HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-06505
~
~
.
, ~.
i~
!
i~
i "
Q
'"
t
....
, ~
i~
;
,
I
i I'"
!.
i
I
I
I
i ~
\I
1....(:
.'"
"-
lit
I
i
!
I
,
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I t
i
I
, \.
i
i ~
I
,
I
i
I
I ......
I
I ,5
I
,
I ~
!
. i
,
~ '.
"- .
~ .
'C't
~
~
et-.
EVEL YN FLEISHER,
Plaintifi.
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
HEALTIISOUTII
CORPORATION tla
IIEALTlISOUTII
REHABILITATION IIOSPITAL :
OF MECI-IANICSBURG.
HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION
OF MECIIANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL.
and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL,:
~
:
I
HEAL THSOUTH OF
MECHANICSBURG, INC. tla
HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL:
OF MECHANICSBURG.
HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL,
and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL,:
HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL:
OF MECHANICS BURG,
HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL,
HEALTH SOUTH
~
r:
MECllANICSBlJlHi REI lAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE
REIIABlLlTATION IIOSPITAL.:
and
RUTII ROGERS.
Dcfcndants
NO,lJH-6505 CIVIl. TERM
ORnER OF COURT
AND NOW. this C. tL.day of Dcccmbcr. 2001. upon considcration of "Plaintiffs
Motion To Extcnd Discovcry and Expcrt Rcport Dcadlines" and "Dcfcndants' Rcsponsc
to Plaintiffs Motion To Extcnd Discovcry and Expcrt Rcport Dcadlincs." and of
"Plaintiffs Motion To Compcl and for Sanctions" and "Dcfcndants' Rcsponsc tll
Plaintiffs Motion To Compel and for Sanctions and Mcmorandum of Law and
Dcfcndants' Rcqucst for Rcasonablc Fccs and Costs Pursuant to Pa.R.C,I', 40 IlJ(g)(2):' a
discovcry confcrcncc/hcaring is schcduled ror Monday, Dcecmber 17, 200 I. at 1 :30 p.m.
in Courtroom No, 1 in the Court of Common Picas of Cumbcrland County in Carlislc.
Pennsylvania.
BY THE COURT.
Nichole M. Staley O'Gorman. Esq.
1719 North Front Strect
Harrisburg, P A 17102
Attorney ror Plaintiff
esley Olcr, .Ir.. . . _ \
/1 op-tw ~()~
Li;?,-L,.{)J ~
Sharon M. O'Donnell. Esq.
4200 Crums Mill Road, Suitc B
Harrisburg, P A 17112
Attorney ror Defendants
EVELYN FI,EISIIER.
Plaintill'
IN TI II: COl //{T OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMIIERI.ANI> COlINTY. PENNSYI. VANIA
v.
CIVil, ACTION LAW
IIEALTIISOLJTII
CORPORATION lIa
IIEALTHSOUTH
RElIABlLlTATION
IIOSPITAL OF
MECHANICSBURG.
HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION OF
MECIIANICSBURG -
ACUTE REI-lAB
HOSPITAL, and
HEALTH SOUTH
MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
ev '-'0'- I
I ~'- \""J ..) l'.I\I'
f.
!'
HEAL THSOUTH OF
MECHANICSBURG.
INC. tla HEALTH SOUTH :
REHABILlT AnON
HOSPITAL OF
MECI-IANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION
OF MECI-IANICSBURG - :
ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and
HEALTH SOUTH
MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
1
<
I
,
J
-'
. ,
....t
n~ ..~
f
. ,
.....
.
.1. ^ll of I'l.tltlf df':: d".ldll'lf':~ ~;pt f'JI,ll lrl tll" M'IY H,
;)(JOl old,,! ,t!i" p:-:tf.ndi.d lll.:~.ti' ('-'0) d,li''<: f tom t llf' d It.t'
I'ldlllt Itf !t'(_"'lV('H <l compl;.tf' ('Ili),/ !~f ..11 '...'lltt."tl polil'J('H
dud pror;f'd\1n'~' of f1"'<llth[:."jljtll 1:1 I.ffl'!" II!l nIVI-:nll/>t"
:'1, IIJ~H, (','ll('I'Ullllq till' It.'11,.'..t'" (I! l>ll/,:ll"11 111(.t<IP'/ to
pdt 1"lItll; "lid
\,
!
l
t
,
,;
i~
b. Tit,. dinc:ovC?t"Y deadl ill(' dH to Reu0C'C'd Mont(!fol.-tf' in
extendC'd indefinitely untiL Bucll tlm(' dB nll." can bC' located
and deponed. Plaintiff shaLL be pennitted an additional
thirty (3D) days following receipt of tho transcript of her
depo~lition for: revision of Pldit1ti[f'~; c'xpc.t"t reports.
.
.
BY THE COURT:
J.
Distribution:
Nichole M. Staley O'Gorman, Esquire
Attorney for Plaintiff
Timothy McMahon. Esquire
Attorney for Defendants
,
/..
a
t
EVELYN FLEISHER,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PI,EAS
CtJt.1HERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plailltlf[
v.
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
tla HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTH SOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM .
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL,
No. 98-6505
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC. t/a HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF
MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG
- ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTH SOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OP MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL,
HEALTHSOUTH MECHPu~ICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL, and
RUTH ROGERS,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
AND NOW, this
day of
, 2001,
upon consideration of the foregoing Motion to Extend Discovery,
Defendants in the above captioned action are directed to show
(',I1J~l", If ,lIi'/. wIlY Iii... ff'(IlII'!;!f.d fi,'llf.f ~Jhould not b(~ qraf1ted.
HIli.. I pI III (l,lh I I'
ILI'r';; t rOlTl the' date of service.
BY TilE COURT:
J.
111111.1" I but ion:
Nichole M. Staley O'Gorman, ESCJuire
Attorney [or Plaintiff
Tlmothy McMahon, Esquire
Attorney for Defendants
EXl.(!IIr! 1J1:lCOVI'I'( dlld Exp"rt H.'pol'!: Deadline,,:
1. MClVdll1 l~l Evc'lyn G. Fl~~udlpr', Plaintiff ill the above
captiolH.d ,Hot lun ',;;110 f-Iuff(.t"(.d 111'illl'i(~~:.:; OIl N()v('mb(~l- /.1, 1996 while
in th(~ CdI-C 01 Def(:Jlldants.
2. Rcnpondcnts arc the Defendants in the above.captioned
action.
3. On May 8, 2001, counsel for the parties stipulated to an
Order establishing deadlines for completion of discovery and
expert reports. A true and correct copy of said order is
attached hereto and made part hereof as Exhibit "A".
4. During an October 25, 2001 discovery deposition of
defense witness Margaret Fiscus, Ms. Fiscus testified that
Healthsouth maintained, on the date of the Plaintiff's injuries,
November 21, 1996, written policies and procedures concerning the
delivery of physical therapy to its patients. She further
testified that although some of the written policies and
procedures in existence on that date have changed, the managers
of each department maintain the outdated versions.
5. As set forth more fully in Plaintiff's Motion to Compel
and for Sanctions filed contemporaneously with this Motion,
Defendants have failed to supply Plaintiff with this information
despite repeated formal and informal requests.
6. As a result of the knowing and willful failure of
Defendants to disclose this information and to tender copies of
2
the docwm.'ntdtion, Pl.dnt1ff will llk('ly hetvp to I',.-tetk,. the
depoBitlolW of r;"f"nel;tIlt Huth Rog,'rn dnel d(,["I1"" witneflfl Mdrgdret
Fiscus, and Pldint: Iff' n expel.tn wi 11 1H.,.d the, oppol-tunity to
review .111 new infonlldtion.
7. In addition to the above, Plaintiff hdB requested a
deposition of Rebecca Monteforte, supervising Physical Therapist
to Defendant Ruth Rogers on the date of the incident that is the
subject matter of this litigation.
8. Defendants have advised that Ms, Monteforte is no longer
an employee of Healthsouth and that they have been unable to
locate her.
9. In a letter dated October 22, 2001 and received by
Plaintiff's counsel on October 25, 2001, Defendants supplied Ms,
Monteforte's last known address to Plaintiff. Defendants'
counsel has verbally agreed that discovery as to this witness
should be extended until she can be located and deposed, A true
and correct copy of defense counsel's letter is attached hereto
and made part hereof as Exhibit "B".
10. As a result of the above, Plaintiff cannot meet the
discovery and expert report deadlines established.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable
Court to enter an order as follows:
a, extending all of Plaintiff's deadlines set forth in
the May 8, 2001 Order ninety (90) days from the date
Plaintiff receives a complete copy of all written
3
poli('J('~1 ,lIld rJl(/""dlJP'!l (II n""lth:luuth in (.tt"r.:t
on Novpmb,': ;'1, ljr.Jr, ('oW"'!llinq t.il(' deltvr...t,y ot
phynicill th"I.'py to pilti"III::; ,lllcl
h, EX.t"IllllllfJ th._' ditJc(J'/'~:'-i' dC..1dlinC! ,]s to r.,:ebt>ccd
Monteforte indefllllte1y until such time uS she Cull be
locuted and depofled und ullowing an udditiona1 thirty
(30) days for revision o( Plaintiff's expert reports
following receipt of the transcript of her deposition.
Dated: ('/',11/1/,
,vi'" /1:,
KRUG AND HALLE\<
, i
I I
By , /) ~t i'i//..l!;':'''~
I J o. .,' - ~, .. ,
Nifhole M. Staley.O'Gorman,
Irj #79866 f
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
717 234-4178
PURCELL,
I
Esquire
4
-
EVELYN FLEISHER,
plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMRERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION . LAW
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
t/a HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE :
REHAB HOSPITAL, AND
HEALTH SOUTH MECHANICSBURG:
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTH SOUTH OF
MECHANICSBURG, INC. t/a
HEALTH SOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG . ACUTE :
REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG:
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG:
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE
REHAB HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG:
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
No. 98-6505 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2001, upon
consideration of Defendants' Petition for Status
Conference, and following a conference held in the chambers
... t'".. ,..... _I' '" ,.-,.-... ,..,,, .~".....,. .... ..-. "".,
..."
Exhibit B
r
t
l'
.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I
r.
.:.
:'.'
r
I, ANGELA S. EATON, an employee of the law firm of Purcell,
Krug & Haller, counsel for Plaintiff, hereby certify that service
following by Regular Mail, on October 30, 2001:
of the PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY was served on the
MARSHALL,
Timothy McMahon, Esquire
DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN
4200 Crums Mill Road
Suite B
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268
(Attorney for Defendants)
& GOGGIN
'I
I'
I)
,
f'
( ( ..110; C ll~
" iJ Angela
n
[). (/c/0l1f
S. Eaton
t f
",
I
,
,
r
) ".;:
r..
j'--
~..
EVELYN FI.EISIIER.
Plaintill'
IN 1I11~ ('()\ IRT (lI' ('( IMM( IN PLEAS (lJ.
l'l IMIlJ'l{I.ANI) ('( II IN I Y. I'ENNSYI.V ANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION J.AW
I IEALTI ISO UTI I
CORPORATION lla
HEALTH SO UTI I
REHABILITATION
IIOSPIT AL OF
MECIIANICSBlJRG.
HEALTHSOlJTl1
REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBlJRG -
ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL. and
HEAL THSOUTII
MECHANICSBlJRG
REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
1S' b5(1~-.. ,,/
HEAL THSOlJTH OF
MECHANICSBURG.
INC. tla HEAL THSOUTH :
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF
MECHANICSBlJRG,
HEAL THSOlJTH
REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBlJRG - :
ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and
HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG
REI.IAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
-:
[
"
.
.. .
:)
~
:..:-! c..rl -"'.
I IEALTI ISOIJTI I
REIIABI L1TATION
IIOSPITAL OF
MECIIANICSBIJRCi.
HEALTIISOlJTII
RElIABlLlTATION OF
MECHANICSBlJRG -
ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL.
HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL. and
RUTH ROGERS.
Defendants
NO. 98-6505 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 2nd day of November. 2001. upon consideration of Plaintiffs
Motion To Compel and for Sanctions, 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.
BY THE COURT,
J
L~(I~JJ
11-5-0/ t
"
~
;.
::.'
.,'
1. MOV,:Hll IH EV/'lYIl r;. Fl"l:dl":, Pi.. I nt It t III ttJl' ,IIJIJ'/('
captioned action who ~;jdfl'rf'~.i 111111: I":; (Ill No'/"mbpr /.1, 1~91) wlllle
in the care of Defend'lnt:;.
2, RE!spond,entH <If ,. t lv' Dt'ff'flcLillt~: lit tile dboVE'-Cdpt iOIH.-}d
action.
], Plaintiff's Complaint includes two count3 of negligence
and one count of corporate negligence, The policy and procedure
existing at Healthsouth on the date of Plaintiff's November 21,
1996 fall are central to the proof needed for each of Plaintiff's
claims.
4. Over the course of discovery in this case, Plaintiff has
repeatedly requested Defendants to disclose and produce all
written policy and procedure applicable to the treatment provided
to Evelyn Fleisher on November 21, 1996.
5. On October 25, 2001, Plaintiff's counsel deposed Meg
Fiscus, Director of Physical Therapy at Healthsouth, who has been
identified by Defendants as a witness who will testify concerning
the policies and procedures at Healthsouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg at the time of Plaintiff's November 21,
1996 fall. See the letter of Defendants' attorney attached
hereto and made part hereof as Exhibit "AU,
6, During Ms. Fiscus' deposition, she testified that
although she was not familiar with the policies and procedures
that existed on November 21, 1996, a policy and procedure manual
2
MS. STALEY: ~Ih,clt. I .1[" trYIIl'! to ,'nt,1hlinh h,'"" I"
u little bit. of b"d:qIOIJlld,
MR MCMAHON: I dOll't. think you are ('nUt.1ed to
background (or.- todd,!' n purpo;-lI'.:'t;.
MS. STALEY: I pen;onully um not tamllJar with
what should have happened on that day. So in
order for me to determine whether or not
something inappropriate did happen, I need to
know what should have happened,
MR. MCMAHON: I elm not going to pet"mit Ms. Rogers
to respond to questions like that. III other
words, if you have a need or if you perceive a
need to determine what the bench mark is, I think
that that information is available to you
elsewhere.
.
','
!
in written discovery.
In Interrogatories submitted to the
A true and correct copy of the pertinent portion of Ms. Rogers'
April 6, 1999 deposition is attached hereto and made part hereof
as Exhibit "8".
9. Several additional requests for this material were made
Healthsouth Defendants on August 3, 1999, Plaintiff asked the
following:
From November 19, 1996 to November 21, 1996, were
there any written procedures, rules, regulations,
guidelines, protocols or other writings
establishing a method for staff or supervisors to
insure that patients were receiving proper care?
If so, answer the following:
r:,
a. Identify the aforesaid documents
establishing such a method.
b. Identify the custodian of the aforesaid
documents.
c. Describe how the procedure worked in
4
,
datpd dune H, ?OOO dnd July ~), ?OOO d1."(.' dtL,H:ll"d !l"r"to dnd made
part hereof as Exhibit "HO.
16. In addition to the abeve, Plaintl(f Bubll1it.t.,'d a
separate Request [or' Product. ion of DOCUII1',"ts 011 M"y 31, 2000 to
Defendant Ruth Rogers request ing "[a J 11 documents you i IItend to
use or upon which you rely to defend Evelyn Fleisher's claims."
Defendant Rogers responded:
Objection. Documentation sought in Plaintiff's
Request for Production of Documents #14 is non-
discoverable as the identity of documents
Plaintiff seeks fall within the ambit of
Pa.R.C,p. 4003.1(a), Subject to and without
waiver of the foregoing, any and all documents
produced thus far between the parties within the
course of discovery in this litigation, Ms.
Rogers reserves the right reasonably supplement
her answer to this request at a reasonable time
prior to trial.
Plaintiff's Request for Production No. 14 and Defendant Rogers'
response thereto are attached hereto and made part hereof as
Exhibit "I".
17. At the close of Ms. Fiscus' October 25, 2001
deposition, defense counsel was asked why all written policies
and procedures for the November 21, 1996 time period had not been
turned over to Plaintiff's counsel and whether there was any
reason the documents could not be turned over by the following
day. Defense counsel asserted that all requested discovery had
been provided to Plaintiff, that he did not know whether or not
he was in possession of this information, and he could not
7
promifj(~ it ,....'ould be' ,]v.1i labl f' UlI t II" l' d 1(1',0/111" d,I'/. ::,./. till'
attaclv.d transcript of thin ('XCil.ltl<!", "t.t.H:h(.d iI"!I.t () dlld l\I(ld~.'
part he~cof as Exllibit "J".
18. On May 8,2001, by Stip"l..tiull of coull",'l f"l.tlll'
parties, an Order was entered setting, dlllong alhe't' thinqn, all
October 31, 2001 deadline for completion of discovery "!lei a
November 30, 2001 deadline for Plaintiff to submit her expert
reports. A true and correct copy of said Dreier is attacheel
hereto and made part hereof as Exhibit "K".
19, Defendants have knowingly and intentionally withheld
the policies and procedures in effect on November 21, 1996 to the
substantial prejudice of Plaintiff.
20, Having conducted all discovery to date without the
benefit of reviewing Defendants' written policies and procedures,
Plaintiff cannot conclude discovery by October 31, 2001 and
therefore, cannot produce expert reports by November 30, 2001. A
Motion to Extend Discovery and Expert Report Deadlines is being
filed contemporaneously with this Motion,
21. pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019 authorizes
the Court to impose sanctions upon a party who fails to provide
sufficient answers to discovery.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable
Court to compel Defendants to respond to the above-referenced
discovery and to produce within ten days the policies and
8
,
A 1(1 (.1()~. ,\.
IJ III ~\t~I,)%lh \ t.\\,
I.M\I
I MARsHAlL, DENNEHEY, WARNF.R, CoLF.MAN ~GoGGI~
A ,. u , . , , 1 U III .. I (: II . , " . .. . 1 .. III
,"""",DUnlWldrnnrhcy,com
.....n......
IlrlNrlw.
11."...",,__
.'"
11,,",,-,
~..." ..,..
No_...
.......,....
....-
\t""'''"
.'-'P'"
N..- JPJUrr
UWtfJ'''U
.(>wWld
D'~'
.--
Wan Y'UllfftA
........
0...
.....-
.......
.........
""'po
4200 Crums MiIIl{oud, Suilc 1I'l/urridlUr!:,I''\ 17112
(717) 651-3500' FUll (717) 651-9630
Dircct I>Iul: 717.651-3505
Email: tmcmuhon@mdwc!:.com
Octobcr 5. 200 I
Nichole M. Staley O'Gorman. Esquirc
PURCELL, KRUG & HALLER
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102-2392
RE: Evelvn Fleisher v. HealthSouth, ct al.
Our File No. 19181.00640
CCP (Cumberland County) No. 98.6505
Dear Ms. O'Gorman:
Thank you for your letter of October I. Ms. Fiscus is the Director of Physical Therapy at Healthsouth
Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechanicsburg. It is anticipated that Ms. Fiscus at trial will tcstify concerning the
policies and procedures at Healthsouth Rchabilitation Hospital of Mcchanicsburg, which policies and
procedures apply to the dclivery or physical therapy to paticnts by various members of the physical therapy
staff, including but not limited to, physical therapy assistants, such as Defendant Ruth Rogcrs. Ms. Fiscus is
also expected to testify at trial concerning the rolc that physical therapy plays in thc interdisciplinary team
approach toward patient care.
1 believe that Ms. Fiscus can be madc availablc for discovery deposition upon reasonable notice
provided that there deposition is held at the hospital. I arn available for dcposition on Octoher 18, 19 or 25.
offer these dates bccause of the recognition that the Court had directed that we complete discovery prior to
October 31. If you are unavailable on those dates, please lct me know and we will do what we have to do to
make Ms. Fiscus available for deposition on some alternativc datc.
Vcry truly yours,
TImi~
TJM/cag
...,......".....,."" ,......-.... ,..... ,........~,........_.....,.
Exhibit B
......
_,.'{OGllRS, RUTH
'h -04106/99
Multi-l'UllC I..
JlI.I!.JSIII!lt VS
IIIiA I.TIISOlfJ'lI
('Utili'!' OF Cur.tf.hJtl PLEA::
ClJMIlEPLAND COmJTY, !'ENN::Y!,VMIIA
)
I.;VEI, YN FLE I S!lE!~,
PLAINTIFF
VS
NO. n -6505
HEALTHSOUT!I COR POHAT ION , ETC.
AND
RUTH ROGEHS,
DEFENDANTS
DEPOSITION OF: RUTH ROGERS
TAKEN BY: PLAINTIFF
BEFORE: PATRICIA C. BARRETT, REPORTER
NOTARY PUBLIC
)
DATE:
APRIL 6, 1999, 9:30 A,M.
PLACE:
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
CENTER
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
APPEARANCES:
PURCELL, KRUG & HALLER
BY: NICHOLE M. STALEY, ESQUIRE
FOR . PLAINTIFF
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN
BY: TIMOTHY J. McMAHON, ESQUIRE
FOR - DEFENDANTS
ALSO PRESENT:
ANNA RIDDLE
GEIGER & LORIA REPORTING SERVICE
1-800-222-4577
1\
H
,
,
:
t
f
'c
fi',
~
~
.:
~
r,
~
-;1
'.;
-
Multi. Pille ,.
(j1iRS. Rtr1"Il
0(,/99
-
f'~" ", "...1I.' ~
"11<1".'
LIH f
.,d ..V.I-""
I.." .qd.
l"'I>~lrll'"
UlIl.11' IP
I . 10-j.04". '1HII~n. 1'1"l'lfll ..",..
..~Il. ptd..,
. _ "r~1. ph111 c, .~'. "..of"'t.
..~ 'v'. ,.~,
...IlPI'!Jl,....I.:'
"
II
).'
