MEDIA – A local man who alleged that he was bitten by bed bugs during his three-day stay in an Econo Lodge hotel located in Delaware County more than two years ago has settled his claims.
Phouvieng Kotanone of Philadelphia first filed suit in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on Oct. 31 versus Econo Lodge Philadelphia Airport and Tinicum Lodging, Inc. of Lester, plus John Doe.
“On or about Nov. 1, 2020, and for some time prior thereto, defendants acting either individually or by and through their agents, servants, workmen, representatives and/or employees, acting as aforesaid, carelessly and negligently allowed a dangerous and defective condition, to wit allowing an infestation of bedbugs to manifest inside the premises and specifically, in the motel/hotel rooms and/or apartments located thereon. This condition was permitted to exist on premises at the aforesaid location for an unreasonable period of time,” the suit said.
“On or about Nov. 1, 2020 through Nov. 3, 2020, plaintiff was a business invitee at the aforesaid premises as a result of renting a hotel/motel room from Nov. 1, 2020 through Nov. 3, 2020. On or about Nov. 1, 2020, while a business invitee of defendants at the aforesaid premises, plaintiff suffered multiple insect bites by reason of coming in contact with the aforementioned dangerous and defective condition at the aforesaid premises, thereby causing plaintiff to suffer the severe and permanent injuries and damages which form the basis for this action.”
The suit added the aforesaid accident “was due solely to the negligence and carelessness of the defendants, acting as aforesaid, and was due in no manner whatsoever to any act or failure to act on the part of the plaintiff.”
“As a result of the negligence and carelessness of the defendants, plaintiff suffered injuries which are or may be serious and permanent in nature, including but not limited to, multiple insect bites, excessive itching, rashes, dermatitis, scarring and spots on plaintiff’s body, as well as other physical and psychological injuries and annoyances as may be diagnosed by plaintiff’s health care providers, all of which injuries have in the past, and may in the future, cause plaintiff great pain and suffering,” the suit stated.
“As a further result of the negligence and carelessness of the defendants, plaintiff has been or will be required to receive and undergo medical attention and care and to expend various sums of money and to incur various expenses, including but not limited money spent on remediation efforts loss of furniture, loss of clothing and other sums and may be required to continue to expend such sums or incur such expenditures for an indefinite time in the future.”
Defendant Tinicum Lodging, Inc. filed preliminary objections in the case on Jan. 5, citing Connor v. Allegheny General Hospital as barring the inclusion of what it referred to as “allegations set forth in the [plaintiff’s complaint] which fall well short of being a statement in a ‘concise and summary form, of the material facts upon which the plaintiff’s cause of action is based.”
The defendant countered that information in the complaint relating to the plaintiff’s injuries are so general as to be improperly-pled.
“Connor has been consistently read as requiring courts to strike portions of complaints that are so general that they could permit a plaintiff to supplement allegations after the statute of limitations has ran. Paragraph 21(u) consists of the exact language that the court in Connor sought to evade, as it is so general and lacking in specificity that moving defendant is unable to respond due to the lack of notification of the specific claims lodged against them. Accordingly, based upon the above-cited law, Paragraph 21 (u) must be stricken from plaintiff’s complaint as mandated by Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1019 and Connor,” the objections stated.
After an amended complaint with Paragraph 21(u) stricken was filed on Jan. 9, Tinicum Lodging, Inc. responded with an answer, new matter and cross-claims on Feb. 6.
“Answering defendant was not negligent at any time material hereto. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Answering defendant caused no damage or losses to plaintiff, and any losses, and/or damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff were caused by sources other than answering defendant and not within the control of answering defendant. Answering defendant breached no duty to plaintiff. If answering defendant was negligent, which is expressly denied, then the acts or omissions of answering defendant alleged to constitute negligence were not substantial factors or causes of the action or incident of which plaintiff complains and/or did not result in the losses or damages alleged by plaintiff,” according to the new matter, in part.
“The intervening deliberate or negligent acts or omissions of another person or entities may have constituted superseding causes of the accident or incident of which plaintiff complains, and any losses or damages allegedly suffered by the plaintiff were caused by superseding negligence of other persons and/or entities. Nothing done or omitted to be done by answering defendant was the proximate cause of the damages to the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s claims are subject to reduction based upon the doctrine of avoidable consequences and failure to mitigate damages. Any damages sustained by plaintiff was caused in whole or in part by the acts or failure of individuals or entities over whom answering defendant had no direction or control, and for whose acts answering defendant was not legally responsible. Plaintiff’s alleged damages or losses were caused in whole or in part by the acts and omissions of plaintiff.”
The answer added that the plaintiff’s claims barred by the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and the applicable statute of limitations.
Tinicum Lodging instead redirected liability for the incident to its co-defendants, Econo Lodge Philadelphia Airport and Doe.
UPDATE
Plaintiff counsel filed correspondence on June 26 explaining that a settlement had been reached in the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
“Please be advised that this firm represents plaintiff Phouvieng Kotanone regarding the above-referenced matter, which is scheduled for an arbitration hearing on July 28, 2023, at 9:30 a.m. Please be advised that this case has settled. Accordingly, kindly remove the same from the arbitration list,” the filing stated.
The plaintiff was represented by Michael T. van der Veen and Jerry A. Lindheim of van der Veen Hartshorn & Levin, in Philadelphia.
Defendant Tinicum Lodging, Inc. was represented by Theodore M. Schaer and Michael J. Schaer of Zarwin Baum DeVito Kaplan Schaer & Toddy, also in Philadelphia.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case CV-2022-008142
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com