Connecticut Injury Attorney Blog

Department of Transportation worker who lost part of her leg in the back of a dump truck while getting it ready for winter snow operations received a 3.6 million dollar verdict in Waterbury Superior Court on November 1, 2011. Her boot was entrained in the moving conveyor chain during a maintenance operation. The defense was primarily that she disregarded a "Danger" decal affixed to the side of the truck advising her not to stand in the body of the dump because of the moving chain which could cause injury. While that was true, the decal had been serially disregarded as the back of the dump bed was often used to store tools and for various other purposes and ther was a ladder affixed to the side of the dump body placed there by the Manufacturer and Dealer to enable access. The dealer who sold and assembled the dump body knew that and in fact their own mechanics would inspect the chain's operation on occasion from inside the dump body as well while the chain was in motion. The State of Connecticut's contract with the DOT required mandatory training on the proper operation and maintenance of the dump body which implicitly included how to clean and maintain the unit in a safe and recommended manner.It also required compliance with OSHA regulations and Industry safety standards. The Dealer maintained that it did so comply and that physical guarding of the chain during operation was implausible as any such guard would necessarily tend to interfere with its intended purpose. Accordingly, administrative controls which included proper training and clear operating instructions were essential and the Dealer maintained that it provided proper training and that the DOT which had operated a fleet of hundreds of similar trucks before the instant purchase should have known how to train their own employees in the first place. After the incident, Conn OSHA did cite the DOT which employed the injured worker for allowing exposure to unguarded nip points and in consequence thereof the DOT implemented a series of heightened administrative controls.

The case was brought under Connecticut's Product Liability Act and was plead under legal theories including Strict liability for Defective design, Breach of the Statutory Duty to provide warnings and instructions, Breach of warranty and negligence. The manufacturer of the Dump bed had settled with the Plaintiff weeks before Trial and was a settled and released party whose fault was considered by the jury for purposes of allocating fault between the Plaintiff, the manufacturer and the remaining Defendant which was the dealer who sold the dump beds to the State under a procurement contract. The Jury allocated slightly less fault to the Manufacturer than to the Dealer who had the contract and primary relationship with the DOT and assigned 38% fault to the injured DOT worker as well resulting in a net verdict of slightly more than 1.3 million dollars to the worker in addition to a confidential sum obtained from the manufacturer shortly before Trial.

A few weeks ago, A Connecticut Jury awarded a $58 Million Verdict in compensatory damages to a child left with severe cerebral palsy on account of an unnecessary and improper delay in the child's delivery at birth. The Jury's verdict appears to be the highest Personal injury medical malpractice verdict in Connecticut history. There is likely to be an appeal filed by the defendant on the basis that the amount awarded by the CT jury was excessive. This is not an easy claim to make, notwithstanding the significance of the size of the award . Connecticut case law is supportive of the jury's determination of what is appropriate financial compensation for injuries caused by negligence. ( ''the amount of an award [of damages] is a matter peculiarly within the province of the trier of facts. . . . [T]he court should not interfere with the jury's determination except when the verdict is plainly excessive or exorbitant. . . . The ultimate test which must be applied to the verdict by the trial court is whether the jury's award falls somewhere within the necessarily uncertain limits of just damages or whether the size of the verdict so shocks the sense of justice as to compel the conclusion that the jury [was] influenced by partiality, prejudice, mistake or corruption.'' (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Mahon v. B.V. Unitron Mfg., Inc., 284 Conn. 645, 661-62, 935 A.2d 1004 (2007)).

Continue reading "Connecticut Personal Injury Award Highest in State" »

One can hardly doubt that persons who have sustained serious work site injuries, some that have led to their Death, by their pursuit of lawsuits beyond the mere assertion of workers compensation claims have fostered awareness and safety for many. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire that occurred in the year 1911 was one of the most tragic industrial accidents in U.S. history. 146 workers lost their lives, many were young female immigrants.
The factory conditions were so deplorable and unsafe that a criminal investigation and charges were filed but the owners of the Factory were acquitted. However, they were sued for civil damages-monetary compensation for those that lost their lives and brought wrongful death claims which they won. The American Society of Safety Engineers(ASSE) was also founded, in part, because of this event and made efforts to bring attention to the horrid conditions which the workers were having to work in.

Continue reading "Safety In The Work Place- " »

A weak economy In Connecticut as in Many other places has generated an increasing number of temporary work positions as companies are reluctant to hire permanent full time workers. This is not just a payroll issue but also one of oversight and management. In factories, warehouses and construction sites where many of these temps wind up laboring there is often a lack of training, supervision and accountability for the safety of those so employed. When a temporary worker is injured there is of course a workers compensation remedy available but the company for whom they were toiling is simply free to hire another temp and ask that the injured temp not return at all. To balance those inequitable scales and also to make up for the harm caused by shoddy or sometimes non existent safety practices the injured temporary employee should consider the initiation of a traditional tort action sounding in negligence which may in such circumstances be asserted against the company on whose job site they were injured. This remedy is one that would not generally be available to a direct employee due to the existence of a workers compensation exclusivity bar to bringing such actions which is legislated into the law in our State as well as many other Sister States.

Continue reading "Temporary Workers, A Permanent Problem OF Accountability" »

The construction accident death of a young man , struck by a steel Beam that fell upon him which had not been properly secured into its concrete pocket was initially invested by Federal OSHA last year. OSHA rendered findings that would support a finding of negligence on the part of the Builder MJM Carpentry. A deeper level of investigation, however, conducted by the Estate of the Decedent's Legal Counsel, Law Offices Of Paul Levin, has now resulted in the imminent filing of a Lawsuit against the general contractor along with the Developer and related individuals associated with the decision and profit making enterprise.