'-pl<J" pt<.;lIl
"
"
l-r~I" l"'I'HI..nl !~":'r'w
.)
.,
I>
I STIPULATION
2 II is hereby stipulated by and between counsel
J for the respective parties that scaling, certification ami
4 Hling arc waivcd~ and lhat all objections except as to the
5 fonn of the question arc reserved to the time of the Irial
6
7 RlJl1I ROGERS. called as a witness, being sworn,
8 testified as follows:
9
10 DIRECT EXAMINATION
II
12 BY MS. STALEY,
13 Q Ms. Rogers, would you please give your full
14 name for the record?
15 A Ruth LynD Rogers.
16 Q What is your present employment capacity with
17 Healthsouth?
18 A 1 am a physical therapistassislaD!.
19 Q How tong have you been a physical therapist
20 assistant?
21 A Almost 9 years.
22 Q What is your training?
23 A Like my sehooliDg?
24 Q Right.
25 A 1 weDt to school for 2 years. 1 have aD
~
GEIGER & LORIA REPORTING SERVICE
l-ROO-222-4577
I to answer.
2 MS STAl.EY We can narrow that.
3 MR. McMAHON It was my understanding that you
4 had wanled an opportunity to ask questions of Ms Rogers.
5 In order to learn Ihat ;nfonnation which you lack about Ms.
6 1'1cishcr. and in particular about an event that occurred
7 involving Ms. Fleisher on November 21, t996.
8 ( am not going to so tightly circumscribe the
9 parameters of your examination that we are only going to
10 talk about one 10 minute slicc of a day.
II MS. STALEY What ( am trying to establish
12 here is a little bit of background.
13 MR. McMAHON, I don't think you are entitled
14 to background for today's purposes.
15 MS. STALEY, I personally am not familiar with
16 what should have happened on that day. So in order for me
17 to detcnninc whether or not something inappropriate did
18 happen. I need to know what should have happened.
19 MR. MCMAHON, 1 am not going to permit Ms.
20 Rogers to respond to questions like that. In other words,
21 if you have a need or if you perceive a need to detennine
22 what the bench mark is, I think that that infonnation is
23 available to you elsewhere.
24 MS. STALEY, We can limit this to what
25 occurred with Ms. Fleisher.
Page 2 - Page 5
... ,.... ""., ..... "'. , ,.....-. ,"".. ,..~... ..... .,.... ,. .
Exhibit C
EVELYN FLEISHER,
Plilintif f
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
t/a HEALTH SOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL,
No. 98 -6505
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC. t/a HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF
MECHANICS BURG , HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG
- ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL CF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL,
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL, and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
INTERROGATORIES OF PLAINTIFF PROPOUNDED TO
DEFENDANTS - FIRST SET
To: HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
"'" '" '".''' .
Exhibit 0
-
-
f' ',' Jii;'~!,"
:. ~ ,_ .~,,:~~ n",' ~~OC~
WI,'. DO HUIIIY: CIII1JN",lHAf.
THI WI1'M1NII ATftUIANO'COlI\
Riel CON, Of-.. THI .".OftllllH,r.~
"LID tH TMtI AC'nQIf':",' '.. i~:::""':' 1t'-:iA\~,
rt. "'~.,,' ., ., ,,;'<,f,-!/--"(\',';
AII:'1!IY" '.~~':~~?~,{
-
100 PH: STREET . 4TH FUXIR
RD. IlDX 803
HARRIBllURO. PENNlIVLVANIA 171Q8.(l803
IWF.I.YN FI.EISIIER,
Plainllff
. COllin OF COMMON PLEAS
: ClIMIII'IU.AND COllNTY.
. l'I,NNSYI.v ANIA
Y.
HEAL TIISOUTII CORPORATION Va
IIEALTHSOUTH REIlAIlILlTATION 1I0SI'ITAL
OF MECIIANICSIlURG, ilEAL TIISOUTII
REHAIlILlTATION OF MECIIANICSIlURG.
ACUTE REHAIlIIOSPITAL, and IIEALTIISOlI'lIl
MECIlANICSIlURG REIIAIl SYSTEM. ACUTE
REHAIlILlTATION 1l0SPITAL
and
: NO. 98.6505
: CIVIL. ACTION _LAW
ilEAL THSOUTII OF MECHANICSlllJRG, INC.
tlallEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION 1I0SI'IT,\!.
OF MECIlANICSIlURG, HEALTIISOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECIlANICSIlURG -
ACUTE REIlAIl HOSPITAL, and ilEAL T1IS0UTlI
MECHANICSIlURG REIlAIl SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHAIlILlTATION 1I0SPITAL
and
HEAL TIISOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSIlURG
and
HEAL THSOUTIl REHAIlILlT A TION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REIIAIl
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REIIAIJ SYSTEM
_ ACUTE REHABILITATION 1I0SPIT AL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES
OF PLAINTIFF PROPOUNDED TO DEFENDANTS FIRST SET
1. Yes.
2. See Defendants' Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint at paragraph 9.
3. See medical records concerning Plaintiffs admission of November 19,1996.
4. See Defendants' Answer to paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs Complaint. By way of
further answer, Ruth Rogers was employed by HealthSouth, 175 Lancaster Boulevard, as a
II, OhjcctiulI, l>c1clld,,"ls "hJCl'llu 1'1,""11 rrs IlIlc"og"'ory i':U. II 10 thc extcllt
Ihat it is vaguc :u1<1 overly broad. Defendanls arc not sure whalplaintin'means by "other
writings establishing a mcthod... to insure that paticnts were receiving proper carc",
Subject to and withont waiver of Ihe Iilrcguing lIhjcction, see inpatient admission sheets
previously exchanged in discovery reg:mling Plaintiffs admission to the Rehab Hospital -
Meehaniesburg, 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, P A.
12. See hospital records relating to Plaintiffs admission which are believed to be
already in Plaintiffs counsel's possession.
13. See records of the Rehah Hospital for the subject admission which are
believed to be in Plaintiffs counsel's possession.
14. See records of the Rehab Hospital - Mechanicsburg, 175 Lancaster
Boulevard, Meehaniesburg, P A relative to the subject admission.
IS. None other Ihan those care plans. charts, notes, orders and other documents
already contained in the admission records relative to Plaintiffs admission, which is the
subject of her Complaint.
16. Defendants are not so contending.
17. Defendants are not so contending.
18. See records relating to Plaintiffs admission, copies of which are believed to
be already in Plaintiffs counsel's possession. Also, see deposition of Ruth Rogers.
19. Defendants have not, as yet, detcnnined who they will call as non-expert
witnesses at the time of trial. As soon as stich detemlination is made, Defendants reserve
the right to seasonably supplement its response to this Interrogatory.
20. Defendants have not, as yet, rctained the services of an expert witness to
testifY on its behalf at the time of trial. When and ifsueh expert is retained, Defendants will
,,-<,I"'. "._..
Exhibit E
inspect.ion .lnd nth,>r purpo::c" includin<l copyill'J. i'UI::U.lnt to
Pennsyl'/i1niil Rules of Civil Procedure No. 4009 dwl otlwr p"rtinent
rules at the office of the coun:Jel for the requcGtinu 1J<lI.ty, or i1t
such other lociltion as may be mutually agreed upon by counnel for
you and for the requesting party. not later thiln thirty (30; days
after service of these requests. the documents i1nd items herein
cited. The word "document" or "documents" as herein used includes
but is not limited to photographs, video tapes. drawings, reports.
statements, computer files. and memoranda. as well as all other
documents as defined in Rule No. 4009. Please be sure to photocopy
the front and back of all two sided documents:
1. All medical records concerning Evelyn Fleisher generated
during or as a result of her October 30. 1996 to November 6. 1996
and November 19, 1996 to December 21, 1996 stays at HealthSouth,
including, but not limited to charts. orders, notes, memoranda,
reports, test results, care plans and diaries.
2. All written procedures, rules, regulations, guidelines,
protocols or other writings establishing a method for care
providers, staff, supervisors, agents and employees to follow with
regard to care given to patients in general and/or Evelyn Fleisher
in particular, including but not limited to Department of Physical
Therapy rules, regulations. protocols and the like.
3. All documents you contend Ruth Rogers should have reviewed
Exhibit F
""_n~
,",:( .! fa . -~ 'J"al~~U"'.'HI"a..'''ca............n.,......--,-
. .,., ..~....,~,,; .
, '\
'"
-r. '.' ::::. t l'.~ I'. -. ~ ! I"" '. I ,"
T"'l t"
~ ...- q' 1#1....
pro'lldinq
(.,)'/l't d(lt' to U~'lt'lId,IIII;1 1"'1 Ill"
,'1.11m:; 1"'IIl'1 .Co:;'" t ..,I I'J
!Nelyn Fl"i~h,n in thi" actioll.
11. Copiet: of: all reportG. c()l're~pondence, memnranda and
writingo forwarded to i1ny expert witness E,,"ployed or consulted by
Defendant.
12. All documents and writings forwarded to any expert in
reviewing this case for Defendants.
13. All documents identified in your Answers to
Interrogatories.
14. All documents you referred to in answering Evelyn
Fleisher's Interrogatories.
15. All books, articles, publications, journals. transcripts
or other documents upon which you intend to rely,
16. All documents you intend to use or upon which you rely to
defend Evelyn Fleisher'S claims.
17. All documents received in response to all subpoenas issued
by one or more Defendants.
lB. All documents evidencing charges of Defendants to Evelyn
Fleisher as a result of her November 19, 1996 through December 21,
1996 stay at HealthSouth.
19. All documents, drawings. photos, diagrams, videotapes, and
the like which concern the subject matter of this litigation, except
as already produced in response to any of the preceding requests for
documents, relating to any aspect of Evelyn Fleisher's care on
November 21, 1996 or the matters averred in her Complaint, excluding
, .
. ' . ' . ,
, "
, '
, , . .
. ,
, "
Exhibit G
Exhibit H
Nichole M, Slaley, ES1luire
JunL' II, :WOO
I'a!:e :1
Firlillly, while il is my inlention 10 allclllpllo accolllnlOdalc your Ihirly nO) day timc limil
in rcspondiog to your rcncwcd rCl/ucst ",r morc spccific inrormalion. I would simply hcg your
indulgcncc 10 allow mc somc addilionallimc within which 10 rel'iewthis mailer amI provide you
with more specific responses il'l alii ahle. II~ aller illY review oflhe Iile.1 amunahle 10 more
specifically respond to your discovery rCl/uesls, I will conlact you persorlillly and discuss this
wilh you in rUrlher delail. If ancr our discussion, you recl compelled to tile a molion with the
court seeking more specific answers to discovery, then wc will ohviously haw 10 cross that
bridge when we gel to it.
If, after you have had an oPPorlunily 10 review Ihe lilregoing, you wish 10 call me 10
discuss Ihis mailer personally, I would eerlainly invile ,l11d welcome you 10 do so, Olhcrwise, as
I indicated above, I will make every allempt to comply with your Ihirty (30) day lime limit,
ahhough I am not oplimistic that Ihal can he reasonably achieved at this point in time.
SMO/mmk
Iy yours,
c----
'LIU i}!J7u@4:[..l---
aron M, O'Donnell
105 _AILlAIl\SMOICORRI51 JOolIMMK119181100640
1
,
\
,
i
I,
r
I
\
,
Ii
I.'
; :"
r~,'~~~
1'1""
._ii
"
,
I
,I
IlET1tL1JfEM, PfNNsnVANIA
C610l1ll:l1-4J4oIl
fAX (610)!I01-4~
rOl1.Lml'llN. J'ENNsnVANIA
UUlJ44-1611
fAX,UlSIl4't.\4N
EJ,IE. ramsnvANIA
181414SH)6l,)
fAXlIII41WHloW
LANCAmR,!'fNNSnVANL\
mn)99.184\
fAX,(1I1))99.18B
NE\VftJWN SQUARE. PENNSYLVANIA
(6101 )51-7420
FAX: (6101 UI.74+4
NORRJSTOVJ'J'o,l. PfNNSnVANlA
(610) 2n4+40
FAX, (610) 292.0410
MULADfJ.PIItA. PENNSYLVANIA
(2IS) S75-l6CO
FAX: UII) S7S.oeS6
LAW Oll'lCES
M/\R.SI-li\l.l, DINNII n:)', \XI,\RNIR
COLEM:\N 8 C<)(;(;IN
rrnsAlJROIt, l'rnN\nVANIA
ltW80llIotO
FAX 141l1801,1188
~'RANTl'lN, rFNNSnVAN1A
t\101'iI.I'M!
FAX (1101 H2,4'H1
'I'll UAM'iIORT,I'fNNsnVANlA
t\10J1l6ml
fAX (i70IJl6HM
UIERRY IlIlL. NI::W 1ER.'iEY
(8\"'414,600)
FAX UIS61 nt 6077
LIVINGSTON. NEW JERSEY
lY7HS97,1\\l
FAX: (97J) 19J.51\5
WILMINGTON, OELAWARE
002) 6\1-7900
FAX: (l02) 6\1.1901
WEIRYON. WEST VIRGINIA
(J04) 748.7.fOO
FAX, 0041 748.0620
STtUBENVIUE. OHIO
(7401282.6701
fl\X: (7'"'1182-6667
A l'H.O.1A'"'sION,....1. 0. 'fl.l'- lRATl(lN
IlU PINE :-.IRFFT, IrII nC')R
ro flOXllt)l
IIARRlsAlJRn, I1:NNsnVANIA l1h'lf C""-ll
I1l1111lli.Jll
CAlllE AI1[lkLs.s MARSIIAU.
FAX, 11l1'1Il1~'"
W,,, Slit wwwnurm..lt.kflNM,W",
Dircct Dial
717-231.3791
July 5, 200D
Niehole M. Staley, Esquire
PURCELL, KRUG & HALLER
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102-2392
RE: Evelyn Fleisher v. HealthSouth, et al.
Our File No, 19181-00640
CCP (Cumberland County) No. 98-6505
Dear Ms, Staley:
1 have reviewed your letter dated May, 31, 2000 regarding responses to Interrogatories
and Reljue,t for Production of Documents ,iireelCd 10 Defendant, HcaHhSouih. I respectfully
submit to you that Defendant, HealthSouth by and through its Counsel, Marshall, Dennehey,
Warner, Coleman & Goggin have responded to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Request for
Production of Document within the Rules of Civil Procedure,
Specifically, Defendant does not have in its possession any additional documents that the
Plaintiff is seeking. The Plaintiff through its own actions or through discovery with Defendant
has obtained all pertinent documents.
In regard to your claim that the back of two-sided doeumenls were omitted, we have
analyzed our file and we have concluded that the documents supplied to Plaintiffwere one-sided
medical bills. Therefore, the documents produced to you through discovery are whole.
!~
f :lIIlicipatc th:ltlhis corrcspondcncc will salisfy your inquiry rcgar.ling Ihc "grossly
inadcljUalc" responscs to I'laintirl's Intcrrogatoric:; allll Rcqucst f(lr I'r()(IUClion orDocumcnls, Ir
you havc any qllcslions pleasc contacl mc atthc ahovc phonc nllmhcr.
jep
tnrn()~
. haron M. O'Donncll
Allorney ror Dcrendant, IIcalthSOllth
t
)
I)
I
I
1-1
f
,
,:.
I'
;";
I
'...'...
Exhibit I
pot<:Ilt ial 'NitIle,~::eG and/ot' per';..>!l" 'Nbo ha'/e iHl, kno'Nledge of the
citcumc:tancec: of l::vel,n Fleistll't" s No'/C,mber 21. 1996 injur,.
7. All interoffice memoranda between reprec:entativec: of your
insurance carrier i1nd memoranda to your insurance carrier's file
concerning the injuries sustilined by Evelyn Fleisher and the
circumstances surrounding said injuries.
8. A copy of the face sheet of any policy of insurance
providing coverage to you for the claims being asserted by Evelyn
Fleisher in this action.
9. Copies of all reports, correspondence, memoranda and
writings forwarded to any expert witness employed or consulted by
you.
10. All documents and writings forwarded to any expert in
reviewing this case for you.
11. All documents identified in your Answers to
Interrogatories.
12. All documents you referred to in answering the
Interrogatories directed to you,
13. All books, articles, publications, journals, transcripts
or other documents upon which you intend to rely.
14, All documents you intend to use or upon which you rely
to defend Evelyn Fleisher's claims,
15. All documents received in response to all subpoenas
issued by you.
; rUMIIERL^Nfl COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
Y.
IIEAI.TIISOUTlI CORI'ORATlON tI,l
IIEALTIISOUl'Il REIlAIIILIT A T10N 1I0SI'1 r A I.
OF MECIIANICSIIURG,IIF.AI.T1IS011111
REHABILITATION OF MECIIANICSBURG.
ACUTE REIIAIlIIOSPITAL, and III!AL TIIS0lJTII
MECHANICSIlURG REHA" SYSTEM. ACUTE
REHAIllLlTATION 1l0SPITAI.
and
: NO, 98,6j()5
: CIVIL ACTION. LA W
IIEALTHSOUTIl OF MECIIANICSIlURG,INC.
Va HEALTHSOUTII REHABILITATION 1I0SI'ITAL
OF MECIIANICSIlURG,IIEALTIlSOUTII
REIlAIllLlTATION OF MECHANICSIlURG.
ACUTE REHAIlIIOSPITAI., and IIEAI.TIISOllTlI
MECIlANICSIlURG RF.IIAIl SYSTEM. ACUTI!
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTIl REHAIllLIT A T10N
HOSPITAL OF MECIlANICSIlURG
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSIlURG. ACUTE REHAIl
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSIlURG REHAIl SYSTEM
. ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S REOUEST FOR
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO
DEFENDANT. RUTH ROGERS
Defendant, Ruth Rogers, by and through her counsel, Marshall, Dennehey,
Warner, Coleman & Goggin, hereby responds to Plaintiffs Request for Production of
Documents with the following answers and objections:
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
1-'
12, NOlle,
13, None, other lhan lhe Physical Therapy Practice Acl referenced in
responding Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs Interrogatories,
14, Objcclion, Documentation soughl in Plaintiffs Request for
Production of Documents # 14 is non-discoverable as Ihe identity of documents Plaintiff
seeks fall within the ambit of Pa,R,C,P, 4003,1 (a), Subject to and without waiver of the
foregoing, any and all documents produced thus far between the parties within the course
of discovery in this litigation, Ms, Rogers reserves the right reasonably supplement her
answer to this request at a reasonable time prior to trial.
15, Objection. Plaintiffs Request for Production of Documents # 15
imposes upon responding Defendant, an unduly burdensome response, Subject to and
without waiver of the foregoing objection, counsel for Ms, Rogers will make records
obtained pursuant to any records subpoenas available for inspection and copying, at
PlaintitTs expense, by Plaintiffs counsel at a time and date to be mutually agreed upon
by counsel for the respective parties,
16, Objection, Responding Defendant objects to the Plaintiffs
Request for Production of Documents #16 to the extent that it seeks non-discoverable
infonnation pursuant to Pa,R,C,P, 4003.1, Subject to and without waiver of the
foregoing objection, none, other than the records previously produced or to be made
available in the future for inspection and copying,
Exhibit J
. "",,,.,.
. ," I.. ~ ....
IQ/~.I=QQI' 11:3~
71iI)411f:jlJ)
!IE:'ll- ,; L.',,;"" 1'"
,....... .....
2
APPCARAflCES:
PURCELL. KRUG S HALLER
B'i: llICllOLF. t~, STALEY OOGOR~IAN, ESQUIRE
FOR - PLAI:IT!FF
:-1ARSHALL, DENNEHI::Y, ~lARNER, COLEMAll .. GOGGIN
BY: TIMOTHY J. McMAHOtl, ESQUIRE
FOR - DEf'EtIDAN1S
~-'
GEIGER & LORIA REPORTING SERVICE - 1-800-222-4577
>~
IQ/:$I:QQI II;,~
71 7'j.11l ':,)1
,;t:t.1E.... :. L(""I'.
~ .... .t,. .....
,1
M5, a'GORMAN: Those arc all the questlons
that I have, Il~wcv.r. b~fore we go off the record I need a
copy of the current poliCY manual and a coPy of the manual
that would ha~e eXlsted in 1996, I think that has certainly
been coverp.d in the rliscoveIY that I've already submitted.
IS there i1ny reilson why I can't have a copy of that by
MR. McMAHON: Yes.
sometimp. tomorrow?
....-.
MS, O'GORMAN: Why?
MR. McMAHON: We have responded to your
dlscovery requests,
MS. O'OORMAN: I don't have a COpy of the
current policy manual, and I also don't have a copy of any
written policy that existed in November of 1996,
MR, McMAHON: All that I can tell you is that
I will be happy to review your prior discovery requests and
defendant's responseS to those, AS far as promising you a
document by tomorrow, I'm simply not going to make such a
promise,
L
t
~'
t~
MS, O'GORMAN: Are any of the written policies
and procedures in your possession at this point?
t~R, McMAHON: I honestly can't answer your
question without looking at my own documentation. I don't
have sufficient memory to answer your question.
MS, O'GORMAN: Okay. Your deposition is
GEIGER & LORIA REPORTING SERVICE - 1_800-222-4577
I .
.,
f
:J
~
,
.'
,
~"
I!"
