Our client, a dedicated factory worker, suffered a catastrophic arm injury when a legacy machine malfunctioned during a routine operation. The immediate problem was a formidable wall of denial. The factory's insurer and the machine's manufacturer each pointed squarely at the other, creating a circular blame game designed to delay and deny responsibility. The employer claimed our client failed to follow proper lock-out/tag-out procedures, while the manufacturer argued the machine had been improperly maintained and modified over decades.
Complicating matters, the machine in question had been partially dismantled by the plant's maintenance team post-accident—a potential act of evidence spoliation. We faced the daunting task of proving liability against multiple powerful defendants while also demonstrating the true, long-term financial impact of an injury that ended our client's career in skilled labor.
We overcame this tangle of blame through a methodical, evidence-first strategy that forced both defendants to the table. First, we moved aggressively to preserve evidence, obtaining a court order to inspect the machine and securing all maintenance records, modification histories, and internal safety audit reports. We retained a premier industrial engineering expert who conducted a forensic examination. His analysis proved the machine lacked critical, modern safety guards required by current industry standards and that a known design flaw in the gear mechanism caused the sudden, unexpected activation. Crucially, the expert demonstrated that the factory's modifications did not cause the failure but were, in fact, a response to the machine's inherent instability.
Simultaneously, we worked with a vocational rehabilitation specialist and an economist to build a powerful damages case. They projected the true cost of a lifetime of medical treatments, adaptive equipment, and, most significantly, the lost wages and benefits from a career cut short 25 years early. We presented this full financial picture alongside the unassailable technical evidence of liability. Confronted with the stark reality of a sympathetic client, a clear design defect, and the immense potential verdict at trial, the defendants abandoned their circular blame strategy. They contributed to a structured settlement designed to provide our client with a guaranteed, tax-advantaged income stream for life, covering all future medical needs and replacing lost income, thereby securing his and his family's financial future.
Result: Our client received a life-care plan funded by a structured settlement annuity, guaranteeing financial security and access to the highest quality medical and rehabilitative care for the rest of his life.
