Superior Court Re-affirms that an Adjacent Landowner Owes No Duty to Those Utilizing Roadway.

Marshall Dennehey
Contact

 

Kistler v. Dietrich, 303 A.3d 168 (Pa. Super. 2023)

The plaintiff was a motorcyclist passing by a property owned by the defendant while an auction was being held. The defendant had directed attendees to illegally park on the street to attend the auction. The plaintiff was struck by a vehicle on the crowded street and filed suit against the defendant for creating an unreasonable risk of harm to motorists through his parking instructions.

The Superior Court upheld summary judgment in the defendant’s favor, holding the defendant did not own a duty to the plaintiff “to direct traffic and monitor parking” and that the defendant “did not have any authority to control parking on public streets.”

The impact of this decision is that it expands the general principle that a property owner owes no duty to pedestrians or motorists on adjoining roadways to include situations in which the property owner can be argued to have created a hazard through their directions to visitors and business invitees.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Marshall Dennehey | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Marshall Dennehey
Contact
more
less

Marshall Dennehey on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide