Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-1273IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY PRUSKI KRYSTYNA PRUSKI Plaintiffs TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant : NO. OI- /2~/,~ .. : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW .. ., : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth against you in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entedng a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a default judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. 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 THIS OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Lawyer Referral Service Two Liberty Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249 - 3166 1-800-990-9108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY PRUSKI KRYSTYNA PRUSKI Plaintiffs TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant NO. CIVIL. ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AVIR~ USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. Si usted desea clefenderse de las quejas expuestas en las p~ginas siguientes, debe romar acci6n dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir de la fecha en que recibi0 la demanda y el aviso. Usted debe presentar comparecencia escrita en persona o por abogado y presentar en la Corte pot escrito sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en su contra. Se le avisa qua si no se defiende, el caso puede proceder sin usted y la Corte puede decidir en su contra sin mas aviso o notificaciOn pot cualquier dinero reclamado en la demanda o pot cualquier otra queja o compensaci6n reclamados pot el Demandante. USTED PUEDE PERDER DINERO, 0 PROPRIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA USTED. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE O NO CONOCE UN ABOGADO, VAYA O LLAME A LA OFICINA EN LA DIRECClON ESCRITA AB/MO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA LEGAL. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Lawyer Referral Service Two Liberty Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249 - 3166 1-800-990-9108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY' PRUSKI KRYSTYNA PRUSKI Plaintiffs TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant : NO, o/- ,/.l '73 ~ ., : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : ,. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT individuals residing at 940 Stevens Road, York Haven, PA 17370. 2. Defendant, Timothy Arnold, is an adult individual Kittatinny Drive, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. Plaintiffs, Jerzy Pruski and Krystyna Pruski, husband and wife, are adult residing at 4127 3. On April 22, 2000, Plaintiff, Jerzy Pruski, was the operator of a 1988 Chrysler Lebaron bearing PA registration plate CDC-5486. 4. On April 22, 2000, the Defendant was the operator of an automobile. 5. On April 22, 2000, at approximately 2:00 p.m., the Plaintiff was operating his automobile near the Camp Hill Mall when his vehicle was struck in the rear by the front of the Defendant's vehicle who was following directly behind Plaintiff's vehicle. 6. This accident occurred solely as a result of the negligence of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 7. This matter is alleged to exceed the applicable limits of arbitration, and a 'ury trial is hereby demanded. COUNT I JERZY PRUSKI TIMOTHY ARNOLD 8. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 7 are incorporated herein and made part hereof as fully as though set forth at length. 9. The negligence of the Defendant consisted of the following: a) Failing to properly operate and control his motor vehicle; b) Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; c) Operating his vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of others and the Plaintiff in particular, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. {}3714; d) Operating his vehicle too fast for the conditions then and there existing, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. {}3361; e) Following too closely to Plaintiff's vehicle, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. §3310; f) Failing to stop or take other evasive action before striking the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle; g)Failing to stop his vehicle within the assured clear distance ahead, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. {}3361; and h) Failing to exercise reasonable care to avoid striking the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle when the Defendant knew, or should have known, of the presence of Plaintiff's vehicle. 10. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries including, but not limited to, cervical strain/sprain, right rotator cuff 2 ~njury, right bicipital tendon tear, scapula pain, headaches, right supraspinatus tendon tear, cord compression at C4-5 and C5-6, and a severe shock to his nerves and nervous system. 11. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff was forced to incur medical bills and expenses for the injuries he has suffered, the cost or reasonable value of which is, or may be, in excess of the sum recoverable under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, and he will continue to incur medical expenses in the future. 12. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has suffered, or may suffer, a severe loss of his earnings and impairment of his earning capacity. This loss of income and impairment of earning capacity has exceeded, or may exceed, the sum recoverable under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, and the loss of income and impairment of earning capacity will, or may, continue in the future. 13. undergone, a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has in the future may undergo, great mental and physical pain and severe As and suffering, mental anguish and humiliation, loss of life's pleasures, and a limitation in his pursuit of daily activities, all to his great loss and detriment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of the mandatory arbitration limits. COUNT II KRYSTYNA PRUSKI V. TIMOTHY ARNOLD 14. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 13 are incorporated herein and made part hereof as fully as though set forth at length. 