Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-1714R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 Attorneys for Julie Belt, Claimant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Plaintiff Highmark, Inc., and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Co., and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., and Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., Defendants V. NOTICE TO DEFEND Docket No. Ay - /'7/y I 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 defense 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 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, Pennsylvania (717) 249-3166 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted guiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguintes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plaza al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la nontificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demandas en contra de su p esona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la petition de demanda. Usted pueda perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes Para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO INMEDIATAMENTA. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA LFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PEUDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania (717) 249-3166 Boharle$W ! ar r, squi?t Ide ation No. 86072 Dated: 2 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (711) 234-6883 Attorneys for Julie Belt, Claimant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Docket No. 0 y' /7/¢ Plaintiff Highmark, Inc., and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Co., and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., and Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., Defendants V. COMPLAINT 1. At all relevant times hereto, Julie Belt, the Plaintiff, was an adult-individual residing at 691 Sand Spur Drive, Etters, Pennsylvania, 17319. 2. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark, Inc. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business located at 1800 Center Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011. 3. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Casualty Insurance Company was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of buiness at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. 4. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Services Co. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of buiness at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. 5. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 6. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, LLC was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. At all relevant times hereto, Ms. Belt was employed by Defendant Highmark as a project analyst. 9. On or about February 24, 2003, Ms. Belt arrived to work and parked in the parking lot designated by Defendant Highmark as employee parking. 10. Due to the very large snowfall from the previous week, snow was piled so high that the most efficient exit from the parking lot was the way Ms. Belt had driven into the parking lot. 11. Upon exiting her car, Ms. Belt began walking toward the parking lot exit. 12. As she carefully walked toward the parking lot exit, Ms. Belt had no choice but to walk over elevated ridges of ice and snow that had formed all over the parking lot surface. 13. Carefully negotiating her way over a ridge of ice, Ms. Belt slipped and slammed to the ground. 14. At the same time that she slipped, Ms. Belt felt her right ankle snap in half. 15. As she lay on the ice, Ms. Belt's right ankle and foot were convulsing uncontrollably from the trauma. 16. Immediately, several bystanders ran to her aid. 17. Ms. Belt was unable to get up, so a bystander backed his Sport Utility Vehicle up to the scene, loaded Ms. Belt in, and rushed her to the hospital. 18. In the hospital, Ms. Belt was diagnosed as suffering from not only two fractures on either side of her right ankle, but a dislocation as well. 19. After popping her ankle back in to place and applying a stabilizing splint, Ms. Belt was instructed to follow-up with an orthopedic surgeon, and she was discharged from the hospital. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Docket No.: 04-1714 Civil Term Plaintiff vs. Highmark, Inc., and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Co., and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., and Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., Defendants JURY TRIAL REQUESTED VS. Bailey Landscape & Maintenance, Inc. Additional Defendant STIPULATION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS, HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, AND HIGHMARK SERVICES COMPANY AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Highmark, Inc., Higmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Company, by and through their attorney, Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire, and states as follows: It is hereby stipulated and agreed, upon Affidavit of Anthony Cosentino, attached hereto and made a part hereof, that, for one or more of the four reasons outlined in the General Affidavit Of Anthony W. Cosentino, Defendants, Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Company and Highmark Services Company shall be removed as named Defendants in the above-captioned case, and are therefore dismissed without prejudice. If, during litigation of the above-captioned civil action, evidence is discovered that may implicate liability upon one of _nore of the parties identified in the attached Affidavit, then one or more of the parties identified in the attached Affidavit will be named as Defendant(s), not withstanding the statute of limitations. General Affidavit of Anthony W. Cosentino RE: Julie Belt vs. Highmark, Inc. and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company and Highmark Services Company, et al I, Anthony W. Cosentino, Director, Insurance and Risk Management of Highmark, Inc. am an authorized representative to execute this affidavit on behalf of Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Company and Highmark Services Company. I hereby swear and depose that Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Company and Highmark Services Company are not proper defendants in the above referenced lawsuit for the following reasons: Highmark Inc. does not own the property at 100 Senate Avenue, Camp Hill, Pa 17011 (commonly known as Senate Plaza) where the plaintiff's alleged injury occurred. Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc owns the building. Highmark, Inc. is a tenant at Senate Plaza and has no responsibility for any exterior maintenance and/or snow removal. (A copy of the lease between Highmark and Rouse that verifies theses facts was previously provided to plaintiff's counsel.) 2. Highmark Casualty Insurance Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Highmark, Inc and is not a tenant in the Senate Plaza property nor do they have any interest whatsoever at this property. Highmark Services Company is also a wholly owned subsidiary of Highmark Inc. that provided claims administration services for the plaintiff's workers compensation claim. They are not a tenant at Senate Plaza, nor do they have any interest whatsoever at this property. 4. The plaintiff has a pending workers compensation claim against Highmark, Inc. based on the same allegations as stated in the above-referenced civil suit. Workers compensation is the exclusive remedy for the plaintiff s claim against Highmark, Inc and they cannot be a defendant in the instant civil matter. ( ignat e Anthony W. Cosentino Highmark, Inc. 1800 Center Street Camp Hill, PA 17089 Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch By: ?- Edward . Cermanski, Esquire Attorne for Highmark Defendants Weber By. Black Landscaping and By: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record this 14"' day of September, 2005, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: Patricia Corll, Esquire WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON 800 North 3rd Street Second Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 Counsel for Rouse Defendants and Bailey Landscape Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RALP F. TOUCH 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 Counsel for Highmark Defendants R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Adam G. Reedy, Law Clerk 414 `,f J i 4? L T a ?r T rJ : .i 20. Accordingly, Ms. Belt followed-up with an orthopedic surgeon, who diagnosed her as suffering from a displaced right tibial fracture and a dislocated right ankle mortise. 21. The orthopedic surgeon immediately scheduled Ms. Belt for an open reduction surgery with internal fixations. 22. On or about February 27, 2003, Ms. Belt underwent the recommended surgery to implant hardware into right ankle. 23. The orthopedic surgeon subsequently applied a hard cast to Ms. Belt's right ankle and ordered her not to work. 24. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Belt's orthopedic surgeon ordered a formal course of physical therapy in an effort to regain some of the strength and range of motion in the injured ankle. 25. After nearly five (5) months of medical care, Ms. Belt was released from the care of her orthopedic surgeon. 26. Unfortunately, Ms. Belt's ankle has not healed back to its preinjury form. 27. Now, more than a year after the injury, Ms. Belt still suffers from pain, weakness, and physical limitations as a direct and proximate result of the February 24, 2003 fall. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the accumulation of snow and/or ice in a parking lot maintained and/or controlled by the Defendants, Ms. Belt fell and suffered severe and permanent injuries, including but not limited to injuries to her right lower extremity. 29. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained severe, permanent and disabling injuries that have caused lost earnings and loss of earning capacity-past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained medical expenses, past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents, Ms. Belt has experienced extreme pain and suffering, embarrassment, humiliation, disfigurement, scarring, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of life's pleasures and may continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 32. The negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents was a substantial factor in causing the injuries and damages described herein, and for all of which damages are claimed. COUNTI-NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark, Inc. 33. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 34. Defendant Highmark is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 35. Defendant Highmark, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 6) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 36. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. submitted, By: Dated: L'-'VT No. 86072 8 VERIFICATION I, Julie Belt, hereby swear and affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 1 understand that the statements made herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. Dated: li Belt p 4Q 0 0 .? a R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Plaintiff Docket No. 04-1714 Civil Term Highmark, Inc., and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Co., and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., and Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., Defendants V. NOTICE TO DEFEND YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this First Amended Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defense 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 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, Pennsylvania (717) 249-3166 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la cone. Si usted guiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en ]as paginas siguintes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plaza al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la nontificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la cone en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demandas en contra de su p esona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, Ila torte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notification y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la petition de demanda. Usted pueda perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO INMEDIATAMENTA. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAIL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME FOR TELEFONO A LA LFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PEUDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania (717) 249-3166 Dated: "0q 2 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BELT, DOCKET NO. 04 -1714 Civil Term Plaintiff VS. HIGHMARK, INC. and HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. and HIGHMARK SERVICES CO. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC: and ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants Jury Trial Requested FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT At all relevant times hereto, Julie Belt, the Plaintiff, was an adult-individual residing at 691 Sand Spur Drive, Etters, Pennsylvania, 17319. 2. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark, Inc. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business located at 1800 Center Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011. 3. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Casualty Insurance Company was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. 4. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Services Co. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. 5. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 6. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, LLC was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 7. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 8. At all relevant times hereto, Ms. Belt was employed by Defendant Highmark as a project analyst. 9. On or about February 24, 2003, Ms. Belt arrived to work and parked in the parking lot designated by Defendant Highmark as employee parking. 10. Due to the very large snowfall from the previous week, snow was piled so high that the most efficient exit from the parking lot was the way Ms. Belt had driven into the parking lot. 11. Upon exiting her car, Ms. Belt began walking toward the parking lot exit. 12. As she carefully walked toward the parking lot exit, Ms. Belt had no choice but to walk over elevated ridges of ice and snow that had formed all over the parking lot surface. 13. Carefully negotiating her way over a ridge of ice, Ms. Belt slipped and slammed to the ground. 14. At the same time that she slipped, Ms. Belt felt her right ankle snap in half. 15. As she lay on the ice, Ms. Belt's right ankle and foot were convulsing uncontrollably from the trauma. 16. Immediately, several bystanders ran to her aid. 17. Ms. Belt was unable to get up, so a bystander backed his Sport Utility Vehicle up to the scene, loaded Ms. Belt in, and rushed her to the hospital. 18. In the hospital, Ms. Belt was diagnosed as suffering from not only two fractures on either side of her right ankle, but a dislocation as well. 19. After popping her ankle back in to place and applying a stabilizing splint, Ms. Belt was instructed to follow-up with an orthopedic surgeon, and she was discharged from the hospital. 3 20. Accordingly, Ms. Belt followed-up with an orthopedic surgeon, who diagnosed her as suffering from a displaced right tibial fracture and a dislocated right ankle mortise. 21. The orthopedic surgeon immediately scheduled Ms. Belt for an open reduction surgery with internal fixations. 22. On or about February 27, 2003, Ms. Belt underwent the recommended surgery to implant hardware into right ankle. 23. The orthopedic surgeon subsequently applied a hard cast to Ms. Belt's right ankle and ordered her not to work. 24. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Belt's orthopedic surgeon ordered a formal course of physical therapy in an effort to regain some of the strength and range of motion in the injured ankle. 25. After nearly five (5) months of medical care, Ms. Belt was released from the care of her orthopedic surgeon. 26. Unfortunately, Ms. Belt's ankle has not healed back to its preinjury form. 27. Now, more than a year after the injury, Ms. Belt still suffers from pain, weakness, and physical limitations as a direct and proximate result of the February 24, 2003 fall. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the accumulation of snow and/or ice in a parking lot maintained and/or controlled by the Defendants, Ms. Belt fell and suffered severe and permanent injuries, including but not limited to injuries to her right lower extremity. 29. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained severe, permanent and disabling injuries that have caused lost earnings and loss of earning capacity-past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained medical expenses, past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents, Nls. Belt has experienced extreme pain and suffering, embarrassment, humiliation, disfigurement, scarring, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of life's pleasures and may continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 32. The negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents was a substantial factor in causing the injuries and damages described herein, and for all of which damages are claimed. COUNTI - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark, Inc. 33. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 34. Defendant Highmark, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 35. Defendant Highmark, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; Q) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 36. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT 11- NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Casualty Insurance Company 37. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 38. Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of theiir employment. 39. Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; Q) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 40. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 10 COUNT 111- NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Services Co. 41. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 42. Defendant Highmark Services Co. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 43. Defendant Highmark Services Co., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 11 (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 0) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and 12 (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 44. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark Services Co. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark Services Co. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT N - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. 45. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 46. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 47. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: 13 (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning; in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; 14 (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; Q) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 48. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 15 COUNT V - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC 49. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 50. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 51. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 16 (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 17 Q) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 52. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT VI - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt VS. Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. 53. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 54. Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 18 55. Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (I) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 19 (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 0) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 56. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages .are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 20 By: Dated: 4?- 3 - (),-I Respectfully submitted, R. J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. No.86072 21 VERIFICATION I, Julie Belt, hereby swear and affirm that the fads and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements made herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. wy. Dated: 'T 36 .. ,04 Julie BeI1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Tammy Adams, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document served upon all counsel of record this 3' day of May, 2004, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: HIGHMARK, Inc 1800 Center Street Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, 17011 HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY 301 Fifth Avenue Building Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15233 HIGHMARK SERVICES, Co. 301 Fifth Avenue Building Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15233 ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, INC 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 171 10 ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, LLC 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110 ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110 R. J. MARZELL A & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By? -?. Tammy Adams c? o t- t, - -T =-i V r C j r l y hi cn cn 104300027 LAW OFFICES OF RALPH F. TOUCH BY: Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 610-320-4780 Atty. ID #56278 Attorney for Defendants, Highmark Services Co. And Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Plaintiff V. Highmark, Inc. and Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. and Highmark Services Company and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. And Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC And Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. Defendants CIVIL DIVISION NO. 04-1714 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance in the above-entitled matter on behalf of the Defendants, Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. and Highmark Services Co. Dated: Wednesday May 26, 2004 ..4 E',dward J Cermanski, Esquire Attorney for Defendants, Highmark Services Co. And Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PANEL OF TWELVE JURORS REQUESTED CERTIFICATION OF SERV[CE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon all parties, their attorneys or representatives, and all other relevant organizations, in the manner(s) set forth below: By first-class, United States mail postage prep Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff, Julie Belt Rouse Commercial Property, Inc. 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 Rouse Commercial Property, LLC 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 Route Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. 2704 Commerce Drive Harrisburg, PA 17110 Dated: May 26, 2004 and J. ermanski, Esquire Attome or Defendants, Highm Services Co. And Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. 104300027/Cermanski > N > m d ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. SWEENEY & SHHEEHAN By: v1ye Andrew Siegeltu Attorney for Defendants DATED: May 28, 2004 N c . fll t' tea. S CI- d 77 Cil - ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT Plaintiff VS. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM Defendants JURY TRIAL, DEMANDED ANSWER OF ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 2. Admitted. Admitted. 4. Admitted. Admitted. 6. Admitted. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 10. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 11. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 12. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 13. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 14. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 15. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 16. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 17. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 18. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 19. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 20. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are; without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 21. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are; without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 22. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are; without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 23. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 24. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 25. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 26. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 27. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 28. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 29. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law, insofar as they are directed to answering defendants. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 30. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 31. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 32. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT I-NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Hiehmark, Inc. 33. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, hic., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 34. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. 35. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. Byway of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT II - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Hiehmark Casually Insurance Connpany 37. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 38. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 39. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 40. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. COUNT III - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Hiehmark Services Co. 41. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 42. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 43. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT IV - NEGLIGENCE; Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties. Inc. 45. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 46. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 47. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, , to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 48. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. Byway of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT V - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC 49. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 50. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 51. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 52. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. COUNT VI - NEGLIGENCE. Julie Belt V. Rouse Office ManaLFement of Pennsylvania. Inc. 53. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, hic., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 54. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 55. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 56. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. NEW MATTER 1. Plaintiff's claims are barred or limited by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence Act. Plaintiff's are barred by the doctrine of assumption of the risk. If plaintiff suffered injuries, losses and/or damages as alleged in the First Amended Complaint, her injuries, losses and/or damages were caused by the acts and/or omissions of individuals and/or entities over whom answering defendants had no control, nor the right to control, nor the duty to control. 4. Answering defendants plead intervening and/or superseding cause as a defense. 5. Answering defendants deny they breached any contractual duty or warranty owed to plaintiff herein. Plaintiff's action is barred or limited by plaintiff's failure to mitigate her damages. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 8. Plaintiff s claims are barred by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Workers' Compensation Act. 9. Answering defendants assert compromise and release as an affirmative defense. 10. Answering defendants reserve the right to assert at trial any and all affirmative defenses revealed through discovery. WHEREFORE, answering defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., demand judgment in their favor, and against plaintiff herein. SWEENEY & SHEEHAN By: 'i Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants DATED: June 7, 2004 VERIFICATION ANDREW SIEGELTUCH, ESQUIRE, verifies and says that he is an attorney-at-law, and represents the Defendants herein. The statements contained in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. i 'Pddrew Siegeltuch DATE: June 7, 2004 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 234-7828 imile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JULIE BELT, Plaintiff DOCKETNO.04 -1714 Civil Term HIGHMARK, INC. and HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. and HIGHMARK SERVICES CO. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLCand ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants VS. Jury Trial Requested PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. LLC, AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff s claims are barred or limited by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence Act. 2. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of Assumption of Risk. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff s injuries, losses and/or damages were caused by the acts and/or omissions of individuals and/or entities over whom answering defendants had no control, nor the right to control, nor the duty to control. 4. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that there was an intervening and/or superseding cause of Plaintiff s injuries and/or damages in reference to Answering Defendants. 5. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Answering Defendants did not breach any contractual duty or warranty owed to Plaintiff herein. 6. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs action is barred or limited by a failure to mitigate her damages. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 8. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff's claims are barred by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Worker's Compensation Act. 9. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Answering Defendants may assert compromise and release as an affirmative defense. 10. No response is required for the allegation stated herein. Dated: (,I 1 109 R. J. Marcella & Associates, P.C. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document served upon all counsel of record this 11th day of June, 2004, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire SWEENEY & SHEEHAN Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Counsel for Rouse Defendants Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RALP F. TOUCH 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 Counsel for Highmark Defendants R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: C,--' ? V Adam G. Reedy., Law Clerk C3 : N ? O - ti ? ,. n ' ? ?? ? _ 47 -n i? _: ?' i'I -';? i?> ? C7 .. M1? N CA _? SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 DEFENDANT to wit: HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of ALLEGHENY County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 2nd , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from ALLEGHENY Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 Dep Allegheny Co 75.00 Notary 6.00 106.00 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA Sworn and subscribed to before me this q6,- day of 141,A,,,__ .U0q A.D. So answ - ? R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County // ?? 4. _ (?, , eo.., ,. Prot onotafy SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 DEFENDANT to wit: HIGHMARK SERVICES CO but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of ALLEGHENY County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 2nd , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from ALLEGHENY Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA Sworn and subscribed to before me this ?w day of wK? o?- V A.D. Cam., APA Prothonotary j So answer R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 DEFENDANT , to wit: ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES but was unable to locate Them INC in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 2nd , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 Dep Dauphin Cc 41.25 .00 66.25 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA So answers-,) R. Thomas Kline .. Sheriff of Cumberland County Sworn and subscribed to before me this 9 day of a2 W f A.L(D. ?Prothoonnoottar'y / SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 DEFENDANT , to wit: ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES but was unable to locate Them LLC in his bailiwick. Be therefore deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 2nd , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA So answeS R. Thomas K1e' Sheriff of?'Cumberland County Sworn and subscribed to before me this day o$?,- . aW y A . D . 1 //-- Pro honota'ry° SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 DEFENDANT , to wit: ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA INC but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE On June 2nd , 2004 this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA Sworn and subscribed to before me this q 6c, day of ,,2AW? A.D. ° C??Prothonotary So answers. R.'Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cum e17 rland County SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC ET AL HAROLD WEARY , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon HIGHMARK INC the DEFENDANT , at 1136:00 HOURS, on the 22nd day of April 2004 at 1800 CENTER STREET CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to SALLY MCCOY, PARALEGAL, ADULT IN CHARGE 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: Docketing 18.00 Service 10.35 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 38.35 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ?)- day of 14t 21V y' A.D. ,Prothonotary So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 06/02/2004 RJ MARZELLA By. ?? Deputy She ff In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Bell ?I vs. Highmark Inc et al SERVE: ighinark Casualt Insurance Company No. 04-1714 civil Now April 21, 2004 I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Allegheny County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Now, e/UA? within upon at by handing to a and made known to Affidavit of Service ,20 , at o'clock copy of the original M. served the the contents thereof. So answers, SheLlof County, PA Sworn and subscribed before me this day of MAY 1 1 4lft_ COSTS SERVICE MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT Notarial Seal Sheila R. O'Brien, Notary Public City of Pittsburgh, Allegheny County My Commission Expires June 19, 2004 m@mBa t le nnsyiveNa Asomietan of Nolades $ In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Bell I? VS. Il Highmark Inc et al SERVE: Hi hmark Services Co. No. 04-1714 civil 8D)]?iR-h fc 81 6 Now, April 21, 2004 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Allegheny County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Now, XC2k)Mk- within upon at by handing to a and made known to Affidavit of Service 20, at o'clock copy of the original M. served the the contents thereof. So answers, She ' of County, PA COSTS Sworn and subscribed before SERVICE $ me this day of MAY 1,12NA_ MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT Notarial Seal $ Sheila R. O'Brien, Notary Public City of Pittsburgh, Allegheny County my Comthission Expires June 19, 2004 Mem9er;1'Ot1n11Y?'?g?g?g?IN11AlIMNOtaries In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Bell VS, Highmark Inc et al SERVE: Rouse Commercial Property Inc. No 04-1714 civil Now, April 21, 2004 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Dauphin County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Affidavit of Service Now, within upon at by handing to a and made known to , 20V, at o'clock M. served the copy of the original the contents thereof. So answers, Sheriff of County, PA Sworn and subscribed before me this _ day of 20 COSTS SERVICE $ MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT fd The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Bell vs. Highmark Inc et al SERVE: Rouse Commercial Property LLC No. 04-1714 civil Now, April 21, 2004 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Dauphin County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Affidavit of Service Now, within upon at by handing to a and made known to ,20 , at o'clock M. served the copy of the original the contents thereof. So answers, Sheriff of County, PA Sworn and subscribed before me this _ day of 120 _ COSTS SERVICE $ MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT fn The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Bell vs. Highmark Inc et al SERVE; Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania No. 04-1714 civil Now, April 21, 2004 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Dauphin County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Affidavit of Service Now, within upon at by handing to a and made known to f-- Sworn and subscribed before me this ! day of ,20 _ , 20, at o'clock M. served the copy of the original the contents thereof. So answers, Sheriff of County, PA COSTS SERVICE $ MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT offire of t4P t*hrxiff Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin • BELT JULIE vs • ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY INC Sheriff's Return No. 3876-T - - -2004 OTHER COUNTY NO. 04-1714 AND NOW:April 23, 2004 COMPLAINT at 9:20AM served the within ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY INC to PAULA WASHBURN BRANCH MANAGER of the original COMPLAINT to him/her the contents thereof at 2704 COMMERCE DR HBG, PA 17110-0000 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 26TH day of APRIL, 2004 A r1 NOTARIAL SEAL Public MARY JANE SNYDER, Notary Highspirs Dauphln County My Commission Expires Sept. t, 2006 So Answers, and snaking known / `e,;?Sheri f p Coun , Pa. By Deputy Sheriff Sheriff's Costs: $41.25 PD 04/23/2004 RCPT NO 193271 TORO upon by personally handing 1 true attested copy(ies) (gibire of th.e ,?$4eri ff Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin BELT JULIE vs ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY INC Sheriff's Return No. 3876-T - - -2004 OTHER COUNTY NO. 04-1714 AND NOW:April 23, 2004 COMPLAINT at 9:20AM served the within ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LLC to PAULA WASHBURN BRANCH MANAGER of the original COMPLAINT to him/her the contents thereof at 2704 COMMERCE DR HBG, PA 17110-0000 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 26TH day of AP$: NOTARIAL bf-AL public MARY JANE SNYYD R, NOtUrnty Hlgt sµre, ro5 S c pt. 1, 2006 My Comrnission Exl So Answers, ?Xj k41(--- and making known Sheriff hi ounty Pa. By eputy Sheriff Sheriff's Costs: $41.25 PD 04/23/2004 RCPT NO 193271 TORO upon by personally handing 1 true attested copy(ies) (pifice of t4-e *hrriff Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania BELT JULIE vs County of Dauphin ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY INC Sheriff's Return No. 3876-T - - -2004 OTHER COUNTY NO. 04-1714 J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy AND NOW:April 23, 2004 COMPLAINT at 9:20AM served the within upon ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA by personally handing to PAULA WASHBURN BRANCH MANAGER 1 true attested copy(ies) of the original COMPLAINT to him/her the contents thereof at 2704 COMMERCE DR HBG, PA 17110-0000 Sworn and subscribed to be?pre me this/.,26TH day of 0 ARIAL SEAL Public rMAFy JANE SNYDE 1In Co ntY Or.spire, t t, Cornrnlssion ExpireSS. and making known So Answers, , 2004 (Sheriff of Dauphin C Pa. By ?; ... puty F?t Sheriff's Costs: $41.25 PD 04/23/2004 RCPT NO 193271 TORO ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN By: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 JULIE BELT Plaintiff VS. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial ]Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL REQUESTED PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly substitute the attached Verification for the Verification originally submitted with the following pleading: Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse's Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. SWEENEY & S13?EHAN Bya --- Andrew Siegeltuch DATED: June 18, 2004 Attorney for Defendants VERIFICATION Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., verifies and says that they are the Defendants in the above-captioned matter, and that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer are true and correct based upon information which they have furnished to their counsel and information which has been gathered by their counsel in the conduct of the lawsuit. The language of the foregoing is that of counsel and not of Defendants. Defendants have read the foregoing and to the extent that the foregoing is based upon information which they have given to counsel, Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire. IT IS true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the information contained in this document has been supplied by counsel, they are relying upon counsel in making this verification. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. DATE: / 0 2004 d ? n i d { ? .1 CN < 3 ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff vs. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant MOTION FOR LEAVE TO JOIN AN ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT AND NOW come defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. (collectively "Rouse"), seeking an Order granting leave to join an additional defendant, and in support thereof aver as follows: 1. This is an action brought by plaintiff Julie Belt to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in a slip and fall on snow and ice in a parking lot owned by Rouse. The accident allegedly occurred on February 24, 2003. 2. The Rouse defendants were served with the original Complaint in this matter on April 23, 2004. A First Amended Complaint was served upon Rouse on May 5, 2004. Rouse filed an Answer to the First Amended Complaint on June 9, 2004. 3. At all times relevant to this action, moving defendants had in force a snow removal contract with the proposed additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, hrc.(`Bailey ). 4. The contract required Bailey to keep moving defendants' parking lot clear of ice and snow. Additionally, the contract required Bailey to provide insurance coverage for Rouse for personal injury claims such as those raised in the First Amended Complaint. 5. Upon notice of the instant action, and in accordance with the contract, Rouse tendered the defense of this case to Bailey and its insurance carrier. After considerable discussion, Bailey's insurance carrier, Penn National, by letter dated Augurs 30, 2004, finally advised that it would not unconditionally assume Rouse's defense, and that it would do so only under a reservation of rights. A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit "A." 6. In light of the above circumstances, it is necessary to add Bailey as a defendant in order to enforce Rouse's rights pursuant to the terms of the contract between the parties, and otherwise. A proposed Additional Defendant's Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 7. hi accordance with the requirements of Pa.R.C.P. 2253, Rouse submits that it has made the required showing of cause to permit late joinder of the proposed additional defendant and respectfully requests that the Court so order. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that this Honorable Court enter an Order in the form attached permitting late joinder of Bailey Landscape: Maintenance, Inc. SWEEN:EY & SHEEHAN By: ` - Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. DATED: October 12, 2004 I lilltlulp ll if 11Alllly'evY'PlIll- P rU Ikn':XNa I plhSflUl1) l'A I/IU4 114g7 III III X11 'I%';. flutl ll: 11. ('a?ll'JIIII I711tlu' Allll X; I!a;j l;I+ ,II;' IIIIIIYI Ir -,PAY I'.m"Nd111ng1k411111Ptn, Pln E pus 30 2004 August 30, 2004 Teresa Rongione Hums The Rouse Company 10275 Tittle Patuxent Parkway Columbia. MD 21044-3456 Re: Julio Belt v, Rouse Commercial Properties et al. File ff: 02683065 Dear Ms. Bums, PENN NAIIONAI --- 1N*411ANF:1- - Penn National Insurance is the general liability insurance carrier for Bailey Landscape/Maintenance Inc. (herelnaftev Bailey). We are in receipt of your 7/14/04 letter requesting defense: and indempification. We will A reo to assume the defense and indemnification 10 Rouse Commercial Properties, loc., 5ercl& roperhes. Lan3 F ouse Ice anagement of Pennsylvania, Ine. (hereinafter; Rouse) under the following reservation of rights, and subject to all terms and conditions of the policy issued to Bailey. Additional insured status is conferred to Rouse by virtue of the Automatic Additional lnsuredc- Owners, C oniraotol,s and Subcontractors endorw rent, which is a part of the Commercial General Liability policy issued to Bailey. 'rhalt policy is identified as CL90034929 with a rm £3/1/02-03 and maintains IM, per occurrence limits. The Automatic Additional Insureds -- Owners, .nn c ors an Subccattacts endorsem states in part: This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART The following provision is added to WHO IS AN INSURED (Section ll): i DEFENDANT'S r EXHIBIT A Any person(s) or organizntions(s) (referred to below as "additional insured") with whom you are required in a written construction contract or agreement to name as an additional insured but only for "fur" acts or omissions arising from "your" ongoing construction operations at the location or project described in the contract or agreement. The insurance provided to the additional insured does not apply to "bodily injury's "Property damage", "personal injury" or "advertising inj ury". a. Arising out of any actor gntission of the additional insured(s) or any of their "employees", including supervision of `your work- or the work of any other person or organization. , Based on the nhnve we will not agree to indemnify Roux; for any independent acts of negligence or supervision, which may become known during the course of the litigadon. Lastly, we will not iudemnify Rouse for any sole negligence, which may come to be known through the course of this litigation. Based on the contractual language the indemnification agreement does not clearly and unambiguously set forth the parties' intent for the indemnitor to assume responsibility for the indeMnitcc's sole negligence as required under PA law; we uzzi v. Butle etroleum Coimoam- 588 A.2d I (Pa. 1991). If this proposal is aeceptahle to you please advise the undersigned in writing. We will then promptly arrange for substitution of counsel. Yours truly, Mary Lou Biesiada Liability Claim Specialist ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT'S COMPLAINT OF ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.'S AGAINST BAILEY LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, INC. 1. Complaining defendants are Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse y DEFENDANPS EXHIBIT Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. Rouse Philadelphia, Inc. ("the Rouse entities"), business entities with an office for business at 100 Senate Avenue, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011. 2. Additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc. ("Bailey"), is a Pennsylvania contractor licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 7704 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17112-0568. 3. The Rouse entities have been sued by plaintiff, Julie Belt, who alleges that she was caused to fall on a Rouse property because of the presence of ice and snow. A copy of plaintiff s Complaint is attached as Exhibit "A." 4. Rouse timely filed an Answer to the Complaint, denying all material averments of negligence therein. See copy of same attached as Exhibit "B." 5 At all times relevant to this action, Rouse had in force a contract with additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc., which required Bailey to provide snow removal and de-icing services for the property in question. The agreement also required Bailey to indemnify Rouse for personal injury claims resulting from Bailey's operations, including claims asserted such as those asserted by plaintiff herein. A copy of the Agreement for Snow Removal Services is attached as Exhibit "C." 6. If plaintiff was injured as alleged in her Complaint, which allegations of injury are expressly denied, then additional defendant Bailey is alone liable to the plaintiff, jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff, or liable over to the Rouse entities for contribution, indemnity and a defense, on the causes of action set forth in plaintiffs Complaint, the averments of which are incorporated herein by reference, without admitting the truth thereof. WHEREFORE, complaining defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. Rouse Philadelphia, Inc., demand judgment in their favor, and against additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc. SWEENEY & SHEEHAN, P.C. By 7 Andrew ? ?- Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. DATED: October 5, 2004 ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED VS. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant STATEMENT OF ATTORNEY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO JOIN AN ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT This defendant at the time of the plaintiff's accident had a snow removal contract with the proposed additional defendant. That contract required the proposed additional defendant to keep this defendant's parking lot clear of ice and snow. The plaintiff claims that she fell on ice in the parking lot. Additionally, the contract referred to above required the proposed new defendant to provide insurance coverage for this defendant. This defendant tendered the defense of this case to the proposed new defendant and its insurance carrier. Finally, after a considerable delay in responding, the insurance carrier for the proposed new defendant would not assume unconditionally the defense of this defendant. For these reasons it is necessary to add the proposed new defendant in order to enforce this defendant's rights against the proposed new defendant pursuant to the terms of the contract. SWEENEY & SHEEHAN i By: Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. DATED: October 12, 2004 ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED VS. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of defendants' Motion for Leave to Join An Additional Defendant was served on all interested counsel by U.S. First Class Mail on October 12, 2004. SWEENEY & SHEEHAN ' Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. INTERESTED COUNSEL Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Julie Beh[ Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch 401 Penn Street - Suite 100 Reading, Pennsylvania 19601 Attorneys for Defendants, Highmark Services Co. and Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. ?? hl ?I _ 'Il ' .J l 1 - ? ;lr ? 1 J } u: ` _..: ?1 .. ?; V ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 OCT 19 2004 Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. JULIE BELT Plaintiff VS. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants VS. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL REQUESTED ORDER AND NOW, this 'U-day of Qxe-'..?004, upon consideration of the motion of defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., and for cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that said motion is GRANTED, and that defendants shall have y? wQ40 which to file and serve an Additional Defendant's Complaint adding Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Enc. as a defendant. J. ?a ?o ?- ; ,; R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JULIE BELT, DOCKET NO. 04 -1714 Civil Term Plaintiff HIGHMARK, INC. and HIGHMARK CASUALTY VS. INSURANCE CO. and HIGHMARK SERVICES CO. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLCand ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. Additional Defendant VS. Jury Trial Requested PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO JOIN AN ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT Plaintiff does not object to Defendant's motion requesting Bailey Landscape & Maintenance, 7704 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg, PA 17112-0568, included as an additional Defendant in the above captioned action. Dated: 10 Respectfully submitted, R. J. Marcella & Associates, P.C. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document served upon all counsel of record this 22°d day of October, 2004, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire SWEENEY & SHEEHAN Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Counsel for Rouse Defendants Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RALP F. TOUCH 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 Counsel for Highmark Defendants R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Adam G. Reedy, Law lerk ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 JULIE BELT Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff VS. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants : JURY TRIAL REQUESTED VS. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT'S COMPLAINT OF ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.'S AGAINST BAILEY LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, INC. 1. Complaining defendants are Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. Rouse Philadelphia, Inc. ("the Rouse entities"), business entities with an office for business at 100 Senate Avenue, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011. 2. Additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc. (`Bailey"), is a Pennsylvania contractor licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of business at 7704 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17112-0568. 3. The Rouse entities have been sued by plaintiff, Julie Belt, who alleges that she was caused to fall on a Rouse property because of the presence of ice and snow. A copy of plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is attached as Exhibit "A." 4. Rouse timely filed an Answer to the First Amended Complaint, denying all material averments of negligence therein. See copy of same attached as :Exhibit "B." 5 At all times relevant to this action, Rouse had in force a contract with additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc., which required Bailey to provide snow removal and de-icing services for the property in question. The agreement also required Bailey to indemnify and provide insurance for Rouse for personal injury claims resulting from Bailey's operations, including claims asserted such as those asserted by plaintiff herein. A copy of the Agreement for Snow Removal Services is attached as Exhibit "C." 6. If plaintiff was injured as alleged in her Complaint, which allegations of injury are expressly denied, then additional defendant Bailey is alone liable to the plaintiff, jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff, or liable over to the Rouse entities for contribution, indemnity and a defense, on the causes of action set forth in plaintiff's Complaint, the averments of which are incorporated herein by reference, without admitting the truth thereof. WHEREFORE, complaining defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management ol'Pennsylvania, Inc. Rouse Philadelphia, Inc., demand judgment in their favor, and against additional defendant, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc. SWEENE'Y & SHEEHAN, P.C. Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. DATED: November 2, 2004 VERIFICATION ANDREW SIEGELTUCH, ESQUIRE, verifies and says that he is an attorney-at-law, and represents the Defendants herein. The statements contained in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. drew Siegeltuch DATE: November 2, 2004 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JULIE BELT, Plaintiff DOCKET NO. 04 -1714 Civil Term VS. HIGHMARK, INC. and HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. and HIGHMARK SERVICES CO. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. and ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC: and ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants Jury Trial Requested FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. At all relevant times hereto, Julie Belt, the Plaintiff, was an adult-individual residing at 691 Sand Spur Drive, Etters, Pennsylvania, 17311). 2. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark, Inc. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business located at 1800 Center Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011. DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT A I 3. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Casualty Insurance Company was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, ;Pennsylvania. 4. At all relevant times hereto, Highmark Services Co. was a corporation duly incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at 301 Fifth Avenue Building, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. 5. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 6. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Commercial Property, LLC was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 7. At all relevant times hereto, Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. was a corporation registered as a foreign business corporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a service agent located at 2704 Commerce Drive, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17110. 8. At all relevant times hereto, Ms. Belt was employed by Defendant Highmark as a project analyst. 9. On or about February 24, 2003, Ms. Belt arrived to work and parked in the parking lot designated by Defendant Highmark as employee parking. 2 10. Due to the very large snowfall from the previous week, snow was piled so high that the most efficient exit from the parking lot was the way Ms. Belt had driven into the parking lot. 11. Upon exiting her car, Ms. Belt began walking toward the parking lot exit. 12. As she carefully walked toward the parking lot exit, Ms. Belt had no c ice to walk o elevated ridges of ice and snow that had formed all over the lot surface. 13. Carefully negotiating her way over a ridge of ice, Ms. Belt slipped and slammed to the ground. 14. At the same time that she slipped, Ms. Belt felt her right ankle snap in half. 15. As she lay on the ice, Ms. Belt's right ankle and foot were convulsing uncontrollably from the trauma. 16. Immediately, several bystanders ran to her aid. 17. Ms. Belt was unable to get up, so a bystander backed his Sport Utility Vehicle up to the scene, loaded Ms. Belt in, and rushed her to the hospital. 18. In the hospital, Ms. Belt was diagnosed as su-ffering from not only two fractures on either side of her right ankle, but a dislocation as well. 19. After popping her ankle back in to place and applying a stabilizing splint, Ms. Belt was instructed to follow-up with an orthopedic surgeon, and she was discharged from the hospital. 3 20. Accordingly, Ms. Belt followed-up with an orthopedic surgeon, who diagnosed her as suffering from a displaced right tibial fracture and a dislocated right ankle mortise. 21. The orthopedic surgeon immediately scheduled Ms. Belt for an open reduction surgery with internal fixations. 22. On or about February 27, 2003, Ms. Belt underwent the recommended surgery to implant hardware into right ankle. 23. The orthopedic surgeon subsequently applied a hard cast to Ms. Belt's right ankle and ordered her not to work. 24. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Belt's orthopedic surgeon ordered a formal course of physical therapy in an effort to regain some of the strength and range of motion in the injured ankle. 25. After nearly five (5) months of medical care, Ms. Belt was released from the care of her orthopedic surgeon. 26. Unfortunately, Ms. Belt's ankle has not healed back to its preinjury form. 27. Now, more than a year after the injury, Ms. Belt still suffers from pain, weakness, and physical limitations as a direct and proximate result of the February 24, 2003 fall. ra 8. As a direct and proximate result of the accumulation of snow and/or ice in in lot maintained and/or controlled by the Defendants, Ms. Belt fell and suffered nd permanent injuries, including but not limited to injuries to her right lower extremity. 4 29. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained severe, permanent and disabling injuries that have caused lost earnings and loss of earning capacity-past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents as detailed below, Ms. Belt has sustained medical expenses, past, present and future, for all of which damages are claimed. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents, Ms. Belt has experienced extreme pain and suffering, embarrassment, humiliation, disfigurement, scarring, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of life's pleasures and may continue to suffer such losses in the future, for all of which damages are claimed. 32. The negligence of Defendants and/or its employees, servants, agents, and/or apparent agents was a substantial factor in causing the injuries and damages described herein, and for all of which damages are claimed„ 1 COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt Highmark, Inc. V. 33. The averments of Paragraphs l through 32 of Plaintiffs' Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 34. Defendant Highmark, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 35. Defendant Highmark, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars; (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 6 (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (0 failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where fit should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 0) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 36. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT If - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Casualty Insurance Company 37. The averments of Paragraphs l through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 38. Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 39. Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning; in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (t) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 6) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 40. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark Casualty Insurance Company in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 10 COUNT III - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Services Co. 41. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 42. Defendant Highmark Services Co. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 43. Defendant Highmark Services Co., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars. (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 11 (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (0 failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 6) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was -the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and 12 (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 44. The negligence of the Defendant Highmark: Services Co. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Highmark Services Co. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. COUNT IV - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. 45. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 46. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 47. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: 13 (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) . failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning; in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (0 failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; 14 (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue;; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 6) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 48. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 15 COUNT V - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC 49. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 50. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 51. Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 16 (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (fl failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where A should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 17 6) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 52. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against ;Defendant Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. .. COUNT VI - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt VS. Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. 53. The averments of Paragraphs 1 through 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference. 54. Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. is responsible, as a matter of law, for the negligent acts of its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees committed within the course and scope of their employment. 18 55. Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., acting by and through its actual or ostensible agents, servants, and employees for whom it is vicariously liable, was negligent in the following particulars: (a) failing to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow from the parking lots used by Highmark employees within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (b) failing to hire additional and/or adequate personnel to maintain and/or clear ice and/or snow from the parking lots, such as the one at issue, within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (c) failing to take prompt and/or appropriate steps to clear the accumulation of ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (d) failing to place some type of warning; in the area of accumulated ice and/or snow within a reasonable time after it ha,d actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (e) failing to make the area of the accumulated ice and/or snow safe within a reasonable time after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; (f) failing to properly monitor the areas of accumulated ice and/or snow prior to clearing the ice and/or snow after it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition; 19 (g) negligently leaving accumulated ice and/or snow and/or a dangerous condition unattended in an area where it should be reasonably known that an invitee and/or licensee and/or tenant may harm themselves; (h) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with maintaining the parking lot at issue; (i) failing to properly supervise those agents, employees or servants charged with clearing accumulated ice and/or snow and/or other similar dangerous conditions; 0) failing to completely and sufficiently clear the ice and/or snow and/or attend to the dangerous condition that was; the direct and proximate cause of Ms. Belt's fall; and (i) negligently contributing to the accumulation of ice and/or snow in an area of the parking lot at issue that is known to be used by licensees and/or invitees and/or tenants and/or Highmark employees. 56. The negligence of the Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. was a substantial factor in causing, and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, losses and expenses sustained by Ms. Belt as alleged in the previous above paragraphs, and for all of which damages are claimed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest and costs thereon as allowed by law. 20 Dated: S - i" tl Respectfully submitted, R. J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. By: Oarles . MZlrsar, Jr squir /Supreme-Quit Idea' r 'on No. 86072 21 VERIFICATION 1, Julie Belt, hereby swear and affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements made herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. Dated: -. ° 04 A ,julve Belt P ES-3365 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN BY: Andrew Siegeltuch Identification Number 40972 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 563-9811 JULIE BELT Plaintiff vs. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES. CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Defendants ?c ? ? 33G5 clC RECEIVED Attorney for Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM n y JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER OF ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT f (7) -T, ..A 7 n? C) .:-,3 -'n 1. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 8 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 10. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 11. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 12. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 13. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 14. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 15. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 16. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 17. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 18. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 19. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 20. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 21. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 22. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 23. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 24. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 25. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 26. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 27. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 28. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 29. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law, insofar as they are directed to answering defendants. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 30. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 31. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. 32. After reasonable investigation, answering defendants are without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averments contained in this paragraph, and same are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark, Inc. 33. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 34. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. 35. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT II - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Casualty Insurance Company 37. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 38. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 39. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded, 40. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. COUNT III - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Highmark Services Co. 41. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 42. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 43. The averments of this paragraph are directed at a defendant other than answering defendant and no answer is required. By way of further answer, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact directed at answering defendants, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT IV - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. 45. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse; Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 46. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 47. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, , to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 48. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. COUNT V - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC 49. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse; Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully set forth herein. 50. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 51. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 52. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. COUNT VI - NEGLIGENCE Julie Belt V. Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania. Inc. 53. Defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., incorporate by reference their answers to the averments of paragraphs 1-32, as if fully sett forth herein. 54. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. 55. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions, of law. By way of further answer, and not in derogation of the foregoing, to the extent the averments of this paragraph can be construed as averments of fact, they are denied and strict proof is demanded. 56. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law. NEW MATTER 1. Plaintiff's claims are barred or limited by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence Act. 2. Plaintiff's are barred by the doctrine of assumption of the risk. 3. If plaintiff suffered injuries, losses and/or damages as alleged in the First Amended Complaint, her injuries, losses and/or damages were caused by the acts and/or omissions of individuals and/or entities over whom answering defendants had no control, nor the right to control, nor the duty to control. 4. Answering defendants plead intervening and/or superseding cause as a defense. 5. Answering defendants deny they breached any contractual duty or warranty owed to plaintiff herein. 6. Plaintiff's action is barred or limited by plaintiff's failure to mitigate her damages. 7. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 8. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the provisions of Pennsylvania's Workers' Compensation Act. 9. Answering defendants assert compromise and release as an affirmative defense. 10. Answering defendants reserve the right to assert at trial any and all affirmative defenses revealed through discovery. WHEREFORE, answering defendants, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., demand judgment in their favor, and against plaintiff herein. SWEENEY & SHEEHAN By: , Andrew Siegeltuch Attorney for Defendants DATED: June 7, 2004 VERIFICATION ANDREW SIEGELTUCH, ESQUIRE, verifies and says that he is an attorney-at-law, and represents the Defendants herein. The statements contained in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. drew Siegeltuch DATE: June 7, 2004 MAN-04-2003 TUE 01,35"PM ROUSE OFFICE NGNT FAX NO. 1 410 730 7673 P. 06 FOR SNOW F :<i7 ^E THIS AGREEMENT, made this 199 _, by and between ROUSE--TEACHERS PROPERTIES, I ("Own ) ROUSI? OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., a Mar,,,'arid corporation, as agent for Owner, ("Client") , and BAILEY LANDSCAPE/MAINTENANCE, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, ("C,ontr ar_tor") . 14 I T N_E S S _ E T I?! by WHEREAS, Client manages the building located at Senate Plaza, 100 Senate Avenue, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011-2309 ("Property/Properties") on behalf of the Building's owner; and WHEREAS, Contractor is engaged in the business of providing snow removal services ("Services'); and W1HEREAS, Client desires to hire Contractor for the purpose of providing Services to the Property/Properties, and Contractor is willing to provide and perform the Services on said Property/Properties. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Client and Contractor, hereby agree as follows: 1. Scobe of Services . Contractor shall provide sufficient personnel and labor, materials, tools, equipment, supplies, permits, fees, etc. necessary to effect: timely, adequate and safe snow removal and/or deicing procedures in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (a) Contractor shall be responsible for snow removal and de-icin from parki4g areas, driveways, reads, sidewalks and any of er areas designated by Client (?iereina? der zeferze to as the "Work") at the Property/Properties. (b) The Services shall be performed by trained personnel who shall be qualified to properly perform the snow removal services as hQrein described. If any of the Contractor's personnel fail to perform the Services in a manner satisfactory to Client, upon Client's request, Contractor shall remove any such personnel and replace tf m with satisfactory personnel. } (c) It shall be the responsi of Contractor to m ni r weather conditions and tom ticall perform the work as 100283.01 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT MAR-04-2003 TUE 01;35 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX NO. 1 410 730 7673 P. 07 C ssary without specific ins' rung; ns from Client --less Cli -ynt i f ically re"ests othe - see _L shall see presumed that oncz -n inc; of snor' alien and remained on the ground for a sutticient period of time to impede vehicular travel, snow removal shall be necessary. Additionally, it shall be presumed that 'r_ the event f ???? rain or sleet have fallen for one hour or more at any time tlat wilaffect the Property/Properties to be serviced duri,3 normal business hours, salj.i or placement. of cinders shall be necessary. Contractor shall continue to monitor.Naather can It ons so that in the evert of a cons nuation o`r ;; - nce of snow , sleet or freezing rain after per nce of the Work -hereunder,-the Contractor shall maintain Property/Properties in a cleared and snow- free or ice-free condition. Contractor's performance of the work shall not nu necessary nterfere with normal flow of traffic. (d) Contractor shall use only equipment and labor as is' necessary to efficiently and economically perform the Work hereunder and r?*spond as weather conditions dictate. (e) Contractor shall be responsible for the removal of all debris created by his work. (f) Other areas on the Property/Properties may be cleared on an individual basis as conditions dictate and when requested and authorized by Client's representative on such written terms and conditions as the parties may agree to. (g) Contractor agrees to take all necessary safeguards and measures to protect the safety of all personnel connected with the job, whethor employees of Contractor or of others. it is the obligation of the Contractor to notify Client immediately of any and all damage caused by Contractor to Client's property, and that of third persons. (h) Contractor agrees to report any and all Work performed by the Contractor's personnel to Client's Representative within forty-eight (48) hours after completion of such Work. The Contractor's report shall itemize the equipment used, the hours worked, and materials used during such snow or ice removal period. (i) In the event the Contractor is requested by the Owners to return to the Property/Properties to perform corrections to the Work due to improper or inadequate: completion of the Work at an area where the Contractor reported performing snow removal or de- icing, then such corrective work shall be performed at the sole cost of the Contractor, unless such return work is necessitated by a continuance or re-occurrence of snow, sleet or freezing rain or other climatic conditions. 2. T_e2??n, Contractor shall provide the Services for a period of one (1) year, commencing January 1, 1997 ("Service Period") and ending on December 31, 1997. 1002:1301 -2- MAR-04-2003 TUE 01:35 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX NO. 1 410 730 7673 P. OS ea) it is under-'-(-,-' and agreed that Client shall have the right tc this entire Agreement, at its sole discretion,- .)y giving not less than thirty (30) days written notice to Contractor prior to the intended date of termination. (b) Client and Contractor agree not t:, h-4 re each employees for the purpose of performing the Services described herein for a period of three (3) months following the termination of this Agreement, except by prior written mutual consent, 3. service Fee. Client shall pay to Contractor a fee for providing the Services ("Service Fee") in accordance with the rates set forth in Exhibit B. The Service Fee shall be payable within thirty (30) day of receipt of an invoice from Contractor for the Services. in the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part, the Service Fee shall be prorated for the actual number of days the Services are provided. 4. Insurance. Contractor shall obtain and keep in force so long as this Agreement remains in effect, at its own cost and expense, the following: (a) commercial general liability insurance, including contractor's liability coverage,, contractual liability coverage, completed operations coverage, employer's liability coverage, a broad form property damage endorsement and contractor's protective liability coverage, to afford protection with limits, for each occurrence, of not less than One ?i1:).ion?os ($? , 0.9?T000) with an aggregate of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) combined single limit with respect to personal (including bodily) injury, death and property damage; (b) comprehensive automobile liability insurance with limits for each occurrence of not less than one Million Dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit with respect to personal injury, death and property damage; and (c) worker's compensation or similar insurance in form and amounts required by law and employers' liability insurance. (a) All policies of such insurance sha?1 at and own - d and Contractor shall deposit certificates of such insurance with Client at the address stated in Section 12 hereof within five (5) days after requested execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto. In the event Contractor fails to deposit certificates thereof with Client, Client shall have the right, but not the obligation, to obtain such insurance and Contractor agrees to reimburse Client for the premiums for such insurance. (b) Contractor agrees to take all necessary safeguards and measures to protect t _s--a3 the safety of all persons on the roperty/Properties, whether employees of Contractor connected with the job or others. Contractor shall report in writing to Client all accidents whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the Services hereunder which result in 100283 01 -3- MAR-04-2003 TUE 01:36 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX NO. 1 410 730 7673 P. 09 injuries or property damage, givinn full details and st-atemei',?s of aniyresu'Ltingporsalleged ilto have (c) If any claim contractor on account any accident Contractor shall result`e` ot1t of the performance of the Services, immediately notify Client in writing. (d) Contractor shall, at its own cost and expense and upon the request of Client, secure uthan ,,weTntytfivenThousand Dollaxsstx insurance in an amount not 00.00) g Agreement 1remainsoineeffectrContractoreshalls for or. as ac long as this deposit a certificate uofnthisoAgree1menttbyCthenpartiesn five (5) days after the execution hereto. Contractor hereby repesenfs too fulfilling obligations of "bondable corporation, capable this Section 4.B. 5. Indemnity by Contractor. Contractor shall indemnify and, at Client's option, defend Client and the owner, their respective employees and agents, and save Client andli e ownerand damages, ability ha-'il`ss from any and all claims, actions, expense in connection with loss of life, personal injury and/or damages to personal property resulting from Contractor's operations and those of its agents, contractors-and o?£mcQOtreGtcr, its agents, without limitation, any and all actir.... contractors and employees whether such actions or omissions are authorized or unauthorized and whether said agents, contractors and employees are acting within or outside of the scope of their employment. The foregoing indemnificaticn shall ethendwner an but not d its be limited to, all. costs and expenses incurred by rospective employees or agents is the defense of any claim, including without limitation, all legal fees, and all court costs, including the preparation of documents and the filing of any and all papers with the courts and the costs of depositions and investigations. Should Contractor neglect to perform the Services properly or fail to perform any provision of this Agreement, or in the event of a strike, lock out or unavailability of labor and materials, Client may, without prejudice to any other remedy it may have, upon written notice terminate this Agreement and Client will complete Contractor's performance or have it completed hereunder and deduct the cost thereof from any payment then or thereafter due the Contractor. If the unpaid balance due to Contractor is less than the cost of finishing the Services including all expenses incident thereto, Contractor shall pay the difference to Client plus 15a administrative costs, if the unpaid balance due to Contractor exceeds the cost of finishing the Services, the Contractor shall be paid for the reasonable value of the Sex-vices performed by Contractor less fifteen percent (15%) as; administrative costs. - 4 - 100285.01 MAR-04-2003 TUE 01:36 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX NO, 1 410 730 7673 P. 10 err, ana L,nd employees, and 1 ,.-yd Contractor, its damages, save Contractor harmless from any and ali claims, actions, liability and expense in connection with loss of life, personal injury and/or damages to personal property resulting from the operations of owner and Client, and thos?hof t eir ag nts,any and contractors and employees, including, all actions of Owner d Client, employe==, whether such unauthorized and w1hether outside agents, ofntheiroemploymentloy'?he- are acting within or outs be l foregoing andeiincusall rred byextend spective the Contractortand its reed all costs and expenses employees or agents in the defense of any claim, including without ofcanysandnalldpapersewith limitation, alldocuments legal fees, andatheafilingcourt preparation of the courts and the costs of depositions and investigations. 7. No Assignment or Subcontracting, Contractor shall not assign or subcontract to any other par,in whole o ntin athis any of the Services to be performed by Contractor Agreement. Any attempted assignment or subcontract shall be deemed void. 8. Independent Contractor. Client and Contractor agree that the relationship created by this Agreement between Client and Contractor is that of independent contractor asdtheaagenttofcClient. shall not act or in any way represent No employee, agent or Contractor is to be of Client?r Contractor deemed to be the employee, agent or s acknowledges the rull, sole and employed independent to performance by y p pe this Agreement. 9. Breach of Acrrpem--nt. Any breach or delay by Contractor in performing any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed a substantial breach of this Agreement, entitling Client to terminate this Agreement without prior notice or liability other less damages than to pay Contractor for those services: rendered, incurred by Client as a result of Contractor's breach. Contractor shall be excused for the period of any reasonable delay in the performance of the Services when the delay is the result of any cause or causes beyond its control. For the purpose of this Agreement, fire, explosions, floods, civil commotion, acts of God and governmental regulations shall be deemed to be the causes which are beyond Contractor's control. 10. Contract Administrator. Client hereby designates Charles Appleby as its Contract Administrator to serve as Client's principal point of contact for all administrative and technical matters involving Contractor's performance hereunder. Contractor shall on regilar tonitstperformancedpursuant to Contract Acmi 100287.01 -5- MAR-04-2003 TUE 01:36 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX N0. 1 410 730 7673 P. 11 the terms of this Agreement. Contractor shall follow those directives and reasonable interpret .-nr of the provisions of th-3 Agreement r1.-21.,6 De communicated to Con I.,a to time by t..? Contiact Administrator. 11. Notices. All notices and invoices required herein shall be in writing anu !.,,all be directed in the following manner: Contractor: Bayley Landscave/Mair?tenance, Inc. 7704 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17112--0568 Attn: Terrv Bailey. President. Client: Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania Inc_ 100 Senate Avenue Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 174.11 A?tr Charles Appleby copy to: office of the General C_ou sel The Rouse Company. 10275 Little Patuxent Parkwav ColuMbia Maryland 21044 12. Compliance With Laws. Contractor covenants to comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, codes, regulations and ordinances, including but not limited to Non- discrimination in Employment, Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, and environmental laws. Client ray germinate the contract in the event Contractor fails to cure any such alleged violations within twenty-four (24) hours of the complaint. 13. ComDl.ete Undergtaj2dina. This writing is intended by the parties hereto as a final expression of their agreement and is a complete and exclusive statement of its terms, and all negotiations, considerations and representations between Client and Contractor are incorporated. No course of prior dealings between Client and Contractor or their affiliates shall be relevant or admissible to supplement, explain or vary any of the terms of the Agreement. This Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto can only be modified by a writing signed by Client and Contractor. 1t is intended that the provisions contained in the Exhibits supplement the terms and provisions of this Agreement, and any conflict between the terms and provisions contained in the Exhibits and those of this Agreement shall be resolved by Client in i.ts sole discretion. 10028) 01 -6- MAR-04-2003 TUE 01:37 PM ROUSE OFFICE MGMT FAX NO. 1 410 730 7673 P. 12 ^L, Uiscrin; _.atic.:. Client is an equal opportunity employer. It is the policy of Client to comply with all applicable state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment based on race, age, color, sex, religion, national, origin, disability or other protected classification. Contractor acknowledges that it is also an equal opportunity employer and that it will comply with all applicable state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment based on race, age, color, sex, religion, national origin, disability or other protected classification. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this SERVICE AGREEMENT by their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. .ATTEST: 7 Assis?an rC eta y CLIENT: ROUSE OFFICE KkNL AGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. Vice President ATTEST : secretary CONTRACTOR: BAILEY LANDSCAPE/MAINTENANCE, INC. 13Y (SEAL) resident 100283,01 7 ?S a ca Fz. `-?z GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER BY: JOSEPH A. GOLDBECK, JR. ATTORNEY I.D. #16132 SUITE 5000 - MELLON INDEPENDENCE CENTER 701 MARKET STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-1532 (215) 627-1322 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE OF AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC., ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-4 UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED AS FO NOVEMBER 1, 2002, WITHOUT RECOURSE 505 City Parkway West Suite 100 Orange, CA 92868 Plaintiff INTHE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Cumberland COUNTY VS. CRICKET M. KRICK HARRY O. KRICK JR. 115 S. George Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Defendant(s) CIVIL ACTION - LAW ACTION OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE Term No. 04-1142 CIVIL TERM PRAECIPE TO REINSTATE COMPLAINT Kindly reinstate the Complaint in the above captioned matter. GOLDBECK, McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER <?Q&aldj;?k By Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff r?..a .s- -r+fi7 card -? i ?? ri WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP By: Brian L. Calistri Identification No. 59061 1811 Chestnut Street, 6`h Floor The Belgravia Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorney for Defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. JULIE BELT, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff V. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Additional Defendant ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND JURY DEMAND TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. Further, kindly note our demand of a jury of twelve (12) jurors with two (2) alternates. WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STA7ETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: Brian L,Calistri, Date: l` CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date indicated below, I served, via U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, a true and correct copy of the attached Entry of Appearance on the following individuals: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 F. Herbert Owen, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: Brian 1. Calistri, Esquire Attornql for Defendant Bailey Landscaping and Maintenance, Inc. Date: (D T C" J ?J T, Notice to Plead to Plaintiffs and Defendants. You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed Answer to Joinder Complaint with New Matter and New Matter Crossclaim Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 2252(d) within 20 days from service hereof or a default judgment may b nlcred aganst you. Brian L. C i, Esquire Lawrence. ozzelli. Esquire WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: Brian L. Calistri Identification No. 59061 Lawrence J. Bozzelli Identification No. 85108 1811 Chestnut Street, 6th Floor Attorneys for Defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. and Rouse Commercial Properties, et al. The Belgravia Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 JULIE BELT, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff V. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant ANSWER OF ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT, BAILEY LANDSCAPE AND MAINTENANCE, INC. TO JOINDER COMPLAINT OF DEFENDANT, ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA WITH NEW MATTER AND NEW MATTER CROSS CLAIMS PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 2252(d) Additional defendant, Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc., by and through its counsel, Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby LLP, hereby answers Joinder Complaint of defendant, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, with New Matter and New Matter Crosselaims pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 2252(d), and in support thereof avers: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without sufficient information to formulate a belief as to the truth of this allegation and accordingly same is denied and proof is demand. 2. Admitted 3. Admitted 4. Admitted 5. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph of the Joinder Complaint constitute conclusions of law to which no further response is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. b. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph of the Joinder Complaint constitute conclusions of law to which no further response is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, defendant Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. demand that defendant's Joinder Complaint against them be dismissed. NEW MATTER Answering defendant incorporates by reference its above answer to the joinder complaint and pleads the same as new matter. Plaintiffs and original defendant voluntarily assumed the risks of this incident, and these risks were known to them during their years of employment. 9. Plaintiffs and original defendant are guilty of contributory and/or comparative negligence. 10. Plaintiffs' and original defendant's actions are barred by the Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §7102. 11. Plaintiffs' and original defendant's injuries, if any, were caused by parties, circumstances or conditions over which answering defendant had no control and no right to control. 12. The venue selected by plaintiffs and original defendant is improper and inconvenient to answering defendant. 13. Answering defendant was not negligent, and any of answering defendant's alleged actions or alleged failures to act were not a substantial contributing factor in causing plaintiffs' and original defendant's alleged injuries. 14. Should penalties be awarded to plaintiffs and/or original defendant pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 238, answering defendant asserts that the application of same is in violation of the constitutions of Pennsylvania and the United States. In the event that Pa.R.C.P. 238 is deemed constitutional, the application of same in this case is either prohibited or limited by delays in the ultimate adjudication of this matter which are attributable to plaintiffs and/or original defendant. 15. Plaintiffs and original defendant failed to mitigate their damages and their claims are barred thereby. 16. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 1019(g), answering defendant hereby incorporates by reference every New Matter asserted by any other party in this matter. 17. Answering defendant is a statutory employer and incorporates the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act and asserts the same herein as new matter. 18. Plaintiffs' and original defendant's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 19. This Honorable Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. 20. Answering defendant incorporates all applicable contracts and/or agreements and pleads the same as new matter. 21. It is expressly denied that answering defendant was negligent, careless, and reckless, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. On the contrary, answering defendant acted reasonably, cautiously, and carefully at all times material and under the circumstances. 22. Plaintiff's complaint and original defendant's joinder complaint fails to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted. 23. These claims are barred for the failure of the instant joinder to be accomplished in a timely fashion and in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 2253. 24. The Statute of Limitations bars/limits this action directly against answering defendant. Answering defendant may not be joined as an additional defendant in this action for tortious conduct on any allegation that answering defendant is alone liable. 25. Pursuant to Rule 1030 of PA.R.C.P. defendant also raises the affirmative defenses of accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, consent, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fair comment, fraud, illegality, immunity from suit, impossibility of performance, justification, lathes, license, payment, privilege, release, res judicata, statute of frauds, statute of limitations, and truth and waiver. Pa.R.C.P. 2252 (d) NEW MATTER CROSSCLAIMS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS 26. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its above answer to the Joinder Complaint with New Matter as if the same were more fully set forth at length herein. 27. Answering defendant avers that if the accident occurred as alleged in plaintiffs' Complaint, and/or additional defendant's Joinder Complaint, which allegations are hereby expressly denied, then any injuries, damages, and/or losses sustained by said parties were due solely, if at all, to the negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of plaintiff and/or defendants, Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. and Highmark Services, and were in no way due to the acts or omissions of answering defendant. 28. Answering defendant avers that in the event that any negligence, carelessness, recklessness, and/or any wrongful conduct on the part of answering defendants is hereby established at trial, which allegations are hereby expressly denied, that original defendants, Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. and Highmark Services are solely liable, liable over to answering defendant for indemnity and/or contribution and/or contractual indemnification or jointly and severally liable with the defendants to the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, additional defendant, Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against plaintiff, Julie Belt, or, in the alternative, demands judgment that original defendants, Highmark, Inc., Highmark Casualty Insurance Co., Highmark Services, Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., be deemed solely liable, jointly and severely liable and/or liable over to additional defendant, Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc., by way of contribution, indemnification, and/or contractual indemnification. WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: 00? - Brian L. CaF Esquire Lawrence J. ozzelli, Esquire Date: 3/'aS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the date indicated below, I served, via U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, a true and correct copy of the attached Answer with New Matter and New Matter Cross Claims on the following individuals: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: Brian L. C ri, Esquire Lawrence . Bozzelli, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant Bailey Landscaping and Maintenance, Inc. Date: 1.3/- D. r _? ? -tit ? _*V 4.? ;. ` 1 . , ,.,,, C= - r ;: ? " .. : :? ?,;? ?