According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), accross the United States, Construction accounted for 1,178 fatal work injuries, the most of any industry sector in 2007.  Construction workers experienced 135,350 injuries and illnesses in 2007 and had an incident rate of 190 per 100,000 workers. Between 1992 and 2005 falls, electric current, highway incidents, and being struck by an object were in the leading causes of death in construction. One third of the fall related deaths were falls from a roof, 18% were falls from scaffolding and 16% were falls from ladders.  Electrocutions accounted for 9% of the deaths in construction in 2005.

It goes without saying that if you work in the construction sector, you face quite a bit a danger.  Particularly in a construction heavy state like in Arizona, the risk of construction related accidents and injuries is high.   For most workplace accidents, worker's compensation laws apply.  That means if you suffer an injury that is the result of workplace injury, then your recovery is limited to the Arizona's worker's compensation fund.  Usually, that means you cannot sue your employer for an injury you suffered at work. 

If, however, you suffered an injury at work that was the result of the negligence of a third party, then you can potentially sue that third party.  In these circumstances, your recovery is not limited to the Arizona worker's compensation fund.   In that circumstance, your potential personal injury claim would be similar to any other Arizona personal injury lawsuit.   To prevail in your case, you would have to prove the liability of a third party and damages, just like a car accident case.   If you did recover against a third party, then the Arizona woker's compensation fund could have lien (reimbursement) rights for any money they paid for your injury. 

Some of the typical third parties who cause Arizona contruction accidents and injuries include subcontractors from different employers, vendors, products, and companies at the job site.  Needless to say, sometimes it gets very complicated figuring out exaclty who someone works for and who is reponsible for the accident.   Even more complicated is figuring out exactly what insurance policies apply and who ultimately should pay for a construction accident.  Of course, the various insurance defense lawyers will do their best to say their client did not do anything wrong, and if necessary, point their finger at someone else.   They might even point their finger at a nonparty at fault. 

If you have suffered an injury at work, like a construction accident, you need the help of an Arizona construction accident and injury attorney to help you figure it all out.  You need help with the possible claims against a third party, resolving any potential Arizona worker's compensation lien rights, and untangling all the various insurance policies invovled.  Please call the Law Office of Vladimir Gagic at 800-603-7203, your Arizona injury attorney.

Under certain circumstances, if you are injured in an Arizona accident case and have suffered an injury, you can recover for more than just your medical expenses and pain and suffering. You can also recover for what is called punitive damages. 

In the typical accident case, what you recover for pain and suffering is usually a multiple of the actual medical expenses.  For example, if you suffered soft tissue injuries, the typical multiple is something like 3 to 1, while in more severe injury cases, the multiple would be much higher.  The most important point here is that the recovery is anchored to medical expenses.  The greater the medical expenses, the higher the recovery.  In a case, however, where the defendant's behavior was especially outrageous, in particular criminal, you could recover for what is called punitive damages.  To establish a claim for puntive damages, there must be clear and convicning evidence that the defendant had an "evil mind guiding an evil hand". There must be direct evidence of intent to cause harm, or sufficient and substantial evidence to infer the intent to cause harm.  Essentially, if you recover for punitive damages, the recovery is not for pain and suffering but to punish and deter the defendant's conduct. That means recovery for puntive damages is not inherently connceted to medical expenses and not limited as a strict mulitple of medical expenses. 

There are a number of different scenarios in which you can recover punitive damages.  Probably the most common circumstance is when you are hurt in a car accident or motorcycle accident and the defendant drive was driving under the influence or a DUI . You could also get punitive damages where a trucker fails to maintain the truck's brakes White v Mitchell.

One of the problems associated with recovery for punitive damages is that the insurance policy of the defendant can exclude coverage for punitive damages.   In Price vs. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co., the supreme court held that if insurance companies wanted to exclude punitive damage coverage, the should include a specific provision excluding coverage.

If you have suffered an accident and believe you may be entitled to punitive damages, please be sure to contact our office, your Phoenix injury accident lawyer, Vladimir Gagic.

Before I became a lawyer, I did not know the first thing regarding insurance, and I assumed anything an insurance agent was selling me was garbage. Usually, the only thing I would buy would be the state mandated minimum coverage.  While I still feel that insurance agents are not always looking out in my interest, I certainly do not think that about Underinsured and Uninsured motorist protection.  Before I tell you exactly why, a few distinctions. 

Liability insurance protects someone who you hurt.  State law requires that every driver have at least minimum liability coverage, which means a liability policy of $15,000 per individual/$30,000 per accident. When drivers have this coverage, they sometimes refer to it as "full coverage", even though it is far from adequate.  Liability insurance is also referred to third party insurance because it covers the injuries of someone else.  That is, the insured is a different person from the beneficiary.  This is what the state requires you to have at the very least, and certain car financing banks, typically car leases, require even more liability coverage. 

But what if someone hurts you, and they do not have any insurance?  That is where uninsured coverage (UM) comes in.  What if the person who hurt you has insurance, but not enough to cover your injuries?  That is where underinsured coverage (UIM) comes in.   Both UIM and UM coverage are referred to as first party insurance because the insured is also the beneficiary of the policy.  Of course, the benefit of first party insurance is that it protects you and your family.  While state law does not require you to get first party insurance, your insurance agent must offer you first party insurance with limits at least the same as your liability limits ARS 20-259.01(A) .   Another benefit of first party insurance is that it is usually very cheap in comparison to liability insurance.  My suggestion is to get higher than typical liability limits for no other reason than to make sure you have first party insurance of the same amount.  $100,000 liability/UM/UIM is a good idea, much better than the state required minimums of liabilty insurance and no first party coverage.  It makes absolutely no sense for someone to have very high liability insurance, but not to have any first party insurance. Remember, "full coverage" is not enough. 

Even if you did not have first party insurance and suffered a car accident, that is not the end of the inquiry.  As mentioned above, state law requires an insurance agent to offer first party insurance with limits at least equal to liability coverage.  If the insurance agent does not do that, there could be a separate claim against either the insurance company or the insurance agent who sold you the policy.