Hill, J. v. Slippery Rock University
138 A.3d 673
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- Jack Hill Jr., a Division II student-athlete at Slippery Rock University, collapsed during a high-intensity late-night basketball practice on September 9, 2011 and later died; autopsy revealed sickle cell trait (SCT).
- Hill completed a pre-participation medical questionnaire that asked about sickle cell disease/trait, but no blood testing for SCT was required or performed and he was not informed of SCT risks.
- The NCAA had issued guidance and began requiring SCT testing for Division I athletes in 2010 but did not require testing for Division II athletes until 2012 — after Hill’s death.
- Plaintiffs (his parents/co-administrators) sued Slippery Rock, university health personnel, and the NCAA for negligence, wrongful death, and survival claims; the trial court sustained a demurrer as to the NCAA and dismissed claims with prejudice.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether plaintiffs sufficiently pled that the NCAA assumed a duty under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 323 and whether the NCAA’s omission could be said to have increased Hill’s risk of harm.
- The Superior Court reversed the dismissal as to the NCAA, holding plaintiffs’ allegations that the NCAA’s protocols (which omitted Division II SCT testing) increased Hill’s risk of harm were sufficient to survive a demurrer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs adequately alleged the NCAA owed a duty under Restatement § 323 | NCAA assumed a duty to student-athletes by promulgating/mandating safety protocols; Hill was within the protected class | No legally cognizable duty to Hill; if any undertaking existed, plaintiffs failed to plead increased risk required by § 323(a) | Court: plaintiffs adequately pleaded an assumed-duty relationship and may proceed on § 323 theory |
| Whether failure to require Division II SCT testing can satisfy § 323(a)’s “increased risk” element | Omission (failure to require testing) increased Hill’s risk by creating an incomplete medical clearance that permitted dangerous exertion | § 323(a) requires affirmative acts that worsen plaintiff’s position (sins of commission), not omissions; omission cannot establish increased risk | Court: increased risk can be established by omissions; plaintiffs sufficiently alleged omission increased risk |
| Whether existing precedent (Wissel/Turbe/Patentas) compels dismissal | Plaintiffs: Pennsylvania law allows omissions to satisfy § 323(a) (Hamil/Feld/Feeney) | NCAA: relied on other jurisdictions’ cases holding § 323(a) requires commission | Court: Pennsylvania precedent controls; Wissel and cited federal/out-of-state cases are not binding; dismissal reversed |
| Whether the complaint was legally insufficient at demurrer stage (i.e., no recovery possible) | Facts, if proven, would permit recovery — demurrer should be overruled | Demurrer: law says with certainty no recovery possible against NCAA | Court: doubt resolved for plaintiff; demurrer improperly sustained and reversal/remand required |
Key Cases Cited
- Hamil v. Bashline, 392 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 1978) (Section 323(a) permits liability where acts or omissions increase risk of harm)
- Feld v. Merriam, 485 A.2d 742 (Pa. 1984) (adoption of Restatement § 323 principles in Pennsylvania)
- Weiley v. Albert Einstein Med. Ctr., 51 A.3d 202 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard for reviewing demurrers and § 323 discussion)
- Feeney v. Disston Manor Personal Care Home, Inc., 849 A.2d 590 (Pa. Super. 2004) (application of Hamil § 323 principles)
- Wissel v. Ohio High School Athletic Ass'n, 605 N.E.2d 458 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992) (counterexample from another jurisdiction treating § 323(a) as requiring commission)