( ~"
,':"":
I'
I, 'il
(. ^..~
"
I,
.1
.1
I
Exhibit K
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, ANGELA S. EATON, an employee of the law firm of Purcell,
Krug & Haller, counsel for Plaintiff, hereby certify that service
of the PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR SANCTIONS was served
on the following by Regular Mail, on October 30, 2001:
MARSHALL,
Timothy McMahon, Esquire
DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN
4200 Crums Mill Road
Suite B
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268
(Attorney for Defendants)
"
& GOGGIN
l.tjl ~L/ a
Angela S,
--,
~~
Eaton
'j\ ^ I 1.\11.,,,cll I 1'(j)Cllh',\....',.I 1'1IJ(141111.J1I
EVELYN FI.ElSIfER,
PlaintilT
: IN TIfE ('ot IRT OF ('OMMON PLEAS
: ('lI~IIII;RI.ANIl ('OllNTY,
PENNS\'l.V ANIA
\"
IIEALTIISOUTII CORI'ORATION lIa
IIEALTlISOUTII REIfABILlTATION
1f0SPlT AI. OF MECIIANICSBURG,
HEALTIISOUTII : NO, IJS.r.505
REHABILITATION OF r\IECIIANICSBURG-
ACUTE REHAB 1I0SPIT AI.. and
ilEAL THSOUTII MECIIANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA W
REIIABILlTATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH OF MECIfANICSBURG,
INC.lla HEALTHSOUTII REIfABILlTATlON
1I0SPIT AL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
r
~: .
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
'-'
-:
'.,)
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
HEFENIMNTS' RESPONSE TO
I'LAINTIFF'S i\lOTION TO COI\IPEL ANH FOR SANCTIONS
ANI) J\n;I\IOIUNHUJ\I OF LAW
ANI) HEFENllANTS' REOUEST FOR REASONABLE Fn:S ANIl COSTS
I'URSUANT TO l'a.Rc'P, 4019(1!)(2)
I. I)efendants' Response to the Allel!ations Contained in Plaintifrs 1\I0tion to Compel
I, Admittcd in part; denied in part, It is admitted that Plaintiff is who she says
she is, It is dcnied that she was injured (/t (/11.1' timc while receiving carc at HealthSouth
Rchabilitation Hospital of Mechanicsburg. Pa,
2, Admitted,
3, Denied, By way of further response, Plaintiff pleads, at paragraph 14 of her
Complaint, that an Interdisciplinary Assessment fonn used oy Ihe HealthSollth Rehabililation
Hospital of Meehanicsburg, Pcnnsylvania, oSlensibly as of November 19, 1996, defined the
standard of care applicable to this theory of negligence, See, Plaintirrs Complaint, attached
hereto and marked Exhibit "A", al paragraph 14,
4, Denied. It is categorically denied that over the course of discovery Plaintiff
has requested the policies and procedures applicable to the care and treatmenl rcndered to her on
November 21, 1996 at the HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Meehaniesburg, Pa, To the
contrary, Plaintiff once requesled "all the policies, procedures, guidelines alld other writings
establishing a method .., to insure that patiellts were reccivillg proper care", to which
Defendants objected as being irrelevant, overly broad and vague, unlimited in scope or time.
Notwithstanding, the Interdisciplinary Assessment Form was produced to thc Plaintiff. It was
nolunlil Octobcr 25, 200 I, aboul four workiug lI"ys l,rior tll the cxpimlion of discovery, th"t, "I
the conclusion of" dcposilion, PI"intilrs counsel "sked for Ihe ('/11'/'1'1/1 policies "nll proccdurcs
l11"nu,,1 lilli/the l11"nu,,1 which existed in I ')1)(" Then, lIuring" tdeplwnc con\'crs"tion with Ihe
undersigned counsel on Novcl11ber 5, 2001. PI"intifrs counsel withllrew her request for Ihe
current policies "nd procedures "nd articul"led (for Ihe first time) " specific requcst for the
HealthSouth Rehabilil"tion lIospilill of Mech"nicsburg policies "nd procedures in effect on
November 21, 11)1)6, rel"ting to the delivery of physical thempy services 10 patienls. The
undersigned counsel agreed to (,,) request tlmt documenl"tion from IlealthSouth, (b) duplic"tc
the document"tion "nd (c) produce it to Plaintifl's counsel nOlwithst"nding that this specific
request was made following the expiration of the disco\'ery de"dline, The documents have been
produced,
5, Admilled,
6, Admilled in part; denied in part, PI"inlifrs counsel has miseharacterized Ms.
Fiscus'testimony, Ms, Fiscus was produced for deposition on October 25, 2001, as the current
Direelor of Physical Therapy, who would testify to the policies and procedures of the
department as she knows them now, Plaintiff did not request a deposition of Ms, Fiscus for the
purpose of exploring the policies and procedures in place at the HealthSouth facility on
November 21, 1996, Therefore, because Ms, Fiscus was not employed as the department
director on November 21, 1996, Plaintifrs counsel's questions regarding 1996 policies and
procedures to this witness were inappropriate,
7, Admilled with qualification. Ms, Fiscus testified to the current policy
regarding the maintenance and archiving of revised written policies, protocols, and procedures,
11 should he noted Ihat I\Is, Fiscus' testimony docs not apply tll the 1I0spilal policy in place in
191)("
S, Admilled wilh Ill...lificalion, Ms, Rogers' deposition was nolieed f.,r Ihe
purpose of cOllllueting pre,Complainl discovery only, The sell pc of Ihis deposilion was limited
to the facts of an incident involving the 1'laintilTand Ms, Rogers' on Novemher 21,191)(" See,
Plaintiffs Notice of Deposilion, .lllached herelo and marked Exhihil "B",
9. Admilled with qualification, i'laintiffhas conlinually deserihed her requests to
mean. Ihe policies, procedures, and protocols with respcct to Ihe "Risk Assessment for Falls"
identified on an InterDisciplinary Asscssmcnt form ("'DA ") which is part of the Admissions
fonns for new paticnts, In facl, it is the information contained on the Interdisciplinary
Assessment Fonn, which indicates a "two-person max assist" protocol which Plaintiff has
alleged was not followed. Iherehy creating negligence on the part of the Hospital. (See,
Plaintiffs Complaint), The only documentation that discusses the numher of persons who
should assist the patient on Ihe day of the admission is the IDA, That documentation was
produced to Plaintiff.
10, Admilled, By way of further response, the primary allegation of negligence
made by the Plaintiff in her Complaint is that Defendants failed to follow the [purported]
requirement for a "two person. max assist" on November 21.1996, which [allegedly] resulted in
an injury to the Plaintiffs lell knee, The IDA fonn is the most accurate document responsive to
Plaintiffs request for documents which would tend to be relevant. On the other hand, the entire
Policies and Procedures Manual for any given year is entirely irrelevant to prove this allegation,
However, for the sake of producing to Plaintiff something that she believes she is entitled to see,
the Policies and Procedures Manual for the year 1996 was produced,
II. ,'dmillcd,
12, Admill,'.I.
13. Admill,"1.
14, Admillcd in part; ,knicd in part, bhihil (j is "dmillcd ,111<1 spe:lks for ilsclf.
However, following rcccipl of thai Icllcr, thc undcrsigncd c,llIcd Plainlirrs counscllwice in an
attcmpt 10 rc-mediate, Plaiulitrs couuscl adviscd tlwt, "(a) Ihcrj higgest prohlcm "'<IS thatthcre
wcre sevcfilllwo-sidcd p<lgcs of thc hospital chart, hut th<ltthc hack sides of some of the pages
were missing, <lnd taller hcing requcsled to idcnlify Ihose p<lrts of the chart Ihat were missing so
that those pages could be produced, Plaintiffs counsel rcsponded hy s<lying IIUlt), (b) "[she] had
two [unrelated] Superior Court bricfs Ihal wcrc duc and she did not havc time 10 go Ihrough the
chart and tell [Ihe undersigncd] which pages wcre missing",
15, Admilled in part; denied in part, Plaintiffs eounselmischaraeterizes Exhibit
H, She had <llready been provided, twice. wilh the IDA fom! that indicated Risk Assessment for
falls, and showed a designation of a "two person m<lx assist"; <lnd thai unless she pointed out
which part of the chart (about 4" in volume) she was missing, we would assume the entire chart
was produced, It should be noted that none of the missing pages were the IDA fonn or any of its
subparts or allaehments,
16, Admitted with qualification. Ruth Rogers was a physical therapy assistant,
not a management employee who could testify to Hospital policy and procedures, It is
nonsensical to assert that Ms, Rogers would rely on the Hospital policy and procedures at trial.
17, Admitted,
18, Admitted,
19. Denied, II is categorically denied Ihat the Defendants knowingly :lI1d
intenlion:llly wilhheld the policies and procedures in effect on Novelllher 21, 1996, 10 the
suhstantial prejudice of lhe I'lainliff, To Ihe conlrary, il was nol until Novemher 5, 20C)) , that
Plainli rrs counsel's nHlde a speei fie requesl, orally, oI'Cr the telephone 10 the undersigned
counsel for that docul11enl. In facl, I'l:lintiffs counsel, allhat lime, admilled .... ,if I knew what
to ask for specilically. I would have asked for it.., I had to lish around," Moreover. Plaintiff
caused her own delay hy "Jishing" and not asking for what she wan led in the first instance,
20. Admilted in part: denied in part, This is prohahly tnle, Had Plaintiffs
counsel simply requested Ihe 1996 Policies :md Procedural Manual in the first Request for
Production of Documents, she would not have 10 requesl the court for an extension of the
discovery deadline OIl this late date, However, in the spirit of cooperation and because no trial
date has been set. Defendants have advised Plaintiff that they are willing to agree 10 extend the
discovery deadline for the limited pumose of :tllowing Plaintiff to depose and/or redepose any
witnesses she chooses to ask questions ahout the 19l)6 Policies and Procedures Manual and its
contents.
21. Denied, Plaintiffmischaracterizes POI, R,C,P, 4019, 4019 is a two-part nile
that requires thc issuance of a eomplianec order first; and in the event of non-compliance by the
non-moving part. the moving party may thcn file another motion seeking sanctions for non-
compliance, Pa,R,C,P,4019; Pel/I/sylval/ia Civil Practice Mal/lIal, Second Edition, Shugart
(Michie 1993),
22. Because Plainti ff had ample time and opportunity to request the 1996
Policy and Procedure Manual from HealthSouth Relmbilitation Hospit:tl of Meehaniesburg prior
Defendants respectfully suhmir that hecause nn cnlllpliance order has issncd alll.!
Defendants have eOlllplied wilh Plaintiffs requests, sanctions, of .IlIY killll or nature, arc nol
appropriale,
Moreover, Defellllanls Imve agreed to exlel1ll lhc disCllvcry deadline to Decemher 31,
2001, to allow Plaintiff to take depositinns limited to the 1<)% Pnlicics .ulllProcedure M.mual
and ils content.
Pa,R,C.P,(g)(2) provides:
"(2) 1 f the motion for sanctions is dcnied, the Courl, afier
opportunity for hearing, shall require rhe moving party or the
allomey advising the motion or both of thcm to p.IY to the party
who opposed the motion the reasonablc expenses incurred in
opposing the motion, including allomcys fees, unless rhe Court
finds t1mrthe making of the motion was suhstantially justificd or
that other circumstances make an award of cxpensed unjust."
Responding Defendants respectfully submit thaI PlainlilT's Motion 10 Compel and
Motion for Sanctions are unwarranted and unjusrified given the fact thaI Plaintiffs counsel did
not request the HealthSouth 1996 Policies and Procedures Manual until November 5. 2001.
Responding Defendants have cooperated fully with PlaintilT's counsel and continue to cooperate
with her notwithstanding the filing of this frivolous and baseless Motion, Because Responding
Defendants have incurred costs and legal fees opposing Plaintiffs Motion, an award of fees and
costs is requested to be levied against the Plainti ff, Evelyn Fleisher, and/or her allomeys, Purcell,
Kmg & Haller, in an amount of$750,OO, pursuant 10 Pa,R,C,P, 40l9(g)(2),
III. ('undnslun
For :III of the foregoing rC:lsons, Dcfcndants rcspcetfully rcqucstthis lIonorahle ('ourt to
dcny Plaintiffs Motion 10 Compcl allll J\'lotion for Sanctions :tIllllo cntcr.1I1 Ordcr rcflecling the
parties' mullml agrecmclll to extend Ihc discovcry dcadline to Dcecmbcr 31, 20l1l, in order to
allow Plainti ff to take dcpositions for Ihe limitcd purposc of cxploring the 1l)CJ6 I'olicies and
Proccdures (relating to the delivery of Physical Therapy serviccs) Manual only, and to award
Defcndants reasonable fees allll costs incurrcd in defending and opposing the Molion~ for
S.lnctions in the amount of$750,OO,
DATE: \\\\'\\~\
Respectfully submitted,
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER,
COLEMAN & GOGGIN
~~~f.tl
RON M, 'D NNELL, ESQUIJtr-
I. ,No, 79457
_00 Cnlms Mill Road, Suite 8
Harrisburg, P A 17112
(717) 651-3503
Attorneys for Defendants
Exhibit A
NOTICE
You have been sued in court. If YOIl wi:!h I" d""'I1<1 """111111
the claims set forth in the following ptlqen, r(IlJ 1IIlIPl t ,d:" ,Ij" IfIll
within twenty (20) days after this cOlllplaint .11I<1 11<11 j.,., "1'/" 1"'1'11
nerved. To defend againnt the aforE'mentiol1f:r!,'I,Ii''':I, ., Willi""
appearance stating your defenses and objectiollll 1Il1llll )11' 1'111," I.d dlld
filed in wri ting by you, the defendilnt, or by .1Il ..I I "I w'Y, '{"" ../'I'
warned that if you fail to take i1ction iI<]aill!lt till'"'' .'I"If":I. tilt,
court may proceed without you and a judgment [01' ..IIY I""""Y I'I..IIII('r!
in the complaint or for i1ny other clilim rcqllin'd by Ih,' ,,1..1111 III
may be entered against you by the court witholll 1IIIIh"I 11.'111"'.
You may lose money, property or other rightn illll'''II,,"1 ,,, y"",
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LA~IYER AT J'Nt'I,;, 1(0'
YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, (:0 '1'0 01/
TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTI! BELml TO FIND OlIT ~IIIEI/E
YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
NOTICIA
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Court Administriltor
4th Floor, Cumberland County COlll't/IOIIll"
Carlisle, PA 17013
Le han demandado a usted en la corte, si \1I11:(.'d quiere
defenderse de estas damandas expuastas en Ian p.lIJ ill,'" :.\ i'JII i (!Jlte:J.
ust.:d tiene viente (20) dias de plazo ill partir de Iii [('cl1a de la
demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar IIn" ilpal'iel1cia
escrita 0 en persona 0 por abogado y arcl1i val' en 1.. COl'te en forma
escrita sus defensas 0 sus objeciones alas demilndo1n (,n contra de
su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defi('nde, la corte
tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contril unted [Jin previo
aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivia que es pedido
en la peticion de demand a . Usted puede perder c1inero 0 sus
propiedades 0 otros derechos importantes para usted,
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMEN'l'8. S1 NO
TIENNE ABOGAD 0 SI NO TIENE EL D1NERO SUFICIEN'l'8 DE PAGAR
TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TEL8FONE A LA
OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRIDA AI3AJO PARA
AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGU1R ASS1STENC1A L8GAL:
(;'
.
t
L~
,
,
f
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Court Administriltor
4th Floor. Cumberland COllnty COllrtl1oulle
Carlisle. PA IlOl3
I
I
I'
l~
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYINAIIIA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVAlIIA
NO,
--,--"'''-'-
Civil Action - Law
EVELYN FLEISHER
4905 EAST TRINDLE ROAD
ROOM 92
MECHANI CS BURG , PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
t/a HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
. MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOTJTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
t/a HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
versus
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
175 LANCASTER BOUlJEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM
- ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
RUTH ROGERS
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANTS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, by and through her
attorneys, Purcell, Krug & Haller and files the following Complaint:
], I').lilll if f I:: I,;,/,'Iyn 1'1"1:'""" ,1/1 oIdllll illdividlloll witll ,1
I'n'::"1l1 .adell''':::: dl l"flUllt J Y l-IJr-',HloWIl, '11)01, ";,1:11" Trindlf' I~{),HJ, Room 97.,
M(!Cl1illl i cnburcJ, P^ l'/O'j~J.
2. De[(mdilnt nllmber onr. in lleollthSollth Corporiltion, trading as
HeillthSouth Rellilbilitation Il~pital of Mcchanicsburg - Acute Rehab
Ilospital and IIcillthSouth r~cchanicsburg Rehab System - Acute
Rehilbilitation Hospital, a corporiltion organized and existing under
the lilws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a present business
i1ddress at 175 Lilncaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania.
3, Defendant number two is HealthSouth of Mechanicsburg,
Incorporated, trading i1S HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of
Mechanicsburg - Acute Rehab Hospital and HealthSouth Mechanicsburg
Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania with a present business address at 175 Lancaster
Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
4, Defendant number three is HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg with a present business address at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
of r~echanicsburg is merely a fictitious name of either Defendant #1
2
01 11"1 <'1I'!.o II 1 II~,
r'" l)p(('rHlilnt 1I1l1l1bpr tolll In 1I..,.ltll:;"lItll H,.II.d,tl!I,.II()I) Id
M"c11,1IIicnbunJ
^cutl' IU'hdb 1I()::pit,i1 with oIl'l"::I'lIt !lll::lIlf'nH dddn":ln
at 1 '/~-) LilnC~lutt.'r Boulevard, r~(.t'hdni ('l:bIJI' I. ClJIlltH'r.l,1I1I1 ('OUllt.y,
P(~nnBY 1 vani a.
It is believed and ,lv..rH'd t.holt 11"<1) t h:;outh
Rehabilitation of Mechanicsbll,rg - ^cuU, Rehab lIunpit,d 1" In('n'ly ,\
fictitious nilme of either Defendant III or Defendant II~,
6, Defendant number five is lleillthSouth Mechanicsburg Rehilb
System - Acute Rehilbilitation Ilospitill with iI present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mecholnicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania, It is believed and averred that HealthSouth
Mechanicsburg Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital is merely
a fictitious name of either Defendant III or Defendant #2.
7, Defendants one through five are hereinafter collectively
referred to as "HealthSouth Defendants,"
8, Defendant number six is Ruth Rogers (hereinafter "Rogers"),
an adult individual and physical therapy assistant with a present
business address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania,
9. On or about November 19, 1996, Plaintiff was admitted to
the HealthSouth Defendants' rehabilitation facility located at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania following surgery
to correct a prior right ankle surgery.
3
:Hlflprpc! Of) Nov('mbpr :J.l, I~JfJ(j:
;t. Spv,'n' If" t kIJf'f' p'lill dlld di::t'(ll!l! '111
h. Deen>'''H'd I f'l t I "'I ::1 I "Il'JI II ; ""d
C, Sevc,n'ly limitro<J mr,llility.
27. As a proximate n>nult: o[ her [.111, PI'tilllill ,,"fler:: Irom
anxiety, embarrassment, Erusl;.rution and depn:~snion by virtll(~ of her
pain and her inability to recover to her pre-November 21, 1996
status.
28, As a further proximate result of her fall, Plaintiff has
been prevented from participilting in her usuill household duties and
social activities, and the aforesaid injuries will permanently
interfere with her enjoyment of life,
29. Prior to her fall, Plaintiff resided at the Ecumenical
fl
. \
,
Communities, an assisted living facility,
30, Plaintiff is now forced to reside at Country Manor, a full
,-I
,
i
I
....,
\'
'i
time care facility, as she is unable to return to Ecumenical
Communities or any other assisted living facility,
31, Such full time care is a significant additional expense
which will continue for the rest of Plaintiff's life.
COUNT I - VICARIOUS LIABILITY
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
32, Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
33, At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Rogers was an
I:'::,
'j"'"
!.:;-
,.
('rnployt.,. of 1I1'.dlh~;ollth fJpfPIIIJ.lIlln ilctilIC] within I.h,. dllthr,riz('d
ncop" dlld in IUlthpl.IlH'f" of li"l dql'IH':Y or ('lflP 1 OYlllr. II I dllt if':: Jnr
11",11 t h::""I" 1),,1 "lId,lIll ::. (
H. Th.. flf'qliqroncc of l}f,.tl'~nddnl. Roqen~ dirf>ctly tllld
proxim<ltply c'''lw"d tlj(> injlln,,:: e!et.-ti lee! herein,
t
I{
35, 11(0,11 thSouth DCfcncl'llltn arc vicitriously liable (nl- the
negligence o( Defendilnt Rogers identified in Paragraph:: 22
(a)
(f) ,
,.
WHEREFORE, Plilintiff respectfully requests this lIonorable Court
to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff itnd against Defendants for
unliquiditted damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount
requiring arbitration, plus costs of this i1ction and interest from
the date of judgment.
'\
,
\
COUNT II - CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
36. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
r
~/
\'1
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein,
37. HealthSouth Defendants were negligent in that they:
a. Failed to properly supervise and oversee
employees providing care to Plaintiff; and
\
'<
b. Failed to formulate, adopt and enforce adequate
rules and policies to ensure quality care for
Plaintiff, their patien~,
~
"
i1~;
1",";1
rf \ ~i;,:
Jr"
ft;~
1\ ,'.'
I,
I ",~
i/~:
I, t
j:'::"
lr;~i
, .
r('^j
38. The foregoing negligence of HealthSouth Defendants
directly and proximately caused the injuries detailed herein,
8
.
<
.
r
!
CERTIFICATEmOF SERYJ,c::F.
I, M^IH'I^ UA'I'E!;, 0111 l'lIIplcIYf'P of 111.. IdW [inn flf J'lln'(.II, Kt'uq (.(
Haller, C'ollnnel (or Plaint: i II, 11<_'L'pby cprt i Iy that ""l'vicp ,,( I he
(oregoin\j COMPI~INT wa:l 1II<ld,' npon the (ollowin<) by placinq .. copy of
I
r
I
b
.
;
,
.
same in the United Staten Illai], postage pr~paid, at HarrinbtJr~.J,
Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, on ~(Ot:'} It 1
, 1999.
L
,.
Timothy McMahon, Esquire
100 Pine Street, Fourth Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17101
D ('/1..//-
\. A~O i /i i( . CX'7t<2,L)
MARCIA E. GATES
)
.\
,
I
I
L
~
,
(1/.
:,:'::;'..,
.~;
f:"
;"
.,f
Exhibit B
\
,
t,
~
I'tll'fJllilnt to f'il,ICC.I', ,100'1,)(,'), I'J.,inljfl flI"k"fl ,Il.. fulJuwinq
fJtatt'rncnt:~l :
Statement of the Nature of the Cause of Action.
,
,
,
On NOVE>tnbCl~ 21, 199/,;, '1/0 i'('dt. rJid EVjllYtI Flpj nhpr wan ~l pat'ient
)
of Defendants HealthSolllll at: theil' 17S SOllth I,,'llcilnter BOlllevard,
I
t.
f
"
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylv,lnia location, ~1:;, Fleisher was admitted to
this locat ion for rehabil i tat ion therapy following surgery to correct
a previous, unsuccess[lIl right ankle surgery.
Ms. Fleisher was IInable to maintain balance when sti:\nding dlle to
the recent surgery i1nd dlle to a prior left knee injllry,
Because of
these conditions, and her overall physical health, it is believed
that Ms. Fleisher reqllired the assistance of at least two (2) staff
members to be safely transferred from her wheelchair to her bed,
On November 21, 1996, Defendant Rogers reqllested Ms, Fleisher to
move from her wheelchair to her bed, It is believed Defendant Rogers
'"t
was the only person present. It is further believed that she
provided no assistance to Ms, Fleisher. When transferring, Ms,
Fleisher lost her balance, fell and sustained significant,
irreparable left knee injuries.
Statement of the Matters to be Inquired Into:
A, The nature of Defendant Rogers' relationship to Defendants
HealthSouth;
B,
'<'
Defendant Rogers' recollection of the November 21, 1996
events described herein; and
.,.
""
n
EVELYN FLEISIIER,
l'lainliff
: IN lllE ('OURl 01' COMMON PI.EAS
: ClI~lIlERLANI)('OllNTY,
: I'ENNSYI.VANIA
v,
HEALTlISOUTH CORPORATION tla
HEAL THSOUTII REIIABILlT ATION
HOSPIT AL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEAL THSOUTII : NO, lJS.6S()S
REHABILITATION OF MECIIANICSI3URG.
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM. ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION. LAW
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC, tla HEALTHSOUTII REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILlT A TION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
"
f!
,\;
r
r
CEIHIFIC'ATE Ofo' SERVICE
I. Joanne M, Parr, an employee of Marshall, O~nn~hey. Warner, Coleman & Goggin, do h~r~by certify
that on this \t~ day of November. 2001, serv~d a copy of the for~going document via Firsl Class United
f
\
!
States mail. postage prepaid as follows:
Nicholc M, Staley O'Gonnan, Esquir~
PURCELL, KRUG & HALLER
1719 North Front Slreel
Harrisburg, PA 17102-2392
.
f
I
~t~ \\\, \?~\.\-
Joan eJ' PalT
.)
;\
. .
i
14
,','
:--".
"1~.^'1.I^1l.'\10 Ill'tj'KHn-J\W 1.")11 HUh.aU
EVELYN FLEISHER,
Plaintiff
: IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CLJMIIEIH.AND COUNTY,
: PENNSYI.VANIA
v,
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION tla
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH : NO, 98-6505
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG .
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEAL THSOUTH MECHANICSBLJRG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA W
REHABILITATION IIOSPIT AL
and
HEAL THSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC, tla HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
"
.
",
'..)/,;
h}:
~
"
i.?
:- ~. .~
^';'''~~
.I,,"'~",~
,~ ';.'
, ~~ i::: ...~~.
(-I4;'~ '~
c.
. ')... .
-~:;-,,~.t-:~
;1.'.... ',,' ~
,""'<,. .
r,
-
It
.;-.
H
or' ~,~
" r~
J
-:l.'
^,
~!,
"
,
"
'~'. ,.
"".'
','
(j- "
h,
'~
'~.~;; \ '~~.f ~'
. "
e., \.:
~<~
..'J.t.l'
~- :Vi
,~
"
')0" <~
.j . .-t.. ",.'i
. .t/.~.)II
,:*~~.)"
.'f .' iof
~~.~'
, . .
.. ~'. . "
.'
,.~
"
;:I.
.~~~.
'...
,
"
,
.' ,
. . '. ' "".
' .
,
,:"",;,.:.,:;,:;:;'-
course of discovery, Notwithstanding Plainliffs counsel's failure 10 do so, Defendants have graciously agrced
to rcproduce Ms, Rogers and Ms, Fiscus for the limited purpose of responding 10 PlainlilT's counsel's inquiries
regarding the 1l)l)6 policies und procedures munuul.
7, Admitted,
8, Admitted,
9, Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admined Ihat Defendants supplied Plaintiffs counsel
with Ms, Monteforte's last known mldress, The remaining ullegalions arc denied categorically, More
specifically, Defendants suggested that the deposition of Ms. Monteforte be held following the deposition of
Ms, Fiscus on October 25,2001, Nowhere in the letter attach cd as Exhibit B does Defendants' counsel "agree
to extend discovery without limitation until Ms, Monteforte can be located and deposed."
10, Admitted,
WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter an Order reflecting the
following agreements:
A, That the discovery deadline be extended through December 31, 200 I;
B. That the deadline for production of Plaintiffs expert report be extended to December 30,
2001;
C, That the deadline for the production of Defendants' expert report be extended thirty days to
January 31, 2002; and
"
. 'j
U~ ^ IIAIt~MO 111'ljJ(U"""}\1I I'JI)l1 wMII
EVELYN I'LEISIIER,
Plainliff
: IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: ('U/o.IIlERLANl> COI INTY.
: PENNSYLVANIA
v,
IlEAL THSOUTH CORPORATION I/a
HEAL TIISOUTlI REIIAI3ILlTATION
HOSPITAL OF MECIIANICSBURG,
lIEAL THSOUTH : NO, 98-6505
REIIABILlTATlON OF MEClIANICSBURG-
ACUTE REHAB 1I0SPITAL, and
lIEAL TIISOUTH MECIIANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA W
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH OF MEClIANICSBURG,
INC, tla HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
I)EFENI)AN'I'S' IU':SI'ONSE TO
I'I.,\INTIH"S !\lOTION '1'0 (,OJ\II'EI. ANI) FOR SANCTIONS
ANI) J\IEl\IORANIH1J\l OF LAW
ANI) I)EFENI)ANTS' lu:om:ST FOI{ REASONAIILE FEES ANI) COSTS
l'llRSlJANT TO I'n,R,C.P, 401')(1!)(2)
I. Defcndnnls' Rcsllonsc tOlhl' Allcl!ntions Contnincd in I'lnintifrs Motion to Compcl
I, Admitted in part; denied in part, II is admilled that Plainliff is who she snys
she is, II is denied that she was injured tit all,l' tilll(, while receiving c,lre at IleallhSoulh
Rehabilitalion Hospital of Mechanicsburg, I'a,
2, Admitted.
3, Denied, By way of further response, Plaintiff pleads, al paragraph 14 of her
Complaint, that an Interdisciplinary Assessment fonn used by the HeallhSouth Rehabililation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, ostensibly as of November 19, 1996, defined the
standard of care applicable 10 this theory of negligence, See, Plaintiffs Complaint, attached
hereto and marked Exhibit "An, al paragraph 14,
4, Denied, II is categorically denied that over the course of discovery Plnintifr
has requested the policies and procedures applicable to the care and treatment rendered to her on
November 21, 1996 at the HeallhSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechaniesburg, Pa, To the
contrary, Plaintiff once requested "al/ the policies, procedures, guidelines alld other writings
establishing a lIIethod ." to illSllre that patients were receiving proper care", to which
Defendants objected as being irrelevant, overly broad and vague, unlimited in scope or time,
Notwithstanding, the Interdisciplinary Assessment Form was produced to the Plaintiff, II was
not until (}clober 25, 2001. ahout Illllr working days prior to the expiration of discovery, 111011, al
Ihe conclusion of a deposition, Plaintilrs counsel asked for Ihe /'1/1"/'('111 policies ami procedures
manual lIlII/lhe manual which exish:d in 19%, Then, during a telephone conversation wilh Ihe
undersigned counsel on November 5, 2011I, I'laintilrs eonnsel withdrew her request for Ihe
eurrenl policies ami procedures amI arliculated (for the first time) a specific requesl for Ihe
HealthSouth Rclmbilitation Hospilal of Mechanicsburg policies ,lI1d procedures in effect on
November 21, 19%, relating to Ihe delivery of physical therapy services to patients. The
undersigned counsel agreed to (a) request that documentation from He.t1thSoulh. (b) duplicale
Ihe documcnt.nion and (c) produce it to Plaintiffs counsel notwilhstanding that this specific
request was made following the expiration of the discovery deadline, The documents have been
produced.
5, Admitted,
6, Admitted in pari; denied in pari, Plaintiffs counsel has mischaracterized Ms,
Fiscus' testimony, Ms, Fiscus was produced for deposition on October 25, 2001, as the current
Director of Physical Therapy, who would testify to the policies and procedures of the
department as she knows them now, Plaintiff did not request a deposition of Ms, Fiscus for the
purpose of exploring the policies and procedures in place at the HealthSouth facility on
November 21, 1996, Therefore, because Ms, Fiscus was not employed as the department
director on November 21, 1996, PlaintiWs counsel's questions regarding 1996 policies and
procedures to this witness were inappropriate,
7. Admitted with qualification, Ms, Fiscus testified to the clIrrelll policy
regarding the maintenance and archiving of revised written policies, protocols, and procedures,
It should he noledlhat Ms, Fisl'lls' lestllnony .Ioes not apply 10 Ihe lIospital policy in plal'e in
11)<)("
M, Admittcd wilh ljualification, ~Is, Rogels' llcpositiou was uOliced for thc
purpose of condnctin!; prc'('llInphlinldiscovery only, The scope of this deposition was Iimiled
to the facts of;1I1 ineidcnl involving thc Plaintiff ami Ms, Rogers' on Novemher 21, 19%, Scc,
Plaintiffs Notice of Deposition, attachcd hereto and marked Exhihil "If',
I), Admittcd wilh ljnalilieation, 1'laintilThas conlinually dcscrihed her requests to
mean, the policies, proccdures, ami protocols with respect 10 Ihe "Risk Assessment for Falls"
idenlified on an InterDisciplimlry Assessment fonn ("IDA") which is part of the Admissions
fomls for new patients, In fact, it is the infonnalion containcd on the Interdisciplinary
Assessment Fonn, which imlicales a "1\Vo-pcrson max assist" protocol which Plaintiff has
alleged was not followed, thcrehy creatin!; negligence on the part of the Hospital. (See,
Plaintiffs Complaint), The only docnmentation that discusses the numher of persons who
should assist the patient on thc day of the admission is the IDA. That documentation was
produced to Plaintiff.
10, Admilled, By way of further response, the primary allegation of negligence
made by the Plaintiff in her Complaint is that Defendants failed to follow the [purported]
requirement for a "two person, max assist" on November 21,1996, which [allegedly] resulted in
an injury to the Plaintiffs left knee, The IDA fonn is the most accurate document responsive to
Plaintiffs request for documents which would tend to be relevant. On the other hand, the entire
Policies and Procedures Manual for any given year is entirely irrelevant 10 prove this allegation,
However, for the sake of producing 10 Plaintiff something that she believes she is entitled to see,
the Policies and Procedures Mannal for the year 1996 was produced,
II, Admilled,
12, Admillcd,
13, Admillcd,
14, Admillcd in pari; dcnied in part. hhihil (i is admillcd allll spcaks for itself,
However, following receipt of thai leiter, the undersigned ealled Plaintifl"s eounsellwice in an
allempt to re-mediate. Plaintiffs counsel adl'isedthat, "(a) [hcrj higgesl prohlem was thai there
were sel'eraltwo-sided pages of thc hospital chart. hutlhal thc hack sidcs of some of Ihe pages
were missing, and [afier being requcsted to idcntify those parts of the chart that were missing so
that those pages could be produecd, Plainlift's counsel responded hy saying that], (b) "[she] had
two [unrelated] Superior Court briefs that wcre due ,lI1d she did not have time to go through the
chart and tell [the undersigned] which pages were missing",
15, Admilled in part; denied in part, Plaintiffs counselmiseharaeterizes Exhibit
H, She had already been provided, twicc, lI'ilh the IDA foml that indicated Risk Assessment for
falls, and showed a designation of a "tll'O person max assist"; and that unless she pointed out
which part of the chart (about 4" in volume) she was missing, we would assume the entire chart
was produced, It should be noted that none of the missing pages were the IDA fonn or any of its
subparts or attachments,
16, Admitted with qualification, Ruth Rogers was a physical therapy assistant,
not a management employee who could testify to Hospital policy and procedures, It is
nonsensical to assert that Ms, Rogers would rely on the Hospital policy and procedures at trial.
17, Admitted,
18, Admitted.
19, Iknie,l. II is cOllcgoricillly ,knied IhOlI Ihe ndendimls knowingly m1<1
inlelnionally withheld Ihe policies and procedures in dlccl on Novcmher 21, 19%, 10 Ihe
suhslalllial prejudice of Ihe Plaintiff. Tu the eunlrary, il was nol until Nuvemher 5, 20(H, Ihill
Plainlifrs counsel's l1Iade a sped lie requesl, ofillly, over Ihe telephone 10 Ihe undersigncd
counsel for thaI document. In facl, Plainlifrs counsel, allhal time, iIlll11ittcd ", ..if I knew what
10 ask for specifically, I would have asked for if.., I had 10 lish around." Moreovcr, Plaintiff
caused her oIVn delay by "lishing" and not asking lor what she wanled inlhe lirst ins lance,
20, Admitted in pilrt: denied in pilrt, This is probilbly tme. Had Plaintifrs
counscl simply requested the 1996 Policies and Procedural Manual in the lirst Request for
Production of Documents, she would not havc to requesl the court for an extension of Ihe
discovery deadline at this late dale, However, in the spirit of cooperation and becil\lse no trial
date has been set, Defendants have advised Plaintiff that they are willing to agree to extend the
discovery deadline for the limiled purpose of allowing Plaintiff to depose and/or redepose any
witnesses she chooses to ask questions about the 1996 Policies and Procedures Manual and ils
contents,
21. Denied, Plaintiffmischaraeterizes Pa, R,C.P, 4019, 4019 is a two-part rule
that requires the issuance of a compliance order lirst: and in the event of non-compliance by the
non-moving part, the moving party may then liIe another motion seeking sanctions for non-
compliance, Pa,R,C,P, 4019; Pe/lllsy/wlIlia Civil Practice Malllllll, Second Edition, Shugart
(Michie 1993),
22, Because Plaintiff had ample time and opportunity to request the 1996
Policy and Procedure Manual from HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechaniesburg prior
to the c'pimlion of Ihc disCtlvcry dC:llllinc, hut failed to do so, ncither a Complianec Ordcr, nor
thc imposition of sanctions, is :II'proprialc, warrantcd or suhst:llllially juslifie,I,
23, Pa,IU',I'.(g)(2) providcs th:1I "if Ihe mol ion for sanclions is dcnicd, the
Court shall, aficr opportunity for hcaring rcquire thc moving party or Ihe allomey advising the
motion 10 pay to the P:lrty who opposcd Ihc mol ion the rcasonablc cxpenscs incurred in opposing
the motion, including allomeys fces, unlcss the Courl finds that Ihe 1Il0tion was substantially
justificd,"
WHEREFORE, Defendants requests Ihis Honorable Court to deny Plainliffs Motion to
Compel on the basis of mootness ([)efel1ll:ulls havc complied with Plaintiffs requests) and 10
instead issue an Order 10 reflcct Ihe parties' agreement 10 extend the discovery deadline until
December 31, 2001 10 allow Plaintiff to take depositions limited to the 1996 Policies and
Procedure Manual which was just requested and produced; ami to enter an Order awarding
Defendants their reasonable fees and costs incurred in opposing Plaintiffs Motion to Compel
and Motion for Sanctions,
II, Plaintiffs Request for Sanctions Should be Denied Because Plaintiff Caused her
own Delav and Because Defendants Ha\'e ComDlied with all Discoverv Requests
a, Pel/I/sylval/ia COllrts Frowl/ UPOI/ "Fishil/g Expeditiol/s"
Plaintiffs counsel cannot and does not deny that her initial requests for documents were
"fishing" expeditions, Although Defendants have an obligation to answer a discovery request to
their best ability, they are not requircd to guess or speculate about what it is that Plaintiff seems
to want. In fact, 'discovery can be barred if the mailers to be discovered are stated too broadly or
without proper specification, Courts frown on fishing expeditions.' Pa, Civ, Pmclice Mal/llal,
Secol/d Editiol/, ,f35.4, Depositiol/s al/(l Discovery, p, 423, Shllgart, (Michie 1993), citil/g, 10
Defendants respectfully submit tbat b,',':ulse no compli:mce order has issued Qml
Defend:lI1ts havc complicd wilh Pl;linlilrs rcqucsts, sanctions, of any kind or nature, are not
lIppropri,.te,
Moreover, Defendants Imve agrecd 10 extcnd Ihe discovery deadline to December 31,
2001, to allow Plaintiff to lake dcposilions limited to Ihe 1')1)6 Policies lInd Procedure MlInual
and its content.
Pa,R,C.P,(g)(2) provides:
"(2) If the motion for sanctions is denied. the Courl, 1I1ler
opportunily for hearing, shall requirc the moving party or the
allomey advising the motion or both of them to PllY to the pllrty
who opposed the motion Ihe reasonable expenses incurred in
opposing the motion, including 1I1l0meys fees, unless the Court
finds that the making of the motion WlIS substantially justified or
that other circumstances make an lIward of expensed unjust."
Responding Defendants respcctfully submit that Plaintiffs Motion to Compel and
Motion for Sanctions are unwarranted and unjustified given the fllctthat Plaintiffs counsel did
not request the HealthSouth 1996 Policies and Procedures Manual until November 5. 2001.
Responding Defendants have cooperated fully with Plaintiffs counsel and continue to cooperate
with her notwithstanding the filing of this frivolous and baseless Motion, Because Responding
Defendants have incurred costs and legal fees opposing Plaintiffs Motion, an award of fees and
costs is requested to be levied against the Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, and/or her allomeys, Purcell,
Krug & Haller, in an amount of $750,00, pursuant to Pa.R,C.P, 4019(g)(2),
Exhibit A
, .' ,,' .... "",;c ,
,,~~ ,.' .
. - .~
NQTICE
"lOll holV" },)C'(!II f.llH.d ill ('(llIlt. If j'OIl winh "0 dr'f"lId dl,...innt
thp c'l..illl:l tl(.t: forth ill t.llt. f(JIIIJwillfl P,IlJP:I, Yllll lIHHlt t dy'f.' detioll
withill tw('nty (20) d"yn ,lilt,., thin ('ulJIpl.aint ,'11<1 lIoticl' 11,,'11' 1)('''11
u(ol"vpd. To d(~fend .]fJi..innt thp dfnr"pll1f.>l1tioned claill1n, d written
clPP('iU'illlCP ntatin<j your: dt"ff.'l1nt~n ,HId uhjf'ct innn mtUlt tH' ('IIl'.('rf'd and
fi]{'d in writinq by you, the t1,,(clldclllt, 01" by "n "t't:onll'Y. You i1l'e
wilrned thilt if you (ail to take actioll ..gain!lt thene cl"imn, the
court may proceed without you i111d i. judgment for ilny money clilimed
In the complilint or (or any other clilim required by the plilintiff
milY be entered against you by the court without further notice.
You may lose money, property or other rights illlportilJlt to you,
YOU SHOULD TAKE 'I'll! S 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 ~IIlERE
YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP,
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Court Administriltor
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
NOTICIA
Le han demandado a listed en la corte. Si usted quiere
defenderse de estils damandas expuastas en las paginas siguientes,
listed tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la
demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia
escrita 0 en persona 0 pOl' abogado y archival' en la corte en forma
escrita SllS defensas 0 sus objeciones alas demandas en contra de
su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte
tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previa
aviso 0 notificacion y pOl' cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido
en la peticion de demanda, Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus
propiedades 0 otros derechos importantes para usted.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE, SI NO
TIENNE ABOGAD 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR
TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONE A LA
OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRIDA ABAJO PARA
AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASSISTENCIA LEGAL:
!'
.
"
\'
",':'
.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
;~"
',.~,
:<~
'~
COMMONWEALTH OF I'ENNSYINANIA
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PL.:Ml
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.
,_.n_'_ _.__.._..,____....__
Civil Action - Lnw
EVELYN FLEISHER
4905 EAST TRINDLE ROAD
ROOM 92
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTII CORPORATION
tIn IIEALTHSOUTII REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS BURG , HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
. MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOUl,EVARD
MECIIANICSIJURG, PA 17055
HEALTIISOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
tla IIEALTIISOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICS BURG -
ACUTE REHAB IIOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
versus
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS BURG
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM
- ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
RUTH ROGERS
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANTS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, by and through her
attorneys, Purcell, Krug & Haller and files the following Complaint:
1. l'l.ltllt it I I:~ 1';'/1'1)'11 Flp,:dll'l. 0111 "dult itldividll,d wit.h d
P1'('11"'1I ,lIld"':::1 ..t 1''''1111 ry r/l,...down. '1'}()1, Ednt 'I"llldlp HOdd, HOflm ~)/.,
Ml"I'lJdllic'::h1Jfl'. I'^ 11nll'"
?. ()pIPIHlclll" Illlfllh(.(" onp in 1If'.lll:h!.~out'h COt'f)Ol'':lt" ion, troldincJ ilO
Healt:hSollth "..habilitat ion Ho.:pital of Mechanic:Jburg - Acute Rehab
Hospit,~J allll Hr,al thSouth r1echanicnbllrg Rehab syntem - Acute
Rehabilitation Houpital, a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with it present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania.
