Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-07196 )AVID MARTIN, Plaintiff V. TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 99-7196 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW R/NG NOT/CE OFARBITRA TORS'HEA Marc T. Levin, Esquire TO: Karl E. South Hanover Esquire Street 4423 North Front Street 155 Carlisle, uth PA Hanover 17013 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Car AND NOW, this 18'h day of May, 2001, you are hereby notified that the arbitrators appointed in the above-captioned action will hold a hearing for the purpose of their appointment as follows: Date: Thursday, July 26, 2001 Time: 9:45 a.m. Location: 3The Law 01 Market treet, Lemoyne, Pennsylvania & Weidner CAVEATS: 1 NTHOSE PAR WISHING TO IN ECESSARYYTEQUIPMENTTODISPLATRODUCE YTHEVIDEOTAPE PPRESENT AT T. ARBITRATION LOCATONVETHE 2 E PROVIDED TO EACH ARBI TIRATOR AT LEAST ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING?NSCRIPTS SHOULD 3. PARTIES WISHING TO ARGUE LEGAL POINTS WILL BE EXPECTED TO HAVE COPIES OF STATUTES, INCLUDING CASES (SPECIFICALLY PORT ONS HIIGHLIGHTED FOR EACH ARBITRATOR AND OPPOSING COUNSEL AT EHE COIMMENC MENT REGARDING UNJUST ENRICHMENT), OF THE HEARING. Horace . Johnson, Esquire, Chairman Michae J. Hanft, Esquire Arbitrator Michael J. Kane, Esquire, Arbitrator kkm:146343 c: Michael J. Hanft, Esquire Michael J. Kane, Esquire Court Administrator Bulletin Board, Prothonotary's Office Jul 24 01 01:01p DAVID MARTIN, V. Kane and Mackin 717 214 3703 p.2 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff NO. 99-7196 CIVIL TERM TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants ORDER AND NOW, this` day of ordered that Charles P. Mackin, Esquire be in the above-captioned case. CIVIL ACTION-LAW = 2001, it is hereby for Mchael J. Kane, Esquire as arbitrator BY THE COURT: Horace Johnson, Esquire Court Administrator RECEIVED .1111 2 6 9nnl STEWART AND DL)FFIE ?.; DAVID MARTIN, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. 99.7196 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED V. TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants ORDER rk- AND NOW, this 2.} day of ?001, in consideration of the foregoing Petition for Appointment of Arbitrators, Esquire; IV/24-Esquire and nAri? squire are appointed arbitrators in the above-captioned action as prayed for. BY THE COURT: P.J. DAVID MARTIN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. V. NO. 99-7196 CIVIL TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET CIVIL ACTION - LAW and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Marc T. Levin, Esquire, Farrell & Ricci, P.C., Counsel for the Defendants in the above action, respectfully represents that: 1. The above-captioned action is at issue. 2. The claim of the Plaintiff is for damages less than $25,000. There is no counterclaim, 3. The following attorneys are interested in the case as counsel or are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: Fred H. Hait, Esquire and/or any attorneys at the law firm of McGraw, Hait & Deitchman (prior counsel to Plaintiff). WHEREFORE, your Petitioner prays your Honorable Court to appoint three (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be submitted. Date: _qhdo Respectfully yours, FARRELL & RICCI, P.C. Marc T. Levin, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 70294 4423 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 230-9201 Counsel for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this a0day of April, 2001, I, Marc T. Levin, Esquire, hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition for Appointment of Arbitrators upon all counsel of record by depositinga copy of same in the United States mail, regular delivery, postage prepaid at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Marc T. Levin, Esq ' e 11- Fred H. Hait, ID 434331 Attorney for Plaintiff McGraw, Halt & Deitchman 4 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249.4500 249-2411 (fax) l?liLl LI i.i. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DAVID MARTIN, Plaintiff Vs. TURKEY HILL, L.P., t/d/b/a TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET, And DONNA REISINGER, Defendants No. 99-7196 Civil Term Civil Action-Law NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Court Administrator Fourth Floor Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240.6200 -.v..A__ Fred H. Hait, ID # 34331 Attorney for Plaintiff McGraw, Halt & Deitchrnan 4 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249.4500 249.2411 (fax) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DAVID MARTIN, No. 99-7196 Civil Term Plaintiff Vs. TURKEY HILL, L.P., t/d/b/a TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET, And DONNA REISINGER, Defendants Civil Action-Law COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff, David Martin, is an adult individual, who resides at 548 Mountain Road, Boiling Springs, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant Turkey Hill, L.P. is believed to be a limited partnership, the individual members of which are unknown to Plaintiff. Turkey Hill, L.P, maintains a place of business known as Turkey Hill Minit Market at 1 Crains Gap Road in North Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Donna Reisinger is an adult individual whose whereabouts is not known to Plaintiff. At the time of the events giving rise to this cause of action, Defendant Donna Reisinger was an agent, servant, or employee of Defendant Turkey Hill, L.P., employed at Turkey Hill Minit Market, at 1 Crains Gap Road in North Middleton Township. 