Essington v. Monroe Cnty. Transit Auth., Owners Ass'n, Inc.

• Court: Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
• Writing for the Court: OPINION BY JUDGE McCULLOUGH
• Citation: Essington v. Monroe Cnty. Transit Auth., Owners Ass'n, Inc., 302 A.3d 219 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023)
• Docket Number: 1081 C.D. 2022,No. 1081 C.D. 2022
• Decision Date: 11 July 2023
• Parties: Sean ESSINGTON, Administrator of the Estate of David Essington, deceased, Appellant v. MONROE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association, Inc. a/k/a A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation v. Joaquin Acevedo-Soltren

302 A.3d 219

Sean ESSINGTON, Administrator of the Estate of David Essington, deceased, Appellant v. MONROE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association, Inc. a/k/a A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation v. Joaquin Acevedo-Soltren

No. 1081 C.D. 2022

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued June 6, 2023

Decided July 11, 2023

Publication Ordered September 20, 2023

Jeffrey K. Stanton and Dennis C. Coyne, Philadelphia, for Appellant.

Christine E. Munion, Blue Bell, for Appellee Monroe County Transit Authority.

Joseph E. Janc, Scranton, for Appellee A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association.

Michael J. Scarinci, Deputy Attorney General, Harrisburg, for Appellee Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation.

BEFORE: HONORABLE PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge, HONORABLE LORI A. DUMAS, Judge, HONORABLE STACY WALLACE, Judge

OPINION BY JUDGE McCULLOUGH

Sean Essington, Administrator of the Estate of David Essington, deceased, (Appellant), appeals from three orders entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County (trial court) on August 15, 2022, granting summary judgment in favor of Monroe County Transit Authority (Authority), Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation (PennDOT), and A Pocono Country Place Property Owners Association, Inc. (Property Owners Association or Association), and dismissing Appellant's complaint. Appellant also appeals from a fourth order entered by the trial court on December 16, 2020, sustaining the preliminary objections of the Authority as to the assertion of liability under the real estate exception to what is commonly known as the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act ¹ (Tort Claims Act), 42 Pa. C.S. § 8542(b)(3), and dismissing Count II (violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution) of Appellant's complaint. ² Upon careful review, we affirm in part, and reverse in part.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On October 30, 2017, at approximately 8:30 p.m., 17-year-old David Essington (the decedent) was struck by an oncoming car while crossing State Road 196 (SR-196) near its intersection with Woodside Drive, in Coolbaugh Township, Monroe County. (Reproduced Record (R.R.) 490a, 508a-09a.) The decedent suffered multiple traumatic injuries and died a few hours after the accident. Id . at 1078a.

SR-196 is a two-lane highway running north and south, with a dividing double-yellow line, and a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour (m.p.h.). Id . at 440a-91a. Each lane is about 10 feet wide, with a shoulder on each side of about 2.5 feet, which is marked off by white lines. Id . at 491a, 545a. In this "very rural area" there are no sidewalks, no street lighting, and no pedestrian crosswalk. Id . at 440a, 491a, 547a, 1676a. To the east of the accident site are woods. Id . at 440a.

A Pocono Country Place (the Development) is a large, gated, residential development consisting of over 4,000 single-family homes. Id . at 545a, 660a. The Development is a private community intended for residents and their guests only. The Development has two gated entrances, known as the Main Gate and the K-L Gate. There are also emergency-access only gates located at Brentwood Drive, Woodside Drive and Millwood Overlook Drive where they intersect with SR-196. Although no vehicular traffic can access the Development at the emergency gates, pedestrians can access the Development through the emergency gates. The accident that occurred in this case occurred on SR-196 at the intersection of Woodside Drive.

Just prior to the accident, the decedent had been riding a bus operated by the Authority. Id . at 510a. The Authority had established a bus stop on the northbound side of SR-196 at its intersection with Woodside Drive many years before the accident (Woodside Drive Bus Stop). Riders getting off the bus at the Woodside Drive Bus Stop would be required to cross SR-196 if they wanted to enter at the gated Woodside Drive entrance. No improvements were made at the Woodside Drive Bus Stop, other than a sign noting an Authority bus stop at the location.

The Authority had five bus stops to service residents of the Development. Pursuant to a 2010 license agreement between the Association and the Authority, the Association permitted the Authority to construct three of the five bus stops, with shelters, on the Association's property. The Woodside Drive Bus Stop, which was located on SR-196, did not have a shelter.

Riders did not have to get off at the Woodside Drive Bus Stop and cross SR-196 to access the Development at Woodside Drive. They could wait until the bus turned around at the K-L Gate, and disembark on the same side of the Development.

Authority buses are required to let riders off at whatever location they choose.

On the night of the accident, the decedent got off the bus at the Woodside Drive Bus Stop. Id . at 508a, 877a. Another bus passenger, Taimar Mosley, exited the bus in front of the decedent. Id . at 508a. They both proceeded toward the rear of the bus, as required by the Authority. Id . at 926a, 1066a. The bus merged back onto SR-196, and Mosley stepped into the street, with the decedent following behind him. Id . at 508a, 1066a.

Meanwhile, Joaquin Acevedo-Soltren (hereinafter the Driver) had left his home at A Pocono Country Place and was heading toward Wal-Mart in his 2004 Hyundai Elantra. Id . at 499a, 1129a, 1180a. The Driver was proceeding south along SR-196 with his car's high-beam headlights illuminated. Id . at 509a, 1137a-39a. The Driver came out of a curve into a straightway of about 100 yards. Id . at 528a-31a, 543a, 1156a. The Driver saw the bus, about 150 yards ahead on SR-196, and switched to his low-beam headlights so as not to blind the bus driver. Id . at 1137a-38a, 1141a-42a.

According to the Driver, the bus driver, Everette Grant, had his high-beam headlights on but did not switch to his low-beam headlights, a fact which the bus driver disputes. Id . at 932a, 1134a. The glare from the bus's bright headlights temporarily blinded the Driver, causing him to glance down at the car's speedometer for a "split second." Id . at 1134a, 1144a. The Driver was going about 45 m.p.h. but had his foot on the brake. Id . at 1145a-51a. Once the Driver recovered his sight, he quickly glanced over at the bus driver. Id . at 1147a. About a second or two later, the Driver turned his attention back to the road. There, only 30 to 50 feet in front of him, was the decedent. Id . at 1134a, 1147a, 1166a, 1183a.

By this point, Mosley had already crossed SR-196. Id . at 1066a. Moments earlier, Mosley had started crossing the street. He looked both ways and did not see any oncoming cars. Id . at 1066a-67a. Once the bus was farther up the road and Mosley was halfway across the street, he looked right again and saw "a car really close." Id . at 1066a-67a. He rushed across the street and turned back to see if the decedent had made it. Id . at 1066a-67a. The Driver did not see Mosley crossing the street. Id . at 1164a.

The decedent was dressed entirely in black—hat, shirt, and shorts. Id . at 1168a. He had a headphone in one ear (a fact confirmed on the Authority's video) and a phone in his hand. Id . at 509a, 522a, 1134a, 1168a, 1186a. The decedent appeared to be looking down at the phone. Id . at 1185-86a. The Driver slammed on the brakes and turned to the left, but he could not avoid hitting the decedent. Id . at 1134a.

The Complaint

Appellant instituted this suit by filing a complaint in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the Authority, PennDOT and the Association. Id . at 27a-67a. The Authority joined the Driver as an additional defendant. Id . The remaining defendants filed cross-claims against each other. On September 24, 2020, the matter was transferred to the trial court pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S. § 5103. ³

In Count II , (Violation of Pennsylvania Constitution), it is alleged that the Authority permitted the decedent to disembark at the Woodside Drive Bus Stop knowing that it was unsafe and that its conduct resulted in a state-created danger to the decedent in violation of the substantive due process rights to bodily integrity secured by article 1, § I of the Pennsylvania Constitution, PA. CONST . Id . at 47a-49a.

In Count III (Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle), Appellant asserts that the Authority negligently operated the bus in such a manner so as to require the decedent to disembark the bus onto the narrow, unprotected shoulder of northbound SR-196 at a point without sufficient sightlines, sight distances and/or unobstructed views of oncoming traffic, and without signs, guardrails, bus shelters, pull-offs, roadway cutouts, or any other feature or mechanism that would provide safety or protection for the decedent. Id . at 51a-53a. Appellant further alleges that the Authority operated the bus in such a manner that required the decedent to disembark the bus at an unreasonably dangerous location, blocked the view of the decedent from observing oncoming traffic while crossing SR-196, and prevented vehicles proceeding southbound on SR-196 from observing the decedent crossing the roadway. Id. Appellant also alleges that the Authority (1) operated the bus in such a manner that its headlights obstructed the view of oncoming vehicles; and (2) failed to warn the decedent of oncoming vehicles or warn oncoming vehicles that the decedent had just disembarked. Id .

In Count IV (Negligent Maintenance of Real Property), Appellant asserts that PennDOT and the Authority are liable under the real property exception to the grant of immunity under the Sovereign Immunity Act ⁴ and the Tort Claims Act. The complaint alleges that PennDOT and the Authority acted negligently in allowing a dangerous condition to occur on SR-196 and by failing to erect signs, lights, guiderails, bus shelters, crosswalks, traffic control devices,...