Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-0545 Supreme Co ' Pennsylvania Con I leas For Prothonotary Use Only: bye ShSet � � r �► Docket No: - ST cue rland'` ` County — Ut < t >p t- w ,e• The information collected on this form is used solely for court administration purposes. This form does not supplement or replace the filing and service ofpleadings or other papers as required bylaw or rules of court. Commencement of Action: S [I Complaint El Writ of Summons 7 Petition E] Transfer from Another Jurisdiction Declaration of Taking E C Lead Plaintiff's Name: Lead Defendant's Name: Aurora Bravo Giant Food Stores, LLC T Dollar Amount Requested: IJ within arbitration limits I Are money damages requested? ix. Yes D No (check one) i9 outside arbitration limits O N Is this a Class Action Suit? Yes El No Is this an MDJAppeal? 0 Yes ED No A Name of Plaintiff /Appellant's Attorney: Gregg S. Freeburn ® Check here if you have no attorney (are a Self- Represented [Pro Sel Litigant) Nature of the Case Place an "X" to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately describes your PRIMARY CASE. If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that you consider most important. TORT (do not include Mass Tort) CONTRACT (do not include Judgments) CIVIL APPEALS 0 Intentional Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies Malicious Prosecution Debt Collection: Credit Card ® Board of Assessment Motor Vehicle [3 Debt Collection: Other ® Board of Elections Nuisance Dept. of Transportation S l Premises Liability H Statutory Appeal: Other Product Liability (does not include Employment Dispute: E mass tort) Slander/Libel/ Defamation Discrimination C 0 Other: ®' Employment Dispute: Other [3 Zoning Board T ® Other: I E] Other: O MASS TORT Q Asbestos N [3 Tobacco Toxic Tort - DES E3 Toxic Tort - Implant REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS ® Toxic Waste Other: [3 Ejectment E] Common Law /Statutory Arbitration B ® Eminent Domain /Condemnation [3 Declaratory Judgment 13 Ground Rent Mandamus Landlord/Tenant Dispute Non - Domestic Relations 0 Mortgage Foreclosure: Residential Restraining Order PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY ® Mortgage Foreclosure: Commercial ® Q uo Warranto ® Dental ® Partition [3 Replevin ® Legal Quiet Title 0 Other: Medical Other: Other Professional: Updated 11112011 Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671 -1955 gfreeburnAfreeburnlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiffs Aurora Bravo, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 818 South Fourth Street CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Chambersburg, PA 17201 Plaintiff Giant Food Stores, LLC CIVIL ACTION - LAW 27 Brookwood Avenue x Carlisle, PA 17013 C Defendant �-rE PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS zCID 27 ' TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Please issue Writ of Summons in the above - captioned action. 2 Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to ( 1) Attorney ( 1) Sheriff Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire - 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 atute of Attorney (717) 671 -1955 Supreme Court ID No. 314883 Date: 01 /23/2014 WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE -NAMED DEFENDANT(S): GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE -NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS /HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. 1 _ Prothonotary Date: .. &puty��� 3 /Z� 3oog�o SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Ronny R Anderson t Sheriff ( CF' t1tf Jody S Smith 2U R 3 EQ�`l I PH 3: 15 Chief Deputy Richard W Stewart CUMBERLAND COUNT`( Solicitor PENNSYLVANIA Aurora Bravo Case Number vs. Giant Food Stores, LLC 2014-545 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 01/30/2014 09:51 AM - Deputy Jamie DiMartle, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Writ of Summons by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Kris Kaneeg, Security Supervisor, who accepted as"Adult Person in Charge"for Giant Food Stores, LLC at 1149 Harrisburg Pike, Middlesex Township, Carlisle, PA 17013. JIE DIMARTL: D ° TY SHERIFF COST: $34.78 SO ANSWERS, January 31, 2014 RONN R ANDERSON, SHERIFF h _r i .EF) OFF'3CL tsi_ THE PROTKONO9ts,EY 2 11i FEB 24 A M II: 07 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION • AURORA BRAVO • Plaintiff : File No. 2014-545 • v. • PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE • A COMPLAINT • GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC • • Defendant TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Issue rule on Plaintiff Aurora Bravo to file a Complaint in the above case within twenty days after service of the rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. DATE: 2/20/14 Signature: e Ga Print Name: LISA P. WILDSTEIN, ESQ. Address: THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6TH STREET, TOWER TWO, #706 PHILADELPHIA,PA 19106 Attorney for: Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC Telephone: 215-880-8358 '' Supreme Court ID No. 310393 NOW, 9)99, ((7, RULE ISSUED AS ABOVE. • •rothonotary Deputy • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Lisa P. Wildstein, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe and Rule to File a Complaint was filed this date via hand-delivery. A copy of the Praecipe was served via regular mail to Plaintiff's counsel this date. 4144 p, ?l/addreus LISA P. WILDS'1'EIN Dated: February 20, 2014 Ronny R Anderson Sheriff Jody S Smith Chief Deputy Richard W Stewart Solicitor SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY QFF!G= rFTk SfA�n ^fr: { RO i jt..'NO f'Sli 2014 MAR 24 tits H :22 CUMBEI LAND COUN TY PENNSYLVANIA Aurora Bravo vs. Giant Food Stores, LLC Case Number 2014 -545 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 03/10/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Gregg S Freeburn, but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the Sheriff of Dauphin, Pennsylvania to serve the within Other according to law. 03/14/2014 02:05 PM - The requested Other served by the Sheriff of Dauphin County upon Holly Rosensteel, who accepted for Gregg S Freeburn, at Freeburn & Hamilton, P.C., 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste 300, Harrisburg, PA 17110. Jack Lotwick, Sheriff, Return of Service attached to and made part of the within record. SHERIFF COST: $37.00 SO ANSWERS, March 19, 2014 RONNY R ANDERSON, SHERIFF (c) CountySui e Sheriff, Teieosoft, on. Shelley Ruhl Real Estate Deputy Matthew L. Owens Solicitor Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin Dauphin County 101 Market Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101-2079 ph: (717) 780-6590 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff Jack Duignan Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy AURORA BRAVO VS GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Sheriffs Return No. 2014-T-0811 OTHER COUNTY NO. 2014-545 And now: MARCH 14, 2014 at 2:05:00 PM served the within RULE & PETITION upon GREGG S. FREEBURN by personally handing to HOLLY ROSENSTEEL * 1 true attested copy of the original RULE & PETITION and making known to him/her the contents thereof at 2040 LINGLESTOWN ROAD, SUITE 300 HARRISBURG PA 17110 PRAECIPE AND RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT * LEGAL ASSISTANT Sworn and subscribed to before me this 18TH day of March, 2014 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAL Karen M. Hoffman, Notary Public City of Harrisburg, Dauphin County My Commission Expires January 8, 2018 So Answers, Sheriff o By Deputy Sheriff Deputy: W CONWAY Sheriffs Costs: $47.25 3/13/2014 AURORA BRAVO : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14 -545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : CIVIL ACTION — LAW 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. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford St. Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249 -3166 (800) 990 -9108 CD Gregg ' . Free.. , Esquire ID No. 3 :83 FREEBURN & HAMILTON, PC 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 04/01/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs AURORA BRAVO : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 14 -545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : CIVIL ACTION — LAW NOTICE USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO /A EN CORTE. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notification. Usted debe presentar ua apariencia esrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTATE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA. ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEQUIR UN ABOGADO. SI USTED NO PUEDE PAGAR POR LOS SERVICIOS DE UN ABOGADO, ES POSIBLE QUE ESTA OFICINA LE PUEDA PROVEER INFORMACION SOBRE AGENCIAS QUE OFREZCAN SERVICIOS LEGALES SIN CARGO 0 BAJO COSTO A PERSONAS QUE CUALIFICAN. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford St. Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249 -3166 (800) 990 -9108 reeburn, Esquire ID 0.314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON, PC 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671 -1955 Date: 04/01/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs Gregg S. Freeborn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671 -1955 gfreeburn@freeburnlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff AURORA BRAVO : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 14 -545 v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : CIVIL ACTION — LAW COMPLAINT AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, and files the following Complaint: 1. Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, is an adult individual who resides at 818 South Fourth Street, Chambersburg, PA 17201. 2. Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, is a Limited Liability Corporation with a corporate headquarters or regular place of business or activity located at 27 Brookwood Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17013 (Hereinafter referred to as "Giant "). 3. Giant owns, operates, and /or manages a grocery store located at 993 Wayne Ave, Chambersburg, PA 17201 (Hereinafter referred to as the "Premises "). 4. The facts and occurrences hereinafter related took place on or about March 6, 2012, at approximately 8:15 p.m., at or about a donut case located in or near the bakery section of the Premises. 5. At or about that time and place, Giant was in exclusive possession, management and control of the Premises and the bakery section of the Premises through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business. 6. At or about that time and place, Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, was shopping for groceries and was a business visitor on Giant's Premises. 7. At or about that time and place, Plaintiff opened the door of the donut case. 8. At or about that time and place, the donut tray fell out of the donut case and struck Plaintiffs body causing her injuries. 9. At all times relevant hereto, Giant, their employees, agents or workmen had control over and were responsible for the donut case including the donut tray that fell out and injured Plaintiff 10. At all times relevant hereto, Giant, their employees, agents or workmen had control over and were responsible for the bakery section of the Premises. 11. At all times relevant hereto, Giant, their employees, agents or workmen were in possession of, had control over and were responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the donut case. 12. At all times relevant hereto, Giant, their employees, agents or workmen were in possession of, had control over and were responsible for placing the donuts on the donut tray. 13. At all times relevant hereto, Giant, their employees, agents or workmen were in possession of, had control over and were responsible for placing the donut tray into the donut case. 2 14. The foregoing incident and all of the injuries and damages as set forth hereinafter are the direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, either individually or jointly, as set for the above and as follows: a. In failing to properly maintain the bakery section of the Premises; b. In failing to properly maintain the donut case; c. In failing to properly train or supervise Giant's employees, workmen or agents; d. In failing to anticipate the harm that improperly placing donut trays in the donut case could cause business visitors such as Plaintiff; e. In failing to properly supervise the Premises; f. In failing to properly supervise the bakery section of the Premises; g. In failing to properly supervise the donut case; h. In failing to properly supervise Giant's employees, agents or workmen who were responsible for baking the donuts and placing them in the donut case; i. In failing to exercise reasonable care to ensure the safety of Giant customers such as Plaintiff; j. In failing to inspect the donut case and discover the donut tray that was improperly placed in the donut case; k. In failing to discover and /or keep the premises clear of defects that would create a hazard to business visitors such as Plaintiff; I. In failing to give warning of the dangerous condition posed by the improperly placed donut tray or take any other safety precaution to prevent injury to Plaintiff or other business visitors; m. In failing to implement a safety procedure that would ensure that the donut trays are placed properly in the donut case and ensure that the donut case was free of hazardous conditions or reduce the risk of injuries to business visitors such as Plaintiff; n. In causing or permitting the donut tray to be placed improperly in the donut case; o. In failing to take any reasonable action to ensure that the donut case was free of hazardous conditions or to reduce the risk of injuries to business visitors such as Plaintiff; p. In improperly placing the donut tray in the donut case; q. In placing or causing the donut tray to be placed in the donut case so that the donut tray would fall when the door to the donut case was opened; r. In failing to exercise reasonable care to ensure the safety of business visitors such as Plaintiff; s. In failing to adequately supervise and manage its employees who should have discovered and corrected the improperly placed donut tray that caused the incident; t. In permitting the donut tray to be improperly placed in the donut case where it posed an unreasonable risk of injury to Plaintiff and other business visitors; u. In failing to give warning of the dangerous condition posed by the improperly placed donut tray, erect barricades, or take any other safety precaution to prevent injury to Plaintiff and other business visitors; 15. As a result of Defendant's negligence, carelessness and recklessness, Plaintiff suffered painful and severe injuries to her nerves, bones and soft tissues, which include but are not limited to foot and ankle injuries. 16. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has suffered a heightened possibility that she will suffer other or additional injury in the future, and claim is made therefore. 17. The aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff may have aggravated or been aggravated by an existing infirmity, condition or disease, resulting in a prolongation or worsening of the injuries and an enhanced risk of future harm to Plaintiff, and claim is made therefore. 18. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she was forced to incur liability for reasonable and necessary medical tests, medical examinations, medical treatment, medications, hospitalizations and similar expenses in an effort to diagnose her injuries and to restore her to health, and claim is made therefore. 19. Plaintiff has not fully recovered from her injuries and it is reasonably likely that she will incur similar expenses in the future, and claim is made therefore. 20. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has suffered a loss of earnings and earning capacity and is entitled to recover the value of the time, earnings and employment benefits she, has lost and which she might reasonably have earned in the pursuit of her ordinary calling, and claim is made therefore. 5 21. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has suffered a loss or impairment of future earning capacity, and claim is made therefore. 22. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has incurred incidental costs and expenses, the exact amount of which cannot be ascertained at this time, and claim is made therefore. 23. As a result of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has undergone and in the future will undergo great physical and mental pain and suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily activities, loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment, and claim is made therefore. 24. As a result of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has been subjected to humiliation, embarrassment, shame, worry and anger. 25. As a result of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has been subjected to severe mental anguish, emotional distress, nervous shock, fright and horror. 26. As a result of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she will continue to endure great mental anguish, emotional distress, shame, worry and anger in the future. 27. By reason of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has been deprived of the enjoyment of the pleasures of life. 28. Plaintiff continues to be plagued by persistent pain and limitation and, therefore, avers that her injuries may be of a permanent nature, causing residual problems for the remainder of her lifetime, and claim is made therefore. 29. As a result of the aforesaid injuries suffered by Plaintiff, she has suffered a disfigurement, and claim is made therefore. 6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, demands judgment in her favor and against Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC., in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND & 00/100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. By: Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON agl Greg. F urn, Esquire I.D. No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 04/01/2014 Counsel for Plaintiffs 7 VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: vy -C.J1 -0)6 /`' Aurora Bravo Bro-tio" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Complaint was duly served on the 1st day of April, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: The Law Office of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 BY: arrie A. Gro , Assistant to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 04/01/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880 -8358 FAX (561) 469 -8948 Supreme Court ID No. 310393 AURORA BRAVO Plaintiff v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant 1. CI THE ,Pie R 2014 APR 16 PH 1: 52 ,ENSYINA I A" : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 14 -545 : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD : STORES, LLC'S ANSWER TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT : WITH NEW MATTER DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER The allegations of this paragraph are not directed against this defendant, and this defendant makes no response to same. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 2. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is only admitted that Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC, is a Limited Liability Corporation with corporate headquarters located at 27 Brookwood Avenue, Carlisle, Cumberland County, PA 17103. This defendant denies any responsibility for any condition leading to the claimed injury. 3. Admitted in part; denied in part. It is only admitted that Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC owns, operates and/or manages a grocery store located at 993 Wayne Avenue, Chambersburg, PA 17201. This defendant denies any responsibility for any condition leading to the claimed injury. 4. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 4 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 5. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 5 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 6. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 6 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 7. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 7 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 8. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 8 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 9. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 9 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 10 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 11. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 11 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 12. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 12 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 13 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 14. (a) -(u) Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 4 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 15. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 15 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 16. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 16 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 17. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 17 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 18. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 18 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 19 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 20. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 20 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 21. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 21 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 22. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 22 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 23. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 23 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 24. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 24 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 25. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 25 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 26. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 26 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 27. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 27 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 28. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 28 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. 29. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 29 and the same are therefore denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this matter. To the extent any response is required, the averments are denied and deemed to be at issue under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and strict proof of same is demanded at trial. WHEREFORE, defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC demands judgment in its favor against Plaintiff, together with costs, attorney's fees and any further relief the Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances. NEW MATTER 30. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answers contained in paragraphs 1 -29 inclusive as though the same were set forth at length hereinafter. 31. This Honorable Court lacks jurisdiction over answering defendant. 32. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a cause of action against answering defendant upon which relief can be granted. 33. Some or all of the damages claimed by the Plaintiff are not recoverable under the applicable law. 34. Answering defendant asserts each and every defense to which it is entitled under the laws of Pennsylvania. 35. Plaintiff's alleged causes of action are barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations for any acts or omissions occurring more than two (2) years prior to the filing of the Complaint. 36. Nothing done or omitted to be done by Defendant was the proximate cause of any injuries to Plaintiff. 37. The alleged injuries to Plaintiff were caused or contributed to in whole or in part, by the negligence or want of due care of persons, parties and/or organizations other than Defendant and over whom said Defendant had no control or right of control or responsibility. 38. If the Defendant was negligent in any respect as alleged in the Complaint, all such allegations being specifically denied, said Defendant's negligence was passive and the injuries sustained by Plaintiff were the result of an intervening negligent act of a third person or persons which was a superseding cause of Plaintiff's injuries and, therefore, the Defendant is not liable. 39. The alleged injuries of the Plaintiff were the result of Plaintiff's own negligence which exceeded any negligence of Defendant, all negligence of the Defendant being expressly denied, and therefore, pursuant to the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act (42 Pa. C.S.A. §7102). Plaintiff's claim is barred. 40. Because the Plaintiff had knowledge of, understood and appreciated the consequences of Plaintiff's actions, Plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk, and, therefore, the Defendant is not liable. 41. Answering defendant believes and therefore avers that Plaintiff has failed to mitigate her damages. 42. In the event that Plaintiff requests damages for delay pursuant to Rule 238 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, answering defendant challenges the applicability and constitutionality of said rule and places same at issue. 43. Defendant reserves the right to amend its Answer and to insert additional defenses and/or supplement, alter or change its answer upon the revelation of more definite facts by the Plaintiff and upon the completion of further discovery and investigation. 44. The Plaintiff is estopped from proceeding with her alleged cause of action. 45. The Plaintiff is barred from instituting this suit pursuant to the Doctrine of Laches. 46. Plaintiffs wrongful conduct bars her claim for relief. 47. Answering defendant denies notice of any alleged negligent condition and denies the opportunity to remedy same. 48. Answering defendant violated no duty to Plaintiff, if any was owed by it, which allegedly proximately caused the injuries and damages alleged to have been sustained. 49. Answering defendant denies that it had actual and /or constructive notice of any alleged defective and/or hazardous condition. 50. In the event it is determined the answering defendant was in any way negligent, which allegation is expressly denied, then it is further denied that said negligence was the proximate cause and /or substantial factor in bringing about the incident in question. 51. Answering defendant denies that it breached any duties allegedly owed to the plaintiff. 52. Defendant asserts all affirmative defenses as set forth in Pa. R.C.P. §1030 (a). WHEREFORE, defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC demands judgment in its favor against Plaintiff, together with costs, attorney's fees and any further relief the Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC By: Dated: 4/16/14 Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire VERIFICATION Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire hereby states that she is counsel for the Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, in this action and is authorized to make this Verification on their behalf. Lisa Pam Wildstein verifies that the statements in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC By: Dated: 4/16/14 Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint was filed via hand-delivery to the following: Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Suite 100 Carlisle, PA 17013 Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC By: Dated: 4/16/14 Lisa Pam C. ildstein, Esquire Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 gfreeburn@freeburnlaw.com i{ s,. ONO it,Fs. 2014 L PR 21¢ r 1 II: 39 CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA Attorney for Plaintiffs AURORA BRAVO Plaintiff v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO.: 2014 -545 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, PC, and file the following Reply to New Matter: 30. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. 31. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that the Court jurisdiction over the answering Defendant. Defendant admits in their Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint with New Matter that Giant Food Stores, LLC has a corporate headquarters located in Cumberland County, PA. (See Answer para. 2). 32. This paragraph no reply is required. To the averments of fact the same are 33. This paragraph no reply is required. To the averments of fact the same are 34. This paragraph no reply is required. To the averments of fact the same are 35. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only extent that a court determines that specifically denied. contains no averments of fact, only extent that a court determines that specifically denied. contains no averments of fact, only extent that a court determines that specifically denied. contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which conclusions of law to which this paragraph contains any conclusions of law to which this paragraph contains any conclusions of law to which this paragraph contains any no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Plaintiffs alleged causes of action are barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations. Plaintiff commenced this cause of action on January 27, 2014 by writ of summons and Defendant was served on January 30, 2014. Plaintiff alleges that this cause of action occurred on March 6, 2012 (see Compl. para. 4). 36. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that nothing done or omitted to be done by Defendant was the proximate cause of any injuries to Plaintiff. 2 37. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Plaintiff's injuries were caused or contributed to in whole or in part, by the negligence or want of due care of persons, parties and /or organizations other than Defendant and over whom said Defendant had no control or right of control or responsibility. 38. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant's negligence was passive and that the injuries sustained by Plaintiff were the result of an intervening negligent act of a third person or persons which was a superseding cause of Plaintiff's injuries. The Defendant is liable. 39. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Plaintiff's injuries were the result of Plaintiff's own negligence, the existence of any negligence on the part of Plaintiff being denied, which exceeded any negligence of Defendant. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant was negligent and denies that her claim is barred by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act (42 Pa.C.S.A. §7102). 40. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically 3 denies that she had knowledge of, understood and appreciated the consequences of her actions, or that she voluntarily assumed the risk. The Defendant is liable. 41. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that she failed to mitigate her damages. 42. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. 43. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. 44. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that she is estopped from proceeding with her alleged cause of action. 45. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that she is barred from instituting this suit pursuant to the Doctrine of Laches. 46. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any 4 averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies the existence of any wrongful conduct on her part and that any conduct on her part bars her claim for relief. 47. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant did not have notice of any alleged negligent condition and that they did not have the opportunity to remedy the same. 48. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant violated no duty to plaintiff, and /or that Defendant's breach of its duty was not the proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 49. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant did not have actual and/or constructive notice of any alleged defective and /or hazardous condition. 50. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant was not in any way negligence. Further, Plaintiff denies that Defendant's 5 negligence was not the proximate cause and/or substantial factor in bringing about the incident in question. 51. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. By way of further reply, Plaintiff specifically denies that Defendant did not breach any duties owed to Plaintiff. 52. This paragraph contains no averments of fact, only conclusions of law to which no reply is required. To the extent that a court determines that this paragraph contains any averments of fact the same are specifically denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court dismiss Defendant's New Matter, and enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC., in an amount in excess of FIFTY THOUSAND & 00/100 ($50,000.00) DOLLARS, exclusive of interest and costs and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsory arbitration. By: Respectfully Submitted, FREEBU AMILTON, PC Gregg S. ire I.D. No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 04/21/2014 Counsel for Plaintiffs 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Reply to New Matter was duly served on the 21st day of April, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: The Law Office of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 BY: Carrie A. Groff, sistant to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esqui Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671 -1955 Dated: 04/21/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs THE FriOTHONOT,:,,l'r( THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 3 +; , i;°; °i`1 I: Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLCM U M E R L A `. D COUNTY TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 PEN@SYLVANIlx: AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : File No. 2014-545 MOTION TO WITHDRAWAL DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS DEEMED ADMITTED FOR NOT BEING ANWERED AND DEEM ADMITTED DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ANSWERED BY DEFENDANT AND PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFF ON JUNE 9, 2014 1.) Plaintiff is Aurora Bravo. She is represented by Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire of Freeburn & Hamilton located at 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300, Harrisburg, PA 17110. 2.) Defendant is Giant Food Stores, LLC. Defendant is represented by Lisa P. Wildstein, Esquire of The Law Offices of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC located at 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706, Philadelphia, PA 19106. 3.) On or around January 23, 2014 Plaintiff filed a Writ against Moving Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC alleging that Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, sustained soft tissue injuries to her left foot when she opened a donut case and a tray of donuts allegedly fell on her left foot at Moving Defendant's store located at 933 Wayne Avenue, Chambersburg, PA on March 6, 2012. 4.) On or around January 28, 2014 Plaintiff served Pre-Complaint discovery on Defendant. (See Pre-Complaint discovery attached hereto as Exhibit A) 5.) On or around February 24, 2014 Moving Defendant filed a Praecipe and Rule to File a Complaint. 6.) On February 25, 2014 Moving Defendant served informal Answers to Plaintiffs Pre-Complaint discovery. (See informal Answers to Plaintiff's Pre-Complaint discovery attached hereto as Exhibit B) 7.) Moving Defendant kept Plaintiff apprised of the status of its investigation and discovery responses. In the spirit of continued cooperation, Moving Defendant granted Plaintiff an extension of time to file the Complaint. (See March 21, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit C) 8.) On or around March 24, 2014 Moving Defendant served Certified Answers to Plaintiff's Pre-Complaint discovery. (See March 24, 2014 correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit D) 9.) On April 2, 2014 Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this matter. 10.) On April 10, 2014 Moving Defendant amended its Answers to Pre- Complaint Discovery. (See April 10, 2014 correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit E) 11.) On April 16, 2014 Moving Defendant filed its Answer in this matter. 12.) On or around April 8, 2014 Plaintiff served additional discovery demands including a Demand for Answers to Interrogatories that included multiple subparts (38 Interrogatories), Demand for Production of Documents (19 Demands) and Request for Admissions (5 Requests). The Requests require responses pertaining to the liability of Defendant in this matter. (See Plaintiff's Discovery Demands attached hereto as Exhibit F) 13.) On April 29, 2014 our office acknowledged receipt of Plaintiff's discovery demands and requested an extension of time to respond to same. Plaintiff s counsel consented to the request for an extension. (See April 29, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit G) 14.) Due to the voluminous and detailed amount of discovery served in rapid- fire succession, and Moving Defendant's expressed intent to serve responsive answers, Moving Defendant repeatedly advised Plaintiff that Moving Defendant was seeking to obtain the requested information but that it would require discovery extensions. (See Exhibits C and G) 15.) There was an ongoing agreement with Plaintiffs counsel that deadlines would be extended by both parties where additional time was required to respond to discovery. (See Exhibits C and G) 16.) Discovery responses were deemed due on May 29, 2014. (See April 29, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit G) 17.) Despite Defendant's best efforts to obtain the requested discovery, on June 5, 2014, Defendant requested additional time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery demands, as requested information was still outstanding. (See June 5, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit H) 18.) Plaintiff did not object to Defendant's request. 19.) On June 9, 2014 Defendant answered all of Plaintiff's outstanding discovery demands, including providing Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, served upon Plaintiff via email and regular mail. (See June 9, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit I) 20.) Plaintiff's counsel acknowledged receipt of the discovery responses and did not object to same. (See June 10, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit J) 21.) Even though there was repeated correspondence exchanged between Plaintiff and counsel, from the period of June 5, 2014 on, Plaintiff never objected to the submission of defendant's Responses to Requests for Admissions. (See Exhibits H, I and J) 22.) In a misguided attempt to manipulate the discovery process and thwart the purpose of Rule 4014, which is to encourage the parties to engage in discovery, not to override the merits of the litigation; it was not until June 23, 2014, almost three weeks after Defendant requested a discovery extension, and two weeks after Defendant served fully responsive Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions and Plaintiff never objected to same, that Plaintiff sent an email objecting to Defendant's Responses to Requests for Admissions as out of time. (See June 23, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit K) 23.) Notably, Plaintiff failed to indicate how his client has been prejudiced by the Defendant's submission of Responses to Requests for Admissions eleven (11) days after the agreed upon discovery extension. 24.) This matter is less than three (3) months old and Plaintiff has suffered no prejudice from the Responses to Requests for Admissions being served eleven (11) days after the discovery end date. 25.) Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4014, Plaintiff must prove prejudice to his client. 26.) This matter is not listed for Trial. There are no depositions scheduled nor any discovery end dates established that would prejudice the Plaintiff. 27.) Moving Defendant is in full compliance with all of its discovery obligations in this matter. 28.) Moving Defendant has acted in good faith and expeditiously in responding to all discovery requests and has provided all responsive information in its possession. 29.) Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4014(d), Moving Defendant requests leave of court to withdrawal the Request for Admissions Plaintiff has deemed admitted and to admit the fully responsive Answers to Requests for Admissions that Defendant served upon Plaintiff on June 9, 2014. 30.) This is the first Motion filed in this matter. 31.) Despite my good faith efforts, I have been unable to resolve the dispute that is the subject of this Motion. 32.) Pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S.A. §2503(9), Moving Defendant is requesting reimbursement of costs and Counsel fees for the preparation of this Motion, any response to be filed, and any appearance before the Court on this issue. An Affidavit of fees and costs will be submitted upon receipt of the executed Order in this matter. I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC By: Ze1-67- Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire Dated: 6/27/14 THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 , ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : File No. 2014-545 : MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN : SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S : MOTION TO WITHDRAWAL : DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES : TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS : FOR ADMISSIONS DEEMED : ADMITTED FOR NOT BEING : ANSWERED AND DEEM ADMITTED : DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO : PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR : ADMISSIONS ANSWERED BY : DEFENDANT AND PROVIDED TO : PLAINTIFF ON JUNE 9, 2014 Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC by and through undersigned counsel, hereby submits this Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendant's Motion to Withdrawal Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions Deemed Admitted for Not Being Answered and Deem Admitted Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions Answered by Defendant and Provided to Plaintiff on June 9, 2014 pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4014(d), and shows as follows: BACKGROUND This motion arises from Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions served on Moving Defendant being answered by Moving Defendant eleven day's (11) past the discovery end date and Plaintiff refusing to accept them. On or around January 23, 2014 Plaintiff filed a Writ against Moving Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC alleging that Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, sustained soft tissue injuries to her left foot when she opened a donut case and a tray of donuts allegedly fell on her left foot at Moving Defendant's store located at 933 Wayne Avenue, Chambersburg, PA on March 6, 2012. On or around January 28, 2014 Plaintiff served Pre -Complaint discovery on Defendant. (See Pre -Complaint discovery attached hereto as Exhibit A) On or around February 24, 2014 Moving Defendant filed a Praecipe and Rule to File a Complaint. On February 25, 2014 Moving Defendant served informal Answers to Plaintiff's Pre -Complaint discovery. (See informal Answers to Plaintiff's Pre -Complaint discovery attached hereto as Exhibit B) Moving Defendant kept Plaintiff apprised of the status of its investigation and discovery responses. In the spirit of continued cooperation, Moving Defendant granted Plaintiff an extension of time to file the Complaint. (See March 21, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit C) On or around March 24, 2014 Moving Defendant served Certified Answers to Plaintiff's Pre -Complaint discovery. (See March 24, 2014 correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit D) On April 2, 2014 Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this matter. On April 10, 2014 Moving Defendant amended its Answers to Pre -Complaint Discovery. (See April 10, 2014 correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit E) On April 16, 2014 Moving Defendant filed its Answer in this matter. On or around April 8, 2014 Plaintiff served additional discovery demands including a Demand for Answers to Interrogatories that included multiple subparts (38 Interrogatories), Demand for Production of Documents (19 Demands) and Request for Admissions (5 Requests). The Requests require responses pertaining to the liability of Defendant in this matter. (See Plaintiffs Discovery Demands attached hereto as Exhibit F) On April 29, 2014 our office acknowledged receipt of Plaintiff's discovery demands and requested an extension of time to respond to same. Plaintiffs counsel consented to the request for an extension. (See April 29, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit G) Due to the voluminous and detailed amount of discovery served in rapid-fire succession, and Moving Defendant's expressed intent to serve responsive answers, Moving Defendant repeatedly advised Plaintiff that Moving Defendant was seeking to obtain the requested information but that it would require discovery extensions. (See Exhibits C and G) There was an ongoing agreement with Plaintiffs counsel that deadlines would be extended by both parties where additional time was required to respond to discovery. (See Exhibits C and G) Discovery responses were deemed due on May 29, 2014. (See April 29, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit G) Despite Defendant's best efforts to obtain the requested discovery, on June 5, 2014, Defendant requested additional time to respond to Plaintiffs discovery demands, as requested information was still outstanding. (See June 5, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit H) Plaintiff did not object to Defendant's request. On June 9, 2014 Defendant answered all of Plaintiffs outstanding discovery demands, including providing Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, served t upon Plaintiff via email and regular mail. (See June 9, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit I) Plaintiff's counsel acknowledged receipt of the discovery responses and did not object to same. (See June 10, 2014 email exchange attached hereto as Exhibit J) Even though there was repeated correspondence exchanged between Plaintiff and counsel, from the period of June 5, 2014 on, Plaintiff never objected to the submission of defendant's Responses to Requests for Admissions. (See Exhibits H, I and J) In a misguided attempt to manipulate the discovery process and thwart the purpose of Rule 4014, which is to encourage the parties to engage in discovery, not to override the merits of the litigation; it was not until June 23, 2014, almost three weeks after Defendant requested a discovery extension, and two weeks after Defendant served fully responsive Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions and Plaintiff never objected to same, that Plaintiff sent an email objecting to Defendant's Responses to Requests for Admissions as out of time. (See June 23, 2014 email attached hereto as Exhibit K) Notably, Plaintiff failed to indicate how his client has been prejudiced by the Defendant's submission of Responses to Requests for Admissions eleven (11) days after the agreed upon discovery extension. This matter is less than three (3) months old and Plaintiff has suffered no prejudice from the Responses to Requests for Admissions being served eleven (11) days after the discovery end date. Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 4014, Plaintiff must prove prejudice to his client. This matter is not listed for Trial. There are no depositions scheduled nor any discovery end dates established that would prejudice the Plaintiff. Moving Defendant is in full compliance with all of its discovery obligations in this matter. Moving Defendant has acted in good faith and expeditiously in responding to all discovery requests and has provided all responsive information in its possession. To date, Plaintiff served Moving Defendant with an outrageous amount of discovery, sixty-nine (69) requests in total, for this claim involving an alleged soft tissue injury to Plaintiffs foot. Same included seven (7) Interrogatories Pre-Complaint, thirty- eight (38) Interrogatories after the Complaint was filed, a Demand for Production of Documents, which included nineteen (19) Demands and a Request for Admissions, which included five (5) Requests. Even though this matter is less than three months old, Plaintiff has bombarded our office with multiple telephone calls demanding that the case be moved forward, emails and correspondence to date. On multiple occasions, Plaintiff called this office multiple times in a given hour if his call was not picked up immediately. Much of which conduct boarders on harassing, and certainly conduct unbecoming of an attorney. Especially in light of the fact that Moving Defendant has been fully responsive to all of Plaintiff's requests, and is in full compliance with all outstanding discovery obligations. That said, there was an ongoing agreement with Plaintiff's counsel that deadlines would be extended by both parties where additional time was required to respond to discovery. (See Exhibits C and G) On June 9, 2014 Moving Defendant served its most recent discovery responses, which included Responses to Requests for Admissions. (See Exhibit I) Plaintiff acknowledged receipt of same. (See Exhibit J) Plaintiff did not advise until several weeks later, on June 23, 2014, that he would not accept same. (See Exhibit K) Plaintiff s tactical effort to bully Defendant in the discovery process is prejudicial to the Defendant and has caused the Defendant to suffer unreasonable annoyance, oppression, undue burden and expense, as evidenced by the necessity of having to file the instant Motion. The Request for Admissions Plaintiff served and has deemed admitted are as follows: 1. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC owned the Premises where the Incident occurred on 03/06/2012. 2. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was responsible for the bakery section of the Premises at the time of the Incident on 3/6/12. 3. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was in exclusive possession, management and control of the Premises and the bakery section of the Premises. 4.. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, had sole control over and were responsible for the donut case including the donut tray that fell out and injured the Plaintiff. 5. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, improperly placed the donut try into the donut case causing it to fall out and injure the Plaintiff. The Requests pertain to the alleged liability of the Defendant in this matter. Moving Defendant denies any and all liability. Moving Defendant's discovery responses have been consistent with our position that Moving Defendant is not liable in this matter. The Responses to Plaintiffs Requests for Admissions that Moving Defendant intends to serve continue to deny any and all liability in this matter. (See Exhibit I) There is no prejudice to the Plaintiff in this matter. The case is in its infancy. The Complaint was filed less than three months ago, on April 2, 2014. The parties have been exchanging discovery prior to the Complaint actually being filed. This matter is not listed for Trial. There are no depositions scheduled nor any discovery end dates established that would prejudice the Plaintiff. Defendant has been more than cooperative in responding to all of Plaintiff's requests. At no point in time did Defendant concede any facts at issue pertaining to liability in this matter. Assuming arguendo that Defendant's Responses were due on May 29, 2014, there was no prejudice to the Plaintiff when Defendant served their Responses on June 9, 2014. LEGAL ARGUMENT Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4014(d), if a Request for Admission is not answered it is deemed admitted. However, there is an exception to this rule: ...the court may permit withdrawal or amendment when the presentation of the merits of the action will be subserved thereby and the party who obtained the admission fails to satisfy the court that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice him or her in maintaining the action or defense on the merits. Any admission by a party under this rule is for the purpose of the pending action only and is not an admission by the party for any other purpose nor may it be used against the party in any other proceeding. Clearly, Rule 4014 is in place to promote the expeditious exchange of discovery. The Rule permits a party to withdrawal or amend their responses where the merits of the action will be affected. In this matter, Defendant moves to withdrawal the responses Plaintiff has deemed admitted and serve the Responses to Requests for Admissions served by Moving Defendant on Plaintiff on June 9, 2014. In Reilly v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 929 A.2d 1193 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2007), the defendant responded to the request for admissions two weeks after the timetable set out for responses by Rule 4014(b). The defendant then filed a motion to withdraw the deemed admissions. The Court granted the motion and provided defendant with an additional ten (10) days to respond to the requests. The Court found for the defendant under the rationale that any deemed admission would "practically guarantee a finding of negligence on the part of the defendants, which is plaintiffs primary claim in the matter" and would "practically eliminate any presentation of the merits of the case." Id. at 1200. Furthermore, Dwight v. Girard Medical Ctr., 623 A.2d 913 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1993), discussed when the Court should permit a party to withdraw their admissions. The Court, relying on federal precedent when interpreting Pa.R.C.P. 1404(d), stated that: Withdrawal of admissions should be granted where upholding the admission would practically eliminate any presentation of the merits of the case; where withdrawal would prevent manifest injustice; and where the party who obtained the admissions failed to prove that withdrawal would result in prejudice to that party. The test of prejudice turns on whether a party opposing the withdrawal is rendered less able to obtain the evidence required to prove the matters, which had been admitted. (Internal citations omitted). Id. at 916. See also Estate of Borst v. Stover, 2011 PA Super 222 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2011); Stimmler v. Chestnut Hill Hosp., 981 A.2d 145, 160 n.18 (Pa 2009)(" We further note that the Superior Court's application of the deemed admissions is problematic in view of the letter and intent of Pa.R.C.P. 4014. Request for admissions pursuant to Rule 4014 are a discovery tool intended to clarify issues, expedite the litigation process, and promote a decision based on the merits.") In this matter, the Moving Defendant served Plaintiff with Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions. (See Exhibit I) In an email dated June 23, 2014, Plaintiff s counsel advised that he will not accept same and has deemed the Requests admitted. (See Exhibit K) The purpose of Rule 4014 is to encourage the parties to engage in discovery. It is not to override the merits of the litigation. The purpose of Rule 4014 is to promote a decision based on the merits. As outlined in Reilly and Dwight, permitting Plaintiff to deem the Responses as admitted would guarantee a finding of negligence on the part of the Defendant, which is Plaintiff's primary claim in the matter. Allowing the Responses to be deemed admitted would eliminate any presentation of the merits of the case with respect to liability in this matter. Allowing the Responses to be deemed admitted would thwart the purpose of Rule 4014. There is no prejudice to Plaintiff as Plaintiff will still be able to obtain the discovery required to contest liability in this matter. However, deeming the Requests admitted would substantially prejudice the Defendant, as it would essentially rob Defendant of its defenses and override the merits of Defendant's case. Moving Defendant has been diligent in responding to Plaintiffs discovery demands to date. Where additional time was necessary to file the Complaint, Moving Defendant granted Plaintiff an exteiision of time to file same. At no point in time did Moving Defendant delay the discovery process or attempt to thwart the exchange of discovery in this matter. At no point in time did Moving Defendant act in bad faith. On the other hand, Plaintiff's failure to act in good faith in this matter has prejudiced the Defendant, causing the Defendant to expend unnecessary time and expense, and wasting the courts valuable resources. Based upon the foregoing, pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S.A. §2503(9), Moving Defendant respectfully requests fees and costs for the preparation of this Motion, any response to be filed, and any appearance before the Court on this issue. CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing, Moving Defendant respectfully requests that the Admissions deemed by Plaintiff to be admitted are withdrawn and Defendant's Responses served on June 9, 2014 be deemed timely Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions. Respectfully, THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS v. Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : VERIFICATION Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire hereby states that she is counsel for the Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, in this action and is authorized to make this Verification on their behalf. Lisa Pam Wildstein verifies that the statements in the foregoing Motion to Withdrawal are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: 6/27/14 THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC By: Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO Plaintiff v. : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the within Motion to Withdrawal was filed via hand delivery on June 27, 2014 to: Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Suite 100 Carlisle, PA 17013 Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC BY: gZa-4 Dated: 6/27/14 Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire EXHIBIT A FREEBURN HAMILTON Your Personal Injury and Workers' Compensation Attorneys January 28, 2014 Andrew Shepley MAC Risk Management, Inc. P.O. Box 20001 Woodstock, GA 30189 RE: Our Client: Aurora Bravo Date of Accident: 03/06/12 Your Claim No.: 094/0000146824/01 Dear Mr. Shepley: RICHARD E. FREEBURN STEPHEN A. SCHNEIDER LAWRENCE F. BARONE CHRISTINA L. BRADLEY GREGG S. FREEBURN RYAN P. MCDANIEL ROBERT D. HAMILTON (1967.2005) Grcgg S. Frecburn greggii pa-inju rylawycr.com As you know, our firm represents Aurora Bravo in connection with the above - referenced matter. Enclosed please find Pre -Complaint Discovery/Interrogatories of Plaintiff to Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC. Your attention is greatly appreciated. GSF/cag Enclosures • c: Ms. Aurora Bravo 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300, Harrisburg PA 17110 www.pa-injulylawyer.com (717) 671-1955 • Fax: (717) 671-1960 • (800) 303-8005 AURORA BRAVO, Plaintiff v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO.. CIVIL ACTION - LAW INTERROGATORIES OF PLAINTIFF TO DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that you are hereby required, pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure No. 4001, et seq. to serve upon the undersigned, within thirty (30) days after service of this notice, your Answers in writing under oath to the following Interrogatories. - DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS The following definitions are applicable to these standard Interrogatories: "Document" means any written, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, including photographs, microfilms, phonographs, video and audio tapes, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. "Identify" or "Identity" means when used in reference to — (1) A natural person, his or her: a. full name; and b. present or last known residence and employment address (including street name and number, city or town, and state or county). c. telephone number (2) A document: a. its description (e.g., letter, memorandum, report, etc.), title and date; b. its subject matter; c. its author's identity; d. its addressee's identity; e. its present location; and f. its custodian's identity. (3) An oral communication: a. its date; b. the place where it occurred; c. its substance; d. the identity of the person who made the communication; e. the identity of each person to whom such communication was made; and f. the identity of each person who was present when such communication was made. (4) A corporate entity: a. its full corporate name; b. its date and place of incorporation, if known; and c. its present address and telephone number. (5) Any other context: a description with sufficient particularly that the thing may thereafter be specified and recognized, including relevant dates and places, and the identification of relevant people, entities, and documents. "Incident" means the occurrence that forms the basis of a cause of action or claim for relief set forth in the complaint pleading. "Person" means a natural person, partnership, association, corporation, or government agency. "Defendant" or "Defendants". As used herein, the term "Defendant" or "Defendants" means either or both of the individuals identified as Defendants in Plaintiffs' complaint, and refers to either both defendants jointly or either Defendant individually, his/her/their independent contractors, investigators, agents, or any other representatives. All information is to be divulged which is in the possession, custody, or control of each individual Defendant including all information that is reasonably available to them. "You". Where the term "you" is used in the interrogatories or instructions, it is meant to include each party and the person(s) referenced above with respect to "Defendant" or "Defendants". "Document(s)" The term "document(s)" is intended to include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: files, notes, memoranda, correspondence, or letters of any kind, intradepartmental or office communications, written statements or reports, either signed or unsigned, recorded or sound taped interviews or statements, maps, plats, photographs, moving or still pictures, diagrams, plans, drawings, specifications, measurements, or documents otherwise described inclusive of agreements, contracts, records, tests, or experimental data and results of computer entries and subsequent printouts, or any other otherwise described documents. "Writing" or "written". The term "writing" or "written" are intended to include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: handwriting, typewriting, computer printouts, printing, photograph, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, including computer records or other types of electronic records, or any form of communication, including letters, words, pictures, sounds or symbols or combinations thereof; and they further include any oral communication later reduced to writing or confirmed by a letter. "Premises." The term "Premises" means the'real property located at 113 Old York Road New Cumberland, PA together with structures erected thereon. STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS. — The following instructions are applicable to these standard interrogatories: (1) Duty to answer — The interrogatories are to be answered in writing, verified, and served upon the undersigned within 30 days of their service on you. Objections must be signed by the attorney making them. in your answers, you must furnish such information as is available to you, your employees, representatives, agents, and attorneys. Your answers must be supplemented and amended as required by the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. (2) Claim of privilege -- With respect to any claim of privilege or. immunity from 'discovery, you must identify the privilege or immunity asserted and provide sufficient information to substantiate the claim. (3) Option to produce documents -- In lieu of identifying documents. in response to these interrogatories, you may provide copies of such documents with appropriate references to the corresponding interrogatories. (4) Multiple part answers. Where an individual interrogatory calls for an answer which involves more than one part or sub -part, each part of the answer should. be set forth separately so that it is clearly understandable and responsive to the respective interrogatory or sub -part thereof. (5) Not applicable. In the event that your answer to any interrogatory is "not. applicable" or any similar phrase or answer, please explain why that interrogatory is not applicable. (6) Don't know or unknown. In the event that your answer to any interrogatory is "don't know" or "unknown" or any similar phrase or answer, please explain all efforts made by the named parties or their attorneys or representatives to obtain the answers to that interrogatory. (7) Testify about. When an interrogatory requests that you or your attomey provide information concerning what a witness may testify about, that interrogatory is intended to elicit a summary of any and all information that any witness may have provided to you regardless of whether they may so testify at trial. (8) Additional .space. In the event the space provided is not sufficient for your answer to any of the interrogatories, please attach a separate sheet of paper with the additional information referencing the applicable interrogatory number. (9) Verification and Copy to Each Individual. These interrogatories should be deemed a copy upon the party defined as a defendant herein. The party defined as a "Defendant" must personally verify the answers to these interrogatories and attach such verification to their answers. THESE INTERROGATORIES shall be deemed to be continuing Interrogatories. Between the time of your Answers to said Interrogatories and the time of the trial, if you or anyone acting in your behalf learns the identity or whereabouts of other witnesses not disclosed in your Answers, or if you obtain or learn of additional information requested herein, but not supplied in your Answers, then you shall promptly furnish a Supplemental Answer under oath containing the same. By: FREEBURN & HAMILTON, PC S. Freebum, Esquire I.D. #: 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 01/28/2014 Attorney for Plaintiff INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES. LLC. 1. Identify all persons or entities that had an ownership interest in the Premises where the Incident occurred on 03/06/2012. ANSWER: 2. As to each person or entity identified in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: (a) The basis of their ownership interest as of the date of the Incident; (b) The date that they first agreed to acquire the property; (c) The date that they acquired an ownership interest in the property (b) Their ownership interest at the present time. ANSWER: 3. BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION: With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: (a) Its correct present name; (b) Each name under which it presently trades and does business;• • (c) Each name under which it traded or did business on 03/06/2012; (d) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business activity conducted there; (e) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; (f) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and (g) The nature of its business organization on 03/06/2012. (h) The date of incorporation; {i) The state of incorporation; (j) Its registered address; (k) • The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; (I) The names and addresses of all persons who have were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 03/06/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; (m) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in Tess than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; (n) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWERS: 4. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any andel! employees, agents or workmen employed by the Defendant who were responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case; maintaining the area where the Incident occurred, were' responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/12. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. 5. Identify all persons or entities who or which were, responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, providing the donut case, manufacturing the donut case, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case, maintaining the area where the Incident .occurred, were responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/12. ANSWER: 6. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to . the preceding interrogatory, state: (a) The precise area that they were responsible for maintaining: (b) What their responsibility entailed; (c) The legal basis of their responsibility, e.g., maintenance contract, employment contract, lease agreement, premises owner, business contract, etc. (d) Their present responsibility; (e) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWERS: 7. BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION: With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: (a) Its correct present name; (b) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; (c) Each name under which it traded or did business on 03/06/2012; (d) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business activity conducted there; (e) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; (f) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and (g) The nature of its business organization on 03/06/2012. (h) The date of incorporation; (i) The state of incorporation; 0) Its registered address; (k) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; (I) The names and addresses of all persons who have were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 03/06/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; (m) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the- approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; (n) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWERS: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Pre -Complaint Discovery/Interrogatories of Plaintiff to Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC was duly served on the 28th day of January, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: -- Andrew Shepley MAC Risk Management, Inc. P.O. Box 20001 Woodstock, GA 30189 BY: Carrie A. Groff, Assistant to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 01/28/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs EXHIBIT B From: Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> Subject: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: February 25, 2014 9:50:10 PM EST To: Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com Dear Gregg, Per our discussion, attached please find informal Pre -Complaint discovery responses in the above referenced matter. Please advise should you have any questions or concerns. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856) 889-1081 wlkirbyki)me.com wildsteiniawaffices.cojn THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS v. Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD Defendant : STORES, LLC'S ANSWERS TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S PRE -COMPLAINT : DISCOVERY/INTERROGATORIES PLEASE BE ADVISED any and all answers have been provided by my attorneys, The Law Offices of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC, as the Interrogatory question calls for a legal conclusion or does not request information regarding the facts of the accident. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that Defendant reserves the right to supplement any Interrogatory answer as additional facts are revealed throughout the discovery process. Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, hereby responds to Pre-Complaint/Discovery Interrogatories as follows: 1. Identify all persons or entities that had an ownership interest in the Premises where the incident occurred on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: Giant Food Stores, LLC 2. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The basis of their ownership interest as of the date of the incident; b.) The date that they first agreed to acquire the property; c.) The date that they acquired an ownership interest in the property; d.) Their ownership interest at the present time. ANSWER: Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC does business in the State of Pennsylvania. Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks privileged information. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 3. With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: a.) Its correct present name; b.) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; c.) Each name under which it traded or did business on 3/6/2012; d.) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business conducted there; e.) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; f.) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and The nature of its business organization on 3/6/2012; The date of incorporation; The state of incorporation; Its registered address; k.) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; 1.) The names and addresses of all persons who were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 3/6/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; m.) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; n.) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Two above. 4. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by the Defendant who were responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case, maintaining the area where the incident occurred, were responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/2012. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 5. Identify all persons or entities who or which were responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, providing the donut case, manufacturing the donut case, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case, maintaining the area where the incident occurred, were responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Four above. 6. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The precise area that they were responsible for maintaining; b.) What their responsibility entailed; c.) The legal basis of their responsibility, e.g., maintenance contract, employment contract, lease agreement, premises owner, business contract, etc. d.) Their present responsibility; e.) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Four above. 7. With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: a.) Its correct present name; b.) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; c.) Each name under which it traded or did business on 3/6/2012; d.) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business conducted there; e.) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; f.) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and g.) The nature of its business organization on 3/6/2012; h.) The date of incorporation; i.) The state of incorporation; j.) Its registered address; k.) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; 1.) The names and addresses of all persons who were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 3/6/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; m.) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; n.) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Two above. CERTIFICATION IN LIEU OF OATH OR AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. BY: Dated: Bruce Astrachan, Manager, General Liability, on behalf of The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company LLC EXHIBIT C From: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> Subject: RE: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: March 21, 2014 4:25:52 PM EDT To: Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> Thanks! Please keep me informed. Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Wendy Kirby [mailto:wlkirby©me.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 3:49 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Re: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, We are only waiting on the certification from our client. We should have it shortly. As soon as we get it we will send it to you. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6TH ST. TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19106 TEL (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 March 24, 2014 Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 30 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Case No. 2014-54 MAC Claim # 094/146824 Dear Mr. Freeburn: Lisa P. Wildstein Iwildstein@me.com New Jersey, Florida District of Columbia Pennsylvania Enclosed herein please find Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's final certified responses to Plaintiff s Pre -Complaint Discovery/Interrogatories in the above matter. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to. contact the undersigned. Thank you for your kind courtesies. Very truly yours, 4624 P. 20/eateia LISA P. WILDSTEIN LPW/wlk Encl. LAW ICES OF P. D. C 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (856) 889-1081 Fax: (561) 469-8948 wlkirby�ir me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Mar 21, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Gregg Freeburn <Greggapa-inju lawyer.com> wrote: Wendy, Do you have any update for me regarding the pre -complaint discovery or an evaluation of the demand? Please let me know. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Wendy Kirby [mailto:wlkirby@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:11 AM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, Upon service of the Praecipe you have twenty (20) days to file the Complaint. You indicate you were served yesterday. Based upon that service information, you have until March 30, 2014 to file the Complaint. If you need a week extension following that date, we have no issue with that. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image001 jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856) 889-1081 wlkirby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com Begin 'forwarded message: From: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> Subject: FW: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: March 11, 2014 8:30:43 AM EDT To: Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> Wendy, I have attached my e-mail that I sent yesterday for your reference. Since the due date for the Complaint is tomorrow, 3/12, a prompt response to my e-mail would be greatly appreciated. Again, I requested a reasonable extension of time to file the complaint after I receive the pre -complaint discovery. Please let me know if you are agreeable. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Gregg Freeburn Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 3:24 PM To: 'Wendy Kirby' Subject: RE: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Wendy, I received service for the rule to file complaint today but am still waiting on your amended pre -complaint discovery. The due date for me to file the complaint would be 3/12 I believe. I request a reasonable extension of time to file the complaint once the pre -complaint discovery is received. Please let me know if you are agreeable. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Wendy Kirby [mailto:wlkirby@me.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 2:58 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, I am out of the office but available via email if you have any questions. Please note any messages I have received from you have been promptly responded to. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image001jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856)389-1081 wlkirby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Mar 10, 2014, at 2:20 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> wrote: Wendy, This is my third or fourth attempt to contact you via telephone. Please return my call when this e-mail is received. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Wendy Kirby [mailto:wlkirby©me.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 4:55 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, As I previously indicated in our email exchanges on February 27, 2014 and February 28, 2014 as well as multiple telephone conversations, the informal uncertified discovery responses forwarded on February 25, 2014 are going to be amended so that they are fully responsive and certified. It is my intention to be able to serve same upon you on Monday, March 10, 2014. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image001.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856) 889-1081 wlkirby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Mar 5, 2014, at 4:08 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Greggnpa-injurylawyer.com> wrote: Wendy, You already sent me your responses to the pre -complaint discovery on 2/25/14. Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Like us on Facebook! Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Wendy Kirby [mailto:wlkirby©me.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:33 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Bravo, Aurora v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, I received your demand in this matter forwarded on March 3, 2014. I also received your multiple phone calls from yesterday and today. Please note we are working diligently with our client to obtain responsive information to your Pre -Complaint discovery requests. We are requesting a brief extension until Monday, March 10, 2014 to provide you with same. Thank you for your kind courtesies. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image001 jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856) 889-1081 wlk.irby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image001.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 (856) 889-1081 wlicirby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel <image00-1.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (856) 889-1081 Fax: (561) 469-8948 wIldrby@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com EXHIBIT D THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6TH ST. TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19106 TEL (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 March 24, 2014 Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 30 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Case No. 2014-54 MAC Claim # 094/146824 Dear Mr. Freeburn: Lisa P. Wildstein Iwildstein@me.com New Jersey, Florida District of Columbia Pennsylvania Enclosed herein please find Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's final certified responses to Plaintiffs Pre -Complaint Discovery/Interrogatories in the above matter. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to. contact the undersigned. Thank you for your kind courtesies. Very truly yours, 4614 p. 2014,teuz LISA P. WILDSTEIN LPW/wlk Encl. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS v. Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD Defendant : STORES, LLC'S ANSWERS TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S PRE -COMPLAINT : DISCOVERY/INTERROGATORIES PLEASE BE ADVISED any and all answers have been provided by my attorneys, The Law Offices of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC, as the Interrogatory question calls for a legal conclusion or does not request information regarding the facts of the accident. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that Defendant reserves the right to supplement any Interrogatory answer as additional facts are revealed throughout the discovery process. Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, hereby responds to Pre-Complaint/Discovery Interrogatories as follows: 1. Identify all persons or entities that had an ownership interest in the Premises where the incident occurred on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: Landlord of the premises: Wayne Avenue Plaza, LP c/o Kimco Realty Corp. 1954 Greenspring Drive, Suite 330 Timonium, Maryland 21093 Tenant of the premises: Giant Food Stores LLC. 1149 Harrisburg Pike Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 2. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The basis of their ownership interest as of the date of the incident; b.) The date that they first agreed to acquire the property; c.) The date that they acquired an ownership interest in the property; d.) Their ownership interest at the present time. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number One above. Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC does business in the State of Pennsylvania. Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks privileged information. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 3. With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: a.) Its correct present name; b.) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; c.) Each name under which it traded or did business on 3/6/2012; d.) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business conducted there; e.) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; f.) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and g.) The nature of its business organization on 3/6/2012; h.) The date of incorporation; i.) The state of incorporation; j.) Its registered address; k.) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; 1.) The names and addresses of all persons who were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 3/6/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; m.) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; n.) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Two above. 4. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by the Defendant who were responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case, maintaining the area where the incident occurred, were responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/2012. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, Customer Operations Manager Daron Furman. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 5. Identify all persons or entities who or which were responsible in any way for the donuts, the donut tray or the donut case, including, providing the donut case, manufacturing the donut case, making the donuts, maintaining the donut case, maintaining the area where the incident occurred, were responsible for putting the donut trays into the case, etc. on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Four above. 6. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The precise area that they were responsible for maintaining; b.) What their responsibility entailed; c.) The legal basis of their responsibility, e.g., maintenance contract, employment contract, lease agreement, premises owner, business contract, etc. d.) Their present responsibility; e.) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Four above. 7. With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: a.) Its correct present name; b.) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; c.) Each name under which it traded or did business on 3/6/2012; d.) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business conducted there; e.) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; f.) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and The nature of its business organization on 3/6/2012; The date of incorporation; The state of incorporation; Its registered address; k.) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; 1.) The names and addresses of all persons who were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 3/6/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; m.) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; n.) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Two above. CERTIFICATION IN LIEU OF OATH OR AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. BY: Dated: 3 a 1ft ti Bruce Astrachan, Manager, General Liability, on behalf of Giant Food Stores, LLC EXHIBIT E t THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6TH ST. TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19106 TEL (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 April 10, 2014 Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 30 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Case No. 2014-54 MAC Claim # 094/146824 Dear Mr. Freeburn: Lisa P. Wildstein Iwildstein@me.com New Jersey, Florida District of Columbia Pennsylvania Our office is in receipt of a copy of Plaintiffs Complaint in this matter. Please provide proof of service on Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC. In addition, please note that Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC hereby amends Defendant's Answers to #5-#7 of Plaintiffs Pre -Complaint Discovery/Interrogatories as follows: Columbus Showcase manufactured the donut tray/donut case. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Thank you for your kind courtesies. Very truly yours, 4iea p. Zf/ 'ddeeus LISA P. WILDSTEIN LPW/wlk EXHIBIT F • f CH izD:a. rRktt)VIN S1'EP'HHEN•A. S HNEIDEI2. ' LAWRLNCt P. BA1 ONE,, CHRISTINA 1... BRADI:) Y ": QRO6S. F12EE$URN RYAN A. N1CDANIEL ... RICHARD A. SADLOCK Gregg _S.:Ereeburri gfreeburii cr freebuilxiaw:com: April 8, 2014. ..: The „Law Offi es' of Lisa P. 233'">s C`1i St' :Tower:Two, #706 Phitadelphia,, PA 19.105 Bravo;vw Giaiit.Food Store $; LLC et al: Docket No::. 2014-545' Ene1osed please filed `:P1au tiff's ':.Request or—Admissions and Aieeornpanyuig Interrogatories Propounded Upori Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, Set I :In addition, I have eneiosed Plaintiff's Request for Production of I)oeuments Directed to Defendant, Giant`Food g`S.: Freebutn 2(3'40 Ling lestori (toad, Suite 3{701 Harrisburg i? 171.10 www; a-utj>xry awyer,co (71 ) 671-19'55 Fazc: (717) .671-1660.. • , (800) 3038005- 1 • AURORA BRAVO, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC, Defendant : NO.: 14-545 : cry'', ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC, SET I Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. Nos. 4009.11 and 4009.12, you are hereby requested to produce and permit Plaintiff, or someone acting on his/her/their behalf, to inspect and .copy the below designated documents and things (including writings, of any kind, including written, recorded or graphic matter, correspondence, personal and interoffice memoranda, notes, diaries, log books, calendars, statistics, analyses, projections, indices, letters, telegrams, minutes, contracts, agreements, reports, studies, summaries, pamphlets, photographs, videotape, motion pictures, drawings, workbooks, work assignments, job reports, billing records, financial records, payment records, government reports and records, graphs, charts, phonorecords, audiotape, and other compilations of data from which information can be obtained or translated, if necessary through detection devices into reasonably usable form), or to inspect and copy, test or sample any tangible things which constituteor contain rnatters within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Nos. 4003.1 through 4003,7, inclusive and which are in the possession, custody or control of the party upon whom this request is served. The party upon whom this request is served shall within thirty days after the service of the request, serve an answer, including objections, to each numbered paragraph in the request, and produce or make available to the parties submitting the request those documents and things described and the request to which there is no objection. The answer shall be in the form of a paragraph -by -paragraph response that shall: (1) Identify all documents or things produced or made available; (2) Identify all documents or things not produced or made available because of the objection that they are not within the scope of permissible discovery under Rule 4003.2 through 4003.6 inclusive and Rule 4011(c). Documents or things not produced shall be identified with reasonable particularity together with the basis for nonproduction. The answer shall be signed and verified by the party making it and signed also by the attorney making an objection if one is set forth. The party upon whom the request is served shall otherwise in all respects comply with Pa. R.C.P. No. 4009.12 and supplement its answer thereafter in accordance with Pa. R.C.P. No. 4007.4. Said documents or tangible things are to be produced at the offices of Freeburn & Hamilton, 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300, Harrisburg, PA 17110 within 30 days of service: 1. The originals, clear copies, or negatives of any photographs relating to the above - captioned claim, including but not limited to, the area involved in this accident or occurrence, the locale or surrounding area of the site of this accident or occurrence, or any other matter or things involved in this accident or occurrence in the possession or under the control of defendant(s), their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. 2. The original or a legible photocopy of any and all statements, reports or memoranda setting forth the facts disclosed in any and all surveys, inspections, testing or investigation with reference to the above -captioned claim being in the possession or under the control of defendant(s), their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel except for the personal notes of impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of the claim. 3. The original or a legible photocopy of any report of expert employed by defendant in the anticipation of litigation or preparation for trial who is expected to be called as a witness at trial, said document being in their possession or under control of defendant, his agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. 4. The original or a legible photocopy of any and all insurance agreements relating to the above -captioned claim in the possession or under the control of defendants, their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. 5. A certified copy of the declaration page pertaining to the liability coverage applicable to this claim. 6. All written statements by witnesses, either eye -witnesses or those who were at or near the scene immediately prior to or subsequent to the incident, signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person making it, including parties hereto and all employees. 7. All interoffice memoranda between the representative of defendant's insurance carrier or memoranda to defendant's insurance carrier's file concerning the manner in which the accident occurred. 2 8. All interoffice memoranda between the representative of defendant(s) insurance carrier or memoranda of defendant(s) insurance carrier's file concerning the injuries sustained by plaintiff. 9. A copy of any written accident report concerning this accident or occurrence. 10. All stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other recording or a transcript thereof by any person about anything relevant to this action. 11. All writings, statements, descriptions, notice of loss reports, report of accident, and any and all documents, including all adjuster diaries, in your possession or under the control of defendant, his agents, servants, workmen, insurers and/or employees, pertaining to the accident upon which this suit is based, and pertaining to all claims of the incident, claim or accident which gave rise to the instant cause of action; however, you may excise or delete any references to mental impressions or conclusions or opinions representing value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics and further excluding privileged communications from counsel. 12. All diagrams, pictures, sketches of the scene, and/or manner in which this accident occurred. 13. All bills, reports and records from any and all physicians, hospitals or to her health care providers concerning the injuries sustained by the plaintiff from this accident or occurrence. 14. All photographs and/or motion picture or summary of any and all surveillance of plaintiff performed by anyone acting on behalf of defendant, defendant's insurance carrier and/or defendant's attorney. 15. Any and all reports, writings, memoranda, xerox cards and/or other writings, lists or complications of plaintiff and others with similar names as indexed by the Metropolitan Index Bureau, Central Index Bureau or any other index bureau in possession of the defendant, or other defendant's insurance carrier. 16. Any and all reports and documents obtained from any government agency or police department pertaining to the accident or occurrence in question. 17. Any and all documents referred to in answers to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories. 18. Any notes prepared by you or your representatives of conversations or interviews with others concerning any matter relevant to this action, the condition which allegedly caused Plaintiffs fall, the incident itself, or Plaintiffs injuries. 19. These Requests for Productions of Documents are continuing and any documents secured subsequent to the production of those requested herein which would have been included in the initial Request for Production of Documents are to be supplied by Supplemental Production of Documents which would be served upon Plaintiffsattorney immediately after the same are brought to the attention or come within control or possession of you or your counsel, insurance companies, or your, his or its agents, servants, workmen or employees. Date: 04/08/2014 FREEBURN & HAMILTON gg S. Free 883 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Attorney for Plaintiffs 1 • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents Directed to Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC was duly served on the 8th day of April, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: The Law Office of Lisa P. 233 S. 6th St. Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 BY: dstein, LLC ie A. Grof411111111111.11', .1 to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste, 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 04/08/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs • DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS The following definitions are applicable to these Requests for Admission and Interrogatories: "Document" means any written, printed, typed, or other graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, including photographs, microfilms, phonographs, video and audio tapes, punch cards, magnetic tapes, discs, data cells, drums, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained. "Identify" or "Identity" means when used in reference to — (1) A natural person, his or her: a. full name; and b. present or last known residence and employment address (including street name and number, city or town, and state or county). (2) A document: a. its description (e.g., letter, memo, report, etc.), title and date; b. its subject matter; c. its author's identity; d. its addressee's identity; e. its present location; and f. its custodian's identity. (3) An oral communication: a. its date; b. the place where it occurred; c. its substance; d. the identity of the person who made the communication e. the identity of each person to whom such communication was made; and f. the identity of each person who was present when such communication was made. (4) A corporate entity: a. its full corporate name; b. its date and place of incorporation, if known; and c. its present address and telephone number. (5) Any other context: a description with sufficient particularly that the thing may thereafter be specified and recognized, including relevant dates and places, and the identification of relevant people, entities, and documents. A "Incident" means the occurrence that forms the basis of a cause of action or claim for relief set forth in the complaint or similar pleading, "Person" means a natural person, partnership, association, corporation, or government agency. STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS FOR INTERROGATORIES -- The following instructions are applicable to these interrogatories: (1) Duty to answer. -- The interrogatories are to be answered in writing, verified, and served upon the undersigned within 30 days of their service on Defendant. Objections must be signed by the attorney making them. In the answers, Defendant must furnish such information as is available to Defendant, her employees, representatives, agents, and attorneys. Defendant's answers must be supplemented and amended as required by the Pennsylvania Rules of' Civil Procedure. (2) Claim of privilege. -- With respect to any claim of privilege or immunity from discovery, Defendant must identify the privilege or immunity asserted and provide sufficient information to substantiate the claim, (3) Option to produce documents. -- In Lieu of identifying documents in response to these interrogatories, Defendant may provide copies of such documents with appropriate references to the corresponding interrogatories. THESE INTERROGATORIES shall be deemed to be continuing Interrogatories. Between the time of Defendant's Answers to said Interrogatories and the time of the trial, if Defendant or anyone acting in Defendant's behalf learns the identity or whereabouts of other witnesses not disclosed in Defendant's Answers, or if Defendant obtains or learns of additional information requested herein, but not supplied in Defendant's Answers, then Defendant shall promptly furnish a Supplemental Answer under oath containing the same. By: FREEBURN & HAMILTON, PC Gregquire Y.D. #: 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 04/08/2014 Attorneys for Plaintiffs REQUESTS L Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC owned the Premises where the Incident occurred on 03/06/2012. RESPONSE: 2. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was responsible for the bakery section of the Premises at the time of the Incident on 3/6/12. RESPONSE: 3. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was in exclusive possession, management and control of the Premises and the bakery section of the Premises. RESPONSE: 3 4. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, had sole control over and were responsible for the donut case including the donut tray that fell out and injured the Plaintiff. RESPONSE: 5. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, improperly placed the donut tray into the donut case causing it to fall out and injure the Plaintiff. RESPONSE: INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO DEFENDANTS, GIANT FOODS STORES, LLC. GENERAI., 1. State the full name and address of all persons answering or assisting in the answering of these Interrogatories. ANSWER: 2. Before you answered these interrogatories, did you make a diligent search of all books, records, computer databases, and other data and information, stored in any way whatsoever by the defendants or on behalf of the defendants by another person or corporation, and have you made diligent inquiry of any agent or employee of the defendants who might have such information, in order to elicit all information available that would be responsive to these interrogatories? ANSWER: 3. Identify all persons or entities that had an ownership interest in the Premises where the Incident occurred on 03/06/2012. ANSWER: 1 • 3 4. As to each person or entity identified in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: (a) (b) (c) (b) ANSWER: The basis of their ownership interest as of the date of the Incident; The date that they first agreed to acquire the property; The date that they acquired an ownership interest in the property Their ownership interest at the present time. 5. BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION: With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: (a) Its correct present name; (b) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; (c) Each name under which it traded or did business on 03/06/2012; (d) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business activity conducted there; (e) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; (f) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and (g) The nature of' its business organization on 03/06/2012. (h) The date of incorporation; (i) The state of incorporation; (j) Its registered address; (k) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; (1) The names and addresses of all persons who have were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 03/06/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; (m) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record, and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; (n) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWERS: 6. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by Defendants in the bakery section of Giant 3 years prior to the Incident on 3/6/12. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. 7. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by Defendants in the bakery section at the time of the Incident on 3/6/12. For any person or persons identified, list their dates of employment and their job title. 8. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any employees, agents, or workmen who were responsible for baking the donuts, maintaining the donut case, cleaning the donuts, maintaining the bakery section of Giant, and/or placing the donuts in the case on the day of the incident on 3/6/12. For any person or persons identified, list their dates of employment and their job title. 9. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any employee, agent or workman, if any, of Defendants that have knowledge or may have witnessed the incident that occurred on 3/6/12. 10. Have you and/or your employees, agents or workmen who were employed at the date of the incident ever discussed the occurrence of the accident made the basis of this lawsuit, the cause of the accident, the events leading up to the accident or injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the accident in an email or other form of written electronic communication including but not limited to instant message? If yes: (a) identify the person(s) to whom said communication was made; (b) identify the date and time of the communication; (c) identify the medium in which the communication occurred; (e) identify on whose computer the communication took place and where the computer was then located; (f) identify the location of the computer presently and in whose possession it is in; (g) identify the service provider through which the communication took place; (h) identify the owner of the account on which the communication took place; (i) describe in detail the contents of said communications; and (j) provide physical and/or electronic copies of all such communications. ANSWER: 1 • 11. At any time since the date of the accident, have you or any of your employees, agents, or workmen, who were employed at the date of the incident, maintained a MySpace, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or any other social networking page or internet blog of any kind? If yes; (a) does the page or blog still exist and if not when and under what circumstances was the page or blog deleted or otherwise destroyed; (b) have you ever posted information regarding the restaurant's daily activities, menu options, hours and days of operation, etc; (c) have you ever posted information regarding the occurrence of the incident, the cause of the incident, event leading up to the incident or injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the incident to such page or blog; (d) have you ever posted anything relating to Plaintiff, Mildred "Judy" Pugh; (e) provide physical and/or electronic copies of any such page or blog. ANSWER: 12. Identify all persons or entities that had a right to possession of all or any part of the Premises where the Incident occurred on 3/6/12. ANSWER: 13. As to each person or entity identified in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: (a) The basis of their right to possession on the date of the Incident; (b) The precise area that they had a right to possess; (c) Their possessory interest at the present time. (d) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their maintenance responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: a 14. Identify all persons or entities who or which were responsible for maintaining any part of the Premises where the Incident occurred on 3/6/12 either prior to the Incident or subsequent to the incident. ANSWER: 15. As to each person or entity identified in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: (a) The precise area that they were responsible for maintaining; (b) What their maintenance responsibility entailed; (c) The legal basis of their responsibility, e.g., maintenance contract, lease agreement, premises owner, etc. (d) Their present maintenance responsibility; (e) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their maintenance responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWERS; 16. State with particularity your understanding, knowledge or belief as to the facts of how the Incident and Plaintiffs injuries occurred; ANSWER: 17. As to each fact set forth in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state the source of the fact and the identity of all persons having direct personal knowledge thereof. ANSWER: 1 8 . WITNESSES. -- (a) (b) ANSWERS: Identify each person who: (1) Was a witness to the incident through sight or hearing and/or (2) Has knowledge of facts concerning the happening of the incident or conditions or circumstances at the scene of the incident prior to, at the time of, or after the incident. With respect to each person so identified, state that person's exact location and activity at the time of the incident. 19. State whether you, your attorney, insurance carrier, representative, consultant, agent or anyone acting on your behalf obtained statements in any form, whether written, stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other recording device hereinafter called "statements", or a transcription thereof, from any person including the Plaintiff regarding any matter or thing concerning this action or its subject matter. If so, state: (a) The name and address, place of employment of the person from whom such statements were taken; (b) The dates on which such statements were taken; (c) The names and addresses of the persons and employers of such persons who took such statements; (d) The names and addresses of the persons having custody of such statements; and (e) Attach photostatic copies or like reproductions of each statement in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa. R.C.P. No. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWERS: 20. REPORTS OF INCIDENT. -- Identify documents (except reports of experts subject to Pa. R.C.P. No. 4003.5) which describe the incident or the cause thereof. ANSWER: 21. If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, video recordings, maps, diagrams, or models of the mall or which may be relevant to the incident, state: (a) The nature or type of such item; (b). The date when such item was made; (0) The identity of the person that prepared or made each item; and (d) The subject that each item represents or portrays. ANSWERS: 22. If you, or someone not an expert subject to Pa. R.C.P. No. 4003.5, conducted any investigations of the incident, identify: (a) (b) ANSWERS: Each person, and the employer of each person, who conducted any investigation(s); and All notes, reports or other documents prepared during or as a result of the investigation(s) and the persons who have custody thereof. 23, State the name, age, address, occupation and place of employment of every person interviewed by you or by anyone on your behalf in regard to the above -titled action along with the date and place of such interviews, the name of the person conducting such interviews, and the relationship of such interviewer, ANSWER: 24. Identify the provisions of Pennsylvania Law that you contend bar, in whole or in part, Plaintiffs claims. ANSWER: 25. State whether any changes have been made to the premises where the Incident occurred after 3/6/12. If so, state: (a) the nature of each change; (b) the date that each change was made; (e) the reason for the change; and (d) the identity of the person or persons who were responsible for the change. ANSWER: 26. State the substance of all conversations, if any, you had with Plaintiff after the Incident on 03/06/2012 which is the substance of this lawsuit. ANSWER: 27. State the substance of all conversations, if any, had with Plaintiff prior to the incident on 03/06/2012 which is the substance of this lawsuit. ANSWER: 28. State the substance of all communications between Plaintiffs and you or any agent or employee of yours relative to the Incident, and, identify all of the persons within hearing of the communications. ANSWER: 29. Identify any other persons who have injured themselves in the bakery section of your premises. ANSWER: 30. Identify any other claims or lawsuits that have been brought as a result of a falling donut tray from a donut case on your premises, stating the case caption, court term and number and the disposition of the suit. ANSWER: 31. INSURANCE. -- If you are covered by any type of insurance, including any excess or umbrella insurance, that might be applicable to the incident in this matter, state the following with respect to each such policy: (a) The name of the insurance carrier which issued the policy; (b) The named insured under each policy and the policy number of each policy; (c) The type(s) and effective date(s) of each policy; (d) The amount of coverage provided for injury to each person, for each occurrence, and in the aggregate for each policy; and (e) ANSWERS: Each exclusion, if any, in the policy which is applicable to any claim thereunder and any reasons, if any, why you or the carrier claim the exclusion is applicable. 32. FACTUAL BASIS FOR DEFENSES. -- State with particularity the factual basis for each defense you are asserting in this case, including the defenses set forth in your answer to Plaintiffs complaint and new matter. ANSWER: 33. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE. -- If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, video recordings, maps, diagrams, or models relevant to the incident, state: ANSWERS: The nature or type of such item; The date when such item was made; The identity of the person that prepared or made each item; and The subject that each item represents or portrays. 34. TRIAL WITNESSES. -- Identify each person you intend to call as a non -expert witness at the trial of this case, and for each person identified state your relationship with the witness and the substance of the facts to which the witness is expected to testify. ANSWER: 35. EXPERT WITNESSES. -- Identify each expert you intend to call as a witness at the trial of this matter, and for each expert state: (a) The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; and (b) The substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. (You may file as your answer to this interrogatory the report of the expert or have the interrogatory answered by your expert.) ANSWERS: 36. TRIAL EXHIBITS. -- Identify all exhibits that you intend to use at the trial of this matter and state whether they will be used during the liability or damages portions of the trial. ANSWER: 37. BOOKS, MAGAZINES, ETC. -- If you intend to use any book, magazine, or other such writing at trial, state: (a) The name of the writing; (b) The author of the writing; (c) The publisher of the writing; (d) The date of publication of the writing; and (e) The identity of the custodian of the writing. ANSWERS: 38. ADMISSION. -- If you intend to use any admission(s) of a party at trial, identify such admission(s), ANSWER: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Request for Admissions and Accompanying Interrogatories Propounded Upon Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC Set I was duly served on the 8th day of April, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: The Law Office of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC 233 S. 6th St. Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 BY: A -Groff, sst� t mt-t Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 04/08/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs EXHIBIT G From: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injuryiawyer.corn> Subject: RE: Bravo, Aurora Date: April 29, 2014 at 11:52:06 AM EDT To: Lisa Wildstein <Iwildstein@me.com> Lisa, Thank you for your correspondence. I do not have a problem with a three week extension of time to answer our Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents, and the Requests for Admissions. This would extend the deadline to provide us with said answers to May 29, 2014. In addition, I would like to schedule the deposition of a corporate designee. Please provide me with the identity of the corporate designee. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www. pa -i nj u ryl awye r. co m Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:Iwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:26 AM To: Gregg Freeburn Subject: Bravo, Aurora Hello Gregg, We received Plaintiffs Request for Admissions and Accompanying Interrogatories as well as Plaintiffs Request for Production of Documents directed to Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC. The current deadline for our responses/answers is May 8, 2014. We kindly request a three week extension to respond to same. Please advise if you will agree to this extension. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire THE LAW OFFKTS Of WA R. WILDSTEIN, LLC. 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com EXHIBIT H From: Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> Subject: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: June 5, 2014 11:32:31 AM EDT To: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> Cc: Lisa Wildstein <Iwildstein@me.com> Bcc: Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> Gregg, It has just come to our attention that although you were kind enough to grant a discovery extension until May 29, 2014, we are still in the process of finalizing all discovery and request an additional two weeks to respond to same. We are happy to grant the same extension to you should you require it. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (856) 889-1081 Fax: (561) 469-8948 wlkirinyme.com wiidsteinlawofficcs. com i From: Lisa Wildstein <Iildstein@me.com> Subject: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: June 9, 2014 3:16:14 PM EDT To: Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com Cc: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com>, carrie@pa-injurylawyer.com Hello Gregg, Attached please find defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's certified responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Again, we thank you for the courtesies in extending the deadlines in which to respond to same. Same will be mailed via hardcopy as well, on even date. After you review same, please advise as to whom you wish to depose and we can set up a mutually agreeable date to conduct the deposition of your client and our corporate designee. Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 5, 2014, at 11:32 AM, Wendy Kirby <wlkirby@me.com> wrote: Gregg, It has just come to our attention that although you were kind enough to grant a discovery extension until May 29, 2014, we are still in the process of finalizing all discovery and request an additional two weeks to respond to same. We are happy to grant the same extension to you should you require it. WENDY L. KIRBY, Esquire Of Counsel 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (856) 889-1081 Fax: (561) 469-8948 wllcirbyyme.com wildsteinlawoffices.com THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY v. : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD Defendant : STORES, LLC'S ANSWERS TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S : INTERROGATORIES PLEASE BE ADVISED any and all answers have been provided by my attorneys, The Law Offices of Lisa P. Wildstein, LLC, as the Interrogatory question calls for a legal conclusion or does not request infoi [nation regarding the facts of the accident. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that Defendant reserves the right to supplement any Interrogatory answer as additional facts are revealed throughout the discovery process. Defendant, Giant Food Stores, LLC, hereby responds to Interrogatories as follows: 1. State the full name and address of all persons answering or assisting in the answer of these Interrogatories. ANSWER: These Interrogatories were answered upon the advice and assistance of counsel. 2. Before you answered these interrogatories, did you make a diligent search of all books, records, computer databases, and other data and information, stored in any way whatsoever by the defendants or on behalf of the defendants by another person or corporation, and have you made diligent inquiry of any agent or employee of the defendants who might have such information, in order to elicit all information available that would be responsive to these interrogatories? ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, yes. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 3. Identify all persons or entities that had an ownership interest in the Premises where the Incident occurred on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: Landlord of the premises: Wayne Avenue Plaza, LP c/o Kimco Realty Corp. 1954 Greenspring Drive, Suite 330 Timonium, Maryland 21093 Tenant of the premises: Giant Food Stores LLC. 1149 Harrisburg Pike Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 4. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The basis of their ownership interest as of the date of the incident; b.) The date that they first agreed to acquire the property; c.) The date that they acquired an ownership interest in the property; d.) Their ownership interest at the present time. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Three above. Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks privileged information. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 5. With regard to each business entity identified in the preceding interrogatories, state: a.) Its correct present name; b.) Each name under which it presently trades and does business; c.) Each name under which it traded or did business on 3/6/2012; d.) The address of its present, principal place of business and the nature of business conducted there; e.) The addresses of each other place which it possesses for the purpose of conducting its business and the nature of the business activity conducted at each such address; f.) The nature of its present business organization, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation; and g.) The nature of its business organization on 3/6/2012; h.) The date of incorporation; i.) The state of incorporation; j.) Its registered address; k.) The names and addresses and titles of officers and directors presently serving as such on its behalf, identifying the office held for each person identified; I.) The names and addresses of all persons who were serving as officers or directors of the corporation or its predecessors, as of 3/6/2012, identifying the office held for each person identified; m.) If the ownership of the corporation is vested in less than 25 persons or entities, state the names and addresses of all stockholders of record. and the approximate percentage of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owned by each; n.) If it has dissolved or merged with another corporation, the effective dates of any such action. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Four above. 6. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by Defendant in the bakery section of Giant 3 years prior to the incident on 3/6/2012. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, Customer Operations Manager Brian Hegadus and Customer Service Representative Tameka Stoner. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 7. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by Defendants in the bakery section at the time of the incident on 3/6/2012. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Six above. 8. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any employees, agents, or workmen who were responsible for baking the donuts, maintaining the donut case, cleaning the donuts, maintaining the bakery section of Giant, and/or placing the donuts in the case on the day of the incident on 3/6/2012. For any person or persons identified, list the dates of employment and their job title. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Six above. 9. List the name, current address, and current telephone number of any employees, agent, or workman, if any, of Defendants that have knowledge or may have witnessed the incident that occurred on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Six above. 10. Have you and/or your employees, agents or workmen who were employed at the date of the incident ever discussed the occurrence of the accident made the basis of this lawsuit, the cause of the accident, the events leading up to the accident or injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the accident in an email or other form of written electronic communication including but not limited to instant message? If yes: (a) identify the person(s) to whom said communication was made; (b) identify the date and time of the communication; (c) identify the medium in which the communication occurred; (e) identify on whose computer the communication took place and where the computer was then located; (t) identify the location of the computer presently and in whose possession it is in; (g) identify the service provider through which the communication took place; (h) identify the owner of the account on which the communication took place; (i) describe in detail the contents of said communications; and (j) provide physical and/or electronic copies of all such communications. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, Customer Operations Manager Brian Hegadus and Customer Service Representative Tameka Stoner. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 11. At any time since the date of the accident, have you or any of your employees, agents or workmen, who were employed at the date of the incident, maintained a Facebook, Instagram, Twitter or any other social networking page or interne blog of any kind? If yes: (a) does the page or blog still exist and if not when and under what circumstances was the page or blog deleted or otherwise destroyed; (b) have you ever posted information regarding the store's daily activities, hours and days of operation, etc; (c) have you ever posted information regarding the occurrence of the incident, the cause of the incident, event leading up to the incident or injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the incident to such page or blog; (d) have you ever posted anything relating to Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo; (e) provide physical and/or electronic copies of any such page or blog. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigationand discovery. 12. Identify all persons or entities that had a right to possession of all or any part of the Premises where the incident occurred on 3/6/2012. ANSWER: Landlord of the premises: Wayne Avenue Plaza, LP c/o Kimco Realty Corp. 1954 Greenspring Drive, Suite 330 Timonium, Maryland 21093 Tenant of the premises: Giant Food Stores LLC. 1149 Harrisburg Pike Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 13. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The basis of their right to possession on the date of the incident; b.) The precise area that they had a right to possess; c.) Their possessory interest at the present time; d.) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their maintenance responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa.R.C.P.4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Twelve above. Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks privileged information. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 14. Identify all persons or entities who or which were responsible for maintaining any part of the Premises where the incident occurred on 3/6/2012 either prior to the incident or subsequent to the incident. ANSWER: Giant Food Stores LLC. 15. As to each person or entity identified in the answer to the preceding interrogatory, state: a.) The precise area that they were responsible for maintaining; b.) What their maintenance responsibility entailed; c.) The legal basis of their responsibility, e.g., maintenance contract, lease agreement, premises owner, etc. d.) Their present maintenance responsibility; e.) Attach photostatic copy of any writings relating to their maintenance responsibility in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa.R.C.P. 4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Fourteen above. Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks privileged information. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 16. State with particularity your understanding, knowledge or belief as to the facts of how the incident and Plaintiffs injuries occurred. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 17. As to each fact set forth in answer to the preceding interrogatory, state the source of the fact and the identity of all persons having direct personal knowledge thereof ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Sixteen above. 18. WITNESSES - (a) Identify each person who: (1) Was a witness to the incident through sight or hearing and/or; (2) Has knowledge of facts concerning the happening of the incident or conditions or circumstances at the scene of the incident prior to, at the time of, or after the incident. (b) With respect to each person so identified, state that person's exact location and activity at the time of the incident. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number Six above. 19. State whether you, your attorney, insurance carrier, representative, consultant, agent or anyone acting on your behalf obtained statements in any form, whether written, stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other.recording device hereinafter called "statements", or a transcription thereof, from any person including the Plaintiff regarding any matter or thing concerning this action or its subject matter. If so, state: (a) The name and address, place of employment of the person from whom such statements were taken; (b) The dates on which such statements were taken; (c) The names and addresses of the persons and employers of such persons who took such statements; (d) The names and addresses of the persons having custody of such statements; and (e) Attach photostatic copies or like reproductions of each statement in lieu of a formal request for production of documents under Pa.R.C.P. No.4009.1 et seq. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 20. REPORTS OF INCIDENT — Identify documents (except reports of experts subject to Pa.R.C.P. No.4003.5) which describe the incident or the cause thereof. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, see Customer Accident Report dated 3/26/2012. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 21. If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, video recordings, maps, diagrams, or models of the mall or which may be relevant to the incident; state; (a) The nature or type of such item; (b) The date when such item was made; (c) The identify of the person that prepared or made each item; and (d) The subject that each item represents or portrays. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 22. If you, or someone not an expert subject to Pa.R.C.P. No.4003.5, conducted any investigations of the incident, identify; (a) Each person, and the employer of each person, who conducted any investigation(s); and (b) All notes, reports or other documents prepared during or as a result of the investigation(s) and the persons who have custody thereof. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 23. State the name, age, address, occupation and place of employment of every person interviewed by you or by anyone on your behalf in regard to the above -titled action along with the date and place of such interviews, the name of the person conducting such interviews, and the relationship of such interviewer. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, Customer Operations Manager Brian Hegadus and Customer Service Representative Tameka Stone. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 24. Identify the provisions of Pennsylvania Law that you contend bar, in whole or in part, Plaintiff's claims. ANSWER: All applicable statutes and regulations, rules or ordinances that may be applicable. This defendant reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 25. State whether any changes have been made to the premises where the incident occurred after 3/6/12. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 26. State the substance of all conversations, if any, you had with Plaintiff after the incident on 3/6/12 which is the substance of this lawsuit. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, Customer Operations Manager Brian Hegadus and Customer Service Representative Tameka Stoner. Customer Service Manager Brian Hegadus spoke with Plaintiff after the incident on 3/6/2012. See also Customer Accident Report dated 3/26/2012. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 27. State the substance of all conversations, if any, you had with Plaintiff prior to the incident on 3/6/12 which is the substance of this lawsuit. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, none that Answering Defendant is aware of at this time. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 28. State the substance of all conversations between Plaintiff and you or any agent or employee of yours relative to the incident, and, identify all of the persons within hearing of the communications. ANSWER: See Answer to Interrogatory Number 26. 29. Identify any other persons who have injured themselves in the bakery section of your premises. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 30. Identify any other claims or lawsuits that have been brought as a result of a falling donut tray from a donut case on your premises, stating the case caption, court term and number and the disposition of the suit. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 31. INSURANCE. - If you are covered by any type of insurance, including any excess or umbrella insurance, that might be applicable to the incident in this matter, state the following with respect to each such policy: (a) The name of the insurance carrier which issued the policy; (b) The named insured under each policy and the policy number of each policy; (c) The type(s) and effective date(s) of each policy; (d) The amount of coverage provided for injury to each person, for each occurrence, and in the aggregate for each policy; and (e) Each exclusion, if any, in the policy which is applicable to any claim thereunder and any reasons, if any, why you or the carrier claim the exclusion is applicable. ANSWER: Giant Food Stores, LLC is a named insured on.a general liability policy issued by The ACE American Insurance Company in an amount sufficient to satisfy an award in this matter. 32. FACTUAL BASIS FOR DEFENSES. — State with particularity the factual basis for each defense you are asserting in this case, including the defenses set forth in your answer to Plaintiffs complaint and new matter. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 33. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE. — If you know of the existence of any photographs, motion pictures, video recordings, maps, diagrams, or models relevant to the incident, state: (a) The nature or type of such item; (b) The date when such item was made; (c) The identity of the person that prepared or made each item; and (d) The subject that each item represents or portrays. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 34. TRIAL WITNESSES. — Identify each person you intend to call as a non- expert witness at the trial of this case, and for each person identified state your relationship with the witness and the substance of the facts to which the witness is expected to testify. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 35. EXPERT WITNESSES. — Identify each expert you intend to call as a witness at the trial of this matter, and for each expert state: (a) The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; and (b) The substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. (You may file as your answer to this interrogatory the report of the expert or have the interrogatory answered by your expert. ANSWER: Objection. Upon advice of counsel, this interrogatory is improper to the extent that this party has no burden to produce any witness, including but not limited to any expert witness, at trial. Further, notwithstanding said objection, at this time this party sees no need to consult with any expert for any purpose and shall rely upon all learned treatises, studies, journals, articles and other such material permissible pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 4003.5. This party reserves the right to amend this answer as facts are revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 36. TRIAL EXHIBITS. — Identify all exhibits that you intend to use at the trial of this matter and state whether they will be used during the liability or damages portions of the trial. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 37. BOOKS, MAGAZINES, ETC. — If you intend to use any book, magazine, or other such writing at trial, state: (a) The name of the writing; (b) The author of the writing; (c) The publisher of the writing; (d) The date of publication of the writing; and (e) The identity of the custodian of the writing. ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 38. ADMISSION. — If you intend to use any admission(s) of a party at trial, identify such admission(s). ANSWER: Objection to the extent that this interrogatory is vague, irrelevant, overly broad and unduly burdensome, and seeks information which is privileged pursuant to the attorney/client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. Without waiving said objection, see any statements made by plaintiff in medical/employment records and Customer Accident Report of 3/26/2012 that have been provided by plaintiff in discovery or requested pursuant to subpoena. Answering Defendant has not yet identified all admissions they intend to use at trial. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. CERTIFICATION IN LIEU OF OATH OR AFFIDAVIT The information supplied in these answers is not based solely on the knowledge of the executing party. It includes knowledge and information of the party, his agents, representatives and attorney (unless privileged) and may also include information obtained from documents, records and information exchanged in discovery proceeding. The word usage and sentence structure may be that of the attorney assisting in the preparation of the answers, and thus does not necessarily purport to be the precise language of the executing party. Any expert reports which are attached as Exhibits to these answers to interrogatories or to the provided supplements to answers to interrogatories are not adopted by this party as their own statements and shall not be deemed as admissions pursuant to the case of Skibinski v. Smith, 206 N.J. Super. 349. In addition, the testimony of any expert retained by this party will include comment upon all matters reasonably raised by their reports and may include matters outside the contents of their reports, such as comment upon matters discovered or generated subsequent to the issuance of their reports. I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are not false. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. I further certify that the copies of the written reports or complete summaries of any oral reports of expert witnesses are true copies of same. Bruce Astrachan, Manager, General Liability, on behalf of Giant Food Stores, LLC Dated: /6(/ CERTIFICATE OF' SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Defendant's Answers to Plaintiff s Interrogatories; Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents and Defendant's Responses to Plaintiffs Request for Admissions was duly served on the of June, 2014, by emailing same and placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, addressed as follows: Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg. PA 17110 THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC zaudei, By: Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire Dated: THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS v. Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY : File No. 2014-545 GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD Defendant : STORES, LLC'S ANSWERS TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S : REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 1. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC owned the Premises where the Incident occurred on 03/06/2012. ANSWER: This paragraph is denied. The accident in this matter occurred at a corporate location. that Giant Food Stores, LLC (tenant) leases from Wayne Avenue, LLC (landlord). 2. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was responsible for the bakery section of the Premises at the time of the Incident on 3/6/12. ANSWER: This paragraph is denied. 3. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, was in exclusive possession, management and control of the Premises and the bakery section of the Premises. ANSWER: This paragraph is denied. 4. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, had sole control over and were responsible for the donut case including the donut tray that fell out and injured the Plaintiff. ANSWER: This paragraph is denied. Columbus Showcase manufactured the donut tray/donut case. 5. Admit that Giant Food Stores, LLC, through its employees who were acting within the scope and course of their employment by Giant, and in furtherance of Giant's business, improperly placed the donut try into the donut case causing it to fall out and injure the Plaintiff. ANSWER: This paragraph is denied. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC &14 p. ?weeded. By: Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire Dated: VERIFICATION I hereby verify that the statements in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: WI BY: e Astrachan, Manager, General Liability, n behalf of Giant Food Stores, LLC THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC 233 S. 6th St., Tower Two #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC TEL: (215) 880-8358 FAX (561) 469-8948 AURORA BRAVO : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : File No. 2014-545 : DEFENDANT, GIANT FOOD : STORES, LLC'S RESPONSES TO : TO PLAINTIFF'S : REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION : OF DOCUMENTS 1. The originals, clear copies, or negatives of any photographs relating to the above captioned claim, including but not limited to, the area involved in this accident or occurrence, the locale or surrounding area of the site of this accident or occurrence, or any other matter or things involved in this accident or occurrence in the possession or under the control of the defendant(s), their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none in Answering Defendant's possession at this time. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 2. The original or a legible photocopy of any and all statements, reports or memoranda setting forth the facts disclosed in any and all surveys, inspections, testing or investigation with reference to the above -captioned claim being in the possession or under the control of the defendant(s), their agents, servants; workmen and/or employees or counsel except for the personal notes of impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of the claim. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, see attached Customer Accident Report dated 3/26/12. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 3. The original or a legible photocopy of any report of expert employed by defendant in the anticipation of litigation or preparation of trial who is expected to be called as a witness at trial, said document being in their possession or under control of defendant, his agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 4. The original or a legible photocopy of any and all insurance agreements relating to the above -captioned claim in the possession or under the control of defendants, their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees or counsel. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, Giant Food Stores, LLC is a named insured on a general liability policy issued by The ACE American Insurance Company in an amount sufficient to satisfy an award in this matter. 5. A certified copy of the declaration page pertaining to the liability coverage applicable to this claim. RESPONSE: See Response to Request Number 4. 6. All written statements by witnesses, either eye -witnesses or those who were at or near the scene immediately prior to or subsequent to the incident, signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person making it, including parties hereto and all employees. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none in Answering Defendant's possession at this time. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 7. All interoffice memoranda between the representative of defendant's insurance carrier or memoranda to defendant's insurance carrier's file concerning the manner in which the accident occurred. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 8. All interoffice memoranda between the representative of defendant(s) insurance carrier or memoranda of defendant(s) insurance carrier's file concerning the injuries sustained by plaintiff. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 9. A copy of any written accident report concerning the accident or occurrence. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, see attached Customer Accident Report dated 3/26/12. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 10. All stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other recording or a transcript thereof by any person about anything relevant to this action. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 11. All writings, statements, descriptions, notice of loss reports, report of accident, and any and all documents, including all adjuster diaries, in your possession or under the control of defendant, his agents, servants, workmen, insurers and/or employees, pertaining to the accident upon which this suit is based, and pertaining to all claims of the incident, claim or accident which gave rise to the instant cause of action; however, you may excise or delete any references to mental impressions or conclusions or opinions representing value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics and further excluding privileged communications from counsel. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, see attached Customer Accident Report dated 3/26/12. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 12. All diagrams, pictures, sketches of the scene, and/or manner in which this accident occurred. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 13. All bills, reports and records from any and all physicians, hospitals or to her health care providers concerning the injuries sustained by the plaintiff from this accident or occurrence. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 14. All photographs and/or motion picture or summary of any and all surveillance of plaintiff performed by anyone acting on behalf of defendant, defendant's insurance carrier and/or defendant's attorney. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, none. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 15. Any and all reports, writings, memoranda, Xerox cards and/or other writings, lists or complications of plaintiff and others with similar names as indexed by the Metropolitan Index Bureau, Central Index Bureau or any other index bureau in possession of the defendant, or other defendant's insurance carrier. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 16. Any and all reports and documents obtained from any government agency or police department pertaining to the accident or occurrence in question. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, see attached Weather Underground Report dated 3/11/2014. This party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 17. Any and all documents referred to in answers to Plaintiff's Interrogatories. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 18. Any notes prepared by you or your representatives of conversations or interviews with others concerning any matter relevant to this action, the condition which allegedly caused Plaintiff's fall, the incident itself, or Plaintiff's injuries. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. 19. These Requests for Production of Documents are continuing and any documents secured subsequent to the production of those requested herein which would have been included to the initial Request for Production of Documents are to be supplied by Supplemental Production of Documents which would be served upon Plaintiffs' attorney immediately after the same are brought to the attention or come within control or possession of you or your counsel, insurance companies, or your, his or its agents, servants, workmen or employees. RESPONSE: Objection to the extent that this request is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks attorney work product. Without waiving said objection, this party reserves the right to rely on information as revealed through ongoing investigation and discovery. THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. WILDSTEIN, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC 4ida zetddree. By: Lisa Pam Wildstein, Esquire Dated: EXHIBIT J From: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Date: June 10, 2014 at 7:40:06 PM EDT To: Lisa Wildstein <Iwiidstein@me.com> Cc: Carrie Groff <carrie@pa-injurylawyer.com> Lisa, I will proceed accordingly. Gregg On Jun 10, 2014, at 7:11 PM, "Lisa Wildstein" <Iwiidstein@me.com> wrote: Gregg,. Best way to proceed is to send me a formal deposition notice. I will do the same. Then we can settle on mutually agreeable dates. As for discovery, we have provided all of the information in our possession and been as responsive as possible. Feel free to send formal supplemental requests. Best, Lisa USA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire <LWildstein.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwiidstein@me.com wildsteiniawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-iniurylawyer.com> wrote: Lisa, I do not know what Rule you are referring to since you did not provide me with any rule number or citation. However, I would like you to produce a corporate designee with the most knowledge regarding the bakery section of the premises, the donut case, baking the donuts, this incident, etc. I requested the same on April 29, 2014. In the interrogatories, when asked to list the information for all employees who worked in the bakery section for Giant at the time of the incident, you list a customer operations manager and a customer service representative. The same answer is then provided in the next follow up questions. It is my assumption that a customer operations manager and customer service representative are not responsible for the bakery section or for baking donuts. Please provide me with a complete list of employees who worked in the bakery section of the premises as requested in the ihterrogatories. If you are not willing to provide me with such a list, I will have to file a motion to compel. Please let me know how to proceed. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 171.1.0 717-6714955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:lwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 6:16 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Carrie Groff Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, Just trying to be helpful here. What is stated below is not accurate. Pursuant to court rule you are obligated to advise me as to whom you would like me to produce "person with most knowledge regarding...." Likewise, the discovery provided is fully responsive and does identify store employees. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire <image001.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 lwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawver.com> wrote: Lisa, Please consult Pa. R.C.P. No. 4007.1. The organization and corporation identifies a corporate designee to testify on behalf of the organization. I would love to depose anyone who was present at the time of the incident or anyone who has knowledge of the incident. Unfortunately, you did not produce any of that information in your responses to discovery. Please reference our interrogatories directed to you and your clients and specifically interrogatories 6, 7, 8, 9, and 18. If you could please provide me with this information as soon as possible, that would avoid any further discovery disputes. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 7.17-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-i njurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:lwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 5:48 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Carrie Groff Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Hi Gregg, I believe it is your obligation to identify whom you wish to depose. Do you want someone who was present at time of incident, person with most knowledge, you let me know and we can set it up. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire <image001.jpg> 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014,.at 5:37 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> wrote: You have not provided me with the name or any information regarding a corporate designee up to this point. I will assume that Bruce Astrachan is who you will identify since he has signed the verifications. If you wish to identify someone else as the corporate designee, please let me know as soon as possible. Please check your schedule for the end of June and early July for a deposition. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www. pa -i nj u ryl awye r. co m Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:Iwildstein@me.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:16 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Gregg Freeburn; Carrie Groff Subject: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Hello Gregg, Attached please find defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's certified responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Again, we thank you for the courtesies in extending the deadlines in which to respond to same. Same will be mailed via hardcopy as well, on even date. After you review same, please advise as to whom you wish to depose and we can set up a mutually agreeable date to conduct the deposition of your client and our corporate designee. Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire EXHIBIT K From: Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> Date: June 23, 2014 at 5:18:29 PM EDT To: Lisa Wildstein <Iwildstein@me.com> Subject: RE: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Lisa, In order to avoid a discovery dispute, 1 kindly ask you to please provide full, accurate and responsive answers to our discovery. Specifically, we refer to number 4 through 7 of our pre -complaint discovery which asks Defendant to identify any and all employees, agents or workmen employed by Defendant who were responsible for the donuts, donut tray, donut case, including making the donuts, maintaining the donut case and donut tray, maintaining the area where the incident occurred or who were responsible for putting the donuts or donut trays in the case on the date of the incident. In response to the interrogatory, you objected and did not provide a response. After the complaint was filed, plaintiff again served you with interrogatories asking you to identify any and all employees, agents, or workmen employed by defendant in the bakery section at the time of the incident. You were also asked to identify any employees, agents or workmen who were responsible for baking the donuts, maintaining the donut case, cleaning the donuts, maintaining the bakery section of Giant and/or placing the donut sin the case on the date of the incident. Again, you objected and failed to provide a responsive, full answer to these extremely relevant interrogatories. You also did not produce any insurance documents that were requested but rather only stated, "Giant is a named insured on a general liability policy issued by the ACE American Insurance Company in an amount sufficient to satisfy an award in this manner." You failed to produce any corresponding documents to this policy which is extremely relevant to this case. Furthermore, you failedto produce any employee lists, checklists, employee procedures, or anything relevant to this case. If you are unwilling to cooperate, I will need to file a motion to compel full, accurate and responsive answers to our discovery. We believe that we have fully cooperated with your discovery requests and are extremely prejudiced by your failure to provide us with the same. It is also our position that your failure to respond to our Requests for Admissions in a timely manner has deemed these admitted. We gave you an extension of time to provide us with these responses three weeks after the normal deadline, May 29, 2014. On June 5, 2014, you e-mailed me and requested another two week extension of time to provide the responses. At that point, however, you were already over our discussed deadline. I did not give you an extension of time after May 29, 2014 to provide the responses to our Requests for Admissions. We believe that we have proceeded with this case in an amicable and cooperative way. We also believe that we have been extremely prejudiced by your failure to cooperate with us throughout the discovery process. It is our hope and intention to continue to work with you to move this case along without dispute or court intervention. Please let me know if you are willing to provide us with the requested documents and responses to our interrogatories or if I should file a motion to compel. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:lwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 7:12 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Carrie Groff Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, Best way to proceed is to send me a formal deposition notice. I will do the same. Then we can settle on mutually agreeable dates. As for discovery, we have provided all of the information in our possession and been as responsive as possible. Feel free to send formal supplemental requests. Best, Lisa USA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire THE LAW °EWE -S OF LISA i WILDSTE N.LLG 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg.@pa-injr y1awyer.com> wrote: Lisa, I do not know what Rule you are referring to since you did not provide me with any rule number or citation. However, I would like you to produce a corporate designee with the most knowledge regarding the bakery section of the premises, the donut case, baking the donuts, this incident, etc. I requested the same on April 29, 2014. In the interrogatories, when asked to list the information for all employees who worked in the bakery section for Giant at the time of the incident, you list a customer operations manager and a customer service representative. The same answer is then provided in the next follow up questions. It is my assumption that a customer operations manager and customer service representative are not responsible for the bakery section or for baking donuts. Please provide me with a complete list of employees who worked in the bakery section of the premises as requested in the interrogatories. If you are not willing to provide me with such a list, I will have to file a motion to compel. Please let me know how to proceed. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein {mailto:lwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 6:16 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Carrie Groff Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Gregg, Just trying to be helpful here. What is stated below is not accurate. Pursuant to court rule you are obligated to advise me as to whom you would like me to produce "person with most knowledge regarding...." Likewise, the discovery provided is fully responsive and does identify store employees. Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire IHE LAW OFFICES OF LISA F. WILDSTE[N. LLC 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> wrote: Lisa, Please consult Pa. R.C.P. No. 4007.1. The organization and corporation identifies a corporate designee to testify on behalf of the organization. I would love to depose anyone who was present at the time of the incident or anyone who has knowledge of the incident. Unfortunately, you did not produce any of that information in your responses to discovery. Please reference our interrogatories directed to you and your clients and specifically interrogatories 6, 7, 8, 9, and 18. If you could please provide me with this information as soon as possible, that would avoid any further discovery disputes. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-injurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:Iwildstein@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 5:48 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Carrie Groff Subject: Re: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Hi Gregg, I believe it is your obligation to identify whom you wish to depose. Do you want someone who was present at time of incident, person with most knowledge, you let me know and we can set it up. - Best, Lisa LISA P. WILDSTEIN, Esquire THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA P. tILDSTt[N, t:LC 233 S. 6TH STREET TOWER TWO #706 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 T: (215) 880-8358 Fax: (561) 469-8948 Iwildstein@me.com wildsteinlawoffices.com On Jun 10, 2014,.at 5:37 PM, Gregg Freeburn <Gregg@pa-injurylawyer.com> wrote: You have not provided me with the name or any information regarding a corporate designee up to this point. I will assume that Bruce Astrachan is who you will identify since he has signed the verifications. If you wish to identify someone else as the corporate designee, please let me know as soon as possible. Please check your schedule for the end of June and early July for a deposition. Thanks, Gregg S. Freeburn Freeburn & Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Rd., Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-671-1955 717-671-1960 (fax) www.pa-i njurylawyer.com Disclaimer: This message and the attachment(s), if any, are confidential and/or are legally priveleged, and intended only for the person to whom this is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please delete and destroy this message and any attachments immediately and notify us at the above address or phone number. Thank you. From: Lisa Wildstein [mailto:lwildstein@me.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:16 PM To: Gregg Freeburn Cc: Gregg Freeburn; Carrie Groff Subject: Aurora Bravo v. Giant Food Stores, LLC Hello Gregg, Attached please find defendant Giant Food Stores, LLC's certified responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Again, we thank you for the courtesies in extending the deadlines in which to respond to same. Same will be mailed via hardcopy as well, on even date. After you review same, please advise as to whom you wish to depose and we can set up a mutually agreeable date to conduct the deposition of your client and our corporate designee. Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, COURT HOUSE LEGAL SERVICES Please deliver the original Motion and copy to the following address: Prothonotary's Office Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas 1 Courthouse Square Suite 100 Carlisle, PA 17013 File the original and get the copy stamped. Return the copy to the Philly office. Please also delivera copy to the following address: Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Freeburn Hamilton 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Please call me if you have any questions: Wendy Kirby: 856-889-1081 PLEASE USE "BRAVO" AS THE REFERENCE FOR THIS DELIVERY AURORA BRAVO V. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2014 — 0545 CIVIL : CIVIL ACTION - LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 3RD day of JULY, 2014, a hearing on Defendant's "Motion to Withdraw" is scheduled for FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 3. Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire 2040 Linglestown Road, Suite 300 Harrisburg, Pa. 17110 Aa P. Wildstein, Esquire 233 S. 6`" Street, Tower Two 706 Philadelphia, Pa. 19106 :sld By the Court, Edward E. Guido, 2 Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 gfreeburn@freeburnlaw.com FILES' { J1i 17 '')ENNSYLVA IH,, Attorney for Plaintiff AURORA BRAVO Plaintiff v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO.: 2014-545 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW DEEMED ADMISSIONS AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, by her attorneys, Freeburn & Hamilton, PC, and file the following Answer to Defendant's Motion to Withdraw Deemed Admissions. Preliminarily, Plaintiff notes that Defendant's Motion is titled, "Motion to Withdrawal [sic] Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Admissions Deemed Admitted For Not Being Answered [sic] and Deem [sic] Admitted Defendant's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Admission [sic] Answered by Defendant and Provided to Plaintiff on June 9, 2014." Literally, Defendant is requesting, by this title, that Defendant's Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions to be withdrawn, and Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions be deemed admitted. However, Plaintiff suspects by the body of Defendant's Motion that that is not what defense counsel intended, and instead that she intended her motion to be a motion to withdraw deemed admissions. Therefore, Plaintiff will treat it as such. 1. Admitted 2. Admitted 3. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff filed a writ against Defendant on or about January 23, 2014. However, the remaining portion of this paragraph is specifically denied. Plaintiff's Complaint alleged that Plaintiff, Aurora Bravo, sustained painful and severe injuries to her nerves, bones and soft tissues after she opened a donut case and a donut tray fell out of the case and struck Plaintiffs body and foot at Defendant's Premises located at 933 Wayne Avenue, Chambersburg, PA on March 6, 2012. Plaintiff's Complaint speaks for itself. The Complaint is incorporated herein by reference thereto. 4. Admitted 5. Admitted 6. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the meaning of "informal Answers" to Plaintiff's pre-complaint discovery. However, itis admitted that Defendant served an unverified response to Plaintiffs pre-complaint discovery on February 25, 2014, that consisted of incomplete answers and objections. 7. This paragraph is admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defendant granted Plaintiff an extension of time to file a complaint because Defendant had not provided complete answers to Plaintiff's pre-complaint discovery. The remaining portions of this paragraph are specifically denied. 8. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the meaning of "Certified Answers" to Plaintiff's pre-complaint discovery. However, it is admitted that Defendant served a verified response to Plaintiff's pre-complaint discovery on March 25, 2014, that consisted of the identical incomplete answers and objections that had been served on February 25, 2014. 9. Admitted 2 10. Denied as stated. Defense counsel advised Plaintiff's counsel via e-mail and letter dated April 10, 2014, that Defendant was amending its answers to interrogatories by identifying the manufacturer of the fixture that injured Plaintiff as Columbus Showcases. It is noted that Defendant waited until after the statute of limitations to provide this information. Defendant has not served Plaintiff with a verified supplemental answer to interrogatories setting forth this information. 11. Admitted 12. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the meaning of discovery "demands." Plaintiff's discovery requests, consisting of interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents and Requests for Admissions, speak for themselves. Any implication that Plaintiff's discovery requests are improper or excessive is specifically denied. It is, of course, admitted that Plaintiff's discovery requests pertain to Defendant's liability, as would be normal and appropriate. 13. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Defense counsel requested an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests. Any implication that Plaintiff's counsel granted a general extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests is specifically denied. Rather, the parties mutually agreed on a three-week extension of time for Defendant to answer Plaintiff's discovery requests. Plaintiff made it clear that answers were due on or before May 29, 2014. All other portions of this paragraph are specifically denied. 14. This paragraph is specifically denied. Plaintiff is unaware of any communication between Plaintiff's counsel and Defendant's counsel prior to the agreed-upon deadline of May 29, 2014. Plaintiff denies Defendant's characterization of Plaintiff's discovery requests as 3 "voluminous" and "rapid fire". Any implication that Plaintiffs discovery requests were improper or excessive is specifically denied. 15. This paragraph is specifically denied. Plaintiff incorporates its answers to paragraphs 13 and 14. 16. Denied as stated. Discovery answers were due on or before May 29, 2014. 17. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is without knowledge or information necessary to form a belief as to whether Defendant was making "best efforts to obtain the requested discovery." It is admitted that Defendant e-mailed Plaintiff on June 5, 2014, and requested a two week extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests. 18. This paragraph is specifically denied. Defendant's Answers to the Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions were late and are deemed admitted by its failure to serve answers as required by Pa. R.C.P. 4014 (b), and the parties agreed-upon deadline. Plaintiff denies that Defense counsel did not object to defense counsel's late request for a further extension of time. To the contrary, Plaintiffs counsel did object and informed Defendant that its Answers were late and deemed admitted. Furthermore, Plaintiff is unaware of any rule that requires a party to object to a Defendant's request for an extension of time after a deadline has expired. 19. Plaintiff denies that Defendant answered all of Plaintiff's outstanding discovery "demands" by email and regular mail on June 9, 2014. To the contrary, Defendant served objections and incomplete answers to Plaintiff's discovery requests. Defendant objected to Interrogatories 2, 6, 10, 11, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38. It objected to Request for Production of Documents 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, and 19. Many of the answers provided to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents are incomplete, inaccurate or evasive. For example, in response to Interrogatory No. 6, 7, and 8, asking for the identity of employees who were working in the bakery section, 4 who were responsible for baking donuts, Defendant provided the names of its Customer Operations Manager and Customer Services Representative. 20. This paragraph is denied. Plaintiff did object and informed Defendant that their Answers to the Requests for Admissions were late and deemed admitted. Furthermore, Plaintiff is unaware of any rule that requires Plaintiff to object to untimely Answers to Requests for Admissions. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto Pa.R.C.P. 4014. 21. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff had correspondence with Defendant. However, it is denied that Plaintiff did not object to the untimeliness of Defendant's responses. Plaintiff informed Defendant that their Answers to the Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions were late and deemed admitted. Furthermore, as stated in paragraph 18 and 20, Plaintiff is unaware of any rule that requires them to object to an untimely served response. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto Pa.R.C.P. 4014. 22. This paragraph is specifically denied. Defendant's Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions were late and deemed admitted. Plaintiff is unaware of any rule requiring Plaintiff to object to untimely Answers to Requests to Admissions. It is admitted that Plaintiff objected and informed Defendant that their Answers to the Requests for Admissions were late and deemed admitted on June 23, 2014. It is denied that Defendant served fully responsive Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions. 23. This paragraph is denied. Plaintiff has been prejudiced by Defendant's failure to Answer Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions and Plaintiff informed Defendant accordingly. Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law is incorporated herein by reference thereto. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference thereto Pa.R.C.P.4014. 24. This paragraph is denied. This matter is over 2 years old, the injury having occurred on March 6, 2012. As stated above, a writ of summons was filed on January 23, 2014 5 and pre-Complaint discovery was served on Defendant on January 28, 2014. Plaintiff has been prejudiced by Defendant's failure to provide complete answers to Plaintiff's discovery requests, and its failure to provide timely, responsive answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions. 25. This paragraph is denied. Pa. R.C.P. 4014 speaks for itself. 26. It is admitted that this case is not listed for trial and that there are not any deadlines ordered by the Court. However, the remainder of this paragraph is denied. There are depositions scheduled, and Plaintiff has been prejudiced by Defendant's failure to provide responsive, timely answers to her Requests for Admissions. 27. This paragraph is denied. Defendant is not in full compliance with all of its discovery obligations in this matter. 28. This paragraph is denied. Defendant has not acted in good faith and/or expeditiously in responding to the discovery requests and has not provided responsive Answers to Plaintiff's discovery requests. 29. This paragraph is denied. Pa.R.C.P. 4014 speaks for itself. 30. Admitted 31. This paragraph is denied. Defendant has not attempted to resolve this dispute. Plaintiff has not had any communication with Defendant other than the present motion since Plaintiff informed Defendant that their Answers to Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions were late and deemed admitted by rule 4014. 32. This paragraph is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that a Court determines that a response is required, this paragraph is specifically denied. Plaintiff does not believe that Defendant is entitled to reimbursement of costs and counsel fees. 6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court deny Defendant's Motion to Withdraw Deemed Admissions and such other relief as is just. By: Respectfully Submitted, FREEBURN & HAMILTON, PC hg' E Freeburn, uire I.D. No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 07/17/14 Counsel for Plaintiff 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Answer to Defendant's Motion to Withdraw Deemed Admissions was duly served on the 17th day of July, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Lisa P. Wildstein, Esquire 233 S. 6th Street, Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia PA 19106 BY: Lam✓ Georgianne . Hess, A stant to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire Attorney I.D. # 314883 FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 07/17/14 Attorney for Plaintiff Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON ID No. 314883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 gregqApa-injurylawyer.com 32 ' CAEfoynoy for Plaintiffs 1,A# AURORA BRAVO : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO.: 2014-545 v. GIANT FOOD STORES, LLC Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE TO: Prothonotary Kindly mark the above -captioned matter settled and discontinued. Respectfully submitted, FREEBURN HAMILTON, PC By: regg S. Freeburn, Esquire I. ► No. 4883 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Date: 10/16/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Praecipe to Discontinue was duly served on the 16th day of October, 2014, by placing the same in the U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Lisa P. Wildstein, Esquire 233 S. 6th Street, Tower Two, #706 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Attorney for Defendant BY: C Sherry A. Sert, Assistant to Gregg S. Freeburn, Esquire FREEBURN & HAMILTON 2040 Linglestown Road, Ste. 300 Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 671-1955 Dated: 10/16/2014 Attorney for Plaintiffs