http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20160211-killed-worker-s-family-wins-53m-jury-verdict-in-kyle-field-stadium-makeover-accident.ece

A&M not on the hook.

Manhattan-Vaughn, a joint venture partnership between Oklahoma-based Manhattan Construction Co. and Houston-based Vaughn Construction Co., provided management services for the project. The demolition company was found 25 percent liable. Manhattan-Vaughn was determined to be 75 percent liable.

Unless there was deliberate negligence at play here (and I do not know all of the details), how is this award not excessive. I would expect this to be lowered after the inevitable appeal.

Edit to add:
In May 2014, Lindamood Demolition was cited by the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for "willful" and "serious" safety violations in the Kyle Field incident and placed in OSHA's Severe Violator Enforcement Program.

quote:

---

Garcia was working for Lindamood Demolition Inc. of Irving in December 2013 when a section of concrete fell onto the equipment he was operating

---

Sounds like someone ****ed up.

quote:

---

quote:

---

How much to attorneys?

---

Probably 70% or more.

---

It's not 70%. Most likely 40% of the mother's recovery and 1/3 of the children's recovery.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

How much to attorneys?

---

Probably 70% or more.

---

It's not 70%. Most likely 40% of the mother's recovery and 1/3 of the children's recovery.

---

And most likely they settle it for 25-35 cents on the dollar because they know the Texas appellate courts or supreme court would reverse it or cut it down drastically.

As someone with very close ties to this case; suffice it to say that the case will be appealed.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

How much to attorneys?

---

Probably 70% or more.

---

It's not 70%. Most likely 40% of the mother's recovery and 1/3 of the children's recovery.

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

quote:

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

---

25% at best.
They should be paid for their services, absolutely. But they are not the ones that are suffering/seeking justice.

Whoa.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

---

25% at best.
They should be paid for their services, absolutely. But they are not the ones that are suffering/seeking justice.

---

One could argue they are getting fair market value as both parties entered into the contract willingly. Attorneys take risk in contingency deals. I have been on both sides. You can spend 1000s of hours and lose a case and get nothing or end up in the hole for expenses (as you will be the one fronting them in personal injury cases) (and not to mention not covering overhead).

And in Texas, you have that 13th juror -- the Texas appellate courts -- that are not friendly at all to plaintiffs.

quote:

---

I personally know the attorney. He is a POS in every sense of the word. He is good at his job though...

---

I have dealt with Jason and have never had a problem with him. Kind of a meathead though.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I personally know the attorney. He is a POS in every sense of the word. He is good at his job though...

---

I have dealt with Jason and have never had a problem with him. Kind of a meathead though.

---

Major meathead. Roids, among other things. I won't go any further.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I personally know the attorney. He is a POS in every sense of the word. He is good at his job though...

---

I have dealt with Jason and have never had a problem with him. Kind of a meathead though.

---

I'm assuming you've dealt with him on a professional level.

I am very close with his family, and have seen and heard all I need to.

Attorney would get a third.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

---

25% at best.
They should be paid for their services, absolutely. But they are not the ones that are suffering/seeking justice.

---

The family is free to pay someone on an hourly basis. That would have been a couple of hundred thousand or less.

---

I agree that is an option.

quote:

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

---

25% at best.
They should be paid for their services, absolutely. But they are not the ones that are suffering/seeking justice.
They're taking all the risk and paying all the expenses to take that case to court. Without them doing that, the family wouldn't be able to even take their case to court. If they lose, they get nothing and are out everything they've spent, which is usually very substantial (expert fees, etc.). It easily costs 6 figures to take that case to trial, not including the time spent. That's expenses out of pocket that the lawyer pays.
I fully agree they are the ones incurring the expenses and assuming the risk.

But they are also free to take the case or not, and assume whether the risk/reward is worth it.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

How much to attorneys?

---

Probably 70% or more.

---

Attorneys are scum. If Hell does exist and our beliefs are true, over half of all attorneys would go there after death.

---

And ONLY half cause the Devil doesn't want the competition he would get from the other 50% !!!!

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I personally know the attorney. He is a POS in every sense of the word. He is good at his job though...

---

I have dealt with Jason and have never had a problem with him. Kind of a meathead though.

---

I'm assuming you've dealt with him on a professional level.

I am very close with his family, and have seen and heard all I need to.

---

Yes. I only know him professionally.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So what should the attorneys get? $0?

---

25% at best.
They should be paid for their services, absolutely. But they are not the ones that are suffering/seeking justice.

---

One could argue they are getting fair market value as both parties entered into the contract willingly. Attorneys take risk in contingency deals. I have been on both sides. You can spend 1000s of hours and lose a case and get nothing or end up in the hole for expenses (as you will be the one fronting them in personal injury cases) (and not to mention not covering overhead).

And in Texas, you have that 13th juror -- the Texas appellate courts -- that are not friendly at all to plaintiffs.

---

Tell me about the time you fronted 50+ million on a case.

There goes Sumlin's buyout

quote:

---

53 mil? That's a whole lot of Jarritos and carnitas

---

racist

Was merely kidding

Caveat: I know just enough PI law to be dangerous

I would assume that the employer had worker's compensation insurance, and so would be shielded from liability for ordinary negligence by the exclusive remedy provision of the worker's comp act, but would still be vulnerable to a gross negligence wrongful death claim (at one time, there were zero recorded appellate opinions upholding such judgments in Texas--all the good ones settled, and the rest got reversed on appeal). I don't know from reading the article if that is what was actually being tried, and whether or not Manhattan-Vaughn would also be in the same position (fellow servant? again, not my field), but that's probably what we're looking at with a $53 million figure--a jury verdict for exemplary damages. So, I'm guessing that this will be subject to the caps found in Chapter 41 of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code, which will probably cut it down to a few million (less than $5 million). Of course, the PI attorney will get the press release out crowing about the jury verdict, but that doesn't mean that the judgment will be anywhere near that amount--its just the numbers put in the charge by the jury. At least, that's my guess--you PI experts are welcome to jump in and correct me.

Manhattan-Vaughn was not the plaintiff's employer. He worked for an indepedendent contractor.


There were no exemplary damages awarded.



$5mm for pain/anguish before he died.

about $23mm to wife for past and future non-economic damages
$300k for pecuniary loss

about $15mm to daughter and $10mm to son for non-economic damages

quote:

---

An elderly woman goes to a lawyer to have her will drawn up. She consults with the attorney, and he says it's a very straightforward document, so the fee will be only $100. The women agrees. Gently opens her purse and pulls out a crisp, new one hundred dollar bill. She then leaves. As the attorney is putting the $100 in his drawer, he realizes that it's really TWO one hundred dollars bills stuck together.

He is then confronted the the laywer's dilemma..... Does he tell his partner?

---

You know that SOB is going to keep all of it.
Dirty bass turd.

quote:

---

Caveat: I know just enough PI law to be dangerous

I would assume that the employer had worker's compensation insurance, and so would be shielded from liability for ordinary negligence by the exclusive remedy provision of the worker's comp act, but would still be vulnerable to a gross negligence wrongful death claim (at one time, there were zero recorded appellate opinions upholding such judgments in Texas--all the good ones settled, and the rest got reversed on appeal). I don't know from reading the article if that is what was actually being tried, and whether or not Manhattan-Vaughn would also be in the same position (fellow servant? again, not my field), but that's probably what we're looking at with a $53 million figure--a jury verdict for exemplary damages. So, I'm guessing that this will be subject to the caps found in Chapter 41 of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code, which will probably cut it down to a few million (less than $5 million). Of course, the PI attorney will get the press release out crowing about the jury verdict, but that doesn't mean that the judgment will be anywhere near that amount--its just the numbers put in the charge by the jury. At least, that's my guess--you PI experts are welcome to jump in and correct me.

---

Manhattan wasn't his employer. He worked for independent contractor.

No exemplary damages were awarded.