SCRANTON – Blue Mountain Resort has denied allegations it was responsible for the death of a man who suffered a fatal fall from a chairlift and says the decedent’s estate has not stated a claim upon which relief could or should be granted.
According to the litigation, on Jan. 1, 2019, Connor Golembiewski of Flemington, N.J. visited the Blue Mountain Resort in Palmerton and fell from a chairlift, sustaining fatal injuries.
In 11 separate counts, Golembiewski’s parents, Michael and Veronika Golembiewski, and estate charged the resort with various negligence forms of negligence that led to their son’s death in a lawsuit filed in a New Jersey federal court.
In response, the resort moved to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, or alternatively, to dismiss the matter for lack of jurisdiction or for improper venue. U.S. District Court Judge Michael A. Shipp approved the move to a Pennsylvania federal court last month.
UPDATE
On July 15, defendant Tuthill Corporation filed an answer to the complaint which issued a wholesale denial to claims brought by Golembiewski’s estate.
“Plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. All allegations pertaining to agency, employment, supervision, or control are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred or limited by the terms of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act,” the answer states.
“Plaintiffs assumed the risk of his own conduct, and his claims and causes of action are accordingly barred as a matter of law. Any injuries or damages sustained by plaintiff were due to the intervening, superseding acts of the third parties over whom defendant had neither control nor right of control. The injuries, damages and losses sustained by plaintiffs, if any, were and/or may have been caused entirely, or may have been contributed to, by the acts and/or omissions of individuals and/or entities over whom defendant had neither control nor right of control.”
The resort claimed that no act of omission or commission on its own part was the proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, and that the plaintiffs’ claims may be barred by the terms of any and all contract or agreement signed by or received by plaintiffs – while also stating it breached no duty of care to the plaintiffs.
“Plaintiffs’ claims for medical expenses must be reduced by the total amount of any and all medical expenses charged, but not actually paid by or on behalf of plaintiff. Any amount of medical expenses claimed by plaintiffs must be reduced by any expenses written off or deducted by any health care provider,” the answer says.
“Plaintiffs have failed to plead, and cannot establish by competent proofs, a cause of action based on res ipsa loquitur. All claims for punitive damages must be dismissed as there is no support in the pleading for a limited and specialized set of damages.”
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case 3:20-cv-01121
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey case 3:19-cv-18096
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com