:20 13:21 43:10 answcrs III 65:11 bikcl'l 57:14 57:15 17:H 611'23 '94111 9:" abovCll1 17:17 apartments (II 17:17 57:19 5H:3 5H:4 cashiCrjl1 4H:1 '95111 abut III 20:10 apologizclll 62:10 5":5 5":6 5":10 4":15 49:17 12:20 34:4 58:13 cast 1'1 3H:23 39:5 4":25 51:25 56:14 accelcrating 12136:" APPEARANCES II( birthll161:11 39:6 40:16 41 :2 56:23 59:1 59:24 36:9 1:17 42:20 43:3 43:5 '97(2) 50:21 55:25 accidcnt(l]1 4:16 appointment 121 bit III 19:16 29:IH 45:25 00121 12:9 )2:9 5:12 ":21 9:11 41:1 56:7 37:2 casted 121 33:15 47:1 47:20 approvcd III block III 39:19 42:22 1/9/76111 61:12 4":24 49:5 5":" 65:12 40:[1 41:9 41:17 43:14 10(11 1:11 5":22 61:6 62:12 April(11 65:20 41:21 42:1 42:7 casts III 42:23 107111 6:13 accumulation (II arcadc (211 ":25 63:4 caught (II 42:9 11(1) 64:25 62:5 9:1 9:7 11:12 bluish(11 22:23 causcd (II 30:21 12:3 12:5 12:12 12(11 16:3 aceurately III 65:16 12:16 12:20 13:5 Book-of-thc-Month causcslII 65:6 15111 15:14 15:15 Acell) 39:7 13:16 14:24 16:8 (II 59:20 certain (II 4:11 35:15 63:12 63:14 ACTION III 1:2 17:11 17:12 17:13 books III 51:9 certification III 63:20 63:22 activiticSI!1 53:9 17:16 19:9 19:10 botherj]1 31:14 3:3 163-68-0783 III 53:11 56:13 56:13 37:17 37:19 3":10 54:25 55:3 certify III 65:7 61:16 56:14 43:3 47:1 47:3 bottom [II 39:6 65:9 65: I 5 17(1) 62:9 address 1]1 47:4 52:2 64:18 chair III 7:13 6:1 43:4 18111 2:15 6:11 60:12 arms 11127:14 bouncing (II 29:22 changc III 914 19111 1:11 administer (II 65:5 Arnold 121 51:7 box [II 7:14 10:2 10:10 5):" 1976(IJ61:13 admitted [21 3":1" arrivcd 121 22:1 boxcs III 51:9 children III 6:23 199111111:12 3":20 38:13 boy III 6:18 IIUI cindcrlll 39:19 1994(1) 57:9 ADW 121 51:4 arriving III 59:6 40:11 41:9 41:16 19951111 51:5 16:11 Brenncmanll'II:12 41:21 41:25 42:7 5:14 arthritis (II 52:5 63:4 5:23 6:1 8:22 afterwards 1]1 33:22 I:IH 1:19 2:4 11:6 11:20 11:25 33:24 65:13 assume III 4:5 4:13 18:2 1":13 CIVII,111 1:2 16:6 33:25 46:25 again 1'1 21:19 attach III 18:9 28:25 30:13 35:20 1:3 47:5 47:1" 47:21 27:24 2":17 34:14 attend III ":9 47:19 52:8 53:1'1 CIOSC(l112:7 47:22 53:1" 53:23 43:11 46:9 attcndcd III 63:8 63:10 64:21 c10scd 141 12:5 53:25 61:7 8:[2 Brickcr III 13: 12 against III 19:24 authorizcd [II 12:12 12,16 47:8 1996(1) 56:1 56:2 26:3 65:5 16:23 611: III closing PI AvcnUCI]1 14:8 bricf1113:14 12,4 1997(4) 46:19 50:20 ago I") 7:22 10:9 17:4 17:19 13:5 54:2 55:23 10:21 44:11 45:17 bright (II 22:3 coat III 228 1998(111:11 56:4 45:18 60:16 61:5 aware 1]1 33:10 brokcn (II .12:18 65:20 agreed (II 55:5 60:4 Bucher III cognl7.antlll J20 65:12 away []128:14 29:3 1:9 cold (II 22.7 201]1 14:4 15:14 ahead (II 63:9 47:10 65:4 color III SJ 56 16:10 Albert II) buildlDg III 21111I 7:25 B[41 20:22 20:25 2222 20-minute III 15:16 alcohol[]) 15:24 21:6 21:24 211:12 20:[5 colors (II 5:4 200011165:23 16:8 62:7 badl]1 37:25 41:7 bumplll .1U coming III 56:11 25141 37:12 43:24 alcoholic III 16:2 42:6 busincsscs III 15:1 Commission [II 44:18 45:1 Aldislll 13:14 badly III 32:18 15:8 19:1 65:2.1 25-pound []I 43:23 allcY[II) 14:19 bandagcIII 39:7 CALKINS (II 1211 COMMON III 11 44:4 44:7 14:20 14:21 17:20 bank (41 20:7 car (1'1 16:20 17:20 3 (2) 2:3 39:1 18:11 1":11 18:17 20:17 17:22 (7:23 22:18 COMMONWHALTII 20:17 21:9 65:1 311101 5:23 6:1 18:19 1":21 1":22 22:22 22:24 23:7 (II 1118 11:25 16:4 18:25 19:2 19:4 basis1l161:2 24:6 25:.1 26:7 company 1'1 7:4 33:25 34:4 53:16 28:13 30:12 30:13 become III 32:13 27:5 21:'1 27: II 8:1 84 9:24 53:23 53:25 30:14 30:17 begin "I 3:13 27:13 27:22 28:1.1 III 5 11116 11:11I 31st III 34:5 allcyway (21 17:3 3:16 4:11I 28:18 28:23 2'U 50:13 55W 35111 17:18 beginning (II 8:17 29:14 29:1'1 .112 complaints III 44:12 1:11 altogcther 121 3125 324 .14.1 complctclIl 44111 1:13 ":6 behind (101 12:2 3417 .16,11I .1624 3:16 21:9 12:20 15:9 16:19 .17:2 63:6 5:17 2014 46111 64:25 always III 17:12 6lh complctcd (II 11:22 5(11 46:7 17:16 19:1 63:12 642 64,12 65:23 American [III 44:14 20:8 25:21 .1(:24 64:14 complctely 141 11I:14 6(1) 12:9 44:25 46:6 46:9 Bcntz[1( 23:19 Carlislc [I( 656 2611I 27:23 40:14 624111 6:2 46:14 46:22 50:17 besidc 1'1 15,9 carpel (11 4821 Complicdl1l 18:2.1 63111 2:4 50:18 50:24 51:2 26:24 278 4823 4HN 4'12 1'15 1912 19:15 64111 2:15 54:1 best 111 n 4'14 4lJ h 4'1 14 1'1 IS 2112.1 2.1:8 7(11 12:9 amount 1'/ 52:12 bettcr( II 411.1 carsl'l \'1 144 compUICr(1I 65'13 53:1 8th [II 65:20 anklclIl between [61 1] 11,11 Ih II Itln concludcd (II 64:24 .12:11 11,14 17\ III confuscd 111 2825 Archive Rcporbng Services (717)234-5922 Index Page I Eric lePore v. Missy McGee on cnscIt Consldcra Iy - Grab ConsidcrablY(l1 dchvcrylll 45:5 dropped "I 39:19 cxhibit[ll IS:9 43:15 43:16 44:3 63:24 DEMANDED III 41:25 42:7 64:23 45:12 45:13 45:15 constant (11 54:14 1:3 drovclll 40:23 EXHIBITS (II 2:13 45:23 49:10 51:11 54:18 54:19 DEPONENT(sl duly [21 3:8 65:10 cxitlSI 14:11 14:22 51:21 53:15 53:22 54:3 54:7 54:9 constantly III 54:20 2:2 18:15 30:14 during (II 15:15 21:10 21:12 21:13 54:16 55:6 55:21 contacted (II 60:1 47:22 53:20 16:3 43:2 Expires III 65:23 55:24 62:20 63:2 contained II) 65:16 dcposition ['I 1:7 dusk III 22:2 cxtent III 4:11 64:3 64:5 64:12 continuing I]) 54:4 18:9 64:23 64:24 EI]I 2:1 6:8 facing (1'1 17:9 64:15 64:18 64:18 54:6 54:11 65:10 65:17 64:23 17:13 17:IS 17:20 64:18 64:19 64:20 control III 9:16 dcpositions (I) 65:5 casicstlll 18:S 17:22 17:23 21:20 football 121 5":16 convcrsation I]) describe (2) 16:14 Eastlll 6:13 21:21 21:23 21:24 ~9:1 24:10 33:21 34:9 16:1~ eight 11162:23 28:10 28:12 28:14 foregoing III 65:7 dcscribed 1') 16:10 29:3 29:5 30:16 form (II 3:5 copy 121 63:2 65:17 16:18 55:20 Eighteen (II 61:10 fact (II 11:4 corncrlll 20:7 diagram III 2:15 cither 121 3:24 fairly III 22:6 forward 121 29:12 30:18 correct II) 4:7 18:5 23:6 4:2~ fairncSSII) 35:24 found (21 12:1 18:14 29:7 diffcrenee (II 36:23 clcvated (II 39:4 ~:16 41:12 63:13 64:9 fall 121 8:1" 30:22 5:24 65:18 diffcrent 1]1 5:4 cmergcncy 111 38:4 family (II 62:17 four11417:16 7:21 39:15 40:2 40:8 corrected II) 41:10 42:23 60:21 far 141 20:2 30:14 9:22 13:7 16:17 Dillsburg (I) 40:24 41:6 62:15 couch (4) 37:22 61:1 employcd [61 37:19 56:4 16:20 16:22 21:9 dil'l".ction 161 17:9 7:1 f artI1cr J2I 21:9 30:4 44:11 45:3 4~:6 53:25 7:1~ 8:22 47:1 29:1" COUNTY 121 1:1 21:19 28:10 30:8 50:13 59:17 29:18 45:17 45:18 45:18 65:2 30:11 65:(4 cmployccslll fast(ll 4:1 34:23 four-door III 23:1 dircctlYIIJ 8:4 fricnds 171 couplc I]) 20:8 35:2 13:4 3:14 cmploycr (I I 52:23 5:4 54:9 dirt (II 58:9 fasterlll 37:2 13:6 15:17 16:18 court 1411: I 1:10 discussion (21 4:14 employment III faze II) 28:22 17:7 5":18 60:17 51:13 front IS117:20 3:14 65:4 1":4 feet (17) 27: 12 27:15 21:20 dispute III 4:12 cmpty(l) 16:)4 21:21 23:23 25:2) covcrage [II 4:12 cndl21 27:11 46:12 28:8 28:10 28:12 full (41 16:14 16:15 covcred III 39:6 doctor(11 62:17 cndcd ISI 28:14 29:2 29:4 16:16 46:8 documcntlll 9:4 27:20 29:12 29:20 30:3 cranny (II 32:2 28:20 30:5 30:6 31:6 43:25 51:11 full-time 161 9:23 crutches (11 43:6 docsn'tl41 31:13 34:2 52:12 52:16 53:14 10:4 10:7 10:24 43:14 43:15 54:22 54:24 ~5:2 cods III 29:5 fclllll 11:10 59:21 Cumberland (11 dOnC(1) 12:4 31:6 45:3 fully (II 65:16 1:1 8:12 65:2 38:21 cogagcdlll 56:14 fcltl21 32:1 36:3 door(11 20:15 cnginc[11 35:1 fcmalc 161 13:8 Funtastik'sJ21 1~:4 currcnt(l) 6:11 cnter(lJ 14:5 14:21 13:10 13:13 23:13 20:5 cut III 48:19 down [111 3:15 21:6 23:14 23:15 furniture (13) 44:14 Cutlass 171 4:20 3:20 7:" 11:7 Fcny 121 44:25 44'25 45:1 17:~ 19:)9 20:6 cntrance I"I 14:9 48:13 5:1 5:q 5:22 25:6 25:7 25:8 14:19 19:15 19:17 49:19 46:6 ;0 46:14 13:19 13:20 13:22 26:23 26:24 27:2 20:25 21:10 21:13 fCW(l1 46, 17 50:18 cutting (2) 4":9 57:17 50:: , 54:2 46:18 27:8 27:12 27:20 21:14 63:8 G, " 49:6 29:4 29:14 34:2 cntrances (II 21:7 Fiftccnlll 35:17 Dill 2:1 38:4 3":5 40:23 Eric ['I 1:1 1:7 filing (I) G-' 18:10 damages III 9:15 43:4 45:12 47:8 2:3 3:8 4:16 3:4 18..... Dan II) 13:12 16:23 ~1:6 ~1:16 52:1 65:8 finish 121 44:22 gamc16118:11 19:7 ~7:23 60:14 65:11 53:19 19:20 20:2 20:7 16:25 33:9 33:12 ESQUIRE 121 1:19 33:13 33:15 60:8 Drl221 40:19 40:22 1:21 first (19) 4:5 27:17 20:15 Dan's 121 40:25 41:3 41:25 cvcningl41 27:20 27:20 28:20 gas II) 36:20 17:3 42:18 43:19 44:10 12:8 30:2 31:5 37:11 GED[I)8:14 60:9 4~:20 45:22 46:4 15:25 32:5 34:1 39:18 41:5 41:5 dangling 121 29:4 51:19 ~2:4 52:14 cvcot(ll 34:16 42:23 43:16 45:4 Gingerbread (4) 29:21 5~:24 56:5 56:8 cvidcncc III 65:16 52:24 61:25 62:6 14:25 15:~ 1~:1O dark II) 22:1 ~6:1O 57:18 62:12 cxact 17111: 16 22:25 62:7 64:16 21:22 date (2) 1:11 61:11 62:18 62:19 35:23 38:15 44:2 fivCI'1 8:6 46:1 girl's III 13:15 dates 11147:17 draw 14118:5 19:13 47:17 60:12 46:2 46:15 ~0:19 girlfricod 121 6:13 day-to-day II) 59:4 20:12 23:7 cxactly 1141 24:10 64:1 59:11 daylight [21 12:21 drivc 1116:2 31:22 29:19 30:6 32:11 follows III 3:9 girlfricod'S[I) 6:14 22:1 32:1 35:5 36:2 36:9 41:6 41:8 foot (621 27: 19 29:9 givco 121 4:7 days III 54:24 37:7 38:6 61:20 45:21 46:24 50:11 29:13 29:22 29:25 59:23 drivcn III 13:16 52:7 53:12 56:3 30:21 31:8 31:17 glasses 121 61:19 dcadlll 17:16 drivcr (I I 23:25 64:13 31:21 31:25 32:8 61:20 dccidcdll) 35:16 drivcr's 141 24:5 EXAMINATION 121 32:14 32:20 33:3 gOCSl21 17:14 17:14 Defcndant (4) 2:2 .1:10 33:6 33:11 33:17 1:4 25:5 25:18 61:7 34:12 34:16 34:24 Gold's II) 57:1 1:8 1:21 2:14 driving 1'1 13:18 cxaminCd(l1 3:9 36:20 37:5 37:25 good III 56:2 dcfinitely 1]1 32:25 13:24 15:12 23:2 cxcept III 3:4 38:21 39:20 40:4 Grab 1191 1:21 36:11 37:3 42:13 cxcess III 44:18 40:12 41:11 42:1 2:3 3:11 3:12 dclivcr(ll 44:17 drop (II 40:11 cxcrcise (II 5S:3 42:7 43:11 43:13 4:10 4:15 18:5 --. , I ~ l) Archivc Reporting Services (717)234-5922 C d 1M bl Index Page 2 d 1M Old bOOd 'l Eric lePore v. Missy McGee Con cnscIt gr. -ma 1":7 18:16 29:1 holdPI 45:10 59:5 indlcatlDg III 21:18 lalldinglll 311:6 Llsbumlll 47:14 30:15 35:21 47:21 59:6 infcction [II 63:1 last 1101 44:10 45: 19 IiVC121 .17:19 611:25 47:24 52:10 53:21 holding 1]1 16:10 injcctions III 52:6 4":3 56:10 57:25 IiVCS(11611:11 61:1 63:7 63:9 64:22 45:7 59:6 injured 121 53:15 5":1 60:9 60:15 living III 6:23 grabbed II) 29:13 holds (II 14:4 53:22 60:23 61:4 50:s gradualc II) 8:7 home 112) 6:24 injurics 141 11:5 late(11 48:6 located (II 15:7 gray II) 5:5 31:22 32:1 32:23 42:6 54:2 62:19 lately (II 60:22 Loglstic8111 51:7 grcat11144:16 37:7 37:18 37:21 injury [II 31:6 laundromat(SI 15:3 51:S GRIFFITH III 1:20 3":10 3":22 39:2 injury's III 59:3 19:25 20:4 20:5 look III 9:3 51:16 60:14 211:6 ground 1141 26:8 hood 1121 22:19 installcrs III 49:6 LAW III 1:2 losc III 42: I) 27:3 27:12 27:15 25:2 25:3 25:13 instancc (II 52:15 Ican (II 29:12 10st(11 27:23 27:17 27:17 27:21 26:10 26:13 26:21 instructions (II 3: 14 Mill 23:7 28:6 28:8 28:19 Icaninglll 26:3 28:20 29:25 30:2 27:9 28:1 63:11 insured 121 5:12 M-i-t-r-o-n-i III 64:2 64:14 Icarncr'slll 42:11 64:7 5:22 S:3 15:21 hop 131 26:25 36:25 intend III 10:23 Icastl2l 3S:17 55:5 MaggiclII 3:12 group (2) 37:1 Icavc 11132:5 46:16 16:24 Hopefully III 10:25 interrupt 121 22:20 47:3 4S:4 4S:IS Malnlltl:1) 6:13 GT (II 5":10 47:19 49:9 49:24 51:111 ma1C11113:8 13:9 guard II) 42:10 hopped 141 22:19 intertwincdll18:IS 13:9 13:13 13:14 28:22 29:2 31:2 involvcd 121 Icft 1311 17:IS 27:16 23:13 23:14 23:21 guess I") 18:1 hospital 161 3":11 8:16 30:21 .11 :S 31:25 )8:20 18:21 21:17 8:17 .12:4 32:22 34:2 Man 141 14:25 15:5 25:23 27:19 2":13 38:14 38:16 3":18 involving 111 59:24 34:10 .14: IS 34:16 15: lU 21 :22 38:25 62:14 31:14 40:3 53:13 hourl6J 7:19 7:20 Janl21 1:9 65:4 34:21 .17:5 .17:16 Marehlll I: II 62:23 63:15 63:25 40:11 42: IS 45:13 MARGARET(II guta II) 42:16 9:22 38:17 48:17 Januaryl2l1 5:12 45:15 45:22 47:4 1:21 49:16 5:22 6:1 S:21 guy (41 44:15 45:8 hourly 1'1 11:6 11:18 11:25 53:15 53:22 54:3 mark 1'118:6 20:21 7:17 54:16 55:6 55:21 45:11 46:11 7:18 9:17 9:19 12:20 16:4 33:24 55:24 62:20 64:3 21:12 gym (3) 56:24 56:25 9:21 34:4 34:5 48:25 64:5 64:15 markcd 121 2:14 57:1 hours 1101 10:1 51:25 53:16 53:22 Icglll 64:23 half II) 53:25 56:14 56:22 56:21 7:16 7:22 11:12 16:3 46:17 59:1 59:24 61:6 Ic,sll/ 26:6 26.7 MarkcllJI 17:24 16:15 16:16 37:20 48:19 49:25 50:1 17:25 38:17 45:18 49:23 50:2 50:3 52:16 61:13 5 :14 56: 1'1 56211 marricd 121 59:13 halfway III 25:24 household III 6:9 JCDI41 23:16 23:24 LePore III 1.1 59:15 24:6 24:24 1:7 2:.1 lS Hamilton PI 13:12 hum (12) 14:16 26:22 Jcnnifcrl'l 23:19 3:12 63:11 603 Mart 1'148:21 4":23 16:23 60:24 28:4 29:8 30:10 24:18 24:23 25:8 65:S 48:24 49:2 49:4 hand (2) 63:19 65:20 30:25 35:18 36:1 26:4 26:20 LERMAN III 1:211 49:14 handlc III 4":6 36:5 36:7 42:2 maYl31 47:4 62:10 59:12 job III 43:3 46:9 ICSSl41 45:1 6):14 hands 1]1 26:24 47:9 47:11 4S:7 63:22 63:24 6.1:8 27:8 28:1 hurt 14J 38:3 45:15 50:9 51:4 52:15 licensc 1'1 5:7 McGee 171 1:3 hangingllJ 26:7 51:12 54:22 jobs III 4S:9 42:11 42: 1.1 617 1:24 3:1) 15:12 hurts (2) 37:25 54:16 16:11 22:1 59:24 happcningll) 5:15 jointa III 43:IS 61:17 61 :22 Ibuprofen IIJ 55:1 I McGee's III 12:22 Harrisburg (I) 57:3 joking 121 24:13 lifcJlI 5'H icelsl 38:2 38:3 meanpl26:1 2":21 headlighta (I) 22:4 39:4 39:5 39:10 24:20 lift 131 43:24 4'1: lU 63:14 health III 10:19 idcal4J Jona(ll 13:14 52:13 11:1 15:1 I Iirted 121 means III 18:14 hear (41 35:1 35:1 34:23 38:13 jump (2135: 16 36:17 27:11 35:4 36:2 jumped III 2S:3 meant III 53:12 identificd III 2:14 25:2 lifting 1'1 Mcchanicsburg ISI heard III 24:24 18:24 20:24 26:13 27:21 44:IS 44:24 51: 18 53:6 1:13 7:10 7:11 hearing III 24:19 identify (II 19:6 Junc (21 50:21 65:23 53:1.1 56: IS 8:13 49:3 heavy 121 45:5 idlclll 36:10 JURYIII 1:.1 light III 21:.1 medical III 37:11 49:11 idling (II 36:19 keep 121 3'1:4 .1'111I lightinglll 12:19 medication III 38:24 held[21 4:14 1":4 iIIncss (21 10:14 KElTIIIII 1:1'1 lightHIl1 12:23 Mellon II) 20:17 help[sl 44:16 45:9 11:9 kcpt(ll'1I5 limitl414:11 53:4 membership III 45:10 55:12 55:17 immediately 121 kidlll 5'15 H6 53:S 57:6 helping III 45:11 57:22 64:16 kids III 621 '115 limitcd(ll 4:12 Memorial (21 38:18 hereby 121 3:2 impact III 59:3 9:16 Iimpinglll 27:4 62:14 65:7 imposed (II 52:4 kindJll41'1 2211I metal 121 21:3 hereunto (II 65:19 incidcnt 1101 22:24 l.inda III 6:6 46:13 11:6 high 1]1 8:7 8:9 11:15 12:12 12:16 kncWll1 1217 I.iPIT IJOI 40:19 Michellc 141 6:15 36:10 16:3 22:17 40:211 42,10 411 2 40:25 41:3 6:17 6:23 59:11 41:25 42:18 43:19 hit (7) 27:15 27:16 51:24 57:16 59:24 knowlcdgc III 4H 44:10 45:20 45:22 might 1121 13:19 27:20 29:25 30:2 indcfinitely 12144:6 IS:21 46:4 51: 19 52:4 22:2 29:17 29:18 45:12 64:5 51:21 1.111 It) ~I IS 5n4 55:24 56:5 31:4 32:10 32:24 hitting 1]1 29:21 indicate III 35:2 65:4 S6S 56:10 57:18 35:15 37:12 37:20 64:3 64:" indicated III 20:9 landJlI 2'16 62:12 62:9 63:14 hobbling III 34:3 mild (II 22:6 Archivc Reporting Serviccs (717)234-5922 Index Page 3 Eric LePore v. Missy McGee Condcnsclt '''' milc - restriction --, mllclll 37:20 3:21 5:17 1":20 21:7 21:" Plaintiff [21 1:1 9:22 48:17 milcslII 37:20 needcd 12I 22:3 23:14 27:16 42:23 1:19 qucstions 1]1 3:21 minC[416:21 17:5 56:12 42:25 45:8 45:10 play 121 58: 16 58:1" 5:18 65:11 17:8 17:17 ncxt ISI 8:20 40:17 49:19 51:4 57:3 playcd(ll 59:1 quick 111 27:3 62:4 62:6 62:7 minutes I]) 15:14 40:18 41:13 49:12 onc'sl21 playing III 25:11 27:21 2":21 31:18 37:12 37:14 night 11134:6 6:21 PLEAS (II 31:19 32:21 63:15 21:13 1:1 radio(1125:1O misscd 121 ":19 nincteen [II 61:10 onto 121 2":5 28:20 plus III 63:1 55:19 nobody III 22:3 point 1121 10:23 ranlsl 33:6 33:17 misstated II) own 121 4:16 58:6 34:12 38:1 41:11 3:25 noiSC11143:17 11:1 12:25 26:16 Missy 1221 1:3 nook (II 32:2 owncdlll 58:9 28:11 32:13 38:19 rate (21 9:21 35:22 1:24 12:22 15:12 owncrlll 7:25 40:1 42:8 44:12 reallSI 10:11 31:13 16:11 22:1 23:3 Notary (II 65:22 P.m. III 12:10 47:11 51:22 31:19 37:25 41:7 23:25 24:5 24:5 notes (1)65:16 packing III 51:9 poinl8lll 62:4 really 111 12:11 24:15 24:18 24:19 now 1111 6:12 10:3 PAGE(II 2:2 POICIII 21:3 22:7 28:21 36:22 24:23 25:6 26:4 19:6 21:11 21:15 Paid III 9:19 polcs 11121:3 37:3 41:24 52:1 26:16 26:20 33:21 21:25 23:9 24:2 36:20 40:4 59:24 28:25 37:16 39:14 pain (16) 31:13 32:3 poppcd(11 27:3 rear (4) 17:22 17:23 21:23 27:11 Mitrani 1'1 7:4 51:22 52:14 54:16 32:12 39:2 43:16 popping 121 43:17 7:25 ":2 9:23 56:15 61:1 64:2 54:12 54:14 54:14 43:18 reason III 31:12 10:4 10:16 1):10 number 1]1 5:7 55:6 55:10 55:15 pops (II 54:12 recolleetion [1133:2 50:13 55:19 60:13 61:15 55:20 57:22 63:1 record IS) 4:13 mom (41 6:4 37:24 0(11 1:19 64:15 64:17 portion [II 64:12 4:14 5:20 18:2 40:23 50:8 oaths 11165:5 palm 121 27:20 28:20 position 121 10:17 18:4 palms III 30:3 10:18 recordcd II) moment 121 54:17 Objcction III 35:20 60:2 63:18 Pamlll 48:3 pottery 121 7:6 records (II 63:2 month I]) objcctions III 3:4 Park [21 35:4 7:14 rccreational[l) 56:13 49:22 obtain III 8:14 36:2 pounds 141 43:24 54:9 60:16 parkcd ISI occur II) 11:2 14:1 44:18 45:1 59:10 red III 5:5 months (121 7:16 occurred (II) 17:2 17:3 17:4 PRESENT II) 1:23 redueed III 65:13 7:22 9:9 9:10 5:12 21:16 44:11 45:17 45:18 9:11 11:15 12:14 parking 1']1 12:2 press (21 56: 18 56:20 regular I') 24:9 46:15 49:8 50:19 12:17 22:17 32:23 41:2 58:4 58:5 32:24 33:20 34:16 12:20 13:3 14:2 presscs (II 56:21 58:9 61:2 61:5 62:23 14:3 14:5 14:11 pressure III 57:23 most ('1 11:7 16:16 60:5 14:24 15:2 15:7 primered 1'1 relation 121 15:7 31:14 44:19 44:20 OctOber(l) 9:8 15:13 15:18 16:10 5:5 35:9 5:5 5:5 44:24 54:21 63:25 offl4'1 4:13 4:14 17:12 17:14 17:15 printout [I) 65:13 remcmberl2t1 5:9 64:1 10:11 10:13 15:11 19:13 19:18 19:22 9:2 11:16 22:9 mother [21 41:14 18:2 18:4 25:2 20:9 20:19 20:20 problcms (61 43:22 22:18 24:7 24:10 41:20 25:3 26:17 26:20 20:22 20:24 21:6 51:2) 52:6 54:5 24:12 24:19 24:21 mother's III 6:5 26:25 27:11 27:13 21:24 22:13 23:9 54:6 54:11 26:15 27:2 27:4 28:1" 29:2 29:11 32:5 32:22 33:5 procccdingsll165:15 3":15 44:2 45:21 motor(11 4:17 29:11 29:22 29:24 33:10 33:20 process (21 8:16 48:8 50:10 50:11 motorized II) 5":11 30:20 32:11 35:10 part 1]1 14:19 45:11 36:16 50:25 51:4 51:16 mountain 121 58:5 35:11 35:13 35:16 64:12 51:20 53:10 ~5:3 58:6 36:13 36:15 36:17 pronc III 31:13 61:25 36:25 37:1 37:4 part-time 141 9:25 proof III 33:1 repcat III 4:1 movclll 20:14 38:1 39:9 42:10 10:17 10:18 11:4 providc(ll 52:22 movcd(11 partics (II rephrase III 4:1 6:12 43:5 43:12 44:3 3:3 providcd III movcmcotlll 36:23 45:25 50:5 64:2 PaskY(l1 46:8 52:21 reporter(21 3:15 moving 141 36:1 I 64:14 64:16 patrons (II 15:1 Public [21 65:5 65:14 65:22 Reporter-Notary 1]1 36:13 36:15 36:25 offhand (1) 11:16 pcdallll 5":13 pullcdl21 MSIIII 14:7 46:23 46:23 23:4 1:10 65:4 65:12 2:3 3:11 Pennsylvania 141 29:14 3:13 4:10 4:15 51:15 58:25 60:14 represent III 3:13 1:1 1:13 65:1 purchased III 1":5 18:7 18:16 officc 121 42:18 65:7 4:21 required 121 44:18 29:1 30:[5 35:21 65:6 peoplc 161 15:18 purposcs III 5:20 61:19 47:21 47:24 52:10 often 1'1 54:8 55:23 16:20 23:11 31:14 push 1]1 28: 18 29:11 requires III 52:16 53:21 63:7 63:9 56:22 5":22 60:19 40:8 40:24 29:12 rescrvcd III 3:5 64:22 N(II oldl]1 6:19 7:13 pcriod 111 10:13 pushed (41 25:2 residc (2) 6:9 2:1 61:9 15:16 35:12 43:2 27:13 29:11 29:24 6:16 namcllll 3:12 0Idsmobilc(SI4:20 43:25 51:3 51:24 pushing(11 26:24 residcdlll 6:3 6:5 6:14 7:25 5:1 5:11 5:22 pcrmitlll 42:12 put 1201 10:17 21:15 respect III 9:1 9:2 13:15 13:20 23:7 27:" 27:12 4:12 14:6 18:19 19:2 phonclll 60:13 2":1 28:5 3":2 respectivc (II 3:3 19:10 46:7 46:8 oncc 1121 7:14 physical 121 52:3 respond 111 43:5 43:13 44:16 3":3 38:23 39:4 4:4 48:3 48:3 51:7 54:12 55:5 55:" 52:9 39:5 39:10 41:2 responsc III 3:17 60:9 60:23 56:24 57:8 57:21 picces (II 7:14 42:20 42:25 46:12 4:6 5:23 namcslll 13:11 62:3 62:21 pilcd11122:12 52:9 53:3 55:16 responscs III 3:21 nature [II 16:2 OnCI211 5:10 6:21 place 1411:12 7:6 putting 1]1 44:15 restate (I) 5:21 nccessary (II 9:4 ":19 8:20 13:9 44:13 51:6 55: 17 57:22 restriction ISI 43:24 nced(4) 3:15 3:19 14:9 14:14 15:22 places [II 51:13 quarter(]1 7:23 44:5 44:8 51:1" . t r , I :~ Archlvc Rcportmg SCrvlCCS (717)234-5922 Index Page 4 Eri LeP M' MG C d I '" ''\ c ore v. ISS c ee on ense t restrictions - types 51:23 31:19 49:21 49:22 somewhcrelll 61:1 stoPI'I 18:13 23:4 21:9 23:12 49:8 restrictions 141 52:3 51:2 62:4 63:19 son [21 11:9 59:9 27:6 52:16 61:5 52:9 52:11 61:17 second-story III son's 121 10:14 stopped 1'1 23:7 through [21 27:24 result III 55:20 45:8 10:19 43:13 45:23 39:5 62:12 scconds 111 35:16 soon III 64:14 story 1]141:9 41:17 Thursday (II 1:11 retakc III 8:20 35:17 63:12 63:15 sorry 1'1 5: 19 11:23 41:21 tight III 42:24 63:20 63:22 64:1 Strawberry 1'1 reV(11 35:1 security III 12:15 22:21 27:7 14:7 times 171 44:19 revocation III 62:1 61:15 27:25 44:23 47:19 14:17 14:18 17:4 45:24 46:1 54:9 revokcd III 61:22 secllol 40:19 40:25 53:20 17:19 18:21 S5:25 56:2 57:17 ridcll) 57:15 41:2 41:3 56:7 sort III 52:6 street 1'1 1:13 tire III 27:19 28:15 60:19 60:20 62:19 space 121 21:15 6:13 14:17 17:24 28:19 29:9 29:13 riding 141 57:14 62:24 63:19 23:9 17:25 20:6 31:16 64:5 64:7 57:18 58:3 58:4 seck II) 37:11 right 1"1 spaccs IS) 17:15 strocta II) 14:6 today 121 32:19 3:22 Scidlc I]) 38:5 3:23 4:3 6:12 19:13 19:18 19:22 strenuous 121 53:9 64:11 7:8 7:10 IS:9 38:18 62:14 20:9 53:11 togctheq]1 16:20 15:9 18:10 18:12 sensation III 64:15 Spanish III 46:8 STRICKLER 111 44:15 46:1~ 18:13 19:18 19:19 sent III 38:22 Spare 121 1:12 1:20 too 1111 3:2S 5:9 19:19 19:23 20:1 servC1'116:8 1:18 sturr (21 44: I 5 49:10 18:25 20:2 41:9 20:2 20:15 20:19 scvcnlll 6:21 speak 121 33:24 subscribed III 65:20 42:24 48:6 49:11 20:19 21:1 21:7 shift (41 35:4 36:2 61:2 Subway 161 15:3 51:11 51:12 63:21 21:8 21:17 25:23 took III 38:1 25:24 34:12 34:14 36:3 48:5 speaking [21 3:25 19:25 20:1 20:2 47:10 51:6 SI:22 Shircmanstown III 16:17 20:5 20:8 top 1]1 45:8 64:17 S2:2 54:16 6:)3 spell III 8:2 supervisor I]) 7:24 64:20 road 111 7:8 19:19 shoe III 38:2 Spillcdlll 42:16 46:6 48:2 tort III 4:12 32:2 47:15 48:13 shoes 121 22:10 Splitlll 31:19 support III 50:7 touching III 26:8 49:19 64:6 29:5 spokc 121 26:4 supposed 1]1 21:4 towards 