Ziaire Leger, v. Gregory L. Martin, Zimmerman Mulch Products, LLC, Andy Zimmerman a/k/a Andrew Zimmerman and Bethel Township

Ziaire Leger, v. Gregory L. Martin, Zimmerman Mulch Products, LLC, Andy Zimmerman a/k/a Andrew Zimmerman and Bethel Township

Civil Action-Governmental Law-Tort Law-Municipal Liability-Motor Vehicle Accident-Negligence-Intersection-Summary Judgment-Governmental Immunity-Exceptions-Actual or Constructive Notice-Dangerous Condition

Ziaire Leger (“Plaintiff”) alleges that she sustained significant injuries in a motor vehicle accident in which the vehicle in which she was riding as a passenger failed to stop at a stop sign and collided with a vehicle operated by Defendant Gregory L. Martin and owned by Defendant Zimmerman Mulch Products, LLC.  Plaintiff brought causes of action against Defendant Bethel Township (“the Township”) on the basis of negligence with regard to the intersection where the accident occurred.  The Township filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, asserting that it is entitled to governmental immunity from damages in this action because it did have actual or constructive notice of other accidents at the intersection in question. 

1.  Summary judgment is appropriate where there is no genuine issue of material fact and the record viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party is clear that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

2.  Title 42 Pa.C.S. § 8541 provides that no local agency shall be liable for damages on account of an injury to a person or property caused by any act of the local agency.

3.  Governmental immunity is waived if: (1) a claim is recognized at common law; and (2) one of the enumerated exceptions is alleged.

4.  Under the “trees,” “traffic controls” and “streets” exceptions to governmental immunity, the local agency must have had actual notice or reasonably may be charged with notice under the circumstances of the alleged dangerous condition at a sufficient time prior to the event to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition.

5.  Plaintiff failed to adduce evidence to show that the Township had actual or constructive notice of any dangerous condition of the intersection where the Township manager testified that she had no awareness of accidents at the intersection until Plaintiff provided notice of the same and the Township does not track collisions due to lack of a police department and Plaintiff failed to establish that a report prepared by an unknown party identifying nineteen (19) accidents at the intersection in question occurred at substantially the same place and under similar circumstances. 

L.C.C.C.P. No. 2022-00231, Opinion by Charles T. Jones, Jr., Judge, January 24, 2025.