Pittsburgh wants to pay engineering consultant up to $140K as city fights Fern Hollow Bridge lawsuit

A year ago, Pittsburgh officials said they wanted to settle litigation by victims of the Fern Hollow Bridge collapse for the maximum $500,000 allowed by law.

But not only has the city not paid the victims a cent, it is seeking approval to spend up to $140,000 on a consultant as it fights the lawsuit.

On Tuesday, City Council will be briefed on a request to pay that amount to Exponent Inc. for “professional engineering services” as the Gainey administration defends the city against the lawsuit.

That amount has ballooned from the $40,000 council had approved in June.

Peter Giglione, an attorney who represents one of the victims in the bridge collapse, questions why the city is continuing to throw money at the litigation “involving a structurally deficient bridge, owned by them, that collapsed while people were on it.

“It doesn’t make legal or financial sense,” he told TribLive.

Mayor Ed Gainey’s administration did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Earlier this year, TribLive reported settlement efforts had fallen apart.

The 447-foot-long Fern Hollow bridge, connecting Regent Square and Squirrel Hill, collapsed about 6:40 a.m. on Jan. 28, 2022.

An articulated bus and four other vehicles fell about 100 feet, and another vehicle shot into the ravine below.

Several people were injured, but no one was killed.

An investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board was released in February 2024. It found the collapse could have been avoided and was the result of years of inaction by city officials, as well as a lack of oversight by state and federal officials.

In September, the Gainey administration announced plans to resolve the lawsuit filed by those injured.

“We’re accepting our full responsibility to the court and then initiating a different process for assigning which of the plaintiffs gets what portion of that,” Deputy Mayor Jake Pawlak said at the time.

City Council voted unanimously on Sept. 24 to provide a total payment of $500,000 — the statutory maximum in Pennsylvania.

The money would be divided among the victims based on the severity of their injuries.

The victims and their attorneys objected, and in January, Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Philip Ignelzi rejected the city’s offer.

By February, the settlement had collapsed. Lawyers representing the victims were angered that the city asked the judge to use some of the settlement money to defray its legal expenses.

Lawyer Jason Matzus represents Clinton Runco, a dentist injured in the collapse. Matzus said it doesn’t make sense for the city to seek to recoup its costs because it is being represented by its own solicitor’s office.

At a hearing in the case, Matzus recounted, Assistant County Solicitor John Doherty said his time is worth money.

“‘The time I spend on this case takes me away from other cases,’” Matzus said Doherty told him. “The flaw with that logic is, he’s a salaried employee. His salary is fixed.”

Asking council to approve an additional $140,000 — almost 30% of their total possible exposure — is ludicrous, Matzus said.

“It’s perverse that the city’s approach has been to increase spending,” he said. “$140,000 is going to get lit on fire in litigation they have absolutely no way of winning.”

Giglione represents bus driver Daryl Luciani, who was injured in the collapse. Giglione said the city misled the public about its actual plan.

“When they’re rightfully settling other civil cases for millions of dollars involving injuries and deaths, I don’t see them playing this game,” Giglione said. “So why are they doing it here?”

ity Councilwoman Erika Strassburger said she expects to be briefed during executive session on Tuesday about the need for the $140,000 in consulting fees and how and why the case is proceeding.

She thinks the city should settle the lawsuit.

“I’d like to move past this,” she said. “It’s been nearly (four) years. We can continue to spend money and fight this for longer, although I’m not confident taking this through any additional process will benefit the city — nor will it benefit the victims.”