141 25:25 roadway III 18:24 shop III 15:4 34:19 39:9 40:18 28:12 30:12 30:17 Robber (I I 6:8 ShOWll1 23:6 spokcn III 33:15 suspendcd [I) 61:22 town (1)7:9 roll II) 36:6 showcdlll 13:4 spota11121:2 suspension 121 62:1 transcript III 65:18 rolling 110) 29:14 sick(11 10:11 spraincd 1]1 31:4 62:2 transporting (II 30:9 30:11 30:18 sidc(l) 14:18 24:5 31:12 32:10 sustaincd III 11:5 62:7 35:14 35:15 36:16 25:4 25:5 25:19 SS(II 65:1 SWCIlIII 51:12 treat III 55:23 36:18 63:12 63:16 26:7 29:4 64:18 stain II) 7:13 swclls 121 54:7 treated 121 46:3 room 1141 18:11 signing III 3:3 stand 1]1 54:9 62:11 19:7 19:20 20:2 31:25 sWOIlCn(l1 20:7 20:15 38:5 silvcrlll 22:23 52:12 53:2 38:3 treatment 121 37:11 39:15 40:2 40:8 silvcrish III 5:6 standing 1111 11:8 sworn [21 3:9 45:22 40:24 41:6 41:19 Simpson 121 48:13 15:17 15:19 15:21 65:10 trial III 1:3 3:6 62:15 49:19 16:17 16:19 17:7 tablcs 121 46:12 65:6 rowlII 17:2 sinUS(l)63:1 31:24 53:4 53:13 46:13 tricdl'131:22 35:13 run (6) 31:8 31:16 sit(ll 7:13 59:6 tag II) 5:7 48:21 51:4 57:21 32:19 stands III taking III 58:1 31:21 32:7 32:14 64:11 46:13 3:15 40:4 sitting 1161 11:7 start III 9:7 46:25 3:20 65:9 tripped (II 27:4 running ISI 25:14 13:1 24:12 25:4 47:16 telling (II 40:1 troublc 141 39:19 2S:16 25:17 58:21 25:13 25:18 25:21 started 1101 7:21 temperature III 22:5 39:22 39:25 42:12 64:12 26:10 29:15 29:19 10:8 19:6 35:10 temporary 141 38:23 trucking III 51:6 runs III 19:1 29:20 35:13 35:25 36:13 36:15 37:2 39:5 39:6 40:16 truCIII 4:7 salaricd III 7:17 36:4 36:24 52:1 50:22 51:11 57:22 TERM III try III 52:6 six 1'1 starts III 36:6 1:3 sareastically III 7:23 10:3 terms 121 17:11 trying IS) 13:21 34:13 43:1 48:17 50:19 statement III 60:2 S6:1I 34:6 36:18 50:10 sat (4) 9:14 24:6 skateboard III 15:3 statements (II 59:23 test III 8:19 8:19 54:20 37:22 43:4 Slate 1117:8 stay III 44:3 8:20 tumcd(11 6:20 saw 1'1 32:17 33:11 slid III 45:12 stenotype III 65:11 testificd II) 3:9 Twenty-rivc (I) 33:22 41:14 44:10 small (II 8:1 stepdad II) 6:4 testimony 1]1 51:17 37:14 56:10 Sncakcrslll 22:11 stepfather's (II 6:7 65:8 65:19 Twenty-two III says III 52:22 Snclbakcrl21 1:12 sticking 111 29:6 Tcxaco 141 48:11 59:10 schedulcd 121 41:1 1:18 still I"I 12:21 22:3 49:13 49:17 SI:I twice [21 56:24 56:7 SnOW(1122:12 36:4 44:9 52:5 third [II 48:5 57:8 schedulcs (II 60:21 social 111 61:15 S2:25 57:4 61:2 thought III 5:23 two 1151 4:5 6:20 school 121 8:7 Sollcnbergcr 121 stipulated III 3:2 18:20 27:4 31:4 10:3 13:9 13:9 8:9 6:15 6:17 STIPULATION 111 31:9 32:9 32:10 17:15 19:23 21:7 sealing (II 3:3 32:24 23:14 34:19 37:20 SOLYMOSIIII:20 3:1 42:23 43:9 45:7 seat III 23:23 Sometimes 121 55:13 stock III 44:15 three 1151 6:21 55:25 second 1101 4:6 55:18 46:11 6:23 9:9 9:10 Tylcnollll 18:3 24:24 27:6 stood III 10:8 10:20 13:7 39:1 somewhat III 12:21 31:7 16:24 17:4 19:2.1 types [II 53:14 . . Archivc Rcportmg ServlCCS (717)234-5922 Index Puge 5 Eric LePore v. Missy McGee Condenselt '"~ U - [sic] -, U(II 17:15 WCar(21 40:16 61:20 unablCII) 51:25 wcaring 121 2::10 undcr(]1 9:16 61:19 29:9 65:13 week ('142:24 55:5 understand ISI 3:24 55:8 56:24 57:" 6:22 29:10 31:15 57:17 36:19 weekcndlll 58:23 undcrstood (I) 4:6 weekcods III 58:19 Uni-Martl]1 33:23 wceks (S) 10:8 47:14 47:25 10:20 43:1 43:9 unlcSSll1 36:10 55:2 UPllll 10:8 13:4 wcighlll 59:9 19:23 20:2 22:12 wcighcdlll 45:1 22:19 23:4 24:6 wcight ISI 43:23 24:12 25:6 25:8 44:4 44:7 51:22 26:10 26:13 27:3 56:18 27:11 27:20 27:21 wcights 121 56:1" 28:3 2":20 28:21 29:18 30:5 30:6 56:20 30:24 31:7 34:2 Wcst(III:13 40:14 45:7 51:12 whatsocver(ll 32:1 54:7 54:10 55:16 wheel 1'1 25:22 55:17 25:24 25:25 29:16 upstairs II' 17:)7 29:21 29:22 29:25 usedl41 43:14 56:24 31:20 64:11 58:18 60:20 whercofll) 65:19 usually III 55:11 window (41 25:6 VallCYll1 8:12 25:8 25:24 45:9 varicd II) 11:14 windshicld 131 26: I various (2J 45:24 26:4 29:16 48:9 within III 65:17 vchiclc 1441 4:17 witncss (21 3:8 4:19 4:22 4:24 65:10 5:8 5:22 12:23 witncsscd 111 60:4 14:1 15:12 16:18 wood II) 7:14 17:6 17:6 17:9 word III 54:20 17:13 21:16 21:20 21:21 21:23 23:6 workcd 1101 10:4 23:9 25:4 25:11 11:17 11:25 46:15 25:14 26:11 30:8 46:2) 48:11 48:24 30:16 30:18 30:21 49:22 50:23 52:2 31:8 32:14 32:20 write (4)18:22 19:4 33:2 33:11 34:23 19:11 19:17 35:2 35:4 35:10 written I]) 51:15 35:11 35:13 35:25 52:21 60:14 36:2 36:6 36:11 '/TOng 141 13:23 37:4 18:21 33:1 37:24 vchiclcs III 16:19 XII) 2:1 vcrbalizc (II 3:21 X-rays 131 32:17 vcrsion 121 63:4 38:20 42:1" 63:5 ycarl61 4:24 6:20 Vcrtison 121 6:6 8:20 13:23 57:25 6:8 58:1 visit III 41:13 yctl21 8:15 24:21 VSIII 1:2 yourself (101 6:16 waiting III 41:18 6:23 28:3 2":5 waivcdlll 3:4 29:24 35:10 37:9 walk 121 43:5 43:10 38:6 50:7 57:11 walkcdlll 24:3 Zimmerman 12162:18 62:19 walking ISI 22:18 [siclll1 11:13 43:13 43:17 53:13 59:5 wants III 52:6 warehouse III 46:11 watch 121 63:17 63:19 WaynC(l1 6:2 Archive Reporting Services (717)234-5922 Index Page 6 f . E X H I B I T 8 ~ '" {~ , " -'-< ~ '-\ ......:- I ~ - ~ - --- ~ - "-- ------., I ~;; / ---- I . 11:----. ~ -l-F \ ~. . IIT\ . ~p \ \ '\ =- I, I - ~\ ('t : J (\f~ ) ::;l- ~ ~--, ~~, ~ ~ iY I t- , " ~ '7~ ~.- '~ I J~\ ~ --"\ "'--'0 \ ....-~\ . ',> r ~ '?~ f ",; , _~J [, L". it [)ol) ( A I .J " , , JJ. Ju) ~ . -. c:" '- " ..;, 1- " , , " '0 '" " , r-. I I.. r"',j .. t ;d. L~. " C) :~J t.' (.,.;" U '-' objective evidence of injury which had ultimately resolved leaving some slight limitation in ann function. Ultimately, the court held that the plainliff did not sustain a "scrious injlJry" and summary judgment was granted on behalf of the defendant. Washinl!ton v. Baxter,~, holds Ihat summary judgment may be granted in a limited tort case, utilizing the DiFranco and Dodson criteria, noting that summary judgment shall be granted if the evidence is clear and convincing. Hence, Washinl!ton reaffirms and adopts Pennsylvania's longstanding summary judgment test. In Washington, 3upm. the court noted the plaintiff was diagnosed as suffering contusions, sprains and strains due to a motor vehicle accident. He treated in the emergency room but was not admitted to the hospital following the motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff ultimately missed four or five days of work. His treating physician characterized his injury asjointarthritis or coalition in the right foot with the possibility that the plaintiffmight need an orthotic heel lift. Id, at 741. Plaintiff's physician also injected one shot of cortisone into the Plaintiff's right foot. Id, at 741. At the Plaintiff's deposition, the Plaintiff testified that he had foot pain approximately every other week but is ablc to perform his normal work duties and activities besides not being able to ride a lawn mower. Id. at 74 I, Ultimately, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision to grant summary judgment to the defendant based upon the limited tort issue. A copy of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's opinion in Washington v. Baxter is attached hereto, and marked Exhibit A. The new summary judgment rules mandate that the plaintiff, who bears the burden of proof at trial, put forth evidencc of facts, including experts reports, which demonstrate a triable issue to be 5 put before the jury. Pa, R.C.P. Rule 1035.2(2). The injuries sustained by the plaintiff in this case are even less "serious" than those sustained by the plaintiffs in Dodson or WashinlJlon. In the instant case, the Plaintiff broke his left foot. He went to the emergency room after the accident, was x-rayed and released. He followed up with Dr. Ronald Lippy who placed him in a cast for six weeks. Upon removal of the cast in March of 1995, Mr. Lepore was seen by Dr. Lippy on six occasions. Dr. Lippy prescribed Naprysn in August of 1995 and at that time placed the Plaintiff under a twenty-five pound lifting restriction. Plaintiffhad no treatment fonn November 2, 1995 until October I, 1997 for the left foot. On October I, 1997 he was scen again by Dr. Lippy and reported that he was employed by American Furniture and while attempting to unload a sleeper sofa it had been dropped on his left foot. Despite dropping a sleeper sofa on his left foot, Dr. Lippy opines that Mr. Lepore's current complaints of pain related to his left foot are the result of the motor vehicle accident of January 31, 1995. Even if this court were inclined to accept Dr. Lippy's opinion that Mr. Lepore's broken left foot which required six weeks of casting and follow up with Dr. Lippy on six occasions resulted in post traumatic arthritis and a "serious injury", the inquiry does not stop here. The Courts have detennined that what is significant is not the injury itselfbut the effect the injury has on the individuals ability to function. Mr, Lepore was obviously capable of working for American Furniture and perfonning thc heavy job responsibilities associated therewith. Dr. Lippy indicates in correspondence to Plaintirr s counsel dated February 17, 1998 that he 6 believes that the injuries which the Plaintiff sustained to his left foot and are permanent and impair his ability to walk and use his left foot. Dr.. Lippy renders this opinion despite the fact that hc has not actively treated the Plaintiff since November of 1995. As the records from Dr. Lippy's office reveal, Dr. Lippy did not see Mr. Lepore at all in 1998, he saw that Plaintiff one time in 1997 and not at all in 1996. Given these facts, Dr. Lippy's opinions are not credible. On November 30, 1998 the Plaintiff was examined by Dr. Lawrence S. Pollaek. A true and corrcctcopy of Dr. Pollack's report is attached hereto, and marked Exhibit B. Dr. Pollack notes that the Plaintiff did sustain a fracture of his left foot. Moreover, Dr. Pollack took x-mys in November of 1998 which reveal that the fractures are healed and that there is no evidence of post-traumatic P.rthritis. Dr. Pollack believes that the Plaintiff can work and function without any restriction relative to the accident. When deposed, Mr. Lepore indicated that with respect to limitations, he could not push weights with his legs, play football with his friends, or ride his bike as before the accident. These certainly are not life altering activities. Mr. Lepore did not sustain a serious injury as that term has been defined in the Court of Pennsylvania for purposes of establishing Entitlement 2 electing limited tort covemge. Numerous courts have granted summary judgment where plaintiffs have not met the requirements of the "serious injury" threshold, These cases, as hereinafter enumemted, were decided utilizing the DodsonIDiFranco criteria, subsequently adopted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Washinl!ton v. Baxter, SUDm. See Benedict v, Slifco. slip op. no, 94-3717 (Washington County December 26,1995 - soft 7 tissue injury and associated pain in the neck, back and headache do not rise to a "serious injury"); Steilzer v, Brown, A.D. 1994 (Crawford County January 19, 1996 -Iowcr back injuries, cervical injuries, knee injuries and sprains/strains and contusions and abrasions which resulted in an inability to perfonnjobs requiring prolonged standing or walking or repetitive or heavy lifting, straining or bending does not rise to the level of "serious injury"); Webb & Pender v, Laube, G.D. 93-8589 (Allegheny Co., May 3, 1996 - pain in lower back, neck and shoulder which was aggravated by walking, sitting, which led to inability to do exercises or play softball was not a serious injury, pennanent injury to the coccyx area which led to pain when silting and having a bowel movement was not a "serious injury"); Whitmore v. Sweitzer, 93-SU-03081-01 (York County, March 7,1996 - No testimony or medical reports to indicate accident caused plaintiff's alleged injuries in combination with only complaints of cervical pain do not rise to a "serious injury"); Yanuzzi v, Reed. No. 1995-C- 337 (Northampton County, July 9, 1996 - acute low back pain, post-traumatic headache, right rib strain and right knee sprain without severe limitation of bodily function is not a "serious injury"); Davies v. Rashomz, No. 93-05483-202 (Bucks County, September4, 1996 - fractured skull rendering unconscious with five-day hospitalization with return to normal activity within a month and a halfis not a "serious injury"); Flowers v, Smilh, No. 1145 Civ. 1994 (Monroe County, July 9,1996 - right elbow, neck, back and sciatic nerve injury with six-month work loss not serious as plaintiff has returned to work full-time and had not sought medical treatment for more than two years); Bell v. ~ No. 94-SU-4571-01 (York County, April 22, 1997 - multiple contusions, cervical strain and psychological problems does not conslitule serious impairment of a body function); Hassinl!er v. Gates, No. 4966 of 1993 (Lancaster County - May 9, 1997 - hernialed lumbar disc and lumbago 8 Exhibit A '. ~ l 734 Pa, 719 ATlu\STIC nt:I'OIITEn, ~d SEnlES ~:i preme Court, No. 004 M.D. Appeal Docket 1998, Cappy, J., held that (1) ultimaw dewr. minaUon of whether a limited tort elector sustained a serious injury. so as to pt~rmit recovery DC noneconomic damages. should be made by jury in all but the clearest of case" and (2) motorist's injury was not ,eriou,. Affinned, Flaherty, C.J., concurred and med opin. ion in which Zappala and Castille. JJ" joined, t, Appeal and Error *'93-1(1) On review of summary judgment matter, Supreme Court must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubts as to the c.'Ciswnce of a genu- ine issue of material fact must be resolved against the moving party, 2, Judgment *'185(2, 6) To withstand a motion for summary judgment. a nonmoving party must adduce sufficient evidence on an issue essential to his case and on which he bears the burden of proof such that a jury could return a verdict in his favor; failure to adduce this evidence establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, 3, JlIlkJnent *,181W Summary judgment will be granted only in those cases which are free and clear from doubt. 4. Appeal and Error *'863 Supreme Court's scope oC review in sum- mary judgment matter is plenary, 5. Statutes *'216 While 'tatements made by legislators during the enactment process are not di,pos. itive of legislative intent, they may be prop. erly considered as part of the contempomne. ous legislative history. 6, Automobiles ,,",251.19 Judgment <>=>181(3.1) Threshold determination of whether mo- torist who elected limited tort option in auto- mobile insurance policy sustained a serious injury in motor vehicle accident, so as to pennit recovery oC noneconomic damages. ~ not to be made routinely by trial court jud~ 00 motion for summary judgment, but is to' he len to jury unless reasonable minds could not differ on issue of whether serious injury has been sust:uned, 75 Pa,C.S.A, H 1702, 1705(d), 7. Judgment \l=>181(2) Even where there is no dispute concem_ ing the facts, a motion for summary judg-' ment should not be granted where those . facts support conflicting Inferences. ' 8. Automobiles <>=>251.15 , The "serious impairment of body func. , tion" threshold which must be met for limited tort elector to maintain action for noneco- . nomic loss arising from motor vehicle acci- dent asks (I) what body function, if any, was ~ impaired because of the injuries sustained in . a motor vehicle accident. and (2) was the impairment of the body function serious, 75 Pa.C,S.A. ~~ I.OZ, 1705(d), 9. Automobiles *'251.15 In determining whether the impairment of body function was serious, for purposes of the "serious impairment of body function" . threshold which must be met for limited tort elector to maintain action for noneconomid loss arising from motor vehicle nccident, sev: era! factors should be considered: the c.xtent of the impairment, the length of time thi impainnent lasted, the treatment required to correct the impainnent, and any other rele;:, vant factors, 75 Pa.C.S.A. ~~ 1702, 1705(d), 10, Aulomoblles <>=>251.15 Impainnent of body function need not be ; pennanent to be "serious," for purposes of : the "serious impairment of body function~ threshold which must be met for limited tort " elector to maintain action for noneconomic: loss arising from motor vehicle nccident. 7~ Pa.C.S,A. ~~ 1702.1705(d), : See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and def. inilions. II. Automobile. \l=>251.15 . Motorist who elected limited tort option in automobile insurance policy did not sustain' a serious injury in motor vehicle accident.. and thus, motorist could not recover nont?CO"' : J W ASJIlNGTON v. BAXTER Cltu.719 Ud 73J IPL '998) Pa, 735 " l :c. nomic damages; motorist's injwie.! as ding- nosed by emergency room physician were mild, mot",;st Wllll di"harged al\cr a Cello' hours, mot",;st missed only Cour or five shifts at both his full-time and part-time jobs in which he was required to perform most oC his work while on his Ceet, treatment Cor motor- ist's injuries was not Co'<lensive, and although some type of arthritis or coalition nfTected motorist's Coot, the injury seemed to have had tittle or no impact on motorist's perfor- mance oC his job functions and engagement in personal activities, 75 Pa,C,S.A. U 1702, 1705(d), James A. Nettleton, Jr" Lancaster, Cor Kenneth Washington, John Philip Stengel. Lancaster, Cor Robert L, Baxter, Jr, BeCore FLAHERTY, C,J" and ZAPPALA, CAPPY, CASTILLE, NIGRO, NEWMAN and SAYLOR. JJ, OPINION OF THE COURT CAPPY, Justice, The question presented in this appeal is whether summary judgment was properly entered against Kenneth Washington ("Ap- pellant"), a limited tort eleetor, in his action for noneconomic"losses arising out of an auto- mobile accident, Because we fmd that Ap- pellant has not presented sufficient evidence to show that he suffered a serious impair- ment oC a body function, and therefore has not sho\\'T1 he is entitled to recover nonCCo. nomic damages, we affirm the entry oC sum- mary judgment against Appellanl I. As this is:ll summary judgment maUer, we view Ihe record in the light most f3vorable to Appel. lanl as Ihe non-moving party. and all doubts as 10 the e:'(i~lence of a genuine issue of material (:let must be: resolved against the moving party. Pcnns.\'h'atlia SlaU U'lj\'f~rsily v. Coun,y of Ct!ntrr. 532 Pa, 1.2. 1.-1- H5. 615 A,2d 303. 30. (J 992t 2. Deposition testimun~' indicates that the analge. sic w.:as Ihuprofen. 3. The suhtal.:ar joint is below the lalus in the fOOl. H. Winter Grirlllh. Complttt GuicU 10 Sports In;". tit's (1986). 4. Two different documents. purportedly generat. ed b~ Dr. Brellm. ""'ere appended to Plainlirrs Respomc 10 Ddendant's Motion for Panial Sum- m.:ary Judgment. As nOled by the trial coun The record reveals I that on April 15, 1994, Appellant was operating a motor vehicle which was slnlck by a vehicle driven by Robert L, Baxter ("Appellee"), As a result oC the acciden~ Appellant suffered il\iuries which included cervical strain or sprain, cuts and contusions, as well as an Il\i1lry to his right CooL The il\iury to the Coot was diag- nosed as a mild sprain or strain, Sl Joseph Hospital Emergency Room Records, 4/151901, He was treated at a hospital emergency room that day, received a prescription- strength analgesic.' and was discharged with- in a Cew hours, Id.; Deposition, 5105195, at 2:), " Immediately alWr the accident, Appellant was unable to work at his two jobs, both of which required him to perform the bulk of his work while on his feel At his first job, where he worked a forty-eight hour a week schedule, he was unable to report to work Cor approximately Cour or live days, Deposition, 5105195, at 39, At his second job, where he worked once a week for three or four hours, Appellant did not report Cor work for approx- imately one to two months, Deposition, 5105195, at 51. Approximately five months after the acei- ~ent, Appellant began treating wiU. Dr. Douglas Bream, Dr. Bream indicated that there was "some type oC subta1ar joint' ar- thritis or eoalition in the right Coot," and that Appellant might need to utilize orthotic heel lifts, Attachments to Plaintiffs Response to Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, 10112/95.' As part of Appellant's below. these documents from Dr. Bream were not sworn to and did not conualn a statement relating to unsworn falsincation to authorities; one of the documents docs not e...en bear the signature: of Dr. Bream, These documents there. fore could not be used to support Appellant's position thilt summary judgment should not be enlered against him D.J they were not competent evidence. Su Pa.R.C.P. 1035 (1995 venion) ("any pany may mo...e for summary judament on the pleadinas and nny depositions. ..nswen to inlerroaalories. admi"ions on me and suppon. Ing affidlwilS."); Pa.R.C.P. 76 (Dc:flnltion of OOar. Cidavit"). Yel, the trial court nonetheless consld. ered these documents In renderins iLS decision on the summary judgment mollon. In liSht of this action of the trial coun, and as we can find no indication in the record that Appellee ever 736 Pa. 719 ATLANTIC n.;PORTER, 2d SEItlES .' treatment regimen, Dr. Bream admini.wred one injection or cortiaone into Appellant's rooL Dr, Bream aJ.o stawd that Appellant had limited range or motion in one or the joint:! in hi> right root; he did not, however, comment on whether that limitation wa.. min- Imnl or severe, Id,' Appellant Wll:l depolled approximately one year after the accidenL At that time, Appel- lant testified that the injury still caused him pain roughly every other week, and that his ankle w.. oflen swollen. Id. at 43. Further- more. he stated that he w.. able to perlonn hi> nonnnl job r"po""ibillties l1S he had been able to prior to the lICcidenL Deposition, 5/05195, at 44. Finnlly, the only lISpect or hi> life to which Appellant could point to .. being changed .. a result or the accident Wll:l that he could no longer use a lawn mower that had to be pushed, but i""wad must u"" a riding mower, Deposition, 5/05195, at &I, At the time or the accident, Appellant was i""ured under an automobile i""uranee poliey is.sued by State Fann Mutual Automobile I""uranee Company, Under thi> policy, Ap- pellant had elected the Fmited tort option pursuant to the provisio"" or t 1705 or the Motor Vehicle Financial Respo""ibillty Law ("MYFRL"),' Section 1705 states in perti. nent part that [elach person who elects the limited tort. alternative remai"" eligible to seek com. pensation for economic loss sustained in 3 motor vehicle accident us the consequence or the rault or another person pursuant to objeclrd 10 the considtr31ion of Ihese documents, we, 100, shall consider these documc:n15 in n:n. dc-ring our decision. 5. Although AppcU:ml repealedl)' characlerius his injuric\ as consilling or a broken bone in his fOOl, su Appellant's brid at 6. there if no indica. tion in the: record thai any of his physicians expressed such an opinion within 3 rc:a!oon3ble degrer of medical cClUinl)'. Dr. Bream did stale in an unsigned. unsworn nole written abouI one of his Initial consuhalions wilh Appellanl thnl Ihere "could be n.n old fra(lure" in Appellant's right fuot. Yet. there was no further indication as 10 wheLher Dr. Bream hnd indeed concluded that Ihere was an old fracture in Appellant's right fool. As Dr. Bn:3m never expressed :m opinion. within a re3sonable degree of medic31 Cer1ainl)'. thai :I bone in Appellant's foot had been broken. we .ue unable to assume the c.,islen,e of such a rradure in e,amining Ihe propriety or grnnting applicable tort law, Unless the injury SUI' tained is a serious injury, each per>On who i> bound by the limited tort. election shaD be pre<luded from maintaining an actJori ror any noneconomic 10M, . . , .,.. 75 Pa.C,S. t 1705(d),T The MYFRL defin.. ".erious injury" lIS "a personal injury result- ing in death. serious impainnent or body function or pennanent serious disfigure:. menL" 75 PaC,S, t 1702, ThUll, while an insured who hoo elected the limited tort 01'0 tion remains eligible to seek compen..tio~ ror economic (0.. sustained in a motor vehicl~ accident caused by the negligence or another, the insured will be precluded from maintain- ing an action ror any noneconomic 10Me.! unless the insured can show that his injuries CroM the .""rious injury" threshold, At the close or w.covelj', Appellee filed .: motion ror partial summary judgment, lLS- serting that Appellant's status lIS a limited tort. elector precluded his recovery ror non- economic damages becawe his injuri.. were not ""riOWl. The tria1 court, relying on the Superior Court's decision in DtXbOTl v, E1l'tV, 445 Pa.Super, 479, 605 A2d 1223 (1995) allo- calur gmnled, 544 Pa. 608, 674 A2d 1072 (1996), granted Appellee's motion ror partial summary judgmenL Relying on the Superi: or Court.'s DtXbon deci>ion, the trinl court concluded that a dewnninalion regarding the seriousness or a limited tort elector's injurieS must initially be made by the trial court judge, Tr, cL slip op, at 3, The trial court " Appellee's summary judgment molion. Su Com- mo"w~J.lltll v. Slo/r:fus, 462 Pa, 4J. J17 A.2d an. (1975) (a medical opinion Is sufficient 10 support .. finding when the opinion is civen within a. rt:lSonable deCfee of medkal cerulnry). 6. The SlalUlory language relotinl to Lhe limited lort option was enacted as par1 of the 1990 omnibus amendmenlS 10 the MVFRL Act 6 1990. F,b, 7. PL. I, No, 6.75 Pa,C,S, ~ 1701" irq. ("Act 6"). ~ 7. Seclion 1705(1.1) also provides certain e.tetP. tlons to the limitations placed on ton recovery. FOf eumple. one or these Cliceptions provides thol a limited ton elector who h,u not suffered a stnow Injury may sliII recover ror his nontco: nomic loues when: he was injurttl while a pas.- senger in a vehicle other than a privllle pa>>tno lef malar vehicle. We note thlll none of these t_,ceptlons. howe\'er. is llPplicable in this cue. l J WASHINGTON v. DAXTER CUeu71tA..ld7JJ (1-a.1"') w. Unless the injury sUs- us injury, each person who limited tort election shall m mainWning an action mic IOSI.". d).' The MVFRL defines "a personal injury result- 'oua impainnent of body anent serious disfigure- , f 1702. Thus, while an lect.ed the Umited tort op- Ie to seek compensation Wned in a motor vehicle the negligence of another, precluded from maintain- any noneconomic losses can show that his injuries ury" threshold, , covery, Appellee filed a summary judgment, as- t's sbitus as a limited ed his recovery for non- because his injuries were , court, relying on the cision in DodJcm v, Elvey. A.2d 1223 (1995) alio- P.. 608, 674 A.2d 1072 lIee's motion for partial Relying on the Superi. decision, the bial court ermination regarding the 'ted tort elector's injuries ade by the trial court op, at 3, The trial court emphasized that in making this detennina- tion, the "'judge should not focus on the injury but should focus on the nature and "ltent of plainlifl"s impainnent as a conse. quence of the injury.''' Tr, cL slip op, at 4 (citing DodJon, 665 A.2d at 1231), The trial court stated that the facts of this matter, when taken in the light most favorable to Appellant as the non-moving party, estab- lished that Appellant suffered from continued pain, inflammation, and "arthritic changes" whIch may necessitate the wearing of orthot- ic heel lifts. Tr, cL slip op, at 5, The trial court went on to note that since the accident, Appellant had to use a riding mower rather than a push mower, Finally, the bial court noted that after a brief absence following the accident, Appellant had returned to both of his pre-accident positions of employment with no reduction in responsibilities. The bial court concluded that these facts. as a matter of law, did not constitute a serious injury and therefore granted Appellee's mo- tion for partial summary judgmenL Appellant filed an appeal from that order to the Superior Court; the Superior Court quashed that appeal as interlocutory. The matter was returned to the bial court where an arbitration awani was entered which set. tled all of the remaining issues. At that juncture, Appellant filed his appeal with the Superior Court, again challenging the trial court's detennination that as a matter of law he had not suffered a serious injury, The Superior Court, in a brief memoran- dum opinion, affirmed, Relying "lclusively on its DodJrm opinion. the Superior Court stated that the threshold question of whether Appellant's injuries were serious was one for a trial court judge to answer prior to the matter being presented to a jury, The Supe- rior Court agreed with the trial court that Appellant had fniled to establish that he had suffered a serious injury and therefore of- finned, Appellant subsequently filed a peti- tion for allowance of appeal, and we granted review. [\-1] In ..'Glrnining this matter, as with all summary judgment cases, we must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubts as to the e:dstence of a genuine issue of material fact .udgment motion. Su Com. IS, 462 Po, 43, 337 A2d sn inion Is sumcienc to support opinion Is given within a medical cCrblnty). age relating to the limited tted as part of the 1990 u to the MVFRL. Act 6 ~o. 6. 75 Po,C,S, ~ 170 I " .0 provides certain excep- tS placed on lort rc..:ovcl)'. these exceptions provides ;tor who has not surTered .. ill recover ror his nonecG- ~ was Injured while 3. p,u. her lhan a privalt' passen- 'e note that none or these IS applicable in this cast. Po. 737 must be resolved against the moving party, Penmylvania State University v, County o{ Centre, 532 Pa, 142, 143-145, 615 A.2d 303, 304 (1992). In order to withstand a motion for summary judgment, a non.moving party "must adduce sufficient evidence on an issue essential to his case and on which he bears the burden of proof such that a jury could return a verdict in his favor, Failure to adduce this evidence establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law," Erinl v. Patriot-News Co., 544 P.. 93, 101-102, 674 A.2d t038, 1042 (1996), Finally, we stress that summary judgment will be granted only in those cases which are free and clear from doubL Mark3 v. Tasman, 527 P.. 132, 589 A.2d 205 (1991). Our scope of review in this matter is plenary. See PhiUip. v, A-Best ProducU Co., 542 P.. 124, 129-131, 665 A.2d 1167, 1170 (1995). The lower courts here determined that the Superior Court's DodJcm opinion mandated the entry of partial summary judgment in this matter, DodJcm has also been cited as the controlling authority in numerous other lower court cases concerning noneconomic damages claims raised by limited tort electors, See, e.g., Kelly v, Ziolko, 705 A.2d 868 (Pa.Super.CLI997); Wal/" v, Scheckler, 700 A.2d 532 (Pa.Super,CLI997); Leomlli v, McMullen, 700 A.2d 525 (p..Super,CLI997). Decause of the importance which DodJcm holds in this case in particular, and in this area of the law in general, we believe that a thorough review of that opinion is appropri- ate at this juncture, Mkhael Dodson ("Dodson"), a limited tort elector, was injured in an automobile acci- denL Dodson filed a complaint, requesting inter alia noneconomic damages, The defen- dant filed a summary judgment motion, al- leging that Dodson's injuries were not seri- ous, The DodJon trial court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, concluding that determinations regarding the seriousness of a Umited tort elector's injuries must be made by bial courts at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings in order to effectuate the legislature's intent to lower insurance costs, The bial court further rea- soned that if this issue were to be submitted 738 Pa, 719 ATLANTIC REPORTER, 2d SERIES to a Jury (or resolution in all cases, the legislature's purp05e (or crafting Section 1705 would be thwarted, The trial court then reviewed the record and concluded that Appellant had not sustained a serious impair. ment o( a body CUnction, Dodson appealed this determination to the Superior Court, which alTumed. The Dod. son court agreed with the trial court that the legislature, in crafting Act 6, had intended to minimize insurance cost.'!, The Superior Court declared that in order to stay true to the Legislature's intent, the trial judge must make the threshold detennination o( whether there has been a serious injury in all cases where the parties agree on the objective evidence relating to the nature and the .... tent of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff, Dodson. 665 A.2d st 1232-1233, The Superi- or Court in Dodson "'Pressly rejected the position, espoused by our sister court in Michigan, that [tlhe question of whether the plaintiff suf- fered a serious impainnent of body CUnc. tion must be submitted to the bier of (act whenever the evidence would cause rea. sonable minds to differ as to the answer, This is true even where there is no materi. aI factual dispute as to the nature and IIltent of the plaintifl's injuries, /d. at t230 (quoting DiFranco v, Pickard, 427 Mieh, 32, 398 N,W.2d 896, 900 0986)). The Dodson court argued that to (ollow the DiFranco approach to this issue would "allow non.serious injury cases to proceed to a jury [and] would frustrate the legislature's goal of reducing litigation and the cost of insurance," /d. 665 A.2d at 1231. Judge (now Justice) Saylor dissented vig- orously in Dodson, asserting that summary judgment is appropriate only in the clearest of cases. He asserted that even if the par. ties were to agree on the objective medical evidence, they could still disagree on whether that evidence established that the plaintiff suffered a serious impairment of body func. tion, /d. at 1237 (Saylor, J., dissenting), Judge Saylor believed that where the parties do disagree on this issue, such a determina. tion should be left to the jury in all but the clearest of cases. /d. The lower COl1l'U in th: matter sub . apparentiy credited the Dodson rationil,l that the legislJ1ture, via Act 6, dictated thaftii cases such as the matter sub judic~ 1M threshold determination of whether a Partlo. ular set of injuries constitutes a serious iml' pairment of body function is to be made routinely by the trial court. Thus, in revi"",: ing whether summary judgment was propei_ Iy entered in this matter, we must first eX: amine Act 6 to ascertain whether it doei contain such a directive, ' [5] It is axiomatic that in construing stat' utory material, we first ..umine the Ian~ of the statutA! in question, J( the IJ1nguage lzi question is unambiguous, we may not avoid it.'! plain application under the pretext tfuit we are remaining faithful to the legislature'. intent, See I Pa.C,S, f 1921(b). Where tJi~ statute is ambiguous, however, we determii,,; , the intention of the Genenil Assembly by considering, among other matters, the occa- sion and necessity of the statute and the contemporaneous legislJ1tive history. I Pa. C,S, f 19211c). While statement.'! made by .. legislJ1tors during the enactment process are ' not dispositive o( legisJative intent, they rray ; be properly considered as part o( the con- ': temporaneous legislJ1tive history, Common~, wealth v, Wilsmi, 529 Pa. 268, 275 n. 4, 602 . A.2d 1290, 1294 n, 4 (1992). The language at issue states that where an individual who has selected the limited tort option cannot establish that he has sustained , a serious injury, then that individual "shall :' be precluded from maintaining an action fo~ any noneconomic loss".," 75 Pa,C,S: f 1705(d), We do not see this language ... an unambiguous directive that the trial judge, and not the jury, should make th~ threshold detennination of whether the plain; .1 till'has indeed suffered a serious impairment of a body CUnction, O( course, the language cited does plainly restrict a limited tort . elector's recovery to those situations where ' he can establish that he has sustained .1, ' serious injury, However, the statute is ut: terly silent as to which entity-the judge or ' the jury-is entrusted with making that threshold detennination. Thus, as the p1aiIi . language of the ltatute offers no directive oa . whether the judge or the jury should make W ASIIINGTON v. DAXTEn Pa, 739 elt...l.' A.ld 733 lPa. 1"1) this decL,;on, we must now ascertain the nullifying the Scanlon Amendment; the Loe- intent of the legislature m enacting the limit. per Amendment passed by a wide margin, ed tort option. Loeper Amendment, No, A-llOO. See gerJel" When the legislature rec.umined the aUy Levi'latit~ Jounlal-StllaU, No. 44, Dc- MVFRL in the late 1980s, it was apparent cember 11, 1989, pp, 143ll-1479, that UlC cost. of aut?mobile insurance ~ad Another attempt occurred when Represen- been steaddy mereasmg.ove: the preceding tative Stephen Freind offered an amendment Years. One of the legISlative purposes In at th H e-S te C' C 'tte , . .' e aUs ena onlerence omml e enacting the IUDlted tort option as part of Act M" hi h lik th S I Am d . . . eC\.Ingw C tee canon en men.., 6 was to lower .nsurance premIUms by reduc. Id h d th' thre h Id d ' . .. wou aYe mn e 18 S 0 etemuna. mg the number of small cJauns for pam and " 'th. d to d 'd . th' th b I . l.Ion one lor e JU ge eel e. ~uffenng; e ~tent was ~t y owenng t990DOO394 00394DGS:AO 2/01/90 /118, U\Surance premIUms, automobile owners who ',. I . had been pushed out of the insurance market Re~resentative Fremd s amen~ment did ?ot because of skyrocketing costs could once ~chleve ~ vote at ~e Co~m~ttee "mee~~ again obtain affordabb motor vehicle insur- ec~~se e ,was una e'dto othtain a sdecon ance, See Legis/alive JO'Unlal-Hou... No, on 15 motion to consl er e amen ment. 11, February 7, 1990, pp. 202, 223, Thu~, both ho~es of t,he General Assembly . " , , considered making the ISSue of whether there Whd~ fashlomng the limited tort op~on, had been a serious injury a purely legal the legISlature spent a great deal of time detennination which could be resolved only , balancing the rights of the limi~d tort by the trial court, and specifically rejected elec,tor to recover for ?on~conomlc losses placing such a requirement into Act 6, ag:unst the goal of lowenng InSurance costs, In striking such a balance, the legislature We gain further insight into the question rejccted attempts to insert language which of whether the detennination of serious im- would have made the question of whether a pairment of a body function Is to be left to limited tort elector had suffered a serious the jury from the fact that the legislature irijury one for the trial judge to detennine modeled the threshold language of the limit- ,rather than the jury, One such attempt was ed tort option after similar language in Mich- made by Senator Scanlon on December 11, igan's no-fault statute,' Se. uvi'/alive 1989 when he introduced an amendment Journal-H"",., No, 42, June 13, 1989, pp, which would have altered the limited tort 986-987, In drafting Act 6, our legislature option so that it read that "[tlhe detennina- was no doubt aware of DiFranco, IlUpro, the tion of whcther an injury constitutes a seri- CDSe in which the Michigan Supreme Court ous irijury shall be a question of law and not held that the Michigan statute required that a question of fact." Scanlon Amendment. A- the threshold detenninaUon of whether the 4129, Printer's No, 2829, Senator Loeper plaintiff had suffered a serious impairment of immediately introduced his 01Vll amendment body function was to be len to the jury.' the matter IlUb judice the Dod.!oll rationale a Act 6, dictated that in atter IlUb judice, the on of whether a partic- nstitutes a serious im- nclion Is to be made urt. Thus, In review' judgment was proper- tter, we must first ex. rtain whether it does e, tlutt in construing stat- t examine the language 'on, If the language in ous, we may not avoid under the pretext th:it hfu1to the legislature's f 1921(b), Where the however, we detennine General Assembly by ther matters, the occa. ( the statute and the , Iative history, t Po. e statements made by enactment process are slative intent, they may cd as part of the con- , e history, Cornman; Pa, 268, 275 n. 4, 602 992), ue states that where an leded the limited tort h that he has sust:lined n that individual "shall ainlaining an action for 055,...n 75 Po.C.S, t see this language as rcctive that the trial jury, should make the, on of whether the plain,; I d a serious impairment f course, the language ,'estrict a limited tort those situations where Jt he has sust:lined ~ , ever, the statute is ul~ ;..< :h entity-the judge or . oed with making that, on, Thus, as the plain e offers no directive on , the jury should make The compar.:ablc Michigan SUllule st:llcs thaI: [a] ~non remains subject to tort liability (or noneconomic loss cawcJ by his or her owner. ship. maintenance, or use DC a mOlor vehicle only if the injured penon has suffered death. serious impairment of body function. or per. m."ncnt serious disfigurement. Mich. (omp.l.1ws ~ SOO.3tJ5(1), 9, WI: nole that Ih!: Michillan Icgislalun: retenlly amended ~ SOO.J 135 10 provide that the iuuc or seriuu!> injury is one for the lrinl court judge 10 decide in either of the following situ:llions: finl. where Ihen: is no (aclual dispute conccmina: the n:Uurc and c:\tcnt DC the penon's injuries; and seconJ. where then: is " (actual dispute concern. ing the nalure and e:.otent o( thc penon's injuries. bUl Ih~ dispulc is not m:Herial to the delennina. lion of whether lhe person has sufTered a serious impainnenl of body function or pcnnanent serio ous disfigurement Se~ Mich. Compo Laws ~ 500.) 135(2) (amendment efTective March 28. 1996), The (act th:n the Michigan legislature has cho. sen 10 enact this amendment In 1996. howe...er. is irrelevant in delennining what our legislature intended when it crealed Pennsylvunia's limited ton oplion in 1990. In ascenalnlng what our legislature intended when it ustd the Michigan law as a modd in enacting Act 6. we must limil our examination to the st:lle of lhe law as it e:\isted then. In 1990.lhe Michiaan statute upon which our limited Ion option w:u based did not conlain Ihis language dilTClinllhat the detcnni. nation of "~rioU5 injury" was to be made. in ~ 740 Pa. 719 ATLAI;TIC ItEI'OItTt:It, 2d SElm;s 16,7) Upon review, we conclude lhal the legislative hislory do.s nol support lhe view that the threshold determioation of whelher a serious injury has been sustained is to be made by the trial judge, In fact. we nnd that the legislature, by follUlving the Michi. gan model, indicated that the tradlUonal summary judgment standard wu.' to be fol- lowed and that the threshold determination was not to be made routinely by a trial court judge in matters such as the one before us now, but rather was to be len to a jury unless reasonable mInds cuuld not differ on the issue of whether a serious injury had been 'sustained," [8-tO) Now that we have decided that the ultimate determination should be made by the jury in all but the clearest of cases, we turn to the question of what that determina- tion consists. Act 6 does not provide any assistance to us in defining llscrious impair. ment of a body Cunction"; nor do we find any elucidation of the meaning of this term in the legislative history. We do,' however, find that the DiFronco definition of "serious im- painnent of body Cunction" is a sound one and hereby expressly adopt it. That defmi- tion states tha~ The "serious impainnent of body Cunction" threshold contains two inquiries: a) What body Cunction. if any, was im- paired because of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident? certain circunut:mces, by the trial judge. Fur- thermore. the DiFranco court interpreted the prc-1996 amendment as entrusting the delennl. n:.llion of whether plaintiff had surrcrcd Do serious impairment of a body function to the jury. We. arc, of course, fully cognizant of the pO!oSi- bility that our Icgisl3ture could determine th3t lhc policy concerns which motivated the Michi. gan legislature to amend its statute arc of equal concern in our Commonwealth and therefore Act 6 should be Amended In a cumparilble fashion. Yet. amending a statute is a uniquely legislati\le function. one which would bt improper for us to underlOlke. Therefore. we conclude that the re. cent amendments to the Michigan statute are not relevant to o-..Jr re~olulion of this mailer. to. We note that the Superior Courl"In DodfOn conlcndc:d that the DiFranco court "abandoned a traditional summary judgment analysis." Dod. SOH. 665 A.2d It 1230 The Superior Court app3r. endy btlieved th3t DiFranco misapplied sum. mary judgment law when it held that e\len where the panies agree on the nature and extent of b) Was the impainnent of the body Cunc: tion serious? The focus of these inquirieS' is not on the Injuries themselvt!s, but on how the injuril'S affected a particular body function. Generally, medical t.oolimony' will be needed to establish the existence extent, and permanency of the Impair; ment. . .. In determining whather the 1m; painnent was serio.us, severnl factors should be cunsidered: the ...tent of the impainnent, the length of lime the Impair; ment lasted, !be treatment required to cor- rect the Impainnent., and any other rele- vant factoMl, An impairment need not be permanent to be serious, DiFronco, 398 N,W.2d at 901.