Wrongful death by electrocution

A 22 year-old employee of a painting contractor was electrocuted by two 34.5 kilovolt lines while painting a partially energized electric substation. There was no protective barrier or warning between the de-energized portion he was painting and the energized switch lines.

He came into contact with an electrical switch on the top level and was electrocuted.

He subsequently fell onto another 34.5 kilovolt line at the second level before hitting the ground on fire.

He lived for eight hours.

Road construction / death at batch plant

The Plaintiff-decedent was a laborer working at an on-site batch plant for a road construction project.

He was run over by an excavator moving gravel. The excavator’s reverse alarm was inoperative and the Defendant had knowledge of the same.

The Plaintiff-decedent lived for three days before life support was terminated.

Plaintiff falls through a hole in the floor and suffers facial fractures

The Plaintiff hired the Defendant-contractor to perform work on the Plaintiff’s rental property. During the course of the construction, the Defendant cut a hole in a hallway floor for construction of a new staircase.

The Plaintiff arrived on the premises to inspect ongoing work and fell through the hole six feet to the basement below. The Plaintiff sustained facial fractures, a right shoulder injury, and a lower back injury which resulted in three surgeries. Admissible special damages at trial totaled over $200,000.

The defense contended it was not negligent in its construction activities and that the Plaintiff’s negligence led to this accident.

Construction / French drain system

The Plaintiff contracted with the general contractor for the installation of a residential French drain system. The contractor then hired the subcontractor to perform the work, but failed to advise the subcontractor of the materials specifications required by the contract.

When the Plaintiff discovered that the installed system did not meet her specifications, she sued the contractor for negligence, breach of contract, and violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. The general contractor joined the subcontractor as an additional Defendant.

The jury rendered a defense verdict for the subcontractor and found in favor of the Plaintiff against the general contractor, awarding the Plaintiff treble damages and attorney fees.