Quantcast

Haverford Township says plaintiff's slip-and-fall inside a local community center is not its fault

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Friday, November 22, 2024

Haverford Township says plaintiff's slip-and-fall inside a local community center is not its fault

State Court
Leticiajsantiago

Santiago | William J. Ferren & Associates

MEDIA – The Township of Haverford disavows liability for the subject incident of a lawsuit filed by a Philadelphia man, which alleged an unknown liquid on the premises of the Haverford Community Center caused him to both slip, fall and become seriously injured.

Saheem A. Purvis of Philadelphia first filed suit in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on Jan. 12 versus the Township of Haverford in Havertown and John Doe.

“On March 7, 2019, plaintiff, was lawfully inside the Haverford Community Center a/k/a premises, when he was caused to lose his balance, slip, stumble and fall due to an unknown liquid and dip near the bleachers, sustaining serious and permanent injuries,” the suit said.

“On March 7, 2019, and at all times relevant hereto, defendant’s Haverford and/or John Doe, and/or their agents, were responsible and had a duty to maintain, inspect, make sure the premises at the Haverford Community Center were safe and failed to perform said duty and/or performed said duty in a negligent/careless manner.”

The plaintiff alleged that the defendant’s negligence in failing to clear the walkway of any defects and other errors made it possible for his fall to take place.

“As the direct and proximate result of Haverford’s negligence, plaintiff sustained severe and multiple injuries…including, but not limited to: Torn Achilles tendon, muscle spasms, internal injuries of an unknown nature, severe aches, pains, mental anxiety and anguish, severe shock to her entire nervous system, exacerbation of all known and unknown pre-existing medical conditions, if any, and other injuries that will represent a permanent and substantial impairment of plaintiff’s bodily functioning, that substantially impairs plaintiff’s ability to perform his daily life activities, and the full extent of which is not yet known,” according to the lawsuit.

“As a further result of the aforesaid accident, plaintiff has and will probably in the future, be obliged to receive and undergo medical attention, which was or will be reasonable and necessary arising from the aforesaid accident and will otherwise incur various expenditures for the injuries he has suffered.”

UPDATE

Counsel for Haverford answered the complaint on March 2, denying its contents and asserting numerous affirmative defenses, so to absolve itself from liability for the incident at issue.

“Plaintiff’s claims are barred or limited by the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff assumed the specific risk of his alleged injuries. Plaintiff’s claims are barred or limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, 42 Pa. C.S.A. Section 7102,” the answer stated, in part.

“Plaintiff’s injuries, if any, were not factually caused by any acts or omissions on the part of answering defendant. The alleged condition was open and obvious. The alleged condition was de minimus and/or trivial. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages. Plaintiff’s alleged injuries, losses and damages, which allegations are denied, were caused by his own act, omission, conduct and negligence.”

Additionally, the answer stated that the plaintiff’s claims are barred by res judicata, by collateral estoppel and the doctrine of release and that the answering defendant is entitled to governmental immunity under the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act.

The plaintiff replied the following day, March 3, that the new matter contained merely conclusions of law, to which no official response was required and strict proof of which was demanded at trial.

For counts of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking damages, jointly and severally, in excess of $50,000 in actual damages, together with costs, counsel fees and such other and further relief as may be just and appropriate under the circumstances, plus a trial by jury.

The plaintiff is represented by Jason E. Fine of J. Fine Law Group, in Philadelphia

The defendants are represented by Leticia J. Santiago of William J. Ferren & Associates, in Hartford, Conn.

Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case CV-2021-000271

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News