HARRISBURG – The Superior Court of Pennsylvania has ruled a former University of Pittsburgh Medical Center executive who was hit by a foul ball during a Pittsburgh Pirates game in 2015 is not entitled to damages from the manufacturers of protective netting used at PNC Park.
The case began during a Pittsburgh Pirates home game against the Chicago Cubs at PNC Park on April 20, 2015, when plaintiff Wendy Camlin, a director of patient care for Obstetrics and Newborn Services at UPMC, was in attendance and upon arrival at the stadium, made her way to her designated seat behind home plate.
Briefly turning her back to the field in order to navigate the row of seats already occupied by other spectators, it was at that point that a Chicago Cubs batter connected with a pitch and the foul ball rocketed backwards behind home plate. The ball struck the protective netting behind home plate with such force that the netting deflected, causing the ball to proceed backward through the netting and connect with the back of Camlin’s head.
Among her subsequent concussion-related injuries, Camlin suffered difficulties with focus, concentration and short-term memory loss – which all led to Camlin being unable to resume her duties at UPMC, which featured intensive time commitments and complex demands.
Camlin then filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on March 11, 2016 against Major League Baseball, the Pittsburgh Pirates and the Sports & Exhibition Authority of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, alleging that the defendants acted negligently in their breach of the duty to minimize the risk of injury to spectators or patrons at events held at PNC Park.
Seven months later, on Oct. 11, 2016, the Pirates and SEA joined Promats Athletics, LLC, the company responsible for designing and installing the netting behind home plate at PNC Park, as a defendant. The Pirates and SEA alleged Promats was negligent in its design and installation of the netting, whereas Promats filed a cross-claim and alleged Camlin’s injuries were the other defendants’ fault.
Nearly two years later, Major League Baseball was dismissed as a defendant on Aug. 24, 2018, as there was no evidence that the league had any responsibility for Camlin’s injuries. Furthermore, the Pirates and SEA confidentially settled with Camlin on Nov. 9, 2018.
The trial began on Nov. 16, 2018 and after 10 days, the jury returned a verdict awarding Camlin $454,000 in damages, consisting of $54,000 for past wage loss and reduced future earning capacity, $200,000 for past and present pain and suffering and $200,000 for future pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life.
The jury further found the already-settled defendants, the Pirates and SEA, were each 47.5 percent liable for Camlin’s injuries, while Camlin was 5 percent responsible and Promats was not liable at all.
Subsequently through a May 22, 2019 notice of appeal, Camlin and her counsel petitioned for a new trial on the issues of liability and damages or alternatively, enter judgment n.o.v. on the issues of Promats’ negligence and causation, and order a new trial on the apportionment of liability and damages.
That rationale did not find favor with Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Judge John McVay Jr. in a July 25, 2019 opinion, leading Camlin to seek relief from the Superior Court.
UPDATE
In her appeal, Camlin had alleged negligence on the part of Promats, due to the netting being defective and said the company failed to warn the Pirates or SEA of the inherent danger such faulty netting posed to stadium spectators.
Camlin further asserted the trial court judge did not properly instruct the jurors as to the legal duty Promats owed to protect her, but the Superior Court disagreed with that argument.
“Three out of five of these proposed charges include the phrase, ‘[Ms. Camlin] must show, and has shown,’ which prevented the trial court from providing these charges to the jury, as doing so ‘would have in essence granted a directed verdict on liability against Promats, the only non-settling defendant.’ While the other two charges do not contain such language, their titles indirectly suggest a directed verdict,” said Superior Court Judge John T. Bender, in the ruling issued July 10.
“A party has no right to have a particular form of instruction, nor is the trial court obligated to temper the contents of the jury instructions to respond to counsel’s arguments. It is sufficient if the trial court’s charge clearly and accurately explains the relevant law and properly conveys the requested point.”
Brian Stroh, senior vice president of business affairs and general counsel for the Pirates, testified at trial that it was “the Pirates’ architects, not Promats, that designed the cabling and net mooring system, as well as the backstop system, which were in place at the time of the April 20, 2015 incident, and that Promats had nothing to do with designing or installing that distance between the seats and the netting that has existed for 15 years before this accident.”
Bender said he found “sufficient evidence in the record to at least create a jury question regarding whether the Pirates knew of the hidden danger to patrons,” and thus rejected Camlin’s attempt for judgment as a matter of law.
“Ms. Camlin asserts that the trial court’s failure to properly charge the jury led to an irreconcilable result with the jury imposing liability on the Pirates and the SEA, but not Promats,” Bender stated.
“Again, Ms. Camlin’s claim is premised on her assumption that Promats should be held to a higher standard of care than the other defendants. Having determined that the trial court properly found Promats did not owe a heightened duty of care, we deem this claim to be meritless.”
Bender, along with fellow Superior Court judges Mary Jane Bowes and Dan Pellegrini, turned away Camlin’s appeal for a new trial and upheld the verdict reached in the trial court.
The plaintiff is represented by Mark Gordon, Paul Kenneth Vey and Peter Willliam Nigra of Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, in Pittsburgh.
The defendants are represented by Paul R. Robinson and Jeffrey Cohen of Meyer Darragh Buckler Bebenek & Eck, also in Pittsburgh, plus John Robert Conley of Vorys Sater Seymour & Pease, in Akron, Ohio.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania case 796 WDA 2019
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-16-003545
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com