Construction Job Accident
Feniger & Uliasz Lawyers
Are you looking for help with a case similar to these?
Contact us right now and speak with one of our lawyers!
(800) 828-3200 (603) 627-5997
or info@fenigeranduliasz.com
MERRIMACK COUNTY NH SUPERIOR COURT
The Parties
The plaintiff is an individual residing in Conway, State of South Carolina.
Defendant number 1 is a New Hampshire Corporation with a principle place of business in Town of Allenstown, County of Merrimack, State of New Hampshire with registered agent listed in Epsom, NH.
Defendant number 2 is a New Hampshire corporation with a principle place of business located in Town of Epsom, Merrimack County, State of New Hampshire with a registered agent listed in Epsom, NH.
Defendant number 3 is a New Hampshire limited liability company with a principle place of business located in Town of Allenstown, Merrimack County, State of New Hampshire, with a registered agent listed in, Epsom, NH.
Defendant number 4 is a business registered in New Hampshire with a principle office address in Town of Epsom, Merrimack County, State of New Hampshire.
Common Averments
1. That on or about July 29, 2004 the defendants, jointly and severally, were acting in the capacity of general contractor, with all legal obligations and responsibilities applicable thereto, in the design and construction of a garage/office building at 168 Granite Street, Town of Allenstown, Merrimack County, New Hampshire, hereinafter referred to as "the project".
2. That prior to July 29, 2004 the defendants, jointly and severally, entered into a contract with Builders, LLC of Hooksett, New Hampshire, to perform services including but not limited to the framing and roofing of the project and further, that on or about July 29, 2004 Builders, LLC was on site performing work in accordance with said agreement as a subcontractor to the defendants.
3. That on or about July 29, 2004 the plaintiff was an employee of Builders, LLC, lawfully on the premises known as Granite Street, Allenstown, New Hampshire and acting within the course of his employment in the construction of the project.
4. That while in the performance of his duties as an employee of Builders, LLC, a subcontractor, he was caused to fall through an unprotected opening in the first floor decking of the project, landing on the concrete floor below.
5. That as a direct and proximate result of said fall the plaintiff sustained serious and permanent injuries including but not limited to, closed head trauma, concussion, vertigo, post traumatic headaches, low back injury with radicular symptoms all of which have rendered him totally disabled through the present time and continuing causing him to endure conscious pain and suffering,
6. That in the treatment of said injuries, as described in paragraph five above, the plaintiff has incurred substantial medical expenses and is likely to incur medical expenses in the future.
7. That as a direct and proximate result of the fall and injury as hereinbefore described the plaintiff, has incurred lost wages and loss of future earning capacity.
8. That at all relevant times hereto the Plaintiff was in the exercise of reasonable care.
9. That for all counts the Plaintiff demands a jury hear his cause.
Count I
10. This count by plaintiff Cary L. Spaulding is against Defendant number 1 as general contractor and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs one through nine and further states:
11. That at all times relevant hereto defendant corporation, in its capacity as general contractor, owed a duty to the plaintiff to maintain the subject work site in a reasonably safe condition for all contractors, subcontractors and their employees, to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards and to supervise the performance of work.
12. That defendant breached its duty as owed to the plaintiff by failing to use reasonable care in the supervision of subcontractors, by failing to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards, by failing to supervise the performance of work performed by subcontractors, by failing to use reasonable care to ensure that openings on walking and working surfaces were properly covered or guarded, and by failing to maintain a reasonably safe work site, free of hazards such as that encountered by the plaintiff.
13. That as a direct and proximate result of the action, inaction, omissions and negligence of the defendant the plaintiff sustained the injuries and incurred damages as alleged in paragraphs five through seven above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests:
1. Judgment for damages plus interest from the date of his Writ;
2. Reasonable cost and attorney’s fees;
3. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.
Count II
14. This count by plaintiff against defendant number 2 as general contractor and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs one through nine and further states:
15. That at all times relevant heretodefendant in its capacity as general contractor, owed a duty to the plaintiff to maintain the subject work site in a reasonably safe condition for all contractors, subcontractors and their employees, to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards and to supervise the performance of work.
16. That defendant breached its duty as owed to the plaintiff by failing to use reasonable care in the supervision of sub contractors, by failing to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards, by failing to supervise the performance of work performed by subcontractors, by failing to use reasonable care to ensure that openings on walking and working surfaces were properly covered or guarded, and by failing to maintain a reasonably safe work site, free of hazards such as that encountered by the plaintiff.
17. That as a direct and proximate result of the action, inaction, omissions and negligence of the defendant the plaintiff sustained the injuries and incurred damages as alleged in paragraphs five through seven above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests:
1. Judgment for damages plus interest from the date of his Writ;
2. Reasonable cost and attorney’s fees;
3. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.
Count III
18. This count by plaintiff is against defendant number3 as general contractor and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs one through nine and further states:
19. That at all times relevant hereto defendant in its capacity as general contractor, owed a duty to the plaintiff to maintain the subject work site in a reasonably safe condition for all contractors, subcontractors and their employees, to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards and to supervise the performance of work.
20. That defendnat breached its duty as owed to the plaintiff by failing to use reasonable care in the supervision of sub contractors, by failing to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards, by failing to supervise the performance of work performed by subcontractors, by failing to use reasonable care to ensure that openings on walking and working surfaces were properly covered or guarded, and by failing to maintain a reasonably safe work site, free of hazards such as that encountered by the plaintiff.
21. That as a direct and proximate result of the action, inaction, omissions and negligence of the defendant the plaintiff sustained the injuries and incurred damages as alleged in paragraphs five through seven above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests:
1. Judgment for damages plus interest from the date of his Writ;
2. Reasonable cost and attorney’s fees;
3. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.
Count IV
22. This count by plaintiff Cary L. Spaulding is against defendant number 4 as general contractor and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs one through nine and further states:
23. That at all times relevant hereto defendant in its capacity as general contractor, owed a duty to the plaintiff to maintain the subject work site in a reasonably safe condition for all contractors, subcontractors and their employees, to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards and to supervise the performance of work.
24. That defendant breached its duty as owed to the plaintiff by failing to use reasonable care in the supervision of sub contractors, by failing to establish and enforce reasonable safety standards, by failing to supervise the performance of work performed by subcontractors, by failing to use reasonable care to ensure that openings on walking and working surfaces were properly covered or guarded, and by failing to maintain a reasonably safe work site, free of hazards such as that encountered by the plaintiff.
25. That as a direct and proximate result of the action, inaction, omissions and negligence of the defendant the plaintiff sustained the injuries and incurred damages as alleged in paragraphs five through seven above.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests:
1. Judgment for damages plus interest from the date of his Writ;
2. Reasonable cost and attorney’s fees;
3. For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS
Date: Respectfully submitted:
Plaintiff
By his attorney
________________________________
Michael R. Feniger, Esq.
FENIGER & ULIASZ
45 Bay Street
Manchester, NH 03104
Tel.: (603) 627-5997
