Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-2288 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff, Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 F-acsimile: - (-7l7) 234=6883 _ _ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. Ot 2006 Civil Action (X) Law ( ) Equity HANNAH VOYTAC 1433 South Mountain Road Dillsburg, PA 17109 MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C 102 Fairway Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 versus and PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D. 503 N. 21" Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 and HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 503 N. 2 V Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 and INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 and RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 and PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD. 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 and TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Plaintiff & Defendant(s) & Address Address(es) PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS Please issue Writ of Summons in the above-captioned action. 7 Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to ( ) Attorney (X) Sheriff Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7828 No. Names/Address/Telephone No of Attorney LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. Supreme Coprt IP No. 86072 Date: ? ? I ?? I ob WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF HAS COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. n A Date: L by () Check here if reverse is used for additional information. ;, ,, ? ? ? ? ? ?.. ? ? d ?. -..? r .s. HANNAH VOYTAC 1433 South Mountain Road Dillsburg, PA 17109 Plaintiff, V. MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C 102 Fairway Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 -and- PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D. 503 N. 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -and- HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 503 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 -and- INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 -and- RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 -and- PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD. 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 -and- LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-2288 CIVIL TERM MEDICAL MALPRACTICE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Wilbur McCoy Otto on behalf of Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital, with respect to the above captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: May 17, 2006 By: ilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Supreme Court. I.D. #01524 Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone: (412) 281-7272 Counsel to Defendants Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Wilber McCoy Otto, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Appearance has been served this 17 day of May, 2006, by U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, upon counsel of record. DICKIE, McCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. By /?Z e::;? ilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Attorney for the Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D.and Holy Spirit Hospital 3 i? f'i7 tt} ?J 7a LAURALEE B. BAKER, ESQUIRE Pa. Supreme Court I.D. No. 58874 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: [7171975-8114 Direct Dial: Fax: [7171975.8124 E-Mail: Ibaker@margolisedelstein.com (717) 760-7504 PENNSYLVANIA Attorneys for Defendants: ]CAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., and LIANA 1. LAZA, M.D. HANNAH VOYTAC V. Plaintiff, MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, AND PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., AND HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., AND RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., AND PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D., Defendants. IN THE COURT CUMBERLANDI CIVIL ACTION - NO. 06-2288-2006 JURY TRIAL TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of Defendants, Neurological Associates, Ltd., and Liana I. Laza, M.D., in the Respectfully MARGOLIS Date: (o ???* By; LALT?ALEE B PA. Attorney Attorney for I PENNSYLVA LIANA I. LAZA, i 3510 Trindle Roa Camp Hill, PA 1 (717) 760-7504 LION PLEAS , PENNSYLVANIA VANIA: matter. ,CER, ESQUIRE N0.58874 NEUROLOGICAL LTD., and 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I served a true and correct coy of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE on all interested partie? by placing the same in postage prepaid, on the the United States mail at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, first-clas1ws; J /+ day of 2zL 17 , 2006, and addressed as fell :Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C 102 Fairway Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL: Internists of Central Pennsylvania, 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 Richard Schreiber, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 MARGOLIS E. Nelso , Secretary c7 ? °' ?; ?. -,-, ,- >,? ?, -r ??? ? ????_. ? r.°; ra ._? .:• HANNAH VOYTAC : IN THE COUR : OF CUMBERL Plaintiff . PENNSYLVAI V. • CIVIL MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA No. R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. Defendants ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter the appearance of Stevens & Lee on beh Schreiber, M.D., Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C, and Internists of Central above action. Serve all papers at 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602,1 Pennsylvania 17608-1594. Notice by copy hereof is given to all counsel of Dated: CI-06-02566 OF COMMON PLEAS ND COUNTY, W of Defendants, Richard nnsylvania, Ltd., in the 1. Box 1594, Lancaster, STEVENS & LEE By: Attorney I.D. No. Maggie M. Finke. Attorney I.D. No. 25 North Queen c P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17 (717) 291-1031 Attorneys for Sch and Internists of( ?squire 6815 ein, Esquire 6305 eet, Suite 602 )8-1594 ibex, M.D., Latsha PA-C ,ntral Pennsylvania, Ltd. SLl 638496vl/041199.00189 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the f was served this _ day of , 2006, by first class mail, following: CI-06-02566 Entry of Appearance prepaid, upon the Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. 503 North 21 st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Holy Spirit Hospital 503 North 21 st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 Pennsylvania Neurological Asso, 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Dated: Liana L Laza, M.D. 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 STEVENS & LEE By: Ltd. 1Attoi$ey I.D. No Maggie M. Finke Attorney I.D. No 25 North Queen P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 1' (717) 291-1031 Attorneys for Scl, and Internists of Esquire 36815 stein, Esquire 86305 treet, Suite 602 1594 7 M.D., LatshaPA-C al Pennsylvania, Ltd. SL] 638496vl/041199.00189 ?-? rv c. ? O cs TI ??r`'` ? Z ?? rn-rT v: ._ W ?t m _:iC -„ r'c` - jrn .. y? ? N =. HANNAH VOYTAC V. Plaintiff, MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, AND PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., AND HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., AND RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., AND PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D., Defendants. IN THE COURT OF i CUMBERLAND COI CIVIL ACTION - LA' NO. 06-2288 JURY TRIAL TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please issue Rule upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint service hereof or suffer judgment non pros. Respectfully Date: I ? uc.y -30, ZOO6 By. LA LEE B A. Attorney Attorney for I PENNSYLVA: qON PLEAS , PENNSYLVANIA twenty (20) days from ,KER, ESQUIRE No. 58874 NEUROLOGICAL LTD., and M.D. LIANA I. LA; 3510 Trindle Camp Hill, PA 7011 717-760-7504 TO THE PLAINTIFF: RULE You are hereby ordered and directed to file your Co in the above-captioned matter within twenty (20) days of or suffer judgment non pros. against the Defendants of this Rule against you Dated: 1 F l OGo P ti ti's, ;-rtG ' P ' J? u ; DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: FRANCIS E. MARSHALL, JR., ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID. NO. 27594 BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID. NO. 78565 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 7314800 (Tel) (717)7314803(Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. ATTORNEY FO DEFENDANTS PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D. D HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL : IN THE COUR OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAN COUNTY, PA : NO. 06-2288 : CIVIL ACT : MEDICAL 1 : LIABILITY JURY ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter the appearance of Francis E. Marshall, Jr., Esquir4 and Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire, on behalf of Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy to the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY Date: May 31, 2006 By: Francis E. Marsh Supreme Court I. Thomas M. Chaij Supreme Court I. Hospital, with respect P.C. , Jr., Esquire .#27594 Esquire #78565 I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 31" day of May, 2006, I, Thomas M. that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document i parties involved by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R. Marcella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) James W. Saxton, Esquire Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Richard Schreiber, M.D., Michelle L. Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd.) Pennsylvania Neurological Associates, 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Liana I. Laza, M.D. 3300 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Esquire, hereby certify all counsel of record or U.S. mail, postage PA-C and Thomas M. v? f i"1 7 70 ro -49 -? w LAURALEE B. BAKER, ESQUIRE Pa. Supreme Court I.D. No. 58874 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 Telephone: [717] 975-8114 Direct Dial: (717) 760-7504 Fax: [717] 975-8124 E-Mail: lbaker(a)margolisedelstein.com Attorneys for Defendants: PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., and LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. HANNAH VOYTAC V. MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, AND PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., AND HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., AND RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., AND PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 06-2288 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA: Kindly file of record the attached Certificate of Service of the RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT which was entered by you on May 31, 2006, and served on the date reflected in the attached Certificate of Service. MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN Date: 140(., By: ?-LAURALEE B. BAKER Attorney for Defendants, PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. HANNAH VOYTAC : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. NO. 06-2288 MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, AND c q o PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., AND c, ; W HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, AND " INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL _ LTD AND PENNSYLVANIA ., , RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., AND PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL }h ?? ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND { LIANA I. LAZA, M.D., Defendants. : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please issue Rule upon Plaintiff to file a Complaint within twenty (20) days from service hereof or suffer judgment non pros. Respectfully submitted, Date: 30, 200(i TWE COPY FROM RECORD W ToWwo o WhMW.1 Wo UWA!d My ow WA 10 SW d OW COW rt Wok M L..e? ? "?1'd11aA?7U1• MA`RnOLIS D STEIN By: LA RALEE B. BAKER, ESQUIRE Attorney I.D. No. 58874 Attorney for Defendant, PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., and LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-760-7504 RULE TO THE PLAINTIFF: You are hereby ordered and directed to file your Complaint against the Defendants in the above-captioned matter within twenty (20) days of service of this Rule against you or suffer judgment non pros. Dated: Aa? Pro tart' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I served a true and correct copy of the RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT entered by the Cumberland County Prothonotary in the foregoing action on May 31, 2006, upon all parties of record or their counsel by placing the same in the United States mail at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, first-class postage prepaid, on the:O Z i day 2006, and addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C 102 Fairway Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL: Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Richard Schreiber, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN Secretar CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing PRAECIPE TO FILE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF THE RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT, on all interested parties by placing the same in the United States mail at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, first-class postage prepaid, on the &4ay of ' 2006, and addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C 102 Fairway Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL: Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Richard Schreiber, M.D. 108 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN Secretary N _ I._) - ?? -n -ri i`L C._ T C.:.. ?-: ? -n '.1-1 - ) r `J ?;. K ti DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: FRANCIS E. MARSHALL, JR., ESQUIRE ATTORNEY 1D. NO. 27594 BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY 1D. NO. 78565 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 7314800 (Tel) (717) 7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. Defendants ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D. AND HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA : NO. 06-2288 : CIVIL ACTION - : MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL : LIABILITY ACTION : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE FOR RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly issue a rule upon Plaintiffs to file a Complaint in the above-captioned case within twenty (20) days after service of the Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. 'h Date: June 23, 2006 By: Tho M. Chairs, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #78565 1. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 23rd day of June, 2006, I, Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon all counsel of record or parties involved by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R. Marcella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) James W. Saxton, Esquire Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Richard Schreiber, M.D., Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd.) Lauralee B. Baker, Esquire MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (Counsel for Pennsylvania Neurological Assoca, Lt da I. Laza, M.D.) Tho . Chair Esquire { ;C?N DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: FRANCIS E. MARSHALL, JR., ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID. NO. 27594 BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY II). NO. 78565 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 7314800 (Tel) (717) 7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. Defendants ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D. AND HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA : NO. 06-2288 : CIVIL ACTION - : MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL : LIABILITY ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RULE TO FILE A COMPLAINT AND NOW, thisa-4-day of J(,438_ , 2006, a Rule is hereby issued upon Plaintiffs to file a Complaint in the above-captioned case within twenty (20) days after service of the Rule or suffer a judgment of non pros. 4Proonotary By: Deputy R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 2346883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac is an adult individual and at all relevant time herein resides in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C (hereinafter "Defendant Latsha") is a physician's assistant licensed to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and at all relevant times herein was engaged as a physician's assistant in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. (hereinafter "Defendant Mudan") is a physician licensed to practice medicine in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and at all relevant times herein was engaged in the practice of emergency medicine in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 4. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital (hereinafter "Defendant HSH") is a corporate medical institution with offices and facilities in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. (hereinafter "Defendant ICP") is a corporate medical institution with offices and facilities in Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At all relevant times herein Defendant Latsha, was an agent, apparent agent, ostensible agent, servant, and/or employee of Defendant ICP and was acting within the course and scope of their employment when providing professional medical services to the Plaintiff. 7. At all relevant times herein Defendant Mudan, all physicians, interns, residents, radiologists, emergency room staff, clinic staff and medical support staff involved in Hannah Voytac's care in 2004 were the agents, apparent agents, ostensible agents, servants, and/or employees of Defendant HSH and was acting within the course and scope of their employment when providing professional medical services to the Plaintiff. 8. In the beginning of 2004, Plaintiff was a healthy, independent 90-year-old woman who lived alone, down the street from her daughter. 9. On or about April 23, 2004, Plaintiff experienced an episode of left-sided weakness causing her to fall in her home. 10. JoAnne Trygg, Plaintiffs daughter immediately took her to Defendant HSH's emergency room. 11. On or about April 23, 2004, Plaintiff presented to Defendant HSH's emergency room and was evaluated by Defendant Latsha and Defendant Mudan. 12. In their dictated emergency room notes, both Defendant Latsha and Defendant Mudan fail to document how long Plaintiffs left-sided weakness had been persisting when she arrived at Defendant HSH's emergency room. 13. At approximately 9:50 p.m., Defendant Latsha authorized a set of orders for admission of the Plaintiff and neuro-status checks every 2 hours for 6 hours by the nursing staff of Defendant HSH, then neuro-status checks every 4 hours for 6 hours by the nursing staff of Defendant HSH. 14. Thereafter, at approximately 11:00 p.m., the first neuro-status check is performed by a nurse. The recorded note indicates that Plaintiff appeared to be aspirating, had right-sided facial droop, and experienced weakness to the left arm and left leg. 15. At approximately 11:55 p.m., Defendant Latsha issued an additional set of orders requesting a consultation from a neurologist regarding trans ischemic attack symptoms, treatment, and recommendations. 16. A second nurse's note was recorded at approximately 12:05 a.m., on April 24, 2004, which stated that Plaintiff continued to suffer from left-sided facial droop. 17. It is believed and therefore averred that, at this point, Plaintiffs condition was not reported to an appropriate medical professional by the nursing staff at Defendant HSH. 18. Even though nursing neuro-status checks of Plaintiff were ordered at 2 hour intervals by Defendant Latsha, the next check was not performed until 12:30 p.m. on April 24, 2004, which was approximately l l hours and 25 minutes after the previous check. 19. It is believed and therefore averred that because there are no nurse's notes during the 11 hour and 25 minute time interval previously noted, no neuro-checks were performed on the Plaintiff as ordered. 20. In the alternative, if it should be shown that Defendant HSH's nursing staff performed neuro-checks, it is believed and therefore averred that Plaintiffs deteriorating condition was not properly documented, and her deteriorating condition was not relayed to the appropriate medical professionals. 21. It is believed and therefore averred that no physician's orders were implemented from April 23, 2004, at 11:55 p.m. through April 24, 2004, at 10:45 a.m. 22. It is believed and therefore averred that at some point between 12:05 a.m. on April 24, 2004 and 12:30 p.m. on April 24, 2004, Plaintiff suffered a massive and debilitating stroke due to the negligent disregard of Plaintiffs condition by Defendants Latsha, Mudan, and HSH's nursing staff. 23. At no point during Plaintiffs hospitalization at Defendant HSH, did she receive any thrombolitic therapy. 24. Upon arrival at Defendant HSH on April 23, 2004, Plaintiff was still capable of moving her legs on her own. 25. By the evening of April 24, 2004, Plaintiffs condition had deteriorated to the point that she was completely paralyzed on her left side. 26. Plaintiff will never fully recover from the injuries she suffered while admitted to Defendant HSH during the time period in question, and she will be forced to spend the remainder of her life in an assisted care living environment. 27. Defendants Michelle Latsha, PA-C, Pushpa Mudan, M.D., Holy Spirit Hospital, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. are jointly and severally liable for the injuries and damages as set forth herein. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence and/or reckless indifference of the Defendants, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has in the past and will in the future require extensive medical treatment, hospitalizations, medicines and a claim is made therefor. 29. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has undergone and will in the future undergo great mental and physical pain and suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily activities, a loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment and a claim is made therefor. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference of the Defendants, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has been and in the future will be subject to great humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, disfigurement, and a claim is made therefor. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has in the past and will in the future incur incidental costs as a result of her medical condition and a claim is made therefor. COUNTI HANNAH VOYTAC V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C 32. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 33. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately managing and/or supervising the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a physician; (d) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (e) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (f) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (g) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (h) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; (i) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; 0) failing to appropriately monitor and/ or re-evaluate the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (k) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (1) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; 34. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT II HANNAH VOYTAC V. PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D. 35. Paragraphs l through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 36. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (0 failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; 6) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; 37. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT III VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 38. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 39. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's agent(s), ostensible agent(s), apparent agent(s), employee(s), and/or servant(s) negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (0 failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; 0) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (o) failing timely to notify the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (p) failing to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (q) failing to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed. 40. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT IV CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 41. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 42. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which an emergency room physician and/or initial intake person should document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C should properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C can manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (e) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding who would be the attending physician and/or supervisor and/or manager of Plaintiffs care in a situation wherein a PA-C and emergency room physician both perform histories and physical examinations of the Plaintiff in the emergency department; (0 failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of the appropriate diagnostic testing for the Plaintiff, including, radiographic, MRI, Cr, hematology, and/or chemistry; (g) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding to timely ordering of a stat consultation by a neurologist for the Plaintiff, (h) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of a stat consultation by an internist for the Plaintiff; (i) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding ensure that medical orders were appropriately executed for the Plaintiff; 6) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate ordering of neurological status checks for the Plaintiff; (k) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate performance neurological status checks; (1) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which neurological status checks shall be documented; (m) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate monitoring of the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (n) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate management of the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (o) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (p) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (q) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely notification of the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (r) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (s) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (t) committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding the supervision thereof. 43. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT V VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA 44. Paragraphs l through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 45. Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's agent(s), ostensible agent(s), apparent agent(s), employee(s), and/or servant(s) negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (f) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; 0) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor and/ or re-evaluate the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (o) failing timely to notify the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (p) failing to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (q) failing to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed. 46. Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT VI CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA 47. Paragraphs l through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 48. Defendant, ICP is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C and/or physician should have documented and/or determined how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C should properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist and/or attending physician and/or physician from Defendant ICP; (d) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C can manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (e) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding who would be the attending physician and/or supervisor and/or manager of Plaintiffs care in a situation wherein a PA-C and emergency room physician both perform histories and physical examinations of the Plaintiff in the emergency department; (fl failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of the appropriate diagnostic testing for the Plaintiff, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (g) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding to timely ordering of a stat consultation by a neurologist for the Plaintiff; (h) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of a stat consultation by an internist for the Plaintiff, (i) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding ensure that medical orders were appropriately executed for the Plaintiff; 0) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate ordering of neurological status checks for the Plaintiff; (k) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate performance neurological status checks; (1) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which neurological status checks shall be documented; (m) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate monitoring of the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (n) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate management of the Plaintiff's care during the hospitalization; (o) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (p) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (q) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely notification of the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (r) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (s) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (t) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the supervision and/or management of a PA-C by a physician; (u) committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding the supervision thereof. 49. Defendant, ICP, is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, ICP, for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. Respectfully requested, R. J ,hfirzella)& Associates, P.C. Charles`W. Marsa? Jr,sgy?ire me ldentifcati o. 86072 3513 N h Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7828 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac Dated: to 1,04 VERIFICATION I, Hannah Voytac, do hereby swear and affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated a Hannah Voytac CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 10' day of July, 12006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Richard Schreiber, M. D., Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital Lauralee B. Baker, Esquire MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Liana L Laza, M.D. and Pennsylvania Neurological Associates, Ltd. R. J. MAUELIn & AssocwTES BY: athan Ram y - ?, ?`; -`; - _ --i -,? ? ; ... ?<;` V R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT : HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL : PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE AS TO RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., and LIANA LAZA, M.D. IN ACCORDANCE WITH Pa.R.C.P. 229(b)(2) To the Prothonotary of Cumberland County: In accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 229(6)(2), which states, "In an action governed by Rule 1042.3, a plaintiff may enter a discontinuance as to a defendant if a certificate of merit as to that defendant has not been filed," please discontinue the above captioned action as to Richard Schreiber, M.D., Pennsylvania Neurological Associates, Ltd., and Liana Laza, M.D. only, as the plaintiff has not filed a Certificate of Merit as to those Defendants. I Dated: ll o(9 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 11`h day of July 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Richard Schreiber, M.D., Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital Lauralee B. Baker, Esquire MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Liana L Laza, M.D. and Pennsylvania Neurological Associates, Ltd. R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy ?- O ZD T `r \( R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimiles (7171234 6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT : HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL : PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AS TO HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL I, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., attorney for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, hereby, certifies that: ? an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by these defendants in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm; AND the claim that the defendants deviated from an acceptable professional standard is also based solely on allegations that other licensed professionals for whom the defendants are responsible deviated from an acceptable professional standard and an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by the other licensed professionals in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm. R. J.111at ella 4% Associates, P.C. Charles W. Aff 6-my It Dated: o2?J Ul9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 23rd day of August 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital BY: Adam G. Reedy R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. LI < L? F ;J ?n R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: emarsar@rjmarzells.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 >i '? (717) 234 b883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT : HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL : PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AS TO MICHELLE LATSHA PA-C I, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., attorney for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, hereby, certifies that: ®J an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by these defendants in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm; AND U the claim that the defendants deviated from an acceptable professional standard is also based solely on allegations that other licensed professionals for whom the defendants are responsible deviated from an acceptable professional standard and an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by the other licensed professionals in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm. R. I MarrXeHk& Associates, P.C. By: Dated: ki-, 66856 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 23rd day of August 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DiCKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSoCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy ?-.? l.? -[1 ... ? F ? ? ?? iJ T? ?? ;?? 4c`+ r" .? ,`: ?' ?. ? =< u' -? I R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytae Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Fs??t,..tto• (7171234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT : HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL : PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AS TO INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA I, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., attorney for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, hereby, certifies that: ? an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by these defendants in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm; AND P1 the claim that the defendants deviated from an acceptable professional standard is also based solely on allegations that other licensed professionals for whom the defendants are responsible deviated from an acceptable professional standard and an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by the other licensed professionals in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm. R. J, Marzella & associates, P.C. Charles ? Mars, J s re 2 ? tifi o. 66856 Dated: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 23rd day of August 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Laisha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy ? ?i ? cv^ ,.-e '? ?... .-., ? z.. ?':? ?+ n c? ; ,? r.? `? ? ?? ..? ? t ? " .; .. ' t` -r? ? ? ' ? ?r?, ;? ?. i, •-- ' .-c C R. J. MARZF.LLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 By: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiff Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT : HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL : PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION FOR OF TIME FOR FILING A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AS TO HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL (CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE), AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. (CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE) PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P.1042.3 AND NOW, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, by and through her attorneys, R. J. Marzella & Associates, P.C., files this instant Motion for Extension of Time for Filing a Certificate of Merit and avers the following: On or about April 24, 2006, Plaintiff filed this instant medical malpractice action against Michelle Latsha, PA-C, Pushpa Mudan, M.D., Holy Spirit Hospital, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. by way of filing a Writ of Summons. 0 2. On or about July 10, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against the above captioned Defendants alleging, among other things, that the Defendants failed to properly diagnose and treat Plaintiffs stroke. 3. Suit was filed close to the expiration of the two-year statute of limitations due to the fact that Plaintiffs counsel was not contacted about this potential case until one month prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations. 4. Under Pa. R.C.P. 1042.3, Plaintiff is required to file a Certificate of Merit verifying the validity of the claim against a licensed professional at the time of the filing of the Complaint or within 60 days after filing the Complaint. 5. Since the Plaintiff filed the Complaint on July 10, 2006, the deadline for filing Certificates of Merit is September 8, 2006. 6. Plaintiff filed the required Certificate of Merit as to Defendant Latsha, Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital (Vicarious Liability), and Defendant Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. (Vicarious Liability) however; the review by the internal medicine expert is not yet complete. 7. Pa. R.C.P. 1042.3(d) states "The Court upon good cause shown, shall extend the time for filing a certificate of merit for a period not to exceed 60 days." 8. Plaintiff is in the process of obtaining reports by experts who are currently reviewing the medical records of Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, some of which have been received less than 60 days from the date of this Motion. 9. Due to the above facts, Plaintiff is requesting this Honorable Court grant a sixty (60) day extension to file Certificates of Merit. 2 Docket No. 3373 CV 2003 10. Counsel for Plaintiff has not obtained concurrence for this instant motion from Counsel for the Defendants. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court grant a sixty-day (60) Date: 9 "7A R. I Marzella & Associates, P.C. By. Zachary . 'impbell e entification No. 93177 3 extension to file the remaining required Certificates of Merit to allow adequate time for the experts to review the medical records recently obtained. Docket No. 3373 CV 2003 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 8`h day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy ? ?Y1 C+3 CS3 . ..? y. .z C} 4? HANNAH VOYTAC IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff : PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA No. 06-2288-2006 R. MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. Defendants PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, come Defendants Michelle L. Latsha (Latsha), and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd., (ICP) and respectfully submit the following Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint: 1. This is a medical professional liability action. 2. According to the Complaint, this case arises out of certain treatment and care provided to Plaintiff Hanna Voytac at Holy Spirit Hospital in April, 2004. 3. Plaintiff alleges that she was evaluated by Defendant Latsha after presenting to Holy Spirit Hospital's emergency room. Complaint, at ¶ 11. 4. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Latsha was acting as an agent of Defendant ICP. Id., at ¶ 6. 5. Plaintiff alleges generally that she suffered a massive debilitating stroke and is paralyzed on her left side as a result of the Defendants' failure to meet the applicable standards of care. Id., at T¶ 22-25. 1 SL1 662669v]/041199.00189 6. In the Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to state claims against Defendants Latsha and ICP including: a claim of direct negligence against Defendant Latsha (Count I); vicarious liability against ICP (Count V); and corporate liability against ICP (Count VI). 7. Plaintiff's Complaint includes allegations designed to support an award of punitive damages against both Defendants Latsha and ICP. Id., at ¶¶ 33, 45. 8. Defendants respectfully submit that the factual allegations of the Complaint are legally insufficient to support an award of punitive damages. 9. Defendants also respectfully submit that the claim of corporate negligence against ICP, a physician practice group, is legally insufficient because the doctrine of corporate liability has not been extended to apply to physician practice groups. Preliminary Objection For Legal Insufficiency - Punitive Damages 10. In Paragraph 33 of the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the actions or inactions of Physician's Assistant Latsha constitute gross negligence and reckless indifference. 11. These allegations are typically designed to support an award of punitive damages. 12. Punitive damages are only available in rare and extreme cases of outrageous conduct demonstrating a depraved state of mind on the part of the defendant. 13. Punitive damages are not typically available in medical professional liability actions. 14. Moreover, the specific factual allegations of negligence against Defendant Latsha, even if taken as true, do not tend to establish the type of conduct or state of mind that supports an award of exemplary damages. 2 SLl 662669v 1 /041199.00189 15. In Paragraph 45 of the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant ICP is vicariously liable for gross negligence and reckless indifference. 16. It is generally well established that a principal or employer is not liable in punitive damages, absent special circumstances, for the conduct of an agent or employee. 17. In Paragraph 48 of the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the conduct of ICP constitutes gross negligence and reckless indifference. However, the specific factual allegations against ICP, even if taken as true, do not tend to establish the type of intentional misconduct or depraved state of mind necessary to an award of exemplary damages. WHEREFORE, Defendants Latsha and ICP respectfully request that this Court grant their preliminary objection and enter an order dismissing all claims of punitive damages against them, with prejudice. Preliminary Objection For Legal Insufficiency - Corporate Liability 18. In Count VI, Plaintiff attempts to state a claim of corporate liability against ICP. 19. Plaintiff alleges that ICP is a corporate medical institution with offices and facilities in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania. Complaint, ¶ 5. 20. Plaintiff does not allege that ICP is a hospital or HMO, or otherwise has assumed the role of a comprehensive health center with responsibility for arranging and coordinating the total health care of its patients. 21. ICP is a physician practice group of internists and not a comprehensive health center with responsibility for arranging and coordinating the total health care of its patients. 22. The Superior Court has expressly declined to extend the applicability of corporate liability to physician practice groups. S Ll 662669v]/041199.00199 WHEREFORE, Defendant ICP respectfully requests that this Court grant its preliminary objection and dismiss Count VI, with prejudice, for legal insufficiency. Respectfully Submitted, Dated: 2006 STEVENS & L By Michael D. Pipa, Esqui Attorney ID # 53624 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendants Michelle L. Latsha, PA- C, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. 4 S Ll 662669v]/041199.00189 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on this date, I served a certified true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe to Discontinue with proposed Discontinuance Certificate upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Lauralee B. Baker, Esq. Margolis Edelstein 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Charles Marsar, Jr., Esq. RJ Marzella & Associates 3513 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Dated: 6 '2006 STEVENS & E By 4??&z Michael D. Pipa, Es re Attorney ID # 53624 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendants Michelle L. Latsha, PA- C, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. SLl 662669v 1 /041 199.00189 ("" --R c .--i e ?. _ ?. t t . ? j.? ,:; C -r ,I R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Email: zcampbell@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (7171234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE AS TO PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D. IN ACCORDANCE WITH Pa.R.C.P. 229(b)(2) To the Prothonotary of Cumberland County: In accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 229(b)(2), which states, "In an action governed by Rule 1042.3, a plaintiff may enter a discontinuance as to a defendant if a certificate of merit as to that defendant has not been filed," please discontinue the above captioned action as to Pushpa Mudan, M.D., only, as the plaintiff has not filed a Certificate of Merit as to that Defendant. Dated: 9 7 oG Respectfully submitted R.J. Marzella & Associates, PC By: achary pbell, Esquire Su urt Identification No. 93177 r' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 8th day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy !? y n ?' ?? ?, ?, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID. NO. 78565 BY: AARON S. JAYMAN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY ID. NO. 85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 7314800 (Tel) (717) 7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff v MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. Defendants ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA : NO. 06-2288 : CIVIL ACTION - : MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL : LIABILITY ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEFENDANT, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL'S. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, by and through its attorneys, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., and hereby preliminarily objects to Plaintiff's Complaint as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, commenced this action by way of Writ of Summons filed on April 24, 2006. 2. Plaintiff's Complaint was filed on July 10, 2006. A copy of Plaintiff's Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 3. Plaintiff filed a Certificate of Merit in support of her vicarious liability claims only against Holy Spirit Hospital on or about August 23, 2006. 4. The underlying basis of Plaintiff's Complaint involves the alleged failure to timely diagnose and treat a stroke. 5. The averments specific to Holy Spirit Hospital are set forth in Counts III (vicarious liability) and IV (corporate negligence) of Plaintiff s Complaint. 6. Holy Spirit Hospital timely preliminarily objects to Plaintiff s negligence per se and corporate negligence allegations. I. DEMURRER TO NEGLIGENCE PER SE ALLEGATIONS ASSERTED IN PARAGRAPH 42(t) OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC STATUTES AND/OR RULES AND/OR REGULATIONS. 7. Holy Spirit Hospital hereby incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 6 as if herein set forth at length. 8. In Count IV of her Complaint, Plaintiff pleads a claim against Holy Spirit Hospital based on negligence per se violations of unspecified local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations. 9. The particular language in Plaintiffs Complaint at issue is contained in paragraph 42(t) and reads as follows: 42. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (t) Committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding supervision thereof. 10. Pa.R.C.P. 1019 and 1028(a)(4) require a plaintiff to specifically state in the complaint the material facts and legal grounds for which the claim is based upon. 2 11. In the instant case, the Plaintiff has failed to state the laws, rules and/or regulations in the Complaint that Holy Spirit Hospital has allegedly violated. 12. "Statutes need not be specifically pleaded but there must be set forth sufficient facts to bring the case within the statute in question." Goldberg v. Friedrich, 124 A. 186 (Pa. 1924) (cited in Godina v. Oswald, 211 A. 2d 91, 93 (Pa. Super. 1965)). 13. Where the plaintiff pleads violations of statutes as grounds for negligence, the defendant is obligated to answer such allegations. A response to such an allegation would simply be a denial, thus adding nothing to the pleading process. O'Malley v. Peerless Petroleum, Inc., 76 Lack.Jur. 115, 116 (Pa.Com.Pl. 1975). 14. In the case of Muir v. Neisner Bros.. Inc., 6 D&C 2d 581 (1955) "the Plaintiff alleged violations of `appropriate laws,' and the defendant was not held to an answer unless and until such laws were pleaded specifically." O'Malley, at 117. 15. The instant case is analogous to Muir and O'Malley, as the Plaintiff here, failed to specifically state in her complaint the statutes that are the basis for her claims. 16. The question presented by demurrer is whether, on the facts averred, the law says with certainty that no recovery is possible. Werner v. Plater-Zyberk, 799 A.2d 776 (Pa. Super. 2002). 17. Because Plaintiff has failed to specify in her Complaint which local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations Holy Spirit allegedly violated, or in the alternative, plead sufficient facts in the Complaint to bring the case within the statute(s) in question, the negligence per se allegations should be stricken from Plaintiff's Complaint, with prejudice WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully request that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff's negligence per se claims, or in the alternative, Order Plaintiff to file an 3 Amended Complaint specifically stating the local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations which Holy Spirit allegedly violated. II. DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM FOR CORPORATE NEGLIGENCE AGAINST HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 18. Holy Spirit Hospital hereby incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 though 17 as if herein set forth at length. 19. In Count IV of her Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to set forth a claim of corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital. 20. The duties a hospital owes directly to its patients under a theory of corporate negligence are: (1) A duty to use reasonable care in the maintenance of safe and adequate facilities and equipment; (2) A duty to select and retain only competent physicians; (3) A duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine within the hospital's walls as to the patient's care; and (4) A duty to formulate, adopt and enforce adequate rules and policies to ensure quality care for its patients. Thompson v. Nason Hospital, 591 A.2d 703 (Pa. 1991). 21. In paragraphs 42 through 43, Plaintiff sets forth her corporate negligence allegations against Holy Spirit Hospital. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital as follows: 42. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which an emergency room physician and/or initial intake person should document and/or determine how long Plaintiff's trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to the Defendant HSH emergency room; 4 (b) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C should properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiff's condition and/or treatment; (c) allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C can manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist; (e) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding who would be the attending physician and/or supervisor and/or manager of Plaintiff's care in a situation wherein a PA-C and emergency room physician both perform histories and physical examinations of the Plaintiff in the emergency room; (f) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of the appropriate diagnostic testing for the Plaintiff, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (g) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding to timely ordering of a stat consultation by a neurologist for the Plaintiff; (h) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of a stat consultation by an internist for the Plaintiff; (i) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding ensure that medical orders were appropriately executed for the Plaintiff, (j) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate ordering of neurological status checks for the Plaintiff; (k) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate performance neurological status checks; 5 (1) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which neurological status checks shall be documented; (m) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate monitoring f the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (n) failing to creat and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate management of the Plaintiff's care during the hospitalization; (o) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (p) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (q) failing to creat and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely notification of the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (r) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (s) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (t) committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding the supervision thereof. 43. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth length. 6 22. However, Plaintiff has failed to plead any facts that support the above-referenced allegations of corporate negligence against Holy Spirit Hospital. 23. There are no facts alleged by Plaintiff in her Complaint which would establish that Holy Spirit Hospital in way breached its duty to oversee the physicians, nurses, physician assistants and staff working in the hospital in this case. 24. In the multiple conclusory paragraphs set forth above, Plaintiff attempts to set forth a breach of the duty on the part of Holy Spirit Hospital for failure to formulate, adopt, review, revise and enforce adequate rules, policies and procedures for strokes to ensure quality care for the Plaintiff in this case. 25. Plaintiffs' allegations are simple, plain, boilerplate allegations that amount to no more than legal conclusions which express potential theories of corporate liability as set forth in Thompson. 26. These vague and conclusory corporate negligence allegations can be alleged against any hospital in any medical malpractice. 27. Conclusions of law which are contained in a complaint are not to be considered in reviewing a demurrer. Callsen v. Temple University Hospital, 652 A.2d 824 (Pa. 1995). 28. In the absence of facts to support allegations of corporate negligence a demurrer should be sustained. 29. Furthermore, hospitals or corporate entities are not directly liable under Thompson just because one of its alleged employees or agents makes a mistake which constitutes malpractice. See, Edwards v. Brandywine Hospital, 652 A.2d 1382 (Pa.Super. 1995). 30. A Plaintiff must show more than negligence by an individual for whom the hospital is allegedly responsible. Thompson requires that a plaintiff show that the hospital itself 7 has breached one its enumerated duties and that the hospital knew or should have known of the defect or procedures which created harm to its patient. See, Edwards supra. 31. In the instant case, the facts alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint amount to nothing more than an alleged breach of the standard of care by the Defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C in her care and treatment of the Plaintiff. 32. Plaintiff's boilerplate allegations do not support a claim based on a breach of one of the administrative duties owed by Holy Spirit Hospital under the corporate negligence doctrine. 33. Accordingly, Plaintiff has failed to set forth a prima facie claim of corporate negligence. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully request that the corporate negligence claim contained in Count IV be dismissed with prejudice from Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: September 14, 2006 By: Thoma h ifs, Esquire Sup rem I.D. #78565 Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-4800 Counsel for Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital 8 C'alI A L J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 3Y: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire ?mail: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com 3ennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff iarrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (71.7) 234-6883' =--? IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ; ;. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA c - HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO DEFEND YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defense 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 claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 TELEPHONE (717) 249-3166 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted guiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las paginas siguintes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plaza al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la nontificacion. Usted debe presentar una apariencia escrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demandas en contra de su p esona. 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 ]a peticion de demanda. Usted pueda perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABODAGO INMEDIATAMENTA. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO 0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA LFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PEUDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE 2 InEmy AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 TELEPHONE (717) 249-3166 Dated: '7 t-0 1,31P R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street 'Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorneys for Plaintiff Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac is an adult individual and at all relevant time herein resides in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland -County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C (hereinafter "Defendant Latsha") is a physician's assistant licensed to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and at all relevant times herein was engaged as a physician's assistant in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. (hereinafter "Defendant Mudan") is a physician licensed to practice medicine in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and at all relevant times herein was engaged in the practice of emergency medicine in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 4. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital (hereinafter "Defendant HSH") is a corporate medical institution with offices and facilities in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. (hereinafter "Defendant ICP") is a corporate medical institution with offices and facilities in Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 6. At all relevant times herein Defendant Latsha, was an agent, apparent agent, ostensible agent, servant, and/or employee of Defendant ICP and was acting within the course and scope of their employment when providing professional medical services to the Plaintiff. 7. At all relevant times herein Defendant Mudan, all physicians, interns, residents, radiologists, emergency room staff, clinic staff and medical support staff involved in Hannah Voytac's care in 2004 were the.agents, apparent agents, ostensible agents, servants, and/or employees of Defendant HSH and was acting within the course and scope of their employment when providing professional medical services to the Plaintiff. 8. In the beginning of 2004, Plaintiff was a healthy, independent 90-year-old woman who lived alone, down the street from her daughter. 9. On or about April 23, 2004, Plaintiff experienced an episode of left-sided weakness causing her to fall in her home. 10. JoAnne Trygg, Plaintiffs daughter immediately took her to Defendant HSH's emergency room. 11. On or about April 23, 2004, Plaintiff presented to Defendant HSH's emergency room and was evaluated by Defendant Latsha and Defendant Mudan. 12. In their dictated emergency room notes, both Defendant Latsha and Defendant Mudan fail to document how long Plaintiffs left-sided weakness had been persisting when she arrived at Defendant HSH's emergency room. 13. At approximately 9:50 p.m., Defendant Latsha authorized a set of orders for admission of the Plaintiff and neuro-status checks every 2 hours for 6 hours by the nursing staff of Defendant HSH, then neuro-status checks every 4 hours for 6 hours by the nursing staff of Defendant HSH. 14. Thereafter, at approximately 11:00 p.m., the first neuro-status check is performed by a nurse. The recorded note indicates that Plaintiff appeared to be aspirating, had right-sided facial droop, and experienced weakness to the left arm and left leg. 15. At approximately 11:55 p.m., Defendant Latsha issued an additional set of orders requesting a consultation from a neurologist regarding trans ischemic attack symptoms, treatment, and recommendations. 16. A second nurse's note was recorded at approximately 12:05 a.m., on April 24, 2004, which stated that Plaintiff continued to suffer from left-sided facial droop. 17. It is believed and therefore averred that, at this point, Plaintiffs condition was not reported to an appropriate medical professional by the nursing staff at Defendant HSH. 18. Even though nursing neuro-status checks of Plaintiff were ordered at 2 hour intervals by Defendant Latsha, the next check was not performed until 12:30 p.m. on April 24, 2004, which was approximately 11 hours and 25 minutes after the previous check. 19. It is believed and therefore averred that because there are no nurse's notes during the 11 hour and 25 minute time interval previously noted, no neuro-checks were performed on the Plaintiff as ordered. 20. In the alternative, if it should be shown that Defendant HSH's nursing staff performed neuro-checks, it is believed and therefore averred that Plaintiffs deteriorating condition was not properly documented, and her deteriorating condition was not relayed to the appropriate medical professionals. 21. It is believed and therefore averred that no physician's orders were implemented from April 23, 2004, at 11:55 p.m. through April 24, 2004, at 10:45 a.m. 22. It is believed and therefore averred that at some point between 12:05 a.m. on April 24, 2004 and 12:30 p.m. on April 24, 2004, Plaintiff suffered a massive and debilitating stroke due to the negligent disregard of Plaintiffs condition by Defendants Latsha, Mudan, and HSH's nursing staff. 23. At no point during Plaintiff's hospitalization at Defendant HSH, did she receive any thrombolitic therapy. 24. Upon arrival at Defendant HSH on April 23, 2004, Plaintiff was still capable of moving her legs on her own. 25. By the evening of April 24, 2004, Plaintiffs condition had deteriorated to the point that she was completely paralyzed on her left side. 26. Plaintiff will never fully recover from the injuries she suffered while admitted to Defendant HSH during the time period in question, and she will be forced to spend the remainder of her life in an assisted care living environment. 27. Defendants Michelle Latsha, PA-C, Pushpa Mudan, M.D., Holy Spirit Hospital, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. are jointly and severally liable for the injuries and damages as set forth herein. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence and/or reckless indifference of the Defendants, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has in the past and will in the future require extensive medical treatment, hospitalizations, medicines and a claim is made therefor. 29. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has undergone and will in the future undergo great mental and physical pain and suffering, great inconvenience in carrying out her daily activities, a loss of life's pleasures and enjoyment and a claim is made therefor. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference of the Defendants, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has been and in the future will be subject to great humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, disfigurement, and a claim is made therefor. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac has in the past and will in the future incur incidental costs as a result of her medical condition and a claim is made therefor. COUNTI HANNAH VOYTAC V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C 32. Paragraphs ] through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set I forth at length. 33. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries I and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the I Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately managing and/or supervising the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a physician; (d) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (e) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (f) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (g) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (h) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; (i) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (j) failing tb appropriately monitor and/ or re-evaluate the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (k) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (1) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; 34. Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C is liable to the Plaintiff' for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT II HANNAH VOYTAC V. PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D. 35. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 36. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant 1CP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic; MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (f) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; 6) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiff's care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, T1A, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; 37. Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries I and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which I are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Pushpa Mudan, M.D. for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT III VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 38. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 39. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's agent(s), ostensible agent(s), apparent agent(s), employee(s), and/or servant(s) negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (1) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; (j) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (o) failing timely to notify the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (p) ' failing toy timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (q) failing to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed. 40. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost-and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT IV CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 41. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 42. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which an emergency room physician and/or initial * intake person should document and/or determine how long Plaintiff's trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C should properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiff's condition and/or treatment; (c) allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C can manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (e) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding who would be the attending physician and/or supervisor and/or manager of Plaintiffs care in a situation wherein a PA-C and emergency room physician both perform histories and physical examinations of the Plaintiff in the emergency department; (0 failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of the appropriate diagnostic testing for the Plaintiff, including, radiographic, MRI, Cr, hematology, and/or chemistry; (g) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding to timely ordering of a stat consultation by a neurologist for the Plaintiff; (h) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of a stat consultation by an internist for the Plaintiff; (i) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding ensure that medical orders were appropriately executed for the Plaintiff; 0) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate ordering of neurological status checks for the Plaintiff; (k) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate performance neurological status checks; (1) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which neurological status checks shall be documented; (m) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate monitoring of the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (n) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate management of the Plaintiffs care during the hospitalization; (o) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (p) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (q) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely notification of the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (r) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (s) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (t) committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding the supervision thereof. 43. Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT V VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL. PENNSYLVANIA 44. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 45. Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's agent(s), ostensible agent(s), apparent agent(s), employee(s), and/or servant(s) negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing to document and/or determine how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP and/or the attending physician from the service under which Plaintiff would be admitted of the Plaintiffs condition and/or treatment; (c) inappropriately allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (d) inappropriately deferring to the judgment of a PA-C rather than properly evaluating and/or examining the Plaintiff and issuing the appropriate medical orders; (e) failing to timely order the appropriate diagnostic testing, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (f) failing to timely order a stat consultation by a neurologist; (g) failing to timely order a stat consultation by an internist; (h) failing to ensure that her orders were appropriately executed; (i) failing to appropriately order neurological status checks; 0) failing to appropriately perform neurological status checks; (k) failing to appropriately monitor and/ or re-evaluate the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (1) failing to appropriately manage the Plaintiff's care during the hospitalization; (m) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (n) failing to timely administer and/or order and/or recommend TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (o) failing timely to notify the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (p) failing to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (q) failing to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed. 46. Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania is vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Internist of Central Pennsylvania for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. COUNT VI CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA 47. Paragraphs 1 through 31 are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 48. Defendant, ICP is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages alleged herein which were directly and proximately caused by the Defendant's negligence, gross negligence and reckless indifference with respect to Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac by: (a) failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PAC and/or physician should have documented and/or determined how long Plaintiffs trans ischemic attack had been ongoing when she reported to Defendant HSH emergency room; (b) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C should properly and/or timely inform physicians and/or other medical personnel at Defendant ICP of the Plaintiff's condition and/or treatment; (c) allowing a PA-C to manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to the appropriate specialist and/or attending physician and/or physician from Defendant ICP; (d) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which a PA-C can manage and/or supervise the care of Plaintiff rather than turning such duties over to a the appropriate specialist or attending physician; (e) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding who would be the attending physician and/or supervisor and/or manager of Plaintiffs care in a situation wherein a PA-C and emergency room physician both perform histories and physical examinations of the Plaintiff in the emergency department; (f) failing create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of the appropriate diagnostic testing for the Plaintiff, including, radiographic, MRI, CT, hematology, and/or chemistry; (g) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding to timely ordering of a stat consultation by a neurologist for the Plaintiff; (h) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely ordering of a stat consultation by an internist for the Plaintiff; (i) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding ensure that medical orders were appropriately executed for the Plaintiff; 0) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate ordering of neurological status checks for the Plaintiff; (k) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate performance neurological status checks; (1) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the manner in which neurological status checks shall be documented; (m) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate monitoring of the Plaintiff during the hospitalization; (n) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the appropriate management of the Plaintiff's care during the hospitalization; (o) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of medical therapy to minimize the detrimental effects of the blood clot, TIA, and/or stroke; (p) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely administration and/or ordering and/or recommendation of TPA, coumadin, heparin, and/or other anticoagulant and/or blood thinning agent; (q) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the timely notification of the ordering physician and/or other medical personnel when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (r) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely take the appropriate action when the Plaintiff's neurological status changed; (s) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding how and when to timely contact the appropriate on-call physician and/or medical specialist when the Plaintiffs neurological status changed; (t) failing to create and/or implement and/or enforce policies and/or procedures regarding the supervision and/or management of a PA-C by a physician; (u) committing negligence per se by way of violating local, state, and/or federal law and/or rule and/or regulation regarding the practice of medicine by a physician's assistant and/or PA-C and/or regarding the supervision thereof. 49. Defendant, ICP, is liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged herein and as set forth in paragraphs 27 through 31 above which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, ICP, for damages in excess of Thirty-Five Thousand ($35,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. Respectfully requested, R.J. Marzella Associates, P.C. L,7 J.. re Charles $V. Marsa JefvZ5.1186072 me Identifcati 3513 N h Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7828 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac Dated: fl to 0 VERIFICATION I, Hannah Voytac, do hereby swear and affirm that the facts and matters set forth in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements made therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: Hannah Voytac . . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 10' day of ,July, 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Richard Schreiber, M. D., Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital Lauralee B. Baker, Esquire MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Counsel for Liana L Laza, M.D. and Pennsylvania Neurological Associates, Ltd. R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATEs .C BY: athan Ram y CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 14th day of September, 2006, I, Aaron S. Jayman Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon all counsel of record or parties involved by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R. Marcella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) James W. Saxton, Esquire Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd.) ? ,, _ ? =-r? .__, -? `` ' »: ? . r, =.: 1 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED STIPULATION OF COUNSEL 1. Counsel executing this Stipulation hereby represent and warrant that they are authorized to do so by their respective clients. 2. In Count III, paragraph 39, and Count IV, paragraph 42, the language "reckless indifference" is stricken from Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice, and it is agreed that Plaintiff is not seeking a claim for punitive damages against Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 3. This Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and shall be considered Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice effective when signed by all counsel, even though signed on separate signature pages, and maybe filed of record. Facsimile or photocopy reproduction of signatures shall have the effective original signatures. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties, by their counsel, have caused this Stipulation to be executed and intend to be legally bound thereby. R j. Marzella & By: Charles W. Makar,-r ;Esquire Supreme Court ID 86072 Dated: l -- Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, PC By: *on. an, Esquire t 1D 85651 Dated: R 10 ,.` CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 15th day of September, 2006, I, Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing document upon all counsel of record or parties involved by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire RJ Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) James W. Saxton, Esquire Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (Counsel for Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd.) t_,3 _. ? ( - .i '_ _.{ r : - . ^-1 ??i _ _. t ,.. ? _? i ?: -_! .'?- ? . } HANNAH VOYTAC ; IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; NO. 2006 - 2288 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 19TH day of SEPTEMBER, 2006, a Rule is issued upon all parties to Show Cause why Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time to file a certificate of merit should not be granted. Rule returnable ten (10) days after service. Edward E. Guido, J. Ad G. Reedy, Esquire J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. For the Plaintiff aggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Zilbur Defendants McCoy Otto, Esquire For the Defendants Ck. :sld IONVAIOV3d Amno? tO :QI WV QZ d3S 9002 A IONOH Odd 3Hi J0 TO#-!-1(1031W SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL RONALD HOOVER , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon MUDAN PUSHPA R MD the DEFENDANT at 1536:00 HOURS, on the 15th day of May 2006 at 210 SENATE AVENUE CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to LYNN SMEIGH, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 13.20 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 L tila?{1u? 29.20 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA By: Deputy She ff Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR 0 CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL RONALD HOOVER , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon WnT.V CPTPTT WngPTTAT. the DEFENDANT , at 1536:00 HOURS, on the 15th day of May , 2006 at 210 SENATE AVENUE CAMP HILL, PA 17011 by handing to LYNN SMEIGH, RISK COODINATOR ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: f. R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA ?-? By: i Deputy Sheriff Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR go CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL RONALD HOOVER , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA LTD the DEFENDANT , at 1648:00 HOURS, on the 15th day of May 2006 at 108 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 by handing to SHIRLEY ZEIDERS, ADULT IN CHARGE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 14.08 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 30.08 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA By: Deputy Sheriff Prothonotary CASE NO: 2006-02288 P SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL RONALD HOOVER , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon SCHREIBER RICHARD MD the DEFENDANT at 1648:00 HOURS, on the 15th day of May , 2006 at 108 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 by handing to SHIRLEY ZEIDERS, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 ?? 5'/??fro0 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA By: .?l,?c? Deputy Sheriff Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR 4 CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL MICHAEL BARRICK Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES LTD DEFENDANT the , at 1030:00 HOURS, on the 17th day of May , 2006 at 110 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 by handing to JANICE MORROW, OFFICE MANAGER, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service 14.08 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 (1 5/2 q o& 30.0 8 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: f R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA -7 By: f, eput S i f f Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon LAZA LIANA I MD the DEFENDANT , at 1030:00 HOURS, on the 17th day of May 2006 at 110 LOWTHER STREET LEMOYNE, PA 17043 by handing to JANICE MORROW, OFFICE MANAGER, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 16.00 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA Depu y her f Prothonotary SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR . CASE NO: 2006-02288 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC HANNAH VS LATSHA MICHELLE L ET AL DAVID MCKINNEY ; Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within WRIT OF SUMMONS was served upon LATSHA MICHELLE PA-C the DEFENDANT , at 2106:00 HOURS, on the 11th day of May 2006 at 102 FAIRWAY DRIVE MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 by handing to SCOTT SCHMINKY, BOYFRIEND, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of WRIT OF SUMMONS together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 8.80 Affidavit .78 Surcharge 10.00 37.58 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A. D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 05/18/2006 RJ MARZELLA By Deputy Sheriff Prothonotary i HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V. MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE No. 06-2288-2006 Defendants ANSWER WITH NEW MATTER OF DEFENDANT INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. IN RESPONSE TO RULE TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED AND NOW, comes defendant Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. (ICP), and in response to Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time for Filing a Certificate of Merit, states as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that suit was filed close to the expiration of the two-year statute of limitations. The remaining allegations of this paragraph are denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. No. 1029(e). By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, ICP is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation about when Plaintiff's counsel was contacted about this potential case. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that plaintiff filed the required certificates of merit as alleged. The remaining allegations of this paragraph are denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, ICP is SLl 667356v 1 /041199.00189 1 without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation about the completeness of review by Plaintiff's internal medicine expert. 7. Admitted. 8. Denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e). 9. Admitted only that Plaintiff is requesting a sixty (60) day extension to file a Certificate of Merit as to the corporate negligence claim against ICP. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff is for any reason entitled to the requested extension. 10. Admitted. By way of further answer, Plaintiff did not seek concurrence from counsel for ICP before filing the motion for extension of time. NEW MATTER 11. The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently explicitly declined to extend the applicability of the doctrine of corporate negligence to claims against physician practice groups such as ICP. Sutherland v. Monongahela Valley Hosp., 2004 PA Super 245, 846 A.2d (2004). 12. The doctrine of corporate negligence applies only to claims against hospitals and certain types of HMOs, entities that have assumed the role of comprehensive healthcare centers that arrange for the total healthcare of their patients. Id., 846 A.2d at 61-62, citing Thompson v. Nason Hosp., 527 Pa. 330, 591 A.2d 703, 706 (Pa. 1991). 13. In her Complaint, Plaintiff has not alleged that ICP is an entity that has assumed the role of arranging for the comprehensive healthcare of its patients, and no such valid allegation can be asserted. 14. Further, ICP filed preliminary objections in this case, seeking dismissal of the corporate negligence claim against it for legal insufficiency based upon the current state of the law as outlined above. 2 S LI 667356v 1 /041199.00189 15. ICP respectfully submits that there is no reasonable likelihood that Plaintiff will succeed on the merits of establishing, as a matter of law, that ICP can be found liable under the doctrine of corporate negligence. 16. Therefore, notwithstanding the outcome of the alleged on-going expert review by Plaintiff's internal medicine experts, a claim for corporate negligence against ICP is not sustainable. 17. An extension of time in which to obtain the necessary expert report to support a certificate of merit as to ICP in support of a claim for corporate negligence is therefore an exercise in futility and will only serve to further delay the progress of this case. 18. Such a delay is prejudicial to ICP, especially in light of the provisions of Rule 238. 19. Moreover, regardless of the time frame in which Plaintiff's counsel was contacted and in which relevant medical records were available to the Plaintiff's expert for review, Plaintiff was able to obtain the necessary written reports to support the Certificates of Merit mentioned in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time, including a written report allegedly critical of the actions of Defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C, a member of ICP. 20. ICP therefore respectfully submits that there is no good cause for Plaintiff's failure to obtain in a timely fashion the written report required in support of a Certificate of Merit against ICP. 3 S Ll 667356v]/041199.00189 WHEREFORE, defendant ICP respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order denying Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File a Certificate of Merit as to ICP in support of a claim based upon the doctrine of corporate negligence. Respectfully submitted, Dated: 6 7i7 , 2006 STEVENS & E c By Michael D. Pipa, Esqui e Attorney ID # 53624 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendant Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. 4 S Ll 667356v]/041199.00189 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on this date, I served a certified true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer With New Matter Of Defendant Internists Of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. to Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time for Filing a Certificate of Merit upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Charles Marsar, Jr., Esq. RJ Marzella & Associates 3513 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Plaintiff Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esq. Aaron Jayman, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorneys for Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital Dated: 2 r, 2006 STEVENS & L E % By Michael D. Pipa, Esqui Attorney ID # 53624 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 399-6639 Attorneys for Defendant Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. SL1 667356vl /041199.00189 t:; ?r ?? ?,1 fir) r .-t -?- fi: i? -?j ? N n ? ?7 tom} <,_ _; °> --r? .?. ?. >t3 . rF ?= - N --s ?r =' 4 , , -- ? .? ? ;,L f R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (7171234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC l Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 7. This allegation does not require a response. 8. Admitted in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff pleads a claim of negligence i per se against Defendant HSH. When read in its entirety, it is clear which statutes and/or I regulations Defendant HSH breached. However, if this Court deems it necessary, Plaintiff will amend the Complaint to specifically set forth such statutes and/or regulations. 9. This allegation does not require a response. 10. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is I required. By way of further response, Plaintiff requests permission to amend the Complaint to contain citations of the applicable local, state and/or federal laws, rules I and/or regulations violated by Defendant HSH. 11. Admitted. However, Plaintiff requests permission to amend the Complaint to cite to the applicable local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations violated by Defendant HSH. 12. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, Plaintiff has pled facts sufficient to bring the case within the statute in question. Furthermore, Plaintiff requests permission to amend the Complaint to specifically cite the applicable local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations violated by Defendant HSH. 13. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 14. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 15. Admitted. By way of further response, Plaintiff has pled facts sufficient to bring the case within the statute in question. Furthermore, Plaintiff requests permission to amend the Complaint to specifically cite the applicable local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations violated by Defendant HSH. 16. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 17. Denied. It is specifically denied that the negligence per se allegations should be stricken from Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice. Plaintiff has pled facts sufficient to bring the case within the statute in question. Furthermore, Plaintiff requests permission to amend the Complaint to specifically cite the applicable local, state and/or federal laws, rules and/or regulations violated by Defendant FISH. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an order denying the Defendant's preliminary objections. In the alternative, Plaintiff would request this Court grant Plaintiff permission to amend the Complaint. 18. This allegation does not require a response. 19. Admitted. 20. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 21. This allegation does not require a response. 22. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff has failed to plead any facts that support the allegations of corporate negligence against Defendant HSH. 23. Denied. It is specifically denied that there are no facts alleged by Plaintiff, which would establish that Defendant HSH breached its duty to oversee the physicians, nurses, physician assistants and staff working in the hospital in this case. 24. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, Plaintiff sets forth factual details supporting the claims of corporate negligence against Defendant HSH. 25. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. Byway of further response, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs allegations are simple, plain, boilerplate allegations that amount to no more than legal conclusions. 26. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiffs allegations could be alleged against any hospital in any medical malpractice case. 27. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. 28. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. 29. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. 30. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. 31. Denied. It is specifically denied that the facts alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint amount to nothing more than an alleged breach of the standard of care by Defendant Latsha, PA-C in her care and treatment of the Plaintiff. When the allegations set forth in Count IV are read in conjunction with the facts set forth in paragraphs 1 through 31, it is apparent that Defendant HSH breached its duty to formulate and/or enforce policies that govern PA-C care. 32. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs allegations do not support a claim of corporate negligence against Defendant HSH. 33. This allegation contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has failed to set forth a prima facie claim of corporate negligence. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an order denying the Defendant's preliminary objections. In the alternative, Plaintiff would request this Court grant Plaintiff permission to amend the Complaint. Respectfully submitted R J. Marzila & sociates, PC Charles W. Mar, ar , uire rem Court We W ication No. 86072 Dated: ?& d(9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 26"' day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS& LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy -T I rt j C3? .,'. i : . R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (71 883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS LATSHA, PAC AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff alleges that she suffered a massive debilitating stroke and is paralyzed on her right side as a result of Defendants' failure to meet the applicable standards of care. It is specifically denied that Plaintiffs allegations are of a general nature. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Denied. It is specifically denied that the factual allegations of the Complaint are legally insufficient to support an award of punitive damages. 9. Denied. It is specifically denied that the claim of corporate negligence against Defendant ICP is legally insufficient. 10. Admitted. 11. This allegation does require a response. 12. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 13. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 14. Denied. It is specifically denied that the allegations against Defendant Latsha do not establish the type of conduct or state of mind that supports an award of exemplary damages. 15. Admitted in part. It is admitted that Plaintiff alleges that Defendant ICP is vicariously liable for gross negligence and reckless indifference, along with other allegations of vicarious liability. 16. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 17. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that the factual allegations I against Defendant ICP do not establish the type of intentional misconduct or depraved state of mind necessary to an award of exemplary damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an order denying the Defendants' preliminary objections. In the alternative, Plaintiff would request this Court grant Plaintiff permission to amend the Complaint. 18. Admitted. 19. Admitted. 20. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff does not allege that Defendant ICP was a comprehensive health center with responsibility for arranging and coordinating the total health care of its patients. 21. Denied. It is specifically denied that Defendant ICP is not responsible for arranging and coordinating the total health care of its patients. 22. This allegation contains a conclusion of law to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an order denying the Defendants' preliminary objections. In the alternative, Plaintiff would request this Court grant Plaintiff permission to amend the Complaint. Dated: q 2 ko Respectffi]ly subm RJ.,,Marzella & As! Charles . Mar r, upreme urt de PC re i No. 86072 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 26"' day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy f cn 1 ' R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 _ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AS TO HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL (Corporate Liability) I, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., attorney for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, hereby, certifies that: MO an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by these defendants in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm; AND ? the claim that the defendants deviated from an acceptable professional standard is also based solely on allegations that other licensed professionals for whom the defendants are responsible deviated from an acceptable professional standard and an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by the other licensed professionals in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm. R. J. Marzel"& Asst o^ces, P.C. By: Attorne de ti cation No. 66856 Dated: 'l4 v CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam G. Reedy, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 26"' day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Adam G. Reedy r---o r !-;Sl .-c. G R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. NEW MATTER 11. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently explicitly declined to extend the applicability of the doctrine of corporate negligence to claims against physicians practice groups such as ICP. Sutherland v. Monongahela Valley Hosp., 2004 PA Super 245, 856 A.2d 55 (2004). 12. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that the doctrine of corporate negligence applies only to claims against hospitals and certain types of HMOs, entities that have assumed the role of comprehensive healthcare centers that arrange for the total healthcare of their patients. Id., 856 A.2d at 61-62, citing Thompson v. Nason Hosp., 527 Pa. 330, 591 A.2d 703, 706 (Pa. 1991). 13. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that in her Complaint, Plaintiff has not alleged that ICP is an entity that has assumed the role of arranging for the comprehensive healthcare of its patients, and no such valid allegation can be asserted. 14. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that ICP filed preliminary objections in this case, seeking dismissal of the corporate negligence claim against it for legal insufficiency based upon the current state of the law as outlined above. 15. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that ICP respectfully submits that there is no reasonable likelihood that Plaintiff will succeed on the merits of establishing, as a matter of law, that ICP can be found liable under the doctrine of corporate negligence. 16. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that notwithstanding the outcome of the alleged on-going expert review by Plaintiffs internal medicine experts, a claim for corporate negligence against ICP is not sustainable. 17. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that an extension of time in which to obtain the necessary expert report to support a certificate of merit as to ICP in support of a claim for corporate negligence is therefore an exercise of futility and will only serve to further delay the progress of this case. 18. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that such a delay is prejudicial to ICP, especially in light of the provisions of Rule 238. 19. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that regardless of the time frame in which Plaintiffs counsel was contacted and in which relevant medical records were available to the Plaintiffs expert for review, Plaintiff was able to obtain the necessary written reports to support the Certificates of Merit mentioned in paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time, including a written report allegedly critical of the actions of Defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C, a member of ICP. 20. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary. To the extent that a response may be required, it is specifically denied that there is no good cause for Plaintiffs failure to obtain in a timely fashion the written report required in support of a Certificate of Merit against ICP. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an Order granting the Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File a Certificate of Merit as to ICP in support of a claim based upon the doctrine of corporate negligence. itted R j. Mw zella & Associates, PC By: Lnanes w. Marsa r., usqu!ye Supreme urtdentifcation No. 86072 Dated: ? 2Q ()(v CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 29th day of September 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Michael D. Pipa, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA -C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esquire Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZELLA & AssoclATEs, P.C. BY: Nathan Ra y c?? ?a ? f? . C.- u _ ? ? ,..,' c'a =r . t ? ....? t,? r __ a _?Cy ??C.? - ' _ « ? I:,Y.t ?..? ` ??" ?' r? ? SEP 1 1 2006 13y: R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 By: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: _ (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; : Defendants ORDER JURY TRIAL DEMANDED A AND NOW, this day of , 2006, Plaintiffs Motion for an extension to file Certificates of Merit, is GRANTED. Plaintiff will have sixty (60) days from the date of this order in which to file the required c4 ficates of Merit. THE COURT: ?e;jri, / J. 7 1 no ?t n f.. R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (7171234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S AMENDMENT TO MOTION TO DISMISS LESS THAN ALL DEFENDANTS Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, by and through her attorney, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, file this instant Amendment to Motion to Dismiss Less Than All Defendants and in support thereof, aver as follows: 1. Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Dismiss Less then all Defendants on or about October 12, 2006; specifically, Plaintiff would like to voluntarily dismiss Internist of Central Pennsylvania, LTD, and Pushpa Mudan, M.D. 2. In addition to the above-referenced Defendants, Plaintiff would like to dismiss Defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C, from the instant case. ti WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs would respectfully request that this Honorable Court amend the filed Motion to Dismiss Less then all Defendants and enter the attached Order. By: Respectfully submitted, R. J. MAu & Ass cwTEs, P.C. harles W. Marsar, JVv, E ire Attorney fqr e Plainti Dated: 4 1016 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 16th day of October 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Michael D. Pipa, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esquire Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MAUELIA & AssoclATEs, P.C. BY: Nathan ey ' t-s C1 L Z5 Ain 12 4 1 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 2346883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA =-? HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants ? w. Docket No. 06-2288 -- Civil Action - Medical Malpractt?e -?Z '.. N N f ; {a ? JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO DISMISS LESS THAN ALL DEFENDANTS Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, by and through her attorney, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, file this instant Motion to Dismiss Less Than All Defendants and in support thereof, aver as follows: 1. Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229, Plaintiff is filing the instant motion to dismiss her action against less than all Defendants; specifically, Plaintiff would like to voluntarily dismiss internist of Central Pennsylvania, LTD, and Pushpa Mudan, M.D. 2. Notice has been provided to all counsel on record pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. ,_) 229(b)(1). (See Notice attached hereto as Exhibit "A"). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs would respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter the attached Order. Respectfully submitted, R. J. MAVEaA $ilAssocuAITs, P.C. By: ha . arsar J ., quire Attorney for a aintiff Dated: ?0 04 ? i EXHIBIT A 3513 NORTH FRONT STREET, HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110 717.234.7828 888.838.3426 717.234.6883 FAx ARZELLA V.L Attorneys & Counselors At Law October 6, 2006 Aaron S. Jayman DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 Dear Counselors, Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 229 (b)(1), please accept this correspondence as formal notice of my intent to file a Motion to Dismiss Less then all Defendants including: Internist of Central Pennsylvania, LTD, and Pushpa Mudan, M.D. Thank you for your attention to this matter. CWMJR/NWR Very truly yours, 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 9th day of October 12006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Michael D. Pipa, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esquire Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendants, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. and Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZEUA & AsSOCIATEs, P.C. BY: N an amsey -T7 r R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDMENT TO MOTION TO DISMISS LESS THAN ALL DEFENDANTS Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, by and through her attorney, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, file this instant Second Amendment to Motion to Dismiss Less Than All Defendants and in support thereof, aver as follows: 1. Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Dismiss Less then all Defendants on or about October 12, 2006; specifically, Plaintiff would like to voluntarily dismiss Internist of Central Pennsylvania, LTD. 2. In addition to the above-referenced Defendant, Plaintiff would like to dismiss Defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C, from the instant case. r WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs would respectfully request that this Honorable Court amend the filed Motion to Dismiss Less then all Defendants and enter the attached Order. Respectfully submitted, R. J.14A*b ? &-A?socwTs, P.C. Charles Wwlar!' ., Esqui Attorney e ff .._ ... Dated: 10)2.4 LO(o CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Nathan Ramsey, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 24th day of October 2006, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Maggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Michael D. Pipa, Esquire STEVENS & LEE 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Post Office Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 Counsel for Defendants, )Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esquire Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC Two PPG Place, Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-5402 Counsel for Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital R. J. MARZEL>A & AsSOCIATES, P.C. BY: athan Ramsey - ?J ? ,?, , Q ..? ? T; p? , ----? °? ?- N „?' ? ?, i? ' ?? -ri ?!? HANNAH VOYTAC IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. NO. 2006 - 2288 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION -LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 3RD day of NOVEMBER, 2006, a Rule is issued upon all Defendants to Show Cause why Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Less than all Defendants (with Amendments thereto) should not be granted. Rule returnable ten (10) days after service. If there is any objection to the granting of the motion, the parties shall list the matter for argument at their convenience. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. Charles w. Marsar, Jr., Esquire For the Plaintiff Xaggie M. Finkelstein, Esquire Michael D. Pipa, Esquire Wilbur McCoy Otto, Esquire J Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esquire yXaron Jayman, Esquire :s 6Z cC ``A C- AM] 99OZ ..;.f.. _ i:? HANNAH VOYTAC IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION LAW MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, and INTERNISTS OF No. 06-2288-2006 CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. Defendants RESPONSE OF DEFENDANTS MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, AND INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. TO THE RULE TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS LESS THAN ALL DEFENDANTS SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED Defendants Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd., through counsel, hereby respond to the Rule issued by this Honorable Court by Order dated November 3, 2006, by stating that there is no good reason why the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Less than all Defendants (with Amendments thereto) should not be granted. Defendants therefore respectfully request that the Motion be granted and that this Honorable Court enter an order dismissing all claims against Defendants Latsha and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd., with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, Date STEYENS&L Michael D. Pipa, Es re 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 P.O. Box 1594 Lancaster, PA 17608-1594 (717) 291-1031 Attorneys for Defendants Michelle L. Latsha, PA-C and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd SLl 680103v1/041199.00189 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michael D. Pipa, Esquire, certify that on this date, I served a certified true and correct copy of the foregoing Response to the Rule to Show Cause Why the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Less Than All Defendants Should Not be Granted upon the following counsel of record, by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Frances E. Marshall, Jr., Esq. Aaron Jayman, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Attorneys for Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital Date: November 13, 2006 S L l 680103 v 1 /041199.00189 C? r.3 C-n e ti ? 71 ?? PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Argument Court, HANNAH VOYTAC, (Plaintiff) VS. MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. RICHARD SCHREIBER, M.D., PENNSYLVANIA NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD., AND LIANA I. LAZA, M.D. (Defendants) No. 06-2288, Civil Term State matter to be argued (i.e., plaintiff's motion for new trial, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint. 2. Identify counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiff: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C., 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (b) for defendant Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire, Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205, Camp Hill, PA 17011 3. I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. 4. Argument Court Date: January 24, 2007 Signature Date: 11130 [06 Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire Print your name Attorney for Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital N ? ' " Q a.P i:r3 I r 'r "Ti ??t: ? -rte eve, II ?? R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 By: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA I HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this Y^ day of , 200 , after consideration of the Motion to Dismiss Less Then All Defen ants and the Second Amendment thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that Internists of Cem be dismissed from this lawsuit without I , and Michelle Latsha, PA-C, 1 'VINVAfiIASWd WV S- Nvr LOOZ w 08d M M t4lo-WU IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL NO. 062288 CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). Date: 02/28/07 File #: M338615 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE 1200 CAMP HILL BYPASS SUITE 205 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 717-731-4800 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) By: Donna Garofolo IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 TO: CHARLES MARSAR JR, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) JAMES SAXTON LAURALEE BAKER NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(s) identical to the one(s) attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. Date: 02/07/07 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE 1200 CAMP HILL BYPASS SUITE 205 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (215) 335-3336 By: Donna Garofolo Enc (s) : Copy of subpoena (s) Counsel return card File #: M338615 VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL File No. 062288 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DO0j ENTS V%% BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE, 175 LANCASTER BLVD, MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 TO: ATTN • mgnTCAT. RECORDS DEPT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: _ SEE ATTACTIED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(A9JRss?940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested t? this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccrmpliance, to the party making thi= request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea,onable 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 thi, subpoena may seek a court ordei- am pelting you to coup1y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: AARON Z TAyDW, ESQ ADDRESS: -- HIEL BYPASS TELFPFIONE : CAMP HILL, PA 17 011 SUPREME COURT ID # ATTORNEY FOR: M338615-01 215-335-3212 DEFENDANT DATE: rcb. IQ. x007 Seal of the Court BY THE COURT: Prot tary/Cl Civ Division 1( Deputy rr*&T NWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERIANID (Eff. 7/97) A.UDEND UM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE Any and all hospital records, including microfilm, microfiche emergency room reports, x-ray reports, out-patient records physical therapy records, and any other information pertaining to: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. ( ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE CUMBERLAND M338615-01 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUN TY OF CIUMBEFIAND VOYTAC Vs. File No. 062288 MUDAN, M.D., ET AL ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISOOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE-X, 175 LANCASTER BLVD, MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 TO: ATTN: RAnTOT,O =Y DEPT (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following docxments or things: -- SEE ATTA-M ED-ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(AM%sSf940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested b? this subpoena, together with the certificate of ompliance, to the party making thin request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable 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 orde:- cxxrpe l l i ng you to comp 1 y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLCWING PERSON: NAPE : AARON S JAT, ESQ ADDRESS' - BYPASS TELEPHONE: CAMP HILL PA 17011 SUPREPE COURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: M338615-02 DEFENDANT DATE: web • /a a6w7 Seal of the Court BY THE COURT iv Division Prot tary/Cler ?' T Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR : HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE-X SPECIFICALLY **LIMITED** TO FILMS AND REPORTS FROM 4/28/04. PERTAINING TO: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED ALL FEES MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RECORDS BEING FORWARDED. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or HEALTHSOUTH REHAB ACUTE-X CUMBERLAND M338615-02 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * a ? n ? -? `_. ?, ` ?4?r a ? _ ? T ...may - '. t f} ") ?? .?" IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL NO. 062288 CERTIFICATE PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 As a prerequisite to service of a subpoena(s) for documents and things pursuant to Rule 4009.22 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE certifies that: 1. A Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s) with a copy of .the subpoena(s) attached thereto was mailed or delivered to each party at least twenty days prior to the date on which the subpoena(s) is sought to be served, 2. A copy of the Notice of Intent, including the proposed subpoena(s) is attached to this certificate, 3. No objection to the subpoena(s) has been received, and 4. The subpoena(s) which will be served is identical to the subpoena(s) which is attached to the Notice of Intent to Serve the Subpoena(s). Date: 03/05/07 File ##: M338728 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE 1200 CAMP HILL BYPASS SUITE 205 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 717-731-4800 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA PA 19135 (215) By: Donna Garofolo IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL I No. 062288 TO: CHARLES MARSAR JR, ESQ (PLAINTIFF) JAMES SAXTON LAURALEE BAKER NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.21 DEFENDANT intends to serve a subpoena(s) identical to the one(s) attached to this notice. You have twenty (20) days from the date listed below in which to file of record and serve upon the undersigned an objection to the subpoena. If no objection is made the subpoena may be served. Date: 02/12/07 AARON S JAYMAN, ESQUIRE 1200 CAMP HILL BYPASS SUITE 205 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT INQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO: MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS, INC. 4940 DISSTON STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19135 (215) 335-3336 By: Donna Garofolo Enc (s) : Copy of subpoena(s) Counsel return card File #: M338728 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC, Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL File No. 062288 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED DICAL HINGS BILLING REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS T FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 BURICK & AZIZKHAN INTE MD, 888 POPLAR CHURCH RD, CAMP HILL PA 17011 TO: (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 SEEngS: TIACHE-D ADDENDUM -- at MEDICAL LEGAL REPR0DUCTI0NS(AMrftst940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of capliance, to the party making thi request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onable 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 thi, subpoena may seek a court orde;- amipe l l i ng you to cut l y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: AARON S JAYMAN, ESQ ADDRESS : - 1200 GA MP-ILL BYPASS TELEPHONE: CAMP HILL, FA 17011 SUPREME OOURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT M338728-01 %-4 j DATE: aD _ C> Seal of the Court BY T1-E COURT : Prot tary/Cl Civ 1 Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: BURICK & AZIZKHAN INTE MD ANY AND ALL OFFICE RECORDS, INCLUDING NOTES, CORRESPONDENCE, MEMORANDA, X-RAY REPORTS, HISTORY NOTES, INDEX CARDS AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO ANY EXAMINATION OR TREATMENT RENDERED TO: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL RECORDS IN YOUR POSSESSION CONCERNING TREATMENT CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or BURICK & AZIZKHAN INTE MD CUMBERLAND M338728-01 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * COMMXMEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 00(R-7 'Y OF CLID93EIU AND VOYTAC. Vs. Fi le No. 062288 ORIGINAL 8-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS gf%% BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 DR KEITH DOWLING, C/O UROLOGY OF CENTRAL PA, 423 N 21ST ST #300 TO: CAMP HTT.T. PA 17011 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: SEE TACHED ADDENDUM at MUDAN, M.D., ET AL MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONSfAM%ssf940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested b? this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making thi-T request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonab]E 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 thin subpoena may seek a court orde:- compelling you to comply with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: AARON S JAS , ESQ ADDRESS' - BYPASS -12E)6 EAMP 111131- TELEPHONE: CAMP HIU FA- 17011 SUPREME OOURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: M338728-02 DEFENDANT DATE: L?d • a0 , -too Seal of the Court BY THE COURT: Prot tary/C1 Ci 1 Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR : DR KEITH DOWLING ANY AND ALL OFFICE RECORDS, INCLUDING NOTES, CORRESPONDENCE, MEMORANDA, X-RAY REPORTS, HISTORY NOTES, INDEX CARDS AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO ANY EXAMINATION OR TREATMENT RENDERED TO: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL RECORDS IN YOUR POSSESSION CONCERNING TREATMENT CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or DR KEITH DOWLING CUMBERLAND M338728-02 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * COtfIDNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND VOYTAC- Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL Fi le No. 062288 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OFD%% BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 DR MARK GOEDECKER, C/O TM HART FAMILY, 1001 S GEORGE ST TO: VQRK PA 17401-3676 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: SEE AT at _ MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(Ag%ss?940.DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested b, this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccmp1iance, to the party making thi: 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 orde;- cxxrpe l l i ng you to ccnp 1 y with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: AARON S JAYMAN, ESQ ADDRESS. - 2:200 eAMP HILL BYPASS TELEPHONE: CAMP HILL, PA 17011 SUPREME OOURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT M338728-03 DATE : 4-A . 'go, aoo? Seal of the Court BY THE CXx1RT : P- ProtFK)r6tary/Cl Civ 1 Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: DR MARK GOEDECKER ANY AND ALL OFFICE RECORDS, INCLUDING NOTES, CORRESPONDENCE, MEMORANDA, X-RAY REPORTS, HISTORY NOTES, INDEX CARDS AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO ANY EXAMINATION OR TREATMENT RENDERED TO: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL RECORDS IN YOUR POSSESSION CONCERNING TREATMENT CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or DR MARK GOEDECKER CUMBERLAND M338728-03 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE COK43NWFALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF C L14BERIAND VOYTAC• Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL Fi le No. 062288 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCIENTS V%% BILLING REQUESTED FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 DR JANE CONROY, C/O WASHINGTON HTS MED PRAC, 50 N 12TH ST TO: _ T.FMOYNR PA 17043 (Name of Person or Entity) Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM at MEDICAL LEGAL REPRODUCTIONS(AJ&gsS?940 DISSTON ST., PHILA., PA You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or produce things requested b? this subpoena, together with the certificate of ccnp1iance, to the party making thi_ request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the rea.onabIE 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 thi, subpoena may seek a court orde;• compelling you to ccx, ly with it. THIS SUBPOENA WAS ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON: NAME: AARON S JAYMAN, ESQ ADDRESS. - BYPASS CAMP HILL, PA 17011 TELEPHONE: SUPREME OOURT ID # 215-335-3212 ATTORNEY FOR: M338728-04 DEFENDANT DATE : ?W- oZ©_ 2,0? _ Seal of the Court BY THE OOURT: Prot tary/Cler "vi Division Deputy (Eff. 7/97) ADDENDUM TO SUBPOENA VOYTAC Vs. MUDAN, M.D., ET AL No. 062288 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS FOR: DR JANE CONROY ANY AND ALL OFFICE RECORDS, INCLUDING NOTES, CORRESPONDENCE, MEMORANDA, X-RAY REPORTS, HISTORY NOTES, INDEX CARDS AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO ANY EXAMINATION OR TREATMENT RENDERED TO: NAME: HANNAH VOYTAC ADDRESS: 1052 S MOUNTAIN RD DILLSBURG PA DATE OF BIRTH: 01/07/14 SSAN: XXXXX6178 ORIGINAL X-RAYS REQUESTED MEDICAL BILLING REQUESTED ALL RECORDS IN YOUR POSSESSION CONCERNING TREATMENT CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES WILL BE ACCEPTED IN LIEU OF YOUR PERSONAL APPEARANCE. RECORD CUSTODIAN - COMPLETE AND RETURN [ ] RECORDS ARE ATTACHED HERETO. I hereby certify as custodian of records that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief all documents or things above mentioned have been produced. [ ] NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. I hereby certify that a thorough search has been made and that no record of the following documents have been located (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX): ( ) RECORDS ( ) PATIENT BILLING ( ) X-RAYS ( ) RECORDS / XRAYS have been destroyed Date Authorized signature or DR JANE CONROY CUMBERLAND M338728-04 * * * SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE * * * c? N d ra _ -T7 i " - 1 a r: .« cn i v 4 #8 HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V. MICHELLE L. LATSHA, PA-C, PUSHPA R. MUDAN, M.D., HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD. Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2006 - 2288 CIVIL TERM IN RE: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL BEFORE OLER, JR., GUIDO, JJ. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 10TH day of MAY, 2007, after review of the briefs filed by the parties in support of their respective positions, and having heard argument thereon, the preliminary objections of Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. They are GRANTED insofar as the negligence per se claim contained in paragraph 42 (t) of the complaint is DISMISSED. In all other respects the preliminary objections are DENIED. /harles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17110 wines W. Saxton, Esquire 25 North Queen Street, Suite 602 Lancaster, Pa. 17608-1594 k A J. C :1 '1j 0 1 ' 'll LOOZ .3 3111 ?Q `'T'homas M. Chairs, Esquire Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, Pa. 17011 :sld DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 78565 BY: AARON S. JAYMAN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)7314800 (Tele) (717)7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, Defendant ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-2288 MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Hannah Voytac c/o Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED TO PLEAD TO THE WITHIN NEW MATTER WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS OF THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THIS PLEADING OR JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU. Respectfully submitted, DICHIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: June 19, 2007 By: Thom *s, Esquire ATTO I.D. NO. 78565 Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 (717)731-4800 Attorney for Defendant, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 117643 DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: THOMAS M. CHAIRS, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 78565 BY: AARON S. JAYMAN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)7314800 (Tele) (717)7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, NO. 06-2288 MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTION Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, comes Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital ("Answering Defendant") by and through its counsel, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. and hereby answers and asserts New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint as follows: 1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment set forth therein. To the extent a response is required, the averments are denied and strict proof is demanded at time of trial. 2. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph are directed to a party other than Answering Defendant and as such, no response is required. By way of further response, Defendant, Michelle, Latsha, PA-C, has been dismissed from the case. 3. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph are directed to a party other than Answering Defendant and as such, no response is required. By way of further response, Defendant, Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D. has been dismissed from the case. 4. Denied as stated. Answering Defendant is a medical facility with a principal place of business located at 503 North 21St Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph are directed to a party other than Answering Defendant and as such no response is required. By way of further response, Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, LTD, has been dismissed from the case. 6. Denied. The allegations contained in this paragraph are directed to party other than Answering Defendant and as such, no response is required. By way of further response, Defendant, Michelle Latsha, PA-C and Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, LTD, have been dismissed from the case. 7. Admitted in part, denied in part. It is admitted that at all relevant times herein, Dr. Mudan was an employee of Answering Defendant and acting within the course and scope of her employment while providing professional medical services to the Plaintiff. The remaining allegations are denied as conclusions of law to which no response is required. By way of further response, insofar as the physicians, interns, residents, radiologists, emergency room staff, clinical staff, and medical support staff, have not been identified, the allegations regarding their conduct are incapable of answer and this paragraph is specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at trial. 8.-26. Denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e) and/or as legal and medical conclusions to which no response is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant 2 was not negligent. At all relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to the injuries as alleged. 27. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant was not negligent. At all relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. 28. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant was not negligent. All relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. 29. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant was not negligent. All relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. 30. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant was not negligent. All relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. 31. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant was not negligent. All relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. 3 COUNTI HANNAH VOYTAC V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C 32.-34. Denied. The averments contained in these paragraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint refer to a party other than Answering Defendant and not response is required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied generally pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, defendant Michelle Latsha, PA-C, has been dismissed from the case. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss this Count and enter judgment in its favor. COUNT II HANNAH VOYTAC V. PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D. 35-37. Denied. The averments contained in these paragraphs of Plaintiff's complaint refer to a party other than that of Answering Defendant and no response is required. To the extent a response may be deemed required, the allegations are denied generally pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, Defendant Pushpa Mudan, M.D., has been dismissed from the case. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss this Count and enter judgment in its favor. 4 COUNT III VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC Ve HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 38. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference answers contained in paragraphs 1 through 37 as if fully set forth at length herein. 39.(a)-(q) Denied. This paragraph and corresponding subparagraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint are denied as conclusions of law as well as medical conclusions. In the alternative, to the extent that this paragraph and corresponding subparagraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint contain facts to which a responsive pleading is required, those allegations of act are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, Answering Defendant is not liable to Plaintiff. At all relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to the injuries as alleged. Insofar as the agents, ostensible agents apparent agents, employees and/or servants have not been identified, the allegations regarding their conduct are incapable of answer and are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. 40. Denied. This paragraph is denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, Answering Defendant is not vicariously liable to the Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint. To the contrary, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed the injuries as alleged. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss this Count and enter judgment in its favor. 5 COUNT IV CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 41. Answering Defendant hereby incorporates by reference answers contained in paragraphs 1 through 40 as if fully set forth at length herein. 42.(a)-(t). Denied. This paragraph and corresponding subparagraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint are denied as conclusions of law as well as medical conclusions. In the alternative, to the extent that this paragraph and corresponding subparagraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint contain facts to which a responsive pleading is required, those allegations of act are denied generally pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, Answering Defendant is not liable to Plaintiff. At all relevant times, Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to the injuries as alleged. Insofar as the agents, ostensible agents apparent agents, employees and/or servants have not been identified, the allegations regarding their conduct are incapable of answer and are specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at the time of trial. Additionally, subparagraph 42(t) has been dismissed by order of Court. 43. Denied as a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further response, it is specifically denied that Holy Spirit Hospital is liable to Plaintiff for the injuries and damages as alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint. Answering Defendant was not negligent. To the contrary, at all relevant times Answering Defendant met or exceeded the standard of care and at no time caused or contributed to injuries as alleged. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss this Count and enter judgment in its favor. 6 COUNT V VICARIOUS LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA 44-46. Denied. The averments contained in these paragraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint refer to a Defendant other than Answering Defendant and no response is required. To the extent a response maybe deemed required, the allegations are denied generally pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, have been dismissed from this case. COUNT VI CORPORATE LIABILITY HANNAH VOYTAC V. INTERNIST OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA 47-49. Denied. The averments contained in these paragraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint refer to a Defendant other than Answering Defendant and no response is required. To the extent a response maybe deemed required, the allegations are denied generally pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029(e). By way of further response, Defendant, Internists of Central Pennsylvania, have been dismissed from this case. NEW MATTER By way of further answer, Defendant, Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a/ Holy Spirit Hospital, avers the following New Matter directed to Plaintiff: 50. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 51. Insofar as the physicians, nurses, nurses aides, medical assistants and any other medical staff have not been identified, the allegations regarding their conduct are incapable of answering and are specifically denied and strict proof demanded at trial. 7 52. Plaintiff is responsible, in whole or in part, for the injuries alleged because Plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risk of the activities, and therefore, all claims resulting therefrom are barred. 53. Nothing Answering Defendant did or failed to do was the cause in fact or the proximate cause of any alleged injury or loss to Plaintiff or Plaintiff's Decedent. 54. Plaintiff's claims may be barred by the doctrines of assumption of the risk and contributory negligence or reduced by comparative negligence. 55. Plaintiffs Complaint is barred or reduced by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, the relevant provisions of which are incorporated herein by referenced as though same were more fully set forth at length herein. 56. At all times material hereto, Answering Defendant and its employees and staff provided treatment in accordance with the applicable standard of medical care at the time and place of treatment. 57. Plaintiff failed to mitigate any damages allegedly sustained. 58. Plaintiffs claims and/or request for damages herein are limited and/or precluded by the doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel. 59. Plaintiff s claims may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 60. Plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to toll the applicable statute of limitations. 61. Plaintiff s cause of action may be barred by the equitable doctrine of laches. 62. To the extent that discovery and/or investigation may reveal, Plaintiff has granted accord and satisfaction to a judgment thereby barring a subsequent suit against any other defendant for the same injuries. 8 63. In accordance with Pennsylvania law, including the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act, plaintiffs shall have no right to recover any amount, which was paid by a collateral source of compensation or benefits. 64. Plaintiff may have entered into a release which has the effect of discharging Answering Defendant from this matter. 65. Upon information and belief, certain of Plaintiffs bills for which Plaintiff seeks to recover in this action that were paid or are payable under accident and health insurance, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Worker's Compensation insurance, or other insurance. 66. Plaintiff shall have no right to recover for any amount which was paid by a private, public, or gratuitous collateral source of compensation or benefits under such as instituted or amended by the Pennsylvania Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act. 67. Plaintiff s claims and/or request for damages is barred or limited by the provisions of the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act, Act. No. 13, House Bill No. 1802, 2202 Pa. ALS 13; 2002, Pa. Laws 13; 2001 Pa. HB 1802, as amended. 68. By way of further answer, Answering Defendant specifically reserves the right to plead hereafter as further New Matter those additional affirmative defenses, including, without limitation, those set forth in Pa.R.Civ.P. 1030, that continuing investigation, discovery in accordance with court rules, and the introduction of evidence at trial may render applicable to claims and causes of action declared upon Plaintiff in the Amended Complaint. 9 WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Health System t/d/b/a/ Holy Spirit Hospital denies that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested or any relief whatsoever and demands that judgment be entered in its favor and against the Plaintiff and that it be awarded appropriate costs and fees. Respectfully submitted, DIME, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: June 19, 2007 By: Thomas h 'rs squire ATTO M. NO. 78565 Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 85651 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 (717) 731-4800 Attorney for Defendant, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 10 PC-145 VERIFICATION I, Franchesca J. Charney, RN, BS, MSHA, CPHRM, hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Answer with New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unworn falsification to authorities. Franchesca J. Chamey, S, MSHA, CP Director of Risk Management/Patient Safety Officer CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, June 19, 2007, I, Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: By First-Class Mail: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) Aaron S. t", s 're r ? C - t'i - __? "? . , E i -r, S?? F. w G . - - ' t - , ; i'1 ' ?J ? _`' _ ?.. { l 1 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com PA Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC, DOCKET No. 2006-2288 PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE vs. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION FOR A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE PURSUANT TO PA RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1042.51 1. Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a Writ of Summons on or about April 24, 2006, with the Cumberland County Prothonotary. 2. Shortly thereafter Michelle Latsha, PA-C; Liana I. Laza, MD; PA Neurological Assoc Ltd.; Richard Schreiber, MD; Internists of Central PA, Ltd.; Holy Spirit Hospital; and Pushpa R. Mudan, MD, were served. 3. On or about June 20, 2006, Plaintiff was served a rule to file Complaint. 14. On or about July 10, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with the Cumberland County Prothonotary listing this action as a Medical Professional Liability Action. 5. Since the initiation of this suit, parties have exchanged numerous Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. I- Is 6. Plaintiff and Defendants entered into several stipulations dismissing all defendants except Holy Spirit Hospital. 7. On or about January 4, 2007, this Honorable Court issued an Order dismissing Michelle Latsha, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania from this action. 8. After the January 4, 2007 Order, the only Defendant in this action is Holy Spirit Hospital. 9. Currently the only depositions conducted have been those of Hanah Voytac and Michelle Latsha by Plaintiffs Counsel. 10. Plaintiff believes that court assistance is needed to assist in the progression of this action and result in a timely conclusion. 11. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1042.41, Plaintiff requests that this court schedule a case management conference so this court may issue an Order setting deadlines for Discovery and the Production of Expert Reports. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court issue an Order requiring a case management conference, so as to establish a Court Ordered deadline for the completion of discovery and production of expert reports. DATED: ? 1`2-dhl 3513 NORTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PA 17110-1438 (717) 234-7828 y . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dennis C. Dougherty, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 27th day of June, 2007, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELIA & P n }rte ? y R( t 't7 ?.rJ • ORIGINAL R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com PA Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC, DOCKET No. 2006-2288 PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE VS. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL'S NEW MATTER ASSERTED 50. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Answering Defendant upon which relief can be granted. 51. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has not identified physicians, nurses, nurses aides, medical assistants and any other medical staff. Furthermore, it is specifically denied that Defendant is incapable of answering the allegations regarding their conduct. 1 52. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer may be required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff is responsible, in whole or in part, for the injuries alleged because Plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risk of the activities. Therefore, Plaintiff specifically denies that all claims resulting therefrom are barred. 53. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, Plaintiff specifically denies Defendant's allegation that nothing the answering Defendant did or failed to do was the cause in fact or the proximate cause of any alleged injury or loss to Plaintiff or Plaintiffs Decedent. 54. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs claims may be barred or reduced by the doctrines of assumption of the risk and contributory negligence or reduced by comparative negligence. 55. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs Complaint is barred or reduced by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act incorporated in Defendant's allegation. 56. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Defendant and its employees and staff provided treatment in accordance with the applicable standard of medical care at the time and place of treatment. 57. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff failed to mitigate any damages allegedly sustained. 58. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs claims and/or request for damages herein are limited and/or precluded by the doctrines of res iud? icata and/or collateral estoppel. 59. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs claims may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 60. The allegation-herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to toll the applicable statute of limitations. 61. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs cause of action may be barred by the equitable doctrine of laches. 62. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that to the extent that discovery and/or investigation may reveal, Plaintiff has granted accord and satisfaction to a judgment thereby barring a subsequent suit against any other defendant for the same injuries. 63. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has no right to recover any amount, which was paid by a collateral source of compensation or benefits. 64. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff entered into a release which has the effect of discharging the Defendant from this matter. 65. In response to this allegation, Plaintiffs medical bills were covered by Medicare and Medigap. Therefore, it is specifically denied that certain bills which Plaintiff seeks to recover in this action were paid or are payable under accident and health insurance, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Worker's Compensation insurance, or other insurance. 66. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiff has no right to recover for any amount which was paid by private, public, or gratuitous collateral source of compensation or benefits under such as instituted or amended by the Pennsylvania Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act. 67. The allegation herein states a conclusion of law to which not response is required. To the extent that a response is required, it is specifically denied that Plaintiffs claims and/or request for damages is barred or limited by the provisions of the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act, Act. No. 13, House Bill No. 1802, 2202 Pa. ALS 13; 2002, Pa. Laws 13; 2001 Pa. HB 1802, as amended. 4 68. It is specifically denied that Defendant may reserve the right to plead hereafter as further New Matter those additional affirmative defenses, including, without limitation, those set forth in Pa.R.Civ.P. 1030, that continuing investigation, discovery in accordance with court rules, and the introduction of evidence at trial may render applicable to claims and causes of action declared upon Plaintiff in the Amended Complaint. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac demands judgment against Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital for damages in excess of Fifty Thousand ($50,000.00) Dollars, exclusive of interest and cost and in excess of any jurisdictional amount requiring compulsive arbitration. DATED: ? 12i loq Respectfully su R. J. N)AZELLA & ID No. 86_072 ?--' 3513 NORTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PA 17110-1438 (717) 234-7828 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Dennis C. Dougherty, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 28th day of June, 2007, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELLA & WOCU , P.C. BY: C. C) CJ _ , tr n ? l W ^` R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com PA Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC, DOCKET No. 2006-2288 PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE VS. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION FOR A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE PURSUANT TO PA RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1042.41 1. Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a Writ of Summons on or about April 24, 2006, with the Cumberland County Prothonotary. 2. Shortly thereafter Michelle Latsha, PA-C; Liana 1. Laza, MD; PA Neurological Assoc Ltd.; Richard Schreiber, MD; Internists of Central PA, Ltd.; Holy Spirit Hospital; and Pushpa R. Mudan, MD, were served. 3. On or about June 20, 2006, Plaintiff was served a rule to file Complaint. 4. On or about July 10, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with the Cumberland County Prothonotary listing this action as a Medical Professional Liability Action. 5. On or about September 19, 2006, the Honorable Judge Guido issued a rule to show cause as to why Plaintiffs Motion for an extension of time to file a certificate of merit should not be granted. 6. On or about October 9, 2006, the Honorable Judge Guido issued an Order granting Plaintiffs request for an extension to file a certificate of merit. 7. On or about November 6, 2006, the Honorable Judge Edward Guido issued an Order for Defendants to Show why Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Less than all Defendants should not be granted. 8. Since the initiation of this suit, parties have exchanged numerous Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. 9. Plaintiff and Defendants entered into several stipulations dismissing all defendants except Holy Spirit Hospital. 10. On or about January 4, 2007, the Honorable Judge Guido issued an Order dismissing Michelle Latsha, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania from this action. 11. After the January 4, 2007 Order, the only Defendant in this action is Holy Spirit Hospital. 12. On or about May 10, 2007, the Honorable Judge Guido issued an Order granting in part and denying in part the Preliminary Objections of Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital. 13. Currently the only depositions conducted have been those of Hanah Voytac and Michelle Latsha by Plaintiffs Counsel. 14. Plaintiff believes that court assistance is needed to assist in the progression of this action and result in a timely conclusion. 15. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1042.41, Plaintiff requests that this court schedule a case management conference so this court may issue an Order setting deadlines for Discovery and the Production of Expert Reports. 16. Pursuant to Cumberland County Local Rule of Civil Procedure 208.2(d), concurrence of Defense Counsel was sought and was given by Defense Counsel on July 3, 2007. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court issue an Order requiring a case management conference, so as to establish a Court Ordered deadline for the completion of discovery and production of expert reports. DATED: '1 ? lul Respectfully submitted, R. J. MARA & A-s?ocmns, P.C. BY: CH RLES W. MARSAR, , ESQ ID o. 60 3513 NORTH ONT STREET HARRISBURG, PA 17110-1438 (717) 234-7828 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dennis C. Dougherty, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 11th day of July, 2007, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATE ,WP.C. BY: s C. c ?.: S -? d' '3i,'_ f. py -. ~ t ! ...? Ca -""` r. ?/.? R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com PA Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1438 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA j HANNAH VOYTAC, DOCKET NO. 2006-2288 PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE Vs. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A SCHEDULING ORDER PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.P. 1042.51 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please withdraw Plaintiffs Motion for a Scheduling Order Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1042.51 Respectfully submitted, DATED: 0q- R. J. MAKNE f.A & &JOCIATES, P.C. BY: ID No. 86S P2 / 3513 NORTH FRON TREET HARRISBURG, PA 17110-1438 (717) 234-7828 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dennis C. Dougherty, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 11th day of July, 2007, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Aaron Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELLA & BY: e- C. _z '3? JUL 17 2001 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC, VS. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DOCKET No. 2006-2288 PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE DEFENDANT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this L7 day of 2007, this Honorable Court issues this Order scheduling a Case Management Conference to be held on the day of 2007 at 1y•-TAM in 1'3 to establish a timeline for the completion of discovery and production of expert reports. Distribution Legend 7 C les W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire 513 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17110 aron S. Jayman, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 J Cumberland County Court Administrator 1 Court House Square, 3R Carlisle PA 17013 no ? D :H ?,!vj 91 InC LODZ HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-2288 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE IN RE: CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 10th day of August, 2007, after a case management conference with counsel, it is hereby ordered and directed as follows: 1. All discovery, including any answers thereto, shall be completed by December 28, 2007. [Therefore, any discovery requests requiring responses must be filed at least 30 days prior to that date.] 2. Plaintiff's expert reports shall be provided by February 28, 2008. 3. Defendant's expert reports shall be provided by April 28, 2008. 4. Any motions for summary judgment shall be filed no later than May 15, 2008. 5. Counsel are to consider themselves attached for our September 2008 trial term. By khE Court, Edward E. Guido. J. /harles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire For the Plaintiff ,/Aaron S. Jayman, Esquire J For the Defendant srs Court Administrator A ?? t ne) all, R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL Defendant Docket No. 2006-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CERTIFICATE OF MERIT IN SUPPORT OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY CLAIM(S) AGAINST HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL FOR CLAIM(S) ARISING FROM ACTS AND/OR OMISSIONS OF UNNAMED AGENTS OF HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 1, Charles W. Marsar, Jr., attorney for Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac hereby, certify that: 19' an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by these defendants in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm; AND ? the claim that the defendants deviated from an acceptable professional standard is also based solely on allegations that other licensed professionals for whom the defendants are responsible deviated from an acceptable professional standard and an appropriate licensed professional has supplied a written statement to the undersigned that there is a basis to conclude that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited by the other licensed professionals in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional standards and that such conduct was a cause in bringing about the harm. Dated: y I -T 106 &,Kssocialxs. P.C. V. Marsar, t , Es re identification No. 86072 . •4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Dennis C. Dougherty, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 18' day of April 2008, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Thomas Chairs, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 20S Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. BY: ?^ h°-? ?1 a, J ? 'Tl _.? ?' • r- 1 ?; ?' s' .. _ 't`i r- } «: - ?t ?? `. .?' R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: emarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 By: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL AND NOW, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, by and through her attorneys, R. J. Marzella & Associates, P.C., files this instant Motion for Continuance of Trial and avers the following: 1. On or about April 24, 2006, Plaintiff filed this instant medical malpractice action against Michelle Latsha, PA-C, Pushpa Mudan, M.D., Holy Spirit Hospital, and Internists of Central Pennsylvania, Ltd. by way of filing a Writ of Summons. r 2. On or about July 10, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against the above captioned Defendants alleging, among other things, that the Defendants failed to properly diagnose and treat Plaintiffs stroke. 3. Due to circumstances that were beyond the control of Plaintiff, discovery I was not completed by its deadline. 4. As such, it is not feasible for Plaintiff to effectively present this case at trial by the pre-determined date. 5. As a result, Plaintiff requests this Motion for Continuance of Trial, in an I effort to ensure that all discovery, including all expert reports and depositions, is completed. 6. Defense Counsel concurs with this Motion for Continuance of Trial. 7. This is the first time this case has been listed for trial, and Plaintiffs have f not requested a continuance in the past. 8. As a result, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court grant a continuance I of the trial of this matter so that it may be relisted for a future trial term. 2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, requests this Honorable Court to grant Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance of Trial. Dated: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Cynthia M. von Schlichten, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 7th day of July 2008, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Thomas Chairs, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: C a M. von Schlichten, Law Clerk C riI' r nt ..? --` ' r i ..? ..?'..'..(? ' yy?' Y CI? Q " -j a V R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@rjmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 By: Zachary D. Campbell, Esquire Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 93177 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 234-7828 Facsimil (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice V. MICHELLE LATSHA, PA-C; PUSHPA MUDAN, M.D.; HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL; INTERNISTS OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, LTD.; Defendants JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this It day of 2008, after consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Continuance of Trial, it is hereby ORDERED that this case be y counsel. removed from the trial list and be relisted for a WRT: J. Vt t-WIl-MM:31d rgr ?r ` r -M no h z : { 1 wv z ! snv BUZ A?i?t1C;i" v 1 .' d 3Hi 10 Distribution Legend: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire RJ Marzella & Associates 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Thomas Chairs, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 District Court Administrator Cumberland County 1 Courthouse Square, 3R Carlisle, PA 17013 OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 1 Courthouse Square • Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone(717)240-6200 Toll Free 1-888-697-0371 x6200 Fax (717) 240-6460 courtadmin@ccpa.net July 14, 2008 f Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire ?'- U Y (??D?'p1no1 AlAtCi VIA FACSIMILE ONLY: (717) 2346883 RE: Failure to Comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3 (a) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL (2006-2288 Voytac v. Latsha, Holy Spirit Hospital) Dear Mr. Marsar : Please note that due to your failure to comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3(a)(2) and/or Rule 208.3(a)(9), your motion will be held in the Court Administrator's Office until an amendment containing the missing information is filed in the Prothonotary's Office. If after two notices no amendment has been filed, your motion will be sent back to the Prothonotary's office and placed in the file and no further action will be taken. Rule 208.3(a). Motions. (2) The motion shall state whether or not a Judge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matter, and, if so, shall specify the judge and the issue. (9) All motions and petitions shall contain a paragraph indicating that the concurrence of any opposing counsel of record was sought and the response of said counsel; provided, that this requirement shall not apply to preliminary objections, motions for judgment on the pleadings, motions for summary judgment, petitions to open or strike judgments, and motions for post-trial relief. Please note that you do not need to file an additional proposed order or provide additional envelopes for service. Your amendment will be attached to the original motion. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. SincY.Mitcthell Jami Deputy Court Administrator s N ./+ OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 1 Courthouse Square • Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone(717)240-6200 Toll Free 1-888-697-0371 x6200 Fax(717)240-6460 courtadmin@ccpa.net July 14, 2008 Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire A"Y afV* -a''? ?OTtGC? VIA FACSIMILE ONLY: (717) 2346883 ? RE: Failure to Comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3 (a) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL (2006-2288 Voytac v. Latsha, Holy Spirit Hospital) Dear Mr. Marsar : Please note that due to your failure to comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3(ax2) and/or Rule 208.3(a)(9), your motion will be held in the Court Administrator's Office until an amendment containing the missing information is filed in the Prothonotary's Office. If after two notices no amendment has been filed, your motion will be sent back to the Prothonotary's office and placed in the file and no further action will be taken. Rule 208.3(a). Motions (2) The motion shall state whether or not a,ludge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matter, and, if so, shall sped the judge and the issue. (9) All motions and petitions shall contain a paragraph indicating that the concurrence of any opposing counsel of record was sought and the response ofsaid counsel, provided, that this requirement shall not apply to preliminary objections, motions for judgment on the pleadings, motions for summary judgment, petitions to open or strike judgments, and motions ftir post-trial relief Please note that you do not need to file an additional proposed order or provide additional envelopes for service. Your amendment will be attached to the original motion. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. Sincer ly, Jami . Mitchell Deputy Court Administrator TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 07/3112008 21:54 NAME FAX TEL SER.# : BROD6J462119 DATE,TIME FAX NO./NAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT MODE 07131 21:54 92346883 0100:00:15 OK STANDARD ECM OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 1 Courthouse Square • Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone (717) 240-6200 Toll Free 1-888-697-0371 x6200 Fax (717) 240-6460 courtedmin@ccpa.net July 14, 2008 Charles W. Marsar, 3r., Esquire "_V"'? I, 08 -o3lnoi Af&ht C, VIA FACSIMILE ONLY: (717) 234-6883 RE: Failure to Comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3 (a) PLAINTUT'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL (2006-2288 Voytac v. Latsha, Holy Spirit Hospital) Dear Mr. Marsar : Please note that due to your failure to comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3(a)(2) and/or Rule 208.3(a)(9), your motion will be held in the Court Administrator's Office until an amendment containing the missing information is filed in the Prothonotary's Office. If after two notices no amendment has been filed, your motion will be sent back to the Prothonotary's office and placed in the file and no further action will be taken. Rule 208.3(a). Motions. (2) The motion shall state whether or not a Mge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matter, and, ifso, shall sped the judge and the issue. that the concurrence of any opposing TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 07/14/2008 02:35 NAME FAX TEL SER.# BRODGJ462119 DATE,TIME FAX N0./NAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT MODE 07/14 02:35 92346863 00:00:15 01 OK STANDARD ECM OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS I Courthouse Square • Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone (717) 240-6200 Toll Free 1-888-6970371 x6200 Fax (717) 240-6460 courtadmin@cCpa.net July 14, 2008 Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire VIA FACSIMILE ONLY: (717) 234-6883 RE: Failure to Comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 2083 (a) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL (2006-2288 Voytac v. Latsha, Holy Spirit Hospital) Dear Mr. Marsar : Please note that due to your failure to comply with Cumberland County Local Rule 208.3(x)(2) and/or Rule 208.3(a)(9), your motion will be held in the Court Administrator's Office until an amendment containing the missing information is filed in the Prothonotary's Office. if after two notices no amendment has been filed, your motion will be sent back to the Prothonotary's office and placed in the file and no further action will be taken. Rule,208.3(a). Motions. (2) The motion shall state whether or not a Judge has ruled upon any other issue in the same or related matter, and,, if so, shall spec6 the judge and the issue, i01 J11 ,,.,,,,r .tie,?r;nH.e .chr,A r^nHrni? a narac rank indicatinz that the concurrence of any opposing DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. BY: Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 78565 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)731-4800 (Tele) (717)7314803 (Fax) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff V. ATTORNEY FOR: DEFENDANTS HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06-2288 MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTION HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AND NOW, comes the Holy Spirit Hospital by and through its attorneys, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. and files the within Motion for Summary Judgment and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. The Plaintiff initiated this civil action with the filing of a Writ of Summons on or about April 24, 2006. 2. After the completion of their investigation, Plaintiff proceeded with the filing of a Complaint against a number of healthcare providers and institutional Defendants. 3. Ultimately, the Plaintiff filed a Certificate of Merit against the Holy Spirit Hospital only. 4. The Holy Spirit Hospital filed a responsive pleading to the Plaintiffs Complaint in June of 2007. 5. The pleadings in this case are closed. 6. By Scheduling Order dated August 10, 2007, Plaintiff s expert reports were due to be produced by February 28, 2008. 7. The case was removed from the September 2008 Trial List by agreement of counsel. 8. More than a year after the deadline for production of Plaintiff s expert reports, the Plaintiff has failed to produce expert support for her allegations of negligence against the Holy Spirit Hospital. 9. The Court's Scheduling Order in this regard is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 10. By letter dated January 20, 2009, counsel for the Holy Spirit Hospital contacted counsel for the Plaintiff and requested the overdue expert reports. The correspondence of the undersigned counsel is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". 11. To date the Plaintiff has yet to produce expert support for her claims of negligence against the Holy Spirit Hospital. 12. The Plaintiffs failure to produce expert reports in support of her claims of negligence against the Holy Spirit Hospital demonstrates that the Holy Spirit Hospital is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order directing judgment in favor of Holy Spirit Hospital and against the Plaintiff. 2 Respectfully submitted, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. Date: May 27, 2009 By:? Tfw(nas M. Chairs, Esquire Supreme Court I.D. #78565 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 (717) 731-4800 Attorney for Defendant, HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL 4c X4,6 /'? /f J AIIC 1 6 2007 HANNAH VOYTAC, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 06-2288 CIVIL TERM HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE IN RE: CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 10th day of August, 2007, after a case management conference with counsel, it is hereby ordered and directed as follows: 1. All discovery, including any answers thereto, shall be completed by December 28, 2007. [Therefore, any discovery requests requiring responses must be filed at least 30 days prior to that date.] 2. Plaintiff's expert reports shall be provided by February 28, 2008. 3. Defendant's expert reports shall be provided by April 28, 2008. 4. Any motions for summary judgment shall be filed no later than May 15, 2008. 5. Counsel are to consider themselves attached for our September 2008 trial term. By Cou t, Edward E. Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire For the Plaintiff Pn S. Jayman, Esquire For the Defendant J. Court Administrator srs F ?,?,+ 393740 Thomas M. Chairs Attomey-at-Law Admitted in PA, MD January 20, 2009 Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 RE: Hannah Voytac v. Pushpa R. Mudan, M.D., et al. Docket No.: 06-2288 Our File No.: PC-145 (0029096.0295873) Dear Chuck: Direct Dial: 717-731-4800 Direct Fax: 717-731-4803 tchairs@dmclaw.com As you may recall we previously agreed to try this case in September of 2008. Your expert reports were due to be produced several months in advance of trial. To date, I have not received any expert reports from you. If I do not receive copies of your expert reports within 45 days from the date of this correspondence I will move forward with the filing of a Motion to Dismiss. In the event that you would like to discuss this matter in greater detail, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, DICHIE, MCCA)ff 1r & CHILCOTE, P.C. 4 M. TMC/nlb DICKIE, 9KAMEY & CHILCOTE, P.C. I ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN: 717-7314800 FAX: 717.731-4803 Irmsburgh I HarAsburg I Philadelphia I Washington, D.L I Delaware 1200 CAMP HILL BYPASS, SURF 205 1 CAMP HILL, PA 17011.3700 1 WWW.DMCIAW.COM New Jersey I North Caroh nr I Ohio I West YrgWu CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, May 27, 2009, I, Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED BY HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT upon all counsel of record by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: By First-Class Mail: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire R.J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (Counsel for Plaintiffs) Thomas ."Chairs, Esquire ?L,{: i,,.1 L..Lj t ; i 11 * 5 .i ?,rfr a r ?, 455040 PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: (List the within matter for the next Argument Court.) CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) HANNAH VOYTAC, Plaintiff vs. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, Defendant No. 06-2288 - Civil Term 1. State matter to be argued (i.e., plaintiff's motion for new trial, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment of Holy Spirit Hospital 2. Identify all counsel who will argue cases: (a) for plaintiffs: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire, 3513 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110 (b) for defendants: Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire, 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205, Camp Hill, PA 17011 3. 1 will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument. 4. Argument Court Date: July 22, 2009 C &-e c:_-_ ignature Thomas M. Chairs, Esquire Print your name Attorney for Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital Date: June 3. 2009 INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Two copies of all briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) before argument. 2. The moving party shall file and serve their brief 12 days prior to argument. 3. The responding party shall file their brief 5 days prior to argument. 4. If argument is continued new briefs must be filed with the COURT ADMINISTRATOR (not the Prothonotary) after the case is relisted. Cq?AL RBD-OrHE OF THE PRMIMURY 2009 JUN -4 PM 2. G 4 CUMB&Lk-40 ?WNTY PDML AAW R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cmarsar@Ddmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile: (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Hannah Voytac, by and through her attorneys, R .J. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL Defendant Marzella & Associates, P.C., brings this Response in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary judgment, based on the pleadings, affidavits, other documents produced and the response to the statement of facts which has been submitted to the Court, and alleges that there are genuine issues of material fact to be tried and Defendants are not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted in part. It is admitted that in accordance with the Scheduling Order, Plaintiffs experts were to be produced by February 28, 2008. However, Plaintiffs Counsel and Defense Counsel have had subsequent telephone conversations wherein Defense counsel has expressed his willingness to extend that deadline. 9. Admitted. 10. Admitted. 11. Admitted. It is admitted that the Plaintiff has yet to produce expert support for her claims of negligence against the Holy Spirit Hospital. However, Plaintiff has retained a neurology expert, Dr. Stephen Gollomp, who has been difficult to contact due to his schedule. Plaintiffs expert, Dr. Stephen Gollomp, returned to his office June 12, 2009 after being out of the country for an extended period. 12. Denied. It is specifically denied that Plaintiffs failure to produce expert reports in support of her claims of negligence against the Holy Spirit Hospital demonstrates that the Holy Spirit Hospital is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. in the alternative, Plaintiff requests a thirty (30) day extension from the date of filing of this response to produce her expert report. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court deny Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's Motion for Summary Judgment. In the alternative, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court order oral arguments regarding Defendant's motion and this response hereto. Respectfully Submitted, By: Identification No. 86072 Dated: R. J. Marzella & Associates, P.C. . M CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Tyler J. Storch, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon defendants, and counsel of record this 15' day of June, 2009, by depositing said copy in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, postage prepaid, first class delivery, and addressed as follows: Thomas Chairs, Esquire DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, PC 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-3700 R. J. MARZELLA & Assoc1ATEs, P.C. BY: CX14- ? 17?? Ty J. torch, Law Clerk R. J. MARZELLA & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BY: Charles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire Email: cinarsar@?dmarzella.com Pennsylvania Supreme Court I.D. No. 86072 3513 North Front Street Attorneys for Plaintiff Harrisburg, PA 17110 Hannah Voytac Telephone: (717) 2347828 Facsimile; (717) 234-6883 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HANNAH VOYTAC Plaintiff V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL Defendant Docket No. 06-2288 Civil Action - Medical Malpractice JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORDER AND NOW, this day of , 2009, after consideration of Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's Motion for Summary judgment and response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant Holy Spirit Hospital's Motion for SummaryJudgment is DENIED. BY THE COURT: J• THE 2009 JUN 17 F I2:'39 HANNAH VOYTAC, PLAINTIFF : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT 06-2288 CIVIL TERM IN RE: MOTION OF HOLY SPIRIT HOSPITAL FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE BAYLEY, J. AND EBERT, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this `?.a, day of July, 2009, the motion of defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, for summary judgment, IS GRANTED. arles W. Marsar, Jr., Esquire 3513 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 For Plaintiff r7Fiomas M. Chairs, Esquire 1200 Camp Hill Bypass, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011 For Defendant :sal Edgar B. Bayley, J. FILED-Of FrCE OF TFrE PROIT CYNOTARY 2009 JUL 22 PM G: 23 CUNT 5: ; a?u O'.;.'UNTY