Neidert, Z. v. Charlie, A.
143 A.3d 384
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- On August 21, 2012, employee Zachary Neidert was injured at Riley’s Pub when a patron fell through a trap/door-in-the-floor in the building owned by Albert Charlie, III. Neidert was working for Brooke Derek, Inc., the corporate owner/operator of the pub, and received workers’ compensation benefits.
- Neidert sued Charlie individually for negligence, alleging Charlie occupied a dual capacity (employer and building owner) and thus was not immune under the Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA).
- The trial court denied Charlie’s summary judgment motion, the case proceeded to a jury trial (June 9–11, 2015), and Charlie moved orally for a compulsory nonsuit on June 11, 2015; the court granted the nonsuit.
- Neidert timely filed post-trial motions to remove the nonsuit and for a new trial; he appealed (two docketed appeals resulted, one dismissed as premature and the other proceeding).
- The trial court denied Neidert’s post-trial motions; the Superior Court consolidated appeals, dismissed the premature appeal, and affirmed the judgment entered for Charlie, concluding Neidert failed to prove the narrow dual-capacity exception and the law-of-the-case argument was inapplicable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supported a dual-capacity claim so WCA immunity does not bar suit | Neidert: Charlie, as building owner, owed independent duties separate from his employer role; evidence raised jury question | Charlie: He acted as employer/operator; duties alleged arise from proprietor/employer role and are barred by WCA | Court: Nonsuit proper—evidence showed Charlie’s roles were inseparable; dual-capacity exception not met |
| Whether law-of-the-case barred reconsideration after summary judgment denial | Neidert: Earlier denial of summary judgment precluded later grant of nonsuit on same issue | Charlie: A compulsory nonsuit differs from summary judgment; plaintiff’s trial presentation is an intervening change | Court: Law-of-the-case inapplicable; different motion types and the presentation of plaintiff’s case justified re-evaluation |
Key Cases Cited
- Alfonsi v. Huntington Hosp., Inc., 798 A.2d 216 (Pa. Super. 2002) (standard for reviewing denial of motion to remove compulsory nonsuit)
- Harvilla v. Delcamp, 555 A.2d 763 (Pa. 1989) (compulsory nonsuit valid only in clear cases showing absence of liability)
- Tatrai v. Presbyterian Univ. Hosp., 439 A.2d 1162 (Pa. 1982) (dual-capacity exception applies when employee’s injury is like that of the general public and extraneous to employment)
- Heath v. Church’s Fried Chicken, Inc., 546 A.2d 1120 (Pa. 1988) (dual-capacity exception is narrow; no exception when injury occurs while performing job duties)