The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-2493 FX < JEANNETTE LUGARO, 1415 S. 15th Street, Apt. 202 Harrisburg, PA 17104, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : No. DJ - ';(I./~~ Gu~l ~~ DONALD DOSS, 1509 Ridge Road Whiteford, MD 21160 and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION: 1513 East Commerce Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013, Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Writ of Sunnnons on behalf of Plaintiff Jeannette Lugaro upon Defendant Donald Doss and Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation at the addresses listed above. By: HANDLER, HENNING ~~ .~ Step en . Held, Esquue Attorney 1.D. #72663 1300 Ling1estown Road P.O. Box 1177 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1177 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: ~Cd-Of cl r ;'-" '"'-'~";- '. T ~.J___~"g1>"'~,:~r',f"7,,'" < ~" ""j'!<"-:' ,'^ :<,,'-.'" ,~","c'lt"lI--t'o, ",p :O"C'-,-I,-~ '." ,_ ,__~" ~~ ,co, ~,~ >'",' ,,'~' __, '~o~<>: ,,,y,,;~_~_,,"",,,,,,.,,.,." ~,.."," '" ",~,,~--,-~'-;!", -,,,,.,,=.~ ", .. .~, .' . Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Cumberland JEANE'I'l'E LUGARO 1415 S. 15th Street, Apt. 202 Harrisburg, PA 17104 vs. DONALD DOSS 1509 Ridge Road Whiteford, MD 21160 Court of Conunon Pleas No. 01-2493 Civil Tem 19____ CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION 1513 East Commerce Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 In ___ __c::~ Y_~U\.9_1:~'?!l__:_ ~~_____ _____________ To _1?9!l_a);,g_ ):lQe!LA1!g_r;_1!J;:HpJ~~_r;E}:::~J~J:_<;:9]JJOration You are hereby notified tha t .____~~~~~~_~_~~9_~~'?__________________________.________________________________________________ the Plaintiff haS commenced an action in _____~_:i,v..:i,:],_~<:.t~9!!._:_~~_____________________________ against you which you are required to defend or a default judgment may be entered against you. (SEAL) ._-------<;:~!~--~~-~~----------------------- Prothonotary Ilate ___~P::_~~_?7_~_~P~_~__________ 19____ ~-2-.-~ - _ _- _~ . IleputyL--t~t-~ "~n.~ _, ," of, Tlo \ '1' l' '" . ,,"_, '" "" ~" 'W"_" ,""^. ,~" ~~~.,~~.. ._""-,- . , , ~ , H....,J5fI1jI--!((.l , O~O @t;i& ii\'~c., , . I-:' . w rt I P> VIP> ..,.(1) I I , o -.J~ 00(1) I ~ ~ ~ ....-0 ~ ~ ~ ~ , . I Ii' ot'Q I ~Wf-' rt\.O ~ VI , ..,......~ ::T h 1-" f-l- (1) f-' ..... (1) , ,,**,WUl t-'ro Ulf,jlUl Hl:<lo. UlCllrt , -.J f-' 0" X .....:::r ~. f-' f-' 01-1. 0". rt 0 , 1,)1 R :::r (1) Ul (1) 8.<8' & ci1 R ~ (1) f-' , , "'..,. f-'<!l G'l ~ r - rt I , ,,",0\.0 1-:'1-'" 0 - (1) Ul <!l VI t" tv , W 0- -.J(1) ~ :gO~ Ul - rt ~ ..,. >' o -.....)OO::r:: eg' ::T<!l '" J '0 rt(1) f-' i ~. '0 P> W ~ ~~ :J>ICIl~ -.J (1) tv 0. rta 0 iO o~~ f-' f-'~ ..... -.J (:1 f-'Q f-' -.J(1) ~ f-' g'~ , W(1)O '" f-'(1) ..... 0 :1 .. a 0 Ort f-' 00 0.';< i = ~~ ..,.- I roo f-' ~ f-' B S ~ -.J I rt -.J I (1) rt I I ..... - <C> I g tv I I 0 I I tv I I I "''''''1 ,>R_" ,",.",""",~!"',~ 0 1~~~~~~i""''''l)!m'[f!~~__~"~fl'<m'~'l-~-\o"f'j''''''''F~:''i'''~''FC;P",,q:j'1IJ'lW~11""",,"WI;~!:1!!!~~i~~ill"OO~WIlIIf~'~~Jlillb'!l~1 SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR iL%'i~~#3 CASE NO: 2001-02493 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND LUGARO JEANETTE VS DOSS DONALD ET AL CPL MICHAEL E. BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION was served upon the , 2001 DEFENDANT , at 1253:00 HOURS, on the 2nd day of May at 1513 EAST COMMERCE AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to DAVE METZLER PRESIDENT CEO a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 18.00 6.20 .00 10.00 .00 34.20 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ,?3,<J.... day of it. ;~,,~:;D P othonotary I 9~ 'l"l..., . ' II r So Answer~~/ff~ R. Thomas Kline 05/02/2001 HAND~y~ c, Deputy Sheriff , ", ~,i""-- ... JEANNETTE LUGARO, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. : No. 01-2493 DONALD DOSS and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION, Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PROOF OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ~ day of May , 2001, I hereby certify that I have served the attached Writ of Sunnnons upon Defendant Donald Doss by sending a Certified copy of same to him via United States Certified Mail # 7000 1670000527676558 at the following address as evidenced by the attached receipts. Donald Doss 1509 Ridge Road Whiteford, MD 21160 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG By: {/L ~ ~ Ste~ ~SqUire Attorney 1.D. #72663 1300 Linglestown Road P.O. Box 1177 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1177 Attorneys for Plaintiffs / ': "~:i-'" ;,;t::r'1i1,c"~"',"":,:,,",,,::'e,,~~~i"":~ - ',; ,~- ;,,~, ^'t"_'-f'_~Pjh1; ,,' ,~'-~_'.,_~, ,~~ ,_" ^<,-_,"'''''''~,>~' c" '-~?0". '1" "~" __, , ", ~ y",_,,,,,,,~_~__,,,,,,,,, __" ,,,"" "' "~ ,_,~, ,"" <-. ~~- J - U.S. Postal Service '-'"" .'._"-.' CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT . .. (DomestIC Mail Only; No Insurance. Coverage- ProviC/eilf ~;' L " _' co U1 U1 .J] I T'.." ',' " ,,-,.' ,4,:> i Postage $ Certified Fee - POS!rLlark Ret,JmReceipt Fee HNe (Endorseme:lt AI:!Q.UlreQJ 1=iestrictedDclivefY FeE; (Endorsement Required) r-- .J] r-- ru U1 CJ CJ CJ ~ Total Postage & Fees I $ : -:::;OAP,~~.o;-r~C'~'hnm__hm h n, _ _ _ mh , _ j g r7;iiY."[jiaiJ~~41.---~~.~--~u. n .0. n no..j r--l...."..._"p.~ ;2\1 (,,~,.""",.+~~r..R,.J SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION . Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 jf Restricted Delivery is desired. .-; Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. . Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front jf space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: B. Date of Delivery r.''i-~DI -~- ')JP o Agent o Addressee D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No 10 1\6.\ d D:,ss l5(O'1 \l,:~(V~oe.& hi\{ Ite.<;o-'ld..] I'rLb 02ll ~ 0 lL, '" 3. ~rvice Type ,til Certified Mail o Registered o Insured Mail o Express Mail tJQ. Return ReceIpt for Merchandise DC.O,D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) Dyes 2. Ar:tlcle Number (Copy from service fabeQ 7eyy, 1I.'7tJ f\tx\'6 ').1101 {,SS'b PS Form 3811, July 1999 Domestic 'Return-Receipt 102595.00.M.0952 I Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Cumberland JEANETI'E LUGARO 1415 S. 15th Street, Apt. 202 Harrisburg, FA 17104 VS. OONALD OOSS 1509 Ridge Road Whiteford, MIl 21160 Court of Conunon Pleas No. 01-2493 Civil Terra 19__h CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION 1513 East Commerce Avenue Carlisle, FA 17013 Civil Action - Law In _____________________________________________ T 0 J29n.2;.~Q. _ P.!:2'? '? _ _'l.qQ. _.9_2;.tH.?),!~_~AJ;:J;~f'_J;: _ ~9JJlOra tion You are hereby notified that Jeanette Luga.ro ._------------------~----------------------------._----------------------------------------------- the Plaintiff haS commenced an action in h___~_~'C.~~_!;."_t~9P__~_~"'___________hh________hh__ against you which you are required to defend or a default judgment may be entered against you. I' (SEAL) .