HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-00715
-
.
.
I.ISA R. JOHNSON,
IN THE COUR'r OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
Plaintitt
.' VI 'If
:j(.\/\t\,~ lIu..J,\
PITTSBURGH-a:1III/B61l ALTOONA
EXPRESS, INC., a Pennsylvania
Corporation; PJAX, INC" a
Pennsylvania Corporation; and
WILLIAM KAUTZ, JR., an individual
Defendants
NO .1&
1/1 (I, ;L( 'l_- A I
:::.J.L . "Y"'--J
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
fRA.elf. rOR WRIT or SUMMONS
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
A. Please issue a Writ of Summons in the above-captioned action,
naming as Defendants the~ein tpe fOllowing,
}, /"lslc"ul\ ...
1. Pittsburgh-aohneeR Altoona Express, Inc., a Pennsylvania
Corporation, having its register.ed place of business at: 2850 Kramer
Drive, Gibsonia, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 15044; and
2. PJAX, Inc., a pennsylvania Corporation, having its
registered place of business at, 2850 Kramer Drive, Gibsonia, Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania, 15044; and
3 . wi lliam Kaut z, Jr., an individual, whose last known
precise residence is: 2322 State Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania, 17103,
B. Please direct the Sheriff of Cumberland County, through the
deputized Sheriff of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to effect personal
service of the Writs of Summons on the corporate Defendants in
accordance with Rule 424 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure
designating the method of authorized service of original process upon
corporations wi thin the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the registered
business addresses for each set forth above in Paragraphs A.1. and A.2.
C. Please direct the Sheriff of Cumberland County, through the
deputized Sheriff of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, to effect personal
service of the Writ of Summons on the individual Defendant in
accordance with Rule 402 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure
designating the method of authorized service of. original process upon
individual defendants within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the
last known precise residence of said individual Defendant set forth
above in Paragraph A.3.
1
... I ~'I
~ ,,( f
If" I , ,'l"~J. (1".,1 \..'1.1"" (tu\.
1'>'(1111 ,.,1."1 ~''''l",..ll'r
.J j!J'~'
l' :
11' ,i
I I
I
I
"
,I
I
!
'i
,I
I
J
,I
J
j' .
.'i
"
i
,
)
, I
H
,
I.
,
I
,
,(
.
And the Sheriff of Cumberland County is further requested to
make a Returl:1 of Service with regard to all Defendants in conformity
with RUle 405 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
,
"
,
LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A. KLEIN, P.C.
~~" ..qui"
I.D, No. 09825
100 Chestnut Street, Suite 210
Post Office Box 1152
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1152
(717) 233-0132
Attorney for Plaintiff
BYI
Datel Feb~uary ~I 1996
\1
!l
I
"
,
, ,
"
I,
t.lI
'I'
;1'
!j
, ,
;,1
'I l'
, '
, ,
"
,
,
, ,
'I
,)
"
"
" I
I')
,'I!.' I,
"
,"
I
j-p
,"1
2
I' '~
,(,,1
ni T
i';'f"
,,:,.
J.
tltl'
~'J
jJ
7t,
1;'11
d
'" '
rl
i.ot
,,, '1
Ii",.l'
{:;j'l
.1
J,i1
,.,
,\,n!
'd)
i'
~
I
.
~'
r.'"
11'(-; ,
0."
~..C:
......
;1... r'~
9<",
1:'1 '",'
, .1~1, to l .
~tlIJ
r'.:
1:1 ~
U
I'
"
, ,
"
i' J II
!,
1'1
'j'
if
;1
,I
"
,I
II.j
, ,
, I
1. ,
,
, ,
"."
i;C
(1'\
,
~J
,I
<0
<r}.
.,
-
-,;.
(~
,"-f,..
1~;J.~
'",)1J'11
t.J~:"J
,I'" ;:,;~
!,!l~d
,'1;1," .
, .:1
;,,~,'Ii:, i
\..;.;r,J
'M""'-
t_'l! J
,.)
U'
",j
<H
"
"
illi
"
~ ,I~
........ j ~
'\ .
.(\~
,-,..
I
Ii
il
'\("\
I'V'I
--
,....
~
.~ ~I ~"J
~i~~
, '
,.
"
I
,'!
I' "
" "
, i , ,
, ,
F!' " I
"
"
,; ,
'-!
,
"
'.'
"
"
"
"
i il
.1
"
I
"
,
'I'
!!
ijl
it '1
"
,I
Ii
ill
\1
).-1
I]
. ,
,
,
',I
',-I
J:
III,
'1;
, ,
I. ,
"
If
!I:
,
,
,I
, '
,I
,
,I
,
" '
"
"
,'Ii
.'
"
"
,
')!"
"
it
II d
I;'
II
II
I,
, "
l,j
, ,
"
, ,
'ii
"
,
~ ~i ,t~
~~i l!. ' .
" <"' "d,;f
(, ~ ~}t~
~~ I':; '~~,
~f, .- :",~
~1..1 ~ )d;
t1:~" P,:; ,-1m
) 'Vi "'I
It ..r~'" :::/
u., a>y'<.;!\'
"i""
'I
,
"
'I
/1 j'
"/
"
it
,
1!1;
"
'I
(I',
1,"'"
.
"
.'
.
.
',,;IIFI\' 11'1'" '1 Iili I \.!ld'1
lilll !II' "limn'
( i\!lr t/f'ir I.'J'=/t, ""ryi/;}tl ~i Fi
,;,INI'IIHIWEALTfI OF' PI::tHl:,,'t'VIANIAI
>";IW II T'I I'll'" (;1I111)r,:rll..ANP " "
,r"
"
)(J1!f1';\Jf:I, JjJ\~.^...B'..
_,'<-._.~. ':~."'~' '-'J" U' r"~'''~"n'._...
,
,
,
11;1
, I
, !
, ,
;! I
!, , ,
" '"
I
I,j
1,1
'I:':;,
,"
,
[' I Tr'!;l'1U.!l!J!!;l.9fUl.2rJlLAblg'J~.(L.:~
"
"
,
"
I ,I
, , , "
" Ii "
, ,
ii'
, '
fj.
Ttl(JJ!l;,J.~, J~_lJ,~l!ie'_""'~"T-,,,~,-,'j_"~'I';-...".m~'_._<-' ~;;hf!!r ~f.,f, '~hb
I,LJW, lSayttJ, Ur.a(i.' he "'/.)~J~,' n dJ,'J:'_U~ilJnt:tT~'lnhi(Jh
111JrIJ;,!,rj
d"'ill'1ndlll1~., ,tu ~j;~.l ..,ltl.\!JJ~."W,lJr~/;",ML
:~.,L(1\J, ,jlply
,
/Jnd 1.r1'lu"tt:Y
.,
ilJ~J~,."';'-T t'T-:-,m"H..a
UlWf)'" n U.?tl~JrdJ;tltl
, -'11
fl)I", Ul'l' , '",tx.l]ln
'I',j ,
t:1J
to
~~:i,:; r 'f f;J i:_hl?
