If you or a loved one has suffered injury or wrongful death as a result of a construction accident, contact our expert construction accident lawyers in Los Angeles today!
Construction Accident Attorneys - Los Angeles - Booth & Koskoff
Submit your case
For well over 30 years, the construction accident attorneys of Booth & Koskoff in Los Angles have been recognized leaders in the representation of seriously injured construction workers. We have not only obtained many large verdicts and settlements in construction accident cases in Los Angeles, but have also published leading articles and have helped develop and expand the law. In recent years in particular, the law concerning construction accident cases has undergone significant changes that have made it much more difficult to litigate these cases successfully. Our construction accident lawyers in Los Angeles have been at the forefront of developing innovative ways of dealing with these changes.
If you or a loved one has sustained an injury in a construction accident, please contact our construction accident attorneys in Los Angeles at Booth & Koskoff.
Featured Construction Accident Cases - Los Angeles
Over the years, we have obtained 12 million-dollar and multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements in construction accident cases. This all started back in 1972, when construction accident attorney, Larry Booth went to trial in the case of Metzger vs. Ocean Salt. Mr. Booth's client, Mr. Metzger, was a welder who had been struck by a pipe dropped by a fellow construction worker and suffered a severe back injury requiring multiple surgeries. The defendant argued that, because the pipe was quite thin and lightweight, Mr. Metzger's injuries could not have been very severe. Mr. Booth proved otherwise, and the result was a verdict of $1,400,000. At the time, this was just the fourth million-dollar verdict in a personal injury case in California history.
- Case Results
- > Smith vs. Farmer Brothers
- > Denney vs. J.D. Carley Corp.
- > Stamper vs. Lawrence Drive Partners
- > Chapman vs. L.A.U.S.D.
- > Karle vs. Aerojet
- > Roche vs. City of L.A.
- > Gruenwald case
- > Metzger vs. Ocean Salt
- > Wilson vs. Edison
Smith vs. Farmer Brothers
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1989 for $5,000,000.
KEY FACTS:
This was a case, handled by construction accident lawyer, LARRY BOOTH, on behalf of a young man who was electrocuted while doing painting work at defendant's plant.
INJURIES: Loss of both arms and a leg.
COMMENTS:
The case involved the "peculiar risk" doctrine, which imposes liability on premises owners. Larry Booth has helped develop this doctrine through numerous articles in legal journals and has utilized the doctrine in numerous cases over the years.
Denney vs. J.D. Carley Corp.
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1984 for $5,000,000.
KEY FACTS:
This settlement, achieved by construction accident attorney, LARRY BOOTH, set a RECORD for the largest settlement for a personal injury case in L.A. County history. It was the subject of an article in the L.A. Times.
COMMENTS:
This settlement, achieved by LARRY BOOTH, set a RECORD for the largest settlement for a personal injury case in L.A. County history. It was the subject of an article in the L.A. Times.
Stamper vs. Lawrence Drive Partners
RESULT/YEAR:
VERDICT in 1989 for $3,454,328.
KEY FACTS:
This construction accident case, handled by lawyer LARRY BOOTH, was on behalf of a 43-year-old construction worker who was struck by a support wire used in the construction of a large concrete wall. Since the plaintiff was the foreman in charge of the operation, the defense attempted to blame the accident on him, or on his crane operator who was holding the wall at the time. Booth established in trial of the construction accident case, through the testimony of an earthquake expert, that a large concrete wall is a relatively elastic object that can move. As a result, Booth was able to convince the jury that the fault lay with the general contractor, who had inappropriately prepared the foundation on which the wall was being erected. The verdict includes $400,000 to plaintiff's wife for loss of consortium. The case was taken on appeal by the defense, which eventually lost the appeal and ended up paying over $4,000,000.
INJURIES: Below knee amputation of one leg.
COMMENTS:
At the time of this construction accident verdict, there had never been a verdict for a below knee amputation in Los Angeles which exceeded $500,000.
Chapman vs. L.A.U.S.D.
RESULT/YEAR:
VERDICT in 1983 for $2,500,000.
KEY FACTS:
The plaintiff, a construction worker, was found lying on the ground at a construction site, beneath a small platform. Because he suffered a brain injury in the accident, he was unable to remember how he fell, and there were no eyewitnesses. As a result, the defendant offered nothing to settle the case.
Construction accident attorney LARRY BOOTH argued that the plaintiff had fallen off the platform because of a lack of safety rails. The defense argued that he might have simply tripped. Booth therefore produced the testimony of an orthopedic surgeon that the type of leg fracture sustained by the plaintiff could only occur by falling directly down on the foot with the leg extended, which would not have happened if he had tripped.
In order to prove that the plaintiff fell off the platform and not off an adjacent wall (where there was no safety violation), Booth presented the testimony of an engineer who had previously conducted tests on the mechanism of falling persons. He established that, had the plaintiff fallen off the top of the wall, he would have landed differently.
By eliminating all other reasonable explanations, Booth proved that the accident was caused by the lack of a safety rail. Incredibly, the jury found almost no fault on the part of the plaintiff, even though he was in charge of the construction for the general contractor.
INJURIES: Brain injury, broken leg.
COMMENTS:
This verdict received a great deal of notoriety, including an article in the L.A. Times, because of Booth's success in reconstructing the accident solely through the use of expert witnesses.
Karle vs. Aerojet
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1993 for $2,165,000.
KEY FACTS:
This construction accident case, handled by attorney LARRY BOOTH, was primarily against the owners of a large factory. The plaintiff, while walking on the roof of the factory, stepped through a hole, which collapsed under his foot. The defendants hotly disputed that they were liable for the accident and contended that the hole had been created by the plaintiff and his co-workers.
INJURIES:
Knee injury involving multiple surgeries, but not requiring the insertion of a manufactured knee joint.
COMMENTS:
This case set a RECORD for the largest settlement in a knee injury case in the entire U.S.
Roche vs. City of L.A.
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1979 for $1,850,000.
KEY FACTS:
The plaintiff was an electrician who fell from the top of a facility under construction in the L.A. Harbor area. LARRY BOOTH, who handled the case, contended that the City of L.A., which was building the facility, was responsible for the accident because they failed to install adequate fall protection at the top of this very high structure.
The case was complicated by the fact that, by the time Booth was hired, the structure had been completed and the very complex superstructure was no longer available to be photographed. To address this problem, Booth hired a model maker to prepare an extremely detailed replica of the scene, which was subsequently photographed. The photographs were then used during the deposition and trial testimony in order to uncover the facts surrounding the accident from the numerous witnesses who were present during the construction.
INJURIES: Plaintiff was rendered a paraplegic.
COMMENTS:
This settlement, achieved after trial had already begun, set a RECORD for the largest settlement ever obtained in the Long Beach courthouse.
Gruenwald case
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1991 for $1,600,000.
KEY FACTS:
This case, handled by DONALD BECK and LARRY BOOTH, was on behalf of two ironworkers who fell approximately 17 feet on a job site. Throughout the years, B & K has not only developed special knowledge and expertise in handling construction accident cases, but has developed even more specialized experience in cases involving ironworkers, who are commonly subjected to extreme hazards, including working at incredible heights. Ironworkers are often killed or maimed as a result of the failure of general contractors (for cost reasons) to use certain well-recognized methods of protecting these workers, such as catenary lines, safety nets and hoists. Typically, the general contractors then turn around and blame the ironworkers themselves or their employer.
Metzger vs. Ocean Salt
RESULT/YEAR:
VERDICT in 1972 for $1,400,000.
KEY FACTS:
This case involved a welder who was struck by a galvanized metal pipe which had been dropped off a tower by a fellow workman. Because the pipe was quite thin and lightweight, the defense claimed that the injuries could not have been serious. The defense further argued that the extensive surgeries undergone by the plaintiff were unnecessary and were the result of either malpractice on the part of the doctors or a psychotic overreaction by the plaintiff.
In order to emphasize the severity of the accident, LARRY BOOTH utilized an accident reconstruction expert, who calculated that the impact from being hit by this pipe, in light of the distance from which it fell, would be equivalent to dropping a 16 pound shot put on someone from the fourth floor of the Long Beach courthouse, which happens to be where the trial was conducted.
INJURIES:
The plaintiff had multiple surgeries throughout his spine, practically fusing his entire spine.
COMMENTS:
This was LARRY BOOTH'S first million-dollar verdict, only the fourth in California history and among a small handful that had been obtained in the U.S. up to that time. B & K has since obtained over 40 additional million-dollar verdicts and settlements.
Wilson vs. Edison
RESULT/YEAR:
VERDICT in 1992 for $1,342,000.
KEY FACTS:
This case, tried by construction accident attorney JOHNNA HANSEN, was on behalf of a construction worker who, while operating a small tractor, inadvertently uncovered a high voltage line and was electrocuted. The key moment in trial came when Hansen suddenly called as a witness the lawyer representing defendant Edison. Edison had contended throughout the trial that the Edison investigator who came to the scene shortly after the accident had not prepared a report. Such a report could have disclosed the critical fact of whether the location of the high voltage line had been properly marked.
Edison's attorney had prepared a summary, for his own file, of the Edison investigator's deposition, and the summary indicated that there was indeed a report and that the report had been withheld. Hansen obtained a copy of the deposition summary when it was included as part of the materials furnished to one of Edison experts. On the witness stand, Edison's attorney again denied that there was any such report, at which point Hansen produced an enlargement of his deposition summary. This enraged the jury and resulted in this huge verdict.
INJURIES: Brain injury.
COMMENTS:
This verdict set a RECORD for the largest verdict ever rendered in the Victorville courthouse.