New York Personal Injury Lawyers

Construction Accident Law: Recent Developments and Key Cases in NYC

By Dansker & Aspromonte

Related Posts

January 16, 2025

Understanding OSHA Regulations in NYC Construction Accident Cases

NYC Construction

Construction Accident Law: Recent Developments and Key Cases in NYC

Construction accident risks in New York City are on the rise. According to the 2024 report from New York City’s Department of Buildings (DOB), construction injuries in the city have risen for the third year in a row, with 692 reported injuries in 2023. This marks a 25% increase from the previous year and represents the second-highest number of injuries recorded since 2015. The report highlights that falls continue to be the primary cause of both injuries and fatalities in the construction sector, consistent with national trends.

At Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP, our New York construction accident lawyers bring over 100 years of combined legal experience to fight for the rights of injured workers. Since 1989, we have recovered more than half a billion dollars in verdicts and settlements for our clients, backed by our firm’s strong trial reputation and innovative legal strategies to deliver results. With a client-centric approach, we provide personalized attention to every client, ensuring that you receive the dedicated, high-powered representation you need. Call now to learn more.

Key Legal Changes in NYC Construction Accident Cases: A Review

Over the past several years, New York City’s legal landscape surrounding construction accidents has seen notable developments. These changes, influenced by new court rulings, evolving statutes, and shifting interpretations of existing laws, have impacted litigation strategies, worker protections, and liability considerations. This review will explore the most significant legal changes in NYC construction accident cases from the past years, along with their implications for the construction industry, injured workers, and legal practitioners.

Major Court Rulings and Legal Developments

Blake v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New York City, Inc

One of the most significant recent cases influencing Labor Law § 240 (Scaffold Law) liability was Blake v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New York City, Inc. In this case, the court clarified that absolute liability under the Scaffold Law is not applicable if workers have access to functioning safety devices but fail to use them properly. The ruling reinforced that liability hinges on whether a worker’s injuries resulted from an absence or inadequacy of safety equipment, rather than simple negligence by the worker.

Implications

This ruling introduced a more balanced approach to Labor Law § 240, allowing defendants, including property owners and contractors, to argue comparative negligence in certain cases. While workers still enjoy robust protections, the ruling shifted some responsibility back to workers for properly using safety equipment, which has influenced litigation strategies, particularly in defense cases.

Cabrera v. NYC Housing Authority

In Cabrera v. NYC Housing Authority, the court addressed Labor Law § 241(6), which mandates compliance with industrial safety standards. The case involved a worker injured by falling debris on a site where safety nets were required but not properly installed. The court ruled in favor of the worker, emphasizing that even technical violations of safety regulations under Labor Law § 241(6) could impose liability on property owners and general contractors.

Implications

This case reaffirmed the stringent safety requirements in New York construction law, increasing pressure on contractors and site managers to rigorously follow safety protocols. For plaintiffs, Labor Law § 241(6) remains a powerful tool, allowing injured workers to pursue compensation when workplace safety violations contribute to their injuries.

Chowdhury v. Rodriguez

Labor Law § 200, which mandates a safe working environment, has also seen significant developments. In Chowdhury v. Rodriguez, the court examined the extent of an employer’s or contractor’s supervisory control over the workplace. The court held that liability under Labor Law § 200 applies when a defendant has the authority to correct unsafe conditions. This ruling made it clear that mere awareness of unsafe conditions is insufficient for liability—there must be control and supervisory authority over the safety protocols on the job site.

Implications

The Chowdhury decision narrowed the scope of Labor Law § 200 liability by focusing on supervisory control. As a result, many defense strategies now emphasize the limited role of certain defendants in controlling day-to-day job site activities, while plaintiffs must demonstrate not just unsafe conditions but also the defendant’s role in managing those conditions.

Worker Protections and Liability Considerations

Enhanced Safety Regulations and Oversight

In response to the persistent rise in construction accidents, New York City has seen increased regulatory oversight. The introduction of Local Law 196, which mandates expanded safety training requirements for construction workers, represents one of the most significant legislative changes in the past few years. This law requires construction workers and supervisors on large job sites to complete up to 40 hours of OSHA-certified safety training.

Implications

This law aims to reduce accidents by ensuring workers have up-to-date training on safety protocols. For employers, this increases their liability for ensuring compliance with training mandates, while workers gain an additional layer of protection, as noncompliance by employers can strengthen the worker’s position in liability cases.

Impact on Litigation Strategies

The combination of these court rulings and new regulations has shifted how construction accident cases are litigated in New York. Defendants are increasingly focusing on contributory negligence defenses, especially in light of the Blake ruling under Labor Law § 240. Additionally, contractors and property owners must now provide evidence of compliance with Local Law 196 and other safety regulations, while plaintiffs must still prove that safety violations directly led to their injuries.

For attorneys representing injured workers, these developments mean that constructing a successful claim often involves demonstrating a clear link between the defendant’s failure to meet specific safety standards and the resulting injury. In contrast, defense attorneys have more room to argue cases based on worker behavior or the limitations of their client’s supervisory control, especially under Labor Law § 200.

Construction Accident Trends in NYC

Construction-related injuries in New York City have remained a major concern. The Construction Safety Report of 2022 by the NYC Department of Buildings indicated a sharp increase in accidents involving falls from heights, reinforcing the importance of Labor Law § 240 in legal disputes. The report also revealed that while general construction accidents slightly decreased from 2020 to 2022, the number of fatal accidents remained high, underscoring the ongoing risks on NYC construction sites.

Accident Data Breakdown

  • Falls from Heights: Responsible for the majority of serious injuries, emphasizing the continued relevance of Labor Law § 240.
  • Falling Debris and Material: A common cause of accidents, often tied to violations of Labor Law § 241(6).
  • Electrocutions and Equipment Failures: Less frequent but still notable causes of injury, often related to Labor Law § 200.

Implications

This data underscores the importance of strict adherence to safety regulations and the continued relevance of New York’s construction accident laws. For injured workers, these statistics highlight the need to understand their legal rights when pursuing compensation under these statutes.

Case Study: $5.5 Million Settlement for NYC Construction Worker

In a landmark case, Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP secured a $5.5 million settlement for a construction worker injured in a four-story fall at a West 17th Street site in Manhattan. The worker sustained multiple fractures—shoulder, clavicle, ribs, and hip—as well as internal injuries requiring several surgeries.

The defendants, including the general contractor and building owner, initially argued that the worker’s carelessness caused the fall. However, Dansker & Aspromonte successfully demonstrated that the unsafe working conditions were to blame. In addition to the worker’s settlement, the firm secured $500,000 for his wife, who provided essential home care during his recovery.

Implications

This case highlights the critical importance of safety measures on construction sites and shows how strategic legal representation can secure substantial compensation for both the injured worker and their family.

Other Significant Cases from Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP

$3.5 Million Settlement for Scaffold Fall

In another major victory, Dansker & Aspromonte obtained a $3.5 million settlement for an undocumented Mexican immigrant who fell 30 feet from scaffolding onto concrete at a New York construction site. The worker suffered severe injuries, including skull and vertebrae fractures. The employer had failed to provide a safety line, which would have prevented the fall.

$2.25 Million Settlement for Ladder Fall

A 46-year-old carpenter, represented by Dansker & Aspromonte, was awarded $2.25 million after falling from a ladder that slipped away from the wall. The property owner and general contractor were held liable for not providing a more appropriate ladder or scaffolding, which could have prevented the accident.

Construction Accident Laws in New York City

Labor Law § 240 (Scaffold Law)

  • Overview: Labor Law § 240, commonly known as the Scaffold Law, establishes the strict liability of contractors and property owners for accidents involving falls from heights. This law is particularly significant in the construction industry, where workers are often required to work at elevated heights.
  • Strict Liability: Under this statute, contractors and property owners are held strictly liable for injuries that occur as a result of falls from scaffolds, ladders, or other elevated work platforms. This means that a worker does not need to prove negligence; instead, they only need to demonstrate that a fall occurred and that it was due to a lack of adequate safety measures.
  • Safety Measures: The law mandates that appropriate safety devices, such as guardrails, safety nets, and harnesses, must be provided to protect workers from falls. Failure to provide these safety measures can result in liability for the contractor or property owner.
  • Worker Protection: The Scaffold Law aims to ensure that workers are adequately protected in elevated environments, thereby reducing the risk of serious injuries or fatalities due to falls. The law emphasizes that worker safety should be prioritized on construction sites.

Labor Law § 241(6)

  • Overview: Labor Law § 241(6) imposes specific safety regulations on construction sites and provides workers with the right to seek compensation when violations of these regulations contribute to their injuries.
  • Specific Safety Regulations: The law requires compliance with safety rules outlined in the New York State Industrial Code. These rules cover a wide range of safety measures, including proper equipment use, site maintenance, and hazard communication.
  • Negligence and Liability: Unlike Labor Law § 240, which imposes strict liability, § 241(6) allows injured workers to pursue claims based on violations of specific safety regulations. Workers must demonstrate that a violation of the safety rules directly contributed to their injuries.
  • Compensation: If a worker can establish that a safety violation occurred, they may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. This law provides an essential mechanism for holding employers accountable for not adhering to safety regulations.

Labor Law § 200

  • Overview: Labor Law § 200 requires employers and property owners to maintain a safe working environment for employees. This law is fundamental in establishing a duty of care regarding workplace safety.
  • Safe Working Environment: The law mandates that employers and property owners take reasonable steps to eliminate hazards and unsafe conditions on construction sites. This includes ensuring that equipment is safe to use, walkways are clear, and necessary safety protocols are in place.
  • Liability for Unsafe Conditions: If an injury occurs due to unsafe working conditions or hazards that the employer or property owner failed to address, they may be held liable. Workers can pursue claims for compensation if they can demonstrate that the employer’s negligence in maintaining a safe environment contributed to their injuries.
  • Employee Rights: Labor Law § 200 empowers employees by providing them with the right to work in a safe environment and seek compensation for injuries arising from unsafe conditions. This law emphasizes the responsibility of employers to actively ensure the safety of their workers.

OSHA Regulations for the Safety of Construction Workers in New York City

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has established a comprehensive set of regulations to ensure the safety and health of construction workers. In New York City, adherence to OSHA standards is essential for maintaining a safe work environment. Here are some key OSHA regulations relevant to construction workers:

General Duty Clause (Section 5(a)(1))

Overview: Employers are required to provide a workplace free from recognized hazards that could cause death or serious physical harm.

Implications: This clause ensures that construction employers proactively identify and mitigate hazards, fostering a culture of safety.

Cranes and Derricks in Construction (29 CFR Part 1926.1400)

Overview: This regulation governs the use of cranes and derricks in construction, outlining requirements for safe operation, maintenance, and inspection.

Key Provisions:

  • Operators must be trained and qualified.
  • Daily inspections of equipment must be conducted.
  • Safety measures must be implemented to protect workers from falls and struck-by hazards.

Scaffolding Safety (29 CFR Part 1926.451)

Overview: Regulations regarding scaffolds aim to protect workers from falls and related injuries.

Key Provisions:

  • Scaffolds must be designed and constructed to support their intended load.
  • Guardrails and toeboards must be installed on all open sides and ends of scaffolds.
  • Regular inspections must be carried out to ensure safety.

Fall Protection (29 CFR Part 1926.501)

Overview: This regulation mandates fall protection measures for workers at risk of falling six feet or more in the construction industry.

Key Provisions:

  • Employers must provide appropriate fall protection systems, such as guardrails, safety nets, or personal fall arrest systems.
  • Training on fall hazards and protective measures is required for all workers.

Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR Part 1910.1200)

Overview: This regulation ensures that workers are informed about hazardous chemicals they may be exposed to on the job.

Key Provisions:

  • Employers must maintain a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for each hazardous chemical.
  • Workers must receive training on recognizing and responding to chemical hazards.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (29 CFR Part 1926.95)

Overview: Employers are required to provide appropriate personal protective equipment based on the hazards present on the job site.

Key Provisions:

  • Employers must assess the workplace for hazards and provide suitable PPE, such as hard hats, gloves, and safety glasses.
  • Training on proper use and maintenance of PPE is necessary.

Electrical Safety (29 CFR Part 1926.416)

Overview: This regulation focuses on protecting workers from electrical hazards in construction.

Key Provisions:

  • Electrical equipment must be properly grounded.
  • Employers must implement lockout/tagout procedures to prevent accidental energization of equipment.

Common Challenges Faced by Construction Accident Victims in NYC

Construction accident victims in New York City may face numerous challenges when seeking justice and compensation for their injuries. These challenges can stem from the complexities of the legal system, the intricacies of construction regulations, and the adversarial nature of insurance companies. Let us take a look at the common hurdles faced by victims and their legal representatives and outline effective strategies that NYC construction accident lawyers use to overcome these obstacles.

Evidence Gathering

Challenges

One of the primary challenges in construction accident cases is gathering sufficient evidence to support the victim’s claim. Construction sites are often chaotic, and evidence can be lost or destroyed quickly. Key pieces of evidence may include:

  • Accident reports: Often incomplete or biased, as they may be written by supervisors or employers.
  • Witness statements: Eyewitness accounts may vary, and some witnesses may be reluctant to come forward.
  • Surveillance footage: Cameras may not always capture the incident or may be unavailable when needed.

Strategies

To address these challenges, an NYC construction accident lawyer will employ several evidence-gathering strategies:

  • Swift Investigation: Promptly investigating the accident site can help preserve evidence. Lawyers often work with private investigators to document the scene, take photographs, and gather any available safety logs.
  • Subpoenaing Records: Attorneys can issue subpoenas for relevant documents, including safety reports, maintenance records, and employee training records, which can establish liability.
  • Interviewing Witnesses: Lawyers will reach out to potential witnesses as soon as possible to collect their statements while their memories are fresh. They may also secure written declarations to strengthen the case.

Dealing with Insurance Companies

Challenges

Dealing with insurance companies can be particularly challenging for construction accident victims. Insurers often aim to minimize payouts and may employ various tactics to deny claims or pressure victims into accepting low settlements. Common tactics include:

  • Delaying the claims process to frustrate victims.
  • Questioning the severity of injuries or linking them to pre-existing conditions.
  • Offering quick settlements that fail to account for long-term medical expenses and lost wages.

Strategies

NYC construction accident lawyers use several strategies to counteract insurance company tactics:

  • Negotiation Skills: Skilled attorneys understand how to negotiate effectively with insurance adjusters. They can present strong evidence and articulate the full extent of the victim’s injuries and damages to support a higher settlement offer.
  • Understanding of Insurance Policies: Lawyers possess a thorough understanding of insurance policies and can identify any benefits or coverage that the victim might have overlooked.
  • Pursuing Legal Action: If negotiations fail, attorneys can prepare to file a lawsuit, which often compels insurers to reevaluate their positions. The threat of litigation can motivate insurance companies to offer fair settlements.

Navigating the Complexities of the Legal System

Challenges

The legal system can be daunting for construction accident victims, especially for those unfamiliar with legal jargon, procedures, and deadlines. Challenges include:

  • Statute of limitations: Victims must file their claims within a specific time frame, which can vary based on the type of claim and the defendants involved.
  • Understanding legal terms: Complex legal terminology can be confusing, leading to misinterpretations that may weaken a case.
  • Multiple liable parties: Construction accidents often involve multiple parties, such as contractors, subcontractors, and equipment manufacturers, complicating liability determinations.

Strategies

To assist clients in navigating the legal system, NYC construction accident lawyers implement various strategies:

  • Education and Communication: Attorneys take the time to educate clients about the legal process, explaining key terms, potential outcomes, and timelines to help alleviate anxiety.
  • Strict Adherence to Deadlines: Lawyers maintain detailed calendars to ensure all filing deadlines are met. This includes not only the initial complaint but also any motions, discovery requests, and settlement negotiations.
  • Coordinating with Experts: Lawyers often collaborate with experts, including accident reconstruction specialists and medical professionals, to build a comprehensive case. These experts can provide valuable insights and testimonies that clarify the circumstances of the accident and the extent of injuries.

Types of Compensation for Injured Construction Workers in New York

Workers’ Compensation Benefits

  • Medical Expenses: Coverage for all necessary medical treatments, including hospital stays, surgeries, rehabilitation, and prescriptions.
  • Lost Wages: Compensation for a percentage of lost income due to injury-related absences from work.
  • Permanent Disability Benefits: Financial support for workers who suffer long-term or permanent disabilities affecting their ability to work.
  • Vocational Rehabilitation: Assistance with job training and placement for injured workers unable to return to their previous roles.

Personal Injury Claims

  • Economic Damages: Compensation for quantifiable losses such as medical bills, lost wages, and property damage.
  • Non-Economic Damages: Payment for pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.
  • Punitive Damages: Additional compensation intended to punish particularly negligent or reckless behavior by employers or third parties.

Strategies NYC Construction Accident Attorneys Will Use to Recover Compensation

  • Thorough Case Investigation: Gathering evidence, including eyewitness statements, safety records, and accident reports.
  • Expert Testimonies: Consulting medical professionals and accident reconstruction specialists to strengthen claims.
  • Aggressive Negotiation: Engaging with insurance companies to secure fair settlements on behalf of clients.
  • Trial Preparedness: Readying cases for trial, if necessary, as this may compel the insurers to offer better settlements.

Future Trends and Challenges in Construction Accident Law in NYC

Emerging Technologies and Legal Issues

As the construction industry in New York City continues to evolve, several future trends and challenges are likely to impact construction accident law. One notable trend is the increasing use of advanced technology, such as drones and wearable safety devices, which may create new legal issues regarding liability and data privacy. As construction companies adopt these technologies, attorneys will need to understand their implications on worker safety and accident reporting.

Legislative Changes on the Horizon

Legislative changes are another area to watch. As safety regulations tighten and new laws are enacted to address emerging risks, attorneys must stay informed to advocate effectively for their clients. For instance, updates to OSHA regulations or local building codes could alter the landscape of liability, requiring construction accident lawyers to adapt their strategies accordingly.

Industry Developments and Mental Health Considerations

Industry developments, including a growing emphasis on mental health and wellness in the workplace, may also reshape construction accident law. Legal representatives will need to consider psychological injuries alongside physical ones, broadening the scope of claims and necessitating a deeper understanding of mental health issues in construction settings.

Recommendations for Staying Informed

To address these evolving dynamics, attorneys and affected workers should prioritize ongoing education and engagement with professional organizations. Networking with peers, attending seminars, and participating in continuing legal education (CLE) programs will help legal professionals stay ahead of changes in the law and industry standards.

Empowering Affected Workers

Affected workers should be encouraged to familiarize themselves with their rights and available resources. By fostering a proactive approach to education and awareness, both attorneys and workers can better prepare for the future challenges in construction accident law, ensuring safer job sites and fair compensation for injuries sustained.

Get High-Powered Legal Representation from Our NYC Construction Accident Lawyers

At Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP, our seasoned construction accident attorneys in New York are committed to fighting for the rights of construction accident victims. With over $500 million recovered for our clients since our founding in 1989, we know how to hold negligent parties accountable. Our firm, led by top-rated attorneys like Salvatore Aspromonte, has earned prestigious awards and accolades, including being named America’s Most Honored Professionals Top 1% and maintaining the highest Martindale-Hubbell distinction for 15 years.

You deserve a legal team that will listen to your concerns, provide dedicated legal support, and pursue the highest compensation you are entitled to. Don’t trust your case to just anyone—choose a firm with a proven record of success. If you have suffered serious injuries on a construction site, our legal team will fight aggressively for justice and compensation on your behalf. Reach out to us today and let our hard-hitting reputation work for you. To schedule your free consultation, call us at (516) 206-6723 or contact us online.

References:

  • Blake v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New York City, Inc. Citation: 1 N.Y.3d 280 (2004) New York Court of Appeals Decision
  • Cabrera v. NYC Housing Authority Citation: 2021 N.Y. Slip Op 03445 New York Appellate Division Decision
  • Chowdhury v. Rodriguez Citation: 57 A.D.3d 121 (2008) New York Appellate Division Decision
  • Labor Law § 240 (Scaffold Law) Full Text: New York Labor Law § 240
  • Labor Law § 241(6) Full Text: New York Labor Law § 241
  • Labor Law § 200 Full Text: New York Labor Law § 200
  • Local Law 196 Full Text: NYC Local Law 196 of 2017
  • NYC Department of Buildings, Construction Safety Report 2022 Source: NYC Department of Buildings Report
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) General Duty Clause
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Cranes and Derricks in Construction
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Scaffolding
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Fall Protection
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Hazard Communication
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Personal Protective Equipment
  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (n.d.) Electrical Safety

Recover Your Life

Let Us Fight For You
Free & Confidential Consultation

By submitting, you agree to be contacted about your request.

Unfortunately, based on your query, we are unable to assist you at this time. Our firm specializes in serious accidents and negligence cases, such as car accidents, slips and falls, construction accidents, and other accidents that require hospitalization or ongoing treatment.

Proven Record of Success

Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP has been advocating for the rights of the injured since 1986. We have the tools, resources, knowledge, and commitment to get you the best possible outcome.

Providing Answers & Solutions

Our team is committed to always being able to provide you with updates on your case and answers to your questions. This is your case and we want to be sure you are confident every step of the way.

Small Firm Dedication & Focus

Our firm is different from most firms in our area in that we are a “boutique” type firm that is small enough to give personal attention to our clients and yet experienced and powerful with a reputation as a hard-hitting litigation firm.

Innovative Legal Strategies

Each client that comes to our team gets a managing partner and trial partner dedicated to their case. We put our collective 100 years of experience behind your case to obtain the best possible outcome on your behalf.
Un joven chino con discapacidad de desarrollo de 21 años caminaba con algunos amigos después de la escuela cuando salió al cruce de peatones contra la luz y un autobús de la ciudad que estaba girando demasiado cerca de la esquina lo golpeó.
Un ayudante de camarero de 20 años fue atropellado por un automóvil en Ocean Parkway en Brooklyn, lo que lo dejó en coma y con graves lesiones cerebrales.
Esta contable caminaba después del trabajo en Battery Park en el paseo peatonal cuando de repente fue golpeada por una motoneta de la policía que iba a gran velocidad.
Una pasante de teatro de 22 años caminaba por la intersección de la calle 42 y la Novena Avenida en Manhattan cuando fue golpeada por la puerta trasera de un camión que pasaba cuando la puerta abrio volando porque no había sido asegurado correctamente por el conductor.
La Sra. Y-H, pasajera en un tren del metro que descarriló.
Un ayudante de camarero de 20 años fue atropellado por un automóvil en Ocean Parkway en Brooklyn.
Un repartidor en bicicleta de 26 años fue golpeado por una camioneta Dollar Rent-A-Car que iba a gran velocidad en una intersección concurrida, causando múltiples fracturas en el cuello, espalda, brazo y pierna, así como daños cerebrales leves.
Christian, un niño de 4 años, fue llevado al hospital para una reparación rutinaria de párpados caídos. El hospital, en una medida de reducción de costos, había contratado sus servicios de anestesia en quirófano a una corporación que empleaba principalmente enfermeras anestesistas en lugar de médicos capacitados para administrar anestesia.
Un niño sufrió lesiones graves después de caerse mientras corría detrás de su autobús escolar y ser atropellado por las ruedas traseras. Este caso demuestra la habilidad de la firma para obtener compensación en accidentes que involucran autobuses escolares y menores.
Un joven chino con discapacidad de desarrollo de 21 años caminaba con algunos amigos después de la escuela cuando salió al cruce de peatones contra la luz y un autobús de la ciudad que estaba girando demasiado cerca de la esquina lo golpeó.
La Sra. Y-H era una pasajera en un tren del metro que descarriló.
Un ayudante de camarero de 20 años fue atropellado por un automóvil en Ocean Parkway en Brooklyn, sufriendo lesiones graves, incluyendo un coma. Aunque es un caso de peatón, el incidente involucra un vehículo y demuestra la experiencia de la firma en manejar accidentes graves de tránsito.
A pesar del hecho de que este caso fue referido a Dansker & Aspromonte LLP Associates por otro abogado 17 años después de que ocurriera el accidente, se obtuvo un veredicto impresionante a través de una investigación cuidadosa y una preparación incansable.
En uno de los casos más trágicos que ha visto esta oficina, dos madres y sus cuatro adolescentes conducían a una reunión de natación de la escuela secundaria en el New York State Thruway en una camioneta.
Este caso involucró a una niña de 6 años que estaba en una camioneta que fue golpeada por una ambulancia en un choque de varios autos en el Northern State Parkway en Long Island, Nueva York.
Una oficial de la Policía de la Ciudad de Nueva York de 35 años sufrió lesiones graves mientras era pasajera en un automóvil policial en camino a una llamada de emergencia.
Un carpintero de 46 años cayó de una escalera que resbaló en el sitio de trabajo, lo que le causó lesiones significativas. Este caso ilustra la experiencia de la firma en accidentes de equipo defectuoso en entornos de construcción.
Un carpintero de 30 años cayó de una escalera en un sitio de trabajo en una tienda minorista, resultando en lesiones graves. Este caso subraya la capacidad de la firma para asegurar compensación en accidentes de caídas en proyectos de construcción.
Un inmigrante mexicano sin documentación cayó 30 pies desde un andamio en un sitio de construcción, sufriendo lesiones graves al impactar contra el cemento. Este caso demuestra la experiencia de la firma en caídas en el lugar de trabajo, comunes en la construcción.
Un trabajador de construcción sufrió fracturas en el hombro, clavícula, costillas y cadera, además de lesiones internas que requirieron múltiples cirugías. Este caso destaca la habilidad de la firma para manejar lesiones graves en el lugar de trabajo.
Baby S was born with a congenital hip dislocation which was not anyone’s fault. However, malpractice occurred when the doctors and hospital did not recognize the condition after she was born. Their failure to diagnose and properly treat the condition resulted in a slight but permanent deformity.
Julio, 16, was an outpatient at the Manhattan Children’s Psychiatric Hospital where he attended school and got psychiatric counseling and supportive therapy every day. The NYC Board of Ed operated the school. One day after school, Julio ran after his bus, which was leaving without him. He slipped and was run over by the back wheels, sustaining severe injuries, including bilateral hip fractures and a shearing injury to his buttocks. Board of Ed rules required that Julio was to be escorted to the bus. The NYCTA denied liability, claiming they weren’t negligent because Julio ran after the bus. The City denied liability because they claimed the school day was over. At trial, both the Board of Ed who had knowledge of Julio’s poor impulse control and was required to put him safely on the bus, and the NYCTA whose bus driver saw Julio running and made no effort to slow or stop the bus were found to be responsible.
Baby Taylor C. – Taylor’s mother had gained over 50 pounds during the pregnancy, was past due, and had a prolonged first stage and second stage of delivery. These are warning signs of an overly large baby. Baby Taylor was 9 lbs. 13 oz. Instead of delivery by C-section, which was clearly indicated, the attending physician elected a natural birth. When the baby was stuck in the pelvic area, excessive force was used to pull her out, injuring the nerves in her neck and causing partial paralysis of her left arm. The condition is known as Erbs Palsy. The case was settled during the trial. Fortunately, Baby Taylor’s injury improved over time.
Ayisha W- A young girl slid down a sliding pond in the playground of an NYC school. The slide was not installed properly and there was a gap between the metal on the side of the slide. As Ayisha slid down, her ring finger went into the gap and the top of it was cut off. The City argued that since it was just the tip of her finger it was not worth much money. At trial, it was proved that Ayisha had a devastating emotional reaction that affected every aspect of her life and self-esteem. The jury agreed.
A 46-year-old carpenter was working on a straight ladder which had been leaned against the wall on a jobsite. He fell when the ladder slipped away from the wall. As a result, he suffered facial injuries and a fractured knee that required surgery. The property owner and general contractor were found to be responsible because Jian S. should have been provided with a more suitable A-frame ladder or scaffolding.
A 30-year-old carpenter who was working at a job site in a retail store fell from a ladder onto both feet. He suffered bilateral calcaneus fractures requiring multiple surgeries.
An undocumented Mexican immigrant working on scaffolding at a construction site fell 30 feet onto the cement. He fractured his skull and vertebrae in his neck and back. It was shown at trial that the company he worked for failed to provide him with a safety line, which would have prevented his fall.
Following a 4- story fall, a construction worker at a West 17th Street construction site in Manhattan recently won a $5.5 million dollar settlement from the general contractor and building owner for failing to provide him with a safe workplace. Defendants had argued that the fall was the result of the 56 year old construction worker’s own carelessness but Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP lawyers were able to prove otherwise. As a result of his fall, the construction worker suffered fractures of his shoulder, clavicle, ribs and hip, as well as internal injuries which required multiple surgeries. These injuries required home care which was primarily provided by his wife who also received a payment of $500,000 as part of the settlement. To minimize their own responsibility, the general contractor and building owner claimed that the worker had made an excellent recovery when he had not. In order to prove the case, Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP retained 5 separate experts to illustrate the full extent of the worker’s injuries and the disabling effect they would have over the course of his life.
Maria, a housekeeper, was walking across Ocean Parkway in Brooklyn in the crosswalk when she was struck by a school bus and thrown over 25 feet. She sustained severe injuries, including multiple fractures. The bus driver claimed that he had a green light and was travelling at a safe speed. Unfortunately, Mrs. S. could not recall any of the facts of the accident. Our investigator combed the area for witnesses. He found a woman who lived on the sixth floor of an adjacent apartment building. Although she didn’t see the accident, she happened to look out her window and saw Maria’s body lying in the roadway down the street. Using this testimony, our accident reconstruction expert was able to prove that the bus had to be speeding to knock Maria that far from the crosswalk. The case was settled immediately after that testimony.
Our client was a married NYC Parks Department employee. On a snowy night in Staten Island, he was preparing his truck to spread salt on the roadways. He drove the spreader truck to the salt storage yard. As he waited alongside his truck, the operator of a front loader truck used to place the salt in the spreader lost control of the loading bucket. Sadly, he was struck by the bucket, suffered massive injuries and died in the hospital several hours later.
A 21-year-old developmentally disabled Chinese boy was walking with some friends after school when he stepped out into the crosswalk against the light and a City bus which was turning a little too close to the corner struck him. The young man had crippling injuries which prevented him from leaving the hospital where he died several months later. Despite the fact that eyewitnesses said the boy stepped into the street against the light, the law reduces an injured person’s share of liability in accordance with their mental capacity. At trial, it was proven through a guidance counselor from his school that he was intellectually comparable to a seven-year-old. Thereafter, the jury determined that this young man was not legally responsible for his actions and awarded 100% in his favor on the liability portion of the trial
In one of the most tragic cases this office has seen, two mothers and their four teenagers were driving to a high school swimming meet on the New York State Thruway in a van. When the driver suspected a flat tire, instead of pulling over onto the shoulder, the mother of two of the children inexplicably stopped the van in the right moving lane of traffic. Within a very short time, the driver of a tanker truck traveling at a steady 65 miles an hour who claimed not to see the stopped van, struck it at full speed, literally cutting the van in half. There were two survivors with grave injuries and four fatalities. We secured the maximum insurance that was available to cover these claims.
Following a 4- story fall, a construction worker at a West 17th Street construction site in Manhattan recently won a $5.5 million dollar settlement from the general contractor and building owner for failing to provide him with a safe workplace. Defendants had argued that the fall was the result of the 56 year old construction worker’s own carelessness but Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP lawyers were able to prove otherwise. As a result of his fall, the construction worker suffered fractures of his shoulder, clavicle, ribs and hip, as well as internal injuries which required multiple surgeries. These injuries required home care which was primarily provided by his wife who also received a payment of $500,000 as part of the settlement. To minimize their own responsibility, the general contractor and building owner claimed that the worker had made an excellent recovery when he had not. In order to prove the case, Dansker & Aspromonte Associates LLP retained 5 separate experts to illustrate the full extent of the worker’s injuries and the disabling effect they would have over the course of his life.
Un trabajador de construcción de 50 años estaba montando su bicicleta cuando cayó debido a un defecto en la carretera y sufrió pequeñas fracturas y daños cognitivos leves.
Un trabajador de mantenimiento de 31 años golpeó un sensor de presión de control de tráfico de la ciudad de Nueva York mientras montaba su bicicleta. Debido a un mal mantenimiento del sensor, el trabajador sufrió lesiones graves.
Una mujer y su novio estaban andando en bicicleta cuando entraron en un sitio de excavación sin protección en una zona completamente oscura bajo un paso elevado. La bicicleta de Rhonda cayó en un pozo y su cara se estrelló contra la carretera.