3. Defendant number two is HealthSouth of Mechanicsburg,
Incorporated, trading as HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of
Mechanicsburg - Acute Rehab Hospital and HealthSouth Mechanicsburg
Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania with a present business address at 175 Lancaster
Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
4. Defendant number three is HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg with a present business address at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
of Mechanicsburg is merely a fictitious name of either Defendant III
2
or ""("nd,lIll- II/..
I,. luo 1('lId.Hlt lIulllbe,. 10111 in 111''-') t h:;"1I1 II H,'II.ll d Ii' ..t i ulI 01
Me('hdll i c'nhu n,
^ctlL(' Hph.dJ Ilnnpi t d I wi Iii II PIPI:I'lIt bun i w'n:: dddn~tHI
at l"/Ij l,aI1C~HJtcr Boulevard, Mpclldnicuburq, Ctlllll)(,I"Jdlld County,
P(~nnsyl vilni 11.
It in believed illId .~ven-ed thill lIf'illthSouth
Rehabilitation of Mechanicsb\l,rCj - Acute Rehab lIospital is merely a
fictitious name of either Defendant III or Defendant 112.
G. Defendant number five in Heal thSouth Mechanicsburg Rehab
System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital with a present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth
Mechanicsburg Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital is merely
a fictitious name of either Defendant III or Defendant 112.
7. Defendants one through five are hereinafter collectively
referred to as "HealthSouth Defendants."
8. Defendant number six is Ruth Rogers (hereinafter "Rogers"),
an adult individual and physical therapy assistant with a present
business address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
9. On or about November 19, 1996, Plaintiff was admitted to
the HealthSouth Defendants' rehabilitation facility located at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania following surgery
to correct a prior right ankle surgery.
3
10. Of) .Hhlllnnioll, Pldinl ill Wd:: j'v.du.lll'd by nr. ~:I._pvPfl
M(JI'lI,tlHl1'.'in, Wll{):;,. {.t iflicdl lll1pn'::::i()11 W,I::, ill Ilf"l-jllpnt f1drl', dll
follow!):
d. Ambulatory dy::ftllwt"inllj
b. StatuB pout levi:Jion l"i'lht oIllkle 01<11';
c. Rpccnt 1 eft knee (~xt:pntJ(H- 1I1(~C'hiln i [1," nt ra in; and
d. History o( total left kll(,(' lr'placcrnenl.
.
11. On the date o( ildmisnion, Dr. Morganntein entered the
(ollowing pertinent orders:
a. Physical Therapy - evaluate and treat bed mobility
transfers, wheelchair mobility, progressive
ambulation with walker, progressive resistance
exercises to increase left leg strength; and
b. Non-weight bearing right leg - milY put foot flat on
floor for balance only.
12. On or about November 19, 1996, an Interdisciplinary
Assessment was prepared by HealthSouth De(endants with regard to
Plaintiff wherein Plaintiff's "mobility" was classified as "impaired
standing balance requiring more than contact guard assistance."
13. In the aforesaid Interdisciplinary Assessment, it was
further noted that Plaintiff was at risk for falls and that the
assistance of two staff members would be required for transfers.
14. It is believed and therefore averred that the
Interdisciplinary Assessment defines, in part, the standard of care
the physical therapy department, including Rogers, was to give to
Plaintiff.
1
IS. Poqf>l"n Wall "W.lff' fir ::!J()lIld 11>1\.'" tH"'11 dWdlf' t h.d r..,::.
Flf'i:thc.'r l'('quip'd Iii,. dnni:lIdlll'" fd ..I 1".1::1 tWI) fll..,pl.. till .111
IlilllfJ[pl-n, illC'Jttdillq IJtll 1101 I illlll.',j 1'1 'rdll::I"I:~ 11{11lI 111,(1 lu
wheelchair.
IG. Rogers wan .1Wilrp ()t' l,hould h.IV," 1"'('\1 oIW;)t'P llJolt Plai.nti(f
had decreased confidence in hr.r Je(t kn(<e oIllll W."ln alr.lid 01 it
buckl ing during ambulation.
17. At all times relevant hereto, Plai.ntiff w(d'Jlwd
approximately 212 pOllnds while Rogers weighed only 150 pounds,
18. On November 21, 1996, denpite all 01 tile above, Defendant
Rogers transferred Plainti ff f"rom Plainti (f' B bed to her ",heelchair
without any other person or staff member' n presence or assistance.
19. At or about the moment that Plaintiff left her bed and
stood on the floor, her left leg buckled llnderneath her, whereupon
she began to fall to the floor.
20. Plaintiff was lowered the rest of the way to the floor by
Defendant Rogers.
21, After lowering Ms. Fleisher to the floor, Defendant Rogers
called for assistance, whereupon a number of other staff members
arrived and lifted Plaintiff on a blanket back to her bed.
. 22. Defendant Rogers' treatment of Plaintiff was negligent, as
follows:
a. Rogers failed to provide adequate assistance and
supervision to Plaintiff;
5
b. Hoqpr:t f.lil..d III .lpplf'('ldlf' l'ldillt ili':: I'hY:~lf'dl
:ltdll' WIH'lIl1lJd.'rtdklll'II'ldJrtlllf':: ">111::11" IrllllllJPd
I () wllf'p) ,'11.. I t j
(', 1~I)ql'll1 t.ai I,.d I q lId 111'0'/ Ilfl,a1111::fJllf II 111)"::,
rf"JlIldllonn, 111'<1('( Jl'l'!!, '111111"1 ill"::, Illl)II'j,.::,
I'ro('f'dlll-f~n dnd pJT)lo('()ln;
d.
Ilo<)r'I">' 'ailed 1.0 follow ,,,,,."opt0d ,,'t:.lnd.lnln for
pllyn iCo11 t hel',.py I n",t 1II,,"t;
c.
.
Ilo']enl 'ailed to neek approval prior to d"'''f'a,dIl9
the number of persons required to assist Plaintiff
with transfers; and
,
i'
f. Rogers failed to read and/or appreciate Plaintiff's
charted limitations regarding transfers from bed to
wheelchuir.
23. As a direct and proximate result of her fall, Plaintiff
immediately su((ered the following injuries which caused her
excruciating pain:
a. Left patellar tendon rupture; and
b. Displacement of the left patella.
24. To date, Plaintiff's knee injuries have not been corrected
and it is believed and averred that her injuries suffered in the
I
r
!'
I
I
November 21, 1996 incident are permanent.
25. As a direct and proximate result of her November 21, 1996
fall, Plaintiff will require a metal knee immobilizer for ambulation
for the rest of her life, which brace causes significant discomfort,
bruising and chafing.
26. Plaintiff has and will continue to suE fer for the
foreseeable future from the following symptoms due to her injuries
G
JIll I t. ..,Pel 011 Nov{'(Ilb(,l~ ~ 1, I S1t)(j:
.1. :;('Vf'n' 1(>lt" Y.lI"(' ()difl 0111(1 di:H'tJlJllrlll
h. 1>('CJ"l'd:l(~d If'f t. It'q nt l-f'll'P II; dnil
('. Seven'ly limited mobility.
27. As a proximate reslllt of he,: [all, I'l,~intifl ""IIC'I-" from
anxiety, C'mbarrassment, frust;.rat ion and depression by vi I t lIe of her
pain and her inability to recover to her pre-NovembC'r 21, 1~9G
Rtatun.
28. As a further proximate resul t of her fall, Plaint if f has
been prevented from participating in her usual househoJd duties and
social activities, and the aforesaid injuries will permanently
interfere with her enjoyment of life.
29. Prior to her fall, Plaintiff resided at the Ecumenical
Communities, an assisted living facility.
30. Plaintiff is now forced to reside at Country Manor, a full
time care facility, as she is unable to return to Ecumenical
Communities or any other assisted living facility.
31. Such full time care is a significant additional expense
which will continue for the rest of Plaintiff's life.
COUNT I - VICARIOUS LIABILITY
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTH SOUTH DEFENDANTS
32. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
33. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Rogers was an
7
(olllploypf' ," lIf'dllhnuuth UPlf'lld.lutn dC" 11lt1 within Ill,. oIutllllf IZl'd
:tr'III"" .11111 III till' 11('1 dl1('4' III IIl'l dlll'III'Y clI "1111 ,I ()'1llll'lIt 11111 If':: II"
1I1.,lIt h;:"ill h Ilt.II'lIdolIl1 n.
~'1. Till' JwqlilJ"Ill.'I' ill ()(.f,und.1ul R<Yl"!'ll dill'e" Iy dlld
pnlxim,l!ply ","wcd thc injul"ic!l dc.tailed hen-in.
3<;. lIe,dthSouth Dcfend<1JltD ,H'C vicariounly liabl(' I"L' thc
negl iqence of Defendant Rogers ident if ied in PaL'aqraplln ?? I,~)
([) .
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully rcquests thif' lIonorablc Court
to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and agaillBt Defendants for
unliquidated damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount
requiring arbitration, plus costs of this action and intcLest from
the date of judgment,
COUNT II - CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
36, plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
37. HealthSouth Defendants were negligent in that they:
a, Failed to properly supervise and oversee
employees providing care to Plaintiff; and
b. Failed to formulate. adopt and enforce adequate
rules and policies to ensure quality care for
Plaintiff, their patient.
38. The foregoing negligence of HealthSouth Defendant~
directly and proximately caused the injuries dctailed herein.
8
~lIlEI~EF()UI':. I'ldint iff J"f'::p"('lflllly r"ftlll'lll:: IlIi:: 11<>1101',,111(, ('Otllt
to Pili PI Jlldqlllf'nt in f.lvo! (If I'ldilll iff dlld dq,lill::t Ih'I"Il(LlIll Hurlf'J':1
tot lllll iquid.lt(.d d.,m.]qc~~ ill eXcC-:l:l u[ t 11'.,' jllri~:di('1 1<111.-11 .llnollnt
requirinq dl"hitration,
plus cantu of this llct.iOU tlntl intorent from
the date of judgment.
.
PURCEI,L, KRUG &
By
Nir.ifo eM.
ID fl79866
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
717 234-4178
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: May 14, 1999
10
9ERTIrI~ATE .OF SERVICE
I, r~^,WI^ (;^'I'E!:, "II "lIIploy.... cd I Ii.. Idw Ii 111I of 1''''''''11, Knlq (.
llaJl('I", ('OIIlW('I for.' I'l.lint.iU, h.'n'by cf',tify t.holt "f'l"vie.. of t.he
foregoill9 COMPLAINT wan lIIolde upon the followill') by pldcin'l il copy of
.
same in the United Stilten mail, postL1CJe prepllid, ilt Harl-inburg,
Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, on ~(al')
/ ,{
I!J99,
Timothy McMahon, Esquire
100 Pine Street, Fourth Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17101
" J..~n I (t (:l ('(i'A~.[~)
~
MARCIA E. GATES
Exhibit B
I
EVELYN FLEISHER.
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plnintif f
v.
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION tla
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG.
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL,
HEALTH SOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC t/a HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF
MECHANICS BURG , HEALTH SOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG
- ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL.
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL, RUTH ROGERS
Defendants
NO. 98-6505
\\1 \\1 MAR 15 1999
I' O!...-----"l
L._____
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE TO TAKE DEPOSITION
To: RUTH ROGERS and
TIMOTHY MCMAHON, ESQUIRE
100 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17108-0803
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 6, 1999 at 9:30 a.m., Nichole
M. Staley, Esquire, attorney for the Plaintiff, will take the
deposition of RUTH ROGERS before a Notary Public, or other person
authorized to administer oaths, at the offices of the HealthSouth
Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechanicsburg, 175 Lancaster Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055, pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 4001(c}.
~
f)~ _ A I 1,\11 :\\1{ 1111'1 j JIlII~.'O )\11 I ,It IrII U'I.~I,
EVELYN FLEISI/ER,
Plaintiff
J
.
: IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAf\:D COUf\:TY,
: PENNSYLVANI,\
v.
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION tla
HEAL THSOUTII REI/ABILlT A TION
HOSPITAL OF MECI/ANICSBURG.
HEAL THSOUTH : NO. 98-6505
REHABILITATION OF MECI/ANICSBURG _
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEAL THSOUTH MECIIANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - I.. A W
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG,
INC. tla HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG.
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS.
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
(,~ ,\ 11 \II :-\t!J 111'11 ;<'IIt.~ ,\I.) 1'11)1(1 1~Il~d
EVELYN FI.EI51IER.
PI~intirr
: IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLV ANIA
v.
ilEAL TIISOUTII CORPORATION l/~
HEALHISOUTII REIIABILlT A TION
HOSPITAL OF MECIIANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTII NO. 98.(,505
REHABILlT A TION OF MECIIANICSBURG.
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, ~nd
HEAL THSOUTH MECllANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA W
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
~nd
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG.
INC. tla HEAL THSOUTII REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECllANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL, and HEALHlSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM.
ACUTE REHABILlT A nON HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS BURG
and
I
,
r
f
,
,
,
!
f
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILlT A nON
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
IlEFENI).\NTS' I~ESI'()NSE TO
1'l.AINTlH'S MOTION TO ('0 l\1I' E I. ANI> FOR SANCTIONS
ANI) J\lEl\IORANI)lJl\1 OF LAW
ANI> UEFENI>ANTS' REOLJEST FOI~ REASONABLE FEES AND COSTS
I'LJRSlIANT TO l'n,R.('.I', ~OI9(1!)(2)
~
I, Defendnnts' Resnonse to the Alleeations ('ontllined in Plaintiffs l\Iotion to Comnel
1. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Plainli ff is who she says
she is. It is denied that she was injured tit tll/Y timl! while receiving e<lre at HealthSouth
Rehabilitation Hospital of Meehanieshurg, P<I.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. By way of further response, Plaintiff pleads, at p<lragraph 14 of her
Complaint, that an Interdisciplinary Assessment foml used by the HcalthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Meehanicsburg, Pennsylvania, ostensibly as of November 19, 1996, defined the
standard of care applicable to Ihis theory of negligence. See, Plainti frs Complaint, attached
j
f'
f
,
hereto and marked Exhibit "A". at paragraph 14.
4. Denied. It is categorically denied that over the course of discovery Plaintiff
I
; .
I'
f'
L..
v,
has requested the policies and procedures applicable to the care and treatment rendered to her on
November 21, 1996 at the HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechanicsburg, Pa. To the
','
""
I
contrary, Plaintiff once requested "all the policies, procedures, guidelines al/d other writings
~
',\
l{~
:1
establishil/g tI method ... to iI/sure that patiel/ts were receiving proper care", to which
Defendants objected as being irrelevant. overly broad and vague, unlimited in scope or time.
Notwithstanding, the Interdisciplinary Assessment Foml was produced to the Plaintiff. It was
not until Oclobcr 25, 2(1)\, ahout four working d"ys prior 10 thc cxpiralion of discovcry, Ih"t, "I
Ihc conclusion of" dcposition, PI"intifrs counsel ,lskcd for thc (,/IIT<'I/t policics ,,1111 proccdurcs
m"'lllUl IIIII/thc manual which cxistcd in 11)l)(,. Thcn, during" Iclcphonc convcrs"lion with thc
undersigned counsel on Novcmbcr 5, 2001. Pl"intifl"s counsel withdrcw hcr request for the
current policies "nd procedurcs "nd articul"ted (for the first timc) " specific request for thc
HealthSouth Rehabilitation Ilospit,,1 of Mcchanicsburg policies "nd proecdures in eITeet on
November 21, 1996, relating to the delivcry of physic,,1 ther"py scrviccs to p"tients. The
undersiglled counsel agreed to ("j requcst that documentation from Hc"lthSouth, (b) duplic"te
the documcntation and (c) producc it to Plaintifrs counsel notwithst"ndingtlmt this specific
request was made following the expimtion of the discovery de"dlinc. The documents have been
nroduced.
5. Admitted.
6. Admittcd in p"rt; denicd in part. Plaintifrs counsel has miseharacterized Ms.
Fiseus'testimony. Ms. Fiscus was produced for deposition on Octobcr 25,2001, as the current
Director of Physical Therapy, who would testify to the policies and procedures of the
department as she knows them now. Plaintiff did not request" deposition of Ms. Fiscus for the
purpose of exploring the policies and procedures in place at the HealthSouth facility on
Novcmber 21, 1996. Therefore, because Ms. Fiscus was not employed as the department
director on November 21, 1996, Plaintiffs counsel's questions regarding 1996 policies and
procedures to this witness were inappropriate.
7. Admitted with qualification. Ms. Fiscus testified to the ClIrrent policy
regarding the maintenance and archiving of revised written policies, protocols, and procedures.
It should be noted Ihal Ms. Fiscus' teslimony docs not .Ipply 10 Ihe Hospital policy in placc in
1996.
8. Admilled wilh qualiliculion. Ms. Rogers' deposition wus nOliced for Ihe
purpose of conducting pre-C'ompluint discovery only. The scope of this dcposilion WilS limitcd
to the facts of un incident involving the Pluintiffaml Ms. Rogers' on Novcmber 21,1996. See,
Plaintiffs Notice of Deposition, allached hereto and marked Exhibit "S".
9. Admilled with quulificution. Pluinti1'1' Ims COlllinually described her requests to
mean, the policies, procedures. and protocols with respect to the "Risk Assessment for Falls"
identified on an InterDisciplinary Assessmenl foml ("IDA") which is part of the Admissions
forms for new patients. In fact. it is the infomlation contained on the Interdisciplinary
Assessment Fonn. which indicates a "two-person max assist" protocol which Plaintiff has
alleged was not followed, thereby creating negligence on the part of the Hospital. (See,
Plaintiffs Complaint). The only documentation that discusses the number of persons who
should assist the patient on the day of the admission is the IDA. That documentation was
produced to Plaintiff.
10. Admitted. Sy way of further response, the primary allegation of negligence
made by the Plaintiff in her Complaint is that Defendants failed to follow the [purported]
requirement for a "two person, max assist" on November 21,1996, which [allegedly] resulted in
an injury to the Plaintiffs left knee. The IDA form is the most accurate document responsive to
Plaintiffs request for documents which would tend to be relevant. On the other hand, the entire
Policies and Procedures Manual for any given year is entirely irrelevant to prove this allegation.
However, for the sake ofprodueing to Plaintiff something that she believes she is entitled to see,
the Policies and Procedures Manual for the year 1996 was produced.
II. Admilled,
12. Admilled,
13. Admilled,
14. Admilled in pari; denied in part. bhihit (j is admilled and speaks for itself.
However, following receipt of that leller, thc undcrsigned callcdPl:lintifl"s eounseltwice in an
allempt to re-mediatc. I'lailllirrs counscl adviscd thaI, "(a) [hcr] biggcst problcm was thaI there
were several two-sided pagcs of the hospital chart, bul lhat the back sides of som" of the pages
were missing. and [afier being rC<jucstcd 10 idcntify thosc paris of thc chari that were missing so
that those pages could be produced, Plaintiffs counscl rcsponded by saying thOll], (b) "[she] had
two [unrelated] Superior Courl briefs that were duc and she did not havc timc to go through the
chari and tell [the undcrsigncd] which pages were missing",
15. Admilled in pari; denied in pari. Plainti f1"s counscl mischamcterizes Exhibit
H. She had already been provided. twice, wilh thc IDA form that indicated Risk Assessment for
falls, and showed a designation of a "two person max assist"; and that unless she pointed out
which pari of the chari (about 4" in volume) she was missing, we would assume the entire chart
was produced. It should be noted that none of tile missing pages were the IDA foml or any of its
subparls or attachments.
16. Admilled with qualification. Ruth Rogers was a physical therapy assistant,
not a management employee who could testify to Hospital policy and procedures. It is
nonsensical to asserlthat Ms. Rogers would rely on the Hospital policy and procedures at trial.
17. Admitted.
18. Admilled.
.
19. Dcnicd, It IS calcgoric;llIy dcnicd Ihal thc Iklcllllanls knowingly and
intentionally withhcld thc policics and I,wccdurcs in clrcct on Novcmhcr 21, 19<)(" to the
suhstantial prcjudicc of thc l'lainliff. To thc conlfilf)', it was not until Novcmhcr 5, 20lH, Ihat
Plaintiffs counscl's m;lllc ;1 spccilic rcqllcsl. orally. ovcr thc telcphonc 10 thc undcrsigncd
counsel for that documcnt. In fact. Plaintiffs counscl, at lhaltimc, admillcd .....if I knew what
to ask for specilically, I would havc askcd for it... I had 10 lish around," Moreovcr, Plaintiff
caused her own delay hy ..tishing" and not asking for what she wanted in the tirst instance.
20. Admilled in part; denied in part. This is prohahly tme, l'lad Plaintitrs
counsel simply requested the 1996 Policies and Procedural Manual in the tirst Request for
Production of Documents, she would not have to rcquest the court for an extension of the
discovery deadline at this latc date. However, in thc spirit of cooperation and because no trial
date has been set, Defendants have advised Plaintiff that they arc willing to agree to extend the
discovery deadline for the limited purposc of allowing Plaintiff to depose and/or redepose any
witnesses she chooses to ask questions about the 1996 Policies and Procedures Manual and its
co~.
21. Denicd. Plaintiffmischaracterizcs Pa. R.C.P. 4019. 4019 is a two-part mle
that requires the issuance of a compliance order tirst; and in the event of non-compliance by the
non-moving part, the moving party may then liIe another motion seeking sanctions for non-
compliance. Pa.R.C.P. 4019; Pelllls)'lvallia Civil Practice Malll/al, Second Edition, Shugart
(Michie 1993).
22. Because Plaintiff had ample time and opportunity to request the 1996
Policy and Procedure Manual from HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Mechanicsburg prior
III. Conclusloll
For all of thc I"rcgoing rcasons, Ikl\:ndanls rcspccllillly rcqllcstthis flonorahlc COllrllo
dcny Plaintiffs Motion to COlllpcl allll :-'Iolion 1l1r Sanclions ,lI1d to cnlcr ;111 Ordcr renecting Ihe
parties' Illutual agrecment 10 extcnd the discovery deadline to Deccmher 31, 2001, in ordcr to
allow Plaintiff to takc dcpositions for Ihe limited purpose of exploring the 1996 Policies and
Proccdures (relating to the delivery of Physic;11 Thempy services) Manllal only, and to award
Defendants reasonable fees and cosls incllrred in defending and opposing Ihe MOlions for
Sanctions in the :11110nnt ofS750.00.
