Would you sue in this case?

[Shugardrawers]

I was asked for my opinion on this. I'm not sure what I think. Tell me what you think.

Jane is a merchandiser for a large corporation. For those not familiar, a merchandiser goes into stores that carry their company's products and helps keep their products fully stocked and neat and tidy. Companys like Coke, Nabisco and Revlon employ these merchandisers. The merchandiser usually has several stores on a route they service on a regular basis.

Jane was in one of her route stores when she was injured on the job. The injury was honestly due to a store employees negligence. Something was left out where it shouldn't have been and she tripped and fell over it. It was left out in a way that she didn't see it until she was right up on it. Her employer (NOT the store she fell in) is not giving her any problems with workman's comp. She's been out of work a month and has to have surgery. She'll have been out a total of about 3 months before it's all done. The injury isn't life threatening but does require surgical repair. Of course, it's also affecting her ability to do many things at home.

It's been suggested by many people that she should sue the store she fell in. She doesn't think she can because A) there weren't any witnesses and B) it's not a major injury (though it is painful and has affected her life and ability to work at least short term). She's certainly not looking to screw anyone out of anything she wouldn't really be entitled to. She's just been asked so many times about this she's wondering if she really should see a lawyer. What do you think?

 

[mssocks]

I'm thinking if she has workers comp, and insurance will cover her bills - and she doesn't have to borrow money to live - she should not sue.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Does she plan on quitting this job or does she still want to work there?
Does she think she could get fired?

Getting a settlement could take a long while and is a PITB.

So the scene would be you would not be working there and prospective employees would be turned off by your lawsuit, I would think.

Could she sue? Perhaps but for what? They are already paying her medical expenses and she is getting workers's comp so it would be a tough sell to a lawyer.
Of course this is just a guess....so I don't know.

 

[DVC-Don]

I know someone who sued a third party after being injured while on the job in a vehicle accident. After the settlement he had to refund workers comp what it had paid out in benefits.

 

[5wdwfans]

No she should not sue. Things like this happen, she is getting workmans comp and sounds like her job will be there when she recovers. Hope she has a speedy recovery.

 

[Disney Doll]

No she should not sue. Things like this happen, she is getting workmans comp and sounds like her job will be there when she recovers. Hope she has a speedy recovery.

I would say this is good advice.

 

[DisneyMommyMichelle]

nope, she is getting what she needs from insurance and such.

 

[Shugardrawers]

I tend to think that since the injury isn't all that serious and as others have said she's getting workman's comp that suing isn't really necessary. She does too. Neither of us can figure out why so many people are urging her to sue though. All I can think of is that the store is a MAJOR corporation. Think world's largest chain store. I think they are powerful enough and rich enough to drag it out for years and it would just be a huge PITA for her.

 

[Disneyrsh]

Where's HappyLawyer when you need some bad advice?

It sounds like everyone's given good advice so far, as long as all her physical needs are being covered, the issue is does she go after the store for punitive damages.

You can sue if you want, it's a free county. I don't think that the store was intentionally negligent, though.

Accidents happen...

 

[Kim&Chris]

Here's the deal: your friend CAN sue, as she certainly has a claim. The employee was negligent by leaving material on the floor, and the company allowed a hazardous condition to be present (whether they were aware of it or not). Jane, while a merchandiser, was an "invitee" at this store, and should have been able to visit the store without injury.

Now, SHOULD she sue....that's another situation entirely. As others have posted, she is getting the care she needs and her worker's comp coverage is paying for it. If she recovers, then good for her. If she does not, then she has the right to make a claim against the company. A claim is different from a lawsuit, and claims usually settle fast. If the company denies her claim, then she may wish to pursue a lawsuit.

Personally, if it were me....I would not make a claim or pursue a lawsuit if I was expected to heal completely. However, if time goes on and she suffers from pain directly related to the incident you discussed, then she may wish to move forward with a claim.

 

[Shugardrawers]

Here's the deal: your friend CAN sue, as she certainly has a claim. The employee was negligent by leaving material on the floor, and the company allowed a hazardous condition to be present (whether they were aware of it or not). Jane, while a merchandiser, was an "invitee" at this store, and should have been able to visit the store without injury.

Now, SHOULD she sue....that's another situation entirely. As others have posted, she is getting the care she needs and her worker's comp coverage is paying for it. If she recovers, then good for her. If she does not, then she has the right to make a claim against the company. A claim is different from a lawsuit, and claims usually settle fast. If the company denies her claim, then she may wish to pursue a lawsuit.

Personally, if it were me....I would not make a claim or pursue a lawsuit if I was expected to heal completely. However, if time goes on and she suffers from pain directly related to the incident you discussed, then she may wish to move forward with a claim.

Yeah, I'm with you. While I think she does technically have a case, I don't see the necessity. Her SO's income pays the bills and she's not having to put out money for medical care. Also, she freely admits the injury isn't that serious. It's just a broken bone that needs to be reset. Stuff happens. All these people urging her to pursue this need to keep in mind that the costs of unnecessary lawsuits like this are passed on to the consumer--them.

