Allowing hazardous construction site conditions ruined a young union operating engineer’s hip, damaging his livelihood, and cost those he sued $919,000 for injuries. 

The settlement, won in early June by Chicago injury law firm GWC, resulted from a lawsuit led by GWC partner Michael D. Fisher and attorney Autumn K. Leslie. It includes a complete waiver of the worker’s compensation lien, which totaled $189,000.

Poor site conditions injured worker

The successful lawsuit resulted from a November 2019 accident where a 27-year-old union operating engineer working on a site in Willow Springs, Illinois, was hurt when he tripped and fell while stepping over a silt fence in muddy conditions. The lawsuit was filed against a large pipeline operator, charging that it didn’t identify and rectify hazardous conditions and activities on the worksite.  

The suit was also filed against the project’s general contractor for failing to provide safe access around the job site without requiring workers to step over the silt fence, which caused the plaintiff to fall.

Companies deny blame for serious injury

The plaintiff in the lawsuit suffered a torn labrum in his left hip and aggravated the underlying impingement in his left hip. The injury required surgery, putting the plaintiff out of work for almost a year.

Both defendants claimed they acted reasonably in identifying and addressing hazards. They also claimed the plaintiff’s injuries were his fault for choosing to step over the silt fence.

“While the defendants conceded nothing, we were able to show, one witness at a time, how their failures directly caused our client’s fall,” GWC partner Michael D. Fisher said.

A pattern of neglect established

The lawsuit demonstrated that the defendants didn’t do enough to identify and address the hazardous conditions on the job site and were responsible for the fall that seriously injured the plaintiff.

Various workers made daily efforts to stabilize muddy ground on the job site before the plaintiff’s fall, but this didn’t fix the problem. 

“Defendants testified that there were alternative routes available; however, when workers who were at the job site on a daily basis testified that there were no alternative routes for the work our client was doing without stepping over that slit fence, it became clear that this incident was inevitable and defendants were going to need to pay,” attorney Autumn Leslie said.