1LAW Logo

A Store's Letter Denying Responsibility After a Fall at Its Entrance in Pennsylvania

Start a free AI-assisted chat and connect with an experienced Pennsylvania attorney, with no obligation.

JV

Reviewed & verified by A. Jason Velez, Esq.*

Founding Attorney, 1LAW · Last reviewed January 2023

Legal Inquiry

Consumer Legal Issue

My wife tripped over an orange cone going into a warehouse store. She broke her hand in two places and strained a ligament in her knee, which had been replaced a few months earlier. She received a letter from the store saying it is not responsible for anything, including her medical bills.

Attorney Answer

A letter like that is the store's opening position, often written by its insurer. It is not a decision about her claim. Whether the store is responsible turns on how the cone was placed and whether it was a hazard a careful shopper would see. Those are facts, and she has two years to pursue them. Her prior knee replacement does not end a claim. It makes the medical records more important.

What decides responsibility. A store owes customers a duty concerning the condition of its premises, and an entrance is part of that. A cone is meant as a warning, but a cone placed where people walk, or hard to see as they come through the door, can itself be the hazard. Where it stood, why it was there, and how visible it was are the facts a lawyer will want, along with the store's video.

Her knee. An injury that aggravates an earlier condition, such as a knee replaced months before, can be part of a claim. But the medical records will need to separate what the replacement left her with from what the fall added. Her surgeon's records from before and after the fall are what do that.

If the store argues she should have seen the cone, Pennsylvania compares fault. Under 42 Pa.C.S. § 7102(a), she still recovers if her negligence “was not greater than the causal negligence of the defendant or defendants against whom recovery is sought” — with her damages reduced by her share.

What you can do

1. Keep the store's letter, and any other letters, together.

2. Gather her medical records for the hand and the knee, including the knee records from before the fall.

3. Write to the store asking it to keep its entrance video from the day of the fall, and its incident report.

4. Have her decline to sign anything from the store or its insurer until she has had advice.

5. Even if you are handling this yourself, you would be best served by a brief phone consultation with a local Pennsylvania attorney before you act. Most lawyers offer a short initial call at no cost, and a few minutes on your specific facts — and on how your court actually handles this — is worth more than any general guidance, including this page.

⏱ Time limits apply. Her claim must be filed within two years under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5524, which covers “An action to recover damages for injuries to the person or for the death of an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect or unlawful violence or negligence of another.” Store video is usually kept for a much shorter time.

*Attorney review is supported by AI-assisted drafting and legal research algorithms. Use of this Chat does not create an attorney-client relationship.

By using this service you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Courts & Legal Aid in Pennsylvania

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a store's letter denying responsibility end an injury claim in Pennsylvania?

No. A denial letter states the store's or its insurer's position; responsibility is decided on the evidence of the condition and how the fall happened, within the two years allowed by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5524(2).

Can you recover for an injury that worsens a prior condition?

Generally an aggravation of an existing condition can be part of a claim, but the medical evidence must distinguish the prior condition from the harm the incident added.

Does partial fault bar a fall claim in Pennsylvania?

Not unless the injured person's share is greater. 42 Pa.C.S. § 7102(a) allows recovery where the plaintiff's negligence was not greater than the defendants', with damages reduced in proportion.

Privacy Policy Terms of Use Your Privacy Choices