A truck driver client, working for a local Container suffered an organic brain injury secondary to being struck by a 1,000 pound steel door on the rear of a container during the refuse unloading process. The grocery chain that owned the compactor, the maintenance company and the manufacturer contributed to the settlement, due to a dangerous modification to a door latching mechanism. During the unloading process, the steel door chain disengaged from the side of the container, slid through the hole in the plate. The door struck the client in the head and knocked him into a pile of trash behind the containers.
A three (3) year old passenger in her mother’s car was killed in a collision by the employee of local distribution company, driving recklessly on the job; drugs found in employee’s system.
Tractor/Trailer rear-ended a husband and wife while driving down I-95. Significant orthopaedic injuries to wife.
In 2007, the client was on a borrowed ATV, riding on the shoulder of a secondary roadway near Hollywood, SC. She struck a sink hole/washout area on the road shoulder, adjacent to a storm water ditch, which threw her and the ATV about 30 feet into the ditch. Her most significant injury was a complete avulsion of her cervical spine at C 5-6, resulting in permanent right arm paralysis. The settlement amount was adjusted for comparative negligence by the ATV rider/client.
A large shelf of champagne bottles tipped forward and fell on top of our 22 year old client, who suffered a deep laceration and tendon injury to her right lower extremity.
A baby suffered a significant brachial plexus shoulder injury when the baby became entrapped on the mother’s pubic bone during birth and doctors failed to follow proper procedures to release the entrapment.
A limousine driver was injured during an attempted car-jacking of a 2007 Bentley Flyer sedan. $22,334.00 actual damages; and $200,000.00 punitive damages awarded.
A local restaurant manager lost control of his Porsche Boxter and ran into a family on the way to church in their Suburban, causing it to roll over. The husband/client suffered a concussion and neck injuries. $25,000.00 actual damages; $75,000.00 punitive damages awarded.
South Carolina’s disabled workers were routinely forced to abandon rights and remedies afforded under the S.C. Workers’ Compensation Act by overt threats from the defense to not consent to life expectancy age proration (“LEAP”) language in workers’ compensation awards.
LEAP language in an award or settlement agreement in workers compensation is nothing more than a mathematical computation of a worker’s net proceeds after the payment of attorney’s fees and costs, divided by the number of weeks a worker is expected to live, per South Carolina’s actuarial table. The resulting life expectancy proration rate allows the Social Security Administration to prorate the federally mandated offset of federal benefits that occurs due to the lump sum state award, over the life expectancy of the worker; rather than having the worker suffer a sometimes 3 to 4 years offset of Social Security Disability benefits. It reconciles all state and federal disability schemes to achieve the underlying purpose of the Social Security Act, which was at its genesis, and still is, to assist disabled persons.
Unfortunately, insurance company lawyers, knowing that workers would go hungry with such an offset, began pushing workers compensation commissioners to require insurance carrier/employer consent to the language being placed in awards. Given the politics involved with workers compensation cases, a gauntlet of commissioners took the position that consent was required, which gave the carriers and employers a de facto veto power over our workers’ federal Social Security Disability benefits.
After two Supreme Court hearings, we prevailed and protected all of South Carolina’s workers. McKnight Law Firm funded the entire appeal and did not charge the client for any appellate work, through two Supreme Court hearings.
The S.C. Court of Appeals reversed a Berkeley County Circuit Court jury verdict where the Court refused to allow a neuropsychologist to testify regarding our client’s episodic depression and anxiety.