Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-05301IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs v. CIVIL ACTION -LAW CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND 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 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 LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HF,LP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)249-3166 (800)990-9108 235780.1~RASVvILB IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW N0. ~l-S3C~[ ~1V1~~~ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la torte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas sugnuientes, usted tiene viente (20) dies de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notification. Usted debe presenter una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la torte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la torte tomara medidas y puede entrar una Orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notification y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la petition de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes pare usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATEMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEPFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARR AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEQUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 (800)990-9108 235780.1\RAS\MLB ~ i IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. O!- S,3Ul ~..lUl~ L- - L v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiffs Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener are adult individuals, citizens of the State of Arizona, who previously resided at 516 Springhouse Lane, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant Consiglia Arena is an adult individual, citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, who resides at 4 Oakwood Court, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The facts and occurrences hereinafter related took place on or about December 16, 2000, in the parking lot of Giant Foods, Simpson Feny Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 4. At that time and place, Plaintiff Donna Kroener had just fmished shopping at Giant Foods and was exiting the store to enter the parking lot and to get into her car. 5. At that time and place, Plaintiff Donna Kroener was walking in the area marked for pedestrians. 6. At that time and place, Defendant Consiglia Arena was operating her 1998 Plymouth Voyager in the parking lot of Giant Foods. 7. At that time and place, Defendant Consiglia Arena failed to stop at a stop sign, failed to stop for pedestrian traffic, and struck Plaintiff Donna Kroener causing Plaintiff Donna Kroener to fall to the ground. 8. The foregoing accident and all of the injuries and damages set forth hereinafter sustained by Plaintiff Donna Kroener are the duect and proximate result of the negligent, careless, wanton, and reckless conduct of Defendant Consiglia Arena as follows: (a) failure to keep alert and maintain a proper watch for the presence of pedestrians who might be in the parking lot; (b) failing to properly inspect the premises for situations or conditions that might pose a hazard to persons in the area; (c) failure to apply her brakes in sufficient time to avoid striking Plaintiff Donna Kroener; (d) failure to keep proper and adequate control over her vehicle; (e) failure to yield the to a pedestrian who was properly crossing the parking lot; (f) failure to have her vehicle under such control as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (g) failure to keep alert and maintain a proper watch for the presence of pedestrians on the highway; (h) failure to travel at a safe speed; and t 234865.1\RAS\PAS 2 (i) driving her vehicle in a manner endangering persons and property and in a reckless manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. CLAIM I DONNA KROENER v. CONSIGLIA ARENA 9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 10. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned accident, Plaintiff Donna Kroener sustained painful and severe injuries, which include, but are not limited to, a fracture of the proximal and distal phalanx of the right great toe and multiple contusions and abrasions. 11. As a result of the injuries sustained, Plaintiff Donna Kroener was forced to incur liability for medical treatment, medications, hospitalizations, and similar miscellaneous expenses in an effort to restore herself to health, and claim is made therefor. 12. Because of the nature of her injuries, Plaintiff Donna Kroener has been advised and, therefore, avers that she may be forced to incur similar expenses in the future, and claim is made therefor. 13. As a result of the aforementioned collision and resulting injuries, Plaintiff Donna Kroener has undergone and in the future will undergo great physical and mental suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily activities, loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment, and claim is made therefor. 234865.1\RAS\PAS 3 u ~ 14. As a result of the aforementioned collision and resulting injuries, Plaintiff Donna Kroener has been and in the future will be subject to great humiliation and embarrassment, and claim is made therefor. 15. Plaintiff Donna Kroener continues to be plagued by persistent pain and limitation and, therefore, avers that her injuries may be of a permanent nature, causing residual problems for the remainder of her lifetime, and claim is made therefor. 16. As a result of the aforesaid accident, Plaintiff Donna Kroener has sustained scars which will result in a permanent disfigurement, and claim is made therefor. CLAIM II ROBERT KROENER v. CONSIGLIA ARENA 17. Paragraphs 1 through 16 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 18. As a result of the aforementioned injuries sustained by his wife, Plaintiff Donna Kroener, Plaintiff Robert Kroener has been and may in the future be deprived of the care, companionship, consortium, and society of his wife, all of which will be to his great detriment, and claim is made therefor. 234865.1\RAS\PAS 4 u WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener demand judgment against Defendant Consiglia Arena in an amount in excess of Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. Date: September 7, 2001 234865.I~RAS~PAS ANGINO & ROVNER, P.C. I.D. N .47281 4503 o ront Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs 5 u VERIFICATION We, Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener, Plaintiffs, have read the foregoing PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT and do hereby swear or affirm that the facts set forth in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. We understand that this Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities. / ~ A / ~l Witness Dated: ~''~aaJ(} f Donna Kroener 1r~2~x~r.~_. Robert Kroener 234961.I~RASVvILB (J ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ fi C .~ + W ~ l ~~ n ~ C r~ =~, -~ -~,s mn, - ~- ~ -r o ~-~, o , , -; U}~ _ ,, _ ~ r, [ i r ~i C~ _ ~4i Cy) 'T) ,_,, ~~ s John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #78000 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 239-4161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S PRE-TRIAL MEMORANDUM I. Statement o£ Facts as to Liability This matter arises from an incident which occurred on December 16, 2000 in the parking lot of the Giant supermarket located along Simpson Ferry Road in Mechanicsburg. Plaintiff Donna Kroener was exiting the Giant and was adjacent to the crosswalk when Mrs. Arena approached the crosswalk. Mrs. Arena believed that Mrs. Kroener was stopped, and that Mrs. Kroener intended for Mrs. Arena to pass in her vehicle. As Mrs. Arena proceeded in the driveway in front of the Giant, Mrs. Kroener continued to walk adjacent to the crosswalk. At some point, the front tire of Mrs. Arena's vehicle came in contact with Mrs. Kroener's right foot. II. Statement of Facts as to Damages Plaintiff received a fracture to hex right great toe, as well as a Crush type soft tissue injury to her right forefoot. No surgery was required or casting was required, and the injuries appear to have resolved without complication. From December 18, 2000, until March 22, 2001, Mrs. Kroener had four office visits with Dr. Hallock of the Orthopedic Institute of Pennsylvania. Dr. Hallock noted on the visit of March 22, 2001 that the foot was stable. Mrs. Kroener also had three visits with Robert E. Wolfe, M.D., a plastic surgeon. Mrs. Kroener's last visit to Dr. Wolfe was on March 6, 2001 wherein Dr. Wolfe noted, "Excellent - the wound has completely healed." There was no further treatment until May 22, 2001 when she was seen by Sun Valley Orthopaedic Surgeons. Plaintiff received 6 physical therapy visits. The second and final visit occurred on June 19, 2001 with Sun Valley Orthopaedic Surgeons. At that point, Mrs. Kroener was instructed to return on an as needed basis. Mrs. Kroener has not sought any further treatment. Consequently, all of Mrs. Kroener's treatment was concluded within approximately six months of the accident. 2 III. Issues as to Liability and Damages ~ L 1. WHETHER MRS. KROENER IS COMPARATIVELY NEGLIGENT WITH REGARD TO THE HAPPENING OF THE INCIDENT? 2. WHAT IS THE VALUE OF PLAINTIFF'S DAMAGES WHERE MRS. KROENER RECOVERED WITHOUT COMPLICATION AND TREATMENT CEASED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE INCIDENT? IV. Summary of Legal Issues Defendant objected during the testimony of Dr. Hallock during Dr. Hallock's videotape deposition. The objection was raised when Dr. Hallock rendered testimony concerning the treatment of Sun Valley Orthopaedic surgeons which was after Dr. Hallock had ceased his treatment of Mrs. Kroener. The parties have not received a copy of transcript of the deposition. Upon receipt of the transcript, Defendant may file a motion in Limine concerning this testimony. V. Witnesses I. Consiglia Arena 2. Donna Kroener (as on cross examination) 3. Robert Kroener (as on cross examination) 4. Any witnesses identified by Plaintiffs in their Pre- Trial Memorandum 3 VY. Exhibits 1. Photographs of the scene of the incident. 2. Any exhibits identified by Plaintiffs in their Pre- Trial Memorandum. VII. Status o£ Settlement Negotiations Plaintiff has demanded $57,500, and Defendant has previously offered $12,000. Date: June 13, 2002 Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By- ~~~i /~/t /,cam Jo R. Ninosky, Es ire I.D. #: 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant 4 s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on June 13, 2002: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By Joh R. inosky, Es uire Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' PRE-TRIAL MEMORANDUM I. STATEMENT OF CASE The instant action arises out of a December 16, 2000, pedestrian/motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred in the parking lot of Giant Foods, Simpson Ferry Road, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff Donna Kroener finished shopping at the Giant, exited the store, and entered the parking lot to return to her vehicle. Plaintiff Donna Kroener was crossing within a marked crosswalk. Unfortunately for Mrs. Kroener, Defendant Consiglia Arena was inattentive while operating her 1998 Plymouth Voyager. Defendant Arena failed to stop at a stop sign, failed to stop for pedestrian traffic, and failed to yield the right-of--way to Plaintiff Donna Kroener. Defendant knocked Mrs. Kroener to the ground and ran over her foot. 236966.1\RAS\MLB II. DAMAGES Plaintiffs seek to recover all damages recognized by Pennsylvania law including, but not limited to, pain and suffering, scarring, loss of enjoyment of life's pleasures, and loss of consortium. III. WITNESSES 1. Plaintiffs Donna and Robert Kroener, 17792 West Camino Real Drive, Suprise, Arizona; 2. Defendant Consiglia Arena, 4 Oakwood Court, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, (on cross-examination); 3. Joan Connor, 16 Pheasant Court, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 4. Richard Hallock, M.D., Orthopedic Institute of Pennsylvania, 875 Poplar Church Road, Camp Hill, PA 17011, (via videotape deposition. Plaintiffs will supplement this list, if necessary, in a reasonable time prior to trial. IV. EXHIBITS 1. Photographs of Plaintiff Donna Kroener's foot; 2. Photographs of accident site; and 3. Diagram of accident site. Plaintiffs will supplement this list, if necessary, in a reasonable time prior to trial. 236966.1~RASVbILB V. EXPERT REPORT The expert report of Richard H. Hallock, M.D. is attached hereto as Exhibit A. VI. STIPULATIONS Plaintiffs request a stipulation as to Defendant's liability. VII. LENGTH OF TRIAL 2 days. VIII. SCHEDULING PROBLEMS Plaintiffs currently reside in Arizona and will be returning to Pennsylvania for the trial. Therefore, Plaintiffs and their counsel respectfully request that this case be given a priority and start trial on the Monday of the trial term. IX. EVIDENTIARY ISSUES Defense counsel raised an objection during a portion of the testimony of Dr. Hallock. 236966.1\RAS\MLB X. SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS Plaintiffs' current settlement demand is $57,500 to resolve the instant action. Defendant has offered $12,000. Respectfully submitted, ANGINO & Ric~d A,.B~dlock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs Date: June~~, 2002 236966.1\RAS\MLB BALRYT BALOO. M.D. RICHARD J. BOAL, M.D. ROBERT R DAHMUS, M.D. STEPHEN W. DAILEY, M.D. WRLIAM W. DeMUTH, M.D., F.A.C.S. JOHH R FRANKEKY II, M.D., F.A.C.S. MARK R OEQ16B, M.D. RICHARD H. tIALLOCK, M.D. JAMES R HAMSHER, M.D., FAGS. OREOORYA. HARKS, M.D. ALEXANDER KALEHAK, M.D., FAGS. ROBERT R KANEDA, D.O., F.A.C.O.S. RONALD W. LR'PE, M.D., FAGS. JASOH J. LfITON, M.D. ERNEST R RUBBO, M.D. WILLIAM J. POLACHECK, JR, M.D. STEVEN B. WOLF, M.D. THOMAS J. YUCHA, M.D. fELEPHOftE: (717)761-5530 (800)834-4020 . FAX: (717)737-7197 , www.orthoinstituteofpa.com March 14, 2002 Angino & R.ovner, P.C. Richard A. Sadlock, Esq. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1708 RE: Donna L. Kroener 332 36 8276 Dear Mr. Sadlock: I originally saw Donna Kroener at the Orthopedic Institute of Pennsylvania at our Powers Avenue Office on December 18, 2000. At that point, she was a 56 year-old lady who came in for evaluation of her right foot. She stated that she was injured in a parking lot by an automobile which ran directly over her right forefoot on 12/16/00. _She was seen in the Emergency Room following her injury where x-rays were taken and revealed a fracture of the proximal phalanx of her great toe. She complained of diffuse pain and swelling throughout her whole right forefoot from the medial side of her foot to the lateral side. Her physical examination.on that date revealed diffuse.swelling in her forefoot. Her skin appeared_to be intact. However, there were some areas where there were fracture type blisters from the swelling. The vascular status of her toes, however, was intact. Range of motion of her ankle was within normal limits. Range of motion of her knee was within normal limits. X-rays of her foot were reviewed and they did, in fact, demonstrate a nondisplaced fracture of the proximal phalanx of her great toe. My impression, at Chat point, was that the patient had not only a fracture of the nrnxima 1. nha,l gnx Of her r;_ghY groat too; hnt also a s;_vnifican t. crush type injury to the soft tissue throughout her whole right forefoot. At that point, she was instructed to wear comfortable foot gear as well as keeping her foot iced and elevated. She was then re-evaluated in our office on 1/12/01. At that point, she was still having significant pain in her forefoot, but the pain in her great toe was subsiding. Her physical exam confirmed that she still had significant swelling in her forefoot. She had an area of eschar or devitalized skin on the dorsum of her foot which appeared to be clean. ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: 875 POPLAR CHURCH ROAD, CAMP HILL, PA 17011 CAMP HILL OFFICE HARRISBURG OFFICE CAMP HILL OFFICE HER6HEY OFFICE CAMP HILL OFFICE 3976 TRINDLE AD. 450 POWEkS AVE. 890 POPLAR CHURCH RD., STE. 108 32 NORTHEAST Dft., STE. 201 875 POPLAR CHURCH RD. RE: KROENER, DONNA L. PAGE 2 March 15, 2002 X-rays showed that the fracture of the great toe proximal phalanx remained nondisplaced and nonangulated. At that point, we continued with dressing changes on the dorsum of her foot, and discussed the possibility of a plastic surgery evaluation for her skin loss. She was again seen in our office on February 8, 2001. At that point, she continued to complain of pain and swelling in her foot. Her physical examination on that date revealed a 4 centimeter in diameter area where she had skin changes on the dorsum of her foot. She still had diffuse swelling in her whole foot as well. At that point, we decided to have her evaluated by a plastic surgeon. She was last seen in our office on March 22, 2001. At that point, her foot was improving. The skin wound on the dorsum of her foot was healing up satisfactorily. Srie had been to see Dr. Robert Wolfe, a plastic surgeon, who suggested that observation was the only indicated treatment at that point. Her physical examination on that day revealed that she still had stiffness in her great toe. Her skin wound was all but healed. She had a small area where there was a minimal amount of serous drainage. The surrounding skin had less than normal sensation. The neurovascularly status of her toes, however, were fully intact. X-rays of her foot on that date revealed that the fracCUre of the proximal of her great toe had fully healed. At that point, she was making arrangements to move to Arizona. Her foot appeared to be stable at that point and was continuing to improve. Unfortunately, I am unable to give you any follow-up past that date. I suspect, however, that she was going to require some type of further orthopedic follow-up in Arizona and was probably going to require some type of physical rehabilitation for her foot injury. This type of injury normally takes approximately one year to reach maximum improvement. If you have any further questions, I would be Y}aRpy to ry to answer them. Y rd H. ~allock, M.D. RHHf mj h D: 3f14f02 T: 3/15/02 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' PRE-TRIAL MEMORANDUM on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 t~ `~.o-~ Marc . Br messer Date: June ~, 2002 236966.1\RAS\MLB SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2001-05301 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND KROENER DONNA ET AL VS ARENA CONSIGLIA RICHARD SMITH Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon CONSIGLIA the DEFENDANT at 1935:00 HOURS, on the 25th day of September, 2001 at 4 OAKWOOD COURT CAMP HILL, PA by handing to CONSIGLIA ARENA a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs Docketing 18.00 Service 8.45 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 36.45 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this d P day of /~.-CC~-.