Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13-3595 Supreme C, lvania CO IeAS Fvreotrrry UsetUpTy: CUMBERLAND County ?fre btfornration collected an this form is used solelp for ciourt adaifnisttuttio purposes. Ibis form does not xwkment or thefdm and service of eadings or otherpapen as by law or rules Lfcawt Commeaoemeat of Action: Q Writ ofSummais . O Petition 3 Transfer from Another)urisdcfi(w ❑ Dedaration of Taking Lead Plaintiffs Names Lead Dekadaat's Name . Steph F. Tuckey Intermatic Incorporated =, A r'e money damages requested? (Yes • D No Dollar Amount Requested: 1] within arbitration limits {dkc& one) ® outside arbitration limits Is this a Qass AdioN Solt? 13.Yes No Is this an MDl Appeal? O Yes EM No Name of Plaimifl7AppellanesAttornry: Richard J. Boyd, Jr. El Check here if you have no attorney (area Self- Repttiseated.(prn Sej Litigant) Nattire of the. Case Place 4n ` X"Ad Bee left.of the. ONE case category ghat most a0cturatety describes your PRIMARYCASF— If you arc nwdng more than one type ofclam, check the one that you consider most important. TORT (do not bwhsde Man raro CONTRACT (do aw Owhide Adg..d,) CIYIi, AA>PEAI.S «O: Intentional 13' Buycr.PlahWff Administrative Agencies O M oos Prosecution ❑ -Debt Qd1cctiow Credit Card 17 Board::of Assessment _Q IVlbtotehicic ❑..11tCoyledion:Other . O. Boar+iiffEiodioris [] N Pr emises 11 Dept. of Trauvortation. Q PremisGS Liability , s = a Produd Liability (does not include mass toil) (3 F.mploymeat- Dispute: ❑ Slandeu 1 elf Defamation Discrimination = : ❑ Othu: ❑ Employment Dispute: Other ❑ Zoning Board ❑ Other. MASS 'PORT O Other • . : • [7 Asbestos - . ❑ Tobacco O Touc Tort - DES O `i w& Tort- Implant REAL PROPERTY MISCEI�; I!1FAUS . Q Toxic Waste 13 EJ 13 Coarmon 1" ;. O ❑0 _ .0 (3 �Y Judges Arbitration Ground Rcat O Mandamus ❑ L.aadlard Tcaaat Dispute 17 Non- Domestic Rdadms ❑ Mortgage Foreaesum. Resideatial PROFESSIONAL I.IABIITY 0 � 13 e Foreclasur= Commercial 0 to Q Replevin a Me" ❑ Qui tie E3 Odret: '0 OthcrProfessional: Updated 11112011 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE STEPHEN F. TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035. 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (215) 358 -5122 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 1150 Dunlin Court CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Plaintiff(s) CIVIL ACTION NO: 13. 35� S V. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 7777 Winn Road Spring Grove, IL 60081 Defendant(s) NOTICE You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your 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 judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 1701.3 (717)249 -3166 or 1-800-990-91.08 (PA only) -, a C:� CD >�-r A N O C.�� 0 R# a 9 a/01� NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, JR., ESQUIRE STEPHEN F. TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (215) 358 -5122 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 1150 Dunlin Court - CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Plaintiff(s) CIVIL ACTION NO: V . INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 7777 Winn Road Spring Grove, IL 60081 Defendant(s) COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby demands judgment against Defendant, and complains against it as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, is an adult individual who, at all times relevant hereto, owned and resided at the home located at 1150 Dunlin Court, Mechanicsburg, PA (hereinafter "the premises "). 2. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, (hereinafter "Intermatic ") was, upon information and belief, a Delaware corporation and was regularly conducting business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Lehigh. 3. Defendant, Intermatic, at all times relevant hereto, was in the business of, ilner a.lia., manufacturing, selling, designing, distributing, and marketing energy management solutions, including the timer (hereinafter the "product ") at issue in this case. 4. On or about November 29, 2011, a fire erupted in the timer which was being used in an ordinary and foreseeable manner at plaintiff's property. 5. This fire caused extensive damage to plaintiffs' property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardship besides; this fire was directly and proximately caused by Intermatic as is further and more fully described below. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 6. Plaintiff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 7. The aforementioned damages were the direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Intermatic, by and through its employees, agents, technicians, vendors, subcontractors and /or servants, more specifically described as follows: a. failing to exercise reasonable care in the following manner: i. failing to manufacture, assemble, sell, design, transport, distribute, test and /or market a properly functioning product; ii. failing to properly inspect and /or test the product and /or its component parts; iii. failing to properly determine and ensure that the subject product was in compliance with applicable industry standards; iv. failing to provide safe and adequate warnings or instructions with the product; and /or V. manufacturing, marketing, distributing and /or selling the product when the Defendant knew or should have known that the product and /or its component parts would be inadequate for the reasons for which purchased. b. failing to adequately instruct, supervise and /or train servants, employees and agents as to the proper ways to perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a); C. failing to adequately warn consumers and others of the dangers and hazardous conditions resulting from the conduct set forth in subparagraph (a) above; d. failing to provide, establish, and /or follow proper and adequate controls so as to ensure the proper performance of the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a) above; e. failing to retain competent, qualified and /or able agents, employees or servants to perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a) above; and f. failing to perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a) above in conformity with the prevailing industry and governmental specifications, laws, and standards. 8. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Intermatic, Plaintiff sustained and incurred damage to his real and personal property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardships, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT II — STRICT LIABIILTY PLAINTIFF v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 9. Plaintiff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 10. The defendant, at all times relevant hereto, was engaged in the business of, inter alia, designing, assembling, manufacturing, testing, selling and /or distributing, inter alia, timers, and, specifically did so with the product at issue in this case. 11. Intermatic designed, manufactured, distributed, tested and /or sold the subject product in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to consumers. 12. Intermatic knew or should have known that the subject product would, and did, reach the subject property without substantial change from the condition in which originally distributed and sold. 13. The aforementioned defects consisted of: (a) design defects; (b) manufacturing defects; (c) component defects; (d) a failure to warn of the design, manufacturing, and /or component defects, and /or properly provide warning and /or safe use instructions. 14: As a direct and proximate result of such defects, Plaintiff sustained and incurred damage to his real and personal property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardship, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00. 15. For these reasons, the defendant is strictly liable to plaintiff for the damages stated herein under Section 402A of the Restatement (2d) of Torts, the Restatement (3d) of Torts, and the applicable case law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT III - BREACH OF EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES PLAINTIFF vs. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 16. Plaintiff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 17. At the time of the sale and /or distribution of the subject product, the defendant had reason to know the particular purpose to which the subject product would be used (i.e. residential application) and they were being relied upon to furnish a suitable product. Thus, the defendant breached the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose as set out in the Uniform Commercial. Code (hereinafter "UCC ") at 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2 -31.5 in that the subject product was not fit for the particular purpose for which such products are required as it was prone to overheating, failure and ignition under normal operation. 18. In addition, the defendant breached its implied warranty of merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2 -314 (c) in that the subject product was not fit for the ordinary uses for which the subject product was used. 19. In addition, the defendant breached any and all express warranties made or relating to the subject product that became part of the basis of the bargain for sale of the product in derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2 -313. (The defendant has better access to said warranties and, therefore, is not prejudiced by them not being attached hereto). 20. Plaintiff's damages as set forth above occurred as a direct and proximate result of the breach by the defendant of its implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose and merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2 -315 and § 2 -314 (c) and as a result of the breach of its expressed warrantees in derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2 -313. 21. Plaintiff has met any and all conditions precedent to recovery for such breaches. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON BY: A4 RICHARD J. D, R., ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR P KINTIFF. STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Dated: VP 0 (3 VERIFICATION I, VICTORIA PHILLIPS, do hereby state that I am a representative for ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, the real party in interest in the within action, and as such do hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing COMPLAINT are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. VICTORIA P LIPS Dated: NELSON LEVINE de LUCA& HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J. BOYD,JR.,ESQUIRE STEPHEN F.TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL,PA 19422 (215)358-5122 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff(s) CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PA V. CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-3595 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant(s) AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and states that he is the attorney for the Plaintiff in the above matter, and in such capacity did have Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated served with a true and correct copy of the Complaint by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested#7012 1640 0001 1864 6865 on July 8, 2013. A copy of the executed return receipt card is attached hereto as Exhibit"A". NELSON LEVINE de LUCA& HAMILTON BY: RICHARD . B R.,ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR P AINTIFF, STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Dated: '7Its !3 c ° -,I to M C --Z- `< ►.t p , C:) C? EXHIBIT "A" SECTION SENDER:COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS . • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. "ure I item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. Agent X ! • Print your name and address on the reverse �- , C7 Addressee so that-we can return the card to you. B.Received by(Panted Name) C. Date of Delivery 1 • Attach thiskcard to the back of the mailpiece, I or on'the frontif,space permits. t dressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes 1. Article Ad dre a_t t If YES,.enter delivery address below: 13 No 3. Ser.14 Type 1 t" Certified Mail 0 Express Mall E3 Registered C3 Return Receipt for Merchandise C]Insured Mail M C.O.D. i 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes i 2..Article Number 7 012 1640 0001 1 8 6 4 6865 (Transfer from service taboo PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02-M-1540 WCORMICK& PRIORE P.C. M C rYw BY: PHILIP D. PRIORE Identification No. 38987 Attorney for Defendant, `- CJj ? 