Some cases are so important that they become a precedent for all future related cases, and are henceforth referred to as case law. It’s not something that happens every day, and it’s certainly not something that every attorney experiences, perhaps even throughout their entire career. However, when it does happen, it means the attorneys involved went above and beyond to specify the egregiousness of their client’s situation to a point at which their arguments can thereafter be considered and referenced in future litigation. At Aiello Law Group, our attorneys have been fortunate enough to be a part of such exciting legal developments – Latham v Barton Malow Co being just one example.
Case Law Summary of Latham v Barton Malow Co
“Latham v Barton Malow Co, 2006 WL 2956334 (Mich App Oct 17, 2006) and Latham v Barton Malow Co, 480 Mich 105, 746 NW2d 868 (2008)” states that “a general contractor can be held liable for an injury to a subcontractor’s employee when it is shown that the general contractor failed to ensure compliance with safety procedures/protection and the contractor ignored the non-use of provided safety equipment by a number of workers on its construction site.”
What Actually Happened
The actual case we represented involved an accident in which the employee (a carpenter) of a subcontractor was unloading and carrying a sheet of drywall from a scissors lift to a nearby mezzanine for a new school building being constructed. When the drywall cracked unexpectedly, the carpenter lost his balance and fell approximately 13-17 feet to the floor below. Despite the fact that the plaintiff was not wearing his mandated safety harness, our attorneys were able to help him sue the general contractor of the project for his extensive injuries on the grounds that the “defendant had failed to ensure that plaintiff would use proper fall protection while working on the lift and the mezzanine, despite knowing that such protection was necessary when the perimeter cable was lowered.” Furthermore, the fact that numerous other employees from other trades would be required to use the same lift to reach the same mezzanine, and that the cable would again need to be lowered to allow access, we were able to additionally argue that the “situation created a high degree of risk to a significant number of workers” apart from our client.
What Does This Mean For You?
Aside from the fact that our work on the Latham v Barton Malow Co case means that countless other people have and will be able to more easily get the justice they deserved, it’s also a testament of our commitment to always pursue every case to its farthest limit. We never secede until we’re certain our clients are getting everything they deserve, even if it means making an example of the entire case! Call us, today, at 313.964.4900 or fill out the form in the sidebar or on our contact page, and learn more about how we can help you.
