HomeMy WebLinkAbout92-1746 CivilROBERT H. CULLEY, Executor of
the Estate of Elizabeth Ann
Culley, deceased; and
ROBERT H. CULLEY, in his own
right and as Trustee ad litem
for Jessica L. Culley and
Katrina M. Culley, minors
also entitled to share in the
damages resulting from the
wrongful death of said
Elizabeth Ann Culley,
Plaintiffs
V.
NORTH MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP, and :
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, :
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, :
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF OMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -
NO. 1746 CIVIL V992
IN RE: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF
BEFORE BAYLEY and OLER, JJ.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 2[5.tday of October, 1992, upon
the Preliminary Objections of Defendant Pennsylvan
Transportation, in the nature of a demurrer, ani
submitted on the matter, the Preliminary Objection
The said Defendant is given 20 days within which tc
BY THE COURT,
WC4X�
J� Wesley Oler
C. Roy Weidner, Jr., Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
James M. Sheehan, Esq.
Attorney for Defendant
North Middleton Township
nsideration of
Department of
of the briefs
are DISMISSED.
file an Answer.
. L 'J
James R. Moyles, Esq.
Senior Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania
:rc
ROBERT H. CULLEY, Executor of
the Estate of Elizabeth Ann
Culley, deceased; and
ROBERT H. CULLEY, in his own
right and as Trustee ad litem
for Jessica L. Culley and
Katrina M. Culley, minors
also entitled to share in the
damages resulting from the
wrongful death of said
Elizabeth Ann Culley, .
Plaintiffs .
V.
NORTH MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP, and :
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, :
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, :
Defendants
Oler, J.
IN THE COURT OF gOMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTT, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION -
NO. 1746 CIVIL 1992
IN RE: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF
BEFORE BAYLEY and OLER, JJ.
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
At issue in the present case are a defe
objections in the nature of a demurrer to a c
,'s preliminary
aint. For the
reasons stated in this Opinion, the preliminary objlections will be
dismissed.
Factual background. This case is a wron ful death and
survival action based upon negligence, arising out of a 1990
automobile accident in North Middleton Township, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania, in which Plaintiffs' decedent was fatally injured.
Named as defendants in the 1992 action are North Middleton Township
and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, t being alleged
that the accident resulted from a dangerous roadway. The
Preliminary Objections at issue have been filed b the Department
No. 1746 Civil 1992
of Transportation.
Liability of the Department with respect to
dangerous roadway is predicated upon the alle
the allegedly
tion that "at
relevant times PennDot exercised jurisdiction over said road"' --
a road presently owned by the Township.' Acts of negligence
alleged in the Complaint include failure to provide''a safe roadway
for drivers, failure to maintain sufficient sig t distance to
enable
drivers
to exit
their driveways,
posting of
speed limit in
excess
of that
which
was safe for the
available
ight distance,
failure to construct and maintain sufficient berm, construction
and maintenance of the highway with dangerous cu'ves and width,
failure to maintain proper highway grades and elev tions, failure
to properly post for speed limits and driveways, and failure to
notice and remedy public risks from the highway co'dition.3
Defendant's Preliminary Objections in the f
assert that the road in question "was turned bac}
Middleton Township in 1985,i4 that no current duty
the road on the part of the Department thus exis
1 Plaintiffs' Complaint, paragraph 8.
' id.
3 Id.
4 Defendant's Preliminary Objections, paragr
5 Id., 7.
2
of a demurrer
over to North
ith respect to
, 5 and that a
aph 6.
No. 1746 Civil 1992
statute of repose contained in Section 5536 of the Judicial Code6
excludes the possibility of liability for acts or omissions prior
to 1985.' Attached to Defendant's brief are documents purporting
to show a transfer of control of the road to the ownship as of
December 31, 1984.8
Statement of Law. With respect to a preliminary objection in
the nature of a demurrer, it has been said that "[t]he question
presented by a demurrer is whether, on the facts averred in the
complaint, the law says with certainty that n recovery is
possible." Vattimo v. Lower Bucks Hospital, Inc. 502 Pa. 241,
244, 465 A.2d 1231, 1232 (1983). "Any doubts a to whether a
demurrer should be sustained should be resolved against the moving
party." David v. Commonwealth, 143 Pa. Commw. 161 169, 598 A.2d
642, 647 (1991). Thus, in ruling on a preliminary o jection in the
form of a demurrer, the court must sustain the demu rer only if it
finds that "a cause of action [has not been] prope ly made out in
the complaint ... and ... the plaintiff would be unable to state a
proper claim even on a different statement of facts." Nagy v. The
6 Act of July 9, 1976, P.L. 586, §2, as amend d, 42 Pa. C.S.
§5536.
' Defendants' Preliminary Objections, paragraph 7.
8 Memorandum of Law in Support of PrelimilLary Objections
Filed on Behalf of Defendant, Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation, attachments. Plaintiff has not conceded the
efficacy of these attachments for purposes of the instant motion.
Brief in Opposition to Defendant Commonwealth o Pennsylvania,
Department of Transportation's Preliminary Objectins 2-3.
3
No. 1746 Civil 1992
Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania, 292 Pa. Su
A.2d 701, 703 (1989).
r. 24, 27, 436
In ruling on a demurrer, a court may consider "[o]nly such
matters as arise out of [the challenged] pleading itself ..., and
the decision must be on the pleading alone. Therefore, collateral
matters may not be considered in ruling on a demurrer." 2 Goodrich
Amram 2d §1017(b):29, at 276 (1991); see Pa. R.C.P. 1028, committee
note. "A demurrer which supplies facts not in the record is known
as a 'speaking demurrer,' which is condemned." Id., at 275 (1991).
With respect to Section 5536 of the Judicial Code, the
provision states that, subject to certain except ons, "a civil
action ... brought against any person lawfully performing or
furnishing the design, planning, supervision or observation of
construction, or construction of any improvement to real property
must be commenced within 12 years after completion of construction
of such improvement to recover damages for ... [a]n deficiency in
the design, planning, supervision or observation of onstruction or
construction of the improvement [,or] ... [i]njury to the person or
for wrongful death arising out of any such def icieno: y . . . . " Act of
July 9, 1976, P.L. 586, §2, as amended, 42 Pa. C.S. §5536(a). The
statute further provides that "[i]f an injury or wrongful death
shall occur more than ten and within 12 years afte completion of
the improvement a civil action ... may be commenced
otherwise limited by [the subchapter of the
4
_thin the time
(Judicial Code
No. 1746 Civil 1992
applicable to civil actions and proceedings], but n
later than 14
years after completion of such improvement." Id , 42 Pa. C.S.
§5536(b)(1).
Application of law to facts. In view of the fact that the
attachments to the Defendant's brief regarding a transfer of
ownership of the road in question to the Township as of 1985 can
not be considered by the Court in ruling upon Defendant's demurrer,
and of the fact that the statute of repose relied up n by Defendant
refers to time periods in excess of those which ran from 1985 to
the accident and from 1985 to commencement of the action, it can
not be said that the Defendant has shown the Plaint#f incapable of
maintaining a proper claim. For this reason, the ollowing Order
will be entered:
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 21st day of October, 1992, upon consideration of
the Preliminary Objections of Defendant Pennsylvani Department of
Transportation, in the nature of a demurrer, and of the briefs
submitted on the matter, the Preliminary Objections are DISMISSED.
The said Defendant is given 20 days within which to file an Answer.
BY THE COURT,
C. Roy Weidner, Jr., Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
J. Wesley Oler, Jr.
J. Wesley Oler, Jr.,
5
J.
No. 1746 Civil 1992
James M. Sheehan, Esq.
Attorney for Defendant
North Middleton Township
James R. Moyles, Esq.
Senior Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania
:rc
0