The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-3395 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. t"J..I. - .3~'1S C.i.uLL '---r?:JJ Vv"\ Civil Action - (XX) Law - - . , ( ) Equity JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RAY A. GAVLlCK 345 N. 2nd Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 : FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED : separately & doing business as Frey Mechanical Services : 1926 Auction Road, Manheim, PA 17545 :FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INC. :2265 Beaver Valley Pike, New Providence, PA 17560 Plaintiff(s) & Address(es) Defendant(s) & Address(es) PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue A Writ of Summons in the above-captioned action. W. Scott HenninQ. Esquire Handler. HenninQ & RosenberQ, LLP 1300 LinQlestown Road HarrisburQ. PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Name/AddresslTelephone No. of Attorney L Writ of Summons Shall be issued and forwarded to ( )Attorney ( Date: July 12, 2004 WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): / YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COM~ENC AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. /J. ':'I r..;~J k.. ~ Prothonotary ~ ~O-",t7P. f:PML,.r- eputy Date: .....JJ'-{ 'J J. noL/ I ( ) Check here if reverse is used for additional information 1ROTHON. - 55 (J~ i~ en :::: 0 01 ~ ~ --- :e --t:- 7J fl- b '.. I t.~~ (."'~ C;) 'Tl .r- c_ :::;-J " i';l~L; f' I }~q <..:) r."l ,:-1 C~j B (:..) -r) C"; i" I ~ SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-03395 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: tOUNTY OF CUMBERLAND GAVLICK RAY A VS FREY MECHANICAL 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: FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of LANCASTER County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within WRIT OF SUMMONS On August 12th , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from LANCASTER Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge Dep Lancaster Co 18.00 9.00 10.00 81.75 .00 118.75 08/12/2004 HANDLER HENNING So a~ _____/ . ~:::::-~ .-- ./c:~~.- R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County ROSENBERG Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3/.J day of ~ ~'j A.D. (j . a~~' ~othonotary , SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-03395 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: C.oUNTY OF CUMBERLAND GAVLICK RAY A VS FREY MECHANICAL 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: FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED D/B/A FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of LANCASTER County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within WRIT OF SUMMONS On August 12th , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from LANCASTER Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge 6.00 .00 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 08/12/2004 HANDLER HENNING So answerc' ___.---/ ____ _____ ") -::~<~/ -- ~~.;::,.~~- R. homas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County ROSENBERG Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3/.J day of ar olOOq;. D. . . Cd 'nu..li(d / linK. ~~ Prothonotary -r, SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2004-03395 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: GOUNTY OF CUMBERLAND GAVLICK RAY A VS FREY MECHANICAL 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: FREY MECHANICAL GROUP INC but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the sheriff of LANCASTER County, Pennsylvania, to serve the within WRIT OF SUMMONS On August 12th , 2004 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from LANCASTER Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge 6.00 .00 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 08/12/2004 HANDLER HENNING , So answ':fo// /..-/' ./ ..-::r-/:~~ R. Thomas Kli~~ Sheriff of Cumberland County ROSENBERG Sworn and subscribed to before me this jl,..r day of C2...-.u..Y J .:Lw-J A.D. eL --i,Q }M.,;tu.- IIDAr '-- 1"-1' Prothonotary , ..,- 1 59/;v 1.0F 3 SHERIFF'S OFFICE 50 NORTH DUKE STREET. P.O. BOX 83480, LANCASTER. PENNSYLVANIA 17608-3480 . (717) 299-8200 Ray A, Gavlick PLEASE TYPE DO NOT DETACH ANY CQPlES. :2 COURT NUMBER 04-3395 civil SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, and AI"FIDAVIT OF RETURN 1 PLAINTIFF/SI 3 DEFENDANT/SI 4 TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT Writ of Sumnons Frey Mechanical Incorporated et al SERVE {5' NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ETC., TO BE SERVED IIIIIIIlII... Frey Mechanical Group. Inc. ...".. 6. ADDRESS (Street or RFO. Apartment No.. City, Bora, Twp., State and ZIP Code) AT 2265 Beaver Valley Pike New Providence. PA 17560 7 INDICATE UNUSUAL SERVICE ~ DEPUTIZE 0 OTHER Cumberland Now, ,11\lX t~ 20 ~ ,I, SHERIFF OF ~ : COUNTY. PA~~i,t"1'>utize t.he Sl?:~:(jf _ Lanc s r County to execute this Writ ~~Jl>:~o..!~~~. to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. . ,... _ -- . SHERI~F OF,' ~ COUNT'! 8. S~~CIAL INSTAIlCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE, Cumberland Please lIEil retUITl of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching al'y property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of le....y or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss. destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof. 9. SIGNATURE of ATTORNEY or olher ORIGINATOR 1'0. TELEPHONE NUMBER I'" DATE 12~SEN%~CJi~~E COpy TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This eree must be co?Jp7etfcA~;~m to be meiled) HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 LINGLES'l'GlN RD. HARRISBURG PA. 17110 SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF SHERIFF ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE NAME of Authorized LeSO Deputy or Clerk. I ' 4. Date Received 1'5. Expiration/Hearing date 13.1 acknowledge receipt of the writ I or complaint a$ indicated above. :lltJ\l>ThlRT'l'E "IAT.TQN 7l7-'i'95-3'309 ,JM 7/15/04 8/12/01 16. I hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that I 0 have personally served~have legal evidence of service as shown in "Remarks", 0 have executed as shown in "Remarks". the writ or complaint described on the indi....idual, co~any, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the Individual, company, cor- poration. etc_. at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COPY thereof 17.01 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual. company, corporation. etc., named above. (See remarks below) 18 Name enS;~~diViduaFR~; not ShPR~::);;~n:;.iP to Detendant) 1'9 O:'~"''''(N030) 20. Address of where seled (complete only il different than shown above) (Street orRFD, Apartment No., City. Bora, Twp 21 Date of Service 22 Time State and Zip COde) ;;: .... p:j ~ ;2 ~ /f;;.& 23. ATTEMPTS - ~ ?-b-O,! /2:S-S' EDST liv~ 7/0/J /fa. /f!/lfAlIle"/1f1 I flA, 17n/~ I ~ I~ :;;6.1;~t I ;~'I~~'.I oo.e, Mlle. IDep. In'. I Do'e 24 Advance Costs 25 Service Costs 126 Notary Cert 127. Mileage/Postage/N.F. R ~31{'lsX3 150.00 64.50 I -"I 2- ':::> . 30 EMAR S /1F: Lulie ~(J _ (J()(I.ItEc7 AOOrV5fS" of (3vs/N"/5sS" I Mlle. I Dep. Int. 1 Dote I Mile. I O.p.lnt. 12'!. Total Costs 129. COST DUE OR REFUND f:3 r ') s tD8 7-~' S.TA: G'-' /\ I Is> \ J g!:r CY'. ~C\ 31. AFFIRMED and su cribed to before me this /'0 1"'- 34 day ot U.<:r+- ,,207CJ 37 ~d{i".",tdfk:::.~~-- MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ,. WHITE - Issuil'\g Authority 2. PINK. Attorney 3. CANARY - Sheriff's Offic$ SO ANSWER. !;:;.f s". F/~ rT""l-- 5~p~~::i~le 01 ,., / ~ 33. Dal;p._~ _ r;' Y 35. Signature of Sherill 36 Da..tL, Of ,\ [ ~ ,l)'-\ SHE~ANCA5T.R" UN ""., 4. BLUE. Sheriff's Office vJ ItW~v ~-,.....'. SHERIPF'S OFFICE :2 OF 3 50 NORTH DUKE STREET, P.O. BOX 83480, LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA 17608-3480 . (717) 299-8200 Ray A. Gavlick PLEASE TYPE DO NOT DETACH ANY COPJES~_ 2 COURT NUMBER 04-3395 civil SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN 1 PLAINTIFF/SI 3 DEFENDANT 1St Frey Mechanical Incorporated et al 4 TYPE OF WRlT OR COMPLAINT Writ of Sunmons SERVE .. AT 7 INDICATE UNUSUAL SERVICE: ~ DEPUTIZE 0 OTHER Now, July 14 20 ~ , I, SHERIFF OF .1 COUNTY, PA., do hereby .2~putize the Sheriff of Lancaster County to execute this wr~urn ther~of a ~~g to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. ,~." .... ././ '""J" . SHERIFF OF :ce~... ~ 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE, Cumberland { 6. ADDRESS (Street or RFD, Apartment No., City, Bora, Twp.. State and ZIP Code) 1926 Auction Road Manheim. PA 17545 LumberlaOO. 5. NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION. ETC., TO BE SERVED Frey Mechanical Incorporated d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. C'TlMRRRLl\NO m NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching allY property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifYing person of levy or attachment, without liabilityon the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof 9, SIGNATURE of ATTORNEY or other ORIGINATOR 110. TELEPHONE NUMBER 111 DATE W. SCOTT HENNING 717-238-2000 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COpy TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This are. must be completed if notice is to be mailed) ~ (Jl n HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 LINGLEST<MN RD. HARRISBURG PA. 17110 SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF SHERIFF ONLY - DO NOT WIUTE BELOW THIS LINE 13.1 acknowledge receipt of the writ I NAME of Authorized LCSO Deputy or Clerk 114. Date Received 115 EXPiration/Hearing date o'compla;nlas;nd;catedabove. ANNETrE WALTOO 717-295-3609 JM 7/15/04 8/12/04 16. I hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that I 0 have personally served, ~ legal evidence of service as shown in "Remarks", 0 have executed as shown in "Remarks". the writ or complaint described on the individual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the individual, company, cor- poration, etc., at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COpy thereof. 17.01 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because I am unable to locate the individual, company, 18. ~~itle ~;;&j~~(i~sh:wn a~O~R(:tA;~efendant) 20. Address of where served (complete only if different than shown above) (Street or R~D, Apartment No State and Zip Code) ~ ~ >< corporation, etc., named above. (See remarks below) /19. ONoService See Remarks Below (No. 30) ,City,Boro,Twp 21 Date of Service 22 Time 23ATTEMPTS ~if;~ :;:'~'I Date I Miles 24. Advance Costs 25. Service Costs 126. R 30. R!3XYsB * loep.,nt.1 Notary Cert. Date I Mlle. I Dep. Int.I 127. Mileage/Postage/N.F. Date 8/01 I Mile., Dep. Int./ Date 128 Total Costs 129. 3:0 'S' - PM - EDST Mile. I Dep.lnt. COST DUE OR REF:UND S.TA: 31. AFFIRMED and ubscdbed to beto," me th;s It")""'^- .(!.J LLt-4 YJI! A'!f~R. c.l.UTf-- ~o " o:pS!II:':it' . . \;L 33 Ot;j- AI' o (). 35 S;g:'~';;, o. Sh.,'" V 3613; lIL c;t/ "!'~!:eY'lltr' .,:'." .:.~-y---.. S'W!I&E G.l'l~. .~.. n8R "/'llNT(2. . ~ J MY COMMISSION E:XPIRES ~ ~J~""" ,. WHITE - Issuing Authority 2. PINK - Attorney 3. CANARY. Sheriff's Office 4. BLUE. Sheriff's Office ...,.,,- -.:lPIj' .:l '-.J I 11.-1 III......~ "- ~c:\CE BOX 83480, LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA 17608-3480 . (717) 2119-8200 I P~SE~_PE DO NOT DETACH AftY COPlES. 2 COURT NUM8ER 04-3395 civil 4 TYPE OF WRIT OR COMPLAINT Writ of Surrmons 50 NORTH DUKE STREET, P.O. SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, and AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN PLAINTIFF/SI Ray A. Gavlick 3. DEFENDANT/SI Frey Mechanical Incorporated et al SERVE {5' NAME OF INDIVIDUAL, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ETC., TO BE SERVED. .. Frey Mechanical Incorporated 6. ADDRESS (Street or RFO, Apartment No., City, Boro, Twp.. State and ZIP Code) AT 1926 Auction Road Manheim, PA 17545 7. INDICATE UNUSUAL SERVICE: tiDEPUTlZE 0 OTHER Cunberland Now, July 14 20 U4 , I, SHERIFF OF. 'I: COUNTY, PA., do her by Lancaster County to execute this W( to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE, Cumberland Please mail return of service to Cumberland County Sheriff. Thank you. :UMBERLAND CO NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheri" levying upon or attaching allY property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession. after notifying person of levy or attachment. without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof. 9. SIGNATURE of ATTORNEY or other ORIGINATOR 110. TELEPHONE NUMBER 111 DATE W_ SOOTT HRNNTNG 7J7-/,R-/OOO 12. SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COpy TO NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW: (This area must be completed if notice is to be mailed) HANDLER I HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 LINGLESTOON RD. HlIRRT~RT1RG Pili. 1711Q . .. SPACt! 8E!lOW FOR WI! OF SHERIFF ONL V .... DO NOT WRITe BElOW THIS LJINE 3 I k I d I f Ih 1 NAME of Authonzed LeSO Deputy or Clerk \14 Date Received 115 ExpIratIon/Hearing datt:::' 1 ac nowe gerecelp 0 ewrl t ~ or complaml as mdlcaled above r lINNR'M'R WlIf,'lY"lIiI 717-/Q'i-,/;OQ ,1M 7/J "/0<1 R/I' /04 ~ 16 I hereby CERTIFY and RETURN that I 0 have personally served, ~e legal eVidence of service as shown In "Remarks", 0 have executed as shown In "Remarks", the Writ or compltunt described on the IndivIdual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the IndIvidual, company. cor- poration, etc., at the address inserted below by handing a TRUE and ATTESTED COPY thereof. 17.01 hereby certify and return a NOT FOUND because t am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc" named above. (See remarks belOw) 18 Na,$;Je oN€S;SJ~ot ::nz;;~,::a~o;;~~;;'Defendanll \'9 D:'~-'(NO~ 20, Address of where served (complete only if different than shown abOve) (Street orRFD, Apartment No., City, Bora, Twp. 21. Date of Service 22. Time State and Zip Codel 3: H P:l j 23ATTEMPTS ~m:~~I;' ~"I 0.,. I Mllu t.p.,nt.1 24. Advance Costs 25. Service Costs 126. Notary Cert. R 30 R/M~Xl23 * 0.,. I Milo. lOOP. Int.I 127. Mileage/PostagelN.F. <;)- Date c:/r(Q V I MHUI D.J,n;. 0.,. Mllu I D.p.lnt. \28. Tolal Cosls 129. COST DUE OA AEFUND 'f.'0) ..... PM -- EDST S.T.A.: 31. AFFIRMED an subScrrbed to before me thIS /O':1"fll- 'NIlA.{~ 32 S,~n.tur - I 20 _ 'I Dep Sheriff 34 da~ot _..!A'.....u-~ 7' ~ 37' a-4:et? ~ ,{I('~I~ 35 S,gnol"eofSh.nll prOlhonotaryO~"- "4:" ...,- 0 - -:. onl:IFOFLAN MY ION EXPIRES -- , f .. 1. WHITE - Issuing Authority 2. PINK - Attorney 3. CANARY - Sheriff's Office 4. BLUE - Sheriff's Offi r~.~ 33DoIr I f( )/4 L( 36,D~ .~ .. WHiTE .Ji$u;nir Au\hOftIy 2. PINK -~ ~~ 3. 'CANllllY;...s-a~ . 4;;BLUE -llf*",e~~ .'~.> .". "'::';"/", '.;', ".:C': -"'-';~"';-',':-i\"'~~;i'-<'!\;-~~~~?!~~};':',-::]' .'.. ,;-,--,~:-,>.x"iii;:;::;';:;;:.;,';Y~:~ '._~~~:~'<~~:~r:;i<;_"- --_...-~ ., I il .-!. , .1 W. Scott Henning, Esquire I.D.#32298 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Fax: (717) 233-3029 E-mail: Henning@HHRLaw.com Attorney fcor Plaintiff RAY A. GAVLlCK, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COIlJNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v, FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED, separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No, 04-3395 CIVIL lrERM CIVIL ACTION - LAIN JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend a~lainst the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complslint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attomey and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SEI~VICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone 717-249-3166 or 800-990-9108 AVISO USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenclerse de las demandas que se presentan mas adelante en las siguientes paginas, debe tomar acci6n dentro dEllos pr6ximos veinte (20) dias despues de la notificaci6n de esta Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmElnte 0 por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrita y radicando en la Corte por escrito sus defensas de, y objecciones a, las demandas presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se Ie advierte de que si usted falla de tomar acci6n como se describe anteriormente, el caso puede proceder sin usted y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demanda 0 cualquier otra reclamaci6n 0 remedio solicitado por el demandante puede ser dictado en contra suya por la Corte sin mas aviso adicional. Usted puede perder dinero 0 propiiedad u otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DE BE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMIEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. E,STA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOG~\DO. ES POSIBLE QUE EST A OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, PA 170'13 Telephone 717-249-3166 or 800-990-!l108 By: HANDLER.I/ENN IA W. Scott Henn I.D.# 32298 1300 Linglesto (717) 238-2000 W. Scott Henning, Esquire I.D.#32298 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238-2000 Fax: (717) 233-3029 E-mail: Henning@HHRLaw.com Attorney 'for Plaintiff RAY A. GAVLlCK, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBEIRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED, separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES : and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL AGTION - LAW JURY TnlAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, by and through his attorneys, Handler, Henning and Rosenberg, LLP, by W. Scott Henning, Esquire, and makes the within Complaint against the Defendants as follows: 1, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, is an adult individual currently residing at 345 North Second Street, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporate,d separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services is a corporation established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its registered office being located at 1926 Auction Road, Manheim, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania 17545. 3. Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated is a corporation established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its registered office being located at 2265 Beaver Valley Pike, New Providence, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania 17560. 4. At all times pertinent hereto, Frey MechaniGal, Incorporated, separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services and/or Frey Mechanical Group Incorporated were one of the construction contractors working on the Lemoyne Middle School project, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. On or before July 15, 2002, and as part of a construction project at Lemoyne Middle School, Defendants placed and SUbsequently removed orange hurricane fencing around certain portions of the construction site and careleissly tossed it to the side allowing it to remain on the construction site. 6. At all times material hereto, there were no warning signs posted on the Premises warning of the orange hurricane fence that remained strewn about at the construction site. 7. On or about July 15, 2002 at approximaltely 7:15 a.m., Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, was engaged in performing his duties as an employee at the construction site. 8, On or about July 15, 2002 at approximately 7:15 a.m" Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick was in the process of traversing the construction site when he tripped on the orange hurricane fencing that Defendants had been cleared away and carelessly tossed on the ground at the construction site. 2 9. As a result of tripping on the orange hurriGane fencing and starting to fall, Plaintiff used his right arm to grab onto a railing so as to catch himself from falling. 10. As a direct and proximate result of the ne!~ligence of Defendants, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, sustained extensive and serious personal injuries, as set forth more specifically below. COUNT I- NEGLlGENCI; RAY A. GAVLlCK v. FREY MECHANICAL" INCORPORATED seDaratelv and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES 11. Paragraphs 1 - 10 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 12. The occurrence of the aforementioned inciident and the resulting injuries to Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, by its agents, servants, workmen or employees, acting in the scope of their authority and employment, generally and more specifically as set forth below: a) In causing or permitting orange hurricane fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the construction site, thereby posing an unreasonable risk of injury to the Plaintiff and to other persons lawfully upon the premises; b) In causing or permitting to be present, orange hurricane fencing and allowing the same to remain haphazardly on the construction site when Defendant knew or should h~~ve known of the likelihood the 3 fencing could be a tripping hazalcd to individuals traversing the construction site; c) In failing to make a reasonable inspection of said Premises which would have revealed the existence ofthe dangerous condition posed by the orange hurricane fencing, and thereby allowing the same to be and remain a dangerous condition when the Defendant knew or should have known of it; d) In failing to ensure the construction site at said Premises was maintained in a safe condition to prevent injury to the Plaintiff and other persons lawfully upon the Premises; e) In failing to ensure that construction materials were not haphazardly strewn on the ground where persons have to walk or work in violation of 34 Pa.. Code 9 39.22 f) In failing to keep the construction site clean and orderly and in a sanitary condition in violation of 29 C.F.R. 9 1910.22; g) In failing to post a warning sign or device in the area to notify of the dangerous condition posed by the orange hurricane fencing on said Premises; and h) In failing to remove or remedy the orange hurricane fencing at said Premises so as to avoid the situation in which the Plaintiff tripped and fell. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, Plaintiff, Ray A. 4 Gavlick, sustained serious injuries including, but not Iimitl~d to, a dislocated right shoulder, which has resulted in an extensive course of medical trE,atment, including surgery, 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, has undergone great physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and he will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to his great detriment and loss, physically, emotionally and financially. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, has been, and will in the future be, hindered from attending to his daily duties to his great detriment, loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 16. As a result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlic, has suffered lost wages/income and will in the future continuE' to suffer a loss of income and/or loss of earning capacity. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, has, and will in the future, suffer a loss of life's IPleasures. 18. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for the aforesaid injuries, to expend large sums of money for medicine and medical attention, and will be required to expend large sums of money for the same purposes in the future" to his great detriment and loss. 5 19. Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, believes and, thelrefore, avers that his injuries are permanent in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, seeks damages from Defendant, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services, in an amount in excess of compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberlancl County. COUNT 11- NEGLIGENCE RAY A. GAVLlCK v. FREY MECHANICAL GROUP. INCORPORATED 20, Paragraphs 1 - 19 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth at length. 21. The occurrence of the aforementioned inciident and the resulting injuries to Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, by its agents, servants, workmen or employees, acting in the scope of their authority and employment, generally and more specifically as set forth below: a) In causing or permitting orange hurricane fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the construction site, thereby posing an unreasonable risk of injury to the Plaintiff and to other persons lawfully upon the premises; b) In causing or permitting to be present, orange hurricane fencing and allowing the same to remain haphazardly on the construction site when Defendant knew or should have known of the likelihood the 6 fencing could be a tripping hazalrd to individuals traversing the construction site; c) In failing to make a reasonable inspection of said Premises which would have revealed the existence of the dangerous condition posed by the orange hurricane fencing, and thereby allowing the same to be and remain a dangerous condition when the Defendant knew or should have known of it; d) In failing to ensure the construction site at said Premises was maintained in a safe condition to prevent injury to the Plaintiff and other persons lawfully upon the Premises; e) In failing to ensure that construction materials were not haphazardly strewn on the ground where persons have to walk or work in violation of 34 Pa.. Code 9 39.22 f) In failing to keep the construction site clean and orderly and in a sanitary condition in violation of 29 G.F.R. 9 1910.22; g) In failing to post a warning sign or device in the area to notify of the dangerous condition posed by the orange hurricane fencing on said Premises; and h) In failing to remove or remedy the orange hurricane fencing at said Premises so as to avoid the situation in which the Plaintiff tripped and fell. 22. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gal/lick, sustained serious injuries 7 including, but not limited to, a dislocated right shoulder, which resulted in an extensive course of medical treatment, including surgery. 23. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlic:k, has undergone great physical pain, discomfort and mental anguish and he will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to his great detriment and loss, physically, emotionally and financially. 24. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavliclk, has been, and will in the future be, hindered from attending to his daily duties to his great detriment, loss, humiliation and embarrassment. 25. As a result of the negligence of Defendclnt, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlic, has suffered lost wages/income and will in the future continue~ to suffer a loss of income and/or loss of earning capacity. 26. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick:, has, and will in the future, suffer a loss of life's pleasures. 27. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlic;k, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for the aforesaid injuries, to expend large sums of money for medicine and medical attention, and will be required to expend largl9 sums of money for the same purposes in the future, to his great detriment and loss. 8 28. Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, believes and, thel"efore, avers that his injuries are permanent in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Ray A. Gavlick, seeks damages from Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated, in an amount in excess of compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland County. Respectfully Submitted, W. Scott He 1.0.#32298 1300 Linglestown Ro d Harrisburg, PA 1711 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff Dated ID - 1/ -J.aoy HANDLER, r By V 9 VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is of counsel and not my own. I havl~ read the document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this Verification. The undersigned also understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~ ~ (~- / W. Scott Henning, Esquire I.D.#32298 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238.2000 Fax: (717) 233.3029 E-mail: Henning@HHRLaw.com Attorney f,or Plaintiff RAY A. GAVLlCK, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED, separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants. No. 04-33!l5 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION. LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On October 11, 2004, I hereby certify that a true and correct GOPy of Plaintiffs Complaint with Notice to Defend was served upon the following by depositing in U.S. Mail: Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services 1926 Auction Road Manheim, PA 17545 Frey Mechanical Grup, Incorporated 1926 Auction Road Manheim, PA 17545 Respectfully Submitted, Date: 10/11/04 HANDLER, HENNI ~ By: . Scott . LLP 'i , - ~j -', ..t'.. (~\ \, r-..> c::::) c.:') ..r~- C) ~'n --I -r f'i o :=i ~". en PETERS & W ASILEFSKI By: Charles E. Wasilefski, Esquire Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 [717] 238.7555 Attorney for Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, Separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services And Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated RAY A. GA VLICK, Plaintiff v. FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED, Separately and d/b/a: FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMl"ON PLEAS FOR CUMUERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAI~ TO: PLAINTIFF AND IDS COUNSEL YOU ARE REQUIRED to plead to the within Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days of service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. Dated: (r!3[o V PETERS & W ASILEFSKI Ba-U CHARLES E. W ASILEFSKI Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants PETERS & W ASILEFSKI By: Charles E. Wasilefski, Esquire Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, Separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services And Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated v. IN THE COURT OF COM1~ON PLEAS FOR CUMUERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA RAY A. GA VLICK, Plaintiff FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED, Separately and d/b/a: FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER FILED BY DEFENDANTS. FREY MECHANICAL. INCORPORATED Separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES And FREY MECHANICAL GROUP. INCORPORATED. TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT NOW COMES, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services ("Frey Mechanical Services") and Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated ("Frey Mechanical Group") (collectively referred to as "Frey Mechanical"), by and through its attorneys, Peters & Wasilefski, and files this Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint as follows: 1. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the: allegations contained III Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 2. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, admit the allegations contained In Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 3. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, admit In part and deny in part the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Complaint. It is admitted that Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, is a corporation established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It is denied, however, that its registered office andlor principal place of business is located at 2265 Beaver Valley Pike, New Providence, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania 17560. To the contrary, its principal place of business and corporate offices are located at 1926 Auction Road, Manheim, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 4. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, admit in part and deny in part the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint. It is admitted that Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, was a construction contractor that had a contract with the West Shore School District to perform HV AC and Plumbing work for the renovation of the Lemoyne Middle School project, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, 2 Pennsylvania and was performing work on that project. It is denied, however, that Defendant, Frey Mechanical Services, was involved in any work at the Lemoyne Middle School project, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. To the contrary, Defendant, Frey Mechanical Services, did not have a contract to perform any work at that location and did not perform any work at that Ilocation. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). S. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, admit in part and deny in part the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint. It is admitted that at some time during the construction project at Lemoyne Middle School, Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, placed orange hurricane fencing at loc:ations on the project where it was working. It is denied, however, that Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, removed orange hurricane fencing and carelessly tossed it to the sid.e allowing it to remain on the construction site. To the contrary, upon information and belief, it is averred that Plaintiff and/or individuals working under his supervision removed and/or lowered and trampled down certain portions of the orange hurricane fencing and allowed it to remain on the ground in order to walk over the fencing to perform the work of the general contractor in the area that was to be protected by the orange hurricane fencing on the construction site. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 6. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, admit m part m deny In part the 3 allegations contained in Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Complaint. It is admitted that there were no warning signs posted on the premises warning of the orange hurricane fence. It is denied, however, that any such signs were necessary with regard to any orange hurricane fence placed by Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group. To the best of the knowledge of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, none of the fence was strewn about the construction site. If any orange hurricane fence placed by Defendant, Frey Mechanical Group, had been taken down, it is understood that this had been done by Plaintiff and/or persons acting under the supervision of Plaintiff. Further, whether the orange hurricane fence was standing or lying on the ground, it was in a position that was open and obvious especially due to its color and therefore could be easily seen by anyone who is observing their surroundings and attempting to move about the construction site in a safe manner. In further answer, Plaintiff was aware of the location of the orange hurricane fence on the ground because it was Plaintiff and/or persons acting under his supervision that placed the fence on the ground. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C. P. 1029(e). 7. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 4 8. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 9. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained III Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demandedl at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. l029(e). 10. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained III Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to 5 causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNT I - NEGLIGENCl8: RAY A. GAVLICK v. FREY MECHANICAl" INCORPORATE Separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES 11. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, incorporate the answers contained in Paragraphs 1 through 10 above as if fully rewritten herein in response to Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 12. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are advised and therefore aver that the allegations contained in said Paragraph are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an aI1lswer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed 6 to any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). With regard to the subparagraphs, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, answer as follows: a. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, neither caused nor permitted orange hurricane fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the constructi.on site in such a manner as to pose an unreasonable risk of injury. To the contrary, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, cause or permit such fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the construction site. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). b. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, did not cause or permit orange hurricane fc~ncing to remain haphazardly on the construction site. To the contrary, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, cause or allow fencing to remain haphazardly on the construction site. At no time were Defendants, Frey Mechanical, aware: that any fencing would pose 7 a tripping hazard. To the contrary, any fencing that was on the construction site was open and obvious to any person who is traversing the site and watching where they were gomg. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). c. Denied. To the extent required and reasonable, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, made reasonable inspections of its worksite to assure that it was maintained in a safe condition so that it would not create any danger to anyone coming upon the site. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). d. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept its work area in a safe condition. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. l029(e). e. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept and stored construction materials and equipment within its work area in an appropriate manner and not haphazardly strewn on the ground. In further answer, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, violate any provisions of the Pennsylvania Code. In 8 further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). f. Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept its work area in a clean and orderly condition. In further answer, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, violate any provisions of the Pennsylvania Code. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). g. Denied. To the contrary, at no time did the orange hurricane fencing cause a dangerous condition and therefore there was not a need to post warning signs or devices. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). h. Denied. To the contrary, at no time did the orange hurricane fencing create a situation in which tne Plaintiff could trip and fall. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). 13. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. 9 To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 14. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the bcts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants" Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to 10 causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 15. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained III Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey MechaI1Jcal, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechankal, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. \Vith regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 11 truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 16. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 16 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanieal, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. 'With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursu.ant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 17. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 17 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. 12 To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechankal, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable iI1lvestigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 18. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is speciJfIcally denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the fllcts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants" Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to 13 causmg any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information suffieient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 19. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained m Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, demand that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed. COUNT II RAY A. GA VLICK v. FREY MECHANICAL GROUP. INCORPORATED 20. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, incorporate the answers contained in Paragraphs 1 through 19 above as if fully rewritten herein in response to Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 14 21. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are advised and therefore aver that the allegations contained in said Paragraph are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). With regard to the subparagraphs, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, answer as follows: a. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, neither caused nor permitted orange hurricane fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the construction site in such a manner as to pose an unreasonable risk of injury. To the contrary, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, cause or permit such fencing to be haphazardly placed and remain on the construction site. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said 15 allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). b. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, did not cause or permit orange hurricane fencing to remain haphazardly on the construction site. To the contrary, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, cause or allow fencing to remain haphazardly on the construction site. At no time were Defendants, Frey Mechanical, aware that any fencing would pose a tripping hazard. To the contrary, any fencing that was on the construction site was open and obvious to any person who is traversing the site and watching where they were gomg. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). c. Denied. To the extent required and reasonable, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, made reasonable inspections of its worksite to assure that it was maintained in a safe condition so that it would not create any danger to anyone coming upon the site. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). d. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept its work area in a safe condition. In further answer, Defendants, 16 Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). e. Denied. To the contrary, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept and stored construction materials and equipment within its work area in an appropriate manner and not haphazardly strewn on the ground. In further answer, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, violate any provisions of the Pennsylvania Code. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). f. Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, kept its work area in a clean and orderly condition. In further answer, at no time did Defendants, Frey Mechanical, violate any provisions of the Pennsylvania Code. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). g. Denied. To the contrary, at no time did the orange hurricane fencing cause a dangerous condition and therefore there was not a need to post warning signs or d'evices. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. RC.P. 1029(e). 17 h. Denied. To the contrary, at no time did the orange hurricane fencing create a situation in which 1he Plaintiff could trip and fall. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. Jl029(e). 22. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny tbe allegations contained in Paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is speeifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanic:al, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. 'With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 23. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained in 18 Paragraph 23 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants., Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury andlor damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 24. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a 19 careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechankal, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded. at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 25. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained m Paragraph 25 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey MechanJical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. VVith regard to the allegations 20 pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 26. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained III Paragraph 26 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants ;are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants,. Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. 'Vith regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 27. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained III 21 Paragraph 27 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Said Defendants are advised and therefore aver that said allegations contain conclusions of law to which no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were in any way negligent under the facts and circumstances of this case. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, acted in a careful and prudent manner. In further answer, it is specifically denied that any act or failure to act on behalf of the Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. To the contrary, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendants, Frey Mechanical, caused or contributed to causing any of Plaintiff's alleged injuries or damages. 'With regard to the allegations pertaining to injury and/or damages, after reasonable investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information suffident to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 28. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny the allegations contained In Paragraph 28 of Plaintiff's Complaint. After reasonablle investigation, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, deny said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendants, Frey Mechanical, demand that Plaintiff's 22 Complaint be dismissed. NEW MATTER 29. Plaintiffs claims are barred by operation of the applicable Statute of Limitations. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were never st~rved with any process until it was served with the Complaint in October 2004. If a Writ of Summons was issued, it was not properly served upon Defendants, Frey Mechanical, and therefore did not properly toll the statute of limitations. 30. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were not the general contractor on the project and therefore were not responsible for the general safety of the construction site. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, were only responsible for their own immediate work area. Defendants, Frey Mechanical, upon information and be1ie1: aver that the area where this incident occurred was the work area of the general contractor and that the orange hurricane fence was lowered and placed on the ground by Plaintiff and/or other persons under his supervision for the purpose of performing the work of the general contractor in the area. The general contractor was in control of the area and directly responsible for the safe condition of the area. 31. Plaintiff was negligent, careless and reckless in the manner in which he traversed the construction site as follows: a. In causing portions of the orange hurricane fence to be 23 lowered to the ground and allowed to remain on the ground so that Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision could perform the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; b. In using a path directly over the orange hurricane fence that Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision lowered to the ground and allowed to remain on the ground so that they could perform the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; c. In failing to watch where he: was walking resulting in his tripping and stumbling as he walked through the construction site in an area where Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision had lowered fence to the ground and allowed it to remain on the ground as they performed the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; d. In walking too fast to allow him to safely negotiate the construction site in an area where Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision had lowered fence to the ground and allowed it to remain on the ground as they performed the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; e. In being preoccupied so as not to watch his step as he 24 walked through a construction site III an area where Plaintiff and/or persons undl~r his supervision had lowered fence to the ground and allowed it to remain on the ground as they performed the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; f. In not observing the conditions on the construction site, including the open and obvious orange hurricane fencing, in order to protect himself from falling as he walked through the construction site in an area where Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision had lowered fence to the ground and allowed it to remain on the ground as they performed the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence; g. In failing to see an open and obvious orange hurricane fence that would have been clearly visible to anyone who looked; h. In failing to adequately protect himself as he walked through the construction site in an area where Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision had lowered fence to the ground and allowed it to remain on the ground as they performed the work of the general contractor in the area 25 inside the fence; 1. In failing to take an alternate course that was available to him instead of walking in an area where the open and obvious orange hurricane fence was located. 32. If an orange hurricane fence was on the ground, which is denied, upon information and belief, it is alleged that Plaintiff failed to see what was obviously present and failed to take precautions necessary to protect himself from falling. 33. If an orange hurricane fence was on the ground, which is denied, upon information and belief, it is alleged that Plaintiff and/or persons under his supervision are the parties that took portions of the fence down and trampled it on the ground for purposes of performing the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence and therefore knew or should have known that the fence was on the ground and had created the alleged dangerous condition described in Plaintiff s Complaint. 34. All or part of Plaintiffs alleged damages are barred by operation of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligent Act. 35. Plaintiff assumed the risk of injury by walking on a construction site in an area where he and/or those under his supervision had lowered and trampled the orange hurricane fence on the ground for purposes of perfomling the work of the general contractor in the area inside the fence or, in the alternativ{~, knew or should have known that the area contained an open and obvious orange hurricane fence on the ground and failed to take other alternate courses available to him so as not to transverse the area 26 where the orange hurricane fence was on the ground. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Frey Mechanical, demands that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed. PETERS & \VASILEFSKI BY:(?JLa, ~ Charles E. Wa.silefski, Esq. Attorney #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorneys for Defendants, Frey Mechanieal, Incorporated separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanieal Services and Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated "3 Date: November " 2004 27 VERIFICATION I hereby affirm that the following facts are correct: Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, separaltely and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services and Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated are Defendants in the foregoing action and I am authorized to execute this verification on their behalf. The attached Answer with New Matter is based upon information which I have furnished to my counsel and information which has been gathered by my counsel in preparation of the defense of the lawsuit. The language of the Answer with New Matter is that of counsel and not of me. I have read the Answer with New Matter and to the extent that the Answer with New Matter is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the Answer with New Matter is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Answer with New Matter are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: \\/2~~ f ' I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I, Pamela J. Cmm, a Legal Assistant in the law offices of Peters & Wasilefski, have this 3:, day Of~~~~~, 2004, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER FILED BY DEFENDANTS, FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORi\TED, SEPARATELY AND D/B/A FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES AND FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT upon all parties by depositing same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed to the counsel of record as follows: W. Scott Henning, Esquire HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 Linglestown Road Post Office Box 60337 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0337 (Attorney for Plaintiff) ~~~ " Pamela J. Crum ...~,~. ~. ,-. <. ~~ '- .:-':' .) (") r ., o :' , , ..1 -''; ... ,...", C_"'] '- ':, .... - .o<r. ~," ( :) -.:: o -1' .......j :r: -.... /'11-':'" ,. - -'I~l ;11 :l,~C? .... ; (-, is~ ?~ :.:< I W -~.., ~ (;-? C) I'J RAY A. GA VLlCK, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, v. FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED, separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES : and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORA TED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Anthony Reaves, by and through his attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP by W. Scott Henning, Esquire, and responds as follows: 29. Denied. The allegation set forth in paragraph 29 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff asserts that a Writ of Summons was filed on July 13, 2004 and service was effE~ctuated by the Sheriffs office upon Defendant, Fry Mechanical Group, Inc., on August 6, 2004 and Fry Mechanical Incorporated d/b/a Fry Mechanical Services on August 5,2004. 30. Denied. Based upon the information and belief of the Plaintiff, the allegations of the Defendants set forth in Paragraph 30 are denied and proof at the trial is demanded. As alleged in the Complaint, Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendants were responsible for the installation of the orange hurricane fence and had also been responsible for lowering, removing or placing the orange hurricane fence on the ground such that it was situated in the position on the date that the Plaintiff encountered the orange hurricane fence and caught his foot in the fencing, causing him to trip and fall and sustain the injuries for which compensation is being requested. 31. Denied. The allegation set forth in paragraph 31 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, the Plaintiff denies that he was contributorily or comparatively negligent in any of the respects set forth in sub- paragraphs (a) - (I), and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 32. Denied. Essentially paragraph 32 is a reiteration of certain of the allegations set forth in Paragraph 31 and to that extent, the Plaintiff incorporates his response to paragraph 31 as though fully set forth herein, 33. Denied. It is denied that the orange hurricane fence was pulled down or lowed by the Plaintiff or persons under his supervision, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 34. Denied. The allegation set forth in paragraph 34 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, it is denied that the Plaintiff was in any way contributorily or comparatively negligent so as to trigger the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 35. Denied. The allegation set forth in para!~raph 35 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, Plaintiff demies that he or anyone under his supervision lowered or trampled the orange hurricane fence, such that it was caused to be resting upon the ground as a result of any actions on the part of the Plaintiff or anyone acting under his supervision. It is furth'er denied that the Plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk of encountering the orange hurricane fence. By way of further answer, the Plaintiff asserts that the Doctrine of the Assumption of Risk, to the extent that it is being asserted by the Defendants, is not applicable to the subject cause of action. Based upon recent case law, the application for the Assumption of the Risk Doctrine has been eroded or abrogated to the extent that it has been supplanted by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negli~lence Act. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for the Relief set forth in his Complaint. Respectfully submitted, /-/-/J. -;loa SL DATE I HANDLER~, HEN (: W. Scott He 1.0.#32298 1300 Lingl1estown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717 -238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff VERI FICA TION PURSUANT TO PA R.C.P. NO. 1024 (c) W. SCOTT HENNING, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verification and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. ::~ ;:~Ii:~_ ::;;aISificalion 10 aUlhO'iL W. SCOT RAY A. GA VLlCK, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA v. FREY MECHANICAL, INCORPORATED, separately and d/b/a FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES : and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORA TED, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, No. 04-33nS CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRlj~L DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 12th day of November, 2004, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply To New Matter was served upon the following by depositing in U.S. Mail; Mr. Charles E. Wasilefski Peters & Wasilefski 2931 North Front Street 2931 N Front St Harrisburg, PA 17110 II r J d ~/Jc;O if DATE ' I Respectfully submitted, HANDLER:, HENNING & ROSENBERG, llP Attorney for Plaintiff (~::-. + 'I' ._"~' C) C- "",) ~:~~ -.1;"'- (" ) -r1 ....,--= : ~r:f I" , ' -r I , , I ;; '")1 '" i ) '~",) -".,1 .' ') -0 ('1 <';", PETERS & W ASILEFSKI By: Charles E. Wasilefski, Esquire Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, Separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services And Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated RAY A. GA VLICK, Plaintiff v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED, Separately and d/b/a: FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LA W JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Defendant certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena with a copy of the subpoena attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty (20) days prior to the date on which the subpoena is sought to be served. 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena, is attached to this Certificate. 3. No objection to the subpoena has been received. 4. The subpoena which will be served is identical to the subpoena which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena. Date: May 9, 2006 PETERS & W ASILEFSKI B Charles E. Wasilefski Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 [717] 238-7555, Ext. 110 Attorney for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I, Pamela J. Crum, a Legal Assistant in the law offices of Peters & Wasilefski, have this ~ day of ~~ ,2006, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing CERTIFICA TE PRERE~E TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 upon all parties by depositing same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed to the counsel of record as follows: W. Scott Henning, Esquire HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 Linglestown Road Post Office Box 60337 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0337 (Attorney for Plaintiff) ~~~~~~ Pamela J. Crum PETERS & W ASILEFSKI By: Charles E. Wasilefski, Esquire Attorney ill #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, Separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services And Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated RAY A. GA VLICK, Plaintiff v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED, Separately and d/b/a: FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LA W JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 Defendants intend to serve a subpoena identical to the one that is attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. PETERS & W ASILEFSKI Date: "\\ o-:;)\D~ BY:~~' Charles E. Wasilefskl Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I, Pamela J. Crum, a Legal Assistant in the law offices of Peters & Wasilefski, have this 0C:l day 0;\\ ~, \L, ' 2006, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 upon all parties by depositing same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed to the counsel of record as follows: W. Scott Henning, Esquire HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 Linglestown Road Post Office Box 60337 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0337 (Attorney for Plaintiff) ~~~~~ Pamela J. Crum COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Ray A. Gavlick, Plaintiff v. Frey Mechanical Incorporated, et al. File No. 04-3395 Civil Term SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO:___Th~ PMA Group, 500 N. 12th street, Lemoyne. PA 17043 (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: any and all recordsr i nr.l nni ng, . buL..not 1 imited to correspondence, medical records, IME reports, deposition transcripts, , hear~ng transcr~pts, reports, medical expenses, wage loss, pleadings, compensat~on rate, compensation paid, medical benefits paid, agreements, etc. pertain~ng to the worKers' compensat~on claim of Ray A. Gavlick for work related injuries of 7/15/02, Claim No: W8902 12120, AJju~Lur, Shane ~ 2931 North Front st., Harrieb9rH5 PA 17110 Weaver Ad re s You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies 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: Name: Charles E. Wasilefski Address: 2931 North Front street Harrisburq. PA 17110 1250 Telephone: f7171238-7555 Supreme Court ID # 21 027 Attorney for: Defendants BY THE COURT: Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE: Seal of the Court Deputy lJ ~f [0 ,...F' ~~, ~'(. >"(::.~ ~~ ~ <=> = 0' o 11 ~ :r:." m-- r-- -urn :09 c.:) ~ __.,<_1 ~C =r'i ()-~ :;.C) OrTl :::::1 ,~ ~ ::x ~ -< o -0 :It' 0' 1''> N . . PETERS & W ASILEFSKI By: Charles E. Wasilefski, Esquire Attorney ID #21027 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendants, Frey Mechanical, Incorporated, Separately and d/b/a Frey Mechanical Services And Frey Mechanical Group, Incorporated v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA RAY A. GA VLICK, Plaintiff FREY MECHANICAL INCORPORATED, Separately and d/b/a: FREY MECHANICAL SERVICES and FREY MECHANICAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, Defendants No. 04-3395 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LA W JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA: Please mark this matter settled, ended and discontinued. HANDLER, HE By: W. Scott Henru , Esqu re Attorney ID #32298 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiff Date: 1- 5 -d-()(h . 'lII - . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I, Pamela J. Crum, a Legal Assistant in the law offices of Peters & Wasilefski, have this o.Cl.. day O~~~1:"""" , 2006, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE upon all parties by depositing same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed to the counsel of record as follows: W. Scott Henning, Esquire HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17106-0337 (Attorney for Plaintiff) ~~~L Pamela J. Crum ~ ~ c;::::> c:;r> o ~ , .+="" -;:t:'\t> --~.. --- ~ ~." rnc -om 'nO ;:_}, t.) _..~:::r-\ ti~~ ---\ \;iI" ?i 9? rv w