Houston Scaffolding Injury Cases

Injured in a scaffolding accident? Let our Houston accident and injury lawyers help you.

Scaffolding is employed in almost every type of construction. Scaffolding is usually a temporary platform constructed by using timber or steel.

Do you have a legal question?
Enter your phone number below and let's talk.
--

Often times, the scaffolding is created using a hodge-podge of materials and scrap left over from prior projects. Additionally, scaffolding built at a construction site often involve very little planning and design to insure the safety of the employees assigned to use them.


Scaffolding Types

The three most common types of scaffolding found on construction sites are supported scaffolds, suspended scaffolds and aerial lifts. Supported scaffolds are platforms supported by load bearing poles, legs and frames. Suspended scaffolds are usually supported by ropes attached to an overhead structure. Finally, Aerial lifts include vehicles equipped with baskets or work platforms that can be elevated to allow employees to work from a height.


Common Injuries in Scaffolding Accidents

OSHA estimates that 4,500 scaffolding accidents that occur each year are preventable with proper training and construction of scaffolding. The most commons hazards that employees working with scaffolds may encounter include: Falls from height, scaffold collapse, being struck by falling objects and electrocution.

  • Falls from height are generally preventable with the use of guardrails and having an employee use a fall arrest system.
  • Scaffolding collapses are preventable by ensuring the that scaffold is properly constructed, ensuring that the scaffold is not overloaded, and having a trained person inspect the scaffold before use.
  • Employers can protect employees from falling objects by restricting access to the area beneath a scaffold, or employing a canopy to protect the employees walking beneath the scaffold.
  • Electrocution can be avoided by ensuring that all scaffolds are constructed a safe distance from utility lines, an employer should also request that local utility companies de-energize lines if scaffold work needs to be performed by utility lines.

The primary purpose of scaffolding, to allow employees to work at a height above shoulder level, also explains why the injuries sustained from scaffold accidents are so severe. Injuries involving scaffolding regularly result in broken bones or traumatic brain injury.


OSHA Rules and Regulations

Do you have a legal question?
Enter your phone number below and let's talk.
--

In 2007, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration reported 88 fatalities involving scaffolding. Recognizing the danger involved in scaffolding accidents, OSHA has promulgated strict guidelines for the design and construction of scaffolds.

OSHA has promulgated a number of regulations and codes concerning the construction and use of scaffolds. OSHA regulations require that the components used to build a scaffold must be able to support four times the maximum intended load. OSHA regulations also prohibit the use of a damaged scaffold until all repairs have been completed. Furthermore, it is a violation of federal law for employees to work on scaffolds during storms or high winds, or when scaffolds are covered with snow or ice.

Grossman Law Offices have helped a number of employees that were injured while working with scaffolds. If you have been injured in a construction accident involving a scaffold, you may be entitled to compensation for your injury. Please call Grossman Law Offices and one of our Houston construction accident lawyers will provide a free consultation concerning your case.



Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases

$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.
Total Recovery:
$226,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$84,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,500.00
$300,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident / Work Injury (Facial Fractures and Head Trauma)
A loading dock worker suffered serious including numerous facial fractures and minor brain trauma when an 18-wheeler back into him, crushing him against the loading dock. The plaintiff's employer was a subscriber to Texas Workers' Compensation coverage, thus a claim was rightly filed against the third party trucking company whom the truck driver operating the reversing 18-wheeler worked for.

The plaintiffs asserted the position that the trucking company in question was liable on the basis of respondeat superior and negligent retention. The defendants argued that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries by virtue of the plaintiff putting himself in harms way. They maintained that the plaintiff simply walked behind the reversing tractor trailer as it pushed back toward the loading dock.

It was later determined through deposition testimony that the truck driver had indeed instructed the plaintiff to stand behind the trailer in order to determine the vehicle's proximity to the dock. Once this fact came to light, the defendants agreed to mediate whereby the case was satisfactorily settled.
Total Recovery:
$300,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$120,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$9,807.00
$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.
Total Recovery:
$335,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$134,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$63,000.00
$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.
Total Recovery:
$1,010,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$333,300.00
Litigation Expenses:
$50,000.00
$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.
Total Recovery:
$700,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$175,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$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
Total Recovery:
$1,450,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$560,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$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.
Total Recovery:
$550,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$220,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$20,465.00
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.
Total Recovery:
Confidential
Attorney Fees:
Confidential
Litigation Expenses:
Confidential
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.
Total Recovery:
Confidential
Attorney Fees:
Confidential
Litigation Expenses:
Confidential
$150,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / Workplace Accident
(policy limits) Recovery of a disputed life insurance policy for the family of a contractor who died on the job.
Total Recovery:
$150,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$50,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$341.00