MEDIA – A Philadelphia man who alleged that a meal he ate at a Delaware County diner more than two years ago caused him to become ill with food poisoning and other gastrointestinal ailments has settled his case.
Roy Edwards first filed suit in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on July 6 versus Springfield Diner and Springfield Diner, LLC of Springfield, AOK Diner, Inc. of Trappe and John Doe.
“On or about July 18, 2021, plaintiff Roy Edwards, while dining at the defendant Springfield Diner, located at 720 Baltimore Pike, Springfield, PA 19064, with his girlfriend, Chanda Jackson, consumed salmon fish and a side of corn, which plaintiff believes was pathogen-tainted, causing him to sustain serious and debilitating food-borne illnesses, which will hereinafter be more fully described,” the suit stated.
“Defendants Springfield Diner, Springfield Diner, LLC, AOK Diner, Inc. and John Doe were negligent and are liable to plaintiff Roy Edwards, for his injuries for the following reasons: (a) Defendants regularly furnish the aforementioned food to the public as distributor and seller; (b) Defendants owe a high duty of care in furnishing the aforementioned food product to the general public and individuals such as plaintiff; (c) Defendants failed to inspect the subject food product in an effort to discover the condition of the food product and thereafter refuse to serve same to the general public; (d) Defendants breached their duty of care in that they furnished the subject food product to plaintiff, which was unwholesome and not fit for human consumption; (e) Defendants knew, or reasonably should have known that the aforementioned food product they furnished to plaintiff was unwholesome and not fit for human consumption; and (f) Plaintiff’s injuries set forth herein were the direct and proximate result of the defendants’ negligence.”
The suit continued that Edwards was “caused to sustain serious and permanent injuries including, but not limited to, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, headaches, gastroenteritis, weight loss and diverticulosis/irritable bowel syndrome, which has caused him and will continue to cause him a great deal of pain, suffering and inconvenience, and which are permanent in nature, character and duration.”
“As a result of the aforementioned injuries, plaintiff Roy Edwards has been compelled to expend voluminous sums of money for medicine and medical attention in an attempt to cure himself of his injuries, all to his great financial detriment and loss,” the suit said.
A stipulation of dismissal was filed by counsel for all parties on Aug. 18, which removed the Springfield Diner defendants from the case and renamed the specific defendant as “AOK Diner, Inc. (doing business as ‘Springfield Diner’)”.
On Aug. 31, AOK Diner, Inc. filed an answer and new matter, which entirely denied the plaintiff’s allegations.
“Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff’s claims are barred and/or limited by the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and the contributory negligence of plaintiff. Plaintiff’s claim may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations and/or repose. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred by the Doctrine of Assumption of Risk. Plaintiff’s claims are barred and/or limited by his failure to mitigate damages. The incident alleged in plaintiff’s complaint was caused by a person, entity or instrumentality over which answering defendant had no control nor responsibility or right of control,” per the new matter.
“Plaintiff’s claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of res judicata or collateral estoppel. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred by the doctrines of accord and satisfaction, payment and/or release. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred and/or limited by the provisions of the Fair Share Act. Plaintiff’s alleged injuries are barred by the doctrines of laches, estoppel and waiver. Plaintiff’s conduct was highly reckless, and said conduct was the sole or superseding cause of his alleged damages, thus barring his claims. Answering defendant incorporates all affirmative defenses available under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.”
The very same day, the plaintiff replied to the answer and new matter, denying it and demanding strict proof of same at the time of trial.
UPDATE
On Feb. 13, plaintiff counsel filed a praecipe notifying the Court of a settlement. Terms of the settlement were not revealed.
“Kindly mark the above-captioned matter settled, discontinued and ended,” the praecipe stated.
The plaintiff was represented by Vincent J. Bonaventura Jr. of Bruccoleri Law, in Philadelphia.
The defendant was represented by Nicholas A. Cummins and Alexander D. Torres of Bennett Bricklin & Saltzburg, also in Philadelphia.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case CV-2023-005708
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com