Injury lawyer Fort Lauderdale

A man who suffered catastrophic injuries due to a ladder fall emerged victorious in his personal injury lawsuit against the manufacturer of the ladder from which he fell. The $11 million verdict he won at trial will stand, following a recent review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

In Baugh v. Cuprum, defendant manufacturer appealed the trial court’s refusal to grant a new trial on the grounds the district court wrongly allowed two of plaintiff’s expert witnesses to testify about critical issues. However, the appellate court ruled that both methodologies used by the two expert witnesses were adequate and most of defendant’s complaints were regarding the weight given to that expert witness testimony, rather than the admissibility. Defendant also argued it was entitled to a judgment in its favor as a matter of law because plaintiff failed to show the ladder was unreasonably dangerous and that this issue was the most likely cause of plaintiff’s accident. Here again, though, the court found there was sufficient evidence that demonstrated the accident was more likely caused by the ladder’s original design defect as opposed to any wrongful use of it, and there was also enough evidence that a reasonable alternative design existed. Therefore, the court affirmed the judgment.

Although multi-million dollar verdicts may not always be the norm, ladder falls are quite common. In fact, they are increasing. Between 1990 and 2005, the American Journal of Preventative Medicine reported the number of ladder-related injuries in the U.S. rose by 50 percent, with almost 1 in 10 victims needing to be hospitalized. The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons reports that 500,000 people are treated every year for ladder-related injuries and about 300 of those are fatal. These injuries are estimated to cost us all approximately $11 billion a year. Continue reading →

A man using chemical paint remover was seriously injured when the substance ignited and burned him. He and his wife filed a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer of that chemical, alleging the warning labels were inadequate and the product was defectively designed.

A federal district court in Illinois granted summary judgment to defendant in Suarez v. W.M. Barr & Co. on both of these counts. Recently, though, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed in part. Specifically, the court ruled that while the label on the product did accurately describe the primary risks for consumers, there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the product was defectively design based on theories of strict liability and negligence.

Strict product liability is a legal rule that holds sellers, distributors and/ or manufacturers of defective products liable to the person injured by that product, regardless of whether defendant was negligent. In a claim alleging negligence, a defendant’s standard of conduct is central to proving liability. That is, defendant acted in a way that fell below the standard of reasonable conduct. In strict liability cases, however, the idea is that it doesn’t matter how defendant acted. Instead, what must be shown is that the product was in unreasonably dangerous condition, the seller expected/ intended the product would reach the consumer without changes and plaintiff was injured by defective product. Continue reading →

Articles Tagged with Injury lawyer Fort Lauderdale

Baugh v. Cuprum – $11 Million Ladder Injury Verdict Affirmed

Suarez v. W.M. Barr & Co. – Product Liability Lawsuit to Proceed