Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-6514LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND TO: David L. Clugh, Jr. 1102 Celeste Drive Shippensburg, PA 17257 David L. Clugh, Sr. 1102 Celeste Drive Shippensburg, PA 17257 Theresa J. Clugh 1102 Celeste Drive Shippensburg, PA 17257 YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within Twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiffs. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 or (800) 990-9108 Document #: 219180~ 1 LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CIVIL COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff LeAnne Haycock is an adult individual residing at 76 Goodhart Road, Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17257. 2. Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. is an adult individual residing at 1102 Celeste Drive, Shippensburg, Franklin County, Pennsylvania 17257. 3. Defendant David L. Clugh, Sr. is an adult individual residing at 1102 Celeste Drive, Shippensburg, Franklin County, Pennsylvania 17257. 4. Defendant Theresa J. Clugh is an adult individual residing at 1102 Celeste Drive, Shippensburg, Franklin County, Pennsylvania 17257. 5. On May 15, 2001, Plaintiff was the owner and operator of a 1996 Saturn Sedan with Pennsylvania registration plate number DAF8736. 6. On the aforesaid date, Defendants David L. Clugh, Sr. and Theresa J. Clugh were, on information and belief, the owners of a 1992 Toyota Corolla with Pennsylvania registration plate number YHM057. 7. On the aforesaid date at approximately 9:55 a.m., Plaintiff was exiting her private driveway intending to turn left southbound on Goodhart Road in Southampton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Document #: 219180.1 8. At the aforesaid date and time, Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. was operating the aforesaid 1992 Toyota Corolla with consent and permission of his co-Defendants. 9. At the aforesaid date and time, Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. was travelling too fast and impacted the driver's side of Plaintiff's vehicle head-on in the middle of the roadway as she was making her mm foming her in a northwest direction coming to rest in the woods approximately 40 feet from impact. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Plaintiffv. Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 hereof are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set 11. Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. owed a duty to other lawful users of the roadways in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to operate the vehicle he was operating in such a way as not to cause harm or to damage to said other persons and to Plaintiff in particular. 12. The negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. consisted of the following: (a) Operating his vehicle too fast for the conditions existing at the aforesaid time and place in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3361 and applicable law; (b) Failing to maintain and stop the vehicle he was operating within the assured clear distance ahead in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3361 and applicable law; (c) Exceeding the applicable maximum speed limit in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3362 and applicable law; (d) Failing to obey traffic control devices in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3111 and applicable law; (e) Disregarding a hidden driveways warning sign and not taking the necessary precautions such as reducing his speed; -2- Document #: 219180.1 (0 (g) (h) (i) (J) (k) Otherwise operating his vehicle at an unsafe speed; Operating his vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3714 and applicable law; Operating his vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3736 and applicable law; Failing to yield in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3323 and applicable law; Otherwise failing to yield to Plaimiffs vehicle; Failing to keep his vehicle under proper and adequate control so as not expose other users of the roadway to unreasonable risk of harm; (1) Failing to maintain adequate control of the vehicle he was operating in order to avoid a collision; (m) (n) (o) (p) (q) (r) Failing to give warning to Plaintiff of his impending collision with her vehicle; Failing to observe Plaintiffs vehicle which was in the process of turning on the roadway; Failing to take proper evasive action in light of Plaintiffs vehicle turning in the roadway; Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; Failing to pay attention to the roadway and conditions existing; and Failing to properly apply the brakes to the vehicle he was operating or take other evasive action to avoid the collision with Plaintiffs vehicle. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the collision and the negligent, careless and reckless conduct of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff sustained and in the future may Document #: 219180.1 -3- sustain, serious and debilitating injuries, some of which are or may be permanent, an aggravation ora pre-existing condition and which include, but not limited to, the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) Trauma and injury to her back including six transverse process fractures; Trauma and injury to her head including cerebral concussion and short-term memory loss; Trauma and injury to her neck including neck abrasions from seatbelt; Trauma and injury to her ribs; Trauma and injury to her hip; Trauma and injury to her abdomen; Trauma and injury to her chest; Driving phobia and psychological injuries; and Other auto related trauma. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff has underwent medical treatment for the care of the injuries suffered in the accident and was forced to incur medical bills and expenses for the injuries she has suffered and will continue to incur medical bills and expenses in the future. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff has suffered and may suffer a loss of earnings, may suffer permanent disability, impairment and/or loss of earning capacity. Document #: 219180.1 -4- 16. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff has undergone and will undergo great mental and physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, discomfort, anxiety and distress, embarrassment and humiliation, past, present and future loss of her ability to enjoy the pleasures of life and limitation in pursuit of her daily activities all to her great loss and detriment. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff has sustained incidental costs associated with her injuries including medication expenses. 18. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid collision, negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr., Plaintiff has visible marking and bruising. 19. Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. drove recklessly before on the road where the accident occurred and was warned about speeding and "hill topping" and continued to do these reckless acts despite the warning providing a basis for punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff LeAnne Haycock demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. for the aforesaid damages, either individually and/or jointly and severally, in an amount which exceeds the limits of compulsory arbitration in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, plus interest and/or damages for delay and costs of prosecution. COUNT II - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT Plaintiffv. Defendant David L. Clugh, Sr. 20. Paragraphs 1 through 19 hereof are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set Document #: 219180.1 -5- 21. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant David L. Clugh, Sr. entrusted his automobile to co-Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. when he knew or should have known that Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. was incompetent to operate said vehicle and should not operate said vehicle because of propensity for careless driving. 22. The negligent acts of co-Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. are imputable to co- Defendant David L. Clugh, Sr. because of his negligent entrustment of the vehicle to co- Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. 23. As a result of the aforesaid negligence of Defendants, Plaintiff sustained the aforesaid damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff LeAnne Haycock demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant David L. Clugh, Sr., either individually and/or jointly and severally, in an amount which exceeds the limits of compulsory arbitration in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, plus interest and/or damages for delay and costs of prosecution. COUNT III - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT Plaintiff v. Defendant Theresa Clugh 24. Paragraphs 1 through 23 hereof are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set 25. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant Theresa Clugh entrusted her automobile to co-Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. when she knew or should have known that co- Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. was incompetent to operate said vehicle and should not operate said vehicle because of propensity for careless driving. Document #: 219180.1 -6- 26. The negligent acts of co-Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. are imputable to Defendant Theresa Clugh because of her negligent entrustment of the vehicle to co-Defendant David L. Clugh, Jr. 27. As a result of the aforesaid negligence of Defendants, Plaintiff sustained the aforesaid damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff LeAnne Haycock demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant Theresa Clugh, either individually and/or jointly and severally, in an amount which County, Pennsylvania, plus exceeds the limits of compulsory arbitration in Cumberland interest and/or damages for delay and costs of prosecution. Dated: November 15, 2001 METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. Clark DeVere, Esquire ~ Attorney I.D. No. 68768 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff Document #: 219180.1 -7- VERIFICATION I, I_~e Haycock, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaim are based upon information which I have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on my behalf in this matter. The language of the Complaint is that of counsel and not my own. I have read the Complaint, and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, infoi~iiation, and belief. To the extem that the content of the Complaint is that of counsel, I have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Complaint are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. : Dated:////~G/~) / nne HaycoCk / Document #: 219180.1 © Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendant LEANNE HAYCOCK, : Plaintiff : : V. : : DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID : L. CLUGH, SR., and THERESA J. : CLUGH, : Defendants : : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PP~EQIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Jefferson J. Esquire, of Goldberg, behalf of Defendants, and Theresa J. Clugh. Shipman, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., as counsel on David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr., Date: 72326.1 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. '~ff~rson J. Shipman, Esquire ~.D. #: 51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, Pennsylvania, on ,~ /'; /~, : by depositing the same in Harrisburg, Clark DeVere, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 & Erb GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPFnZ~N, P.C. Jg~fe~r~on J. S~ipm~, Esquire I3D. #: 51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendants 4:- Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. %51785 GOLDBERG, ~]%TZb~N & SHIP~N, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendants LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff V. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR., and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEM3%NDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Plaintiff and her counsel, Clark DeVere, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff YOU ARE HEREBY notified to plead to the within New Matter of Defendants within twenty (20) days of service hereof. GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. Date: 72600.1 J~ff%~on J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney I.D. 51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Attorneys for Defendants Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. #51785 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. 320 Market Street P. O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 (717) 234-4161 Counsel for Defendants LEANNE HAYCOCK, : Plaintiff : : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. v. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID : No. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM L. CLUGH, SR., and THERESA J. : CLUGH, : Defendants : : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS, DAVID L. CLU~H, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, AND THERESA J. CLUGH AND NOW, come the Defendants, David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr., and Theresa J. Goldberg, Katzman and New Matter: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. Clugh, by and through their counsel, & Shipman, P.C., and file the following Answer 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph No. 7 and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted only that there was contact between the vehicle operated by Defendant, David L. Clugh, Jr., and Plaintiff's vehicle. The remaining averments of Paragraph No. 9 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. COUNT I - NEGLIGENC~ PLAINTIFF v. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR, 10. The answering Defendant incorporates herein by reference his answers to Paragraph Nos. i through 9 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 11. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. contain conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. 11 2 12. Denied. subparagraphs (a) which no response The averments contained in Paragraph No. 12, through (r), are conclusions of law and fact to is required. If a response is deemed to be required, denied. a. Defendant, the averments contained therein are specifically Denied. It is specifically denied that the David L. Clugh, Jr., operated his vehicle too fast for the conditions existing at the aforesaid time and place, allegedly in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3361 and applicable law; b. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was negligent, careless and reckless in any manner with respect to allegedly failing to maintain and stop the vehicle he was operating within the assured clear distance ahead, allegedly in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3361 and applicable law; c. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., exceeded the applicable maximum speed limit in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3362 and applicable law; d. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., failed to obey traffic control devices in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3111 and applicable law; Clugh, §3323 e. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was negligent in allegedly disregarding a hidden driveway warning sign and not taking necessary precautions such as reducing his speed; f. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was otherwise operating his vehicle at an unsafe speed; g. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was operating his vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3714 and applicable law; h. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., operated his vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons and/or property in violation of of 75 Pa. C.S.A. §3736 and applicable law; i. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Jr., failed to yield in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. and applicable law; j. Denied. It Clugh, Jr., otherwise vehicle; k. Denied. Clugh, is specifically denied that David L. failed to yield to Plaintiff's It is specifically denied that David L. Jr., failed to keep his vehicle under proper and 4 adequate control so as not to expose other users of the roadway to unreasonable risk of harm; 1. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., failed to maintain adequate control of the vehicle he was operating in order to avoid a collision; m. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was negligent in allegedly failing to give warning to Plaintiff of the impending collision; n. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., was negligent in allegedly failing to observe Plaintiff's vehicle which was in the process of turning on the roadway; o. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., failed to take proper evasive action in light of Plaintiff's vehicle turning in the roadway; p. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., failed to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; q. Denied. It is specifically denied that David L. Clugh, Jr., failed to pay attention to the roadway and conditions existing; and r. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to properly apply the brakes to the vehicle he was operating or to take other evasive action to avoid the collision with Plaintiff's vehicle. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that the Defendant, David L. Clugh, Jr., was negligent, careless and reckless in any manner whatsoever With respect to Plaintiff's alleged cause of action. 13. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 13 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 13 relating to Plaintiff's alleged serious and disabling injuries and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial, including but not limited to subparagraphs (a) through (i) of Paragraph No. 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 14. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 14 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 14 relating to Plaintiff's alleged medical treatment and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 15 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 15 relating to Plaintiff's alleged loss of earnings, permanent disability, impairment and/or loss of earning capacity and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 16 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 16 relating to Plaintiff's alleged great mental and physical pain and suffering and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 17. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 17 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 17 relating to Plaintiff's alleged costs and expenses and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 18. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 18 are, in part, conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments of Paragraph No. 18 relating to Plaintiff's alleged visible marking and bruising and the same are, therefore, denied and strict proof demanded at the time of trial. 19. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 19 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Defendant, David L. Clugh, Jr., respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT PLAINTIFF v. DAVID L. CLUGH, SR, 20. The answering Defendant incorporates herein by reference his answers to Paragraph Nos. i through 19 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 21. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 21 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 22. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 22 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 23. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 23 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 9 WHEREFORE, Defendant, David L. Clugh, Sr., respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT III - NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT PLAINTIFF v. THERESA J. CLUGg 24. The answering Defendant incorporates herein by reference the answers to Paragraph Nos. I through 23 above as though fully set forth herein at length. 25. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 25 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 26. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 26 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 27. Denied. The averments contained in Paragraph No. 27 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 10 WHEREFORE, Defendant, Theresa J. Clugh, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in her favor and that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MA??ER By way of additional answer and reply, the answering Defendants interpose the following New Matter defenses: 28. That the Plaintiff's claims are barred and/or limited by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. ~7102, et seq., and by the doctrine of comparative negligence. 29. That the Plaintiff, Leanne Haycock, failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety under the circumstances then and there existing. 30. That the Plaintiff, Leanne Haycock, was comparatively negligent and failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety, which comparative negligence included, without limitation, the following: a. Failing to yield the right-of-way to the Defendant's vehicle, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A §3323 and ~3324; b. c. Making an improper and hazardous Failing to keep a proper lookout vehicles on the highway; turning movement; for other d. Failing to observe the Defendant's vehicle; e. Failing to keep her vehicle under proper and adequate control so as to avoid the collision with the Defendant's vehicle; f. Failing to take an alternative, more safe exit from her property; g. Operating her vehicle without due regard for the right, safety and position of other vehicles on the highway; and h. existing. 31. That the Plaintiff's failure to care for her own safety was a substantial of the accident. 32. That the Plaintiff, Leanne Haycock, knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk of her own injuries under the circumstances then and there existing by identifying a dangerous condition, appreciating its dangerous character and voluntarily proceeding to encounter the condition. 33. That the Plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any, were not caused by any acts, omissions or breaches of duty by answering Defendants. Being inattentive to the conditions then and there exercise reasonable factor in the happening 12 34. That if it should be found that there was any negligence on the part of the answering Defendants, which negligence is expressly denied, any such negligence was not a proximate cause of any damages to the Plaintiff. 35. That the accident and injuries sustained by Plaintiff may have been caused in whole or in part by the negligence of third persons or entities including goverD/ment agencies which are not presently involved in this action. 36. That the accident, and any resulting injuries, may have been caused in whole or in part by an act of God or by forces beyond the control of the answering Defendants. 37. That the accident, and any resulting injuries, may have been caused by an intervening/superseding cause. 38. That the accident, and any resulting injuries, may have been caused by a sudden emergency. 39. That the accident, and any resulting injuries, may have been unavoidable. WHEREFORE, Defendants, David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr., and Theresa J. Clugh, respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Date: i~l~l/Ol 72600.1 GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. J~fe~on J. S~man, Esquire I.~. #: 51785 320 Market Street P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendants 14 VERIFICATION I, David L. Clugh, Jr., hereby acknowledge that I am a Defendant in this action; that I have read the foregoing document and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Davl Date:/~/~.-/{)/ VERI F~ I, David L. Clugh, Sr., hereby acknowledge that I am a Defendant in this action; that I have read the foregoing document and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. David L. Cl~gh, Sr. Date: VERIFICATION I, Theresa J. Clugh, hereby acknowledge that I am a Defendant in this action; that I have read the foregoing document and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been duly served on the following counsel of record, in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, Pennsylvania, on I'Z~[~,,l/~ : by depositing the same in Harrisburg, Clark DeVere, Esquire Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOLDBERG, KATZMAN & SHIPMAN, P.C. Jetf~son J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. #: 51785 P.O. Box 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Attorneys for Defendants 72621.1 LEANNE HAYCOCK, : Plaimiff : ; VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. : CLUGH, : Defendants : 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 28. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. Thc averments arc also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(c) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiffwas not negligent in any manner. 29. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, thc averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for her own safety and was not negligent in any manner. 30.(a)-(h) Conclusions of law, no reply required. Ifa reply is required, the averments arc specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(c) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff exercised reasonable care and was not negligent in any manner. Plaintifffurther responds as follows: (a) Plaintiff had the right-of-way, did not fail to yield the right-of-way and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; (b) Plaintiff did not make an improper or hazardous turning movement and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in thc Complaint filed in this action; Document #: 224116.1 (c) (d) Plaintiff kept a proper lookout for other vehicles and Plaintiff incorporates her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; Plaintiff exercised reasonable care in her observation of motor vehicles on the roadway and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; (e) Plaintiff kept her vehicle under proper and adequate control and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; (f) Plaintiff safely exited her property and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; (g) Plaintiff operated her vehicle with due regard for the right and safety, and position of other vehicles on the road and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against Defendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action; and (h) Plaintiff was attentive to conditions then and there existing and Plaintiff incorporates by reference her allegations of negligence against D.efendants as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action. 31. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff exemised reasonable care for her own safety and it was Defendants' conduct, either individually and/or jointly and severally, which was the substantial factor in causing the accident as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. 32. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e) and 1030(note). By way of further reply, Plaintiff did not "assume any risk of her own injuries under -2- Document #:224116. I the circumstances" and it was Defendants' negligent conduct, either individually and/or jointly and severally, which caused her injuries as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated hereby reference. 33. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, Plaintiff's injuries and damages were caused by acts, omissions and/or breaches of duty by Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated hereby reference. 34. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, the Defendants were negligent and their negligence, either individually and/or jointly and severally, was the proximate cause of the injuries and damages to the Plaintiff as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. 35. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied as stated. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further, Plaintiff's accident and injuries were caused by the negligence of Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. As for the involvement of any other third parties or entities including any government agencies, the Plaintiff is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments based on the allegations in the New Matter. 36. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way ~3~ Document #.'224116.1 of further reply, the accident and resulting injuries and damages were caused by the negligent actions of Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. 37. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, the accident and resulting injuries and damages were caused by the negligent actions of Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. 38. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, the accident and resulting injuries and damages were caused by the negligem actions of Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complalm filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. 39. Conclusions of law, no reply required. If a reply is required, the averments are specifically denied. The averments are also denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further reply, the accident and resulting injuries and damages were caused by the negligent actions of Defendants, either individually and/or jointly and severally, as set forth in the Complaint filed in this action which is incorporated herein by reference. -4- Document #:224116.1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff LeAnne Haycock demands that Defendants' New Matter be dismissed and that judgment be entered in her favor and against Defendants as requested in the Complaint filed in this action. METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By:. ~ Clark DeV~re, Esquire -- A~torney I.D. No. 65768 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff Dated: -5- Document #.'224116,1 VERIFICATION I, Leanne Haycock, hereby certify that the following is correct: The facts set forth in the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter are based upon information which I have furnished to counsel, as well as upon information which has been gathered by counsel and/or others acting on my behalf in this matter. The language of the Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter is that of counsel and not my own. I have read the Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter, and tothe extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that the content of the Plahatiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter is that of counsel, I have relied upon such counsel in making this Verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. Dated: LeAnne Haycock Document #:224116.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Clark DeVere, Esquire, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a tree and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this 15th day of January, 2002 on the following: David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr. and Theresa J. Clugh, Defendants c/o Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street - Strawberry Square P.O. 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Clark DeVere, E~-~uire Document #:224116.1 LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaimiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.27, As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Plaintiff certifies that (1) a notice of intent to serve the subpoena with a copy of the subpoena attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena is sought to be served, (2) certificate, a copy of the notice ofintent,.including the proposed subpoena, is attached to this (3) . no objection to the subpoena has been received, and (4) the subpoena which will be served is identical to the subpoena which is attached to the notice of intent to serve the subpoena. METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB Dated: By. Clar~D~V-~e, Esquire Attorney I.D. #68768 3211 North From Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorneys for Plaintiff Document #: 227405.1 LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA ON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 Plaintiff intends to serve a subpoena on the Department of Transportation identical to the one that is attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made, the subpoena may be served. METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By: . Clark DeVere,~'~quire Attorney I.D. No. 68768 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, Pa 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff Date: LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, ~R., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA ~. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: ~ of ~ Bureau of Driver LicensinLPO Box 68695_~ Harris~-~nia 17106-8695 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Certifi~ecord o__f David ~ 1102 Celeste Drive_~ ~Pa 17257~_Driver Number: 26048953' Date of Birth: 5/30/82 at ~am__.~Knauss & Erb P.C. Attention: An ie...q~._3211 North Front Street Harrisbu~-~ 17110 You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies of produce the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: Name: _Clark DeVere, Esquire Address: 3211 North Front Street Harrisbur.q, Pa 17110 Telephone Number: 717-238-8187 Supreme Court ID # 68768 Attorney for: Plaintiff BY THE COURT: Date: Seal of the Court Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division Deputy Document #: 225550.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Angela M. Flynn, an employee of the law finn of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing document with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this c~/~- day of January, 2002 on the following: David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr. and Theresa J. Clugh, Defendants c/o Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street - Strawberry Square P.O. 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Clark DeVer~e, Esquire CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Angela M. Flynn, an employee of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this ] i~~(¢/day of February, 2002 on the following: David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr. and Theresa J. Clugh, Defendants c/o Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street - Strawberry Square P.O. 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Document #: 227405.1 LEANNE HAYCOCK, Plaintiff VS. DAVID L. CLUGH, JR., DAVID L. CLUGH, SR. and THERESA J. CLUGH, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTON - LAW NO. 01-6514 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED and ended. Dated: PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE TO SETTLE, DISCONTINUE AND END Kindly mark thc above action by Plaintiff LeArme Haycock settled, discontinued METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB, P.C. By: ~- ~.~._ _ Clark DeVere, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 68768 3211 North Front Street P.O. Box 5300 Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300 (717) 238-8187 Attorney for Plaintiff Document it: 246322.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Clark DeVere, Esquire, of the law firm of Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb, P.C., hereby certify that I served a tree and correct copy of Plaintiff's Praecipe to Discontinue with reference to the foregoing action by first class mail, postage prepaid, this 23rd day of December, 2002 on the following: David L. Clugh, Jr., David L. Clugh, Sr. and Theresa J. Clugh, Defendants c/o Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C. 320 Market Street - Strawberry Square P.O. 1268 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268 Clark D~ere,~i}~ - ~ Document #: 246322.1