Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-3893NED LEE STAMM and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ANN STAMM : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiffs : PENNSYLVANIA V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, : CIVIL ACTION _ Defendant : No. 07- 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 of 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. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT 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 PERSONS AT REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 NED LEE STAMM and ANN STAMM Plaintiffs V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, : PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION? n-- : No. 07- 3 gg 3 L;1JV? Y P.i., COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff is Ned Lee Stamm, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 2. Plaintiff is Arm Stamm, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 3. Plaintiffs are Husband and Wife. 4. Defendant is Scott M. Forester, an adult individual residing at 7073 Carlisle Pike, Carlisle, PA 17015. 5. On November 11, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, owner and operator of a 1993 Subaru Impreza, was traveling North on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, Pennsylvania, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. 6. At that same time and place, the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, the owner and operator of a 1997 Mazda Miata, was traveling South on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. 7. It was the duty of the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, to operate the said motor vehicle with due care and caution, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place. 8. The Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, attempted to make a lawful left turn into the Middlesex Diner between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive, and signaled his intention to make said left turn. 9. The Plaintiff ascertained that if all reasonable care were undertaken by drivers of vehicles in the oncoming lane, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place, Plaintiff would be able to safely negotiate the left turn. 0. Defendant, who, by his own admission, was speeding and had drank alcohol prior to driving his automobile, caused his automobile to collide with that of the Plaintiff. COUNT I - NED LEE STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 11. Paragraphs 1-10 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 12. At the time and place aforesaid the Defendant, Scott M. Forestr, was omissions: guilty of one or more of the following careless and negligent (a) Driving in excess of posted speed limits (b) Failing to observe oncoming traffic (c) Driving under the influence of alcohol 13. As a direct and proximate result of one or more of the aforesaid careless and negligent acts or omissions, the automobile being driven by the Defendant, Scott Forester, violently collided with the automobile being driven by the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature, including but not limited to, medical expenses, damages to property, pain and suffering, and physical and emotional trauma, all of which are permanent. WHEREFORE the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, asks for a judgment in his favor and against the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. COUNT II - ANN STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 15. Paragraphs 1-14 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 16. At the time of the accident on November 11, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, was legally married to Ann Stamm, and, as husband and wife, each became entitled to the companionship, society, guidance, material services and consortium of their respective spouses. 7. As a result of the injuries to her spouse, the plaintiff Ann Stamm was deprived guidance, and will in the future consortium of her spouse, Ned Lee Stamm. material services, an WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Ann Stamm, asks for a judgment in her favor and against the Defendant, Scott Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. Respectfully Submitted, --0-110-1- Date lhi't'a 41. Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 (717) 245-9688 VERIFICATION t made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct. I w I verify that the statemen s d that false statements herein aze made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 xnderstan relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Date Date N4eee*t???? Stamm CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Complaint upon Scott 4. Forester via Sheriff s service and United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid, on he 27 h day of June, 2007, addressed as follows: Scott M. Forester 7073 Carlisle Pike Carlisle, PA 17015 TURO LAW OFFICES Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 245-9688 Attorney for Petitioner Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 ?a ? r C-. V '?` ? {1 }, `? ``'? `y .?.. _;_r_, ?'? °"` r.? r_:7 ?-._.? f\? -r.t ?_ i? N "7'1 !? {?{?^-- -t;,7 i"I l ?,? t ? r ?? ?? IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, No.: 07-3893 Civil PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 #15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of the undersigned, Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, of the law firm of Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., on behalf of the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, in the above case. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. '4?vr J By: frey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Counsel for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe for Appearance was served upon the following counsel of record on the 1 t day of August, 2007, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, G. rie & Skeel, L.L.P. ?r By: ff C. Catanzarite, quire Counsel for Defendant 0 _Tj ni -n y = P7'1 r ? IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM NO.: 07-3893 Plaintiffs, vs. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO SCOTT M. FORESTER PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT THEREOF Defendant. Filed on Behalf of: Scott M. Forester, Defendant Counsel of Record for this Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D. #72765 SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. Firm I.D. No.: 911 707 Grant Street, Suite 2400 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED #15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM NO.: 07-3893 Plaintiffs, vs. SCOTT M. FORESTER Defendant. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Scott M. Forester by and through his attorneys, Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, and Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. and files these Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint in Civil Action averring as follows: I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1. The above-referenced lawsuit arises out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on November 11, 2006 on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiffs, Ned Lee Stamm and Ann Stamm, husband and wife, filed a Complaint in Civil Action against Scott M. Forester, alleging various personal injuries. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Complaint is attached hereto as "Exhibit A." 3. The Plaintiffs' allegations against the Defendant sound in general negligence, and aver that he was careless and negligent in the operation of a motor vehicle at the aforementioned time and place. 2 4. In particular, Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges in Paragraph 10 that "Defendant, by his own admission, was speeding and had drank alcohol prior to driving his automobile." 5. Furthermore, in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, it is alleged: "At the time and place aforesaid, the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, was guilty of one or more of the following careless and negligent acts or omissions: (a) Driving in excess of posted speed limits (b) Failing to observe oncoming traffic (c) Driving under the influence of alcohol" 6. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1028(a)(2) provides that Preliminary Objections may be filed for inclusion of scandalous or impertinent matter. II. ARGUMENT A. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO SCNDALOUS AND IMPERTINENT MATTER: 7. The above paragraphs of Defendant's Preliminary Objections are incorporated herein by reference, as if more fully set forth at length. 8. As indicated above, the Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to state a claim for damages through allegations that Defendant drank alcohol prior to operating his automobile and that he was "guilty" of driving under the influence of alcohol. 9. Defendant avers that such allegations are scandalous and impertinent to Plaintiffs' negligence claim which arose out of the accident giving rise to this lawsuit. 3 10. Moreover, this Defendant avers that these allegations are irrelevant to Plaintiffs' negligence claim arising out of the subject accident and should be stricken from Plaintiffs' Complaint. 11. Pennsylvania law regarding the relevance of evidence of intoxication to prove negligence in a civil action is well-settled. Such evidence must reasonably establish a degree of intoxication that proves unfitness to drive or walk. Kuehn v. Morgan, 62 Pa. D.&C. 4th 509 (C.C.P. Lehigh Co.) citing Whyte v. Robinson, 617 A.2d 380 (Pa. Super 1992). 12. As applied to this matter, the Plaintiffs' Complaint has not set forth the requisite facts to support a claim that the Defendant, Scott Forester was intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol at any time before, during or after the subject accident, nor does any proof exist. 13. To be scandalous and impertinent, the allegations must be immaterial and inappropriate to the proof of the cause of action. Common Cause/Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 710 A.2d 108 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) citing Department of Environmental Resources v. Peggs Run Coal Company, 423 A.2d 765 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1980). 14. No evidence exists in the instant matter to suggest that the Defendant was intoxicated at any time while operating his motor vehicle as stated. The "admission" referred to in Plaintiffs' Complaint consists of Defendant Forester stating that he drank one (1) beer four (4) hours prior to driving his vehicle at the time of the subject accident. Clearly, those facts in no way indicate that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol. 4 15. A blood test to determine blood alcohol content was never administered, no field sobriety tests were conducted, nor was the Defendant, Scott Forester charged with violating 75 Pa. C.S §3731 for driving while under the influence of alcohol. Nothing occurred at the scene of the accident to support Plaintiffs' allegation that the Defendant was "guilty" of driving under the influence of alcohol. 16. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs' inclusion of facts pertaining to Defendant's consumption of alcohol in Paragraph 10 and their allegation that he was "guilty" of driving under the influence of alcohol in Paragraph 12 (c) of their Complaint are irrelevant and unnecessary and should be stricken from the pleading. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order striking Paragraphs 10 and 12(c) from Plaintiffs' Complaint as scandalous and impertinent matter. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, LLP ,4 11VvU44(KA&wa4? C. Ofith'n-zarite, quire C unsel for Defendant 5 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM NO.: 07-3893 Plaintiffs, vs. SCOTT M. FORESTER Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Scott M. Forester by and through his attorneys, Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, and Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. and files this Brief in Support of Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint in Civil Action averring as follows: I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The within lawsuit arises out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on November 11, 2006 on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs, Ned Lee Stamm and Ann Stamm, husband and wife, filed a Complaint in Civil Action against Scott M. Forester, alleging various personal injuries. 