Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-2767WILLIAM P. DOUGLAS, ESQ. ATTY. I.D. # 37926 DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE 43 W. SOUTH ST. POB 261 CARLISLE PA 17013 TELEPHONE 717-243-1790 Bryan Tate In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Plaintiff v Thor Industries, Inc./Damon, Inc.; Navistar International Corporation; Workhorse Custom Chassis, L.L.C.; Workhorse, Inc.; No. 2007 ~ a 71x7 Civil Term Civil Action Law Jury Trial Demanded Defendants N TI E 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 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 THLS PATER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE TBE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH IIVFORMATION ABOiIT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE TER50NS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle PA 17013 717-249-3166 DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE By ~ ~~ ~ , May 4, 2007 Attorney for Plaintiff COMPLAINT 1. The plaintiff, Bryan Tate, is an adult individual residing at 219 Chestnut Street, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The defendant, Thor Industries, Inc./Damon Motor Coach, Inc., (Damon) is a corporation having a business address of 2958 Gateway Drive, Post Office Box 2888, Elkhart, Indiana, 46515. 3. The defendant, Workhorse Custom Chassis, L.L.C., Workhorse, Inc., (Workhorse) is a Limited Liability Company and/or acorporation having a place of business at 29508 Southfield Road, Southfield, Michigan and Union City, Indiana. 4. The defendant, Navistar International Corporation, is a corporation and the parent of the company and/or companies named in paragraph 3, with a business office Located at 4201 Winfield, Rd., Warrenville, Illinois, 60555. 5. On or about May 6, 2005, the plaintiff was employed by Roger L Hosfelt, t/a/d/b/a Hosfelt Towing having a place of business at 251 S. Earl Street, Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. On the aforesaid date the plaintiff was acting within the course and scope of his employment 6. On and prior to May 6, 2005, the defendants, Damon. and Workhorse were engaged in the business of designing and manufacturing recreational vehicles. 7. Said defendants knew that if it designed or had designed or manufactured or had manufactured a recreational vehicle (RV), which was defective, that it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user. 8. Said defendants knew that their recreational vehicle would be used without any substantial change being made in their product. 9. Prior to May 6, 20(}5, a recreational vehicle designed. and manufactured by the defendants Damon and Workhorse had been placed into the stream of commerce and sold to George Norsen. 10. On May 6, 2005, the plaintiff, in the course and scope of his employment with Hosfeit Towing, was directed to go to the Western Village Campground in South Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, to tow the RV of George Norsen because it would not start. 11. In accordance with the instructions he received from his employer the plaintiff arrived in South Middleton Township to tow the vehicle. 12. Upon arriving at the location the plaintiff attached his tow truck to the RV and ascertained that the vehicles transmission was in the neutral position and the engine was off. 13. The plaintiff proceeded to lift the vehicle with the tow truck enough that he could have access to the underside of the vehicle. 14. As the plaintiff had been instructed by his employer, he proceeded to attempt to disconnect the driveshaft so he could tow the vehicle to a repair center in Harrisburg Pennsylvania. 15. While the plaintiff was in the process of disconnecting the drive shaft, suddenly and without warning, a metal component failed and the plaintiff was struck by the shaft and severely injured. 16. The recreational vehicle in question was defective in either its design and/or manufacturer. 17. It is believed that the malfunction was caused by the transmission being under extreme pressure with caused to metal to fail and the shaft to break free and strike the plaintiff. 18. As a result of the aforesaid malfunction, the plaintiff was seriously injured. 19. The RV in question was not safe for its intended use. 20. The defendant breached their express and/or implied warranties concerning the safety of the aforementioned product. 