Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-7501Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Deceased 4045 Carlisle Road Gardners, Pa 17324 Plaintiff(s)& Address(es) NO. d7-150( Civil -1;rM CIVIL ACTION - LAW BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife 592 Craig Road Carlisle, Pa 17013 Defendant(s) Address(es) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly issue a Writ of Summons against the above named Defendants. METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By- , , '/p Francis J. Laffert ; Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 84009 P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs Dated: 14111117 389021-1 00 a ? O 93 'C! oo a 11114 ", M Cl") CA v DO Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Deceased 4045 Carlisle Road Gardners, Pa 17324 Plaintiff(s)& Address(es) BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife 592 Craig Road Carlisle, Pa 17013 Defendant(s) Address(es) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED WRIT OF SUMMONS TO: BARBARA STODTER 592 Craig Road Carlisle, PA 17013 DEAN STODTER 592 Craig Road Carlsile, PA 17013 You are hereby notified that the above named Plaintiffs, Eugenia Dillard and George Dillard have commenced an action against you. Dated: /,* A/07 NO. - O ivil lern? CIVIL ACTION - LAW By Prothonotary of Cumberland County F Pro onotary 389021-1 c SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07501 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL WILLIAM CLINE Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon STODTER BARBARA the DEFENDANT at 1546:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of January , 2008 at ROOT HALL US ARMY WAR COLLEGE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to DEAN STODTER 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 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 00 32.-80 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of , So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 01/04/2008 METZGER WICKERSHAM 01 By. Deputy Sheriff A. D. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07501 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL WILLIAM CLINE Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon STODTER DEAN the DEFENDANT at ROOT HALL at 1546:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of January , 2008 US ARMY WAR COLLEGE CARLISLE, PA 17013 DEAN STODTER by handing to 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: So Answers: Docketing 6.00 Service ,00 Affidavit . 00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 /lld?oB 16.00 01/04/2008 METZGER WICKERSHAM Sworn and Subscibed to By: before me this day Deputy Sheriff of A. D. 4. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Todd B. Narvol, Esquire, Marc A. Moyer, Esquire, and Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP, 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor, Post Office Box 999, Harrisburg, PA 17108, on behalf of Defendant Dean Stodter. We are authorized to accept service of all documents in this matter. y submitted, Todd B. Narv , Esquire Attorney I. . No. 42136 Marc A. yer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP 305 North Front Street, 6t' Floor Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 717-441-3960 mmoyer@tthlaw.com Dated: January 14, 2007 Counsel for Defendant Dean Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 16th day of January 2008, I, Kristine Hendrix, a paralegal, with the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Kris me Hendrix ?? <;,, c'" ?:, i : _ -...? }r.?,, ? ? j ? W _. ti. ..? -?y+ _.t` S'i3 T. i....i _ .tL ^y ' ? ^ .?4 ??'1 ?i 1 L Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Todd B. Narvol, Esquire, Marc A. Moyer, Esquire, and Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP, 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor, Post Office Box 999, Harrisburg, PA 17108, on behalf of Defendant Barbara Stodter. We are not authorized to accept service of original process in this matter. submitted, Todd B. N ol, Esquire Attorney . No. 42136 Marc oyer, Esquire Atto y I.D. No. 76434 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 717-441-3960 mmoyer@tthlaw.com Dated: January 16, 2007 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 16th day of January 2008, I, Kristine Hendrix, a paralegal, with the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Kri ine Hendrix t? ?ws - z? ` ? ---? ri`? f ?? y? rn - r _ -; ?, _ . _ . ,?? _1 YI __ ...F.?. ?.., `-i i i . 'op Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule directing Plaintiff to file a Complaint against Defendants within twenty (20) days or suffer judgment of non pros. Dated: February 12, 2008 Todd B. Marc A. o RULE TO: Gregory Rohrer, Plaintiff c/o Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300, 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 , Esquire , Esquire You are hereby directed to file a Complaint against Defendants within twenty (20) days of service of this Rule or suffer judgment of non pros. /,/ 0"'(" A othonotary Dated: February A?, 2008 By: 0 , CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 12d' day of February 2008, I, Kristine Hendrix, a paralegal, with the law firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 568635.1 Kristine Hendrix C.IP rla J : • .? ' ( co Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND TO: Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within Twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiffs. 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, 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 A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-1 AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las quejas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, debe tomar acci6n dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir de la fecha en que recibi6 la demanda y el aviso. Usted debe presentar comparecencia esrita en persona o po abogado y presentar en la Corte por escrito sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en su contra. Se le avisa que si no se defiende, el caso puede proceder sin usted y la Corte puede decidir en su contra sin mas aviso o notificaci6n por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o po cualquier otra queja o compensaci6n reclamados por el Demandante. USTED PUEDE PERDER DINERO, O PROPIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA LISTED. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE, SI USTED NO TIENE O NO CONOCE UN ABODAGO, VAYA O LLAME A LA OFICINA EN LA DIRECCION ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA LEGAL. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, by and through their attorney, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., and respectfully represents the following: 1. Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer is an adult individual residing at 4045 Carlisle Road, Gardners, CumberlandCounty, Pennsylvania, and is also the surviving son of the decedent. 2. Plaintiff was duly qualified as Administrator for the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, on March 1, 2007, by way of Letters of Administration, by the Register of Wills of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer is the only person entitled to recover damages in this action. 4. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are adult individuals residing at 592 Craig Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 392792-1 5. The facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth occurred on December 22, 2005, at or about 9:10 p.m. at or near North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer was the front seat passenger of a 1995 Honda bearing Pennsylvania License Plate No. DFJ8075 which was operated by Eugenia Dillard and owned by George Dillard. 7. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was the operator of a 1998 Dodge bearing Oklahoma License Plate No. 328EHB which was owned by Barbara Stodter. 8. On the aforesaid time and place, the vehicle Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, was a passenger in was traveling on North Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The driver of the vehicle had slowed her vehicle in caution of the snow and ice covered roadway. 9. On the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was traveling directly behind Plaintiff. 10. At the aforesaid time and date, Defendant failed to slow her vehicle and violently struck the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. 11. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, sustained various personal injures including, but not limited to, aggravation of DJD of the lumbosacral spine, lumbar spondylosis, bulging annuli at L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1, peripheral neuropathy, lumbar myelogram, spinal stenosis, lumbar facet arthropathy, lumbosacral sprain, spondylosis, paraesthesias of the buttocks and legs, lower back strain/pain, right leg pain, pain in left and right foot heels, and other injuries. 392792-1 12. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had incurred various medical expenses for physicians, medical supplies, medication, therapy, and other medical treatment. 13. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer had undergone emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had undergone much pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of life's pleasures. 15. The collision occurred solely as a result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 16. Defendant owed a duty to operate her vehicle in such a way as to not cause harm or damage to other persons and to the Plaintiff in particular. 17. The negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant consisted of the following: (a) Failing to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) Operating her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (d) Operating her vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) Following too closely; 392792-1 (f) In failing to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or take other evasive action to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) Driving at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and not having regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing and at a speed greater than will permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) In failing to give warning to Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard of her impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (1) In failing to observe vehicles on the roadway; (j} In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions; (k) In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow Defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) In failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) In failing to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as not to expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harm; (n) Otherwise operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed; and (o) Rear ending the vehicle in front of her. 18. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are liable to Plaintiff for all of those damages sustained by Plaintiff, as set forth in the preceding paragraphs. 392792-1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, demands judgment against Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, in an amount exceeding that requiring submission to compulsory arbitration, plus costs. Date: METZGER, WICKE , KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By Fr is J. Laffert , Esq ire I.D. No. 84009 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs 392792-1 VERIFICATION I, Gregory Rohrer, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are based upon information which we have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on our behalf in this matter. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and not of my own. I have read the Complaint, and to the extent that it is based upon information which we have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the content of the Complaint is that of counsel, we have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Complaint are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Dated: , AGregjoRoe 392792-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and exact copy of the foregoing document with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this a 7g` day of )Ce b r, , 2008, on the following: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Melanie L. Kirk 392792-1 r T, CO ? 0 1 wz e C:? "`. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendants V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS BARBARA STODTER AND DEAN STODTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, come Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, by and through their counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and file Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs Complaint and, in support thereof, aver as follows: 1. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. This is a negligence action seeking monetary damages for personal injuries purportedly experienced by Plaintiff's Decedent, Eugene Rohrer arising out of an automobile accident which occurred on December 22, 2005 on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, PA. 2. Plaintiff initiated this action through the filing of a Writ of Summons against Barbara and Dean Stodter, individually and as husband and wife, on or about December 17, 2007. Exhibit "A". I M I,, Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter by commissioning the services of the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office. 4. Rather than attempting to serve Defendants at the address identified on the Writ of Summons, or at the address identified in Plaintiff s Complaint, the Cumberland County Sheriff's Return of Service indicates that on January 3, 2008, Deputy Sheriff William Cline attempted to serve Dean and Barbara Stodter by handing copies of the Writs of Summons to Dean Stodter who was identified on the Return of Service as the "adult in charge" of Root Hall located on the grounds of the United States Army War College. See Sheriff's Returns, Exhibit «B» 5. On February 12, 2008, Defendants served Plaintiff with a Rule to File a Complaint. 6. Plaintiff, thereafter, filed their Complaint on February 28, 2008. Exhibit "C". 7. Plaintiff's Complaint asserts a cause of action against Defendants Barbara and Dean Stodter based solely upon the alleged negligence of Barbara Stodter as the operator of one of the automobile involved in the December 22, 2005 automobile accident. 8. For the reasons set forth herein, Defendants are filing Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff s Complaint based upon improper service/lack of personal jurisdiction upon/over Defendant Barbara Stodter. Defendant Dean Stodter also files a Preliminary Objection to Plaintiff s Complaint on the ground that Plaintiff s Complaint fails to assert any facts capable of supporting a claim for negligence. 2 ,' ! II. LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION/IMPROPER SERVICE OF ORIGINAL PROCESS UPON DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER. 9. Preliminary objections may be asserted based upon lack of personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Pa. R. Civ. P. 1028(a)(1). 10. A defendant must be provided with proper notice whenever an action has been initiated against him/her. McCreesh v. City of Philadelphia, 585 Pa. 211, 888 A.2d 664 (2005). To that end, the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure govern the service of original process so as to ensure that proper notice is provided to a defendant. See Pa. R. Civ. P. 400-430. Specifically, Rules 400 and 400.1 designate who may make service. Rule 402 provides for the manner of service. 11. Because service of process is the mechanism by which a court obtains jurisdiction over a defendant, the rules governing service of process are to be strictly enforced. Cintas Corp. v. Lee's Cleaning Serv., Inc., 549 Pa. 84, 90, 700 A.2d 915, 918 (1997) (citation omitted); Beglin v. Stratton, 816 A.2d 370 (Pa. Cmmwlth. Ct. 2003); Collins v. Park, 423 Pa. Super. 601, 604, 621 A.2d 996, 997 (1993). 12. Absent valid service of original process, a court lacks personal jurisdiction over a defendant and is powerless to enter judgment against him/her. Id.; Frycklund v. Way, 410 Pa. Super. 347, 351, 599 A.2d 1332, 1334 (1991). 13. Moreover, because service of original process is a fundamental step in completing the progression of events by which an action is commenced, a plaintiff must make a good faith effort to notify a defendant of an action by promptly effecting service. Witherspoon v. City of Philadelphia, 564 Pa. 388, 397, 768 A.2d 1079, 1084 (2001); Leidich v. Franklin, 394 Pa. Super. 3 t' 302,575 A.2d 914 (1990); Farnacci v. Beaver County Indus. Dev. Auth., 510 Pa. 589, 511 A.2d 757 (1986). 14. A plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that efforts to effect original service of process were reasonable. Bigansky v. Tomas Jefferson Univ. Hosp., 442 Pa. Super. 69, 658 A.2d 423 (1995); Cahill v. Schults, 434 Pa. Super. 332, 643 A.2d 121 (1994). 15. To comport with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania law, service of original process may only be accomplished, in relevant part, by handing a copy of a writ of summons or complaint to the defendant or to the defendant's agent at her usual place of business or to the person for the time being in charge thereoe. Pa. R. Civ. P. 402(1) and (2)(iii). 16. In this case, Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a Writ of Summons on December 14, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Docket No. 07-7501. 17. Thereafter, Plaintiff attempted to serve the Writ on Barbara Stodter by handing a copy of the Writ to Defendant Dean Stodter at Root Hall located on the grounds of the United States War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 18. While Dean Stodter was identified on the Sheriff's Return of Service as the "adult in charge" of Root Hall, there is no evidence of record to suggest that Root Hall was Barbara Stodter's office or usual place of business. On the contrary, Barbara Stodter has never worked at Root Hall and Root Hall has never been her usual place of business. See Barbara Stodter Affidavit and Dean Stodter Affidavit, Exhibit "D". 19. Moreover, Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter were not husband and wife on the date service was attempted but, instead, had been divorced for more than a year prior to the attempted service. See, Exhibit "E". ' A defendant must have proprietary or managerial interest in the business in order for it to qualify under the rule as a "usual place of business". Pincus v. Mut. Assur. Co., 457 Pa. 94, 99, 321 A.2d 906, 910 (1974). 4 20. Similarly, Plaintiff has never perfected service of the Writ, or any subsequent pleading, upon Barbara Stodter at her usual place of business or residence, and has never put forth any effort to do so since January 3, 2008, despite having the Sheriff's Return of Service in their possession evidencing the defective location and manner of service, and despite public records evidencing the fact that Dean Stodter was not Barbara Stodters' husband at the time of attempted service. 21. In this case, Plaintiff has clearly failed to serve Defendant Barbara Stodter with original process in accordance with Pa. R. Civ. P. 402. For that reason, this Court currently lacks jurisdiction over Defendant Barbara Stodter. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully requests that her Preliminary Objection be sustained, that this Honorable Court hold that service of original process upon Barbara Stodter was defective, and that the Court require Plaintiff to serve Defendant Barbara Stodter with original process in accordance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania law. III. DEMURRER - FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 22. Despite naming Dean Stodter as a Defendant in this matter, Plaintiff s Complaint fails to aver any facts capable of stating a prima facie claim for negligence against him. 23. On the contrary, Plaintiff's Complaint, on its face, merely alleges that Defendant Barbara Stodter was negligent in the operation of her motor vehicle on December 22, 2005. 24. Because Plaintiff's Complaint is completely devoid of any allegations of negligence against Defendant Dean Stodter, Plaintiff's Complaint against Dean Stodter should be dismissed with prejudice. 5 t' WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Defendant Dean Stodter respectfully requests that his Preliminary Objection be sustained, and that Plaintiff's Complaint against him be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: Todd $. N ol, Esquire Attorney .D. No. 42136 Marc Moyer, Esquire Atto ey I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 717-441-3960 mmoyer@tthlaw.com Dated: 3/?lpg Counsel for Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 117'h day of , 2008, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, .. maAch a legal secretary, with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the Preliminary Objections of Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter to Plaintiffs' Complaint upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Jennif r L. Deitch Legal tecretary to Marc A. Moyer 574349.1 7 ?X??b?k ? Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07 - '7535 CIVIL ACTION - LAW EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, individually and as husband and wife 1940B Fry Loop Avenue Carlisle, Pa 17013 Plaintiff(s)& Address(es) BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife 592 Craig Road Carlisle, Pa 17013 Defendant(s) Address(es) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED WRIT OF SUMMONS TO: BARBARA STODTER 592 Craig Road Carlisle, PA 17013 DEAN STODTER 592 Craig Road Carlsile, PA 17013 You are hereby notified that the above named Plaintiffs, Eugenia Dillard and George Dillard have commenced an action against you. By Prothonotary of Cumberland County &T-th 'n b S 1?t$ PT6thonotary Y Dated: 1-111167 389020-1 SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07535 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND DILLARD EUGENIA ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL WILLIAM CLINE , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon ------- TI .M 71-r the DEFENDANT at 1546:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of January , 2008 at ROOT HALL US ARMY WAR COLLEGE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to 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 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 1110h? ?- 16 . 0 0 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of , So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 01/04/2008 METZGER WICKERSHAM By °p`- a Deputy Sheriff A. D. 4 .. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07535 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND DILLARD EUGENIA ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL WILLIAM CLINE , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon STODTER BARBARA the DEFENDANT at 1546:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of January 2008 at ROOT HALL US ARMY WAR COLLEGE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to DEAN STODTER, ADULT IN CHARGE 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 Service Affidavit Surcharge l/l o)D t ?), 18.00 4.80 .00 10.00 .00 32.80 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 01/04/2008 METZGER WICKERSHAM By: Deputy eriff A. D. ? o .r a-- , I r..C-1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney_for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintlff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND TO: Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within Twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiffs. 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, 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 A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-1 e, AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las quejas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, debe tomar acci6n dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir de la fecha en que recib16 la demanda y el aviso. Usted debe presentar comparecencia esrita en persona o po abogado y presentar en la Corte por escrito sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en su contra. Se le avisa que si no se defiende, el caso puede proceder sin usted y la Corte puede decidir en su contra sin mas aviso o notificac16n por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o po cualquier otra queja o compensac16n reclamados por el Demandante. USTED PUEDE PERDER DINERO, O PROPIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA USTED. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE, SI USTED NO TIENE O NO CONOCE UN ABODAGO, VAYA O LLAME A LA OFICINA EN LA DIRECCION ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA LEGAL. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-1 ! 1, Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, by and through their attorney, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., and respectfully represents the following: 1. Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer is an adult individual residing at 4045 Carlisle Road, Gardners, CumberlandCounty, Pennsylvania, and is also the surviving son of the decedent. 2. Plaintiff was duly qualified as Administrator for the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, on March 1, 2007, by way of Letters of Administration, by the Register of Wills of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer is the only person entitled to recover damages in this action. 4. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are adult individuals residing at 592 Craig Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 392792-1 5. The facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth occurred on December 22, 2005, at or about 9:10 p.m. at or near North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer was the front seat passenger of a 1995 Honda bearing Pennsylvania License Plate No. DFJ8075 which was operated by Eugenia Dillard and owned by George Dillard. 7. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was the operator of a 1998 Dodge bearing Oklahoma License Plate No. 328EHB which was owned by Barbara Stodter. 8. On the aforesaid time and place, the vehicle Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, was a passenger in was traveling on North Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The driver of the vehicle had slowed her vehicle in caution of the snow and ice covered roadway. 9. On the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was traveling directly behind Plaintiff. 10. At the aforesaid time and date, Defendant failed to slow her vehicle and violently struck the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. 11. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, sustained various personal injures including, but not limited to, aggravation of DJD of the lumbosacral spine, lumbar spondylosis, bulging annuli at L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1, peripheral neuropathy, lumbar myelogram, spinal stenosis, lumbar facet arthropathy, lumbosacral sprain, spondylosis, paraesthesias of the buttocks and legs, lower back strain/pain, right leg pain, pain in left and right foot heels, and other injuries. 392792-1 12. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had incurred various medical expenses for physicians, medical supplies, medication, therapy, and other medical treatment. 13. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer had undergone emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had undergone much pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of life's pleasures. 15. The collision occurred solely as a result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 16. Defendant owed a duty to operate her vehicle in such a way as to not cause harm or damage to other persons and to the Plaintiff in particular. 17. The negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant consisted of the following: (a) Failing to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) Operating her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (d) Operating her vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) Following too closely; 392792-1 w '+ (f) In failing to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or take other evasive action to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) Driving at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and not having regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing and at a speed greater than will permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) In failing to give warning to Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard of her impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (1) In failing to observe vehicles on the roadway; (j) In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions; (k) In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow Defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) In failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) In failing to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as not to expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harm; (n) Otherwise operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed; and (o) Rear ending the vehicle in front of her. 18. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are liable to Plaintiff for all of those damages sustained by Plaintiff, as set forth in the preceding paragraphs. 392792-1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, demands judgment against Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, in an amount exceeding that requiring submission to compulsory arbitration, plus costs. METZGER, WICKEBS I, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Date: By / Frai is J. Laffert V, Esgii I.D. No. 84009 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs 392792-1 VERIFICATION I, Gregory Rohrer, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are based upon information which we have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on our behalf in this matter. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and not of my own. I have read the Complaint, and to the extent that it is based upon information which we have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the content of the Complaint is that of counsel, we have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Complaint are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. t Dated: f ?- ?-- Grego Ro er 392792-t CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and exact copy of the foregoing document with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this a 7K` day of b rv , 2008, on the 47 following: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 70 Melanie L. Kirk 392792-1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants AFFIDAVIT OF BARBARA STODTER I, Barbara Stodter, being duly sworn according to law, depose and state as follows: 1. I am one of the Defendants named in the matter of Gregory J. Rohrer, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer v. Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Docket No. 07-7501 (C.P. Cumberland). 2. I currently reside at 1011 Sadler Drive, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 3. My place of employment since June, 2007 has been at 637 Liggett Road, United States Army, Carlisle Barracks-United States Army Garrison. 4. Prior to June 2007, I worked as a substitute school teacher for the Carlisle School District. 5. At no time did I maintain a place of business at Root Hall, Building 122 or with the United States Army War College at Carlisle Barracks of which Root Hall is part. 6. On December 19, 2006, I became divorced from my former husband, Dean Stodter. 1 I 7. At no time was my former husband, Dean Stodter, in charge of my place of business or authorized to accept a Writ of Summons on my behalf. 8. At no time was I served with a Writ of Summons or Complaint in person by a Sherriff, at my place of business, or at my residence. I hereby state that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and information. . - d' '/' ? ?'? Arr &SStt oo dd itteSworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, 99?? r this day of ?-- , 2008. 7), SGT , (/ S- ?.? . Notary Public My Commission Expires: /v E F (SEAL) 573384-1 2 . 1 r . { i t r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants AFFIDAVIT OF DEAN STODTER I, Dean Stodter, being duly sworn according to law, depose and state as follows: 1. I am one of the Defendants named in the matter of Gregory J. Rohrer, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer v. Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Docket No. 07-7501 (C.P. Cumberland). 2. I currently reside at 4 Farm Lane, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17015. 3. My place of employment is Root Hall, Building 122, which is part of the United States Army War College, Carlisle Barracks. 4. 637 Liggett Road is part of the United States Army garrisoned at Carlisle Barracks and is not part of the United States Army War College. 5. At no time did my former wife, Barbara Stodter, maintain a place of business at Root Hall, Building 122 or with the United States Army War College at Carlisle Barracks of which Root Hall is part. 6. On December 19, 2006, I became divorced from my former wife, Barbara Stodter. 7. At no time was I in charge of my former wife's place of business. 8. At no time was I authorized by my former wife to accept service of a Writ of Summons. 9. At no time did I inform the Cumberland County Sherriff that I was married to Barbara Stodter as of January 3, 2008, or that I was authorized to accept service of the Writ of Summons on my former wife's behalf. I hereby state that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and information. 4L, r COL Dean St dter United States Army Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public, this 4 day of o rc V- , 2008. C-Ur??S S. Yov??9 SAC ? V?S, tQr?-•?? Notary Public My Commission Expires: L N '-V-'?C F (SEAL) 573386-1 2 Ib I1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY STATE OF PENNA. Barbara M Stodter n N o, 2006 - - 4704 VERSUS Dean C. Stodter DECREE, IN DIVORCE AND NOW ?) fit"tor k0? Barbara Ni Stodter DECREED THAT Dean C Stodter AND , 160(p, IT IS ORDERED AND ARE DIVORCED FROM THE BONDS OF MATRIMONY. , PLAINTIFF, , DEFENDANT, THE COURT RETAINS JURISDICTION OF THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED OF RECORD IN THIS ACTION FOR WHICH A FINAL ORDER HAS NOT YET BEEN ENTERED; none BY THE COURT: PROTHONOTARY C t `;? a L a PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: (List the within matter for the next Argument Court.) CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer vs. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife No. 07-7501, CIVIL TERM 1. State matter to be argued (i.e., plaintiffs motion for new trial, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): Preliminary Objections of Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter to Plaintiffs' Complaint. 2. Identify all counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiffs: Marc A. Mover Esquire (Name and Address) Thomas Thomas & Hafer LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999, Harrisburg, PA 17108 (b) for defendants: Francis J. LaffeKjy, IV Esquire (Name and Address) Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erg, P.C., P.O. Box 5300, 3211 N. Front St., Harrisburg, PA 17110 3. I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. 4. Argument Court Date: April 16, 2008 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire / Date: Attorney for Defendants 3l?-!L a INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Two copies of all briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) before argument. 2. The moving party shall file and serve their brief 12 days prior to argument. 3. The responding party shall file their brief 5 days prior to argument. 4. If argument is continued new briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) after the case is relisted. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 0 day of March 2008, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, legal secretary, with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 4 Je er L. Dei ? -n " t "TI f F7 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly reinstate the Complaint for the following defendant: Barbara Stodter 1011 Sadler Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 METZGER, WIC AM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By: Fr cis J. Laffe , IV, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 84009 P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Date: - s/v Attorneys for Plaintiffs 395212-1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ; individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ! R of the ESTATE OF EUGENE A 1" ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW _ Plaintiff(s) ; - vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND TO: Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within Twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiffs. 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, 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 A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-] AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las quejas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, debe tomar acci6n dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir de la fecha en que recib16 la demanda y el aviso. Usted debe presentar comparecencia esrita en persona o po abogado y presentar en la Corte por escrito sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en su contra. Se le avisa que si no se defiende, el caso puede proceder sin usted y la Corte puede decidir en su contra sin mas aviso o notificaci6n por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o po cualquier otra queja o compensaci6n reclamados por el Demandante. USTED PUEDE PERDER DINERO, 0 PROPIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA USTED. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE, SI USTED NO TIENE 0 NO CONOCE UN ABODAGO, VAYA 0 LLAME A LA OFICINA EN LA DIRECCION ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA LEGAL. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 392792-1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) VS. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, by and through their attorney, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., and respectfully represents the following: 1. Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer is an adult individual residing at 4045 Carlisle Road, Gardners, CumberlandCounty, Pennsylvania, and is also the surviving son of the decedent. 2. Plaintiff was duly qualified as Administrator for the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, on March 1, 2007, by way of Letters of Administration, by the Register of Wills of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer is the only person entitled to recover damages in this action. 4. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are adult individuals residing at 592 Craig Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 392792-1 5. The facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth occurred on December 22, 2005, at or about 9:10 p.m. at or near North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer was the front seat passenger of a 1995 Honda bearing Pennsylvania License Plate No. DFJ8075 which was operated by Eugenia Dillard and owned by George Dillard. 7. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was the operator of a 1998 Dodge bearing Oklahoma License Plate No. 328EHB which was owned by Barbara Stodter. 8. On the aforesaid time and place, the vehicle Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, was a passenger in was traveling on North Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The driver of the vehicle had slowed her vehicle in caution of the snow and ice covered roadway. 9. On the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was traveling directly behind Plaintiff. 10. At the aforesaid time and date, Defendant failed to slow her vehicle and violently struck the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. 11. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, sustained various personal injures including, but not limited to, aggravation of DJD of the lumbosacral spine, lumbar spondylosis, bulging annuli at L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1, peripheral neuropathy, lumbar myelogram, spinal stenosis, lumbar facet arthropathy, lumbosacral sprain, spondylosis, paraesthesias of the buttocks and legs, lower back strain/pain, right leg pain, pain in left and right foot heels, and other injuries. 392792-1 12. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had incurred various medical expenses for physicians, medical supplies, medication, therapy, and other medical treatment. 13. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer had undergone emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had undergone much pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of life's pleasures. 15. The collision occurred solely as a result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 16. Defendant owed a duty to operate her vehicle in such a way as to not cause harm or damage to other persons and to the Plaintiff in particular. 17. The negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant consisted of the following: (a) Failing to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) Operating her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (d) Operating her vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) Following too closely; 392792-1 (f) In failing to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or take other evasive action to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) Driving at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and not having regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing and at a speed greater than will permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) In failing to give warning to Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard of her impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (1) In failing to observe vehicles on the roadway; (j) In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions; (k) In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow Defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) In failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) In failing to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as not to expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harm; (n) Otherwise operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed; and (o) Rear ending the vehicle in front of her. 18. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are liable to Plaintiff for all of those damages sustained by Plaintiff, as set forth in the preceding paragraphs. 392792-] WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, demands judgment against Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, in an amount exceeding that requiring submission to compulsory arbitration, plus costs. METZGER, WICKED, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Date: By Fra is J. Laffert , Esgt I.D. No. 84009 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs 392792-1 VERIFICATION 1, Gregory Rohrer, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are based upon information which we have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on our behalf in this matter. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and not of my own. 1 have read the Complaint, and to the extent that it is based upon information which we have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the content of the Complaint is that of counsel, we have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Complaint are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: ! _ ` Grego Ro er 392792-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and exact copy of the foregoing document with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this a 7` day of b rw , 2008, on the following: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Melanie L. Kirk 392792-1 r^? -Mk "3 ?+ t Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED O ER AND NOW, this day of , 2008, upon consideration of the Preliminary Objections of Defendants Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter to Plaintiffs Complaint, and in consideration of Plaintiff's reply thereto, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Plaintiff's service of original process upon Defendant Barbara Stodter was defective and that Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to properly serve Defendant Barbara Stodter with original process in accordance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. It is further hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Plaintiff's Complaint Defendant Dean Stodter is dismissed. 575530.1 . W 4Z d `Z w O SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07501 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL MARK CONKLIN , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon STODTER BARBARA the DEFENDANT at 1015:00 HOURS, on the 31st day of March , 2008 at 1011 SADLER DRIVE CARLISLE, PA 17013 BARBARA STODTER by handing to a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 4.80 Postage .58 Surcharge 10.00 00 ylb3?b8 L?r, 3 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of , So Answers: S R. Thomas Kline 04/01/2008 METZGER WICKERSHAM By: Deputy Sh riff A.D. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Gregory J. Rohrer, Individually and as Administrator of The Estate of Eugene Rohrer c/o Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED NEW MATTER WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS OF SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. Date: 4/'A/ To d B. a , Esquire Attorney . No. 42136 Marc A oyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of C17VIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT TOGETHER WITH NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and respectfully submits her Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint as follows: 1. DENIED. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment set forth in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 2. ADMITTED based upon information and belief. 3. DENIED. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment set forth in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 4. DENIED. It is DENIED that Barbara Stodter resides at 592 Craig Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter resides at 1011 Sadler Drive, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. To the extent the averments set forth in Paragraph 2 pertain to Dean Stodter, Mr. Stodter has been dismissed from this action pursuant to the April 4, 2008 Order of the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley and, therefore, no response is required. 5. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges the occurrence of a December 22, 2005automobile accident on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania at or about 9:10 p.m.. To the extent the averments are intended to impute the liability against Barbara Stodter, the averments are DENIED. 6. DENIED. After reasonable investigation Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the owner of the automobile operated by Eugenia Dillard on December 22, 2005. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. By way of further Answer, the averments regarding Decedent's status as a front seat passenger in the 1995 Honda on December 22, 2005 are ADMITTED based upon information and belief. 7. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was the owner of one of the vehicles involved in the accident referred to in Plaintiffs' Complaint. 2 8. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that on December 22, 2005, Plaintiffs' Decedent was a passenger in the automobile operated by Eugenia Dillard on Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments set forth in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs' Complaint regarding why Eugenia Dillard allegedly slowed her vehicle. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 9. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was operating her automobile behind Eugenia Dillard on North Spring Garden Street prior to the accident. 10. DENIED. It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter failed to slow her vehicle, or that she violently struck the rear of the vehicle being operated by Eugenia Dillard on December 22, 2005. 11. The averments set forth in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, Defendant Barbara Stodter lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to Plaintiffs' Decedent's medical condition as alleged in Paragraph I 1 of the Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. To the extent the averments attempt to impute liability upon Barbara Stodter for the alleged injuries, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to the injuries alleged in Paragraph 1 I of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 3 12. The averments set forth in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, Defendant Barbara Stodter lacks sufficient knowledge or information as to what medical expenses, if any, Plaintiffs' Decedent allegedly incurred so as to form a belief to the truth or falsity of the averments set forth in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. To the extent the averments attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiff Decedent incurring the medical expenses alleged in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 13. The averments set forth in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, and to the extent the averments attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiffs' Decedent experiencing emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. The averments set forth in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, and to the extent the averments attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiffs' Decedent experiencing pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, or loss of life's pleasures. 4 15. The averments set forth in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED the collision occurred solely as the result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of Defendant Barbara Stodter. 16. The averments set forth in Paragraph 16 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter breached any duty she may have owed to Plaintiffs' Decedent in the operation of her motor vehicle. 17. The averments set forth in Paragraph 17 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was negligent, careless or reckless towards Plaintiffs' Decedent. By way of further Answer: (a) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (d) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly followed Plaintiffs' Decedent's vehicle too closely; (f) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or failed to take other evasive action so as to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly drove at a speed greater than was reasonable under the conditions, or did not have regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. By way of further Answer, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly drove at a speed greater than would permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to give warning to Plaintiff of her impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (i) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to observe vehicles on the roadway; 6 0) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions; (k) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to drive at a speed and in a manner that would allow her to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as to not expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harm; (n) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle at an unsafe speed; (o) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly rear-ended the vehicle in front of her. 18. The averments set forth in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter is liable to Plaintiff for any damages alleged in Plaintiffs' Complaint. To the extent the averments set forth in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint pertain to Defendant Dean Stodter, Mr. Stodter has been dismissed from this action pursuant to the April 4, 2008 Order of the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley and, therefore, no response is required. 7 WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully request that judgment be entered in her favor and against Plaintiff, and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER 19. Defendant Barbara Stodter hereby incorporates her Answers to Paragraphs one through 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 20. Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted under Pennsylvania law. 21. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred and/or limited by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 22. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the assumption of risk. 23. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' cause of action, the existence of which is DENIED, is barred by the applicable statutes of limitations under Pennsylvania law. 24. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the Doctrines of Estoppel, Waiver and/or Laches. 25. Discovery may show that the claimed injuries and/or damages of Plaintiffs' Decedent, the existence of which are DENIED, were caused in whole or in part by acts or omissions of another or others for whom Defendant Barbara Stodter was not responsible and whose conduct Defendant Barbara Stodter had no reason to anticipate. 26. Discovery may show that Defendant Barbara Stodter is not responsible for the actions of any other parties whose conduct may have caused or contributed to the injuries complained of in Plaintiffs" Complaint. 8 27. Discovery may show that the alleged actions and omissions of Defendant Barbara Stodter were not a substantial factor, or were an insignificant factor, or were not a legal factor in causing or contributing to Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any. 28. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any, were not caused or aggravated by the acts or omissions of Defendant Barbara Stodter but, rather, were pre-existing, or caused by something other than the collision on or about December 22, 2005. 29. As discovery may show, Plaintiffs' recovery may be barred or limited by the affirmative defenses of waiver, release, immunity, settlement, accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, collateral estoppel and/or equitable estoppel. 30. Discovery may show that recovery for Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any, are barred or limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility law, 75 Pa. C.S. § 1701, et. seq., including, but not limited to, the sections relating to the limited tort provision, the provision that bars recovery of medical expenses and wage loss benefits paid or payable by insurance, and/or the provisions that reduce the recoverable amount of damages. 31. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' Decedent, if he suffered any injuries at all, did not suffer any permanent loss of a bodily function, permanent disfigurement, or permanent dismemberment as a result of the accident. 32. Defendant Barbara Stodter asserts as a defense that she was confronted with a sudden emergency. 33. Defendant Barbara Stodter asserts that this action may be barred by the Doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel, which are asserted herein. 9 WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully requests that judgment be entered in her favor and against Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer and that she be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and costs together with such other relief as this Court may deem just and equitable. Respectfully submitted, Date: ??4 11ilm Todd Na 1, Esquire Attorney I . No. 42136 Marc A. oyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter 10 VERIFICATION I, Barbara Stodter, state that I have read the foregoing ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT TOGETHER WITH NEW MATTER which has been drafted with the assistance of counsel. The factual statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief, although the language is that of counsel and, to the extent that the content of the foregoing document is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. Date: GifJU C7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1?m On this a `? day of April 2008, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, a legal secretary with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Je ifer L. Deitch 582604.1 - Ij 17 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@,tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVF_,GNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants NOTICE TO DEFEND YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You mav_ lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE 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 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 A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Belford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea defender conta la dema.nda puestas en las siguientes paginas, usted tienen que tomar accion dentro viente (20) dias despues que esta Demanda y Aviso es servido, con entrando por escrito una aparencia personalmente o por un abogado y archinvando por escrito con la Corte sus defensas o objeciones a las demandas puestas en esta contra usted. Usted es advertido que si falla de hacerlo el caso puede proceder sin usted y un jazgamiento puede ser entrado contra usted por la Corte sin mas aviso por cualquier dinero reclamado en la Demanda o por cualquier otro reclamo o alivio solicitado por Demandante. Usted puede perder dinero o propiedad o otros derechos importante para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE PAPEL A SU ABOGADO ENSEGUIDA. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, VAYA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO LA OFICINA FIJADA AQUI ABAJO. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERE CON INFORMACION DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGARLE A UN ABOGADO, ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERE INFORMACION ACERCA AGENCIAS QUE PUEDAN OFRECER SERVICIOS LEGAL A PERSONAS ELIGIBLE AQ UN HONORARIO REDUCIDO 0 GRATIS. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Belford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 -direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED JOINDER COMPLAINT OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and hereby files the within Joinder Complaint against Additional Defendants Eugenia Dillard, Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer has brought the within action Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer by filing a Complaint against Defendant Barbara Stodter. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff s Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. Through his Complaint, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages allegedly sustained by Eugene Rohrer as a result of a motor vehicle accident that occurred on about December 22, 2005 between Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard and Defendant Barbara Stodter. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges, inter alia, that Plaintiff's Decedent, Eugene Rohrer, was a front seat passenger in the automobile being operated by Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard at the time of the accident. See, Complaint, ¶ 6. 4. Defendant Barbara Stodter has filed an Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint, wherein Defendant has denied any and all allegation of negligence, carelessness or recklessness in this matter. A true and correct copy of Defendant Barbara Stodter's Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". 5. Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno, is an adult individual who, upon information and belief resides at 112 Spring Farm Circle, Carlisle, PA 17015-8504. 6. Upon information and belief, Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. is a Pennsylvania business corporation with a principal place of business located at 401 East Lowther Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 7. Upon information and belief, Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties is a Pennsylvania business corporation with a principal place of business located at 401 East Lowther Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. Upon information and belief, Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties is a Pennsylvania business corporation with a principal place of business located at 401 East Lowther Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Barbara Stodter v. Richard Rovegno 9. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 8 of her Joinder Complaint, and the averments set forth in her Answer and New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint as if more fully set forth at length herein. 10. The aforementioned alleged damages, if any, sustained by Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer, as more fully referenced in Plaintiff s Complaint, were caused by the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno, and were in no manner whatsoever due to any act, or failure to act, on the part of Defendant Barbara Stodter. 11. On or about December 22, 2005, prior to the automobile accident referred to in Plaintiff's Complaint, Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno was shoveling/removing ice and snow that had accumulated on the sidewalk, curb and to the side of North Spring Garden Street in the vicinity of the accident. 12. In an effort to dispose of the ice and snow he had shoveled, Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno deposited the ice and snow into the lanes of travel on North Spring Garden Street, thereby creating an accumulation of ice and snow in the lanes of travel on North Spring Garden Street which had not existed on December 22, 2005 prior to the accident. 13. Prior to Richard Rovegno's placement of the ice and snow onto North Spring Garden Street, and prior to the accident described in Plaintiff s Complaint, the lanes of travel in the vicinity of the accident were generally free from ice and snow. 14. Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno owed a duty of care to motorists and their passengers traveling on North Spring Garden Street on or about December 22, 2005. 15. The actions of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno in placing ice and snow onto the roadway created a foreseeable risk of harm that his actions would result in a hazardous condition being created on North Spring Garden Street from which an automobile accident could result. 16. Additional Defendant Richard Rovegnos' actions in placing ice and snow onto the roadway created a hazardous condition for individuals operating their motor vehicles on North Spring Garden Street and their passengers which had not existed prior to his actions. 17. Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in the following respects: (a) Depositing ice and/or snow onto the roadway when he knew, or should have known, that such conduct would create an unreasonable risk of harm to individuals operating motor vehicles on the roadway, and to passengers in such vehicles; (b) Depositing ice and/or snow onto the roadway when he knew, or should have known, that such conduct would create a hazard to vehicular traffic; (c) Committing acts of negligence per se by placing ice and snow onto the roadway in violation of Pennsylvania law and Carlisle Borough ordinances, including Carlisle Borough Ordinance 1184, Subsection 223-16; (d) Failure to dispose of the ice and snow he had shoveled in a manner which did not interfere with, or impede, vehicular traffic on the roadway; and (e) Failure to mark or identify the patch of ice and snow he had created on the roadway so as to alert oncoming motorists of the ice and snow accumulation. 18. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, the negligent, careless and reckless conduct of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno, was the direct, legal, and proximate cause of Plaintiffs injuries and damages as more fully described in Plaintiffs Complaint. 19. If the allegations contained in Plaintiff s Complaint are proven to be true and correct, all such allegations being expressly denied insofar as they relate to Defendant Barbara Stodter, then Additional Defendant, Richard Rovegno, is solely liable to the Plaintiff, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over the Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno in that he is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff's Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. COUNT II Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. 20. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 19 of her Joinder Complaint as if more fully set forth at length herein. 21. At all times material to Plaintiff's Complaint, Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno was acting within the course and scope of his duties as agent, servant and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. 22. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for Plaintiff's alleged injuries to the extent Plaintiff's alleged injuries are the direct, legal, and/or proximate result of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegnos' negligent, careless and/or reckless conduct. 23. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Plaintiff's damages were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno who was acting within the course and scope of his duties as an agent, servant, and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. 24. If the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Complaint are proven to be true and correct, all such allegations being expressly denied insofar as they relate to Defendant Barbara Stodter, then Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. is solely liable to the Plaintiff, is jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. in that it is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff's Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. COUNT III Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno Properties 25. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 24 of her Joinder Complaint as if more fully set forth at length herein. 26. At all times material to Plaintiff s Complaint, Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno was acting within the course and scope of his duties as agent, servant and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties. 27. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for Plaintiff's alleged injuries to the extent Plaintiff's alleged injuries are the direct, legal, and/or proximate result of Richard Rovegnos' negligent, careless and/or reckless conduct. 28. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Plaintiff's damages were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno who was acting within the course and scope of his duties as an agent, servant, and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties. 29. If the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Complaint are proven to be true and correct, all such allegations being expressly denied insofar as they relate to Defendant Barbara Stodter, then Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties is solely liable to the Plaintiff, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties in that it is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff's Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. COUNT IV Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno Real Estate Properties 30. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 29 of her Joinder Complaint as if more fully set forth at length herein. 31. At all times material to Plaintiff's Complaint, Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno was acting within the course and scope of his duties as agent, servant and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties. 32. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for Plaintiff's alleged injuries to the extent Plaintiff's alleged injuries are the direct and/or proximate result of Richard Rovegnos' negligent, careless and/or reckless conduct. 33. In the event Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Plaintiffs damages were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of Additional Defendant Rick Rovegno who was acting within the course and scope of his duties as an agent, servant, and/or employee of Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties. 34. If the allegations contained in Plaintiff s Complaint are proven to be true and correct, all such allegations being expressly denied insofar as they relate to Defendant Barbara Stodter, then Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties is solely liable to the Plaintiff, is jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties in that it is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff s Complaint, is jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. COUNT V Barbara Stodter v. Eugenia Dillard 35. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 34 of her Joinder Complaint as if more fully set forth at length herein. 36. The aforementioned alleged damages, if any, sustained by Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer, as more fully set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint, were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, and were in no manner due to any act or failure to act on the part of Defendant Barbara Stodter. 37. Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard owed Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer a duty of care as a passenger in her vehicle at the time of the accident. 38. Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard, was negligent, careless and/or reckless in the following respects: (a) Operating a motor vehicle in a careless and reckless manner; (b) Failing to maintain a proper lookout; (c) Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper watch for the presence of other motor vehicles on the roadway; (d) Failing to apply her brakes in a manner so as to allow Defendant Barbara Stodter to take evasive action; (e) Failing to keep a proper and adequate control over her vehicle; (f) Failing to drive her vehicle with due regard for the highway and traffic conditions which were existing, and of which she was, or should have been aware; (g) Failing to take reasonable evasive action when faced with the ice and snow accumulation on the roadway; (h) Driving her vehicle upon the highway in a manner endangering persons and property in disregard for the rights and safety of others and in violation of Pennsylvania's Motor Vehicle Code; (i) Negligence per se; 0) Failing to make proper and reasonable observations of vehicular traffic while operating a motor vehicle; (k) Operating her vehicle at a high and excessive rate of speed under the circumstances in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3361, 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3362, 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3363, 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3364, and her common law duty; (1) Operating her vehicle in willful disregard for the safety of persons or property in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3736 (a) and her common law duty; (m) Operating her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and property in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3714 and her common law duty; (n) Failure to alert Defendant Barbara Stodter of an impending hazardous condition; (o) Failure to alert Defendant Barbara Stodter of her sudden stop and/or deceleration upon encountering ice and snow on the roadway; and (p) Engaging in abrupt and erratic driving without providing Defendant Barbara Stodter sufficient time to react when faced with hazardous ice and snow located on the roadway. 39. As a direct result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard, Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer may have sustained damages as more fully described in Plaintiff's Complaint. 40. In the event that Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer is entitled to recover damages, the same being expressly denied, Plaintiff's damages were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard. 41. If the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Complaint are proven to be true and correct, all such allegations being expressly denied insofar as they relate to Defendant Barbara Stodter, then Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard is solely liable to the Plaintiff, is jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard in that she is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff's Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter, and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, Date: Q'I' o's 'fod;Mt ol, Esquire AttoNo. 42136 Marer, Esquire Att o I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter txh,e,+ ? Mid°,O @031DA338 S31H3S 00006 Francis J. Lafferty, W, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Eanisbur2. Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Atlornel for Plaimijfs IN] THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF CONIMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and -,vlfe, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND TO: Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter 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 Nviiting 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 judDunent 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 Plaintiffs. You may lose money or property or other ri-ghts important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS 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 WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAAVYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3 166 39''792-1 AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de las quejas expuestas en las pdginas siauientes, debe tomar action dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir de la fecha en que recibi6 la demanda y el aviso. Usted debe presentar compai-ecencia esnta en persona o po abogado y presentar en ]a Corte por escrito sus defensas o sus objeciones a ]as demandas en su contra. Se le avisa que si no se defende, Cl trio puede proceder sin usted y la Corte puede decidir en su contra sin rrias aviso o notification por cualquier dinero reclarnado en la demanda o por cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o po cualquier otra queja o compensaci6n reclaniados por el Demandante. US TIED PUEDE PERDER DINERO, O PROPIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA LISTED. LLEVE ESTA DEMA2,IDA A T Tl?T ABOGADO IMMEDLAT_gMENTE, SI USTED NO TIENE 0 NO CONOCE UN ABODAGO, VAYA 0 LLAME A LA OFICINA EN LA DIRECCION ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA, LEGAL. LAI.A7YER REFERRAL. SERVICE CUMBERLAND COUNTY B AR ASSOCLAMON 32 S. BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 717-249-3166 39'?92-1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 171 10 (717) 238-8187 Attorneyfar Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of tl.e ES'T'ATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) Vs. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, conies the Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, by and through their attorney, Metzger, '1?7ickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., and respectfully represents the following: Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer is an adult individual residing at 4045 Carlisle Road, Gardners, CumberlandCounty, Pennsylvania, and is also the surviving son of the decedent. 2. Plaintiff was duly qualified as Administrator for the Estate of Eugene Roly er, on March 1, 2007, by w2ty of Letters of Administration, by the Register of-Wills of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 3. Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer is the only person entitled to recover damages in this action. 4. Defendants, Barbara Stodtcr and Dean Stodter are adult individuals residing at 592 Cram Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. !)17c' -I 5. The facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth occurred on December 22, 2005, at or about 9;10 p.m. at or near North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff Eugene Roly er was the front seat passenger of a 1995 Honda bearing Pemisylvania License Plate No. DFJ8075 which was operated by Eugenia Dillard and owned by George Dillard. 7. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was the operator of a 1998 Dodge bearing Oklahoma License Plate No. 328EHB which was owned by Barbara Stodter. 8. On the aforesaid time and place, the vehicle Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, was a passenger in was traveling on North Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Peiuisylvaiiia. The driver of the vehicle had slowed her vehicle in caution of the snow and ice covered roadway. 9. On the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Barbara Stodter was traveling directly behind Plaintiff. 10. At the aforesaid time and date, Defendant failed to slow her vehicle and violently struck the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. 1 l . As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, sustained various personal 11])Ures including, but not limited to, aggravation of D.1D of the lumbosacral spine, lumbar spondylosis, bulging annuli at 1-3-1-4, 1-4-L5, and L5-S1, peripheral neuropathy, ]Lumbar myelogram, spinal stenosis, lumbar facet arthropathy, lunabosacral sprain, spondylosis, paraesthesias of the buttocks and legs, lower back strain/pain, right leg pain, pain in left and right foot heels, and other injuries. 3 9-' 7 93-1 12. As a result of the aforesaid accident and collision, Plaintiff, Eugene Roly-er, had incun-ed various medical expenses for physicians, medical supplies, medication, therapy, and other- medical treatment. 13. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer had undergone emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. As a result of the aforesaid accident and injuries, Plaintiff, Eugene Rohrer, had undergone much pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of life's pleasures. 15. The collision occurred solely as a result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of the Defendant and was due m no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 16. Defendant owed a duty to operate her vehicle in such a way as to not cause hams or damage to other persons and to the Plaintiff in particular. 17. The negligence, carelessness and recklessness of the Defendant consisted of the followinu: (a) Failing to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) Operating her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (d) Operating her vehicle in recldess disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) Following too closely- 392792 -1 (f) In failing to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or take other evasive action to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) Driving at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the coiidltlons and not having regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing and at a speed greater than will permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) In failling to cynie wan irjg to Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard of her I'D impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (i) In failing to observe vehicles on the roadway; (j) In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic condltlons; (k) In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow Defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) In failing to keep alert and maintain a proper- lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) In failing to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as not to expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harm; (n) Otherwise operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed; and (o) Rear ending the vehicle in front of her. is. Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter are Iiable to Plaintiff for all of those damages sustained by Plaintiff, as set forth in the preceding paragraphs. 39'_79?-1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Rohrer, demands judginent against Defendants, Barbara Stodter and Dean Stodter, in an amount exceeding that requiring submission to compulsory arbitration, plus costs. Date METZGER, WICKE I1, KNAUSS ERB, P.C. r , Frai is J. Laffert ?r V, Esgt ire I.D. No. 84009 ' 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs X937 ?2-i VERIFICATION 1; Gregory Rohrer, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are based upon information which we have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel gild/or others acting on our behalf in this matter. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and not of my GWll. 1 Have read the CGillpiaim aiid tG the ciacn' that it is based upon iiilvilliatioii VviiiCll -we i]aVc given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of our Imowledge, infoimation, and belief To the extent that the content of the Complaint is that of counsel, we have relied upon such counsel in slaking this Venification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Complaint are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to autborid es. Dated: Gregolry Rohrer 3927Q'_-I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham; Knauss &. Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and exact copy of the foregoing document NVIth reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this day of 1) , 2008, on the following: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Melanie L. Kirk rxOr" m 0d soon ©0313A33H S31H3S 00006 Thomas, Thomas S Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.G. Box 999 Harrisburo, PA 17105 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY; PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol('--I?tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer aatthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Atrorneps for Defendant DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Gregory J. Rohrer, Individually and as Administrator of The Estate of Eugene Rohrer c/o Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED NEW MATTER WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS OF SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT OF NON PROS MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. Date: Todd B. Nar T Esquire Attorney 1 D . No. 42136 Marc A Ooyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter Thomas, Thomas 6 Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Mover.. Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.U. Box 999 Harrisburg. PA 17108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, ; Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol0t),tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyerk-ntthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys.for Defendant BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT TOGETHER WITH NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and respectfully submits her Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint as follows: DENIED. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment set forth in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 2. ADMITTED based upon information and belief. I DENIED. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment set forth in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 4. DENIED. It is DENIED that Barbara Stodter resides at 592 Craig Road.. Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pemisylvania. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter resides at 1011 Sadler Drive, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. To the extent the averments set forth in Paragraph 2 pertain to Dean Stodter, Mr. Stodter has been dismissed from this action pursuant to the April 4, 2008 Order of the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley and, therefore, no response is required. 5. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges the occurrence of a December 22, 2005automobile accident on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania at or about 9:10 p.m.. To the extent the averments are intended to impute the liability against Barbara Stodter, the averments are DENIED. 6. DENIED. After reasonable investigation Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the owner of the automobile operated by Eugenia Dillard on December 22, 2005. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. By way of further Answer. the averments regarding Decedent's status as a front seat passenger in the 1995 Honda on December 22, 2005 are ADMITTED based upon information and belief. 7. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was the owner of one of the vehicles involved in the accident referred to in Plaintiffs' Complaint. 8. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that on December 22, 2005, Plaintiffs' Decedent was a passenger in the automobile operated by Eugenia Dillard on Spring Garden Street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. After reasonable investigation, Defendant Barbara Stodter is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments set forth in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs' Complaint regarding why Eugenia Dillard allegedly slowed her vehicle. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 9. DENIED as stated. It is ADMITTED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was operating her automobile behind Eugenia Dillard on North Spring Garden Street prior to the accident. 10. DENIED. It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter failed to slow her vehicle, or that she violently struck the rear of the vehicle being operated by Eugenia Dillard on December 22, 2005. 11. The averments set forth in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, Defendant Barbara Stodter lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to Plaintiffs' Decedent's medical condition as alleged in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint. The avei7nents are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. To the extent the averments attempt to impute liability upon Barbara Stodter for the alleged injuries, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to the iniuries alleged in Paragraph I 1 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 12. The averments set forth in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, Defendant Barbara Stodter lacks sufficient knowledge or information as to what medical expenses, if any, Plaintiffs' Decedent allegedly incurred so as to form a belief to the truth or falsity of the averments set forth in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. The averments are, therefore, DENIED and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. To the extent the averments attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiff Decedent incurring the medical expenses alleged in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 13. The avennents set forth in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, and to the extent the averments attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiffs' Decedent experiencing emotional and mental distress and anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation. 14. The avennents set forth in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the avennents are deemed to be factual in nature, and to the extent the avennents attempt to impute liability against Defendant Barbara Stodter. it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly caused or contributed to Plaintiffs' Decedent experiencing pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, or loss of life's pleasures. 15. The averments set forth in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED the collision occurred solely as the result of the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of Defendant Barbara Stodter. 16. The averments set forth in Paragraph 16 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter breached any duty she may have owed to Plaintiffs' Decedent in the operation of her motor vehicle. 17. The averments set forth in Paragraph 17 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter was negligent, careless or reckless towards Plaintiffs' Decedent. By way of further Answer: (a) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to slow or stop the vehicle she was operating so as to avoid a rear-end collision; (b) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; (c) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; 5 (d) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property; (e) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly followed Plaintiffs' Decedent's vehicle too closely; (f) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to apply the brakes to the vehicle she was operating or failed to take other evasive action so as to avoid a collision with the rear of the vehicle in front of her; (g) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently; carelessly or recklessly drove at a speed greater than was reasonable under the conditions, or did not have regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. By way of further Answer, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly drove at a speed greater than would permit her to have brought her vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (h) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to give warning to Plaintiff of her impending collision with the vehicle in front of her; (i) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to observe vehicles on the roadway; 6 (j) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions; (k) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to drive at a speed and in a manner that would allow her to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (1) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; (m) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly failed to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as to not expose other users to an unreasonable risk of harin; (n) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly operated her vehicle at an unsafe speed; (o) It is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter negligently, carelessly or recklessly rear-ended the vehicle in front of her. 18. The averments set forth in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter is liable to Plaintiff for any damages alleged in Plaintiffs' Complaint. To the extent the avennents set forth in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint pertain to Defendant Dean Stodter, Mr. Stodter has been dismissed from this action pursuant to the April 4, 2008 Order of the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley and, therefore, no response is required. 7 WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully request that judgment be entered in her favor and against Plaintiff, and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER 19. Defendant Barbara Stodter hereby incorporates her Answers to Paragraphs one tlv ough 18 of Plaintiffs' Complaint by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 20. Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted under Pennsylvania law. 21. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred and/or limited by the Permsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 22. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the assumption of risk. 23. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' cause of action, the existence of which is DENIED, is barred by the applicable statutes of limitations under Pennsylvania law. 24. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the Doctrines of Estoppel, Waiver and/or Laches. 25. Discovery may show that the claimed injuries and/or damages of Plaintiffs' Decedent, the existence of which are DENIED, were caused in whole or in part by acts or omissions of another or others for whom Defendant Barbara Stodter was not responsible and whose conduct Defendant Barbara Stodter had no reason to anticipate. 26. Discovery may show that Defendant Barbara Stodter is not responsible for the actions of any other parties whose conduct may have caused or contributed to the injuries complained of in Plaintiffs" Complaint. 8 27. Discovery may show that the alleged actions and omissions of Defendant Barbara Stodter were not a substantial factor, or were an insignificant factor, or were not a legal factor in causing or contributing to Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any. 28. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any, were not caused or aggravated by the acts or omissions of Defendant Barbara Stodter but, rather, were pre-existing, or caused by something other than the collision on or about December 22; 2005. 29. As discovery may show, Plaintiffs' recovery may be barred or limited by the affirmative defenses of waiver, release, immunity, settlement, accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, collateral estoppel and/or equitable estoppel. 30. Discovery may show that recovery for Plaintiffs' Decedent's alleged injuries and damages, if any, are barred or limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility law, 75 Pa. C.S. § 1701, et. seq., including, but not limited to, the sections relating to the limited tort provision, the provision that bars recovery of medical expenses and wage loss benefits paid or payable by insurance, and/or the provisions that reduce the recoverable amount of damages. 31. Discovery may show that Plaintiffs' Decedent, if he suffered any injuries at all, did not suffer any permanent loss of a bodily function, permanent disfigurement, or permanent dismemberment as a result of the accident. 32. Defendant Barbara Stodter asserts as a defense that she was confronted with a sudden emergency. 33. Defendant Barbara Stodter asserts that this action may be barred by the Doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel, which are asserted herein. 9 WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully requests that judgment be entered in her favor and against Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer and that she be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and costs together with such other relief as this Court may deem just and equitable. Date:_ Respectfully submitted, /// lx?) Todd B-. Nar 1, Esquire 11 Attorney 1. No. 42136 Marc A. oyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Boa 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter 10 VERIFICATION 1. Barbara Stodter, state that I have read the foregoing ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT TOGETHER WITH NEW MATTER which has been drafted with the assistance of counsel. The factual statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my inforination, knowledge, and belief, although the language is that of counsel and, to the extent that the content of the foregoing document is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in malting this Verification. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. Date: a ;? 100 ? Y 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE m On this o? `1 day of April 2008, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, a legal secretary with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 rvvt?"' &Je ifer L. Deitch 582604.1 VERIFICATION I; Barbara Stodter, state that I have read the foregoing JOINDER COMPLAINT OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER which has been drafted with the assistance of counsel. The factual statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief. although the language is that of counsel and., to the extent that the content of the foregoing document is that of counsel. I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements. I may be subject to criminal penalties. Date, Barbara Stodter . i CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this J- day of April 2008, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, a legal secretary with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 ennifer L. Deitch 583042.1 2 r--? ?.? ?. -? °? _ _? _ --_+ ._? ,.a ?, ?.. M CASE NO: 2007-07501 P SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL was served upon ROVEGNO RICHARD the A.DD'TL DEFEND. , at 0910:00 HOURS, on the 28th day of April 2008 at CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17015 by handing to T TelT TT T9 T1 1-1 f'%1 TL's r1XT/'% a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service .00 Postage .75 Surcharge 10.00 .00 /b,?/D? ? 28.75 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day So Answers: R. Thomas K ne 05/05/2008 THOMAS THOMAS HAFER of A. D. CASE NO: 2007-07501 P SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL R. Thomas Kline Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL ROVEGNOS OF CARLISLE INC was served upon the ADD'TL DEFEND. , at 0910:00 HOURS, on the 28th day of April 2008 at CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to RICHARD ROVEGNO, PRESIDENT a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge std -7 /o F 9.-, 6.00 .00 .00 10.00 .00 ? 16.00 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this of Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/05/2008 THOMAS THOMAS HAFER day A. D. f SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07501 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL R. Thomas Kline Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL ROVEGNO PROPERTIES was served upon the ADD'TL DEFEND. , at 0910:00 HOURS, on the 28th day of April , 2008 at CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to RICHARD ROVEGNO, OWNER a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: So Answers: Docketing 6.00 -?" Service .00 ? . ----- Surcharge 00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline 00 5/69/08. 16.00 05/05/2008 THOMAS THOMAS HAFER Sworn and Subscibed to Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of before me this day of A. D. CASE NO: 2007-07501 P SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL was served upon ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES the ADD'TL DEFEND. , at 0910:00 HOURS, on the 28th day of April 2008 at CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE ONE COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013 by handing to RICHARD ROVEGNO, PARTNER a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Additional Comments ACTUAL TITLE OF BUSINESS IS ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PARTNERSHIP Sheriff's Costs: So Answers: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit :00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas K37ine .00 S?b?Iof- ? 16.00 05/05/2008 THOMAS THOMAS HAFER Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of A. D. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-07501 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ROHRER GREGORY J ET AL VS STODTER BARBARA ET AL MICHAEL BARRICK Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL was served upon DILLARD EUGENIA the ADD'TL DEFEND. , at 1557:00 HOURS, on the at 1940-B FRY LOOP AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 EUGENIA DILLARD by handing to a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 5.00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 51671oP C,_ 21.00 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/05/2( THOMAS '. By 2nd day of May , 2008 )f A. D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 07-7501 Plaintiffs, V. PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE (Jury Trial Demanded) BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants, Filed on Behalf of Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard V. EUGENIA DILLARD, RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants. 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 #16284 ,. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, No. 07-7501 Plaintiffs, V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants, V. EUGENIA DILLARD, RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants. 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 Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, in the above case. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: ruaenia Catanzarite, Esquire or Additional Defendant illard 4 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 7th day of May, 2008, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 By: Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. ,y C. CatanzaTite, Esquire sel for Additional Defendant nia Dillard p irn 33s r^Y -BIT C= ?rn N .7 I t 4 q Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS individually and as Administrator CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff(s) vs. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 19. Conclusions of law, no reply required. 20. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's Complaint states claims and causes of action against answering Defendant upon which relief can be granted. 21. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 22. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are 397595-1 ,. 11 1 specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 23. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiffs claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 24. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiffs injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff s claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 25. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 26. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 27. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 28. Denied. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 29. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are 397595-1 specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 30. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 31. Denied. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 32. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 33. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 397595-1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer demands that Defendant's New Matter be dismissed and that judgment be entered in Plaintiffs' favor and against Defendant as requested in the Complaint filed in this action. METZGER, )WICrERSkM, &4AUSS & ERB, P.C. By VI If v v Francis . Lafferty, IV, squ: I.D. No 84009 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Date: IP/ 0 $ Attorney for Plaintiff 397595-1 VERIFICATION I, GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased, do hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer to New Matter are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 0 Gregory Ro er 397595-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's New Matter with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this day of May, 2008 on the following: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Melanie L. Kirk 397595-1 --c m t!J ..g . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, V. Plaintiffs, BARBARA STODTER, V. Defendant, EUGENIA DILLARD, RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 07-7501 ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P. 1031.1 (Jury Trial Demanded) Filed on Behalf of Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard 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 TO: ALL PARTIES You are hereby notified to file a written response to th closed Answer, New Matter and New Matter and New atte Pursuant to Pa. R.C. 031.1 within twenty (20) days rom s rvi 6 hereof r a dg ent may be entered against you. h HUDOCK, GUTHRIE #116284 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, No. 07-7501 Plaintiffs, V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant, V. EUGENIA DILLARD, RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO`S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants. ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, by and through her attorneys, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., and Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, files the following Answer, New Matter and New Matter Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1: 1. ANSWER 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. After reasonable investigation, this Defendant is without knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 6 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 7. After reasonable investigation, this Defendant is without knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 7 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 8. After reasonable investigation, this Defendant is without knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 8 and therefore, said allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Barbara Stodter v. Richard Rovegno 9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are herein incorporated by reference. 10. The allegations of Paragraph 10 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 11. The allegations of Paragraph 11 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 12. The allegations of Paragraph 12 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 13. The allegations of Paragraph 13 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 14. The allegations of Paragraph 14 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 15. The allegations of Paragraph 15 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 16. The allegations of Paragraph 16 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 17. The allegations of Paragraph 17 and its subparts of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 18. The allegations of Paragraph 18 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 19. The allegations of Paragraph 19 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. COUNT II Barbara Stodter v. Rovecino's of Carlisle, Inc. 20. Paragraphs 1 through 19 are herein incorporated by reference. 21. The allegations of Paragraph 21 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 22. The allegations of Paragraph 22 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 23. The allegations of Paragraph 23 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 24. The allegations of Paragraph 24 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. COUNT III Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno Properties 25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 are herein incorporated by reference. 26. The allegations of Paragraph 26 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 27. The allegations of Paragraph 27 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 28. The allegations of Paragraph 28 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 29. The allegations of Paragraph 29 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. COUNT IV Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno Real Estate Properties 30. Paragraphs 1 through 29 are herein incorporated by reference. 31. The allegations of Paragraph 31 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 32. The allegations of Paragraph 32 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 33. The allegations of Paragraph 33 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. 34. The allegations of Paragraph 34 of this Joinder Complaint are not directed to this Defendant. Accordingly, no response is required from this Defendant. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. COUNT V Barbara Stodter v. Eugenia Dillard 35. Paragraphs 1 through 34 are herein incorporated by reference. 36. The allegations of Paragraph 36 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 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 37. Admitted. 38. The allegations of Paragraph 38 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. 39. The allegations of Paragraph 39 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 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 40. The allegations of Paragraph 40 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 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. 41. The allegations of Paragraph 41 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 1029(d) and (e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. II. NEW MATTER 42. Paragraphs 1 through 41 are herein incorporated by reference. 43. The Plaintiff's claims are subject to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and the Additional Defendant asserts as an affirmative defense all rights, privileges and/or immunities accruing pursuant to said statute. 44. The Original Defendant's claim for sole liability is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 45. If the Plaintiff sustained the injuries and damages as alleged in the Complaint, which is not admitted, then Plaintiff's injuries and damages were caused solely by the actions and/or inactions of parties other than this Additional Defendant. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. III. NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 46. Paragraphs 1 through 45 are herein incorporated by reference. 47. To the extent Plaintiff's allegations are true, which are admitted only to the extent set forth above, Original Defendant, Barbara Stodter (hereinafter referred to as "Stodter"), and Additional Defendants, Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties (hereinafter referred to as "Rovegno"), are solely liable to the Plaintiff in this matter. 48. In the alternative, to the extent Plaintiff's allegations are true, which are admitted only to the extent set forth above, the Original Defendant, Stodter, and Additional Defendant, Rovegno, are jointly liable with Eugenia Dillard and Eugenia Dillard is entitled to contribution from Stodter and Rovegno. 49. To the extent Plaintiff's allegations are true, which are admitted only to the extent set forth above, Original Defendant, Stodter, and Additional Defendant, Rovegno, are liable over to Eugenia Dillard and Eugenia Dillard is entitled to indemnification from Stodter and Rovegno. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard, demands judgment in her favor. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Gslthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: K, Catanzarite,'Esquire for Additional Defendant ugenia Dillard VERIFICATION Defendant verifies that he/she is the Defendant in the foregoing action; that the foregoing ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 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, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 is that of counsel and not of the Defendant. Defendant has read the ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 and to the extent that the ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 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, NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 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. ./ 1 Date:} (-. Eugenia illard, Defendant #16284 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Answer, New Matter and New Matter Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 was served upon the following counsel of record on the 14th day of May, 2008, by U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 N. Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. By: i Z 61-1? ,ffiffrd'y C. Catanzarite, Esquire Pounsel for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Additional Defendants: Fax: 761-3015 Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. E-Mail: jjs@jdsw.com Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants V. NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION - LAW EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: PLEASE enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno; Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties in the above-captioned matter. JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER I By: J erson J. Shipman, Esquire ' Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Date: May 15, 2008 Attorneys for Additional Defendants 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 May 15, 2008: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Attorneys for Defendant Eugenia Dillard 1940B Fry Loop Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER LB erson J. Ship an, Esquire .D. #: 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants 332756 " r,? ? ? '- _:? ?_ ?.7 --,. ?-? " i"rar" -. ?., ;?:.? -?-• __... ? '; i'V .S` :> Et% Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO NEW MATTER AND PA. R. CIV. P. 1031.1 NEW MATTER OF EUGENIA DILLARD AND NOW9 comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, to file the following Answer to New Matter and Pa. R. Civ. P. 1031.1 New Matter of Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard and, in support thereof, avers as follows: 42. Paragraphs 1 through 41 of Barbara Stodter's Joinder Complaint are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth at length herein. 43. The averments set forth in Paragraph 43 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, the averments are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1029(d) and 44. The averments set forth in Paragraph 44 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter's claim for sole liability against Additional Defendant is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 45. The averments set forth in Paragraph 45 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any, were caused solely by the actions and/or inactions of parties other than Additional Defendant. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard in that she is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiffs Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. 2 III. NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO PA. R. CIV. P. 1031.1 46. Defendant Barbara Stodter incorporates the averments set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 41 of her Joinder Complaint and Paragraphs 42 through 45 of her Answer to Additional Defendant's New Matter as if fully set forth at length herein. 47. The averments set forth in Paragraph 47 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter is solely liable to Plaintiff in this matter. 48. The averments set forth in Paragraph 48 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter is jointly liable with Eugenia Dillard or that Eugenia Dillard is entitled to contribution from Barbara Stodter in this matter 49. The averments set forth in Paragraph 49 of Additional Defendant's New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Barbara Stodter is liable over to Eugenia Dillard or that Eugenia Dillard is entitled to indemnification from Barbara Stodter. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard in that she is solely liable to Plaintiff on Plaintiff s Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter and/or is liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. 3 Date: odd B. ol, Esquire .ttorne I.D. No. 42136 Marc /. Moyer, Esquire Atto ey I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Counsel for Defendant Barbara Stodter 4 VERIFICATION I, Barbara Stodter, state that I have read the foregoing ANSWER OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER TO NEW MATTER AND PA.R.CIV.P.1031.1 NEW MATTER which has been drafted with the assistance of counsel. The factual statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief, although the language is that of counsel and, to the extent that the content of the foregoing document is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. Dates.. 1J?, f!. Barbara Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 30th day of May 2008, I, Nora A. Starnes, a legal secretary with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Nora A. Starnes 593953.1 ,?' -.t 0.yw ?y ?-} -, 4 C'?J - ? _- ... r.•?..4 .. ?? ? t .. ...-t ?- ;?t i ' C"':) .. . {"f7 ±, .< '^ C.f i Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. 0. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants Fax: 761-3015 E -Mail: iisO-idsw com GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants V. NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION - LAW EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Barbara Stodter and her attorneys, Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 North Front Street, P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 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. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER Jerson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Date; May 30, 2008 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 Fax: 761-3015 E-Mail: jjs@jdsw.com GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO JOINDER COMPLAINT OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER AND NOW, come the Additional Defendants, Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners, by and through their counsel, Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire and Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, and file the following Answer and New Matter to Joinder Complaint of Defendant Barbara Stodter: 1. Admitted only that the Plaintiff is Gregory Rohrer. The remaining averments of paragraph number 1 are denied as stated. 2. Admitted that Plaintiff filed a Complaint relative to a motor vehicle accident that occurred on December 22, 2005. The remaining averments of paragraph number 2 are denied as stated. 3. Admitted that Plaintiffs, Complaint alleges that Plaintiff's decedent was a front seat passenger. The remaining averments of paragraph number 3 are denied as stated. 4. Admitted only that Defendant Barbara Stodter filed an Answer with New Matter to Plaintiffs Complaint. The remaining averments of paragraph number 4 are denied as conclusions of law. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted, except as to the address. 7. Denied. 8. Denied. The correct name is Rovegno Real Estate Partners. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Barbara Stodter v. Richard Rove no 9. Mr. Rovegno incorporates herein by reference the answers to paragraphs 1 through 8 above as fully set forth herein at length. 2 10. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 10 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 10 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless and reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged caused of action. 11. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that on or about December 22, 2005, Mr. Rovegno was shoveling snow. The remaining averments of paragraph number 11 are denied as stated. 12. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted only that Mr. Rovegno deposited snow. The remaining averments of paragraph number 12 are denied as stated. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Mr. Rovegno is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph number 13 and same is therefore denied. 14. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 14 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. 3 15. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 15 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 15 are denied. 16. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 16 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. 17. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 17 and subparagraphs (a) through (e) are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 17 and each individual subparagraph (a) through (e) are specifically denied. (a) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno deposited ice and/or snow onto the roadway when he know or should have known that such conduct would create an unreasonable risk of harm to individuals operating motor vehicles on the roadway and to passengers in such vehicles; (b) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno deposited ice and/or snow onto the roadway when he knew or should have known that such conduct would create hazard to vehicular traffic; (c) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno committed acts of negligence per se by placing ice and snow onto the roadway allegedly in violation of Pennsylvania law and Carlisle Borough ordinances, including the Carlisle Borough Ordinance 1184, subsection 223-16; (d) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent in allegedly failing to dispose of ice and snow he had shoveled in a manner which did not interfere with or impede vehicular traffic on the roadway; and 4 (e) Denied. It is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent in allegedly failing to mark or identify the patch of ice and snow which he had allegedly created on the roadway so as to alert oncoming motorists of the ice and snow accumulation. 18. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 18 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 18 are specifically denied. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 19 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 19 are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that any and all claims be asserting against him be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II Barbara Stodter v. Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. 20. Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. hereby incorporates by reference the answers to paragraphs 1 through 19 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 21. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 21 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed 5 to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 21 are specifically denied. 22. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 22 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 22 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 23. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 23 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 23 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 24. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 24 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 24 are specifically denied. 6 WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and that any and all claims be asserting against Additional Defendant Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc. be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT III Barbara Stodter v. Rovenno Properties 25. Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties hereby incorporates by reference the answers to paragraphs 1 through 24 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 26 Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 26 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 26 are specifically denied. 27 Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 27 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 27 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 28. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 28 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 28 are specifically 7 denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 29. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 29 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 29 are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and that any and all claims be asserting against Additional Defendant Rovegno Properties be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT IV Barbara Stodter v. Roveano Real Estate Partners 30. Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Partners hereby incorporates by reference the answers to paragraphs 1 through 29 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 31 Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 31 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 31 are specifically denied. 32 Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 32 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed 8 to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 32 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 33. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 33 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 33 are specifically denied. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Mr. Rovegno was negligent, careless, and/or reckless in any manner with respect to the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter. 34. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 34 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 34 are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Partners respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and that any and all claims be asserting against Additional Defendant Rovegno Real Estate Properties be dismissed with prejudice. 9 COUNT V Barbara Stodter v. Eugenia Dillard 35. Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners incorporate herein by reference their answers to paragraphs 1 through 34 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 36.-41. The averments contained in paragraphs 36 through 41 are directed to another party and accordingly no response is required by the Rovegno Additional Defendants. If a response is deemed to be required by the Rovegno Additional Defendants, then any and all averments asserted against them are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor and that any and all claims be asserting against Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER By way of additional answer and reply, the Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners interpose the following New Matter defenses: 10 42. That Defendant Barbara Stodter has failed to state a cause of action as to the Rovegno Additional Defendants. 43. That the alleged cause of action of Barbara Stodter and any other party and entity is barred by the applicable statute of limitations; consequently, there can be no sole liability by and between Gregory J. Rohrer, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate Eugene Rohrer and the Rovegno Additional Defendants. 44. That if it should be found that there was any negligence on the part of the Rovegno Additional Defendants, which is specifically denied, then in that event any such negligence was not a substantial factor or factual cause of any alleged harm and/or alleged injury to the Plaintiff or the original Defendants. 45. That the alleged causes of action may be barred in whole or in part by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and by the Doctrine of Comparative Negligence. 46. That the alleged cause of action may be barred in whole or in part by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 47. That the alleged cause of action being asserted may have been caused by third parties or entities not presently involved in this action. 48. That any causes of action being asserted may have been caused by an intervening, superseding cause. 11 49. That the Rovegno Additional Defendants have no duty of care with respect to the Plaintiffs and/or original Defendant. 50. That the Plaintiff Eugene Rohrer's alleged injuries may have been pre- existing. WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor and that any and all alleged claims being asserted against them be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, JOHNS-OK DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: Je erd'oK J. Shiprhan, Esquire A orney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Date: May 30, 2008 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants 12 VERIFICATION I, Richard Rovegno, Individually and on behalf of Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., &=P* AA Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate have read the foregoing Answer and New Matter and hereby affirm that it is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge, information and belief. This Verification and statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. I verify that all the statements made in the foregoing are true and correct and that false statements may subject me to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4804. T / ich rd Rovegno Date: 5'/2- I /d) 8 332497 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 May 30, 2008: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Eugenia Dillard 1940B Fry Loop Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER 4erson lqz? J. Shipma , Esquire I.D. #: 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants 332754 r.. ? ?_, _ ? _. r -_; t _. ??? _'. fJ _ :::.r . _,. ,•? ; _? i : 1 ?' .., "[ 16 Johnson, Duffle, Stewart S Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 169 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 Phone: (717) 761-4540 Fax: 761-3015 E-Mail: jjs@jdsw.com GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER OF ROVEGNO DEFENDANTS TO NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa.RC.P. 1031.1 OF ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT, EUGENIA DILLARD AND NOW, come the Rovegno Defendants, by and through their counsel, Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire and Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, and file the ? 1 following Answer to New Matter of Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1031.1: 46. The Rovegno Additional Defendants incorporate herein by reference their Answer and New Matter as though fully set forth herein by length. 47. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 47 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 47 are specifically denied. 48. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 48 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 48 are specifically denied. 49. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph number 49 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained in paragraph number 49 are specifically denied. 2 WHEREFORE, the Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Partners respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor and that any and all alleged claims being asserted against them be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: 4r4son AShip an, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Date: June 5, 2008 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants 3 VERIFICATION PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P. NO. 1024(c) Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, states that he is the attorney for the parties filing the foregoing Answer of Rovegno Additional Defendants to New MatterPursuant to Pa. R. C. P. 1031.1 of Additional Defendant, Eugenia Dillard; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verification and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. a AL? Je rson J. Shipma , Esquire Att rney for Rovegno Additional Defendants Date: 6 I 51D e 334956 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing ANSWER OF ROVEGNO DEFENDANTS TO NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa.RC.P. 1031.1 OF ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT, EUGENIA DILLARD 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 June 5, 2008: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Jeffery C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attoreeys for Eugenia Dillard 334952 (Bv efferson J. Ship an, Esquire I.D. #: 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants r^ 57- c n Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. RORHER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiff V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, individually and as husband and wife, Defendants V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO ROVEGNO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 42. Conclusions of law, no reply required. 43. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused, in part, by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 44. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of 399828-1 further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action were caused by the negligence of Answering Defendant. Therefore, Plaintiff's claims are not barred, modified or limited in any manner. 45. Conclusion of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. Furthermore, the averments are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Defendants have failed to set forth how Plaintiff's action or claims are limited by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 46. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's Complaint speaks for itself and is incorporated herein by reference. Furthermore, Defendant has failed to specifically identify the sections of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law she is referring to and therefore Plaintiff cannot properly respond. Moreover, Plaintiff's claims are not precluded, barred or limited in any manner pursuant to Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 47. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff cannot more specifically respond to this New Matter because Defendants have failed to identify the individuals or entities they are referring to. 48. Conclusion of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Defendants' duties of care were set forth in the Complaint filed in this action as was the manner in which Defendants breached these duties. By way of further reply, Defendants have failed to specify what persons and/or entities other than Defendants allegedly constituted an intervening and/or superceding 399828-1 cause thereby obviating liability on the part of answering Defendants, therefore, Plaintiff cannot fully reply. 49. Denied. By way of further reply, Defendants' acts and omissions were negligent and were substantial factors in injuring Plaintiff and causing damages to the Plaintiff. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference its Complaint filed in this action. 50. Denied. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's Complaint speaks for itself and is incorporated herein by reference. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer demands that Defendants' New Matter be dismissed and that judgment be entered in Plaintiffs' favor and against Defendants as requested in the Complaint filed in this action. METZGER, By Date: Franci J. Lafferty Esquire I.D. 0.84009 ((?? 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs & ERB, P.C. 399828-1 VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the attorney for the Plaintiffs, and that the facts in the foregoing Answer to New Matter are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief, and that said matters relating to the Plaintiffs, are as known to the undersigned as to the clients, Plaintiffs said knowledge being based upon information contained in the attorney's file in this matter, and further states that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 399828-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply to Rovegno Defendants New Matter with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, thisi^`day of June, 2008 on the following: Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. A 9i elanie L. irk 399828-1 N d q f"t' P -Ti } .. T i j W t. As Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaint ff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. RORHER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiff V. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO, EUGENIA DILLARD, DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER II. NEW MATTER 42. Conclusions of law, no reply required. 43. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiffs Complaint speaks for itself and is incorporated herein by reference. Furthermore, Defendant has failed to specifically identify the sections of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law she is referring to and therefore Plaintiff cannot properly respond. Moreover, Plaintiff s claims are not precluded, barred or limited in any manner pursuant to 399980-1 Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 44. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff cannot more specifically respond to this New Matter because Defendants have failed to identify the individuals or entities they are referring to. 45. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff cannot more specifically respond to this New Matter because Defendants have failed to identify the individuals or entities they are referring to. III. NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO Pa. R.C.P. 1031.1 46. Conclusions of law, no reply required. 47. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 48. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 49. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied and denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). 399980-] WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Gregory Rohrer demands that Additional Defendants' New Matter be dismissed and that judgment be entered in Plaintiffs' favor and against Defendants as requested in the Complaint filed in this action. METZGER, By Date: /// / i ancis J. Lafferty, IV,` Esquire D. No. 84009 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiffs & ERB, P.C. 399980-1 VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the attorney for the Plaintiffs, and that the facts in the foregoing Answer to New Matter are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief, and that said matters relating to the Plaintiffs, are as known to the undersigned as to the clients, Plaintiffs said knowledge being based upon information contained in the attorney's file in this matter, and further states that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. Francis J. Laffy, W, Esquire Dated: 399980-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply to, Eugenia Dillard, Additional Defendants New Matter with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this I d day of June, 2008 on the following: Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, DufFie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Dillard METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. XXZ5?--' elanie L. Kirk 399980-1 n ' co FZ911 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER OF BARBARA STODTER TO NEW MATTER OF ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS RICHARD ROVEGNO, ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC, ROVEGNO PROPERTIES, AND ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and hereby files the within Answer to the New Matter of Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties, and in support thereof avers as follows: 42. The averments set forth in Paragraph 42 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that Defendant Barbara Stodter has failed to state a cause of action against the Rovegno Additional Defendants. 43. The averments set forth in Paragraph 43 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the causes of action alleged by Barbara Stodter against the Rovegno Additional Defendants are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. By way of further Answer, it is DENIED that there can be no sole liability by and between Gregory J. Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer and the Rovegno Additional Defendants. 44. The averments set forth in Paragraph 44 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the negligence of the Rovegno Additional Defendants was not a substantial factor or factual cause of any harm alleged and/or alleged injury to the Plaintiff or the original Defendants. 45. The averments set forth in Paragraph 45 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the alleged causes of action against the Rovegno Additional Defendants are barred in whole or in part by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and by the Doctrine of Comparative Negligence. 46. The averments set forth in Paragraph 46 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the causes of action asserted against the Rovegno Additional Defendants are barred in whole or in part by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility law. 47. The averments set forth in Paragraph 47 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the causes of action being asserted against the Rovegno Additional Defendants were caused by Third Parties or entities not presently involved in this action. 48. The averments set forth in Paragraph 48 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the causes of action being asserted against the Rovegno Additional Defendants were caused by an intervening or superseding cause. 49. The averments set forth in Paragraph 49 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, it is DENIED that the Rovegno Additional Defendants had no duty of care with respect to the Plaintiffs and/or original Defendant. 50. The averments set forth in Paragraph 42 of the Rovegno Additional Defendants' New Matter are conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent the averments are deemed to be factual in nature, the averments are ADMITTED. 4 WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter demands judgment against the Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties in that they are solely liable to the Plaintiff on Plaintiff's Complaint, jointly and/or severally liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter and/or are liable over to Defendant Barbara Stodter for contribution and/or indemnification on the causes of action asserted by Plaintiff, and further requests that this Honorable Court grant any other relief that it deems just and proper. Date: `I 3la y Respectfully submitted, Todd B. Narv , Esquire Attorney I. o. 42136 Marc A. oyer, Esquire Attorney No. 76434 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 717-441-3960 Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter 5 VERIFICATION I, Barbara Stodter, state that I have read the foregoing ANSWER OF BARBARA STODTER TO NEW MATTER OF ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS RICHARD ROVEGNO, ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC., ROVEGNO PROPERTIES, AND ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES which has been drafted with the assistance of counsel. The factual statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief, although the language is that of counsel and, to the extent that the content of the foregoing document is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this Verification. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I make knowingly false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. _ Date: 10 ar ara todter 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On y? day of June 2008, I Jennifer L. Deitch a legal secretary with the law firm this of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named by United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeffrey J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno 's of Carlisle, Inc. Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties nnifer L. Deitch 598545.1 C. =p , C.P 7 r _..4 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. RORHER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiff Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff V. BARBARA STODTER Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please substitute the attached Verification for the Verification of counsel on Plaintiffs' Reply to, Eugenia Dillard, Defendant's New Matter. METZGER, WIC&BR'S)%ANX/J??USS & ERB, P.C. Dated: ?i By: Francis J. Lafferty/'IV, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 84009 P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 400315-1 VERIFICATION I, GREGORY G. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased, do hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer to New Matter are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 6 ~1 '5 -0 GREGO G ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER 399980-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Praecipe to Substitute Verficiation with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this day of June, 2008 on the following: Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Dillard METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Melanie L. Kirk 400315-1 c? ?r, P- t1 Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire I.D. No. 84009 Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa 17110 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. RORHER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiff V. BARBARA STODTER Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please substitute the attached Verification for the Verification of counsel on Plaintiffs' Reply to Rovegno Defendant's New Matter. METZGER, W RSyL6) &WAUSS & ERB, P.C. By: Dated: 116) 5 d* Fr cis JXaffertVIV, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 84009 P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 400314-1 Pr 'I VERIFICATION I, GREGORY G. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, deceased, do hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer to New Matter are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 6 - /T -0 5' A-C*5??7 b " ?- GRE R G. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER 399828-1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Melanie L. Kirk, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the Praecipe to Substitute Verficiation with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, thisX -day of June, 2008 on the following: Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorneys for Defendants Stodter Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Rovegno Additional Defendants Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P Suite 2400, Gulf Tower 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Dillard METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. A": Melanie L. Kirk 400314-1 . 0411 . ? }Tt? f Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct umvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct rrm>oycr®tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants CERTIFICATE PitEREQRSITE TO MACE OF SUS ONAS PURSUANT TO RULE 40"12 As a prerequisite to service of subpoenas for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Defendant certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoenas with a copy of the subpoenas attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party on or about March 12, 2009 to serve subpoenas upon Carlisle Regional Medical Center, Mira Orthopedics, William Phelan, M.D., Orthopedic & Spine Physical Therapy, Cumberland Valley Pain Management and State Farm. 2. A true and correct file copy of the Notice of Intent, including a copy of the proposed subpoenas, is attached to this Certificate. 3. The twenty (20) day notice requirement to serve these subpoenas has been waived by counsel for Plaintiff, as evidenced by the attached correspondence. 4. The subpoenas which will be served are identical to the subpoenas attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoenas. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: March 17, 2009 By: MARC A: rN R, ESQUIRE Attorney I76434 COUNSE DEFENDANT 678257.1 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Nan ol; Esquire Attornev I.D. No. 421,36 Marc A. Mover, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg. PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct tnan,ol@ttWaw.com (717) 441-396o - direct mmoyerCtthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAVA' The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 v. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANTDED Defendants NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE SUBPOENAS TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 TO: Counsel for Plaintiff Defendant intends to serve subpoenas upon Carlisle Regional Medical Center, Mira Orthopedics, William Phelan, M.D., Orthopedic & Spine Physical Therapy, Cumberland Valley Pain Management and State Farm. You have twenty (2o) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned objections to the subpoenas. If no objections are made, the subpoenas will be served. RespectfulIN7 submitted, THOMAS,, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP March, 2009 A. AY,91'ER, ESQUIRE GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW . NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE A004.22 To: Carlisle Regional Medical Center. 246 Parker Street Carlisle PA 17oia Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: memoranda hospital records/reports physical therapy records/reports radiological reports and films (i.e.. x-rays. MRIs. CT scans etc) prescriptions telephone call messages correspondence ps cy hological and/orpssychiatric records/reports/correspondence/notes etc from his very Rrst visit to the present. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer. LLP. P.O. Box 9A9 Harrisburg PA imo8 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No. Address: Telephone No.: Attorney for. DATE: Seal of the Court 675991a Marc A. Moyer, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants BY THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary,-] GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUIN7Y, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4.oog.22 To: Mara Orthopedics. Medical Arts Building. Suite 2o6, 220 Wilson Street Carlisle, PA i7ov% NATithin twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete cope of any the entire medical chart/file regarding Eugene Rohrer (DOB 5L18 31) including, but not limited to: office notes doctor's records/reports/correspondence notes/ memoranda hospital recordsfreports,phusical therapy records/forts radiological reports and films rLe_, x-rays, MRIs. CT scans, etc.), prescriptions, telephone call messages correspondence ps ct? hological and/or psychiatric records/reports/correspondence/notes, etc., from his very first visit to the present. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer, LLP, P.O. BOX 9Ag. Harrisburg. PA 177o8 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party malting this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twent31(20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No. Address: Telephone No. Attorney for: DATE: Seal of the Court 575991.2 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Boa 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants BY THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary] GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and IA7ife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVILACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4004.22 To: 'ATilham Phelan, M.D., 2 Tyler Court, Carlisle. PA :rove Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete cope of any the entire medical chart file regarding Eugene Rohrer (DOB 51181111 including, but not limited to: office notes. doctor's records/reportsJcorrespondence/notes memoranda hospital records1renorts physical therapy records/rei2orts radiological reports and films (i.e., x-rays MR£s CT scans etc) prescriptions telephone call messages correspondence psychological and/or psychiatric records/reports/correspondence/notes etc from his very first visit to the present. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer. LLP. P.O. Box cm. Harrisburg P -k mo8 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena in ithin twenty (20) days after its service, the party seMng this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No.: Address: Telepbone No.: Attorney for: DATE: Seal of the Court 675991.3 Marc A, Moyer, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Boa 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants BY THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary] GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs 1-. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4004.22 To: Orthopedic & Spine Physical Therapy, Belvedere Medical Center, 85o Walnut Bottom Road. Suite io6, Carlisle, PA r7ion Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete copy of anu the entire medical chart&le regarding Eugene Rohrer (DOB 511$1,v2 includina. but not limited to: office notes. doctor's records/ e orts/correspondence/ otesZ psychological and/or psychiatric records/reports/correspondence/notes, etc., from his veryfirst visit to the present. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer. LLP. P.O. Box A99, Harrisburg, PA 17io8 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together Arith the certificate of compliance, to the part- making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena Adthin twenty (2o) days after its service, the part; sendng this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No.: Address: Telephone No.: Attorney for: DATE: Seal of the Court 675991.4 Marc A. Mover, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 37-7100 Defendants By THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary] GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 To: Cumberland Valle`, Pain Management, g Tyler Court, Carlisle, PA, mop Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete cope of am the entire medical chart/file regarding Eugene Rohrer (DOB 11$zjxl including, but not limited to: office notes, doctor's records/reports/correspondence/notes) memoranda, hospital records/reports.physical therapy recordsLports. radiological reports and films (i.e.. x-rays. MRIs, CT scans, etc.), prescriptions, telephone call messages. correspondence, ps cu hological and/or psychiatric recordsLports/correspondence/notes, etc.. from his very-first visit to the present. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer. LLP, P.O. Box 94Q, Harrisburg. PA 17108 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its sen ice, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Identification No.: PA Bar No. 76434 Address: P.O. Bor. 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Telephone No.: (717) 237-7100 Attorney for: Defendants BY THE COURT: DATE: BY: [Prothonotary] Seal of the Court 675991.5 GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individuallv and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually- and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANI . CIVIL ACTION - LAVA' NO. 07-'7501 JURI' TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR TIDINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4oog.22 To: State Fawn. One State Farm Plaza. Bloomington, IL 61710 Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete copy of the anti and all claims file material. including but not limited to all medical records, photographs, statements. police reports, maps, diagrams, wage loss documentation. EOBs. regarding Eugene Rohrer regarding Polft No. oS,;!2-.353 ; or Date ofLoss t gAaaI25. at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer. LLP. P.O. Box ogg, Harrisburg. PA 17i08 You maN, deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the part?? making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena'Arithin twenty (20) days after its service; the part), serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorneys Name: Identification No. Address: Telephone No. Attorney for: DATE: Seal of the Court 675991.6 Marc A, Mover, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants BY THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereb3, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Intent to Issue Subpoenas to Produce Documents and Things for Discovery Pursuant to Rule 4009.21 was served by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the day of March 2009, on all counsel of record as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box log Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys forAdditional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 24.00 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Additional Defendants March 12 , 2009 THOM.P0, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Renee K. "C Marc A. M ladt, Paralegal for , Esquire 676049.1 L 03/16/2009 13:18 FAI 7172349478 NWK&E H® PA 11004/004 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LL1' Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire March 11, 2009 Page 2 Y, Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiffs do hereby agree to w eiv a the 20 Day Notice of Intent rule allowing counsel for Defendant to issue subpoenas to Carlin Regional Medical Center, Mira Orthopedics, Mrlliam Phelan. M.D.. Orthopedic & Spine Physzca? er y, Cumberland Valley Pain Management and State Parm. DA'Z'E: Francis Esquire I, RENEE K. COONRADT, PARALEGAL of the law firm of THOMAS, THOMAS, & HAFER, LLP do certify that I served the foregoing document on the following person(s), by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania addressed as follows: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Counsel for Plaintiff Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: . RENEE K. COO T, PARALEGAL C7 N ° ? M ?. t:- Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Individually, Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Individually Defendant V. RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 07-7535 : CIVIL ACTION -LAW Additional Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER FOR DISCOVERY STATUS CONFERENCE AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, to file her Application for Discovery Status Conference and, in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. These matters arise out of a December 22, 2005 automobile accident (the "Accident") between an automobile driven by Plaintiff/Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard and a vehicle driven by Defendant Barbara Stodter, on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. It is believed the December 22, 2005 Accident occurred on an isolated patch of ice/snow created by Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno on the evening of the Accident. 3. Plaintiff Rohrer initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7501 by Writ of Summons filed on December 14, 2007. Plaintiff Rohrer, thereafter, filed his Complaint on February 28, 2008. 4. Plaintiff Dillard initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7535 by Writ of Summons filed on December 17, 2007. Plaintiff Dillard, thereafter, filed her Complaint on February 20, 2008. 5. By Order dated April 4, 2008, this Court dismissed Dean Stodter from each of the above-referenced matters. 6. On April 24, 2008, Defendant Barbara Stodter filed Joinder Complaints in each action naming Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties as Additional Defendants. 7. Defendant Barbara Stodter further named Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard as an Additional Defendant in the Rohrer v. Stodter action, Docket No. 07-7501. The pleadings in the Dillard v. Stodter matter were closed on May 12, 2008, and the pleadings in the Rohrer v. Stodter matter were closed on June 12, 2008. 2 9. Written discovery has been exchanged between the Parties, and Plaintiffs' medical records are currently under subpoena. 10. Despite numerous attempts by counsel to schedule depositions of the Investigating Police Officers and the Parties, counsel has been unable to schedule the depositions on dates which are mutually convenient to all Parties. 11. Based upon counsels' inability to schedule depositions, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully seeks a discovery status conference for the purpose of discussing the status of discovery, the scheduling of depositions, and the promulgation of a discovery scheduling order. 12. Undersigned counsel has obtained the concurrence of all counsel of record for the filing of this Application. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully requests that this Honorable Court schedule a discovery status conference for the purpose of addressing the status of discovery, the scheduling of depositions, and the promulgation of a discovery scheduling order. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: y - 1 ? -- 01 Todd B. N ,*'c I, Esquire Attorney . No. 42136 Marc A. oyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this day of April, 2009, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, legal secretary, with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER FOR DISCOVERY STATUS CONFERENCE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeffrey J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno 's of Carlisle, Inc. Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jennifer . Deitch :686871.1 4 RLED-Di 2GG9 APR 20 PM 1: 4 :; Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer. Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg. PA 17108 (717) 237-7133 - direct marvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER. Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Individually, Defendant V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7501 V CIVIL ACTION - LAW EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO' S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD. Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTF,R, Individually Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 07-7535 V. RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CIVIL ACTION -LAW CARLISLE.. INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AMENDED APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER FOR DISCOVERY STATUS CONFERENCE AND NOW, comes Defendant Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, to file her Amended Application for Discovery Status Conference and, in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. These matters arise out of a December 22, 2005 automobile accident (the "Accident") between an automobile driven by Plaintiff/Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard and a vehicle driven by Defendant Barbara Stodter, on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. It is believed the December 22, 2005 Accident occurred on an isolated patch of ice/snow created by Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno on the evening of the Accident. 3. Plaintiff Rohrer initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7501 by Writ of Summons filed on December 14, 2007. Plaintiff Rohrer, thereafter, filed his Complaint on February 28, 2008. 4. Plaintiff Dillard initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7535 by Writ of Summons filed on December 17, 2007. Plaintiff Dillard, thereafter, filed her Complaint on February 20, 2008. 5. By Order dated April 4, 2008, this Court dismissed Dean Stodter from each of the above-referenced matters. 