6 Plaintiff contends that he was traveling north on Route 11, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive, attempting to make a left turn into the Middlesex Diner. Defendant Forester was said to be traveling south on Route 11 at the same time and place as Plaintiff, when he allegedly caused his vehicle to collide with Plaintiffs vehicle. The Plaintiffs' allegations against the Defendant sound in general negligence, and aver that he was careless and negligent in the operation of a motor vehicle at the aforementioned time and place. In particular, Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges in Paragraph 10 that Defendant, by his own admission, was speeding and had drank alcohol prior to driving his automobile. Additionally, in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint, it is alleged: "At the time and place aforesaid, the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, was guilty of one or more of the following careless and negligent acts or omissions: (a) Driving in excess of posted speed limits (b) Failing to observe oncoming traffic (c) Driving under the influence of alcohol" Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1028(a)(2) provides that Preliminary Objections may be filed for failure of a pleading to conform to law or rule of court or for "inclusion of scandalous or impertinent matter." This Defendant now files the within Preliminary Objections and Brief in Support in response to Plaintiffs' Complaint for inclusion of scandalous and impertinent matter, with reasons more particularly set forth below. II. ARGUMENT A. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO SCNDALOUS AND IMPERTINENT MATTER 7 As previously noted, the Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to state a claim for damages through allegations that Defendant drank alcohol prior to operating his automobile and that he was "guilty" of driving under the influence of alcohol. It is the Defendant's position that the Plaintiffs' allegations regarding his purported intoxication are without merit and are inconsequential to the within cause of action. This is simply the inclusion of scandalous and impertinent matter, which is irrelevant to Plaintiffs' negligence claim. Pennsylvania law regarding the relevance of evidence of intoxication to prove negligence in a civil action is well-settled. Such evidence must reasonably establish a degree of intoxication that proves unfitness to drive or walk. Kuehn v. Morgan, 62 Pa. D.&C. 4th 509 (C.C.P. Lehigh Co. 2002) citing Whyte v. Robinson. 617 A.2d 380 (Pa. Super 1992). For our purposes, the threshold question is essentially whether or not an individual could be deemed unfit to operate a vehicle. In order to reach that conclusion, the totality of evidence must be assessed. Factors considered in making such a determination include eyewitness observations, usually by police officers and medical personnel, of an odor of alcohol on someone's breath, slurred speech, and staggered gait, along with toxicology results from a blood alcohol test. See Locke v. Claypool, 627 A.2d 801 (Pa. Super 1993) and Ackerman v. Delcomico, 486 A.2d 410 (Pa. Super 1984). Even conclusory evidence such as a report showing the driver's blood alcohol content coupled with expert testimony of a toxicologist, without more, was insufficient to show unfitness to drive. See Billow v. Farmer's Trust Co., 266 8 A.2d. 92 (Pa. 1970). Pennsylvania courts refuse to admit evidence of a party's imbibing alcohol in a civil matter absent additional facts which would show a level of intoxication that adversely affected driving ability. Dove v. Gruber, 42 Pa.D.&C.3d 287 (C.C.P. Lebanon Co.1985) citing Emerick v. Carson, 472 A.2d 1133 (Pa. Super 1984). As applied to this matter, the Plaintiffs' Complaint has not set forth the requisite facts to support a claim that the Defendant, Scott Forester was intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol at any time before, during or after the subject accident, nor does any proof exist. The "admission" referred to in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs' Complaint consists of Defendant Forester stating that he drank one (1) beer four (4) hours prior to driving his vehicle at the time of the subject accident. Clearly, those facts in no way indicate that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol. Plaintiffs cannot rely on such a statement to make the bold allegations that the Defendant was intoxicated. It is the Defendant's position that he was not intoxicated at the time of the accident. A blood test to determine blood alcohol content was never administered, no field sobriety tests were conducted, nor was the Defendant, Scott Forester charged with violating 75 Pa. C.S §3731 for driving while under the influence of alcohol. Nothing occurred at the scene of the accident to support Plaintiffs' allegation that the Defendant was "guilty" of driving under the influence of alcohol. Furthermore, the mention of the Defendant drinking alcohol is irrelevant to in this matter and should be stricken from Plaintiffs' Complaint. To be scandalous 9 and impertinent, the allegations must be immaterial and inappropriate to the proof of the cause of action. Common Cause/Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 710 A.2d 108 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) citing Department of Environmental Resources v. Peggs Run Coal Company, 423 A.2d 765 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1980). In the instant case, the Plaintiffs' cause of action would be complete based upon the alleged motor vehicle accident. Adding that the Defendant drank alcohol is unnecessary and constitutes scandalous and impertinent matter. Consequently, such facts are unfairly prejudicial to the Defendant and should be excluded from the Complaint. If the allegation is wholly irrelevant to the action and is without any influence in leading to the results of the judicial inquiry, said allegation will be deemed impertinent. Nading v. Boice, 61 Pa. D.&C. 4th 353 (C.C.P. Butler Co. 2003) citing Jefferies v. Hoffman, 207 A.2d 774 (Pa. 1965). A case directly on point with the instant matter is Samuelson v. Buck, 18 Pa. D.&C. 3d 74 (C.C.P. Monroe Co. 1981), where the court ordered a paragraph in plaintiff's complaint be stricken as scandalous and impertinent due to the inclusion of an averment that Defendant consumed alcoholic beverages immediately prior to the motor vehicle accident. Without question, the court held, "Proof of consumption of alcohol prior to an automobile accident may only be offered into evidence if it can establish a degree of intoxication which proves unfitness to drive." relying on Billows v. Farmer's Trust Co. supra. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs' inclusion of facts pertaining to Defendant's consumption of alcohol in Paragraph 10 and their allegation that he was "guilty" 10 of driving under the influence of alcohol in Paragraph 12 (c) of their Complaint are irrelevant and unnecessary and should be stricken from the pleading. III. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing reasons, this Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order sustaining his Preliminary Objections and strike Paragraphs 10 and 12(c) from Plaintiffs' Complaint, with prejudice, as scandalous and impertinent matter. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, LLP R y C. Catanza ' e, Esquire Counsel for Defendant 11 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 NED LEE STAMM and ANN STAMM Plaintiffs v. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant TURO LAW PAGE 02/08 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION No. 07- 3 ?C ? NOTICE O -r1 _7,1( 1 7D ^t C:. N t_? ??1 YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take act-Ion 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 of 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. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WTTH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 219-316 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW PAGE 03/08 ii 1 NED LEE and. ANN STAMM, Plaintiff's V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION No. 07- ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2007, it is ORDERED that a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff Ned Lee Stamm against Defendant Scott M. Forester in the amount of Dollars shall be entered and it is further ORDRED that a,judgment in favor of the Plaintiff Ann Stamm against Defendant Scott M. Forester in the amount of Dollars shall be entered. BY THE C"OUR'T, ,T. c.c.: Michael M. Jeromin.ski, Esquire Scott M. Forester 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW NED LEE STAMM and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ANN STAMM : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiffs :.PENNSYLVANIA V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, : CNII. ACTION Defendant : No. 07- COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff is Ned Lee Stamm, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 2. Plaintiff is Ann. Starr?m, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 3. Plaintiffs are Husband and Wife. PAGE 04/08 4. Defendant is Scott M. Forester, an adult individual residing at 7073 Carlisle Pike, Carlisle, PA 17015. On November It, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, owner and operator of a 1993 Subaru Impreza, was travelutg North on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, Pennsylvania, at approximately 5:44 p.m_, between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. 6. At that same time and place, the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, the owner and operator of a 1997 Mazda Miata, was traveling South on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. 7. It was the duty of the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, to operate the said motor vehicle with due care and caution, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place. 8. The Plaintiff Ned Lee Stamm, attempted to make a lawful left turn into the Middlesex Diner between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive, and signaled his intention to make said left turn. 9. The Plaintiff ascertained that if all 'reasonable care were undertaken by drivers of vehicles in. the oncoming lane, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place, Plaintiff would be able to safely negotiate the left turn. 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW PAGE 05/08 10. Defendant, who, by his owit admission, was speeding and had drank alcohol prior to driving his automobile, caused his automobile to collide with that of the Plaintiff. COUNT I - NED LEE STAMM v- SCOTT M. FORESTER 11. Paragraphs 1-10 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 12. At the time and place aforesaid the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, was guilty of one or more of the following careless and negligent acts or omissions: (a) Driving in excess of posted speed limits (b) Failing to observe oncoming traffic (c) Driving under the influence of alcohol 13. As a direct and proximate result of one or more of the aforesaid careless and negligent acts or omissions, the automobile being driven by the Defendant, Scott Forester, violently collided with. the automobile being driven by the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm. 14. As a direct and. proximate result of the aforesaid collision, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature, including but not limited to, medical expenses, damages to property, pain and suffering, and physical and emotional trauma, all of which are permanent. WHEREFORE the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, asks for a judgment in his favor and against the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. COUNT I1- ANN STAMM v, SCOTT M. FORESTER 15. Paragraphs 1-14 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 16. At the time of the accident on November 11, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, was legally married to Ann Stamm, and, as husband and wife, each became entitled to the companionship, society, guidance, material services and consortium, of their respective spouses. 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW PAGE 06/08 17. As a result of the injuries to her spouse, the Plaintiff Ann Stamm was deprived and will in the future be deprived of the companionship, society, guidance, material services, and consortium of her spouse, Nod Lee Stamm. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Ann. Stamm, asks for a judgment in her favor and against the Defendant, Scott Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. Respectfully Submitted, Date Michael M. Teromins i, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Supreme Court T.D. No. 92977 (717) 245-9688 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW PAGE 07/08 fyr VERXEIC MON I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint 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. Date r Date N Lee mm .. .? r i ? r' i Ann, Stamm 07/27/2007 14:46 7172452165 TURO LAW PAGE 08/08 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE i hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Complaint upon Scott M. Forester via Sheriff's service and United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid, on the 27"' day of June, 2007, addressed as follows: Scott M. Forester 7073 Carlisle Pike Carlisle, PA 17015 TURO LAW OFFICES MPW AM Michael M_ Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 245-9688 Attomey for Petitioner Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and ANN STAMM Plaintiffs, vs. SCOTT M. FORESTER Defendant. CIVIL DIVISION NO.: 07-3893 ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, to-wit, this day of , 2007, upon consideration of the within Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint and Brief in Support, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that Paragraphs 10 and 12(c) of Plaintiffs' Complaint in Civil Action are hereby stricken, with prejudice, as scandalous and impertinent matter. BY THE COURT: J. #15643 12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of r-aQ record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 2 day of U/Jt , 2007: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, LLP J a anzari , Esquire ounsel for Defendant 13 O ?. Fn y rv i ; SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-03893 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND STAMM NED LEE ET AL VS FORESTER SCOTT M TIMOTHY REITZ , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon FORESTER SCOTT M the DEFENDANT , at 1650:00 HOURS, on the 18th day of July 2007 at 7073 CARLISLE PIKE LOT 220 CARLISLE, PA 17015 by handing to SCOTT M FORESTER a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Postage Surcharge * /0-7 cx So Answers: 18.00 .41 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 ? 34.17 07/19/2007 RON TURO Sworn and Subscibed to before me this of By: day D uty Sh iff A.D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR V. ARGUMENT (Jury Trial Demanded) SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeei, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 #15643 PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Argument Court. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. 1 . State matter to be argued (i.e. plaintiff's motion for new trial, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs' Complaint. 2. Identify counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiff: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (b) for defendants: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers McDonnell Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. 2400 Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 and/or John A. Lucy, Esquire Summers McDonnell Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 3. 1 will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. 4. Argument Court Date: October 3, 2007 Je rdy C. Catanzarite Date: August 9, 2007 A orney for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe for Listing Case for Argument was served upon the following counsel of record on the 9th day of August, 2007, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, 00hrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: Wz` L/ rley C. Catanzarite, Esquire unsel for Defendant C? ? O G 7 -7 r _ 1 Jy C.iS NED LEE STAMM and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ANN STAMM : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiffs : PENNSYLVANIA V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, : CIVIL ACTION Defendant : No. 07- 3%93 AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff is Ned Lee Stamm, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 2. Plaintiff is Ann Stamm, an adult individual residing at 48 Warwick Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050-7050. 13. Plaintiffs are Husband and Wife. Defendant is Scott M. Forester, an adult individual residing at 7073 Carlisle Pike, Carlisle, PA 17015. On November 11, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, owner and operator of a 1993 Subaru Impreza, was traveling North on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, Pennsylvania, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. At that same time and place, the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, the owner and operator of a 1997 Mazda Miata, was traveling South on Route 11 in Middlesex Township, at approximately 5:44 p.m., between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive. It was the duty of the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, to operate the said motor vehicle with due care and caution, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place. The Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, attempted to make a lawful left turn into the Middlesex Diner between Carolina Way and Roadway Drive, and signaled his intention to make said left turn. The Plaintiff ascertained that if all reasonable care were undertaken by drivers of vehicles in the oncoming lane, in accordance with the applicable statues and ordinances, in effect at