Continue reading " Construction accident Death in Farmington CT leads to Wrongful Death Lawsuit" »

The construction accident death of a young man , struck by a steel Beam that fell upon him which had not been properly secured into its concrete pocket was initially investigated by Federal OSHA last year. OSHA rendered findings that would support a finding of negligence on the part of the Builder MJM Carpentry. A deeper level of investigation, however, conducted by the Estate of the Decedent's Legal Counsel, Law Offices Of Paul Levin, has now resulted in the imminent filing of a Lawsuit against the general contractor along with the Developer and related individuals associated with the decision and profit making enterprise.

Continue reading " Construction accident Death in Farmington CT leads to Wrongful Death Lawsuit" »

In Connecticut as well as many other Jurisdictions, in the case of accidental deaths whether occuring on the job, while operating a motor vehicle or opertaing machinery or simply the result of substandard medical care lawsuits may be initiated on behalf of those killed. Legally, this may be accomplished through the appointment of an Administrator of the Estate by the Probate Court who then engages legal counsel to investigate and file the lawsuit if warranted by the circumstances.

From a personal injury perspective, wrongful death claims are often complex and challenging cases to pursue, not only for the Law Firm entrusted with this task but also for the family members left behind who must interact with lawyers and provide information and insight into the life of the decedent. In Connecticut, accidental death lawsuits must generally be initiated within two years of the event causing the death in order to fall within the Statute of Limitations period. It is not uncommon for the investigation of such claims to take an extended period of time to complete so prompt retention of an experience lawyer is always helpful and sometimes critical. This is particularly the case when critical evidence or witnesses may no longer be easily ascertainable given any extended delay.

Continue reading "Wrongful Death Lawsuits" »

One of the more challenging categories of cases within the field of personal injury are Head injuries, Sometimes alternatively referred to as Brain injuries or Traumatic Brain Injury claims (TBI) these cases are often challenging and complex to pursue. For the Law Firm entrusted with this task of proving these claims while their clients are adjusting to all manner of symptoms ranging from Memory and speech to dizziness and headaches, the effort must be continuous. The importance of monitoring and studying the medical reports, assisting where necessary with making sure that the right specialists are evaluating and treating the clients cannot be overstated. In Connecticut, we have detected to some extent the existence of an institutional bias, even within the medical profession, where the more subtle types of Brain trauma are involved. My office has taken the deposition of well known neurologists tasked with performing an independent medical exam where they insisted that in the absence of evidence on an MRI or CT Scan of a brain injury that post concussive syndrome would simply not be a credible explanation for ongoing neuro psychological difficulties. That expert opinion, much like another, suggesting that a loss of consciousness was necessary to even have a brain injury , is not supportable under current guidlines nor peer reviewed clinical literature.

Continue reading "PROVING AND LITIGATING HEAD INJURY LAWSUITS" »

Injury to the spine is perhaps the most common body part reportedly affected from motor vehicle, industrial and construction accidents which take place regularly through the State of Connecticut. No doubt, a similar trend would be found to apply in other States as well. The severity of the injuries involved, naturally ranges from back strains and sprains to paralysis. It is safe to say though that anyone who has experienced the effects of any significant trauma to the spine can readily appreciate just how debilitating the effects of even a temporary severe strain may be.

From a legal perspective, the circumstances and cause of the injury event are critical in terms of figuring out who, if any person or company, may be legally responsible to compensate the injured party. In work circumstances, this is usually that individual's direct employer. Sometimes, a third person or company can be held financially responsible even in the presence of a work injury. That is one reason it is particularly helpful if the attorney retained knows what to look for and how to pursue both types of legal claims.

Continue reading "SPINAL INJURIES- A LAWYERS PERSPECTIVE" »

Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice cases are not only about benefiting the injured parties, obtaining answers for them and appropriate financial compensation,but also about achieving social justice which benefits us all. To quote Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Peter Zarella:

"The profession of law is not just a business. It transcends a mere occupation. It is a lifelong communal pursuit of justice."

Just like government must be accountable to have a free and fair society and its mistakes laid bare the same is true in our society's private endeavors. Errors committed by Connecticut area hospitals, physicians, construction companies, manufacturers , Insurance companies as well as Companies who employ Connecticut workers must be held accountable where their actions cause harm and suffering. The natural inclination to deny any mistake or wrongdoing and defend is most often the predictable iniital response. Occasionally, active concealment and coverup is as well. Neither instinct when allowed by these Entities to become an ongoing legal strategy serves to assure justice to those injured or the rest of us. That behavior is injurious to our familes in the larger community and must not be tolerated.

Continue reading "Public Interest Benefits From Personal Injury Lawyering" »

Surgery in Connecticut as elsewhere involves certain inherent risks that are attendant to the nature of any operation. Sometimes delayed healing, infections and adverse reactions to anesthesia occur and are not the result of medical neglect on the part of the Surgeon or Hospital staff. There are, however, many types of occurrences which are considered more than the natural complications of surgery and often indicate the presence of a deviation from the Standard of Care for practicing surgeons and Hospitals performing surgery. A few that come to mind are cutting important nerves and tendons which are nearby and not intended to be injured as part of the surgery being performed. As an example, my office sued a Connecticut Orthopedic surgeon who while performing a carpal tunnel surgery, inadvertently cut the ulnar nerve resulting in severe restricted use of my client's hand and chronic pain. At his deposition, the Surgeon admitted that he had used the backside of his surgical blade to retract some tissue rather than a special blunt tool to do so and that is how it happened. A very substantial recovery was obtained but only after considerable litigation. Other situations involve performing the wrong type of surgery or performing it in a manner which unnecessarily injures healthy organs and bodily functions.

Continue reading "Surgical Errors Commited By Connecticut Surgeons" »