HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-01451
, ,
"
, ,
"
"
"
'''/
, I
I'
"
II!
,
,
, ,
, ,
. ,1
~I!
1
~
"
J}?
fa
:, .~
:I'
, :i
r:~
'jr'
.. .~
I ,~
i~JI
~(
, I
" ,
'I
'I
"
, ,
~
~
....
.~
--
~
3
.
"
"
I
,
,
, , p \
'I, " , , , , " ,
I
,
.
. , ' , "I!
)
"
, ,
, "
. , , .'
.
, I
~
" , , ,
I
, , I,
~ ,
!II . I
"
, 'I I
I'
\
~
'\
"
,
, I
"
,
'I
"I
"
,/.,
"
.'
J
"I
,
"
,I,
'I
-
, I
r
I
'I
:J
,
"
. I
I,
I .
'I'
" oJ
"
"
, ,
I"
J>
"
MELISSA D. WHISLER and COREY J.
WHISLER, her husbahd,
Plaintiff.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICIIAIlL CONNER,
NO. rie(-- /tfY I
(~_{ lhR.. ..jl~
Defendant.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
KOTICI TO DI'IKD
You have been sued in oourt. It you wish to detend against
the olaims set forth in the followin9 page., you must take aotion
within twenty (20) days after this complaint and Notice are served,
by enterin9 a written appearanoe peraonollly or b~ attorney end
t11in9 in writing with the Court your det.n..s or objection. to the
olaims .et torth a9ainst you. You are warned that if you tail to
do so the ca.e may prooeed without you and jUdgmant may be entered
against you by the Court without turther notioe for any money
olaimed in the complaint or tor any other olaim or relief r.quested
by the Plaintiff. You may 10.. money or property or other ri9hts
important to you.
YOU SHOULD TARE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICI
SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Court Admini.trator
Cumberland County Courthouse - 4th Floor
On. Courthou.e Square
carli.le, PA 17013-3387
(717) 240-11200
i.1
6. At all ti.e. relevant to thi. co.plaint, Defendant Doy L.
Talbot w.. a ..rvant, aqent, apparent aqent and/or e.ployee of
Defendant CRST, Ino., and Defendant Rapid Lea.inq, Ino., and wa.
actinq within the oour.e and .oope of hi. e.ploy.ent.
7. The faot. and ooourrenoe. hereinafter related took plaoe
on or about June 18, 1993, at approxi.ately 10145 p... on Route
581, near the aooe.. ramp from Route. 11 and 15, la.t penn.boro
Town.hip, cumberland County, Penn.ylvania.
8. At that time and plaoe, Plaintiff Meli..a D. Whi.ler wa.
operatinq e 1991 Chevy aeo Metro and wae travellinq eaet on Route
581, Ba.t penn.boro Town.hip, Cumberland county, Penn.ylvania.
9. At that time and plaoe, Defendant Doy L. Talbot wa.
operatinq a 1989 International Cabover traotor owned and/or
operatad by Defendant CRST, Ino. and wa. pullinq a 1993 Fruehauf
Trailer owned by Defendant Rapid Leaainq, Ino. and l....d to
Defendant CRST, Ino.
10. At that time and plaoe, Defendant Doy L. Talbot wa.
travellinq we.t in the left-hand lane of Route 581, la.t penn.boro
Town.hip, cumberlend county, Penn.ylvania.
11. At that time and plao., Defendant Miohael Connor wa.
operatinq . 1990 Ford Tauru. and wa. travellinq we.t in the riqht-
hand lane of Route !l81, Zut Penn.boro Town.hip, Cumberland county,
penn.ylvania.
2
1:1. At that tillle and pllce, Defendant Doy L. Talbot and
Defendant Michael Connor were opentinll their vehicle. directly
b.. ide each other on Route 581.
13. At that tillle and place, Defendant Doy L. Talbot operated
hi. tractor-trailer at a hiqh rate of .peed while attelllptinq to
chanqe line., etruck Defendant Michlel Connor'. vehicle, who wa.
al.o Ittelllptinq to chanqe lane., cau.inq Oefendant Connor'. vehiole
to .pin out-ot-oontrol, and cau.inq the tractor-trailer beinq
operlted by Defendant Doy L. Talbot to cruh throuqh the lIIetal
median barrier and into the ea.tbound lane. of Route 581.
,
14 . At that tillle and place, the content. of the trailer, huqe
roll. of piper, were thrown frolll the trailer, .trikinq the vehiole
beinq driven by Plaintiff Melieea D. Whi.ler, and trappinq hlr in
her vehiole.
15. At the time ot the atoremlntioned acoident, Detendant
Miohael Connor wal intoxicated with a blood aloohol oontent of .14.
OOUII'JI I
Mali... D. Whi.lar and C9r.v J. Whialar v. Dav L. Talbot
16. Paraqraph. 1 throuqh 15 ot Plaintith' Complaint an
inoorporated herein by reterence.
3
17. The atore.entioned accident and allot the injurie. .nd
da.age. .et torth hereinatter .u.tained by Plaintitt. Neli..a D.
Whi.ler and corey J. Whi.ler are the direct and proxi.ate re.ult ot
the ne9ligent, carde.., wanton, and reck lee. .anner in whiClh
Detendant Doy L. Talbot operated hi. motor vehiClle in the .cope and
coune of hia e.ployment tor Defendant CRST, Inc. and Rapid
Lea.in9, InCl., a. follow.l
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(t)
(9)
(h)
(i)
failure to have hi. motor vehiClle under .uch
Clontrol e. to be able to .top within the a..ured
Cllear di.tance ahead,
failure to apply hi. brake. in .ufficient time to
avoid .trikinq the Connor vehicle cauainq thia
chain reaction accident,
failure to keep a proper watch for traffic on the
hiqhway,
failure to drive hi. vehicle with due reqard for
the hiqhway and traffic condition. which were
exi.tinq and of which he wa. or .hould have been
aware,
failure to keep proper and adequate control over
hi. vehicle,
failure to keep alert and maintain a proper watch
for the preeence of other motor vehicle. on the
hiqhway,
failure to yidd the riqht-of-way to the Connor
vahicle,
tailure to .tay within hi. lana of travell
failura to properly .ecure hi. load
be9inninq to travell and
bafore
4
(j)
ddvil19 h1l v.hiol' upon th. hi9hw,y in . .ann.r
.ndan9.rin9 p.r.on. and prop.rty and in . r.okl...
lIann.r with oaral... d1lr'9.rd to th. ri9hh and
.at.ty of oth.n and in violation of th. Motor
V.hiole Cod. of the cOllllllonwealth of Penn.ylvania
.nd the st.te of Indi.n..
com :n:
",Ii... D. Whial.r and cor.y J. Whi.l.r v. eRST, Inc.
18. p.ra9raph. 1 through 17 of Plaintifh' cOllplaint are
inoorporated herein by referenoe.
19. The aforementioned acoident .nd all of the injurie. and
da.'ge. .et forth hereinafter .u.tained by Plaintiff. Meli..a D.
Whi.ler and corey J. Whi.ler are the direct and proximate re.ult ot
the ne911gent, oarele.., wanton, and reckle.. m.nner in "hioh
Defendant CRST, Ino. employ.d D.t.ndant Doy L. Talbot and entru.ted
D.fendant T.lbot with the 1989 International cabover traotor-
trailer a. follow.c
(a)
(b)
(c)
hirin9 and retaining a driv.r whom it wa. aware or
.hould h.v. b..n awar. wa. not oomp.t.nt .nd
qu.litied to op.r.t. a tr.otor-tr.il.r on th.
public highway. and who did not exerci.. th.
incr....d c.re .nd precaution. n.c....ry with .
tr.ctor-tr.il.r,
t.iling to prop.rly tr.in and in.truct it. dr.iv.r
in th. prop.r m.nner of op.rating and loading it.
tractor-trailer,
perlllittin9 Defendant Talbot to op.rat. it. truck
.lthough h. kn.w or Ihould han know that Mr.
Talbot did not have any training, .xperi.nc. and
jUd9m.nt to ad.quately control and load it,
15
U. The afore.entioned aocident and aU of the injurie. and
dlmave. .et forth hereinafter .u.tained by plaintiff. Meli..a D.
Whi.ler and corey J. Whi.ler are the direct and proxi.ate re.ult of
the neql1vent, carele.., wanton, and reckle.. .anner in which
Defendant Michaal Connor operated hi. motor v.hicle a. fOllow.,
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(q)
(h)
(i)
(j)
failure to have hi. motor vehicle under .uch
control a. to be able to .top within the a..ured
olear di.tance ahead,
failure to apply hi. brake. in .ufficient ti.e to
avoid .trikinv the tractor-trailer cau.inq thi.
chain reaction accident,
failure to keep a proper watch for traffic on the
hiqhway,
failure to drive hie vehicle with due reVlrd for
the highwey and traffic condition. which were
exi.tinq and of which he wa. or .hould have been
aware,
failure to keep proper and adequate control ovel'
hie vehicle,
failure to keep alert and maintain a proper watch
for the pre.ence of other motor vehiCle. on the
highway,
failure to yield the right-of-way to the tractor-
trailer,
failure to .tay within hi. travel lane,
driving hi. vehicle while intoxicated, and
drivinq hie vehicle upon the hiqhway in a manner
endanqarinq per.on. 'and property and in a reckle..
.anner with carele.. di.re9ard to the ri9hta and
..fety of other. and in violation of the Motor
Vehicle Coda of the Coamonwealth of penn.ylv_nil.
8
GLAZII Z
"e~i~d t!:.bl.~ v. Day L. t1bOt.. CRST. t",~.,
, . ..~ng. Inc. f anet lah..l Connor
a4. Pauquph. 1 through aa ot plaintiff.' complaint an
incorporated herein by reterence.
a5. A. a re.ult ot the atorementioned accident, Plaintiff
MeU..a D. Whialer .u.tained paintul and ..vere injurie. which
include, but are not Umited to, II laceration to the torehead
requiring .uture., multiple abra.ion. and contu.ion. to the tace
and arm, di.location ot the tourth tinger on the right hand, .acond
degre. burn. on her right leg, abra.ion. to tha right knea, clo.ed
haad injury re.ulting in po.t-concu..ion .yndrome with mamory 10...
a6. By rea.on ot tha atora.aid injurie. .u.tained by
Plaintitt Meli..a D. Whi.ler, .h. wa. torced to incur liability for
madical treatmant, medication., hospitalization, and .imilar
mi.cellan.ou. axpan.a. in an at tort to re.tora her.elf to health,
and claim i. made tharator.
a? Bacau.a ot the natura ot har injuria., Plaintitt Mali..a
D. Whialer has bean advisad and theretor avan that .he may be
forcad to incur .imilar madical expen.e. in tha tuture, and claim
i. made theretor.
t
al. A. a r..ult ot the ator..ention.d injurie., Plaintitt
Meli..a D. Whi.lar ha. undergone .nd in the tutur. will und.rgo
gre.t phy.ioal .nd .ental p.in and .uttering, gr.at inoonv.nieno.
in oarrying out h.r d.ily .otiviti.., 10.. of lit.'. pl...ur.. .nd
enjoya.nt, .nd ol.i. i. ..d. th.r.for.
ago A.. r..ult of the .for...id injuri.., Pl.intiff M.li..a
D. Whblar h.. b..n and in the future will b. .ubj.ot to great
hu.ili.tion and ..b.rr.....nt, .nd claim i. ..de th.retor.
30. A. a r..ult of the afore.aid injuril., Plaintiff M.li...
D. Whbl.r h.. .u.tainld work 10", 10.. of opportunity and .
p.r.an.nt di.inution of h.r larning c.pacity, .nd ol.i. i. ..dl
therefor.
31. A. a ~..ult of the afor..aid injuril., plaintiff M.li...
D. Whi.l.r h.. .u.tainld uncompln.atld work 10.., and claim i. .ad.
therefor.
3a. Pl.intiff MIli..a D. Whi.l.r continul. to b. plagu.d by
plnbtlnt pain and limit.tion and, thareforl, avan that h.r
injuri.. ..Y b. of . parm.n.nt natun oau.ing n.idual probl... tor
the r..aind.r of hlr lif.timl, and claim i. .ad~ therlfor.
33. A. a re.ult of the afor..aid accid.nt, Plaintiff Meli..a
D. Whi.l.r ha. .u.tain.d .car. which will rl.ult in a per.anent
di.tigur..ent, and claim i. .adl thlrefor.
10
g~11I II
99J'~ J. WhJ"l,1' v. Day L. T.'""'~t. CRST. Inq..
Blllid J.Ii-ina. Ina.. ,.'Jl!t NjJsh..[ (2an~ar
34. Para9nph. 1 throu9h 3:1 of Plaintiff., complaint an
incorporated herein by referenae.
35. A. a re.ult of the aforementioned injurie. .u.tainad bY
hi. wife, plaintiff Meli..a D. Whi.ler, Plaintiff corey J. Whi.ler
ha. been and in the future ~e deprived of the care, companion.hip,
con.ortiulll, and .cciety of hi. wife, all of which will be to hi.
great detriment, and claim i. made therefor.
O~III In
~.li... D. Whial.r and corey ~. Whial.r v. Miah..l Connor
36. Pan9r1ph. 1 through 35 of Plaintiftl' compalitn are
incoporated herein by reference.
37. At the tillle of the aforementioned accident, Defendant
Micheel connor we. intoxicated with e blood alcohol content of .14.
31. Defendant'. conduct of operatinq a vehicle while
intoxicated con.titute. outraqeou. conduct and a reckle..
indifferenoe to the rightl of other penon. 01\ the hiqhway.
Defendant connor knew or .hould have known that opereting a motor
vehicle while intoxioated oreated a hiqh degree of ri.k to other
par.on. on the roadway.
i'
l'
'Ii
,
j
.1;
1
I
'~
,
lit'
)to laid conduct of Defendant Mich..l Connor con.titute.
wanton and willful neqliqence, i. outraqeou., and entitle.
Plaintiff. to an award ot punitive da.aqe.
WHIRIFORI/ Plaintiff. Meli..a D. Whi.ler and corey J. Whi.ler
de.and jUd9Jllent aqaJ.n.t Defendante Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc. / Rapid
Lea~in9, Inc./ and Micha.l Connor in an amount in exce.. of TWenty
Thou.and Dollar. ($20/000.00)/ exclu.ive of intere.t and co.t. and
in exce.. of any juri.dictional amovnt requirinq compul.orY
arbitration.
'I
,
!
l
1
I
I
r
I
,I
t
!I
I,
ANGINO , ROVNER, P.C.
-,- ')
"
//' ,.,'
ilP..~~,:~.I.qUire
I.D. ~-;- 47281
4503 North Front street
Harri.burq, PA 17110
(717) 238-67U
Ccun.el for Plaintiff.
:,
i
"
~ ;
'I
Oatel March 23, le94
I
,
I
,I
"
1 ,
ft
':1:1
(.)..
C!
'"
-
~"
," r"
., .
~t', ,141
1.)..,":1'
,'.,:..,"''''
I~~. '"I "
,'I .P,
"\".'
v;: \
~
,)
.-.r
'"
~
:1.
,
,
\ ,~\,
'../)
\ -<t-
~,::,~)
.' )
. '1;
~"~
, ,
"..'1
'-.) "C)
-~
-J
"' , l.u
- ,.., <<:
Y.J~ :r
:>- u
l~ Vl - ;:J
UJ-' ..... ..:E
-'>- 0 ..... , t:
n.. V) u ". uu "'
iSE5 ~ ;z c: '0
't:J c: ""' "' c: t:
c: '~ <lJ ~.
~"-';::J "'''' "' , . ..... -
Cl c: ~ r , <lJ ..
UJ "'"' "- Vl ,~ Cl _J
u~:s S1 UJ.t:l '" .~ ~
,-
"~ Vl Ul....
"-2 ffi "' ::J 0
o=> I _.r: u
r82 3i r '-~
Cl .... e) ~1':
IX 0 dJ OOH
::>52- wt ,.r: -' Vl
o f- Cl ..."
U",u - . I- lW
-'"' IX "'IX .~
~'" I- VlUJ . IX
~~ Vl-l -J r:l l.J-J
>- -V :> ~ ;:~
!i> ,'" ..J- >- ~ ..
..
;Z 1-10::> UJ~ C)., 0
-ut.,)zn :r;:, Cl n:: (..)
.
'.
I
I,
".,1
I.~ -
Q
''-.J It:-
~
~
,~ r<\
...... fV'
......r;.:J, \, , or
(.. C' :J. ~~ q<)
I
~!~
~I~i,'l
~"~l ~
Ii
"
MI~I'IA D. WHII~IR and CORIY J. I IN THI COURT or COMMON P~IA'
WHI Sl.1It , her hu.band, I ~- 'J COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
I ('.J(,L~~ h.t V 14 ~ ~.
I
I CIVIl. ACTION - LAW
: q 4 /45 I -
I NO. t. 111 CivU ( (', r.l
I
I
I
I JURY TRIAL DEMANDID
plaintiff.
v.
DOY ~. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID l.IASING, INC., and
MICHAIL CONNIR,
D.fendant.
~.ID~YIT O. I..VIO.
Thi. i. to c.rtify that on the 33rd day of March 1994, a true
and corr.ct copy of PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT, civil Action No. 94-151
civU w.. ...U.d to Def.ndant. Talbot, CRST, Inc., and Rapid
L..dn9, Inc., via c.rtified maU, return rec.ipt reque.ted to
J.... R. Hankl., I.quir., F.ld~t.in, Grinber9, stein . Mo~.e, 42.
Boulevard of the Alli.., pitt.burgh, PA 115219. A copy of the
c.rtifi.d ...il r.c.ipt No. P147 391 983 i. attached hereto.
