Press

This article appeared in the Pennsylvania Record on October 5, 2023, written by Nicholas Malfitano. Click here to read it on the Legal Newsline site.

PHILADELPHIA – A Philadelphia Parking Authority officer is suing ride share company Lyft, a separate vehicle provider and a Lyft driver, nearly two years after an altercation ensued where the driver allegedly sprayed the plaintiff in the face with mace.

Jacqueline Gallagher filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sept. 26 versus Lyft, Inc. and Flexdrive Services, LLC (both c/o CT Corporation System) of Harrisburg, plus Yolanda Medley of Philadelphia and ABC Companies 1-5.

“On Nov. 18, 2021, plaintiff Gallagher was employed as an officer by the Philadelphia Parking Authority and, on that date, was enforcing parking laws at and around the Philadelphia International Airport. Defendant Medley was operating the aforementioned ride share vehicle, with Lyft placard displayed, to transport Lyft customers, for a fee, to and from the Philadelphia International Airport. Plaintiff Gallagher was in the course and scope of her duties as a Philadelphia Parking Authority Officer, patrolling the roads and parking areas in and around the Philadelphia International Airport,” the suit states. 

“On Nov. 18, 2021, at approximately 9:30 a.m., defendant Medley stopped the aforementioned rideshare vehicle, for the purpose of awaiting a Lyft customer request for a ride from the Philadelphia International Airport. The location where defendant Medley stopped the ride share vehicle was a prohibited area. Plaintiff Gallagher, in furtherance of her duties as a Philadelphia Parking Authority officer, pulled alongside the stopped ride share vehicle and informed defendant Medley that the rideshare vehicle had to be moved out of the prohibited area. Defendant Medley was initially non-cooperative but eventually moved the ride share vehicle out of the prohibited area and then began driving the roads in and around the Philadelphia International Airport while awaiting a Lyft customer request for a ride.”

The suit continues that the plaintiff, Gallagher, resumed her patrol and, in doing so, came to stop at a red traffic light next to the aforementioned ride share vehicle operated by defendant Medley.

“Defendant Medley, upon seeing plaintiff Gallagher, stopped at the same traffic light, began screaming obscenities at plaintiff Gallagher. Defendant Medley, then produced a canister of mace and/or pepper spray and pointed it at the plaintiff. Defendant Medley, knew, or should have known, that pointing a canister of mace and/or pepper spray at the face of the plaintiff created a high-degree risk of the canister discharging and causing injury to the plaintiff. Said canister did, in fact, discharge a chemical irritant, believed to be mace or pepper spray, at close range, into the face and eyes of plaintiff Gallagher,” the suit says.

“Defendant Medley then drove off in the aforementioned ride share vehicle without rendering aid to plaintiff or calling for help for the plaintiff. As a direct and proximate result of defendants’ carelessness, negligence and recklessness, the plaintiff suffered significant injuries including: Burning and irritation of the face, eyes, ears, scalp and hand; Impaired vision; Periorbital headaches; Eye pressure; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Anxiety; Mental and emotional pain and suffering; Physical pain and suffering; Loss of life’s pleasures, past, present and future; Medical care expenses past, present and future; Psychological care expenses, past, present and future and other physical, ophthalmological and psychological injuries, the full extent of which is yet to be determined and some or all of which may be permanent in nature.”

For multiple counts of vicarious liability, negligent hiring, supervision, retention and entrustment, negligence, the plaintiff is seeking damages, jointly and severally, for sums in excess in excess of the jurisdictional amount requiring submission to arbitration, in compensatory and punitive damages, interest, cost and delay damages, pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 238 and brings this action recover same,

The plaintiff is represented by Kevin M. Durkan of Fritz & Bianculli, in Philadelphia.

The defendants have not yet obtained legal counsel. 

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 230902696

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com