HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-00882
\
I
\
~
,
~
:1-
.
-7
i
i
I
.n !
vI I
gol
3 1
cf)
,
I
,
"
//
/"
/"
/
ij
~
~
J
"
ro
()O
()O
01
-Z
1.....I.It~l;lm..
II........''""
A",.........I..
I:<<h,'\,(....',....,
1-.' .,_,,,.......,1.11
."........"I"'......'fI
IX TaB COURT OW COKKO)l PLIAS ow CUJCBDLAHD COUllTY, PJDIIl8YLVUIA
CUXPl II. BURGOS, I )10.
plaintiff I
I
v.. I Civil Aotion - La"
I
IIIcnBL A. JlA80, I
Defendant I Jury Trial D...nded
COMPLAINT
MID )lOW, this
I~
day of
, 1996, comes
her attorneys,
the Plaintiff, Carmen M. Burgos, by an
Griest, Himes, Gettle, Herrold & swift, by Gregory E. Gettle,
Esquire, who bring this Complaint against the above-named
Defendants, upon a cause of action whereof the following is a
statement:
1.
Plaintiff, Carmen M. Burgos, is an adult individual residing
at 719 Manor street, York, York county, pennsylvania 17403.
2.
Defendant, Michael A. Haso, is an adult individual residing at
21 West Shore Drive, Camp Hill, Cumberland county, Pennsylvania
17011.
3.
On December 30, 1995, Plaintiff was the owner and operator of
a 1983 Toyota Corolla, pennsylvania Registration ARM6507.
3
4.
On December 30, 1995, the Defend~nt was the owner and operator
of a 1994 Oldsmobile CUtlass ciera, Pennsylvania Registration
ItC0l186 .
5.
On December 30, 1995, at approximately 11:10 a.m., the
Plaintiff was traveling westbound on Carlisle Road CSR 2018) in
Lower Allen Township, CUmberland County, Pennsylvania near the
Carlisle Road intersection with the entrance to the Cedar Cliff
Mall. The Defendant, operating his motor vehicle in a north bound
direction on West Shore Drive toward the entrance to Cedar Cliff
Mall, pulled into the intersection and into the lane of traffic
lawfully occupied by the Plaintiffs' vehicle, cOlliding with the
vehicle of the Plaintiff.
6.
Said collision resulted from the negligent and careless
conduct of the Defendant and was due in no part whatsoever to any
act or failure to act on the part of the Plaintiff.
7.
The negligent and careless conduct of the Defendant consisted
of the following:
a. Failing to properly operate and control said .otor
vehicle;
~,.*-.I.nTU.
".-.....-
b. Failing to keep alert and maintain a proper lookout
for the presence of other motor vehicles on the streets and
.,,'.............
I...............,....,
1..1.._.",....., ...1
H,"__'-,',............
4
-J.
,
,
I
,
.
.
i
~
i
I
~
,
1
1
,
highway.;
c. Failing to maintain proper and adequate control of
the vehicle;
d.
Operating his motor vehicle in violation of 53114
,
I
I
,
(carele.. driving) of the pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code; and
e. Operating his motor vehicle in violation of 53323 (b)
(stop signs and yield signs) of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle
Code.
8.
As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff
suffered serious and permanent injuries, including, but not limited
to, severe emotional distress and damage, chest contusion, cervical
strain, and distal fibular fracture of right ankle.
9.
As a result of the negligence of the Defend~nt, the
Plaintiff's 1983 Toyota Corolla was totalled.
10.
As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff was
forced to incur medical bills and expenses for the injuries she has
suffered, the cost or reasonable value of Which is, or may be, in
excess of the sum recoverable under the pennsylvania Financial
Responsibility Act, and she will continue to incur .edical expenses
in the future.
I,.......I"-l;un...
110_...&\_,"
.,,,..,,.""1..
;-....<\lI....'\....'
'u ,."..,..',.....1..11
11.
f"........ ......""
As a result of the negligence of the Defendant, Plaintiff has,
5
_JIO
or may sutter a severe loss ot her earnings and/or impairment ot
her earning capacity. Said loss ot income and/or impairment of
earning capacity has, or may, continue in the tuture.
12.
As a turther result of the negligence ot the Detendant,
Plaintift has undergone, and in the future may undergo, great
mental and physical pain and sUffering, mental anguish and
humiliation, inconvenience, loss of life's pleasures, and a severe
limitation in her pursuit of daily activities, all to her great
loss and detriment.
13.
At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff was covered by a
policy of auto insurance wherein the declaration page on her policy
indicates that she had selected the limited tort benefit. The
limited tort option may not apply due to an invalid tort selection
document.
Regardless, the injuries suffered by Plaintiff as a
result of this accident have resulted in a serious impairment of
body function and/or permanent serious disfigurement, including,
but not limited to, the fOllowing:
a. The inability to use her neck and right ankle as
intended and the possibility of future surgical intervention 0
right ankle, which would result in scarring.
14.
.,_>t.........I.....,..
110............,.
\,,,....,,..)..
I;~ I." w...., ,."...
.'..."'_,,,.....,'.u
r",.......;', ',.......'fl
This matter is alleged to exceed the applicable Halts of
arbitration and a jury trial is hereby demanded.
6
""RI'O.R, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable
Court to enter judgment against the Defendant in an amount in
excess of T'orenty-tive Thousand and 00/100 ($25,000.00) Dollars,
plus intereat and ~osts as allowed by law.
GaIR.T, HI"., ORTTLR, HBaaOLD , .WIWT
By:
Gre r
Supre e
129 East Market street
York, Pennsylvania 17401
(717) 846-8856
Attorney for Plaintiff
1'-",II_.;.,.m..
~86'"",
,,~.....,," I..
1....1.."\04....",.,..
........_"'........u
1..._.....1.1.........
7
CARMEN M. BURGOS, . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
.
. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
.
Plaintift .
. i
v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW I
. NO. 96-882 CIVIL TERM i
. I
MICHAEL A. HABO, :
Oer.ndant : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED I
PRABCIP. roa APPBARAHCB
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Plea.. enter the appearance ot Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss'
Erb on behalt ot Detendant Michael A. Haso.
1
METZGER, WICKERSHAM, KNAUSS , ERB
By
R chard B. 0
Attorney 1.0. No. 61904
3211 North Front Street
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
Attorneys for Defendant
Michael A. Haso
Date: March~, 1996
-,-."n.
CBR~I~ICATB O~ 8BRVle.
P-
AND NOW, this ~ day ot March, 1996, I, Richard B. Druby, of
Metzger, wickersham, Knauss' Erb, attorneys for Defendant, hereby
certify that I served the foregoing praecipe for Appearance this
day by depositing the same in the United states mail, postags
prepaid, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed to:
Gregory E. Gettle, Esquire
GRIEST, HIMES, GETTLE,
HERROLD , SWIFT
129 East Market Street
York, PA 17401
BY:
I;
.j
I
I
I
'I
! 0
w 0
'" '"
o
~ ~ Q
:3 lit 6
Z I ~
:s: j Ul g ~
. '"' ~ tf'I ~
Z · 0 " "
0( II) II x ~
% )0 u.. 0 ~
UlW'Iillz
Ct ,"" lit
... ~ ~ 0 ..
:.:' to- Z a.: U
~ ~ It
:= N ,
. (') =
II: _
... ~
S ~
~
L
"
'I
( ~ '
CARMEN M. BURGOS, IN THE COURT or COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintitt
v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW
MICHAl':L A. RASO, NO. 96-882 CIVIL TERM
Defendant JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
n..IXDANT'S AHSWIR
WITH liD MATTIlR
1. Admitted upon information and belief.
;a. Admitted.
3. Admitted upon information and belief.
4. Admi tted.
5. Admitted in part and denied in part. The allegation that
Defendant pulled into the lane of travel lawfully occupied by the
Plaintiff's vehicle is a conclusion of law, to which no answer is
required, and the allegation is deemed denied. If an answer is
required, the allegation is specifically denied and proof thereot
is demanded.
It is also specifically denied that Defendant's
vehicle collided with Plaintiff's vehicle. On the contrary, it was
Plaintiff's vehicle which struck Defendant's vehicle. The
remaining allegations of paragraph 5 are admitted.
6. Conclusion of law, to which no answer is required. If an
answer is required, the allegations of paragraph 6 are specifically
denied, and proof thereof is demanded. In further answer, it is
alleqed that the accident was due, in whole or in part, to the
Plaintiff's actions or her failure to act.
7. Conclusion of law, to which no answer is required. If an
answer is required, it is specifically denied that the Defendant
was negligent or carele.. in any manner. In further answer, the
allegation. of paragraphs <a) through <e) are specifically denied,
and proof thereof i. de.anded.
8. It i. specifically denied that the Defendant was
negligent in any manner. As for the remaining allegations of
paragraph 8, Defendant is without knowledge or information
eufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments, and
proof thereof is demanded.
9. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was
negligent in any manner. As for the remaining allegations of
paragraph 9, Defendant is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments, and
proof thereof is demanded.
10. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was
negligent in any manner. As for the remaining allegations of
paragraph 10, Defendant is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment., and
proof thereof is demanded.
11. It is specifically denied that the Defendant was
negligent in any manner. As for the remaining allegations of
paragraph 11, Defendant is without knowledge or infor.ation
sufficient to form a belief ~s to the truth of the averments, and
proof thereof is demanded.
1~. It is spe~ifically denied that the Defendant va.
negligent in any manner. As for the remaining allegations of
-2-
paragraph 12, Defendant ie without knowledge or information
SUffioient to form a belief as to the truth of the avermente, and
proof thereof is demanded.
13. Conolusion of law, to whioh no answer is required. If an
answer is required, the allegations of paragraph 13 are
speoifioally denied, and proof thereof is demanded. In further
answer, Defendant avers that Plaintiff has not suffered a serious
injury as envisioned by the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility
Law, and she should be held to the limited tort selection.
14. No answer is required. If an answer is required, the
allegations of paragraph 14 are specifically denied, and proof
thereof is demanded.
WHEREFORE, Defendant demands that Plaintiff's complaint
be dismissed with prejUdice and that judgment be entered in his
favor and against the Plaintiff, plus costs of this action.
NB1f HATTER
15. Plaintiff'S complaint fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted.
16. Defendant believes and therefore avers that Plaintiff ha.
or may have failed to mitigate her damages.
17. Defenses reserved pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. l030(b) and all
other defenses not required to be pleaded are hereby reserved.
18. If Plaintiff has sustained damages as alleged, Of which
strict proof is demanded, the same were caused by condition. tor
-3-
....;.
_.J>
which D.tendant 18 not responsible and/or the damages were not
causally related to this accident.
19. For the policy period covering this accident, Plaintiff
chose the limited tort coverage.
20. Plaintitf did not suffer a serious impairment of body
function or permanent serious disfigurement.
21. As such, Plaintiff is barred from recovering damages for
non-economic losses.
22. Plaintiff had the last clear chance to avoid the
! .
accident.
23. Defendant raises any and all defenses available to him
under the Vehicle Code and the Motor VehiclE! Financial
Responsibility Law.
BY:
/i chard B. Druby,
Attorney 1.0. No.
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburg, PA 17110-0300
(717) 238-8187
, ERB
WHEREFORE, Defendant demands that plaintiff's complaint
be dismissed with prejudice and that judgment be entered in his
favor and against the Plaintiff, plus costs of this action.
Dated: i4a. h~
Attorneys for Defendant
-4-
'"
VERIFICATION
I, Michael A. Haso, hereby certHy that I have read the
foreqoinq Answer with New Matter and believe it to be true and
correct to the best of my knowledqe, information, and belief. I
understand that false statements herein are made subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. 54904 rslatinq to unsworn falsification
to authorities.
/. -j, 7a~
~7J // f.t!.l. ./, la.D
Mie liel A. Haso
Date: 17 ~/l. l'i'it
"
CERTIrICATE or SERVICE
I, Riohard B. Druby, Esquire, do hereby oertify that on the
date set forth below, I did serve a true and correct copy ot the
foregoinq document upon the following person(s) at the followinq
addr.ss(es) indicated below by sendinq same in the United states
.ail, first-class, poetage prepaid:
Gregory E. Gettle, Esquire
Griest, Himes, Gettle, Herrold , Swift
129 East Market Street
York, PA 11401
;
t #
Date: ~;'z~;I?~
,
KNAUSS , ERB
,
~
:"
r;
l
tll
9
o ~
i ~ i ~
~ ~ .. i
~ili
" t: ti r
. c ;lI ~
I/) .,
~ ~
s:
tn'
w
if
"
Ii
.....M;,.Ii, .n...."., ,....",. "nl'"
'~_." T).'...."I......II'h','i.'...
1;-".......1;""...
I~..;...,
,'''....''..1...
,....I-.........w..,.....,
..,.~ "'_", ....... ".11
'..,__-".._411....
