Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-2073SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, husband and wife, 315 Robin Hood Rd. Dillsburg, PA 17019 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. East Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 411 Exton, PA 19341 Defendant NO. n$ - aC)73 (2wi( -Fex*. CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, his wife, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and file this Complaint and respectfully represent the following: FACTS APPLICABLE TO ALL COUNTS 1. Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, is an adult individual who currently resides at 315 Robin Hood Road, Dillsburg, York County, Pennsylvania. 2. Plaintiff, THERESA A. ROTH, is an adult individual who currently resides at 315 Robin Hood Road, Dillsburg, York County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiffs, JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, are husband and wife, having been married on November 17, 1990. 4. Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC., is a Pennsylvania Corporation, with its operating office at East Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 411, Exton, Pennsylvania. Said office reports to the Comcast Eastern Division office located at 200 Cresson Boulevard, Oaks, Pennsylvania. 5. The facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth took place on Sunday, May 21, 2006 at or about 1:45 p.m. on North Middlesex Road, at or about house number 149, Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, was the owner and operator of a 2005 Harley Davidson Motorcycle, bearing Pennsylvania Registration Number PFV24. 7. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, was operating the 2005 Harley Davidson Motorcycle south on North Middlesex Road. Two to three feet after he crested a hill at or about house number 149, the front wheel of the 2005 Harley Davidson Motorcycle struck a television cable that was hanging approximately three feet from the roadway, causing the cable to wrap around the front wheel and resulting in Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, being thrown from the 2005 Harley Davidson Motorcycle. 8. As a result of the aforesaid collision, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has suffered serious and permanent injuries, including but not limited to the following: 2 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 a. Post traumatic cervicothoracic strain; b. Post traumatic lumbosacral strain; c. Strain and sprain of the muscles, tendons, ligaments and other soft tissues at or about the dorsal region; d. Post traumatic stress disorder; e. Pain disorder associated with psychological factors and a general medical condition; f. Headaches; g. Injury to the right ribcage; h. Mild closed brain injury; i. Concussion; j. Abrasion and contusion to the right elbow; k. Head injury; and 1. Bilateral hip injury 9. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has undergone and in the future will undergo great pain and suffering for which damages are claimed. 10. As a further result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has sustained a permanent diminution in his ability to enjoy life and life's pleasures for which damages are claimed. 11. As a further result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has suffered and may continue to suffer a loss of earnings for which damages are claimed. 3 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2115 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 12. As a further result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has and/or may in the future incur a loss of earning capacity for which damages are claimed. 13. As a further result of this collision, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has and/or may incur reasonable and necessary medical and rehabilitative costs and expenses in excess of the amounts paid or payable pursuant to Subchapter B of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, or any program, group contract, or other arrangement for payment of benefits as defined in 75 Pa. C.S.A. Section 1719. 14. As a further result of the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, has incurred or may hereinafter incur financial expenses and losses, which exceed sums recoverable under the limitations and exclusions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law for which damages are claimed. 15. Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, was occupying a motorcycle at the time of the collision, which is not a private passenger motor vehicle. Therefore, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, remains eligible to claim compensation for non economic loss and economic loss sustained in this collision to applicable law tort. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE JOHN W. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC. 16. Paragraphs 1 through 15 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. 4 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 17. The aforesaid collision was the direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC., in the following particulars: a. In failing to properly secure a television cable to a utility pole at or about house number 149 North Middlesex Road, Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania; b. In failing to properly secure a television cable to the house at 149 North Middlesex Road, Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania; c. In failing to properly inspect, maintain and repair the area of the utility pole at or about house number 149 North Middlesex Road, Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, where the aforementioned television cable was attached; and d. In failing to reattach a television cable to a utility pole at or about house number 149 North Middlesex Road, Middlesex Township in a timely manner. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, demands judgment against Defendant, COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC., for compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the amount requiring compulsory arbitration. COUNT II - RES IPSA LOQUITUR JOHN W. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC. 18. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. 5 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 19. The incident set forth in paragraph 7 of this Complaint and the resultant injuries suffered by Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, set forth in paragraph 8 of this Complaint, would not have occurred in the absence of negligence by Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC.,. 20. Except for the negligence of Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC., there exists no other responsible cause for the incident set forth in paragraph 7 of this Complaint and the resultant injuries suffered by Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, set forth in paragraph 8 of this Complaint. 21. Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, did not engage in conduct that would have caused the incident set forth in paragraph 7 of this Complaint and the resultant injuries suffered by Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, set forth in paragraph 8 of this Complaint. 22. The negligence of Defendant, COMCAST OF PENNSYL- VANIA/MARYLAND, INC., as set forth in paragraphs 7 and 17 of this Complaint, was within Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC.'s scope of duty owed to Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, as a motorist on a road to which a utility pole was adjacent and over which a television cable crossed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, JOHN W. ROTH, demands judgment against Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC., for compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the amount requiring compulsory arbitration. 6 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 1225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 COUNT III THERESA A. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. 23. Paragraphs 1 through 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. 24. As a further result of injuries sustained by her husband, Plaintiff, THERESA A. ROTH has been and will be deprived of the assistance, companionship, consortium and society of her husband, all of which has been and will be to her great detriment and loss. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, THERESA A. ROTH, demands judgment against Defendant, COMCAST OF PENN SYLVAN IA/MARYLAN D, INC., for compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the amount requiring compulsory arbitration. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff Dated: March (?/\U , 2008 By Es. Timo y A. S e r, q Attorney I. D. #34343 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 (717) 728-3200 (717) 728-3400 (fax) 7 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Far: 717-728-3400 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, husband and wife, 315 Robin Hood Rd. Dillsburg, PA 17019 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. East Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 411 Exton, PA 19341 Defendant NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 4day of , 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint has been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP By: thy . Plenbe&rger, Esq. 8 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17015 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 - c_-s cry -TI (p -?I T _* I n R1 71 C7 d "d 'fl t o l V? r h O Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire E-mail: seduldig@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 43530 (717) 237-7119 Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire E-mail: shersperger@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 78735 (717) 255-7239 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-0999 FAX (717) 237-7105 Attorneys for Defendant: COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Husband and wife, Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION --LAW NO. 08-2073 CIVIL TERM : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire, Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire, and Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, as attorneys for Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/ Maryland, Inc., in the above-captioned matter, reserving our right to answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiffs' Complaint. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 2/Q By: 554603.2 STEP EN E. GEDULDIG, ESQ I Attorney I.D. No. 43530 STEPHANIE L. HERSPERGER, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 78735 Attorneys for Defendant, COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH,. . Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, 'PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-2073 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ,A GCEPTAN:CE'.O'F ?SERVIC:E I accept service of the Complaint in the above action, on behalf of Defendant Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., and certify that I am authorized to do so. Dated: L1/Ct?a? By Step en E. Geduldig, Esqui e Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorney for Defendant co ti r CO :'9 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. Defendant NO. 08-2073 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE I accept service of the Complaint in the above action, on behalf of Defendant Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., and certify that I am authorized to do so. Dated: y1 /Cc?a? BY Aj?X-, G Step en E. Geduldig, Esqui e Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Attorney for Defendant THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFERLLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW www.tthlaw.com Mailing Address: P.O. Box 999, Harrisburg, PA 17108 Street Address: 305 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101 Phone: (717) 237-7100 Fax: (717) 237-7105 Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire (717) 255-7239 shersperger@tthlaw.com April 17, 2Oo8 Adam T. Wolfe, Esquire SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Pyramid Business Park 2225 Millennium Way Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Re: Roth v. Comcast Corporation Philadelphia County No. 0033n, November 2007 Dear Adam: Thank you for the time-stamped copy of the Complaint filed by Plaintiffs in Cumberland County. Enclosed, please find the Acceptance of Service of the Complaint which we executed on behalf of our client, Comcast of Pennsylvania/ Maryland, Inc., with its permission. Please provide us with a time-stamped copy of the Acceptance once it is filed with the Court. We will be filing an Entry of Appearance and an Answer to the Complaint and would request a reasonable extension of time to file the Answer. If you have any objection to a reasonable extension of time to file the Answer, please let me know. Otherwise, we will assume that you have provided us with the courtesy of an extension. Thank you in advance for your anticipated courtesy and cooperation. Very truly yours, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP By: Stephanie L. Hersperger SH/sed 554605.2 Enclosure Bethlehem Office • 3400 Bath Pike, Suite 302, Bethlehem, PA 18017 • Phone: (610) 868-1675 • Fax: (610) 868-1702 Pittsburgh Office 0 301 Grant Street, Suite 1150, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 • Phone: (412) 697-7403 • Fax: (412) 697-7407 n "u '-' FTI F? ^C Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire E-mail: sgeduldig@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 43530 (717) 237-7119 Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire E-mail: shersperger@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 78735 (717) 255-7239 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-0999 FAX (717) 237-7105 JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Husband and wife, Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC., Defendant Attorneys for Defendant: COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -- LAW NO. o8-2073 CIVIL TERM : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: John W. Roth and Theresa A. Roth, Plaintiffs Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed New Matter within twenty (2o) days from service hereof or a Judgment may be entered against you. THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: STE EN E. GEDULDIG, ESQUI Attorney I.D. No. 43530 STEPHANIE L. HERSPERGER, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 78735 Attorneys for Defendant, Date: S/tea/jo r Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc. Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire E-mail: sgeduldig@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 43530 (717) 237-7119 Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire E-mail: shersperger@tthlaw.com Attorney I.D. No. 78735 (717) 255-7239 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Post Office Box 999 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-0999 FAX (717) 237-7105 JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Husband and wife, Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendant: COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -- LAW V. NO. 08-2073 CIVIL TERM COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC., Defendant : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INCA TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as "Answering Defendant"), by and through undersigned counsel Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire, and Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire, of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and files the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs' Complaint: FACTS APPLICABLE TO ALL COUNTS 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 2. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations 2 contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 3. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7- Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 8(a)-G). After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph and subparagraphs (a)-(1) of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 9. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of 3 the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 10. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 11. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 12. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 4 13. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 14. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 15. To the extent that this paragraph contains allegations that are conclusions of law as opposed to statements of fact, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed necessary, after reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form an opinion or belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint. As such, all allegations are generally denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). All allegations also are placed at issue and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 5 COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE JOHN W. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND. INC 16. Answering Defendant incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 15 of this Answer as if set forth at length herein. 17(a)-(d). The allegations contained in this paragraph and subparagraphs of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., respectfully requests that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed in its entirety and judgment entered in its favor. COUNT II - RES IPSA JOHN W. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND INC 18. Answering Defendant incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 17 of this Answer as if set forth at length herein. 19. The allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. 20. The allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. 21. The allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. 6 22. The allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., respectfully requests that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed in its entirety and judgment entered in its favor. COUNT III THERESA A. ROTH V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. 23. Answering Defendant incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 22 of this Answer as if set forth at length herein. 24. The allegations contained in this paragraph of Plaintiffs' Complaint are denied as a legal conclusion and pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). Strict proof of said allegations is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., respectfully requests that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed in its entirety and judgment entered in its favor. NEW MATTER 25. Answering Defendant incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 24 of this Answer as if set forth at length herein. 26. No act or omission on the part of Answering Defendant, its agent, employees or servants, caused the Plaintiffs' injuries. 27. Plaintiff, John Roth, may have been comparatively negligent, contributorily negligent and/or assumed the risk of his alleged harm. 7 28. Some or all of Plaintiffs' claims may be barred or limited by Plaintiffs' election of the limited tort option. 29. Plaintiffs may have failed to mitigate their injuries and/or damages. 30. Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, if any, may not have been caused by any acts, omissions, or breaches of duty of Defendant, but rather may be a result of pre-existing injuries and conditions. 31. Plaintiffs' claims may be barred by the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Act, which are pleaded by reference and incorporated herein as if fully set forth at length. 32. Plaintiffs' claims may be barred by the defenses of release, accord and satisfaction, waiver, estoppel, the terms of a contract or express warranty, or an award at arbitration as may be shown by discovery in this case. 33• Plaintiffs' claims may be barred or diminished in accordance with the Comparative Negligence Act, for the reason that Plaintiff, John Roth, negligently caused the accident in the following manners: a. he failed to keep a proper look out; b. he was inattentive; C. he failed to keep proper control over his motorcycle; d. he exceeded the speed limit or a safe speed under the prevailing conditions ; e. he failed to have his vehicle in good mechanical and working order; f. he violated the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Code. 34• Some or all of Plaintiffs' claims may be barred or reduced by previous payments for which Defendants are entitled to a credit. 8 35• If there was any hazardous condition caused by any cable owned by or under the control of Answering Defendant, which is specifically denied, Answering Defendant had no actual or constructive notice of same, to have taken reasonable corrective measures. 36. If any hazardous condition existed, which is denied as aforesaid, Plaintiff, John Roth, failed to exercise his last clear chance to avoid the known or reasonably discoverable condition to which he exposed herself. 37• Answering Defendant pleads a credit for any medical expenses or wage loss benefits which may have been advanced to the Plaintiffs. 38. The incident and alleged damages may have been due to the negligent acts and/or omissions of third parties for whose conduct Answering Defendant is neither liable nor responsible. 39• The acts and/or omissions on the part of persons or entities other than Answering Defendant may constitute intervening and/or superseding acts of negligence that caused Plaintiffs' alleged damages if any. 40. Answering Defendant breached no duty that it may have owed to Plaintiffs under the circumstances. 9 WHEREFORE, Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., respectfully requests that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed in its entirety and judgment entered in its favor. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: 591989.1 P KEN E. GEDULDIG, ESQ I Attorney I.D. No. 43530 STEPHANIE L. HERSPERGER, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 78735 Attorneys for Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc. 10 VERIFICATION I, Jim Samaha, hereby states that I am a representative of Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc. and verify that the averments made in the Answer with New Matter of Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. l Date Jim Sa a Senior _ice President CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter of Defendant, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Maryland, Inc., to Plaintiffs' Complaint, was served by depositing the same in th United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on theQ2,0 day of May, 2oo8, on all counsel of record as follows: Timothy A. Shollenberger, Esquire Adam T. Wolfe, Esquire SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Pyramid Business Park 2225 Millennium Way Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Attorneys for Plaintiffs THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire 591989.1 11 z? L, mss;. ? ? SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-2073 CIVIL TERM V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT, COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC. AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, his wife, by and through their attorneys, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP, and file this Complaint and respectfully represent the following: 25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. 26. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 27. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 28. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 29. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 30. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 31. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 32. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 33. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 34. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 35. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 36. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 37. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 38. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 39. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 40. The above referenced averment is a conclusion of law to which no answer is required. To the extent an answer is required, same is denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, respectfully requests that the Defendant, COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/MARYLAND, INC.'s. New Matter be dismissed and judgment entered in favor of the Plaintiffs as a matter of law. Respectfully submitted, SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Attor eys for Plaintiff Dated: July V v, 2008 By: othy Y".1- er, Attorney I.D. #34343 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 (717) 728-3200 (717) 728-3400 (fax) SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, husband and wife, 315 Robin Hood Rd. Dillsburg, PA 17019 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. East Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 411 Exton, PA 19341 Defendant NO. 08-2073 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this day of , 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing nswer o New Matter has been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephen E. Geduldig, Esquire Stephanie L. Hersperger, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP By: of h e Vg , Esq. Cl ? ' 9 g ? rr V I SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. Defendant NO. 08-2073 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 10AW sEt AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Interrogatories Directed to Defendant have been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephanie Hersperger, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SHOLLENE?EKGER & By: T. Wolfe, Esq. 21 , LLP Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-718-3400 <:? -? t t?s µ i ` ': ti?: "., _ ..? .s s u??? ?.ri? °. . ra,?, ;?:; SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-2073 V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ CIVIL ACTION - LAW MARYLAND, INC. Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents Propounded to Defendant have been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephanie Hersperger, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SHOLLENBE ER & JAN By: j Adam T. Wolfe, Esq. 7 , LLP Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phane:717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 C C C?o -4 _ S TM SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 08-2073 V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ CIVIL ACTION - LAW MARYLAND, INC. Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Responses to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents have been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephanie Hersperger, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SHOLL JANUZZI, LLP By: v Adam T. Ife, Esq. 10 Shollenberger 6 Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax: 717-728-3400 C .. ,? MM -'ter SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP 2225 Millennium Way Enola, PA 17025 Telephone Number: (717) 728-3200 Fax Number: (717) 728-3400 Attornevs for Plaintiff JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC. Defendant NO. 08-2073 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 2008, 1 hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Answers to Defendant's Interrogatories have been served upon the following via U.S. Mail: Stephanie Hersperger, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 SH By: 24 Shollenberger & Januzzi, LLP 2225 Millennium Way, Enola, PA 17025 Phone: 717-728-3200 Fax-717-728-3400 N 'tJ A JOHN W. ROTH and THERESA A. ROTH, Husband and wife, Plaintiffs V. COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/ MARYLAND, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION --LAW NO. 08-2073 CIVIL TERM : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SETTLE DISCONTINUE AND END TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned matter settled, discontinued and ended with prejudice. Respectfully Submitted, SHO By: Adam T. Wolfe, rsqu: Attorney for Plaintiffs LLP CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing is being served via first-class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, on the 5 day of February, 2009, on counsel of record as follows: Adam T. Wolfe, Esquire SHOLLENBERGER & JANUZZI, LLP Pyramid Business Park 2225 Millennium Way Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Attorneys for Plaintiffs THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP C__? Gwen M. leck, Secretary err;, co rr ? C y T.