4. Turkey Hill Minit Market is a retail establishment which holds itself out as offering various types of merchandise for sale to the public. 5. On 10/26/99, at or about 6:30 P.M., Plaintiff entered Turkey Hill Minit Market, at the Crains Gap Road address, intending to make some purchases. Plaintiff selected some items, and asked the clerk on duty, Defendant Donna Reisinger, the price of one of them. 6. Defendant Donna Reisinger, who was standing at the cash register, then instructed Plaintiff: " Bring them here, I'll scan them." 7. As Plaintiff approached Defendant Donna Resinger's location, he stumbled, nearly fell, and recovered about six to eight feet from Defendant Donna Reisinger. 8. At that point, Defendant Donna Reisinger yelled at Plaintiff: "You're not allowed back here", and then intentionally, or without exercising due care, thrust a straight arm at Plaintiff's face and shoulders, striking him across his shoulder and the left side of his face, causing him to twist his neck and back, and to fall back. 9. If Defendant Donna Reisinger did not actually strike Plaintiff, Plaintiff nevertheless, in an effort to avoid being struck, twisted his neck and back, and fell back. 1O.As a result of being struck by Defendant Donna Reisinger, or by attempting to avoid being struck, and in attempting to break his fall, Plaintiff suffered injuries, including cephalgia, cervical, thoracic, and lumbar strain/sprain, and severe shock to his nerves and nervous system. 11.As a result of the injuries he suffered due to the incident described above, Plaintiff was required to seek medical attention and care, with the result that he has incurred medical expense, and will probably continue to require medical care and to incur medical expense for an indefinite time into the future. 12.As a further consequence of his injuries, Plaintiff has suffered pain, suffering, mental anguish, and the loss of the ability to enjoy life and life's pleasures, and he will continue to suffer such losses for an indefinite time into the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants for damages not exceeding $25,000.00, together with costs of suit and such additional relief as the Court deems appropriate, McGraw, Hait & Deitchman Attorneys for Plaintiff G Fred H. Hait, ID # 34331 4 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)249.4500 249.2411 (fax) pajoblawfh@aol.com AFFIDAVIT I verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I acknowledge that any false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date_ / Z/ . U C) { L David Martin' c. - • ' 1`^ 1?;:_.'?i Lim ??I DAVID MARTIN, Plaintiff V. TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. 99-7196 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO: David Martin, Plaintiff c/o Fred H. Hait, Esquire McGraw, Hait & Deitchman 4 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Counsel for Plaintiff NOTICE TO PLEAD YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO PLEAD TO THE WITHIN ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS OF SERVICE OR A DEFAULT JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. Respectfully submitted, Date: d3/ ob Avin, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 70294 2000 Linglestown Road, Suite 108 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 652-6101 L.P. and Counsel for Defendants Turkey Hill, Donna Reisinger DAVID MARTIN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. V. NO. 99-7196 CIVIL TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET CIVIL ACTION - LAW and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS, TURKEY HILL L.P. AND DONNA REISINGER, TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, come Defendants, Turkey Hill, L.P. and Donna Reisinger, by and through their counsel, Farrell & Ricci, P.C. by Marc T. Levin, Esquire and replies to the Plaintiffs Complaint as follows: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendant is without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly denies the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 2. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant Turkey Hill, L.P. is a limited partnership which maintains a place of business known as "Turkey Hill Minit Market" at 1 Crane's Gap Road in North Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The remaining averments in this Paragraph are denied since after reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly deny the same and demand strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 3. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant Donna Reisinger is an adult individual and at the time of the events giving rise to this cause of action, was an employee of Defendant Turkey Hill, L.P., employed at Turkey Hill Minit Market at 1 Crane's Gap Road in North Middleton Township. The remainder of the averments contained in this Paragraph are denied since after reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly deny the same and demand strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 4. Admitted. 5. Denied. The averments contained in this Paragraph are denied in conformity with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 6. Denied. The averments contained in this Paragraph are denied in conformity with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 7. Denied. The averments contained in this Paragraph are denied in conformity with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 8. Denied. The averments contained in this Paragraph are denied in conformity with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, the averments contained in this Paragraph are conclusions of law to which no affirmative responses are required. To the extent affirmative responses may be required, said averments are specifically and unequivocally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial if deemed material. 9. Denied. The averments contained in this Paragraph are denied in conformity with Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 2 10. Denied. To the extent this Paragraph is an averment of proximate causation, it is a conclusion of law to which no affirmative response is required. To the extent an affirmative response may be required, said averments are specifically and unequivocally denied and strict proof thereof demanded at time of trial if deemed material. By way of further response, to the extent this Paragraph is an averment of the Plaintiffs alleged damages, it is denied since after reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly deny the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 11. Denied. To the extent this Paragraph is an averment of proximate causation, it is a conclusion of law to which no affirmative response is required. To the extent an affirmative response may be required, said averments are specifically and unequivocally denied and strict proof thereof demanded at time of trial if deemed material. By way of further response, to the extent this Paragraph is an averment of the Plaintiffs alleged damages, it is denied since after reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly deny the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. 12. Denied. To the extent this Paragraph is an averment of proximate causation, it is a conclusion of law to which no affirmative response is required. To the extent an affirmative response may be required, said averments are specifically and unequivocally denied and strict proof thereof demanded at time of trial if deemed material. By way of further response, to the extent this Paragraph is an averment of the Plaintiffs alleged damages, it is denied since after reasonable investigation Answering Defendants are without information sufficient to admit or deny the truth or falsity of the said averments and accordingly deny the same and demands strict proof thereof at the time of trial if deemed material. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor and against the Plaintiff and that Answering Defendants be awarded appropriate costs and fees. NEW MATTER 13. The Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 14. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Answering Defendants upon which relief can be granted. 15. The alleged negligence of Answering Defendants, same being specifically and unequivocally denied, was not the proximate cause of the alleged accident and injuries to the Plaintiff, if any. 16. The alleged accident and injuries to the Plaintiff, if any, were proximately caused by parties other than the Answering Defendants, including both parties and non. parties to this litigation over which the Answering Defendants had no control or right to control. 17. Plaintiff, at all times material hereto, was guilty of contributory negligence, such negligence being the proximate cause of the accident and injuries to the Plaintiff, therefore, Plaintiffs claims are barred or, in the alternative, diminished in accordance with the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §7102. 18. Plaintiff failed, at all times material hereto, to keep a proper lookout while proceeding upon the property of Answering Defendant. 19. At all times material hereto, Answering Defendants acted reasonably, properly and prudently and were at no time negligent. 20. In the alternative, if any negligence on the part of Answering Defendants is found to exist, the same being specifically and unequivocally denied, such negligence was not the proximate cause of the Plaintiffs injuries. 21. At no time material hereto did Answering Defendants have either actual or constructive notice of the alleged condition that Plaintiff claims to have caused him harm. 22. Plaintiffs injuries, the same being specifically and unequivocally denied, were the sole and proximate result of a pre-existing condition, not related in any manner whatsoever to any act or omission of Answering Defendants. 23. It is believed and therefore averred that discovery will show that the Plaintiff voluntarily assumed a known risk thereby barring recovery by the operation of the Doctrine of Assumption of Risk. 24. It is believed and therefore averred that discovery will show that the alleged condition that Plaintiff claims to have encountered on Answering Defendant's property, same being specifically and unequivocally denied, was open and obvious to the Plaintiff. 25. At the time of the alleged injury, Plaintiff was in an area of the premises not intended for the use of Answering Defendant's invitees and, therefore, Plaintiff was a trespasser. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and against the Plaintiff and that Answering Defendants be awarded appropriate costs and fees. Respectfully submitted, FARg.RELL & RICCI, P Date: 31/ Marc T. Levin, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 70294 2000 Linglestown Road, Suite 108 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 652-6101 Counsel for Defendants Turkey Hill, L.P. and Donna Reisinger TH•101 VERIFICATION I, James M. Leonard, as President of Turkey Hill L.P. hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S_ §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATED: ?1 c; 2-6 2000 VERIFICATION PURSUANT TO Pa R C P 1024(c) Marc T. Levin, Esquire states that he is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verification and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and/or because the whereabouts of the party for whom he makes this affidavit is unknown; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. 4904, relating to unsworn falsification of authorities. DATE: January 31, 2000 Mare!'. Levin, Esquire CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE T AND NOW, this a) d-ay of January, 2000, I, Marc T. Levin, Esquire, hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter upon all counsel of record by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail, regular delivery, postage prepaid at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Fred H. Hait, Esquire McGraw, Hait & Deitchman 4 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Marc T. Levin, Esquire DAVID MARTIN, Plaintiff V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAN, D COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA N0.99-7196 CIVIL TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants : CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, David Martin, by and through his attorney, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, and replies to Defendant's New Matter as follows: 13. Denied. The suit was timely filed under the applicable Statute of Limitations. Proof of such is strictly demanded at trial. 14. Conclusion of law and requires no answer; but by way of further answer, Plaintiff has stated a legally cognizable claim. 15. Conclusion of law and requires no answer. 16. Conclusion of law and requires no answer. By way of further answer, it is denied that any other parties besides the defendants were the direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 17. Conclusion of law and requires no answer. By way of further answer, it is denied that Plaintiff was contributorily negligent and strict proof of the same will be demanded at trial. 1g. It is denied that Plaintiff failed to keep a proper lookout. Strict proof of the same is demanded at trial. 19. Conclusion of law and requires no answer. 20. Conclusion of law and requires no answer, 21. It is specifically denied that defendants did not have actual constructive notice to the alleged condition or conditions. By way of further answer, proof of defendant's allegation will be required at trial. 22. Conclusion of law and requires no answer. By way of further answer, Plaintiff avers that his injuries are not the sole and proximate cause of a pre-existing condition, and strict proof of defendant's allegations will be required at trial. 23. Conclusion of law. By way of further answer, Plaintiff denies that he assumed any risk and requires strict proof of the same. 24. Conclusion of law and a question of fact. Strict proof of these allegations will be required at trial. By way of further answer, Plaintiff re-avers that it was this defect that at least in part led to his injury. 25. Denied. By way of further answer, Plaintiff asserts that he was an invitee and was not trespassing at the time. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the New Matter of the answering defendants be stricken. Respectfully submitted, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 717-241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I verify that I am the Plaintiff and that the statements made in the foregoing Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's New Matter are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. § 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities. i Date: Da id Martin CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire, attorney for David Martin, do hereby certify that I this day served a copy of the Plaintiffs Answer to Defendant's New Matter upon the following by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Marc T. Levin, Esquire FARRELL & RICCI, P.C. 2000 Linglestown Road, Suite 108 Harrisburg, PA 17110 r _ Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for David Martin, Plaintiff Dated: . j r ' . (J v Farrell & Ricci, P.C. Attomeys andCaunsefars at Law 4423 91(prth Front Street 7la7risburg, PA 17110 artchadA. %amff yareph A. Ricci t Marc T. Levin' MichaelX NaPmger' 909vher July 26, 2001 Stepfmn R, Xards Co(feen E. Ehws ,RN ljngory D. f,ew 'a&o aCmiudina w7cney Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 RE: David Martin v. Turkey Hill Minit Markets Docket No. 99-7196 (Cumberland) Our File No. TH-101 Dear Attorney Rominger: Telephone: (717)230.9201 ?a{• p» )2309202 E-=& mtfevWfipcfawwm sTritAnf03ti o??01 Hn Fj ?/Oko This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 24, 2001, addressed to Chairman Johnson, confirming the rescheduling of the above-captioned arbitration to October 16, 2001 at 10:00 a.m. in Lemoyne. Thank you. Very trul our Marc T. Le 1J'n MTL/cas cc: Horace A. Johnson, Esquire t Crniipd" a Civd1rafAdwcate by the.Vdon ooanloJTtidAdvowcy A Penuyfvania Supreme Coun Acer ftedAecuy c/s 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 f lQn•`n 717.241,6070 • 888.241.9679 - FAX: 717.24 1.6878 low0aromingerlaw.com • www.romingerlaw.coni I'Icaw rcpt) Iu L'x1h.Ir Or WC August 1.1.'_'001 1 tonne A..fohnson. Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Nhirket Street P,O.0os 109 Lemoyne. PA 17043-0109 RI's: ARBITRATION FOR DAVID MAR'T'IN y.'I'URKEN' 1111.E MINFI' MARKEIT and DONNA RE,ISINGER Dear Attorney.lohnson: This letter is to conlinn the rescheduling of Iheubovc captioned arbitration %yhich is scheduled for October 16. 2001. to October 26. 200 L al 9:30 a.m. in your office. By copy of this letter I am confirming the rescheduling with the various attorneys involved. 'thank you for your continued cooperation in this matter. Sincercly. Earl I.. Romingcr, lisquire KER:LIJ cc. khirc 1's. Levin. Esquire D:nicl klartin \lichael.l. I lanli. Inquire Charles 1'. Mackin. Esquire Advocacy - Advice Answers 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 717.241.6070 • 888.241.9679 • FAX: 717.241.6878 law@romingerlow.com • www.romingerlaw.com Please reph Iu Carlisle e0iee. Alulust 2. 2001 Horace A. Johnson. Esquire Johnson, nuffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne. PA 17043-0109 sT?? Oj RE: ARBITRATION FOR DAVID MARTIN v. TURKEY HILL MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER. Dear Attorney Johnson: This letter is to ask for another continuance on the above captioned arbitration which is scheduled for October 16. 2001. in your off ice. The Superior Court has scheduled Oral Arguments for an appeals case which I am currently working on and there is no way that I can reschedule an appearance before the Superior Court. 1 am sorry for any inconvenience this may cause you. My secretary has contacted Attorney Levin and he has concurred with another continuance. My office will coordinate with the various attorneys offices to reschedule the arbitration. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely. Karl E. Rominger. Esqu{rc Clltil7+R ` 1? ^7 0Wtt.t,w?4?_''Cs?_?-w?ll KER:Ijj cZUPl/It+ Ay/,,??'?" ffM4% w4ek cc. Marc E. Levin. Esquire David Martin Michael J. I-lanlt, lisquire Michael .1. Kane. Esquire -;vn 1c7 at.4? . inn Advocacy - Advice Answers dnZf/ 1 246 Y- aw C/?CG's 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 /(/I 1 5 X001 717.241.6070 • 888.241.9679 • FAX: 717,241.6878 JOHN , law@romingerlow.com • www.romingerlow.corn57GlygfiT'UN OFF Nca'c cia, w r: r.icidle AND WF10? .lulu 24. _2001 NER Fforace A. Johnson. Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & NVcidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne. PA 17043-0109 RE: AR131TRATION F*OR DAVID MARTIN v. TURIO-N IIILI,MINIT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER [)car AttorneN, .lohnson: This letter will Simply confirm that title hr all I?tnergency C'ustndy hearing in Cumberland County. I am unable to attend the arhilration schedtdctl in the ahove captioned case laid it has been rescheduled to October 16.2001 at 10:00 i.m in %our ol'licc in Lemoyne. PA. by agreement ol'ull of the parties. Thank you lift )'our time and attention to this miller. Sincerely ,- Earl H. Rominger.l:squire KrIZ:l,ll cc. Marc IL Levin. Esquire Davit] \dartin Advocacy Advice Answers , Farre11 & Ricci, P. C. Attorneys andCaunsefors at Law 442.3 North Front Street ITlarrisdurg, PA 17110 ;"CPAA xai t Marc T. Levin' as?atrx?amsR• Daniell. Gafflfxr supbm X Harris Cofieat E. Eraa an.'PN Gregory D. Grin 'afsc a Wttelin Nfwjcney Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 7efcpbow 07)230.9201 7a-V ( W)230.9202 E.maif• mt4vihQfrpdaw.wm July 19, 2001 Via Telecopy 241-6878 And First Class Mail RECEIVED Re: David Martin v. Turkey Hill Minit Markets JUL 2 0 2001 Docket No. 99-7196 (Cumberland) Our File No. TH-101 JOHNSON, DU STEWART AND WEID EIDNER Dear Karl: Please allow this letter to confirm my conversations with your secretary, Linda, on July 19, 2001. Linda indicated that Judge Bailey of the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas scheduled you to be in his courtroom on the date and time set for the arbitration in the above-referenced matter. She indicated that you attempted to have the court date scheduled for a different time but were unable to do so. Therefore, you have requested my concurrence` in a continuance of the arbitration which was scheduled for Thursday, July 26, 2001. After consulting with my client, I called Linda and indicated that we will concur in your motion for a continuance. However, I asked your professional courtesy in agreeing that the arbitration shall not be rescheduled until some date after September 10, 2001, due to the fact that my client is having surgery in early August and will be unable to attend the arbitration until September. By copy of this letter to the Chairman of the Arbitration Panel, I am informing him of our agreement regarding the rescheduling of this matter. I assume that the rescheduling of this arbitration will be coordinated by Chairman Johnson's office as it was done previously. t Certiful as a CivdTriafA wcate 6y tfu V bond Bo&dof?riafAdwcacy ABenWyfvaniaSupm= CourtAecndtedjgeney Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Page Two July 19, 2001 Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your ongoing professional courtesy. Very trul ours, Marc T. Levin V6-:- kd=cas Horace A. Johnson, Esquire Farrell & Ricci, P.C. Attorneys andCounselars at Law 4423 North Front Street 9farrisburg, PA 17110 Afefiae(A. 7arnef Joseph A. Rini t Mitre T. Leoin' Rfufiae(R;Na(fingtr' Dankf f. raaagher Stephen X 9farris Coffeen S. Lfiresman, XN Gngory D. Geiss 'afro admitted in 96w Jersey Horace A. Johnson, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043.0109 Michael J. Kane, Esquire 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pa 17011 RE: David Martin v. Turkey Hill Minit Markets Docket No. 99-7196 (Cumberland) Our File No. TH-101 Dear Arbitration Panel Members: Pursuant to the Notice of Arbitrator's Hearing in, the above-captioned case, I am - providing each of you with the deposition transcripts which may be utilized as evidence in the above-referenced matter during the July 26, 2001, arbitration. Very truly yours Marc T. Levin MTIJcas Enclosures cc: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire (no enclosures) July 17, 2001 Telephone: (717)2J0.9201 faw (717(2J0.9102 E-mail.. mt(ttin@frpcfaw.com VISCSIVEI) 30- 8 00 daHA?p wEIONER gg1EW A Michael J. Hanft, Esquire 19 Brookwood Avenue, Suite 106 Carlisle, PA 16013-9142 f Cenifud" a CivdTriafArlwcme by the Nptionaf DoarCofTriafAQwcacy A Tenuyfwnia Suprew Court ArcnditedAiency ) ) _ v ) a )) MIA T r ?Y a OATH In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania le:71_2? We do solemnly swear (or affirm) that we will support, obey and defend -the Constitution of the United States and the Constit ti,o t this Common- wealth and that we will discharge the duties of gur?f?e/with fidelity. AWARD Arbitrat applicable.) Date of Hearing: 1612(.10( Date of Award: (012(, lot NOTICE OF ENTRY OF AWARD Now, the // t?' day of Q,#AZQ , ]b Joo.l at /O: 29, iF .l1. , the above award was entered upon the flocket and notice thereof given by mail to the parties or their attorneys. Arbitrators' compensation to be Ct u t? yC, Di e,w paid upon appeal: Pr h notary Deputy We, the undersigned arbitrators, having been duly appointed and sworn (or affirmed), make the following award: (Note: If damages for delay are awarded, they shall be separately stated.) n CZ) C n: , r n 7A - (n,.. Iv 1? lD _t - c??r?s roe +'`?.''U?0 -` S ? kle 't? Mcoc??t f (?A?rf e-A-v/oFfl`sl 14,C OWzz- C? OW1,93 Jul 24 01 01:01p DAVID MARTIN, Kane and Mackin 717 214 3703 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA plaintiff NO. 99-7196 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION-LAW V. TURKEY HILL N MT MARKET and DONNA REISINGER, Defendants ORDER zoo 1, it is hereby AND NOW, this -day of ordered that Charles P. Mackin, Esquire be substituted for Michael I Kale, Esquire as arbitrator in the above-captioned ease. 13Y THE COURT: P.2 _AO) P.J. Horace Johnson, Esquire t?? v\ Court Administrator r