Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-07028 " ,- - "', .,~,,~ - ,-;,' - -, , ' .'0 , ~ ", :~.'''" ".- '- ,-,--,,~, .-.r -, ~;.J IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA /J ,,' tl~' No. 00 - 7c>;;P u ~ Civil Action - (X) Law () Equity JURY TRIAL DEMANDED KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually PLAINTIFFS 1397 CREEK ROAD APARTMENT 3 BOILING SPRINGS, PA 17007 HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 503 NORTH 21ST STREET Versus CAMP HILL, PA 17011 THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS 423 NORTH 21ST STREET, SUITE 202 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ANNE MARIE MANNING, MD. 423 NORTH 21ST STREET CAMP HILL, PA 17011 Plaintiff(s) & Addresses Defendant(s) & Addresses PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue writ of summons in the above-captioned action. X Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to TIMOTHY A. SHOLLENBERGER Shollenberaer & Januzzi. LLP 1820 Linalestown Road Harrisbura. PA 17110 (717) 234-3700 Names/AddresslTelephone No. of Attorney Date: October 11, 2000 WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COMMENCED A AGAINST YOU. Date: Od- I;;J.. ;;2(Y:>t'.) l ( ) Check here if reverse is issued for additional information PROTHON. - 55 . . . ;:.;"'-~, ~,"-""-.", '~-.' ,-,,-,,;.-. "~ 1111II ~''V 'r:"M-lillM;willdr~b.:nn~,.&I. -', -- C\ )U w tv ~ '-" \"'.-;.;,.-,',>,,,,;,,"" ';-'" ",. . . ?J(0 (:I::fi ~ t) <-'--~l,;j,- fA .J::: ~ h h C) 9~~ ~"'~ ~ J:- Q ~e ~~;: :;::::-:-:-- 2;:,-.-: ~t_, z~~~ >c ~ ':J :~, ---1 ;'-,,: ~ f".,) (.r; ~r:J J.1 -< G ",I~ ~.......,..ll" ..L__~,. - "lJ<>",c .. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR 1'lII CASE NO: 2000-07028 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STITES KENNETH ET AL VS HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL the DEFENDANT , at 0011:25 HOURS, on the 25th day of October 2000 at 503 NORTH 21ST STREET CAMP HILL, PA 17011 GWYN BINNER (ADMIN. SEC) by handing to a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 18.00 9.30 .00 10.00 .00 37.30 S;;i2~~~~! R. Thomas Kline 10/26/2000 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI Sworn and Subscribed to before By: ~~~.~ Deputy Sheriff me this 3Lv- day of (9'~ ,2,cnri) A. D . ~~ rl. ~i~- P othonotary -" =~....-. ~. ~~"".-__t\;" SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR ; CASE NO: 2000-07028 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STITES KENNETH ET AL VS HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland county,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS THE the DEFENDANT , at 0011:35 HOURS, on the 25th day of October ,2000 at 423 NORTH 21ST STREET SUITE 202 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to BARBARA MEHAfFEY (OFFICE MANG) a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 6.00 .00 .00 10.00 .00 16.00 So Answers: ~~~~~! R. Thomas Kline me this .3 JA.% day of 10/26/2000 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI By: ~~ ~. \lJL Deputy Sheriff Sworn and Subscribed to before CD~;).JnrO A.D. ~O~'fJ;")~ othonotary , -= ,~~..~"- SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR , CASE NO: 2000-07028 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STITES KENNETH ET AL VS HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL DAWN KELL , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon MANNING ANNE MARIE M D the DEFENDANT , at 0011:35 HOURS, on the 25th day of October ,2000 at 423 NORTH 21ST STREET CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to BARBARA MEHAFFEY (OFFICE MANG) a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge So ;;~~l R. Thomas Kline 6.00 .00 .00 10.00 .00 16.00 10/26/2000 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI Sworn and Subscribed to before \)o.um.g ~ Deputy Sheriff By: me this 31.Af day of (fl~ .2-Wi) A.D. C~. 12 /},,/;,., Jj"'J 'P othonotary I - -~"""'" KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants '.,c-,,-,',-, ", _" ,.",~ ._'''J;' ' '" . ...;..:.~: .' : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: PLEASE enter our appearance on behalf of defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital, The Center for Women's Health and Wellness, and Anne Marie Manning, M.D. DATE: November 20,2000 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By.~!!!bL Sup. Ct. I. D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants '. - ,-' -- '''~~- _o_c__,--- ,'-" 'ii CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with first-class postage, prepaid, as follows: Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Shollenberger & Januzzi 1820 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 By: METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE .,vt~^-' gJ~~L Steven D. Snyder, Esqmre Sup. Ct. I. D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants DATE: November 20, 2000 ",,"'., '~"'-:;""-"'o--, " ^.-,d~",.'''' --, '.1- . ,"...:.. ' .u_ l:I~~Y"'" d .,.,m 0, 0-"''-'''' " '-"-<:' "--,,~,-" ,-,,,'..,,-~,,-,- " ","..-<--' "", ,,~, ,-' C) C '::' l+i'{::~ Z-:: C:~!~-" c:. ~--- ~~ S~~ ):;~ :::J ...-( ~~ - '~) r-...-, " i~~ ::~~ :;~ -', ::? p.';' -p~~--- -~ ~ . KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants ',_','C, !@: -, , : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: PLEASE issue a Rule upon the plaintiffs to file a complaint within twenty (20) days or suffer judgment of non DroS. DATE: November 20, 2000 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: x!~ :;PJ~L Steven D. Snyder, Esquire Sup. Ct. I. D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, P A 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants cJ",~ ',- - ~ - ~ - , ,.- '",.". ,- ,"", ",'" ,.,. '---.. ""-",",--,\ .'1 ,,,:-,'-,-;.{ . ~ KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT TO: Kenneth Stites, a Minor, by Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, Guardians, and Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, Individually, Plaintiffs c/o Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Shollenberger & Januzzi 1820 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 You are hereby directed to file a complaint in the above entitled matter within twenty (20) days of service hereof or judgment of non mos will be entered against you. .., /I!~/Q(j 'V'_Jl'-'''g'~~' :'~"-,,,"{;' , . '0'- ','_~,.,~:h'," ;.'.;~"",~~".,-~" ;."""...~=._- ""<<~ -~ ".,,~,"Hlli"'c,'" """',' .~ 0' , 0 c> ~n (" S~b -,"'" -~] CX-: '---. rn [, .,.- . ..-::'~" e.-___ r.....) UJ -<: V-. l~, :-.;;~ (~ , " en I"-.J r S <~ ::::> " -...1 ::0 -' fv -< -'.... . . '~ .,,-, "." KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants ."'"-.'," "?""" - ",",~,""""", -~:~",,,, ;""~;^"',.::: ",c,;.,~. , "",,: 111 : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certifY that I am this day serving a copy of rule to file complaint upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with first-class postage, prepaid, as follows: Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Shollenberger & Januzzi 1820 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 By: DATE: November 22, 2000 METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE /JbcWl~ Steven D. Snyder, Esqmre Sup. Ct. I. D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P. O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, P A 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants .,,;.. '" ~~.i.-.ti'I"if~ ;'" '~"~.J ,,,] .JUJIL~~n""" ,,0""," ,,'= " ~,,", ~" lliiJl1iJj;"'"~1i ""i.U"'" ~-" , '-~ L -,. . ,C< "' ~'- , ';'''~''"C i=<~ () ~;;: ""t).", !:::),~.-< t;s~,; --.::: ~:~ ~:: \--..~' ~f~~: >(:.:, , 2.: =< ...-, ",-" CJ ',I -'i') ,__,,"J C(; (J1 J- "-'_",'--, , :!i c" I I I , J SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorneys for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that, if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P .0, BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com " SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorneys for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants LE HAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demand as expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene veinte (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 tomaro medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previa aviso 0 notoficacaion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. usted puede perder dinero 0 sus propiededas 0 otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZ1, LLP 1820 LINGLE$TOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX(717) 234-8212 WNW.sholijanlaw.com SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants AND NOW comes the Plaintiffs, KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and RALPH MAZER, ESQ. and do respectfully represent the following: The Parties 1. Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites are adult individuals who currently reside at 1397 Creek Road, Apartment 3, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007 and are the parents and natural guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, who was born on July 14, 1998 and resides with his parents at the Creek Road address. 1 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P,Q. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com 2. Holy Spirit Hospital is a hospital operating under Holy Spirit Hospital & Health System, duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 503 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17011. 3. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness (hereinafter referred to as "The Center") operates as a part of the Holy Spirit Hospital & Health System providing a full range of gynecological and obstetrical services with its principal place of business at 423 North 21st Street, Suite 202, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. 4. Anne Marie Manning, M.D. is a physician duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with her principal place of business at 423 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. Facts Aoolicable to All Counts 5. Sharon A. Stites was a patient at The Center and at the Holy Spirit Hospital receiving obstetrical care relating to the birth of Kenneth A. Stites. 6. On July 13, 1998, Sharon A. Stites was admitted to The Center at 42 weeks, 5 days, for induction secondary to post date. 7. At 12:36 p.m. on July 13,1998, an external fetal monitor strip was begun. 8. At the outset of monitoring, Kenneth Stites had a normal heart rate at between 120 and 150 beats per minute and there were reactive accelerations. 2 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, lLP 1820 llNGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com 9. At 1 :50 p.m. on July 13, 1998, induction was begun. At this point, the cervix was 1-2 cm dilated, 50% effaced, with the fetal head at -3 station. 10. By 7:30 p.m. on July 13,1998, there was minimal cervical change and no descent of the fetal head. 11. On July 14,1998, at approximately 1 :44 a.m., approximately 7 and % hours before delivery, Dr. Manning artificially ruptured Sharon Stites' cervical membrane to induce labor. Sharon Stites was found to be 9+ cm dilated, 100% effaced, with the fetus still at -3 station. Dr. Manning found no meconium in the amniotic fluid, however, noted that baby Stites was presenting brow. 12. Fetal monitoring strips and the progress notes further reveal the following occurred on July 14,1998: (a) At 2:00 a.m., decelerations were becoming deeper, but with a reasonable period of recovery; (b) At 2:10 a.m., each contraction was associated with a variable deceleration down to 80 bpm; (c) At 2:30 a.m., presentation is noted to have seemingly converted to face with a left mentum anterior presentation, -3 station. Dr. Manning notes that she is having difficulty feeling the fetal mouth and chin; (d) At 2:50 a.m., there is no descent and Sharon Stites is having difficulty pushing; (e) At 3:15 a.m., a rim of cervix was palpated and the variable decelerations were lasting a minute, some down to 70 bpm; (f) At about 3:25 a.m., there is a late variable deceleration; 3 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P,Q. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 WVtIW.sholljanlaw,com _'~', <t ~,o, :,,,, , . ,'~ - ^ ,- ~ , ,'" ' - ~, c' (g) At 3:50 a.m., the cord is compressed secondary to the earlier artificial membrane rupture. There is a deep variable deceleration with late component. An amnioinfusion is not done and an internal fetal monitor is not inserted; (h) At 4:10 a.m., there are deep variable decelerations lasting greater than 60 seconds; (i) At 4:20 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that there is still a rim of cervix. There are deep variable decelerations with late component; 0) At 5:15 a.m., there is still a rim of cervix. Contractions continued every 3-4 minutes with persistent deep variable decelerations in the range of 70 bpm with some overshoot on recovery; (k) At 6:30 a.m., Dr. Manning introduces Pitocin and encourages Sharon to push as she is fully dilated. Pitocin was contraindicated and Dr. Manning did not utilize an intra-uterine catheter; (I) At 7:30 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that Sharon is pushing with fair effort, and that there have been some improvement in decelerations in the one-half hour between 7:00 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. with good variability and no deep variables. Dr. Manning notes if no significant descent in the next one-half hour will most likely proceed to cesarean section; (m) At fetal monitor strip panel 60314 (at 7:43 a.m.) severe variables in fetal heart rate ensued at 7:55, 8:06, 8:10 and 8:11 a.m. Fetal bradycardia to the 60's ensued at 8:11 a.m.; nadiring at 54 bpm; (n) At 8:00 a.m., Dr. Long came into Sharon's room, according to Dr. Manning, to check for descent. Dr. Long placed an internal fetal monitor at approximately 8:30 a.m. because of difficulty recording the fetal heart on the external monitor; (0) At 8:17 a.m., it was decided that an emergency cesarean section was necessary, with time of delivery noted as 8:23 a.m. on the operating room clock and 8:27 a.m. by monitor. Just before proceeding with the cesarean section, meconium stained fluid was noted for the first time. 4 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholijanlaw.com 13. Kenneth Stites was born with perinatal hypoxia with resultant hypoxic- ischemic encephalapathy which has resulted in severe and permanent neurological injures and the sequelae thereof. He was floppy at birth with no heart rate and thick meconium stained fluid. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as will be set forth hereinafter, the Plaintiffs, Kenneth Stites, Steven Stites and Sharon Stites, have incurred significant medical expenses and will continue to incur such expenses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has suffered a loss of earning capacity and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff Kenneth Stites, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of earnings and earnings capacity for which damages are claimed. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has experienced extreme pain and suffering, scarring, disfigurement, embarrassment, humiliation and loss of the enjoyment of life's pleasures and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 5 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BQX60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX(717) 234-8212 www.sholijanlaw.com ""." '-;, --~' , _ ~,"" "".', c' '__', ',_- ,__, 18. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of future earnings, for all of which damages are claimed. COUNT I KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Anne Marie Mannina. M.D. NEGLIGENCE 19. Paragraphs 1 through 18 are incorporated by referenced herein as if set forth in full. 20. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Sharon Stites and Kenneth Stites were patients at the Center for Women's Health and Wellness and the Holy Spirit Hospital, both operating under the Holy Spirit Hospital and Health System and were receiving care and treatment from the Hospital and The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including Defendant Manning. 21. Defendant, Anne Marie Manning, M.D., acting by and through her actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, she persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; 6 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com ,~ ',,'..; "'-" ;',,;.,',y,',>, ,,':, ,c.,',r. ,"__', ' "'",;i i I 'i , (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, she continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, she failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) She did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, she augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) She failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy she had imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station and failure of the fetal head to descend; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that she was dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation and failure of the fetal head to descend. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 7 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106..()545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717)234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com I$ii<:.,i COUNT II KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Holv SDirit HosDital NEGLIGENCE 22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 23. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at Holy Spirit Hospital receiving care and treatment from the Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including the Defendant physicians. 24. Holy Spirit Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; 8 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LlNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX(717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com -- . , '.," <~- '~'-- ,",,-.--' >-, ='- - - .-,-, '",', ~' '. " '-'.-1 _,' .~- --, .', "'l~r, (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT III KENNETH STITES. A Minor. by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individually. v. The , Center for Women's Health and Wellness NEGLIGENCE 25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 26. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at The Center for Women's Health and Wellness receiving care and treatment from The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including the Defendant physicians. 9 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, lLP 1820 L1NGlESTOWN ROAD. P .0, BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717)234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com " 27. The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 10 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, llP 1820 L1NGLE$TOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106..0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com "'-' ii d " I, i1 COUNT IV KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Holv SDirit HosDital CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 28. Paragraphs 1 through 27 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 29. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of Holy Spirit Hospital. 30. Plaintiffs aver that defendant Holy Spirit Hospital owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 31. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 32. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 33. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 11 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZJ, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P,O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.shollJanlaw.com , '~__" '"' n" ;'v ,,- - ""'< -,',,';',: ;',,', ~."', "", 34. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that the Holy Spirit Hospital was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients; (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's affirmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. 12 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, llP 1820 lINGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT V KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individually. v. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 35. Paragraphs 1 through 34 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 36. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of The Center for Women's Health and Wellness. 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant The Center. 38. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 39. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 40. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, 13 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LlNGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX(717) 234-8212 www.sholijanlaw.com . , --',- -,,~' --', ,,' "', ,'. , "'" ,-~'" '~,' M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 41. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that The Center was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients; (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant The Center, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant The Center's affirmation of Defendant 14 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LlP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.shol1janlaw.com - -" ." "~ -. '.' '., ,<j-',>,,',- '~ Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Tim thy A. Shollenberger, Attorney I.D. #34343 1820 Linglestown Road P. O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700 (717) 234-8212 (fax) Ralph S. Mazer, Esq. Attorney I.D. #66229 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, PA 18940 (215) 860-9528 (215) 860-6415 (fax) Dated: December 11 , 2000 15 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, llP 1820 llNGlESTOWN ROAD. P .0, BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com - , c_" t. " . -- '!iG- o o AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : SS COUNTY OF DAUPHIN I, Sharon Sri tes , being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that the facts and allegations contained herein are based upon facts given by me to my counsel and are true and correct to the best of my knowlege, information, and belief; that the language of said Corrplaint is that of my counsel and that I have relied upon counsel in making this Corrplaint based upon my information. ,~d~ r( , Sharon A. :SHtes 'Parent & Natura I Guard i an of Kenneth Stites Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, this j)~ fJ:, II day of , 9;pn) q.~,~ My commission expires: 11/29/04 SHOLLENBERGER I!. JANL'ZII, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. p,o, BOX 60S45 . HARRISBURG, I'A 1710&-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX (71~) ~J4-8~1~ ,rr,uPS,OOC\MflOAVIT , . KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants I ! : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Kenneth Stites, a minor, by Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, Guardians, and Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, Individually, Plaintiffs c/o Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire 1820 Linglestown Road, P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg,P A 17106-0545 You are hereby notified to file a written response to Defendants' Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. DATED: March 4,2002 :288001 _1 METrE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: xl (;J ;sf xf~ Steven D. Snyder, Esq e Sup. Ct. J.D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants , ,,',",'. ~, ,,', ., ,~, " :' c , KENNETH STITES, a Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT i 1~ Defendants, by and through their attorneys, Mette, Evans & Woodside, hereby file the following Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint, pursuant to Rule 1028 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and aver as follows: PRELIMINARY OBJECTION BASED UPON THE PENDENCY OF A PRIOR ACTION PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(6) 1. On June 27, 2000, the above named plaintiffs instituted an action against the above named defendants in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania by filing a praecipe for writ of summons, docket number of said action being 00-4450. " ,~ - .. ~~--~, (' 1 2. On or about July 10, 2000, the above named plaintiffs filed their ,,, , ~ '; complaint against the above named d~fendants to No. 00-4450 in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A copy of the plaintiffs' complaint filed to No. 00-4450 is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A," and 1''-: incorporated herein by reference. 3. Subsequent to the date aforesaid, the plaintiffs instituted the instant action against the defendants above named (being the same defendants as the defendants in the aforesaid action) by filing a praecipe for writ of summons on October 12, 2000. 4. On December 12, 2000, the plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action (No. 00-7028) against the defendants. A copy of the plaintiffs' complaint is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by reference. 5. The two actions are identical in the following respects: (a) the parties in both actions are identical; (b) both actions arise out of the care and treatment of Sharon A. Stites and the birth of Kenneth Stites at Holy Spirit Hospital on July 13-14, 1998; (c) the facts, as alleged in both complaints, are identical; -2- __0 ' _ ~,__ ,_, ~ ~"" , -- :', ~. ,- . (d) the allegations of negligence, as set forth in both complaints, are identical; (e) in both actions the plaintiffs seek the same damages; and (f) the causes of action alleged in both complaints are identical. 6. The previous action, Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites. as Parents and Natural Guardians of Kenneth Stites. a minor v. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness. Holv Spirit Hospital. and Anne Marie Manning'. M.D., C.P. Cumberland County No. 00-4450, has not been dismissed or discontinued. WHEREFORE, defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital, The Center for Women's Health and Wellness, and Anne Marie Manning, M.D., respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter an Order, dismissing, with prejudice, the plaintiffs' complaint filed in this action. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER FOR LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY OF A PLEADING PURSUANT TO Pa. RC.P. No. 1028(a)(4) 7. Paragraphs 1 through 6 above are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. -3- ~ ~ - " ' ~.;"', ii' , I if I,; I' ii' , , , '"'''',,~ lLl.-,,~<t ~ , ,"',-~ >-"'-, 8. In Count N of the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital. See Exhibit "B." 9. In paragraphs 30-34 of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: 30. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 31. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, breacheci its duty to select, retain, and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 32. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 33. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Anne Marie Manning, M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use ofPitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation offetal monitoring strips. 34. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that the Holy Spirit Hospital was careless -4- ~,~,". ~ =~". :L_ ;i', ( ; and negligence which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct, and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high- risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and an improper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note,and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high-risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft, and enforce, adequate rules and -5- '''~,','--'' ',-, . --~,. c > (e) (f) , policies to insure quality care for its patients; ~ ': : :r' ';j Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record, or to determine, discover, and be appraised of same; and "~I :~ ;', Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's affIrmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. :,W See Exhibit "B," paragraphs 30-34 (emphasis added). 'J 10. Count V of the Plaintiffs' Complaint is alleged against The Center and is labeled "Corporate Negligence." See Exhibit "B," Count V. 11. In paragraphs 37-41 of Count V of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant The Center. -6- ~ " ~ ',. ",' { , 38. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to select, retain, and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 39. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 40. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise as Defendant Anne Marie Manning, M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation offetal monitoring strips. 41. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that The Center was careless and negligent which consisted ofthe following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficulty or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise, Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high- risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and -7- '/'0." 1 - "". ~" ;. , ""'t* \ improper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips, and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high-risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft, and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients; (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover, and be , appraised of same; and (f) Defendant The Center, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant The Center's affirmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which -8- , ~", ~"^ , , -h .",~ - ',,,-' , Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. See Exhibit "B," paragraphs 37-41. 12. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has classified a hospital's duties into four general areas: 1) a duty to use reasonable care in the maintenance of safe and adequate facilities and equipment; 2) a duty to select and retain only competent physicians; 3) a duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine within its walls as to patient care; 3) a duty to formulate, adopt and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for the patients. ThomDson v. Nason HosDital, 527 Pa. 330, 339-340, 591 A2d 703, 707 (1991). 13. The allegations of paragraphs 34(e), 34(D and 41(e) and 41(D do not fall within any of the four duties a hospital has under a corporate negligence theory of liability. 14. Also, Plaintiff has not pled sufficient facts to support a corporate negligence claim. -9- :j i'l i'i ::j !-,1 , , ! ,~,O, ?_ ,~,", . - ., '''0_ 'i;" , 15. In the absence of facts to support such allegations, a demurrer will be sustained. Detweiler v. Dovlestown Hosoital, No. 93-11004-14-1 (Bucks County, 1994). 16. Also, in paragraphs 31-34 and 37-41, Plaintiff implies and avers in conclusOIY fashion that Dr. Manning is incompetent, basing his allegations of corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center on such conclusory statements. See Exhibit "B," paragraphs 31-34, 37-41. 17. However, the Complaint contains no specific, factual allegations that Holy Spirit Hospital and/or The Center knew or should have known of Dr. Manning's alleged incompetence; nor does the Complaint state how Holy Spirit Hospital and/or The Center knew or should have known of Dr. Manning's alleged incompetence. See Exhibit "B." 18. Paragraphs 33 and 40 are merely conclusory averments that are not supported by factual allegations elsewhere in the Complaint. See Exhibit "B." 19. Furthermore, under Thomoson v. Nason Hosoital, 527 Pa. at 339, 591 A.2d at 707, a hospital is not directly liable just because one of its employees or -10- " .'''...< 'M'", --iiliIdEi" agents makes a mistake which constitutes negligence. Edward v. Brandywine Hospital, 428 Pa. Super. 673, 652 A.2d 1382 (1995). 20. A plaintiff must how more than active negligence by an individual for whom the hospital is responsible. 21. Under Pennsylvania law, in order to allege corporate negligence, a plaintiff must show that the hospital itself is breaching a duty and is somehow substandard. 22. For all these reasons, Plaintiff has failed to set' forth a claim of corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center. WHEREFORE, Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter an Order dismissing, with prejudice, Plaintiffs' claim of corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness, including paragraphs 31-34 and 37-41. -11- . .. ,,_,~~,__~__, .J,: l~~ ~ ~' . "t', i 1-: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF A MOTION TO STRIKE FOR INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY OF A PLEADING PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3) 23. Paragraphs 1 through 22 above are incorporated herein by reference as iffully set forth at length. 24. In paragraph 18 of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: 18. As a direct and proximate result of the ne!!'li!rence of the Defendants, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of future earnings, for all of which damages are claimed. See Exhibit "B," paragraph 18 (emphasis added). 25. III Count IV of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: *** 30. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital owed a non-dele!!'able duty of care directlv to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said dutv was breached by Defendant Holv Suirit Hosuital. 31. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, breached its duty to select, retain, and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 32. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital breached its duty to oversee all -12- - ~ - " persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 33. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Anne Marie Manning, M.D., in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 34. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital is liable directly to Plaintiff under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that the Holy Spirit Hospital was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descent, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; *** (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patient. *** (f) Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon -13- , '-' '~'- "-' ~ , - -- *--' j;, ""~ ;, '"!' I, , , , j' I 1 I:" I' i!'/ I, .c ~ .'~ -. ",' '."'A'. . its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's affIrmation of Defendant Manning's confidence, upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. See Exhibit "B," paragraphs 30-34, 34(a), (d), (0 (emphasis added). 26. In Count V of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: *** 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center owed a non-delel2'able dutv of care directlv to the mother-Plaintiff and her babv in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said dutv was breached bv Defendant The Center. 38. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to select, retain, and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 39. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 40. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Anne Marie Manning, M.D. and the handling of high-risk pregnancies, diffIcult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use ofPitocin, use of -14- , ~-- :',,, ,'., ~"< ' li Ii Ii Ii Ii 1<1 I'! " , 1': Ii ::i ';i Ii: ~ ' ! i:! I' I:: I, I I';) ':' ::i '" i " ,ii " ;] ,I, :! ,~ ~ - ~. ~ . ;,., ~- ,~. amnia infusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 41. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that The Center was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct the difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin. *** (d) Failing to formulate, draft, and enforce adequate rules, and policies to insure quality care for its patients. *** (f) Defendant The Center, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant The Center's affirmation of Defendant Manning's confidence, upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. See Exhibit "B," paragraphs 37-41, 41(a), (d), (f) (emphasis added). -15- - -''; '= 27. The above-quoted allegations of the Complaint do not contain the factual specificity required under Pennsylvania law, nor are they supported by factual allegations elsewhere in the Complaint. See Exhibit "B." 28. Under Pennsylvania law, "[t]he material facts on which a cause of action or defense is based shall be stated in a concise and summary form." Pa. R.C.P. No. 1019(a). 29. The Defendants are prejudiced by the above-quoted allegations because they do not apprise the defendants of the claims against them, and the Defendants are therefore unable to prepare a defense thereto. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully requests that this Honorable Court strike paragraphs 18; 30-34, 34(a), (d), (D; 37-41, 41(a), (d), (D of the Complaint for insufficient specificity. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be directed to file a more specific pleading. -16- ,',~ ""''-'\ I' I': Ii I) I'" i i ~ I I': ~," . "'-' '".'",,-,- PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF A MOTION TO STRIKE FOR INSUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY OF A PLEADING PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P. No. 102S(a)(3) 30. Paragraphs 1 through 29 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 31. In Count I of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: *** 20. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Sharon Stites and Kenneth Stites were patients at The Center for Women's Health and Wellness and the Holy Spirit Hospital, both operating under the Holy Spirit Hospital and Health System and were receiving care and treatment from the Hospital and The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible a!!"ents. servants. and emplovees. inc1udin!!" Defendant Manning-. 21. Defendant, Anne Marie Manning, M.D., acting by and through her actual or ostensible a!!"ents. servants. and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: *** See Exhibit "B," Count I, paragraphs 20 and 21 (emphasis added). -17- ~~ ..., , -,- ."^, ,,-, ~. - ~.~-',"", 1 if' 32. In Count II of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: *** 23. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at Holy Spirit Hospital receiving care and treatment from the Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible a!!'ents. servants and employees. includine- the Defendant physicians. 24. Holy Spirit Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible al!ents. servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: *** See Exhibit "B," Count II, paragraphs 23 and 24 (emphasis added). 33. In Count III of the Complaint, Plaintiff pleads as follows: *** 26. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at The Center for Women's Health and Wellness receiving care and treatment from The Center, acting by . and through its actual or ostensible ae-ents. servants and employees. inc1udine- the Defendant physicians. 27. The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible ae-ents. servants and emplovees, rendered negligent medical treatment to -18- "" '~~'"'~ ' "~' Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: *** See Exhibit "B," Count III, paragraphs 26 and 27 (emphasis added), 34. It has been held that a Complaint must not only give the defendants notice of what Plaintiffs' claim is and the grounds upon which it rests, but also must formulate the issues by summarizing those facts essential to support the claim. Baker v. Ran!!'os, 229 Pa. Super, 333, 324 A.2d 498 (1974). 35. In the very least, a complainant must allege facts which: 1. IdentifY the agent by name or appropriate description; 2. Set forth the agent's authority, and how the tortious acts of that agent fall within the scope of that authority. Alumni Association. etal. v. Sullivan, 369 Pa. Super. 596, 535 A.2d 1095 (1987). 36. Without further facts to substantiate the identity of the alleged "actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees" of Defendants who allegedly committed the negligent acts, the Defendants are without notice as to what the Plaintiffs' claims are and the grounds upon which they are based. -19- .~. .. ~ . , ',c_ ,~," "" WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter an Order striking paragraphs 20,21,23,24,26,27 Plaintiffs' Complaint due to their insufficient specificity. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be directed to file a more specific pleading. Respectfully submitted, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants DATED: March 4, 2002 "'''" -- ""' '.'''. '" ,,', ,', ""lr . --h SHOLLENBERGER & J ANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attome s for Plaintiff SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, as Parents and Natural Guardians of KENNETH STITES, a minor, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 004450 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH -' JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND WELLNESS, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that, if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In T ab1~1'\"KY.lY whereoi, I oore unto $WI my hand afld too s~:Jj oi said Coort at Carlisle. Pa. This ~~ day ~~' ~ "- ~ () <')/?<)!. honotary l - ~ . """-" -- > ~- ~ SHOLLENBERGER & J ANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (7l7) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attome s for Plaintiff SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, as Parents and Natural Guardians of KENNETH STITES, a minor, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 004450 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND WELLNESS, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants NOTICE. LE HAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene veinte (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 tomaro medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previa aviso 0 notoficacaion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. usted puede perder dinero 0 sus propiededas 0 otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDAA UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DON DE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 - -' -~ , " ,-, .", '." -' SHOLLENBERGER & J ANUZZI, LLP l820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-82l2 Attome s for Plaintiff SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, as Parents and Natural Guardians of KENNETH STITES, a minor, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2000-4450 v. THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D., Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the Plaintiffs, Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, as Parents and Natural Guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and RALPH MAZER, ESQ. and do respectfully represent the following: The Parties 1. Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites are adult individuals who currently reside at 1397 Creek Road, Apartment 3, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007 and are the parents and natural guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, who was born on July 14,1998 and resides with his parents at the Creek Road address. 1 ;,'" - 'k --""1' 2. Holy Spirit Hospital is a hospital operating under Holy Spirit Hospital & Health System, duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its. principal place of business at 503 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17011. 3. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness (hereinafter referred to as "The Center") operates as a part of the Holy Spirit Hospital & Health System providing a full range of gynecological and obstetrical services with its principal place of business at 423 North 21st Street, Suite 202, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. 4. Anne Marie Manning, M.D. is a physician duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with her principal place of business at 423 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. Facts Aoolicable to All Counts 5. Sharon A. Stites was a patient at The Center and at the Holy Spirit Hospital receiving obstetrical care relating to the birth of Kenneth A. Stites. 6. On July 13, 1998, Sharon A. Stites was admitted to The Center at 42 weeks, 5 days, for induction secondary to post date. 7. At 12:36 p.m. on July 13,1998, an external fetal monitor strip was begun. 8. At the outset of monitoring, Kenneth Stites had a normal heart rate at between 120 and 150 beats per minute and there were reactive accelerations. 2 -1"'1 9. At 1 :50 p.m. on July 13, 1998, induction was begun. At this point, the cervix was 1-2 cm dilated, 50% effaced, with the fetal head at -3 station. 10. By 7:30 p.m. on July 13, 1998, there was minimal cervical change and no descent of the fetal head. 11. On July 14, 1998, at approximately 1 :44 a.m., approximately 7 and Y, hours before delivery, Dr. Manning artificially ruptured Sharon Stites' cervical membrane to induce labor. Sharon Stites was found to be 9+ cm dilated, 100% effaced, with the fetus still at -3 station. Dr. Manning found no meconium in the amniotic fluid, however, noted that baby Stites was presenting brow. 12. Fetal monitoring strips and the progress notes further reveal the following occurred on July 14, 1998: (a) At 2:00 a.m., decelerations were becoming deeper, but with a reasonable period of recovery; (b) At 2:10 a.m., each contraction was associated with a variable deceleration down to 80 bpm; (c) At 2:30 a.m., presentation is noted to have seemingly converted to face with a left mentum anterior presentation, -3 station. Dr. Manning notes that she is having difficulty feeling the fetal mouth and chin; (d) At 2:50 a.m., there is no descent and Sharon Stites is having difficulty pushing; 3 " " ""'4"-'i:, (e) At 3:15 a.m., a rim of cervix was palpated and the variable decelerations were lasting a minute, some down to 70 bpm; (f) At about 3:25 a.m., there is a late variable deceleration; (g) At 3:50 a.m., the cord is compressed secondary to the earlier artificial membrane rupture. There is a deep variable deceleration with late component. An amnioinfusion is not done and an internal fetal monitor is not inserted; (h) At 4:10 a.m., there are deep variable decelerations lasting greater than 60 seconds; (i) At 4:20 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that there is still a rim of cervix. There are deep variable decelerations with late component; U) At 5:15 a.m., there is still a rim of cervix. Contractions continued every 3- 4 minutes with persistent deep variable decelerations in the range of 70 bpm with some overshoot on recovery; (k) At 6:30 a.m., Dr. Manning introduces Pitocin and encourages Sharon to push as she is fully dilated. Pitocin was contraindicated and Dr. Manning did not utilize an intra-uterine catheter; (I) At 7:30 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that Sharon is pushing with fair effort, and that there have been some improvement in decelerations in the one-half hour between 7:00 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. with good variability and no deep variables. Dr. Manning notes if no significant descent in the next one-half 4 ,:;,""'~~,; , i j hour will most likely proceed to cesarean section; (m) At fetal monitor strip pane/60314 (at 7:43 a.m.) severe variables in fetal heart rate ensued at 7:55,8:06,8:10 and 8:11 a.m. Fetal bradycardia to the 60's ensued at 8:11 a.m.; nadiring at 54 bpm; (n) At 8:00 a.m., Dr. Long came into Sharon's room, according to Dr. Manning, to check for descent. Dr. Long placed an internal fetal monitor at approximately 8:30 a.m. because of difficulty recording the fetal heart on the external monitor; (0) At 8:17 a.m., it was decided that an emergency cesarean section was necessary, with time of delivery noted as 8:23 a.m. on the operating room clock and 8:27 a.m. by monitor. Just before proceeding with the cesarean section, meconium stained fluid was noted for the first time. 13. Kenneth Stites was born with perinatal hypoxia with resultant hypoxic- ischemic encephalapathy which has resulted in severe and permanent neurological injures and the sequelae thereof. He was floppy at birth with no heart rate and thick meconium stained fluid. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as will be set forth hereinafter, the Plaintiffs, Kenneth Stites, Steven Stites and Sharon Stites, have incurred significant medical expenses and will continue to incur such expenses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as 5 , ",' , -~ '",-,;', ",''-'-;L; hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has suffered a loss of earning capacity and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are cia imed. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff Kenneth Stites, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of earnings and earnings capacity for which damages are ciaimed, 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has experienced extreme pain and suffering, scarring, disfigurement, embarrassment, humiliation and loss of the enjoyment of life's pleasures and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 18. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of future earnings, for all of which damages are claimed. COUNT I Sharon Stites and Steven Stites. as Natural Parents and Guardians of Kenneth Stites. a minor v. Anne Marie Mannina. M.D. NEGLIGENCE 19. Paragraphs 1 through 18 are incorporated by referenced herein as if set forth in full. 20. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Sharon Stites and Kenneth Stites were patients at the Center for Women's Health and Wellness and the Holy Spirit Hospital, both operating under the Holy Spirit Hospital and Health 6 -', d ~' - ',",'^ ,-, ~ '1M!': System and were receiving care and treatment from the Hospital and The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including Defendant Manning. 21. Defendant, Anne Marie Manning, M.D., acting by and through her actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the fOllowing particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, she persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, she continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, she failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) She did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, she augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) She failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy she had 7 - 0' .'..~" .'j'!i imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station and failure of the fetal head to descend; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that she was dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation and failure of the fetal head to descend. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT II Sharon Stites and Steven Stites. as Natural Parents and Guardians of Kenneth Stites. a minor v. Holv Soirit Hosoital NEGLIGENCE 22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 23. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at Holy Spirit Hospital receiving care and treatment from the Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including the Defendant physicians. 8 .~' ~' , '" 24. Holy Spirit Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (a) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (b) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (c) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (d) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (e) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; 9 , ,00 ~ '~- '''', " ,,' ~" "-~ . ~'~: (f) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station; (g) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT III Sharon Stites and Steven Stites. as Natural Parents and Guardians of Kenneth Smes. a minor v. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness NEGLIGENCE 25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 26. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at The Center for Women's Health and Wellness receiving care and treatment from The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including the Defendant physicians. 27. The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: 10 -, " , ,-^--- , " ""fit! (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (a) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (b) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart , , i rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately " I I measuring heart rate variability; !i I I I, (c) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with I I' I Ii an amnioinfusion; I !I il ,I " (d) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor I I ii I with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism I I I " with an intrauterine pressure catheter; , I I I Ii (e) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by ~ I Ii pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of I I I failure to progress; I II ~ (f) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- i i reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation i " I I of a high station; I I Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail I (g) 11 " ~-~ "'--".['0:: given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT IV Sharon Stites and Steven Stites. as Natural Parents and Guardians of Kenneth Stites. a minor v. Holv Spirit Hospital CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 28. Paragraphs 1 through 27 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 29. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of Holy Spirit Hospital. 30. Plaintiffs aver that defendant Holy Spirit Hospital owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 31. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 32. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 33. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, 12 . " ,- ,,' iL; M,D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 34. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that the Holy Spirit Hospital was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high- risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin. (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto. (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto. (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to 13 - , >, ",L_ ~, -- - " insure quality care for its patients. (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's affirmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amourit in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT V Sharon Stites and Steven Stites. as Natural Parents and Guardians of Kenneth Stites. a minor v. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 35. Paragraphs 1 through 34 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 36. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of The Center for Women's Health and Wellness. 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and 14 '-, / '~" "- - , , "-'""'" said duty was breached by Defendant The Center. 38. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 39. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 40. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetaL monitoring strips. 41. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that The Center was careless and , negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high- risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin. (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response 15 -- " '~.'~ ~.. , ~," I; thereto. (c) Failing to note and Inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with ' difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto. (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients. (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant The Center, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant The Center's affirmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 16 . ' Dated: ,,',.' , -'~ "', -;. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff By: othy . S enberger, ttorney J.D. #34343 1820 Linglestown Road P. O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700 (717) 234-8212 (fax) Ralph . Mazer, Esq. Attorney I.D. #66229 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, PA 18940 (215) 860-9528 (215) 860-6415 (fax) July 7, 2000 17 -". . .~ . ~ " '"'-"'-"'i' AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYL VANIA : SS COUNTY OF DAUPHIN I, , ,-V..tI.F.u SLt -eS , being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that the facts and allegations contained herein are based upon facts given by me to my counsel and are true and correct to the best of my knowlege, information, and belief; that the language of said Cr,)~~"1 is [hat of my counsel and that I have relied upon counsel in making this r~~-r based upon my information. s/l~/d ;'< Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, this l1r-. day of O'~ 0Jr~~,:~ ( MAR,IOAI~ l\1"tfiAUGHTON. NoWy PuOllc ',: " lj3(rlffi<lJlllO Two., Oauvh1n C{)U~n I :, ;" eoirllllssloo EXpires ~ov. 2Z:.~ t..".~.a ~ ..... ,a' .,....___~.-__ ,~ 8-000 . SHOU(...lifR(,fR ,So 1........ll:1 lLP If\.'O lL\:CLESTO\\',.... R..)...O. po BO\ ,,,':,~: . 11.\;;:"i~HU\C, 1"\ l'\C(,-O:;~5 _' c'" _ ~,_ <'"'''~", AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : SS COUNTY OF DAUPHIN I, ShA-1U;.J (I - S..f, k' ~.::. , being duly sworn according to Jaw deposes and says that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that the facts and allegations contained herein are based upon facts given by me to my counsel and are true and correct to the best of my knowlege, information, and belief: that the language of said rD \v..p IA-: ~t is that of my counsel and that I have relied upon , counsel in making this Ll:~~l based upon my information. ~~~/~ / Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, this lU- day of ~~ ,'".t9 c70Clv 9rr/~ , J\!(!"AiiiA: ~~,: ------1- ~ 'IJ/ARJn~II~~'" , - 1..1'\1.. f ' ",'~ ~::.~ r:;:~J~VSrrr3N. IJ?i.arJt Public ' , ; ,~:~.;'t;"'::I:tI:Ji' f~Jti,. ):~phm Courrnl , J.~\,r..1'~Il~!,IlfI..EY:pI!~. ruo~.Z7. 200v J' ,',--'-......~ SIIOUr"'Hrl\,~r~ .\ 1"""'l.::1 llr II\~D !l"CLl~T()~\" ROAD. I' n B,)\ i"l~,~~ . 1I,\f\I\)~IH RC; P \ '-It)I,.:l'j-l} ,- \ -\ ~ \ J, 1 ~," . , '\ -.. ': ~,' .-" ~"~ if" "';,: ,~> ~ . " . SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorneys for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND . CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that, if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. 'IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1620 llNGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717)234-3700. FAX' (717) 234-8212 wv.w.shclljanlaw.com -, .. , . SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorneys for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVil ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants NOTICIA LE HAN DEMANDADO A USTED EN LA CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene veinte (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 demand as en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomaro medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notoficacaion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. usted puede perder dineroo sus propiededas 0 otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDAA UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 lLAME POR TELEFONO ALA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, lLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX: 50545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106.0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com ,= .iiu~', --j , . SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ,CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the Plaintiffs, KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and RALPH MAZER, ESQ. and do respectfully represent the following: The Parties 1. Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites are adult individuals who currently reside at 1397 Creek Road, Apartment 3, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007 and are the parents and natural guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, who was born on July 14, 1998 and resides with his parents at the Creek Road address. 1 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 llNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60645. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234--3700. FAx':(717) 234-8212 www.sholijanlaw.com 2. Holy Spirit Hospital is a hospital operating under Holy Spirit Hospital & Health System, duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 503 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17011. 3. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness (hereinafter referred to as "The Center") operates as a part of the Holy Spirit Hospital &, Health System providing a full range of gynecological and obstetrical services with its principal place of business at 423 North 21s1 Street, Suite 202, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. 4. Anne Marie Manning, M.D. is a physician duly licensed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with her principal place of business at 423 North 21 sl Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011. Facts ADolicable to All Counts 5. Sharon A. Stites was a patient at The Center and at the Holy Spirit Hospital receiving obstetrical care relating to the birth of Kenneth A. Stites. 6. On July 13, 1998, Sharon A. Stites was admitted to The Center at 42 weeks, 5 days, for induction secondary to post date. 7. At 12:36 p.m. on July 13, 1998, an external fetal monitor strip was begun. 8. At the outset of monitoring, Kenneth Stites had a normal heart rate at between 120 and 150 beats per minute and there were reactive accelerations. 2 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LlNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX ti0545 41 HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com ~.~ "" ,> -'('F.I 9. At 1 :50 p.m. on July 13, 1998, induction was begun. At this point, the cervix was 1-2 cm dilated, 50% effaced, with the fetal head at -3 station. 10. By 7:30 p.m. on July 13,1998, there was minimal cervical change and no descent of the fetal head. 11. On July 14, 1998, at approximately 1 :44 a.m., approximately 7 and % hours before delivery, Dr. Manning artificially ruptured Sharon Stites' cervical membrane to induce labor. Sharon Stites was found to be 9+ cm dilated, 100% effaced, with the fetus still at -3 station. Dr. Manning found no meconium in the amniotic fluid, however, noted that baby Stites was presenting brow. 12. Fetal monitoring strips and the progress notes further reveal the following occurred on July 14,1998: (a) At 2:00 a.m., decelerations were becoming deeper, but with a reasonable period of recovery; (b) At 2:10 a.m., each contraction was associated with a variable deceleration down to 80 bpm; (c) At 2:30 a.m., presentation is noted to have seemingly converted to face with a left mentum anterior presentation, -3 station. Dr. Manning notes that she is having difficulty feeling the fetal mouth and Chin; (d) At 2:50 a.m., there is no descent and Sharon Stites is having difficulty pushing; (e) At 3:15 a.m., a rim of cervix was palpated and the variable decelerations were lasting a minute, some down to 70 bpm; (f) At about 3:25 a.m., there is a late variable deceleration; 3 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LINGLESTOWN ROAD_ P.O. 80;<60545. HARRISBURG. PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 YNNI.sholIJanlaw.com -: (g) At 3:50 a.m., the cord is compressed secondary to the earlier artificial membrane rupture. There is a deep variable deceleration with late component. An amnioinfusion is not done and an internal fetal monitor is not inserted; (h) At 4:10 a.m., there are deep variable decelerations lasting greater than 60 seconds; (i) At 4:20 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that there is still a rim of cervix. There are deep variable decelerations with late component; G) At 5:15 a.m., there is still a rim of cervix. Contractions continued every 3-4 minutes with persistent deep variable decelerations in the range of 70 bpm with some overshoot on recovery; (k) At 6:30 a.m., Dr. Manning introduces Pitocin and encourages Sharon to push as she is fully dilated. Pitocin was contraindicated and Dr. Manning did not utilize an intra-uterine catheter; (I) At 7:30 a.m., Dr. Manning notes that Sharon is pushing with fair effort, and that there have been some improvement in decelerations in the one-half hour between 7:00 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. with good variability and no deep variables. Dr. Manning notes if no significant descent in the next one-half hour will most likely proceed to cesarean section; (m) At fetal monitor strip panel 60314 (at 7:43 a.m.) severe variables in fetal heart rate ensued at 7:55, 8:06, 8:10 and 8:11 a.m. Fetal bradycardia to the 60's ensued at 8:11 a.m.; nadiring at 54 bpm; (n) At 8:00 a.m., Dr. Long came into Sharon's room, according to Dr. Manning, to check for descent. Dr. Long placed an internal fetal monitor at approximately 8:30 a.m. because of difficulty recording the fetal heart on the external monitor; (0) At 8:17 a.m., it was decided that an emergency cesarean section was necessary, with time of delivery noted as 8:23 a.m. on the operating room clock and 8:27 a.m. by monitor. Just before proceeding with the cesarean section, meconium stained fluid was noted for the first time. 4 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP , 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P,Q. BOX ~545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717)234.S212 WNW,shollJanlaw.com ! -1 13. Kenneth Stites was born with perinatal hypoxia with resultant hypoxic- ischemic encephalapathy which has resulted in severe and permanent neurological injures and the sequelae thereof. He was floppy at birth with no heart rate and thick meconium stained fluid. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as will be set forth hereinafter, the Plaintiffs, Kenneth Stites, Steven Stites and Sharon Stites, have incurred significant medical expenses and will continue to incur such expenses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has suffered a loss of earning capacity and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff Kenneth Stites, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of earnings and earnings capacity for which damages are claimed. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants as hereinafter set forth, Plaintiff Kenneth Stites has experienced extreme pain and suffering, scarring, disfigurement, embarrassment, humiliation and loss ofthe enjoyment of life's pleasures and will continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 5 SHOLLENBERGER. & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LINGLESTOWN ROAD. p.o. BOXSQ545 G HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. F~ (717) 234-8212 WW'N.sholljanlaw.eom '." <;, L - . '~' "":; , . " 18. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, Plaintiff Sharon Stites has suffered a loss of future earnings, for all of which damages are claimed. COUNT I KENNETH STITES. A Minor. by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Anne Marie Mannina. M.D. NEGLIGENCE 19. Paragraphs 1 through 18 are incorporated by referenced herein as if set forth in full. 20. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Sharon Stites and Kenneth Stites were patients at the Center for Women's Health and Wellness and the Holy Spirit Hospital, both operating under the Holy Spirit Hospital and Health System and were receiving care and treatment from the Hospital and The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including Defendant Manning. 21. Defendant, Anne Marie Manning, M.D., acting by and through her actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, she persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; 6 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI. LLP 1820 LINGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700 . FAX (117) 234-8212 YNNI.sholljanlsw,com -"""L;{ ! (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, she continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, she failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) She did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, she augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) She failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy she had imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station and failure of the fetal head to descend; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that she was dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation and failure of the fetal head to descend. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 7 SHOl.lENBERGER & JANUZZI, l.lP 1820 l.INGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 G HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717)234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com COUNT II , KENNETH STITES. A Minor. by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Holv Soirit Hosoital NEGLIGENCE 22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 23. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at Holy Spirit Hospital receiving care and treatment from the Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees. including the Defendant physicians. 24. Holy Spirit Hospital, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately measuring heart rate variability; (d) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; 8 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LlP 1a20 lINGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX. 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 171Q6.0545 (717) 234--3700. FAX (717) 234-6212 www.sholljanlaw.com -1 (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT III KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. The , Center for Women's Heailth and Wellness NEGLIGENCE 25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 26. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint, Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites were patients at The Center for Women's Health and Wellness receiving care and treatment from The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, including the Defendant physicians. 9 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LlNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234.3700 . FAX (717)2J4.8212 www.shoUjanlaw.com --,,-,,' .0'.' 27. The Center, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants and employees, rendered negligent medical treatment to Kenneth Stites and Sharon Stites in the following particulars: (a) Despite a malpresentation at a high station in a primigravida which was post-date, persisted excessively with induction of labor with the cervix being a rim to fully dilated for over six hours; (b) Despite severe variable decelerations from an umbilical cord compression and a non-reassuring fetal status, continued the induction for five hours; (c) Despite the severe decelerations, failed to monitor the fetal heart rate with a scalp electrode which is the only means of accurately me~suring heart rate variability; (d) Did not attempt to correct the severe heart rate decelerations with an amnioinfusion; (e) Despite severe fetal heart rate decelerations, augmented the labor with Pitocin and did this without assessing the labor mechanism with an intrauterine pressure catheter; (f) Failed to appreciate the degree of fetal jeopardy imposed by pushing on with fetal induction attempts despite blatant signs of failure to progress; (g) Failing to proceed with cesarean delivery in the face of a non- reassuring fetal heart rate pattern coupled with a malpresentation of a high station; (h) Failing to recognize the high probability that induction would fail given that they were dealing with a primigravida, postdates, a high presenting part and a malpresentation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 10 SHOllENBERGeR & JANU~I. llP 1820 UNGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com COUNT IV KENNETH STITES. A Minor. bv SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. Holv Spirit Hospital CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 28. Paragraphs 1 through 27 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 29. At all times relevant to the subject matter ofthis complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of Holy Spirit Hospital. 30. Piaintiffs aver that defendant Holy Spirit Hospital owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 31. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 32. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 33. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 11 SHOLLENBERGeR & JANUZZI, LLP 1B20 UNGlESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaW.com I ", 34. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that the Holy Spirit Hospital was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients; (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's affirmation of Defendant Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. 12 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZ1, LLP 1820 UNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 80545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234.3700. FAX (711)234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com " -""~": I rJ, WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT V KENNETH STITES. A Minor. by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Guardians. and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES. Individuallv. v. The Center for Women's Health and Wellness CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE 35. Paragraphs 1 through 34 are incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. 36. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this complaint, the mother- Plaintiff came under the care and custody of The Center for Women's Health and Wellness. 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center owed a non-delegable duty of care directly to the mother-Plaintiff and her baby in utero, upon which Plaintiff relied, and said duty was breached by Defendant The Center. 38. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to select, retain and permit use of its facilities to only competent physicians. 39. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center breached its duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine and offer patient care upon its premises. 40. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center had actual or constructive knowledge of the lack of competence and expertise of Defendant Ann Marie Manning, 13 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 llNGLESTQWN ROAD. P.D, BOX 60545. HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717),234.3700 . FAX (717) 234-8212 " WNW.shOlljanlaw.com ""'~ -',~ ,~ " " "" .,', -~; -, ) - , , , , fl, . M.D. in the handling of high-risk pregnancies, difficult pregnancies, brow or face presentations, use of Pitocin, use of amnioinfusion techniques, and the reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips. 41. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant The Center is liable directly to Plaintiffs under the theory of hospital corporate negligence and that The Center was careless and negligent which consisted of the following: (a) Permitting and allowing Defendant Manning to conduct a difficult or high-risk delivery of a baby with a face presentation, failure to descend, prolonged bradycardia, and allowing inappropriate use of Pitocin; (b) Failing to observe, monitor, train, instruct and supervise Defendant Manning in the performance of difficult or high risk delivery with face presentation, failure to descend, prolong bradycardia, and in the proper use of Pitocin, internal monitoring, amniofusion, and the proper reading and interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the proper response thereto; (c) Failing to note and inform itself of Defendant Manning's level of skill, continuation of training, and competence in general and specifically with difficult and/or high risk pregnancies and/or face presentations, and the use of Pitocin and amnioinfusion and the interpretation of fetal monitoring strips and the appropriate reaction thereto; (d) Failing to formulate, draft and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for its patients; (e) Failing to require that Defendant Manning report to it her claims history and record or to determine, discover and be appraised of same; and (f) Defendant The Center, knew or should have known that patients were likely to rely upon its allowing of Defendant Manning to use its facilities as Defendant The Center's affirmation of Defendant 14 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 LlNGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOXS0545 OJ HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (711) 234.3700. FAX (717) 234-8212 www.shoUjanlaw.com ,~ ~~ . , f (I, Manning's competence upon which Plaintiffs did rely to their detriment. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Tim thy A. Shollenberger, Attorney I.D. #34343 1820 Linglestown Road P. O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700 (717) 234-8212 (fax) Ralph S. Mazer, Esq. Attorney I.D. #66229 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, PA 18940 (215) 860-9528 (215) 860-6415 (fax) Dated: December 11, 2000 15 SHOllENBERGER & JANUZZI, llP 1820 LINGlESTOWN ROAD. P,Q. BOX 60545 G HARRISBURG, PA 1710~545 (717) 234.3700. FAX (717)234-821'2 v.ww ,sholljanlaw .com ,-~ ~ ~~ 1__ , , " I ,. AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : 55 COUNTY OF DAUPHIN I, Sharon St i tes , being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that the facts and allegations contained herein are based upon facts given by me to my counsel and are true and correct to the best of my knowlege, information, and belief; that the language of said Corrplaint is that of my counsel and that I have relied upon counsel in making this Corrplaint based upon my information. 'f ~~ 11~ ( Sharon A. St i tes Parent & Natural Guardian of Kenneth St i tes Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, this J)~ f:J::, /1 day of ,~ .q~~ My commission expires: 11/29/04 SHOUENBERGfR &. IA:-'l'1I.1, llP 11120 llNGUSTOWN ROAD. 1',0, BOX 605.15 . HARRISBURG, PA 1 il06-OS-lS (717) 21.1.)7'00 . FAX (7'1 ~l ~ JJ.1l21~ \-fT.L'P$ COCIAfflO^\'lf ~' . ,,~,~ ,-. -, ';; ~ ",. ~ t l,J .. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, First Class Mail, postage prepaid, as follows: Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Shollenberger & Januzzi 1820 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 [Attorney for PlaintiffJ Ralph S. Mazer, Esquire 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, PA 18940 [Attorney for PlaintiffJ METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE By: ~'dP~. Steven D. Snyder, Esq re Sup. Ct. I.D. #34344 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants DATED: March 4, 2002 ,;",,;-~- -''''''i~r ,- ;'_-ie."-" til1lta_~;:1.~~i.riMti,h;BjjrIDlli.B!i;!&Il"<ililit';j}i1tiiiMW"" ,Jot- :, -_.JVl.-U,,'_:':,cJ LLr:JllH..~~,;,_-.", 'C"..' h ~"- -,,,,,:~ .,~ Jr '_'~. ",., -,,-,",/.< ,- ",".~O"' - ", -, L..'.,~"; --,~> ':. - ,,~-- > ~~~ - ,",' ." ,<~" " ., "F.' .' .. . 0 C) 0 C I'-..J -11 .-.::: ::r;: IJCJJ J.~'" i'iF:2 rn[T1 "'OJ 2:.1'.: I " "n 2::C' - ':0 :~:) (J),,!~ U"j ~,,~~Ji; -<"c. ~C) -0 ~C) 3: ~~~ ~~ ~C) i:-? .J-"C ~ Z --I (n :D -< -< "0'-' ,-,-- .--"-".', ,,- --'__.'F"'-'''- , .'-; ""-"~" ,~,'- ~ ""'~-,-, "'% ii , , SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants " "R . ~~ "'~, AND NOW come the Plaintiffs, Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, as Parents and Natural Guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and RALPH MAZER, ESQ., and do respectfully respond to Defendants' Preliminary Objections as follow: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted in part. By way of further answer, the caption in this action and the action filed at No. 00-4450 are different. Pleadings AII\Stites - Plaintiff's Respol)ses to DF's PO's in No. 7028 -1- it;- 6. Admitted. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff's respectfully requests that the Defendants Preliminary Objections be dismissed and judgment entered in favor of the Plaintiff's as a matter of law. Plaintiff's ResDonse to Defendants Preliminarv Obiections in the Nature of Demurrer for Leaallnsufficiencv of a Pleadina Pursuant to Pa. R.C..P. 1028 (a)(4) 7. Plaintiff's responses to paragraphs 1 to 6 of Defendants Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 8. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs assert a corporate negligence claim against the Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital in Count IV of their Complaint. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18,2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 9. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 10. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs assert a corporate negligence claim against the Defendant, The Center for Women's Health and Wellness in Count V of their Complaint. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 11. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. Pleadings AII\SliIes - Plaintiff's Responses to DF's PO's in No. 7028 -2- "-"'- " , ,,', --" -, '~'(-"'4;; 12. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has classified a hospital's duties into four general areas: 1) a duty to use reasonable care in the maintenance of safe and adequate facilities and equipment; 2) a duty to select and retain only competent physicians; 3) a duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine within its walls as to patient care; and a duty to formulate, adopt and enforce adequate rules and policies to insure quality care for the patients. Thompson V. Nason, 527 Pa. 330, 591 A.2d 703, 701 (1991). By way of further answer, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Thompson, also states ". . . we adopt as a theory of hospital liability the doctrine of corporate negligence or corporate liability under which the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper standard of care owed its patient. In addition, we fully embrace the aforementioned four categories of the hospital's duties." J..Q., at 708. By way of further answer, paragraph 12 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 13. Denied. The allegations of paragraphs 34(e), 34(f), 41 (e), and 41 (f) fall within the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's language that under the doctrine of corporate negligence, the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper standard of care owed its patient. Thompson, at 708. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 14. Denied. To the contrary, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts ADDlicable to All Counts." Plaintiffs have specifically Pleadings AII\Slites . Plaintiff's Responses to OF's PO's in No. 7028 -3- .' ,,~~-, ---- - ",,- .,- ~, "-'r''',- u-~lr: incorporated by reference paragraphs 9 through 24 of the Complaint. In those paragraphs, the Plaintiffs have pled changes in Baby Stites and Mother Stites condition demonstrating that baby was in imminent danger, including a change in fetal presentation to a face presentation, which to appropriately trained obstetrical personnel is a clear danger to baby and mother, an arrest in progression of labor, a severely prolonged second stage of labor and late decelerations on the fetal monitor strip. The Plaintiffs have also pled that Pitocin, a medication that is administered by intravenous injection by hospital personnel and monitored by hospital personnel was improperly administered. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 15. Denied as stated. Plaintiffs by incorporating all parts of the Complaint in each count as well as clearly stating "Facts APolicable to All Counts," on page 2 have asserted enough facts to overrule a demurrer. By way of further answer, paragraph 15 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 16. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint, being a document in writing speaks for itself and any such summarizations by the Defendants are strictly denied. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts Aoolicable to All Counts." By way of further answer, Plaintiffs have specifically incorporated all parts of the Complaint by reference as if fully set forth therein and thus have asserted enough factual allegations to overrule a demurrer. This Pleadings AllIStites . Plaintiff's Responses 10 OF's PO's in No. 7028 -4- ,., ,,"'. exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 17. Denied. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. By way of further answer, the Plaintiffs, in paragraphs 9 through 27 assert enough facts to withstand a demurrer and give the Defendants enough factual information to formulate a defense. By way of further answer, each part of the Plaintiffs' Complaint is incorporated by reference in each count thus asserting specific factual allegations therein to provide adequate notice to the Defendants of Plaintiffs' claims. The information regarding how the Defendants Holy Spirit Hospital and Center for Women's Health and Wellness, knew or should have known of Dr. Manning's incompetence is information that is exclusively in control of the Defendants themselves, not something Defendants need to have set forth for them in the Complaint in order to formulate an adequate defense and which can be developed during the discovery phase of the case. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 18. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint, being a document in writing speaks for itself and any such summarizations by the Defendants are strictly denied. By way of further answer, Defendants fail to point out that Plaintiffs have incorporated by reference all of the averments of the preceding paragraphs as factual allegations in support of their allegations. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 19. Denied as stated. Although it is true that a hospital is not directly liable if one of its employees makes a mistake, liability does attach directly to the hospital if Pleadings AII\Stiles - Plaintiff's Responses 10 OF's PO's in No. 7028 -5- -'-~ . '~;.€,: [1 l,; !~ /; i,~ i:1 n :J r I;) 1'1 H ::: '" :;; '! " !,j " Ii ,',-'=<'.', , ',". "~ ,-'-'~- -""" '...~ -'-~ -'.-' -~- ,..,"-- there is evidence that the hospital should have known about the mistake or that a reasonable hospital would have intercepted or corrected it. Edward v. Brandvwine Hospital, 428 Pa. Super. 673, 652 A.2d 1382 (1995). By way of further answer, among other things, the presence of a clearly abnormal fetal monitor strip, face presentation, delayed decent of the fetus and prolonged second stage of labor, as plead in the Plaintiffs' Complaint and which were incorporated by reference should have alerted the Defendants of an impending problem. By way of further answer, paragraph 19 of the Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 20. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown more than active negligence through factual pleading in paragraphs 9 through 24 and that enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness should have known that there was a problem with the delivery of Baby Stites. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts ADDlicable to All Counts." By way of further answer, paragraph 20 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 21. Denied. Paragraph 21 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is Pleadings AII\$tiles - Plaintiff's Responses 10 OF's PO's in No. 7028 -6- . ".1 i :') (i i,j i~~ iJ H ,I i'j ~ , Co- " -- , '< -i ,;~ : ", -~,.', ~_,.,:, J--- ;~ ", ."-~".<_' _ ,. "<'k conclusion of law to which no answer is required. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs' Complaint adequately asserts facts necessary to support how the Defendants breached a duty and how their rendering of care was substandard. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 22. Denied. For all the reasons stated in paragraphs 1 through 19 of Plaintiffs' Response, Plaintiffs have asserted facts necessary to set forth a claim of corporate negligence against the Defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully request this Honorable Court enter an Order overruling the Defendants Preliminary Objections, including paragraphs 31-34 and 37-41 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff's ResDonse to Defendants Preliminary Obiections in the Nature of a Motion to Strike for Insufficient SDecificitv of a Pleadina Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) 23. Plaintiff's response to paragraphs 1 to 22 of Defendants Preliminary ,f f; ~ :~ Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if full set :~ ::; I:' forth at length. 24. Denied as stated. The Plaintiff's Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 25. Denied as stated. The Plaintiff's Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court Pleadings AII\Stites - Plaintiff's Responses to OF's PO's in No. 7028 -7- . ~ " c, '__n'' ..< , -, ' ,~ ---'--,- " ,', ".~'__- _-__~'" ,;'_~d~ C--.-'. in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 26. Denied as stated. The Plaintiff's Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 27. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown more than active negligence through factual pleading in paragraphs 9 through 24 and that enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness, should have known that there was a problem with the Plaintiffs' delivery. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts Applicable to All Counts." By way of further answer, paragraph 27 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 28. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown more than active negligence through factual pleading in paragraphs 9 through 24 and that enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness should have known that there was a problem with the Plaintiffs' delivery. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts Applicable to All PleadinglS A11\Stites - Plaintiff's Responses 10 DF's PO's in No. 7028 -8- -. :1 i i] H :i II H i.! iJ Ii Ij :j f.I' :'i j I , '" " ,---- '-_.r; ~_ ,",'_ " '0 ^ ",.- .,,~ ~ ,,-,-,.- r'<j;~ Counts." By way of further answer, paragraph 28 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 29. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown more than active negligence through factual pleading in paragraphs 9 through 24 and that enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Wellness should have known that there was a problem with the Plaintiffs' delivery. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts Applicable to All " 1 Counts." By way of further answer, the Defendants have been given enough factual i 1 i ;:1 !1 Ii !:l Ii I~ 1.1 :.1 ;,1 ii averments throughout the Plaintiffs' Complaint to fully notify the Defendants of all the claims against them. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court overrule the Defendants' Preliminary Objections with respect to paragraphs 18; 30-34; 34(a), (d), (f); 37-41; and 41 (a), (d), (f) of the Plaintiffs Complaint. In the alternative, should this Honorable Court find paragraphs 18; 30-34; 34(a), (d), (f); 37-41; and 41 (a), (d), (f) of the Plaintiffs Complaint to lack specificity, Plaintiffs should be directed to amend their Complaint. Preliminary Obiections in the Nature of a Motion to Strike for Insufficient Specificity of a Pleadina Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(3) Pleadings AII\Stites - Plaintiff's Responses to OF's PO's in No. 7028 -9- , ,~'-, . .' -, ,-" -- ~,,-, -,'-, , '-~ ~""'~,~ 30. Plaintiffs response to paragraphs 1 to 29 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 31. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 32. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 33. Denied as stated. The Plaintiffs' Complaint is a document in writing which speaks for itself. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable "'J H I" Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 34. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown more than active negligence through factual pleading in paragraphs 9 through 24 and that enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Well ness, should have known that there was a problem with the Plaintiffs' delivery. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts ADDlicable to All Counts." By way of further answer, paragraph 34 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. It is further averred Pleadings AII\SliIes - Plaintiff's Responses to DF's PO's In No. 7028 -10- d"" '--", -~~,," ^ ~' ;-" -'-~. , ,c:' ~ . "::, that Defendants have adequate notice of what Plaintiffs' claims are and the grounds upon which it rests as well as facts essential to support a cause of action. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18,2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 35. Denied as stated. Paragraph 35 of the Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. 36. Denied. The Plaintiffs have shown enough facts exist to demonstrate that the Defendants, Holy Spirit Hospital and The Center for Women's Health and Well ness, should have known that there was a problem with the Plaintiffs' delivery. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs specifically incorporate all factual averments into each count of the Complaint as if fully set forth therein. By way of further answer, on page 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, in bold letters, it is clearly stated: "Facts Applicable to All Counts." By way of further answer, the Defendants are adequately aware of enough facts asserted in the Plaintiffs' Complaint to have notice of the claims against them. By way of further answer, paragraph 41 of Defendants' Preliminary Objections is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. This exact preliminary objection was overruled by the Honorable Court in an Order dated January 18, 2002 under Civil Action No. 00-4450. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court overrule the Defendants' Preliminary Objections with respect to paragraphs 20, 21, 23, Pleadings AII\$tites - Plaintiff's Responses to OF's PO's in No. 7028 -11- . """./"-'- ~ - ,-", ~-' -'- ,-~ " <_~"",--c --""'_" i', ,c - '-~:".' ~;~' 24, 26, and 27 of the Plaintiffs Complaint. In the alternative, should this Honorable Court find paragraphs 20, 21,23,24,26 and 27 of the Plaintiffs Complaint to lack specificity, Plaintiffs should be directed to amend their Complaint. ).t?1~ ~ f$O' ii~ ';,' 'i~ :;:: '1'; :lj , Dated: 31~16~ i:; [i " Pleadings AII\Slites . Plaintiffs Responses to OF's PO's In No, 7028 -12- '-'- ',~ , ..-','- -, . " ' , ,- " ,'--. 'd ->-+ ',,-^ -'="'".-"-' - - ~- " ii4i SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED M.D., Defendants :-, AND NOW thisCb'" day of (Y\u('cl'\..- , 2002, I hereby certify that I have served the following Plaintiff's Responses to Defendants Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint on the following by forwarding a true and correct copy of same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to: Steven D. Snyder, Esq. METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE 3401 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Ralph S. Mazer, Esq. 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, PA 18940 Respectfully submitted, SHOLLEN E ER & JANUZZI, LLP Date:)ldOloa... Pleadings AII\Slites - Plaintiff's Responses to OF's PO's in No. 7028 I " ,---~ ,,:~, '. J" "li(~n - ~-~. -"'-'J.;....l .1.."l!~un,111.H"J ~[J o , .;: - (?-',;.'.;1......,;",.-"":V;y-'Iit.i- ""'\i!lW~ ",,- " _, w -''''''~ ih"ilI~f.:"" -",- .'~ ", ".- o ~: "", 0'-~ ~,>, --;'7; ()2 ' ~L.) ";":.{ ~C'---,-:: ~ ,. ~~-);",,1 C') f',j \~ -~-\ ~:i" ','-' -;::;1 r"<) ."'0 :--':1 ") --;fj ,~.) "',) lI1 :u ~< I -~~ " ~ ';;-'.~' ""' "' , U'_^.'-' .~ /-- ~-" _.~ ~td .. KENNETH STITES, a Minor by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES AND STEVEN STITES, Individually, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 Plaintiffs v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, and ANNE MARIE MANNING, M.D. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISCONTINUE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND NOW come the Defendants, by their attorneys, METTE, EVANS & WOODSIDE, who respectfully respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice as follows: 1. It is admitted that the above-captioned matter was commenced by Praecipe for a Writ of Summons on October 12, 2000. 2. It is admitted that the Defendants filed a Praecipe for a Rule requiring the filing of a Complaint on or about November 20, 2000. 3. It is admitted that a Complaint was filed in the above-captioned action on or about December 12,2000. 4. Denied as stated. By way of further answer, Plaintiffs in the action filed to No. 00-4450 were "Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites and parents and natural guardians of Kenneth Stites, a Minor." The Plaintiffs in the action filed to No. 00-7028 are Kenneth Stites, a Minor, by Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, Guardians, and Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, ~=- ~ .'~ Individually. The Plaintiffs are also referred to in their individual capacities in the lead-in paragraph and in the headings of each of the Counts. 5. It is admitted that the Defendants filed Preliminary Objections to the Complaint filed to No. 00-7028. 6. It is denied that thee Preliminary Objections filed by Defendants to the action commenced to No. 00-7028 were "identical" to the Preliminary Objections filed in the action commenced by Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites as parents and natural guardians of Kenneth Stites to No. 00-4450. Rather, as to the action filed to No. 00-7028, Defendants filed Preliminary Objections based on the pendency of a prior action pursuant to Pa. R.C.P 1028(a)(6). Defendants did not raise an objection based upon the pendency of a prior action in the Preliminary Objections it filed to No. 00-4450. 7. It is admitted that the Complaints filed to Nos. 00-4450 and 00-7028 allegedly arise from events surrounding the birth of Kenneth Stites at Holy Spirit Hospital on or about June 14, 1998. 8. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to whether minor Plaintiff suffered injuries, and, if so, whether they were sustained on or aboutJuly 14, 1998. 9. The averments of the corresponding paragraph require no answer. Undersigned counsel agrees, however, that plaintiff may discontinue the action filed to No. 00-7028, with prejudice, and to proceed with the action filed to No. 00-4450. It is noted that Defendants oppose the filing of a Second Amended Complaint to No. 00-4450 in response to another Motion filed the same day by Plaintiffs. 2 ",' '< --'~~L . . - - - ,,' ~--, " "",', ~ ' , ,---, -~. --'", ';;-'., ,.,-,' WHEREFORE, Defendants request This Honorable Court to discontinue the above action with prejudice and that Plaintiffs be directed to proceed with the action docketed to No. 00-4450. MET By: Craig to, E uire Sup. Crt. J.D. #15907 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, P A 1711 0-0950 (717) 232-5000 Dated: June 8, 2004 Attorneys for Defendants, The Center for Women's Health and Wellness, Holy Spirit Hospital and Anne Marie Manning, M.D. 3 400247vl '-'-, , ~' "1.1-",' 1,1 ~ ~- - ^,,'- ,.j---- 'L" _ - .' ~~"."" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pa. R.C.P., by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, First Class Mail, postage prepaid, as follows: Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Shollenberger & Januzzi 1820 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 [Attorney for Plaintiff] By: DATED: June 8, 2004 397851vl Ralph S. Mazer, Esquire 96 Autumn Drive Newtown, P A 18940 torney for Plaintiff] Crai . St e, Sup. Ct. LD. #15 Kathryn 1. Simps Sup. Ct. J.D. #28960 3401 North Front Street P.O. Box 5950 Harrisburg, P 1711 0-0950 (717) 232-5000 Attorneys for Defendants '~MalJi';l~~Ji\!Iil!!l~!l!l'M';;1,!l;i)-,n1>l@i--,"liI'_b,g(41~~mlllit~~' . ,-~,,-,\.;,~ _~ll",lJ~.k""~~""",,. ",,~,"~_,-, ",~ _.J H",,'""'" "", '" ,r. '"'' ,'",~ '~1' ? .>\!!~ ~,..'~,-2." ~1IiiIl:i1l~="~ _~~.o~~~ '0 o ~:: .-' <= t,:::';'.: <-- C:..:. :;;:'.:.: o -n ::.J :L -" rl1f'"'";; ~q~:? C~,(.!.) ;~~~3 ~i~~ ,.--.' I ,0 --0 -,,/ _l" -- <-'"J u? ,oc_o .).". _.~. _....'- --N J , c5 JUN 0 8 200f SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW, thislD~daYOf -r ,2004, a Rule is issued upon Defendants to show cause why Plaintiffs Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice should not be granted. Rule returnable ~ days after service. J. Motions - Stites - Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice ~ , - ,I'l!!IIIi!fl!Il!' - ,,- ~"'<-' '" -, i~, ~~"....,-. ," ,o,~, ,'-"k ~,;c-'.' .'-"'-' ..~ _"~'9 ~ N '''~'''''. e" . &"" i ,,"_1.L, ""_."",__;;;;o_",?;'~""',p,_,""""""",, ""~~,~,'~ --n,,' ,'-, FILED-{)'Fj::iCE 'u~F '!'HI"" DD{lTLi0\"I:-ri{\I"W ell \',"ilf.,,,-!;\'~_I.f\_,, 2uOlj ,JLli'l i 0 Ml 9: 2 I n' .", . "'J' ""Y ,[ , i "II,',! ~ , ,', If 1\:' v,-,t ,~.',__" ~',-.-, . j :,jd\,lj\Sf0./i~,;\j i/, ~''''t~~~~''!W4~~-="~~\\~'''"!!,j~, ~,~_. __", e_ ,~,~_!.',""' SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW, this _ day of ,2004, pursuant to Plaintiffs' Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice, same is GRANTED. The Prothonotary should mark the within action discontinued without preiudice. BY THE COURT: J. Motions - Stites - Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice ,~ . '~'"- ,~ ",,'" .,.,.- SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs JUN 0 8 2C04:;t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW come the Plaintiffs, Sharon A. Stites and Steven Stites, as Parents , and Natural Guardians of Kenneth Stites, a minor, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP and do respectfully represent as follows: 1. The above-captioned action was initiated by Writ of Summons on October 12,2000. 2. Defendants filed a Rule to File Complaint on November 21, 2000. 3. Plaintiffs thereafter filed a Complaint in the above-captioned action on December 12, 2000. 4. The within action was identical to a Complaint filed at Docket No. 2000- 4450 on July 10, 2000 except for the manner in which the Plaintiffs were designated in the caption. 5. Preliminary Objections were filed by the Defendants to the within ~~ " . ,,' , ........ '-''''"''"';'' Complaint on March 4, 2002. 6. The Preliminary Objections filed by Defendants were identical to those filed in the action docketed to No. 2000-4450 except as to the identity of the Plaintiffs in the caption. 7. Both actions No. 2000-4450 and No. 00-7028 arise out of the same set of facts which transpired on July 14,1998. 8. The injuries sustained by minor Plaintiff Kenneth Stites also arise out of the same set of facts. 9. For the convenience of the Court, the parties and the witnesses and to avoid unnecessary costs and speed the resolution of the within matter, Plaintiffs desire to discontinue the within action without prejudice and proceed under the original action filed at Docket No. 2000-4450. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Honorable Court to Order that the within action be discontinued without prejudice to proceed with action at Docket No. 2000-4450. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff othy . Sh enb Attorney I.D. #34343 1820 Linglestown Road P. O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700 Dated:June t, 2004 ., -". b- '<. _ "d", dUN 0 8 28fU1 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Unglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW, this 4th day of June, 2004, our office contacted Craig Stone, Esquire, counsel for the Defendants in the above-captioned action, to ascertain their concurrence to the filing of the within Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice. Mr. Stone does not concur in the filing of this Motion. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP By: Date: June 4, 2004 Motions - Stites - Motion to Discontinue Action Without Prejudice ;-- ~- v , ""-:. ,~ I, ...._~ . SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs JUN 08 2004f IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW this tJ day of ~ ~04, I hereby certify that I have served the following Motion to Discontinue A ion Without Prejudice on the following by forwarding a true and correct copy of same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to: Craig A. Stone, Esquire Mette, Evans & Woodside 3401 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Respectfully submitted, SHOLLE B ER & JANUZZI, LLP Date: b .-<f-olf Pleadings AII\Stltes - Plaintiff's Responses to DF's PO's in No. 7028 ,-".- '^- -~j, d ~~~~i~if';'il,~iil..lilOiwo:,..""",".;,.;,,;z,l'O~'ft~~~OIllldiiiIP'::' ~-, J!"~~~~ ! ,,[.fl.,.;,",: .=T~7 '~__"', ',""'l'~,~"','_""" .,""'-<,, ,~,-, _".'"' ',- ",-." ,~ M ," " ,~'. "' ~, ,-, ,~ " C) ,...., = 0 c-:: = -n z .c- >",., L. --' I~': ::r:' , c= rn# -'C" -- t,-"-: I v m -..1 257 ~: -,0 -0 __,.J ~ri - =-' 9~ ,:;-- )-~ c:: w (SIn ~,;:,:" -, ___t ? -( 3J N ......: ". :~ ". " <" <',--,,-, ' -- ~-- ,,-- - ~, ~ - , _"H -~-~.-, i ~>', :,~~i~;_;"",_-' '_:~':'--';''-2i-':~- ':'"'-""".- SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned action discontinued with prejudice with the caveat that Plaintiffs are not waiving their right to proceed under Cumberland County Civil Action No. 2000-4450. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP By: Dated: /-I4-0Y SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZ1, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD. P.O. BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700' FAX (717) 234-8212 . www.sholljanlaw.com ,-- --, " ..~ -'-~~ ", '. -""-,_,,^,, __"e'___- -"_ '''-<--&i< ~ ~ l:~ , . - SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 60545 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0545 Telephone Number: (717) 234-3700 Fax Number: (717) 234-8212 Attorne s for Plaintiff KENNETH STITES, A Minor, by SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Guardians, and SHARON A. STITES and STEVEN STITES, Individually, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 00-7028 v. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CIVIL ACTION - LAW WELLNESS, and ANNE MARIE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MANNING, M.D., Defendants AND NOW this I t( day ofCJ..L.. ,2004, I hereby certify that I have served the following Praecipe to Dis~e following by forwarding a true and correct copy of same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to: Craig Stone, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 By: Dated: l-14-C4 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 1820 L1NGLESTOWN ROAD' P,O, BOX 60545 . HARRISBURG, PA 17106-0545 (717) 234-3700. FAA (717) 234-8212 www.sholljanlaw.com fF. <" ~, .~~ ~-, =,< -.",~,,:...::..~ "'- ~..,~ ~, -::au:i: " -", " - ~-~ :z C/i :::::::, '..~"- ~::::,._. >.S^~ :< "', C.> C.:.) J=- '- ~~;: C) -n -t -'I- rA f~~ :pcn g~~~) -,-' -'," , ~~~~ .::;~ :"iJ .-<. (T. -0 -,." '>? -'" 1"'0