PHILADELPHIA – JCPenney has disavowed liability for severe injuries claimed to be suffered by a Bucks County Man, who took a fall at its store in Langhorne’s Oxford Valley Mall.
Raymond Johnson and Josephine Scott of Bensalem initially filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Aug. 3 versus J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. of Langhorne, Old Copper Company, Inc. of Plano, Texas, Penney OPCO, LLC (doing business as “JCPenney”) and Simon Property Group, Inc. of Wilmington, Del. and Brookfield Asset Management, Inc. of New York, N.Y.
“In the early afternoon of Aug. 23, 2020, plaintiff Raymond Johnson, validly on the premises as a business invitee, was shopping on the premises, when he was caused to fall on a dangerous and defective condition of the premises, namely a slippery substance on the ground, believed to be vomit, causing plaintiff Raymond Johnson, the injuries and other losses more fully set forth herein,” the suit says.
“Prior to the accident, defendants had actual and/or constructive notice of the defective and dangerous conditions that caused plaintiff’s injuries. Defendants failed to take reasonable steps to correct and/or prevent the dangerous conditions on their premises prior to tire accident. Defendants failed to provide any warning to patrons, including plaintiff Raymond Johnson, of the defective and dangerous conditions prior to the accident.”
The plaintiffs claim that any and all negligence for the incident rests with the defendants.
“At all times material hereto, plaintiff acted in a reasonable and prudent manner and was free from any comparative negligence. At the time of the incident, defendants breached the duty of care owed to plaintiff. At all times material hereto, plaintiff did not assume the risk of injuries. At all material times, defendants were responsible for maintaining the premises and all associated grounds in a clean manner and in a state of good repair. Business invitees and the general public were expected by defendants to walk the premises,” the suit states.
“As a result of the negligence and carelessness of the defendants acting as aforesaid, plaintiff Raymond Johnson, was caused to sustain severe injuries of, but not limited to, his bones, joints, muscles, tendons, blood vessels and soft tissues through his entire body; he was caused to sustain injuries and/or aggravate pre-existing injuries, including but not limited to: back, lumbar disc protrusions/herniations, lumbar radiculopathy, left ankle, leg numbness, and a severe shock to the nerves and nervous system, all of which said injuries have in the past and will in the future cause plaintiff great pain and suffering, and are permanent in nature.”
On Sept. 14, counsel for JCPenney removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, citing diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount of damages at issue.
“Based upon allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint, Brookfield Asset Management is incorporated in New York and, therefore a citizen of New York. Thus, as plaintiffs are citizens of Pennsylvania and Defendants are citizens of Texas, Delaware and New York respectively. Accordingly, there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(c)(1). After sending plaintiffs’ counsel an email whether he would agree to cap damages below the federal jurisdictional limits, plaintiffs’ counsel indicated he could not. Therefore, the amount in controversy meets federal jurisdictional limits,” the removal notice stated.
“Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1446(b)(3), this notice of removal is timely filed. This court is the federal court embracing the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where the original action was filed. Thus, venue and removal to this Court are proper under 28 U.S.C. Section 14411(a). Because this action satisfies the requirement of 28 U.S.C. Section 1331, this Court has original and supplemental jurisdiction over all claims alleged in the Complaint, and this action may be removed to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1441. Because there is complete diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy is in excess of $75,000, this case is properly removed to this Court.”
UPDATE
JCPenney answered the complaint on Oct. 24, denying the plaintiff’s charges in their entirety and providing affirmative defenses on its own behalf.
“Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries were caused and/or contributed to, in whole or in part, by the negligence and/or carelessness of persons, parties, and/or organizations other than answering defendant, over whom answering defendant had no control, right of control, or responsibility and was due in no matter whatsoever to any act or failure to act on the part of answering defendant. Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries were caused by the intervening negligence of a third person or persons which was the superseding cause of Plaintiffs’ injuries and, therefore, answering defendant is not liable over to the plaintiffs or anyone else. Answering defendant did not have any notice, either actual or constructive, of the claimed dangerous condition, nor would a reasonable inspection have disclosed any such dangerous condition, to the extent one existed, at the time of plaintiff’s claimed injuries. Any act, conduct, failure to act or misconduct by answering defendant, or by any person for whose acts answering defendant was responsible, did not cause any damages/injuries to the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s injuries may have been caused by the negligence and/or carelessness of plaintiff, Raymond Johnson, and any recovery shall be barred and/or limited by the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and the contributory negligence of the plaintiff,” the defenses stated, in part.
“The alleged defective conditions were not open and obvious to someone exercising reasonable care for their safety. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages and/or exercise reasonable care to prevent aggravation of their alleged injuries. Defendant complied with all applicable statutes, ordinances and laws. Plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiffs’ claims may be barred and/or limited by the Bankruptcy Code. Defendant acted with due care and regard at all times relevant hereto. Plaintiffs’ claims should be offset by any collateral source of benefits. Defendant reserves the right to supplement its affirmative defenses.”
For counts of negligence and loss of consortium, the plaintiff is seeking damages, jointly and severally, in excess of $50,000.
Plaintiff Raymond Johnson is represented by Jason R. Weiss of Haggerty Goldberg Schleifer & Kupersmith in Holland Pa., while plaintiff Josephine Scott is representing herself.
Defendants J.C. Penney and Simon Property Group, Inc. are represented by Jennifer Glazer Shorr of Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby and Michael S. Bogdanoff of Gekoski & Bogdanoff, respectively, both also in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:22-cv-03665
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 220800469
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com