Contact Us Today
If you have any questions concerning your case, the attorneys at SwartzCulleton PC are available to discuss your claim at 215-550-6553
All consultations are FREE
|
June 17th, 2010
The police officer knocked on Pam’s front door at 4:00 am. She received the news her husband Joe had been killed while on his way to work in a car crash on the Newtown Bypass. The police were blaming Joe: the officer explained that two accidents had occurred; a young woman returning from a night out had run a red light and hit a tractor trailer, which had become disabled in the intersection; minutes later, Joe had driven at high speed into the stationary tractor trailer. The police concluded that Joe should have seen the tractor trailer and should have had plenty of time to stop.
Facing the loss of her husband’s support for her two young children, Pam turned to the lawyers of Swartz Culleton. Prosecuting attorney Brandon Swartz filed suit against the young woman whose conduct had caused the tractor trailer to be where it was, and the truck driver for failing to ignite warning flairs after the first accident. As litigation proceeded, two seemingly insurmountable defenses emerged. The truck’s black box recordings revealed the truck driver had insufficient time to have placed flares or cones. More dauntingly, the defendants reconstructed the accident scene and filmed what the tractor trailer would have looked like that morning to oncoming drivers. Video taken from a car as it approached the intersection during the reconstruction raised the serious question of why Joe had not seen the truck in time to stop. Relying on this video, the defendants argued that Pam and her family had no case because Joe had been speeding or driving carelessly, and was most at fault for the second accident.
Undeterred, attorney Brandon Swartz launched an investigation of the intersection lighting and the truck’s reflectivity. The intersection was dark, had no street lights and the lights on the tractor trailer had been disabled by the first accident. He hired an expert on the reflective tape used on the tractor trailer. After reviewing the placement of the vehicles at the accident scene, this expert concluded that given the angle at which the truck was stopped, the reflection of Joe’s headlights would have been deflected to the side and not back at Joe. Without adequate light, Joe’s reaction time decreased dramatically. By providing a reasonable explanation for why Joe had not seen the truck in time to avoid it, this investigation helped absolve Joe of blame, and compelled the defendants to settle.
Following protracted negotiations, a settlement of $800,000 was reached.
Tags: auto accident, motor vehicle accident
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
June 17th, 2010
A young single woman living in Monroe County was involved in a vehicle collision when another driver veered into her lane and collided into her vehicle head on. The injuries resulting from the accident required surgical attention to her face and left eye, leaving a part of her face scarred.
A settlement of $230,000, plus medical costs, was obtained after Brandon Swartz filed a suit against the wrongful driver.
“This attractive lady went through emergency face surgery and was left with facial scars as a result of the other driver’s negligence,” states Swartz. Subsequent medical procedures have been a success and the young lady has made a strong recovery.
Tags: collision, motor vehicle accident
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
June 17th, 2010
A 55 year old gentleman, who was about to retire, injured his shoulder while working at a well known retail home improvement store. The damaged shoulder required three reconstructive surgeries, and left the man unable to return to work at full capacity.
After collecting benefits for several years from worker’s compensation, the employer’s carrier challenged the man’s disability, contending he could return to employment. His lawyers, Swartz Culleton, hired a medical specialist who established that the injury was too severe for a return to work. After litigation, the case settled for $195,000, plus payment of full medical expenses and benefits.
Tags: injury, workers compensation
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
June 17th, 2010
A nursing home has paid $375,000 to settle claims by a former resident that poor wound care led to his below the knee amputation. The man, a diabetic and smoker, was in the nursing home for post-op care following a left leg artery bypass operation to treat a circulatory condition called peripheral vascular disease. That surgery, although a success, had not cured a persisting diabetic ulcer on his left heel. Following a six week stay at the nursing home, the man was discharged to home nursing care. However, shortly after coming home, his foot ulcer became septic. He was taken to the ER and the same day underwent amputation.
Swartz Culleton sued the nursing home for malpractice.
According to prosecuting attorney Chris Culleton, “The nursing home failed to follow medical procedure and provide adequate treatment for this ailing individual. Specifically, the nursing home had discontinued using a wound treatment device called a wound vacuum.” Medical experts hired by Swartz Culleton provided opinions that the wound vacuum treatment would have increased the chance that the wound would have healed. The experts also criticized the facility’s decision to send the resident home, although by that point his fate was essentially sealed.
The patient died of unrelated causes, and the suit was continued by his family and Swartz Culleton. A settlement of $375,000 was obtained for the man’s estate.
Tags: Amputation, claim, nursing home
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | 12 Comments »
June 17th, 2010
A week prior to her retirement, a government employee attempted to open a window in her office when a malfunction occurred within the window, causing it to slam down on her hand. The window crushed the top of her middle finger, which required surgical repair.
Swartz Culleton was hired to prosecute a product liability claim against the window maker. The window, however, was over 20 years old, had been installed by a company no longer in business, and contained no markings that identified the manufacturer. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Christopher Culleton, retained a window expert who, after inspecting the window, was able to narrow the suspect list to five window manufacturers and two component makers. Culleton then filed a lawsuit against all the suspects. After obtaining documentation and testimony from the defen-dants, the cause of the malfunction was isolated to a defect in the balance casing, which had been made by a Massachusetts company.
“We showed that even though the window was 20 years old, the balance mechanism was supposed to survive the number of operations that would have occurred over that period and unfortunately it had not, and was therefore defective,” said Culleton.
The case was cracked during a deposition of a representative of the Massachusetts company. Under cross examination, the representative agreed that his company made the balance and that the failure of the balance had caused the window’s sudden fall. The case settled soon after for $200,000 dollars and compensation for all medical expenses. Fortunately, the former government employee was able to make virtually a full recovery from her injury.
Tags: defective, Government Employee, window maker
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
June 17th, 2010
A national fast food chain has paid $175,000 to settle claims that its food caused a young woman E. coli poisoning.
The law suit was brought by law firm of Swartz Culleton, which contended that the E coli, a food borne bacterium, came from fast food that the woman had eaten at the restaurant chain two weeks earlier.
The law suit hit an early road block when genetic testing showed that the strain of E. coli found in the woman did not match the strain of E. coli that had affected other customers of the same restaurant chain. A further hurdle was the fact that the woman did not become sick until two weeks after eating the chain’s food. The incubation period for E. coli is usually 2 to 3 days.
The Swartz Culleton lawyers were able to overcome these defenses using a detailed survey of everything the woman had eaten in the weeks before she was sick, and evidence that the fast food chain was the only place at which she ate where other diners had also reported E. coli symptoms.
The woman made a full recovery and later gave birth to a healthy baby boy.
Tags: E. Coli, Fast Food, Poisoning
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
February 7th, 2010
Bucks County, PA.
A Pennsylvania construction company has agreed to pay $800,000.00 to a union employee to settle a lawsuit filed by the Swartz Culleton law firm. The employee had sustained lower back injuries after he fell down a flight of stairs during a high-rise construction project. The lawsuit alleged that the stairs were unsafe because the construction company, which was the general contractor on the large construction project, did not maintain bilateral hand-rails during the construction phase, and that the stairs were overly congested due to improper coordination of contractors at the site.
In defending the case, the company argued that OSHA did not require bilateral hand-railings and, more importantly, that it was immune from civil suit because of the exclusivity of the Workers’ Compensation Act. Under the Act, if a general contractor hires a subcontractor and that subcontractor employs a worker, that worker cannot sue his employer or the general contractor if he sustains a work injury on the job site. This is something called the statutory employer defense and is an absolute defense. In this case, the plaintiff was employed by a subcontractor of the defendant company.
The worker’s attorney, Brandon Swartz of the Swartz Culleton law firm, explained how the statutory employer defense was overcome: “Using the project contracts and through a forensic investigation of the different contractors’ actual relationships, we were able to show that the contract between the general contractor and the worker’s employer, the subcontractor, was essentially a “sham” designed to create the shield of the statutory employer defense. By putting the legitimacy of that contract in play, the defendant company lost its absolute defense, was forced to the negotiating table, and the case settled.”
Tags: Construction Injury, injured, settlement
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
February 7th, 2010
A Reading woman has settled her law suit against a German baking equipment manufacturer relating to a concussion she sustained while cleaning a commercial dough mixer at a Berks County bake goods plant. The woman claimed that the mixer was defectively designed for safe cleaning operations. The law suit alleged that the mixer’s extrusion lever, which had to be lifted and propped up for cleaning, should have had a catch to prevent it from falling due to the inevitable shaking and vibration caused by the cleaning process. According to the Complaint, the lack of a catch created an unreasonable risk of operator injury.
The plaintiff was represented by Christopher Culleton of the Swartz Culleton law firm. The law suit settled following a two year investigation of the mixer design process and extensive litigation on the identity and responsible of the original product manufacturer’s successor-in-interest.
“The difficulty with the case,” according to Mr. Culleton, “was not proving that the machine lacked the necessary safety features; rather, the problem was that the company that made and sold the mixer had filed for bankruptcy in the late 1990s and no longer existed.” Through researching US and German corporate and legal filings, the plaintiff’s lawyers were able to identify a German company that had purchased from a bankruptcy trustee some of the mixer manufacturer’s original production equipment, customer lists and intellectual property. “We started suit against that company and served process in Germany using the Hague Convention,” said Culleton.
The case resolved following testimony by representatives of the German company concerning the assets it had acquired. Under Pennsylvania law, a company may be considered responsible for the products made by a previously existing company if it acquires its assets and uses them to “continue the product line.” The plaintiff’s lawyers solicited testimony that the German company employed its acquired assets to mke baking equipment similar to the mixer involved in the plaintiff’s accident. It also used the brands of its predecessor. In advertising in Germany, the company had boasted that its equipment continued the long history and traditions and high standards of its predecessor. The case settled for $150,000.
Tags: banking, claim, lawsuit, settlement
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | 1 Comment »
February 7th, 2010
A Philadelphia nursing home has agreed to pay $450,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by the family of a 73 year old man who developed multiple bedsores during a three week stay at the NE Philadelphia nursing facility. The lawsuit alleged that the bedsores were caused by the nursing staff’s failure to monitor and rotate the patient, who at the time was incapacitated due to a recent stroke.
The family’s lawyer, Christopher J. Culleton of the Swartz Culleton law firm, explained that the settlement was compensation for two months of pain and suffering only as the family had not pursued a wrongful death claim; the bedsores, which resolved after appropriate treatment was provided at a new nursing facility, had played no role in the victim’s eventual death. “The key to the case,” said Mr. Culleton, “was to show that the victim’s pressure sores were not inevitable. Nurses at another facilities testified in depositions that the victim’s bedsores began to heal with appropriate care.”
Relying on records showing that the victim received no pain medication, the defendant nursing home contended that the victim, who was non-responsive due to his stroke, was unable to feel pain. “Relying on the same records and witness observations of the patient’s response to external stimuli,” explained Culleton, “we were able to obtain expert geriatric care specialist opinion that the patient could feel and did feel tremendous pain. In that respect, we turned the lack of pain medication from the nursing home’s shield to our sword.”
According to the plaintiff’s lawyer, “A patient who is terminal and has poor quality of life is still entitled to quality medical care. With limited exception, bed sores just shouldn’t happen and the legal system will not turn a blind eye when our loved ones are caused to spend their final days in avoidable suffering due to nursing home neglect.”
Tags: bed sore, lawsuit, nursing home, settlement, victim
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
February 7th, 2010
Bucks County, PA.
A Pennsylvania pedestrian who was catastrophically injured when struck by a drunk driver has settled his claim against the Tavern where the drunk driver had been previously drinking. The claim was brought under the Pennsylvania “Dram Shop” Statute, which prohibits bars from serving alcohol to any patron who is visibly intoxicated. The case settled for one million dollars, which was the full amount of the Tavern’s Dram Shop insurance coverage.
The bar’s main defense was that its staff did not know that the driver was drunk when they served him alcohol. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Brandon Swartz of the Swartz Culleton firm, explained that “a Dram Shop claim is difficult to prove because the Statute requires the victim prove that the tavern had actual knowledge it served its patron to the point of intoxication.” Early in the litigation, the investigating police officer testified that immediately after the accident, the driver acted like he was intoxicated. Attorney Swartz argued that the officer’s testimony was sufficient circumstantial evidence that the driver must also have been obviously drunk when he was at the Tavern. “Whether this evidence was enough,” said Swartz, “caused us some concern, so we kept digging.” According to Swartz, “the plaintiff caught a break in the case when we found a new witness, a co-worker of the driver, who admitted that on a prior occasion, he and the driver had visited the same Tavern, and the Tavern had served both men well past the point of intoxication.” Shortly after this co-worker testified, the insurance company agreed to pay the full amount of the policy.
Tags: claim, dram shop, drunk driver, injured, insurance, intoxicated, million dollar, pedestrian
Posted in Publications, Successful Cases | No Comments »
|
