Bennicoff, A. v. Lehigh County Agric. Soc.
420 EDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 27, 2017Background
- On March 6, 2015, Ada and Charles Bennicoff went to Ag Hall (Lehigh County Agricultural Society property); there were icy patches in the parking lot after recent snow.
- Charles parked on a dry spot and walked to the building without incident; Ada exited, took 3–4 steps on dry pavement, saw a white-gray patch of ice directly in front of the truck, and then stepped on it and slipped, fracturing her ankle.
- Plaintiffs sued LCAS for negligence and loss of consortium, alleging LCAS failed to treat the icy parking lot.
- At deposition Ada testified she saw the ice, understood the risk, and nevertheless stepped on it because she thought she would not fall; later she submitted an affidavit claiming the truck was encircled by ice and there was no safe alternative route.
- The trial court granted LCAS summary judgment, rejecting Ada’s affidavit as inconsistent with her deposition, finding the danger obvious and avoidable, and applying assumption of risk.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether Ada’s affidavit contradicted her deposition | Affidavit and deposition consistent; trial court improperly disregarded affidavit | Affidavit directly contradicted deposition testimony and was not credible | Court: affidavit contradicted deposition; trial court permissibly disregarded it; no error |
| 2. Whether any evidence showed an alternate safe pathway existed | There was no scintilla of evidence of an alternate safe path from the truck to the building | Evidence showed Charles (and the area where Ada first stood) were on dry pavement and she could have followed him or gone around the ice | Court: undisputed facts show Ada observed ice and could have avoided it; alternative path existed; issue without merit |
| 3. Whether merely stepping on ice is insufficient for assumption of risk | Stepping on ice alone does not establish assumption of risk | Ada knowingly observed and identified the specific ice patch and voluntarily proceeded despite the risk | Court: Ada’s admitted knowledge and decision to step on the ice established assumption of risk; defense applies |
| 4. Whether “alternate path” is a valid articulation of assumption of risk in slip-and-fall cases | Contest that no safe path existed; challenges use of alternate-path analysis | Alternate-path/avoidability supports assumption-of-risk defense where danger is obvious and avoidable | Court: alternate-path argument adequate; plaintiffs failed to develop any new legal theory; claim waived or without merit |
Key Cases Cited
- Summers v. Certainteed Corp., 997 A.2d 1152 (Pa. 2010) (summary judgment standard; review of record)
- Carrender v. Fitterer, 469 A.2d 120 (Pa. 1983) (land possessor duties depend on entrant’s status)
- Longwell v. Giordano, 57 A.3d 163 (Pa. Super. 2012) (assumption of risk where danger is obvious and avoidable)
- Ott v. Unclaimed Freight Co., 577 A.2d 894 (Pa. Super. 1990) (plaintiff assumed risk crossing icy parking lot when alternate route existed)
- Gruenwald v. Advanced Computer Applications, Inc., 730 A.2d 1004 (Pa. Super. 1999) (trial court may disregard affidavit that contradicts prior deposition)