Trabajadores de la Construcción de Indemnización de Daños
Usted ha sido herido de Trabajo en una obra de construcción ¿Está cubierto por la Compensación de Trabajadores?
Lesiones en un sitio de construcción son muy comunes. Si tiene que solicitar para recibir una compensación económica por su lesión, debe tener en cuenta todos los hechos.
Ley de Compensación de Trabajadores ( o compensación de los trabajadores ) es complicado. seguro de compensación está diseñado para proporcionar a los empleados lesionados cobertura financiera si se lesiona en el lugar de trabajo. A cambio, los empleados lesionados por lo general no puede traer lesiones personales se adapte a sus empleadores. Si el empleador es un no-abonados, alguien que no tiene compensación al trabajador, el empleador es vulnerable a demandas por lesiones personales.
Muchas empresas de construcción no tiene seguro de compensación de trabajadores. Entonces, ¿qué hace que estos juicios tan complejo? A menudo esto se debe principalmente a empresas de la construcción de alquiler de los contratistas. Los contratistas no son elegibles para llevar trajes de lesiones personales de la misma manera que los empleados son. Las empresas de construcción que pueden ser inmunes a demandas y ahorrar el costo de la compensación a trabajadores, al mismo tiempo mediante la contratación de los contratistas.
Las empresas de construcción también se podrÃa tratar de engañarlo para que acepten una solución inadecuada, fingiendo como si han de compensación de trabajadores y, a continuación le ofrece una pequeña compensación con un "lo tomas o lo dejas" manera. A menudo se trata de conseguir que para resolver el caso antes de hablar con un abogado.
No deje que esto le suceda a usted. Si usted ha estado involucrado en un accidente en una construcción, en contacto con un abogado de los trabajadores de Dallas un borrador de la Ley de Oficinas de Grossman. Nuestros abogados con experiencia tienen veinte años de experiencia en casos contra empresas de construcción y que puede ayudar a explorar todas sus opciones legales. Hagamos que usted reciba la compensación que se merece.
(policy limits) A father of two was killed on the job when he fell from a personnel platform atop an elevated piece of machinery. The defendant was initially afforded protection from a liability suit by virtue of their workers' comp policy. Upon thorough investigation, it became evident that gross negligence was at the root of the accident, and suit was filed accordingly. A successful outcome was obtained through litigation.
$550,000.00
$220,000.00
$40,000.00
Our attorneys were hired by a delivery driver who sustained a serious shoulder injury when a worker for a third party negligently operated a fork lift. The accident occurred as the plaintiff delivered a load of hay bails to a commercial farm.
An employee of said facility attempted to unload the trailer with a forklift. In doing so, he pushed several bales of hay off of the flatbed, over the side opposite the forklift. Consequently, several of the 400 lb (est.) bales of hay struck the plaintiff who was working to disconnect tie downs on the opposite side of the trailer. This resulted in serious injury to the plaintiff's shoulder.
The defendants took an aggressive stance and denied the claim, asserting that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his own injuries by virtue of the fact that he was standing in a known dangerous area. Suit was filed soon thereafter. Our attorneys argued that the plaintiff's ordinary work duties, and indeed the normal protocol for all flatbed delivery drivers, consists of letting loose the materials to be unloaded. We maintained that the true cause of the plaintiff's injuries was that the forklift operator rushed into unloading the trailer.
Furthermore, the manner in which he unloaded the trailer was itself a contributing element of the defendant's negligence. The forks that were incorporated into the forklift in question were not compatible with stabbing hay bails; they were ordinary forks that were designed to be positioned below a heavy object that was to be lifted. The case was successfully resolved in mediation.
$226,000.00
$84,000.00
$5,500.00
Major freight train company sued as the result of an incident which claimed the life of an employee. Our attorneys settled the case outside of court for a confidential amount.
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
(policy limits) Our attorneys secured a recovery against a major trucking company for the daughter of a man who was killed after his vehicle collided into an 18-wheeler which was blocking the roadway. Litigation is ongoing against additional defendants.
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
Recovered for worker who injured their shoulder while lifting a heavy object.
$162,500.00
$81,250.00
$3,784.00
A young worker was negligently trained to operate a piece of machinery. During a routine cleaning procedure, he suffered a serious hand injury consisting of numerous deep lacerations across his palm. The defendants claimed that he was a contract laborer and therefore owed no legal duty. Through litigation, our attorneys showed evidence to establish an employer-employee relationship thereby creating a non-subscriber work injury cause of action.
$1,010,000.00
$333,300.00
$50,000.00
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
$75,000.00
$25,000.00
$350.00
The mother of a young man hired our firm to investigate the death of her son following a fatal car accident. The incident occurred as one of the two vehicles involved ran a red light and drive into the path of the other. The defendant was driving a work vehicle for a construction company. The defendant survived the accident and stated to police that the decedent caused the accident. The police could not conclusively determine who was at fault, yet the police report strongly implied that the decedent was likely at fault based on the statement provided by the defendant.
The plaintiff's mother was not convinced. Through a thorough investigation, we ultimately determined that the stoplight that the defendant claimed that our client ran, in fact, worked on a timer whereby the light was always green between certain hours unless a vehicle traveling on the intersecting road had been stopped at the right light for more than 30 seconds. Based on an analysis of the vehicles and tire markings, it was conclusively determined that both vehicles were traveling at the speed limit, which clearly indicates that the defendant driver had not accelerated from stop, rather, he was traveling at the speed limit, which would not have triggered a green light for the defendant.
The logical implications of this information is that the light could not have been red for the plaintiff, and it certainly would have been red for the defendant. As a consequence of this information, the case was resolved through litigation.
$335,000.00
$134,000.00
$63,000.00
Recovery for injured worker who suffered a closed head injury in a scaffolding accident.
$125,000.00
$30,000.00
$2,135.00
A loading dock worker suffered serious including numerous facial fractures and minor brain trauma when an 18-wheeler back into him, crushing him against the loading dock. The plaintiff's employer was a subscriber to Texas Workers' Compensation coverage, thus a claim was rightly filed against the third party trucking company whom the truck driver operating the reversing 18-wheeler worked for.
The plaintiffs asserted the position that the trucking company in question was liable on the basis of respondeat superior and negligent retention. The defendants argued that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries by virtue of the plaintiff putting himself in harms way. They maintained that the plaintiff simply walked behind the reversing tractor trailer as it pushed back toward the loading dock.
It was later determined through deposition testimony that the truck driver had indeed instructed the plaintiff to stand behind the trailer in order to determine the vehicle's proximity to the dock. Once this fact came to light, the defendants agreed to mediate whereby the case was satisfactorily settled.
$300,000.00
$120,000.00
$9,807.00