Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 06-04-1999

Case Style: Thomas Candelaria, III, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Thomas Candelaria, Jr. v. B.C. General Contractors, Inc.

Case Number: 202421

Judge: William E. Collette

Court: Circuit Court, Ingham County, Michigan

Plaintiff's Attorney: James E. Wynne and James J. Giszczak of Butzel Long, P.C., Detroit, Michigan

Defendant's Attorney: Janet C. Barnes and Roger F. Wardle of Secrest, Wardle, Lynch, Hampton, Truex and Morley, Farmington Hills, Michigan

Description: Defendant Horizon, a company in the business of providing cable television service, hired defendant BC, as an independent contractor, to install cable television service in certain areas of Ingham County. BC, in turn, hired Bob Rego, also as an independent contractor, to perform a portion of the work involving aerial construction. Rego employed plaintiff's decedent, Thomas Candelaria, Jr. Part of Rego's job involved laying cable wire across the surface of state trunkline M-106 in Ingham County. On the day of the accident, Rego's foreman and Candelaria were the only workers at the site. When the foreman needed more cable to work with, he asked Candelaria to release some slack from the reel. Instead of pulling slack from the reel by hand, which was the standard procedure, Candelaria turned the reel on its side and began pushing it like a wheelbarrow. Because the foreman was concerned that Candelaria's action might tighten the cable rather than create slack, he ran to the reel and flipped it back up into its usual position. Just as the foreman turned the reel, a passing car snagged a portion of the cable that had become elevated from the surface of the highway. This caused the reel to jerk forward into Candelaria, killing him instantly.

Plaintiff filed a wrongful death action against defendants alleging that that their negligence caused Candelaria's death. At the close of the proofs, plaintiff's theory with respect to BC was that it could be held liable in negligence on the basis of its retention of control over the work performed by Rego. Plaintiff's theory with respect to Horizon was that it could be held liable in negligence pursuant to a nondelegable duty arising by virtue of the fact that it had obtained a permit issued by the Michigan Department of Transportation.

Outcome: The jury found (1) that Horizon's negligence was a proximate cause of the accident, (2) that BC was negligent and that its negligence was a proximate cause of the accident, and (3) that Candelaria himself was negligent, that his negligence was a proximate cause of the accident, and that he was fifty percent at fault. The final judgment entered against defendants was in the amount of $248,248.48.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: Reversed and remanded by the Michigan Court of Appeals. See: 600 N.W.2d 348 (Mich.App. 1999). Note: The date shown above is the date of the appellate court decision and not the trial date.



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: