- Home
- Practice Areas
- Personal Injury Information
- Houston Personal Injury Lawyer
- What is a Personal Injury?
- Can I File an Injury Claim?
- Statute of Limitations
- What Makes Up a Strong Case?
- Personal Injury Damages
- Personal Injury Categories
- Vicarious Liability
- Injury Attorneys in Houston
- Houston Premises Liability
- Child Injury Cases in Houston
- Preponderance of Evidence
- Burn and Scald Injury
- Free Online Legal Advice
- Houston Personal Injury Law Firm
- Conroe Personal Injury Attorney
- Missouri City Personal Injuries
- More...
- Houston Pro Bono Lawyer
- Houston Personal Injury Accident Claim
- Houston PI Lawyer
- Houston Personal Injury Law Attorney
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Amputation Accidents in Houston
- Houston Personal Injury Legal Advice
- Spinal Cord Injury
- Houston Personal Injury Lawyers
- Houston Personal Injury Attorneys
- Mitigating Damages After an Injury
- Proving the Proximate Cause
- Thin Skull Rule
- Broken Bones
- Mediation in an Injury Lawsuit
- Houston Personal Injury Law
- Subrogation Reimbursement
- Best Injury Lawyer in Houston
- Clear Lake Personal Injury Lawyer
- Deer Park Personal Injury Attorney
- Galveston Personal Injury Lawyer
- Pasadena Personal Injury Attorney
- Sugar Land Personal Injury Lawyer
- Texas City Personal Injury Attorney
- Wrongful Death Information
- Houston Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Statute of Limitations
- Texas Wrongful Death Law
- Texas Survival Statute
- Fatal Car Accidents
- Truck Accident Fatalities
- Plane and Aviation Fatalities
- Houston Fatal Boating Accidents
- Motorycle Accident Wrongful Death Cases
- Houston Work Related Death Cases
- Fatal Construction Accidents in Houston Texas
- Fatal Pedestrian Accidents in Houston
- Houston Elderly Wrongful Deaths
- Conroe Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Deer Park Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Galveston Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Pasadena Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Sugar Land Wrongful Death Lawyer
- 18-Wheeler Truck Accidents
- Houston Trucking Accident Attorney
- Houston 18-Wheeler Accident Info
- Flatbed Trailer Accidents
- Trucking Accident Claim
- Cargo Related Trucking Accidents
- Intoxicated Truck Driver Accidents
- Unsafe Trucking Company Practices
- Commercial Vehicle Accidents in Houston
- Accidents Caused by Defective Truck Tires
- Conroe 18-Wheeler Accidents
- Houston Fatal Truck Accident Attorney
- Galveston Truck Accident Lawyer
- More...
- Houston Truck Accident Lawyer
- Houston Dump Truck Accidents
- Houston Tractor Trailer Accident Lawyer
- Accidents with Construction Vehicles
- Houston Truck Crash Attorney
- Sugar Land Truck Accident Lawyer
- Houston Trucking Accident Lawyer
- Houston Truck Injury Lawyer
- Pasadena 18-Wheeler Accident Attorney
- Houston 18-Wheeler Accident Lawyer
- Flatbed Truck Accidents
- Houston Truck Accident Lawyers
- Houston Tractor Trailer Accident Attorney
- Big Rig Accidents in Houston
- Houston Truck Attorney
- Houston 18-Wheeler Attorney
- Conroe Truck Accident Lawyer
- Galveston 18-Wheeler Accidents
- Pasadena Truck Accident Lawyer
- Sugar Land 18-Wheeler Accidents
- Clear Lake Truck Accident Lawyer
- Deer Park Truck Accident Lawyer
- Houston Truck Accident Lawsuits
- Texas City 18-Wheeler Accidents
- Car Accidents
- Houston Automobile Accident Attorney
- How the Claims Process Works
- Statute of Limitations
- Fatal Car Accidents
- Denied Car Insurance Claims
- Damages Available in a Car Accident
- Negligent Entrustment of a Vehicle
- Injury to a Child
- Rollover Accidents
- Can You Trust the Insurance Adjuster?
