Credit: Shutterstock

How far do the protections provided by a liability release stretch?

That's the central question now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Degliomini v. ESM Productions.

The justices granted allocatur in the case Jan. 28, taking up an appeal from a June 2019 decision by the Commonwealth Court, which tossed out a $500,000 verdict that had been awarded to a man who was partially paralyzed when he struck a sinkhole during the 20-mile Phillies Charities Bike Ride in 2015.

While plaintiff Anthony Degliomini had signed a liability release before the ride, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Frederica Massiah-Jackson ruled that the city could not escape liability for Degliomini's injuries. The judge denied the city's request for post-trial relief, which came after a jury awarded Degliomini and his wife $3.2 million, finding 90% liability against Philadelphia and 10% liability against the event organizer. Massiah-Jackson ultimately reduced the verdict to the $500,000 statutory damages cap for awards against state and political subdivisions.

"When the city attempted to transfer the risks to Mr. Degliomini it had no incentive to ensure safety for the charity bike ride by properly repairing the hole on Pattison Avenue and it abdicated its duty of care," Massiah-Jackson wrote in an opinion explaining her decision, adding that the release would "contravene public policy." "It was an attempt to exculpate the city from liability for conduct that violates its duty to the public."

Massiah-Jackson pointed to Section 5-500 of the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter—which addresses the design, construction and maintenance of city roadways—as establishing a standard of care on behalf of the city that could not be waived.

But a three-judge panel of the Commonwealth Court unanimously reversed Massiah-Jackson's ruling, rejecting the public policy argument and agreeing with the city's assertion that the liability waiver was valid and enforceable.

The waiver, Judge Christine Fizzano Cannon wrote for the appellate panel, "was a private agreement between Degliomini and various entities involved with the ride."

"Degliomini was under no obligation to agree to the release or participate in the ride," Fizzano Cannon said. "The release did not concern an essential service but instead merely governed a voluntary recreational activity. Additionally, because the ride was a private event that was to occur on public roads, city's involvement with the ride was akin to that of a private race track owner hosting a race. Therefore, no contravention of public policy occurred when Degliomini voluntarily agreed to absolve city of liability for the use of its roads for this specific recreational activity."

Cannon, joined by Judge Anne Covey and Senior Judge Bonnie Brigance Leadbetter, also said the trial court's reliance on Section 5-500 was "misplaced."

Cannon said Section 5-500 is merely "an organizational section that mandates the creation of the Department of Streets and delineates the functions of the department upon its creation, which are to include the design, construction, repair and maintenance of city's streets."

"In establishing the Department of Streets, Section 5-500 provides no standard of care or guidelines for how the department must accomplish its road repair duties," Cannon said. "Certainly, the Home Rule Charter established an obligation to maintain city's streets that would be carried out by the Department of Streets. However, the department's and, therefore, city's, duty of care to repair streets arising under Section 5-500 was no different than any common law duty of reasonable care, which may be waived."

The Supreme Court, in its order granting allocatur, agreed to address two issues on appeal: "Can the city of Philadelphia contractually immunize itself from tort liability for breaching a mandatory public safety duty which has existed for decades under common law, and which is now codified and/or imposed under Pennsylvania's Tort Claims Act and Philadelphia's Home Rule Charter? 2. Does the Phillies' exculpatory release immunize the city from liability for negligently repairing its road hazard before the parties drafted or entered the release, and long before the event covered by the release?"

A spokesman for the city declined to comment on the allocatur grant.

The Degliominis' attorney, Villari, Lentz & Lynam attorney Leonard Villari, said he was unable to comment on pending litigation.