21 • As a direct and proximate result of being struck in the head as a result of the malfunction the plaintiff suffered severe skull fractures, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness. 22. As a result of his injuries, the plaintiff has incurred medical expenses, lost wages, disfigurement, aggravation and inconvenience, pain and suffering, permanent disability and will continue to do so in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, A jury trial is hereby demanded. CQL-NT 1 STRICT LIABILITY Tate v Thor Industries, Inc,/Damon, Inc 23. The allegation of paragraphs 1 through 22 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 24. At all times relevant hereto, the defendant, was engaged in the business of designing or having designed, manufacturing or having manufactured, supplying and selling outdoor lighting fixtures/ballasts. 25. The defendant did design, or have designed, according to their specifications, manufacture, or have manufactured, to their specifications, supply and sell the RV. 26. The defendant knew that if the RV was defective in design and manufacture, it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user of the product. 27. The defendant knew that the RV would reach the user without substantial change. 28. The said RV did reach the user, without any substantial change, 29. The said RV was defective in either its design or manufacture. 30. The defendant gave no warnings of the defective design and/or manufacture of their RV to the user of the product. 31. As a result of the defective design and/or manufacturing of the RV a shaft broke free and injured the plaintiff. 32. Due to the defective nature of the RV and/or the fault of the defendants, and through no fault of his own, the plaintiff suffered the following injuries, though not limited thereto: a. severe skull fractures, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness 33. As a result of the plaintiff's injuries he has incurred substantial medical expense and he may incur additional medical expenses. 34. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has endured pain and sufferin embarrassment and humiliation, aggravation and inconveniencg, disfigurement, disability and a loss of life's pleasures, both past and future. 35. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has lost wages and may lose additional wages in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 2 NEGLI EN E Tate v Thor Industries, Inc,/Damon, Inc. 36. Paragraphs 1 through 35 are incorporated herein and reference is made thereto. 37. The negligence of the defendant was the immediate and proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. 38. The defendant was negligent in the following respects: a. In failing to adequately ascertain that the product was safe for the intended use; b. In failing to adequately warn the plaintiff of the inherent dangers of the product; c. In failing to design the product to be adequate and safe for the intended use; d. In failing to correct design defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present; e. In failing to correct manufacturing defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present. f. Having full knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous condition of the RV and their propensity to cause electrocution, the defendant failed to take timely and effective action to prevent injury to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 3 BREACH OF WARRANTY Tate v Thor Industries IncJDamon Inc 39. Pazagraphs 1 through 3$ are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 40. The defendant impliedly and/or expressly warranted that the RV sold and supplied by them was safe and fit for the intended purpose. 41. As a result of the aforesaid, the defendant breached their warranty and/or warranties, which breach resulted in the injuries to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 4 STRICT LIABILITY Tate v Workhorse, Inc.; Wor horse, L.L.C.; Navistar International Corporation 42. The allegation of paragraphs 1 through 41 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 43. At all times relevant hereto, the defendant, was engaged in the business of designing or having designed, manufacturing or having manufactured, supplying and selling outdoor lighting fixtures/ballasts. 44. The defendant did design, or have designed, according to their specifications, manufacture, or have manufactured, to their specifications, supply and sell the RV. 45. The defendant knew that if the RV was defective in design and manufacture, it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user of the product. 46. The defendant knew that the RV would reach the user without substantial change. 47. The said RV did reach the user, without any substantial change. 48. The said RV was defective in either its design or manufacture. 49. The defendant gave no warnings of the defective design and/or manufacture of their RV to the user of the product. 50. As a result of the defective design and/or manufacturing of the RV broke into two pieces and fine defendant suffer a bone fracture. 51. Due to the defective nature of the RV and/or the fault of the defendants, and through no fault of his own, the plaintiff suffered the following injuries, though not limited thereto: a) severe skull fractures, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness 52. As a result of the plaintiff's injuries he has incurred substantial medical expense and he may incur additional medical expenses. 53. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has endured pain, and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, aggravation and inconvenience, disfigurement, disability and a loss of life's pleasures, both past and future. 54. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has lost wages and may lose additional wages in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded COUNT 5 NEGLIGENCE Tate v Workhorse, Inc.; Workhorse, L.L.C.; Navistar International Corjmration 55 56. 57. Paragraphs 1 through 54 are incorporated herein and reference is made thereto. The negligence of the defendant was the immediate and proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. The defendant was negligent in the following respects; a. In failing to adequately ascertain that the product was safe for the intended use; b. In failing to adequately warn the plaintiff of the inherent dangers of the product; c. In failing to design the product to be adequate and safe for the intended use; d. In failing to correct design defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present; e. In failing to correct manufacturing defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present. f. Having full knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous condition of the RV and their propensity to cause electrocution, the defendant failed to take timely and effective action to prevent injury to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 6 BREACH OF WARRANTY Tate v Workhorse Inc.; Workhorse, I..L.C.; Navistar International Corporation 58. Paragraphs 1 through 57 are incorporated herein by reference thereto, 59. The defendant impliedly and/or expressly warranted that the RV sold and supplied by them was safe and fit for the intended purpose. 60. As a result of the aforesaid, the defendant breached their warranty and/or warranties, which breach resulted in the injuries to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE William P. Dou s, Esq. ATTORNEYS FOR PL IFF Affidavit I hereby swear or affirm that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and,/or information and belief. This is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.§ 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: May 4, 2007 c^ ~-- ~ ~ `i. ... ~ ~ ~ =~~. G' ~ -s ~~ ~..:~ } .::.. ~,.~ C7 -n ..a T rig -„ ~ =°. ~-~= ~':y i rri '-~, ..~ MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN BY: DAVID F. WHITE, ESQ. IDENTIFICATION NO.: 55738 620 Freedom Business Center, Suite 300 King of Prussia, PA 19406 (610) 354-8250 (610) 354-8299 (FAX) dfwhite~mdwcs.com BRYAN TATE v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY THOR INDUSTRIES, INC./DAMON, INC. NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL : CORPORATION; WORKHORSE . CUSTOM CHASSIS, LLC and WORKHORSE, INC. NO. 2007-2767 PRAECIPE TO FILE NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE PROTHONOTARY Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), defendants, Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc., hereby file a copy of the Notice of Removal to Federal Court of the above captioned matter, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. DENNEHEY, WARNER, GOGGIN BY: ~~. WHITE, ESQ. A ey for Defendants Workhorse Custom ~,.y Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc. Date• ~t1 ~ • ~~ EXHIBIT "A" I1S-44 (Rev 11/04) CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This forth, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civH docket sheet. (SEE MSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM,) 1. (a) PLAINTIFFS BRYAN TATS (b) County of Residence of First Listed CUMBERLAND Plaintiff COUNTY PA (EXCEPT TN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) THOR INDUSTRIES, INC./DAMON, INC.; NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION; WORKHORSE CUSTOM CHASSIS, LLC AND WORKHORSE, INC. County of Residence of First Listed Defendant ELKHART, INDIANA NOTE: M LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LACATION OF THE LAND INVOLVED. (~) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Teleptane Number) William P. Douglas, Esq. Dougdlas Law Office 43 W. South Street, P.O. Box 261 Carlisle, PA 17013 717-243-1790 Attorneys (If Known) (OV U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLI~ David F. White, Esq. Marshall, Dennehey,Warner, Coleman BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only) [I III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place An "X'• in One Box for . (Fw Diveniry Cases Only) Pleitttiff and One Box for Defendant) O I.U.S. Government O 3. Federal Question F DEF PTF DEF Citizen of This State ~1 O 1 Incorporated or Principal Place O 4 O 4 Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Petty) of Bwinesa in This Sate ^ 2. U.S. Government ~. Diversity Citittn of Another State O 2 p 2 Incorporated and Principal Place p S j~5 of Bwiness in Another State Defendant (Indicates Citizenship of Parties in Item III) Citizen of Subject of e Forei Coun O 3 ^ 3 Forei Nation O 6 O 6 IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Phrce en "X" is Oae Box Orly) O 110 Insurance O 120 Marine O 130 Miller Act O 140 Negotiable Instrument p ISO Recovery of Overpayment &Enforcement of ludgmerN O 151 Medicare Act O I S2 Recovery of Defaulted Student Loans (Excl. Veterans) O 133 Recovery of OveryaymeM of Veteran's Hercfits. Q 160 Stockhoklcr^a Suits p 190 Other Contract O 195 Contract Product Liability O 210 Lad Corrdemadon O 220 Forecbaure O 230 Rena. Lease do Ejectment p 240 Torts b Lard p 245 Tort Product Lability p 290 All Other Ral Property PERSONAL INJURY O 310 Airplarw O 313 Airplane Product Liability O 320 Assault. Libel & Slender p 330 Fedewl Employers' Liability O 340 Marine O 345 Marine Product Liability 350 Motor Vehicle X53 Motor Vehicle Product Lability O 360 Other Petsotal b1wY O 441 Voting O 442 Eapbytneru O 443 Hoeing / Accormadations O 444 Wel6re O 445 Amr. w/DiabB'liea- Empbymera p 445 Amer. w/Diabi'M~- Otha V. ORIGIIV (Flux an "X" in one Box Only) ^ 1 P~roce~edn-B ~2 Removed from ^ 3 State Court ~+.._a._r~e n:.~. VI. CAUSE OF ACTION PERSONAL INJURY O 362 Peaorml Injury - Med Malptacdce 365 Personal Injury - Product Liability O 368 Asbestos Personal Injury Product Liability PF1L90NAL PROPERTY ^ 370 Other Feud p 371 Truth in Lending O 380 Other Penoral >'roPertY Damage O 385 Property Damrge Product Liability O S 10 Motions to Vagte Sentence Habeas Carpe: t] 530 Geneel O 533 Dash Parsley O 540 Marrdanus Qe OUxr v sw civil Righa O SSS Prison Cordition Remanded ffom ^ 4 Appellate Court ttnaer wntcn you are 28 U.S.C. 5 1441(x) cause: O 610 Agriculture O 620 Other Food 8c Drog O 625 Drug Related Seizure of Property 21 USC 861 O 630 Liquor Laws t7 640 R.R & Truck p 650 Airline Rega O 660 Occupational Safety/Health ^ 690 Odra p 710 Fair Labor Sterdards Act O 720 Labor/Mgmrt. Relations O 730 LabodA4gtnt. Reporting ~ Diacbaure Act O 740 Raihvay Labor Act p 790 Other Labor Litlgadon 0 791 ErrQL Rat. brc. Severity Act p 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 p 423 Withdrawal 28 USC 157 p 820 Copyrights ^ 830 Patent p 840 Trademark O 861 HLA (1395ff) O 862 Black Lung (923) p 863 DIWGDIWW(405(g)) O 864 SSID Title XVI O 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaint or Defendant) O 871 DtS -Third Party 26 USC 7609 f7 400 Stale Reapportionment p 410 Aruitrust p 430 Banks erd Banking O 450 Commerce O 460 Deportatan D 470 Racketeerln~luenced and Corrupt Organizations O 480 Cotrswner Credit O 490 Csbk/Sat TV O 810 Selective Service p 850 Secmidea/ComrodiGeea~ Exchange O 875 Cetorror Challenge 12 USC 3410 O 890 Otlrer Statutory Actions p 891 Agricultural Acts p 892 Fmnomic Stabrlvatr'on Act O 893 Eavironmeatal Matters O 894 Energy Alkrcadon Act t] 895 Freedom of Information Act O 900 Appalof Foe Detatoiaiaon Ueda Egwl Access b Justice f7 930 Cororatity of State Stawta Appeal to District Reinstated or ^ S Tntnaferrod from ^ 6 Multidiatrict ^ 7 Judge t}vm Reopened atwther District Litigation Magistrate not cite jurlsdictfonal sbtutea unless ~ Complde diversity of plaintiff and defendants ViI. REQUESTED IN CHI3CK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMANDS ,3 CHECK YES only if demanded m complaint: COMPLAINT: UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 JURY DEMAND: ^ Yes ^ No VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See irotnseGons) JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER May 24, 2007 USE ONLY AMOUNT I I APPLYiNO I I NDGE I I MAG. JUDGE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA BRYAN TATS FILEp HARRI~~URC3 PLAY t ~ 2007 ~.• • ~' `` h. ~ SEA, CLERK ~; CEP`UTY CLERK v. . THOR INDUSTRIES, INC.lDAMON, INC.; *~ \/ . O •• NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL CORP ~ ^ ORA N;. WORKHORSE CUSTOM CHASSIS, LLC AND WORKHORSE, INC. CIVIL ACTION NO. DEFENDANT, WORKHORSE CUSTOM CHASSIS, LLC AND WORKHORSE, INC.'S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION TO FEDERAL COURT. MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA AND NOW COMES Defendants, Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc., by and through undersigned counsel, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman and Goggin, and hereby give Notice of the Removal of the above captioned action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446. The grounds for removal are as follows: 1. On or about May 4, 2007, plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, docketed at No. 2007-2767. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. Plaintiff, Bryan Tate, alleges that he was injured on or about May 6, 2005, while in the process of attempting to tow a recreational vehicle. See, generally, Exhibit "A". 3. Plaintiff alleges that he is a resident of Mt. Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. See Exhibit "A." 4. Plaintiff alleges that the first defendant, Thor Industries, Inc./Damon Motor Coach, Inc., has a business address in Elkhart, Indiana. See Exhibit "A." 5. Plaintiff alleges that the second defendant, Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc., have a business address in Southfield, Michigan and Union City, Indiana. See Exhibit "A." 6. Plaintiff alleges that the third defendant, Navistar International Corporation, has a business address in Warrenville, Illinois. See Exhibit "A". 7. "Any civil action brought in the State Court of which the District Courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the District Court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending." 28 U.S.C. §1441(a). 8. Because Cumberland County is located in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, removal to this Court is appropriate. 9. Under 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), this Court has diversity jurisdiction only if each Plaintiff is a citizen of a different state than each Defendant. See, e.g., Norman v. C & F, Inc., No. Ol- 5677, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8818 (E.D. Pa. May 15, 2002). The relevant time for determining the status of a party's citizenship for the purpose of diversity jurisdiction is the time the suit is filed. Id. 10. Citizenship of an individual arises from the intention to establish domicile. See Krasnov v. D +~nan_, 465 F.2d 1298, 1300 (3d Cir. 1972). Where one lives is prima facie evidence of domicile. Id. 11. A corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any state by which it has been incorporated and of the state where it has its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (c)(1). 12. For the purposes of these proceedings, there exists a complete diversity of citizenship between Plaintiff and Defendants, and the United States Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania has original jurisdiction pwsuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. 13. Section 1332 provides for diversity jurisdiction when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00 and involves the citizens of different states. See 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(1). 14. In this case, Plaintiff is alleging that his claims against each of the Defendants is for a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Moreover, Plaintiff alleges that he suffered the following injuries: "severe skull fractwes, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness". See Exhibit "A," e.g., Paragraph 32. 15. Therefore, after a reasonable reading of the Complaint, one must conclude that the value of potential damages claimed by the Plaintiff exceeds the jurisdictional amount of $75,000.00. See Johnson v. Costco Wholesale, No. 99-3576, 1999 WL 740690 at 3 (E.D. Pa. September 22, 1999). 16. Therefore, this case is appropriate for removal from state court to the United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, pwsuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(1) and §1441 (a), as complete diversity of citizenship exists between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. 17. Written notice of the filing of the Notice of Removal was given to all adverse parties in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1446(d) and is noted in the attached Certificate of Service. 18. Promptly after filing in this Court and the assignment of a civil action number, a Notice of Removal will be filed with the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1446(d). 19. Copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon defendants are attached hereto as exhibits in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1446(a). WHEREFORE, Defendants, Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc., request this Honorable Court remove this action from the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN AND GOGGIN ar ~~~~~ DAVID F. WHITE, ESQUIIZE Attorney for Defendants, Workhorse Custom Chasis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc. 620 Freedom Business Center, Suite 300 King of Prussia, PA 19406 (610) 354-8250 Fax (610) 354-8299 dwhitenumdwcg.com Identification No.: 55738 DATE :May 25, 2007 X26_A~LIAB~AMSORCEU,[PG18580451KMDOU(iHERTY112180102885 VERIFICATION DAVID F. WHITE, ESQ., hereby states that he is attorney for Defendants Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc., in this action and verifies that the facts set forth in the foregoing Notice of Removal to Federal Court aze true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein aze made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. . ~~ DAVID F. WHITE, ESQUIRE Dated: May 25, 2007 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I did mail, by regular First Class Mail, a true and correct copy of Defendant Workhorse Custom Chassis, LLC and Workhorse, Inc.'s Notice of Removal of Civil Action to Federal Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, to the below listed on the date indicated: William P. Douglas, Esq. Douglas Law Office 43 W. South Street P.O. Box 261 Carlisle, PA 17013 Thor Industries, Inc./Damon Motor Coach, Inc. 2958 Gateway Drive P.O. Box 2888 Elkhart, Indiana 46515 Navistaz International Corporation 4201 Winfield Road Warrenville, Illinois 60555 J DAVID F. WHITE, ESQ. Date: May 25, 2007 EXHIBIT "A" WILLCAM P. [X3UGLAS, ESQ. ATTY. I.D. ~ 37926 DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE 43 W. SOUTH ST. POB 261 CARLISLE PA 17013 TELEPHONE 717-243-1790 Bryan Tate Plaintiff v Thor Industries, Inc./Demon, Inc.; Navistar International Corporation; Workhorse Custom Chassis, L.L.C.; Workhorse, Inc.; Defendants In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania No. 2007 - a~ x(07 Civil Term Civil Action Law Jury Trial Demanded 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 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 OBjBCTIONS 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 ENTERBD 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 TASE TIDS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITS II~FORMATION ABOUT HIRIl~TG A LAVOYER IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, TSIS OFFIC$ MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAI. SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEL OR NO FEE. Cumberland~County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street Carlisle PA 17013 717-249-3166 DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE By ~~ Q ~ ~~ TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In Testimony whereof, ! hire unto set my hand and the seal of said Court at Carlisle, Pa. This ~...... day of....1.?'~.. gip? Prothonota May 4, 2007 Attorney for Plaintiff COMPLAINT 1. The plaintiff, Bryan Tate, is an adult individual residing at 219 Chestnut Street, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The defendant, Thor Industries, Inc./Damon Motor Coach, Inc., (Damon) is a corporation having a business address of 2958 Gateway Drive, Post Office Box 2888, Elkhart, Indiana, 46515. 3. The defendant, Workhorse Custom Chassis, L.L.C., Workhorse, Inc., (Workhorse) is a Limited Liability Company and/or acorporation having a place of business at 29508 Southfield Road, Southfield, Michigan and Union City, Indiana. 4. The defendant, Navistar International Corporation, is a corporation and the parent of the company and/or companies named in pazagraph 3, with a business office located at 4201 Winfield, Rd., Warrenville, Illinois, 60555. 5. On or about May 6, 2005, the plaintiff was employed by Roger L Hosfelt, t/ a/ d/ b/ a Hosfelt Towing having a place of business at 251 S. Earl Street, Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Penx~tsylvana. On the aforesaid date the plaintiff was acting within the course and scope of his employment 6. On and prior to May 6, 2005, the defendants, Dammon and Workhorse were engaged in the business of designing and manufacturing recreational vehicles. 7. Said defendants knew that if it designed or had designed or manufactured or had manufactured a recreational vehicle (RV), which was defective, that it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user. 8. Said defendants knew that their recreational vehicle would be used without any substantial change being made in theix product. 9. Prior to May 6, 2005, a recreational vehicle designed and manufactured by the defendants Damon and Workhorse had been placed into the stream of commerce and sold to George Noreen. 10. On May 6, 7A05, the plaintiff, in the ccnxrse and scope of his employment with Hosfelt Towing, was directed to go to the Western Village Campground in South Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania., to tow the RV of George Noreen because it would not start. 11. In accordance with the instructions he received from his employer the plaintiff arrived in South Middleton Township to tow the vehicle. 12. Upon arriving at the location the plaintiff attached his tow truck to the RV and ascertained that the vehicles transmission was in the neutral position and the engine was off . 13. The plaintiff proceeded to lift the vehicle with the tow truck enough that he could have access to the underside of the vehicle. 14. As the plaintiff had been instructed by his employer, he proceeded to attempt to disconnect the driveshaft so he could tow the vehicle to a repair center in Harrisburg Pennsylvania. 15. While the plaintiff was in the process of disconnecting the drive shaft, suddenly and without warning, a metal component failed and the plaintiff was struck by the shaft and severely injured. 16. The recreational vehicle in question was defective in either its design and/or manufacturer. 17, It is believed that the malfunction was caused by the transmission being under extreme pressure with caused to metal to fail and the shaft to break free and strike the plaintiff. 18. As a result of the aforesaid malfunction, the plaintiff was seriously injured. 19. The RV in question was not safe far its intended use. 20. The defendant breached their express and/ or implied warranties concerning the safety of the aforementioned product. 21. As a direct and proximate result of being struck in the head as a result of the malfunction the plaintiff suffered severe skull fractures, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness. 22. Aa a result of his injuries, the plaintiff has incurred medical expenses, lost wages, disfigurement, aggravation and inconvenience, pain and suffering, permanent disability and will continue to do so in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 1 STRICT LIABILITY Tate v Thor Industries. Inc/Damon. Inc. 23. The allegation of paragraphs 1 through 22 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 24. At all times relevant hereto, the defendant, was engaged in the business of designing or having designed, manufacturing or having manufactured, supplying and selling outdoor lighting fixtures/ballasts. 25. The defendant did design, or have designed, according to their specifications, manufacture, or have manufactured, to their specifications, supply and sell the RV. 26. The defendant knew that if the RV was defective in design and manufacture, it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user of the product. 27. The defendant knew that the RV would reach the user without substantial change. 28. The said RV did reach the user, without any substantial change. 29. The said RV was defective in either its design or manufacture. 30. The defendant gave no warnings of the defective design and/ or manufacture of their RV to the user of the product. 31. As a result of the defective design and/or manufacturing of the RV a shaft broke free and injured the plaintiff. 32. Due to the defective nature of the RV and/or the fault of the defendants, and through no fault of his own, the plaintiff suffered the following injures, though not limited thereto: a. severe skull fractures, coma, brain i~ury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness 33. As a result of the plaintiff's injuries he has incurred substantial medical expense and he may incur additional medical expenses. 34. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has endured pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, aggravation and inconvenience, disfigurement, disability and a loss of life's pleasures, both past and future. 35. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has lost wages and may lose additional wages in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 2 NEGLI ENCE Tate v Thor Industries, IncJDamon, Inc. 36. Paragraphs 1 through 35 are incorporated herein and reference is made thereto. 37. The negligence of the defendant was the immediate and proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. 38. The defendant was negligent in the following respects: a. In failing to adequately ascertain that the product was safe for the intended use; b. In failing to adequately warn the plaintiff of the inherent dangers of the product; c. In failing to design the product to be adequate and safe for the intended use; d. In failing to correct design defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present; e. In failing to correct manufacturing defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present. f. Having full knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous condition of the RV and their propensity to cause electrocution, the defendant failed to take timely and effective action to prevent injury to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 3 BREACH OF WARRANry Tate v Thor Industries, Inc,/Damon, Inc. 39. Paragraphs 1 through 38 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 40. The defendant impliedly and/or expressly warranted that the RV sold and supplied by them was safe and fit for the intended purpose. 