PITTSBURGH – A Pittsburgh-area museum’s curator has reiterated claims that she suffered severe injuries in a fall on the center’s grounds, due to an alleged defectively constructed staircase which also lacked a handrail.
Simmons Kennedy of Blawnox first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Jan. 19 versus August Wilson Center for African-American Culture, Inc., of Pittsburgh.
According to the suit, Kennedy was responsible for the care and maintenance of all common areas on the defendant’s property.
“On June 17, 2022, plaintiff was on defendant’s premises as a business invitee on the second floor. When plaintiff descended the staircase from the second floor to the first floor, she did not realize until too late that the stairs were constructed and designed in a manner that the step blended into the first-floor flooring, such that it was not possible to see where the stair ended and the floor began. Further, the staircase was excessively wide and there was no handrail within her reach as she descended the stairs. Additionally, the staircase appears to be made of smooth stone, lacking sufficient friction to stop a fall,” the suit said.
“Plaintiff was unable to discern the landing from the stairs. Plaintiff could not figure out where to put her foot, and she stepped down missing the last step, which caused her to fall forward. Defendants were aware of the unsafe staircase, as others had fallen under these same circumstances. At the time of the fall, a security guard excitedly uttered, ‘Oh, there goes another one.’ Defendant failed to repair or replace the known defective staircase. Defendant failed to warn plaintiff so that she could either avoid the staircase or take greater care in navigating it.”
The suit added that the defendant knew of the staircase’s danger and failed to warn others of that same danger, and likewise did not remedy the defective condition.
“As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of defendant, plaintiff suffered the following serious injuries, some or all of which may be permanent: A complete tear of the right anterior cruciate ligament, right meniscus tear, right medial lateral ligament sprain, right ruptured Baker’s cyst, contusion and other serious and permanent injuries, the exact nature of which are not known to the plaintiff at this time,” the suit stated.
“As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of defendant, plaintiff sustained the following damages: She has endured and continues to endure physical and mental pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, emotional distress, anxiety, and loss of enjoyment of life; her general health, strength and vitality have been impaired; she has been embarrassed, humiliated, permanently scarred and disfigured, and she will be required to expend large sums of money for medical attention, hospitalization, medical supplies, medical appliances, medicines and various other medical services.”
UPDATE
On March 1, the defendant issued an answer and new matter to the complaint, denying liability for the plaintiff’s allegations.
“Plaintiff’s claims are barred and/or limited by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. By plaintiff’s actions at the time, date and place stated in the complaint, plaintiff assumed the risk of any and all injuries and/or damages which she is alleged to have suffered. Plaintiff’s claims are or may be barred or limited by application of the terms and provisions of Pennsylvania’s Fair Share Act. Plaintiff’s claims are barred and/or limited by the applicable statute of limitations. The complaint, or portions thereof, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The damages alleged by plaintiff in the complaint did not result from acts or omissions of defendant, but from acts and/or omissions of third parties over whom defendant had no control,” per the new matter.
“The negligent or reckless acts or omissions of other persons or entities may constitute a superseding and/or intervening cause of the injuries claimed. The action should be dismissed for failure to join any and all necessary and indispensable parties. The plaintiff’s claims are barred or substantially reduced because plaintiff failed to act reasonably or timely to mitigate damages. The acts or omissions of answering defendant were not a factual cause or legal cause of the injury, loss or damage alleged by the plaintiff. Answering defendant had no notice or knowledge of the defect as alleged by plaintiff, which bars the plaintiff’s recovery. If there was a dangerous and/or defective condition present on the premises in question, which is specifically denied, the plaintiff was and/or should have been aware of the alleged condition and failed to act properly under the circumstances.”
The plaintiff replied to the answer and new matter the very same day, denying it in its entirety as conclusions of law to which no response was required.
For a count of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages in an amount that is fair, equitable and in excess of minimal jurisdictional limits, plus pre- and post-judgment interest, costs and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Patrick C. Booth, Eric Chaffin and Andrew T. Flenner of Chaffin Luhana, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Greg A. Ray of Bunker & Ray, in Philadelphia.
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-23-000867
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com