The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-1330IN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., VS. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendan~ No. 0 Action at Law NOTICE TO: HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant: You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and 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 THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania Telephone No: (717) 249-3166 COMPLAINT 1. Pla'mt'iff, Adams Electric Cooperative, Inc., is a nonprofit electric cooperative corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to furnish electric energy to persons in rural areas, with its principal office at 1338 Biglerville Road, Gettysburg, Adams County, Pennsylvania 17325. 2. Defendant, Howard E. Schlusser, Jr., is an adult individual residing at 4707 Enola Road, Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241. 3. At the time referred to below, Plaintiff owned an electric pole along the northern side of Enola Road (SR. 0944/150) in Lower Frankford Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, located approximately 200 feet west of its intersection with Old Mill Road (SR 4025) as part of its electric energy distribution system, including the electric lines strung therefrom and the hardware and equipment affixed thereto. 4. On December 13, 1999, at or about 11:00 P.M., a motor vehicle operated by Defendant in a westerly dhcection on Enola Road violently collided with Plaintiff's electric pole mentioned above, causing the damage referred to below. 5. The collision was due solely to Defendant's recklessness, carelessness and negligence in the operation of his vehicle. 6. Defendant's reckless, consisted of the following: (a) 6o) (c) careless and negligence operation of his vehicle failing to keep his vehicle under proper and adequate control; driving his vehicle in excess of the speed limit; operating his vehicle at a rate of speed greater than was reasonable and proper having due regard for the conditions then existing; (d) operating his vehicle at a speed greater than would permit him to stop within the assured clear distance ahead; (e) failing to exercise reasonable care and caution while operating his vehicle on the roadway; (f) failing to have the vehicle that he was operating under proper control so as to avoid hitting Plaintiffs electric pole; (g) failing to stop before colliding with Plaintifi~s electric pole; (h) failing to comply with the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code relating to the operation of motor vehicles, specifically as they relate to the aforesaid acts of negligence; and (i) engaging in such other acts or omissions as may be revealed in the course of discovery, or at the trial of this case. 7. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's aforesaid recklessness, carelessness and negligence, Plaintifi~s electric pole was sheared off, leaving it in a dangerous position exposing operators of vehicles and pedestrians traveling on or along Enola Road and the property owners adjacent thereto, their guests and invitees to the potential risks of death or serious bodily injury should they or their vehicles come into contact with the energized wires attached to the top of the broken pole. 8. After learning about such collision and the damage caused to its pole, Plaintiff promptly dispatched one of its crews to set a new pole to replace the broken pole and to transfer the electric lines from that broken pole to the new pole. 9. The damages suffered by Plaintiff as a consequence of Defendant's actions were those costs it incurred, fairly and reasonably allocated on a functional basis in accordance with established accounting principles, when it promptly set its new electric pole, transferred the electric lines and removed the broken pole, to wit: Direct Labor Costs $1,674.01 Overhead Costs 3,845.68 Replacement Materials Used (pole fully depreciated) 165.87 Meals for Line Crew DAMAGES 60.63 $5.746.19 10. Despite repeated demands made to him by Plaintiff requesting payment of such damages, Defendant has failed and refused and continues to fail and refuse to pay Plaintiff the same. 11. This action is subject to compulsory arbitration under the provisions of Cumberland County Local Rule 1301-1. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment in its favor and against Defendant in the amount of $5,746.19, plus legal interest from April 6, 2000 and costs of suit. TEETEr, TEETER & TEETER ID#19623 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717) 334-2195 Attorney for Plaintiff Verification I, Scott A. Wehler, as Manager of the Engineering Department of Adams Electric Cooperative, Inc., the Plaintiff herein, verify that I am authorized to make this verification on its behalf and that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date:March ~, 2001 Pl ~o .-I SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2001-01330 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLYANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC VS SCHLUSSER HOWARD LEE JR KENNETH GOSSERT , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon SCHLUSSER HOWARD E JR DEFENDANT , at 0019:20 HOURS, on the 13th day of March at 4707 ENOLA ROAD NEWVILLE, PA 17241 _ by handing to CAROLYN HOLTRY (PIANCE~CO- RESIDENT) a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE law~ the , 2001 together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof, Sheriff,s Costs: So Answers: Docketing 18.00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 36.06 03/14/2001 ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Sworn and Subscribed to before me this 2P~--- day of A1 A.D, ~rothonotary GREGORY E. CASSIMATIS, ESQUIRE 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-791-0400 Attorney I.D. # 49619 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT Howard J. Schlusser, Jr. ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE. INC., Plaintiff V. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 01-1330 you Ant utzt'm~ A WRITTE~ RESP~E,~TM THE ENCLOSED /~e ~ t~/~ ~ WD'HI~! TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEEEOF OR A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED A~O~L DEFENDANT'S ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr., by and through his attorney, Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire and files the following Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint whereof the following is a statement: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof thereof is demanded, 2. Admitted. 3. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the t~nth of the allegations in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof thereof is demanded Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that the Defendant's motor vehicle collided with the Plaintiffs electric pole on December 13, 1999 at or about 10:30 p.m. The balance of the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs Complaint are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). Denied as a legal conclusion to which no responsive pleading is required and pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). (a)-(h). Denied. As a legal conclusion to which no responsive pleading is required and pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). (i) This subparagraph has been dismissed by a Stipulation of Counsel which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 7. Denied. As a legal conclusion to which no responsive pleading is required and pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 8. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are deemed denied and strict proof thereof is demanded. 9. Denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 10. Denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 11. Admitted. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in its favor and against the Plaintiff. NEW MATTER 12. Plaintiff s Complaint fails to set forth a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. 13. Moments before the accident in question, Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr. had swerved to avoid hitting a deer constituting a sudden emergency which caused his vehicle to leave the roadway and knocked him unconscious. 14. The electric pole referred to in Plaintiff's Complaint was rotted and in an unsafe condition. 15. Plaintiff's alleged damages, specifically direct labor costs and overhead costs, are non- specific and excessive. WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment in its favor and against the Plaintiff. By: assimatis, Esquire Attorney for Defendant VERIFICATION I, Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire, state that I am the attorney for the Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr., that I am duly authorized to execute this verification on his behalf; that a verification of said Defendant cannot be obtained within the time permitted for this pleading; that I am acquainted with the facts set forth in the foregoing pleading; that the same are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: Gre gory,,~. Cassimatis, Esquire Attorney for Defendant GREGORY E. CASSIMATIS, ESQUIRE 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-791-0400 Attorney I.D. # 49619 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT Howard J. Schlusser, Jr. ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE. Plaintiff HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 01-1330 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED STIPULATION TO WITHDRAW PARAGRAPH 6 (i) FROM PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT It is hereby stipulated and agreed between Samuel E. Teeter, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiff, and Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire, counsel for Defendant, that Paragraph 6 (i) be stricken from Plaintiff's Complaint. Date: ~(~ '2~It Date: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this //~ day of fi~tr// , 2001, I, Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire, Attorney for Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr., hereby certify that I served a copy of the within Defendant's Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint on this date by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to: Samuel E, Teeter, Esquire Teeter, Teeter & Teeter 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 Date: By: 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 791-0400 Attorney I.D. # 49619 GREGORY E. CASSIMATIS, ESQUIRE 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-791-0400 Attorney I,D. # 49619 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT Howard J. Schlusser, Jr. ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATWE. INC., Plaintiff V. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 01-1330 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please substitute the Verification of Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr. for the Attorney's Verification previously attached to Defendant's Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint. Date: ¢/~ / By: E. Cassimatis, Esquire Attorney for Defendant VERIFICATION I, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr., a Defendant herein, verify that I am authorized to execute this Verification and veri~ that the facts set forth in the foregoing Defendant's Answer with New Matter to PlaintifFs Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this I~z~3- day of t4or,/ , 2001, I, Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire, Attorney for Defendant, Howard Lee Schlusser, Jr., hereby certify that I served a copy of the within Praecipe to Substitute Verification on this date by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, in Mechmficsburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to: Samuel E. Teeter, Esquire Teeter, Teeter & Teeter 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 By: Gregory. Cassimatis, Esquire 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 791-0400 Attorney I.D. # 49619 IN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS ~J,ECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Plaintiff, VS. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendan~ No. 01-1330 Action at Law Jury Trial Demanded REPLY TO NEW MATTER 12. Denied (i) as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required and (ii) pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 13. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(c). 14. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further reply, denied that the condition of Plaintiffs pole had any substantial impact upon or was a material factor in the extent of the damages suffered by Plaintiff due to Plaintiffs actions as described in the Complaint. 15. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further answer, denied that the damages alleged in the Complaint for direct labor and overhead costs are excessive for the reasons set forth in Paragraph 9 of the Complaint in pertinent part. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff renews its requests for judgment in its favor and against Defendant as set forth in the Complaint. T /~ .EE~R~ TEE & TEETER ~Sam~el E. Teeter, t~squire 'I~I~v19623 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717)334-2195 Attorney for Plaintiff Verification I, Scott A. Wehler, as Manager of the Engineering Department of Adams Electric Cooperative, Inc., the Plaintiff herein, verify that I am authorized to make this verification on its behalf and that the facts set forth in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are true to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Scott A. Wehler ' H IN COLYRT OF OOMMON I:'LF_~A.S OF CLUk. fBEI:U.,/~ND CO~, PENNSYLVANLA CIVIL ADAMS ~J.ECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Plaintiff, HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant No. 01-1330 Action at Law Jury Trial Demanded CONSENT TO FILING BY PLAINTIFF OF A. MENDED REPLY TO NEW MATTER I hereby consent to the filing of the attached Amended Reply to New Matter by Samuel E. Teeter, Counsel for Plaintiff, without the need for further verification by Plaintiff. Date: y~/~ ~ ,2001 Gro~ E. Cass~[~natis, Esquire Attdrney for Defendant IN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERI,AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., PI,,in t/fl, VS. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendan~ No. 01-1330 Action at Law Jury Trial Demanded AMENDED REPLY TO NEW MAT'I R 12. Denied (i) as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required and (ii) pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 13. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(c). 14. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further reply, denied that the condition of Plaintiffs pole had any substantial impact upon or was a material factor in the extent of the damages suffered by Plaintiff due to Defendant's actions as described in the Complaint. 15. Denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further answer, denied that the damages alleged in the Complaint for direct labor and overhead costs are excessive for the reasons set forth in Paragraph 9 of the Complaint in pertinent part. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff renews its requests for judgment in its favor and against Defendant as set forth in the Complaint. ~mu~l E. Teeter, Es(I~iire ID~19623 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717)334-2195 Atto~ey for Pla~tiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE NOW, this 25th day of May, 2001, I hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the foregoing Amended Reply to New Matter filed in the above-captioned action by depositing a certified copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 TEE~R,~ TElPhER & TEETER By:/~ ~'7 ~_ /~ ~el E~eet~ Esquire ID~19623 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717)334-2195 A~to~ey for Plaintiff IN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBEIII.AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS EI,ECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., PlsintLff, VS. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant No. 01-1330 Action at Law Jury Trial Demanded CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE NOW, this 25th day of May, 2001, I hereby certify that I served a copy of the Reply to New Matter filed in the above-captioned action by depositing a certified copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania on May 10, 2001, addressed as follows: Gregory E. Cassimatis, Esquire 4999 Louise Drive, Suite 103 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 By: 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717)334-2195 Attorney for Plaintiff IN COURT OF COMMON PLRAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS EI.ECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., PIRintiff, ¥8° HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendant No. 01-1330 Action at Law Jury Trial Demanded PRAECIPE DIRECTING FILING OF PLAINTIFF'S A.IPn~NDED REPLY TO NEW MAT~I'ER TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please file the Consent and PlaintifPs Amended Reply to New Matter submitted herewith. Date: May 25, 2001 TEETEA TEETER & TEETER By: /~ ~/~r,~q~ ~ quire A~orney for Plaintiff IN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ADAMS FJ.,ECTRIC COOI:'ERATIV'E, INC., VS. HOWARD LEE SCHLUSSER, JR., Defendan~ No. 01-1330 Action at Law PRAECIPE TO SETTI.E, DISCONTINUE AND END Kindly mark this action settled, discontinued and ended upon payment of your costs only. Date: ~'~ ~ , 2001 By: ~,~TEE~R & TEETER ~ ~ el~E. Teethe ,~Esquire ID#19623 108 West Middle Street Gettysburg, PA 17325 (717)334-2195 Attorney for Plaintiff