H,Lm.,'..
,
.',...:_j'I.~lJ.!'!j ltC..
;, . . .' ,,' -1'1
",,1 t Ii 1. n, ~_W1l1'L.QE,.~'j\mJ1P}:!.l~,.;......,"w...'
(,I
, ,
...."..q..l-~.
, '
tn hte! bil:Ui...,t'~I~. !' n... U').'t'r~'fol''''
.
but. W'''TJ UI1;;blll' to) l'acst..
,
dup"tL~u~'th, llih.l'iff ot
'.'r7'C~-'~.l
CO'Hlty,
, , "I
1'"nrII11Y!.'lllnia.
i';
(} n '. )'I!JL'~.h..., "..,,_..~:;\!\hL
, ,I
II"" ,".I.;,,,~h'ld r"t.lJ I" 1'1 ,frl)rn
,
, '
J,'i1.)l'i;L',..!'......_~ t.ht'" ';l~hl~'p
~.~....d' .!l.~!J,rntN:,~u,.y, .!
was 11'1 r~c.i~~ 01
,
ClJli)nt.y~ p~I'I'nro)tlvit1nla.
l'iocketintil . ,
Out. ,j.f Ci;lunty
:Sll J"ch.J rq'f.,p
l),jlJphin' C'JlIll~,Y'
(.;.01il
;i~li100,
,_ 1l,'0lt1,
i , '~~~j. ~.i0
i'i
"
. c;.J tlillilW.w I ...;/ ~-;/ ..
'ir'/< ~" .....;~ ?- ,.:~
'. '/ Y..A?~~ -;1'.' ~.
R~' rrr11111f.ii.:J 'l{!..trll?',- ~tt}lreri,tf" ".~,h>-- ;'!
~:::il,'!r'!.J1'H (f:lst..f,!H
, .1
$1I~';, '3/i1 JI!:~~~,H! lHn~JfC:
'~,31 "",II l.;rdb
I , ;
,.
J !I
::3\1.:11'"n Hnd' ~~uPHJdribiUd 't,o bI01;'orin, nil!!
!-- ; '._ _ ,;1 . 'I )
t..lll :.......'L.. d~y' Qf Gf~t......"."..,.... ....
13".,5~1,p.. A, D,' ' . "
,_'I"
,
,
L,
q-
, '
"
'I
II
Y~~h,jJ~t6~~Y""':+~
, ,~ - ~ ,--. " " .1.
, <, '
, ,
H
, '
"
,
"
,..
If
Ii
C_RTI'ICAT. or S_RVIel
I, Susan M. williams, an employee of MArshall, Dennehey~
,
Warner, coleman & Goggin, do hereby certify that on this 9th day
of October, 1996 served a copy of the foregoing document via
First Class United States mail, postage prepaid as follows I
Mark S. Silver, Esquire
100 Chestnut Street, suite 210
Post Office Bolt ),152
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1152
Ji
,
, ..fL~- ~Vl, U),~i" 0~~)
, ~USAN M. ILL lAMS .'
"
"
ill
11.1,
'I "I
"
. ,
"
,
"
"
I.,
I,
,
>,1
i,
.j'
-,it
, ,
'I !I
'.
I,
I
" "
"
" iI
I ,
jJ"
,I
il}
" -j
I
I'
"1/'
,
I'i
,
;'1
'I
jl)
, '
. ,
'"
',I
,
'"
"..
Er:
l):"
(,-,1;
f'. '
I"
(,;~-
c,-,,
U';.;,
[1"
j: -,
,
1I.
,)
k,.,.
I,'
.
Ii',-.
, ..
~,--'}~,~!:-
, )~ii
",. -',-
;-.~: j l
,
" ,"
i1:1Cnt
I ":_l.\,Jao
~'[j
l,)
.;-.,
c,:;
..
~;
I I'
'I
I" "
"
fI'
'"
'I
"
i,1.-.
,
~:,
i"
,.."
Id
,
'I
. 1
, I
I ,
I,
"
"
,,,'
c
.;::.,
1,1)
I,P
.,
,I"
,
"
"
"
I
I
, '
"
"j
,I
,
;I
d
'I
!;
,
,
,
,
,
'I
'.\1
"
I'
1'/
"
,il
,
,
~ J
"
" ,
I"~
"
,..
"
,"' ,I")
I'
"
"
,
,
. ~-i
11
,I
"
I,)
f'.
1;
<"
Ii
"
'.1
,
Ji
if
II ; 1
"I 'rJ
'"
,
"
,I
"
,
,
,
"
'I
,
I
"
..". C. , ,
,;....
r.,.; C; I,,;
~b ,. .:- .r""
-'1
j 'T.T
h., ,,-
~( < "'., ,-
[.., 1,.'.. '.."
C~i. ., (i) I~:!
6" "":' i ,,!: rl~~
i1- '" t,:'':.':.,
."1'1 ,.., ',;,i[()
u: (.) :.!-J I~.
j.:'i q It'~J
II l'"
U r;~'; l.,j
I"
'I
,
,I' 'I
.'
I',
I;j
! J
,"
"
"
I
"
'"
':,
iI,
:1
"J
I"
'I:.
II
"
I'
"
d,
,
'I:' :'
I
I,~
"
iI
"
,,'
\1
"
I' 'I
"
'I
.J
!? .... \"'
- ..... "
r .. ~. ,
- :~;,)
~j :.t: , \
J~
Q., ,,oJ"' "
c:' "
k 0 5~
C"'l
t" . , , ,
, t- .jlffi
,..: g . ~!
'L- ,,")
0 U" ,~ !
~~
~~
Z~
ip-
8 .:. !il
~jo-l~
~ ~ I ~ ffi
r<8ZtJA
~~6~~
...: 100:
~ "'r<
~;:l0\1><
;;0 ~oe:
foo4 uzt:i
t:
...
t
...
:l
p-
.
;;0
o
'"
~
o
...,
,
00:
~
...
o-l
'.
