Summary Judgment Granted in Lackawanna County Slip and Fall Case

In the case of White v. Nesbeth, No. 2022-CV-2147 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Sept. 17, 2024 Nealon, J.), Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas granted summary judgment in favor of a Defendant homeowner under the hills and ridges doctrine in a slip and fall case.  The Opinion provides an excellent, thoroughly researched overview of the current status of the hills and ridges doctrine in Pennsylvania.

According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff, who was considered to be an invitee, and who was making a Door Dash delivery to the Defendants’ residence during an ongoing storm of “freezing rain and sleet,” allegedly slipped and fell on the homeowner’s sidewalk.

According to the record before the court, the Plaintiff’s deposition testimony acknowledged the existence of persistent freezing precipitation falling at the time of the incident. The Plaintiff additionally conceded that he did not observe or feel “any kind of an accumulation.” The Plaintiff additionally confirmed that he did not “notice anything” on the sidewalk.

After the completion of discovery, the Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment relying upon the hills and ridges doctrine.

The Plaintiff responded by arguing that, since the landowner applied rock salt to the sidewalk approximately forty-five (45) minutes before the Plaintiff arrived, the hills and ridges doctrine was in applicable due to “human intervention” which allegedly altered the “natural accumulation” that was falling at the time.

In granting summary judgment, Judge Nealon noted that there was no dispute that general slippery conditions prevailed at the time of the incident as a result of a continuous winter event and precipitation.

Judge Terrence R. Nealon
Lackawanna County

Judge Nealon also emphasized that no party or witness had identified or specifically described the condition upon which the Plaintiff allegedly fell.

In his Opinion, Judge Nealon pointed to appellate case law holding that a landowner is not obligated to salt their sidewalk while winter precipitation remains in progress.  He also ruled that, in any event, since the record lacked any evidence that the application of rock salt somehow created dangerous condition or increased the natural hazards of the existing ice, the hills and ridges doctrine still applied and governed the negligence claim presented.

Judge Nealon ultimately held that, even when the record is examined in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff as required by the applicable motion for summary judgment standard of review, the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a prima facie cause of action under the hills and ridges doctrine.

Accordingly, summary judgment was entered in favor of the homeowner.

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