In Pennsylvania the jolt or jerk doctrine creates a hurdle for bus or trolley passengers to show a driver was negligent. The doctrine remains relatively unchanged since its inception over a century ago in trolley car cases. “It is well established by a long line of decisions that testimony indicating that a moving trolley car jerked suddenly or violently is not sufficient, of itself, to establish negligence in its operation.” Staller v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co., 339 Pa. 100, 103 (1940). To show negligence, the Plaintiff must prove the movement was extraordinary and not expected. Id. In recent caselaw, the doctrine has been employed by defendants at the summary judgment stage to preclude a negligence claim from making it to the jury.
In order to survive summary judgment in a jolt or jerk case (or a motion for a compulsory nonsuit), a “plaintiff must establish not only that there was a jerk or stop but that the jerk or stop was so unusual and extraordinary as to be beyond a passenger’s reasonable anticipation.” Meussner v. Port Auth., 745 A.2d 719 (Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 2000)(quoting Staller). A plaintiff can overcome the standard with evidence that other passengers were affected in an extraordinary way. A plaintiff can also show the extraordinary nature of the accident with evidence of how it happened or what effects it had. Id. The word “accident” as used in this test doesn’t require there to be a collision.
In Philadelphia these types of accidents occur all of the time. Often you will find the defendant is SEPTA but there are a variety of other common carries that this law applies to. If you have been injured on a bus, trolly or other common carrier call a Philadelphia personal injury lawyer for a free consultation.
Kind regards,
Gabriel Levin, Esquire
Philadelphia Accident Attorney and Bus Injury Lawyer
