Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-4421IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. ~{~ /_ 2007 (~' i ui 1 1 e1' M Civil Action - (XX) Law ( )Equity STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON Edward Kemp his wife, 921 Hamilton Street 60 Mulberry-Kelso Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Mulberry, TN 37359 PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue A Writ of Summons in the above-captioned action. X Writ of Summons Shall be issued and forwarded to ( )Attorney (XX)Sheriff Jason C. Imler, Esquire_ Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg. PA 17110 (7171238-2000 Name/Address/Telephone No. of Attorney ti Signature of Attorney Supreme Court ID No. 87911. Date: July 20. 2007 WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. Date: 7 a5 07 ( )Check here if reverse is used for additional informati,,.. PROTHON. - 55 r..~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ f___`_''_'~ ~r"1 -.l t,... ~ -n _,;.~ ~ ~ rat'` -; , . ~ '_ „~ '(~ "r? ~.... ~ a^..,3 _ } 1 F~ 3~ , `mow ~.. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE N0: 2007-04421 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND SHELTON STEVE ET AL VS KEMP EDWARD VALERIE WEARY Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon KEMP EDWARD the DEFENDANT at 1519:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of August 2007 at 921 HAMILTON STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to EDWARD KEMP a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 4.80 Postage .41 Surcharge 10.00 00 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 08/06/2007 HANDLER HENNING ROSENBERG By / Deputy Sh riff of A.D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 4421 2007 Civil Action - (XX) Law ( )Equity STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON his wife, 60 Mulberry-Kelso Road Mulberry, TN 37359 Edward Kemp 921 Hamilton Street Carlisle, PA 17013 PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA: Please withdraw the appearance of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. HANDLER, HENNING AND ROSENBERG LLP Dated Zf ~ ~ " ~~ By -~' Jason C. Imler, Esq. I.D. #87911 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 n-.? _~ ~~ ^S1 ;"^.'1 ,VT _. a'S --t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 4421 2007 Civil Action - (XX) Law ( )Equity STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON his wife, 60 Mulberry-Kelso Road Mulberry, TN 37359 Edward Kemp 921 Hamilton Street Carlisle, PA 17013 PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA: Please enter the appearance of Andrew C. Spears, Esquire of Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP on behalf of the Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action. Date: HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP By: Andrew C. Spears, Esquire Attorney I.D. #87737 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 ~_, <_-, ~~;, .: _..~ >c~* ~s c,~=~, V ~ Johnson, Duffle, Stewart 8~ Weiidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 E-mail: jjst~jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW v. EDWARD KEMP, Defendant NO. 07-4421 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: PLEASE enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of Defendant Edward Kemp in the above-captioned matter. STEWART 8~ WEIDNER Date: September 3, 2008 343290 Jeff rsori J-Shipman, Esq~ Att mey I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorney for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on September 3, 2008: Jason C. Imler, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER J fferson J. Shipman, Esquire ~? ~ ` ~ _,: ..~{- try _ , = - ~ - .~„- ,~ ~, , ~::,~ .,_.. ~r Johnson, Duffle, Stewart 8 Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 E-mail: ps@jdsw.com STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, Plaintiffs v. EDWARD KEMP, Defendant TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 07-4421 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE PLEASE enter a Rule upon the Plaintiffs to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days of the date of service thereof or suffer judgment of non pros. Date: September 3, 2008 TO: Plaintiffs Steve and Holly Shelton c/o Jason C. Imler, Esquire J S N, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER e e son J. Ship n, Esquire RULE You are hereby directed to file a Complaint in the above-captioned matter within 20 days or judgment non pros will be entered against you. Date: 9~~/og thonotary OKfi 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Rule to File Complaint has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on September 3, 2008: Jason C. Imler, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER J erson J. Shipma squire r`~'~ ~ a ~~ f_:'} " _~ i ti~ i i l ~-1 ~ ""Y f? a , '~: ~./u i .. 1a.d ~~~*. Andrew C. Spears, Esq. I.D.#87737 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Fax : (717) 233-3029 E-mail: spears(c~HHRLaw.com STEVE SHELTON and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF HOLLY SHELTON, his wife Plaintiffs v. EDWARD KEMP, Defendant CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-4421 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION -LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Steve Shelton and Holly Shelton, husband and wife, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by Andrew C. Spears, Esq., and makes the within Complaint against Defendant, Edward Kemp, and avers as follows: 1. Plaintiffs, Steve Shelton and Holly Shelton, husband and wife, are adult individuals currently residing at 60 Mulberry-Kelso Road, Mulberry, TN 37359. 2. Defendant, Edward Kemp, is an adult individual currently believed to be residing at 921 Hamilton Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17013. 3. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Steve Shelton was driving a 2006 Chrylser PT Cruiser rented from Hertz Rental Car Company. 4. At all times material hereto, Defendant, Edward Kemp, was the owner and operator of a 2001 Dodge. 5. At all times material hereto, there were no adverse weather or road conditions. 6. On or about July 26, 2005, at approximately 7:50 a.m., Plaintiff Steve Shelton was in the left lane of S.R.11 and was lawfully stopped at a traffic light in Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 7. At approximately the same time and place, Defendant was proceeding directly behind Plaintiff s vehicle on S.R.11. 8. Defendant failed to stop his vehicle and suddenly, and without warning, violently struck the rear of Plaintiffs vehicle. 9. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, sustained serious and permanent injuries as set forth more fully below. COUNT I -NEGLIGENCE Steve Shelton v. Defendant 10. All prior paragraphs are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 11. The occurrence of the aforementioned collision and all resultant injuries to Plaintiff Steve Shelton are the direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, generally, and more specifically, as set forth below: 2 (a) In failing to be reasonably vigilant to observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; (b) In failing to be reasonably vigilant to observe the road and traffic conditions then and there existing; (c) In failing to operate Defendant's vehicle in such a manner that would allow him to apply the brakes and stop before striking the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. (d) In failing to operate Defendant's vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could have avoided striking Plaintiff's vehicle; (e) In failing to properly regulate the speed of Defendant's vehicle so as to prevent arear-end collision; (f) In failing to operate Defendant's vehicle at a speed and under such control so as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3361; (g) In failing to operate Defendant's vehicle at a speed that was safe for existing conditions, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3361; (h) In operating Defendant's vehicle at a speed in excess of the posted speed limit; (i) In failing to maintain proper adequate observation of the existing 3 road and traffic conditions; (j) In failing to exercise reasonable care in the operation and control of Defendant's vehicle in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3714; (k) In following another vehicle closer than was reasonable and prudent in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3310; (I) In failing to have due regard for the speed of the vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of the highway in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3310; and (m) In failing to be continuously alert and failing to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist and failing to have Defendant's vehicle under such control that injury to persons or property could be avoided. 12. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has suffered serious injuries, including, but not limited to occipital skull laceration repaired with staples, multiple traumas, secondary right occipital basilar skull fracture with resulting right temporal bone fracture and moderately severe conductive hearing loss in the right ear, loss of short term memory and mild cognitive disorder. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has suffered lost wages and may in the future continue loss of income and/or loss of earning capacity. 4 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has suffered physical pain, discomfort, and mental anguish and will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to his physical, emotional and financial detriment and loss. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for aforesaid injuries, to expend money for medicine and/or medical attention, and may be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, to his detriment and loss. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures and he will continue to suffer same in the future, to his detriment and loss. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff Steve Shelton, has been, and will in the future, be hindered from attending to his daily duties, to his detriment and loss, humiliation and embarrassment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, plus enter such other orders as are equitable and just. 5 COUNT II -LOSS OF CONSORTIUM Holly Shelton v. Defendant 18. All prior paragraphs are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 19. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff Holly Shelton, has suffered a loss of consortium, society and comfort from her husband, Holly Shelton, and she will continue to suffer a similar loss in the future. 20. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff Holly Shelton, has been compelled, in order to effectuate a cure for her husband's injuries to expend money for medicine and medical attention and will be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, much to her great detriment and loss. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, plus enter such other orders as are equitable and just. Date: Q ~ Respectfully submitted, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP av ~t~ Andrew C. Spears, Esquire 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs 6 VERIFICATION THE UNDERSIGNED hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based on information that was gathered by counsel in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the above-named document is of counsel and not my own. I have read the said document and, to the extent that it is based on information that I gave to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the said document is that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in preparing this Verification. Date: Holly S ton 8 VERIFICATION THE UNDERSIGNED hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based on information that was gathered by counsel in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the above-named document is of counsel and not my own have read the said document and, to the extent that it is based on information that I gave to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the said document is that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in preparing this Verification. Date: /d' O Steve Shelton 7 STEVE SHELTON and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF HOLLY SHELTON, his wife CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. NO. 07-4421 Civil Term EDWARD KEMP, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Andrew C. Spears, attorney for Plaintiffs, hereby certify that I have served the foregoing Complaint by first class mail, postage pre-paid on the 19th day of September 2008, upon the following: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Date: ~ Andrew C. Spears, squire Attorney for Plaintiff 9 .-.-. ' ~~ r'~ ~~ + f ~ l,7 { rt t 5" V f ~:... ry ~ ~V ; .~ t..~ =~ f t» ` `-' i ~'' ~ j i'i -t ~~ A'.11-=! .• ~ ~~ W ~ ;~ .L~ ~ r.~ Johnson, Duffie, Stewart 8 Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Attomeys for Defendant I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 E-mail• jjs[cDidsw.com STEVE SHELTON and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION -LAW v. : NO. 07-4421 Civil Term EDWARD KEMP, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Steve and Holly Shelton and their attorney, Jason C. Imler, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 YOU ARE REQUIRED to plead to the within Answer and New Matter within 20 days of service hereof or a default judgment may be entered against you. DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER Date: September 30, 2008 J~Ferson J. Shipman, Esqui orney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant Johnson, Duffle, Stewart ~ Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I . D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 E-mail: jjs@jdsw.com Defendant STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, Plaintiffs v. Attorneys for Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 07-4421 Civil Term EDWARD KEMP, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Edward Kemp, by and through his counsel, Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire and Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, and files the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint: 1. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph number 1, and the same are therefore denied. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph number 6 and the same therefore denied. 7. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph number 7 and the same therefore denied. 8. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 8 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 9. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 9 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. COUNT 1-NEGLIGENCE Steve Shelton v. Defendant, Edward Kemp 10. Mr. Kemp incorporates herein by reference his answers to paragraphs 1 through 9 as though fully set forth herein at length. 11. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 11 and subparagraphs (a) through (m) are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is 2 required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 11 and each and every subparagraph (a) through (m) are specifically denied. (a) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to be reasonably vigilant to observe the traffic conditions; (b) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to be reasonably vigilante to observe the road and traffic conditions; (c) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to operate his vehicle in such a manner that would allow him to apply his brakes and stop before striking the rear of Plaintiffs vehicle; (d) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to operate his vehicle under proper and adequate control so as to avoid striking Plaintiffs vehicle; (e) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to properly regulate the speed of his vehicle so as to prevent arear-end collision; (f) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to operate his vehicle at a speed and under such control as to be able to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (g) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to operate his vehicle at a speed that was safe for existing conditions; (h) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp operated his vehicle at a speed in excess of the posted speed limit; (i) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to maintain a proper and adequate observation of the existing road and traffic conditions; (j) Denied. It is ,specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to exercise reasonable care in the operation and control of his vehicle; 3 (k) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp is following another vehicle closer than was reasonable and prudent; (I) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to have due regard for the speed of the vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of the highway; (m) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Kemp failed to be continuously alert and failed to perceive any warning of danger that was reasonably likely to exist and failing to have his vehicle under such control that injury to persons or property could be avoided. It is further specifically denied that Mr. Kemp was in violation of any provisions of the Motor Vehicle Code, spec~cally as alleged in Plaintiffs' Complaint at paragraph 11 and subparagraphs (a) through (m). 12. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 12 are in part conclusions of law of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 12 and the same are therefore denied. 13. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 13 are in part conclusions of law of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as 4 to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 13 and the same are therefore denied. 14. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 14 are in part conclusions of law of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 14 and the same are therefore denied. 15. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 15 are in' part conclusions of faw of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 15 and the same are therefore denied. 16. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 16 are in part conclusions of law of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 16 and the same are therefore denied. 5 17. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 17 are in part conclusions of law of fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 17 and the same are therefore denied. WHEREFORE, the Defendant Edward Kemp respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II -LOSS OF CONSORTIUM Hollv Shelton v. Defendant Edward Kemp 18. Mr. Kemp incorporates herein by reference his answers to paragraphs 1 through 17 as though fully set forth herein at length. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 19 are in part conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 19 and the same are therefore denied. 6 20. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 20 are in part conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Kemp is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of paragraph number 20 and the same are therefore denied. WHEREFORE, the Defendant Edward Kemp respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER 21. That the Plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action against Defendant Edward Kemp. 22. That the Plaintiffs alleged cause of action may be barred in whole or in part of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and by the limited tort option. 23. That if it should be found that there was any negligence on the part of Mr. Kemp, which is denied, then in that event any such negligence was not a proximate cause nor factual cause of the Plaintiffs' alleged harm. 24. That the Plaintiffs harm may have been pre-existing. 25. That the Plaintiffs may have failed to mitigate their alleged injuries and damages. 7 26. That the Plaintiffs alleged cause of action may have been caused by an intervening, superseding cause. 27. That the Plaintiffs' alleged cause of action may have been caused by third parties or entities not presently involved in this action. WHEREFORE, Defendant Edward Kemp respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER r By: Jeff rson .Shipman, squire Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant Date: September 30, 2008 8 VERIFICATION I, Edward Kemp, hereby acknowledge that I am a Defendant in this action, and I have read the foregoing Answer and New Matter and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein made are subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Edward Kemp Date: ~ ~"7 ~ 2S 345423 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on September 30, 2008: Jason C. Imler, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for PlaintifiF JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER J fferson J. Shipman, Esquire ~? ~., ~~ -~-, ~ ~L; L7 : "" ~ ,. -cs `-; =~ ' ~ ;:~ Andrew C. Spears, Esquire I.D.#87737 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff Fax: (717) 233-3029 E-mail: SPEARSCa2hhrlaw.com_ STEVE SHELTON and : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, :CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. : NO. 07-4421-Civil Term EDWARD KEMP, Defendant :CIVIL ACTION -LAW PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Steve Shelton and Holly Shelton, his wife, by and through their attorneys, Handler, Henning and Rosenberg, LLP., and file the within Reply to New Matter and avers as follows: 21 . The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. 22. The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. By way of further response, plaintiffs have purchased an automobile policy through State Farm and their vehicles are insured in the state of Tennessee where they reside. Therefore, the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law does not apply and plaintiffs cannot be deemed have to have elective limited tort or full tort. 23. The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. 24. The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. 25. The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. 26. The averments in this paragraph constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. 27. The averments in this paragraph. constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, any and all allegations and insinuations of wrong doing on the part of plaintiffs are hereby denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Steve Shelton and Holly Shelton respectfully request that this Honorable Court dismiss Defendant's New Matter and enter judgment in their favor and enter such other orders as are equitable and just. Respectfully submitted, Date: Q S~ HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP By: Andrew C. pears, Esquire 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorneys for Plaintiff VERIFICATION THE UNDERSIGNED hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based on information #hat was gathered by counsel in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the above-named document is of counsel and not my own. I have read the said document and, to the extent that it is based on information that I gave to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the said document is that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in preparing this Verification. THE UNDERSIGNED also understands that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.R.C.P. 2252(d) C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~ ~ ~. O ~ ~~ Steve Shelton VERIFICATION THE UNDERSIGNED hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based on information that was gathered by counsel in preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the above-named document is of counsel and not my own. I have read the said document and, to the extent that it is based on information that I gave to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the contents of the said document is that of counsel, I nave relied upon my counsel in preparing this Verification. THE UNDERSIGNED also understands that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.R.C.P. 2252(d) C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 6 ~ ~~ v ~' ~-----' H Ily elton L Andrew C. Spears, Esquire I. D.#87737 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff Fax: (717) 233-3029 E-mail: SPEARS(a~hhrlaw.com STEVE SHELTON and HOLLY SHELTON, his wife, Plaintiffs First Class U. S. Mail: Jefferson Shipman, Esquire JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WE/DNER 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 v. EDWARD KEMP, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-4421-Civil Term CIVIL ACTION -LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ~~ 1 AND NOW, this ~~ day of d , 2008, I hereby certify that I have served Plaintiffs' Reply to New Matter upon Coun el of Record by sending a true and correct copy of the same to them via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Andrew C. ears, Esquire r-~ ; ~ ` .~ , -'s-1 c~ -~ c ~ ~ .r ' c'~ ...3 . ~.; cry x; N ._,~~, _ ~~ :~-- ~ ~ ~ ., ~ ` c'c`t ' C_ °.. =TM =~ ~ '"{ Andrew C. Spears Attorney ID# HANDLER, HENNING 8~ ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff(s) Fax : (717) 233-3029 E-mail: Spears@hhrlaw.com Steve Shelton IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff(s) v. NO. 4421-2007 CIVIL ACTION -LAW Edward Kemp Defendant(s) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SETTLE, DISCONTINUE AND END TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA: Please mark the above-captioned matter settled and discontinued. Respectfully Submitted, HANDLER HENNING~ ROSENBERG, LLP Dated: 8/13/09 Andrew C. pears -- Attorney for Plaintiff(s) Andrew C. Spears Attorney ID# HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff(s) Fax : (717) 233-3029 E-mail: Spears@hhrlaw.com Steve Shelton IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff(s) v. ^J0.4421-2007 CIVIL ACTION -LAW Edward Kemp Defendant(s) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On 8/13/09, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of a Praecipe to Settle, Discontinue and End was served upon the following by depositing same in the United States Mail, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C. 301 Market Street P.Q. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP Dated: 8/13/09 _~.~ ~,_ Andrew C. Spears I.D. #87737 FILED-~.}z~Fl ~ OF 7}-~ PFD""un~`J7 i ARY 2009 AUG 17 P~ 3~ 36 _,, ~~ ~,,v ~~`i~~l`vJ ~ i~r'iti"~",'~