SETTLEMENT: | $1,200,000.00 (New Money)
|
CASE/NO: | Alva v. Doe Manufacturer
|
DATE: | August 30, 1996
|
ATTORNEYS | Plaintiff - Michael H. Whitehill
Defendant - Curtis W. Morris, Esq.
|
|
PLAINTIFF'S EXPERTS: | Paul Youngdahl, Mechanical Engineer
|
|
DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: |
|
FACTS: The plaintiff was a production assistant at Bennett Industries which makes plastic buckets. Plaintiff's job included servicing injection molding machines. On June 12, 1992, a 700 ton remanufactured horizontal injection molding machine developed a blockage in the feed throat area.
High density polyethylene plastic pellets are gravity fed from a feed hopper atop the involved horizontal injection molding machine through a three-inch feed throat opening into a large steel chamber that houses a rotating screw. The rotating screw forces the plastic through to the molder and is heated by electrical heaters outside the steel chamber. The heat melts the pellets forming a molten plastic material that reaches temperatures of 500 to 600 degrees fahrenheit.
On the day of the incident, melted plastic hardened in the feed throat creating a blockage. Once a blockage occurs gases can become trapped below the blocked area. Plaintiff and several co-workers initially attempted to unblock the feed throat by removing the hardened plastic with a brass rod. After breaking up the blockage, and removing what was remaining in the feed throat, Plaintiff and his co-workers placed styrene in the feed throat and rotated the screw in an attempt to purge the remaining blockage out of the machine.
After unsuccessfully attempting on two occasions to remove the remaining blockage a third purging cycle was contemplated. Either before or immediately after the third purge attempt gases inside the barrel overcame the resistant of the blockage and 500 to 600 degree molten plastic shot out of the exposed feed throat. Plaintiff was struck directly in the face and suffered third degree burns.
CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended there should have been an interlock placed on the machine requiring the hopper to be over the feed throat and act as a guard before the screw would operate. Plaintiff also contended that the protective clothing described in defendant's manual which was to be worn during the purging process was inadequate to prevent serious injuries in the event of an eruption. Plaintiff contended that even though face shields were available to plaintiff and were not worn, the shield would not have prevented plaintiff's most serious burns since the molten plastic would have went under the face shield.
Defendant contended the accident was the complete fault of Bennett Industries employees. First, the machine as well as the manual warned that the screw should not be operated while the hopper was out of place. Second, had plaintiff been wearing available protective clothing at the time of the incident it would have minimized or eliminated all of his burn injuries.
Third, defendant argued that plaintiff and his co-workers used the wrong purging material, styrene, to remove the blockage since styrene turns to gas at 500 degrees. Finally, defendant contended that an interlock system would have been bypassed by most end users and commercially impossible to universally design because of the endless variations in hoppers used with the machine.
INJURIES: Third degree burns to the face. Multiple skin grafting surgeries. Plaintiff has incurred approximately $350,000.00 in medical bills all of which have been paid by the worker's compensation insurance carrier. Plaintiff has been unemployed since the accident, although he is in the process of vocational rehabilitation training and is expected to be employable in the near future.
SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS: Plaintiff's initial demand was $2,000,000 and Defendant's initial offer was $500,000.
OTHER INFORMATION: The worker's compensation intervenor waived its lien in total for past and future payments to plaintiff in return for a dismissal of a "serious and willful" claim. Accordingly, Plaintiff's weekly disability benefits, and all future medical care, will be paid by the worker's compensation carrier.