JOHNSTOWN – The Richland Fire Department has denied responsibility for head injuries a New York man alleged he incurred, when the bicycle he was riding collided with a plastic barricade placed outside Richland High School and caused him to be thrown from the bike.
Nicholas Sequino of Huntington, N.Y. first filed suit in the Cambria County Court of Common Pleas on June 20 versus the County of Cambria, of Ebensburg; Richland School District, Richland Township, Richland School District School Board, Richland Fire Department and Pennsylvania Highlands Community College of Johnstown; and LTM Paving, Co., of Hollsople.
“On or about Oct. 5, 2022 at approximately 2:56 p.m., Nicholas Sequino was lawfully and safely riding his bicycle on Academic Avenue, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, which is adjacent to and/or in front of Richland High School. While operating his bicycle within the proper lane of traffic on the road and wearing a helmet, and without warning, Sequino was caused to collide with a plastic barricade located in the roadway. The letters ‘RTFD’ were visibly displayed on the barricade signifying that this barricade belonged to the defendant Richland Township Fire Department,” the suit stated.
“The impact from hitting the barricade caused Sequino to flip over the front of his bicycle and strike his head violently against the concrete roadway. A passerby spotted Sequino in the roadway and emergency crews were notified of the accident, and he was provided with emergency medical attention. Sequino suffered severe head injuries and other injuries as a result of the accident, which have, and continue, to cause him permanent and life-limiting injuries.”
The aforementioned injuries included a severe closed traumatic brain injury, a traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, fractured vertebrae, a fractured skull, multiple facial fractures and multiple other injuries.
The suit continued that it was the defendant County of Cambria that was negligent in its ownership, maintenance and monitoring of the roadway, which caused the barricade to remain in the roadway and created a hazardous condition for individuals using the roadway, such as the plaintiff.
“Prior to plaintiff’s accident, all defendants had actual and/or constructive notice of the dangerous and defective condition existing on and in the roadway where plaintiff was injured, and the defendants failed to maintain, manage, monitor secure, warn the public or remove the dangerous condition which would have prevented this accident from happening. The defendants’ repeated and sustained failure to remedy this known dangerous condition on and in the roadway where plaintiff was injured constitutes negligence for which plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the injuries sustained as a result of the Oct. 5, 2022 incident,” the suit said.
Counsel for the Richland defendants removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on June 30, citing diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount of contested damages in question.
UPDATE
After an amended complaint was filed on July 6, an answer filing came from the Richland Fire Department on July 17, which denied the plaintiff’s rationale in its entirety.
“Plaintiff has failed to state a valid cause of action against RTFD upon which relief may be granted. To the extent that discovery may establish that plaintiff’s alleged injuries and/or damages were caused by his own actions and/or inactions and/or the actions and/or inactions of persons and/or entities other than RTFD, said actions and/or inactions bar, either in whole or in part, plaintiff’s claims against RTFD, and as such, same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims. To the extent that discovery establishes that plaintiff was guilty of contributory and/or comparative negligence, his negligence bars, either in whole or in part, his claims against RTFD, and as such, the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff’s alleged injuries and/or damages were not caused by the conduct, actions and/or omissions of RTFD, and as such, same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims,” the department’s affirmative defenses stated, in part.
“To the extent that discovery establishes that plaintiff’s alleged injuries and/or damages were the sole, proximate and/or substantial result of the actions and/or inactions of a person and/or entity other than RTFD, same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims against RTFD. RTFD was not negligent and any of RTFD’s alleged actions and/or failures to act were not a substantial contributing factor or factual cause in causing plaintiff’s alleged injuries and/or damages, and same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims against RTFD. To the extent that discovery establishes that plaintiff’s claims are or may be barred, either in whole or in part, as a result of plaintiff’s failure to comply with the applicable statute of limitations provisions, same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims against RTFD. To the extent that discovery establishes that plaintiff failed to mitigate his alleged injuries and/or damages, same is specifically pleaded as a defense to plaintiff’s claims against RTFD.”
For one count of negligence against all of the defendants, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of the jurisdictional limits of arbitration, together with interest, costs of suit and any other damages which this Honorable Court deems necessary to recover for which this suit is brought.
The plaintiff is represented by Jason E. Luckasevic of Goldberg Persky & White and Max Petrunya of Max Petrunya, P.C, both in Pittsburgh.
The defendants are represented by Mary Lou Maierhofer of Margolis Edelstein in Hollidaysburg, plus Darren M. Newberry of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Bruce E. Rende of Robb Leonard Mulvihill, Joseph L. Luvara of Dickie McCamey & Chilcote and Donald L. Best of DiBella Weinheimer, all in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 3:23-cv-00145
Cambria County Court of Common Pleas case 2023-2312
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com