Construction Worker Injured In Fall Into Unguarded Elevator Shaft

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: The ABC Project, which spanned December 2003 to October 2004, was a multi-million dollar, interior remodel and seismic and structural upgrade of an existing retail store and building in San Francisco. Defendant XYZ Contracting Corporation of New York was the general contractor, and it hired several subcontractors, including plaintiff Randy Scar’s employer, C Constructors, and P Elevator, an elevator subcontractor.

At the time of the accident, subcontractors were replacing the existing elevator, and to accommodate other ongoing work, XYZ was required to maintain barricades in front of each opening to the elevator shaft. On August 30, 2004, plaintiff, a 45-year-old construction superintendent, was working when he slipped into the unguarded elevator pit, falling backwards and landing on his back on the concrete floor.

Plaintiff alleged that the contract stipulated that defendant was required to maintain barricades in front of each opening to the elevator shaft during the entirety of the project. Defendant had a non-delegable duty to guard the elevator shaft.

Defendant disputed the allegations, contending that plaintiff was comparatively negligent for not paying attention as he worked. Defendant also pointed out that plaintiff was in a methadone program, claiming that he was not really injured but simply faking injuries in order to obtain painkillers.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff sustained permanently disabling back, neck, and knee injuries that prevented him from ever returning to his prior work as a construction supervisor and general contractor or to the physical activities he loved.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: Not reported.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.


SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: Demand: $1.75 million (CCP § 998). Offer: $150,000 (CCP § 998), increased to $400,000 during trial.

COMMENTS

According to Plaintiff: The verdict was 25 times the amount of defendants’ final, pre-trial settlement offer. Plaintiff will file a cost bill and a motion for pre-judgment interest pursuant to CCP § 998 and a motion for reasonable expenses pursuant to CCP § 2033.420.

SUMMARY:
Verdict/Judgment: Plaintiff
Verdict/Judgment Amount: $10,563,862

$282,248 past economic loss; $3,144,957 future economic loss; $846,743 past pain and suffering; $6,289,914 future pain and suffering. Defendant disputed the damages, saying that plaintiff suffered pre-existing injuries related to a 2002 car accident. The jury assigned 2 percent liability to plaintiff.

Trial Type: Jury
Trial Length: 7 weeks.
Deliberations: 3.5 days

Jury Poll: 12-0.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Contact Information