By Kevin L. Connors, Esquire
Effective as of April 8, 2013, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has amended Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure No. 1311.1, dealing with procedures on Appeals from awards of arbitrators.
The amendment deals with the admission of documentary evidence, when a party appeals an award of arbitrators to the Trial Court division of the Court of Common Pleas.
The Rule has been amended to allow Plaintiffs to stipulate to limit their maximum amount of damages recoverable at trial to $25,000.00, when an appeal from an award of arbitrators is taken.
The Rule requires that the Plaintiff formally make the election to limit damages, and that the election must be made thirty (30) days from the date that the appeal is first listed for trial.
The Plaintiff’s election may be withdrawn at any time by agreement of the parties.
If the parties cannot agree, the Trial Court is vested with discretion to grant a Plaintiff’s Motion to withdraw the election, with the Plaintiff being required to show good cause for the withdrawal.
If the Plaintiff does elect, via Stipulation, to limit their maximum amount of damages recoverable at trial to $25,000.00, any party is then permitted to offer into evidence at trial any documents that are referred to in PRCP No. 1305(b)(1), contingent upon the party seeking to admit the documents to provide notice to every other party of their intention to offer the documents into trial at least twenty (20) days from the date that the appeal is first listed for trial.
As all are well aware, PRCP No. 1305 permits the following types of documents to be admitted into evidence, if the parties seeking their admission give twenty (20) days notice of the intent to offer the documents, prior to the date of arbitration, to include documents such as:
Bills or other documents evidencing charges incurred;
Records of businesses;
Records of government departments, agencies or offices, contingent upon any statutory restrictions;
Records and reports of hospitals and licensed healthcare providers;
Expert reports and descriptions of expert qualifications;
Written estimates of value, damage to, cost of repair of or loss of property; and,
Reports of earnings and time lost from work or lost compensation prepared by an employer.
Under the amended Rule No. 1311.1, the notice requirement must be accompanied by a copy of every document that is sought to be offered into evidence.
This Rule waives the necessity of requiring testimony to authenticate the document, subject to the Court being permitted to disregard any portion of a document that would be inadmissible if the person whose testimony is being waived by this Rule were testifying in person.
Any party receiving a PRCP No. 1311.1 Notice, is empowered to subpoena the person whose testimony would otherwise be waived by this Rule, permitting the party seeking the testimony to serve a Notice to Attend on the person whose testimony is sought, as well as, upon any adverse party, thereby permitting the person whose testimony is sought to be waived to be cross-examined as though the person were a witness for the party offering the document.
The subpoena-issuing party must pay the usual and customary fees and costs to the person subpoenaed to testify, to include being required to pay a usual and customary expert witness fee, if applicable.
The caveat to this rule, is that if a party subpoenas or otherwise compels attendance at trial the person whose testimony is sought to be waived by PRCP No. 1311.1, the document sought to be introduced into evidence at trial can be presented to the judge or jury as though it is being offered on direct examination, with the Plaintiff also being entitled to conduct the direct examination of the witness who has been subpoenaed.
Any party or the person being subpoenaed, may require that the testimony be recorded by deposition, pursuant to PRCP No. 4020(a)(5), again requiring the party issuing the subpoena to pay the usual and customary fee for the witnesses’ testimony.
The amended Rule further requires that the Plaintiff file a formal Stipulation with the Court, resulting in all parties to the action being placed on notice of the Plaintiff’s election to limit the maximum amount of damages recoverable at trial to $25,000.00.
The Rule also requires the issuance of a formal Notice of Intent to offer Documentary Evidence.
The amendments, recently promulgated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court do not substantially alter existing Civil Practice Procedures, although the amendments should simplify appeals of arbitration awards, and will limit damages to be sought at trial.
ConnorsLaw LLP
Trust us, we just get it!
It is trust well spent!
Defending liability-based lawsuits throughout Pennsylvania, on behalf of insurance carriers, third-party administrators, and self-insured businesses and corporations, our 100+ years of cumulative experience defending our clients against negligence and occurrence-based liabilities, empowers our Casualty Practice Trial Group attorneys to be entrusted to create the factual and legal leverage to expeditiously resolve lawsuits and claims, in the course of limiting/reducing/extinguishing our clients’ potential liabilities under Pennsylvania’s common law, trial practices, and rules of civil procedure.
With every member of our trial practice group being AV-rated, our partnership with the Pennsylvania Defense Institute and the Counsel on Litigation Management magnifies the lens through which our professional expertise imperiously demands that we remain dynamic and exacting advocates for our clients, the same being businesses, corporations, insurance carriers, seeking our trial and litigation acumen, to navigate the frustrating and liability-intensive minefield pervasive throughout Pennsylvania trial practice and procedure.
Questions concerning tort and/or contract liability that might arise in the context of casualty claims can be directed to Kevin L. Connors at [email protected] (Phone: 610-524-2100 Ext. 112).