~ ""~ Prothonotary So Answers: ~~~ ~~,~ R. Thomas Kline 09/26/2001 ANGINO & ROVNER By: Deputy Sheriff John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. $78000 GDLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-9161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ROBERT KROENER, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. CIVIL ACTON - LAW CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant TO THE PROTHONOTARY: NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE PLEASE enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant, Consiglia Arena, in the above-captioned matter. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By ~~ ~ ~~ ~,~( John/R. Nino'sky, EsgiYlre Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: September 28, 2001 69019.1 m ' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on September 28, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KAT2MAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. BY ~tlli/ -~~ Joh Rte. °I inosky, Esqu~e Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #78000 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1266 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ROBERT KROENER, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant TO THE PLAINTIFFS: CIVIL ACTON - LAW N0. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from the date of service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By John /d, . Ninosky, Esqu3lre I.D. #: 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: ~d//'i11~' 69337.1 l/ John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #78000 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Sox 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 239-9161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ROBERT KROENER, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTON - LAW N0. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes Defendant, Consiglia Arena, by and through her counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., who files this Answex' with New Matter by respectfully stating the following: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation the Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 1 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. The averments in this Paragraph contain conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If .... .: a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 4. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 5. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 6. Denied. The averments in this Paragraph contain conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 7. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 8. Denied. This paragraph, including subparagraphs (a) through (i), are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). CLAIM 1 DONNA KROENER v. CONSIGLIA ARENA 9. The answers contained in Paragraphs 1 through 8 of Defendant's Answer with New Matter are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 10. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 11. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 12. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 13. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 14. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R,C.P. 1029(e). 15. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 16. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in her favor and respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. CLAIM 2 ROBERT KROENER v. CONSIGLIA ARENA 17. The answers contained in Paragraphs 1 through 16 of Defendant's Answer with New Matter are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 18. Denied. This paragraph is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in her favor and respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice. NEW MATTER 19. Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 20. Plaintiffs' causes of action may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 21. That this action is subject to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S.A. X1701, et sec. 22. The Plaintiffs' claims may be limited or barred by the ~~Limited Tort" option pursuant to 75 Pa. C.S.A. X1705, et s_e~c. 23. That the accident and any injuries sustained by the Plaintiffs may have been caused in whole or in part by the negligence of third persons or entities not presently involved in this action. 24. That if it should be found that there was any negligence on the part of the Defendant, which negligence is expressly denied, any such negligence was not a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs' damages. 25. That if the Plaintiffs suffered the injuries alleged in their Complaint, those injuries may have been caused in whole or in part by the negligence of the Plaintiffs and to recover in this action is barred or diminished in accordance with the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 26. Plaintiff may have assumed the risk of her injuries. 27. Plaintiff may have failed to mitigate her damages, if any, with any liability or responsibility on the part of the Defendant being expressly denied. 28. Plaintiffs' claims and/or alleged losses may have been, or were entirely or substantially, the result of, or caused by, intervening or superceding causes for which the Defendant is not liable or responsible. Any liability or responsibility on the part of the Defendant being expressly denied. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in her favor and respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. BY--- ~~~~'~-,-~ Joh R. Ninosky, Esq re I.D. #: 78000 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant Date: ~0'1)f0~ 69337.1 VERIFICATION I, Consiglia Arena, have read the foregoing Answer with New Matter and hereby affirm that it is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge, or information and belief. This Verification and statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities; I verify that all the statements made in the foregoing are true and correct and that false statements may subject me to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. X4904. ~ vL ~ Consigli rena DATE: 69337.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on October 17, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. BY~~_ Joh R. Ninosky, EsgUy/re Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 h - r ,; ~ __ , ~:~ - t» a`_ ~ _ ~, E ~ -c~ ~ :> ~. ~ - -- '- i ~ . ~ ~i - -i iV ~ 7 -C .„ ~ ~l ~/( i IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant NRY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW come the Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Angino & Rovner, P.C., and hereby enter the following Reply to the New Matter of Defendant as follows: 19. Defendant's averment is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent the auerment may be deemed factual, it is hereby specifically denied. By way of amplification, Plaintiffs' Complaint does state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. 20. Defendant's auerment 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, Plaintiffs' Complaint was filed well within the applicable statute of limitations. 21. Defendant's 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, 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 Plaintiffs may recover herein. 237700.I~RASVViLB 1 22. Defendant's 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, Plaintiffs selected the full tort option on their policy and is, therefore, entitled to maintain an action for non-economic losses. Further, Plaintiff did suffer a serious injury. Plaintiffs' Declaration Page is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 23. Defendant's 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, Defendant's averment lacks the specificity required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Further, all of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence, carelessness, wantonness and recklessness of the instant Defendant. 24. Defendant's 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 Donna Kroener was not negligent in any way. All of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence, carelessness, wantonness and recklessness of the instant Defendant. 25. Defendant's 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 Donna Kroener was not negligent in any way. Therefore, the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act does not apply to the instant action. Further, all of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action and are in no way reduced. 236966.1V2ASVVILB 26. Defendant's 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, Plainfiff Donna Kroener did not assume the risk of her injuries. Further, as previously stated herein, Plaintiff was not negligent or careless. All of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action. 27. Defendant's 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, where appropriate, Plaintiffs properly mitigated their damages. 28. Defendant's 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, there were no intervening or superseding causes. All of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages are recoverable in the instant action and were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence, carelessness, wantonness, and recklessness of the instant Defendant. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Defendant's Answer and New Matter and enter judgment in his(her favor against the Defendant. ANGINO Date: October 30, 2001 1~ I it ~~ 236966.I~RAS~MLB and A. Sadlock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs VERIFICATION We, Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener, Plaintiffs, have read the foregoing PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER and do hereby swear or affirm that the facts set forth in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. We understand that this Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unswom falsification to aurbpriries. ,~~.>> ~'~., "~ _ Donna Kroener " Robert Kroener Dated: ~~ a~ ~/ 234961.1V2A5\M[.B UNITED SERVICES AUTG JBILE ASSOCIATION IA RECIPROCAL INTENIN6UflANCE EXCHANGE) - .® 9800 Fredericksburg Road - San Antonio, Texas 78288 PENNSYLVANIA AUTO POLICY RENEWAL DECLARATIONS /d Insured and Address ROBERT A KRDENER LT COL USAFR RET 516 SPRINGHOUSE RD CAMP HILL PA 17011-1454 PAGE 3 ADDL INF( N NEXT PAGE MAIL MCH-M-I I<ENEWAL OF stele 18 21 ven POLICY NUMBER Terr 00069 30 11U 7102 ~ POLICY PERIOD: (12:01 A.M. standard time) EFFECTIVE NOV 01 2000 TO MAY 01 2001 01 ROBERT A KRDENER 02 DONNA L KRDENER mur uen m •mu~rc w/ VEN USE WUNX/SCNOf i YEAN TNAUE NAME MUOEL NOOY TYPE ANNUAL Iles Oeys MILEAGE IDENTIFICATION NUMBEN SYM ~se ) ~frr 1I99IMERCEDESIC280/C280SPTISED 4D 60001 WDBHA29G9XA746557 address EH 18 CAMP HILL PA 17011-1454 EH 21 CAMP HILL PA 17011-1454 'his policy provides ONLY those coverages for which oremium is shown below. KI H - L1H61L11I BODILY INJURY EA PER $ 100,000 EA ACC $ 300,00( PROPERTY DAMAGE EA ACC $ 100,000 RT B - FIRST PARTY BENEFITS MEDICAL EXPENSE $ 10,000 WORK LOSS $ 5,000/$1,000 MO FUNERAL EXPENSE $1,500 RT C - UNINSURED MOTORISTS STACKED BODILY INJURY EA PER $ 100,000 EA ACC $ 300,000 RT C - UNDERINSURED MOTORISTS STACKED BODILY INJURY EA PER $ 100,000 EA ACC $ 300,000 ~T D - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE COMPREHENSIVE LOSS ACV LESS ~OLLISION LOSS ACV LESS TOWING AND LABOR VEH 18 6-MONTH D=DED I PREMIUM 40 32 10.2 16.6 13,7 18 IP VEH I VEH 21 6-MONTH D=DED PREMIUM D=DED l PREMIUM D=DED I PREMIUM \MOUN~ S MOUNII S MOUNTI S 40.0 32.5 12.8 16. 13. 100 24,90p 100 39.1 5001 65.45 50 96.1 4.00 4.0 TOTAL PREMIUM - SEE FOLLOWING PAGE(S) )ORSEMENTS: ADDED 11-01-00 - A089(04) 5100PA101) ~ORMATION FORMS(NOT PART OF POLICY)- AANER 39PQ(01) 41PA(20) SOPA(02) i0PA101) 200103) 260(01) 650108) 5685(08) it Attorney-in-Fact on this date SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 caused ou rHUe v ~` ~ UNITED SERVICES AUT(_ )BILE ASSOCIATION C (A NECIPBBCAI INTEBINSUBANCE EXCHANBn Smle Veh POLICY NUMBER U$f~® 9800 Fredericksburg Road - San Antonio, Texas 78288 Terr 00069 30 11U 7102 PENNSYLVANIA AUTO POLICY POLICY PERIOD: (72:01 A.M. standard time) RENEWAL DECLARATIONS EFFECTIVE NOV 01 2000 TO MAY 01 2001 lamed Insured and Address Te ROBERT A KROENER LT COL USAFR RET 516 SPRINGHOUSE RD CAMP HILL PA 17011-1454 TBABE NAME I MBBEL I BBBY TYPE IUENTIEICATION NUMBEB I SYM I WBBx/SEB~ P=Plea This policy provides ONLY those coverages for which VEH VEH VEH VEH a premium is shown below. COVERAGES LIMITS OF LIABILITY D=DED PREMIUM D=DED PREMIUM D=DED PREMIUM D=DED PREMIUM 1"ACV" MEANS ACTUAL CASH VALUEI Mou S MOUN S MOON 5 MOU s EHICLE TOTAL PREMIUM 207.47 254.9 6 MONTH PREMIUM $ 462.40 ULL TORT APPLIES HE FOLLOWING COVERAGES) DEFINED I N THI S POLIC ARE NOT P VID FOR: VEH 18 - RENTAL REIMBURSEMENT VEH 21 - RENTAL REIMBURSEMENT their Attorney-in-Fact on this date SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 000 U Robert G. Davis Attorney-in-Fact CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ~rymesse ~ ~_ Date: October 30, 2001 236966.1UiASWILB ii c~ ~-~ ~; - ~. ~_; t'_ Z~^? _`. ~;~;_ ..1 -I ~~ cx "~ ~"Si 6212-1-4/CERT OF SERVICE/LRS/vlf November 26, 2001 3:28 PM ROBERTA M. KLEIN, PLAINTIFF v. MICHAEL SQUILLARIO, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 01-5371 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION -CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, LeRoy Smigel, Esquire, attorney for Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, do hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Complaint for Custody and the Emergency Petition to Confirm Custody with Order dated September 14, 2001, attached, on the Defendant by depositing same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid for first class mail, certified, restricted delivery, and return receipt requested, addressed as follows: MICHAEL SQUILLARIO 1929 MUNSTER ROAD PORTAGE, PA 15946 Defendant signed for said documents on September 17, 2001, as evidenced by the return receipt card attached hereto. SNIIGEL, ANDERSON & SACKS By: d~.9- LeRoy S 'gel, Es ire ID #09617 2917 No Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1260 (717)234-2401 Attorneys for Plaintiff W h.... ~ 1 (J..I l ~ ~M11~ ~Ie.~ n - -- - ~~~. niso complete xitem 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired A. Redeived~tiy (Please Print G`lea)". B_R `te dfDeliver . ~°Pnnt your name and address on the reverse )CN Z cif L ~ ('] 0 so that we can return the card: to you. ~ '"` ,, ,~,, ^ Attadh this card to the back of th e , 0. Signature _._ , e mailpieo , tar on the frontrf space permRs. ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ ~ ~ A9ent - 1. Article Addressed to: t). Is deliveryadd - different from item ^ AddressE 19 ^ Yes I ~ C~E ~ ~~~ ~~ o It YES, enter d ery address below: ^ No 19 z9 ~1u/UST~2 ~~ . . P© F-1 r F~~ r T I .J I wp 3.~~`S,er``~v.ice Typa rtMed Mall ^ Express Mail Registered ^ Return Receipt for Memhandis.~ (o,,` `-~'r ~ ~• ~ • ~O~ -r ~~"j ( ^ Insuretl Mail ^ C.0.0. 4 Re t i t . , . s r c ed Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes 2. Article-N U mb e r (Copy f m s rvice label) e S i~ v ~ . r ~~®t t~ieY~il...i ®o~'~ . `°~~~ 3Z~J ~ili r y t PR Form 3$11 Jul 1999 { Y Domestic Refum Receipt 192595011-M-0852 2917 NORTH FRONT STREET, HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1223 I! 1 n ~, _ _c __ b cz' nj r, , o <...z< ~~= rn i~; ±~ c ~=' ~:~ c ' ~ ~ 2, .. FA ~!J '~j/ John R. Ninqsky, Esquire I.D. #78000 GOLDBERG, HATZbH,N 6 SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Dependant DONNA KROENER and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ROBERT KROENER, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes the Defendant Consiglia Arena, by and through her counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., who files this Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel with New Matter by respectfully stating the following: 13. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiffs have answered interrogatories. To the extent that Plaintiffs claim to have "fully" answered interrogatories, this averment contains a conclusion of law and fact which is denied. 14. Admitted. By way of further response, it is unknown as to whether Plaintiffs have produced all-records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. Plaintiffs' refusal to permit Defendant to obtain records directly from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons raises a question as to whether all records have been produced by Plaintiffs concerning Mrs. Kroener's treatment at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 15. Denied. Plaintiffs' refusal to sign an authorization which permits Defendant to obtain records directly from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons raises a question as to whether all records have been produced by Plaintiffs concerning Mrs. Kroener's treatment at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. Plaintiffs have placed Mrs. Kroener's physical status at issue by filing this action. As such, Defendant is entitled to obtain all records concerning Mrs. Kroener's treatment for her alleged injuries. 16. Denied. Plaintiffs' refusal to sign an authorization which permits Defendant to obtain records directly from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons raises a question as to whether all records have been produced by Plaintiffs concerning Mrs. Kroener's treatment at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. Plaintiffs have placed Mrs. Kroener's physical status at issue by filing this action. As such, Defendant is entitled to obtain all records concerning Mrs. Kroener's treatment for her alleged injuries. 17. Denied. Defendant is prejudiced if Mrs. Kroener has not produced all records concerning her treatment at Sun Valley 2 Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. Further, there is no prejudice to Plaintiffs by Defendant receiving all of the records from the various providers. Plaintiffs' refusal to sign an authorization makes it appear as if Plaintiffs have something to hide in Mrs. Kroener's records. Harmful information contained in records which are produced does not equate to prejudice. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant her Motion to Compel. Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN 6 SHIPMAN, P.C. By /ll Joh--L=ny~osky, Esq re I.D. #: 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant Date: la/~'~ 7zoiz.i 3 VERIFICATION I, John R. Ninosky, Esquire, have read the foregoing Reply and hereby affirms that it is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge, or information and belief. This Verification and statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. X4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities; I verify that all the statements made in the foregoing are true and correct and that false statements may subject me to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. X4904. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By ~ / V' John Ninosky DATE: /2IS~0~ 69979.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on December 5, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By ~J~,/,~ /~ John Ninosky, Esqui Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 ~} E r l_ _.... ~.) [, U~ n <" U,Y _. ', c i ~';__ ~:: _: x' C -=i -C °°_ -< G~ ~; s. , • K DONNA KROENER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF and ROBERT KROENER, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA her husband, Plaintiffs v. CIVIL ACTION -LAW CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 11`i' day of December, 2001, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Discovery Responses of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, and of Objections of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents, a discovery conference is scheduled in chambers of the undersigned judge for Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 2:30 p.m. BY THE COURT, Richard A.Sadlock, Esq. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiffs John R. Ninosky, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorney for Defendant :rc `o.a ~2_~~-0l 1~.~'"~ ii ~~~1'°iP~i.4S~ J"J-ld irr~ r, , IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and CIVIL ACTION -LAW ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2001, after due consideration of the attached Motion to Compel Discovery Responses of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, it is hereby Ordered that Defendant Consiglia Arena provide the requested responses within days of service of this Order or show cause why such responses and documents are being withheld. Failure to comply with this Order will result in sanctions as provided by Pa.R.C.P. 4019. BY THE COURT: J. n t f , a ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Angino & Rovner, P.C., respectfully move this Honorable Court to compel Defendant Consiglia Arena to file full and complete responses to Plaintiffs' discovery requests for the following reasons: 1. ~ A Complaint in this matter was filed on September IQ, 2001, under the docket number of 01-5301 Civil. 2. On September 25, 2001, the Complaint was served on the Defendant Consiglia Arena. 3. On October 4, 2001, Plaintiffs forwarded to Defendant Consiglia Arena Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents. Copies of these discovery requests are attached hereto as Exbibit A. 4. As of the date of this Motion, Defendant Consiglia Arena has failed to respond to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plainfiffs' Request for Production of Documents. 207124.IQvILB~PAS r ~ , 5. On November 6, 2001, Defendant Consiglia Arena forwarded to Plaintiffs' counsel objections to Request for Production of Documents Numbers 1, 2, 3, 12, 13 and Interrogatory Numbers 23 and 34. Copies of Defendant's objections are attached hereto as Exhibit B. 6. Plaintiffs respectfully submit they are entitled to have Defendant explain all efforts Defendant made in answering the Interrogatories. 7. Defendant's objections to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents are without merit and are untimely. 8. Defendant Consiglia Arena objects on the grounds that requested documents are overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant discoverable information as such information is protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 9. All of the discovery sought by Plaintiffs through the Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents is relevant to the instant action. 10. Our Rules of Civil Procedure provide for the liberal granting of discovery. 11. Defendant Consiglia Arena has failed to comply with the discovery as required by Pa.R.C.P 4005 and 4006. 12. Defendant Consiglia Arena has had more than ample time to respond to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents. 13. Pa.R.C.P. 4019 provides that upon motion of a party, the Court can make an appropriate order when a party "fails to make discovery." Pa.R.C.P 4019(a)(viii). 239088.1\MLB\PAS ~ ~ a ~ 14. Plaintiffs are represented by Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire of the firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., 4503 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110, (717) 238-6791. 15. Defendant Consiglia Arena is represented by John R. Ninosky, Esquire, of the firm Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C, 320 Market Street, Strawberry Square, P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268, (717) 234-4161. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Your Honorable Court order Defendant Consiglia Arena to respond to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents and to pay Plaintiffs' attorney's fees and costs associated with the instant Motion. Plaintiffs further request that should Defendant fail to comply with the Court Order, then Defendant should be prohibited from presenting any testimony at the trial of this matter, precluded from entering defenses to Plaintiffs' claims at trial, and such other sancfions as the Court deems appropriate. Date: November 28, 2001 239088.1V~ILB~PAS ~r~u~ norm rruui oucc~ Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT TO: Consiglia Arena and her counsel, John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ANGINO & Date: October 4, 2001 Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs 236966.1\RAS\MLB Plaintiffs, through their attorney, hereby propound the following Interrogatories to defendants pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4006 to be answered within thirty (30) days from service thereof. These Interrogatories shall be deemed to be continuing Interrogatories. If, between the time of your answer to said Interrogatories and the time of the trial of this case you, or anyone acting on your behalf, learns the identity and whereabouts of any other witnesses not identified in your said answers, or if you obtain or become aware of additional requested information not supplied in your answers, you shall promptly furnish the same to plaintiffs' attorney by a supplemental answer. For the purposes of these Interrogatories, "you or "your" refers to the defendants and their files and all other persons, agents or representatives of the defendants and their files. "You' shall further include all persons on whose behalf defendants prosecuted this action and all persons who will benefit or be legally bound by the results of this action. Your answer to the Interrogatories shall reflect and contain the knowledge of all of the above persons. References to plaintiff and/or defendant shall be interpreted as singular or plural, depending upon the particular circumstances of each case. The term "description" or "describe" as used herein shall mean that the defendants shall set forth the name and address of the author or originator, dates, title or subject matter, the present custodians of the original and of any copies and the last known address of each custodian. "Document" shall mean any written, printed, typed or other graphic matter of any kind, whether handwritten, typed or printed, whether distributed or undistributed. It shall include without limitation letters, memoranda, articles, studies, notebooks, diaries and notes, as well as all mechanical and electronic sound recordings or transcripts thereof in the possession or control of the defendants or known by them to exist. It shall also mean all copies of documents by whatever means made. Answer each Interrogatory in the space following the Interrogatory Supplemental sheets may be attached for answers which require additional space. Please take notice that you are required to serve upon the undersigned your answers in writing within thirty (30) days pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. These Interrogatories are deemed continuing and supplemental answers should seasonably be provided. r ~ i ~ 1. For the person answering these Interrogatories, please state your full name, age, address, social security number, extent of formal education, occupation and the name of your employer, employer's address, as well as the nature of your employment, and if married, give your spouse's name. ~ ~ 2. State the year, make, model number, and registered owner of the vehicle which you were driving at the time the accident in question occurred. ANSWER ~ ~ r , 3. If you were not the owner of the motor vehicle but were the operator, give the name and address of the party who gave you the authority to use the vehicle you were driving at the time the accident in question occurred and state what instructions, if any, were given to you prior to operating the vehicle. T TTG.T.TL. T] 4. List the names and addresses of persons known or believed by you, or any person acting on your behalf, to have been within sight or hearing distance of the accident referred to in the Complaint, and with regard to each person, state: (a} his or her exact location at the time of the accident; (b) his or her activity at the time of the accident; and (c) whether he or she witnessed the accident. ANSWER 5. List the names, addresses and telephone numbers of each fact witness you intend to call at trial, and briefly summarize their anticipated testimony. ANSWER 6. Did you consume any alcoholic beverage, sedative, tranquilizer, marijuana, cocaine, hashish or other drug, medication or pill during the eight hours immediately preceding the incident referred to in the Complaint? If so, state: (a) the nature, amount and type of item consumed; (b) the amount of time over which consumed; (c) the names and addresses of any and all persons who have knowledge as to the consumption of those items; and (d) the names and addresses of the physician(s) or other person(s) who gave, purchased or prescribed any of the said items. ANSWER 7. State whether or not the vehicle which you were driving had any mechanical defects and, if so, state .the nature of same. ANSWER S. State whether you were performing any act in connection with your employment at the time of the incident in question. ANSWER 9. Give the carrier name, policy number and policy limits for each and every policy insuring you against the claims made in the instant action. ANSWER .=::wuwr~iais 10. State the name, address and occupation of any person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial, and with regard thereto, state: (a) the subject matter on which the expert is to testify; (b) the facts and opinions to which the expert is to testify; (c) a summary of the grounds of each opinion; (d) the name of any report, memorandum or transcript used to substantiate each opinion; (e) any code, regulation or standard, governmental or otherwise, alleged by the expert to have been violated, in whole or in part; (f) any standard scientific principle alleged by the expert to have been violated, in whole or in part; (g} any standard manufacturing principle alleged by the expert to have been violated, in whole or in part; and (h) the date, name and author of any textbook, document or other source relied upon by the expert in rendering his opinion and testimony. ANSWER ..~wa~.,,~ ,.,....... . 11. With regard to each individual you expect to call as an expert witness at trial, state the following: (a) date of birth; (b) name and address of present employer, and if self- employed, name and address of the business; (c) full formal educational background, with date of attendance and degrees obtained; (d) a list of all writings and/or documents of any kind prepared in whole or in part by the expert; and (e) names and addresses of all persons, firms or corpora- tions who have retained this expert in the past ten years to render a report or testify as an expert witness. ANSWER ]2. State your whereabouts for the twenty-four hour period prior t.o the incident in question. ANSWER w~~~~ . _ ~M ~ . , ~-; 13. State the purpose of the trip or journey in which you were involved at the time of the incident in question, including the exact time and point of departure, destination and time and place of all stops and departures. ANSWER 1 14. As of the time of the incident referred to in the Complaint, please state whether or not you were familiar with the location where the occurrence happened and state the nature and extent Of your familiarity, indicating the number of times you had visited the location where the incident took place within the last year. ANSWER :v~:.~tese°_ h I .:... i ~ ....r ~ nx 'yg%~~4iifl v: 1 ~ 15. Please describe as fully as possible the weather and road conditions at the time and location of the alleged occurrence, setting forth conditions of light, precipitation and temperature. ANSWER ~d.,av _ I ~ ~.~, n,.~ 16. Describe as accurately as possible what you were doing immediately prior to this incident, and all circumstances surrounding this incident. ANSWER _ ... .i.. ~ ~- - .~ ~-~:~kr_~ 17. State the following as accurately as possible: (a) your speed when you first viewed Plaintiff's vehicle; (b) the distance between your vehicle and Plaintiff's vehicle prior to the accident, and your speed at that time; (c) the distance from Plaintiff's vehicle when you first applied your brakes; (d) any efforts made by you to avoid Plaintiff's vehicle; (e) if your car skidded, the distance from Plaintiff's vehicle when the skid began; and (f) the amount of feet your vehicle required to stop at time of collision with full application of the brakes and travelling at the speed you were going. ANSWER _ _ .,, __ _ .~ ~ __ _, ~ ,. 18. State exactly how you contend the incident occurred. ANSWER . . 19. Do you contend that the Plaintiff was contributorily negligent or that the Plaintiff assumed the- risk of being injured? If so, state precisely the facts that support your position. ANSWER ~. . ~.... ,. ., ~.. ~-...«..~ .-._,_ _. _.. I ___.. t __ 4 I: _._.~,... ..._:.._.. raiiurun+'m5~murLmme~r,~ a .n-sd. I 20. Are you or anyone acting on your behalf in possession of or know of the existence of any photographs, blueprints, sketches, drawings, diagrams or plans of the instrumentalities, locality, equipment, tools or any other thing or matter involved in the incident in suit? If so, state: (a) the nature of the document, the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) preparing such document, and the date of its preparation; (b) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) presently having possession or custody of each such document; (c) the specific subject matter of the document; (d) the date it was made or taken; and (e) what the document purports to show, illustrate or represent. ANSWER 21. Have you ever been charged for any violation of the motor vehicle traffic laws or ordinances of any state or municipality arising from the incident involved in this action. If so, state: (a) the specific violation with which you were charged; (b~ the manner in which you were charged, i.e. citation; (c) by and before whom you were charged; (d) the verdict rendered and/or fine paid regarding said violation; and (e) the court involved. ANSWER ..n ,r nxaew ~ - I ._~...:.....,~.....,,$~, rte.:...,-,. f ~. 22. Have you or anyone acting on your behalf conducted any investigations of the incident which is the subject matter of the Complaint? If so, identify: (a) each person and the employer of each person who con- ducted any investigation; (b) the dates of investigation; and (c) all notes, reports or other documentation prepared during or as a result of the investigations, and the identity of the person who has possession thereof. ANSWER ~,.~.a.~:.a, ~.._. .. _. .. ... I I r~r~ ~.~.~,,. 23. If your attorney has completed an investigation, please provide the name, address, and telephone number of all witnesses identified in the investigation. ANSWER ~.,_ _ A_ , 24. At the time of the incident referred to in the Complaint, did you have a valid license to operate a motor vehicle? If so, state: (a) issuing state; (b) expiration date; (c) operator's license number; and (d) any restrictions, qualifications or conditions on said license. ANSWER ~_ __. I i m2~~~ 25. with regard to any restrictions, qualifications or conditions on your license, please state: (a) a full and complete description including the exact and precise language or wording on your license; and (b) the time, in months and years, that such wording appeared on your license. ANSWER 26. At the time of the incident referred to in the Complaint, did your license contain any reference to any prior actions, violations or offenses committed by you? If so, please state: (a) the date, time and place; and (b) the precise language or wording of each action, viola- tion or offense as it appeared on your license. ANSWER ~auawEwrer~um r. a....~.-~.,~.~~. 27. At the time of the incident referred to in the Complaint, did you have any condition for which you wore eyeglasses, or for which eyeglasses were prescribed? If so, state: (a) a description of the condition; (b) whether you were wearing eyeglasses at the time of the incident; (c) the name and address of the person who prescribed the eyeglasses; and (d) a description of your vision at the time of the accident referred to in the Complaint, both corrected and uncorrected. ANSWER ~~, ,~~, 28. At the time of the occurrence, did your motor vehicle license refer in any way to the use of eyeglasses by you while operating a motor vehicle? If so, please give full details as to any reference to eyeglasses on your motor vehicle operator's license. ANSWER y ~ ~ ~ 29. Have you ever previously been involved in a law suit? If so, state: (a) the date and location of the action; (b) -the nature of the action; (c) the name(s) and address(es) of the party(ies); (d) the disposition of the action; and (e) the name and address. of the attorney who represented you. ANSWER ~:~.~..n. ... I _ ,.. .. .. .I.I. 30. Have you ever been convicted of a crime? If so, state: (a) the nature of the conviction; (b) the date and location of said conviction; and (c1 the penalty imposed. ANSWER ~s u 31. If you have served time in prison as a result of any conviction, for each conviction give the name of the prison, the length of the term served and the date of release. ANSWER -.~-.~ww r~w~....~,.... ,._ i __.._, _., .., ..,. ,I I ~ ._ au~i+.~E: ~ti ~.~..G 32. Have you ever received any citation or summons of a criminal nature resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle? If so, state: (a) the nature of the citation or summons; (b) the final disposition; and (c) the court involved. ANSWER -„ 33. Have you ever had an operator's license suspended or revoked? If so, state: (a) time and location of suspension or revocation; (b) period of time of said suspension or revocation, including dates; (c) reason for such suspension or revocation; and (d) whether such suspension or revocation was lifted. ANSWER 34. Have you made any statement, whether in writing, tape recording or otherwise, to any person(s) regarding any of the events referred to in the Complaint? If so, state: (a) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) to whom such statement was-made; (b) the date of such statement; (c) the form of the statement, i.e., written, oral, record- ing device, or stenographer; (d) whether such statement, if written, was signed; and (e) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) presently having custody of such statement. ANSWER ~~a ...... ~ .. I I - :~..-......~r.._ 35. Identify all exhibits which you expect to offer into evidence at the time of trial of this case. ANSWER .a~:, ,~.~~w 36. State whether there was an accident report made regarding the subject incident, and, if so, the place where such report was filed. ANSWER: 37. Are you aware of any newspaper articles concerning the incident referred to in the Complaint? If so, state the date of publication and newspaper involved. ANSWER: su,m~w.w ~:aaJ~. 38. Has the Defendant, or any representative of the Defendant, his/her counsel, or his/her insurer performed or contracted to perform any surveillance of the Plaintiff or his/her activities at any time. If so, please identify each such person(s) or entities who have custody of and attach a complete copy, without editing, of all reports, memorandum, letters, electronic data, or information of any type (including computer recordsl, regarding such surveillance activity, along with a copy of any photographs, films, videotapes, or other information, including, but not limited to, videos, eight-minute film, and hand-written notes. ANSWER These Interrogatories shall be deemed to be continuing. If between the time of your answers to these Interrogatories and the time of trial of this case, you or anyone acting on your behalf learn the identity and whereabouts of any other witness(es) not identified in your answers, or if you obtain or become aware of additional requested information not supplied in your answers, you shall promptly furnish same to the undersigned by supplemental answers. ANGINO & ROVNER, P.C. l~ichard A. S ock, Esc I.D. No. 47281 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs Date: October 4, 2001 236966.1\RAS\MLB CERTIFICATE;OF SERVICE T, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' INTERROGATORIES on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ~~na ~ M cy L. ryme er Date: October 4, 2001 236966.1\RAS\MLB IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT TO: Consiglia Arena and her counsel, John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Mazket Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ANGINO & ROVNER, P.C. A. Date: October 4, 2001 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs 236966.1\RAS\MLB PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Pa.RC.P. Nos. 4003.4 and 4009 and/or F.RC.P. No. 34, please furnish at our expense, at our office, on or before thirty (30) days of service hereof'; a photostatic copy or like reproduction of the materials concerning this action or its subject matter which are in yow possession, custody or control and which are not protected by the attorney/client privilege; or, in the alternative, produce the said matter at said time to permit inspection and copying thereof. 1. Any and all documents referred to, relating to, or pertaining to any answer to any Interrogatory. ~e_ 2. Any and al] doarments containing information relating to any answer to any Interrogatory. 3. Any and all statements concerning this action or its subject matter obtained by you or anyone acting on your behalf. 4. Any and all investigation reports, except those protected from discovery, prepared by you or by anyone on your behalf in regard to the evaluation and litigation ofthe instant action. 5. Any and all curriculum vitae for each and every person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial. ...._ ~:.~ ..,...~._ i.,. ~w ~ t . -.~_ 6• Any and all expert reports from each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial. Any and all writings, memoranda, reports, statements and records, etc., which you, your company and/or client possess concerning the case, investigation or review of the Plaintiff and his case. ~:; ~ 8. Copies of all statements, memoranda, summaries of other writings, documents, diagrams and pictures obtained from your investigation, your insurance company's investigation or your attorney's investigation into the incident involved. You need not supply any attomey's "work product" or other material which is specifically accepted as a privileged by the above rule. 9. All documents in your possession, custody or control prepared in anticipation of litigation or trial of this case, except those documents which disclose the mental impressions of your attorney or yow attorney's conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories, and except those documents prepared in anticipation of litigation by your representatives to the extent that they would disclose the representatives' mental impression, wnclusions, or opinions respecting the value or merit of the claim or defense. 10. To the extent that you have not already provided the same in response to previous requests herein, all statements obtained from any witnesses or memoranda of conversations with witnesses or recordings of witnesses' statements made or obtained during the course of the investigation or matters relating to this law suit, and all such statements, memoranda, or records made by parties to this law suit or their representatives. 11. To the extent not already provided in response to previous requests herein, all statements made by any party to this action, including written statements made by any party to this action, including written statements, signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person making it, or stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other recording or transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement and contemporaneously recorded, as allowed by PaRC.P. 4003.5 and/or F.RC.P. No. 34. 12. To the extent that you have not already provided the same, copies of all records, documents and memoranda which have any bearing upon the matters alleged against the requesting party or upon the responsibility of the requesting party for the matters alleged against the requesting P~Y• 13. To the extent not already provided, copies of all experts' reports made or secured by you in connection with your investigation of the matters relating to this law suit. 14. To the extent not already provided, copies of all exhibits which you intend to offer into evidence at the trial of this matter. 15. To the extent not already provided, all photogaphs, motion pictures, diagrams, maps, surveys, plans and models of the site of the incident and of the vehicles in question that are in your possession. 1 .. -.__. .. :....... .. ..u~ ~ _ 4k'. 16. Copies of Declaration Sheets for each and every_policy insuring you against the claims made in the instant action. 17. Any and all documents which evidence any facts on the basis of which you will assert a defense against the cause of action stated in the Complaint. .. ~~ 18. Any and all surveillance tapes, films, motion pictures, photographs, or other documents wnducted, prepared, taken, or filmed in the nature of surveillance or as part of a surveillance of any of the parties. ,_. ~., ri+~~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Q~ 'L _ M >~y L. Brym ser Date: October 4, 2001 2369fi6. I\RAS\MLB John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #43812 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Mazket Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant Counsel for Defendant, Consiglia Arena IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEA5 OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO.O1-5301 CIVIL CIVII, ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES TO: Donna Kroener, Robert Kroener and Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Respectfully submitted, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN BY: John . Ninosky, Esquire - I.D. # 8000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717)234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant Consiglia Arena ~ ~'~/~~ 23. Objection. Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 34. Objection. Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. __ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on November 6, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P. C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHII'MAN, P.C. By John . Ninosky, Esquire Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717)234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant Consiglia Arena 69708.2 John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #43812 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant Counsel for Defendant, Consiglia Arena IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 01-5301 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCT7[ON OF DOCUMENTS Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 2. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 12. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 13. Objection. Defendant objects to this request pursuant to Pa R.C.P. 4003.5(a)(3). Respectfully submitted, GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN BY: ~~ ~ L_ John . Ninosky, Esquire - I.D. # 8000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant Consiglia Arena 1l/~ f ~~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Hamsburg, Pennsylvania, on November 6, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By John . Ninosky, Esquire Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717)234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant Consiglia Arena 69709.2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE f ~ I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPET, DISCOVERY RESPONSES on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ///!~/1 ~ oa4P.~ M •cy L. Bryme r Date: November 28, 2001 1- -- -. , ig ~' - r - - ;, , - _ _, : ~ , __. -~_ . r; ` - _ ,. , _, -,, =5 -< r~ -~ DONNA KROENER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF and ROBERT KROENER, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA her husband, Plaintiffs v. CIVIL ACTION -LAW CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant NO.O1-5301 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 11~' day of December, 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion To Compel, and of Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion To Compel with New Matter, Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that Plaintiff Donna Kroener is directed to execute and furnish to Defendant's counsel the requested Consent For Release of Information from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP, within 20 days of the date of this order. IN THE EVENT Plaintiff declines to do so, the court, upon motion, will enter an order precluding Plaintiffs from introducing evidence of treatment rendered to Plaintiff at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. BY THE COURT, Richard A. Sadlock, Esq. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiffs ~" c> n ~-, ... ~ ~ -~, ; ~ ~~ r: , '1. =: ~' ::° <~ -~ c - .._w >_ y~ :_ ~ .. - ~ _ :_ ~' ~r &~ John R. Ninosky, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorney for Defendant :rc PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Please list the following case: (Check one) (X) for JURY trial at the next term of civil court O for trial without a jury CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) (check one) ( ) Assumpsit DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs v. JOYCE M. TIMMONS, Defendant ( ) Trespass (X) Trespass (Motor Vehicle) ( ) Other The trial list will be called on June 11, 2002. Trials commence on July 8, 2002. Pre-trials will beheld on June 19, 2002. (Briefs are due 5 days before pre-trials.) (The party listing this case for trial shall provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to all counsel, pursuant to local Rule 314-1.) No. 01-5301 Civil Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire, Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110 Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: John R. Ninosky, Esquire, Goldberg, Katiman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street, P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 This case is ready for trial. Print Name: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Date: April 1, 2002 Attorney for: Plaintiff b .. Y.s3S<^~_LaavF4~~ ~ Fmv¢*14iYazkN '3 I ~~ ~T ~~ ~-i ~i ~ ~ r.. ~- -~ _- e„ _ f,5 . '.? _.. ~,, c ,~/~S Jry IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and CIVIL ACTION -LAW ROBERT KROINER, her husband Plaintiffs NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this day of 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Compel and Plaintiffs' Response thereto, it is hereby Ordered that Defendant's Motion is DENIED. BY THE COURT: J. 236966.1uLSSVbILB IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and CIVIL ACTION -LAW ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Consiglia Arena and her counsel, John R. Ninosky, Esquire You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. ANGINO & Date: November 28, 2001 239129.1\RAS\MLB 'Ehar a lock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs A IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIF'FS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH NEW MATTER 1. Plaintiff Donna Kroener was in fact struck by a vehicle operated by Defendant and suffered personal injuries. 2. Admitted. By way of amplification, Plaintiffs have already provided Defendant and her counsel with copies of all medical records available from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. To the extent the Defendant cannot locate said records, another copy is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons is located in Arizona. It is denied that Sun Valley would not have honor a Pennsylvania subpoena. Further, a subpoena is not necessary as Plaintiffs have already provided Defendant and her attorneywith two copies of the records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 4. Admitted, However, the Rules of Civil Procedure do not require Plaintiff Donna Kroener to execute a Consent for Release of Information for defense counsel. Further, as 239129.1~RASVvILB previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs' counsel has provided defense counsel with copies of the records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 5. Admitted. By way of further amplification, see Plaintiffs' prior responses herein. 6. Admitted. However, there is no Rule of Civil Procedure or court order requiring Plaintiff Donna Kroener to sign a Release for Defendant. 7. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(a)(1)(viii) speaks for itself. By way of further amplification, as the requested records have already been supplied to defense counsel, the only appropriate order is to deny Defendant's Motion. 8. It is admitted that Plaintiff Donna Kroener did in fact suffer physical injuries caused by the instant Defendant and that she received treatment from multiple medical providers. All of the medical providers haue been identified to defense counsel and copies of all of their treatment records have been provided to defense counsel. No court order, Rule of Civil Procedure, or case decision compels Plaintiff Donna Kroener in this action or any other plaintiff in this Commonwealth to sign a Release of Information for the Defendant. 9. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(2) speaks for itself. However, that Rule does not apply herein. By way of amplification, Plaintiffs have in no way been disobedient of any court order or rule of court. Further, as previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs have fully complied with the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to discovery and Defendant's discovery requests. Plaintiffs need not comply with a request of defense counsel that is not authorized by Rule of Court. 239129.1\RP.S\MLB 10. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(5) speaks for itself. However, as with Rule 4019(c)(2), the instant Rule does not apply to the instant action. Again, as previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs have fully complied with Defendant's proper and judicially recognized discovery requests. Therefore, Defendant is not entitled to any remedy herein. 11. Defendant's 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, Plaintiffs fail to see how Defendant can request preclusion of evidence when the medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons have been previously produced for Defendant and have again been produced for Defendant at this time. 12. Defendant's 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, Defendant has not cited to any law, Rule, or court decision that requires or compels the signing of a Release of Information. Further, Defendant has produced no evidence to indicate how she is prejudiced by Plaintiffs supplying the records on their own. NEW MATTER 13. Plaintiffs have fully answered all of Defendant's Interrogatories. 14. Plaintiffs have responded to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents including the production of medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 239129.1~RAS~iLB li 15. Defendant and her counsel have already had sufficient time from the production of the medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons to the present time to review said records. 16. The aforementioned records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons clearly document the dates Plaintiff Donna Kroener was examined, the treatment provided, and the diagnosis rendered by the physician. 17. Defendant is in no way prejudiced by Plaintiffs providing of medical records rather than signing a Release of Information. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener respectfully request this Honorable Court to deny Defendant's Motion to Compel. ANGINO & ROAR, P.C. Rr~d A. Sadlock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs Date: November 28, 2001 239129.1U2ASWILB EVALUATION ~ '`~~ 05/24/01 -DONNA KROENER ~l ; ~ ~ ~.~~. DIAGNOSIS: RIGHT FOOT SOFT TISSUE INJURY =--' ~ ~~r'r ~ti, REFERRING PHYSICIAN: DR. ROBERT KARPMAN, M.D. PAST MEDICAL HISTORY: Patient is a 57 year old female who lives here during the winter months. She has a history of arthroscopic surgery to right knee in 97, OA, discomfort level rated at 5/10. ASSESSMENT: On Dec/00 patient was walking in the parking lot and was hit by a car which ran over her foot and caused deep wound of the dorsal region of the foot. She has been treated for a few months by a plastic surgeon and the wound eventually healed. There is a large scar along the dorsal part of the foot hexagon shaped 1.5 cm/ 1.5 cm. She complains of sporadic episodes of sharp pain which initiates in the scar region and radiates into the anterior region of the ankle. ROM and muscle testing reveals no deficits. There is no swelling of the foot or ankle. Patient ambulates with sandals and with no high risk of falling. Problem is the pain level which interferes with ADLs reduces the ability to walk. FUNCTIONAL LIMITATIONS: Patient has difficulty going shopping, walking, ascending or descending stairs. PLAN OF CARE: We will follow physician order for phonophoresis and apply ice massage and teach patient with ice application. Ultrasound applied at 50% at 1 watt per cm. sq. x 3 mgh secondary to the location of the pain which is quite superficial. FREQUENCY OF VISITS: 3 week x4 weeks. SIIORT--TERM GOALS: (2 weeks) Patient reports decreased pain level from 5 to 2, decreased frequency of sporadic pain episodes. LONC-TERM GOALS: (4 weeks) Patient is pain free, able to ascend and descend stairs and go shopping without problem. REHAB POTENTIAL: Good. Marva Tahan, PT # 1444/mb .~,. Rene A. Lucas, M.D. SVO Physical Therapy j ~N ~~ Patient ~ ~~rn rn Gt ~'~-frZU1P~-' p~cautions New Modalities/Pr cedures added to POC: Diagnosi~ ~~ °k ~' S° ~ }iS ~ Referring MD Y~ ~ ~'~ ~~'^ ~9' c: Modalities/ Manual Therapy 'Date ~.€~ Date Date Date Date Date `~i /YYlG3~ ~~ ~~` ~~ v .e-~ szY ~,t s ~ sow v ~~~~ N ew Therapeuti c. Exercise Added to POC: TherapeutlC Exsrase/Activity Date Date Date Date Date Date Date DaM Date Date Dale Date Date .~.~«~~.ims ... ._.., ._. ..~. I_ I .. .. ....,,~,. ~3ss,::.m use,. -~- rm°at,._ tyV~/ p~~ Month / ~~ SVO Physical Ther: ~r ~XS~ Treatment Da c+~ Da ~ a Dad S Date ~ paw (/ pate Date Dale Date Date Date Date Eva e-eval V,~( Soft Tissue Mob. V / ~/ ~/ / ~/ us. V / ~/ Elec. Stim. Joint Mob. ~QeMeat ~ - Measure. Report PA1on1 Gait Training Counter Initial (11) ~ ~ e ~ ~F Daily Unit Value ~ x 3 ~ 3 .t Progress.Notes Date Sign atu re nD d-}, ~ - V Ct-C. w VJ 'C.~DQ °~ -~ pp b L i l' eS-C GCi. LCSZ CtSS T ~7 ~ (KI-t~J y~ /~/ oZOD/ ,~~ r "~ Gf/1~~ N~7"Yl OLC:~S Pn ~- ,3,~ a as r~,cf9A - ~ ~.~ ess d-~--~ G~ O P/~'~ O -"'d? ~/~' /`i' `i/~JJQ V~f/' ~~~' ~ ''may//nL/,/A ZN /V ~~~~ ~~~~ Patient's Name Y'~ ~~" ~O M (K~ Date _ -b( Pro Tess 6Votes Si nature ~!t' ~ 61t~ ~f U 1'ea~ la S ...~. ~ ~- c- {!oL ~ .r.~ /~ rf G J'' ur•-e aoo I ~~ rrr > ~d v /m a-s D~P~i~ // ~J ~ / ~ ~v+xn..~ •e ~ i s ~ -~ / - oJ` !'JG~s / me /s r ~ ~~ e7/s.~9- x~Gi // Jam- t Gtn i~.L~ /it S ,~cvrs-t CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH NEW MATTER on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 ~~~~~~~ M~ircy~rymes r Date: November 28, 2001 239129.I~RASV~ILB i ._ __ .__ ~". ~-rwv~ifine .r-.. .. _ _..~...~. l J ~ \,.1 C_ - -. ~ ~~. =~ - Z: "J _ -.. .-~ _' r~ gym, .:. ~, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant 2001, after due consideration of AND NOW, this day of the attached Motion to Compel Discovery Responses of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, it is hereby Ordered that Defendant Consiglia Arena provide the requested responses within days of service of this Order or show cause why such responses and documents are being withheld. Failure to comply with this Order will result in sanctions as provided by Pa.R.C.P. 4019. BY THE COURT: J. 'a ii t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Angino & Rovner, P.C., respectfully move this Honorable Court to compel Defendant Consiglia Arena to file full and complete responses to Plaintiffs' discovery requests for the following reasons: 1. A Complaint in this matter was filed on September 1Q 2001, under the docket number of 01-5301 Civil. 2. On September 25, 2001, the Complaint was served on the Defendant Consiglia Arena. 3. On October 4, 2001, Plaintiffs forwarded to Defendant Consiglia Arena Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents. Copies of these discovery requests are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 4. As of the date of this Motion, Defendant Consiglia Arena has failed to respond to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents. 207124.1\MLB\PAS ii i ____ _ _ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant AND NOW, this day of NRY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER 2001, after due consideration of the attached Motion to Compel Discovery Responses of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, it is hereby Ordered that Defendant Consiglia Arena provide the requested responses within days of service of this Order or show cause why such responses and documents are being withheld. Failure to comply with this Order will result in sanctions as provided by Pa.R.C.P. 4019. BY THE COURT: J. 1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROEN$R and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Angino & Rovner, P.C., respectfully move this Honorable Court to compel Defendant Consiglia Arena to file full and complete responses to Plaintiffs' discovery requests for the following reasons: 1. A Complaint in this matter was filed on September 10, 2001, under the docket number of 01-5301 Civil. 2. On September 25, 2001, the Complaint was served on the Defendant Consiglia Arena. 3. On October 4, 2001, Plaintiffs forwarded to Defendant Consiglia Arena Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents. Copies of these discovery requests are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 4. As of the date of this Motion, Defendant Consiglia Arena has failed to respond to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents. 207124.IQvILB~PAS _ ~r l r The second motion is Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Discovery Responses of Defendant to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents. This motion is in response to several of Plaintiff s discovery requests, to which Defendant objected on various grounds: "overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege." (The relevant portions of both the interrogatories and request for production of documents have been copied and attached to the respective objections.) Defendant apparently served appropriate answers to the other discovery requests. Plaintiff requests relief in the forms of an order compelling responses and requiring payment of Plaintiffs' attorney's fees for the filing of this motion. After examining the discovery requests at issue, it seems that Defendant's objections may have merit. Plaintiff s document requests ask for "[a]ny and all documents referred to, relating to, or pertaining to any answer to any Interrogatory," "[a]ny and all documents containing information relating to ny answer to any Interrogatory," "[a]ny and all statements concerning this action or its subject matter obtained by you or anyone acting on your behalf," "copies of all records, documents and memoranda which have any bearing upon the matters alleged against the requesting party or upon the responsibility of the requesting party for the maters alleged against the requesting party," and "copies of all experts' reports made or secured by you in connection with your investigation of the matters relating to this law suit." The last request specifically seems to conflict with Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5(a)(3), which requires the parties to produce only expert reports to be relied upon at trial. The rest of these requests also maybe construed as overly broad. Plaintiff s interrogatories ask for all witnesses identified by the Defendant's attorney during that attorney's investigation and information relating to all statements "to any person[s] regarding any of the events referred to in the Complaint." The first request deals specifically with information obtained during the attorney's investigation, and would seem potentially to violate the attorney work product. The second may be construed as being overly broad in its request. In my opinion, these objections seem to be valid, and the motion could be denied on the grounds that Plaintiff may serve more focused discovery requests to obtain the relevant information. If the motion is not denied, a rule to show cause and a discovery conference would probably be required to settle the issues involved. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Pa.RC.P. Nos. 4003.4 and 4009 and/or F.RC.P. No. 34, please furnish at our expense, at our office, on or before thirty (30) days of service hereof a photostatic copy or like reproduction of the materials concerning this action or its subject matter which are in your possession, custody or control and which are not protected by the attorney/client privilege; or, in the alternative, produce the said matter at said time to permit inspection and copying thereof. 1. Any and all documents referred to, relating to, or pertaining to any answer to any Intenogatory. 2. Any and all documents containing information relating to any answer to any Interrogatory. 3. Any and all statements concerning this action or its subject matter obtained by you or anyone acting on your behalf. 12. To the extent that you have not already provided the same, copies of all records, documents and memoranda which have any bearing upon the matters alleged against the requesting party or upon the responsibility of the requesting party for the matters alleged against the requesting P~Y• 13. To the extent not already provided, copies of all experts' reports made or secured by you in connection with your investigation of the matters relating to.this law suit. John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D.#43812 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Hamsburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant, Consiglia Arena DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 01-5301 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OB.IECTIONS OF DEFENDANT TU PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 3. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 12. Objection. Defendant objects to this request as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 13. Objection. Defendant objects to this request pursuant to Pa R.C.P. 4003.5(a)(3). I I I '~'a° i 23. If your attorney has completed an investigation, please provide the name, address, and telephone number of all witnesses identified in the investigation. ANSWER ~_;, 34. Have you made any statement, whether in writing, tape recording or otherwise, to any person(s) regarding any of the events referred to in the Complaint? If so, state: (a) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) to whom such statement was made; (b) the date of such statement; (c) the form of the statement, i.e., written, oral, record- ing,device, or stenographer; (d) whether such statement, if written, was signed; and (e) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) presently having custody of such statement. ANSWER 23. Objection. Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. 34. Objection. Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is overly broad, burdensome and not likely to lead to relevant, discoverable information as it is requesting information protected as attorney work product and attorney/client privilege. a ANGINO & ROVNER, P. C. 4503 NORTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PA 171161708 717/238b791 FAX 717/2365610 W W W.ANGIN6ROVNER.COM EMAIL RSADLOCK@ANGIN6ROVNEIt.COM December 3, 2001 The J-lonorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr. Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 Re: Donna and Robert Kroener v. Consielia Arena No. 01-5301 Civil Term Dear Judge Oler: RICHARD C. ANGINO MICHAEL E. KOSIK NEIL J. ROVNER RICHARD A. SADLOCK JOSEPH M. MELILLO JOSEPH M. DORIA T$RR~ S. HYMAN JAMES DECINT( DAVID L. LUTZ JOAN L. STEHULAK I have received your Order of Court of November 28, 2001 in reference to Defendant's Motion to Compel filed in the above action. Please be advised Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion was filed on November 29, 2001. A copy is enclosed for your convenience. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, pleases-do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly A. RAS/mlb Enclosure cc: John R. Ninosky, Esquire (w/o enc.) 239387.I~RAS~IvfLB --~,~~ ~ .~rw IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW. this day of 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Compel and Plaintiffs' Response thereto, it is hereby Ordered that Defendant's Motion is DENIED. BY THE COURT: J. ?36966.1UtAS\MLB i IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Consiglia Arena and her counsel, John R. Ninosky, Esquire You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: November 28, 2001 ANGINO & R~ har a lock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs 239129.1\RAS\MLB IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs V. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW ~, ~__ NO. 01-5301 CIVIL ~, -- n,; . i~C' JURY TRIAL DEMANDED %~ ~:_: - _: r c:_ PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH NEW MATTER ~i r C.') 1. Plaintiff Donna Kroener was in fact struck by a vehicle operated by Defendant and suffered personal injuries. 2. Admitted. By way of amplification, Plaintiffs have already provided Defendant and her counsel with copies of all medical records available from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. To the extent the Defendant cannot ]ocate said records, another copy is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons is located in Arizona. It is denied that Sun Valley would not have honor a Pennsylvania subpoena. Further, a subpoena is not necessary as Plaintiffs have already provided Defendant and her attorney with two copies of the records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 4. Admitted. However, the Rules of Civil Procedure do not require Plaintiff Donna Kroener to execute a Consent for Release of Information for defense counsel. Further, as 239129.1\RAS\MLB .. - w I _. I_~. _... ~ '....I _.. _. .ALL-. ....;~ previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs' counsel has provided defense counsel with copies of the records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 5. Admitted. By way of further amplification, see Plaintiffs' prior responses herein. 6. Admitted. However, there is no Rule of Civil Procedure or court order requiring Plaintiff Donna Kroener to sign a Release for Defendant. 7. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(a)(1)(viii) speaks for itself. By way of further amplification, as the requested records have already been supplied to defense counsel, the only appropriate order is to deny Defendant's Motion. 8. It is admitted that Plaintiff Donna Kroener did in fact suffer physical injuries caused by the instant Defendant and that she received treatment from multiple medical providers. All of the medical providers have been identified to defense counsel and copies of all of their treatment records have been provided to defense counsel. No court order, Rule of Civil Procedure, or case decision compels Plaintiff Donna Kroener in this action or any other plaintiff in this Commonwealth to sign a Release of Information for the Defendant. 9. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(2) speaks for itself. However, that Rule does not apply herein. By way of amplification, Plaintiffs have in no way been disobedient of any court order or rule of court. Further, as previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs have fully complied with the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to discovery and Defendant's discovery requests. Plaintiffs need not comply with a request of defense counsel that is not authorized by Rule of Court. 239129.1\RAS\MLB 10. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(5) speaks for itself. However, as with Rule 4019(c)(2), the instant Rule does not apply to the instant action. Again, as previously indicated herein, Plaintiffs have fully complied with Defendant's proper and judicially recognized discovery requests. Therefore, Defendant is not entitled to any remedy herein. 11. Defendant's 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, Plaintiffs fail to see how Defendant can request preclusion of evidence when the medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons have been previously produced for Defendant and have again been produced for Defendant at this time. 12. Defendant's 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, Defendant has not cited to any law, Rule, or court decision that requires or compels the signing of a Release of Information. Further, Defendant has produced no evidence to indicate how she is prejudiced by Plaintiffs supplying the records on their own. NEW MATTER 13. Plaintiffs have fully answered all of Defendant's Interrogatories. 14. Plaintiffs have responded to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents including the production of medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons. 239129.1\RAS\MLB 15. Defendant and her counsel have already had sufficient time from the production of the medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons to the present time to review said records. 16. The aforementioned records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons cleazly document the dates Plaintiff Donna Kroener was examined, the treatment provided, and the diagnosis rendered by the physician. 17. Defendant is in no way prejudiced by Plaintiffs providing of medical records rather than signing a Release of Information. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Donna Kroener and Robert Kroener respectfully request this Honorable Court to deny Defendant's Motion to Compel. ANGINO & ROYNI~k. P.C. RicTaid A. Sadlock, Esquire I.D. No. 47281 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs Date: November 28, 2001 239129. I\RAS\MLB EVALUATION ~ : ~ ~~~ 05/24/01 -DONNA KROENER L~l !~ DIAGNOSIS: RIGHT FOOT 50FT TISSUE INJURY ~! f ~ 1_h_ - , ; REFERRING PHYSICIAN: DR ROBERT KARPMAN, M.D. PAST MEAICAL HISTORY: Patient is a 57 year old female who Lives here during the winter months. She has a history of arthroscopic surgery to right knee in 97, OA, discomfort level rated at 5(10. ASSESSMENT: On Dec/00 patient was walking in the parking lot and was hit by a car which ~.. ran over her foot and caused deep wound of the dorsal region of the foot. She has been treated for a few months by a plastic surgeon and the wound eventually healed. There is a large scar along the dorsal part of the foot hexagon shaped L5 cm/ L5 cm. She complains of sporadic episodes of sharp pain which initiates in the scar region and radiates into the anterior region of the ankle. ROM and muscle testing reveals no deficits. There is n0 swelling of the foot or ankle. Patient ambulates with sandals and with no high risk of falling. Problem is the pain level which interferes with ADLs reduces the ability to walk FUNCTIONAL LIMITATIONS: Patient has difficulty going shopping, walking, ascending or descending stairs. PLAN OF CARE: We will follow physician order for phonophoresis and apply ice massage and teach patient with ice application. Ultrasound applied at 50% at 1 watt per cm. sq. x 3 mgh secondary to the location of the pain which is quite supe~cial. FREQUENCY OF VISITS: 3 week x4 weeks. SHORT-'PERM GOALS: (2 weeks) Patient reports decreased pain level from 5 to 2, decreased frequency of sporadic pain episodes. LONG-TERM GOALS: (4 weeks) Patient is pain free, able to ascend and descend stairs and go shopping without problem. R>/HAB POTENTIAL: Good. Marva Tahan, PT #1444/mb Rene A. Lucas, M.D. SVO Physical Therapy j ~ ti v~ New Modalities/Pr cedures added to POC: Patient ~ ~'rn M Gt ~'~-ere ~lP.r-~ precautions Diagnosis °k ~' ~5:: ~" -~-"~ss~j Referring MD _Y? ~ ~~,~~"^ r~ `~~ Modalities/ Date Date Date Date Date pate Manual Therapy ~-E-~ Lei (Yl'lU-S~ ~:, ,e~~V ~. v .e-~ ~~ ~' V VtS ~ ~ ~R ~ i,[n N ew Therapeut ic. Exercise Added to POC: Therapeutic Exercise/Activity Dare Date Date Date Date Dare Dare Oare Dare Date Dare Date Dare ~ V ~~/ Month , J~-c. SVO PhysICaI Thee ~/ o~ v` j Treatment Dai o-N Dat ~ a DatE S Date D D;te (~ Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Eval e-eval ~,~( v Soft Tissue Mob. 1/ / /~ !/ / // us. V / v Elec. Stim. Joint Mob. //nn~ ""'' r.~. ~erneai ~ Measure. Report PA1on1 / GaR Training Counter Initial = 7 7 1 () ~e ~ ,~F Daily Unit Value , . r O ~ ~ 3 l .t Date Progress Notes Signature tom, ~ ~ 1ra-e ~ ~~4a~-PQQ a Pe ~- ~ r e~2 . ~eQ ~s .T ~7 y /~ dao/ ~-, ~~ ti c~S~~ o ~, ~s Q-, ~-~--~ PLC .~?~rss~ ~ , fT/!'7 - ,7 / d a00 D,tS'.3ff ~ ~~ e~ a ---- . P / G~fJU/ ~'~~•t' // n O~/_~~ ois3//- Patient's Name ~ ~~"'~'~ ~O rn mu __ ,_:__ ,. Date _ ~ -D( Pr ress Notes Si nature ~4' A aU~ ~r U Y9~ ~6 S iw,~1i- t p B r/-~c ©~ rh ~ CS'd v /m OY q~~23r~ ,/ ~1 / / ~ / Sde w«.~ y~ ' ~2 arc ~ ~ -i / -~ -~ /' / - OJT f7L23 / ~/r/LC- - /SY L`.. - / J ~~ / i3tO/5.~9- rxpG/ LaM-.. ~ ,a.-, LAS ~~. ~eyf ' Y r- ' t c.r /'~/,LJ /n 9 (/~ / T S l +~ poi Tl~ _. _ _v .~_ _ .. w CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcy L. Brymesser, an employee of the law firm of Angino & Rovner, P.C., do hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH NEW MATTER on the following via postage prepaid, first class United States mail, addressed as follows: John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 M cy L. rymes r Date: November 28, 2001 239129.1\RASWILB A NOV 212001 DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW N0. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED O R D E R day of 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Compel, and Plaintiffs' response thereto, if any, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are precluded from introducing any evidence of the treatment rendered to Donna Kroener at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. BY THE COURT: J. 71582.1 John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. µ7B000 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-9161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW N0. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND NOW, comes Defendant, Consiglia Arena, by and through her counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., who files this Motion to Compel by respectfully stating the following: 1. Plaintiff claims that she was struck by a vehicle operated by Defendant and has suffered personal injury. 2. Plaintiff has identified Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons as a medical provider who has treated her alleged injuries. 3. Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP, is located in Arizona and, as such, does not have to honor a Pennsylvania Subpoena to provide medical records. 4. Defense counsel has provided a Consent for Release of Information to Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, for her to execute so that defense counsel may obtain a copy of her treatment records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. 5. By letter dated November 13, 2001, Plaintiffs' counsel has indicated that he will refuse to have his client sign this authorization without a Court Order. A copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 6. A copy of the Consent for Release of Information is attached hereto as Exhibit `~B." 7. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(a)(1)(viii) states the following: The court may, on motion, make an appropriate order if a party or person otherwise fails to make discovery or to obey an order of court respecting discovery. 8. Plaintiff has alleged that she has suffered a physical injury and that she received treatment from a medical provider for whom she refuses to provide an authorization to provide information from that health care provider concerning the treatment she claims is related to this incident. 9. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 9019(c)(2) states: The court, when acting under subdivision (a) of this rule, may make an order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose the designated claims or defenses, or prohibiting such party from introducing in evidence the designated documents, things or testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental condition. 10. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(5) states: The court, when acting under subdivision (a) of this rule, may make such order with regard to the failure to make discovery as is just. 11. Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiffs be precluded from introducing any evidence concerning the treatment Donna Kroener received at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. 12. In the alternative, Defendant respectfully requests that Donna Kroener be compelled to execute the Consent for Release of Information which is attached hereto as Exhibit ~~B." WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant her Motion to Compel. Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiff be precluded from providing any evidence concerning her treatment at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. Alternatively, Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiff be compelled to execute the Consent for Release of Information which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" to obtain her treatment records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By G ~~ ~~~~ Johr-sky, Es ire I.D. #: 78000 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant Date: ~'''q'JI 71582.1 ANGINO & ROVNER, P.C. 4503 NOATH FY20NT STREET HARRISBURG, PA 17110.1708 717/238b791 FAX 717/?335610 RICHARD C. ANGCNO NEIL]. RovNex JOSEPH M. MELILLO 7$RRY S. HYMAN DAVID L. LUTZ MICHAEL E. KOSIK RICHARD A. BADLOCK JOSEPH M. DOR1A JAMES DECINTI JOAN L. STEHUL4K W W W.ANGNO-ROVNSR.COM &MA11: RSAULOCK@ANGIN6ROVNER.COM November 13, 2001 John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzmar. ~ Shipman, P.C. 320 Mazket Street P.O. Bex 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Re: Donna and Robert Kroener v. Consiglia Arena Cumberland County Docket No.: 01-5301 Civil Dear John: Thank you for your letter dated November 5, 2001. Please be advised unless I am compelled by a Court Older or policy language as in a UMfUIM case, I do not have my clients sign Authorizations for defense counsel. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Very truly yours, Richard g a S/mlb ?36969.1ARAS\MLB (All parts of this form must be completed in compliance with the revised regulations pursuant to the Mental Health Procedures Act and the Federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse ActJ I hereby authorize Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP to release information fiom the records of Donna Kroener D.O.B. 4/3/44 SS# 332-36-8276 for the purpose of Review The information to be released is: Psychiatric Evaluation Discharge Summary itiiedications ~~iedical History Y Other (specify) Complete Medical File Psychological Evaluation_ Psycliosocial History Summary of Treatment to Date Academic/School Records PLEASE FORWARD INFORMATION TO ATTENTION OF: John R. Ninosky, Esquire, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-126$ I have been told that, in order [o protect the confidentiality of records, my agreement to obtain or release information is necessary and that this permission is limited for the purposes and to the person listed above, and will be eTeciive durin_e the dales listed below. I also understand that this consent is revocabie except that action has been taken in reliance thereon. This consent shaii be in erect from (Siy u[are of Patiznt) (Parrot or Guardian if Pmitnt is Irss than 14 yrars of agr) o5\\'iniassj until (Not to rxcerd 1 year) (Date (Date of Signaturt) J5982.1 r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on November 19, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By ~~~1~ Jo R. rnosky, Es ire Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 t DONNA hROENER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF and ROBERT KROENER, : Ci JMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA her husband, Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO.O1-5301 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 28~' day of November, 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion To Compel, a Rule is hereby issued upon Plaintiffs to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 20 days of service. BY THE COURT, Richard A. Sadlock, Esq. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiffs John R. Ninosky, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorney for Defendant :rc ~iP~~,~iti`}AStJPJ3c~ .~ n~f ~ ..1~: I, _~~ _J :~i' t r DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant ~ ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW N0. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED O R D E R AND NOW, this day of 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Compel, and Plaintiffs' response thereto, if any, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are precluded from introducing any evidence of the treatment rendered to Donna Kroener at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. BY THE COURT: J. 71562.1 John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.U. #78000 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 32Q Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (77.7) 234-9161 Counsel for Defendant DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs vs. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND NOW, comes Defendant, Consiglia Arena, by and through her counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., who files this Motion to Compel by respectfully stating the following: 1. Plaintiff claims that she was struck by a vehicle operated by Defendant and has suffered personal injury. 2. Plaintiff has identified Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons as a medical provider who has treated her alleged injuries. 3. Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP, is located in Arizona and, as such, does not have to honor a Pennsylvania Subpoena to provide medical records. 4. Defense counsel has provided a Consent for Release of Information to Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, for her to execute so that defense counsel may obtain a copy of her treatment records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. 5. By letter dated November 13, 2001, Plaintiffs' counsel has indicated that he will refuse to have his client sign this authorization without a Court Order. A copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 6, A copy of the Consent for Release of Information is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 7, Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(a)(1)(viii) states the following: The court may, on motion, make an appropriate order if a party or person otherwise fails to make discovery or to obey an order of court respecting discovery. 8, Plaintiff has alleged that she has suffered a physical injury and that she received treatment from a medical provider for whom she refuses to provide an authorization to provide information from that health care provider concerning the treatment she claims is related to this incident. 9, Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(2) states: The court, when acting under subdivision (a) of this rule, may make an order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose the designated claims or defenses, or prohibiting such party from introducing in evidence the designated documents, things or testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental condition. 10. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019(c)(5) states: The court, when acting under subdivision (a) of this rule, may make such order with regard to the failure to make discovery as is just. 11. Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiffs be precluded from introducing any evidence concerning the treatment Donna Kroener received at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. 12. In the alternative, Defendant respectfully requests that Donna Kroener be compelled to execute the Consent for Release of Information which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant her Motion to Compel. Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiff be precluded from providing any evidence concerning her treatment at Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. Alternatively, Defendant respectfully requests that Plaintiff be compelled to execute the Consent for Release of Information which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" to obtain her treatment records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP. Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By L~~~1 ~ A./ted~~, Johr~sky, Es ire I.D. #: 78000 P.O. BOX 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant Date: ~I''q'~~ ~ise2.i ANGINO &~ RcwNER, P.C. 4503 NORTH FRONT STREET HARALSBURG, PA 17110.1708 717/2386791 FAX 717/23&5610 W W W.ANGINO-ROVNEA.COM EMAIL RSADLOCK@ANGIlVO-ROVNER.COM November 13, 2001 John R. Ninosky, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman. & Shipman, p.C. 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Re: Donna and Robert Kroener v. Consielia Arena Cumberland County Docket No.: 01-5301 Civil Dear John: RICHARD C. ANGINO MICHAEL E. KO51K NEIL J. ROVNER RICHARD A. SADLOCK P JOS E H M. MELILLO JOSEPH M. DORW Y ~{ ~ l BRAY $. HYMAN JAMES DECiNTI DAVID L. LUTZ JOAN L. 57EHULAK Thank you for your letter dated November 5, 2001. Please be advised unless I am compelled by a Court Order or policy language as in a UMfUIM case, I do not have my clients sign Authorizations for defense counsel. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Very truly yours, Richazd R.AS/mJb 236969.1\RASVNLB ,~~ ., . /A!1 parts of this form must be completed in compliance tivith the revised regulations pursuant to the ~Llental Health Procedures Act and the Federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse Act) I hereby authorize Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP to release information from the records of Donna Kromer D.O.B. 413144 SS# 332-36-8276 for the purpose of Review The information to be released is: Psvchiatric Evaluation Dischazge Summary Medications ;vledical History Psychological Evaluation Psycliosocial History Summary of Treatment to Date Academic/School Records X Other (specify) Complete Medical File PLEASE FORWARD INFORMATION TO ATTENTION OF: John R. Ninosky, Esquire, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., P.O. Box 1268, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 I have been told that, in order to protect [he co~dentiality ofrecords, mV as_reement to obtain or release information is necessary and that ffiis permission is limited for the purposes and to the person listed above, and will be effective during the dates listed below. I also understand that [his consent is revocable except that action has been taken in reliance [hereon. This consent shall be in eiiect from (Signature of Pati.°nt) (Parent or Guardian if Patient is less than l4 years of age) (Signature until (Not to exceed 1 year) (Date (Date 45982.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) indicated below by depositing a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on November 19, 2001: Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire Angino & Rovner, P.C. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. BYJo R. inosky, Esc ire Attorney I.D. 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendant 69021.1 ~ ~; __, = c -_- ~'L t, -~;: =y I?LF'n :°_ ~_ __ _ __ r C-. ~.., sr~.' _... _ ___ i [x_ !` --i -~ {l) ~`~ I apologize for not being able to speak with you personally, but I have plans with a study group for 1:00 p.m. I hope the information provided below will be sufficient to advise you as to the issues involved in these matters. Both of these motions arise from a personal injury claims by Plaintiff after Defendant allegedly struck her vehicle. The first motion is Defendant's Motion To Compel, which requests that Plaintiff be compelled to execute a Consent for Release of Information. This consent would authorize the release of Plaintiff's medical records from Sun Valley Orthopedic and Hand Surgeons, LLP, an entity located in Arizona from which Plaintiff received medical treatment after the accident. Defendant also requests relief in the form of an order precluding Plaintiff from introducing any evidence from Sun Valley. The motion argues that Defendant has no power to subpoena documents in Arizona, so the consent form must be signed to allow Defendant access to Plaintiff's medical records in the case. Plaintiff's response states that while the request for the Consent for Release of Information has not been followed, Plaintiff has released all records from Sun Valley. Plaintiff has attached to the motion a copy of several pages claimed to be the entire record. Plaintiff argues that the consent form is unnecessary because Defendant has already made the information from Sun Valley available. It should be noted that Plaintiff's response includes new matter and a notice to plead within 20 days. The motion was filed here on November 29, 2001. In the new matter, Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff has produced all medical records from Sun Valley pertaining to treatment of Plaintiff. Because of these outstanding matters, it may be prudent to wait until Defendant files a response to Plaintiff's allegations regarding the production of the medical records from Sun Valley. If the files have been produced to Defendant, then it maybe unnecessary to compel the execution of the Consent for Release of Information. ~ A John R. Ninosky, Esquire I.D. #78000 GOLDSERG, RATZHP+N 6 SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. 0. Box 1268 HarrisYaurg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant 4 ~ DONNA KROENER and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ROBERT KROENER, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs vs. CIVIL ACTON - LAW CONSIGLIA ARENA, NO. 01-5301 CIVIL TERM Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUGGESTED POINTS FOR CHARGE FOR DEFENDANT CONSIGLIA ARENA AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Consiglia Arena, by and through her counsel, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., who requests that the following instructions be read to the jury: 1. Under all of the evidence and the law, you are directed to enter a verdict in favor of the Defendant and against the Plaintiffs. GIVEN: MODIFIED: --_~~J REFUSED: 2. The Plaintiffs claim that they were injured and sustained damage as the result of the negligent conduct of the Defendant. The Plaintiffs have the burden of proving these claims. The Defendant denies the Plaintiffs' claims and asserts as an affirmative defense that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was herself negligent and that such negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' injuries. The Defendant has the burden of proving this affirmative defense. Based upon the evidence presented at this trial, the only issues for you to decide in accordance with the law as I shall give it to you, are: First: Was the Defendant negligent? Second: Was the Defendant's conduct a substantial factor in bringing about harm to the Plaintiffs? Third: Was the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, herself negligent and was such negligence a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' alleged injuries? Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.00. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 2 3. In civil cases such as this one, the Plaintiffs have the burden of proving those contentions which entitle them to relief. When a party has the burden of proof on a particular issue, their contention on that issue must be established by a fair preponderance of the evidence. The evidence establishes a contention by a fair preponderance of the evidence if you are persuaded that it is more probably accurate and true than not. To put it another way, think, if you will, of an ordinary balance scale, with a pan on each side. Onto one side of the scale, place all of the evidence favorable to the Plaintiffs; onto the other, place all of the evidence favorable to the Defendant. If, after considering the comparable weight of the evidence, you feel that the scales tip, ever so slightly or to the slightest degree, in the favor of the Plaintiffs, your verdict must be for the Plaintiffs. If the scales tip in favor of the Defendant, or are equally balanced, your verdict must be for the Defendant. In this case, the Plaintiffs have the burden of proving the following prepositions: That the Defendant was negligent, and that that negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the accident. The Defendant has the burden of proving whether the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was negligent, that that negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the accident. If, after considering all of the evidence, you feel persuaded that these 3 propositions are more probably true than not, your verdict must be for the Plaintiffs. Otherwise, your verdict should be for the Defendant. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 5.50. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 4 4. To establish a fair preponderance of the evidence in a civil case, the jury may consider the testimony of all witnesses, regardless of who may have called them, and all exhibits received in evidence, regardless of who may have produced them. Miller v. Borough of Exeter, 366 Pa. 336, 77 A.2d 395 (1951). .+{, GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 5 ii 5. The legal term negligence, otherwise known as ~- carelessness~is t~he absence of ordinary care which a reasonably prudent person would exercise in the circumstances here presented. Negligent conduct may consist either of an act or an omission to act when there is a duty to do so. In other words, negligence is the failure to do something which a reasonably careful person would do, or the doing of something which a reasonably careful person would not do, in light of all the surrounding circumstances established by the evidence in this case. It is for you to determine how a reasonably careful person would act in those circumstances. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.01. ., V GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 6 6. Ordinary care is the care a reasonably careful person would use under the circumstances presented in this case. It is the duty of every person to use ordinary care not only for his own safety and the protection of his property, but also to avoid injury to others. What constitutes ordinary care varies according to the particular circumstances and conditions existing then and there. The amount of care required by the law must be in keeping with the degree of danger involved. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.02. ~ ,. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 7 7. Negligence can never be presumed and a mere happening of an accident is not evidence of negligence. Miller v. Hickey, 368 Pa. 317, 81 A.2d 910 (1951). ~"` ~.. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: S 8. The Defendant claims that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was contributorily negligent. Contributor negligence is .~,..,. ,~,~pr negligence on part of the Plaintiff that is a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' injuries. The burden is not on the Plaintiffs to prove their freedom from contributory negligence. The Defendant has the burden of proving contributory negligence by the fair preponderance of the credible evidence. You must be determined whether the Defendant has proven that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, under all the circumstances present, failed to exercise a reasonable care for her own protection. Even if you find that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was negligent, you must also determine whether the Defendant has proven that the Plaintiff's conduct was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' injury. If the Defendant has not sustained that burden of proof, then the defense of contributory negligence has not been made out. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.03. V ^ GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 9 9. The court has already instructed you about what you may consider in determining whether the Defendant was negligent, whether the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was contributorily negligent, and whether such negligence, if any, was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' harm. If you find, in accordance with these instructions, that the Defendant was negligent and such negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' harm, you must then consider whether the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was contributorily negligent. If you find that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was contributorily negligent and such contributory negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' harm, then you must apply the Comparative Negligence Act, which provides in Section 1: The fact that a plaintiff may have been guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery by the plaintiff where such negligence was not greater than that causal negligence of the defendant, or defendants against whom recovery is sought, but any damages sustained by the plaintiff shall be diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributed to the plaintiff. 10 Under this act, if you find that the Defendant was causally negligent and you find that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, was also causally negligent, it is your duty to apportion the relative degree of causal negligence between the Defendant and the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener. In apportioning the causal negligence you should use your common sense and experience to arrive at a result that is fair and reasonable under the facts of this accident as you have determined them from the evidence. If you find that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener's, causal negligence was greater than the causal negligence of the Defendant then the Plaintiffs are barred from recovery and you need not consider what damages should be awarded. If you find that the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener's, causal negligence was equal to or less than the causal negligence of the Defendant then you must set forth the percentages of causal negligence attributable to the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, and the percentage of causal negligence attributable to the Defendant. The total of these percentages must be 100 percent. You will then determine the total amount of damages to which the Plaintiffs would be entitled if Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, had not been contributorily negligent; in other words, in finding the amount of damages, you should not consider the degree, if any, of the Plaintiffs' fault. After you return your verdict, the court will 11 reduce the amount of damages you have found in proportion to the amount of causal negligence you have attributed to the plaintiff. To further clarify these instructions, the court will now distribute to each of you a verdict form containing specific questions. At the conclusion of your deliberations, one copy of this form should be signed by your foreman and handed to the court clerk; this will constitute your verdict. The verdict form reads as follows: Question 1: Do you find that the Defendant, Consiglia Arena, was negligent? Yes No If you answer Question 1 "No," the Plaintiffs cannot recover and you should not answer any further questions and should return to the courtroom. Question 2: Was the Defendant's negligence a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs' harm? Yes No 12 If you answer Question 2 "NO," the Plaintiffs cannot recover and you should not answer any further questions and should return to the courtroom. Question 3: Was the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener, contributorily negligent? Yes No If you answer Question 3 "No," proceed to Question 5. Question 4: If you answered Question 3 "Yes," was the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener's, contributory negligence a substantial factor in bringing about (her) harm? Yes No Question 5: Taking the combined negligence that was a substantial factor in bringing about the Plaintiffs° harm as 100 percent, what percentage of that causal negligence was attributable to the Defendant) and what percentage was attributable to the Plaintiffs? Percentage of causal negligence attributable to Defendant. (Answer only if you have answered "Yes" to to Questions 1 and 2 for Defendant.) ~. 13 Percentage of causal negligence attributable to the Plaintiffs. (Answer only if you have answered "Yes" to Questions 3 and 4.) $ Total 100$ If you have found the Plaintiff, Donna Kroener's, causal negligence to be greater than 50$, then the Plaintiffs cannot recover and you should not answer Question 6 and should return to the courtroom. Question 6: State the amount of damages, if any, sustained by the Plaintiffs as a result of the accident, without regard to and without reduction by the percentage of causal negligence, if any, that you have attributed to the Plaintiffs. c After you return your answers to these questions on the verdict form, signed by your foreman, the court will determine the amount to be awarded to the Plaintiffs, if any, by reducing the amount of damages found by you in proportion to the percentage of the Plaintiffs' causal contributory negligence, if any. I again caution you that you are not to make this reduction yourselves in 14 reaching the amount of the Plaintiffs' damages, as set forth by you in answer to Question 6. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.03A. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 15 10. In order for the Plaintiffs to recover in this case, the defendant's negligent conduct must have been a substantial factor in bringing about the accident. This is what the law recognizes as legal cause. A substantial factor is an actual, real factor, although the result may be unusual or unexpected, but it is not an imaginary or fanciful factor or a factor having no connection or only an insignificant connection with the accident. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.25. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 16 S r ~ 11. The number of witnesses offered by one side or the other does not, in itself, determine the weight of the evidence. It is a factor, but only one of many factors which you should consider. Whether the witnesses appear to be biased or unbiased; whether they are interested or disinterested persons, are among the important factors which go to the reliability of their testimony. The important thing is the quality of the testimony of each witness. In short, the test is not which side brings the greater number of witnesses or presents the greater quantity of evidence; but which witness or witnesses, and which evidence, you consider most worthy of belief. Even the testimony of one witness may outweigh that of many, if you have reason to believe his or her testimony in preference to theirs. Obviously, however, where the testimony of the witnesses appears to you to be of the same quality, the weight of numbers assumes particular significance. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 5.03. ~, ,. GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 17 ,. 12. You may find inconsistencies in the evidence. Even actual contradictions in the tiestimony of witnesses do not necessarily mean that any witness has been wilfully false. Poor memory is not uncommon. Sometimes a witness forgets; sometimes the witness remembers incorrectly. It is also true that two persons witnessing an incident may see or hear it differently. If different parts of the testimony of any witness or witnesses appear to be inconsistent, you the jury should try to reconcile the conflicting statements, whether of the same or different witnesses, and you should do so if it can be done fairly and satisfactorily. If, however, you decide that there is a genuine and irreconcilable conflict of testimony, it is your function and duty to determine which, if any, of the contradictory statements you will believe. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 5.04. .>S ~~;; -.r ~_- GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 18 ~ . w ~ 13. You are not required to accept the evidence offered by the Plaintiffs as to the causal relation between the accident and any damages that they }are claiming. You may reject such evidence, or any part of it, if you do not find it credible or if, in your minds, it does not meet the standards as to the burden of proof as has been defined by the court. You may reject such evidence, or any part of it, even though no contradictory evidence has been offered by the Defendant. You may make your findings independent of all, or any part of, such testimony. Gaita v. Pamula, 385 Pa. 171, 122 A.2d 63 (1956), Gottlob v. Hilleaas, 195 Pa. Super. 453, 171 A.2d 868 (1961). GIVEN: MODIFIED: REFUSED: 19 ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ 14. Any award of dames to the Plaintiffs must be based upon evidence, not conjecture or speculation. Gordon v. Trovata, 234 Pa. Super. 279, 338 A.2d 653 (1975). Respectfully submitted: GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. By: Johri R. Ninosky, Esgili're I.D. #: 78000 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendant Date: Cpl ~°""' s 20 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' POINTS FOR CHARGE AND NOW come Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Angino & Rovner, P.C., and provide the following jury instructions which they move the Court to read to the jury. ANGINO & RO~PdER, P.C. Date: -July 8, 2002 I.D. I~T~-72"81 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs 236966.1V2AS\MLB 1. Based on the evidence and applicable law in this case, I hereby direct you to return a u~~~w.~...,~~ verdict finding Defendant Consiglia Aren~negligent, d thus, liable to the Plainfiffs for their injuries in an amount of monetary damages which you will determine by applying the law of monetary damages, which I will explain to you in detail, to the evidence which you have heard. 236966.IU2AS\MLB 2. The legal term negligence, otherwise lmown as carelessness, is the absence of •..~_/"_ ordinary care which a reasonably prudent person would exercise in the circumstances here presented. Negligent conduct may consist either of an act or an omission to act when there is a duty to do so. In other words, negligence is the failure to do something which a reasonably careful person would do, or the doing of something which a reasonably careful person would not do, in light of all the surrounding circumstances established by the evidence in this case. It is for you to determine how a reasonably careful person would act in those circumstances. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.01; Archer v. Pennsylvania R.R. Co., 166 Pa. Super. 538, 72 A.2d 609 (1950); Fisher v. Strader, 399 Pa. 222, 160 A.2d 203 (1960); Vaughn v. Philadelphia Transp. Co., 417 Pa. 464, 209 A.2d 279 (1965). 236966.]U2AS~NILB 3. Ordin the care a reasonably careful person would use under the circumstances presented in this case. It is the duty of every person to use ordinary care not only for her own safety and the protection of her property, but also to avoid injury to others. What constitutes ordinary care varies according to the particular circumstances and conditions existing then and there. The amount of care required by the law must be in keeping with the degree of danger involved. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.02; Matemia v. Pennsylvania R.R. Co., 358 Pa. 149, 56 A.2d 233 (1948); Potere v. Philadelphia, 380 Pa. 581,112 A.2d 100 (1955). """.~-- " ~...-- 236966.]~RAS~MLB 4. An Act of Assembly of this Commonwealth, in effect at the time this accident occurred, provided in part: No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing, nor at a speed greater than will permit the driver to bring his vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead. Consistent with the foregoing, every person shall drive at a safe and appropriate speed wl~e~tappreacki~~.~w„' ~'m.:a•.s~®~^^ ^r railroad ¢rad cin~ ~ han n n2Ch' rl a e , special hazards exist with respect to This Act dictates the duty of care required of someone in the same situation as the Defendant. If you find that there was a violation of this Act, you must fmd the Defendant negligent as a matter of law. However, before you answer the question of Defendant's liability, you must determine whether this negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about Plaintiffs' injury. Pa. S5JI (Civ) 3.30; 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3361; D'Ambrosio v. Philadelphia, 354 Pa. 403, 47 A.2d 256 (1946), Wemeling v. Shattuck, 366 Pa. 23, 76 A.2d 406 (1950); Majors v. Brodhead Hotel, 416 Pa. ,~ 265, 205 A.2d 873 (1965). 236966.1 W+SWILB 5. The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code provides that no motorist "shall tum a vehicle or move from on traf c 1 e to another ... unless and until the movement can be made with reasonable safety nor without giving an appropriate signal...." 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3334(a). See also, Sollin¢er v. Himchak, 402 Pa. 232, 166 A.2d 531 (1961). u~~- 236966.1~RASVVILB 6. An Act of Assembly of this Commonwealth, in effect at the time this accident occurred, provided in part: (b) Duties at stop signs: -Except when directed to proceed by a police officer or appropriately attired persons authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop at a clearly line or, if none, before. enter;n¢ a crosswalk on th_e_neaz side of the intersection r, if none, then at ~ie point nearest the intersecting roadway wher~~e the a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering. After having stopped, the driver shall yield the right-of way to any pedestrian ina crosswalk or o any ve is e m c'i41t~'PS8Cl7dPIg'approac ng on ano erilT~oadway so c se y as o constitute a hazard during the time when the driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of roadways. This Act dictates the duty of care required of someone in the same situation as the Defendant. If you find that there was a violation of this Act, you must find the Defendant negligent as a matter of law. However, before you answer the question of Defendant's liability, you must determine whether this negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about Plaintiffs' injury. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.30; 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3323(b). 236966.1~RASV~ILB A driver has a duty to maintain a proper lookout and to observe what is occurring in front of her vehicle. Lavely v. Wolota, 253 Pa. Super. 196, 384 A.2d 1298 (1978). 236966.IV2ASWILB 8. The duty to exercise ordinary care to keep a proper lookout involves not only the duty to look when such looking would be effective, but also the duty to see what an ordinarily prudent person, exercising ordinary care, would have seen under the circumstances then and there existing. Joannides v. Norris, 146 Pa. Super. 488, 23 A.2d 53 (1941); Kmetz v. Lochiatto, 421 Pa. 363, 219 A.2d 588 (1966); Frisina v. Dailev, 395 Pa. 280, 150 A.2d 348 (1959); Meyer, Law of Vehicle Neeli~ence in Penns lvania, § 1.46, pp. 66-68 (1970). y 236966.1UZASN4LB 9. The Assured Clear Distance Rule provides that it is the Defendant's duty to operate her vehicle in such a manner that she can always stop within the distance she can clearly see. The Defendant must always control her vehicle so as to be able to stop and avoid striking a person within her vision. Enfield v. Stout, 400 Pa. 6, 161 A.2d 22 (1960); Filer v. Filer, 301 Pa. 461, 152 A. 567 (1930). 236966.1\RP.S\MLB 10. The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code definer a crosswalk as follows (1) That Hatt of a roadway at an intersection ncluded within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidew sides of the highway, measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the transversable roadway; and, in the absence of a sidewalk on one side of the roadway, that part of roadway included within the extension of the lateral lines of the existing sidewalk. °~-_-. (2) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for edestrian crossin b lines or other markm s on the surface. ,«wM' ""` ~- P g Y ~ g _~, 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 236966.1VtASN~(LB 11. An Act of Assembly of this Commonwealth, in effect at the time of this accident occurred, provided in pertinent part: When traffic control signals are not in place or not in op driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of--way to a pedestrian crossin a roadwa 'thin any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an mte This Act dictates the duty of care required of someone in the same situation as the Defendant. If you find that there was a violation of this Act, you must find the Defendant negligent as a matter of law. However, before you answer the question of Defendant's liability, you must determine whether this negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about Plaintiffs' injury. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.30; 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3542(a); D'Ambrosio v. Philadelphia, 354 Pa. 403, 47 A.2d 256 (1946), Wemeling v. Shattuck, 366 Pa. 23, 76 A.2d 406 (1950); Maiors v. Brodhead Hotel, 416 Pa. 265, 205 A.2d 873 (1965). 236966.(\RAS\MLB .. 12. If a pedestrian, before being hit, has been on the l~igk~ovey for a lon period of time so that a careful driver could see her and avoid the accident, and if the pedestrian is then hit, you may conclude that negligence has then been established on the part of the driver. Whether or not that took place in this case will, like all of the other facts, be for you to determine. The oper for of a vehicle is under a duty to be attentive, to discover the presence of a pedestrian in the ead. of her. She has an affirmative duty to observe a pedestrian in her line of vision and to take precautions not to injure her. ~1~~~°~~^*'~ f ~~~~~~ *~ ~~~ ~ -~a~~M~- ~- ~---~ -rL_._ ___. ,__r____ McNett v. Brides, 217 Pa. Super. 322, 272 A.2d 202 (1970); Berry v. Lintner, 226 Pa. Super. 562, 323 A.2d 253 (1974). 236966.IU2AS\MLB 13. A pedestrian has a perfect right to rely on the exercise of reasonable care by the drivers of automobiles on the highways. Lavely v. Wolota, 253 Pa. Super. 196, 384 A.2d 1298, 1302 (1978). 236966.!\RASVvILB 14. A person need not anticipate that another will act negligently. Crross v. Smith, 388 Pa. 92, 130 A.2d 90 (1957). 236966.1~RAS~MLB 15. In order for the Plaintiffs to recover in this case, the Defendant's negligent conduct must have been a substantial factor in bringing about the accident. This is what the law recognizes as legal cause. A substantial factor is an actual, real factor, although the result may be unusual or unexpected, but is not an imaginary or fanciful factor or a factor having no connection or only an insignificant connection with the accident. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 3.25; Whitner v. Lojeski, 437 Pa. 448, 263 A.2d 889 (1970). 236966.1\RAS\MLB 16. Under Pennsylvania law, the negligent party is liable for all damages which ordinarily and in the natural course of events have resulted from the commission of the original negligent act. Frank v. Volkswaeenwerk, A. G. of West Germany, 522 F.2d 321, 323 (3d Cir. 1975); Simmons v. Mullen, 231 Pa. Super. 199, 331 A.2d 892 (1974). ~-~ 236966.1~RASNdLB 17. You will recall that Richard H. Hallock, M.D. gave testimony of his qualifications as expert in e field of orthopedics. ,<..: ness who has special knowledge, skill, experience, training or education in a particular science, profession or occupation may give his opinion as an expert as to any matter in which he is skilled. In determining the weight to be given to his opinion, you should consider the qualifications and reliability of the expert and the reasons given for his opinion. You are not bound by an expert's opinion merely because he is an expert; you may accept or reject it, as in the case of other witnesses. Give it the weight, if any, to which you deem it entitled. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 5.30. 236966.IUtASV~ILB 18. If you find that the Defendant is liable to the Plaintiffs, you must then find an amount of money damages which you believe will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiffs for all the physical and financial injury they have sustained as a result of the accident. The amount which you award today must compensate the Plaintiffs completely for damage sustained in the past, as well as damage the Plaintiffs will sustain in the future. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.00; Miller v. Weller, 288 F.2d 438 (3d Cir. 1961); Frankel v. United States, 321 F. Supp. 1331 (E.D. Pa. 1970), affd, 466 F.2d 1226 (3d Cir. 1972). 236966.I~RASVvILB ~~~:~~: '"~ 19. The damages recoverable by the Plaintiffs in this case and the items that go to make them up, each of which I will discuss separately, are as follows: (a) Past and future pain and suffering; (b) Embarrassment and humiliation; (c) Disfigurement; ~ ~,,,,....- ~.tM~^~."~' (d) Loss of enjoyment of life; and (e) Loss of consortium. ~""`~ In the event that you find in favor of the Plaintiffs, you will add these sums of damage together and return your verdict in a single, lump sum. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.01; Schwe~el v. Goldberg, 209 Pa. Super. 280, 228 A.2d 405 (1967); Mack v. Johnson, 430 F. Supp. 1139 (E.D. Pa. 1977), affd, 582 F.2d 1275 (3d Cir. 1978); Reist v. Manwiller, 231 Pa. Super. 444, 332 A.2d 518 (1974). 236966.1\RAS\MLB 20. The broad term "pain and su ffe ri n g'"''' includes a wide range of not only physical, but ~ - - ~ also emotional reactions to injuries th~tfCc - eir consequences. In calculating damage for pain and suffering, yo u may place a value on the following: (a) Mental pain and distress; (b) (c) Fear; Shock ,~ ; (d) Emotional suffering; (e) Anxiety; (f) Frustration; (g) Degradation; (h) Loss of the feeling ofwell-being; and (i) Limitation on activities. Niederman v. Brodskv, 436 Pa. 401, 261 A.2d 84 (1970); Walsh v. Brodv, 220 Pa. Super. 293, 286 A.2d 666 (1971); Corcoran v. McNeal, 400 Pa. 14, 161 A.2d 367 (1960). 236966.1~RAS~MLS 21. Plaintiff Donna Kroener is entitled to be fairly and adequately compensated for such physical p_ a^mental anguish, discomfort, inconvenience and distress as you find she has endured, from the time of the accident until today. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.OlE; Niederman v. Brodsky, 436 Pa. 401, 261 A.2d 84 (1970); Boe avarapu v. Ponist, 518 Pa. 162, 542 A.2d 516 (1988). °'',. ~,,,~ 2369bb.1\RASWiLB 22. In evaluating the amount to be awarded fo pain d suffering, you should consider that the infliction of pain means taking from a person what is her own to possess and retain -- namely health and well-being -- and that the law allows for compensation of this loss to the extent that loss maybe calculated in money damages. Corcoran v. McNeal, 400 Pa. 14, 161 A.2d 367 (1960); Thompson v. Iannuzzi, 403 Pa. 329, 169 A.2d 777 (1961); DiChiacchio v. Rockcra8 Stone Products Co, 424 Pa. 77, 225 A.2d 913 (1967). Y~ 236966.1UZAS~(LB 23. Plaintiff Donna Kroener is entitled to be fairly and adequately compensated for such physical pain, mental anguish, discomfort, inconvenience and distress as you believe she will endure in the future as a result of her injuries. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.O1F; Murphv v. Tavlor, 440 Pa. 186, 269 A.2d 486 (1970); Cunni~ham v. Davis, 688 F. Supp. 1030 (E.D. Pa. 1988). C~~ 236966.1\RAS\MLB 24. If you find that Plaintiff Donna Kroener's injuries will continue beyond today, you must determine the life expectancy of the Plaintiff. According to statistics compiled by the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the average li expect cy of all persons of the Plaintiff s age at the time of accident, sex and race was 6° ye s. is figure is offered to you only as a guide, and you are not bound to accept it if you believe that the Plaintiff would have lived longer or less than the average individual in her category. In reaching this decision you are to consider the Plaintiffs health prior to the accident, her manner of living, her personal habits and other factors that may have affected the duration of her life. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.21; Rosche v. McCoy, 397 Pa. 615, 156 A.2d 307 (1959); Messer v. Bei¢hley, 409 Pa. 551, 187 A.2d 168 (1963); see, Life Expectancy, Vital Statistics of the United States, (1990) Life Tables. 236966.1~RAS~MLB 25. Plaintiff Donna Kroener is entitled to be fairly and adequately compensated for such embarrassment and humiliation as you believe she has endured and will continue to endure in the future as a result of her injuries. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.O1G; Frankel v. United States, 321 F. Supp. 1331 (E.D. Pa. 1970), affd, 466 F.2d 1226 (3d Cir. 1972); Marinelli v. Montour R.R. Co., 278 Pa. Super. 403, 420 A.2d 603 (1980); Fish v. Gosnell, 316 Pa. Super. 565, 463 A.2d 1042 (1983). G-~„"-`. 236966.1\RP.S\MLB `~... 26. The disfigurement which Plaintiff Donna Kroener sustained as a result of this accident is a separat em of damages recognized by the law. Therefore, in addition to such sums as you award for pain and suffering and for embarrassment and humiliation, the Plaintiff is entitled to be fairly and adequately compensated for the disfigurement she has suffered in the past as a result of this accident, and which she will continue to suffer during the future duration of her life. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.O1H; Frankel v. United States, 321 F. Supp. 1331 (E.D. Pa. 1970), affd, 466 F.2d 1226 (3d Cir. 1972); Rogers v. Moody, 430 Pa. 121, 242 A.2d 276 (1968). µ 236966.1\RAS\MLB 27. Plaintiff Donna Kroener is entitled to be fairly and adequately compensated for past, present and future loss of her ability to enjoy any of the pleasures of life as a result of her injuries. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.OlI; Frankel v. United States, 321 F. Supp. 1331 (E.D. Pa. 1970), affd, 466 F.2d 1226 (3d Cir. 1972); Corcoran v. McNeal, 400 Pa. 14, 161 A.2d 367 (1960); Thompson v. Iannuzzi, 403 Pa. 329, 169 A.2d 777 (1961); DiChiacchio v. Rockcraft Stone Products Co , 424 Pa. 77, 225 A.2d 913 (1967). 236966.1\RAS\MLB 28. Plaintiff Donna Kroener's spouse, Robert Kroener, is entitled to be compensated for the loss of the injured party's services to him and the loss of companionship of his spouse. Pa. SSJI (Civ) 6.O1L; Hopkins v. Blanco, 457 Pa. 90, 320 A.2d 139 (1974); Mueller v. Brandon, 282 Pa. Super. 37, 422 A.2d 664 (1980); Burns v. Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Co , 353 Pa. Super. 571, 510 A.2d 810 (1986). ~"~_ 236966.1\RAS\MLB 29. In this Commonwealth, loss of consorti een recognized as a right growing out of the marriage relationship which the husband and wife have respectively to the society, companionship and affection of each other in their lives together. Any interference with this right of consortium by the negligent injury to one's spouse affords the other spouse a legal cause of action to recover damages for that interference. Burns v. Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottline Co., 353 Pa. Super. 571, 510 A.2d 810, 812 (1986). ~~ ~~. 236966.1\RASVvILB ~ + !I 30. An injury to the marital relationship is a compensable wrong for the relationship is a continuing one with an inseparable mutuality of obligations and pleasures, affection and companionship. Hopkins v. Blanco, 224 Pa. Super. 116, 120; 302 A.2d 855 (1973). 236966.1~RASWILB ~ ~ W , 31. It is not an issue in this case nor are you to concern yourselves with how any verdict will be paid. our verdict must fully compensate the Plaintiffs for all injuries, past, present and future that they have sustained. ~~ „~^'""'° ,,~~~ Dranzao v. Wiunterhalter, 395 Pa. Super. 578, 577 A.2d 1349, 1356 (1990). y py 9 ~, r~ F"~WnaR _. M1 236966.1\RAS\MLB .. i_ _ ~ 4~ ~', i~. DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs V. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 01-5301 CIVIL TERM Before: Edgar B. Bayley Date: July 8, 2002 Attorneys: Richard Sadlock and John Ninosky LIST OF EXHIBITS FOR THE PLAINTIFF 1. Three photos of the area around Giant 2. Photo of wound on foot 3. Photo of wound on foot 4. Photo of foot after some healing 5. Photo of both feet 6. Video of Dr. Hallock 7. Transcript of Dr. Hallock *Exhibits given to Court Administrator's Office to be put in vault* . a.~..... :,g: : _ ~.,n,~~ ter.: ~,. n ~„~;z.sxHg...~.va ^~.~ £ ~ :Ot ~~ ~ I 1 l; ~;' Abp>, ~;,+~ ,.~ ,.. _, ~~i_1_'C; ~i.~; s7t! ~~~ ~~ R •- DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, PLAINTIFFS V. CONSIGLIA ARENA, DEFENDANT QUESTION 1: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION-LAW 01-5301 CIVIL TERM VERDICT State the total amount of damages that plaintiff, Donna Kroener, has sustained as a result of the causal negligence of defendant. TOTAL $ .~~ F~ k ~ QUESTION 2 State the total amount of damages for loss of consortium that plaintiff, Robert Kroener, has sustained as a result of the causal negligence of defendant. TOTAL $~_ `--,-fir Bp~ (Date) re an ^ -__ cz~~-=~ ter. c~,~..~.~.,n;..~„ `E~p,~,~ .. ~~ ~ 1 ~~ ~~u9-dt ~tw-o -.' ~R'; ......., L.~.. ll.~.ux ~ .ldm.y° Judge Clerk/Proth _ Tipstaff C A SE NO. : S COi7RTROOM NO.: aZ~ ( 1 ~` ~' ' ' / ~ / '~+~t~tt4 /1 i~ 0. ~,~-l~ ~.62 VS -~ C u ~wn.. ,~nw ~o nocx [~i ~ 53c~ ~ HATE: aooa , . Juror# Name Random No. --- 140 _ Morrow, Edward E -1879138521 7 Rossi, Maryann L -1743070325 ;_ __ , enne-_ Z~ -1532003077 ' -6a $ eNr En ep¢ PT - ~' 1383 17 1 . __ e. , - _ ~ - 55 9 - - - - , __ ~ 4 ~_ -1178427268 _ __ (; _ 29___ _ _ Nichols, Sylvia J- __ _ - - - -1137595223 - - 7 40 Ottenberg,Tara' -969457339 f, - 129__ - _ Shatto,l)avi[> W__ ___ _ -953071920 9 14 Beers, Robert A -741985721 0 13 _ Moore,_John,T _ __ _ -626213602 ': 116 Bianco, Ruth A -519078342 I? 33_ Bashore,Teena Lee -400234753 1~ Q 4 3 7 u - 1 0273 5 ~~ _: _ - - -219403331 !" - - 122 Duncan, Laura -157231642 ~ ~ - - ---- -128255823 ~ - _ , - ~ -87706412 1° 5-_ Boden,RobeitR II 126777842 "r - _ -- - A 232975114 a 3i~ _ __ 121 Avitabile,.Matthew " _ 331119001 - 70 Lehr, Kenneth G_ _ 74357911(.3 " 125 _ - _ Shuey, Jndith_F ' _~ - 797345412 '"' `' 45 Herman,Gerald W Jr - 8_$2535274_ - =~ 5~ Heiser, Michelle L 887257632 3:; 16 Klingensmith, Russell S _ - 912629197 ~'G 138 McLeod, Carol 1059375486 _, 126 Eckenroad,Flayd B Jr 1149254965 ":8 128 Swartz(Rable), Paala M _ _ 1161992511 ''~ 127 Strock, Sandra S 1170759762 {, 10 _ __ __ Heckler _I)ayid 1236760944 72 Greene,_Richard V 1341426732 ,? 31 - Sullivan, Mark W 1394290614 123 Bogdan,James E 1441938799 -~ __ _27_ McCae,Edward W ____ ___ ____ 1619938499 35 66 Paoletta,_Arlen_e_S 171.41.87598_ {; 118 _ Cohck, Joann H _ _ __ _ 1738624051 M~ UrJ~ .. Juror# Name Random No. ~, 9 3 120 CalkinszHgam B_III _ 1871722232 =R 28____ Wng_ert,Sasan K 1941614664 - _ _ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband Plaintiffs v. CONSIGLIA ARENA, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 01-5301 CIVIL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the judgment previously entered in this matter in favor of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant in the amount of $5,500.00 as satisfied. Date: ' 236966.1\RAS\MLB III ANGINO & chard A. Sad , E~ I.D. No. 472 4503 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)238-6791 Counsel for Plaintiffs P.C. ~:. _-~ z :~. ,: ~. ~~} _~ J ~--' .~ S T. ~<i I .-~ T -- . .`? CT.J -G Sr~t ~n DONNA KROENER and ROBERT KROENER, her husband, Plaintiffs v. CONSTGLIA ARENA, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO.O1-5301 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 5~' day of February, 2002, upon consideration of the attached letter from Richard A. Sadloek, Esq., attorney for Plaintiffs, the discovery conference previously scheduled for February 7, 2002, is cancelled. BY THE COURT, Richard A. Sadlock, Esq. 4503 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiffs John R. Ninosky, Esq. P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorney for Defendant ~p,,,L ~_S.a.v ~' :rc . °' " mmv~imn5.nrtau?~tend~a ~. six -~zk sz ~ar=~+ ..ax~k ~$a~.a_ ..,.,.w~ .. y~y V!u 1~~:i/ 1 Ill~l s~i~~~G ~~ 1 i.~ .~ reb-Or.-02 12: 3f3P ANGI~vc~ & Rov1vER, P.C. 4503 Nrnerx FkONT tirRECY' I]ARRiSRURI:, PA 17I10.170R 7l7/2s(~[.Tn I~AZ 717/L.1&5610 W W W.ANC IN(YROV NF.hCY)M G°MAIL: M1YAUlAC1tGBANUINOROT'NEIL000S 1'ebruary 5, 2002 VIA 1+'AX: 240-6462 The IIonorable I. Weclry C]ier, .lr. Cumberland County Courthouse Onc Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 Re: I)anna and Robert Kroener v. Consialia Arena No. O1-5301 Civil Term ^eaz Judge t)ler: KICkWtil G. ANGINU Nch]. IirnNER I(TS[Ptl M. MP.LILLO 7EItltY $, }tyA{AN DAV,n L. Lvlx P.Oc^ MIGXAk,. I-.'. KVnul N,n,At(uA. Snnerx•z ](xsrl~N M. DuRN ]ANDS 17EC W'L1 JOAN L J'lElllnalK A discovery' conference in the above action is currently scheduled lilt Fehnlary 7, 2002. Please: be advised the discovery is+ues ltavc been resolved by wunsel, and the conference may be canceled. 't'hank you for your attention to this matter. Shuuld yuu have a!y questions, picas(: do not hesitate to contact mc. RAS/mlb cc: lnhn R. Ninosky, I/syuire (234-6808) 2:SY787.I1RA51ML6