- Auto Accident Attorney in Houston
- Conroe Car Accident Lawyer
- More...
- Houston Auto Accident Attorney
- How Property Damage Affects Your Personal Injury Claim
- Rear End Collision
- Head, Neck and Back Injuries
- Soft Tissue Injuries
- Car Accidents Resulting in Psychological Damages
- Accidents Caused by Drivers on Their Cell Phone
- Getting a Rental Car
- We can help you get Medical Attention
- How to Handle a Car Accident Claim
- Houston Insurance Attorney
- How Uninsured and Underinsured Claims Work
- How Personal Injury Protection (PIP) Works
- How Witness Statements Affect Your Claim
- Accident Mediation Process
- How to Handle Disputed Liability
- Clear Lake Car Accident Lawyer
- Galveston Car Accident Lawyer
- Houston Accident Attorney
- Houston Accident Injury Lawyer
- Houston Car Accident Lawyer
- Pasadena Car Accident Lawyer
- Sugar Land Car Accident Lawyer
- Texas City Car Accident Lawyer
- Drunk Driving Accidents
- Houston Drunk Driver Accident Lawyer
- Dram Shop and Liquor Liability Cases in Houston
- Fatal Drunk Driving Accidents
- Galveston Drunk Driver Accidents
- Texas Drunk Driver Accident Statistics
- Conroe Drunken Driver Accidents
- Pasadena Drunk Driving Accidents
- Sugar Land Drunk Driver Accidents
- Texas City Drunk Driving Accidents
- On The Job Injuries
- On the Job Injury Attorney
- Worker's Compensation
- Non Subscriber Cases
- Injuries Caused by Machinery
- Houston Drilling Accident Injury
- Houston Mesothelioma Attorney
- Forklift Injury Cases Houston Texas
- Pasadena Work Injury Lawyer
- Slip and Fall Accidents
- Conroe Work Injury Lawyer
- Houston Lifting Injury
- More...
- Industrial Accidents
- Houston Warehouse Injury Attorneys
- Shiping and Receiving Dock Injuries
- Houston Carpal Tunnel Office Injuries
- Houston Delivery Driver Injuries
- Subscriber Claims and Workers Compensation
- Loading Dock Accidents and Waterfront Injuries
- Houston Oilfield Injuries
- Toxic Exposure and Asbestos Cases
- Galveston Work Injury Lawyer
- Sugar Land Work Injury Lawyer
- Construction Accidents
- Job Site Injury Attorneys
- Workers Compensation Cases in Houston Texas
- Houston Non Subscriber Cases
- Construction Site Hazards
- Heavy Equipment Injuries in Houston
- Electric Shock Cases in Houston Texas
- Crush Injuries on Houston Construction Sites
- Power Tools Injuries and Accidents in Houston Texas
- Houston Trench Collapse Attorney
- More...
- Trench Collapses in Houston Texas
- Houston Hazardous Chemical Exposure
- Construction Accidents Caused by Equipment Malfunction
- Scaffolding Accidents and Injuries in Houston
- Houston Road Worker Injuries
- On the Job Burn Injuries
- Houston Crane Accidents
- Fallling Injuries in Houston
- Structure Collapse Cases Houston Texas
- Maritime Injuries
- Product Defect Liability
- Prescription Drug Injury
- Medical Malpractice
- Birth Injuries
- Day Care Child Abuse
- Drowning Accidents
- Other Vehicle Accidents
- Personal Injury Information
- Successes
- Meet Our Attorneys
- Information Center
- Contact Us
Houston Job Site Injury Attorneys
Houston Construction Work Injury Attorney Michael Grossman on Houston Construction Site Injuries

As the fourth largest city in the United States, Houston is constantly expanding. With such expansion comes the constant noise of construction throughout the city and into suburbs like Sugar Land, Spring, and The Woodlands.
Downtown Houston sees constant construction, with cranes rising out of the cityscape nearly year-round. With so much construction on-going within the city of Houston, and with an estimated 2.3 million people in the city, construction site accidents are inevitable. Such accidents can range from mild to severe, and can result in a simple sprain to something as debilitating as a permanent disability. When construction accidents happen in Houston, an injured worker may be able to seek compensation for their injury. However, work injury laws in Texas are quite complex, and, without the help of an experienced Houston construction work injury attorney, an injured victim may not be able to receive full and fair compensation for their injury. With two decades of experience in work injury accident cases in Texas, Michael Grossman can help you seek compensation if you’ve suffered an injury due to a construction accident.
The essential question to ask after sustaining any construction work injury in Houston is “Does my employer have workers’ compensation insurance?” The answer to that question is not always easily obtained, or honestly answered by those with vested interests in the outcome of your work injury claim. However, answering that question is imperative toward understanding your legal options to seek compensation for your Houston construction work injury. It often takes the work of a knowledgeable Houston construction work injury attorney to ascertain an employer’s workers’ comp status. Such an attorney can also assist you in seeking proper legal action so that you can stand to be compensated for your injury in order for you to recover from your injury, and, where possible, get back to work. The following informational article provides broad information regarding work injury laws in Texas, how workers’ comp both helps and hinders an injured construction worker in their recovery process, and the necessity of proving an employer/employee relationship when a construction site accident occurs.
Unfortunately, the complexity of Texas work injury laws often allows negligent employers to hide behind the law, effectively allowing their insurers and defense attorneys to use legal gray areas to have work injury claims denied or severely lessened. In many instances, employers may be more concerned with their company’s bottom-line than with assisting an injured construction worker get back on their feet. While this is not always the case, we’ve seen it happen many times over. The Houston work injury attorneys at Grossman Law Offices are ready to assist you against a negligent employer or other liable party so that you can start the recovery process.
Texas Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Its Effect on Construction Site Accident Injuries in Houston

To most people without proper knowledge regarding Texas’ workers’ compensation law, workers’ comp is often a misunderstood set of rules and regulations that many Texans only understand through word-of-mouth or other ineffective means of communication. Attorneys that do not have extensive practice in workers’ comp cases are often just as prone to misunderstanding the complexity of these laws. In other words, it’s seldom a good idea to learn about your possible legal options from a friend or co-worker who thinks they know what they’re talking about, or even to obtain advice from a lawyer who has little to no prior experience with workers comp cases in Texas. While the basics of workers’ comp law in Texas can be understood, as we’ll show within this article, the application of these laws to a specific construction work injury case can be challenging without the proper type of legal help.
What You Need to Know About Workers’ Comp in Texas
- Texas does not require employers to purchase workers’ comp coverage; however, the laws are written in such a way that the incentives offered to employers that subscribe to workers’ comp are enticing. As a result, many employers in Texas carry workers’ compensation insurance. These companies are known as subscribers.
- A subscribing company is immune to lawsuits, barring the exception of a wrongful death caused by the gross negligence of an employer. This means that an injured construction worker must seek compensation for his or her injury through a workers’ comp claim. They cannot bring legal action against their company through a personal injury lawsuit.
- Companies that are not covered by workers’ comp insurance are known as non-subscribers. Since non-subscribers are not immune to lawsuits, an injured construction worker can sue a negligent employer through a personal injury lawsuit.
- Assessing an employer’s workers’ comp status is not easy. Co-workers, or even managers, may not know if your employer is covered by workers’ comp. Some non-subscribing companies may act as if they are subscribers in the hopes that an injured construction worker will not dig deeper or proceed with a costly lawsuit. It often takes the work of an experienced Houston construction work injury attorney to be able to correctly ascertain whether a negligent employer is a subscriber or a non-subscriber.
