Professional Negligence In Lend Lease's Contribution Case
Lend Lease’s contribution case against Cives will focus on the professional services Cives provided and will attempt to avoid any reference to construction negligence. Our defense will include presenting evidence that Cives met the applicable standard of care and that the accident was the result of construction negligence committed by Lend Lease and Midwest in addition to professional negligence on behalf of Midwest. Therefore, using the same percentages as set out above, a potential verdict against Cives solely with regards to Lend Lease’s current contribution claim is $104,250 ($1,668,000 x 25% x 25% = $104,250), for professional negligence, only. (If Lend Lease settles with the remaining plaintiffs, we expect it will pursue it contribution
…show more content…
Illinois Tool Works. Consequently, its percentage of liability is reallocated to the remaining parties, excluding the plaintiff. (In a contribution case, the contribution plaintiff is allocated a pro rata share of the employer’s fault). Therefore, both Cives’ Lend Lease’s percentage of liability in relation to Lend Lease’s contribution claim increases from twenty-five percent to fifty percent. (Since Cives and Lend Lease share the same degree of liability, half of Midwest’s percentage of fault is added to each of their percentages.) Applying the reallocated percentages to the current value of Lend Lease’s contribution claim, estimated damages against Cives would be $208,500 ($1,668,000 x 50% x 25% = $208,500), for the contribution claim alone. Combining the estimated damages against Cives for the non-settled plaintiffs’ claim and Lend Lease’s contribution claim, the estimated damages assessed against Cives could be $381,354 to $431,042. Further, in the event Midwest waives the workers’ compensation liens it holds against Mr. Sandoval’s claim and Mr. Aranda’s claim, and using the calculations set forth above, the estimated damages against Cives could increase $154,098 to $203,785 for an estimated total of $535,452 to $634,827, solely for the professional negligence portion of the claim against Cives. It should be noted these calculations will change significantly if the jury finds Midwest is not guilty of professional
Illinois Tool Works. Consequently, its percentage of liability is reallocated to the remaining parties, excluding the plaintiff. (In a contribution case, the contribution plaintiff is allocated a pro rata share of the employer’s fault). Therefore, both Cives’ Lend Lease’s percentage of liability in relation to Lend Lease’s contribution claim increases from twenty-five percent to fifty percent. (Since Cives and Lend Lease share the same degree of liability, half of Midwest’s percentage of fault is added to each of their percentages.) Applying the reallocated percentages to the current value of Lend Lease’s contribution claim, estimated damages against Cives would be $208,500 ($1,668,000 x 50% x 25% = $208,500), for the contribution claim alone. Combining the estimated damages against Cives for the non-settled plaintiffs’ claim and Lend Lease’s contribution claim, the estimated damages assessed against Cives could be $381,354 to $431,042. Further, in the event Midwest waives the workers’ compensation liens it holds against Mr. Sandoval’s claim and Mr. Aranda’s claim, and using the calculations set forth above, the estimated damages against Cives could increase $154,098 to $203,785 for an estimated total of $535,452 to $634,827, solely for the professional negligence portion of the claim against Cives. It should be noted these calculations will change significantly if the jury finds Midwest is not guilty of professional