PITTSBURGH – A Methodist church, its day care center and two employees contend they are not liable for injuries that an eight month-old child in their care suffered, after the child allegedly fell from a changing table and broke his right leg.
C.M. (a minor, by and through his parents and natural guardians), John Munoz and Lisa Munoz, all of Pittsburgh, first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Nov. 30 versus Community United Methodist Church (doing business as “Community Child Development Center”) of Aspinwall, Beverly Hood of Pittsburgh and Stacy DeAngelis of Aspinwall.
The plaintiffs brought C.M. to the Community Child Development Center and placed him in the care of Hood and DeAngelis.
“On Nov. 27, 2018, C.M. was on the diaper changing table at defendant daycare under the care of employee defendant DeAngelis. Defendant DeAngelis admittedly turned away from C.M. while he remained unattended and unsupervised on the changing table, which was several feet high. While defendant DeAngelis turned away for a period of time and while he was left unattended and unsupervised on the diaper changing table, C.M. fell to the ground and suffered significant injuries,” the suit said.
“Defendants DeAngelis and Hood continued their duties throughout the day and later returned C.M. to his parents at the end of the day. On the daily report slip, which details how C.M. performed that day and gives an opportunity for the defendants to report any issues with the minor child, the defendants failed to indicate an incident involving C.M. that day.”
The plaintiffs said they discovered the injury to C.M. as he remained fussy and cried through the night, and was tender to the touch on the morning of Nov. 28, 2018.
“The next day, plaintiffs John and Lisa Munoz took C.M. to the emergency room, where he was diagnosed with an acute right femur fracture. At no time did defendant day care, DeAngelis or Hood document the injury to C.M. or notify the parents of the injury to C.M. As a direct and proximate result of the violent fall, plaintiffs sustained injuries,” per the suit.
“As a direct and proximate result of the careless, reckless and negligent conduct of defendants, plaintiff C.M. suffered serious injuries, including: Leg pain, lower extremity pain, overall pain, dizziness, listlessness, femur fracture and femur pain.”
UPDATE
The defendants filed an answer and new matter in the case on April 1, discounting liability on their parts for the events in question.
“While minor child, C.M. was present at the defendant Church on November 27, 2018, during which time C.M. fell from a changing table, but did not show any signs of injury and was thereafter returned to his parents, in further response to this paragraph, the defendants specifically deny that they caused or contributed to any of the plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and/or damages.,” the answer read, in part.
“To the contrary, defendants acted at all times in a careful, cautious, prudent and reasonable manner and did not cause or contribute to any of the plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and/or damages, the existence of which are and have been denied. The averments contained…are further specifically denied pursuant to Rule 1029(e), with strict proof to the contrary demanded at the time of trial.”
In new matter, the defendants asserted several affirmative defenses.
“The plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted against the defendant church, defendant Hood and defendant DeAngelis. To the extent applicable, the defendants raise the statute of limitations applicable to the plaintiffs’ cause of action, specifically, the cause of action brought by John and Lisa Munoz,” the new matter stated.
“To the extent applicable, the defendants raise the statute of limitations applicable to a civil conspiracy cause of action. The plaintiffs’ complaint and the facts of the case are inadequate to support any finding of civil conspiracy, which could form the basis of an award. Any alleged injuries and/or damages claimed by the plaintiffs, the existence of which are and have been denied, were the result of superseding or intervening causes of which the defendants had no control or right to control at any time.”
Furthermore, the defendants argued they “did not engage in any conduct that was or could be considered outrageous, malicious, willful, or reckless, such that punitive or special damages could be awarded.”
For counts of negligence and civil conspiracy, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $35,000, punitive damages and interest sufficient to compensate for past and future damages resulting from the injury, costs, attorney’s fees and for any other relief as the Court may deem appropriate, plus a trial by jury.
The plaintiffs are represented by Frank C. Walker II of Frank Walker Law, in Clairton.
The defendants are represented by Jeffrey M. Olszewski, of Cipriani & Werner, in Pittsburgh.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-20-012137
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com