IN THE UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

ROBERT E. COLE Attorney For Plaintiff

ROBERT E. COLE, P.C.

ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 73263

437 CHESTNUT STREET, SUITE 218

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106

(215) 922-2050

___________________________________

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., P.C. :

d/b/a THE PAIN CENTER

501-07 SOUTH 12TH STREET

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19147

Plaintiff :

V. : NO. 3:06cv728-VPM

SKILSTAF, INC. :

P.O. BOX 729

ALEXANDER CITY, AL 35011

Defendant :

___________________________________

REPLY OF PLAINTIFF TO AMENDED COUNTER-CLAIMS OF DEFENDANT WITH

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Denied. Denied as after reasonable investigation,

defendants are without knowledge or sufficient information to

form belief as to the truth of this averment and therefore, same

is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.

2. Denied. Denied as after reasonable investigation,

defendants are without knowledge or sufficient information to

form belief as to the truth of this averment and therefore, same

is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 1 of 7
3. Denied. Denied as after reasonable investigation,

defendants are without knowledge or sufficient information to

form belief as to the truth of this averment and therefore, same

is denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.

4. Denied. After reasonable investigation, defendants

are without knowledge or sufficient information to form belief

as to truth of this averment and therefore, same is denied and

strict proof thereof is demanded at trial.

5. Admitted.

6. Admitted.

7. Admitted.

8. Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted that

plaintiff is a medical provider. Denied as to the basic

characterization of services by defendant. The remainder of

this allegation is denied as a conclusion of law to which no

response is required. To the extent that this allegation is

deemed factual, it is specifically denied and strict proof is

demanded at trial.

9. Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted that

plaintiff provided treatment to Dianna Berry. The remainder of

this allegation is denied as a conclusion of law to which no

response is required. To the extent that this allegation is

deemed factual, it is specifically denied and strict proof is

demanded at trial.

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 2 of 7
 10. Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted that

plaintiff billed defendant for medical services rendered to

Dianna Berry. The remainder of this allegation is denied as a

conclusion of law to which no response is required. To the

extent that this allegation is deemed factual, it is

specifically denied and strict proof is demanded at trial.

 11. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

 12. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs one (1)

through eleven (11) as though set forth at length below.

13. Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted as to the

language quoted. Denied as to the legal effect, if any, of the

said language.

14. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

15. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 3 of 7
WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, plaintiff

respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its

favor and against defendant, plus costs and attorney’s fees.

 16. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs one (1)

through fifteen (15) as though set forth at length below.

 17. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

 18. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

 19. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

 20. Denied. This allegation is denied as a conclusion of

law to which no response is required. To the extent that this

allegation is deemed factual, it is specifically denied and

strict proof is demanded at trial.

WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, plaintiff

respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its

favor and against defendant, plus costs and attorney’s fees.

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 4 of 7
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

 21. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs one (1)

through twenty (20) as though set forth at length below.

 22. Defendant has failed to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted.

 23. Defendant has brought these counter-claims in bad

faith and for the purposes of harassment.

 24. Plaintiff asserts the defenses of estoppel and waiver

as full and complete defenses to all counter-claims by defendant

in this matter.

 25. Plaintiff reserves the right to assert any and all

affirmative defenses which discovery proceedings may hereafter

reveal to be appropriate.

WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, plaintiff

respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in its favor

and against defendant, plus costs and attorney’s fees.

Respectfully submitted,

 

REC6159______________________________

Robert E. Cole, Esquire

Attorney for Plaintiff

Atty. I.D. No. 73263

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218

Philadelphia, PA 19106

(215) 922-2050

recoleesq6@juno.com

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 5 of 7
VERIFICATION

Robert E. Cole, Esquire hereby states that he is attorney

for plaintiff in this action and verifies that the averments set

forth in the foregoing Reply are true and correct to the best of

his knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned

understands that the statements therein made are subject to the

penalties relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.

 

REC6159______________________________

Robert E. Cole, Esquire

Attorney for Plaintiff

Atty. I.D. No. 73263

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218

Philadelphia, PA 19106

(215) 922-2050

recoleesq6@juno.com

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 6 of 7
IN THE UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

ROBERT E. COLE Attorney For Plaintiff

ROBERT E. COLE, P.C.

ATTORNEY I.D. NO. 73263

437 CHESTNUT STREET, SUITE 218

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106

(215) 922-2050

___________________________________

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., P.C. :

d/b/a THE PAIN CENTER

V. : NO. 3:06cv728-VPM

SKILSTAF, INC. :

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Robert E. Cole, Esquire, attorney for plaintiff, hereby

verifies that on the 26th day of October, 2006, he electronically

filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF

system, which will send notification of such filing as follows:

Amelia T. Driscoll, Esquire

Bradley Arant et al.

1819 Fifth Avenue North

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104

Robert E. Cole, Esquire, attorney for plaintiff, hereby

verifies that on the 26th day of October, 2006, he served upon

Jeanne L. Bakker, Esquire, attorney for defendant above, a true

and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail, postage

prepaid to the following address:

Montgomery, McCracken et al.

123 South Broad Street

Philadelphia, PA 19109

 

REC6159______________________________

Robert E. Cole, Esquire

Attorney for Plaintiff

Atty. I.D. No. 73263

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218

Philadelphia, PA 19106

(215) 922-2050

recoleesq6@juno.com

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 33 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 7 of 7