Respectfully sllbmilted.
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER,
COLEMAN & GOGGIN
DATE: \\\\<'\.\1::,\
Attorneys for Defendanls
n:IHFI(',UIl);I\
I, Sharon M. O'Donncll, Allomcy lilr Dcfcndants. vcrifics that thc facts sct forth in
Dcfcndants' Rcsponsc to Illaintifl"s Motion to Compel ;lIlll Motion for Sanctions arc true to the
best of her knowlcdgc, inlimmllion ami hclici: Iflhc :lhovc statcmcnts :lrc not true, thc deponcnt
is sllbject to thc pcnaltics of IS Pa.C.S. ~-ll)(J-l rcl:lling IOllnswom 1111silication to authorities.
I hercby certify tlwlmy Icg:ll fccs for opposing PI;lintifl"s Motion to Compcl and Motion
for Sanctions :lrc S750.00, an :lmollnl which I bclicvc 10 hc fair and reasonable.
DATE:
Exhibit A
- '
. ,...." _ ~.~.ot~ ~''''' ,
" -
, ,
~OTI~J;;
You have bc(~n Bued in COUl't. If. you winh t'() d(.fplld .1~J,]illnt
the claims net forth in tIH"' folluwintJ pd~Jf'H, "'CHI IIIllnt tdkl..~ dction
within twenty (20) day" afU'I' thin complaint ,'lIld nul: ie'" have been
served. To defend ag,lillflt thc' "fon'mentioned C1.1 im[1, ,', wl'itten
appearance stating your defelwe!J <'1I1d objection::: mU<Jt be entered ilnd
filed in writing by you, the defendant, or by an attorney. You are
warned tbat if you fail to take action against these claims, the
court may proceed without you and a judgment for any money claimed
in the complaint or for any other claim required by the plaintiff
may be entered against you by the court without further notice.
You may lose money, 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
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
NOTICIA
Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere
defenderse de estas damandas expuastas en las paginas siguientes,
usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la
demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia
escrita 0 en persona 0 por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma
escrita sus defensas 0 sus objeciones alas demandas en contra de
su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte
tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo
aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido
en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus
propiedades 0 otros derechos importantes para listed.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. 81 NO
TIENNE ABOGAD 0 81 NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR
TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONE A LA
OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRIDA ABAJO PARA
AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CON8EGUIR ASSI8TENCIA LEGAL:
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLF.AS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO,
--- -- ------
Civil Action - Law
EVELYN FLEISHER
4905 EAST TRINDLE ROAD
ROOM 92
MECHANICS BURG , PA 17055
IIEALTHSOUTII CORPORATION
tla IIEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTII
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG _
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
· MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
tja HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG _
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
versus
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECllANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM
- ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
RUTH ROGERS
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANTS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, by and through her
attorneys, Purcell, Krug & Haller and files the following Complaint:
I, "1.IIIlI " f ,,: ";'/"IYII F''',,:II'', , _III oIdllll illdividll,1l wil II 01
fn-p!1f'nl dddtl'::ll ,I' 1'!llJllt ry Mf'.ld()w::, ()(J(}l, 1';"ltlt Tr"illdlt, 1~(),III, HOf.111l ~/.,
Mr:,ch.:tni.c::l)tlnJ. I'^ 1./OllII.
2, Dpfplldal1t ntlrTlIH.'l- on" i!J lip 01 1 thSouth Corpot'at ion, t rold i I1g olD
HealthSouth Rf'habilitiltion lIc,..pital of Mechanicsburg - ACllte Rehab
Hospital and lIei.llthSouth Mechanicsburg Rehab System _ Acute
Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a present business
address at 17~; Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania,
3. Defendant number two is HealthSouth of Mechanicsburg,
Incorporated, trading as HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of
Mechanicsburg - Acute Rehab Hospital and HealthSouth Mechanicsburg
Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania with a present business address at 175 Lancaster
Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania,
4, Defendant number three is HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg with a present business address at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
of Mechanicsburg is merely a fictitious name of either Defendant HI
2
or Defendant 112.
Ii, lJ(~[L'IJ(lat1t nllmbt~r fflUI i:: 11(',,11 h!;r/utll lh'lJ"bi I iLatioll of
Meehunicnburg ~ ^cuLt~ I':f~lvlb 1I():~p i ld 1 wi t II d pn'Hc'nt bUGiIH!On dtklrens
a.t 175 Lancaster Boulevilt'd, MpchanicDburq, Cumberland County,
pennsylvania.
It is believed and ,wen-eel that llealthSouth
Rehabilitation of Mechanicsb\J,r9 - Acute Rehab Hospital is merely a
fictitious name of either Defendant III or Defendant 112.
6. Defendant number five is llealthSouth Mechanicsburg Rehab
System _ Acute Rehabilitation Hospital with a present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, cumberland
County, pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth
Mechanicsburg Rehab system - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital is merely
a fictitious name of either Defendant 111 or Defendant 112.
7. Defendants one through five are hereinafter collectively
referred to as "HealthSouth Defendants."
8. Defendant number six is Ruth Rogers (hereinafter "Rogers"),
an adult individual and physical therapy assistant with a present
business address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland County, pennsylvania.
9. On or about November 19, 1996, Plaintiff was admitted to
the HealthSouth Defendants' rehabilitation facility located at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania following surgery
to correct a prior right ankle surgery.
3
10. On ,Hlmin:liol1, Pldlllt ilf W"fl "Vdlll,tlf'lllIY 111-. ~:t(>Vf'1l
MorgiHlsteil1, wllo::,. ('lllli_"11 IllIr"":lHlfJII W,I:I, ill 1"'ltlllf'lIl 1)<11'1:, dn
follows:
d. A1I11HII'1111l Y (IYIIIIIII/" i/t1I;
b. ~a ,II till IHIlll II'Vlnll/1l 11'1111 'Inkle OJ{rF;
c. U(l{'I'1l1 1"11 klll'f' ,'xtl'lI!lrq lfI1'chanimn strain; and
d. lIi!:l fll),' Id 'Ill ,i1 1..11 1'.111'" H'pldcement.
.
11. On tIll" doll" III ddtrll:lllllJlI/ Ill, r-1or~Jllnstein entered the
followinC) 1"."'" i "",,' ,.,,10'1 II:
.1. I'hyn,i(...t TI1",..py "v..tllilt.e and treat bed mobility
11,111111"'11, Whf'I'II.'lldir mobility, progressive
.1I"IJlII.., ill" wI! 11 W.i1kf'l', progressive resistance
j'xl'lf'i:\l':1 I,) ifl(""dlll' J.rll. leg strength; and
b. Non,w"i"I1, I"'''l'i"" ricl"t. lcg - may put foot flat on
floOl" 10'" IJdldnC[! only,
12. On or abolll: Novcrnbcl' 19, 1996, an Interdisciplinary
Assessment was prepared by IIc>althSouth Defendants with regard to
Plaintiff wherein PlailltiU's "mobility" was classified as "impaired
standing balance reqlliring more than contact guard assistance."
13. In thc afon"lidd Interdisciplinary Assessment, it was
further noted that I'la i nU f. f. wan at risk for falls and that the
assistance of two [ltall: "K,rnbel'fJ would be required for transfers.
14. [I. ill hcdieved ill'" there[ore averred that the
Intenliucipl illill Y AII/"''''"''I'nt del'ineEl. in part, the standard of care
the pIlY/lI(...1 II"'I"/,Y ""/,0111''''''''1:, including Rogers, was to give to
l' I. Ii III i I I
4
b. Uecreased left let) utt.L'Il'JLh; dllU
~
suffered on November 21, 1996:
11. Severe left knee pain dud di:;comfort;
c. Severely limited mobility.
27. As a proximate result of her fal!, plaintiff suffers from
,
I
f
~.,
:'
anxiety, embarrassment, frust;.ration and depression by virtue of her
pain and her inability to recover to her pre-November 21, 1996
29. Prior Lo her fall, Plaintiff resided at the Ecumenical
status.
28. As a further proximate result of her fall, Plaintiff bas
been prevented from participating in her usual household duties and
social activities, and the aEoresaid injuries will permanently
interfere with her enjoyment of life.
Communities, an assisted living facility.
30. Plaintiff is now forced to reside at Country Manor, a full
~.
l
~,
.
t
p
f
f}:
time care facility, as she is unable to return to Ecumenical
Communities or any other assisted living facility.
31. Such full time care is a significant additional expense
which will continue for the rest of Plaintiff's life.
COUNT I - VICARIOUS LIABILITY
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
32. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
33. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Rogers was an
7
~1I11':lmFOHE, Plaintiff 1,'"p..ct(\I11y n''ll,,"::!::: 1111\1 Ilollo....blr' COlli!
to ('Ilt'erjudql1\pnt in fdVOI of l'l..illl if,! ,1IHI d<'dill::! 1I....1Ih~~ol1th
Dcfcnd\J.nLs [or unliCJlliddt ,.d ddtll,lqt.'n ill ('X('f~:ln (If 1 )H' jtlllndicLional
amount requiring llrbi trat ion, pluG COHt:!J of thin act ion llnd interent
from the date of judgment.
.
ALTERNATE COUNT III
EVELYN FLEISHER V. RUTH ROGERS
39. plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
40. Defendant Rogers was not acting within the authorized
scope and furtherance of her agency or employment duties for
HealthSouth Defendants.
41. The foregoing negligence of Defendant Hogers directly and
proximately caused the injuries detailed herein.
9
VERIFICATION
I, EVELYN FLEISHER, verify that the ntiltementn milde in the
foregoing ~.~ ".re true and correct. I lInden,tand
that false statementB herein "re made subject to the penalties of
18 Pa.C.S. 54904, reJating to unswom falsification to
authorities.
l3y:
.. r; r [.1 ./
l:~'-l'-[t{fVo.-'/if, -:.{Jl.d.1; ~
EVELYN FLEISHER
Dated: 1 H leit')
Exhibit B
" ' "''''''-'. . \, ' '
. .
. . . , ~
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 'I j. I.~L": b", -r;.,~
Civil Action - Law
EVELYN FLEISHER
4905 EAST TRINDLE ROAD
ROOM 92
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION
tla HEALTHSOTJTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
t/a HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
versus
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
: 175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTH SOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM
- ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
RUTH ROGERS
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANTS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT:
Please issue writ of summons in the above-captioned action.
<"'.
,'.-.,
:\.-.-: .
...~
,.<J" .
r~..r~~ ... -c.
;:,'.-
~~
..~.,
::,;/ '~, ! - :';
" ; , ~
jjQ{l=-
/Lbv-<,4" (..'--
1 c 9J'..
~O)1~.~,
HARRISBURG/SYS:\LIAB\TJM\LLPG\85664
EVELYN fLEISHER.
Plaintiff
mURT Or' CO~ON I'LEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
PEN~JSYLVl~Nr^
v.
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION t/a
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION HOSI'ITAI.
OF MECHANICSBURIl, HEAI.TIlSOUTlI
REHABILITATION Of MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, ,1nd HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
rm. 98.f,SOIJ
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
HEALTHSOUTH Of MECHANICSBURG. INC.
t/a HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
OF MECHANICSBURG. HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION Of MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL. and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION Of
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM
- ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS.
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
TO: CUMBERLAND COUNTY PROTHONOTARY
Kindly enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of
all Defendants in connection with the above-referenced case.
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER,
COLEMAN & GO G
DATE: I J - J J - 'I/,
BY:
T T cMAHON, ESQ.
100 P' e Street - 4th Fl.
P.O. Bo 803
Harrisburg, PA 17108-0803
I.D. 52918
(717) 232-9323
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS
EVELYN H.EISIIER.
1)laintitT
: COURr or CO~I~IO:-< PI.EAS
: CUMIIERI.A:-<IlCOl:~n'.
: I'E~~SYI.\'A~IA
v,
IIEAI.'I'IISOIl'l'l1 COI\PORATIO:-< ~'i1
IIEAI.'I'IISOIl'l'lI REIIAIlILlTATIO:-< IIOSI'II AI.
OF MECIIANIl'SIIIIIW.IIEAI.IIISO\J III
REIIAIlILlTA1ION OF MECIIANICSIIURO.
Acum RI:IIAIIIIOSPITAI.. ''"~ IIE,\I.TIISOIII'II
MECIIANICSIIURG I\EIIAII SYSTEM. ACUTE
RmlABlLlTATION 1I0SI'ITAI.
and
: SO. IJK.('~U5
: CIVIl. An 10:-': . J..\ II'
IIEAI.TfISOU1II OF MECIIANICSlIlJRO.INl'.
lIallEAl.TIISOU1I1 REIIAIlILlTATION 1I0SI'ITAl.
OF MECIIANICSIlURG.IIEAl. TIIS0UTII
REIIABlLlT A TION OF MECIIANICSIlURO.
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and IIEAl.TIISOIITII
MECIIANICSIlURG REIIAIl SYSTE~I. ACUTE
REIIABlLlTATION 1I0SI'ITAl.
and
HEAL THSOUTII REIIABlLlTA TION
HOSl'lTAl. OF MECHANICSIlURG
and
HEAl.T11S0UTH REHABILITATION OF
MECIIANICSIlURG. ACUTE REIIAIl
HOSPITAL
an~
HEAI.T1IS0UTH MECHANICSIlURG REIIAIl SYSTEM
. ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
an~
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendanls
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
RULE
AND NOW, this 01.- day of ~, 1999, upon consideration of the
foregoing Praecipe, Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, is hereby ordered to file a Complaint within
twenty (20) days hereof or suffer judgment of non oros.
BY THE PROTHONOTARY:
.\'Ct..tU-
~-Q
,-
L
i..,
,
I
,
~
!
~
L.
,
!
t
f'
;
.
~'~
h/~
.
~. \
NOTICE
You have been sued in court. If you wu,h to defend against
the claims set forth in the following pagen, you must take action
within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice have been
fll'rved. To defend against the aforem(,nt iOIWd cl aimE', a wri t ten
appeaJ:ance stating your defenses and obJ(,ct ionn mllnt be entered and
filed in writing by you, the defendant, or bi' an attorney. You .,re
warned that if you fail to take action against these claims, the
court may proceed without you and a judgment for any money claimed
in the complaint or for any other claim required by the plaintiff
may be entered against you by the court without further notice.
You may lose money, 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
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
NOTICIA
Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere
defenderse de est as damandas expuastas en las paginas siguientes,
usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la
demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia
escrita 0 en persona 0 por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma
escrita sus defensas 0 sus objeciones alas demandas en contra de
su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte
tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo
aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido
en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus
propiedades 0 otros derechos import antes para usted.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO
TIENNE ABOGAD 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR
TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONE A LA
OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRIDA ABAJO PARA
AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASSISTENCIA LEGAL:
CUMBERL&~D COUNTY
Court Administrator
4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.
Civil Action - Law
EVELYN FLEISHER
4905 EAST TRINDLE ROAD
ROOM 92
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTH SOUTH CORPORATION
tla HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS BURG , HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
tin HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTH SOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
versus
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM
_ ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
RUTH ROGERS
175 LANCASTER BOULEVARD
MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANTS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, by and through her
attorneys, purcell, Krug & Haller and files the following Complaint:
I, Plalntiff in Evelyn Flf'i"jw" ,lll "dull lndlvldual with a
pn'tH.'nt ,lddrpfHl (.It::. Countr:y Ml'adown, .1~HJI, !';.IHt Tlllldll.' J'~(ldd, I<oum 92,
MechilnicfJburg, PA 17055.
2, Defendant number one is lIeilItl1South Corporation, trading as
Healtl1South Rehabilitation Hospital of MechaIllcsburg - Acute Rehab
Hospital and Heal thSouth Mechanicsburg Rehab System - Acute
Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation organized and eXlsting under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania.
3. Defendant number two is HealthSouth of Mechanicsburg,
Incorporated, trading as HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of
Mechanicsburg - Acute Rehab Hospital and HealthSouth Mechanicsburg
Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital, a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania with a present business address at 175 Lancaster
Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
4. Defendant number three is HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg with a present business address at 175
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
It is believed and averred that HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
of Mechanicsburg is merely a fictitious name of either Defendant #1
2
or D~tendant U2,
S. Detend"nt Ilumbel' foul' HI H~'dlthSouth 1~,'h.ll)lIIl.oIt.IOIl <.>1
Mechanicsburg , Acute Rehab Iloflpi ta I wi th il pn'fI..nt b"" 111""" "dclress
at 1"'.> Lilllcaster Houlevard, Mcchanlcsburg, l'llmbed,lIld COlll1ty,
pennsyl vania. It is bel ieved and avel'red thilt Ilea lthSout h
Rehabilitation of Mechanicsburg - Acute Rehab Hospital is merely a
fictitious name of either Defendant Ul or Defendallt n2,
6. Defendant number five is HealthSouth Mechanicsburg Rehab
System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital with a present business
address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania. It is believed and averred that HealthSouth
Mechanicsburg Rehab System - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital is merely
a fictitious name of either Defendant n1 or Defendant #2.
I
,
7. Defendants one through five are hereinafter collectively
referred to as "HealthSouth Defendants."
y.
8. Defendant number six is Ruth Rogers (hereinafter "Rogers"),
an adult individual and physical therapy assistant with a present
business address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg,
!,"
~
,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania,
9. On or about November 19, 1996, Plaintiff was admitted to
the HealthSouth Defendants' rehabilitation facility located at 175
'~\~
~:~
i~,
<i
"'~\,;
Lancaster Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania following surgery
to correct a prior right ankle surgery.
3
'-~
,:'
su(tel"ed on November 21, 1996:
a. Severe left knee pain and discomfort;
b. Decreased left leg stl"ength; "m!
c, Severely limited mobility.
27. As a proximate result of her fall. Plaintiff suffers from
anxiety, embarrassment, frustration and depression by virtue of her
pain and her inability to recover to her pre-November 21, 1996
status,
28. As a further proximate result of her fall, Plaintiff has
been prevented from participating in her usual household duties and
social activities, and the aforesaid injuries will permanently
interfere with her enjoyment of life.
29. Prior to her fall, Plaintiff resided at the Ecumenical
Communities, an assisted living facility.
30. plaintiff is now forced to reside at Country Manor, a full
time care facility, as she is unable to return to Ecumenical
Communities or any other assisted living facility.
31. Such full time care is a significant additional expense
which will continue for the rest of Plaintiff's life.
COUNT I - VICARIOUS LIABILITY
EVELYN FLEISHER V. HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
32. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
33. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Rogers was an
7
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff n'B!"'{'t!ully 1'^'queBtfJ thuJ Hunuf,It,I.. Court
to enter judgment in favor of I'l.llnt 1 f f ..nd againnt lie,dthSouth
Def~'ndantfJ for unl1qulddted d..III"<I":I In ,'xce:l!J of th(' JunndlL't 1011.11
amount requiring arbitr,~tion. pllw cOHtn of this action ,Illd Interest
from the date of judgment,
,
(
r
ALTERNATE COUNT III
EVELYN FLEISHER V. RUTH ROGERS
39. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 31 by
reference thereto as if set forth more fully herein.
40. Defendant Rogers was not acting within the authorized
scope and furtherance of her agency or employment duties for
HealthSouth Defendants.
41. The foregoing negligence of Defendant Rogers directly and
proximately caused the injuries detailed herein.
."
~IHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this 1l0norLlble Court
to enter judgment in favor of Pl.llllt lff and ilCjilinst D"fE.ndant Ho']cru
for unliquidated damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount
requiring arbitration, plus costs of this action and interest from
the date of judgment.
Dated: May 14, 1999
PURCELL, KRUG & . \
/ ! I"!
Sea
I
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
71 7 234 -4178
Attorney for Plaintiff
10
., Admilled in part: denied in part. It is admilled only thatlleallhSouth
Corporation is.1 eorpomtion. It is spceilkally denied thatlleallhsoulh Corporation
mainlllins a husiness address al 175 I.ancaster Boulevard, Meehanicshurg. 1',\ and/or
trades as Ileuhhsoulh Rehahililalion Ilospilal or ~Iechanieshurg Acute Rehah Ilospital
and/or Ileulthsouth Mechanieshurg Rehah System - Acute Rehahilitalion Ilospitul. It is
speeilieully denied thatlleallhsOlllh Corporation is a Pennsylvania corporation. To the
contrary. it is a Delaware Corporation.
3. Admilled in parI: denied in purl. II is udmilled only Ihatllealthsouth or
Meclmnicsburg. Inc. is a Pennsylmnia corporal ion which docs busincss as 'leulthsoulh
Rehabilitation Hospital or Meehaniesburg - Aeule Rehab Hospital and which maintains
an address at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Meehaniesburg, Pennsylvania. The remaining
allegations of this paragraph arc denied.
4. Admilled in part: denied in parI. It is admitted only that Healthsouth
Rehabilitation Hospital of Meehaniesburg maintains an address at 175 Lancaster
Boulevard. Meehaniesburg. ['ennsylvania. It is furlher admitted Ihat Healthsoulh
Rehabilitation Hospital of Meehaniesburg is a fietilious name of Healthsouth
Meehaniesburg.lne.. Further. it is specifically denied that HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Meehaniesburg is a Iietitious name of any other legal entity.
5. Denied. Defendants deny that there is any legal entity known as
HeallhSouth Rehabilitation of Meehaniesburg - Acute Rehab Hospital and accordingly
the allegations set forth in this paragraph arc denied on Ihat basis. By way of further
answer, Defendant. Healthsouth of Meehaniesburg. Ine trades and/or docs business as
Heallhsouth Rehabilitation of Meehaniesburg - Acute Rehab Hospital.
6. Denied. DcI"endants deny that there is any legal entity known as
IlealthSouth Meehanieshurg Rehah Syslem - ,\eute Rehahilitation Ilospital and
accordingly Ihc allegations set li'rth in this paragraph arc dcnicd on that hasis.
7. Iknkd. Defendants spccifically deny Ihal it is appropriatc (0 colleclivcly
refer to Dcfendanls as "llealthSoulh Defendants." Ily way of further answer, thc
allegations set forth in this paragraph constitute legal conclusions to which no further
responsive pleading is required.
8. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Defendant Ruth
Rogers is an adult individual and a physical therapy assistant cmploycd hy llcalthsouth of
Meehaniesburg, Inc. The remaining allegations of this paragraph arc specifically denied.
9. Admitted in part; dcnied in part. It is admitted only that Plaintiff was
admitted to HealthSouth Rehabilitation of Meehanicsburg - Acute Rehabilitation Hospital
on November 19, 1996 at 175 Lancaster Boulevard, Meehanicsburg, Pennsylvania. The
remaining allegations ofthis paragraph arc denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e).
10. Denied as stated. By way of further answer, the medical records
concerning Plaintiffs admission to the subject hospital on Novcmber 19, 1996 arc
incorporated herein by reference and those records their entirety speak for themselves.
11. Denied as stated. By way of further answer, the medical records
concerning Plaintiffs admission to thc subject hospital on November 19, 1996 are
incorporated herein by refercnce and those records their entirety speak for themselves.
12. Denied as stated. By way of further answer, the medical rceords
concerning Plaintiffs admission to the subject hospital on November 19, 1996 are
incorporatcd herein by referencc and those records their entirety speak for themselves.
13. Denied ..s stllled. lIy w"Y Ilf further ..nSll'er, the medie..1 recnrds
coneerning l'l..intitrs ..dmissionto lhe subjcct hospit..1 on Nowmher II), 11)% arc
ineorpomled herein hy rcfcrencc ,11111 thosc rccords their cntircly spca~ li,r thcmselvcs.
14. Dcnied. Dclcnd..nls spccitic..lly deny the ..lIcgationthatlhc
intcrdisciplin..ry lIsscssmcnt dclincs thc ,'pplic..hlc stllndllrd of carc concerning I'laintilT.
Ily WllY of further answer, thc alleg..tions set ll,rth in this p..ragmph are conclusions of
IlIw to which no further responsivc pleading is rcquircd and lIccordingly the sollne are
dcnied in lIccordllnce with Pa.R.C.!'. I029(e).
15. Denied in lIccurdllnce with plI.R.C.p. 1029(e).
16. Denied in lIccordance with plI.R.C.p. 1029(e).
17. Denied in lIccurdance with plI.R.C.p. 1029(c).
18. Denied. Delcndllnts deny that on Novcmber 21, 1996 Delcndmll Rogers
transferred PllIintiff fromPlainlifrs bed to Plaintifrs wheclclmir without the lIssistanee
of any other person. To the contrary. the assistance of Plain tilT herself was an intricate
part of that transfer and the injuries and/or damages described elsewhere in Plaintiffs
Complaint result from Plaintiffs failure to provide that assistance in making the transfer
from her bed to her wheelchair.
19. Admitted.
20. Admitted.
21. Admitted in parI; denied in part. It is admitted only that after Ms. Fleisher
was lowered to the !loor. Defendant Rogers called for assistance lInd Ms. Fleisher was
lifted with a blanket bllck to her bed. The remaining allegations of this paragraph are
denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e).
22. Denied. Defendanls spceilically den)' all allegalions ofnel!li!(encc as sel
lilrth in this pam graph logelhcr wilh its sullparts (a) through (I). To Ihe contrar)',
Defcndanl Rogcrs aclcd in aCCllnlance wilh Ihc applicallJc slandard of car.' and providcd
appropriate care U1ulatlcnlion 10 Ms. Fil'islK'r "11 Nnvcl1111cr 21, 19%.
23. Denied in accordance wilh l'a.ltC.I'. 1029(e).
24. Denicd in accordance with l'a.R.CI'. I029(e).
25.
Denied in accordance wilh l'a.R.C.I'. I029(e).
.
!'
~
26. Dcnied in accordance with l'a.R.CI'. 1029(e).
27. Denied in accordance with l'a.R.Cl'. 1029(e).
28. Denied in accordance with l'a.R.C.P. 1029(e).
29. Denied in accordance with Pa.R.CP. 1029(e).
30. Denied in accordance with l'a.R.C.I'. 1029(e).
31. Denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e).
'"
.
I
,
COUNT I - VICARIOUS LIARlLlTY
EVENLYN FLEISHER V, HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
32. Defendants incorporate by reference their responses to paragraphs I
-i
through 31 above if as set forth at length herein.
1
r.
i\
.
33. Denied as staled. It is denied that Defendant Rogers was an employee of
"HealthSollth Defendants" as that term is alleged at paragraph 7 of the Complaint. To the
contrary, Ms. Rogers was on November 19, 1996 an employee of l-IealthSollth
Corporation, Inc. It is specifically denied that Ms. Rogers was an employee of an)' other
~.
I, i
~r! ....'
"
r~1
a
!\
,
Defendant named herein.
34. Denied. The allegation of negligence on the part of Defendant Rogers is
specifically denied. To the contrary, Ms. Rogers acted in accordance with the applicable
.~
slllndard of care rendered lIpproprillte ellre lInd 1I1lention10 I'I1Iintiffon November 19,
19%. By wa)' of lilrtber answer, Ihe 1I11egalions selll'rth in Ihis p:mlgraph are
conclusions orlaw which me denied in accordance with l'a.R.C.P. I021J(e).
35. Denied. The allegation of negligence on the part of Defendant Rogers is
specilieally denied. To the conlrary, Ms. Rogers acted in accordance wilh the applicable
standard ofc:lre rcndcred :Ippropriate care and allenlion to PlaintilTon Novembcr 19.
1996. By way of further :lIlswer, the allegations sct forth in this paragraph arc
conclusions oflllw which lIrC denied in accordance wilh Pa.R.C.P. I029(e).
WIIERI'ORE. Defendants demllndjudgment in their favor lInd against Plaintiff
together with such other relief as this Court shall deem appropriate.
COUNT II - CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE
EVELYN FLEISHER V, HEALTHSOUTH DEFENDANTS
36. Defcndants incorporate by reference their responses to pllragraphs I
through 35 lIbove ifas set forth at length herein.
37. Dcnicd. Defendants specilically dcny all allegations of negligence as set
forth in this paragraph together with its subparts (a) and (b). To the contrary, to the
extent that one or more of the Defendants had any duty to provide supervision and/or
oversight of patient care and/or any duty to formulate, adopt and/or enforce adcquate
rules and policies concerning patient carc, such Defcndants did so in a rcasonable manner
with relation to the care provided to Plaintiff in November of 1996. By way of further
answer, the allegations set forth in this paragraph arc conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required and the same arc denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.P.
I029(e).
44. Whatever injuries and/or dmnages. ifan)', were sustained h)' l'laintifl'as
averred b)' Plaintill' in her Complaint, all such injuries and/or damages heing expressl)'
and specilieall)' denied, were caused in whole or in part h)' persons or entities ovcr whom
Delendants had neither uny dut)' to supervise or conlrol or an)' right of supervision or
control and accordingly ()elendanls arc notliahle and I'laintilTmay not recover as aguinst
them.
45. I'laintifl's injuries and/or damages. if .111)', were not caused h)' an)' conduct
or negligence on the part of Delendants but rather were caused b)' preexisting medical
conditions and causes be)'ond the control of Delendanls or .m)' of them and accordingly
Plaintiff may not recover against Defendants in this action.
46. The averments setlilrlh inl'laintifrs Complaint t(lilto state a cause of
action or claim as against Defendants upon which rclief can be granted.
47. Any claim or cause of action as set lorth in Plaintiffs Complaint is barred
by the applicable statute of limitations, including specilically, but not limited 10, any
claim or cause of action in which b)' reason of lack of specificity of a pleading is not
directly and specifically set forth in the language of Plaintiffs Complaint, but which
Plaintiff may seek to raise at a later time by further amendment claiming to have
preserved such claim or cause of action within Plaintiffs Complaint.
48. Plaintiffs claims may be barred and/or limited by the applicable
provisions of the Pennsylvania Health Care Malpractice Act and accordingly the same is
referenced herein as an aflirmative defense.
49. Plaintiffs injuries and/or damages. if any, were caused in whole or in
parly by persons not party to Ihe within action.
VEIUJlICA TION
The undersigned hereby veri lies Ihatthe stntements in the lilregoing Answer with New
Maller 10 I'lainlifl"s Complail1l me based upon inlilrmation which has been furnished 10 counsel
by llIe und inlimlllltil.n which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of the defense of
Ihis lawsuit. The langunge of the Answer with New Maller to Plaintiffs Complainl is that of
counsel and not my own. I have read the Answer with Ncw Maller 10 Plaintifl"s Complaint. and.
to the cxtentthat it is b.lscd upon inform.llion which I have given to counsel, it is true nnd corrcet
to the best of my knowledge. inlonnation and belicf. To the extcnt that the contents of the
Answer with New Maller to I'laintirt"s Complaint arc that of counscl,l have relied upon my
counsel in making this verilication. The undersigned also understands that the statements therein
arc made subject to the penalties of 18 I'n.C.S. Section 4904, relating 10 unsworn falsification to
authorities.
DATE: :.r/~I/c;q
2.ttf1 1?"'JrA\
Ruth Rogers (
-"
Plaintiff
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND CO., PENNSYLVANIA
EVELYN FLEISHER,
IIEALTflSOUTII CORPORATION
t/a IIEAL'l'HSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH:
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECIIANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
NO. 98-~
qf- ('.to..t
f1EALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG, INC.
t/a HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH:
REHABII,ITATION OF MECHANICSBURG -
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and HEALTHSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
and
HEALTH SOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS BURG
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEM:
_ ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER
AND NOW COMES THE Plaintiff, Evelyn Fleisher, by and through her
attorneys, Purcell, Krug and Haller and files the following Answer to
1
~
New MatteI"
42. Denied an it conC1U'JlOll of law to which no l-esponse is
required.
43. DCJued au d cOile lun ion at 1....1\'1 t'J wh 1. ell no response is
required.
44. Denied. plaintif f' sin) uries as referenced in her Complaint
were proximately caused by Defendants and their agents or employees.
45. Denied. The injuries suffered by Plaintiff are separate and
distinct from any prior problems she experienced. To the extent there
is any causal connection between her pre-existing injuries and her
present injury, Defendants had actual or constructive knowledge of all
pre-existing injuries and had a duty to provide care that would not
exacerbate them.
46. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is
required.
47. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is
required.
48. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is
required.
49. Denied. Plaintiff's injuries as referenced in her Complaint
were proximately caused by Defendants and their agents or employees.
50. Denied. Plaintiff's injuries as referenced in her
2
PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT
(Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate)
TO THE PROTHONOTARY/OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
1'lt'i1\l'Il\IIlll'ullhI1lIUilllrr(lIrthl'lIt'\1:
.---------------------------------------------------------------------
o l'n"TrI,d MgIlllM111 ('ClUrt
~ Argllllll'UI('llllrl
!-:'/r::~'Oj ri.!-:r:a!EP.,
I' ~ I i r~ t i tt
('()Illd' OF CC:-1:.1(!!1 PU:;\S
l'r::-:!',[R,LMlU C()fJ~lTY,
l'E:l~J:;,(L':i\!l I^
'f.
1lr:!\LTW~fJ!)TII Cr)fU'(JHI\Tl(l~l t /,1
HEt";LTW::;OUTl! HEHABII.ITATI():; IV):")PIT!\L
OF ~IECHl\N ICSBURG, IlEtd,TJi.SnUTIl
HEHA8 r L TTATton OF' MEr:IlMI !,~:'~F"f)?(; -
!\CUTE PE:IU'\B HOSPIT,'!', ,wd 1l~~J\LT!l~;OUT!l
HF;C:'HANICSBURG HE:!!AB :~YSn:N - ACUTE
PEHABI LITATION HOSPITAL, 1-:1' l\L.
[h:.'fendants
~;U. f~H-{):)O~J
CIVIL!\CTION - LAW
JUHY Tf~ I ,,1. DEr-lAt-lDED
CAI'TION OF C/\SE
(tntire c..pliou mlL~t he stalt'tl ill rulll
~fI.
no. 98-6505
ChoU
Adiull ~ Law
19 98
I. StOlle 1l11lth'r to be ar!:lIt"Cl (i.e., plainlirrs million for new trilll,
defendant's dt'lIIl1rrl'r to compliant, elc.): I'l'titjoll fur Slalu~ Confl'rellct'
2. Idenlif)' t'ml1l~e1 whll uill arJ:Ue C:t'iC:
(a) rur plaiutiff: Niclllllc SIal e)' Gorman, K~(IUire
(h) for defcndant: Sharon M. O'Dol1nell, E~(I,llre
3.
,.,,~, '" ,..". .... ..'"." ..." ."... __~,':ZI'~/I'I'~.'/"r/a..ir~l~w:~---"
/ If!. _ . i ,J:' (I( i),t/( 1(--
(A,rl.lnle)' for Dcfendalll<;)
;
Uah'd:
~ III \0 (
"
..
~
wlli~'h rHo) l'-'.'::;ponse is rl~'qt.ir'~(J.
., . r.,< J:n i t t,'r! i 11 I), J r t, j., r, i "
" j , J '..: ~ : : : " 1m 1 I 1 ,.<"1
"' : ".. , : ::,' " .. I'J' " r ,:r)! In:;r~ 1
~nd; ~"--11H);,f'1 tor i'r~titinn"r:; 11':'_
fur H(~:;ponrl.f:nt on or rlbout r\pri 1 .:, /i)()l,
'nl.".l':: ~.:l,,'phorH' cdll
'w,-tS r(~turned .....ithin forty-eiqht hC\).1t~:;. Tl,1 .Ll:"'~' !,ttorney
O'Donnell has not responded to t.hdt". r.--}tUrl11'ij t>.I~c'phorF~ call. In
any event, had t1s. 0' Donnell returned the call, ,,!:e 'Nould hav(?
Leer! dJvlseu that PetitioD(!l" dCles not (jbj._~\:t. ~.() :_,li'::~ iH;lJlnq ()f d.
status conference, provided that it is scheduled for at least
sixty days from the current date.
Expert review of the file is in
progress, and at least sixty days is needed in order to establish
what additional discovery will be required. It is further noted
that while this petition appears to have been filed with the Court
on April 6, 2001, it was not served upon counsel for Respondent
until April 11, 2001 and thus, not received by her until April 12,
2001.
WHEREfORE, Respondent, Evelyn fleisher, does not object to
the Court's entry of an order for a status conference, provided
that such is not scheduled for at least sixty days from the
current date.
Date, 1-///(1/0 I
.
p
''I'
ld'I(~fJ'/j:1 tI/
I VI 1.\ \ III 1\111 It.
l'I,lIlllttl
('Ill 'Ill III (("'\tll" 1'1 h\"
, IT\III"'II,A\Il(,()l:\I\',
i'1'\\S\'LVA\IA
/IIA'"ISlllJllI (,Olll'O/I^"0\ 1,1
II!'. \I. II/SOL 'III "111.\111111" 110\ /lOSl'I'A'
01 \lITIIA\I<'SIIl:"li,lIh\lIIISOl'lIl
""'/AIIII,II ATIO\ Ill' \11 (,1I""I<'SIIl'IU i.
A( "I'll, 11I'IIAIIIIOSI'1I AI.. ","I/1h\l,IIISOl 'TII
,\lITIIA\I(,SIIlJ<<O <<""All WSII'\l. '" 'I'll,
<<FIIMIILlT"T10\ IInSl'1 "AL,.-t aL.
Ikf~:lulillll"
\(). l)S.6505
: ('11'11. A('TIO\ - LAW
: Jl 'Ill' T"IM.IlEM/\NDED
PROPOSED ORDER
Ii ., . I
AND NOW, this _~~__ day or Ji~, 2001. upon considcration of Defendant's
I'etilion lor Status Confcrcnce. il is herc:hy Ordered Ihat a Stalus Conference has bcen scheduled
before the'HElRlmthle .J" \ ,
.;
/ . on tbe :? llL
, I. ,-
l .:_
. in chambers/courtroom
A.M.
> ) .'/ (. /
(j
,200l,at q :.30 o'clock
,
dayof
BY THE COURT:
/
/
(>1
'I
I. /
/ //./ ,~-~
/
;
i
\ /
./
,
J.
C'-' "..
~_"{.' (..,t_I....~"-'" <.
-7?P:'!Go'c/
i/ -,h)-d
.../-~
;1l
L\'U.Y~ .'L1'ISI/LK.
1'1.1111111'1'
, ('01 'Ill OITO\l\tO~ I'll AS
: ('I!Vtlll'KLA~Il(CJl:'IY,
I'I'~~SYI.\',\"A
\,
I/"-ALI I/SOI' I 1/ (,OIlI'OI(A 110~ 'a
IIEALTI/SOI JTI/ IIUIAIlILlIAIIO~ IIlISI'II"1
OF VIITI/A~I('SIlIIKli. I/"'\LTI/SOI' I 1/
I(UIAIlILlTATlO~ OF VtJTIIM,ICSIIII<<i.
ACIITL I(EI/AIl I/OSI'IlAL. and I/EALI I/SOI'I 1/
\tLCI/ANICSIlIlKG KEI/AIl SYSTEVI. ,\n 'II,
IIEI/,\IlII.1TATlO~ I/OSI'ITAL
:lI1d
: :\0. I)S.h~lI~
: nVIL ACTIO~. LAI\'
I/EALTI/SOllTI/ OF MECI/ANICSIlIJKI i, I~C'.
lia I/EALTI/SOIlTI/ KEI/AIlILlTATIO:'; I/OSI'IT,\!,
OF MECI/A~ICSIlIlI((;. I/EALTI/SOlITI/
J<EIlAIlIJ.lTATlON OF MITIIANICSIII1I((i-
AClITE KEI/AIlIlOSI'ITAL. and IlEALTIlSOU III
MECIlANICSBIIRG KEIlAB SYSTEVt - Anln,
REIlAIlILlTATlON I/OSI'IT,\L
i.lI1d
IIEAtTllSOllTl1 KEIIABII.ITATION
I/OS?ITAL OF MECI/ANICSBUR(;
und
I IEALTI/SOUTI I REIIAIJII.IT,\TION OF
MECI/ANICSIlURCi - ACUTE REIlAB
I/OSI'ITAL
:lI1d
I/EALTI/SOUTI/ MECI/ANICSIJURG REIlAB SYSTEM
. ACUTE REIlABILlTATION 1l0SPITAL
,md
ri
RIITI/ ROGERS,
Defendants
r
,
I
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PETITION FOR STATUS CONFERENCE
Defendant, HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Meehanicsburg. by and
through its counsel, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin. hereby files this
I
Petition seeking a status conference, and in support thereof asserts the following:
I. This is an alleged hospital negligence claim commenced by way of Writ of
Summons filed on or ahout Novcmber 16, 1998.
EVELYN FLE 1 SIlEH,
Plailltiff
IN TilE COUHT 01' COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL M:TION
I.A~1
III-:AI,TIISOUTIl crw i'OliAT I ON
t /" HEALTHSOUTII
HEIIABILITATION 1I0SPITAL
OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE ,
REHAB HOSPITAL, AND
HEALTHSOUTII MECHAN I CSBURG,
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH OF
MECHANICSBURG, INC, t/a
HEALTH SOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE :
REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG:
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
OF MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE
REHAB HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG,
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants No, 98-6505 CIVIL TERM
, '
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2001, upon
consideration of Defendants' Petition for Status
Conference, and following a conference held in the chambers
of the underHigned Judq,' III '..hlch th,' i'l..llltiff Wilt.
rcpreocnted by Nichole Stclley O'GOl'm,,", Enquire, and the
llcf(}i]dalltn WCI'C n'prei"'lIu'd b/' TlflIothy ,J. McMaholl, Esquil'e,
~lJld pun.luant to an .1gn'elflj'l1t of counuel, It IS ordered and
directed as follows:
1. Discovcry in this case shall be
completed by October 31, 2001;
2. Plaintiff's expert report shall be
furnished to Defendants on or betore November 30, 2001;
3. Defendants' expert report shall be
furnished to Plaintiff on or before December 31, 2001; and
4. Supplemental expert reports shall be
exchanged on or before January 31, 2002.
By the Court,
J,
Timothy J. McMahon, Esquire
100 Pine Street - 4th Floor
P,O. Box 803
Harrisburg, PA 17108
For the Defendants
;0
~
Nichole Staley O'Gorman, Esquire
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102-2392
For the Plaintiff
~~
5,?--~-0\
wcy
EVELYN FUoISIIJ,R.
Plall1lllf
: ('(ll;RJIII;(-(I:\I:\IlIN PLJ:,\S
: ('ll:\IIII'llI..\NII('(llINn',
PI:NNSYI,\' ,\NI,\
\'.
IIEAI.TIISOUTII CORPORATION t:a
I IEAI.TIISOUTII REIIAIlIUTATION IIOSPITAI.
OF MECIIANICSIIURG. IJEAI.TllSOllTII : NO, I)S_c.;IJ;
REIIAIlII.ITATION OF MECIIANICSIlUI{(j-
ACUTE REIIAII I 10SPITAI.. and IIEAI.TIISOllTII
MECIIANICSIIURG REIIAIl SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION _ I.A W
REIIAI3ILlTATION IIOSPITAI.
and
IIEAlTIISOUTII OF MECIIANICSlllll{(j. INC,
tla IIEAI.TIISOUTII REIIABlLlT ATION IIOSPITAI.
