SHIMMEL et al v. NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION et al
Filing
75
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 50 Motion to Dismiss, and as more fully stated in said Memorandum Opinion and Order. Signed by Judge Kim R. Gibson on 2/24/2020. (dlg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN PAUL SHIMMEL, an incapacitated
)
person, by his parent and duly appointed
)
Pennanent Plenary guardian of the person and )
)
Estate, BEATRICE SHIMMEL,
)
Plaintiffs,
Case No. 3:18-cv-123
JUDGE KIM R. GIBSON
)
v.
)
)
NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION (flk/a INTERNATIONAL
HARVESTER), a foreign corporation; RUSH
TRUCK LEASING, INC., a foreign
corporation; RUSH TRUCK CENTERS OF
VIRGINIA, INC., a foreign corporation;
EXPRESS LIGHT TRUCKING, INC., a
foreign corporation; WEI JIANG, a nonresident individual; and SEALAND FOODS,
INC., a foreign corporation,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.
Introduction
John Paul Shimmel ("John Paul"), a motorcyclist injured in a motor vehicle accident on
Pennsylvania State Route 322, and his mother and duly appointed guardian, Beatrice Shimmel
(collectively, the "Shirnrnels"), brought this personal injury action against Defendants Navistar
International Corporation ("Navistar"), Rush Truck Leasing, Inc. ("Rush Leasing"), Rush Truck
Centers of Virginia, Inc. ("Rush Truck"), Express Light Trucking, Inc. ("Express Light"), Wei
Jiang, and Sealand Foods, Inc. ("Sealand"). The Shimmels allege that Defendants are liable in
negligence and strict liability for John Paul Shirnmel's injuries. Rush Leasing and Rush Truck
(collectively, "Rush") moved to dismiss the Complaint, arguing that the Shimmels' strict
-1-
liability and negligence claims are actually negligent failure to market claims, which
Pennsylvania law does not recognize. Rush's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 50) is fully briefed
(ECF Nos. 50, 56, 62) and ripe for disposition.
This Court DENIES Rush's Motion and holds that the Shimmels have adequately
pleaded claims against Rush.
II.
Jurisdiction and Venue
This Court has jurisdiction because the parties have complete diversity and the amount
in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Venue is proper because a substantial part of the events giving rise to this action
occurred in Clearfield County, which is in the Western District of Pennsylvania. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1391.
III.
Factual Background
The Court draws all facts from Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (ECF No. 46) and accepts
them as true for the purposes of deciding the Motion. 1
A. The Crash on State Route 322
On the afternoon of September 8, 2017, John Paul was riding his motorcycle east on
Pennsylvania State Route 322 ("SR 322"). (ECF No. 46
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?