Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-5905 AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff NO. 6::l - _~-10.:;~ G~;L~l v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claim set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defense or objections to the claim set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and judgement may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any 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. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone 717-249-3166 or 800-990-9108 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas signuientes, usted tiene vienta (20) dias de plazo al partir de ai fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita 0 en persona a por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas 0 sus objectiones alas demand as en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se fefiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 akuvui que es pedido en ia peticion de demanda. Usted puedo parder dinero 0 sus propiedades 0 otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DIMERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEPONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE EMCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSSGUIA ASISTENCIA LEGAL. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone 717-249-3166 or 800-990-9108 By: ROSENBERG, LLP id H R enberg, Esquire I .# 20569 1300 inglestown Road Ha risburg, PA 17110 , (717) 238-2000 Attorneys for Plaintiff AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. 5- Cl - /) '.. J NO. 0;,2 - . /0) LLvJ - ~ NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, by and through their attorney, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by David H. Rosenberg, Esquire, and makes the within Complaint against the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, as follows: 1, Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, are competent adult individuals currently residing at 15 McBride Ave, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17013, 2. Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, is an adult individual currently residing at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007, 3. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, was the owner and operator of a green 1999 Kia Sephia bearing Pennsylvania registration number BDW-7030. 4, At all times material hereto, Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, was the operator of a 1999 Acura bearing Pennsylvania registration number BVH-8194, 5. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, was insured by State Farm Insurance Company and covered by a limited tort option pursuant to 75 Pa, C.S.A. S 1705, 6. Pursuant to 75 Pa. C,S.A. S 1701, Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, is permitted to seek 14. As a result of the negligence of Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, the Plaintiff,Audrey Neal, has suffered lost wages/income and will in the future continue to suffer a loss of income and/or loss of earning capacity. 15. As a result of the negligence of Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, the Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, has suffered great physical pain, discomfort, and mental anguish, and she will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to her great physical, emotional, and financial detriment and loss. 16. As a result of the negligence of Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, the Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for aforesaid injuries, to expend large sums of money for medicine and/or medical attention, and will be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, to her great detriment and loss, 17. As a result of the negligence of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, the Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures, and she will continue to suffer the same in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 18. As a result of negligence of Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, the Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, has been, and probably will in the future be, hindered from attending to her daily duties, to her great detriment, loss, humiliation, and embarrassment. 19, Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, believes and, therefore, avers that her injuries are permanent in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Audrey Neal, seeks damages from Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland 4 County exclusive of interest and costs, and demands a trial by jury. COUNT /I LOSS OF CONSORTIUM ROBERT NEAL v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO 20. Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, incorporate and make part of this Count paragraphs 1 through 15 of this Complaint as if fully set forth. 21. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff, Robert Neal, has suffered a loss of consortium, society, and comfort from his wife, Audrey Neal, and he will continue to suffer a similar loss in the future. 22. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff, Robert Neal, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for his wife's injuries, to expend money for medicine and medical attention and will be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, to his great detriment and loss. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Robert Neal, seeks damages from Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland County exclusive of interest and costs, and demands a trial by jury. Respectfully submitted, Date: i2/~ z.... By: R, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP ~/ David H. osenberg, Esquire Attorne 1.0, #205569 1300 Li glestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs 5 VERI FICA TION The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit, The language of the document is of counsel and not my own, I have read the document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this Verification, The undersigned also understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S, Section 4904 ""ti"9 '0 ""'WOCO f"'~:;hO;~ . Robert Neal Date: 1)- 0< 5-0 ~ VERIFICA TION The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit, The language of the document is of counsel and not my own, I have read the document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this Verification, The undersigned also understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa, C,S, Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, c~ ( /}LufJ Audrey C, N~I Date: II-~S-o~ AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 27th day of November, 2002, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Complaint was served upon the following by depositing in U.S, Mail; Nicholas N, Cordero 259 Red Tank Road Boiling Springs, P A 17007 Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Date: /212/07 , By: David H osenbe ,Esq, I.D, # 20569 1300 Linglest wn Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 (717) 238-2000 Attorneys for Defendants ~ 0~ rt ~ 0:- li( D () w -U C f fJ '" , ...., ~ 0:, ,- ---( 1'.,', g () ..-.} :-) - /-,', ~ , ) , 1'-' , . , '") .) '1 SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2002-05905 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTy'OF CUMBERLAND NEAL AUDREY ET AL VS CORDERO NICHOLAS N KENNETH GOSSERT , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon CORDERO NICHOLAS N the DEFENDANT , at 1555;00 HOURS, on the 13th day of December, 2002 at 231 N BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to MICHAEL JONES, ROOMMATE a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs; Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge So Answers; 18.00 3.45 .00 10.00 .00 31.45 ...., ,'....~ ~~ (",'C.<' ,,< ., ..., c . .' <~"">:;;;r.-:.., ~ .r //.?4 " '..-..-" -:I -~- R. Thomas Kline 12/17/2002 HANDLER HENNING Sworn and Subscribed to before By: me this 3.4-( day of , . , <... j,~w<(<'7 ;)VtJ~3 A.D. I . . l )tf L fJ ~/t<~ ~ I rot onotary I Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire 1. D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., as counsel on behalf of Defendant, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. / fe s n J. Shipman, A orney I.D. 51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: ~ /''-11'",3 90961.1 .~, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the fo:(egoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, on ~ I q / /) 3 / I Pennsylvania, David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. / '....... Esquire 17108-1268 Defendant .. ~ .. 0 '-'-", 0 .--."'.... c.: w -'fj ..::,:~ ...." -D ~~~ .""1 Cr.,: ~"'i. ~::.J':;; ~ C r 0] C'l -', ~ -v r --'. ~~ cO; ")..- (1.,,) ...... c:::: '.,.... ~ c. :<-~ -.J =< Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire 1.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Plaintiffs: YOU ARE HEREBY notified to plead to the within New Matter of Defendant within twenty (20) days of service hereof. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. f son J. Shipman, Esquire ttorney I.D. 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: 2-/ 2-5'/63 91368.1 Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire 1.0. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, by and through his counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., and files the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint: 1. Admitted upon information and belief. 2. Admitted except as to the address. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 6 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted only that there was contact between the vehicles as the Cordero vehicle changed lanes. The remaining averments of Paragraph 9 are denied as stated. 10. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 10 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. COUNT I Audrev Neal v. Nicholas N. Cordero Neqliqence 11. Mr. Cordero incorporates herein by reference his answers to Paragraphs 1 through 10 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 12. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 12 and subparagraphs (a) through (h) are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein, including all sUbparagraphs, are specifically denied. 13. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 13 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, the answering 2 Defendant, Mr. Cordero, is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 13, relating to Plaintiff's alleged injuries and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 14. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 14 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 14 relating the Plaintiff's alleged loss of wages and income and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 15 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 15 relating the Plaintiff's alleged physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 16 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is 3 without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 16 relating the Plaintiff's alleged medical expenses and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 17. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 17 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 17 relating the Plaintiff's alleged loss of life's pleasures and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 18. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 18 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 18 and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph No. 19 and the same are therefore denied. 4 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II Robert Neal v. Nicholas N. Cordero Loss of Consortium 20. Mr. Cordero incorporates herein by reference his answers to Paragraphs 1 through 19 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 21. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 21 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 21 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 22. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph 22 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Cordero is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph 22 relating to Plaintiff's alleged medical expenses and medical attention to 5 Mrs. Neal and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER By way of additional answer and reply, the Defendant interposes the following New Matter defenses: 23. That this action is subject to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S.A. ~1701, et seq. 24. That Plaintiff's claims may be limited or barred by the ~Limited Tort" option, pursuant to 75 Pa. C.S.A. ~1705, et seq. 25. That if it should be found that there was any negligence on the part of Defendant Cordero, which negligence is expressly denied, any such negligence was not a proximate cause of any damages to the Plaintiff. 6 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. DATE: 2- / ;z.~ /63 91329.1 Esquire 7 VERIFICATION I, Nicholas N. Cordero, hereby acknowledge that I am a Defendant in this action, and I have read the foregoing document and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, informati?n and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject me to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ;f/ 1J ~~ ~~/h . Nicholas . ordero ~ Date: 91367.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on ;Z / bl:S- /D 3 I / David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. -1/f.-4~ J f ipman, Esquire . D. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant Q ~: "T,1 (i ~)f;. ':}" E:-2 ~rl ~ =< t=~ C.l " i"rl Cl,,) C'> -"n "'-) 0--\ ') ;:.:.J """":t -.J", ~~) -r-t -', } _.,- ,.. < ) ~'--:- '"Tl .' '1' ~~:~ If --< N :.n U) AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes the Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LlP by David H Rosenberg, Esquire, and responds as follows: 24-25. Denied. All these averments are conclusions of law to which a response is not required. If a response was required, these averments are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demands judgment against Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero for the Relief set forth in their Complaint. Respectfully submitted, 2r/UU;; DATE HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Attorney fOlr Plaintiffs AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 28th day of February, 2003, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Reply To New Matter was served upon the following by depositing in U.S. Mail; Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 Respectfully submitted, zfd(63 DATE HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP ~. David H Ro I.D. #205 1300 Li lestown Road HarrisDurg" PA 17110 717 -238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff (") c < "'U1:'li mrT~ ~~-: z(' en ";; "'< " !<c ~(' =C' ....~c Z =< o (...) ~ "l~" ::0 I (.1'1 o "'l ~ II , r 'Ti .SJ ---~ ~~) ,.~ ". ){) ,~)nl '::1 ~r> ::.0 -< ,) -=:? ''V AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 3 pt day of March of2003, I hereby certify that I have, on this date, served the within Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal, Answers to Defendants First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production Addressed To Plaintiff, via first class mail by sending a true and correct copy of same to their attorney and including copies to all parties of interest as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney for Defendants Attorney ID#51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG By: David H osenberg, Esquire Attorne ID# 20569 1300 inglestown Road Harr" burg, PA 17110 (717)238-2000 .. () c C (.,,) s: ~ ." 0: Cl q;J q' :::0 zf ~t <::: -0 )>c ...;t... ~g Z :"''1 :< () -n I..r' l..,_~ , ~Ii ~~~~ ::c -< AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 6th day of May of2003, I hereby certify that I have, on this date, served the within Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal, Answers to Defendants Second Set of Request for Production Addressed To Plaintiff, via first class mail by sending a true and correct copy of same to their attorney and including copies to all parties of interest as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney for Defendants Attorney ID#51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG By: David Rosenberg, Esquire Atto ey ID# 20569 130 Linglestown Road H isburg, P A 1711 0 (717)238-2000 " ~ () C ? -ol~ 0'1";" .:.?. :J-: .~s.; ~c:... ;::; c: ~~~; / ::2 -. o W :J:: :t::'" ~ I -.! o '-rf ...,., ,",G '0 L ~) .H~ _...LJ --'. . r;:'" ~o -< -0 .....- ~ 'J1 (~ Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire LD. *51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OBJECTIONS TO SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Nicholas Cordero, by and through his counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., and files the following objection to the proposed Subpoena that is attached to these Objections for the following reasons: 1. The Subpoenas seeks the entire claims file of Erie Insurance Company. Pursuant to Rule 4003.3, the discovery of a representative of a party shall not include disclosure of his or her mental impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or re,specting strategy or tactics. Respectfully submitted, G, K1~ZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. ~.~A:'b.<...---' J f rson J. Shipm ,Esquire A torneys for Defendant DATE: -;J 1:2-7/ e>"3 98865,1 AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.:21 Plaintiff intends to serve a subpoena identical to tlhe one that is attached to this notice, You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to tlhe subpoena, If no objections are made the subpoena may be served, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP ii?//(( D,") DA E David H osenberg, Esquire 1.0,#2 69 1300 inglestown Road Harrisburg, PA '17110 717-238-2000 Attorney for Pla;intiff '. AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v, NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 7/15/03, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,21 upon all counsel and parties of interest by placing the same in the United States mail, first class. postage-prepared, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania addressed as follows: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P,O, Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 Respectfully submitted, . ,/5'(J :> DATE HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Ro I.D. #20Ei6 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238.2000 Attorney for Plaintiff COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROOERI' NEAL, plaintiffs v. NICHOLAS N. CORDEro, Defendant File No, 02-5905 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Erie Insurance Group, 4901 Louise Drive, P.O. Box 2013, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: ENTIRE CLAIMS FILE at Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP, 1300 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg, PA 17011 (Address) You may deliver or maii legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: Name David H Rosenberg, Esq. Address: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: 717-238-2000 Supreme Court ID # 20569 Attorney For: Audrev and Robert Neal Date: 0l..L1'l II .J /'V'l. ~ , Seal of the Court BY THE COURT: -L7tlrr~ J K ~ ProthonotarylClerk, Division ,---=-~~I ,P ~/J.d. r- Deputy (Eft,7/97) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the united States Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on 7/:1-3/t'''? { / David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for plaintiff GOLDBERG, K1~ZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. r ./.-10 rL4(b.4 son ;.~~ Esquire #: 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant (") c: :?' -0 IT.' rTlr-:- ~~;;'>. /.- " U).' ~t~i ~;:;.C ~('.J 5>f; ::2 c c~ ,".] ~ :; / '..,) '''::) . ~..l Jefferson J. Shipman 1.0,#51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.e. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. NO. 02-5905 CIVIL TERM NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TR[AL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE PREREOUlSITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Defendant hereby certifies that: (1) A Notice OfIntent To Serve A Subpoena, with copies of the subpoenas attached thereto, was mailed, via Certified Mail, or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoenas were sought to be served; (2) A copy of the Notice OfIntent, including the proposed subpoenas, is attached to this Certificate; (3) No objection to the subpoenas has been received; and (4) The subpoenas to be served are identical to the subpoenas attached to the Notice OfIntent. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C, By Je rson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 51785 320 Market Street P,O, Box ]268 Harrisburg, PA 17]08-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant Date: '1/ d. f / 0;' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon all counsel of record by depositing the same in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the ;2 rg'th day of Ju. ~/ ,2003, addressed as follows: David H, Rosenberg, Esquire Handler Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, P A 17110 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P,C. Jeffe on J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney 1.D. # 51785 320 Market Street P,O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 By Counsel for Defendant Jefferson 1. Shipman !.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SIllPMAN, P.c. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNS'\:'L VANIA v. NO. 02..5905 CIVIL TERM NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION .. LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 TO: Audrey Neal, Robert Neal and David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant intends to serve eleven subpoenas identical to the ones that are attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoenas. If no objection is made, the subpoenas may be served, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, p.e. . Date: '11'1/03 By . Ie rson 1. Shipman, Esquire AttorneyLD, # 51785 320 Market Street P,O, Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant -.- - -.-----~....-...---____..._________~___H....___._..._.______._._..__~______.___ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon all counsel of record by depositing the same in the United States Mail, certified postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the '7 -ffl day of ,/ <.A ( \ , I ,2003, addressed as follows: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, P A 1711 0 GOLDBERG KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P,C, By Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire . Attorney I.D, # 51785 320 Market Street P,O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant --_...._-_._-_._----~_. --_.~._-----_._-------_.__._--"_..._-----,--_..._-_._-.._~ COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERU\ND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO FtULE 4009,22 TO: State Farm Mutual Insurance Company _ (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and all records reoardino Policy number 7115-452-38R. claim number 38-J831-457 pertainino to Audrey Neal SSN: 169-44-7497 DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman. P,C" 320 Market Street, P,O. Box 1268, Hanisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the part}' making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a coulll order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburq, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT 10 # 51785 BY THE COURT: DATE:JU.A-'-1 ,], a. 00') ~court ('~ (Elf. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL. her husband Plaintiffs v. : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,22 TO: Dollar General Corporation (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: any and all emolovment recore!s, personnel records, workers' compensation file pertaininQ to Audrev Neal SSN: 169-44.7497 DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P,C" 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, ESQuire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P,O. Box 1268 Harrisbura, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 DATE: 3, oZ CJLJ3 eCourt BY THE COURT: {t ~A r:;(,0 prothonotary/Clel Ci\{1 Division () ~ /L,c{' f:. tel.' ~/ D~ ty (Eft. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,22 TO: Cumberland Crossinas Retirement Communitv (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: any and all emoloyment records, personnel records. workers' compensation file pertainina to Audrey Neal SSN: 169-44-7497. DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman. P,C" 320 Market Street, P.O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonalble cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbura, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 j JOo3 BY THE COl!RT: ~ f2~ Pro honotary/ClerkJiA;YiSiOn . tv...L-- k ~ ' j De t DATE: (Eft 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Claremont NursinQ and Rehabilitation Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: any and all employment reco rds, personnel records, workers' compensation file pertaininQ to Audrey Neal SSN: 169-44-7497, DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P,C" 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268, You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the paricY making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a COLlrt order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburo. PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COURT: DATE: ,-3, ;((566 Court (t~<j J'::^i:J I J (Eff. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION.LAW NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: ManorCare Health Services _ (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and all emplovment records, personnel records, workers' compensation file pertaininq to Audrey Neal SSN: 169-44-7497, DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburq, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT 10 # 51785 BY THE COURT: DATE: (Eff.7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLANQ AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v. : CIViL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,22 TO: Hobart's Auto Bod (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, YOll are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: any and all records pertainina to a 1999 Kia Sephia, VIN: KNAFB1211X5793447 owned bv Robert Neal and Audrev Neal at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P,C., 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonat,le cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esauire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbura, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COURT: ~ RJ proi,' onotary/C.lerk. <fivil ~.~ ;..J DATE: ~~ 3 ~o62 Sd of t Court (Elf. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Sarah Todd Memorial Home (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: any and all emplovment records, personnel records, workers' compensation file pertainino to Robert Neal SSN: 195-38-9834 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P .C., 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbum, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COURT: DATE: j ~6()3 ourt ~1 P Dp ty (Elf. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLANQ AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v. : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Unum Provident (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, YOll are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and all records reaardina ciaim number 0099153055 pertainina to Audrev Neal SSN: 169-44-7497 DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C" 320 Market Street, P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies af the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbura, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COURT: eWGLW DATE: 3 ;( (I oj Court pr~thonotary/Cle1' A.viI Divisio , .~~, /~~ lJM.~ ~ / D~pty (Eff.7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CiVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Carlisle Reoional Medical Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and all medical records, reoolis. corresoondence, diaonostic test results oertainino to Audrev Neal SSN: 169-44-7497, DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C" 320 Market Street, P.O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268, You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shioman, Esquire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburo, PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COUR'1: !J. J.609 e Court DATE: '- (Eft. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N, CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Yellow Breeches FamilY Practice Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and all medical records, reports, correspondence, diaanostic test results pertainina to Audrey Neal SSN: 169-44-7497, DOB: 1/23/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P,C,. 320 Market Street, P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268, You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compeliing you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Jefferson J, Shipman, Esauire ADDRESS: 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbura. PA 17108-1268 TELEPHONE: (717) 234-4161 SUPREME COURT ID # 51785 BY THE COURT: r~~~ Pro honotary Ic~rkl Civil Divi i n ;J ~ ~ --.~ I 7 eputy DATE: 1 CM63 trl oft e Court (Eft. 7/97) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs v, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : NO: 02-5905 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Appalachian Orthopedic Center L TD (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: anv and ail medical records, reports, correspondence. diaanostic test results pertainina to Audrev Neal SSN: 169-44-7497, DOB: 1/n/58 at Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P,C., 320 Market Street, P,O, Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-'1268. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above, You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compeiling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT ID # Jefferson J, Shipman, Esauire 320 Market Street. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisbura, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 51785 NAME: ADDRESS: BY THE COURT: DATE: n.l, 1,0 (~.Wl pro. thonotary/cl,rk, ~c-,JL y U / puty (Elf. 7/97) () S- :'0 Et"f nit,',; ,;?:=':' /2J' ~r: j;: ~? < ::< ~ :.11 .J::- c-::: S,? '.. I-~- ~:'} -";"Tl <:1 , :~.() i..r -,:5 ,'c;nl .~ .5:; ~ ~'\) f,C: .~, '.' F:IWP DirectorieslLAWCLERKlKASIMotion to CompellNeal - redaction log,wpd AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant, CIVIL AC:TION - LAW MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT'S FULL AND COMPLETE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND NOW, comes the Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, by and through their attorney, David H Rosenberg, Esquire, of HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, and hereby moves this Honorable Court to compel the Defendant, Nicholas N, Cordero, to file complete and responsive Answers to Plaintiffs' Requests fclr Production of Documents, and in support thereof, avers the following: 1, Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, are adult individuals residing at 15 McBride Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17013. 2, Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, is an adult individual residing at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17007. 3. On or about December 12, 2002, Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County alleging that personal injuries were sustained on November 30, 2001, resulting from Defendant's vehicle slamming into the driver's side of Plaintiffs' vehicle. Defendant hit Plaintiffs' vehicle when he attempted to change lanes, from the left to the right, while traveling on West Willow Street through the intersection of Hanover Street in Carlisle, Cumberland County, 1 Pennsylvania. 4, On or about February 11,2003, Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, was served with Plaintiffs' First Request for Production of Documents. 5. Pursuant to Pa.R.Civ.P, 4009.12(a), "[t]he party upon whom the request is served shall within thirty days after service of the request (1) serve an answer including objections to each numbered paragraph in the request, and (2) produce or make available to the party submitting the request those documents and things described in the request to which there is no objection," 6, As ofthe date of this Motion to Compel, Plaintiffs have only received a partial and incomplete response to their First Request for Production of Documents. 7, Plaintiffs requested Defendant's Erie Insurance file and to date have received only portions of the insurance file with many redactions. 8, Pursuant to Pa,R.Civ.p, 4009,12(b), "The answer shall be in the form of a paragraph-by-paragraph response which shall (1) identify all documents or things produced or made available; (2) identify all documents or things not produced or made available because of the objection that they are not within the scope of permissible discovery under Rule 4003,2 through 4003.6 inclusive and Rule 4011(c:), Documents or things not produced shall be identified with reasonable particularity together with the basis for non- production, . , " 9, Defendant has not provided a redaction log or an indexing log as required pursuant to Pa,R.Civ.P. 4009,12(b), 10, Defendant's full and complete response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents should have been served on or before March 13, 2003, 2 11. Well over thirty (30) days have passed sincH Plaintiffs served Defendant with their Requests for Production of Documents and, in fact, over 174 days have passed. 12, Plaintiffs believe and, therefore, aver, that the information that could be gained by the response to their Requests for Production of Documents is necessary and vital in order for them to properly litigate their claim, 13, On or about April 2,2003, Plaintiffs' counsel notified Attorney Jefferson J. Shipman by letter that full and complete responses to Plaintiffs' First Request for Production of Documents had not been received and requested that Defendant provide a time frame as to when the responses could be expected. Subsequently, on or about April 4,2003, Plaintiffs' counsel notified Attorney Shipman by letter that Plaintiff would grant an extension for responses to discovery until April 25, 2003, On May 12, 2003, Plaintiffs' counsel notified Attorney Shipman by letter that although discovery had been received it was deficient in that it appeared to lack the Defendant's complete Erie Insurance file. On May 27, 2003, Plaintiffs' counsel again wrote a letter to Attorney Shipman requesting a redaction log for the Erie Insurance file. Subsequently, on July 15, 2003 Plaintiffs' counsel sent Notice of Intent to Serve Subpeona to Erie Insurance to produce their entire claims file, Attorney Shipman replied on July 28, 2003, by Objecting to the sUbpeona, claiming Rule 4003,3 as precluding release of the file. Attached hemto and marked exhibit "A" are copies of that correspondence, 14, Defendant and/or his counsel have never produced the requisite redaction log of all the documents in the entire Erie Insurance file, which they claim are protected under Rule 4003.3, 15, In order to complete discovery and move this action expeditiously, Plaintiffs 3 respectfully submit this Motion to Compel the Production of Defendant's entire Erie Insurance File including a redaction log of any and all privileged information. 16, In the alternative, Plaintiffs request that at least a redaction log be provided for what documents have been provided and for what documents from the file will not be provided based on an objection, 17, Plaintiff also respectfully requests an in camera inspection of the Erie Insurance file. 18, Assuming arguendo this Honorable Court does not grant the foregoing motion, Plaintiff respectfully requests a discovery conference. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, respectfully request that this Honorable Court issue an order compelling Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to respond to Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents within twenty (20) days or suffer such sanctions as this Court may deem just. Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG Date: O-? -() ) -I J / /4/' By: ""JA; David H Ro nberg, Esquire Attorney I. . # 20569 1300 Un estown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-:WOO Attorney for Plaintiff 4 AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 7th day of August, 2003, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Motion to Compel Defendant's Full and Complete Response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents was served upon the following by depositing in U,S. Mail; Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq, Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C, P,O, Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 Jf7~ DATE Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP ~ osenberg, Esquire /.0,# 569 130 Lingll~stown Road H risburg, PA 17110 7 7-238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff ATTORNEYS AT LAW HARRISBURG OFFICE 1300 Unglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717.238-2000 1-800-422.2224 717.233-3029 (fax) LANCASTER OFFICE 140A E King Street Lancaster, PA 17602 717-431-4000 Leslie B. Handler, Retired W. Scott Henning David H Rosenberg (PA, Fl) Carolyn M. Anner (PA, NY, RN) Matthew S. Crosby (PA, NJ) Gregory M_ Feather (PA, NJ) Stephen G. Held Jason C. Imler April 2, 2003 DIRECT MAIL TO: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 www.HHRLaw.com Rosenberg@hhrlaw.com Jefferson J, Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P.O, Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 RE: Audrey C. Neal v. Nicholas Cordero Incident of 11/30/2001 Dear Mr, Shipman: I note that the Answers to Discovery are due and I havl~ not received them from you. Please give me an idea when you are going to receive them, If you need and extension, please advise, Additionally, I would like to move forward with this case. Are you prepared to commence depositions at this time? Please contact my office to schedule depositions, I will be willing to take the depositions of your insured, Mr. Cordero, of course that is provided he is out of jail at this point in time, Please let me know his whereabouts, I look forward to hearing from you, Very truly yours, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Rosenberg DHR/tgd cc: Audrey C. Neal andlt. . tnningli I ostnbt,g,LLP 8A,J;;ro,RN.'&e'lS AT LAW W. Scott Henning David H Rosenberg (PA, FL) Carolyn M. Anner (PA, NY, RN) Matthew S. Crosby (PA. NJ) Gregory M. Feather (PA, NJ) Stephen G. Held Jason C. Imler April 4, 2003 HARRISBURG OFFICE 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 1.800.422-2224 717.233-3029 (fax) LANCASTER OFFICE 140A E Kin9 Street Lancaster, PA 17602 717-431.4000 DIRECT MAIL TO: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 www.HHRLaw.com Rosenberg@hhrlaw.com Jefferson J, Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C, P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 RE: Audrey C. Neal v. Nicholas Cordero Date of Incident: 11/30/2001 Dear Mr. Shipman: I spoke with Susan in your office regarding the Discovery that has been served on you for your client. She advised me that she was having trouble locating your client, who has apparently moved. As I indicated to you, I do know that he was in the Cumberland County prison for drunk driving at one point in time, however, he may be out of jail at this time. In any event, I am not adverse to granting a reasonable extension to answer the Discovery, You have not indicated to me how much of an extension you would like and it is already past the time of having the response to Discovery. While I do not mind working with you on this matter, I do want to move this forward. My client should not be held up in pursuin9 her claim based upon the inability of your client to cooperate with you. I would hope that you would contact my office and we can schedule my client's deposition and any other depositions, with the exception of your insured, that you fe,al are necessary in order to be able to move this case forward. Please advise me if you are going to depose my client and if so, when you would like to do that. If there is any other Discovery that you need to take piace conceming my client, I would appreciate it if you would indicate that to me at this point in time. I will want to take your client's deposition but not until I do receive the Discovery responses. There may be other individuals I may want to depose, depending on those Discovery responses. I will want you to respond to the questions concerning surveillance prior to any deposing of my client. To reiterate, please contact me upon receipt of this letter to commence scheduling depositions. I will grant you an extension to answer the Discovery in this case to April 25, 2003. IF for some reason this is not adequate, please advise me as soon as possible. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Rosenberg DHR/tgd cc: Audrey C. Neal andltr. tnningrr I Ostnbtrg,LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Leslie B. Handler, Retired W. Scott Henning David H Rosenberg (PA, FL) Carolyn M. Anner (PA. NY, RN) Matthew S. Crosby (PA, NJ) Gregory M. Feather (PA, NJ) Stephen G. Held Jason C. Imler May 12, 2003 HARRISBURG OFFICE 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717.238-2000 1-800.422.2224 717-233-3029 (fax) LANCASTER OFFICE 140A E King Street Lancaster, PA 17602 717.431-4000 DIRECT MAIL TO: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 www.HHRLaw.com Rosenberg@hhrlaw.com Jefferson J, Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 RE: Audrey C. Neal v. Nicholas Cordero Dear Mr. Shipman: I have reviewed your answers to Discovery and I do think they are deficient in many aspects. I would like to discuss this with you and hopefully we can resolve the deficiencies without court intervention. However, if we cannot, then that will be necessary. With respect to our request for Production of Documents, I asked in question four for the entire insurance file and any indexing information. I do not see any documents reflecting Erie insurance's file, notes or any other information or indexing information. The only thing remotely in Erie's insurance file was documents that I sent to them. I am aware of Erie's procedures and I have seen their insurance files before and I know that they keep notes in there computer programs and they have other information. I would ask that you provide me those documents. If you feel there is something not discoverable, you should redact that information. However, your failure to provide me with any information is inappropriate. With respect to the Interrogatories, your response to paragraph 19 does not say anything, Your reference to the answer of New Matter is not responsive in that you only provided general denials without any specific basis for those denials. Please review my question again in which I asked for the basis of your denial, not to refer me back to the general answer that you provided me. The same applies to paragraph 20. As I indicated, I hope we can resolve this matter without court intervention, however, if we are not able to resolve this, I will request a Discovery conference. I look forward to hearing from you shortly. Very truly yours, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Rosenberg DHRltgd cc: Audrey C, Neal HARRISBURG OFFICE 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 1.800-422-2224 717-233.3029 (fax) LANCASTER OFFICE 140A E King Street Lancaster, PA 17602 717.431-4000 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Leslie B. Handler, Retired W. Scott Henning David H Rosenberg (PA, FL) Carolyn M. Anner (PA, NY, RN) Matthew S. Crosby (PA, NJ) Gregory M. Feather (PA, NJ) Stephen G. Held Jason C. Imler May 27, 2003 DIRECT MAIL TO: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 www.HHRLaw.com Rosenberg@hhrlaw.com Jefferson J, Shipman. Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P,O, Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 RE: Audrey C. Neal v. Nicholas Cordero Dear Jeff: Thank you for providing me with the requested Discovery which included Erie Insurance's file, Please advise me if you have redacted any information from that file. There is a lot of empty spaces and it appears that there may be information that was deleted. If that is the case, I would like to have a log from you or a copy showing what was redacted by running lines through it rather than receiving documents without that information, I look forward to hearing from you with clarification whether or not redactions took place. Very truly yours, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Rosenberg DHR/tgd cc: Audrey C. Neal / Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire 1.0. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P,C. 320 Market Street p, O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OBJECTIONS TO SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Nicholas Cordero, by and through his counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., and files the following objection to the proposed Subpoena that is attached to these Objections for the following reasons: 1. The Subpoenas seeks the entire claims file of Erie Insurance Company. Pursuant to Rule 4003.3, the discovery of a representative of a party shall not include disclosure of his or her mental impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics. Respectfully submitted, DATE: -7/27/ t";J 98865,1 j(]l,TZMAN & SHIPMAN, P. c. .,~AKfPt,c/tA~-- ff rson J. Shipma , Esquire torneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 Plaintiff intends to serve a subpoena identical to the one that is attached to this notice, You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena, If no objections are made the subpoena may be served. HANDLER, HEI\INING & ROSENBERG, LLP j(/((D,) DATE David H osenberg, Esquire I.D. #2 69 1300 inglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND AUDREY NEAL and ROOERI' NEAL, Plaintiffs v. NICHOLAS N. CORDEro, Defendant File No. 02-5905 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANTTO RULE 4009.22 TO: Erie Insurance Group, 4901 Louise Drive, P.O. Box 2013, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: ENTIRE CLAIMS FILE at Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP, 1300 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg, PA 17011 (Address) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOllOWING PERSON: Name David H Rosenberg, Esq. Address: 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: 717-238-2000 Supreme Court ID # 20569 Attorney For: Audrev and Robert Neal BY THE COURT: -17 Date: 0l..L1'l /I .J rY'l. < I Seal of the Court Prothonotary/Clerk, . Division ,-----=-,4;2-"" .P . ~/.Vy . r-- Deputy (Eft. 7/97) AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 7/15/03, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 upon all counsel and parties of interest by placing the same in the United States mail, first class, postage-prepared, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania addressed as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman. Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 Respectfully submitted, : J !I-(/J 3 DATE HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP t David H Ro 1.0. #2056 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage 7 /2-~ /r-" I / prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. (' . . 1../L-<-/-J!:;J,1tI.1 (t!l-Lf son J. Shipmar!, Esquire #: 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant C) ("-\ Cl C , :'j -- , ~ :~ '".' j- ., ; ~. ~I ~0' C' ) ."7 i:) r -""1 ;'( - -:-::J ,~~ C) < j., f'-J rn -:--=t .' ~'" :'.{ :.'1 ::J -< ( .., -< AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant , I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 18TH day of August, 2003, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Defendant's Full and Complete Response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents, a Rule is hereby issued upon Defendants to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 20 days of service. .,.6'avid H. Rosenberg, Esq. 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff /.kfferson J. Shipman, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-6808 Attorney for Defendant :rc BY THE COURT, J ~ tMaU R~S 0<8-JQ-03 'iINVlil\Si\fi\f3c1 ,-, '"oJ ,. '~T:':':!~',lnJ 5/:;; d (] J ;;iW CO .~!:J\/L~_. .;'"j-.___,. dO Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire !.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT'S FULL AND COMPLETE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' REOUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS I. Admitted. 2. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Nicholas N. Cordero is an adult individual. It is denied that he resides at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007. Mr. Cordero's current address is 61 West North Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Admitted that there was a collision between the vehicles. The remaining statements are denied as stated. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. Defendant has produced all documents in th(:ir file which are relevant and discoverable pursuant to the Pa. R.e. P. Rule 4003.3 states, With respect to the representative of a party other than the party's attorney, discovery shall not include disclosure of his or her mental impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics. 7. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is denied that only portions of Erie's file was produced. It is admitted that there were redactions in the file that was produced. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant did not provide a log listing each document not produced or explain each redaction made within certain documents which were produced. It is denied that Defendant did not provide an explanation of the redactions made by Defendant. In Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintijft, response No.4, Defendant states, "Objection.....this request is Seekl!ng infonnation protected by Pa. R.e.p. 4003.3...." (supra) 10. Admitted. II. Admitted. 12. Denied. No discoverable infonnation vital to Plaintiffs' claim has been withheld from Plaintiff 2 13. Admitted. By further explanation, in their letter of May 27,2003 to Attorney Shipman, Plaintiffs' asked for a redaction log "or a copy [ofthe Erie Insurance file] showing what was redacted by running lines through." 14. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant's did not provide a "redaction log of all the documents in the entire Erie file." It is denied that Defendant did not respond to Plaintiffs' request as stated in their May 27,2003 letter. On May 22,2003, Defendant served on Plaintiffs' Supplemental Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintifft. These responses contained documents from the Erie Insuranc,e file which had not been provided in Defendants original discovery answers, served May 7, 2003. Said documents contained portions which were protected by Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3 (supra) thus, portions were redacted. Pursuant to Plaintiffs' letter of May 27,2003 (supra), Defendant served on May 22,2003, Supplemental Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintifft. Said supplemental responses contained the documents from Erie's file which had betm provided previously, but which contained redactions. In lieu of providing copies "showing what was redacted by running lines through", Defendant marked the deleted areas of the documents with a "redacted" stamp, in red ink, so that Plaintiffs would know the exact location of the redacted information. Defendants also provided, at this time, documents which had been mistakenly omitted during the copying process when the file was first produced. 15. All relevant, discoverable information has already been provided to Plaintiffs. 3 16. All relevant, discoverable information has already been provided to Plaintiffs. 17. The statement requests a legal remedy. The Defendant has no objection to an in camera review ifthis is deemed necessary. 18. The Defendant has no objection to a conference, if necessary, to clarify/exp1ain its position. Respectfully submitted, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN B-0 "'.AA'~.'''''''- y:~ Shipman, Esquire - LD. #51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifY that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in A~ Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 2) . day of ~~ ,2003: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. <f-l~,~ fer on J. Shipman, Esquir~ .D. #: 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-1268 717-234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant () c: <'" '"tJ ;~r; nll'r": Z:X' ZC,-~ (j),,'::.. -<. . r'c ~c ~ :;::1'"'-; ~'i~",' ;J> .. c::: 2': :~ o (...) ~ (;~ f'~ C.Fl o -q ;J :'12;) ;:_~G '2(~ ),~ ::H ~)o :"':o;(Tl ,_..) --I '.,.:.. 5:) -< -0 '-', ''0 ."- AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 18TH day of August, 2003, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Defendant's Full and Complete Response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents, and of Defendant's Response to Motion To Compel Defendant's Full and Complete Response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents, a discovery conference is scheduled for Wednesday, November 12,2003, at 1 :30 p.m., in chambers of the undersigned judge. .,1)avid H. Rosenberg, Esq. 1300 Ling1estown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff ? v1efferson J. Shipman, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-6808 Attorney for Defendant :rc BY THE COURT, J. es1ey 01 t~ r'tRX5 09-03-03 ItIN'ltA1ASNN3d IJ.NnO'.J O\'lY38[J\J(1:1 [)'1 :Z I: ,\ 7.. _1 Jt,: ('r~ '. I.,/,.J,,,,, 1.-". ^~NL~:: Jefferson 1. Shipman, Esquire !.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.c. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717)234-4161 Counsel for Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 02-5905 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT'S FULL AND COMPLETE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' REOUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Nicholas N. Cordero is an adult individual. It is denied that he resides at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007. Mr. Cordero's current address is 61 West North Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Admitted that there was a collision between the vehicles. The remaining statements are denied as stated. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. Defendant has produced all documents in their file which are relevant and discoverable pursuant to the Pa. R.C. P. Rule 4003.3 states, With respect to the representative of a party other than the party's attorney, discovery shall not include disclosure of his or her mental impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics. 7. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is denied that only portions of Erie's file was produced. It is admitted that there were redactions in the file that was produced. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant did not provide a log listing each document not produced or explain each redaction made within certain documents which were produced. It is denied that Defendant did not provide an explanation of the redactions made by Defendant. In Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintiffs, response No.4, Defendant states, "Objection.....this request is seeking information protected by Pa. R.C.P.4003.3...." (supra) 10. Admitted. 11. Admitted. 12. Denied. No discoverable information vital to Plaintiffs' claim has been withheld from Plaintiff. 2 13. Admitted. By further explanation, in their letter of May 27,2003 to Attorney Shipman, Plaintiffs' asked for a redaction log "or a copy [of the Erie Insurance file] showing what was redacted by running lines through." 14. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant's did not provide a "redaction log of all the documents in the entire Erie file." It is denied that Defendant did not respond to Plaintiffs' request as stated in their May 27,2003 letter. On May 22,2003, Defendant served on Plaintiffs' Supplemental Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintiffi. These responses contained documents from the Erie Insurance file which had not been provided in Defendants original discovery answers, served May 7, 2003. Said documents contained portions which were protected by Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3 (supra) thus, portions were redacted. Pursuant to Plaintiffs' letter of May 27,2003 (supra), Defendant served on May 22, 2003, Supplemental Responses of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to First Set of Request for Production of Documents of Plaintiffs. Said supplemental responses contained the documents from Erie's file which had been provided previously, but which contained redactions. In lieu of providing copies "showing what was redacted by running lines through", Defendant marked the deleted areas of the documents with a "redacted" stamp, in red ink, so that Plaintiffs would know the exact location of the redacted information. Defendants also provided, at this time, do'~uments which had been mistakenly omitted during the copying process when the file was first produced. 15. All relevant, discoverable information has already been provided to Plaintiffs. 3 16. All relevant, discoverable information has already been provided to Plaintiffs. 17. The statement requests a legal remedy. The Defendant has no objection to an in camera review if this is deemed necessary. 18. The Defendant has no objection to a conference, if necessary, to clarify/explain its position. Respectfully submitted, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN BY: Je erson J. Shipman, Esquire - LD. #51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PAl 71 08-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in "0 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the ;.)' day of ~~ ,2003: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, P A 171 06 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. er on J. Shipman, Esquire .D. #: 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, P A 17108-1268 717-234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant OF COllNSEL F. LEE SHIPMAN COUNSEL JOSHUA D. LOCK ARNOLD B. KOGAN ARTHUR L. GOLDBERG (1951-2000) HARRY B. GOLDBERG (1961-1998) RONALD M. KATZMAN PAUL J. ESPOSITO NEIL HENDERSHOT J. JAY COOPER THOMAS E. BRENNER JOHN A. STATLER APRIL L. STRANG-KUTAY GUY H. BROOKS JEFFERSON J. SHIPMAN JERRY J. Russo MICHAEL ]. CROCENZr THOMAS J. WEBER STEVEN E. GRUBB JOHN DELoRENZO JOHN R. NINOSKY ROYCE L. MORRIS DAVID M. STECKEL HEATHER L. PATERNO BENJAMIN D. ANDREOZZI 320 MARKET STREET. STRAWBERRY SQUARE P.O. Box 1268 . HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17108-1268 717.234.4161.717.234.6808 (FAX) GOLDBERG, KATZMAN &- SHIPMAN, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW August 22, 2003 Curt Long, Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Re: Neal v. Cordero No: 02-5905 Civil Term Dear Mr. Long: Enclosed please find the original and two copies of Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel which I would appreciate your filing of record in the above-referenced matter. Please return a time-stamped copy of the Response to me in the enclosed envelope. Thank you. JJS:mem Enclosures Very truly yours, cL/! ;;.~Jh:-fJ~~_t<-- ~ef~rson J. Shipman cc: The Honorable J. Wesley Oler (w/enc.) David H. Rosenberg, Esquire (w/enc.l .~\t AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant NO. 02-5905 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of November, 2003, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Defendant's Full and Complete Response to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents, and following a conference held in the chambers of the undersigned judge in which David H. Rosenberg, Esquire, represented the Plaintiffs, and Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, represented the Defendant, and counsel having indicated that they believe this matter can be amicably resolved, Plaintiffs' motion is deemed moot, without prejudice to Plaintiffs' right to file a subsequent motion in the event that Plaintiffs believe the amicable resolution referred to above has not been achieved. By the Court, ~David H. Rosenberg, Esquire 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 For the Plaintiffs vJefferson J. Shipman, Esquire P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 For the Defendant J. J.' ! . i ,/ '/ pcb 7GY~ lI'I1-~ \;fINV/i1ASI\N3d ,\IN:,C\,"; n\',\_/-,l;::::::.r~n~ 9 ~ : I t.,!d f.. \ i'ld;~ :;:;J N-::~'JJ.': .' ~}:) ~,(i\ IJ --Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire LD. No. 51785 30 I Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMEiERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA O~... S90$ NO.EllT-'i'M1 CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: PLEASE change the address and phone number of Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, attorney for Defendants, to: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER 301 Market Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Telephone: (717) 761-4540 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER ff son J. ShiPrr~;~~r;-- .D.#:51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Defendants DATE: ~~-f :226641 CERTIFICA TE OF SERVlCE AND NOW, this day of April, 2004, the undersignl~ does hereby certify that he did this date serve a copy of the foregoing document upon the other parties of record by causing same to be deposited in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: 'U(4t._. J ffe n J. Ship Sin, Esquire 01 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Defendants :226611 Q c ::'? ,...., C,".? co'" ",' ~} ?.) \ --l '- c"-' S;,., ,;\ :.;( .- ...... o .-n -' :-r--n rn--'"- -<1 ~" _.,,0 "d \ "?-\() :?j:;2) -.(.'0. rf\ ":e:1 -~~). ...... -.j ~:;;;.. -- U' U> AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION-LAW No. 02-5905 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 10th day of November of2004, I hereby certify that I have, on this date, served the within Plaintiffs Supplemental Answers to Defendants First Set of Interrogatories Addressed To Plaintiff, via first class mail by sending a true and correct copy of same to their attorney and including copies to all parties of interest as follows: Jefferson 1. Shipman, Esquire Attorney for Defendants 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, P A 17043-0109 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG By: osenberg, Esquire Attar y ID# 20569 130 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, P A 17110 (717)238-2000 F:IWP DirectoriesWFLlmotion-petition\dismiss objectionlneaJ.wpd AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Rolbert Neal, her husband, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by David H Rosenberg, Esq., and hereby move this Court, pursuant ItO Pa. R.C.P. 4006(a), for an Order to dismiss Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero's, Objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories to Defendant's medical experts, Dr. J10hn S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker, to disclose the amount of work they have performE~d and to provide all Federal 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors, in connection with medic:al and/or legal exams, the preparation of reports, examinations, and depositions forthe y,ears 2000 through 2005, and aver as follows: 1. Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, her husband, are competent adult individuals currently residing at 15 McBride Avenue, CarlisIE~, CUmberland County, PA 17013. 2. Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, is an adult individual currently residing at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, PA 17007. 3. On or about December 12, 2002, Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, alleging that personal injuries were sustained on November 30, 200", arising from a motor vehicle collision that occurred when the vehicle Defendant was operating struck the driver's side of Plaintiffs vehicle when Defendant was attempting to change lanes. 4. On or about July 12,2005, Plaintiffs served Defendant with their first set of Expert Interrogatories, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. Nos. 4005 and 4006, et. seq. Said Discovery requested the amount of work Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker have performed and all Federal 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group in connection with medical and/or legal exams and associated items from 2000 through 2005. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit A," is a copy of Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories). 5. On or about August 11, 2005, Defendant servl3d Plaintiffs with Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit B," is a copy of the August 11, 2005 Answers). 6. Impeachment of an expert witness by demonstrating partiality is permissible. Smith v. Celotex Corp., 564 A.2d 209, 214 (Pa. Super. 1985I) (citing Grutski v. Kline, 43 A.2d 142 (Pa. 1945)). 7. With regard to disclosing the amount of work an alleged IME doctor has provided for a defendant, our Superior Court in J.S. v. Whetzel!, 860 A.2d 1112, 1121 (Pa. Super. 2004) opined [The expert witness] should be required to "lift his visor so that the jury 2 could see who he was, what he represented, and what interest, if any, he had in the results of the trial, so thatthe jury could appraise his credibility." Whetzel, 860A.2d at 1120 (citing Goodis v. Gimbel Brothers, 218 A.2d 574,577 (Pa. 196El)). 8. In the instant matter, both Dr. John S. Rychalk and Jasen M. Walker are well- known in the south-central Pennsylvania area as two ofth'9 insurance industry's main "go- to men." 9. Further, our appellate courts have consistenllly permitted a party to examine an expert witness's relationship with the Counsel calling the expert, including the history and amount of compensation received by the expert from counsel. Whetzel, 860 A.2d at 1121;1 CooDer v. Schoffstall, 2004 WL 1969347 (Pa. SupE'r. 2004). 10. In CooDer, the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the trial court's Order that directed the Defendant's physician to produce, subject to a confidentiality order, copies of all Federal 1 099 tax forms which he received from insurance companies and law firms in connection with litigation-related examinations, reports, and depositions for the years 1999 through 2001. 11. Most recently, our Superior Court followed the Whetzel decision, holding that the production of 1099 forms was clearly relevant to determine whether an alleged IME doctor is biased in favor of the defendant or personal injury plaintiffs in general. Moore v. Clavton, Superior Court 1.0.P. 65.37 (Montgomery Cty. Apri/29, 2005). I The Superior Court in Whetzel ordered Dr. Perry Eagle to produce all 1099 forms received from any insurance company or attorney from 1999 through 2002, including those 1099 forms related to his services for Mr. Whetzel's counsel, in that particular case as well as other Gases. 3 12. In the instant matter, Plaintiffs' requests are not intended to intimidate, unduly burden nor harass neither Dr. John S. Rychak nor Jasen M. Walker. 13. Plaintiffs believe and, therefore, aver, that the information that could be gained by Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker, regarding the amount of work they have performed and the 1099 and W-2 forms they havEl received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors, is cleclrly relevant to the issue of bias. 14. Additionally, Plaintiffs believe and, therefore, aver, that there are no privacy concerns that will be implicated by an Order compelling pmduction of the amount of Work Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker have performed and the 1099 and W-2 forms issued to them by Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorne~'s or their predecessors. See CooDer, 2004 WL 1969347 at 6. 15. Plaintiffs have attempted to confer with Defl3ndanl's counsel in order to resolve the outstanding Discovery dispute; however, Defendlant does not concur with this Motion. 16. Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories are clearly proper and Defendant's experts should be directed to answer. 17. To complete discovery and move this action expeditiously, Plaintiffs respectfully submit this Motion to dismiss Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero's, Objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories. 18. Assuming, arauendo, this Honorable Court dOl3S not grant the foregoing motion, Plaintiffs respectfully request a Discovery Conference. 4 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, respectfully request that this Honorable Court issue an Order compelling Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker disclose the amount of work they have performed and to produce the requested 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors within twenty (20) days. Respectfully submitted, Date; f!z/o:;- HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP By; , Davi Rosenberg, Esq. A rney /.D. #20569 1 00 LinglE~stown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs 5 , . : 'Cl '~":771 ::'0" ';'::~ (';;::l , !,~ r'.j 1 CJ -'- ('il r:'? (II _,,) ,.c.:J .-< .C c'" """II! ;'..i:,.('.... '):-j:'~;x;:~:, Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs NO. 02-5905 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGA TORIES AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, by and through his attorneys, Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, and files this Answer to the Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss the Objections to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories, and avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted in part; Denied in part. It is admitted that the averments contained in this paragraph are identical to what the Plaintiffs have alleged in their Complaint. The truth as to the allegations contained in the Plaintiffs' Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded thereof at trial. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted in part; Denied in part. It is admitted that Smith v. Celotex Corp., 564 A.2d 209, 214 (Pa.Super. 1989) allows for the impeachment of an expert witness by demonstrating partiality. However, it is important to note, based on the issue presented in this Motion, that the Superior Court notes that an expert witness' compensation only "may have a slight bearing on the question of his impartiality." Id at 214 (quoting Grutski v. Kline, 352 Pa. 401, 43A.2d 142 (1945)). 7. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Superior Court opined that an expert witness should be required to disclose the amount of work an IME doctor has provided to "lift his visor". In fact, the Court inserted the quote cited by the Plaintiff for the purpose of emphasizing that cross examination of an expert witness is not unbridled and should be limited to determine what interest, if any, the IME physician had in the results of the trial at hand. Additionally, the very issue presented by the Defendant in this particular matter is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the matter Cooper v. Schoffstall, 863 A.2d 1146 (Pa. 2004). Until a final determination is made by the Supreme Court in the Cooper appeal, the Plaintiffs' premise in this particular motion lacks support under Pennsylvania law. 8. Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are unsupported conclusions of fact and are impertinent. 9. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that in certain cases, inquiry into an expert witness' relationship with counsel has been allowed. However, the court has specifically stated that "at all times, this [Superior] Court has made clear the information sought must be relevant to the inquiry presently before the Court." J. S. v. Whetzel, 860 A.2d 1112, 1121 (Pa.Super.2004). Again, it is imperative to note that the identical issue presented by the Plaintiffs in the instant motion is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and therefore, despite the Plaintiffs' assertions, the Plaintiffs' position is not a law in the Commonwealth. 10. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Cooper affirmed the trial court's order. Again, it is imperative to note that the identical issue presented by the Plaintiffs in the instant motion is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and therefore, despite the Plaintiffs' assertions, the Plaintiffs' position is not a law in the Commonwealth. 11. Denied. The Pennsylvania Superior Court in Moore v. Clavton, 876 A.2d 478 (Pa.Super.2005), filed no opinion regarding the issue at hand. 12. Denied. In fact, the Plaintiffs' requests are specifically intended to intimidate, unduly burden and harass both Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker. The intimidation, burden and harassment is clearly evidenced by the Plaintiffs' averment in paragraph 8 of their motion in which the Plaintiffs state: In the instant matter, both Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker are well-known in the south-central Pennsylvania area as two of the insurance industry's main "oo-to men." (emphasis added). 13. Denied. See paragraph 12 contained herein. 14. Denied. It is unfathomable that the Plaintiffs would aver that there are no privacy concerns implicated with the Plaintiffs' request. Any request to delve into an individual's personal finances is clearly an invasion into the individual's privacy. In the instant matter, there is absolutely no indication set forth by the Plaintiffs that either Dr. Rychak or Dr. Walker present issues of accountability or honesty, and therefore the privacy concerns of the individuals far outweigh the prejudicial impact of delving into private matters. 15. Admitted. 16. Denied. 17. Denied. 18. Denied. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court deny the Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker to disclose work they have performed and financial information from Erie Insurance Group or the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner. Respectfully submitted, , DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER . B' er ~. Sh pma orney I. D. No. 51785 1 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant csj:258393 22740-1472 CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this /:11Yday of September, 2005, the undersigned does hereby certify that she did this date serve a copy of the foregoing document upon the other parties of record by causing same to be deposited in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: David H. Rosenberg, Esq. Handler, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: !~ 17 /1\, AC ,) &arl& S. Jensen ~ C) ~~, -, " t:;'\_ 0.....'_,_, -:- l.> >~ ~~; ..: ~ =< r-> =' ~ U') f'""t -0 - \D o -rl ~~ -';''23 :.c; 1, 'i~~:H '0'(1. ~-,~.~ 'J 1 , ':.~ ", ~, :< -0 .- \'-') .- .t,:,"" Ut AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES ORDER AND NOW, this /f.- day of September, 2005, a brief argument on the within motion is set for Thursday, December I, 2005, at 2:45 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, P A. BY THE COURT, vVavid H. Rosenberg, Esquire For the Plaintiffs All :rlm ~efferson J. Shipman, Esquire For the Defendant VIN\f!\lASN~~:Jd I I "I'C'-' n', .-, ,-r'lln'"' f\.U,{ , I._" c,:.,.J "J-'d: '1. V LO :~ Wd 9/ d3S saUl AtNlONOHlOtid 3H1:10 381:1:{O-o311:l AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES ORDER AND NOW, this /" day of December, 2005, the motion of the plaintiffs to dismiss defendant's objections to their expert interrogatories is GRANTED and the defendant is directed to respond but with the following limitations: I. Each inquiry shall be limited to a period comprising the past four (4) years, the years 2002 through 2005 inclusive. 2. No response shall be required for interrogatory 4(b), 8(c) or 9(c). With respect to the witness, Jasen Walker, it is understood that the interrogatories relate to matters which are financial and not medical. BY THE COURT, --/G - /Ii v1'efferson J. Shipman, Esquire For the Defendant /'!?avid H. Rosenberg, Esquire For the Plaintiffs i. ':'1" "-, ;", 7... '1~ln Lj ,._ _,.-'._,l F:\ WP Directories\JFL\motion-petition\sanction\DA VID\neal.wpd AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant, CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND IMPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT FOR DEFENDANT'S FAILURE TO OBEY DISCOVERY ORDER AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by David H Rosenberg, Esquire, and hereby move this Honorable Court to make the Order dated December 1,2005, Absolute and Compel the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to file full, complete, specific and responsive answer to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories, and if Defendant fails to file said answers, Plaintiffs motion this Honorable Court for sanctions pursuant to Pa. R.c.P. 4019, and further disqualifying Jasen Walker as an expert for Defendant, and in support thereof, aver the following: 1. Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, are adult individuals residing at 15 McBride Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17013. 2. Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, is an adult individual residing at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17007. 3. On or about December 12, 2002, Plaintiffs, Audrey and Robert Neal, filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County alleging that personal injuries were sustained on November 30, 2001, resulting from Defendant's vehicle slamming into the driver's side of Plaintiffs' vehicle. Defendant hit Plaintiffs' vehicle when he attempted to change lanes, from the left to the right, while traveling on West Willow Street through the intersection of Hanover Street in Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 4. On or about July 12, 2005, Plaintiffs served their Expert Interrogatories on the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero. Said Discovery requested the amount of work Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker have performed and all Federal I 099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group in connection with medical and/or legal exams and associated items from 2000 through 2005. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit A," is a copy of Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories). 5. On or about August 11,2005, Defendant served Plaintiffs with Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit B," is a copy of the August 11,2005 Answers). 6. On or about September 2, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Objections to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories and further requested a Discovery Conference should said Motion not be granted. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit C," is a copy ofthe September 2, 2005 Motion). 7. On or about September 15,2005, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Objections to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit D," is a copy of said Answer). 8. On or about September 16, 2005, the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess granted a Discovery Conference to be held on December 1,2005, at 2:45 pm. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit E," is a copy of said Order). 2 9. On December 1,2005, oral argument was held in this matter before the Honorable Judge Kevin A. Hess. 10. On December 1,2005, this Honorable Court issued an Order that Defendant provide the requested responses to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories. The Order provided, inter alia, "With respect to the witness, Jasen Walker, it is understood that the interrogatories relate to matters which are financial and not medical." (A copy of said Order is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked as "Exhibit F.") I 1. On February 24, 2006, Defendant served Plaintiffs with Defendant's second response to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit G," is a copy of said Answer). 