Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-6560IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff(s) & Address(es) Ronald E. Beinhaur, II, and Adrienne S. Beinhaur 4911 Colorado Avenue Harrisburg, PA 17109 VS. Defendant(s) & Address(es) Mark A. Osevala, D.O. Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C. 423 N. 215` Street Suite 301 Camp Hill, PA 17011 And Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Associated Cardiologists, P.C. 856 Century Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 :Case No. - (p Jr Civil Term Civil Action PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF SAID COURT: Issue summons in the above case Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarder Date : 9/30/09 • • • • • WRIT OF SUMMONS TO: Mark A. Osevala D.O. and Stuart B. Pink M.D. YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HASMAVE COMMENC5D AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. A .-. , JJ Prothonotary/Clerk Civ' Date: IOI??09 y Address:- 8 North Queen Street Lancaster. PA 17603 Telephone #: (717) 393-9596 Supreme Court ID Number: 69072 CA ) CF THE C1?TARY 2009 OCT - I AM I I: 5 5 P914 cur,{ ?L;urvt?r OT-50 PO ATT-1 GL`s' Sss (0 9 pr".1313w r Edward R. Kennett, Esquire ATLEE, HALL & BROOKHART, LLP 8 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17608 717-393-9596 Court I.D. No. 69072 Attorney for Plaintiffs Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE I, Michael D. Pipa, Esquire, hereby accept service of the Writ of Summons filed on October 1, 2009, on behalf of Defendant Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D., and certify that I am authorized to do so. Date: /a t S b Michael D. Pipa, Esqu Attorney for Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Court I.D. No. 53624 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, to be served upon the following persons by placing a copy of the said document in the United States mail, first class mail, directed to their office addresses as follows: Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Stevens & Lee 17 North Second Street 16"' Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C., and Associated Cardiologists, P. C. Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 Attorney for Defendant Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital Dated: to - a2- - og ATLEE, HALL_& BRQ6KHART, LLP By: F?dward R. Kennett Attorney for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717) 393-9596 1. D. No. 69072 0 F T H E Pfm% DOCH nCaWWDW 2119 OCT 23 !! 12: 17 Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 08-7444 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant(s) Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) No. 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED STIPULATION FOR CONSOLIDATION It is hereby stipulated by and between counsel of record in the two above-captioned cases that the matters be consolidated for purposes of discovery and trial. This Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and shall be considered effective when signed by counsel, even those signed on separate signature pages, and may be filed of record. Facsimile or photocopy reproductions of signatures shall have the effect of original signatures. The following caption shall be used: Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital; Mark A. Osevala, D. 0., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) Dated: / p ( Z (v 10 a IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION LAW No. 08-7444 Civil Term & No. 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED By: tarn d R . Ke tt, Esq ri eu 5anc, Hall & rookhart, LLP rth een Street ox 449 asterPA 17608-0449 (717) 393-9596 I.D. No. 69072 Attorney for Plaintiffs Dated: 1 t) 1119- 0 jl By: ` Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Stevens & Lee 17 North Second Street 16th Floor Harrisburg, pA 17101 (717) 234-1090 I.D. No. 53624 Attorney for Mark A. Osevala, D.O. & Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Oct, 23, 23!a 1 Dated: DICK Y McCAMEY 717 731 4803 No.2867 P. 3/3 B Y• Thomas airs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P. C, 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 170113700 (7.17) 731-4800 I.D. No. 78565 Attorney for Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, to be served upon the following persons by placing a copy of the said document in the United States mail, first class mail, directed to their office addresses as follows: Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Stevens & Lee 17 North Second Street 16' Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C., and Associated Cardiologists, P. C. Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 Attorney for Defendant Holy Spirit Health System tldlbla Holy Spirit Hospital Dated: p?Qq ATLEE, HALL OKHART, By: Edward R. Kennett Attorney for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717) 393-9596 I.D. No.69072 BLED-t?rrCE OF THE PAOTHO,mOTARY 2009 OCT 28 PH 1: 02 C .y?tiJYLVANIA t• Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S. Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital No. 08-7444 Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant(s) Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S. Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) No. 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this d 9 lrl?' day of (( ? , 2009, upon consideration of the Stipulation For Consolidation entered into by all parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the action captioned at 08-7444 and the action at 09-6560 are hereby consolidated for purposes of discovery and trial. It is further ordered that the caption shall be: Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S. Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital; Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 08-7444 Civil Term & No. 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED J. s. f"-A- (?' ALf: D - =U T? l10E OF THE 2009 OCT 30 A 10: 34 W' Edward R. Kennett, Esquire ATLEE, HALL & BROOKHART, LLP 8 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17608 717-393-9596 Court I.D. No. 69072 Attorney for Plaintiffs Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S. Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C. , Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital, Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Defendant(s) 2014 J~1~ 2S P~ ~' 4~} C~;~,=._. tR h ~'~a ~=':S <~, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW No. 08-7444 & 09-6560 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS STUART B. PINK, M.D., AND ASSOCIATED CARDIOLOGISTS, P.C., TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT 72-83. Neither admitted nor denied. Paragraphs 72 through 83 state conclusions of law to which no response is required. Nevertheless, in further answer thereto, Plaintiff denies the allegations set forth in paragraphs 72 through 83. Plaintiff incorporates the Amended Complaint herein. S . WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Mubashir M. Mumtaz, M.D., Mark A. Osevala, D.O., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Stuart B. Pink, M. D., and Holy Spirit Health System in an amount in excess of $50,000, together with interest and costs. Respectfully Dated: l ~~I (° ATLEE, By: Edward R. Kennett, Esquire Attorneys for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717)393-9596 I.D. No. 69072 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, to be served upon the following persons by placing a copy of the said document in the United States mail, first class mail, directed to their office addresses as follows: Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Stevens & Lee 17 North Second Street 16~' Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C., and Associated Cardiologists, P. C. Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 Attorney for Defendant Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital Dated: ~ I ~~ ~ v ATLEE, HA & BRO ART, LLP By: / l~ward R. Kennett Attorney for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717) 393-9596 I.D. No.69072 ` Sti'vens & Lee, P.C. Michael D. Pipa, Esquire I.D. #53624 Karen E. Minehan, Esquire I.D. #78050 17 North Second Street, 16th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717)255-7376 (717) 371-7743 (facsimile) Tt__r - ~.,~_ . ~! V/ i ` ,` , .' ~. - Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Mark A. Osevala, D.O., Stuart B. Pink, M.D.; Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C. and Associated Cardiologists, PC. RONALD E. BEINHAUR, II AND ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ADRIENNE S. BEINHAUR, ~ CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs, ~ CIVIL ACTION -LAW -MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY ACTION v. No. 08-7444 & 09-6560 MUBASHIR A. MUMTAZ, M.D.; CAPITAL AREA CARDIOVASCULAR ~ Civil Term SURGICAL INSTITUTE, P.C.; ASSOCIATED CARDIOLOGISTS, P.C.; and HOLY SPIRIT HEALTH SYSTEM ~ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED T/D/B/A HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, MARK A. OSEVALA, D.O. AND STUART B. PINK, M.D., Defendants. NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Plaintiffs Ronald E. and Adrienne S. Beinhaur c/o Edward R. Kennett, Esquire Atlee, Hall & Brookhart, LLP 8 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17601 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed new matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Respectfully submitted, Dated: ~ , 2010 STEVENS & LEE BY~ ~~ _ ~~~1 , `^ Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Karen E. Minehan, Esquire S L 1 96 8641 v2/041199.00364 Stevens & Lee, P.C. Michael D. Pipa, Esquire I.D. #53624 Karen E. Minehan, Esquire I.D. # 78050 17 North Second Street, 16th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717)255-7376 (717) 371-7743 (facsimile) Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Mark A. Osevala, D.O., Stuart B. Pink, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C. and Associated Cardiologists, PC. RONALD E. BEINHAUR, II AND ADRIENNE S. BEINHAUR, Plaintiffs, v. MUBASHIR A. MUMTAZ, M.D.; CAPITAL AREA CARDIOVASCULAR SURGICAL INSTITUTE, P.C.; ASSOCIATED CARDIOLOGISTS, P.C.; and HOLY SPIRIT HEALTH SYSTEM T/DB/A HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, MARK A. OSEVALA, D.O. AND STUART B. PINK, M.D., Defendants. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW -MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY ACTION No. 08-7444 & 09-6560 • Civil Term JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS MUBASHIR A. MUMTAZ, M.D., MARK A. OSEVALA, D.O., AND CAPITAL AREA CARDIOVASCULAR SURGICAL INSTITUTE, P.C. TO PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, come the Defendants, Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, by and through their attorneys, and respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint, as follows: PARTIES TO THE CAUSE OF ACTION 1. Admitted based upon information and belief. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. SL 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 4. Admitted based upon information and belief. 5. Admitted based upon information and belief. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. STATEMENT OF LIABILITY 8. Admitted that Plaintiffs allege that this is a professional liability action brought against all Defendants named in the Complaint. This allegation constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegation is denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as a legal conclusion. STATEMENT OF FACTS 9-32. Denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). Byway of further answer, the allegations of these paragraphs appear to relate to the facts of medical treatment and care, which have been recorded in the appropriate and associated medical records. Those medical records are incorporated herein by reference. To the extent that Plaintiffs' allegations are inconsistent with or in conflict in any way with the contents of the records, the allegations are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. Other allegations involve medical concepts that constitute medical expert opinions and legal conclusions, which are not the proper subject of pleading and no response is required. To the extent any response is required, such allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). After reasonable investigation Answering Defendants lack sufficient knowledge and information to form the belief as to the truth of certain of these averments pertaining to care rendered by other providers, strict proof thereof being demanded at trial. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages. 2 SLl 968641v2/041199.00364 33. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages.. 34. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages. 35. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages. 36. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages. 37. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029. By way of further response, it is denied that Answering 3 SL 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 Defendants were negligent or that any act or omission of Answering Defendants caused or contributed to the Plaintiffs' alleged damages. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. COUNTI Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D. and Mark A. Osevala, D.O. Negligence 38. Paragraphs 1 through 37 are incorporated herein by reference. 39. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Drs Mumtaz and Osevala were Plaintiff's treating physicians at various relevant times as set forth in the relevant medical records. It is denied that they were Plaintiffs' only treating physicians or that they treated Plaintiff "at all material times," to the extent that this phrase can be understood. Otherwise, Plaintiffs' allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.Civ.P. 1029. 40. Admitted. 41. (a)-(i) Allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). By way of further answer, all allegations of negligence or medical professional liability are denied and it is averred to the contrary that Drs. Mumtaz and Osevala at all times acted with reasonable care and met the applicable standards of care under the circumstances then and there existing. 42. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). 4 S L 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. COUNT II Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Stuart B. Pink, M D Ne~lisence 43. Paragraphs 1 through 42 are incorporated herein by reference. 44. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 45. Admitted upon information and belief. 46. (a-i). Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 47. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. 5 SL 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 COUNT III Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P C Negligence 48. Paragraphs 1 through 47 are incorporated herein by reference. 49. Denied. After reasonable investigation Answering Defendants lack sufficient knowledge and information to form the belief as to the truth of certain of these averments at this time, as Plaintiffs fail to define what they mean by "at all times material hereto" and fail to identify the relevant acts or the unnamed individuals. It is admitted only that Defendants Mumtaz and Osevala acted within the course and scope of their agency relationship with Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C. with regard to the medical care that they rendered to Plaintiff Ronald Beinhaur as set forth in his medical records from October 3, 2007 to October 7, 2007. It is specifically denied as a legal conclusion that Mark Watson, PA-C or J. Quatman, PA-C were employed by CVSI in October of 2007 with regard to the care rendered to Plaintiff. It is admitted only that Drs. Mumtaz and Osevala served as supervising physicians for PA Watson and PA Quatman, but it is specifically denied that this creates any vicarious liability on the part of CVSI or its physicians based upon the actions of the physicians assistants. Any other averments are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) or as legal conclusions. 50. Denied. The response to paragraph 49 above is incorporated herein by reference. 51. Denied. The responses to Paragraphs 49 above is incorporated herein by reference. 52. Denied. The response to paragraph 57 above is incorporated herein by reference. 6 S L 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 53. (a-i) Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). The response to paragraph 49 above is incorporated herein by reference. By way of further answer, all allegations of negligence or any other liability producing conduct on the part of Answering Defendant are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. To the contrary the Answering Defendant at all time acted with the appropriate care and reasonably under the circumstances then and there existing and all allegations of liability or liability producing conduct are specifically denied. 54. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. COUNT IV Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Associated Cardiologists, P.C. Neglisence 55. Paragraphs 1 through 54 are incorporated herein by reference. 56. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 57. Denied. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the 7 S L 1968641 v2/041199.00364 extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 58. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 59. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 60. (a-i). Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 61. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than the Answering Defendants, and no response on their behalf is therefore required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. COUNT V Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital Ne~lisence 62. Paragraphs 1 through 61 are incorporated herein by reference. 8 S L 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 63. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph are directed to a party other than Answering Defendant and no response on their part is therefore required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e) and as legal conclusions. 64. Denied. The response to Paragraph 63 above is incorporated herein by reference. 65. Denied. The response to Paragraph 63 above is incorporated herein by reference. 66. Denied. The response to Paragraph 63 above is incorporated herein by reference. 67. Denied. The response to Paragraph 63 above is incorporated herein by reference. 68. Denied. The response to Paragraph 63 above is incorporated herein by reference. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. COUNT VI Ronald E. Beinhaur, II v. Mubashir A. Mumtaz. M D , Mark A Osevala. D O , Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P C ,Associated Cardiologists, P C , Stuart B. Pink, M.D. Holv Spirit Health Svstem t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital Lost of Consortium 69. Paragraphs 1 through 68 are incorporated herein by reference. 70. Admitted based upon information and belief. 9 SL 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 71. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required the allegations are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. NEW MATTER 72. Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 73. Plaintiffs' injuries were caused as a result of natural, unknown causes, and not as a result of any action or inaction on behalf of Answering Defendants. 74. No conduct on the part of the Answering Defendants was a substantial factor in causing or contributing to the injuries alleged to have been sustained by the Plaintiffs. 75. If the Plaintiffs suffered any damages, those damages were caused by the conduct of others over whom Answering Defendants had no control or right of control. 76. Plaintiffs' injuries and those alleged in the Amended Complaint, if any, were the result ofpre-existing medical conditions and causes beyond the control of Answering Defendants. 77. Injuries alleged in the Amended Complaint, if any, are the result of superseding and intervening causes. 78. Plaintiffs' claims are barred in whole or in part by the MCARE Act, Act 13 of 2002, or the Healthcare Services Malpractice Act, 40 p.s. § 1301.101, et seq., and Answering Defendants raise all affirmative defenses and applicable provisions of both Acts. 79. To the extent that the evidence shows that Answering Defendants or any person for whom it is or may be vicariously liable, elected a treatment modality that is 10 S L 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 recognized as proper, but that may differ from another appropriate treatment modality, then Answering Defendants raise the "two schools of thought" defense. 80. All claims raised in the Amended Complaint are barred at whole or in part by the applicable statute of limitations. 81. Causes of action raised in the Amended Complaint are barred in whole or reduced in part by the applicable doctrines of assumption of the risk, comparative negligence or contributory negligence or some combination of the three. 82. To the extent that the evidence reveals that Defendants, or any person for whom he was or may be vicariously liable, elected a treatment modality that is recognized as proper, but that may differ from another appropriate treatment modality, then the "two schools of thought" defense is hereby raised. 83. At all times material hereto, Defendants provided care and treatment in accordance with the applicable standards of care at the time and place of treatment. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Plaintiffs, with prejudice, together with such other relief as is deemed just. Respectfully submitted, STEVENS & LEE Date: 2010 By: ichael D. ipa, Esquire Karen E. Minehan, Esquire 11 SL1 968641 v2/041199.00364 VERIFICATION (Beinhaur) I, Mark A. Osevala, D.O., depose and state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer and New Matter, are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: I loo ~° .~~G~+AGGi, Mark A. Osevala, D.O. SL 1 971372v1/041199.00364 VERIFICATION (Beinhaur) I, Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., depose and state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer and New Matter, are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~ ~~`a ~- Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D. SL 1 971374v 1 /041199.00364 VERIFICATION (Beinhaur) I, Stephen A. Vickers, depose and state that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer and New Matter, are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~ ~ ~ ~o~o Stephen A. Vickers, Executive Director Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C. S L 1 971369v 1 /041199.00364 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on this date, I served a certified true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter To Plaintiffs'Amended Complaint upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Edward R. Kennett, Esquire Atlee, Hall & Brookhart, LLP 8 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17603 Dated: , 2010 Thomas Chairs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 ~~~ Karen E. Minehan S L 1 968641 v2/041199.00364 Edward R. Kennett, Esquire ATLEE, HALL & BROOKHART, LLP 8 North Queen Street Lancaster, PA 17608 717-393-9596 Court I.D. No. 69072 Attorney for Plaintiffs Ronald E. Beinhaur, II and Adrienne S Beinhaur Plaintiff(s) vs. Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital, Mark A. Osevala, D.O., and Stuart B. Pink, M.D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW No. 08-7444 09-6560 N ~ q v JURY TRIAL DEMANDED `e+u `n ~ rn~;, ~ ~ ~ _ v~:_~:- ~~ r-- ~ ~cr ~ ~ -~ ~~ ~ Y -,- c~ :~~ ~ ~ te ~ ° -a ~ N .. Defendant(s) PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANTS MUBASHIR A. MUMTAZ, M.D., MARK A. OSEVALA, D.O., AND CAPITAL AREA CARDIOVASCULAR SURGICAL INSTITUTE, P.C. 72-83. Neither admitted nor denied. Paragraphs 72 through 83 state conclusions of law to which no response is required. Nevertheless, in further answer thereto, Plaintiff denies the allegations set forth in paragraphs 72 through 83. Plaintiff incorporates the Amended Complaint herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Mubashir M. Mumtaz, M.D., Mark A. Osevala, D.O., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P.C., Associated Cardiologists, P.C., Stuart B. Pink, M. D., and Holy Spirit Health System in an amount in excess of $50,000, together with interest and costs. Respectfully Dated: Z• ~ ~ f `' ATLEE, HALL B~~IZOOKHART, LLP By: Edward R. Kennett, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717) 393-9596 I.D. No. 69072 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, to be served upon the following persons by placing a copy of the said document in the United States mail, first class mail, directed to their office addresses as follows: Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Stevens & Lee 17 North Second Street 16`~ Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 Attorney for Defendants Mubashir A. Mumtaz, M.D., Capital Area Cardiovascular Surgical Institute, P. C., and Associated Cardiologists, P. C. Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 Attorney for Defendant Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a Holy Spirit Hospital Dated: ~~~~c ~ ATLEE, HALF&~ROO LLP By: ~-- Edward R. Kennett Attorney for Plaintiffs 8 North Queen Street P.O. Box 449 Lancaster, PA 17608-0449 (717)393-9596 I.D. No.69072