HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-04046
,,'
/
../'
1
VJ
1
\
~
c..
.pt.
]1
i
i
, I
.9/
t"i
::>:
1'!
, I
rl
r;
.
o
,
..
/
/
\
"
, ,
,;I
I
I
!j
'1\
.'
!,.1
i;I~'
.,';
':~
)\
J
, 'o!;~
.j't,
iA
'!f
,~
d'"
I,
,
,
, "
",'
, ,
"~'I
; l~
"
"
,
,
"
"
.
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS, :
PlQin~iff :
:
v. :
I
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendan~
117 OLER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS or
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
94-4046 CIVIL TERM
IN REI PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
A pretrial conference was held in the chambers of
Judge Oler on Thursday, January 2, 1997. Present on behalf of
~he Plaintiff was Richard oare, Esquire. Present on behalf of
the Defendant was Raymond W. Dorian, Esquire.
This is an action for fraud arising out of
Defendan~'s failure to pay a medical bill of a 8ta~e prisoner,
which it placed in Plaintiff's rehabili~ation facili~y.
This will be a jury trial in which each side,
pursuant ~o an agreement of counsel, will have four peremp~ory
challenges, for a total of eight. The trial is estimated ~o be
of a duration of three days, unless a motion for compulsory
nonsuit is granted.
An issue which may arise at trial is whether
sovereign immunity represents a viable defense in this case. In
this regard, it is anticipated that the Defendant will move for
a compulsory nonsuit at the conclusion of Plaintiff's case based
on the doctrine of sovereign immunity. By separate Order of
Court, a motion filed by Defendant for summary judgment based in
.,
"'1,1 '.. -I ,
'.! ,J/,'.<it'"I. I",V,~{ ->(1*.
)1
,
of
, ,
'....,:,',tr'il
I"
i"';'I'4,1
,'I",l
"
;,' ," ."".,.,.,'!'t{".., ""'~tl'!I~/'
"', ,.,
"
I.,. I'
.,
" ,
t' ",'
':', 'II i'l~'~\it~"'I.(,-!~.~~;;
i'l
, ,
, Ili,1
, '\,!
'"
I;"'"
,,~ t f; )
J'l' :/Ii'
1;'1
:,:.'.1.(,
,r-~V
I,'"
1;1:
;,.
.,'1
FllEO-or-FICE
Or: 71,((: pr<ml~()N01NIY
"
'r,
1}7 .m! . G MilO: ~ I
:,
CU"'; , ." "'IY
'''l,^-I,~. J~jl' l__,...\JI.
PENNSYLVANIA
'I
"
."
,
.'!'I
,'I ','I,J
"
I,
,;,
,'r
.,
".
,
"
,
"i
"
I':
,
,
"
,"
'I. 'I
,'I'
,
'I,'
, ,
"
'!'
,
"
'I'
"
l,!
,
I,' ,r",
'I'
',.
, ,
"
;'-1,
",
,,-.,-
~! ,- ~I,. "...".
,'.-.,
,Ill"
"
J'H,
..
. ~
,.,
.
".
.
"
\It
"
.'
'.
,
.
.
.
-;
r"'l'
(J]/
':'~ tJ-
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO: 94-4046
V.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
PRETRIAL DATE: 1/2/97
E!,AINTlFF'S PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM
! I. STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 1217/92 inmate Larry Lanehart was admitted to Harrisburg Community Correction
Center from Cresson Prison (CSI). On 12/8192, because of medical complications, he was
transferred to Camp HIli Correctional Facility and examined by the medical staff and
immediately admitted to Community Osteopathic Hospital the same day. He was admitted on
1218192 as a left leg amputee, While a patient at Community Osteopathic Hospital In
December 1992 he had his right leg amputated. Thus, he was a double amputee alld was
admitted to Renova Center on 1/27/93 for therapy and training to deal with his double amputee
status,
He was admitted to MRSlRenova on 1127/93 on an emergent basis at the request of the
Department 01 Corrections and upon recommendation of the doctors at Community
Osteopathic Hospital.
By an agreement reached between Renova and the Department 01 Corrections, he was
provided services through an Emergency Purchase Order (EP17527, Exhibit 3) covering the
period 1/26193-21"5193, for an initial 30 day (a pcvclep )stay payable at the rate of $750.00 per
day.
1
There was frequent communication between the case manager for the palient at
Aenova and the Department of Corrections counselor for the inmate regarding his treatment,
progress and payment. His doctors requested additional therapy and an additional thirty (30)
day stay was authorized alter consultation between the Aenova case manager. His second
cycle stay was authorized on the same terms for service from llj26193to 3/~7193, Exhlblt8.
An additional 30 day cycle was requested but not documented by an Emergency
Purchase Service Form from 3/28/93 to 4126/93.
The Department 01 Corrections paid the first thirty (30) day cycle but did not pay the
remaining thirty (30) day cycles despite defendant's request for additional rehabllitaUve
services. Mr, Lanehart's treatment at plaintiff's facility continued through June 18, 1993. There
was continuous communication between the Department of Corrections through Larry
Lanehart's counselor and plaintiff through the Aenova case worker assigned to Larry Lanehart.
The communication concerned Larry Lanehart's treatment and progress and payment.
II. DAMAGES:
Defendant owes the plaintiff $68,891,18, costs, punitive damages and attomey's fees.
III. STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL ISSUES OF LIABILITY AND DAMAGES:
Plaintiff Is proceeding on a theory of fraud. Essentially the plaintiff Is arguing that the
Commonwealth baited plaintiff and then switched to Medicaid as a source of payment by
authorizing the plaintiff to provide services, maintaining continuous contact, paying the first
cycle, and then alter the inmate was discharged from the facility, instructed the facility to bill
Medicaid. The plaintiff, through the billing office, attempted Initially to bill Medicaid and was
informed by Cumberland County Department of Public Welfare that the facilities effort to collect
payment for its services to Larry Lanehart would constitute a criminal act because the facility
and Cumberland County Department of Public Welfare viewed the inmate as ineligible for
Medicaid services, The defendant knew or should have known that Mr. Lanehart was not
2
eligible for medical assistance benefits. In short the defendant mislead the plaintiff as to the
source of payment of Mr. Lanehart's medicel benefits, Furthermore once the Inmate was
admitted to the plaintiffs facility, the plaintiff was not In a position to put him on the street or
remove him from the facility because of his underlying physical condition,
Thus plalnlllf seeks the princlpal amount of $68,891.18 together with costs, punitive
damages, attorney fees and interest.
IV. SUMMARY OF LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING EVIDE~
The plaintiff has no dispute regarding evidence. The defendant has filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment on December 16, 1996. Plaintiff opposes the Motion for Summary
Judgment and notes that the last discovery conducted was by the plaintiff of defendant's
witnesses. Plalnllff notes that defendant never deposed any of plaintiffs witnesses.
Plaintiff further notes that this case was originally listed for trial In August of 1996 for the
October 15, 1996 term.
Plaintiff notes that defendant was represented from commencement of the suit to
August of 1996 by Jill Devine, Esq, and that In September another attomey intervened and
asked the plaintiff to strike the case from the trial list so as to give new defense counsel an
opportunity to apprise himself of the case, No motions were flied by this second attorney for the
Commonwealth. Now defendant is represented by a third attorney. Within four months, three
different attorneys have represented the Commonwealth.
V. WITNESSES:
a) Steve Lindsey, Director of Case Management
b) Martha Hartley, Pallent Accounts Director
c) Alan Fertko, Business Office Manager
VI. EXHIBITS:
1. 12/8192 memo Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN #1, KOBIERECKI
#1)
2, 1/27/93 memo by Kobierecki/From Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN
#2, O'CONNOR #2)
3
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15,
16.
17.
18,
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24,
25.
Emergency purchase of Service EP17529 1/26193 to 2/25193
(O'CONNOR #1)
2/1/93 memo O'Connor to Marks (O'CONNOR #7)
MRS 2/20/93 memo (KOBIERECKI #4, O'CONNOR #4))
2/23193 memo by Koblerecki/From Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN
#4, O'CONNOR #3,3A)
2i24193to 3124193 MRS memo (KOBIERECKI #2,#5)
2/26/93 to 3/27/93 Emergency purchase of Service (MAEVER #1)
3124193 to 4121/93 MRS memo (KOBIERECKI #3)
4121/93 to 5/19/93 MRS memo (KOBIERECKI #6)
MA card 415/93 (KOBIERECKI #8)
5/5/93 DPW Notice to Applicant (KOBIERECKI #9)
5/17/93 MRS memo (KOBIERECKI #7)
W/93 memo Troutman to O'Connor (O'CONNOR #6)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to East Shore Surglcal(TROUTMAN #11)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to Holy Spirit Hosp.(TROUTMAN #12)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to Internists of Central PA (TROUTMAN #13)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to Dr. Rolando Casal (TROUTMAN #14)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to Cumberland Ambulance Service
(TROUTMAN #15)
6/30/93 letter Troutman to Physicians of Rehab, (TROUTMAN #16)
6/30/93 letter by Troutman to MRS (TROUTMAN #5)
7/6193 memo Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN #6)
7/15/93 letter Troutman to Physicians of Rehab. (TROUTMAN #17)
8/4193 memo by KoblereckVFrom Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN
#7,0'CONNOR #5)
8/12/93 letter Troutman to A.Z, Ritzman A'3Soc. (TROUTMAN #18)
4
26. 11/5193 letter by Troutman to MRS (TROUTMAN 18, MAEVER 12)
27. :?I14194 memo Troutman to O'Connor (TROUTMAN #3)
28. 3124194 letter Troutman to Rausch (TROUTMAN #10)
29. 416194 memo Troutman to Greenleaf (TROUTMAN #9)
30, Medical Records of Larry Lanehart
31. Financial Records of Larry Lanehart's stay at Renova
VII. SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS:
No settlement negotiations have been made by the defef)./ Plaintiff had requested
settlement discussions with defendant's attorneys number 1 and, ,
/
DATED: December 20, 1996 ctfu Itted,
"r<l\14'IlHh..tt \pl...,llfloJ.\l,ut rl.1 ~.."'n
,
5
See Delendllnt's Answer IlI1d New Mllller, mllrked Exhibit "C", ~~ 20, 24, 27.
On September 12, 1995. counsellor the I'lllintill'took the depositions of I'llul O'Connor,
Regional Director of the Burellu of Community Corrections with the l)ennsylvlll1ill Department
of Corrections. On that slime date, Plaint ill's counsc1also took the deposition of David S,
Maeyer, Business Manager lor the State Correctionullnstitutionat Cump HiIIllI1d John
Kobierecki, Counselor at the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center, who was assigned to
llll1ehlll1. Finally, on October 27, 1995, I'luintill's counscltook the deposition of Jellrey A.
Troutmlll1, Director of the Hllrrisburg Community Corrections Center,
C. Relevant Faets and I'roeedural History:
On or about July 26,1994. the Plaintiff. Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems ("MRS") filed a
Complaint against the Defendlll1t, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections for breach of contract
relating to certain rehabilitative services supplied by the I'luintiff Irom January 27,1993 until
June 18, 1993 to a former inmate of the Harrisburg Corrections Center, On or about March 21,
1995, the Plaintiff MRS amended its Complaint to include a count of Iraud, See Exhibit" A" to
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.
On January 25,1996, upon consideration of Defendant's Preliminary Objections to
Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, this Honorable Court entered an Order granting the Defendant's
Preliminary Objections in part. transferring the breach of contract claim to the Board of Claims
and denying the Defendant's Preliminary Objections as they related to Plaintifl's fraud claim, See
Exhibit "B" to Defendant's Motion, On April II, 1996. Defendantliled its Answer and New
Matter to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint.
The Plaintiff has certified this matter as roady lor trial. Trial in this matter has been
usettled to start on January 27. 1997, On December 17. 1996. the Delcndlll1t tiled its Motion for
until two conditions arc met and the alleged harm arises from one of the acts set lorth in the
section. The conditions arc: (I) the cause of action arose out of acts which would, under nonnal
circumstances, expose the actor to liability pursuant to either statutory or common law; and (2)
the damages arise "out of a negligent act", 42 I'a. C.S.A. ~ 8522 (a); Frnzier.llI., at 762. In
addition, the injury to the Plaintilf must arise out of one of the nine enumerated exceptions to
sovereign immunity set torth in Section 8522 (b) (l) - (9) of Title 42. These include: 1. Vehicle
Liability; 2. Medical-Professional Liability; 3, Custody or control of personal property; 4.
Commonwealth real estate, highways and sidewalks; 5. Potholes and other dangerous
conditions; 6, Care, custody or control of animals; 7, Liquor store sales; 8, National Guard
activities and 9. Toxoids and vaccines, Frazier. at 762.
A Commonwealth party cannot be held liable lor damages arising out of intentional torts,
Frazier,~; Pickeri",z,~; RIIY v. Pa, State Police, Pa, Commw. __, 654 A.2d 140
(l995),lIff.~ curiam 667 A, 2d 194. In Frazier, the Plaintiff brought claims of intentional and
negligent infliction of emotional stress and fraud and deceit, against Defendant SEPTA, in
association with surveillance conducted by SEPTA in the course of a personal injury suit. The
Court held that since intentional infliction of emotional stress and fraud are both intentional torts,
no liability could attach to the Defendant as a Commonwealth party for claims based upon those
torts, The Court also found that the Plaintiffs claim tor negligent. infliction of emotional stress
must also fail, since it did not constitute one of the nine enumerated exceptions to sovereign
immunity set forth in 42 Pa, C.S,A. ~ 8522 (b) (]) - (9).
2. THE DEFENDANT COMMONWEALTH PARTY IS IMMUNE FROM THE
IMPOSITION OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES,
4
Finally, claims for punitivc damagcs against Commonwcalth agcnclcs arc not proper,
since govemmcntagencics are traditionally cxcmpt from thc imposition of punitivc dl1ntagcs.
FrllZier,~. at 762. Sincc thc Dcfendant is a Commonwcalth agcncy, it is immunc from thc
imposition ofpunitivc damagcs Wld Plaintill's c1l1imlor punitivc damages against the DOC
should be also dismissed,
3. THE PLAINTIFF CANNOT ESTABLISH A CLAIM OF COMMON LAW
FRAUD AGAINST TIlE DEFENDANT,
In Pennsylvania, there are five c1cmcnts which a Plaintiff must prove in order to establish
common-law fraud: (I) a misreprcsentation: (2) a fraudulent ullcrWlce thereof; (3) Wl intention
by the declarWlt to induce action in the party defmuded; (4) justifiable reliance on the
misrepresentation by the party defraudcd, and (5) damagcs incurrcd by thc party defrauded,
Prime Meats. Inc, v, Yochim, 422 Pa, Super, 460. 619 A, 2d 769 (1993); Pillsburlih Live. Inc, v,
Servov. 419 Pa, Super, 423,6\ 5 A, 2d 438, 441 (1992), Each of the aforesaid elements must be
proved by clear Wld convincing evidence. fillsburllh Live, Inc" ld. Furthermore, fraud consists
of Wlything calculated to deceive whether by a singlc act or combination, or by suppression of
truth, or suggestion of what is false. whether it be by direct falsehood or by innuendo, by speech
or silence, word of mouth, ur look or gesture, Pittsburltlh Live. Inc" ~; DelahWlty v, First
PennsylvWlia BWlk, N.A., 318 Pa, Super, 90. 107,464 A, 2d 1243. 1251 (1983), The first
element, a misrepresentation, is established if the misrepresentation was made knowingly, in
conscious ignorWlce of the truth. or with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the statement.
Delahantv.ld., 318 Pa, Super, at 107.8.464 A,2d at 1252, For the evidence to be clear and
convincing, the witnesses must be credible, This means that the witnesses must both distinctly
5
remember the facts to which they testify. and narrate the details eXllctly. If the whne:ss' testimony
fails to mee:tthls cxacting starldard, an action lor fmud cannot be: maintained. Jlitlsburllh Live,
lnI:., ~.
The breach of a promise to do something In thc future is not fraud. Moreover. arI
unperformed promise does not give risc to a presumption that the promisor intended not to
perlorm when the promise was made, Bash v. Bell Telephone Company. 411 Jla, Super, 347,
601 A. 2d 8:/5,832 (\992): Fox's Foods Companv v. Kmart Co11". 870 F. Supp, 599.608-609
(M,D. Pa, 1994), In Fox's Foods Company, Kmart failed to comply with a commercial lease with
the Plaintiff, when Kmart did not timely complete a new shopping center. The evidence
indicated that Kmart gave repeated assurances to the Plaintill' that the shopping center would be
constructed arid received repeated extensions of time, Kmart moved for summary judgment on
the breach of contract, fraud arid other counts, With respect to the fraud count, the motion was
denied. Kmart argued that promises to do something in the future carlnot form the basis lor
fraud. citing Ram v, Bell Telephone Companv, The Court in Fox's Foods. Inc. distinguished
~. which involved a mere unperformed promise, However, in Fox's Food, Inc,. the Court
held that there was sufficient evidence on the record for a jury to believe that Kmart intended not
to perform when the promise was made, Also. it noted that Kmart's assurances of performance
may have induced the Plaintiff to delay asserting its rights earlier,
IV. SUMMARY OF LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING EVIDENCE:
The Defendant opposes the introduction of inmate Lanehart's medical records and any
other records relating to his care and treatment by the Plaintiff, The DOC does not dispute the
necessity or reasonableness of the care and services provided by the Plaintiff MRS, Therefore,
6
thc introduction of such records is irrelevlll1t and unnecessary.
In addition, the Detendantasks thc Plaintitl'to stipulate to the tilct that Inmate LlII1chw1
was cliglble for Medical Assistance retroacliw 10 January I, 1993.
V. LIST QIt' WITNESSES:
The names and addresses of the witnesses whom DetendWltlntend to call at the trial of
this matter are as follows:
\. Paul O'Connor, Regional Director, Bureau of Community Corrections;
2. Jetl'rey TroutmWl, Director, lIarrisburg Community Corrections Center;
3. John Kobierecki, Counselor, lIarrisburg Community Corrections Center; Wld
4. David S, Maeyer, Business Manager, SCI-Camp Hill,
Defendant reserves the right to call the Plaintiff, or any of the witnesses it lists. as of
cross-examination, None of the foregoing witncsses will be called as an expert.
VI. LIST OF EXHIBITS:
The Defendlll1t intends to submit some or all of the exhibits listed by the Plaintiff in its
Pre-trial Memorandum. In addition, the Defendant also introduces the following exhibits:
\, MRS invoices, various dates;
2. Information concerning previous dealing3 between the parties, including services
provided for an inmate named Booker Moore lII1d the manner of payment received by the
Plaintiff;
3, Memo from Paul O'Connor to Diane Marks, dated JWlUury 29, 1993;
4. DPW Memo from Patricia lI, O'Neal to Christine M, Bowser, dated May \\, \993
with enclosures;
7
OCT 1llQQ'ldfl,
MECIIANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PI.AINTI FF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLF:AS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
V.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPAHTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
JUHY TRIAL DEMANDED
PLAINTIFF'S BRIBF IN RBSPONSB TO DBFBNDANT'S
PRBLIMIKARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED C~LAINT
I. COUNTER-STATEMENT OF THE CASE
(a) Procedural History
The Plaintiff originally filed a complaint against Defendant
on or about July 15, 1994. More than 45 days thereafter, Plaintiff
served a Notice of Intention to Take Default Judgment and
subsequently entered judgment against the Defendant.
However,
Plaintiff subsequently stipulated to the opening of the judgment
and entered into negotiations with Defendant's counsel.
This action was institute in order to compel payment of the
indebtedness as no express denial of payment was ever provided to
Plaintiff and, to this day, has not been provided. Once such a
denial is provided, the breach of contract portion of this claim
could arguably be presented to a board of claims.
(b) Factual background
The Plaintiff instituted this action to recover funds for the
fraudulent procurement of medical services by the Defendant. The
underlying factual setting arises out of the Defendant's request
for wound care and rehabilitation services for Larry Lanehart with
1
respect to his condition as a paraplegic. The Defendant requested
services from The Renova Center for Specialized Services
(hereinafter "Renova"), which is a subacute care facility of the
plaintif f, Mech,micsburg Rehabil i tation Services ("MRS") .
(Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint). Mr. Lanehart was
not a "resident of Defendant's Community corrections center" as
alleged in Defendant's Brief. Through recent depositions plaintiff
has learned that Mr. Lanehart spent one night at Harrisburg
Corrections Center and the Center determined that he was
inappropriately placed within the Center because of Mr. Lanehart's
complicated medical problems and therefore was transferred the next
morning to Camp Hill Correction Center for medical treatment and
the same day transferred to an acute care hospital wherein her
received treatment and thereafter was transferred, at defendant's
request, to Renova for care. Based upon information and belief, it
is Plaintiff's understanding that Mr. Lanehart was and inmate at
the State Correctional Institute at Camp Hill. (Paragraphs 5 and
22 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint).
As alleged in the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, the Defendant
denied the existence of a valid contract Amended
Complaint,paragraph 29), intended not to make payment for services
it had contracted for with plaintiff ( Amended Complalnt, paragraph
27) and Defendant based its denial of liability for payment on the
pretext that Mr. Lanehart was an inmate or resident of HCCC when in
fact he only spent one night there, was determined inappropriate
for placement there because of his medical condition and was sent
2
to medical providers for treatment.
I II . ARGUMENT
A. Th. Board of Claillllt do.. not bav. jud.diction ov.r tbe
.ubj.ct _tt.r of thill action .. Plaintiff .1l.V.' . cau.e of
action ba.ed upon fraud.
The law is clear that the Board of Claims does not have
jurisdiction with respect to claims of fraud against a state
agency. 72 P.S. ~4651-4.
With respect to the Plaintiff's claim based upon breach of
contract, it may be true that, standing alone, this claim could
proceed to the Board of Claims. However, it would not be practical
or reasonable to expect the Plaintiff to pursue two separate
actions where they arise out of one occurrence.
With respect to the jurisdiction of the Board of Claims, the
statute states that they have jurisdiction to hear and determine
all' claims against the commonwealth arising from contracts
hereafter entered into with the Commonwealth.
B. Plaintiff ia th. party in inter..t.
Renova's rights will not be compromised as it is one and the
same place as MRS. However, if the Defendant wishes to have the
name "Renova" included in the caption, the plaintiff concurs to
such an amendment.
3
C. The cODtract i. p~e.d.
A factual dispute is the core of this issue. Renova has plead
a contract of performance. The defendant failed to have its
authorized agents sign a contract which it sought and prepared and
on two occasions presented to pla int iff seeking performance by
plaintiff of its services for Mr. Lanehart. These facts were
established at deposition of defendant I s contracting
representatives. The defendant on two occasions went personally to
plaintiff's chief officer and verbally represented that defendant
would pay the agreed charges and the matter awaited formal
ratification by the bureaucrats of defendant who had signing
authority.
D. 1'1aiDtiff has plead its fraud claim with sufficient
apecificity.
It is hornbook law that the defendant made a misrepresentation
of fact upon which the plaintiff relied in admitting Mr. Lanehart.
The residence of Mr. Lanehart appeared to be various hospitals
following his discharge from the state correctional institution at
Camp Hill, PA. The allegations set forth in plaintiffs Amended
Complaint, paragraphs 19-34 are factually specific and especially
paragraph 20 wherein plaintiff alleges that Mr. Lanehart was placed
in the HCCC for an evening and based on that fact and despite a
memorandum of defendant that he was inappropriately placed,
defendant now contends that he was a resident of that facility.
See E:xhibit A, Memorandum of January 27, 1993 from Jeffrey A.
4
Troutman to Paul M. O'Connor.
.. Public Aaaiatanca aliqibility ia moot.
The defendant informed the plaintiff .ftar Mr. Lanehart was
discharged from the plaintiff's care and after the defendant sought
Mr. Lanehart's care by plaintiff and agreed to pay for it. The
important f.acts defendant neglects are:
1. defendants sought plaintiff's care for Mr. Lanehart at a
negotiated specified contract rate per diem rate;
2. defendant sought periodic updates on Mr. Lanehart's
progress in order to get approval for 2 additional 30 day stays;
3. following the updatp.s, defendant approved additional 30 day
stays for more therapy at the agreed rates;
4. defendant submitted and paid the first stay at the
negotiated/agreed rate.
5. defendant represented to plaintiff that the additional 2
thirty day stays would be paid at the same rate as the first stay.
CONCLUSION
Every issue raised by defendant is a factual dispute.
Preliminary objections are not the method for resolution of factual
disputes.
Respectfully Submitted,
Richard Oare, Esquire
Attorney 10: 18631
1776 South Queen Street
York, PA 17403
5
t
.,
i
l SIJ8JEC r r
I
101
rr.OMr
j( it)
,
"
.
/
I
"
..",:!"
~
t
,"
to.
:",.
COHHO~WEAlTH OF PENNSVlVANIA
December 8. 1992 "
'.".,. U' I.
lar,'y lanehart. 8K9')12 "",,
, ,
Paul H. O'Collnor , ,.
Acting Dlf'ector . ,
ComMunity correctlo~ns ~~~l
.J e ff re y A. T,' 0 OJ t mil n ,6,
Director .
Harrlsburq COMmunity Corrections Center
On December 7, 1992, HI', lanehart was received at this facility
from SCI Cresson.He was originally referred to the Johnstown
CCC. but the ca$e was transferred to the Harrisburg CCC because
of the suitability of this facility.
Prior telephone convp.rsatlons with Hr. lanehart's counselor at
SCl Cresson Indicated t~ot lanehart was "capable of taking core
of hiMself" atld WilS quite mobile. At the time of the
conversation, Hr. lanehart had only recently been transferred to
SCI Cresson and was residing In general population.
Only upon Hr. lanehart's arrival at the Harrisburg cce did we
learn of Hr. lanehart', true limitations. We were aware of his
limited 1II0bll Ity due to his being confined to a wheelchair, but
we were not made aware of the extent of his medical problems.
The cec referral at best provided limited Inforllatl~n about his
medical disabilities. We were not aure that his left leg was
severely damaged, and the amount of daily maintenance required
for other lesser problems. We were further not aware that Hr.
lanehart takes a multitude of medications, which the Institution
only saw fit to provide us with a four dai. and In some Instances
a three day supply. Fortunately, Cumberland Apothecari was able
to refill the prescriptions for us after consulting with the
pharmacy a' sel eresson.
All things con5 Idered. there were many aspecls of Hr. lanehart's
medlc.,l cO'Hi! lion. -'lnd previous medlcol hlslory that were not
revealed to us prior to his admission. This would not have I"ade
a differp.ncP. in our decision to accept him Into .the cec program.
but it would have permitted tme opportunity to pre-plan for his
ar 1'1 va I . .'
F"nrtinnll1y Mr I )/1('h",., will do well in this progrillll. He
1 p I' ~ .. ,. ~ ,I f, I P. f 0 ,,) d p. rl' lill C 1 y C il f' e for his 0 w n nee d s (I. e. pel's 0 11 a 1
hIOi,.".. rook!l1q, I'lr), Our concern, and It Is Vf'.ry real, Is for
t I ". 1Il:1i",. n M' r,. n ( It i. i m me d \ ate me d ! c al c a" e . II I' I' a n 9 e III P. n, 5 ,11' r
be i "" '''HI. rl a k (' /1 t" qUill i f y him for p u hI i c A ~ s 1st /I nee, , f
".. "( "..',. '''', 'h, m,11 t.,. of sprv Icp proc"relllent and paYOlf!nl w; 11
,',," 0" I'" 1"11 y f" 1 1 "p 0 nth e 0 e p a I' t 1ft e n t 0 f Cor I' e c t Ion s .
,
PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL
(/ot.Jst be typewritten and subniUed in duplicate)
.
TO 'mE plVlllOI'Vl'ARY OF' ClMlERlJ\!'{) COUNI'Y
Please list the following case,
(Check one)
X) for JURY trial at the next term of civil court.
for trial without a jury.
-----------------------------------------
CAPl'ION OF CASE
(entire caption must be stated in full)
(check one)
( X) Civil Action - Law
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems Appeal from Arbitration
(other)
(Plaintiff )
vs.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections
The trial list will be called on 12/17/96
and
Trials comnence on 1/27/97
(Defendant)
Pretrials will be held on 1/2/97
(Briefs are due 5 days before pretrials.)
(The party listing this case for trial shall
provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to
all counsel. pursuant to local Rule 214.1.)
vs.
No.94-4046 Civil Term
--
1996
Indicate the attomey who will try case for the party who files this praecipe.
Richard Oare, Esq., 1776 S. Queen St., York, PA. 17403
Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known. Shaw
PA. Dent of Corrections, P.O. BOX 598 Carn
This case is ready for trial.
Signed.
~
Print Nme. Richard Oare
Date.
f0~CJt,
Attomey fon
Plaintiff
;,ilt
,
,i'
\W'f/"r'';':'i,lt'r' '-"-,
""jJ)I,.,;., 'I ' I .1 ,." ,I . .
}f r_J I I .' I " I . JI, U 1 'nl ' , 'II
'< ,J, !l,' , ,,'\I':.'i:i{\{~;,;,;,l':':I~~f;i!.Il.,',>'f,,::'HIIl'lih."'~',lliIdil. 'III:T.!~l':!I,;":iJ';~';~II"J""'~:
4~(,..4"J:.<Jl k\,1i\I.~""J.J!iIrM\.~t~rtU'jJi\~,~i'4I.~'li7;'vJ}rlw'1WlHKf:r,t" . i" ,') r
,\
Li,
I'
~"""~,""'~.~Il;"'tI',,,,~(rI!\it'JIIH'-''''\J-.,I{-T.t)'I!~!'''"''-I'f .,
"u"'''''-PN;r;~'i tr,---~W;j~(~--'~M~-!'>!4I~~.
", OFTH~ARV
,/.'
" if. 95 OCT 30 r11121~5
',' (;UM8tdlj.~iJ ~l.JUi'HY
PENNSYLVANIA ,,,
,
"
" "
! \
),i
'1,;
::_..1,
,,,,'
.,,".1,'
r,:_\;
"', ,
" '
,"
".'
I.
,
"
'i:
"
"
,
.'
'!
"
'i'
"
,II
"
,
"".......,....,,,;.{.........',
.,;t~-',h.-..."..... . I. ..
. .' ..._~..,..;~.U,"'WI"'~"l.."fmn~.Jih................-......,
, " I ~ .1" . .i; , ...
" .,' ' .: " I ,.-
,
.'
.
.
, ,.".'
i' '.' IVV"
1'0
;'.'- .<!lJ"""-:"
.. I 'j
"
"
,:
"
'I
"
"
"
I' ,',:
,
.,
. 'lot'
,',I
;1;
"
,,,
, '
,'"
~"
\
\'
"
,'I
'I!
i'il
"
"
,
"
,
,
'1.1 i\'
;-;
,
"ii,
,
.,'
,
"
i
'lla:'_-J-(~t~,'!'(;l.r:'!!' . ';"\ I " ,~"""';i""i.'I,~'i__ ,',! J' 'h'," ';".J"\;- i",
'''{'h""ll';)..''i.,. I' ,L: ,1'.. \.:.'1,' ,'p.' _,"..'... _ '. '01,,: '.".' I. .' '''Ll".. J." .r.;....;;"iJhkjl-.l'-~..
",flll...",,.,'I, "'tI~'" P't,,:"IIaIt" Ci"\"""e.6i""\"\'il(,.,\.,;\",~~r,.!',";1\
,,[, ,:1;J1i3tflL:' '! , 'f\'" . I , ",,,~,' '1'1I1l'I;I,
of"" ' . ,UI.' ""'" 'Ii,t\l~-" "
"l~\i .., -.iYltJllill. '
.
"
,'Ii
11""""""~~IIj,""'1"~ll"I"I,,,,""""-"',
",
"
" '
OFn~TAAY
"
.
,
,
"
96 ocr 30 PH 121 35
.,
,
,
"
"
"
:'
ClJMliEillJ~iO COUNTY
PENNSYLV~IA
I'
"
, '
\-,
,
i'
;.
, , ,
, "
, ,/
,
"
,
, , . ,
, 'I , "
, ,
, ~ I
,
,
"
";'r
,
"
'li'l
"
"
" ,
,',
.h"...."oFf......,'co;'~m'.,,,.,I,~-,,-,.~...'....~-hl'htfi;''''i'''''i'},I~''#I'HI~.f~aJ,)'1i+'jIfJi,,-1~.M4\ftt~>;Q\Uhi~~\~ I
, .. I" 'I ", \ ,",
~, .. '"
IWI
-.r......l_"'...
/.. .J"
/" ..'
.
.
,~
"
J
"
',-
.
~
....-;r..
,,,WI
j
CASlrlg
TABLI or CAS IS AXD .TAT~I.
Warren v. Pennsylvania DeDartment ot correction.,
616A.2d140, 142 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1992)...,...........................3
Vartan v. Commonwealth,
616 A.2d 160, 164-65 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1992)............................4
Mill S.rvic8. Inc. v. Crv. Inc.,
619A.2d807, 810 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1992)...............................4
E-Z Park.. Inc. v. PhiladelDhia Parkina Authorit~,
!l21A.2d71, 73 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1987).................................!l
Zerr v. Commonwealth. DeDt. ot Environmental Resource~,
!l70 A. 2d 132 (Pa .Cmwl th. 1990) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .!l
A.tn. In.. Co. v. Ginter,
72 D.' C.2d 614,23 Chest. 88 (1974).............................6
KeClellaft v. Health Maintenance Oraanization ot Penn.vlvania,
604 A. 2d 10!l3, 1060 (Pa. Super 1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
St. ~pi.toDh.r'. HOBD. v. DSDt.
!l62 A.2d 10U (Pa.CIDwlth 1989)....
ot Public W.ltar.,
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . .. ... .. .. .. . " . . .7,8
Wali..r v. n.Dartment of Public Weltar~,
611 A. 2d 13!l9 CPa. C1Dwl tho 1992) . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. 8
STATlI'rES
72P.s. $4651-4.....
.................... ......... ... ..... .....
.3,4
71P.S. S6l..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .3
42 Pa.R.c.p. 2227(a)..............................................4
42 Pa.R.c.p. 1019................................................. 6
li
x. ~t.t...nt of tb. c...
A. ..ture of Aotion an4 X4entity of partiee
Plaintiff in this action is Mechanicsburg Rehab systems, a
health care treatment facility located at 175 Lancaster Boulevard
Mechan,\csburg, Pennsylvania. Defendant in this action is the
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, with its central Office
located at 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff
instituted this action to recover for medical services furnished to
a resident of Defendant's Community Corrections Center.
.. Prooe4ural Hiatory
On or about March 23, 1995, Plaintiff filed an AIIIended
complaint. On April 12, 1995, the Defendant filed its Preliminary
Objections to the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Thi. brief b
submitted in eupport of the Defendant's preliminary Objection..
II. CU..liona .r...Dt.d
A. Should Plaintiff's action in assumpsit against the
Defendant, a Commonwealth agency, lie with the Boar4 of
Claims?
Suaqe.ted Answer: Yes.
B. Should Plaintiff's claims be dismissed where the actual
party to the alleged contract has not been named as a
party?
Suaa..ted Answar: Yes.
1
XXX. Arcnlllellt
A. 'l'be loa I'd of cld.. ba. Ixolu.ive JurhdiotloD OVer tbe
lubjeot Natter of this AotioD.
Plaintirt alleges that the
Defendant
and PlaintiU
"
.. .
entered into a contract for the purchase of certain medical
.ervices..." to provide inmate Larry Lanehart with rehabilitative
and wound care services necessary for his recovery and ability to
return to the Harrisburg Correction Center.
(see Plaintiff's
complaint at ., 6,7,10-13).
Furthermore, the Plaintiff alleges
that as a result of the services rendered to Lanehart from January
27, 1993, through June 18, 1993, the total costs minus the
contractual adjustment amount to $68,891.18.
Co.plaint at . 16 and Plaintiff's Exhibit "C").
However, the Board of Claims has jurisdiciton over this type
(See Plaintiff's
of controversy. Title 72 P.S. 5 4651-4 states in part:
"The Board of Claims shall have exclusive jurisdiction to
hear and determine all claims against the Commonwealth
arising from contracts hereafter entered into with the
Co_onwsalth, whers the amount in controversy amounts to
$300.00 or more...."
Clearly this statute grants the Board of Claims exclusive
jurisdiction in this matter.1
Under 5 201 of the Administrative Code of 1929, Act of April
9, 1929, P.L. 177, as amended, 71 P.S. 5 61, the Department of
Corrections is titled an administrative department of the
Co_onwealth. Warren v. pennsvlvania DeDartment of Corrections,
lDefendant expressly re.erve. the right to argue that
Plaintiff's claim is barrsd by the statute of limitations
applicable to the Board of Claims.
3
616 A.2d 140, 142 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1992).
Additionally, as stated
above, Plaintiff'o allegations sound in contract and the amount in
controver.y exceeds the requirement set forth under 72 P.S. 4651-4.
The Board of Claims has exclusive juriediction over claim.
against the Commonwealth arising in assumpsit, such as contractual
claim. made by parties seeking to be made whole.
Vartan ..:t..L
COlllBlonwealth. throuah Unified Judicial System bv Administrative
Office of pennsvlvania courts, 616 A.2d 160, 164-65 (Pa.CIlIwlth.
1992).
.. 'laill~iff a.. raUed ~o Job all %Ildhpell.able 'ar~y ill
Viola~ioD ot Title 42 Pa.R.C.P. 2227.
Plaintiff submits as Exhibits "A" and "B", an alleged copy of
the contract between Renova and the Defendant. Plaintiff further
allege. that Renova Center for Specialized Services "... is a
subacute care facility of the [Pjlaintiff...." (See Plaintiff'.
Co.plaint at ! 6).
However, the Plaintiff has failed to join
Renova as a party to this action, even in light of the fact that
the Plaintiff has failed to produce any contract between the
Defendant and Plaintiff.
Title 42 Pa.R.C.P. 2227(a) requires persons having even only
a "joint interest" in an action to be joined as a defendant or
plaintiff. An indispensable party has further been defined as a
party whose rights are "... so closely connected to those of the
litigants that an order or decree cannot be made without impairing
~hOS8 right.." Mill Service. Inc. v. Cry. Inc., 619 A.2d 807, 810
(Pa.cmwlth. 1992). Regardless of Plaintiff'S characterization of
4
R.nov. .s . "subacute facility" ot plaintitt's, Renova is still the
p.rty which was contractually obligated.
(see Plaintift's
coapl.int, Exhibits "A" and "B").
Without this indispensabls
party, Renova's rights would be compromised. Thus, tailure to join
this indispensable party deprives a court of jurilldiction. E=..Z.
Parks. Inc. v. PhlladelDhia Parkina Authoritv, 521 A.2d 71, 73
(pa.cmwlth. 1987); ~ Zerr v. Commonwealth. DeDt. of Environmental
R..ources, 570 A.2d 132 (Pa.cmwlth. 1990).
C. Pl.intiff Baa ...Ued to Ple.d or Attaob by copy of tbe All.qed
Contr.ot that tbe partie. to this Aotion .ere P.rties to th.
&11eqe4 contr.ct.
plaintiff bases its alternative causes of actions on a breach
of the contract terms between Renova and the Defendant, attempting
to ....rt a cause of action on Renova's behalf. Plaintiff alBo
fail. to allege that the contracts attached a. Exhibit. "A" and "B"
to the Amend.d Complaint were executed by the Defendant. Plaintiff
a.r.ly provides a copy ot the alleged contract which is supposed to
bind the Defendant. Plaintift does not .ven provide a writing
signed by an authorized agent of the Def.ndant as proof of the
Def.ndant'. intent to be bound to the docum.nt. To that end, the
Plaintiff has tailed to plead that the alleged contracts attached
as Exhibits indicate that the Defendant executed the contracts. In
fact, the copies of the aUeged contracts do not establish that the
D.f.ndant executed them. Lastly, Plaintitf is neither r.terred to
or aade a party to the documents on the face of the alleged
contracts.
5
Title 42 Pa.R.C.P. 1019(a) requires a party to plead the
..terial facts upon which its claims are based. In an action ba.ed
in contract, a party must plead, or attach by copy of the contract,
the terms and conditions which the Defendant is accused to have
breached.
a.u Aetna Ins. Co. v. Ginter, 72 D. , C.2d 614, 23
Chest. 88 (1974). Likewise, a Plaintiff bringing an action ba.ed
in contract must plead or establish by copy of the contract that
the Plaintiff and Defendant are actually parties to the contract.
Having failed to do so, Plaintiff's claims in this regard should be
dismissed.
D. Plaintiff Ba. ra11ed to Plead It. C1&1II of Fraud with
lufflalent particularity.
Plaintiff baldly alleges that the Defendant placed Lanehart in
the Harri.burg Co_unity Corrections Center in order to qualify
Lanehart for Public Assistance.
(See Plaintiff's Complaint at !
20). Plaintiff goes on to allege that it does not believe that the
Defendant physically placed Lanehart in the Center but rather
placed him in another institution in an effort to defraud the
Plaintitt .
Lastly, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant
negotiatad for Plaintiff's services "... with no intention of
providing payment for such services." (See Plaintiff's Complaint
at , 24).
However, Plaintiff makes these general assertions without
providing the bases, dates and times, or specifics of the
allegation.. Title 42 Pa.R.C.P. 1019(b) require. allegations of
fraud be made with sufficient particularity.
6
"Sufficient
particularity" requires that eleact statements or actions which
aUeqedly constitute the fraudulent misrepresentation. be set
forth.
McClellan v. Health Maintenance oraaniz.tion,.....gt,
Pennsvlvania, 604 A.2d 1053, 1060 (Pa.Super 1992).
Alleqations .uch as "[t]he Defendant negotiated with MRS in an
effort to procure medical services for Mr. Lanehart, with no
intention of providing payment for such services," do not meet the
strinqent requirements set out by Rule 1019(b) for allegations of
fraud, therefore, Plaintiff has fail~d to meet SUfficiently a claim
of fraud, and these claims should therefore be dismissed.
.. Plaintiff'S beDded coaplaiDt ..ails to state a Cau.e of AotiOD
Where the cO"llDity correotioD Center aesideDt .a. .liqi~le
for PUblio A..i.taDoe.
Plaintiff acknovledqes that on or about June 30, 1993, the
Defendant infoned the Plaintiff that Lanehart vas eliqible for
Public A.sietance retroactive to January 1, 1993. (See pleintiff's
co.plaint at , 28). Plaintiff also ackno....ledges that Defendant
informed the Plaintiff that payment of any services rendered to
Lanehart should be pursued through Public Assistance, .ince
Lanehart vas so covered for the length of the service.. (See
Plaintiff's Complaint at " 28 , 29).
Plaintiff, in the instant action, has determined that it vill
not be satisfied vith the Public Assistance payment and seeks to
hold the Defendant liable for a contract allegedly entered into by
the Plaintiff and Defendant. Ho....ever, in st. ChristODher's HOSD.
v. DeDt. of Public Welfare, 562 A.2d 1021 (Pa.em....lth lUg) the
7
1M TBI COuaT OW CONNOM PL8A8
CUKBIRLJUID COUIl'1'Y, PIllII8YLVUlIA
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
plaintiff
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Jill A. Devine, hereby certify that I served a copy of the
foregoing Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default, by causing tho same
to be deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as
follows:
Richard Oare, Esquire
2020 S. Queen street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
/I: 1\ (\ A 0.-<-~_-,,_
Jill1":'-oevi~~~
Assistant Counsel
Attorney Identification No. 54700
Pa. Department of Corrections
P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17001-0598
(717) 975-4864
Date: October 12, 1994
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIFf'
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
FEe 28 1995
-f,.,
V.
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTME~T OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
ORDBR
AND NOW, this ~ day of v\1...J ~L
ordered and decreed that:
, 1995, it i8 hereby
A. The default judgment is opened;
B. The Plaintiff may flle an amended complaint within 20
days from the date of receipt of this order;
C. The Defendant may file a response to the amended
complaint within 20 days from the date of service of the
amended complaint.
/'
I ~ i.
--J .0""14) 0 j~ ·
, J.
.'
,(It'
I ,',
. )1_, " ,
-II'
.iJ1.Jf,:
~ I, ,
" '1!1j
: L JO
SG, lid 00 E: '
I IJ~N
\doc.\mrl\lan8hart\ord~r.pld
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
V.
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the date indicated below, a. copy of
the foregoing document was sent via U.S. mail postage prepaid to
the following:
JILL A. DEVINE, ESQUIRE
PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS
P.O. BOX 598
CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0598
Date I February 27, 1995
/ QH ESQUIRE
/ ,1776 South en Street
VYork, PA 17403
(717) 846-3000
I.D. No. 52987
Attorney for Plaintiff
\dQc.\m,.'l~n.~.r'\co.
.
,
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS, I
Plaintiff, I
I
I
I
V. I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-404&
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant.
NOTICB OF ORAL DEPOSITION
TOI
Paul O'Connor - Begin at
John Kobierecki - Begin at
David Mayer - Begin at
9100 a.m.
10:30 a.m.
1:00 a.m.
Pa. Dept. of Corrections
P.O. Box 598
Mechanicsburg, PA 17001-0598
Please take notice that on Wednesday, March 8, 1995, John D.
Briggs, Esquire, of Oare & Briggs, attorneys tor the Plaintiff in
the above matter, will tak& the deposition of the above-named
individuals, beginning at 9:00 a.m. and to remain until excu.ed,
for purposes of discovery and for use at trial.
The depositions will take place at the executive offices of
Mechanicsburq Rehab Systems, located at 175 Lancaster Boulevard,
Mechanicburq, Pennsylvania. The depositions will be conducted
pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, before an
officer authorized by the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
to administer oaths.
The above-mentioned individuals are directed to bring with
them all documents and other papers in his possession relovant to
the above-captioned case.
J..( I
Dated: I)... 'IS
.
n D.
torney 10 No
177& South Que'en
York, PA 17403
(717) 846-3000
Attorney for Plaintiff
AUG 21
ioqr.)'
./.. ,
;;...-.
IN THE COURT OF COMKON PLIAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab systems,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of pennsylvania,
Department of corrections,
Defendant
ORDER:
AND NOW, this day of , 1995, upon
consideration of Defendant's Motion for a stay, it is hereby
ordered that said motion is GRANTED. This Court's order dated July
27, 1995, is STAYED during the pendency of the appeal and any
subsequent Commonwealth Court proceedings.
BY THE COURT:
J.
IN THE COURT or COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Meahanicsburg Rehab systems,
Plaintiff
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections,
Defendant
MOTION FOR A 8~1
1. By Order date July 27, 1995, the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland county granted the Motion of Plaintiff, Mechanicsburg
Rehab systems, to compel discovery. The Court's Order did not
contain the statement ~pecified in 42 Pa.C.S. S702(b).
2. Defendant wishes to appeal this Court's order, but must
first seek an amendment of the Court's order to include the
statement specified in 42 Pa.C.S. S702(b).
3. On August 18, 1995, Defendant filed an Application to
Amend Order to Include the statement Specified in Pa.C.S. S702(b).
4. By letter dated August 18, 1995, counsel for Plaintiff
see~s, ~~_. enforce the lower court's discovery order. ,.
5. Defendant is likely to prevail on the merits of its
appeal because this Court has not yet disposed of Defendant's
prelimInary Objections in the nature of a demurrer, which
challenge, inter Alll, this Court's jurisdiction to hear the matter
before it, which is a contract claim involving more than $300.00,
and exclusive jurisdiction of which statutorily lies with the Board
of Claims. 72 P.S. S4651-4.1
6. Unless this Court grants this appl ication for
supersedeas, Defendant will suffer irreparable injury, because
lAppellee includes a fraud claim in his amended complaint.
Even assuming that a fraud claim would remove this action from the
Board of Clailns' exclusive jurisdiction, the Court of Common Pleas
of Cumberland County still would not have juriSdiction over th~s
matter. Rather, exclusive juriSdiction would lie with the
Commonwealth Court, as the action is against the Commonwealth. 42
Pa.C.S.A. S761.
IN THI COURT or COMMON 'LIAS
CUMBIRLAND COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
Meohanicsburq Rehab systems,
Plaintiff I
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of corrections,
Defendant
A'PLICATION TO AMINO ORDIR TO INCLUDI
STATIMINT SPICI1IID IN P..C.8. ~702(bll
1. By Order date July 27, 1995, this Court granted the
Motion of Plaintiff, Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, to compel
discovery.
2. This Court's order involves a controlling question of law
to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion,
because this Court has not yet disposed of Defendants' preliminary
objections in the nature of a demurrer, which challenge, inter
AliA, this Court's jurisdiction to hear this case.
3. An immediate appeal from this Court's order will
substantially advance the termination of this case, in that an
order from the Commonwealth Court reversing this Court's order and
deferring discovery until this Court's disposition of Defendant's
preliminary objections will avoid the necessity for needless and
expensive discovery in a tribunal that does not have jurisdiction
to entertain the merits of this case.
4. Pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1311, Defendant may file a petition
for permission to appeal from this Court's July 27, 1995 Order only
if the Court amends that order to include the statement specified
in 42 Pa.C.S. 5702 (b) that the order "involves a controlling
1M THI COURT or COMMON PLIA.
CUIII.RLAND COUNTY, PIlNHSYLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of corrections,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Jill A. Devine, hereby certify that I served a copy of the
foregoing Application to Amend Order, by cauriling the same to be
deposited in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
Richard oare, Esquire
2020 s. Queen street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
.,
(\~~\ ~~{I~
Jill A.\ Devifte
Assistant Counsel
Attorney Identification No. 54700
Pa. Department of Corrections
P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road
camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17001-0598
(717) 975-4864
Dated: August 18, 1995
..
PRAECIPE FOR t.HlTIIIIG CASE FOR ARGUMENT
(Mullt be typewritten and subnitted in dupUCUlte)
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
please list the within matter for the next Arg\I1W!I1t CClUrt.
-~-----------------------------------------------~-------------------------------------
CAPTION OF CASE
(entire caption nlSt be stated in full)
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
( plaintiff)
w.
COl4MONWEAL TH OF PEflNSYLVANIA
OEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
( Defendant)
11Io.
94
Civil 4046
94
19
1. State matter to be 8r9JI!d (Le.. plaintiff's ll'DtiCX'l for MW trial, defendant'..
deIurrer to CCJltllaint. etc.):
Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Complaint
2. Identify counsel who will argue case:
(a) for plaintiff: Richard Oare, Esq.
Address: 1776 South Queen St.
York, PA 17403
(b) for defendant: Jill A. Devine. Esq.
Address: 2520 Lisburn Rd.
Camp HIll. PA 17011
3. I will not ify all parties in writ ing vi thin t'<IIO days that thia ca88 hu
been listed for argurent.
4. ~t Court Ilt!te:
October 11. 1995
llIIted: August 31, 1995
{~ I.. }">> ',---'
AU for Defenaant
.'
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
v.
I
:
I
I
I
I
:
I
I
CIVIL ACTION NO.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
COMPLAIN'r
1. Plaintiff MechilnIcsburg Rllhab Systems (hereinafter "MRS"),
is a health care treatment facility duly licensed to practice
medicine in PennsylvanIa with a principal plac~ of business at 175
Lancaster
Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland
County,
Pennsylvania.
2. Defendant Commonwealth of pennsylvania, Department of
Corrections, Bureau of Community CorrectIons, is a duly authorized
agency of the Commonwealth, with offices at Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center.
27 North Cameron Street,
Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania.
3. The defendant operates a facility at 2500 Lizburn Road,
Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania known as the State
Correctional Institution at Camp Hill (hereinafter "SCI at Camp
Hi 11") .
4. At all relevant times stated hereinafter. the defendant
acted by and through its duly authorized agents, employees and
servants, and through its respective agencies and institutions,
inCluding SCI at Camp Hill.
5. On or about January 26. 1993. Larry Lanehart,
identification number aX9512. was an inmate at SCI at Camp Hill.
6. On or about January 26, 1993, the defendant requested
rehabilitation services for Larry Lanehart with respect to his
condition as a paraplegic from The Renova Center for Specialized
Servic~s (hereinafter "Renova"), which is a subacute care facility
of the plaintiff, MRS.
7. Defendant requested Renova to provide limited term
rehabilitative services for the purposes of enabling Larry Lanehart
to return to the Harrisburg Correction Center to be productive
through developed skills and to function independently through
performing personal hygiene and use of developed ambulatory skills.
SERVICES PROVIDED
8. The Plaintiff provided care and medical services to Larry
Lanehart pursuant to the parties' agreement from January 27, 1993
through June 18, 1993.
INITJ.AL CONTRACT
9. On or about January 26, 1993. the plaintif f and defendant
entered into a contract for the purchase of certain medical
services. as identi f ied in the terms of the contract, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by
reference,
10, Pursuant to the terms of their written agreement, the
plaintiff was to provide services to Larry Lanehart for 30 days at
a rate of $150.00 per day.
SUPPLEMENTAl. CONTRACT
11. On or about March 12, 1993, the plaintiff and defendant
entered into a supplement to their written contract for the
purchase
attached
of additional medical services, a copy of which is
hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by
reference.
12. The supplementa 1 terms of the contract attached dS
Exhibit "B" set forth the provision of services by the plaintiff to
Larry Lanehart from February 26, 1993 through and including March
27. 1993, and provide that services will be increased for 30 days
at the daily rate of $750.00.
CONTINUING AGREEMENT
13. By its actions, the defendant subsequently requested and
gave approval for an extended stay for Larry Lanehart based upon
the previOUSly agreed upon rate of $750,00 per day and in
furtherance of the ~arties' agreement,
AMOUNT DUE
14. The defendant knew or should have known that Larry
Lanehart was receiving ongoing c~re at the cost of $750.00 per day
based upon the parties' agreements and his continued stay.
15. Pursuant to the parties' agreements, the plaintiff
submitted an invoice to the defendant for the amount of $68,891.18,
a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated
herein by reference.
16, Despi te repea ted demands the de f endant has refused to pay
the amount currently due and owing.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that your Honorable
Court enter jUdqment aqainst the defendant in the amount of
.68,891.18 toqather with costs and
submi tted,
July 14, 1994
RICHARD OARE, Esquire
2020 S. Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846 - 3000
I.D. No. 18631
.L9~
. Briggs;- Esquire -
020 S. Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846-3000
I.D. No. 52982
\~rl'lan'hart\~comPlal
TC
Jar(}' .3::
:,j"
l' '
1:.: l(1 Uo ,,:..),: f.. (,,:
'.....".....
,:,.".
. '. OJ" I ..,... ~ .... Ii
'h ;,.,
1140. 'r.11 IIUMlU
~ 011 IIYOltl
. . - _.' -..
(./),' I" '"
W 110
_ _ ' . m
:i~~~:i:ii~~E:~: .~~~.. :~l ~~~\'iC:: .,-_. "'=~='~T"~~~ii~~~~i:~i~~~r:;~~~~ectlons
Ic('hllllit:sburg, PtI 17001\ : lIarrlsburg Community CorrectIons Center'
I 27 North Cameron St.
, Harrisburg, Pa. \71 01
EMI!RGEI'lCY PURCHUE OF SI!RVICE
I!P 17527
.I~"'" tI, ,,.IlO,",OC o.,,,iiiA~ Ii~. '.0 ([I,..a 0' ._..oltel
Stote Correctional Institution
I lit Camp Hill
;;;;r~(l" .. ..,au'.' ~'-::-;':-.Ot. tU -0), ,cu, o. n..",.ri . --l 2500 Llsburn Rd. - P.O. Box 8837
.___'_ _..____1.; /J~/ J~l. Camp Hili, Pa. 17001-8837
~""",q.. fl' ~,.. ~\I "., ,"l. ~ ......... ""';1. ~..... ',0..,' " ..'I; '''',
o pro\'idt' :ehlltolllt'.tioll sel'vlces to Inmate Larry LaneMI.t, BX9512, following surglcall'emoval of II. log
t the Cornmun:tv G~nel'1l1 Ost~opathlc Hospital. Inmate Lanehart Is n paraplegic who has had both legs
Irg;cl\lly t'emoved. Ser\'ic~s will be for 30 dllYs at $750 dally.
...~--
i.;" .;;'lO; "0- , ..~H~i:; ...:i,,'i"&i-i'r;~~Ci".iih...,.... ...." 0'''''' ,..u' I' .1."DU,1
.....---.,.--
: ';ciar:~ .!nd ,"ci~1 ',vol'~:('rs at the Community General Osteopathic Hospital who removed Inmate Lanehal.t's
'l;llroing leg, tM co~ti'ilct('d health care physic!ans at the Camp Hill Institution, and the Depertment's Bureau
Il~Alth C(\."~ ';':~'. :cp.~ director. solely recommended IIse of the Renova Center Cor SpftcloUzed Services in
','idlllg' th~ ." ,,',,lIlative services to (nmale Lanehart. The Renova Center will provide limited term
abililat:\ . vb's for the pUI'::,ose of ~nabllng inmate Lanehal.t's return at the /larrfsburg Corrections
;lte'> te I.)..: p. ."J"~IIVll through develored skills to function Independently through performing personel
"('II~ lII'U I,S,' If Jcvdooed AmbuI8tor~' sklUs, which will o1lso enable him to participate In other rcllabllltntfve
(~I'ums.
-. -I I, 1- .. ._- -r-- I .....01.1..' ~'~. .. \,Q\lI"A'lnlll
, rot or, .", :.1' .,., ' ~o ,. ."..cr'o.. f "'I IIU:.II....II.....(I.. .OUJhdlill'"O.
illl: o"i'iJ. !03 ~:L:.i::_@nD=-i!.~J:5JO. 1'31S~~l 2~,~Q .-
........ I .--. j---....--.. I I
_,____'-u,______,_ :_---- L.. i ,"'--r I '
I "."1"".1."" .1
1'-'.~'I~,~"I'-::--,-.,::~t-LJ.i".", 'U';(". ~", 11\1 1.1(,.
r. ' ....,)., ., I
01".0' I .-..-- -- .- -----, I -: - , .--- L
TRAIlS. ...--.---.- -- .-' ~- ' ... I ,--- .
1/11 ...L__ -L-_____ I "'-'-"r ---.--'...
'" . ..... '... ---;;;;0----. : "..;;;-:;,':, ~..~c",;~"" ,. ...- _'d_
I~'
I
';\"'''''' 0,. .1IC?~i;;--
.~(H..", .
~~
I
,.,....,:>,
a.,u,
'1:1.."-
1.""' "II'" "".IlN' I ....u.
fIt".
I I l-.--
1 I lie ~ ~.:
I . --'1
, ' I
I _L__~_
,~I ,
"
'I',
'.Iht ,,,'
rov,,' nT'1" II ~ II
f' "
.----. -
,. ~ r r,<! , .f' . I. .,....'
"'.
!'Ito...11 ,,~.HH:. - :UL'AVJ I L
~. 0 COX ::03:':
MECHAHC3BRG. PA 170~!
~ I 7 6-7 :'700
II .."...
..... II I"' 0 I
... ;-
.
""
23-;:014In.
I It 014 ,.",
27 IL CriMERON S T
I.MIEHA/:;T, I.AR"Y
, .w
'JI 01 27
27 9:\
:'I~RI;'" LANEHARr
~7 N. CAMEPON ~T
HARf\! SIlURG P;~ I;' 233
co
.w,
.. co
I
I
I
"'1'
. . ,
.. '"
430.00 J20 ~4~
'. 2:10 ~ ,
" ~
270 '-132
'300 8
,10! ~
...----. 30: 2
307 I
9of','"1' '320 15
..:":w"
.120 J08
'.. '~~' :";$0 ~8
434 13
'." ~.~ ~10 10
..~ ". 'I'
1 .
.' .~
" ,.I~,... ':_... "
',:'. ';,~l'. ,'-"'" ''':'lI:.''' ":'~,'~,
__ . .-'-'.........~ ~'. ..\IIl","
.....
- ....~=:;~~;.~...
..t. -~ ~'r' .~:~~., ~~TJ.'.
... .. .;\ -0 " _,_~......u... . .:.;.;.(.. .: ..
't ""':"'"" ':':'~'
~ . .. ~i. ;......:.:
,T,;TE '~OPPE,:T rNS'IIIED"'SS V
'0
. UNI . U II) III ..""l)
I
l" ."..
'.
j
, ~..II''''o.Il'IllIlA~
1 I
I I
. ..'.'.1..." "','" ."",' !.'
. , , . , . l
,_~..~. .;....J~ _, ..._....
.-'::::C': ...) ",. I
:1" ~,.'I
.r ", ".':,' I
. ,..,[.c,..-" "l '"'' 'I
.......~.. ~ ...... I
::? i,.~ =:;.._~~~ ..~:' :;:~'~l
j : i
.~.'~~_ .. '~:~'.r.:t:~~,C:, 1.:~.:1~':::,;J
i i
. 'J;---'l' .,," :'..11!!....,.....1
1.:...._._....,.'.......: . ...::n.~*,.._.
1162934
"
HARRI5DURG
In 9:\
u..
.)010 ,IlIQU
I
.w,
. ........ ,.....
,:,
NON-';OV
.-..'...,... .
, .
.,....... ...0'
~~1' ~..~....
.-. ..............
..\"'.~..
.....di...~
~.. .~ ::-~\r~:~::
...........-.....~
..,....':'I-~. . ..... ...1
.. ,,1_ '_~". -... [.
. .
FA
172~J
1>106000
. ~2021 1:12.. ,-,:';:~1--~:
880745
'~3~ 18~
38590
lQ6.17:J
3050
, 3'03'1(10'
12414 :00
.23~610fL
S 12 :50
:120 100
893:13147
20 16~,29
68, 9. 18 "
.0.
..
!
":'.' '1
,~. .. ..,
II '-O,,..SUIIM.r.1
II f!t "UPOJd,.,un I.) "IIO~ 1'1U..IHtI
.. I AIlIIOUHrOUI
1.
.. ,HII.I"'O'''A...
..... ". "L .. C1"'.III\1'I'lIC.IO,,"O
DUE FROM PATIENT"
.. IlAOUP ,...ll,ll
.MIEHART. L.,:,RRY
... 01 EPl7527
",,0 ',n J IlII Y """"'I
,. IIrI"'OUIIO
'.~r. :- ,~= O\d': ~'r!ES \Jr,! I Lt','r; I~HiNGPE~!E
IT'J u ~~',,"CI'AL AHO or..... '~<1dl),,'lI~ r;f~,:~'''',t)...~
"r.1
,~ U,II'~O'I" lCC""'O,,"
Jr "Ill!... COOl
.~'7~. .:
. .('~l"":,~'" .",.
._. -...... .....
'.....'. f.-
M ..1,.'__'"
. ''1. ._...
"Ul II "'"' 01,1
.
" ,"~ .,~n.",,,
.' ."..'......'.'jTH
n .m,..,),.." ~...," ,~.. '0 F' 1-1,.10"5 t 72. 9 9 E
B2~~-I~ ~R[ER PETE;
, ~I~' ... <. ... ..
:~~__'____[IOU=-'~
:~~:.:'::~ _'''. 0
" :l~"" ,...ri.':T ...1.... ",'u,,'''~ 'J'" ..."
lI'Je,ll,
.."""'.....Il~
.. ,_' '~, ~< R r::.: :
'-'11.'
: '~.'.~F H,L
1:' .,
_ . ;: ~'. ::-u.t
,:'
.,<
I,
,'.;'ir:T'Ilrlf'N ('()PV l'JW1fllT '/,'(11\':., . X
''-1 A;? HC'A.l.~n
l . ....";;--..
.:1 ;\",',.
i -""-
'0 '"IU'''
~
,;i..
fl...T ~P"~lJ;--
. ---.;,i'ii(';"~ U'
.. "",,,,,,,L,,",, __,,,,, ...
.... r",III"
..
'A"
.%'%~TIClJI
% verify that the statements made in the foreqoinq
COJIlPlaint are true and correct to the best of my Icnowledqe,
information and belief. I undorstand that false statements herein
are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. 4904 relatinq to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date, .:1.:J'~01{
~ c:2.C--.L.
Charles C. Peane,
Senior Vice President of Operations
For Syndicated Office Systems
,
,
e 001
...
'.""0 0""N01l"'" ftolOO.ln
.'" '''10 'J"Cl
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS :
PLAINTIFF :
I
I
I
V. I
I
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, :
DEFENDANT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on thil!l / ~.-6IJ day of ~
a copy of the foregoing Complaint was sent via U.S.
,
1994
mail
postage prepaid to the following:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections
Harrisburg Community Corrections Center
27 North Cameron Street
Harrisburg, PA 1710l
Office of Attorney
15th Floor
Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA l7
Richar squire
2020 S. Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
(7l7) 846-3000
1.0. No. l863l
J),B
. Briggs, Esquire
. Queen Street
Pennsylvania l7403
(717) 846-3000
1.0. No. 52982
IN THI COURT or COKKON PLEAS
CUKBIRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems,
Plaintiff
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections,
Defendant
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE:
AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections, by and through its attorney, Jill A.
Devine, Assistant Counsel, and answers the Court's Rule to Show
Cause dated April 24, 1995, and in support thereof avers as
follows:
lIotion for Default Judqmtnil
1. On or about July 20, 1994, Plaintiff instituted this
action in assumpsit for medical services allegedly furnished, from
January 27, 1993 to June 18, 1993, to Larry Lanehart ("Lanehart"),
an individual in Defendant's custody.
2. On September 8, 1994, Plaintiff sent Defendant a Notice
of Intention to file a pracipe for Entry of Default.
3. On September 19, 1994. within the time period provided by
Pa.R.C.P. S106(b) and Pa.R.C.P. S237.1, Defendant filed preliminary
objections to Plaintiff's Complaint.
4. On September 19, 1994, Plaintiff's counsel requested the
prothonotary to enter Defendant's default, even though Defendant
timely filed preliminary objections to Plainti.ff's complaint.
5. On March 1, 1995, the Court opened the default judgment,
directed Plaintiff to file an Amended complaint within twenty (20)
days, and directed Defendant to file a response within twenty (20)
days from the date of service of the amended complaint.
6. Plaintiff served Defendant with the amended complaint on
March 23, 1995.
7. Defendant filed preliminary objections to the amended
complaint on April 12, 1995, twenty (20) days from the date of
service of the amended complaint.
8. For the second time, Plaintiff moved for entry of
default, even though Defendant filed preliminary objections in a
timely manner.
9. Plaintiff's motion is ft'ivolous and Plaintiff and/or
Plaintiff's counsel is proceeding in bad faith.
WHIRlrORI, Defendant prays this Court deny Plaintiff's motion
for default judgment, hold Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel in
contempt of court, and assess attorney's fees against Plaintiff and
Plaintiff's counsel in the amount of $500.00.
lIotion to ComDe1:
10. Plaintiff instituted this action on July 20, 1994.
11. Defendant filed preliminary objections to Plaintiff's
Complaint on septemb9r 19, 1994.
12. By letter dated January 9, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
sought Defense counsel's concurrence in filing an amended
complaint. On t.he same date, under the same cover, Plaintiff's
counsel enclosed Interrogatories and Requests for Production of
Documents.
13. By letter dated January 20, 1995, Defense counsel
concurred in the filing of an amended complaint and advised
Plaintiff's counsel that answers to discovery would be deferred
until the amended complaint was filed.
14. By letter dated February 20, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
renewed his request for discovery, and scheduled the depositions of
Messrs. Kobrierecki, O'Connor and Mayer.
15. By letter dated February 24, 1995, Defense counsel
advised Plaintiff's counsel that she was unavailable for
depositions on March 8, 1995, due to a federal trial in
Williamsport scheduled for the beginning of March 1995,1 and
x'eiterated that answers to discovery should be deferred until. the
filing of the amended complaint.
16. By letter dated March 1, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel again
renewed his request for discovery.
17. By telephone conversation of March 6, 1995 and by letter
dated March 6, 1995, Defense counsel advised Plaintiff's counsel
that discovery should be deferred pending disposition of
Defendant's preliminary objections, particularly since the
preliminary objections included a challenge to the Court's
lSaid trial ultimately took place on March 9, 1995 and March
10, 1995.
jurisdiction.
18. Imposition of sanctions is within the sound discretion of
the Court. ~ Gonzales v. Procaccio Brothers Truckino Comoanv, 407
A.2d 1338 (pa. super. 1979). It is not an abuse of discretion for
the Court to decline to impose sanctions upon a party who fails to
respond to discovery where the failing party, while also failing to
file objections or to apply for a protecti.ve order, did advise the
opposing party of objections by letter. Aooeal of Nor~~, 547 A.2d
867 (Pa.commw. 1988).
19. On March 21, 1995, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint.
20. Defendant filed preliminary objections to the amended
complaint on April 12, 1995.
21. Plaintif f' s motion to compel should be denied because
Defendant's preliminary objections to Plaintiff's amended complaint
are currently pending. If Defendant's preliminary objections are
sustained, answering Plaintiff's discovery would serve no purpose
except to cause needless annoyance to Defendant, contrary to the
provisions of Pa.R.civ.P. No. 4011. See Laurence G. Chait and CO'L
Inc. v. Reoublican state Committee, 30 D.&C. 2d 678 (1963), and
Deans v. Pollock-Timblin co., 14 D.&C. 2d 455 (1958).2
22. Plaintiff's motion to compel seeks relief in the form of
expenses and fees from the Defendant.
23. Pursuant to Pa.R.civ.P. No. 4019(h), no expenses or fees
can be imposed upon the Commonwealth.
24. Defendant is a Commonwealth agency.
25. Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel is proceeding in bad
faith.
WHBRBFORB, Defendant prays this Court deny Plaintiff's motion
2 This concept is well-recognized in tha federal arena.
See Hilton v. W.T. Grant Co., 211 F.SUpp. 126, 130 (W.D.Pa. 1962);
Shaonon v. Bell, 642 F.2d 1248, 1266 (D.C. Cert. 1980), cert.
denied, 453 U.S. 911 (1981) ("uncontrolled discovery in the court
of insubstantial lawsuits can be a form of harassment that imposus
an undue burden on the time and resources of public officials and
their agencies"); Dolenc v. Owens, civil Action No. 88-1047
(M.D.pa.) (memorandum and order filed August 28, 1989); Wu v.
Keeney, 384 F.Supp. 1161, 1167 (D.C. Cir. 1974) (discovery is not
a device to enable a Plaintiff to make a casa when his complaint
has failed to state a claim); and Kavlor v. Fields, 661 F.2d 1177,
1184 (8th Cir. 1981) (discovery should follow the filing of a well-
pleaded complaint). Inasmuch as the language in the state
discovery rules closely tracks that of the federal discovery rules,
Defendants request that the Court adopt the foregoing principles.
,{....
;'.,~
't\;
'k.
',.
; ,
':i':~
j.'
I~\f;
':",
,'iA
;~~
,.I
ill
III THI COURT or COMMOH PLD8
CUHBIRLAND COUNTY, PBNH8YLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections,
Defendant
DECLARATION OF LOVINA E. NIPPLE
I, Lovina E. Nipple, hereby declare under penalty of perjury, that
the following information is true and correct based upon personal
knowledge and belief:
1. I am presently employed by the Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections, Office of Chief Counsel,
Central Office at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, as a Clerk
Typist~
2. My responsibilities and duties include receiving,
opening, logging and distributing incoming mail for the
legal staff of the Office of Chief Counsel.
3. I receive mail from the Post Office two times each
day. I stamp all incoming mail on the cate received and
record all incoming mai 1 in the "mail log". I then
distribute all mail to each designated
attorney/addressee.
4. I am the custodian of the mail log.
5. On this date, pursuant to a request from Attorney
Jill A. Devine, I reviewed the mail log for March 1995 to
determine when Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was received
in the Office of Chief Counsel.
6. There is an entry in the mail log for March 23, 1995
to indicate receipt of Plaintiif's Amended Complaint in
the Office of Chief Counsel.
I
/
'--.'
"
,"r/t:'
Executed on
this 15th day
of May 1995.
LOVINA E. NIPPL
IN THI COURT or COKHON PLIAB
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
Mechaniosburg Rehab systems,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections,
Defendant
DECLARATION OF JILL A. DEVINE
I, Jill A. Devine, hereby declare under penalty of perjury, that
the following information i~ true and correct based upon personal
knowledge and belief:
1. I am presently employed by the Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections ("Department"), Office of Chief
Counsel, Central Office at camp Hill, Pennsylvania, as an
Assistant Counsel.
2. I am the staff attorney assigned to represent the
Defendant in the above-captioned matter.
3. Mail is placed in my mail box twice daily as it is
received.
4. I check my mail box for incoming mail, including
pleadings and correspondences, periodically throughout
each day.
5. I received Plaintiff's Amended Complaint on March 23,
1995.
6. By letter dated January 9, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
sought Defense counsel's concurrence in filing an amended
complaint. On the same date, under the same cover, Plaintiff's
counsel enclosed Interrogatories and Requests for Production
of Documents. I certify that a true and correct copy of the
January 9, 1995 letter is attached hereto.
7. By letter dated January 20, 1995, Defense counsel
concurred in the filing of an amended complaint and advised
Plaintiff's counsel that answers to discovery would be
deferred until the amended complaint was filed. I certify that
a true and correct copy of the January 20, 1995 letter is
attached hereto.
8. By letter dated February 20, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
~~
~~
" .\ ~~: "t.,,::~ f.o
PENNSVLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
P,O, BOX 1198
CAMP HILL. PENNSVLVANIA 17001.0698
(71719711.48119
February 24, 1995
John D. Briggs
Oare , Briggs
1776 South Queen street
York, Pennsylvania 17403-4628
Re: Mechanicsbura Rehab,Systems V. Decartment of Corrections
Dear Attorney Briggs:
I received and reviewed your letter dated February 20, 1995.
It is apparent that we differ in our understanding of the Public
Welfare Code as it applies to this situation. Regrettably, I
suspect our differences will have to be settled in court.
Please be advised that your Stipulation for opening of the
Default with an Agreement for the Filing of an Amended Complaint
was not enclosed with your letter. Please forward the same for my
revi.w.
I note that you renew your request for Responses to your
written discovery requests, and I note that you have scheduled the
Depositions of Mr. Kobrierecki, Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Mayer for
March 8, 1995. I remain convinced that we should defer any
discovery until the filing of the Amended Complaint, but in any
event, I am unavailable for depositions at the beginning of March.
I am currently involved in federal litigation which was listed on
the February trial list in Williamsport, Pa. Due to a backlog of
criminal cases on the January trial list, however, the February
trials have been postponed. The Deputy Chief Clerk advises that my
trial is tentatively scheduled for the beginning of March. If I
learn otherwise, I wilt notify you promptly.
I trust this satisfies your inquiries as noted in your
February 20, 1995 letter.
Very truly yours,
:"1~4~,
Jill A. Devine
Assistant Counsel
JAD:len
cc: file
,,*~
1!lf7P;~
. ",.~Ic ,
March 6, 1995
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
P,O, BOX 1598
CAMP HILL, PENNSYLVANIA 17001-01598
(717) 9715.4869
VIA rACIIMILB AND REGULAR MAIL
John D. Briggs
OARE , BRIGGS
1776 S. Queen street
York, PA 17403-4620
Re: Mechanicsburg Rehab. systems v. Dept. of Corrections
Dear Attorney Briggs:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation this date
regarding your March 1, 1995 letter. As we had discussed, my
position in regard to the discovery you request is the same as in
ay previous two letters to you: Discovery should be deferred
pendinq the disposition C'f Defendants' preliminary objections,
particularly when those objections include a challenge to the
court's jurisdiction in this case.
Further, you have unequivocally expressed your intention to
amend your complaint. Certainly you can appreciate Defendants'
reluctance to respond to discovery before receiving your amended
complaint.
Finally, my federal trial is imminent, although I will not
know the actual trial date until notification from the clerk's
office, which gives only seventeen hours advance notice.
Accordinqly, as per our discussion, I do not intend to attend
any depositions on March 8, 1995, nor do I intend to send Messrs.
Kobrierecki, O'Connor or Mayer.
I trust this satisfies your inquiry.
Very truly yours,
y'Jj ~ ~
Jill A. Devine
Assistant Counsel
.-
IN THB COURT or COMMON PLIAS
CUKBBRLAND COUNTY, PINNSYLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems,
Plaintiff
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Oepartment of Corrections,
Defendant
Defendant'. Kotion for Bnlarqement
~ime. Nuno Pro Tunc:
AND NOW, comes the Defendant, by and through counsel, Jill A.
Devine, Assistant Counsel, Pennsylvania Department of corrections,
and make this Motion for Enlargement of Time, and in support
thereof aver as follows:
1. This action was instituted on or about July 20, 1994.
2. On April 24, 1995, this Court directed Defendant to show
cause, within 20 days of the date of service, why the relief
requested in Plaintiff's "Motion for Default Judgment with Motion
to Compel" should not be granted.
3. Defendant's answer to the rule was due May 15, 1995.
4. A member of this office's clerical support staff resigned
on september 30, 1994. As of this date attempts to fill her
position have been unsuccessful.
5. This office currently has three clerical support persons
providing assistance to the office's ten staff attorneys. Only two
of the clerical support staff provide support in typing documents
or other work assignments.
6. The shortage in clerical support has caused significant
problems in responding to court deadlines.
7. Counsel for Defendants personally undertook the task of
typing and delivering defendant's answer to the rule to show cause
to the courthouse.
8. Counsel underestimated the time necessary to reach the
courthouse, and due to heavy late-a~ternoon traffic, did not reach
the courthouse until 4:37 p.m.
9. The Cumberland County prothonotary's office closes at
4:30 p.m.
IN THB COURT or COIIIIOM .L1A8
CUMBBRLAHD COUNTY, PIHM8YLVAMIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections,
Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Jill A. Devine, hereby certify that I served a copy of the
foregoing Motion to Submit Affidavits In Lieu of Depositions for
the Determination of Rule to Show Cause and Motion to Strike
Exhibits from Plaintiff's "Motion for Default Judgment with Motion
to Compel" by causing the same to be deposited in the U.S. mail,
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
John Briggs
OARE & BRIGGS
1776 S. Queen street
York, Pennsylvania 17403-4628
(I ill " ~H-. $I
Jifj; A. Devine
Assistant Counsel
Attorney Identification No. 54700
Pa. Department of Corrections
P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17001-0598
(717) 975-4864
Dated: May 17, 1995
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAIN'l'IFF
IN THE COUR'r OF COMMON
PLEAS O~' CUMBERLAND COUNTY
V.
COMMONW~;ALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
MOTION FOR DBFAULT JUDGMENT WITH
MOTION TO COMPBL, IN THB ALTBRNATIVE
Plaintiff Mechanicsburg Rehab systems (hereinafter "MRS"),
files this motion seeking the entry of a default jUdgment and,
alternatively. an order compelling an answer to the complaint,
responses to outstanding discovery requests and order scheduling
depositions of defendants representatives.
COUNT I - DBFAULT
1. Pursuant to stipulation of the parties, Judge J. Wesley
Oler. Jr.. en::ered an Order dated March 1, 1995, opening the
default judgment previously taken against the Defendant and
directing the filing of an amended complaint within 20 days after
service and the filing of defendant's response within 20 days after
service. A copy of this order is attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
2. On March 22. 1995, and within 20 days of service of the
Court's Order. Plaintiff filed its amended complaint and served it
upon opposing counsel via U.S. mail as indicated on the attached
certificate of service.
3. More than twenty days have elapsed since the date of
service of the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
4. Plaintiff has received no answer or responsive pleading to
its amended complaint as of the date of this motion. ~'urthermore,
, .
Plaintiff's counsel received no convnunications from Defense counsel
conc~rning this matter.
5. No "Notice of Default" is required where the Defendant
fails to comply with a Court Order requiring response within a
specified time period.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that you Honorable
COurt enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant
or, alternatively, direct Defendant to file an Answer within five
days and pay counsel fees incurred in preparing this motion.
COUNT II . MOTION TO COMPBL
5. On January 9. 1995, Plaintiff's counsel served
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents upon
Defendant's counsel. True and correct copies of these documents
are attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
6. By letter dated February 20, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
provided notices of deposition for Defendant's agents and
employees, SChedUling depositions for March 8, 1995. A copy of
this letter and enclosures is attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
7. By letter dated March I, 1995, Plaintiff's counsel
requested responses to the overdue written discovery requests. A
copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "D".
8. Def endant' s counsel did provide notice that the
Defendant's employees would not appear for their depositions and
confirmed that. they did not intend to provide written discovery
responses but did not pursue a protective order from the Court.
The Defendant's employees and counsel dld not appear for the March
8, 1995 depositions.
. I '.
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS :
PLAINTIFF :
:
:
:
V. :
:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-4046
STIPULATION
It 1~ hereby st1pulated and agreed by and between the
undersigned counsel, as follows:
A. The default judgment may b~ opened;
B. The plaintiff may file an amended compla1nt w1thin 20
days from the date of rece1pt of this order;
C. Tho Defendant may file a response to the amended
compla1ntwith1n 20 days from the date of serv1ce of the
amended compla1nt.
It 1s requested that the Court enter the Order attached hereto.
Ji Esquire
Atty ID .
Pa. Dept. Of Corrections
P.O. Box 598
Camp H111, PA 1'I00l-0598
Ph.(7l7)975-4859
/. hn D. 9S1
!/ Atty ID .5298
r Oare' Brig9s
1776 south Queen St.
York, PA l7403
Ph. (717)846-3000
r
Date: 1-/2~ J~ \-
Date:
\doc'\~r.\l.n.~.rt\.llp.pld
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS :
PLAINTIFF :
I
:
I
V, I
:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, :
DEFENDANT I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-4046
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the date indicated below, a copy of
the foregoing document was sent via U.S. mail postage prepaid to
the following I
JILL A. DEVINE, ESQUIRE
PA, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS
P.O. BOX 598
CAMP HILL, PA l700l-0598
Date: February 27, 1995
N D. B I
l776 South en
York, PA 17403
(717) 846-3000
1.0. No. 52987
Attorney for Plaintiff
\4oc1\..I\II.lbl,t\..1
I, .,
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIFF
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
v,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDAN'r
PLAINTIFF'S REQlJES'r FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
TOI Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections and
Jill Devine, Esquire
P.O. Box 598
Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598
Plaintiff, Mechanicsburg Rehab System. by its attorneys, the
Law Offices of Oare & Briggs, request that Defendant produce the
following materials pursuant to the pennsylvania Rules of Civil
Procedure within thirty (30) days after receipt of this request:
This request is deemed to be continuing and any documents,
photographs, statements, reports, handwritten notes or other
tangible things secured subsequent to the date set herein for the
prOduction of same are to be provided to plaintiff's counsel within
thirty (30) days of receipt of same.
DEFINITION AND INSTRUCTIONS
A. "Documents" means all written or graphic matter, however
produced or reproduced, of every kind and description in your
actual or constructive possession, custody. care or control,
including but not limited to originalS (or copies where originalS
are unavailable) of: investigations, reports, test results,
correspondence, papers, books, accounts, letters, minutes,
photographs. drawings, sketches. graphs, maps, summaries, phono-
records, objects, microfilm, telegrams, notes written or taped or
other sound recordings of any type of personal or telephone
conversations or meetings, memoranda, interoffice communications,
intra-office communications, records, reports, diaries, studies,
forecasts, projects, analyses, publications, contracts, licenses.
agreements, ledgers, financial statements, books of account,
working papers, drafts, statistical recoI'ds, cost sheets,
abstracts. invoices, stenographer'S notebooks, punch cards,
, .
computer print-out sheets ilnd job or transaction files or papers
similar to any of the foregoing and other compilations of data from
which information can be obtained, translated, if necessary, by you
through detection devices into reasonably usable form. Any copy of
a clocum(mt. as def ined herein, containing thereon or attached
thereto any al terat. ions, notes, comments or other mater ia Is not
included in the originals or copies referred to in the preceding
sentence shall be deemed a separate document within the foregoing
definition. This definition does not include mental impressions.
conclusions or opinions representing the value of merit of a claim
or defens(J or respecting strategy or tactics and privileged
communications from counsel. Also excluded hereto are the mental
impressions of your attorney or his conclusions, opinions,
memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories.
B. "Statement" means a written statement signed or otherwise
adopted or approved by the person making it or a stenogLaphic,
mechanical, electrical or other recording, or a transcription
thereof which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral
statement by the person making it and contemporaneously recorded.
.REQUESTS
1. Any and all documentary material in your possessio~ or in
the possession of anyone acting on your behalf concernlng or
representing training or guidelines regarding communication with
providers of medical services with respect to insurance coverage,
benefits, pOlicies and/or plans for patients or prospective
patients.
2. The complete minutes, any and all notes. memoranda,
agenda, documents and/or statements prepared for. referred to, or
distributed at any meeting concerning the matter which is the
subject of this litigation.
3. All those documentz, statements and records which are in
your possession or under your control which you either have relied
upon. reviewed or used in any way in answering Plaintiff's
Interrogatories, Set No.1, or which relate to or have been
referred to in the interrogatories or in your answers in response
thereto.
4. Any and all documents containing surveys,
compilations of data. reports or year-end summaries of
expenses for ir~ates and detainees of Defendant,
statistics,
medical care
5. Any file. personal or otherwise, of Mr. Troutman and Mr.
Kobreiki, containing their notes, writings, or documents of anyone,
including the parties to this suit or employees of parties to his
suit or Larry Lanehart or Plaintiff, or about the same.
6. All statements concerning this action or its subject
matter previOUSly made by the Defendant herein or anyone having
knOWledge of the events in this case.
. .
C. You. Whenever the word "You" or "your" appears herein and
whenever the designarion of the party served with these
Interrogatories appears herein and whenever any person or entity is
referred to herein, such word, desiqnation, person, or entity shall
be construed to mean not only the party served with these
Interroqatories, other person or entity in his. her. its, or their
own right, but also his, her. its or their agents, servants,
workmen, representa t i ves, employees. or attorneys. If the party to
whom these Interrogatories are addressed is not an individual(s),
"you" or "your" includes the entire entity, its divisions, its
merged or acqu i red predeceSSOr/I, i Ls present and former of f icers,
directors, agents, employees, and all other persons purporting to
act on behalf of it or its predecessors.
D. Representative. The word "representative" or
"representat i ves" includes the attorney for the party and any
consultant, surety, indemnitor. insurer, employee. agent, adjuster
or investigator for the party or the party's insurer.
E. Statement. The term "statement" includes a written
statement signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person
making it. It also includes a stenographic, mechanical, electrical
or other recording or a transcription thereof which is
substantially verbatim recital or an oral statement by the person
making it and contemporaneously recorded. It also includes any
verbal or oral statements.
F. Identi fy documents. The term" identify" as used herein in
reference to documents, including correspondence. reports,
memoranda, notes, books and records shall mean to:
(1.) State the type of document, Le., letter,
memorandum, note, etc., the number of pages thereof, the title
and date of the document, the time of preparation, dispatch
and/or receipt of the document, and identify the person or
persons originating, preparing, or participating in the
preparation of the document. the person or persons to whom the
document was addressed, the person or persons to whom copies
of the document were to have been sent and the place or places
where such document was dispatched and/or received; and
(2,} State the names and addresses of all persons whom
you know or believe to have possession, custody or control of
the document and of any copies thereof. If any document was.
but no longer is. in your or your organization's control.
state what disposition was made of it and the date of such
disposition; and
(),) With respect to each document which you contend is
confidential. designate each such document numerically. e.g.,
I', .,
Document 1, Document 2, etc., and state the number of pages,
date, its present Location and its custodian's identity.
(4.) The identification should be with "reasonable
particuLarity" !lO as to enable plaintiff to request production
of documents under RuLe No, 4009 of the Pennsylvania Rules of
Civil Procedure. [t is sufficient to attach a copy of the
document for the purpose of answering these interrogatories.
If any document was but. is no Longer in your possession or
subject to your control. state what disposition has been made
of it.
G. Docummlts, The tenn "document" or "documents" refers to
writings printed or graphic matter of every kind and description
including, but not limited to correspondence, telegrams, other
written communications. contracts, agreements, notes, statements,
memoranda, photographs, tape recordings, video recordings, checks.
bank draf ts. invoices. memoranda. photographs and drawings, graphs,
charts, telegrams, letters, contracts, diaries, notes. minutes of
any board of directors or committee thereof. and records of any
event, written or oral communication and recordings (tape, disc, or
other) of events or oral corrununications and other data compilations
in whatever form from which information may be obtained or
translated through human, mechanical, or other means into a
reasonable usable form including drafts, copies, transcripts, and
summaries of any of the foregoing whether or not within the
possession, custody or control of the Defendant. As used herein.
"document" or "documents" also refers to the originalS of the
materials listed as well as all copies, reproductions, and
printouts or such documents which bear any notations or other
alterations not found on the original or differing in form or in
substance from the original or if the original is not in the
possession, custody or control of the Defendant or that of its
subsidiaries, affiliates. divisions, or other organizational units
or their agent(sl or representative(sl.
H. Identify persons, The term "identify" as used herein in
connection with or in reference to an individual person means to:
(1.) State the person's full name and present residence
address if known or the person's 1as t known res idence address,
their present or last known business address, employment, and
pos i tion;
(2.) State the person or persons whom he was representing
or for whom he was acting at the time of the event or events
in which he was involved or with which he was connected; and
(),) With respect to each individual whose identity you
contend is confidential, designate each such individual by
~ I it.
letter designation, e.g., Person A. Person B, etc., and state
his or her sex, ago, race and region of the country in which
he or she resides, e.g., vicinity of Harrisburg, vicinity of
Pittsburgh, etc.
I. IdentifY entities. The term "identify" as used herein in
connection with a reference to a company, corporation, association
or partnership or other legal entity or subdivision thereof not of
natural person means to state its full name, address of its
principal place of business and description of the type of entity
involved.
J. Person. The word "person," "persons" or "person(s)" as
used herein means any individual, association, partnership,
corporation, trust. governmental a<jency, or other entity, and also,
where relevant, the individual representing such "person."
K. Describe. Generally, the tenn "describe" as used herein
shall mean to provide all relevant and material factual information
pertaining to the matter about which inquiry is sought.
L. Discussion. "Discussion" means oral communication.
INTERROGATORIES
1. Experts. State the name and address of each expert you
intend to call as a witness in this case, giving further his
specific qualifications including memberShips to any professional
societies to which he belongs and any papers, books, or articles
which he is the author or co-author thereof and the subject matter
of such articles, the degrees he holds, and the date and the
institution conferring such degrees upon him.
ANSWER:
2. Expert Ooinions. For each expert listed in the answer to
No. 1 above, state the substance of the facts that said expert is
expected to testify. the opinion held by said expert to which he
will testify, and t~e grounds of each opinion to which the expert
will testify.
ANSWER:
3. Statements in your Dossession, For any statements taken
from any person concerning the happening or event giving rise to
this action or concerning the allegation contained in the complaint
and Answer or other pleading, state the name and last known address
of each person from whom a statement was takon, who took the
statement, the date when said statement was taken, who was present
when the statement was given, whether such statement is in writing
or has been reduced to writing, and who has possession or custody
of the statement or a copy thereof.
ANSWER:
4. Persons havinQ knowledQe. Identify all persons not
her.etofore named in your answers to these Interrogatories who have
personal knowledge .of the facts concer.ning the happeninq of the
occurrence, the contract at issue or concerning the allegations
contained in the complaint and Answer or other pleading, including
the identification of the person or persons who prepared, initiated
and/or forwarded to Plaintiff the documents attached to Plaintiff's
Complaint as Exhibits "A" and "B".
ANSWER:
, '
lO. Individual's involved. Identify any individuals havinq
knowledqe or information pertaining t.o the items requested in or
described in response to the preceding interrogatory, specifically
including the individual who was primarily responsible for the
transfer of Mr. Lanehart's confinement prior to the initiation of
his medical treatment.
ANSWER:
OARE , BRIGGS
Dated
n
ttorney for
1776 South n
York, PA 17403
(717) 846-3000
(1\...\mrl\Lan.nart\Lnterroq,dLI
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS :
PLAINTIFF I
:
I
:
V. I
:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, I
DEFENDANT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-4046
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the date indicated below, a copy of
the foregoing document was sent via U.S. mail postage prepaid to
the fOllowing I
JILL A. DEVINE, ESQUIRE
PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS
P.O. BOX 598
CAMP HILL, PA l7001-0598
Date: January 9, 1995
r
76 S. Queen
ork, Pennsyl
(717) 846-30
I.D. No. 52982
"
\docl\.r.\lln.hllt\COI
. . ~. "
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS, I
Plaintiff, :
I
I
I
V. I
I
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA I
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, I
Defendant. I
(
IN TItE COURT or COMMON
PLEAS or CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO.94-404&
NOTICI or ORAL DIPOBITION
TO:
Paul O'Connor - Begin at
John Kobierecki - Begin at
David Mayer - Begin at
9100 a.m.
10130 a.m.
11001l.m.
Pa. Dept. of Corrections
P.O. Box 598
Mechanicsburg, PA l7001-0598
Please take notice that on Wednesday, March 8, 1995, John D.
Briggs, Esquire, of Oare , Briggs, attorneys for the Plaintiff in
the above lDatter, will take the deposition of the above-named
individuals, beginning at 9100 a.m. and to remain until excusad,
for purposes of discovery and for use at trial.
The depositions will take place at the executive offices of
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, located at 175 Lancaster Boulevard,
Mechanicburg, Pennsylvania. The deposi Uons will be conducted
pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, before an
officer authorized by the law~ of the Commonweelth of Pennsylvania
to administer oaths.
The above-mentioned individuals are directed to bring with
them all documents and other papers in his possession relevant to
the above-captioned cae..
Dated I "j.. ..I..~
.
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIFF
I
:
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
V.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTME~r OF CORRECTIONS,
DEFENDANT
CIVIl. ACTION NO. 94 -4046
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
AMBNDBD COMPLAINT
1. Plaintiff Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems (hereinafter "MRS"),
is a health care treatment facility duly licensed to practice
medicine in Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at l75
Lancaster
Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland
County,
Pennsylvania.
2. Defendant Commonwealth of pennsylvania, Department of
Corrections, Bureau of Community Corrections, is a duly authorized
agency of the commonwealth, with offices at HarriSburg Community
Corrections Center,
Pennsylvania.
27 North Cameron Street,
Harrisburg,
3. The Defendant operates a facility at 2500 Lizburn Road.
camp Hill, Cumberland County, pennsylvania known as the State
Correctional Institution at Camp Hill (hereinafter "SCI at camp
Hill") .
4. At all relevant times stated hereinafter, the Defendant
acted by and through its duly authorized agents. employees and
servants, all of whom were acting within the scope of their
employment, and through its respective agencies and institutions,
including SCI at Camp IIi 11 and the HarriSburg Communi ty Corrections
Center.
5. On or about January 26, 1993, Larry Lanehart,
identification number BX9512, was an inmate at SCI at Camp Hill or
otherwise in protective custody by Defendant.
6. On or about January 26, 1993, the Defendant requested
wound care and rehabilitation services for Larry Lanehart with
respect to his condition as a paraplegic from The Renova Center for
Specialized Services (hereinafter "Renova"), which is a subacute
care facility of the plaintiff. MRS,
7. Defendant requested Renova to provide limited term wound
care and rehabilitative services for the purposes of enabling
Larry Lanehart to return to the Harrisburg Correction Center to be
productive through developed skills and to function independently
through performing personal hygiene and use of developed transfer
skills.
8. Defendant and its agencies did not have the facilities,
training, or expertise needed to provide acconunodations,
appropriate medical care or assistance to Mr. Lanehart.
SERVICES PROVIDED
9. MRS provided care and medical services to Larry Lanehart
pursuant to the parties' agreement from January 27, 1993 through
June 18, 1993.
INITIAL CONTRACT
10. On or about January 26. 1993, MRS and Defendant entered
into a contract for the purchase of certain medical services, as
identified in the terms of the contract. a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein.
2
11. Pursuant to the tenns of their written agreement, MRS
was to provide services to Larry Lanehart for 30 days at a rate of
$750.00 per day.
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT
12. On or about March 12. 1993. MRS and Defendant entered
into a supplement to their written contract for the purchase of
additional medical services. a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference.
13. The supplemental tenns of the contract attached as
Exhibit "B" set forth the provision of services by MRS to Larry
Lanehart from February 26, 1993 through and including March 27,
1993, and provide that services will be increased for 30 days at
the daily rate of $750.00.
CONTINUING AGREEMENT
14. By its actions, the Defendant subsequently requested and
gave approval for an extended stay for Larry Lanehart based upon
the previously agreed upon rate of $750.00 per day and in
furtherance of the parties' agreement.
15. The Defendant knew or should have known that Larry
Lanehart was receiving ongoing care at the cost of $750.00 per day
based upon the parties' agreements and his continued stay.
AMOUNT DUE
16. Pursuant to the parties' agreements, MRS submitted an
invoice to the Defendant for the amount of $68,891.18, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by
reference.
3
17. Despite repeated demands the Defendant has failed or
refused to pay the amount currently due and owing.
18. Defendant contends that that Medical Assistance benefits
should be available for Mr. Lanehart, despite their contractual
obligations.
FRAUD
19. Paragraphs 1 through 18. above. are incorporated herein
by reference as though set forth in full.
20. Defendant a llegedly placed Mr. Lanehart in the Harrisburg
Community corrections Center for the purpose of attempting to gain
qualification for medical assistance benefits, which actions were
in direct contravention of the law,
2l. It is believed and therefore averred that the Defendant
did not physically place Mr. Lanehart in the Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center.
22. It is believed and therefore averred that Mr. Lanehart
was transported directly from SCI at camp Hill to Community General
Osteopathic Hospital in Harrisburg.
23. It is believed and therefore averred that the Defendant I s
agents were aware that it was inappropriate to seek Medical
Assistance benefits for Mr. Lanehart by means of the fictional
transfer to another facility.
24. The Defendant negotiated with MRS in an effort to procure
medical services for Mr. l,anehart, with no intention of providing
payment for such services.
4
25. Defendant prepared official paperwork and both verbal and
written contract!! promising payment for the medical services
provided by MRS to Mr. Lanohart.
26. Defendant 'lave continued assurances and made
misrepresentation!!, by and throu'lh its agents and employees that it
would provide payment for the service!! rendered by MRS to
Defendant.
27. Defendant did not intend to make payment for the services
provided by MRS.
28. In response to the MRS request for payment, the
HarriSburg community Corrections Center sent a letter dated June
30. 1993. to MRS alleging eligibility for Public Assistance and
directed MRS to submit their bill to Public Assistance. A copy of
this letter is attached hereto as Exllibit "D". and incorporated
herein.
29. By letter dated March 24, 1994, HCCC alleged that is was
not responsible for contractual arrangements between MRS (Renova)
and the Department of Corrections. 'rhis letter indicated that "I
have forwarded your correspondence to the other concerned offices
within the Department of Corrections for their consideration. A
copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "E". and
incorporated herein,
30. The Defendant I s representations were knowingly false.
made in conscious ignorance of the truth. or made recklessly
without caring whether they were true or false.
5
31. Defendant, by and through the actions and representations
made by its representatives, intended to induce MRS to provide
medical services and accommodations to Mr. Lanehart.
32. MRS justif iably relied upon the Defendant's
misrepresentations to its detriment.
33. Despite its contractual obligations, repeated assurances
and expressions of intention to provide payment, Defendant failed
and, by their actions, refused to provide payment for MRS' s
services.
34. Defendants act ions were malicious. wi II ful, outrageous or
so careless as to indicate wanton disregard of the rights of MRS.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that your Honorable
COurt enter judqment against the Defendant in the amount of
'68,891.18 together with costs, punitive damages, attorney fees and
interest.
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
6
,,,
'I"
,(
I ~. ~
I
I'
t
I t ~
I)
:' ~
". ., ".,...L ,.. .
"'1\ .'11'
lito. TllllllUlI.11I
'4IP-: ONINVOICl
~.."
W no IP 17527
__ _ __._,~-"'--=__~_ __ __'==,_ .' __ ' no
;-..-;;1'~;; _ ....... to ..:,uu "~vl.r ....111, '. 1..1,,,,e.,.
!1I0Vtl (,~'mt.::r 'or ~pl'{ :nl "~r\'ices Departrnent ot Corrections
50 Wilson Lime I Buroau or Community Corrections
:('I1Rlli,=sbur:\, Pu t 70Z11 : Uarrlsburg Community Corrections Centel'
I 27 North Cameron St.
I Harrisburg, Pa, 1'1101
-
EMERGENCY PURCH~SE OF SERVICE
.l~ ,. ,~."'DI 0.......: All' ,.. CO,.,.., ',.".IHI ..
,
I...... ......i ,~
I 1 .. 26 I 93 I
2/ 26/ 93!
;"7,~~~'i, ,i'll. ;:-:::'-':-':;-::;:j;'7;;:""irn,-;-:;;t:'''''--~
pro\'iM ~elll\t-i1lt;.UolI services to Inmate Larr~' Lanclu.\J't, 8X9612, (ollowlng surglcoll'emoval of Illog
tne '::ornmun::v (;<1l1el'1I1 Ost~opathlc Hospital. Inmate Lanehart Is 0 paraplegic who has had both legs
;;;:r.ll~' removed. Sel'\'jco:>S will be (or JO dllYs at $750 dally.
~-::;-rOt, He, "v',
State Correctlonallnstltutlon
at Camp Hill
:l000 Llsburn Rd. - P.O. Box 8837
Camp IfllJ, Pa. 17001-8837
;: .',~;,: ..... ; ........i;:; i';.c,';7i'iT;:~"..h",... ..... ..... ...u:"..,ir........1
C iL..~;! '.!nd ;:"cl~l "...o:'~:t'rs Ilt the Community Ge:1eral Ostoopathlc Hospital who removed Inmate Lanehol'f's
,r,in!; lei, tn~ <:ont:'uctf'd he&1th care physicians at the Camp Hill institution, and the Department's Buroau
~t::ll,~a."J '':':,',:CIJ! direoctor, solely recornmendf'd IIse of the Renova Center for Specialized Services In
~;ll:!r :!l!' . ...."1I:3tlve services to Inmate Lanehart. The RenovaCenter wlU provide limited term
iiitat:\ , I'll'." (or the pUI';:,ose of <?nsbllng Inmate Lanehart's roturn at the Harrisburg Corrections
.-' Ic ~)" [1. ."j"r.nve through develorad skills to (unctloll independently through performing pe~sonal
".' UI,cj liS~' if 1cvl:looed f1m~ullltor~' skills, which wllllllso enable him to participate In other rcl1abllltntive
!,n~1
2~.500 00
uOIlIl''''IO.
.... .DClorH..., "..
ll')~i;--
I
I-
I
,.";"I.u . '.:1' '.. j-':~,- -I:::;;..-r- 'o'J
: o'i"i~'-iO~:.L1-1 91.In.!f::_~~JI)0_ ,- .1lSI"--L-
___" I--i.. , ; ,..I,
I I l' ., I I ...,.. ~ I' . of
I ,..~..~ ~,. I.....-:::--~.~ ..c. ' t'-;'. '1'....& .co,r... ,..
~_._ _ ""~J '
.....Iol'.., e,
c.cu........Cl
,.,...lIe"
~
I I
." r '.(1" 0.,."
'--- ~'-
'''---/r".,,,...
I _
_~.. S"
I.,"' In" ....."'''', I "'.C
I"''''
------.-.
i j
--- -----.----- .
I
IUI.-C:
- .-t
,r,
'111
...-..- ------..
.0"'''.' '.'. ,,,,' ,...
, i I
I__~-,
~ 2,.
-,
-, \
.....,... .........,.."-8..., \1'
.....1...4."....01"'......""'-.: .
Department or Corrections
..........' .",
Burc~u. ~t!~om.!!'..~!ty qorrectlons
({arrlsb~ q,~m~..g,uty Co~rectlons Center
rr N"o~~ a.mDar 11 f!treet' ,. .
BamSb~-~..... '7101_ . ,,"',
,I.r.~r j' ;~" .,.
-' I. '::.~ .. . ..,., .~i,l.,' "
tiLl. '.'I........C............."'- I......,. '...'Cll
....., .." ....
State. a~tfonli.IIhstltutlon
,... ,. RI1l'~""l""
ar ",amp. "II'..~'.
~ . .
,... or ....". 2500' tlsburn RcL "::P.O. Box 8837
t,' 26 / 93 camp...~'.Pi_B.. "-001-8837
27 93 "~,...,..... ',IlC,..'....
I - .., , , J:" r:- .,",
~~..;r.~:i~:~~~;;:~:;;~~'~;.;:~.a;;;;;~;~o'~.:~~~;~.;;.~'o inmat~ r;~;ll~_~X95.12, who is a porapleg:
with ooth legs surgically removed. Services will be increased fo:- :l0' diiii.t $750 dally. .
. h""' t't":J./~:.'
,\mendment to increase volume of services. No change in any other term or condition of this contract.
. . . ,', ,~ ": .
St!e ~.:emo and Letter regarding Larry Lanehart - BK9512 on uttachmeni"'I:'
,.;;,'
. ,ot,,,
. ,~.,..' lif.
. ",JK.~ I,
.. ..'
.'. \.:~~ .":~ ~: '
"JI~ :,r:..,. ,. t
;~l~.~:;.: .' ~.
~-' '---' --"
-.-.
c.........."...~ 'M .., .......""V6.16
'TO_lirl IIn. I."
i'.
EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF SERVICE
J10
nil
co..,." ra." ..... . ..0....
Renova Center (or Special Services
4950 Wilson Lane
~1echanicsburg,Pa 17055
'0.'."'0." '.0111.... . II. .... ..e. lie. Ol'.
23-201H75
u, ..~
...lft'ICa"O" "all [..'1I4e"" ....lIe".... 0' ".YICI 1AI,'.e"... aOOlno"... '''11'' ,,. ".IOCO.I
/--
fhe recommendations prOVided by the medical personnel at the Renova Center Cor Specialized Services
lnd Harrisburg's Corrections personnel state that inmate Lanehart needs to continue in the rehllbilitatio:
Jrog'nm to mom tor his wound healing, exercise [)rogram to increase strength and endurance, monitorim;
'je' nutrItional intake, and physiatry consultation. It is anticipated that If inmate Lanehart became
,taoilized upon completion of this additional rehabilitation servIce. he will be placed in a special case
placement with a relative. '.. ,
I .....<)1,1., " I.I'UlnA"..
",.0 "liII. ... .. ..:>>1' ,.. co,, 'v.e""o. ... c.ev.......,. 0
'ill Ii'I : 0:1 'J'2 l "., :inn ' nn
...- .
I
.'''' "." ..n.,c' .VW.'II
,"o.. .. . I ,., I.".... ... .. ~.". ...,..,
.n. ... ....., 0., '.c''''. ,
.'UII I
...,~~:~:~n.. I COOl
I
10'''' I 'ew ."0\1'"
OEP l". ."
rAA"~. . ---
'~F. ___.________.__
.,.> '"
'1"1"'.1..
,._, -'-,:r.-'--
I
/
I
.-.....--..--
"
'. .
'1:"
~
."JlI'"
'.INC
"c... '
.".'
A VISO
USTED HA SIDO DEMANDADO EN LA CORTE. SI uSled desea deCenderse de las
quejas expueslas en las paglnas siguienles, debe tomar acci6n dentro de veinte (20) dias a partir
de Is Cecha en que recibi6 la demanda y e1 aviso. Usted debe presentar comparecencia escrila
en persona 0 par abogado y presenlar en la Corte par escrilo sus defensa.\ l) sus objeciones a las
demandas en su contra.
Se Ie avisa que si no sc defiende, el caso puede proceder sin usled y la Corte puede
decidlr en su contra sin mas aviso 0 nOliCicacion par cualquier dlnero rec1amado en la demanda
o par cualquier olra queja 0 compensacion reclamados par el Demandanle. USTED PUEDE
PERDER D1NERO, 0 PROPIEDADES U OTROS DERECHOS IMPORTANTES PARA
USTED.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE.
51 USTED NO TIENE 0 NO CONOCE UN ABOGADO, VAYA 0 LLAME A LA
OFlCINA EN LA DlRECCION ESCRlTA ABAJO PARA AVERlGUAR DONDE
PUEDE OBTENER ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
Cumberland County Courthouse
Court Administrator
One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, Pa 17013
717-21\0-6200
..;;-
.20.DAYS NOTICE TO DEFEND
CIVil AC:J'JON (4/93)
identification nljmlH!r BX9512. was an inmate at SCI at Camp Hill.
6. On or about ,January 26. 1993. t.he defendant requested
rehabilitation services for l.arry l.anehart with respect to his
condition as a paraplegic from The Renova Center for Specialized
Services (hereinafter "Renova"). which is a subacute care facility
of the plaintiff. MRS.
7. Defendant requested Renova to provide I imi ted term
rehabilitative services for the purposes of enabling Larry Lanehart.
to reLurn to the Harrisburg Correction Center to be productive
through developed skills and to function independently through
performing personal hygiene and use of developed ambulatory skills.
SERVICBS PROVIDED
8. The Plaint Iff provided care and medical services to Larry
l.anehart pursuant to the parties' agreement from January 27, 1993
through June 18, 1993.
INITIAL, CONTRACT
9. On or about January 26. 1993. the plaintiff and defendant
entered into a contract for the purchase of certain medical
services. as identified in the terms of the contract. a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by
reference.
10. Pursuant to the t.erms of their written agreement, t.he
plaintiff was to provide services to Larry l.anehart for 30 days at
a rate of $750.00 per day.
SUPPI,EME:NTAL CONTRACT
11. On or about March 12. 1993, the plaintiff and defendant
entered into a supplement to thei r wr I t ten contract for the
purchase of additional medical
attached heret.o as Exhibit "n"
reference.
12. '['he Bupp1emollta 1 t.orms of the cont.ract attached as
~~xhlblt. "n" set forth the provision of services by the plaintiff t.o
l.arry Lanllhart from February 26, 1993 throuqh and inCluding March
27. 1993. and provide that services will be increased for 30 days
at the daily rat.e of $"~IO.OO.
CONT INUING AGRBEME;N'r
services. a r;opy of which
and incorporated herein
is
by
13. By its act Ions. the def l1ndant subsequent ly requested and
gave approval for an extended stay for Larry Lanehart based upon
the previously agreed upon ra te of $750.00 per day and in
furtherance of the parties' agreement.
AMOUNT DUE
14. The defendant knew or should have known that Larry
Lanehart was receiving ongoing c~re at the cost of $750.00 per day
based upon the parties' agreements and his continued stay.
15. Pursuant to the parties' agreements. the plaintiff
submitted an invoice to the defendant for the amount of $68,891.18.
a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibi t "C" and incorporated
herein by reference.
16. Despite repeated demands the defendant has refused to pay
the amount currently due and owing.
T(
Jar(: .~:
13: ,(, tl,:, , ",,)~ p, (I'::
...,...."1
':' .,'.
I 'I <)~ I 110"".' ~ .... '"
JIll, 'I'
- "-., ...----- .
_.._~... .-. -.-...--. -.
;;-,,~~;; . II.... ~ .':~." ,.
- -... ..-....
._. ---
.14010 '14IS MV14aU
.~ ~~~~,~.:o~t~,,_~
(l) !.- I ..
w -f.H I!P 17527
_ -... J:I. .1.2.LL _ _._ ..___ __no
l.~..~wfor ...."',u '. ",....e"'l
Department ot Corrections
Bur\!au ot Community Correction~
I
I lIarrisburg Community Corrections Center'
I
, 27 North Cameron St.
, HarrIsburg, Pa. 17101
EMI!MGI!IlCY PURCH~~E OF SERVICE
"novu r.~.mtvr (or <;pl'{ Inl ~I'I'\'ices
!l50 Wilson Lllne
Icchllnksburg, PtI 1705~
.1:..~~~IM;''' ....;; '''0 ((...,. 0' ,,~') ~(I
:r;;r;.o,. ......,..,-:-.....-;:-.-L-~""7t1t. .iC ''''''---I~"liiP~'~1
I . 26 I
I 2" 2& /
._____.__ __. __. _. _l ___ _.'
1C.""'I.''' ", ~r.. ~" ",. d"l. ..... .... ..O/~l' ~..._ f""- , ..,t:."
'0 prol'idt" ~ehl1l'\1It(.t1ol1 Rel'v(ces to inmate Larry Lllnehtu't, 8"9512, (ollowlng surgicall'emoval oC U log
I the Cornmlln;tv G,mer'1l1 Ost~opathlc Hospital. Inmate Lanehart Is 0 paraplegj~ who has hod both legs
lrgiclIlly removed. Sel'l'lc~' will be Cor 30 dUYfi III $750 dally.
~3~
93 !
.--~.
State CorrectlonollMtltutlon
ut Camp HIl1
\lliOO LJsburn Rd. - P.O. Box 8837
Camp HIIl, Pa. 17001-8837
.. -----~,..-.-
,-ii. ...c;; ',,;.; ...'....;~~; ..';i,-,;;,i ~-r';U-;-'i."..ll...i:'-'---''i''II~'.' 0...... '..I" '..'dC....l
.... --_--.___0_" .___
v ,icier:- .1Od ::I)cl~l wOI'kt'rs at the Community Oe:1eral Ostoopathlc Hospital who removed Inmate Lanehal't's
n.:.inlng leg, tne conU'llctE'd health care physic!an~ at the Camp Hlll institution, and the Department's Buroau
ilealth Ca,'", '.:','r', ices director. solely recommended use of the Renova Center tor Specialized Services in
wldillg I!l!' :.. ','Jlhlatlve services to inmate Lanohllrt, The Renova Center wm provide lImltec1lerm
'abilltllt:' , VIL-I'S Cor the plll':::,ose 0( ~n8bllng inmate Lanehart's return at the lIarrlsburlt Corrections
IIt~r tc b" fli ..duclIve through develol"ad skills to (unction independently through pertormlng personal
T:('lI~ 1l1Il! liSt' >f 1cvllloped fHl1culator:: sklUs, which wll1lllso enable him to participate In other rchabtlltntfve
"Jgrum.!l.
~. ".~'I ..It r .,. :,~.., .~. ,- ~~., ,,~.;;;~'t..-r-'-'.'::-;:--"'I
71011 ifi~._i031 Qz~~~~n~.~' ~~IJlfp ,m~~~_ n.
------.....L-r--J !__LL__ ..J-r
I l' ~ fI I ",. L~ I' 't"
I,..~'.~ \,y -~~.:~r:1 ~"-""l 11I0(''' ~'" I.V ".c..
.( . ""0).. ,
--.-- ... - """------. r -_.~_.- -
~:~~:~' to !---I=__~___ j ~--:-~-T.-~.; '~L=-_~__ _ ._.:~~-
'OO}'J~~"'~':.'==tI~- :?;:~::t;;-~'--- i ,.,,;.---
. ___--.J
, .. l - --...--i"'-'-;;;;o.;-
O.J'~' '-I"' ".... U,lCIIH.1 I '~','..~'
, ,.,,,.
1-------
1....'-.1:
,
'll', " ,...
.'ltl,r.
." ~, '.' .'
. .."" .-_. .
~~=:=J=-- . -.----
._ ._.. ..r~'_L 1______
.O.'"''L"f'''',.I''''.\IL'''''
, .. "" ~
.....
.''''',0'."
"f ". .
'.",
"'r.,"i,-.,:n;'-"7.'i. c'. l~ ~ ,~i-;:-:~l'"
EXHIBIT "A"
(
. .:f ::'.'\&';,!('(,:, .
.., 'i ... ~~.
, . I.:' ." ~.. ~ , , ,.... I,
.. ......&~ c.. ..~' r,e ;" ....I..." I'"
_ _. _._ ....'~_. J,~.._~'. .
-- ._--
(O....O......~ ,.. 'I' ... ""..".. ...,.
,rn~l1) Ill". '.U
IHOW THII NUlllI'
.. ON IHVOICI
~:".c-;;;;-;'";-';'''' . &0011'" _...~=-::::c=---::=t:::"'=:=':=-;:;I~.~=-'':'-;-:!....-_~_ ..1I0"ID. ..."IC. 'It !j".'ltC"
EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF SERVICE /
o 110
120
EP ~6~ 175
FundTn~ A~I':li!inl!n
---
RenovlI Center for Special Services
4950 Wilson Lane
Mechnnicsburg,Pll 17055
Deportment of Corrections
Bureau of Community Corrections
Harrisburg Community Corrections Center
27 North Cameron Street
Harrisburg, ~a. 17101
111.1. "D ",,,..... .1I'''"AL A"O ''''a co,,,, 0' "UDlll,
State Correctional Institution
at Camp Hill .
"";;'~;~~~;;'5"." D. ...1..., "=CY}~'/:~ ~~0~:~i~~r~a~di70~'1~8::: 8837
I)IU"'."'I)" q, '1111/'('1 "'OWIIIIIU tA".eM .. .00IP'."'1. ....1' " "lJDIQ.1 , , ,.
To provide continuation of rehabilitation services to inmate Larry Lanehart, BX95l2, who is a paraplegic
with both legs surgicaUy removed, Services will be increased for 30 days at $750 dally,
,\mendment to increase volume of services. No change in any other term or condition of this contract,
See ~,lemo ancJ Letter regarding Larry Lanehart - ElK9512 on attachment 1/1.
/
....u,,,..,,o.. 'Oil """'1"41"e. "VII(H"'I' 0' ',...nCI ...""'10.... ..00"'010"'" 'MC"'!' "'1.010.'
fhe t"ecommendotions provided by the medical personnel at the Renova Center for Specialized Services
and Harrisburg's Corrections personnel state that inmate Lanehart needs to continue in the rehabilitation
:Jrogr.'lm to monitor his wound healing, exercise program to increase strength and endurance, monitoring
of nutrltional intake, and physiatry consultation, It is anticipated that it Inmate Lanehart became
stabilized upon completion of this additional rehabilitation service, he will be placed in a special case
placement with a relative.
. :,.;;j - ~;;; -: ~~;~1-~ 9'2 >~., 9;;;O=~G;~(;~"'I':.?:"~1 :{:;--- ,:,..,".:......~:: 01)
= ~_-~~-~-~~-r :: =r -EE_~~_282.~nn:
.....1 ~' IPI""."O'..!('''V~__'!. ___
, "... I "" ;;;;-r [ Oil' "1.1 'lfOI
. > "r, '..11. 10". !:'~. 1_..",. U{ ,'?..
.... ."0' I
DIPT. '1/' 1.....--1 I r-----r--.--..---.. i' ----I --1---",.- --.-
rUM' ~ - -..--.- ---- - hr ----l -- r -...-----.-. --....
..I\F. :_L__L. .' I _: _ I
...ou,na"o..
....llU.....!!..t._
1.1~~g~~"(i'.. -'-~"1 ~;.m;'
,
: --1...~'
r:;:~;'" I
I ."'.
'l... i
O.lle,
I.I"'" "IN 'MOU..'
.J
I
I
._.._--~_.
-
~ . , "
, '''''r'
. .'~(i':' ,',-';-,-':~-'c.~,.
. ,
, .,.".......
;' "II /,'''K'
.' (,./ v"'{
'./' , ,.
. , ,
-<./ I :" ~ ,
, I I
.1 .,,,..
..f "'" ....
,:XH IIIIT "fl"
'''1E ..', H~,JAt:-
r) :0'( .:: J.3'::
"E ::HANf"'3Bf,G,
PA
l 'O~~
'I:~ ~;',' "':'J~
,~ joA'..hlll....t "..101.
'..,,,....,
. ,~t1~>i.;'; T
" .'11'''0.'
':'~
."r
,-
~' I
."
"
..,'oF..., ~,/~Nc..4Af.r
~ - 'I, '~;,'1EH)rl ';T
_Ah' 1~,t;IIFrJ F-
1723'3
...1 I) .' ,'I,
~l
,;;1..1~~~.~."...1i.'.!!L
302~~J
....OiU.U"')
---..,.--t-,.-----
\
...:... 'iOiwl;O-------ril-n.iJtltij"-"Yii'l;;i--.-'..--li--;,ltJ<f
JJ~;~Oi"17~:
'1------.- ,.,---,.-.~.---. ~---,-_.. --...-..-.,....'
,,,,1''''1 .. ,,. 1,' ~ "'llU'" ~~ ' ,n
(~I,McFHJN S i
.
I""'"
'J!
;:l
(I)
,.,
,.
..
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
ll(IJJ.lptmcn t
Illill;r:'L;",,-.-(
_"..r,..~ 11;.\. .,.:.. j
1'"':')0. '" .,..,,~ .. "J" "."'1"
...........n__
1 ~; Ij . '1':-: hlOn(l (1')
2:50 9 2021 i02
27(1 '-I~:; eeo:" '1'i
JOO 8 :lJ:l is:I
:~ 0 ~ ~ J(j~ 90
~
JOO 2 106 :7:1
J0"? I 30 50
J20 ~ JOJ ioo
. ao ; '2'~ l24111 00
430 48 23:16 ioo
'I 'Jo1 t:i g 1:1 ~o
910 10 :120 ioo
001 S9J:lJ i47
:'() In::, :2U
flR ,fW~.l
-rcl ;..[JI!~\I; ~ _.~ E~------- ._~--"~o. ':)G
r>HARHACY
'::'j.--.;l)".' jl,I~,I~'L;E::
~ABORATORY OR (LAB)
.~" ..'''l''t., r :irr; y
'_AB/liEPfATDLDGY
...:.':: ;:R,lLw:':."
RAD I OLOGY
... ,,,l~,,,, THERF
OCCUPAT I ON THER
: T - .:'h~L.'\ T r ,VI
PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICE
TOTAL CHARGES
llinllS ""nt rllctulll
TOTAL DUE;
., '..111
: 'r .:~ ! r:. . IJ ? r~ ~:: T
,;'r1~H~'; T ~R' t
o ",,,. '""7,.~,:~n~___
t.
o
..1
"'11\/' ',:'.'!"
I
.' ; ;.,,,,,.~, I
.)1
EF' 1 7~J.7
Ilb,?9]d
\T,i.l
I ~
1 '1.? -: .f
1 "
"
',II
..
'.'
.. NIJN-';OJ
..
..
I
I
I
I
'I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;1,."';'" "'''''.,[,.' I
'" '....il. :J:tI....... .:
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
''''''Mr'
. t'r.~~,~.. (,
;','rr,," , .
. ,l!t'.. 1.
."
.""1'1"""';' ,-'__....11,
,". ,'tl ~~;2:;
I
:'~" .
'i f!fNI8......!'.",..
" UI "WOlJ".' 0,,1
'Anli'''''!
.... --;r,'
70 "1.1.
IIU tl
I. f"'Pll~'U Ii
...-.....;;~~I"
~----.
"',,,..
,.N,,, "Ia
'....", ',:fj'.F ,..~~':. ilr!IL,','j; 1~;'NGP';"'E
:rr""~~~'i~';lnlJ"'~ lJ...,:",!lt'n..~
.' """'IoI'IoI.U'" r"Trl..ll'".O"...~.(,'... LJ'-.'-;-;,-i"'-;-: ]--:::t;-,-r,'
L;~ I ,.." I.. J.. .... -, , L;.
- ""c I:: ~:,';"~C',~:'r'::'
~- ", . ' - f' a';'..:;: .. '-;;;'.iT,I",r.jl'~
"CO .. .,~ '"'J'''
.
III 'P'
"N'HJ!;"
.. .f....ll~\
.' . iJ.-:
'"
"
"
,.
.. ,i" ~ , I
..~ '7 .,' . -,
toJ Lj~(:
, ., ,~
IW;[lrUrION COpy EXHIBIT :"{JI'"
!\
JB'82 HCFA.14'\O
.........;.,;".;". -l.-i,...."'''''
1';;';':;'jj;;-...~., ;.;"i7~r '1"'" ..,", ,!
..
...
":
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEMS I
PLAINTIFF I
I
I
I
V, I
I
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA I
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, I
DEFENDANT I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this /::>,.0, day of ~
1994 a copy of the foregoing Complaint was sent via U,S.
postage prepaid to the following:
,
mall
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections
Harrisburg Community Corrections Center
27 North Cameron Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Office of Attorney
15th Floor
Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17
Richer
2020 S. Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846-3000
I,D. No. 18631
J)ji
. Briggs, Esquire
, Queen Street
Pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846-3000
1.0. No. 52982
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Mechanicsburg Rehab systems,
Plaintiff
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of corrections,
Defendant
ORDER
AND NOW, upon consideration of Defendant's Preliminary
Objections, the preliminary Objections are SUSTAINED, and it is
hereby ORDERED that the Complaint in the above-referrenced case be
DISMISSED, with prejudice.
BY THE COURT:
~
.'
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
NO. 94-404~
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Default Judgment
PLAINTIFF'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIOqa
TO DEFENDANT' S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
HQ,nON TO STRIKE
PURSUANT TO PaRCP 1017Cb)C2)
1. On or about September 19, 1994, Plaintiff obtained judgment
against the Defendant by default.
2. The Defendant filed preliminary objections to Plaintiff's
complaint subsequent to the entry of judgment and the expiration
of the ten day default period.
3. Plaintiff's prel iminary objections are untimely and,
therefore, not in compliance with the applicable law or rule of
court.
4. Pursuant to Rule 1017(b)(2) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil
Procedure, Plaintiff respectfully requests your honorable court to
strike the Defendant's Preliminary Objections,
IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLIAB
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Meohanicsburg Rehab systems,
Plaintiff I
v.
civil Action No. 94-4046
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of corrections,
Defendant
Defendant's preliminary Objections
to Plaintiff's Amended complaint:
AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of corrections, by and through its attorney, Jill A.
Devine, Assistant counsel, and makes these preliminary objections
to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint, and in support thereof avers as
follows:
1. On or about July 20, 1994, Plaintiff instituted this
action in assumpsit for medical services allegedly furnished, from
January 27,1993 to June 18,1993, to Larry Lanehart ("Lanehart"),
an individual in Defendant's custody, Plaintiff served an Amended
Complaint on March 23, 1995.
2. The Board of Claims has exclusive jurisdiction in claims
against the Commonwealth arising in assumpsit,l
3. In Paragraphs 7 and B of the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff
alleges that the services were provided to Lanehart by The Renova
Center for Specialized services, which Plaintiff alleges is a
"subacute care facility of the plaintiff."
4. The Renova Center for Specialized Services is an
indispensib1e party to this action,
5. Plaintiff did not join The Renova Center as a party.
".~: Plaintiff's claim against Defendant is based on its
allegation that Plaintiff is a party to a "contract" with
Defendant, and attaches a copy of the alleged "contracts" as
EXhibits "A" and "B" to the Amended Complaint.
7. P1ainti ff is not listed as a party to the alleged
lDefendants expressly reserve the right to argue that
Plaintiff's claim is barred by the statute of limitations
applicable to the Board of Claims,
contracts attached au Exhibits "A" and "8" to the Amended
Compla int.
8. Plaintiff docs not allege that the alleged "contracts"
attached as Exhibits "A" and "B" to the Amended Complaint were
executed by Defendant, nor do Plaintiff's exhibits indicate that
the alleged "contracts" were executed by Defendants, in
contravention of Pa.R.civ,P. 1019, which requires that a pleading
contain "material facts",
9. In Paragraphs 19-34 of the Amended complaint, Plaintiff
generally avers fraud,
10. Allegations of fraud must be averred with particularity,
Pa.R,Civ.P. 1019(b),
11. In Paragraph 28 of the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff
acknowledges that Defondant advised Plaintiff, by letter dated June
30, 1993, that Lanehart is eligible for retroactive Public
Assistance, and attaches a letter from Defendant as Exhibit "0",
12. As indicated in Exhibit "0", Lanehart's Public Assistance
eligibility information was attached to the original letter, a copy
of which Plaintiff submits as Exhibit "0".
13. Plaintiff does not include Lanehart's Public eligibility
information in Exhibit "0".
14. A
information
1.
copy of Lanehart's Public Assistance eligibilty
is attached to these preliminary objections as Exhibit
15. Lanehart' s
Lanehart was eligible
1, 1993.
16. Plaintiff fails to state a claim, because the Public
Welfare Code ("Code") provides that vendors of medical services
shall agree to accept the rates of payment authorized by the Code,
and shall not seek or accept additional payments. 62 P.S. 5447.1.
el ig ibil i ty information indicates that
for retroactive medical assistance to January
WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Court to dismiss this
action for lack of jurisdiction, for failure to join an
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTBMS, I
Plaintiff I
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
DBPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TBRM
!N RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
BEFORE SHEELY. P.J.. and OLER. J.
OPINION and ORDER OF COURT
Olei, J.
Plaintiff's amended complaint in this civil action for breach
of contract and fraud against the Commonwealth is the subject of
preliminary objections.
These preliminary object ions may be
classified as (I) a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the action;' (2) a motion to dismiss for
nonjoinder of an indispen$able party;' (3) a motion to dismiss for
failure of the complaint to conform to rule of court in terms of
pleading material facts;' (4) a motion to dismiss for insufficient
pleading specificity as to fraud;' and (5) a motion to dismiss for
legal insufficiency of the pleading (demurrer).'
Plaintiff's claims arise out of the Commonwealth's alleged
refusal to fully pay for certain medical services provided to a
See Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a)(l).
See Pa. R.C.P. 1028(A) (5).
See Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a) (2); Pa. R.C.P. 1019(a).
See Pa. R.C.P. 1028(4); Pa. R.C.P. 1019(b).
, See Pa. R.C.P. 1028(a) (4); Defendant's preliminary
Objections to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (filed April 12, 1995).
,
.
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
state prisoner, Defendant's preliminary object ions are based, more
specifically, upon the following grounds I first, that the Board of
Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over claims against the
Commonwealth arising out of breach of contract; second, that an
entity called Renova Center for Specialized Services is an
indispensable plaintiff, inasmuch as Plaintiff's amended complaint
alleges a default by the Commonwealth in paying for Renova' s
services; third, that the amended complaint fails to aver that the
Commonwealth executed the contracts upon which the action is based;
fourth, that averments of fraud by the Commonwealth are overly
broad; and, fifth, that as a matter of law under the Public Welfare
Code Plaintiff can not collect from the Commonwealth at rates, as
it seeks, in excess of those statutorily authorized for medical
assistance patients.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The facts as averred in Plaintiff's amended complaint are as
follows:' Plaintiff is Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, a health care
treatment facility with its principal place of business at 175
Lancaster
Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg,
Cumberland
County,
Pennsylvania.
Defendant is the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Corrections, Bureau of Community Corrections, with
of fices at Harrisburg Community Corrections Center, 27 Nor.th
, The recitation of averments in Plaintiff's amended
complaint is not intended to express a view by the court as to
their accuracy.
2
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
Cameron Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.
Defendant also operates a facility known as the Stato Correctional
Institution at Camp Hill (SCI-Camp Hill) at 2500 Lisburn Road, Camp
Hill, Cumberland County, pennsyl. vania.
On or about January 26, 1993, Larry Lanehart was an inmate at
SCI-Camp Hill, or otherwise in the protective custody of Defondant.
On or about that same date, Defendant requested "wound" care and
rehabilitation services for Mr. Lanehart from Renova in connection
with his condition as a paraplegic. Renova is a subacute care
facility of the Plaintiff. Defendant requested Renova to provide
limited term wound care and rehabilitatio~ services for the purpose
of enabling Mr. Lanehart "to return to the Harrisburg Correction
Center to be productive through developed skills and to function
independently through performing personal hygiene and use of
developed transfer skills."
Plaintiff provided care and medical services to Mr. Lanehart
pursuant to the parties' understanding from January 27, 1993,
through June 1B, 1993, In accordance with the terms of a written
agreement, Plaintiff was to provide services to Mr. Lanehart for
thirty days at a rate of $750.00 per day. On or about March 12,
1993, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a supplemental agreement
for the purchase of additional medical services by Plaintiff for
Mr. Lanehart, for the period February 26, 1993, through and
including March 27, 1993, at the daily rate of $750.00. "By its
3
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
actions," Defendant subsequently requested and gave approval for an
extended stay for Mr. Lanehart based upon the previously agreed-
upon rate of $750.00 per day and "in furtherance of the parties'
agreement."
Pursuant to the parties' agreements, Plaintiff submitted an
invoice to Defendant in the amount of $68,B91.lB. Despite repeated
demands, however, Defendant has failed or refused to pay the amount
currently due and owing. Instead, "Defendant contends that Medical
Assistance benefi.ts should be available for [Mr.] Lanehar.t, despite
their contractual obligations."
In addition to the aforesaid averments relating to an alleged
breach of contract by Defendant, Plaintiff also makes the following
allegations pertaining to fraud:
20. Defendant allegedly placed Mr.
Lanehart in the Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center for the purpose of
attempting to gain qualification for medical
assistance benefits, which actions were in
direct contravention of the law.
2l. It is believed and therefore averred
that the Defendant did not physically place
Mr. Lanehart in the Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center (HCCC).
22. It is believed and therefore averred
that Mr. Lanehart was transported directly
from SCI at Camp Hill to Community General
Osteopathic Hospital in Harrisburg.
23. It is believed and therefore averred
that the Defendant's agents were aware that it
was inappropriate to seek Medical Assistance
benefits for Mr. Lanehart by means of the
fictional transfer to another facility.
4
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
Failure to ioin an indisDensable Dartv. Pennsylvania Rule of
Civil Procedure 2227(a) provides that "[p]ersons having only a
joint int~rest in the subject matter of an action must be joined on
the same side as plaintiffs or defendants." Pennsylvania Rule of
civil Prccedure 1032(b) further states that " [w]henever it appears
by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that ... there has been
a failure to join an indispensable party, the court shall order ...
that the indispensable party be joined, but if that is not
possible, then it shall dismiss the action."
"An indispensable party is one whose rights are so connected
with the claims of the litigants that no relief ~an be granted
without impairing or infringing upon tho13e rights." 3 Goodrich-
Amram 2d S1032.13, at 151 (1991). Where an indispensable party is
not joined, the court is not required to dismiss the action in the
first instance, but may grant leave to the plaintiff to join the
absent party. Id., at 152-53.
Failure to Dlead material facts. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil
Procedure 1019 (a) provides that "[ t] he material facts on which a
cause of action or defense is based shall be stated in a concise
and summary form." "Material facts are those which are essential
to show the liability which is sought to be enforced." 2 Goodrich-
Amram 2d SI0l9(a) :1, at 316 (199l).
Failure to Dlead fraud with Darticu1aritv. Pennsylvania Rule
of C.ivil Procedure 1019(b) provides that" [a]verments of fraud...
8
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
shall be averred with particularity." "The requirements of Rule
l019(b) are satisfied if a party pleads facts sufficient to permit
an opponent to prepare his or her response to an averment of fraud.
A party must set forth the exact statements or actions which the
party alleges constitute the fraudulent misrepresentations." 2
Goodrich-Amram 2d SI019(b) :1, at 328-29 (1991). "When the
sufficiency of a paragraph of a pleading is being considered, a
court may take into consideration the averments of other paragraphs
dealing with the same subject matter. Thus, in determining whether
fraud has been pleaded with the required particularity, a court
must examine a pleading as a whole." 2 Goodrich-Amram 2d S 1019: 4,
at 313-14 (l99l).
Demurrer. "In order to sustain a demurrer, it is essential
that an opponent's pleading indicate on its face that his claim ...
cannot be sustained. The question to be decided is whether,
upon the facts averred, it shows with certainty that the law will
not uphold the pleading. Since sustaining a demurrer results in a
denial of a pleader's claim ... a preliminary objection in the
nature of a demurer should be sustained only in cases that clearly
and without a doubt fail to state a claim foT. which relief may be
granted. If the facts as pleaded state a claim for which relief
may be granted under any theory of law, then there is sufficient
doubt to require that a preliminary objection in the nature of a
demurrer be rejected." 2 Goodrich-Amram 2d S1017(b) :27, at 271-72
9
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
( 1991) .
"When a doubt exists as to whether a demurrer should be
sustained, this doubt should be resolved in favor of overruling
it." Snyder v. Speciality Glass Products, Inc.,
Pa. Super.
-,
_, 658 A.2d 366, 368 (1995).
Section 444.1 of the Public Welfare Code provides, in
pertinent part, as follows:
As a condition of participation in the
medical assistance program, vendors of
services shall agree to accept the rates of
payment authorized by this article and shall
not seok nor accept additional payments. The
department shall permit each person eligible
for assistance under this act freedom to
choose whichever practitioner and/or vendor of
the services, care or prescriber.! drugs he
shall desire so long as such practitioner or
vendor is entitled to participate in the
assistance program provided for in this act.
Act of June 13, 1967, P.L. 31, S441.l, as added, 62 P.S. 5444.1
(1995 Supp.).
Elements of a fraud claim.
"The elements of a fraud and
deceit action in trespass may be said to consist of: (1) a false
representation of an existing fact 1 (2) if the misrepresentation is
innocently made, then it is actionable only if it relates to a
matter material to the transaction involved; while, if the
misrepresentation is knowingly made
materiality is not a
requisite to the action; (3) scienter, which may be either actual
knowledge of the truth or falsity of the representation, reckless
ignorance of the falsity of the matter, or mere false information
10
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
where a duty to know is imposed on a person by reason of special
circumstances; (4) reliance, which must be justifiable, so that
common prudence or diligence could not have ascertained the truth;
and, (5) damage to the person relying thereon." Smith v. Renllut,
387 Pa. Super. :199, 306, 564 A.2d 188, 192 (1989).
APPLICATION OF LAW TO FACTS
Plaintiff's breach of contract claim. With regard to
Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, the law appears to be clear that the Board of Claims
has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine Plaintiff's
contractual claim against the Commonwealth, and that the proper
course of action in such a case is a transfer of the matter to the
Board. Therefore, Plaintiff's claim tor breach of contract will be
transferred to the Board of Claims pursuant to the Act of July 9,
1976, P.L. 586, S2, as amended, 42 Pa. C.S.A. S5l03(a), (d) (1995
Supp.). Defendant's additional preliminary objections as to this
claim are more appropriately to be considered by the tribunal
having jurisdiction over the claim.
Plaintiff's claim for fraud. Having found no case law which
would sanction the transfer of a trespass action to the Board of
Claims on a theory of ancillary jurisdiction, the court is
constrained to retain the portion of Plaintiff's action relating to
fraud in this forum. In so doing, the court will refrain from
considering sua sponte the application of the doctrine of sovereign
11
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
immunity to this aspect of Plaintiff's action."
Aftllr carefully reviewing the balance of Defendant' s
preliminary objections as they may apply to Plaintiff's claim for
fraud, the court does not believe that further relief is warranted.
With respect to the fraud claim the amended complaint does not
appear to contain deficiencies in terms of an absence of an
indispensable party, the omission of material facts, a lack of
particularization as to fraud, or preemption by a statutory scheme
applicable to services provided to medical assistance recipients
that would justify dismissal of the claim.
For the foregoing reasons, the following order will be
entered:
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 25th day of January, 1996, after careful
consideration of Defendant's Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's
Amended Complaint, as well as the briefs and oral arguments
presented in the matter, and for the reasons stated in the
accompanying opinion, the preliminary objections are GRANTED as
they relate to Plaintiff's breach of contract claims, to the extent
that the claim is transferred to the Board of Claims, and the
" See Wilson v. Philadelphia Housing Auth., 99 Pa. Commw.
508, 513 A.2d 586 (l986).
12
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL DIVISION
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No. 94-4046
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMMONWEALTH OF PA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
TO: MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEMS
NOTICE
You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth
in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this New
Mater and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an
attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set
forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed
without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further
notice for any money claimed In the New Matter or for any other claim or relief
requested by the Defendant. You may lose money or property or other rights important
to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE
THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL
HELP:
Cumberland County Courthouse
Court Administrator
One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6200
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL DIVISION
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action No, 94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND
NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT
1.- 2, The Identity of the parties Is Admitted,
3. Admitted.
4. The averments In paragraph 4 of the amended complaint are conclusions of law
to which no reply is necessary. To the extent a reply is required, the averments are
denied.
5. Denied as stated. On January 26,1993, Larry Lanehart, BK-9512, was a
resident of a Community Corrections Center operated by Defendant.
6. Admitted in part. Admitted only that Defendant requested rehabilitation
services for Larry Lanehart with respect to his condition as a paraplegic. Upon
reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to determine
whether the Renova Center for Specialized Services (hereinafter "Renova"), is a
subacute care facility of the Plaintiff.
7. Admitted,
8, Admitted.
9, Admitted,
10, Denied as stated. Defendant prepared an Emergency Purchase of Services
contract for the purchase of certain medical services for Lanehart. Denied that the
same was a fully-executed contract, binding upon the Defendant.
11. Denied as stated. Pursuant to the terms of the Emergency Purchase of
Services contract, MRS was to provide services to Larry Lanehart for thirty (30) days at
the rate of $750.00 per day,
12, Denied as stated. On or about March 12, 1993, Defendant supplemented their
request for medical services. Denied that the same was a written contract binding
upon the Defendant.
13. Denied as stated. By the terms of the Emergency Purchase of Services
contract, Defendant requested an extension of the services to Larry Lanehart from
February 26, 1993 to March 7, 1993.
14. Denied as stated. Admitted only that Defendant approved Lanehart's stay a~
Plaintiffs facility for as long as was medically necessary,
15. Denied a~ stated. Admitted only that Defendant knew of an Emergency
Purchase of Services contract for $750.00 per day for Lanehart's medical care. Denied
Defendants knew or should have known that $750.00 per day was the cost to the
Plaintiff.
16. Admitted only that Plaintiff submitted an Invoice to the Defendant In the amount
of $68,891.18. The remainder of the averments in paragraphS 16 are denied.
2
17. Admitted that only the Defendant has not paid Plaintiff for Lanehart's medical
care,
18. Admitted only that Defendant advised Plaintiff that Lanehart was eligible for
medical assistance for the period during which he was at Plaintiffs facility.
19, No reply Is necessary to paragraph 19 of the amended complaint.
20. Denied that Defendant placed Lanehart In the Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center for the purpose of attempting to gain qualification for medical
assistance benefits. On the contrary, Defendant placed Lanehart In the Harrisburg
Community Corrections Center because he was an eligible participant in the
Community Corrections program.
21. Upon reasonable Investigation, Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to
determine what Plaintiff believes; however, Defendant den Ie. that it did not physically
place Mr. Lanehart In the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center.
22, Upon reasonable Investigation, Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to
determine what Plaintiff believes; however, Defendant admits that Lanehart wa$
transported directly from SCI-Camp Hill to Community General Osteopathic Hospital In
Harrisburg.
23. Upon reasonable Investigation, Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to
determine what Plaintiff believes; however, denied that Defendants were aware that it
was not appropriate to seek medical assistance benefits for Lanehart. Denied that
defendants were involved in any "fictional transfer" of Lanehart to another facility,
3
24. Admitted only that Defendant negotiated with Plaintiff In an effort to procure
medical servicas for Lanehart. Denied that Defendant had no Intention to providing
payment for Lanehart's services.
25. Admitted only that Defendant prepared an Emergency Purchase of Services
contract for medical services provided by Plaintiff to Lanehart,
26, Denied that Defendant gave continued assurances or made misrepresentations
by and through Its agent employees that It would provide payment for the services
rendered by Plaintiff to Defendant.
27. Denied that Defendant did not Intend to make payment for the services provided
by Plaintiff.
28. Admitted,
29. Admitted,
30, Denied in Its entirety.
31, Paragraph 31 contains conclusions of law to which no reply Is necessary, To the
extent a reply Is necessary the averments In paragraph 31 are denied,
32. Paragraph 32 contains conclusions of law to which no reply is necessary. To the
extent a reply Is necessary, It is denied that Plaintiff justifiably relied upon Defendant's
representations to Its detriment.
33. Admitted only that Defendant has not paid for Plaintiffs services, The
remainder of the averments in Paragraph 33 are conclusions of law to which no reply is
necassary. To the extent a reply is necessary, the remainder of the averments In
Paragraph 33 are denied,
4
34, Paragraph 34 contains conclusions of law to which no reply Is necessary. To the
extent a reply Is necessary, the averments therein are denied,
AFFIRMA liVE DEFENSES
1. Plaintiffs Complaint falls to state claims or causes of action against answering
Defendants upon which relief can be granted.
2. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations and by the
doctrine of laches,
3. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral
estoppel.
4. Plaintiff failed to mitigate Its alleged damages which failure bars and/or limits Its
claims or causes of action.
5. Plaintiff was negligent in falling to follow orders, recommendations, and/or advice
which negligence bars Plaintiffs claims.
6. Plaintiffs claims are barred and/or limited by the application of the Pennsylvania
Comparative Negligence Act and/or by the doctrine of the assumption of risk,
7, Punitive damages are not recoverable against answering defendants.
8. Any damages sustained by Plaintiff, if proven (but expressly denied), were
caused solely and proximately by persons and/or entities other than answering
Defendants and not within the control of answering Defendants.
9. Any acts or omissions on the part of answering Defendants, if proven, were not
the proximate cause of the damages alleged by Plaintiff.
5
10. Plaintiffs state law claims are barred by sovereign Immunity and are not waived
by any of the exceptions thereto. 1 Pa.C,S. ~2310; 42 Pa,C.S. ~8522.
11, To the extent that Immunity has been waived with respect to any of Plaintiffs
cl6ims, answering Defendants assert all defenses to and limitations upon those claims
which are or may hereafter be set forth at 42 Pa,C.S. ~~8522 . 8528.
12. Answering Defendants are entitled to official Immunity from Plaintiffs claims,
13, At all times relevant hereto any actions or Inactions of answering Defendants
were done within the scope of their authority in good faith and without malice,
14, Answering Defendants are entitled to objective good faith Immunity from
Plaintiffs claims and have not violated any rights and/or clearly established rights of
Plaintiff.
15. Whatever actions or Inactions committed by answering Defendants which may
have caused loss to the Plaintiff (but expressly denied), were Justified,
16, Plaintiff consented to any actions or Inactions committed by answering
Defendants, and therefore, Plaintiffs claims are barred against answering Defendants.
17. Any actions or Inactions committed by answering Defendants were done
pursuant to duties required by statute, regulation or directive and therefore answering
Defendants are immune.
18. Any actions or inactions committed by answering Defendants were matters
within the discretion granted to answering Defendants by statute, regulation or directive
and the claimed right was not clearly established; therefore answering Defendants are
immune.
6
\ /,1
,
;.;'1,\'
I
,I
,
"
"i'
I.
'1"
,:i
, I
""
'i\
"
I'
, , .'
..
"
"
"
, I
,,"
, '
"
"
I.
,
,I
,,'
t
, I
..",
I
"
.
',or: TJJt7.Q~9r~CI!
. , ,'. ,,: frlTA!iY
S" ~",., r
(.) 1\1'/1 r F,'I 31 ~l
~' I
CU\'I"
I 1 J';'-II,/:j \:) , I"'" '1
P~NljJYL.vA:~,\'" ii,
,
,
" "~'-"-"~r-~"-" - ~. "',"'V 'b~~' '--.--
,0/"
'.
,
_.:~--............_..--...""..",--~..-,. .
1/1 ,,.
.
...
r- i '..
~ .
.
~
.
.
..
:\'Jl'~t;,~,
I. '
I I
,.
',I
I,
iJ'
I
. .01
..
I' Nt
'I
"
J~1.""""'"
,iIif,' . i
I
I'
,
I,
"
:\
,
ci!
,
'"
"
"
,
'I'
q "
',.'
"
..
.
.,
,~.' I
,
'j
I
'i.'11
jl:1
"
'.
.,
"~I
',L,,'
"
,{\
,',',".II,,--j
I"~
','fr
"
I,
,
.'
,I >I'
I
I
I'
"
,'1',
,'.'
1\
I'
,.
I
,
I'
';1
'''1
.,
APR 11 \996d~>'
~.~~
n;x :i~~~~
" 1I:_'r:~..,~f 'r....
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
P,O, BOX 1598
CAMP HILL. PENNSYLVANIA 17001,01588
1717)9715-48158
April 5, 1996
Lawrence E. Welker
Prothonotary
Cumberland County Court of Common pleas
1 Courthouse Square
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3387
RE: Mechanicsbur9 Rehab Systems v. Commonwealth af Pa.
Department of Corrections
civil Action No, 94-4046
Dear Mr. Mansberger:
Enclosed please find for filing with your office the original
and one (1) copy o~ Defendant's Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's
Motion to Reconsider in the above-captioned case. Also enclosed is
an extra copy of each for the purpose of time/date stamp to be
returned.
Thank you for your attention to this matter,
Sincerely, .
~~\\ I~ \~0\'f'L/ 7J~
Jill A, Devine
Assistant Counsel
RML:jls
EnclosuX'es
cc: Richard Oare (w/enclosures)
File
./Pa/~.
~
APR 11 1996(~"---
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL DIVISION
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
Plaintiff
v.
Civil Action-Law No, 94-4046
Civil Term
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
DB'BNDAHTS' BRIB' IN OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIPP'S MOTION TO RBCONSIDBR
Statement of the Ca.e,
A. Nature of the Action and Identity of the Parties,
plaintiff in this action is Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, a
Healt.h Care Treatment Facility located at 175 Lancaster Boulevard,
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.
Defendant in this action is a
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections with its Central Office
located at 2520 Lisburn Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff
instituted this action to recover from medical services furnished
to a resident of Defendants Community Corrections Center,
Complaint at Paragraph 16 and Plaintiff's Exhibit C),
Thus,
exclusive jurisdiction lies with the Board of Claims, and this
Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff I s
contract claim.
IV.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny Plaintiff's
Motion to Reconsider its Order dated January 29, 1996 granting
Defendant's Preliminary Objections insofar as the Order transferred
Plaintiff's Breach of contract claim to the Pennsylvania Board of
Claims.
Respectfully submitted,
~: U i'\~~....
Jill \i:. ~evine
Assistant Counsel
Attorney Identification
~
No. 54700
Penna. Department of Corrections
55 Utley Drive, p, O. Box 598
Camp Hill. Pennsylvania 17001-0598
(717) 731-0444
Dated:
April 5, 1996
4
I
I
\, .1
'....
.
rr~V~1 '..,.J I
"
'I
.,.......'!
, I
,I
,
I
I I"
.,
I I
'. ~:
'\;1 .f,
r..
,I \
;'.
'\ r+.'.
. ",'i''':
~r-' 1
".\t;:
, If.
, I f,i'l
il
It!
I l1!',
! ~111
t
i1Jf
i Ili)I'
I ~'~!, '
! ,
,
i
I
I
! .
,
~ ,.
B '"
~ '"
0: i!l
o:l :;:
u
I u. ,.
. I 0 I"
I ~ \l 4:
I (~) ~
'00(
I ~ x>
J o~
,! "'Vl
;;: '"
, 0"
\ W ..~
I Q
i :5 ..j
~
I ~ i!
I ~'
;! ;3
i Vl
I Z
Z
, W
0. .,
,.
.
.. .
" . ...
_k._
.:~ -
III. ARGUMBNTI
A. Tbe Court .bould not reoon.ider it. order dated January 29,
199& granting Defendant'. Preliminary Objeotion. in.ofar a.
tbi. order tran.ferred Plaintiff'. breaob of oontract olaim to
tbe Penn.ylvania Board of Claim. I
At issue is Plain~iff's Motion to the Court to reconsider its
order dated January 29, 1996 granting Defendants' Preliminary
Objections insofar as the said order transfers Plaintiff's breach
of contract claim to the Pennsylvania Board of Claims.
Although a trial Court has the inherent power to grant
requests to reconsider orders anytime prior to the final
disposition of the matter in question, Fernandez v. City of
Harrisburg, 643 A.2d 1176 (Pa, Cmwlth, 1994), the Court may not
assume jurisdiction over a matter of which the Board of Claims has
exclusive jurisdiction.
Title '72 P.S. S 4651-4 provides,
in
pertinent part, that "the Board of Claims shall have exclusive
jurisdiction to hear and determine all claims against the
Commonwealth arising from contracts hereafter entered to with the
Commonwealth, where the amount in controversy amounts to three-
hundred dollars ($300.00) or more...",
Plaintiff brings a claim against the Commonwealth arising from
an alleged contract entered into with the Commonwealth in which the
amount in controversy amounts to $68,891.18,
(~, Plaintiff's
3
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS, I
Plaintiff I
I
V. I
I
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, I
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, I
Defendant I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
IN REI PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER
BEFORE SHEELY. P.J. and OLER,~
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this ~\~i day of May, 1996, upon consideration of
Plaintiff's Motion To Reconsider the court's order of January 29,
1996, which motion was filed on May 13, 1996, and is opposed by
Defendant, the motion to reconsider is DENIED.
BY THE COURT,
I ..-)
;;///
, 1/ / L-OV
. Wesley 0
?;.
IA.Io
,
~ '\4""
Richard Oare, Esq.
1776 S. Queen Street
York, PA l7403
Attorney for Plaintiff
Jill A. Devine, Esq.
Pa. Dept. of Corrections
2520 Lisburn Road
P.O. Box 598
Camp Hill, PA l7011-0598
Attorney for Defendant
Ire
. ,
..' .,.1,
.,
;':i;'~
! 'nl,:'
'I :p,\j"
I,ll ',,(}tIJ
II' ',''':1,1;'''\
,,'-/1,'k~l:
, wl,k
1.',"',,'1'
.I..f,j~:
':;~ll,l,ft/,':;
/(-,'lY( ;
',;, :\I!!ld"
, ;1'/",;'
(1,!;,L~,il
'_'\ill:
.i,;'it,{:'
".-t",.
II "'f
~';.:it;.\i(.
'I,',,::','i,t\'jfit
,',~' I:I,'V(I~{Y-' .
E",I'!;(;'!{
,,'!:_!,:(:+~:';N,J
"l",I_~d!,_c:'f
;i;'-!;,':~Xh; ,~~_'
..'}(!]J\._L)I:
I' ," ,1:"lj;1~Vii:';' ~"
'....,,>.:!\',\./jj,
",t;\I",'F,*iji~t\ I'
I '11~;'h wn,
I' /~",&J~
jl h,lt'
l',::':'I/~lr.'1
;,,;:!i,.l.:t~(~'l
,-'-ii'I"~\l'
I: ',:(.",.\,!
r:.Ii!fit'\;ril
,:J,. u"u.~fj~~!
,) '\' II;\;V{?"~
,I , '~,tll
1 , ~ on
; I J f, ll~
,I 'I,' ~, I
.., '. li,.,'i"1'1n~'
I / ~ ;t't;..fZ '
.,' I' .".jl1IJ!'
. ,,'.:..1....'["',1(1
'I ':1 ;-\:f:'(~~:M~,
;', "'H,)':~
";~V:"ii:::'.Ih
"I' "n,\"I'I,I~Nl
"',. ..ij;
,',,'1 L, ',1~111 '1:!i1
": ,- \ 'll" r\y1
II I:: " ";/'t'~'\~
I{,'. ,jl:i~i
I to': r,',
.""~I"'I'
'j . ;I\;:l'~'i\:\-
,j...""..,- .(,;/,;"
'1,,\:jh~\'6 ',I
..nj,q:t}t~\.
""':'\:l'Ji:~
" ' 'I' j l:l~
. I Illl
, I},,;~
,,:i'Xf
" .'F):'}
'I,,"~:~j
, 'i:~'[i~
\ ' I" /r.;~!!
" .,:g}~
..',,_..,!,,;),
'f<</'-;'
,
.,
"
.,.-....... f.'--.;'....-,,,.,,.....,,.........-
ul..
.1
e~1 r \!..(Jr F:( F.
r; ,.. .., 1 .', I .".~" "'(
..,j". r"'';',. 'I,'"i
1
, ,
(~;'
t~,i 11;,'( I:) ";',101 t 2
,
'I'
';j
"
(.u;,
'1'\.
\ ,.') "',_.\!'it
T~tli'~~ iLIfiNI\
,
',;
,.
..'
.1
'-_.',
"
",I
'.
,
,
','
,
'oj
"
I,
1
,
,
,
.,
',\,
"
"
I'j
.'.
i'.
,
,'/:,
,"i
.
. .,
'..II
",1',
, 1,'
..,
.,
'I'.
'.
""
"
I'.'
.,
"
".
"
"
'.
,'.\
.
.'
,.
, '
:!,
,
,.
".
.,
, .
"
d'i
, '
./ "
'-',-~~~ --<R1'ffUIIM'II
........-..--..,..--.
'-;,)1,:1 "1'- '. -,
,
,
. .'
'"'~..j><;"'.....".,....flIl.-'r"..'O'-"t
, 1-' , " .
,
""".','
..}t."
, .
.'
'. ,.
Ii ".~
1',11
,.1.'11
.".
''-',
,.
~
.
..
II'
.
,
.?'~t"'1 .~.. l\ltl'.f'~"I1Y~;\"I'T"'
,_",_,1",1 "I,.}I., "
'.1 ~',', 'I, _.~';r:;irr' co' 1
,'l/>~'i_i"~.;i; . . :' ,
',".", \
,"
",..-,'
;;'-;'-.1IfI,'1i>"
.."1
,II
,
.,'
II',
'rt.,
,
'i'
'"
PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL
(Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate)
TO 'nlE PRmlClNJI'ARY OF c.u-lBERLAtV COONl'Y
(-:
.
'"
n
.,
I
, "J
,1.;-
'll!J
,'.
:Q
'"jJ
!...)
)111
,!
..!
,;,
Please list the following case.
-,
I
'"
I'.'
",}
(Check one)
x )
for JURY trial at the next term of civil toUrt. '.'
,
,.,
for trial without a jury.
"
-------------------------------------.--~-
CAPl'ION OF CASE I) I
(entire caption nust be stated in full) (check one)
(X) Civil Action ~ L/lw
( ) Appeal fran Arl>itration
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, (other)
(Plaintiff)
vs.
Co~nonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections,
The trial list will be called on lO/15/96
..
Trials commence on
1l/l2/96
(Defendant)
Pretrials will be held on lO/23/96
(Briefs are due 5 days before pretrials. )
(The party listing this case for trial shall
provide forthwith a copy of the praecipe to
all counsel, pursuant to local Rule 2l4.1.)
vs.
No. 94-4046Civil Term
1996
Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe,
Richard Oare, Esq., 1776 S, Queen St" York, PA
l7403
Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known.
Jill A, Devine, Es~
Pa. Dept. of Corrections, POBox 598,
l700l-0598
This case is ready for trial.
Signe ,
Date.
F 13o/?~
prin t Narre.
Rlchard Oarc, Esq.
Attorney fOri P laintif f
MECHANICSBURG REHAB
SYSTEM,
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
V.
COMMONWEALTH OF PA,
DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
94.4046 CIVIL TERM
~
AND NOW, October 23, 1996, the case Is stricken from the trial list.
This case was listed for trial on August 30, 1996, by Richard Oare, Esquire,
attorney for plaintiff, Notice was given to Jill A. Devine, Esquire, defense counsel,
that the pre-trial would be held October 23, 1996, The case was on this Judge's
pre.trlalllst, and we received no pre-trial brief from either attorney, nor did either
attorney appear for the pre.trlal conference.
--
By the Court,
J.
Richard Oare, Esquire
1776 South Queen Street
York, PA 17403 . _... A:.L
Ci"'f1""~
Jill A, Devine, Esquire /oP.,/4' ~ ~~
Pa, D6pt. of Corrections
PO Bo)( 598
Camp Hili, PA 17001.0598
\1IW,\')'!:;N~!3cl
I I ~ I''''''' ('" r -, .h ,('t,~,"'"
,')" ,,' ',,". ,j ~ hJ'
S I :l fiJ 8':: .L~U %
AUVlCl,,,,:.L;;": :J 11 :JO
30lilQ-GJllj
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
CIVIL ACTION NO, 94-4046
Plaint\ll"
v,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
DEFENDANT'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARV JUDGMENT
AND NOW, comes the Dcfendant Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, by and through
its allomey, Raymond W. Dorian, Esquire, Assistant Counsel, and pursuant to Pa. R. C,P. 1035.1
et seq, movcs this Honorable Court as follows:
I. On or about July 26,1994, thc Plaintiff, Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems ("MRS")
filed a Complaint against the Defendant, Pcnnsylvania Departmcnt of Corrections ("DOC") alleging
breach of contract relating to certain rchabilitative serviccs supplied by the Plaintiff from January
27,1993 until June 18, 1993 to Larry Lanehart ("Lanchan"), a formcr inmate of the Harrisburg
CommUl1ity Corrcctions Center.
2. On or about March 21, 1995, the Plaintiff MRS amended its Complaint to include a
count of fraud. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint is allached hereto and
marked Exhibit "A".
3. On January 25, 1996. upon consideration of Defcndant's Preliminary Objcctions to
Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. this Honorable Court entered an Order granting the Defendant's
Preliminary Objections in part, transferring the Plaintiffs breach of ~ontract claim to the Board of
Claims and denying the Defendant's Preliminary Objections as they related to Plaintiffs fraud claim.
.
A true and correct copy of said Ordcr is attached hereto and marked Exhibit "B".
4. In its Amended Complaint, MRS alleges that DOC placed Lanehart in Harrisburg
Community Corrections Center for the purpose of having him qualified for medical assistance.
which it contends was in violation of the law. MRS also alleges that DOC negotiated with it, having
no intention to paying for the services requested. Plaintiff also alleges that agents and employees of
DOC continued to represent and assure pa)lnent to MRS, while having no intention 10 do so. See
Exhibit "A"," 20,23-27.
5. In its Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, Defendant denied
that it never intended to pay for the rehab services and that it placed the inmate in the Harrisburg
Community Corrections Center for thc purpose of gaining his eligibility for medical assistance. In
its New Matter, Defendant asserted, .inll:I iI1W, the defense of sovereign immunity. See Defendant's
Answer and New Matter, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and marked Exhibit
"C"," 20, 24, 27.
6. On September 12, 1995, counsel for the Plainliff took the depositions of Paul
O'Connor, Regional Director of the Bureau of Community Corrections with the Pelmsylvania
Department of Corrections. On that same date, Plaintiffs counsel also took the deposition of David
S. Maeyer, Business Manager for the State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill and John
Koblerecki, Counselor at the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center, who was assigned to
Lanehart. Finally, on October 27, 1995, Plaintiffs counsel took the deposition of Jeffrey A.
Troutman, Director of the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center.
7. In his deposition, Mr. Kobierecki testified that on December 7, 1994, when inmate
Lanehart was first transferred to the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center, it was quickly
2
.
determined that LWlehlll1, who was an wnputee. required immediate medical care, The next day,
LWlehart was subsequently transferred to the Community General Osteopathic Hospital in
Harrisburg where his other leg wnputaled. Since the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center did
not have the facilities to take care of LWlehwt upon his release, it was detennined upon consultation
with medicalstafTatthe hospital thaI he should be admilled to the Renova Cenler operated by the
Plaintiff, MRS. See Deposition of John Kobierecki, taken September 12, 1995 at pages 5 through
14,true WId correct copics of which are allachcd hereto and marked Exhibit "D",
8, Kobierecki also testilied that prior to the admission to the hospital, Kobierecki helped
him fill out forms in order to qualify for public assistance. However, he was not able to take him to
the Welfare Office to process the application, due to the medical crisis situation which existed at the
time. He also had nothing to do concerning processing payments for rehab services such as those
provided by the Plaintiff to the inmate. See Deposition of Kobierecki at pag~s 22-25 and 28, true
WId correct copies of which are allached hereto are marked as Exhibit "D". It was standard policy
for the Harrisburg Community Corrections Center to assist residents with obtaining medical
assistWlce. He also underslood that Lanc:hlll1 was eligible for medical assistWlce retroactive to
January I, 1993, which included the time he received rehabilitation services at the Plaintiff's facility.
See Deposition of Kobierecki at pages 49.50, 55-56, true and correct copies of which are allached
are marked Exhibit "0".
9. In his deposition, Paul O'Connor testified that when the Department of Corrections
originally contracted wilh MRS for the rehab services, he was undcr the impression that the
Departmenl ofCorreetions was going to pay for Ihe services. However, he did not know exactly
who was going to pay for the service, nor was that his concern. See Depasition of O'Connor, taken
3
.
September 12, 1995 at pages 28, 33 and 45, true WId correct copies of which lU'l: altuched and mOlked
Exhibit "E", He WIlS told by a rcprcscntativc ofthc Plaintill'thatthcy would nottukc payments by
the Department of Public Welfarc, Howcvcr, it was normal proccdurc tilr I1cld slllll' at the
Community Corrections Ccntcrs, such as Mr, Kobicrccki to assist inmatcs in securing medical
IlSsistance, Normally they olc qualiIied for public ussislW1cc. Scc dcposition of O'Connor at pages
12,26-27 and 43.44,truc WId corrcct copies of which arc lIuached IIrC mllrkcd Exhibit "E", Thc
rehab services provided by thc Plaintitl'wcrc originally approved through a Emergency PurchllSe of
Service form, but O'Connor did not have the authority to approve or disapprove those services. He
indicat.ed that he would not have arranged for the contract if hc knew that welfOle would have paid
for these services originally, See Deposition of O'Connor, at pages 14 through 16 WId 44, trae and
correct copies of which Ole atlllched hereto are marked Exhibit "E".
I O. In his dcposition, Jcffrey Troutman testilied that he did not know for certain who
would be responsible for paying the mcdical bills for inmatcs who had applied for public ussistance
but had not yet oblllined il. Hc also testiIicd that he received bills from thc Plaintiff, which he sent
to the Defendant's Business Office at Camp Hill. He also testiIied that on a second occllSion, he
returned the bills to the Plaintiff along with a copy of II ICllcr from the Department of Public
Assistance, explaining Ihatthe bill should be sent to the Department of Public Assistance. See the
Deposition of Troutman, taken October 27, 1995 at pages 47. 55-56, true WId correct copies of which
are atlllched hereto arc markcd Exhibit "F". See also letter from Troutman to the Plaintiff, dated
June 30, 1993, which is auached hercto and marked Exhibit "G". TroutmWl also testiIied that he
was not involved in the paymcnt of serviccs rendercd to inmates at the Community Corrections
Centers. However, he understood thatthc DOC was a payor of lust rcsort, in the even! that medical
4
.
assislance did not cover the services. He Iirst became uware of Lanehart's eligibility for medical
assislanceon or about April 6, 1993. See Deposition of TroutmWl, taken October 27, 1993 at pages
S9, 63.6S, true and correct copies of which are auuched hereto are marked Exhibit "F",
II. In his deposition, Duvid S, Maeyer testilied he WllS nol involved in the negotiations
for lite rehab services supplied by the PlaintilT. However, he prepared and processed lite Emergency
Purchase of Service forms relating to Lanehart's treatment at Renova, There was an initial request
for lItirty (30) days of Irentment from January 26, 1993 through February 2S, 1993 and a second
request for services from February 26, 1993 through March 27, 1993, were prepared by Maeyer.
However, once it was determined that the inmate was eligible for medicnl assistance for lItese
services, the requests were no longer processed. See Deposition of Mneyer. taken September 12,
1995 at pages 14, 17, 19 and 23, true and correct copies of which are attached hereto are marked
Exhibit "H". See also Emergency Purchase of Service forms, aunched hereto and marked Exhibit
"I". When he originally processed the forms for the Plaintiff's services, he expected that the Plaintitl'
would be paid by the DOC, He did notlenrn until later that they had not been paid, See Deposition
of David Maeyer, taken September 12,1993 at pages 32-33, true and correct copies of which are
attached hereto are marked Exhibit "H".
12. On or about March 4, 1996, Plaintiff served Defendant with its Answers to
Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, true and correct copies of which are attached hereto and
marked Exhibit "J". Interrogatory No.8 of Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories and Plaintitl's
Answer thereto read as follows:
"8. Identify at what time you became aware that Larry Lanehart was on
S
.
THE CONTRACT
A, On 1/23/93, AI Fertko - Business Manager for Renova Center,
received a fax from David Mlleyer, As business manager he had discussions with
Dave Maeyer, business manager for the Slate Corrections Department. He Informed
Mr. Maeyer of the $750,00 pcr day fec and was given verbal authority that the
contracts would be signed and thc fee paid,
B. William Roth . Dircctor of Renova Ccnter was presentcd by
Defendant and he was asked to sign the contracts for the 30 day periods of January
26. 1993 through February 25, 1993 and Fcbruary 26, 1993 through March 27. 1993,
THE FRAUD
C. Paul O'Connor, Rcgional Director of the Bureau of Community
Corrections, PA Department of Corrections notified David Maeyer, Business
Manager that they were in nccd ofa contract with MRS (Renova), An Emergency
Purchase of Service (EPS) was prcparcd and approved by Tim Ringler. The EPS
contract is for a 30 day period ofscrvicc, 1/26/93 through 2/25/93 at $750.00 per day.
As per his deposition, Mr. Maeycr represcnted to Mr. William Roth, Director of
Renova Centcr, that although he needed two more signatures (011 the contract) that
he was going on verbal authority that he could have Mr. Lanehart admitted to Renova
and that the Commonwealth would pay for the service.
Towards the end of February Mr. O'Connor phoned Mr. Maeycr and told him
that Larry Lanehart would be kept at Renova for an additional 30 days. Renova
received another EPS form for the period of 2/26193 though 3/27/93.
While these forms were being sent and processcd at the Govemor's Office
Mr. Troutman informed Mr. Maeyer that Mr. Alexander from Mr. Maeyer's
accounting staff had told him that thc Department of Public Welfare accepted
retroactively all costs associated with Larry Lanehart's treatment and that all bills
should be sent to the Department of Public Welfare. At this point contract approval
was not pursued. Renova was never informed by the Department of Corrections of
its Intention not to pay and it was not until 11/5/93 thaI Mr. Troutman wrote to MRS
to inform it that payment for Mr. Lanchart's treatment must bc obtained from the
Department of Public Welfare.
Defendant first notified Plaintiff of it's [sic] intention not to pay and to utilize
medicaid on 11/5/93. By way of further answer, plaintiff, through Martha Hartley,
Patient Accounts Representative, was informcd on 717193 by Public Assistance that
coverage was denied becausc public assistance does not cover skilled nursing
7
benefits for inmates and it was illegal to seek payment from public as~istance,"
I 5, Interrogatory No, 2 of Defendant's Second Set of Interrogalorles wid the Defendant's
Anawer thereto read as follows:
"2, Identify (title, full nwne and present address) all persons having
knowledge of the facts set forth inlntcrrogatory number I and for each person listed,
describe the facls of which he/she has knowlcdge and the manner in which he/she
obtained that knowledge,
RESPONSE:
Williwn Roth - Dircctor of Rcnova Ccnter, Sce Answer to Interrogatory 1#1,"
16. Interrogatory No.3 of Defendant's Second Sct of Interrogatories and Plaintill's
Answer thereto read as follows:
"3. State the reasons why you believc Defcndant knew the alleged facts
to be false.
RESPONSE:
Conversations with Mr, Macyer concerning payment of the bills by DPW
took place in March or April of 1993. Notification from the Department of
Corrections that all bills should be forwarded to DPW did not occur until 6/30/93,"
17. Interrogatory No.4 of Defendant's Second Sct and Plaintiffs Answer thereto read as
follows:
"4, State the reasons tor how you believe Dcfendant intended to induce
your action from any alleged misrepresentations,
RESPONSE:
Plaintiff does not understand the meaning of thc term" ...intended to induce
your action Wun any alleged misrepresentations." By way of further answer, see
response to Interrogatory Number I sets forth in detail the misrepresentations by
Defendant to Plaintiff wherein Plaintiff could and should rely on Defendant's
representations of payment of $750.00 per day."
8
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEMS
Plu\INTIPP
IN THE COURT OP COMMON
PLEAS OP CUMBERLAND COUNTY
V.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CIVIL ACTION NO. 94.4046
COMMONWEALTH OP PENNSYLVANIA
D!PARTMBNT OP CORRECTIONS,
DEPENDAN'l'
JURY TRIAL DIMANDID
TOI COMMONWEALTH OP PENNSYLVANIA,
DEPARTMENT OP CORRECTIONS
NOTICE
You have been sued in COurt. If you wish to defend aqainst
the claims set forth in the followinq paqes, you must take action
within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served,
by enterinq a written appearance personally or by an attorney and
filinq in writinq with the COUrt your defen..s or objections to the
claima set forth aqainst you. You are warned that if you fail to
do so, the case may proceed w:a.ehout you and a judqment may be
entered aqainst you by the COurt without further notice for any
money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief
requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or
other riqhts important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR lu\WYER AT ONCE. IP YOU DO
NOT HAVE A lu\WYER OR CANNOT APFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OPPICE SET PORTH BELOW TO PIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP:
Cumberland County Courthouse
Court Administrator
One Courthouse Square
carlisle, PA 17013
717-240-6200
'.
EXHIBIT
I
A
MECHANICS BURG REHAB SYSTEMS
PLAINTIPP
I
I
I
IN THE COURT OP COMMON
PLEAS OP CUMBERLAND COUNTY
V.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
COMMONWEALTH Of' PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT Of' CORRECTIONS,
DEPENDANT
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
JUlBNDBD COHPLAIN'l'
1. plaintiff Mechanicsburq Rehab systems (hereinafter "MRS") ,
is a health care treatment facility duly licensed to practice
medicine in Pennsylvania with a principal place of business at 175
Lancaster
Boulevard,
MechanicSburg,
cumberland
county,
,
Pennsylvania.
2. Defendant COIlIl\Onwealth of pennsylvania, Department of
COrrections, Bureau of eommunity corrections, is a duly authorized
aqency of the commonwealth, with offices at Harrisburg community
COrrections Center, 27 North cameron Street, Harrisburq,
pennsylvania.
3. The Defendant operates a facility at 2500 Lizburn Road,
camp Hill, Cumberland county, pennsylvania known as the State
Correctional Institution at camp Hill (hereinafter "SCI at camp
Hill") .
4. At all relevant times stated hereinafter, the Defendant
acted by and through its duly authorized agents, employees and
servants, all of whom were acting wi thin the scope of their
employment, and through its respective agencies and institutions,
inCluding SCI at camp Hill and the HarriSburg Community COrrections
Center,
5. On or about January 26, 1993, Larry Lanehart,
identification number BX9512, was an inmate at SCI at Camp Hill or
otherwi.. in protective cUltody by Defendant.
6. On or about January 26, 1993, the Defendant reque.t.d
wound care and 'rehabilitation ..rvice. for Larry Lanehart with
r.spect to hil condition al a parapleqic from The Renova Center for
Specialized Services (hereinafter "Renova"), which is a lubacute
care facility of the plaintiff, MRS.
7. Defendant requested Renova to provide limited term wound
care and rehabilitative services for the purposes of enablinq
Larry Lanehart to return to the Harrilburq correction Center to be
productive throuqh developed skills and to function independently
throuqh performinq personal hyqiene and use of developed tran.fer
.kill. .
8. Defendant and itl agenciel did not have the faciliti..,
traininq, or expertise needed to provide accOlllllOc1ation.,
appropriate medical care OT a.li.tance to Mr. Lanehart.
SERVICES PROVIDED
9. MRS provided care and medical services to Larry Lanehart
purluant to the parties' aqreement from January 27, 1993 throuqh
"
June 18, 1993.
INITIAL CONTRACT
10. On or about January 26, 1993, MRS and Defendant entered
into a contract for the purchase of certain medical lervicel, as
identified in the terms. of the contract, a copy of which is
at~ached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein.
2
11. pursuant to the terms of their written aqreement, MRS
wu to provide services to Larry Lanehart for 30 days at a rate of
'750.00 per day.
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT
12. On or about March 12, 1993, MRS and Defendant entered
into a supplement to their written contract for the purchase of
additional medical services, a copy of which is attached heret.) II
Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference.
13. The supplemental terms of the contract attached as
Bxhibit "B" set forth the provision of services by MRS to Larry
Lanehart from pebruary 26, 1993 throuqh and includinq March 27,
1993, and provide that services will be increased for 30 days at
the daily rate of $750.00.
COm'INUING AGREEMENT
14. By its actions, the Defendant subsequentlY reque.ted and
qave approval for an extended stay for Larry Lanehart ba.ed upon
the previOuslY aqreed upon rate of '750.00 per day and in
furtherance of the parties' aqreement.
15. The Defendant knew or should have k.nown that Larry
Lanehart was receivinq onqoinq care at the cost of '750.00 per day
based upon the parties' agreements and his continued stay.
AMOUNT DUE
16. Pursuant to the parties' aqreements, MRS submitted an
invoice to the Defendant for the amount of $68,891.18, a copy of
which is attached hereto .as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by
reference.
'.
3
\
17. Delpi te repeated demands the Defendant hal failed or
refu.ed to pay the amount currently due and owinq.
18. Defendant contend. that that Medical Aui8tanCe benefit.
.hould be available for Mr. Lanehart, despite their contractual
obliqations.
P1lA1JP
19. paraQraphs 1 throuqh 18, above, are incorpora',ed herein
by reference as though set forth in full.
;20. De!endant alleqedly placed Mr. Lanehart in the Harri.burq
( ',-' .-
commUnity Corrections Center for the purpose of attemptinq to qain
qualification for medical alsistance benefitl, which actions were
in direct contravention of the law.
.21. It i. believed and therefore averred that the Defendant
4i4 not phYlically place Mr. Lanehart in the Harriaburq C~,ftity
corrections Center.
22. It is believed and therefore averred that Mr. Lanehart
was tran.ported directly frOlll sel at CamP Hill to comnunity General
o.teopathic Hospital in Harrisburg.
23. It is believed and therefore averred that the Defendant's
agents were aware that it was inappropriate to seelt Medical
Assistance benefits for Mr. Lanehart by means of the fictional
transfer to another facility.
24. The Defendant negotiated with MRS in an effort to procure
medical services for Mr. Lanehart, with no intention of providinq
payment for such lervices.
4
25. Defendant prepared official paperwork and both verbal and
'/') written contracts promising payment for the medical. I18rvices
'..
provided by MRS to Mr. Lanehart.
i 26. Defendant gave continued assurances and made
\...~
misrepresentations, by and through its agents and employees that it
would provide payment for the services rendered by MRS to
Defendant.
27. Defendant did not intend to make payment for the services
provided by MRS.
28. In response to the MRS request for payment, the
Harrisburg Community corrections Center sent a letter dated June
30, 1993, to MRS alleging eligibility for Public Auistance and
directed MRS to submit their bill to Public AI.istance. A copy of
th~s letter is attach.d h.reto as Exhibit -0-, and incorporated
herein.
29. By letter dated March 24, 1994, HCCC alleged that 18 WaI
not responsible for contractual arrangements between MaS (Ronova)
and the Department of Corrections. This letter indicated that -I
have forwarded your correspondence to the other concerned offices
within the Department of Corrections for their consideration. A
copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "E", and
incorporated herein,
30. The Defendant's representations were knowingly false,
made in conscioul ignorance of the truth, or made recklessly
without caring whether they were true or false.
'.
5
31. Defendant, by and throuqh the actions and reprenntatlons
('') made by ita reprel8ntatives, intended to induce HRS to provide
.edical .ervice. and accommodation. to Mr. Lanehart.
32. MRS
justifiably
relied
upon
the
Defendant' a
misrepre.entations to itl detriment.
33. D..pit. itl contractual obliqations, repeated aSluranc.s
and exprelsions of intention to provide payment, Defendant failed
and, by their actions, ref us lid to provide payment for MRS' s
.ervicel.
34. Defendants actions were malicious, willful, outraqeoul or
.0 carelesl as to indicate wanton dilreqlrd of the riqhts of MRS.
WHEREPORE, it is respectfully requelted that your Honorable
Court enter judgment Iqainst the Defendant in the amount of
,
'68,891.18 toqether with co.ta, punitive cSamaqe., attorney fee. and
intere.t.
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEPT BLANK)
.,
'.
6
,I\IIACH or CONTRACT
(ASSERTED IN THE ALTERNATIVE)
35. Paraqraphs 1 through 17, above, are incorporated herein
by reference as thouqh set forth in full.
36. Defendant breached its contractual obligation to provide
payment for the .ervices provided to Mr. Lanehart.
WHEREPCRE, it is respectfully requested that your Honorable
court enter judqment aqainst the Defendant in the amount of
.68,891.18 toqether with costs and interest.
Respectfully submitted,
March 21, 1995
D. ,
6 S. Queen S
York, pennsylv
(717) 846.300
I,D. No. 52987
~r.\I..oft.r.\AMINDCQM'
7
~.
....,. ........
IMIRGltlCY 'URCH.U OF SIRVICI
II' 17527
-~. . .-~-_. ,..
,',' -. H..... .. .11.... "
I
,~., .:':",n t"r ~or ':Pl" Inl ~l!r\'lces
, \V nlon I..lIn.
Ilftlllr.sburi, Pa 1 ':'oe~
_.__ __..~"""'-""-~...,." ......, I. ,.mi,.'
. .
Depll't1nent ot Corrections
Bureau ot Community corrections
lIarrlJbW'C community Corrections Center
27 North Cameron St.
Hurl.bUre, Pa. 17101
i~ .. \"""..1 ....... ... r. .......,. \....ilut ...
,-
- '
\ "fl" ",.;...... ., ro', .v.
I...... ".,..ei' ~
I 1 "211 I 113 J
_ .__ _:l,'-!y!~
.. II" ",. 10".. ~,. .",."e.: >.t........ ...... ~"... .",,' ., ..,I:'"''
ro\'ide ~l!Ill\~U1t'..tlon Ilel'vlces ,to lnm"ltl Larr~' Lanehert, 8X91512, tollowinC surriCDI removal ofll101
:e ':;ornmun::V G.:merftl Ost,opathlc Hospital. Inmate Lanehart Is 11 paraplecic Who hU had both 1115
:r.Uy I'emoved. Ser\'lc':!' will be tor 30 dllYS at S'T50 daily. .'
,.c. ice. :..
State Corr.ctlonalln'tltutlon
at Camp HIU
IDOO LI.burn Rd. - P.O. !Jox 8837
Camp KW, Pa. 1'1001-883'1
-
..',~.. ..... r'~....;:ii:7 .';I~:;~..J',.i... ..... ..,.. ..,f."......."......
.
,.
,.-
iu:;! ~d r"cllll'....o:.k~rs at the Community a.neral o.toopathic Hospital who remov.d Inmat. t.an.hart',
.in" 1.(, tn. contractf'd health care physlc:ans at the Camp KID Inltttutlon, and the Departm.nt's Suren;
:::i (~".':.I ..:,;,~,..:ce! director, lol.ly r.eommende-d IIse of the Renoy. Canter tor $pectaUzed S.rvlc" In
,u:; :!If' '," :.'Jlht3tlvI services to In mat. Lanohll't. The Renoya,Canter wiD provideUmltcd term
llt..l:', ',I'l~'''j for the pllr~ole of enabling inmate Lan.hart'S return at the lIarrilbul'tf Corr.ctions
, Ie ~l" fll",J\lr:t1ve through deyeJored skills to tllllctlonlndepend.ntJy throoch pertorminr personal
~ t1lio.l \,iSI.' If :1ev~looed flmeulatol'j' skills, which will also enable him to participate In oth.r rollabllltnUv
rn~, ,-
,,;:'j .... ".,... :.:1' ... '!-"~;~:-,::;;:.,,--r- 'dJ I
: 7iiTI:'.-i'oz j'2'-l 911Q.Q' tlpllQ. ~315 r .,.
, I I
I '
.-...' , "-:-1 I
__ ' oi ~
I ~. . .. . .......,. I .
I....a...~ ..',L""" - '-14.
I .. 'Ie, '...~; j1..... .IC':"" .
"
...."'l,, C,
...u......c..
".ev'''..'O-
.II
I c.;U--
,-
I
-.---.
" .
",' ~
-. '
"t.::=:: ,..
... .-.
"'5P; ;00 :_.7.~:",' .
I . .....'
...: I .., I. ..... ..,n, "I.' lYe.. ......' I "...
1= ,'~f'''''
-:' I.' I I
1...~U
,.. I '---I '"'''' ! .. Ii. ,.~
,.._._ .___.._.... 1._',_..---
, 0" . .. . , ... . .'.. .' .. .. ~
,.,...".' .
I
--.----.
. ...
. .f'
._- ..---.-...
',/1
. .
I .......~w.,...r..' ......"....,.
.YD-"" . .... I."
..,...,.'.'...f...'...;.-~...lt;'.......;:,.,
.. ,... ~ '~ ~- ..:. ,
., .,.,.......,':':t.\'~...I~~I~.t' ,\~~~:'\.......:..'.,.. ....THlI.
,. .','.'. ,.''''''' I., ("\...&1:.,.... ....l.:..-.. OMIMYC
" .' . ~ I' ,". 1\ J ..........-
!MERCi EHCY PURCHASE OF, SERVICE "::':" "i~)~; . ,
. ,,' '. ~,':"'~i"'''!t'. :nD IP
f:, .~. .:.0,", II'
. ......,... ,Ifr" D..un
....... ........~Uile_.t'. _. "r ,'~", .
De".rtm~f~fc=~u~ns ", ,
Buruu:ofC'am'iii1inCij'Correctfons
H'lllTfIb~q.!'J~~ty' 91?a;rectfons Center
17 tf".Il~. u..t . ,.:.,:. .:,'
a:.....Jt.i.;.'. "';':'"1'" 1 .'.y~,;,'". .
. ~ ... 1.".\......
..\~'t'l ,'~, '. . .....'(.1;0... :
.-" "\0''': ... .1ro..~.I'
....~.'IIII........_.......~~ ........ ....1...
State. C'l)~~;.4tfbiiitJhstftuUon
.... t' ....... ;iO~~tb1~~~~~'8~'3'1
~/ 26/ 93 C~R'.~~~~i-~.~,:fr. '
:v 27 93 . ~~'~~~"'r,'
1..._.It"'I. ... ......'c.. _'1'''.'' I.'''''''" .. .""1'."'- ....." " .UIII.t ,'" ".".1.:: -".l.=e~' '!'IlI_,'/ . . ..
frllO.;.llP.! --\. ."" .
To provide continuation at rehabilitation services to Inmate tarry ~~ ',BX9512, who is a pllrnpl
with both legs suriically removed. Services will be increased tOl"' 30, dAy& at' $'150 dafly. . .
. . .. . ~ .,.1.... _A.~.::.'. ,'.
....~ .-,."''''''......,' .
Am.ndment to increase volume ot services. No change lit any other term or condition ot this contra(
. ::':',..ji'::'"~''' .'
S.e :'.1emo and Letter ~egarding Larry Lanehart - BK9512. on attachmen'(.l:-.:',;.,'
" <,Ii,_:.'" "
. ,,..., 4~ ..~. .
.' '.'1i--' '-,',
.., ~'1,""':~':.' ,
". .,' ~~ "',/0.'.
,h. .~".' .' :.
..Y~.. ..:r;,"'.... ,.'
. " " ~ t'\.... ~, .'
_ . - .~{;.. .::;;.:. '.',~ ..,'
... :...'_..' ..,....
" ". ';~~~'''. .
c..,...,.... ..... · .......
a.nova Center Cor Special Services
U50 Wilson Lane
M.chanlcsburi,~Cl 17Q55
"
~.
.. !"
I..'...,.... "...A.... 10 .. 111",,1. lie. "..
23-2014175
~
....,IPII..'I.. "'" ...... IIIC" IIU..,.....P .. ..... "*' A........I' I...... II
IP ..
t"
The :,eccmmendations ;lrovided by the medical personnel at the Rencva Centir tor Specialized Servlc
and Harrisburg's Cor:'ections "e"onne1 state that inmate Lanehart needs to continue In the rehablllta
;lrcqram to monitor his wound healing, exercise program to increase strength'and endurance, monitor
of nutritional intake, and physiatry consultation, It is anticipated that It inmate Lanehart bectlme
stabl11zed upon compietion ot this additJonal rehabilltation service, he will be placed In a special cas
pltlcemelH with a relative. ,'" ,
...
'.'
,.".. 0'"'' I .11. .. ..11'1 0.. I c.., ....."..
I I)ll ' 103 ' 92 1 90'JO' 62300 I
! I I
...
.......u., 0
..cu........
, .. 'inn 'nn
Io......r...
.
"I\=::~ .
I 3
: ..,." i
I"'.... .,.. I
.... I '" 10.". ....
...
..
.11..
",.. 1 "... .......r
OE~", .,..
TRA"'S, .'
'IS!
-----
,
.------
- ---'--
"".t..
. ..... .," ,......
_H' _ .__.
.. -"--,-:;7----' --'-"---.
,
.~. ----....
. ~iI"'U liD 4 II ft\; "
P.ul M. O'Connor
RE~IONAL DIRECTOR
Thol" A. lo,o.ky
IUREAU DIRECTOR
.L) COMMON ilEAL TH OF PENNSVL VAN [A
~'v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS I
~ (tll fr HARR I SBURG COMMUN ITV CORRECTIONS CENTER ,J1"
~(1G 0' 27 NORTH CAMEROIt STREET f'" -
,.~fY. '6 .:~ HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17111 ~ u,;~
'-f~ ~-r" 1? (717) 717-4427 ~,...
1 ~ J.ffrey A. Trout..n - DIRECTOR r;;P. ..5'
...~J" :If ,,.yP' - J.$.",f
O. cro / ... Jun. 3", 1993 1":.".1;"
I
M.ch.nic.burg R.habI1It.tlon
P.O. BOll 2132
M.chanlcsburg, PA 17155
hi Larry Lan.hart
Our Slr/M.dul
Att.ch.d pl.... find bi," fro. your offlc. for L.rry L.n.h.rt.
Mr. L.n.h.rt h.s b..n .,lgib,. for Public A..i.t.nc. r.tro.ctiv.
to J.nu.ry 1, 1'93. Att.ch.d ,. . copy of Mr. L.n.h.rt'.
.,lgibl1 \tV fori.
Pl.... .ub.1t the b1," through Public A..1.t.ncI .t the .ddr..'
ll.t.d on the for.. If you .r. not. Public A..I.t.nc. providlr,
you ..y cont.ct the O.p.rt..nt of Public W.lf.r. .t the phon.
nUlb.r 11st.d In ord.r to r.qu..t prov~dlr st.tus so th.t you ..y
rec.ln p.yllnt.
"
.y A. Trout..n
01 ctor
H.rrlsburg Co..unlty Corrlctlons C.nt.r
CCI
St.tl Corrlctlon.l
Busln... Office
File
Institution .t C..P Hill
.'
,
,~
"
,
-'
t
MBCHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS, I
plaintiff I
I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
NO. 94-4046 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: DEFENPANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
BEFORE SHEELY. P.J.. and OLER. J.
OF COURT
AND NOW,
this
ORDER
z.st4 day of
January,
1996,
after careful
consideration of Defendant. 6 Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's
Amended Complaint, as well as the briefs and oral arguments
presented in the matter, and for the reasons stated in the
accompanying opinion, the preliminary objections are GRANTED as
they relate to Plaintiff's breach of contract claims, to the extent
that the claim is transferred to the Board of Claims, and the
preliminary objections are DENIED as they relate to Plaintiff's
fraud claim.
BY THE COURT,
J
Richard Oare, Esq.
1776 South Queen Street
York, PA 17043
Attorney for Plaintiff
Jill A. Devine, Esq.
v1ennSY1Vania Department
2520 Lisburn Road
P.O. Box 598
Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598
Attorney for Defendant
of Corrections
:rc
EXHIBIT
I
B
,
8, Admitted,
9. Admitted,
10, D.nled 8S stated. Defendant prepared an Emergency Purchase of Services
contract for the purchase of certain medical services for Lanehart, Denl.d that the
same was a fully-executed contract. binding upon the Defendant.
11. Denied as stated, Pursuant to the terms of the Emergency Purchase of
Services contract, MRS was to provide services to Larry Lanehart for thirty (30) days at
the rate of $750,00 per day,
12, Denl.d as stated, On or about March 12,1993, Defendant supplemented their
request for medical services. Denied that the same was a written contract binding
upon the Defendant.
13, Denied as stated, By the terms of the Emergency Purchase of Services
contract, Defendant requested an extension of the services to Larry Lanehart from
February 26, 1993 to March 7, 1993,
14, Denied as stated, Admitted only that Defendant approved Lanehart's stay at
Plaintiffs facility for as long as was medically necessary.
15. Denied as stated, Admitted only that Defendant knew of an Emergency
Purchase of Services contract for $750,00 per day for Lanehart's medical care, Denied
Defendants knew or should have known that $750,00 per day was the cost to the
Plaintiff,
16, Admitted only that Plaintiff submitted an Invoice to the Defendant in the amount
of $68.891,18, The remainder of the averments in paragraphs 16 are d.nled,
2
\
24, Admitted only that Defendant negotiated with Plaintiff In an effort to procure
medical aervlcea for Lanehart. Denl.d that Defendant had no Intention to providing
payment for Lanehart's servlcas.
25. Admitted only that Defendant prepared an Emergency Purchase of Services
contract for medical services provided by Plaintiff to Lanehart,
26, D.nled that Defendant gave continued assurances or made misrepresentations
by and through Its agent employees that It would provide payment for the services
rendered by Plaintiff to Defendant.
27. Denied that Defendant did not intend to make payment for the services provided
by Plaintiff,
28, Admitted,
29. Admitted.
30, Denl.d In Its entirety,
31. Paragraph 31 contains conclusions of law to which no reply Is necessary. To the
extent a reply Is necessary the averments In paragraph 31 are denied,
32, Paragraph 32 contains conclusions of law to which no reply Is necessary, To the
extent a reply Is necessary, it is denied that Plaintiff justifiably relied upon Defendant's
representations to its detriment.
33, Admitted only that Defendant has not paid for Plaintiff's $ervices, The
remainder of the averments in Paragraph 33 are conclusions of law to which no reply is
necessary, To the extent a reply is necessary, the remainder of the averments In
Paragraph 33 are denied,
4
,
34. Paragraph 34 contains conclusions of law to which no reply Is necessary, To the
extent a reply Is necessary, the averments therein are denl.d,
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1, Plaintiffs Complaint falls to state claims or ceuses of action against answering
Defendants upon which relief cen be granted,
2, Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations and by the
doctrine of laches.
3, Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrines of res Judicata and/or collateral
estoppel.
4. Plaintiff failed to mitigate its alleged damages which failure bars and/or limits its
claims or causes of action,
5, Plaintiff was negligent in failing to follow orders, recommendations, and/or advice
which negligence bars Plaintiffs claims,
6. Plaintiffs claims are barred and/or limited by the application of the Pennsylvania
Comparative Negligence Act and/or by the doctrine of the assumption of risk,
7. Punitive damages are not recoverable against answering defendants,
8, Any damages sustained by Plaintiff, if proven (but expressly denied), were
caused solely and proximately by persons and/or entitles other than answering
Defendants and not within the control of answering Defendants,
9, Any acts or omisllions on the part of answering Defendants, if proven, were not
the proximate cause of the damages alleged by Plaintiff,
5
, ,
, .
10, Plaintiff's atate law claims are barred by sovereign Immunity and are not waived
by any of the ellceptlonstheretQ, 1 Pa.C,S. 52310; 42 Pa,C,S, 58522.
11, To the extent that Immunity has been waived with respect to any of Plaintiffs
clalma, In.wering Defendants assert all defenses to and limitation. upon those claima
which are or may hereafter be set forth at 42 Pa,C.S. 558522 . 8528.
12. Answering Defendants are entitled to official Immunity from Plaintiffs claims.
13, At all times relevant hereto any actions or Inactions of answering Defendants
were done within the scope of their authority in good faith and without malice,
14, Answering Defendants are entitled to objective good faith Immunity from
Pllllntlffa claims and have not violated any rights and/or clearly established rights of
Plaintiff.
15, Whatever actions or inactions committed by answering Defendants which may
have caused loss to the Plaintiff (but expressly denied), were Justified,
16, Plaintiff consented to any actions or Inactions committed by answering
Defendants, and therefore, Plaintiffs claims are barred against answering Defendants.
17, Any actions or Inactions committed by answering Defendants were done
pursuant to duties required by statute, regulation or directive and therefore answering
Defendants are Immune,
18, Any actions or inactions committed by answering Defendants were matters
within the discretion granted to answering Defendants by statute, regulation or directive
and the claimed right was not clearly established; therefore answering Defendants are
immune,
6
, .
. ,
19. Plaintlff'a clalmsar8 barred for failure to loin the Pennsylvania Department of
Public Welfare a. an Indlapensable party,
WHEREFORE, Defendants request this Court to enter a Judgment In their favor,
Respectfully submitted,
~1 ('~,K..~
Jill ,Devine .
Assistant Counsel
Attorney I. 0, No, 54700
Answer filed on behalf of
all Defendants
PA Department of Corrections
Utley Drive, P,O. Box 598
Camp Hili, PA 17001-0598
(717) 731-0444
DATE: ~j ,1996
"
.
,
7
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL DIVISION
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
Plaintiff
.
.'
v,
Civil Action No. 94-4046
COMMONWEALTH OF PA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
VERIFICATION
I am Jeffrey Troutman and I am authorized to make this verification on behalf of
Defendant because of my position as the Director of the Harrisburg Community
Corrections Center. The attached Answer and New Matter is based upon information
which I have furnished to counsel and information which has been gathered by counsel
In preparation for defense of the lawsuit. The language of the Answer and New Matter
Is that of counsel and not of me, I have read the Answer and New Matter and to the
extent that the Answer and New Matter Is based upon Information which I gave to
counsel, it Is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, Information and belief. To
the extent that the content of the Answer and New Matter is that of counsel, I have
relied upon counsel in making this verification, I hereby acknowledge that the facts set
forth In the aforesaid Answer and New Matter is made subject to the penalties of 16 Pa,
S4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities,
DATED:~
~~.~~
Je rey A,Troutman
Director
Harrisburg Community Corrections Center
9
1 admitted to the Osteopathic Hospital,
2
3 that?
4
5 his problem.
6
7 happened?
6
Q
And what's your understanding for the purpose of
A
To give him proper medical care for whatever was
Q
What's your laymen's understanding of what
A
That he had some problems -- he could not stay at
9 the center -- we could not handle within the center. And he
10 needed to stay at the hospital. They really don't go into
11 big detail.
12
13
14
15 week?
16
Q
He got the one good leg he had cut off, right?
A
That was a week or so later.
Q
Was he at the Osteopathic Hospital that whole
A
We was at the Osteopathic Hospital -- I would have
17 to look at my notes,
16
Q
Let me explain to you this is called discovery.
19 I'm asking you questions to find out what you know about
20 Mr. Lanehart. If there are any documents there that help
21 you answer --
22
A
These would be my confidential notes that I make
23 on anyone of the residents that I would have.
24
25
Q
I bet you I have a copy of it,
A
This was treatment information, I don't think it
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
, "
11
1 we can get into what the treatment was.
2
MR. OARE: Was it treatment for something I already
3 know about, dicubitus, sores on his buttocks?
4
MS. DEVINE: I think in general terms we could.
5
THE WITNESS: That was basically --
6 BY MR. OARE:
7
Q
He had a sores on hi~ body?
8
A
Yes, sir.
9
Q
Do you know the region of the body?
10
A
That I couldn't tell you without looking at
11 medical documents. I wouldn't document that in my file that
12 way.
13
Q
But is it my understanding, as well as your
14 understanding, that the condition of his -, - which leg was it
15 that he had removed?
16
A
I think he still had his left leg at the time.
17
Q
Let's agree that it was his left leg that he had
18 when he showed up 12/7/92 and that he lost 12/18/92. Do you
19 know anything about the condition of that leg that led to
20 the medical decision to remove it?
21
A
I really don't know because that was a medical
22 decision.
23
Q
I just wonder if Mr, Lanehart shared that with
24 you,
25
A
That was between Mr, Lanehart and the doctors.
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
20
1 write,
2
THE WITNESS I I have nothing to do with payment or how
3 things are paid for. Our concern is for medical care, Our
4 job is to make sure that our guys are healthy.
5 BY MR. OARE:
6
Q
Was it part of your job to secure payment of his
7 medical bills?
8
A
Other than applying for the welfare, no, sir,
9 It's not my job.
10
Q
Now, just tell me on a day-by-day basis what your
11 involvement was with Mr, Lanehart after 12/8/92 in securing
12 medical treatment.
13
A
Medical treatment?
14
Q
Yes. First, what did you do, if anything, in
15 regard to Osteopathic Hospital?
16
A
I didn't have any input to that. That was done
17 medically by the institution to have him transferred there.
18 My job was just to do follow-up with him as far as casework.
19
Q
Would it be fair to say that while he was in the
20 Osteopathic Hospital you met with him?
21
A
Yes, I did,
22
Q
What was -- was one of the purposes in meeting
23 with him to provide a plan for what was to occur to him
24 after the hospital, the acute care hospital, released him?
25
A
Yes, That was part of my job, Where ever he was
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
50
1 I really couldn't tell you. It just says that our men that
2 come into our program are eligible for programs on welfare.
3
Q
What do you know about the emergency purchase of
4 service document?
5
A
Nothing.
6
MR. OARE: End oj deposition for me.
7 BY MS. DEVINE:
8
Q
Mr. Kobierecki, you have indicated that you are
9 aware that residents of the CCC, or Community Correction
10 Center, are eligible for welfare benefits and specifically
11 medical assistance from the Department of Welfare. Where
12 did you come up with this understanding?
13
A
It's something we have been doing ever since I
14 started working for the Department of Corrections.
15
Q
Okay. Did anybody from the Department of Welfare
16 tell you that residents of the CCC are eligible for medical
17 assistance,
18
A
It was just policy since I started.
19
Q
Have you ever had any involvement in assisting
20 residents of CCC obtain medical assistance?
21
A
Yes, everyone who is eligible,
22
Q
And what is your involvement?
23
A
When an inmate is transferred from an institution
24 to the Community Correction Center, they have an orientation
25 to tell them what they are eligible for from the Department
HOIjBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
, ,
,
10
57
1 bills and the procurement of extensions the for his stay
2 here.
3
o
Did you ever have a conversation with Elaine Wolfe
4 regarding Larry Lanehart/s eligibility for medical
5 assistance?
6
Not on plain medical assistance.
A
7
Did YOll have a conversation regarding his
o
8 eligibility for welfare?
9
No, we did not.
A
o
Did you ever have any conversation with her
11 regarding payment for the services?
12
A
During one of our early times, she asked me if the
13 department was going to do, what happened with another
14 client that was here switch over to DPA. And I said I
15 couldn't answer that because --
16
17
18
19
20
0 Did she re,present that Larry Lanehart would not
have been accepted at Mechanicsburg Rehab if they would have
known he was eligible for medical assistance?
A I couldn/t answer that right now,
0 Did you ever represent to Elaine Wolfe or anyone
21 else in general that you had power to contract on behalf of
22 the Commonwealth?
23
24
25
A No. I don't have that power.
0 And do you have the power to sign contracts?
A No, I do not,
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(71 7) 540- 9669
, ,
.
1
1
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
2
Plaintiff
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
3 VS
4 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
5
Defendant
I CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
6
7
8
DEPOSITION:
PAUL O'CONNOR
9
TAKEN BY:
Plaintiff
10
BEFORE:
Tierna L. Strayer,
Notary Public
York County, Pennsylvania
11
12
BEGINNING:
Tuesday, September 12, 1995
3:30 a.m.
175 Lancaster Boulevard
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
13
14
15
16 APPEARANCES:
17
RICHARD OARE, ESQUIRE
1776 South Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff
18
19
20
JILL A. DEVINE, ESQUIRE
2520 Lisburn Road
PO BOX 5913
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17001-0598
Appearing on behalf of Defendant
21
22
23
f,Y-H\8\T
~~
24
25
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
12
1 Mr. Lanehart and get approval for Camp Hill to be able to do
2 this. And I spoke to people at the business office here.
3 And, unfortunately, I don't know who I spoke to. It's been
4 awhile.
5 They explained to me their cost structure, what they
6 would and wouldn't take. They wouldn't take DPA benefits.
7 They wanted $750.00 a day to provide services for
8 Mr, Lanehart.
9
Q
DPA?
10
A
Department of Public Assistance grants.
11
Q
All right, What did you do when you learned that
12 we wouldn't take DPA?
13
A
They told me what it would cost, and I talked to
14 the head of health care services at the Department of
15 Corrections who at the time was Diane Marks,
16
Q
What was her title?
17
A
Director of health care services,
18
Q
And where is she located?
19
A
She worked at the central office for the
20 Department of Corrections.
21
Q
What's the address? Where is that?
22
A
It's right up here in Camp Hill.
23
Q
Is that Camp Hill or Harrisburg?
24
A
I think it's Post Office Box 200.
25
Q
But it's at Camp Hill correctional facility?
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
1
14
Q
Did you discuss with her the facility's position
2 with respect to not accepting DPA?
11
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
A
I can't answer that honestly, I can't remember.
3
4
Q
Did you discuss with her the request the facility,
5 Mechanicsburg, made for $750.00 per day?
A
Yes.
6
7
8
o
What did she say?
A
Well, it was approved. I don't remember. What we
9 talked about particularly was the care of the inmate, not so
10 much the cost.
Q
So you discussed with her the kind of care. Do
12 you know, would it have been her job to approve or
13 disapprove of the $750.00 a day, or would that have been
14 somebody else?
A
Somebody else.
Q
Who?
A
Tim Ringler, R-i-n-g-l-e-r,
Q
What's his title?
A
Director of fiscal services. They have had a
20 reorganization. I don't know what it is.
Q
Is he still there?
A
Yes,
Q
Where is there? Is it at Camp Hill?
A
Mr. Ringler's office is at the administrative
25 office for the Department of Corrections.
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
15
1
Q
And his title now -- Is his title now director of
2 fiscal service?
3
A
I'm not sure that's his exact title.
4
Q
You believe it was his job to approve or'
5 disapprove the contract amount?
6
A
I believe he approved the emergency purchase of
7 service for Mr, Maeyer to process this.
8
Q
And when you say this, you are referring to
':I O'Connor 1?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Now, just take me step by step through this
12 process, You explained to me that Diane Marks and you
13 discussed the kind of care that Mr, Lanehart wished to
14 receive. And you and she agreed that MRS, Mechanicsburg,
15 would provide the kind of care that was appropriate.
16
17
A
Yes,
18 responsibility for approving the contract from the facility,
Q
But that neither you nor she would have the
19 Mechanicsburg?
20
21
22
23
A
That's true.
24 responsibility to contact Mr, Ringler, or some third person
Q
That would be done by Mr, Ringler?
A
Yes,
Q
Was it your responsibility or Ms, Marks
25 I know nothing about, to get his approval?
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-96(9
1
A
16
Once again, I don't know. But I know it was
This piece of paper we have, O'Connor I, is a
4 Department of Corrections form, correct?
2 approved.
3
Q
Business office or business manager.
Now is that the same department as fiscal
14 services, or is that different?
11
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Camp Hill?
A
Q
15 A This might get a bit difficult.
12
13
16 Q That's why you're here to explain this process?
17 A The Department of Corrections has a fiscal
18 management division to oversee fiscal management everywhere.
19 Each institution has a business office who comes under their
20 jurisdiction.
21
Q
Okay,
As a result, they have dealings with the
23 institution's business office regarding issues related to
22
A
24 community corrections because we have none of those services
25 available to us, We use each business office for the
HOI,BERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540.,9669
.
.
33
1 that I recall on the subject of DPA benefits paying for
2 Mr. Lanehart's rehabilitation services or any medical
3 services?
4
A
No. Actually, I think some of the memorandums
5 here even mention that. It was mentioned. I can take a
6 look. I don't see it here, but I know as a fact that they
7 were looking for DPA benefits from the very beginning. I
8 know that as a fact.
9
10
11
Q
They being?
A
Mr. Troutman and Mr. Kobierecki.
Q
Never the less, the Department of Corrections
12 approved payment by the Department of Corrections in the
13 amount of $750.00 a day, Is that correct?
14
15
A
Yes.
Q
On the date of this Exhibit Number 6, the June
16 7th, 1993 memo, was it your understanding that the
17 Department of Corrections was still obligated to pay
18 Mechanicsburg at the rate of $750.00 per day?
19
A
I really don't know truthfully. I just had no
20 idea one way or the other.
21
Q
What was your mind set, at this time, as to who
22 was going to pay for Mr, Lanehart's care?
23
24
25
A
Here?
Q
Yes.
A
The Department of Corrections.
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540.9669
,
.'
1
"
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
43
Mr, Maeyer to do an emergency purchase of service for
Mr. Lanehart.
Q And did you - - were your dealings with
Mechanicsburg Rehab as a result of referral from the
Osteopathic Hospital or the recommendation of Osteopathic?
A Essentially, yes, They felt that the
Mechanicsburg Rehab was the best possible placement for him,
Q Okay. Before you had any deal in'l/! with
Mechanicsburg Rehab, did you know whether IJarry Lanehart Wi1B
eligible for medical assistance?
A I knew Larry Lanehart was eligJ.blo bofonl he got
here, before he got anywhere.
Q How did you know that?
A Because all our residents are eligible if they
meet DPA's requirements.
Q when you say, if they meet DPA's rcquirementa, can
you explain that?
A DPA requires that you be indigent, essentially.
Q So you are talking about financial requirements?
A Yes.
Q So had it been YOllr expedlilllce that residents of
Community Correction Centers aro, in fact, eligible for
public assistance and medical o'ItlOiflt:,I/lCe?
A They are,
Q Havo any Ot.h"l' p,,!i,h'lll:f1 of any of the CCC's under
HOLBERT MillO" [NI'ES
('11'1) 'AO 'Jf,/;'J
55
1 the bill? Was that the wheelchair?
,
(
2
A.
No, it was -- it was for his stay here I
3 believe.
4
o.
All right. What was the substance of that
5 conversation about payment?
6 A. From what I can remember, she was just stating
7 that the bill hadn't been paid. And at the time, I wasn't
8 aware of what was going on as far as payment, you know,
9 payment of the bill wasn't really my - - I don't want to say
10 my concern but you know,
11
0,
Your responsibility?
My responsibility, yes, So I told Elaine to
12
A,
13 fax me what ahe had as far as some billing material that she
14 had and I would pass it along to the proper channels.
15
o.
Were bills from this facility submitted to
16 John Kobierecki if you know?
17
A.
They were sent -- I think they were just sent
,18 in care of the facility, I don't think anybody's name was
19 actually on them from what I can remember.
20
0,
What I'm trying to ge' an understanding of,
21 Mr, Troutman, is what was your understanding of the routing
22 of bills from this facility for Larry Lanehart's care. If
23 you know, were they to be routed to John Kobierecki and/or
24 you at Harrisburg Community Corrections Center or routed
25 some place else?
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
" '
1
A.
56
It was my understanding that they would 'have
2 been routed some place else,
Where did they, in fact, go to?
They came to our facility,
Okay. Do you know why they came to your
3 Q.
4 A.
5 Q.
6 facility?
7 A,
8 Q,
No,
And once they came to your facility, what then
9 was done with them?
10
A.
Two things, I believe the first time I sent
11 the bills to our business office at Camp Hill, and I believe
12 the second time I sent them with a copy of a public
13 assistance letter back to Renova explaining that the bill
14 should be sent to public assistance.
15
Q.
I want to show you exhibits that have been
16 attached to the complaint in this case, Are you familiar
17 with the emergency purchase of service forms?
18
19
A.
I know what they are, yes.
Q.
I'm showing you Exhibit A to the complaint and
20 it's an emergency purchase of service for the period 1/26/93
21 to 2/25/93,
22
23
24 correct?
25
A,
Okay.
Q,
Roughly a one month stay, 30 day stay,
A,
Right.
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
64
1
A.
There should have been a copy attached to the
2 bills. But I do have copies of it.
3
o.
I'm showing you what's been marked in the
4 previous deposition, Kobierecki deposition as Exhibit Number
5 9, And what is the date of eligibility as you understand
6 it?
7 A, Let me see that please. The date of
8 eligibility would have been 4/6/93 which would have been
9 April 6th.
10 0, Okay,
11 A. That's when it was determined that he was
12 eligible. Now, you have to realize that that date, you have
13 to go back 90 days, 90 days then go to the first day of that
14 month. So his actual eligibility date would have been
15 January 1st;, '93.
16
o.
Okay. Whose responsibility is it, if you
17 know, to provide this information to health care providers?
18
A,
It can either be the client's responsibility
19 or the health care provider can request payment.
20
o.
But how would the health care?
21
A.
Basically the procedure is that a person
22 receives a medical card in the mail, okay, for a specific
23 month. When they're sick and they go to the doctor, they
24 take the card with them, The doctor has different forms he
25 fills out for public assistance and he submits for payment.
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
,
.
65
1
Q.
What I'm trying to get at is how within the
2 Department of Corrections, how do you impart this knowledge
3 to Renova who's sending you bills for payment?
4 A. Right.
5 Q. What was done in this case to let Renova know
6 in April April 6th, '93 that Larry Lanehart can get his
7 bills paid through public assistance?
8
A.
I would assume John probably discussed it with
9 Blaine Wolfe.
10
Q. Do you know whether that, in fact, occuI'red?
A. I can't say with certainty,
Q. Is there any record of any letter to Renova
from you or Mr. Kobierecki advising Renova that he became
eligible for public assistance?
11
12
13
14
15
A.
Not that I'm aware of.
16
Q.
So the first letter I see is dated June 30th,
17 1993 from you to Mechanicsburg?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q.
And is that the only record that you have
20 notifying this facility of Mr. Lanehart's eligibility?
21
A.
That's the only one that I have, yes.
22
Q,
Would you agree then that the first time this
23 facility became aware of Mr. Lanehart's eligibility for
24 public assistance was 12 days after he was discharged?
25
A.
I can't agree to that, no/ because I'm not
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
~""_?
ill." A. Ito,oak"
.UItUU OUECTOR
p.ul M. O'Connor
REGIONAL DIRECTOR
.L5 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSVLVANIA
~/V' DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS I '
'liP fr HARRISBURG COMMUNI TV CORRECTIONS CENTER "';7f'
~(l().(I''' c 27 NORTH CAMERON STREET f" ......
,.~(Y. '60:~ HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17111 ~ ,,,,1<-
'71. 'r'" / (717) 787-4427 ::A' -
1'6 1 J.ffr.y A. Trout..n - DIRECTOR ".... D.5r;
~ ~_ iJ~
O. "" ofF,,)}' :;.." ,,,~ . ""J<A. .1,.dF
"" /' Jun. 31l1, 1993 1,4'~" . ,J".
I
M.ch.nlcsburg R.h.blllt.tlon
P.O. Bo~ 2"32
M.ch.nlcsburg, PA 17155
R.: L.rry L.n.h.rt
Our Slr/M.d,,1
Att.ch.d pl.... find bill. fro. your offlc. for L.rry L.n.h.rt.
Mr. L.n.h.rt h.. b..n .'I,lbl. for Public A..I.t.nc' r.tro.ctIY'
to J.nu.ry 1, 19513. Att.ch.d 11 . copy of Mr. L.n.hert"
.'I,lbl,lty fori.
Pl.... sub.lt the bill. throu,h Public A..i.tlnc. .t th. .ddr."
".t.d on th, for.. If you Ir' not. Public Ani.Unc. proyld.r,
yOU ..y contlct the D.p.rt..nt of Public W.lf.r, It the phon.
nUlb.r llst.d In ord.r to r.qu.st proyld.r .tatu. .0 th.t you ..y
r.c. iv. p.y..nt.
"
.y A. Troutlln
01 ctor
H.rrl.bur, COllunlty Corr.ctions C.nt.r
CCI
Sl.l. Corr.ctlon.l
Busln.ss Offlc.
FIle
Institution It C..p Hill
-'
,
I
EXHIBIT
G
1
1
MECHANICSBURG REHAB SYSTEMS,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
2
Plaint i.f f
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
3 VS
4 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant
II
, CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-4046
5
6
7
8
DEPOSITION:
DAVID S. MAEYER
9
TAKEN BY:
Plaintiff
10
BEFORE:
Tierna L. Strayer,
Notary Public
York County, Pennsylvania
11
12
BEGINNING:
Tuesday, September 12, 1995
9:30 a.m,
175 Lancaster Boulevard
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
13
14
15
16 APPEARANCES:
18
RICHARD OARE, ESQUIRE
1776 South Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff
17
19
21
JILL A. DEVINE, ESQUIRE
2520 Lisburn Road
PO BOX 598
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17001-0598
Appearing on behalf of Defendant
20
22
23
24
EXHIBIT
25
,
H
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
14
1 think that would be in there. I don't think I have ever
2 seen it.
3
THE WITNESS: For many reason it's not here.
4
MR. OARE: But at any rate, I think we can all agree
5 Attachment 1 doesn't have any bearing on answering questions
6 at issue in this case.
7
MS, DEVINE: Right.
8
THE WITNESS: That's right.
9 BY MR. OARE:
10
Q
Now had, you ever dealt with Renova or
11 Mechanicsburg Rehab Syscem before to provide for inmates?
12
A
No,
13
Q
Did you participate in any negotiations with any
14 one at this facility, Mechanicsburg Rehab System, including
15 Renova regarding the contract terms?
16
A
The word negotiating is a big word,
17
Q
Let me rephrase it, Did you talk to anyone at
18 Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems, including Renova, about the
19 cost of its services to Mr. Lanehart?
20
A
No.
21
Q
Did you discuss with anybody at Mechanicsburg
22 Rehab System, including Renova, Mr. Lanehart's treatment?
23
A
No,
24
Q
So I take it you spoke to no one about
25 Mr. Lanehart's stay here?
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(71'7) 540-9669
, '
19
1 was going to pay those bills, that's when we did not peruse
2 the approval of those contracts any further,
3
Q
Is it my understanding that the first cycle for
4
the period 1/26/93 to the 2/25/93 represented on this
EP-17527 was paid at a rate of $750.00 a day?
A Paid?
Q Yeah.
A It was not paid,
Q Okay, It wasn't, Did the Commonwealth ever make
5
6
7
8
9
10 a payment?
11
A
No, not under the Department of Corrections. I
12 don't know if the Department of Public Welfare -- see once
13 we were under -- once we learned the DPW was going to pay
14 Renova, that's when we sort of pulled our contracts and
15 cancelled them.
16
What do you know about a form called an
Q
17 encumbrance?
18
This is basically any kind of contractual
A
19 documents, emergency purchase of services or any other type
20 of orders or forms used by the Commonwealth used to encumber
21 those types of funds and set the money aside because we have
22 an approved obligation,
23
Does that mean you pay it?
Q
24
At that stage, once the monies are encumbered,
A
25 they are set aside from our allotment, And then the next
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
. .
1
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
document official?
A That's correct.
Q Did you process the emergency purchase of service
contract for Mechanicsburg Rehab with the expectation that
the Mechanicsburg Rehab would be paid pursuant to this
document?
A That's correct.
MR. OARE: And you are referring to
MS. DEVINE: Referring to -- when I say this document
I refer to O'Connor Number 1.
THE WITNESS: Probably the other Maeyer one is the
other document, the funding adjustment.
MR. OARE: Covering the second 30 day period?
THE WITNESS: Right.
BY MS. DEVINE:
Q And it was also your expectation that the funding
adjustment identified as Maeyer Number J. was also how
Mechanicsburg Rehab was going to be paid for providing
services to Larry Lanehart?
A That's correct,
Q When did you learn otherwise that this is not how
Mechanicsburg was going to be paid?
A It was through a conversation that Mr. Alexander
of my accounting section had with Mr, Troutman,
Q When was that?
HOLBERT ASSOCIATES
(717) 540-9669
.'." ,
"....
., , -. ........ .......... ..,..' _ ,~:' ..~' ~.J;
_~L..:.......::~ ~,._,."l.....~i.r" ..
, H 1'\""""<lit' f ",.. "..~...".c\,' ",......' I :J/ ~.
, _ ','gt.I . \' r ,!~.\" \,1"'" ' , '
, , . ~ " , 'J' t'J 1 ....' ,
"-l ,\.." ". ~',f .. ",,'~I ....~l..: .' \ '-, ' "
\ ,.; . 1" .,'.",I".~' :"l"~.. ,~t"" ,.
.,' >- I r,~' .." :Ht. ',;",~~.'(~~~:. ".' ..., ,"OW THlI MU....I
" "~...,, ....~.,~. .' ".... 0" '"YOlel
" "'c>7t, "" ~"""'f"" I' .. .
","'~"'," ...1,"'" ,
,~ '. I ."Ho. t .,.
" '..' .' ';.C'
, . l,",' ,~:t '0
0\. ,.~,~..}~:, hit'.
, ,-
-- --- --,
-.-..-
I............,. 'F ,.....""'.....
"0..'" .'''.1-''
IMI!RGEtlCY PURCHASE ,OF. SERVICE
IP ~ In
Pun n d Wltmen
,~10 ,
no
.......... ..~I.~., .,.. u.~ ..'''1'.~~'~; I'",~..:.
Departmeh'i 'ofcOiTectlons ,
Bureau or. Community 'Correctlons .
Harrllb!iriCom';i!unlty Corrections Center
rr N'ortl1 Camerolt'Street ~.':"", "
. Harrfsb" ....';"Ir.....i.n01 ii"":,,
: : '11'I,~~~~~~t~,.;;:~~;~::t .
IILL 'fe' ,........ ........... __ .... ...,11. ,II' .........
State. Corl;!tctforiaI.i!isdtutlon
at Camp Hl~";'~',,:" '_ "
ctn.A'''.'' n.........'. I. ..",.c. nc. ... un'F 'U""II 2500 LlsbUrit Rei. ='.0. Box 8837
23-2014175 V ~~ /:~ ca,m~:~~.,~a~.;~f.r,.
~~';;~~i;:~~~;;~~:~;;n'.~;.~:~.:~;;;~:;;o'~';~~:;~.:;.~o inmat~ ~~~y~t.ii;~~;X~iI'12, \vho Is a paraplegic
with both legs surgically removed. Services will be increased tor- 30 days at $750 dally. ' -.-
, , .......".,).,
, " . ..'10-;....'...,' ,
Amendment to increase volume ot services. No change In any other term 'or condition ot this contract.
. .;.
....UA".. . ...... . ........
Renova Center tor Special Services
4950 Wilson Lane
Mechanlcsbul'(,Pa 170115
. . ~ .t
"
Sel! r,1emo and Letter regarding Larry Lanehart - BK9512 on attachment'I~','" .
...:' .~4:'-~' :~.-"
..~,4;.'
...~.... .
.:0::"<<>'"
~ ,', ~ "
. i.;"..,~'. :,;, I'~ '~'..
_~. ..r:', . f.
~
.61''''''110'''. '011 ,well.t"ef ..".eM....Il.F ".'Wle& tAT''''M ".. ""0"'0",-'. aMIIT I~ ....COCO. I
The recommendations provided by the medical personnel at the Renov! Center tor Specialized Services
and Harrisburg's Corrections personnel state that inmate Lanehart needs to continue In the rehabilitation
program to monitor his wound healing, exercise program to increase strength and endurance, monitoring-
ot nutritional Intake, and physiatry consultation. It is anticipated that it Inmate Lanehart became
stabUlzed upon completion ot this additional rehabilitation service, he will be placed in a special case
placement with a relative.
."... 0"" ..fl. fit :"'0 ...
C"1' .,,,.,.,..,,
.0.
"'OU." Q,
..eu........cc
~I)n tOt)
",'l"O,,'t._
,"1\t:Je,,~OIll
..oco
I
tl 10
9211 '9000 62300
I
315
""C'''VII
..",.
",w I'.
..,
.,.,. _"OJec, ,,"'... It
,..
'-.11, ",.
.". ""....
..'J
I"T""
...
.u
'.'0
'~CCT
I.IIIC 'f'" ....."'..
"OJ"'..
IoI.C
.,.""
'IPT, 0'
TUNS. ..,
un
.."..,.
I """"0" '~..
______, ,..J.-___
""''''''','rll ",u"."'''''('' It '~r~" "":I"'U,"""
I' / .
! i(} t> ~,.-
l '"he
..----r--'---~-_. .. -0.. u ________.J..__
fJ"" r I ~ Q" .... t , 1 ~ , 11' "'. , '.1'
...;' / EXHIBIT "fl"
. < I",'. '. I
I , ", !::> '
i I
, ' ,
, __,____-L__,.
,: ", r
.'
B. William Roth. Director of Renova Center. Was presented
by defendant and he was asked to sign the contracts for the 30 day
periods of January 26, 1993 through February 25, 1993 and February
26, 1993 through March 27, 1993.
3. Identify all documents which reflect the facts set forth
in Interrogatory number 1 and all documents whIch otherwise support
those claims.
ResDonse:
All documents utilized in depositions inclusive but not
limited to the following:
a. Memo to Paul O'Connor from Jeff Troutman dated
12/8/92 regarding the need to immediate medical attention.
b. Memo to Paul O'Connor from Jeff Troutman dated
1/27/93.
c. Memo to Paul O'Connor from Jeff Troutman dated
2/23/93.
d. Emergency Purchase of Service Contract for the period
1/26/93 through 2/25/93.
e. Emergency Purchase of Service Contract for the period
2/26/93 through 3/27/93.
f. Statement from Renova Center for services rendered
to Larry Lanehart from 1/27/93 to 6/18/93.
g. 2/14/94 memo from Troutman to O'Connor
h. 6/30/93 letter by Troutman to MRS
1. 7/6/93 memo from Troutman to O'Connor
j. 8/4/93 memo by Kobierecki from Troutman to O'Connor
k. 11/5/93 letter by Troutman to MRS
1. 4/6/94 memo Troutwan to Greenleaf
m. 3/24/94 letter troutman to Rausch
n. 6/30/93 letter Troutman to East Shore surgical
. 2
9, Identify what portion, if any, of Larry Lanehart's
medical bjll'was paid, when it was paid, and in what amount,
ReSDonse:
No payments were made on Lar~y Lanehart's bill,
10. Identify whether or not you are a participant in the
Department of Welfare's medical assistance program, when you became
a participant, and your participating provider identification
number.
Renova Center, provider number 141 934.
~
ResDonse:
DATED: March 4, 1996
R HARD OARE, Esquire
Attorney for plaintiff
1776 S, Queen Street
York, pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846 - 3000
1.0. No. 18631
\CrC\LAN2HART\PLEAOING\ANSW2R,INT
6
" .
.
B. William Roth, Director of Renova Center. Was presented
by defendant and he was asked to sign the contracts for the 30 day
periods of January 26, 1993 through February 25, 1993 and pebruary
26, 1993 through March 27, 1993.
THE FRAUD
C. Paul O'Connor, Regional director of the Bureau of
Community corrections, PA Department of corrections notified David
Maeyer, Business Manager that they were in need of a contract with
MRS(Renova). An Emergency Purchase of Service (EPS) was prepared
and approved by Tim Ringler. The EPS contract is for a 30 day
period of service, 1/26/93 through 2/25/93 at $750.00 per day. As
per his deposition, Mr. Maeyer represented to Mr. William Roth,
Director of Renova Center, that although he needed two more
signatures (on the contract) that he was going on verbal authority
that he could have Mr. Lanehart admitted to Renova and that the
Commonwealth would pay for the service.
Towards the end of February Mr. 0' Connor phoned Mr. Maeyer and
told him that Larry Lanehart would be kept at Renova for an
additional 30 days. Renova received anther EPS form for the period
of 2/26/93 through 3/267/93.
While these forms were being sent and processed at the
Governor's office Mr. Troutman informed Mr. Maeyer that Mr.
Alexander from Mr. Maeyer's accounting staff had told him that the
Department of Public Welfare accepted retroactively all costs
associated with Larry Lanehart t s treatment and that all bills
should be sent to the Department of Public Welfare, At this point
contract approval was not pursued. RenOVd was never informed by
the Department of corrections of its intention not to pay and it
was not until 11/5/93 that Mr. Troutman wrote to MRS to inform it
that payment for Mr. Lanehart's treatment must be obtained from the
Department of Public Welfare.
Defendant first notified plaintiff of it's intention not to
pay and to utilize medicaid on '1/5/93. By way of further answer.
plaintiff, through Martha Hartley. Patient Accounts Representative,
was informed on 7/7/93 by public Assistance that coverage was
denied because public assistance does not cover skilled nursing
benefits for inmates and it was illegal to seek payment from public
assistance.
2. Identify (ti tle. full name and present address) all
persons having knowledge of the facts set forth in Interrogatory
number 1 and for each person listed. describe the facts of which
he/she has knowledge and the manner in which he/she obtained that
knowledge.
RESPONSE:
william Roth - Director of Renova Center.
See Answer to
Interrogatory Hl.
3. State the reasons why you believe Defendant knew the
alleged facts to be false.
RESPONSE:
Conversations with Mr. Maeyer concerning payment of the bills
by DPW took place in March or April of 1993. Notification from the
Department of Corrections that all bills should be forwarded to DPW
did not occur until 6/30/93.
,I .
.
4. State the reasons for how you believe Defendant intended
to induce your action from any alleged misrepresentations.
RESPONSE I
plaintiff does not understand the meaning of the term
....intended to induce your action f!Qm any alleged
misrepresentations.. By way of further answer see response to
Interrogatory Number 1 sets forth in detail the misrepresentations
by Defendant to plaintiff wherein plaintiff could and should rely
on Defendant's representations of payment of $750.00 per day.
5. State how you justifiably relied upon any alleged
misrepresentations made by Defendant.
RESPONS~
Not only had Renova Center received verbal approval from Mr.
Maeyer, it had received copies of the EPS contracts. Although
these contracts did not have signatures on them at the time of
receipt it was communicated to Mr. Roth, of Renova, that the final
signatures were being pursued.
6, State all damages that you claim were suffered as a
proximate result of any misrepresentation made by Defendant.
RESPONSE:
$68.891.18 - The total medical bill for services rendered to
Larry Lanehart.
7. When did you first become aware that Larry Lanehart was
eligible for medical assistance? By what means did you learn of
Lanehart's eligibility?
RESPONSE:
Renova first became aware that Mr. Lanehart may be eligible
.. ~ . I
for medical assistance upon receipt of Jeffrey Troutman' B letter on
6/30/93.
8. Did you submit a claim for payment to the Pennsylvania
Department of Welfare?
al If so, on what date?
b) If so, what were the results?
c) If not, why not?
RESPONSE:
On July 7, 1993 Martha Hartley contacted Medical Assistance.
She was informed that coveraqe was revoked because it was illeqal
for Mr. Lanehart's counselor to apply for MA while he was in the
halfway house for only one day.
e~1 / ...... _
RICHARD OARE, Esquire
Attorney for Plaintiff
1776 S. Queen Street
York, Pennsylvania 17403
(717) 846-3000
1.0. No. 18631
DATED: April 12, 1996
\C:E c\laUhu ~ \p 1. "dln~\an.l n ~.r. ~
, t' ·
CERTIPICATE OP SERVICE
I, Richard Oare, Esquire, hereby certify that I have this 12th
day of April, 1996. sent a true and correct copy of the foreqoinq
documents I
PLAINTIPF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S SECOND SET OP
,
INTERROGATORIES to the following individual. via United States
Mail. postage paid, addressed as follows:
Jill A. Devine, Esq.
Pa. Dept. of Corrections
P,O. BOX 598
camp Hill, PA. 17001.0598
i---
{
. /'
(~\
ichard Oare, Esquire
Attorney 10: 18631
1776 South Queen Street
York, PA 17403
(717) 846-3000
Attorney for Plaintiff
I
t. r
I,.'
\,...
If,
~ -.
PRAECIPE FOR ~ISTING CASE FOR ARGUHEN~
(Iolwt be typewritten and subnitted in duplicate)
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
Please list the within matter for the next ArgUneIlt Court.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------.--------
CAPTION OF CASE
(entire caption must be stated in full)
Mechanicsburg Rehab Systems
e V3 ~
0'\
. ~
~m ~I
,.,
f! -
,. -.I
,',
c::c.: ~ ;~
:i;c.
!il:' ~
I? (1'.: 'P.
0. :::>> ~
-.I
( Plaintiff)
VB.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvdnia, Department of Corrections
( Defendant)
No. 4046
19 94
Civil
1. State matter to be argued (Le.. plaintiff's rmtien for new trial. defendant's
derorrer to canplaint. etc.):
Defendanls Motion for Summary Judgement
2. Identify counsel who will argue case:
(a) for plaintiff: Richard Oare, Esq,
Address: 1776 South Queen Street
York, PA 17403-4628
(b) for defendant: Raymond W. Dorian, Assistant Counsel
Address: Office of Chief Counsel
55 Utley Drive, P,O. Box 59B
Camp Hill, Pa 17001-0598
3. I will notify all parties in writing within t'4IlO days that this case hII8
been listed for arglII1ent.
4. Arg\Jrent Court Date:
Dated:
, '. i
"
,
.'
",
, ,
"
"
!,.,
,
,
"
,
,
, "
'J,I,<.i;,"I"
.
FILED-OFRce
0F TI",O:: F:'(\Wf"0TM'lY
tl1 ,1W ? 9 PI'I 21 !16
CUM:'klt, . ;1) (",,;,;illY
l;l:.N~;SY~/i'N!1I
"
"
"
, ,
"
I """I' -I"l, "1', d.-.-,.' .""-- -"";1~1'-,"-," "...."r',....'
'?";Y)"l'Jif'!i\,!~t:1'.\'\~'(~~I'.-','
Ill'",4''I~'Wf.l1l'r'\'!''' f
i'~-'_~':\M:~tnW:1~/,::;', " .
" ~:
. ;.
,
I'-_'''~''.l' ,
"
1-'
.'
"
* "
,
.
"
" ,
,
,
", "
" ,
"
,~ J I
"
"
jj,~'-:-j~,....
,.''-1,,[
",
"
..
"
,
,
, ,
"
,
,
~I'
-"1'
Ii
.(.,.."""''''.,"'''''''''''--
'if' "-'T'tV("..c:<'; ,rJi'H ~;rJ:,!i',~',
,,-j;'k,I,-h, I
,
,I
,I
,
, '
,
,',\