Powers, T. v. Verizon Pennsylvania
230 A.3d 492
Pa. Super. Ct.2020Background:
- On March 27, 2016, Thomas Powers was injured when his foot fell into the lid of a cable service box located near 415 Elm Circle in Chalfont, Bucks County.
- Powers filed suit in Philadelphia County (August 2017) against Verizon Pennsylvania, LLC and Oxford Lane Community Association; Oxford Lane later joined neighbors Kourtney Chichilitti and Raja Gali as additional defendants based on the box's disputed location between 415 and 417 Elm Circle.
- Verizon sought to join the box manufacturer (Carson Industries/Oldcastle) and filed a petition under Pa.R.C.P. 1006(d) on March 6, 2018 to transfer venue to Bucks County via forum non conveniens.
- Verizon argued most parties, witnesses, and the accident site were in Bucks County, that key witnesses faced over one hour commutes to Philadelphia (vs. ~15 minutes to Bucks County court), and that site access and medical-witness convenience favored transfer.
- The trial court granted Verizon’s petition on April 18, 2018; the court treated Powers’ general denials as failing to dispute Verizon’s factual averments and found a reasonable evidentiary basis for transfer. This Court affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants met burden under Pa.R.C.P. 1006(d) to show plaintiff's chosen forum was oppressive or vexatious | Powers: defendants failed to establish oppressive/vexatious forum; mere inconvenience only | Verizon: forum is oppressive given witnesses/residences, travel burden, site-access, and medical-witness convenience | Transfer affirmed — court found a reasonable evidentiary basis that forum was oppressive when viewed in totality |
| Whether travel from neighboring Bucks County to Philadelphia is merely inconvenient or can be oppressive | Powers: commuting from Bucks is mere inconvenience and not enough for transfer | Verizon: commute >1 hour for key witnesses, rush-hour delay, greater lost time; Bucks courthouse is much closer | Court held commuting burden can be oppressive when combined with other practical burdens; here those additional burdens existed |
| Effect of plaintiff’s failure to dispute defendants’ factual averments about witnesses’ residences | Powers: did not successfully refute Verizon’s claims | Verizon: averments should be treated as admitted where not disputed with particularity | Court treated Powers’ general denials as admissions for purposes of the petition and relied on them to support transfer |
| Relevance of access to sources of proof, site view, and medical witnesses | Powers: these do not overcome plaintiff's forum choice | Verizon: Bucks County provides easier access to site, local witnesses, and medical witnesses, reducing time away and cost | Court found these practical advantages supported transfer and contributed to oppressiveness of Philadelphia forum |
Key Cases Cited
- Cheeseman v. Lethal Exterminator, Inc., 701 A.2d 156 (Pa. 1997) (plaintiff's forum choice entitled to deference; defendant must show more than mere inconvenience)
- Bratic v. Rubendall, 99 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2014) (clarifies burden for forum non conveniens and recognizes distance and travel burdens can make a forum oppressive)
- Wright v. Consol. R.R. Corp., 215 A.3d 982 (Pa. Super. 2019) (summarizes private/public interest factors and the Petty/Gulf Oil framework for transfer analysis)
- Petty v. Suburban Gen. Hosp., 525 A.2d 1230 (Pa. Super. 1987) (adopts Gulf Oil factors for private and public interests)
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (U.S. 1947) (Supreme Court articulation of private and public interest factors in forum non conveniens analysis)
- Mateu v. Stout, 819 A.2d 563 (Pa. Super. 2003) (transfer affirmed where alternative venue provided easier access to sources of proof)
- Wood v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 829 A.2d 707 (Pa. Super. 2003) (oppressiveness requires detailed factual showing; access to witnesses and site views are significant factors)