When you are injured working at your construction job and decide to pursue a legal claim for the harm you suffered, you may face many types of hurdles. One of these may be a defendant who tries to place the blame for the accident on you by asserting that you wrongfully failed to follow proper procedures or instructions. These types of arguments are not uncommon in construction accident cases and highlight why it’s important to make sure you have a skilled New York construction injury attorney representing you in your case.
One New York electrician’s injury case was an example of a situation in which a worker faced such a challenge. The electrician’s job on the date of his accident was to complete the installation of a transformer. The transformer was located in a closet and suspended from overhead by four rods. The electrician was standing on a ladder and trimming the rods when the transformer crashed down and hit the electrician in the head. That impact caused the electrician to fall off the ladder and crash to the ground. That impact with the ground left the electrician unconscious.
The electrician sued for the injuries he suffered. He based his case on Section 240(1) of the Labor Law. While that law is commonly known as the “Scaffold Law,” it applies to a variety of workers, including those using “scaffolding, hoists, stays, ladders, slings, hangers, blocks, pulleys, braces, irons, ropes and other devices.” In other words, the electrician’s case, as a worker working on a ladder when he suffered his fall and injuries, clearly amounted to a claim that fell under this statute.
In any injury case, there are varying degrees of success. One of the most complete types of success is a favorable ruling on a motion for summary judgment on the question of liability. A success at this juncture means that the court has concluded that the people and entities you’ve sued are to blame, and you have achieved this result without even having to go through a full trial. The only thing that remains to be tried is the amount of your damages.
There may be many different techniques that a contractor or a building owner may try to use to defeat your case. One commonly employed tactic is to assert that you, as the worker, were actually the one who made the error that got you hurt. In this electrician’s case, the defense argument before the Appellate Division was that a foreman on the job had given out explicit instructions regarding propping up the transformer to prevent it from falling. The defense had a major problem regarding this piece of evidence, however. They couldn’t prove that the electrician received those directions. The foreman gave testimony stating that he was unsure whether or not the electrician was close enough to him (when he gave the instructions) to hear those directions. Without proof that the electrician heard the instructions but ignored them anyway, the proof of the instructions did nothing to impair the injured worker’s case.
The knowledgeable Queens ladder accident attorneys at Newman, Anzalone & Newman have many years of experience working on behalf of injured workers. We have the skill, determination, and resources to give you what your case needs. To schedule a free consultation with one of our qualified attorneys, contact us toll-free at 877-754-3099 or through our website.
More Blog Posts:
Worker Wins New York Construction Injury Lawsuit After He Shows that the Opposition’s Proof of His Negligence was Merely Speculative, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, Nov. 8, 2017
New York Construction Worker Wins Summary Judgment for Injuries Suffered as a Result of Falling Transformer, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, Oct. 19, 2017