CJC Elevator Crash Comes to $20.5M Settlement
The sheriff's deputy who was partially paralyzed following a 2016 elevator malfunction at the Criminal Justice Center has agreed to settle his claims against numerous companies for $20.5 million.
December 18, 2018 at 05:02 PM
4 minute read
The sheriff's deputy who was partially paralyzed following a 2016 elevator malfunction at the Criminal Justice Center in Philadelphia has agreed to settle his claims against numerous companies for $20.5 million.
Paul Owens, who was paralyzed from the waist down after the elevator he was in sped up through the CJC before crashing into the ceiling, agreed to settle his claims against the companies late Thursday following a mediation before Jerry Roscoe, according to his attorney, Michael Tinari of Leonard, Sciolla, Hutchison, Leonard & Tinari.
“Paul and Heather are satisfied and happy to know that the money will cover their future medical costs and his living needs,” Tinari said. “That's a weight off their shoulders.”
Owens and a court employee were injured during the crash that took place in early August 2016. The crash involved restricted-access elevators used mostly by judges and court staff, and raised concerns throughout the Philadelphia legal community.
Owens' lawsuit, which was filed in January 2017, included allegations that the defendants were reckless and failed to notify the public of any warning signs regarding the elevators' safety.
According to Tinari, who handled the case along with Christopher Fleming, the settlement was largely motivated by the severity of Owens' injury and the evidence that was uncovered, which, Tinari said, showed there was faulty bolts and ring gear. According to Tinari, a company later bought by Otis performed maintenance on the elevator in 2009, and, when the ring gear was replaced, the original bolts, which dated back to 1994, were reused. The bolts, he said, should not have been reused, and over time they became loose and broke.
Several months after Owens' lawsuit was filed, a whistleblower suit was also filed against U.S. Facilities, the management company that was allegedly responsible for maintaining the elevators. According to the complaint, a company employee who was the building manager for the CJC reported “life safety issues” starting in December 2013, but was later fired. Tinari told The Legal in August that the whistleblower suit bolstered Owens' punitive damages claims.
Speaking Tuesday, Tinari said he could not disclose how much each party contributed to the settlement.
In an emailed statement to the press, thyssenkrupp spokesman Dennis Van Milligen said, “While all parties were able to reach a confidential resolution in connection with the tragic accident involving Sgt. Paul Owens at the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center, no amount of compensation can ever give Sgt. Owens back what he lost that day. We hope this settlement brings some measure of closure to Sgt. Owens and his family.”
A spokeswoman for Schindler Elevator Co., which had also been sued, said the company denies the allegations in the suit and “contributed a very minor amount” to the settlement to avoid “further litigation expense.”
“Schindler is pleased to see this matter resolved and wishes the Owens' well. Schindler was neither the elevator service provider when the subject event occurred nor was its equipment involved,” Kim Hoskins said on behalf of the company.
A spokeswoman for Otis said in an emailed statement, “It wouldn't be appropriate for us to comment on the details of this serious legal matter, but we are pleased the many parties involved in this lawsuit were able to reach a settlement.”
A spokesman for the Philadelphia Law Department did not return a call for comment. U.S. Facilities also did not return a call to its headquarters.
Theodore Schaer of Zarwin Baum DeVito Kaplan Schaer Toddy, who represented U.S. Facilities; Shimberg & Friel attorney Nancy Nolan, who represented thyssenkrupp; and Keith Johnston of Lucas and Cavalier, who represented Schindler, each did not return a call seeking comment. Christine Boyd of Lavin, O'Neil, Cedrone & DiSipio, who represented Otis, declined to comment.
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFirst Trial in Litigation Tying Pa. Medical Device Plant Emissions to Cancer Ends in Defense Win
3 minute readThe Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readJefferson Doctor Hit With $6.8M Verdict Over Death of 64-Year-Old Cancer Patient
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250