HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-01679
J
J
.
,n_.....":;\.J:;.~Ji.~)"'~:~-,.', t......4/ ~~;,t ~."l-~. '.;.'- '''', .. ',,.'~t"l/,-~" '''r~ "4..... ...,~.'"'.,-...~ "::'\
, (' ~.I~ ~t!:~"''''.J...lf.....~.. ~..,,~],-.~"l.f',.1.-].o'. j" ,'J. 11 >-'.....i..~.,':..~...'I.;\I-...if, 1I:}{...>ii ~}.~'t.~::,. '.~)1'
~...~, ~1; 'F-'~t"~.""'< ""t".-, ,">_y:',,",;)~l>.,.~, '." 'd~'1 ~...~,~."'+,~"r "-.?"I,*"':f:!.;"~)"';~d""">:.-''\::",.,,~.f
HS,"', t. ,\'.,. >'/ ',. :1-'" '''' ....~.' 'J"'- .'. >I ""' 1'-'''',;,,1',.,. "~.I....n\(,.(r."'1-. ~'i'"
."' \' ,^i...lj.+....!(,j-....7,"~' ;..r:" '".. ..,',.,,~.ll<l']/<~......i.',".~':1..'''t'~,.,I'~
., '~ 1t,.l.VT - .~~ . <\ ""j l{'" ~,." 11!l,\,+ ~ ".,~".,.. ""'.''''--!r.,!:,joil' .',7"") '~If,J
" ' ','f ~"'",.,,,.' .', ""-1._ l,<.~',,'.t.~'\. <., \_...1__~,' ~. - ~.,\>;'Ij'l~"~'" .,' 7.'l!" t.,-~l","~':j,"".I.!r,;'\.t'~r.' ./-
, .,', ,",t ,f ~"".".., ,'.,~,,',""".... ~"'{~'J ,_ ''';~'t f ';r.', .... .'!~l:'l-),t;~.t<",d'_.. ~!.,..!#r,4"~
.... . _'r It ". .t.':" " ; 'o.:o\r '.; GC'llpT A T'"'T -:/' 'i ,"" "'t~ :.11' "" '.~ ':I rl'--M,., %~-'f."q)'~~\., ,,'r,1. ~ iI.
---- \.... "\ ,-" 1."'1 ~~.. '" ~...'~\":\!,~,:a:f,.' I .u.4~_l't "'..J~ .' ..:;:~f~." ;t;...Lt;;.~.:}..."-~,.}i;\\~~,(... J," 'J',,~;l
f ....~" . , . '", i'" ,p ',-~";: I , " ~...' ~-"" j '.~l ,'I ii" ~~" ~ ,\f"' "" "j"
,I 1 ",," I ","'.,',,"-t'''.', r'.-..". ........'1 '~,.! r,t,';' ~ " ,:1,.,:; "~, '" ".1> '....... .' ~Fltl1,.',',' ,.
I,~, , . t j . ','''f;,''~.'~ ,'...; ..".;".....:',.^"'>~,V.,.f&~"l'- .....~~,.fl/'-' '" ..~'';"' f/,"-):-- ..~t", ~'-'.', ~,"'-.""~" oJ.;.. .,'
";<",...*.,.,,, \ ..' )';;;--' .'> ,.- _....1.0 ........; '1::"" , "n'''fi,''- .....'...,..,...,.
" /.\ . '~".~, 1\' ....,'f..'.,.<".-~ .'.........-"" '\'''''''T'*''7'-''''''''''''--'''''~''''''~'''~~''~i'i ~',I''''~ .J~t'';''i''~'' .. ~ ....'''"'''~''.>... "'~">-J
" 'j' ~ I" ~--I ,\I- .., >.- ~'H'~"~1"'t.. ~."," "" ,-';.", ~j!:""")','A;t :'i j!\'"'''' I~' f._' '.,.."r," I ....~ "ii~' li ll",t '/ }
:,',(\,.I.tJ...', ,"f'; '~~""',,,L}'""{~:'''~S'''\J~-~~'#'~'';''~''"ll'%'I\''''''i.'.,,!<'o:'''C'~tt'ti~,f...,,~.,!~ ~ :"~;'''H''I'ILt::rt~ ,'t "~.."-~<t<=l'f./."".t....;:..
. -C.'''''. "\-' f' ....", \ '"..\ ,,, .."'-'!"""'>~7.' ""~..t"",J'II,\jJ'Th ,~~'... ....., ~ "-...'11.'1':-,'11 .....". "':- '" ....t.:!(';r..wJ.~ , f-'
.~.~~".< I' ,. . l(t'~~4'~..r., .",;,t"..,.,..1'<~ ri>;u7(,' ,..,-;:>.{1'.-\h>"i.'....".-~,....,.". " I. '..Il"'l"'~ It.,..... -. --i!"'<'i~' -I r ".~ ~'I'
. ,"- '" .,~. .,' '!: . ".. .' ~"i"",,~ \ ,~~ ~~.. '11~1 V.~l: .~"""h'~"'>: "'.." ",I _ . '. ~.. l..Jc .... ~ i' ~,'(i!"~ .~.... L i'l'
L ' ,-";.,,.,,~), "-' 11' h~'l" }i. f.L#I.:~ijIS-~,nt~""~ 'f3,'f' d' "'0A,1t'" ''''''iiJ! ;J<"- mt' ~'l . ~A';"} '..... "'''',<'"" "('I:; - 'M. "'~ )'I.i'I...... )
... .. .". ~.' Y--.." ,t',~~,._ '~,""~ l-_'" ,,,'4!>{ _.. '...... . .. ""f" t:{v::',~ . rl- 't~~;;:t-:;f, ,,'.~,.""',.'.~.,I
CORY A. CORHANY, . "XM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEA::' OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS.
CIVIL NO.
q4- 1"'7'1 C.I~;I Turn
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
KAREN FINKENBINDER OF THE
CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTHENT,
DEFENDANT
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
i
NOTICE
You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claim
set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20)
days after this Complaint and Notice are served by entering a written
appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court
your defense or objection to the claims set forth against you. You are
warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and
judgement may be entered against you by the Court wihout further notLce
for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief
requested by Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights
important
'z THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE.
IF YOU DO
BR OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Court Admlnstrator
Fourth Floor
Cumberland County Courthouse
carlsile, Pennsylvania
(717) 240-6200
I
.
{
l,
CORY A. CORHANY,
PLAINTIFF
.
.
IN THE COURT OF COHHON PLEAS OF
CUHBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VB.
CIVIL NO. ~Lf. lIP 7 q Ct'VI I nrM
KAREN FINKENBINDER OF THE
CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTHENT,
. DEFENDANT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
JURY TRIAL DEHANDED
COHPLAINT
AND NOW comes Cory Cormany, Plaintiff, pro se, and sets forth
causes of action against the above Defendant, whereof the following
is a statement:
1. Plaintiff is Cory Cormany, an adult indivdual residing in
Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
2.
Defendant Karen Finkenbinder is an adult indivdual residing
in
County, Pennsylvania.
3.
an adult individual employed with
s.P.c.
4. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder is an adult ind1vdual employed
with C.P.D. Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013.
5. On the day of December 5th, of the year 1993, on or about
3:00 a.m., Plaintiff Cory A. Cormany was injured in the parking lot
of the Carlisle Police Department, said incident having happened in
.
t
~
,
the Borouqh of Carlisle.
6. On the aforesaid date and time this aforesa,d Plaintiff, cory
cormany did enter the Carlisle Police Station and he was qreeted by
an on duty officer at the window inside the station. The officer
said. " Hello, what can I do for you? "
7. Of the aforementioned date and time stated in statement
number five (5) and prior thereof statement number six (6), the
Plaintiff answered the question asked in statement number six (6).
He answered. II Yes, hello. I would like to file a complaint. " The
officer on duty at the window, as mentioned in statement number six
(6) replied to the Plaintiff Cory Cormany. He replied by tellinq the
Plaintiff to have a seat and someone would be with him shortly.
The Plaintiff Cory Cormany did as lnstructed.
8. On December 5th, on or about 3:10 a.m., an officer entered
the waitinq area of the Carlisle Pollee Station in order to
acknowledqe a complaint made by a citizen of the Commonwealth of
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. The citizen Is now identified as
,t.~ormany and the offlcer is now identf1ed as Karen
Finkenbl . Defendant. The Defendant, Officer Finkendinder, did
~;~;: .'. ,
,'Plaintiff, Cory Cormany, by sayinq, "what seems to
.. It
be the problem here? H'
9. The Plaintiff did reply to the question put forth in
statement number eiqht (8) and sald, II I was recently struck in the
head three times. II The Officer Finkenbinder, Defendant, did respond
to the Plaintiff's statement. She asked, II where did this occur? II
oj
!
,
.
10. The Plaintiff did not immediately respond to the question
asked in statement number nine (91, the Plaintiff did take several
seconds to collect his thoughts.
11. The Defendant continued a question while the Plaintiff
was not making any response, as stated in statement number ten
(101. The Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, asked. "WeIll Who assaulted
you? "
12. The Plaintiff did answer the questions put forth to him in
statements nine (91 and eleven (11). He hesitantly answered. " It
occurred at the residence of Hotter... he lives on North west street,
across from the st. Paul's Church. "
13. There is a response to the question stated in statement
eleven (111 and it is answered in statement twelve (12). The Defendant,
Officer Finkenbinder, did not respond to the answer given by the
Plaintiff, Cory Cormany, but looked at the officer inside the window
of the Police station. The same officer that is mentioned in
statements six (6) and seven (7).
14.
was in fact engaged in prior activity when
she put
stated i
,..
:.J '..
~ estion to the Plaintiff, this prior activity is
"
.-;;
~(thirteen (13). The Defendant did ask, while
looking at the on duty officer, " I'm not sure, you mean Raymond
Hotter? "
15. The Plaintiff did hear the guest Ion that is stated in
statement number fourteen (14) and he did answer the word yes. The
Defendant discontinued her prior engagement, as stated in statements
v "."_
#.
.
t.hlrteen (13) and fourteen (14), and did turn her attention directly
back to the Plaintiff Cory cormany. " What caused this assault to
happen ", she asked? The Plaintiff did respond to this
question asked, and did answer. " I was invited over to have a couple
of beers, but then Hotter brought out some type of drug or something.
When I said I didn't want anything to do with them he got mad and hit
me, then told me to get out... that's when I came here. "
16. On December 5th, on or about 3:15 a.m., the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder did make a movement and did take the open chair beside
the Plaintiff Cory Cormany. She said clearly at this aforsaid time,
" I'm sorry there's nothing I can do about it. "
17. The Defendant continued a statement after she concluded the
statement made in statement numbered sixteen (16). She said, " If you
like you can file a complaint yourself with the District Justice. "
18. The Plaintiff did remain silent for an unspecified amount of
time after the Defendant did conclude the statement made in statement
numbered seventeen (17). The Plaintiff did realize the answer to his
.~a~ been answered, as stated in statements seven (7),
"'..:'''t--''' ."
.ri.1....-r, and fifteen (15). The Plaintiff did state, " Ok,
.
was file a complaint because I thought it was the
,H.
nine (9)"
all I
right thing to do. "
19. When the Plaintiff Cory Cormany finished his statement, as
stated in statement eightteen (18) he then proceeded to leave the
Carlisle Police Station.
20. On December 5th, on or about 3:20 a.m., the Plaintiff Cory
1j
,::':,:,~" .-}..'"
~
Cormany did proceed to exit the waiting area of the Carlisle Pollee
Station when he did hear a voice call from the other side of the room.
The voice said II wait. II
21. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany responded to the voice that Is
stated in statement number twenty (201. The Plaintiff identifies the
person who intiated the sound of the voice and the word, II wait, II as
being Officer Karen Finkenbinder. The Defendant, after seeing the
Plaintiff turn his attention back towards her, did not say anything else.
22. The Plaintiff did wait an unspecified time period for the
Defendant to continue her statement that is made in statement number
twenty (201. An unspecified time period did pass and the Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder still did not say anything. The Plaintiff cory
cormany did ask, II yes, what is It? II
23. The Plaintiff cory cormany again waited an unspecified time
period. This mentioned time period was for the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder to make a response for her intially instituted statement,
as mentioned again in statement number twenty (201. There was no
response from the Defendant and the Plaintiff did continue a question.
.' , ".;...1;
. . ....~ .
He quell :~ don't understand, I had a complaint, I came down here
,.',
,.,~'.
..pre was nothing you could do about it..., isn't that
right? "
24. The Plaintiff cory Cormany again waited for a response from
his statement and question made in statement numbered twentytwo (221
and twentythree (231. The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder again made no
response and again said nothing.
f. -_.
.<-~-
",
.
25. On December 5th, on or about 3:25 a.m., the Plaintiff cory
cormany did proceed to exit the waiting area of the Carlisle Police
Station. The Plaintiff did exit the Carlisle Police Station and did
ascend the sidewalk to the edge of the parking lot of the Carlisle
Pollce Station.
26. On or about the aforesaid date and time, and prior thereto,
Plaintiff cory cormany did reach the edge of the sidewalk and did open
his umbrella and did began to walk down the edge of the parking lot.
After the Plaintiff did open his umbrella and did take several steps
along the end of the parking lot he did hear his name called. The call
said distinctively, " Cory. "
27. The quotation made in statement number twentysix (26) is a
statement of personal directive to this Plaintiff. The Plaintiff Cory
Cormany directly responded to the call of his name. The Plaintiff did
turn back to the sound of the call of his name.
28. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany does identify the person that had
made the call mentioned in the quotation, numbered statement twentysix
(26), as
Karen Finkenbinder, Defendant.
.. nt1ff after acknowledging the identity of the one
29.
....:...:
"ias .mentioned in statements twentys ix (26),
,
.
l; and twentye1ght (28), did see the Defendant on or
about the aforesaid time and date running toward him with a can of
calling' .
mace. The Plaintiff did stand waiting for the Defendant to reach him.
30.
The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did stop approximately three
feet from the Plaintiff, as stated In statement twentynine (29). The
~, .
r
~
. ,
--".
,j
.
. ...-'-. .'.
t:. ".~.,
-
..
Plaintiff did not say anything as though to await for the Defendant to
make a statement. The Defendant said nothing.
31. A specified time period of about ten (10) secounds passed
after the incident described in statements twentynine (29) and thirty
(30) did occurr.
32. On December 5th, on or about 3:30 a.m., the Plaintiff cory
Cormany did resume walking down the Carlisle Police station's
parking lot. At this time the Plaintiff did hear the words very
loudly spoken, " you're under arrest. "
33. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany, on or about the aforesaid time
and date did turn his back around to the direction of the loud voice
that is mentioned in statement thirtytwo (32). The Plaintiff does
identify the oringin of the loud voice coming from the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder. The Plaintiff did acknowledge the voice by aSking and
stating. " He, what for? "
34. The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did not respond to the
question set forth in statement thirtythree (33).
35. A s~~cified time period passed after the Plaintiff did make
If
,the' question 1n statement thirtythree (33). This
~, "
'.
aforeme ,me period was about thirty (30) to forty (40) seconds.
me~period the Plaint1ff continued to say nothing and the
Defendant continued to say nothing.
36. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany did turn back away from the
Defendant after the incident described in statement (35) did occur. The
Plaintiff did resume walking along the side of the Carlisle Police
'.
,
station's parking lot.
37. A brief second did pass after the action taken by the
Plaintiff in statement number thirtysix (36) did occur.
38. On December 5th, on or about 3:35 a.m., the Plaintiff cory
cormany was grabbed by the sleeve and by the trousers. The Plaintiff
does identify the person causing this disturbance as the Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder.
39. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany, on or about the afore said date
and time did turn toward the person causing the disturbance stated in
statement number thirtyeight and did hastily ask out the word what.
40. The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did state, " you're under
arrest. "
41. The Plaintiff cory cormany did respond to the statement made
in statement number forty (40) and did ask the question what for.
42. The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did finally answer abruptly
and unclearly the question that the Plaintiff did ask in statements
thirtythree (33), thlrtynine (39), and fortyone (41). She blurted the
words, " publIc drunkeness. "
. -.
....
43. nttff Cory Cormany dId remain sIlent for an
;"
,~tiod after he did hear the response to his question
. .4' '
.-
asked ~~t8 thlrtythree (33), thirtynlne (39), and fortyone
(41). The Plaintiff dId reach his arms into the aIr and did ask, " why
am I stumbling? "
44. The Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did not reply to the question
asked by the Plaintiff cory Cormany In statement number fortythree
~,.i
,
~,,,,~.,-,
.
. '
(43). The Defendant did state, " Cory I'm going to spray you with this. "
45. In reference to the Defendant's statement in statement
fortyfour (44) and in reference to statement twentynine (29), the
Plaintiff does identify the Defendant Karen Finkenbinder and does
identify her as the individual earring the can of mace, as stated in
statements twentynine (29) and fortyfour (44).
46. On December 5th, on or about 3:40 a.m., the Plaintiff Cory
Cormany does again identify the Defendant Karen Finkenbinder as the
individual earring mace and at the time that the Plaintiff did identify
the mace that the Defendant was in fact earring, she did in fact raise
this mace at the Plaintiff. And upon the Plaintiff's visual
acknowledgement of the mace was in fact sprayed in the eyes, nose, and
mouth area.
47. On or about aforesaid time and date, the Plaintiff cory
Cormany did respond to the action set forth by the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder described in statement number fortysix (46), by trying to
shield his eyes, nose, and mouth area with his umbrella and arm.
48. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany was blinded by the action that the
Defendan and could not see or breath because of this
'T~
aforesal
49. afore mentioned Incident did take place, as described
in statements fortysix (46), fortyseven (47), and fortyeight (48) did
occur, the Plaintiff Cory Cormany could hear a female voice say, " come
with me I can help. " The Plaintiff does Identify this female voice as
that of the Defendant Karen Finkenbinder.
.
50. On December 5th, on or about 3:43 a.m., the Plaintiff Cory
cormany could feel someone again pulling on his sleeve and on his
trousers and because of the actions taken by the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder stated in statment fourtys1x (46) the Plaintiff did
fall down and strike his head.
51. The Plaintiff Cory cormany acknowledges that It did take
approximately six (6) hours until he was able to regain proper breathing
and that it took approximately three days until he was able to regain
full use of his vision. Further, the Plaintiff did suffer nasea and loss
of work for the followIng three days after the incident described
herein did occur.
52. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany has suffered loss wages and public
humiliation which was a direct result of the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder's contributory actions.
5.. The Plaintiff cory cormany has suffered mental anguish and
emotional distress and has since been advised to recieve counseling for
his own mental health, he has currently been imposed amounts in order
to recieve this
counseling and has also under went legal fees and
.,'......... .:
" ori'ect~ resul t of negligence per formed by the
. ~: .
enblnder or the actions directly related to the
imposed hereof.
Defendant K
, t~~
negligence' C)
{//vU
, '
. , , .' . ~ . ~. .'. '-." . :. ". -' ". -j
" 1 ~,.,.., ....... .,....."i'....1 ,..,Ii(I'i\> '..~,: ~.~ - . " . .," '. ',,'
.. ..,n'",~ .' """~"" .... . ~.. l _ .,01', . ,t . ., I,> '.
\....,...;''1,~".f~~,Y:f'.' .\\P':I,'V,'\""~f'."t &'A~'~'" . .~~,~",\ ,I",
\ " ~., 'f',) ',!,'[o l;.'" -." ~l'lr ' }-"...... .' V' . ~ ...(1' '~t\ ,,'I I "
, ~!, :.~": ,":.......: ~ \'I'~;"".~~'~,ri-~' ,,-~':) .".~"-:'- " " .-... 0', ,', ., " ,~,. :\'-".. .> 0
,.,~....I... '~.'.".'C....Jr ~.\_.".>!.1"'~...."',:.\...,...,. 'H,', ',\ ~I,. ,I.'.' ,l,'/' "L '-,'-'
""'"\.'''''''~f.'''''''~'-('t~:i,....,l''' p'..,......1'..' - " ' , . -'I"'.
-,'. 'J'-",'~f.~,;?:t..('\~J'.;f'~~!..;1?,~\~'it~'id::';t;;,,/ ,JJ~f\'l .......~.) ~~'::.., ,,'~,r' "t'.:r.~t;"rr.~:'\'~':>,,1
, ..,:l:\:j'\;"l:,},:,j,~'''''~~~~Ji,.:{~':f~).....f-'':~~~;-;:;':...~d-f~/,"~ 7'1 ~:r,~"~\.,~',":( : .. ,.;, :' '.0 ,.t.",.Z:,.I';:I~;."':.';"'!'! '.~;
,.' .; \ "r'i:f.l,.,_\:tl.,,}O:..,.1":';A,~~\:t'l\"":"'~~"H'" ..,.~I"')'IX/\.'/'~~'" <, "" .: . ~ 'I";~' '~~"~"'r\.' ,.lj." ,\
" ,. ~",' ,'.1: ;:, ~ :",'; '1-;.....;:.. -\l t%~ ;-.. '; )l..)t,':~ '". ,:.~",,,,-,.,. ,It'" " ';, '~'. ~;':~.. t .:.,..,.~t~I j'''\' - t' " ... ~," .~' ",,', ..." 'k :~.... .),',,:,,' ',:. .~ ~ : I '"
, ; , . ",,' . .~; 'If..... 3~''',f,...,''. "..>(.oi'~~ j -';2,. ,;)t~......-. ~" '.' i;.<; ",t ~,".L' ~ . rt, ...~-\'.,~.....fr~"t!~<;',';:":;!... J ':~. /' ~~.;' . ',' ",. ... '" .i, !;-1, j "!".. .1' j1 \~,....i ..I,' I. ' . J..
- ,- . <' .. ,-"," ,. ~,......-..
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
...'r
AND NOW, this ~day of (Y'\".fr ""
, 1994, I, cory A cormany,
current Esquire in the aforesaid matter, hereby certify that I have
served the foregoing document upon the following by depositing a
copy of same in the United States mail, at carlisle, Pennsylvania,
certified postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
Ms. Karen Finkenbinder of the
Carlisle Police Department
53 West South street
carlisle, Pa. 17013
(~.. OL
C~ Cormany, ~
S.P.C. Services
CURRENT HAILING ADDRESS
1883 Douglas Dr.
Car1sile, Pa. 17013
Representative No. 0010967
Currently Representing Plaintiff
j
Dated: 3, ~ \ - '1 "i
I
!
11
. ,
VERIFICATION
I, cory Cormany, Plaintiff in the above captioned action,
hereby verfy and state that the facts set forth in the Complaint
against Karen Finkenbinder of the Carlsile Police Departmant are
true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and
belief. I understand that false statements herein are made
subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating
to unsworn verification to authorities.
Dated:
3 - 3 1 - C.i '-I
~ (J'. Cn~?
Cor Cormany ,
By:
-
',' :":.\.~ ::'~!d;~~~1t.;'?F{~!';?'~'(~~~~;:')::5~;" "f' "'Iv ?i;~, t~ ' a~'~~ .y.i\: ),I'~~f~.d';.';'F" ~',,'~ ."',,,' ,~'.~'/ ~ , -:~,. .,~ \.,
._ ':, ", ".,,!,/J";:'J1'~~~'\:I' ill ~ "'rt. l.~ :'i.L 1>.'\'" :~1~" ."",t""j",,'r~Y" "",,'t '. t. I \"/ .,.1 .'
~ . j~.\-r,:,t.'\i;""~ .~'"l..._~,,,-tio)!rf_,l;,~"T;: ...-,<."Y:IJ'iL" #~" ~).!t-.,.~, ~,,;.t'(. "I;' <";\.'"J~....\I,....,.,'''
~. , P'\'~'~~""'~>::: ;., ,~&< i">"~":" .1'"11.. 'ri ,"1\;;........, . ~~'.,. ~~ '~"u.~ .'.~'~" ,'1."',(,.,'( 'to', '.,/^ It, ..
" .", . '. ' "',',' .',o;,~ ,,~~; ~~~4~.~f'~"l~~....~.j;Jt'~ ~i:J;U.'1i;I;'~ ~i[.ir ( _" '~.;'4~P;, ;~ 1f1 f " t,ltl, '.".~r'}\:lr.~1 .4:.:(: '
," ".'.'" \ 'f h }2~!. 1., .;,/~" .t .-..... '1l'~,.~t"t"~ i~ / ~,~ ,,'t1 . ~~"+,.,, ~l\.1 . f" ~c... "
. " /,f,;; >: l,;.~i?l:,~,~'~' v,;'i I: L.\ Iil... "'.;~~t~\;, ,; r,\~; ~';t::;. ,;; ~l, ~~:'~;-~~2!;';',' . ';; "
'. 'f :. ~.'i ~ 111:J,,: 'f;-~!t.f~~~:''', tt~~~" f;",:~'1 :..:-~~,. ~ ,<::....;..., ,:-" ~ ....t4.'it ~ ~<, .-;..;"'..,.,:..,', .;; \ .;<
. ',,":, :.t~''''\'''l~', -,;~'"'::;..:'~~ ' .. ,'l),"'~j,"'nt~~,.. '~~';,t"',;"';..,~"," jt:.tr.lt\,1~;1 1;...I.::I..r....
, .,' ',_ "~"',.' . "'-_,' ....' ,....~.f_- ...t. ,t' ...,,,, .~' !,i'.'-'- '.t.~.1-.."t..,..",. ~.(,t;; ,b';'SI, /11..,.'...,......,. '"
.. ..,..". ' , \' . . .~""" ._}" n ,,~'F. ~,., .J. if,' .. ~ ,. .'~
l : " " ~ .' ;\" .,\j.~"'t ',.' ,~~;,,:,.. 't~~ ~,.' /(ltJ.~,-,'., : /i ,I ,{ ; ,.1:,' ;''<k. :\ffi,;-;.\ ','ir.;;.::~';.{c,.I,'~~S\I':;,;~'~t;r:~l.i;::;!" ',,~ " ill':
.,f~~ \'" ., ~..~' ,,' _' ~~j ~o.l.;...,.o!:','. ...,..~>~! '_',' > ~'-"'." .' "."1-... ".4."/.'1 A '; t '
.
<, "
COUNT ONE
CORY CORMANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
54. The averments set forth in paragraphs one through seven
teen (1-17) of the complalnt are incorporated by reference as If
set forth at length.
55. At the time and date of the said lncldent, Defendant
Karen Finkenblnder was negligent In performing her dutles as a
police officer after hearing the complaint of Plaintiff cory
cormany and it is stated in the complaint numbered slxteen (16)
and seventeen (17), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A 1, A 2,
A 9, A 11, A 13) and (B 2, B 4) and exhibits (E), (H) and (I).
56. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was negligent in performing
her duties as a police officer because she dld refuse to acknowledge
the complaint of the Plaintiff cory cormany and it ls stated in
the complalnt numbered twelve (12) and flfteen (15), respectfully
1, A 2, A 9, A 13) and (B 2, B 4) and
'\".:;',
~$-r. and (I).
..4'.
",
~ant Ka~en Finkenbinder was negligent in performing
her duties as a police officer and It ls stated in the complalnt
exhlbl -
numbered twelve (12), fifteen (15), sixteen (16), and seventeen (17),
however she did exerclse her pollee powers in exhibit (F),
respectfully submitted.
.VI
V
58. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was negligent in performing
her duties as a pOlice officer and it is under investigation by
the carlisle Police Chief and it is stated in the Complaint numbered
twelve (12) through fifteen (15), respectfully submitted exhibits:
(A 5) and (E).
59. By reason of the aforesaid incident, and Defendant's
negligenct performance as a Police Officer, Plaintiff Cory Cormany
did put him self in risk of injury and harm by trying to do his
Civic duty for the community and Defendant Karen Finkenbinder's
vicious denial to help the Plaintiff Cory Cormany did in fact
put him further in risk of injury and harm.
60. The PlaIntIff Cory Cormany has suffered emotIonal
distress and public humiliation which was a direct result
of the Defendant's negligent actions as an officer of the law.
61. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Cory Cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount not excess of
Ten Thousand and 00 Dollars ( $10,000.00 ) including cost of
suIt.
, ~ r.:.. ,.,
~'.l'".
.~. ..
"
'...~ .~
~.,
"t'
~";' .
'.
COUNT TWO
CORY CORHANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTHENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
62. The averments set forth in paragraphs one through fifty
(1-50) of the Complaint are incorporated by reference as if set
forth at lenght.
63. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for contributory negligence when
exercising her arrest procedure and it is stated in the Complaint
numbered sixteen (16), seventeen (17), and eightteen (18),
respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and (E).
64. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered nineteen (19), respectfully
submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and (E).
65.
Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
)<.rf '"
l~ence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
J' " .
. bmpiaint numbered twenty (20), twentyone (21) and
"".~ 'a,.. '
is stat
"fi'~~pectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and
(E) .
66. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered twentythree (23) and Twentyfour
r;..:"""'--.::.p.<:.:, <',"OIJ........~..'.':J
(24), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and (E).
67. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered twentyfive (25), twentysix (26),
twentyseven (27), twentyeight (28), twentynine (29), thirty (30) and
thirtyone (31), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and
(E).
68. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered thirtytwo (32), thirtythree
(33), thirtyfour (34), thirtyfive (35), thirtysix (36) and
thirtyseven (37), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and
(E).
69. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered thirtyeight (38), thirtynine
(39), fourty (40), fourtyone (41), fourtytwo (42), fourtythree (43),
fourtyfour
exhibit"
70. '
(44), and fourtyfive (45),
, .i".