the said time and place, Plaintiff would be able to safely negotiate the left turn. 10. The Defendant, who, by his own admission was speeding, caused his automobile to collide with that of the Plaintiff. COUNT I - NED LEE STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 11. Paragraphs 1-10 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 12. At the time and place aforesaid the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, was guilty of one or more of the following careless and negligent acts or omissions: (a) Driving in excess of posted speed limits (b) Failing to observe oncoming traffic 13. As a direct and proximate result of one or more of the aforesaid careless and negligent acts or omissions, the automobile being driven by the Defendant, Scott Forester, violently collided with the automobile being driven by the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature, including but not limited to, medical expenses, damages to property, pain and suffering, and physical and emotional trauma, all of which are permanent. WHEREFORE the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, asks for a judgment in his favor and against the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. COUNT II - ANN STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 15. Paragraphs 1-14 inclusive are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full. 16. At the time of the accident on November 11, 2006, the Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, was legally married to Ann Stamm, and, as husband and wife, each became entitled to the companionship, society, guidance, material services and consortium of their respective spouses. 17. As a result of the injuries to her spouse, the Plaintiff Ann Stamm was deprived and will in the future be deprived of the companionship, society, guidance, material services, and consortium of her spouse, Ned Lee Stamm. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Ann Stamm, asks for a judgment in her favor and against the Defendant, Scott Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. Q70 101 Date Respectfully Submitted, Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 (717) 245-9688 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Amended Complaint upon Jeffrey Catanzarite, Esquire via United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid, on the 10 t h day of A mu J , 2007, addressed as follows: Jeffrey Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. 707 ('want Street, Suite 2400 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 TURO LAW OFFICES Michael M. Jerominski, squire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 245-9688 Attorney for Petitioner Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 VERIFICATION 1, Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire, attorney for the Plaintiffs herein, have sufficient knowledge of the facts contained in this Amended Complaint and verify that the statements made in the foregoing Amended Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, based upon information received from the Plaintiffs. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. A verification executed by the Plaintiff will be filed of record as soon as it becomes available. Date Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire rl ? '`=? ? t_ _ -;?_i _sl cF ? r, ? -.-, ,-r F`.? :;;;;C?. G `?.7 :? , __... c fir' ? _.__ ?? ?+ Ci ..:7 ., s IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, PRAECIPE FOR REMOVING CASE FROM V. ARGUMENT LIST (Jury Trial Demanded) SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 #15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. PRAECIPE FOR REMOVING CASE FROM ARGUMENT LIST 1. On August 13, 2007, the Defendant filed a Praecipe For Listing Case For Argument concerning the Defendant's Preliminary Objections to the Plaintiffs' Complaint. 2. The Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint which is acceptable to the Defendant and the Defendant intends to file an Answer to the Amended Complaint. 3. Accordingly, the Defendant requests that the argument for his Preliminary Objections be removed from the October 3, 2007 argument list. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, thrie & SSkkeel, L.L.P. By: ?ffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire ounsel for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe For Removing Case From Argument List was served upon the following counsel of record on the 22nd day of April, 2007, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: f' rey C. Catanzarite, Esquire ounsel for Defendant i, n? _ ,?, ,_, = r ,_. ? ? ? ? -?+ i - c- ? t _ h.y _ . '`' ? ? ?_ _" i-n J?J ` ? ` IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, No.: 07-3893 Civil ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 TO: PLAINTIFF You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer and New Matter within twenty (20) days from-service rvice hereof or ?t may be entered HUDOCK, GUTHRIE (412) 261-3232 15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, Scott M. Forester, by and through is attorneys, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., and Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, files the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint: 1. ANSWER 1. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 1 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 2. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 2 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 3. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 3 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. The allegations of Paragraph 8 are conclusions of law to which to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 9. The allegations of Paragraph 9 are conclusions of law to which to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 10. The Defendant admits that he was operating his vehicle at 50 mph in a 45 mph zone prior to this accident occurring. The remaining allegations of Paragraph 10 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. COUNT I - NED LEE STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 11. Paragraphs 1 through 10 are herein incorporated by reference. 