PITTSBURGH – The widow of a man killed after an altercation at a Pittsburgh Steelers game in November 2016 has reached a settlement with the assailants, the stadium and its security team she held legally responsible for his death.
Rebecca Laughlin of Allegheny County initially filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Sept. 20, 2018 versus David Jones and Colin Jones of Carnegie, PSSI Stadium, LLC (a.k.a. “Heinz Field”) and Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc., both of Pittsburgh.
The lawsuit was centered on decedent William J. Laughlin, a married father of three children who attended a Pittsburgh Steelers-Dallas Cowboys game at Heinz Field in Pittsburgh, on Nov. 13, 2016. At the conclusion of the game, the suit said the plaintiff and decedent were exiting Heinz Field through a tunnel leading to the concourse at the stadium.
While traveling through that tunnel, which the suit said was not monitored by security or crowd control personnel, Rebecca Laughlin bumped into the allegedly intoxicated defendant, Colin Jones. At that time, Colin glared and yelled profanity at Rebecca, she said, and in response, William retaliated with profanity at Colin and an altercation began.
Defendant David Jones entered the fray to separate the two men and in the process, William, Rebecca, Colin and David all fell to the floor, the suit said. As a result of the fall, William’s head slammed on the concrete floor, leading him to sustain blunt impact injury and causing a fatal hematoma and brain hemorrhage, the suit said.
After not responding to CPR performed by his wife the following morning, William succumbed to his injuries that same day, Nov. 14, 2016, the suit said.
The lawsuit alleged the intoxicated and criminal conduct of the assailants, in addition to the negligence of the stadium and security defendants in not staffing the stadium properly after the game, led to William’s unfortunate and untimely death.
Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. filed a motion for summary judgment on July 6, 2021, charging that Rebecca “has failed to produce evidence of facts essential to her cause of action, which in a jury trial would require the issues to be submitted to a jury.”
“The plaintiff has not come up with anything to show that she has a viable cause of action against Landmark. She has not shown that there existed a duty running from Landmark to William Laughlin; nor, if there were one, what it consisted of. She has not shown what Landmark supposedly did or failed to do; much less that whatever Landmark supposedly did or failed to do constituted a ‘breach’ of some unknown, undefined ‘duty.’ Plaintiff has not shown that there was any causal connection between Landmark’s supposed actions or inactions and the alleged injury,” the company stated.
“With respect to the putative cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress, plaintiff herself actually denied witnessing any traumatic event or injury being done to her husband. Therefore, plaintiff has failed to come forward with any evidence of the third element of the cause of action, i.e., that the distress resulted from the observation of the traumatic event and the negligence.”
The company added that after the supposed incident, William Laughlin walked out of Heinz Field with his wife “like nothing had happened”, walked back to their vehicle and tailgated, before being driven home – at which point, William vomited during the drive home and did not complain of a head injury.
Plaintiff counsel filed an opposition brief to the motion on Aug. 18, 2021, arguing that it was “clear” based on discovery that was completed that Landmark had in fact breached their duty of care to the plaintiff.
“Defendant Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. claims that there is no genuine issue of material fact because ‘plaintiff herself actually denied witnessing any traumatic event or injury being dome to her husband.’ This is in direct conflict with plaintiff’s deposition, which was not a denial of observation, but rather a denial of recollection, where the events of the deposition transpired nearly 4 years prior,” the reply brief stated.
“Further, visual observation is not a requirement for negligent infliction of emotional distress, ‘it is the immediate sensory awareness and not the source (i.e. visual, tactile, aural, gustatory or olfactory), of the awareness which must control.’ Regarding plaintiff’s negligence claim, Ms. Laughlin’s deposition emphasized that Landmark Event Staffing Service, Inc. did not have personnel in the tunnel, who might have prevented her husband’s death by acting as a deterrent or by stepping in.”
The plaintiff felt that because genuine issue of material facts still exist and discovery is ongoing, that any motion for summary judgment is premature and should be denied.
On Aug. 31, 2021, the summary judgment motion was denied without prejudice.
UPDATE
Nearly six months later, on Feb. 14 of this year, Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Judge Arnold I. Klein reported that the case had been settled amicably among the parties.
On March 17, the plaintiff filed a petition to approve the settlement reached in the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
“The Pennsylvania Department of Revenue does not have any authority to ‘approve’ or ‘disapprove’ of the proposed distribution. However, plaintiff has provided notice to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue of the proposed allocation and the presentation of the within petition. The inheritance tax implications have no bearing on the proposed distribution, as all proceeds to the Survival Action will be distributed to decedent’s wife pursuant to decedent’s will. Further, the inheritance tax division has previously approved the same percentage allocation. Plaintiff entered into a contingency fee agreement with Goodrich & Geist, P.C. for an attorney fee of 33 1/3 percent, plus reimbursement of costs advanced. Goodrich & Geist, P.C. has advanced [unknown amount] in expenses. After attorney fees and reimbursement of expenses totaling [unknown amount], there is a balance of [unknown amount],” per the petition.
“Plaintiff has agreed to waive her claim to any wrongful death settlement proceeds from this settlement and has agreed to pay counsel fees and expenses from the survival action proceeds. Plaintiff proposes the balance be distributed as follows: a. [Unknown amount] to the Estate of William J. Laughlin; b. [Unknown amount] to Maddie Laughlin; c. [Unknown amount] to a minor, to be placed into an interest-bearing account not to be withdrawn until age 18; d. [Unknown amount] to a minor, to be placed into an interest-bearing account not to be withdrawn until age 18. There are no medical liens asserted by any entity. This Honorable Court has previously approved a partial settlement of this case with the Jones defendants. Upon approval of the within settlement, the only remaining defendant will be Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc.”
The parties further stipulated that all aspects of the settlement would remain confidential, only being disclosed under court order, to the parties’ financial professionals or attorneys, in any trial or proceeding where that information would be relevant or by written agreement of the parties – and that the parties were not to disclose details of the settlement to any news media whatsoever.
The plaintiff was represented by Joshua P. Geist of Goodrich & Geist, in Pittsburgh.
The defendants were represented by Edward A. Schenck of Cipriani & Werner, Dean E. Avgerinos and Gina M. Zumpella of Walsh Barnes Collis & Zumpella, plus Ashley J. Giannetti and Donald H. Smith of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, all in Pittsburgh.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-18-012225
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com