Lucy Elizabeth Tufts's Legal Cases (3)

Defective and dangerous products

Bender Shipbuilding, et al. v. Caterpillar, Inc., et al.

Apr 18, 2014

OUTCOME: $46,000,000 Settlement

In October 2005, Bender Shipbuilding entered into a contract with the ship operator for the construction of a series of state-of-the-art vessels, including the M/V Sherman. The contract price for the M ... /V Sherman was almost $27 million. On May 14, 2008, while the vessel was still under construction, one of its 3516B Caterpillar marine engines threw a rod during routine testing, causing a massive fire that burned the ship to its hull. Everyone who was on the ship at the time of the explosion was safely evacuated. In their lawsuit, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Caterpillar engine installed on the M/V Sherman was defective at the time of its original manufacture and delivery. The engine that failed weighed 17,000 pounds, had thousands of parts, was the size of a commercial truck, and was severely damaged in the fuel fed fire that burned for almost 24 hours. Discovery in the lawsuit revealed that the engine failure was caused by a missing oil plug. The missing plug was the size of a nickel, and had been left out of the crankshaft in the innermost part of the engine when it was manufactured. The missing oil plug starved part of the engine of oil, which led to the engine’s catastrophic failure.

Personal injury

Christopher Brock Hill v. All Crane Rental of Alabama, et al.

Apr 01, 2013

OUTCOME: $1,700,000 Jury Verdict

On October 30, 2009, Christopher “Brock” Hill was using a manlift to install an overhead crane at the ThyssenKrupp Plant in Calvert, Alabama. While he was in the basket of the manlift and nearly 80 fee ... t in the air, the wire ropes in the manlift catastrophically failed. The wire rope failure caused the boom of the manlift to suddenly retract, which resulted in Brock Hill falling 25 feet. Upon impact, Brock’s right femur snapped in half, his head hit the control panel in the platform, he lost consciousness, and he collapsed. When Brock regained consciousness, he was still suspended 60 feet in the air, trapped in the basket and unable to move. It took rescue crews 45 minutes to get him safely to the ground. Mr. Hill was represented by Lucy E. Tufts and Robert L. Mitchell, attorneys with Cunningham Bounds, LLC. At trial, they introduced evidence that proved that SMP Welding used the manlift to push a 90,000 lb. girder approximately 10-15 feet – even though such action was expressly prohibited by the manlift’s Operation and Safety Manual, by the lease agreement, and by SMP’s own corporate safety policies. This abuse caused internal components of the manlift to become misaligned, which led to a progressive deterioration of the wire ropes over the next three months. Despite the fact that there were eyewitnesses who reported the abuse, the manlift was never inspected to ensure it was safe to operate. Mr. Hill’s attorneys also proved that TEK Aerial Lifts and All Crane Rental of Alabama failed to conduct multiple routine safety inspections on the manlift during the three months following the misuse. Any one of these routine inspections would have revealed the misalignment and the progressive deterioration of the wire ropes. While All Crane had conducted these safety inspections in the past, the evidence showed that All Crane eliminated the inspections in order to reduce the amount of overtime it was paying to its mechanics.

Consumer protection

Kyle Morris v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, et al.

Feb 08, 2013

OUTCOME: $2.4 million Jury Verdict

On February 8, 2013, a Mobile County, Alabama, jury returned a $2.4 million verdict in favor of a local insurance agent in a fraud case brought against 11 companies, all affiliated with Farmers Insuran ... ce Group. The plaintiff in this case, Robert “Kyle” Morris, was a licensed insurance agent at the Morris Insurance Agency, owned and operated by his father. In late 2006, Kyle learned that Farmers was recruiting agents to sell their products. He contacted Farmers about the potential opportunity and made it clear from the beginning that he was not interested in becoming a Farmers agent if it meant having to leave his father’s agency. Farmers assured Kyle that it was not a problem for him to remain with the Morris Insurance Agency, and that his association did not violate any of Farmers’ policies or procedures. In fact, they told Kyle his association with the Morris Insurance Agency would be a benefit to his customers and Farmers. However, that representation was false when it was made. Farmers had a written internal policy since at least 2003 that prohibited any Farmers agent from associating with an independent insurance agency. The internal policy also stated that ownership by an agent’s immediate family member in a competitor of Farmers would be considered an unacceptable conflict-of-interest. Kyle worked diligently for Farmers over the course of two and a half years, building a book of business, establishing relationships with clients, and quadrupling the premiums he earned for Farmers. In September 2009, Farmers terminated Kyle without warning. Farmers’ confidential internal documents proved that Farmers terminated Kyle because of his relationship with his father and the Morris Insurance Agency – the very thing they assured him would be no problem when he started. At trial, Farmers executives admitted that the representations made to Kyle had been false. Based on his employment agreements, Farmers took all of Kyle’s customers and prohibited him from contacting them for a year. Kyle lost all of his investment in his Farmers agency, over 200 customers, and the renewal premiums from the more than 300 policies he sold as a Farmers agent.

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

The Avvo Rating explained