Un repartidor en bicicleta de 26 años fue golpeado por una camioneta Dollar Rent-A-Car que iba a gran velocidad en una intersección concurrida, causando múltiples fracturas en el cuello, espalda, brazo y pierna, así como daños cerebrales leves.
La madre de Taylor había subido más de 50 libras durante el embarazo, estaba atrasada, y tuvo una prolongada primera y segunda etapa del parto.
Una joven madre china por primera vez resultó herida debido a la negligencia médica de los médicos y el personal de lo que entonces era el Hospital Beekman Downtown.
Un bombero de 42 años, que antes había corrido más de 30 maratones, se cortó la pierna mientras luchaba contra un incendio.
Christian, un niño de 4 años, fue llevado al hospital para una reparación rutinaria de párpados caídos. El hospital, en una medida de reducción de costos, había contratado sus servicios de anestesia en quirófano a una corporación que empleaba principalmente enfermeras anestesistas en lugar de médicos capacitados para administrar anestesia.
Un guardia de seguridad resbaló en una superficie helada frente a un edificio propiedad de Metropolitan Life, lo que le causó una fractura de rodilla.
Una asistente de salud en el hogar de 56 años tropezó con un cable expuesto que se extendía desde una cabina telefónica en la plataforma del metro, resultando en una lesión que requirió un reemplazo de rodilla.
Un conductor de servicio se bajó de su vehículo para recoger dinero en el carril de un Burger King cuando cayó a través de una rejilla de alcantarillado rota, resultando en una caída de 4 pies y lesiones significativas.
Un trabajador de construcción indocumentado cayó desde un andamio a 30 pies de altura, impactando contra el cemento y sufriendo lesiones graves. Este caso muestra la experiencia de la firma en caídas graves en el trabajo, que se relacionan con incidentes de resbalones y caídas en entornos peligrosos.
Un niño de 16 años fue atropellado por un camión que estaba retrocediendo lentamente y quedó atrapado contra una pared, sufriendo una grave laceración en el bazo, que tuvo que ser removido.
Adjudicado al cónyuge. El Sr. S. era un empleado casado del Departamento de Parques de Nueva York. En una noche nevada en Staten Island, estaba preparando su camión para esparcir sal en las carreteras
En uno de los casos más trágicos que ha visto esta oficina, dos madres y sus cuatro adolescentes conducían a una reunión de natación de la escuela secundaria en el New York State Thruway en una camioneta.
Una pasante de teatro de 22 años caminaba por la intersección de la calle 42 y la Novena Avenida en Manhattan cuando fue golpeada por la puerta trasera de un camión que pasaba cuando la puerta abrio volando porque no había sido asegurado correctamente por el conductor.
Adjudicado al cónyuge. El Sr. S. era un empleado casado del Departamento de Parques de Nueva York. En una noche nevada en Staten Island, estaba preparando su camión para esparcir sal en las carreteras
Adjudicado a la familia. Un hombre de 49 años cayó por el hueco de un ascensor cuando las puertas del ascensor se abrieron, pero la cabina del ascensor estaba en un piso superior.
En uno de los casos más trágicos que ha visto esta oficina, dos madres y sus cuatro adolescentes conducían a una reunión de natación de la escuela secundaria en el New York State Thruway en una camioneta.
Este accidente ocurrió en el Bronx cuando Rafael C. estaba trabajando en un camión de saneamiento. El conductor perdió el control al girar el vehículo.
Una pasante de teatro de 22 años caminaba por la intersección de la calle 42 y la Novena Avenida en Manhattan cuando fue golpeada por la puerta trasera de un camión que pasaba cuando la puerta abrio volando porque no había sido asegurado correctamente por el conductor.Una pasante de teatro de 22 años caminaba por la intersección de la calle 42 y la Novena Avenida en Manhattan cuando fue golpeada por la puerta trasera de un camión que pasaba cuando la puerta abrio volando porque no había sido asegurado correctamente por el conductor.
En uno de los casos más trágicos que ha visto esta oficina, dos madres y sus cuatro adolescentes conducían a una reunión de natación de la escuela secundaria en el New York State Thruway en una camioneta.
Un bombero de 42 años, que antes había corrido más de 30 maratones, se cortó la pierna mientras luchaba contra un incendio.
Un Oficial de la Policía de la Ciudad de Nueva York de 35 años era una pasajera en un automóvil de la policía que iba a una llamada de emergencia.
An undocumented Mexican immigrant working on scaffolding at a construction site fell 30 feet onto the cement. He fractured his skull and vertebrae in his neck and back. It was shown at trial that the company he worked for failed to provide him with a safety line, which would have prevented his fall.
Julio, 16, was an outpatient at the Manhattan Children’s Psychiatric Hospital where he attended school and got psychiatric counseling and supportive therapy every day. The NYC Board of Ed operated the school. One day after school, Julio ran after his bus, which was leaving without him. He slipped and was run over by the back wheels, sustaining severe injuries, including bilateral hip fractures and a shearing injury to his buttocks. Board of Ed rules required that Julio was to be escorted to the bus. The NYCTA denied liability, claiming they weren’t negligent because Julio ran after the bus. The City denied liability because they claimed the school day was over. At trial, both the Board of Ed who had knowledge of Julio’s poor impulse control and was required to put him safely on the bus, and the NYCTA whose bus driver saw Julio running and made no effort to slow or stop the bus were found to be responsible.
Baby Taylor C. – Taylor’s mother had gained over 50 pounds during the pregnancy, was past due, and had a prolonged first stage and second stage of delivery. These are warning signs of an overly large baby. Baby Taylor was 9 lbs. 13 oz. Instead of delivery by C-section, which was clearly indicated, the attending physician elected a natural birth. When the baby was stuck in the pelvic area, excessive force was used to pull her out, injuring the nerves in her neck and causing partial paralysis of her left arm. The condition is known as Erbs Palsy. The case was settled during the trial. Fortunately, Baby Taylor’s injury improved over time.
Ayisha W- A young girl slid down a sliding pond in the playground of an NYC school. The slide was not installed properly and there was a gap between the metal on the side of the slide. As Ayisha slid down, her ring finger went into the gap and the top of it was cut off. The City argued that since it was just the tip of her finger it was not worth much money. At trial, it was proved that Ayisha had a devastating emotional reaction that affected every aspect of her life and self-esteem. The jury agreed.