Articles Posted in Work Injuries

by

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Chicago reversed a district court decision granting summary judgment where the court found that the expert testimony for the plaintiff was unreliable. Donald Schultz was a painter for American Motors Corp. from 1981 until 1989. Benzene was a substance in the paint that was used.Mr. Schultz died in 2006 from an acute myeloid leukemia (AML) related to benzene exposure. 

The wife of Mr. Schultz, Joann, filed a lawsuit against Akzo Nobel Paints (formerly known as the Glidden Co.), asserting that the benzene in the paint caused Mr. Schultz’s AML and subsequently his death.

Akzo moved for summary judgment using the expert testimony of its expert toxicologist, David Pyatt. Pyatt’s opinion was that the benzene exposure did not cause Mr. Schultz’s AML because only workers exposed to more than 40 parts per million (ppm) years of benzene developed AML.

Continue reading

by

Philip Crosby worked for Cooper B-Line Inc., a manufacturer of electrical components and tools.  A portion of Crosby’s middle finger was severed while he was working on the job on July 28, 2010. Crosby filed a claim in the Illinois Industrial Commission under the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act.  He asked for his medical bills to be paid and for temporary total disability benefits. 

Crosby returned to work in September 2010.  In a conversation with his manager, Crosby allegedly argued that he did not intend to refrain from using the unsafe work practice that led to his injury.  His employer, Cooper, then suspended him for 3 days without pay as a disciplinary measure.  A grievance was filed on behalf of Crosby by his union. 

A few days later, Crosby was accused of violating a different safety regulation and was fired. At this point, the union representing workers at Crosby  asked that his termination be referred to as a permanent lay off without recall rights. That would make him eligible for unemployment benefits and a neutral job reference for the future.

Continue reading

by

James Miglore, age 58, was an electrician working at the construction site of a new Hoffman Estates park district ice arena.  The construction area was located at 1685 W. Higgins Road in Hoffman Estates, Ill.  The defendant, Harbour Contractors, was the construction manager for the project. Midwest Masonry was the masonry subcontractor.  Miglore was employed by the third-party defendant, American Electric, the electrical subcontractor.

In August 2004, Midwest Masonry built the scaffolding at the site to assist its masons in building a 10-foot interior wall.

Miglore alleged in his lawsuit that he was using Midwest’s scaffolding when he fell from it; he was working about 8 feet above ground. At the trial, Miglore testified that he had set his A-frame ladder next to the scaffolding, climbed onto the scaffolding without a problem and then took 3 to 4 steps when a board on the scaffold “flipped up” and caused his fall. 

Continue reading

by

In a wrongful discharge case brought by Larry Holland, there was evidence against his former employer, Schwan’s Home Service, that included the claim file of Schwan’s insurance carrier. 

The claim adjuster’s file contained notes from Joan Kantor, a specialty risk services third-party administrator for Hartford Insurance Co. The notes contained summaries of conversations with Schwan’s agents and employees. Kantor did not testify at the trial. Schwan’s objected to the conclusion of the notes as evidence arguing that (1) the statements were inadmissible hearsay, (2) the documents were protected by attorney-client privilege and (3) the business records exception to the hearsay rule did not apply because the claim file was prepared in anticipation of litigation.

The jury in Benton, Ill., returned a verdict for Holland for $4,260,400, which included $3.6 million in punitive damages.  Schwan’s Home Service appealed. 

Continue reading

by

Clarence Goranowski filed a lawsuit against Metra under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) alleging that he was injured while reinstalling the door on the railcar’s bathroom without assistance. In his suit, he also stated that  the railroad was negligent in choosing not to provide a reasonably safe work environment and for choosing not to provide sufficient assistance to Goranowski to install the door.

Before the start of the trial, the defendant, Metra, asked the trial judge to submit a special interrogatory to the jury that asked the question:  “Did Metra use ordinary care to provide plaintiff with a reasonably safe place in which to do his work?”

The Cook County judge agreed with Goranowski’s objection that the special interrogatory was defective because it covered only one of the many different allegations of negligence. Metra refused to submit a revised special interrogatory.

Goranowski received a $545,000 jury verdict, which was reduced to $272,500 based upon the jury’s finding that Goranowski was 50% at fault for his own injuries. In any event, Metra appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court.

Continue reading

by

Michael Williamson was driving a gasoline tanker truck when he died on April 23, 2003, after a truck driven by Arthur Asher crossed into oncoming traffic on an Illinois highway. The two vehicles collided, and both men died as a result of the crash. The truck company that owned the Williamson truck paid workers’ compensation benefits to Williamson’s widow, Mary Catherine Williamson, in the amount of $283,549.80. 

In the meantime, the Williamson family brought a lawsuit against several defendants for the wrongful death of Michael. After a jury verdict was reduced, a recovery of $1 million plus 9% interest from State Farm Insurance  was made. The total amount received was $1,503,506.85. It took six years to receive the funds.

The employer for Williamson then petitioned the court to seek not only its workers’ compensation lien of $283,549.80 less 25% for attorney fees and the prorated share of the costs, but also wanted interest that the Williamson family had received at 9% on the judgment.Interest on the jury verdict was $503,506.85.The trial judge denied the employer’s petition for interest on its workers’ compensation lien.

Continue reading

by

Atlantic Casualty Insurance Co. insured Paszko Masonry as it worked on the construction of an apartment building in Downers Grove, Ill., along with three other companies, Prince Contractors Inc., Chicago Masonry Construction and 4929 Forest LLC..

Robert Rybaltowski was an employee of the waterproofing company, Raincoat Solutions, which had submitted a bid to the general contractor, Prince Contractors, to perform caulking work on the building. 

On the condition that Raincoat bring its employee to the jobsite to show that Raincoat’s employee was competent, the general contractor would approve the submitted bid for the caulking work. 

Continue reading

by

Humberto Menendez was working for Steine Cold Storage, Inc., which was a subcontractor for the installation of thermo units at a Wal-Mart store under construction in Indiana. Steine rented a boom lift from NES Rentals. 

NES Rentals delivered the lift to the construction site on Aug. 23, 2006. The Steine foreman on site signed a 1-page, double-sided, rental agreement that was given to him by NES Rentals.

A paragraph including an indemnification clause was posted on the backside of the rental agreement. The indemnification clause stated that Steine indemnified NES against any claims arising out of negligence as to the use of the rented boom lift. 

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court has taken a case for consideration dealing with the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission as to an employee’s commute from a motel to a job site. The issue in the case is whether the employee is covered for his injuries by the Workers’ Compensation Act when he was on his way from his motel (temporary living quarters) to his job site. The Supreme Court will look at whether the jobsite is linked closely enough to the worker’s employment so that the injuries he suffered in a car accident on the way to work are compensable. 

The law does not usually consider injuries while commuting to or from work as compensable unless the travel is a result or requirement of the job.

In 2006, the plaintiff, Ronald Daugherty of Springfield, Ill., took a temporary pipefitting job with The Venture-Newberg Perini Stone & Webster, which is a contractor working on a nuclear power plant in Cordoba, Ill.,  owned by Exelon Corp.  Daugherty was injured in a car accident on his way to work from his motel. As a result of his injuries, he filed a workers’ compensation claim. 

Continue reading

by

A flatbed tractor-trailer driver was assigned to load and deliver 7,000-pound concrete barriers. The barriers were being loaded into rows onto the driver’s trailer. The truck driver was standing next to his trailer strapping down the first row of barriers when a crane operator was loading the second row. 

As the crane operator was moving a barrier, it struck another one in the truck causing it to fall onto the driver. He suffered a traumatic, below-the-knee amputation of his left leg.

The driver, age 44, underwent several surgeries resulting in an above-the-knee amputation of the leg. He has been working with prosthesis, but continues to undergo revisions and adjustments. His past medical expenses totaled $283,700. He has not been able to return to work. The trucker faces very limited prospects for long-term employment because of his limited formal education. He is undergoing retraining for a different line of work compatible with his training.

Continue reading