PITTSBURGH – Starbucks says it’s not responsible for injuries alleged in a federal lawsuit brought by a Pittsburgh couple after the wife-plaintiff suffered hip, leg and spinal injuries after falling off a restroom toilet.
Judith Olszewski and Edward Olszewski of Pittsburgh initially filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on July 31 versus Starbucks Corporation, of Seattle, Wash.
The plaintiffs say they visited a Toronto, Ontario location of Starbucks as customers on April 4, 2018, where plaintiff Judith Olszewski also used the restroom facilities.
“While in the process of using the bathroom, the toilet seat violently shifted to the left, causing plaintiff Judith Olszewski to be forcefully unseated. The force from the shifting toilet seat caused plaintiff Judith Olszewski to strike the wall and floor of the bathroom stall with great force,” the suit says.
“As a result of colliding with the bathroom stall wall and the floor, Olszewski was caused to suffer severe injuries. When plaintiff Olszewski was found, she was lying on the floor of the defendant’s bathroom, injured and exposed. She did not receive immediate medical treatment and her condition continued to worsen over the coming days.”
After a medical visit, it was determined that Olszewski was caused to suffer low back pain, right lateral leg pain, leg pain, laminectomy to the L4-L5 vertebrae with revision foraminotomy, L3 vertebral laminectomy, L4-LS posterior lateral fusion and other injuries.
Four weeks later, Starbucks removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 28 and issued an answer to the complaint with affirmative defenses on Sept. 4.
“Plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a claim against Starbucks Corporation upon which relief can be granted. At all times relevant to the incident alleged in the plaintiffs’ complaint, defendant Starbucks Corporation did not own or operate the retail location identified by the plaintiffs,” the answer read, in part.
“Defendant Starbucks Corporation did not engage in any negligent or careless conduct of any type, merit or form. Defendant Starbucks Corporation raises the defenses of the plaintiff-wife’s contributory negligence, comparative negligence and voluntary assumption of the risk which may bar or reduce the plaintiffs’ recovery herein.”
Starbucks also availed itself of both liability and responsibility, should it be revealed in discovery or established at the time of trial that said injuries and/or damages were the result of pre-existing and/or unrelated medical conditions
For counts of negligence and loss of consortium, the plaintiffs are seeking damages in excess of jurisdictional arbitration limits, plus costs and interest.
The plaintiffs are represented by Joseph P. Rewis of Rewis & Yoder, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Jennifer M. Swistak of Cipriani & Werner, also in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-01279
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-20-004890
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com