. .

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 191044

$________ TOTAL – PREMISES LIABILITY – FALL DOWN – SLIP AND FALL ON ICE IN RESTAURANT ALLEY – INADEQUATE LIGHTING – AGGRAVATION OF DEGENERATIVE JOINT DISEASE – TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT PERFORMED – WORKER'S COMPENSATION CLAIM.

Philadelphia County, PA

The plaintiff asserted both a worker’s compensation claim against the bakery where he was employed and a liability claim against the restaurant where he was delivering bread when he allegedly slipped and fell on black ice. The defendants disputed the causal connection between the plaintiff’s fall and the subsequent performance of a total hip replacement.

The plaintiff was a 59-year-old man who was employed as a route salesman for the employer bakery. His job required delivery of merchandise between 3:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. to various customers. The defendant restaurant provided a key to its premises for the purposes of the bread delivery. The plaintiff testified that he opened an iron gate on the defendant’s property and as he began walking towards the back door of the restaurant to deliver the bread, he slipped and fell on ice.

The plaintiff obtained weather reports showing that the temperatures were such as to cause a melting and refreezing of the snow run-off, creating ice in the alley. The plaintiff’s safety expert opined that the defendant was negligent in the way it piled the snow adjacent to the alley and on a slope, where it would melt, refreeze and create an icy condition. The plaintiff’s safety expert also reported that the defendant restaurant failed to provide adequate lighting and violated various city ordinances. The plaintiff alleged that the motion-sensor light did not activate until a person was half way down the alley.

The plaintiff’s orthopedic surgeon testified that the fall caused the plaintiff to sustain aggravation of a preexisting degenerative hip condition which necessitated a total hip replacement. The plaintiff continued to work following hip replacement surgery. He claimed that he could no longer work full time due to his injury and that he had difficulty getting up and down in his delivery truck. The defendants were expected to argue that the plaintiff had a significant amount of degenerative joint disease which pre-dated the fall.The plaintiff settled his worker’s compensation claim for a lump sum of $________ and a waiver of a lien of approximately an additional $________. He subsequently settled the third-party case against the defendant restaurant for $________ for a total recovery of $________.

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.