Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-0768NOTICE LISTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notification. Usted debe presentar ua apariencia esrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notifcacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LISTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTATE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME O VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEQUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO O BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE PA 17013 1-800-990-9108 ' L Christina L. Bradley, Es ire FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 31 2,008 I.D. #89107 Date: ?? Attorney for Plaintiff 2. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Attorney for Plaintiff christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com DIANE RILEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, Q V. NO. Of- 7A i 6 ROSEMARY GIBB, and CIVIL ACTION - LAW KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Diane Riley, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, and files the following Complaint: 1. Plaintiff, Diane Riley, is an adult individual, who resides at 780 Funt Road, Gardners, Adams County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, is an adult individual, who resides at 85 Buttonwood Drive, Dillsburg, York County, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Katherin Richards, is an adult individual, who resides at 12 Turnberry Way, Bluffton, South Carolina. 4. The facts and occurrences hereinafter related took place on or about August 17, 2006, at approximately 7:05 a.m. on or about Route 581 East, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. At or about that time and place, Plaintiff was driving her Jeep Grand Cherokee sport utility vehicle on Route 581 East, in Lemoyne Borough, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3 6. At or about that time and place, Defendant, Katherin Richards, was driving her Toyota Camry automobile on Route 581 East, directly behind Plaintiff's automobile. 7. At or about that time and place, Defendant Rosemary Gibb, was driving her Ford Escape sport utility vehicle on Route 581 East, directly behind the vehicle driven by Defendant, Katherin Richards. 8. At or about that time and place, Plaintiff stopped her vehicle on Route 581 East due to stopped traffic in front of her on Route 581 East. 9. At or about that time and place, Defendant, Katherin Richards, failed to stop her vehicle, and the front of her vehicle violently collided with the rear of Plaintiff s vehicle. 10. Immediately after the initial impact between Defendant, Katherin Richards' and Plaintiff's vehicles, the vehicle of Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, struck the rear of the vehicle driven by Defendant, Katherin Richards, pushing Defendant Richards' vehicle into Plaintiff's vehicle a second time. 11. By reason of the aforesaid collision, Plaintiff suffered painful and severe injuries to her nerves, bones and soft tissues which include, but are not limited to, injuries to her head, neck and back. 12. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff suffered a heightened possibility that she will suffer other or additional injury in the future, and claim is made therefore. 13. The aforesaid collision and injuries suffered by Plaintiff may have aggravated or been aggravated by an existing infirmity, condition or disease, resulting 4 in a prolongation or worsening of the injuries and an enhanced risk of future harm to Plaintiff, and claim is made therefore. 14. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has been forced to incur liability for reasonable and necessary medical tests, medical examinations, medical treatment, medications, hospitalizations and similar expenses in an effort to diagnose her injuries and to restore herself to health, and claim is made therefore. 15. Plaintiff has not fully recovered from her injuries and it is reasonably likely that she will incur similar expenses in the future, and claim is made therefore. 16. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has suffered a loss of earnings and earning capacity and is entitled to recover the value of the time, earnings and employment benefits she has lost and which she might reasonably have earned in the pursuit of her ordinary calling, and claim is made therefore. 17. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has suffered a loss or impairment of future earning capacity, and claim is made therefore. 18. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has incurred incidental costs and expenses the exact amount of which cannot be ascertained at this time, and claim is made therefore. 19. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has undergone and in the future will undergo great physical and mental pain and suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily activities, loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment, and claim is made therefore. 20. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has been subjected to severe humiliation, embarrassment, shame, worry and anger. 5 21. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has been subjected to severe mental anguish, emotional distress, nervous shock, fright and horror. 22. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff will continue to endure great mental anguish, emotional distress, shame, worry and anger in the future. 23. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has been deprived her enjoyment of the pleasures of life. 24. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff continues to be plagued by persistent pain and limitation and, therefore, avers that her injuries may be of a permanent nature, causing residual problems for the remainder of her lifetime, and claim is made therefore. 25. By reason of the aforesaid collision and injuries, Plaintiff has suffered a disfigurement, and claim is made therefore. 26. Plaintiff is entitled to recover non-economic damages because Plaintiff sustained a "serious injury," as that term is defined in the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. COUNT I Diane Riley, Plaintiff v. Rosemary Gibb, Defendant 27. Paragraphs 1-26are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 28. The foregoing accident and all of the injuries and damages set forth hereinafter suffered by Plaintiff, Diane Riley, is the direct and proximate result of the 6 negligent, careless, wanton and reckless manner in which Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, operated her motor vehicle as follows: a. In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; b. In failing to apply her brakes in time to avoid a collision; C. In negligently applying her brakes; d. In failing to observe vehicles ahead of her on the highway; e. In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions and traffic controls; f. In permitting or allowing her vehicle to strike and collide with the rear of the vehicle ahead of her; g. In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; h. In failing to keep a reasonable lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the road; i. In operating her vehicle in a manner not consistent with the road and weather conditions prevailing at the time; and j. In operating her vehicle so as to create a dangerous situation for other vehicle on the roadway. 29. Defendant's conduct, as set forth above, was in violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, which is intended to protect persons lawfully on the highway such as Plaintiff, Diane Riley, from personal injury, and thus constitutes negligence per se. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Diane Riley, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND & 00/ 100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. 7 COUNT H Diane Riley, Plaintiff v. Katherin Richards, Defendant 30. Paragraphs 1-29 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 31. The foregoing accident and all of the injuries and damages set forth hereinafter suffered by Plaintiff, Diane Riley, is the direct and proximate result of the negligent, careless, wanton and reckless manner in which Defendant, Katherin Richards, operated her motor vehicle as follows: a. In operating the vehicle at an excessive rate of speed under the circumstances; b. In failing to apply her brakes in time to avoid a collision; C. In negligently applying her brakes; d. In failing to observe vehicles ahead of her on the highway; e. In failing to operate her vehicle in accordance with existing traffic conditions and traffic controls; f. In permitting or allowing her vehicle to strike and collide with the rear of the vehicle ahead of her; g. In failing to drive at a speed and in the manner that would allow defendant to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; h. In failing to keep a reasonable lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the road; i. In operating her vehicle in a manner not consistent with the road and weather conditions prevailing at the time; and j. In operating her vehicle so as to create a dangerous situation for other vehicle on the roadway. 32. Defendant's conduct, as set forth above, was in violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, which is intended to protect persons lawfully on the 8 highway such as Plaintiff, Diane Riley, from personal injury, and thus constitutes negligence per se. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Diane Riley, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant, Katherin Richards, in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND & 00/100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON By: ?,h n?-L Christina L. Bradley, Esq e I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date:.cu,uk 3?, acc?e Counsel for Plaintiffs 9 VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 1-31-06 d t ?o w W -64, N rri -n C71 CV) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 V. PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHERIN RICHARDS, (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendants. Filed on Behalf of the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb Counsel of Record for This Party: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Pa. I.D. #83058 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE and SKEEL, L.L.P. Firm #911 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 (717) 901-5916 #16112 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, V. NO. 08-768 ROSEMARY GIBB and (Jury Trial Demanded) KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE TO: THE PROTHONOTARY Kindly enter the Appearance of the undersigned, Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, of the law firm of Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., on behalf of the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, in the above case. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, By: n 6. Rauch, Esquire nsel for Defendant, emary Gibb CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 20TH day of February, 2008. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Katherin Richards 12 Turnberry Way Bluffton, SC 29910-4947 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEE".L.R. By: _evin D. RAuch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb c ' '..) _ c'r? i (?"? 1_ r.: . , i V.1 .. :i ,??? ?....1` ?.> rti Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Plaintiff, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-768 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION -LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Kindly reinstate the complaint in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully Submitted, & HAMILTON By: Christina L. Bradley, Esq ire I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: r_L. -(-ua'2r.99 j °'1008 Counsel for Plaintiff ia. D ' SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2008-00768 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND RILEY DIANE VS GIBE ROSEMARY ET AL R. Thomas Kline Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENnANT GIBB ROSEMARY but was unable to locate Her deputized the sheriff of YORK serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE County, Pennsylvania, to On March 7th 2008 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from YORK Sheriff's Costs: So answe Docketing 18.00 -?"_-- Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline Dep York County 42.19 Sheriff of Cumberland County Postage 1.99 81.18 ? f /d f d p 6,,., 03/07/2008 FREEBURN & HAMILTON Sworn and subscribe to before me this day of to wit: in his bailiwick. He therefore A. D. COUNTY OF YORK OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF SERVICE CALL (717) 771-9601 28 EAST MARKET ST., YORK, PA 17401 SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN 1 3. DIANE RILEY INSTRUCTIONS PLEASE TYPE ONLY LINES 1 TO 12 DO NOT DETACH ANY COPIES. 2. COURT NtrMRFR 08-768 civil ROSEMARY GIBB & KATHERIN RICHARDS 4. TYPE OF WRIT ORCOMPLAnVI NOTICE, CICA I CIVIL Complaint SERVE Vsemary AME OF INDIVIDUAL COMPANY CORPORATION ETC TO SERVE OR DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE LEVIED, ATTACHED, OR SOLD. W Gibb DDRESS (STREET OR RFD WITH BOX NUMBER, APT NO., CITY, BORO, TWP., STATE AND ZIP CODE AT 7. INDICATE SERVICE: ? PERSON IN CHARGE NOW Pebri l rYL-5, 20019 XH X I, SHERIFF OF C( Vrr1r COUNTY to execute to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITINn AFavnre. ? 1 ST CLASS MAIL ? POSTED ? OTHER do ty?reby deputize th-a a jeriff of Please mail return Of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. ADV FEE PAID BY CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction, or removal of any property before sherifrs sale thereof. 9. TYPE NAME AND ADDRESS of ATTORNEY/ORIGINATOR and SIGNATURE 10. TELEPHONE NUMBER 11. DATE Christina L. Bradley, Esquire 2-1-2008 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COPY TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This area must be co Lee, mpleted if notic to be mailed). 6 71-19 5 5 4415 N. FrontSt., Harrisburg, PA 17110 CUMBERLAND CO SHERIFF SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF THE SHERIFF ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE 13.1 acknowledge receipt of the writ SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED CLERK -T2 Date Received 15. Expiration/Hearing Date or complaint as indicated above. MJ MCG I L L Y C S O 6-2008 3-2-2008 16.1 hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that have personally served, ? have posted property, ? have legal evidence of service as shown in 'Remarks', ? have executed as in 'R rks', the writ or complaint described on the individual, company, cor- poration, etc, at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COPY thereof. 17. ? 1 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc, named above. (See remarks below.) 18. NAND TITLE OF INDIVIDUAL 1$ERVED /LIST ADDRESS HERE IF NOT SHOWN ABOVE (Relationship to Defendant) 19. Date of Service 20. Time of Service 21. ATTEMPTS Date Time ilas Int. Date TimilOe5l?nt?Date mes?nt. Date Time -O 4:3?Pm ?? Miles Int. Date Time Miles Int. Date Time Miles InL 22. Advance Costs 23. Service costs 24. Not $100.00 1 ?- Oc 25. Mileage 26. Postage 27. Poundage 1,41 Notary Fee 29. Surcharge 30. Total CI I -IF lu _2. Cost 131. Cost Due or 33. AFFIRMED and subscr)bed before me this 34.da ARV'____. _ vof B.RU li r 35. a MV C!'1M\AICe1nr.1 CJr1, .. 36. Signature of ` Dep. Sheriff J 37. Signature of York t:"- i 138. Signature of Foreign AJG. 12, 2002 County Sheriff 39. Date g0. Date )HERIFF 2-28-20 41. Date OF AUTHORIZED ISSUING AUTHORITY AND TITLE • ?^" ?u"~? ??? 43. Date Received 1 WHITE Issuing Authonty 2 PINK Attorney 3. CANARY - Shenfrs Office 4. BLUE -Sheriff's Office 4 # f v W . 1 ?? v ?.. _ ? _ t.? ? r,' ?. ?' . -o. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, V. NO. 08-768 Civil Term ROSEMARY GIBB, and CIVIL ACTION - LAW KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Kindly reinstate the complaint in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON By: 1?Y1?.?-? Etna Christina L. Bradley, Esq ire I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 311o (o8 Counsel for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Reinstate Complaint has been duly served on the following this I q day of March, 2008, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Katherin Richards 12 Turnberry Way Bluffton, SC 29910-4947 Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 BY: ulie . Barnes, Assistant to nstina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 3- lq-() g Attorney for Plaintiff C .-a 5 ??It '? x IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff, V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. TO: Plaintiff and Co-Defendant CIVIL DIVISION NO. 08-768 ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND CROSS-CLAIM PURSUANT TO 1031.1 (Jury Trial Demanded) Filed on Behalf of the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer and New Matter and Cross-Claim Pursuant to 1031.1 within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P. Counsel of Record for This Party: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Pa. I.D. #83058 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE and SKEEL, L.L.P. Firm #911 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 (717) 901-5916 #16112 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff, CIVIL DIVISION V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. NO. 08-768 (Jury Trial Demanded) ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND CROSS-CLAIM PURSUANT TO 1031.1 AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, by and through her counsel, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., and Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, and files the following Answer and New Matter and Cross-Claim Pursuant to 1031.1 and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 2. Admitted. 3. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 4. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 5. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 6. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 7. Admitted. 8. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 9. Admitted in part. It is admitted that an impact occurred between the vehicles. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of the remainder of the averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 10. Admitted in part. It is admitted that an impact occurred between the vehicle of Defendant, Katherin Richards and the vehicle of Rosemary Gibb. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant has insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of the remainder of the averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 11. Paragraph 11 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 12. Paragraph 12 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 13. Paragraph 13 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 14. Paragraph 14 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 15. Paragraph 15 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 16. Paragraph 16 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 17. Paragraph 17 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 18. Paragraph 18 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 19. Paragraph 19 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 20. Paragraph 20 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 21. Paragraph 21 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 22. Paragraph 22 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 23. Paragraph 23 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 24. Paragraph 24 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 25. Paragraph 25 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 26. Paragraph 26 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNT I DIANE RILEY, PLAINTIFF, v. ROSEMARY GIBB, DEFENDANT 27. In response to paragraph 27, this Defendant reiterates and repeats all their responses in paragraphs 1 through 26 as if fully set forth at length herein. 28. Paragraph 28 and all of its subparts state legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 29. Paragraph 29 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. COUNT II DIANE RILEY, PLAINTIFF, v. KATHERIN RICHARDS, DEFENDANT 30 - 32. Paragraphs 30 through 32 of the Plaintiffs Complaint are directed to a Defendant other than this Defendant and, therefore, no response is required. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. NEW MATTER 33. The motor vehicle accident in controversy is subject to the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and this Defendant asserts, as affirmative defenses, all rights, privileges and/or immunities accruing pursuant to said statute. 33. Some and/or all of Plaintiffs claims for damages are items of economic detriment which are or could be compensable pursuant to either the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and/or other collateral sources and same may not be duplicated in the present lawsuit. 34. To the extent that the Plaintiff has selected the limited tort option or is deemed to have selected the limited tort option then this Defendant sets forth the relevant provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law as a bar to the Plaintiffs ability to recover non-economic damages. 35. This Defendant pleads any and all applicable statutes of limitation under Pennsylvania Law as a complete or partial bar to any recovery by Plaintiff in this action. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 36. Answering Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, incorporates by reference the entirety of Plaintiffs Complaint against answering Defendant without admission or adoption as though the same were set forth herein at length. 37. Answering Defendant incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of her Answer and New Matter as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 38. Solely for the purposes of the within cross-claim and without admitting the truth of the same, this Defendant adopts and incorporates those allegations of the Plaintiffs Complaint directed to the Co-Defendant, Katherin Richards. 39. In the event it is determined that the Plaintiff is entitled to a recovery, the same being denied, it is thereby averred that the Co-Defendant, Katherin Richards, is solely liable to the Plaintiff. 40. In the event it is judicially determined that the Plaintiff is entitled to a recovery from this Defendant, which is denied, then it is averred that the Co-Defendant, Katherin Richards, is liable with this Defendant for contribution and/or indemnification. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. By: r - 1-' > ko,. Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb VERIFICATION Defendant verifies that she is the Defendant in the foregoing action; that the foregoing ANSWER, NEW MATTER, AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 is based upon information which she has furnished to her counsel and information which has been gathered by her counsel in the preparation of the lawsuit. The language of the ANSWER, NEW MATTER, AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 is that of counsel and not of the Defendant. Defendant has read the ANSWER, NEW MATTER, AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 and to the extent that the ANSWER, NEW MATTER, AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 is based upon information which she has given to her counsel, it is true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the ANSWER, NEW MATTER, AND NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 is that of counsel, she has relied upon counsel in making this Affidavit. Defendant understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 31191 0 $ Rosemary Gibb #16112 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND CROSS-CLAIM PURSUANT TO 1031.1 has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 20th day of March, 2008. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Katherin Richards 12 Turnberry Way Bluffton, SC 29910-4947 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. By: , Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb '77 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, : NO. 08-768 Civil Term : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT. ROSEMARY GIBB'S. NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Diane Riley, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, and files the following Reply to Defendant, Rosemary Gibb's, New Matter: 33. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 33. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 34. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 35. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court DISMISS Defendant, Rosemary Gibb's, New Matter and enter judgment in Plaintiffs favor and against Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND AND 00/ 100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs, and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. NEW MATTER PURSUANT TO RULE 1031.1 36. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 37. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 38. This paragraph is directed to a party other than Plaintiff, and no reply is required. By way of further reply, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto, each and every allegation contained in her Complaint. 39. This paragraph is directed to a party other than Plaintiff, and no reply is required. By way of further reply, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto, each and every allegation contained in her Complaint. 40. This paragraph is directed to a party other than Plaintiff, and no reply is required. By way of further reply, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto, each and every allegation contained in her Complaint. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court DISMISS Defendant, Rosemary Gibb's, New Matter and enter judgment in Plaintiffs favor and against Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND AND 00/ 100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs, and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON By: &,'U?i4 ?Lfsao'??=" Christina L. Bradley, Esqui e I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: ? I2. I©$ Counsel for Plaintiffs 2 VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: y-a- 08' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to New Matter has been duly served on the following this 2nd day of April, 2008, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 BY: Barnes, Assistant to stina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 4 / 2 / 08 Attorney for Plaintiff ,,., r..? :--y 1?- " ? --t r ,. -?-, a-,, ? ?- ' .. =` ? ?, <?::: r Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, V. NO. 08-768 Civil Term ROSEMARY GIBB, and CIVIL ACTION - LAW KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Kindly reinstate the complaint in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON By: Christina L. Bradley, Esqui I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 1 ??8 Counsel for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Reinstate Complaint has been duly served on the following this 16th day of April, 2008, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie &, Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 BY Ju ' A. nes, Assistant to hristina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 4/115/08 Attorney for Plaintiff ? C-71 ~ T ' I . ?sr "'1 Cal ' J J . Y .. * 3 73 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Kindly reinstate the complaint in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON 1 By: I C2, Christina L. Bradley, Es ire I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: f Z, ? 1 -'? , ai?0g Counsel for Plaintiff s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Reinstate Complaint has been duly served on the following this 12th day of May, 2008, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 BY: u ' A. arnes, Assistant to ristina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 5/12/08 Attorney for Plaintiff * O -, gg c7 .a co Ri i7 ~ C, - r? 0 1 < e SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2008-00768 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND RILEY DIANE VS GIBB ROSEMARY ET AL MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon RICHARDS KATHERIN the DEFENDANT , at 2019:00 HOURS, on the 15th day of May 2008 at 144 FINEVIEW ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to KATHERIN RICHARDS a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: So Answers: Docketing 18.00 Service 16.00` o? 4 Affidavit .00. Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline p 44.00 05/16/2008 FREEBURN &HAMILTON Sworn and Subscibed to By: before me this day Deputy Sheriff of A.D. r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, Defendants NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1012 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Michael B. Scheib, Esquire, of Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins, as attorney for the Defendant, Kathryn Richards, in the above-captioned matter and mark the docket accordingly. Date: May 30, 2008 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS By MICHAEL B. SCHEIB, ESQUI Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (717) 757-7602 Attorney for Defendant, Kathryn Richards / ' IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM Plaintiff V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 30th day of May, 2008, I, Michael B. Scheib, Esquire, a member of the firm of Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Praecipe for Entry of Appearance Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1012, by United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CAL S r' 1, By: MICHAEL B. SCHEIB, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (717) 757-7602 Attorney for Defendant, Kathryn Richards ___ 4M"` _n.N - .?._ ,? ?; ;., ? t? - --? _. _ ? ?_.- -• w ??;= 'i4 ;.t IL"- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff V. : ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION- LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT RICHARDS'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT GIBBS'S CROSS-CLAIM AND NOW comes Defendant, Katharine Richards, and files the following Reply to New Matter/Crossclaim of Defendant, Rosemary Gibb. 38. Denied. This paragraph sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 39. Denied. This paragraph sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Katharine Richards demands judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiffs and/or co-Defendants, together with costs of suit. By: Respectfully Submitted, GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, SOLYMOS & CALKIN5 MICHAEL B. SCHEIB, ESQJ Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Katharine Richards VERIFICATION I, Katharine Miller, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Reply to Defendant Gibb's Cross Claim are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or information and belief, as well as reports, records, conferences and other investigatory material made available to me. To the extent that the foregoing contains averments which are inconsistent in fact, I verify that my knowledge or information is sufficient to form a belief that one or more of them is true, although I am currently unable, after reasonable investigation, to ascertain which of the inconsistent averments are true. To the extent that the foregoing contains legal conclusions or opinions, I hereby state that my Verification is made upon the advice of counsel, upon whom I have relied in the filing this document. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 related to unsworn falsifications to authorities. Date: )p?o? ;?-J?Q 1 G Katharine Miller • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION- LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this day of July, 2008, I, Michael B. Scheib, a member of the firm of Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Defendant Richards's reply to Defendant Gibb's Crossclaim, by United States First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 (Attorney for Co-Defendant Gibb) GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS MIC14AEL B. bCHEIB, ESQt Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Katharine Richards Ti ... t '?? rri IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM Plaintiff V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, ; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer with New Matter and Cross Claim within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: '') - q - b g GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CA KINS By: MICHAEL B-SCHEIB, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Kathrin Richards IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, Defendants NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD To: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer with New Matter and Cross Claim within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Date: / ° ? - d GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS /. BY. U` MIC AEL B. SCHEIB, ESQUIRE Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Katharine Richards IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, ; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER AND CROSS CLAIM COMES NOW, the Defendant, Kathryn Richards, by and through her attorneys, Michael B. Scheib, Esquire, and Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos, & Calkins, and responds to the allegations in Plaintiffs Complaint as follows: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 2. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 3. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is denied that Defendant's name is Katherin Richards. Defendant is Katharine Miller and resides in York, Pennsylvania. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted in part and denied in part. Defendant was driving a Toyota Solara. All oter allegations contained in paragraph 6 are admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff's vehicle was stopped. The remaining allegations are denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 9. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the vehicles came into contact with one another. The remaining allegations are denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 11. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 12. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 14. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 16. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 16 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 17. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 17 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 18. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 20. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 20 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 21. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 22. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 23. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 23 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 24. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 24 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 25. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 25 of Plaintiff's Complaint and strict proof thereof is demanded. 26. Denied. This paragraph sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. COUNT 1 DIANE RILEY v. ROSEMARY GIBB 27. Paragraphs 1 - 26 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 28. This paragraph is addressed to another party and therefore, no answer is required 29. This paragraph is addressed to another party and therefore, no answer is required. COUNT 2 DIANE RILEY v. KATHRIN RICHARDS 30. Paragraphs 1 - 29 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 31. Denied. This paragraph sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 32. Denied. This paragraph sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Richards, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in her favor, together with the costs of this lawsuit. NEW MATTER 33. Paragraphs 1-33 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 34. Plaintiffs injuries, if any, may be barred or limited by the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 35. Plaintiffs injuries, if any, were caused by the acts or omissions of a third party over whom Defendant had no control. 36. Plaintiffs injuries, if any, were caused by events which either predated or postdated the motor vehicle accident which is the subject of this lawsuit. 37. Plaintiffs damages were caused by her own conduct. CROSS CLAIM 38. Paragraphs 1-38 are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 39. If it is determined that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief, which is denied, then Defendant Rosemary Gibb is solely liable to Plaintiff. 40. Should there be a finding or liability on the part of the Defendant, which is denied, then Defendant Gibb is liable over the answering Defendant for contribution or indemnification. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Richards, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in her favor, together with the costs of this lawsuit. Respectfully Submitted, GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS MICHAEL B. SCHEIB, ES UI Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Katharine Richards VERIFICATION I, Katharine Miller, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or information and belief, as well as reports, records, conferences and other investigatory material made available to me. To the extent that the foregoing contains averments which are inconsistent in fact, I verify that my knowledge or information is sufficient to form a belief that one or more of them is true, although I am currently unable, after reasonable investigation, to ascertain which of the inconsistent averments are true. To the extent that the foregoing contains legal conclusions or opinions, I hereby state that my Verification is made upon the advice of counsel, upon whom I have relied in the filing this document. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa:C.S. § 4904 related to unsworn falsifications to authorities. Date: p 1 1 n ?r Katharine Miller d?S /Y IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, NO. 08-768 CIVIL TERM Plaintiff V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHRIN RICHARDS, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this day of July, 2008, I, Michael B. Scheib, a member of the firm of Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Interrogatories/Request for Production of Documents of Defendant, Kathryn Richards, to Plaintiff, by United States First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, SOLYMOS & CAI By; MICHJI??W gCIjEIB, L Supreme Court I.D. No. 63868 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Attorney for Defendant, Katharine Richards 5 w ?. C CIO IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 V. DEFENDANT GIBB'S REPLY TO ROSEMARY GIBB and DEFENDANT RICHARDS' CROSS- KATHERIN RICHARDS, CLAIM Defendants. (Jury Trial Demanded) Filed on Behalf of the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb Counsel of Record for This Party: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Pa. I.D. #83058 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE and SKEEL, L.L.P. Firm #911 1017 Mumma Road, Suite 300 Lemoyne, PA 17043 (717) 901-5916 #16112 J IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff, CIVIL DIVISION V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. NO. 08-768 (Jury Trial Demanded) DEFENDANT GIBB'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT RICHARDS' CROSS-CLAIM AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, by and through her counsel, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, L.L.P., and Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, and files the following Reply to Defendant Richards' Cross-Claim and in support thereof avers as follows: 38. In response to paragraph 38, this Defendant reiterates and repeats all of their responses contained in their Answer and New Matter and Cross-Claim Pursuant to 1031.1 as if fully set forth at length herein. 39. Paragraph 39 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 40. Paragraph 40 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. By: --c-?--? f` pztt? - - Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT GIBB'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT RICHARDS' CROSS-CLAIM has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this day of '2008. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos,and Kalkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (Attorney for Katherin Richards) SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, L.L.P. By: lp " Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb `.`' ?? ?? . '. „ C ---+ ' ; r .. , ?...... ? ? t ?? ?? «Y E.,,_ CF ; r 1 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab@pa-injurylawyer.com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, V. Plaintiff, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 08-768 Civil Term ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT. KATHERINE RICHARDS', NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Diane Riley, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, and flies the following Reply to Defendant, Katherine Richards', New Matter: 33. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 34. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 35. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in this paragraph, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further reply, any implication that the injuries and damages suffered by Plaintiff were not caused by Answering Defendant is specifically denied. 36. Denied. Plaintiff denies that Plaintiffs injuries were caused by events which either pre-dated or post-dated the motor vehicle accident which is the subject of this lawsuit. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 37. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiffs damages were caused by her own conduct, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. Cross-Claim 38. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact, the same are specifically denied. 39. This paragraph is directed to a party other than Plaintiff, and no reply is required. By way of further reply, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto, each and every allegation contained in her Complaint. 40. This paragraph is directed to a party other than Plaintiff, and no reply is required. By way of further reply, Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto, each and every allegation contained in her Complaint. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court DISMISS Defendant, Katherine Richards', New Matter and enter judgment in Plaintiffs favor and against Defendant, Katherine Richards, in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs, and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON By: aLkl?m Christina L. Bradley, Esquir I.D. No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: ac"- Z.H I ZOO$ Counsel for Plaintiffs 2 VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 7-aD-o DIANE RIL CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to New Matter has been duly served on the following this a? day of July, 2008, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 BY: uli A. arnes, Assistant to Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: I - -/)-q -0 ? Attorney for Plaintiff ' 71 .? 1 77, v r - , ? ?y V i W # ' . ; fir 1' ?r •? ?Mi {m, R U r? - 1" '- ? ?)r lll,- R 2010 JA,q 22 FP 2: 02 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 V. MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTAL ROSEMARY GIBB and DISCOVERY RESPONSES KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. (Jury Trial Demanded) Filed on Behalf of the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb Counsel of Record for This Party: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Pa. I.D. #83058 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE and SKEEL, P.C. Firm #911 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 (717) 901-5916 #16112 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, Plaintiff, CIVIL DIVISION V. ROSEMARY GIBB and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. NO. 08-768 (Jury Trial Demanded) MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, by and through her counsel, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, P.C., and Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, and files the following Motion to Compel Supplemental Discovery Responses and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. This matter arises out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on August 17, 2006. As a result of this accident, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint sounding in negligence against Ms. Gibb and Ms. Richards. 2. On November 16, 2009, this Defendant served the Plaintiff with Supplemental Interrogatories relative to the above-referenced matter. A true and correct copy of the correspondence between the parties dated November 16, 2009, is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 3. In accordance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff's Answers to Supplemental Interrogatories should have been received by December 16, 2009. 