Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-3842LEROY D. CAMERONI, Plaintiff VS. WILLIAM ANDREW FOLTZ; IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. ~ ~J~._CIVIL TERM DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES,: CIVIL ACTION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYVLANIA;: AND : DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: Defendants : NOTICE TO DEFEND YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court our 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 complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO F1ND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association Two Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-3166 LEROY D. CAMERONI, Plaintiff VS. WILLIAM ANDREW FOLTZ; : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. ~ CIVIL TERM DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES,: CIVIL ACTION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYVLANIA;: AND : DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: Defendants : COMPLAINT AND NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni, by and through his attorney, Henry F. Coyne, Esquire, Coyne & Coyne, P.C., and avers the following in support of the within Complaint. 1. Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni is an adult individual who resides at 26 Wood Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant, William Andrew Foltz, is an adult individual who resides at 126 Valley View Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The Defendant, Department of General Services is an agency of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with offices at 515 North Office Building, Harrisburg, PA 17125-0001. 4. The Defendant, Department of Public Welfare is an agency of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with offices at Room 333, Health and Welfare Building, Harrisburg, PA. 5. On November 15, 2000, Defendant William Andrew Foltz was an employee, agent or servant of the Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and/or · the Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 2 On November 15, 2000, at 4:40 P.M., Defendant William Andrew Foltz, while an employee, agent or servant, as noted in Paragraph 4 above, and while perforating services within the scope of his employment, the Defendant William Andrew Foltz controlled and operated a 1999 Plymouth Breeze motor vehicle; bearing Pa. Registration License No. 19161-PA owned by the Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and/or Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and which was traveling South on U.S. Route No. 11 & 15 in Penn Township, Perry County, Pennsylvania. On November 15, 2000 at 4:40 P.M., Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni owned, controlled and operated a 1995 Buick Regal motor vehicle, bearing Pa. Registration License No. AXJ 2411 that was traveling with traffic behind numerous vehicles going South on U.S. Routes 11 & 15 at the vicinity of the Village of Perdix, Penn Township, Perry County, Pennsylvania. On November 15, 2000 at 4:40 P.M., the motor vehicle that Defendant, William Andrew Foltz was operating made a violent impact with the rear of Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni's motor vehicle that was in traveling behind other motor vehicles which were traveling slowly because a school bus, in front of the line of motor vehicles, was lawfully stopped and discharging. The rear end collision was due solely to the negligence of the Defendant, William Andrew Foltz in that: (a) Defendant operated his motor vehicle in a careless, reckless and negligent manner; 3 (b) (c) (d) (e) (g) Defendant operated his motor vehicle without due regard to the right, safety and position of the Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni; Defendant failed to use due care under the circumstances; Defendant failed to keep a proper lookout for Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni's motor vehicle; Defendant did not have his vehicle nnder the proper control so as to stop his vehicle within the assured clear distance ahead which is in violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code (75 Pa. C.S.A. Section 3361, as amended); Defendant operated his motor vehicle in disregard of the roles of the road and the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and Defendant operated his motor vehicle in a careless disregard for the safety of Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni, in failing to operate his motor vehicle at a safe speed in making violent impact with the rear of the vehicle, that was in a stationary position, and operated by Plaintiff, Leroy D. Cameroni which is in violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code (75 Pa. C.S.A. Section 3322, as amended). 10. COUNT NO. 1 Lero¥ D. Cameroni~ Plaintiff vs. William Andrew Foltz~ Defendant Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 9 of the Complaint as if individually set forth within this Count. 4 11. As a result of the collision of the Defendant's vehicle with Plaintiff's vehicle, Plaintiff suffered severe injuries to his body in the nature of pain in his neck, right shoulder and back; headaches and light-headedness. 12. Additionally, the Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, prostrate, and disoriented, and was made to undergo great mental anguish and physical pain from which he suffered; still suffers and will continue to suffer for an indefinite time in the future. 13. In order to treat and attempt to remedy the aforesaid injuries, Plaintiff has been compelled to expend various sums of money for medicine and medical attention and care and he will be required to expend additional sums of money for the same purpose in the future. 14. As a result of Defendant's negligent conduct, Plaintiff was unable to perform his normal household duties and pursue his daily habits to his great, determinant and loss. 15. As a result of the Defendant's negligence and the violent impact of Defendant's motor vehicle with Plaintiff's motor vehicle, Plaintiff sustained substantial damage to his motor vehicle. The reasonable cost to repair the motor vehicle was $7,864.36 16. As a result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff had to lease a motor vehicle for his use for a period of 42 days. The cost incurred was $2,I69.65 17. Plaintiff has made demand for compensation of the aforementioned injuries and losses which Defendant has refused and still refuses to pay. WItEREFORE, Plaintiff Leroy D. Cameroni respectfully requests that your Honorable Court find in his favor and against Defendant, William Andrew Foltz in an amount in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), plus interest and docket costs. 5 COUNT NO. II Leroy D. Cameroni~ Plaintiff vs. Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Penns¥1vania~ Defendant 18. Paragraphs 1 through 17 are incorporated herein. 19. Plaintiff Leroy D. Cameroni incorporates the preceding paragraphs 1 through 17 of this Complaint as if individually set forth within this Count. 20. Defendant, William Andrew Foltz, at all times and dates stated in this Complaint was an employee, servant, and agent of the Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 21. At the date and time of impact the Defendant, William Andrew Foltz was an employee of the Defendant, Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and operating within the scope of his employment. 22. The negligence of William Andrew Foltz in causing the collision, described above, is imputed with his employer and master, the Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Leroy D. Cameroni respectfully requests that your Honorable Court ~nd in his favor and against Defendant, Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in an amount in excess of Twenty-t~ve Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), plus interest and docket costs. 23. COUNT NO. III Leroy D. Cameronin Plaintiff vs. Department of Public Welfare~ Commonwealth of PennsyIvania~ Defendant Paragraphs 1 through 22 are incorporated herein. 6 24. Plaintiff Leroy D. Cameroni incorporates the preceding paragraphs 1 through 21 of this Complaint as if individually set forth within this Count. 25. Defendant, William Andrew Foltz, at all times and dates stated in this Complaint was an employee, servant, and agent of the Department of Public Wefare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 26. At the date and time of impact the Defendant, William Andrew Foltz was an employee of the Defendant, Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and operating within the scope of his employment. 27. The negligence of William Andrew Foltz in causing the collision, described above, is imputed with his employer and master, the Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. WItEREFORE, Plaintiff Leroy D. Cameroni respectfully requests your Honorable Court find in favor of the Plaintiff and against Defendant, Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in an amount in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), plus interest and docket costs. Dated: Respectfully submitted, COYNE & COYNE, P.C. Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227 (717) 737-0464 Pa. S. Ct. No. 06250 Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 VERIFICATION The facts set forth in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, information and belief and are verified subject to the penalties for unswom falsification to authorities under 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 4904. Dated: ' / "/ Leroy D~meroni 8 Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 LEROY D. CAMERONI, Daniel R. Goodemote Senior Deputy Attorney General Direct Dial 717-783-3147 · IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff · CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 02-3842 CIVIL TERM WILLIAM ANDREW FOLTZ, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES, COMMONWEALTH OF . PENNSYLVANIA, AND DEPARTMENT CIVIL ACTION OF PUBLIC WELFARE, COMMON- WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Defendants ' JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendants, William Andrew Foltz, Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in regard to the above case. ~~NI~L R. G~dDEMOTE SR. DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL #30986 ~ERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day sending a copy of the foregoing document to ail persons and in the manner indicated below. SERVICE MADE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Henry F. Coyne, Esquire 3901 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227 Senior Deputy Attorney General #30986 Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th FI., Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 783-3~47 / DATED: ~'|d z. Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Daniel R. Goodemote Senior Deputy Attorney General Direct Dial 717-783-3147 LEROY D. CAMERONI Plaintiff Vo WILLIAM ANDREW FOLTZ, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, COMMON- WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 02-3842 CWIL TERM CIVIL ACTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Defendants, William Andrew Foltz, Department of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the Department of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth Defendants) and file this Answer and New Matter to Plaintiff's Complaint: 1. Admitted, based solely on information obtained fi.om the police accident report. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted that on November 15, 2000, Defendant William Andrew Foltz was an employee of the Department of Public Welfare of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It is denied that Defendant Foltz was an employee, agent or servant of the Depamnent of General Services of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 6. It is admitted that on November 15, 2000, Defendant William Andrew Foltz, while acting as an employee within the scope of his employment for the Pennsylvania Depathnent of Public Welfare, was operating a 1999 Plymouth Breeze beating Pennsylvania license plate number 19161 PA. It is further admitted the vehicle is registered to the Depmtment of General Services, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It is admitted that the vehicle was traveling south on Routes 11 and 15 in Penn Township, Perry County, Pennsylvania. However, according to the police accident report, the accident took place at 4:10 P.M.on November 15, 2000, not at 4:30 P.M., as alleged. The remaining allegations of paragraph 6 are denied. 7. Based on the police accident report, averments of paragraph 7 are admitted with the exception of the time. According to the police accident report, the crash took place at 4:10 P.M. and both vehicles were towed from scene. Based there on, it is denied that Plaintiff was operating his motor vehicle at 4:30 P.M. According to the police accident report the accident took place at 4:10 P.M. 8. Admitted only that on November 15, 2000, the motor vehicle operated by William Andrew Foltz, impacted with the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle which was traveling behind other vehicles. Contrary to Plaintiff's allegation, Commonwealth Defendants believe that the accident occurred at 4:10 P.M. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants do not have sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the remaining averments of paragraph 8 and they are therefore denied. 9. Denied generally pursuant to Rule 1029(e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. COUNT I LEROY D. CAMERONI, PLAINTIFF VS. WILLIAM ANDREW FOLTZ. DEFENDANT 10. Requires no answer. 11. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or infomxation to form a belief as to the truth of these avetments. 12. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the troth of these averments. 13. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments. 14. Denied. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to from a belief as to the truth of these avemients. Denied generally pursuant to Rule 1029(e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil 15. Procedure. 16. Procedure. 17. Denied generally pursuant to Rule 1029(e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Admitted that Plaintiff had previously made a demand for damages to his vehicle and for a rental vehicle. It's denied that Plaintiff made previous demands for compensation for personal injury. It is further denied that the Commonwealth Defendant have refused to pay for Plaintiffs losses. Prior to the filing of this Complaint, Defendant's have paid the following sums to or for Plaintiff.' (a) Fire Inc. - $590.00 (b) State Farm Insurance - $6,850.87 (c) State Farm Insurance Company - $114.22 (d) Leroy Cameroni - $250.00 (e) Enterprise Rent-a-Car - $1,301.58 Wherefore, the Commonwealth Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiff. COUNT H LEROY D. CAMERONI, PLAINTIFF VS. DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. DEFENDANT 18. Requires no answer. 19. Requires no answer. 20. Denied. 21. Denied. 22. The allegation as to employment is denied. Remainder of the allegation is a conclusion of law to which no response of pleading is required. Wherefore, the Commonwealth Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against all other parties COUNT IH LEROY D. CAMERONI, PLAINTIFF VS. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. DEFENDANT 23. Requires no answer. 24. Requires no answer. 25. Admitted. 26. Admitted. 27. The negligence of William Andrew Foltz is denied generally pursuant to Rule 1029(e) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The remaining allegation of paragraph 27 is denied as a conclusion of law to which no response of pleading is required. Wherefore, Commonwealth Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against all other parties. 28. The present action is controlled by the provisions of 1 Pa. C.S. §2310 and Act No. 1980-142, set forth in 42 Pa. C.S. §§8501, et seq., which Acts are incorporated herein and pled by reference. The Commonwealth Defendant asserts all the defenses contained therein. 29. Should liability be found on the part of the Commonwealth Defendant, the amounts and types of damages recoverable in the present action are limited and controlled by 42 Pa. C. S. §8528. 30. The Commonwealth Defendant asserts all defenses available to it under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 1701, et seq., and any successor statute and claims any defenses which may be available pursuant to said Act. 31. The Commonwealth Defendants have already reimbursed Plaintiff for damages in the amount set forth below: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Fire Inc. - $590.00 State Farm Insurance - $6,850.87 State Farm Insurance Company - $114.22 Leroy Cameroni - $250.00 Enterprise Rent-a-Car - $1301.58 Wherefore, the Commonwealth Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiff. Respectfully submitted, D. MICHAEL FISHER Attorney General "'~D~iel R. Goodemote, I.D. #30986 Senior Deputy Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 783-3147 - Direct Dial DATED: September 26, 2002 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing document(s) upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below: SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL POSTA GE PREPAID ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Henry F. Coyne, Esquire 3901 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227 (Attorneys for Plaintiff) Torts Litigation Section 15t~ Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-783-3147 - Direct Dial By: ~I~/NIEL R.'~ODE-MOTE ID #30986 Senior Deputy Attorney General DATED: September 26, 2002 '- SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO: 2002-03842 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND CAMERONI LEROY D VS FOLTZ WILLIAM ANDREW - REGULAR BRIAN BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon FOLTZ WILLIAM ANDREW the DEFENDANT , at 2107:00 HOURS, on the 21st day of August , 2002 at 286 RIDGEHILL ROAD MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055 CAROLYN POTTS, SISTER by handing to a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 4.83 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 32.83 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ~[o ~ day of So Answers: R. Thomas Kline O /lO/2OO2 HENRY COYNE By: Deputy Sheriff SHERIFF'S CASE NO: 2002-03842 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND CAMERONI LEROY D VS FOLTZ WILLIAM ANDREW RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY R. Thomas Kline , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT to wit: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN County, serve the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE He therefore Pennsylvania, to On September 10th , 2002 this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Out of County Surcharge Dep Dauphin Co 6.00 9.00 10.00 31.50 .00 56.50 09/10/2002 HENRY COYNE Sheriff of Cumberland County Sworn and subscribed to before me this ~2o ~ day of ~ ~/~ .~ A.D. ! ~ Prothono-t~z~y · , SHERIFF'S RETURN - OUT OF COUNTY CASE NO: 2002-03842 P CONLMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND CAMERONI LEROY D VS FOLTZ WILLIAM ANDREW Thomas Kline duly sworn according to law, and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES but was unable to locate Them deputized the sheriff of DAUPHIN serve , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff who being says, that he made a diligent search and , to wit: He therefore Pennsylvania, in his bailiwick. County, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE to On September 10th , 2002 , this office was in receipt of the attached return from DAUPHIN Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Out of County .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 .00 16.00 09/10/2002 HENRY COYNE ~. Thomas Kline f Sheriff of Cumberland County Sworn and subscribed to before me this ~ ~ day of ~__ ~ A.D. ' ' Prothonotary' t , Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin A/qD NOW:August 19, 2002 COMPLAINT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE tO GAIL KOHL, SECRETARY of the original COMPLAINT to him/her the contents thereof at ROOM 333 HEALTH & WELFARE BLDG HBG, PA 17101-0000 : CAMERONI LEROY D vs : DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Sheriff's Return No. 1975-T - -2002 OTHER COUNTY NO. 02-3842 at ll:15AMserved the within upon by personally handing 1 true attested copy(les) and making known Sworn and subscribed to before me this 30TH day of AUGUST, 2002 ! PROTHONOTARY SO Answers, Sheriff of Dauphin County, Pa. By · / Deputy Sherlf f Sheriff's Costs:S31.50 PD 08/19/2002 RCPT NO 168155 HUNTER Mary Jane Snyder Real Estate Deputy William T. Tully Solicitor Dauphin County Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 ph: (717) 255-2660 fax: (717) 255-2889 Jack Lotwick Sheriff J. Daniel Basile Chief Deputy Michael W. Rinehart Assistant Chief Deputy Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Dauphin AND NOW:August 19, 2002 COMPLAINT DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES tO ARLENE MITCHELL, RECEPTIONIST of the original COMPLAINT to him/her the contents thereof at 515 NORTH OFFICE BLDG HBG, PA 17101-0000 : CAMERONI LEROY D vs : DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Sheriff's Return No. 1975-T - -2002 OTHER COUNTY NO. 02-3842 at ll:00AMserved the within upon by personally handing 1 true attested copy(ies) and making known Sworn and subscribed to before me this 30TH day O~-~UGUST, 2002 t PROTHONOT.~.¥ So Answers, Sheriff ' Sheriff's Costs: $31.50 PD 08/19/2002 RCPT NO 168155 TORO ~n The Coart of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Leroy D. C~neroni VS. William Andrew Foltz et al 02 3842 civil SERVE: Department of General Services Now, AugUst 14, 2002 hereby deputize the Sheriff of deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY} PA, do County to execute this Writ, this Affidavit of Service Now, ,20 , at o'clock __ M. served the Within upon by handing to a and made known to copy of the original So answers, the contents thereof. Sheriff of County, PA Sworn and subscribed before me this __ day of ,20__ COSTS SERVICE MIl ,EAGE AFFIDAVIT In The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Leroy D. C~meroni VS. William Andrew Foltz et al 02 3842 civil SERVE: Department of Public Welfare No. Now, AugUst 14, 2002 , I, SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA, do hereby deputize the Sheriff of Dauphin County to execute this Writ, this deputation being made at the request and risk of the Plaintiff. Sheriff of Cumberland County, PA }XIOW, within Affidavit of Service ., 20__., at o'clock M. served the upon by handing to a and made known to copy of the original So answers, the contents thereof. Sworn and subscribed before me this __ day of ., 20__ Sheriff of County, PA COSTS SERVICE MILEAGE AFFIDAVIT ADAM G. GRISSINGER, APPELLANT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, APPELLEE : 02-3842 CIVIL TERM IN RE: APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVING PRIVILEGE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ~*t'~l~ day of October, 2002, the within appeal from an DISMISSED. order of suspension of driving privilege, IS By Edgar B. Bayley, J. Robert Saidis, Esquire For Appellant George H. Kabusk, Esquire For Appellee :sa] ADAM G. GRISSINGER, APPELLANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, APPELLEE : 02-3842 CIVIL TERM IN RE: APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVING PRIVILEGE OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., October 24, 2002:- Appellant, Adam G. Grissinger, filed this appeal from a notice by PennDOT of the suspension of his driving privilege for 365 days pursuant to the Vehicle Code at 75 Pa.C.S. Section 1539. A hearing was conducted on October 21, 2002. On May 4, `1998, appellant was assessed four points for speeding. On July 5, '1998, he was assessed another four points for speeding. Because he was over six points, PennDOT notified him by letter that he must pass a special examination. The contents of that notice, which is referred to on the certification statement of PennDOT, is not in PennDOT's records. On July 6, '1998, appellant was assessed four points for a third speeding conviction. That gave him a total of twelve points which triggered a sixty day suspension of his driving privilege. The notice of the suspension was mailed to appellant on July 28, 1998. Pursuant to the prior notice to pass a special examination based on his second speeding conviction, appellant took and passed the examination 02-3842 CIVIL TERM on September '1'1, '1998. However, on that same day, September 11, '1998, PennDOT mailed him a notice suspending his driving privilege indefinitely. The notice stated, inter alia: An indefinite suspension will be imposed under Section 1538 of the Vehicle Code, on the effective date listed below, as a result of your failure to comply with the required Special Examination. The effective date of suspension is 09/11/1998, 12:01 a.m. The above mentioned sanction is in addition to any previously issued sanction(s). Failure to pass the examination before 09/11/1998 will result in the suspension of your driving privilege until you pass the examination. If you pass the examination on or after 09/11/1998, you must pay a $25.00 restoration fee, and are not authorized to drive until your driving privilege is officially restored by the Department. The notice set forth that there was a right to appeal the indefinite suspension within 30 days of the mail date. No appeal was filed. Appellant's driving privilege was restored on September 29, 1998, after he completed the sixty day suspension for which he was notified on July 28, 1998. On May 22, 1999, appellant received a ninety day suspension for carrying a false ID card. His driving privilege was restored on November 8, 1999. Appellant was assessed points on June 30, 2000, and October 13, 2000, for two more speeding convictions. Following yet another speeding conviction, he was assessed four points on June 16, 2002. This resulted in his point total again exceeding eleven points, triggering the current suspension of 365 days. PennDOT maintains that this is the -2- 02-3842 CIVIL TERM fourth suspension of driving privilege which, pursuant to Section 1539 of the Vehicle Code, mandates a 365-day suspension. The prior suspensions being: (1) 1998, sixty days, (2)1998, indefinite, and (3) 1999, ninety days. Appellant maintains that this is a third suspension, the length of which should be for 165 days, because the indefinite suspension in 1998 was invalid, and should not be counted under Section 1539(c) of the Code. Section 1539 provides: (a) General rule.--When any person's record shows an accumulation of 11 points or more, the department shall suspend the operating privilege of the person as provided in subsection (b). (b) Duration of suspeneion.--The first suspension shall be for a period of 5 days for each point, the second suspension shall be for a period of 10 days for each point, the third suspension shall be for a period of 15 days for each point and any subsequent suspension shall be for a period of one year. (c) Determination of subsequent suspensions.--Every suspension and revocation under any provision of this subchapter shall be counted in determining whether a suspension is a second, third or subsequent suspension. (Emphasis added.) Before we can address the merits of appellant's claim we must resolve a motion by PennDOT to quash this appeal as untimely. PennDOT mailed appellant notice of this 365-day suspension on July 10, 2002. The Judicial Code at 42 Pa.C.S. Section 5571(b) provides: Except as otherwise provided in subsections (a) and (c) an appeal from a tribunal or other government unit to a court or from a court to an appellate court must be commenced within 30 days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is taken, in the case of an interlocutory or final order. (Emphasis added.) The timeliness of this appeal is a jurisdictional issue. Department of -3- 02-3842 CIVIL TERM Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Shemer, 157 Pa. Commw. 380 (1993). The 30th day after July 10, 2002, was Friday, August 9, 2002. The appeal was filed on Monday, August 12th, thus it is untimely? An extension of a statutory appeal cannot be granted as a matter of grace or mere indulgence. Dixon Estate, 443 Pa. 303 (1971). Extensions are generally limited to cases where there is fraud or some breakdown in the court's operation. West Penn Power Co. v. Doddard, 460 Pa. 551 (1975). See also, Overnite Transportation Company v. Local Union No. 107, 786 A.2d 173 (2001). In the case sub judice, our examination of the evidence on the issue of the untimely appeal satisfies us that there is no legal basis for granting an extension. See Tarlo v. University of Pittsburgh, 66 Pa. Commw. 149 (1981). Having no discretion to exemise, we will not address the appeal on the merits. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ~ day of October, 2002, the within appeal from an order of suspension of driving privilege, IS DISMISSED. Edga; B. Baylei,~J.~ ' If the thirtieth day following the date of the notice of the mailing of the suspension had been on either a Saturday or Sunday, or on any day made a legal holiday by the laws of this Commonwealth or the United States, this appeal filed on Monday, August 12th, would have been timely. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1908. -4- 02-3842 CIVIL TERM Robert Saidis, Esquire For Appellant George H. Kabusk, Esquire For Appellee :sal -5-