Construction Accident Settlement (How Much is Your Case Worth?)
We have compiled some recent Illinois construction accident verdicts and settlement to help give you an idea as to how juries and insurance companies value these cases.
While you can get the gist of the case value, the circumstances of each case and the nature of each injury is really unique, so the best way to get a fair assessment of your case is to talk with an attorney who has experience litigating these cases. Our office is committed to maximizing the value of each construction accident case we work on. Contact our office for a free case review and a discussion with an attorney who has worked on similar matters.
Amount: $2,050,000 SETTLEMENT
Injury: Broken Elbow; Fractured leg (compartmental syndrome)
An employee was working on the roof of a building at a construction site when an accident occurred. He was in a Gehle device that held him off of the ground and allowed him to pull materials from the building.
While he was doing this, the metal he was grabbing moved and he lost his balance and fell out of the Gehle device onto the ground. He fractured his leg and elbow. He brought an action against his employer for these injuries. His claim maintained that the defendants should have better supervised the job site and erected the Gehle device among other things.
The defendants replied that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent because he was not wearing the proper safety guards and operated the device improperly. The claims never met in court though because they settled for $2,050,000.
Amount: $1,228,594 JURY AWARD
Injury: Broken tibia
A 37-year-old male construction worker sustained a tibia fracture while working at a job site. The scaffolding he was on fell apart during a storm and he fell down. He turned around and sued his employer and alleged that it negligently kept the workers working and did not shut the site down, and generally failed to monitor the site for the employees’ safety.
The defendant refuted these claims and responded that the plaintiff was actually the negligent party because he should have kept a better watch of the weather, control of his body, and taken other safety measures. Stuck on the issue of fault, they went to trial and the jury found for the plaintiff but also awarded him 22% of the responsibility so his award was reduced by that amount.
- Pain & Suffering:
Amount: $355,000 JURY AWARD
Injury: Back/neck sprains; herniated discs; prior injury aggravations.
This incident involved a 59-year-old construction worker. He was mounting windows when the scaffold he was working on collapsed. He fell and suffered various injuries including back and neck sprains, herniated discs, and a worsening of prior medical issues such as arthritis. He sued the company he worked for and sought damages for these injuries.
His suit stated that the company should have made the job site safer and supervised the plaintiff properly. Additionally, the plaintiff alleged that the scaffold in question could not even hold his weight and was unsuitable for working conditions.
The defendant refused to admit to any of these claims and went further to allege that the plaintiff was exaggerating the nature of his injuries. The jury found for the construction worker and gave him the following award:
- Pain & Suffering:
Amount: $5,000,000 SETTLEMENT
Injury: Broken hand
This unfortunate construction accident happened on a cold and rainy day. The worker involved was operating an outrigger crane when it started to malfunction. He got out of the seat and went to inspect the matter. He discovered a pin was out of place so he attempted to replace it when he slipped and caught his hand in the crane.
It was immediately crushed and he permanently lost all of its use. When he recovered from the incident, he sued the company that he worked for as well as the subcontractor and the company that owned the land on which he worked. His claims broadly alleged that the defendants should have made the construction site safer and provided him with better equipment.
The only issue really was who was going to take the blame because clearly the plaintiff was not responsible. Eventually, all of the defendants decided to chip and give him a combined $2,000,000 settlement for his injuries.
Amount: $1,347,865 JURY AWARD
An employee of a construction company was helping to unload timber when another worker ran into him with a forklift. The man suffered various injuries across his body.
He later sued the business that employed both of them for negligence. The lawsuit alleged that the defendant negligently hired and supervised its employees, failed to adequately put in place safety procedures, and insufficiently monitored its workers.
The defendant denied this and said that the plaintiff should have paid more attention while working so the two sides went to trial. The jury decided that the defendant was 100% responsible for the plaintiff’s injuries and gave him $1,347,865 for the following damages:
- Lost Wages:
- Pain and Suffering:
Amount: $2,375,394 JURY AWARD
Injury: Herniated disc.
A male construction worker was injured as he attempted to outfit a construction site with dry-fit valves. Apparently, he was doing it on his own and the valves were quite heavy, causing him to fall and injure himself. From the incident, he sustained a herniated disc that eventually required fusion surgery and led to permanent disability.
He sued the company he was working for at the time of the incident. The complaint stated that the defendant negligently erected the construction site and failed to properly assist the plaintiff. The defendant refuted these contentions and said that the man should have asked for help and assumed the risk of injury by taking the valve work on his own.
The jury believed the worker and gave him a $2,375,394 award with the following breakdown:
- Pain & Suffering:
- Lost Wages:
Amount: $60,000 JURY AWARD
The employee in this incident was working at a construction site when a truck arrived to deliver some mirrors. In the process of unloading these mirrors, they fell over and landed on this worker.
He sustained various personal injuries from the accident. He brought an action against the construction company he worked for as well as the glass company that was responsible for the delivery; however, by the time trial commenced, only the latter remained as a defendant. The man’s suit sought damages for losses related to medical bills, wages, disfigurement, disability, and other items.
He claimed that the company did not provide enough safety precautions at the scene of the accident and did not properly train its employees among other allegations. The company responded that the employee did not exercise reasonable care and caution while working and that he was contributorily negligent.
The jury split the issue down the middle: they awarded the worker $60,000 ($15,000 for loss of normal life and $45,000 for pain and suffering) but also apportioned him 50% of the fault. Therefore, he only netted $30,000.
Amount: $910,000 JURY AWARD
A young boy was riding around a construction zone when tragedy struck. He was on his bike going around the perimeter of the site when he ran right into a beam suspended from a building.
The collision seriously injured his head including his eyes, nose, and brain. He sued the construction company and sought damages for medical bills, loss of income, loss of normal life, and pain and suffering. The defendant agreed that it was negligent but denied the extent of the plaintiff’s claimed damages. Therefore, this was the only issue at trial. The jury fixed the number at $910,000.
Do you have questions about an Illinois construction site accident case?
Don't be lulled into believing that a company responsible for an accident will automatically compensate you for your injuries. In order to recover the maximum compensation that you are entitled to, you will likely need to litigate the case.
Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC has extensive experience litigating construction site accident cases for individual and families. Contact our office to discuss your situation without any cost or obligation on your part.