.)'/(0) and (E).
respectfully submitted
t Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
~~-;.+~.
~ilig~nce when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered fourtysix (46), fourtyseven
(47), fourtyeight (48) and fourtynine (49), respectfully submitted
exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and (E).
.
,2f~..~~::r
71. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
contributory negligence when exercising her arrest procedure and it
is stated in the complaint numbered fifty (50), respectfully
submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D) and (El.
72. By reason of the aforesaid incident, and Defendant's
contributorily negligent conduct, Plaintiff cory cormany sustained
swelling in numerous areas of the head and face, as well as cuts
bumps and bruises to the head and face areas.
73. The injuries set forth in the Complaint, numbered statement
fifty (50), were serious as having happened in the Carlisle Police
Station's parking lot, it caused the Plaintiff cory Cormany to
undergo mental anguish and physical pain, as a result of which he
has suffered.
74. The Plaintiff cory Cormany has suffered a loss of his
earning capacity, which has exceeded any insurance benefits
allowable to him.
75. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany has suffered grave emotional
distress which was a result of public humiliation and the physical
injur iea;,
76. '
,
occur.
cory cormany claims from the
in an amount excess of Fifty Thousand
and 00 Dollars ( $50,000.00 ) plus cost of suit.
COUNT THREE
CORY CORMANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
77. The averments set forth in Paragraphs one through fifty
one (1-51),of the Complaint are incorporated by reference as if
set forth at length.
78. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder was responsible for exercislng the arrest procedure
in statements sixteen (16) through fifty (50) of the Complaint.
79. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder was excessively abusive in exercising the arrest
of the Plaintiff cory cormany and it is stated in the complaint
numbered fourtysix (46), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B),
(C), (D), (E, E 1) and (K).
80. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was excessively abusive in
,~~~at'of the Plalntiff Cory cormany and it is
stated i (47), respectfully
submitte (A), (B), (C), (D), (E, E 1) and (K).
81. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was excessively abusive in
exercislng the arrest of the Plaintlff Cory Cormany and it is
stated in the Complaint numbered fourtyelght (48), respectfully
submitted exhiblts: (A), (B), (C), (D), (E, E 1) and (K).
,......,.."..".,.
82. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was excessively abusive in
exercising the arrest of the Plaintiff Cory Cormany and it is
stated in the Complaint numbered fourtynine (49), respectfully
submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (C), (D), (E, E 1) and (K).
83. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder was excessively abusive in
exercising the arrest of the Plaintiff cory cormany and it is
stated In the complaint numbered fifty (50), respectfully submitted
exhibits: (A), (B), (C), (D), (E, E 1) and (K).
84. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant,
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for creating a disturbance 1n
the Carlisle Police Station's parking lot, and this disturbance
did lead to the abuse of the Plaintiff cory Cormany.
85. By reason of the aforesaid incident, and Defendant's
careless and abusive conduct, Plaintiff Cory Cormany sustained
swelling 1n numerous areas of his head and face, as well as
cuts bumps and bruises to the head and face areas.
86. The injuries set forth in the Complaint, numbered
statements fifty (50) and fiftyone (51), were serious as having
happened: '.Carl1s1e Pollee station's parking lot, it caused
the Plai to undergo mental anguish and physical
pain, as of which he has suffered.
87. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany has suffered a loss to his
earning capacity, which has exceeded any insurance benefits
allowable to him.
88. The Plaintiff cory Cormany has suffered grave emotional
distress which was a result of public humiliation and the physical
injuries which did occu~.
89. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Cory cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount excess of Fifty Thousand
and 00 Dollars ( $50,000.00 ) plus cost of suit.
COUNT FOUR
CORY CORMANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
90. The averments set forth in paragraphs one through fifty
one (1-51) of the complaint are incorporated by reference as if set
forth at length.
91. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder did harrass the Plaintiff cory cormany as he ....as
leaving the Carlisle Police station and it is stated in the complaint
numbered twenty (20), twentyone (21), twentyt....o (22), twentythree
(23) and t....entyfour (24), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B),
(D), (E), (0) and (K).
92. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did harrass the Plaintiff
cory cormany as he was leaving the Carlisle Police Station and it
is stated in the complaint numbered twentyfive (25), twentysix (26),
t....entyseven (27), twentyeight (28), twentynine (29) and thirty (30),
respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D), (E), (0) and (K).
&.ntKaren Finkenbinder did harrass the Plaintiff
~-:\-..
. "" ~ .
q'~',lRlS leaving the Carlisle pollce Station and it
. '
.' ".'
~
,"complaint numbered thirtytwo (32), thirtythree (33),
thirtyfour (34) and thirtyfive (35), respectfully submitted exhibits:
93.
,
. ..,l
cory Cor
-
(A), (B), (D), (E), (0) and (K).
94. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did harrass the Plaintiff
Cory Cormany as he was leaving the Carlisle Police Station and it
"
-........!, -
,
I
.
.
is stated in the Complaint numbered thirtysix (36), thirtyseven
(37), thirtyeight (38), thirtynine (39), fourty (40), fourtyone
(41), fourtytwo (42), fourtythree (43), and fourtyfour (44),
respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D), (E), (0) and (K).
95. Defendant Karen Finkenbinder did harass the Plaintiff
Cory Cormany has suffered grave emotional
cory Cormany as he was leaving the Carlisle Police Station and it
is stated in the Complaint numbered fourtyfive (45), fourtysix (46),
fourtyseven (47), fourtyeight (48), fourtynine (49) and fifty (50),
respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (D), (E), and (K).
96. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for creating a disturbance
in the Carlisle Police Station's parking lot and this disturbance
did lead to the harassment of the Plaintiff Cory Cormany and caused
him to be subjected exposure in the form of unlawful arrest or
proceeding to disclose false facts to the local news paper
subjected tort, respectfully submitted in exhibit (G).
97. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany has suffered a loss to his
earning capacity, which has exceeded and will exceed any benefits
....". .... l.
, ::a result of pUblic humiliation and the physical
injuries which did occur.
99. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Cory Cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount not in excess of Twenty
Thousand and 00 Dollars ( $20,000.00 ) including cost of suit.
EI"'"<-'''-:;',''''''' ';-" ",""0""'..... ...1'c:".,...
.
COUNT FIVE
CORY CORHANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTHENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
100. The averments set forth in Paragraphs one through forty
six (1-46) of the Complaint are incorporated by reference as if
set forth at length.
101. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder did simply assault the Plaintiff cory Cormany
as he was leaving the Carlisle Police station and it is stated in
the Complaint numbered fourtyfour (44), fourtyfive (45) and
fourtysix (46), respectfully submitted exhibits: (A), (B), (C),
(E, E 1) and (J).
102. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder did cause or intend to cause deliberate
emotional"
upon the Plaintiff Cory Cormany by taking
the Complaint numbered fourtyfour (44),
fourtysix (46), respectfully submitted
fourtyH .'
exhibits: (A), (8), (C), (G) and (E, E 1).
103. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for creating a disturbance in
the Carlsile Police Station's parking lot and this disturbance did
--'~
~,
~~
"
"
'I.
~l
~~~
.
,
.
.
lead to the event of which Plaintiff cory Cormany was in fact
simply assaulted and also causing the Plaintiff to be subjected
exsposure in the form of unlawful arrest or proceed~ng to disclose
inacurate or false facts to the local news paper subjected tort,
respectfully submitted in exhibits (0), (J) and (K).
104. By reason of the aforesaid incident, and Defendant's
abrupt and unreasonable behavior, Plaintiff Cory Cormany sustained
swelling in numerous areas of the head and face, as well as cuts
bruises and bumps to the head and face areas.
105. The injuries set forth in the aforesaid averment were
serious as having happened as a direct result of the Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder's actions, it caused the Plaintiff Cory Cormany
to undergo mental anguish and physical pain, as a result of which
he has suffered.
106. The Plaintiff cory cormany has suffered a loss to his
earning capacity, which has exceeded any insurance benefits
allowable to him.
107. The Plaintiff has suffered grave emotional distress
and pain', a result of public humiliation and the physical
injuries' occur.
ORE, Plaintiff Cory Cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount not in excess of Fifty
Thousand and 00 Dollars ( $50,000.00 ) plus cost of suit.
1
I,
t
.~
.
COUNT SIX
CORY CORMANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CALISLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
109. The averments set forth in paragraphs one through fifty
three (1-53) of the Complaint are incorporated by reference as if
set forth at length.
110. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder did maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff cory
cormany and it is stated in the Complaint numbered twenty (20)
through fourtyfive (45) and the Defendant did continue to
maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff in statements fourtysix (46)
through (50) of the Complaint. Further; the Defendant Karen
Finkenbinder did continue to maliciously prosecute the Plaintiff
cory cormany and it is displayed exhibits: (A) through (K).
111. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
'was responsible for creating a disturbance
in the
Station's parking lot and this disturbance
prosecution and was a result of her unbecoming
conduct as an Officer of the law.
112. The injuries set forth in the Complaint numbered fifty
through fiftythree (50-53) were serious as having happened in the
Carlisle Police Station's parking lot, it caused the Plaintiff
~, ...'.'';-'). .C';;'.",:
L:.__,.^,. ..
Cory Cormany to undergo mental anguish and physical pain, as a
result of which he has suffered.
113. The Plaintiff Cory Cormany has suffered grave emotional
distress which was a result of the malicious prosecution and also
resulting in public humiliation and the physical injuries which
did occur.
114. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff cory cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount not in excess of
Twentyfive Thousand and 00 Dollars ( $25,000.00 ) including
cost of suit.
.....
'(
COUNT SEVEN
CORY CORMANY VS. KAREN FINKENBINDER
OF THE CARLISLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
115. The averments set forth in paragraphs one through fifty
three (1-53) of the Complaint are incorporated by reference as if
set forth at length.
116. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for wanton misconduct of
a police officer or wanton misconduct as an individual because
she was negligently responsible for not allowing a pedestrian
the right away when there was a right away available without the
interfearence of injury. Further this negligence did directly cause
injury to the Plaintiff Cory cormany and it is stated in the
Complaint numbered fourtysix (46) through fiftythree (53)
respectfully submitted exhibits: (A) through (L).
117.
ten~ant Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for
. ~.~
~. .,
t:ae a police officer or wanton misconduct as an
wanton ml
indivdua
causing an influence upon the Plaintiff Cory
cormany, as it is stated in number one (1) through fifty (50) of the
Complaint. Further the use of gas according to the Pennsylvania Crime
Code is to be only held valid by police officials in the instance of
labor dispute, respectfully submitted exhibits: (A) through (L).
118. At the time and date of the said incident, Defendant
,
f:'k.'..A:i,,'.o.,
Karen Finkenbinder was responsible for creating a disturbance
in the Carlisle Police Station's parking lot and this disturbance
did lead to malicious prosecution and was a result of her wanton
misconduct causing the reputation of the Plaintiff cory Cormany to
b~ subjected exposure in the form of unlawful arrest or proceeding
to disclose false facts to the local news paper subjected tort,
respectfully submitted in exhibit (G).
119. By reason of the aforesaid incident, and Defendant's
wanton careless conduct, Plaintiff Cory Cormany sustained
swelling in numerous areas of the head and face, as well as
cuts bumps and bruises to the head and face areas.
120. The injuries set forth in the complaint numbered
statement one through fiftythree (1-53) were serious as having
happened in the Carlisle Police Station's parking lot, it caused
the Plaintiff Cory cormany to undergo mental anguish and physical
pain, as a result of which he has suffered.
121. The Plaintiff cory Cormany has suffered a loss to his
earning capacity, which has exceeded any insurance benefits
Cory Cormany has suffered grave
was a result of public humiliation
emotional .
and the phYSical injury which did occur.
123. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Cory Cormany claims from the
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, in an amount excess of One Hundred
Thousand and 00 Dollars ( $100,000.00 ) including cost of suit.
00-t-;r
. ,,:.<"'"....,.~~,.I..\.: ...n~,... ~,.)..., ' '. ...'_^ 1', ,.~. ;'.~. ioI~'-.\. .,. !',,~,~:-......."\-.~.. ';<~. ..
. '.'~; "t<'&~,~ .~'. '1"~\'!:.,,)'~ 9lAl'('~-\;;J r.,~~~~"'..f),.. tr. ~ .. It'' ..... J '\ 'f ~l,.... f ,,'Ii "1"y,.,"'/tt.-#". "'.\ "',,, ~;i; \ j.~J!.':[\' . '" . ',k" "f\o-:f "...." tl ""<'. ."~ ,
" . ~ t', or "'-. ..'V~.'S. ,-,L<""~,;e~, y .'4' "\-\f ......" :<""'" ~"'I"" ~;..,;-,,, ,'$....;"'.....,-.~: .. .it,I"~ ",,-f~.~, ~ .
'/ + ~ ,:' e,.~~~~ .!tf,i,.\;tr:J.;~w~-~::rr.'1l""'.;~'::ttt' \.:r?l,t{)~:'~\i'~l~.,t J~-t';Zt5i'S~~.,,~,~~<t~~}~~-,~~:;'~\~~~~" t ~l,,\.,;i,..,t \\~..t ~~t-> ' :~ ~~tl;,},{!" ! ',', ,,'
.. 'r' l" ",. ~~'. (l!'r~.... \;1"''"'<.'\1' . '''''''l''''lI.~~~ I') "'V.!,; , ;-""" . "ot. [ f',':4"'"'1 -i7'J'.'"''
:1. ~'"..'~~ .,vx~~'..., t,,,l t:.'l::.";'t'"<~/,-1'l:'-I':;~ #'1'.:.>,.".'..'-'i.:_1ltt:.t\;:);\';.....""'~-;:~~ .'ft~/..;:;rtl'i,V'-tl;:....'.~\'I,..;f",.t1i;-t~'. ~ ~f4..... " ','
,-.. .t,4,~, ,"'.:"l;.,l..""'-~'",..Jhf."^-'.';.,~~ \,'-";Jt/\l';o ,.~.f}'...~~lc,'('~;":r,,~:4.:....,l.-,.V1>i...,, ~ ,,(. ,- '~',,:\,:"1l.,/.~..
",." "..,,~I~t~..!O,rfl ~.",,~, .'....-c"l {~, ''''llll1"'S ',,1(;' "'""~t!:- ~l," "'J.'-~".:,I,\""~i:'\,\ ... .:c.:""" , " .
t '1,. ~-:{,'~...~~~'(i.',;b.'r:I\'~~~t.1I,,-'\'/iJ~~4<...llO" J~.\: J ~'t't.li:}...,~.;~tv;r.S._\\1'~,~t~k'5f.":'l'.itm~ ..."'~1 ~~'.'.
. ~1;Y" J.4 :I;'[d ..~-rN '...J.'"'?{{''' I-.(:'''..!; ......i.~i:'.t,.l";.,t~t.'i,~\'i..... 1,,,,~..,~~f',., Cf-=',C:'."/;}~
\ ',~' '>l." ti")' a-<<';J; ~""~"'~~,.-':-: {~:.. 'J~ . t I. ~.., ~tt' . N ~.--,,_~ ,_ .,..., ,.~~".,llj\-f:': . .~. ,!~.., 'f~J-'l.''o'''.)i. ~ {'i.f: I';:;'~( : f,;rr;.~, .~i~ " "
. :.. ~>.r.'~')j;'~l 't v~,~r~.~" "'v-.-...~ "'-tl' c' ..~ ".t f 1~1~;:':\.'...; .;. . ~, ,rJt~.;-(#~.,~j..~~.,}J \.~,,-::"H~1 j...t(~)',lf..~,,,~~r'1'i' .~:~~ . .:. ;f-='
-~-li-f ,'::\......."''"''f~>....(~1'-'I.,' :.";~[K"'t'~~.,',>-"':..J,~41~~ .....;jrf~:t.~' ~';"j(_.'ii.t,t'l.-'-"~'e!:b\;o... ...,'1>,'.... ~."
i:.\ ~:"'t :~\.~p~~.;":l,j.~:~-r;~.',I;~~}':'~t~.~. ~~~. ':., ~;,.ti\{ii..~~I-~.~'/~~J. J"1,f'11 ;~.~'l''lt:!'~.J:.~?ryl;JfJf~'f/fg~~, '!~1J-:, :/} 1 <",
.a;. , ....,~., '" .-."\ ".,.. "'.<-.'l-,.._,....._'.,.r-..L,-'f..!.f..::i.~.,.:::......_,.,..._,~.1~' . ~ "~,. ...>^r_. .~,~~. ~,
i;~ ;
,,--,
,\ ,.
THB FOLLOWING ARE CASES HEARD AND THE OUTCOME
OF THE CASES AFTER TRIAL DID BY LAW DIRECT
PENNSYLVANIA DIGEST
RIGHTS, DUTIES AND LIABILITIES OF POLICEMEN
1. 189) Pa. 1974. The Police have an absolute duty to both the public
and the accused to investigate the circumstances of a crime in
order to ascertain the accused's possible connection with the
alleged offense. Com. V. Blagman, 326 A.2d 246, 458 Pa. 431.
2. Pa. 1973. Courts should constantly look beneath the surface
of apparently reasonable conduct to determine illegal police
behavior. Com. V. Dembo, 301 A.2d 689, 451 Pa. 1.
3. D.C. Pa. 1968. No police department is above the law, and everyone
is to be treated by police with dignity and without brutality as
long as he does not use force against, or resist the police. Heard
4. D.C. P
t~ F. supp. 720.
,.^
. w' .;
'.,'''"Xl-f II pollee officer can perform his duties without
then even use of minimal force is actionable.
;1'
use of
Donaldson V. Hovanec, 473. Supp. 602.
5. D.C. Pa. 1980.
police department was not entitled to
City
qualified immunity based on good faith of its officials. Mays v.
Scranton city Police Dept., 503 F. Supp. 1255.
~
A'
6. D.C. Pa. 1983. Pennsylvania's Political subdivision Tort Claims Act
contemplates liabilty only for intentional torts, thus requiring
that state law claims asserted against police officer be limited
to claims of assault and battery, intentional inflIction of
emotional distress, and malicious prosecution, as apposed to claims
for negligence and gross negligence. 42 Pa. C.S.A. 8541 et seg.
8550. La. Plant V. Frazier, 564 F. Supp. 1095.
7. D.C. Pa. 1973. Term "security risk" is not a talismen by which
constitutional limitations are erased and police given free hand.
Farber V. Rizzo, 363 F. Supp. 386.
8. Pa. Cmwlth. 1979. Adherence to standards which are higher than
those applied to many other professions is properly demanded of
law enforcement officers. Lower Gwynedd Tp. V. com., Unemployment
compensation ed. of review, 404 A.2d 770, 44 Pa. cmwlth. 646.
9. Pa. Cmw1th. 1975. In view of compelling state interest in
hig" degree of public respect for police officers,
police " .'may be held to a higher standard of conduct then
other including other public employee's 53 P.S. 46190.
Faust V. Police Civil Service Commission of Borough of state
college, 347 A.2d 766, 22. Pa. Cmwlth. 123.
A
,,'-" ".~,,,-,,,,.
". .........~:H,
~,
1l",~
10. Pa. Com. P.I. 1976. Where a person under arrest has physically
assaulted a police officer in order to escape and proceeds to
flee, the police officer is not guilty of conduct unbecoming
an officer if, after shooting a warning he fires a shot into
the air in the absence of any duly promulgated regulations
establishing a policy against such action. Wilson V. Warminster
Tp., 74 0 & C.2d 407, 28 Buck 162.
11. Pa. Com. P.I. 1961. Where police officers act within the scope of
their authority they are immune from suit, but if they exceed
their
powers they
are
liable for their torts,
and such
interferences will be enjOined. Jenkins sportware V. City of
Pittston, 22 0 & C.2d 566, 50 Luz. C. Reg. 185, 52 Man. 36.
12. Pa. Com. P.I. 1960 Unbecoming conduct on the part of municiple
employee, especially a policeman or fireman, is any conduct
which adversely affects the moral efficiency of the bureau to which
he is assigned. It is not necessary that alleged conduct be
criminal 1n character nor that it be proved beyound a reasonable
doubt;
sufficient that the complained of conduct and its
mstances be such as to offend publicly accepted
Appeal of Nye, 53 Berks 17. 596 Public
Peace and Order.
13. Pa. Com. P.I. 1954.
Unless a given exercise of police power
promotes or tends to promote public safety, health or welfare,
it is without constitutional sanction. Loblow, Inc. v. City of
Erie, 89 D. & 449, 37 Eries 130.
A
.
.--.,
.
2,
THE FOLLOWING ARE CASES BROUGHT TO
TRIAL AND THE OUTCOME OF THE TRIAL
PENNSYLVANIA DIGEST
1. Under act 247 a munic1pality may not ra1se new objectives to
subdivision application on appeal which were not communicated to
applicant at time of or1ng1nal hear1ng. Appeal of B.J. Development
Corp. 18 Chest. 98.
2. Failure of a municipality to meet any of the mandated requirements
of subdivision approval statute must result 1n a legally approved
plan reguardless of words or protests to the contrary. Appeal of
B.J. Development Corp., 18 Chest. 98.
3. Pa. Com. Pl. 1947. A pedestrian 1s requ1red to look where he 1s
walking and to use ordinary care to av01d such dangers as ord1nary
prUdence would disclose. Ph1ll1ps v. Upper Darby Tp., 34 Del. 172.
4. Pa. 1948. A person challeging val1d1ty of leg1slation must aver and
prove that 1t 1s subject to the challenged enactment. Northwestern
Pennsylvania Automatic Phonograph Ass'n C1ty of Mradv1lle, S9 A.2d
}
i
,
~
1s
907, 359'
5. Pa. Com'.,
1s prerupt1vely valid and the burden
to prove otherw1se. Com. ex rel. Tp. of Agr.
v. Fulk, 10 Adams L.J. 1.
8
;,: ,._^_ .^,_,~'u:i"~'!lry"c;::...
6. Pa. Cmwlth 1976. Whether exercise of police power to regulate health,
safety, morals, and general welfare in a given instance out weight
private rights is largly matter of degree.
Com. V. Fisher, 350 A.2d 428, 23 Pa. Cmwlth 25, certiorian
denied. Fisher V. Pennsylvania, 97 S. ct 649, 429 U.S. 1020,
50 L.Ed. 2d 629.
7. Pa. Quar. Sess. 1961. As a general rule every person who is capable
of taking an oath in a court of justice is competent to become a
prosecutor.
Corn. V. Bernitsky, 57 sch L.R. 29.
8. Pa. 1976. The requisite intent of an offense is one of the elements
of the crime.
Com. V. walzack, 360 A.2d 914, 468 Pa. 210.
9. Pa. 1976. Because a state of mind by its very nature is subjective a
court, absent a declaration by the actor himself, can only look to the
conduct and the circumstances surrounding it to determine the mental
state which occasioned it.
10.
~o,. 352 A.2d 30, 466 Pa. 224.
"*". '.
97~. Guilty knowledge or guilty intent is, in general,
lement in crimes at cornmon law, but whether criminal
intent or guilty knOWledge is a necessary ingedient of a statutory
Com.
offense, enacted under the state's police power, is matter of
constuction to be determined from the laguage of the statue.
Corn. V. Zehner Brothers Farm Products 64 D, c2d 637.
Com. V. Jackson, 28 A.2d 894, 345 Pa. 456.
B
11. C.A. P.I. 1958. A Plaintiff will not be heard to say that he looked
and did not see what was plainly there to be seen.
North East Borough V. parmenter, 41 Erie 232.
12. Pa. Super 1940. Only when the danger is so obvious that an ordinary
prUdent person would reguard it as a hazard, and therefore avoid it,
is a person taking a chance guilty of "contributory negligence, "
as a matter of law.
Lutz V. City of scranton, 13 A.2d 121, 140 Pa. Super. 139.
13. Fa. Com. P.I 1956. A duty to look is imposed on anyone moving into
a position of foreseeable danger.
Kline V. Keller, 6 D. & C.2d 606, 6 Cumbo 130.
14. A. Pa. 1949. Though there is an active force intervening after
defendant's wrongful act, the harmful result will nevertheless
be proximate if the defendant's act caused the intervening force
that is, if it was the causa causans which set in operation the
intervening distructive force.
B. Whenever one's will contributes to impel a physical force,
'.,
..
whet_ - his own, or a combined force, proceeding from
what sources, he is reasponsible for the result,
the his hand, unaided, had produced it, provided
the contribution is of substantLal magnitude and is near the
result.
C. Casual relation is the universal factor common to all legal
liability, and it applies to crimes with the same force and
effect as it applies to torts.
B
~~-.:.._.
..---..".~..>
D. An intervening act of an individual which is a normal response
to the stimulus of a situation created by another's criminal
conduct is not a superseeding cause of that harm to a third
person which the other's conduct was a substantial factor in
being about.
Com. V. Almeida, 68 A.2d 595, 362 Pa. 596, 12 A.L.R. 2d 183,
certioraria denied. 70 S. ct. 614, 339 U.S. 924, 94 L.Ed.
1346 rehearing denied 70 S. ct. 798, 339 U.S. 950, 94 L.Ed
1364, certiorari denied 71 S. ct. 83, 340 U.S. 867, 95 L.Ed. 633
15. D.C. Pa. 1972, No one is immune from prosecution, in good faith,
for his alleged criminal acts.
Independent Tape Merchant's Ass'n V. Creamer, 346 F. Supp. 456.
e
~'.. .
-,
_.~---
'"
I~
1~
.y
!
(9
carlisle police Depar~ment
53 w. South Street
carlisle, PA 17013
717_243-5252
CARLISLZ POLICE DBPAR~
COHPLAlft _ MISCOIIDUC'l! COMPLAI1I'1! rORM
This form should be completed for ~he filing of a complaint against
any employee of the Carlisle police Departmen~. If the complaint
is received via telephone, a police employee may complete the form.
A supervisor is to complete the form in cases of anonymous
complaints.
COMPLAIBAJl'f IlIPOJlMJ\'l!IOB
NaJlIe: c... ~~ ~ c.~ ~
Address: _ l~:!. CS::;. .~ 0.... .
Telephone:~-~l'. '-1:\' ~
other Location Complainant
Can Be Reached:
r _...,"".~
~~~
\"'\n\.~
n'rIIBSSBS ,\ \ \ ~ r-
oN J..\, tJo.~-f<-~' IIr .,.;.,.~ <>~,~r
NaJlIe:ol'l ~ t"O(,:"",~ ..\ \~.5-'.:3 NaJlIe:(M_ O. ll2'''''''''''9ir''
Addre'" r.," \. ~..\.' ~'.."" Addre..' · ,-- n:::.+.: ili
Telephone: '3~" _~__~~ Telephone: ii';"_:l~3-C.~\'
Date complaint rlled:~-" -'1. ':?l rrype of coaaplaint: \~~'''r......,~~
., u ~ t\ o...\\..o....\-....\, "\
Date & 'rille of Incident:-'LJ.>1-/"',.J\.. 7-1:00 t>orl\. \:l-~-"\~
Location of Incident: c:>...,\~( e. ~\~:...~
.,.1_<') .. ...1..... ,.,.,"_: _ ~"'.. V '. \.:. ~.\ "
oe~~iPti~~~~~!Cide~(~r co~~~~~ prompting Complaint:
,
I
,
\
i
'I
;
Signed:L- /1 ~---tl
complainan~U '
complainant received by:
Date:
(Use add'l page if necessary)
I:J - "f. -"\ "-
Date
c..
.
CORY A. CORMANY
1883 DOUGLAS DRIVE
. CARLISLE, PA 17013
en the~day of December' 5th, of the.year 19'3 this Plaintiff,
Cory A. Cormany, entered the Carlisle Police Sttt10n'on East South
Street at approximately 2:45 A.M. It was at this time he, the Plaintiff,
acknowledged the on duty attending officer at the window of the Station.
This Plaintiff then said to the attendine officer that he would like to
file a complaint because he felt that he had been physically assaulted.
The on duty officer. then responded by telling this Plaintiff to have a
seat and someone would be with him shortly. This Plaintiff, Cory A.
Cormany, took a seat and then waited.
At approximately 2:50 A.M., of the same above mentioned date,
an officer, one iden tified as Kar.en Finl<enbinder, entered the waiting
area of the Police Station. It was at this time she acknowledged this
Plaintiff, Cory A. Cormany, byaskine, ":/hat is the problem?" At this
time the Plaintiff proceeded to describp. the events and how the
assault occurred, thus leading him to his decision to go to the
Folice Station. He, the Plaintiff, said to the acknowledging officer,
identified as Karen Finkenbinder, "I '....as recently struck in the head
three times." The officer replied by asking where this occurred and
also asked if, the Plaintiff knew who it was that had struck him.
This Plaintiff answered, "It occurred at the residence of ('jotter...
he lives on North \'/est street across from St. Paul's Church." ','/hen
Cfficer Finkenbinder heard the name Notter, she immediately looked
at the other officer inside the window of the Police Station and said,
"I'm not sure, you mean Raymond Motter?" It \~as then that this Plaintiff
answered yes, however, Officer Finkenbinder did not acknowledge this
Plaintiff. A few moments later she did in fact turn back to the
c.
Plaintiff and asked. "'Ilha t caused this assault to happen?" He. the
Plaintiff. answered. "I was invited over to have a couple of beers.
but then Motter broueht out some type of drugs or somethine. When I
said I didn't want any thine to do with them he got mad and hit me. then
told me to get out...that's when I came here." After hearing this
last statement, Cfficer Finkenbinder told this Plaintiff that there
was nothine she could do because he had no visible injuries and that
if he wanted. he could file a report himself with the Distr.ict Justice.
After digesting the response the officer had just made. this Plaintiff
responded by saying. "Fine. all I wanted to do was file a complaint
because I thoueht it was the rieht thing to do." It was then that this
Plaintiff got up and started toward the doors of the Police Station.
As he reached the doors. Officer Finkenbinder asked this Plaintiff
to wait. The P-aintiff turned back to the aforementioned officer.
however. she made no further statements. After several seconds~
this Plaintiff. now beginning to eet disgusted with the officer's
attitude asked. "What is it? I had a complaint. I came down here
and told you. and you told me there was nothing you could do about
it." Again Cfficer Finkenbinder said nothing and aeain this Plaintiff
began to leave.
After this Plaintiff exited the buildine and opened his
.;.'
umbrella. ll~~gan walking up the ramp toward the sidewalk. Shortly
';1('..'.
after roundffig the corner, Officer Finkenbinder called the Plaintiff
by name, "Cory!" At this time the Plaintiff. Cory A. Cormany. turned
around to acknowledge the pers~n calline him by name. It was then
this Plaintiff reco~nized the aforementioned officer runnine toward
him with a can of mace. The Plaintiff waited to see what the officer
wanted. Nhen officer Finkenbinder reached a point approximately!
three feet from where the Plaintiff was standine she stopped and
c..
,
t,'
..
t.i:<:.... ,~
"'-""~SooI,
.
said, "You're under arrest." This Plaintiff responded by saying, "\'lha t
for?" It was at this time the officer once again did not respond and
this Plaintiff turned and resumed walking down the sidewalk. The
aforementioned officer grabbed the Plaintiff's sleeve and once
again he asked, "What?" Officer Finkenbinder stated aeain, You're
under arrest." Again this Plaintiff asked, "'lIhat for?" This time
_the officer did blurt out the words, "Public drunkeness." This
Plaintiff then asked, "Why, am I stumbling?" It was then that this
officer threatened the Plaintiff with a can of mace she was carrying.
She then said, "Cory, I'm going to spray you with this." The Plaintiff
looked at the officer for a few moments and said nothing. It was then
that this officer, identified as Karen Finkenbinder, sprayed the mace
into the Plaintiff's eyes, nose and mouth. The P~aintiff tried to
shield his face, but the mace had already taken effect. It was then
that the P~aintiff heard officer Finkenbinder say, "Come with me, I
can help you." A few seconds later this Plaintiff could hear the
voice of a male individual telling him tbat he had to get cold
water to wash his eyes.
It is now that I will ask this reviewing officer and Honorable
Court to call his/her attention to exhibits A and A-1. Exhibit A is
the citation number 199368 and exhibit A-l is the citation number
199369. Plea8~ note, the arresting officer, as identified in the
n.'
above description makes no explanation of what it was this Plaintiff
did in order to receive this summons, she merely repeats the actual
description from the criminal code. And now this Plaintiff would
ask this reviewing officer and the Honorable Court to call his/her
Co.
L: '"' ,,' ,}'\.;:! ---sri':":..
attention to exhibit B. Exhibit 3 is a newspaper article describine
the officer's interpretation of the events leading up to the
issuance of the summons.
It is now that this complaint is concluded and this Plaintiff
will question the ethical procedure of the officer, one identified
as Finkenbinder, and question the authenticity of these two
citations one numbered 199368 and the other numbered 199369.
, .~
"+-:~~',<^:~ ~~'J
'.---''''~t'''
.~~?:~"~
-':'~:~:
c..
."
.'t(...I'''~)''t'I \t1.<~
'>.-t';'". '\ '. I' '<kJo\~.Yr;'$r~'_~...~' J:.~ J.I-';,;..~\<;.:. f~' ~.J'
,., _" '!I, . '. ....'1:.';,Jf',J~I.~;-J'~) I,'" f,~, \"\t~tl';..)~.~""l/At ,JJ.~ ~ ...."~tA'r:.yl !'; '.
:)C' . ,,,\,',,~..~~t.th~_~h;"~"~T.,~...!f .Nt~'frJ'^(n~4;.t.;"f;rI";~J"!,,\,V~,i.,,; lJ:""Ii1A)">;.< ::;:;~J~'",j{l"~'~'" H
. ~J ,;tlf;,l,ftr'~,'4{" ..'.~~'~\~d:"~~:{:fj \1.~ ~"-'" ,,~~'~~~"'. ~;~"j" ~f' ;.',,"~h_\'t /'i<)":"i:\,-r...'
\. .1-1,1..~( "':":"', -\,;)~ j<.' " 1, .'.''j;~ '..'-..;" l";J'.)"f,J'~t'{ ('~:',,,,!~l I"' . ., ....!"f.,}J'Il,J..j;J( ,l ."....,:~. '~'
",,-'.' , 1i', ",...".\' ""r~ll I.t~ <.' "1-",,1 t ~ '''11'''>> '''J l.'~", f ,,' ,.}.t~."":":Jlr~J.~... ~']t. j .'f'"."
-..ltr >t ." .f. .~~, .\, J..., ~~...,t ._~.i, ".' . ~"J' l"h""'! ."~' '.;....I~.~.,' ':>.-~ :~,~..,....t~~""1 '
. . f'" .~"'~~"l.';~>-~"" ',~"_d'1."':,""""""~'t. ,.~.,' {t~" ..;J.'J,'ftit"'j!.J'l~~ 't" C"
" ~~.:;) '1/i'.1 .if; ,," ,..<' , :;':.r-}.~tiI"t "t"'" 'i\'\....~:...j.1;r. .....~ ,~J,."
~\, . ,,":" ~"\~~~^;:~--':~~I':ir: "~/," ~{i~::,~~~ ~~XI! I :3J 'J.\; ~;:~~t~;V::,;!~t:.:~~~~i4~~~t\ii1:~~J~~~~:.:~'t.~L ~i::i~' ',/~;
, 1& 'l, ~ '. ,~'.. ," .1 . , "" ...t '"~"\..I"i'i'f' "'~n ~,,~. 't'....~.. ,"'......"},l.') """-:""ic (, i~ .., \ ~, J
""" '" ".i.".".t~',\I. '~I' ...-".." ~ I --~-''''-::''''lr;fe' .t1~4,~"'~t.-'lt't.., tl,.""J;"""''f-'i~''t.~. 'r.,..",,, E'"''''~''' ,
~-'.~...J. ..I"~t'..'~'~..'l!;t'0:ll,'':1':'~::;.~.i/'''.-: ~ '"' Jv,,;I'\..{~~"ti~";":'~'iJi.:.:t.,-,;~",.,{l"'~;:"\'#";..7. t1~~J.':4.../~t~I"""':".
~ '.. '.t",;;~:~',;,,,,\,,""....;lft:',,i!jV' j~I..H"~,..{ ~U ";'''J'~?-;;~;'~ft",t'(r;j'''"liI...;t)[t..i..'\t''~:'''' p:.l~,>o;,?lc,. .... IT~
':, " "'''4J:.~.f''{f,'':.~ ~;,~./1",~,'1't:'f ;t:'~ /~~..' \~\-l,~-;f/";')'~~""'-7U:'.'I,:)~'f,,:,t\~'%":''''~;' '" -'~"._.--.~". ,
, ' _ ;1,..; f,'~t~*<~l\~' ~~ri" :....1~\ !;~' Ij,?~. ~.; ;.. ~ 1, ' '-"'f t. ',r.,_ - ~
,_, \-'" ,~,.,.".......,'._~..1.." _.. ....
-y"
..,
a ure
this
person
signing
form
signifies
that
the
on
this form recieved the complaint filed by Cory A. Cormany on the
below signed date and signifies that there were four attached
copies attached with the complaint that Cory A. Cormany filed.
@
~p~
.-le
",
.
cf
o
ARTICLE 1. or THZ u.s. CONSTITUTION STATES AS FOLLOWED:
SEC. 1. INHERENT RIGHTS OF MANKIND:
All men are born equally free and independent, and have
certain inherent and infeasible rights, amoung which are those of
enjoying and defending life liberty, of aquiring, processing and
protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own
happiness.
SEC. 6. TRIAL BY JURY:
Trial by jury shall be as hereto fore, and the right there
of to remain inviolate.
SEC. 7. FREEDOM OF PRESS AND SPEECH; LIABELS:
The printing press shall be free to every person who may
undertake to examine the proceedings of the legislature or any
branch of goverment, and no law shaw ever be made to restrain the
right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions
is one of the invaluable rights of man; and every citizen may
:::e::.s~eak; ,,::i::a:ndl:::::y~n ::y
any pi .. " . -~,~. for the publlcat ion
official conduct of officers or men
subject, being responsible
conviction shall be had in
of papers relating to the
in public capacity, or to any
other matter proper for public investigation or information, where
the facts that such publication was not maliciously or negligently
made shall be established to the satisfaction of the jurys; and
in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to
o
.
determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the
court, as in other cases.
':" t
~~,:J
;.'.'''-;,,;
;;:~ '
r"r~,i! ,
1
I
,
SEC. 9. RIGHTS OF ACCUSED IN CRIHINAL PROSECUTION:
In all criminal prosecutions the accused hath a right to
be heard by himself and his Counsel, to demand the nature and
cause of the accusation against him, to meet the witnesses face
to face, to have compUlsory process for obtaining witness in
his favor, and, in prosecution by indictment or information, a
speedy pUblic trial by an impartIal jury of the vIeirage; he
cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself, nor can he
be deprIved of his life, lIberty, or property, unless by the
jUdgement of hIs peers or the law of the land.
;:
SEC. 11. COURTS TO BE OPEN, SUITS AGAINST COHHLTH:
All courts shall be open, and every man for injury done him
In hIs lands goods, person or reputatIon shall have remedy by
due course of law, and rIght and justice administered without
sale denial
or delay.
Suits may be brought
against the
Common
as the ,;
manner, in such course and in such cases
may by law direct.
'~1.r. <
SEC. 13. BAIt, ~INBS AND PUNISHENT:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines
imposed, nor cruel puniShment inflicted.
D
~"y 1 1>.,
~ ~
~fl~
(':l ..
~ ~
"J;, 01 Cfc
~\)\\q\t 01 C4Jo1l.
f90 IJ' %
'~'I
.g.
.-l9p,.;
~ ....,
DIII/ded \ '\.'01
@
Slephen L. Margeson
Chier or Police
ClIrUS/1! Policl! Deparlml!nt
53 Wesl South Slreel
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
717.243.5252
December 10, 1993
Cory A. Cormany
1883 Douglas Drive
Carlisle, PA 17013
Dear Mr. Cormany:
1 am in receipt of the complaint you filed against Officer Finkenbinder of the
Carlisle Police Department.
Pursuant to our department policy, I have initiated an investigation into your
complaint. You will be advised of the outcome of this investigation.
In the meantime, please contact me with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
.Cift,#~... 7. frL-r-"
Stephen L Margeson
Chief of Police
SLM/js
cc: complaint file
..'~'
-..-0'
~. "',
'I'
.,1
~
~'6,.1 "of
':~=fJ.. ,~. ~,
. ...
("l ',. <I
:J ' ..
..~ -J:::
"I', Ol-rc
{0
~1:l\\.llq ot C4J'I/,
~o r.-' '" "4
iI'.~_"
re
r\" If,. .
r:'f':-;'l
,;.W....~l
~.......:_..... ~
Ol/qdlll\ \'l~
Stephen L. Margeson
Chief of Police
Carlisle Police Deparmlem
53 Wesl Soulh SOIeel
Carlisle. Pennsylvania 17013
717.243.5252 '
February 15. 1994
Mr. Cory A. Cormany
1883 Douglas Drive
Carlisle. PA 17013
Dear Mr. Cormany:
I am writing you to inform you that the investigation into your complaint has
been completed.
My investigation led me to conclude that Officer Finkenbinder had adequate
probable cause to arrest you for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct,
and that she was justified in spraying you with the pepper spray when you
refused to comply with her verbal commands. As a result, I have determined
that your complaint is unsubstantiated.
If you are not satisfied with the results of my investigation into your complaint.
you may direct such concerns to Mayor Kirk R. Wilson. Borough of Carlisle, 53
W. South Street, Carlisle, PA 17013.
Please contact me if you have further questions on this maUer.
Sincerely,
j~ 7'. fK-r--
Stephen L Margeson
Chief of Police
SLM/js
cc: Mayor Wilson
Officer McCoy
E'
-
0")
jCD I
i~1
,l!I
j
hi
~~A
.. 0-
'S
=
..
a
!
I
ill
,CD
:iCDj
z('t')
00")
~0")1i
13 ...t II
,l!I
=
..
:0
l'
~z-
.... 01
..!:::;
=~*
'i Ell
.. 0 - '
a
=
51
a
~
'...
\Y
i I _
.* I ;- !
=~~: r
I ~ ~
F
~;Ig';I~~d':N~'1 ~
(..,,,,...,,,,,, =2'~.",. g
i g,a.Soa g ~ll 15!;sc "
t")'~l'D"l'Di ......,
"'....." ~1i:-'"
g-,,05'H ":f':iia
-e:;'" -"'aO'
;;;' !:!.:g >". g- ....
~r:;!i i5.ilI.,o i.:! o-f 0
fJ 1: ~ fa i ~ .:! @ ~ g
slit"....." t-<,'2 =
a .. t!i Y' - a "',< =:' <
Ir ... ~ g... l! 03 I! ll' g
r.tfi1:~.r1! ~3S ;'
.h i....P./':'so a~ =
I u! l~~ v;:, :::il :i
'~O's*apo~ ! ... f4
'I"'~:;;i ~f! ~
II. ...3no_ ..~! 0
So..NJf~f; i~f g:
"'g. ;"a.. glllJ cti
If 'K, ~ 'll!li -:
..,s. fi r~ fi" 0
,'l! ~ e,a. is,i-~
P. ; IUl, ,<lJ~ ....,
'.
'.
.....-.
....-..
-...--.......-. ,..
....
TodaJ'l dlllllte is on HUMAII RIBHTS and
how to protect rights and tight abuses around the world.
Fight human rights abuses
OUR VIEW
TIle UnIted StIteI of refugees is in sight - Unless all peo.
IIIUIt tall. lie'" pie's human rights are protected.,
IhIp ....... 'lIIUrIng IIumIn rt- . Thus, the Clinton ad.ministration
. ..... wisely has taIa:n the lead ID the Vienna
far II ~ .. ''':''',, 'COnferencctopromotewUversalhuman .
. The'HOiror:oib '<' " .iabusc.isl" rights. It propoe..,'f4 pursqe:J(O~r1:: '
as plain as- ,.. :o(.a.beateDi -""<XlIdi-thlu-have lanl!',iohed.r. . I
woman..It's; , '~qati9l1r;,ades, and has 0IlIl0!td a,cuItura1 .stan:
U.N. conti " " IS, end~1 dard pushed by-Qina." . ....
ing today in ' start 'to : The cultural loophole would allow
erase. And only "., . . p. each nation to decide whether tortUre Ot'
Confronting the conference were brutalization of women violates basic
these brutal facts: principles of liIimess. That would make
· 500 deaths last year from torture or human rights l1l""ning/ess.
poor jail conditions in 48' countries. The four accords, meanwhile, ~
· 4,400 people imprisoned because of. racial and sexual discrimination, ~gi1e
their beliefs in 62 nations. promoting Ci vii liberties. But theY f18ve
· 300,000, people jailed without' been bottled up in the U.S. Senate ~
charge in 60 nations. cause some clauses offend U.S. princi.
In Bosnia alone, 20,000 women have pies of liberty. '
been raped, while 100,000 Muslims may That's foolish. The Senate can make
have been IdIIed by a Seroian campaign modifications to the accords that are
of ethnic c......noi"g needed to protect U.S. rights. Not ap.
Such horrors wash upon U.S. shores proving them only undercuts U.S. ef.
each day with wave after wave of fleeing fons to promote freedom abmad.
refu~-fTnmr""fM'A"","';__ ~_ T.. e.._"o.'. '"
G-
G,.
..,~{<",~.y_..._-
, .
, '
.'
H
?\c..\uC'~ *0
'oe d:,~ ~\o.\c.J-. "'\;;
.' ">~~M' O~ \(';,.. \
~
.. ',1.,
. .
~
c:: t
~ e
l! \U en. I)
eC/) o.
:a c::
lli .o.
-Cl .- ~It!
J ~ ~:;:) )1 tlii ~
c! .....
a. a: c: I/)
i~ Ji~;
~ wC - iCOl
W tr.tl'!!~
I ~u. Q, .11:1::
~ U. Ii ~tlc1
q: 00 i: l!
~ ~t
I- ~
Q
isl ~i I ; .. ~.s II. .11 ~ 1,11 li li ~! 2'1 11.1)
: i~ E~~ .i< g !~ t:Jfi-':;
j 8.i111i._o H:I~ ! l['~t ~.:'~! 'i Ii . .
~ s.o .11 .!l/l 1: . ~ III SlI -
. Ef i~~ [j a.g [ II: '"
~=~ ..0..,..' I!~~ .-
=5..I'"'s5 . . :g . ~I~
.;:,1t: 1 . 111J~ J li :!.,~! 8.:.~~'
\Q .!!8~il .'0 1'- ., 1-0
~d ~i~=l .lrfi 8,w~l. · i . en... ~
.E 2' f( E" ~ '" 1: Q _,c"'N
\\l c__:I l E ~, ~~ ~t~:~ g. Q 1ft
:~8.e'ii1li! .11 E :: Q 2'8-. SCN
H ~ :Jeo..! &;;0 ~l! =811J::. 'l~)."'i~'ef~ .t5! ~ . Golft
...- i · ucZ . ~
~ ,ll~~is~ S.. ~ . g:i= .. · ~>.. ~ J ~iJ = .1')
.. - 1 '" .elll .- C .CL- 0....
"'-11 :0 2 ~~ ll.i e .1:;"[le "ill' .! '! a.1!N
~ ~ IS.I' ~;" ~~.II ilJ oS_ . a>-. . !.. H .~'C
· '. · .c liE.Q! Ei~i5.. ~a~ Q
= ~1'&.11 5'j e-l'ii--:j~_:E . E.j~
J -I~ S ,II IE EO 1= 1;.:0
-3'~ ~~Ui .I: ..11 lJ
ii~1 ~.r .~~~,gS:!~g'''<~f c5 ~
'-11I 011I ~ 'r!.~li;lljl &li.u
[~tlr~ [B.1;I .
! 1:.2 :!!
.2~l!~~lh ~ t'~ 11 ~li~ill:llS~ II ~~lg8
Jeo.2 i
t~
~ j~i.~
~ ~ 8'G.1
i~i~
~ Q~ j'l
,,' .Q
! ~sS!!,
~~ [1
~.5 !'~
J];f
..~1;1!;
~,li ~Jl
JIJ
J:-
~IJ
s-;j
... ~ "'li
- "'=ll
lii'6
E-1J
.!= .5
-If I
1.1;
~I
!~ ...
[lU
~3J [I
1~~1 I~;~
! :,:1 ua~
hQj I!l~
j iC E
2' .! ~! .2
,_.u_l!! f....:
l!>ll ."
.a'll'" ll' ':os 1:
j.e5o ......e..
--sf I..!e
: _ j.t!;i ~
d! 1~5'i
~..a. &,Bj'i
[~~1 ~!I!
.!8G~ j.o
iil Ii i!ij~
.2.s ~~ i ~5!!1
S~s
.; i i
~ ~ I
I!'.!
1Il~1
.i
'! 'Ii '~i
'ill
. E
Q E'Y
'H S ,ji
~ ! ,ii
. 'lil'i! I
.coe.
i;JS
,;2 .I:
.";15i
;!II
~~ ii.~i li~
~i.5.!5:J::
II . ; S 8'= r
. ~ i'ii 50.5 =
i~~~~;l
.ii=.l!.21ig
Qca.!!! 15
'ii. -..
)slii1lli
cnE.l:lf-! f
· ![ll a.~'g
· "1; .cia
< !~ls2'
~. 15'0'-
11= 2'e- -1! .
'c ,,,....l!.a.~
. 2"'" . -. e
~IJfi:ji
l! : III !I~
i=.l:Il.i!.
i'E~~f
-"[.
it ~
'I Go: ~ ~
~. .-
"'.I: ~
.c-Q::I.c
'J_~S'j
..2liS~
E'O!,~~
!lee Q.
~;'~J8.
III - _ '"'
Al '0 J:: 2'. .
.. --E';
~~IIi"i
1 ri Ii)
;t
.51
1:..
I!
)..
.li
.Ii ,
~,~
;;;;oe
.-:0
.. ,~ ~
iiiS
_ " ~
,2: . ~
11 :3,5 ..~
"i "i S ,......
.... ;!
.i..
mm Hill i
fi~f;; Ih[l ~
~j"J~i. jJiJI ~..
\IS I ajJiti i IS ~ lr- sf
~ ~ii~..i 'ill!! 11
~ ~"ljll11 11;ij ~ll
~~c~i!~ t::!~r~ ~'15
~ [Ii Il~ ~i~jl ~1
1))=111
1 I j {J l! ~ t
l~ IE t ~I~~o
! !~ !~if j~tii~
Ii jlJ~IBit li,11 f!!I~;~i
.cl"c.".,gof
III c-.c.", <=
. .-lit- ~.
!ilii~1"al1
~2~ .g.:ll: t-
~ii~" ~ cll.J
s.5 E -l!!1ic
,:1""III."IIIIW
~...CI"5.UC= .
~\II""Il.c,,- III
il W _Of:.!! 'V I: :I
'E'5Siliig~jlll-r
il...Oii.5'1111
.-s.!U)e._ _
s:. ~..... c
~~~~={ls S~I'
~.gg~s~lijiE
.ii::"cCQ.- l5.
- .. III 0"" I! 1
c. ._.1:
~ -g E i=s .11 : ~ 1i g
s;;,,g ii.-g'ii..l 0 ;i.li
-~1I0Jll1
1-.cR N
19~i II
;::.cgoO ll.
lIlgo~.. ~i'
el1...I. _
1=\liHil!~
.c ,ill c
\Ii : "!--.!!.ll
1l1~,_lE1!
'.~Oll!:[
~~~i:lal
c__ 11II.c~
....fll Ei iR~jj
I!liie~ ~
at a o.
-eS~_:cll
~o.'~lli~~
!'!~~~l!~EI
2!o2:C. .
in E IS B i'o:S ~
'2}1 _,g\li z:. ~ :"l! Ii; lli;;"l!
· I' Alt:_.c_J:!! ,ss-
tt "" - .Ii. E
'ii ,t:'iBgo_iJJzx<
I- I Q ~~ .!:i 'i ~) 1:i ~ ..:
c.:1 ..o-l!-lij .!:I ,0
ii. 'S.r!5_ c _
lire ~ "'.a J!~-'. II rt ·
E.t~&-SWgo.;! .:i.l! il-cl
.. wC"'t:e .-E e-.c
.I: ~::E c c . . tS ! ~- E -
! = 4: . 0 E = a i: e R'l .,g li
~ Ji \Ii ~ . t ~ ~ ~ 11 ~.ll ! 'ij ~
l' .E-"~-~W_U
.clll ~.5:5!-ilo&.~ c..l...."
- ... >!'Eoo.O '15 Oc
o ~"e _ " u 0 ~ 01 ~,,-
-'1:)N!Q. U o-.Q.c..
"'ii.. t:"O,g.E"~l".li
c ~t:<.c..c E.c...
a..ti.@ ~ 0 E ."i !! bE..:: .
!~i~ffi!r~~~~]Bl~~
~ ~ B ~ ~ .! ! ~ I ! [~ 1 ~ 8 :!
.
~
~
~
~
~f~i~j ~'l~~ I
~.-t'V-'E'a_~.';
8:~f~~jr;it:~81
t ~ ;~ll"- ~ III ~li1i.
til ! ~~ 8'1103 ~i m!
1:~.slil";;" 'i~
\IS !~lR.5tlo'iB~~~"
(Ii 8.,rE- 8'; s 1 B-,f::l S
. i="leiili-ii:"il
~ e ; ~ f- J i -: ; t1. i 2 .
'':~4 _-3!E~~~~
~ ~ !oii!i1~!!I[
-;; It.!l c wi .l~ 1IIS'.a
i-i )~~~-:.=~~
~~Ji'i3il~litl~l
E!l.a~.:tiSElii.!i':~'ii
.a ; i! 1: c ~ , lII.;!j !.~ ..2 g
"~~- ~~ ......
~~.5[~I.li !~~!i
uC.c III l5.!!E'I"
~.ia:. I=.srlll.".lij
.a.,... >.... cac=
= c i ; ~ ~ Ii -Ii :J ~ l.! =
-.ll1il'... ." iI-51-
~l~"<;;!iJ i~El~
c""O.,, "'- .11I-
.1II'15me"';'1!~l".:a.:o
a.=::lCl"!;1II . .eli-
.5l;!"~ f(.c~&g8o.EI
l.!"~Ol~~o-5-lij~~
~ ~~~~~!i~ ~la [!
~"'l.cf'l ~~E,g~
-!!l~iE.2E Io.!C--
fie j;,11!~ :a:~3~t
"EiI e"R'. -lIIici!!-
o i:! II 0.11I ~= .0 15." B B :
E!!lIlllll!.lII,;-gl.2:l:l
l!1l~.c01!5c --
[8.5 .il B-r~ l E ~ ~
J511i~.5118-.~! .5!
Q.- l! · -.5 8' =,. ... .g
-,flil"'ll~l!-lc;oll:~.~
. c" - 0 ....
.-... ... z::. ....:.c.
i~..51'ii;! u..a'15~.2~
-..... .cc - u-
"'a~a...o ._.~E
!~.. :l:'E~-li-'E~
E . a.!i oS i.;! i ~ j ~ E ;I
i~ i B'15 c ~ E '> ~ li E 1l
mc ~-li-il~-li;;B1!
.Ii." .c 11I0"" ;
-.~1II-1 .
8'.c;~ '1-g=~.a>~~
1 : 11 ~ 1:8 'ii !! ; ~ !
Ii -.ll'ljlli : fl i 8' E
($J'I< u ai _ o.l! o.l!"
1---1
Paula P. Correal
401 Eaat Louther St.
Carliale, Pat 17013
J
Defendant:
Karen Finkinbinder
Caliale P.D.
53 W. South St.
Carlisle, Pat 17013
District Justice Magisterial District No. 09-2-01
I Cory A. Cormsny being a citizen in this country and a registered
voter in the county of Cumberland and a resident of North Middleton
Twp. do hereby state: I accuse the above named defendant, who is
employed at the above mentioned address set forth above, with violating
the Crimes Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at 53 W. South
St. Carlisle, Pat 17013 in Cumberland County on or about December
5th 1993 3:00 A.M.
Participants were:
1). Karen Finkinbinder
2). Onduty Dispatcher (12-5-93 3:00 P.M.)
3). Unidentified Police Officer (male 12-5-93 3:00)
The acts committed by the accused were:
A. 2708 Simple Assault (3) attempts by phYSical menace to put another
in fear of imment serious bodily injury.
B. 3126 Indecent Assault: A person who has indecent contact with
another not his/her spouse, or causes such other to have indecent
contact with him is guilty of indecent assault, a misdemeanor of
the secound degree if: (1) He does so without the consent of the
other person. (2) He knows that the other person suffers from mental
disease or defect which renders him or her incapable of appraising
the nature of his her conduct. (3) He knows that the other person
is unaware that a indecent contact is being committed. (4) He has
substantially impaired the other person's power to appraise or
control his or her conduct, by administring or employing without
the knowledge of the other drugs, intoxicants or other means for the
purpose of preventing resistance, or: (5) The other person is in
J
2701: 1972, Dec. 6, P. L. 1482, No. 334, $ 1 . effective June 6, 1973.
3126: 1972, Dec. 6, P.L. 1982, No. 334, $ 1 , effective June 6. 1973.
As amened 1976, May 18, P.L. 120 No. 53 , $ 1 , effective in 30 days.
2705: 1972. Dec.' 6, P.L. 1482, No. 334, $ 1, effective June 6, 1973 .
2709: 1972, Dec. 6, P. L. 1482, No. 334, $ 1 . effective June 6. 1973.
2706: 1972 , Dec. 6. P.L. 1482. No. 334, $ 1 , effective June 6. 1973.
j
.
custody of law or detained in a hospital or other institution and the
actor has supervisary or disciplinary authority over him.
C. 2705 Recklessly endangering another person: A person commits a
misdemeanor of the secound degree if he recklessly engages in con-
duct which places or may place another in danger of death or serious
bodily inj ury.
D. 2709 Harassment: A person commits a summary offense when, with
intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person: (2) He follows a
person in or about a public place or places. (3) He engages in ~
course of conduct or repeadedly commits acts which alarm or seriously
annoy s~ch other person and which serve no legitimate purpose.
E. 2706 Terrositic Threats: A person is guilty of a misdemeanor
of the first degree if he threatens to commit any crime of violence
with intent to terroize another or to cause evacuation of a building,
place of assembly, or facility of public transportation, or otherwise
to cause serious public inconvienience, or in reckless disreguard
of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.
F. 4501 Definitions: "Harm," loss, disadvantage or injury or anything
so reguarded by the person affected, including loss, disadvantage
or injury to any other person or entity in whose welfare he/she is
intrested.
G. 4702 Threats and other improper influence in official and political
matters: A person commits an offense if he: (1) threatens unlawful
harm to any person with intent to influence his decision, opinion,
recommendation, vote or other exercise of discretion as a public
servant, party official, or voter.
.
,
45011 1972, Dec. 6, P.L. 1482, No. 334, $ 1, effective June 6, 1973.
47021 1972, Dec. 6, P.L. 1482, No. 334, $ 1, effective June 6, 1973.
I verify that the facts set forth in this complaint are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge or information and belief. This
verification is m3de subject to the penalties of section 4904 of the
Crimes Code (18 Pa. C.S. 4904) relating to unsworn falsfication to
authorities.
c~p.~. ..z-J~~'1
Signature of complaint ant
flC/(~~<l7<,~k;t(c::./--'
Witness
tJo.':!~i.iSc?1
H~"K:..U:.:i' ..:c"'~/DI~"'::
t.!:ct:J5,JA ;.'.;J.. ':~.~":"~",.' OG ~ .....:. '''{..
f"~/CC.(t".rr.t.<;'~jl=.,.;-.:'i~I\.:;.....'J ,~.....
t.lanUI, t'llIlIlSjlVaR<ll\SSOO~ gl Notll'SS
o
. '
, '
. .
.
.
k
?'c- \vrc- \- 0 ~(.
a\~ ~\CI'\. 'Co cl o..~ ~,'",<.
o.c ~r~~\
K
. .
4
L
1. Pa. Quax. 8ess 1954. Wanton Misconduct is something different
from negligence however gross, "Wantonness II exists where
the danger to the Plaintiff, though realized, is so recklessly
disregarded that, even though there be no actual intent, there
is at least a willingness to inflict injury, a conscious
indifference to the perpetration of the wrong.
Corn. V. Malinowski, 46. Berks 141.
2. Pennsylvania statutes Annotated. Crime Code 2708: Use of tea x or
noxious gas in labor dispute.
A.
Offense Defined
A person other than a duty constituted
officer of the law is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first
degree if he uses or directs the use of tear or noxious
gas against any person involved in a labor dispute.
B.' Definition - As used in this section the term II tear
'.'1
:X:::
or noxious gas" means any l1qu1.d or gaseous substance
~
t,~..J
...;....
that, when dispersed in the atmosphere, blinds the eyes
with tears or irritates or injuries other organs and
3.
tissues of the human body or causes nausea.
..;;-. .
'.C..6 P.l. 1482, No, 334, effective June 6, 1973.
, t:,-
Annotated. Crime Code 2709 Harrassment.
a summary offense when, with intent to
~~xrass, annoy or alarm another person:
, ~,.;
A~ he follows a person in or about a pUblic place or places.
B. he engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits
acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and
which serve no legitimate purpose.
1972, Dec 6 P.l. 1482, No. 334, effective June 6, 1973.
L
+
,.
I
i
\
i
;
l
~
..
~-'
a;
-
:a
ro4
#
a')
~>-
.. ,-
i- ;r..
Wr....-;....,
~.;r.tr
".0 .-<t
L"- ':1':0'>
r.,I..:r.-
. .::...;-.-
,,:~~~~~
",.ltd~
. ..,.m1ok
,~ ';1" ~
l-i3
o
IJ")
co::
.:a
~
-
,> -
.
1
~
~. ~
1--
~
:ll
~
f.
:t
:a..:
;;
o 0
\J)C
~I.r)
~
()
\!)
~
~
.
1
C?)
SEP 22199
de
LlORARD, TILLERY" SCIOLLA
BY I BUGH J. IlUTCHISON
IDBRTIPICATIOR RO. 02381
1515 HARKBT STREBT, 18TH PL.
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19102
(215\ 567-1530
CORY A. CORMANY,
ATTORRBY POR DBPBHDAHT
I
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
.
.
Plaintiff, I
.
.
v.
I
NO. 94-1679
CIVIL TERM
.
.
KAREN FINKENBINDER,
Defendant.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:.'
BRIBF IN SUPPORT OF DBFBHDAHT KAREN FINKBHBIHDBR'S
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
I. INTRODUCTION IFACTUAL STATEMENT
On April 5, 1994, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against
Defendant Karen Finkerbinder, an officer in the Carlisle Police
Department. The pleading contains 7 Counts, 123 paragraphs and 11
exhibits.
It is, for the most part, a collection of irrelevant,
unintelligible statements and items1 that cannot be responded to
in their present form.
Moreover, the aspects of Plaintiff's "cause of action" tha~ do
become apparent illustrate that his complaint, as pled, fails to
make out the claim under Pennsylvania law.
In partiCUlar,
Plaintiff's claims are barred by the Political Subdivision Tort
Claims Act. Consequently, Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, requests
1 For example, attached as Exhibit D, is a document entitled
"Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution". The attachment seems to be
an amalgamation of selected, edited, parts of the U.S. Constitution
and the Bill of Rights. It obviously has no relevancy to
Plaintiff's claim.
that this Court dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to state
a cause of action.
~.'
II. ARG1JMBNT
A. PLAINTIFF'S VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE DICTATES
THAT BIS COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED
The statements contained in Plaintiff's Complaint must be
judged against the standards of Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1019 which states in applicable part:
CONTENTS OF PLEADINGS. GENERAL AND SPECIFIC
AVilRMBNTS.
...(a) The material facts on which a cause of
action or defense is based shall be stated in
a concise and summary form.
... (h) A pleading shall state specifically
whether any claim or defense set forth therein
is based upon a writing. If so, the pleader
shall attach a copy of the writing, or the
material part thereof, but if the writing or
copy is not accessiple to him, it is
sufficient so to state, together with the
reason, and to set forth the substance of the
writing.
Under this Rule, a pleading must be sufficiently specific to
allow the Defendant to prepare an appropriate response. Laursen
vs. General Boseital of Monroe Countv, 259 Pa. Super. 150, 159, 393
A.2d 761, 766 (1978)~ Hohenese vs. Luaar, 412 A.2d 1111 (pa. Commw.
1980)2. ' Bohenese is especially applicable to the case at bar.
There the Plaintiff filed a confusing, voluminous complaint that
failed to meet the requirements of Rule 1019. As a result, the
trial court dismissed the pleading.
2 There is not Commonwealth Court Reporter citation for this
case.
2
~..
On Appeal, the Commonwealth Court affirmed. The court noted
that the Rule required concise clear allegations so as to allow all
parties to recognize the issues in question and to move forward.
Bohenese vs. Luaar, 412 A.2d at 1112. The court held that the
complaint before it did not meet this requirement since:
The averments present such a confusing array
of fragmented claims that no court could
adjudicate them without undertaking to
research and rewrite them in their entirety.
The judicial role must be to adjudicate
coherent claims, not to assume the burden of
the advocate or the litigant. Moreover, a
pleading must be sufficiently specific to
allow defendants to prepare their defense.
Bohenese vs. Luaar, 412 A.2d at 1112
(citations omitted)
The above authority fits the present case precisely and
demands dismissal.3
In particular, Plaintiff's Complaint is a
confusing collection of allegations and attachments that lacks the
coherent specificity required by Rule 1019.
3 At the very minimum, Plaintiff's Complaint should be
strickened with leave to file an Amended Complaint that is void of
impertinent matters prohibited by Rule 1028(2). For example, the
11 "exhibits" attached to the pleading deal with, at best,
evidentiary material that has no place at this stage of the
proceeding. GOODRICH-AMRAM SECOND Section 1019 (h);7
3
B.
DEPENDANT KAREN PINKERBINDER IS IMMUNE PROM LIABILITY POR THE
ALLEGATIONS SET PORTH IN COUNTS ONE THROUGH SEVEN.
A party may demur to allegations in a pleading for failure to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Pa.R.C.P. 5
1028(A)(4). The threshold inquiry for determining the adequacy of
a demurrer is "whether it is clear and free from doubt from all of
the facts pleaded, that the pleader will be unable to prove facts
legally sufficient to establish his right to relief". Bower vs.
Bower, 531 Pa. 54, 611 A.2d 181, 182 (1980). In addit~on, in
:..
determining whether to sustain preliminary objections in the nature
of a demurrer, all well-pleaded facts and inferences which may
reasonably be deduced therefrom must be accepted as true. Pactor
v. Goode, 149 Pa. Commw. 81, 612 A.2d 591 (1992).
The City of Carlisle is a political subdivision of the
COlDDlonwealth of Pennsylvania and specifically a "local agency"
within the meaning of Subchapter (C) of Title 42 Pa.C.S.A. 558541-
8564.
Claims sounding against an employee of a political
subdivision, are governed by the political Tort Claims Act, Title
42 Pa. C.S.A. 5 8541 et sea., which states:
-
· ,Although, pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure,
immunity is an affirmative defense usually to be pleaded in New
Matter, (pa. R.C.P. 1030), such defense may be considered on
Preliminary Objections if it is apparent on the face of the
challenged pleadings. Alleahenv Countv v. Dominiianni, 109 Pa.
Commw. 484, 488, 531 A.2d 562,564 (1987). Moreover, Pennsylvania
Courts have routinely allowed the use of Preliminary Objections
raised on the issue of governmental immunity to dispense with
merit less claims at the earliest possible moment. Norbet v.
I . COlDDlonwealth State Police, 148 Pa. Commw. 505, 611 A.2d 1353
(1992); Miller v. Kistler, 135 Pa. Commw. 647, 582 A.2d 416 (1990);
and Doualas v. Housina Authoritv, 134 Pa. Commw. 441, 578 A.2d 1011
(1990).
4
--I
~_-;tt?:':~ '., :';:'.', .,:.
8542 provides exceptions when damages would be recoverable under
common or statutory law, if injury was caused by negligent acts of
a local agency or an employee thereof, and such act by local agency
or its employees resulted from one of eight (8) enumerated
exceptions to the general rule of absolute governmental immunity.
Those exceptions are:
(1) vehicle liability;
(2) care, custody or control of personal property;
(3) Real Property;
(4) trees, traffic controls and street lighting;
(5) utility service facilities;
( 6 ) streets;
(7) sidewalks; and,
(8) care, custody or control of animals.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held that exceptions to
governmental immunity are to be narrowly construed, because of the
express legislative intent to insulate political subdivisions from
tort liability. Mascaro v. Youth Studv Center, 514 Pa. 351, 523
A.2d 1118 (1987).
Moreover, an employee of a local political
subdivision can only be held liable where it is judicially
determined that an act or omission of the employee constituted "a
5
. '
,
Malicious Prosecution
Paragraph 113) 5
7. Wanton Misconduct in the Nature of
Negligence~ ~ the Unauthorized Use of
Gas, Malicious Prosecution and Unlawful
Arrest (Count Seven, Paragraph 118)
(Count
Six,
~.'
crime, actual fraud, actual roalice or willful misconduct. Scott
vs. Willis, 116 Pa. Commw. 327, 543 A.2d 165 (1988).
In the case at bar, Plaintiff's Complaint has alleged:
1. Negligence Performance of Duties as a
Police Officer (Count One, Paragraph 57)
2. Contributory Negligence When Exercising
Her Arrest Procedure (Court Two,
Paragraph 63)
3. Careless and Abusive Conduct (Count
Three, Paragraph 85)
4.- Creating a Disturbance Which Subjected
Plaintiff to Harassment When Led to His
Unlawful Arrest (Count Four, Paragraph
96)
5. Abrupt and Unreasonable Behavior (Count
Five, Paragraph 104)
6.
It is respectfully submitted that ngng of the above
allegations fit into the eight exceptions to immunity outlined in
the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act.
In addition, the
Complaint does not state with sufficient specificity that any of
these actions constituted willful misconduct on the part of the
Defendant. As a result, they are, as a roatter of law deficient.
Scott vs. Willis, 543 A.2d at 165~ citina Weissman vs. Citv of
5 It should be noted, that although this Count purports to
set forth a claim for "malicious prosecution" the elements of the
actions are not alleged. Kellev vs. Local Union 249, 518 Pa. 517,
544 A.2d 940 (1988)
6
PhiladelDhia, 99 Pa, Commw. 77, 377 A.2d 1277 (1977). As a result,
it is clear that Plaintiff's Complaint must be dismissed.
Respectfully submitted,
LEONARD, TILLERY & SCIOLLA
BYI
ch son, Esquire
t Street, 18th Floor
hia, PA 19102
Attorneys for Defendant
~..
-
7
.,.~..._-
,'" ",..
'_.,.~,,_."
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Hugh J. Hutchison, do hereby certify that on this day
I caused to be served one copy of the Brief in Support of Defendant
Karen Pinkenbinder's Preliminary Objections upon the following by
Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested:
Cory A. Cormany
S.P.C. Services
1883 Douglas Drive
Carlisle, PA 17013
;,'
Date: o/;3I/UI
~
LBOIUUU), TILLERY " DAVISON
BY' HUGH J. HUTCHISON
IDBHTIPICATION NO. 02381
1515 KARKBT STREET, 18TH PL.
PHILADBLPHIA, PA 19102
(215) 567-1530
CORY A. CORMANY,
ATTORNEY POR DEPENDANT
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff,
v.
NO. 94-1679
CIVIL TERM
KAREN FINKENBINDER,
Defendant.
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
AND DBMAHD FOR JURY TRIAL
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Kindly enter my appearance in the above-entitled matter
on behalf of the defendant, Karen Finkenbinder.
A jury trial consisting of a 12-member panel is hereby
demanded on behalf of said defendant.
~IL!. %UJ71~.~
Hu J Hutchison
Leonard, Tillery & Davison
1515 Market Street, 18th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
(215) 567-1530
i
i
,
f-
\
1:
,
I ,.. '~~i
G~._'_..
"<, .~!tA~ _
~
E~.,"Z'.^"'"
'-"''if".J!
_~t!<,,,0;;.,,,,#.; '_j,;.
~
-
:C
~
r-
o
N
~>-
.~
"'x
w~:: ~-l:t
<.):,cl..... .:
,=60~
..) ;'": '::~ -::
. j ~ <.,",
~ );.r:
Ln
'%:~
:;,
-
...s ,_,
=
1.
State matter
Preliminary
Finkenbider
to be argued:
Objections
of
Defendant,
Karen
!rO !rBB PRO'.rBOHO'.rARY OF CUMBBRLAND CotJw.rY:
Please list the within matter for the next:
Pre-Trial Arugment
X Argument Court
CORY A. CORMANY,
Plaintiff,
v.
i:';':
-<
t~,
=
KAREN FINKENBINDER,
Defendant.
I'-.;
"
.'
-.0
~
No. 1679
Civil
c...c
-'=-
1994
2. Identify counsel who will argue case:
(a) for plaintiff:
Cory A. Cormany, Pro Se
S.P.C. Services, 1883 Douglas Dr.
