Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-4905DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, 128 Bungalow Road Enola, PA 17025 Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O., 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY 650 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 BARBARA .K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., and QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. o¢- JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Writ of Summons against the Defendants in the above-captioned action. 533807. I The Writ shall be issued and forwarded to the Sheriff of Cumberland County. James E. Ellison, Esquire RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square P. O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 Supreme Court ID No. 81372 Date: September 23, 2004 Attorneys for Plaintiff WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFFS HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL - REGULAR VALERIE WEARY , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS ROUMM ALAN D MD DEFENDANT , at 1255:00 HOURS, on the at 650 POPLAR CHURCH ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 TAMMY HEIM, RECEPTIONIST, ADULT a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the 4th day of October 2004 by handing to IN CHARGE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 11.10 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 39.10 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /3~ day of ~ L~[~_ ~00~' A.D. ~Ptothonotary ~ So Answers: R. ~homas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON By: ~//~D~u~Sheriff SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL VALERIE WEARY , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS SANFORD & ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY DEFENDANT , at 1255:00 HOURS, at 650 POPLAR CHURCH ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 TAMMY HEIM, RECEPTIONIST, a true and attested copy of Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the on the 4th day of October , 2004 by handing to ADULT IN CHARGE WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /J~-~- day of A.D. A ro honot ary So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON Deputy SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL VALERIE WEARY Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the on the 4th day of October , 2004 by handing to ADULT IN CHARGE copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS KUNKEL BARBAP~A K MD DEFENDANT , at 1334:00 HOURS, at 405 ST JOHNS CHURCH ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ALLYSON KEEFER, GREETER, a true and attested and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 10.36 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 26.36 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ~-~ day of A.D. O/ rr' .(2 othonotary So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON By: Deputy S~r~l f f SHERIFF'S RETURN - CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL REGULAR VALERIE WEARY , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS STEWART RICHARD MD DEFENDANT , at 1334:00 HOURS, on the at 405 ST JOHNS CHURCH ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ALLYSON KEEFER, GREETER, a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the 4th day of October , together with by handing to ADULT IN CHARGE 2004 and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ~-~ day of O~ ~ A.D. othonotary So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON By: ~ty~herif f SHERIFF'S CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D 0 ET AL RETURN - REGULAR VALERIE WEARY , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon QUANTUM IMAGING & THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES INC the DEFENDANT at 1334:00 at 405 ST JOHNS CHURCH ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ALLYSON KEEFER, GREETER, a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS HOURS, on the 4th day of October , 2004 by handing to ADULT IN CHARGE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /3 ~-~ day of ~ o26%~v A.D. rothonotar~ ~' So Answers: 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON Depugy ~er~f SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVAi~IA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL VALERIE WEARY , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS ZIMMERMAN LAWRENCE B MD DEFENDANT , at 1354:00 HOURS, on the at 108 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 KEVIN LEITZEL, OFFICE MANAGER a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the 4th day of October , 2004 by handing to together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof, Sheriff's Costs: So Answers: Docketing 6.00 Service 11.84 Affidavit .00 ~ Surcharge 10.00 R. Thomas Kline .00 27.84 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /3~ day of O~ ~6W3~ A.D. honotary By: SHERIFF'S RETURN - CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL REGULAR VALERIE WEARY , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA LTD DEFENDANT , at 1354:00 HOURS, on the at 108 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 KEVIN LEITZEL, OFFICE MANAGER a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the 4th day of October , 2004 by handing to together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /3 ~ day of {[~ . ~ c.~3 &"ti ~ A.D. --/Prothonotary ' ' ' So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON By: SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL VALERIE WEARY Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the 4th day of October , by handing to together with says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS BGTSPB GROUP LTD DEFENDANT at 1354:00 HOURS, on the at 108 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 KEVIN LEITZEL, OFFICE MANAGER a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS 2004 and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service o00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this /~---- day of 0~ .26-~ A,D. I Pro~honotar~ So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/06/2004 RHOADS & SINON SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO: 2004-04820 P COMMONTWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND NOT FOUND EWING DOROTHY J EXT EST OF HAR VS BRUAW DONALD D O ET AL R. Thomas Kline duly sworn according to law, inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT BR3kUAW DONALD DO unable to locate Him WRIT OF SUMMONS ,Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff, who being says, that he made a diligent search and in his bailiwick. but was He therefore returns the the within named DEFENDANT 56 SOUTH ENOL~ DRIVE ENOLA, PA 17025 DEFENDANT · NOT FOUND , BRAUAW DONALD DO IS NOT KNOWN AT GIVEN ADDRESS. as to Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Not Found Surcharge 18.00 11.10 5.00 10.00 .00 44.10 So answers. Sheriff of Cumberland County RHOADS & SINON 10/06/2004 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 7~~-~ day of A.D. Pro'fy MICHAEL M. BADOWSKI, ESOUIRE Pa. Supreme Court I.D. No. 32646 MARDOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: [717] 975-8114 Direct Dial: [717] 760-7500 Fax: [717] 975-8124 E-Mail: mbadowski(~margolisedelstuin.com Attorney for Defendants ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY DOROTHY R. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of Harry W. Ewing, Deceased, Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D.; SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KLrNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D.; QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC.; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERK32qD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 JIJRY TRIAL DEMANDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or suffer judgment non pros. Respectfully submitted, MARGOL S / Date: ~O/,~)~[Ol~ By: ~¢)/~' Michael lVl. Badowski, Esquire Attorneys for Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D., and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology RULE TO THE PLAINTIFF: You are hereby ordered and directed to file your Complaint against the Defendants in the above-captioned ~natter within twenty (20) days of servj~e of this Rule against you or suffer j~dgment non pros.z~ / J Dated: ('~L ~i,3, i ~_ f~.) ~// ~ ' rl~honotary MICHAEL M. BADOWSKI, ESQUIRE Pa. Supreme Court I.D. No. 32646 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindlo Rood Comp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: [717] 975-8114 Direct Dial: [717] 760-7500 Fax: [717] 975-8124 E-Mail: mbadowski(~margolisedelstein.com Attorney for Defendants ALAN D, ROUMM, M,D. ond SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY DOROTHY R. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of Harry W. Ewing, Deceased, Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D.; SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D.; QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC.; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Margolis Edelstein on behalf of Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology in the above-captioned action. MARGOLIS EDEI2~ By Date: I O/~"'~ 104 Mic~aael I~I. ~ adc~ws ki, Es~tuire Attorneys for Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D., and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have served a true and correct copy of the foregoing on all counsel of record and interested parties by placing the same in the United States mail at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, first-class, postage prepaid, on the c,~ I ~'~ day of October, 2004, and addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P. O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (Counsel for Plaintif~ Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Barbara K. Kunlde, M.D. Richard Stewart, M.D. Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.I). Internists of Central PA BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUlVlBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, deceased, Plaimiff, V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D. and QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPG GROUP, LTD., Defendant. C1VIL ACTION - LAW No: 04-4820 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THEPROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, and Craig A. Stone, Esquire, on behalf of Defendants, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA, Ltd., in connection with the above-captioned matter. Respect ful~'h~ .i[ted, By: w,~,~,f CRAIG A. ~rONE, ESQUIRE Counsel for Defendants, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central, PA, Ltd. 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-35;00 PA I.D. #15907 \05_A\LIAB\CES\LLPG\165205\TKC\16194~50000 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE has been served upon the following known counsel of record this 2t2d day of October, 2004, via United States First-Class Mail, postage prepaid: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Michael Badowdski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein PO Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108 0932 (Counsel for Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology) Donald Bmaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D., Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 By: ~ CRAIG, i\ ~TONE, ESQUIRE Counsel I~11~ Defendants, Lawrence B. Zimmernlhn, M.D. and Internists of Central, PA, Ltd. 4200 Cnm~s Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3500 PA I.D. #15907 \05_A\LIAB\C ES\LLPG\165205\TKC\16194~50000 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUM][~ERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, deceased, Plaintiff, DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D. and QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPG GROUP, LTD., Defendant. ) CIVIL ACTION - LAW ) ) No: 04-4820 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JURY TR][AL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR A RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly issue a Rule directing Plaintiff to file a Comphfint in the above-referenced matter within twenty (20) days of service thereof or risk a judgment e,f non pros. Respect~su~tted, Counsel for Deft ~dants, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central, PA, Ltd. 4200 C~ts Mill Ro~, Suite B H~sb~g, PA 17112 (7~7) 65~-~500 PA I.D. ~15907 \05_A\LIAB\CES\LLPG\165232\TKC\16194~50000 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a tree and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT has been served upon the following known counsel of record this ~[ day of October, 2004, 'via United States First-Class Mail, postage prepaid: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Michael Badowdski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein PO Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108 0932 (Counsel for Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology) \05_A\LIAB\CES\LLPG\165232\TKC\16194k50000 Donald Bma~v, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D., Richard Stewart, M.D. and Qutantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 By: CRAIG A. ER, ~O~J~E, ESQUIRE Counsel for Defendants, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central, PA, Ltd. 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (717) 651-3500 PA I.D. #15907 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the ) CIVIL ACTION - LAW Estate of HARRY W. EWING, deceased, ) Plaintiff, No: 04-41820 V. ) ) ) DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ) ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ) ROLrMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA ) K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, ) M.D. and QUANTUM IMAGING AND ) THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES; ) LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; ) INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and ) BGTSPG GROUP, LTD., ) Defendant. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED .RULE AND NOW, this _~__~ay of ~ _, 2004, upon consideration of the foregoing Praecipe, Plaintiffs are hereby ordered to file their Complaint within twenty (20) days hereof or suffer judgment of non l~ros. BY THE PROTHONOTARy: Joseph p. Haler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAs, THOMAs & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer~lthlaw, com gcauler@tthlaw, com DOROTHY j. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND : THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., i LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., : INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., : Defendants : : JURy TRIAL DEMANDED P~RAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEAI~N.~_.~CE TO THE PROTHONOTARy: AttOrneys for Defendants: R/chard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeut/c Associates,/nc. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAbff) COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CFVIL ACTION - LAW .' : NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM Please enter the appearance of Joseph p. Haler, Esquire and Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire counsel for Defendants R/chard Stewart. Associates, Inc. in the above-captioned mah~eDrl and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic as 322108.1 By: Respectfully submitted, ~S~AFER, LLP ?Jorth St3;;? ~aa~ sBb°;; 9~A i-7'~ ;~_0999 (717) 255~7613 C~ERTIFICATE OF SER'~CE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the £ollowing: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Alan D. Roumm, M.D. Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology 650 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. Internists of Central PA and BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 By: THOMAS, THOM/ ~0_~ No~h Front Str~i, P.O/Brox 999 R, LLP Harrisburg,PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax o (717) 237~7105 jhafer@tthlaw.com gcauler~tthlaw.com Atlorneys for Defendants: Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Irmging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule on Plaimiffto file a Complaim in the above case within twenty (20) days after service of the Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. Respectfully s)lbmi Thomas, Th 0/Baas Jose/~ Haler, Est RULe_/ DATE: 10-2-5 -6q' uire 2004, RULE IS ISSUE~ABOVE. Prothonotary CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Donald Bmaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Alan D. Roumm, M.D. Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology 650 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. Internists of Central PA and BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 THo~S~¢IAS~FER, By: jo s~pk~p. HZfer,..~tuire Atto~ey I.D. No. 0'7186 305//North Front Street P.i¢. Box 999 H~irrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 LLP 322191.1 Joseph P. Haler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryarme Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer~tthlaw.com gcauler~tthlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION-- LAW NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please file of record the attached Certificate of Service which served the Rule to File a Complaint upon Plaintiff issued by the Prothonotary of Cumberland County on October 29, 2004, with regard to the above-captioned matter. By: Respectfully submitted, Joseph ~l-afer, l~quire Atto .m6y//LD. No. 07186 Gerry~l~ne Cauler., Esquire Att~o~ey I.D. No. 90539 Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer~tthlaw.com gcauler@tthlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Ricl~trd Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.C., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 04-4820 Crv'IL TERM · ~Y T~ DEMA~ED PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule on Plaintiff to file a Complaint in the above case within twenty (20) days after service of the Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. ow, 0c_.4. ,kq Respectfu!ily s~4bmitte ,d~ Thomas, rh'i;~aas &/Hafer. J~P , // /,A' ......... JoseP/h~'Hafer, Esquire / RULE/ , 2004, RULE IS ISSUED AS~BOVE. Prothonota~ ' ~ '~ TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In Testimony wh~faof, I here unto set my hancl ~1 ~ s~ e~. :?~J-.cl Cour~ at ~fll~i~, Pa. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (Counsel for PlaintifjO Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein 35 l0 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (Counsel for Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology) James Saxton, Esquire Stevens & Lee, P.C. 25 North Queen Street, Suite 6(}2 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc.) Craig A. Stone, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (Counsel for Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA) BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA Joseph~rlaf~, Esquiff,~ ^tto~,~,I.?._/N?;, 07 r86 305 ~"orth Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 FOULKROD ELLIS Professional Corporation 2010 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 909-7006 Fax: (717) 909-6955 DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUN~¢, M.D. and SANFORD AND Attorney for Defendant: Barbara K. Kunkle, M.D. IN THE COU'RT OF COMlqON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 04-4820 ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K.: CIVIL ACTION - LAW KUNKLE, M.D., RICHARD STEWART,: M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND : THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., : LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., : INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and : BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE TO: PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Kindly enter our appearance as counsel on behalf of Defendant, Barbara K. Kunkle, M.D., in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESS I"~Ng_L CORPOR. ATION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that true and correct copies of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE was served upon counsel of record this 4th day of November by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoades & Sinon, LLP 1 South Market Street P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein Post Office Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Richard Stewart, M.D. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Internists of Central PA 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Date: FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Beth E. Forbes, ~gal FOULKROD ELLIS Professional Corporation 2010 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 909-7006 Fax: (717) 909-6955 DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased Plaintiff Yo DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND Attorney for Defendant: Barbara K. Kunkle, M.D. : IN THE COLrRT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : NO. 04-4820 ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K.: CIVIL ACTION - LAW KUNKLE, M.D., RICHARD STEWART,: M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND : THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., : LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., : INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and : BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO: PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Please issue a Rule upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or suffer judgment non pros. FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Andrew H. Foulkrod, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 77394 RULE TO THE PLAINTIFF: You are hereby ordered and directed to file your Complaint against Defendants in the above-captioned matter within twenty (20) days of service of this Rule against you or suffer judgment non pros.~,~ Date: J~,,,. ~' ~ Prothonotary, Cumber~~y CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that true and correct copies of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT was served upon counsel of record this 4th day of November by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoades & Sinon, LLP 1 South Market Street P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein Post Office Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Richard Stewart, M.D. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Internists of Central PA 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Date: BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 By: FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Beth E. Forbe~l DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaimiff VS. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION ~ LAW NO.: 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Stevens & Lee on behalf of Defendant Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D., in the above action. Serve all papers at 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602, P.O. Box 1594, Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17608-1594. Notice by copy hereof is given to all counsel of record. Dated: STEVENS & LEE Jar~,~ W. Saxton, Esquire Attbrney ID#36815 Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Attorney ID#86305 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendants Barbara K Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. SLI 488808vl/41199.074 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a tree and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance was served this /fi'~ day of A~bt;e~ft-r, 2004, by first class mail[, postage prepaid, upon the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor PO Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 STEVENS & LEE By: Jan~JW. S~u~'on;Esquire Att~fiey ID#36815 Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Attorney ID#:86305 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendants Barbara K Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic .Associates, Inc. SL1 488808vl/41199.074 Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer @tthlaw.com gcauler @tthlaw.com DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix : of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, : Deceased, : Plaintiff : V. ; DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. : ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND : ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, : BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., : RICHARD STEWART, M.D., : QUANTUM IMAGING AND : THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., : LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., : INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and : BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., : Defendants : Attorneys for Defendants: Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RESPONSE OF DEFENDANTS RICHARD STEWART, M.D. AND OUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC. TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO CONDUCT PRE-COMPLAINT DISCOVERY AND NOW, come Defendants Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. (hereinafter "Answering Defendants"), by and through their counsel, Thomas, Thomas & Haler, LLP, and hereby respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Conduct Pre-Complaint Discovery and aver as follows: 1. Admitted in part and denied in part. Answering Defendants admit only that Plaintiff commenced suit by Writ of Summons on or about September 23, 2004. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the troth of all other averments contained in paragraph 1, and therefore, deny said averments and demand strict proof thereof at trial. Furthermore, Plaintiff's allegations of negligence are specifically denied as Answering Defendants acted at all times within the accepted standards of medical practice. 2. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted only that Plaintiff served with her Writ of Summons pre-complaint discovery in the form of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Plaintiff's discovery requests were overly broad in nature relative to the allowable scope of pre-complaint discovery under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania case law. 3. The averments in this paragraph are directed to a Defendant other than Answering Defendants and therefore no response is required. 4. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that Answering Defendants responded to PlalntiWs discovery requests on November 8, 2004. Answering Defendants responded to PlaintiWs discovery requests with appropriate objections as PlainfiWs discovery requests were beyond the scope of pre-complaint discovery allowed under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania case law. 5. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that Co-Defendants Roumm and Sanford and Roumm R_heumatology filed a Praecipe for Rule to File a Complaint and that Answering Defendants have filed a Rule to File a Complaint on October 25, 2004. It is specifically denied that Answering Defendants seek to abrogate Plaintiff's allowable pre-complaint discovery efforts. 6. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that pre-complaint discovery is allowable under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania case law. However, it is denied that Luckett v. Blaine, et al., 850 A.2d 811,818 (Pa. Commw. 2003) 2 stands for Plaintiff's position that Plaintiff should be allowed to conduct pre-complaint discovery in the form of extensive interrogatories, requests for production of documents and depositions in the instant matter. In fact, the Court in Luckett expressly stated that pre-complaint discovery is permitted in Pennsylvania to aid in the preparation of pleadings, pre-complaint discovery does not authorize a fishing expedition to determine whether a cause of action exists. Id~ at 818. 7. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that pre-complaint discovery is allowable under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania case law. However, it is denied that Luckett v. Blaine, et al., 850 A.2d 811,818 (Pa. Commw. 2003) stands for PlaintiWs position that Plaintiff should be allowed to conduct pre-complaint discovery in the form of extensive interrogatories, requests for production of documents and depositions in the instant matter. In fact, the Court in Luckett expressly stated that pre-complaint discovery is permitted in Pennsylvania to aid in the preparation of pleadings, pre-complaint discovery does not authorize a fishing expedition to determine whether a cause of action exists. Id~ at 818. 8. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the troth of the allegations contained in paragraph 8. Decedent's medical records and radiology reports speak for themselves. Additionally, Answering Defendants object to PlainfiWs characterization of the events of Plaintiff decedent's medical care and aver that all allegations of negligence set forth in this paragraph are specifically denied as Answering Defendants acted within the requisite standard of care at all times relevant hereto. 9. Denied. Plaintiff has requested pre-complaint discovery to identify all licensed professionals involved in the care and treatment rendered to the decedent and state that discovery will reveal the whereabouts of potential witnesses. However, Plaintiff has the ability to obtain all medical records related to Plaintiff decedent without conducting pre-complaint discovery. Upon information and belief, Answering Defendants submit that Plaintiff is already in possession of all radiology reports pertaining to Answering Defendants' care of Plaintiff's decedent. Additionally, Plaintiff claims that discovery may reveal that some named Defendants bear no responsibility for the alleged misdiagnosis of Plaintiff's decedent. However, Plaintiff incorrectly states that "judicial economy would be best served by discovering this information now, and properly discontinuing the action as to those licensed professionals". Answering Defendants submit that the Pennsylvania Courts have imposed strict limitations on pre-complaint discovery. See, McNeil v. Jordan, 2002 Pa. Super. 400, 814 A.2d 234 (Pa. Super. 2002); Speicher v. Toshok, 63 Pa. D&C 4th 435, 2003 Pa. D&C Lexis 63 (C.P. Allegheny 2003); and Potts v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 37 Pa. D&C 4th 196, 1998 Pa. D&C Lexis 52 (C.P. Allegheny 1998). Specifically, the Pennsylvania Superior Court in McNeil states: "depositions may only aid in the preparation of pleadings, not determine whether pleadings shall be prepared in the first place." McNeil, 814 A.2d at 246. Plaintiff is attempting to use pre-complaint discovery to determine which Defendants are appropriate parties to this action. Answering Defendants submit that Plaintiff, as evidenced by her Writ of Summons and Motion, is in possession or control of all necessary records and reports to file a sufficient complaint and to allow pre-complaint discovery to continue will be prejudicial to all Defendants. 10. Denied. Plaintiff has made the bald allegation that pre-complaint discovery is necessary and essential for Plaintiff to draft a detailed and precise, factual complaint as required by Pa.R.C.P. 1019. However, Plaintiff has failed to detail what information she requires in order to file the appropriate factual complaint. In McNeil v. Jordan, 2002 Pa. Super. 400, 814 A.2d 234 (Pa. Super. 2002), the Pennsylvania Superior Court has determined that pre-complaint discovery is only allowable for certain narrow exceptions. The McNeil Court held that it is permissible if it is 4 shown, fn'st, that the plaintiff has set forth aprimafacie case and, second, that the plaintiff cannot otherwise prepare and ftc a complaint. See Id. at 243. 11. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that Plaintiff has requested relevant radiology reports from Answering Defendants. Answering Defendants state that they do not oppose Plaintiff's request for medical records/reports. On information and belief, Plaintiff has received a complete copy of the radiology reports of Answering Defendants. Plaintiff, through her discovery requests, has requested information that is not necessary for the filing of a complaint. Answering Defendants deny that Plaintiff is entitled to pre-complaint depositions as requested in paragraph 11. The McNeil opinion notes that depositions may only aid in the preparation of pleadings, not determine whether pleadings shall be prepared in the fn'st instance. See McNeil, 814 A.2d at 238. 12. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that Pa.R.C.P. 4001(c) authorizes discovery for the preparation of pleadings. Answering Defendants submit that the Plaintiff has sufficient information to file a complaint, and further state that the relevant Pennsylvania case law precludes Plaintiff from the relief requested. See, McNeil v. Jordan, 2002 Pa. Super. 400, 814 A.2d 234 (Pa. Super. 2002); Speicher v. Toshok, 63 Pa. D&C 4th 435, 2003 Pa. D&C Lexis 63 (C.P. Allegheny 2003); and Potts v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 37 Pa. D&C 4th 196, 1998 Pa. D&C Lexis 52 (C.P. Allegheny 1998). 13. Admitted in part and denied in part. Answering Defendants hereby admit that Pa.R.C.P. 4009.1 l(a) authorizes a Request for Production of Documents to be filed with or after service of original process. Upon information and belief, Answering Defendants submit that Plaintiff is in possession of all medical records pertaining to the care provided by Answering Defendants. All other Requests for Production of Documents made by Plaintiff are outside of the scope of pre-complaint discovery as they are not necessary for the preparation of a complaint. If discovery is sought in aid and preparation of the pleadings, the inquirer has the burden of establishing the relevancy of the questions and the fact that they will aid in preparation of the complaint. See, McNeil, supra. Plaintiff has failed to establish the relevancy of her discovery requests or that she is lacking information sufficient to the filing of a complaint with Pa.R.C.P. t019. Pre-complaint discovery may be permitted upon carefully constructed limitations and a- showing that without the discovery a complaint could not be drafted. See, McNeil at 244. 14. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is hereby admitted that Plaintiff' s recitation of Pa.R.C.P. 4003. l(a) is correct. However, Plaintiff fails to note that discovery in Pennsylvania is subject to the provisions of Pa.R.C.P. 4003.2, 4003.5 and 4011. Specifically, Pa.R.C.P. 4005, Written Interrogatories to a Party, in pertinent part states: "Interrogatories may be served upon any party at the time of service of the original process or at any time thereafter. Interrogatories which are to be served prior to service of the complaint shall be limited to the purpose of preparing a complaint and shall contain a brief statement of the nature of the cause of action." Plaintiff' s Writ and discovery requests did not contain a brief statement of the nature of the cause of action and therefore are not in compliance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Furthermore, as stated above, Plaintiff has made discovery requests that far exceed the limited scope of allowable pre-complaint discovery. 15. Denied. Plaintiff seeks leave of court to conduct discovery beyond the limits of pre-complaint discovery under Pennsylvania case law and the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Discovery prior to the filing of a complaint should be discouraged because a defendant who is served only with a writ of summons and a notice of deposition cannot effectively prepare 6 for the deposition and has little basis for challenging the relevancy of any question. Potts v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 37 Pa. D&C 4th 196, 203. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. respectfully request that this Honorable Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Conduct Pre-Complaint Discovery and further deny Plaintiff's request for stay of the Rules to File a Complaint obtained by Answering Defendants: DATE: 328630.1 By: Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Jos Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a tme and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square PO Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Counsel for Plaintiff Wiley P. Parker, Esquire Henry & Beaver, LLP 937 Willow Street P.O. Box 1140 Lebanon, PA 17042-1140 Attorneys for Donald Bruaw, D.O. Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology James Saxton Esquire Stevens & Lee PC 25 North Queen Street Suite 602 PO Box 1594 Lancaster PA 17608 Counsel for Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. Andrew H. Foulkrod, Esquire Foulkrod Ellis 2010 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. Craig A. Stone, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crams Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 Counsel for Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP DATE: 328630.1 By: Gerryanne Qauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 FOULKROD ELLIS Professional Corporation 2010 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Phone: (717) 909-7006 Fax: (717)909-6955 Attorney for Defendant: Barbara K. Kunkle, M.D. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased i Plaintiff Vo DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : NO. 04-4820 : ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K.: CIVIL ACTION - LAW KUNKLE, M.D., RICHARD STEWART,: M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND : THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., : LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., : INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and : BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO FILE A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE TO: PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PE~NNSYLVANIA Kindly file of record the attached Certificate of Service of the Prothonotary's Rule to File Complaint. Respectfully submitted, FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Date: II II~{~)t~ By: Michael C. Mongiello, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 87532 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that true and correct copies of the foregoing RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT dated November 3, 2004 entered by the Prothonotary of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania on November 5, 2004 was served upon counsel of record this 17n day of Novembe~C~J~ depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoades & Sinon, LLP 1 South Market Street. P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein Post Office Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Richard Stewart, M.D~. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Internists of Central 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Date: By: FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESS IONAL CORPORATION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that true and correct copies of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO FILE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE was served upon counsel of record this 17th day of November 2004 by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire Rhoades & Sinon, LLP 1 South Market Street P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein Post Office Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 171013 Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Richard Stewart, M.D. 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 170111 Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Internists of Central PA 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Date: BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 By: FOULKROD ELLIS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Beth E. Forbes] Paralegal DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND ,COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this 2-2- -, ']~-day of ~ ,2 v , 2004, Defendants, Alan D. Roumm, Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology; Lawrence B. Ziimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA, Ltd.; Richard Stewart M.D., and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. are hereby directed to show cause why the relief requested in the attached Motion for Leave to Conduct pre-Complaint discovery should not be granted. Defendants' Rule to File a Complaint is hereby stayed. Rule retumable~a b~'t'~.r>' '2-0 ~.2,.71~ ~[~ ~Fl,,t James E. Ellison, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 81372 RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -. LAW NO. 04-4820 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO CONDUCT PRE-COMPLAINT DISCOVERY NOW COMES, Plaintiff, Dorothy Ewing, Executrix of the Estate of Harry W. Ewing, by his attorneys, Rhoads & Sinon, LLP, and files the within Motion for Leave to Conduct Pre-Complaint Discovery, as follows: 1. Plaintiff, instituted suit by filing a Praecipe for Writ of Summons on September 23, 2004 (See Exhibit "1") in connection with the death of her decedent, Harry Ewing, which is believed to have resulted from a delayed cancer diagnosis caused by the negligence of the named defendants. 538498.2 2. Accompanying the Praecipe for Writ of Summons was pre-Complaint Discovery, in the form of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents (See Exhibits "2" and "3"), which seeks information relative to these incidents. 3. On November 1, 2004, Defendant Quantum Imaging responded to Plaintiff's discovery request for production of documents. (See Exhibit "4".) 4. On November 8, 2004, Defendants' Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. responded to Plaintiff's discovery requests. Defendants' provided multiple objections to Plaintiff's discovery, primarily asserting that the sought information was not necessary for the filing of a Complaint. (.See Exhibit "5".) 5. On or about October 22, 2004, Counsel for Defendants Roumm and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology filed a Praecipe for Rule to File a Complaint which, in effect, seeks to abrogate Plaintiff's pre-Complaint discovery efforts. ~ (See Exhibit "6".) 6. Pre-complaint discovery is permissible if it is shown, first, that the Plaintiff has set forth a prima facie case, and second, that the Plaintiff cannot otherwise prepare and file Complaint without the requested discovery. Commw. 2003). 7. Luckett v. Blaine,, et al., 850 A.2d 811, 818 (Pa. Pre-complaint discovery is appropriate to obtain particular facts, such as all the proper parties liable to the Plaintiff for injury, or the identiity and whereabouts of witnesses. See id. ~ Subsequently, several other Defendants filed Rules to File a Complaint. Defendants Lawrence Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA, Ltd., October 26, 2004 (See Exhibit "7"); and Defendants Richard Stewart, M.D., and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc., October 28, 2004 (See Exhibit "8"). Plaintiff anticipates additional Rules to File a Complaint may be filed, and requests this Court's Order be applicable to all named Defendants. 8. Instantly, the decedent had been treating for an illness since 1996. Medical records clearly indicate that a malignant tumor in his ltmg, in 1996, could not be ruled out. However, the decedent was diagnosed with Wegener's Granulomatosis, and medicated for same. Despite his gradually declining physical health, he was continuc,usly diagnosed with and treated for Wegener's. In October of 2002, the decedent was diagnosed with lung cancer. Subsequent tests revealed the decedent had been suffering from cancer for several years. Bluntly stated, the diagnosis and treatment of Weneger's was incorrect, and conc',ems over the decedent's tumor in 1996 went unaddressed. 9. Pre-complaint discovery in this matter will serve to identify all licensed professional involved in the care and treatment rendered to the decedent, and will reveal the whereabouts of potential witnesses. Furthermore, discovery may reveal that some named Defendants bear no responsibility for the misdiagnosis, and judicial economy would be best served by discovering this information now, and properly discontinuing the action as to those licensed professionals. 10. Pre-Complaint Discovery is necessary and essential for Plaintiff to draft a detailed and precise, factual Complaint as required by the Pa.R.Civ. P. 1019. 11. In addition, numerous documents necessary to enable Plaintiff to prepare a Complaint have been requested. (See Exhibit "3"). It is anticipated that after Defendant has fully answered Plaintiff's pre-Complaint Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories, several witnesses will be identified who must be deposed prior to filing a Complaint. 12. of pleadings. Pa.R.Civ. P. 4001(c) specifically authorizes discovery for the preparation 13. Pa.R.Civ.P. 4009.1 l(a) authorizes a Request for Production of Documents to be filed with or after service of original process. 14. Pa.R.Civ.P. 4003.1(a) provides that "a party may obtain discovery regarding any matter not privileged which is relevant to tl~e subject matter involved in the pending action..." 15. Defendants have not at the present time filed a Motion for Protective Order. However, if Plaintiff is required to file a Complaint within 20 days of the Rule, it would allow Defendants to circumvent the Pennsylvania. Rules of Civil Procedure's well-established mechanisms recognizing Plaintiff's right to pre-Complaint discovery. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court grant Plaintiff leave of court to conduct pre-complaint discovery and preclude the issuance of a rule to file complaint until 30 days after completion of pre-Complaint discovery. By: RHOADS & SINON LLP r~gs E. Eitlis(~n, Esq~i-~ - ~Attorne~ I.D. NO. $1372 RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF James E. Ellison, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 81372 RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF NONCONCUI~RENCE Plaintiff's counsel, James E. Ellison, Esq., avers that on iNovember 11, 2004, my associate, James J. Jarecki, Esq., phoned Michael Badowski, Esq., to seek his concurrence. Attorney Badowski did not return my associate's call. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, 128 Bungalow Road Enola, PA 17025 Plaintiff Vo DONALD BRUAW, D.O., 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SAN'FORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY 650 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 BARBARA .K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., and QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBEP~AND COLrNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. ~ v- ~?~o ,~;t-f-~-- JURY TRIAL DEMA.NEDED C~ PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Writ of Summons against the Defendants in the above-caption, 533807.1 The Writ shall be issued and forwarded to the Sheriff of Cumberland County. James E. Ellison, Esquire RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square P. O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 Supreme Court ID iNo. 81372 Date: September 23,, 2004 Atto'meys for Plaintiff WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFFS HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. Prothonotary , ~' ff James E. Ellison, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 81372 James J. Jarecki, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 89580 RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square, 12t~ Floor P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 Attorneys for Plaintiff DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff Vo DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SAN-FORD AND ROUMM HEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO: PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES DISRECTED TO ALL DEFENDANTS - SET I ALL DEFENDANTS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that you are hereby notified and required to answer separately, fully, in writing, and under oath, within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Notice and to serve your answers thereto on the undersigned in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure No. 4001, et seq. These Interrogatories shall be deemed to be conthauing Interrogatories. If you or anyone acting on your behalf learn of further information responsive to these Interrogatories not contained in your Answers between the time of your Answers to these Interrogatories and the time 534077.4 set for hear/rigs in this matter, you are under a duty to promptly notify the undersigned of such further information by way of a supplemental Answer. The Plaintiff reserves the fight to conduct additional discovery. DEFINITIONS TO INTERROGATORIES The following definitions are applicable to each Interrogatory and are incorporated by reference in each Interrogatory. The Interrogatories must be read in the light of these definitions and your Answers must be responsive to the Interrogatories as so defined: 1. "Document": The term "document" means any written, recorded, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, whether sent or received or neither, including drafts or copies bearing notations or marks not found on or in the original, and includes but is not limited to: (a) all letters or other forms of correspondence of co:mmunication, including e- mail, envelopes, notes, telegrams, cables, telex messages, messages (including reports, notes, notations and memoranda of or relating to telephone conversations or conferences); (b) all memoranda, reports, test results, financial statements or reports, notes, transcripts, tabulations, studies, analyses, evaluations, projections, work papers, corporate records or copies thereof, lists, comparisons, questionnaires, surveys, charts, graphs, summaries, extracts, statistical records, cornpilations; (c) all desk calendars, appointment books, diaries; (d) ail books, articles, press releases, magazines, newspapers, booklets, circulars, bulletins, notices, instructions, manuals; (e) ail minutes or transcripts of ail meeting; and (f) ail photographs, microfilms, phonographs, tapes or other records, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drams, pr~at-outs, and other data complications from which information can be obtained. 2. "Identi~," "Identity" or "Identification": (A) When used in reference to a natural person, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) his/her full name; - 2 - (ii) his/her present or last known business address; (iii) his/her present or last known business affiliation; and, (iv) his/her present or last known business position (including job title and a description of job functions, duties and responsibilities). (B) When used with reference to any entity other than a natural person, state: (i) its fullname; (ii) the address of its principal place of business; (iii) the jurisdiction under the laws of which it has been organized or incorporated and the date of such organization o:r incorporation, if known; (iv) in the case of a corporation, the names of its directors and principal officers; and, (v) in the case of an entity other than a corporation, the identities of its parlners or principals or all individuals who acted or who authorized another to act on its behalf in connection with the matters referred to. (C) When used in reference to a document, the terms "identify," "identity" or "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) the nature of the document (e.g., letter, contract, memorandum) and any other information (i.e., its title, index or file number) which would facilitate in the identification thereof; (ii) its date of preparation; (iii) its present location and the identity (as defined in paragraph 2(A) hereof) of its present custodian or, if its premmt location and custodian are not known, a description of its last known disposition; (iv) its subject matter and substance or, in lieu thereof, annex a legible copy of the document to the answers to those interrogatories; (v) the identity (as defined in paragraph 2(A) hereof) of each person who performed any significant function or had any role in connection therewith (i.e., author, contributor of information, recipient, etc.) or who has any knowledge; and, - 3 - (vi) if the document has been destroyed[ or is otherwise no longer in existence or cannot be found, the reason, if knox~m, why such document no longer exists, the identity (as defined in paragraph 2(A) hereof) of the people responsible for the document no longer being in existence and of its last known custodian. (D) When used in connection with an oral conuntmication, the terms "identify," "identity" and "identification" mean to provide the following information: (i) its general nature (i.e., conference, telephonic communication, etc.); (ii) the time and place of its occurrence; (iii) its subject matter and substance; (iv) the identity (as defined in paragraph 2(A) hereof) of each person who performed any function or had any role in connection therewith or who has any knowledge thereof; and, (v) the identity (as defined in paragraph 2(C) hereof) of each document which refers thereto or which was used, referred to or prepared in the course or as a result thereof. 