In
the case of Wasnetsky v. Quinn’s Market, No. 1160-MDA-2018 (Pa. Super.
April 8, 2019 Ott, J., Nichols, J., and Pellegrini, J.) (Op. by Pellegrini, J.)
(Non-precedential), the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a decision by
Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas
granting summary judgment for a supermarket Defendant in a fatal slip and fall
case in which the trial court ruled that the evidence presented by the
Plaintiff after discovery did not pose any triable question of fact as to
whether a dangerous condition on the supermarket’s premises caused the alleged
injuries to the decedent.
In so ruling,
the Superior Court agreed with the trial court that, although the Plaintiff
produced two (2) biomechanical experts both of whom opined that the decedent
slipped due to a substance on the floor and that the supermarket was negligent
in failing to protect customers from that alleged dangerous condition, neither
expert could identify what kind of substance could have caused the accident.
The
Superior Court emphasized that one of the Plaintiff’s expert even concluded his
report by emphasizing that “it is impossible to describe the specific state of
the floor, that is, what material was on the floor, at that time and how that
state contributed [to the accident].”
The
Superior Court therefore affirmed the entry of summary judgment indicating that, to allow the
case to proceed to trial, may have invited conjecture on the part of the
jury. As such, the entry of summary
judgment by the trial court below was affirmed.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.