Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-6329 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No.o,c;- - le2.2.'1 C'L>L'j-~ Civil Action. (XX) Law ( ) Equity JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DARLENE GROFF 99 Ickes Lane Newville, PA 17241 KENNETH SALISBURY, SR. 11 Springfield Road Newville, PA 17241 DONALD GROFF 99 Ickes Lane Newville, PA 17241 versus Plaintiff(s) & Address(es) Defendant(s) & Address( es) PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue A Writ of Summons in the above-captioned action. L Writ of Summons Shall be issued and forwarded to ( )Attorney XX) eriff W. Scott HenninQ, Esquire ~. / 1300 LinQlestown Road L-/ HarrisburQ, PA 17108 Signature 0 ey' (717) 238-2000 Supreme Court ID No, 32 9 Name/AddresslTelephone No. of Attorney Date: WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): Date;:J)~ C. f ;). ':::J IJO...S: I ( ) Check here if reverse is used for additional information 1ROTHON. . 55 Deputy (J -fA -,::J <rt ~ ~ i\- V1 ..,,"'. , - If\ ,"c'" II - ~ -.:t () - ~ <><v -U .' ",~ /J) - i~.) --..c ?- ... b --<" ,. +- .' -f-- .-L... W. Scott Henning, Esquire 1.0.#32298 HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Telephone: (717) 238.2000 Fax: (717) 233.3029 E-mail: Henning@HHRLaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. NO. 05-6329. CIVIL TERM KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION. LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT, If you wish to defend against the cJaims 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, 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. Lawyer Referral Service 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 240.6200 A VISa USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO/A EN CORTE. Si usted desea defenderse de Jas demandas que se presentan mas adelanle en las siguienles paginas, debe tomar acci6n dentro de 10s pr6ximos veinle (20) dias despues de la notilicaci6n de esla Demanda y Aviso radicando personalmente 0 por medio de un abogado una comparecencia escrila y radicando en la Corte por escrilo sus delensas de, y objecciones a, las demand as presentadas aqui en contra suya. Se Ie advierte de que si usted lalla de lomar acci6n como se describe anleriormenle. el caso puede proceder sin usled y un fallo por cualquier suma de dinero reclamada en la demand a 0 cualquier olra reclamaci6n 0 remedio solicilado por el demandanle puede ser diclado en contra suya por Ja Corte sin mas aviso adicional. Usled puede perder dinero 0 propiedad u otros derechos importanles para usled. USTED DEBE LLEVAR ESTE DOCUMENTO A SU ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI USTED NO TIENE UN ABOGADO, LLAME 0 VAYA A LA SIGUIENTE OFICINA ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PROVEERLE INFORMACION A CERCA DE COMO CONSEGUIR 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 CUALlFICAN. Lawyer Referral Service 4th Floor, Cwnberland County Courthouse Carlisle, P A 17013 (7l7) 240-6200 HANDLER, HeNNING ~S~} By: . Cd( / / . W. Scott H . g, Esquire / ( F:IWP Directories\BWS\ComplaintsIMVAllntersectionIGroff. Ran Slop Sign. WSH - LOC.wpd DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. NO. 05-6329. CIVIL TERM KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Darlene Groff and Donald Groff, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP, by W. Scott Henning, Esquire, and make the within Complaint against the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., and aver as follows: 1, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, is a competent adult individual currently residing at 99 Ickes Lane, Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241, 2. Plaintiff, Donald Groff, is a competent adult individual currently residing 99 Ickes Lane, Newville, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241. 3. Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., is a competent adult individual currently residing at 11 Springfield Road, Newville, Pennsylvania 17241. 4. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, was the owner and operator of a 2000 Ford Windstar, bearing Pennsylvania Registration Plate Number DJV7984 (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiffs' vehicle"). 5, At all times material hereto, Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., was the owner and operator of a 1999 Ford Ranger, bearing Pennsylvania Registration Plate Number Y JV1650 (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant's vehicle"). 6. At the time of the collision, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, was insured under a motor vehicle policy through State Farm Insurance. Plaintiff was covered by the full-tort option. 7. On or about January 10, 2004, at approximately 11 :52 am, Plaintiffs' vehicle was traveling southbound on SR465 approaching the intersection of TR410 in South Middletown Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 8. On or about January 1 0,2004, at approximately 11 :52 am, Defendant's vehicle was traveling westbound, on TR410 approaching the intersection of SR465, in South Middletown Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 9. At approximately that same time and place, as Plaintiff's vehicle was lawfully proceeding straight through the intersection of SR465 and TR410, Defendants' vehicle failed to observe the Stop sign and illegally continued through the intersection and violently collided with Plaintiffs' vehicle. 10. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, sustained serious and extensive injuries as set forth more specifically below. COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE DARLENE GROFF v. KENNETH SALISBURY. SR. 11. Paragraphs 1 through 10 are incorporated herein as if set forth at length. 12, The occurrence of the aforesaid collision and the resultant injuries to Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, were caused directly and proximately by the negligence of Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., more specifically, as set forth below: a. In failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiffs' vehicle; -2- b. In failing to be reasonably vigilant to observe Plaintiffs' vehicle; c. In failing to properly and adequately observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; d. In driving in a careless manner in violation of 75 Pa. C.SA S 3714; e. In failing to operate his vehicle in such a manner that would allow him to apply the brakes and stop before striking Plaintiffs' vehicle; f. In failing to operate his vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking Plaintiffs' vehicle; g. In failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiffs' vehicle, which was already in the intersection, in violation of 75 Pa. C.SA !l 3324; h. In failing to operate his vehicle at a speed at which he could stop within the assured clear distance ahead, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A, S 3361; i. In failing to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfully proceeding through the intersection on SR465; j. In driving his vehicle upon a roadway in a manner endangering persons and property and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; k. In entering a roadway without first looking in both directions for traffic and in failing to continue to look as he advanced through the intersection; I. In failing to exercise the high degree of care required of a motorist entering an intersection; m. In failing to stop at a properly posted Stop sign controlling the intersection, -3- in violation of Pa,C.S.A. S 3323; n. In failing to be reasonably vigilant and slowly pull forward to a point where he had a clear view of traffic, in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. 9 3323; and o. In traveling at a speed that was unsafe for existing road and traffic conditions. 13, As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, sustained severe injuries, including, but not limited to, fractured ribs, head trauma which necessitated staples as well as neck and chest pain. 14. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff has suffered great physical pain, discomfort, and mental anguish, and she will continue to endure the same for an indefinite period of time in the future, to her great physical, emotional, and financial detriment and loss. 15. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, has suffered lost wages/income and will in the future continue to suffer a loss of income and/or loss of earning capacity. 16. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for the aforesaid injuries, to spend money for medicine and/or medical attention, and will be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 17. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, -4- negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, has been, and probably will in the future be, hindered from attending to her daily duties, to her great detriment, loss, humiliation, and embarrassment. It has been necessary for Plaintiff to hire and engage the services of an employee to perform the tasks around the Plaintiff's farm that had been performed by Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, prior to the Collision. 18. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr.'s, negligence, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, has suffered a loss of life's pleasures, and will continue to endure the same in the future, to her great detriment and loss. 19. Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, believes and, therefore, avers that her injuries are permanent in nature. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, seeks damages from Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland County, exclusive of interest and costs. COUNT II -LOSS OF CONSORTIUM DONALD GROFF v. KENNETH SALISBURY. SR. 20. Paragraphs 1 through 19 are incorporated herein as if set forth at length. 21. At all times material to this action, Plaintiffs, Darlene Groff and Donald Groff, were married as husband and wife. 22. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligence, the Plaintiff, Donald Groff, has suffered a loss of consortium, society, and comfort from his wife, Darlene Groff, and he will continue to suffer a similar loss in the future. 23. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligence, the Plaintiff, Donald Groff, has been compelled, in order to effect a cure for his wife's injuries, to expend -5- money for medicine and medical attention and will be required to expend money for the same purposes in the future, to his great detriment and loss. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Donald Groff, seeks damages from the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., in an amount in excess of the compulsory arbitration limits of Cumberland County. Respectfully submitted, Date: I r- [f -;;zc4 By: W. Scott 1.0.#32298 1300 Linglestown Roa Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs -6- VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby verifies that the statements in the foregoing document are based upon information which has been furnished to counsel by me and information which has been gathered by counsel in the preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is of counsel and not my own, I have read the document and to the extent that it is based upon information which I have given to counsel, it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the contents of the document are that of counsel, I have relied upon my counsel in making this Verification. The undersigned also understands that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Donald Groff Date: 1 /1 o~ HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG, LLP W. Scott Henning, Esquire ID #32298 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, P A 17110 717-238.2000 DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 05-6329 - CIVIL TERM v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On January 23, 2006, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Complaint with Notice to Defend was served upon the following by depositing in US certified mail: Kenneth Salisbury, Sr. 11 Springfield Road Newville, PA 17241 Respectfully Submitted, Date: January 23, 2006 By: I.., ."J ,. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2005-06329 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND GROFF DARLENE ET AL VS SALISBURY KENNETH SR SHANNON SHERTZER Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon SALISBURY KENNETH SR the DEFENDANT , at 1420:00 HOURS, on the 27th day of December., 2005 at 11 SPRINGFIELD ROAD NEWVILLE, PA 17241 by handi.ng to KENNETH SALISBURY a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents chereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service PostaCJe Surcharge So Answers: 18.00 12.48 .37 10.00 .00 40.85 :r:o'''' R. Thomas Kline 'f~~~:;jj::~ Sworn and Subscribed to before 12/28/2005 HANDLER HENNING ROSENBERG By: ,--/ In! //-, JI~ . /t.) 7 . Deputcy Shejriff me this ~_ day of (1. ~~;;;NL AO pr~ t. Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Wade D, Manley 1.0. No. 87244 301 Market Street P.O.Box109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 wdm@jdsw.com Attorneys for Kenneth Salisbury, Sr. DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. 05-6329 v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW KENNETH SALISBURY, SR. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE AND NOW, this J{(} day of February, 2006, enter the appearance of WADE D. MANLEY, I.D. 87244, on behalf of the Defendant, KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., in the above- captioned suit. JOHN ON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: :269328 22740.2057 A CERTlFICA TE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this rf> day of February, 2006, the undersigned does hereby certify that he did this date serve a copy of the foregoing document upon the other parties of record by causing same to be deposited in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: W. Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER By: {v~ ~. ,.,.,", -n f"-; ; '. 'il :::J 1t-12:~ r'-,:, (-_1 c:' J Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION -LAW v. : NO. 05-6329 KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs c/o W. SCOTT HENNING, ESQUIRE Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 You are hereby notified to plead to Defendant's New Matter within twenty (20) days of the date of service hereof, or judgment may be entered against you. N, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER Jeff r$on J. Shipman, Esq Attorney I. D. No, 51785 301 Market Street P,O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Defendant DATE: ;].-1 J-'" 10(, Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No, 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attorneys for Defendant Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, v, KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant : NO. 05-6329 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., by and through his attorneys, Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P,C., and files the following Answer with New Matter to the Plaintiffs' Complaint, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1, Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to either confirm or deny the averments in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 2. Denied, After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to either confirm or deny the averments in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 3, Admitted. 4. Denied, After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to either confirm or deny the averments in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial, 5. Admitted. 6, Denied, After reasonable investigation, the Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to either confirm or deny the averments in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 7. Admitted, 8. Admitted. 9, Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demand at the time of trial. 10, Denied, The averments contained in this paragraph constitute conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demand at the time of trial. 2 COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE DARLENE GROFF v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR. 11, The Defendant's responses contained in Paragraphs 1-10 herein are incorporated by reference, 12. Denied, The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law to which no response is required, If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., was negligent in the following manner: a, In failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiffs' vehicle; b, In failing to be reasonable vigilant to observe Plaintiffs' vehicle; c. In failing to properly and adequately observe the traffic conditions then and there existing; d, In driving in a careless manner in violation of75 Pa. C.S.A, S 3714; e. In failing to operate his vehicle in such a manner that would allow him to apply the brakes and stop before striking Plaintiffs' vehicle; f. In failing to operate his vehicle under proper and adequate control so that he could avoid striking Plaintiffs' vehicle; g. In failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiffs' vehicle, which was already in the intersection, in violation of 75 Pa, C.SA S 3324; 3 h. In failing to operate his vehicle at a speed at which he could stop within the assured clear distance ahead, in violation of 75 Pa. C.S.A. S 3361; i. In failing to keep a proper lookout for vehicles lawfully proceeding through the intersection on SR465; j. In driving his vehicle upon a roadway in a manner endangering persons and property and in a manner with careless disregard to the rights and safety of others in violation of the Motor Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; k. In entering a roadway without first looking in both directions for traffic and in failing to continue to look as he advanced through the intersection; I. In failing to exercise the high degree of care required of a motorist entering an intersection; m, In failing to stop at a properly posted Stop sign controlling the intersection, in violation of Pa, C.S.A. S 3323; n, In failing to be reasonably vigilant and slowly pull forward to a point where he had a clear view of traffic, in violation of 75 Pa, C.S.A. S 3323; and 0, In traveling at a speed that was unsafe for existing road and traffic conditions, 13, Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 4 14. Denied, The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 15. Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required, If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 16. Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 17, Denied, The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 18, Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 19. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either confirm or deny the averments 5 contained in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice, COUNT II - LOSS OF CONSORTIUM DONALD GROFF v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR. 20. The Defendant's responses contained in Paragraphs 1-19 herein are incorporated by reference, 21. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either confirm or deny the averments contained in this paragraph, and therefore the averments are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. 22, Denied, The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 23. Denied. The averments contained in this paragraph are conclusions of law and fact to which no response is required. If it is deemed that a response is required, the averments contained in this paragraph are specifically denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at time of trial. 6 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice, NEW MATTER 24. Some or all of the Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, 25, Some or all of the Plaintiffs' claims are barred in whole or in part and/or are limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (75 Pa. C.S.A. 91701, et. seq.), and especially by 91722 of that law. 26. Discovery may reveal that the Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages. 27. Discovery may reveal that some or all of the Plaintiffs' alleged injuries, conditions, or damages pre-existed the date of the subject accident and are not caused or aggravated by this accident. 28. Discovery may reveal that some or all of the Plaintiff's injuries, conditions or damages were caused by the events that occurred subsequent to the subject accident. 29. To the extent that the Plaintiffs have been or will be paid for some or all of their damages, then the claims for those damages are barred both by 91722 of the 7 Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and by the defense of payment generally. 30. The Plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action upon which any relief of any kind can be granted. 31. The Plaintiffs' causes of action alleged are barred in whole or in part by the doctrines of comparative negligence and/or contributory negligence, as may be applied to the facts disclosed in discovery. 32. The mechanism in the Plaintiffs' alleged injuries was under the care, custody and control of persons or entities other than the Answering Defendants. 33. The mechanism in Plaintiffs' alleged injuries was under the care, custody and control of persons or entities other than the Answering Defendants, such persons including but not limited to the Plaintiffs. 34, The Plaintiffs' causes of actions alleged damages claimed by the Plaintiffs that were created and/or caused by individuals under circumstances over whom the Answering Defendants had no control or right to control. 35. Sudden and unexpected conditions at the time of the accident created a sudden emergency for drivers on the roadway, including the Answering Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr. 8 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his favor and that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER B. , efferson J. Shipman, Esquire I ttorney I. D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 DATE: Z-/2.-1 I{)~ 269342 9 VERIFICATION I, KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., hereby acknowledge that I am the Defendant in this action; that I have read the foregoing Answer and New Matter; and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief I understand that any false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. c.s. ~4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. /~!f: t J~Ql~U ~fl. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR. (7 DATE: ,).- 23 -D~" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter was served upon all parties or counsel of record by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, with first-class postage prepaid on .2- / :;L 1 /0 tP , addressed to the following: I ! W, Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 JOHNSON, DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER efferson J. Ship an, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P.O, Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant .. , ,. -r: ,- f':': I....~, DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiffs v. NO. 05-6329 - CIVIL TERM KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND NOW, come the Plaintiffs, Darlene Groof and Donald Groff, by and through their attorneys, HANDLER, HENNING & ROSENBERG. LLP, by VV. Scott Henning, Esquire, and reply to Defendant's New Matter as follows: 24. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 24 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, it is denied that the Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 25. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 25 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, The Plaintiffs acknowledge that they will be bound by any provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law that the Honorable Court deems properly applicable to the subject cause of action. 26. Denied, It is denied that the Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 27. Denied, It is denied that Plaintiff's injuries, conditions and resulting damages pre-existed the date of the subject motor vehicle collision and were not caused or aggravated by the subject motor vehicle collision, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 28. Denied, It is denied that the Plaintiff's injuries, Gonditions or damages were caused by events that occurred subsequent to the subject motor vehicle collision, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 29, Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 29 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems that Section 1722 is applicable to the subject cause of action, Plaintiffs acknowledge that they will be bound by the provisions of Section 1722, 30, Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 30 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, it is denied that the Plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 31. Denied, The allegation set forth in Paragraph 31 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, it is denied that the Plaintiffs' cause of action should be barred in whole or part by the Doctrines of Comparative Negligence and/or Contributory Negligence, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff, Darlene Groff, was in any way comparatively or contributorily negligent with regard to the happening of the subject motor vehicle collision. 32. Denied, The allegation set forth in Paragraph 32 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, however, to the extent that the Honorable Court deems a response necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff's injuries were caused by entities other than the Answering Defendants, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. By way of further answer, the Plaintiffs are unclear as to the meaning of the allegation set forth by the Defendant in Paragraph 32, namely "the mechanism in the Plaintiffs' alleged injuries was under the care, custody and control of persons or entities other than the Answering Defendants". As set forth previously, if Defendant is endeavoring to assert that the mechanism that caused the Plaintiffs' injuries was something other than the Defendant's careless driving, that allegation is denied and proof is demanded, 33. Denied. The Plaintiffs incorporate their response to Paragraph 32 in response to Paragraph 33, as though fully set forth herein, 34. Denied. It is denied that the Plaintiffs' injuries and damages were created or caused by other individuals or entities other than the Answering Defendant, and proof to the contrary is demanded at the trial in this matter. 35. Denied. The allegation set forth in Paragraph 35 is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. The Plaintiffs assume that the Defendant is endeavoring to assert the Sudden Emergency Doctrine, however, the Defendant does not set forth any facts that would support the Sudden Emergency defense. Proof of the Sudden Emergency defense, being an affirmative defense, rests with the Defendant. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Kenneth Salisbury, Jr., for the relief set forth in their Complaint. Respectfully submitted, 3/'~-~ DATE W. Scott He . 1.0, #32298 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs VERIFICA TION PURSUANT TO PA R.C.P. NO. 1024 Ie) W. SCOTT HENNING, ESQUIRE, states that he is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that he makes this affidavit as an attorney, because the party he represents lacks sufficient knowledge or information upon which to make a verificatiol'] and/or because he has greater personal knowledge of the information and belief than that of the party for whom he makes this affidavit; and that he has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon his investigation of the matters averred or denied in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, w. SC Date: 3 - :2-d-.r:ch DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 05-6329 - CIVIL TERM v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 2nd day of March, 2006, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Reply To New Matter was served upon the following by depositing in U.S, Mail; Jefferson J. Shipman, Esq. Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner, P.C. 301 Market Street P,O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Respectfully submitted, 3 -~-~ DATE w. Scott Henning, s uir. 1.0.#32298 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 1i'110 717 -238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D.No.51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 Hs@jdsw.com Attomeys for Defendant DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 05-6329 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: W. Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22, Defendant hereby certifies that: (1) A Notice Of Intent To Serve A Subpoena, with copies of the subpoenas attached thereto, was mailed, via Certified Mail, or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoenas were sought to be served; (2) A copy of the Notice of Intent including the proposed subpoenas, is attached to this Certificate; (3) No objection to the subpoenas has been received; and . (4) The subpoenas to be served are identical to the subpoenas attached to the Notice Of Intent. , UFFIE, STEWART WEIDNER. By: Je rson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney 1.0. No. 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant Date: '8J;}.l/l:lo CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter was served upon all parties or counsel of record by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, first-class postage prepaid on Au~II'1+ :Jll) "10& ,addressed to the following: W. Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 , DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER Jefferson J. Shipm'an, Esquire Attorney 1.0. No. 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant By: . \', ~ . \ f".,... ~ .",.. ." \ ') ~.,..H.S'\:; :.-....'- '--rJ-..-~)""~' ','" ,-.-.... , ' ' ',\ J Johnson. Duffie, Stewart & Weidner By: Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire I.D. No. 51785 301 Market Street P. O. Box 109 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0109 (717) 761-4540 jjs@jdsw.com Attomeys for Defendant Plaintiffs : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant : NO. 05-6329 : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 TO: W. Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant intends to serve one subpoena identical to the one that is attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of records and serve upon the undersigned objections to the subpoenas. If no objections are made, the subpoena may be served. DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER DATE: "i/ 3'"1 jlo By Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorneys I.D. #: 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Attorneys for Defendant . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and New Matter was served upon all parties or counsel of record by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail at Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, certified mail, first-class postage prepaid on /hi G . X ?~~, addressed to the following: J J . W. Scott Henning, Esquire Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLP 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 JOHNSON DUFFIE, STEWART & WEIDNER r) .' ~UVvv By: Je rson J. Shipman, Esquire Attorney 1.0. No. 51785 301 Market Street P.O. Box 109 Lemoyne, PA 17043-0109 Telephone (717) 761-4540 Attorneys for Defendant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND Darlene Groff and Donald Groff, Plaintiffs File No. 05-6329 vs. Kenneth Salisbury, Sr., Defendants SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Hershev Medical Center (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: CT scan of head and C-sDine dated 1/10/04 lactualscan): CT scan of head dated 2/27/04 tactual scan) Dertainina to Darlene Groff DaB: 10/26/54 SSN: 187-48-2743 at Johnson. Duffie. Stewart & Weidner. 301 Market Street. P.O. Box 109. lemovne. PA 17043. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOllOWING PERSON: NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: SUPREME COURT ID #: ATTORNEY FOR: Jefferson J. Shioman. ESQuire 301 Market Street lemovne. PA 17043 717-761-4540 51785 Defendants "--- .aa.....e ~p .7f:./7IY!L/ Deputy DATE: JJ,.. ~ "'C'o :JCY'Ib Seal 0 the urt (Efl.7/97) --e,i:, \'i\; " ...-.;~ Q ~ " ~ c::> 0"' ~ 1:.--"- G) rV ..0 , ~::;,. ';~~S~. :2 Q. ::;:\ rii:O \=i} :Do T) 1.., ::.4t.-:- --:'!::\.\ ,.,") (~) 7,)-rn ':'".::-4 ~ -:l ""'" :1\:' t:? o ..0 DARLENE GROFF and DONALD GROFF, Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 05-6329 - CIVIL TERM v. KENNETH SALISBURY, SR., Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the Docket in the above captioned matter as Settled, Discontinued and Satisfied. Respectfully submitted, 1- /1-~7 DATE HANDLER, HENNIN & ROSENBERG, LLP W. Scott Henning, sq re 1.0.#32298 1300 Linglestown Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 717 -238-2000 Attorney for Plaintiffs (") ~ ....:,,.... ;:f; n ~/. c.ii. \ -.< ~. :c:: ~... !- ~::; ~~~. ~ t--.:I = = .....J <-- :r.>- % o -n ~::o -oFTi :Qy '~'.."';Q ..,-, . --1' c)c=) .2: rn ,.-) ~ 15 =< -oJ ""'Cl =~ - .. N \SJ