Court Grants Summary Judgment, Finding Trivial Tile Height and Lack of Causation in Slip-and-Fall Case

Marshall Dennehey
Contact

Marshall Dennehey

Klobusnik v. The Carafaro Co. and Cafaro-Peachcreek Joint Venture Partnership, No. 1132-2021, 2025 WL 978886 (Pa. Com. Pl. Jan. 3, 2025)

In support of their motion for summary judgment, the defendant argued that the photographic evidence offered by the plaintiff, to show the height variation between floor tile heights in the area where she fell, was too trivial of a height difference to be deemed a dangerous condition. The defendant also argued that there was no evidence that it had actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition in the area where the plaintiff fell. Lastly, the defendant argued that there was no evidence linking a raised floor tile to the plaintiff’s fall.

Upon reviewing the record, the Erie County Court of Common Pleas agreed that the difference in tile heights was too trivial to be considered a dangerous condition. Furthermore, it found that because the plaintiff could not recall exactly where she fell and because of the trivial height of the floor tiles, the plaintiff could not establish the required causal link between the alleged dangerous condition and her fall. The court noted that it was just as likely she tripped over her own shoe rather than on a raised floor tile.

Written by:

Marshall Dennehey
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Marshall Dennehey on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide