NY Construction Accident
Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro, Moses & Halperin, LLP attorney Carmine Goncalves secured a $2,500,000 settlement for a 51-year-old union mason working to construct the Tappan Zee Bridge.
While inspecting and performing spot repairs on one of the concrete pylons rising out of the Hudson River, the plaintiff was left with only a wooden pallet as his means of ascending and descending the exterior metal gangways until the final staircase could be installed. As he stepped down from one level, the unsecured pallet shifted beneath him, causing him to lose his footing. The handrail, which was still unwelded and not yet fixed in place, gave way as he grabbed for support. He fell approximately three feet onto his backside. The incident was promptly reported, and the plaintiff recorded a video documenting the hazardous conditions.
Carmine argued that the State of New York failed to maintain a safe worksite, in violation of Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). Through multiple depositions and a meticulous investigation into the site’s safety practices, Carmine dismantled the defendants’ argument that the plaintiff could have retrieved an alternate safety device, such as an extension ladder stored in a warehouse accessible only by boat. Although the lower court declined to award the plaintiff summary judgment on liability, Carmine persisted, bringing the case to the Second Department. There, the appellate court reversed the earlier ruling and granted plaintiff summary judgment.
As a result of the accident, the plaintiff sustained injuries to both knees, his left shoulder, elbow, hip, neck, and back. He ultimately underwent four surgical procedures.
At trial, the Carmine planned to present testimony from the plaintiff’s surgeons regarding his orthopedic injuries and testimony from his friends and family to illustrate the profound impact the accident is having on his daily life.
An economist was retained to detail the financial consequences of the plaintiff’s inability to continue earning his union wages and fringe benefits. A vocational rehabilitation expert was also retained to testify about his severely restricted employment prospects.
On the eve of the damages-only trial, the parties agreed for the third time to submit the matter to mediation, after the first two attempts had failed to resolve the case. Finally, a fair settlement was reached thanks to Carmine’s preparation and readiness for trial.