4. On December 29, 2009, Defense counsel forwarded a letter to Plaintiffs counsel requesting that the Plaintiff respond to the outstanding discovery and advising that a Motion to Compel the same would be filed with the court. A true and correct copy of the correspondence between the parties dated December 29, 2009, is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 5. To date, the Defendant has not received any response from the Plaintiff or Plaintiffs counsel regarding her discovery requests. 6. It is necessary for the proper defense of this lawsuit that the Plaintiff file full and complete responses to the Defendant's discovery requests. 7. Accordingly, pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4019, the Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order directing the Plaintiff to provide full and complete responses to the Defendant's Supplemental Interrogatories within twenty (20) days or suffer additional sanctions. 8. Counsel for Ms. Gibb certifies that he has attempted to contact with counsel for Ms. Riley as set forth above to resolve this discovery dispute. Despite such attempts, the discovery responses have not been received. 9. Counsel for Ms. Gibb certifies that no Judge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matter. 10. Counsel for the Plaintiff does not concur in this motion. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter an Order compelling the Plaintiff to produce full and complete discovery responses to Ms. Gibb's discovery requests. Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, P.C. BY• KL Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb November 16, 2009 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 RE: Riley v. Gibb, et al. Our File No. 16112 Dear Ms. Bradley: Enclosed please find my Supplemental Interrogatories directed towards your client in the above-referenced matter. Kindly respond to the same within the timeframe outlined by the applicable Rule of Civil Procedure. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Seth T. Black STB:Iat Enclosure cc: F. Dean Morgan, Esquire (w/enclosure) December 29, 2009 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 RE: Riley v. Gibb, et al. Our File No. 16112 Dear Ms. Bradley: I previously forwarded Supplemental Interrogatories directed to your client in the above-referenced matter. I have yet to receive your client's responses. Kindly respond to the same in the next two weeks or I will be forced to file a motion to compel. If you need any addition time, please do not hesitate to contact me. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Seth T. Black STB:Ies CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 21St day of January, 2010. Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Attorney for Plaintiff) Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos, and Kalkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (Attorney for Defendant, Katherin Richards) SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & SKEEL, P.C. 4 By. Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, Rosemary Gibb JAN P5 .'2010 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DIANE RILEY, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, V. NO. 08-768 ROSEMARY GIBB and (Jury Trial Demanded) KATHERIN RICHARDS, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, TO WIT, this day of (7 c? U, Gig 2010, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Plaintiff shall provide Defendant, Rosemary Gibb, with Answers to Supplemental Interrogatories within twenty (20) days of this Order. BY THE COURT: Distribution to: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, P.C. 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos, and Kalkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 hristina L. Bradley, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 ??t Q?S I'ridt 1 ril -17 i T co =-' ;; C Christina L. Bradley, Esq FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, OF ?N? FiLEC}- r-ICE 2010 MAR 23 A', 10: 20 r. ..fttb& h y for Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1. This matter arises from an automobile accident that occurred on August 17, 2006, at approxima ely 7:05 a.m. on or about Route 581 East, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. As a result o the accident and the injuries Plaintiff sustained in the accident, Plaintiff filed a C mplaint citing negligence on January 31, 2008. 3. Defendant G bb filed an Answer with New Matter on March 20, 2008. 4. Defendant Ri hards filed an Answer with New Matter on July 9, 2008. 5. All parties ha e conducted discovery, Plaintiff has been seen for Independent Medical Ex s scheduled by Defendants, and Defense counsel continues to issue subpoenas to Plai tiff's treating physicians. 6. Plaintiff respe tfully requests a Status Conference be scheduled in the captioned matter to schedu e dates and deadlines for the completion of discovery and listing the matter for trial. 7. Plaintiff k matter is ripe for a Sta 8. No Judge 9. Defense c Conference. 10. Oral argon scheduled for a Status C WHEREFORE, Ply Court grant Plaintiff's Pe Scheduling Conference ii ves and therefore avers that discovery is complete and this Conference. > had any significant prior involvement in this case. .sel has no objection to Plaintiff's Petition for a Status t is not requested, and it is requested that this matter be ntiff Diane Riley respectfully requests that this Honorable tion for a Status Conference and issue an Order granting a the above-referenced matter. Respectfully submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON Dated: 3119 110 Christina L. Bradley, Esq ' e Attorneys for Plaintiff - Diane Riley 4415 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)671-1966 ID No. 89107 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinaboapa-injurylawyer.a Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR STA manner listed below, us Griffitl CONFERENCE have been served on the date and in the as follows: ULAR MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID Kevin Rauch, Esquire McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, LLP 1017 Mumma Road Lemoyne, PA 17043 (717)920-9129 Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 (717)757-3783 FREEBURN & HAMILTON Dated: -11 b n Christina L. Bradley, Esq re Attorneys for Plaintiff Diane Riley 4415 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)671-1955 ID No. 89107 P MAR 2 4 2010 Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinab(a)pa-iniurvlawyer. com DIANE RILEY, V. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, Attorney for Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, : NO. 08-768 Civil Term : CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendants. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SCHEDULING ORDER AND NOW, TO WIT this 25- day of N -ii , y S 2 10, Ris l hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED, that a Status Conference in the captioned matter is scheduled for the 10 day of , 2010 at 1,30 • 3a Courthouse. , -P m. in room of the Cumberland County BY THE COURT: Distr' tion List: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire -/Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins 4415 N. Front St. 110 South Northern Way Harrisburg, PA 17110 York, PA 17402-3737 Kevin Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie 8s Skeel, LLP 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 1//7050 ?'Yt t l?C I J t ;2-s 3 ?s ? v l ? S .r . N? DIANE RILEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ROSEMARY GIBB AND KATHERIN RICHARDS, DEFENDANTS 08-768 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of April, 2010, following a status conference attended by Christina L. Bradley, Esquire, counsel for plaintiff Diane Riley, Ethan K. Stone, Esquire, counsel for defendant Rosemary Gibb and Dean Morgan, Esquire, counsel for defendant Katherin Richards, upon agreement of the parties, the court issues the following order: 1. The parties shall conduct and conclude all discovery within sixty (60) days of the date of this order. The only matter currently pending is Medicare lien information requested by defendant Gibb; however, should any additional discovery be sought, it shall be conducted within sixty (60) days. 2. Plaintiff shall list this case for trial for the September 2010 Term of court. Although the court did not conduct a formal pretrial conference it appears that the duration of a jury trial will be two to three days to try, and it is suggested that the Court Administrator schedule this for Monday, September 20, 2010. By the Court, f,. Albert H. Masland, J. tL P7 w?. 1f, •, w Christina L. Bradley, Esquire 4415 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 For Plaintiff ?han K. Stone, Esquire Welsh & McKean Roads PO Box 844 Spring House, PA 19477 For Rosemary Gibb / "man Morgan, Esquire 110 S Northern Way York, PA 17402 For Katherin Richards Court Administrator :sal F 1'£S m3ll,4L ~~/n PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted in triplicate) "E:1 t7=; t'I1 ~''. -a - <->; ~f;. ~° . ~= -.:~ ,- w=- _: TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY ~~ `--" Please list the following case: :~ X^ for JURY trial at the next term of civil court. ^ for trial without a jury. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) (check one) © Civil Action -Law Diane Riley ^ Appeal from arbitration (other) vs. Rosemary Gibb and Katherin Richards vs. (Plaintiff) (Defendant) The trial list will be called on and Trials commence on Pretrials will be held on (Briefs are due S days before pretrials No. 08-768 ~ Civil Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire, Freeburn & Hamilton, 4415 N. Front St., Harrisburg, PA Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: Kevin Rauch, Esquire and Michael Scheib, Esquire N t__- C:= N s~ ., c, Term This case is ready for trial. Date: 07/21 /2010 Signed: ~~~,~ ~a _ ~a.d-~-^/ Print Name: Christina L. Bradley, Esquire Attorney for: Plaintiff ~:r 7~ _ ...q '~" .-~ '1 ~=-- .<r i"S ._~~ _., ~~ ~~ av ~ y ~,~d~y ~Ck~~~yii 1 ~ a ~ ®/, r ~ DIANE RILEY, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ROSEMARY GIBB AND KATHERIN RICHARDS, DEFENDANTS 08-768 CIVIL TERM PRETRIAL CONFERENCE A pretrial conference was held on September 8, 2010. In attendance were plaintiff's counsel Christina Bradley, Esquire and Richard Freeburn, Esquire, defendant Gibb's counsel Seth Black, Esquire, and defendant Richards' counsel Michael Schieb, Esquire. This case involves a three car motor vehicle accident that occurred on August 17, 2006 after plaintiff stopped her vehicle on Route 581 east because of stopped traffic. According to plaintiff she was struck first by defendant Richards' vehicle. Then, defendant Gibb's vehicle struck the Richards' vehicle causing it to strike plaintiff s vehicle a second time. Although defendant Gibb has admitted liability, and stated in a deposition that she saw the Richards' vehicle strike plaintiff's vehicle before being struck by the Gibb vehicle, the sequence of the impacts is in dispute. Specifically, defendant Richards denies liability and contends she did not strike plaintiff before she was hit by the Gibb vehicle, but rather was forced into plaintiff. Defendant Richards intends to call Trooper Keir Dissinger who will testify that at the time of the accident, Gibb did not state that she witnessed Richards striking the plaintiff. No party is claiming that the plaintiff~,~negligen~ly ~ ~~ ~ stopped her vehicle on 581 eastbound. ~~; •,~ .- '::~ .~ ~- ~ -v ~ ~ CG -..t There have been no motions in limine filed; however, the parties have yet to depose two of plaintiff's physicians, which could result in motions being filed. Aside from potential motions in limine, the parties will need to brief the issue of whether the defendants are entitled to credit for social security disability payments made to the plaintiff. Although plaintiff does not intend to make any reference to her award of social security disability and/or a disability pension plaintiff does not agree that the defendants are entitled to the aforesaid credit. An additional evidentiary issue involves the admissibility of the police report, which defendant Richards intends to introduce during the testimony of Trooper Dissinger. Defendant Gibb claims it is not admissible under 75 Pa.C.S. Section 3751(b). The court noted that even if the report is admitted (and that the trooper will undoubtedly make reference to it during his testimony), it is not an exhibit that would be released to the jurors during deliberations. Therefore, any harm from its admission would be negligible. The parties agree that plaintiff's vocational expert may testify regarding his reliance on plaintiff's income tax returns. Plaintiff recently submitted other exhibits to defendant. If the parties cannot stipulate as to certain Commonwealth of Pennsylvania documents (plaintiff was a state employee) a continuance may be necessary. The plaintiff will have four peremptory challenges and the defendants will have two each. The parties anticipate the trial to take approximately two days. The jurors will not be permitted to take notes. Regarding settlement negotiations, plaintiff has demanded the policy limits of $100,000 each from the defendants. Neither defendant has made a counteroffer. Because counsel for defendant Richards will be unavailable the morning of Thursday, September 23, 2010, they are requesting a date certain of Monday, September 20, 2010. Even so, there is a chance that evidentiary matters may arise in the next few days which would cause this case to be deferred until the December trial week. The parties will promptly notify the Court Administrator if that is the case. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. ~hristina K. Bradley, Esquire Richard Freeburn, Esquire For Plaintiff /Seth T. Black, Esquire For Rosemary Gibb ichael B. Scheib, Esquire For Katherin Richards Court Administrator :saa e~,~~S ,~,~~1~. Q/~/~a Christina L. Bradley, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 89107 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 christinabnpa-iniu rvlavwer. com Attorney for Plaintiff DIANE RILEY, v. ROSEMARY GIBB, and KATHERIN RICHARDS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO. 08-768 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO: Prothonotary Kindly mark the above-captioned matter settled and discontinued. Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN 8v HAMILTON Dated: L-h~be~ ~~h Christina L. Bradley, E~tzire Attorneys for Plaintiff Diane Ril ey 4410 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717)671-1955 ID No.: 89107 ~ ~ -.~ ~ --- -~ . -:~ .~~,..a. ~-:- ~ ~+ ~ r~ r ,~ r~~ ~ ~ ~ ~;,~, -y O N ~ tTl 3 ~' j CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the forgoing documents was duly served on this 6th day of October, 2010, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Seth T. Black, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie 8v Skeel, LLP 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Michael B. Scheib, Esquire Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos 8v Calkins 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 BY: Elizabe~ Ziegler, Pai~~al t~ Christina L. Bradley, Esquire v Attorney I.D. #89107 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 4415 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 10/06/ 10 Attorney for Plaintiff