Construction Site Accident Attorney in Matteson

Let Carlson Bier Fight For You

Over $50 Million in Recoveries

Jeff Bier – Personal Injury Lawyer At Carlson Bier Associates
Personal Injury Lawyer Orland Park Illinois | Carlson Bier Associates

About Carlson Bier Associates

When it comes to choosing a construction site accident attorney in Matteson, Carlson Bier stands unrivaled. Our firm is renowned for its adept handling of personal injury cases and displays unique proficiency with Construction Site Accident lawsuits. Leveraging an industry-rich experience across Illinois, our attorneys comprehend the complexities associated with these casualties better than anyone else. At Carlson Bier, we passionately work towards securing rightful compensation for our clients suffering physical and financial loss due to such unfortunate incidents. Our attorneys meticulously review every detail relating to your case which aids us in devising formidable litigation strategies tailored uniquely for you. It’s not by happenstance that we’ve been able to acquire millions of dollars worth settlements for our esteemed clientele over the years; diligence coupled with legal prowess assists us meticulously uncover negligence at construction sites leading up to accidents as few others can manage. So when considering appointing a lawyer after a construction site mishap, turn confidently toward Carlson Bier – where legal expertise meets compassionate service!

About Carlson Bier

Construction Site Accident Lawyers in Matteson Illinois

Carlson Bier is a renowned personal injury law firm in Illinois, specializing in construction site accident cases. Representatives of this esteemed organization understand that life as we know it can change drastically following a workplace accident – especially those occurring on perilous construction sites. Regardless of the scale or severity, you deserve justice if you have been victimized by a mishap through no fault of your own – and this is exactly where our team steps in.

To provide insight into what an injury case at a construction site may entail, possible accidents include but are not limited to: falls from heights such as ladders or rooftops; tripping over hazardous materials left unattended; being hit by moving or falling objects; electrical shocks from improper wiring; injuries due to faulty equipment or machinery and exposure to toxic substances.

Each category has its unique complexities which require detailed examination:

– Falls from Heights: The greatest factor influencing the occurrence of these accidents is inadequate safety measures. Our legal efforts concentrate on proving negligence on part of responsible entities who failed to adhere to safety standards.

– Tripping Accidents: These are often due to improper management and organization at construction sites. Our focus would lie in establishing the entity’s failure in maintaining proper housekeeping protocols.

– Strikes by Objects: These primarily occur due to inefficient control of operations and procedures. The legal service provided would aim towards holding accountable those who displayed negligent actions leading up to the accident.

– Electrical Shocks: Demonstrating defective machinery or ill-managed electrical systems serves as potential evidence for proving liability.

– Faulty Equipment/Machinery Injuries: One cannot underestimate thorough examination of product specifications and historical performance records when dealing with such incidents.

– Toxic Substance Exposure: Proving violation against Occupational Safety & Health Administration’s regulations forms crucial part under such circumstances.

The consequences following these injuries could truly be devastating – physically, emotionally, and financially. Thus, Carlson Bier offers pursuit for compensation that adequately covers for medical expenses, lost wages, vocational rehabilitation, emotional distress and overall quality of life – whichever may be applicable in your case.

The statute of limitations is a key aspect that victims or family members need to consider when seeking reparation for their damages. According to Illinois law, you typically have two years from the date of accident – or from the moment you should have reasonably become aware of injury as a result of said incident- to file a lawsuit. Failure to do so within this prescribed time frame could potentially jeopardize your financial recovery claims.

Navigating through such cases on your own can feel daunting and utterly overwhelming at times. Having knowledgeable representation can go an extraordinary way towards unburdening victims off complicated legal procedures and providing peace during these trying times.

At Carlson Bier, we take grave accidents seriously because we firmly believe every hapless victim is entitled to justice and adequate compensation that truly reflects their suffering. Our experienced attorney team goes beyond traditional client handling – offering compassion when you need it most; shielding victim rights with courage amidst adversarial proceedings; demonstrating proficiency by staying updated with evolving construction laws and regulations; all while strategically manoeuvring through strenuous lawsuit intricacies.

With each reading word drawing us closer towards completing insights into our dedication towards rightfully serving construction accident victims; we would like you now more than ever, to ponder upon the weight this matter holds over life’s balance scale. Knowledge about the possibility is power but moving forward with securing rightful justice could be transformative.

If our detailed discussion has made you contemplate further on proceeding along the path towards retaining deserved sanctity in life post unjust injuries sustained at construction sites– then waste not another minute pondering alone! Click on the button below now itself & find out how much your case could possibly secure in terms of reparation provisions – all under thorough guidance from personal injury attorneys who vow relentless commitment to victim rights and justice within sphere of Illinois Law!

