. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.

ARTICLE ID 146908

$________ - CO-WORKER STRIKES PLAINTIFF WITH DUMP TRUCK AT SCRAP YARD - AMPUTATION OF RIGHT LEG ABOVE THE KNEE - LEFT LEG FIXATED WITH METAL RODS - SPINAL CORD DAMAGE.

Cook County, Illinois

In this case, the plaintiff and his co-employee went to the defendant’s scrap yard to pick up a by-product of the scrap process. They drove separate trucks for their employer. Once at the defendant scrap yard, the co-employee was forced to back the truck up to get out of the premises. The co-employee was unable to make a u-turn or go forward because there was a large scrap pile blocking forward movement of the truck and he said there wasn’t enough room. The plaintiff had been out of his truck, while being loaded, as required by the scrap yard when picking up scrap materials, when the co-employee backed the dump truck up and the plaintiff was struck. The plaintiff suffered massive leg injuries which required amputation of the right leg above the knee and the left leg was fixated with metal rods. The plaintiff also suffered some spinal cord damage. The plaintiff is now able to walk short distances with assistance, but was permanently disabled and unable to return to work. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant scrap yard did not provide a proper route of travel, which would have allowed the co-employee to move forward instead of being forced to move backward and that they should have regulated that trucks were not permitted to move backwards while in the scrap yard.

The defense argued that the plaintiff had actually fallen out of the cab of the truck when he was struck and was not actually standing outside the truck. The defense maintained that the piles of scrap were not the cause of the accident and that the accident was caused by the co-employee driver, as he could have waited for the pile to be cleared, was negligent in backing up his truck and his truck was not equipped with operable back-up beepers. They also argued the co-employee was able to make a u-turn with the truck and should have done so instead of moving backward.

After a three week trial, the jury deliberated for four and a half hours before returning a verdict for the plaintiff. The plaintiff was awarded $________, but this amount was reduced by 10% for the plaintiff’s comparative negligence to $________.

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.