Frazier v. Commonwealth

In Frazier v. Commonwealth, 845 A.2d 253 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004), a driver was operating his vehicle when a state trooper observed him commit a traffic violation. The trooper began to pursue the vehicle, but the driver did not stop. Ultimately, the driver lost control of his vehicle and a collision occurred, which resulted in the driver's death. The driver's parents sued the PSP and the state trooper, claiming the driver's death was caused by, among other things, the willful, reckless and negligent manner in which the trooper pursued the vehicle. Relying on our Supreme Court's decision in Lindstrom v. City of Corry, 563 Pa. 579, 763 A.2d 394 (2000) (municipality and its police officers owe no common law duty of care to fleeing motorists), this Court held the PSP and its state troopers owed no duty of care to the fleeing driver. The Court also determined it was improper to rely on the language of the vehicle liability exception to immunity to create a cause of action where no common law liability existed independently. Additionally, the Court held the "emergency vehicle doctrine" in Section 3105(e) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa. C.S. 3105(e), did not create a statutory duty to a fleeing motorist where no common law duty existed. Consequently, the Court concluded the suit brought by the fleeing driver's parents was barred, and PSP and the state trooper were entitled to judgment on the pleadings. The plaintiffs' decedent was killed while fleeing from a state trooper in hot pursuit. The issue was whether the audio-visual requirements of the emergency vehicle doctrine created a cause of action based on the trooper's duty to the decedent. The Court held that the doctrine set forth in Section 3105 did not create a statutory duty to the decedent where no common law duty to a fleeing motorist previously existed. In Frazier, the plaintiffs were trying to use the statute to create a duty where none existed at common law. Instead, Frazier basically held that the statute is a shield for the operators of emergency vehicles and not a sword for litigation.