Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-2375
GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING 700 West Louther Street Apt. 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 and Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA :NO. /2.,.2375' CIVIL ACTION - LAW NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072 Defendants PRAECIPE TO FILE WRIT OF SUMMONS PROTHONOTARY: c r? r_- .77 - Kindly issue a Summons to Defendants The Mechanicsburg Club, Shermansdale Community Fire Company and New Kingston Fire Company in the above captioned matter. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: ??6"CLLW- Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Date: April 13, 2012 Attorney for Plaintiff v j /03. 7SpW,006 C#' 103,;2- ?2, ,e? .2 73F<F3 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING 700 West Louther Street Apt. 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 and Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 1,2 -o937S ?ld?? L°?'?1 CIVIL ACTION - LAW SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072 Defendants SUMMONS IN CIVIL ACTION TO: THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY You are notified that Plaintiff has commenced a civil action against you which you are required to defend. Prothonotary of CUMBERLAND County (Court Seal) Deputy GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING 700 West Louther Street Apt. 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 and Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072 Defendants ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: ` _r Cn - , Kindly enter the appearance of Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, as attorney for Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: CS Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Date: April 13, 2012 Attorney for Plaintiff SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson y v Sheriff ot ?? Jody S Smith ' Chief Deputy ) Richard W Stewart © -ice Solicitor ; =- -v Y ° 7Z tsn _f Jacob Stimeling vs. The Mechanicsburg Club (et al.) Case Number 2012-2375 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 04/17/2012 Ronny R. Anderson, Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law states that he made a diligent search and inquiry for the within named defendant, to wit: Shermansdale Community Fire Company, but was unable to locate them in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the Sheriff of Perry County, Pennsylvania to serve the within Writ of Summons according to law. 04/20/2012 08:40 AM - Perry County Return: And now April 20, 2012 at 0840 hours I, Carl E. Nace, Sheriff of Perry County, Pennsylvania, do hereby certify and return that I served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Shermansdale Community Fire Company by making known unto Mike Minich, Fire Chief for Shermansdale Community Fire Company at 5450 Spring Road, Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and correct copy of the same. 04/20/2012 11:09 AM - William Cline, Corporal, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 20, 2012 at 1109 hours, he served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: The Mechanicsburg Club, by making known unto Jerry Temple, Secretary for The Mechanicsburg Club at 333 Heinz Street, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and correct copy of t same. ,hl V-, L IAM CLINE, DEPUTY 04/20/2012 10:44 AM - William Cline, Corporal, who being duly sworn according to law, states that on April 20, 2012 at 1044 hours, he served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: New Kingstown Fire Company, by making known unto Greg Brammer, Director for New Kingstown Fire Company at 277 S. Locust Point Road, New Kingstown, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17072 its contents and at the same time handing to him personally the said true and co ect copy of the same. Z-" CLINE, DEPUTY SHERIFF COST: $86.00 April 26, 2012 SO ANSWERS, RON R ANDERSON, SHERIFF i rU! suiln hE Jacob Stimeling Versus Shermans Dale Community Fire Company THE 41st JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, PERRY COUNTY BRANCH IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF No. 2012-2375 Cumberland Co. SHERIFF'S RETURN And now April 20 , 2012: Served the within name Shermans Dale Community Fire Company the defendant(s) named herin, personally at his place of residence in Carroll Twp- 5450 Spring Road, Shermans Dale, Perry County, PA, on April 20, 2012 at 8:40 o'clock AM by handing to Mike Minich, fire chief 1 true and attested copy(ies) of the within Writ of Summons and made known to him the contents thereof Sworn and subscribed to before me this o2 ?l r day of Or 01 So answers Sheriff of Perry County COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAL MARGARET F. FLICKINGER, Notary Public Bloomfield Boro, Perry County My Commission Expires February 16, 2016 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP by: Brooks R. Foland, Esquire I.D. No. 70102 305 North Front Street 6th Floor Poo 999 Hamsburg, PA 17108-0999 (71771 255-7626 (71 237-7105 fax bfolond@tthlaw.com JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff vs. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMAfNSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants rr, , y N11 2: F, _,J, DERLA D COUNT`'; PENNSYLVANIA Counsel for New Kingstown Fire Company IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter our appearance on behalf of Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company in the above matter. Respectfully submitted, T HO !??= ER, LLP by: Bro . Foland, E e I.D. No. 70102 -? 305 North Front Street, 6th Floor POB 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7626 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE mj? AND NOW this Y?tl 201 I, Coleen M. Polek, day of - of the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing document by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esq. Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Coleen M.' Polek 1094064.1' i.JAC `... . c PH 1: McCORMICK LAW'461' By: J. David Smith _?,!J Or-RLASD COBTY Attorney I.D. 27813 PE111I NSYLVANIA 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 JACOB STIMELING Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants Attorney for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Department IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 Civil Term CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter our appearance on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire company, defendant in the above-captioned matter. McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: I.D. # 27813 , J. Daa Attorney for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 (570) 601-0248 (fax) * % CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, J. DAVID SMITH, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipafor Entry ofAPPearance was served this day of jel /,) e , 2012, upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Force Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 The Mechanicsburg Club 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 New Kingstown Fire Company 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, PA 17072 McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: ?a -? J. Da id Smith, # Attorney for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 (570) 601-0248 (fax) JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff vs. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: r?1 G use'" ? rC3 ?- ta N Afz -i w W En -c Please enter a rule upon plaintiff to file a complaint within twenty (20) days of service thereof or suffer the entry of a judgment of non pros. McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: D vid Smith, I.D. #27813 J. 4 Attorney for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION - LAW RULE 'TO FILE COMPLAINT AND NOW, this _ day of , 2012, a Rule is hereby entered upon plaintiff to file a complaint in the above-captioned matter within twenty (20) days of service hereof or suffer the entry of a judgment of non pros. ary ,i i CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, J. DAVID SMITH, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe_for Rule to File Complaint was served this ' - day of June, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, Pa 19482 The Mechanicsburg Club 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 New Kingstown Fire Company 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, PA 17072 McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: J. Davi mith -OFFICE .3t nip ?jJe -o P? t. NC CO???? C?'J ?? ?S`IG??NIA Jacob Stimeling Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA The Mechanicsburg Club, et. al. Defendant No. 2375 20 12 Civil Term NOTICE TO DEFEND 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 AN ATTORNEY AND FILLING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. YOU ARE WARNED THAT IF YOU FAIL TO DO SO THE CASE MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOU AND A JUDGEMENT 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 PEOPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO THE TELEPHONE OR THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 SOUTH BEDFORD STREET CARLISLE, PA 17013 1-800-990-9108 717-249-3166 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING 700 West Louther Street Apt. 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff vs. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 and Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION - LAW SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072 Defendants COMPLAINT I . Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling is an adult individual who resides at 700 West Street Apt 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 2. On information and belief, at all times pertinent hereto, Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club, hereinafter "Club", is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation whose principle place of business is 333 Heinz Street, Pennsylvania 17055. 3. On information and belief, at all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Community Fire Company, hereinafter "Shermansdale", is a Pennsylvania non-profit whose principle place of business is 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090. 4. On information and belief, at all times pertinent hereto, Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company, hereinafter "Kingstown", is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation whose principle place of business is 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, 17090. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants Club, Shermansdale and Kingstown were acting by and through their predecessors and/or successors in interest. 6. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Club owned, leased, operated, maintained and/or otherwise controlled the premises and common areas of The Mechanics Club located at 333 Heinz Street, Pennsylvania 17055. 7. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Shermandale owned, leased, operated, possessed, maintained and/or otherwise controlled the premises and common areas of The Mechanicsburg Club located at 333 Heinz Street, Pennsylvania 17055. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Kingstown owned, leased, operated, possessed, maintained and/or otherwise controlled the premises and common areas of The Mechanicsburg Club located at 333 Heinz Street, Pennsylvania 17055. 9. On or about May 1, 2010 Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling was a business invitee on premises of The Mechanicsburg Club located at 333 Heinz Street, Pennsylvania 17055. 10. At said place and while on the above-mentioned premises, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling was waiting for his brother on a bridge when suddenly and without warning the of the bridge broke causing Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling to fall into the ravine below. 11. At the time of the his fall, the bridge was rotting and in disrepair which substantially contributed to Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling's fall. 12. The aforesaid incident and resulting injuries and/or damages were in no way caused by any act or failure to act on the part of Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned incident Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling suffered severe and painful injuries including, but not limited to, acute traumatic lumbar spine fracture right transverse process L 1, 2, 3, left hip pain and multiple abrasions all which required surgical intervention and resulting scarring. In addition Plaintiff Jacob Stimelin suffered an injury to her nerves and nervous systems, and increased risk of developing arthritis and other debilitating conditions, emotional distress, pain, suffering and other physical ailment all or some of which are or may be permanent in nature. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned incident and the injuries and/or damages, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling has been in the past and may continue to be the future unable to attend to his usual habits, customs, avocation and enjoyment of life. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned incident and the injuries and/or damages, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling has been compelled, and/or may be to spend money for medical and surgical aide, medicines and similar medical and medically related treatments, instrumentalities and modalities. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned incident and resulting injuries and/or damages, the integrity, resilience, resistance to injury of Plaintiff Jacob has been compromised so that Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling is more susceptible to injury and may have earlier onset of degenerative and other problems than Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling would suffered had the above-mentioned injuries not occurred. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned incident and the injuries and/or damages, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling has suffered and/or suffers and/or will from physical and mental anguish, pain, inconvenience and/or emotional distress. COUNTI JACOB STIMELING V. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 18. Paragraphs 1 through 17 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length herein. 19. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Club had a duty to provide a safe premises for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, or in the alternative, warn business invitees of dangerous, hazardous and/or defective conditions which they knew or have known existed thereon and further knew or should have known that business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would fail to notice and/or fail to protect themselves 20. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Club knew or should have known of dangerous and/or defective condition of said premises. 21. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Club acted and/or failed to act by and through its officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workman and/or representatives were acting within the course and scope of their employment and on the behalf of said Defendant. 22. The aforementioned incident and the resulting injuries and/or damages were direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Club whose consisted of, without limitation, the following: a. Failure to inspect and/or maintain the area of the aforementioned incident in a reasonable and prudent matter; b. Failure to provide a safe bridge for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling to walk on; C. Creating a trip hazard and dangerous condition; d. Allowing a xx safety rail over a pedestrian bridge to become dangerously xx and unsafe. e. Failure to issue any warnings, verbal, written, actual or constructive to business invitees of the dangerous condition which Defendant Club knew or should have known about on said premises; f. Failure to provide adequate warnings as to the existence of unreasonably dangerous conditions; g. Permitting and allowing business invitees in and about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Club knew or should have known of dangerous condition; h. Failure to properly hire, supervise, train and/or direct Defendant Club's agents, servants, workman, employees and/or other representatives; i. Failure to regard the rights, safety and position of business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, in or about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Club knew or should have known that business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would not realize the existence of the dangerous and defective condition of Defendant Club's premises; j. Failure to meet minimal safety standards, codes and/or practices with regard to pedestrian bridge and walk ways; k. Failure to promulgate, publish and/or enforce adequate procedures and polices protect business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, whom Club knew would be out and about the area where Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling from a bridge into a ravine; and 1. Knowingly creating an unreasonable dangerous condition that, at created a trap for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling hereby demands judgment in his favor and against Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club in amount which exceeds the jurisdictional limit requiring arbitration referral by local rule plus interest, costs and such other remedies as this Court may deem just and reasonable. COUNT II JACOB STIMELING V. SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 23. Paragraphs I through 22 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length herein. 24. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Shermansdale had a duty to provide a premises for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, or in the alternative, warn business invitees of dangerous, hazardous and/or defective conditions which they knew or have known exists thereon and further knew or should have known that business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would fail to notice and/or fail to protect themselves 25. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Shermansdale knew or should have known of the dangerous and/or defective condition of said premises. 26. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Shermansdale acted and/or failed to by and through its officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workman and/or representatives who were acting within the course and scope of their employment and on the behalf of said Defendant. 27. The aforementioned incident and the resulting injuries and/or damages were direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Shermansdale conduct consisted of, without limitation, the following: a. Failure to inspect and/or maintain the area of the aforementioned incident in a reasonable and prudent matter; b. Failure to provide a safe bridge for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling to walk on; C. Creating a trip hazard and dangerous condition; d. Failure to issue any warnings, verbal, written, actual or constructive to business invitees of the dangerous condition which Defendant Shermansdale knew or should have known about on said premises; e. Failure to provide adequate warnings as to the existence of unreasonably dangerous conditions; f. Permitting and allowing business invitees in and about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Shermansdale knew or should have known of the dangerous condition; g. Failure to properly hire, supervise, train and/or direct Defendant Shermansdale' agents, servants, workman, employees and/or other representatives; and h. Failure to regard the rights, safety and position of business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, in or about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Shermansdale knew or should have known that business including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would not realize the existence of the dangerous and defective condition of Defendant Shermansdale's premises. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling hereby demands judgement in his favor and against Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company in amount which exceeds the jurisdictional limit requiring arbitration referral by local rule plus interest, costs and such other remedies as this Court may deem just and reasonable. COUNT III JACOB STIMELING V. NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 28. Paragraphs 1 through 27 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length herein. 29. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Kingstown had a duty to provide a safe premises for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, or in the alternative, warn business invitees of dangerous, hazardous and/or defective conditions which they knew or have known exists thereon and further knew or should have known that business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would fail to notice and/or fail to protect themselves 30. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Kingstown knew or should have of the dangerous and/or defective condition of said premises. 31. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Kingstown acted and/or failed to act by and through its officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workman and/or who were acting within the course and scope of their employment and on the behalf of said Defendant. 32. The aforementioned incident and the resulting injuries and/or damages were direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Kingstown whose conduct consisted of, without limitation, the following: a. Failure to inspect and/or maintain the area of the aforementioned incident in a reasonable and prudent matter; b. Failure to provide a safe bridge for business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling to walk on; C. Creating a trip hazard and dangerous condition; d. Failure to issue any warnings, verbal, written, actual or constructive to invitees of the dangerous condition which Defendant Kingstown knew or should have known about on said premises; e. Failure to provide adequate warnings as to the existence of unreasonably dangerous conditions; f. Permitting and allowing business invitees in and about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Kingstown knew or should have of the dangerous condition; g. Failure to properly hire, supervise, train and/or direct Defendant Kingstown's agents, servants, workman, employees and/or other representatives; and h. Failure to regard the rights, safety and position of business invitees including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, in or about the area of the aforementioned incident when Defendant Kingstown knew or should have known that business invitees, including Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would not realize the existence of the dangerous and defective condition of Defendant Kingstown's premises. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling hereby demands judgement in his favor and against Defendant New Kingstown Community Fire Company in amount which exceeds the jurisdictional limit requiring arbitration referral by local rule plus interest, costs and such remedies as this Court may deem just and reasonable. Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. Y: yls' Stacy J. ckerbocker, Esquire Date: August 3, 2012 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, state that I am the attorney for the within named Plaintiffs and that the facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best my knowledge, information and belief; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties 18 Pa C.S.A §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. `ckerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff i GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C*0-' t RpTKQNQTAk`` By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker 2012 AUG - P? Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley ForgcCUMBERLSYN-OVAN A" Suite 7, Box 987 PEN Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING 700 West Louther Street Apt. 2 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff VS. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 333 Heinz Street Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 5450 Spring Road Shermansdale, Pennsylvania 17090 and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 277 South Locust Point Road New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072 Defendants Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 3`d day of August, 20 a true and correct copy of the within Complaint was sent by first class, postage prepaid US to the following: J. David Smith, Esquire Brooks R. Foland, Esquire McCormick Law Firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP PO Box 577 Po Box 999 Williamsport, PA 17703 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Bernard Little Erie Insurance P.O. Box 2013 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0710 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By:'?? Stacy J. ckerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 ~. ~~ ~ i ~~ ~~O~~ONO~~. 2t}12 AUG 13 P~ 3:02 ~;t~M~£.~t1.R~N~ COUNTY p~NNSYLVAN{ A Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL'ACTION -LAW COMPANY Defendants PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly substitute the enclosed Verification signed by Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling for the Verification previously filed and signed by Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire. GRAHAM &MAUER ~- Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Date: August 11, 2012 VERIFICATION I, Jacob Stimeling, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this Action and verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to the of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 i L~"+~ ~` ~' i ~ t Attorney for Plaintiff ~~= ~~1~~~ Pt?QT~dONOTA~~~~ c~12 AUG 13 PM 3~ 02 CUMER~ANO COUNTY ~ENNSYLYANIA JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION -LAW COMPANY Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 11th day of August, 2012, a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe to Substitute Verification was sent by first class, postage prepaid US Mail to the following: J. David Smith, Esquire Brooks R. Foland, Esquire McCormick Law Firm Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP PO Box 577 Po Box 999 Williamsport, PA 17703 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Bernard Little Erie Insurance P.O. Box 2013 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0710 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. Stacy J. l~.nickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, CIVIL ACTION -LAW -v= ,,;, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY '- FIRE COMPANY, and rn NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY ?? N) rv Defendants, < ° := ? ?? PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANT ? •• --i?`? SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY TO PLAINTIFF' S COMPFAI* AND NOW, comes defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company, by and through its attorneys, McCormick Law Firm, and files the following Preliminary Objections to plaintiff s complaint, and in support thereof state: On April 16, 2012, plaintiff commenced this premises liability action by Writ of summons. 2. On August 3, 2012, plaintiff filed his complaint. 3. The gravamen of plaintiff s complaint is that plaintiff fell from an allegedly negligently maintained bridge located on premises owned by the Mechanicsburg Club. See Complajint at ¶¶ 9-10. 4. Count II of the complaint is directed to defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company. 1. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE 5. Count II is a premises liability claim which includes references to unnamed and unidentified "officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workmen and/or representatives who were acting within the course and scope of their employment and on behalf of said [Shermansdale Community Fire Company]." See Complaint at ¶¶26-29. 6. While it is unnecessary to plead all the various details of an alleged agency relationship, a complaint must allege, at a minimum, facts which: 1) identify the agent by name or appropriate description; and, 2) set forth the agent's authority, and how the tortious acts of the agent either fell within the scope of that authority or, if unauthorized, were ratified by the principajl. Alumni Association, et al. v. Sullivan et al., 369 Pa.Super. 596, 535 A.2d 1095 (1987); see also Mundy v Wyoming Valley Health Care System, Inc., et.al. (2001 Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County, attached as Exhibit A). 7. Plaintiff has not identified by name, or any other description, the unidentified officers directors, employees, agents, servants, workmen and/or representatives of Shermansdale Commulnity Fire Company who were allegedly negligent. 8. As such, defendant is unfairly prejudiced in its ability to understand, and prepare defenses to plaintiff's allegations. 9. Indeed, as presently plead, the allegations contained in Count II of the complaint could be construed to apply to any employee or representative of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. 10. Consequently, plaintiff should be required to replead Count II, and specifically identify the alleged officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workmen and/or representatives to whom each averment of negligence is directed. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that all averments of agency be stricken from plaintiff's complaint, and plaintiff should be required to replead Count II to identify by name or appropriate description any and all officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, workmen and/or representatives he claims to be negligent. 2 II. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE 11. A complaint must set forth the material facts upon which the cause of action is based in a concise and summary form. Pa.R.C.P. 1019(a). 12. The complaint must apprise the defendant of the claim being asserted and summarize the material facts needed to support the claim. Cardenas v. Schober, 2001 Pa.Super. 253, 783 A.2d 317, 325 (Pa.Super. 2001). Stated otherwise, a party pleading a cause of action must set forth specific facts and legal theories in support thereof in a manner sufficiently clear to apprise the defendants of the issues they must be prepared to meet and answer at trial. Baker v. Rte,, 229 Pa.Super. 333, 342 A.2d 498 (1974). 13. The language used in the complaint must be specific enough to prevent the plaintiff from asserting new causes of action or theories of liability at a later date (i.e., after expiration of the Statute of Limitations) under the guise of merely amplifying what was been timely pleaded. Connor v. Allegheny General Hospital, 501 Pa. 306, 461 A.2d 600, 602-03, n.3 (Pa. 1983). 14. Plaintiff's complaint contains several open-ended and generalized averments of negligence in violation of the Rules of Civil Procedure. See Pa.R.C.P. 1019(a). 15. Specifically, the following averments of negligence are open-ended and not supported by appropriate, specific facts: 27,. The aforementioned incident and the result of injuries and/or damages were the direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of defendant Shermansdale whose conduct consisted of, without limitation, the following: (c) Creating a trip hazard and dangerous condition; (g) Failure to hire, supervise, train and/or direct defendant Shermansdale's agents, servants, workmen, employees, and/or other representatives; and 3 (h) Failure to regard the rights, safety and position of business invitees including plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, in or about the area of the aforementioned incident when defendant Shermansdale knew or should have known that business invitees, including plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, would not realize the existence of dangerous and defective condition of defendant Shermansdale's premises. 16. The above-cited allegations constitute improper, open-ended and generalized allegations of negligence. See Connor v. Allegheny General Hospital, supra. 17. Without additional facts in support of the above-referenced averments of negligence, defendant is unable to know exactly what is being alleged by plaintiff, and the defendant would be unfairly prejudiced in its ability to prepare defenses to plaintiff's claims. 18. In addition, by including the words "without limitation" in Paragraph 27, plaintiff intentionally left this averment open-ended, and the allegations would be improperly subject to amendment at a later time after the expiration of the Statute of Limitation. See Connor v. Allegl, ieny General Hospital, supra. 19. Based upon the above, defendant requests that Paragraph 27 be stricken from plaintiff's complaint, with prejudice. 20,. Alternatively, only in the event that this Honorable Court does not strike said averments from plaintiff's complaint, plaintiff should be required replead said averments with greater factual specificity. WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court sustain these preliminary objections and strike Paragraph 27 from plaintiff's complaint, or alternatively, order plaintiff to replead said averments with appropriate factual specificity. 4 Respectfully submitted, McCORMICK By: David Smith, I.D. #27813 /Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 5 JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff V. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Preliminary Objections of Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company to Plaintiffs Complaint was served this 2 1 day of August, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J.' Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham, & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 The Mechanicsburg Club c/o Bernard Little Erie Insurance P.O. Box 2013 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 New Kingstown Fire Company c/o Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: X:::? 'David Smith, I.D. #27813 Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 cp I? JACOB STIMELING, V. Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW r I r.a a * ? - = - - t ?r Xl as ? : " G7 "t:Y .,., N C) _., = CD -1 C) C?a THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT TO THEj PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: 1. State matter to be argued: Preliminary Objections of Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company to Plaintiff's Complaint. 2. Identify all counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiff: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge, Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, Pa 19482 (b) for defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company: J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701. 3. Argument Court Date: O 5 0 4. I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. McCORMICK By: J?David Smith, I.D. #27813 Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 Date: '4t, c? '_r 20/ Z plµ? elq.? pd °!F''? __ JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART 8c WEIDNER By: Jefferson J. Shipman I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs cLDjdsw.com JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of the undersigned on behalf of the Defendant, Mechanicsburg Club, in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, DUFFIE~STEWART & Date: August ~, 2012 Attorneys for D n t, The MechaniC~~rg b--? ~,~,y ~~_ ~~ '~ 2 ~:c~ ~- ~,~ ,~¢-~ --~ K IN THE COURT OF COMMCIN PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLV NIA Q'effel+SoK J. Shipm~fri, Esqui Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Counsel for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club _ _ _ __ ~ _ _ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Entry of Appearance been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on August 201 Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Counsel for Plaintiff J. David Smith, Esquire McCormick Law Firm P.O. Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 N, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNE esquire 512573 ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~TAE~~ THOMAS, THOMAS 8~ HAFER, LLP by: Brooks R. Foland, Esquire I.D. No. 70102 305 North Front Street 6th Floor POB 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7626 (717) 237-7105 fax bfoland@tthlaw.com JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff vs. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants 2~ l1 SAP - ~ Pt! 2~ 3 ~ CUM~E~LANQ CpUNT'r' PEl~#~SYLVANtA Counsel for New Kingstown Fire Company IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVAN NO. 12-2375 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD You are hereby notified to plead to the enclosed Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a default judgment may be entered against you. ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND CROSSCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY AND NOW, comes Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company, by and through its attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, and files the following Answer, New Matter Crossclaims: Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied and proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 2. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 3. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 4. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that Answering Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company is a Pennsylvania non profit corporation with its principal place business at 277 North Locust Point Road, New Kingstown, Pennsylvania 17072. Any all other allegations contained in paragraph 4 are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 5. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 5 are conclusions of law which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 6. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 7. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 8. Denied. It is specifically denied that at any time material hereto that Answering Defendant owned, leased, operated, possessed, maintained, or otherwise 2 controlled the premises and/or common areas over the Mechanicsburg Club located at 333 Hintz Street [sic], Pennsylvania 17055. 9. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 10. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 11. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 12. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 12 are conclusions of which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 13. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 14. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 15. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 15 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 3 16. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 16 of Plaintiffs Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 17. Denied. Defendant is without information or belief as to the truth of the averments of paragraph 17 of Plaintiff's Complaint and the same are therefore denied a proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. COUNTI JACOB STIMELING v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 18-22. No response is required as these allegations are directed to The Mechanicsburg Club and not to Answering Defendant. COUNT II JACOB STIMELING v. SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY nt 23-27. No response is required as these allegations are directed to Co-Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company and not to Answering Defendant. COUNT III JACOB STIMELING v. NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 28. Answering Defendant incorporates by reference the answers to PI Complaint as though the same were fully set forth herein at length. 29. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 29 are conclusions of law which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 4 30. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 30 are conclusions of law which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 31. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 31 are conclusions of law which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 32(a)-(h). Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 32 are of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company, respectFu requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. NEW MATTER 33. Answering Defendant incorporates by reference the answers to Plaintiff' Complaint as though the same were fully set forth herein at length. 34. Plaintiff's claims may be barred by the expiration of the applicable statute limitations. 35. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 36. Plaintiff's claims are barred pursuant to the immunity provisions of the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8541, et seq. 37. Answering Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company is a local agency and/or political subdivision as defined by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8541, et seq. 5 38. No exceptions to immunity apply to this case. To the extent that Plaintiff been injured or damaged, said injuries and/or damages being specifically denied, then Plaintiff's damages may be barred or limited by the applicable provisions of the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8553. 39. Plaintiff's claims, damages or injuries, if any, may be barred or reduced by Plaintiff's own contributory and/or comparative negligence. 40. Some or all of the Plaintiff's injuries and/or damages, if any, may be by parties other than Answering Defendant. 41. Answering Defendant did not owe a duty to Plaintiff. 42. If Answering Defendant owed a duty to Plaintiff, which is spec~cally den then Answering Defendant did not breach any duty owed to Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company respectfully req judgment be entered in its favor and against Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. .NEW MATTER CROSSCLAIMS 43. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in its Complaint as though the same were fully set forth herein at length. 44. If Plaintiff sustained damages as alleged, which allegations are herein expressly denied, then said damages were caused by the acts, omissions, negligence, carelessness, and other liability producing comment on the part of all other Defendants, The Mechanicsburg Club and/or Shermansdale Community Fire Company, and were caused in no manner whatsoever by Answering Defendant. 45. In the event that Plaintiff receives by verdict, settlement or otherwise, any payment related to this matter, all other Defendants are alone liable to the Plaintiff and/or 6 jointly and severally liable with Answering Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company, by way of contribution and/or indemnification. WHEREFORE, Answering Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company, denies liability, demands judgment in its favor, and demands that in the event receives by verd settlement or otherwise any payment related to this matter, all other Defendants be fou alone liable to Plaintiff and/or jointly and severally liable with Answering Defendant by of contribution and/or indemnification. RespectFully submitted, THOMAS, THOMAS ~ HAFER, LLP By: BRO LAND, UIRE ATTORNEY ID. N 0102 305 NORTH FRONT REET P.O. BOX 999 HARRISBURG, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7626 Attorneys for Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company 7 VEFltF1CAT10N i, JAMES HALL., PRESIDENT OF NE1N KINGSTOWN FIRE CQMPANY, have read the foregoing Answer, New Matter and New Matter Crosscfeims and hereby affirm that it is true and correct to the best of my personal ivtowladge, iMormatiort and belief. 'This Verifit~tion and statement is mew subject to the penettie-s aft 8 Pt~.C.S. ~ 490+t rating to urtsa~om fa~fication tc authorities; I verify that ail the statements made in the forming am true and correct and that false statiemertits may subject me #o they penalises of 1 r3 Pa.C.S. § ~49it)4~. JAM A41.. fnr K~VGSTCyWN FIRE C~MF'ANY Date: ~ ,31 ~ofz CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this ~ day of , 20'bZ-t, Coleen M. Poly of the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing document by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esq. Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street POB 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 J. David Smith, Esq. McCormick Law Firm 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 Coleen M. Polek 1130363.1 ~ I~ .IOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART 8~ A WEt6 ~~ 5 D ~~ ~~~~ By: Jefferson J. Shipman I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs~jdsw.com JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff v. Attorneys for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, comes The Mechanicsburg Club, by and through its counsel, Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire and Johnson, DufFe, Stewart & Weidner, and files the following Answer to Cross Claims of Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company: 43. The Mechanicsburg Club incorporates herein by reference its Answer and New Matter as though fully set forth herein at length. 44-45. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 44 and 45 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Date: September ~' , 2012 Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: ~ff~r~oN J. Shipman j~Esqui ttorney I.D. No. 517$5 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Counsel for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club y CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer of Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, to Cross Claims of Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on September ~, 2012: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Counsel for Plaintiff Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Counsel for Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company J. David Smith, Esquire McCormick Law Firm P.O. Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 Counsel for Defendant Community Fire Company Shermansdale DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: . Shipma),fJ, Esquire 513346 JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, CIVIL ACTION - LAW,° -,_ SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY ''' `-)" FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants c K ` t ° =C:) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing k Expert Interrogatories was served this day of October, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: T.-David Smith, I.D. #27813 Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ti : NO. 12-2375 rn= d THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, CIVIL ACTION - LAW-` C--) SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY cnr" ' 4; FIRE COMPANY, and "? , NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants 5?_ w r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereb y certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Requests for Production of Documents of Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company Directed to Plaintiff was served this ? day of October, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 McCORMICK LAW FIRM By: -rpavid Smith, I.D. #27813 J on L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 12-2375 -0 m c-°7 ' THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, CIVIL ACTION - LAW -? -r SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY IN ; FIRE COMPANY, and c ° NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY c =t Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Interrogatories of Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company Directed to Plaintiff was served this Ltday of October, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 McCORMICK LAW FIRM avid Smith, I.D. #27813 "Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney LD. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box. 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 ';I ,~ ~~ , r `~ 't. :61'4 Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING : 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLL:AS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PF.,NNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION -LAW COMPANY Defendants PLAINTIFF JACOB STIMELING'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY'S NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT 33. No response required. 34. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised b;y counsel and, therefore. avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company's. hereinafter "Kingstown", New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. T~o the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his cause of action is barred by any Statute of Limitation. To the contrary, Plair7tift~ commenced the instant action within the applicable two year Statute of Limitations,. 35. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore. avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of t:he Defendant: Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his Complaint fails to state a claim l.~pon which relief can be granted. To the contrary, Plaintiff's Complaint sets forth each and every element entitling Plaintiff to the recovery sought. 36. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore. avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant. Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent however a reply may be required Plaintiffs claims fit squarely within the real estate property exception to the Political Subdivision 'Tort Claims Act. 37. Denied.. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. 38. Denied.. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and., therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent however a reply may be required Plaintiffs claims fit squarely within the real estate property exceptio~~ to the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act. 39. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Kingstown's 1~lew Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his claims are barred and/or mitigated by Plaintiff s contributory and/or comparative negligence. "To the contrvy, Plaintiff's injuries or damages as set forth in his Complaint which is incorporated herein by reference were solely and proximately caused b:y the Defendants named therein. 40. Admitted. 4l . Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore. avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant: Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. 42. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant. Kingstown's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company~s New Matter be dismissed with prejudice and judgment be entered in favor of Plaintiff. Respectfully Subrnitted, GRAHAM & MA,UER, P.C. i By. ~~' i ~ ~ !' C:. r~ ~. ~ _.. Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esduire Attorney for Plaintiffs Date: October 16, 20l 2 VERIFICATI01~1 I..facob Stimeling, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this Action and veriiti~ that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. -~'acob Stimeling GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney LD. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 G ,, '; t Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLF;AS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COiJNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACT1ON -LAW COMPANI~' : Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE [, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 16`" day of October, 2.012, a true and correct copy of the within Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling, s Repl~Defendant New Kingstown Fire Com~anx's New Matter to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was sent b~~ first class, postage prepaid US Mail to thf; following: J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm PO Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson Duffie 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 L.emovne, PA 17043-0109 Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer. LLP Po Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C.. Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART H~ WEIDNER By: John H. Statler, Esquire I.D. No. 43812 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-()109 (717) 761-4540 jas@jdsw.com " ~' Attorneys for Defendant, . __ ...:.. The Mechanicsburg Club JACOB STIMELINCG, Plaintiff v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Jacob Stimeling c/o Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Shermansdale Community Fire Company c/o J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm P.O. Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 New Kingstown Fire Company c/o Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA AND NOW, this ~ day of November, 2012, you are hereby notified to plead responsively within twenty (20) days of the date of service hereof, or judgment may be entered against you. JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER \ `\ _ By ~y _ _ John A. Statler, Esquire Counsel for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: John A. Statler, Esquire I.D. No. 43812 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jas@jdsw.com JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff v. Attorneys for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants CIVIL ACTION -LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER, NEW MATTER AND CROSS CLAIMS OF DEFENDANT, THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB AND NOW, comes The Mechanicsburg Club, by and through its counsel, John A. Statler, Esquire and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, and file the following Answer, New Matter and Cross Claims in reply to Plaintiff's Complaint: 1. Admitted upon information and belief. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted upon information and belief. 4. Admitted upon information and belief. 5. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 5 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 6. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted only that The Mechanicsburg Club owned the premises located at 333 Heinz Street, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. The remaining averments of paragraph 6 are conclusions of law and fact to whicr~ no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 7. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 7 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 8. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 8 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 9. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 9 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 10, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 2 11. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 11 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 1:?. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 12 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 13, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 14. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 14, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 15, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 16. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 16, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 3 17 Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 17, and the same are therefore denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNTI JACOB STIMELING v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 113. The Mechanicsburg Club incorporates herein by reference it> answers to paragraphs 1 through 17 above, as though fully set forth herein at length. 19. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 19 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 20. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 20 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 21. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 21 are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. 22. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 22 and subparagraphs (a) through (I) are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If a response is deemed to be required, the averments contained therein are specifically denied. (a) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Club failed to inspect and/or maintain the area of the aforementioned incident in a reasonable and 4 prudent manner; (b) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Club failed to provide a safe bridge for business invitees, including Plaintiff; (c) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant created a trip hazard and dangerous condition; (d) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Club allowed a safety rail to become dangerous and unsafe; (e) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant Club failed to issue any warnings, verbal, written, actual or constructive of an allegedly dangerous condition; (f) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to provide adequate warnings of an allegedly dangerous condition; (g) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant Club permitted and allowed invitees in the area when they allegedly knew of a dangerous condition; (h) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to properly hire, supervise, train and/or direct the Club's agents, servants, workmen, employees and other representative; (i) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to regard the rights, safety and position of invitees, including Plaintiff, in the area when the Club allegedly knew or should have know that invitees would not realize the existence of an allegedly dangerous and defective condition; (j) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to meet 5 rriinimal safety standards, codes and/or practices with regard to the bridge and/or walk ways; (k) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant failed to promulgate, publish and/or enforce adequate procedures and policies to protect invitees including Plaintiff, when the Defendant Club allegedly knew would be in the subject area; and (I) Denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant Club knowingly created an unreasonable dangerous condition and a trap for invitees, including the Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. COUNT II JACOB STIMELING v. SHERMANDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 2;:5. The Mechanicsburg Club incorporates herein by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 22 above, as though fully set forth herein at length. 24-27. The averments contained in paragraphs 24 through 27 are directed to another party and, accordingly, no response is required by The Mechanicsburg Club. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. 6 COUNT III JACOB STIMELING v. NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 28 The Mechanicsburg Club incorporates herein by reference its answers to paragraphs 1 through 27 above, as though fully set forth herein at length. 29-32. The averments contained in paragraphs 29 through 32 are directed to another party and, accordingly, no response is required by The Mechanicsburg Club. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Glub, respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER 33. That Plaintiffs Complaint failed to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted. 34. Plaintiff s alleged cause of action, if any, may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 35. That Plaintiffs alleged cause of action, if any, may be barred and/or substantially reduced by the Doctrine of the Assumption of the Risk, contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence. 3Ei. To the extent that the Plaintiff did sustain injuries as alleged, which are specifically denied, then in that event, any such injuries were caused by individuals other than answering Defendant and over whom the answering Defendant had no control and/or by circumstances beyond their control. 3 i'. That there was no dangerous, defective or latent condition at any relevant time herein on the premises referred to in Plaintiffs Complaint. 7 38 That if any such dangerous, defective or latent condition did exist as alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint, which is specifically denied, then in that event, the answering Defendant avers that it was not responsible for creating or maintaining any such condition. 39. If any such alleged dangerous, defective or latent condition did exist as alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint, which is specifically denied, then in that event, it is alleged that the condition was open and obvious to any individual exercising reasonable care, including the Plaintiff. 41J. That Plaintiffs alleged cause of action may be barred in whole or in part by an intervening superseding cause. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, respectfully request that judgment be entered in its favor and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. NEW MATTER IN THE NATURE OF A CROSS CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 4'I. Answering Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, incorporates herein by reference its Answer and New Matter, paragraphs 1 through 40 to the Plaintiffs Complaint, as if set forth at length. 42. Prior to May 1, 2010, Defendant, Shermansdale Community Fire Company, entered into a written Lease Agreement with Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, for the use of premises consisting of picnic grounds, and facilities located on or near Glendale Drive, Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County. (A true and correct copy of the Lease Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."~ 8 43. Pursuant to the terms of the Lease Agreement, Shermansdale Community Fire Company agreed to hold and save The Mechanicsburg Club harmless from any and all claims and liability for damage to property and injury or death sustained by any person or persons on the premises or on route to or from the premises, which arises from and are incurred by Shermansdale Community Fire Company's use and occupancy of the premises described in the Lease Agreement. 44. On or about May 1, 2010, Defendant, Shermansdale Community Fire Company, possessed, maintained and controlled the premises and facilities on the picnic grounds located on Glendale Drive, Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County, pursuant to the terms of the Lease Agreement attached as Exhibit "A" hereto, and the express understanding and agreement that the New Kingstown Fire Company and the Shermansdale Community Fire Company were jointly leasing and would be using the premises on or about May 1, 2010. 4;i. If it is determined that the Plaintiff was injured on May 'I , 2010 and sustained damages while on the premises described in the Lease Agreement, and if it is further determined that the Plaintiff is legally entitled to recover for those injuries and damages, then Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company is solely liable to the Plaintiff or, in the alternative, is liable over to Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, for contractual and common law indemnification, contributory or both. WHEREFORE, Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, respectfully requests that if it is determined that the Plaintiff is legally able to recover damages in this case then Defendant, Shermansdale Community Fire Company, be found solely liable to the 9 Plaintiff or in the alternative, jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff and liable over to Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, for contractual and common law indemnification, contributory or both. NEW MATTER IN THE NATURE OF A CROSS CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 46. Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, incorporates herein by reference the averments contained in paragraphs 1 through 44 of the Answer, New Matter and Cross Claim as if set forth at length. 4.7. On or about May 1, 2010, Defendant, New Kingstown Fire Company, possessed, maintained and controlled the premises and facilities on the picnic grounds located on Glendale Drive, Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County, pursuant to the terms of the Lease Agreement attached as Exhibit "A" hereto, and the express understanding and agreement that the New Kingstown Fire Company and the Shermansdale Community Fire Company were jointly leasing and would be using the premises on or about May 1, 2010. 4~~. On or about May 1, 2010, the New Kingstown Fire Company was wholly or jointly in control of the premises and facilities of the picnic grounds located on Glendale Drive, Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.. 49. if it is determined that the Plaintiff was injured on May 1, 2010 and sustained damages while on the premises described in the Lease Agreement, and if it is further determined that the Plaintiff is legally entitled to recover for those injuries and damages, then Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company is solely liable to the Plaintiff 10 or, in the alternative, is liable over to Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, for contractual and common law indemnification, contributory or both. Date: October `~_, 2012 512879 Respectfully submitted, JOHN~8~1.,_.QUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER ''~` ~~ By:~~ John A. Statler; ~s Attorney I.D. No. 43812 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Counsel for Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club 11 VERIFICATION The undersigned, having read the attached Answer and New Matter, hereby certifies that the attached Answer, New Matter and Cross Claims is based on information furnished to counsel, which information has been gathered by counsel in the course of this lawsuit. The language of the Answer, New Matter and Cross Claims is that of counsel and not of the undersigned. The undersigned verifies that he has read the attached Answer, New Matter and Cross Claims and that it is true and correct to the best of his information and belief. To the extent that the contents of the ,4nswer are that of counsel, the undersigned has relied upon counsel in taking this Verification. This Verification is 18 Pa.C.S.a. §4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to au1 J ~r°" Michael Gal Dated: /~' - /S ~/ 2- subject to the penalties of ._._.~ ,~ ~- 518242 EXHIBIT A LEASE AGREEMENT EXHIBIT "A" 10/15/2010 10:23 7172511194 BLITTLE ~~~vtu tn~aa~laie 14:23 7172b1ii94 OCT/07/2009/~ED 02:47 PM MECHANItSBUBG GLUE FAX No, 7t7796D653 i.r.~,s~.~a~r.n~~r-1'7 L-'' 7]zi~F.s~ceemetn made this ,~~ day tit_•J N/~ __ -; betweeai T'he Mcclsatucshrn~ Club, ~ ~enas;-xvanan~urporacion of Pe~nIISyEveainY PBrrV ofthc ftrs!.part, l~sOr', ~ Pt'MAML3 .! parry of the second pen, I,essse(s~. Bi.ITTLE ~~ and PACE 02/ 05 ~. D~12 ~ .~ ~a~a WIT11E53~I'$S, ~r tt~e , m acaon of the_rurus sud caveq~s~ts mentioned, dose d~fse and lea.4e u~ ~t i,es~ec(s) . ~, ~i3AT cERT,9~Ii`t pdcaaii~c ground ~ a m silvc~ Spate Tav~,hip, G~abadaad Cot~r:Fe~rmsyl~mis, loud on C$Cpdaie Dsivc, sad to be ~ as apiauc .. - " t~ud 6Y the ~~csgoc(S), ~d SOS no other p'tupOSe, a~cluc'~ig~e psvi~aas, ki'te~eal fatice, rest rocmas,pa~n~,g 8ros< aver bus~aat includes a bt~ld~~xrdiecix:ti to as a ciampi~ a tv!tal saes of s~,p~i3mertcty fivc (~7 uaras. TOBA'4EAMID~O HOLU unto seidI.~9ee~s),.snbfett taxhe~..comd~ioz~s ditfis mt fcr a tam of 3 ~yts) ~ ~ ~6: ~0 o'cdock,,G . ~a., cnt~: ~~Y o!' a~fn , ands ~.1,~:.~ o'er ~ ~ .~' ~ t}ze , daY of , ire ~. Mteela:aicsbprgamb.~:.~nz~~.oo, (s9~4.o0~er~aa~nd ~2b0.flQ•for~•seagri~p depwit) ~tox"_*ronns:ai~300: or ~ or0,09, (~dOdlO for #be `'~ reas~L~d Sl~4:D01'or ~aotridv dspo~ fir at awrr30Q ror~pial ~fp~lp,~t (a~i~oaes afreoafiptaf~me~to~ugmt~e~te(s)badfodii~sbo~e. ?foot ~fivea'~Pttbiaa~u]~ttfredtnae,-EheBst~e(a)9vDlbe~aaniea~Eed.~od~s ox'.~'t-ea~bwtl , tam b~roatside~ed~ttli~l void. ~Vii3du caviar (7) dapsrs$errtie:Les~s) •r~eate~apra~iaea,~e],essor ~saekn ao . ~ in5pe~ioa o~'fheporempses, amd;if'ftjs ~atzLO pl~-aiCa]~Qagaa~a:6NS OOC~ied, A~d$~isaA ;~, ~Fm~p~'asc~iP~rt,aa8~~,~ee(s)h~a~gperl4aod . cOmOpTetely cleaved tf~puu~nni~,-~e7.~sar~-st~ rnat~~xcaa6ty depa~t~full, W~ IO dtrys. ~ul.assor shall ~fY the7.ess~(s) in ar~ahag ev3~in 1d dsYs od' ~~ aaaait3aQ- ~~,exaapaxty sad ~*-rawooatl~ dapo~iit orpaoroide a wry fist desaeges orprob]eooas mod tea6eu.fnr deductiaa ~'dsposit, or any es s®o~ m bepmd bg lescea{s~ 3h0u1d.'~eLe4SOC'ao~tl~tpb~ioRL clam~^CbBS OCL"mrad'~0'the~ ~~t,8 ~E1C I+eeB~e(S)118C and OCCCy, t~ ift~gtC 3s 7d~ti~Sitlg grope~- or eQ1t„ os if'$ie ~.~0(8~ 31i161~C'd'DO aIId Y. c]eaa'd~epR~tnisea 8~. QsFy t~ Lesaee(s} she,4 ~ot~Ctbe securjtlt dsposb..l4s addition,l3~s I.essoa sbnII b~avo"~ac right. Va chi tie lessee(s) £or ~P damaa~°rs or ~xuss~, propt~L}- ar equipnate~t w~sic~,t Ike cost e~eeedsthe atnonnt ofthe seaaxty de~wsit. ITIS FUR?I3>:~ AGREED that the Y.(s) s~eu be res~rone~-ble fmr ~ ooh off' ~• acuities tit ocx~v titittiag them. oy a~saad~reamiaec sad vd7J mt h~~ c~o~, or $llow, aa}- ~{~ aaiui(y; the vse or passrssian of eery idle; al dzug, the posse~.~ioZt or 10/11/2010 10:23 7172611194 BLITTCE FREE 03/05 Ra4tlVtt~ ltl!l7lillej0. 14:23 7172611194 BLITTCE OCT/07/2009/IWED 02:47 Pid P~7C$F~IIGGBIIBG CLUB PAID No. 7177960653 P, OD3 use aP.arry Ctrwa~m, tbeptgian or ust atar-y Breworks. of sbc possc;avion oT use nC coy lt~t ar aobstunsx wlzicli eotild or miSlm. eauat damage to the proper~r or ~~m~3ing area, or cause dea~tti oc igjury. IT IS FURTI~R AGREED that the ~,esetiata) wt"II cease sl} loud noise aAd 2inuaic ao later cbem } O:ilO pm. Bad vs-lIl totally vie ehe pr+egnitxat by I2:00 ml~i~hl. 1T' iS FURTHER A~ t~l ibr lessee(s) shall be rospa~siltie ~ tdG 5tld palia~ztg tb~s des ~r the use of same'by the Lessee(s). 2? LS FCTKTSEBACrRE$D #~t:iftlaeLessx(s~ c~ucel ~v~inforty Svc (45} afthe da»e se~eduled~.es~ets) vial tt~e S'lOQAO Se~ty deposit. LBS6~E(S) oavemSal, ptro~a~,.aad e~rccwlfbZc~or, to hold and s~ h..ami~es the T-~r;6rona aaY.a~pd all oleos ~d IiabiNry for daatgae m pro~y.end i~,jtug•ca~ d by.atzypeozon orpernars oatbapxem~s os e~zaute w.er$vm~hcpretaoises~ vehich ~ fzom and min iacmrad by I.eastt{s) s~se and o Atha grauaises P~asuanttbeceto, , A7TF.fiT: T~I~~iAN1CBHURQ CLUB ~~ , y ~os+deoa P3e8se situ one (1) copy atldteta~ ltta The Mechaniaebt~gtaah, X33 Hetgz 9n,eet, h€eait~ Pa 17053.. .. Date depoaltteceived C~eck~tie~ D.abe~eQtal'See receivai _ t~~ Number Dail afrefimtl (~erknamber Ra~IlOOt ~~ ~~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer, New Matter and Cross Claims of Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, to Plaintiff's Complaint has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on November _, 2012: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Counsel for Plaintiff J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm P.O. Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 Counsel for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company Brooks R Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Counsel for Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company JOHNSON, DUFFI~,, STEWART & WEIDNER By: John A. ire 512879 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE ~ ~ `' COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION -LAW ~ ~ ~. COMPANY ~~ ~~. Defendants ~ rte-- N ~~;' """ ~ -~ ~ ~ _,., ~a PLAINTIFF JACOB STIMELING'S REPLY TO ;mac ,,,~ `~,~} DEFENDANT THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB'S NEW MATTED'' ~ ;~,~ ~ . 33. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club's, hereinafter "Club", New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent however a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. To the contrary, Plaintiff in his Complaint, which is included herein by reference, set forth each and every element necessary to recover in this matter. 34. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his cause of action is barred by any Statute of Limitation. To the contrary, Plaintiff commenced the instant action within the applicable two year Statute of Limitations. 35. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, that a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his claims are barred and/or substantially reduced by the Doctrine of the Assumption of the Risk, contributory negligence and/or comparative negligence. To the contrary, Plaintiff did not knowingly and willingly assume the risk of injuries and damages which were solely and proximately caused by Defendants named in Plaintiff's Complaint. For further answer, Plaintiff s injuries or damages as set forth in his Complaint were solely and proximately caused by the Defendants named therein. 36. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. For further answer, answering Plaintiff, after reasonable investigation, presently lack sufficient knowledge and/or information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in the corresponding paragraphs of the Defendant Club's New Matter and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. 37. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. Answering Plaintiff, after reasonable investigation, presently lack sufficient knowledge and/or information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in the corresponding paragraphs of the Defendant Club's New Matter and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. 38. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that answering Defendant was not responsible for creating or maintaining the dangerous, defective or latent condition. To the contrary, answering Defendant was responsible for creating or maintaining the dangerous, defective or latent condition, 39. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that the dangerous, defective or latent condition was open and obvious. To the contrary, the dangerous, defective or latent condition was not open and obvious. 40. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Club's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent, however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his cause of action may be barred in whole or in part by an intervening superseding cause. To the contrary, Plaintiffs injuries or damages as set forth in his Complaint were solely and proximately caused by the Defendants named therein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling respectfully requests that Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club's New Matter be dismissed with prejudice and judgment be entered in favor of Plaintiff. Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: ~~ r Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Date: November 21, 2012 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I, Jacob Stimeling, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this Action and verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. % cob Stimeling GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 Attorney for Plaintiff JACOB STIMELING : 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : NO. 12-2375 ,- :~ ~..~ ' THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, _~~ SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE ~° ~ ~~-~- COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION -LAW ~~ N COMPANY _ ~~' rn `~' Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ~~ ~ ~~ ~~> .~ ~ ~ ~.~ c= ry c-~: v ... ."'.'4 ~~ ?y x~ I, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 21 S` day of November, 2012, a true and correct copy of the within Plaintiff Jacob Stimeling s Rely to Defendant The Mechanicsburg_Club was sent by first class, postage prepaid US Mail to the following: J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm PO Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 John A. Statler, Esquire Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson Duffie 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Po Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. ckerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff ..~ , l~~l .'(~~,.. , _ ~ k a . ~., , , ~ : _. ~. ~ r . ~.~ ~" d .. 4; k.. -. 6 i ~ i. t ~'~ JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COiJNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRF, COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW DEFENDANT SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY'S ANSWER TO THE CROSS-CLAIM OF THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB AND NOW, comes defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company, by and through its attorneys, McCormick Law Firm, and hereby answers the cross-claim filed by co-defendant The Mechanicsburg Club in accordance with its consecutively-numbered paragraphs as follows: 42-43. Denied. Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club's selective reference to and quotation of the lease agreement is denied. The lease agreement is in writing and speaks for itself. This averment is further denied pursuant to Pa.RC.P. 1029(e). Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 44. Denied. This averment contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, it is denied that any of the alleged damages/ injuries claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence of defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company. To the contrary, at all pertinent times hereto, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company acted appropriately under the circumstances and in accordance with all applicable standards of care. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 45. Denied. This averment contains a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, it is denied that any of the alleged damages/ injuries claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence of defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company. To the contrary, at all pertinent times hereto, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company acted appropriately under the circumstances and in accordance with all applicable standards of care. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 46-50. These averments are directed to a party other than the answering defendant, and therefore, no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that an answer is required, these averments are denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). WHEREFORE, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies liability, demands judgment in its favor, and against the plaintiff and/or defendant The Mechanicsburg Club, together with the costs and expenses of this lawsuit. Respectfully submitted, McCORMICK LAW FIRM B David Smith, I.D. #27813 J son L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 2 VERIFICATIONPURSUANT TO Pa.R. C.P. NO. 1024(c) I, JASON WIEMANN, state that I am the attorney for defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company; that I make this verification as an attorney, because defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company is outside the jurisdiction of the Court and its verification could not be obtained within the time allowed for service of this document; and that I have sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon my investigation of the matters stated in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company will supplement this verification with a verification performed pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1024(a). Jason Wiemann Dated: ~f ~?~¢ ~1 Z JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's Answer to the Cross-Claim of the Mechanicsburg Club was served this 26th day of November, 2012 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 McCORMICK LAW FIRM r By. J. avid Smith, I.D. #27813 Ja on L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 i JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff V. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY Defendants, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL ACTION -LAW ORDER AND NOW, this /5' day of December, 2012, upon consideration of the attached Motion of Shermansdale Community Fire Company requesting a continuance; the Motion for Continuance is GRANTED, and the hearing scheduled for December 21, 2012, is hereby a m- e :erd continued ??^*? ?? _-- Mx v ?o be ecdIJ&4 67 -Al" 10 a, k BY THE COURT: ? - 5-nC r, ??'mii n ri , Sri? ? r??'r L! }? ?* cam. s rw JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY : FIRE COMPANY, and �+ a NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY . s •. Defendants, vv. . : s Zs' ;-r; NOTICE TO PLEAD ,a TO: Plaintiff c/o: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Defendant,New Kingstown Fire Company Graham &Mauer, P.C. c/o: Brooks R. Foland, Esq. The Commons at Valley Forge Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Suite 7, Box 987 P.O. Box 999 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Defendant,The Mechanicsburg Club c/o: John A. Statler,Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart& Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne,PA 17043-0109 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE ENCLOSED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER AND CROSSCLAIM WITHIN TWENTY(20) DAYS FROM SERVICE HEREOF OR A JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. McCORMICK LAW FIRM Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorney for Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport,PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 • JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY • FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY : Defendants, ANSWER OF DEFENDANT SHERMANDALE COMMUNITYFIRE COMPANY TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER AND CROSSCLAIM AND NOW COMES defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company, by and through their counsel, McCormick Law Firm, and answers plaintiff's Amended Complaint with New Matter as follows: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, it is believed and therefore averred that plaintiff is now deceased. 2. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 3. Denied as stated. It is admitted only that the answering defendant is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation with a principal place of business at 5450 Spring Road, Shermansdale, Pennsylvania, 17090. Any and all other allegations contained in paragraph 3 are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 4. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 5. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To an extent the response is required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). 6. This averment is directed to a party other than the answering defendant and no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a responsive pleading is required, the answering defendant incorporates by reference the response of defendant The Mechanicsburg Club to this averment pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(g). 7. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent a response is required, the averments are specifically denied. 8. This averment is directed to a party other than the answering defendant and no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a responsive pleading is required, the answering defendant incorporates by reference the response of defendant New Kingston Fire Company to this averment pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(g). 9. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 2 11. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of this averment; it is therefore, denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. 12. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). 13. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 14. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 3 15. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence 4 on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. COUNT I JACOB STIMELING V. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB 18-22. No responsive pleading is required to an allegation asserted against a co- defendant. To the extent a response is required, these averments are denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). COUNT II JACOB STIMELING V. SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 23. Paragraphs l through 22 above, are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth. 24. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). 25. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. 26. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant 5 to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. 27. Denied. This averment contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that a response is required, this averment is denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that it was negligent in any way. Moreover, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company denies that any of the alleged damages/injuries suffered and/or claimed by plaintiff were the result of any alleged negligence on behalf of Shermansdale Community Fire Company. Strict proof to the contrary thereof is demanded at trial. COUNT III JACOB STIMELING V.NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY 28-32. No responsive pleading is required to an allegation asserted against a co- defendant. To the extent a response is required, these averments are denied pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1029(e). WHEREFORE, the answering defendant, Shermansdale Community Fire Company, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. NEW MATTER By way of further answer, Shermansdale Community Fire Company avers the following: 33. Paragraphs 1 through 32 above, are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth. 34. Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 6 35. Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole or in part by the statute of limitations. 36. Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole or in part pursuant to the immunity provisions of the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §8541, et. seq. 37. Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company is a local agency and/or political subdivision as defined by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §8541, et. seq. 38. Plaintiff's claims, damages, and/or injuries if any, are barred and/or limited by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §8553. 39. Plaintiff's claims, damages, and/or injuries if any, may be barred or reduced by plaintiff's own comparative and/or contributory negligence. 40. Some or all of plaintiffs injuries and/or damages, if any,may be caused by parties other than the answering defendant. WHEREFORE, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company respectfully requests judgment entered in its favor and against plaintiff Jacob Stimeling. CROSS CLAIM 41. Paragraphs 1 through 40 above, are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth. 42. Any damages sustained by plaintiff, all of which are specifically denied, were caused by the acts, omissions, negligence and/or other liability on the part of all other defendants, the Mechanicsburg Club and/or the New Kingstown Fire Company, and were in no way caused by the answering defendant. 43. In the event that the plaintiff receives payment in this matter,by way of verdict, settlement, or otherwise, all other defendants are liable to the plaintiff, only. Alternatively, all 7 other defendants are jointly and severally liable with defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company, by way of contribution and/or indemnification. WHEREFORE, defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company, denies liability, demands judgment in its favor, and demands that in the event that plaintiff receives payment due to verdict, settlement, or otherwise, that all other defendants be found liable to plaintiff, only, and/or jointly and severably liable with defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company by way of contribution and/or indemnification. McCORMICK LAW FIRM BY: J. avid Smith, I.D. #27813 Jason L. Wiemann, I.D. #311549 Attorneys for Shermansdale Community Fire Company 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 (570) 326-5131 8 VERIFICATION I, MIKE W. MINICH,verify that I am Fire Chief of the Shermansdale Community Fire Company,and being duly sworn according to law,deposes and says that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer with New Matter of Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company to Plaintiffs'Amended Complaint, are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief I understand that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ike W. Minch Date: a Rr t t`3 JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY • FIRE COMPANY, and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY : Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JASON L. WIEMANN, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer with New Matter of Defendants Shermansdale Community Fire Company to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was served this 24 day of April, 2013 upon the following, service as indicated: First-Class Mail, Postage Prepaid: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Brooks R. Foland, Esq. Graham & Mauer, P.C. Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP The Commons at Valley Forge P.O. Box 999 Suite 7, Box 987 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Valley Forge, PA 19482 John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffie, Stewart &Weidner 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 McCORMICK LAW FIRM B • Jason L. Wiemann i � '�0�°F1C� GRAHAM&MAUER,P.C. OF T '1LEDHE PROTHONOTARY Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 20113 APR 12 PM 1 31 Whitney S. Graham,Esquire CUMBERLAND COUNTY Attorney I.D. 312145 PENNSYLVANIA The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7,Box 987 Valley Forge,PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA VS. : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION-LAW COMPANY Defendants PLAINTIFF JACOB STIMELING'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY'S NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT 33. No response required. 34. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent,however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his Complaint,which is incorporated herein by reference, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. To the contrary, Plaintiff's Complaint sets forth each and every element entitling Plaintiff to the recovery sought. 35. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore,avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent,however, a reply may be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his cause of action is barred by any Statute of Limitation. To the contrary, Plaintiff commenced the instant action within the applicable two year Statute of Limitations. 36. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent however a reply may be required Plaintiff's claims fit squarely within the real estate property exception to the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act. 37. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. 38. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent however a reply may be required Plaintiff's claims fit squarely within the real estate property exception to the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act. 39. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter is automatically deemed denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at trial, if material. To the extent,however,a replymay be required Plaintiff specifically denies that his claims are barred and/or mitigated by Plaintiff's contributory and/or comparative negligence. To the contrary, Plaintiff's injuries or damages as set forth in his Complaint were solely and proximately caused by the Defendants named therein. 