Defendant's Attorney: Daniel W Rankin and Eric Peter Gillett

Description: Seattle, Washington personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on an elevator negligence theory.

"Washington elevator negligence law is based on the principle that elevator owners and operators have a duty to maintain their elevators in a safe condition and to warn passengers of any known dangers. If a person is injured in an elevator accident, they may be able to sue the elevator owner or operator for negligence if they can prove that the owner or operator breached their duty of care and that this breach caused the accident.

To prove negligence in an elevator accident case, the plaintiff must show the following elements:

The elevator owner or operator owed the plaintiff a duty of care.
The elevator owner or operator breached that duty of care.
The breach of duty caused the plaintiff's injuries.
The plaintiff suffered damages as a result of their injuries.

The duty of care owed by an elevator owner or operator is a high standard of care. This is because elevators are considered to be common carriers, which means that they owe a duty of the highest degree of care to their passengers.

A breach of duty of care can occur in a number of ways in the context of elevator accidents. For example, the elevator owner or operator may have failed to properly maintain the elevator, failed to inspect the elevator regularly, or failed to warn passengers of a known danger.

If a plaintiff can prove that the elevator owner or operator breached their duty of care and that this breach caused their injuries, they may be entitled to recover damages for their medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other losses.

In addition to negligence claims, plaintiffs who are injured in elevator accidents may also be able to bring claims under other legal theories, such as product liability or breach of warranty.

If you have been injured in an elevator accident in Washington, it is important to contact an experienced personal injury attorney to discuss your legal options."

Google Bard

Outcome: 10/20/2023 19 Stipulated MOTION to Dismiss (Stipulation and Order of Dismissal), filed by Consol Defendant Port of Seattle, Defendant Schindler Elevator Corporation. Noting Date 10/20/2023, (Rankin, Daniel) (Entered: 10/20/2023)
10/20/2023 20 ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Pursuant to the Parties' 19 Stipulated Motion to Dismiss IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without fees and costs to any party. Signed by Judge Tana Lin. (KRA) (Entered: 10/20/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: