PITTSBURGH – A local Italian restaurant has objected to allegations that it was liable for the hip injuries and subsequent death of a woman who fell there more than two years ago.
Ernesto Contenti (as Administrator of the Estate of Esther Contenti, on behalf of Esther Contenti, on behalf of himself and Ana Maria Dalmastro as wrongful death beneficiaries and in his own right) first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Sept. 21 versus Pizza Roma Corporation (doing business as “Roma Italian Restaurant”). Both parties are of Pittsburgh.
According to the lawsuit, the events in question took place on Oct. 8, 2020.
“The booths at the Roma Italian Restaurant, including the booth at which plaintiffs were seated, are elevated booths. Specifically, the booth floor, or platform, is raised from the restaurant floor. Consequently, a patron has to step up to enter the booth-seating area, and then has to step down from the booth floor to leave or go to the bathroom. There were no signs or other warnings on the booth table or on the flooring warning plaintiff and plaintiff’s decedent of the step-down from the booth to the restaurant floor,” the suit said.
“There were no color strip markings or any other kind of markings on the restaurant or booth or flooring to clearly distinguish the booth platform from the restaurant floor below. There were no floor lights on the booth platform or on the restaurant flooring to warn or distinguish or light the different-leveled surfaces of the booth platform and the restaurant floor. The defendant did not otherwise warn plaintiff or plaintiff’s decedent of the elevated booth.”
The suit added the plaintiffs had never sat in a booth at the restaurant on any prior occasion.
“After plaintiff’s decedent and plaintiff were seated at the booth for a few minutes, an employee of the defendant requested that the plaintiff’s decedent and plaintiff exit the booth so it could be cleaned. Said employee gave no warning regarding the elevated step of the booth. Plaintiff’s decedent exited the booth and missed and/or did not negotiate the raised step due to the negligence of the defendant causing her to fall and suffer a left hip fracture (closed intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip) and subsequent death,” the suit stated.
“On the aforesaid date and time, defendant caused to exist and/or permitted to exist an unreasonable risk of harm to its invitees posed by the above-described elevated booths. Prior to this incident, defendant had constructive and/or actual notice of the unreasonable risk of harm to its invitees created by the above-described elevated booth. At all times relevant hereto, defendant was acting by and through its servants, agents and employees, who were then and there engaged upon the performance of their duties, within the scope of their employment and upon the business of the defendant.”
UPDATE
Counsel for the restaurant filed preliminary objections in the case on Nov. 23, seeking that the count of negligent infliction of emotional distress leveled against it be stricken from the case.
“Roma, at this stage of the litigation, is not challenging plaintiff’s negligent infliction of emotional distress claim insofar as it is based on his allegation that he witnessed firsthand his mother’s fall in the restaurant. However, Roma does challenge plaintiff’s negligent infliction of emotional distress claim to the extent it is or may be based on Mrs. Contenti’s subsequent death, as plaintiff does not allege that he was present for and observed this event,” according to the objections.
“Plaintiff does not allege that he was present for or observed his mother’s subsequent death on Nov. 18, 2020. Consequently, while plaintiff may at this time maintain his negligent infliction of emotional distress claim in connection with seeing his mother fall, he cannot do so beyond the fall itself. Plaintiff’s negligent infliction of emotional distress claim, therefore, should be confined to the fall and should not be permitted to encompass Mrs. Contenti’s death. Roma requests that the Court rule consistently and limit plaintiff’s potential negligent infliction of emotional distress damages to the fall that he alleges to have witnessed.”
The defense added that the allegation was “vague” and “ambitious”, in addition to being insufficient.
For counts of premises liability negligence, survival, wrongful death and negligent infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff is seeking judgment and damages in excess of the jurisdiction of the Board of Arbitrators of the Court.
The plaintiff is represented by Marc J. Reiter of the Law Offices of Marc J. Reiter, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Robert J. Grimm of Walsh Barnes & Zumpella, in Wexford.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-22-011877
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com