Pennsylvania Premises Liability Lawyer

Pennsylvania has not abolished the common-law entrant categories the way some states have. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has adopted the Restatement (Second) of Torts formulations, and the duty a possessor of land owes turns on which category you fall into. This is the first thing I determine in any premises intake, because it dictates everything after it.

Invitees — the highest duty

An invitee is someone on the land for a purpose connected to the possessor's business, or someone on land held open to the public. Customers in a grocery store, patrons in a restaurant, tenants and their guests in the common areas of an apartment complex, patients in a medical office, and shoppers in a mall parking lot are all invitees.

The duty owed to an invitee is set out in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343, adopted in Pennsylvania: a possessor is liable for physical harm caused by a condition on the land if, but only if, the possessor (a) knows of or by the exercise of reasonable care would discover the condition and should realize it involves an unreasonable risk of harm to invitees, (b) should expect that invitees will not discover or realize the danger or will fail to protect themselves against it, and (c) fails to exercise reasonable care to protect them against the danger.

The critical phrase is "by the exercise of reasonable care would discover." For invitees, the possessor has an affirmative duty to inspect. It is not a defense that nobody noticed the puddle if a reasonable inspection routine would have found it. That is why sweep logs, inspection schedules, and the corporate designee's testimony about whether the schedule was actually followed are the center of gravity in my discovery plan.

Licensees — a lower duty

A licensee is present with permission but for their own purposes rather than the possessor's — a social guest is the classic example. Under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 342, the possessor is liable only for conditions they actually know or have reason to know about, where they should expect the licensee will not discover the danger, and where they fail to make it safe or warn. Notably, there is no duty to inspect for the benefit of a licensee. If nobody at the property knew the deck board was rotted, a licensee generally has no claim.

Trespassers — the lowest duty

To an undiscovered trespasser, a possessor owes essentially only a duty to refrain from willful or wanton misconduct. The duty rises where the possessor knows or has reason to know trespassers regularly enter a particular part of the land. Children are treated separately under the attractive-nuisance doctrine of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 339, adopted in Pennsylvania, which is why unfenced pools, construction sites, and abandoned structures generate viable claims for injured children where an adult would have none.

Open and obvious conditions — § 343A

Even for invitees, the duty has a limit. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343A provides that a possessor is not liable for harm caused by a known or obvious danger unless the possessor should anticipate the harm despite the obviousness. That exception is where most well-prepared premises cases live: a store that funnels every customer through the only entrance available, a stairway with no alternative route, or a parking lot where the ice is unavoidable if you want to reach the door. Establishing the anticipation-of-harm exception with layout evidence and photographs is often the difference between surviving summary judgment and not.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Carrender v. Fitterer, 469 A.2d 120 (Pa. 1983), is still the case both sides cite on this point. It is worth understanding exactly what it holds: the plaintiff parked next to an isolated patch of ice she saw and appreciated, when other spaces were available, and the Court held the danger was known and obvious and no duty was breached. What defense counsel usually leaves out is that the holding is grounded in the availability of a safe alternative and the plaintiff's actual appreciation of the risk. Where there was no alternative, or where the hazard was not appreciable, Carrender does not resolve the case.

Slip and fall

Liquid on a hard floor — tracked-in rain, a produce-department spill, a leaking cooler, a freshly waxed surface, an overflowing restroom. The proof problem is always notice. I want the sweep log, the interval between the last documented inspection and the fall, the surveillance footage covering the period before the fall (not just the fall itself), and the prior-incident history for that location. Footage showing a hazard sitting unattended for twenty minutes ends the notice argument permanently, and it is gone within weeks if nobody demands it.

Trip and fall

Raised sidewalk slabs, unmarked single steps, defective or missing handrails, non-compliant riser heights, torn carpet, unsecured mats, extension cords across walkways, and poorly lit stairwells. These are usually stronger cases than slip-and-falls because the defect is structural and permanent — it has been there long enough that constructive notice is nearly automatic, and it can be measured against a published standard. I have an architect or a safety engineer measure riser and tread dimensions, handrail height and graspability, and lighting levels against the applicable code edition and ASTM standards. Pennsylvania courts have applied a trivial-defect concept to very minor sidewalk irregularities, but whether a defect is trivial is generally a jury question when the surrounding circumstances — lighting, traffic, distraction — make it dangerous.