3. "Relates to": The terms "relates to" or "relating to" when used in connection with any act, action, activity, accounting, practice, process, occurreace, occasion, course of conduct, contractual provision or document, happening, relationship, scheme, conference, discussion, development, service, instance, incident, event, etc., means used or occunSng or referred to in the preparation therefore, or in the course thereof, or as a consequence thereof, or referring thereto. 4. "Person": The term "person" means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships or other business associations, public authorities, municipal corporations, state governments, local governments, all governmental bodies, and any other legal entities. 5. Answer by Reference to Documents: If any Interrogatory is answered by reference to a document or group of documents, with respect to each such Interrogatory Answer, identify (as defined in paragraph 2(C) hereof) the specific document or documents containing the requested information. - 4 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refttse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objex:tion. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean Alan D. Roumm, M.D., and his agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refu:~e to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Donald Bruaw, D.O., and his agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the: first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objec, tion. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the; subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology, and its agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. - S - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you reft:me to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Richard Stewart, M.D., and his agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a .document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the.. subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief' statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc., and its agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and. shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D., and his agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All o~her individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the: subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd., and its agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": Ali other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the: first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, BGTSPB Group, and its agents, servants, and/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All other individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. - 5 - If you refer to, identify, or otherwise rely upon a document when you answer these Interrogatories, please attach a copy of that document. If you refuse to do so and assert the privilege set forth the grounds for that privilege or the grounds for the objection. 6. Claim of Privilege: If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you need not set forth the brief statement of the subject matter of the document, or the substance of the oral communication called for above. You shall, however, otherwise "identify" such document or oral communication and shall state such ground on which you claim that such document or oral communication is privileged. 7. Incident in Question: The term "incident in question" means the care and treatment provided by Defendant to Harry W. Ewing, Deceased. 8. "Defendant": The term "Defendant" shall mean, Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D., and her agents, servants, an6/or employees. 9. "Healthcare provider": The term "healthcare provider" shall include physician, physician assistant, resident, medical student, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and certified nursing assistant. 10. "Remaining Named Defendants": All ol~her individuals and organizations listed as defendants in the caption of this action as reflected on the first page of these interrogatories. INTERROGATORIES 1. Fully explain your current business and eon~yactual relations~p with any and ail of the remaining defendants named in this action. 2. State your full name, address, date of birth and Social Security Number. 3. Please state whether you were covered by or were the subject of any liability insurance policies for the injuries arising out of the instant action. - 7 - following: If your answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the affirmative, please state the a. Name and address of the company issuing each policy; b. Policy number of each such policy; c. Names and addresses of the persons named under each such policy;, d. Limits of liability;, e. Whether the insurance company issuing each policy has denied coverage with respect to this incident for any reason; and if so, the nature and reason given for such denial; f. Whether the insurance company issuing each policy has required the execution of any agreement by you or on your behalf before undertaking to investigate and/or defend this action; and if so, 1) The nature of such agreement; 2) The reason the agreement was required; 3) Whether or not you or any other person acting on your behalf executed the agreement. g. Whether or not each of said policies provide cove,age for the damages set forth in the Complaint; and, h. Whether the policy was in full force and effect on t~he date of Mr. Ewing's death. - $ - 6. State whether this case is being defended by an ~ttomey who has entered his or her appearance on your behalf subject to a reservation of rights agreement between you and your insurance carder. - 9 - 7. Have you or anyone acting on your behalf obtained from any person any statement concerning Harry W. Ewing regarding this action or its subject matter. If so, state: a. The name and last known address of each such person; b. When, where and to whom each statement was made and whether it was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded; c. The name and address of any such person who h, as custody of any such statement that was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded; 8. Do you contend any document requested in Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents or any information requested in these Interrogatorie~ is protected by the Peer Review Protection Act? If so, please state with reasonable particularity the items which are not being produced because of any alleged Peer Review objection. - J. 1 - 9. If you, or someone not an expert subject to Pa.. R.C.P. 4003.5, conducted any investigations of the incident, identify: a. each person, and the employer of each person, who conducted any investigation(s); and b. all notes, reports or other documents prepared during or as a result of the investigation(s) and the persons who have custody thereof. - 12 - 10. Set forth the date(s) you medically evaluated Hm-y W. Ewing and the nature of such evaluation. - 13 - 11. If you have ever been certified by any specialty board, or if you are now or have ever been a member of any specialty board, set forth the following: a. the name and address of each specialty board; b. the date you were certified or became a member; and c. if you are no longer certified or a member, giYe the date your certification or membership was terminated and the reason for such termination. - 14 - 12. Identify aI! hospitals with Which you were at~.~liat~ prior to 2003 and, with respect to each such hospital, set forth your pos/t/on(s) and responsibilities. 13. Identify any association or partnership with any other medical practitioner at the time of the incident. 14. Have you spoken to anyone at your professional liability insurance company regarding Harry W. Ewing on or after March 18, 1996, but prior to receiving the Writ of Summons related to this matter? If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the date of the discussion b. name and address of each person involved in the discussion; c. subject matter of each discussion; d. action taken, if any, as a result of the discussion. - l? - 15. Have you provided to anyone at your professional liability insurance company any written statements regarding Harry W. Ewing on or after March 18, 1996, but prior to receiving the Writ of Summons related to this matter? If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the name of the person to whom the statement wa~s made; b. on what date was the statement made; c. subject matter of the statement; and d. action take, if any, as a result of the statement. (This interrogatory can be answered by providing a copy of all statements as referenced in this particular paragraph.) - 3.8 - 16. Have you spoken to anyone at your professional liability insurance company regarding Harry W. Ewing or any of the matters set forth in the instant action. If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the date of the discussion; b. name and address of each person involved in the discussion; c. subject matter of each discussion; and d. action taken, if any, as a result of the discussion. 17. If you ever spoke with any other healthcare provider in connection with the care and treatment of Harry W. Ewing from March 18, 1996 up through and including the present, set forth: a. the date(s) of the consultation; b. the identity of the practitioner; c. the subject matter of the consultation; d. action taken as a result of the consultation; and e. the identity of any documents relating to the consultation. 18. Did you make and/or keep any records regarding the care and treatment of Mr. Ewing, independent of those maintained by the remaining named defendants. If so, state: a. a summary of those records; b. the current location of those records; (In response to this interrogatory, if such records are kept, this interrogatory may be answered by simply providing a copy of all records as described in this paragraph.) - 21 - 19. If you have ever had any staff privileged revoko:l or curtailed at any hospital, for each such privilege, state: a. a descr/ption of the privilege; b. whether it was revoked or curtailed, and, if curtailed, in what way; c. the date the privilege was revoked or curtailed; d. the reason the privilege was revoked or curtailed; and e. the name of the disciplinary body which revoked or curtailed the privilege. - 22 - 20. change, state: If you ever changed any diagnosis you made of Mr. Ewing's condition, for each a. a description of the diagnosis change; b. the time in which you made such diagnosis change; and c. the reason you made the change, indicating ea~:h fact on which the change in diagnosis was based. - 23 - 21. If any additions, deletions, or corrections were made to the medical records of Harry W. Ewing following the date of completion, please state: a. date of any addition, deletion or correction; b. name, address, telephone number and current whereabouts of the person(s) who made the same; c. reason(s) for any addition, deletion or correction; d. name, address, telephone number and present whereabouts of the person(s) who authorized said addition, deletion or correction; e. location on medical records where said addition, deletion or correction was made; and f. state the nature of the said change. - 24 - 22. To the extent you contend and/or believe that a person other than yourself was responsible for Mr. Ewing's injuries, for each person, state: a. the person's name, telephone number, job title or capacity; and b. the facts on which you base your contention that this person was responsible for Mr. Ewing's injuries. - 2S - 23. If there are any other individuals whom you are aware of that may possess knowledge or information concerning this case, and this person's name is not listed in the preceding answers to these interrogatories, for each person, state: a. the person's name, address, and telephone number; b. the address of the place each person is employed; and c. the person's occupation and job title. RHOADS & SINON LLP fJame;s E. Ellison James J. Jarecki One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (7171} 233-5731 Attomeys for Plaintiff James E. Ellison, Esquire Attomey I.D. No. 81372 James J. Jarecki, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 89580 RHOADS & SINON LLP One South Market Square, 12t~ Floor P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (717) 233-5731 Attorneys for Plaintiff DOROTHY J. EWlNG, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff Vo DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. JURY TRIAL DEI~LANDED PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR. PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ALL DEFENDANTS TO: ALL DEFENDANTS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that you are hereby required, pm-suant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 4009, as amended, to produce for inspection, examination and copying the following documents, at the offices of Rhoads & Sinon LLP, One South Market Square, P. O. Box 1146, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146, not later than thirty (30) days after service of this Request. This Request shall be continuing. If, between the time of trial of this case, you or anyone acting on your behalf learn of additional documents responsive to this Request, you shall produce such document by Supplemental Response. 533950.3 DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Barbm'a K. Kunkel, M.D., her agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memorm~da inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note,, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diffident from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable fi:om which information may be 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a doc~:anent or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or communication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); do The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; ground or basis on which you contend that the communication is privileged. and state the document or oral - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Alan D. Roumm, M.D., his agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diffixent from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a docmnent or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or commtmicafion by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); Co The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; eo The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; and state the ground or basis on which you contend that the document or oral communication is privileged. - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Richard Stewart, M.D., his agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memora~ada inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note,, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are different from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summm-y of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a docmnent or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or communication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape r,~ording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); do The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; eo The name, address, employer and job pc,sition of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; and state the ground or basis on which you conterd that the document or oral communication is privileged. - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc., its agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively' and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note:, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diffi;rent from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a doc~maent or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or commu~fication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); do The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the, document; and state the ground or basis on which you contend that the document or oral communication is privileged. - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D., his agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diffi~rent from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a docmment or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or commtmication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); Co The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); do The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; eo The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; and state the ground or basis on which you contend that the document or oral commmcafion is privileged. - 2 - additional documents responsive to this Request, you shall produce such document by Supplemental Response. DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Intemists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd., its agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working draris of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diffi,~rent from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or communication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); Co The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; and state the ground or basis on which you contend that the document or oral communication is privileged. - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendanf' refers to BGTSPB Group, its agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, ir~tcluding the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are diff,:rent fi.om the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summary of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable: from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a doctanent or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or communication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape r~x:ording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); do The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; ground or basis on which you conte~[d that the communication is privileged. and state the document or oral - 2 - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1. "You", "your" or "Defendant" refers to Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology, its agents, representatives or attorneys. 2. "And" and "or" shall be construed conjunctively and disjunctively so as to bring within the scope of this Request for Production any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. 3. "Document" means any correspondence, memoranda inter-office communication, e- mail, intra-office communication, agreement, minute, report, note, schedule, check, draft, diary, log, telegram, drawing, picture, table, graph, chart, map, or survey, including the originals and working drafts of all of the above and any copies thereof which are different from the original by way of interlineation or notation, and including any transcript or summa~ of the foregoing and any other tangible representation of information which may be retrievable from which information may be used. 4. If you claim that the subject matter of a document or oral communication is privileged, you are required to identify the document or communication by stating the following information: a. Its nature (e.g., letter, memorandum, tape recording, etc.); b. Its date (or if it bears no date, the date when it was prepared); Co The name, address, employer and job position of the signer or signers (or if there is no signer, of the person who prepared it); The name, address, employer and job position of the person, if any to whom the document was sent; The name, address, employer and job position of each person known or believed to have originals or copies of the documents; or A brief statement of the subject matter of the document; and state the ground or basis on which you contend that the document or oral communication is privileged. - 2 - 5. If you do not have possession, custody or control of a document requested, but know who does have possession, custody or control, you are required to identify the document and the person who has possession, custody or control in the manner requested in subparagraph 4 above. REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION 1. A current copy of your curriculum vitae. 2. Any and all incident reports and/or occurrence reports which you prepared or reviewed which relate to, or mention in any manner, Harry W. Ewing. at time of trial. All exhibits or demonstrative evidence to be offered or used for any purpose 4. Statements obtained from any witness or arty other person having knowledge of the facts giving rise to this lawsuit. 5. All documents identified in your answers to. any set of Interrogatories. 6. Any and all documents sent to you by your professional liability insurance company related in any manner to the care you provided to Harry W. Ewing on March 18, 1996 to November 4, 2003. 7. Any and all documents you sent to yom' professional liabihty insum_nce company related in any manner to the care you provided to Harry W. Ewing on March 18, 1996 to November 4, 2003. 8. A copy of any and all insurance policies, including the declaration sheet, covering the incident in question 9. The entire contents of the investigative file obtain, developed or possessed by you, or anyone acting on your behalf, excluding the mental impressions of your attorney or his conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories, and also excluding the mental impressions, conclusions or opinions of yom' representatives other than your attorney, respecting the value or merits of any claims or defenses, or respecting strategy or tactics. - 3 - 10. All documents in your possession which mention Harry W. Ewing except those protected by attomey/client privilege. 11. Any and all records in your possession regarding the care and trealment of Harry W. Ewing, independent of those maintained by Holy Spirit Hospital. 12. Any and all documents reflecting the conla-actual arrangement between you and Holy Spirit Hospital Hospital. 13. A copy of all contracts and/or agreements between you and Holy Spirit 14. Any and all incident, MIXX and/or unusual occurrence reports prepared in connection with the incident giving rise to this lawsuit. RHOADS & SINON LLP James J. Jarecki One South Market Sqr. 12th Flr. Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 233-5731 Attomeys for Plainfi!ff - 4 - DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff ~VS. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING and THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. and BGTSPB GROUP Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO.: 04-4820 RESPONSE OF DEFENDANT QUANTUM IMAGING TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 1. Not applicable. 2. Objection. Defendant objects to this request in that it is vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome for response, and to the extent that it is asking for altomey work product, attorney client privileged information, information protected by the Peer Review Protection Act, information in breach of the confidentiality provisions of the MCARE Act, or information that is otherwise outside the scope of permissible discovery. 3. Trial exhibits have not yet been determined, but at the present time it is anticipated that they will include, but not be limited to, all of decedent's medical records and x-rays, including all of the x-my reports that are attached hereto as exhibit A. 4. Objection. Defendant objects to this request in that it is vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome for response, and to the extent that it asks for attorney work product, attomey client privileged information, information beyond the scope of 4003.5, information protected by the Peer Review Protection Act, information in breach of the confidentiality provisions of the MCARE Act, or information otherwise outside the scope ofpemfissible discovery. Subject to these objections, by way of further response, at the present time ]Defendant is not in possession of any discoverable statements as defined by Pa. R. C. P. 4003.4 other than what is a part of the attached radiology reports. SLI 487192vl/41199.074 5. Not applicable. 6-7. Objection. Defendant objects to this request in that it is vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome for response, and asks for attorney work product, attorney client privileged information, information beyond the scope of Pa. R. C. P. 4003.:5, information protected by the Peer Review Protection Act, information in breach of the confidentiality provisions of the MCARE Act, or information otherwise outside the scope of permissible discovery. 8. Insurance coverage is under investigation and all applicable insurance information will be disclosed when available. 9. Objection. Defendant incorporates its objections to requests :numbers 6 and 7 herein by reference as if set forth fully. Subject to these objections, by way of further response, the only discoverable documents contained in Defendant's file at the pres. ent time are the radiology reports, copies of which are attached hereto. 10-11. Objection. Defendant incorporates its response to request number 9 herein by reference as if set forth fully. 12-13. Objection. Defendant objects to this request in that it is 'vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome for response, and to the extent that the information requested is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of any admissible evidence. To the extent required in the future, this response will be supplemented. 14. Objection. Defendant incorporates its response to request number 2 herein by reference as if set forth fully. Date: Respectfully submitted, STEVENS & LEE Jarffe~-~/S~xtox{, Esquire I.D. No. 36815 Maggie M. Finl:elstein, Esquire I.D. No. 86305 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 PO Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6636 Counsel for Defendant Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. SL1 487192vl/4! 199.074 EXHIBIT "A" 'j QUANTUM IMAGING u. AA 0CT-~1-2004 08:55 QUANTUM IMAGING ?17 932 3095 P.04 ~-~.~ ~: ........ - ~, ~.~- ~!OL ..~-,,, ~ ....... ~..~ .... , * .' .. -. ":' .'~.~" · ..,~:.~,~:'~ ~:.*:.. -~: ~,....':.,.-:.~.* ~~.~~~y~..,~. :.. ...... :.. · ....... ~ .... · . -~.:. ~ ~ : -- ,. :'.'~=*~. ~.~. -, :.- ? ,~,' ~~-:k- ~ ~l.q~:[~ouw '-~*,. ~ .': :* · , . . . ", , ~-.. :..*~ ..~. ~.~,~.,..;:~:'.~.:,_.,.,...~.~:.~:,. ~ ..... ~::.'.? .'~ ?r~:..~;~ ~,-p~..~-~.~'~* .~-. . , . · . '. ~:.~ ::~:~ .-~-~ ¥,:~=... ~.~.~:?.. ~,.,~~ .......... . . . ... ~ ~, ~:~ ~..~;.~.~ ~ ~: :~ ~~~`~ ~ ~ ~:~. ~`.~.~:~.~:~.~ ~?~:~* ~ ..~ :.,, . . : . - *~ ..,. ....... ~, ?.:f'~*.:~T~:..:.:,:.'.T:~.;:.:~{ ..... ~ ~ . .. ,. ..'..'.. .., ..: .... '.... . ,. .~ -. .... ~ '~' ~~o~ ~ o~/t1/tg~ ~0 / 91199.6 0CT-21-2~4 0B:5~ QUANTUM IMAGING 7~_? 932 3095 P.05 0CT-~1-:2004 88:58 QUANTUM IMAGING ?1~ 932 ~095 ,.~, ..'~ QUANTUM IMAGING TOTAL P.O? PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MRS; 310298 SOC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: ALAN ROUMM M.D. PT TYPE: R ADM DATE: 02/20/2001 LOCATION: QUANTUM IMAGING ?17 932 3095 Holy Spirit Hospital Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Feb21 2,D01 1:13P TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Fe:~ 21 2001 4:18P ARRNAL DATE: HOSP SERVICE: RAM P. 06 ***Final Report*** EXAMINATION: PARANASAL SINUSES 70220 · Feb 20 2001 .... COMMENTS: Indicaiton: Wagoneers disease, On steriods. H~ving sinus drainage and pressure in maxillary ama as well as congestion. The examination shows inGreased density in the rigl~t maxillary sinus with an air fluid level consisting with right maxillary sinusitis, The remaining sinuses appear clear. CONCLUSION: Right maxillary sinusitis. DICTATED BY: RICHARD STEWART M.D. / DKD DATE OF EXAM: Feb 20 2001 SIGNED BY: RICHARD STEWART M.D. DATE/TIME: Feb 21 2001 6:39P *; '''~ ' Imaging Services Consultation PATIENT: EWING. HARRY W MRS: 310298 $OC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: ALAN ROUMM M.D. PT TYPE: R ADM DATE: 02/20/2001 LOCATION: 14:06 QUAHTUM ]MAG]HG ?17 932 30~$ P.O? Holy 8piffi HospI~I Depa~ent of Radlolo~ and. Diagnostic Imagine Camp Hill, Pennsyl~la 17011 ~1~ 763-2600 D~TATION DATE: Feb ~ 2001 8:47P TWK~ON DA~: Feb ~ 2001 8:47P ~k~ DATE: HOSP SE~CE: ~M EXAM INATION: ***ADDENDUM*** ***Final Report*** CHEST 2V 71020 - Feb 20 2001 ', ~.'.., ;. COMMENTS: Indication: Wegeners granulomatceis on stemlds and Cytoxin. Former smoker. Congestion. The heart size is normal. There is no vascular congestion. There is some, slightly coarse interstitial change in the left mid lung. Them is some finer interstitial change in the left costophrenic angle and some minimal change in the right infrahilar area which appears more like subsegrnental a .telectasis. There is also a nodule projected in the lateral aspect of the right lung base just above the costophranic angle. 'l?fi~'lS uncalc, ified end of Ir~determinate age and nature. Both costophrenlc angles are blunted. ~;,,.~,,... The patient's prior chest x-ray of 1996 was signed_ .btJi and not returned and hence is unavailable for comparison. The report from Hat study describes some right lurtg-infilffate and also some Interstitial density in the right mid lung at the right base and at the left base. No nodule was described, The findings therefore could be current in their origin. Clinical correlation and follow up is recommended and if we confirm the nodule at I~e dght base CT scanning would seem in order for further assessment. The hilar and mediastinal contours are normal. CONCLIJSlON: COPD. Coarse pulmonary abnormality in the la. ft..re, id lung mainly In the left upper lobe and IIngula with some minimal changes elsewhere as described, Them is a nodule at the lateral right base of Indeterminate age, If any prior chest radiographs from outside institutions are available they w~..Id be useful for comparison. Otherwise follow up is recommended. CT probably should be performed for the right basila~'pulmonary nodule if its previous presence can not be documented. DICTATED BY: RICHARD STEWART M.D, I DKD DATE OF EXAM: Feb 20 2001 SIGNED BY: DATE/TIME: RICHARD STEWART M.D. Feb 22 2001 9:43P Imaging Services Consultation OCT-~6-L:~4 14:07 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MR~/: 310298 SOC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: ALAN ROUMM M.D. PT TYPE: R DOB: 09/28/1938 LOCATION: QUANTUM IMAGING 717 932 3095 .oiy apm~ rlosprlal Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (7t7) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Sap 25 2002 11:39A TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Sep 25 2d02 3:08P ADM' DATE: 09/2412002 ARRIVAL DATE: 09/24/2002 HOSP'$ERVlCE: PAD P. 08 ***Final R, por EXAMINATION: CHEST (2V) PAAND LATERAL, THORACIC SPINE' 71020 -0912,4/2002 ~ t. COMMENTS: Indicetlon: Pain. The patient has a history of-V~.~er'$ granulomatosis, THORACIC SPINE: Thera is no evidence of mala~!gnmant of the thoraoiio vertebrae or loss of vertebral body height. Thera is, however, sclerosis noted nvo. v ng the leff'~.: .;:,,. 'bf. the.4~ thorad~ vertebra. The s~gn~ficance' ' of this finding is unclear, but correlation with nuclear medic,ne bone scan IS advised, to exclude bl;astic metastases. CHEST: Thera is moderate to marked hyperin.flaJion. The heart size is within normal limits. The questionable nodular density noted in the right lower lateral chest~ 0.~.films from 2-2-01 is nc,t definitely identified. On the current study, however, thera is increased density in the left infratiilar ragioh'that is of uncertain significance. CONCLUSION: 1. There is no evidence of acute abnormality, but there is increased density in the T4 thoracic vertebra, for which correlation with nuclear medicine bone scan is advised~. - 2, Them are findings consistent with COPD. There is also increased left infrahilar density when compared to prior films from 2/20/01. Advised followup films in 4-6 weeks. If these finding.,r persist at that time, then correlation with chest CT is advised. . . DICTATED BY: RICHARD MOSER M.O. I PJD DATE OF EXAM: 09/24/2002 RICHARD MOSER M.D. Sep 26 2002 5:17P SIGNED BY: DATE/TIME: Imaging Services: .Co.n. !ultation PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MR#: 310298 ~ SEC: 209-28-919g ORD DR: ALAN ROUMN M.D. PT TYPE: R DOB: 0g/28/1936 LOCATION: QUAHTUM IMAGIHG ?l? 932 3095 HOly Spirit Hospital Department of Radiology and D. iagnostic Imagiing Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Oct 11 2002 12:00A TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Oct 14 2002 12:48P ADM' DA' E: 0/1 /2002 ARI~V.~M,. DATE: 10/11/2002 HOSP .SERI/ICE: CAT P. 09 ***Final Report*** EXAMINATION; CT CHEST W CONTRAST 71260 - 10/1112002 COMMENTS; INDICATION: Lesions found on bone s=ans. There are osteoblastic metastases throughout th.e:.s..keleton as seen on recent on nuclear imaging of 4 October and the CT scan shows osteoblastic lesions in the thora~i.c spine and sternum. There is partial collapae of the euperlor Ilngular division of the left upper lobe with density extending up to ' left hilum. I do not identify definite hllar mass though the perihii~ar.tisSues are obscured by the collapse density. Clearly with metastatic disease to the bones and lung collapse. There i~.e.'"'~0bd possfbility that we may dealing with a lung cancer obstructing the lingular bronchus and endoscopy should be consid~r~l bronchial cancer. The lungs are emphysematoue. There is a wfde spread panlobular and cantrilobular emphysema." There is subsegmental etalectasis in the right middle lobe. There ia pleural paranchymal scaring the apex of the right lung. There are some areas of patchy granular density in both lungs but no discrete mass is identified. There is a small 6 mm in diameter nodule in 'the fight lower lobe laterally, the lateral basal segments are of questionable signifi~;ance. If lung cancer is confirmed. Then this nodule could be metastatic. The few lymph nodes in the mediastinum look innocent. There are small. There is no pleural or pericardial effusion. Heart size is normal. CONCLUSION; Collapse of the superior lingular segment. Endobrenchial obstru~ion is s,~spected and we could be dealing with bronchial carcinoma. Endoscopy maybe necessary to diagnosis lung CA in this instance. Diffuse moderate to advanced emphysema. Metes. tatic disease to the skeleton. DICTATED BY: I SED DATE OF EXAM: 10/11/2002 SIGNED BY: DATEtTIME: HOWARD EIRONFMAN M.D. Oct 14 2002 2:50P Imaging Services Consultation 0CT-06-2~4 14:07 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MRS: 310298 $O¢ SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR; TIMOTHY CLARK M.D. PT TYPE: R DOB: 09/28/1936 LOCATION: QUANTUM IMAGING 717 932 3895 HOly tiplnt'MOSplml Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imagi~ng Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Nov 1 2C~2 10:47A TRANSCRIPTION DATE: No~ 6 2002 7:55A ADM'dXf~: ~ 1~0~20'02 ARRIVAL DATE: 11/01/2002 HOSP SER¥1CE: CTM P.10 ***Final Report*** EXAMINATION: CT ABDOMEN AND PELVIS W CONTRAST 74;1;60~,j.-. 11/0t/2002 COMMENTS: INDICATION: Staging of lung cancer. There are a few small hypodanse lesions scattered in the right hepatic lobe. These measure 1 cm in diameter or less. These are consistent with small metastases. Srr~ii'focal areas of incr=ased bone density are present in multiple locations of the lumbar spine and pelvis. These are suspicious for osteoblestlc metastases. Osteoblastic lesions are more often associated prostatic cancer than lung cancer, however, the multiplidty of thIn_se lesions is consistent with metastatic disease. The gallbladder is normal in size and wall thic~.~ese. The biliary tree i~s not dilated. The spleen and panoreas are normal. The kidneys and adrenal glands are norrq?l:. '[he retroperitoneal va~;culature is normal. The bladder distends well without Intrinsic abnon"nality. The prostate glared !s not enlarged. There are no pelvic masses. CONCLUSION: A few small hypodense lesions are scattered in. the'r ght hepatic lobe and this is consistent with metastatic disease. There are also several discrete areas of in~reased bone density In the lumbar spine and pelvis also consistent with metasta~o disease, The scan is otherwise normal. DICTATED BY: HAROLD RABIN M.D. / SED DATE OF EXAM; 11/0t/2002 SIGNED BY; DATE/TIME; HAROLD RABIN M.D. Nov 62002 8:21A Imaging Services Consultation I~mru~ ~ OCT-O6-L~ 14:88 QUANTUM IMAGING PINNACLEHEALTH System Imaging Report ?17 932 3895 P.11 MRS: 000209389199 NAME:. HARRY EWING ADM; 000223476017 128 BUNGALOW RD DOB: 09/28/1936 12:01AM ENOLA, PA 17025 ORD.: ORD DR: SCOTT BARNES RF.A~ON: LUNG CA COMMENTS: ***Final Report*** EXAM: 90001- *BONE IMAGING, WHOLE BODY- BNM - 8306 DATE: 01/22/2003 02:31PM EXAM: 90001-*BONE IMAGING, WHOLE BODY-BNM-8306 DATE: 01/22/2003 14:31 TOTAL BODY RADIONUCLIDE SKELETAL IMAGING (22 January 2003) HISTORY: Lung ~arcinoma. RESULT: The patient received 25.9 mCi technetium-ggm HDP and scans ~m obtained in multiple proJections three hours following the radionuclide administration. Comparison is made to the pm~Jous study of 04 October 2002. - · ' Again noted are the multiple areas of increased actNity in the thomcolumbar spin,:, the pelvis, the proximal aspect of both femurs, the right clavicle, the right scapula, tlie'pro~mal aspect of the right humerus and the calvarium. Slight overall increase has occurred since the predous study. CONCLUSION: Increasing skeletal metastases. D: 01/22/2003 05:58PM T: 01/22/2003 05:58PM /KSC DICTATED BY: TIMOTHY P FARRELL, M.D. ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: 01/23/2003 09:17AM Accession#: 4194969 0CT-06-~{~4 14:88 QUANTUM IMAGING ?17 g~ ~095 PINNACLEHEALTH System Imaging Report P.12 MR#: 000209389199 NAME:. HARRY EWING ADM: 000223476017 128 BUNGALOW IRD DOB: 09/28/1936 12:01AM ENOLA, PA 1702.=i ORD#: ORD DR: Sco'n' BARNES REAEON: LUNG CA COMMENTS: PT WILL BE SEEN IN NUC MED FIRST ***Final Report*~ EXAM: 90002- SCAPULA RIGHT- BDI - 1227 DATE: 01/22/2003 03:12PM EXAM: 90002-SCAPULA RIGHT-RIGHT-BDI-1227 DATE: 01/22/2003 15:12 RIGHT SCAPULA, TWO VIEW8 (22 January 2003) HISTORY: Lung caminoma. RESULT: Con-elation is made v, ith the mdlonuclide bone scan. There is sclerotic, irregular blastic appearance to the posterolateral aspect of the right fourth rib, indicative of metastasis. There i.,; also a small lyric area in the superior margin of the right scapula, ,* '.~.':,'' CONCLUSION: Metastases to the dght fourth rib and also to the scapula. D: 01/22/2003 06:00PM T: 01/22/2003 06:00PM/KSC DICTATED BY: TIMOTHY P FARRELL, M.D. ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: 01/23/2003 09:17AM Accessiorr~: 4194974 0CT-06-2~4 14:08 QUANTUM ~MAGING 717 932 3095 P.13 PINNACLEHEALTH System MRIk 209389199 NAME; .. SWING, HARRY SSN: 209389199 128 BUNGALOW RD ADM: 000223521882 ENOI_A, PA 17025 DOB: 09/28/1936 ORD DR:'" BARNES, SCOTT BED: ORD#: .. 90005 LOC: ATT DR: :. BARNES, SCOTT Imaging Report REASON; F/U TO 3/7 CXR COMMENTS..' MEDICARE FAX TO 737-6268 EEFORE 5PM ***Final Report*** FREDRICKSEN DIAGNOSTIC DEPARTMENT EXAM: 90005 - CHEST PA LAT - FDI -4607 DATE: Mar 14 2003 12:48PM 2V CHEST: HISTORY: RESULT: 03. Follow-up, carcinoma. AP erect and lateral views of the chest Were obtained and CO~T~pared with the study of 3-7- Medlasfinum Is neither widened nor shifted. Heart is normal in size. Aorta is mildly sclerotic. Significant emphysematous change is noted. There is stable lingular/le.ft.hilar density, likely refle~l:ing changes related to known left lung carcinoma with possible post obstructive ate[edmsW. These findings are stable. There is no significant change in the appearance of the chest from 3-7-03 with no active area of intiltrate, effusion, or vascular congestion, There are, however, no chest films prior to 3-7-03 for correlation. The patient has known osteoblastic skeletal metastases. CONCLUSION: Stable chest from 3-7-03 with multiple.'findings as detailed abovE;. D: CG/Ijk 03-14-03 1:23PM T: Mar 16 2003 11:1ZAM / LJK DICTATED BY: CHRISTINE A. GOULDY, MD ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: Mar 16 2003 1:12PM If you hav~ read, ed Ibis document by facsimile, the in~rmaflort m~fained in this tr~n.~/ti~ion It p~lvlle~led and confidential. If fha reader of this message is not Ihe recipient, you ate hereby notified that any dissemination, ~Lslribufion, or ~opy of 1his ~ommunica~ion is stripy prohibited. If you have re~eived this ~ommuni~alJon In error, ptea~e no~fyu~ Imnmdiately ab, 1-717-782-~240. QUANTUM IMAGING 717 932 ~95 P,14 PINNACLEHEALTH System MRS: 209389199 NAME: EWING, HARRY ~N; 209289199 t28 BUNGALOW RD ADM; 000223614513 ENOLA, PA 17025 DOB: 09/28/1936 ORD DR: BARNES, SCOTT BED: ORD,: 90001 LOC; ATT DR; ,.. BARNES, SCOTT REASON: LUNG CANCER BONE METS COMMENTS: Imaging Report --Final ReP0~''** HARRISBURG NUCLEAR MEDICINE DEPARTMENT EXAM: 90001 - PROVIS OF THERAPEUTIC RADPHARM - NUC - 9900 DATE; Jun 27 2003 12:36PM QUADRAMET THERAPY HISTORY: Lung oaminoma with bony metastases. RESULT: This Js the second Quadramet therapy in this patient with lung ~arcinoma with bony metastases. Procedure and dsks were reviewed with the patient by phone consultation on 6/27/03, The patient's questions were answered. Laboratory values from 6/17t03 were reviewed. 75 mCi of Ouadmmet was injected intravenously. The patient was monitored in the department for 30 minutes following the injection with no adverse reaction noted, CONCLUSION: Second Quadramet therapy for bony metastases, as above. The patient was given a prescription for weekly CBC with pi~biets to monitor for bone marrow suppression over the next eight weeks. The patient will also continue to followu[~* dini~lly with Dr. Barnes. D: Jul I 2003 12:28PM CGlalw T: Jul 1 2003 2:10PM /ALW DICTATED BY: CHRISTINE A. GOULDY, MD ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: Jul 2 2003 10:12AM if you have mcelvecl this document by facsimile, the Information conlalned In Ihi~ ~ransmission I~ privileged ;and confidential. If Its reader of ~s message is not the recipient, you m~ hereby notified that any cfisseminafion, d'~"tflbuUon, or copy of this ~ommunioation Is OCT-D6-2~4 14; D9 ,oly t~plnt Mospltm Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (7'17) 763-2600 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MRg: 310298 SOC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: LI MIN LIU M.D. PT TYPE: S DOB: 09/28/1936 LOCATION: DICTATION DATE: Jul 29 2C03 9:48P TEANSCRIPTION DATE: Jul! 29 2003 g:48P ADM:DAiE: 07/29/2003 ARRIVAL DATE: 07/29/2003 HOSP SERVICE: MED P.15 ***Final Repb. rt,*** EXAMINATION: CT CHEST W CONTRA,~T 71260 - 07129/2003~*;,:*,'.'; COMMENT8,' The indication: Idetastafic carclnoid tumor Comparison made to prior study 11 October 02 which re-demonstrates partial left upper lobe coflapse. This has not changed significantly since the October 02 exam. As wa follow the ]eft~'upper lobe bronchus from its origin, there is a blunted taper which is surrounded by a brcad wedge-shaped pulmonah/opacification which lies adjacent to the mediastinurn and extends out of the pleural surface consistent with partial collapse of the le~ upper lobe. · ,. *1~:~';' . .... The lungs show diffuse emphysema. As on the prior study there. !~/a!so diffuse reticular op~city m the right upper lobe, streaky atelectatic density in the medial segment of the fight mid~le.lbbe and a mild increase in interstitial markings scattered throughout the lungs, No soft tissue nodules identified in the lungs, No pleural effusion. Mediastinal windows show no pathologically enlarged lymph nodes, No pleuml or pedcardial effusion, Sclerotic changes in Ihs bones described previously and attribute'S0 I~etastatic disease. CONCLUSION: CT examination of the chest shows no significant change since prior study 11 October 02. Partial left upper lobe collapse· Metastatic disease to the skeleton, Diffuse emphysema with chronic interstitial lung disease. DICTATED BY: HOWARD BRONFMAN M.D. / PSC DATE OF EXAM: 07/29/2003 SIGNED BY: DATE/TIME: HOWARD BRONFMAN M.D. Jul 29 2003 9:48P Imaging Services Consultation 0CT-06-21~1~4 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MI~: 310298 SOC SEC: 209-28-9t99 ORD DR: PHILIP MAGUIRE M.D. PT TYPE: E DOB: 09128/1936 LOCATION: 14:09 QUANTUM IMAGING ?1? 932 3895 P. 16 Holy Spirit Hospital Department of Radiology .and. Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, PennsylVania t701 t (7t 7) 763-Z600 DICTATION DATE: Jul 29 2003 1:27P TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Jul 29 2003 1:27P ADM DATE: 07/29/20{33 ARRIVAL DATE: 07/29/2003 HOSP SERWCE: ER1 ***Final Report'~ EXAMINATION: CHEST PORTABLE 71010 - 07129/2003 COMMENTS: Indication: Weakness. Carcinoma of the lung. Comparison is made to previous examination of 24 September, 2..q02. There is some scarring in the left pedhilar region, adjacent the heart. Cardiac monitor leads overlie the heart. .. There are no soft tissue abnormalities. Bony structures have a "dense" appearance consist~nt with the patient's known bony metastases. The lungs are free of acute Infiltrate and the pu~l~o~n, ary vasculature is no~mal. The pleural surfaces are unremarkable. There are no pleurel effusions. The heart is normal in ~ize. The mediasflnal ;structures are normal. CONCLUSION: No acute disease. No significant interval change. DICTATED ii!Y: TIMOTHY FARRELL M.D. / PSC DATE OF EXAM: 07/29/2003 SIGNED BY: TIMOTHY FARRELL M.D. DATE/TIME: Jul 29 2003 1:27P .... Imaging Services.Consultation OCT-1~6-21~)4 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MRS: 310298 SOC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: ALAN ROUMM M.D. Iq' 'tYPE; S DOB: 09/28/1936 LOCATION: 14:89 QUANTUM IMAGING 717 g32 3895 P. 17 Holy Spirit Hospital Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 763.2600 DICTATION DATE; Jul 30 2003 5:42P TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Jul 30 2003 5:42P ADM DATE: 07/29/2003 ARRIVAl. DATE: 07/30/2003 HOSP SERVICE: MED ***Final Report*~ EXAMINATION: BONE SCAN TOTAL 78306 - 07130/2003 ;~,. :~ COMMENTS: Indication: Metastatic disease, caminoid tumor Dose: 27.3 mCi of Tc-99m HDP Comparison made to prior bone scan at Holy Spirit hospital, 40'st6ber'02 and bone scan carded out a Harrisburg hospital dated 22 January 03. ' · ' All studies show extensive metastatic disease to the skeleton with lesions in the skull, trunk and long bones. There has been mild p~ogmssion of metastatic disease since the January 03 study with a few additionaJ lesions identified in the trunk and in the long bones. Lit'de background aotivity indicates that we are moving to a" Superscan ' consistent with ext,~nsive metastatic disease to lhe skeleton. -..: CONCLUSION: Widespread metastatic disease to the skeleton showing further progressia,n since January 03. DICTATED BY: HOWARD BRONFMAN M.D. / PSC DATE OF EXAM: 07/30/2003 SIGNED BY: HOWARD BRONFMAN M.D. DATE/TIME: Jul 30 2003 6:42P Imaging Services Consultation Paan 't , PATIENT: MRft:. $OC SEC: ORD DR; PT TYPE: DOB: LOCA'r]ON: 14:09 EWING, HARRYW 310298 209-28-9199 KATARZYNA FERRARO M.D. E 09/28/1936 QUANTUM IMAGING 717 932 3095 Holy Spirit'Hospital Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imagiing Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (7t7} 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Sap 14 2003 6:16P TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Sal3 14 2003 6:16P ADM DATE: 09/14/2003 ARRIVAL DATE: 09/14/2003 HOSP SERVICE: ER1 P.18 ***Final RepOrt*** EXAMINATION: COMMENTS: CHEST PORTABLE 71010 - 09/14/2003 Portable chest 9/14/03 at 1730 Indication: Dyspnea Comparison: 7/29/03 '" Findings: Persistent scarring left mid-lung zone, No new focal a~eola.r..opacity, No signs of Ilsart failure, The medlastinum and bony structures are unremarkable, · :i~" CONCLUSION: NO significant interval change. DICTATED BY: DAVID GREENBERG M.D. / PSC DATE OF EXAM: 09/14/2003 SIGNED BY: DATE/TIME: DAVID GREENBERG M.D. Sap 14 2003 6:16P Imaging Services Consultation 0CT-06-~1~4 14:~0 PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MI~: 310298 $OC 8ECl 209-28-9199 ORD DR: THOMAS ALDOU$ M.D. PT TYPE: E DOB: 09/28/1936 LOCATION: Holy upErlt'.ospltal Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (7t 7) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Sap 14 2003 8:54P TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Sap 14 2003 8:54P ADM DATE: 09/14/2003 ARRIVAL DATE: 01]/14/2003 HOSP SERVICE: ER1 P.19 ***Final Report*** EXAMINATION: CT CHST W/WO/ANG/PE/INC PP 71275 - 0glI~/20Q.3 · COMMENTS: CT Chest unenhanced and enhanced .~ .. ·. Indication: Shortness of breath, history of metasfaflc carcinoid turner, Procedure: Examination tailored for pulmonary embolism. Preco&~iaSt sections through the chest. Heli~al sections through the chest during rapid in/ravenous infusion of intravenous contrast. Comparison: Report of 7/29/03 ..:' ,'.'" Findings: Relatively diffuse emphysematous ohange with left upp~ Ibbe atelectesis as before. No pulmonary embolism. The heart and major vascular structures are'unremarkable, No significant hilar or mecliastinal adenopathy. Limitecl evaluation of the upper abdominal organs shows no gross.abnormalities. Numerous sclerotic bony metastases are present as before. CONCLUSION: Ne pulmonary embolism. No significant interva!'~ll'ah'ge otherwise. DICTATED BY: DAVID GREENI~ERG M.D. / PSC DA'rE OF EXAM: 09114/2003 SIGNED BY: DATFJTIME: DAVID GREENBERG M,D. Sap 14 2003 8:54P Imaging Services Consu~tion PATIENT: EWING, HARRY W MRS: 310298 ~iOC SEC: 209-28-9199 ORD DR: SCO'I-I' BARNES M.D, PT TYPE: R DOB: 09/28/1936 LOCATION: 14:18 QL~qNTUM IM~GIN~ 717 932 3095 P.20 rlo~y ap;n; ~p~m~ Depa~ment of Radiolo~ and Diagnostic imag~ing Camp Hill, Penns~vania 17011 (7~7) ?~4eoo DICTA~N DATE; O~ 17 2{~3 3:10P T~SCR~ION DATE; Oct 17 2003 3:10P ADM DATE: 10/17/2003 ARRIVAL DATE: 10/17/2003 HOSP SERVICE: ESO ***Final Repori*~* EXAMINATION: CTBRNW/WOCNTRS 8008 .10/1712003 ; ..,.:,?. ,. COMMENTS: CT of the brain before and after IV contmst-enh.an..ce, ment. Indication: Dizziness. Blurred vision. Memory problems, History o.f..lun~, carcinoma treated ~vilh radiation and chemotherapy. I have no prior exams for comparison. .' The vent~icutar and sulcal configuration are within normal limits. Theee. is no evidence of subdural or subarachnoid collection, Post contrast-enhanced images do not suggest any suspicious area of contrest-enhencemenf, There are no focal abnormaliUe,~ identified otherwise. .::,. Skull and skull base areas are normal. There are no other acute focel abnormalities identified. CONCLUSION: CT of the brain before and after IV contrast is within.normal limits, No sue~picioue changes to suggest metastatic disease. ' :'~O'":'" ~ DICTATED BY; ANAND JAG,A~NNATH M.D. IPSC DATE OF EXAM; 10/17/2003 SIGNED BY: ANAND JAGANNATH M.D. DATE/TIME: Oct 17 2003 3:10P Imaging Services~ Consultation OCT-O6-2'E~4 PATIENT: ET/VING, HARRY W M R~: 310296 SOC SEC: 20g-28-9199 ORD DR: PUSHPA MUDAN M.D. PT TYPE: E DOB; 09/28/I 936 LOCATION: 14:10 QUANTUM IMAGING ?17 932 3095 P.22 I'lOl~ O~ll'il. I'II~IIllIIWI Department of Radiology' and Diagnostic Imagiing Camp Hill, Pennsylvditia 17011 (7t7) 763-2600 DICTATION DATE: Oct 24 2003 8:52A TRANSCRIPTION DATE: Dot 24 2003 8:SZA · ~ ADM DATE: 10/24/2003 ARRIVAl. DATE: 10/24/2003 HOSP EERVICE: ER1 '""'Final Report*** EXAMINATION: L./S SPINE 72110 - I0124/2003 COMMENTS: +Lumbar spine 6 views. October 24, 2003. ,. Clinical Indication: Low back pain. There is extensive trabecular abnormaJlty involving the lumbar v..ert,e~ra and visualized portions of the peNi~ and lower thoracic spine. Tl~e findings are consistent with an extensive bla~.Ji~;~astatl¢ process. Th,..re is no evidence for pathologic fracture. Them rs disk space narroWing at L4-5 with vacuum phendm'anon ,ndlcating dIsk degenerat,on. Anterior osteophytes am most apparent in the lower lumber spine. .. CONCLUSION: Extensive ITabec, ular abnormality throughout the-I, umber spine and visualized portions of the lower thoracic spine and pelvis consistent with blastic metastatic disease. NO pathologic fracture identified. Degenerative changes present and there Is disk space narrowing at L4~5. DICTATED BY: BARBARA KUNKEL M.D. / PSC DA'rE OF EXAM: 10/24/2003 SIGNED BY: DATE/TIME: BARBARA KUNKEL M.D. Oct 24 2003 8:52A Imaging Services Consultation Pa~..~.. 0CT-06-~ 1~:11 QUANTUM IM~IN~ ?17 93~ ~095 P.~ PINNACLEHEALTH System Imaging Report MRfk 209389199 NAME: E-WING, HARRY $SN: 209289199 128 8 UNGALOW RI:) ADM: 000240104894 ENOLA, PA 17025 DOB: 09/28/1936 ORD DR: DF_AUGUSTINE, CARLO J BED: ORI~: 90002 LOC: ATT DR: EMERGENCY ROOM, ASSOCIATES REASON: CP COMMENTS.' 'BED-15 X5255 HARR, ISBUR6 DIA6NOSTIC DEPARTMENT EXAM: 90002 - CHEST 1 VIEW - DIA - 4506 DATE: Oct 27 2003 2:42AM AP CHEST (0250 hours) HISTORY: Chest pain. RESULT: There are scattered areas of increased density noted In multiple ribs. particularly the right fourth ril~ and in the scapula, consistent with allegedly knowri blastic metastases. There is an area of increased density noted I~elow the left hilum consistent with mass, infiltrate, or scarring with abnormality noted in a similar location on chest x-ray from 03/14/2003. This needs to be correlated with chest CT scan. The heart size is top- normal in size. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence of aGute lung infiltrate. Them are findings ,consistent with skeletal metastases and there is an Ill-defined density in the left Infrahilar area that was also nor~ on 03//14/2003, but requires additional evaluation with chest CT scan. .-' D: 10/29/2003 1;33PM RPM/ks~ T: Oct 29 2003 3:44PM / KSC DICTATED BY: RICHARD P MOSER, MD ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: Oot 29 2003 3:54PM If you have received lhls document by fa~imile, the Informaliofl oofllalned in ads tmnsml]mic~ I~ privileged ;md (xxifide~lSal. If thl wider of ~is mess~lm IS not lhe recipient, you am hereby nolflted that any di~4~mlnatlon. (~slTIbutiofl, or copy of Ibis (~omn~ni~llon Is sbic~ OCT-1~6-~i~IB4 :[4:11 QUANTUM I M~G I NG PINNACLEHEALTH System 717 932 3095 P. ~5 imaging Report IdRf~: 209389199 NAME: EWING, HARRY SSN: 209289199 128 BUNGALOW RD Al)M: 000240104894 ENO[A, PA '17025 DOB: 09/28/1936 ORD DR: ::.. LEAL, ALFRED R BED: ORD.. 90003 LOC: AI'F DR: BARNES, SCOTT REASON: SOB, DECREASED SPO2 COMMENTS: ***Final Report*'* HARRISBURG DIAGNOSTIC DEPARTMENT EXAM: 90003 - CHEST 1 VIEW - DIA - 4506 DATE: Oct 28 2003 6:08AM AP CHEST - 06t0 HOURS HISTORY: Shortness of breath. RESULT; As mentioned previously, there is evi~r~ce of blast~ skeletal metastases, and there is an ill-defined area of in=mased densit7 in the left infrahilar area [hat requires CT correlat/o.n. There is now evidence of small right pleuml effusion with patchy bilateral lung infiltrates vs pattern of early pulmonary edema. CONCLUSION: Since prior film from 0250 hours on 10/27/03, the patient has developed a right pleural effusion with diffusely increased lung markings and questionable patchy infilbatas, particularly in the lateral aspect of the right micl and upper lung. Radiographic followup until clearing is advised. D: Oct 29 2003 1:36PM RPM/arns , T: Oct 29 2003 3:45PM I AMS .. :i- ~-. DICTATED BY: RICHARD P MOSER, MD ELECTRONICALLY REVIEWED: Oct 29 2003 3:54PM If you hav~ mc~lvld this do<3ume~ by facsimile, the Infommflon cz~bdrmd in this tran,~mlssion is privileged and c~nflderdiai. If the reader of th~ m.es~l..g? le n~t. the mOl.l?n,t,..y? are hereby 1~3tfflad Eat any dismmlinatlon, ~uGcm, or Gopy of th~ cammuni=aU0n is stdc'dy CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Amy L. Bucher, an employee of the law firm of Stevens & Lee do hereby certify that on j~J0~]. i , 2004 I served a true and correct copy of Defendant Quantum Imaging's Response to Plaintiffs Request for Production of Documents upon all counsel of record via postage prepaid first class United States mail addressed as follows: James E. Ellison, Esquire James J. Jarecki, Esquire Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square, 12th Floor PO Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 Date: y-L.--EloXeher - _ . 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 PO Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6651 SL1 487192vl/41199.074 Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer@tthlaw.com gcauler~tthlaw.corn Attorneys for Defendants: Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS RICHARD STEWART~ M.D. AND QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES~ INC.'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO ALL DEFENDANTS - SET I General Obiections to Plaintiff's Interroeatories Directed to All Defendants-Set I 1. Objection. Plaintiff's Interrogatories fail to comply with the requirements of Pa. R.C.P. 4005, Written Interrogatories to a Party, in which Interrogatories that are served prior to the service of a Complaint shall be limited to the purpose of preparing a complaint and shall contain a brief statement of the nature of the cause of action. 2. Objection. Plaintiff's Interrogatories fail to state why the requested information is necessary to the filing of a Complaint. Specific Obiections to Plaintiff's Interrogatories Directed to All Defendants- Set I 1. Fully explain your current business and contractual relationship with any and all of the remaining defendants named in this action. ANSWER: Objection. See general objections stated above. 2 2. State your full name, address, date of birth and Social Security Number. ANSWER: Objection. Answering Defendant Dr. Stewart's date of birth and Social Security Number are not necessary to the filing of a complaint. 3. Please state whether you were covered by or were the subject of any liability insurance policies for the injuries arising out of the instant action. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. following: If your answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the affirmative, please state the a. Name and address of the company policy issuing each policy; b. Policy number of each such policy; c. Names and addresses of the persons named under each such policy; d. Limits of liability; e. Whether the insurance company issuing e, ach policy has denied coverage with respect to this incident for any reason; and if so, the nature and reason given for such denial; f. Whether the insurance company issuing each policy has required the execution of any agreement by you or on your behalf before undertaking to investigate and]or defend this action; and if so, 1) The nature of such agreement; 2) The reason the agreement was required; 3) Whether or not you or any other person acting on your behalf executed the agreement. g. Whether or not each of said policies provide coverage for the damages set forth in the Complaint; and h. Whether the policy was in full force and effect on the date of Mr. Ewing's death. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. 6. State whether this case is being defended by an attorney who has entered his or her appearance on your behalf subject to a reservation of rights .agreement between you and your insurance carrier. ANSWER: Objection. The information requested is not necessary :['or Plaintiff to file a complaint. Further, without a statement of the nature of the cause of action, Answering Defendants are unable to prepare a reply. 7. Have you or anyone acting on your behalf obtained from any person any statement concerning Harry W. Ewing regarding this action or its subject matter. If so, state: a. The name and last known address of each such person; b. When, where and to whom each statement was made and whether it was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded; c. The name and address of any such person who has custody of any such statement that was reduced to writing or otherwise recorded. ANSWER: Objection. The information requested is not necessary fbr Plaintiff to file a complaint. Answering Defendants further object to this Interrogatory to the extent that it requests information that may be protected by the attorney work-product doctrine and or attorney-client privilege. 7 8. Do you contend any document requested in Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents or any information requested in these Interrogatories is protected by the Peer Review Protection Act? If so, please state with reasonable particularity the items which are not being produced because of any alleged Peer Review objection. ANSWER: Objection. This Interrogatory does not conform to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particularity. Additionally, without further information from Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 401 l(b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 401 l(e)). Finally,, the information requested is not necessary for Plaintiff to file a complaint. 8 9. If you, or someone not an expert subject to Pa. R.C.P. 4003.5, conducted any investigations of the incident, identify: a. each person, and the employer of each person, who conducted any investigation(s); and b. all notes, reports or other documents prepm'ed during or as a result of the investigation(s) and the persons who have custody thereof. ANSWER: Objection. This Interrogatory is objectionable to the extent that it requests information, which is protected by the Peer Review Protection Act, the Mcare ,act, attorney-work product and/or attorney/client privilege. It is also objectionable to the extent it exceeds Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3. Further, without additional information from Plaintiff said Request is overly broad and burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Finally, the information requested is not necessary for Plaintiff to file a complaint. 9 10. Set forth the date(s) you medically evaluated Harry W. Ewing and the nature of such evaluation. ANSWER: Objection. Answering Defendant Stewart provided interpretation of radiologic studies for the Plaintiff. Therefore, this Interrogatory as written does not apply to Answering Defendants Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. 10 11. If you have ever been certified by any specialty board, or if you are now or have ever been a member of any specialty board, set forth the following: a. the name and address of each specialty board; b. the date you were certified or became a member; and c. if you are no longer certified or a member, give the date your certification or membership was terminated and the reason for such termination. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. 11 12. Identify all hospitals with which you were affiliated prior to 2003 and, with respect to each such hospital, set forth your position(s) and responsibilities. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. 12 13. Identify any association or partnership with any other medical practitioner at the time of the incident. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. 13 14. Have you spoken to anyone at your professional liability insurance company regarding Harry W. Ewing on or after March 18, 1996, but prior to receiving the Writ of Summons related to this matter? If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the date of the discussion; b. name and address of each person involved in the discussion; c. subject matter of each discussion; d. action taken, if any, as a result of the discussion. ANSWER: Objection. This request seeks information protected by Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3, Scope of Discovery. Trial Preparation Material Generally. This information is not necessary to the filing of a complaint. Without additional information from Plaintiff regarding the nature of the alleged action, this Request is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 14 15. Have you provided to anyone at your professional liability insurance company any written statements regarding Harry W. Ewing on or after March 18, 1996, but prior to receiving the Writ of Summons related to this matter? If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the name of the person to whom the statement was made; b. on what date was the statement made; c. subject matter of the statement; and d. action taken, if any, as a result of the statement. (This interrogatory can be answered by providing a copy of all statements as referenced in this particular paragraph.) ANSWER: Objection. This request seeks information protected by Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3, Scope of Discovery. Trial Preparation Material Generally. This information is not necessary to the filing of a complaint. Without additional information fi:om Plaintiff regarding the nature of the alleged action, this Request is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 15 16. Have you spoken to anyone at your professional liability insurance company regarding Harry W. Ewing or any of the matters set forth in the instant action. If the answer is in the affirmative, please state: a. the date of the discussion; b. name and address of each person involved in the discussion; c. subject matter of each discussion; and d. action taken, if any, as a result of the discussion. ANSWER: Objection. This request seeks information protected by Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3, Scope of Discovery. Trial Preparation Material Generally. This information is not necessary to the filing of a complaint. Without additional information from Plaintiff regarding the nature of the alleged action, this Request is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 16 17. If you ever spoke with any other health care provider in connection with the care and treatment of Harry W. Ewing l~om March 18, 1996 up through and including the present, set forth: ao ANSWER: Objection. the date(s) of the consultation; the identity of the practitioner; the subject matter of the consultation; action taken as a result of the consultation; the identity of any documents relating to the consultation. This information is not necessary to the filing of a complaint. Without additional information fi:om Plaintiff regarding the nature of the alleged action, this Request is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 17 18. Did you make and/or keep any records regarding the care and treatment of Mr. Ewing, independent of those maintained by the remaining named defendants. If so, state: a. the summary of those records; b. the current location of those records. (In response to this interrogatory, if such records are kept, this interrogatory may be answered by simply providing a copy of all records as described in this paragraph.) ANSWER: Objection. This information is unnecessary to the filing of a complaint. Without additional information from Plaintiff regarding the nature of the alleged action, this Request is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, it is believed that Plaintiff is in possession of Answering Defendants' radiologic interpretation records. 18 19. If you have ever had any staff privileges revoked or curtailed at any hospital, for each such privilege, state: ao d. ANSWER: Objection. calculated to lead to admissible evidence. of a complaint. a description of the privilege; whether it was revoked or curtailed, and, if curtailed, in what way; the date the privilege was revoked or curtailed; and the name of the disciplinary body which revoked or curtailed the privilege. This interrogatory is overly broad and burdensome and not reasonably Further, this information is not necessary to the filing 19 20. change, state: If you ever changed any diagnosis you made of Mir. Ewing's condition, for each a. a description of the diagnosis change; b. the time in which you made such diagnosis change; and c. the reason you made the change, indicating each fact on which the change in diagnosis was based. ANSWER: Objection. Defendants provided radiologic interpretation and not medical diagnoses. 20 ao b. who made the same; C. d. 21. If any additions, deletions, or corrections were made to the medical records of Harry W. Ewing following the date of completion, please state: date of any addition, deletion or correctiort; name, address, telephone number and current whereabouts of the person(s) reason(s) for any addition, deletion or correction; name, address, telephone number and present whereabouts of the person(s) who authorized said addition, deletion or correction; e. location on medical records where said addition, deletion or correction was made; and f. state the nature of the said change. ANSWER: Objection. Answering Defendants provided radiologic interpretation and did not provide medical care. Further, all radiologic reports are believed to be in the possession of Plaintiff's counsel. 