Wade Clark Mulcahy LLP

In Robinson v. Seven Springs Mountain Resort, Inc., Plaintiff Robinson was a business invitee at Seven Springs, playing a round of disc golf when she slipped on a steep slope consisting of loose gravel, and fractured her ankle. Seven Springs field a Motion for Summary Judgment arguing that Robinson “failed to present prima facie evidence that Seven Springs owed a duty of care to her because the condition of the hillside was obvious.” See 2024 WL 2955263, at 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. June 12, 2024). The trial court granted Seven Springs' Motion for Summary Judgment, stating  “the natural condition was known and obvious” since Ms. Robinson knew “she was traversing a steep slope with patches of rocky and loose dirt.” Id. at 3.

On appeal, the court reversed Seven Springs' Motion for Summary Judgment, holding that there was a question of material fact as to whether the hazard was open and obvious. The Court explained that, based on the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343A, “Seven Springs is 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 discovered, or fail to protect himself against it.” Id. at 5. The Court explained that Robinson’s testimony about the condition of the loose rocks was not “unquestionably obvious.” Id. at 4. Lastly, the Court reasoned that Seven Springs could anticipate that “any invitee's attention may be distracted while playing disc golf and attempting to retrieve discs mid-play.” Id. at *5.