,
I:>
~.~ i
)/ III III
~ ~ .. ~
:;j ~u.~"
J,~::l~lIl
:a lU ~"
o p.. .. 0 .
t; lIl~ e-e;
;;0 ..., 0
1%1 ..~ u '"
0' N
7 ~ i:i.~!;; .
ffi .~~;2~
00: ...:> ::l
t:JtnC1S....t~"t:1
tQ CI:I ... p..,~ 'M
~l:l g,~o-l.~
"'e::"'''o-l'1;l
~ta8~~.::l
i
....
A
~
i
~ ~
~ i P ~
~~J.~ ~~~i~I~'
~ =~i=~ ~io
..:J ~ V; 'r, III ~ ~
III E <.. P -
~ ~ ~ 0. ~
'J.r,
,
"
i'
'i
, '
, '
.
LISA R. JOHNSON,
IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 96-715 CIVIL
plaintiff
v.
PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN-ALTOONA
EXPRESS, INC., a pennsylvania
corporation; PJAX, INC., a
pennsylvania corporation; and
WILLIAM KAUTZ, JR" an individual
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
II 0 TIC B
YOU BAVS BBEN SOWD 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 is served. by entering a written
appearance personally or by 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 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 TAltB THIS PAPBR TO YOUR LAWYBR AT ONCB. 11 YOU DO HOT
BAVS A LAKYBR OR CANNOT Al'I'ORD ONB, GO TO OR TBLBPHONB THB OJ'J'ICB S"1'
J'OaTH BBLOW TO FIND OUT WRBaB YOU CAN GBT LBGAL HBLP.
Court Administrator
cumberland County courtbouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) ~49-6200
"
I! ',-'
, I'
l,ISA R. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff
IN THB COURT OF COMMON Pl,BAS OF
CUMBBRl,AND COUNTY, PBNNSYl,VANIA
CIVIl, ACTION - LAW
NO. 96-715 CIVIL
v.
PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN-ALTOONA
EXPRESS, INC., a pennsylvania
Corporation; PJAX.. INC., a
pennsylvania corporation; and
WILLIAM KAUTZ, JR., an individual
Defendants
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COllPlJAIN'l'
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Lisa R. Johnson, by her attorneys,
Law Offices of Joseph A. Klein, P.C., and files this complaint against
Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., a pennsylvania corporation;
PJAX, Inc., a pennsylvania corporation; and William Kaut:ll, Jr., an
individual, Defendants, upon a cause of action more fully set forth as
follows:
1, plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson is and was at all times relevant
hereto an adult American citizen of the Commonwealth of pennsylvania.
As of the date of the collision involved in the instant action,
Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson resided at 1529 N. Naudain Street, City of
Harrisburg, Dauphin county, pennsylvania, 17104; but as of the date of
filing hereof, said plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson resides at 5124 Haverford
Road, City of Harrisburg, Dauphin County, pennsylvania, 17109.
2. Defendant Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., is and
was at all times relevant hereto a pennsylvania corporation having its
1
principal place of business and registered office within the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at 2850 Kramer Drive, Gibsonia, Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania, 15044.
3. Defendant PJAX, Inc., is and was at all times relevant hereto
a Pennsylvania corporation having its principal place of business and
registered office within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at 2850
Kramer Drive, Gibsonia, Allegheny County, pennsylvania, 15044.
4. Defendant William Kautz, Jr., is an adult individual who
resides at 2322 State Street, City of Harrisburg, Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania, 17103.
5. The within civil action was commenced by Praecipe for Writ of
Summons, the same filed with the Office of the Prothonotary of
Cumberland County, pennsylvania, on February 9, 1996, docketed to No.
96-715 Civil. service of the Writs of Summons issued by the Office of
the Prothonotary of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, was made upon
Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and PJAX, Inc. by
the deputized sheriff of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, on February
26, 1996, and upon Defendant William Kautz, Jr. by the deputized
sheriff of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, on March 4, 1996.
6. The events giving rise to the instant cause of action occurred
Wednesday, February 16, 1994, at approximately 12: 37 p.m. on Ritter
Road situate in what is commonly referred to as the Rossmoyne
Industrial Park in Lower Allen Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania.
7. At all times relevant and material hereto, Oefendant William
2
Kautz, Jr., was an agent, servant, workman and/or employee of Defendant
pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and/or Defendant PJAX, Inc.,
who was acting within the course and scope of his employment, and was
on and about his duties in furtherance of the business of Defendant
Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and/or Defendant PJAX, Inc.
8. At the aforesaid time and place, Defendant William Kautz, Jr.
was operating a 1988 Mack truck tractor owned by Defendaflt PJAX, Inc.,
which was pulling a trailer unit owned by Defendant Pittsburgh-
Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., in a southerly direction and out of
the driveway access lane of EUR Datacenter, Inc., situate in the
Rossmoyne Industrial Park at 5040 Ritter Road in Lower Allen Township,
Cumberland county, pennsylvania. Ritter Road, at the location of its
intersection with the aforesaid driveway access lane, extends generally
in an east-west direction,
9. At the aforesaid time and place, Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson was
an owneI' of a 198,9 Ford Escort LX two-door hatchback, pennsylvania
Vehicle Identification No, lFAPP9196KT162427 bearing Pennsylvania
Vehicle Registration Plate No. SCV-082, which she was lawfully
operating in a westerly direction and in the right lane of travel
provided for eastbound traffic on Ritter Road, and was approaching its
point of intersection (from the north side of Ritter Road only) with
the driveway access lane servicing EUR Datacenter, Inc. at 5040 Ritter
Road,
10. At the aforesaid time and place, the tractor-trailer vehicle
I
operated on behalf of Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express,
3
Inc., and PJAX, Inc. by Defendant William Kautz, Jr., suddenly and
without warning pulled out from the driveway access lane servicin9 the
EUR Datacenter, Inc. premises at 5040 Ritter Road from the north, and
in a southerly direction, and entered into and onto the westbound lane
of Ritter Road, the through roadway having the right-of-way, at a point
immediately in front of the vehicle then and there operated by
Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnsoll, which was being operated along Ritter Road
in a westerly direction, and Defend~nt William Kautz, Jr" caused the
vehicle he was operating to collide suddenly, violently, and without
warning directly into the front right passenger's side of the vehicle
operated by Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson, which caused said plaintiff'S'
vehicle to be pushed across Ritter Road, and to the south, spill, ahd
come to rest against a snowbank situate along the south side of Ritter
Road, west of the point of impact,
11. The aforesaid collision between the vehicle operated by
Plaintiff Lisa R, Johnson and that owned by Defendant Pittsburgh-
Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc, and/or Defendant PJAX, Inc" operated
at the time by its agent, servant, workman, and/or employee Defendant
William Kautz, Jr. was caused solely by, and was the direct, proximate,
sole, and exclusive result of the negligence, recklessness, and