4 Penn Center, Suite 800 Intermatic Incorporated 1600 JKF Boulevard =cam:) EDr:; Philadelphia, PA 19103 y (215) 972-0161 N) Email: ppriore( ,mccormickpriore.com STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY VS. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED NO. 13-3595 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter this firm's appearance for defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, regarding the above captioned matter. McCORMICK& PRIORE, P.C. BY: HI D. P Attorney for Ziendant, Intermatic Incorporated Dated: July 22, 2013 a i i McCORMICK& PRIORE,P.C. By: Philip D. Priore, Esquire Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorney ID #38987/312404 Attorneys for Defendant, Four Penn Center; Suite 800 Intermatic Incorporated 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard CD Fr - Philadelphia, PA 19103 E-5 (T) 215-972-0161' (F) 215-972-5580; email: ppriore@r ccormickpriore.com 7-1 = mm CD cbenedetto@mccorm — ickpriore.com � •_ STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY VS. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED NO. 13-3595 i PRAECIPE TO FILE NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO: THE PROTHONOTARY OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1446(d), defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, files herewith i I a copy of a Notice i of Removal filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of I Pennsylvania on the 6th day of August, 2013, case number 1:13-CV-02096. i McCORMICK& PRIORE, P.C. i I By: I ilipli. Priore, Esquire ad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated i I MCCORMICK & PRIORE I ATTORNEYS AT LAW I I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE i I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Praecipe to File Notice of. Removal was forwarded to counsel identified below, by first-class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, on August 8, 2013. Richard J. Boyd, Esquire Nelson Levine de Luca&Hamilton 518 Township Line Road i Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 McCORMICK& PRIORE,P.C. i I By: P lip . Priore, Esquire -aarad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated i I i i I i j i I i MCCORMICK & PRIORE j ATTORNEYS AT LAw I JS44 (Rev. 12107) Case 1:13-cv-02096-CC CIVC IL Document SHEET 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 1 of 1 COVER The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the inforniation contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law,except as provided by local rules of court. This font],approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974,is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose if initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.) I(a)PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS STEPHEN F.TUCKEY INTERMATIC,INC- (b)COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF _ COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT McHenry Counly.IL (EXCEPT IN U.S,PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S.PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES,USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED (c)ATTORNEYS(FIRM NAME,ADDRESS,AND TELEPHONE NUMBER) ATTORNEYS(IF KNOWN) Richard J Boyd,Jr,,Esquire Philip D.Priore,Esquire Nelson,Levine,do Luca&Hamilton McCormick&Priore,P.C. 518 Township Line Road,Suite 300 4 Penn Center,Suite 800 Blue Bell,PA 19422 1600 John F.Kennedy Blvd. Phone:215-358-5122 Philadelphia,PA 19103 Fax:215-358-5101 Phone: 215-9720161 ihoXd@nIdhla*A,.com Fax: 215-972-5580 ppriore awniccormickuriore.com 11. BASIS OF JURISDICTION(PLACE AN^x'IN ONE BOX ONLY) 111. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (PLACE AN")C'IN ONE BOX (For Diversity Cases Only) FOR PLAINTIFF AND ONE FOR DEFENDANT ❑1 U.S.Government ❑3 Federal Question Plaintiff (U.S.Government Not a Party) PTF DEF PTF DEF Citizen of This State I ❑ I Incorporated or Principal Place [__14 [34 Of Business in This State ❑2 U.S.Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State [12 ❑2 Incorporated and Principal Place rl 5 05 Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of of Business in Another State Parties in Item 111) Citizen or Subject of a 03 [13 Foreign Nation E36 [:16 Foreign Country IV. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY Off� '.W k"A ❑110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0610 Agriculture 0 442 Appeal 28 USC 159 0400 State of Reapportionment ❑120 Marine 0 310 Airplane ❑362 Personal injury- 0 620 Other Food&Drug ❑423 Withdrawal ❑410 Antitrust ❑130 Miller Act E3 315 Airplane Product Med Malpractice E3 625 Drug Related Seizure of 28 USC 157 0 430 Banks and Banking 0 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 13365 Personal Injury- Property 21 USC 881 0450 Commerce ❑150 Recovery of Overpayment 0 320 Assault,Libel& Product Liability 0 630 Liquor Laws ❑460 Deportation &Enforcement of Slander ❑368 Asbestos Personal El 640 R.R.&Truck E3 470 Racketeer Influenced and Judgment 13330 Federal Employers' Injury Product ❑650 Airline Regs RIX Him Corrupt Organizations 0 151 Medicare Act Liability Liability ❑[3 660 Occupational ❑E1820 Copyrights 13480 Consumer Credit ❑152 Recovery of Defaulted ❑340 Marine safety/Health ❑930 Patent 0490 Cable/Sat TV Student Loans [1345 Marine Product PERSONAL PROPERTY 0690 Other 0840 Trademark 0810 Selective service (Excl.Veterans) Liability ❑370 Other Fraud 13850 Securities/commodities 0 153 Recovery of Overpayment E3 350 Motor Vehicle 0 371 Truth in Lending s6TFAL7`§ECQRITW- Exchange 861 HIA(13911) ❑355 Motor Vehicle 0 380 ------Personal 0 875 Customer Challenge of Veteran's Benefits 0 160 Stockholders Suits Product Liability Property Damage ❑E3 710 Fait Labor Standards [3 862 Black Lung(923) 12 USC 3410 13 t90 other contract 0 360 Other Personat 0385 Property Dammige Act 0863 DIWC/D1WW(405(g)) E3 890 Other Statutory Actions ❑195 Contract Product Liability injury Product Liability 0720 Labor/Mgmt.Relations ❑864 SSID Tile XVI 0 891 Agricultural Acts ❑196 Franchise ❑730 Labor/Mgmt.Reporting& [1865 RSI(405(g)) ❑892 Economic Stabilization Act Disclosure Act 0893 Environmental Matters [1740 Railway Labor Act, 0894 Energy Allocation Act FF-­T:- TRoPr1RT1y IVILM IG ATST P9150NEWFETITIONS 0790 Other Labor Litigation F>D)RALIAXSULTS ,^�; ❑510 Motions❑2 10 Land Condemnation 64 ns to Vacate U 791 Empl.Ret.Inc. ❑895 Freedom oflnformalion Act ❑220 Foreclosure C3442 Eniplayment Sentence Security Act ❑870 Taxes(U.S.Plaintiff EJ 900 Appeal ofFee Determination 0 230 Rent Lease&Ejectment ❑443 Housing/ Habeas Corpus: or Defendant) Under Equal Access to Justice ❑240 Torts to Land Accommodations 0 530 General [3 871 IRS-Third Party 13950 constitutionality of IMR55UH NT 26 USC 7609 State Statutes ❑245 Tort Product Liability 0 444 Welfare 0535 Death Penalty 0 462 Naturalization Application ❑290 All Other Real Property ❑445 Amer.w/Disabilities- 0 540 Mandamus&Other ❑463 abeas Corpus-Alien Employment ❑550 Civil Rights Detainee ❑446 Amer.w/Disabilities- E3 555 Prison Condition 0465 Other Immigration Actions 0 " ,:h 0 440 he,Civil Rights V. ORIGIN (PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY) ❑1 Original 02 Removed from ❑3 Remanded from 0 4 Reinstated or ❑5 Transferred from ❑6 Multidistrict [37 Appeal to District Judge Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened another district(specify) Litigation from Magistrate Judgment V1. CAUSE OF ACTION Give the U.S.Civil Statute under which you are filing(Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity): 28 U.S.C.§1332(a)(1)and 28 U.S.C.§1441(a) 13riefdescription of cause: Product Liability: Contract,Tort-Real Property,Tort—Personal Property. VII. REQUESTED IN ❑ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMANDS Over 50,000,00 Check YES only if demanded in complaint. COMPLAINT: UNDER F.R.C.P.23 JURY DEMAND 0 Yrs, ❑ NO VIII.RELATE D CASE(S) (see instructions): IF ANY None JUDGE DOCKETNUMBER. DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD August 6,2013 slPhilip D.Priore FOR OFFICE USE ONLY RECEIPT# AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG.JUDGE Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document I Filed 08106113 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN F. TUCKEY CIVIL ACTION V. INTERMATIC, INC. NO. NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE FOR REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT To: Richard J. Boyd, Esquire Nelson Levine de Luca& Hamilton 518 Township Line Road, Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant, Intermatic, Inc. ("Intermatic"), in the above-captioned matter, originally pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, docketed as No. 13-3595, hereby files in the United States' District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania a Notice of Removal of said action, a copy of that Notice of Removal being attached hereto and served herewith. slPhilip D. Priore Philip D. Priore, Esquire Attorney ID: 38987 McCormick & Priore, P.C. Four Penn Center, Suite 800 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19103 (T) 215-972-0161 / (F) 215-972-5580 ppriore@m.ccormiclipriore.com Attorney for Defendant, Intermatic, Inc. Dated: August 6, 2013 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 2 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN F TUCKEY CIVIL ACTION V. NO. INTERMATIC, INC. NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE FOR REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT To: The Honorable Judges of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania: Defendant, Intermatic, Inc. ("Intermatic"), hereby files a Notice of Removal of this case from the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in which it is now pending, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and in support thereof, avers as follows: 1. On June 20, 2013, plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey ("plaintiff"), commenced the instant action through the filing of a Complaint against Intermatic in the Court of Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, docketed as Civil Action No. 13-3595. A true and correct copy of plaintiffs Complaint is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit"A." 2. Plaintiff claims that on or about November 29, 2011, his property sustained extensive damage, as well as "the imposition of additional expenses and Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 3 of 21 hardship besides," caused by a fire "directly and proximately caused by Intermatic." See Ex. A ¶ 5. 3. At all tunes relevant, plaintiff was a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, residing in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. 4. According to plaintiff's Affidavit of Service, plaintiffs Complaint was served upon Intermatic by certified mail on or about July 8, 2013. A true and correct copy of the Affidavit of Service is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "B." 5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1332(c), "for the purposes of a diversity action, a corporation shall be deemed a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated and also of the state in which it has its principal place of business . . . [i]t is well settled that a corporation can have only one principal place of business." Viola v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10277, *4 (E.D. Pa. 2000) (citations omitted). 6. More specifically, the Supreme Court of the United States recently held: "[P]rincipal place of business" is best read as referring to the place where a corporation's officers direct, control, and coordinate the, corporation's activities. It is the place that Courts of Appeals have called the corporation's "nerve center." And in practice it should normally be the place where the corporation maintains its headquarters -- provided that the headquarters is the actual center of direction, control, and coordination, i.e., the "nerve center," and not simply an office 2 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08106/13 Page 4 of 21 where the corporation holds its board meetings (for example, attended by directors and officers who have traveled there for the occasion). Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 92-93 (2010). 7. Intermatic is a corporation organized, incorporated and existing under the laws of a State of Delaware, which maintains its principal place of business at 7777 Winn Road, Spring Grove, Illinois 60081. See Affidavit of Wayne Veach which attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit"C." 8. Intermatic is therefore a citizen of the States of Delaware and Illinois, is not otherwise a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of Pennsylvania, and is consequently of diverse citizenship from plaintiff. 9. Proper diversity jurisdiction exists in the instant matter as the claim involves a legitimate "controversy between citizens of different states, all of whom on one side of the controversy are citizens of different states from all parties on the other side." City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat'l Bank, 314 U.S. 63, 69 (1941). 10. Pursuant to the above analysis, complete diversity exists between the plaintiff and Intermatic in the instant action. 11. The Complaint demands, on behalf of plaintiff a judgment in excess of$50,000.00 against Intermatic based upon several theories of liability, including negligence, strict liability, and breach of express and implied warranties. See Ex. A. 3 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document I Filed 08/06/13 Page 5 of 21 12. The value of the matter in controversy, as appearing from the allegations contained in the Complaint, with respect to the alleged damage to plaintiff's property, as well as additional expenses, delay damages and "hardship" to plaintiff, upon information and belief exceeds $75,000.00. See Samuel-Bassett v. KID. Motors America, Inc., 357 F.3d 392, 398 (3d Cir. 2004); see also Schelgel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17088, at *8 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 10, 2012). 13. Accordingly, the present lawsuit is removable from the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) and § 1441(a), as complete diversity exists between plaintiff and Intermatic and the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount. 14. True and correct copies of all process, pleadings and orders which have been received by Intermatic, consisting of the Complaint and its service, are attached hereto and filed herewith. 15. This notice is timely, as it is being filed within thirty (30) days of service of the Complaint upon Intermatic. 16. Intermatic expressly reserves the right to raise all defenses and objections in this action after it is removed to this Honorable Court. 4 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 6 of 21 17. A true and correct copy of this Notice of Removal is being simultaneously filed with the Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d). 18. Written notice of the filing of this Notice of Removal will be given to all parties as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d). WHEREFORE, Notice is hereby given that this action is removed from the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Respectfully submitted, s/Philip D. Priore Philip D. Priore, Esquire Attorney ID: 38987 McCormick& Priore, P.C. Four Penn Center, Suite 800 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19103 (T) 215-972-0161 (F) 215-972-5580 pprioregmccormickpriore.com Attorney for Defendant, Intermatic, Inc. Dated: August 6, 2013 5 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 7 of 21 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Philip D. Priore, Esquire, attorney for defendant, Intermatic, Inc., in the within action hereby certify that I am duly authorized to make this certification; and that on this date, I did cause a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Removal to be forwarded by first-class United States mail to counsel addressed as follows: Richard J. Boyd, Esquire Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton 518 Township Line Road Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 s/Philip D. Priore Philip D. Priore, Esquire Attorney ID: 38987 McCormick& Priore, P.C. Four Penn Center, Suite 800 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19103 (T) 215-972-0161 (F) 215-972-5580 ppriore@mccormickpriore.com Attorney for Defendant, Intermatic, Inc. Dated: August 6, 2013 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 8 of 21 EXHIBIT A Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 9 of 21 NELSON L 17T.NE de LLICA & HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J. BOYD,JR.)ESQUIRE STEPHEN F. TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 51.8 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD,SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (215) 358-5122 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 1150 Dunlin Court CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Phi Mechanicsburg, PA 1.7050 , L ION NO: CIVIL ACTION V. INTER.MATIC INCORPORATED 7777 Winn Road —:0 C)~ Spring Grove, IL 60051 :zc) Defeudant(s) NOTICE You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your 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 judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff- You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU.SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE Cumberland County Bar Association 32 Soutb Bedford Street Carlisle,PA 17013 (717)249-37.66 or 1-800-990-91.08(PA only) •1H H H H Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 10 of 21 NELSON LEVI:NE de LUCA b'=HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J. BOYD, 3R., ESQUIRE STEPH EN F. TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 51.8 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 (215) 358-5122 STEPHI,N F. 'JFTJCKEY -- COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 1150 Dunlin Court CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PA Mechanicsburg, PA 1705{) Plaintiff(s) CIVIL ACTION NO: v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED 7777 Winn Road. Spring Grove, 11, 00081 Defendant(s) COMPLAINT Plaintiff-, Stephen F. Tuckey, by and through his undersigned. counsel, hereby demands judgment against Defendant, and complains against it as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, is an adult individual who, at all times relevant hereto, owned and resided at the home located at 1150 Dunlin. Court, Mechanicsburg, PA (hereinafter "the premises"). 2. At aJ.l times relevant hereto, Defendant, Interrnadc Incorporated, (hereinafter "Interm.atic") was, upon information and :belief, a Delaware corporation and was regularly conducting business in the Commonwealth.of Pennsylvania, County of Lehigh. 3. Defendant, Intermatic, at all times relevant hereto, was in the business of, inter alia., manufacturing, selling, designing, distributing, and marketing energy management solutions, including the timer (hereinafter the"product") at issue in this case. n A e a s Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 11 of 21 4. On or about November 29, 2011, a fire erupted in the tuner which was being used in an ordinary and foreseeable manner at plaintiff's property. 5. This fire caused extensive damage to plaintiffs' property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardslv.p besides, Lhis fire was directly and proximately caused by Intermatic as is further and more fully described.below. COUNT I--NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF v. INTERMATI:C INCORPORATED 6. PIainti.ff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 7. The aforementioned damages were the direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Intermatic,by and through its employees, agents,technicians, vendors, subcontractors and/or servants, more specifically described as follows: a. failing to exercise reasonable care in the following manner: i. failing to manufacture, assemble, sell, design,transport, distribute, test and/or market a properly functioning product; ii. failing to properly inspect and/or test the product and/or its component parts; iii. failing to properly determine and ensure that the subject product was in compliance with applicable industry standards; iv. failing to provide safe and adequate warnings or instructions with the product; and/or V. manufacturing, marketing, distributing and/or selling the product when the Defendant knew or should have known that the product and/or its component parts would be inadequate for the reasons for which purchased. b. failing to adequately instruct, supervise and/or traill servants, employees and agents as to the proper ,ways to perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a); y p , S B fl fl Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 12 of 21 C. failing to adequately warn consumers and others of the dangers and hazardous conditions resulting from the conduct set forth in subparagraph (a) above; d. failing to provide, establish, and/or follow proper and adequate controls so as to ensure the proper performance of the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a) above; e. failing to retain cornpeten.t, qualified and/or able agents, employees or servants to perform the tasks set forth i.n subparagraph (a) above; and f. failing to perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph (a) above in conformity with the prevailing industry and governmental specifications, laws, and standards. 8. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of Intermatic, Plaintiff sustained and incurred damage to his real and personal property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardships, in an amount in excess of$50,000.00. VffMR.EFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant, Iutermatic Incorporated, in an ainount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. COUNT R--STRICT LIABULTY PLAINTIFF v. INTERM.&TIC INCORPORATED 9. Plaintiff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 10. The defendant, at all times relevant hereto, was engaged in the business of,inter aba, designing, assembling, manufacturing, testing, selling and/or distributing, inter alit, timers, and, specifically did so with the product at issue in this case. L , Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 13 of 21 11. . lnterinatic designed, manufactured, distributed, tested and/or sold the subject product in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to consumers. 12. Interinatic knew or should.have known that the subject product would, and did, reach the subject property without substantial change from the condition in.which originally distributed and sold. 13. The aforementioned defects consisted of: (a) ' design defects; (b) manufacturing defects; (c) component defects; (d) a failure to warn of the design, manufacturing, and/or component defects, and/or properly provide warning and/or safe use instructions. 14_ As a direct and proximate result of such.defects,Plaintiff sustained and incurred damage to his real and personal property, as well as the imposition of additional expenses and hardship, in an amount in excess of$50,000.00. 15. , For these reasons,the defendant is strictly liable to plaintiff for the damages stated herein under Section 402A of the Restatement (2d) of Torts, the Restatement (3d) of Torts, and the applicable case law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant, lnterinatic { Incorporated, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 14 of 21 COUNT III-BREACH OF EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES PLAINTIFF vs. INTERMiATIC INCORPORATED 16. Plaintiff repeats the allegations set forth in the prior paragraphs of this Complaint as though they were set forth at length herein. 17. At the tune of the sale and/or distribution of the subject product, the dcfendaait had reason to know the particular purpose to which the subject product would be used (i.e. residential application) and they were being relied upon to furnish a suitable product. Thus,the defendant breached the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose as set out in the Uniform Commercial Code (hereinafter"UCC") at 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-315 in that the subject product was not fit for the particular purpose for which such products are required as it was prone to overheating, failure and ignition under normal operation. 18. In addition, the defendant breached its implied warranty of merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-314 (c) in that the subject product \vas not fit for the ordinary uses for which the subject product was used. 19. In addition, the defendant breached any and all express warranties made or relating to the subject product that became part of the basis of the bargain for sale of the product in derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. §.2-313. (The defendant has better-access to said warranties and, therefore,is not prejudiced by them.not being attached hereto). 20. Plaintiff's damages as set forth above occurred as a direct and proximate result of the breach by the defendant of its implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose and merchantability as set out in 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-315 and § 2-314 (c) and as a result of the breach of its expressed warrantees in.derogation of 13 Pa. C.S.A. § 2-313. 21. Plaintiff has met any and all conditions precedent to recovery for such breaches. 8 � Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 15 of 21 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests ,judgment against Defendant, Jnterm-!alic Incorporated, in an amount in cxcess of $50,000.00, plus costs incident to this suit, delay damages, and attorney fees, and for such other relief as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate under the circumstances. NEI-SON, LFVINE de LUCA &z HAMILTON BY: �- RICHARD J. O R., ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR P AINTIFF. STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Dated: w t t 1/(,3 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 16 of 21 VERIFICATION I, VICTORIA PHILLIPS, do hereby state that I aLn a representative for ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, the real party in interest in the within action, and as such do hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing COMPLAINT are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 1.8 Pa.C.S. § 4904 rehitins;to unsworn falsification to authorities. VICTORIA PHILLIPS Dated: ��' l a a e • a Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 17 of 21 EX IBIT B 9 S Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Do uff 1—Fled 1 08/06/-13 Pagz49 of 21 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA& HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, BY: RICHARD J.BOYD,JR.,ESQUIRE STEPHEN F.TUCKEY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 84035 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD,SUITE 300 BLUE BELL,PA 19422 (215)358-5122 STEPHEN F.TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff(s) CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PA V. CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-3595 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant(s) AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and states that he is the attorney for the Plaintiff in the above matter, and in such capacity did have Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated served with a true and correct copy of the Complaint by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested#7012 1640 0001 1864 6865 on July 8,2013. A copy of the executed return receipt card is attached hereto as Exhibit"A". NELSON LEVINE de LUCA&HAMILTON BY: RICHARDVj3Pft R.,ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR P AINTIFF, STEPHEN F.TUCKEY Dated: 7 �� !3 = mw M� rn ` Ci 5:C21 h CA i • to W I ' SECTION SENDER:COMPLEMrHIS .MPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY , • Complete Items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A 1 item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired. gAAgent • Print your name and address on the reverse X d Addressee I ab that-we can return the card to you.- g,Fteoeived by(Pdnfed Name) C.Date of Delivery I •Attachttilstcard to the back of the mailplece, f or on'the front'ifspace permits. 1. Article Addreps to: D.Is delivery address different from Rem 1? 0 Yes m �r. �r� If YES,.enter delivery address bsloyr O No 1r / (/�'"�c✓/'r "a` ' 3. SerAType certified Mall d Express Mall T • ^ l�J [ dQ�� — 0 Reglstered CI Return Receipt for Merchandlse ❑Insured Mail O C.O.D. I t2 FF Q j 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) p Yes I O 2.Article Number -7 012 1640 0001 Z$6 4 6865 0 (fransferirom servkelebel} PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-WIS40 I c� CD . N cD 0 N N w n m 0 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 20 of 21 EXHIBIT w a a a Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 21 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPI-IEN F. TUCKEY CIVIL ACTION V. NO. INTERMATIC, INC. AFFIDAVIT Wayne Veach, being duly sworn and according to law,deposes and says the following: 1. 1, Wayne Veach, am a Director of Intermatic, Inc., the defendant named in the instant action. 2. Intermatic, Inc., is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware and its principal place of business is located at 7777 Winn Road, Spring Grove, Illinois 60081. 3. The statements contained in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, and are made subject to the penalties of perjury and to the penalties relating to sworn falsification to authorities. 1 Wayne each Director Risk Management Intermatic, Inc. Dated: NELSON LEVINE de LUCA& HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF BY: KATHRYN C. MELLINGER,ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 309591 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 STEPHEN F. TUC"Y COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff(s) CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PA V. CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-3595 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant(s) ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance as counsel for Plaintiff in the above captioned matter. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON BY: YN CIE R, ESQUIRE A T RNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF G tot ;.. "5'p r, g 7. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF BY: KATHRYN C. MELLINGER,ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 309591 518 TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD, SUITE 300 BLUE BELL,PA 19422 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff(s) CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PA V. CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-3595 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant(s) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Kathryn C. Mellinger, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Entry of Appearance was served on September 13, 2013, upon counsel listed below by United States Mail,postage prepaid. Phillip D. Priore, Esquire McCormick&Priore, PC 1600 JFK Blvd., Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON BY: KA C. MELLINGER, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Dated: September 13, 2013 13- 3S9s C,;L Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 15 Filed 05/29/14 Page 1 of 3 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 14 Filed 05/29/14 Page 1 of 3 NAPLFD Mqy au IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT a472y2 a 201¢ FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAN r STEPHEN F. TUCKEY . CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 1:13 -CV -02096 c-) C INTERMATIC, INC. HON. CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER m 73 u)r— CONSENT ORDER < D i--. AND NOW, this 297" day of , 2014, it is HEREBY ORDECt'D AND DECREED, PURSUANT TO THE AG EMENT OF THE PARTIES, that: 1. It is agreed between the undersigned Counsel that the above matter shall be remanded to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County under the following prior caption: Stephen F. Tuckey 1'. Into -matte Incorporated, Civil Action No. 13-3595; 2. In consideration for defendant, Intennatic, Inc., agreeing to remand the above matter, plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, his heirs, executors, administrators, insurers, successors and assigns, and any and all other persons, including his principal, subrogor, counsel and/or representatives (hereinafter "plaintiff"), HEREBY AGREE, CONSENT TO AND STIPULATE, FOR NOW AND ALL TIME HEREAFTER, that all damages, losses, interest and expenses that are sought to be recovered, and/or will be sought to be recovered, by whatever name known, in this litigation, wherever it may be venued, will be limited to and capped at, heretofore, now and forever, the amount of Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65). It is expressly agreed to and understood by plaintiff that the essence of Intermatic, Inc.'s agreement to remand this case to state court is plaintiff's agreement to forever foreswear from seeking or obtaining any money damages or recovery in excess of Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65); Certified fro:.t the Date Per C- '4 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 15 Filed 05/29/14 Page 2 of 3 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 14 Filed 05/29/14 Page 2 of 3 3. Plaintiff, heretofore, now and forever, relinquishes any and all further claims for delay damages pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 238 to which they may be entitled, as well as any other claims for interest, attorneys fees and/or money damages, by whatever name known, that are in excess of Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65). 4. In the event a verdict and/or judgment is entered against defendant, Intermatic, Inc., in excess of Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65), including any delay damages pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 238, interest, attorneys fees and/or money damages, such a verdict and/or judgment will be molded to be capped at, never to exceed, the number limit agreed upon by plaintiff and defendant, Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65). 5. If damages in excess of Sixty -Five Thousand, Six Hundred Eighty -Five Dollars and Sixty -Five Cents ($65,685.65) are claimed at any point from this date forward and forever, defendant, Intermatic, Inc., expressively reserves the right to remove the matter to the Federal Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania within one (1) year of any such claim for damages in excess of this amount. NELSON LEVINE DE LUCA & OfFA7MCCORMl HAMILTON, C BY BY: PH LI' ►. PRI 1 ii, ESQUIRE R i l* s 1. BOYD, ESQUIR Atton for Defendant, Attorney for Plaintiff, Intermn . tic Incorporated Stephen F. Tuckey Dated: .6---. , 1i' Dated: Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 15 Filed 05/29/14 Page 3 of 3 Case 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Document 14 Filed 05/29/14 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Philip D. Priore, Esquire, attorney for defendant, Intermatic, Inc., in the within action hereby certify that I am duly authorized to make this certification; and that on this date, I did cause a true and correct copy of the foregoing Consent Order to be served by electronic means to counsel addressed as follows: Richard J. Boyd, Esquire Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton 518 Township Line Road Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 s/Philip D. Priore Philip D. Priore, Esquire Attorney ID: 38987 McCormick & Priore, P.C. Four Penn Center, Suite 800 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19103 (T) 215-972-0161 (F) 215-972-5580 ppriore@mccormickpriore.com Attorney for Defendant, Intermatic, Inc. Dated: May 29, 2014 TRICT c- Lu (36 riel (GI bvG Clerk of Court OFFICE OF THE CLERK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA U.S. Courthouse 228 Walnut Street, Rm. 1060 P.O. Box 983 Harrisburg, PA 1 71 08-0983 May 30, 2014 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL(RRR) David D. Buell, Prothonotary Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas One Courthouse Square Suite 100 Carlisle, PA 17013 c4\ (717) 221-3920 FAX (717) 221-3959 IN RE: Stephen F. Tuckey v. Intermatic, Inc. Civil Action No. 1:13 -CV -2096 (USDC Middle District of Pennsylvania) Dear Mr. Buell: —3 7i Enclosed please find both a certified copy of our docket sheet, in the above - captioned action, and a certified copy of this court's order, which remands this matter to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. Please acknowledge receipt of these items at the bottom portion of this letter and return a copy of the same, to our offices, at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Very truly yours, GARY HOLLI GER, ACTING CLERK Enclosures Kimberly A. c inney Deputy Cle k RECEIPT I hereby acknowledge receipt this 3ACt- day o V 2014. Pennsylvania Middle District Version 6.1 13 3 g QS C.�/ C> �, Page 1 of 3 CLOSED,COMPLEX,HBG United States District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13-cv-02096-CCC Tuckey v. Intermatic, Inc. Assigned to: Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner Demand: $75,000 Case in other court: Cumberland County Court, 13-03595 Cause: 28:1332 Diversity -Product Liability Plaintiff Stephen Tuckey cD. M V. Defendant Intermatic, Inc. Certified trim the record Date 1..., c �o'! Per Date Filed: 08/06/2013 Date Terminated: 05/29/2014 Jury Demand: Defendant Nature of Suit: 385 Prop. Damage Prod. Liability Jurisdiction: Diversity represented by Richard J. Boyd , Jr. Nelson Levine deLuca & Hamilton 518 Township Line Road Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-358-5100 Fax: 215-358-5101 Email: rboyd@nldhlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn C. Mellinger Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton, LLC 518 Township Line Road Suite 300 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-358-5167 Fax: 215-358-5101 Email: kmellinger@nldhlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Philip D. Priore McCormick & Priore, P.C. 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd Suite 800 4 Penn Center Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 972-0161 Email: ppriore@mccormickpriore.com LEAD ATTORNEY https://ecf.pamd.circ3.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?239496379070811-L_1 _0-1 05/30/2014 Pennsylvania Middle District Version 6.1 Page 2 of 3 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 08/06/2013 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by defendant Intermatic, Inc. from Cumberland County Court, Case Number 13-3595. (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 2853151); jury trial demanded. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jc) (Entered: 08/07/2013) 08/06/2013 2 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO FRCP 7.1 by Intermatic, Inc.. (jc) (Entered: 08/07/2013) 08/12/2013 3 SCHEDULING ORDER - Initial Case Management Conference set for 9/17/2013 @ 02:15 PM - placement of the telephone conference call is the responsibility of the plaintiff. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 8/12/13. (ki) (Entered: 08/12/2013) 08/13/2013 4 ANSWER to Complaint with Affirmative Defenses by Intermatic, Inc.. (Priore, Philip) (Entered: 08/13/2013) 09/13/2013 5 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by Intermatic, Inc.. (Priore, Philip) (Entered: 09/13/2013) 09/17/2013 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Kathryn C. Mellinger on behalf of Stephen Tuckey. (Mellinger, Kathryn) (Entered: 09/17/2013) 09/18/2013 8 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER (COMPLEX TRACK) - Sets forth case management instructions, guidelines & pretrial/trial schedule, inc. - Discovery due by 6/2/2014; Jury Selection & Trial set for 12/1/2014 @ 09:30 AM in Harrisburg - Courtroom 2 before Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner; Dispositive Motions due by 7/2/2014; Pretrial Memos due by noon on 11/12/2014; Pretrial Conference set for 11/19/2014 @ 10:00 AM in Harrisburg - Jury Room 2. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 9/18/13. (ki) (Entered: 09/18/2013) 12/16/2013 9 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Stephen Tuckey.(Boyd, Richard) (Entered: 12/16/2013) 12/17/2013 10 CERTIFICATE of Non -Concurrence by Stephen Tuckey . (Boyd, Richard) (Entered: 12/17/2013) 12/30/2013 11 REPLY by Intermatic, Inc.. to Plaintiffs Motion to Remand to State Court. (Priore, Philip) (Entered: 12/30/2013) 01/24/2014 12 MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry) re: pltfs motion to remand to state court 9 . (See memo for complete details.) Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 1/24/14. (ki) (Entered: 01/24/2014) 01/24/2014 12 ORDER (Memorandum 12 filed previously as separate docket entry) - It is hereby ORDERED that pltfs motion to remand to state court 9 is DENIED. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 1/24/14. (ki) (Entered: 01/24/2014) https://ecf.pamd.circ3.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?239496379070811-L_1 _0-1 05/30/2014 Pennsylvania Middle District Version 6.1 Page 3 of 3 1.05/29/2014 14 STIPULATION /Consent Order to Remand to Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County by Intermatic, Inc., filed by Intermatic, Inc..(Priore, Philip) (Entered: 05/29/2014) 05/29/2014 15 CONSENT ORDER re: stipulation 14 REMANDING CASE to Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County under prior caption Stephen F. Tuckey v Intermatic Incorporated, Civil Action No. 13-3595, with stipulation to damages, losses, interest & expenses limit. (See order for complete details.)Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 5/29/14. (ki) (Entered: 05/30/2014) https://ecf.pamd.circ3.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?23 94963 79070811-L_ 1 _0-1 05/30/2014 de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: 215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY C COURT OF COMMON P w; S c CUMBERLAND COUNT % r'Q NO. 13-3595 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF A CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files its Motion to Compel and states as follows: 1. On or about April 18th, 2014, Plaintiff's counsel forwarded a Notice of Deposition of a Corporate Representative of Intermatic Incorporated to defense counsel. The date, time and location were left blank and it was requested that defense counsel provide his client's availability. A copy of the Notice and correspondence are attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A". 2. On July 30th, 2014, Plaintiff's counsel was told by the Defendant's attorney that they would not provide available dates for the named corporate designee at that time. See Exhibit "B." 3. On October 10, 2014, both attorneys as well as the named corporate designee agreed on the deposition date of Thursday, October 23, 2014. The parties agreed to this date in person, after consulting their calendars. 4. Later that same day, Plaintiff's counsel sent an email memorializing the agreed upon date of October 23`d, 2014. A copy of the email is attached hereto and marked Exhibit "C". 5. On October 20th, 2014, Plaintiffs counsel forwarded a Notice of Deposition of a corporate representative of Intermatic Incorporated to defense counsel via e-mail. A copy of the email is attached hereto and marked Exhibit "D". 6. On or about October 20th, 2014, defense counsel informed Plaintiff's counsel that the deposition of Intermatic Incorporated's corporate representative would be unilaterally cancelled because of a "conflict." A copy of the email is attached hereto and marked and included with Exhibit "E". 7. Plaintiff's counsel requested clarification of the conflict, yet never received a response from defense counsel. 8. As of this writing, defense counsel has still not responded, even to suggest the next available date. 9. Defense counsel did not seek a protective order before telling his corporate designee not to show up for his deposition. 10. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 4019. this Honorable Court is empowered to enter an Order compelling Intermatic Incorporated to produce a Corporate Representative to testify regarding the areas outline in the Notice of Deposition (Exhibit "C"). 11. Further, because Intermatic Incorporated has failed to produce a representative, Intermatic Incorporated is precluded from raising any objections to the Notice of Deposition sent to counsel on October 20, 2014 and October 22, 2014. (Exhibit "F"). 12. Plaintiff is unable to properly prepare for trial without the testimony of the Corporate Representative of Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated. His testimony is clearly relevant and there is no valid reason for the continuing delay. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey, requests that its Motion to Compel to produce a Corporate Representative within twenty (20) days or suffer sanctions upon further application to this Court. Respectfully submitted, de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: Dated: October 29, 2014 Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire Attorney ID No.: 201181 Three Township Line Road, Suite 200 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-383-0081 (phone) 215-383-0082 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: 215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff V. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 NOTICE OF PRESENTATION TO: Corporate Designee(s) of Intermatic, Inc. c/o Conrad Benedetto, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Blvd., Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff, Stephen F. Tuckey's Motion to Compel Deposition will be presented to the Court on de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: ,47Zet/ / / 1/41 Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire Attorney ID No.: 201181 Three Township Line Road, Suite 200 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-383-0081 (phone) 215-383-0082 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs' CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that service of a true and correct copy of the within Motion to Compel was made on October 29th, 2014 to the counsel above named by United States mail, postage prepaid. de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: Dated: October 29th, 2014 Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire Attorney ID No.: 201181 Three Township Line Road, Suite 200 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-383-0081 (phone) 215-383-0082 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: 215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 ATTORNEY CERTIFICATION OF GOOD FAITH The undersigned counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant hereby certifies and attests that: a. He or she has had the contacts described below with opposing counsel or unrepresented party regarding discovery matter contained in the foregoing discovery motion in an effort to resolve the specific discovery dispute(s) at issue and, further, that despite all counsel's good faith attempts to resolve the dispute(s), counsel have been unable to do so. Description: Please see above described attempts made in good faith. Depositions were scheduled for October 23', then cancelled by Defense. b. He or she has made good faith but unsuccessful efforts described below to contact opposing counsel or unrepresented party in an effort to resolve the discovery dispute. Date: CERTIFIED TO THE COURT BY: Note: The Signature of Respondant's Counsel Is Not Required de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: 215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 PRAECIPE FOR DETERMINATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly submit the following matter to a Judge for determination: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF A CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Dated: October 29, 2014 de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire Attorney ID No.: 201181 Three Township Line Road, Suite 200 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-383-0081 (phone) 215-383-0082 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs EXHIBIT "A" IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff(s) V. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant Civil Action No: 1:13 -CV -02096 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TO: Wayne Veach c/o Phillip D. Priore, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Please take notice that the oral deposition of WAYNE VEACH will be taken at the offices of McCormick & Priore, PC, 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19103 on TBD, beginning at. 10:00 a.m., before a Notary Public or other such officer as is entitled to administer oaths, and said deposition shall continue from day to day thereafter until completed. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON Y: Dated: April 18, 2014 CG A ORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff(s) v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant(s) Civil Action No: 1:13 -CV -02096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Joseph L. McGlynn, , hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Notice of Deposition was served on April 18, 2014, upon counsel listed below by United States Mail, postage prepaid. Phillip D. Priore, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON BY: Date: April 18, 2014 /.4-4 J EPH ' . MCGLYNN, TORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY EXHIBIT "B" Joseph McGlynn From: Conrad James Benedetto <CBenedetto@mccormickpriore.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:48 PM To: Joseph L. McGlynn Cc: Eileen Sweeney; Kimberly A. Manning Subject: RE: Tuckey v. Intermatic Mr. McGlynn, We are working with Mr. Veach to determine his earliest availability. However, due to his schedule, at this time we are unable to propose a date certain. We will suggest dates once we are able to confirm with Mr. Veach his availability. Thank you for your continued cooperation and courtesies in this regard. Yours, Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire McCormick & Priore, P.C. 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone (215)972-0161 I Fax (215)972-5580 cbenedetto@mccormickpriore.com I www.mccormickpriore.com The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipients named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication, and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail at mp@mccormickpriore.com and delete the message. Thank you. Original Message From: Joseph L. McGlynn [mailto:jmcglynn@NLDHLAW.COM] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:27 PM To: Conrad James Benedetto; Kimberly A. Manning Subject: Tuckey v. Intermatic Mr. Benedetto, I was just informed that you are unwilling to suggest any available dates for the deposition of Wayne Veatch. Please confirm. Thank you. This electronic communication and its contents may contain information that is confidential, privileged and/or exempt from disclosure. Any forwarding of this communication without express permission is strictly prohibited. If the reader of this electronic communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that review, copying, dissemination or distribution of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it and contact Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton at 215.358.5100. Thank You. 1 EXHIBIT "C" Joseph McGlynn From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Joseph McGlynn Friday, October 10, 2014 3:33 PM 'cbenedetto@mccormickpriore.com' Linette Trowery tuckey v. intermatic Conrad, This email will confirm the deposition of Wayne Veatch that we scheduled earlier today for Thursday, October 23rd, 2014 at 9:30 at your office. Thanks. Have a good weekend. Joseph L. McGlynn Attorney de Luca Levine, LLC Direct Dial: 215.310.4731 Email: jmcglynnPdelucalevine.com Three Valley Square Suite 220 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Main Phone Line: 215.383.0081 Fax: 215-383.0082 www.deLucaLevine.com 1 EXHIBIT "0" Danielle McCormick From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Good morning Mr. Priore, Danielle McCormick Monday, October 20, 2014 11:15 AM 'PPriore@mccormickpriore.com' Tuckey v. Intermatic Incorp. 0867_001.pdf Attached please find a Notice of Deposition addressed to the Corporate Designee of Intermatic, Inc. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you, Danielle McCormick Paralegal de Luca Levine, LLC Direct Dial: 215.310.4739 Email: dmccormick@delucalevine.com Three Valley Square Suite 220 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Main Phone Line: 215.383.0081 Fax: 215-383.0082 www.deLucaLevine.com 1 INI,THE':.,UNIThDSI.:.TESIMSTRJCTC . MIDDLE:,'DISTRICT'OF'.PENNSYLVANIA., STEPHEN F. TUCIKEY Plaintiff(s) Civil Action No: 1:13 -CV -02096 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED NOTICE OF DEPOSITION, TO; Corporate Designee(s) of Intermatic, Inc do Phillip D. Priore, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Please talce notice that purs• uatit to Federal Rule of Civil Procecltee 30(b)(6), Plaintiffs hereby notice the oral deposition of a corporate designee(s) of Intermatic, Inc. to be taken at the offices of McCormick & Priore, P.0 , 1600 JFK Blvd , Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19103, • • on October 23, 2014, beginning at 10 00 a m , before a Notary Public or other such officer as is entitled to administer oaths, and said deposition shall continue from day to day thereafter until completed. The corporate designee(s) should be the individual(s) with the most knowledge and information with regard to the areas of inquiry set forth in the attached Appendix. The deposition will continue from day to day until completed. You are invited to attend and participate in the deposition. NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY Dated: October 20, 2014 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT; MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff(s) Civil Action No. 1:13 -CV -02096 INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant: CERTIFICATE.. OF SERVICE I Joseph L McGlynn, Esquire, hereby certify= that a true and correct copy of Notice of Deposition was served on October 20, 2014, upon counsel listed below via e-mail and United States Mail, postage prepaid. Date: October 20, 2014; Phillip D Priore, Esquire'; McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 PPriore@mccormickpriore.eom NELSONLEVINE de' LUCA & HAMILTON BY, JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY' APPENDIX AREAS OF INQUIRY AS TO INTERMATIC, INC. 1. The manufacturing process of the subject transformer, timer, and electrical components. 2. The creation of manuals or instructional pamphlets that accompanied the subject transformer, timer, and electrical components. 3. Any other paperwork or warranties that accompanied the subject transformer, timer, and/or electrical components. 4. Any complaints and/or claims arising out of the use of similar transformers, timers, and/or electrical components. 5. Any complaints and/or claims to the Consumer Products Safety Commission regarding similar transformers, timers, and electrical components. 6. Lawsuits asserted against Intermatic, or related companies, alleging fires arising from similar transformers, timers, and/or electrical components. 7. Any reports, analysis, or investigations relating to the incident at issue in this case. 8. The method or methods presently and in the past as to how defendant records and memorializes consumer complaints regarding similar transformers, timers, and electrical components. 9. The design drawings of the subject transformer, timer and electrical components; as well as any evolution of their design from the time of initial design and manufacture. EXHIBIT "E" Joseph McGlynn. From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject]= Joe; Conrad -lames Benedetto <CBenedetto@mccorrniickprigre com> Monday, October 20, 2014 616 PM Joseph .McGlynn. Linette Trowery, Eileen Sweeney:. .tuckey v. intermatic: Please be advised that, due to a conflict, Mr. Veach's deposition .need's to be postponed. I'm working with Mr.. Veach to obtain agreeable dates in early November. Thanks for your anticipated courtesies in this regard. M :c!: IWI1CiC; PRIUR P ; Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire;i McCormick & Priore, P.C. 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Suite 800' Philadelphia, PA 19103. Phone (215) 972-0161 Fax (215)- 972.5580 cbenedetto@mccormickpnore.com 1' www. mccormickpriore:com The iniartnation contained in this email message is intended o•nly far ttre personal ari coniiilentiai Use of the designated: recipients named:above; This message may tae an attorney-client communication and as s•uch is privileged and confidential,;if the,reader of -this rrie"ssage,is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering'it to the intended recipient you are:hereby:notified that you have'received this document in error, and that: anyreview, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is §k.; etly `prohibited If:you•hove received.• this communication?:in error, please notify us.by reply a -mail a it fnpC�ya iYtccorrrrickongre Gcirri and delete the message Thank you ` ,,m,• , ••,,,„. From Joseph McGlynn[mailto:jmcglynn@delucalevine:com]` Sent Friday, October 10,;2014 3:33 PM To: Conrad :James ;Benedetto. Cc: Linette Trowery Subject: turkey v intermatic. Conrad, This email; will confirm the deposition of Wayne Veatch that we scheduled earlier todayfor Thursday, October 23rd, 2014 at 9,:30 at your office. Thanks. Have a good .weekend. Joseph L McGlynn EXHIBIT "F" IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff(s) Civil Action No: 1:13 -CV -02096 IINTTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendan NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TO: Corporate Designee(s) of Intermatic, Inc. c/o Phillip D. Priore, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Please takenotice that pursuant to Federal Itule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), Plaintiffs hereby notice the oral deposition of a corporate designee(s) of Intennatic, Inc. to be taken at the offices of McCormick & l'riore, PC., 1600 JFK Blvd., Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19103, on October 23, 2014, beginning at 10:00 a.m., before a Notary Public or other such officer as is entitled to administer oaths, and said deposition shall continue from day to day thereafter until completed The corporate designee(s) should be the individual(s) with the most knowledge and information with regard to the areas of inquiry set forth in the attached Appendix. The deposition will continue from day to day until completed. You are invited to attend and part.icipate in the deposition. Dated: October 20, 20.14 NELSON LEVINE de LUCA & HAMILTON JOSEPH L MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No. 1:13 -CV -02696 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE; I, Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire, hereby certify that a.true and correct copy of Notice of Deposition was served on October 20, 2014, upon counsel listed below via e-mail and United States Mail, postage prepaid. Date: October 20, 2014 Phillip D Priore, Esquire; McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103, PPriore@mccormickpriore.com NELSON`LEVINE deLUCA & HAMILTON JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY APPENDIX AREAS OF INQUIRY AS TO INTERMATIC. INC.1. The manufacturing process of the subject transformer, timer, and electricalcomponents. 2. The creation of manuals or instructional pamphlets that accompanied the subject transformer -timer and electrical components. 3. Any other paperwork or warranties that accompanied the subject transformer,timer and/or electrical components. 4. the use Any ._ complaints --�and/or -~'claims arising�---.out of similartransformers, timers, and/or electrical components. 5. Any complaints and/or claims to the Consumer Products Safety Commission regarding similar transformers, timers, and electrical components. 6. Lawsuits asserted against Intennatic, or related companies, alleging fires arising from similar transformers, timers, and/or electrical components. 7 or investigations relating to the incident at issue in this 8. The method or methods presently and in the past as to how defendant .records and memorializes consumer complaints regarding similar transforme , timers, and electrical components. 9. The desip drawings of the subject transformer, timer and electrical components; as well as any evolution of their design from the time of initial design and manufacture. de LUCA LEVINE LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P 215-383-0081 F 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F, TUCKEY - — Plaintiff INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 -NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TO: Corporate 13esignee(s) of Intermatic, Inc. do Phillip D. Priore, Esquire IVIcConnicic & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Please take notice that the oral deposition of a corporate designee(s) of Intermatic, Inc. is to be taken at the offices of McCormick & Priore, P.C., 1600 JFK Blvd , Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19103, on October 23, beginning at 10:00 a.m., before a Notary Public or other such officer as is entitled to administer oaths, and said deposition shall continue from day to day thereafter until completed. The corporate designee(s) should be the individual(s) with the most knowledge and information with regard to the areas of inquiry set forth in the attached Appendix. The deposition will continue from day to day until completed You are invited to attend and participate in the deposition. de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH - L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY Dated October 22, 2014 de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: .215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHENT. Tuaay Plaintiff V. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 CERTIFICATE,OF SERVICE. I, Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Notice of Deposition was served on October 22, 2014, upon counsel listed below via e-mail and United States Mail, postage prepaid. Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire McCormick &13riore, PC 1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 cbenedetto@mccormickpriore.com de LUCA LEVINE, LLC MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN TUCKEY Dated October 22 2014 1. components. APPENDIX AREAS OF INQUIRY AS TO INTERMATIC, INC. The manufacturing process of the subject transformer, timer, and electrical 2. The creation of manuals or instructional pamphlets that accompanied the subject transformer, timer, and electrical components. Any other paperwork or warranties that accompanied the subject:' transformer, timer, and/or electrical components. 4 Any complaints and/or claims arising out of the use of similar transformers, timers, and/or electrical components: 5. Any complaints and/or claims to the Consumer Products Safety Commission regarding similar transformers, :timers; and electrical components.. 6. Lawsuits asserted against Inter vatic, or related companies alleging fires arising from similar transformers, timers, and/or electrical components, 7. Any reports, analysis, or investigations relating to the incident; at issue in this case. 8 The method or methods presently and in the past as to how defendant records and memorializes consumer complaints regarding similar transformers, timers, and electrical components. 9. The design drawings of the subject; transformer,timer and electrical components; as well as any evolution of their design from the time of initial design and manufacture. 11 LEO- 3.. -i -i C� THE PROTI ONOT/ 2EH11 NOV -5 AM 8:50 CUMBERLAND COUNTY STEPHEN F. TUCKEY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED, Defendant Cont' of Cumbtrtarrb IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 13-3595 CIVIL ACTION IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF A CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC INCORPORATED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 4th day of November 2014, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Deposition of a Corporate Representative of Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, a RULE is issued upon Defendant to show cause the requested relief should not be granted. PLAINTIFF shall effectuate service of this Order of Court upon Defendant and shall file proof of service. Response by Defendant shall contain a proposed order. RULE RETURNABLE twenty (20) days from the date of service. JOI•istribution List: J seph L. McGlynn, Esq. ./Conrad Benedetto, Esq. 1)(IttEcio <<7S/Iy H , COURT, Thor A. Placey C.P.J. de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION NO.: 201181 THREE VALLEY SQUARE, SUITE 220 BLUE BELL, PA 19422 P: 215-383-0081 F: 215-383-0082 STEPHEN F. TUCKEY Plaintiff V. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Defendant ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF STEPHEN F. TUCKEY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, JOSEPH L. MCGLYNN, ESQUIRE, do hereby certify that service of a true and correct copy of the Order of the Court dated November 4, 2014, was made on November 10, 2014, to the counsel above named by Certified United States mail, postage prepaid. Conrad Benedetto, Esquire McCormick & Priore, PC 1600 JFK Blvd., Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 de LUCA LEVINE, LLC BY: Dated: November 10, 2014 Jose . McG1,rnn, Esquire Attorney ID No.: 201181 Three Township Line Road, Suite 200 Blue Bell, PA 19422 215-383-0081 (phone) 215-383-0082 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs' McCORMICK & PRIORE, P.C. By: Philip D. Priore Conrad James Benedetto ID Nos. 38987 / 312404 4 Perm Center, Suite 800 1600 JKF Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 972-0161 Email: ppriore@mccormickpriore.com cbenedetto@mccormickpriore.com STEPHEN F. TUCKEY VS. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 RESPONSE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC INCORPORATED, TO PLAINITFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF INTERMATIC'S CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Defendant/respondent, Intermatic Incorporated ("Intermatic" or "Respondent"), by and through its attorneys, McCormick & Priore, P.C., hereby responds to plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Intermatic's Corporate Representative, and in support of its response, avers as follows: 1. Denied as stated. The documents attached to plaintiff's Motion to Compel as Exhibit "A" speak for themselves and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff. 2. Denied as stated. The documents attached to plaintiff's Motion to Compel as Exhibit "B" speak for themselves and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff, and, in fact, plaintiff has mischaracterized Exhibit "B." Respondent stated that, due to his heavy work schedule as a Director with Intermatic, at the time indicated the Intermatic Corporate Representative was unable to travel from Murfreesboro, Tennessee, to Pennsylvania for a 1 MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW deposition. Further, as indicated in plaintiffs Exhibit "B," once the Representative's schedule would allow, Respondent would propose several dates for his availability for a deposition. 3. Denied as stated. It is admitted that the named Intermatic Corporate Representative agreed to October 23, 2014, after being put on the spot and pressed for a date after a minimal review of his upcoming schedule. 4. Denied as stated. The documents attached to plaintiffs Motion to Compel as Exhibit "C" speak for themselves and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff 5. Denied as stated. The documents attached to plaintiffs Motion to Compel as Exhibit "D" speak for themselves and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff By way of further response, Respondent did not hear further regarding any planned deposition until plaintiff served the Deposition Notice only three (3) days in advance of Respondent's deposition. Moreover, as plaintiff forwarded the Notice of Deposition on October 20, 2014, it was not received by Respondent until on or about October 21, 2014. However, prior to receipt of the Notice, at 6:16 p.m. on October 20, 2014, Respondent informed plaintiffs counsel that the Intermatic Corporate Representative would be unable to attend due to a conflict that arose and requested that plaintiff provide dates in early November for his availability. In fact, in response to the correspondence referenced by plaintiff in ¶ 6, infra, which was not attached as part of plaintiffs Motion, plaintiffs counsel informed Intermatic's counsel that he was unavailable for the deposition in early November. A true and correct copy of plaintiffs response to the correspondence referenced in plaintiffs Exhibit "E" is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "A." 6. Denied as stated. The documents attached to plaintiffs Motion to Compel as Exhibit "E" speak for themselves and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff 2 MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW By way of further response, plaintiff served the Deposition Notice only three (3) days in advance of Respondent's deposition. See ¶ 5, supra. 7. Denied as moot. Respondent later forwarded plaintiff correspondence addressing the deposition of the Intermatic Corporate Representative, though this was after the filing of the instant Motion. See ¶ 8, infra. 8. Denied. In an effort to depose all the parties, so as not to continue the slipshod manner in which plaintiff had attempted to depose the Intermatic Corporate Representative, after plaintiff filed the instant Motion, Respondent proposed several dates for the deposition of the Intermatic Corporate Representative, conditioned on plaintiff being made available prior to the Intermatic Corporate Representative deposition. A true and correct copy of Respondent's letter to plaintiff's counsel is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "B." 9. Denied as mischaracterizing the facts. It is specifically denied that counsel "instructed" Intermatic's Corporate Representative "not to show up," and any characterization or implication by plaintiff that Respondent violated Pa. R. Civ. P. 4019 is specifically denied. By way of further response, on October 20, 2014, Respondent informed plaintiffs counsel that the Intermatic Corporate Representative would be unable to attend any deposition scheduled for October 23, 2014, due to a conflict that arose that was previously unforeseen by the Representative when the date was agreed upon on October 10, 2014, and any other characterization is specifically denied. See Ex. A; see also ¶¶ 2, 5-6 supra. 10. Denied. The Rules of Civil Procedure are a writing which speaks for itself, and Respondent denies any characterization of it by plaintiff. 11. Denied. It is specifically denied that Respondent "failed to produce a representative," and is therefore precluded from raising any objection. By way of further 3 MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW response, on October 20, 2014, Respondent informed plaintiff's counsel that the Intermatic Corporate Representative would be unable to attend any deposition scheduled for October 23, 2014, due to a conflict that arose that was previously unforeseen by the Representative when the date was agreed upon on October 10, 2014, and any other characterization is specifically denied. See Ex. A; see also ¶¶ 2, 5-6, 8 supra. 12. Denied as stated. Respondent will not address the mental impressions of plaintiff, but any insulation that plaintiff has suffered any prejudice in their preparations for trial is denied. Moreover, it is specifically denied that there is any "continuing delay." WHEREFORE, defendant/respondent, Intermatic Incorporated, hereby demands that the plaintiffs' Motion to Compel the deposition of Intermatic's Corporate Representative be denied. Respectfully submitted, McCORMICK & PRIORE, P.C. Dated: November 26, 2014 By: 4 /s/ Conrad James Benedetto Philip D. Priore, Esquire Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW McCORMICK & PRIORE, P.C. By: Philip D. Priore Conrad James Benedetto ID Nos. 38987 / 312404 Attorneys for Defendant, 4 Penn Center, Suite 800 Intermatic Incorporated 1600 JKF Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 972-0161 Email: ppriore@,mccormickpriore.com cbenedetto@mccormickpriore.com STEPHEN F. TUCKEY VS. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY NO. 13-3595 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC, INC., TO PLAINITFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF INTERMATIC'S CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Defendant/respondent, Intermatic Incorporated ("Intermatic" or "Respondent"), by and through its attorneys, McCormick & Priore, P.C., hereby responds to plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Intermatic's Corporate Representative. In support of its Response, Intermatic submits the instant Memorandum of Law. I. MATTER BEFORE THE COURT Response of Intermatic to plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition of an Intermatic Corporate Representative. II. STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION INVOLVED Should this Court grant plaintiff's Motion to compel Intermatic's corporate representative based on plaintiff's mischaracterization of the facts? Suggested Answer.:. No. 1 MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW III. FACTS In the interest of brevity, the factual averments pled in Intermatic's Response to plaintiff's Motion to Compel are incorporated herein by reference. IV. ARGUMENT Plaintiff has mischaracterized the facts to obtain an Order from this Court to Compel the deposition of Intermatic's Corporate Representative, who is located in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, without exhausting reasonable means prior to coming before the Court. Plaintiff engaged in no meaningful discussions regarding the deposition of the Intermatic Corporate Representative between April and October 2014. Plaintiff did not request specific dates for a deposition at any time until plaintiff's counsel cornered the Intermatic Corporate Representative in a room and demanded a date that the Representative would be available for a deposition. After a cursory review of the calendar the Representative provided a date. However, upon realizing there was a conflict with that date, Respondent notified plaintiff. Despite and after this communication, plaintiff unilaterally forwarded a Notice of Deposition, dated October 20, 2014, for a deposition of the Representative scheduled for three (3) days later. Plaintiff then filed this instant Motion to Compel on November 5, 2014. In an effort to resolve the issue outside of the Court, soon thereafter Respondent provided potential dates for the Intermatic Corporate Representative deposition provided that plaintiff provide dates of his availability prior to the Intermatic Corporate Representative deposition. See Ex. A. No such dates were forthcoming. Plaintiff has failed to carry his burden under Pa. R. Civ. P. 4019. Plaintiff forcibly obtained one potential date for the Intermatic Corporate Representative deposition, unilaterally 2 MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW forwarded a Notice despite Respondent communicating that there was a conflict. Plaintiff then, without further follow-up, filed this instant Motion. Plaintiff has therefore failed to show why this Court should grant his Motion, despite the efforts by Respondent to potentially resolve the issue. Thus, the Court should deny plaintiff's Motion. V. CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's Motion to Compel the deposition of the Intermatic Corporate Designee should be denied in its entirety. Respectfully submitted, McCORMICK & PRIORE, P.C. Dated: November 26, 2014 By: /s/ Conrad James Benedetto 3 Philip D. Priore, Esquire Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire, hereby states that he is the attorney for defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, and caused to be served a true and correct copy of Intermatic Incorporated's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Intermatic's Corporate Representative, via electronic service and/or U.S. First Class Mail, postage pre -paid, to the following: Dated: November 26, 2014 Richard J. Boyd, Jr., Esquire Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire de Luca Levine, LLC Three Valley Square Suite 220 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Attorneys for Plaintiff McCORMICK & PRIORE, P.C. By: /s/ Conrad James Benedetto Philip D. Priore, Esquire Conrad James Benedetto, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated MCCORMICK & PRIORE ATTORNEYS AT LAW EXHIBIT "A' Conrad James Benedetto From: Joseph McGlynn <jmcglynn@delucalevine.com> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 6:30 PM To: Conrad James Benedetto Subject: RE: tuckey v. intermatic Conrad, Would you be so kind as to tell me the nature of the conflict? Early November is difficult for me to schedule. Only a week or two ago, Mr. Veatch agreed on this date in front of my very eyes. From: Conrad James Benedetto [mailto:CBenedetto@mccormickpriore.comj Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 6:16 PM To: Joseph McGlynn Cc: Linette Trowery; Eileen Sweeney Subject: RE: tuckey v. intermatic Joe, Please be advised that, due to a conflict, Mr. Veach's deposition needs to be postponed. I'm working with Mr. Veach to obtain agreeable dates in early November. Thanks for your anticipated courtesies in this regard. McCQRNIiCKRIOIR!F; :A1,TOltNEYSAT LAW • Pti11pA PH1 I e1111OUY4i Mt E`TThJ I riu,;.4. t. I ktEWIEASf Conrad lames Benedetto, Esquire McCormick & Priore, P.C. 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone (215) 972-0161 I Fax (215) 972-5580 cbenedetto@ mccormickpriore.com I www.mccormickpriore.com The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipients named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication, and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail at mp( mccormickpriore.com and delete the message. Thank you. From: Joseph McGlynn [mailto:jmcglynndelucalevine.com] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 3:33 PM To: Conrad James Benedetto Cc: Linette Trowery Subject: tuckey v. intermatic Conrad, This email will confirm the deposition of Wayne Veatch that we scheduled earlier today for Thursday, October 23rd, 2014 at 9:30 at your office. Thanks. Have a good weekend. Joseph L. McGlynn 1 Attorney de Luca Levine, LLC Direct Dial: 215.310.4731 Emaihkncglynn@delucalevine.com Three Valley Square Suite 220 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Main Phone Line: 215.383.0081 Fax: 215-383.0082 www.deLucaLevine.com EXHIBIT November 13, 2014 Joseph L. McGlynn, Esquire de Luca Levine, LLC Three Valley Square Suite 220 Blue Bell, PA 19422 RE: Tuckey v. Intermatic Our File No: 6939-15776 Dear Mr. McGlynn: Please be advised that Mr. Veach is available for his corporate designee deposition on the following dates: November 24-25 December 2-4 December 8-12 December 16-19 In turn, kindly provide the dates and location that Mr. Tuckey is available for his deposition. We would like to conduct his deposition prior to the deposition of Mr. Veach. Your courtesy and anticipated cooperation is appreciated. Very truly yours, Philip D. Priore Conrad James Benedetto PDP/CJB/lm STEPHEN F. TUCKEY, Plaintiff v. INTERMATIC INCORPORATED, Defendant Count? of 4Cumbtriaatrb IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 13-3595 CIVIL ACTION IN RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF A CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE OF DEFENDANT, INTERMATIC INCORPORATED ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 15t" day of January 2015, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Deposition of a Corporate Representative of Defendant, Intermatic Incorporated, Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED. Defendant is DIRECTED to produce a Corporate Representative of Intermatic Incorporated for deposition within 30 DAYS of service of this Order. Distribution List: L/fgseph L. McGlynn, Esq. nrad Benedetto, Esq. ies P&I tz4_, 1/l ($/1S Thomas A. `' I . cey C.P.J.