12. The allegations of Paragraph 12 and its subparts are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 13. The allegations of Paragraph 13 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 14. The allegations of Paragraph 14 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Scott M. Forester, demands judgment in his favor and against Plaintiff. COUNT II - ANN STAMM v. SCOTT M. FORESTER 15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 are herein incorporated by reference. 16. The allegations of Paragraph 16 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 17. The allegations of Paragraph 17 are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Scott M. Forester, demands judgment in his favor and against Plaintiff. II. NEW MATTER 18. Paragraphs 1 through 17 are herein incorporated by reference. 19. The Plaintiffs' claims are subject to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and the Defendant asserts, as an affirmative defense, all rights, privileges and/or immunities accruing pursuant to said statute. 20. Defendant claims the benefit of the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act as set forth in 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 7102, et seq., and pleads the same as an affirmative defense against any and all claims of the Plaintiffs. 21. If the Plaintiffs sustained the injuries and damages as alleged in the Complaint, which are not admitted, then Plaintiffs' injuries and damages were caused solely by the actions and/or inactions of parties other than the Defendant. 22. If the Plaintiffs sustained the injuries and damages as alleged in the Complaint, which are not admitted, then Plaintiffs' injuries and damages were caused solely by the actions of Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, in that this Plaintiff: a. failed to yield the right-of-way of vehicles coming in the opposite direction; b. made an illegal left-hand turn while failing to yield the right-of- way to the Defendant's vehicle; C. failed to have his vehicle under proper control; d. failed to keep a proper lookout for oncoming traffic; e. failed to use due care and acted without due regard for the rights and safety of other drivers on the roadway; f. failed to observe the road conditions of the highway and the traffic on said highway; and, g. continued to operate his vehicle in the same direction when he saw, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have seen that further operation in that direction would result in a collision with the Defendant's vehicle. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Scott M. Forester, demands judgment in his favor and against Plaintiffs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Cuithrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: Je ey C. Catanzarite, Esquire unsel for Defendant VERIFICATION Defendant verifies that he/she is the Defendant in the foregoing action; that the foregoing ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which he/she has furnished to his/her counsel and information which has been gathered by his/her counsel in the preparation of the lawsuit. The language of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel and not of the Defendant. Defendant has read the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER and to the extent that the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which he/she has given to his/her counsel, it is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel, he/she has relied upon counsel in making this Affidavit. Defendant understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: (114 2 4r cott M. Fo ster, Defendant #15643 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint was served upon the following counsel of record on the 13-A day off 2007, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: rfr'ey C .1-C-atanzarite, Esquire unsel for Defendant C3 rs ?a G ° NED LEE STAMM and ANN STAMM Plaintiffs V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, : PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION No. 07-3893 ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER 18. No response required. 19. The allegations of Paragraph 19 are conclusions of law to which no reponse is required. To the extent a repsonse is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 20. The allegations of Paragraph 20 are conclusions of law to which no reponse is required. To the extent a repsonse is necessary, said averments are generally denied pursuant to Rule 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 21. DENIED. 22. DENIED. (a) DENIED. (b) DENIED. (c) DENIED. (d) DENIED. (e) DENIED. (f) DENIED. (g) DENIED. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Ned Stamm, asks for a judgment in his favor and against the Defendant, Scott Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000; the Plaintiff, Ann Stamm, also asks for a judgment in her favor and against the Defendant, Scott Forester, in a sum in excess of $50,000. ?Z Date Respectfully Submitted, Michael M. Jeromidski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 (717) 245-9688 VERIFICATION I, Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire, attorney for the Plaintiffs herein, have sufficient knowledge of the facts contained in this Answer to Defendant's New Matter and verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer to Defendant's New Matter are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, based upon information received from the Plaintiffs. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. A verification executed by the Plaintiff will be filed of record as soon as it becomes available. Date Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Answer to Defendant's New Matter upon Jeffrey Catanzarite, Esquire via United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid, on the Z 6 } day of ?j e D J C el- , 2007, addressed as follows: Jeffrey Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. 707 Grant Street, Suite 2400 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 TURO LAW OFFICES U44 /1'1/1. k-. - Michael M. Jerommski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 245-9688 Attorney for Petitioner Supreme Court I.D. No. 92977 C"? r,,.? ? ? ?"7 ___ ""J [; ^'? i+'1 ? _y ' ? !': ?i ? ? 