Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-01438 I , , " 'I " \ ' " '" ,I !I ii , I), " 'I I ~ I " , , " , -i , " , , " " I I ~ '$' "11 I' , " ,I:, i, i, I " , " " ';1 ,ii " " ',j, , , " , " ,i II' " " , " " , " 'I ;1, , II; , " ; I Ii.! i' " , , " /' I , " " , , , , >\, ' 'I I I', j J " ,'1 I " " II II ',I 'II " " I, II. " , I " , , II", " i' , ,/ I' " ~I ........ 1'1 , j.; " , , : ';'1 " I; II il\ , , " " 'i, , , 1;( " " , " MARGUBRITB SBNIORt 011 illdividual! Ph ntiff v.. I IN TIIB COURT 01' COMMON PLIAS I CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA I I I CIVIL 1994 I I I CIVIL ACTION - LAW I JURY TllIAL OHMANDBD MBCHANICSBURG RHIIAB SY6TBMS, ACUTB RBIIAB 1I0SPITAL, Defendant ~t AND NOW this 22~i day of A1 JIt c:~ , 1994 com.. Plaintiff MARGUBRITB SBNIOR, above-named, by and through her attorney. STBFANON , GLACB and re.pectfully pre.ent. thi. Complaint Il8 follow.. 1. Plaintiff MARGUBRITB SBNIOR ill a widowed adult individual who at all times relevant to thh Complaint resided at 3524 September Drive, Apartment 1, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, penn.ylvania. 2. Defendant MBCHANICSBURG RIHAB SYSTIMS, ACUTI RIHAB HOSPITAL (hereinafter Defendant) no.pital i. located at 175 Lanca.ter BOUlevard, Mechanic.burg, CUmberland County, Penn.ylvania, operate. a. a for profit ho.pita1 primarily for, but !'lot limited to, the adminhtraUon of rehabilitative medical treatment and therapy. 3. On or about June 23, 1993, Plaintiff was admitted to Defendant Hospital and its acute rehab facility with chief 1 oomplaint. of extrsme low back pain with degenerative disc and degenerative joint di.e.ee. 4. Plaintiff at hsr admis.ion wa. 68 year. of age and wa. extremely over:weight, non-ambulatory, and unable to roll hereeU into bed without extremely difficulty. 5. During the couree of hsr hoepitAlization and treatment at Defendant Ho.pital Plaintiff wae not able to .it without diffioulty, had great difficulty with tran.fer .kill. especially bed transfer., and was not able to walk without assistance. 6. During the course of the above d..cribed ho.pitalization, plaintiff required attendanoe and al.iltance for all lower extremity care, toilet tranlfers, and bsd tran.fer.. 7. Throughout the cour.e of her ho.pitalization Plaintiff received care, treatment, and management of her medical condition. and life care needs from .ervanta, agenta, smployees, and/or authorized rspre.entativss of Defendant no.pital, whoss name. are unknown to Plaintiff, but all of whom were aoting within the Scope of their employment, agency and/or authority. 8. Defendant Ho.pitd aho .elected Or cau.ed to have .eleoted and providsd to Plaintiff the furni.hing. and fixture. of her ho.pital room inoluding, but not limited to, her ho.pital bed which furniehing. and fixtUre. were .ubjeot to control, supervision by Defendant Ho.pital. 9. On or about July 7, 1993, after returning from a toilet vi.it, ambUlating with difficulty by U.e of her walker, Plaintiff attempted to tranefer to her ho.pital bed with the a..i.tanae of a 2 nurse's as.i.tant, known to the Plaintiff a. Pat Barne., who, upon knowledge and beUef, wa. an employee, agent and/or .ervant of Defendant Hospital. 10. A. Plaintiff released from her walker and leaned against her hospital bed for lupPQrt in attempting to facilitate her tran.fer to her ho.pital bed, said bad rolled and Plaintiff was cau.ed to twi.t and fall to the floor with gr~at foroe. 11. The above desoribed bed roll oocurred .olely or, in great part, as a result of the nur.e'. aesi.tant'. failure to engage tho bed's braking syetem or, alternatively, because of a failure of the bed'. braking .y.tem. 12. Responsibility for securing the bed and assisting Plaintiff'. saf~ tranlfer was a.signed to the nur.e'. a..i.tant, Pat Barne., who wae present during the entirety of the aforem~ntioned tran.aotion preceding Plaintiff'. fall. 13. A. a direct and proximate cau.e of the above de.oribed fall, Plaintiff .u.tained lateral malleolu. fracture. to both of her ankle. as well a. inten.e pain, contu.ions and hematoma to her body. 14. A. a direct and proximate re.ult of the negUqllnoe of the Defendant hereinafter de.oribed, Plaintiff .uffered .evere, permanent and di.abling injurie. which will permanently impede her from ambUlating without a.si.tance. is. A. a direct and proximate re.ult of the negligence of Defendant hereinafter described, Pl~intiff wa. required to remain ho.pitalizsd and inourred additional medical expense. for her care 3 ,I' l and treatment whioh eXpen.e. continue to accrue a. of the date of thie oomplAint. 16. A. a direct and proximate re.ult of the negligenoe of the Defendant hereinafter de.cribed, Plaintiff ha. experienced and, in the future will continue to experience, pain and .uffering, humiliation, mental anguieh, inoonvenience, and loes of life'. plllallure. . 17. A. a direct and proximate re.ult of the negligence of the Defendant hereinafter de8cribed, Plaintiff h.. 8uffered permanent impairment of her ability to oare for her.elf, provide for life'. nece..itie. and perform the normal acts Which previoUdy con.tituted her Ulual and cUltomary daily activity. COUNT :E NIOL:EOBNCI 18. Paragraphs one (1) through .eventeen (17) are incorporated herein and part hereof a. if .et forth in full. 19. The Defendant, it. agente, emp1oy.e., .ervanta and/or repre.entative. Were negligent in the care, treatment, and management of the Plaintiff, when .he wa. an admitted patient, in eaoh of the follOWing re.p.ot.1 a. failure to IAfe1y provide a bed tranlfer on July 7, 1993. b. failure to hire and/or train employee., agent., .ervanta, and/or repr..entative. to the degree of rea.onable skill and knOWledge to .afely provide care, management and treatment to Plaintiff in her bed tran.fer, 4 o. failure to impl.ment . .afeguard .y.tem to pr.v8nt a ho.pital b.d brake from not bdng .ng.g.d or, altern.tively, to Alo.rtain if a brake def.ct exhh wh.n it wa. n.c....ry for the hospit.l bed to remain .t.tionary and the furth.r f.ilure to train its employ..., .gent., .ervant. and/or repres.ntativ.s to .mploy .uoh . ..f8gu.rd .y.t.m. d. failure to purcha.. and/or provide ho.pital bed. with a .uffioient warning devioe. to alert patients, Defendant'. .taff, or other. thr~ the bed brake was not .ngag.d. .. failure to provide the supervi.ion and a8.i.tance nsce..ary to Plaintiff to f.cilitate her .ate return f.rom the toilet and tr.n8fer to her bed. f. failure to properly maintain the brake. on it. ho.pital bed. g. failure to properly set the br.k.. on the b.d prior to the attempted tran.fer. 20. At all tim.. relevant h.r.to, Defendant Ho..pital re..rved the right to control the aotiviU.. of ih .nvanb, agenh, repre.entativ.., and/or .mployee. and failed to exercise control to pr.vent the injuri.s and damages suff.red by Plaintiff. 21. Th. afore..id negligence of Defendant oau.ed the injurie. and damages .uff.red by the Plaintiff. 5 WHBRBFORB, Plaintiff MARGUBRITB SBNIOR d.mand. judgment a9ain.t Def.ndant HBCHANICSBURG RIHAS SYSTBMS, ACUTI RIBAS HOSPITAL for damage. in an amount in exoe.. of $20,000.00 which amount exo.ed. the limit. for oompul.ory arbitration under the Local rul.. of Court of Cumberland County, penn.ylvania, plu. intere.t and co.t. of .uit. COUIIT II RI. IP8A LOQUITUR 22. Paragraphs one (1) through twenty-one (21) are inoorporat.d herein and made part hereof a. if .et forth in full. 23. Plaintiff, a. a patient with ambulation dy.function, wa. owed a duty of care by Defendant Ho.pital whioh inoludes, but i. not limitsd to, facilitation of rea.onable and .afe b.d tran.f.r. 24. Rea.onable and safe b.d tran.fer of Plaintiff on July 7, 1993 wa. within the exclu.ive oontrol of Defendant Ho.pital, it. .ervant., .mploye.., agent. and/or repre.entatives. 2S. The transaction r"ulting in Plaintiffs injuri.. and damage. herein de.cribed occurred without any voluntary act of Plaintiff oontributing to it. result. 2fi. Th. .vent. d.scribed her.to in paragraph. one (1) through sev.nt.en (17) of thi. Complaint do not ordinarily oocur in the ab.ence of n.gligenoe, oarels..ne.s, and/or r.okle..n.... 27. No other reaeon cau.. uiets but for the n.glig.nce, car.l...ne.., and/or reckl...n.s. of the D.f.ndant Ho.pital and/or 6 ;0..';1 , ., I .., .. " " VlIl!rICA'SOII The undersigned hereby verifie. that the fact. averred in the fongoing coapla1Dt: are true and oorrect to the be.t of her knowledqQ, information and belief. Thi. Verification i. made .ubject to the penaltios of 18 pa C.B.A. I 4904 relating to uneworn falsification to authoritie.. DATil lI1uych2/. 1~9{ I I I 'I I I;j I I " , ., , I " I I I 1,1 " I I " I ~ ., ,I " " IN TH~ COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VI. I I I I I I CIVIL ACTIQN NO. 94-1438 , I MARGUIRITI SENIOR KlCHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS ACUTI REHAB HOSPITAL IHTay O. .....aAHO. TQ THE PROTHONOTARY I Kindly enter my appearanoe on behalf of Defendant, Mechanicsburg Rehab system. Aoute Rlhab HOlpital in the above- captioned cAle. Defendant al.o demand. a jury of twelve (12) memberl for the trial. KYLOTTB, DaVID . 'ITI.aTaICI , ') (, (10 J I C) In_c:J'--__ aT IC '0 0'.11.., B'QUIII atto~ney fo~ D.flndant, N.obanlo.bu~g a.bab .y.t... loute I.hab lospital 'I IVI I, " I I , 'I I' Iii IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS or CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARGUERITE SENIOR v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. !iI4-143.8 MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM, ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL D..lIfDAIIT, ....CDIIZC.IVRG nllAl nITI", ACVTB DIU B.O'>>Z'l'~L" u.nR TO >>LAIIITZ>>>>" COII>>LAZIIT AND NOW, Defendant, Meohanicsburg Rehab System, Aoute Rehab Ho.pital, by and throuqh its attorney., Mylotte, David , Fitllpatriok, hereby an.wers Plaintiff'. Complaint and aver. a. follow.1 1. Denied. After rea.onable inve.tiqation, an.werinq defendant i. without knowledqe or information sUffioient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the ftlleqation. oontained in paraqraph 1 of plaintiff' II oomplaint. Therefore, the .ame are denhd and strict proof thereot is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 2. Adll\itted. 3. Denied AS stated. It is admitted that plaintiff WAS admitted to the defendant's facility on June 24, 1993. It 11 further admitted that ths medical record. .tate that the plaintiff wa. admitted from home with a chiet oomplaint of extreme low baak pain and with deqenerative disk and deqenerative joint di.ea.e. 4. Denied. After reasonable inve.tigation, answering defendant i. without knowledqe or information Buttioient to form a .. h .., b.lief as to the truth or fal.ity of the alleqation. contain.d in paragraph 4 of plaintiff's complaint. Therefore, the ..Ill. an denisd and .trict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deellled relevant. 5. Denied. After rea.onable inve.tigation, an.w.ring defendant i. without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of ths alleqation. oontained in paraqraph !l of plaintiff'. oomplaint. Therefore, the ..m. are denied and strict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 6. Denied. After reasonable inve.tigation, an.wering defendant i. without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the allegation. contained in paragraph 6 of plaintiff'. oomplaint. Therefore, the .ame are denied and .trict proof thereot' i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 7. Denied. The allegation. contained in paragraph 7 are oonclusione of law to which no reepon.ive pleading i. required. To the extent that .uch allegation. are determined not to be conclusions of law, after reaaonable inve.tigation, an.wering defendant is without knowledg~ or information .ufficient to form a belief as to the truth or f.l.ity of the allegation. contained in paragraph 7. Therefore, the eame an denied and .triot proof thereof i. demanded ot trial if dsemed relevant. 8. Denied. The allegation. contained in paragraph . are ooncludon. of law to whioh no re.pondve pleading i. requir.d. To the extent that .uch allegation. are determined not to b. OO/'lolusion. of law, after re..onable inve.tigation, anllwerinq defendant i. without knowledge or information suffioient to form D belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 8. 'rherefore, the .ame are denied and strict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relsvant. 9. Denied. After reasonable inve.tigation, an.werinq defendant i. without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief ae to the truth or faleity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 9 of plaintiff's complaint. Therefore, the ..m. are denied and strict prOOf thereof is demanded at trial if de.med relevant. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information lIufficient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of plaintiff's oomplaint. Therefore, the same are denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial if de'med relevant. 11. Denied. The allegations contained in parcgraph 11 are conclu.ions of law to Which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to b. conclusion. of law, atter reasonable inve.tigation, an.werinq defendant i. without knOWledge or information sUffioient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 11. Therefore, the same are denied and .trict proof thereof i. demanded at trial it deemed relevant. 12. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 12 are conclu.ions of law to which no responsive pleading i. required. To the extent that luoh allegation. are determinsd not to be conolueione of law, after reasonable investigation, an.wering defendant ie without knowledge or information luffioient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 12. Therefore, the eame are denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deomed relevant. 13. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 13 are conolusionl of law to which no responsive pleading iR required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be oonclu.ione of law, after reasonable investigation, an.wering defendant is without knowledge or information sUffioient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 13. Therefore, the same are denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 14. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 14 are oonolusions of law to whioh no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to b. oonolusions of law, after reasonable investigation, an.wering defendant is without knowledge or information SUfficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 14. Therefore, the same are denied and .triot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. l~. Denied. The allegations oontained in paragraph l~ are conclusions of law to Which nO responsive pleadinq is required. TO the extent that such allogations are determined ~ot to be conolusions of law, after reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information luffioient to form a belief as to the truth or talsity ot the allegations oontained in paragraph us. Theretore, the same are denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. WKIRlrORB, defendant, Mechanicsburq Rehab By.tem, Acute Rehab Hoepital respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judqement in its favor and against the plaintiff together with co.t. and interest. COUHT II 22. Defendant inoorporates by reference it. an.wer. and allegations to paraqraphs 1 through 21 of plaintiff" complaint a. it the .ame were set forth herein at length. 