Superior Court of Pennsylvania Held that Landowner Was Not Relieved of Its Duty of Care for Open and Obvious Dangers When It Should Have Expected a Business Invitee to Be Distracted

The plaintiff, a business invitee, broke her ankle while playing disc golf at the defendant’s disc golf course. While walking to retrieve her disc, the plaintiff fell when she slipped on a steep slope that contained loose gravel in the grass. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and argued it did not owe any duty of care to the plaintiff since the condition of the hillside was an obvious condition. In granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the trial court held that the alleged condition was a natural condition that was known and obvious.

On appeal, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania determined that the alleged condition of loose rocks beneath the grass on the slope was not unquestionably obvious. Relying upon Jones v. Three Rivers Management Corporation, 394 A.2d 546 (Pa. 1978), the Superior Court held that the question of material fact as to whether the hazard was open and obvious was a question for the jury to determine. The court further held that, even if the condition was open and obvious, the defendant was still not entitled to summary judgment. Based upon Section 343A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, the Superior Court reasoned that the defendant was “not relieved of its duty of care for open and obvious dangers when it has reason to expect that the invitee’s attention may be distracted, so that he will not discover what is obvious or will forget what he has discovery, or fail to protect himself against it.” The court ruled it was reasonable to anticipate that an invitee’s attention may be distracted while playing disc golf and attempting to retrieve discs mid-play. The Superior Court reversed the trial court’s order and remanded for further proceedings.