\1 Now we must apply this s,tandnrd to the matter IUb judk.., As noted IUpro. all infer- ences must be resolved in favor of Appellnnt US" the non-moving party, and the maUe~ must be submitted to a jury unless we can say reasonable minds cuuld nol differ on the' conclusion that Appellnnt cannot recover on the evidence adduced, As to the first factor in the DiFmnco test, it is the use of Appei- lant's right foot that bas been impaired, The n..'<I. question to be answered is whether this impainnent of the use of Appellnnt's righ\ foot was serious. The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to Appellant., shows that Appellant was immediately treat- pl.ilintiffs injuries. the case should still go 10 the jury where fCa.sonablc minds could diHcr o\lcr whether the facts established that the plaintiff had suITered a serious Impainnent of a body function. Contrary to the Superior Court's assumption. l the DiFranco court's decision is in accord with summary judlment law. E\len where there Is no dispute concerning the facts. a motion for swo' mary judgment should not be: granted where those facts can support connicting inferences. 73 AmJur.2d SlImmary Judgmntl ~ 27. Whert the facts can support connkting inferences. it cannot bt said that the ca<< is free ami dcAI' from doub1 and Ihus ripe for summary judgmCflL &e !tIa,b. suprll. <i II. We note that although the Superior Court in Dodson rejected the DiFranco coun's approach on the l5.5ue of whelher the judge or the j~ should detennlne Ihe threshold iuue. it did adoptlhe DIFranco standard on what constituteS a "5trious impainnent of body function". [)od- ,on, 665 A,2d at 1233-1234 n, 16, " . lOt o( the body (uno; ous o( these Inqulri.. ' s themselves, but On ,ted a partioular body , medical testimony tablish the existence ency o( the Impair: ining whether the 1m. .us, leveral (aoto... I: the extent o( the :h o( time the Impair. ment required to COr. and any other rei.. ,ainnent need not be -us. this _tandard to the loted rupl'll, alllnCer. In (avor o( Appellant 'ty, and the matter , jury unless we can ,uld not differ on the ,t cannot recover on As to the first (actor is the use or Appel: been Impaired, The ,..red is whether thiS or Appellant's right tidencc, when viewed ,rable to AppeUan~ , .s Immediately treat- .c should still go to lhe linds could differ ova shed that lIle plaintiff : mpairment or a body If Court's asJumplion. sian is in accord with Even where there is no CU, a motion ror sum- . lot be granted where l:onnicting inferences. 'lIdtm~"' ! 27. Where ,nlcting inrerences. It ;a.se: Is (ree and crest Ir summary judgmenL i the Superior Court In.. "CO court's approach he judge or the jUl)' .tShold issue. It did d on what constituu:s .ody function", [)oJ- n.16. WASIIlNGTON v. UA.XTElt CIlIu71t A.ld 7]) IrL 1"1' ed in n hospital emergency room. where his injuries were diagnosed as consisting of con. lusions. spr.uns, and strains; he was dis- charged from the emergency room within a rew hours, He missed rour or live days or work at his rull.time job, and missed approxi- mately rour or his weekly shifts at his part- time joh. Approximately sLx months after the accident, one or Appellant's physicians .tated that there appeared to be some type or joint arthritis or cODlltion In the right root, and that Appellant might need to utilize or. thotic heel un.; his physician also injected one shot or cortisone, Finally, at his deposi- tion approximately one year after the ooci- dent, Appellant Indicated that although his root oaused him pain approximately every other week. he was still oble to perConn his work duties and, aside from having to utilize I riding mower, he was able to engage in his nonnal daily ootivities. [111 Even when this evidenoe is taken in the light most ravorable to Appellant as the non, moving party, we find that reasonable minds could not differ on the conclusion that Appellant's Injury was not serious, Appel- lant's injuries as diagnosed by the emersenoy , room physician were mild and he was dis- . charged after a rew hours. Furthennore, he missed only rour or live shifts at both his , Cull-time and part-time jobs, where he was , required to perConn most or his work while on his feeL Also, the treatment for his , injuries was not extensive, Finally, although IOme type or arthritis or coalition is o/Tecting , one or the joints In Appellant's right roo~ the injury seems to have had little or no Impact , on Appellant's perConnance or his job func- " tions ond engagement in personal octivities. . Thererore, although the evidence, when tak. en in the light most favorable to Appellant, does show that he was injured in the acci. dent, the Impainnent resulting from that in. . jury is clearly de minimis. Appellant, however, is or the opinion that " he has adduced sufficient evidence or a serio 12. Appellant also bri~ny alludes tu the argumtnt th::u a limit~d ton e1tctor's conslilutionnl right to a jury trial will be denied if this coun were 10 sanction tht gr.lnting of summary judgment against a limited tort elector who has not shown that he has sustained n Strious injury. This argument is specious. Ndthcr the Pcnns)h::mla Pa, 741 ous Impainnent o( body (unction so that the issue Ihould go to a jury, In arguing this, AppeUant foouses primarily on Dr, Bream's pronouncement that there was some type or arthritis or coalition in Appellant's right root; apparently, Appellant uaumes thot this evi- dence alone is _ufficient to bring the matter to a jury, Appellant oeems to have misap- prehended the noture o( the inquiry here. The question to be answered is not whether Appellant has adduced _ufficient evidence to show that Appellant lutTered on1/ injury; rather, the question is whether Appellont has shown that he has _utTered a .mow injury such that a body (unction has been seriously Impaired, Clearly, it is insufficient ror Ap- pellant to _how that there has been some injury-no maUer how minor-in order to avoid the entry of summary judgment against him, Were we to rail to require Appellant to adduce evidenoe that not only was there an injury, but that it was also serious, berore allowing him to present his ease to the jury, we would make a mockery out or the summary judgment standard, Al- though Appellant has introduced evidence thot there is some type o( arthritis or coali- tion in his (oo~ he has (ailed to show that this injury has hod such an Impact on him so that it constitutes a serious injury, There(ore, we reject Appellant', argument For the roregoing reasons, we afllnn the order or the Superior Court.12 , I " " I FLAHERTY, C,J" files a concurring opinion which is joined by ZAPPALA and CASTILLE, JJ, FLAHERTY, Chier Justice, concuning. I t is initially ror the trial court, not the jury, to decide whether a plaintiff has suf- rered a "serious injury" whioh, for purposes o( 75 Pa.C,S, ~ 11000d), allows suit to be maintained ror noneconomic damages, suoh as pain and sutTering, where limited tort coverage has been elected under an auto nor the United States Constitutions grant an ab. solute right to a jury lriill in a civil action. Where a plaintiff has failed 10 establish that he has a cause or aclion. lhe constitutional right to a jury tria.] is not violated when that plainlirrs suit Is dismissed. I " exhibit B Michael F. Mitrick, D.O. Orthopaedic Surgery Hand Surgery Mitrick Pollack Orthopaedic Associates 1750 FilUl Avenue Suite 201 York, PA 17403 Phone: 717-848-2297 Fax: 717-848-2941 Lawrence S. Pollack, D.O. Orthopaedic Surgery Foot & Ankle Surgery : Law Offices Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins Ann Margaret Grab, Esquire 110 S. Northern Way York, Pennsylvania 17402-3737 RE: Eric Lepore v, Missy McGee Cumberland County No, 97-481 Social Security No.: 163-68-0783 Dear Attorney Grab: On November 30th, 1998, I saw Eric Lepore in our office for an Independent Medical Evaluation per your request. He attended this evaluation by himself with no one accompanying him, Throughout the entire history and physical examination, one of our office staff, Michele Gettel was in attendance, For review, were medical records from Dr, Ronald Lippe, a deposition of Eric Lepore dated March 19, 1998, Dr, David Zimmerman, and Seidle Memorial Hospital, This patient relates a history that on January 31 st of 1995, he sustained an injury to his left foot. At that time, he was working for an arcade as an attendant. He had been working for this arcade for approximately six months, After hours, he was sitting on the hood of a vehicle that took off with him on the hood, Apparently, this palient jumped off of the hood and his left foot was run over by the front tire. At the time, the patient was sitting on the driver's side of the vehicle, From the deposition that was taken, the patient was unsure if the tire actually ran over his foot. He was able to get into his vehicle and drive home. He did place ice on his foot and elevated his foot. Apparently, he then presented to an UrgiCare Center pnd the history he offered was that he dropped a cinderblock onto his left foot, He was placed in a temporary cast and referred to Dr. Lippe. He states he fabricated the story so that he would not get the driver of the other vehicle in any type of trouble, On February 1 st, 1995, the patient did see Dr, Lippe, The history at that time revealed that while the patient was at home, he dropped a cinderblock on his left foot. Apparently, x-rays were obtained, which were unavailable for review, According to Dr, Lippe, these x-rays revealed a fracture of the base of the first and second metatarsals, The first metatarsal was somewhat comminuted and the second metatarsal was in satisfactory position, The patient was placed in a cast. Over a seven to eight week period, his cast was changed and he was placed into a new cast, secondary to the cast being too tight. He : RE: Eric Lepore Page 2 Continued: was taken out ofthe cast after a seven to eight week period, He has had no other treatment to date. He is currently still seeing Dr, Lippe on an as needed basis. He last saw Dr, Lippe approximately seven to eight months ago, This patient is currently working for Montgomery Ward's, where he has been working for approximately 1 1/2 weeks, He is in Shipping and Receiving and does work 22 hours per week, Prior to that he was working at Merchani & Company Antique Pottery as a warehouseman, He worked there for approximately seven to eight months, picking orders. Prior to that, he has had multiple jobs. His current activities outside of work include working on cars and body work, He states he is unable to lift weights at the gym, secondary to too much pressure on his foot. He is unable to run or ride his bike, He states he is able to walk for approximately one half hour, stand for a half hour and he is unable to drive a standard transmission vehicle, He is complaining of pain with walking, He states he has frequent swelling. At times, there is a popping sensation in his foot. He denies any prior left foot injuries or any other injury to his left foot. He also denies any numbness and tingling, It appears that from the medical records that the patient was seen again by Dr. Lippe on November 2nd, 1995, It was noted that the patient complained of occasional pain in his left foot, mostly about the medial aspect of the mid fool. He was placed on Naprosyn 500 mgs. On November 10th, 1995, he was again evaluated, Apparently, while walking, he felt a pop. I do not have any indication that the patient was seen by Dr. Lippe after November 10th, 1995, From the medical records reviewed, the patient was evaluated on October 1 st, 1997 by Dr, Ronald Lippe. Apparently, this patient sustained an injury while moving a sofa, Apparently, he twisted his left knee and struck the top of his left foot. It was noted at that time that this patient had swelling in the dorsum of his left foot. There was no ecchymosis or dramatic swelling. Anti-inflammatory medications were recommended and he was told to follow up on an as needed basis. It is interesting to note that Dr, Lippe did mention in his report that Eric was well until live days ago, when he injured himself at work, This would suggest that the patient did not have any difficulty in regards to his left foot at that time, As mentioned, the patient was not seen in Dr, Lippes office for approximately a two year period. The patient denies any medical problems, He is not taking any medications at the present time. He has undergone right ankle surgery in the past. He is right hand dominant, smokes one half pack cigarettes per day and has allergies to penicillin, as well as erythromycin, . ," ., . : RE: Eric Lepore Page 3 Continued: Physical examination reveals that this patient is a 22-year-old white male, 5'9", 155 pounds. I did limit my examination to both lower extremities, The patient was first examined in a standing position. He did ambulate with a normal gait. He was also able to heel and toe walk without any difficulty. He was able to squat without any difficulty, I then placed this patient in the sitting position, Tactile s~nsation was intact. Dorsalis pedis and posterior tibial pulses were palpable. Range of motion of the ankle, hind foot, mid foot, fore foot, knee and hip were normal, There was a negative Tinel's over the posterior tibial nerve, superficial peroneal nerve, or deep peroneal nerve, There were no unusual markings on the patient's left foot. There was no evidence of ecchymosis or swelling about the patient's left foot. He did have subjective areas of tenderness to palpation about the great toe metatarsal, He seemed to have more tendemess about the shaft of the metatarsal, He had very minimal tenderness to palpation about the tarsal metatarsal joint. The patient had excellent capillary refill to the left foot. There was no evidence of any atrophy of either lower extremity, He had equal strength to both lower extremities. There was no evidence of reflex sympathetic dystrophy, The patient did undergo x-rays in our office of his left foot. These x-rays revealed normal bony architecture. There were no gross abnormalities noted, There are no acute fractures or dislocations, There is no evidence of post traumatic arthritis of the tarsal metatarsal joint of the left foot. ASSESSMENT: 1. Status post fracture base of first and second metatarsals of the left foot dated January 31st, 1995, 2, Status post contusion of the left foot in September 1997, DISCUSSION: This patient apparently fabricated a history ofa cinderblock being dropped onto his left foot. He did sustain a fracture of the base of his first and second metatarsals according to Dr, Lippe's medical records dated February 2nd, 1995, The patient then changed his history, stating that he jumped off of the hood of a vehicle that was moving, Certainly, the action of jumping off of a vehicle could cause a fracture of the metatarsals, He also states that his foot may have been run over by the front ties, I do find it hard to believe that if a car was in motion and he was sitting on the driver's side of the vehicle hood and jumped away from the vehicle, how his fore foot and mid foot could be run over by the vehicle's tires in that his feet are actually pointing away from the vehicle, If anything, one would suspect that the posterior aspect or his heel would have been struck by the car tire. . ,~ . ." . " RE: Eric Lepore Page 4 Continued: In any event, the patient did sustain an injury to his left foot. I do feel he was treated appropriately with cast immobilization, I do not have his originallilms to review, But films that were taken in my office do reveal that his fractures are we\1 healed and there is no evidence of post traumatic arthritis, This patient has had multiple jobs over the years and seems to be tolerating them we\1, It is interesting to note that the patient was not seen by Dr. Lippe for approximately two years fo\1owing his last visit of November 10th, 1995, It is also interesting that Dr, Lippe did mention that when this patient was seen on October 7th, 1997, he stated that "Eric was we\1 until five days ago", At that time, Mr, Lepore did sustain a contusion to his left foot when he dropped a sofa onto his left foot. In the office today, the patient did have some subjective tenderness to palpation about mostly the shaft of the great toe metatarsal. Taking a\1 of this into account, it is unknown whether the patient actually sustained an injury when he jumped offofthis moving vehicle's hood, As mentioned above, I find it very hard to believe that the car tire did run over his fore foot or his mid foot. According to Dr, Lippe, he did sustain a fracture of his first and second metatarsals, These did heal uneventfu\1y, as expected, His injuries do not seem to be significant. He does not appear to have lost any function of his left foot, secondary to his injuries, One would certainly expect that if he did have significant limited function of his left foot and disability that he would be undergoing more treatment to his left foot, which he has not over the years. In my opinion, I feel this patient can work a normal duty job without restrictions, There is no evidence to support the fact that the patient sustained a significant orthopedic injury, Certainly, with an in-tra-articular fracture which involves the-tarsal metatarsal joint, patients can have a flare-up of arthritic symptoms, I do not have any x-rays to support that the patient even sustained an intra-articular fracture, Certainly, this patient has not sustained a "serious injury". I do not feel the patient has sustained a loss of function to his left foot as a result of this accident. I do not feel that this patient has been functionally impaired, If you are in need of any further informatltnt, please do not hesitate to contact me. These opinions were rendered within a reasonable degree of medical certainty. Sincerely, I ;tltl Lawrence S, Po\1ack, D,O, LSP:bas LAW OFFICl:'i 5NELDAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE the direction of Dr. Ronald W. Lippe, an orthopedic surgeon, which lasted until November 10, 1995. Dr. Lippe initially diagnosed Plaintiff as having fractures of the first and second metatarsal bones. A temporary cast was placed on Plaintiff's foot at Seid1e First Care. A permanent cast was placed on Plaintiff's foot by February 1, 1995 which needed to be replaced one week later with another permanent cast that was subsequently removed on March 13, 1995. Due to Plaintiff's continued pain and swelling, Dr. Lippe on August 7, 1995 placed a twenty-five pound weight lifting restriction on Plaintiff indefinitely. X-rays taken on August 7, 1995 revealed post-traumatic arthritis in the area of Plaintiff's first tarsal-metatarsal joint. Dr. Lippe has indicated in a report dated February 17, 1998 that Plaintiff's condition was most likely permanent and that he is impaired in his ability to walk and use his left foot. Plaintiff was therefore restricted by Dr. Lippe in rigorous activities and spending a great deal of time on his foot as his pain allowed. On September J, 1999 Defendant filed a Motion For Partial Summary JUdgment claiming, inter alia, that Plaintiff has not sustained a "serious injury" which would permit Plaintiff to maintain a claim in this action for pain and suffering or other non-economic damages. On September 20, 1999, Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion For Partial Summary Judgment was served upon Defendant's counsel. This Brief is submitted by -2- LAW Off.Cl'. SNI.:LUAKHf, BHENNL:MAN a SPAHE: Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Washinqton. See Furman v. Shapiro, 721 A.2d 1125, 1126 (Pa. Super. 1998). Second, none of the cased cited by the Defendant are appellate cases binding on this Court. , Third, only one of the nine cases cited by Defendant was decided after the Pennsylvania Suprerne Court's pronouncement in Washinqton. It is telling that Defendant ignores in her Brief the appellate cases addressing the very issue before this Court which were decided after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Washinqton. In Furman v. Shapiro, supra., the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment and remanded the case for trial, concluding reasonable minds could differ as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury. The plaintiff in Furman was diagnosed with a bulging disk. She had pain that radiated into her left leg which prevented her from walking more than one block at a time, lifting heavy objects and bathing her daughter. Although the plaintiff could continue to do household chores and could drive, she reduced her work frorn full-time to part-time due to her inability to remain in one position for an extended period of time. Her doctor described her condition as perrnanent. Her back problems persisted more than three years after the accident h3d occurred. In Kellv v. Ziolko, 734 A.2d 893 (Pa. Super. 1999), the Superior Court for a second time since the Washinqton decision addressed the issue of whether a limited tort plaintiff was -5- LAW OrnCl:~ SNELDAKER. BRENNLMAN 8: SPARE precluded from recovering non-economic losses and again reversed a trial court's grant of a partial sumrnary judgment. The plaintiff in Kellv received out-patient treatment immediately after a motor vehicle accident and later underwent physical therapy. He was diagnosed as having a herniated disk which caused back pain when he engaged in physical activity or sat for long periods of time. Although the plaintiff in KellY was able to return to work only three days after the accident, he was placed on minor limitations with respect to lifting heavy objects. He claimed he could not engage in recreational I activities such as bike riding, motorcycle riding and hunting and his doctor testified that his condition was most likely permanent. 2 Plaintiff in the case sub ;udice, like the appellant in KellY, initially received out-patient medical treatment. Plaintiff was first placed in a temporary cast and then a permanent cast for six weeks. Also like the appellant in Kelly, Plaintiff was placed on a lifting restriction. Due to this limitation and his inability to lift, Plaintiff was unable to 2In the Commonwealth Court case of Hames v. The Philadelphia Housinq Authority, 1999 WL 680314 (No. 1412 C.D. 1998, Pa. Commw.) the court on Septernber 2, 1999 reversed the grant of a motion for summary judgment by the trial court finding that whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury was a matter for the jury to decide. -6- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, KEITH O. BRENNEMAN, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I have on the below date, caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Brief in Opposition to Motion For Partial Summary JUdgment to be served upon the person and in the manner indicated below: FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID. ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Ann Margaret Grab, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Soloymos & Calkins 110 S. Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Date: October 8, 1999 ~tH~~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. 44 West Main street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff Eric M. Lepore l.AW OfFICr.'. SNELDAKER. BRENNEMAN a SPARE -- ...... IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ERIC LEPORE, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW plaintiff, NO. 97-481 CIVIL TERM v. MISSY McGEE, Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWERS/RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORIES/REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF SET NO. 1 To: Eric Lepore c/o Keith o. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER AND BRENNEMAN 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA l7055 The Defendant, Missy McGee, by her attorneys, GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, Esquires, hereby demands that plaintiff answer the following interrogatories under oath pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil procedure 4005 and pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4006 within thirty (30) days from the service hereof. These interrogatories shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental answers if affiants obtain further information between the time the answers are served and the time of the trial. Also, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. Rule 4009, as amended, plaintiff is requested to produce for inspection, examination and copying, at ~ ,...., the offices of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, 110 S. Northern Way, York, Pennsylvania 17402, not later than thirty (30) days after service of this Request, the documents herein described. Definition of Terms THESE DEFINITIONS FORM AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE FOLLOWING INTERROGATORIES: A. "And" and "Or" means "and/or," and the singular form shall be deemed to include the plural and vice versa. B. "Describe" or "Description" when used with reference to any conversation, communication, statement, meeting, or discussion or any act, transaction, occurrence, happening, instance, or event, means to provide the following information: 1. The subject matter and substance of that which took place; 2. The time, date and place thereof; 3. The identification of each person who participated therein, or who was a witness thereto; and 4. The identification of each communication or document which refers thereto or which was prepared or made during the course thereof or as a consequence thereof. C. "Documents" shall mean the originals, and all non- identical copies (whether different from the originals because of 2 .""'"'\ --.... notes made from such copies or otherwise), of all written, printed, recorded or graphic matter of every kind and description, including all attachments or addenda annexed thereto, whether inscribed by hand or mechanical, electronic, microfilm, photographic or other means, as well as phonic or visual reproductions, in the possession, custody or control of Plaintiff, including by way of amplification and not limitation: contracts, invoices, correspondence, notes, drafts, reports, plans, recordings, diaries, desk calendars, interoffice and interoffice memoranda, memoranda for file, memoranda of telephone conversations, and minutes of meetings or conferences. D. "He" and any other individual, regardless of sex, otherwise apply. E. "Identify," "Identification" or "Identity" means to masculine pronoun includes any to whom the interrogatory would provide the following information: 1. When used with referenCE to a natural person, state his full name and present or last known business and residence address, his last known or present business affiliation, and his position in business affiliation at the time of the transaction, occurrence, event, happening, or matter in question. 3 '-... .-.. . 2. When used with reference to any entity other than a natural person (e.g., corporation, partnership, joint venture or association), state: (a) Its full names; (b) The address of its principal place of business; and (c) Its organization form and its purposes, primary business or activities. 3. When used with reference to an oral communication: (a) State the place at which and the date on which such oral communication occurred; (b) Identify each person making such oral cornmunication, the person to whorn it was made and each other person who was present (in person or by telephone) when it was made; (c) State the subject and substance of such oral communication; and (d) Specify, in accordance with paragraph (b) below, each document which relates or refers to each such communication or which was prepared and made during the course hereof or as a consequence thereof; F. "Person" means any natural person or any entity other than a natural person, including, but not limited to, sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations, associations, joint 4 .~ ,..." . ventures, co-ventures and any other legally recognized entity of any description whatever, as well as all divisions, departments, affiliates, subsidiaries, or other sub-units of the foregoing entities. G. "Specify" when used with reference to a "document," calls for: 1. The nature of the document (e.g., letter, contract, chart, memoranda); 2. Its date; 3. Each author (and, in different, each signer) thereof, and each person to whom the document was distributed; 4. Its subject matter and substance; 5. Its present or last known location or custodian; 6. The disposition of such document if it was but is no longer in your possession or subject to your control; and 7. Any other information necessary to enable the custodian to locate the particular document and necessary for use in a subpoena duces tecum or in a demand for the production of the documents under Rule 4009 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. I. "Date" means the exact day, month and year if ascertainable, or, if not, the best approximation (including the relation of other events) . 5 ~ ~ .. 8. Give the names and addresses of all hospitals where you have been either as an in-patient or an out-patient during the ten (lO) years prior to the accident complained of and, as to each hospital, give: (a) Dates of admission and discharge; ANSWER: 1980, exact date unknown. (b) Nature of the ailment or illness for which you were hospitalized; ANSWER: Foot surgery as described in Answer to Interrogatory 5. 9. Of your own knowledge, what injuries did you receive in the accident involved in this case? ANSWER: Broken foot which consisted of fractures of the first and second metatorsals, arthritis, foot was badly bruised. 10 INTERROGATORY 12. ANSWER: Dr. Ronald Lippe orthopaedic Institute of PA 3916 Trindle Road camp Hill, PA 17011 Dr. David zimmerman 6 Market Plaza Way Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 seidle Memorial Hospital Seidle First Care c/o Capital Health system 17 s. Market street P. o. Box 8700 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8700 Seidle First Care treatment, 1/31/95 outpatient treatment charge for service: $205.65 orthopaedic Institute of PA dates of treatment: 2/1/95; 2/6/95; 2/22/95; 3/13/95; 5/15/95; 6/19/95; 8/7/95; 11/2/95; 11/10/95 charge for service: $1,170.00 Dr. David Zimmerman one examination - date unknown charge for service: unknown . ,"'" r-, 20. Do you know of any person who witnessed the alleged occurrence or who has any knowledge of the relevant facts concerning the nature, character and extent of the inj uries, disabilities, damage9, losses or expenses sust3ined by you as a result of the occurrence and for which claim is being made in this action? ANSWER: Yes. 21. If so, for each person, state: (a) The name and last-known address; (b) A detailed description of the relevant facts known; (c) Whether written or otherwise recorded statement has been taken, and, if so, the name and address of the person taking the statement and the person in present custody of the statement; (d) If you will do so without a Motion to Produce, attach a copy of each statement to your Answers to these Interrogatories. ANSWER: See attached page. 15 ....... ,-' (f) State whether there are any provisions, such as medical pay clauses, first party benefits, uninsured motorist's coverage, underinsured rnotorist' s coverage, or other insurance payment provisions, which will provide benefits to a party injured by your vehicle and set forth any conditions, exclusions or other relevant terms concerning such additional benefits, including the amount(s) of coverage; (g) The number of vehicles covered, if applicable. (h) Your legal domicile at the time insurance was applied for; (I) Your legal domicile at the same time each policy of insurance (or any endorsement thereto) was issued; (j) Did you elect full tort option or limited tort option? ANSWER: Not applicable. 28. Has the insurance company or companies involved raised any issue as to your coverage for damages arising from the aforesaid accident? If so, please set forth in detail the basis for such issue, reservation of right or denial of coverage. N/A 20 ......, 38. State the total amount of bills you have incurred for medical treatment as a result of the motor vehicle accident upon which this lawsuit is based? ANSWER: In addition to those bills identified in Answer to Interrogatory 12, there are the following additional bills known of at this time: 1. A. z. Ritzman Associates, Inc.; 1/31/95; $23.00 26 ---. .- Please produce the following documents: 45. All photographs in the possession, custody or control of the Plaintiff, counsel for Plaintiff, or any other person or entity acting on behalf of the Plaintiff, including any insurers for the Plaintiff, showing, representing or purporting to show any vehicles, locales, instrumentalities, persons, and any and all other matters related to the subject matters of this litigation. 46. All diagrams, sketches, drawings, plans, measurements, or blueprints in the possession, custody or control of Plaintiff, counsel for Plaintiff, or any other person or entity acting on behalf of said Plaintiff, including any insurer of said Plaintiff, showing, representing, or purporting to show any of the instrumentalities, locales, persons or other matters involved in the incident which forms the basis of Plaintiff's Complaint. 47. All statements, signed statements, transcripts of recorded statements or interviews, recorded statements if not transcribed or any statement of recorded statements if not transcribed verbatim taken of any parties, persons, or witnesses as part of an investigation of the happening or cause of the incident in question, conducted by, or in the possession of Plaintiff, Plaintiff's attorney, insurers, or anyone else acting on behalf of the Plaintiff. 29 - , /-.. ~ , 48. All expert opinion, expert reports, expert summaries, or other writings of experts in the possession, custody or control of Plaintiff, or his/her attorneys or insurers who are expected to testify at trial, which relate to the subj ect rnatter of this litigation and the incident in question. 49. All documents prepared by Plaintiff, or by any insurers, representatives, agents or anyone acting on behalf of Plaintiff, except his/her attorneys, during an investigation of any aspect of the incident in question. Such documents shall include any documents made or prepared up through the present time, with the exclusion of the mental impressions, conclusions, or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense, or respecting strategy or tactics. (NOTE: As referred to herein, "documents" includes written, printed, typed, recorded, or graphic matter, however produced or reproduced, including correspondence, telegrarns, other written cornmunications, data processing storage units, tapes, contracts, agreements, notes, memoranda, analyses, projections, indices, work papers, studies, reports, surveys, diaries, calendars, filrns, photographs, diagrams, drawings, minutes of meetings or any other writing (including copies of the foregoing, regardless of whether the parties to whom this request is addressed is now in the possession, custody or control of the original) now in the 30 " ~, possession, custody or control of Plaintiff, his/her former or present counsel, agents, employees, officers, insurers, or any other person acting on Plaintiff's behalf.) 50. I f not otherwise covered by the above Requests, the complete claims/investigation/subrogation (file(s) of any insurers of Plaintiff, dealing with the incident in question. with the exclusion of the mental impressions, conclusions, or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense, or respecting strategy or tactics. 51. All documents in the possession, custody or control of Plaintiff, Plaintiff's counsel, insurers, or anyone else acting on Plaintiff's behalf, dealing in any way with the injuries. damages and losses sustained by Plaintiff, other than those documents supplied by Plaintiff's counsel to Defendant's counsel. This should include, but not be limited to, all medical bills, medical records, medical reports, correspondence, any and all other bills and documents relating to medical treatment, hospitalization, medication, appliances, lost wages, etc. 52. If you are maintaining a claim for irnpairment of earning capacity, please produce copies of your Federal income tax returns for past six (6) years. 53. Please produce your W-2 (wage and tax statements) for the past six (6) years. 31 IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA BRIC LBPORE, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 97-481 CIVIL TBRM v. MISSY McGBB, Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDBD AND NOW, this CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE / c2'/"uay of August, 1997, I, Robert A. Lerman, . Esquire, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, Esquires, hereby certify that I have, this date, served a copy of Notice to Take Deposition of Plaintiff, Brie LePore by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE 44 West Main Street Mechaniesburg, PA 17055 Attorney for Plaintiff GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS BY: J& i?c ( ( /::.,.0"---___ ROBERT A. LERMAN Supreme Court I.D. No. 07490 mlc/mcgee.dep.z BY: U/t())} )2 ( ANN MARGARET GRAB Supreme Court I.D. No. 55986 Attorneys for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 Telephone No. (717) 757-7602 3 >- C') i;; 0; N ;5 i;' .5 ul0 i- -1; .);.;.,. c..')'" ..' ~~~i tfl,! - ,~- '"1~ ~S .::r ~i;fn ':::Ie. - .:):Z: (.!J -'-dJ a:y' '." F- :::> die- .a ~ .- ::5 O' u IN THE COURT OF COI\'lMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY LEPORE t r Vs. NO. 97481 CV ~ MCGEE CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). Date: 3/9/98 ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE 110 S NORTHERN WAY </~I '<J '. "--.... '\ .~ YORK, PA 17402 717-757-7602 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL J,EGAT. REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISS'I'ON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) 335-3590 By: Heide Collins File n: M238007-01 09.'l11:99 IIEJl H:25 F.\L1.l1-2W 657J Cl11B co PROTHnSOT.\RY PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (MuSt be typeWritten ard subnitted in dupl.icate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: pleilSe list the within matter for the next ~t eourt. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entUe caption must be stated in full) 11 , Eric Lepore ( Plaintiff) vs. Missy McGee ( Deferxiilnt l ~. 97-48l Civil 19 Illl TQT"m 1. State matter to be a:t9Ued (i.e.. plaintiff's rrotion for new tr:ia1, defendant's denur'r'E!r to cCI\tllaint, etc. I : Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 2. Identify oounsel ...ro will argue case: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Ann Margaret Grab Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA l7402 3. I will l'oOtlly all parties in writing within bio days that this case has been listed for ~t. (al for plaintiff: Address: (b) for deferdant: Address: 4. ArgUTCllt eourt Date: October 13, 1999 S"ptember 1, 19'JI! Ii;. \ ~(, '- )1.tt /1) rJ Attorney for .)e~~ a:lt Ann na:::garet Grab Esquire Do1ted: ~ , - OFFICE OF TilE SHERIFF CU~r "I'Y JAM 30 8 06 ~M '91 PEHHS'{LVANIA C :" i~ ~ ,~~. E , I I , , en , - I , , . III I ~l , , , 0' III , I , , I , , III 0 , , Ql' , , III r- , e-l , , ... , , , , , , , .+l , ...: , , C Ql I I , Cl , , '.-4' , .. , IlIQlo( , >1 , , ): Ekll< , , , , '.-4' , , I Ill' Ql+l , ul , - , ..:I: C CIl . co :~ : Ql , , Ql , , C DIN ...' , k Ql , ...: QlCklll :e col , 8. , k..-4 :l CO :~ , Cl , '.-4' ..,' , u , >: llllll,c, Ii , Ql , :E1Ilr- :< , ..:I :E , rn '.-4, , .....' , , u' . UOl , 01: , :>. , , o +l..-4 '" , : U , , III C , , III , , , ~ I '.-4 III , , .cQlIll- , , k , , +l:K.cr- I , III '.-4 , , , I :E I , ..-4 U'" I I I , Ql....Ql..... , I , I I :.:....:E- I , , I I ~ ~.. .\ , . . .~, . :>- ..:r ~ ~ 0 b !S! ::l~ :J ~,. '.". l':f..~' :l:: ::..)~ 'J_ ... a.. ")~ c ". ,.<;: '7\: '... ~.'ln 0.. JZ w~: I -1.;2 r::J'I' 0::: Ufe LJ..-'" a.. ::] 1"- oq ~ t5 0'\ a 0'\ '.., '- :'-.1 .l: ',! ',. ,;.'.' ','. :i,' ". .,.... . . ., . . '. "," "', '. . , .' .10.... "r .' "'/';: ...;.,,;.~{?/,.,;:', '.. ':",'" '._~'~' ',' .'/'1 '.... -:: . ''',,1. .;,' ".. , ~ '. \,,' ,:: ',.,.. , . - ~ ; , ''\ . .,.. .. '..). IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ERIC LEPORE, CIVIL ACTION - LAW plaintiff, NO. 97-481 CIVIL TERM v. MISSY McGEE, Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 1lth day of May, 1999, I, Ann Margaret Grab, Esquire, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, Esquires, hereby certify that I have, this date, served a copy of Answer of Defendant to Plaintiff's Interrogatories (First Set) by United States Mail, addressed to the party or :/' attorney of record as follows: Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA l7055 Attorney for plaintiff t~ ~ t_~....1 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS n: ItA ANN MARGARET ESQUI Supreme Cour 1.0. # 55986 110 South Northern way York, Pennsylvania 17402 Telephone: (7171 757-7602 Attorney for Defendant, Missy McGee mcgee. int 3S IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY LEPORE Vs. NO. 9?-4Bl CV MCGEE CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE certifies that: l. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(sl attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(sl is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(sl is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(sl has been received, and 4. The subpoena(sl which will be served is identical to the subpoena(sl which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(sl. Date: 4/21/98 ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE 110 S NORTHERN WAY YORK, PA 17402 717-757-7602 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT {'" , ((( /t~r>f'-.. , ~~ File #: M239212-01 "~J\ INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (2151 335-3590 By: Margaret Basiura IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY LEPORE Vs. MCGEE No. 97481 CV TO: KEITH BRENNEMAN, ESQ NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND TIlINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(sl identical to the one(ol attached to this notice. You have twenty (201 days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. Date: 3/21/98 ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE 110 S NORTHERN WAY YORK, PA 17402 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (2151 335-3590 By: Margaret Basiura Enc(s) : Copy of subpoena(sl Counsel return card File #: M239212 ~TIl Of' PaHlYLmnA <XlJNl"i OF ~ 9748l CV Fi Ie No. LEPORE VS. MCGEE 51 RPtlF'NA TO PRCO n:' DOCl.tENTS aI THl If3S FOR 0 I SOOYERY PlJlSUANT TO Rt.l.E 4009.22 WILLIAMS GROVE AMUSEMENT PARK. . ,. , (NlIllll of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this s\Jlpoena, you are ordered by the COU"t to prod.lce the following doeunentl\ or things: TO: - **SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM** at -MEDH'IIT. T.lmIlT. REPRODUCTIONS ST PHILA PA 19135 INC 4940 DISSTON (Address) " o. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the dOCunenU or procilce things requeste<i h, this s\t)poena, together with the certificate of <XI11lliance, to the party making thi: request at the adcress listed above. You have the ri!flt to seek in advance the res~ 1< cost of pr'll!>aring the copies or prodJcing the things sou!fIt. .f you fail to produce the docunents or things required by this subpoena within twent~ (20) days after its serv~ce, the party serving this s\bpoena may seek II court orde'. ocrrpell;ng you to CXlTPly with it. THIS Sl&'OENA WAS 1SS1..ED AT Tlt:: RE<U:ST a: Tlt:: F<X.LCWINCi PERSON: IW'E: ANN GRAB, ESQ ADORESS: 110 S NORTHERN WAY YORK PA 17402 (215) 33::> n12 TELEPH:lNE : SlPREI'E CXUlT 10 . 55986 '1)Ef'E1ttm1'i' ATIORNEY FOR: DATE: ~ q.lq~L Sell I of the Ccu.t Division Deputy (Eff. 1/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA LEPORE Vs. No. 9748l CV MCGEE CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: WILLIAMS GROVE AMUSMENT ANY EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS, EARNINGS, LEDGER SHEETS, TIME CARDS REVIEWS, ATTENDANCE SHEETS, ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS AND REPORTS AND PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS, WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION CLAIMS MADE, ANY W-2 WITHHOLDING TAX FORMS, AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO: NAME: ERIC LEPORE ADDRESS: 624 WAYNE AVE MECHANCISBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/09/76 SSAN: 163680783 CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES OF TIlE RECORDS WILL BE ACCEPfED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. County of: CUMBERLAND MLR File #: M239212-01 I I , II'l C' II'l Ul 0 '" ~ r- oO el .-t .... C III ~I .51 llllllllC Elollloo I ~, III... .-tl ~ 10, C tI') ..ex) ~ '"I ..., C tIlN >1 - I IIICIolIl'l .", III III J .-tl Iol'" =' exl ~ UI Iol III .", llllO.c1 < 8- ~ >1 :EUlr- .-t' u .", . UOl exll III :E U' 0'" '" \D .,.: ... , Ul C , I, :>, , .cllllO- r-' U Ul , ...:a.cr- , OIl '" Ul , '" U.-t Iol '" I III.,. III r- I ~ ~ :E I 1oo:.,.:E- I , l2. As a direct factual and proximate result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of Defendant aforesaid and of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff as made reference to in Paragraph lO, above, Plaintiff has developed ~ost-traumatic arthritis, is limited in the type of employment he can engage in for which he would otherwise be suitable due to weight limitations in the amount he can lift and his previous active lifestyle has been substantially limited and impaired since the time of the accident set forth hereinabove. l3. It is believed and therefore averred that Plaintiff's post-traumatic arthritis as well as the weight limitation imposed upon his activities and the substantial limitation in his active lifestyle are permanent. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Eric Lepore demands judgment against Defendant Miss McGee in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with costs of this action. SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C. By: t''' . 11U#-- Kelth O. Brenneman, Esqu re 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA l7055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff Eric Lepore LAW Of"FICES SNELEJAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARE: Date: March 4, 1997 -4- J r I ,. CI r''': ". I u~( , t: t. fL, I I, Ie I ., I :. " r- u c:- I the motor vehicle operated by Defendant, conversing with Defendant and a passenger in said motor vehicle while said motor vehicle was at a complete stop. On the contrary, it is averred that on the aforementioned date and time, Plaintiff may have been intoxicated and was behaving in a belligerent, unusual or erratic manner when he climbed upon the hood of the motor vehicle in which the Defendant was situate. By way of further answer, it is averred that Plaintiff's presence upon the hood of Defendant's motor vehicle was uninvited and unsolicited and that Plaintiff refused to remove himself in response to Defendant's numerous requests. 6. Denied. It is denied that on or about January 31, 1995, at approximately 8:45 p.m., Defendant operated a motor vehicle in such a reckless, careless and negligent manner as to drive said motor vehicle forward withouc any warning or notice to plaintiff and while Plaintiff was still sitting on the hood of the motor vehicle, causing Plaintiff to immediately leave the hood of the motor vehicle while said vehicle was moving and land on the ground to the left side of said vehicle, whereupon the left front tire of said vehicle, while under Defendant's operation and control, ran over Plaintiff's left foot, causing the alleged injuries as set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint, On the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant acted carefully, lawfully, properly, and prudently with due care under the circumstances and that at all times relevant, Plaintiff may have been intoxicated and was behaving in a belligerent, unusual or erratic manner when he climbed upon the hood of the motor vehicle in which the Defendant was situate. By way of further answer, it 2 recklessness of the Defendant, the Plaintiff sustained injury, and it is averred, to the contrary, that at all times relevant, Defendant acted carefully, lawfully, properly and prudently with due care under the circumstances. The remaining allegations of Paragraph No, 10 with respect to Plaintiff's specific injuries alleged are denied in that after reasonable investigation Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and strict proof thereof is demanded. 11. Denied. It is denied that solely as a direct, factual and proximate result of the aforementioned negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant, the Plaintiff sustained injury, and it is averred, to the contrary, that at all times relevant, Defendant acted carefully, lawfully, properly and prudently with due care under the circumstances. The remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 11 with respect to Plaintiff's specific injuries alleged are denied in that after reasonable investigation Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and strict proof thereof is demanded. 12. Denied. It is denied that solely as a direct, factual and proximate result of the aforementioned negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant, the Plaintiff sustained injury, and it is averred, to the contrary, that at all times relevant, Defendant acted carefully, lawfully, properly and prudently with due care under the circumstances. The remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 12 with respect 5 to Plaintiff's specific injuries alleged are denied in that after reasonable investigation Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and strict proof thereof is demanded. 13. Denied, It is denied that solely as a direct, factual and proximate result of the aforementioned negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant, the plaintiff sustained injury, and it is averred, to the contrary, that at all times relevant, Defendant acted carefully, lawfully, properly and prudently with due care under the circumstances. The remaining allegations of Paragraph No. 13 with respect to Plaintiff's specific injuries alleged are denied in that after reasonable investigation Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff together with costs of suit, By way of further answer, Defendant asserts the following: NEW MATTER Defendant's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint as set forth herein above in paragraphs 1 through l3 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. l4. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. 6 l5. Plaintiff's Complaint may be barred by applicable statutes of limi tat ion . l6. At all times relevant, the Plaintiff may have been intoxicated and/or under the influence of alcohol. l7. At all times relevant, the Plaintiff was acting in an unlawful, improper, careless, reckless and negligent manner in complete disregard for his safety. l8. Plaintiff assumed the risk of any injuries and damages he sustained. 19. Plaintiff's recovery is barred or diminished in accordance with the application of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 20. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages. 2l. Plaintiff is bound by a limited tort option under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and is precluded from bringing this litigation. 22. Plaintiff has not sustained a serious injury as defined under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and is not entitled to recover for the injuries he allegedly sustained. Plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any, were not caused as a result of the incident involving the Defendant's vehicle. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in her favor and against Plaintiff together with costs of suit. 7 -.. ,!I C,' ,. cj illl ~ C'I t,: '. ". C , ".:1 (..1' " .. I r U. . ,j ,', .. ..- .' f- \,...-' ,::" LAW Of'f'ICtS SNELDAKER. BRENNEMAN 6: SPARE Pa.R.C.P. 1029(dl. To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff's Complaint may be barred by applicable statutes of limitation. 16. Denied. It is denied that at any time relevant to the matter set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint that Plaintiff was or may have been intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol. l7. Paragraph 17 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff was acting in an unlawful, improper, careless, reckless and negligent manner in complete disregard for his safety. l8. Paragraph l8 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. l029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff assumed the risk of any injuries and damages he sustained. 19. Paragraph 19 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is -2- LAW OFFiCeS SNCLDAKER. BRENNEMAN 8: SPARe denied that Plaintiff's recovery is barred or diminished in accordance with the application of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 20. Paragraph 20 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. l029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages. 21. Paragraph 21 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. l029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff is bound by a limited tort option under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and is precluded from bringing this action. 22. Paragraph 22 of Defendant's New Matter contains an unwarranted conclusion of law to which no response is required by this party; therefore, same is deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.p. 1029(d). To the extent a response is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff has not sustained a serious injury as defined under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and is not entitled to recover for the injuries he sustained. It is further denied that Plaintiff's -3- l injuries and damages, if any, were not caused as a result of the c incident involving Defendant's vehicle. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant in his favor as set forth in his Complaint and that Defendant's Answer and New Matter be stricken. By: SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. c. J4~ Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 West Main street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff Eric Lepore Date: April 22, 1997 LAW O,.,ICES SNELDAKER. BRENNEMAN 6: SPARE -4- ",~;~. - . . . . ' , I' . ,",-""! " ..----.; .. , ," ~;;.l'j.',~.;' 1'- .~~"-\i'2",.,~ ,.;' " ;VC' 'I'. ..'\ ',:" (. ~ ' "t, ",', ".:'. .., "~, - .. 5. Pursuant to Pa. C,S,A. ~ 1705(a)(5) the owner of a currently registered private passenger motor vehicle who does not have financial responsibility shall be deemed to have c1eeted a limited tort alternative, 6, Plaintiff's eounsel has eonceded that in light ofPa, C,S,A. ~ 1705(a)(2) his client is bound by a limited tort option, (See Attorney Brenneman's May 14, 1996 correspondence attached hereto marked "Exhibit 2",) 7, The limited tort provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law provide for a reduced insurance premium in exehange for loss of the right to seek recovery for pain and suffering or other non-economic damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident unless the injuries sustained fall within the definition ofa "serious injury," 75 Pa. C.S.A, ~ 1705(a)(I)(A). 8. A "serious injury" is defined as a personal injury that results in "death, serious impainnent of a body function, or pennanent, serious disfigurement." 75 Pa, C,S,A. ~ 1702, 9. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has recently applied the longstanding rule oflaw in this Commonwealth that summary judgment will be granted only in those cases which are free and clear from doubt in the context ofa limited tort case and in so doing has outlined the criteria for what constitutes a serious impainnent ofa body function, Washinl!ton v, Baxter, 719 A,2d 733 (1998), 10. In essence, Washinl!ton v, Baxter, id., has adopted the criteria of the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Dodson v, Elvev. 445 Pa, S, 479. 665 A,2d 1223 (1995), (reversed on the grounds 720 A,2d 1050 as laid out originally by our sister state of Michigan in DiFranco v, Pickard, 427 Mich. 32, 398 N,W,2d 896, 900 (1986)) with respect to the definition of a serious injury and what constitutes a serious impainnent of a body function, 2 II, The PlaintifTin the instant case was treated immediately following the accident at First Care, a division ofSeidle Memorial Hospital and released the same day, 12. The PlaintifTwas never admitted to or held overnight in a hospital or had any surgery as a result of the within accident. 13, Subsequently, the PlaintifTwas treated orthopedically by Dr, Ronald Lippe who placed his left foot in a cast for six weeks, 14, The PlaintifT's cast was removed on March 13, 1995 at which time Dr, Lippe noted that the alignment of the foot was good and that its healing was satisfactory, 15, PlaintifTstopped treating wilh Dr, Lippe in November of 1995 and had no treatment until October I, 1997 when he was moving furniture and dropped a sleeper sofa on his fool. 16. Following the October I, 1997 injury to his left foot, Dr. Lippc's records rel1ecllhat he did not see any sign of major concern and reassured the PlaintifT of that facl. (A true and correct copy of all of Dr, Lippe's records are auached hereto marked "Exhibit 3",) 17. On February 17, 1998 Dr. Ronald Lippe authored a letter to PlaintifT's counsel wherein he opines that the sleeper sofa dropped on PlaintifT's foot was "just an exacerbation of his previous problem" and concluded that the PlaintifTcondition is pcnnanent and his ability to walk and use his left foot arc rcstrictcd. (Sec "Exhibit 3",) 18, PlaintifTwas evaluatcd orthopcdically by Dr, Lawrcncc S, Pollack on Novcmber 3rd, 1998 who concludcd thatthc PlaintifT sustained a fracture of his first and sccond metatarsals which havc healed and show no signs of post traumatic arthritis. (A true and correct copy of Dr, Pollack's cvaluation is attached hereto marked "Exhibit 4",) 3 19. Plaintiff was employed on the date of the accident at an arcade in Mechaniesburg, Pennsylvania earning $4,25 per hour. (A true and correct copy of an except of Plain tilT's deposition, pages 8 and 9 is attached hereto marked "Exhibit 5".) 20. When he was deposed in March of 1998 the Plaintiff was employed by Mitrani and Company earning $7.00 per hour. (A true and correct copy ofan except of Plain tilT's deposition, page 7 is attached hereto marked "Exhibit 6".) 21. The Plaintiff cannot credibly assert a claim for earning capaeity nor can he establish any time missed from employment relative to the accident. 22, Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1035,2 provides that if, after the completion of diseovery relevant to the Motion for Summary Judgment, including the production of expert reports, the party who bears the burden of proof at trial has failed to produce evidence of facts essential to the cause ofaetion or defense which in ajury Trial would require the issues to be submitted to ajury, summary judgment may be granted in whole or in part as a matter or law, 23. There is no evidence from which a jury could conclude lhat plaintiff, Eric Lepore, sustained a serious injury as a resuh of this motor vehicle accident, applying the criteria outlined in Washinl!ton v, Baxter, supra, Wherefore, Defendant, Missy McGee requests this honorable Court grant her Motion for Partial Summary Judgment finding that Plaintiff, Eric Lepore has not sustained a serious injury, as a matter of law, 4 . ERIC LEPORE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERI.AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 97-48l CIVIL TERM Plaintiff v. MISSY MCGEE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the clainls s~t fort:. in the following pages, you take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with a court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for ~ny other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Court Administrator One Courthouse Square Carlisle, Pennsylvania l70l3-3387 (717) 240-6285 SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & S~ARE, P. c. BY'-.&~'~*~ Attorneys for plaintiff LAW o,.,.U:J:S SNELDAKER. BRENNEMAN a SPARE TRUE copy FROM RECOR~no In Testimony wherecl, I here unto ~ my ""t1 t\1'.l seal 01 said Court at CarliSle. P3.:, ihis ~,/I~~" d~ ~~~:~;:::,L:.",~90t:~ Prothonotary 6. On the aforementioned date and time, Defendant did operated a motor vehicle in such a reckless, careless and negligent manner as to drive said motor vehicle forward without any warning or notice to Plaintiff and while plaintiff was still sitting on the hood of the motor vehicle, causing Plaintiff to immediately leave the hood of the motor vehicle while said vehicle was moving and land on the ground to the left side of said vehicle, whereupon the left front tire of said vehicle, while under Defendant's operation and control, ran over Plaintiff's left foot, causing the injuries and damages more fully set forth herein. 7. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff acted in a prudent and reasonable manner. 8. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that Defendant was operating the aforementioned motor vehicle without a driver's license. 9. The injuries and damages more fully set forth herein were caused solely, factually and proximately by the carelessness, recklessness and negligence of Defendant in the following particulars: a. In operating the aforementioned vehicle in disregard of the safety and well being of Plaintiff; LAW OF,ICES SNEL.BAKER. BRENNEMAN &. SPARE b. In operating a motor vehicle without being properly licensed by the commonwealth of pennsylvania; -2- c. In causing said vehicle to move forward from a stopped position without any warning or notice to Plaintiff; d. By moving said motor vehicle forward from a stopped position while plaintiff was sitting on the front hood of the car in plain view of Defendant; e. In failing to stop said vehicle upon seeing plaintiff leaving the hood of same; f. In operating the motor vehicle while being inattentive and otherwise failing to take due and proper cognizance of Plaintiff's position on and beside said vehicle; and g. In improperly moving said vehicle forward when Defendant knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that to do so would place plaintiff in danger of physical injury. lO. solely as a direct, factual and approximate result of the aforementioned negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant, plaintiff has sustained the following serious personal injuries: a. Fractures of his first and second metatarals of d. his left foot; and ~ b. contusion of his left foot; 11. As a direct factual and proximate result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of Defendant aforesaid, and of the injuries sustained by plaintiff as made reference to in Paragraph lO above, Plaintiff in the past and believes he will into the future be caused to endure great pain and suffering, L.AW a..,leES SNELBAKER. BRENNEMAN Be SPARE mental anguish, loss of life's pleasures, inconvenience, humiliation and embarrassment. -3- r VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of l8 Pa. C.S. 54904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. (~,.~ /ll .~~f (.' Eric Lepore Date: March J, 1997 - FIRSTCARBam AlEDICAL ~CENmlS A OV1S01 01 SIde MetrWJt~ tt:1tSl),1J LEPORE ERIC ~_ )636~783 ~: 2'!I1911H-12 L~ tfj,,'li HW19 (,24 WAYNE"a KECH PA ~ ~ I T U 0 N G N GUY EN INSmuCTloN9 TO llIE PATlENT _ The~i'll'~. and trealment you have received In tho FltslCaro Center hu been ronderod on an ulIllnl bull only, and are nollntlnded '.10 'b ~t ~f9r.or on ofIQ . I CfJ plolo modidal caro, IF YOU DEVELOP NEW PROBLEMS OR COMPUCAnONS, cdl C 'Y fA 'PHYSICI \~ FIR! dJ\RE, , E INSmUCTlONS BELOW AS INOICATED FOR YOU, EYE INJURIES 21. Wear eye pald1 for hours, 22. Do not drive Dr optl/llla machlnllf}' unlil 23. RaILwn to FntCa", Dr family physlclan lunglaSlal. 