________~~~i'?__~c_~_n:g_______________________ Prothonotary Date ___~!?!_~~_?!_'_,?9.?_~______h__ lL__ ~_2___~ Deputy -C-t.! I-,! 1" f. I I ., " - Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW JEANNETTE LUGARO, v. No. 01-2493 DONALD DOSS and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 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 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 Court Administrator Fourth Floor Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone (717) 240-6200 f1f ,,-- '_"r_'~'_~'. ).",-" ,~, <, ',"eo', "'," -,< "'I"~"I""",~~"'_ ;t".~,__ '.'1 '.' ,'^ 'r",-, , . Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW JEANNETTE LUGARO, v. No. 01-2493 DONALD DOSS and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas signuientes, usted tiene vienta (20) dias de plazo al partir de al fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita 0 en persona a por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas 0 sus objectiones alas demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se fefiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 akuvui que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puedo parder dinero 0 sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO IMMEDIATAMENTE. 51 NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 51 NO TIENE EL DIMERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEPONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE EMCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSSGUIA ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Court Administrator Fourth Floor Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone (717) 240-6200 \"," ----,-,,' ----'-'~~~':'iJ"-<:c< -'/q' ~ "~",': "'-:"fl';;'i' , 'p-,,,'_'" "':"',"0',' . . o' I '-', ,,' -~ .- '__ ", < '~-~_'C: A' ',"'~' "__'; ,n<, . Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION. LAW JEANNETTE LUGARO, v. No. 01-2493 DONALD DOSS and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Jeannette lugaro, by and through her attorney, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, by Stephen G. Held, Esquire, and makes the within Complaint against the Defendants, Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation, as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, is a competent adult individual currently residing at 1415 South 15th Street, Apartment 202, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17104. 2. Defendant, Donald Doss, is a competent adult individual currently residing at 1509 Ridge Road, Whiteford, Maryland 21160. 3. Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, is a corporation currently doing business at 6380 Brackbill Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 1 "~;:':,,~:,,:~,.,).~~,,:j'_<', -_"}',e --- "",,;,.;:<_,_?"':,(~"-:' '-):''''?''~''I'~I>", ,':' ^' -,'-:'.- ":',c ",~ .',~:-'," ,C'" ,,,,,^'c ,-' ' ..0,-" . -.; -1' "e ~' "" p, ... <"""",~" ,," ,," ", _c__' . , , "y 4. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, was the owner and operator of a 1986 Honda Accord that was insured by Progressive Insurance Company under which motor vehicle insurance policy, Plaintiff was covered by the Limited Tort Option. (hereinafter "Plaintiff's vehicle"). 5. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, elected the Limited Tort Option enumerated in the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. CSA 9 1705(a)(1). However, pursuant to Act 6 of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. CSA 91701 et sea., Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, is entitled to seek damages as though she has elected the full tort alternative due to the fact that she has sustained injuries as a result of the collision described herein with a vehicle that was registered in Maryland. See 75 Pa CSA 91705 (d)(1)(ii). 6. At all times material hereto, Defendant, Donald Doss, was employed by Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, and was the operator of a 1998 Peterbuilt Tractor Truck, upon information and belief, owned by Defendant Donald Doss and registered in Maryland. 7. On or about May 10, 1999, Plaintiff was stopped at a red light on St. Johns Road near Trindle Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 8. At approximately that same time and place, Defendant Donald Doss was traveling on the same road way when he failed to stop and rear-ended Plaintiff Jeannette Lugaro's vehicle. 2 , --, -'::"-;'j""~(.:?'':0'0'_,~';'''.''''_~!: ,,_~_'e}':~'::-=-~,"" " ""oJ}] < ';'__" "-, ' ,~ I" 'I, "", ,_'"V',< " 9. As a direct and proximate result ofthe negligence of the Defendants, Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation, Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, sustained extensive and serious personal injuries, as set forth more specifically below. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Jeannette Lugaro v. Donald Doss 10. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, incorporates and makes part of this complaint paragraphs 1 through 9 above, as if the same were set forth fully below. 11. The occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro were caused directly and proximately by the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: (a) In failing to keep a reasonable lookout for vehicles lawfully stopped on 81. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; (b) In failing to be reasonably vigilant in order to observe the stopped vehicles including the Plaintiff's; (c) In failing to operate the vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking the Plaintiffs vehicle; 3 , - " -" ~>_"'"' <~"V" , ~,'- J'?'I'r"",'-'~ ,< '"''_.~,<_~-r',--''' ""'~'I" 'r" r ",'''n ,. "__, _~,"__ "-y- ~'" ~ '-, ~"":'''t,_,!",,_'''_'''' (d) In failing to operate the vehicle in such a manner so that he could apply his breaks in a manner that would have enabled him to avoid striking the Plaintiff's vehicle; (e) In failing to take such precautions as a prudent person would take in regards to the speed and control of the vehicle, as he approached other vehicles stopped on 81. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; (f) In failing to maintain proper and adequate observation of the existing traffic conditions; (g) In failing to operate a motor vehicle at a speed that was safe for existing weather and road conditions, in violation of 75 Pa. C.8.A. S 3361; (h) In failing to operate said vehicle at a speed and under such control so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance, in violation of 75 Pa. C.8.A. S 3361; (I) In failing to be continuously alert, in failing to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, an in failing to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons of property could be avoided; U) In driving the vehicle upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property, and in a manner 4 ',' '~~p"l,e"_,.,,.:<,~, "" _",'':' >:' ~',' '~___p, ',," " ",'" < ,~~, ,--" with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation ofthe MotorVehicle Code ofthe Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 12. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, sustained personal injuries including, but not limited to, her neck, back and gluteal regions which ultimately required surgical attention. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been and will in the future be, hindered from performing the duties required by her usual occupation and from attending to her children, daily duties and chores, to her great loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered great physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to her great physical. emotions and financial detriment and loss. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for the aforementioned injuries, to expend money for medicine and medical attention to her great detriment and loss. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures and she will continue to suffer the same in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 5 '.c, -''''--~ ,-'-_"~A~ "'7,_,,,,,,,,__,~,,,"'_,",o-h''-}'!.,'~,_,> ,,":"I"I'~~r;~+ ~~~" ,~-"-- , ,,'~, ,- -'-,' "I" , ~' " "~",, 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has incurred lost wages and will in the future continue to suffer lost wages and/or a loss of earning capacity. 18. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro believes and therefore, avers that her injuries are permanent and serious in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, seeks damages from the Defendant, Donald Doss, in an amount in excess of Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), exclusive of interests and costs, which is an amount in excess of jurisdictional limits requiring compulsory arbitration. COUNT II - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT Jeanette Luaaro v. Carlisle Carrier CorDoration 19. Plaintiff, Jeanette Lugaro, incorporates and makes part of this complaint paragraphs 1 through 18 above, as if the same were set forth fully below. 20. The occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence, carelessness or recklessness of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, acting solely and/or in conjunction with Defendant Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: (a) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfull stopped on 81. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; 6 " , , ,~ '1"'.-" c'_;"'" '''~ ,'- " . '1"'1": '''''-''--'':--"'=-/--, ~,' - I' ,-- , ',,, '[-, , ~"_-~_ ,,- ,~, " ~~ (b) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to operate his vehicle at such a speed, and under such control, so as to avoid striking Plaintiffs vehicle; (c) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to properly observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; and (d) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to operate his vehicle at a speed and under such control, so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. 3361. (e) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to be continuously alert, to fail to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, and in allowing Defendant to fail to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons of property could have been avoided; (f) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to drive upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property, and in a manner ith careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 7 ,,,~, -9_,':,',-:':", ~,"'"'-~ ,7,'"" ""I'" "'-,1' "'-', ,t~ .__'_>_~,", ,c~__,,' 21. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, sustained personal injuries including, but not limited to, her neck, back and gluteal regions which ultimately required surgical attention. 22. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been and will in the future be, hindered from performing the duties required by her usual occupation and from attending to her children, daily duties and chores, to her great loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 23. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered great physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to her great physical, emotions and financial detriment and loss. 24. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure forthe aforementioned injuries, to expend money for medicine and medical attention to her great detriment and loss. 25. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures and she will continue to suffer the same in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 8 "-.," ~ , -' , c" "- - ,," -'-" 1"'1" ", ""'.'--'''-',' ", ;-~- ~""'l" , ,'- -~, I , 26. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has incurred lost wages and will in the future continue to suffer lost wages and/or a loss of earning capacity. 27. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, believes and therefore, avers that her injuries are permanent and serious in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, seeks damages from the Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation in an amount in excess of Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), exclusive of interests and costs, which is an amount in excess of jurisdictional limits requiring compulsory arbitration. COUNT III - RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR Jeanette Luaaro v. Carlisle Carrier Corooration 28. Plaintiff, Jeanette Lugaro,. incorporates and makes part of this complaint paragraphs 1 through 27 above, as if the same were set forth fully below. 29. At all times applicable hereto, Defendant Donald Doss, was acting as an employee, agent and/or representative of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, and to that extent Defendant is vicariously liable forthe negligent acts of Defendant, Donald Doss, under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 30. The occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries To the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence, carelessness or recklessness of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, acting solely 9 J~ ' ,", -'", ';' ;;'--, ';~'"r~._~, , ; , '"',,.- ~'~'I~-I-', y"-," '..., "-,,,?, ~, I ' " ", .." and/or vicariously and through Defendant, Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: (a) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfully stopped on 5t. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; (b) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to operate his vehicle at such a speed, and under such control, so as to avoid striking Plaintiffs vehicle; (c) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to properly observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; and (d) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to operate his vehicle at a speed and under such control, so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance in violation of 75 Pa. C.5A 3361. (e) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to be continuously alert, to fail to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, and in allowing Defendant to fail to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons of property could have been avoided; 10 . "1;;',,",/" "-- ,~'". ",-, < "~",,. --. ",,'r 0", (f) In allowing Defendant, Donald Doss, to fail to drive upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property, and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, sustained personal injuries including, but not limited to, her neck, back and gluteal regions which ultimately required surgical attention. 32. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been and will in the future be, hindered from performing the duties required by her usual occupation and from attending to her children, daily duties and chores, to her great loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 33. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered great physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to her great physical, emotions and financial detriment and loss. 34. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for the aforementioned injuries, to expend money for medicine and medical attention to her great detriment and loss. 11 ,'r'\" 35. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures and she will continue to suffer the same in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 36. As a direct and proximate result of negligence of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, has incurred lost wages and will in the future continue to suffer lost wages and/or a loss of earning capacity. 37. Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, believes and therefore, avers that her injuries are permanent and serious in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, seeks damages from the Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation in an amount in excess of Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), exclusive of interests and costs, which is an amount in excess of jurisdictional limits requiring compulsory arbitration. Respectfully submitted, Date: ~ By: HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG Jd~rn I.D. No. 72663 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs 12 .. -', c'~ I',,,:'~" .,0<_ c<.. ,,__ ,"~-'_ __ ' ,"-, " , '^," ' ~~ ~ " ~ VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is of counsel and not my own. I have read the document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this Verification. The undersigned also understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~(13/ 0;). I ~r.l\flM.1 ~rl!2l- Jean ette Lugaro I - , '"-":c 'f',,;y,,<t;: - ,-',' 'r"',- '::'':-' '1" .", o. "I, r'''",,::" -,,~, ,-'~ ""-'_" __>,' ,~~"_~~,,,__ ,- " "J' '" _~ ,. " ,'--"V", '.-,7 ,=,', _ ' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this IJ'i-h day of OIJ8"d- ,2002,1 herebycertifythatl have, on this date, served the within document upon defendant's counsel and all counsel of record by sending a true and correct copy of same to them via first class United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: Dave Metzler, President, CEO Carlisle Carrier Corporation 1513 East Commerce Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Donald Doss 1509 Ridge Road Whiteford, MD 21160 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG LLP By: <JlJ-.tlw.. ':If.nhrJlu~ Patricia Kohnlein . " -" ,:q;g'"'"'~f-;("': _,~f~,', 'Y-- ~;'~;:\ _~''<?C'''"'''-'_71:''1 ,,'c_, ,'_~-'F~,,','_'~'" -- ~ .' 'I "- <, " - "-"~,,,,, --,">> '" " .",~ ,".. ,," __ ,_ , w.. " I I I I L '-- __r,." , ~ <,~, "("__!u,, ''O'F;'-~,'',,':')''-' , ,C _,~" __ __ "_",,~ ~ ~ 0 ('::J ~) r " '" ,1 ,-- < ~'!lO .~.~ T (~'''i ,< n-: , ,,' ) :.-.::' --, J 2:>) -- , -' , , , -- " ) , I ,", ,li -"" :',J ,,,' - Co ;:,:;~ < - ) '"""I ~ _^J' -< ()~ -< "M~,M "~II~l'\ , IN THE CIRUlT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Jeanette Lugaro, No.: 01-2493 Civil Term Plaintiff vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Donald Doss and Carlisle Carriers Corp., Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this d 7~y of August, 2002, a copy of foregoing Entry of Appearance of Robert A. Lerman, Esquire, and Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, was forwarded to the following via first class mail, postage prepaid: Stephen G. Held, Esquire 1300 Ling1estown Road, P.O. Box 1177 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1177 Attorney for Plaintiff R bert A. Lerman, Esquire ~. # 07490 ~/~~~h. A- Thomas B. Sponaug , Esquifle S.C.1.D. # 64584 Date: ~ /2> 1/n.-/ I By: Date: 1J!z,,7)iV , By: 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (717) 757-7602 Attorneys for Defendant, Carlisle Carriers Corp. pfh - doss~PRentryapp.z ~,. ,.,.~. -, ~, 1'-,1 "'- .-', 'I i I "'" """",,,". ~ . (") 0 0 C 1",) " $. "S>> -00.:. r= h,:O rnn C;-) Z:r 'r- N .~-.rn ~~~ _OJ ::J <.0 ~6 !;=C' -0 rl-r, 2; c) ~ {"5 :fJ .",0 ==0 r;: ~~':::: i-n PC '-'. Z, s;! -1 +" ::D -< -< '<,< ~_~, <""''- ,,,,:;>:_=~,,_,., ~,_ "_,~~",l"llliiIli~']T_.:~~~t~~!I!Il~,, . . IN THE CIRUIT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Jeanette Lugaro, No.: 01-2493 Civil Term Plaintiff vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Donald Doss and Carlisle Carriers Corp., Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Robert A. Lerman, Esquire, and Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, as attorneys for the Defendant, Carlisle Carriers Corp., in the above-entitled matter and mark the docket accordingly. g!>1) 6 V By: Date: Date: 9 /~1 }. :z.---- I ' ,Robert A. Lerman, E q S.C.I.D. # 07490 B;/~~~~d ~_ Thomas B. Sponaug , Esquir;.r S.C.I.D. # 64584 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (717) 757-7602 Attorneys for Defendant, Carlisle Carriers Corp. "'I",TJI 'A><r?_' ..-,,_ ,- In ^ . -- ""~- . , - -,~ 'iff, "~-.- .~- ~ 1- . " ..,..'C. . ~.= . _jillt"~- ""' '." .-.~-~'"> -~-~ ,~ (") 0 0 C f\..) " s: ~ '-1 -OCt,; ,- :-.f; :!J 0;1 D:: G') "'---'-' N ~~9 Zt:, (f.).c'. ,,D -<L Jr,'-, ~c:; ___J,,--," -0 _~ ::f~ >(-... ~. ~~~ C) 26 ~. ('.) ~-~'-ITl PC ( )' :::1 Z > =< (h) :::t ':"- .."'~--, "T,~ _"_,H"h_",;,r~""z"O',,~~:"\' " ,~. -~~ij.~~~","..,,-.~ IN THE CIRUIT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this GfA day of ~~ , 2002, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & Esquire, a member of the firm CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy ofthe Interrogatories/Reqnest for Production of Documents of Defendants to Plaintiff, Set No. 1 by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Stephen G. Held, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road, P.O. Box 1177 IIanisburg,Pi\ 17108-1177 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS By: THOMA . SPONi\UGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York,PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 ~-_~c; ~_" - ,,""'-"_"'~_ ",'"-'',^'--''' "--"-"" ~~--"N~L_r _~ .~- F..Ct," ,p~.." .'.'il' " :! ii, !.'I.'I !~ :11 iii ![I :!\ ~ 4~~ I J _ J' ,-.~ . 1- ~"I. ~, " rrJ~' ~. "~ ~." ,~-~~~ (") C <' -r.."/t~C rpr.r ""-~'_: 2:1:-- (n,"~~. r;.:l.~ >.~(. .~~~ ::':J ~. ", ._~.~ ,,~ N :J') ,.." '-0 I \D ,.,~) ~ -.-:-:1 - ;:~\~~\ "1'.__0' _.~ L :-:; LJ :S;2 '-':~;f(; ~~ .< ~~o -'"' 0"'-. ..,1""',,,,,,.. ~ "",~~.4iI~~~,~~~j!1>~_~~1 J ~,~.~~,''''''''-~t!ll!~~_"",,:~;"'., ,"TO", ,".~~ IN THE CIRUIT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, ANSWER & NEW MATTER 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 5. Denied. Paragraph 5 is a conclusion oflaw to which no response is required. 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 8. Denied. It is specifically denied at approximately that same time and place, Defendant Donald Doss was traveling on the same roadway when he failed to stop and rear- ended Plaintiff Jeannette Lugaro' s vehicle. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and did not fail to stop and rear-end Plaintiffs vehicle. -"'~"~-" ,-,-,~''l'_'~~<~:r_::c>='~''_ -- -^ - <~ 't C'_ - I. I"",;,', _ -~, ,"H.',e_' _ '-! '; " ~ 9. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendants Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation were negligent. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendants acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and were not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 9 are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE JEANNETTE LUGARO v. DONALD DOSS 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 of Defendants' Answer are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. 11. Denied. It is specifically denied the occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence of Defendant, Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: a. In failing to keep a reasonable lookout for vehicles lawfully stopped on St. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; b. In failing to be reasonably vigilant in order to observe the stopped vehicles including the Plaintiff s; c. In failing to operate the vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking the Plaintiff s vehicle; d. In failing to operate the vehicle in such a manner so that he could apply his brakes in a manner that would have enabled him to avoid striking the Plaintiff s vehicle; e. In failing to take such precautions as a prudent person would take in regards to the speed and control of the vehicle as he approached other vehicles stopped on St. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; f. In failing to maintain proper and adequate observation of the existing traffic conditions; , -"',_,,~,'- "_~_ ..'w~"", ,"., ~,..' ~,,, nO' '''''''_'IO':''I_,"_~'_ _,,",0 0 " ,'_' ".,', g. In failing to operate a motor vehicle at a speed that was safe for existing weather and road conditions in violation of75 Pa. C.S.A. ~3361; h. In failing to operate said vehicle at a speed and under such control so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. ~3361; 1. In failing to be continuously alert, in failing to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, and in failing to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons or property could be avoided; and J. In driving the vehicle upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent rnanner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is dernanded. 12. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 13. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information :0, , ,'\'. 'r-',," _ <, "~"'~_,c" ,--, , ,",' "h' -1"-' _>-:"~",,_",,,_,/ __ .^. -- I sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 14. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 15. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is dernanded. 16. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. ~r':'~' '"I "". "'" 17. Denied. It is specifically Defendant Donald Doss was negligent in causing this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Donald Doss acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The rernaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 18. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant Donald Doss respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff. COUNT II - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT JEANNETTE LUGARO v. CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION 19. Paragraphs 1 through 18 of Defendants' Answer are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in fulL 20. Denied. It is specifically denied the occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence, carelessness or recklessness of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, acting solely and/or in conjunction with Defendant Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: a. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfully stopped on St. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; f!<_ _- 7""'_"~-_-""'-" "'".::h~''' :T1-< ",,, ,,,,-,.;f',," ""...,~", -, ,~ ,".,." ,-' '~'I'~I' ,-- _ ._ ,=_ , _ ",!,., " ,_ _ ,_ - _ "i _ ,_ _ ,\\ _, IN THE CIRUIT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, No.: 01-2493 Civil Term vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, ,>' ;-' NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Jeannette Lugaro c/o Stephen G. Held, Esquire HandIer, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road, P.O. Box 1177 Harrisburg, P A 17108-1177 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer & New Matter of Defendants, Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation, within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOL YMOS & S By: THOM S . SPONAUGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme 000 J.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York,PA17402 (717) 757-7602 '"lD "~~''O' " ,!;,.,,",_,,_"T",~, .,",.e -, ,', . ''I "1-' , - '_, -, .,-~, '-',,-~ " " ~ ." ~ b. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to operate his vehicle at such a speed and under such control so as to avoid striking Plaintiff s vehicle; c. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to properly observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; d. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to operate his vehicle at a speed and under such control so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance in violation of75 Pa. C.S.A. 93361; e. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to be continuously alert, to fail to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, and in allowing Defendant to fail to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons or property could have been avoided; and f. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to drive upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner and was not negligent, careless or reckless and strict proof thereof is demanded. 21. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is dernanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 22. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The ,;~ . ,,,~- ,"._ C',"',!.'_!,"", "~P- "-.,., ~- ., -, \--"\ -- - ',' - ',~' ",.-.-" '-~-'--""Y"', - .' ~~ ""'" .c, remammg allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 23. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent rnanner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 24. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 25. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable '<- . ','w_ 'Y-,'.,?"1',,,-"'Ot!'._;. ',_ _o~', ". " ",,", .,~" - .-1",-1"'" ,,-^ ~- ,r_~_ -, ,~~ _'I' , investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 26. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 27. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in its favor and against the Plaintiff. COUNT III - RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR JEANNETTE LUGARO v. CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION 28. Paragraphs 1 through 27 of Defendants' Answer are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. 29. Denied. Paragraph 29 is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 30. Denied. It is specifically denied the occurrence of the aforementioned collision and the resultant injuries to the Plaintiff, Jeannette Lugaro, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence, carelessness or recklessness of Defendant, Carlisle Carrier Corporation, acting solely and/or in conjunction with Defendant Donald Doss, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: .", - - ,- '-"'-T~-_"~"- _~-__'" ,_r~ _"" ~.' 1"'1 " ",",_1_ '1-- '1- a. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfully stopped on St. Johns Road in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County; b. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to operate his vehicle at such a speed and under such control so as to avoid striking Plaintiff s vehicle; c. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to properly observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; d. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to operate his vehicle at a speed and under such control so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance in violation of75 Pa. C.S.A. ~3361; e. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to be continuously alert, to fail to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist, and in allowing Defendant to fail to have the vehicle under such control that injury to persons or property could have been avoided; and f. In allowing Defendant Donald Doss to fail to drive upon the streets in a manner endangering persons and property and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in strict violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner and was not negligent, careless or reckless and strict proof thereof is demanded. 31. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circurnstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity ofthe allegation, the same is denied, and strict proofthereof is demanded. 32. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, ,~~~ ~,," "~, -~ _,- ,',J, '~"'r"_';"""C'~"" ;'''' ',~' C'}-, -",_ ~I-tl"~'"'''''' _ -, .w.,_ ~,~~ ,-.,- r,,- _ '_ " Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 33. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent rnanner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 34. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 35. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The L';'~, ~,~_~ "'_ _"~"__ '1",-, ~J'~""""'!~ - -, _',0 <. 1..1 ,,'. -I' .,,, ",' ~, rernammg allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 36. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation caused the above-referenced accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in this Paragraph are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. 37. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegation, the same is denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in its favor and against the Plaintiff. By way of further response, the following is asserted: NEW MATTER 38. Paragraphs 1 through 37 above are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in ful1. 39. Plaintiffs Cornplaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. 40. Plaintiffs Complaint may be barred by the applicable statute oflimitations. "r., ".0'._ "<--,..-c,:'f",d'f""!'"_:",,''''' ,', .~._ . , -. , -;-1-"-1 . ,~-, . " ~--' - - :-~ 41. Plaintiff s injuries and damages, if any, were caused solely and directly as a result of individuals or entities other than the Defendants and over whorn the Defendants have no responsibility or right of control. 42. Plaintiff created a sudden emergency when she suddenly, abruptly and without warning stopped in front of Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation. 43. Plaintiffs injuries and damages, if any, were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence ofthe Plaintiff, which consisted of the following: a. Failing to properly control her motor vehicle; b. Failing to keep a proper lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the roadway; c. Driving at an excessive rate of speed for the conditions existing therein; and d. Failing to maintain proper and adequate observation of the existing traffic and road conditions. 44. Plaintiffs claims must be barred or diminished with respect to Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence Act because of the negligence ofthe Plaintiff as set forth above. 45. Plaintiff has not sustained a serious injury as defined under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 46. Plaintiffs claims for non-economic damages may be barred because Plaintiff has elected the limited tort option as set forth in the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 47. Plaintiff may have failed to rnitigate her damages. 48. Plaintiff has received various benefits from other insurance arrangements, programs, or group contracts of insurance, including benefits under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, and Plaintiff may not recover the same benefit from this proceeding. -" ;-~'"~<(_"'", !':f,,'~d'> ;'c'",: ,'" "-.", , - - I-_l-~' -:' -",,~-1-,,' -'"C_ ~, _, -, 'I ". '," ,"'. .' . ~, 49. The injuries and damages the Plaintiff claims to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have pre-existed this accident and were not caused as a result of the accident. 50. The injuries and damages the Plaintiff claims to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have pre-existed this accident and were not aggravated or exacerbated as a result of this accident. 51. The injuries and damages the Plaintiff claims to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have been sustained subsequent to this accident and may not be related to this accident. 52. Plaintiff has recovered from the injuries, which she allegedly sustained as a result of this accident. GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERM~?, SOLYMOS & CALKINS />/ /... Y By: THOMAS . P Supreme Court 1. . #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York,PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 - .1 '_0'" "'~,"~,~,~~' ':-~3\,,"'-:" ','"~" ''''"., - l' ~ ,--I'!"l"'" .,'-'. - , '-, , ,,~, ... ,~" 1- . IN THE CIRUlT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, VERIFICATION I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, do hereby verity that I am the attorney of record for the pleading party herein, Donald Doss, and that the facts set forth in the foregoing pleading are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, upon information supplied. I understand that false statements made herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LE SOLYMOS & CAL Dated: ~~*oZ/ BY: THOMAS B. .ONAUGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme Court J.D. #64584 110 South Northern Way York, Pennsylvania 17402 (717) 757-7602 - ~"."""~-".-"" ."":-3-\,';-_,'__~__'.~~'~~_"__ ,..-,-, . .-V"jc '~__,_,~ """_ 0,",' "_,~ .~~_I__~ ,--c, f- IN THE CIRUIT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, VERIFICATION I verify that the foregoing facts are true and correct, upon my personal knowledge or information and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. ' 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: \m :r - , . .-r-'\'!-' ,- ~.-!"!"':RTi"~_,4-_,,'~~,'~,,_,,_~,.c,.-,~, _, ,- , , -, "".e _,', ' -, '1:>1' e >.,~_^, ,',_, -,,,,___ --" . . IN THE CIRUlT COURT OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plain tiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this S~ day of ~ ~~ , 2002, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, a mernber of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOL YMOS & CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Answer & New Matter by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Stephen G. Held, Esquire HandIer, Henning & Rosenberg 1300 Linglestown Road, P.O. Box 1177 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1177 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, RMAN, SOL YMOS & CAL By: THOMAS . SPONAUGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme Court LD. #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York,PA17402 (717) 757-7602 ;\1 " . ;',::-R,~-'n"':_"b-,I .-~l\("i-,_,;'fh-<"--'- ,~, ._,~ . ~1"'1 " -":'" "., , 'f-" , ,., . ,.<;:- ,\ J c.y }( A '1-' i! I:: I!l I Iii i'l ,'j i:f Ii ,,11 I" h I" (\ I' II! ::1 I' ~ II Ji. n ~; i,i ...1 -<:. . . c::') t',' 1~ " c~-, ,",-. id ',) (.", ~I-__. 2t ~~" ~. Tc .~ ~_, . ,~'r':1,': .,_~:l!1ffli!~'~:!"_~t~rlt~~lJ1l~f~JIWj!~Wi!'i)lJjlliJl~'!.'IIl~W1l!lf__ ""T'" Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW JEANNETTE LUGARO, v. No. 01-2493 DONALD DOSS and CARLISLE CARRIER CORPORATION, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 38. Paragraphs 1 through 37 of Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference thereto as set forth at length. 39. The averments in this paragraph are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averments may be deemed factual, they are hereby denied. By way of amplification, Plaintiff's Complaint does state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. 40. The averment in this paragraph is a conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, the applicable statute of limitations, 42 Pa. C.S.A. S 5524 provides a two-year statute of limitations for an action to recover damages for the injury to the person or for the death of an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect or unlawful violence or the negligence of another. The motor vehicle accident giving rise to the cause of action occurred on May 10, 1999. This action \h~^,'_.. w.'. ---:-'_\"'~::,~.'.,~,_-_,,!::,.,, \'_>"<"o:>-r',_ "^'_"'~ '.,~r:I'_V"_">"F~___,_ .',,",-_""),_'~" --I' - 1 , _ 'M~__ was instituted by a Praecipe for Writ of Summons filed on April 27, 2001. As such, plaintiff's claims are not barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 41. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. Byway of amplification, defendants' averment lacks the specificity required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Further, all of plaintiff's injuries and damages were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence, carelessness, wantonness and recklessness of the instant defendant. 42. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, Plaintiff did not create a sudden emergency when she suddenly, abruptly and without warning stopped in front of Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation. Furthermore, if there was a "sudden emergency" involved in this accident, which is specifically denied, said "sudden emergency" was caused by the negligence of Donald Doss and Carlisle Carrier Corporation. 43. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of lawto which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, Plaintiff was not negligent in any way. All of Plaintiff's injuries and damages were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence, carelessness, wantonness and recklessness of the instant defendant. Furthermore it is , denied that Plaintiff failed to properly control her motor vehicle, failed to keep a proper look 2 .,. '~:"~"~'k",,,..,,- , - '-_7 - '?-'."';P",:'" ''''-CWI?11-':''',- /"'~>'!''''''''''_' K_C' ~_ ~. ",- - out for other vehicles lawfully on the roadway, did not drive at an excessive rate of speed for the conditions existing therein and maintained proper adequate observation of the existing traffic and road conditions. 44. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of lawto which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, as previously indicated herein, plaintiff was not negligent in any way. Therefore, the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act does not apply to the instant action. Further, all of plaintiff's injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action and are in no way reduced. 45. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. to the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, plaintiff has sustained a serious injury as defined under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 46. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of lawto which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, all of plaintiffs injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action. The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law in no way limits the damages Plaintiff may recover herein. 47. Defendants' averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, plaintiff has not failed to mitigate her damages. 3 ',"" ,~ ".-~, ,",,,_n' '--"""'""'__',-0"- ,-,"",<"",;,.","_~,_,_,~,I'P'i"-. '__,""~,",,,,'_ "_'-",'",___ ,_,-~.'" "" T. .".,0' 48. Defendants' averment is a conclusion oflawto which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, all of plaintiff's injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action. The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law in no way limits damages plaintiff may recover herein. 49. Defendants' averment in this paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, all of plaintiff's injuries are due to conditions caused by the present motor vehicle accident. To the extent that it is averred by defendants that any injuries are the result of pre-existing conditions, it is denied. If it is determined that pre-existing conditions were present in plaintiff, said pre-existing conditions were aggravated or accelerated by the damages sustained in the present motor vehicle accident. 50. Defendants' averment in this paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification all of plaintiff's injuries are due to conditions caused by the present motor vehicle accident. To the extent that it is averred by defendants that any injuries are the result of pre-existing conditions, it is denied. If it is determined that pre-existing conditions were present in plaintiff, said pre-existing conditions were aggravated or accelerated by the damages sustained in the present motor vehicle accident. 4 P7?!ij^~ Y~'f""l'i,,~'__,~,:i',"_.~:;,''''__' :_!C,,,!,_,,,, -. t"-~"_.,ry"J'I','r;-i~:",-",,,,,~--"~ -, ,>. ".,.' _ ,'1,"'_ -.1_ ", ',""_'. _'" 1 51. The averment in this paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, the injuries and damages that plaintiff sustained in this motor vehicle accident, have not been caused subsequent to the accident and are related to this accident. 52. Defendants' averment is a conclusion oflawto which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent this averment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, it is denied that plaintiff has recovered from the injuries she sustained as a result of this motor vehicle accident. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendants' Answer and New Matter and enter judgment in her favor against the Defendants. Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG LLP Date: \&f JC{ ([l- By: Stephen G. eld, Esq. 1.0. No. 72663 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff 5 c.> '" -~. ",-~, " ;,~,:o:~":~.~r.f:.~!":~,~1__~'~ '~<:"";.::":':"":;,'.-1!";>'__ . ! ",'I'~IL' "F. ~",_ ,/~1'-'-' -',' ~ "f -"'I". .~. r . ~ - , .~ f VERIFICATION STEPHEN G. HELD, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verification and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation ofthe matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 1Lt ~Ct()~ ~1!.", _ ,;,'-o""--',,"IT4:_"~-o~'" 0 'co -, ""r ",,',_,,~ - r''''~o:'' 'V~~ll__'_' ~,',,~,,'<~ ~-o~_""';'''''', <? .,' _;'C "" ' , I _",~ "-- .. -" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this-;Jf~ day of AhllfJlltR'f"- / , 2002, I hereby certify that I have, on this date, served the within document upon defendant's counsel and all counsel of record by sending a true and correct copy of same to them via first class United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG LLP By: P"fA ct'f r. 41_ htJJo..l~' Patricia Kohnlein 1*'" ",,,~, , """,--",;.;'; >. ,'~"; , '''''', '-, I,>'" ",,:,-:rYr'_(-~~"'"^~,~ ,."~,-, ,~-, , - ""'--'- - - -'._,','-". -',-,," ,-' }".r' '1/ F<V'- I I :'1 ':i , , i " ,. " " I , , I i :1 , :',! ;"i I :1 1 ~1 '.;i 1M; ~. , r. , ?, ,. ~ -< ~, ~~ "'!I;I,,,,,_ _ -_~^' -A' -.~ (") S '" .'"t~(E n II~- ;~.~' c/),r ~(-~ -" S':.:C) >C) c z =;! C:' ('I.) o 1''1 n I 1''' ~~ JJ -. --t~q 'r ~-~A ~;~ :~~~ f,~,rn 'J ---1 35 --< -') -iJi.. N c- 'v F<:_~_O~~~le\~~~,__ --;T":: 01, 'J.'-I9J CU'l( CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 10 day of January, 2003, I hereby certify that I have, on this date, served the within Answers to Interrogatories/Production of Documents by sending a true and correct copy of same to Defendants' attorney of record via first class United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows: Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG Date:~) St : ~ '; ~Y',<j;;,!"",-'" ~-" "'-~~'~O.~ ",,1_~_,,' __"..'''''..,_ . N ,"__" -,.'-." _" ~_, _ ~_,,-,_ < M ~" I g c:> 0 W .on s::: - .--, i rBcP P" ~;\.\== I no, :z 2~ N ,.,-. ',-' --, ~~Z r _:~~~L) !:2Ci -0 ._1"'" .:1 ZO -:~ ~l"'1~~ -. _'''_~ t.. ) ~O '.~ '_~~ rn J>"C ~~ 'Z - ):~ ~ N ~ ': ';I I I [I I, Ii 'I ~: r,' 11 1.11 III lr ,: 'I I Ii, i'1' i:- ~_ 1'-' f';l ,.1, f ~~ 1'."1 r,':' "] 1[1 I ,c. [. ~. ,,-,- . . ,.' rr-~V:_ll:~Im. ___,!fm~",),_Jl~-. '__'""~-'"""'V}1-_ __".V._ "'y~" ~. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ?~ day of ~ o./I..cL 2003, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOL YMOS & CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Defendant Donald Doss's Response to Plitintiff's Request for Production of Documents by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Stephen G. Held, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg P.O. Box 60337 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0337 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOL YMOS & CALKINS By: ~ THOMAS B. SPONAUGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme Court LD. #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 '\;\1,\1>,,,,, '",,~~ _ r" ",-, . 11 -','"','""- "'""'-,< ... :) :1 ,) I ;j i "j I :j 1: ,-:1 ':) i i i I I I , ! i -1 ~-~ ".' . - .'~ - ~~ '~~~" =~." o f; -ocr ~~~;'. ....::- (!~ -, r::(:J ~~;:~, 5c~ z ;~:J c:: (,,> -( ~ (Jl [~'- ,~ -"", ~fl_"'~~,'JI;lll~(~~1I',*'l!1:_W~~)ml~~m~,Ij~~~1.,_. -'-,>1'~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 7~ day of doJ~ 2003, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, hereby certifY that I have this date served a copy of the Defendant Carlisle Carrier Corporation's Response to Plaintifrs Request for Production of Documents by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Stephen G. Held, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg P.O. Box 60337 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0337 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS By: ~ THOMAS B. SPONAUGLE, ESQUIRE Supreme Court J.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendants 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 ~- 1'1 ~r t' ",,' '~",,, "", < c.... s..j )(:;0 ;i '. 1" ;! ,q (,i .' . i;: }:. '-1 I , "" .".-- ~ -"-'-'" '" "'~ ~-) ". ~. (J ?E ~r; ~~:: ~-. .~~'c:_ j;;t:' .."... -'1'''' c:~ -::.:; -<: O--~ ."'_,.,,~ ",_'%O~~__../~i!'_~m\'!~II;HWt~)~~~~~~~" -:"},-:J~'~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEANNETTE LUGARO, Plaintiff, vs. No.: 01-2493 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DONALD DOSS AND CARLISLE CARRIER CORP., Defendants, PRAECIPE TO: PROTHONOTARY Please mark the docket in the above-captioned matter settled and satisfied. HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, By: 8TE G. D.?~ Supreme Court J.D. # Attorney for Plaintiff . P.O. Box 60337 Harrisburg, P A 171 06-0337 > '_'; _,'co' :'.";";l<Oo/'.--_,'}',_'-;-,,,./,,. _'," ~'~ ,~_. _.,,'_~:_'I~I''''o ,-" ~ , -"'1 -",,"'_1'''"'''-' f - " ((;..., l(p !1 I I I I f2!:l , - ~. _." e'., ~ . ._ ~- - '" .~ .,- ." ,,' O'Ck ,", t~ ---0,_, r,-;, ;~:' ~'. ~l_- >. )';: ~- f'~) "--.J '-:..- . ~ ~> -"....1 L..~-' ~:; . )~~_!~. 1_~_~""I'.~~f~,~l'ii'jl!~~jW~~~I!!~.;!lImi'l;mft"jl!i~~_~~~ .il4\'l!il'l