TRIMBLE & ARMANO LAW OFFICES

Lawsuit against national builder for construction defects on behalf of 1,065 homeowners settled for $21,000,000.

A group of 40 South Jersey residents brought a lawsuit against a financial services company alleging that it duped these retirees, and others, into investing their life savings in risky limited partnerships.  The Complaint further alleged that its sales force misrepresented the nature of the investments and guaranteed that the investors would double or triple their money in between 7 and 10 years.

As a result of the misrepresentations, the retirees lost most of their life savings, much of which was in the form of “lump sum” payments upon their retirement.

A two-year old boy was attending a family picnic when he drowned in a neighbor’s in-ground swimming pool.  The neighbors failed to enclose their in-ground swimming pool after their existing fence was removed.  The employees of the property owners’ business removed portions of an existing chain-linked fence and failed to erect a safety fence or barrier to obstruct access to the swimming pool. The family brought a negligence and wrongful death action against both the property owners and their business.

According to the Center of Disease Control, children ages 1 to 4 have the highest drowning rates. In 2009, among children 1 to 4 years old who died from an unintentional injury, more than 30% died from drowning.  Among children ages 1 to 4, most drownings occur in home swimming pools.  Drowning is responsible for more deaths among children 1-4 than any other cause except congenital anomalies (birth defects).  Among those 1-14, fatal drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death behind motor vehicle crashes.

Approximately 5,000 more children have experienced near-drowning emergencies. Many of these children suffer permanent neurological disabilities.

Proving someone’s negligence is often difficult and sometimes impossible. Early investigation is essential in handling these cases. Our experience, knowledge of the law, resources coupled with our investigative skills, gives Trimble & Armano the competitive edge you need on your side.

Trimble & Armano represented a group of 22 homeowners against builder of new homes that deviated from architectural prints and constructed properties in violation of building codes.

Homeowner obtained $740,000 judgment for consumer fraud, common law fraud and breach of contract against a builder for failing to disclose material defects in the property.

A Burlington County Builder along with its subcontractors agreed to pay $290,000 to homeowners for violations of the New Jersey Home Improvement Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. Burlington County homeowners entered into a contract in the amount of $680,000 for a home improvement project. The companies violated the Home Improvement Act, N.J.A.C. 13:45A-16.2 both prior and subsequent to entering into the contract with the homeowners by: (1) commencing work without all applicable state or local building and construction permits as required under state law or local ordinances; (2) requesting the buyer to sign a certificate of completion, or make final payment on the contract before the home improvement was completed in accordance with the terms of the contract; (3) failing to produce copies of inspection certificates to the buyer when construction is completed and before final payment is due or the signing of a completion slip is requested of the buyer; (4) failing to serve the plaintiffs with a written copy of all guarantees or warranties made with respect to labor services, products or materials furnished in connection with home improvements; and (5) failing to put changes to the contract in writing.

As a result of The Law Offices of Trimble & Armano’s experience in consumer and contract litigation, the homeowners recovered $290,000 in damages.

A 14-year-old minor and another boy were sitting on the tailgate of the pickup truck while taking out the trash at a friend’s house when the 14-year-old boy fell off the back of the truck causing injuries to his head, neck and other areas of his body.

A developmentally disabled man obtained $250,000 settlement for alleged abuse and negligence of group home.

A lawsuit brought by the family of an 82 year old man who developed multiple bedsores during a period of two years.  The man was involved in a motor vehicle accident that occurred in May, 2006 that left him paralyzed. In July, 2006 he was transferred to the nursing home for sub-acute rehab.  The nursing home admission orders stated that the man’s diagnosis in July, 2006 were spinal cord injuries resulting from motor vehicle accident with cervical fusion, cervical osteophytes and arthritis.  The 82 year olds’ pressure ulcers were recorded as secondary injuries and instructions were to apply accruzyme daily and “as necessary”.

The lawsuit alleged that the bedsores were caused by the nursing staff’s failure to monitor and rotate the patient according to appropriate nursing protocols.

A furniture rental company agreed to $210,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by a subcontracted employee who was installing a sprinkler system above metal storage racks that gave way beneath him.  The approximate 20-foot fall caused him to hit his chest on a metal bar located five feet from the ground before he landed on the concrete floor causing:  fractured lumbar spine; fractured ribs; collapsed lung; pulmonary contusion; herniated cervical spine discs; and extreme anxiety associated with a fear of falling among other injuries.  The general contractor’s metal racks were improperly installed and were, therefore, in a defective and unreasonably dangerous condition.

Trimble & Armano successfully prosecuted and collected $175,000 for injuries sustained as a result of domestic violence wherein a husband pushed his wife down a flight of steps causing a rotator cuff tear.

A lawsuit brought by a pedestrian that tripped and fell while walking along the sidewalk on their premises. The plaintiff fell on the hazardous condition that was the elevation differential of one-half inch (1/2”) on the sidewalk at the shopping center in front of the nail salon.  The American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM) identifies the elevation differential of one-half (1/2”) as a hazard requiring treatment of a beveled edge with a slop profile of one (1) unit vertical and two (2) units horizontal. The law requires the owners of a property to maintain the sidewalk in a safe condition by either performing a repair or by placing a warning such as spray paint on the sidewalk at this accident location to inform of this hazardous elevation differential.

An owner or possessor of real estate is liable for personal injury…arising from a dangerous condition …including the dangerous acts of a third parties on the land where the owner or possessor should have reasonably anticipated the injurious occurrence when either, the injured party is an invitee or business guest…and the negligent owner or possessor of real estate…was aware of circumstances given rise to the reasonable probability that a dangerous condition would develop, or could have discovered the dangerous condition.

The owner of land abutting public sidewalk may be liable to pedestrian who is injured as result of dangerous condition irrespective of fact that nature or some third person may have caused condition.  Mirza v. Filmore Corp. 92 N.J. 390 (1983).

A construction worker received $110,000 settlement from general contractor for fall at job site due to improper violations of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Plaintiff was stopped in traffic at a red light when struck by another vehicle. There was very minor property damage to the plaintiff’s vehicle, but significant damage sustained to the plaintiff’s cervical spine (neck area) which required surgery.

The law imposes upon the driver of a motor vehicle the duty to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would use under all the circumstances confronting him at the particular time in question.  Failure to exercise such care constitutes negligence.  Your insured has violated that standard of conduct, whereby such violation constitutes negligence on the part of your insured in that “…there is evidence [which] establish[es] that a vehicle was operated in violation of a motor vehicle statute…” Ewing v. Burke, 316 N.J. Super. 287 (App. Div. 1998); Philips v. Scrimente, 66 N.J. Super. 157 (App. Div. 1961).

The defendants agreed to pay $97,000.00 to settle this matter out of the total $100,000.00 insurance policy.

A consumer received $60,000 settlement for odometer fraud from automobile dealership after one day of trial wherein automobile dealer misrepresented the actual miles on the vehicle at the time of sale.