According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff’s decedent fell from the fifth floor of a building to his death. Among the claims presented was that the Plaintiff’s decedent was not presented with fall protection equipment.
In reviewing post-trial motions, the trial court judge wrote in his Rule 1925 Opinion that the Plaintiff had presented sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The court noted that the Plaintiff had presented sufficient evidence to enable the jury to make a determination as to who the alleged general contractor on the job was and who, therefore, was responsible for the provision of safety equipment on the site.
In response to the challenges to the amount of the award, the court otherwise held that there was no evidence that the jury’s award resulted from bias, impartiality, prejudice or ill will. The court instead found that the verdict was supported by the evidence presented and that the verdict was not grossly excessive under the circumstances and, therefore, did not shock the court’s conscience.
Anyone wishing to review this decision may click this
Source: Article – “Phila. Judge Upholds $68.5M Verdict Over Construction Worker’s Death” by Aleeza Furman of The Legal Intelligencer (Dec. 27, 2024).
Source of above image: Photo by Sylvia Brazzoduro on www.unsplash.com.