ShareThis Page
Allegheny

Lawsuit says Pittsburgh International Airport escalator malfunction caused knee fracture

Theresa Clift
| Wednesday, March 28, 2018, 4:30 p.m.
Travelers walk through Pittsburgh International Aiport's ticketing area on Jan. 19, 2018.
Tribune-Review
Travelers walk through Pittsburgh International Aiport's ticketing area on Jan. 19, 2018.

A Pittsburgh man is suing the Allegheny County Airport Authority because he said he fractured his knee getting off a malfunctioning escalator at Pittsburgh International Airport in November.

According to the complaint, filed this month in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Earsell Fitzgerald was riding the escalator down to the train after getting off a flight from Houston.

As Fitzgerald was standing on the escalator, one of the stairs came apart from the escalator creating a “gaping hole and uneven surface,” the complaint said.

The hole caused Fitzgerald to fall to the ground and hit his knee, fracturing it, the complaint said.

The injury has affected Fitzgerald's ability to work and resulted in lost wages and benefits, the complaint said. He needed two surgeries as a result, and will need at least one more.

The authority does not comment on pending litigation, said Bob Kerlik, airport spokesman.

The lawsuit also names Schindler Elevator Corp. as a defendant — a company based in Switzerland with a U.S. headquarters in Morristown, N.J.

The company did not respond to a request for comment.

Theresa Clift is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-380-5669, tclift@tribweb.com or via Twitter @tclift.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me