40. Admitted. Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM&MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J.Vnickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs Date: April 10, 2013 GRAHAM&MAUER,P.C. FILED-OFFICE Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker OF THE PROTHONOTARt Attorney I.D. 94819 2013 APR 12 PM 1: 38 Whitney S. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 312145 CUMBE&ANO COUNTY The Commons at Valley Forge PENN YLVANIA Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA VS. NO. 12-21375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION-LAW COMPANY Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Stacy J. Knickerbocker,Esquire,do hereby certify that on this 10'day of April,2013,a true and correct copy of the within Plaintiff Jacob Sfiaeling's Reply to Defendant Shmansdale Community Fire Company's New Matter to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was sent by first class,postage prepaid US Mail to the following: J. David Smith,Esquire Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire Thomas, Thomas&Hafer, LLP McCormick Law Firm Po Box 999 PO Box 577 Harrisburg,PA 17108 Williamsport, PA 17703 Jefferson J. Shipman,Esquire John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson Duffie 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM&MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J.Xnickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff f u rliE R0 THON0E ray Y 2013 APR 15 P �H 2. 52 CUMBERLAND COUNTY THOMAS,THOMAS&HAFER, LLP IENNS YLVANIA by: Brooks R. Foland, Esquire ' I.D. No. 70102 305 North Front Street 6th Floor POB 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717)255-7626 (717)237-7105 fax bfoland @tthlaw.com Counsel for New Kingstown Fire Company JACOB STIMELING, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, NO. 12-2375 CIVIL TERM SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN CIVIL ACTION — LAW FIRE COMPANY, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER CROSSCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY 41. Answering Defendant incorporates by reference the answers to Plaintiff's Complaint as though the same were fully set forth herein at length. 42. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 42 are conclusions of law l to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). 43. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 43 are,conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed to be required, the allegations are denied pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company on the latter's new matter crossclaims. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS, T I HAFER, LLP by: Br oks R. Foland, Es I.D. No. 70102 305 North Front Street, 6t" Floor POB 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7626 Attorneys for New Kingstown Fire Company VERIFICATION The undersigned, having read the attached document, hereby verifies that the attached pleading is based on information which has been gathered by counsel in the course of this lawsuit. The language of the pleading is that of counsel. Furthermore, the matters contained in this pleading are of a procedural nature only among counsel and the court. The undersigned verifies that he has read the attached pleading and that it is true and correct to the best of his information and belief. This Verification is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Brooks R. Foland Date: • I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE `A AND NOW, this �� day of 201.3 I, Coleen M. Polek, of the law firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer,_LLP, hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing document by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esq. Graham & Mauer, P.C. . The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Jefferson.J. Shipman, Esq. John A. Statler, Esq. Johnson, Duffie, Stewart &Weidner 301 Market Street POB 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 J. David Smith, Esq. Jason Wiemann, Esq. McCormick Law Firm 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 I, Coleen M. Polek 1270412.1 THE PRO THONO TAR 2014 MAR 13 AH H: fli CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN By: Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 70102 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 651-3714 brfoland@mdwcg.com Attorney for Defendant New Kingstown Fire Company JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION — LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Plaintiff V. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE COMPANY, Defendants PRAECIPE FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO THE PROTHONOTARY: /dew g;tvisiolon r-;Re COittpa.t7 Kindly note the change of address of counsel for Defendant Apelle-Peeris-,--Ine. from Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, 305 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA to: A' per pkene- Conversa.440,1. 14,144 Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin Suite 201 100 Corporate Center Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 651-3714 (717) 651-3707 - fax Respectfully submitted, MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER COLEMAN & GOGGIN BY: Date: March 12, 2014 05/1184807.v1 ooks R. Fo land, Esquire, Attorney for Defend New Kingstown Fire Company CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served upon the following known counsel and parties of record this 12th day of March, 2014 via United States First-Class Mail, postage prepaid: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge 1220 Valley Forge Road, Suite 7 P.O. Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 • Attorney for Plaintiff John A. Statler, Esquire Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, P.C. 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorney for Co-Defendant The Mechanicsburg Club J. David Smith, Esquire McCormick Law Firm 835 West Fourth Street P.O. Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 Attorney for Co-Defendant Shermansdale Community Fire Company MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER COLEMAN BY: 05/1184807Ni Brooks R. Foland, E f. I fill JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDN�E NN4 „, ,) cQ By: John A. Statler )` y / " I.D.: 43812 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jas@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendants JACOB STIMELING, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION — LAW v. THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and : SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE : COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN : FIRE COMPANY, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR STATUS CONFERENCE AND NOW, comes the Defendant, The Mechanicsburg Club, by and through its counsel, Johnson, Duffle, Stewart & Weidner, and John A. Statler, Esquire, and files the following Motion for Status Conference by stating the following: 1. This case arises out of a fall down accident that allegedly occurred on May 1, 2010, at The Mechanicsburg Club picnic grounds near Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a Complaint on August 3, 2012. 3. The Plaintiff then filed an Amended Complaint on September 7, 2012. 4. On November 5, 2012, the Defendant filed its Answer and New Matter. 5. The Plaintiff filed his reply to the Defendant's New Matter on November 21, 2012. 6. The Plaintiff died on February 3, 2013 from causes unrelated to the subject accident. 7. On February 7, 2013, the defense counsel sent a letter to counsel for Plaintiff requesting to know how he wished to proceed in the matter. Defense counsel received no response from Plaintiff's counsel. 8. On July 11, 2013, defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff's counsel offering a settlement in exchange for general release. 9. On September 17, 2013, defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff's counsel requesting a response to the settlement offer. 10. On October 11, 2013, defense counsel sent a second letter to Plaintiff's counsel requesting a response to the settlement offer. 11. On December 30, 2013, defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff's counsel requesting that Plaintiff's counsel agree to file a Praecipe to Discontinue this lawsuit. Defense counsel received no response from Plaintiff's counsel. 12. On March 26, 2014, defense counsel sent a second letter to Plaintiff's counsel requesting that Plaintiff's counsel agree to file a Praecipe to Discontinue this lawsuit. Defense counsel received no response from Plaintiff's counsel. 13. In light of the Plaintiff's death, Plaintiff's counsel will be unable to successfully proceed with the suit against the Defendant. Plaintiff was never deposed in any matter related to this lawsuit and will be unable to sustain his burden of proof in this suit. 14. The Defendant requests a status conference in order to resolve this matter or to establish case management deadlines. 15. No judge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matters. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order scheduling a status conference. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: Date: May Zd 2014 624246 John A. Statler, e uire Attorney I.D. No. 43812 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Counsel for Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Defendants' Motion for Status Conference has been duly served upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, on May Zv , 2014: Ron Graham, Esquire The Commons at Valley Forge, Suite 7 P.O. Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 J. David Smith, Esquire 835 West Fourth Street Williamsport, PA 17701 Brooks R. Foland, Esquire 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Camp Hill, PA 17011 JO By: UFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER John A. Statler JACOB STIMELING, Plaintiff v. _ 1 1 L� -OFFICE 2-1 LED TFEPROTHO'0iAr; 2014MAY 23 P11 1:43 CUMBERLAND COUNT`r, PENNS YLVANIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 12-2375 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION — LAW THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB and : SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE : COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN : FIRE COMPANY, Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this ;Ste( day of 1//� , 2014, on consideration of the Defendant's Motion for Status scheduled for Yae4� Conference, a Status Conference is hereby 07 y , 2014 at /6;364.M. at the Cumberland County Courthouse in Judge's Chambers. Dist ' ution: • John A. Statler, Esquire, Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, 301 Market Street, P.O. Box 109, Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109; Tel. (717) 761-4540; Fax (717) 761- 3015; jas@jdsw.com. • Ron Graham, Esquire, Graham & Mauer, P.C., The Commons at Valley Forge, Suite 7, P.O. Box 987, Valley Forge, PA 19482; Tel. (610) 933-3333; Tel. 1-800-218-0808; Fax (610) 983-0570. David Smith, Esquire, McCormick Law Firm, 835 West Fourth Street, Williamsport, PA 17701, Tel. (570) 326-5131; Fax (570) 326-5529; Brooks R. Foland, Esquire, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, 100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Camp Hill, PA 17011; Tel. (717) 651-3714; Fax (717) 651-3707; brfoland@mdwcg.com. %n`atLtL S/23//Y GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Whitney S. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 312145 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 2011 , ON 18 1'i , 1. CL! f�nLAND COLA PC,`YNS YL VA t, JACOB STIMELING vs. Attorney for Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE : COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPANY Defendants PRAECIPE TO SETTLE, DISCONTINUE AND END TO: The Prothonotary of Cumberland County Kindly mark the above -captioned matter settled, discontinued and ended. Thank you. By: Date: r 1 GRA AM f MAUER, P.C. Whitney S. Graham Attorney for Plaintiff GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Whitney S. Graham, Esquire Attorney ID .312145 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 JACOB STIMELING vs. Attorney for Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 12-2375 THE MECHANICSBURG CLUB, SHERMANSDALE COMMUNITY FIRE : COMPANY and NEW KINGSTOWN FIRE: CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMPANY Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Whitney S. Graham, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 1.6 day of June, 2014, a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe to Settle, Discontinue and End was sent by first class, postage prepaid US Mail to the following: J. David Smith, Esquire Jason L. Wiemann, Esquire McCormick Law Firm PO Box 577 Williamsport, PA 17703 John A. Statler, Esquire Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Johnson Duffle 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 By: Brooks R. Foland, Esquire Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP Po Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108 Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & M ER, P.C. Whitney S. Graham, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff