Case details

Plaintiff claimed debilitating back pain from fall from ladder

SUMMARY

$7300000

Amount

Verdict-Plaintiff

Result type

Not present

Ruling
KEYWORDS
back, chronic pain, CRPS, fusion, lower back, lumbar, neurological, reflex sympathetic
FACTS
On Saturday, June 18, 2011, plaintiff Shawn Kim, 31, a business development representative for AkzoNobel (Glidden Paints), was volunteering at a Saturday paint event hosted by a preschool owned by First Lutheran Church of Long Beach, a small church located in Long Beach. Glidden Paints donated paint to help spruce up the rundown preschool and requested that some of its salespeople volunteer their time for the event. Kim was one of those volunteers. In addition, the church’s preschool director brought in her own personal ladder to be used for the project at the church that day. The articulating ladder could be configured into 18 different positions, one of which allowed the ladder to be used as a scaffold when fitted with a base and a plank to walk on. While painting, Kim used the preschool director’s ladder while in the scaffolding position without the required base and plank. As a result, while standing on the rungs forming the horizontal “scaffold” surface of the ladder, Kim fell through the ladder and struck his groin on the rungs, thereafter causing him and the ladder to tip over onto the floor, where his buttocks landed in a tray of paint. Kim subsequently injured his lower back. Kim sued the property owner, First Lutheran Church of Long Beach Inc.; the retailer of the ladder, Lowe’s Home Centers LLC; and the manufacturer of the ladder, Werner Co. Inc. Kim alleged that the incident stemmed from an elevation-related hazard and that First Lutheran Church was negligent because it failed to provide him with proper, safe equipment. Kim also alleged that Lowe’s and Werner failed to properly design and manufacture the subject ladder. Lowe’s and Werner agreed to settle confidentially with Kim prior to trial, and were ultimately dismissed from the case. Thus, the matter continued against Lutheran Church only. Kim claimed that he had never before used an articulating ladder, such as the type supplied by the church’s preschool director, and that he had never been trained on how to use that type of ladder. Although the ladder has warnings, Kim did not recall if he had read the warnings prior to the incident, and neither party knew who had set the ladder up in the scaffolding position at the event. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that in order for the ladder to be safely used in the scaffolding position, the manufacturer recommends that it be fitted with a base and a plank. However, counsel contended that the preschool director had never attached the base and did not provide a plank for the event. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel argued that the ladder base was a vital safety component needed to insure the ladder’s stability and that the church’s failure to attach a base caused Kim’s fall. Defense counsel for First Lutheran Church argued that Kim was solely responsible for the incident, as standing atop the ladder while in the scaffolding position without a plank to walk on presented an open and obvious danger. Counsel also argued that no evidence was presented showing that a lack of a base was a substantial factor in causing Kim to fall on the ladder or in causing the ladder to fall over. In addition, the preschool director claimed that Werner, the ladder’s manufacturer, had failed to include the base or the instruction manual with the ladder. However, the director’s testimony was impeached by the person most knowledgeable from the ladder manufacturer., Kim claimed the fall caused him to develop complex regional pain syndrome, also known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy or causalgia, a chronic pain condition. Immediately after the fall, Kim was offered the opportunity to go to St. Mary Medical Center, in Long Beach, located across the street from First Lutheran Church of Long Beach, but he declined. Instead, Kim drove home, allegedly hoping that his lower back pain would be resolved with a good night’s sleep. After resting for the rest of the weekend, he returned to work on light duty on Monday, June 20, 2011. However, Kim claimed that when his pain did not go away in over a week, he presented to a physician. Kim ultimately visited multiple doctors in an attempt to find a solution for his lumbar pain, and several of the physicians recommended that Kim pursue a conservative approach, emphasizing physical therapy, which Kim chose not to pursue. Kim claimed that, eventually, the pain became so bad that he underwent a lumbar fusion at the L4-5 level on Nov. 21, 2011. However, Kim claimed the fusion surgery did not stop his pain, which grew worse. Kim was eventually diagnosed with CRPS in April 2012. He claimed that his chief pain centers were in his lower back and left thigh and that his continuing leg pain emanated from the CRPS. As a result, he had a spinal cord stimulator installed in his lower back in an attempt to reduce the allegedly constant pain that he suffers from the CRPS. However, Kim claimed that his pain continues and that he now takes daily pain medication. As a result of his condition, Kim has been unable to work at all since 2.5 months post-incident and has been out of work since 2011. He contended that his pain was debilitating and prevented him from returning to any type of work. Thus, Kim sought recovery of medical costs, lost earnings, and damages for his past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel did not contest the diagnosis of CRPS, but argued that the condition was mild and that Kim could be expected to return to work after treatment. Counsel also noted that Kim did not see a doctor for his alleged pain for over a week after the incident, and highlighted Kim’s prior back injury and a 2002 back surgery. In addition, defense counsel disposed some of Kim’s other prior doctors, who testified that they would not have recommended surgery.
COURT
Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Long Beach, CA

Recommended Experts

NEED HELP? TALK WITH AN EXPERT

Get a FREE consultation for your case