The Drawbacks to Filing a Workers’ Comp Claim and How We Can Help
When a construction worker is injured at a Houston construction site, their only remedy for help with their medical bills, lost wages, and other incurred damages may be through a workers’ comp claim. Since the injured worker cannot sue a subscribing employer, filing a worker’s comp claim may be their only recourse to seek compensation. Unfortunately, the compensation received through a workers’ comp claim is often less than an amount that is equal to the total amount of damages, i.e. financial losses, that an injured worker has sustained. In such instances, our Houston work injury law firm will work to identify other possible liable parties, many of whom will likely not be protected by a workers’ comp policy. For example, construction site injuries are often the result of a chain of events in which each negligent party in that chain may be a separate defendant in a construction work injury case. As such, the injured worker could file a workers’ comp claim with their employer, and also bring a personal injury lawsuit against a negligent co-worker, another liable entity on-site, or an entity like the manufacturer of a defective piece of safety equipment. By seeking to hold all liable parties accountable for their actions, an injured worker could stand to receive compensation through a personal injury lawsuit that may help to make up the difference between the compensation received through their workers’ comp claim and the compensation necessary to help them make a full recovery. With 20 years of investigative experience in work injury cases, our firm knows what to look for in construction site accidents so that all liable parties are identified and held accountable for their negligent contributions to the construction site accident.
Additionally, as previously noted, a family member of a construction worker that has been killed due to the gross negligence of an employer is allowed to sue a subscribing employer. However, proving gross negligence requires a high standard of proof since it must be shown that an employer was well-aware of the possibility of a fatal accident likely occurring and yet did little to nothing to rectify the situation before it claimed a life. However, with previous experience in such cases, our Houston fatal construction accident attorneys can help your family through such a difficult time so that a negligent employer’s ways do not have to cause further grief to another family.
Dealing with Non-Subscribers
One of the main reasons that a majority of Texas companies subscribe to workers’ comp is the protection such coverage affords. One of the main reasons that a Texas company opts to not carry workers’ comp insurance is the cost of purchasing the policy, especially in regards to policies that must cover dangerous occupations like that of a construction worker. However, a non-subscriber is then open to a lawsuit that may be much more costly than purchasing workers comp coverage. In many ways, workers’ comp laws in Texas are punitive against non-subscribers. Only standard negligence must be proven against a non-subscriber. However, proving such negligence will require relevant evidence to be gathered that can show how a liable employer’s negligence contributed to your construction site injury.

When an injured worker proceeds with a personal injury lawsuit against a non-subscriber, a liable employer can opt to settle out-of-court with the injured worker. While our firm works toward obtaining such settlements, as long as they’re fair to our clients and commensurate with the amount of damages they’ve incurred, construction work injury lawsuits are often likely to be contested by the employer and their insurer. The employer will want to do as much as possible in order to shift blame from the company for an accident, both for their own public image as well as the possible detrimental effect to their company’s bottom-line. Additionally, any insurance policies that are held by the company will likely be contested by the insurance company, who simply does not want to lose what could amount to a sizable sum of money. As such, enlisting the help of a Houston construction work injury attorney like Michael Grossman, who has handled hundreds of work injury cases in Texas and around the country, can prove beneficial when going against negligent construction employers and their insurers who likely have little interest in seeing you receive proper compensation.
The Non-Subscriber Defense: Sole Proximate Cause
As another punitive measure against non-subscribers, such employers are only offered one defensive measure in a personal injury claim. This defensive measure is known as sole proximate cause, and it is quite often used in work injury cases. Sole proximate cause means that the injured worker was wholly responsible for their injury. In other words, a defense attorney for a liable employer will argue that the injured construction worker was incompetent or otherwise unable to perform their duties, thus resulting in an injury to themselves. Proving sole proximate cause is quite difficult, since a defense attorney must be able to show that an injured worker was 100% responsible for their injury accident while on a construction site. If the non-subscribing employer can be shown to be even 1% responsible for the accident, then the defensive measure of sole proximate cause cannot be argued. Although such a defensive measure is difficult to fully argue, experienced defense attorneys will know how to use the argument to their advantage. In order to properly combat their arguments with relevant proof otherwise, you will need a Houston construction work injury attorney that will be able to show exactly how a negligent employer contributed to your injury.
Proving the Employer/Employee Relationship
Proving the employer/employee relationship is often an essential aspect of a majority of construction site accidents in Houston. Since contractors are often employed by construction companies for a number of purposes, many contract workers become injured while working at a Houston construction site. Since a contractor is responsible for their own safety while on-the-job, they may often have little to no legal recourse to seek compensation for their sustained injury. However, Texas law contains a broad definition for an employee, and a few specific questions can work to identify an injured worker as an employee, even if the employer called them a contractor from the first day they started worker for that construction company. Once an employee/employer relationship is substantiated, an injured construction worker can then seek compensation through the proper channels. The following questions can be used in order to determine a worker’s employment status:
- Did the employer withhold taxes of social security from the worker’s paycheck?
- Did the employer provide the tools and equipment to do the job?
- Did the employer oversee or manage the worker as they were working?
- Did the employer set a specific schedule for the worker?
- Did the employer require the worker to sign a document limiting the worker’s rights while on-the-job, like an employee handbook or an agreement to be tested for drugs?
- Did the employer employ the worker for an unspecified amount of time?
- Did the employer pay the worker via salary or by the hour?
If a worker can answer yes to any of the above questions, it’s likely that such a worker can be argued to be an employee, and not just a contractor. As such, an injured employee can then receive workers’ compensation benefits from a subscribing employer, or pursue legal action through a personal injury lawsuit against a non-subscribing employer. Our Houston work injury law firm can help you assess whether or not you may be considered an employee so that you can stand to be fully and fairly compensated for your construction site injury.
Is OSHA Important in a Construction Work Injury Case?
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration will often become involved after a major construction accident has occurred that results in severe injury or death to a worker. While their involvement is beneficial in regards to general workplace safety, their work is not concerned with the personal ramifications of a construction site injury. In other words, they will not work to hold the liable parties accountable for their actions. While fines may be assessed, often many months to many years down the road, these punitive effects do little to nothing to assist the injured worker or bereaved family of a deceased construction worker. While OSHA reports can be beneficial to a construction site personal injury case in Houston, such a report is only one part of a much greater whole in regards to evidence for a work injury case. Strong, robust construction site injury cases are built on many pieces of evidence that can all point the finger at the negligent employer. As such, OSHA serves a good purpose in their duties, but OSHA cannot assist you in seeking compensation for your injury. That’s where our knowledge, experience, and reputation comes into play.
Next Steps if You’ve Been Injured at a Houston Construction Site
- Do not sign a waiver of liability, otherwise known as a waiver of your ability to pursue legal action in exchange for accepting a settlement offer. Such a settlement is often a shrewdly calculated move on the part of the employer in order for them to not be responsible for awarding a likely larger amount of compensation at some point in the future. If such a settlement is not looked over by an experienced attorney, it’s often the case that an aggrieved party will receive less than fair compensation for their injury. If such a settlement is accepted by the injured worker, there is often little that even an experienced attorney can do in order to help a victim seek further compensation from the liable party.
- Contact a Houston construction work injury attorney as soon as possible after suffering a construction site accident injury. Quick movement after an accident is often in your best interests since evidence can go quickly missing in time. Evidence can also be manipulated or erased by those that would rather not be caught. As such, stronger cases are often built by an experienced investigative team that can get onto the scene of a construction accident shortly after it has occurred. Hesitating even a day longer than necessary to contact proper legal help may do irreparable damage to your possible case. We want to help you hold the negligent parties accountable, and this is often best accomplished by allowing us to investigate an accident site as soon as possible after the accident has occurred.
Houston construction work injury attorney Michael Grossman Can Help You Recover Full and Fair Compensation

Suffering a construction site accident injury can cause you more than physical pain. Rising medical debt, lost wages due to time off from work, and your own pain and suffering can all work to compound the physical, emotional, and mental toll that such an injury has likely caused you to experience. We want to help you recover full and fair compensation for your construction site injury so that you can return to living your life, be able to continue to take care of your family, and seek justice against the liable parties. With 20 years of experience in work injury cases across Texas, Houston construction work injury attorney Michael Grossman and his team at Grossman Law Offices are ready to help you through this likely difficult time. Contact our Houston work injury law firm toll-free at 1-855-392-0000 for a free and confidential legal consultation. We’ll answer your questions and help you understand your possible legal options in light of your Houston construction work injury accident.
Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases
$75,000.00 Recovery - Workplace Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
Total Recovery:
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$350.00
$350.00
Confidential Recovery - Wrongful Death / Workplace Accident
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.
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.
Total Recovery:
Confidential
Confidential
Attorney Fees:
Confidential
Confidential
Litigation Expenses:
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential Recovery - Wrongful Death / Commercial Vehicle Accident
(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.
(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.
Total Recovery:
Confidential
Confidential
Attorney Fees:
Confidential
Confidential
Litigation Expenses:
Confidential
Confidential
$226,000.00 Recovery - Workplace Accident (Shoulder Injury Requiring Surgery)
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.
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.
Total Recovery:
$226,000.00
$226,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$84,000.00
$84,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,500.00
$5,500.00
$550,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / Workers' Compensation Gross Negligence
(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.
(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.
Total Recovery:
$550,000.00
$550,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$220,000.00
$220,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$700,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident / Work Injury (Fractured Pelvis, Other Internal Injuries)
A loading dock employee suffered a fractured and damage to internal organs as the result of a crushing injury sustained when an 18-wheeler backed into him and crushed him between the trailer and loading dock.
A loading dock employee suffered a fractured and damage to internal organs as the result of a crushing injury sustained when an 18-wheeler backed into him and crushed him between the trailer and loading dock.
Total Recovery:
$700,000.00
$700,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$175,000.00
$175,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$1,084.00
$1,084.00
$1,450,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Brain Injury)
Our firm was hired by a delivery driver who suffered a closed head injury resulting in the permanent loss of smell in a head-on accident. The incident occurred as the driver of an 18-wheeler lost control of his vehicle and veered into oncoming traffic. Our client's delivery vehicle was struck head-on, causing massive damage to both vehicles.
Our client was taken to an area hospital where he was treated for minor bodily injuries and a closed head injury which originally manifested itself as a concussion and temporary memory loss.
Suit was filed against the defendants following their failure to respond to our correspondence in a timely manner and litigation began. Included in the suit were both the defendant truck driver and his employer. The results of our investigation and the physical evidence from the accident scene made it apparent that the defendants had indeed caused the accident. Defense counsel soon conceded liability
Our firm was hired by a delivery driver who suffered a closed head injury resulting in the permanent loss of smell in a head-on accident. The incident occurred as the driver of an 18-wheeler lost control of his vehicle and veered into oncoming traffic. Our client's delivery vehicle was struck head-on, causing massive damage to both vehicles.
Our client was taken to an area hospital where he was treated for minor bodily injuries and a closed head injury which originally manifested itself as a concussion and temporary memory loss.
Suit was filed against the defendants following their failure to respond to our correspondence in a timely manner and litigation began. Included in the suit were both the defendant truck driver and his employer. The results of our investigation and the physical evidence from the accident scene made it apparent that the defendants had indeed caused the accident. Defense counsel soon conceded liability
Total Recovery:
$1,450,000.00
$1,450,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$560,000.00
$560,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$31,410.00
$31,410.00
$550,000.00 Recovery - Workplace Accident (Closed-Head Injury)
A painter fell from an apartment balcony resulting in a closed-head injury and other minor bodily injuries. The case was successfully resolved through litigation against the plaintiff's employer and the general contractor.
A painter fell from an apartment balcony resulting in a closed-head injury and other minor bodily injuries. The case was successfully resolved through litigation against the plaintiff's employer and the general contractor.
Total Recovery:
$550,000.00
$550,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$220,000.00
$220,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$20,465.00
$20,465.00
$1,010,000.00 Recovery - Workplace Accident (Hand Lacerations)
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.
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.
Total Recovery:
$1,010,000.00
$1,010,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$333,300.00
$333,300.00
Litigation Expenses:
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$335,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death/ Commercial Vehicle Accident
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.
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.
Total Recovery:
$335,000.00
$335,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$134,000.00
$134,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$63,000.00
$63,000.00








