Recently, in Lucykanish v. Flurer, 2024 Pa. Super. Unpub. Lexis 2142, 2024 WL 4003231 (Aug. 30, 2024), the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the lower court verdict, in which the judge found in favor of the defendant based in part on plaintiff’s failure to wear her seatbelt, contributing to her own injuries. Lucykanish thus confirms that evidence of non-use of seatbelts cannot be used as evidence, for any purpose, in civil actions in Pennsylvania.
The plaintiff, Lori Lucykanish, was a passenger in the defendant’s vehicle when the defendant applied the brakes to avoid striking the car in front of him. As a result, the plaintiff sustained various injuries. At the time of the subject incident, the plaintiff had dropped her cell phone on the floor of the car and unbuckled her seatbelt to search for it. During this time, the defendant, attempting to avoid striking a car cutting in front of him, suddenly applied his brakes. The trial court found in favor of the defendant, ultimately concluding that plaintiff’s own actions, of being unrestrained by a seatbelt, does not impute negligence on the defendant.
The plaintiff filed an appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in granting summary judgement in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff further stated that the trial court failed to comply with 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 4581(e) when, in making their determination to grant summary judgement, they considered evidence that she was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of her injury.
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed. The Court agreed with the plaintiff’s claim, citing a prior holding as controlling. Gaudio v. Ford Motor Co., 2009 PA Super 102, 976 A.2d 524 (2009). In Gaudio, the Court held that the language in subsection 4581(e)
“clearly and unambiguously expresses the intent of the Legislature that evidence of non-use of seat belts should be strictly prohibited in civil actions tried in Pennsylvania courts, for any purpose. Because the highlighted language neither contains nor references any exceptions to its rule, we construe the legislative intent of the provision to be a blanket exclusion of evidence of seat belt usage in civil actions for any purpose, including to prove not only contributory negligence but also defect, causation and/or damages . . . . .”
Gaudio v. Ford Motor Co., 976 A.2d at 536 (emphasis in the original).
Here, the Court found that the trial court committed an error of law by failing to exclude evidence of plaintiff’s non-use of her seatbelt in accordance with 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 4581(e). Thus, the Court reversed the order granting summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings. The Superior Court’s decision emphasizes the fact that a defendant cannot use the plaintiff’s own failure to wear a seatbelt as a way to mitigate damages.
The Lucykanish decision can be found here.
For additional questions, please contact Conrad James Benedetto, Esq. and/or Molly Hecht, Esq.
This article was prepared by McCormick & Priore, P.C. to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is in no way intended to provide legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship. All Rights Reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of McCormick & Priore, P.C.
