A gym was not liable for a slip and fall incident when there was no evidence of actual or constructive notice.

The plaintiff slipped and fell on an unknown substance in the men’s locker room of the defendant gym. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and argued that there was no evidence that it had actual or constructive notice of any dangerous conditions in the men’s locker room at the time of the incident. Relying upon Toro v. Fitness International LLC, 150 A.3d 968 (Pa. Super. 2016), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that as there was no evidence as to what the substance was, the source of the substance, or how long the substance was present on the floor, the plaintiff failed to establish constructive notice. While the plaintiff argued that the defendant’s failure to place dry deck mats in the locker room created a dangerous condition, the district court found this argument unpersuasive. The court held that there was no evidence that there was anything particular about the floor of the locker room that required mats and that the plaintiff failed to offer an explanation as to why mats were necessary. The court further held that the plaintiff failed to establish actual notice of the substance, as there was no evidence that the defendant knew the type of spill was one that frequently occurred. Finding that the plaintiff failed to establish notice of or that the defendant created the alleged condition, the district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

^{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}