. /~ ,l(>> ~.
Marc ~yer 11
~OO."axO' o' I..VIO.
Thi. i. to c.rtify that on the 31.t day of March, 1994, . true
and corr.ct copy of the .bove-notmd COMPLAINT w.. ..rved upon the
D.f.ndant. T.lbot, eRST, Inc., and Rapid Lea.in", Inc. via
c.rtifi.d mail, return receipt r.qu..ted at the .bove-not.d
.ddr.... A copy of the .igned r.c.ipt No. P147 391 983 i. .tt.ch.d
harato.
"yYl~1Y/ {)ffiL~/
Mar oy.r
Sworn to .n~.ub.cr1bed before
ma th" _" r.'l day of
. 1994.
; I
I
~
IL. .
"
,;;...
....~._-
NOrMIAl SIAL
EETT ^ J f mGU~iON. NOl3ry Public
Grep.nwoccl, Junlala CGunly
Comml!!ion '_PlrR'1 ~I'pl I~, lIill6
"
"/
;1'
'H
.'
,
,
"
I'
,
, ,
I;)
..I
J" I
!,
,
I,
I,
I
,
'I
(.' .:1;
':;J I.A.. e r
I. , I.~ t I
f,1 '1
"
;11 ."J
1/ "
ll'lJ /1.
0.(::1 )
I; '"
", ,
,) .1 .~
i.J
i'
1
'I
1
r'"
, I'
'''.j
, ,
I "
'I
, ,
"
, I,
,I
I ,
,
'I
,
i
'I
1'(
I,',
I.
I
f: "
I
I'
,'.I
I
"I
I'
"
I'
,
, I
"
"
"'
"
HILISSA D. WHISLIR an4 CORIY J.
WHISLIl, har huabDnd,
Plaintiff.
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLIA.
CUHBIlRI.AHD COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAIL CONNIR,
NO.
Dafandant.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDIlD
Aeel'T~el O' ...VIel
I, Jama. R. Hankla, I.quire of rald.tain, Grinberg, Stein'
McKa., 438 Boulevard of tha Alliaa, Pittaburgh, Pannaylvania le219,
accapt .arvica of tha attached Complaint on behalf of Dafandanta
Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc., and Rapid Lea.ing, Inc., and certify
that I am authori.ed to do ao.
I'
I-
Dahl 3-3'-",/
, '
I,
I
" '
"
d I
1
" 'il
" "
"
, ,
1 ,
,
"
'~~'7
!:...
a; ~S '11
r',1
~ "," .:"
'.-,': ~~E~ ;..t'
' ,~
:~ '"p.r J:"
\'"..J ~~-~ , , ,
~I'.P.'\... "
"
r-
'"
,,"!1 "
,
,
"I
"
,
,
"
"
,
,
;1
"
"I
"
,
I
"
,
,I
"
"
IN TH~ COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, P~NNSYlNANIA
MELISSA D. WHISL~R and
COREY J, WHISLER, hel' husband,
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NOl 94-1451 Civil Term
v,
JURY TRIAL D~MAND~D
ANSW~R, NEW MATT~R AND N~W
MATT~R UND~R Pa. R.C.P, 2252(d)
Filed on Behalf of Defendants,
DOY L, TALBOT, CRST, INC. and
RAPID L~ASING, INC,
DOY L, TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID L~ASING, INC" and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
Defendants.
Counsel of Record for these
Partiesl
JAM~S R, HANKL~, ~SOUIRE
PA I,D. NOI 36019
F~LDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKEE
Firm I,D, 11084
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 471-0677
" ,
i'
1
, ,
1 '
1
,
II
I
I.
'I
:1
,I
I
I'
, "
"
, 1
I,
r
.,
CERTIFI~ATE OF SERVICE
I, JAMES R, HANKLE, ESQUIRE, do hereby certify that a
true and correot copy of the foregoing AH8~R. NKW MAT1.~ ~ ~
MATT.. U1(p.. Pa ..C.P. 221l21lU was mailed to the following
counsel of recordr
Richard A, Sadlock, Esquire
Angino & Rovner
4503 North Front Stroet
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Ann M, Grab, Esquire
Griffith, Strickler, Lerman,
Solymos & Calkins
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
"
on this ~~ th_ day of
April
, 1994, via first-ola..,
United States mail, poatage pre-paid.
"
I
I 'J
I
"
"
-24-
IN THE COURT OF COMMON P~EAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHISLER and
COREY J, WHISLER, her husband,
Plaintiffs,
Defendants.
) CIVIl, ACTION - LAW
)
) NOI 94-1451 Civil Term
)
l JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
l
)
1
)
)
v.
DOY L, TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC" and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
,
I,
1
,I
I'
i
'I
I,
,
I
I
MaWJR, NIW MATTllt ANI)
NWW MATTIR UNOI. p& R.C.P. 2252(dl
AND NOW, comes the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, eRST,
Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc., by and through their attorneys,
James R. Hankie, Esquire and Feldstein Grinberg Stein & MaKee,
and files the within Answer, New Matter and New Matter Under Pa.
R,C.P. 2252(d) averring as followsl
ANSWER
I
'!
1. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 1,
Bame pertain to the identity of adverse parties and are neither
admitted nor denied, Strict proof is demanded at the time of
trial.
2, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 2,
admitted.
3. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 3,
admitted,
4. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 4,
admitted.
5. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 5,
same pertain to the identity of an adverse party and are neither
admitted nor denied. Strict proof is demanded at the time of
trial.
~
6, As to tho allegations contained in paragraph 6,
admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that at all
times material to this cause of action, the Defendant, Doy L,
Talbot, was an employee of the Defendant, CRST, Inc" and was
acting within the course and scope of his employment. It is
specifically denied that at any time material to this cause of
action, the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was an agent, servant,
apparent agent, and/or employee of the Defendant, Rapid Leasing,
Inc" when to the contrary, at all times material to this cause
of action, the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, was an employee of the
Defendant, CRST, 1nc,
"
,/
,I
i,
7. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 7,
!,
admitted.
-3-
8. As to the allegations contained in pa~ag~aph 8,
admitted.
9. As to the allegations contained in pa~agraph 9,
admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that at the
time in question, the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was operating a
1989 International Cabover tractor and was pulling a 1993
Fruehauf trailer owned by the Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc" and
leased to and operated on behalf of the Defendant, CRST, Inc, It
is specifically denied that at any time in question, the 1989
International Cabover t~actor was owned by the Defendant, CRST,
Inc" when to the contrary, at all times material to this cause
of action, the 1989 International Cabover tractor was owned by
the Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc, and leased to the Defendant,
CRST, Inc,
10, As to the allegations contained in pbragraph 10,
admitted.
r
I '
i
j
11, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 11,
it is admitted that at the time in question, the Defendant,
Michael Connor, was operating a 1990 Ford Taurus, As to all
other allegations contained in paragraph 11, after reasonable and
diligent investigation, the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without information or knowledge
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations,
-4-
il
88 the knowledge and means of proof thereof lie within the
exclusive knowledge and control of the Defendant, Michael Connor,
and/or the Plaintiffs, and same is therefore denied, and if
material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this cause,
12, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 12,
after reasonable and diligent investigation, the Defendants, Doy
L, Talbot, CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without
information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of said allegation, os the knowledge and means of proof
thereof lie within the excluoive knowledge and control of the
Defendant, Michael Connor, and/or the Plaintiffs, and same is
therefore denied, and if material, proof thereof is demanded at
the trial of thio causu.
13, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 13,
it is admitted that at the time in question, an impact between
the vehicle owned and operated by the Defendant, Michael connor,
and the tractor-trailer operated by the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot,
caused said tractor-trailer to crash through the metal median
barrier and into the east bound lanes of Route 581, It is
specifically denied that at any time material to this cause of
action, the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, operated his
tractor-trailer at a high rate of speed while attempting to
change lanes and struck Defendant Michael Connor's vehicle, when
to the contrary, at all times material to this cause of action,
-5-
the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, operated hiB tractor-trailer at or
near the Bpeod limit of 55 m.p,h, and remained traveling weDt in
the left-hand lane of Route 581 until the Defendant Michael
Connor's vehicle struck said tractor-trailer, AB to all other
allegationB contained in paragraph 13, after roaBonable and
diligent investigation, the Defendants, Day L, Talbot, CRST, Ino,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without information or knowledge
Bufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegation,
aB the knowledge and means of proof thereof lie within the
excluBive knowledge and control of the Defendant, Michael Connor,
and/or the PlaintiffB, and same is therefore denied, and if
material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this oause,
14, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 14,
it is admitted that at the time in question, a number of rolls of
paper were expelled from the trailer after the Defendant Michael
Connor's vehicle struck the tractor-trailer, As to all of the
.I,
~
I
!
I
other allegations contained in paragraph 14, after reasonable and
diligent investigation, the Defendants, Day L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without information or knowledge
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegation,
as the knowledge and means of proof thereof lie within the
exclusive knowledge and control of the Plaintiffs, and same is
therefore denied, and if material, proof thereof is demanded at
the trial of this cause.
I
)
-6-
15, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 15,
admitted,
16. Paragraphs 1 through 15 of the Answer of the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, eRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto,
17, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 17,
it is specifically denied that at any time material to this cause
of action, the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, opsrated his motor
vehicle in the scope and course of his employment for the
Defendant, CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc" in a negligent,
careless, wanton and/or reckless manner in the following I
Failing to have his motor vehicle under such
control as to be able to stop within th~ assured
cleared distance ahead, when to the contrary, at
all times material to this cause of action, the
Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, had his motor vehicle
under sufficient control to be able to stop within
the assured clear. distance ahead;
,
.,
Failing to apply his brakes in sufficient time to
avoid striking the Connor vehicle causing this
change reaction accident, when to the contrary,
the tractor-trailer did not strike the Connor
vehicle, rather the Connor vehicle struck the
tractor-trailer, causing the change reaction
accident and therefore there was insufficient time
for Doy Talbot to apply his brakes;
Failing to keep a proper watch for traffic on the
highway, when to the contrary, at all times
material to this cause of action, the Defendant,
Doy L, Talbot, kept a proper watch for traffic
upon and around him on the highway;
Failing to drive his vehicle with due regard for
the highway and traffIc conditi.ons which were
-7-
d)
"
I"
g)
0)
oxisting and at which he was or Ilhould have bean
aware, when to the contrary, at all timell material
to thill cause of action, the Defendant, Doy L,
Talbot, drove hill vehicle with due regard for the
highway and the traffic condit iono which were
existing and of which he wall or Ilhould have been
aware at the time in question,
In failing to keep proper and adequate control
over hill vehicle, when to the contrary, at all
times material to this caulle of action, the
Defendant, Day L, Talbot, kept proper and adequate
control over hill vehicle I
Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper watch
for the presence of other motor vehiclell on the
highway, when to the contrary, at all times
material to this cause of action, the Defendant,
Doy L, Talbot, kept ale~t and maintained a proper
watch for the presence of other vehiclell on or
about him on the highwaYI
Failing to yield the right-of-way to the Connor
vehicle, when to the contrary, at all times
material to thill cause of action, the Defendant,
Day L, Talbot, operated his motor vehicle wellt and
remained in the left-hand lane of Route 581 until
the Connor vehicle impacted the tractor-trailer on
its right-hand side, furthermore, the Connor
vebicle did not have the right-of-away in the
left-hand lane of Route 5811
Failing to stay with~n his lane of travel, when to
the contrary, at all times material to this cause
of action, the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, operated
his tractor-trailer west in the left-hand of Route
581 until it was impacted by the Connor vehicle on
its right-hand sidel
Failing to properly secure his load before
beginning to travel, when to the contrary, at all
times material to this caulle of action, the load
that was b~ing transported in the tractor-trailer
was properly secured in accordance with any and
all state and/or federal transportation
regulationsl and
Driving his vehicle upon the highway in a manner
endangering persons and property and in a reckless
manner with careless disregard to the rights and
safety of others and in violation of the Motor
Vehicle Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
f)
h)
i)
j)
-8-
and the Qtate of Indiana, when to the contrary, at
all timo~ material to this cause of action, the
Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, drove hi~ vehicle upon
the highway in a safe, cautious and careful manner
with proper regard to the rights and safety of
others and in complian~e with the Motor Vehicle
Code of the Commonwealth of Penn~ylvania and the
State of Indiana,
As to all other allegations contained in paragraph 17, ~ame
relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control of
the Plaintiffs, and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and
Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form a
belief ae to the truth thereof, and same are therefore are
denied, and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial
of this cause,
18, Paragraphs 1 through 18 of the Answer of the
Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto.
19. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 19,
it is specifically denied that at any time material to this cause
of action, the Defendant, CRs'r, Inc" was negligent, careless,
wanton and/or reckless in any manner in its employment of the
Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, and/or its entrustment of the 1989
International Cabover tractor-trailer to the Defendant, Pay L.
Talbot in the following;
a) Hiring and retaining a driver whom it was aware or
should have been aware was not competent and
-9-
qualified to operate a tractor-trailer on the
public highways and who did not exercise the
increase care and precautions necessary with a
tractor-trailer, when to the contrary, at the time
that the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was hired and
retained and all times material to this cause of
action, the Defendant, CRST, Inc" was aware that
the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was extr'emely
competent and qualified to operate a
tractor-trailer on the public highways and did
exercise the increased care and precautions
necessary with a tractor-trailer in his control,
b) Failing to properly train and instruct its driver
in the proper manner of operating and loading its
tractor-trailer, when to the contrary, at all
times material to this cause of action, the
Defendant, CRST, Inc" had properly trained and
instructed the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, in the
proper manner of operating and loading the
tractor-trailer in question,
c) Permitting Defendant Doy L, Talbot to operate its
truck although he knew or should have known that
Mr, Talbot did not have any training, experience
and judgment to adequately control and load it,
when to the oontrary, at all times material to
this cause of action, the Defendant, CRST, Inc.,
only permitted the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, to
operate its truck after it became aware and knew
that the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, did, in fact,
have the proper training, experience and judgment
to adequately control and load the tractor-trailer
in question,
d) Hiring, instructing and retaining its operator and
maintaining its trailer in a manner which
endangers persons and property without due regard
for the rights and safety of others on the highway
and in violation of the pennsrlvania Motor Vehicle
Code and the Iowa, Motor Vehic e Code, when to the
contrary, at all times material to this cause of.
action, the Defendant, CRST, Inc" hired,
instructed and retained the Defendant, Doy L.
Talbot, and maintained its tractor-trailers in a
proper and safe manner so that persons and
property would not be endangered and with due
regard to the rights and safety of others on the
highway and in compliance with the provisions of
the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code and the Iowa
Motor Vehicle Code I
-to-
e)
Permitting Defendant Talbot to operate and load
the tractor-trailer although it knew or ehould
have known that he wae careleee or recklese in the
operation and loading of trucke or other motor
vehiclee, when to the contrarr' at all timee
material to thie cause of act on, the Defendant,
eRST, Inc" permitted the Defendant, Doy L,
Talbot, to operate and load the tractor-trailer in
queetion, only after it was aware and knew that
the Defendant, DOY L, Talbot, wae knowledgeable
and competent to operate and load tractor-trailers
lIuch as the one in question, and
Failing to properly r,eet, train and supervise the
operation of its vehicle in accordance with the
duty a commercial vehicle owee to the safety of
other motorists on the highway, when to the
contrary, at all times material to this cauee of
action, the Defendant, CRST, Inc" properly
teeted, trained and supervised the operation of
ite tractor-trailers in accordance with the duty
that a commercial vehicle owner owes to the eafety
of other motorists on the highway.
f)
Ae to all other allegations contained in paragraph 19, eame
relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control of
the ~laintiffs, and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and
Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without suf f icient knowledge to form a
belief as to the truth thereof, and same are therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause,
20, Paragraphs 1 through 19 of the Answer of the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto,
21, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 21,
it is specifically denied that at any time material to this cause
-11-
of action, the Defendant, Doy L, 'ralbot, was an agent, servant,
apparent agent, and/or employee of the Defendant, Rapid Lessing,
Inc., when to the contrary, at all times material to this cause
of action, the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was a servant, agent,
apparent agent and/or employee of the Defendant, CRST, Inc.
However, if it is determined that legally, the Defendant, Rapid
Leasing, Inc, was an employer of the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, at
any time material to this cause of action, it is specifically
denied that at any time material to this cause of action, the
Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc" was negligent, careless, wanton
and/or reckless in any manner in its employment of the Defendant,
Doy L, Talbot, and/or its entruDtment of the 1989 International
cabover tractor-trailer to the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot in the
followingl
I'.
,
~ I
'I
I'
i
1
'I
I
a)
Hiring and retaining a driver whom it was aware or
should have been aware WaD not competent and
qualified to operate a tractor-trailer on the
public highways and who did not exercise the
increase care and precautions neceDsary with a
tractor-trailer, when to the contrary, at the time
that the Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, was hired and
retained and all times material to this cause of
action, the Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc., was
aware that the Defendant, DOr L. Talbot, was
extremely competent and qual fied to operate a
tractor-trailer on the public highways and did
exercise the increased care and precautions
necessary with a tractor-trailer in his control,
Failing to properly train and instruct its driver
in the proper manner of operating and loading its
tractor-trailer, when to the contrary, at all
times material to this cause of action, the
Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc., had properly
trained and instructed tbe Defendant, Doy L.