15. Solely as a result of the negligence of the Defendant, and the resulting injuries to her spouse, Plaintiff, Krystyna Pruski, has been deprived of the assistance, companionship and consortium of her husband, all of which has been to her great loss and detriment. Said losses will continue for an unknown time into the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of the mandatory arbitration limits. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: LAW--ALE E. ANSTINE, P.C. Gr,,e~ory E Martin, Esquire ~(torney I.D. #38894 Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 (717) 846 - O606 4 I HEREBY VERIFY that the information set forth in the foregoing Complaint is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements contained herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. {}4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Krystyna Pruski IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P. 1012 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly emer the appearance of Robert A. Lerman, Esquire and Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire of Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, Solymos & Calkins as attorneys for the Defendant, Timothy Arnold, in the above-captioned matter and mark the docket accordingly. GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS Robert A. Lerman, Esquire Superior Court ID No.: 07490 Thomas B. ~l~fft~igle, Esquire Superior Court ID No.: 64584 Dated: 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Telephone: (717) 757-7602 Attorney for the Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION- LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this { Io4~' dayof ~f~5 ~' v~¢ L, ,2001, I, Robert A. Lerman, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALK1NS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the Praecipe for Entry of Appearance as indicated below, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 (counsel for Plaintiffs) [ X] United States First-Class mail ] facsimile transmission ] personal delivery ] commercial overnight delivery GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS Robert A. Lerman Supreme Court ID No. 07490 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, Pennsylvania 17402 (717) 757-7602 acc/tbs/arnold.prp SHERIFF'S RETURN - C~SE NO: 2001-01273 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND PRUSKI JERZY VS ARNOLD TIMOTHY REGULAR WILLIAM DIEHL Sheriff Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE ARNOLD TIMOTHY DEFENDANT , at 1935:00 HOURS, at 4127 KITTATINNY DRIVE MECH3~NICSBURG, PA 17055 TIMOTHY ARNOLD a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE or Deputy Sheriff of duly sworn according to law, was served upon the on the 8th day of March , 2001 by handing to together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 8.68 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 36.68 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this pT~- day of ~ ,~rotnonotar~z ' So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 03/12/2001 DALE ANSTINE By: PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY PRUSKI KRYSTYNA PRUSKI Plaintiffs TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant : NO. .. : : : CIVIL ACTION ~ LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, Jer-zy Pruski and Krystyna Pruski, husband and wife, are adult individuals residing at 940 Stevens Road, York Haven, PA 17370. 2. Defendant, Timothy Arno[d, is an adult individual residing at 4127 Kittatinny Drive, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 3. On April 22, 2000, Plaintiff, Jer-zy Pruski, was the operator of a 1988 Chrysler Lebaron bearing PA registration plate CDC-5486. 4. On April 22, 2000, the Defendant was the operator of an automobile. 5. On April 22, 2000, at approximately 2:00 p.m., the Plaintiff was operating ~ automobile near the Camp Hill Mall when his vehicle was struck in the rear by the front of the Defendant's vehicle who was following directly behind Plaintiff's vehicle. 6. This accident occurred solely as a result of the negligence of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 7. This matter is alleged to exceed the applicable limits of arbitration, and a 'ury trial is hereby demanded. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, : Plaintiffs : : vs. t : TIMOTHY ARNOLD, : Defendant : No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ~5 ~ day of~ ~ ,2001, 1, Thomas B. Sponaugle, a member of the firm of GPdFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of Interrogatories/Request for Production of Documents of Defendant to Plaintiffs, Set No. 1 by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E, Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALK1NS Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD To~ Jerzy and Krystyna Pruski c/o Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Answer & New Matter of Defendant Timothy Arnold to Plaimiff's Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER & NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT TIMOTHY ARNOLD TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. AdmiRed. 6. Denied. Paragraph 6 is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant strictly denies that he was negligent in any manner whatsoever with respect to this accident and strict proof thereof is demanded. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent in any manner and strict proof thereof is demanded. 7. Denied. Paragraph 7 is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. COUNT I JERZY PRUSKI v. TIMOTHY ARNOLD 8. Paragraphs 1 through 7 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. 9. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence of the Defendant consisted of the following: a. Failing to properly operate and control his motor vehicle; b. Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and highways; c. Operating his vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of others and the Plaintiff, in particular, in violation of 75 Pa~ C.S. §3714; d. Operating his vehicle too fast for the conditions then and there existing, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S. §3361; e. Following too closely to Plaintiff' s vehicle, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S. §3310; f. Failing to stop or take other evasive action before striking the rear of Plaintiff' s vehicle; g. Failing to stop his vehicle within the assured clear distance ahead, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.§3361; and h. Failing to exercise reasonable care to avoid striking the rear of Plaintiffs vehicle when the Defendant knew, or should have known, of the presence of Plaintiff's vehicle. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent in any manner and strict proof thereof is demanded. 10. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was negligent in the happening of this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10 are denied because after 2 reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegations, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. 11. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was negligent in the happening of this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 11 are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegations, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. 12. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was negligent in the happening of this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent mariner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 12 are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegations, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. 13. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was negligent in the happening of this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligent and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 13 are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegations, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in his favor and against the Plaimiff, together with costs. COUNT II KRYSTYNA PRUSKI v. TIMOTHY ARNOLD 14. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. 15. Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was negligent in the happening of this accident. On the contrary, at all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted in a careful, lawful and prudent manner with due care under the circumstances and was not negligem and strict proof thereof is demanded. The remaining allegations comained in Paragraph 15 are denied because after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or veracity of the allegations, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to emer judgment in his favor and against the Plaintiff, together with costs of suit. By way of further answer, Defendant asserts the following New Matter: NEW MATTER 16. Paragraphs 1 through 15 above are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. 17. Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. 18. Plaintiffs' Complaint may be barred by applicable statute of limitations. 19. Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, if any, were caused solely and directly as a result of individuals or entities other than the Defendant, and over whom the Defendant had no responsibility or right of control. 20. Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, if any, were caused solely and directly as a result of the negligence of Plaintiffs, Jerzy Pruski and Krystyna Pruski, which negligence consisted of the following: a. Slowing and/or stopping their vehicle suddenly and abruptly and without warning directly in the path of the motor vehicle operated by the Defendant; b. Failing to keep a proper lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the highway; c. Failing to take appropriate actions to slow their vehicle in a safe and non- hazardous manner; d. Operating their vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of others and Defendant in particular in violation of 75 Pa. C.S. §3714; e. Failing to yield the right-of-way to Defendant's vehicle; f. Failing to properly operate and control his motor vehicle; g. Failing to observe the presence of Defendant's vehicle when the Plaintiff knew or should have known of the presence of Defendant's vehicle; and h. Failing to properly operate brake lights to warn of stopping in Defendant's path. 21. Defendant was faced with a sudden emergency, not of the Defendant's making, which occurred when Plaintiff's vehicle suddenly, abruptly, and without warning or notice slowed and/or stopped in his path. 22. Plaintiffs' claims must be barred or diminished with respect to Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence Act because of the negligence of Plaintiffs, Jerzy Pruski and Krystyna Pruski, as set forth above. 23. Plaintiffs have not sustained a serious injury as defined under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 24. Plaintiffs' claim for non-economic damages may be barred because Plaintiffs have elected a limited tort option as set forth in the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. 25. Plaintiffs may have failed to mitigate their damages. 26. Plaintiffs may have received various benefits from other insurance arrangements, programs, and groups of contract insurance, including benefits under the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and may not recover for the same benefits in this proceeding. 27. The injuries and damages that Plaintiffs claim to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have pre-existed this accident and were not caused as a result of this accident. 28. The injuries and damages that Plaintiffs claim to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have pre-existed this accident and were not aggravated or exacerbated as a result of this accident. 29. The injuries and damages that Plaintiffs claim to have sustained in this motor vehicle accident may have been sustained subsequent to this accident and may not be related to this accident. 30. Plaintiffs have recovered from the injuries which they allegedly sustained as a result of this accident. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Timothy Arnold, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to emer judgment in his favor. By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFICATION I verify that the foregoing facts are true and correct, upon my personal knowledge or information and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this fi//~ day of ~/)~ff- ,2001, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, a member of the firm of GPdFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of Answer & New Matter of Defendant Timothy Arnold to Plaintiff's Complaint by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS THOMAS~SQ 'UIRE Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND CO., PENNSYLVANIA JERZY AND KRYSTYNA PRUSKI Plaintiffs V. TIMOTHY ARNOLD Defendant : NO: 01-1273 : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW . : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT 16. Paragraph 16 states an incorporation paragraph, and therefore, no responsive pleading is required. 17. - 19. Denied. Paragraphs 17 through 19 state conclusions of law and therefore, no responsive pleading are required. To the extent that such a responsive pleading is required, it is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 20. Denied. Paragraph 20 states a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Moreover, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff: a) Slowing and/or stopping their vehicle suddenly and abruptly and without warning directly in the path of the motor vehicle operated by the Defendant; b) Failing to keep a proper lookout for other vehicles lawfully on the highway; c) Failing to take appropriate actions to slow their vehicle in a safe and non- hazardous manner; d) Operating their vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of others and Defendant in particular in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.§3714; e) Failing to yield the right-of-way to Defendant's vehicle; f) Failing to properly operate and control his motor vehicle; g) Failing to observe the presence of defendant's vehicle when the Plaintiff knew or should have known of the presence of Defendant's vehicle; and h) failing to properly operate brake lights to warn of stopping in Defendant's path. 21. - 30. Denied. Paragraphs 21 through 30 state a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such a responsive pleading is required, it is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter judgment against the Defendant with interest and costs as allowed by law. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF DALE E. ANSTINE, P.C. -'I.D.: 38894 Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 (717) 846-0606 I HEREBY VERIFY that the information set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements contained herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. ~4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. J~ruski Date: Krystyna Pruski CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 17th day of April, 2001, Gregory E. Martin, Esquire, a member of the Law Offices of Dale E. Anstine P.C., hereby certify that I have, this date, served a copy of the within and foregoing document by Certified and first class United States Mail, postage, pre-paid, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Thomas B. Sponaugle, Esquire 110 S. Northern Way York, PA 17402-3737 Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES/O= DALE E. ANSTINE, P.C. BY: ~re~ory E. Martin, Esquire I.D. NO: 388~4 Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York PA 17405 (717) 846-0606 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant AND NOW, this No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE dayof c~ ,2001, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALK1NS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O, Box 952 York, PA 17405 GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS By: Supreme Court I.D.//64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ! '~Ct'~ day of ~q~ ,2001, I, Thomas B. Sponaugle, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKiNS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories to Defendant, Set No. 1 by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALK1NS Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ANDNOW, this /"/e4~ dayof ~t'l~r ,2001, I, ThomasB. Sponaugle, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of Defendant's Answers to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories to Defendant, Set No. 2 by United States Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 By: GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS & CALKINS THOMA~ Supreme Court I.D. #64584 Attorney for Defendant 110 South Northern Way York, PA 17402 (717) 757-7602 PRAEC~PE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (F~st be typewritten and submitted in duDlicate~ TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CU~BEPJi~3 COUNTY Please list the following case~ (Check one) (XX / for JURy trial at the next term of civil court, ( ) for trial without a jury, CAPTION OF C3~-E [entire caption nust be staled in full) Jerzy Pruski and Krystyna Pruski vs. Timothy Arnold (Plaintiff) check X) ) Civil Action Law App~a~.fromArb~tration (other) (Defendant) VS. T~e trial list will De ca/led cn October 9, 2001 and Trials commence onJanuary 2002 Pretri~ls will be held on October 17, 2001 (Briefs are due 5 days befor~ pr~trials.-~ (The party listing tiLtS case for trial shall prGvide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to al~ counsel, pursuant to local Rulm 214.1.) No. 01 Civil 1273 19 Indicate t,qe attorney who wiil try ca~e fcc the party who flies this praecipe: Gregory E. Martin, Esquire Indicate trial counsel for other parties if Thomas Sponaugle, Esquire ~r,~nt ~Nj~~.GreR-/Or~E~Mar This case is ready for trial, Sig~ed ' tin, Atto~ey for~Plaintiffs Date, August 24, 2001 Esqu{re IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JERZY and KRYSTYNA PRUSKI, Plaintiffs VS. TIMOTHY ARNOLD, Defendant No. 01-1273 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO: PROTHONOTARY Please mark the docket in the above-captioned matter settled and satisfied. By: LAW OFFICES OF DALE E. ANSTINE GREGORY E, MARTIN, ESQUIRE .... Supreme Court I.D. # ~._~8~4 Attorney for Plaintiffs Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405