12. Although Defendant filed Answers with regard to Dr. R ychak' s financial information, Defendant has failed to file responses with regard to Jasen Walker's financial information. Instead, Defendant provided the response "Mr. Walker is not a medical physician and does not deal with medical legal matters," and provided said response five times. (See "Exhibit G.") 13. Defendant's response that Mr. Walker is not a medical physician is irrelevant and specifically contrary to the Honorable Judge Hess' Order dated December 1,2005. 14. Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4006(a)(2), Defendant's answers and objections, ifany, to the Expert Interrogatories were due within thirty (30) days of service of such Expert Interrogatories. IS. Well over thirty (30) days have passed since Plaintiffs served Defendant with their Expert Interrogatories and, in fact, over three (3) months have passed. 3 16. Plaintiffs believe and therefore aver, that the information that could be gained by full responses to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories is necessary and vital in order for them to properly litigate their claim. 17. By virtue of Defendant's failure to comply, Plaintiffs have been unable to secure important evidence and documents essential to the proof of their case and, as a result, have been prejudiced. 18. Defendant's failure to fully respond to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories has severely limited Plaintiffs' ability to develop their case in chief. 19. Pursuant to Rules 401 9(a)(I )(i) and 4019(a)(I)(viii) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may issue an appropriate Order for sanctions if a party fails to serve sufficient answers to written Interrogatories or fails to make discovery or to obey an Order of the Court respecting discovery. 20. Pursuant to Rules 4019( c)(I) ofthe Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may issue "...an order that the matters regarding which the questions were asked, or the character or description ofthe thing or land, or the contents of the paper, or any other designated fact shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the order." 21. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 4019(c)(2) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court may issue "...an order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated claims or defenses, or prohibiting such party from introducing in evidence designated documents, things or testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental condition." (emphasis added). See also Moore v. Team Clean Inc., 2005 PhiIa. Ct. Com. PI. LEXIS 4 484 (Oct. 20,2005) (Trial court did not err in sanctioning the injured party by prohibiting the injured party from introducing evidence at trial regarding his claim, as his continual failure to provide discovery despite the trial court's request that he do so meant the trial court could sanction him, even to the extent of barring him from presenting evidence based on Pa. R.e.p. 4019 (c)(2)). 22. A court's decision to exclude an expert's theory that was not mentioned in the experts reports was a proper sanction under Pa. R.C.P. 4019(c)(2) and within the trial court's discretion. Schweikert v. St. Luke's Hosp. of Bethlehem, 886 A.2d 265 (Pa. Super. 2005). 23. Where an insurance company violated discovery orders by repeatedly refusing to produce its records custodian for deposition and to produce corporate records, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering a default judgment as a sanction. Luszczvnski v. Bradlev, 729 A.2d 83 (Pa. Super. 1999), dismissed by 739 A.2d 1058 (Pa. 1999). 24. Pursuant to Rule 4019(g)(l) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court may require a party to pay reasonable expenses, including attorney fees, incurred by the moving party in obtaining an order of compliance and subsequent Order for sanctions. 25. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs believe and therefore aver, that Defendant will not provide Jasen M. Walker's financial information absent a court order pursuant to Pa. R.c.P. 4019(a)(I)(i). 5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, respectfully request that this Honorable Court issue a Rule Absolute and compel Defendant to file full, complete, specific and responsive Answers to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories within fifteen (15) days or Jasen Walker shall be disqualified as an expert and Defendant shall pay attorney's fees and shall suffer such additional sanctions as this Honorable Court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Date j - fL/-()b By Dav'a H Rosenberg, Esq. I. . # 20569 1 00 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 14th day of March, 2006, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Motion to Make Rule Absolute and Impose Sanctions Against Defendant for Defendant's Failure to Obey Discovery Order, was served upon the following by depositing in U.S. Mail; Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Goldberg, Katzman Shipman, P.C. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-6808 Respectfully submitted, 3 -I'-(-OV? DATE HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H Rose 1.0.#20569 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs Get a I "",ument - by Citation - 11-146 Dunlap-Hanna Pennsylvania ... I http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve.! _ m=29c3aStD7 a9 52d7 3d5aO... Service: Get by LEXSTAT@ TOC: Dunlap-Hanna. Pennsylvania Forms> Part 9 CIVIL lITIGATION--ACTIONS AT LAW> Chapter 146 Depositions and Discovery> Form 146.16-7 Motion for Sanctions To Preclude Use of Expert Witness Testimony at Trial Under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5(b) and 4019(c)(2) 1 Citation: 11-146 PAFORM FORM 146.16-7 11-146 Dunlap-Hanna Pennsylvania Forms Form 146.16-7 Dunlap-Hanna Pennsylvania Forms Copyright 2005 by George T. Bisel Company, Inc. and Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group. Part 9 CIVIL LITIGATION--ACTIONS AT LAW Chapter 146 Depositions and Discovery 11-146 Dunlap-Hanna Pennsylvania Forms Form 146.16-7 Form 146.16-7 Motion for Sanctions To Preclude Use of Expert Witness Testimony at Trial Under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5(b) and 4019(c)(2) 1 (Caption) DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF PLAINTIFF'S EXPERT WITNESS Defendant, Hospital, by its undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this court for an order pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5(b) and 4019(c)(2) precluding plaintiff from offering expert witness testimony at trial, and in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. This is an action for alleged medical malpractice arising out of care and treatment rendered to plaintiff by moving defendant and co-defendant Dr. , during plaintiff's hospital admission of , 19 2. On or about (date), moving defendant served on the plaintiff expert witness interrogatories pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5 seeking the identity of plaintiff's intended expert witnesses at trial and information as to their expected testimony and the basis for it. A copy of Defendant's Expert Witness Interrogatories to Plaintiff is attached as Exhibit "A." 3. On (date), after repeated requests on behalf of defendant and repeated promises of plaintiff to provide answers to defendant's expert witness interrogatories, plaintiff's counsel provided defense counsel with purported answers to the interrogatories. A copy of the Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's Expert Witness Interrogatories to Plaintiff is attached as Exhibit "B." These answers identified a psychiatrist who will testify as an expert on damages only and set forth that plaintiffs did not yet have an expert to testify with regard to liability. 4. Thereafter, on Defendant's (date), counsel for moving defendant filed and served Motion to Compel Answers to Expert Witness Interrogatories. 5. On (date), counsel for plaintiff filed and served Plaintiff's Answer to Defendants' Motion to Compel Answers to Expert Witness Interrogatories. 6. Ultimately, on (date), this Court entered an order directing plaintiff to either file complete answers to defendant's expert witness interrogatories or produce an appropriate report of an expert as to liability issues within days from the date of the order. A copy of the Court's order of (date) is attached as lof2 3/1 0120063:56 PM -.., ~cument - by Citation - 11-146 Dunlap-Hanna Pennsylvania ... http://www.lexis.comlresearch/retrieve.? _ m~29c3a81lJ7 a9 5 2d73 d5 aO... . Exhibit "c." 7. Plaintiff has violated the Court's order of (date), in that it has not responded to the expert witness interrogatories to date or submitted the reports of any expert witnesses who will testify regarding liability. 8. The discovery sought by moving defendant is essential to the defendant in formulating its defense to this action, and moving defendant has been and will be further prejudiced by reason of plaintiff's continued, willful and contemptuous failure to provide proper and timely discovery in this regard. 9. Pa. R,C.P. No. 4003.5(b) requires that the court preclude a disobedient party from presenting testimony of an expert witness, whose identity and opinion has not been provided in discovery. WHEREFORE, Defendant, , respectfully requests that this Court enter an order precluding plaintiff from introducing any expert testimony on the subject of liability at the trial of this matter. Attorney for Defendant (Verification) 1. This motion would normally be filed shortly before trial, when the prejudice to the discovering party is clear and irremediable. In that setting, the motion could also be styled as a motion in limine. Service: Get by LEXSTAT@ TOC: Dunlap-Hanna. Pennsylvania Forms> Part 9 CIVIL L1TIGATION--ACTIONS AT LAW> Chapter 146 Depositions and Discoverv > Form 146.16-7 Motion for Sanctions To Preclude Use of Expert Witness Testimony at Trial Under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5(b) and 4019(c)(2) 1 Citation: 11-146 PAFORM FORM 146.16-7 View: Full DaterTime: Friday, March 10, 2006 - 3:56 PM EST eb LexisNexisb About LexisNexis I Terms & Conditions Copvriqht (E) 2006 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 20[2 3/10120063:56 PM F:\WP Directories\BW8\DisCQvery\lnterrogatories\Expert Interrogatories\Neal.wpd AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF EXPERT INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT, NICHOLAS N. CORDERO To: NICHOLAS N. CORDERO clo JEFFERSON J. SHIPMAN, ESQUIRE Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C. 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that pursuant to the provisions of Pa.R.C.P. Nos. 4005 and 4006, et seq., as amended, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, her husband, Plaintiffs in this action, serve the within Expert Interrogatories on Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, and demand on Defendant to file the original of his Answers and objections, if any, in writing and under oath, to the following Interrogatories within thirty (30) days after service of the Interrogatories. The Answers shall be inserted in the spaces provided following each Interrogatory. If there is insufficient space to answer an Interrogatory, the remainder of the Answer shall follow on a supplemental sheet. These Interrogatories shall be deemed to be continuing in nature, in accordance with the provisions of PaRC.P. No. 4007.4, et seq., as amended. If, between the time of the filing of your original Answers to these Interrogatories, and the time of trial of this matter, you or anyone acting on your behalf gain knowledge of discoverable facts and the identity of persons expected to be called as expert witnesses not disclosed in your original Answers; or, if you or an expert witness obtain information upon the basis of which you or he knows that an Answer, though correct when made, is no longer true, then you shall promptly supplement your original Answers under oath to the undersigned. PLAINTIFF'S I EAIT DEFINITIONS - The following definitions are applicable to these standard interrogatories: "Document" means any written, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, including photographs, microfilms, phonographs, video and audio tapes, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. "Identify" or "Identity" means when used in reference to -- (1) A natural person, his or her: (a) full name; and (b) present or last known residence and employment address (including street name and number, city or town, and state or county); (2) A document: (a) its description (e.g., letter, memorandum, report, etc.), title, and date; (b) its su bject matter; (c) its author's identity; (d) its addressee's identity; (e) its present location; and (f) its custodian's identity; (3) an oral communication: (a) its date and the place where it occurred; (b) its substance; (c) the identity of the person who made the communication; and -2- (d) the identity of each person to whom such communication was made, and each person who was present when such communication was made; (4) a corporate entity: (a) its full corporate name; (b) its date and place of incorporation, if known, and (c) its present address and telephone number; (5) Any other context: a description with sufficient particularity that the thing may thereafter be specified and recognized, including relevant dates and places, and the identification of relevant people, entities, and the documents. (6) The term "identify" when used with respect to any other person, means to give the person's official, legal and formal name and/or the name under which the person acts or conducts business; the address of the person's place of business, profession, commerce or home; and the identity of the person's principal or chief executive officer or person who occupies a position most closely analogous to a chief executive. (7) If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the substance of the document or oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state each ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. "Incident" means the occurrence that forms that basis of a cause of action or claim for relief set forth in the Complaint or similar pleading. "Person" means a natural person, partnership, association, corporation, or government agency. -3- 1. What is the name and address of each expert witness on whom this defendant will rely at the trial of this matter? ANSWER: -4- 2. As to each expert, state the following: a. The field of specialty of the expert; b. The details of the expert's qualifications; and c. The purpose of reliance on the expert witness. ANSWERS: -5- 3. Please provide a copy of the curriculum vitae for each expert witness. ANSWER: -6- 4. Identify by case name, docket number, and by attorney and/or insurance company who hired him, all cases where each expert witness has been retained as an expert witness, rendered an opinion, or testified within the past ten (10) years. a. Include the amount of money each expert was paid for each service rendered (for example, consultation, defense medical examination, writing of a report, testifying, etc.) in each case. b. Attach to your answers to these Interrogatories all tax forms, including, but not limited to, 1099s and W-2s, documenting your answers to the preceding Interrogatories. ANSWERS: -7- 5. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state the following for each such expert: a. Gross amount of annual income earned from medical legal matters; b. Percentage of total income that was earned from medical legal matters. ANSWERS: -8- , 6. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert, the following; a. Hourly rate; b. Rate for review of charts, files and/or records; c. Rate for deposition testimony; d. Rate for trial testimony; e. Rate for travel. ANSWER: -9- 7. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert the following: a. The number of times the witness has participated in medical legal matters at the behest of Erie Insurance Group; b. The number of times the witness has participated in medical legal matters at the behest of the law firms, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. ANSWERS: -10- 8. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters at the behest of Erie Insurance Group, please state the following: a. The annual income earned from Erie Insurance Group; b. The percentage of the total income earned from Erie Insurance Group; c. Kindly include a copy of any documentary confirmation of the answer to this Interrogatory such as a W-2 or a 1099 form issued to each expert witness by Erie Insurance Group. ANSWER: -11- 9. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert the following: a. The annual income earned from the law firms of both Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors; b. The percentage of total annual income earned from the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. c. Kindly include a copy of any documentary confirmation of the answer to this interrogatory such as a W-2 or 1099 form issued to each expert witness by the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. ANSWERS: -12- 10. If any expert previously identified has ever been a guest speaker, lecturer, or panelist for any type of professional presentation, please provide the following information: date(s) of such presentation(s); where the event was held; the company or group for which the expert was speaking; the topic of the presentation; whether the event was recorded; did the expert prepare any materials to be distributed at the presentation, if yes, please attach a copy of those materials. ANSWERS: -13- 11. Set forth: a. The facts to which each expert you have listed is expected to testify; b. The opinions to which each such expert is expected to testify; c. Whether the facts and opinions listed above are contained in a written report, memoranda or other transcript; and if they are kindly attach a copy of each such written report, memorandum or other transcript to your answers to these interrogatories; d. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part on any scientific rule or principle, set forth such rule or principle; e. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part on any code or regulation, governmental or otherwise, identify said code or regulation and specifically set forth each section relied upon; f. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part upon any scientific or engineering textbook or other publication, identify said text or publication. ANSWERS: -14- " 12. State, in detail, the factual information supplied to each expert which was used as a basis for his opinion(s), including all documents, reports or records furnished, all testimony reviewed, all x-rays, test results or other tangible things provided to each expert for review. ANSWER: -15- " 13. Set forth a summary of the basis or foundation (other than the facts previously requested) for each such opinion, including any text material upon which the expert witness will rely. Identify all such texts or other publications, including the name, author, edition and page reference. ANSWER: Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG Date: By: David H Rosenberg, Esquire Attorney 1.0. # 20569 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs -16- Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D.No.51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs NO. 02-5905 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF EXPERT INTERROGATORIES TO: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiffs N, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: Date: 6/I'(Os- / e erson J. Shipman, E quire ( ttorney \.D. No. 51785 , 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant I PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT B 1. What is the name and address of each expert witness on whom this defendant will rely at the trial of this matter? ANSWER: John S.Rychak, M.D. Orthopaedic Surgeons of Central Permsylvania 99 Noveniber Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 Jasen M. Walker, Ed.D., C.R.C., C.C.M. COC Associates 1220 Valley Forge Road, Unit 9 P.O. Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482-0987 -4- , , 2. As to each expert, state the following: a. The field of specialty of the expert; b. The details of the expert's qualifications; and c. The purpose of reliance on the expert witness. ANSWERS: With respect to each expert's field of specialty, qualifications and purpose of reli.imce on, see their curricula vitae. -5- 3. Please provide a copy of the curriculum vitae for each expert witness. ANSWER: See curricula vitae of respective experts, attached as Exhibit 1. -6- 4. Identify by case name, docket number, and by attorney and/or insurance company who hired him, all cases where each expert witness has been retained as an expert witness, rendered an opinion, or testified within the past ten (10) years. a. Include the amount of money each expert was paid for each service rendered (for example, consultation, defense medical examination, writing of a report, testifying, etc.) in each case. b. Attach to your answers to these Interrogatories all tax forms, including, but not limited to, 1099s and W-2s, documenting your answers to the preceding Interrogatories. ANSWERS: Objection. This Interrogatory is beyond the scope of permissible discovery, is unduly harassing and burdensome and is not reasonably designed to lead to the discovery of adnissible evidence at trial. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs' counsel has a=ess to expert data bases Iohich it can a=ess for information regarding experts. -7- 5. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state the fOllowing for each such expert: a. Gross amount of annual income earned from medicalleQal matters; b. Percentage of total income that was earned from medical legal matters. ANSWERS: Objection. This Interrogatory is beyond the scope of permissible discovery, is unduly harassing and hrrdensane and is not reasonably designed to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at trial. -8- 6. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert, the following; a. Hourly rate; b. Rate for review of charts, files and/or records; c. Rate for deposition testimony; d. Rate for trial testimony; e. Rate for travel. ANSWER: See Interrogatory Answer No.5. -9- 7. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert the following: a. The number of times the witness has participated in medical legal matters at the behest of Erie Insurance Group; b. The number of times the witness has participated in medical legal matters at the behest of the law firms, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. ANSWERS: See Interrogatory Answer No.5. -) 0- 8. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters at the behest of Erie Insurance Group, please state the following: a. The annual income earned from Erie Insurance Group; b. The percentage of the total income earned from Erie Insurance Group; c. Kindly include a copy of any documentary confirmation of the answer to this Interrogatory such as a W-2 or a 1099 form issued to each expert witness by Erie Insurance Group. ANSWER: See Interrogatory Answer No.5. -11- 9. For each of the past ten years that each previously identified expert witness has participated as an expert in medical legal matters, please state for each such expert the following: a. The annual income earned from the law firms of both Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors; b. The percentage of total annual income earned from the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attomeys or their predecessors. c. Kindly include a copy of any documentary confirmation of the answer to this interrogatory such as a W-2 or 1099 form issued to each expert witness by the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart, Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. ANSWERS: See Interrogatory Answer No.5. -12- 10. If any expert previously identified has ever been a guest speaker, lecturer, or panelist for any type of professional presentation, please provide the following information: date(s) of such presentation(s); where the event was held; the company or group for which the expert was speaking; the topic of the presentation; whether the event was recorded; did the expert prepare any materials to be distributed at the presentation, if yes, please attach a copy of those materials. ANSWERS: See Interrogatory Answer No.5. -13- 11 . Set forth: a. The facts to which each expert you have listed is expected to testify; b. The opinions to which each such expert is expected to testify; c. Whether the facts and opinions listed above are contained in a written report, memoranda or other transcript; and if they are kindly attach a copy of each such written report, memorandum or other transcript to your answers to these interrogatories; d. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part on any scientific rule or principle, set forth such rule or principle; e. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part on any code or regulation, governmental or otherwise, identify said code or regulation and specifically set forth each section relied upon; f. If the opinion of any expert listed above is based in whole or in part upon any scientific or engineering textbook or other publication, identify said text or publication. ANSWERS: With respect to each expert's facts and opinions, see their reports, previously provided. -14- 12. State, in detail, the factual information supplied to each expert which was used as a basis for his opinion(s), including all documents, reports or records furnished, all testimony reviewed, all x-rays, test results or other tangible things provided to each expert for review. ANSWER: With respect to the factual information supplied to each expert, see their reports, previously provided. -15- 13. Set forth a summary of the basis or foundation (other than the facts previously requested) for each such opinion, including any text material upon which the expert witness will rely. Identify all such texts or other publications, including the name, author, edition and page reference. ANSWER: See Interrogatory Answer No. 11. Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG Date: 7//z,/t?S By: David H osenberg, Esquire Attorn I.D. # 20569 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs -16- ,. VERIFICATION PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.? NO. 1024(c) Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, states that he is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verification and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. !}4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: 6/rrfs- " '. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, ~ postage prepaid, at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on the /1 day of ~ ,2005. David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17106 Attorneys for Plaintiffs N, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER e erson J. Shipman, squire ttorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant , '. F:IWP Direclories\JFLlmolion-petition\dismiss objec\ion\neal.wpd AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA . NO. 02-5905 v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, her husband, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by David H Rosenberg, Esq., and hereby move this Court, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4006(a), for an Order to dismiss Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero's, Objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories to Defendant's medical experts, Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker, to disclose the amount of work they have performed and to provide all Federal 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors, in connection with medical and/or legal exams, the preparation of reports, examinations, and depositions for the years 2000 through 2005, and aver as follows: 1. Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, her husband, are competent adult individuals currently residing at 15 McBride Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17013. PLAINTIFF'S I EXC~m , 2. Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, is an adult individual currently residing at 259 Red Tank Road, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, PA 17007. 3. On or about December 12, 2002, Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, alleging that personal injuries were sustained on November 30, 2001, arising from a motor vehicle collision that occurred when the vehicle Defendant was operating struck the driver's side of Plaintiffs vehicle when Defendant was attempting to change lanes. 4. On or about July 12, 2005, Plaintiffs served Defendant with their first set of Expert Interrogatories, pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. Nos. 4005 and 4006, et. seq. Said Discovery requested the amount of work Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker have performed and all Federal 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group in connection with medical and/or legal exams and associated items from 2000 through 2005. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit A," is a copy of Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories). 5. On or about August 11, 2005, Defendant served Plaintiffs with Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories. (Attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked "Exhibit 8," is a copy of the August 11,2005 Answers). 6. Impeachment of an expert witness by demonstrating partiality is permissible. Smith v. Celotex Coro., 564 A.2d 209, 214 (Pa. Super. 1989) (citing Grutski v. Kline, 43 A.2d 142 (Pa. 1945)). 7. With regard to disclosing the amount of work an alleged IME doctor has provided for a defendant, our Superior Court in J.S. v. Whetzel, 860 A.2d 1112, 1121 (Pa. Super. 2004) opined [The expert witness] should be required to "lift his visor so thatthe jury 2 , could see who he was, what he represented, and what interest, if any, he had in the results of the trial, so that the jury could appraise his credibility." Whetzel, 860 A.2d at 1120 (citing Goodis v. Gimbel Brothers, 218 A.2d 574, 577 (Pa. 1966)). 8. In the instant matter, both Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker are well- known in the south-central Pennsylvania area as two of the insurance industry's main "go- to men." 9. Further, our appellate courts have consistently permitted a party to examine an expert witness's relationship with the counsel calling the expert, including the history and amount of compensation received by the expert from counsel. Whetzel, 860 A.2d at 1121;1 Coooer v. Schoffstall, 2004 WL 1969347 (Pa. Super. 2004). 10. In Coooer, the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the trial court's Order that directed the Defendant's physician to produce, subjectto a confidentiality order, copies of all Federal 1 099 tax forms which he received from insurance companies and law firms in connection with litigation-related examinations, reports, and depositions for the years 1999 through 2001. 11. Most recently, our Superior Court followed the Whetzel decision, holding that the production of 1099 forms was clearly relevant to determine whether an alleged IME doctor is biased in favor of the defendant or personal injury plaintiffs in general. Moore v. Clavton, Superior Court l.O.P. 65.37 (Montgomery Cty. April 29, 2005). I The Superior Court in Whetzel ordered Dr. Perry Eagle to produce all 1 099 forms received from any insurance company or attorney from 1999 through 2002, including those 1099 forms related to his services for Mr. Whetzel's counsel, in that particular case as well as other cases. 3 , . 12. In the instant matter, Plaintiffs' requests are not intended to intimidate, unduly burden nor harass neither Dr. John S. Rychak nor Jasen M. Walker. 13. Plaintiffs believe and, therefore, aver, that the information that could be gained by Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker, regarding the amount of work they have performed and the 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weid ner, P. C., their attorneys or their predecessors, is clearly relevant to the issue of bias. 14. Additionally, Plaintiffs believe and, therefore, aver, that there are no privacy concerns that will be implicated by an Order compelling production of the amount of work Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker have performed and the 1099 and W-2 forms issued to them by Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors. See Cooper, 2004 WL 1969347 at 6. 15. Plaintiffs have attempted to confer with Defendant's counsel in order to resolve the outstanding Discovery dispute; however, Defendant does not concur with this Motion. 16. Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories are clearly proper and Defendant's experts should be directed to answer. 17. To complete discovery and move this action expeditiously, Plaintiffs respectfully submit this Motion to dismiss Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero's, Objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories. 18. Assuming, arauendo, this Honorable Court does not grant the foregoing motion, Plaintiffs respectfully request a Discovery Conference. 4 '. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Audrey Neal and Robert Neal, respectfully request that this Honorable Court issue an Order compelling Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker disclose the amount of work they have performed and to produce the requested 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys ortheir predecessors within twenty (20) days. Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Date: f/w:;- By: Davi Rosenberg, Esq. Arney 1.0. #20569 1 00 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs 5 ". . AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY , PENNSYLVANIA NO. 02-5905 v. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2005, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion to dismiss Defendant's objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Expert Interrogatories to Defendant, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero's, medical experts, Dr. John S. Rychak and Jasen M. Walker, disclose the amount of work they have performed and produce the relevant 1099 and W-2 forms they have received from Erie Insurance Group and the law firms Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C., their attorneys or their predecessors, within 20 days of the issuance of this Order. BY THE COURT: J. Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman 1.0. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 lis@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs NO. 02-5905 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGA TORIES AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, by and through his attorneys, Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, and files this Answer to the Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss the Objections to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories, and avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. PLAINTIFF'S I E~IT SEP -I 9 2005 ~.'~~\.#~l\1.;: t;;o..... .' 3. Admitted in part; Denied in part. It is admitted that the averments contained in this paragraph are identical to what the Plaintiffs have alleged in their Complaint. The truth as to the allegations contained in the Plaintiffs' Complaint are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded thereof at trial. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted in part; Denied in part. It is admitted that Smith v. Celotex Corp., 564 A.2d 209, 214 (Pa.Super. 1989) allows for the impeachment of an expert witness by demonstrating partiality. However, it is important to note, based on the issue presented in this Motion, that the Superior Court notes that an expert witness' compensation only "may have a slight bearing on the question of his impartiality." Id at 214 (quoting Grutski v. Kline, 352 Pa. 401, 43 A.2d 142 (1945)). 7. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Superior Court opined that an expert witness should be required to disclose the amount of work an IME doctor has provided to "lift his visor". In fact, the Court inserted the quote cited by the Plaintiff for the purpose of emphasizing that cross examination of an expert witness is not unbridled and should be limited to determine what interest, if any, the IME physician had in the results of the trial at hand. Additionally, the very issue presented by the Defendant in this particular matter is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the matter Cooper v. Schoffstall, 863 A.2d 1146 (Pa. 2004). Until a final determination is made by the Supreme Court in the Cooper appeal, the Plaintiffs' premise in this particular motion lacks support under Pennsylvania law. 8. Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are unsupported conclusions of fact and are impertinent. 9. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that in certain cases, inquiry into an expert witness' relationShip with counsel has been allowed. However, the court has specifically stated that "at all times, this [Superior] Court has made clear the information sought must be relevant to the inquiry presently before the Court." J. S. v. Whetzel, 860 A.2d 1112, 1121 (Pa.Super.2004). Again, it is imperative to note that the identical issue presented by the Plaintiffs in the instant motion is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and therefore, despite the Plaintiffs' assertions, the Plaintiffs' position is not a law in the Commonwealth. 10. Admitted in part Denied in part. It is admitted that the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Cooper affirmed the trial court's order. Again, ~ is imperative to note that the identical issue presented by the Plaintiffs in the instant motion is currently on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and therefore, despite the Plaintiffs' assertions, the Plaintiffs' position is not a law in the Commonwealth. 11. Denied. The Pennsylvania Superior Court in Moore v. Clayton, 876 A.2d 478 (Pa.Super.2005), filed no opinion regarding the issue at hand. 12. Denied. In fact, the Plaintiffs' requests are specifically intended to intimidate, unduly burden and harass both Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker. The intimidation, burden and harassment is clearly evidenced by the Plaintiffs' averment in paragraph 8 of their motion in which the Plaintiffs state: In the instant matter, both Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker are well-known in the south-central Pennsylvania area as two of the insurance industry's main "qo-to men.' (emphasis added). 13. Denied. See paragraph 12 contained herein. 14. Denied. It is unfathomable that the Plaintiffs would aver that there are no privacy concerns implicated with the Plaintiffs' request. Any request to delve into an individual's personal finances is clearly an invasion into the individual's privacy. In the instant matter, there is absolutely no indication set forth by the Plaintiffs that either Dr. Rychak or Dr. Walker present issues of accountability or honesty, and therefore the privacy concerns of the individuals far outweigh the prejudicial impact of delving into private matters. 15. Admitted~ 16. Denied. , . 17. Denied. 18. Denied. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court deny the Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Dr. John S. Rychak and Dr. Jasen M. Walker to disclose work they have performed and financial information from Erie Insurance Group or the law firms of Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner. Respectfully submitted, B' , DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER er J. Sh pma orney 1. D. No. 51785 1 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant csj:258393 22740-1472 . . CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this /:Jffyday of September, 2005, the undersigned does hereby certify that she did this date serve a copy of the foregoing document upon the other parties of record by causing same to be deposited in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: David H. Rosenberg, Esq. Handler, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 JOHNS~7' ~FFIE, ;~EIf!~ART & WEIDNER By' ~JA (J~v/1l.' Me , . ar~ S. Jensen jEKHY R DUFFIE OF COUNSEL C. l\UY \NE1DNEr... if:: EUfVlljNC C, ~\iIYERS OAVfD \/'1" DELuCL !OJ-iN A S'i'AfLEn JEFFEnSO~ j, Sf-flI'MAN RALPH H. Wl'iIGj-1T if. Mi\J',1\ C [)UFFlF JUHN R NINOSI{'i MICHAEl. I CASSIDY VlELlSSi\ PEEl, GREEV\' ROBERT;VI. ~ri\.LKEf\ WADE D. MANLEY LAW OFFICES JOHNSON DUFFIE HO]{ACE A. jUHNSCt\; FLEE SH1PMA\i Bl{UCL I. (Jr~OSSf\'IA:\: Cldmittrd in ;-';1' Illl!\' nli'iL\Iil; \V. STE'vV,\ln Wi:dTl.:r;'s r,~_\"" Nt! HB I!>!\'L\: L ,J.J.s:i'~ids\\- .COnl September 15, 2005 Curt Long, Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Re: Audrey Neal and Robert Neal v. Nicholas N. Cordero Cumberland County C.C.P. Docket No. 02-5905 Dear Mr. Long: Enclosed please find an original and one copy of Defendant's Answer to Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Objections to Plaintiffs' Expert Interrogatories in the above-referenced matter. Please return a time-stamped copy to my office in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, csj:258853 22740-1472 enclosure cc: David H. Rosenberg, Esq. 301 MARKET STREET p.o. BOX 109 LEMOYNE, PENNSYLVANIA 17043.0109 WWWIDSWCOM 717.761.4540 FAX 717.761.3015 MAIL@JDSWCOM S[p 79 ?n,,~ ~UUJ "'~... lOt JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER, P.C. AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES ORDER AND NOW, this /(.- day of September, 2005, a brief argument on the within motion is set for Thursday, December 1,2005, at 2:45 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, P A. BY THE COURT, David H. Rosenberg, Esquire F or the Plaintiffs /IIi Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire For the Defendant :rlm PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT E.. I ... AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION ~ LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT INTERROGATORIES ORDER AND NOW, this I .. day of December, 2005, the motion of the plaintiffs to dismiss defendant's objections to their expert interrogatories is GRANTED and the defendant is directed to respond but with the following limitations: 1. Each inquiry shall be limited to a period comprising the past four (4) years, the years 2002 through 2005 inclusive. 2. No response shall be required for interrogatory 4(b), 8( c) or 9( c). With respect to the witness, Jasen Walker, it is understood that the interrogatories relate to matters which are financial and not medical. BY THE COURT, ~G./9J David H. Rosenberg, Esquire For the Plaintiffs Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire For the Defendant j PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT F .. .. Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman LD.No.51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. 02-5905 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS ANSWERS TO EXPERT INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED BY PLAINTIFF TO: David H. Rosenberg, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg,PA 17110 Enclosed please find Answers of Defendant, Nicholas N. Cordero, to Plaintiff's Expert Interrogatories. In accordance with Pa. R.C.P. No. 4002.1, these answers have not been filed with the Court. ON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER erson J. Shipman. Esquir I : 51785 P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: ~ / j...l{lob I PLAINTIFF'S E~IT INTERROGA TORY #1 ANSWER: Dr. John Rychak 99 November Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 Jason Walker The Commons at Valley Forge 1220 Valley Forge Road, Unit #9 P. O. Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Others have not yet been determined. Defendant will supplement if necessary. INTERROGATORY #2 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak a) Orthopedic Surgeon b) See attached Curriculum Vitae (Exhibit A) c) Dr. Rychak performed an Independent Medical Exam on Plaintiff Jason Walker a) Vocational/Disability Evaluator b) See attached Curriculum Vitae (Exhibit A) c) Vocational Evaluation done on Plaintiff INTERROGA TORY #3 ANSWER: See attached Exhibit A INTERROGA TORY #4 ANSWER: a) Dr. Rychak - See Exhibit 8 Jason Walker - See Exhibit C b) No response required. INTERROGATORY #5 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak a) Gross amount of annual income earned from medical legal matter from 2002 through 2005 equates to $481,938.38. b) 10% Jason Walker a) Mr. Walker is not a medical physician and does not deal with medical legal matters. INTERROGATORY #6 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak a) None b) $250 per hour c) $1,600 per hour Video deposition - $2,200 per hour Time in excess of 1 sl hour - $1,400 per hour d) $2,500 per hour from point to point e) None inclusive of trial testimony rate f) IME - $1,000 Jason Walker See Exhibit C and answer to #5. INTERROGATORY #7 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - See Exhibit B Jason Walker - See Exhibit C and answer to #5. INTERROGA TORY #8 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - a) & b) OSCP receives 1099 Miscellaneous Income Statement from Erie Insurance by group and not by physician. Jason Walker - See Answer to Interrogatory #5. INTERROGATORY #9 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - OSCP does not have annual statement from Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman or Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner nor does it retain or compile financial information for hiring law firms. Jason Walker - See Answer to Interrogatory #5. INTERROGATORY #10 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - has never been a guest speaker, lecturer or panelist at a professional presentation for the past 4 years. Jason Walker - See Exhibit D. INTERROGATORY #11 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - See Exhibit E Jason Walker - See Exhibit F INTERROGATORY #12 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - See Exhibit E Jason Walker - See Exhibit F, Report pgs. 1-12 INTERROGATORY #13 ANSWER: Dr. Rychak - NJA Jason Walker - NfA o ~~ -;';tl I:~} i: ~ .:~ -^ ~"" c"' cc~ 'C';'" ::rr; :<>- ?:1 o "11 -l ::r:'T1 r~lr:::: -om -,_...,,-J :~i~~ :~ 5::; ^< U1 "'" :;!': (1':.') UJ AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND IMPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT FOR DEFENDANT'S FAILURE TO OBEY DISCOVERY ORDER ORDER AND NOW, this z .., . day of March, 2006, a brief argument on the within motion is set for Thursday, April 6, 2006, at 3:30 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, P A. BY THE COURT, v6avid H. Rosenberg, Esquire For the Plaintiffs "\ ~ . ..-;y vh'fferson J. Shipman, Esquire ~ (;~. . '.' For the Defendant /.~ ~~ rim V\ . r-: ~ /0 lP 2>'~ o ~ 4d- . Hess, J. \ :~ ~G , {'}-j",,:.'i.\."': \. :'J'.' I ~ ", "/J .;.,2 '(}\I:;\ l}\jl,j!" ~_'Wi ...;L ._ _(I -" ..-' ~-,'nq. .\ 1,.)--1, ;::.'" AUDREY NEAL and ROBERT NEAL, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-5905 CIVIL IN RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE AND IMPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT FOR DEFENDANT'S FAILURE TO OBEY AND NOW, this DISCOVERY ORDER ORDER -:r day of April, 2006, action on the pending motion for sanctions is continued generally with the direction that, following mediation, should same prove unsuccessful, counsel for defendant is directed to use his best efforts to complete the answers to expert interrogatories, and in the event that said efforts shall prove unsuccessful, the plaintiff is authorized to take the deposition of the witness, Dr. Jasen Walker. "A5avid H. Rosenberg, Esquire For the Plaintiffs ~ferson J. Shipman, Esquire For the Defendant rim BY THE COURT, -:f{1t. /l i, Ke,:ih A. Hess, J. / / or: .. i ~ ,., l- 1 ( i':: L.,( AUDREY NEAL, and ROBERT NEAL, her husband IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. NO. 02-5905 NICHOLAS N. CORDERO, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the Docket in the above captioned matter as Settled, Discontinued and Satisfied. ,is /ok DA Respectfully submitted, HAND~NNING & ROSENBERG, LLP David H R senberg, Esquire I.D. #20 9 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717 -238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs ''1 l~ I... o r-- ,-- ~..... I"-..:> = c.~ C~ o 11 ::;:f rl1 :0 r- 3J r-r. .c ~ C;::i ---+i(:J ;2~i; ~..') rn :~ -< '--- c- :Z I C"\ ;::r:,,-. - -~''''.. 9 f'V co