Articles Posted in Forklift Injuries

by

The U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, affirmed the trial court’s decision that granted the defendant manufacturer’s (Clark Equipment Co.) motion to exclude the plaintiff’s expert witness and for summary judgment in the plaintiff’s strict product liability lawsuit. In this case, it was alleged that the plaintiff was injured because of the design defect in the Clark Equipment’s skid-steer loader when the loader tipped over on the plaintiff and severely damaged his leg, foot and ankle.

The plaintiff’s-controlled experts stated that the design of the loader, which provided for a 62-inch low-profile bucket, made it highly likely that the loader would tip over on plaintiff when the bucket would have been loaded in excess of 1,300-1,400 lb. capacity. The appeals court also ruled that the district court could properly find that the expert’s opinion did not meet the standard set forth in Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and Daubert, since:

(1) the expert had never used the skid-steer loader to pick up or move material and had not tested this design theory on neither the instant loader or similar loaders of equipment; (2) the evidence from others regarding operation of the loader did not support the expert’s opinion, where the individuals disclaim any personal knowledge or experience with other tipping or bouncing incidents; (3) the expert did not know the weight of the load that plaintiff was lifting at the time of the incident and thus this expert could only speculate that the size of the bucket was cause of the injuries to plaintiff; and (4) the expert chose not to account for and investigate potential alternative causes of this incident.

Continue reading

by

Doe, a 42-year-old laborer, was installing air pollution control equipment in a confined space at a Massachusetts factory.

The equipment consisted of a 12-foot, two-piece wheel that weighed 1,000 pounds when fully assembled.

After Doe removed the wood block that supported half of the wheel while it was suspended by a sling from a forklift, the wheel swung toward Doe and struck him.  The contact caused multiple fractures and a severe left arm injury.

Continue reading

by

Bahram Yahyavi was driving a Dodge Charger in the course of his employment with a car dealership when his vehicle was struck by a forklift driven by a then-employee of Capriati Construction Corp. The forklift’s forks penetrated the car’s front end from the passenger’s side, causing the front windshield to cave into the car.

Yahyavi suffered a severe neck injury that required conservative care and later a five-level cervical fusion.

His past medical expenses were more than $491,000. His past lost wages and lost earnings capacity was proved to be $300,000.

Continue reading

by

William Clay, 67, went to a car dealer to help his son purchase a car. As he stood by a raised vehicle in the dealer’s garage, an employee operating a hydraulic vehicle lift lowered the car onto Clay’s right foot.

He suffered crush fractures to three toes, which required amputation within two weeks of the incident. He now suffers pain when walking, has a limp and uses a cane. His medical expenses were more than $31,300.

He sued the operator of the dealership, Shako Mako Inc., and the premises owner, Nahla LLC, alleging that these defendants negligently allowed Clay to access the garage area without warning of the hazard posed by the elevated vehicle.

Continue reading

by

Sherri Miyagi, a dentist, was visiting a Walgreens pharmacy when she was injured by a hand truck operated by an employee of the defendant, Dean Transportation Inc. Dr. Miyagi filed a complaint, alleging negligence and respondeat superior against the defendant, Dean. Before the start of the jury trial, Dean admitted its negligence and a trial was held on the issues of causation and damages to the four elements of negligence.

Following the trial, the jury signed a verdict in favor of Dr. Miyagi for $2.4 million in noneconomic damages, $300,000 for past medical expenses, and $7.3 million for future medical expenses.

The defendant, Dean, filed a post-trial motion, seeking judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial on all issues, a new trial on damages only, or in the alternative, a remittitur of all but $5,703.68 of the future medical expenses awarded by the jury. The trial court denied defendant’s request for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. The trial court did, however, grant defendant’s request for a remittitur, but in the amount of $3.65 million, which represented 50% of the jury award for future medical expenses.

Continue reading

by

George Petrosian was performing general repair work at an elevated parking system. While he was standing on a scissor lift, the lift’s work platform fell 25 feet, which caused him to suffer a torn ligament in his left ankle and bilateral torn rotator cuffs.

Petrosian, 72, underwent six surgeries and now suffers from complex regional pain syndrome and carpal tunnel syndrome.

Petrosian’s medical expenses were $500,000. He is no longer able to work and has incurred $100,000 in lost income. Petrosian and his wife sued the corporate property owners and one of the property owners individually, claiming that they chose not to maintain the scissor lift in proper working order. The Petrosian family alleged that the lift had been stored outside and became rusty and worn leading to its failure.

Continue reading

by

Thomas Neuhengen was injured in a forklift accident allegedly caused by Frederick Neirinckx, a Global Experience Specialists employee. The judgment was entered in the amount of $12,228,068 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages for Neuhengen. Global Experience appealed from that judgment.

Global Experience argued that the trial judge erred in refusing to dismiss Count III of the plaintiff’s complaint, which provided the predicate for the exemplary award for alleging willful and wanton conduct in hiring and training Neirinckx because Global Experience stipulated, before trial, that it would be vicariously liable for any negligent or careless conduct by Neirinckx.

In the appeal, Global Experience relied on the case of Neff v. Davenport Packing Co., 131 Ill.App.2d 791 (1971). In cases in which a complaint alleges negligence by an employee along with vicarious liability for that negligence against the employer, Neff calls for dismissing the negligence claims against the corporation if it admits liability for the employee’s conduct.

Continue reading

by

Reginald Lindsey was employed as a forklift operator by Electro-Motive Diesel Inc. and was working at its facility in southwest suburban McCook, Ill. Central Blacktop Co. was contracted to do road repair work and resurfacing there.

On Oct. 19, 2010, Lindsey was driving an older model forklift over a permanent portion of paved road. Lindsey testified that the road north of the warehouse was “broken” and “deteriorated” making it difficult to operate the forklift. Lindsey’s lawsuit claimed that he followed a marked path, turned right and hit some pavement in disrepair causing his forklift to jolt suddenly. Lindsey stated that he heard a “pop” in his neck and suffered a spinal injury.

He filed a lawsuit against Central Blacktop claiming it was negligent in leaving broken concrete in his path and in choosing not to issue a warning on the problem area or to repair the fault. Lindsey alleged Central Blacktop was at fault and owed him a duty of care.

Continue reading

by

Jimmy Hill was 66 years old and was unloading a truckload of chicks at a farm when an employee of the transportation company J.B. Hunt drove a forklift over Hill’s ankle. Hill underwent surgery to repair the broken ankle and later died of post-operative sepsis. He is survived by his adult son.

Hill’s son sued J.B. Hunt claiming its employee, the forklift driver, chose not to follow the company’s safety policies and safety training. The lawsuit did not include a claim for lost income. The jury’s verdict of $3.4 million found the defendant J.B. Hunt 98% responsible and a non-party 2% liable for Hill’s injuries and untimely death.

The attorneys representing the Hill family were John P. Zelbst and David Butler. For trial the plaintiff engaged the expert services of an internal medicine physician and engineering expert, both of whom testified at the trial.

Continue reading

by

On July 11, 2008, Tenesha Martin, an employee of a railroad, was operating a forklift while unloading the truck’s trailer at Canadian Pacific Railway’s docking area in Chicago. The forklift fell off the loading dock when the unmanned truck, owned by the defendant Central Transport Inc., rolled away from the dock causing her to sustain disabling lumbar disc injuries.

The defendant, Soo Line Railroad, argued that the trucking company, Central Transport, was at fault, while the trucking company blamed the railroad. Both defendants argued that Martin was contributorily negligent for choosing not to exercise due care and caution.

The presiding trial judge allowed evidence of Martin’s marijuana use in 2010 based on her history, which was given to a psychiatrist in 2011.

Continue reading