Quantcast

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Tuesday, October 1, 2024

Michigan family who collided with duck crossing sign outside Holiday Inn sues the hotel

Lawsuits
Holiday inn express harmarville 6121625100 2x1

Holiday Inn Express – Pittsburgh North | ihg.com

PITTSBURGH – A Michigan family claims that an improperly-placed duck crossing sign outside a Holiday Inn near Pittsburgh was the proximate cause of a collision they incurred and the subsequent injuries they sustained.

E.Z. (a minor, by and through his parents), Jeff Zaker and Antoinette Zaker of Brownstown, Mich. filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on May 17 versus JSKLD Hospitality Enterprise, LLC of Belle Vernon, SAP Hotels, LLC (doing business as “SAP Hospitality Management”) of Bucyrus, Ohio, InterContinental Hotel Groups of Atlanta, Ga. and Hockey Time Productions, Inc., also of Ohio.

“Minor plaintiff and his father, Jeff Zaker, stayed at the Holiday Inn Express Pittsburgh – North from Oct. 7, 2022 through Oct. 9, 2022. They were staying at this hotel so that the minor plaintiff could participate in a hockey tournament. This hockey tournament was organized and managed by defendant Hockey Time Productions. As part of this, Hockey Time Productions secured blocks of rooms for hockey tournament participants and their families. Hockey Time Productions website currently requires out-of-town hockey tournament participants such as the minor plaintiff and his family to reserve hotel rooms through Hockey Time Productions, from a list of approved hotels. This requirement for hockey tournament participants and their families to reserve a hotel room through Hockey Time Productions was in place at all relevant times,” the suit states.

“Hockey Time Productions failed to properly inspect and assess the hotel to determine whether the premises were safe for the hockey tournament participants and their families, or in the alternative, Hockey Time Productions failed to inspect and assess the hotel at all. If Hockey Time Productions had made a proper inspection and assessment, it would have discovered that the premises were unsafe, as is set forth in this complaint. The property is not located near a farm nor in the immediate vicinity of the habitat of wild ducks such that ducks would cross the hotel entranceway with any frequency warranting the use of a ‘Slow Duck Crossing’ sign. Its placement and use were not reasonable. The hotel is located next to a large trucking terminal and all around the hotel are cement/asphalt commercial enterprises. With the motivation to generate a laugh for the hotel’s employees and/or its patrons, an authorized agent, acting within the scope of their agency with SAP and/or JSKLD, (whose identify will be determined through discovery), purchased and erected a ‘Slow Duck Crossing’ in a strip of grass between the parking lot and the hotel’s entrance.”

The suit adds that the hotel caters to families of minors who come to attend a hockey tournament on a regular basis as the hotel is close to the Alpha Ice Complex and during the weekend in question, the hotel was filled to capacity with multiple hockey teams of kids.

“On Oct. 8, 2022, plaintiff collided with the ‘Slow Duck Crossing’ sign, located in a strip of grass between the drop-off/pick-up lane in front of the hotel and the hotel parking lot. The sign itself had no functional purpose, as the drop off/pick up lane at the Holiday Inn Express was not an actual duck crossing. Traffic did not actually need to slow for ducks to cross from the parking lot to the hotel. Instead, the Holiday Inn Express staff, who lured ducks onto the hotel property with food scraps, installed the sign as a gag prop. In the alternative, if ducks actually crossed the drop-off/pick-up lane at the Holiday Inn Express, it was an artificial traffic condition or attractive nuisance created by JSKLD and/or SAP to lure the ducks to that location with food scraps. No engineering judgment or studies were done of physical or traffic factors to justify the use, location or safety perimeters of the duck crossing sign,” the suit says.

“The use and placement of the Duck Crossing sign did not conform to industry standards, guidelines, and/or customs. The sign was made of metal and had sharp edges, and was affixed to a metal pole. The top of the sign is approximately 59 inches above the ground. The sign is located in an area that is heavily traveled, as it is located between the front parking lot and front entrance of the Holiday Inn Express. The sign did not have any reflective tape or any other illuminating device so that it could be seen at night. The area the sign was in was not illuminated. The sign was installed on the hotel property by a manager of the Holiday Inn Express, who was an employee or agent of JSKLD and/or SAP, or in the alternative was installed by another employee or agent of JSKLD and/or SAP, and/or in the alternative was installed at the direction of or with the permission of JSKLD and/or SAP and/or InterContinental. Following plaintiff’s collision with the sign, minor plaintiff received emergency care in Pittsburgh and has been treating thereafter. As a result of the collision with the sign, plaintiffs suffered severe harm, including scaring to face and emotional trauma.”

For premises liability negligence, the plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages (including past and future medical expenses), punitive damages, attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, interest and any other relief that this Honorable Court deems just and proper.

The plaintiff is represented by Richard E. Shenkan of Shenkan Injury Lawyers, in New Castle.

The defendants have not yet secured legal counsel.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-00835

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News