PITTSBURGH – The City of Pittsburgh’s Water and Sewer Authority has denied it was responsible for the alleged defective design and failure to repair a deteriorating storm sewer culvert, which caused storm water runoff to flow into the plaintiffs’ homes.
Sandra C. Hill and Alan Ricketts first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Dec. 7 versus the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority. All parties are of Pittsburgh.
“Plaintiff Hill is the lawful owner of a duplex (multi-family home) on property located at 8882-8884 Frankstown Road, Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235. Plaintiff Ricketts is a tenant who resides in the subject property,” the suit said.
“The defendant owned and controlled the storm sewer system including but not limited to drainage pipes, culverts and structures installed throughout the City of Pittsburgh; The municipal authority was responsible for the design, construction, inspection, maintenance and repair of the storm sewer system at or near the subject property, and said storm sewer and related structures were under this defendant’s care, custody and control.”
The suit added that over a long period of time, the defendant allowed the culvert or inlet adjacent to the subject property to deteriorate and eventually collapse, blocking the inlet and preventing the surface water from flowing into the storm sewer system – in addition to failing to repair the structure, or notice that the collapsed inlet with the manhole cover formed an artificial ramp that caused storm water from the roadway to flow onto plaintiff Hill’s property.
“On July 11, 2019, during a heavy rainfall, storm water from the road surface diverted by the aforesaid damaged inlet flowed directly onto the subject property, causing substantial structural damage to the subject property and the personal property inside the basements of the residences. The defendant had no easement or legal right-of-way from the plaintiffs to direct storm water across the subject property,” according to the suit.
The PWSA filed preliminary objections to the complaint on Jan. 15, charging that the complaint failed to state a cause of action upon which relief could be granted and failed to state its claims with proper sufficiency.
“In order for plaintiffs to recover against the PWSA for tort claims, they must establish that the PWSA had ‘actual notice or could reasonably be charged with notice under the circumstances of the dangerous condition’ prior to the date on which the incident occurred,” the objections stated, in part.
“Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts to establish that the PWSA had the requisite prior notice of any alleged defect in any facilities over which the PWSA exercises ownership or maintenance responsibilities.”
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Judge Alan D. Hertzberg overruled the defendant’s preliminary objections on Feb. 22.
UPDATE
PWSA filed an answer and new matter on March 12, claiming immunity from suit under the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, among other defenses.
“The PWSA is a local authority entitled to those immunities set forth in the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, and the PWSA is immune from liability for damages claimed by plaintiffs, pursuant to the Tort Claims Act. The PWSA did not have notice of the condition at issue prior to the incident that is the subject of this lawsuit. The PWSA asserts each and every defense, bar and/or limitation contained within the Tort Claims Act, and/or the PWSA is entitled to a set off,”
“The PWSA owns and/or maintains certain water and sewer mains, pumps and other facilities as part of the supply of water and sewer services for areas within the City of Pittsburgh. The PWSA is not responsible for maintenance of drainage pipes, culverts and structures that are not connected to the PWSA maintained public sewer system. It is unclear, based upon the averments set forth in the complaint, to which ‘storm sewer inlet or culvert with manhole cover’ plaintiffs refer.”
The municipal authority claimed the plaintiffs incurred no damages as a result of any acts or omissions on their part and the incidents, injuries and/or damages alleged to have been sustained by plaintiffs “were not directly or proximately caused by the PWSA.”
For counts of negligent control of real estate and trespass to property, the plaintiffs are seeking damages in excess of the arbitration limits of this jurisdiction and a trial by jury.
The plaintiffs are represented by Margaret M. Egan and Alexander J. Jamiolkowski of Egan & Jamiolkowski, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Lindsay S. Fouse, Danny P. Cerrone Jr. and Mark F. Nowak of Clark Hill, also in Pittsburgh.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-20-012351
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com