Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13-1198 Kimberly Dixon Plaintiff Truoc T. Trang and DE Trang Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. ~ J ( ~ 20 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 ~~,~ ~ ~ a 3. ~.S~a ~~a~~a~ GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney LD. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON 96 B Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff :1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. vs. TRUOC T TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 and DE TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Defendants CIVIL ACTION -LAW COMPLAINT Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon is an adult individual residing at 96 B Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 2. On information and belief, Defendant Truoc T. Trang is an adult individual residing at 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 3. On information and belief, Defendant DE Trang is an adult individual residing at 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013. 4. On or about April 26, 2011, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon was the operator of a 1993 Chevy Astro Van which was stopped at a stop sign on Ritner Highway in Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. At said time and place, Defendant Truoc T. Trang was the operator of a Toyota Camry traveling on Ritner Highway in Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. Suddenly and without warning, at said time and place, the front of the vehicle operated by Defendant Truoc T. Trang struck the rear of the vehicle operated by Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. 7. As a result of said collision, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon was violently thrown about within the vehicle Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon was operating. 8. As a result of said collision, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon sustained serious personal injuries. COUNT I -NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY DIXON V. DEFENDANT TRUOC T. TRANG 9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated herein, as if set forth at length herein. 10. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Truoc T. Trang, and not due to any act or failure to act on the part of Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon, said Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon suffered headaches, cervical spine pain and a full thickness tear to the right supraspinatus tendon, requiring right shoulder arthroscopy, debridement, biceps tenotomy, distal clavicle excision subacromial decompression, and mini-open right rotator cuff repair, loss of life's pleasures, and injuries to her nerves and nervous system, some or all of which are or may be permanent in nature. 11. Some or all of Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon's injuries have caused great pain, mental anguish and a permanent weakening and/or loss of strength and limitation of movement in those body systems and parts of the body so that they are now exposed to a greater likelihood of reinjury than had these injuries not occurred. In addition, as a further result of these injuries, and the medicine and procedures they made necessary, the integrity and resilience/resistance to injury of the foregoing body systems have been compromised so that these systems and other component body subsystems are more susceptible to injury and will have an earlier onset of degeneration and other problems than they would have had Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon not been so injured. 12. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Truoc T. Trang, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon has been and may continue to be in the future unable to attend to her usual habits, customs, vocation, and/or enjoyment of life. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Truoc T. Trang, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon has suffered and/or continues to suffer and/or may in the future suffer a loss of earnings and/or earning capacity. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Truoc T. Trang, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon has been in the past and may continue to be in the future required to undergo medical and medically-related treatments and procedures. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Defendant Truoc T. Trang, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon has been in the past and/or may be in the future required to spend great sums of money for medical and medically-related treatment and procedures as a result of her injuries. 16. Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon is entitled to recover damages under the full tort option provided by the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S.A. §1701 et seq. 17. Defendant Truoc T. Trang was negligent and careless in the operation of said motor vehicle for the following reasons, which include: a. Failure to properly operate, manage and control said motor vehicle; b. Disregarding the rights, safety and position of other vehicles on the road including the vehicle driven by Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon; c. Failure to keep a proper look out; d. Failure to remain a safe and clear distance away from Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon's vehicle; e. Failure to abide by the applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the road; f. Failure to stop in time to avoid a collision with Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon's vehicle; h. Failure to apply the brakes in a timely manner; I. Failure to control said motor vehicle in a reasonable and prudent fashion; k. Operating, steering and controlling said motor vehicle in a careless and negligent manner; 1. Failure to avoid the occurrence complained of; m. Failure to observe the roadway and/or the vehicles thereon including the vehicle of Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon; n. Failure to remain alert at the wheel; and q. Failure to alter her course to avoid a collision with the vehicle operated by Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant Truoc T. Trang in an 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 -NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY DIXON V. DEFENDANT DE TRANG 18. Paragraphs 1 through 17 are incorporated herein, as if set forth at length herein. 19. On information and belief, at all times pertinent hereto, Defendant DE Trang was the owner of the Toyota Camry operated by Defendant Truoc T. Trang at the time of said motor vehicle collision. 20. By virtue of Defendant DE Trang's ownership interest in the striking motor vehicle, Defendant DE Trang had an absolute right to control the use of the subject motor vehicle. 21. Defendant DE Trang negligently entrusted said vehicle to Defendant Truoc T. Trang when he knew or should have known that Defendant Truoc T. Trang was a negligent motor vehicle operator so as to present an unreasonable risk of harm to others upon the highway, including Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. 22. Defendant Truoc T. Trang was operating said vehicle at said time and place within the scope of consent and/or for the benefit of Defendant DE Trang. 23. Defendant DE Trang was negligent in permitting Defendant Truoc T. Trang to operate said motor vehicle without placing limitations on it's use, including driving at a safe speed, maintaining a safe and clear distance ahead and obeying traffic control devices. 24. On information and belief, Defendant DE Trang was negligent in entrusting said motor vehicle to Defendant Truoc T. Trang when Defendant DE Trang knew or should have known that Defendant Truoc T. Trang's history of negligent or unsafe driving and/or physical condition due to lack of sleep and/or condition of health and/or medications and/or illness and/or limited faculties, or the combination thereof, was such that Defendant Truoc T. Trang would be likely to have impaired motor functions or reaction times, such as to cause a danger of injury to others, including Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. 25. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant DE Trang, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon has suffered damages as set forth herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant DE Trang in an 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. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: ~ ~/ Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Date: March 2, 2013 VERIFICATION I, Kimberly Dixon, 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. ~.. ~.~1L. Kimberly Dixon GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON 96 B Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff vs. TRUOC T TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 and DE TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COQU~NTY, PENNSYLVANIA :NO. t3 _11q O ~II~I CIVIL ACTION -LAW ~.,; ~. aFY~~~~s n+~~~.1 ~"~ -... t' -~ i . ~: ~:~ ~..w ,m<<~ '~ ~ ~ ~ . - ~4 J V rn .- ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Ronald M. Graham, Esquire, as attorney for Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Ron~d"M. Graham, Esquire Date: March 2, 1013 Atto ey 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 KIMBERLY DIXON 96 B Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA :NO. ~3_~lq~ ~U~1 vs. TRUOC T TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 and DE TRANG 2790 Spring Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Defendants CIVIL ACTION -LAW • . -- -_.a ~:~ :. = ~ -- ~ .~.... cap ,. ~ 4 ~ ,: ^V j ~.~ .,. :~ ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, as attorney for Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon. GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. ~~~~ _, ,_ By: ~~Ca.~ ~r~j,~t~-" Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Date: March 2, 2013 Attorney for Plaintiff SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson Sheriff FILED-O F ICE , Jody S Smith 1jF THE PR0TH0t4eTAPN r Chief Deputy 2013 MAR 1.8 AM 9* Richard W Stewart , . Solicitor OfME+FT E6"tzRIFF CUlGrO .ANB CotiNTY FE 1�SYLVAN1 A Kimberly Dixon vs. Case Number Truoc T Trang(et al.) 2013-1198 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 03/1112013 05:04 PM-Deputy Noah Cline, being duly sworn according to law,served the requested Complaint& Notice by"personally"handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be the Defendant, to wit: DE Trang at 2790 Spring Rd., N. Middleton Twp., Carlisle, PA 17013. NOAH CLINE, DEPUTY 03111/2013 05:04 PM-Deputy Noah Cline, being duly swom according to law,served the requested Complaint& Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be De Trang,who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge"for Truoc T Trang at 2790 Spring Rd., N. Middleton Twp., Carlisle, PA 17013. NOAH CLINE, DEPUTY SHERIFF COST: $50.00 SO ANSWERS, March 12, 2013 RONW R ANDERSON, SHERIFF {cl CountySuile Sheriff,Teleosoft,iric. f: t F1 e j r.� �'It7t;Cl � T t; 2013 MAR 21 PM 1: 23 '-UJBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, NO. 13-1198 V. TRUOC T. TRANG and PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE DE TRANG, (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendants. Filed on Behalf of the Defendants Counsel of Record for This Party: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Pa. I.D. #83058 SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE and SKEEL, P.C. Firm #911 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 (717) 901-5916 #19800 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, V. NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T. TRANG and (Jury Trial Demanded) DE TRANG, Defendants. PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE TO: THE PROTHONOTARY Kindly enter the Appearance of the undersigned, Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, of the law firm of Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, P.C., on behalf of the Defendants, Truoc T. Trang and De Trang, in the above case. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE EEL, P.C. Si a or" By: such, E JK vin4sD.Pa L squire ef� i olunseli for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 20th day of March, 2013. Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (Attorney for Plaintiff) SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE S SKEEL, P.C. By: evin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendants 4J13 MAY 31 An 11 29 CUMBERLAND CWMITv IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, NO. 13-1198 V. ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TRUOC T. TRANG and DE TRANG, (Jury Trial Demanded) Defendants. Filed on Behalf of the Defendants TO: Plaintiffs Counsel of Record for This Party: You are hereby notified to file a written Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Response to the enclosed Answer and New Matter within twenty (20) days Pa. I.D. #83058 From service hereof or a judgment SUMMERS, McDONNELL HUDOCK, Maybe ntered aga' st you. GUTHRIE and SKEEL, P.C. Firm #911 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 u m M Donnell, Hudock, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Gut rie & Skeel, P.C. (717) 901-5916 #19800 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, V. NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T. TRANG and (Jury Trial Demanded) DE TRANG, Defendants. ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes the Defendants, Truoc and De Trang, by and through their counsel, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, P.C., and Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, and files the following Answer and New Matter and in support thereof avers as follows: i 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that a Plaintiff was travelling on Ritner Highway, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The remaining allegations in paragraph 6 are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 5. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the Defendant, Truoc Trang was travelling on Ritner Highway, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. It is'denied that Truoc Trang was operating a Toyota Camry, to the contrary, she was operating a 1996 Toyota Avalon. 6. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that a collision occurred between the Plaintiff's vehicle and the Defendant's vehicle at the date and time alleged. The remaining allegations in paragraph 6 are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 7. After reasonable investigation, the Defendants have insufficient information as to the truth or falsity of said averments, therefore said averments are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 8. Paragraph 8 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNT I - NEGLEGENCE 9. In response to paragraph 9, the Defendants reiterate and repeat all their responses in paragraphs 1 through 8 as if fully set forth at length herein 10. Paragraph 10 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 11. Paragraph 11 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 12. Paragraph 12 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 13. Paragraph 13 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 14. Paragraph 14 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 15. Paragraph 15 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 16. Paragraph 16 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. i 17. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that the Defendant, Truoc Trang was negligent in the operation of her vehicle on the date, time and place of the subject accident. The remaining allegations contained in paragraph 17 and its subparts are legal conclusion and no response is necessary. To the extent, however, that a response is necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. COUNT II —NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT 18. In response to paragraph 18, the Defendants reiterate and repeat all their responses in paragraphs 1 through 17 as if fully set forth at length herein. 19. Admitted. 20. Paragraph 20 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 21. Paragraph 21 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, it is specifically denied that De Trang acted in a negligent and careless manner. To the contray, Mr. Trang acted in a reasonable and prudent manner at all times. 22. Paragraph 22 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, said averments are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(d) and (e). Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 23. Paragraph 23 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, it is specifically denied that De Trang acted in a negligent and careless manner. To the contrary, Mr. Trang acted in a reasonable and prudent manner at all times thereto. 24. Paragraph 24 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, it is specifically denied that De Trang acted in a negligent and careless manner. To the contray, Mr. Trang acted in a reasonable and prudent manner at all times thereto. 25. Paragraph 25 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent, however, that a response is deemed necessary, it is specifically denied that De Trang acted in a negligent and careless manner. To the contrary, Mr. Trang acted in a reasonable and prudent manner at all times thereto. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Truoc and De Trang, respectfully request this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. NEW MATTER 26. The motor vehicle accident in controversy is subject to the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and these Defendants assert, as affirmative defenses, all rights, privileges and/or immunities accruing pursuant to said statute. 27. Some and/or all of Plaintiffs claims for damages are items of economic detriment which are or could be compensable pursuant to either the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and/or other collateral sources and same may not be duplicated in the present lawsuit. 28. To the extent that the Plaintiff has selected the limited tort option or is/are deemed to have selected the limited tort option then these Defendants set forth the relevant provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law as a bar to the Plaintiff's ability to recover non-economic damages. 29. These Defendants plead any and all applicable statutes of limitation under Pennsylvania Law as a complete or partial bar to any recovery by Plaintiff in this action. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Truoc and De Trang, respectfully request this Honorable Court enter judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiff with costs and prejudice imposed. Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE & KEEL, P.C. By: Ik,4& Yievin D. auch, squire ounsel for Defendants r e VERIFICATION Defendant verifies that she is the Defendant in the foregoing action; that the foregoing ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which she has furnished to her counsel and information which has been gathered by her counsel in the preparation of the lawsuit. The language of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel and not of the Defendant. Defendant has read the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER and to the extent that the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which she has given to her counsel, it is true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel, she has relied upon counsel in making this Affidavit. Defendant understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: S Truoc Trang #19800 VERIFICATION Defendant verifies that he is the Defendant in the foregoing action; that the foregoing ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which he has furnished to his counsel and information which has been gathered by his counsel in the preparation of the lawsuit. The language of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel and not of the Defendant. Defendant has read the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER and to the extent that the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is based upon information which he has given to his counsel, it is true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the ANSWER AND NEW MATTER is that of counsel, he has relied upon counsel in making this Affidavit. Defendant understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: De Trang #19800 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 29th day of May, 2013. Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (Attorney for Plaintiff) SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK, GUTHRIE SKEEL, P.C. By: - 'Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Counsel for Defendants 1 • 1 GRAHAM& MAUER, P.C. ";' By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire '�' �_��,, .Pr,0T 1O P 410 ? Attorney I.D. 64483 2 013 JUIN 17 Nk! 1; 20 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 CUPISER LAND COUNTY The Commons at Valley Forge PENNSYLVANIA Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. : NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION- LAW and DE TRANG Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' NEW MATTER 26. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and, therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendants' 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. 27. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendants' 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. 28. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendants' 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 that a reply may be required, Plaintiff specifically denies that the her claims are barred, reduced, and/or limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, in that Plaintiff is entitled to recover under the full tort provision of said Law. 29. Denied. Answering Plaintiff is advised by counsel and,therefore, avers that the allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph of the Defendants' 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 her 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. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon hereby demands judgment in her favor and against Defendants Truoc Trang and De Trang in an amount which does exceed the jurisdictional limit requiring arbitration referral by local rule plus interest, costs and such other remedies as this Court may deem just and reasonable. Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM& MAUER, P.C. By: auU"bidxr Stacy J. ickerbocker, Esquire Date: June 15, 2013 Attorney for Plaintiff ,y f' VERIFICATION I,Kimberly Dixon, 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. Kimberly Dixon " yr GRAHAM&MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7,Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. : NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION - LAW 70 70C� and ---' DE TRANG *' Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 15th day of June, 2013, a true and correct copy of the within Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' New Matter was sent by first class,postage prepaid US Mail lo the following: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Kyle W. Krombach, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie& Skeel, P.C. 100 Sterling Parkway Suite 206 Harrisburg, PA 17050 GRAHAM & MAUER,P.C. By. L` Stacy J. kyickerbocker Attorney for Plaintiff GRAHAM&MAUER,P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquires Attorney I.D. 64483 AP1 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker �UM8ERLAI-vD COUNT E Ns YLV " t Attorney I.D. 94819 AP�1l� The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7,Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. :NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION- LAW and DE TRANG Defendants PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A STATUS CONFERENCE 1. This lawsuit arises from a motor vehicle collision which occurred on April 26, 2011. 2. Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon suffered permanent injuries as a result of said collision. 3. On March 4, 2013 Plaintiff filed suit in this matter. 4. At this'time, a judge has not ruled upon any issues in this matter. 1 S. Depositions of the parties have been scheduled for August 9,2013. 6. Counsels for the parties have discussed this matter and Defendants' counsel, Kevin D. Rauch has no objection to this request. 7. Plaintiff requests a Status Conference for the purpose of setting deadlines for discovery, exchanging expert testimony and assignment of the case for trial to a specific trial tOrm. Respectfully Submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. a,ickerbocker, Esquire Date: June 20, 2013 Attorney for Plaintiff i s GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. L l fit: 'r i{, .� a?_ ih-: By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire " 1 3 JU 28 PM 12: 4 n Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker CUMBERLAND COUNTY Attorney I.D. 94819 PENNSYLVANIA The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge,PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. :NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION- LAW and : DE TRANG Defendants ORDER AND NOW, this -4y-aay of 2013, upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion for A Status Conference and any response thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Status Conference is scheduled for the 11^x'- day of .4 —' 2013 at Y: C'6 in ( 1 tl_. �i L �Y�IJ �l' , :`"�1 L s3 ��ay°� 1�1� ( � tC- � ��iZ' =1 1 • .� / By the Court, ,91� . 1.+�( S'. uEs fz"a J. to ;z a/r3 �F GRAHAM ,+���� BY Stacy J. Knickerbocker � �Sep Attorney I.D. 94819 , The Commons at Valley Forge Y L ,D /:49 r Suite 7, Box 987 S yt v 0(/'v Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. : NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION- LAW and DE TRANG Defendants PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly withdraw Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire as attorney for Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon in the above captioned matter. GRAHAM&MAUER, P.C. By: Stacy J. kn ckerbocker, Esquire Date: August 29, 2013 Attorney for Plaintiff } GRAHAM &MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION - LAW and DE TRANG Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this 29' day of August, 2013, a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe for Withdrawal of Appearance were sent by first class,postage prepaid US Mail to the following: Kevin D. Rauch,Esquire Kyle W. Krombach, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, P.C. 100 Sterling Parkway Suite 206 Harrisburg, PA 17050 GRAHAM & MAUER,P.C. By: Stacy J.4s ickerbocker Attorney for Plaintiff KIMBERLY DIXON, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW TRUOC T. TRANG, and DE TRANG, Defendants 13-1198 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTION FOR STATUS CONFERENCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 16th day of September, 2013, this being the time and place set for a Motion for Status Conference, and pursuant to an agreement between the parties for deadlines for the trial of this matter, it is hereby ordered as follows : 1 . All discovery shall be completed 4 months from today' s date . 2 . Plaintiff ' s expert reports shall be due to the Defendant 30 days from the close of all discovery. 3 . Defense expert reports shall be due to the Plaintiff 45 days from the close of discovery. 4 . Either party may thereafter list the case for trial with the understanding that the parties at this time agree that the trial is expected to commence on Monday, May 19, 2014, at 9 : 00 a.m. At this point both parties expect the trial to last not longer than two days . By the Court, CA.A�= z&&K C-,) r , ri ylee . Peck, J. N co C/) ZZ s r ,/Ronald M. Graham, Esquire rn , For the Plaintiff rte- u , Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire For the Defendants ef Aom:w >cz� w cj C- [�} p cb p --� � is t„tt. t. !. t 1='I J'I F1UNJ TAI GRAHAM&MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire 1013 DEC 23 PM 109 Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker CUMBERLAND COUNTY Attorney I.D. 94819 PENNSYLVANIA The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T TRANG : CIVIL ACTION - LAW and • • DE TRANG • Defendants • • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ronald M. Graham, Esquire, attorney for Plaintiff, certify that on this 19th day of December 2013, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Expert Report and CV of Michael E. Darowish, M.D., was sent via first class mail, postage prepaid to the following counsel of record: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Skeel, P.C. 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 206 Harrisburg, PA 17050 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Ronal<1 raham, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, v. NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T. TRANG and (Jury Trial Demanded) DE TRANG, Defendants. MOTION TO EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DEADLINES AND NOW, comes the Defendants, Truoc T. Trang and De Trang, by and through their counsel, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, & Guthrie, P.C., and Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, and moves to extend the Case Management Order Deadlines as follows: 1. This matter arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on August 25, 2011. 2. This Honorable Court entered a Case Management Order on September 16, 2013. According to paragraph 3 of the Order, the Defendant's expert report was to be exchanged by March 3, 2014. (A copy of said Case Management Order is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A") 3. At the time the Case Management Order was entered, the Plaintiff's medical records obtained by the Defendant did not indicate the need for further medical treatment. She was authorized to return to work full duty on March 13, 2013. Additional dates of treatment rendered in August, 2013 were not obtained until December 10, 2013. (See Record Cover Sheet attached hereto as Exhibit "B") 4. Counsel for Defendants has yet to obtain any of the Plaintiff's most recent treatment records, including diagnostic studies, the most recent of which occurred on December 5, 2013. 5. To date, Defense Counsel has not had an opportunity to obtain a full and complete record of Plaintiff's medical treatment necessary for the expert evaluation of the alleged injuries resulting from the subject motor vehicle accident. The following records remain outstanding: (1) Hershey Medical Center Office Notes from November 20, 2013 to present (2) December 5, 2013 - MRI report; (3) Carlisle Regional Medical Center April 26, 2011 - CT Scan and MRI, (4) Walnut Bottom Radiology MRI dated May 26, 2011 and July 28, 2011. 6. Defense Counsel has scheduled an Independent Medical Examination for March 25, 2014, with Dr. Lawrence S. Pollack at Orthopedic and Spine Specialists in York, Pa. 7. It is anticipated that the Defense will be able to provide a narrative report within five to ten business days following the examination. 8. Counsel for Defendants certifies that Plaintiff's counsel was contacted regarding the extension of Discovery deadlines and he does not concur in the Motion. 9. The Status Conference held on September 16th, 2013 was presided over by the Honorable Christylee L. Peck. She is the only Judge who has previously ruled upon the issues in this matter. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Truoc T. Tang and De Trang, respectfully request this honorable Court to grant the relief requested by allowing the Defendant to submit an expert report by April 10, 2014. Respectfully submitted, SUMMERS, McDONNELL, HUDOCK & GOTH' •0 (_P . By: A /i h.._*_K-vi" . Ra ch, Esuire C•unsel for Defendants KIMBERLY DIXON, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. • . CIVIL ACTION - LAW TRUOC T. TRANG, and DE TRANG, • Defendants : 13-1198 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTION FOR STATUS CONFERENCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 16th day of September, 2013, this being the time and place set for a Motion for Status Conference, and pursuant to an agreement between the parties for deadlines for the trial of this matter, it is hereby ordered as follows : 1 . All discovery shall be completed 4 months from today' s date. 2 . Plaintiff' s expert reports shall be due to the Defendant 30 days from the close of all discovery. 3 . Defense expert reports shall be due to the Plaintiff 45 days from the close of discovery. 4 . Either party may thereafter list the case for trial with the understanding that the parties at this time agree that the trial is expected to commence on Monday, May 19, 2014, at 9 : 00 a.m. At this point both parties expect the trial to last not longer than two days . By the Court, ri, lee" L. Peck, J. o ` ; y rri w y ,/Ronald M. Graham, Esquire r For the Plaintiffs t7 �r Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire d ,�� ,\/ Cp For the Defendants lN, r� et Aam N 2c, �..;, pcb 0 D . o A kd ,NrF h ECORD COVER SHEET https://rats.litsol.coir/ vents/rptRecordCoverSheet.asp?corllinuatiorPf. TO: Kyle Krombach Summers McDonnell-Mechanicsburg 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306 Mechanicsburg PA 17050 FILE: 19800 RE: Kimberly Dixon FR: Hershey Medical Center RCVD: 12/10/2013 RP: Dawn Panichelli State Farm Insurance-Atlanta (Concordville) Pennsylvania Auto Injury Claims PO Box 106110 Atlanta GA 30348 CL: 38-0696-509 D/A: 4/26/2011 If you have any questions regarding these records, please contact: Kristy Muehiman 412-253-1129 kmuehlma n @litsol.com Additional Comments: Additional Medical Records Received;Difference in page total received. Er m d oft _.°, " r 12/10/2013 4:46 PIV • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA KIMBERLY DIXON, CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, v. NO. 13-1198 TRUOC T. TRANG and (Jury Trial Demanded) DE TRANG, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2014, it is hereby ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion to Extend the Case Management Order Deadlines is GRANTED. The deadlines of the Case Management Order pertaining to this matter are extended as follows: The Defendant shall provide the Plaintiff with an expert report by April 10, 2014, provided that the Plaintiff shall submit for an Independent Medical Examination by March 25, 2014. BY THE COURT: The Honorable Christylee L. Peck Distribution List: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire, Summers, McDonnell, Hudock & Guthrie, P.C.; 100 Sterling Parkway, Suite 306, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Ronald M. Graham, Esquire; Graham & Mauer, P.C., The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987, Valley Forge, PA 19482 • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION TO EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DEADLINES has been mailed by U.S. Mail to counsel of record via first class mail, postage pre-paid, this 28th day of February, 2014. Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Graham & Mauer, P.C. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (Attorney for Plaintiff) SUMMERS, McDONNELL, • OCK & GUTHRI' , P.0 By: IdA Vi /k b Ke i .'�aucr, Esquire Co nsel for Defendants KIMBERLY DIXON, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : CIVIL ACTION — LAW TRUOC T. TRANG and : DE TRANG, Defendants : NO. 13 -1198 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DEADLINES ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 7th day of March, 2014, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion to Extend Case Management Order Deadlines, a Rule is hereby issued upon Plaintiff to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 10 days of service. Esq. Ronald M. Graham, q Es The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Attorney for Plaintiff Kevin D. Rauch, Esq. 100 Sterling Parkway Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Attorney for Defendants :rc co ries , 2P/iv BY THE COURT, Christytee L. Peck, J. �< 00 GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON vs. TRUOC T TRANG and DE TRANG Plaintiff Defendants PRO THONG' I 26/11 MAR /2 6 C41118ERL ND PENNSYLVACOUNTY NIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 13-1198 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE FOR DETERMINATION To: THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly file the enclosed Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' Motion to Extend Case Management Order Deadlines and forward to the appropriate Judge for determination. By: Date: 3/11/14 GRAHA & MAUER, P.C. Ronald . Graham Attorney for Plaintiff GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON vs. TRUOC T TRANG and DE TRANG Plaintiff Defendants TL I i u: 201 flit'? 12 AN 10:' cLi,IBERL A ND COUNT Y 1-ThiNS YL VA NI 4 • : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 13-1198 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DEADLINES AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Kimberly Dixon by and through her counsel Graham &. Mauer, P.C., and moves this Court to deny Defendants' Motion to Extend Case Management Order Deadlines for the reasons that follow: 1 Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3 Denied as stated. Plaintiff's medical records speak for themselves and did not affirmatively state that no additional treatment would be required. It is Defendants' misinterpretation of the records which apparently led Defendants to believe that no additional treatment was required. The fact that Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon was authorized to return to work on March 13, 2013, in itself, does not necessarily speak to the ongoing need for additional treatment. By way of further answer, the additional dates of "treatment rendered" as described on the "record cover sheet" attached as Exhibit B to Defendants' instant motion refers to records which date back to April 26, 2011 and were presumably available to Defendant ever since that date. 4. Denied as stated. Defendants contend that they have yet to obtain any of Plaintiff's most recent treatment records. Perhaps the reason for that inability is that the subpoena issued for a CT and MRI scan conducted on April 26, 2011 and an x-ray performed on May 6, 2011 as well as MRI and x-ray films dated May 26, 2011 and July 20, 2011 and July 28, 2011 as well as an x-ray taken on August 20, 2013 and an MRI on December 5, 2013 were not subpoenaed until March 4, 2014, six weeks after the ordered close of discovery. Please see attached documents from Litigations Solutions, LLC. 5. Denied as stated. It is denied defense counsel has not had an opportunity to obtain a full and complete record of Plaintiff's medical treatment necessary for the expert evaluation of the alleged injuries resulting from the subject motor vehicle accident. To the contrary, most of the records that the Defendants now seek to obtain were available in the summer of 2011. By way of further answer, since these records were just subpoenaed on March 4, 2014 it is unlikely that Defendants had any realistic belief that they would be in compliance with this Court's Order closing discovery on the 161h of January 2014. By way of further answer, Defendants have scheduled a defense medical examination for Plaintiff on March 25, 2014 at which point the subpoenaed records, which Defendants claim are necessary to evaluate Plaintiff Kim Dixon's medical condition, will not yet be available. 6. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is admitted that defense counsel has scheduled a defense medical examination for March 25, 2014. It is, however, denied that such scheduling is consistent with their inability to secure medical records in a timely fashion to provide their defense medical expert with a full record of Plaintiff Kim Dixon's medical profile. On the contrary, the bulk of the records that Defendants claim they were unable to acquire in a timely manner were available to them in 2011. Further, since these records have not been subpoenaed until March 4, 2014 and further since these records will certainly not be available for the review by the defense medical expert on March 25, 2014 apparently those records are unnecessary for the defense medical expert to reach his expected conclusions. By way of further answer Defendants have completely ignored this Court's scheduling order with regard to both the close of discovery and the production of expert reports. The first notice of a need for extension of time with respect to discovery has come nearly two months after discovery closed and the first notice of a needed extension with regard to the production of the expert reports surfaced at the very time that report was due. By way of further answer with the ongoing and seemingly endless discovery conducted by Defendants, Plaintiff is severely prejudice with respect to preparing Plaintiff's case and arranging for a rebuttal to the long overdue defense expert report. 7. Denied as stated. It seems unlikely that Defendants will be able to produce a narrative report within five to ten business days following the proposed March 25, 2014 examination of Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon in that the medical records recently subpoenaed by Defendants and claimed by Defendants to be vitally necessary for that defense medical expert's opinion will certainly not be available within that time frame. Therefore if those recently subpoenaed medical records are not necessary for the defense medical expert's review then all mention of those records in Defendants' instant motion is simply a red herring. Conversely if those records are essential to the defense medical experts evaluation and since they will certainly not be available to the expert within the time limit suggested by Defendants there will be no report generated in the suggested time frame. 8. Admitted. By way of further answer, Plaintiff's counsel did not concur in Defendants' instant motion but rather suggested that this matter be resolved by some form of alternative dispute resolution which would allow the parties to craft a mutually agreeable forum and related schedule. However Plaintiff's suggestion was rejected. By way of further answer, Defendants suggested extension of the Case Management Order Deadlines favors only Defendants and leaves Plaintiff in a decidedly disadvantage position and with absolutely nothing to gain from the proposed deadline extensions, and in fact would penalize Plaintiff for meeting all of the Plaintiff's deadlines while Defendants would be allowed to do as the please. 9. Admitted. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kimberly Dixon respectfully requests this honorable Court to deny the relief request by Defendants in their instant motion. Date: By: Respectfully submitted, GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. Ronal4 M. Graham, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff \›<' Exhibit A Litigation Solutions, LLC Brentwood Towne Center 101 Towne Square Way, Suite 251 Pittsburgh, PA 15227 Phone: 412- 253 -1091 Fax: 412 -882 -3477 * * * ** *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE * * * * ** The documents accompanying this telecopy transmission contain confidential information that is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual named below. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this telecopy in error, please notify the sender immediately to arrange for return of these documents. * * * ** *PROHIBITION OF REDISCLOSURE * * * * ** The enclosed information has been disclosed from records whose confidentiality is protected by federal law. Federal regulations prohibit the redisclosure of the information without the written consent of the person to whom it pertains. Attention: Time sensitive materials attached. Thank You FACSIMILIE TRANSMISSION FROM: Mary Pusateri PHONE NUMBER: 412 - 253 -1101 FAX: 412- 253 -1059 CAPTION: Dixon vs. Trang To: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire FAX: 610 -983 -0570 NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVERSHEET: 13 MESSAGE: Attorney Knickerbocker, Please find attached the Notice of Intent pertaining to the above referenced caption. If the 20 -day waiting period should be waived and /or copies are requested, sign and date this document below where specified and fax to my attention at 412 -253 -1059. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this request, I can be reached at 412 -253 -1101. Please be advised this fax is a copy of the actual Notice, and you will receive a hardcopy via FedEx or regular mail. Also be advised that these subpoenas will be served on the 20th day of issue if no formal objections are filed. Please be advised that IF formal objections are filed, we will need to be notified along with our client (i.e. defense counsel). Thank you very much for your assistance. Mary Pusateri Litigation Solutions, Inc. I HAVE REVIEWED THE ATTACHED NOTICE OF INTENT REGARDING Dixon, Kimberly 03/04/2014 I HEREBY WAIVE I DO NOT WAIVE THE 20 DAY NOTICE PERIOD. ALSO, I WILL REQUIRE WILL NOT REQUIRE COPIES OF THE MATERIALS RECEIVED. Opposing Counsel /Other Counsel Name DATE PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Dixon vs. Trang Court of Common Pleas 2013-1198 NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 Provider: Record Type: Carlisle Regional Medical Center Radiology Casses Chiropractic Radiology Hershey Medical Center Radiology Walnut Bottom Radiology Radiology TO: Stacy J. Knickerbocker, Esquire note: please see enclosed list of all other interested counsel Litigation Solutions, LLC (LSLLC) on behalf of Kevin Rauch, Esquire intends to serve a subpoena identical to the one that is attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If the twenty day notice period is waived or if no objection is made, then the subpoena may be served. Date of Issue: 3/4/2014 Litigation Solutio s, LLC on behalf of: CC: Kevin Rauch, Esquire of Summers McDonnell-Mechanicsburg - Court of Kevin Rauch, Esquire Common Pleas Defense If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact: Litigation Solutions, LLC (412.263.5656) Brentwood Towne Centre 101 Towne Square Way, Suite 251 Pittsburgh, PA 15227 COUNSEL LISTING FOR DIXON VS. TRANG County of Cumberland Court of Common Pleas Counsel Counsel Firm Type Knickerbocker, The Commons at Valley Forge, Suite 7 1220 Valley Forge Rd, P.O. Box Opposing Esquire, Stacy J. 987 Valley Forge PA 19481 P: 717-240-0900 F: 610-983-0570 Counsel COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Dixon Court of Common Pleas vs. Trang 2013-1198 Request For Records Copies Related To Subpoena Document Request Provider: Copy Sets Requested: Carlisle Regional Medical Center Gasses Chiropractic Hershey Medical Center Walnut Bottom Radiology Please return this completed form to Litigation Solutions, LLC. Please be advised that Litigation Solutions, LLC requires prepayment for all requested records above. Therefore, once the requested records are obtained an invoice for prepayment will be generated and sent directly to your attention. This prepayment includes a $5.00 administrative fee. Once payment has been received the records will be promptly forwarded to your attention. If you should happen to have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please don't hesitate to contact Kristy Muehlman at 412-253-1129 or fax at 412-253-1163; 412-882-3477. Date of Issue: 3/4/2014 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Dixon COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND V. Trang 2013 -1198 VS. Plaintiff File No. TO: Defendant SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 Carlisle Regional Medical Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: See attached rider for instructions. Litigation Solutions, LLC, 101 Towne Square Way, Suite 251 Pittsburgh, PA 15227 at (Address) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: Kevin Rauch, Esquire NAME: . ADDRESS: TELEPHONER 1 -9U1 -5 21b SUPREME COURT ID V"6 ATTORNEY FOR?' Date: Seal + the Court Deputy Rider to Subpoena Explanation of Required Documents and Things TO: CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: Carlisle Regional Medical Center 361 Alexander Spring Road Carlisle PA 17015 Attention: Radiology Films Library Subject: Dixon, Kimberly SS #: 4546 Date of Birth: 04/18/1962 Requested Items: Please remit: Complete copies of 4/26/11 - CT and MRI. Dixon VS. Trang TO: CONDICO1WEM211 OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND : File No. 2013-1198 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 400122 Casses Chiropractic - (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or *Inas: " See attached rider for instructions. at' LitigatiOn" 101 Towne -8gdate: "Suite' 251 i'ittsburgh,- PP: '15227- You'may deliver or mail! eelsic"Copiet thell-acutdcauS piecruCe things raquesthi by this subpoena, together with the certift• cats of compliance, to the partymaking this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of prepacing,the. copies or producing the __._.._ things sought. - ifyou fail to produce the documents or things -required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party nerving this subpoena ma y'seek a court ordet compelling you to comply with it • THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT TEE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: Kevin Rauch. Mcqu3re ADDRESS: Lail Rtorling Parkway cnitr. 306 mprtonir-hvirg. PA. 17050 TELEPHONE: is , SUPREME COURT ID # Alf1CR ATTORNEY FOR: Defense Date: Seal of the Court Deputy Rider to Subpoena Explanation of Required Documents and Things TO: CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: Casses Chiropractic 313 S. Hanover Street Carlisle PA 17013 Attention: Radiology Films Library Subject: Dixon, Kimberly SS#: 4546 Date of Birth: 04/18/1962 Requested Items: Please remit: X -rays from 5/6/11. a-. Dixon VS. Trang TO: CONNONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND File No, 2013-1196 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 Hershey Medical Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or rhino: See attached rider for instructions. at Lit_igLion-Solui_ions, ',LC; 101 Towne SgUare Way, Suite 251 Pittsburgh, PA 15227 (Address) You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the - things sought. if you ail to produce the documents or things .required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after .its service, the party nerving this subpoena mayseek a court prat compelling you to comply with it • 1..tilb SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAM: Kevin Rauch, Esquire ADDRESS: ion Sterling Earkway. Suite 306 M- aQicsburq, PA, 17050 TELEPHONE: 717-ant SUPREME COURT ID # R 1 n5E1 ATTORNEY FOE: Defense Date: a-7 I Li Seal of the Court Deputy Rider to Subpoena Explanation of Required Documents and Things TO: CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: Hershey Medical Center 500 University Drive Health Information Services, HU24 Hershey PA 17033 Attention: Radiology Films Library Subject: Dixon, Kimberly SS # : 4546 Date of Birth: 04/18/1962 Requested Items: Please remit: 8/20/13 - x -ray and 12/5/13 - MRI. Dixon VS. Trang CONadIONVTEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND File No. 2013-1198 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR TB1NGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Walnut Bottom Radiology (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the cont to prod= the following documents or rhino: See attached rider for instructions. at Litigation Solul_ions, LLC, 101 Towne Square Way, Suite 251 Pittsburgh, PA 15227 (Address) Yon may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party raking this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the partynerving this subpoena mayseek a court ordee compelling you to comply with it • THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT TEE REQUEST OF MB FOLLOWING PERSOINT: NAME: Kpvin Ranrh Rstinire ADDRESS: inn Si-or-ling PArkway 306 Mprhpnirghnrej PA. 17050 TELEPHONE: 717 901 5914 SUPREME COURT ID # ATTORNEY FOR: De falls Date: Seal of the Court Deputy Rider to Subpoena Explanation of Required Documents and Things TO: CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: Walnut Bottom Radiology Belvedere Medical Center 850 Walnut Bottom Road Carlisle PA 17013 Attention: Radiology Films Library Subject: Dixon, Kimberly SS#: 4546 Date of Birth: 04/18/1962 Requested Items: Please remit: MRI dated 5/26/11, X-ray dated 7/20/11 and MRI dated 7/28/11. GRAHAM & MAUER, P.C. By: Ronald M. Graham, Esquire Attorney I.D. 64483 By: Stacy J. Knickerbocker Attorney I.D. 94819 The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7, Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 (610)933-3333 KIMBERLY DIXON vs. TRUOC T TRANG and DE TRANG Plaintiff Defendants PtS'0 TH1. 4 IA 2314 MAR 2 AN CLIMaERL NO COUNT PENNSYL VA, NIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 13-1198 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW .• CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Ronald M. Graham, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this day of March, 2014, a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants' Motion to Extend Case Management Order Deadlines was sent by first class, postage prepaid US Mail to the following: Kevin D. Rauch, Esquire Summers, McDonnell, Hudock Guthrie & Skeel, P.C. 100 Sterling Parkway Suite 206 Harrisburg, PA 17050 By: GRAHA MAUER, P.C. Ronald Attorney for Plaintiff KIMBERLY DIXON, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • v. : CIVIL ACTION — LAW 1RUOC T. TRANG and : DE TRANG, Defendants : NO. 13-1198 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DEADLINES ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 18th day of March, 2014, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion To Extend Case Management Order Deadlines, and Plaintiffs reply thereto, Defendants' motion is granted as follows: Defendants shall provide Plaintiff with Defendants' expert report by April 10, 2014; no further extensions of time shall be granted to Defendant. BY THE COURT, Christ ee L. Peck, J. AOnald M. Graham, Esq. The Commons at Valley Forge Suite 7 Box 987 Valley Forge, PA 19482 Attorney for Plaintiff ./kevin D. Rauch, Esq. 100 Sterling Parkway Suite 306 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Attorney for Defendants :re ier&LLL /0t(