Bicyclists Must Obey the Rules of the Road

In the case of Matthews v. Batroney, No. 2019 Pa.Super. 299 (Pa. Super. Oct. 4, 2019 Murray, J., Strassburger, J., and Pelligrini, J.) (Op. by Murray, J.), the court affirmed the entry of a verdict in favor of a Defendant in a matter in which a Plaintiff bicyclist was injured in a motor vehicle accident.

The court noted that a Plaintiff bicyclist who failed to stop at a stop sign was properly found by the jury to be 70% comparatively negligent.

The court additionally held that the jury was properly charged on statutes regarding the duty of bicyclists to obey traffic laws as well as the duty to stop at stop signs.

The court also found that that, by failing to stop at the stop sign, the Plaintiff forfeited his statutory right-of-way.

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

I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Philadelphia office of the Reed Smith law firm for bringing this case to my attention.

Pennsylvania Superior Court Holds that Landowners Do Not Have a Duty To Protect Invitees Against Dangers on Adjoining Roadways

In its recent decision in the case of Newell v. Montana West, 2017 Pa. Super. 15 (Pa. Super. Jan. 19, 2017 Bowes, J., Ott, J., Solano, J.) (Op. by Solano, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that, in a case first impression before this Court, that a business does not have a duty to protect its invitees against the dangers associated with adjoining roadways.  

This matter rose out of an incident during which the Plaintiff’s decedent was struck and killed by a car after he left a show at a music venue.  

The court ruled that a pedestrian who walks on a public highway places himself at risk of injury from vehicles traveling on the highway.   The duty of care owed to that pedestrian was found to rest with those who maintain the road and those motorists who travel upon the roadway.   The court ruled that the “duty does not extend to the landowners who has premises adjacent to the roadway.”  

In so ruling, the Newell court relied, in part, on a prior decision of the Commonwealth Court in the case of Allen v. Mellinger, 625 A.2d 1326 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993), appeal denied, 644 A.2d 738 (Pa. 1994), in which that court held that the owners of premises abutting state highways are not liable to pedestrians or motorists injured on those highways.  

Notably, despite the rule against citing non-precedential Opinions from the Pennsylvania Superior Court, the Newell court referred to one of its non-precedential Opinions involving a case with nearly identical facts.  

In upholding the trial court’s decision that no duty was owed to the Plaintiff’s decedent by the adjoining landowner, the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the entry of summary judgment.  

 

Anyone wishing to review this case may click this LINK.


Source:  Article: "Duty to Protect Patrons Does Not Extend to Roadway Dangers" by Max Mitchell of the Pennsylvania Law Weekly (Jan. 27, 2017)