Testimonials from Clients

Your Success Is Our Success

Notable Illinois Appellate Wins

Moruzzi v. CCC Servs., Inc., 2020 IL App (2d) 190411, 171 N.E.3d 61
Background: Insured motorist filed action against insurer for declaratory judgment seeking construction of automobile insurance policy issued to insured and that was in effect when insured was injured by an underinsured driver. The Circuit Court, DuPage County, Bonnie M. Wheaton, J., granted the insurer's motions for summary judgment. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Zenoff, J., held that:1 medical payments reduction clause in automobile insurance policy conflicted with underinsured motorist provisions so as to render reduction clause ambiguous, and thus medical payment benefits were deductible from insured's damages;2 law firm representing insured did not create common fund or common funds when it reached settlement with underinsured motorist, and thus law firm was not entitled to recover fees under common-fund doctrine; and3 collateral estoppel did not bar automobile insurers from litigating whether common-fund doctrine applied in insured motorist's declaratory judgment action.Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Maier v. CC Servs., Inc., 2019 IL App (3d) 170640, 132 N.E.3d 795
Background: After insured, who was injured in automobile collision with another driver, recovered full liability limits of driver's policy, she filed amended complaint for declaratory judgment against her own automobile insurer, alleging that insurer breached contractual duty to pay for insured's damages in accordance with uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in insured's policy and that insurer acted in bad faith in denying insured such coverage. The Circuit Court, La Salle County, Troy D. Holland, J., granted the insurer's motion to dismiss claims as time-barred. Insured appealed.The Appellate Court ruled that neither the insurer nor the insured could add amended policy provisions to the court record. It was decided that the policy's requirement for a written arbitration demand applied to both uninsured and underinsured motorist claims. The court found that a letter from the insured's attorney to the insurer wasn't a valid arbitration demand nor a proof of loss to toll the statute of limitations. Finally, the insurer was permitted to use the defense based on the two-year statute of limitations period. The court's decision was affirmed.
Econ. Premier Assurance Co. v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 IL App (1st) 192364-U
Holding: The circuit court's order that granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment was proper where defendant had no duty to indemnify its insured with respect to the underlying complaint and therefore plaintiff was not entitled to recover against defendant on its subrogation or unjust enrichment claims; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Westerheide, 2023 IL App (5th) 220343-U
Holding: The court affirmed judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff where the defendant failed to make a written demand for arbitration within two years from the date of the accident as required by the underinsured provisions of the defendant's automotive insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Olsak, 2022 IL App (1st) 200695, 216 N.E.3d 291
In a complex legal case, an insurer sought to avoid defending or indemnifying a hockey player under a policy issued to the player's stepfather after the player was sued for assaulting his coach. The initial Circuit Court ruling favored the insurer, but the Appellate Court reversed this decision, leading to a protracted legal battle. Ultimately, the Appellate Court determined the insurer was liable only up to the $3 million policy limit and found the insurer's four-year delay in seeking a declaratory judgment to be reasonable. This case highlights important aspects of insurance litigation and policy limit liabilities.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Durkin Elec. Co., Inc., 2022 IL App (1st) 210293-U, appeal denied, 199 N.E.3d 1187 (Ill. 2022)
Holding: The circuit court's order that denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment and found that defendant was an additional insured under the policy was proper. The circuit court's order that denied defendant's motion for summary judgment and found that plaintiff did not have a duty to defend or indemnify defendant under the policy was proper; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Groen, 2017 IL App (4th) 160028, 69 N.E.3d 911
Background: Uninsured motorist (UM) carrier brought action against insured for declaratory judgment that it owed no benefits since workers' compensation received by insured exceeded policy limits. The Circuit Court, Sangamon County, Chris Perrin, J., entered summary judgment in favor of the carrier. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Harris, J., held that:1 employer's medical payments entitled carrier to setoff, and2 setoff clauses were enforceable.Affirmed.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Frobish, 2021 IL App (3d) 190473-U
Holding: Allegations in the underlying complaint that a township employee caused property damage by excavating and digging out a ditch failed to impose a duty to defend under township employee's individual farm insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 2018 IL App (1st) 173154-U
Holding: The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County is affirmed; plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against the underlying complaint because the loss claimed in the underlying complaint is subject to an exclusion. The court held that it would also enter judgment for plaintiff because the underlying complaint does not allege an “occurrence” causing bodily injury within the meaning of the policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schmitt, 2021 IL App (5th) 190173-U
Holding: The appellate court reversed and remanded the judgment of the circuit court where plaintiff had no duty to defend its insured and thus was not stopped from raising policy defenses to coverage for the underlying tort action contained in the amended declaratory action.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Livorsi Marine, Inc., 222 Ill. 2d 303, 856 N.E.2d 338 (2006) (the late Keith Carlson)
Liability insurer brought action against insureds for a declaratory judgment based on failure to provide timely notice of lawsuits against them. The Circuit Court, Cook County, Stephen A. Schiller, J., entered judgment for the insurer. Insureds appealed. The Appellate Court, Wolfson, J., 358 Ill.App.3d 880, 295 Ill.Dec. 665, 833 N.E.2d 871, affirmed. Leave to appeal was granted.Holdings: The Supreme Court, Garman, J., held that:1 if the insurer did not receive reasonable notice of an occurrence or a lawsuit, the policyholder may not recover under the policy, regardless of whether the lack of reasonable notice prejudiced the insurer, overruling Rice v. AAA Aerostar, Inc., 294 Ill.App.3d 801, 229 Ill.Dec. 20, 690 N.E.2d 1067, and Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Baur's Opera House, Inc., 296 Ill.App.3d 1011, 230 Ill.Dec. 624, 694 N.E.2d 593, and2 insured did not need to prove that it was prejudiced by delayed notice of lawsuits.Affirmed.
Education & Information