(1 SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-01714 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT JULIE VS HIGHMARK INC 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 ADD'TL DEFEND. to wit: BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE INC but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN serve the within COMPLAINT JOINING ADDL County, Pennsylvania, to On November 17th , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Out of County 9.00 Surcharge 10.00 Dep Dauphin County 31.25 .00 68.25 11/17/2004 SWEENEY & SHEEHAN Sworn and subscribed to before me this /? day of `/1e f i So answer R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County _ 1m y A.D. -? ?I Prothonotary In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Julie Belt VS Highmark Inc et al vs. Bailey Landscape & Maintenance Inc No. 04-1714 civil Now, November 8, 2004 I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Dauphin County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA Affidavit of Service Now, _ within 20,, at o'clock M. served the upon at by handing to a and made known to copy of the original the contents thereof. So answers, Sheriff of County, PA Sworn and subscribed before me this ____ day of 20! COSTS SERVICE $ MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT (piftre -of e "Sohrxrff Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2884 Jack Lotwick Sheriff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania BELT JULIE J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy vs County of Dauphin BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC Sheriff's Return No. 6914-T - - -2004 OTHER COUNTY NO. 04 1714 AND NOW:November 10, 2004 at 11:05AM served the within NOTICE & COMPL. AGAINST ADDITIONAL DEFT. upon BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC by personally handing to SHIRLEY SWISHER-SECRETARY 1 true attested copy(ies) of the original NOTICE & COMPL. AGAINST ADDITIONAL DEFT. and making known to him/her the contents thereof at 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0000 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 12TH day of NOVEMBER, 2004 NOTARIAL SEAL MARY JANE SNYDER, Notary Public Highspire, Dauphin County My Commission Expires Sept. I, 2006 So Answers, ;;*,l ? Sheriff of Da3l2biq Cot', ?a By6°s-Jrn ????? Y De y Sheriff Sheriff's Costs:$31.25 PD 11/10/2004 RCPT NO 201412 ET R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Harrisburg, PA 17110 Julie Belt, Claimant Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Fa?mile• 17171234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA e Belt, Docket No.: 04-1714 Civil Term Plaintiff VS. Highmark, Inc., and Highmark Casualty Insurance Company, and Highmark Services Co., and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc., and Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC, and Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc., Defendants JURY TRIAL REQUESTED vs. Bailey Landscape & Maintenance, Inc. Additional Defendant Plaintiffs Reply to New Matter and New Matter Cross Claims Pursuant to PA.R.C.P. 2252(d) 7. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant is permitted to incorporate by reference its above answer to the joinder complaint and pleads the same as new matter. 8. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiff voluntary assumed the risks of this incident, and these risks were known to her during their years of employment. 19. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiff is guilty of contributory and/or comparative negligence. 10. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiffs actions are barred by the Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §7102. 11. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiffs injuries were caused by parties, circumstances or conditions over which answering defendant had no control and no right to control. 12. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that the venue selected by plaintiff is improper and inconvenient to answering defendant. 13. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant was not negligent, and any of answering defendant's alleged actions or alleged failures to act were not a substantial contributing factor in causing plaintiffs alleged injuries. 14. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that Pa.R.C.P. 238 is in violation of the constitutions of Pennsylvania and the United States. It is further denied that the application of same in this case is either prohibited or limited by delays in the ultimate adjudication of this matter which are attributable to plaintiffs and/or original defendant. 15. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages. It is further denied that plaintiffs claims are barred thereby. 16. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that pursuant to Pa.R.C.P 1019(g), answering defendant is entitled to hereby incorporate by reference every New Matter asserted by any other party in this matter. 17. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant is entitled to incorporate any or all provisions of the Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act. 18. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 19. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that this Honorable Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. 20. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant is entitled to incorporate all applicable contracts and/or agreements and plead the same as new matter. 21. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant was not negligent, careless, and reckless. Further, it is denied that answering defendant acted reasonably, cautiously, and carefully at all times material and under the circumstances. 22. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that plaintiffs complaint fails to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted. 23. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that these claims are barred for the failure of the instant joinder to be accomplished in a timely fashion and in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 2253. 24. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that the Statute of Limitations bars/limits this action directly against answering defendant. Further, it is denied that answering defendant may not be joinder as an additional defendant in this action for tortuous conduct on any allegation that answering defendant is alone liable. 25. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that pursuant to Rule 1030 of Pa.R.C.P, defendant is permitted to raise the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, consent, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fair comment, fraud, illegality, immunity from suit, impossibility of performance, justification, laches, license, payment, privilege, release, Fes judicata, statute of frauds, statute of limitations, and truth and waiver. Further, it is denied that any and/or all of the aforementioned affirmative defenses are applicable. Plaintiffs rely to Pa.R.C.P. 2252 U New Matter Crossclaims Against All Defendants 26. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that answering defendant is entitled to incorporate by reference its above answer to the joinder Complaint with New Matter as if the same were more fully set forth at length herein. 27. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that defendant Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. may not be comparatively and/or contributory negligent as set forth in the Complaint and/or joinder Complaint. 28. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Julie Belt, request this Honorable Court dismiss Defendants' New Matter and enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff as a matter of law. Dated: G I5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Nathan W. Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record this 15th day of February, 2004, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire SWEENEY & SHEEHAN Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Counsel for Rouse Defendants Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF RALP F. TOUCH 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 Counsel for Highmark Defendants Brian L. Calistri, Esquire Lawrence J. Bozzelli, Esquire WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP 1811 Chestnut Street, 6" Floor The Belgravia Philadelphia, PA 19103 Counsel for Bailey Defendants R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIA By: W. RanAev, Law Clerk .i WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: Brian L. Calistri Identification No. 59061 Lawrence J. Bozzelli Identification No. 85108 1811 Chestnut Street, 6°i Floor The Belgravia Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorneys for Defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. and Rouse Commercial Properties, et al. JULIE BELT. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PLNNSYLVANIA Plaintiff V. DOCKET NO.: 04-1714 CIVIL TERM HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. 7704 LINGLESTOWN ROAD HARRISBURG, PA 17112-0568 Additional Defendant SUBSTITUTION/WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEYS TO THE COURT: Kindly substitute/withdraw the appearances as set forth below. +r Substituting Attorney for Rouse Commercial Properties et al. Mini ),. Calist Esquire' WeGallaghe Simpson Stapleton Pir?S & Newby LLP Date Withdrawing Attorney for Rouse Commercial Pamper ?-- Iq-- G-? Date et al. _,. ,; .,,= IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY BELT Vs. NO. 041714 BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). Date: 05/11/05 qL^ File #: R320969 LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQUIRE 2000 MARKET STREET 13TH FLOOR PHILA, PA 19103 215-972-7900 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) 335-3653 By: Susan Tyre IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT i No. 041714 TO: CHARLES MARSAR JR, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) EDWARD CERMANSKI ANDREW SIEGELTUCH NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(s) identical to the one(s) 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. Date: 04/20/05 LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQUIRE 2000 MARKET STREET 13TH FLOOR PHILA, PA 19103 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD HE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (21?) 335-3653 By: Susan Tyre Enc(s): Copy of subpoena(s) Counsel return card File #: R320969 C NWMLTH OF PF2INSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND BELT vs_ BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. 041714 ORIGINAL 1L-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOGUh1F.Nf S OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 ORTHO INST OF PENNA, 875 POPLAR CHURCH RD, CAMP HILL PA 17011 TO: (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: SEE ATTACHED Al DENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS<A .1940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t, this subpoena, together with the certificate of cam liance, to the party making thi- request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable cost of preoaring the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thin subpoena may seek a court orde•' cxrrpelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 2086 MARKET STREET TELEPHONE: PHILA, PA-IU3 SUPREME COURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT R320969-01 DATE: q, curt ` Se 4l of the Court BY THE COURT: a Prothono aryy/C1 Tv Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: ORTHOINST OF PENNA ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, INCLUDING ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATION, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO, I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] )VODOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorize signature or ORTHO INST OF PENNA CUMBERLAND R320969-01 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COM DNWFALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ODUNfY OF CUMBERLAND BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. 041714 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TQ PRODUCE DOCIIJENTS OR TH 1 NC9S FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: FIRST CHOICE REHAB SPEC, 240 GRANDVIEW AVE STE 101, CAMP HILL PA 17011 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following docunents or things: SEE ATTACHED -- MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(AsJ940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the docLrwnts or produce things requested t? 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 preoaring the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thin subpoena may seek a court orde+- =ypelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REOUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAVE: rAwRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS. - STREET -008 PMRIEBT TELEPHONE: PHI A?AT9I03 SUPREPE OOURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-02 DATE: 4c- " J,7 s?UZ Se 1 of the Court BY THE COURT: a ^?? Proth tary?l / Civ' Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: FIRST CHOICE REHAB SPEC ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, INCLUDING ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATION, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO.I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or FIRST CHOICE REHAB SPEC CUMBERLAND R320969-02 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * COIYllNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CoujwY OF cLDMERLAM BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. 041714 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE QOQUMYTTS OR._THIt a FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: DALE HILBOLT, PT, 321 R WALNIJ: ST, PA& YRA 7A 13076 (Name of Person or Entity within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following doc ments or things: SEE ATTACHED l DENDUM -- at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(A9*;ssj940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested ty this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making thi_ request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi, subpoena may seek a court orde.- axrpelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: LAWRENCE--J BOZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS:. REET `--- TELFPI- PHIL JX-T -03 i?NE: SUPREME COURT ID # 215-335-321'1- ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-03 DATE: a a'd' ?2 -ry C"&05? Se hl of the Court BY THE COURT: Protho tar/ y/C1 ivil ivision Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: DALE HILBOLT, PT ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, INCLUDING ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATION, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS AREATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ } NO DOCUMENTS AIAII,ABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for DALE HILBOLT, PT CUMBERLAND R320969-03 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * COMMDNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUNI8EEFd AND BELT Vs. File No. 041714 BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR TIjINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: DR v;)" SMOKE, 1900 CARLISLE RD, CAMP MILL PA 1 :'011 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: SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(Ag&Fessf940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t,> this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccnvliance, to the party making thi: request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court orde;- ccsrpelling you to ccmply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REOUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAFE: LAWRENCE J BO ZELLI, ESQ ADORESS: ^ 2000 REET TELEPHONE: PHILA, PA 19103 aPRE1•1E OOURT ID # 215-335-3212` ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-04 DATE:_ 7 ` 2Ch.i Shal of the Court BY THE OOURT: Prot tary Civ 1 Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: DR JOHN SNOKE ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, INCLUDING ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATION, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ } RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO:I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ } NO DOCUMENTSAVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or DR JOHN SNOKE CUMBERLAND R320969-04 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * Cot*UNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNPY OF CLIVERIAND BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. O4i714 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUkENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: DR RONALD LIPPE, KAMISEIlk3 x3031', 1+i $ FTrciSDTt Sa (Name of Person or Ent Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following doaments or things: _ SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(A s1940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t) this subpoena, together with the certificate of oaTpliance, to the party making thi_ request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. if you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi, subpoena nay seek a court ordea- crnpelling you to cmply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: T.AWRFMCF. ,T _RDZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS: - 2000 f9ftRKET STREET TELEPHONE:! PHILA, PA 19103 SUIREIE COURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-05 DATE: „Z jer,;' S al of the' Court BY THE COURT: f /? Prot tar Civi Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: DR RONALD LIPPE ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, INCLUDING ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATION, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ } RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO.I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ } NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorize signature for DR RONALD LIPPE CUMBERLAND R320969-05 *** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE *** CoM4DNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUwY OF CUM3ERJAND BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. 041714 ANA TO PRODUCE PQO MENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HOLY ZPIRIT HOSP, 50' N 21ST ST, i &Y.P HT" Pia :7011 TO: ATTN- MEnlfzL RECORDS DEPT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following dome ents or things: _ SEE ATTACHED ADD N UM - at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(Ag*(;sS1940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the docL'Wnts or produce things requested ti this subpoena, together with the certificate of camliance, to the party making thi: request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thin subpoena may seek a court orde;1 om pelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NA1?F: LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS - REET TELEPHONE: PHILA, PA 19103 SUPREhE COURT ID #215 - 3 3 5- 3 212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-06 DATE: ??*C?:? _ S of h Court BY THE OOURT: Protho otary/Col, ADivision vi Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HOLY SPIRIT HOSP ANY AND ALL MEDICAL RECORDS, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, HOSPITALIZATIONS, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorize signature for HOLY SPIRIT HOSP CUMBERLAND R320969-06 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * CoMwNwEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CULT AND BELT Vs. BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT File No. 041714 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMEhffS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: HOLY SPIRIT HOSP-X, 503 X 71ST WE, C: MP KILL PA 17011 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: SEE AT -- at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(Aessl940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested ti this subpoena, together with the certificate of camliance, to the party making thi= request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable cost of preoaring the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thin subpoena may seek a court ordei- cmpelling you to conply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: LAWRENCE J BOZZELLI, ESQ ADDRESS: ' STREET -2OeE) MARKET TELEPHONE: PHILA, PA-=. 3 SUPREPE COURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT R320969-07 DATE: ( ? q A0,0 ' Sbal of the Court BY THE COURT4tarqyfi Prot , Ci I Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) BELT Vs. ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BAILEY LANDSCAPING & MAINT No. 041714 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HOLY SPIRIT HOSP-X ANY AND ALL ACTUAL FILMS, STUDIES, REPORTS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ETC. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. L ] NO DOCL 1ENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed ite Authorize signature or HOLY SPIRIT HOSP-X CUMBERLAND R320969-07 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * -, ?, ?:? C-; ..t1 _•? 1` ... X13 i IN TIRE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY BELT Vs. HIGHMARK INC, ET AL NO. 041714CV CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 PATRICIA HAAS CORLL, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). Date: 08/31/05 PATRICIA HAAS CORLL, ESQUIRE 800 N 3RD ST 2ND FLOOR HARRISBURG, PA 17102 717-237-6940 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) 335-3653 File #: R324146 By: Susan Tyre IN T1:1E COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY BELT Vs. HIGHMARK INC, ET AL I No. 041714CV TO: CHARLES MARSAR JR, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(s) identical to the one(s) 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. Date: 08/10/05 PATRICIA HAAS CORLL, ESQUIRE 800 N 3RD ST 2ND FLOOR HARRISBURG,, PA 17102 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL L19GAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (215) 335--3653 By: Susan Tyre Enc(s): Copy of subpoena(s) Counsel return card File #: R324146 OOMI474WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CouNPY OF mU EEMAND BELT File No. 2001 1714 CV VS. HIGHMARK INC, ET AL SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: BUREAU OF WORKERS COMPENSATION of Person or Ent within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following doaments or things: _ --w - -- at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS INC 4940 DISSTON ST PHILA PA 19135 (Address) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the doci.ments or produce things requested t this subpoena, together with the certificate of cmpliance, to the party making thi: request at the address listed above. You have the right. to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documnts or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving 'thiir, subpoena may seek a court orde+- cxxrpelling you to carply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: PATRICIA HAAS CORLL, ESQ ADDRESS:- Ben nm 2;p .,r 14 TjjjF_B HARRISBURG PA 17102 TELEPHONE: (215) 335-3212 SUPREME COURT ID ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT DATE: Seal of the ourt BY THE COURT: Protho ary/C1 ivil ivision Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA BELT Vs HIGHMARK INC, ET AL No. 041714CV CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: BUREAU OF WORKERS COMP ENTIRE FILE RELATED TO WORKERS COMPENSATION BUREAU #2501764. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JULIE BELT ADDRESS: 691 SAND SPUR DR ETTERS PA DATE OF BIRTH: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ) RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or BUREAU OF WORKERS COMP CUMBERLAND R324146-01 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * C7 o O :s. A L 9 4 OD CO JULIE BELT, AN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, : HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE : COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., :NO. 04-1714 - CIVIL TERM ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, : LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, : INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. Additional Defendant :JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of Defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. Date: October -N--' 202005 By; Respectfully submitted, WEBER, GALLAGHE SIMPSON STAPLETON, FIRES AND NEWBY, LLP Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire AttorneyA.D. No. 59238 800 N. 4`a St., 2nd Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 237-6947 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire, hereby certifies that on this date a true and correct copy of the following Praecipes to Withdraw/Enter Appearance were sent by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 F. Herbert Owens, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza, Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 Respectfully Submitted, WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP Rv- Dated: .1%-A C Patricii Haas Corll, Esquire Attorney for Defendant, Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc ?r-? ?? C) '? -, i <? ,_.? -?! - i _ -'- '?, <- ?? i e ? 1 ['i U i "'` JULIE BELT, :IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, : HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE : COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., :NO. 04-1714 -CIVIL TERM ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, : LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, : INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. Additional Defendant :JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please withdraw my appearance on behalf of Defendant Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. Respectfully submitted, WEBER, GALLAGHER, SIMPSON STA1 k f TON, FIRES AND NEWBY, LLP )VI 1 / By: Brian L. listri, Esquir Attorney ID. No. 59061 2000 Mayket St., 13`x' Floor Philade phia, PA 19103 (215) 972-7938 Date: September _LL. 2005 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire, hereby certifies that on this date a true and correct copy of the following Praecipes to Withdraw/Enter Appearance were sent by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 F. Herbert Owens, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza, Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 Respectfully Submitted, WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP .._......... By: Dated: 4 T Patricie Haas Corll, Esquire Attorney for Defendant, Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc ^, TM C) c ? 'Y1 u? C ?-} .? -' -rt (Il ?. .._ . .r J - l`'` --, t tai: _, r L?? h JULIE BELT, Plaintiff V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. Additional Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 04-1714 -CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.1 Defendants intend to serve a subpoena to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Labor & Industry, Bureau of Workers' Compensation, identical to the one that is attached to this Notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date of this Notice 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. Dated: r` WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP By: . Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire Supreme Ct. ID No. 59238 800 North Third Street, Second Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 1717)237-6940 Attorneys for Additional Defendant, Bailey Landscape and Maintenance, Inc CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire, hereby certifies that on this date a true and correct copy of the following Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena to Produce Documents and Things was furnished via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 F. Herbert Owens, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza, Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 Respectfully Submitted, WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP L By: CPatricia Haas Corll, Esquire Attorney for Defendant, Bailey Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. Dated: c JULIE BELT, Plaintiff V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 04-1714 -CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Additional Defendant SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry Bureau of Workers' Compensation 1171 So. Cameron Street, Room 103 Harrisburg, PA 17104 Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: Copies of any and all Bureau documents relating to: Name: Julie Belt Address 691 Sand Spur Drive, Etters, PA DOB: 02/11/64 SSAN: 172626614 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 see, in advance, the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena, within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire Supreme Court ID# 59238 Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby, LLP 800 North Third Street, 2"d Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 237-6940 Attorney for Defendant, Bailey Landscape & Maintenance, Inc. By the Court: Prothonotary/Clerk Civil Division Date: r i J+ LAW OFFICES OF RALPH F. TOUCH Jeffrey S. Lee, Esquire Atty. I.D. No. 69952 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 (610) 320-4780 Fax (610) 320-4787 Attorney for Defendants, Highmark Services Co. And Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Julie Belt, Plaintiff CIVIL DIVISION NO. 04-1714 V. Highmark, Inc. and Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. and Highmark Services Company and Rouse Commercial Properties, Inc. And Rouse Commercial Properties, LLC And Rouse Office Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. Defendants V. Bailey Landscape & Maintenance Inc. Additional Defendant PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL/ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly withdraw the appearance of Edward Cermanski, Esquire, as counsel of record for Defendant, Highmark, Inc., and enter in his place Jeffrey S. Lee, Esquire, as counsel for Defendant, Highmark, Inc. Cermanski, Esquire ). # 56278 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 W, Esquire # 69952 401 Ilene Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 Dated: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing document(s) upon all parties, their attorneys or representatives, and all other relevant organizations, in the manner(s) set forth below: By first-class mail, postage prepaid: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 N. Front St. Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff, Julie Belt Patricia Corll, Esquire Weber, Gallagher, Simpson, Stapleton Fires & Newby, LLP 800 North 3`d Street, 2"d Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 (Attorney for Defendants, Bailey Landscape Maintenance, Inc.) F. Herbert Owens, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza, Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuck, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street, 19`h Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 Dated: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 Jef y e, Esquire Attohw? for Defendant, Highmark Services Co. And Highmark Casualty Insurance Co. 104300027 w c=+ ?? ? ..?, ' _ji.- ?,' ?'. i. 1+? ? ? t:..r - ? - _ - ' S JULIE BELT, Plaintiff V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, : HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE : COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, : LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, : INC., . Defendants V. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 04-1714 - CIVIL TERM BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Additional Defendant RE- NOTICE OF DEPOSITION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, the undersigned attorney for the Defendant will take the deposition of Plaintiff, Julie Belt, under oral examination for the purposes of discovery and/or for use at trial, before an officer duly authorized to administer oaths, at the law offices of Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, 3513 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA on February 1, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. on all matters not privileged which are relevant and material to the issues and subject matter involved in the above captioned action, and said individual is required to appear at the aforesaid date and time and submit to examination under oath. WEBER, GALLAGHER, SIMPSON STAPLETON, FIRES AND NEWBY, LLP By: Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant PA.Bar No.: 59238 860 North Third Street, 2"d Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 Tel: 717.237.6940 Date: January 6, 2006 c: Geiger & Loria 541-1508 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Patricia Haas Corll, Esquire, hereby certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the following Notice of Deposition was furnished via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Edward J. Cermanski, Esquire Law Offices of Ralph F. Touch 401 Penn Street, Suite 100 Reading, PA 19601 F_ Herbert Owens, Esquire Law Offices of Sweeney & Sheehan Sentry Office Plaza, Suite 500 216 Haddon Avenue Westmont, NJ 08108 Andrew Siegeltuch, Esquire Sweeney & Sheehan 1515 Market Street, 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 Respectfully Submitted, WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP By: Patri is Haas Corll, Esquire Att ' ney for Defendant, aley Landscaping & Maintenance, Inc. Dated: January 6, 2006 ?] r.• '°i'1 -? _ C_ .. . ???_. L <t ? ... ?7 ORIGINAL IN THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE JULIE BELT, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. HIGHMARK, INC., HIGHMARK CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, : HIGHMARK SERVICES CO., ROUSE : COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC., NO. 04-1714 -CIVIL TERM ROUSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, : LLC AND ROUSE OFFICE MANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., Defendants V. BAILEY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC. :JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Additional Defendant PRAECIPE TO SETTLE AND DISCONTINUE To the Prothonotary: Kindly settle and discontinue the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, R.J. MA ASSOCIATES, PC By: ars , Esq ' e Attorney I. /No. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7828 Date: December Lo , 2007 . -.. . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Rachel A. Tingler, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record this 10th day of December, 2007, by way of United States postal service to the address as follows: Patricia Corll, Esquire WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON 800 North 3`d Street Second Floor Harrisburg, PA 17102 counsel for Rouse Defendants and Bailey Landscape R. . MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: \ Rachel A. Tingler, Lega ssistant to Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire ?' _._, C"s `c W :?='' r ?, _?.? --+ C? __'K '?? - - ?'+ ..:. R, T`,.i {'??? ?' { ?i _.