HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-5599 civilJEREMY J. HOUP, · IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
· CUMBERLAND cOUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff .
LAW'I'ON and EVELYN '
ROVEGNO, RICHARD L. '
ROVEGNO and ROVEGNO'S ~ NO. 94-5599 CiViL TERM
OF CARLISLE, .
Defendants .
MELISSA BRIDWELL, '
Additional Defendant · CIVIL ACTION - LAW
BEFORE HOFFER J. AND HESS J.
ORDER OF THE COURT
AND NOW, June 30, 1998, after careful consideration, the Court denies
Defendant Bridwell's Motion for Summary Judgment. A Motion for Summary
Judgment places the burden upon the moving party to show that they are entitled
to summary iudgment as a matter of law and that there is no genuine issue of any
material fact as to a necessary element of the cause of action. Pa. R. Civ. Pro.
1035.2 (1997). The Court finds that Defendant Bridwell has failed to show that
there was no genuine issue of material fact relating to Plaintiff's negligence claim.~
By the Court
Taylor P. Andrews, Esquire
Andrews & Johnson
78 West Pomfret Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Attorney for Plaintiff
Jefferson J. Shipman, Esquire
Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C.
320 Market Street
P.O. Box 1268
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1268
Attorney for Defendants Rovegno
Robert J. Mulderig, Esquire
Turo Law Offices
32 South Bedford Street
Carlisle, PA 17103
Attorney for Defendant Bridwell
~ The Court also notes that Defendants Rovegno failed to submit an answer
to Defendant Bridwell's Motion for Summary Judgment. Additionally, Defendants
Rovegno's brief states that all deposition transcripts were filed contemporaneously
with the Brief. However, while Defendants cite the depositions of Melissa Bridwell,
Richard Rovegno, Todd Lawrence and James Musselman, only Richard Rovegno's
deposition was on file with this court.