I. ,.. coua, Ol' CO.,...... 'LJIU Ol' CUId-Y..UO COUDY, '....nVUIA
~..... .. auaG08 , I 110. '1-882 CIVIL 'IRK
l'la1aUff I
I
v.. I Civil AotioD - Law
I
.ICBAJlL A. DBO, I
Detea4aDt I Jury Tdal Deaaa4e4
R.PLY TO ~ HATTER
UJ) IIOW, TO WIT, this 9th day of May, 1996, come. the
Plaintiff, Carmen M. Burgos, by her attorneys, Grieat, Himes,
Gettle, Herrold , Swift, Esquires, by Gregory E. Gettle, Esquire,
and tile. the fOllowing Reply to New Matter, whereof the following
ia a atatement:
1 - u.
Paragraph. 1 through 14 are answers to Plaintiff's
Complaint and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent
the Plaintiff is required to answer, Plaintiff denies all
allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
REPLY TO NEW HATT!R
15 - 18. The allegations contained in paragraphs 15 through
18 are a r.onclusions of law to which no responses are required. To
the extent the Plaintiff is required to answer, Plaintiff
.pecifically denies the allegations contained in these paragraphs
and demands strict proof thereof.
19. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that
the Plaintiff ch~se limited tort coverage for the policy period
1
.....",..
VBR!.!CAlf%O.
I, Caraen M. Burgos, do hereby certify that the fact
contained in the foregoing Reply to New Matter are correct to th
beat of .y knowledge, information and belief and that I under stan
that f"lsl& statoments made t.erein are made sub:iElct to penaltie
of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification t
authorities.
v-.u.,"\L N\. ~ ~
Carmen M. Burgos
Dated I
/117 ?
, 1996
t___.~j.rm&,
....... . ....
,,"........,1..
I...~." "'.un ,'...
,......,._.,.....1'0011
0._..."11,_....
3
U 'DJI COUll'l' 01' COIDlO. 'LIU 01' CUJDUUJID COunl, >>DJf8YLVAIIU
"....... M. InGe8, I .0. "-112 CIVIL '1''''
Uaintiff I
I
v.. I Civil Aotion - La.
I
1lI<1'I'.-r, A. u.o, I
Defendaat I Jury Trial D...aded
CBRTI.IC1TB OW SERVICB
pre-paid,
III~I/ , 1996,
a copy of the Reply to
Gettle, Esquire, do hereby certify that on th
I served by U.S. Kail, postaq
I, Greqory E.
.it!!:. day of
New Matter upon the fol10win
attorney. and/or individuals of record.
Richard B. Druby, Esquire
KETZGER, WICXERSHAK, KNAUSS' ERa
P.O. Box 5300
Harrisburq, Pennsylvania 17110-0300
Attorney for Defendant
GRIEST, BI"S, GBTTLB, BBRROLD I .WIlT
By:
....,E
y e
Supr me Court 1.0. 165600
129 East Market Street
York, Pennsylvania 17401
(717) 846-8856
Attorney for Plaintiff
~,a--.'~",'"
........,......
...'.........1....
,...t.........."',.....,
,...........IH.....ll.1I
hU__.JI'.UfI....'I4l
4
k,,_ r":"l
C'~ oJ
I
u:~
~'. ",
p>' -.
~:-
.-~~ l'
u.;. r~:
'....
. ~
<~
1''<'
..,
()
=;
,...
cr.
'{.)
': ~
.., ~p
':ltJ
.\tl..
-:J
(.)
\,n
-.
.
i
.'
9 i
i $ ~
ffi ~ E i
~ ~ i ~
~i!1
iii .. II g
w ',.
2
X
~
w
a:
Cl
d
1,;_........,.."'-.
_....\..-r
~"......, ",..
I.... ~... ........ \,...11
1_...",_,,,,,...1'.,,
ro..,.....;',',_..",
III THI COURT O. COKKOH PLEAS O. CUKBIRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
C~IH II. BURGOS, I 110. tl-882 CIVIL TERM
Plaintiff I
I
va. I Civil Aotion - Law
I
IIICHABL A. RASO, I
Dafandant I Jury Trial Da.andad
PRAECIPE TO SETTLE. DISCONTINUB AND END WITH PREJUDICB
TO THIl PROTHONOTARY I
Please mark the above-captioned matter settled,
discontinued, and ended with prejudice.
Respectfully submitted,
GRIEST, HIIIBS, GETTLB, HBRROLD , SWI.T
By:
Ii. Gettle,
Supre e Court I.D. #65600
129 East Market street
York, Pennsylvania 17401
(717) 846-8856
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: June 11, 1997