172 A.3d 80
Pa. Super. Ct.2017Background
- RPCC manages the Philadelphia Wholesale Produce Market and oversees common areas; TMK leased space where Kovacevich worked as a TMK salesman; Feb. 18, 2013 Scarlata, driving a pallet jack, collided with Kovacevich causing serious injuries; Kovacevich sued Crown Equipment and RPCC, alleging negligence under a premises-liability theory; trial court granted a non-suit against RPCC based on lack of duty under OSHA’s controlling-employer concept and related policy; post-trial motion denial and appeal followed, with the issue framed as whether RPCC owed a duty to Kovacevich under OSHA policy, lease terms, or Restatement provisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RPCC owed a duty as a controlling employer | Kovacevich argues RPCC controlled safety and training at the Market. | RPCC did not control tenant employees or safety training. | No duty; controlling-employer theory not a tort duty. |
| Whether OSHA Directive 02-00-124 creates tort liability | Directive supports imposing a duty on RPCC for multi-employer liability. | Directive is an enforcement-policy guide, not a tort duty. | Directive does not establish a Pennsylvania tort duty. |
| Whether Restatement Sections 343 and 344 apply | Sections 343/344 impose landowner liability for invitees and public-entry risks. | Inapplicable to a tenant’s employee in leased areas; no duty owed by RPCC. | Inapplicable; no duty under these sections. |
Key Cases Cited
- Leonard v. Commonwealth, Dep’t of Transp., 771 A.2d 1238 (Pa. 2001) (distinguishes enforcement policy from legal duty; policy not liabilityCreating)
- C.C.H. v. Phila. Phillies, Inc., 940 A.2d 336 (Pa. 2008) (uses Section 286 Restatement to adopt regulatory standards for standards of care)
- Newell v. Montana West, Inc., 154 A.3d 819 (Pa. Super. 2017) (restatement adoption of standards and duty analysis in torts)
- Universal Constr. Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Rev. Comm., 182 F.3d 726 (10th Cir. 19999) (multisite/controlling-employer doctrine context in construction)