1 + K -- _?? IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, No.: 07-3893 Civil MOTION TO COMPEL (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 #15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, No.: 07-3893 Civil Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. MOTION TO COMPEL AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Scott M. Forester, by and through his attorneys, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., and Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, and files the following Motion to Compel and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. The instant case arises out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on November 11, 2006. 2. On or about September 13, 2007, the Defendant served the Plaintiffs with Interrogatories and a Request for Production of Documents. A true and correct copy of the September 13, 2007 correspondence to Plaintiffs' attorney is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "1 " 3. To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to these discovery requests. 4. It is necessary for a proper defense of this lawsuit that Plaintiffs provide full and complete responses to Defendant's discovery requests. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter an Order directing Plaintiffs to provide full and complete responses to Defendant's discovery requests within ten (10) days of the date of the Order. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrj-e &_Skeel, L.L.P. By: J fle . Catanzarite, Esquire u I for Defendant SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, H UDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS AT LAW STEPHEN J. SUMMERS THOMAS A. MCDONNELL JOSEPH A. HUDOCK. JR GREGG A. GUTHRIE PETER B. SKEEL PATRICK M. CONNELLY* JEFFREY C. CATANZARITE PITTSBURGH OFFICE: GULF TOWER, SUITE 2400 707 GRANT STREET PITTSBURGH, PA 15219 PHONE 412-261-3232 FAX 412-261-3239 JASON A. HINES KEVIN D. RAUCH ERIN M. BRAUN Guy E. BLASS MARK J. GOLEN ROBERT J. FISHER, JR. KIMBERLY L. GALLUCC1- JESSICA M. JURASKO ERICK V. VIOLAGO JOHN A. Lucy ELLEN L. KAPALKO SETH T. BLACK PAUL D. MURPHY ALSO ADMITTED IN WV Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 September 13, 2007 In Re: Ned Lee Stamm and Ann Stamm v. Scott M. Forester Docket Number 07-3893 Civil (Cumberland County) Date of Loss November 11, 2006 Our File Number 15643 Dear Mr. Jerominski: "`ALSO ADMITTED IN OH Enclosed please find the Defendant's Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents directed to Plaintiff, Ned Lee Stamm, in the above- referenced matter. Kindly provide a response to these discovery requests pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. ere eff y C. Catanzarite JCC/pk Enclosures HARRISBURG OFFICE: 1017 MUMMA ROAD, LEMOYNE, PA 17043 PHONE: 717-901-5916 FAX: 717-920-9129 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Motion to Compel was served upon the following counsel of record on the 15th day of November, 2007, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Michael M. Jerominski, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie-c Skeel, L.L.P. By: Cannzarite, Esquire for Defendant r-J ` - t L ) 13 : I l IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and CIVIL DIVISION ANN STAMM, Plaintiffs, No.: 07-3893 Civil STIPULATION V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendant. Filed on Behalf of Defendant Counsel of Record for This Party: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire PA I.D.#: 72765 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Firm No.: 911 Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 261-3232 #15643 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NED LEE STAMM and ANN STAMM, Plaintiffs, V. SCOTT M. FORESTER, Defendant. CIVIL DIVISION No.: 07-3893 Civil STIPULATION The undersigned parties agree and stipulate that Plaintiffs, Ned Lee Stamm and Ann Stamm, are not seeking damages in this case for past wage loss, past lost earnings or diminished earning capacity against Defendant, Scott M. Forester. By: Turo La ffices --? By: John Shugars, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff Ned Lee and Ann Stamm Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. 1co rey. C anzarite, Esquire nsel for Defendant tt M. Forester CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Stipulation was served upon the following counsel of record on the 1 t day of May, 2008, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: John Shugars, Esquire Turo Law Offices 28 South Pitt Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, key 'Skeel, L.L.P. By: v ` atanzarite, Esquire Defendant ?:"'> n?? s"-i _a '?? ,,., , ? ?:? '77 ._ ,. '•t? ?? ,''??-y 77 ?,, ? ?? )i ? _ ...`.ti ? . .. ('y) .. ,. , ? ? , ?; r .., .,'7 •-c S l Ned Lee STAMM and Anne STAMM IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiffs, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 07 - 3893 . CIVIL TERM Scott M. FORESTER, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please settle, withdraw and discontinue the above-captioned matter on behalf of the Plaintiffs. Respectfully Submitted, TU (01102109 Date 28 (717 LAW Andrew nyder, Esq. 20319 th Pi treet P 17013 -9688 'y or Plaintiffs 1 Ned Lee STAMM and Anne STAMM Plaintiffs, V. Scott M. FORESTER, Defendant. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07 - 3893 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Lorin Andrew Snyder, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiffs, do hereby certify that on the Second day of April, 2009, 1 served the foregoing Praecipe to Withdraw Complaint in the above-captioned matter, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage paid, addressed as follows: Jeffrey A. Catanzarite, Esq. Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 707 Grant Street, Suite 2400 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Defendant Respectfully Submitted, TURO NAW O-MCE Lon Andre Snyder, Esq. 28 S th P tt Street Carlisl 17013 (717) - 88 ney for Plaintiffs ..G