A judge has refused to toss a punitive damages claim in the case of a widow

U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson

of a municipal employee who is suing the City of Philadelphia and Louisville Ladder over allegations that the man’s death was caused by injuries from an allegedly defective ladder.

In a Feb. 6 memorandum and order, U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson, of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, denied a motion by the ladder manufacturer to dismiss the punitive damages claim only.

Late last year, the Pennsylvania Record reported on Cecelia M. Sweeney’s case against the city and Kentucky-based Louisville Ladder Inc. over the Aug. 15, 2012, death of her husband, which occurred after William B. Sweeney fell from a rolling steel warehouse ladder stand manufactured and distributed by Louisville.

The city employee died four days after he fell from the device while doing work for the city on the 100 block of East Hunting Park Avenue.

The device gave way, causing Sweeney to crash the ground and strike his head on the concrete floor, the lawsuit states.

The plaintiff claims that the ladder her husband was using at the time was missing nuts and bolts.

The worker was taken to Temple University Hospital, where surgeons attempted to alleviate the swelling in his brain, but he ultimately succumbed to his injuries, according to the civil action.

Louisville Ladder subsequently filed a motion seeking to dismiss only the punitive damages claim, leaving the compensatory damages claim unchallenged, records show.

The plaintiff alleges that the company knew or should have known that the ladder was unsafe, and that by selling the ladder “demonstrated willful, wanton and reckless disregard for human life,” thereby entitling her to punitive damages, which, under Pennsylvania law, may be imposed only if a defendant’s conduct is “outrageous due to either the defendant’s evil motive or reckless indifference to the rights of others.”

In refusing to dismiss the punitive damages claim at this stage of the litigation, Baylson, the judge overseeing the case, wrote that the complaint alleges a “litany of actions and failures to act on the part of Defendant, which must be accepted as true on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.”

The suit, Baylson wrote, also avers that the defendant’s conduct was done with “recklessness and malice.”

“Viewed as a whole in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, these factual allegations are sufficient to plead a claim for punitive damages, but Defendant will have a further opportunity to renew its punitive damages contentions at the close of discovery,” Baylson wrote.

The suit was originally filed at the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas but was removed to the federal District Court in late November by defense attorney J. Michael Kunsch.

A Pennsylvania woman is suing Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals over

James Ronca

claims that she became pregnant while on the Mirena birth control system because the implanted device had migrated from its original spot in her body.

Rebecca Syx filed suit in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia on Feb. 10 accusing the pharmaceutical giant of negligence, defective manufacturing, defective design, strict liability and other violations in connection with her ordeal.

The complaint says Syx, 33, had her doctor insert the Mirena intrauterine device during a visit to the physician’s office in the spring of 2011.

When she went for a follow-up in mid-June of that year, the device was confirmed to be in its proper location, but during a subsequent visit a month later, the doctor discovered that Syx was pregnant.

Days later, Syx underwent an ultrasound, which failed to locate the Mirena.

Another ultrasound in early August, however, showed that the device was located in the vescio-uterine wall just posterior to the bladder and anterior to the uterus, the lawsuit states.

The plaintiff was then told doctors would remove the migrated Mirena when she came back to the hospital to deliver her baby.

She gave birth via caesarian section to a healthy newborn in early 2013, at which time the birth control device was surgically removed from her body.

The lawsuit contains additional counts of failure to warn, failure to adequately test, breach of implied and express warranties, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud by concealment, and violations of Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

The plaintiff seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, along with interest, litigation costs, attorneys’ fees and other court relief.

In support of her claim for punitive damages, Syx says that Bayer knew Mirena was dangerous and ineffective, and that the company concealed the dangers and health risks from members of the public and physicians, made misrepresentations as to the safety and efficacy of Mirena, and sold and distributed the device with full knowledge of the health risks associated with the product.

The lawsuit was filed by attorneys James R. Ronca, Gregory S. Spizer and Joseph J. Fantini, of the Philadelphia firm Anapol Schwartz.

