MEDIA – A Delaware County church and the Archdiocese of Philadelphia have denied any and all allegations of negligence lodged by a volunteer who claimed she ingested a toxic cleaning supply product, which was allegedly located on the same table as refreshments offered to the public when she worked at an event to provide COVID-19 vaccinations two years ago.
Pamela Wheeler of Folsom first filed suit in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 6 versus the Church of Saint Kevin, of Springfield, plus the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
“On or about March 4, 2021, defendant Church of Saint Kevin hosted volunteers in the Church building(s) on Sproul Road, Springfield, PA to aid in dispensing information, advice, medication and the like, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Plaintiff was among the volunteers helping to dispense information, advice and medications, including vaccinations,” the suit said.
“On or about March 4, 2021, defendants (1) performed acts that a person of ordinary prudence in the same or similar circumstances would not have done or (2) failed to perform acts that a person of ordinary prudence in the same or similar circumstances would have done, because in the area of the Church where a table of edibles and refreshments were offered by the defendants, Ms. Wheeler consumed a toxic substance negligently placed by the Church on the same table in a substitute container that resembled other refreshments.”
The suit added that the defendants “have total control of the premises and especially the area of the Church where refreshments were offered, and the area where toxic substances such as cleaning supplies are stored.”
After consuming the toxic and or poisonous substance present on the refreshment table due to the defendants’ alleged negligence, the suit said Wheeler immediately felt a “burning sensation in her mouth, throat and stomach.”
“Her colleagues from Devine Providence Village alerted the Church, as Ms. Wheeler was escorted to the Springfield Hospital Emergency Room. Ms. Wheeler has been under the care of her physicians since then for injuries sustained. Defendants provided no warning of any kind to the volunteers that a toxic substance was among the refreshments in a container that was not the original container that the toxic substance came in,” the suit stated.
“Solely as a result of the negligent act previously described, plaintiff was caused to suffer various physical injuries in and about her person, including but not limited to, her mouth, throat, esophagus, stomach, colon and other parts of her body, all of which are severe and permanent in nature.”
UPDATE
The defendants filed an answer and new matter in the action on May 4, which admitted that a COVID-19 vaccination event was held at the church on the day in question, but further, not only denied that they negligently placed a toxic substance within the plaintiff’s reach, but denied that they provided refreshments and that Wheeler was a volunteer at all – rather, labeling her “an employee” of the church.
“Plaintiff’s amended complaint fails to set forth a cause of action for which relief can be granted. Plaintiff’s allegations are improper insofar as they contain impertinent or scandalous matter. Answering defendants did not breach any duty of care owed to plaintiff. No action or inaction on part of answering defendants caused or contributed in any manner to the damages, injuries and losses alleged in plaintiffs’ amended complaint. Plaintiffs’ damages may have been caused by intervening, superseding acts. Plaintiff’s alleged damages, injuries and/or losses, if any, may have been caused entirely by the acts or omissions of other persons or entities over which answering defendants had no control. Plaintiff’s damages, as alleged, were caused directly by the intervening, superseding acts of another, over whom answering defendants had no control,” the defense’s new matter explained.
“Plaintiff’s alleged damages are barred, in whole or in part, because they are speculative, uncertain, and incapable of being ascertained. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, because some or all of plaintiffs’ alleged damages, injuries, and/or losses are not causally related to this alleged incident and/or were pre-existing in nature. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the Pennsylvania Worker’s Compensation Act, including but not limited to the sole remedy provision. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by her failure to mitigate damages. Plaintiff’s claims are barred or otherwise diminished pursuant to the applicable comparative negligence statute(s). Answering defendants reserve the right to raise any additional defenses which may arise in the course of discovery or at trial in this matter.”
For one count of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess $50,000.
The plaintiff is represented by Norman G. Matlock in Philadelphia.
The defendants are represented by Nicholas M. Centrella and Matthew L. Jones of Clark Hill, also in Philadelphia.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case CV-2023-001010
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com