It’s hard to believe but a banana peel can teach a lesson about Pennsylvania Slip and Fall Personal Injury Law. Falls on banana peels don’t just happen in cartoons. One happened in Philadelphia and the court decision that resulted has taught an important lesson about the concept of Notice in Negligence cases.
The Case
A patron of the Save-A-Lot grocery store filed a lawsuit after sustaining injuries in a slip and fall on a bannana peel in the produce aisle of the store.
Unfortunately for the patron, he had no evidence about how the banana got on the floor in the first place or how long it was there before he fell.
The judge dismissed the case because of a lack of evidence of Negligence, reasoning that in order for the store to be held liable, the patron had to prove that the store knew or should have known about the dangerous condition and had enough time to eliminate the hazard.
The Legal Concept of Notice in Pennsylvania Slip and Fall Cases
In order to have a Slip and Fall case in Pennsylvania, an injured person must show that the property owner was Negligent, or careless, by failing to discover and remedy a dangerous condition. However, the law cuts property owners a little slack by only requiring them to act reasonably and fix hazardous conditions that they create or conditions that others create but that the property owner should have noticed through reasonable care.
What does that mean in the context of a banana peel fall in a grocery store? It means that the patron who fell must show that a store employee caused the banana peel to be on the floor OR that the banana peel was on the floor for such a long period of time that the store employees should have noticed it and cleaned it up.
How this can be proven depends on the circumstances and, oftentimes, it cannot be proven resulting in the patron having no case. In other cases there are eyewitnesses or surveillance video that show what happened and prove the case.
This concept of NOTICE is critical in Pennsylvania Slip and Fall cases. Notice can be established in the form of Actual Notice which proves that the store caused the condition or someone testifying that the store actually knew of the condition. In the alternative, Constructive Notice can be established through proof that the dangerous condition existed for such a long period of time that the store should have discovered it.
The bottom line is that Pennsylvania Slip and Fall cases can be hard to prove and win because of this Notice issue. It’s not enough that someone fell and got hurt badly. An injured victim also needs to show that the store was Negligent because it knew or should have known about the hazard and failed to fix it.
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Slip and Fall Lawyer with the Chester County Law Firm MacElree Harvey, Ltd. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of Slip and Fall accidents in Pennsylvania receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Contact Tim at trayne@macelree.com or 6108400124 to schedule a Free Consulttation in Tim’s Kennett Square or West Chester offices.
MacElree Harvey is proud to report that Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer Tim Rayne was again named a Top 100 Super Lawyer in Pennsylvania for 2016.
Super Lawyers employs a rigorous selection process to pick the top attorneys in their fields of practice including: Peer Nomination, Independent Research and Peer Evaluation by a Blue Ribbon Panel of Attorneys.
The purpose of the Super Lawyer designation is to “create a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and consumers looking for legal counsel.”
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer with the Chester County full-service law firm MacElree Harvey, Ltd. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of accidents receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Tim offers Free Consultations in his offices in Kennett Square, West Chester or Doylestown or will meet with you at your home or any other convenient location. Contact Tim at 6108400124 or trayne@macelree.com or check out his website at www.timraynelaw.com.
Medical Malpractice cases resolve one of two ways, through an agreed upon settlement or through a Jury Verdict. The high profile Medical Malpractice claim resulting from the death of famous comedian and QVC maven Joan Rivers was just resolved by way of a confidential settlement.
Rivers died after what should have been a routine out-patient endoscopic procedure. Rivers had been sedated with Propofol and her breathing and heart rate slowed to dangerous levels. The Medical Malpractice lawsuit alleged that her doctor failed to respond quickly and appropriately to these warning signs and that, as a result, Rivers suffered oxygen loss, brain damage and death.
Notably, the lawsuit also claimed that the doctor was taking selfies with Rivers rather than providing good medical care.
The financial terms of the Joan Rivers Medical Malpractice settlement are secret, but based upon Rivers’ significant earnings, I would expect that the settlement was almost certainly in the millions.
Joan’s daughter, Melissa Rivers, has explained that the case was never about the money, but to get answers about what happened and try to ensure that safety improves at out-patient surgical facilities so that this tragedy is not repeated.
People don’t often think about the fact that civil lawsuits, including Medical Malpractice claims, can accomplish two things: (1) compensation for victims and their families and (2) accountbility for bad actors along with increased safety for the rest of us.
Tim Rayne is a Car Accident, Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer in Pennsylvania. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of accidents and their families receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester Pennsylvania and can be reached at 610 840 0124 trayne@macelree.com.
People acting together in a Criminal Conspiracy can be held equally culpable regardless of who drives the getaway car and who pulls the trigger killing the bank security guard. The same can be true in a joint act resulting in Personal Injury. Both actors can be held liable.
In a recent Pennsylvania Texting and Driving injury case Gallatin v. Gargiulo, a judge has decided to allow a novel theory to be litigated, the issue of whether a person can be held liable for knowingly texting with someone who was driving and then caused an accident.
Facts of the Case
Laura Gargiulo was driving a car behind a motorcylce being driven by Daniel Gallatin. Gargiulo was allegedly texting with her boyfriend, Timothy Fend, and was either reading or writing a text when she failed to notice that Gallatin was slowing his motorcycle to make a right hand turn. Gargiulo crashed into the rear of Gallatin’s motorcycle and dragged him for over 100 feet resulting in his death.
Gallatin’s family filed a Wrongful Death case against Gargiulo for causing the collision and Gallatin’s death. The family also joined Fend in the lawsuit claiming that he was texting with Gargiulo when he knew she was driving and that his act of distracting Gargiulo with texts was the the cause of the collision.
The Legal Theory Against a Non-Driving Texter
Fend’s lawyers filed Preliminary Objections to the Wrongful Death Lawsuit, claiming that the suit against Fend should be dismissed because there was no viable theory of negligence against him.
The Judge disagreed and issued an Opinion in Gallatin v. Gargiulo in support of his precedent setting decision to allow a civil lawsuit to proceed against a non-driving texter.
In the Opinion, the Judge explained that the Pennsylvania Texting and Driving Law prohibits the sending, reading or writing of a text-based communication while a vehicle is in motion. Next, the Judge cited a rule regarding liability for people who act in concert which provides:
Persons Acting in Concert
For harm resulting to a third person from the tortious conduct of another, one is subject to liability if he
1- does a tortious act in concert with the other or pursuant to a common design with him;
2- knows that the other’s conduct constitutes a breach of a duty and gives substantial assistance or encouragement to the other so to conduct himself; or
3- gives substantial assistance to the other in accomplishing a tortious result and his own conduct, separately considered, constitutes a breach of duty to the third person.
Then, the Judge noted that there was no Pennsylvania precedent regarding the legal duties of someone sending a text message to a person who was operating a motor vehicle, but there was a case out of New Jersey addressing the issue. In Kubert v. Best, a New Jersey court held that as a matter of New Jersey civil law, the sender of a text message could be potentially liable if an accident is caused by texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to know that the recipient would view the text and be distracted while driving.
Ultimately, the Judge in Gallatin v. Gargiulo decided to follow the reasoning of the New Jersey court and allowed the case to proceed forward against Fend to determine whether he was, in fact, texting Gargiulo while he knew she was driving.
The Lessons to be Learned
Although this is only a trial court opinion and, as such, is not binding law in Pennsylvania because it has not been affirmed by the Superior or Supreme appellate courts, the Opinion in Gallatin v. Gargiulo and in the New Jersey case of Kubert v. Best put all texters in legal danger. Based on the potential legal liability, no one should text with someone who they know is driving. By now we all know that texting while driving is distracting and a common cause of vehicle accidents. If we text with someone who we know is driving, we are contributing to the risk, aiding the commission of a crime and may (and probably should) be held civilly liable for the consequences.
So, don’t text and drive AND don’t text with someone who you know is driving!
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer in Chester County Pennsylvania. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of car accidents and families of people killed in car crashes receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Tim is Board Certified in Civil Trial Advocacy and has been named a Top 100 Lawyer in Pennsylvania by Super Lawyers. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester, Pennsylvania. Contact Tim for a Free Evaluation of your injury claim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com.
Why is the Insurance Adjuster Calling after a Pennsylvania Car Accident?
If you have been injured in a car accident in Pennsylvania that was caused by the other driver’s negligence, it’s almost certain that the car insurance adjuster for the other driver will call you. Why is the insurance adjuster calling after a Pennsylvania car accident? Because the car insurance company knows they are legally obligated to make up for the injuries and damages caused by their driver. The insurance company adjuster will telephone, write you letters and might even show up at your home because the insurance company wants to close your injury claim and do so for as little money as possible.
A few quesstions arise: Do you have to talk to the adjuster? Should you talk to the adjuster? What should you do?
Do You Have to Talk to the Insurance Adjuster after a Pennsylvania Car Accident?
The answer is No, you have no obligation to talk to the insurance adjuster for the other driver after a car collision in Pennsylvania. You do have to talk to the adjuster for your insurance company, but not the other insurance company.
Should you Talk to the Insurance Adjuster?
Again, the answer is No, you should not talk to the insurance adjuster for the other insurance company after a Pennsylvania car accident.
A car accident case can be compared to a criminal situation. If you are arrested for a crime or questioned by police, you have no obligation to talk to them AND you should not without getting the advice of a lawyer. The police want to convict someone of the crime. They are not primarily concerned with your legal rights.
It’s the same after a car accident. Anything the insurance company does they do to protect their driver, not you. In fact, the job of the adjuster is to get the claim closed as quickly and inexpensively as possible. The adjuster wants to take your statement to see if there is any way to blame the collision on you or to minimize your injuries and damages or argue that they were caused by something other than the car accident. Because of this, it is not wise to talk to the car insurance adjuster after a Pennsylvania car accident.
What Should You Do After a Car Accident?
What you should do after a Pennsylvania car accident is hire an experienced car accident lawyer as soon as possible after a car accident in Pennsylvania. A car accident lawyer will take over all communication with the insurance company and make sure that you are properly represented. An experienced car accident lawyer will do everything possible to make sure that you are fully and fairly compensated for your injuries and losses, like medical bills, lost wages and compensation for pain and suffering.
Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer who helps injured victims of Pennsylvania car accidents receive fair treatment from car insurance companies. For over 20 years, Tim has been fighting with all of the major car insurance companies: Allstate, State Farm, Nationwide, Progressive, GEICO, USAA, Travelers and many others. For a Free Consultation after a Pennsylvania car accident, contact Tim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester Pennsylania.