The federal case number is 2:14-cv-00844-AB.

It’s back to the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas for a premises liability

Patrick J. McDonnell

case initiated by a city woman against the Wal-Mart Corp.

U.S. District Judge Robert F. Kelly, who sits in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, granted a motion to remand by plaintiff Juanita Lewis-Hatton in her case against Wal-Mart Stores East.

The case, initially filed in state court back in early October of last year, stems from a slip-and-fall incident that Lewis-Hatton blames on an accumulation of spilled and trampled produce and other food items that had been left on the store’s floor.

The incident occurred in late September 2012 at the Wal-Mart store located at 2200 Wheatsheaf Lane in Philadelphia.

The plaintiff claims that she sustained “severe, disabling, and permanent bodily injuries” as a result of her fall.

They allegedly include injuries to her joints, pelvis, thigh, hip, lower back, and other parts of her body.

Lewis-Hatton accuses the defendant of negligence for failing to remedy the dangerous situation inside of the retail store.

She is being represented by attorney John A. Spitale of Christopher L. Giddings P.C.

The dispute with regard to venue began late last year when defense lawyers Patrick J. McDonnell and Marc R. Kamin, of McDonnell & Associates in King of Prussia, Pa., filed a removal petition seeking to move the litigation to the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.

The two argued that the plaintiff’s damages, if any, are limited to an amount not in excess of $50,000 and $75,000, although Lewis-Hatton’s legal counsel denied the allegation with regard to damages.

Defense lawyers sent the plaintiff’s attorney a letter in mid-December of last year seeking clarification as to the issue of damage, records show, but no answer was given, leading Kamin and McDonnell to assume that Spitale, the plaintiff’s lawyer, was unwilling to stipulate to their damages contention.

The two defense attorneys then filed their removal petition seeking to transfer the case to federal court.

In her motion to remand, the plaintiff contended that the defendant has failed to establish that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, as required for subject matter jurisdiction under federal procedural rules.

She maintains that the amount-in-controversy requirement has not been met because she filed the case in the arbitration program at Philadelphia’s Common Pleas Court, explicitly stating that she seeks damages not in excess of $50,000.

She additionally noted that actions filed in the Compulsory Arbitration Program in Common Pleas Court caps damages at $50,000.

The defendant, in turn, argued that a “reasonable reading” of the civil action reveals that the damages exceed the jurisdictional amount in state court.

Kelly, the judge, wrote that in this case, the defense lawyers have failed to meet the “high burden of proving to a legal certainty that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.”

“Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s failure to stipulate, and denial to its New Matter, that the amount in controversy is less than $50,000 or $75,000 shows that diversity jurisdiction is satisfied,” Kelly wrote in his Feb. 7 memorandum. “While probative, under the facts of this case as we currently know them, Plaintiff’s refusal and denial alone are insufficient to meet Defendant’s burden.”

Kelly wrote that he does not solely rely upon the fact that the plaintiff’s case was designated for the Compulsory Arbitration Program at Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas to show that the amount in controversy does not meet the jurisdictional limit.

“Likewise, we do rely upon Defendant’s speculation about future awards on appeal to establish subject-matter jurisdiction,” the judge wrote.

Defense lawyers also asserted that the basis for its removal to the federal venue stems from the plaintiff’s “boilerplate” allegations of severe, permanent injuries, including future pain and suffering and lost earnings.

Kelly wrote that while the alleged injuries are not insignificant, he has no sense of what injuries or medical expenses the plaintiff is claiming at this point in the game.

Likewise, neither party has provided the court with any information regarding damages for lost wages, the judge noted.

“We do not know what occupation plaintiff has or how such employment has been impacted by the injuries caused by the alleged slip and fall,” Kelly wrote. “There is no colorable dispute regarding any underlying jurisdictional facts because neither Plaintiff nor Defendant has provided any specific information regarding the damages allegedly incurred, and no request for limited jurisdictional discovery in this action has been made.”

Kelly further noted that the defendant has relied upon “pure speculation leaving this Court to guess whether the jurisdictional threshold has been met under the current facts of this case.”

The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals has cautioned that removal statutes are to be strictly construed against removal, and that all doubts should be resolved in favor of remand, the judge noted.

With this directive in mind, Kelly wrote, the case should be sent back to state court.

A woman who says she was seriously injured during a stage-diving incident

U.S. District Judge Jan DuBois

at a Philadelphia concert venue four years ago has been awarded more than a million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages by a federal judge.

Kimberly Myers, who says her skull was cracked on Feb. 23, 2010, while she was attending a musical performance of the band Fishbone at Philadelphia’s World Café Live venue, received a judgment of $1,117,145.93 in compensatory damages and $250,000 in punitive damages.

The judgment was against Angelo Moore, Fishbone’s leader singer who dove into the crowd that day, and fellow band member John Norwood Fisher.

Myers filed suit in 2010 against Moore, Fisher, who is the band’s bassist, Fishbone, Silverback Artist Management, the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, Behind Closed Doors Touring, Hajoca Associates, and Real Entertainment – Philadelphia Inc.

She alleged claims of negligence relating to the defendants’ failure to warn the audience that the concert would feature stage diving.

The plaintiff also asserted claims of civil conspiracy against all defendants and assault and battery against Moore, Fisher, Fishbone and Behind Closed Doors Touring, records show.

The plaintiff subsequently reached settlements with Silverback, the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and Real Entertainment, according to court records.

The court, at the plaintiff’s request, then dismissed claims against the non-settling defendants without prejudice.

On Feb. 3, 2012, Myers brought a separate case against Moore, Fisher, Fishbone, The Agency Group and Behind Closed Doors Touring for negligence, civil conspiracy, and assault and battery.

Moore and Fisher failed to respond to the complaint, leading to a default judgment, records show.

Although the band also failed to respond to the complaint, Myers had not sought a default or a default judgment against the group as a whole.

Moore and Fisher never appeared at a hearing to assess damages that took place this past spring, records show.

Myers, 46, who resides in Voorhees, N.J., and who worked as the director of operations and business development at Comprehensive Clinical Research, which conducts pharmaceutical clinical trials, says that she sustained a fractured skull, a concussion, a broken clavicle, a perforated eardrum, hearing loss, autoimmune problems, lacerations, headaches and other physical injuries and mental impairments as a result of being struck by Moore when he dove off the stage and into the crowd during the concert four years ago.

She also says accompanying cognitive difficulties hindered her “productivity and confidence” in the workplace, and affected her ability to care for her three teenage children.

Myers claimed that none of the defendants apologized to her following the incident, and that the band continued its performance “as if nothing happened,” despite the fact that Myers was taken from the scene by ambulance.

The plaintiff’s complaint stated that Neil Sulkes, the general manager of World Café Live, told the Philadelphia Daily News that no performers had ever previously stage-dove at the concert venue, and that he had no advance notice that Moore would be diving from the stage during the Fishbone show.

Records show that when he was deposed in early February 2008, Moore, the lead singer, invoiced his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

“The Court infers from Moore’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment that his testimony would have been unfavorable to his interests,” U.S. District Judge Jan DuBois wrote in his Feb. 12 memorandum.

Myers claimed she incurred $15,845.97 in out-of-pocket medical expenses for the treatment of her injuries, and she estimated to have future lifetime costs of more than $350,000, records show.

“Plaintiff has established that, both as general partners and members of a single civil conspiracy, Moore and Fisher are jointly and severally liable for the full amount of compensatory damages awarded by the court,” DuBois wrote in the memorandum accompanying his order.

DuBois ended up awarding Myers close to $16,000 for her past medical expenses and more than $350,000 for future medical costs.

He also awarded her $750,000 for past and future noneconomic damages.

The judge ruled that punitive damages should only be assessed against Moore, who “refused to answer questions at his deposition regarding his use of illicit drugs on the date of the incident in question, [and] intentionally dove from an elevated stage despite knowing that stage diving in and of itself poses a serious risk of harm to audience members.”

“Moore continues to stage dive at almost every performance and exhibits nothing but apathy and hospitality towards his victims, whom he repeatedly characterized, during his deposition, as ‘predators’ out to steal his money,’” DuBois wrote.

Falcone

A Darby woman is suing two companies she claims is responsible for selling a shampoo which burned the hair off of her scalp.

Carrie Fitzpatrick filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas naming JF Labs Inc. and AFAM Concept Inc. as the defendants.

Fitzpatrick of Darby filed her suit on Feb. 12 and seeks monetary damages from the two defendants, both from Chicago. According to her complaint, Fitzpatrick was applying Hawaiian Silky No Base Relaxer Conditioning Cream and neutralizer shampoo product as intended when her scalp began burning. Fitzpatrick says says she suffered hair loss, abrasions to her head and scarring on her scalp as a result of the allegedly defective product.

Fitzpatrick is suing the two companies for the role each played in the manufacturing or sale of the shampoo. She is suing on claims of products liability and seeks to hold the defendants strictly liable.

Fitzpatrick is seeking more than $50,000 in damages. She is being represented by attorney Craig A. Falcone of Sacchetta and Falcone.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 140201368.

Parx Casino in Bensalem is being sued by a customer who allegedly was injured when she slipped and fell in the women’s restroom.

Melvine West of Philadelphia filed her lawsuit on Feb. 12 in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, naming Greenwood Gaming and Entertainment Inc., Parx Casino Design Inc., Philadelphia Park Casino and Racetrack, Greenwood Gaming Association and Bensalem Racing Association as defendants.

West explains in her complaint she was at the Parx Casino, 2999 Street Road in Bensalem, when the incident occurred. West says on Dec. 1, 2012, she was walking in the women’s bathroom when she stepped in a puddle of water, slipped and fell. West says Parx was negligent in allowing the dangerous condition to exist in an area frequented by customers.

West goes on to say when she fell she suffered injuries to her shoulder, neck, knees and legs which caused her to suffer in pain. West would like to hold the defendants liable for her injuries and the costs associated with treating them.

West is seeking more than $50,000 in damages.

She is being represented by attorney Attrah B. Feenane and Stephen C. Josel of the law firm Josel and Feenane P.C.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 14020295.

A Philadelphia resident is suing various businesses following an injury she claims to have suffered after tripping on a pothole. 

Sheila Burke filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 12, naming Montgomeryville Associates Inc. and various other business as defendants.

According to her filing, Burke was walking out of the Montgomery Mall at 230 Montgomery Mall, in North Wales, when she was injured. Burke says she was walking in a designated pedestrian walkway on April 27, 2012, when she stepped into a pothole or onto uneven and defective concrete, causing her to fall.

Burke goes on to say the parking lot was negligently maintained and in a defective condition which caused her to trip and fall. Burke claims she sustained serious injuries from her fall and now seeks to hold the defendants liable.

Burke is seeking more than $50,000 in damages. She is being represented by attorney Attrah B. Feenane and Stephen C. Josel of the law firm Josel and Feenane P.C.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 14020197.

Palazzo

A Pennsylvania County man is suing over claims he sustained injuries as a result of tripping at a Dave and Buster’s restaurant. 

Anthony Renzulli Jr. filed a lawsuit Feb. 12 in the Pennsylvania County District Court against Dave and Buster’s Inc. and Dave and Buster’s of Pennsylvania Inc., citing negligence.

Renzulli claims on Oct. 28, 2012, he suffered injuries when he tripped and fell down on a metal hand cart at Dave and Buster’s at 325 N. Columbus Blvd. in Philadelphia. According to the brief, the metal hand cart was sticking out and obstructing the walkway. Renzulli tripped on the cart, causing injuries to his left shoulder, knee, hand and arm, as well as his neck and back.

Renzulli is seeking damages in excess of $50,000. He is being represented in the case by attorney Nicholas L. Palazzo of Defino Law Associates P.C.

Pennsylvania County District Court Case No. 140201292.

Masterson

A Philadelphia man is suing after a table allegedly collapsed and struck him in the head.

Kareem Bishop filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 12 naming Voyeur Nightclub, Esbert LLC and Mayfield Social Club as the defendants.

According to Bishop, he was at the Voyeur Nightclub at 1221 Saint James St. in Philadelphia in October when the incident occurred. Bishop says while he was there, a folded up table or other part of the property which was not properly fastened, collapsed and struck him in the face. Bishop claims he suffered various injuries including lacerations and scarring to his forehead, cheek and lip and post concussion syndrome.

Bishop argues the defendants were negligent in maintaining the nightclub and should be held accountable for the cost of his pain and injuries.

Bishop is seeking more than $50,000 in damages.

He is being represented by attorney Thomas A. Masterson, Jr.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 140201370.

A Kentucky woman is suing the makers of the anti-coagulant drug Xarelto

W. Steven Berman

in Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas over allegations that she experienced severe internal and gastrointestinal bleeding two years ago after being prescribed the drug for atrial fibrillation.

Attorney W. Steven Berman, of the Marlton, N.J. firm Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik & Associates, filed suit earlier this month on behalf of Virginia G. Stuntebeck, who said she was admitted to the hospital in mid-February of last year, a year-and-a-half after she was prescribed the drug by her physician.

According to the mass tort claim, Xarelto, an anti-coagulant primarily used to reduce the risk of, and/or treat, stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, was routinely marketed as a “one size fits all drug.”

The makers of the drug misinformed patients and their healthcare providers as to the necessity of routinely monitoring those requiring a blood-thinning agent.

The lawsuit says that the defendants created a new pharmaceutical that is not, from a safety perspective, any better than another drug called warafin, even though Xarelto may be slightly easier to use and administer.

“The idea of this apparently easier-to-use anticoagulant evidently appealed to physicians, who were subject to extreme marketing and promotion by the Defendants, but ignores patient safety,” the complaint reads.

The marketing materials for Xarelto suggest that the drug represents a therapeutic simplification and therapeutic progress because it didn’t require patients to undergo periodic monitoring with blood tests and because there were no dietary restrictions, the suit states.

The drug companies, however, failed to address in their warning for the product the increased risk of serious and fatal bleeding, despite the fact that the information on their website originating from a clinical trial says patients taking Xarelto, compared to those taking warafin, have more gastrointestinal bleeding incidences and require more blood transfusions.

In spite of this reference, the plaintiff’s complaint states, the information is still “wholly inadequate,” because it is not conveyed in the boxed warning on the Xarelto label.

The drug was first approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in July 2011.

The lawsuit also says that the drug companies “fervently marketed Xarelto using print advertisements, online marketing on their website, and video advertisements with no regard to the accuracy and repercussions of their misleading advertising in favor of increasing sales.”

As a result of the defendants’ “intense marketing,” about 130,000 prescriptions were written for Xarelto in the U.S. during the first three months of 2012, resulting in large profits for the drugmakers, the lawsuit states.

Due to the nature of the drug, however, those prescribed Xarelto, even for a brief period of time, were at an increased risk of developing life-threatening bleeds, the suit claims.

The suit says that people taking Xarelto were told they do not require blood monitoring or frequent doctor follow-ups, even though there are concerns about the risk of stroke and blood clots while taking the pharmaceutical.

There were a reported 968 suspected “undesirable side effects” reported in Germany, including 72 deaths, in just the first eight months of 2013, according to the complaint.

“Defendants concealed their knowledge that Xarelto can cause life threatening, irreversible bleeds from the Ingesting Plaintiff, other consumers, the general public, and the medical community,” the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit contains counts of products liability, negligence, unreasonable marketing of a dangerous drug and unreasonable failure to remove the drug from the market, breach of implied and express warranties, fraud, and violation of consumer protection laws.

The plaintiff seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, along with litigation costs and attorneys’ fees.

The defendants named in the complaint include Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corp., and Johnson & Johnson Research and Development LLC.

On Monday, attorneys representing the defendants, Michael McTigue Jr. and Susan M. Sharko, of Drinker Biddle & Reath, filed a removal petition in federal court in Philadelphia seeking to have the litigation transferred to that venue on the basis of diversity of citizenship, since the plaintiff, a resident of Kentucky, and the defendants are citizens of different states.

The defense attorneys also say the amount-in-controversy requirement is satisfied since the damages are likely to exceed $75,000.

The state case ID number is 140201754 and the federal case number is 2:14-cv-01097-JHS. 

An Upper Darby resident is suing over injuries she allegedly sustained when riding the bus.

Altude Desrosiers and her husband Joel Dorsa filed their lawsuit on Feb. 12, in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, naming Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority as the sole defendant.

Desrosiers says on May 10, near Keystone Street and West Chester Pike in Upper Darby, she got onto a bus. Desrosiers goes on to say after she got onto the bus the driver accelerated then slammed on the brakes. While the bus was stopping, Desrosiers was allegedly thrown when the bus stopped suddenly and she was injured.

Desrosiers says the driver approached the intersection going way too fast and failed to look out for pedestrians or street signs. According to Desrosiers, the driver’s negligence caused her injuries and now she seeks to hold SEPTA liable.

Desrosiers is seeking more than $50,000 in damages.

She is being represented by attorney Val Pleet Wilson.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 140201348.

A woman is suing the city of Philadelphia after she allegedly injured herself as a result of a negligently maintained sidewalk.

Marsha Kearney is suing the city of Philadelphia in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Kearney filed her suit Feb. 12, and accuses Philadelphia of failing to fix a defective sidewalk.

Kearney says she was walking near the 8100 block of Bartram Avenue in Philadelphia when the accident occurred. According to Kearney, in November she was walking on the defective sidewalk which caused her to trip, fall and sustain injuries.

Kearney claims Philadelphia had actual knowledge of the defective sidewalk, but negligently allowed it to exist in the dangerous condition. Kearney says her injuries required her to get medical treatment and incur a hospital bill in excess of $1,500.

Kearney is seeking more than $50,000 in damages. She is being represented by attorney Val Pleet Wilson.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 140201308.

A Philadelphia biker is suing various city of Philadelphia entities and a construction company over injures he allegedly sustained as a result of the city’s maintenance of the roads.

Jerry Hemingway filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 12, naming Philadelphia Gas Works, Philadelphia Facilities Management Corp., the city of Philadelphia, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and Cedotal Construction Inc. as defendants.

According to Hemingway, on Oct. 2, 2012, he was riding his bike near the intersection of Ninth and Snyder streets in Philadelphia when he hit a pothole. Hemingway says Cedotal was hired to repair it and may have been responsible for excavating the concrete around a pipe.

Hemingway goes on to say when he rode over the pothole on his bike he went flying over the front handlebars. Hemingway says he fell as a result of the pothole and sustained serious injuries.

Hemingway is seeking more than $50,000 in damages. He is being represented by attorneys John F.X. Fenerty Jr. and Margaret M. Fenerty.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 140201332.

A federal judge has sent back to state court a personal injury complaint

U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick

against a New Jersey trucking company being sued by a cyclist who says he sustained “catastrophic, disabling, life-altering and permanent” injuries after being struck by a big rig in Philadelphia.

Thomas McMillan filed suit against Wilkie Trucking Inc. in late September of last year in Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas over the injuries he says he sustained following a May 16, 2013 incident in which a tractor trailer owned by the defendant ran over the plaintiff at the corner of Second and Callowhill Streets.

The defendant’s driver made a right turn and struck McMillan, who had been riding his bicycle parallel to the big rig at the time.

McMillan ended up suffering injuries to his skin, bones, muscles, nerves, tissues and ligaments, and had to spend more than two weeks recovering at Hahnemann Hospital in downtown Philadelphia, according to his complaint.

