There has been much talk of course about the stunning reversal of fortune for the plaintiff in Pelletier v. Sordoni/Skanska upon the Connecticut Supreme Court’s overturn of the judgment. The amount at stake, from a jury’s verdict and accrued interest, totaled more than $41 million. That is a massive amount of money. The plaintiff, a construction worker severely injured by a falling beam, must have been devastated by this outcome. News of it must have hit his counsel, presumably on contingency, right in the pit of the stomach. Verdicts of that height come once in a lifetime and, for most personal injury lawyers, never.
Legally speaking, was this outcome just? Obviously, yes. I do not practice personal injury law and know next to nothing about the principles and evidentiary standards that apply to that poor plaintiff’s situation. The issues arose in the context of workplace injury and involved knotty questions and nuances of negligence law, contractor liability, and delegable duties. But the justices know this stuff well and were unanimous.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
