A Continuing Trend of Claims Representative Depositions Being Allowed in Luzerne County

Luzerne County Courthouse

In each of the following three (3) Orders (without Opinion) out of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, the court ruled that the claims representatives handling the case for the Defendant’s liability carrier was required to attend a deposition requested by Plaintiff’s counsel. 

However, the court did note that the Plaintiff would be precluded from questioning the claims representative as to the claims representative’s mental impressions, conclusions, or opinions respecting the value or merit of any claim, any defense thereto, or respecting strategy or tactics with respect to any claim or defense:


The court Order in Ehrmanntraut v. People’s Security Bank and Trust Co., No. 4995-CV-2020 (C.P. Luz Co. Nov. 15, 2021 Hughes, J.), may be viewed at this LINK.


The court Order in Harenza v. House, No. 2019-CV-10883 (C.P. Luz Co. Dec. 2, 2021 Pierantoni, J.), may be viewed at this LINK.


The court Order in Stochla v. Fenner, No. 2019-CV-11607 (C.P. Luz. Co. May 26, 2022 Polachek-Gartley, J.), may be viewed at this LINK.

Judge Hughes of Luzerne County Strikes Claims of Recklessness at Preliminary Objections Stage

In the companion cases of McLane v. Almquist, No. 7057-CV-2021 (C.P. Luz. Co. Jan. 24, 2022 Hughes, III, J.), and Kastreva v. Almquist, No. 7056-CV-2021 (C.P. Luz. Co. Jan. 24, 2022 Hughes, III, J.), Judge Richard M. Hughes, III of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas sustained Preliminary Objections seeking to strike all references to recklessness and reckless conduct, along with a claim for punitive damages, in a motor vehicle accident case.

The court found that these types of allegations lacked conformity to the Rules of Civil Procedure and/or Pennsylvania law and/or were legally insufficient, in part, under Pa. R.C.P. 1019.

As such, the court ruled that all allegations of “recklessness” and the Plaintiff’s request for punitive damages directed against the corporate Defendant were stricken from the Plaintiff without prejudice for leave to amend at a later date should discovery warrant the same.

It is emphasized that the court issued its decision by way of Orders only and without any Opinion. Those Orders can be viewed HERE and HERE.

In so ruling, Judge Hughes followed the rulings of a majority of trial courts from around the Commonwealth as well as several appellate court decisions.  For an overview of the law regarding the proper pleading of recklessness, please click this LINK to access my article on this issue that was published in the January, 2022 edition of the Pennsylvania Bar Quarterly.    

I send thanks to Attorney Lisa Goodison Faden of the Philadelphia office of Ryan, Brown, Berger & Gibbons, P.C. for bringing these recent Luzerne County decisions by Judge Hughes to my attention.

Judge Hughes of Luzerne County Denies Severance of Post-Koken Matter But Grants Transfer of Venue

In his recent Order, without Opinion, in the case of Best v. Emsley and Progressive Insurance Company, No. 1549 of 2014 (C.P. Luz. Co. Aug. 29, 2014 Hughes, J.), Judge Richard M. Hughes, III of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas denied a tortfeasor Defendant’s Preliminary Objections requesting the severance of the third party negligence claims from the contractual UIM claims asserted against the UIM carrier.  

Judge Richard M. Hughes, III
Luzerne County

In that same Order, however, the Preliminary Objection of the tortfeasor based upon an argument of improper venue was granted and the case was transferred to Lehigh County.  

In this matter, the accident occurred in Lehigh County and the tortfeasor Defendant resided in Bucks County.   The Plaintiff resided in Luzerne County. The tortfeasor Defendant was served by an Acceptance of Service by the tortfeasor’s defense counsel but without the waiver of any venue objections.  

The Plaintiff filed suit in Luzerne County despite the above facts.  As noted, the court granted the Preliminary Objection based on improper venue and transferred the case to Lehigh County, Pennsylvania.  The request for a severance of claims was denied.

Anyone wishing to secure a copy of this Order without Opinion may contact me at dancummins@comcast.net.


REGISTER FOR THE TORT TALK EXPO

It is noted that Judge Hughes will be one of the featured speakers during the Judicial Hour of this Friday's Tort Talk Expo CLE Seminar at the Mohegan Sun Casino Hotel.  The hope is that the Judicial Panel will provide tips for improving chances for success at jury selection and settlement conferences. 

For info on how to register for the Tort Talk Expo please visit www.TortTalk.com and click on the links in the upper right hand corner of the blog or email dancummins@comcast.net.

