HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-00903
>. co .'
c; ("',' t"
-.,
I.: e
(-)
1.1.1..
~~< ; ,
"!'I' "':; ; -:.1
((~,: .... , )
0." ,
lG::_ , , . ,
C:\I} c.-; :j ;'.t.t
j::.: <, i:::1 r~
lo. a :":,
0 C) (.5
;.
~
~ 0-
W 00
~ ~ " 0
cr
'-i 0- !::
'" " ~
., 0- "
C:J .... :z "
" 0 ~ ",'
~ ~ cr 0 cr
... .. "
'" ~ r ci 00
~ E 0- '"
cr ~ ~
~ 0 cr
:z <
.; ~ '" r
0
C:J '"
Ii:
'"
~
--
~ Cl ,-
~,~ ..:;1 I
,. . .
I ~
, I " (...,J , .. "
"
) ,. : .' .'
d..~ (- I .. "
C) , .
, ',7\ ': 'I
;:- , I I
i\_" ~. c ) :cJ
., t, , , ,,-
l'u' t:"
u C'- . :::)
Ci G.) U
r.
~
~ ....
'"
~ . '" III
c.:j '" 0
.... ~
III '"
" .... '" ~
~ ... z '"
e c 0 K ,,'
'"
~ ... 0 '"
Il III :>
~ ~ X 0 III
E .... III
'" ~ ii:
.:! 0
~ z '"
oj III C
X
~ 0
e '"
Il
~
'.
,-. 'h
{~,.. r.;
c'..: , :r:
, ,
,
:
','.J
" 0 :.'?
( 'J ,
r . .J
, , :.1...
.:J
...., ()
n::
f:);:1 W
~~ J:l Ul t: ~
.J-' ~
"" C .., Ir ,
.., <0 g, .
...:1>< .J-' 't:l ~ W z ;;
~~ ~ .~ c m 0 0 "
~ <( ~ w . 0
<0 " w , 0 0
0:: ~ El ~ w 0 " . . CO
~~ . " . ~
8 " . ...J " . en
Q) w 0 w x < I
>< u 0
<l: rl " 0 u , m Z \0
H n:: ~ Ul " J , W ~ ""
~~ 0 z < 0 u
~8 ~ Ul z " CO
~ ~ <( 0 I " J
. " 0 >
J , " .
> ~ . 0 . z ,...
w . 0 z
<l: UJ U " . w rl
~ 0 .
~~ . " . ,...
e! ~ ~ . 0 . " i
H :x: I- < "
ffiUl ~ H ~ Q) fJ) 0
>
;! c
gl Cln:: H <0
~~ :5 ...,
'"
ClUJ
HM"Oilt(l'A1)'iSU.(I'1B't1lIL(I'JQ'CQIL1I rON i'll/OJ
':1M 'l'r'NOll'1"NlIllNl.n'U-1W.o NOISlfllQ It '1\"0]1 UYJ!O"W
Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
NO, 99-903
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
,
i
I"
CAROLENE E. SANTIAGO and HENRY
SANTIAGO,
vs.
DAVID MARK KEENER and SPAHR,
INC.,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
DEFENDANTS' ANSWER AND NEW MATTER
1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted. I
I
5. Admitted. I
,
i
6. Admitted. ,
,
,
I
7. Admitted. I.
I
I
8. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that at the time and place
alleged, Plaintiff Carolene E. Santiago was operating a 1995 Mercury Tracer and was
exiting from the Camp Hill Shopping Mall intending to cross Trindle Road to continue on
South 34th. Street. The remaining allegations are denied on the basis that, after
reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without information or knowledge sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth thereof.
9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the vehicle operated by
Defendant Keener struck the left side of the vehicle operated by Plaintiff Carolene
Santiago as both vehicles were within the intersection of Trindle Road and South 34th,
Street. The remaining allegations are denied, It is specifically denied that Plaintiff
Carolene Santiago had a green light as she entered the intersection and that Defendant
Keener failed to stop at a red light for his direction of travel at the intersection. To the
contrary, Defendant Keener had a green light as he approached and entered the
intersection. In the absence of any evidence of a traffic signal malfunction or conflict, it
is believed and therefore averred that Plaintiff Carolene Santiago entered the
intersection against a red light for her direction of travel.
10. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendants caused or contributed
to causing the accident by any negligent, careless and/or reckless act or omission. By
way of further answer, the allegations are denied in accordance with Pa.R.C.p. 1029(e).
