Heavy Machinery
Submit your case
Booth & Koskoff is one of the leading law firms in the entire United States in suing manufacturers of heavy machinery such as forklifts and loader/backhoes when a defect in the design or manufacture of the equipment has caused the death or serious injury of a construction worker. These cases are very difficult, time-consuming and expensive, and only a select few firms have the expertise and resources necessary to handle them effectively. We have assembled rooms full of key documents showing the history of catastrophic accidents involving forklifts and loader/backhoes and the failure of certain manufacturers to address the serious safety problems with their products.
Booth & Koskoff's most notable result in a heavy machinery case occurred in 1997, when Larry Booth went to trial against Case Corporation in federal court in Los Angeles. The case was brought on behalf of a 27-year-old man who had become a triplegic (losing the use of both legs and one arm) as a result of being crushed by the boom of a Case loader/backhoe. The plaintiff, Reggie Qualls, had reached into the cab of the loader/backhoe to place his cooler there. The cooler landed on the pedals that control the swinging of the boom, and the boom suddenly swung towards Mr. Qualls and crushed him.
Unbeknownst to Mr. Qualls, this type of accident had happened many times before. Case had designed a safety device to prevent such accidents, but did not install this device on the loader/backhoe that Mr. Qualls' employer owned. When Mr. Booth became involved in this case, none of the many prior lawsuits that had been brought involving so-called "inadvertent actuation" of the loader/backhoe pedals had been successful. Mr. Booth and his colleagues proceeded to "leave no stone unturned" in preparing this case, which involved finding and reviewing thousands of pages of documents and taking depositions across the country.
The result, after a five-week trial, was a verdict for the plaintiff for an astounding $17,500,000!
Mr. Booth's unique trial strategy in the Qualls case was the subject of an article in a nationwide publication, the Law Reporter.
- Case Results
- > Qualls vs. Case Corp.
- > MaGee vs. Challenge-Cook Brothers
- > Hutchison vs. Gripalloy
Qualls vs. Case Corp.
RESULT/YEAR:
VERDICT in 1997 in excess of $20,000,000, reduced by reason of partial fault on the part of plaintiff's employer to a net verdict of $17,500,000.
KEY FACTS:
The plaintiff was struck by the boom of a loader/backhoe (a large piece of construction equipment) manufactured by the Case Corporation. B & K claimed that the loader/backhoe was defectively and negligently designed and had similarly injured a number of people throughout the years because of inadvertent actuation of the pedals which moved the boom from side-to-side. This problem should have been addressed by the use of a variety of fail-safe devices which would have rendered the pedals inert when they were not in use or made it impossible for the inadvertent actuation of one pedal to cause the boom to move without simultaneously moving both pedals.
This case was successful because of immense preparation, primarily by DONALD BECK, and a lengthy federal court trial conducted by LARRY BOOTH and JOHNNA HANSEN. The case was settled during the course of an appeal.
INJURIES:
The plaintiff was rendered a triplegic, losing the ability to move one arm and both legs. He requires round-the-clock nursing for many of the most basic day-to-day human activities.
COMMENTS:
B & K sued the Case Corporation on behalf of this young man even though every previous case that had been brought against them on the same theory had either settled for a relatively nominal amount or had been unsuccessful in trial. This verdict was the subject of a "Spotlight" article in the Law Reporter and was the "centerfold" in Verdictum Juris.
MaGee vs. Challenge-Cook Brothers
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1984 for $2,500,000.
KEY FACTS:
The plaintiffs were the parents of a 31-year-old construction worker who was crushed (and killed) by the collapse of a large crane on a construction job. His father worked on the same job and, not only witnessed the accident, but performed the heroic task of lifting the crane off of his son's dying body. As a result of this experience, the father became permanently disabled because of severe emotional distress.
The company which owned and operated the crane was a defendant, along with the manufacturer of the crane. Therefore, the case combined aspects of both construction accident law and products liability law. LARRY BOOTH established, through a series of exhaustive depositions and detailed investigation, that the boom of the crane had been constructed without certain support braces, that the manufacturer was aware of the problem and that there had been prior similar accidents with the same type of crane. Independent investigator MICHAEL SORESI was instrumental in gathering this information, which exposed the manufacturer to a substantial risk of being hit with punitive damages.
INJURIES:
Death of son and severe emotional distress suffered by father.
COMMENTS:
This settlement, which was reported on by the Daily Breeze, will pay out $21.5 million to the plaintiffs over their lifetimes.
Hutchison vs. Gripalloy
RESULT/YEAR:
SETTLEMENT in 1996 for $1,000,000.
KEY FACTS:
This is a case, handled by DONALD BECK and LARRY BOOTH, involved an allegedly defective hoist. The defense claimed that the hoist had been abused and that the load on the hoist at the time of the accident was excessive.
INJURIES: Back injuries.
COMMENTS:
This is another example of B & K's background and experience in establishing liability against manufacturers despite the complexities of the design of many of these products.