LANCASTER – A local woman who went into a Lancaster nail salon for a manicure last year has settled her case that she received serious injuries to her right hand, due to the salon’s alleged negligence.
Telisia Williams first filed suit in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas on Nov. 28, 2022 versus Unique Nails and Tri Tran. All parties are of Lancaster.
“On May 25, 2021, plaintiff was a customer of defendants and received a manicure from one of defendants’ agents, servants, contractors, employees and/or representatives. Subsequent thereto, plaintiff developed pain, redness and swelling in the fingers and thumb of her right hand, thereby suffering severe and permanent injuries,” the suit said.
“The injuries sustained by plaintiff resulted solely from the negligence and carelessness of the defendants and was due in no manner whatsoever to an act or failure to act on the part of plaintiff.”
The suit added the defendants failed to properly and appropriately perform a manicure to the plaintiff’s right hand and failed to ensure that the salon’s technician used proper equipment and proper protocols to perform the manicure.
“As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of the defendants, plaintiff sustained severe and debilitating personal injuries, including but not limited to: Paronychia of the right middle finger and right thumb, an abscess around the right middle finger, a subungual hematoma of one finger on the right hand, a partial loss of the nail plate on the right middle finger, an ill-defined edema and hyper-enhancement of the nail bed of the long finger, whereby plaintiff has suffered, is suffering and will for an indefinite time into the future suffer, all to plaintiff’s great detriment and loss,” the suit stated.
According to a Jan. 3 stipulation, it was agreed the defendant parties would be renamed and that the plaintiff would no longer seek attorney’s fees in this case.
“It is hereby agreed by and between counsel for the undersigned parties, that the proper party defendant shall be Tri Tran (doing business as “Unique Nails”). In addition, the plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees as found in the body of the complaint shall be dismissed with prejudice. This stipulation may be signed in sub-parts and shall have the same effect as an order of Court,” the stipulation read.
The defendant issued an answer to the case on Jan. 12, admitting that the plaintiff came to its nail salon on the day in question, but denying liability for causing Williams’s injuries.
“Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff’s complaint may be barred by the applicable statutes of limitation. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred or limited by application of the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act. The plaintiff may have failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety under the circumstances existing, and such failure to exercise reasonable care constitutes comparative negligence on her part,” the answer’s new matter stated.
“Any alleged violation of statute; ordinance; or law may have been, under the facts, excused and due in no part to any alleged negligence of defendant. Defendant denies that he was negligent in any manner whatsoever. Should it be determined to the contrary, then the negligence of plaintiff, or others, was comparatively greater than that of defendant, causing the claims brought against defendants to be reduced pursuant to the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act, and/or the Fair Share Act. Plaintiff has failed to state a viable claim of negligence against the defendant and said claim should be dismissed.”
In a Jan. 23 reply to the new matter, plaintiff counsel denied it in its entirety.
“[The new matter is] denied as conclusions of law to which no further response is required. Strict proof thereof is demanded at the time of trial,” per the reply.
UPDATE
On Oct. 13, plaintiff counsel filed a praecipe explaining the case had been settled, without disclosing terms of the settlement.
“Kindly mark the above-captioned matter settled, discontinued and ended,” the praecipe stated.
The plaintiff was represented by Michael T. van der Veen of van der Veen Hartshorn & Levin, in Philadelphia.
The defendant was represented by Lisa M. DiBernardo and Harrison N. Hagelgans of BBC Law, in Lancaster.
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas case CI-22-07347
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com