New Trial on Damages Granted in Luzerne County Zero Verdict Case

In Coopey v. City of Wilkes-Barre, No. 5855 of 2009 (C.P. Luz. Co. July 31, 2014 Hughes, J.),  Judge Richard M. Hughes, III of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas issued a detailed Opinion addressing post-trial motions in an auto accident case in which the jury found both the Plaintiff and Defendant drivers negligent, but neither of the parties' negligence to be a substantial factor in causing the injuries alleged. 

Judge Richard M. Hughes, III
Luzerne County

After finding circumstantial evidence of uncontroverted evidence that the Plaintiff sustained some form of injuries as a result of the accident, Judge Hughes ordered a new trial limited to the issue of damages.

A distinguishing fact in this case, differentiating it from other zero verdict personal injury matters, was that the defense did not present expert medical testimony at trial, but rather contested the Plaintiff's claims of spinal injuries through cross-examination and argument focusing on the alleged pre-existing nature of the Plaintiff's spinal conditions.

The court noted in its Opinion that there was no substantial contesting by the defense of the Plaintff's separate claims of head, thumb, and knee injuries.

While Judge Hughes noted that an "agreement between medical experts as to the existence of an injury sufficient to constitute uncontroverted evidence, but not necessary.  In other words, circumstances may arise that present uncontroverted evidence of an injury without an agreement between parties' experts"  Op. at p. 6.

While acknowledging that a jury had a right to believe all, some, or none of the testimony offered by a witness, the court found that a jury could not reject testimony where the resultant verdict turns out to be "so disproportionate to uncontested evidence as to defy common sense and logic."  Op. at p. 10.

Here, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff on the head, thumb, and knee injuries were found by the court not to have been rebutted by the defense through a cross-examination of the Plaintiff's medical expert or otherwise.  Accordingly, the court ruled that the jury's defense verdict under the circumstances presented shocked one's sense of justice and that the Plaintiff was entitled to a new trial on damages.

I note that Judge Hughes is scheduled to speak at the upcoming TORT TALK EXPO 2014 set for September 26, 2014 at the Mohegan Sun Casino Hotel in Wilkes-Barre, PA.  Click HERE  for an Agenda and HERE for online Registration.

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may contact me at dancummins@comcast.net.

I send thanks to Attorney John Aciukewicz of Wilkes-Barre, PA for bringing this case to my attention.

Judge Hughes of Luzerne County Denies UIM Carrier's Preliminary Objections to Sever in DUI/Punitive Damages Case

In his recent Order without an Opinion in the Post-Koken case of  Hoinski v. Farrell and Erie Ins. Co., No. 7270-CV-2013 (C.P. Luz. Co. 2013 Hughes, J.), Judge Richard Hughes of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas denied Preliminary Objections filed by the UIM carrier seeking a severance of claims.

In doing so, the court followed the general rule in Luzerne County of keeping Post-Koken cases consolidated at least through discovery.

In this Hoinski case, the UIM carrier sought severance particularly in light of the fact that the tortfeasor was charged with a DUI and the Complaint sought punitive damages against the tortfeasor.  The UIM carrier argued that it would be too prejudicial to be coupled with such a co-defendant at trial.

Judge Richard Hughes
Luzerne County

Judge Hughes denied the Preliminary Objections for severance without prejudice to the UIM carrier's right to file a later motion for bifurcation with the trial judge.

Anyone wishing to review this Order may click this LINK.

I send thanks to Attorney Ann Farias of the O'Donnell Law Offices for bringing this decision to my attention.

Reassignment of Luzerne County Judges Announced (Effective January 1, 2014)

Luzerne County Courthouse
Wilkes-Barre, PA
 

According to an October 21, 2013 Scranton Times Tribune article by Bob Kalinowski entitled "Luzerne County Judges Getting New Assignments," the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas announced a planned reassignment of judges to be effective come January 1, 2014 for the civil, criminal, juvenile, and family courts. 

Here is a LINK to the article.

To the extent, that you may not be able to access the article online (because you have to pay to view, or otherwise), I note that the article reports that Judge Lesa Gelb and Judge Richard Hughes will now focus on civil matters rather than civil and criminal matters as they have in the past.  President Judge Thomas F. Burke, Jr. will also continue to handle civil matters.

Judge William H. Amesbury has been appointed as administrator of the juvenile court but will also continue to handle civil matters.

Judge Michael T. Vough will continue to handle criminal and civil matters.

No other judges were identified as being assigned to take part in civil matters after January 1, 2014.