PITTSBURGH – U.S. Steel argues that it is not liable for a Glassport man’s injuries, which allegedly took place while he was working at the company’s plant in Clairton.
Dennis Maksin and Melanie Riley of Glassport first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on July 30 versus United States Steel Corporation, of Pittsburgh.
“On or about Aug. 14, 2019, plaintiff Maksin was working in the course and scope of his employment with his employer (SSSI, Inc., doing business as “Songer Steel”). In turn, on that date, Songer Steel had contracted to provide its employees, including plaintiff, to perform work at U.S. Steel’s Clairton Plant; on Aug. 14, 2019, plaintiff was working at the Clairton Plant in the capacity of Maintenance Bricklayer,” the suit said.
“On Aug. 14, 2019, there existed a dangerous condition within the Clairton Plant, specifically in or about the location in the plant known as Batteries 1-3, namely, an unlit, darkened hallway (and/or other sections/portions of Batteries 1-3). Indeed, no illumination or lighting whatsoever was present in the hallway and other sections/portions of Batteries 1-3 rendering it impossible for plaintiff to see.”
In the course of his work, Maksin was required to traverse the hallway and/or other sections/portions of Batteries 1-3 in order to manually transport a large, 70-pound pipe through said area, by carrying the pipe overhead.
“As plaintiff walked through the darkened, ‘pitch black’ hallway and/or other sections/portions of Batteries 1-3, he tripped. Upon tripping, plaintiff dropped the pipe he was carrying overhead, backwards; he then released the pipe with his right hand while continuing to hold it with his left. Immediately, plaintiff heard and felt ‘popping’ in his left shoulder, experienced severe pain, and was rendered unable to move his left arm,” the suit stated.
“Because of the total and complete lack of lighting in the ‘pitch black’ hallway and other sections/portions, plaintiff was unable to see, and consequently tripped. Due to the unexpected nature of plaintiff’s tripping, he had no time to respond, causing plaintiff to sustain serious and severe bodily injuries, and to require extensive treatment, including surgeries. As the owner of the Clairton Plant, the defendant was aware or should have been aware of the dangerous condition consisting of non-existent lighting in the hallway and other portions of the area located at Batteries 1-3 and should have remedied the dangerous condition.”
According to the complaint, Maksin suffered a litany of injuries, including: Severe left shoulder pain; displaced fracture of the glenoid cavity of the left scapula, requiring surgery; inferior labral tearing, left shoulder, requiring surgery; loss of range of motion, left shoulder; left shoulder dislocation; left shoulder anterior instability; muscular pain in the left shoulder; axillary pain extending into the left fourth and fifth fingers; aggravation of left elbow injury; left upper extremity pain, tingling, and numbness; back pain; cervical spine pain; chest pain; left foot and leg pain; sciatic pain; anxiety and other potential serious and/or permanent damage.
UPDATE
U.S. Steel provided an answer to the complaint along with new matter on Dec. 16, denying it was responsible for Maksin’s full-body injuries.
“Plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action against U.S. Steel upon which relief may be granted. U.S. Steel hereby pleads plaintiffs’ comparative and/or contributory negligence and assumption of the risk, in diminution of any award plaintiffs may ultimately recover in this action, pursuant to applicable laws and statutes. The accident, injury and/or damage about which plaintiffs complain, the nature, occasion and extent of which are unknown after reasonable investigation and inquiry, and therefore are denied, were caused or contributed to by the negligent act, omission and/or other culpable conduct of a party, person and/or entity over which U.S. Steel had no right or duty of control and for which U.S. Steel cannot be held liable,” the company’s new matter stated.
“No act or omission on the part of U.S. Steel caused or contributed in any way to plaintiffs’ alleged injuries, damages and/or other losses. U.S. Steel raises as an affirmative defense any superseding and/or intervening cause that may have resulted in plaintiffs’ alleged injuries, damages and/or other losses. To the extent investigation and/or discovery reveal the same to be appropriate, U.S. Steel pleads the existence of pre-existing conditions and/or incidents or subsequent conditions and/or incidents, then the same are barred from recovery to the extent that the alleged injuries, damages and/or other losses are not related to any act or omission of U.S. Steel.”
U.S. Steel further pleaded that the plaintiffs did not mitigate their own damages, and cited the statute of limitations, the borrowed servant doctrine and the Pennsylvania Worker’s Compensation Act as avenues by which the plaintiffs’ claims should be barred.
For counts of premises liability negligence and loss of consortium, the plaintiffs are seeking damages in excess of the jurisdictional arbitration limits of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas’s Arbitration Division, including but not limited to, pain and suffering, compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs and fees, plus a trial by jury.
The plaintiffs are represented by Patrick W. Murray and Jonathan M. Stewart of SMT Legal, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by J. Lawson Johnston, Scott D. Clements and Aaron M. Ponzo of Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, also in Pittsburgh.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-21-008882
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com