Resources For Matteson Residents

Links
Legal Blogs

Construction Site Accidents FAQ​

The most common causes of construction site accidents in Chicago include:

  • Falls: Falls from heights are the leading cause of fatalities on construction sites.
  • Struck-by accidents: Struck-by accidents occur when workers are hit by falling objects, moving vehicles, or other equipment.
  • Electrocutions: Electrocutions can occur when workers come into contact with live wires or electrical equipment.
  • Caught-in/between accidents: Caught-in/between accidents occur when workers are caught between two moving objects or between a moving object and a stationary object.
  • Overexertion injuries: Overexertion injuries can occur when workers lift heavy objects or perform repetitive tasks.

If you are injured in a construction site accident in Chicago, you should:

  • Seek medical attention immediately. Even if you don’t think you’re seriously injured, it’s important to get checked out by a doctor.
  • Report the accident to your supervisor and to OSHA. OSHA is the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and they are responsible for investigating workplace accidents.
  • Contact a construction site accident lawyer. A lawyer can help you understand your rights and options, and can represent you in court if necessary.

As a construction site accident victim in Chicago, you have the right to:

  • Seek compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages.
  • File a lawsuit against the person or company responsible for your accident.
  • Have your case heard by a jury.

In a construction site accident lawsuit in Chicago, you may be able to recover the following types of damages:

  • Medical expenses: This includes the cost of ambulance rides, hospital stays, doctor’s appointments, and physical therapy.
  • Lost wages: This includes the wages you lost while you were unable to work because of your injuries.
  • Pain and suffering: This includes compensation for the physical and emotional pain you have endured as a result of your injuries.
  • Loss of enjoyment of life: This includes compensation for the activities you can no longer enjoy as a result of your injuries.
  • Property damage: This includes the cost of repairing or replacing your personal belongings that were damaged in the accident.
  • Punitive damages: These damages are awarded to punish the defendant for egregious or reckless conduct.

The statute of limitations for construction site accident lawsuits in Illinois is two years. This means that you have two years from the date of the accident to file a lawsuit.

All Attorney Services in Matteson

Areas of Practice in Matteson

Bike Incidents

Specializing in legal advocacy for victims injured in bicycle accidents due to others' indifference or risky conditions.

Burn Traumas

Extending specialist legal help for people of severe burn injuries caused by events or negligence.

Healthcare Incompetence

Ensuring specialist legal representation for individuals affected by physician malpractice, including surgical errors.

Products Responsibility

Dealing with cases involving problematic products, offering professional legal guidance to consumers affected by faulty goods.

Senior Mistreatment

Supporting the rights of aged individuals who have been subjected to abuse in elderly care environments, ensuring compensation.

Slip and Trip Accidents

Skilled in handling tumble accident cases, providing legal support to persons seeking recovery for their harm.

Birth Wounds

Supplying legal help for families affected by medical misconduct resulting in infant injuries.

Car Accidents

Incidents: Focused on aiding clients of car accidents obtain fair recompense for damages and destruction.

Motorbike Incidents

Expert in providing legal services for victims involved in bike accidents, ensuring just recovery for losses.

Truck Mishap

Ensuring experienced legal advice for individuals involved in trucking accidents, focusing on securing appropriate claims for damages.

Construction Site Crashes

Concentrated on defending workmen or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to safety violations or irresponsibility.

Head Injuries

Focused on ensuring expert legal support for clients suffering from head injuries due to carelessness.

Canine Attack Wounds

Adept at tackling cases for victims who have suffered damages from puppy bites or animal attacks.

Jogger Collisions

Expert in legal assistance for walkers involved in accidents, providing effective representation for recovering restitution.

Undeserved Loss

Fighting for loved ones affected by a wrongful death, supplying understanding and experienced legal services to ensure fairness.

Vertebral Harm

Expert in advocating for victims with spinal cord injuries, offering specialized legal guidance to secure redress.

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer