On
March 16, 2020
, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declined to review Plaintiff, Patrick Pearson’s appeal of an October 2019 Pennsylvania Superior Court decision in Pearson v. Philadelphia Eagles, LLC et. al., Docket No. 548 EAL 2020 (a case not handled by Zarwin Baum). In Pearson v. Philadelphia Eagles, LLC et. al., the Superior Court addressed to what extent a premises owner was required to protect business invitees from criminal acts committed by third parties. Pearson v. Phila. Eagles, LLC, 220 A.3d 1154 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
On December 14, 2014, the Plaintiff, Patrick Pearson, a Cowboys fan accompanied a friend to an Eagles v. Cowboys game at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. At halftime, the Plaintiff and his friend entered the rest room. As the Plaintiff approached the urinal, another patron walked up to him, grabbed his Dallas Cowboys knit cap, and threw it into a urinal. The patron that threw Plaintiff’s cap into the urinal then lunged at him, and somehow the Plaintiff ended up on the floor. Plaintiff’s friend fought through the crowd to find the Plaintiff on the floor surrounded by 4 or 5 individuals holding him down, twisting his leg, and choking him. At some point, someone in the crowd yelled “security” and the assailants fled. When the Plaintiff got up, he noticed that his right foot was bent at a 90-degree angle.
At trial, the Plaintiff argued that the Eagles breached their duty of care over to him by failing to have security guards in the bathrooms, because he argued that it was foreseeable that he could have been assaulted in the bathroom by other fans. By contrast, the Eagles argued that the mere fact that they did not place security guards in the bathroom did not establish that the security program offered was in fact negligent. After a jury trial, the Eagles were found to be 50% liable for Plaintiff’s right ankle fracture, the Eagles security contractor was found to be 30% liable, and the Plaintiff was found to be 20% comparatively at fault. The jury awarded the Plaintiff $700,000 in damages.
On appeal, the Superior Court ruled in favor of the Eagles. Specifically, the Court relied on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling in Feld v. Merriam, 485 A.2d 742 (Pa. 1984). In Feld v. Merriam, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that landlords could be liable for the criminal acts of third persons if the landlord’s security program was operated negligently. However, the Superior Court clarified that business owners must have some notice of criminal acts of third parties through past experience in order for liability to be imposed on the basis of a negligently administered security program.
Thus, the Court held that the Plaintiff could not recover on the mere basis that the Eagles did not place security guards in the bathrooms of Lincoln Financial Field, because the Eagles had no past experience of violent assaults in the bathroom. Therefore, the Superior Court reversed the trial court, and held that the Plaintiff had failed to make out a negligence claim because he had submitted insufficient evidence that the Eagles had notice of violent assaults in the bathrooms of Lincoln Financial Field.
This case reflects as an important reminder for business owners, and their insurance carriers. Business owners’ security programs are not legally obligated to protect invitees from every possible third-party criminal act. Rather, business owners’ security programs must protect business invitees from foreseeable third-party criminal acts. If business owners have notice from past experiences of criminal activity in a particular area of their premises, they should amend their security programs to protect invitees from criminal acts in those areas.