carelessness of the said Defendants pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona
Express, Inc, and/or Defendant PJAX, rnc., and/or their agent, servant,
workman, or employee, Defendant william Kautz, Jr., as aforesaid, and
was not caused in any manner whatsoever by any act or failure to act on
the part of Plaintiff, Lisa R. Johnson,
4
12. The negligence, carelessness, and recklessness of Defendant
William Kautz, Jr, in causing the aforesaid collision consisted of his:
(a) failure to operate and control Defendants' vehicle with
due care;
(b) failure to have Defendants' vehicle under adequate and
proper control so as to avoid striking plaintiff's
vehicle;
(c) failure to allow a safe distance between vehicles and in
failing to operate Defendants' vehicle with due regard
for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon and
the condition of the highway in violation of
pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, 75 pa.C.S.A. 53310;
(d) failure to operate the brakes in such a manner so that
Defendants' vehicle could be stopped in time to avoid
the collision with plaintiff's vehicle;
(e) failure to avoid a collision with the vehicle operated
by plaintiff when Defendant Kautz saw, or in the
exercise of due care, should have seen Plaintiff's
vehicle was on the through roadway and approaching the
driveway intersection in which Defendant's vehicle was
exiting, ahead and in full, unobstructed view of
Defendant Kautz;
(f) failure to operate Defendants' vehicle at a speed which
was reasonable or prudent under the conditions, giving
due regard to the actual and potential hazards then
existing, in violation of the pennsylvania Motor Vehicle
Code, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 53361;
(g) failing to yield the right -of -way to an oncoming vehicle
properly and lawfully proceeding on the through roadway,
in violation of the pennsylvania Motor Vehicle code, 75
Pa.C.S.A. 53324;
(h) operating a tractor-trailer at a rate of speed which
rendered Defendant incapable of controlling its
movements, in violation of the pennsylvania Motor
Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S.A, 53361;
(i) operating a tractor-trailer into the path of another
vehicle lawfully on the roadway, in violation of the
pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 553311(a)
and 3324;
5
(j) operating Defendants' vehicle with careless disregard
for the safety of the property and person of the
Plaintiff, in violation of the pennsylvania Motor
vehicle Code, 75 Pa,C.S.A. ~3714;
(k) failing to stop, change direction of, or otherwise avoid
impact with the vehicle Plaint.iff was operating within
the assured clear distance ahead, in violation of the
pennsylvania Motor Vehicle code, 75 Pa.C.S,A, ~3361;
(1) continuing to operate Defendant's vehicle in a direction
toward the vehicle plaintiff was operating when
Defendants' agent, servant, workman, or employee,
Defendant william Kautz, Jr" saw, or in the exercise of
reasonable dil igence, should have seen that further
operation in that direction would result in a collision
with Plaintiff's vehicle;
(m) failing to yield the right -of -way to plaintiff's vehicle
approaching on the roadway to be entered or crossed by
the Defendant in violation of the pennsylvania Motor
vehicle Code, 75 pa.C.S.A. ~3324;
(n) operating Defendants' vehicle upon the highways and
streets of the commonwealth of pennsylvania in utter
disregard of the rights and safety of others lawfully
upon such highways;
(0) failure to exercise that degree of care for the rights
and safety of plaintiff as required of Defendants under
the law;
(p) failing to operate Defendants' vehicle in an attentive
manner and failure to maintain a sharp lookout on the
road ahead for surrounding traffic condi,tions; and
(q) continuing to operate Defendants' vehicle out and into
Ri t ter Road, the through roadway having the right -of -way
and directly toward and into Plaintiff's vehicle when
Defendant saw, or in the exercise of reasonable
diligence, should have seen that further operation in
that direction would result in a collision with
Plaintiff's vehicle.
13. Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., and
PJAX, Inc. are vicariously liable for the negligence, carelessness, and
recklessness of their agent, servant, workman, and/or employee,
6
'I
Defendant william Kautz, Jr., as hereinbefore set forth in causing the
aforesaid collision with the vehicle operated by plaintiff and the
latter having sustained injuries and damages resulting therefrom as
hereinafter claimed under the Doctrines of Agency and Respondeat;
Superior.
14. As a direct, proximate, sole, and exclusive result of the
negligence of Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc.,
and PJAX, Inc., and/or their agent, servant, workman, or employee,
Defendant William Kautz, Jr., in causing the aforesaid collision,
Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson was thrown violently about the int~rior of
the vehicle she was operating and sustained the following multiple,
serious, severe, and painful injuries, some of which are of a permanent
nature, and include but are not limited to:
(a) injuries and damages in and about the muscles,
ligaments, tissues, vessels, nerves, discs, and bones of
the head, neck, back, chest, shoulders, arms, legs,
knees, and hands,
(b) central subligamentous protrusion at the C6 -C7 level
which has resulted in intractable and chronic pain and
discomfort in the cervical spine,
(c) chronic, intractable, and recurrent pain over the medial
border of the left scapula with radiating paresthesia
into and down the left upper extremity with resultant
partial weakness in the left upper extremity,
(d) chronic and recurrent cervical and thoracic pain and
discomfort resulting from cervical strain requiring the
use for the management thereof of non-steroidal anti-
inflammatory medication with attendant out-patient
modalities of therapy,
(e) recurrent chronic headaches,
(f) palpable tightness in both paranuchal masses,
7
(9)
t.nde~ness over the left paravertebral muscles in the
thoracic region with identifiable trigger points which
required trigger point injections for the attempted
management thereof;
possible nerve root encroachment producing the chronic
and recurrent pain and burning sensation in and about
the areas of the trigger points along the parascapular
area;
(h)
pain and discomfort associated with the administration
of trigger point injections and in the active physical
therapy in which plaintiff participated;
(j) multiple levels of cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and
sacral spinal pain; and
(i)
(k) such other general pain and discomfort resulting from
the injuries sustained, treatments, diagnostic studies
and tests performed, medical procedures accomplished,
physical therapy, and recuperative periods following
thereafter.
15. AS a direct and proximate result of the negligence of
Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and PJAX, Inc.,
and/or their agent, servant, workman, or employee, Defendant william
Kautz, Jr., in causing the aforesaid collision and Plaintiff Lisa R.
Johnson to sustain the injuries set forth as aforesaid in paragraph 14
of the Complaint, Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson has incurred in the past
and may in the future continue to incur costs and expenses for medical
care and treatment, some portion of which may exceed the sums
recoverable under the limitations as set forth in the Motor Vehicle
Financial Responsibility Law, Act of February 12, 1984 (P.L. 26/ No.
11), as amended, 75 Pa.C.S.A. S1711, and claim is made therefor.
16, As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of
Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and PJAX, Inc.,
and/or their agent, servant, workman, or employee, Defendant William
8
Kautz, Jr., in causing the aforesaid collision and plaintifC Lisa R.
Johnson to sustain the injuries set forth in paragraph 14 of the
Complaint as aforesaid, said plaintiff has suffered an impairment of
her earning capacity and the loss of future earnings, which sums may
not be recoverable by plaintiff [,isa R, Johnson under the provisions of
the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, Act of February 12,
1984 (P.L. 26, No. 11), as amended, and claim is made therefor.
17. As a further direct and proximate result of the negligence of
Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and PJAX, Inc.,
and/or their agent, servant, workman, or employee, Defendant William
Kautz, Jr., in causing the aforesaid collision and plaintiff Lisa R.
Johnson to sustain the injuries set forth in paragraph 14 of the
complaint as aforesaid, said Plaintiff has undergone mental and
physical pain and suffering, anguish, humiliation, and loss of life's
pleasures, with limitations on her pursuit of ordinary daily
acti vities, all to her great loss and detriment, and claim is made
therefor.
18. As a further direct and proximate result of the negligence of
Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc. and PJAX, Inc.,
and/or their agent, servant, workman, or employee, Defendant William
Kautz, Jr., in causing the aforesaid collision and plaintiff Lisa R.
Johnson to sustain the injuries set forth in paragraph 14 of the
Complaint as aforesaid, said plaintiff does presently and will in the
future undergo mental and physical pain and suffering, anguish,
humiliation, loss of life'S pleasures, with limitation on her pursuit
9
.
. nR:r.:rCA'l'to,
I, Lisa R. Johnson, hereby verify and state that the facts set
'forth in the foregoing COICPL.\:urr are true and correct to the best of my
information, knoWledge and belief. I underBtand the false statements
herein are made Subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C,S.A. Section 4904
relating to unsWorn verification to authorities.
(pi"~~.
~ I ,
f( ()_r{,,~~___
JOMs,tm
Dater October 30, 1996,
, ,
"
"
./ 'f
. ,
"
,I
! '
, "
"
,
"
,
"
,
, .i"
'I
"
I ,
,
"
I.,
'I
"1,'
,I'
,I
'j'
I, "
Ii'
"
"
ill
;;1
, ,
..
, ,
'11\
,;1
,
"1
"
, ,
, ,
,
LISA .. JOHNSON, I IN T81 COURT OV CONNON PL~S OV
Plaintiff I CUKBIRLAND COUNTY, P8NNSYLVANIA
I
v. I CIVIL ACTION - LAW
I
PITTSBuaGH-JOHNSTOWN-ALTOONA I NO. 96-715 CIVIL
IXPRISS, INC., a pennsylvania I
Corporation, PJAX, INC., a I
pennsylvania Corporation, and I
WILLIAM kAUTZ, JR., an I
indi vidual, I
Defendants I JURY TRIAL DIMANDID
STIPULATION
AND NOW, the parties to the above-captioned matter, through their
respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that subparagraphs (a) I
(b) I (h) I reference in subparagraph (i) to 75 Pa.e.S.A. ~3311(a), but
retain reference in subparagraph (i) to 75 Pa.C.S.A. ~33241 (m) I (n) I
and (0) of Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint in the above-captioned
matter are hereby withdrawn with prejudice.
Date: \\~"O-qlc
LAW OFF\IC\ES o~ JOSEPH A, KLEIN, P.C.
By: ,\ (Let,
Mark'S. Silver, Esquire
I.D. No. 09825
100 Chestnut Street, Suite 210
Post Office Box 1152
HarriSburg, PA 17108-1152
(717) 2'33-0132
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, eOLEMAN
AND GOGGIN
By:
l-4 d~L-
Ly n F, R telhuber, Esquire
100 pine Street, Fourth Floor
Post Office Box 803
Harrisburg, PA 17108-0803
(717) 232-4641
Attqrneys for Defendant
.,
Datel J~~/p' 0k
~,:
t..,
r>
III J~'.)
(,) "I'
~'..';.\I'
( I,;
"
'\\:
'I
.'_11
u.:..
1:-
Lj"
('
C')
-
"
'.;";
,
It
i-j
(t..
?:::
~ .," I
.'J<
i'" "J.!'
, .~, ",I
, U,~
' ....'1
".-jt-
.:~,
, /.'7
:'1i'iJ
:.,,) i1;
:/1
.:)
CJ
r"
(\..j
~~)
""..
..n
>:1'
,
,
"
,
,
'!
,.,
"
, I,
"
,',
,I
,"',
I,
"
1,'1
,(.
.'
i'li
"
I,
':.
I'
Ii
'i
i,'
,I
,
,
j'
I'
I;)
,
"
d
,
I ,
, ,
I
\1 , ,
",
"
" "
..
"
".
'Ii
!!J
L,
'-I
.,
"
'I 'I
'I'
""
, '
"
11
I
, '
;-1
"
i:
,
.
5, . Denied, The docume,nts speak for themselves.
6, Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry,
Defendants are without information sufficient to form a belief as
to the allegations set forth in this paragraph and accordingly,
the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at
trial.
7. Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry,
Defendants are without information sufficient to form a belief as
to the allegations set forth in this paragraph and accordingly"
the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at
trial. By way of further answer/ the allegations of this
paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive
pleading is required, and accordingly, the same are denied and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
8. Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry,
Defendants are without information sufficient to form a belief as
to the allegations set forth in this paragraph and accordingly,
the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at
trial.
9. Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry,
Defendants are without information sufficient to form a belief as
, to the allegations set forth in this paragraph and accordingly,
the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at
trial. By way of further answer/ the allegations of this
paragraph constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive
2
pleading is required, and accordingly, the Bamtl are denied and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
10. Denied. After reasonable investigation and inquiry,
Defendants are without information oufficient to form a belief as
to the allegations set forth ill thio paragraph and accordingly,
the same are denied and I!Jt riet proof thereof is demanded at
trial. By way of further anower, the allegations of this
paragraph constitute concluo iOllo of law to which no responsive
pleading is I'equirod, LInd accordlngly, the same are denied and
strict proof thereof ls dom~nded at trial.
11. Denied, The allegations of ,this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no rOllponsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the Olllne are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial.
12. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no reoponsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the Bame are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial, By way of further answer, Defendants
specifically deny all allegations of negligence, carelessness
and/or recklessness as Bet forth in this paragraph together with
its SUbparagraphs (a) to (q), (Subparagraphs (a); (b); (h); (i),
concerning 75 Pa,C.S.A. S 3311(a) I (m); (n) and (0), of
Plaintiff's Complaint were withdrawn with prejudice, through the
stipulation filed by counsel on November 27, 1996.) To the
contrary, at all times relevant to the m~terial allegations set
3
forth in Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendants acted with reasonab~e
care under the circumstances, then and there existing,
13. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial. Defendants hereby incorporate its response to
paragraph 12 above. In addition, if any factual allegations are
set forth in this paragraph, Defendants deny the truth of said
allegations and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
14. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial.
15. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is requiredl
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial,
16. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial.
17. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial.
4
18. Denied. The allegations of this paragraph constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required,
and accordingly, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is
demanded at trial.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment in their favor and
'against Plaintiff, together with such other relief as th'is Court.
shall deem appropriate.
NBW MATUB
19. Defendants incorporate their responses, to paragX'aphs 1
thX'ough 18 above as if set forth at length herein.
20. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute
of limitations.
21. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon
which relief can be granted.
22. Plaintiff is barred and/or limited by all applicabl~
provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial
Responsibility Law.
23. No act or omission on the part of Defendants was a
substantial or contributing factor in bringing about Plaintiff's
alleged injuries and/or damages, all said injuries and/or damages
being expressly denied,
24. Any and all injuries and/or damages as described by
Plaintiff in her Complaint, the same being expressly denied, weX'8
5
caused in whole or in part, by acts or omissions on the part of
others over whom Defendants had no control nor right of control.
25. Plaintiff's claims are barred and/or limited by the
doctrine of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel.
26. Defendants breached no duty of care owed to Plaintiff
under the circumstances.
27. Plaintiff's claims are barred and/or limited by the
Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act.
28. Plaintiff's comparative negligence was a substantial
factor in bringing about any injuries and/or damages alleged in
the Complaint, said injuries and/or damages being expressly
denied.
29. Plaintiff's claims are barred and/or limited by the
applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Worker's Compensation
Act.
30. Plaintiff's injuries, if any, were preexisting and not
caused by any act or omission on the part of the Defendants,
31. At all times material hereto, Defendants acted in a
safe, legal and non-negligent manner.
32. Plaintiff assumed the risk fbr her activities on the
day in question with regard to the litigation at hand,
33. Plaintiff's claims are barred and/or limited by
Plaintiff's contributory negligence.
34. Because Plaintiff chose the limited tort option
enumerated in Pennsylvania's Motor Vehicle Financial
6
,
~ N " "
r.: , ,
("'J .'"'),. , "
~. 0" '.':1' I' ,Ii
("I ,',)..f.. Ii
~;" ',I'~
r', 'r.' ) -.
.:1
"'T ;'f.\! .,'
,~ ::1
9<' ",. ""1"_;
"'f'
[';1,,' , ~ ",1 "
~,j I , ,
[t.:-' ,/,. ;1(0
I: PI''- i -l'~).. ,
,., >
" '"' d
u (;'" "
f:
l'
"
~t
III
~~ III .
!:: '" "" ~ ~
H ~ ,,., "
~ = '" ~ ~
~~ ~ '" '"
H > '. ~ ~
::s ... . =
~ 1 >> . 0 "" '" ~ I ~ n
z Po< UlU 'H = "'" >=l
0 =z " '"
~ Po< ~ I'll-< '" 0 e ~ 2"'~~ ~
fil <lI ... . !-<
.;. 1:l '" . 0
U ~~ ~ ~ e-e; ::1 ~~J,~5~tl~1
::> III '"
~ z ~ ..., 0 Po< 3 =j"'=~. ~
0 0 . '" U '"
,- 8 III 0 N '" ~ u ~ J ..
Z >=l ~ ..., U ,. '. !:; ~" g
~~ 0 I Z l:..... III III _ 0.
H on ~ 0 E'5 I-< 0 =;:i H . '"
!-< ... ..., .~ (lj 113 ~~ 0
u.... S .... > ~ "j <
<I ~ V1 (lj~~'U
'" '" I::Q V) "'" ~ 'I"'l ~~
~~ ....'" III ~ 0 Ul >
H ~ V'l !:: e- " .... ," H
::> . ~ =.... "" :s~
HO H 1-'4 0 I3J c::
uz .... Po< U Po< ~,,., Po<Z
I,
"
I
"
,
,
i')
,
,
",
,I 'F
,
,
"
"
;:,1'
,
I'
,
'Iii
"
, ,
,
,
',"
"
"
. .
, .
LISA .. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff
IN TH8 COURT 0' COMMON PLaAS O'
CUMB8RLANO COUNTY, P8NNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v. '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Defendants I
NO. 96-715 CIVIL
PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN-ALTOONA
8XPR8SS, INC., a Pennsylvania
Corporation, PJAX, INC., .
Pennsylvania Corporation, and
WILLIAM KAUTZ, JR., an
individual,
JURY TRIAL DBMANDBD
PLAINTIFF'S RBPLY TO
DBFBNDANTS' NilW MATTBB
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Lisa R. Johnson, by and through her
attorneys, Joseph A. Klein, P,C., and Mark S. Silver, Esquire, and
makes Reply to Defendants' New Matter as follows:
19.
Denied,
paragraph 19 of Defendants' New Matter is an
incorporation paragraph which avers that it incorporates by reference
all of the Defendants' admissions and denials set forth elsewhere in
its Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint, Paragraphs 1 through and including
18, and as such, is a paragraph to which no further Answer or Reply is
required; subject, however, to the denial by Plaintiff to each and
every denial interposed by Defendants in their Answers to the averments
of fact set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint,
However, and by way of
further Reply, to the extent any Answer or Reply may be judicially
deemed to be required, said Paragraph 19 is specifically denied
regarding all denials as. set forth by Defendants in their Answers to
the averments of Plaintiff's Complaint, and to the extent Defendants
have admitted averments plead in Plaintiff's Complaint, the same are
1
admitted by reference thereto and incorporation thereof.
20. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
her claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The
date of the collision giving rise to the instant cause of action was
February 16, 1994; the date on which a praecipe for writ of summons was
filed in the Office of the prothonotary of cumberland county,
pennsylvania, to the above Court term and number, was February 9, 1996,
a date well within two (2) years subsequent to the date of the incident
giving rise to the instant cause of action,
21. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that her Complaint
fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.