COUNT I
11. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
12. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
14. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
16. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
r
17. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
WHEREFORE, Defendants David Mark Keener and Spahr, Inc. demand
jUdgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Carolene E. Santiago,
COUNT II
18. The answers set forth above in Paragraphs 1 through 17 are incorporated
herein by reference.
19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants are without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
WHEREFORE, Defendants David Mark Keener and Spahr, Inc. demand
judgment in their favor and against Plaintiff Henry Santiago,
NEW MATTER
20. Plaintiffs' claims may be barred or limited by provisions of the Motor
Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa.C.S,A. 91701 et seq.
21. Plaintiffs' claims may be barred or iimited by the doctrine of comparative
negligence.
22. Plaintiff Carolene Santiago may have entered the intersection against a
red traffic signal, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. 93111 and 93112(a}(3}.
23. Plaintiff Carolene Santiago was negligent and careless in the manner in
which she operated her vehicle at the time and place of the accident in the following
particulars:
a.} failing to observe and obey a lawfully posted traffic signal;
b,} failing to stop in obeyance of a red traffic signal;
C) Ii:> n
c t.;) 11
-. ..-,
..~~ t -n -r'
.:"' 'I
rl; , : ;.lj I .1: _~
, I .-1~'
'0
" Ci' ;")(L)
,
r-' ., , .-:'J :,1:.,
. "j :'.1
:1 : (~; :::'. ........( ")
J , "n
S';" ,~
.. .~
.l'~'
:Ci r.- :J!
-<. In -...
l..
~
~ ..
'"
-0 s '" <lI
~ 0: 0
.. !':
<II III
Co .. III ~
~ ... Z III
IE 0 0 ~ ci
a:
:!.. ~ 0 a:
Q <lI ~
~ . :r 0 <lI
t .. <II
0: '" ~
..:l 0
z a:
.; ~ <II ~
:r
~ 0
IE '"
Q
~
en
",
,"-:1
,
\,'.'
t. ~ . .
, ,.
., .
"'"
I ,
C :J
,"'- , .-
.- ..)
l , r:''''I
c:. c.... (J
1:1 r,
u.'
~;:'i
~~ OJ
<fl en t>l .~ ,
-i-J U g, a: .
...:1;.< 4-l C H W z ii
i~ '1:1 'n III ~ m 0 0 l-
ra -i-J 'E ~ . 0
.~ <( w
t>l . w , 0 0
'1:1 &: tIl W 0 . . . ro
8 III ,.. . l- . ~
c . .J . . 0)
'"" . III ~ "" OJ w 0 . < ,
u w 0
;:'i p.. > 0 '"" " 0 u < . Z \0
~~ 0:: en , " 0 w ~ ""
~8 ~ t>l en 0 Z < 0 u ro
z "
~ E ~ <( 0 z , ,
I- 0
~8 " . 0 l- .
M ~ . 0 . z r--
<>: w . 0 z '""
U , . w
'H . 0 . . r--
Sc t>l~ t€ u t>l 0 . "
. i
Z ~ :r: I- < .
t>l~ ffiUJ ~ H (/) 0
OJ
C ,
~! ...:I~ co:: III
~~ ~~ ....,
HMfiUO' "'O'SSILO. 101:iltG' ~9.t'ltO ;'O~ l'jIlO~
':lNI"If'NOUlj'~Il11NI.11\l!S'11't ~o NOISINO 't '1"'Oi1 31't15'11\1
"- ,
~_r. tr. C
I (..~ 'j
tLl~~: ; ',.
(--'
i ~~ , , '~"J
(:)
1(" , ;
C1:. ...., 1 .:
L~ J I. "1
-, , .'
[i_ I , C::l I , , i (j
.1 l.L.! ~ I .,.
'0- c,.
L!~ '" :j
C) 'J' 0
I.
~
~ >-
w
~ S w co
~ ~ 0
>- E
III 01
" >- 01 ~
~ "i; Z 01
Ii: 0 " ,,-
~ ~ 0 a:
Q "- co "
~ ~ r 0 co
E >- III
a: '" it
-ll 0
z a:
.; ~ 0(
III r
~ 0
'"
Ii:
Q
~
4.
At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Spahr, Inc., was the owner of a 1996
Chevrolet 300 Van.
5.
At all times relevant hereto, the said Chevrolet Van was being operated by
Defendant David Mark Keener as an agent, servant or employee of Spahr, Inc.
6.
The facts and occurrences hereinafter related took place on or about June 17,
1998 at approximately 8:10 a,m. at the intersection ofTrindle Road and S. 34th Street
in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
7.
At that time and place, Defendant David Mark Keener, was operating the
Chevrolet Van in an easterly direction on Trindle Road.
8.
At that time and place, Plaintiff Carolene E. Santiago was operating her vehicle,
a 1995 Mercury Tracer in a southerly direction on S. 34th Street. Plaintiff had just
driven through the Camp Hill Shopping Mall and had made a right turn onto S. 34th
Street after stopping at the stop sign.
9.
As Plaintiff drove on S. 34th Street and approached the intersection of Trindle
Road, she had a green light and proceeded through the intersection when she was
struck on the driver's side by Defendant David Mark Keener, who had failed to stop at
the red light facing traffic heading east on Trindle Road.
2
10.
The foregoing accident and all of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiff
are the direct and proximate result of the following negligent, careless and reckless acts
of the Defendant Mark David Keener and Defendant, Spahr, Inc., by its agent, servant
or employee, Kenner:
Failure to obey traffic signals;
Failure to observe other vehicles on the highway;
Failure to keep a reasonable lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the
A.
B.
C.
road;
D.
E.
Failing to have his vehicle under proper and adequate control; and
Failure to use due care under the circumstances.
COUNT I
CAROLENE E. SANTIAGO v. DAVID MARK KEENER AND SPAHR. INC.
11.
Plaintiff sustained painful and severe injuries which include but are not limited to
multiple facial lacerations, a fractured rib, cervical strain, vertigo, permanent loss of
hearing in her left ear, post trauma syndrome, headaches and blurred vision.
12.
By reason of the aforesaid injuries sustained by Plaintiff, she was forced to incur
expenses for medical treatment, medications, hospitalizations and similar
miscellaneous expenses in an effort to restore herself to health, and claim is made
therefor.
3
13.
Because of the nature of her injuries, Plaintiff has been advised and, therefore,
avers that she may be forced to incur similar expenses in the future and claim is made
therefor.
14.
As a result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff has undergone and in the future will
undergo physical and mental suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily
activities and loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment.
15.
As a result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff has been and in the future will be
subject to great humiliation and embarrassment.
16.
As a result of the aforementioned injuries, Plaintiff has sustained loss of income
and will continue to suffer loss of income in the future.
17.
Plaintiff continues to be plagued by persistent pain and limitation and, therefore,
avers that her injuries are of a permanent nature, causing residual problems for the
remainder of her lifetime.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff claims damages from the Defendants in excess of
Twenty-Five Thousand ($25,000.00) Dollars upon this cause of action, together with
costs of suit.
4
>-
n-
O:)'
,_:
l1rS)
fi:(,
~!.i.J~'
,),-
01;
U.:f.\
5'~~:;
..l.
,_.
(~
\~
[)~
~~
...:1...:1
ij
[)~
~8
~!
~!
li_
o
c,
.
'.J
"'-,
'~'. \~
'~ '\,.'
.---::t-
rJ
'\~
,'"
N
(:
;:--
:5:~:
'.:1 ..:'~
.oJ.
:;,jl
:-:5
u
,..,.~
~
--.
r....::
r--
~\~~
c~
1.'.1
u...
CT\
en
(}:'
~
~
"'- ('j1 /,,-
.
r.\ f'0 ----
r' '
r:---\ ..;' '~S-.
______t- ..::;
~( 0
-~--
c:J ('{~ 0/
"----.J' ."
<fl III
4-<
'tl 'rl -I-'
C -I-' C
co c co
~ .rl 'tl 'E
co c .
~ co <2l 0' a:
m ,
H ~ !i: w 2 .
~8 0:: 0 0 Ui
i H <t ~ "
j i-< w . 0
. OJ W " w , 0
0 " . 0
.~ ;> a H" ..J , " " . OJ
III ~ " . ~
0 ~ 0'1
w~ Ill" 0 u w < I
5l~ ::JC < . z '"
.cO z - , w
15Ul < 0 u ~ ""
~~ <t 2 "
~H 0 2 C " OJ
" " 0 >
...:1>< ~ " , "
w 0 . 2
@~ Cl . . .
u C " 0 z .....
HO:: :t: 0 , w H
6 ~~ 0 " .
OJ , 0 . .....
I- < "
c (f) .
co 0
..., >
":IN HMflILO. AlI1;~ll ..
1".""!mYNlI!JNI.ll:I~:~'~S:~O. ~9'l~LtO :ON wwo
~jOtSll\la v 'W!ln ~!'f~SlW