News & Insights

Recent Posts

WSHB Partner Janice Michaels Named to The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 List

One Bad Apple: Navigating through Sexual Battery and other Intentional Torts

Leading Construction Litigator Cynthia Tari Joins WSHB's Dallas Office

WSHB’s Philadelphia Partner Secures Summary Judgment in Catastrophic Premises Liability Matter

WSHB Welcomes New Partner Andrew Kessler

New Bill In New York Proposed for Signature by Governor Andrew Cuomo is Set To Make Employers "SWEAT"

Renowned Litigator Jason Williams Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Litigator Richard Young Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Published Appellate Opinion Upholding Summary Judgment in Favor of Commercial Tenant Against $3.5M Subrogation Suit

17 WSHB Lawyers Honored as 2019's Rising Stars

Arizona Supreme Court Allows Court of Appeals Decision Expanding Defendants' Ability to Enforce Settlements to Stand

WSHB’s Jason Klein Breaks Down the Good, the Sad and the Funny Sides of Claims

Litigating Sexual Battery and Other Intentional Torts: Navigating the One Bad Apple in Medical Negligence

WSHB Partner Michelle Arbitrio to Moderate Panel on Insurance and Risk Management in the Age of Mass Shootings

WSHB Cannabis Attorney Finalist for "Lawyer of the Year"

Girl on Fire: The Price of Pursuing the Truth in the #MeToo World

Pragmatic Issues on Settlement Versus Trial for Legal Malpractice Cases

WSHB Partner Jade Tran Named to Lawyers of Color's "Nation's Best" List

WSHB Senior Associate Selected for 2020 Diversity Leadership & Mentoring Program

A Withering Assault

The Natural Progression of Natural Disasters

Nevada’s Governor Signs Chapter 40 Reform Bill

WA Condo Law Changes Hope to Curtail Frivolous Defect Lawsuits and Stimulate Production

WSHB Co-Founder Stephen Henning Steps Into the Spotlight at this Year's West Coast Casualty Seminar

Professional Liability Expert Weighs In On Protecting Your Practice From Opioid Doc Arrest Fallout

Penalties, Punitives, and Granny Cams: The Escalating Lure of Elder Abuse Litigation

Are Structured Settlements Still Relevant

Game Changing Trends Affecting Construction

He's Not My Guy: The Joint-Employer Doctrine

WSHB Case Update: DOL Proposes Increase to Minimum Salary Threshold

WSHB and DWF Announce Exclusive Association

Brooke Bohlke Takes to the Stage at CLM's 2019 Nevada Chapter Education and Networking Event

WSHB Partner Constance Endelicato Named to The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 List

WSHB Trial Alert: Defense Verdict in High Exposure Wrongful Death Case

June 24, 2014

Defense Verdict in Wrongful Death Case:
Demand Ranged From $12-45 Million Before Trial

In a case involving the death of a construction worker by a 30,000 pound forklift in the Maricopa County Superior Court, a 10-person jury returned a defense verdict after deliberating only two hours. WSHB attorney James W. Evans led a legal team representing the forklift driver and his employer, in a 10-day wrongful death trial which was completed to verdict on June 24, 2014.

The decedent, who was an employee of the on-site general contractor, was crushed to death on a large hospital construction site when the forklift driver ran over him while he was working in the roadway. The entire accident was documented on videotape which was played for the jury.  There was testimony that the forklift driver saw the decedent three to four minutes before the accident in approximately the same position he was in at the time of his death.  However, defense counsel argued that without the mandated flaggers, barricades, cones or other warning devices, the forklift driver had no notice of the decedent’s actual location at the time of his death.

Arizona is purely a comparative fault state. As a result, the jury could allocate fault to the decedent, the general contractor or any other parties or designated non-parties.  However, Plaintiff was precluded from actually naming the general contractor as a defendant in this case pursuant to the worker’s compensation statutes.

Defense counsel argued that the decedent and the general contractor decedent were ultimately responsible for the accident and the resulting death and the jury agreed. In a 9-1 verdict, the ten person jury awarded no damages to the surviving spouse and the decedent’s six children. During the course of the trial, Plaintiffs had demanded $12.5 million to settle the case.  The defense countered with a global offer of $2.25 million.  In closing arguments, Plaintiffs’ counsel requested a jury award of $14.2 million at a minimum.   Within minutes of the jury rendering its verdict, the Plaintiffs rejected a “high/low” offer from the defense of $1.0 million to $5.0 million. Minutes later, the jury rendered its verdict – no award.

Post verdict, members of the jury indicated that the defense of the forklift driver and his employer was compelling, logical and well supported by the evidence. The jury never considered Plaintiffs’ requested award of $14.2 million, and agreed that the actions of the decedent and his employer were the sole cause of the accident.  The accident occurred in January 2010 and the case had been pending for four years.

 

PRINT

Privacy Policy      |      Site Map

© 2019 Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required