21 22. To the extent you contend and/or believe that a person other than yourself was responsible for Mr. Ewing's injuries, for each person, state: a. the person's name, telephone number, job title or capacity; and b. the facts on which you base your contention that this person was responsible for Mr. Ewing's injuries. ANSWER: Objection. This interrogatory attempts to shift the burden of proof from the Plaintiff to Answering Defendants. Answering Defendants are only required to rebut allegations of negligence. 22 23. If there are any other individuals whom you are aware of that may possess knowledge or information concerning this case, and this person's name is not listed in the preceding answers to these interrogatories, for each person, state: a. the person's name, address and telephone number; b. the address of the place each person is employed; and c. the person's occupation and job title. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of the complaint. Additionally, none other than those referenced in Plaintiff's medical records, which currently are not in possession of Answering Defendants. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP DATE: 322475.2 By: Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, ]Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 23 23. If there are any other individuals whom you are aware of that may possess knowledge or information concerning this case, and this person',,; name is not listed in the preceding answers to these interrogatories, for each person, state: a. the person's name, address and telephone number; b. the address of the place each person is employed; and c. the person's occupation and job title. ANSWER: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of the complaint. Additionally, none other than those referenced in Plaintiff's medical records, which currently are not in possession of Answering Defendants. Respectfully submi~Ited, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: Joseph P. H~ifer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, ]Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17 ]: 08-0999 (717) 255-7613 23 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire- Hand Delivered on November 7, 2004 Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Donald Bmaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (Counsel for Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology) James Saxton, Esquire Stevens & Lee, P.C. 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc.) Craig A. Stone, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crams Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (Counsel for Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA) BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP DATE: 322475.2 By: Joseph P. H~[fer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 171108-0999 (717) 255-7613 Joseph P. Haler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North From Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer~tthlaw.com gcauler~tthlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Ricl~rd Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS RICHARD STEWART~ M.D. AND QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES~ INC.'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ALL DEFENDANTS General Objection to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents Directed to All Defendants-Set I 1. Objection. Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents fails to state why the requested information is necessary to the filing of a Complaint. Specific Obiections to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents Directed to All Defendants- Set I 1. A current copy of your curriculum vitae. RESPONSE: Objection. This information is not necessary to the filing of a Complaint. 2. Any and all incident reports and/or occurrence reports which you prepared or reviewed which relate to, or mention in any manner, Harry W. Ewing. RESPONSE: Objection. Without further information from Plaintiff, finis request is overly broad and burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, without additional information this request would require an unreasonable investigation for Answering Defendants. This Request for Production is objectionable to the extent that it may request information which is protected by the Peer Review Protection Act and/or the MCare Act. 3. All exhibits or demonstrative evidence to be offered or used for any purpose at time of trial. RESPONSE: Objection. Without additional information from Plaintiff, said Request is overly broad and burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, this information is unnecessary to the filing of a Complaint. Information responsive to this request is unknown at this time. 4. Statements obtained from any witness or any other person having knowledge of the facts giving rise to this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production is objectionable to the extent that it may request information, which is protected by the Peer Review Protection Act, the Mcare Act, attorney-work product and/or attorney/client privilege. It is also objectionable to the extent it exceeds Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3. Further, without additional information fi-om Plaintiff said Request is overly broad and 2 burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This information is unnecessary to the filing of a Complaint. 5. All documents identified in your answers to any set of Interrogatories. RESPONSE: Objection. Without additional information from Plaintif:[', said Request is overly broad and burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discow:ry of admissible evidence. It is believed that Plaintiff's counsel is in possession of Answering Det~ndants' radiologic reports. 6. Any and all documents sent to you by your professional liability insurance company related in any manner to the care you provided to Harry W. Ewing on March 18, 1996 to November 4, 2003. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production is objectionable to the extent that it requests information that exceeds allowable discovery under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3. This Request for Production does not conform to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particulari .ty. Additionally, without further information from Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 4011 (b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 401 l(e)). Further, without additional informat][on from Plaintiff said Request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 7. Any and all documents you sent to your professional liability insurance company related in any manner to the care you provided to Harry W. Ewing on March 18, 1996 to November 4, 2003. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production is objectionable to the extent that it requests information that exceeds allowable discovery under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3. This Request for Production does not conform to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particnlaritv. Additionally, without further information fi.om Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 401 l(b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 401 l(e)). Further, without additional informat][on fi:om Plaintiff said Request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 8. A copy of any and all insurance policies, including the declaration sheet, covering the incident in question. RESPONSE: Objection. Without further information fi.om Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause um'easonable annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 4011 (b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 4011 (e)). Further, without additional information fi.om Plaintiff said Request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, this information is unnecessary to the filing of a Complaint. 9. The entire contents of the investigative file obtained, developed or possessed by you, or anyone acting on your behalf, excluding the mental impressions of your attorney or his conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal re~earch or legal theories, and also excluding the mental impressions, conclusions or opinions of your representatives other than your attorney, respecting the value or merits of any claims or deJ~enses, or respecting strategy or tactics. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production does not conform to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particularity. Additionally, without further information fi.om Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable ~mnoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 4011 (b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 4011 (e)). Further, this information is unnecessary to the filing of a Complaint. 10. All documents in your possession which mention Harry W. Ewing except those protected by attorney/client privilege. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production does not conform to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particnlari~. Additionally, without further information fi-om Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 401 l(b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 4011 (e)). Further, this information is unnecessary to the filing of a Complaint. 11. Any and all records in your possession regarding the care and treatment of Harry W. Ewing, independent of those maintained by Holy Spirit Hospital. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production does not conforrn to the requirements of Rule 4009.11, Request Upon a Party for Production of Documents and Things. This Rule requires that the Request shall be set forth in numbered paragraphs and the items to be produced shall either be identified individually or by category, and each item or category must be described with reasonable particularity. Additionally, without further information from Plaintiff regarding the alleged cause of action, this Request would cause unreasonable .annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense, (See Pa.R.C.P 401 l(b)) and would require the making of an unreasonable investigation (See Pa. R.C.P.P. 401 l(e)). It is believed that Plaintiff's counsel is in possession of Answering Defendants' radiologic reports. 12. Any and all documents reflecting the contractual arrangement between you and Holy Spirit Hospital. RESPONSE: Objection. Without further information from Plaintiff, ~Maswering Defendants are unable to accurately identify which contract or portions thereof are responsive to this request. 13. A copy of all contracts and/or agreements between you and Holy Spirit Hospital. RESPONSE: Objection. Without further information from Plaintiff, Answering Defendants are unable to accurately identify which contract or portions thereof are responsive to this request. 6 14. Any and all incident, MIIX and/or unusual occun:ence reports prepared in connection with the incident giving rise to this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Objection. This Request for Production is objectionable to the extent that it requests information that exceeds allowable discovery under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3. Further, without additional information from Plaintiff said Request is overly broad and burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 322379.2 By: Joseph P. Haler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. (}7186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on this day I served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following: James E. Ellison, Esquire- Hand Delivered on November 7, 2004 Rhoads & Sinon, LLP One South Market Square P.O. Box 1146 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1146 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Donald Bmaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Michael M. Badowski, Esquire, Margolis Edelstein 3510 Tfindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (Counsel for Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and San ford and Roumm Rheumatology) James Saxton, Esquire Stevens & Lee, P.C. 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc.) Craig A. Stone, Esquire Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin 4200 Crams Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (Counsel for Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central PA) BGTSPB Group, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 DATE: 322475.2 By: THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP Joseph P. l~I~fer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7613 .~-; MICHAEL M. BADOWSlG, ESOUIRE Pa. Supreme Court I.D. No. 32646 MARGOUS EDELSTEIN 3510 Tfindle Road Camp Hill, Penns~vania 17011 Telephone: ['/17] 9758114 Direct Dial: [717] 760-7600 Fax: [717] 9758124 E-Maih mbadowski@margoiisedeistein.com Attorney for Defendants ALAN D, ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY DOROTHY R. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of Harry W. Ewing, Deceased, Plaintiff Vo DONAI.D BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D.; SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D.; QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC.; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COlvlMON PLEAS CUMBERIZd~D COUNTY, PFaNNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW N0.04-4820 IURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or suffer judgment non pros. Date: T~UE COPY FROM RECORD !,.', ~*..'-.:imony whereol, I here unto sst my hand ~,.-,..,.-; ~ seal ,of said ~urt at Carlisle, Pa. T his~c/':-day_~ ~ TO THE PLAINTIFF: Respectfully subraitted, Michael M. Badowski, Esquire Attorneys for Defendants Alan D. Ra.umm, M.D., and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology RULE You are hereby ordered and directed to file your Complaint against the Defendants in the above-captioned matter within twenty (20) days of service/qf this Rule against you or suffer judgment non pros.,~ // Dated: ~DL ~, ~q /j(_~/Z~:~2_)-'- ~1~.~/*"~~ ' ~ - -~?m'One--L tary Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 07186 Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90539 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Phone - (717) 255-7613 Fax - (717) 237-7105 jhafer~tthlaw.com gcauler~tthlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Richard Stewart, M.D. and Quantum Imagilag and Therapeutic Associates, Inc. DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWlNG, Deceased, Plaintiff V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O., ALAN D. ROIjMM, M.D., SANFORD AND ROUMM RHEUMATOLOGY, BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D., RICHARD STEWART, M.D., QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D., INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and BGTSPB GROUP, LTD., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -- LAW · NO. 04-4820 CIVIL TERM · · · JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Rule on Plaintiff to file a Complaint in the above case within twenty (20) days after service of the Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In Testimony w~r~of, I here unto set my hand DATE: l0' Respectfully sgbmitte ,d~ Thomas, Tlf~as &/Hafer,~2LP By: Josep¢ Hafer, Esquire / RULEr Pro~onot~ ow, ©c_.4-. &q ~m IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOROTHY J. EWING, Executrix of the Estate of HARRY W. EWING, deceased, Plaintiff, V. DONALD BRUAW, D.O.; ALAN D. ROUMM, M.D. and SANFORD AND ROUMM RI-IEUMATOLOGY; BARBARA K. KUNKEL, M.D.; RICHARD STEWART, M.D. and QUANTUM IMAGING AND THERAPEUTIC ASSOCIATES; LAWRENCE B. ZIMMERMAN, M.D.; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PA and B(~TSPG GROUP, LTD., Defendant. CIVIL ACTION - LAW No: 04-482.0 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, this ,~.~a'y of RULE ,2004, upon consideration of the foregoing Praecipe, Plaintiffs are hereby ordered to file their Complaint within twenty (20) days hereof or suffer judgment of non pros. BY THE PROTHONOTARY: TRUE OOPY FROM F_.CORD In T~timony v~haroo~, ! ~r~ u~ ~t my hand CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 12th day of November, 2(}04, a true and correct copy of the foregoing "Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Conduct Pre-Complaint Discovery" was served by means of United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, upon tlhe following: Michael Badowski, Esquire Margolis Edelstein P.O. Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0932 (Counsel for Defendants Alan D. Roumm, M.D. and Sanford and Roumm Rheumatology) Craig A. Stone, Esquire 4200 Crums Mill Road, Suite B Harrisburg, PA 17112 (Counsel for Defendants, Lawrence B. Zimmerman, M.D. and Internists of Central, PA, Ltd.) Donald Bruaw, D.O. 56 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 Barbara K. Kunkel, M.D., 405 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Joseph P. Hafer, Esquire Gerryanne Cauler, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Haler LLP 305 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 (Counsel for Defendants, Richard Stewart, M.~. and Quantum Imaging and Therapeutic Associates, Inc.) -~ Susan B. Chandler