Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-5629IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JENNIFER M. MADER, and JOHN C. MADER 1010 Woodridge Road Red Lion, PA 17356 v. DONALD HARRIS 815 Windsor Place Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 NO. 04 - S'b-Z `? CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAFCIPF FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF SAID COURT: Issue summons in Trespass against the Defendant in the above case. _XWrit of Summons shall be issued and DATE// 04'+&q(/ SUMMONS IN CIVIL ACTION To: Donald Harris 815 Windsor Place Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF HAS COMMENCED AN Aw of ES of ACTION AGAINST YOU. -''Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Dive& DATE _By Supreme Court I.D. #22487 Two West Market St., P.O. Box 952 York, PA 17405 Phone: (717) 846-0606 Attorney for the Plaintiff wc w 4 J coo i ti =?{ co, SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2004-05629 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MADER JENNIFER M ET AL VS HARRIS DONALD HAROLD WEARY Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon HARRIS DONALD the DEFENDANT , at 1825:00 HOURS, on the 10th day of November-, 2004 at 815 WINDSOR PLACE MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 DONALD HARRIS a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 7.40 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 35.40 APT 2 So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 11/12/2004 DALE E ANSTINE Sworn and Subscribed to before me tAiis day of 2 J A.D. L r thonotary By: 7" Deputy She Tiff by handing to IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, h/w, Plaintiffs V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant : NO. 04-5629 . CIVIL ACTION - LAW : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT The Plaintiffs Jennifer M. Mader and John C. Mader, husband and wife, are adult individuals residing at 1010 Woodridge Road, Red Lion, York County, Pennsylvania 17356. 2. The Defendant, Donald Harris, is an adult individual residing at 815 Windsor Place, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 On December 18, 2002, Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader, was a driver pulling out of the parking lot of Red Lobster onto the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg. 4. On December 18, 2002, at approximately 1:15 p.m., the Defendant was operating his vehicle on the Carlisle Pike when he struck the Plaintiff, Jennifer M. Mader, who was in plain view, in the rear, resulting in injuries and damages to the Plaintiff. 5. This accident occurred solely as a result of the negligence of the Defendant and was due in no manner to any act, or failure to act, on the part of the Plaintiff. 6. This matter is alleged to exceed the applicable limits of arbitration, and a jury trial is hereby demanded. COUNTI JENNIFER M. MADER V. DONALD HARRIS The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 6 are incorporated herein and made part hereof as though fully set forth at length. 8. The negligence of the Defendant consisted of the following: a) Failing to properly operate and control his motor vehicle; b) Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout for the presence of pedestrians on the streets and highways; c) Operating his motor vehicle with careless disregard for the safety of others, and the Plaintiff in particular, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. §3714; d) Operating his vehicle too fast for the conditions then and there existing in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. §3361; e) Failing to observe the presence of the Plaintiff when the Defendant knew or should have known of the presence of the Plaintiff; and f) Failing to stop or take other evasive actions before striking the Plaintiff with his vehicle. 9. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries including, but not limited to, injuries to her lower back, and a severe shock to her nerves and nervous system. 10. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff was forced to incur medical bills and expenses for the injuries she has suffered, and she will continue to incur medical expenses in the future. 11. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has suffered, or may suffer, a severe loss of her earnings and impairment of her earning capacity, and the loss of income and impairment of earning capacity will, or may, continue in the future. 12. As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has undergone, and in the future may undergo, great mental and physical pain and suffering, mental anguish and humiliation, loss of life's pleasures, and a severe limitation in her pursuit of daily activities, all to her great loss and detriment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of the mandatory arbitration limits. COUNT II JOHN C. MADER V. DONALD HARRIS 13. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 12 are incorporated herein and made part hereof as fully as though set forth at length. 14. Solely as a result of the negligence of the Defendant, and the resulting injuries to his spouse, Plaintiff, John C. Mader, has been deprived of the assistance, companionship and consortium of his wife, all of which has been to his great loss and detriment. Said losses will continue for an unknown time into the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests This Honorable Court to enter judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of the mandatory arbitration limits. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: York, PA 17405 (717) 846 - 0606 Dale E. Anstine, Esquire Attorney I.D. #22487 Two West Market Street P.O. Box 952 VERIFICATION I HEREBY VERIFY that the information set forth in the foregoing COMPLAINT is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that any false statements contained herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: (5- / - 0S Date: 0- - Q J i er M. Mader Q John .Mader CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this / ©?Nay of August, 2005, I, Dale E. Anstine, Esquire, a member of the Law Offices of Dale E. Anstine, P.C., hereby certify that I have, this date, served a copy of the within and foregoing document by first class United States Mail, postage pre-paid, addressed to the party or attorney of record as follows: Donald Harris 815 Windsor Place, Apt. 2 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: LAW 01 Fa SO -DA,LE E. A INE, P EMle`E Xnstine, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiffs 1?aa. a: M,?drvmm?mu. Ai Q'. ?.. a==r..o. saw p C.l? .?.f ? - ?? _ _? C J ? J.?,: ?.. ro t ?? f lTt N fT7 ' `; N 37 -G PETERS & WASILEFSKI By: Adam L. Seifenh, Esquire Attorney ID #89073 2931 North Front Street Hamsburg, PA 17110 [7171238-7555 Attorney for Defendant, Donald Harris JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, husband and wife, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant DOCKET NO: 04-5629 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of Defendant, Donald Harris, in the above- captioned action. Date: p%?O?Z-?l9C9S PETERS & WASILEFSKI By: LJCO Adam L. Seifel ,Esquire Attorney ID #89073 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238••7555 Attorney for Defendant, Donald Harris JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, husband and wife, Plaintiffs V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO: 04-5629 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance, has been served on all parties of interest by placing the same in the United States mail, first-class postage pre- paid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on this 9rh day of September, 2005., and addressed as follows: Dale E. Anstine, Esquire Two West Market Street Post Office Box 952 York, Pennsylvania 17405 9dew d `tUaeite f eki ?> r-; -a c:n .? fJ T ,_, art `?5 ?t?`, y y" to ?'? -i :`.= ?, 4J`4 PETERS & WASILEFSKI By: Adam L. Seiferth, Esquire Attorney ID #89073 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717] 238-7555 Attorney for Defendant, Donald Harris JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, husband and wife, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant DOCKET NO: 04-5629 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: PLAINTIFFS AND THEIR COUNSEL: YOU ARE REQUIRED to plead to the within Answer with New Matter within twenty (20) days of service hereof, or a default judgment may be entered against you. PETERS & WASILEFSKI By: ??S O Adam L. Seiferth, Esquire Attorney ID #89073 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717]238-7555 Date: 0q-0 6 --?„VD? Attorney for Defendant, Donald Harris PETERS & WASa,EFSHI By: Adam L. Seiferth, Esquire Attorney m #89073 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [7171238-7555 Attorney for Defendant, Donald Hams JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, husband and wife, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant DOCKET NO: 04-5629 CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT, DONALD HARRIS, TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT NOW COMES, the Defendant, Donald Harris ("Hams"), by and through his attorneys, Peters & Wasilefski, and answers Plaintiffs' Complaint as follows: 1. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendant, Harris, is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded a trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 2. Defendant, Harris, admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 3. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. After reasonable investigation, Defendant, Harris, is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded a trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 4. Defendant, Harris, admits in part and denies in part the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. It is admitted that Defendant, Hams, was operating his vehicle in the vicinity of the Carlisle Pike on December 18, 2002 at approximately 1:15 p.m. However, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, struck Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader, in the rear resulting in injuries and damages. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader, was in plain view. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 5. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and no further answer is required. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, Defendant, Hams, specifically denies that he was negligent in any way. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, operated his vehicle in a careful and prudent manner. By way of further answer, Defendant, Harris, specifically denies that the accident was due in no manner to any act or failure to act of Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 6. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Hams, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and require no further answer. With regard to the allegations referencing alleged damages, if any, exceeding the applicable limits of arbitration, after reasonable investigation, Defendant, Harris, is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief 2 as to the truth of said allegations and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendant, Hams, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). COUNTI JENNIFER M. MADER v. DONALD HARRIS 7. Defendant, Harris, incorporates his answers as contained in Paragraphs 1 through 6 above as if fully rewritten herein in response to Paragraph 7 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. 8. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 and sub- paragraphs (a) through (f) of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that each and every allegation in Paragraph 8 and sub-paragraphs (a) through (f) are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent in any way. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Hams, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. With regard to sub-paragraphs (a) through (f), Defendant, Harris, answers as follows: a) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, controlled his vehicle in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). b) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, was alert and maintained a proper lookout. By way of further answer, the presence of pedestrians is not alleged anywhere in Plaintiffs' Complaint and, therefore, this allegation should be stricken. In further answer, 3 Defendant, Hams, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). C) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, controlled his vehicle in a reasonable and prudent manner and in accordance with laws and statutes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the operation of motor vehicles. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). d) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, operated his vehicle at a speed appropriate for conditions then and there existing and in accordance with laws and statutes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the operation of motor vehicles. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). e) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Hams, kept a careful and diligent watch of the road and of Plaintiff. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). f) Denied. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, controlled his vehicle in a reasonable and prudent manner and took all actions necessary to avoid striking 4 Plaintiff. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 9. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendant, Harris, caused or contributed to any alleged injuries or damages of Plaintiff. With regard to the allegations referencing Plaintiff's injuries, Defendant, Harris, denies that Plaintiff suffered any injuries as alleged, and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 10. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendant, Hams, caused or contributed to any alleged injuries or damages of Plaintiff. With regard to the allegations referencing medical bills and expenses, Defendant, Harris, denies that Plaintiff incurred medical bills and expenses as alleged, and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 5 11. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendant, Harris, caused or contributed to any alleged injuries or damages of Plaintiff. With regard to the allegations referencing loss of earnings and impairment of earning capacity, Defendant, Harris, denies that Plaintiff sustained a loss of earnings or impairment of earning capacity as alleged, and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). 12. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendant, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that said allegations are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendant, Harris, caused or contributed to any alleged injuries or damages of Plaintiff. With regard to the allegations referencing non-economic damages, Defendant, Harris, denies that Plaintiff sustained any non-economic damages as alleged, and proof thereof is demanded at trial. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendant, Donald Harris, demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed. 6 COUNT II JOHN C. MADER v. DONALD HARRIS 13. Defendant, Harris, incorporates his answers as contained in Paragraphs 1 through 12 above as it fully rewritten herein in response to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 14. Defendant, Harris, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendants, Harris, is advised and therefore avers that the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 are conclusions of law and require no further answer. To the extent that an answer may be necessary, it is specifically denied that Defendant, Harris, was negligent or caused injuries to Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader. To the contrary, at all times relevant, Defendant, Harris, acted in a reasonable and prudent manner. In further answer, no act or failure to act on behalf of Defendant, Harris, caused or contributed to any alleged injuries or damages of Plaintiff, John Mader. In further answer, Defendant, Harris, denies said allegations pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). WHEREFORE, Defendant, Donald Harris, demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed. NEW MATTER 15. Defendant, Harris, incorporates his answers as contained in Paragraphs 1 through 14 above as it fully rewritten herein at length. 16. Plaintiff, Jennifer Mader, was negligent, careless and reckless in operating her motor vehicle by abruptly stopping in front of Defendant, Harris, in inappropriate manner and in otherwise violating the laws and statutes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the operation of motor vehicles. 7 17. All or part of Plaintiffs' claims for injuries and damages, which are specifically denied, are barred by operation of the Comparative Negligence Act. 18. All or part of Plaintiffs' claims for injuries and damages, which are specifically denied, are bared by operation of the Pennsylvania Financial Responsibility Act. 19. Plaintiffs assumed the risk of any alleged damages and injuries, which are specifically denied, and the claims against Defendant, Harris, should be dismissed. 20. Plaintiffs' claims for injuries and damages, if any, were caused by the actions or inactions of other persons or entities who may or may not be a party to this suit, and accordingly, the actions or inactions of other persons or entities are intervening superseding causes of Plaintiffs' damages and injuries, which are specifically denied, and the claims against Defendant, Harris, should be dismissed. 21. Plaintiffs' claims, if any, are barred and/or limited to the extent that Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their alleged injuries and damages, which are specifically denied. 22. Plaintiffs' claims, if any, are barred and/or limited to the extent that Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, which are specifically denied, pre-existed the happening of the accident in question. 23. Plaintiffs' claims for injuries are limited and/or barred to the extent that they arise out of incidents, accidents or injuries sustained subsequent to the happening of the accident in question and are therefore unrelated thereto. 24. Defendant, Hams, reserves the right to plead any and all other available defenses as may be determined through the process of discovery and/or at trial. 8 WHEREFORE, Defendant, Donald Hams, demands that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed. PETERS & WASILEFSKI By: ag? 0?,)Ilk, Adam L. Seiferth, Esquire Attorney ID #89073 2931 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 [717]238-7555 Date:Q -01-C.00S Attorney for Defendant, Donald Hams VERIFICATION I hereby affirm that the following facts are correct: I, Donald Harris, am a Defendant in the foregoing action and the attached Answer and New Matter is based upon information which I have furnished to my counsel and information which has been gathered by my counsel in preparation of the defense of the lawsuit. The language of the Answer and New Matter is that of counsel and not of me. I have read the Answer and New Matter and to the extent that the Answer and New Matter is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the Answer and New Matter is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I hereby acknowledge that the facts set forth in the aforesaid Answer and New Matter are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. 4'- "- Donald Harris Dated: q1e/OS JENNIFER M. MADER and JOHN C. MADER, husband and wife, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO: 04-5629 V. DONALD HARRIS, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter of Defendant, Donald Harris, to Plaintiffs Complaint, has been served on all parties of interest by placing the same in the United States mail, first-class postage pre-paid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on this e day of September, 2005, and addressed as follows: Dale E. Anstine, Esquire Two West Market Street Post Office Box 952 York, Pennsylvania 17405 Betew d 40464,4& -'Yl cj . r i ?? ._ ?" c: i (, -• n?: f`? 1 l0 f,? cJT C:: C1 -t t _-1 T 1`l _[j i" ?; tl f7 4 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JENNIFER M. MADER, and NO: 04-5629 JOHN C. MADER Plaintiffs V. DONALD HARRIS Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO REMOVE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: (X) Please mark the above captioned action SETTLED AND SATISFIED OR () Please mark the above captioned judgment or li and satisfied. Attorney for the Plaintiff Dale E. Anstine, Esquire Supreme Court No. 22487 Dated: 5-1e-6945 CC: Stephen Moore, Esq. r a ?? --. rrs