Logo
Contact Us
  • Media, PA Office

    610-565-4055
  • Wilmington, DE Office

    302-594-4535
Follow Us
  • HOME
  • FIRM OVERVIEW
  • OUR ATTORNEYS
    • Timothy B. Barnard
    • John J. Mezzanotte, Jr.
    • Mark S. Pinnie
    • Anne Kai Seelaus
    • Denise Seastone Kraft
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • Personal Injury
      • Motor Vehicle Accidents
        • Auto Accidents
        • Motorcycle Accidents
      • Premises Liability
      • Workers Compensation
    • Corporate & Business Law
    • Real Estate
      • Commercial Real Estate
      • Zoning Land Use
    • Estate Planning Administration
      • Estate Planning
      • Wills
      • Trusts
      • Living Wills
      • Probate Estate Administration
    • Products Liability
    • Intellectual Property
  • RESOURCES
  • OUR BLOG
  • CONTACT US

Pennsylvania Does Not Recognize the “Mode of Operation” Rule

February 20, 2018 By Mark Pinnie

Pennsylvania Does Not Recognize the "Mode of Operation" Rule

In slip and fall cases, the court typically looks at whether the defendant took reasonable steps to monitor or become aware of potentially dangerous situations, and then took appropriate steps to remedy them. But what if the owner of the business knew, because of the type of business being conducted, that the floors were likely to be slippery, to have water, food or other dangerous substances on them at any time? For example, what if a person slips and falls at a buffet-style restaurant, where customers regularly serve themselves, and regularly drop food on the floor?

Some jurisdictions, considering it reasonable that the owner of such an establishment should expect such conditions to exist, have eliminated the requirement that an injured person show negligence, based on what’s known as the “mode of operation” doctrine. In New Jersey, where this approach has limited application, the courts have identified specific requirements for its application:

  • It only applies where the mode of operation" involves self-service, with customers independently handling products or merchandise
  • It only applies in areas affected by the self-service operations—it may not be transferred to all parts of such a business
  • The legal theory may also be used if the dangerous conditions were created by an employee, rather than a customer. For example, if a business has a self-service food bar, but an employee caused items to be on the floor, the doctrine can be used if another customer slips and falls on the items the employee caused to land on the floor.

Though a number of cases have been filed in Pennsylvania alleging liability under a “mode of operation” principle, the state has not yet recognized it as a valid doctrine.

Contact Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP

At Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP, we have fought for the rights of individuals throughout Delaware County since 1980. We offer a free initial consultation. To schedule an appointment, call us at 610-565-4055 or 302-594-4535 or contact us online

Personal Service | Dedicated Advocacy | Cutting Edge Technology

Filed Under: Personal Injury, Slips and Falls Tagged With: Personal Injury, Slip and Fall, Slips and Falls

Things You Need to Know in a Pennsylvania Slip and Fall Case

February 6, 2018 By Mark Pinnie

Pennsylvania Slip and Fall Case

In Pennsylvania, as in other states, the owner of residential or commercial property has a duty to maintain the premises in such a way as to minimize the risk of injury to anyone legally on the property. That duty can also extend to anyone who maintains control of property, from a property manager to a landlord or tenant. The duty requires reasonable monitoring to discover and remedy any potentially dangerous conditions.

There are a couple other issues that you should be aware of, if you have sustained an injury on someone else’s property:

  • The Statute of Limitations—Under the laws of the state, there’s a time limit for filing a lawsuit to recover any losses sustained as a result of a slip and fall. In Pennsylvania, that period of time is two years, typically measured from the date of the injury, or from the date you learned of the injury. There’s good reason for this rule—memories fade and evidence gets lost, so the sooner you file, the better the chance of a fair trial for everyone. In addition, the law considers it unreasonable that a person should have a potential lawsuit hanging out there for an extended period of time.
  • The Principle of Comparative Negligence—In a personal injury case based on negligence, the jury typically requires the at-fault party to pay for losses suffered by the injured party. If the injured party was negligent in any way and that negligence caused or contributed to the accident, the injured party may have some responsibility. Under Pennsylvania law, if the jury determines that the injured party was more than 50% responsible for the accident, the injured party cannot recover any compensation. For example, if you went into an area that was blocked off by tape or cones, or if you were on a device or otherwise engaged in distracted behavior, that may be considered contributory negligence and may reduce or preclude damages.

Contact Our Office

At Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP, we offer experienced and knowledgeable legal counsel to individuals in Pennsylvania. To set up an appointment for a free initial consultation, call us at 610-565-4055 or 302-594-4535 or contact us online

Personal Service | Dedicated Advocacy | Cutting Edge Technology

Filed Under: Personal Injury, Slips and Falls Tagged With: Personal Injury, Slip and Fall, Slips and Falls

Man Sues Philadelphia Restaurant after Sign Falls

February 9, 2017 By Mark Pinnie

personal injury

A man who was injured last summer when restaurant sign hit him on the head has filed a personal injury lawsuit against the restaurant and its owners. Keith Blackwell, a resident of Philadelphia, brought the legal action against the eatery, saying he had suffered “painful and permanent” injuries, including post-concussive syndrome, cognitive impairment, spinal cord injury, and lacerations and contusions to his head and body.

According to the complaint, Blackwell was a patron at the restaurant on July 22 when the restaurant’s sign fell and hit him on the head. He has alleged that the owners of the restaurant negligently failed to maintain the premises so as to minimize the risk of injury.

Under Pennsylvania law, the owner of commercial or residential property has a duty to monitor and maintain the premises so as to minimize the risk of injury to anyone legally on the property. Because Blackwell was on the property in the ordinary course of business—he came there to eat—his legal status would be that of an “invitee.”  An invitee is defined as a person who enters the property of another at the express or implied invitation of the property owner.

In Pennsylvania, a business or property owner has a specific duty to invitees:

  • To exercise reasonable care to discover any condition that poses an unreasonable risk of danger
  • To take reasonable steps to protect invitees from that danger

There is a caveat—a property owner will only be liable if the danger is one that the property owner could not reasonably expect that the invitee would discover on his or her own.

Contact Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP

At Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP, we have fought for the rights of individuals throughout Delaware County since 1980. We offer a free initial consultation. To schedule an appointment, call us at 610-565-4055 or 302-594-4535 or contact us online

Personal Service | Dedicated Advocacy | Cutting Edge Technology

Filed Under: Personal Injury, Slips and Falls Tagged With: Personal Injury, Slips and Falls

Our Practice Areas

  • Personal Injury
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents
  • Auto Accidents
  • Motorcycle Accidents
  • Premises Liability
  • Workers' Compensation
  • Corporate & Business Law
  • Real Estate
  • Commercial Real Estate
  • Zoning and Land Use
  • Estate Planning & Administration
  • Estate Planning 101
  • Probate & Estate Administration
  • Wills
  • Living Wills
  • Trusts
  • Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Copyright Litigation
  • Trademark Litigation
  • Trade Secret Litigation
  • False Advertising Litigation
  • Products Liability

Contact Us Today

Contact us today for a free initial consultation to discuss your legal concerns.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

From Our Blog

Must Property Owners Remove Snow and Ice? It's winter in Pennsylvania, when snow and ice make … [Read More...]

Is There a Higher Standard of Care When Driving in Ice and Snow? Under the laws governing … [Read More...]

Media, PA Office

Media, PA Office
218 West Front Street Media, Pennsylvania 19063
Phone: (610) 565-4055
Map

Wilmington, DE Office

Wilmington, DE Office
1205 N. Orange Street
PO Box 26304
Wilmington, DE 19899
(302) 594-4535

Links

  • Firm Overview
  • Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
  • Resources
  • Personal Injury
  • Business Law
  • Real Estate
  • Estate Planning
  • DUI & Minor Criminal

contact us

610-565-4055

© 2020 by Barnard, Mezzanotte, Pinnie, Seelaus & Kraft LLP. All rights reserved. Disclaimer CONCEPT, DESIGN and HOSTING BY GETLEGAL.COM'S WEB SERVICES TEAM.