New York Personal Injury Lawyers

The Intricacies of Wrongful Death Lawsuits: An Expert Examination

By Dansker & Aspromonte

Related Posts

December 4, 2024

Grieving Families Call on New York State

Categories

Courtroom Discussion

The Intricacies of Wrongful Death Lawsuits: An Expert Examination

When litigating a wrongful death case in New York City, it is crucial to be acutely tuned into the minutia of the procedural mechanisms of the New York wrongful death statute as well as the cause of action that underlies the wrongful death claim.  Litigating NYC wrongful death claims can be a strenuous effort that is not well-suited to being handled by inexperienced attorneys.  It is imperative to hire a lawyer who has a deep understand of New York’s wrongful death statute and the procedural mechanisms attendant thereto.

If you have a loved one who was killed by the misconduct of another person then you need to retain experienced counsel as soon as possible.  Retaining an effective attorney can be make-or-break in terms of maximizing the settlement value of your case.  Reach out to the wrongful death attorneys at Dankser & Aspromonte today to schedule your free consultation.

Understanding Wrongful Death Lawsuits

Wrongful Death vs. Survival Actions: What is the Difference?

In New York, there is an interplay of two seemingly similar causes of action: claims for wrongful death and survival actions.  Both causes of action allow the personal representative of a deceased person to bring lawsuits arising from the deceased person, but this is where their similarities end.

A wrongful death claim is an action created by New York state statute authorizing the personal representative of a deceased person to commence an action for wrongful death for the sole benefit of the decedent’s statutory distributees.[1]  Wrongful death claims limit the damages distributees can recover to the “fair and just compensation for the pecuniary injuries resulting from the decedent’s death to the person for whose benefit the action is brought.”[2]

A survival action sounds similar to a wrongful death claim, but it is quite different.  New York’s survival action statute provides that no claim for personal injury or injury to property shall abate because the claimant or the tortfeasor passed away.[3]  In effect, this means that a person who was injured and could have sued or did in fact initiate a personal injury lawsuit can have that personal injury lawsuit continued by his or her personal representative after he or she dies as long as the action was not time-barred when they died.[4]  One of the most important aspects of a survival action is that, unlike a wrongful death action, plaintiffs bringing a survival action claim can recover damages for the pain and suffering of the deceased person.[5]

The Statutory Basis for Wrongful Death Claims

New York courts are very clear that actions for wrongful death are brought pursuant to statutory authority and that there is no common law basis for a wrongful death claim.[6]  Due to its statutory basis, New York judges construe these claims strictly.[7]  This means that anyone who brings a wrongful death claim will be required to comply with exacting statutory requirements.[8]

The Elements of a Wrongful Death Claim

There are four elements that a wrongful death claimant must both plead and prove:

  1. The defendant’s wrongful act would have given rise to a viable claim for personal injury by the decedent against the defendant.
  2. The defendant’s wrongful act must cause the decedent to die.
  3. There must be a distributee—meaning someone who is entitled to collect the proceeds of the wrongful death lawsuit under the statute—who suffered a pecuniary loss by reason of the decedent’s passing.
  4. The person bringing the wrongful death suit must be the personal representative of the decedent’s estate.[9]

A wrongful death act is flexible in defining a “wrongful act,” allowing wrongful death claimants to bring their claims on a large number of theories.[10]  The crucial aspect of the wrongful act prong is that, regardless of the nature of the wrongful act, the decedent would have been able to maintain a personal injury action based on the wrongful act against the defendant if not for his death.

Some elaboration on the term “distributee” is also necessary.  A distributee is someone who (1) survived the decedent, and, (2) at the time of decedent’s passing, either (a) would have been the decedent’s distributee under the law of intestacy or (b) was the decedent’s parent and the decedent had no kids.[11]

Damages in Wrongful Death Lawsuits

In New York, damages in wrongful death cases are limited compensatory damages for the pecuniary loss suffered by the distributee due to the decedent’s death.[12]  In simpler terms, this means that damages can only be awarded to wrongful death claimants for the economic value of the losses they suffer as result of the death.  Generally, these damages include the following:

  1. Reasonable medical and funeral expenses;[13]
  2. Interest that has accrued since the date of the decedent’s passing;
  3. When appropriate, punitive damages;
  4. Loss of services;[14] and
  5. Loss of parental guidance.[15]