6. On April 24, 2008, Defendant Barbara Stodter filed Joinder Complaints in each action naming Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties as Additional Defendants. 7. Defendant Barbara Stodter further named Plaintiff Eugenia Dillard as an Additional Defendant in the Rohrer v. Stodter action. Docket No. 07-7501. 8. The pleadings in the Dillard v. Stodter matter were closed on May 12, 2008, and the pleadings in the Rohrer v. Stodter matter were closed on June 12, 2008. 2 9. Written discovery has been exchanged between the Parties, and Plaintiffs' medical records are currently under subpoena. 10. Despite numerous attempts by counsel to schedule depositions of the Investigating Police Officers and the Parties, counsel has been unable to schedule the depositions on dates which are mutually convenient to all Parties. 11. Based upon counsels' inability to schedule depositions, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully seeks a discovery status conference for the purpose of discussing the status of discovery, the scheduling of depositions, and the promulgation of a discovery scheduling order. 12. Undersigned counsel has obtained the concurrence of all counsel of record for the filing of this Application. 13. No Judge has ruled upon any other issue in this case. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter respectfully requests that this Honorable Court schedule a discovery status conference for the purpose of addressing the status of discovery, the scheduling of depositions, and the promulgation of a discovery scheduling order. Respectfully submitted, Date: f h 9 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP T'odd & N ol, Esquire Attorney /VD. No. 42136 Marc I?M oyer, Esquire Atto LD. No. 76434 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this q day of May, 2009, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, legal secretary, with the law firm of ?'? Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the AMENDED APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER FOR DISCOVERY STATUS CONFERENCE upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeffrey J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne. PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno 's of Carlisle, Inc. Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties a Jennifer Deitch :686871.1 4 OF ' TARV, 2009 MAY -6 PH l *. 2 5 cuw, COUNTY P NNS1'!.l'ANA e MAY 0 ?7 20o@( IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER, Plaintiffs v. V. NO. 07-7501 BARBARA STODTER, Individually, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. NO. 07-7535 BARBARA STODTER, Individually Defendant V. RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CIVIL ACTION -LAW CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 1,oy-c-J day of 2009, upon consideration of Defendant's, Barbara Stodter, Application for Discovery Status Conference, it is hereby ORDERED that a discovery status conference will be held at 3,'6,L .m. on S , 2009, in Cf BY THE COURT, J. V r C's r, t Distribution to: VIZ Attornev for Plaintiff: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire, Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., P.O. Box 5300, 3211 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300, Phone: (717) 238- 8187, Fax: (717) 234-9478 ?Z Attorney for Defendant: Marc A. Esquire Thomas Thomas & Hafer, LLP, 305 North Front Street, P.O. Box 999, Harrisburg, PA 17108, Phone: (717) 441-3960, Fax: (717) 237-7105 ? Attornev for Additional Defendant Dillard: Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP, Gulf Tower, Suite 2400, 707 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, Phone: (412) 261-3232, Fax: (412) 261-3239 Z Attornefor Additional Defendants Rove o: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire, ? Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, 301 Market Street, P.O. Box 109, Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109, Phone: (717) 761-4540, Fax: (717) 761-3015 I:D?IFS m?.ELL I :688610.1 r GREGORY J. ROHRER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Individually and as CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Administrator of the ESTATE Of EUGENE CIVIL ACTION/- LAW ROHRER, NO. 07-7501 Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Individually, Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Addl. Defendants EUGENIA DILLARD and IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF GEORGE DILLARD, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Individually and as Husband and Wife, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiffs NO. 07-7535 V. BARBARA STODTER, Individually Defendant V. RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Addl. Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IN RE: STATUS CONFERENCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 5th day of June, 2009, this matter having been called for a conference, it is ordered and directed that counsel adhere to the following case management order: _c NO. 07-7501 & NO. 07-7535 1. All parties shall make themselves available for deposition no later than September 30th, 2009. 2. Plaintiffs' expert reports shall be produced to all parties no later than October 31st, 2009. 3. An independent medical examination of plaintiffs shall be completed no later than November 15th, 2009. 4. Defendants' expert reports shall be produced no later than December 31st, 2009. By the Court, Andrew Norfleet, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff A arc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney for Defendant ./john Lucy, Esquire Attorney for Defendant Dillard efferson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney for Defendants Rovegno :bg 12 T. I k. m?-tl.£CL Kevin A. Hess, J. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants (717) 237-7133 - direct marvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax .Attorneys for Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of subpoenas for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Defendant certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve A Subpoena, with a copy of the subpoena attached thereto, was mailed or delivered to each parry on or about September 18, 2009 to serve a subpoena upon Walnut Bottom Radiology. 2. A true and correct file copy of the Notice of Intent, including a copy of the proposed subpoena, is attached to this Certificate. 3. A Notice of Intent to Serve a Subpoena with a copy of the Subpoena attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party on or about September 29, 2009, to serve a Subpoena upon Triple A Transport. 4. A true and correct copy of the Notice of Intent, including a copy of the proposed Subpoena, is attached to this Certificate. 5. The twenty day notice requirement to serve the Subpoenas has been waived, as evidenced by the attached correspondence. 6. The Subpoenas which will be served are identical to the Subpoenas attached to the Notice of Intent. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: BY: ?owj*cv x MARC A. MOYER, QUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 76434 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvol@tthlaw.com (717) 441-3960 - direct mmoyer@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4004.21 TO: Counsel for Plaintiff Defendant intends to sen e a subpoena upon Walnut Bottom Radiology. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned objections to the subpoena. If no objections are made, the subpoena will be served. Respectfully submitted, Date: THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP MARC A. MOYER, ESQUIRE GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO.0 7-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE A009.22 To: Walnut Bottom Radiology, 8tio Walnut Bottom Rd Carlisle, PA 17oia Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete copy of the any and all radiology films for the 1212010.17 lumbar spine x-ray of regarding Eugene Rohrer (DOB 5/18/-,qz) at Thomas, Thomas & Hafer. LLP P.O Box 9go Harrisburg, PA i7io8 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together vvith the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No.: Address: Telephone No.: Attorney for: Marc A. Moyer, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants 4TH COURT: DATE: BY: Seal of the Court notary] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Intent to Issue A Subpoena to Produce Documents and Things for Discovery Pursuant to Rule 4009.21 was served by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the day of 2009, on all counsel of record as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Roveqno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jeffrey C. Catalzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 1521 g Attorney for Additional Defendants THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: Renee K. Coonradt, Paralegal for Marc A. Moyer, Esquire 676049.2 2 SUMMERS, MCDONNELL, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, 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 `ALSO ADMITTED IN WV Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 PITTSBURGH OFFICE: GULF TOWER. SUITE 2400 707 GRANT STREET PITTSBURGH. PA 15219 PHONE 412-261-3232 FAX 412-261-3239 September 22, 2009 In Re: Rohrer v. Stodter v. Dillard, et al. Docket Number 07-7501 (Cumberland County) Our File Number 16284 Dear Mr. Moyer: JASON A. HINES KEVIN D. RAUCH ERIN M. BRAUN Guy E. BLASS MARK J. GOLEN ROBERT J. FISHER, JR. KIMBERLY L. GALLUCCI- JESSICA M. JURASKO ERICK V. VIOLAGO JOHN A. Lucy SETH T. BLACK... ETHAN K. STONE MATTHEW RIDLEY CANDACE N. EDGAR DANA F BUTIA ALSO ADMITTED IN OH 'ALSO ADMITTED IN NJ Please be advised that I received your September 18, 2009 correspondence and the Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena on Walnut Bottom Radiology. I would like to advise you that I have no objection to this Subpoena and request that you forward copies of any and all records that you receive pursuant to this Subpoena. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. JCC/pk Si cereIy, ffrey C. C/ - Catanzarite HUDOCK, L.L.P. HARRISBURG OFFICE: 100 STERLING PARKWAY SUITE 306. MECHANICSBURG. PA 17050 PHONE. 717-9015916 FAX 717-920-9129 SINCE 1888 September 21, 2009 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Re: Rohrer v. Stodter et al. No. 07-7501; Cumberland County, Pa. Dear Attorney Moyer: 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 717-238-8187 Fax: 717-234-9478 Other Offices Lancaster Shippensburg 717-431-0138 717-530-7515 Wilkes-Barre York 570-825-7500 717-843-0502 Enclosed is the executed waiver of the 20 day notice period, with regard to the Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena on Walnut Bottom Radiology. Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or require further information. Sincerely, METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. lvielallI- L. Kirk Paralegal MLK/hs Enclosure(s) cc: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. (w/o encl.) Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esq. (w/o encl.) 427451-1 James F. Carl Edward E. Knauss, IV* Clark DeVere' Francis J. Lafferty, IV Andrew W. Norfleet Michael J. Boone Robert P. Grubb Of Counsel Board Certified in civil ^t - trial Lazo and advocacy by the National Board r? THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire September 18, 2009 Page 2 I, Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiffs do hereby agree to waive the 20 Day Notice of Intent rule allowing counsel for Defendant to issue a subpoena to Waln-e tom Radiology. DATE: 11eq J. Ldfferty; Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Todd B. Nan ol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 Marc A. Mover, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 76434 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of CIVIL ACTION - LAW The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs NO. 07-7501 N'. (717) 237-7133 - direct tnarvo] @tthlaw.com (717) 441-396o - direct mmover@tthlaw.com (717) 237-7105 - fax Attorneys for Defendant BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE A'SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 TO: Counsel for Plaintiff Defendant intends to serve a subpoena upon Triple A Transport. You have twenty (2o) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned objections to the subpoena. If no objections are made, the subpoena will be served. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Da ?hM iff R L A. MO SQUIRE GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER and DEAN STODTER, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-7501 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4000.22 To: Triple A Transport, A4 Dakota Drive Hanover, PA 173,11 Within twenty (2o) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Complete copy of the entire employment/personnel file regarding EUGENE ROHRER (DOB c;48/.% 1); including but not limited to: all medical records correspondence notes payroll slips, wage information application for employment grievances performance reviews job description, documents prepared for any and all accidents involving Plaintiff while working Wes, all worker's compensation documents etc at Thomas. Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box g9g Harrisburg PA 17108 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the parry making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (2o) days after its service, the parry serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: Attorney's Name: Identification No.: Address: Telephone No. Attorney for: DATE: Seal of the Court Marc A. Moyer, Esquire PA Bar No. 76434 P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 237-7100 Defendants BY THE COURT: BY: [Prothonotary] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Intent to Issue A Subpoena to Produce Documents and Things for Discovery Pursuant to Rule 4009.21 was served by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the ay 9on all counsel of record as follows: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Additional Defendants THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: Renee K. Coonradt, Paralegal for Marc A. Moyer, Esquire 676049.3 2 T rAINPAh 0 Uj9kA September 30, 2009 Marc A. Moyer, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP 305 N. Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Re: Rohrer v. Stodter et al. No. 07-7501; Cumberland County, Pa. Dear Attorney Moyer: SINCE 1888 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 717-238-8187 Fax: 717-234-9478 Other Offices Lancaster Shippensburg 717-431-0138 717-530-7515 Wilkes-Barre York 570-825-7500 717-843-0502 Enclosed is the executed waiver of the 20 day notice period, with regard to the Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena on Triple A Transport. Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or require further information. Sincerely, METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Melanie . Kirk Paralegal MLK/hs Enclosure(s) cc: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. (w/o encl.) Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esq. (w/o encl.) 428163-1 James F. Carl Edward E. Knauss, IV* Clark DeVere' Francis J. Lafferty IV Andrew W. Norfleet Michael J. Boone Robert P Grubb Of Counsel Board Certified in civil trial lazo and advocacy by the National Board -1-1 . _ , THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire September 28, 2009 Page 2 I, Francis J. Lafferty, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiffs do hereby agree to waive the 20 Day Notice of Intent rule allowing counsel for Defendant to issue a subpoena tl,?A. Transport. DATE: J. Lafferty`, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, RENEE K. COONRADT, PARALEGAL of the law firm of THOMAS, THOMAS, & HAFER, LLP do certify that I served the foregoing document on the following person(s), by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania addressed as follows: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Counsel for Plaintiff Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno 's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Date: _X MM f? K'? RE E K. COONRADT, PARALEGAL 678257.2 --..;;ay+?TRF?Y ('F THE 2009 OCT -8 PM 2: k e EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7535 : CIVIL ACTION LAW RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF : CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES;: and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED GREGORY J. ROHRER, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Individually and as Administrator of CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant NO. 07-7501 V. CIVIL ACTION -LAW EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER AND NOW, comes Moving Defendant, Barbara Stodter, by and through her counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, to hereby file this Motion to Consolidate matters docketed at No. 07-7535 and 07-7501 into Docket No. 07-7535, and in support thereof, avers as follows: This matter arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on December 22, 2005, on North Spring Garden Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff at Docket No. 07-7535, Eugenia Dillard, was operating a motor vehicle northbound on North Spring Garden Street when she encountered ice and snow which had been placed onto the road by Additional Defendant Richard Rovegno. 3. Upon encountering the ice and snow placed on the road, Eugenia Dillard slowed/stopped her vehicle, and was struck from behind by Defendant Barbara Stodter, allegedly causing certain injuries as set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint at Docket No. 07-7535. 4. Plaintiff's Decedent at Docket No. 07-7501, Eugene Rohrer, was a front-seat passenger in the vehicle being operated by Eugenia Dillard at the time of the accident, and allegedly sustained certain injuries as set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint in that matter. 5. Plaintiffs Eugenia Dillard and George Dillard initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7535 by Writ of Summons filed on December 17, 2007. Plaintiffs, thereafter, filed their Complaint on February 20, 2008. 6. Plaintiff Gregory J. Rohrer, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Eugene Rohrer, initiated suit at Docket No. 07-7501 by Writ of Summons on December 14, 2007. Plaintiff, thereafter, filed his Complaint on February 28, 2008. 7. On April 24, 2008, Defendant Barbara Stodter joined Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties at Docket No. 07-7535 and Docket No. 07-7501. Defendant Barbara Stodter similarly joined Eugenia Dillard as an Additional Defendant at Docket No. 07-7501. P 8. The allegations set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaints and in Barbara Stodter's Joinder Complaints involve common questions of law and fact and arise from the same December 22, 2005 automobile accident. 9. The claims against Defendant Barbara Stodter at Docket Nos. 07-7535 and 07- 7501 sound in negligence for negligent operation of her motor vehicle. 10. The claims against Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties, and Rovegno Real Estate Properties similarly sound in negligence based upon the Additional Defendants' alleged negligence in placing ice and snow on Spring Garden Street prior to the accident. 11. The claims against plaintiff/Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard sound in negligence for the negligent operation of her motor vehicle. 12. Pursuant to Pa.R.Civ.P. 213, actions pending in a county which involve common questions of law and fact, or which arise from the same transaction or current may be consolidated. 13. Consolidation of the separation actions should occur to avoid multiplicity of trials and to reduce the expenses to the Parties. Corbett v. Weisbend, 380 Pa. Super. 292, 316-17, 551 A.2d 1059, 1071 (1988). 14. The decision to consolidate the matters is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Vallard v. Sladeck, 381 Pa. 85, 90, 112 A.2d 156, 159 (1955); Corbett v. Weisbend, 380 Pa. Super. 316, 551 A.2d 1071. 15. By way of correspondence dated July 23, 2009, undersigned counsel has sought the concurrence of all Parties with this Motion. 16. All Parties concur with the Motion. WHEREFORE, Defendant Barbara Stodter, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant her Motion to Consolidate the cases docketed at Nos. 07-7535 and 07-7501 into Docket No. 07-7535 because the cases arise from the same occurrence and involve common questions of law and fact. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP azzlkl, c A. oyer, Esquire Attorn No. 76434 Tod . Narvol, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 42136 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 717-441-3960 mmoyer@tthlaw.com Attorneys for Defendant Barbara Stodter CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE f"' On this r 0 day of November, 2009, I, Jennifer L. Deitch, legal secretary, with the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I have, this day, served a true and correct copy of the MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE OF DEFENDANT BARBARA STODTER upon the person(s) and at the address(es) below named via United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, in Harrisburg, PA: Francis J. Lafferty, IV, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C. P.O. Box 5300 3211 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorney for Plaintiffs Jeffrey C. Catanzarite, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP Gulf Tower, Suite 2400 707 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorney for Additional Defendant Eugenia Dillard Jeffrey J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Additional Defendants Richard Rovegno, Rovegno's of Carlisle, Inc., Rovegno Properties and Rovegno Real Estate Properties Jennifer L. Deitch 717764.1 FLIT .T THE in, - IFY A NOV 16 2009( EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO' S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7501 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this IS- day of /Nevc.? , 2009, upon consideration of BARBARA STODTER, Defendant V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7535 CIVIL, ACTION LAW RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO' S OF : CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES;: and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant Barbara Stodter's Motion to Consolidate the matters docketed at No. 07-7535 and 07- 7501, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Defendant's Motion is GRANTED, and that the matters shall be consolidated into Docket No. 07-7535, and that the new consolidated caption shall be as follows: EUGENIA DILLARD and GEORGE DILLARD, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-7535 : CIVIL ACTION LAW RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF : CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES;: and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, : Additional Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED GREGORY J. ROHRER, Individually and as Administrator of The ESTATE OF EUGENE ROHRER Plaintiffs V. BARBARA STODTER, Defendant V. EUGENIA DILLARD; RICHARD ROVEGNO; ROVEGNO'S OF CARLISLE, INC.; ROVEGNO PROPERTIES; and ROVEGNO REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES, Additional Defendants BY THE COURT: 2009 NOV 18 AM 11: 15 JUNTY CUAtis ,uw i C; P?l?lt?t &A !A ?oq - (?o