41. As a result of the aforesaid, the defendant breached their warranty and/or warranties, which breach resulted in the injuries to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the azbiixation limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 4 STRICT LIABILITY Tate v Workhorse, Inc.; Workhorse, L.L.C.; Navistar International Coraoraiaon 42. The allegation of paragraphs 1 through 41 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 43. At all times relevant hereto, the defendant, was engaged in the business of i~ designing or having designed, manufacturing or having manufactured, supplying and selling outdoor lighting fixtures/ballasts. 44. T'he defendant did design, or have designed, according to their specifications, manufacture, or have manufactured, to their specifications, ~ supply and sell the RV. 45. The defendant knew that if the RV was def~tive in design and manufacture, it would be unreasonably dangerous to the user of the product. 46. The defendant knew that the RV would reach the user without substantial change. 47. The said RV did reach the user, without any substantial change. 48. The said RV was defective in either its design or manufacture. 49. The defendant gave no warnings of the defective design and/or manufacture of their RV to the user of the product. 50. As a result of the defective design and/or manufacturing of the RV broke into two pieces and the defendant suffer a bone fracture. 51. Due to the defective nature of the RV and/or the fault of the de#endants, and through no fault of his own, the plaintiff suffered the following injuries, though not limited thereto: a) severe skull fractures, coma, brain injury, injury to his optic nerves and blindness 52. As a result of the plaintiff's injuries he has incurred substantial medical expense and he may incur additional medical expenses. 53. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has endured pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, aggravation and inconvenience, disfigurement, disability and a loss of life's pleasures, both past and future. 54. As a result of the aforesaid, the plaintiff has lost wages and may lose additional wages in the future. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 5 NEGLIGENCE Tate v Workhorse, Inc.; Worlchoarse, L.L.C.; Navistar International Gorpo~ration 55. Paragraphs 1 through 54 are incorporated herein and reference is made thPxeto. 56. The negligence of the defendant was the immediate and proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. 57. The defendant was negligent in the following respects: a. In failing to adequately ascertain that the product was safe for the intended use; b. In failing to adequately warn the plaintiff of the inherent dangers of the product; c. In failing to design the product to be adequate and safe for the intended use; d. In failing to correct design defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present; e. In failing to correct manufacturing defects when they knew or should have known that the defects were present. f. Having full knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous condition of the RV and their propensity to cause electrocution, the defendant failed to take timely and effective action to prevent injury to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT 6 BREACH OF WARRANTY Tate v Workhorse, Inc.; Workhorse, I..L.C.; Navistar International Corporation 58. Paragraphs 1 through 57 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 59. The defendant impliedly and/or expressly warranted that the RV sold and supplied by them was safe and fit for the intended purpose. 60. As a result of the aforesaid, the defendant breached their warranty and/ or warranties, which breach resulted in the injuries to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum in excess of the arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. A jury trial is hereby demanded. DOUGLAS LAW OFFICE A w William . Dou ,Esq. ATTORNBYS POR IFF Affidavit I hereby swear or of jcrm that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and/or information and belief. This is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.§ 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: May 4, 2007 Affidavit I hereby swear or afJcrm that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and/or information and belief. This is made subjecf fo the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.§ 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~. ~ J ~~' Bryan Tate Date: May 8, 2007 ~7 c~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~i~~ f_ ~~F _ _ ~~ ! `-{ • `~ ~ *y ' ~~ ,: