|
Workman's
Compensation Statutes provide a remedy and compensation
for people injured at work. In some situations injuries
result in the workplace from conditions that are unsafe.
When employers are aware of dangerous circumstances within
the workplace they have an obligation to correct the problem.
If they fail to do so, they can be held responsible for
the resulting injuries and the tragic deaths that occur.
Defective processes or defective machinery in the workplace
can also result in injury and/or death. In these situations,
if the employer is aware of the defective or unreasonably
dangerous condition, they may share in responsibility for
the harm that results from exposure to the danger along
with the manufacturers that create the unsafe equipment
or circumstance. These types of claims are recognized as
employement intentional torts.
Work Place Injury Cases
2003 Todd Reber v. Lovejoy Steel
| Plaintiff was
employed at Lovejoy Steel in Portage County as a material
handler and saw operator. As part of his job responsibilities
he was required to work within steel bar bin racks.
As Plaintiff was in the process of moving steel bars
within the racks, a several ton steel bar rolled out
of the rack onto Plaintiff's foot. Plaintiff sustained
a serious crush injury wich led to a complete transmetatarsal
amputation. Suit was filed against Plaintiff's employer,
Lovejoy Steel, based upon their knowledge of a dangerous
condition; knowledge that if an employee was subjected
by his employer to such dangerous condition, harm would
be a substantial certainty, and that Lovejoy Steel,
under such circumstances and with such knowledge, did
act to require Mr. Reber to work within the dangerous
condition. |
Click
For PDF Version
|
| Jury
Verdict |
|
|
2002
Estate of John Doe v. Company X
| Mr.
Doe was an employee of Company X, working as a maintenance
man. While repairing the “crash” of a Garnett/Lapper
machine, Mr. Doe was underneath the machine, which was
neither locked out nor tagged out. Company X preferred
that the machines not be locked or tagged out when repairing
a crash because it slowed down production. The machine
crash was cleared and Mr. Doe was caught by the neck
between the Lapper roller and shaft and was asphyxiated.
Company X reported the death as a heart attack rather
than a strangulation. Mr. Doe’s family alleged
a violation of workplace safety regulations and an employment
intentional tort. |
|
|
| Settlement
at Mediation |
|
2002
John Doe v. ABC Corporations
Plaintiff
was a salesman working for a general contractor who placed
him in the role of Job Superintendent on a building site.
He was requested by a subcontractor to climb a 14-foot A-frame
ladder to paint piping. While atop the ladder, he leaned
on the piping which was secured by ceiling hangers, and
the piping moved causing him to fall 14 feet landing on
his head, resulting in a traumatic brain injury.
Plaintiff
suffered post-traumatic seizures with cognitive dysfunction
with a subsequent behavioral disorder, resulting in uncontrolled
fits of aggression and damaged short-term memory. Plaintiff
alleged negligence on the part of the 3rd party subcontractor,
Defendant contended Plaintiff caused his own injury and
that he was a loaned servant which provided Defendant immunity
from suit.
| Settlement |
|
2002
Estate of Gregory K Rhoades v. Summit Tower Services Inc.,
et al.
Decedent,Gregory
Rhoades, worked as a tower erector for Defendant Summit
Tower Services. In October 1998, Summit was contracted by
Defendant GPD Services to erect a 180-foot cell tower in
Newton Falls, Ohio. Toward the end of the project, Mr. Rhoades
was working at the top of the tower when he began the process
of rappelling down the tower and suddenly lost control falling
180 feet to his death. Suit was filed against Summit Tower
based upon their knowledge of a dangerous process on their
job site; knowledge that if an employee was subjected by
his employment to such dangerous process, harm would be
a substantial certainty, and that Summit Tower, under such
circumstances and with much knowledge, did act or require
Mr. Rhoades to continue to perform the dangerous process
of rappelling. Suit was also filed against GPD Services
based upon the theory that as a general contractor, GPD
Services actively participated in directing the activity
that resulted in Mr. Rhoades' death.
| Settlement
with both Defendants |
|
1998
The Estate of Max Harrell (deceased) v. Gaylord Foundry
Equipment Co., et al.
Plaintiff,
Max Harrell, deceased, was a 61 year old man working at
an aluminum coring foundry when a solenoid gassing valve
stuck open causing sulfur dioxide gas to leak into the ambient
work air. Mr. Harrell was a known asthmatic and was exposed
to the gas causing an asthma attack which resulted in suffocation
and death. The widow brought suit alleging product defect
and failure to warn. Defendants contended the employer misused
the product and Plaintiff should not have been working in
that environment.
1995
Joe Frankovich v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., et al.
Plaintiff,
an electrical lineman, suffered electrocution when he came
in contact with 13,700 volt tension lines while working
in an Asplundh line lift bucket truck. Plaintiffs alleged
design defect in the controls of the bucket in that they
were confusing and reversed directions when the bucket was
operated in an over center position (over 90°), making
it unreasonably dangerous to the operator. Mr. Frankovich
lost his left arm, all his back muscles and suffered serious
internal injuries.
| Settlement |
|
1994
The Estate of John Blaney v. Rick Scott Trucking Company,
et al.
Plaintiff
was a laborer working on the premises of his employer. Defendants’
tractor trailer truck was making a delivery on employer’s
premises. While backing without appropriate backing warning,
Defendants’ driver-employee hit decedent crushing him
and causing his death.
E-mail
This Site To A Friend
Copyright©
2002,The Landskroner Law Firm, LTD. All Text and Site Design,
All Rights Reserved.
|
