. .

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 197277

$________ – LABOR LAW – FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY SECURE AND BRACE CONCRETE FORM AT CONSTRUCTION SITE – FALLING OBJECT – WALL FALLS AND TRAPS PLAINTIFF WORKER'S HAND – CRUSH FRACTURES TO RIGHT, DOMINANT HAND – THREE SURGERIES – WRIST FUSION.

Bronx County, NY

This was an action involving a male plaintiff worker on a construction site who was next to a partially completed form that would be used to hold concrete when the wall, comprising the left portion of the form, collapsed, pinning his right, dominant hand. The plaintiff maintained the sections of the Industrial Code, relating to the proper bracing and securing of concrete forms, were violated, giving rise to liability under Sec. ________ (6). The plaintiff suffered severe crush fractures and underwent some three surgeries, including the final ________ wrist fusion. The incident occurred in ________ when the plaintiff was age in his mid 40s. The evidence reflected that the form would include a wall on either side of the area in which concrete was to be poured and the incident occurred after the first wall, only, was completed. The plaintiff maintained that the defendants should have properly braced the first wall before continuing with the work.

The plaintiff had also brought Sec. ________ (1) claims. The defendants had maintained that this section did not apply in this first department case in which the plaintiff was struck while working at ground level, and this aspect was dismissed relatively early in the litigation. The defendants also denied that Sec. ________ (6) applied to partially completed forms. The defendants’ Summary Judgment motion was denied and the App Div reversed and dismissed the action. The Court of Appeals then found that a hearing was needed to determine if the partially completed form was required to be braced. The trial court then dismissed the action and the App Div reversed, granting plaintiff’s motion for Summary Judgment on liability. There was no evidence that the plaintiff, who did not participate in the construction of the form, was comparatively negligent.

The plaintiff maintained that he suffered severe crush fractures to the hand that, despite three surgical interventions, ultimately required wrist fusion. The plaintiff contended that he cannot work in a physical capacity. The plaintiff graduated from high school in Jamaica before moving to this country and alleged that his educational level, talents and inclinations gear him towards physical labor, and that he is permanently unemployable. The defendant denied that this position should be accepted, and alleged that the plaintiff could find and perform work in any number of more sedentary occupations.

The plaintiff is divorced and maintained that everyday activities and household chores are painful and difficult.The case settled after jury selection for $________.

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.


Your cart is empty
Let Our expert Researchers Do The Searching For You! Pro Search Service

Related Searches