Talbot, in the proper manner of op~rating and
loading the tractor-trailer in question,
bl
-12-
'\
c) Permitting Defendant Doy L, Talbot to operate its
truck although he knew or should have known that
Mr. Talbot did not have any training, experience
and judgment to adequately control, operate and
load it, when to the contrary, at all times
material to this cause of action, the Defendant,
Rapid Leasing, lnG" only permitted the Defendant,
Doy L. Talbot, to operate its truck after it
became aware and knew that the Defendant, Doy L,
Talbot, did, in fact, have the proper training,
experience and judgment to adequately control,
operate and load the tractor-trailer in question,
d) Hiring, instructing and retaining its operator and
maintaining its trailer in a manner which
endangers persons and property without due regard
for the rights and safety of others on the highway
and in violation of the pennsrlvania Motor Vehicle
Code and the Iowa Motor Vehic e Code, when to the
contrary, at all times material to this cause of
action, the Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc" hired,
instructed and retained the Defendant, Doy L.
Talbot, and maintained its tractor-trailers in a
proper and safe manner so that persons and
property would not be endangered and with due
regard to the rights and safety of others on the
highway and in compliance with the provisions of
the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code and the Iowa
Motor Vehicle Code,
e) Permitting Defendant Talbot to operate and load
the tractor-trailer although it knew or should
have known that he was careless or reckless in the
operation and loading of trucks or other motor
vehicles, when to the contrary, at all timeD
material to this cause of action, the Defendant,
Rapid Leasing, Inc" permitted the Defendant, Doy
L, Talbot, to operate and load the tractor-trailer
in questi.on, only after it was aware and knew that
the Defendant, Doy L, Talbot, was knowledgeable
and competent to operate and load tractor-trailers
such as the one i.n question, and
Failing to properly test, train and supervise the
operation of its vehicle in accordance with the
duty a commercial vehicle owes to the safety of
other motorists on the highway, when to the
contrary, at all times material to this cause of
aotion, the Defendant, Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
properly tested, trained and Bupervised th~
operation of its tractor-trailers in accordance
f)
I
,
,
I
-13-
with the duty that a commercial vehicle owner owes
to the safety of other motorist6 on the highway.
As to all other allegations contained in paragraph 19, same
reiate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control of
the Plaintiffs, and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and
Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form a
belief as to the truth thereof, and same are therefore are
denied, and if material, proof ther~of is demanded at the trial
of this cause,
22. Paragraphs 1 through 21 of the Answel" of the
Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto.
23, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 23,
admitted,
24, Paragraphs 1 through 23 of the Answer of the
Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRET, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Ino.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto.
25, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 25,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and tha Defendants, noy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without RUfficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
-14 -
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause.
26, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 26,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause.
27. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 27/
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintif.fs and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc., are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause.
28, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 28,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Day L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and Dame is therefore d~nied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause.
-15-
29, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 29,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
ot the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause,
30. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 30,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof., and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
;
,
,
\
cause,
I
. I
i
31. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 31,.
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to torm
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
I
I
:\
cause.
32. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 32,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and oontrol
I
I
I
I
~
,I
'I,
-16-
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
cause,
I
,I
i
33, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 33,
same relate to matters within the exclusive knowledge and control
of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, lnc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" are without sufficient knowledge to form
a belief as to the truth thereof, and same is therefore denied,
and if material, proof thereof is demanded at the trial of this
"
1
I
I
I
I
cause.
34, Paragraphs 1 through 33 of the Answer of the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by 19ference hereto,
!
! '
!
35. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 35,
as they relate to the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and/or Rapid Leasing, Inc" same relate to matters within the
exclusive knowledge and control of the Plaintiffs and the
Defendants, Doy 1., Talbot, CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are without sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the truth
thereof, and same is therefore denied, and if material, proof
thereof is demanded at the trial of thio cause, As to said
i
, I
-17-
~
allegations in paragraph 35 that relate to the Defendant, Michael
Connor, admitted.
36. Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the ~nswer of the
Defendants, Doy ~. Talbot, CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference hereto,
37, As to the allegations contained in paragraph 37,
admitted.
II
"
,I
38, ~s to the IAllegations contained in paragraph 38,
admitted.
,I,
39, As to the al.legat ions contained in paragraph 39,
admitted,
,1
WHEREFORE, the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc., request judgment in their favor and
ag~inst the Plaintiffs,
~EW MATTER
By way of further answer to the allegations contained
in the Plaintiffs' Complaint, the Defendants, Doy ~, Talbot,
CRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc" set forth the following New
Matterl
-18-
40. If the Plaintiff, Melissa D, Whisler, has
sustained 8 loss of wages or income, or in the future may sustain
a loss of wages or income, as a result of the motor vehicle
accident of June 16, 1993, which loss of wages and income the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
deny, any alleged wage or income lo~s of the Plaintiff,
Melissa D, Whisler, is a result of the said Plaintiff's voluntary
refusal to remume employment or obtain alternate available
employment within her alleged physical restrictions, which
physical restrictions, the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" deny.
41, The claim of the Plaintiff, Melissa D. Whisler,
for wage loss and medical care costs are barred, in whole or in
part, by the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Financial
Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S,A. 1701, ~~.
, '
,
42. If the Plaintiff, Melissa D, Whisler, has been
compensated pursuant to the Workmen's compensation Act for wage
loss and medical expenses allegedly resulting from the motor
vehicle accident of June 18, 1993, and if it is determined that
the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, eRST, Inc. and/or Rapid Leasing,
Inc., are in any way liable for the Plaintiff's alleged injuries
and damages, which tiability is expreesly denied, said
Plaintiff's claims against said Defendants are barred and/ox'
I.
,
,
,
I
,
, .
I
I
!
I
I
I
11
. ,
-19-
diminished by the applicable provisiona of the penn.ylvania
Workmen's Compensation Act, as amended,
WHEREFORE, the Defendants, Doy I" Talbot, CRST, Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc., request that Plaintiffs' Complaint be
dismissed with prejudice,
~EW MATTER UNDER ~R.C.P. 2252(~)
By way of further answer to the allegations contained
in Plaintiffs' Complaint, the Defendants, Day L, Talbot, CRST,
Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc" set forth the following New Matter
under Pa. R,C,P, 2252(d) I
4J, Paragraphs 1 through 39 of the Answers of the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, eRST, Inc, and Rapid Leasing, Inc.,
are incorporated herein by reference thereto,
I
44, On or about June 18, 1993 at approximately
10145 p,m" Doy Talbot was operating a 1989 International Tractor
that was pulling a 1993 Fruehauf Trailer owned and/or operated by
the Plaintiff, Rapid Leasing, Inc" and leased to the Plaintiff,
eRsT, Inc" westbound in the passing lane of Route 581 in
Cumberland county, Pennsylvania, at the intersection of Route 581
and the entrance ramp from Routes 11 and 15,
'I,
, I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
r
-20-
45, At the aforementioned date, time and place, ~ 1990
Ford Taurus owned and operated by the Defendant, Michael Connor
and/or owned and/or operated by The Connor Group, was traveling
in a south-westerly direction on the entrance ramp from Routes 11
and 15 onto Route 581, The Defendant, Michael Connor was an
employee and/or officer of the Defendant, The Connor Group, and
was operating said Ford Taurus within the scope of his
employment, agency or authority for the Defendant, The Connor
Group.
"
I
!
d
46, The negligence of Michael Connor and the vicarious
negligence of Tile Connor Group was a proximate cause of the
collision and damages sustained by the Plaintiffs. Such
negligence included, but is not limited tOI
I
I
I
1'1"
t
,
a)
In operating a motor vehicle at a rate of speed
which rendered him incapable of oontrolling its
movements properly I
In failing to have his motor vehicle under control
at all times!
In operating his motor vehicle in a manner so as
to be unable to control its movements safely and
properly!
b)
c)
d)
e)
In operating a motor vehicle at such a speed
to cause it to travel into the path of the
Plaintiffs' tractor-trailerl
In failing to maintain his motor vehicle in a
safe, sound and road worthy mechanical condition!
so as
f) In failing to keep a look out in the direction in
which he was traveling, taking due note of the
roadway conditions that then and there confronted
him, and responding accordingly!
-21-
g)
In failing to yield the right-of-way to oncoming
trafficl
In failing to operata his motor vehicle in
accordance with the rules of the road, including,
but not limited to prnper stopping, yielding to
oncoming traffic, reckless driving in violation of
Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code 75 Pa, C,S,A.
83323(b) at al, and the ordinances of Cumberland
County in such case made and provided I
h)
i)
In operating a motor vehicle while under
influence of alcohol or other controlled
substance I
the
j)
In operatin9 hia motor vehicle in such a
to totally disregard the care and safety
property of the Plaintiffs I
k) In otherwise operating or maintaining a motor
vehicle in a reckless, careless and negligent
manner gen~rally and as is more specifically set
forth above,
manner as
of the
46, The Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc, and
Rapid Leasing, Inc., have denied and continue to deny that they
have any liability to the Plaintiffs in this litigation. If it
is established that there is liability upon the Defendants,
Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc. and/or Rapid Leasing, Inc" as
described in the Plaintiffs' Complaint, it may be established
that the Plaintiffs' damages and losses occurred as a result of
the negligence, carelessness and/or tortious conduct of the
Defendant, Michael Connor.
'"
I
i
'!
I
,
,I
,
i
I
I
47, The Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, CRST, Inc. and
Rapid Leasing, Inc., claim against the Defendant, Michael connor,
for common law indemnity, contractual indemnity and/or
I
i
,
, I
I
I
..l
"
,
i
-22-
contributions for any sums it is called upon to pay as a result
of thi~ litigation, for the reason that if any liability existed
herein, said liability was that of the Defendant, Michael Connor,
or that said Defendant, Michael Connor, is liable over to the
Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, eRST, Ine, and/or Rapid Leasing, Inc,
WHEREFORE, the Defendants, Doy L, Talbot, CRST, Inc,
and Rapid Leasing, Inc" demand judgment against the Defendant,
Michael Connor.
Respectfully submitted,
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKEE
BY~___~i.. ~.,.Jh
J es R, Han le, Esqu re
tox'ney for the Defendants,
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC, and
RAPID LEASING, INC,
I
; !
, ,
"
"
';I .,
"
,
;tl
I
,
"
, ,
"
, '
-ru-
v . RIP I CAT ION
I verify that the statement a made in the f.oregoing
AN~W'R. NRW MATTIR AND Haw MATTRR UNDER Pa R.C.P. 2252'd)
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information
and belief.
I under.tand that false statement. herein are made
subject to the p~naltie8 of 18 Pa. C.S. 14904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
Datel
~n.~ Wi "94
By I ii~'l.t.J'1 u~
Val l1am., .quire
;1 1
I
,
, ,
"
,j " I
, I
,I
I ,
IN TH. COURT or COMMON PL!AS or CUMB!R~D COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
ULIIIA D. WHISLER AND COREY J.
WHISLER, her hu.band,
Plaintift
I
I Civil Aotion w Law
I
I
I No. 94-1451 civil
I
I
I
I
I
'I
~
va.
DOY L. TALIOTT, CRST, INC'L
RAPID LEASING, INC., and MICHAIL
CONNOR,
I"
1
',"1
I
I
,I
(
Datandant
,RAICIP. rOR ENTRY or APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO Pa.R.C.p. 101a
'I
10 TH! PROTHONOT~Y,
i'
Rindly antar the appearanoe ot Robart A. Lerman, ..quira, Ann
Nar9aret Grab, ..quire and Grittith, striokler, Lerman, Solymo. ,
calkin., a. attorney. tor tha Detendant, Mioha.l Connor, in the
above-oaptioned .attar and .ark the dooket aooordingly.
i
GRIFFITH, STRICRLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
BYII4.~. bQ
ROnERT A. LERMAN
Supreme Court 1.0. No.
.~
07490
"
1
BYI a~7 ht-.
ANN MA GARB'l' CRAB
Suprame Court 1.0. No. 55986
Attorl1ay. tor Miohael Connor
110 South Northarn Way
York, PA 17402
Talephone No. (717) 757w7602
i,
i
I
'I
,
r
t
\
I
,
I
f
18X9
I ,
"
.
, ,
I" THE COURT or COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHISLlR AND COREY J.
WHISLlR, her hUlband,
Plaintift
Defendant
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
No. 94-14~1 civil
civil Aotion - Law
VI.
DOY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and MICHAEL
CON"OR,
~EPLY or MICHAEL CO~NOR TO DaY TALBOTT~
CRST AND ~~ID LEASING. INC.'S CROSSCLAIM
43. Paragraphl 1 through 47 ot the Answer ot Michael Connor
are incorporated herein a. though tully .et torth at length.
44. Denied. Atter re..onable inve.tigaUon, Detendant i.
without knowledge or intormation .uttioient to torm a beliet al to
the truth or veracity ot the allegation. oontained in paragraph 44
ot Plaintitt'. Complaint and .allle are denied and .triot proof
thereot de.anded.
4~. Denied.
It i. .peoifically denied that at the
atore.entioned date, time and place, a 1994 'l'auru. owned and
operated by the Defendant, Miohael connor, and/or owned and/or
operated bY' The connor Group, wae travelinq in a southwesterly
direotion on the entranoe ramp from Route. 11 and 1~ onto Route
~81. On the oontrary, it i. averred that at all tillle. relevant
hereto, Michael connor was operatinq hi. vehicle in a we.terly
direction in the riqhthand lane ot sa ~1l1.
allegation ot paragraph 44 i. admitted.
46. Denied. It i. .peoifically denied that the neqliqenoe
The remaininq
of Michael connor wu a proximate oau.e of the ooUbion and
da.ave. .u.tained by the plaintiff'.. Buoh negligenoe inoluded,
but i. not limited tOI
In operating a motor vehiole at a rate of .peed whioh
rendered him inoapable of oontrolling ih movement.
properly I
In failing to have hi. mQtor vehiole under control at all
time. I
In oferating hi. motor vehicle in a manner .0 a. to be
un.b e to control it. movemene. .afely and properly I
In oper.ting a motor vehiole at .uch a .peed .0 a. to
oau.e it to travel into the path of the plaintifh'
tractor-trailer,
In failing to maintain hi. motor vehiole in a .afe, .ound
and road worthy mechanical condition I
In failinq to keep a look out in a direction in which he
wa. travelinq, taking due note of the roadway condition.
that then and there confronted him, and re.pondinq
locordinqlYI
In failinq to yield the right of way to oncominq traffiol
In failinq to operate hie motor vehiole in accordanoe
with the rule. of the road, inoluding but not limited to
proper .topping, rielding to onoominq traffio, reokle..
driving in violat on of Penn.ylvania Motor Vehiole Code
75 Pa.C.B.A. 13323(b) et a1. and the ordinanoe. of
cumberland county in .uch ca.e made and provided I
In operating a motor vehiole while under the influence
of alcohol or other oontrolled .ubBtanoe,
In orerating hi. motor vehiole in .uch a manner a. to
tota ly di.regard the oare and .afety of the property of
the plaintiff.'
In otherwi.e operatinq or maintaininq a motor vehicle in
a reckle.., carelee. and negligent manner generally and
a. ie more .paoifically .et forth above.
On the contrary, it i. averred that at all time. relevant hereto,
anewerinq Oefendant, Mioha.l Connor operated hi. vehicle oarefully,
lawfully, prudently and in full oompliance with the Penn.ylvania
a)
b~
c)
d)
e)
f)
9)
h)
i)
j)
k)
Motor V.hicl. Cod.. Th. Connor Grcup h not. party to thh .ction
.nd .ccordinqly, no r..pon.. i. n.c....ry and non. i. .ad..
41. Deni.d. It i. .p.cific.lly d.nied th.t the Def.nd.nt.
Doy L. Talbott, CRST, Inc., and R.pid IAuinq, Inc. h.v. any
liability to the Pl.intiff'. for this litiqation. It i. furth.r
d.ni.d that if it i. ..tabli.h.d that th.r. i. liability upon the
d.f.nd.nt., Doy L. T.lbott, CRST, Ino., and/or R.pid IA..inq, Inc.,
a. d..crib.d in the plaintiff'. Compl.int, it may b. ..t.bli.h.d,
th.t the Pl.intiff'. d.maq.. .nd lo...ft occurred a. the r..ult of
the n.qliq.nc., carel...n... .nd/or tortiou. conduct of the
D.f.nd.nt, Hich..l Connor. On the contrary, it i. av.rr.d that .t
all time. rel.v.nt h.reto, an.w.rinq D.fend.nt, Hich..l Connor
.ct.d c.refully, l.wfully, and prudently and in full complianc.
with the p.nn.ylv.ni. Hotor V.hicl. Cod..
47. Dani.d. Paraqraph 47 con.titut.. a conclu.ion of law to
which no r..pon.ive pl.adinq i. n.c....ry and ..m. h d....d
d.nied.
WHEREFORI, Defendant, Michael connor, d.mand. judgment aqain.t
Def.ndant. Doy Talbott, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Lea.inq, Inc. toq.ther
with int.r..t and co.t. of .uit.
GRIffITH, STRIC~LlR, LERNAN,
SOLYHOS , CAL~INS
BYIJEf!~~
sup rem. Court 1.0. No. 07490
I
,
,
I I
1")
"
"
" I
" I
,
'I
'I
i ;
~ IIII
..
....... .,
" ~..
.. .,,1
r~ " 'I I ! ~
'.
~ ..
':~. (
"- "
:t~'! ,
"
"
I,
,
I,
d
'I
"
"
I' ,
I'
I,
I'
I
I
...
"
..
,
.
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLEAS or CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MILI18A D. WHISLER AND COREY J.
WHIILlR, her hu.band,
Plaintiff
Civil Aotion - Law
VI.
No. 94-1451 civil
DOY 1.. TA1.BOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and MICHAEL
CONNOR,
Dotfendant
~.,.., ~.. MATT'. AND CIDIICLAIM
AND NOW, com~. the Defendant by and through hi. attorneYl,
Griffith, Strickler, Lerman, solymo. , calkin., and Robert A.
ZAman, lIl.quire and Ann Marqaret Grab, Esquire and file. thi.