OF MECIIANICSBURG. IIEALTIISOUTII
REIIAI3ILlTATlON OF MECIIANICSBURG _
ACUTE REI lAB IlaSpITAL. and IIEAI.TIISOUTII
MECIIANICSBURG RElIAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REIIABlLlT ATION II0SpITAI.
and
IIEAlTllSOUTl1 REIIABlLlTATlaN
1I0SpITAl OF MECIIANICSBURG
and
ilEAL TIIS0UTII REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REIIAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEAlTHSOUTH MECIIANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION 1I0SPITAl
and
RUTH ROGERS,
Defendants
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
CERTIFICATE
PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA
PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.24
As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for doculllenls and things pursuant to Rulc
4009,24,
EVEI.YN F1EISIIl'R,
1'( II 'II III!' 1'1 IMI\IIIN I'II'.'\S
l"\IMIlHlI ,\NI)('oIINIY.
I'I'NNSYI \'..\NL\
I'laintilf
\,
IIE/\I.TIISIII ITII ('ORI'(IIIAIII IN I.;'
I lEAI.TIISOUTI I REIII\I!ILlTATIlIN III IS!'II,\!
OF MECIIANICSIlUR<i, I IEAI.TIISOI IT II NIl, C/~,(,~II'
REIIAIlIUTATION OF ME( '1IANIl, 'SIIUR( i .
ACUTE REIlAB IIOSI'ITAI.. "IllI IIEAI:II ISlll I III
MECIIANICSBUR(j REIIAI! SYSTEM - Al 'UTI' : ('IVII AI'II< IN - lAW
REIIABlUTATION IIOSI'ITAI.
allll
I IEAI.TIISOUTI I OF MEClIANICSIlIJlU i. IN(',
Va IIEAI.TI ISOUTI I REIIAIlILlTATION I II ISI'ITAL
OF MECIIANICSBURG, lIEAI.TIISOIJTII
REHABILITATION OF MEC'lIANICSBUR(i-
ACUTE REIIAB 1I0SI'ITAI., and IIEAI.TIISO\JTII
MECIIANICSI3URG REIIAB SYSTEM - ACUTE
REHABILITATION 1I0SI'ITAI.
and
IIEALTI ISOllTl1 REIIABILlTATION
I 10SI'ITAL OF MECIIANICSIIlJlUi
ami
IIEALTHSOUTII REIIABlLlTATION OF
MECIIANICSBURG - ACUTE REIIAB
I 10SPIT AI.
and
IIEALTHSOUTII MECIIANICSBlIR<i REIIAIl
SYSTEM - ACUTE REIIAIlILlTATION IIOSI'ITAL
and
RUTII ROGERS,
Defendants
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PROIlUCE DOCUMENTS
TO: Niehole M. Staley O'Gorman, Esquire
PURCELL, KRUG & HALLER
1719 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102-2392
Timothy J. McMahon, Esquire, with the Law Oflices of Marshall, Dennehey, Wamer,
Coleman & Goggin, on behalf of Defendants. intends to serve a subpoena identical to the one
EXI'J.,\N,\TION OF IUo:QIIIHEIl REC'OIWS
TO: CUSTODIAN OF RH 'OI<l>S FOR:
Ecumenical Community Inc,
725 Wilhelm Road
Ilarrishurg, P A 1711 I
IU:: EVELYN FLEISIlEI{
Any and all records concerning residency Jrolll d,lle of firsl residency 10 lhe present including, but
not limited to, nurses notes. any and all records regarding mcdical aJl(Vor nursing care, invoices.
charges, hills. transportation records allllthe like concerning Evelyn Fleisher,
1>:lles Requested: Up to and including the presellt
Subject: Evcl)'n Fleisher
Social Security #: 201-18-5302
Dale of Birth: 7/19/24
IlEFENIMNTS' RESI'ONSE TO
1'l.f\INTIJlJI'S MOTION TO EXTENI) IlISC'O"ERY
ANIl EXI'.:RT REI'ORI' UEAUI.INES
The Delellll:mts, hereinaller eolleelively relerred to as "Dekllllants" or "llcallhSouth", herchy responds
to Plaintiff's Molionlo Exlend Discovery and Expcrt Rcport Deadlincs as li,l1ows:
1. Admillcd in part; denied in part. II is .Idmitted that I'l:linliff is Evelyn G, Fleisher. II is
r
dcnicd that Ms, Flcisher suffcrcd any injurics on Novcmher 21, 11)1)(, while in the care of Defend.mls,
2, Admillcd.
3. Admittcd,
4, Admittcd in part; denicd in part, It is mlmittcd thaI thc discovcry dcposition of Margarct
Fiscus was hcld, as schcdulcd, on Octobcr 25,2001, Thc rcmaining allcgations of Paragraph 4 arc dcnicd to Ihc
cxtcnt that those allegations miseharacterize the testimony of Ms. Fiscus.
5. Denied. It is specifically and categorically denied Ihat Defendants have failed to supply
Plaintiff with any infonnation dcspite repeated formal and informal requests. To the contrary, Plaintiffs
counsel never articulated a request for the 1996 policies and procedures from HeallhSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg until after the discovery deadline had expired. That documentation has been
produced,
6. Denied. II is specifically and categorically denied thaI Defendants "knowingly and willfully
failed to disclose" any documents requested by Plaintiff during the course of discovery, To the contrary,
Plaintiff failed to request the 1996 policies and procedures manual from the HealthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechanicsburg during the course of discovery. It was after the discovery deadline had expired that
Plaintiffs counsel finally requested that information, and those documents have already been produced,
Moreover, and more critically, it is Plaintiffs counsel's own failure to request that infonnation that caused the
delay in discovery and her failure to depose any witness regarding the 1996 policies and procedures during the
course of discovery, Notwithstanding Plaintifrs counsel's failure 10 do so, [)efendmlls have graciously agreed
to reproduce Ms. Rogers ami Ms, Fiscus for the limited Jlurpose of responding tlll'hlintifrs counsel's inquiries
regarding the 11)9(, policies lInd procedures lI1anual.
7, Admitted,
8, Admitted,
9, Admitted in Pllrl; denied in part, II is admitted that Defendants supplied Plaintiff's eounsel
with Ms, Monteforte's last known lIddress. The remaining allegations arc denied elltegoriclllly. More
specifically, Defendllnts suggested thai Ihe deposition of Ms. Monteforte be held lollowing the deposition of
Ms. Fiscus on October 25,2001. Nowhere in the letter attached liS Exhibit B does Defendanls' counsel "agree
to extend discovery without limitlltion until Ms, Monleforte clln be located lInd deposed."
10. Admitted,
WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter an Order reneeting the
following agreements:
A. That the discovery deadline be extended through December 31, 200 I;
B. That the deadline for production of Plaintiffs expert report be extended to December 30,
2001;
C, That the deadline for the production of Defendants' cxpert report be extended thirty days to
January 31,2002; and
,
r;
I'
t:
rs
.'1
!
''JU\J :t. U ZOOI J.o~
i\ HII.le.", \1 1),11 ", 111'f,,, 11')"- I .\\\ FIN'"
I MARsHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, CoLEMAN /OGoGGIN I
4 1'. u , . . , I II If "I (; u . , II I .t I In.. ........manhallcknnC'hry.c'Um
---
-
U,ot..........
IN
"-
,....,._n........
,.",-....
-
"''''-
\cram....
'-..~
4200 Crums 1\111I Road, Suite II. IIl1rrishurJ:,I'A 17112
(717) 651.3500. "'ax (717) 651.9630
Direct l>ial: 717.651.3503
[mail: sodonnell@mdwcJ:.com
....,.....
fllrrrylllll
~........
D",,-u
...-....-,..
......"........
......
""~
............
Curt Long
Prothonotary
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Cumberland County Courthouse
1 Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013-3387
Novcmbcr J I). 200 I
"'u..
<.......
11m..
RE: Evelvn Fleisher v. HeallhSouth. et al.
Our File No. 19181-00640
CCP (Cumberland County) No, 98-6505
Dear Mr, Long:
Enclosed herewith for filing please find an original and three copies of Defendants' Response to
PlaintifT's Motion to Extend Discovery Deadlines and the Deadline for Exchange of Expert Reports, together
with a Certificate of Service evidencing service of the same upon Plaintiffs counsel, and a Proposed Order.
By copy of this correspondence, I am providing a copy of the cnclosed documents to the Court
Administrator's Office.
Likewise, [ am providing Judge Oler with a courtesy copy of the enclosed documents for his reference
and review.
me.
If you have any questions, or are in need of any additional infonnation, please do not hesitate to contact
""" "'"~-
RON tib'DON L
SMO/jmp
Enclosures
cc: Honorable Wesley Oler, Jr.
Nichole Staley O'Gorman, Esquire
Richard Pierce - Court Administrator
\OS _A \L1AD\SMO\CORR\8J57S\JMF\19 [81 \00640
I'IU>I'OSEJ) OIWEI{
AND NOW, this day llf____________ _____.__' 2001, upon consideration of Defendants'
Response to Plaintirrs Motion to Exlemlthe Discovcry Dcadline and the Deadline for the Exchange of Expert
Reports, it is hereby ORDERED as fi,lIows:
I, The deadline for discovery shall bc extended to December 31. 2001;
2, The deadline for production ofl'laintiffs expert report shall be extended to December 30,2001;
3. The deadline for Defendants' production of an expert report shall be extended to January 31,
2001; and
4, The deadline for supplemental experts shall be extended to February 28, 2002.
BY THE COURT:
J.
HEFENIMNTS' RESI'ONSE TO
I'L\lNTIFF'S MOTION TO f:XTENIl nrsc:on:ln'
,\NI> EXI'ERT REI'OIH IlEAIlI.li'ES
Thc Defcmlmlls, hereinaller ('(lllcclivcly rcli:rrcd 10 as "lJcli:ndanls" or "/IeallhSonth", hcrcby rcsponds
to Plaintifrs Motion to Extcnd Discovcry ami Expcrt Rcport Dcadlincs as follows:
dcnicd that Ms. Flcishcr suffercd any injurics on Novcmbcr 21, I~l)(, while in thc care of Defendants.
I. ^dmilled in P:lrt; denicd in part. It is admiUed that Plaintiff is Evclyn G. Flcisher. It is
2. ^dmilled,
J. Admilled.
Fiscus was held, as scheduled, on October 25, 200 I. The remaining allegations of Paragraph 4 arc denied to the
4. Admilled in part; denicd in part. It is admilled that the discovery deposition of Margaret
extent that those allegations mischaractcrize the testimony of Ms. Fiscus,
Plaintiff with any information despite repeated formal and infonnal requests. To the contrary, Plaintiffs
5. Denied. It is specifically and ealegorically denied that Defendants have failed to supply
counsel never articulated a request for the 1996 policies and procedures from l-IeaIthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Meehaniesburg until aller the discovery deadline had expired. That documentation has been
produced.
failed to disclose" any documents requested by Plaintiff during the course of discovery, To the contrary,
6. Denied. It is specifically and categorically denied that Defendants "knowingly and willfully
Plaintiff failed to request the 1996 policies and procedures manual from the HeaIthSouth Rehabilitation
Hospital of Mechaniesburg during tbe course of discovery. It was after the discovery deadline had expired thaf
Plaintiffs counsel finally requested that infomlation, and those documents have already been produced.
Moreover, and more critically, it is Plaintiffs counsel's own failure to request that information that caused the
delay in discovery and her failure to depose any witness regarding the 1996 policies and procedures during the
course of discovery. Not\\ithsl.mding PI..intirl's counsel's l:lilure to do so, Defendants hale graciously agreed
10 reproduce Ms. Rogers allll Ms. FiSl.'us for Ihe limited purpose of respouding to Plainlirl's counsel's inquiries
reg.mling the 11)lJ6 policies :nlll procedures lIIanual.
7, Admilled.
8, Admillcd.
9. Admilled in part; denied in part. It is admilledtlmt Dcfcndants supplicd Plaintifrs counsel
with Ms. Monteforte's 10151 known address. The rcmaining allcg.ltions arc denied categorically, More
specifically, Defendanls suggested that Ihe deposition of Ms. Monteforte be held following the deposition of
Ms, Fiscus on October 25, 200!. Nowhere in the leller allached as Exhibit B docs Defendants' counsel "agree
to extend discovery without limitation until Ms. Monteforte can be locatcd and deposcd."
10, Admilled.
WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request Ihis Honorable Court to enter an Order renecting the
following agreements:
A. That the discovery deadline be extended through Dccember 31, 200 I;
B. That the deadline for production of Plaintifrs expert report be extended to December 30,
2001;
C. That the deadline for the production of Defendants' expert report be extended thirty days to
January 31, 2002; and
D, Thalthc lk'alllilll' for Ihc c\changc of sUJlJllcUI<'nlall'\Jll'rl rqlOll, hl' l'\lc/Ilklllhirly days to
Fcbnmry 28. 2002,
Rcspcctfully submiUl'lI.
l\IARSIIAI.I.. DENNEIIE.... WAI{NER.
COLE AN & GOGGIN
DATE: \\\\~\~\
y~
ARON M, O'DONNELL. ESQUIRE
. No, 79457
'1200 Cmms Mill Road. Suite B
Harrisburg, P A 17112
(717) 651-3503
Attorneys for Dcfendants
t
,
[
I
f.
EVEI.YN FI.EISHER.
PI..intiff
: IN TIlE ('OIJRT OF ('OMM()N PI.b\S
: CUMBERI.AND COI INTY.
: PENNSYI.VANIA
\',
IIEALTIISOUTII CORPORATION 1/..
IlEAL TIIS0UTII REIIABIUTATION
HOSPITAL OF MEClIANICSBURG.
HEALTHSOUTll : NO, 98-6505
RElIABJUTATION OF MECIIANICSBURG-
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL. ..nd
HEALTIISOUTH MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM - ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA \V
REHABILlTA TION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG.
INC, tla HEAL THSOUTH REHABJUT A TION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG.
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL. and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEAL THSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILlT A nON
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS.
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
".
'f1~.^'II^II.s\lO 11 I'(j KU,,/uJMI' I"I~I tIlll,.,aU
EVELYN FLElSIIER.
Plaintiff
: IN TIlE ('OllRT OF COMMON PLEAS
: <:lIMIIERLAND ('OllNTY.
: I'ENNSYLVANI,\
v,
HEAL TIISOUTII CORPORATION lhl
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECIIANICSBURG,
HEAL THSOUTII : NO, lJS,(,SOS
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICSBURG-
ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL. ami
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM _ ACUTE : CIVIL ACTION - LA W
REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH OF MECHANICSBURG.
INC, tla HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICSBURG - ACUTE REHAB
1I0SPIT AL. and HEAL THSOUTH
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE REHABILITATION 1I0SPITAL
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICSBURG
and
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS BURG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSP1T AL
and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL
and
RUTH ROGERS.
Dcfcndants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
f'"
/~....
.I
~
"IWI'OSE!> OR!>ER
And now, this
day of
_,,' 2001, upon consideration of
OClcndants' Response to Phlintifrs Motion to Compel and MOlion ",r Sanctions, it is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions arc Denied; that
the Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions WilS not substantially justified and th.lt Plaintiff and/or her
allorneys, Purcell, Krug & lIaller shall pay Defendants costs ill opposing the Motion for
Sanctions in the amount of$750.00 within ten (10) days;
It is further ORDERED that the discovery deadline shall be extended to December 31,
2001. and that Plaintiffshall be allowed to lake deposilions for a limited purpose of exploring the
1996 Policies and Procedures Manual (relating to the delivery of Physical Therapy Services)
only.
BY THE COURT:
J.
t.:',,'t::":'!~ FI.F: '-:'::::F,
: ~ ~ '::: F
','..11/,,-,1' ;:,' '~r ':'
...,'._.... . .....t..'1.J
".':~':':', ;. =:1~1~:3 '{ L \. !..!~ r I..
t' ~ .:1 '; : . ~_ : : :
.. '~~:. : .;, :..:.. ~; :
HE;~~~;H:.:~)'J':'H i-:=():.~i<):.1\T: ~.~;
t/.'t !iF:.l\LT1~~~CFU':'H F~E:H!..:~,:l,:Tr'.T: I'
H:):~P:Tl\L i,iF r.j~~(~H!..!~;(~~:~:,i'j.'t:,
j!r:J..:/:'Jl~::)J':-)! FCH;..BI:~~':';..'j':'.;:; ..
.~:w ~ Q 2004
MECHA!~ICSBCRG - ACU7E REHAB
~iOSPI~AL, and HEALTH SOUTH
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTE!1 -
ACUTE P,EHABIL~Tl..TIOH HOSFIT1"\L,
r;::J. ;~'~-~~<):.
HEAL7HSOvTH OF' ~ECHA1~:CSBt)RG,
INC. t!a HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILIT.t,TION HOSPIT1,L or
MECHANICSBURG, HEALTHSOUTH
REHABILITATION OF MECHANICS3URG
- ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL, and
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICS BURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL,
HE.t,LTHSOUTH REHABILITATIOII
HOSPITAL OF MECHANICS3URG,
HEALTHSOUTH REHABILITATION OF
MECHANICS3URG - ACUTE REHAB
HOSPITAL,
HEALTHSOUTH MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM - ACUTE REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL, and
RUTH ROGERS,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
JURY TR1AL DEMANDED
Defendants
ORDER
AND NOW, this illlday of vt1.7 J ,2004, upon
consideration of the Plaintiff's Motion Ior Continuance, the pre-
triaf. conference is reschedu;Ledo to occur on (It<-M- I b ",Ja5'f at
//-01) $,M. inf).U(4T!.' c:'-{e.( 5 (1I/unt..,,,4/' ,Cumberlatld Couhty
Courthouse, One Cour~house Square, Carlisle, PA 17013.
Distribution:
BY
~ichole H. Staley O'Gorman, Esquire
1719 N. Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102
v1fharon O'Donnell, Esquire
4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B, Harrisburg, PA 17110
a
~<~ ~
'7 LA' \~C\.D
o':J'~
o
J.
8. I::'~l:-lse::- -,.r !~- ','_J;,' ''^'~. ~ :"
"".';.': e,i' JL:rH~
28, 2004 ;'jnd wi 11 L'" ~;.J""d;.::
.:
!,";;'~;':~ '~iurirlq
that week.
WHEREFORE, I-JjGvii;;': ::'.:.sF':~ct..f'-..~>/ r':'cFv'~~._:~ ~:'l':'::~ :!o;.:>rab:e Court
to ~eschedule the pre-tr~al C2~!~::0;i=~.
J..t tc~ne:v'
Date:
,-f)/I'6LO ~\
3
I / 1\1~"II~\\'E.\I.TII UF I'I.~~'YI.\'.\~;I.\
f);ml! ^ Sl~WC1"l. bq
Proth{,"OI~t).
f',ltllmA \'(.'lulUkef
()rpu()'l'tl1thcIUCIIU\"
Nichole Marie Staley, Esq.
Purcell, Krug & Haller
1719 N Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
RE: Simmons-Hoffman, KI. v. Hoffman, MoW,
No,: 1524 MDA 2003
.
SuperiorCourt of Pennsylvania
\llddlt. DI~lrl(l
April 30, 2004
1'_. I'rll! ,....'rrt :-"111r -li,;t
Ilm.,l."" l'o\l':'li>I
':" l"_"":.I:r~<4
.....~...... \1I1>c fj,,' I "lilt \l.llr P~_U\
Dear Attorney Staley:
This is to advise that the above-captioned appeal has been listed for argument as stated
below:
Panel:
Location:
Date:
25 Dally List Number: 21
Courtroom 437-Main Capitol, Harrisburg
6/23/2004 Time: 9:30 am
In the event the Court finds it necessary to change this listing, we will give as much advance
notice as possible. We regret that requests for scheduling changes cannot be entertained,
time.
Court convenes at the time shown above. All counsel are requested to be present at that
If you or your client(s) have requirements under The Americans with Disabilities Act, please
contact this office so that the appropriate arrangements can be made. Your acknowledged receipt
of this letter is requested by signing the enclosed copy and promptly returning the same to us.
Please note that if you have an e-mail address on the docket, the Court's decision in this
appeal will be sent to you bye-mail only.
Very truly yours,
David A, Szewczak
Prothonotary
PAW
EXHIBIT
j PI
I IEAI.TI IS()UTII
REIIABlLlTATlON
IIOSPITAI. OF
MECIIANICSBI JlHi.
IIEAI.TIISOUTII
REIIABILlTATlON OF
MECIIANICSBlJRG -
ACUTE REI lAB
IIOSPITAL.
I IEALTIISOUTI I
MECIIANICSBURG
REHAB SYSTEM -
ACUTE
REHABILITATION
HOSPITAL. and
RUTH ROGERS.
Defendants
NO, 9R.6505 CIVIl. TERM
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW. this 91h day of June. 2004. upon consideration of the attached letter
from Nicholc M. Staley O'Gorman. Esq.. attorney for Plaintiff: the pretrial conlcrenee
previously scheduled for June 16.2004. is cancelled.
BY TilE COURT.
.-.'
..
Nicholc M. Staley 0'( inrman. hq,
1719 North Frolll Slreet
IInrrishurg. I' A I 7 Ill:!
Altorney filr Plaintiff
Timothy McMahon, Esq.
4200 Crul11s Mill Road
Suite B
lIarrishurg. PA 17101l-1:!6l\
Altorncy lilr Defendants
~l~h~
1\ \t~~iHL " ,II} ,.'" I
I
......._. .(U"\.1
/ .
:rc
"
j
i-_
.
,
(\-
\,
f<'
<:'
"',
,'.
~.
r
'"
.f; .__.
r
~.(
~: "ii'~,
.....,..
[:~l,!:
1,<,1.-
j'\;;
.- f":
',.
f.
:oJ
I
,
.")
fI_
':!
, ,
i~
N
; ,
i 1
f'
i
.';
I
i,
(,
~ "
r~'
~. .
.....
\