Inadequate maintenance and structural defects

Collapsing decks and porches, rotted stair treads, failing railings, ceiling collapses, and building-code violations in rental housing. In landlord-tenant cases the lease and the maintenance-request history are the case: a documented, ignored repair request converts a negligence claim into a very difficult one for the defense to try. Where an unpermitted or non-conforming renovation caused the failure, the contractor and sometimes the municipality's inspection records come into play.

Negligent security

When someone is assaulted, robbed, shot, or otherwise attacked on commercial property — an apartment complex, a hotel, a parking garage, a bar, a shopping center — the property owner can be liable for failing to provide security reasonably proportionate to a foreseeable risk. Pennsylvania follows Restatement (Second) of Torts § 344 for possessors of land held open to the public, and the analysis turns on foreseeability. I build that with police call-for-service data for the address and the immediate area, prior incident reports, tenant complaints, and comparison of the site's security measures — lighting, camera coverage and whether the cameras actually recorded, access control, courtesy patrols — against industry practice for a property with that history. These cases produce catastrophic injuries and fatalities, and they often involve wrongful death claims.

Swimming pool incidents

Drownings and near-drownings at apartment complexes, hotels, community pools, and private residences. The recurring issues are unfenced or non-self-latching gates, absent or untrained lifeguards where staffing was represented, missing depth markings and no-diving signage, defective or non-compliant drain covers, and unmaintained water clarity that delays rescue. Pennsylvania's Department of Health public bathing place regulations set enforceable standards for public pools, and violations are powerful evidence. Where a child gains access to a residential or unsecured pool, the attractive-nuisance analysis under Restatement § 339 applies even though the child was technically trespassing.

Dog bites on the property

Dog attacks have their own statutory framework in Pennsylvania and I handle them as a separate practice — see Pennsylvania dog bite claims for the strict-liability medical recovery, the severe-injury threshold for pain and suffering, and the dangerous-dog history analysis. What belongs on this page is the premises overlay: where the attack happens in the common area of a rental property, or where a landlord knew of a dangerous dog and had the ability to require its removal, the landlord's liability is a premises question layered on top of the owner's Dog Law liability, and it frequently reaches a much larger commercial policy.

Elevator and escalator incidents

Mis-leveling elevators that create a trip hazard at the threshold, doors that close on passengers, free-fall and sudden-stop events, escalator entrapment and sudden stops, and missing comb plates or handrail failures. These are hybrid cases: the building owner has a non-delegable duty of care regarding equipment in common use, and the maintenance company has a separate contractual and negligence exposure. The maintenance contract, the service and callback history for that specific unit, and the state elevator inspection records under the Department of Labor and Industry elevator program are the first documents I request. A pattern of repeat callbacks for the same fault before the incident is the single most valuable document in these files.

If you were hurt on property owned by a municipality, a school district, a transit authority, a housing authority, or the Commonwealth, the ordinary rules are replaced by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act and the Sovereign Immunity Act, and the deadlines are far shorter than the two-year statute of limitations.

• Six-month notice. Written notice of the claim must generally be given to the government entity within six months of the injury (42 Pa. C.S. § 5522). Missing it can bar an otherwise strong claim outright. This is the single most common way a viable municipal premises case is lost.
• Narrow immunity exceptions. Recovery is possible only within enumerated exceptions. For premises claims the relevant ones are typically the real property exception, the sidewalks exception, the streets exception, and the utility service facilities exception — each with its own conditions and its own body of appellate law about what falls inside it.
• Damages caps. Recovery against a local agency is capped at $500,000 in the aggregate (42 Pa. C.S. § 8553(b)), and against the Commonwealth at $250,000 per plaintiff and $1,000,000 in the aggregate (42 Pa. C.S. § 8528(b)). Non-economic damages against a local agency are further limited by statute.
• Abutting owners. Many Pennsylvania municipalities shift sidewalk maintenance and repair responsibility to the abutting property owner by ordinance. That frequently produces a private defendant with private insurance alongside — or instead of — the capped municipal claim, which is why the ordinance is one of the first things I pull.

If there is any chance a government entity owned or controlled the property where you fell, treat six months as your real deadline and call immediately.

Not documenting the hazard while it exists

The hazard will be gone within minutes and the video within weeks. If you can, photograph the condition from multiple distances and angles before anyone cleans it, include something for scale, photograph the lighting and the full path of travel, and photograph your footwear. Get the names of witnesses and any employee who responded. This one step changes more premises outcomes than anything a lawyer does later.

Not reporting the fall, or reporting it and never getting a copy

Report it to a manager and ask for the incident report number. Do not sign anything and do not give a recorded statement. If you leave without reporting, the defense will argue the fall did not happen there — and in a surprising number of files, that argument works.

Suing the wrong entity — or only one of several

The sign on the building is not the defendant. A retail fall can involve a property owner, a tenant operating company, a property management company, a janitorial contractor, and a snow-removal contractor, with the duty allocated among them by lease and service contract. I identify the record owner through county records, pull the lease and vendor agreements in discovery, and join everyone with a plausible share before the limitations period runs. A release signed with one defendant before the others are identified can end the case.

Missing a deadline

Two years from the date of injury for most claims under 42 Pa. C.S. § 5524, but six months' written notice for a government entity under 42 Pa. C.S. § 5522, and short contractual notice provisions in some commercial leases and event waivers. Minors' claims are tolled to age 18. The Pennsylvania statute of limitations FAQ covers the exceptions in detail — but treat the shortest applicable deadline as the real one.

Gaps in treatment

A four-week gap between the emergency department visit and the first follow-up is the first thing a defense adjuster highlights. If you are hurt, treat consistently and tell every provider that the injury came from the fall, on the day you first see them. Records that first mention a fall six weeks later invite a causation fight you should not have to have.

Posting about it

Assume every public post, photo, and check-in will be pulled and shown to a jury out of context. A single photograph at a family event, taken on a good day, has done more damage to premises claims in my experience than any defense medical examination.

Premises cases reward speed and preparation, and they punish volume practices. The firms that advertise heavily for slip-and-falls tend to send a letter of representation, wait for records, and submit a demand — and then wonder why the carrier offered a nuisance number. The carrier offered a nuisance number because nobody ever asked for the video, the sweep log, or the snow-removal contract, and the file contains no evidence of notice.

I keep my caseload small enough to send preservation letters in the first week and to visit the site myself. I take the corporate designee deposition personally, because the questions that establish whether an inspection policy was actually followed are follow-up questions, not a script. Where the case needs an engineer, an architect, a human-factors expert, a security consultant, or a life-care planner, I retain them and advance the cost.

I will also tell you honestly when a case is weak. A genuinely open and obvious hazard with an available safe alternative, no notice evidence, and no video is a hard case in Pennsylvania, and you deserve to hear that in week one rather than after two years of expense. When I do take a case, I take it intending to try it.

Everything is on a contingency fee. There is no attorney fee unless I recover for you, and I advance the litigation costs. You may be responsible for certain case costs and expenses in addition to the fee, as explained in your written fee agreement. If a case calls for resources or expertise beyond my firm, I bring in co-counsel and put the fee arrangement in writing before you agree to anything. More about my background and how I work.

Where I handle premises cases. Property claims follow population and foot traffic, so most of my premises docket comes from Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Harrisburg, and Scranton. I also file countywide in Philadelphia County, Allegheny County, and Montgomery County, where venue, jury pool, and the local practice on summary judgment in open-and-obvious cases differ enough to matter.

If you were hurt on someone else's property, call now. The surveillance footage that proves your case is on a retention loop that is already running, and if a government entity is involved you may have six months rather than two years. Tell me where it happened and what you remember, and I will tell you within one conversation whether there is a case worth pursuing — or request a free case review and I will call you.