32 A.3d 882
Pa. Commw. Ct.2011Background
- Sodders sued the Borough after a 2005 accident in Midland, Beaver County, where three patrol cars traveling west at ~35 mph in a 25 mph zone, with lights/sirens off, collided with Sodders as he turned left at 9th Street.
- Sodders testified he stopped at the intersection, could not see the third vehicle, and proceeded left; the third vehicle struck him, causing spinal surgery.
- Officer Fry admitted traveling ~35 mph in a 25 mph zone and not using lights/siren, violating Section 3105 and 3362; he had no emergency exception, and no “sub-emergency” allowance applied.
- The trial court refused to instruct the jury on negligence per se for either party; the jury found Fry not negligent, ending further factual-causation questions.
- Sodders moved for a new trial; the trial court granted, finding error in not instructing negligence per se as to both parties; the Commonwealth Court affirmed, distinguishing negligence from negligence per se and holding the charge was inaccurate.
- On appeal, the Borough argued no prejudice from omission and that the instruction as a whole was adequate; the court held the failure to instruct on negligence per se misdescribed duties of care and prejudiced Sodders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligence per se instruction for Fry | Sodders argued Fry violated 3105 and 3362, so per se instruction required | Borough argued no prejudice and that overall charge sufficed | Yes, error; per se instruction should have been given |
| Negligence per se instruction for both parties | Jury needed per se instruction for both to address duty/breach and causation | Charge balanced; no need to single out Fry | Yes, error; new trial warranted due to misinstruction |
Key Cases Cited
- Page v. City of Philadelphia, 25 A.3d 471 (Pa.Cmwlth.2011) (negligence elements and negligence per se distinction in proof)
- Talarico v. Bonham, 168 Pa.Cmwlth. 467, 650 A.2d 1192 (Pa.Cmwlth.1994) (negligence elements and causation framework)
- Lahr v. City of York, 972 A.2d 41 (Pa.Cmwlth.2009) (emergency-vehicle burden under 3105; no exceptions to privileges)
- Shamnoski v. PG Energy, 579 Pa. 652, 858 A.2d 589 (Pa.2004) (statutory speed limits; distinction between general and absolute limits for per se)
- Jenkins v. Wolf, 911 A.2d 568 (Pa.Super.2006) (VIOLATION of section with mandatory language can be negligence per se)