Help

BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Negligence suit in forklift accident dismissed

Reprints
forklift

A warehouse worker who was injured in a forklift accident cannot sue the company that owns the warehouse, which regularly allowed workers to engage in unsafe practices such as standing on a forklift in motion, an appeals court in New Jersey ruled on Friday.

Carlton Hocutt appealed a summary judgment granted to Minda Supply Co., which owns the warehouse where he was injured, claiming the company was negligent in directing him to ride as a passenger on a forklift in violation of federal workplace safety regulations, according to documents in Carlton Hocutt III v. Minda Supply Company, et. al., filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, in Jersey City, New Jersey.

“Forklifts are used at the warehouse to move pallets of supplies” for the dry-cleaning industry, according to documents. “It was a common practice at the warehouse for a worker to ride on the forklift, standing on either the front or back of the forklift while it was moving. This practice violates federal workplace safety regulations.”

Minda Supply, however, had never been cited by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration prior to the three citations it collected after Mr. Hocutt’s forklift accident, which caused a serious injury to his leg.

Both the trial court and the appeals court used case law to determine that while the practice that led to the accident was against regulations it was “not enough to establish intentional wrong” that could prompt a negligence suit, according to documents.

In affirming the summary judgment, the appeals court rejected Mr. Hocutt’s assertion on wrongdoing, writing that “given the absence of prior accidents or employee complaints, and especially given the absence of fraud, concealment, or deception, we do not believe Minda’s misconduct was plainly beyond anything the Legislature intended the (New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act) to immunize.”

 

 

 

 

 

Read Next

  • Citation related to fall from forklift affirmed

    An administrative law judge of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission affirmed a serious citation and a $9,054 penalty against a steel erection company after an employee suffered three broken ribs and a partially collapsed lung after falling from an unsecured platform.