Carlisle, PA 17013
Hugh J. Hutchison, Esquire
1515 Market St., 18th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
3. I will notify all parties in writing within two
days that this case has been listed for argument.
(b) for defendant:
Dated: May 18, 1994
ee: Cory A. Carmany
Court Administrator
ison, Esquire
Defendant
9.
CORY A. CORMANY
I IN THB COURT OF COMMON pLEAS OF
I CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA
I CIVIL ACTION - LAW
I
I
I
I NO. 94-1679 CIVIL TBRM
I
V
KAREN FINKBNBINDBR
IN RB I ARGUMENT CONTINUBD
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, July 25, 1994, the above case appearing on the
Argument List for July 13, 1994, is continued by agreement of
counsel. Prothonotary is directed to relist the case for October
5, 1994.
By the Court,
Pro Se
Hugh J. Hutchison, Bsquire
For the Defendant
Court Administrator
:sld
,)
'" ,'11 :l.l
j,~ ;Vf
'l ,0. flCE
Of ;,~E 1'''\lKON')TA!\Y
CUIIO[r'L ~NU Cf~\J/jTY
Pltlll~YI'n""
~uc 3 \0 21 ~~ 19~
TO THB PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBBRLAHD COUNTY:
Please list the within matter for the next:
Pre-Trial Arugment
x
Argument Court
CORY A. CORMONY,
Plaintiff,
v.
KAREN FINKBN8INDER,
Defendant.
1.
State matter
Preliminary
Finkenbider
No. 1679
to be argued:
Objections
civil
1994
of
Defendant,
Karen
2. Identify counsel who will argue case:
Cory A. Cormony, Pro Se
S.P.C. Services, 1883 Douglas Dr.
Carlisle, PA 17013
Hugh J. Hutchison, Esquire
1515 Market St., 18th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
I will notify all parties in writing within two
days that this case has been listed for argument.
(a) for plaintiff:
(b) for defendant:
3.
4.
This case was previously listed for argument on July
13, 1994 but was contin ed by p aintiff.
chison, Esquire
or Defendant
Dated: August 9, 1994
cc: Cory A. Cormany
Court Administrator
r;::;~;"-;::;;~;;,,;..;~
6;
.
>-....
"'...
;!:r.
~ ~~. 2~!
_ ;.e~..z
l&..O-~
l... xC)::..
.7:~jt,;
. i i.~-. J::
-"..JllJ.::'
. :~:;.;1~
~ ~ :t:
~.g
<:>
::a::
-::'T
'"
.::I'
-
-
'"
-
g
c:r;
.
~.. .
LBORARD, TILLERY & DAVISOR
BY: BUGH J. HUTCHISOR
IDBHTIFICATIOR RO. 02381
1515 MARKBT STREBT, 18TH FL.
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19102
(215\ 567-1530
CORY A. CORMANY,
ATTORHBY FOR DBFBHDAHT
:
I
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff,
v.
NO. 94-1679
CIVIL TERM
KAREN FINKENBINDER,
Defendant.
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF
DBFBHDAHT. KAREN FIHKBHBIHDBR
Defendant, Karen Finkenbinder, by and through her counsel,
Leonard, Tillery & Davison, files these preliminary objections pursuant
to Pa.R.Civ.P. 1028(a)(2) and (4), and in support thereof avers the
following:
A. MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO CONFORM TO LAW PURSUAHT
TO PA.R.CIV.P. 1028(a\(2\
1. Plaintiff' s Complaint purports to set forth a civil
cause of action in tort against Defendant Karen Finkenbinder.
2. Plaintiff's Complaint contains seven counts, one-hundred
twenty-three paragraphs and eleven exhibits.
3. The allegations in the Complaint, including exhibits,
are, in large measure, redundant, irrelevant and/or incoherent with
respect to the causes of action which Plaintiff purports to allege.
4. The material facts on which the cause of action is based
are not stated in a concise and summary form.
5. The cause of action alleged does not purport to be based
upon a writing.
I ~
l"'....~~ ~
.
6. The Complaint fails to conform to the requirements of
Pa.R.Civ.P. 1019(a) and (h).
WHEREFORE, Defendant request that Plaintiff's Complaint be
stricken for failure to conform to law or to the rules of court.
B. MO'lION!rO S!rRIKE IKPBRUHBft KA!r!rBR PURSUAH'J! !rO PA. R. CIV . P
1028(a\(2\
7. The allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 6 are
incorporated herein and re-averred as if the same had been set forth at
length.
8. The allegations contained in Plaintiff's Complaint are,
in substantial part, irrelevant to the material issues of the case.
9. Exhibits A through L, inclusive, are irrelevant and
immaterial to the issues of the case.
10. Impertinent matter is so pervasive that it is unduly
onerous and burdensome to identify and move to strike each individual
example of impertinent matter.
WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that Plaintiff's Complaint be
stricken or, in the alternative, that all impertinent matter be
stricken from the Complaint.
C. MO'.rION!rO DISMISS IN !rBA!r NA!I!URE OF !rBB DBKURRER PURSUAH'J! !r0
PA.R.CIV.P 1028(a\(2\
Count I
11. Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for "negligent performance of duties as a police
officer."
.
I .
12. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42 Pa.C.S.A.
58541 n. .u.sL:.
13. Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
I of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Count: II
14. Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for "contributory negligence when exercising her
arrest procedure."
15. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42 Pa.C.S.A.
58541 et sea.
16. Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
II of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Count: III
17. Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for "careless and abusive conduct."
18. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42
Pa.C.S.A. 58541 et sea.
19. Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
t.".-"'--.
'-,-
, .
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
III of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Count IV
20. Count IV of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for "creating a disturbance which subjected Plaintiff
to harassment which led to his unlawful arrest."
21. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count IV of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42 Pa.C.S.A.
58541 n us...
22. Plaintiff's Complaint does not allege that the
underlying criminal charge was terminated in his favor.
23. Count IV of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
IV of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Count V
24. Count V of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for assault and deliberate infliction of emotional
distress as a result of "abrupt and unreasonable behavior."
25. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count V of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42 Pa.C.S.A.
58541 et us...
26. Count V of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
Count VII
30. Count VII of plaintiff' s Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for "wanton misconduct" in the nature of negligence,
the unauthorized use of gas, malicious prosecution and unlawful arrest.
31. Defendant has full and complete immunity for the cause
of action set forth in Count VII of Plaintiff's Complaint. 42
Pa.C.S.A. 58541 ~ sea.
32. Count VII of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
,
.
V of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Count VI
27. Count VI of Plaintiff's Complaint purports to set forth
a cause of action for malicious prosecution.
28. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege that the criminal
proceedings were terminated in his favor.
29. Count VI of Plaintiff's Complaint fails to set forth a
cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
VI of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
.
.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Karen Finkenbinder requests that Count
VII of Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed.
Respectfully submitted,
ison
lery & Davison
1515 et Street, 18th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
(215) 567-1530 '
Attorney for Defendant
N
'~~.
-:r
.,.,
:s::
0-
,!)
:;J"
HJ .
'7'
,. ,.
'" .
"
':..; '. . ~
~
~ .:'
.~-
--
.
,
,
vs.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACfION - LAW
CORY A. CORMANY.
Plaintiff
KAREN FINKENBINDER.
Defendant
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECfIONS
BEFORE SHEELY. P. J. AND HESS. J.
ORDER
AND NOW. this
0'
day of January, 1995. the preliminary objections of the
defendant are GRANTED. The plaintifrs complaint is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT.
Cory A. Cormany, Pro Se
Plaintiff
4(1-' Ad-
KevrA. Hess. J.
~~11/;9.).
A ,f.
Hugh J. Hutehison. Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
.....,...,j..
JAH 17
~ 06 PH '95
Of l'{
r;tI~:
r' i~ !i :
,nr'c!:
'.; ~;j: ~ M.Y
! . ',;. f. .'oI'IIfY
. . .' ,'. ~.' I,'.
h'
i
!.,
l",~
~'.
~)i.'
t~.,
I,
t."
CORY A. CORMANY,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACfION - LAW
vs.
KAREN FINKENBINDER,
Defendant
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECfIONS
BEFORE SHEELY. P. J. AND HESS. J.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the preliminary objeetions of defendant, Karen
Finkenbinder, to the complaint of plaintiff, Cory A. Cormany. The alleged facts, to the extent they
can be determined from the complaint, are as follows.
Plaintiff is an adult resident of Carlisle, Cumbcrland County. Defendant is a police officer
employed by the Borough of Carlislc, Cumbcrland County. At about 3:00 AM on December 5,1993,
plaintiff entered the Carlisle police station intending to file a complaint against an acquaintance with
whom he had an altercation. The dispatcher on duty instructed the plaintiff to take a seat and wait
for a patrol officer. The officer who arrived was the defendant. Defendant questioned plaintiff and
informed him that she could do nothing, but that hc could file a private complaint with the District
Justice if he so desired. Plaintiff then moved toward thc exit. Defendant called out to him to wait
or stop. Plaintiff stopped and turned around to face defendant, then turned back and exited the
building.
Defendant followed plaintiff outside and called his name. Plaintiff stopped and turned
around to face defendant, who then approached plaintiff and attempted to place him under arrest
2
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
for public drunkenness.. When plaintiff resistcd and repeatedly questioned the officer, she showed
him a can of mace and indicated that she would use it, Plaintiff refused to respond to defendant's
instructions and defendant sprayed him with the mace, Plaintiff eventually fell and struck his head.
The plaintiff, proceeding oro ~ filed the Instant complaint on April 5, 1994. Defendant filed
preliminary objections in lieu of an answer on May 20, 1994. The matter was scheduled for
argument, but later submitted to the court on briefs.
We note initially that plaintiff, by failing to submit a brief to the court, has violated
Cumberland County Rules 210-10 and 210-6, relating to briefing schedules and the submission of
cases to the court on briefs. Nevertheless, wc will dispose of the case on the merits of defendant's
several preliminary objections.
Defendant's first objections relate to the form and content of the complaint, specifically, that
the complaint should be stricken for failure to conform to the law, and that the complaint should
be stricken because it contains impertinent matter. The rule of law governing preliminary objections
of this nature is that the complaint must contain facts specific enough to allow the defendant to
adequately prepare her defense. Foster v. Peat Marwiek Main and Co.. 138 Pa.Commw. 147, 156,
587 A.2d 382, 386 (1991).
We agree that plaintiffs complaint is fragmented and voluminous, and that much of the
information contained therein is irrelevant and impertinent. Furthermore, several of the causes of
action stated in the complaint have no foundation in the law of this Commonwealth, Only two of
the six counts in the complaint arc stated in a manner that allows defendant to adequately prepare
· The complaint admits that this was the basis for the arrest. An arrest, in the form of
physical apprehension, for public drunkenness is lawful. Commonwealth v. Shillim!ford. 231
Pa.Super. 407, 332 A.2d 824 (1975).
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
her defense: count one (negligent performance of duties) and count six (malicious prosecution). The
remaining counts arc variously characterized as "contributory negligence," "excessive abuse:'
"harassment," and "deliberate emotional distress." Because each count lacks specific facts, defendant
cannot properly prepare her defense, We arc therefore constrained to dismiss counts two through
five. As the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has held:
The judicial role must be to adjudicate coherent
claims, not to assume the burden of the advocate or
Iitigant....Violation of the pleading rules is not excused
because plaintiffs proceed in propria persona.
Hohensee v. LUl!er, 412 A.2d 1111, 1112 (Pa.Commw. 1982).
Normally, at this stage, we would allow plaintiff to amend his complaint in order to bring it
into conformity with the rules of pleading. However, our disposition of defendant's final preliminary
objection makes this step moot.
This remaining preliminary objection is in the form of a demurrer. Our standard of review
in considering a preliminary objection in the form of a demurrer is well established
All material facts set forth in the complaint as well as
all the inferences reasonably deducible therefrom arc
admitted as true for the purpose of this review, The
question presented by the demurrer is whether. on the
facts averred, the law says with certainty that no
recovery is possible. Where a doubt exists as to
whether a demurrer should be sustained, this doubt
should be in favor of overruling it.
Jones v. Wallner. 425 Pa.Super, 102, 104-105,624 A.2d 166, 167 (1993). In this regard the defendant
argues that since the conduct on which the complaint is based oceurred while she was acting in her
capacity as a member of the Carlisle Police Department, she is entitled to immunity from suit
granted by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. ~541 ltlseQ. (hereinafter "Act"
or "the Act").
3
.
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
We note initially that the Borough of Carlisle is a local agency, See 2 Pa.C,S.A. lil0t.
Therefore, defendant, in her eapacity as an employee of the Borough, is facial1y entitled to the
protection of the Act. 42 Pa,C.S.A. li8545.
The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure require that immunity, because it is an affirmative
defense, be pled in New Maller. Pa,R.C.P. 1030. However, if the defense of immunity is apparent
on the face of the pleadings, it may be considered in a preliminary objection. Al1el!henv Countv v.
Dominiianni, 109 Pa.Cornrnw. 484, 488, 531 A.2d 562, 564 (1987), In the instant case, the defense
of immunity is apparent on the face of the challenged pleading.
Because the incident on which this action is based occurred while defendant was acting in
the scope of her duties as an employee of a local agency, she may rely on the immunity conferred
by the Act unless an exception applies. 42 Pa.C.S.A. !i!i8541, 8545. Section 8542(b) of the Act
creates eight exceptions to section 8541, none of which apply in this case.z However, we must
consider one other section of the Act in order to complete the analysis. Section 8550 of the Act
states:
Willful Misconduct
In any action against a local agency or employee
thereof for damages on aceount of an injury caused by
the act of the employee in which it is judicially
determincd that the act of the employee caused the
injury and that such act constituted a crime, actual
fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct, the
provisions of sections 8545 (relating to official liability
gencrally), 8546 (relating to defense of official
immunity), 8548 (relating to indemnity) and 8549
Z The eight exceptions arc: vehicle liability; care, custody or control of personal property;
care, custody or control of real property; trees, traffic controls and street lighting; utility service
facilities; streets; sidewalks; and care, custody or control of animals.
4
.t.......
~.." .-
CO --:'1
,", ". ~,,"~"~'"
-'~"".'~'~.~"."""-""~."
.
94-1679 CIVIL TERM
(relating to limitation of damages) shall not apply.
The instant complaint makes no allegations of crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful
misconduct that would trigger the operation of scction 8550. In fact, even the portions of the
complaint that purport to allcge negligence arc, for thc most part, conclusions of law rather than
allegations of fact. Section 8550 docs not override the immunity granted by the combination of
sections 8541 and 8545.
ORDER
AND NOW, this
/70"
day of January, 1995, the preliminary objections of the
defendant arc GRANfED. The plaintifrs complaint is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT,
.,4/-1.
Cory A. Cormany, Pro Se
Plaintiff
Hugh J. Hutchison, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
5