24. Avoid brightlighlS. T,V. and prnJonged rucing for _hours. 25. Eye madcation HEAD INJURIES 26, Avoid s~enuous physical acti.~ty for alI88SI24 hours, 27, Usa for haadache overy 4 hours sa needed, 26. Ughl diet for 24 hours, CALL DOCTOR IMMEDIATELY IF: A. Unabl.'o arou.. paUanl, conlu""" or InI1able 8. PeUanl conUnu.. 10 be nluaoalad andlor voml" C. PeUenl hu trouble with balan.. D. PeUenl complel.. 01 any vtlUal dllllcully E. H""""ch" parololllonger thin 24 hourw Dr lilt bacom.. more Inll..1 Iller 12 hourw, F. Conwlllonl LACERAnON, ABRASIONS OR BURNS 1. Keop wound ciean and ay 24-48 hours. . I 2, Aflar 24-46 hours walh with loap and wal8l' OI'pdloxido. 3. Wald1lor signs 01 swaning, tendomess, redness. heal Dr dralnagA - rolUm to FOlIC,,", if any 01 thOIO signs occur. 4. Ro~m to ArstCare to have your SUIU"'" ",moved 5. Tetanus ToxiodlTetanus diphtheria given SPRAINS, BRUISES AND FRACTURES 6. E1ova18 on 2 pillows and ",SL 7. U.. Ieolor minu18S times a day lar days. 8. Acewrap - g, UI..plinllor 10. Ulecrull:hoslor \1, Bogin to boar weight 12. SIarl wann soaks on minutes symptoms prosenL 13. Wear cervical collar 14. No heave filling for 15. Us..llng for MEDICAL INSTRUCTIONS 16. Bod ","lIar 17. Take alpirin 01 Tylonol$ overy 18, II a child has fevo,;... A. d",SI IIghlly -donlcovorwith blankalS; 8. place in IUb ollukewann walBr and sponge for 30 minule.. if temp_lUre is high.. than and won'l coma down with aspirin or Tylonoli!!l C. give plenty 01 nulds - on.. sman amounlS fI1Iquenlly; D. give baby aspirin or Tylenoli!!lll temparalU'" higher than lor times a day unli recheck or no ." E. DO NOT usolce packs, cold wallr enemas or alcohol bath. 19, Clear liquid diol- advance as tolerated. 20. Drink plenly 01 Iiqulds. yes. hours. F..tC....: -bring NOSEBLEEDS 29. Do nol blow your nose, 30. II blooding occurs through nasal packing or in Ihr)llll caB FirslCa'" or.fainily physician, I' / ". FOLLOW UP CARE 31. RaIUm lO FiraICare 32. FoUow-up with lamily physician 33. See Dr, 00 al AMiI'M EMPLOYMENT 34. RelUm 10 normal duly on 35. Umited duly from Umitation 36. Soe Occupational Instructional Sheel until vJ I IV +t ,) 1tP./, d ,'" I f X-RAY INSTRUCTIONS: Your x-rays havo been read by the ArstCa", Cenlar Physician. For your added prolaction, your x-<ay will bO"'l1IId by our Radiology DapartmanL II any abnormalities are found !hat have nol been called to your attention. you and your doctor will be caned Immedat8ly, Sometime. ,",ctures or abnonnalitios may not show up on Hays lor .everal days. lI.ymptoms parsisl or got worse, call your Physician or rolUm to lhls FOlICa", Cenlar. Mo", x-<ays may have to be taken. LABORATORY INSTRUCTIONS: Call FirslCale SIGNATURES __________ . ...... '"\ , JR.N. (~, M.D. ...... l' ForrnSU....Z(819I) TN F ,nte",. 11'\&1\ .~ ""me II bt...g unci ut'ld., h~"'. for ",sullS 01 your pending lab tOltS. I HEREBY ACKNOWLEOGE RECEIPT OF THESE INSmUCTIONS AND UNDER- STAND llIEM. I UNOERSTAND THAT I HAVE HAD URGENT mEATMENT ONLY AND llIAT I MAY BE RELEASED BEFORE ALL OF MY MEDICAL PROBLEMS ARE KNOWN OR TREATED. I WILL ARRANGE FOR FOLLOW-UP CARE AS I HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED. x (j,;,/ (I ';<J ~/ Signature: Pauent or re ponslble person II } 1t1r- , Data VISIT o PHYSiCAl 'Ii! ACE S AUDIOGRAM o CArn TRAY o CARDIAC MONITOR o CAST o CERVICAllXlllAR o ClAVlCAl STRAP o CRUTCHES o 000. I , 000. II o EKG o FEI.lAlE CA TH o HEMATEST o ICE BAG o 1& o TRAY o IV IVAC RJMP !<NEE IMMOB. o MINOR EYE SUPPUES o OXYGEN o SHOULDER IMMOB. o SUNG o BUT LAMP \l WUNT (DeL 6\sUCTION o SUTURE TRAY o SUTURE REMOVAl. KIT o VAG, EXAM o WET PREP o MISC. ~~!o f~~ nESPIRA TOnv o ABG o AEROSOL o PEAK FLO o PULMONARY FUNCTIONS AUTHORIZATION TO TREAT: STATtMENTS ON ThiS FOllllAAE TR\Jf TO ThE om Of MY KNOWLElXlE."'" HERESY AUTHORIZE TlfE PHY~ PHYlllOAHS" QWlGE OF ThE CASE OF THIS PATlfNTTO ADWINlSTER #.J4.V TREATUENT. OR TO ADUIHlSTEA ESTliETlCS ~o PERfORJ.I suo. QPEAAnoHS AS YAY BE OUYED NECESSARY OR IN~E I AND TREATJ.IEHT Of' PATlEHT. CC/: 10"- ...""'" f'fW\IATI I'HTSlCNI GUARANTOR NAME AND ADDRESS EPORE, ERIC 24 WAYNE DR, MECH PA 17055 ......Hd717 766-7470 NOnFICA TION...w.u: AND ADDRESS AEl. INDA RUOISILL 24 WAYNE DR, MECH PA 17055 _NO 717 PATlENT CASE NO. DATE 202987412 01/31/95 PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS Ef'ORE, ERIC 24 WAYNE DR. MECH '1\ M TlIlE I INT. o AIlYlASE 0 tWl OFAClAL o NAS; o BUN 0 lYTES OC OT OllS o CARDIAC PANEL 0 PREGNANCY 0C8C 0 PT o mES o CHEM'2 0 m 0 CXR o KUB o CIlElolI 0 RPR o CIlElolII 0 UlA 0 IVP o CIlElolIU 0 URINEOIP 0 SHOUlDER l II o ETON 0 URINE o GLUcose PREGNANCY 0 RIBS L R BIl 0 NUMERUS L R CULlURES: 0 EUll1N L II 0 FOREAR/oll R o BlDOOlCHWlYDlA/GC 0 WRlSTlR 0 NIP l R o HERPfS o SPUTUM 0 IWlDlR 0 ANGER o rnROAT ISTREP) (ROUTINE) (fW'IO) o URINE 0 PELVIS 0 FEMUR L R o WOUND 0 T18If1IllR O~ DflUQ SCREEN: 0 ANKlE l II 'A l o SCREEN o N10A COUECTlON 0 TOES l R o US o ~IDA COUECTlON AUTORIZAClON PARA OAR TRATAIIIENTO: LO ESTAIlLEOOO EN ESTA FORWo ES C:EiI' HASTA La MEJOR DE UI CONOQIoIIENTO. AIJTHORIlO N. UEOtCO 0 Ir.IEDlCOS EHCARQADOS l STE CASO v PACEN'Tt A ADUNSTRATAR CUALQU\EA 11\ATAMIEHTO 01. ADMINIST'RAA ANEm~ Y UEVAA A CABO CUAlQUIER IOERACION QUE SEA NECESNUA 0 ACOHSEJABLE EN . OIAQNOSTlCCl Y ACERCA DEL TAATAJoaEHTO auE HE DE SEOUIfl p.,.,..tnca dtI peoent8 ARMA PAOENTElPADRES. QUARDlAH LEGAL TtST\OO , -, .. ...0 10\ , , ....... . N/A /995 UNEMPLOYED PAnon EMPLOYER INFORMATlOH N/A /995 PAnENT S,S NO MEDICAL AEe. NO. -...., 1.63680783 GROUP NO. 1636807Fl. 39' SUBSCRlBfR HA.YE NON INSUR.A1iCE co. NAME POLICY NUMBER RElIGION '.1~~ICA,- =::,:r::::- '..' LEPORE, Eric Chart No.: 98809 February 6, 1995--Trindle Road Eric admitted to me that he in fact did not drop a cinder block on his foot. It was run over by a car. On examination. his left foot is swollen and actually his cast is too tight. We changed his cast. His skin is satisfactory. He will be reseen at his previously scheduled appointment. RWL/jln February 22, 1995--Trindle Road Eric had some discomfort under the cast. He came in for evaluation. On examination. his toes are pink. He is neurovascularly intact. He states that he doesn't feel that the skin is rubbing he just describes discomfort from the fracture. I reassured anything as with that. him that this is normal and I do not recommend that he change he does not feel that his skin is irritated. He seemed happy He will be reseen at his previously scheduled appointment. RWL/jln - March 13. 1995 - Trindle Road ERic's cast was removed. He is nontender over his fracture site. He has a normal bony alignment of his foot. AP lateral and oblique x-rays of his left foot show his first metatarsal fracture is healing in satisfactory position with goed callus formation. I told him he may begin weight bearing on this as tolerated but it may take some time before he is asymptomatic. I will see him again in another six weeks for clinical recheck. RWL/ss April 21. 1995- copy of office notes mailed to Snelbaker & Brenneman- jln I I , I , ~ . - ffMOX.JO'l'tItR."'D.fA.C.S RICHARD H. KAUOCK, "'D ~R.HM9lER.MD.F^-c.s WIJ..1AMV/DrMUTli.MD..FAC.S IlOr1AlD W. UPPE. "'D. JOHN R. flANKUty a. IItD .MES A. SHAW. M.D. 1OWD.1 p.tlUSCI'l. "'.D ~!LlTID"I..""D. Tl1O'\A.$.l,OOt' .""D. IlCKUO!&Cl.'L..""D smL'11. 'Q.1. 1'\ D. c:;arr.arrA.tWUU./ltD. "l.f.'(A.'Ul ICAlL"Wl "'D. ORTHOPEDIC INSTITUTE OF PENNSYLVANIA TELEPHONE: (717) 761,5530 . (800) 834.4020 . FAX: (717) 737.7197 June 2. 1995 Keith O. Brenneman Snelbaker and Brenneman 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg. PA l7055 RE: DOA: CHART: Eric M. Lepore l-3l-95 98809 Dear Mr. Brenneman: This is in response to your questions regarding Eric M. Lepore in your letter dated May 24. 1995. I first met Eric on February 1. 1995. He presented with an injury to his left foot. He had fractures of the base of his first and second metatarsals and the first metatarsal fracture was somewhat comminuted. He was treated with a short leg cast at that time. The history he recounted to me at that point was tbat he had dropped a cinder block on his foot. I specifically remember thinking this was somewhat odd because the amount of trauma imparted to the foot to require this type of fracture would probably take more energy than that imparted by a falling cinder block. Subsequently when I saw him on February 6. 1995. he admitted to me that infact he did not drop a cinder block on his foot and that he was attempting to protect the person that had run over his foot with a car. I duly noted that in my notes. His cast was opened at that point as his foot was started to swell as one sees in a high energy injury such as a foot being run over by a car. His cast was removed on March 13. 1995. and I saw him on May l5, 1995. He does have some tenderness in the area of his first metatarsophalangeal joint and some clicking there. I suspect that he has had some trauma to the first metatarsophalangeal joint and this may infact continue to bother him down the line. If he develops arthritis in this area he may require a fusion of this joint. although I think there is a good chance that he can get by without any other further intervention. I really think his prognosis is relatively good although it may be difficult for him to participate in jobs that require him to be on his feet all day. I make all these statements with a reasonable degree of medical certainty. If there is anything else I can do please feel free to contact me . '!B~;'~~.;, ~. Lippe. M.D RWL/clg Enclosure CAMP HILL OFFICE -~..- ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO 3916 TRINDLE ROAD. CAMP HILL. PA \701\ HARRISBURG OFFICE HERSHEY OFFICE -------- ':.~. (:""~'. srrr:''';17 :'>~)';:I~r : JI) ':'..:'(0 \ (. rl'uCCl 'TE. .-'lVE CAMP HILL OFFICE Ai5 "':~"'1; r:"-i$CH ~o i I ORTHOPEDiC INSTITUTE OF PENNSYLVANIA (717) 761-5530 Patient: Eric Lepore DOB: 01/09/76 SSN: 163 68 0783 Chart ~: 0988090l Page ~ 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11/02/1995 PROGRESS NOTE CHIEF COMPLAINT: Eric still being on it all day and he pain is in the medial side RONALD W. LIPPE MD has occasional pain in his left foot, worse notices that that is somewhat of a problem. of his midfoot with radiations plantar ward. with The PHYSICAL EXAM: On physical exam, he is tender in the area of his first TMT joint. PLAN: We discussed the options, He apparently has a familial history of adverse reaction to Cortisone and elected not to have one at this point. I wrote a prescription for Naprosyn 500 mg. to be taken bid with food with two refills. I told him to give this several weeks to improve and if he fails to see an improvement, he knows to bring it to my attention. RWL/jln LETIER TO: 11/10/1995 BRIEF OFFICE HARRISBURG Lippe, M.D., Ronald W. RONALD W. LIPPE MD VISIT CHIEF COMPLAINT: Left foot pain which increased yesterday. He states that he was walking and felt a pop, He localizes his pain to the medial border of his midfoot, PHYSICAL EXAMINATION: phalangeal joint. He ecchymosis. He is tender in the area of his first metatarsal does have some slight swelling there. There is no IMPRESSION: This appears to be an exaccerbation of his first MTP joint arthritis, PLAN: We discussed his options, He is going to give it some more time and continue to take his anti-inflammatory medicine, and if his symptoms change, he knows to bring it to my attention, RWL/c1v 5/31/1996 RONALD W. LIPPE MD TEL/KBSG-MBSSAGE TO CHART T HCC sent copies of offices notes Attorneys Snelbaker & Brenneman rrc 7/30/1996 RONALD W. LIPPE MD TEL/KBSG-MBSSAGE TO CHART T HCC mailed copies of offices notes to Attorney's Sne1baker & Brenneman rrd 10/01/1997 RONALD W. LIPPE MD LEVEL TWO I had the pleasure of meeting your patient Eric Lepore in the Trindle Road Office on October 1, 1997. CHIEF COMPLAINT: Eric was well until five days ago when he injured himself at ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ,~ I ~i .. "'.. : .!, " ,'j ,I ~I .'~ : ";. 1 j'j '':!. , Dale I (j-/ L ~ /lPQ.. . f= rle '1S O1vS q xl(CR ! I Tone a; ?) Doclor L l -e pur e. Addres. G":;Lc( Uvne a. , ....~RaM l1eck'/f~ ~bry ItL Phone (5 n ) iC -/l;:/;:>O _ d- ?}.-1.:.2'! n DOB /-9- 7C: Employe( /lnC::I'/LC/L Chart. Patient Name tI . 55. /;(?S5 /63- Cf'-o ;:>g> ~ S:H~/e OccupallontU:nkure s'kk~i%; 7/0.::L Mother J..:,,~ Age ,:) I r:u f 11 t' rf::,y. C- ~rr # /(vcl.s,y/ 5ex /,i;/e MarKal 51l1tus /r/s6rr OOB Employe( Father '];;hl1 LJ ~~ 5"r. DOB w. Employe( 11000VjOl'ta y U~ , r . ~. ~_. Spouse : "-~- Empbyel CUi- ku '~ Child (5! M I t,('oid ~OI A1temi Injury e:r--~ Accident Deacrl>tion . d~p;,.;. /!tkr7lN' DOB w. Reaponallle party ~ Child - Sports Auto ,~.__~~.It:,.-, ,.,-.. " ., ..~ ..... "-...'" '": ,..' ..; r.......' .-,.r . .. ~..' '. .... " \'. '.-; 1'-" r f ; ORTHOPEDrC rNS7!~'J7E OF ?E~mS~:V~~IA (7::'7) . . 761-553'J ~:.:::.e!lt:: :05: E~ic LeCC::2 01/09(76 cha:'': P:l.ge # # : 1 0938C?C: ~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5/31/1996 ~L/MESG-KlSSAGZ RONALD W. L:~PE, M.~. TO OlART ':' ECC sent c:p:.as ~f :f~i=es ~c:~s ~~:==~2YS Sr.e~=a~!= ~ 3=!r~ernan . -- - --- -- --- -..- -...... --.. --.. -- --- - - - - --- - - - --- - ---- --- -- --- -- - ------------------- . ----- - -' -.. --- ...- ...::a:::. = . _ _ 4.... .. .. - .. .... ..- -... -- :.=."-; 1\ ;"f.;l:;;:..} '. .;~\t" ,..... ": " " . I ''-~::> .' :'" ". , ~ .:" ...,.;>......,::...y.;..j. : .~. "", . .... . '" .... ". "',.., . -,. .".. :<.'iI,....ffil..'I(J/lJl .: .;, I' ,',.' I, .f:<..I:.:1,"~, \.~..1!)1t~!i::.t~!~~i)j}l,~\~.i\)':'r.'{t~1/~::{...~~~~ '~'I!~~~,W\~h ~:)}~'~:;fJ'9.~'1 ,~~, .' . ,"''': ""'"'.':'''.l~'''';:'',,,,,-:~':''' 1',(' ,...~-,.~.-\.".~.:.~'::,~~~~~.t..~~,.,:: .'" ';~~f;""''-' . ......,::;.3.:..... . . ." ;' ," 'I,. ,I.;;;;~:.'.~~~~;. " :. . .. .. .,.~ .'.'.:..'_\:.'.:',.,~~").--j'}~.i';, 1717) 7()().151-l 1.1',11 'f1l\\II'il' . kl"'.lll'Mflll,I 'II' I ~ I ,~ J ' 1111' '.! II 'lIltlll"" ," \\ Ill' 'r:. : !I' 1\1 \\ j I Hill I~ ".01 ,. "0'\111 ~ III \1.;' ,11 " lllRrNI'''il.IlI,\'. '1;' 111111'.11\"1.1'1'.11 'Ill "''.111 \ 111111",:11\'1;' 'Itl\l \11111 lilln'.\I\~ \tU II \~IIIII' M'BI'Il \Ill "1111.\\111 \lIIltA.IM. liD .HIMI;I,IWltlUk.\liI 'l\lIlIlIY I' t\llllltL. \In \'.\\11 \ J\1~\_",\nl \lU ..11(11 M lI\j()cr \10 tIlUlII'" \1 'n.... \10 :il'I,J J \'\\ll'llMI\H\IU t r ~he A.Z. RITZMAN Associates, Inc. "'0 IIKII\ IlJl'tj ~Hn HT \ r: I(Khlll Uli JllISI'lI \1. . 1I0l.i ~IlIIU I 1111'1'1 r \1. . "I liB I: \II:\HIIU \1. 110'1'1 r \1. PA 17055 . . . ERIC LEPORE 624 WAYNE DR MECHANLCSBURG SEIDLE MEMORIA DETACH TOP PORTION AND RETURN WITH YOUR REMITTANCE KEEP THlS PORTION FOR INCOME TA.X PURPOSES .. C(8 ~ [/-1 (j),' =If- 3Cf ,if41' I 11-/015 $tl/.'1t; J r f '. SNELBAKER 8 BRENNEMAN A 'kOrWIOtML CO~OlV.nON ArTOlU'JEY5 AT lAW ..... WUT MNN STlUET MEC~IC5BURG, PENNSYLVAN,^ 17055 IUCHMD C. !NELBAKER KEITH 0, BRENNEMAN PHIUP H, !PAAE P. 0, BOX 311 MCIMILE <7l1l 6Q7.7111 117.607.8528 May 14, 1996 Dr. Ronald Lippe orthopedic Institute of Pennsylvania 3916 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Re: Eric M. Lepore Date of Accident: January 31, 1995 Dear Dr. Lippe: As you are aware, this office represents Eric M. Lepore in reference to an injury he sustained to his left foot in an incident that occurred January 31, 1995 involving an automobile. Your records should reflect that on May 24, 1995 I wrote to you requesting, among other things, a copy of your office notes and records pertaining to your treatment of Mr. Lepore. This letter will serve to request a complete copy of your office notes and records which reflect treatment he obtained under your care subsequent to March 13, 1995. I have your office notes and records from his file up to March 13, 1995 and am requesting only those records that pertain to treatments and visits after that date. Your file should reflect a properly executed authorization permitting the release of the above-requested information to this office. If the:-", lS a ~ho~ocopying cost involved wit:n this request, please advise me of same and your office will be reimbursed directly. I thank you for your assistance. 'fo,/,- truly, ~: ~-it/'./'/Vv-- Keith O. Brenneman KOB/sz CC: Eric Lepore .' r ., DoL DBA UHTH INST I TUlI': OF PA l{)'i-c'l-':Ib 87:5 PUj.JLI-lR CHURCH RUAO t.:H~IP HILL Pl-l 171/111 717-7&1-;;5.30 mx 10 II: 23-18'1~547 PATIENT: 098809 LEPORE . ERIC PfH BHL: .11111' INS 8~IL: .1iJ1ll UlH BAL: .00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SERV C INS l-l LIN!:. INVUIelO RUNNING DATE INV RP S DR PHOC UESC CO~I~IENT CO CIIA PL AMOUNT 8ALI-lNCt:: BHLHI~L!:. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 020195 1 & 1 39 90000 DC ERRO 01 .00 .00 .IIJIiJ RONALD W LIPPE MD DIAG: 020195 2 & 1 39 28470 FX METATAR 01 313.00 31.3. o III RONALD W LI PPE MD DIAG: 825.25 E849.0 E91& 0&0595 2 1 1 COAJ COL ADJUST COMM AeCE 01 -313.1l\0 .00 . III \!I 020195 3 & 1 39 28470 FX METATAR 01 31.3.000 .31,,;.1iJ1Il RONALD W LI PPE ~ID DIAG: 825.25 E849.0 E91& 0&0595 3 1 1 COAJ eOL ADJUST eOMI~ ACCE 01 -313.00 .0(d .1l'1Il 020195 4 6 1 39 SLCS SL CAST SY 01 37.00 3'1. III 10 RONALD W LIPPE MD DIAG: 825.2:5 E84':1.0 E91& 0&0595 4 1 1 COAJ COL ADJUST COMM ACCE 01 -37.00 .01i;1 .1tI1{J 020&95 7 1 1 39 2942:5 CAST SLW 01 223.00 22.3. illll' RONALD W LIPPE MD DIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.0 0&0595 7 1 1 COAJ COL ADJUST COMM ACCE 01 -223.00 .r;:11il .1l1fll 020&95 8 1 1 39 SLCS SL CAST SY 01 37.(/10 37.1I)1i;I RONALD W LI PPE MD DI!-lG: V54.8 ~25.25 E849.0 0&0595 8 1 1 CUAJ CUL ADJUST COI'IN ACCE 01 -3'7.0121 . fblO .01i) 020&95 9 1 1 39 91il000 DC 01 .00 .01il .1l1lLl RUNALD W LI PPE NO DIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.0 031395 10 1 1 49 73&30 FOOT 01 49.00 49.00 RUNALD W LI PPE MD DIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.0 0&0595 10 1 1 eOAJ COL ADJUST COMM !-lCCE 01 -49.00 .01il .00 031395 11 1 1 39 ':11i;100121 De 01 .00 .1il0 .01l1 RONALD W LI PPE ~ID OIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.0 051595 12 1 1 49 73&30 FOOT 01 49.00 4':1.0<10 RONALO W LI PPE ~ID DIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.1il 060595 12 1 1 COAJ COL ADJUST eOMM ACCE 01 -49.00 .010 . o III 051595 13 1 1 3':) 90000 DC 01 . III 0 . iii'" . III III RONPll:.D W LI PPE MD DIAG: V54.8 825.25 E849.0 0&1995 15 1 1 49 73&3tll FOOT 01 49.00 'I'1.1iJ1tJ RONALD W LI PPE MD DIAG: 719.47 100995 15 1 1 CUAJ COL ADJUST CO~I~I AeCE 05 -4':1.0121 . "'Ill .1I)\!I 0&1995 1& 1 1 39 99212 OFFICE OUT 01 25.17.10 2::i.1I,11lI RONALD W LI PPE MD DIAG: 719.47 10111995 1& 1 1 COAJ COL ADJUST COMM HCCE 1115 -25. 00 . 0~) .1ll~1 080795 17 1 1 39 qq212 OFFICE OUT 11)1 25. "lid 2=;. liIlLl RONALD W LIPPE:: MD DIAG: 719.47 100995 17 1 1 CDAJ eOL ADJUST eUM~1 ACel:. \!I5 -i:::::).011' .ilIlil .Ilub 110295 18 1 1 39 ~9212 OFFICE OUT 11.12 25.ll)li.1 2~.II.IILl RUNALD W Ll PPE ~1D DIAG: 71':).'17 tlIi-::"15~b 18 1 1 COAJ LUL AUJUbl LO~IM HeLl" 1115 -2:..l.illll . "Hll . 1i.'Ill { 1.11ll9~ 1'1 1 1 ,;9 'i...,.-::L~ 1Jf-t'-ICE IJIJr ",I,~ ;7.::,-,.1/)11.1 0::5. V,Il1.1 ( MEDICAll0N RECORD ..... LA.ST nR.ST HIllllL& I DOCTOR or pumn' CIWlT IItlHII&Il I , /1 iJ--t!.l'cr<. Eric... I I , i HlDICM'IOlIS I PIWlKI\C'l AND I AHr, I un= I DAn I DOCTOR I PHCIm HUHBIR DUP. ; COSteN I i I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I , I , I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I , I I I I I I , J " " ( .dEAL TH mSTORY ., 1 ." ~--:"" 1'< : -~.. . .~,'Thc following is very important to US in tDlcing care of your health. Please talce time to completely and accurately flIl out t(.all of this information. Please also make sure you update this information as changes occur. ~;. patlent'sName.b/~,I{j..<" oo-r<" ) Medications You Are Taking J::lJ.m AmDlIII1 FffftUenr:v " '.,. ~ , I,. .\ ."-".-".:.... '" .~,i ':,'.~ ,..-' .. ..........', Are you taking diet medication? No-4 Yes_ Allergies (Drugs and Other Allergies) , , ' JI.;JJ).IJC Penicillin No _ Ves.K _r=tionl-'dlo,lJ.II:J1 Local Anesthetic No j{ Ves_-r=tion (xylocaine. novocaine) Other Allergies " Hospitalizations J.::"(List serious illness and in;uries or oper.lrions and ._ ~ :I ....., i\:'approximate year.) . t~1' ~ SeriOl1!l il1n~~!1 iniurv or SUJ:Ilet'V Homitnl I,t. .,t:~ . ;'~~'" tit " ,,( ~ :,,J. " Cbart Number 9 ?fRO '7 Past Mcdlcal History Hav. you or members or your family ever be.n lold tbat you bav.: Your You Family Descrlhe Anemia [ ] [ ] Asthma [ ] [ ] Abnonna1 Bleeding [ ] [ ] Blood clnls I phlebitis [ ] ~? Cancer I tumor [ ] Diabetes [ ] [~ Drug abuse [ ] [ ] Eczema I psoriasis [ ] [ ] Epilepsy I seizures [ ] [ ] Heart Condition [ ] ~~ High or low blood pressure [ ] Liver disease I bepatitis I yellnw jaundice [ ] [ ] Kidney I bladder problems [ ] [ ] Lung disease [ ] [ ] Pros1ate problems [ ] ~? Stroke [ ] Thyroid disease [ ] [ ] Tuberculosis [ ] [ ] Ulcer in stomach I [I duodenum [ ] Osteoporosis ~J' [ ] Arthritis [ ] Other bone I joint disease [ ] [ ] Any nervous system disease [ ] [ ] UPD^ TE /0-(-' 7...~ Social History Do you smoke?.l1 No Yes)( Amount~A, Do youdrinkalcoho!? No= YesLAmount~W4t4t/( Do you use street drugs? No.J( Yes_ Amount Continued on back of page.......... " - -..-... . ._---~-~'_......, - . ;';,',( " .' /. ': ~-" , During the pnst year, have you hud: ..' " ':' .,' ~ . ,I heartburn or indigestion?......:....:.."'..............................,"'................ 2 bowel movements that were bloody or tarry?..................................... 3 any recent change in your bowel habits?........................................... 4 frequent urinntion during the day or night?......................................... 5 any recent loss of control ofyourbl~ddcr7......................................... 6 burning with urination?.........."':........................................................ 7 difficulty starting your urinatio~?...;..:............:.................................... 8 excessive urination? .....;:..;~:...::;.::;..:........."'.. .................................. . ' ~ ..,:i./)~;.~.,\~:~;;:;-'::. ,: '~. .- . ," .' "I".!1)"'rWI,.,.:.~; ',' excessive thirst? ..............::~:'~.:...~~::::;.............:................................ . '. :~~ ,~:.,..~ '0',) ',:' . . shortness of breath or wheCZlllg?....................................................... hr . .. gh? ";,;i"!""r[.t;..,~l'~;'''..',, C OOlC cou .............;;.:...d...;.~.. :...:.................................................. h . 'th ... '?' J.;!.ll$lr"t'.;~: :,'., ,'.' c cst pam WI actiVIty ,..;,....:,::.:;..:..:.;......:...........................,.......... . " .':"J.~~rt'~", *""'.', : , . ,', ':;'~i>~"'l" ';;"'.'" '. ".-:0...- ,'....., ,'....(, . .' .; ....~I. ~ ~~~,~i;~~'" racmg heart or palpitations?....:..,:.:..:...;............................................. I 'ankI .. ',~'~*i.1.;'~\~-~: .;,,; ~" . swo len feet or es?..:.:.......:.....;..:................................................ .'\-.':-~I:I, ,,'., . \.d . frequent headaches? ...,.;..;;.:::'.~~:;.:.:..;..:.::...:........:............................ , .: . '; :~, ~..~..~ ' . , difficulty hel1l1I1g?.....:.;..;~:.:.:...:..::..:............................................... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 " 22 , 23 24 25 26 27 28 ..'...:....J:... '. dental or other mouth problemS?........................................................ '.: ';:\...., ,',. frequent nose bleeds?..;.::.:..::.:...:..................................................... e~ bruising? ...................::.;:.:f::.::.......:....:...................................... skin rashes? ..............;.....:.:...........;.....;............................................ aching muscles or joints?................................................................... swollen joints? .................................................................................. cold hands I feet?............................................................................. gangrene?........................................................................................ loss of consciousness?...................................................................... recent numbness in arms or legs?...................................................... chronic fatigue? ......................................................;......................... uncontrolled bleeding?....................................................................... :L " 29 weight loss?.................................................................................. .. 30 weight gnin?.....,............................................................................... 31 heat I cold intolerance? ..............................................................,...... . "'~", . , ,i;/ " ......, ~~,~~". ,~ The above Information Is true and correct to the he.5t of my beUef. Patient slgnature~.r7 ~~ ..c',', :." ,~;. ,:', '. ...-. . . -.------- ._....- ( No Ycs ./ No ~/ Ycs_ No V Yes . No- Ycs? - - No ~cs No-v" Ycs- No -;r Ycs- No t/ Ycs- - - NOtT Ycs / No Ycs No ~/YCS- NOYes',' - - . , No t2 Ycs V. ' No t/ YeS,;>.' No_/ Ycs_ No v Ycs - - No ~ Ycs_ No~ Ycs No.:..!L: Ycs_ NoL... Ycs_ No_ Ye~~/ NOiT Ycs No-=..L Ycs_ No II Ycs - - No ;; Ycs t/ No--'ir Yes- No-,L Ycs No'; Yes - - t/ No Ycs--,L No--/ycs~ No Y Ycs - - D/f~ ? " -.~.:.-:..;..~-::.::::.:--:.-:.::,.'\ , ,.. Patient Name: .--"':". '_.','~ \Plel1:l.e Punt) J . I hereby consent to any necessary medical diagnosis and treatment for myself, child, or above named minor lor whom I am legaily responsible, DATE SIGNED AUTHORIZATION X'.: "" I ~:(C- I -.. ~~...,:,_"",,_~ -' WITNESS /L/ " /.. ' :w I AUTHORIZATION FOR RELEASE OF MEDICAL INFORMATION AND ASSIGNMENTS OF INSURANCE BENEFITS The attending physicians are authonzed to release any medical ,nformation required In the processlllg of applications for financial coverage for services rendered, I hereby authorize direct payment of surgical and medical benefits (not to exceed the regular charges for Similar services) on my behalf to any organization, hospital. phYSician, surgeon, radIOlogist or pharmaCist, otherwise payable to me, The benefits referred to herein would be payable to me if I did not make this assignment If covered by Medicare, I authorize any holder of Medicare information about me to release to current Medlgap Insurer any information needed to determine these benefrts payable lor related services, I understand that I am personally responSible to the phYSICian for charges not covered by this agreement. DATE SIGNED AUTHORIZJ\,lION WITNESS /! c./tl"'t' _L'v , '/7 'A'J ""':"v. "/.."' .~- ~ - -' MEDICARE. MEDICAID PATIENTS CERTIFICATION Patient's Certification Authorizalion to Release Information: I certify the informallon given by me and needeo for tnlS cr related medical claims In applYing for payment under Title XVIII and XIX of the Social Secullty Administration, ItS' Intermed,alles, or Call1ers, I request payment of authollzed benefits be made on my behalf, If my in.urance callier determines thiS treatment to be unnecessary. I accept full responsibility for payment. DATE SIGNED AUTHORIZATION WITNESS Michael F. Mitrick, D.O. Orthopaedic Surgery Hand Surgery Mitrick Pollack Orthopaedic Associates 1750 Fil\h Avenue Suite 201 York, PA 17403 Phone: 717-848-2297 Fax: 717-848-2941 Lawrence S. Pollack, 0,0. Orthopaedic Surgery Foot & Ankle Surgery Law Offices Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins Ann Margaret Grab. Esquire 110 S, Northern Way York, Pennsylvania 17402-3737 RE: Eric Lepore v, Missy McGee Cumberland County No, 97.481 Social Security No,: 163.68.0783 Dear Attorney Grab: On November 30th, 1998, I saw Eric Lepore in our office for an Independent Medical Evaluation per your request, He attended this evaluation by himself with no one accompanying him, Throughout the entire history and physical examination, one of our office staff, Michele Gettel was in attendance, For review, were medical records from Dr. Ronald Lippe, a deposition of Eric Lepore dated March 19, 1998, Dr. David Zimmerman, and Seidle Memorial Hospital. This patient relates a history that on January 31 st of 1995, he sustained an injury to his left foot. At that time. he was working for an arcade as an attendant. He had been working for this arcade for approximately six months, After hours, he was sitting on the hood of a vehicle that took off with him on the hood, Apparently, this patient jumped off of the hood and his left foot was run over by the front tire, At the time, the patient was sitting on the driver's side of the vehicle, From the deposition that was taken, the patient was unsure if the tire actually ran over his foot. He was able to get into his vehicle and drive home, He did place ice on his foot and elevated his foot. Apparently, he then presented to an UrgiCare Center and the history he offered was that he dropped a cinderblock onto his left foot. He was placed in a temporary cast and referred to Dr, Lippe, He states he fabricated the story so that he would not get the driver of the other vehicle in any type of trouble, On February 1st, 1995, the patient did see Dr. Lippe, The history at that time revealed that while the patient was at home. he dropped a cinderblock on his left foot, Apparently, x-rays were obtained, which were unavailable for review, According to Dr, Lippe, these x-rays revealed a fracture of the base of the first and second metatarsals, The first metatarsal was somewhat comminuted and the second metatarsal was in satisfactory position, The patient was placed in a cast. Over a seven to eight week period, his cast was changed and he was placed into a new cast, secondary to the cast being too tight. He RE: Eric Lepore Page 2 Continued: was taken out of the cast after a seven to eight week period, He has had no other treatment to date, He is currently still seeing Dr, Lippe on an as needed basis, He last saw Dr, Lippe approximately seven to eight months ago, This patient is currently working for Montgomery Ward's, where he has been working for approximately 1 1/2 weeks, He is in Shipping and Receiving and does work 22 hours per week, Prior to that he was working at Merchani & Company Antique Pottery as a warehouseman, He worked there for approximately seven to eight months, picking orders, Prior to that, he has had multiple jobs, His current activities outside of work include working on cars and body work, He states he is unable to lift weights at the gym, secondary to too much pressure on his foot. He is unable to run or ride his bike, He states he is able to walk for approximately one half hour, stand for a half hour and he is unable to drive a standard transmission vehicle, He is complaining of pain with walking, He states he has frequent swelling, At times, there is a popping sensation in his foot. He denies any prior left foot injuries or any other injury to his left foot, He also denies any numbness and tingling, It appears that from the medical records that the patient was seen again by Dr, Lippe on November 2nd, 1995, It was noted that the patient complained of occasional pain in his left foot, mostly about the medial aspect of the mid foot. He was placed on Naprosyn 500 mgs, On November 10th, 1995, he was again evaluated, Apparently, while walking, he felt a pop, I do not have any indication that the patient was seen by Dr. Lippe after November 10th, 1995, From the medical records reviewed, the patient was evaluated on October 1 st, 1997 by Dr, Ronald Lippe, Apparently, this patient sustained an injury while moving a sofa, Apparently, he twisted his left knee and struck the top of his left foot. It was noted at that time that this patient had swelling in the dorsum of his left foot. There was no ecchymosis or dramatic swelling, Anti-inflammatory medications were recommended and he was told to follow up on an as needed basis, It is interesting to note that Dr, Lippe did mention in his report that Eric was well until five days ago, when he injured himself at work, This would suggest that the patient did not have any difficulty in regards to his left foot at that time, As mentioned, the patient was not seen in Dr, Lippes office for approximately a two year period, The patient denies any medical problems, He is not taking any medications at the present time, He has undergone right ankle surgery in the past. He is right hand dominant, smokes one half pack cigarettes per day and has allergies to penicillin, as well as erythromycin, RE: Eric Lepore Page 3 Continued: Physical examination reveals that this patient is a 22-year-old white male, 5'9", 155 pounds. I did limit my examination to both lower extremities, The patient was first examined in a standing position, He did ambulate with a nonnal gait. He was also able to heel and toe walk without any difficulty, He was able to squat without any difficulty, I then placed this patient in the sitting position, Tactile sensation was intact. Dorsalis pedis and posterior tibial pulses were palpable, Range of motion of the ankle, hind foot, mid foot, fore foot, knee and hip were nonnal. There was a negative Tinel's over the posterior tibial nerve, superficial peroneal nerve, or deep peroneal nerve, There were no unusual markings on the patient's left foot, There was no evidence of ecchymosis or swelling about the patient's left foot. He did have subjective areas of tenderness to palpation about the great toe metatarsal. He seemed to have more tenderness about the shaft of the metatarsal. He had very minimal tenderness to palpation about the tarsal metatarsal joint. The patient had excellent capillary refill to the left foot. There was no evidence ofany atrophy of either lower extremity, He had equal strength to both lower extremities, There was no evidence of reflex sympathetic dystrophy, The patient did undergo x-rays in our office of his left foot. These x-rays revealed nonnal bony architecture, There were no gross abnonnalities noted, There are no acute fractures or dislocations, There is no evidence of post traumatic arthritis of the tarsal metatarsal joint of the left foot, ASSESSMENT: I, Status post fracture base of first and second metatarsals of the left foot dated January 31st, 1995, 2, Status post contusion of the left foot in September 1997, DISCUSSION: This patient apparently fabricated a history ofa cinderblock being dropped onto his left foot. He did sustain a fracture of the base of his first and second metatarsals according to Dr, Lippe's medical records dated February 2nd, 1995, The patient then changed his history, stating that he jumped otfofthe hood ofa vehicle that was moving, Certainly, the action of jumping otfofa vehicle could cause a fracture of the metatarsals, He also states that his foot may have been run over by the front ties, I do find it hard to believe that if a car was in motion and he was sitting on the driver's side of the vehicle hood and jumped away from the vehicle, how his fore foot and mid foot could be run over by the vehicle's tires in that his feet are actually pointing away from the vehicle, If anything, one would suspect that the posterior aspect or his heel would have been struck by the car tire, " B 1 the company. It's a small -- How do you spell Mitrani? M-i-t-r-o-n-i, I do believe. How many employees does the company have? Do 2 Q 3 A 4 Q 5 you know? 6 A 7 Q B A 9 Q 10 A 11 Q 12 A 13 Five, I think, altogether. Did you graduate from high school? No. Did you attend high school? Yes. Where? I attended Cumberland Valley and also Mechanicsburg. 14 Q Did you obtain aGED? 15 A No, not yet. 16 Q Are you currently involved in that process? 17 A I was involved with it in the beginning of the 1B fall. And then with work and -- it intertwined with the 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 one test. And I had missed the test. So I have to go back to it next year and retake the one test. Q At the time of this accident in January of 1995, were you employed? A Yes, I was. Q Where? A It was the arcade that was there. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q What was the name of that arcade? A I don't even remember what the name of it was. Can I look in this? Q It's not necessary. If it's in the document, I'll be able to find it. A I think it is. Q When did you start working at the arcade? A October of '94. Q So you'd been there about three months -- A Yeah, about three months. Q -- when the accident occurred? A Yes. Q And what did you do there? A Just sat there and gave change and also just made sure there was no damages from the kids and kept the kids under control. Q A Q A Hourly? Yeah. Paid hourly? Yes. Q What was your hourly rate? A I think it was only four and a quarter an hour. Q Currently do you work full-time with Mitrani and Company? A Part-time. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q Are you currently employed? A Yes, I am. Q Where? A Mitrani and Company. Q What do they do? A It's a little pottery place. Q Where is it? A Right down -- what's that? I think Slate Road. Q Give me a town. A Mechanicsburg. It's right here in Mechanicsburg. Q And what do you do for them? A I just basically sit on a chair and stain old wood pieces and once in a while box pottery. 15 Q And how long have you been employed there? 16 A Four and a half months. 17 Q And are you salaried or hourly? 18 A Hourly. 19 Q How much do you make an hour? 20 A $7 an hour. 21 Q Is that how much you made when you started four 22 and a half months ago? 23 A No, it was six and a quarter. 24 Q who's your supervisor? 25 A His name is Albert Mitrani. He's the owner of ERIC LEPORE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 97-481 CIVIL TERM MISSY MCGEE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT plaintiff Eric Lepore, by his attorneys, Snelbaker, Brenneman & Spare, P. C., submits this Response to Defendant's Motion For partial summary Judgment as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted in part; denied in part. The injuries described and the method by which said injuries are claimed to have been caused by Defendant are admitted. It is denied that Plaintiff alleged that on January 3, 1995 he received the injuries described by a vehicle running over his foot. 3. Admitted, with the qualification that Paragraph 3 of Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is a general statement only of the limitations he is under and the impairment of his physical ability and lifestyle. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admi tted. LAW OFf"lCr::'j SNELDAKER, BRENNEMAN a SPARE 8. Admitted. The matter was argued on October 13, 1999. For thc reasons stated in this opinion, defendant's motion for partial summary judgment will be denied. STATEMENT OF FACTS For present purposes,3 the record in this case consists of plaintiffs complaint, defendant's answer with new matter, plaintiff's reply, defendant's motion for partial summary judgment, plaintiff's answer to the motion, a deposition of plaintiff, and plaintiff's answers to defendant's interrogatories. On a motion for summary judgment, the court will "view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubts as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact must be resolved against the moving party.',4 "[AlII. inferences must be resolved in favor of ... the non-moving party... .',5 Viewed in this light, the facts may be summarized as follows. On the evening of January 31, 1995, a car being operated by defendant in a certain parking lot in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, ran over the left foot of the plaintiff.6 3 See Pa. R.C.P. 1035.1. 4 Washington v. Baxter, 553 Pa. 434, 441, 719 A.2d 733, 737 (1998). 5 Id. at 448, 719 A.2d at 740. 6 N.T. 11-37, Deposition of plaintiff, March 19, 1998 (hereinafter N.T.-->. 2 The detennination of whether an injury qualifies as a "serious impairment , f . of body function" involves a consideration of what body function, if any, was ,~ impaired because of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident and whether the impainnent of the body function was serious. See Washington v. Baxter, 553 Pa. 434,447, 719 A.2d 733, 740 (1998). The focus of these inquiries is not on the injuries themselves, but on how the injuries affected a particular body function.... In detennining whether the impainnent was serious, several factors should be considered: the extent of the impainnent, the length of time the impainnent lasted, the treatment required to correct the impairment, and any other relevant factors. An impairment need not be pennanent to be serious.21 The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held "that the legislative history [of the provision in question] does not support the view that the threshold detennination of whether a serious injury has been sustained is to be made by the trial judge.... [T]he legislature ... [has implicitly] indicated that the traditional summary judgment standard was to be followed and that the threshold detennination was not to be made routinely by a trial court judge ..., but rather was to be left to a jury unless reasonable minds could not differ on the issue of whether a serious injury had been sustained." Washington v, Baxter, 553 Pa. 434, 446-447,719 A.2d 733, 740 (1998). 21 Washington v, Baxter, 553 Pa. 434, 447-448, 719 A.2d 733,740 (1998). 6 PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted In duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY (Check one) Please list the lollowlng case: ( X) lor JURY trial at the next term of civil court. ) lor trial without a jury, .......u..........................--...................................................................---.......................................................................................... CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated In lull) (check one) Assumpsit Trespass (XX) Trespass (Motor Vehicle) ERIC LEPORE ( ) (other) (Plalntlll) vs. The trial list will be called on ? /' s / 00 and Trials commence on 3/13/00 MISSY MCGEE Pretrials will be held on 2/23/00 (Brlels are due 5 days belore pretrials.) (The party listing this case for trial shall provide lorthwlth a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local Rule 214.1.) (Delendant) vs. No. 97-481 Civil 19_ Indicate the attorney who will try case lor the party who Illes this praecipe: ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE FOR DEFENDANT Indicate trial counsellor other parties II known: PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY IS KEITH O. BRENNEMAN This case Is ready lor trial. Signed: ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE Print Name: Date: JANUARY 21, 2000 Attorney lor: MISSY MCGEE ~ Cl '- , ,-' n;.- l~' .. , , , -~ , .., C _..0 , " .,. C. ,-.: - ;, , : ,. , '.J . (...- - ) , C":) L' 0 () , y ,. "!': " -- .'~ -- -...... ...... '::-:- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA '-Ifft NO, 97.:HH-CIVIL TERM ERIC LEPORE, Plaintiff v, MISSY MCGEE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned action settled, discontinued and ended with prejudice upon your docket and indices, SNELBAKER, BRENNEMAN & SPARE, P. C, l~./n~ BY: Keith 0, Brenneman, Esquire 44 W, Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff Eric Lepore Date: March 20, 2000 J l' I , -- r-- >- a; -" t:; .:: ,- ,- & ~.:J ~, l"'t l'.1. . (.) -; : -)~ .- Ll~ ,-' : -'- 11_- ~ ,'"'):,"j '. ,I (,,;Ji' c:> .:..i{, ~" \/ ii;:" N " .Z ..' . C" . ~ l..LI .' .1;': . ,i~l- r -' ;-~ - l'_ C) -:-J (.) c:> c.J