The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-0430 JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. C)". '-130 ~ DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant NOTICE TO DEFEND YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following Complaint, 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 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 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, P A 17013 Phone: (717) 249-3166 JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant No. ()~, L.J3d JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes JAMES SCHMICK, and LUCY SCHMICK by and through their attorney, Karl E. Rominger, Esquire and in support of their Complaint aver as follows: COUNT I. NEGLIGENCE JAMES SCHMICK v. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY 1. Plaintiff, James Schmick is an adult individual who resides at 711 Easy Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company is believed to be a Pennsylvania Corporation trading and doing business as Dauphin Oil at 429 South Hanover Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Dauphin Oil maintains gas pumps and a station and store at 200 East High Street, Carlisle, P A 17013. 4. At all times mentioned herein, Defendant was in exclusive possession management and control of the premise, individually and through his employees, who acted within the course and scope of their employment by Defendant and in furtherance of Defendant's business. 5. On or about February 2,2000, Plaintiff was a business visitor to the store, and as he exited his vehicle to pump gas, there existed an accumulation of water and/or ice on the pavement, directly in front of the gas pump, which caused the Plaintiff to slip, tumble and fall resulting in permanent and serious injuries as set forth below. 6. The accident was caused exclusively and solely by the Defendant's negligence, carelessness, and recklessness in that: (a). Defendant caused or permitted water and/or ice to accumulate upon the pavement at a point where it posed an unreasonable risk of injury to Plaintiff and other business visitors; (b). Defendant failed to make a reasonable inspection of the parking lot which would have revealed the existence of the dangerous condition posed by the accumulation of ice; (c). Defendant failed to give warning of the dangerous conditions posed by the accumulation of ice, erect barriers, or take any other safety precautions to remove or melt the ice and to prevent injury to the Plaintiff and other business visitors; (d). Defendant failed to properly construct and point the drain pipe for the overhead covering or roof over the pumps, insomuch as said drain pipe projected the water in front of the gas pumps where it was posing an unreasonable risk of injury to Plaintiff and other business visitors; (e). Defendant created an artificial condition by channeling melting snow and ice through a pipe and causing it to freeze and accumulate at a point where it represented an unreasonable risk to Plaintiff and other business visitors. 7. Solely as a result of Defendant's negligence, carelessness and recklessness, Plaintiff suffered injuries to his head, neck, shoulders, body, buttocks, arms and legs, both internally and externally; severe shock to his nerves and nervous system; and injury to his head, including a contusion, and to his neck and shoulder, and did further aggravate existing injuries; all of which injures have caused Plaintiff great pain and suffering, and may continue for an unknown and indefinite time into the future, and may be permanent. 8. Solely as a result of Defendant's negligence, carelessness and recklessness, Plaintiff has and will in the future be obliged to expend monies for medicine and medical care and treatment to help treat his injuries. 9. Solely as a result of Defendant's negligence, carelessness and recklessness, Plaintiff has and will in the future be unable to attend to his usual and daily duties and employment to his financial detriment and loss. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff claims damages against the Defendant, and asks that the Court enter judgment in his favor in the amount in excess of the statutory limits for compulsory arbitration. COUNT II. PLAINTIFF'S LOSS OF CONSORTIUM LUCY SCHMICK v. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY 10. Previous paragraphs incorporated by reference as iffully set out herein. 11. As a result of the negligence as laid out in Count I, Plaintiff has suffered a loss of consortium and services from her husband. 12. Said loss of consortium is caused by the negligence of Defendant. 13. Said loss of consortium was a foreseeable and direct consequence of Defendant's actions. 14. Defendant had a duty to Plaintiff and violated that duty as described previously. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that she be awarded damages for loss of consortium in an amount in excess of the statutory limits of compulsory arbitration and that the Court enter judgment in her favor. Respectfully submitted, ROMINGER & BAYLEY ] "-- Karl E. Rominger, Esquire 155 South Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 241-6070 Supreme Court ID # 81924 Attorney for Plaintiffs Date: January 24,2002 JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. No. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant VERIFICATION I verify that I am the petitioner and that the statements made in the foregoing Petition are true and COrrect. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. S 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: /-J1/-d ~ JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. No. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant VERIFICATION I verify that I am the petitioner and that the statements made in the foregoing Petition are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. S 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date~ ~- ~l.\-o~ ~ .~ ~ ~~)..,. ~ ~ \,.) \ Lucy Schm&k \~ ~ " " ~ ~ ~ JJ ~ (") 0 0 c: N -n ~ ;.- "'tler:1 :t:w :~ :;2rn z ~9.fq :0 N Z?; ~.n .,1' (j) 0' ~~-~ ~~ -<.<. !:;20 -0 '-,-- -'11 ~o :::It <;J (") 5>2 1'3 r=::rn ,j -.-l ~ :Jl ~ '" 1-1..1 '''''''''-''''~"'''''~,-",,,,"-,''''_''"'~r''"''';''''''''~'''''''',,,'''''~:'"''''''''''-'''''''_""''~..,~,.> >- en ~ ~ ~ tc- :.:J;::t.; ~~: S:':! O2 ::c O~r: 'J_ f"'" D... (::!:::J C) >- : I,.n ~ '::.;0, ef) C\; <:I~ ;!:. :"J.! ('>,,! ,-:C :2: l':' L.:.JtU *'::~ l::'~'~J (~ :::=: C'J ::-.:> a <.) 00'" > om n ~ ~r:- ~ "'''' >~ "'- ;>:l<.l1 ...", g ",' ,....<.11 -'" ~ViVl "'~ )- ""'0 '" . 0 '" ,m C 0 -< ~i' '" ~"-l 0 I ~m::c Oz > ~. z ::c :::JVl> ~ OQ-<z Si ~,....O '" 0 f~< :l: 111 .zm ~.." 8-;>:l <3 ~ I 3>~ 3 .. > -. '" :::J _ ~;>:l ~:--J Z '1m om ~~ ~ ~-l :l: ,... w . '" n 00 o '" ~ 3 00 .> : @:'_:.~-""~_~""~ -~..2. "." J~~U/~\:!JJ~ LAw OFFICES 717.241.6070.800.734.2132. FAX: 717.241.6878 ADVOCACY - ADVICE - ANSWERS ~ ()/,,<q law@romin~aw.com www.romingerlaw.com 155 SOUTH HANOVER STREET CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013 ~ WEBER GOLDSTEIN GREENBERG & GALLAGHER LLP BY: Mark T. Gallagher, Esquire Jolm P. Coyle, Esquire Identification NO: 41362/79137 The Belgravia 1811 Chestnut Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorneys for Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS LAW DIVISION vs. NO. 02-430 DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter our appearance on behalf of defendant Dauphin Oil Company in the above-captioned matter. A jury of twelve (12) is hereby demanded. WEBER GOLDSTEIN GREENBERG & GALLAGHER LLP By: 11-1' ~. II Mkk T. Gallagher, E~ire ....- Jolm P. Coyle, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company Date: 2/29-/0 L-- ( I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John P. Coyle, Esquire, attorney for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company, do hereby certify that I have served on the following parties a true and correct copy of the foregoing document and in the manner indicated below: Document: Entry of Appearance Service by: United States First Class Mail Addressed as follows: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Rominger & Bayley Carlisle, P A 17013 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF jl~L~ Date: ~/}g!() 2- -2- ~.'" ~"... . o c ;;:: -0 CO mrn Z_. ..1,...' zr C/l or; -<""- ~C) ~o -0 )>c: ~ I I I i 'i ,.(.,.(..;., -- c:> N :x ".. :::0 I ..,.. o "'1' .,,,1 :1::...,., illr -'~)rn ...'Y ~'-'~(J ',' -OJ .-':-'-'n ~-,d (-;7j ,:srn s;! ::0 -< -0 -<;" N .' :.n c::> NOTICE TO PLEAD: To: Plainliffs You are hereby noticed 10 plead 10 Ihe within New Matter wilhin twenty (20) days of service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Weber GOldstei~ree berg & Gallagher LLP By: r, Attorneys for Defe danls Defendant Dauphin Oil Company WEBER GOLDSTEIN GREENBERG & GALLAGHER LLP BY: Mark T. Gallagher, Esquire John P. Coyle, Esquire Identification N2: 41362/7913 7 The Belgravia 1811 Chestnut Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorneys for Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS LAW DIVISION JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, vs. NO. 02-430 DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant ANSWER OF DEFENDANT. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY WITH NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company, (hereinafter "Dauphin"), by and through its attorneys, Weber Goldstein Greenberg & Gallagher, LLP, hereby answers plaintiffs' Complaint as follows. COUNT I JAMES SCHMICK v. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY NEGLIGENCE I. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph I and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. 2. Admitted. 3. Denied as stated. Defendant, Dauphin owned a gas station located at 200 East High Street, Carlisle, PA 17013. 4. Denied. It is denied by the answering defendant that any person or persons unidentified in plaintiffs Complaint were agents, servants, workmen, and/or employees until said person or persons are identified and answering defendant is give a change to admit or deny agency. By way of further answer, the remaining averments contained in paragraph 4 of plaintiffs Complaint are addressed to defendants other than the answering defendants herein. Answering defendant is therefore advised that no further answer is required to the averments contained therein. 5. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 5 and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. By way of further answer, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 5 of plaintiffs Complaint are addressed to -2- - defendants other than the answering defendants herein. Answering defendant is therefore advised that no further answer is required to the averments contained therein. 6. More specifically, the answering defendant states the following: (a) It is specifically denied defendant caused or permitted water and/or ice to accumulate upon the pavement at a point where it posed an unreasonable risk of injury to plaintiff and other business visitors; (b) It is specifically denied answering defendant failed to make reasonable inspection of the parking lot; (c) It is specifically denied that a dangerous condition existed on the property of answering defendant or that answering defendant breached any duties to the plaintiff; (d) It is specifically denied answermg defendant failed to properly construct said drain pipe or that any alleged condition posed an unreasonable risk of injury; (e) It is specifically denied answering defendant created an artificial condition representing an unreasonable risk. 7. It is specifically denied answering defendants were in any way negligent, careless and/or reckless. By way of further answer, the remaining allegations of paragraph 7 of plaintiffs' Complaint are denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or infonnation sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the -3- remaining averments contained in paragraph 7 and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. 8. It is specifically denied answering defendants were in any way negligent, careless and/or reckless. By way of further answer, the remaining allegations of paragraph 8 of plaintiffs' Complaint are denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 8 and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. 9. It is specifically denied answering defendants were in any way negligent, careless and/or reckless. By way of further answer, the remaining allegations of paragraph 9 of plaintiffs' Complaint are denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 9 and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. WHEREFORE, defendant, Dauphin Oil Company hereby prays that the Complaint be dismissed and all claims against answering defendant be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II LUCY SCHMICK v. DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY PLAINTIFF'S LOSS OF CONSORTIUM 10. The answering defendants incorporate by reference the answers to paragraphs I through 9 inclusive, as fully as though the same were here set forth at length. -4- - II. It is specifically denied answering defendants were in any way negligent, careless and/or reckless. By way offurther answer, the remaining allegations of paragraph II of plaintiffs ' Complaint are denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 11 and therefore, the defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof at the trial of this case, if relevant. 12. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 12 are conclusions oflaw to which the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure require no responsive pleadings, are therefore denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial, if relevant. 13. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 13 are conclusions oflaw to which the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure require no responsive pleadings, are therefore denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial, if relevant. 14. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 14 are conclusions oflaw to which the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure require no responsive pleadings, are therefore denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial, if relevant. WHEREFORE, defendant Dauphin Oil Company hereby prays that the Complaint be dismissed and all claims against answering defendant be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER 15. The answering defendants incorporate by reference the answers to paragraphs I through 14 inclusive, as fully as though the same were here set forth at length. By way of further answer, the answering defendants aver the following New Matter. 