Anlwer and New Matter in responSE! to Plaintiff's complaint, and
Itlte. a. tollowsl
1. oenied. After reuonable investigation, Defendant JB
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief a. to
the truth or v.racity of the allegation. contain.d in paragraph 1
of Plaintiff'. Complaint and same are denied and striot proof
th.reot demanded.
a. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief a. to
the truth or veracity of the allegations oontained in paragraph a
of Plaintiff'. complaint and same arEl denied and strict proof
th.reof demanded.
). Denied. After reasonable .investigation, Defendant 111
without knowledge or information sUffioient to torm a beliet BS to
1
the t~uth o~ ve~ao1ty of the alleqatione contained in paraqraph 3
of PlaintUf'. complaint and ..me an 4enied and etrict proof
the~eof demanded.
". Oenied. After naeonable inveetiqation, Defendant h
without knowledqe or information eUllicient to form a belief ae to
the t~uth o~ veracity of the alleqatione contained in paraqraph "
of Plaintiff'e complaint and eame are denied and etrict proof
thereof demanded.
5. Admitted.
6. Oenied. After reasonable invllstigation, Defendant ie
without knowledqe or information suffioient to form a belief ae to
the truth or veraaity of the allegatione contained in paraqraph 6
of Plaintiff'e Complaint and same are denied and strict proof
thereof demanded.
7. Oenied. After reaeonable investigation, Defendant ie
without knowledqe or information sufficient to form a belief ae to
the truth or veracity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 7
of Plaintiff'e Complaint and same are denied and strict proof
thereof demanded.
8. Denied. After rellsonable investigation, Defendant ie
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or veracity of the allegations contained in paragraph 8.
of plaintiff'e complaint and same are denied and strict proof
thereof demanded.
II. Denied. After reasonablo investigation, Defendant i.
without knowledqe or information SUfficient to form a belief .. to
l'
2
the truth or veracity of the alleqation8 oontained ln paraqraph Il
of PlaintUf '. Complaint and aame are denied and atrict proof
thereof demanded.
lOt Denied. Atter rBll80nable inveati9ation, Defendant i.
wlthout knowledqe or information aufficient to form a belief a. to
the truth or veracity of the alleqationa aonteined in paraqraph lO
of PlaintUf' a Complaint and ..me are denled and .trict proof
thereof demanded.
, ,
I
1'1
1'1
11. Admitted.
12. oenied. It i. specifically denied that at that time and
place, Defendant Doy L. Talbott and Defendant Michael connor were
operating their vehicle. directly be.ide .ach other on Route 58l.
On the aontrary, it ia averred that at all time. relevant hereto
and durinq the aequence of eventa, Michael Connor waa behind Doy
Talbott on sa ~81.
13. Denied. It i. speaifically denied that at that time and
place, Defendant Doy L. Talbott operated hi. tractor trailer at a
hiqh rate of apeed while attempting to ahange lanea, .truck
defendant, Michael Connor'e vehicle, who waa alao attempting to
change lane., cauainq defendant connor'. vehicle to apin out of
control, and causinq the tractor-trailer beinq operated by
Defendant Doy L. Talbott to craah throuqh a metal median barrier
and into the eaatbound lanae of Route ~81. On the contrary, it i.
averred th~t at no time during the aequence of event. did Michael
connor attempt to chanqe lanea a. he traveled we.t on SR 58l and
3
turther that Michael Conncr acted at all timee relevant hereto
caretully, lawtully and prudently.
14. Denied. Atter reaaonable inveeti9ation, Defendant ie
wlthout knowledqe or information eufticient to form a belief ae to
the truth or veracity of the alleqatione contained in paraqraph 14
ot Plalntiff' e Complaint and samfl are denied and striot proof
thereot demanded.
15. Denied. Paragraph 1~ constitutee a conclusion of law to
whioh no reepone1ve pleading ie neceseary and same ie d.emed
denied.
aoulf'l' 1
Melieea D. ~i.ler and Corey J. Whisler v. Doy L. Talbot
16. -17. Paraqraphs 16 and 17 do not pertain to Answering
Detendant Miahael Connor and no response is necessary.
COUlf'l' XX
Meli.ea D. Whieler .nd Corey J. Whisler v. caST. Inc.
18. -1Il. Paragraphe 18 and 19 do not pertain to Answerin9
Defendant Michael Connor and no response is necessary.
COUNT XXI
Me1i.e. D. Whieler and Corev J. Whisler v. RaDid Leasinq. Inc.
20.-21. Paragraphs 20 and 21 do not pert~in to Answering
Defendant Michael Connor and no response is neoessary~
OOUlf'l' IV
Melieea D. Whisler and Corey J. Whisler v. Michael Connor
22. Paragraphs 1 through 15 of Defendant'e Answer are
incorporated herein a. though tully set forth at length.
4
:013. Denied. It ie epeoifically denied that the
atorementioned acoident and all of the injuries and damaqee .et
fOlC'th hereinafter euetained by Plaintiff. Meli..a D. Whisler and
Corey J. Whi.ler are the direct and prolCimate result of the
ne9ligent, oarelees, wanton, and reckl.e. manner in whioh Detendent
Michael Connor operated hi. motor vehiole .. follows I
(a) tailure to have hia motor vehicle under .uch control a.
to be able tQ stop within the ..eurad olear diltance
ahead,
(b) failure to apply his brakes in sufficient time to avoid
etriking the tractor-trailer causing thie ohain reaot1on
aocident,
(e) railure to keep a proper watoh for traffic on thll
hiqhway,
(d) failure to drive his vehicle with due regard tor the
hi9hway an~ traffic conditicn. which wee exietinq and ot
which he wae or should have been aware,
(e) tailure to keep proper and adequate cont,rol over hie
vehicle,
(f) t.ailure to keep alert and maintain a proper watch for the
pre..noe of other motor vehicle. on the highway,
(q) tailure to yield the riqht-of-way to the tractor-trailer,
(h) tailure to stay within his travel lano,
(i) driving hi. vehicle while intoxicated, and
(j) dr1vinq hie vehicle upon the highway in a .anner
endanqering persons and prcperty and in a r.ckle.. manlier
5
with oarele.. disregard to the rights and safety of
other. and in violation of the Motor Vehiole Code of the
Commonwealth ot Penneylvania,
On the oontrary, it ie averred that at all times rele',ant hereto,
Anewerinq Defendant Michael Connor operated his motor vehiole
carefully, lawfully, prudently and in full compliance with the
Penneylvania Motor Vehicle Code.
CLAIM 1
Melie.a D. Whieler v. Doy L. Talbot. CRST, Inc.
BA>>id Lea.inq. Inc. and Michae\ Connor
24. Paraqraphs 1 through 15 and 23 are incorporated herein
a. thouqh fully .et forth at length.
25. Denied. After reasonable investigatior., Defendant i.
without knowledge or information oufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or veracity of the allegations contained in paraqraph 25
of Plaintiff'lS Complaint and same are denied and 8trict proof
thereot demanded.
26. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant i.
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief a8 to
the truth or veraoity of the allegations oontained in paraqraph 26
of Plaintiff'. Complaint and same are denisd and Btrict proof
thereot demanded.
27. Denied. After rea80nable inve8tigation, Defendant ie
without knowledge or intcrmation 8ufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or veracity of the allegations contained in paragraph 27
6
ot plaintiff'. Complaint and eame are denied and at.dot. proof
thereot demanded.
as. Oenied. Aft.er rneonable inve.UqaUon, Defendant le
without knowledge or informat.ion sufficlent t.o form a bellef ae t.o
the truth or veracity of the alleqat.lone contained ln parlqreph 38
of plaintiff'. complaint and eame are denied and .t.riot proof
thereot demanded.
21l. Denied. After reasonable inveetiqat.lon, I)efendant i.
wlthout knowledqe or information suffioient to form a billet ae t.o
the truth or veracity of the allegation. contained in paraqraph 29
of Plaintiff'e complaint and same are denled and etrict proot
thereof demanded.
30. Denied. After reaeonable invedUqlltion, Defendant i.
without knowledge or information eutficient to form a beliet .e to
the truth or veracity of the alleqations contained in paraqraph 30
ot Plaintiff '. complaint and eame are denied and strict proot
thereot demanded.
31. Denied. Attar reasonable investlqaUon, Defendant i.
without knowledqe or information QUffioient to form a belief ae to
the truth or veracity of the al hqRtiQIIH oontained in pllrllqraph 31
ot Plaintift'. Complaint and ume are den ied and strict proof
thereot demanded.
32. Denied. After rea.onable inveatiqat ion, Defendant i.
without knowledqe cr information aurfioient to form a belief .e to
the truth or veracity of the alleqi:\tiolld oontained in paraC)raph 32
7
ot plaintift'. complaint and same are denied and striot proot
the~eot demanded.
U. Denied. Atter rea.onable investigation,' Defendant 18
without knowledqe or intormation sUffiQient to form a belief se to
the truth or veracity ot the allsgations oontained in paraqraph 33
ot Plaintiff's Complaint and same are denied and strict proot
thereot demanded.
CLaIM n
corey ~p :h~. ~~~ L~ ~a~~~~~. CRST. I~o..
Rsgid r. n 81 Connor
34. Paraqraphs 1 through l~ and 23-33 are incorporated herein
as thouqh fully set forth at len9th.
35. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendant ie
without knowledqe or information sUfticient to form a belief as to
the truth or veraoity of the alle9ations contained in paragraph 35
of Plaintiff'. Complaint and same are denied and strict proof
thereof demanded.
CLaIM In
Meli..a D. Whisler and Corey J. Whisler v. Michael Connor
36. Paragraphs 1 t.hrough 15 and 23-35 ars incorporated herein
ae thouqh fully eet forth at length.
37. Denied. Paraqraph 37 constitutes a oonclusion of law to
which no reeponeive pleading is necessary and samo is deemed
denied.
38. Denied. It is specifically denied that Detendant'e
conduct ot operating a vehicle while illtoxioated constitute.
8
out~ageou. conduct and a reckless indifference to the righte of
othe~ pe~.on. on the highway. It is further denied that Defendant
Connor knew or should have known that operating a motor vehicle
while intoxicated creat.d a high degree of ri.k to other person.
on the ~oadway. On the contrary, it is averred that at all time.
relevant hereto, anewering Defendant, Michael Connor, operated hi.
.oto~ vehicle carefUlly, lawfully, prudently, and in full
ooapliance with the Penneylvania Motor Vehiole Code.
311. Denied. It i. specifically denied that any oonduot of
Mlchael Connor conetituted wanton and wilful negligence, i.
out~aqeoue, and entitles Plaintiff's to an award of punitive
damaqe. On the contrary, it is averred that at all timee relevant
hereto, anewerinq Defendant, Hichael connor, operated hie motor
vehlole oarefully, lawfully, prUdently, and in full compliance with
the Penn.ylvania Motor Vehicle Code.
WHIRBrORI, Michael Connor demands judgment in his favor and
aqainet the Plaintiffs together with interest and cost of euit.
NI" MATTIR
40. Paragraphs 1 through 15 and 23 - 39 are incorporated
herein a. thouqh fully set forth at length.
41. Plaintiff'e Complaint fails to state a cause of action
aqain.t Michael Connor upon which relief can be granted.
42. Plaintiff, Melis.a D. Whisler was contributorily and/or
oomparatively negligent, which contributory and/or oomparative
negligence was a substantial faotor in bringing about her alleged
injurie. and damaqee.
9
u. plaintiff MeU..a O. Whialer'. alleqed injurie. and
damaq.. were the reeult of her own eol. neqliqence.
U. plaintiff. MeU.ea D. Whieler and Corey J. Whieler'e
alleqed injuri.e and damaqes may have been the reault of acte or
oai..ione of Third Partie. over whom Answering Oefendant Michael
Oonnor had no leqll reeponeibility or control.
45. No act or failure to aot on the part of Michael connor
wae a proximate oau.. or Plaintiffe Melisea O. Whi.ler and Corey
J. Whi.ler'e alleged injuries and damages.
46. plaintiff has not sustained a serious injury as defined
by Aot 19110-6, 7~ Pa.C.B.A. 11702.
47. Plaintiff's claim for non-economic damaqes may be barred
becauee Plaintiff has elect~d a limited tort option as eet forth
in Act 1Il90-6, 7~ Pa.O.S.A. 1l70~(b) (3) (d).
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Michael connor, demand. judgment in hi.
favor and aqainst the Plaintiff together with interest and coete
of .uit.
'i
,
" I
'ii
"I
"
CROSICLAIII
IIJmlnL conol V. DOY TJ'LBOT. CRIT, INC. ~ND RAnD LIUINQ. 1110.
.... Paraqraphe 1 through 15 and 23 through 48 are
incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length.
n. Michael connor expressly and specitioallY denies any
liability to the Plaintiffs or any party in this action for either
oontribution or indemnification.
50. If Plaintiff.' alleqations as to defendant Doy Talbott,
CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc. ehould be proven true at the
10
tl.. of trial, then it ie averred that .aid Defendanta ara eolely
liable to the flaintiff in thie action.
51. An.werinq Defendant, Michael Connor, hereby joine
Dd.ndantB Ooy Talbot, CRST, lnc., and Rapid Leaainq, Inc. ..
additional defendante to thie matter purauant to the provieione of
Pa.R.C.P. 1225:1 (d) for the purposes of protecting its riqhte of
oontribution and/or indemnity.
WHIRlrORI, Anewerlnq Defendant, Miohael connor, demande
jUd9lllent in hie favor and against the Plaintiff toqether with
int.r.st and coat. of suit. Alternatively, answerin9 Defendant
Michael Connor demands that in the event he is found liable to the
Plaintiff or any other party on any thllory of liability, that
jUd9lllent be entered in his favor and against defendante Doy
Talbott, CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc. for contribution and/or
indemnity to the full extent of ani liability anewerinq defendant
Michael Connor, Inc. might have to any party to the proceedin9.
GRIFFITH, STRlCKLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
BYI~'^~
ROB RT A. LERMAN
supreme Court I.D. No. 07490
lay'
BYI
A MARG RET
supreme Court I. D. No. ~59815
Attorney. for Michael Connor
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
Telephone No. (717) 7~7-7602
11
..,
,
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLlAS or CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
MILISSA D. WHISLER AND COREY J.
WHISLER, her hu.band,
Plaintiff
COY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LlASING, IHC., and MICHAEL
CONNOR,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
No. 114-1451 civil
Civil Aotion - Law
v..
Def.ndant
CERTI,ICATZ 0. smRVICR
AND NOW, thie
E.quir., a member
/ /""" day of May, 19114, I, Ann Narvar.t Grab,
.
of the Urm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLlR, LlRNAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS, I.quire., hereby c.rtify that I hav., thi. dati,
..rved a oopy of Re.pon.1 of Michael Connor to Defendant'. Request
for Production of Document. by United state. Nail, addr....d to the
party or attorney of record a. follow..
Richard A. sadlook, I.quire
Anvino , Rovn.r
4503 North Front Street
Harri.burg, PA 17110
Jame. R. Hankle, I.q.
Feld.tein, Grinberq, stein' McKee
4ae Boulevar.d of the Allie.
Pitt.burqh, PA 15219
GRIFFITH~ STRICKLIR[ LlRMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
1b6b
BY. ~}IJ1 ~
ANN MARGARET GRAB, ESQUIRE
Attorney for Micha.l Connor
Supreme Court 1.0. f 5~986
110 South Northern Way
York, Penn.ylvania 17402
Telephone. (717) 757-7602
'1
"
"
,
"
"
I
\'1,
"
, '
"
, ,
I
" ~
?11, ';'1; r ,II'
- ~ III
-, "
-.,~: "
[~ " I ! ~
t.,.J
r~ -j I
".
.
.',
",
, '
I!
!l
",
"-,
)
"
,.
I
I
.1
II
I
. "\DAT^\~.H\NQT\a'I'1
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MlilI.ISSA D. WHISLER aud
CORRY J. WHISLER, her husband,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
Defendants.
"
; .1
I, ,
I.
"
,
, "
1 CIVIL ACTION - LAW
)
)
)
)
I
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
I
i
NOI
94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
MOTION FOR ADMISSION OF VISITINO
ATTORNEY
Filed on Behalf of Defendants,
DOY L. TALBOT, ~RST, INC. and
RAPID LEASING, INC.
Counsel of Record for these
Parties I
JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE
PA I.D. NOI 36019
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKiE
Firm I.D. 11084
428 Boulevard of the Allies
pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 471-0677
,
, ,
, ,
, ,
., ,
,
i'
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLMD COUNTY, PENNSYLVMIA
MELISSA D. WHISLER and ) CIVIL ACTION - LAW
COREY J. WHISLER, her husband, )
) NOI 94-1451 Civil Term
Plaintiffs, )
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
v. )
)
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC. , )
RAPID LEASING, INC. , and )
MICHAEL CONNOR, !
Defendants.
, ,
NOTION WOR ADMISSION or VISITI~Q ATTORHIYI
The undersigned, a member of the firm of Feldstein
Grinberg Stein and McKee, 428 Boulevard of the Allies,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219, a member of the bar of
l?ennllylvania and counsel for the Defendants, CRST, Inc., Rapid
Leasing, Inc. and Day Talbot in the above-captioned case,
respectfully moves that the Court admit Robert E. Konchar, a
partner in the law firm of Moyer & Bergman, 2720 First Avenue
N.E., Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402, to participate on behalf of CRST,
Inc., Rapid Leasing, Inc., and Doy L. Talbott, Defendants, in the
trial and pre-trial activities connected with this calle.
It is understood that Mr. Konchar has been admitted to
practice before the following courts, among others I (1) all
State Court for the state of Iowa in 1965/ (2) the United States
District Court, Northern and Southern Districts of Iowa in 1965/
,
"
I"
"
,
!
I
I
CERTIFICATE OF SERVIC~
I, JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE, do hereby certify that a
true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTION '0. ~NIIIION Q.
VIIITINCJ ~OIUm~ waB mailed to the following counsel of record I
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Angino & Rovner
4503 North Front Stroet
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Robert A. Lerman, Esquire
Ann M. Grab, Esquire
Griffith, Strickler, Lerman,
SolymoB & Calkins
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
on this '" <<u day of .
May
, 1994, via first-class,
United States mail, postage pre-paid.
~1"~- ~t~
~es ~. Ha kle, Esquire
, "
,
"
"
-4-
" \PATA\JMII\MQT\aUn
, .
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MmLISSA D. WHISLER and )
COREY J. WHISLER, her husband, )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
I
)
)
i
i
PlaintiffI:',
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
Defendants.
i'
I
I
I
I
l
I
"
I,
j
,
I
"
Ii,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NOI 94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
MOTION FOR ADMISSION OF VISI'rING
ATTORNEY
Filed on Behalf of Defendants,
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC. and
RAPID LEASING, INC.
Counsel of Record for these
Partiesl
JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE
PA I.D. NOI 36019
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKEE
Firm I.D. 11084
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 471-0677
. ,
"
I'
"
, J \UM',\\o1IH\NOr\3.1U
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHISLER and )
COREY J. WHISLER, her hUsband, )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
i
)
)
)
)
i
Plaintiffs,
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST,
RAPID LEASING, INC.,
MICHAEL CONNOR,
INC. ,
and
Defendants.
"
'1,
"
I,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NOI 94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
MOTION FOR ADMISSION OF VISITING
ATTORNEY
Filed on Behalf of Defendants,
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC. and
RAPID LEASING, INC.
Counsel of Record f.or these
Parties I
JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE
PA 1.0. NOI 36019
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKee
Firm 1. D. #084
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 471-0677
, ,
, "
, ,I,.
,.
I,
MILIIIA D. WHISLIR and coalY J.
WH18Lla, har hUlband,
Plaintiff.
IN THI COURT or COMMON 'LaAI
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, 'INNIYLVAlfIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, caST, INC.,
RAPID LIAIINO, INC., and
MICHAIL CONNER,
NO. 114- N'il Civil
Defendante
JURY TRIAL DIMAHDID
>>LaI.,I...' ..,LY '9 ... MA~.. O. D...MD..,.
paw L. ~~.~. a.I~. I.C.. AHD ...ID L...tMd. I.C.
40. D.f.ndant.' av.r..nt i. a concluaion of law to which no
r.epon.ive pl.adinq i. r.quired. To the .xtent that av.r..nt .ay
be d....d factual, it ie h.r.by .p.cifically deni.d. By way of
aapUtioation, at aU time., Plaintiff lIeU..a D. Whieler acted
app~opriatelY and reeum.d .lllploYJII.nt within her phy.ical
re.t~iotion..
41. D.f.ndant.' av.ra.nt i. a conclu.icn of law to which no
re.poneiv. phadin9 b requir.d. To the .xt.nt the av.ra.nt ..y be
d....d faotual, it b h.r.by .p.citicaUy denhd. Iy way of
a.plification, all of Plaintiff.' lnjurie. and da.a9.' ar.
~.cov.~abl. in th. in.tant action. Th. penn.ylvania lIotor Vehlel.
finanoial R.eponeibility LaW in no way li.it. the da"9.'
plaintiff. .ay r.cov.r h.r.in.
442U/NU1
, ,
'\",
~ , '1
~). ,,, , i
~ i~~; '\
[11.,. 'I
~ ~)f' r
:. 'J' "
... ';1
, , . , , ,
"~ 1 1
, 1
" ,1
1
.. "
1 1
-'.. ,1
"
" 'I
"
'I
} , , , "
1
' 1
"
I,
" "
, 1
"
"
. ,
1
, "
1
1
"
. 1
, I
'Ii
, i
1 .
;L
I,
HILXIIA D. WHXILla and coalY J.
WHXIL.." he~ hu.band,
Plaintiffe
IN TN. COURT 0' COIOION PLIAI
CUIlIIlU.AND COUNTY, PINNIYLVANXA
CXVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRIT, INC.,
RAPID LIAIING, INC., and
HICIfAIL CONNY,
NO. 1l4- IY5/Civl1
Detendant.
JURY TRIAL DIllAHDID
,LAI"I...' ...LV ~a ...
ID.Mn O. D...IIDAII'1' 1II101lA.L cano.
40. Def.ndant'e av.r..nt do.. not r.quire a r.epon.iv.
pl.adin9. plaintiff. inoorporat. th.ir Complaint h.r.in by
r.far.nQ..
,
I,
i
I
I
'I
41. Def.ndant'e avermant ie a conclueion of law to whiQh no
~..pondv. pl.adinq ie required. To the ext.nt the av.na.nt ..y be
d....d factual, it i. h.reby .pacifically denied. By way of
aaplification, Plaintiff.' Co.plaint doe. etate a cauee of action
upon which ~.lief ..y be 9ranted.
42. D.f.ndant'e aver..nt ie a oonQlu.ion of law to whloh no
reepon.iv. pl.adinv ie requir.d. To the .xtent the av.raant .ay be
d....d factUal, lt i. hereby ep.cifically d.nl.d. Iy way of
aaplification, Plaintiff H.li..a D. Whl.1.r wa. not n.91igent in
any way. All of Plaintiff.' injurie. and da.a9.. w.r. oaue.d a. a
di~.ct re.lllt of the n.9liq.nc., carel..ene.., wantonn..., and
r.ckl...n... of the in.tant D.f.ndant.
4U72/MLII
43. D.f.ndant'. aver..nt i. a conclu.ion of law to which no
re.pon.he pl.adinv ia required. To the .xtant the aver..nt .ay b.
d....d faotual, it 18 h.nby .pecifically d.ni.d. By way of
a.plifioation, Plaintiff Melieea D. Whi.l.r wa. not n.9ligent in
any way. All of Plaintiff.' injuri.. and da.aq.. w.re caU..d a. a
dir.ct reeult of the n.qliqenoe, car.l..ene.., wantonn..., and
reckle..nee. of the in.tant Defendant.
44. D.f.ndant'. avera.nt i. a conclu.lon of law to whioh no
r..pon.ive pleadinq ia r.quir.d. To the extent the avera.nt .ay be
d....d faotud, it ie her.by epecifically d.ni.d. By way of
aaplifioation, Defendant'. averment lack. the .p.cificity r.qui~.d
by the P.nn.ylvania Rule. of Civil Procedur.. rurth.r, all of
Plaintiff., lnju~ie. a~ da.av.. were cau.ed a. a dir.ct ~..ult of
the n.9li9.noa, car.l..ene.., wantonne.., and reokl...n... of the
in.tant Def.ndant.
45. Defendant'. avera.nt i. a conclu.ion of law to which no
~..pon.ive phadinq i. requlred. To the .xtent the av.ra.nt .ay be
d....d faotual, it 18 her.by .pecifically denied. By way of
furth.r a.plification, ae more .peoifioally .tat.d in Plaintiff.,
co.plaint, the .ction. or inaction. on the part of Mioha.l Connor
.were a proxbat. cau.e of Plaintiff.' injuri.. and da.a9",
Plaintiff. incorporate th.ir Complaint h.rein by r.f.r.nc..
41. D.f.ndant'. averm.nt i. a conclu.ion of law to which no
re.pone1v. pl.adinq i. requlred. To the .xtent the aver..nt .ay be
I
\'
t,
,
\,
"
d....d faotual, it is h8l'.by .ploiflollly d.ni.d. Iy way of
furth.~ aaplif1cltion, the full tort option appli.d to Plaintiff.'
.oto~ v.hiol. polioy. Additionally, Def.ndlnt Michael Connor wa.
.ivniflcantly intoxicat.d while op.ratinv hi. v.hiol. at the ti..
of thi. aooid.nt. Th.r.for., the full to~t option allo appli...
47. D.f.ndant'. av.ra.nt 1. a conolu.ion of l.w to whioh no
~..pon.iv. pleadinq ie required. To the .xtent the av.n.nt .ay be
d....d factual, it 11 h.reby .paoifically d.ni.d. Iy way of
further aaplification, the full tort option appll.d to Plaintiff.'
aoto~ vehiol. policy. Additionally, D.fendant Micha.l Connor wa.
.ivnlficantly intoxicat.d while op.ratinq hi. v.hicl. at the ti..
of thi. accid.nt. Th.r.for., the full tort option al.o appli...
41. - 51. D.fendant'. aver..nt. are not dir.ct.d to
Plalntlff. h.~.in.
WHIR.rORI, Plaintifta re.p.cttully requ..t thl. Hononble
Cou~t to di..b. Def.ndant'. An.wer and New Matter and .nt.~
jUdqaent in th.ir favo~ avain.t the Def.ndant.
l'
I,
I.,
, ,
I
,', '
I
ll!",
,'1
,,,
" ,
Dat., Nay 13, 1..4
c a~
I.D. 0
4503 No~ h-rront .tr..t
Har~i.bur9, PA 17110
(717) 231-6711
Coun..l fo~ Plaintiff.
1
COMMOtnflALTH or PINNIYINANIA I
I ".
COUNTY or DAUPHIN I
I, Riohard A. .adlock, ..quire, beinq duly .wo~n aooord1n9 to
law, depc.e and .tate that I a. coun.el for Plaintiff., that I a.
autho~i'ed to .ake thi. Affldav1t on behalf of .aid Pla1ntlff. and
that the fact. .et forth in the foreqoinq .LAI..I".' ...LI '0 ...
..".. 0' D"~ COIIOa are true and correct to the beat of .y
knovledqe and belief.
,.
I,
I
\
1',
\j'
,
i ,~
.worn to and .ub.cribed
L~
befo~~ this II day
Qf,- I / Ii d. Y , 1114.
(~' rl atIif If C ~ </u.~
lfota~y JiiiI'ro / !I
r:MAEF.r~t~jl~~~~*jJ~~';:~;~'
Gr~..n\\OI)~, Juniata Cr,unly
~1.c:.oI111111\~ll)n flp1rB\ S'fil I~, 1"
, ,
I.
I
j'l
,
I
, I'
1,
I'.
, ,
II'
U 1'7/l1U1
,1\
\
\'
I
\
I .
i
I
i
:
.
YIRIrICATJON
I verlfy that the fore9oin9 faots are true, upon my pe~.on.l
knowledge or information and belief. Thie verification i. made
.ubject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. I 4904, relatinv to un.worn
fal.ificetion to authorities.
Date,_S ~ J/- 't~
~
MICHAEL CONNOR
I'
,
I I
, ,
,
II
'1 '
I">'
II
I,
;11
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLEAS or CUMBIRLAND COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
"ILISSA D. ~ISLER AND CORBY J.
WHISLER, her hueband,
Plaintiff
civil Aotion - Law
va.
No. 94-1451 Civil
COY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and MICHAEL
CONNOR,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, thi. 16th day of May, 1994, I, Ann Margaret G~ab,
I.quire, a member of the firm of GRIFFITH, STRICKLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS . CALKINS, Bequiree, hereby certify that I have, this date,
.erved a copy of Praecipe to substitute Veritication by united
State. Mail, addre.8ed to the party or attorney of record a.
followel
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Anqino . Rovner
4503 North Front Street
Harrieburq, PA 17110
Jamee R. Hankle, Eeq.
Feldetein, Grinberg, stein & McKee
428 BOUlevard of the Allie.
Pitteburgh, PA 15219
GRIFFITH, STRICKLERt LERMAN,
SOLYMOS . CALKINS
I
,I
BYI ai, .~ ~JL (
ANN KARel B GRAB, ESQUIRE
Attorney for Michael Connor
Supreme Court 1.0. . 55986
110 South Northern Way
York, Pennaylvania 17402
Telephone. (717) 757-71502
1bd)c
"'
"
:1
IN THm COURT OF COMMON PLmAS
OF CUMamRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
M2LISSA D. WHISLER and
CORmy J. WHISLER, h~r husband,
Plaintiffll,
CIVIl, ACTION - LAW
Nor 94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID I,EASINO, INC., and
MICHAmL CONNOR,
Defendantll.
AN8WKa TO Ca08SCLAIM rILID BY THI DlrINDANT. MICHAlL CONNOR
AND NOW, comes the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot, eRST,
Inc., and Rapid Leasing, Inc., by and through their counsel,
James R. Hankle, Esquire and Feldstein Grinberg Stein & McKee,
and file the within Answer to Crossclaim filed by the Defendant,
Michael Connor, averring as followsr
1. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 48,
paragraphs 1 through 4'/ of the Answer, New Matter and New Matter
Under Pa. R.C.P. 2252(d) filed by the Defendants, Doy L. Talbot,
CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc., are incorporated herein as
though fully set forth at length.
2. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 49,
same constitute legal conclusions to which no response need be
made, however, said conclusions are denied to the extent they may
I'
('
"
~TIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE, do hereby certify that a
true and correct copy of th~ foregoing AH'W.R TO qRp"C~IK .ILID
IY Tal DI.IND~. NICHAIL CONNOR was mailed to the following
counsel of recordl
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Angino .Ie Rovner
4503 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Ann M. Grab, Esquire
Griffith, Strickler, Lerman,
Solymos & Calkine
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
on this
J 9.ft..day of
May
-,
1994, via firat-ala..,
United States mail, postage pre-paid.
~~_. .~- .e. ~'J.
es R. Hankle, Esqu re -
"
,1
, '
I,
) ,
I,
" ....-
;Jf;,
.
=
I...
;::l
en
,-.
)... \'
,-r
"I.,
i!:~
"-
11l\,
. ; ..,.; ~
"
I,
"
".
I
-II,
"
,
"
, , -\
" ,
,1
"
I I
I "I "
,
, ,-
."
:1' }
,,,
,-
",
"
'1
I,
, ,
-,
I
I;
, .
,.
MILIIIA D. WHIILER and COREY J.
WHIILIR, h.r hu.band,
Plaintiff.
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLEAS
CUMBIRLAND COUNTY, PINNIYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
I'I!{,
NO. u-_ Civil
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEAIING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNER,
D.fendant.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
....01>>. ~o .U.I~ITU~. V..I.IOATIOM
TO THI PROTHONOTARY I
Pl.... eubetitut. the attached Verification of Plaintiff. for
the Attorney Affidavit filed with Plaintiff.' Reply to New Matt.r
of D.fendant Conn.r.
Re.p.otfully eubmitt.~,
ANGINO , ROVN
r.
Dat.. May 24, 1114
4004l/1I1M
pa!.la".la.
w., MILIIIA D. WHIILIa and coalY J. WHI8LIa, Plaintiff., have
~ead the tor.qoinq 'LaIltl",' ..'LY '0 ... ..".. 0' DI'IIDAI'
0011II.. and do .welr o~ afUr. that the tacts .et forth in the
fOr8qoinq are true and oorreot t~ the be.t of our knowledq.,
lnforaation and belief. We under.tand that thi. Varifiaation i.
..de .ubjeot to the penaltie. of 1. Pa.C...A., Seation 4104,
r.latinq to un.worn fal.ifiaation to authoritie..
, ) I
~' I fd
. ~~hlL .. l /1/J/
I ~i fL.ir 7) t CM.(J&l{
ie ..a . Whl.1er -
~}(},~jJJ'IL l #hIi'
Wlffi.... ~
~~
eor.y~ . .r
Datel)!? 9(
I'
,
1 ,1
. I
" ,
"
I'
,
"
: I
I
4004'7/lGJ4
, '
a"~I.Jca~. O. ...VJql
I, Ma~cy L. Moy.r, an .mploy.. of the law tira of An91no I
Rovn.~, P.C., do her.by certify th.t I .. thie day .erv1n9 a t~u.
and corr.ct oopy of the foreqoinv ....01.. upon all coun.el of
r.cord via po.taV. pr.paid, firet-ola.. Unit.d 8tat.. .a11,
.ddr....d .. followel
II
)
,
,
"
I,
I
"
J.... R. Hankle, I.quire
r.ld.tein, Grinberq, Stein , McR.e
421 Boul.vard of the Allie.
'ittebur9h, PA 15219
Ann M.rqaret Grab, laquir.
Griffith, strickl.r, Lerman,
801yao. , C.lkin.
110 80uth Northern W.y
York, PA 17402-3737
I'
I'
~fY) ();1 (l,~ "'1' )i2.{2 'f A
Marcy L. oyer
,
I,
Dat.1 May 24, 111.
~ 'I ' I
" I
, ,
I
IN THI COURT or COMMON PLEAS or CUMBIRLANO COUNTY, PENN8YLVANIA
MlltII8A O. WHI8lt1lR AND CORIY J.
WHIILlR, her hU.bend,
Plaintiff
DOY 1". TALBOTT, CMST, INC.,
RAPID LEASINO, INC., and MICHAEL
CONNOR,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
No. ~4-l451 civil
Civil Action - Law
v..
Def.ndant
PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFJC~TION
TO THE PROTHONOTARY I
Pl.... eUb.titute the attach.d verification of the Defend.nt
for the v.rification of D.f.ndant'e coun.el to Def.ndant Mioh..l
Connor'. R.ply to the Cro..olaim of the DefendantB, Doy Talbot,
CRST, Inc. and Rapid Lea.inq, Inc., filed in the .bove-c.ptioned
metter.
GRIFFITH, STRICRLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
BYI
ROBERT A. LERMAN
Supr.me Court I.D. No. 074110
,) 'I
BYI~!J' }J L"
AN 0 E'V ORAB
Supr.me Court I.D. No. 55~86
Attorneye for Michael Connor
110 south Northern Way
York, PA 17402
T.lephon. No. (717) 757-7602
'/
, ,
I'
I,
I
l'
i
I "
f'l
I
,
I'
, ,
\"
,'"
"
1
I,'
j
';/
"
f:
"
--:'1~
~.n
,.
I;
"
,.t.
'".J
"
"
"
"
,
,!
1,.'
"
"
,
"
, ,
"
,
"
(I:
, "
,)
"
,
,
"
"
"
"
'I;
"
','
, '
I,'
" 1\
,
"
, ,
"
,
,'!
,
II'
, ,
,"
,
.
.
IN 'rHE CQUR'I' OF COMMON PI,EAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHIaLER and )
COREY J. WHISLER, her husband, )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
l
)
l
l
Plaintiffs,
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEl, CONNOR,
Defendants.
I 'I
, '
CIVIL ACTION - IJAW
No, 94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE
VERIFICATION
Filed on Behalf of Defendants,
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC. and
RAPID LEASING, INC.
Counsel of Record for these
Part ies,
JAMES R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE
PA I.D. NO, 36019
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKEE
Firm I.D. lI084
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 471-0677
, ,
,
"
:
'i'
,
I
I ,
I'
IN THg COURT OF COMMON ~LgAS
OF CUMagRIJAND COUNTY, ~ENNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHISLgR and
COREY J. WHISLgR, her husband,
Plaintiffs,
CI'IIL ACTION - T.AW
NOI 94-1451 Civil Term
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
Defendants.
PRABCIPB TO SUBSTITUTB VIRJ.IC~TION
TO THE ~ROTHONOTARYI
~lease substitute the attached Verification of the
Defendant, Doy L. Talbot, for the Verification of said
Defendant's counsel to Defendant, Doy L. Talbot's, Answers to
Interrogatories which was filed in the above-captioned matter.
Respectfully submitted,
FELDSTEIN GRINBERG STEIN & McKEE
, '
By I~ ..Ar " I, -1v~ 1,l,J. .,'
J es R. Hankle, Esquire
/
",
Robert E. Ronchar, Esquire
MOYER & BERGMAN
3rd Floor Commerce Exchange Building
2720 First Avenue, N.E.
~.O, Box 1943
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52406-1943
Attorney for the Defendants,
DOY L. tALBOT, CRST, INC. and
RA~ID LEASING, INC.
I,
~~TIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, JAMb~S R. HANKLE, ESQUIRE, do hereby certify that a
true and correct copy of the foregoing PRA.9IP. TO IUlITI~UT~
V.RI.~CATION was mailed to the following counsel of reoordl
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Angino & Rovner
4503 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Ann M. Grab, Esquire
Griffith, Strickler, Lerman,
Solymos & Calkins
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
on this
, 1994, via
15tp
day of
June
first-olass, United States mail, postage pre-paid.
"""/1 ~, 1v1....,.lJ.1.
~ es R. Hankle, Esquire
.,
I
,
;, I
.,
,1
'I'
"
,
,
-3-
,
,
"
"
"
;;;
-
:."t
:r.:
,,~
')
1.\
; '<.J
I",
,
,
"
II
~'l
, ~I
:1'-)
."
'I
"
"
I I III
, ,
'I
,1
,
.
IN THB COURT or COMMON P~BAS or CUMBBRLANO COUNTY, P.NNSY~VANJA
M.~ISSA O. WHIS~BR AND CORIY J.
WHISLER, h.~ hu.b.nd,
plaintiff
I
I civil Action - Law
I
I
I No. 1l4-1451 civil
I
I
I
I
I
v..
COY ~. TA~BOTT, CRST, INC.
RAPID LEASING, INC., .nd MXCHABL
CONNOR,
Oetend.nt
CERTIFICATE OF SERYI3
AND NOW, thi. ~) day of Jun"L 1994, I, Ann Ma~qar.t G~ab,
I.quire, a m.mb.r of the Urm of GRIFFITH, STRICI(LIllt, LERMAN,
SO~YHOS , CALI(INS, I.quires} hereby certify that I have, thl. datei
.erved a copy of R.quest for Produation or Docum.nt. of Michae
Conno~ to CRST, lno. by United states Mail, .ddr....d to the party
O~ .ttorney of reoor.d as followsl
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Angino , Rovner
4503 NQrth Front street
Rarri.burq, PA 17110
Jams. R. Rankle, Esq.
'eld.tein, Grinb.rq, st. in ,
428 Bouleva~d or the Allie.
Pittsbu~9h, PA 15219
McKee
lb.1II
GRIFFITHt STRICKLIRt LlRMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
...~~
ANN MARG IT , IlSQUIRB
Attorney for Miohael Connor
Supreme Court 1.0. . 55986
110 south Northern Way
York, Pennsylvania 17402
Telephone I (717) 757-7602
.
..
.
MILISSA D. WHISLER and CQREY J.
WHISLER, her hueband,
Plaintiff.
IN THI COURT OF COMMON PLIAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - I~W
11/5(
NO. 94__ civil
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPIO LIASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNER,
Defendant.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1',
,
>>LAIKTI.'.' KOTICH TO aOM.IL
DIICOVIRY O. DI.INDAHT KICHAIL CONNOR
Plaintiffe, by and throuqh their attorneys, Anqino , Rovn.r,
P.C., re.peotfully move this Honorable Court to compel Defendant
Michael Connor to file full and complete answers to Plaintiffe'
di.cQvery request. tor the followinq reasons I
1. The inetant action WIl8 commenced by the filinq of a
Complaint on March 24, 1994.
I.
I
"
,
"
.'
,
,
2.
On April 25, 1994, Defendant'. coun.el filed an Entry of
Appearance.
,
,
3.
On April 26, 1994, Defendant. filed an Anewer with Naw
Matter.
4. On May 13, 1994, Plaintiffs filed their Reply to
Defendant'. New Matter.
5. On April 11, 1994, plaintiff. forwarded to Defendant
Michael Connor Interroqatorie. and a Requa.t for Production of
Document..
47442/1"1.
..
.
I
I.
.. On May 11, 11184, Oafendant Michael Conno~ re.ponded to
Plaintiff.' aequeet for production of Dooument..
7. To date, Defendant Michael Connor haG not re.ponded to
Plaintiffs' Interroqatorie. and ...id raepon.e. an overdue. A oopy
ot the Interrogatoriee are attaohed ae Exhibit A.
I. On May 23, 11l94, Plaintiff.' ooun.el wrote Ann Marqaret
Grab, I.quire, aouneel tor Defendant Michael connor, and reque.ted
reepon.e. to the Interroqatorie.. A copy of the letter ie attaohed
hereto a. Exhibit B.
9. Defendant Michael Connor has failed to comply with the
diecovery ae required by Pa.R.C.P 400~ and 4006.
10. All of the discovery aouqht by Plaintiff. through their
Interroqatorie. ie relevant to the in.tant action.
11. Defendant Michael Connor ha. had more than ample time to
re.pond to Plaintiffe' Interroqatoriee.
12. Our RUlee of civil Procedure provide t.or the liberal
qrantinq of diecovery.
13. Pa.R.c.P. 4019 provide. that upon motion of a party, the
Court oan make an appropriate order when a party "faile to make
diecove~y." Pa.R.C.P 4019(a)(viil).
14. Plaintiffe, therefore, believe that an.werinq all of
Plaintiff.' diecovery request. would not burden or oppree.
Defendant Michael Connor.
"
,
U. Plaintitt. are repre.ented by Riohard A. Sadlock, I.quire
ot the tJ.l'lD ot Anqino , Rovner, P.C., 41503 North Frcnt streIt,
Ha~ri.burq, PA 17110, (717) 238-6791.
16. Defendant Michael Connor is represented by and Ann
Marqaret Grab, Isquire ot the firm Griffith, striokler, Lerman,
80lymo. , calkin., 110 South Northern Way, York, PA 17402, (717)
757-7602.
WHEREFORE, Plaintitt. respec.l:fully request that this Honorable
Court order Defendant Michael Connor to respond to Plaintiff.'
Interroqatorie.. Plaintiffs further request that should Defendant
Michael Connor tail to comply with the Court Order, then eaid
Defendant shOUld be prohibited from presenting any testimony at the
trial of thi. matter, precluded from entering defen.e. to
Plaintifte' claim. at trial, required to pay Plaintiffs' attorney"
fee. and coet. aesociated with the instant Motion, and such other
.anction. ae the Court deems appropriate.
Data. JU~' 23, 1994
. .$1 re
. 7281
4503 orth Front Street
Harriaburg, PA 17110
(717) 238-6791
Counsel for Plaintiffe
',1
,
,
"
I
)
.
plaintiffs, through their attorney, hereby propound the following
Inteno9atodes to defendants pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of
civil Procedure 4006 to be answered within thirty (30) days from
service thereof. These Interrogatories shall be deemed to be
continuing Interrogatories. If, betweun the time of your answer
to ..id Interrogatoriell and the time of the tdal of this case
you, or anyone acting on your behalf, learns the identity and
whereabout a of Any other witnellses not identi fied in your said
anawers, or if you obtain or become aware of additional requested
lnforma\:ion not supplied in your answers, you shall promptly
furnish the lIame to plaintiffs' attorney by a supplemental
anewer.
For the purposes of these Interrogatories, "you or "your" refers
to the defendants and their filell and all other persona, !jents
Qr :rep~esenta\:ivell of the defendants and their fUllS. Youll
shall further include all persons on whose behalf defendants
proesauted this action and all persons who will benefit or be
legally bound by the results of this action. Your answer to the
Interrogatories shall reflect and contain the knowledge of all of
the above porsons.
References to plaintiff and/or defendant shall be interpreted as
singular or plural, depunding upon the particular circumlltances
of each case.
The term "description" or "describe" as uRed herein shall mean
that the defllndants IIhall set forth the name and address of the
author or originator, dates, title or subject matter, the present
custodians of the original and of any copies and the last known
address of each custodian. "Document" shall mean any written,
printlld, typed or other graphic matter of any kind, whether
handwritten, typed or printud, whether distributed or
undistributed. It shall include without limitation letters,
memoranda, artic les, studies, notebooks, d iar iell and notes, as
well as all mechanical and electronic sound recordings or
transcripts thereof in the possession or control of the
defendanta or known by them to exist. It shall also mean all
copiss of doauments by whatever means made.
An.wer each Interrogatory in the space following the Interrogatory.
SUpplemental sheet.s may be attached for answers which require
additional space. Please take notice that you aru require~ to
serve upon the undersigned your answers in writing within thirty
(30) days pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
These Interrogatories are deemed continUing and supplemental
answers should seasonably be provided.
.
2.
owner of
accident
Statu
the
YlIar I make I
which
model nu~u,
were drivin'iJ at
and U'iJilteud
the time the
the
vehicle
you
in question occurred.
"N6111~
,',
,,'
"
),;
"
"
'1,.
.,
"
"
, ,
-',
l'
3. It you were not the owner of the motor veh1cle but were
the operator, givll the name and addroBB of thB party who gave you
the authority to use the vehicle you were driving at the time the
accident in question occurred and Btate what instruot1ons, if
any, were given to you prior to operating the vehicle.
L\~SWER
,
i
,
i J
, I
"
1\1"
I,
,l.
"
, '
'I
'l
'1,
,
"
I 1<
I ,I
'I I'
, II I
"
1'1
I
\
, I
I'
.
.
5. List the names, addreasee
fact witnlse you intend to call at
their anticipated teetimony.
and telephone numbere Qf each
trial, and briefly eummarile
ANSWIR
,,'
'I'
,I
i
, I
, 1
I,
I'
I'
,
,
. 1
I,
1;)
I,
~
"
I'
6. O~d you consume any alcoholic beverage, sedative,
tranquilizer, marijuo1na, cocaine,
huhiah or other drug,
medication or pill during the ei9ht hours immediately prQoeding
the incident referrllc:t to in the Complaint? If so, statel
(I) the nature, amount and typ~ of item consumed,
(b) . the amount of time over which consumed,
(a) the names and addresses of any and all persons who have
knowledge as to the consumption of those items, and
(d) the names and addruuB of the physician (a) or other
person(s) who gave, purchased or prescribed any of the
said items.
^JfBW~~
I' " , ,
, " q .,.
"I
, ., "
, ,
, I
I I
" i ,
i'
11'1
, I
1,,111
"
(
I
II
"
,
Iii
7. Stat~ whether or not the vehiclll which you were driving
had any mechanical defects and, if so, ~tate the nature of same.
, ,
i
ANSWER
I,
~
"
"
,1
,
,
'I
,I
,
"
'I
,
,
"
, 1
, ,
"
"
"
"I
,
,
,
y
"
1',\
"
8. State whether you were performing any 5ct in oonneotion
with your employment at the time of the incident in quu.tion.
~~R
"
"
" '
~
I'
" ,
'I
,
I
"
,'1
1\ /,i
"
, ,
"
I,
"
'I
"
"
, I
I,
9. Give the oarrier name, policy number and policy limits
~
fqr each and eVlIrY FOlicy insuring you against the claime made in
II
,
I
the 1nstant action.
"
;l~
!;'"
~NeW~R
"
"
ii
, ,
"
, ,
j'
"
,I
"
"
, '
,
I'
. I
"
1"
"
','
,
,
, ,
"
"
,
"
"
I'
12.
,
State your whereabouts for the tWenty-to~r hour period
prior to thll inoident in qU.ltion.
"NSWIl~
"
,I
, "
,
I
'1 'I
, I
"
, ,
I,.
,
"
,
1
I
d
",
I'
,
, ,
~.
.
~
i
ii,
I ~
"
I
I,
,
14. A" of the time of the incident referred to in the
Complaint, please state woether or not you were familiar with the
location where the occurrence happened and state thu nature and
extent of your familiarity, indicating the number of times you
had visited the location where the incident took place within the
laet year.
"~SWEJ!
r
,I,
"
"
"
"
"
:'
"
;1
, ,
, ,
"
I il
"
:;l
"
"1
"
"
"
, '
"
I
,
l5.
Please dll8cribe .. fully as pouible the weather and
road
oonditions
at
the
time
and
looation
of
the
alleqed
Qccurrence, setting forth conditions of light, precipitation and
temperature.
ANSW~R
,
"
, ,
"
,1 '
I,
'"
" ,
.,
"
I'
"
11'1
"
"
I,
"
"
.1
1
',I
, ,
" ,
,
,
,
1
, I
"
,...,'
1
15. Please desoribe as tully as possible the w..thltlr and
road conditions at thll time and location of the alleqed
oocurrenoe, settinq forth conditions of liqht, precipitation and
temperature.
'\N,W.R
,
"
'1
"
" ,
, I
.,
"
"
"
I'
/'
"
,,,
,
,
I
,
,
I I.,
, ,
I; I'
,
I>
"
,
I
'1'
16.
De~cribe a8 accuratllly as possible what you were doinq
imlllediately
eurrounding
prior to this
this incident.
inoidllnt,
and
all
ciroumetancee
I
'.
AN8W!~
"
,\ ,I
,
,
I,
1\
,
'1 ,I I
"
"
,.,
"
, '
"
,
'I
I
,
,
"
.',
'"
"
"
I,
, ,
17. State the following as accurately as po.sible.
la) your speed when you first viewlld Plaintiff's vehicle,
(b)
the distance
vehicle prior
time,
the distance from PlaintHf' s vehicle when you tir.t
applied your brake.,
between your vehicle and Plaintiff'e
to th~ accident, and your speed at that
Ic)
Id)
any efforts made by you to avoid Plaintiff'e vehicle,
Ie) if your car IIkidded, the dietence from plaintiff' e
vehicle when the skid b~qan, and
If) thll amount of feet your vehicle r.quind to stop at
time of collision with full application of the brakee
and travelling at the .peed you were goinq.
"NSWIJR
,I
,
I I I I
,
, ,
,I
"r:
" ,
",
,I
1 ,
I'
lB.
state exaotly how you oontend the inc1dent oCQu~~ed.
!Yt3W8~
,]1
"
"
, ,
I
'11
"
Oil' 'II
'1
"
'I
"
"
..,
I'
,
,
I
I'
.,.
1
1
I"
I",
I'
I'
i
20. Are you or anyone acting on your beha It in poueuion
ot or know of the exhtenctl of any photographs, blueprints,
eketches, drawings, diagrams or plans of the instrumentalities,
locality, equipment, tools or any other thing or matter involved
in the incident in suit? If so, statel
(a) the nature of the document, the name(s) and addr~ss(es)
of the person(s) preparing such document, and the date
of its preparation,
(b) the name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) presllntly
having possession or custody of ullch such document,
(c) the specific subject matter of the document,
(d) the date it was made or taken, and
Ie) what the document purports to show, illustrate or
represent.
ANSWER
",
, ,
,', 'I
,
, '
'il
"
"
2l. Have you liver been charged for any violation of the
motor vehicle traffic laws or ordinances of any state or
municipality arising from the incident involved in this action.
If eo, state.
(a) thll specific violation with which you wllre chargod,
(b) the manner in which you were charged, i.e. citation,
(c) by and before whom you were charged,
(d) the verdict rtlndered and/or fine paid regarding said
violation, Dnd
(e) the court involvlld.
ANaWE~
,1
I,
"
, ,
I ,
'"
'/
'I
I I
,
"
I
, '
22. Have you or anyone actinq on your behalf conducted any
investigations of the incident which is the dubject matter of the
Complaint?
If so, identify.
la)
each person and ,the employer of each person who con-
ducted any investiqation,
the dates of investigation, and
all notes, reports or other documentation prepared
during or AI a result tJf the investigations, and the
identity of the person who has posselsion thereof.
Ib)
(c)
"NSWr,~
"
I,
,I
i' I
,
,
,
, I
, ,
, '
23. It your attornllY haM completed en inve.tigation, pl...e
provide the name, address, and telephone number of all witn...e.
id.ntitied in the inveBtigation.
A~swmR
"
"
,"
, ,
"
1'1
, 1
, ,
I
'1 I ,
I, I
,I
'I
, ,
.
'.
,
,
24. At the time of the incident referred tQ 1n the
Complaint, did you have a valid lioense to operate a motor
veh1cle? If .0, statlll
(a) issuing state,
(b) expiration date,
(c) operator's licunse number, and
(d) any restriotion., qualifications or conditione on eaid
licunse.
~
,
i'
i
, ,
~NSW~R
. ,
, ,
'I I I
I,
I'
. I
"
,
rl
, I
,I "
, ,
I II
,
, I
1','1""11'
I ,.j,
25. With regard to any restriotions, qualificatione or
Qonditi~ns on your lioense, pleaso statel
la) a full and complete de8cription including the exaot and
precise language or wording on your license, and
lb) the time, in months and years, that such wording
appeared on your license.
ANSWER
, "I'
1'1
, ,
,
,
I,
,
, ,
I,
"
"
'I
'1
, '
"
'; "
/,
,
j "j
'I
,'!
, ,
,I
, "
26. ^t th~ timu of the incidllnt referred to in the
Complaint, did your Huen.1I oontain any referoncQ to any prior
aotione, violAtions or olllln8118 committQd by you? If so, pleae.
etate.
1ft) the dotu, timll ~nd plocel ond
Ib) thu prlloiBII lAnguage or wording of each actioh, viola-
tion or olfllnoll as it appuarlld on your license.
M1.@.!1J.!
"
, '
',i I
, ,
"
" ,
,
, '
'"
'I
, '
-I'
27. fit the time of the inoident referred to in the
Complaint, did you have any condition for whioh you wore
eyeglaues, or for which eyeglaues werll prescribed?
8tatel
It 80,
(a) a description of the condition,
(b) whether you wer~ wearing eyeglasses at the time of the
incident,
(0) the name and address of the person who prescribed the
eyeglasses, and
(d)
a description of
accident referred
and uncorrected.
your vision at the time of the
to in the Complaint, both corrected
"NSW~R
"
,
"
"
" ,
,
",
.,
" ,
I
I'
30. Ilavu you liver beun convicted of a crime? If so, statlll
(a) the nature of the convictionl
(b) the date and location of said convictionl and
(e) the penAlty imposed.
ANSWER
I I
" '
"
, '
, '
" I
II
"
"
34. Have you madti any stattimtint, whtitber in writing, tapti
recording or otherwise, to any person (e) r<<Igarding any of the
eventl referred to in the Complaint? If so, statel
(a) the name(s) and addren(es' of the ptinon(s) to wham
such statement was made,
(b) the date of such statement I
(c) the form of the statement, i.e., written, oral, record-
J.ng dovice, or stenographer,
(d' whether Buch statement, if written, was signedl and
(e) the name (B) and addreu (eB) of the penon (s) prelently
having custody of such statement.
"NSWER
,
,
I
"
I'
, '
"
",
" ,
"
"
"
ii,
,II
35.
Identify all
exhibits which you expect ~o offer into
evidence at the time of trial of thil caee.
ANSWER
"
1',
'J,
,
"
"
I,
,
Ii'
I'
"
"
'I
'l'
"
,
,
,
,
I,
"
I,
"
,
I,
,
,
,
"
, I
"I
"
'i '
,I'
I
,
'I
1'1
,;
I I',
'I
, I
I,
, I
I,
\,,;
,
I
",
"
I
.
i'
, , ..
..'CIIAlID c. MH~lrm
1.,AwnJ'.'JuJ:t
ANOlNO ~~ H()VN~:n. E~C,
HIJl-I. .O~'1lI
"AX i1l1111~"1I"'1)
TIUIIIY.. HVWoAH
MJC',".t.1lIo NOlue
"ATHJ"Jl'It:~, MAJiADV.....ITH
DAVTD" WIIN"''''
~JQtlA.L I. ,..,\Vlftn
~Wlt.IN(I. ~ IAMo,..8
lo..,H,\I, MI!LILLO
L)AVID t. pJTZ
JI,UIIl..A Q. _HUMAN
.,CJ{""D .,. ''''PLOCK
mJOUI c. OUlOH
RQlrN 1. ~IA."~lJ..A
IJANN l.. IJ,NNJNQI
.6flI~ Nl),.l'H rHI}1'I1' l'\TH"I'"
U"Hfi,""lJlH), .I~NH". Inll'
1111' \I:JIo"'l1l
May 23; 1994
Ann Margaret Grab, Esquire
Grittith, strickler, Lerman,
solymo8 , calkins
110 South Northern way
York, PA 17402-3737
REI Melissa Whisler v. Mic~a~j Conner
Dear Ms. Grabl
'l'hanlt you for providing me with Detendant Connor'_ ae.pon.e to
our Request for production ot Documents. Please immediately
provide me with Defendant Connor's Answers to our Interrogatori.,
which were served on you April 11, 1994, or I will have ]'10
alternative but to file a Motion to Compel. Your prompt att~rion
to thi8 matter il appreciated. ~
RAS/mlm
cal Jll.Jlle. R. HanKie, m,quire
, ,
Ii
"
I
39190/11LK
, "
a'.'!.laa~. O. II.Vlal
I, Ha~cy L. Moy.r, an .mploy.. of the law fi~m of Anv1no ,
Rovn.~, P.C., do her.by certify that I am thi8 day ..rvinv a true
and correct copy of the foreqoinq .LAIIIT!".' NO'l'lOI TO aONJIL
Dl.aOVUy OJ DIJIIJIJ)1UIT aonoa upon all coun..l of reco~d via
po.taq. prepaid, tirat..claae United State8 mail, addr....d a.
folloWl1
Ann Marqaret Grab, Esquire
Grittith, strickler, Lerman,
Solymo8 , Calkin8
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402-3737
Jam.. R. Hankle, E.quire
f.ld8tein, Grinberg, stein' McKe.
428 Boul.vard of the Allie8
Pittlburqh, PA 1~219
\1Iafli~jlijJ i/!tJ~ ~
Mar L. oyer
Dat.1 Jun. 23, 1994
6J,
p
1'\\
ti:!,
'1;.1,1
ri,
Ill'
f
, '
!i'
\
@
I'
..:
,..,
:f
~>
~-I
-1>-
~~ E
i,,- I\J
~ ~:5; ~
~~~c~
IX O~
::)o_u")...J
O;o!I->q''':
u<u..-.-
..J< I ~
~i-l'3,1-
I- ,.., >-
> . IX
Z 1--10:::>
~ UU Z r':l
,"1','.,"
,',"lIl1'"
'I
,
r>
>-
~
IX
o
U
'"
r;: .
"'0
z
"'..:
~""
-IV)
~~
iIX
.':i!
o
o
-
"-
K(
'"
~I~
illl, \i
~Ui ~
lX
__J f=>
\ow ..~
0- -.
:r. ~:5
Ou
u
r-
CJ ~;,o;
b- ""
""
;; r;l
_u..
I-"u.'
C.JD
~
u.
~ CJ
'F'
~j- >-
h. O~
_ Lu
1->
~3
"" 'n
_J -
0-0
...J
.L<J
u""
;ax
-<.)
....
.,-.
I- -,
l/1-"';:}
lXC
t..,) 1\1
~
c:
'"
'"
c:
I\J
4..
~
ill
....
....
,~
..,
c:
,~
'"
.-
n.
r-
OU
0:) ;~
;'~ -
f- .
,"
,-~ 0::
_,;':':'0
V) .~
>- c( t"!
OlJ.JI..""J
Cl..JU
.
"'el
~vl
-1-
~5i
,
:>
--
, ,
"
\
"
\\
L\
"
"
'1"1
... t ~
... It.
.' 'II",' ",II
, .",',,,,"'.
",.
"JlJN 2 ,I W~)\
I
.
IN THE COURT or COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PIllNNSYLVANIA
MELISSA D. WHISLER AND COREY J.
WHISLER, her husband,
Plaintiff
Civil Aotion - Law
Vs.
No. 94-14~1 civil
DOY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and MICHAEL
CONNOR,
Defendant
CER'l'IrICATE or SERVICE
AND NOW, this 27th day ot June, 1994, I, Ann Margaret Grab,
Zlquire, a member ot the tirm ot GRXrrI'l'H, S'l'RICKI.ER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS, Esquires, hereby oertity that I have, this date,
served a copy of Response ot Michael connor to Defendant's Request
for Production of Documents by United states Mail, addressed to the
party or attorney of record as followsl
Riohard A. Sadlock, Illsquire
Ang1no , Rovner
4~03 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Jame. R. Hankle, Esq.
Feld.tein, Grinberg, stein' MoRee
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 1~219
GRIFFI'l'H, S'l'RICKLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
BYI ~ fJJW
ANN MARGARE'l' GRAB, ESQUIRE
Attorney for Michael Connor
Supreme Court X.D. * ~~986
110 South Northern Way
York, Pennsylvania 17402
tel.phonel (717) 757-7602
1bllb
"
;!,'
"
"
'I I,'
.
I
.~,. Ii;
~") "
,
'1-:-': 1111
'l
"
,
(Y)
,
, I ! .
I ,
\, ,
i, (
. '
'I
" ,
'1.
"
.'
"
,
, ,
:,
I
",
.,.j
"
'.
"
. '
I
,I
,I
. ..
I~ THB COURT or COMMON PLEAS or CUMBIllRLAND COUNTY, PENNSY~VANIA
MI~ISSA D. WHISLER AND CQREY J.
WHISLER, her huaband,
Plaint! ft
civil Action - Law
va.
No. 94-1451 civil
DOY L. TA~BOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEA~ING, INC., and MICHAIllL
CONNOR,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SIllRVICIll
AND NOW, this ~)~
,
I
day of June, 1994, I, Ann Margaret Grab,
Isquire, a lIIember of the firm of GRIFFI'l'H, S'l'RICK~IR, LEaMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALI<INS, Ill.quire., hereby certify that I have, this date,
aerved a copy ot Defendant, Michael Connor's Answers to
"
,
Interrogatorie. of Plaintiff by United states Mail, addres.ed to
the party or attorney of record a. followsl
Richard A. Sadlock, Esquire
Angino , Rovner
4503 North Front Street
Harri.burq, PA 17110
Jallles R. Hankle, Esq.
Feldstein, Grinberg, Stein , McKee
428 Boulevard of the Allie.
pittsburgh, PA 15219
I,
GRIFFITH, STRICKL!RL ~ERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CA~KINS
.y,al'~ J/ J-?, e ""'
RGA T GijAB, SQU
Attorney for Michael Connor
suprellle Court 1.0. . 55986
110 South Northern Way
York, Pennsylvania 17402
Telephone I (717) 757-7602
"
I' ,
I,
, ,
" "
' , "
,
, ,
,
,
'I "
"
", I,
'I
,
,I
" I
.. ~
I I ,II'
I
,
I~ .~ '" "
r ~ I I
,-
,I " .,
' I'~) I!~
,,'
'"') ,I
, , I
,
"
"
"
"
I
"
I,
, ,
,
"
"
,I,
I,
I,
"
"" ~
.
-, ,
.... ~
III '1.1 COUI'I O' COIUlOII tLIU O' OUJIII.w.n COVll'l'V, 'I..IYLVUIA
11I101... D. UI.LlI a.iI CODV ".
nl.LI., be~ bU.ba.iI,
'labci".,
110. '.-1." oivil
v.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
civil Aotio. - La.
DOV L. '1ALlO'l'l, CUT, IIIC., "'ID
LIAIIII', 1110., a.4 IIIC...L 00..0.
Defe.4a.t.
01.'11'10."1 0' II.VIOI
AND NOW, this I S1~ay of JUly, 1994, We, Robert A. IAnan,
Isquire, and John F. Yaninek, Esquire, lIIelllbers of the Urlll of
GRlrPITH, S'l'RICKLER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS , CA~INS, Esquires, hereby
certify that we have, this date, served a copy of the supplelllental
~esponse to Detendant's First Set of Interrogatories Directed to
Defendant, Michael connor, by United states Mail, addressed to the
party or attorney of record as followsl
Richard A. sadlock, Esquire
ANGINO . ROVNER
4503 North Front street
Harrisburq, PA 17110
Jalll.. R. Hankle, Esquire
'ILDBTIIN, GRINBERG, S'l'EIN , MCKEE
421 Boulevard of the Allies
Pltt.burqh, PA 15219
"
, '
I
I
j
I'
r
! ,
"
,
-
-
l"'-l
~
'''i
~
IE
fi
......
.~f,
..,....
'II :~. :" .,
,) ",'.' j
,~: :: J I. \ ..
I, ':r: ~ :'1
.' ~\ I Of'
" "~ ,",\
. l Ir; :~:
.11 ),'IJ
:~ ' l .
'.J
.,
Ii
,
"
"
I i,-I
"
, ,
"
-"'j
, Ii!
I:j
, , 1111
" I! t
' ,
I
,
"
"
,
, ,
"
'I
, ,
"
"
l'li
"
, ,
i.1
"
'I
,
,I
II i
"
. ~
MILISSA D. WHISLER ftnd COREY J. IN TIIB COURT or COMMON PLUS
WHISLIR, her husband, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Pla4,lt1ffB
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
/ L/'i I
NO. U-8IE civil
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASINO, INC., and
MICHAIL CONNER,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
o RD. R
AND NOW, this
1. , . day of
1'-4
, 19U, it
i. hereby Ordered and Decreed, pursuant to stipul,tion ot oounsel,
that the oaption in this caBe is amended and shall hereinafter be
the following I
MIllLISSA D. WHISLER and COREY J.
WHISLER, her hUsband,
Pla1ntiUs
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLIllAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
f'Nil
NO. 94-_ civil
DOY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASINO, INC., and
MICHAIllL CONNOR,
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDBD
BY THill COUR'l'1
!I
/1;L
I.
t. ~
~.LISSA D. WHISLER and COREY J. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLIAI
WHISLD, her husband, CUMBIllRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiffs
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNER,
NO. 94-1~1 civil
Detendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
ITIPULATIOlf
W., the undereigned, hereby stipUlate and agree that the
gaption in this gas. be amended to read ae folloWl1
MELISSA D. WHISLER and COREY J.
WHISLER, her hueband,
Plaintiffs
IN 'l'HE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
DOY L. TALBOTT, CRST, INC.,
RAPID LEASING, INC., and
MICHAEL CONNOR,
NO. 94-151 Civil
Defendants
JURY TRIAL ~DED
re
g
Datel ,'J" I .'J "J /./,1 'I
;' /.
1,;- I
(J "; ,II
n" h.I' " t ~. - tki!J'1t.(
J,~el R. Man le, Esquire
,,~
' ,at
Ann argJ11Gr.h~e~uire
Date I 7/1 "}! '7 t-
4004l/11U1
II ,.. aou., 0' aOMMOI .LIAI 0' CUNI..LAlD COUNTY, .....YLV..IA
MlLIIIA D. ..IlL.. aD' aOlll J.
WlI'Lla, b.~ hu.~an',
.1aintiff.,
10. .4-14.1 civil
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Civil Aotion - Law
v.
DOl L. 'ALIO", aRI', Ila., RA.ID
LlUII', IIC., an. NlallAlL oo..oa
DUan.ant.
.Ra.a!~. ~o .U..T!~U~. v..J'JOa,IOB
'l'O ,.. '1O'.OIlO'ARI I
Please substitute the attaohed veritioation of the Detendant,
Michael Connor, tor the veritication ot Defendant's counsel to the
Supplemental Respon.e to Detendant's First Set of Interroqatorie.
Direoted to Defendant, Miohael Connor whioh was tiled in theabove-
oaptioned matter.
GRIFFITH, S'l'RICKLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CAL~INS
Date. f~U-q~
,-,
BYI~tlu-t ti . )JAM/AM
RO A. LE N
supreme Court I. D. No. 07490
IN ~
rt 1.0. No. ~~741
tor Detendant
p
I"
i
l
j lll1/1000 Y .
.,
, '
,/
V.R:r'J~T:rOtf
:1
I
I',
,
!
I'
I ve~lfy that tha to~e9oin9 tact. are true, upon .Y p.~.onal
know1edge or intonation and baliet. 'l'his veritication i. .ade
.ubject to the penal tie. ot 18 Pa.C.S. . 4904, relatin9 to Ul,.worn
tal.lticati~n to authorities.
r
&.1-q"f
\~..o.
Date I
"
"
,
"
I,
i:1
,
I
,,'
"
:"/
(:1;'
III
i\:
~/
'I
,I;
, '
,
ll,l;
"
I,'"
.)'
I
~:
I
,
,
I
'I
I
,
I
I,
"
II ".. ClOU." or COIUlOI Plt.a. or oUII.nun oOunl, '....IYLVUIA
MlLI..a D. IXI.L.. aD' oOal' J.
..1.Lla, be~ bUlb.Dd,
,1aiDtUf.,
10. .4-14.1 oivil
v.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Oivil aotioD - Ita.
!'
I
"
"
I
DOY It. "aLlO"", 0"", 110., Ra'ID
LlUII", 110., .Dd 1I10DIIL 00...0.
DefeD'.Dt.
I
i'l
,
I'
Q~.TI.loaT' O. ",VIO'
AND NOW, this {fthday ot Augult, 1994, We, Robert A. Lenan,
Illquire, and John F. Yaninek, Illsquire, member. of the firm of
GRIFFITH, STRIC~LER, LERMAN, SOLYMOS , CAL~INS, Esquires, hereby
certify that we have, thi. date, served a oopy ot the Praeoipe to
Substitute Verification to the Supplemental Relpon.e to Detendant'.
Fir.t Set of Interrogatoriea Direoted to Defendant, Miohael connor,
by United states Mail, addres.ed to the party or attorney of reoord
as tollOWl1
Richard A. Sadlook, E.quire
ANGINO , ROVNER
4503 North Front street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Jameo R. Hankle, Elquire
FELDSTEIN, GRINBERG, STEIN , MC~EE
428 Boulevard of the Allies
PIttlburClh, P10 15:H9
"
q,
i I
,
I,:
"
GRIFFITH, STRIC~LER, LlRMAN,
SOLYMOS , C1oL~INS
1
"
I
I'
II
"
, 'I
BYI"'~t4f {l. ~~11M-
o ETA. IJERiiiif
Supreme Court I. b. No. 07490
~1./1C!OC Y
"
, "
, ,
. I
elle court I. D.
orneys for
Connor
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
Telephone No. (717) 757-7602
'1'1
"
"
,
"
"
,
" I,
,>I
,I
I,
,II
"
"I
',Ii
,
,
No. 55?U
Defandlne
1
,
,
"
"
.
ZM THI OOUIT or CONNON .LIA. or CUK.laLAMD COU.TY, .....YLVANZA
KlLI..A D. ..Z.LII anG CQa.y J.
"Z'L.a, ber buabanGr
.laintiffs
DOY L. TAL.OTT, CI.T, ZNC.,
aa'ZD LIA.ING, INC., anG
IIICIIAIL OOlOloa,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Jury Trial D.manG.G
civil Aotion - La.
vs.
I'I~ I
No. ..~ Civil
DefenGants
CIRTIrIO~TI Qr .IRVIOI
r:J.
AND NOW, this23r day of August, 1994, I, Robert A. Lerman,
Illsquire, and John F. Yaninek, Esquire, members of the firm of
GRIFFITH, BTRIC~LER, LERMAN, BOLYMOS , C^L~INS, Esquires, hereby
oertify that we have, this date, served a copy of Defendant,
Miohael Connor's Request for Production of Documents to Defendant.,
CRS'l', Inc., Rapid Leasing, Inc. and Doy to Talbott, by United
states Mail, addressed to the party or attorney of record as
follow. I
Jam.. R. Hankle, Esquire
Feldstein, Grinberg, stein , Mc~ee
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pitt.burgh, PA 15219
Riohard A. sad10ck, Esquire
4503 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
,
GRIFFITH, STRICRLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CAL~INS
BYI ,;).1, Ii .II, ~4t-<"
~-fiiAlCl .
Supreme Court I. D. No. 07490
I'
-
BYI
HE
rt I. D. No. !HS741
tor Defendant
110 South Northern Way
York, fA 17402
Telephone No. (717) 1~7-7602
jla/1CU3 Y
"
"
,1'1 j
"
"
,
I,
.,
. ,
"
1'1
-III
'I;
,
I
.,'1
...
..
, ,
\
,I
"
"
I,
"
,
, ,
"
,
"
-a:.
..
-
";i..
",
V'
c,j
"
r; .'J
!"1
";:L
&
,',
..; ,.
~I ' ,
\
I,.,.
,
"
,
\, '.
"
,,'
"
,
II
"
.I
I I
II I
!I ;
I
" I " ,
, , I "
1'.' ~ I
,I
,I
" 'I
,
Ii
I
,"
"
"
d
,
,"
"
"
,
"
I
'I
,
jJ"1
'i I,
"
"
.'
",
1
',I
"
, "
I Ii
, ,
;,\1 I'
,II
,
'III
"
",
"
,
1M 'II OOU.T or COKNO. .LIA. or OUKlI.LAMD OOUITY, .....VLV..IA
KlLI..A D. ..I.LI. and OO..V J.
..I'LI., be~ bu.~an4,
'lailltirr.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oivil AqtioD - Lav
v..
10. '4-~.'~ oivil
DOV L. TALIOTT, OalT, 1.0., JA.ID
LlA'II', lIe., and KIOBAlL OOKlO.,
De'endantl
Dlr.IDAIfT I' IIOTIOI roa LIAVI TO NUlID OOIl'LAIIT TO
'LI~ CQLLAT,JAL ,.TO..IL
I:,
r
AND NOW, oomes the Defendant Miohael Connor and the Connor
Group by and through their oounsol, Robert A. Lerman, Esquire and
John F. Yaninek, Esquire and Griffith, striokler, Lerman, Solymo.
, Calkins and moves tor leave to file an amended answer pleadinq
the dootrine ot collateral estoppel and in support of respeotfully
represent. I
1. 'l'his action was oommenced by the filing of a complaint
on Maroh 21S, 1994, .ounding in negliqenoe as a result of an
automobile accident that ocourred on June 18, 1993.
2. Defendant Michae\ Connor and The Connor Group filed an
An.wer on or about May 6, 1994. This case alleges nsgliqence of
Miohael Connor and 'l'he Connor Group as a cause of this aooident.
3. A previous lawsuit was filed by Defendant., CRS'l', Ino.
and Rapid Leasillg, Inc. in the Middle Distriot Court of the United
states as a result ot the vehicle accident occllrl:ing on June 18,
1993.
,
I
4. The claims a..erted by CRS'l', Ino. and Rapid Lea.inq, Ino.
were the nsgliqenoe of Michael connor and The Connor Group that
, ,
t'
"
resulted in the v~hiole aooident on June 18, 1993.
5. Defendant Miohael Connor and 'l'he connor Group joined the
eRST truok driver, Doy L. Talbott as an Additional Defendant in
that federal oourt aotion.
6. The issue of negliqenoe of Miohael Connor and The Connor
Group is identical to that issue presented in this oase.
7. The issue of neqligence of Michael Connor and The Connor
Group in the vehicle accident on June 18, 1993 was deoided in a
prior adjudiQation in the Middle District CQurt of Pennlylvania in
the suit brought by CRST, Ino. and Rapid lAasing, Ino. against
Michael Connor and 'l'he Connor Group on November 3, 1994 in favor
of Michael Connor and The Connor Group.
8. 'l'here was a final judgment on the merits in the tederal
court case deoided on ~ovember 3, 1994. Thie judgment was against
Doy 'l'albott, the CRS'l' truck driver, and CRS'l', Inc. and Rapid
lAning, Inc.
9. 'l'he jury in the Middle District Court deoided Miohael
Connor's negligenoe was not a substantial factor oausing the
aocident between hie Ford Taurus and the tractor trailer driven by
Doy 'l'albott on June 18, 1993 at approximately 11100 p.m.
10. CRST, Inc., Rapid Leasing, Inc. and Doy 'l'albott had a
full and tair opportunity to litigate the issues ot Michael Connor
and 'l'he Connor Group's causal negligence in an eight (8) day trial.
11. Any and all olaims made by the Defendants, eRST, Inc.,
~apid lAasing, Ino. and Doy Talbott against Defendant Miohael
Connor and 'l'he Connor Group are barred by the doctrine of
"
"
'I
"
"
I'
a
rl
,
oollateral ..toppel.
12. Any claim. Dlade by Plaintiff are alao barred by the
dootrine of collateral estoppel.
13. Allowing Defendant Mich.el Connor and 'l'he Connor Group
to amend their Answer and plead the dootrJ,ne ot oollateral .atoppel
against the Plaintiff does not foreolo.e the Plaintiff of a
recovery in th1a oase. Plaintiff '. reoovery would be from the
aotual tortfe.sors who caused the acoident, Doy L, Talbott, the
CRST truck driver and hi. employer, CRST, Inc.
WHERIllFORE, Defendant Miohael Connor and 'l'he Connor Group
re.peotfully request. that this Court enter an order permitting
them to file an amended Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint allowing
them to plead the doctrine of oollateral estoppel aqain.t the
Plaintiff.
Respectfully SUbmitted,
GRIFFITH, S'l'RICRLIllR, LIllRMAN,
SO YMOS , CALKI S
"
BYI
RO ERT A. LEl
Supreme Court I. D. No. 07490
J
<-
N F.
upulIIe urt I. D. No. !l!l741
Attor~eys for De'endant
Michael Connor and The
Connor Group
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
'l'elephone No. (717) 7!l7-7602
"
:l ilIll i DXT \r
I,.,
"
I
,
*
~
.
,~::
.
~~ 1-.
,/
, ..
..' d
1, '"
,;.' .
'I
,
"
"
~
N
"
"'r
,,-I
"
"
I,
...
~
1:1
"
,
,
I I'
, ,
,
I,
, '
I
i i ;
If I
~II-
I
,
,
,"
"
"
'i
I'
,
,
"I
"
I'
I'
, ,
"
,
,.
a~.'I.raA'. O. ...VIO.
,
I
L
I, Maroy L. Moyer, an employee of the law fir. of Anvino ,
Rovner, p.e., do hereby certifY that I a. thi. day servinq a true
and correct copy of the fore9oinq '1A1Cnl '1'0 'I'I"l'LI upon all
coun..l of record via po.tave prepaid, fir.t-cla.. United State.
mail, addres.ed as followsl
I'
Jame. R. Hankle, E.quire
F.ldstein, Grinberq, stein' McRoe
428 Boulevard of the Allies
Pitt.burqh, PA 1e219
John F. Yaninek, Esquire
Griffith, strickler, Lerman,
80lym08 , calkins
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402-3737
, ,
,
\'l~~UA
Marc . er 1
I,'
Date I Nov..ber 21, 1114
. ,
,I
'.
,
.
.
i:
HlLISSA D. WHISLBR and
CORBY J. WHISLBR, her
husband,
Plaintiffs
IN TUB COURT Of COMMON PLBAS Of
CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL AC'l'ION - LAW
DOY L. TALBO'l'T, CRS'l',
INC., RAPID tBASING,
INC't and MICHAIL
CONNOR,
Defendants
NO. 94-l4~1 CIVIL TaRN
"
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, thil 2~tj day of November, 1994, upon consideration
of Defendant's Motion for Leave To Amend Complaint To Plead
Collateral Bstoppel, a Rule is ISSUED upon the Plaintiff to show
oaus~ why the relief requested in the motion should not be granted.
RULI RE'l'URNABLE within 20 days of sftrvioe.
BY 'l'HE COUR'l',
"''''/
~ ,// Uj~i
Oler~., J.
RObert A. Lerman, Isq.
John F. Yaninek, Blq.
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
Attorneys for Defendant
Miohael Connor and The
Connor Group
Ire
, '
,
,
, ,
I 'j
"
"
Ii
" ,
"
"
Ko~ lJ
2 ~l\ \),~ 'Sq
1'.' :1' \1
i'll'''''
I",n
liIlJt~'JIM'V
,,,Ii:) I,' '):1 rI
;, I, ,,\).l~
I
, I.
,
,
I
I
"
,
I
I,.
,
"
,
"
",
,
"
I
\',
i
~';
"
,
"
,I 'I
.
,
'1'1
I'
I
I
"
,
"
, I'
,
I,
,'I
'N
,
"
"
"
,
I
,
:q!
,
"
..
I..'.. ooua, or OOMMO. 'L.A' or OUM..aLAMO OOUN'Y, .....YLVAMIA
KlLI..A O. WHI.L.. an. ooa.y J.
WHI'L.., be~ busban.,
'laintiUs
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oivil Aoti~n ~aw
vs.
Ho. ..-1..1 oivil
DOY L. 'ALIOTT, oa'T, IHO., RA.IO
LI.'I.~, IHO., an. MIOHAIL COMMO.,
Oefen..nh
OlrlHOMT I' MOTIOH roa L..VI TO AMI.O COM.LAIQ TO
'LIAD COLLATlRAL I.TO..IL
1"
~
;.:...
AND
.
~
NOW, comes the Defendant Michael Connor and the Connor
. '
Group by and through their oounsel, Robert A. Lerman, Esquire and
John r. Yaninek, Esquire and Griffith, strickler, Lerman, Solym08
, Calkine and moves for leave to file an amended answer pleading
the doctrine ot collateral estoppel and in support of respectfully
represents I
1. 'l'his action was commenced by the filing of a Complaint
on March 26, 1994, sounding in negligence as a result of an
automobile accident that occurred on June 18, 1993.
2. Defendant Michael Connor and The Connor Group tiled an
Answer on or about May 6, 1994. 'l'his case alleges negligence of
Michael Connor and 'l'he Connor Group as a cause of this acoident.
3. A previous lawsuit was filed by Defendants, CRS'l', Inc.
and Rapid Leasing, Inc. in the Middle District Court of the United
states as a result of the vehiole accident occurring on June 18,
1993.
4. 'l'he claims asserted by CRS'l', Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Inc.
were the negligence of Michael Connor and The Connor Group that
re..lted in the v.hiole aocident on June 18, 1993. .
6. Detendant Miohael Connor and The Connor Group join.d the
CRST truok driver, Doy L. Talbott as an Additional Detendant in
thet f.deral court aotion.
6. The issue of. negl iqence ot Miohael Connor and The Connor
Oroup is identioal to that is.ue presented in this 0....
7. The issue ot neqliqenoe ot Miohael Connor and 'l'he Connor
Oroup in the vehicle aocident on June 18, 1993 was deoided in a
prior adjudication in the Middle Distriot Court ot Pennsylvania in
the suit brouflht by CRST, Inc. and Rapid Leasing, Ino. again.t
Miohael Connor and The Connor Group on November 3/ 1994 in tavor
ot Miohael connor and The Connor Group.
8. There was a final judgment on the merits in the tederal
court case deoided on November 3, 1994. This judgment was against
Doy Talbott, the CRST truok driver, and CRST, Inc. and Rapid
Leasing, Inc.
9. 'l'he jury in the Middle District Court decided Michael
Connor IS negligence was not a substantial tactor causing the
acoident between his Ford Taurus and the tractor trailer driven by
Doy Talbott on June l8, 1993 at approximataly ll100 p.m.
10. CRS'l', Inc., Rapid Leasing, Inc. and Doy 'l'albott had a
tull and tair opportunity to litig~te the issues of Michael connor
and Th. Connor Group's oausal negligence in an eight (8) day trial.
11. Any and all olaims made by the Defendants, CRST, Ino.,
Rapid Leasing, Ino. and Doy Talbott against Detendant Michael
connor and 'l'he Connor Group are barred by the dootrine ot
I
collateral estoppel.
.
1:1. Any claim. mllde by Pla1ntitt are also bllrred by the
doctrine of collateral estoppel.
13. Allowinq Defendant Michael Connor and 'l'he Connor Oroup
to amend their Answer and plelld the doctrine ot collateral estoppel
against the Plaintitt doe. not foreclose the Pla1ntift of a
recovery in thls clIse. Pla1ntitt's recovery would be trom the
aotual tortfellsorB who caused the accident, Doy L. Talbott, the
CRST truck driver IInd his employer, CRST, Inc.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Michllel Connor and 'l'he Connor Group
respect tully requests that this Court enter an order permitting
them to file an amended Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint IIllowinq
them to plead the doctrine of collateral estoppel against the
Plaintitt .
Respectfully SUbmitted,
GRIFFITH, S'l'RIC~LER, LERMAN,
SO YMOS , CALKI S
11'1'
, "
BYI
RO ER'l' A. LE
supreme Court I.D. No. 07490
<.~
N F.
upreme urt I.D. No. 55741
Attorneys for Defendant
Michael Connor and The
Connor Group
110 south Northern Way
York, PA 17402
'l'elephone No. (717) 757-760:1
, 1
BY
"
jllll/1DXT It
*
I.
,
I
XI.T.. OOURT 0' OOKNOI 'L.A' 0' OUKS..LAMD OOUITY, '....YLVAlX.
H.LX"A D. waX'L.. and OOR.Y J.
WRX'L.., he~ hua~and,
Plaintiffa
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Oivil Aotion - Law
v..
10. '.-1..1 civil
DaY L. TALIOTT, O.,T, XIO., RAPXD
L.A'XNG, XNO., and KXOHA.L OOHKO.,
Defendant.
O.RTX'XOAT, 0' .B.VICB
AND NOW, this/l~day ot November, 1994, I, Robert A. Lerman,
Esquire, and John F. Yaninek, Esquire, members ot the Urm of
GRIFFITH, S'l'RICKLER, LERH^N, SOLYMOS & CALKINS, Esquires, hereby
oertity that I have, this date, served a oopy of Defendants' Motion
tor Leave to Amend Complaint to Plead Collateral Est.oppel, by
United states Mail, addressed to the party or attorney ot reoord
as follows I
James R. Hankie, Esquire
4ae Boulevard ot the Allies
PittSburgh, PA 1~219
Riohard A. sadlock, Esquire
ANGINO & ROVNER
4~03 North Front street
Harrisbur9, PA 17110
GRX"IrH, S'l'RICKLER, LERMAN,
SOLYMOS , CALKINS
t.
"
,
.
jlm/1DXT Y
"
t': . ,4. (...J,
INIlll<
urt: I. O. No. !l!l741
Attorney for Defendant
Miohael Connor and 'l'he
Connor Group
110 South Northern Way
York, PA 17402
Telephone No. (717) 7!l7-7lS02
"
"
"
,I,
I , ,
, ,
, , ,
,
'I
, , ,
"
"
'I
1'1
"
, , I
,
, ,
,
"j' "
,
, " , 1
'I' " ,
[I
1'1
, , I I '\
I I,
',I
" , "
,,' ,I,
, ,
I
,.,'! ", ,I'
,'i
,I
\'~ "
Iii , ,
, I
:1
, I, i ;
{:
~r!, "
I I I
'(I I , !
~\." " I
I''"' ~
'(
,Ii
It!
III' , , I
!-,' " " ,
Iii I ,
!I " ,Ii
~ ( ,
"
t./ ,,' ,
1\1 ,
1.1
"
):, "I
IV , ,
"
I'
I
,
"
,I
1,1
.1
),
"
"
~ f
,I
I'
~\
NOV 21199~ ~