Page v. City of Philadelphia
25 A.3d 471
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2011Background
- Marc Page sued City of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for injuries from black ice on Allegheny Avenue on February 23, 2008.
- Page alleged the ice resulted from melt and refreeze due to improper snow/ice removal on a state highway treated under a City-DOT snow-removal contract.
- DOT moved for summary judgment arguing no duty to Page and that it was not responsible for removal at that location under the contract; argued no 8522(b) exception applicable.
- The City moved for summary judgment arguing no common-law duty and that snow/ice removal was governed by the contract and not a tort exception; plaintiff sought to prove improper removal with expert testimony.
- The trial court granted both motions for summary judgment, concluding the real-estate exception did not apply and the street exception under the Tort Claims Act did not apply, and that the contract existence was not a genuine issue.
- Page appealed asserting DOT and City violated Sovereign Immunity Act and Tort Claims Act exceptions; the appellate court affirmed, holding no material fact warranted liability under the asserted theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| DOT's immunity and real-estate exception | Page claims 8522(b)(4)/(b)(5) apply due to artificial/dangerous ice from DOT's removal. | DOT did not owe a duty to Page; ice did not derive from Allegheny Ave; no artificial condition under real-estate exception. | DOT's summary judgment affirmed; real-estate exception not applicable. |
| Whether the City owed a duty under the Tort Claims Act § 8542(b)(6)(ii) | City's negligent snow/ice removal created a dangerous street condition and liability under § 8542(b)(6)(ii). | No dangerous condition derived from the street itself; proper salting evidence undermines claim; Kilgore distinction. | City's summary judgment affirmed; § 8542(b)(6)(ii) not applicable. |
| Contractual maintenance and genuine issue of material fact | Existence of contract for snow removal should negate summary judgment and impose liability if negligent. | Contractual arrangement already admitted; no genuine issue; contract does not create liability absent a recognized exception. | Contract existence not a genuine issue; no liability under asserted theories. |
Key Cases Cited
- Snyder v. Commonwealth, 522 Pa.424, 562 A.2d 307 (Pa. 1989) (real estate dangerous condition requires derivation from Commonwealth realty)
- Jones v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 565 Pa.211, 772 A.2d 435 (Pa. 2001) (on/of distinction clarified; dangerous condition must derive from realty)
- Weller v. Commonwealth, 133 Pa.Cmwlth. 18, 574 A.2d 728 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1990) (artificial accumulation by DOT; not applicable here)
- Miller v. City of Philadelphia, 582 A.2d 416 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1990) (improper plowing not a basis for artificial condition under §8522(b)(4))
- Vitelli v. City of Chester, 545 A.2d 1011 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1988) (snow shoveled remains natural; cannot change character to artificial)
- Kilgore v. City of Philadelphia, 717 A.2d 514 (Pa. 1998) (distinguishes real property vs. streets exception; Kilgore involved §8542(b)(3))
- Burns v. Crossman, 740 A.2d 773 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1999) (no action against city for improper plowing under §8542(b)(3))