16. Ifit is determined that answering defendants are liable on the plaintiff's cause of action, the answering defendants aver that the plaintiff's recovery should be eliminated -5- or reduced in accordance with the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. Section 7102. 17. It is further averred that if the plaintiff suffered any injuries/damages as alleged, they were caused solely and primarily by plaintiffs own carelessness, recklessness and negligence. 18. It is further averred that if the plaintiff suffered any injuries/damages as alleged, they were caused solely and primarily by the carelessness, recklessness and negligence of the third parties both unknown to the answering defendants and over whom answering defendants had no control. 19. It is further averred by the answering defendants that if the plaintiff suffered any injuries/damages as alleged, said plaintiff by his conduct assumed the risk of those injuries/damages. 20. It is further averred by the answering defendants that the plaintiffs cause of action is barred by the appropriate Statute of Limitations. 21. The answering defendants deny the hazardous condition alleged. 22. The answering defendants deny the dangerous condition alleged. 23. In the event that it is determined that the plaintiff sustained any injuries and/or damages, which allegations are expressly denied, then said injuries and/or damages were caused by the negligence of the plaintiff himself. 24. In the event that it is determined that the answering defendants were in any way negligent, which allegation is expressly denied, than it is specifically denied that any such negligence was the proximate and/or substantial factor in causing the accident in question. -6- 25. The answering defendants deny the plaintiff's status on the premises. 26. The answering defendants deny that they breached any duties allegedly owed to the plaintiffs. 27. The answering defendants deny either constructive and/or actual notice of any alleged hazardous and/or defective condition. 28. The answering defendants hereby move to amend this Answer to include any defenses which may become available through discovery. 29. In the event the plaintiff requests damages for delay pursuant to Rule 238 of the Pennsylvania Rules, answering defendants hereby challenge the applicability and constitutionality of said Rule, places it at issue and demands a hearing on the matter. 30. Answering defendants assert that at the time and place averred in plaintiff's Complaint an intervening and superceding event/action took place which as a matter oflaw relieves answering defendants from any and all liability. 31. Answering defendants aver that plaintiff's alleged injuries, damages and treatment are unreasonable and excessive in light of the facts of this case. 32. Answering defendants aver that plaintiff has failed to take all reasonable and necessary steps to mitigate damages and injuries allegedly suffered in this case. 33. Answering defendants aver that either some or all of plaintiff's alleged injuries, damages and treatment are unrelated to the accident and/or incident which is the basis for this lawsuit. -7- WHEREFORE, defendant Dauphin Oil Company hereby prays that the Complaint be dismissed and all claims against answering defendant be dismissed with prejudice. WEBER GOLDSTEIN GREENBERG & GALLAGHER LLP By: Date: ~ / ~/{)V ( { k T. Gallagher, Es uire Jo P. Coyle, Esquire Attomeys for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company -8- VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby deposes and says that he is Counsel for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company, and having read the attached pleading verifies that the within pleadings are true and correct to the best of signer's knowledge, information and belief. The verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: fi -9- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John P. Coyle, Esquire, attorney for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company, do hereby certifY that I have served on the following parties a true and correct copy of the foregoing document and in the manner indicated below: Document: Answer with New Matter Service by: United States First Class Mail Addressed as follows: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Rominger & Bayley Carlisle, P A 17013 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF J&fE{dL Date: v -10- >- a; ~ t'~.l u.J:"'.. (.)p, R=~(:: 5:_)'..... ; '- oC': UJLJ." -' , EC':-:..,-' ~. u_. o "'0 ~ 7' 5 r)~ o~ "" c~ 5:' ..~? (/J ::J2 >~r=z UJUJ t'On... ~ :::> u M :!C u.. co I 0::: CL oc: ,'V o WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP BY: Mark T. Gallagher, Esquire John P. Coyle, Esquire Identification N2: 41362/79137 The Belgravia 1811 Chestnut Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorneys for Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS LAW DMSION JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, vs. NO. 02-430 DAUPIDN OIL COMPANY, Defendant MOTION TO COMPEL 1. On January 24, 2002, Plaintiff initiated this suit by filing a Complaint against Dauphin Oil Company. 2. On February 27,2002, counsel for defendant, Dauphin Oil Company, served plaintiff with defendant's Interrogatories and Request to Produce Documents.. (See Exhibit "A" letter from defense counsel to plaintiff's counsel.) 3. The thirty day period within which properly verified answers to the Interrogatories and Request to Produce Documents were due, expired on March 27, 2002. 4. Although almost five (5) months have elapsed since service of defendant's discovery, plaintiff has failed to provide answers to said Interrogatories and Request to Produce Documents.. (See Exhibit "B" Defendant's Interrogatories and Request to Produce Documents.) -2- 5. Defendant is entitled to plaintiff's answers to Defendant's Interrogatories and Request to Produce Documents.. 6. Answers to this discovery are required to prepare a proper defense for Dauphin County Oil and that plaintiff's responses are necessary to properly counter assessment of damages and to determine the amount of alleged liability, if any, regarding the defendant in this action. WHEREFORE, defendant requests this Honorable Court to grant the aforesaid Motion and enter the proposed Order. WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY, LLP ~(l(J~k Jo P. Coyle, Esg e I -3- CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE I, John P. Coyle, Esquire, attorney for Defendant Dauphin Oil Company, do hereby certify that I have served on the following parties a true and correct copy of the foregoing document and in the manner indicated below: Document: Defendant's Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Plaintiff Service by: United States First Class Mail Addressed as follows: Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Rominger & Bayley Carlisle, PA 17013 A TTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF ~' ~ I/AJ-- J n P. Coyle, squire Date: 8 ) If) 07...-- , , -4- ... (") Cl 0 c: r....~ ''T1 :;-.- ~ -U e~~ rnp, '.;.) 7 J'__ 7- r (f) \.0 -< r:: ''''"J '- :.--- .<? z c:; j::: . , ~ j , , ~Z -'- ~:::..'l -.--1 :::::> ::n -< .....l -< JAMES SCHMICK and LUCY SCHMICK, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 02-0430 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW DAUPHIN OIL COMPANY, Defendant IN RE: MOTION TO COMPEL ORDER AND NOW, this Z- I ... day of August, 2002, a rule is issued on the plaintiffs to show cause why the relief requested in the within motion to compel ought not to be granted. This rule returnable fifteen (15) days after service. BY THE COURT, t upieS .r<J cl"J 't- ~.I-0.t' l. Rk -to: ~."Romit..ljeR C.o~\ e.. FILD'\ :'"\'.c'f'E L:I.rtA-, Iv . OF T'..:r: [)D'~'THf)~i0'rAny ,i '_ "1__ I, ,',,' ,-..JIt'\f1, 02 AUG 2 I Mi /I: I 5 CUMBERlANiJ COUNlY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CIDvlBERLAND COUNTY SCHMICK Vs. NO. 02'130 DAUPHIN OIL CO CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009,2"~ As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 MARK T GALLAGHER, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). MARK T GAI,LAGHER, ESQUIRE 1811 CHESTNUT ST SUITE 600 PHlLA, PA 19103 215-972-7916 ATTORNEY POR DEFENDANT XNQUXRXES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISS~~ON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) 335.-3653 Date: 05/05/04 By: Susan Tyre File #: R310095 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUlVmERLAND COUNTY SCHMICK Vs. DAUPHIN OIL CO No. 02430 TO: KARL ROMINGER, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(s) identical to the one(s) attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. Date: 04/14/04 MARK T GALLAGHER, ESQUIRE 1811 CHESTNUT ST SUITE 600 PHlLA, PA 19103 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LE:GAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISS'I'ON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (215) 335-3653 By: Susan Tyre Enc(s): copy of subpoena(s) Counsel return card File #: R310095 ~TH OF PENNSYI.vJ\lm~ COONI'Y OF ClJMBEIUANQ SCHMICK Vs. File No. 02430 DAUPHIN OIL CO SUBPOENA TO pRODl.JQ!; DOCl.t'ENTS OR TH I NGS FOR DlsrovERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HOLY SPIRIT HOSP, 503 N 21ST ST, CAMP HILL, PA 17011 TO: ATTN: MEDICAL RECORDS DEPT (NI!I1le of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoenal, you are ordered by the court to produce the following doct.rnent'" or t!1ing~: AfJ NDu~ I SEE ATl'ALHEJJ lJJ~ N at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS{A~S'940 DlCSSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the docunElOts or produce thi.ngs requested h) this subpoena, together with the certificate of cC:I1I1)liance, to the party making thi, request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonablE cost of prelJaring the copies or producing the things sought. I f you fai 1 to produce the docunents or things requked by this subpoena within t"'ienty (20) days after its servke, the party serving thi", ~;ubpoena may seek a court orde'- o:::rrpelling you to carply with it. TH I S SUBPOENA WAS NA/'E : ADDRESS : ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLONING PERSON: MARK T GALLAGHER, ESQ 1811 CHESTNUT ST PHlLA, !'A 1.~.Lu3 TELEPH:lNE: SUPREr'E CXlU'lT I 0# ATTORNEY FOR: 215-335-3212 DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: ~ t? R '. prothonotar~~ivi.l ~ (2 IvuJl,_-, Division R310095-01 DATE: ~'~fltn;~:t Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA SCHMICK Vs. No. 02430 DAUPHIN OIL CO CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HOLY SPIRIT HOSP ANY AND ALL RECORDS, REPORTS, NOTES, PRESCRIPTIONS, OPERATIVE REPORTS, REPORTS/RECORDS FROM OTHER PROVIDERS, EMERGENCY ROOM RECORDS, ENTIRE CHART, NOT LIMITED TO INJURY DATE, 2/1/00. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JAMES ROBERT SCHMICK ADDRESS: 711 EASY RD CARLISLE PA DATE OF BIRTH: 10/31/49 SSAN: 210402388 ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN . COMPLETE AND RETURN [ I RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and . belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ NO DOCUMENTS A V AILABLE: I hereby cert i fy that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : RECORDS X-RAYS PATIENT BILLING RECORDS / XRAYS ha~e been destroyed Date Authorized s~gnature for HOLY SPIRIT HOSP CUMBERLAND R310095-01 *** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE *** ~TH OF PENNSYLVANI1~ a:xJNI'Y OF QJMBEmAN[> SCHMICK VS. File No. 02430 DAUPHIN OIL CO ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO P~ ooa..tENTS OR TH I NGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HOLY SPIRIT HaSP-X, 503 N 21ST ST, CAMP HILL PA 17011 TO: J;I.'1''1'N' RJ;l.DTOT,OGY DEPT (N!I'Ile of Person or Entity) within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoenfL, you are ordered by the court to produce the following docLment'" or things: SEE ATTACllliD AODJ!:NDlJM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS<A~s'940 D:CSSTON ST., PElLA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the clocunEmts or produce things requested h) this subpoena, together with the certificate of carpliance, to the party making thi~ request at the address 1 i sted above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonab I E cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. I f you fai I to produce the docunents or things required by this subpoena within t...enty (20) days after its serv~ce. the party serving thi<; ~,ubpoena may seek a court orde.' o::rrpel1ing you to carply with it. TH I S SUBPOENA WAS NM'E: ADDRESS: I SSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLCIl'/ I NG I~ERSON: MJ;l.RK T GALLAGHER, ESQ 1811 CIIEOTNUT ST PHlLA, PA 19103 215-335-3212 TELF.PI-ONE: SlJ>REI'E COJRT I D# ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE QCAJR"!": ~ l( KlSR4 ~ . prothconotary/Cf>er , Civi 1 (~U- () f\A' PO.. . Division R310095-02 DATE: nh"':'~ /1. JOll'f tea I of the CoUrt DepUty (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA SCHMICK Vs. No. 02430 DAUPHIN OIL CO CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HOLY SPIRIT HOSP-X ANY AND ALL FILMS NOT LIMITED TO INJURY DATE, 2/1/00. PERTAINING TO: NAME: JAMES ROBERT SCHMICK ADDRESS: 711 EASY RD CARLISLE PA DATE OF BIRTH: 10/31/49 SSAN: 210402388 ORIGINAl, X-RAYS REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. - - - - -- - - --- - - ------- - - ---- - - -- - - - - - -- --- RECORD CUSTODIAN. COMPLETE AND RETURN [ I RECORDS ARE AITACHED HERETO: I hereby cert:ify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) X-RAYS PATIENT BILLING RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Author~zed signature for HOLY SPIRIT HOSP-X CUMBERLAND R310095-02 *** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE *** (") ::~ ;-j s~ L '" ('".:..::> = ~- o ., ::;:l Fii :D ",F.; -'''0 Sl{~ ~~ j;! ;-n -<: ::n: ::r;n -< -.J c;; <.n -.J WEBER GALLAGHER SIMPSON STAPLETON FIRES & NEWBY LLP BY: Mark T. Gallagher, Esquire Identification NQ: 41362 2000 Market Street 13 th Floor Philadelphia, P A 19103 (215) 564-4597 Attorney for Defendant, Dauphin Oil Company James Schmick and Lucy Schmick, h/w Plaintiffs CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CIVIL ACTION -- LAW vs. Dauphin Oil Company Defendant No. 02-430 ORDER TO SETTLE. DISCONTINUE AND END TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly mark the above-captioned matter Settled, Discontinued and Ended upon payment of your costs only. Rominger & Bayley '/ By: ~/ Karl E. Rominger, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs, James Schmick and Lucy Schmick Date: November 10,2005 ~:..~ ;:::::.> u, (Ji o ..::,'1 ::r!,-, rhS~ c -' -l.., '-' ~~: '~;:-~ ~:~~~ ')' ':-~:l ,-" C.) ::.<: I",",