23. Denied. The alleqations contained in paragraph 23 are conclusion. ot law to which no responsive pleading i. required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclusion. ot law, after reasonable investigation, an.werinq detendant i. without knowledge or information .ufficient to form a belief as to the truth or talsity ot the allegation. contained in paragraph 23. Theretore, the same are denied and strict proof thereot is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 24. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 24 are oonolusions ot law to Which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conolusion. of law, after rea.onable investigation, an.wering detendant is without knowledge or intormation suttioient to form a beliet as to the truth or talsity ot the allegations contained in paragraph 24. Theretore, the same are denied and .trict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of turther an.wer, it 11 .pecif1oally denied that uAlonable and IAfe bed tranlfeu were within the exclusive oontrol ot the detendant ho.pital, itl agent., nrvant., employee. aqent. and/or repn.enta ti v... 2~. Denied. The alleqationa oontained in paragraph 2~ are conolulion. of law to whioh no responlive pleadinq i. required. To the sxtent that .uch alleqationa are determined not to be conclulion. of law, atter reasonable inve.ti9ation, an.wer1n9 detendant il without knowledge or intormation luttioient to torm a beliet aa to the truth or tallity ot the alleqations contained in paraqraph 25. There tore , the same are denied and .trict proot thereot is demanded at trial it deemed relevant. 26. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 26 are conolulion. of law to which no responlive pleadinq i. required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be concluaion. of law, atter reasonable inv.etiqation, an.wering detendant i. without knowledge or intormation .uttioient to form a beliet a. to the truth or tallity ot the allegation. oontained in paragraph 26. Theretore, the .ame are denied and at-riot proot thereot is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way ot furthor an.wer, it i. specifically denied that event. de.oribed in plaintitt'. complaint do not ordinarily occur in the ab.enoe of nlqliglnoe, carelessness and/or reoklessn.... 27. Denied. The allegation. contained in paraqraph 27 are conclusion. of law to which no responsive pleadinq iI required. To the extent that suoh allegation. are determined not to be conclulion. of law, after reasonable invlatiqation, an.wering defendant is without knowledqe or information sufficient to form . belief a. to ths truth or fal.ity of the allegation. contained in paraqraph 27. Therefore, the same are denied and striot proof thereof i. demanded at trial if dsemed relevant. By way of further an.wer, it i. epecificallY denied that no other cause exi.ts but for the neqliqenoe, carelossne.. and/or reckle..ness of the defendant hoepital or it. .ervantl, employees, agente and/or repre.entativIs. 28. Denied. The allegation. containsd in paragraph 28 are conclusion. of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclusions of law, after reasonable inve.tigation, answering defendant i. without knowledge or information .ufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegation. oontained in paragraph 28. Therefore, the same are denied and .trict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of further an.wer, it is specifically denied that answering defendant Will negligent, careless or reckless. 29. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 29 are conclu.ion. of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that .uch allegation. are determined not to be conclusions of law, after re..onable. investigation, an.wering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or fal.ity of the allegations contained in paragraph 29. Therefore, the same are denied and .trict proof thereof ia demanded at trial if deemed relevont. By way of further an.wer, it is speoifically denied that answering defendant failed to exeroi.e due oare. WHI.BrO.I, defendant, Meohanicuburq Rehab Sy.tem, Acute Rehab Ho.pital reapecttully requestll that thill Honorable Court entsr jUdq8ment in its fuvor and against the plaintift toqether with oq.t. and intere.t. II.. IlATTD 30. Plaintitf'. Complaint failu to state a olaim again.t defendant upon whioh relief may be qranted. 31. Plaintitf voluntarily a..umed the ri.k of her injurie.. 32. Plaintiff was contributorily negligent. 33. Plaintiff's claim shOUld be barred or diminillhed in aocordance with the Pennsylvania Negligenoe Act, 42, Pa. C.B.A. 87105. 34. It the plaintift suffered injuries, damages, expen.e. and/or loslle. III alleged the lIame whioh are denied, then auch injuries, dama~es, expenses and or los.es were caused by per.ons or otherwil. Comparative sntitiea who are not presently parties to this action and for whoee acts and omiseions defendant is not responeible. 35. Plaintiff's olaims are barred by the tailure to give prompt and timely notice to defendant. 36. Plaintiff'S aotion is barred in whole and/or in part by her aotions and/or omissions. 37. All the causes of aotion alleqed by th~ plaintitt are barred by the applioable statutes of limitation.. 38. The injuries reterred to in plaintiff'S complaint were oau.ed by the voluntarily Assumption of a known riak by plaintiff and plaintiff is therefore barred by .uch assumption ot the riek f~o. any ~eoove~y againat the defendant. 39. Plaintiff. a~e not entitled to delay damage. pu~.uant to p,nnaylvania Rule of civil P~ooedu~. 238. 40. Delay damag.. purauant to Pennaylvania Rule of civil P~ooedu~e 238 ahould not be awa~ded to plaintiff. fo~ .uoh damage. a~e unoonatitutional and/o~ otherwi.e unlawful. ...a.roa., Defendant, Meohaniosbu~g Rehab System, Aoute Rehab Hoapital ~espeotfully requesta that this Honorable court ente~ jUdgment in ita favor and against the plaintiff togethe~ with ooata and intereata. MYLOTT., DAVID I rIT.fATaIOI BYI ()f '(' 'I' ,JJc" llJq ,\,~))I.- '-"'"'- fA 10... 0'1.1.., .'QUIRI Attorney for Defendant, Meobanioaburg .ebab .yate., Aoute .ebab Roapital " , , ), II , , \1 I " , "I,i IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARGUERITE SENIOR v. I I I I I , CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 94-1438 MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEM, ACUTE REHAB HOSPITAL DlrIKDAHT, KIOKAKIOllUaG RlRAI IYITIH, AOUTI alBAI HO'PITlLL( AKINDID AMI.I. TO PLaINTI"" COMPLaINT AND NOW, Defendant, Mechanic.burg Rehab sy.tem, Acute R.hab Hoapital, by and through its attorneys, Mylotte, David , Fitzpatrick, hereby answers Plaintiff'e Complaint and avera a. fOllows, 1. Denied. Atter reasonable investigation, answering defendant i. without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the allegation. contained in paragraph 1 of plaintiff'a complaint. Therefore, the aame are denied and .triot proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 2. Admitted. 3. Oenied as .tated. It ia admitted that plaintiff WU admitted to the defendant's faoility on June 24, 1993. It is further admitted that the medical reoords state that the plaintiff waG admitted from home with a chief complaint of extreme low back pain and with degenerative disk and degenerative joint disea... 4. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief ae to the truth or falsity of the allegation. contained in paragraph 4 of plaintiff'S complaint. Therefore, the aame are denied and strict proof thereof ill demanded at trial it deemed relevant. ~. Denied. After reaeonablo inve.tigation, anewering defendant is without knowledge or information eUfficient to form a belief aa to the truth or falsity ot the allegationa contained in paragraph 15 ot plaintiff's oomplaint. Theretoro, the aame are "enied and etrict proof thereof ia demanded at trial it deemed relevant. S. Denied. After reasonable investigation, anewaring defendant ie without knowledge o~ information eutficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paraqraph S or plaintiff'S complaint. Therefore, the eame are denied and etrict proof thereof 18 demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 7. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 7 are conolueions of law to which no re.poneive pleading h required. To the extent that suoh alleqations are determined not to be conoluaions of law, after reaeonable investiqation, anewering defendant is without knowledqe or information 8utficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 7. Therefore, the aame an denied and atrict proof thereot ie demanded at trial it deemed relevant. B. Denied. The alleqat.1on8 contained in paraqraph 8 are c\'Jnolu.ions of law to whioh no responsive pleadinq h required. To the extent that SUch alleql\t.1one are determined not to be concluaion. of law, after reasonable inveetigation, anewering detendant ie without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief aa to the truth or falsity ot the allegationa contained in paragraph B. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial it deemed relevant. 9. Denied. After reasonable investigation, anewering detendant is without knowledge or intormation eutticient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity ot tho allegations contained in paragraph 9 of plaintiff'S complaint. Theretore, the aame are denied and strict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 10. Denied. After reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information aufficient to torm a belief ae to the truth or falsity of the allegatione oontained in paragraph 10 of plaintiff's complaint. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 11. Denied. The allegations contained in paraqraph 11 are oonclusions of law to which no responaive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegatione are determined not to be conclueions of law, after reaaonable investiqation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information auffioient to form a belief as to the truth or falaity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 11. Therefore, the aame are denied and strict proof thereof ia demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 12. Denied. The allegationa contained in paragraph 12 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that euch allegatione are determined not to be oonclusiona of law, after reaaonable inv..tiqation, answering detendant is without knowledqe or information sufficient to form a belief aa to the truth o~ falsity of the alleqatione contained in peraqraph 12. Therefore, the eame are denied and etrict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 13. Denied. The allegatione oontained in paraqraph 13 are oonclueione of law to which no reaponsive pleadinq i. required. To the extent that such allegation. are determined not to be conclusione or. law, atter reasonable investigation, anewering defendant ie without knowledge or information eufficient to form a beliet as to the truth or falsity of the allegatione contained in paraqraph 13. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 14. Denied. The allegations contained in paraqraph 14 are conclusions of law to whioh no reeponBive pleadinq is required. To the extent that such alleqation. are determined not to be oonoluBions ot law, after reasonable inve.tigation, an.werinll defendant is without knowledge or information euffioient to form a belief ae to the truth or faleity of the alleqationa contained 1n paragraph 14. Theretore, the eame are denied and atriot proof thereof ie demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 115. Denied. The allegations oontained in paragraph 115 are ooncluaions of law to which no reaponBive pleadinq h required. To the extent that euoh allegation. are determined not to be ooncluBions of law, after reasonable investigation, anawering defendant is without knowledge or information autficient to form a belief al to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 1'>' Therefore, the same are denied and strict proot thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 16. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 16 are conclusions of law to which no rosponsive pleading is r~quired. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclusions of law, after reasonable inVestigation, nnsw~rinq defendant is without knowledge or information sUfficient to form a ~eliet as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 16. Therefore, the same are denied and striot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 17. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 17 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclusions of law, after reasonable investigation, anlwering defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient t~ form a belief aa to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 17. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. WHIRlrORI, defendant, Mechanicsburg Rehab system, Acute Rehab Hospital respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judgement in its favor and against the plaintiff together with costs and interest. OOUNT I 18. Oefendant incorporates by referonoe its answers and allegations to paragraphs 1 through 17 as it the same were Bet forth herein at length. 19. (1l-9). Deni\Jd. The alle9ations contained in para9raph 19 are conolusions of law to whioh no responaive pleading is required. To the extent that euoh allegationa are detllrmined not to be oonolu.iona of law, after reaaonable investigation, anewering defendant is without know1~dge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 19. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 20. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 30 are conolu8ions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclueions of law, after reasonable investigation, answering defendant is without knowledge or information suffioient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 20. Therefore, the same are denied and striot prOOf thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. 31. Denied. The allegations oontained in paragraph 21 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that such allegations are determined not to be conclusions of law, after reasonable investigation, anawering defendant ie without knowledge or intormation sutficient to form a beliet as to the truth or falsity of the allegations oontained in paragraph 21. Therefore, the same are deniod and etriot proof thereof is demanded at trial if deemed relevant. ....1.0.., defendant, Mechanicsburg Rehab syatem, Aoute Rehab Hospital respectfully requests that thie Honorable Court enter judgement in its favor and against the plaintiff together with coete and interest. 091,111'1' II :U. Detendant incorporatee by reference ite anewen and alleqation. to paragraph. 1 through 21 ot plaintitt'e oomplaint a. it the ..m. were set forth her.in at l.nqth. 23. Denied. The allegation. contained in paragraph 23 are conoludona ot law to which no l'8apon.ive pleadinCJ ie required. To the extent that such all.qatione are determined not to be oonolu.ione of law, after reasonable inveetigation, anewerinq detendant i. withollt knowledge or intormation autticient to form a belief a. to the truth or falsity of the alleqatione oontained in paraqraph 23. Therefore, the ..me are denied and atriot proot thereof ia demanded at trial it deemed relevant. 