New York falls in the minority of jurisdictions which limit wrongful death remedies to pecuniary losses while prohibiting damage awards for loss of society.[16]  Fifteen years after enacting the wrongful death statute, the New York Court of Appeals held that the word pecuniary was used in distinction to those injuries to the affections and sentiments which arise from the death of relatives, and which, though most painful and grievous to be borne, cannot be measured or recompensed by money. It excludes, also, those losses which result from the deprivation of the society and companionship of relatives, which are equally incapable of being defined by any recognized measure of value.[17]

Based on that distinction, New York does not permit wrongful death claimants to recover for grief of the survivors, the loss of the decedent’s love, loss of companionship, loss of society, or the surviving spouse’s loss of consortium because these losses cannot be measured or recompensed by money.[18]

The New York wrongful death statute is not without its critics, who say that the current law disproportionately favors wealthy people litigating wrongful death claims by only awarding damages for pecuniary losses.[19]  They also contend that awarding damages only on a pecuniary loss basis measures the value of a human life in terms of the amount of money that person made.  Many of these critics support the Grieving Families Act, which would allow damage awards for non-pecuniary losses in wrongful death claims.[20]

In rare occasions, a wrongful death claimant may be entitled to punitive damages.[21]  Wrongful death claimants can recover punitive damages so long as the tortfeasor is still alive, but punitive damages will not be awarded if the tortfeasor is deceased.[22]

The Role of a Wrongful Death Attorney

When hiring an attorney for a wrongful death claim, it is always crucial to hire the right NYC wrongful death lawyer.  Hiring an experienced wrongful death attorney is of the utmost important, and a client’s selection of counsel is one of the most critical decisions he or she will make in the case.  The client should look for the following criteria when selecting an attorney to represent him in his wrongful death claim:

  1. Experience litigating wrongful death claims;
  2. A track record of good results for clients;
  3. A good ethical record with the state bar;
  4. Significant trial experience to push insurance companies to the negotiating table; and
  5. Honesty and dependability from the person handling what is likely the most important issue in the client’s life.

Upon being retained, counsel should get to work investigating the case and drafting the initial pleadings as soon as possible.  The attorney should take the following steps at the case’s outset:

  1. Get signed releases from the client allowing the attorney to acquire the decedent’s medical records;
  2. Interview all possible distributees within the family;
  3. Inquire into the relationships between the decedent and the family members; and
  4. Investigate the scene of the death to the extent possible.

The case is going to progress through stages.  Discovery will commence shortly after the defendant files an answer to the complaint, and once discovery is complete, dispositive motions such as a motion for summary judgment will likely follow.

Throughout that process, the lawyer should be engaged in settlement talks with defense counsel to determine if a strong recovery is possible without expending too much time or too many resources.  Ultimately, it is the lawyer’s job to resolve the case on terms favorable to his or her client.  The case should be prepared to go to trial for the start, but trial is rarely the optimum outcome for either side and will typically happen when one side has significantly overvalued or undervalued the settlement of the case.

Challenges and Complexities

The Statute of Limitations in New York Wrongful Death Claims

In New York, the statute of limitations for a wrongful death claim begins to run on the day of the decedent’s passing, and it expires two years after he or she dies.[23]  This two-year period is strictly enforced in New York, even when cause of action underlying the wrongful death claim would ordinarily have a longer statute of limitations.

New York does follow a few exceptions to the statute of limitations, specifically allowing the statute to be tolled in the following circumstances:

  1. Infancy: The statute of limitations is tolled during a period where all of the distributees are children and have not yet had a guardian appointed to bring the claim on their behalf.[24]
  2. Fraudulent Concealment: The statute of limitations cannot run on a claim in New York if the defendant acts fraudulently to conceal his or her wrongful act, thereby preventing its discovery.[25]
  3. The Discovery Rule: New York applies the discovery rule the statute of limitations, meaning that the statute of limitations will not run on a wrongful death claim arising from exposure to harmful or toxic substances until the exposure is discovered.[26]

The Impact of Family Dynamics in Wrongful Death Cases

The quality of the relationship between the decedent and the distributees is important in determining the decedent’s disposition to have given voluntary assistance or support to them.[27]  The quality of these relationships is even more important where the decedent had no legal obligation to support the statutory distributee.

Further, evidence of these relationships is admissible and often comes from unusual sources.  In Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., a decedent-wife left her spouse just one dollar in her will because he had been a cruel, indifferent husband while she had been a faithful, dutiful, and loving wife.[28]  The Court held that the decedent’s will, which had been executed just four months earlier, was admissible at trial to prove the decedent’s state of mind.[29]  Further, the decedent’s state of mind was highly relevant to whether or not the husband had a reasonable expectancy of future assistance or support from his wife had she lived.[30]  Ultimately, that court explained:

It is always proper to make proof of the relations of the decedent to the person for whose benefit the action is maintained, because such proof has a bearing upon the pecuniary loss suffered by the person entitled to the recovery, and this is true whether the beneficiary is the surviving husband or wife or one or more of the next of kin.[31]

The Court went on to hold that the amount recoverable in any particular wrongful death case is heavily influenced by the nature of the relationship between the beneficiary and the decedent precisely because the measure of loss is determined from the standpoint of the surviving spouse and is limited to compensation for pecuniary loss.[32]  The decedent’s voluntary decision to provide support for the beneficiary is of essential importance to a jury in determining pecuniary loss.[33]

Conclusion

As has been demonstrated above, the law of wrongful death in New York is complex, and it often accompanies fact patterns in which the worst has befallen innocent families.  When litigating these cases, it is always important to keep the humanity of the client at the forefront of one’s mind while helping them to navigate one of the biggest issues they will deal with in their life.

After a loved one is killed by another person’s wrongful act, it can be hard to know where to turn, but you do not have to go it alone.  Our attorneys have years of experience litigating these cases and a resume of results to show for it.  Reach out to our skilled NYC wrongful death attorneys at Dansker & Aspromonte by calling us at (516) 206-6723 or by contacting us at our webpage, which is linked here.

[1] N.Y. EPTL § 5-4.1.

[2]  Mazella v. Hauser, 37 N.Y.S.3d 596 (2016).

[3]  N.Y. EPTL § 11-3.2.

[4]  Stolarski v. Family Services of Westchester, Inc., 973 N.Y.S.2d 725 (2013).

[5]  Tenczar v. Milligan, 365 N.Y.S.2d 272 (1975).

[6]  Carrick v. Central General Hospital, 434 N.Y.S.2d 130 (1980).

[7]  Ratka v. St. Francis Hosp., 407 N.Y.S.2d 458 (1978).

[8]  Young v. Robertshaw Controls Co., 481 N.Y.S.2d 891 (1984).

[9]  Chamberlain v. City of White Plains, 986 F.Supp.2d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2013).

[10]  Cauverien v. De Metz, 188 N.Y.S.2d 627 (1959); McDonald v. McDonald, 597 N.Y.S.2d 159 (1993); Greco v. S.S. Kresge Co., 277 N.Y. 26 (1938); Coursen v. New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, 499 N.Y.S.2d 52 (1986); Ploof v. B.I.M. Truck Service, Inc., 384 N.Y.S.2d 521 (1976); Sullivan v. Dunham, 161 N.Y. 290 (1900).

[11]  N.Y. EPTL § 4-1.1; N.Y. EPTL § 5-4.5.

[12]  Gonzalez v. New York City Housing Authority, 77 N.Y.2d 663 (1991).

[13]  Milczarski v. Walaszek, 969 N.Y.S.2d 685 (2013).

[14]  De Long v. County of Erie, 60 N.Y.2d 296 (1983).

[15]  Gonzalez v. New York City Housing Authority, 77 N.Y.2d 663 (1991).

[16]  Gonzalez v. New York City Housing Authority, 77 N.Y.2d 663 (1991).

[17]  Tilley v. Hudson Riv. R.R. Co., 24 N.Y. 471 (1862).

[18]  Gonzalez v. New York City Housing Authority, 77 N.Y.2d 663 (1991).

[19]  Midgley & Potenza, The Push and Pitfalls of New York’s Attempt to Expand Wrongful Death Recovery, Best Lawyers (May 20, 2024), https://www.bestlawyers.com/article/new-york-wrongful-death-recovery-expansion/5859.

[20]  Midgley & Potenza, The Push and Pitfalls of New York’s Attempt to Expand Wrongful Death Recovery, Best Lawyers (May 20, 2024), https://www.bestlawyers.com/article/new-york-wrongful-death-recovery-expansion/5859.

[21]  N.Y. EPTL § 5-4.3(b).

[22]  N.Y. EPTL § 11-3.2(a)(1).

[23]  Proano v. Gutman, 180 N.Y.S.3d 279 (2022).

[24]  Hernandez v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 687 (1991).

[25]  McIvor v. DiBenedetto, 503 N.Y.S.2d 836 (1986).

[26]  N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-c.

[27]  15 N.Y.Prac., New York Law of Torts § 15:24.

[28]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

[29]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

[30]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

[31]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

[32]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

[33]  Loetsch v. New York City Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308 (1943).

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.