Miami Jury Returns Defense Verdict in $3.1 Million Ladder Case
A Miami jury deliberated for about 18 minutes before returning a verdict for Louisville Ladder Inc. in the case of a plumber who was seriously injured in a 9-foot fall.
May 07, 2018 at 04:33 PM
5 minute read
A Miami jury deliberated for about 18 minutes before returning a verdict in favor of defendant Louisville Ladder Inc., which was facing a request for $3.1 million in damages in a products liability lawsuit.
Louisville Ladder is a Kentucky-based company that designs, manufactures and distributes step stools, scaffolds and ladders. It was sued by Jorge Morejon, who fell about 9 feet as he was climbing down a ladder at a work site.
The odds seemed lined up against the company and its defense counsel, Scott M. Sarason and Jens C. Ruiz of Rumberger Kirk & Caldwell in Miami.
Across the aisle was a hardworking plaintiff — a plumber who had been working on a client's roof when he plummeted from the ladder, fracturing his hips, ribs and vertebrae.
“There was no doubt that he did have an injury,” said Sarason, a litigator with about three decades of experience defending clients in federal and state courts across the U.S.
After the fall, Morejon required a prosthetic pelvic reconstruction plate in his hip and multiple screws to repair the fracture. His medical bills passed $292,000, and the cost of future care would likely reach $150,000, according to court pleadings. His doctor said Morejon would later require a total hip replacement.
“We focused on the liability aspect because the plaintiff clearly was injured in the fall,” Ruiz said. “The most difficult part was just reiterating and sticking to what we believed happened in this case and focusing on the facts as opposed to the sympathy factor.”
Morejon's legal team included plaintiffs lawyer Robert L. Parks and Gabriel Garay of The Law Offices of Robert L. Parks in Miami. They asked the jury to award $3.1 million award in their client's favor.
They argued the ladder was defective, and the manufacturer failed to properly warn users about potential risks. They also claimed the ladder was unreasonably dangerous in its design because it required users to shift their center of gravity beyond its side rails to prevent falls when descending.
Plaintiffs counsel argued a proper design would have included a “walk-through” device at the top to allow the user to maintain the center of gravity between the rails. They also claimed the ladder failed to comply with criteria set by the American National Standards Institute, a private nonprofit that oversees development criteria for systems, products, processes and services.
Louisville Ladder denied all the allegations. It argued it issued adequate warnings and instructions, but the plaintiff failed to follow them. It filed a pretrial motion for partial summary judgment on Morejon's claim that it failed to warn consumers. U.S. Magistrate Judge John O'Sullivan granted the motion.
Another pretrial motion went in the defense's favor when the judge prohibited testimony from an expert witness on the plaintiff's side.
In the end, Sarason and Ruiz successfully argued Morejon owned the ladder for more than six years without incident and an oversight on his part led to his injuries. They showed the plaintiff used the ladder multiple times over the years and twice before on the day he fell.
“What was different on that day?” Sarason asked. “It was the homeowner climbing up the ladder to observe Mr. Morejon, and Mr. Morejon not observing and making sure the ladder was stable when he climbed down.”
“It was a tough case,” Parks conceded. “The number of times the ladder was used for that purpose is a tough deal. I still think it's improperly designed, but the jury disagreed.”
Attorneys on both sides praised the other's professionalism and practice skills, saying the case was hard-fought but respectfully handled.
“The plaintiffs lawyer is an excellent lawyer. Bob Parks is a well-known, always prepared lawyer who has tried many many cases,” Sarason said. “He showed great professionalism. The parties worked together as well as can be expected in an adversarial situation, but anytime Mr. Parks is involved, it's going to be a difficult case.”
Parks returned the compliment.
“Mr. Sarason is a terrific lawyer and highly professional. He makes it a pleasure to try a case,” he said. “I've always found it's better to have a really good lawyer against you (rather) than the other way because it makes the case easier in every way.”
Parks said he client had not decided whether to file post-trial motions.
Case: Jorge Morejon v. Louisville Ladder
Case No.: 17-22558-CIV
Description: Products liability
Filing date: Sept. 29, 2016
Verdict date: April 24, 2017
Judge: U.S. Magistrate Judge John O'Sullivan
Plaintiffs attorneys: Robert L. Parks and Gabriel Garay, The Law Offices of Robert L. Parks, Miami; and Theodore J. Fournaris, Fournaris & Sanet, Miami
Defense attorneys: Scott M. Sarason and Jens C. Ruiz, Rumberger Kirk & Caldwell, Miami
Verdict amount: For the defense
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Tampa Jury Returns $5.8M Verdict Against Insurer Who Denied Coverage
2 minute readEven the Chief Judge Noted the Cost of This Broward Case
Marriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Trending Stories
- 1Formal Charges Filed Against Judge Accused of Helping Defendant Escape ICE Detention
- 2Top 10 Predicted Business and Human Rights Issues for 2025
- 3$7.5M in Punitive Damages Awarded in Product Liability Case
- 4Does My Company Really Need a Generative AI Policy?
- 5'This Is a Watershed Moment': Daniel's Law Overcomes Major Hurdle
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250