Records show that he also had to spend time at a rehabilitation facility from late May until mid-June of last year.

The defendant removed the case from Common Pleas Court to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in early December 2013, well beyond the 30-day time frame permitted for removal under procedural rules.

The plaintiff subsequently filed a motion to remand, arguing that the trucking company should have filed its removal petition within 30 days of receiving the complaint.

The trucking company then counter-argued that the removal was timely because it was filed within 30 days of being first put on notice that the action was removable; it claims to have learned damages may exceed $75,000 only after receiving the plaintiff’s answer to new matter.

In a Feb. 21 memorandum and order, U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick wrote that the defendants should have “reasonably and intelligently concluded from a fair reading of the damages alleged in the Complaint, particularly in consideration of the extent of the injuries, the multiple surgeries Plaintiff underwent, the time he spent in the hospital and in rehab, the injuries not yet determined, and the loss of earnings, that the damages sought would well exceed the $75,000 jurisdictional amount.

“Plaintiff’s Complaint is not one that sets damages equivocally,” the judge wrote. “Nor does the Complaint merely contain boilerplate language to describe Plaintiff’s injuries.”

Surrick, citing the detailed nature of the civil action, which included dates of surgeries and diagnoses of treatment that the plaintiff received, wrote that the defendants were clearly put on notice that damages sought would likely exceed the jurisdictional amount.

Randy Lovell, the truck driver, is named as a codefendant in the suit.

In the end, Surrick ruled that the defendants’ notice of removal was not timely filed, and he ordered the litigation remanded to the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.

An attorney for U.S. Airways has petitioned a federal judge to take up a

Joseph R. Fowler

personal injury case that was initiated in state court by a woman who says she sustained severe knee and other injuries after tripping over a misplaced floor mat at Philadelphia International Airport.

Lawyer Joseph R. Fowler, of the firm Fowler Hirtzel McNulty & Spaulding LLP, filed a removal notice at U.S. District Court in Philadelphia on Feb. 25 seeking to transfer a suit originally brought at Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas to the federal venue.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff Janette Anderson injured herself on Feb. 1, 2012, at about 3:30 in the afternoon while walking in the check-in area at Philadelphia International Airport.

Anderson says she fell to the ground after coming into contact with a mat that had been “crumpled on the side.”

As a result of the incident, the woman claims to have sustained injuries to her left leg and both of her knees.

Some of the injuries required Anderson to undergo surgery, the record shows.

The plaintiff says she experienced pain, discomfort and limitation of motion, all of which may be of a permanent nature.

The airport and the City of Philadelphia are also named as defendants in the litigation, which was filed by Philadelphia attorney James M. Turner, Jr. of Furia and Turner LLC.

In his removal notice, Fowler, the defense lawyer, wrote that the matter qualifies for removal under federal diversity jurisdiction because the parties are citizens of different states.

He also wrote that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, another qualifier for removal to U.S. District Court.

Fowler noted that attorneys for the city, who are also representing Philadelphia International Airport, have also consented to the case’s removal out of Common Pleas Court.

The lawsuit, which also names Anderson’s husband, John, as a codefendant, faults U.S. Airways for failing to maintain the flooring on the premises in a reasonably safe condition and other acts of negligence.

The state case ID number is 140102371 and the federal case number is 2:14-cv-01127-BMS.

A Philadelphia County woman is suing over claims she was injured by tiles falling off a building.

Ruby Foster filed a lawsuit Feb. 11 in the Philadelphia County Circuit Court against Ginark Investments & Management LP, citing negligence.

According to the complaint, on June 28, Foster was standing on the sidewalk outside a property near her own home on Etting Street when a piece of the second-floor tile and wood base of the property owned by Ginark Investments fell on Foster’s neck, shoulder and foot. Grinark is accused of failing to maintain the premises or warn the public of the dangerous condition.

Foster is seeking no more than $50,000 in damages. She is being represented in the case by attorney John M. Rodden.

Philadelphia County Circuit Court Case No. 140201089.

Vitale

A Philadelphia County woman is suing over claims she was injured on the premises of a Lord & Taylor store.

Jessica and Grant Krow filed a lawsuit Feb. 3 in the Philadelphia County Circuit Court against Turner Construction Company, Dale Construction Company, Dale Construction, Dale Corporation, Lord & Taylor LLC, National Realty and Development Corp. and NRDC Equity Partners LLC.

According to the complaint, on Oct. 16, 2012, Jessica Krow was shopping at The Lord & Taylor store on East City Avenue when she tripped on a raised frame left in the middle of the sales area and sustained injury. The defendants are accused of failing to maintain the premises during construction. Grant Krow is suing for loss of consortium.

The Krows are seeking no more than $50,000 in damages. They are being represented in the case by attorney Marc D. Vitale.

Philadelphia County Circuit Court Case No. 140201081.

Falcone

A Delaware County man is suing over claims he was attacked and injured by a group of minors near his home.

Ian Mitchell filed a lawsuit Feb. 11 in the Philadelphia County Circuit Court against Shane Aldridge, a minor, and Sarah Moors as guardian of Aldridge at the time of the incident, Craig Brian Dellapolla Jr., a minor, and Craig and Collette Dellapolla, also known as Collette Higney, as guardians of Dellapolla, Jared Hunt, a minor, and Lynn Potter, as guardian of Hunt, Brandon Nguyen, a minor, and Carrie Donnelly as guardian of Nguyen, Michael Serody, a minor, and Laura and Florence Serody, as guardians of Serody, Dwight Wyli Jr., a minor, and Nicole Gamble as guardian of Wyli, Norcroft Corporation, Merton Price Incorporation and Kenneth Hurwitz.

According to the complaint, on March 31, 2012, Mitchell noticed smoke coming from the wooded area behind his house in Folcroft and when he went to investigate he encountered the defendant minors who then physically assaulted him. Mitchell says he suffered serious injuries, including a punctured lung, concussion, stab wounds and multiple fractures requiring surgery.

The defendant guardians are accused of failing to supervise the minors. The property where the incident occurred was owned by Norcroft, Merton Price and Hurwitz. They are accused of failing to supervise the property where suspicious and disorderly activities were known to occur in the past.

Mitchell is seeking more than $50,000 in damages. He is being represented in the case by attorney Craig A. Falcone of Sacchetta & Falcone.

Philadelphia County Circuit Court Case No. 140201216.

A Philadelphia County woman is suing over claims she was injured on the sidewalk outside a restaurant.

Theresa Pearson filed a lawsuit in the Philadelphia County Circuit Court on Feb. 11 against the city of Philadelphia, Super China Restaurant and Kent and Leanne Heng, citing premises liability.

According to the complaint, on April 16, 2012, Pearson was walking on the sidewalk outside Super China Restaurant, owned by the Hengs, when she slipped on the uneven sidewalk and sustained injuries to her hand and spine.

Pearson is seeking no more than $50,000 in damages. She is being represented in the case by attorney Kenneth S. Saffren.

Philadelphia County Circuit Court Case No. 140201091.

A Philadelphia County man is suing over claims he was injured when his scooter struck a hole in the street.

Samuel Ahmad filed a lawsuit Feb. 11 in the Philadelphia County Circuit Court against Comcast, P.E.C.O., P.G.W., the city of Philadelphia, Verizon Pennsylvania Inc., Philadelphia Water Department, Temple University and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

According to the complaint, on May 22, 2012, Ahmad was riding a Taizhou Scooter on 15th Street at the intersection with Montgomery Avenue in Philadelphia when he struck a hole or depression in the ground and sustained injuries to his elbow, ankle and shoulder. The defendants are accused of being responsible for maintaining the street in this location.

Ahmad is seeking no more than $50,000 in damages. He is being represented in the case by attorney Elizabeth A. Savitt.

Philadelphia County Circuit Court Case No. 140201082.