Case Law Alerts
Superior Court Upholds Nonsuit in Slip‑and‑Fall Case Involving Visible Wet‑Floor Warnings
Pitts v. Sonesta Int’l Hotels Corp., 2026 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1619 (Pa. Super. June 23, 2026)
July 20, 2026
In a non-precedential opinion, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the entry of compulsory nonsuit in a slip-and-fall negligence case when evidence of placement of wet floor signs established adequate warnings to business invitees.
The plaintiff filed negligence claims against the defendant hotel after she fell on a wet floor in the foyer/vestibule between the hotel lobby and an adjacent parking garage. The evidence included security video footage that showed, prior to the incident, a hotel employee mopping the floor and placing two yellow wet floor signs. At the close of the plaintiff’s case-in-chief during a bench trial, the defendant hotel moved for entry of a compulsory suit, which the trial court granted. The plaintiff subsequently appealed and argued that the trial court committed an error of law by usurping the function of the factfinder and resolving disputed issues of material fact.
On appeal, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held there was no error or abuse of discretion by the trial court. The Superior Court reasoned the evidence established that the placement of the yellow wet floor signs were open and obvious. The Superior Court noted that the plaintiff admitted to seeing the wet-floor sign before taking her second step into the foyer (which was the step during which she fell). The Superior Court ruled “if there is anything settled in the law of negligence in Pennsylvania, it is the duty of a person to look where he is walking and to see that which is obvious.” The Superior Court further ruled there was no evidence the defendant hotel had knowledge that the wet floor signs were inadequate to warn business invitees of the danger of slippery floor. The Superior Court held there was no evidence that the defendant hotel breached its duty to the plaintiff and thus, there was no error in the trial court’s conclusion that the plaintiff failed to assert a prima facie negligence. The Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s entry of compulsory nonsuit against the plaintiff.
