Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-2015F •' F0-0FF110 7- THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC REIFF & BILY BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire ' c 2 9 r M 10: S OJeffrey M. Reiff, Esquire Identification No.: 49724 dentification No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street r r ` 0 RLAN0 C 0 U N T 1 125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 191074997 Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 246-9000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) (215) 370-6696 (Facsimile) JEFFREY QUINN : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 82 Malibu Boulevard : CUMBERLAND COUNTY Carlisle, PA. 17015 Plaintiff, VS. No. G I a_ S l,l If ?? PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 400 Park Drive Carlisle, PA 17067 Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND "NOTICE" You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defense or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. "AVISO" Le ban demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene veinte (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notificacion. Hace falta asentar una comparencia escrita o en persona o con un abogado y entregar a la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objecciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede continuar la demanda en contra suya sin previo aviso o notificacion. Ademas, la corte puede decidir a favor del demandante y requiere que usted cumpla con todas las provisions de esta demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades u otros derechos iportantes para usted. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association LAWYER REFERRAL & INFO. 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 (800) 990-9108 LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O St NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGA. Asociacion de Licenciados de Cumberland County Servicio de Referencia a Informacion 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 (800) 990-9108 ibS. -7SPd aNy Cl? 1 1? S (?q t THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Identification No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 191074997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) REIFF & BILY Jeffrey M. Reiff, Esquire Identification No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 246-9000 (215) 370-6696 (Facsimile) JEFFREY QUINN 82 Malibu Boulevard Carlisle, PA 17015 Plaintiff, VS. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 400 Park Drive Carlisle, PA 17067 Defendant. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CIVIL ACTION COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Jeffrey Quinn, by and through his undersigned counsel, and hereby files his Complaint against the above-captioned Defendant, of which the following is a statement: 1. THE PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn is an adult individual resident who resides at 82 Malibu Boulevard, Carlisle, PA 17015. 2. Defendant PPG Industries, Inc. ("PPG") is, upon information and belief, a Pennsylvania corporation which regularly conducts business and maintains a registered service address of 400 Park Drive, Carlisle, PA 17067. 3. Defendant PPG is the owner of the plant located at 400 Park Drive, Carlisle, PA 17067. 1 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. Jurisdiction and venue is appropriately situated in this Honorable Court because the events and circumstances which give rise to this cause of action all occurred within Cumberland County and the Defendant regularly and continuously transacts business in this county. III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 5. On July 12, 2011, Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn was employed by Seaton Corp, Inc. 6. Incident to his employment with Seaton, Plaintiff was working for Seaton at the PPG plant located at 400 Park Drive, Carlisle, PA 17067. 7. At that time, Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn was working as the "offline lead" in the tempered glass department. Plaintiffs responsibilities as "offline lead" included keeping the load area clear of any and all obstructions. 8. Plaintiffs job duties included supervising and helping his Seaton co-workers with tasks that included transporting loads of glass across the tempering department of PPG's plant. 9. At approximately 11:30 on July 12, 2011, the Plaintiff and his co-workers' eight hour shift was coming to an end. At this time, Plaintiff was cleaning up a work area located in the load end of the tempering department. 10. On July 12, 2011, the load end tempering area of the PPG facility had a roll cart which was to be used to move glass. The Plaintiff moved a roll cart that had a 9KS container holding 15-20 lites of 4.0mm glass. 11. At all times relevant hereto, the cart represented the only piece of equipment available to the Plaintiff to move multiple large pieces of glass. 12. On July 12, 2011, Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn was using a roll cart to move large pieces of glass when the cart malfunctioned causing the cart, containers and all of the glass to fall on Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn. 2 13. While the Plaintiff was moving the cart, and upon information and belief, its center of gravity was compromised due to the weight of the glass and container, a broken wheel, and customized adjustments that had been made to the cart. 14. As a result, the cart and its load of glass tipped and trapped the Plaintiff underneath it. 15. Other workers immediately came over to try to help free the Plaintiffs legs from under the cart and the load of glass, but were unable to do so. 16. Another co-worker called for a forklift to help move the cart and all of the glass from on top of the Plaintiff. 17. The Plaintiff remained trapped under the 9KS container and all of the glass for approximately five minutes. 18. Upon information and belief, the roll cart was retrofitted so that it could better handle the weight and size of both the 9KS containers and the heavy loads of glass it transported. 19. Therefore, at the date, time and place set forth above, and while properly and lawfully working within the course and scope of his employment for Seaton Corp, Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn sustained severe and permanent injuries when the cart, container and multiple large pieces of glass came crashing down upon him, all due to the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of Defendant PPG as will be set forth in the following counts which are incorporated herein by reference. 20. As a result of the carelessness, negligence and recklessness of PPG, the Plaintiff sustained severe and permanent injuries including but not limited to: a. Numerous bilateral calcareous fractures b. Open wounds to his knee and legs c. Crush injury to lower leg d. Joint effusion in left leg 3 e. Numerous lacerations f. Numerous infections g. Blackened tissue h. Bruising, blistering and redness i. Headaches j . Trauma k. Chronic, ongoing and intense pain 1. Decreased mobility in. Cognitive dysfunction n. Depression and anxiety o. Nervous shock p. Difficulty sleeping q, Instability r. Tenderness s. Weakness t. Numbness u. Swelling v.. Fever w. Aggravation and/or exacerbation of all known and unknown preexisting medical conditions x.. Numerous medical procedures and surgeries, and ongoing medical care in the future 21. Plaintiff has in the past and will in the future undergo severe pain and suffering, the result of which he has been in the past and will be in the future unable to attend his usual duties 4 and occupations, all to his great financial detriment and loss, and may be required to expend additional sums for the same purposes in the future. 22. Plaintiffs injuries are permanent in nature. 23. As a result of his injuries, the Plaintiff shall suffer wage loss which shall continue indefinitely into the future. 24. As a result of his injuries, the Plaintiff shall suffer an impairment of future earning capacity. 25. As a result of his injuries, the Plaintiff has suffered present wage loss and loss of benefits. 26. As a result of his injuries, the Plaintiff has also suffered through various medical procedures and treatments, all of which have required the Plaintiff and/or his health insurers and/or his employer to pay for such medical care and those sums shall need to be repaid, in whole or in part, in the future. 27. As a result of his injuries, the Plaintiff has suffered the increased risk of harm for future medical problems, disease and ailments, medical bills, pain and suffering and ongoing loss of life's pleasures and activities of daily living. 28. As a result of the aforementioned occurrence, and as a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence as set forth below, the Plaintiff has been compelled to expend large sums of money for medicine and medical attention, and will be required to expend additional sums for such purposes in the future. 29. As a result of the aforementioned negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff has been prevented from attending his usual and daily activities and duties, and will be so prevented in the future, all to his great detriment and loss. 5 30. As a result of the aforementioned negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has suffered great physical pain, great mental anguish and humiliation, and will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite period of time in the future. 31. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant was acting through its respective agents, actual, apparent or ostensible, servants and/or employees, and anyone or entity that discovery may reveal acted in concert or with Defendant PPG in bringing about the Plaintiffs injury and damages. COUNTI NEGLIGENCE v. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 32. Plaintiff incorporates each and every allegation set forth herein as though fully set forth in length. 33. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant undertook the responsibility to make its workplace and plant safe, including the area where the Plaintiff was known to be working. 34. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant owned the property where the Plaintiff was known to be working and where the Plaintiff was injured. 35. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant had a duty to see that the area where the Plaintiff was working was kept in a safe and workmanlike manner, especially with regard to the foreseeable actions and conduct of the Plaintiff. 36. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant had duty to make sure that the Plaintiffs work area, and the equipment made available to the Plaintiff, was in proper, safe and workmanlike order and condition. 37. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant owed a duty to the Plaintiff to provide a reasonably safe working environment free from unreasonable hazards and, furthermore, to provide reasonably safe equipment for the Plaintiffs use. 6 38. Although the Defendant knew or should have known that injured workers in manufacturing plants is one of the leading causes of fatalities and injuries, the Defendant still failed to enact or implement all of the necessary and reasonable safety precautions to prevent the Plaintiff from being injured in its manufacturing plant. 39. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant owed the Plaintiff a duty to protect against and/or warn the Plaintiff of dangerous conditions that the Defendant knew of, or should have been aware of, at its manufacturing plant. 40. Defendant therefore, by and through its agents, servants, workers and/or employees, were careless, negligent, grossly negligent and reckless and indifferent to the rights, welfare and safety of the Plaintiff in that the Defendant: (1) Failed to provide the Plaintiff with a safe place in which to work for Seaton; (2) Failed to provide the Plaintiff with reasonably safe equipment to carry out the Plaintiffs job functions for Seaton; (3) Failed to adequately inspect its manufacturing plant in the area where the Plaintiff was working for dangerous or hazardous conditions; (4) Failed to properly coordinate with other entities and/or subcontractors to make sure that the Plaintiff had a reasonably safe place to work, and with reasonably safe equipment; (5) Breached its duties under various sections of the Restatement of the Law of Torts (Second); (6) Failed to properly supervise its employees to identify and correct dangerous conditions and hazards so that others, like the Plaintiff, would not be injured; (7) Failed to properly select, hire, employ, and train its employees to make PPG's work area safe so that individuals like the Plaintiff would not be seriously hurt; 7 (8) Failed to warn the Plaintiff of the dangerous and unsafe conditions that then and there existed at PPG's plant; (9) Failed to warn the Plaintiffs employer of the dangerous and unsafe conditions that then and there existed at PPG's plant; (10) Failed to adopt, enact, employ and enforce proper and adequate safety programs, precautions, procedures, measures and plans; (11) Violated and failed to comply with federal and state statutes, local ordinances, and other rules, enactments or regulations, applicable or in effect, be they administrative, industry-wide or otherwise pertaining to the performance of the Plaintiffs work on the Defendant's job site; (12) Failed to perform safety analyses and inspections as required; (13) Utilized poor equipment for the purpose of saving money at the expense of safety of other workers in the PPG plant like the Plaintiff; (14) Failed to correct, remedy, repair and/or eliminate the defective and/or hazardous conditions which it was aware of or should have been aware of; (15) Failed to investigate dangerous conditions; (16) Failed to investigate dangerous and defective equipment; (17) Failed to train and/or instruct its employees working in the same area as Seaton Corp employees like the Plaintiff with respect to issues of worksite and equipment safety; (18) Failed to exercise proper and due care for the safety of the Plaintiff and others under the circumstances as they then and there existed; (19) Failed to take all reasonable precautions for the safety of all Seaton workers at the Defendant's plant; 8 (20) Acted in reckless disregard for the safety of the Plaintiff by knowingly permitting and/or causing the area where the Plaintiff was working for Seaton to be defective and deficient, especially knowing that the Plaintiff would be using a cart which would be rolled across the areas located in the load end of PPG's tempering department; (21) Acted in reckless disregard for the Plaintiff by placing corporate profits above public safety. 41. With respect to PPG's negligence as set forth above, PPG substantially increased the risk of harm to be suffered by the Plaintiff thereby causing his numerous injuries and damages. 42. As a result of the negligence of PPG as set forth more fully herein, Plaintiff suffered serious, permanent and ongoing injuries and damages as set forth above. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant for a sum substantially in excess of this Honorable Court's jurisdictional threshold, together with delay damages, interest, costs, pre and post judgment interest, and potentially punitive damages to the extent that the discovery in this case confirms the Plaintiffs entitlement thereto under the facts and circumstances presented above, together with any further relief which this Court deems just and appropriate under the circumstances. NOTICE OF PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE PLAINTIFF HEREBY DEMANDS AND REQUESTS THAT DEFENDANT TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO ENSURE THE PRESERVATION OF ALL DOCUMENTS, COMMUNICATIONS, WHETHER ELECTRONIC OR OTHERWISE, ITEMS AND THINGS IN THE POSSESSION OR CONTROL OF ANY PARTY TO THIS ACTION, OR ANY ENTITY OVER WHICH ANY PARTY TO THIS ACTION HAS CONTROL, OR FROM WHOM ANY PARTY TO THIS ACTION HAS ACCESS TO, ANY DOCUMENTS, ITEMS, 9 OR THINGS WHICH MAY IN ANY MANNER BE RELEVANT TO OR RELATE TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CAUSES OF ACTION AND/OR THE ALLEGATIONS OF THIS COMPLAINT. TOfRe LC BY: DION G. RASSIAS Attorney I. D. No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) REIFF & BILY JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D. No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: March Qom, 2012 10 VERIFICATION Jeffrey Quinn hereby verifies that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. JEFFRE INN DATED: SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson Sheriff 4??Ett -:;1 ?It1r ifrrill Jody S Smith Chief Deputy Richard W Stewart Solicitor Jeffrey Quinn vs. PPG Industries, Inc. SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE Tj P? 12 Case Number 2012-2015 04/04/2012 02:52 PM - Elizabeth Muller, Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 4, 2012 at 1452 hours, she served a true copy of the within Complaint and Notice, upon the within named defendant, to wit: PPG Industries, Inc., by making known unto James Schiappa, Director of Human Resources for PPG Industries, Inc. at 400 Park Drive, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17013 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and correct copy of the same. SHERIFF COST: $34.45 April 10, 2012 ELI ETH MULLER, DEPUTY SO ANSWERS,, RON R ANDERSON, SHERIFF 1231824.doc DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: Christopher D. Stotko, Esquire ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 81979 BY: Christine L. Line, Esquire ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 93257 Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-4800 (Tele) 888-811-7144 (Fax) JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff, It' T F PROIkOiNOT" A46RNEY FOR: DEFENDANT 2011 APR 20 Alf (0: 44 PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., AND COUNTY" SYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. , Defendant. NO. 2012-2015 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of the undersigned as counsel for Defendant, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: /9 0?-0 /.'Z By. Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 81979 Christine L. Line, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 93257 Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21 st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 717-731-4800 Attorney for Defendants, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. , 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, April 4,10 , 2012, I, Christine L. Line, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing ENTRY OF APPEARANCE upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: By First-Class Mail: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire REIFF & BILY The Beasley Building 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Chris me L. Line, Esquire No. 2012-2015 CIVIL ICE o THE i012 ?,1' 20 AM 10, 45 CU pENNSYLVAN A TY IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff, V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., CIVIL DIVISION No. 2012-2015 CIVIL DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Defendant. NOTICE TO PLEAD Filed on behalf of Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. Counsel of record for this party: Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire PA I.D. # 81979 TO: Plaintiff You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint within twenty (20) days from the date of service hereof or a judgment may e e d against ou. B _ •?_ Christine L. Line„ Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Firm #067 Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 (412) 281-7272 Christine L. Line, Esquire PA I.D. # 93257 DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Firm #067 Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 (717)731-4800 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED No. 2012-2015 CIVIL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, No. 2012-2015 CIVIL V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. ("PPG"), by and through its attorneys, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., and files the following of Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint and avers as follows: 1. On March 29, 2012, Plaintiff, Jeffrey Quinn, initiated the instant lawsuit by filing a Complaint. 2. In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he was employed by Seaton Corp, Inc. when he was working at a PPG plant in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff claims that he was cleaning up his work area on July 12, 2011 and as part of his clean-up he was using a roll cart to move a large piece of glass. Plaintiff then alleges that the cart malfunctioned and caused the cart to fall on him. Plaintiff claims injuries as a result of the alleged accident. 4. Plaintiff's Complaint contains a myriad of deficiencies under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and Pennsylvania law. Accordingly, Defendant No. 2012-2015 CIVIL files these Preliminary Objections to dismiss portions of Plaintiff's claim against Defendant. The Non-Specific Allegations of Negligence Set Forth in Paragraph 40 of Plaintiff's Complaint are Lacking the Requisite Specificity as Required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and the Case Law of this Commonwealth 5. Under Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019(a), a plaintiff is required to plead all of the material facts upon which a cause of action is based in a concise and summary form. 6. Allegations withstand the challenge of Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019(a) if they contain averments of all of the facts the plaintiff will eventually have to prove in order to recover and are sufficiently specific so as to enable the defendant to prepare a defense. Baker v. Rangos, 324 A.2d 498 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1974). 7. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court stressed the importance of requiring a plaintiff to comply with Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019 in Connor v. Allegheny General Hospital, 461 A.2d 600 (Pa. 1983). In Connor, complaint contained a general allegation that the defendant was negligent "[i]n otherwise failing to use due care and caution under the circumstances." Connor, 461 A.2d at 601. 8. During trial, plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint. The purpose of this amendment was to introduce a new theory of negligence. Under this new theory, plaintiffs sought to allege that the hospital had improperly delayed performing surgery after the perforation of her colon. Id at 602. The trial court denied plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend on the grounds that plaintiffs would be introducing a new cause of action. Id. The trial court's decision was affirmed by the Pennsylvania Superior Court, holding that the amendment introduced a new cause of action, and was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 2 No. 2012-2015 CIVIL 9. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed both the decision of the Superior Court as well as the decision of the trial court. The Supreme Court, in Connor, reasoned that the plaintiffs' proposed amendment was merely an amplification of the "boiler-plate" allegation in the complaint and thus did not constitute a new cause of action, despite the plaintiffs failure to specifically identify the cause of action in the original complaint. Id. 10. In Connor, the Supreme Court stressed that the defendant had not been without a procedural means of protecting itself. In a footnote to the decision, the majority commented that the defendant should have filed preliminary objections in the nature of a request for a more specific pleading or a motion to strike the boiler-plate allegations in the complaint. Id. The Supreme Court seemed to suggest that the failure of a defendant to file preliminary objections could be construed as a waiver by the defendant of any rights to object to plaintiffs amendment to the Complaint after the running of the statute of limitations. 11. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that a defendant may be prejudiced if a general allegation of negligence is permitted to stand. Such general allegations could be used by a plaintiff as a means to introduce a new negligence theory after the running of the applicable statute of limitations. 12. In the instant case, the Complaint, specifically Paragraph 40, subparagraphs 5, 19 and 21, includes a boiler-plate allegations of negligence which fail to state the material facts upon which they are based and fails to apprise PPG of the claims being asserted against it. In light of the decision in Connor, as well as the requirements of Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019(a) and the supporting case law, Defendant has filed the within Preliminary Objections in the nature of a Motion to Strike. The boiler-plate allegations in Plaintiffs 3 No. 2012-2015 CIVIL Complaint are in violation of Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019(a) and should be stricken or, alternatively, be pled with more specificity. Plaintiff's Allegations of Recklessness are Inappropriate, Scandalous and Impertinent and Should be Stricken. 13. Plaintiffs one and only count sounds in negligence and it is negligence which is alleged to have caused harm. Yet, Plaintiff improperly claims that the same negligent conduct was also "grossly negligent" and "reckless." See Count I, 1 40, p. 7. Such an allegation is inappropriate in a negligence claim as such a claim does not import an evil motive or reckless indifference to the rights of others. Additionally, such allegations are impertinent and scandalous. Pa.R.C.P. 1028. 14. It has been held that where the allegations of a Complaint detail the allegedly negligent conduct of the Defendant, it is not sufficient to merely allege that the same conduct was also reckless. The Complaint must allege facts that indicate in what manner the Defendant knew or had reason to know that his conduct involved a high probability of substantial harm to others. Van Ingen vs. Wentz, 70 D&C 2d 555 (1975). 15. Additionally, as the Pennsylvania Superior Court pointed out in Ratti v. Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel Corp., 758 A.2d 695 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2000), "there is a substantive difference between ordinary negligence and gross negligence. The general consensus finds gross negligence constitutes conduct more egregious than ordinary negligence." Ratti, 758 A.2d at 703. 16. Other than merely listing purportedly negligent acts/omissions, Plaintiffs Complaint contains no allegations that this Defendant knew or had to reason to know of facts which would have lead a reasonable man to realize that Defendant's conduct created 4 No. 2012-2015 CIVIL an unreasonable risk of physical harm substantially greater than that which is necessary to make his conduct negligent. 17. Additionally, Plaintiffs Complaint does not contain any allegations that the conduct of the Defendant rose above ordinary negligence. In essence, the Plaintiff has alleged that the alleged acts or omissions on the part of PPG are at the same time negligent, grossly negligent and reckless. Such cannot be the case and therefore, Defendant respectfully requests that any references to "gross negligence" and "recklessness" in Plaintiffs Complaint be stricken. Plaintiffs Punitive Damages Claim Should be Dismissed as Legally Insufficient Under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1028(a)(4). 18. The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure provide for "legal insufficiency of a pleading (demurrer)" to be raised by preliminary objection. Pa. R. Civ. P. 1028(a)(4). It is unclear in Plaintiffs wherefore clause whether or not he seeks punitive damages in this action. 19. Specifically, Plaintiff states that he is entitled to "potentially punitive damages." Any reference to punitive damages, regardless of including the adverb "potentially" is improper when all that is alleged is negligent conduct. 20. "Punitive damages may be awarded for conduct that is outrageous, because of the defendant's evil motive or his reckless indifference to the rights of others." Feld v. Merriam, 485 A.2d 742, 747 (Pa. 1984). As such, an award of punitive damages must be based on conduct which is "malicious, wanton, reckless, willful, or oppressive." Feld, 485 A.2d at 747. When determining whether punitive damages are proper, the state of mind of the actor is vital. Id. "The act, or the failure to act, must be intentional, reckless or malicious." Id. 5 No. 2012-2015 CIVIL 21. An appreciation of the risk of harm to plaintiff is a necessary element of the mental state required for the imposition of punitive damages. The imposition of punitive damages is appropriate only where the conduct of the Defendant is especially egregious. A mere allegation of the conduct on the part of the Defendant is wanton or gross is insufficient to state a claim for punitive damages. Martin v. Johns-Mansville Corp., 508 Pa. 154, 494 A.2d 1088 (1985). 22. In addition to the specific requirements regarding allegations for punitive damages as indicated above, the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure also dictate that the "material facts on which a cause of action ...is based shall be stated in a concise and summary form." Pa. R. Civ. P. 1019(a). 23. In this case, Plaintiff has merely alleged a cause of action for negligence and has included no allegations which support his claim for punitive damages. Furthermore, as discussed, Plaintiffs conclusory allegations of recklessness and gross negligence should be stricken as improper and provide no basis whatsoever to argue for "potentially punitive damages." 24. Moreover, inclusion of the word "recklessness" in a negligence count is insufficient to support a claim for punitive damages. Plaintiffs Complaint contains no allegations that Defendant had notice of or an appreciation for any risk of harm to Mr. Quinn. Likewise, Plaintiff has made no allegations that Defendant acted, or failed to act, in conscious disregard of a known risk. Absent any such allegations, Plaintiff has failed to allege facts sufficient to support or establish a claim for punitive and/or exemplary damages under Pennsylvania law. 6 No. 2012-2015 CIVIL 25. In conclusion, Plaintiff has not pled any facts sufficient to demonstrate that Defendant's conduct was outrageous, inspired by an evil motive, or caused by reckless indifference to the rights of others. As such, Plaintiffs allegations are insufficient to warrant the imposition of punitive damages and should be dismissed or stricken pursuant to Rule 1028(a)(4). WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc., respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order sustaining the within Preliminary Objections. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. B hristopher D. Stofko, Esquire Christine L. Line, Esquire Attorney for Defendant PPG Industries, Inc. 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Christopher Stofko, Esquire, hereby certify that true and correct copies of the foregoing Preliminary Objections have been served this day of April, 2012, by U.S. first-class mail, postage pre-paid, to counsel of record listed below: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire REIFF & BILY 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Counsel for Plaintiff DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. &J B 2:1 ?k Christopher Stofko, Esquire Christine L. Line, Esquire Attorneys for PPG Industries, Inc. PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) i !L'?-U-OFFICC OF IN foll4m j LlTA ? TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: (List the within matt& Argument Court.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ZO I Z APR 2Q AM IQ? 6 CAPTION OF CASE CUMBERLAND COUNT (entire caption must be stated in full) PENNSYLVANIA OUT JEFFREY QUINN vs. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC No. 2012-2015 CIVIL 1. State matter to be argued (i.e., plaintiffs motion for new trial, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint 2. Identify all counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiffs: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire, Reiff & Bily, The Beasley Building 1125 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (b) for defendants: Christopher D. Stojko, Esquire/Christine L. Line, Esquire, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P. C., Plaza 21, Suite 302, 425 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, PA 17011 3. 1 will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. 4. Argument Court Date: June 1, 2012 Signature Christine L. Line. Esquire Print your name Date: Y -x -Cao/g Attorney for Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Two copies of all briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) before argument. 2. The moving party shall file and serve their brief 12 days prior to argument. 3. The responding party shall file their brief 5 days prior to argument. 4. If argument is continued new briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) after the case is relisted. Q?? C? Q S1r1 a?Uo?? ,i2 k? THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Identification No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) i t d'i 1 { T?1 11! ! at. 'j. REIFF & BILY (j ? , i ; ,Jeffrey M. Reiff, Esquire Identification No.: 30023 D E R L A N D C0 U 14'[ [125 Walnut Street c . C y VA I ! A Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 246-9000 (215) 370-6696 (Facsimile) jr.rrmr.Y t2uiiNrN Plaintiff, VS. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY : No. 2012-2015 CIVIL Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED S O Plaintiff, Jeffrey Quinn, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby files this Response to the Preliminary Objections of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc., and in support thereof, states and avers as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached here at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself. 3. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached here at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself. 4. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached here at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in the Plaintiff's Brief In Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. 5. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 6. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 7. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 8. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 9. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 10. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 11. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 12. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct dopy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. The allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint fully inform the moving defendant, with sufficient accuracy and completeness, of the allegations of negligence, and are sufficiently specific to enable the defendant to formulate a defense. 13. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. 14. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 15. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 16. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's :Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. 17. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. 18. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 19. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct dopy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by 4 reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. The allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint are sufficient under the Rules and case law of the Commonwealth to support an award of punitive damages. 20. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 21. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 22. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 23. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By wily of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. The allegations in Plaintiff s Complaint', are sufficient under the Rules and case law of the Commonwealth to support an award of punitive damages. 24. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. The allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint are sufficient under the Rules and case law of the Commonwealth to support an award of punitive damages. 25. Denied. The allegations in this paragraph of Defendant's Preliminary Objections, purporting to characterize the contents of the Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached to Defendant's Preliminary Objections at Exhibit "A," are denied, as the Complaint is a writing that speaks for itself, and are further denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. By way of further answer, without waiver of the foregoing, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, filed herewith and incorporated herein by reference, any assertion or implication that the averments at issue are deficient in any respect under Pennsylvania law is specifically denied. To the contrary, said averments are in full conformity with, and more than sufficient under, the law of this Commonwealth, to withstand Defendant's Preliminary Objections. The allegations in Plaintiff s Complaint are sufficient under the Rules and case law of the Commonwealth to support an award of punitive damages. WHEREFORE, and for the reasons further detailed in Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to the Preliminary Objections of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc., filed herewith' and incorporated herein by reference, it is respectfully requested that this Honorable Court overrule Defendant 6 PPG Industries, Inc.'s Preliminary Objections and compel the Defendant to file an Answer to the Complaint within twenty (20) days of the date hereof. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: DION G. RASSIAS Attorney I.D. No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) REIFF & BILY JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D. No.: 300123 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: May 9, 2012 7 c-> - ?r*t M THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC cnr mot-? BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire r"?-- °' --'ca Identification No.: 49724 ° -v o ,._ ' 1125 Walnut Street 2-yc w Wit Philadelphia, PA 19107-499 7. o z' (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) JEFFREY QUINN : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY Plaintiff, VS. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. : No. 2012-2015 Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AMENDMENT TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT'S MORE SPECIFIC RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSION, INTERROGATORY AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, by and through his undersigned counsel, and hereby his Motion to Compel Defendant's More Specific Responses to Plaintiffs First Request for Admission, Interrogatory and Request for Production of Documents in order to comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3(a)(2) and/or Rule 208.3(a)(9) as follows: On June 1, 2012, a hearing was held before the Honorable Kevin A. Hess and Honorable Christylee L. Peck regarding Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs Complaint, and Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objections, but no ruling has been made on the issue to date. No other motions and/or petitions have been filed in this case. 2. On June 25, 2012, counsel for Plaintiff forwarded a letter to Defendant req more specific responses and agreeing to enter into a confidentiality stipulation regarding the exchange of allegedly "proprietary" information. See Exhibit "C," attached to the original motion. 3. No response was received from the Defendant. Respectfully submitted, THE BEASLEY RM, LLC • BY: DION G. RASSIAS Attorney I.D. No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) REIFF & BILY BY: /s/Jeffrey M. Reiff JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D. No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: July 5, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dion G. Rassias, hereby certify that I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoin? to be served via first class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon: Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Vaughn K. Schultz, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Christine L. Line, Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21 S` Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 Wf - BY: DION G. RASSIAS DATED: July 5, 2012 i i EY QIJINN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL, ACTION -LAW INDEJSTRIES, INC., Defendant NO. 12-2015 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT BEFORE HESS, P.J. and PECK, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /S%~-day of August, 2012, upon consideration of Defendant s inary Objections to Plaintiffs Complaint, Plaintiff's Response to Defendant s inary Objections, the briefs filed by the parties, and following oral azgument, it s ordered and directed as follows: 1. Paragraph 40, subsections 5 and 19 of the Complaint are insufficient y specific; these two subsections aze stricken from the Complaint, and, therefo , Defendant's Preliminary Objection with regazd to these two subsections s SUSTAINED; 2. Pazagraph 40, subsection 21 of the Complaint is sufficiently specific an , therefore, Defendant's Preliminary Objection with regard to this subsection s OVERRULED; 3. Sufficient facts have been averred to justify allegations of recklessness d gross negligence; these allegations are not impertinent or scandalous therefore, Defendant's preliminary objection is OVERRULED; 4. Plaintiff's punitive damage claim is legally sufficient and, then Defendant's preliminary objection is OVERRULED. PLAINTIFF is granted leave to amend his complaint within twenty days (20) date of this order. Don G. Rassas, Esq. BEASLEY FIRM, LLC T M. Reif, Esq. IFF & BILY 1 25 Walnut Street P 'ladelphia, PA 19107-4997 A ornevs for Plaintiff istopher Stoflco, Esq. ;KIE, McCAMEY & [LCOTE, P.C. ~ PPG Place, Suite 400 sburgh. FA 15222-5402 and ~/C 'stine L. Line, Esq. P aza 21, Suite 302 4 5 North 21 ~` Street C p Hill, PA 17011-2223 A ornevs for I3efendant BY THE COURT, ~~ Christylee L. Peck, J. ~pes /x.a:lid ~'1~s/~a ~~ ,.~~' r~ ~~ a .: ~.~ c c~ ~n~ w ~.. ~, ~, ~-, ~:,, *- :~-- ~;: r ~` 'REY QUINN, Plaintiff v. INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 12-2015 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDR_,~+IT'S MORE SPECIFIC RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF' S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSION. Ii~1TE~ROGATORY AND REQUEST FOR PRODIICTIQN OF DOCUMENTS ORDER QF COURT V AND NOW, this 15~' day of August, 2012, upon consideration of Plainti ion To Compel Defendant's More Specific Responses to Plaintiff s First Request Fission, Interrogatory and Request for Production of Documents, a Rule is her ed upon Defendant to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 20 days of service. BY THE COURT, on G. Rassias, Esq. BEASLEY FIRM, LLC T f~rey M. Reif, Esq. IFF & BILY 1 25 Walnut Street P iladelpha, PA 19107-4997 A ornevs for Plaintiff C 'stopher Sto#ko, Esq. D CKIE, McGAMEY & C LCOTE, P.C. T o PPG Place, Suite 400 P' burgh, PA 15222-5402 and ' ~/~~ Christylee L. Peck, J. c ~ P"" C1? ~ ~~ ~' c~ ;, c~~: .~~ . ~; C!'t ~: ~'++~ c~.~ <. ~ s .;~ r~-~ -.. E.:~ f°1 ':7 ,F~ - ::, ~-~ -: 0..°~r:; :;:, ~ C 'stine L. Line, Esq. P aza 21, Suite 302 4 5 Noah 21 ~` Street C p Hill, PA 17011-2223 A ornevs for Defendant ~pes ~. ~e~ ~~iS'/ a_ ~~ JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 12-2015 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 8th day of October, 2012, the order of court dated October 1st, 2012, regarding the Plaintiff's Motion to Make Rule Absolute is hereby voided. This Court having had a conference call on today's date with all parties hereto, and it subsequently being learned by the Court that the Defendant had answered the Rule to Show Cause issued on the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant's More Specific Responses to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions, Interrogatories, and Request for Production of Documents, the Plaintiff's Motion to Make Rule Absolute is hereby denied. Pursuant to an agreement of all the parties hereto, the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant's More Specific Responses to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions, Interrogatories, and Request for Production of Documents is hereby granted as follows: Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant's More Specific Responses to the Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions is granted to the extent that the Defendant must file a response to the Plaintiff's Motion for More Specific Responses to the extent it is able to do so. If Defendant's answer is that it is not in the position currently to file any more specific responses at this time, then the Defendant shall file an answer saying such, and such answer will comply with this order. The Defendant is under a continued obligation to supplement that answer at any time that it receives more information regarding the Request for Admissions filed by the Plaintiff. The Defendant is further ordered to file responses to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents within 30 days from the date of this order. By the Court, J? ?- / ie?e ristyl L. Peck, J. Don G. Rassias, Esquire Jeffrey M. Reif, Esquire For the Plaintiff ?ristopher Stofko, Esquire ,,-'Christine L. Line, Esquire For the Defendant lfh I xz? : ,. No_ 2012-2015 t`z L r~, c:3 r , -0 3 W ~ --t ~ ~ ~~ ~ ---4 ~ ~ r'- ~ r~~ O~ ~ ' .~ CJ C`, ~, _ Z C "~'! ~' -* ~ C~ :'y ~ ~i.,., .. ~.~ IN THE COITRT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSY"LVANIA~`~ JEFFREY QUIIVN, Plaintiff, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. NOTICE TO PLEAD "I~O: Plaintilt~ You area hereby notified to file a written response to they enclosed New Matter within twenty (20) days from the date of service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. ~_~~- -~~ Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire CIVIL DIVISION No. 2012-2015 Issue No. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC.'S ANSWIh;R AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Code: Filed on behalf of Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. Counsel of record for this party: Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire PA LD. # 81979 Vaughn K. Schultz, F,squire PA L D. # 206264 DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE.. P.C. Firm #067 Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 (412)281-7272 Christine L. Line, Esquire PA LD. # 93257 DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCO"[~E. P.C. Firm #067 Plaza 2I , Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 (717)731-4800 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED No ?012-2015 IN TIIE COtJR"I~' Ol' COMMON PLEAS OF CUMQERLAND COUNTY, PF,NNSY[ VAN[A JEFFREY QUINN, ) CNIL DIVISION Plaintiff, ) No. 2012-2015 ~%. ~ PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., ) Defendant. ) fiNSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT t~ND NOW comes the Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. ('`PPG"), by and thx-ough its undersigned counsel, and sets forth the Following Answer and New Matter to the Plaintiff's Complaint: L THE PARTIES 1. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph l ~~f Plaintiffs Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. ~. ~hhe averments contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff s Complaint are admitted. 3. The averments contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint are admitted. II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ~_ 'The averments contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the a~~~erments contained in P,:~ragraph 4 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time ~.?Ftr~iaf. III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ~. ~['he averments contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required. the averments Na Z012-2015 contained in Paragraph 5 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. h. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff was «orking at the Carlisle. Pennsylvania PPG facility. The remaining averments contained in Paragr.~aph 6 of Plaintiff's Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. ~I~o thu extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 6 are denied and strict pro~af thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ?. The averments contained in Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff s Complaint are admitted. 8. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff's job duties included supervising and helping coworkers with tasks that included transporting loads of glass across the tempering department. The remaining averments contained in Paragraph 8 cif Plaintiff's Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent .a response is required. the averments contained in Paragraph 8 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of t~~ial. ~a. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that at approximatelti~ 1 ~~ : i0 p.m. on July l2, ~'.O] 1. the Plaintiff's eight hour shift was coming to an end. After reasonable investigation, F'PG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief a~~, to the truth of the remaining averments contained in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Complaint and. therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 1 ~. .Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that on July l 2, 201 1. the load end tempering area of the PPG facility had roll carts which could be used to mo~~e glass. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to forms a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore. denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 2 No. 2012-2015 1 ] . After reasonable investigation. PPG is without knowledge o~~- information sutf cient to f-orm a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 1 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the tame of trial. 12. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to forth a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph l? oi~Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the lime of trial. To the extent Plaintiff contends that the cart he was using "malfunctioned", said allegation states a conclusion 2~f law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, that allegation is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 13. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 1 ~ ~~f Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the dine ~~f trial. 14. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff became trapped underneath a load of glass. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information si.afficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments ;.ontained in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the lime of trial. l S. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or intti~rmatiou sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff s Complaint and'.. therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the tics~e of trial. 1 ~. Upon information and belief, admitted. J No. 7_(:)12-2015 17. After reasonable investigation. PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 17 of Plaintiff's Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the ~t~me of trial. 18. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint and. therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 19. The averments contained in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is req~_iired, the averments contained in Paragraph 19 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 20. The averments contained in Paragraph 20 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 20 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at. the time of trial. .' l . After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or inf~~rmation sufficient to foam a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in P~~ragraph 2l ~:~f P'laintiff's Complaint and., therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the tune of trial. 22. After reasonable investigation, PPG is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in Paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint and, therefore, denies the same. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the tune of trial. ?3. The averments contained in Paragraph 23 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 23 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time 4 Ro. 2012-2015 of trial. 2~. "Che averments contained in Paragraph 24 of Plaintiffs Cc~-nplaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 24 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ~5. The averments contained in Paragraph 25 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 25 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 26. The averments contained in Paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is regi.aired, the averments contained in Paragraph 26 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded ar. the time of trial. 27. The averments contained in Paragraph 27 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 27 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ?8. The averments contained in Paragraph 28 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 28 are denied and strict proof thereof is demander-. at the time of trial. '?9. The averments contained in Paragraph 29 of Plaintiff's C~rriplaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. fo the extent a response is required, the 5 ~~~~. zolz-zo15 averments contained in Paragraph 29 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded ,at the time of trial. 30. "l~he averments contained in Paragraph 30 of Plaintiffs Cornpl~iint state conclusions ~.~f law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 30 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial 31. T'he averments contained in Paragraph 3l of Plaintiff's Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response i~~, required, the averments contained in Paragraph 31 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNTI NEGLIGENCE v. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 32. PPG incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 31 of this Answer by reference ~~s though the same were set forth fully at length. ~3. The averments contained in Paragraph 33 of Plaintiffs Colrlplaint state conclusions os law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 33 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ~4. The averments contained in Paragraph 34 of Plaintiffs Complaint arc admitted. ~~. The averments contained in Paragraph 35 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments cont,~ined in Paragraph 35 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 6. The averments contained in Paragraph 36 of Plaintiffs Complaint state 6 No. 2012-2015 conclusions cif law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is re~_~uired, the averments contained in Paragraph 36 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 37. The averments contained in Paragraph 37 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 37 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ~8. The averments contained in Paragraph 38 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions old law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is regraired, the averments contained in Paragraph 38 are denied and strict proof thereof' is demanded at the time of trial. ~9. The averments contained in. Paragraph 39 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is regriired, the averments contained in Paragraph 39 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ~0. The averments contained in Paragraph 40 of Plaintiffs Complaint.:and each discrete subpart contained therein, state conclusions of la~~~ to which no response is regtaired. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 40, and each discrete subpart contained therein, are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. ~1. The averments contained in Paragraph 41 of Plaintiffs Complaint state conclusions oi~~ law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 41 are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at t11e time of trial. 7 No. 2012-2015 42. The averments contained in Paragraph 42 of Plaintiff's Complaint state conclusions a~f law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments contained in Paragraph 42 are denied and strict proof thereof is demandwd at the time of trial, WHEREFORE. PPG Industries, Inc. respectfully requests that judgment be enured in its favor and against Plaintiff and that it be awarded costs, fees and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. JURY TRIAL llEMANDED NEW MATTER ~ ~. PPG hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 42 of the Answer by reference as though the same were set forth fully at length. ~~. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a claim against PPG upon which relief' can be granted. 45. At all relevant times, this Defendant was in compliance with the "state of~ the art," and Plaintiffs alleged damages and injuries, all of which are denied, were not foreseeable. =16. PPG did not breach any duty, express or implied, which proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiffs alleged damages. ~7. If Plaintiff suffered any damages, which is denied, such damages ~,vcre caused solely by or ~,~~ere the direct and pro~.imate result of negligent acts or omissions of persons, parties. or circumstances other than PPG, for which PPG is not responsible; said negligent acts or omissions of persons, parties, or circumstances other than PPG constitute a superseding and intervening cat.-se of alleged damages to Plaintiff. 8 h1o. 2012-2015 48. To the extent that discovery may show- or demonstrate, Plaintifi~'s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence. ~9. upon information and belief, Plaintiff was misusing the roll cart at the time of the incident in gl.iestion. ~0. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff was acting contrary to his training at the time of the incident in question. ~1. [;pon information and belief, at the time of the incident in question Plaintiff was not acting in a safe manner. ~2. To the extent discovery may show or demonstrate, Plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damages alleged in the Complaint. ~>. "To the extent that discovery may show or demonstrate. all or part ~:~f Plaintiff's claims which are the basis of this lawsuit have either been settled or adjudicated and, therefore, the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, payment and release, waiver, and accord and satisfaction bar Plaintiff's claims against this Defendant. ~4. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was a statutory employee of I'PCi~. ~5. Plaintiff's exclusive remedies are pursuant to the workers' compens~~tion Paws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or the federal workers' compensation laws and Plaintiff is therefore precluded from maintaining the cause of action alleged in the Amended C~:~mplaint against PPG. 56. I'PG pleads the exclusivity provisions of the Pennsylvania ~Norkers' Compensation .Act as an absolute defense to Plaintiffs cause of action alleged in the Amended Complaint. 9 [~Jo. 2012-2015 >7, To the extent that discovery may show or demonstrate, Plaintiff has failed to join feasible and necessary parties to afford a just adjudication of the cause of action ,:alleged in the Amended Complaint. ~8. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant complied with all applicable.;overnmental and industry rules, regulations and standards. ~9. Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages violates and thus is barred by the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the due process and equal protection provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 60. Punitive damages cannot be awarded because an imposition of punitive damages in this case ~NOUId deprive the Defendant of life, liberty, or property in an ~~.rbitrary and capricious manner in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and in violation of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. bl . PPG did not act in an outrageous manner, or with willful and reckless disregard of Plaintiff s interests. Accordingly, Plaintiff is not entitled to an award of punitive or e~~emplary damage. ~2. Any injuries allegedly sustained by Plaintiff were caused by his own idiosyncrasies., and not by any act or admission or wrongful conduct on the part of this Defendant. Such idiosyncrasies were peculiar to Plaintiff and not known to the general public, and this Defendant neither knew nor had reason to know, nor could it have reasona~~lti foreseen such idiosvncrasics. f, ~. "fo the extent that discovery may show or demonstrate Plaintiff s alleged injuries. if any, were caused by Plaintiff's pre-existing medical conditions, subsequent medical 10 I~io. 2012-2015 conditions. .and the natural course of those conditions, for which this Defendant is not responsible. 64. To the extent that discovery may show or demonstrate, this Defendant sets forth its entitlement to an offset to the extent of any benefits received by Plaintiff from anv party to this matter or through any other collateral source, including workers' compensation benefits. 65. PPG reserves the right to assert any and all affirmative defenses which discovery hereafter ma4 reveal to be appropriate. WHEREFORE, PPG Industries, Inc. respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against Plaintiff and that it be awarded costs, fees and such other relief as phis Court deems .just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED. Respectfully Submitted, DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTI?. 1'.C. ~„ C~ *.y ~ 7f~~- Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Vaughn K. Schultz, Esquire Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Telephone: (412) 281-7272 Fax: (412) 392-5367 Christine L. Line, Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA l 7011-2223 (717)731-4800 Attorney for Defendant PPU Industries. Inc Igo. 2012-2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Christopher Stofko, Esquire, hereby certify th t true and correct copies of the foregoing Answer and New Matter have been served this __ day of October, 2012. by I_~'.S. first-class mail, postage pre-paid, to counsel of record listed below: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire REIFF & BILY 1 125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Counsel for Pluintiff~ DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCO~'E, P.C. By ~ - -~~ ~~~~ Christopher Stofko, Esquire Attorneys for PPG Industries. I~~~c. 12 VERIFICATION 1. DIANA L. REED, being duly swor?~, state that I am Senior Counsel, Product Liability and Commercial Litigation, PPG Industries, Inc. and am authorised to make this verification fr~r and <~n behalf of PPG Industries, Inc. I have Dead "YPG Industries Inc.'s r1ns~.~~er and New 'Matter t~~ Plaintiff's Complaint" ("PPG Answer'') and am familiar with the con?:ent~ of that document. The PPG Answer was prepared with the assistance and advice of emplC~yees oI; and counsel for, PPG Industries, Inc., upon whose assistance and advice 1 !•elicd. "1'he 1'YC; Answer, subject to inadvertent or undiscovered error, is based can and therefore neccssarilti ]i~1~itl:d by the records and information still in existence, Presently recollc;eted and thus far disco~,~erra, in the course ol~~ the preparation of the PPG Answer. Subject to these limitations, the PPG Ans~>v~er is true t~~ the Lest of my knowledge, infol7nation and belief. This statement and verification are?nade subject to the penalties of 18 P~LC,~.A ~~ 490d reiatil;~ to l::ns~a~orn talsifrcation to authorities, ~~~hich provides that if I make l:.no~~.~in~.ly false statements, f may be subject to criminal penalties, PPG INUGSTRIE:S, II~~C. ;, ,~- __ DANA I,. R1~ED Senior Cour,s~~l SWOR~~ TC~~ and subse?ibed before me this .; j ``~ day of~ ''~L_~~`~- --- ~ ~0I2. ..* , ~ . i ,t 3 ' ,,; NOTARY' Pl,BL1C C:t)MMflNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVAP~lt; Notarlal5eai ! Susan U. HaM~, Notary F'hbiic y Ctty or P1tt5burgn, AlVegileny County ! M Commisslon Ex ices Ma 1 201a ~ Y ~ Y -__..._, MEMBER, PENNSYLVANIA ASSOC?A7IC~N Op Nf)"f4RIF5 THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Identification No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) _~,. JEFFREY QUINN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY Plaintiff, vs. No. 2012-2015 PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER 43. The averments contained in paragraph 43 constitute an incorporation paragraph to which no response is required. 44. The averments contained in paragraph 44 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 45. The averments contained in paragraph 45 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further answer, Plaintiff objects to, and therefore cannot respond to, the Defendant's allegation regarding "state of the art," and this specific averment is further denied. 46. The averments contained in paragraph 46 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 47. The averments contained in paragraph 47 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 48. The averments contained in paragraph 48 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 49. The averments contained in paragraph 49 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of even further answer, to the extent that paragraph 49 raises a factual defense, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. S0. The averments contained in paragraph 50 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of even further answer, to the extent that paragraph 50 raises a factual defense, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 51. The averments contained in paragraph 51 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and. generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of even further answer, to the extent that paragraph 51 raises a factual defense, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 52. The averments contained in paragraph 52 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 53. The averments contained in paragraph 53 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 54. The averments contained in paragraph 54 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 55. The averments contained in paragraph 55 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 56. The averments contained in paragraph 56 are denied as conclusions of law to which. no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 57. The averments contained in paragraph 57 are denied as conclusions of law to which. no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 58. The averments contained in paragraph 58 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 59. The averments contained in paragraph 59 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further answer, the Defendant's pleading in this regard is completely inapposite to on point United States Supreme Court opinions, and Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinions. 60. The averments contained in paragraph 60 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further answer, the Defendant's pleading in this regard is completely inapposite to on point United States Supreme Court opinions, and Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinions. 61. The averments contained in paragraph 61 are denied as stated. By way of further answer, these averments constitute a conclusion of law to which no response is required. By way of even further answer, the Plaintiff's Complaint has clearly averred that PPG's conduct was clearly in reckless disregard of the Plaintiff s health, safety and welfare, and as a result, PPG can be held liable for punitive damages. 62. The averments contained in paragraph 62 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of even further answer, this averment fails to define the Plaintiff s alleged idiosyncrasies, and as a result, this averment is incapable of being responded to on these grounds. Bay way of even further answer, Plaintiff objects to the term idiosyncrasies and/or that the Plaintiff, in fact had any. For all of these reasons, these averments are denied. 63. The averments contained in paragraph 63 are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. Furthermore, without defining the Plaintiff s alleged preexisting conditions, the Plaintiff cannot provide any further denial. 64. The averments contained in paragraph 64 are denied as a conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent that a response may be required, these averments are specifically and generally denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 65. The averments contained in paragraph 65 are denied as stated, and Plaintiff raises and preserves a motion to strike. Affirmative defenses may not be so preserved under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, and this averment is denied. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC DION G. RASSIAS Attorney I.D. No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) REIFF & BILY BY: /s/Jeffrev M. Rei JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D. No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: November 5, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dion G. Rassias, hereby certify that I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served via first class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon: Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Vaughan K. Schultz, Esquire Dickie, McCamey &Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Christine L. Line, Esquire Dickie, McCamey &Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21S' Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 BY: ~ ~ _ DION G. RASSIAS DATED: November 5, 2012 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff', V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. CIVIL DIVISION 2012-2015 rn No ?' . r r-a -.• Wit, 7n? 2 STIPULATED AGREEMENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER ON CONFIDENTIALITY Plaintiff and Defendant in the above captioned action (each referred to herein separately as a "Party" and collectively as "the Parties"), by their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree, subject to the approval of the Court, to the following limitations on the use and dissemination of documents and other information obtained through discovery in the above- captioned Action (the "Action"): "Discovery Material" means all documents, depositions, pleadings, exhibits, and all other material or information subject to discovery in the Action, including responses to requests for production of documents, answers to interrogatories, responses to requests for admissions, deposition testimony, and expert testimony and reports, as well as testimony adduced at any hearing in this Action, hearing exhibits, matters in evidence, and any other information used or disclosed at any hearing, furnished, directly or indirectly, by or on behalf of any party, in connection with this Action. 2. Each Party may designate as confidential any Discovery Material produced or disclosed by it that the designating Party in good faith believes contains (i) confidential personal information; (ii) confidential business information; (iii) trade secrets; or (iv) sensitive proprietary, commercial, financial, or customer information (referred to herein collectively as "Confidential Information"). The Parties shall designate Discovery Material as confidential only to the extent reasonably necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the Confidential Information. The Discovery Material subject to restricted use and disclosure under this Stipulated Agreement and Order on Confidentiality (the "Agreement and Order") shall bear the word "CONFIDENTIAL" on each page. Confidential Information other than documents that is disclosed pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and Order shall be conspicuously identified as Confidential Information in an appropriate manner. Discovery Material so designated shall be used solely in connection with the prosecution or defense of this Action consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and Order. 3. Any Party may designate any part or all of any deposition, or any part or all of any deposition exhibit, as Confidential Information by advising the reporter and the other Parties of such fact during the deposition or up until fourteen (14) days after the deposition transcript is available. Any deposition transcript or portion thereof that is so designated, as well as the substance of such testimony, shall be treated as Confidential Information to the same extent as documents and other information disclosed during discovery. 4. Disclosure by the receiving Party of Confidential Information shall be limited to: (a) The Parties to this Action, their attorneys in fact, their legal successors and their counsel of record including without limitation attorneys, paralegals, and stenographic and clerical employees in their respective law firms; the personnel supplied by any commercial photocopying, data storage or evidence presentation firms with whom such attorneys work in connection with the Action; and stenographic employees and court reporters recording and transcribing testimony relating to the Action; (b) Both in-house and outside counsel employed by any Party to assist in the Action, including without limitation the attorneys, paralegals, and stenographic and clerical employees in 2 the respective law firms of such outside counsel; the personnel supplied by any commercial photocopying, data storage or evidence presentation firms with whom such attorneys work in connection with the Action; and stenographic employees and court reporters recording and transcribing testimony relating to the Action; (c) Experts and consultants (including independent experts) who are employed, retained, or otherwise consulted by counsel or a Party for the purpose of assisting in, or consulting with respect to, the preparation and trial of the Action; provided that: (1) access to Confidential Information by experts and consultants shall be limited to documents that the experts or consultants reasonably need to review in their roles as experts or consultants with respect to this Action; and (ii) such person has read this Agreement and Order and agrees to be bound by its germs in accordance with Paragraph 9 hereof before viewing any such Confidential Information and otherwise complies with this Agreement and Order. (d) The Court and any members of its staff to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose Confidential Information for the purpose of assisting the Court in this Action; (e) Witnesses who appear at any deposition, hearing or trial in this Action, provided that counsel making such disclosure shall first provide a copy of the terms of this Agreement and Order to each witness and shall: (i) obtain the witness' agreement to be bound by its terms in accordance with Paragraph 9 of this Agreement and Order; or (ii) obtain an order from this Court permitting disclosure in the absence of such witness' agreement; (f) The author and any prior recipients of the Confidential Information, except that disclosure to prior recipients under this subparagraph shall not be permitted if the authority under which those recipients originally obtained the Confidential Information is expired or revoked; (g) A Party's outside or in-house auditors, provided that: (i) access to Confidential Information by such auditors, shall be limited to documents that the auditors reasonably need to review to fulfill their responsibilities; and (ii) such persons have read this Agreement and Order and agree to be bound by its terms in accordance with Paragraph 9 hereof before viewing any such Confidential Information and otherwise comply with this Agreement and Order; and (h) Any mediator retained by the Parties or appointed by the Court in connection with this Action, and employees of such mediator who are assisting in the conduct of the mediation. With respect to all of the above categories, disclosure shall be limited to individuals with a legitimate need to know, use or handle the information in connection with the prosecution, defense or supervision of the litigation of the Action. 5. Any Party may designate as "CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY" Discovery Material that contains proprietary, marketing, sensitive personal, medical, financial or other strategic information that the Party providing the information believes, in good faith, will be reasonably expected to cause harm to the designating Party by its mere disclosure to the non- designating Party (referred to herein collectively or individually as "Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only"). Documents subject to restricted use and disclosure as Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only shall bear the words "CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY" on each page; other information designated "Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only" shall be conspicuously identified as such in an appropriate manner. Discovery Material so designated shall be used solely in connection with the prosecution or defense of this Action, consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and Order. 6. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, documents and other information designated "Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only" shall be treated as a subset of 4 Confidential Information and shall be subject to all the other terms and conditions of this Agreement and Order related to the designation, use and treatment of Confidential Information. Disclosure by the receiving Party of Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only shall be limited to: (a) Counsel of record, and both in-house and outside counsel employed by any Party to assist in the Action, including without limitation the attorneys, paralegals, and stenographic and clerical employees in the respective law firms of such outside counsel; the personnel supplied by any commercial photocopying, data storage or evidence presentation firms with whom such attorneys work in connection with the Action; and stenographic employees and court reporters recording and transcribing testimony relating to the Action; (b) Experts and consultants (including independent experts) who are employed, retained, or otherwise consulted by counsel for the purpose of assisting in, or consulting with respect to, the preparation and trial of the Action; provided that: (1) access to Confidential Information- Attorneys' Eyes Only by experts and consultants shall be limited to documents that the experts or consultants reasonably need to review in their roles as experts or consultants with respect to this Action; and (ii) such person has read this Agreement and Order and agrees to be bound by its terms in accordance with Paragraph 9 hereof before viewing any such Confidential Information- Attorneys' Eyes Only and otherwise complies with this Agreement and Order; 5 (c) The Court and any members of its staff to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only for the purpose of assisting the Court in this Action; (d) Witnesses who appear at any deposition, hearing or trial in this Action, provided that (i) counsel making such disclosure shall first provide a copy of the terms of this Agreement and Order to each witness and either obtain the witness' agreement to be bound by its terms in accordance with Paragraph 9 of this Agreement and Order, or obtain an order from this Court permitting disclosure in the absence of such witness' agreement; (e) A Party's outside or in-house auditors, provided that: (i) access to Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only by such auditors shall be limited to documents that the auditors reasonably need to review to fulfill their responsibilities; and (ii) such persons have read this Agreement and Order and agree to be bound by its terms in accordance with Paragraph 9 hereof before viewing any such Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only and otherwise comply with this Agreement and Order; and (f) Any mediator retained by the Parties or appointed by the Court in connection with this Action, and employees of such mediator who are assisting in the conduct of the mediation. With respect to all of the above categories, disclosure shall be limited to individuals with a legitimate need to know, use or handle the information in connection with the prosecution, defense or supervision of the litigation of the Action. 6 7. The restrictions and obligations set forth in this Agreement and Order relating to Confidential Information shall not apply to any information that: (1) is already public knowledge; (ii) has become public knowledge other than as a result of disclosure by the receiving Party; or (iii) the receiving Party legitimately possesses independent of the producing Party. Nothing in this Agreement and Order shall be construed as restricting or limiting the use, dissemination or disposition by a Party of its own Confidential Information. 8. The persons identified in Paragraphs 4 and 6 shall be prohibited from using any Confidential Information in any way outside the scope of litigating this Action or from disclosing Confidential Information to any other person or entity, except as otherwise agreed upon in writing by the producing Party; or except as required by law or as permitted by subsequent order of the Court. 9. Any person to whom Confidential Information is disclosed (1) shall be provided a copy of this Agreement and Order prior to disclosure of the Confidential Information; (ii) shall be directed not to reveal the contents of the Confidential Information for any purpose other than as permitted in this Agreement and Order, as required by law, or as permitted by a subsequent order of the Court; and (iii) shall execute a Consent to Stipulated Agreement and Order on Confidentiality attached hereto as Exhibit A. By such execution, the person to whom Confidential Information is disclosed shall agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement and Order and to subject himself/herself to the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania solely for the enforcement of this Agreement and Order prior to being permitted to review documents. In the event that such witness refuses to sign the Consent to Stipulated Agreement and Order on Confidentiality, the Parties agree to confer to consider alternative precautions to insure that prohibited disclosure does not occur. 7 10. Should any Confidential Information be disclosed, inadvertently or otherwise,, by the receiving Party to any person or party not authorized under this Agreement and Order to receive such Confidential Information, the recipient of such information shall automatically be bound by this Agreement and Order to the maximum extent possible. In such case, the Party making such unauthorized disclosure shall promptly: (1) use that Party's best efforts to obtain the return of any such Confidential Information and/or any copies thereof; (ii) notify the producing Party of the unauthorized disclosure and the identity of the unauthorized recipient; (iii) provide the unauthorized recipient with a copy of this Agreement and Order and use that Party's best efforts to have the unauthorized recipient execute a copy of the Consent in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and serve the same on the producing Party; and (iv) take any other actions reasonably necessary to protect the confidentiality of the information disclosed. 11. The use of Confidential Information for any purpose other than the discovery, trial preparation, trial and appeal of the Action is prohibited, except as required by law or as authorized by subsequent order of the Court. In the event that a Party is served with a subpoena seeking the production of Confidential Information, the Party receiving the subpoena shall, prior to producing such Confidential Information: (i) provide prompt written notice of the subpoena to the Party that produced such Confidential Information, and (ii) afford the Party that produced such Confidential Information a reasonable period of time, not less than seven (7) business days after the notice required hereunder is received, to object to the production of the Confidential Information. 12. The acceptance of Confidential Information by either Party shall not constitute an admission or concession or permit an inference that the Confidential Information is, in fact, confidential. A Party's failure to challenge the propriety of a confidential designation at the time 8 such designation is made shall not preclude a subsequent challenge thereto. In the event that any Party disagrees at any stage of these proceedings with the designation of any information as confidential, the Parties shall try first to resolve such dispute in good faith on an informal basis. If the dispute cannot be resolved, the Party challenging the confidentiality designation must move the Court to remove such designation. Any material designated as Confidential Information shall remain subject to the terms of this Agreement and Order during the pendency of any such challenge. In the: event that a party challenges the designation of Discovery Materials as Confidential or Confidential - Attorneys Eyes Only, the designating party shall have the burden of persuasion that the designation was proper under the terms of this Stipulation. This Agreement and Order shall be without prejudice to any Party's right to bring before the Court at any time the question of whether any particular information is or is not confidential. 13. Inadvertent production of any information, document or thing without it being designated confidential shall not itself be deemed a waiver of any claim of confidentiality as to such information, document or thing, and the same may thereafter be designated as confidential. A Party may not be held in violation of this Agreement and Order for the distribution of documents or information prior to the designation of the documents or information as confidential. 14. In the event that counsel for any Party determines to file with this Court any Confidential Information or any documents containing or making reference to such Confidential Information, such documents, or the portions of them that contain Confidential Information, shall be filed only in a sealed envelope on which the case caption and a statement substantially in the following form shall be endorsed: CONFIDENTIAL: 9 This envelope contains documents that are subject to a Stipulated Agreement and Order on Confidentiality, approved as an order of Court, governing the use of confidential documents and information. This envelope is not to be opened until further order of Court. All such material so filed shall be maintained by the Prothonotary's Office separate from the public records in this Action and shall be released only upon further order of the Court. The Prothonotary"s Office, however, may release such materials to Court personnel and to counsel of record for the Parties without. further order. 15. When Confidential Information is presented or discussed during any deposition or at any argument, hearing or trial, counsel for the Party designating the Confidential Information as such shall have the right to exclude from such deposition or, if permitted by the Court, argument, hearing or trial, during such time as the Confidential Information at issue is subject to presentation or discussion, any person who is not authorized by this Agreement and Order to receive Confidential Information. 