Plaintiff's Complaint provides identification of the parties and, in
particular, the several Defendants; describes the location and scene of
the collision involved; describes in detail the events giving rise to
the occurrence of the collision between the vehicles involved;
describes in detail the factors comprising the negligence, carelessness
and recklessness of Defendants in causing the collision complained of;
describes the injuries plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson sustained as a sole,
direct, and proximate result of the collision; and otherwioe states a
claim (cause of action) upon which relief can be granted 'in accordance
with pennsylvania law, the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial
Responsibility Law, and the general law of negligence.
22. Denied. The averrr.ents set forth in paragraph 22 of
Defendants' New Matter constitute conclusions of law to which no
responsive pleading is required; therefore, the same are denied and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
2
23. Denied. It is denied Defendants committed no act or omission
which was a substantial or contributing factor in bringing about
Plaintiff's injuries and/or damages I rather, and to the contrary,
Plaintiff avers that the collision and resultant injuries to Plaintiff
Lisa R. Johnson were caused solely by, and were the direct, proximate,
and exclusive result of the negligence, recklessness, and carelessness
of Defendants as plead with specificity in Plaintiff's Complaint at
paragraphs 1 through and including 18, all of which are restated and
incorporated herein for such purposes. More particularly, and by way
of further Reply, the act, acts, omission, or omissions on the part of
Defendants which were substantial and/or contributing factors in
bringing about plaintiff Lisa R, Johnson'S injuries and/or damages, all
of which are plead in said complaint, are averred in detail in
paragraphs 7 through i,lnd including 13 of the aforesaid Plaintiff's
complaint, all of which are reiterated and incorporated herein by
reference,
24. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
the injuries and/or damages which she sustained and as are averred in
detail in paragraphs 14 through and including 18 of Plaintiff's
Complaint, incorporated herein by reference, were caused in whole or in
part by acts or omissions or negligence on the part of others over whom
Defendants had no control or right of control. To the contrary and by
way of further Reply to Defendants' New Matter, the aforesaid collision
between the vehicle operated by DefenQant william Kautz, Jr., and that
operated by Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson was caused solely by, and was the
direct, proximate, and exclusive result of the negligence,
3
t_, .,
recklflssneu, and carelessness of Defendant Willlam Kautz, Jr., imputed
to Defendants Pittsburgh-Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., and PJAX,
Inc., in accordance with paragraphs 7, 10, and 11 of Plaintiff's
Complaint, all ot' which are incorporated hereJ.n by reference, and was
not caused in any manner whatsoever by any act or failure to act on the
part of Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson. Insofar as any claim by Defendants
of acts or omissions on the part of others over whom Defendants had no
control nor right of control as averred by Defendants in Paragraph 24
of their New Matter in causing the instant collision, such averments
are denied as, after reasonable investigation, the replying Plaintiff
is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or veracity of the remaining averments contained in paragraph
24 of Defendants' New Matter and the same are, therefore, denied and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
25. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any of her
claims are barred and/or limited by the doctrines of res judicata
and/or collateral estoppel inasmuch as there has been no prior
determination by any branch of the judiciary of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania as to any of the issues plead in Plaintiff'S Complaint,
all of which are incorporated herein by reference, Further, the within
Plaintiff's Complaint, and Defendants' Answer with New Matter are the
very first pleadings filed in the instant action other than Plaintiff's
initial filing of the Praecipe for Writ of Summons on February 9, 1996,
docketed to the above-referenced Court term and number, which filing
commenced the instant action in the Court of CORmon Pleas of Cumberland
County, pennsylvania. Furthermore, and to the extent any further
4
Answer or Reply may be judicially deemed to be required, the averments
of paragraph 25 of Defendants' New Matter ~onstitute conclusions of law
to which no responsive pleading is required, therefore, the same are
denied and strict proof. thereof is demanded at trial.
26. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that Defendants
breached no duty of care owed to plaintiff under the circumstances,
plaintiff Lisa R, Johnson has plead in paragraphs 10 through and
including 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint, the same incorporated herein by
reference, the facts setting forth Defendants' breach of the duty of
care owed to plaintiff under the circumstances in accordance with the
pennsylvania Rules of civil Procedure.
27. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
Plaintiff's claims as plead in her Complaint, incorporated herein by
reference, are barred and/or limited by the Pennsylvania Comparative
Negligence Act. By way of further Reply, to the extent any further
Answer or Reply may be judicially deemed to be required, said paragraph
27 of Defendants' New Matter sets forth averments which constitute
conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required;
therefore, the same are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at
trial.
28. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
the injuries and/or damages sustained by her as set forth in paragraph
14 (a) through and including (k) of Plaintiff's Complaint, and those
other claims set forth with specificity in paragraphs 15 through and
including 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint, all of which are incorporated
herein by reference, 'were caused by her own contributory and/or
5
comparative negligence which contributory and/or comparative negligence
is denied, and Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson further denies that she was
the cause, in part or entirely, of the instant collision between
Defendants' vehicle and Plaintiff's vehicle, but avers to the contrary
that the collision and resultant injuries to Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson
and concomitant claims for losses as set forth in the Complaint in its
aforesaid Paragraphs, all of which are incorporated herein by
reference, was caused solely by, and was the direct, proximate, and
exclusive result of the negligence, recklessness, and carelessness of
Defendants as plead in said Complaint, and was not caused in any manner
whatsoever by any act or failure to act on the part of Plaintiff Lisa
R. Johnson.
29, Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any of the
claims set forth with s,ecificity in Plaintiff's Complaint incorporated
herein by reference, are barred and/or limited by the provisions of the
pennsylvania Worker's compensation Act inasmuch as the provisions of
the Pennsylvania worker's Compensation Act are inapplicable to the
instant cause of action. On the date and at the time of the instant
collision, Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson was not acting on behalf of her
employer; she was returning to her office from lunch, which lunchtime
is a time separate and distinct from working hours for which plaintiff
Lisa R. Johnson is not compensated; further, Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson
was not attending a "working lunch" and was not, at the specific time
of the instant collision, acting in furtherance of her employer's
,business. By way of further Reply, to the extent any further Answer or
R~ply may he judicially deemed to be required, paragraph 29 of
6
Defendants' New Matter is specifically denie(j, inasmuch as the averments
of said Paragraph constitute COllclulilions of law to which no responsive
pleading is required; therefore, the same are denied and strict proof
thereof is demanded at trial.
30. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that the injuries
sustained in the instant collision, set forth with specificity in
Paragraph 14 (a) through and including (k) of the Complaint, all of
which are incorporated herein by reference, pre-existed the instant
collision. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson further denies that the injuries
set forth with specificity in Paragraph 14 (a) through and including (k)
of her Complaint, all of which are incorporated herein by reference,
were not caused by any act or omission on the part of Defendants;
rather, and to the contrary, each, every, and all of the injuries set
forth with specificity in paragraph 14(a) through and including (k) of
the Complaint, incorporated herein by reference, were brought about and
caused as a direct, proximate, sole, and exclusive result of the
negligence, recklessness, and carelessness of all Defendants in causing
the aforesaid collision as a result of which Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson
was thrown violently about the interior of the vehicle she was
operating and sustained the IT'.ultiple, serious, severe, and painful
injuries, some of which are of a permanent nature, and which include
but are not limited to those injuries set forth with specificity in
Paragraph 14 (a) through and including (k) of the Complaint,
incorporated herein by reference.
31. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that at all times
materIal hereto Defendants acted in a safe, legal, and non-negligent
7
manner. Rather, and to the contrary, at all times material to the
instant Complaint, Pefendants >acted in a negligent, careless, and
reckless mlInner as set forth with specificity in paragraph 12 (a)
through and including (q) of the Complaint, all of which are
incorporated herein by reference, as amended by the Stipulation entered
into by and between counsel, entered of record in the instant
proceeding. November 27, 1996, the amending provisions of which are
incorporated herein by reference. By way of further Reply, to the
extent any further Answer or Reply may be judicially deemed to be
required, said Paragraph 31 of Defendants' New Matter contains
averments which constitute conclusions of law to which no responsive
pleading is required. 'rherefore, the same are denied and strict proof
thereof is demanded at trial.
32. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that she assumed
the risk for her activities on the day in question inasmuch as
Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson was lawfully operating her vehicle along the
roadway (Ritter Road) having the right -of -way, being the through
roadway and was possessed of no prior knowledge whatsoever that
Defendant William Kautz, Jr" would suddenly and without warning pull
out from the driveway access lane from the north, in a southerly
direction, and would enter into and onto the westbound lane of the
through roadway (Ritter Road), the through roadway having the right-of-
way, at a point immediately in the front of the vehicle then operated
by Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson, resulting in collision between the
vehicle operated by Defendant William Kautz, Jr., into the front right
passenger's side of the vehicle operated by plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson,
8
_,
which caused the same to be pushed across Ritter Road, to the south,
and to spin, and thereafter come to rest against a snow bank situate
along the south side of Ritter Road, west of the point of initial
impact. By way of fUl:"ther Reply, to the extent any Answer or Reply may
be jUdicially deemed to be required, the collision between the vehicle
operated by Plaillciff Lisa R. Johnson and that owned by Defendant
Pittsburgh-JOhnstown-Altoona Express, Inc., and/or Defendant PJAX,
Inc" operated at the time by its agent, servant, workman, and/or
employee Defendant William Kautz, Jr., was caused solely by, and was
the direct, proximate, sole, and exclusive result of the negligence,
recklessness / and carelessness of the said Defendants Pittsburgh-
Johnstown-Altoona Express, Inc, / and/or PJAX, Inc. / and/or their agent,
servant, workman, and/or employee Defendant William Kautz, Jr., as set
forth in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint, incorporated herein by
reference, and was not caused in any manner whatsoever by any act or
failure to act on the part of Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson. Moreover, and
by way of further Reply, to the extent any Answer or Reply may be
judicially deemed to be required, said Paragraph 32 of Defendants' New
Matter contains averments which constituted conclusions of law to which
no responsive pleading is required; therefore, the same are denied and
strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.
33. Denied, Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
her claims are barred and/or limited by her own contributory
negligence, which contributory negligence is specifically denied as
having OCCurred in any degree whatsoever, and Plaintiff further denies
that any of the matters complained of in her Complaint, incorporated in
9
toto herein by reference, were caused by her own contributory and/or
comparative negligence which is specifically denied, and Plaintiff
further denies that she was the cause, in part or entirel.y, of the
instant collision between Defendants' vehicle and plaintiff's vehicle,
but avers to the contrary that the collision and resultant injuries to
plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson and concomitant claims for losses as set
forth with specificity in Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson's Complaint, all of
which are incorporated herein by reference, were caused solely by, and
were the direct, proximate, sole, and exclusive result of the
negligence, recklessness, and carelessness of Defendant William Kautz,
Jr., and the resultant named Defendants in accordance with the
averments set forth at Paragraph 13 of plaintiff's complaint, all of
which are incorporated herein by reference, and that the instant
collision was not caused in any manner whatsoever by any act or failure
to act on the part of plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson,
34. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that she chose the
limited tort option enumerated in pennsylvania's Motor vehicle
Financial Responsibility Law, 75 pa.C,S,A. !i1701, et seq., and as a
result, plaintiff is not barred as a matter of law from recovering non-
economJ,c damages. To the contrary, and by way of further Reply,
plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson, in accordance with the policy of automobile
insurance in effect on her vehicle on the date and at the time of the
instant collision was covered/insured by a policy of automobile
insurance which includes "Full Tort" coverage; as a result, plaintiff
is not barred as a matter of law from'recovering non-economic damages,
35. Denied. plaintiff Lisa R, Johnson denies that she was
10
negligent in any manner or fashion or in any degree by comparison
whatsoever; therefore, Plaintiff further denies that her operation of
her motor vehicle on date and at the time of the instant collision was
the sole or proximate cause of het' alleged injuries and damages, and
Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson further denies that she was negligent in any
manner or to any degree whatsoever or that she was in any way "the sole
and proximate cause of the alleged injuries and damages". '1'0 the
contrary, and by way of further Reply to Defendants' New Matter,
Plaintiff denies that any or all of the injuries sustained by her as
set out in Paragraph 14(a) through and including (k) of Plaintiff's
Complaint, incorporated herein by reference, were caused by her own
contributory and/or comparative negligence, which contributory and/or
comparative negligence is specifically denied, and Plaintiff Lisa R.
Johnson further denies that she was the cause, in part or entirely, of
the instant collision between Defendants' vehicle and Plaintiff's
vehicle, but Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson avers to the contrary that the
collision and all resultant injuries to Plaintiff Lisa R, Johnson were
caused by, and were the direct, proximate, sole, and exclusive result
of the negligence, recklessness, and carelessness of Defendants, and
were not caused in any manner whatsoever by any act or failure to act
on the part of Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson.
36. Denied. Plaintiff Lisa R. Johnson denies that any or all of
the claims set forth in Plaint if f' s Complaint are barred by the
Doctrine of SUdden Emergency. By way of further Reply, to the extent
any Answer or Reply may be judicially deemed to be required, said
Paragraph 36 of Defendants' New Matter is specifically denied inasmuch
11