The opinion of the court was delivered by: Buckwalter, S. J.
Currently pending before the Court is the Motion of Plaintiffs Prameela Inaganti and Rao Inaganti for Remand. For the following reasons, the Motion is denied.
According to the facts set forth in the Complaint, Plaintiff Prameela Inaganti was a guest at the Defendant's hotel in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. (Compl. ¶ 7.) On January 29, 2008, while exiting the side entrance of the hotel, Plaintiff fell due to a "slippery substance and/or ice" outside the entrance of the hotel near the parking lot. (Id.) As a result, she sustained multiple severe and permanent orthopedic and neurological injuries. (Id.)
Plaintiffs commenced the current action on January 27, 2010, by filing a Writ of Summons in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. On February 25, 2010, Plaintiffs served Defendants with the Complaint, which alleged two counts of negligence, (id. ¶¶ 8-27), and two counts of loss of consortium. (Id. ¶¶ 28-31.) The ad damnum clauses in Counts I through IV of the Complaint sought losses for a sum in excess of $50,000.
In an apparent effort to determine whether Plaintiff believed their case to be worth more than $75,000, Defendants served requests for admissions on Plaintiffs on March 10, 2010. (Defs.' Resp. Mot. Remand, Ex. D.) The four requests contained in that document sought admissions as follows:
1. The amount in controversy claimed by the plaintiffs in this action does not exceed $75,000.00.
2. The total damages sustained by the plaintiffs in this action do not exceed $75,000.00
3. The total amount of damages recoverable by the plaintiffs in this action does not exceed $75,000.00.
4. The total amount of damages recoverable by the plaintiffs in this action does not exceed $75,000.00, exclusive of interests and costs.
(Id.) By way of answers dated April 4, 2010, Plaintiffs denied all of these requests for admissions and indicated that Plaintiff Prameela Inaganti was "still ...