verdicts-and-settlements-article

Sullivan v. Werner

$2.5M

Date of Verdict: May 10.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 161003086.

Judge: Michael E. Erdos.

Type of Action: Personal injury.

Injuries: Fractured tailbone, other orthopedic injuries.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Jeffrey F. Laffey, Stewart Ryan, Laffey, Bucci & Kent, Philadelphia.

Defense Counsel: Michael Dunn, the Law Offices of Michael J. Dunn, Philadelphia.

Comment:

A carpenter who alleged that scaffolding he fell from was defective has been awarded a $2.5 million verdict by a Philadelphia jury.

The verdict came down May 10 after a two-week trial in Sullivan v. Werner in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Michael E. Erdos' courtroom.

Plaintiff Michael Sullivan claimed that defendant Werner Co.'s “Baker” scaffolds were defectively designed and came with insufficient warnings. Sullivan alleged that, while working at Albert Schweitzer Elementary School in Levittown in June 2014, the deck pin—which keeps a scaffold from collapsing—dislodged, causing the platform to fall out from under him, according to court papers.

He fractured his tailbone and sustained other orthopedic injuries. He claimed to have ongoing difficulties with back pain, which cut short his career. He also claimed to require continuing medical care and extensive physical therapy relating to multiple hernias.

Jeffrey F. Laffey and Stewart Ryan of Laffey, Bucci & Kent in Philadelphia represented Sullivan.

Michael Dunn of the Law Offices of Michael J. Dunn represented Werner and Lowes, which sold the scaffolding.

“The verdict was against the great weight of the evidence and contrary to Pennsylvania law,” Dunn said. “Post-trial motions and an appeal will be pursued.”

The plaintiff claimed in court papers, “Defendant, Werner, touts itself as 'No. 1 in Ladders.' However, it cannot call themselves No. 1 in scaffolds due to the flimsy and unsafe design of its steel rolling scaffolds such as the one involved in Mr. Sullivan's accident.”

“Fred Bartnicki, Werner's senior engineer and corporate designee, testified that Werner began manufacturing steel rolling scaffolds in 2010. The design phase, which preceded the mass-production involved a 'gatekeeper process,' which was described as input from Werner's engineering department, legal department and marketing department,” the papers continued. “Werner's Model SRS72 scaffold was the culmination in certain respects of this 'gatekeeper process' where other manufacturers' designs were evaluated and incorporated. … Werner should have relied upon other manufactures' designs that were far superior in ensuring that the scaffold's platform remained secured during its foreseeable use.”

Werner denied that its product was defective.

“The product is designed such that, if properly used, according to clear and explicit instructions and warnings on the product, the accident could not have occurred as plaintiff maintains it did,” the defendants' court papers said.

—P.J. D'Annunzio, of the Law Weekly