# Atcovitz v. Gulph Mills Tennis Club, Inc.

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 20, 2002 · 571 Pa. 580

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737223

## Case

- **Full name:** Jerry ATCOVITZ and Roslyn Atcovitz, H/W, v. GULPH MILLS TENNIS CLUB, INC, JKST, Inc. and Gulph Mills/JKST Tennis Club, Inc., Lafayette Ambulance Rescue Squad I. Appeal of Gulph Mills Tennis Club, Inc., JKST, Inc. and Gulph Mills/JKST Tennis Club
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 20, 2002
- **Citations:** 571 Pa. 580; 812 A.2d 1218; 2002 Pa. LEXIS 2832
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cappy
- **Judges:** Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin
- **Cited by:** 184 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737223

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- declining to impose a duty upon a tennis club to maintain a defibrillator on its premises, principally on the ground that the legislature has carefully regulated the use of such devices without imposing a duty on business operators to maintain such equipment
- holding that tennis club owed no duty to tennis club member who suffered heart attack while playing tennis to acquire and maintain a defibrillator on its premises for emergency use
- declining to impose a duty on club to maintain defibrillator on its premises, principally on the ground that legislature carefully regulated use of such devices without imposing a duty on business operators to maintain such equipment
- explaining that the Supreme Court’s conclusion in that case rested on its analysis of the fifth Althaus factor

## Opinion text

Justice CAPPY,
concurring.
I join the majority opinion to the extent that it holds that we must balance the factors in Althaus ex rel. Althaus v. *591 Cohen, 562 Pa. 547 , 756 A.2d 1166 (2000). After evaluating all five factors, I agree that no duty exists here.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737223. Public record. Not legal advice.