16. All copies of Discovery Material containing Confidential Information shall be returned to the producing Party or destroyed (or, to the extent stored electronically, permanently deleted) by the receiving Party at the termination of this Action, except that counsel of record for the Parties in the Action may each retain one copy of (i) deposition exhibits, (ii) pleadings, court exhibits, documents and other materials submitted to the Court, (iii) deposition transcripts and transcripts of court proceedings, and (iv) Confidential Information to the extent that it includes or reflects an attorney's work product. Such material shall continue to be treated as Confidential Information under this Agreement and Order and shall be stored in boxes maintained only by or under the control of counsel bearing the following legend: CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. THIS BOX CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL DISCOVERY MATERIAL SUBJECT TO A 10 STIPULATED AGREEMENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER ON CONFIDENTIALITY, AND IS NOT TO BE OPENED NOR ITS CONTENTS DISPLAYED EXCEPT BY COUNSEL OF RECORD. The return or destruction of Discovery Material containing Confidential Information shall be completed no later than sixty (60) days after the earlier of the resolution of the case or expiration of the time limit for final appeal. A Party providing Discovery Material to an expert or other person shall likewise insure that all copies of Discovery Material containing Confidential Information in the possession of such expert or other person are destroyed no later than sixty (60) days after the earlier of the resolution of the case or expiration of the time limit for final appeal. Upon request. counsel for either receiving Party shall execute a certification of compliance with this paragraph, including by the Party, its counsel and any individuals or entities to whom it disclosed Confidential Information. IT If a third party provides discovery to any Party in connection with this Action, such third party may adopt the terms of this Agreement and Order with regard to the production of Confidential Information by executing and filing with the Court a Notice of Election in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event of such election, the provisions of this Agreement and Order shall apply to Confidential Information produced by a third party as if such discovery were being provided by a Party, and the third party shall have the same rights and obligations under this Agreement and Order as held by the Parties to this Action with respect to its production of documents and information. Nothing in this paragraph shall entitle any such third party to receive or review Confidential Information produced by any of the Parties. 18. Notwithstanding anything else contained herein, nothing in this Agreement and Order shall obligate either Party to produce or disclose any documents or information, nor shall this Agreement and Order constitute a waiver by either Party of the right to withhold from 11 production or disclosure in this Action or in any other context, documents or information as to which such Party asserts a privilege or protection from disclosure. Additionally, nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of either Party's right to: (a) object to any discovery request on an.y ground; (b) seek an order compelling discovery with respect to any discovery request; or (c) object to the admission of any evidence on any ground. However, in the event that either Party seeks to withhold any documents or information from production or disclosure on the basis of confidentiality, that Party shall, at least ten (10) days prior to the date for such production or disclosure, seek such further protective orders or modifications of this Agreement and Order as the Party deems necessary to protect the confidentiality of the documents or information to be produced or disclosed. Finally, nothing contained herein shall be deemed to otherwise restrict: access to publicly available information in this proceeding unless so ordered by the Court. 19. The inadvertent production of any privileged document or information will not, solely by virtue of such inadvertent production, be deemed a waiver or impairment of any claim of privilege, including but not limited to the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine, concerning such document or information, any unproduced document or information, or the subject matter of the produced document or information. The Party asserting inadvertent production shall bear the burden of demonstrating that such production was inadvertent. The document or information claimed to be produced inadvertently must be declared to be an inadvertent production within five (5) business days of the producing Party learning of the inadvertent production. Inadvertent production of privileged documents and information may include the mistaken production of privileged documents or information that has been reviewed by the disclosing Party's attorneys prior to production. 20. This Agreement and Order shall survive the termination of the Action. 12 Dated: November30, 2012 Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CH'?I`?LC,,OTTE, PC By: C Christopher D. Stofk.o, Esquire Vaughn K. Schultz, Esquire Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3115 Telephone: (412) 281-7272 Christine L. Line, Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 Telephone: (717) 731-4800 C Respectfully sub i ed, l i ? Dion G. assias, Esquire ?u a-F4 l Vs. ? / Wes- ?C?7 1125 Walnut Street / Philadelphia, PA 19107 Telephone: (215) 946-2000 Counsel to Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. APPROVED and ORDERED this day of , 2012. The Honorable hristylee L. Peck: "Ic 13 1545386.doc DICKIE,MCCAMEY&CHILCOTE,P.C. 1110 Nt)TA BY:Christopher D.Stofko,Esquire ATTORNEY FOR:DEFENDANT ATTORNEY I.D.NO.81979 7013 MAR 20 AM 11-* '58 PPG INDUSTRIES,INC., BY:Christine L.Line,Esquire 'D CCUNTY ATTORNEY I.D.NO.932S7 MSERLAS Plaza 21,Suite 302 PENNSYLVANIA 42S North 21st Street Camp Hill,PA 17011 717-731-4800(Tele) 888-811-7144 Fax JEFFREY QUINN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO.2012-2015 CIVIL V. CIVIL ACTION-LAW PPG INDUSTRIES,INC., Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO THE PROTHONOTARY: AND NOW, February 28, 2013, comes Defendant, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. by and through their counsel, Dickie, McCamey& Chilcote, P.C. and files the within DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL as follows: 1. On March 14, 2013, Defendant served,via email and first class mail,their full responses to PlaintifFs Second Request for Production of Documents. 2. Therefore, Plaintiffs Motion should be dismissed as moot. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., respectfully requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Discovery Responses as moot. Respectfully Submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY&CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: March 18. 2013 By. Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 81979 Christine L. Line, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 93257 Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 717-731-4800 Attorney for Defendants, PPG INDUSTRIES, INC, 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, March 18, 2013, I, Christine L. Line, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid,at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: By First-Class Mail: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire REIFF&BILY TRIAL LAWYERS The Beasley Building 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (Counsel for Plaintiff) Christine L. Line, Esquire THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ``' P, fir" t BY: Dion G. Rassias,Esquire Z�l,31%2Q ' �rz; Identification No.: 49724 ,� 481Or 1125 Walnut Street � ' ' x,11 C} c�8 (215)592-1000 A 19107-4997 SYt VA N/A �r`'' (215)592-8360 (Facsimile) JEFFREY QUINN : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY Plaintiff, VS. . No.2012-2015 PPG INDUSTRIES,INC. : Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly withdraw Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Second Request for Production of Documents filed on February 22, 2013 in the above-captioned matter. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: &kQ- DIGN G. RAS§1AS Attorney I.D.No.: 49724 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) REIFF& BILY BY: /s/JeffrevM. Reiff JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D.No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: March 19, 2013 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dion G. Rassias, hereby certify that I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served via email and first class United States mail,postage prepaid, upon: Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Dickie, McCamey&Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Christine L. Line,Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21St Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 BY: DION G. RAS IAS DATED: March 19, 2013 JEFFREY QUINN, IN THE COURT OF"CgMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, NO. 2012-2015 CIVIL V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW,this�E` day of 2013,it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Dbefendant, and Defendant's Response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED ASMOOT BY THE COURT: Ix J 3 w Cn 1 CJ 'L7 Tc w_r, �/l t FILED-OFFICE OF THE PROTHONOTARY 2013 APR I I AM I I: 50 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Plaintiff, No. 12-2015 V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE Filed on behalf of Defendant, PPG Industries, Defendant. Inc. Counsel of record for this party: L. John Argento, Esq. Pa. I.D. #39342 Robert J. Grimm, Esq. Pa. I.D. #55381 S WARTZ CAMPBELL LLC Firm#765 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412)232-9800 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED L. JOHN ARGENTO, ESQ. ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PPG PA. I.D. #39342 INDUSTRIES, INC. ROBERT J. GRIMM, ESQ. PA. I.D. #55381 S WARTZ CAMPBELL LLC FIRM#765 4750 U.S. STEEL TOWER 600 GRANT STREET PITTSBURGH, PA 15219 (412) 232-9800 JEFFREY QUINN, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff, PENNSYLVANIA V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., CIVIL ACTION-LAW NO.: 12-2015 Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Filed on behalf of PPG Industries, Inc., PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE TO: PROTHONOTARY Kindly enter our Appearance on behalf of Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc., in the above- captioned matter. Respectfully submitted: S WARTZ CAMPBELL LLC BY. nJ. Grni squire Esquire endant, PPG Industries, Inc. f CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, L. John Argento, Esquire, hereby certify that true and correct copies of the foregoing Praecipe for Appearance have been served this 9th day of April, 2013, by U.S. first-class mail, postage prepaid, to: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire The Beasley Firm, LLC 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Dickie, McCamey& Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Christine L. Line, Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21 It Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 Respectfully submitted: S WARTZ CAMPBELL LLC BY: L. John Arge t Esquire Robert J. G , Esquire Attorneys f efendant, PPG Industries, Inc. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY QUINN Vs. NO. 2012-2015 Ci. IE, PPG INDUSTRIES INC CERTIFICATE ;7J PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 4 -'; un As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009 .22 CHRISTINE LINE, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2 . A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3 . No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4 . The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) . Date: 04/04/13 CHRISTINE LINE, ESQUIRE 425 NORTH 21ST ST SUITE 302 PLAZA 21 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 717-731-4800 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) 335-4907 By: Dawn Smith MLR File #: M409613 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY QUINN Vs . PPG INDUSTRIES INC No. 2012-2015 CIVIL TO: DOIN RASSIAS, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena (s) identical to the one (s) attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. I Date: 03/14/13 CHRISTINE LINE, ESQUIRE 425 NORTH 21ST ST SUITE 302 PLAZA 21 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (215) 335-4907 By: Tara Yeager Enc (s) : Copy of subpoena (s) Counsel return card File # : M409613 rnmw)mWRALTr4 OF PENNMVANIA CCU NrY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. Fi le No. ('TVTT, PPG INDUSTRIES INC SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOaj,,ENTS *ZRAqkjS BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 CARLISLE REG MEDICAL CTR, 246 PARKER ST, CARLISLE' PA 17013 TO: A!vT-N. mgpTc-Aj, �2yrnj�n-o:4 ny.PT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents. or things: SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRIODUCTIONRA-A&W-s-s)4940 DISSTOR ST. , PHILA> I PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested b} this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccnpliance, to the party making thi-z request at the address listed above. You have the rignit to seek in advance the reasonablE cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi3 subpoena may seek a court orde;- onmpelling you to ccnply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: (-T4RjqTTNF T-T-E, ESQ ADDRESS: 425 NeRTH 2±ST ST TELEPHONE: CAMP HILL, PA 17011 SUPREME COURT I D 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: M40961,3_-01 Prothonotary/c I erk, Ci v i I Division DATE:. seaI ,-.6f. he Court Deputy (Eff, 71197) ---- - - - ADDEND UM T O S UBPOENA QUINN ` Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: CARLISLE REG MEDICAL CTR ***SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM*** PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for CARLISLE REG MEDICAL CTR CUMBERLAND M409613-01 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE ADDENDUM To: Carlisle Regional Medical Center Any and all copies of medical records regarding Jeffrey Quinn from 1/1/ 1991 to present. Including, but not limited to, all correspondence, medical consultations, medical records, medical exam reports, medical billing and radiology reports. Also including records from the Wound Care Center and the Ambulatory Care Center. COMMDNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC MEnTCAL SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS M-TRTN(3S BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 WEST SHORE HAND & ORTHO, 1000 BENT CREEK BLVD, MECHANICSBURG PA 17050-1 TO: (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or th gs: SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(, '..d;R&,,)4940 DISSTON ST. , PHILA. , You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t,y A. this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccn-pliance, to the party making thiZ request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea,7,onablc cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thir, subpoena rnay seek a court ordei- axTpelling you to coup l with it, TH I S SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOW I NG PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: 495 WnRTT4 21ST ST CAMP 1qitt—, -PA 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT ID #�_- 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE T: M409613-02 ' I Division DATE: Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil 6//-3 Sea l 'of the Court C Deputy (Eff. 7/9T) QUINN " Vs. No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: WEST SHORE HAND & ORTHO ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information -and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for WEST SHORE HAND & ORTHO CUMBERLAND M409613-02 *** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA - C01UNrY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC MEDIC SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR TH I NOS BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 CELTIC HEALTHCARE, 150 SHARBERRY LANE, MARS PA 16046 TO: (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or A OAT ATTACHED ADDENDUM ' 9s: at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS,, ZINC, .4940 DISSTON ST. , PHILA. , PA tAaaress) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested ti� this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onablc- cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi, subpoena may seek a court orde.- crnpe l l i ng you to crnp 1 y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REGOEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 495 NORTH 21 ST ST CAMP Hith, P 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME OOURT ID 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: M409613-03 Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE:_ Seal of the Court Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA QUINN Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: CELTIC HEALTHCARE ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for CELTIC HEALTHCARE CUMBERLAND M409613-03 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA -- -- -- - ---— - OOUt1I'Y OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE D=1 ENTS OR DTH CA NLGS BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 T0: MECHANICSBURG FAM PRACT, 120 SOUTH FILBERT ST, MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or stag : at ------- MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS..,INC_,_ .4940 DISSTON ST. .. PHILA. ; Phi kAuuress) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested! h� this subpoena, together with the certificate of carpliance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonabl,- cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court ordei, dx.rnpe l i i ng you to camp l y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ .42 S NQRTN 21 ST ST th, P 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT I D # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE T: M409613-04 Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE:_ 3 /8 /3 Se&l f the Court Deputy (Eff. 7/97) w'rJ ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA QUINN ' Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: MECHANICSBURG FAM PRACT ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL. BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS: DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO.-­I__ hereby certify_. as_ custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned- have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / •XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for MECHANICSBURG FAM PRACT CUMBERLAND M409613-04 * ** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COMMNW ALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs . Fi le No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC , SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR TH I W3 BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 SHEPHERDSTOWN FAM PRACT, 2140 FISHER RD, MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 TO: (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or��gsA: __ at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(R INC. 4940 DISSTON ST= , PRILAt , PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t.� this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccaTpliance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi; subpoena may seek a court orde;- cxxnpe l l i ng you to comp 1 y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 42-, NORTH 21ST ST 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT ID # 215-3 3 5-3 212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE M409613-05 COURT: Prothonotary/Cl ark, Civil Division DATE: Seal of the Court Deputy (Eff. 7/97) --- - - ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA QUINN Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: SHEPHERDSTOWN FAM PRACT ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for SHEPHERDSTOWN FAM PRACT CUMBERLAND M409613-05 ** * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CXXJNry OF CUJrMERLAND QUINN Vs . File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR D H I NG BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 PENN STATE HERSHEY MED, 500 UNIVERSITY DR, HERSHEY PA 17033 TO: ATTN: MEDICAL RECORDS DEPT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents orl� SjrgsA at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTION.%,. ,] )4940 DISSTON ST. , PHILA. , PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested h� this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccmipliance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its sere;ce, the party serving •thi: iubpoena may seek a court orde.- cxm pe I l i ng you to carp l y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 425 NORTH 21 ST ST 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT ID 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: M409613-06, ' Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE: 3 / 3 Seal of the Court Deputy (Eff. 7/97) T ADDENDUM T-6--S UBPOENA QUINN' Vs. No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: PENN STATE HERSHEY MED ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date AutHo-rizea signature for PENN STATE HERSHEY MED CUMBERLAND M409613-06 * ** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COMCNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA_.-- - .--- _--_--— _------ -- - -- - - - - -- - - - -- — COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC , MEDICAL SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR T-H 1 NQS BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 CUMBERLAND GOODWILL FIRE, 519 SOUTH HANOVER ST, CARLISLE PA 17103 TO: (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following docunents or Sg A at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(-;A TNC a o a n DIg0"' T ST '=A. , PA d0ress)_- _- , You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested h� this subpoena, together with the certificate of camiiance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onablE cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this, subpoena may seek a court orde:- cxxTpelling you to camp1y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 42!;. NORTH 21 ST ST CAMP Mitt, P 17011 TELEPHONE: : 215-335-3212 SUPREtVE COURT I D # ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: M409613-07 7 J� -4/19/43 Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE seal of the Cour=t Deputy (Eff. 7/97) _-_-_- A-DDEIVD UNI TO S UBPOENA QUINN ` Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: CUMBERLAND GOODWILL FIRE ANY/ALL COPIES OF MEDICAL RECORDS REGARDING JEFFREY QUINN FROM 1/1/1991 TO THE PRESENT. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL CORRESPONDENCE, MEDICAL CONSULTATIONS, MEDICAL RECORDS, MEDICAL EXAM REPORTS, MEDICAL BILLING, AND RADIOLOGY REPORTS . PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF FOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for CUMBERLAND GOODWILL FIRE CUMBERLAND M409613-07 ** * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE - COPWNWEALTH OF- PENZMVANIA- COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC MEDTCAT, BILLING REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS W-'MTWFS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 ROXBURY TREATMENT CENTER, 601 ROXBURY RD, SHIPPENSBURG PA 17257 TO: (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: EE TTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICA L LEGAL REPROD UCTION�'AdWgs�940 DISSTON ST. , PHILA. , -iA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documnts or produce things requested by A. this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccn-pliance, to the party making thi-r request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea7,onablE cost of preoaring the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thi3 subpoena may seek a court orde;- cxmPelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: 425 NORTH 21ST ST f-Itt, -PA 17011 kol-UVILI ri-L TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT I D 215-3 3 5-3 212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE COURT: M409613-08 Protho DATE: 'Rhahs ary/Clerk, Civil Divisi---n Seal 6f the Court -15e. �9,z'jp Deputy (Eff.- 7'/97) ADDENDUM To: Roxbury Treatment Center Any and all copies of medical records regarding Jeffrey Quinn from 1/1/ 1991 to present. Including, but not limited to, all correspondence, medical consultations, medical records, medical exam reports, drug and/or substance abuse records, mental health and/or psychiatric records, medical billing and radiology reports. CobMNWFALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA - -- — - ---- COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND QUINN Vs . File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC , SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, 503 NORTH 21ST STREET, CAMP HILL PA 17011 TO: ATTN: MEDICAL RECORDS DEPT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or-th 'SEE'sA: at --- MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIC)"(1AAPP9 s)4940 DISSTON ST z ; PHILA. ; PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the 6ocunents or produce things requester4 this subpoena, together with the certificate of campiiance, to the party making thi_ request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onablr cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the docunents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court orde;- cxm pe l l i ng you to comp 1 y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: _ 495 NORTH 21 T ST 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREW COURT ID 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY ThE COURT: M409613--09° Proth—rotary/Clerk, Civil Division DATE= 3 h8h2 , Sea! of the Court Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA QUINN Vs. No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL ***SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM*** PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS: DATE OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN COMPLETE AND RETURN I RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE.- I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : RECORDS PATIENT BILLING X-RAYS RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL CUMBERLAND M409613-09 SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE ADDENDUM To: Holy Spirit Hospital Any and all copies of medical records regarding Jeffrey Quinn from 1/1/ 1991 to present. Including, but not limited to, all correspondence, medical consultations, medical records, medical exam reports, drug and/or substance abuse records, mental health and/or psychiatric records, medical billing and radiology reports. COMMNWEALTH OF,PENNSYLVANIA . COUNTY OF-CUbMERLAND QUINN Vs. File No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISOOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 SEATONCORP, 860 WEST EVERGREEN AVE, CHICAGO IL 60642 TO: ATTN: HUMAN RESOURCE (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or S,V.19%TTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTION 4040 nTSSmn*,T Sm. , PHILA. , PA S(%dWKeF9s You mnay deliver or ma I legible copies of the documents or produce things requested �� this subpoena, together with the certificate of caTpliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reaaonablc cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving thir, subpoena may seek a court ordei- cxmpel l ing you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: CHRISTINE LINE, ESQ ADDRESS: 42R MORT14 21ST ST CAMP B13i PA 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT I D # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT BY THE CST M409613-10 Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil D ,vls,10n DATE: —�� !-I� ert al o L Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA QUINN Vs . No. 2012-2015 CIVIL PPG INDUSTRIES INC CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: SEATONCORP ***SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM*** PERTAINING TO: NAME: JEFFREY QUINN ADDRESS : DATE. OF BIRTH: 03/22/80 SSAN: XXXXX1398 CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO: I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX) : ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature for SEATONCORP CUMBERLAND M409613-10 * ** SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE ADDENDUM To: SeatonCorp Any and all employment records, pertaining to Jeffrey Quinn, including but not limited to, personnel files, employment applications, earnings, ledger sheets, time cards, reviews, attendance sheets, medical records & reports, pre-employment physicals, workmen's compensation claims, W-2 withholding forms, and any other information THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Andrew M. Carobus, Esquire PA Identification I.D. Nos.: 49724/202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) Ti ' C)'" 20 14 APR bf- / 6 CUMEERL /A ND COUN PEN YL \/4 TY Fil Attorneys for Plaintiff JEFFREY QUINN : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Defendant. : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : No. 2012-2015 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. AND NOW, Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby requests this Honorable Court to compel Defendant PPG Industries, Inc. to produce its Corporate Designee(s) for deposition, and in support thereof states and avers as follows: 1. This case involves injuries suffered by Plaintiff while working for Seaton Corporation at Defendant's manufacturing plant. 2. On July 12, 2011, Plaintiff was severely injured while working in the tempering department of Defendant's manufacturing plant. Plaintiff was using a roll cart to transport large pieces of glass when the cart malfunctioned causing Plaintiff to be trapped under the cart and its enormous load of glass for approximately five (5) minutes. Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 3. Plaintiff suffered numerous bilateral calcaneus fractures, lacerations and trauma to his knee and legs and other serious injuries as a result of the cart malfunction. In fact, Plaintiff's foot was nearly severed as a result of the guillotine -like nature of the injury. Plaintiffs serious injuries have caused his disability from work and Plaintiff has further endured extensive and complicated medical treatment and therapy. 4. Plaintiff filed a civil action Complaint on March 29, 2012. 5. On March 6, 2014, Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition via First Class mail unilaterally scheduling the deposition of the Corporate Designee of Defendant for Wednesday, April 2, 2014, at 1:0o p.m. at the law offices of Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., Plaza 21, Suite 302, 425 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania. See Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 6. On March 14, 2014, Defendant responded to Plaintiffs Notice of Deposition by electronic mail and notified Plaintiff that counsel for Defendant would not be available for the deposition date scheduled by Plaintiff. See Exhibit "B," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 7. Per request, Plaintiff asked counsel for Defendant to provide alternative dates so that Plaintiff may reschedule the deposition for a date, time and location suitable for all parties. See Exhibit "C," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 8. On March 20, 2014, having not received a response to his electronic mail correspondence, Plaintiff sent a letter to counsel for Defendant via First Class mail requesting dates that would be convenient for counsel so that Plaintiff could properly Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. schedule the intended deposition. See Exhibit "D," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 9. On April 2, 2014, having not received a response to the letter, Plaintiff requested that counsel for Defendant provide dates for scheduling the deposition or Plaintiff would resort to motion practice. See Exhibit "E," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 10. As of the filing of this motion, Plaintiff has not received notice from counsel for Defendant providing possible dates, times and locations for the requested deposition. The deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant goes to the very nature of the claims filed by Plaintiff and remains highly relevant and probative to the issues as plead in Plaintiffs complaint. 12. Plaintiff will be severely prejudiced by Defendant's failure to participate fully in discovery and such failure substantially impairs Plaintiffs ability to prepare for trial in this matter. 13. Under Pa.R.Civ.P. 4019, this Court is empowered to enter an Order imposing sanctions upon a party who does not cooperate and participate in good faith in the discovery process, including, but not limited to, depositions. 14. Plaintiff is entitled to the requested discovery as it remains relevant, material and necessary and Plaintiff will be severely prejudiced if the deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant is not immediately ordered. 15. Plaintiff requests an Order compelling Defendant to produce its Corporate Designee(s) for deposition. Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 16. A judge has not ruled on any prior motion to compel the deposition of a party in this matter. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order granting Plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc. within twenty (20) days of the date of said order, without objection, and that Defendant shall otherwise suffer sanctions imposed by this Court. Respectfully submitted, THE BEASLEY FIRM BY JIG MURIA" D'iON G. RA 147S DREW M. CAROBUS PA Attorney I.D. Nos.: 49724/202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592 -836o (facsimile) REIFF & BILY BY: /s/ Jeffrey M. Reiff JEFFREY M. REIFF Attorney I.D. No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246 -9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: April 15, 2014 Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Andrew M. Carobus, hereby certify that I have caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following entities: Christopher D. Stofko, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 L. John Argento, Esq. Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Christine L. Line, Esq. Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 BY: DATED: April 15, 2014 Ilitralitt _ DREW M. OBUS Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Exhibit "A" THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW ANDREW M. CAROBUS, ESQUIRE ANDRE%. CAROBUSQBEASLEYFIRM. COM 215.931.2626 ADMI 1 1 ED TO PRACTICE: PENNSYLVANIA NEW JERSEY VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL Christopher D. Stofko, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Christine L. Line, Esq. Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21 Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 a. ,;; , :Illi 111 :1111 .1111 i16, asm �Iltlii� 1i) ° � Iis THE BEASLEY BUILDING 1125 WALNUT STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107.4997 W W W.BEASLEYFIRM.COM 6 March 2014 L. John Argento, Esq. Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Re: Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. Cumberland County CCP, No. 2012 -2015 Dear Counsel: NEW JERSEY OFFICE 1949 BERLIN ROAD SUITE 100 CHERRY HILL, NJ 08003 856.354.0755 FAX: 856.673.0060 Enclosed please find a Notice of Deposition scheduling the deposition of The Corporate Designee of PPG Industries, Inc. for Wednesday, April 2, 2014, at 1:00 p.m. at the law offices of Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., Plaza 21, Suite 302, 425 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania. Please be advised that I have secured a court reporter for this matter. Please let me know within the next ten (10) days in writing whether you oppose the deposition as scheduled. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you for your anticipated courtesy and cooperation. IN LOVING MEMORY: JAMES E. BEASLEY, SR. 1926 -2004 Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. 6 March 2014 Page 2 Very truly yours, THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ANDREW M. CAROBUS, ESQUIRE AMC /bc Enclosure THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Andrew M. Carobus, Esquire PA Attorney I.D. Nos.: 49724/202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 -4997 (215) 592 -1000 (215) 592 -8360 (Facsimile) JEFFREY QUINN Plaintiff, vs. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Defendant. : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY • • • : No.2012 -2015 • • : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED TO: L. John Argento, Esquire Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 -5402 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 4017.1 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys, will take the deposition of THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE OF PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. before a person duly authorized to administer oaths at Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., Plaza 21, Suite 302, 425 North 21st Street, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 on Wednesday, April 2, 2014, commencing at 1:00 p.m. and continuing from day to day until completed. Plaintiff requests that PPG Industries, Inc. identify, designate and produce a corporate designee authorized to testify on behalf of the Defendant and with knowledge to fully discuss the issues, and provide relevant documents, surrounding: 1. Plaintiff Jeffrey Quinn's status as an employee of Seaton Corp. and not an employee of PPG Industries, Inc.; 2. Any documents which relate to or concern Plaintiff's employment status; 3. Any contracts, agreements and/or writings between PPG Industries, Inc. and Seaton Corp. in effect on July 12, 2011; 4. The Purchase Order covering the term October 10, 2011 to October 9, 2012 with Staff Management; 5. The Accident Report relating to the events leading up to Plaintiffs injury; 6. Any individuals who were part of the "on site management team" at PPG Industries, Inc.'s facility on July 12, 2011; 7. Any reports made by PPG Industries, Inc. to Seaton Corp. of any observed Health and Safety Program violations as contemplated by 4.3.4 of the Operational Services Agreement; 8. Any notice of Plaintiff's injury made by Seaton Corp. to PPG Industries, Inc. pursuant to Section 4.3.4 of the Operational Services Agreement; 9. Any and all invoices between PPG Industries, Inc. and Seaton Corp. that relate to or concern the date of July 12, 2011 and any deductions made by PPG Industries, Inc. for any of these invoices; 10. Any insurance policies provided by Seaton Corp. to PPG Industries, Inc. as required under Section 6.0 of the Operational Services Agreement. The deposition will be conducted pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure and will be conducted before a notary public or other officer authorized to administer oaths. The deposition will be recorded by stenographic means. The deposition, including videotape, audiotape, and/or 2 transcript or recording of same, may be used for all purposes permissible under the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of Evidence. BY: Date: 6 March 2014 THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ANDREW M. CAROBUS, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Andrew M. Carobus, hereby certify that I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served via facsimile and first class mail upon: L. John Argento, Esquire Swartz Campbell LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 -5402 Christine L. Line, Esquire Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 BY: Date: 6 March 2014 THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ANDREW M. CAROBUS, ESQ. PA Attorney I.D. No.: 202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592 -1000 (215) 592 -8360 (facsimile) Exhibit "B" ** Replied to All on Fri 3/14/2014 02:43 PM ** From: L. John Argento (largento @swartzcampbell.com) Sent: Fri 3/14/2014 02:28 PM Rcvd: Fri 3/14/2014 02:27 PM To: Carobus, Andrew CC: L. John Argento (largento @swartzcampbell.com); Stofko, Christopher (C Stofko@dmclaw. com) Subject: Quinn v PPG Andrew: This will serve to follow up and confirm the voicemail I left for you just a few minutes ago regarding your Notice of Deposition of a Corporate Designee of PPG which you unilaterally scheduled for April 2"d. As my voicemail indicated, I am not available on that date. I do not know if Mr. Stofko is available on April 2"d. Please contact myself and Attorney Stofko and we will provide alternative dates. Thank you. L. John Argento emailImy biojwebsite Exhibit "C" ,,,,, From: Carobus, Andrew Sent: Fri 3/14/2014 02:43 PM Revd: Fri 3/14/2014 02:43 PM To: L. John Argento (largento@swartzcampbell.com) CC: Stofko, Christopher (CStofko@dmclaw.com) Subject: RE: Quinn v. PPG Counsel — I appreciate you notifying me early that one (or both) of you will be unable to attend the deposition scheduled for Wednesday, April 2, 2014. Please provide me with alternative dates at your nearest convenience so that we may reschedule this deposition for a date, time and location suitable for everyone. Thank you and please enjoy your weekend. Andrew From: L. John Argento [mailto:largento@swartzcampbell.corn] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 2:29 PM To: Carobus, Andrew Cc: L. John Argento; Stofko, Christopher Subject: Quinn v. PPG Andrew: This will serve to follow up and confirm the voicemail I left for you just a few minutes ago regarding your Notice of Deposition of a Corporate Designee of PPG which you unilaterally scheduled for April 2'. As my voicemail indicated, I am not available on that date. I do not know if Mr. Stofko is available on April 2'. Please contact myself and Attorney Stofko and we will provide alternative dates. Thank you. L. John Argento emailimy biolwebsite Exhibit "D" THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW ANDREW M. CAROBUS, ESQUIRE ANDREW.CAROBUS Q,BEASLEYFIRM.COM 215.931.2626 ADMI I IED TO PRACTICE: PENNSYLVANIA NEW JERSEY VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL Christopher D. Stofko, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Christine L. Line, Esq. Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 .�■ • ;; i Exhibit "E" From: Carobus, Andrew Sent: Wed 4/2/2014 03:10 PM Revd: Wed 4/2/2014 03:10 PM To: L. John Argento (largento@swartzcampbell.com) CC: Stofko, Christopher (CStofko@dmclaw.com) Subject: RE: Quinn v. PPG Counsel — I have previously requested alternative dates for the deposition of a corporate designee of PPG in regards to the above-named case by both e-mail dated March 14, 2014 and by a letter sent by First Class mail on March 20, 2014. To date, I have not received a response with possible alternative dates. Please provide with dates, times and locations for the deposition by Monday, April 14, 2014 so as to avoid my resorting to motion practice. Please let me know whether you require anything further of me at this time. Thank you for your anticipated courtesy and cooperation, Andrew From: L. John Argento [mailto:largento@swartzcampbell.corn] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 2:29 PM To: Carobus, Andrew Cc: L. John Argento; Stofko, Christopher Subject: Quinn v. PPG Andrew: This will serve to follow up and confirm the voicemail I left for you just a few minutes ago regarding your Notice of Deposition of a Corporate Designee of PPG which you unilaterally scheduled for April 2'. As my voicemail indicated, I am not available on that date. I do not know if Mr. Stofko is available on April 2'• Please contact myself and Attorney Stofko and we will provide alternative dates. Thank you. JEFFREY QUINN, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : CIVIL ACTION — LAW PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant : NO. 12 -2015 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 2014, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion To Compel the Deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc., a Rule is hereby issued upon Defendant to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 20 days of service. BY THE COURT, Christylee L. Peck, J. ./ Dion G. Rassias, Esq. Andrew M. Carobus, Esq. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 -4997 Attorneys for Plaintiff .hristopher Stofko, Esq. DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 -5402 and Christine L. Line, Esq. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21St Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 Attorneys for Defendant �L. John Argento, Esq. Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 :rc CPI tIccL o es vaspy IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff, V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., CIVIL ACTION — LAW No. 12-2015 RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO Defendant. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL Filed on behalf of Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. C-) -c) rri Cr/. --r•• rri Counsel of record for this party -<> L. John Argento, Esq. Pa. I.D. #39342 Robert J. Grimm, Esq. Pa. I.D. #55381 SWARTZ CAMPBELL LLC Firm #765 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 232-9800 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Z-7,1 CD cD IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY QUINN, Plaintiff, V. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. CIVIL ACTION — LAW No. 12-2015 RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND NOW, comes Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. ("PPG"), by and through its attorneys, Swartz Campbell LLC and L. John Argento, Esquire, and files the within Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, and in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. Without admitting Plaintiff's characterization of the claims at issue in this matter or the alleged injuries referenced in his present Motion to Compel, it is admitted that Plaintiff in this action seeks recovery for an incident which is alleged to have occurred on or about July 12, 2011 when he claims to have been injured while working for his employer, Seaton Corporation, at a manufacturing plant operated by Defendant PPG. 2. Discovery is ongoing and Plaintiff's present Motion to Compel seeks a court order requiring the deposition of the Corporate Designee of Defendant PPG - an issue which, since the filing of Plaintiff's Motion, has been effectively resolved. 1 3. As admitted by Plaintiff in Paragraph 5 of his Motion to Compel, without seeking any input from other involved counsel, on March 6, 2014 Plaintiff s counsel unilaterally scheduled the deposition of a Corporate Designee for Defendant PPG for April 2, 2014. See Plaintiff's Motion at ¶5. 4. As also acknowledged in Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, counsel for Defendant PPG promptly advised Plaintiff's counsel that the date on which Plaintiff had unilaterally scheduled the deposition was not agreeable. See Plaintiffs Motion at ¶6. 5. While it is acknowledged that Plaintiff's counsel subsequently requested alternate dates for the deposition of Defendant PPG's Corporate Designee, the undersigned counsel for Defendant PPG was not able to immediately provide alternate dates insofar as additional time was needed in which to coordinate his schedule as well as the schedule of the potential witness and that of Co-Counsel for Defendant PPG. 6. Contrary to the suggestion in Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, at no time did counsel for Defendant PPG ever object to producing a Corporate Designee, nor did the undersigned counsel ever fail to participate in discovery or reasonably cooperate in the discovery process. 7. In any event, and contrary to the assertions in Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, counsel for Defendant PPG has since provided alternate dates and, since the filing of Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, the parties have agreed that the deposition of Defendant PPG's corporate designee will take place on June 19, 2014. 8. Despite the fact that the deposition has been scheduled to take place within a reasonable time, Plaintiffs counsel has not withdrawn the present Motion to Compel which, given that the issues have been resolved, appears to be a waste of both the parties' and this Honorable Court's time and resources. 2 9. In light of the above, since the deposition of Defendant PPG's Corporate Designee has been scheduled, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel should be denied as moot. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Defendant PPG Industries, Inc. respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order in the form attached hereto, thereby denying Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. By: Respectfully submitted: SWARTZ C • PBELL LLC L. J • rArgento, E . uire Robert J. Grimm, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that true and correct copies of the foregoing RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL have been served this day of 2014, by U.S. first -class mail, postage prepaid, to: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire The Beasley Firm, LLC 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Christopher D. Stofko, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 -5402 Christine L. Line, Esquire Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -2223 Respectfully submitted: SWARTZ CAMPBELL LLC BY: �� L. Jo r gento, Esqu Robert J. Grimm, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, PPG Industries, Inc. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC BY: Dion G. Rassias, Esquire Andrew M. Carobus, Esquire PA Attorney I.D. Nos.: 49724/202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (Facsimile) °�/i rl +rE Pt vINSAYt/D �oU 1 � �A MIA Attorneys for Plaintiff JEFFREY QUINN : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY Plaintiff, • v. : No. 2012-2015 PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. : Defendant. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly withdraw Plaintiffs Motion to Compel the Deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc., filed on April 16, 2014 in the above - captioned case. THE BEASLEY FIRM, BY: �rr D1 • N G. RA' S DREW M. CAROBUS PA Attorney I.D. Nos.: 49724/202241 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 592-1000 (215) 592-8360 (facsimile) Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. T., REIFF & BILY BY: /s/ Jeffrey M. Reiff JEFFREY M. REIFF PA Attorney I.D. No.: 30023 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 246-9000 Attorneys for Plainttff DATED: May 8, 2014 Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. • •r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Andrew M. Carobus, hereby certify that I have caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing to be served via First Class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following entities: Christopher D. Stofko, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 L. John Argento, Esq. Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Christine L. Line, Esq. Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 BY: DATED: May 8, 2014 Jeffrey Quinn v. PPG Industries, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE JEFFREY QUINN, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : CIVIL ACTION — LAW PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant : NO. 12-2015 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF THE CORPORATE DESIGNEE(S) OF DEFENDANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of May, 2014, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion To Compel the Deposition of the Corporate Designee(s) of Defendant PPG Industries, Inc., Defendant's response thereto, and Plaintiff's reply brief to Defendant's response, and the parties having tentatively agreed that the deposition of Defendant PPG's corporate designee(s) shall take place on June 19 or 20, 2014, the Motion to Compel is hereby deemed moot. THIS ORDER is made without prejudice to Plaintiff to refile the motion to compel should the deposition of Defendant's Corporate designee(s) not occur within 60 days of the date of this Order. BY THE COURT, -0 3: 2 rn 7.3 l✓y'r'�.U� U'r Christylee L. Peck, J. r— t ion G. Rassias, Esq. v Andrew M. Carobus, Esq. THE BEASLEY FIRM, LLC 1125 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107-4997 Attorneys for Plaintiff co rTl -/Christopher Stofko, Esq. DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 and ....,-Christine L. Line, Esq. Plaza 21, Suite 302 425 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-2223 Attorneys for Defendant John Argento, Esq. Swartz Campbell, LLC 4750 U.S. Steel Tower 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 :rc