Court Finds Jury Issues With Respect to Defense of Open and Obvious Danger

In the case of Irwin v. Neshannock Woods, Inc., No. 10457 of 2022 (C.P. Lawr. Co. May 15, 2023 Motto, P.J.), the court denied a Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment in a slip and fall case that occurred at an apartment complex.

In this case, the Plaintiff sued her landlord and the landlord property maintenance company after the Plaintiff allegedly sustained injuries from a slip and fall caused by a snow mound near a dumpster on the property.

In their Motion for Summary Judgment, the Defendants asserted that Plaintiff’s claim of negligence was legally insufficient because the snow mound was an open and obvious condition. 

The Defendants also asserted that the Plaintiff voluntarily assumed a risk by choosing to walk over the mound to dispose of her trash. The landlord additionally asserted that the Plaintiff failed to inform the landlord about an issue with the snow mound before the Plaintiff’s fall.

The court denied the Motion for Summary Judgment after finding that genuine issues of material fact remain to be decided by a jury.

The court otherwise noted that the Defendants had a duty to protect the Plaintiffs from the known and obvious hazard created by the snow mound and that the Defendants could have taken steps to prevent the alleged injuries.

The court additionally considered the fact that the landlord had a policy requiring residents to use the dumpster and the fact that the landlord had made a prior request to have the snow mound removed, which was not accomplished.

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.


Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.” Pennsylvania Law Weekly (June 20, 2023).