Foot Injury in Harrisburg Ballpark Construction Mishap Nets Welder Award of $2.87M
Delay damages in the case, which stemmed from a mortar-laden machine running over the worker's foot, could raise the judgment to nearly $3.8 million, according to plaintiffs attorneys.
August 22, 2019 at 06:31 PM
4 minute read
A welder whose foot was run over by a motorized pallet jack loaded with mortar has secured a $2.87 million award.
On Aug. 15, a Dauphin County jury awarded John Jarema $400,000 in past lost earnings, $1.4 million in lost earning capacity and $980,000 in pain and suffering. Along with a stipulated workers' compensation and medical lien of nearly $98,000, Jarema received more than $2.87 million. The nearly four-day trial was held before Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas Judge Andrew Dowling.
According to Haggerty & Silverman attorney Howard Silverman, who represented Jarema, delay damages should add an additional $900,000 to the case, bringing the total judgment to more than $3.78 million.
"I think there's a perception that Philadelphia juries are the only ones that will award money, but if you have a genuine person with a genuine injury and real loss, it doesn't matter where you're at," Silverman said.
Jarema's pretrial memo said that in January 2010 he was working as a welder installing a stainless steel exhaust duct at the Minor League Baseball team Harrisburg Senators' Metro Bank Park, when an employee with N.C. Masonry, another subcontractor on the project, drove a pallet jack over the heel of Jarema's right foot. When the accident happened, Jarema had been welding with his welding hood down, and was in a crouched position.
Jarema's pretrial memo said there were eyewitnesses, and that his liability expert, Vincent Gallagher, opined that, if the pallet jack operators had been trained and followed industry standard, the accident would not have occurred.
According to Jarema's pretrial memo, the accident left him with complex regional pain syndrome. In February 2012, he had to undergo a plantar fasciotomy, and then, in October of that year, he also underwent a tarsal tunnel release. The memo also said he continues to receive cortisone injections every four months.
The injury, the memo said, decreased his strength and stamina, because he could no longer perform strenuous activities. He also reported difficulty navigating stairs, or even descending a curb, saying it can lead to shooting pain in his right foot and ankle, according to the memo.
Jarema's expert, Timothy Kauffman, said that, although he has a "gallant attitude," he suffered significant impairment, and estimated he can only work 30 to 40 hours a week. Jarema's vocational expert, John Risser, opined that his economic outlook is limited, estimating a lost earning capacity of between $983,000 and $1.5 million.
The defendant did not contest liability, but rather contested the severity of Jarema's injuries.
N.C. Masonry's pretrial memo contended that Jarema did not suffer any broken bones or torn ligaments or tendons. N.C. Masonry also contended that Jarema continued to work for another 18 months before he was fired. The memo noted that the jury was permitted to hear that he had been fired for "violating company policies."
N.C. Masonry's expert, Dr. Jasen Walker, disputed much of Risser's opinion, especially the argument that Jarema could essentially only work as a video surveillance monitor. Walker, on the other hand, opined that Jarema could work full time at numerous jobs.
However, Silverman said Walker hurt the defense's credibility when he estimated that Jarema, who, according to Silverman, had been earning $90,000 a year, had an earning capacity around $58,000.
"I think that just wasn't believable," Silverman said. "I think that undermined the whole defense really."
The jury deliberated for more than two hours before rendering its verdict.
Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner attorney Anthony Lucido represented the defendants. Lucido did not return a call seeking comment.
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 AllPhila. Judge Upholds $68.5M Verdict Over Construction Worker's Death
3 minute readDelivery Driver's Slip-and-Fall Suit Slides Forward Against Equipment Rental Company
4 minute readPa. Construction Law Update: Best Practices Learned From 3 Recent Appellate Decisions
Troutman Pepper Accused of Inattentive Case Management in $59M Malpractice Suit
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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