 

[MorganLeFey]

I've done defense work for many years.

the idea of workers comp is to pay the employee's economic losses. The comp carrier would have a lien against the proceeds of the suit -- but probably only to the extent that your friend sued for reimbursement of medical expenses. and yes, even though she's not out of pocket for lost wages or medical expenses, they are an element of the damages she would seek in the event she sued.

if your friend has recurring problems down the road, the comp carrier would still be on the hook for medical expenses and lost wages, so long as your friend could connect the recurring problem to the original inury.

a friend of mine tripped and fell on a NYC sidewalk. she sued the city and the owner of the property adjacent to the sidewalk. she claimed that the sidewalk was in disrepair and had been left in a dangerous condition -- a tripping hazard. thre were no witnesses to the fall. she broke her elbow. she settled for $30,000.

your friend's injury -- aa broken bone that requires additiional surgery -- is probably worth $50,000 or more. a local lawyer would be in a better position to assess the value of the injury.

litigation is a grueling process. your friend has to balance ehat she might get from this litigation with what she might lose. especially since she will continue to wrok at that location as part of her job responsibilities.

good luck to her.

 

[2Princes2Princesses]

I am with everyone else. As long as she is being taken care of, I don't see why she would sue.

I fell outside of church on the ice when I was about 22 (I was glad it was me rather than one of the older woman who go....could have been worse for them). I cracked a vertebrae. The diocese paid my doctor bills and offered to reimburse me for anything state disability didn't pay while I was out of work. I actually had additional disability coverage so that made up the rest, and my DH worked, so I wouldnt have taken the $$ anyway from the diocese.

A friend of mine kept telling me to sue. But I felt they helped with anything I had to pay out of pocket and that was more than enough. I think it is just a litigious mindset out there.

Besides....suing church? Eek. That would have to be a 1-way ticket to hell.

 

[FayeW]

I suggest that your friend see a lawyer, but only to document the injury, and have it on record in case of further problems down the road. I don't necessarily think she should sue.

 

[Poohnatic]

If she's getting the care she needs covered by worker's comp, then I wouldn't. If, however, she finds that she's not being reimbursed for lost wages, then I'd retain a lawyer.

Suzanne

 

[DawnCt1]

"Being taken care of" is really subjective. If one can be treated and fully recover with no lasting effects, that is being taken care of. I have a friend however who was seriously injured on the job. She had her jaw dislocated last winter by an unruly patient. She would have been better off if her jaw had been fractured because the force of the blow would have been expended into the bone rather than the joint. Since January she has only been able to eat soft foods, she can't sustain a conversation for more than 20 minutes and the failure rate of TMJ surgery is so high that she is unwilling to risk it. In fact, she can't get 3 surgeons to agree on whether it would be beneficial. In addition to that, if her facial nerve is damaged she will have a permanant disfigurement. The medication she is on caused her to fall and injure her back resulting in a hematoma that one radiologist thought was metastatic disease. If she can't talk, she can't dictate. She is a radiologist and dictation of her findings is essential. The work load is too heavy to rely on any other form of communication, not to mention the ongoing, chronic pain. Workers Comp does not begin to cover the salary that she is missing from being out of work. If I were her I would be talking to a lawyer. She was at the peak of a very lucrative career when this happened. She may never be able to work full time again, if and when she does return to work at all.

 

[DWDreams]

It depends if she'll have any permanent issues as a result of this injury. If not, I'd leave it be, but if it ends up being the case then I'd say yes.

Three things to consider, however:
1. the employer likely has a relationship with this store and might not be too happy if she pursues a claim against them.
2. the workers compensation carrier would have rights to a lien against any settlement she'd collect from the third party (being the store) and this usually includes both medical benefits AND lost wage benefits paid. I stress that because I saw a prior post mention only medical benefits, which normally isn't the case. Future medical coverage by the workers compensation carrier was also mentioned in the thread so to be clear I'd pont out that this future coverage is also impacted after settlement with the third party -- usually future benefits are reduced until the proceeds of the third party settlement have been exceeded, in other words the lien remains regardless.
3, If there is actually a third party responsible for the work injury, it's also quite possible the workers' compensation carrier will pursue recovery on their own anyhow.

 

[N.Bailey]

In all honesty, I'm not sure she has much to gain. Attorney fees will run some major $$$, plus if worker's comp has to be repaid, where is the benefit in suing? Things may be entirely different now too, but my husband had to apply for worker's comp many years ago for a 2 week period. Keep in mind, we're probably talking a good 13-14 years. At that time, he did not have to pay taxes on the worker's comp, so he actually was making more money than if he was working. I can't remember if we had to add that to our gross income at tax time, but I'm thinking we did not. Don't hold me to that though! LOL

My opinion would be entirely different however if her medical bills aren't being covered completely. At that point, I would encourage her to retain an attorney as she would then be suffering a financial hardship.

If the company were to ask her to sign a waiver for the insurance claim, I would highly encourage her not to sign as she could be giving up future benefits if for whatever reason something happens on down the road.

 

[donnajon]

I think this is parlt of what is wrong in this country these days! Everyone is so sue happy! $30,000 for tripping on the sidewalk! I'm sorry, that is just ridiculous! What happened to accidents! Everyone has to blame someone and is out to get easy money. Good for all of the people saying that she is taken care of and to not sue. Now if she wasn't having her medical needs taken care of, that would be a different story.