PITTSBURGH – The Port Authority of Allegheny County has denied responsibility for severe arm and shoulder injuries a Pittsburgh woman claimed she suffered, while being a passenger aboard a bus operated by the defendants.
Flora Bagley first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on April 14 versus The Port Authority of Allegheny County. Both parties are of Pittsburgh.
“On April 26, 2021, at approximately 3 p.m., plaintiff boarded The PAT bus at the station located at 7th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219, paid the bus fare, and approached an available seat on the bus. Shortly after plaintiff boarded the bus, the driver suddenly accelerated, took a sharp right turn at an unreasonable speed, and without notice, jolted the plaintiff, causing her to lose her balance,” the suit said.
“In an effort to stabilize herself, plaintiff grabbed a handgrip of one of the seats which caused her to slam into the seat and twist her shoulder. In grabbing this handgrip in order to keep herself from falling, plaintiff seriously injured the right side of her body, causing plaintiff severe pain and anguish.”
The suit added that the defendant, acting by and through its servants, employees and/or personnel, operated the bus and negligently failed to maintain proper speed and control over the bus, while simultaneously, the plaintiff acted reasonably and prudently.
“As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s negligent conduct, plaintiff suffered the following injuries, some or all of which may be permanent: Strains, sprains, contusions of the right shoulder, torn right rotator cuff, right biceps tendon tearing and disruption, severe pain in left biceps, strains and sprains of the back; bruises, contusions and other injuries in or about nerves, muscles, bones, tendons, ligaments, tissues and vessels of the left leg and other injuries as the medical records might reveal,” the suit stated.
UPDATE
The Port Authority of Allegheny County filed an answer and new matter in the case on June 26, denying liability for the injuries Bagley described.
“To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, plaintiff’s claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, plaintiff has failed to set forth a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, defendant Port Authority is immune from liability regarding plaintiff’s claims in the above-captioned matter pursuant to the Pennsylvania Sovereign Immunity Act. To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, plaintiff’s claims do not fall within any of the enumerated exceptions to liability set forth in the Pennsylvania Sovereign Immunity Act,” the answer stated, in part.
“To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, Plaintiffs own negligence proximately caused and/or proximately contributed to the alleged injuries and damages of which Plaintiff complains, the existence and extent of which are expressly denied, and which negligence exceeds the negligence, if any, of defendant Port Authority. Therefore, plaintiff’s alleged injuries and losses are barred or diminished by the application of the laws of comparative and/or contributory negligence. To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, the alleged injuries and damages of which plaintiff complains were proximately caused and/or proximately contributed to by persons and/or entities other than defendant Port Authority. To the extent justified by the evidence developed in discovery or the testimony at the time of trial, the alleged injuries and damages of which plaintiff complains were proximately caused and/or contributed by a superseding and/or intervening cause or causes other than an act or omission on the part of defendant Port Authority, and, accordingly, recovery or relief against defendant Port Authority is barred. At all times relevant to this matter, defendant Port Authority exercised reasonable care under the circumstances.”
For one count of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of the jurisdictional limits of compulsory arbitration, together with court costs, interest and all other relief permitted by the Court.
The plaintiff is represented by G. Christopher Apessos of Apessos Law, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Michael E. Kennedy, Roger W. Foley Jr., Robert L. Monks and Michael J. Cetra of the Port Authority of Allegheny County, also in Pittsburgh.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-23-004962
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com