Nertavich, V. v. PPL Electric Utilities - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT VINCENT P. NERTAVICH, JR. : No. 582 EAL 2014 : : v. : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the : Order of the Superior Court : PPL ELECTRIC UTILITIES, KTA, : KTA-TATOR, INC., KTA/SET : ENVIRONMENTLA, S-E : TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ALEXANDER : ANDREW, INC., D/B/A FALLTECH, : ALEXANDER ANDREW, INC., : FALLTECH, THOMAS & BETTS CORP., : THOMAS & BETTS CORP., D/B/A OR : T/A MEYER STEEL STRUCTURES, : F/K/A I.T.T. - MEYER INDUSTRIES, : F/K/A MEYER INDUSTRIES, MEYER : STEEL STRUCTURES F/K/A I.T.T.: MEYER INDUSTRIES, F/K/A MEYER : STEEL STRUCTURES, ITT-MEYER : INDUSTRIES, MEYER INDUSTRIES, : MEYER MACHINE, INC. AND WINOLA : INDUSTRIAL, INC. : : : PETITION OF: VINCENT P. : NERTAVICH, JR. : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 14th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are: (1) In the face of the trial court’s cumulative review of, and conclusion that the record evidence of PPL’s operative control of the contractor’s work was sufficient to allow the issue of PPL’s liability to be presented to the jury, does the majority of the Superior Court panel conflict with Beil v. Telesis Construction, Inc. and §414 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts? (2) Did the majority of the Superior Court panel err in adding an element of proof for imposing liability on a property owner under §414 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts that was not contained in and is in conflict with Beil v. Telesis Construction, Inc.? [582 EAL 2014] - 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
