MANORCARE OF EASTON PA LLC v. NAGY

Filing 34

ORDER AS FOLLOWS: 1. COUNTER-DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THEM AND ANY OTHER ENTITY, IF ANY, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT (DOC. #17) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS:A. COUNT NINE O F THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM FOR LEGAL MALPRACTICE (ALONG WITH ANY OTHER POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY) IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE BASED ON COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS FAILURE TO FILE A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT. B. INSOFAR AS THE MOTION TO DISMISS ALL OTHER COUNTS OF THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM IS BASED ON LACK OF SERVICE AND IMPROPER JOINDER, IT IS DENIED. C. THE ALTERNATIVE REQUEST FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT IS DENIED. 2. MANORCARE (AND ANY OTHER COUNTER-DEFENDANT WHO HAS ALREADY JOINED IN T HE EXISTING MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM (DOC. #17)) SHALL FILE A NEW MOTION WITH SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SETTING FORTH ANY ADDITIONAL GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL WITHIN 30 DAYS.1 3. THE MOTION TO DISMISS CONTAINED WITHIN DEFENDANTS ANSWER, AME NDED COUNTERCLAIM, AND MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. #14) IS DENIED. 4. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO STRIKE (DOC. #18) IS DENIED. 5. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS OBJECTION (DOC. #23), WHICH APPEARS TO BE A MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS/COUNTER-DE FENDANTS RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE-REFERENCED MOTION TO STRIKE, IS DENIED. 6. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS DISCOVERY PLAN OBJECTION AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER (DOC. #25) IS DENIED. 7. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO DENY MANORCARES REQUEST FOR ADMISSION, ETC. (DOC. #29) IS DENIED. 8. THE THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT (DOC. #30) IS DISMISSED AND STRICKEN. 9. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS (DOC. #31) IS DENIED AS MOOT GIVEN THE STRIKING OF THE THIR D-PARTY COMPLAINT. 10. DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RELIEF REGARDING COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM (DOC. #32) IS ALSO DENIED AS MOOT GIVEN THE STRIKING OF THE THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT. 11. THE CLERKS OFFICE SHALL ISSUE SUMMONSES RELATING TO THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM (DOC. #14) FOR THE FOLLOWING COUNTER-DEFENDANTS: KENNEDY, PC; NORTHAMPTON COUNTY; AETNA, INC.; HEARTLAND HOSPICE; DR. EDWARD CUMBO; DR. DILIP BERA; BRAKELEY PARK CENTER; NEW EASTWOOD CARE AND REHAB; COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYL VANIA; DR. KEYURKUMAR DALSANIYA; DR. STEPHEN KSIAZEK; AND ST. LUKES WARREN HOSPITAL. 12. COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS SHALL PROPERLY SERVE A COPY OF THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM AND SUMMONS, ALONG WITH A COPY OF THIS ORDER, ON EACH OF THE ABOVE COUNTER-DEFENDANTS WITHIN 30 DAYS.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 6/25/2015. 6/26/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO DEFENDANT AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MANORCARE OF EASTON PA LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 13-5957

JOSEPH A. NAGY,
Defendant
__________________________
JOSEPH A. NAGY and JOSEPH EUGENE
NAGY,
Counter-Plaintiffs,
v.
MANORCARE OF EASTON PA LLC;
KENNEDY, PC; NORTHAMPTON COUNTY;
AETNA, INC.; HEARTLAND HOSPICE; DR.
EDWARD CUMBO; DR. DILIP BERA;
BRAKELEY PARK CENTER; NEW
EASTWOOD CARE AND REHAB;
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; DR.
KEYURKUMAR DALSANIYA; DR. STEPHEN
KSIAZEK; and ST. LUKE’S WARREN
HOSPITAL,
Counter-Defendants
ORDER

AND NOW, this 25th day of June, 2015, upon consideration of several
outstanding motions identified below, and as set forth in the accompanying memorandum
opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Any and All Claims Against
Them and Any Other Entity, if Any, or, in the Alternative, for a More
Definite Statement (Doc. #17) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED
IN PART as follows:

a. Count Nine of the Amended Counterclaim for legal malpractice
(along with any other potential claim for professional liability) is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on CounterPlaintiffs’ failure to file a certificate of merit.
b. Insofar as the Motion to Dismiss all other counts of the Amended
Counterclaim is based on lack of service and improper joinder, it is
DENIED.
c. The alternative request for a more definite statement is DENIED.
2. ManorCare (and any other Counter-Defendant who has already joined in
the existing Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaim (Doc. #17))
shall file a new motion with supplemental briefing setting forth any
additional grounds for dismissal within 30 days. 1
3. The Motion to Dismiss contained within Defendant’s Answer, Amended
Counterclaim, and Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #14) is DENIED.
4. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike (Doc. #18) is DENIED.
5. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Objection (Doc. #23), which appears to be
a motion to strike Plaintiff’s/Counter-Defendants’ response to the abovereferenced motion to strike, is DENIED.
6. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Discovery Plan Objection and Motion for
Protective Order (Doc. #25) is DENIED.
7. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Motion to Deny ManorCare’s Request for
Admission, etc. (Doc. #29) is DENIED.
1

Any counter-defendant newly served with the Amended Counterclaim following issuance of this order
may as a matter of course file a motion or responsive pleading within the normal time frame allowed by the
rules if that period is longer than the 30 days here allowed.

2

8. The Third Party Complaint (Doc. #30) is DISMISSED AND
STRICKEN.
9. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Serve Third Party
Defendants (Doc. #31) is DENIED AS MOOT given the striking of the
third-party complaint.
10. Defendant’s/Counter-Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judicial Relief Regarding
Compulsory Counterclaim (Doc. #32) is also DENIED AS MOOT given
the striking of the third-party complaint.
11. The Clerk’s office shall issue summonses relating to the Amended
Counterclaim (Doc. #14) for the following Counter-Defendants: Kennedy,
PC; Northampton County; Aetna, Inc.; Heartland Hospice; Dr. Edward
Cumbo; Dr. Dilip Bera; Brakeley Park Center; New Eastwood Care And
Rehab; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Dr. Keyurkumar Dalsaniya; Dr.
Stephen Ksiazek; and St. Luke’s Warren Hospital.
12. Counter-Plaintiffs shall properly serve a copy of the Amended
Counterclaim and summons, along with a copy of this order, on each of
the above Counter-Defendants within 30 days.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl
Jeffrey L. Schmehl, J.

3