24. Denied. The allegations oontainod in paragraph 24 are conoludone of law to which no reapondvo pleadinq 11 required. To the extent that such allegations are determin.d not to be ocnolu.ione ot law, atter reasonable inve.tigation, anewerinq detendant is without knowledge or information lutfioient to form a belief ae to the truth or falaity of the alleqatione contained in paragraph 24. Therefore, the ..me are denied and .trict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of turther answer, it 11 .pecifically denied that reasonable and ..fe bed transfere were within the exolueive control of the defendant hoepi tal, its agents, servants, employees aqente and/or representatives. 215. Denied. The alleqations contained in paraqraph 25 are conolusione of law to whioh no responsive pleadinq ia required. To " ,', .' i, l I ,) coate end intereut. OOUII'l' IJ aa. Defendant inoorporatea by reference it. enlwera and allegation. to paragraphu 1 through 21 ot plaintitt'. complaint ae if the .ame were set forth herein at length. 23. Denied. The allegatione contained in paragraph 23 are conclusione of law to whioh no responsive pleading is required. To the extent that suoh allegations are determined not to be concluaione ot law, after reasonable invSltigation, anewerinq defendant ia without knowledge or infOrMation luftioient to form a belief ae to the truth or falsity of tho allegationl contained in paragraph 23. Therefore, the same are denied and atrict proof thereof il demandod at trial if deemed relevant. 24. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 24 are conclueions of law to whioh no responlive pleading is required. To the extent that suoh allegationa are determined not to be conclueione of law, atter reaaonable inveetigation, anewerinq defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief aa to the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 24. Therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof ie demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of further anawer, it is speoifioallY denied that reasonable and eafe bed transfers were within the exoluaive oontrol of the defendant hOlpital, its aqentB, eervants, employees agents and/or representatives. 215. Denied. The allegationl contained in paragraph 215 are concluaions at law to which no reaponlive pleading is required. To '\, . , ',\ f' . the extent that such alleqation. are determin.d not to b. oonclusion. of law, after rea.onabl. investigation, an.wering d.f.ndant i. without knowledqo or information sufficient to form a belief a. to the truth or fal.ity of the allegation. contained in paraqraph 25. Therefore, the same are d.ni.d and strict proof ther.of i. demanded at trial if deemed rel.vant. 2S. D.nied. The alleqation. contain.d in paragraph 2S are conclusion. of law to which no ~..poneive pleadinq i. r.quired. To the .xt.nt that .uch allegation. are determined not to be conolusion. of law, after rea.onabl. inv..tigation, an.w.ring defendant is without knowledge or information .uffioient to form a belief ae to the truth or faldty of the allegation. oontained in paragraph 26. Therefore, the same are denied and .trict proof thereof i. demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of furth.r an.wer, it i. specifically denied that events d.scribed in plaintiff's complaint do not ordinarily occur in the abeenc. of neglig.nce, oarele.sn.ss and/or reckle..n.... 27. Oeniod. The allegation. contained in paraqr.aph 27 are conclusion. of law to which no re.pon.iv. pleading i. requir.d. To the .xtent that 8uch allegations are det8rmined not to b. conc~ueion. of law, after rea.onable inve.tiqation, an.w.rinq defendant is without knowledge or information sUffioi.nt to form a belief a8 to the truth or fal8ity of the allegations contain.d in paragraph 27. Therefore, the 8ame are denied and .triot proot thar.of i8 demanded at trial if deemed relevant. By way of further answ.r, it i8 .pecifically denied that no other caus. exi.t. but for the neqliqence, careles8ness and/or reckle8sne.s of the der.ndant ho.pital or it. ..rvante, .mploy.e., aqent. and/or r.pr..entative.. 38. Deni.d. Th. allaqatione contain.d in paraqraph 38 ar. conclu.ion. of law to whioh no r.eponaiv. pleadinq ie required. To the .xt.nt that .uch all.qations are dete~ined n~t to b. conclueione of law, att.r reasonable inv.etiqation, anew.rinq d.r.ndant i. without knowl.dq. or information .uffici.nt to form a b.li.t a. to the truth or fal.ity of ~he all.gation. contain.d in paraqraph as. Th.r.etor., the eam. are d.ni.d and .trict proof th.r.of i. d.mand.d at trial it d.em.d r.l.vant. By way of turth.r an.wer, it h .p.cifioally deni.d that answering def.ndant Wal n.qliq.nt, car.l.e. or r.ckl.... 39. D.niad. The all.qation. contained in paragraph 39 are conolu.ion. of law to which no reeponsive pleading b required. To the .xt.nt t.hat euch allegation. are determined not to b. conolusion. or law, after reaeonabl. inveaUgation, answ.ring d.f.ndant i. without knowledqe or information .uffici.nt to form a b.li.f a. to the truth or falsity of the alleqations contain.d in paraqraph 39. Th.refor., the sam. are denied and .trict proof thereor is d.manded at trial if deemed rel.vant. By way of further an.wer, it i. .p.cifioally d.nied that an8w.rinq derendant ta!led to .x.rci.. due car.. .....ro.., d.fendant, Mechaniceburq Rehab sy.t.m, Aout. R.hab Hospital re.peotfully requests that thb Honorabl. Court .ntsr judqement in it. favor aM aqain.t the plaintiff toqether with co.ts and int.r.at. " '''WIH~, 1(, .~. q'l'TIa 30. Plaintiff's Complaint fail. to .tate II claim again.t detendant upon which relief may be granted. 31. Plaintiff voluntarily a.sumed the risk of he~ injurie.. 32. Plaintift was contributorily negliqent. 33. Plaintiff's claim .hould be blS~red or diminiahed in acco~dance with the Pennsylvania Negliqence Act, 42, Pa. C.S.A. 111015. 34. If the plaintiff' .uffered injuri.e, damage., expen.e. lind/or lo.... as alleged the .ame whioh are denied/ then suoh injurie., damag.., expen.e. and or lo.s.. were cau.ed by p.r.one or .nti tie. who are not presently parties to thie aotion and for who.e eot. and omissions defendant is not r..ponsible. 35. Plaintiff'. claims are barred by the failure to give prompt and timely notice to defendant. 36. Plaintiff's aotion is barred in whole and/or in part by her actione and/or omissions. 31. All the cau.e. of aotion alleqed by the plaintitt are bar~ed by the applicable statutes of limitations. 38. The injuries referred to in plaintiff'. oomplaint were cau..d by the voluntarily assumption of a known ri.k by plaintitf and plaintiff is therefore barred by such as.umption of the ri.k from any recovery against the defendant. 39. Plaintiffs are not entitled to delay damaqe. pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil frocedure 23B. 40. Delay damage. pur.uant to Penn.ylvania RUle of Civil Procedure 238 should not be awarded to plaintiff. for euch damaqee I otherwiee Comparative ,~I I' I " i I; , . J3. Denied, The allegatione of parag~aph 33 of Defendant'e New Matter aver oonolu.ione of law to which no reeponeiv. pleading ie required. To the extent that a factual reeponee may be required, it ie denied that Plaintiff wae negligent whateoever, but, to the oQntrary, all her alleged injurie. and damagee arQae while ehe wa. within the total control and medical care of the Defendant and ite agent., employe.s, .ervante and/or oeten.ibl. aqent.. 34. Denied. It ie epecifically denied that the injuriee and damagee of Plaintiff were caueed by pe~eone or entitiee other than Defendant and it. agent., omployee., eervante and/or oeteneible agente and etrict proof of the contrary ie demanded. 35. Denied. Plaintiff Wae in the oomplete care and oontrol of the Defendant, and its agent., employee., eervante and/Qr oeteneible agente and Defendant faoilitated Plaintiff'e emergency orthopedio oare. Therefore, the allegation of paragraph 35 of Defendante' New Matter ie noneeneioal and denied. Strict proof otherwiee i. demanded. 36. Denied. It ie .pecifically denied that Plaintiff'e act. or omiuione contributed in whole or part to her injurie. and damage. ae alleged in the underlying oomplaint and .trict proof to the contrary ie demanded. 37. Deniedl The allegatione of paragraph 37 of Defendant'. New Matter aver conclueione of law to which no re.poneive ple.ding 11 required. 2 To the extent that factual nepon.II may be required it J.e denied that Plaintiff.' aotion wae timely filed and that any claim fo~ rolief h barnd by any Statute of X.imitetione. 38. Denied. It h epecitioa11y denied that Plaintiff ...umed any riek in her actione deecriblld in the underlying complaint or by any other aote o~ omieeione relevant to her injuriee and dalllAgee. To the contrary Plaintitf wae an in-patient in an acute care facility with a nure.'e aid, an employ.e of the Defendant pre.ent at time of in~ury. Strict proof to the contra~y ie demanded. 39. Denied, The allegatione of paragraph 39 of Defendant/. New Matter aver conclueione of law to which no reeponeive pleading ie required. 40. Denied, The allegation. of paraqraph 40 of Defendant'e New Mlltter aver conolueiono of law to which no reeponsive pleading h required. WHBRBFORB, Plaintiff MARGUBRITB SBNIOR, ~eep.ctfully requeete that thi. Honorable Court diemiss above Defendant'e New Matter and enter jUdgment in favor of Plaintiff and grant the relief reque.ted in the underlying Complaint. LY SUBMITTBD, BY ....,J;~~/1?/ ace, Blqu re STill AN 'GLAeB 40~ N th Front Street P.. x 12027 Ha ieburg, PA 17108-2027 (7 7) 232-0511 I.D. .23933 3 ,/ gJlZrZClA'.IIZOJ The undereigned hereby verifiee that the facte averred in the foregoing AD.we~ to Defendant'. .ew Hatter are true and correct to the beet of her knowledge, information and beliof. Thi. Verification ie made eubject to the penaltiee of 18 Pa C.B.A. S 4904 relating to un.worn falsification to authoritie.. DATil ~1~ If?! ~.vul<: /J 4' I'"~ '-' ITI BINIO , ,I, " , " I , " , I ,I " I I , , I '. '.,11 . . MARGUeRITe SINIOR, an individual, Plaintiff I IN TKB COURT or COMMON PLIAS I CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA I l , NO. 94-1438 CIVIL 1994 l l CIVIL ACTION - LAW l , JURY TRIAL DBMANDED v.. MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTBMS, ACUTB ReHAB HOSPITAL, Defendant 'RAZCIPI or ..TTLaKlNT AHD DI.CONTINUAHCI TO TII ,aOTBOHOTARYI Plea.e discontinue the above-captioned ca.e a. .ettl.d. ReSPBCTFULLY SUBMITTBD . , 17108-2027 ...