Alexander v. City of Meadville
61 A.3d 218
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2012Background
- Appellant Danny M. Alexander sued Patron’s Mutual Fire Association and the City of Meadville after a slip-and-fall on Feb. 10, 2008 at the Chestnut and Market street corner in Meadville.
- The accident occurred on a retrofitted ramp on a sidewalk, involving a patch of ice beneath 1–2 inches of snow.
- Patron’s Mutual maintained its sidewalk during business hours; maintenance outside business hours was not performed.
- The City had a sidewalk-ice removal ordinance and had retrofitted ramp design with a tapered ramp and alert mats.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for both Patron’s Mutual and the City; the Superior Court affirmed.
- Appellant challenges the grants of summary judgment on liability theories against Patron’s Mutual and against the City.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patron’s Mutual duty and notice | Alexander claims Patron’s Mutual had a duty and notice | Patron’s Mutual had no notice; complied during business hours | Patron’s Mutual not liable; no notice shown |
| City liability under sidewalks exception | City caused dangerous condition via design or snow removal | No sidewalk defect; no notice; immunity under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8541 et seq. | City not liable; sidewalks exception not satisfied; no actionable defect or notice |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. SEPTA, 772 A.2d 435 (Pa. 2001) ( sidewalks exception requires condition of realty; notice and foreseeability)
- Gilligan v. Villanova Univ., 584 A.2d 1005 (Pa. Super. 1991) (hills and ridges doctrine; transient danger not generally actionable)
- Baker v. City of Philadelphia, 603 A.2d 686 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992) (summary judgment; foreseeability and defect proof required)
- McDonough v. Borough of Munhall, 200 A.638 (Pa. 1938) (no liability absent notice or dangerous condition)
- Sellers v. Cline, 49 A.2d 873 (Pa. Super. 1946) (no hills and ridges where no obstructive ice patches)