CASES AND VERDICTS

Check back regularly to stay informed of recent decisions and and other information that may be of interest to you, including news of recent Gushue Law cases and activities.

$144,000 Jury Verdict for Real Estate Fraud

In a case accepted from the Boston Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service,  Gushue Law obtained a jury verdict of $144,000 for a couple in New Bedford after a 10-day trial in New Bedford. The jury found they were defrauded by a Fall River builder and a  New Bedford real estate broker, who was also a City Councillor, when they purchased their residence in 2003.  The jury also found the City of New Bedford liable under the Mass.  hazardous waste law (Chapter 21E).  The seller-builder and broker were found liable for failing to disclose knowledge of a 7,600-gallon underground heating oil tank on the property.  The individual defendants were also found to have wilfully and knowingly violated the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act (Chapter 93A), and were each ordered to pay an additional $41,000 in damages and to pay jointly over $110,000 in attorneys' fees and costs.  Judgments entered in this case are under appeal.  

$150,000 Settlement for Fall in Dental Office

A settlement of $150,000 was negotiated for an 82-year woman who suffered hip and back injuries in a fall down stairs in a Dentist's office.  Liability was predicated upon the maintenance of an unreasonably safe condition by having an office entry door open onto a small landing carpeted with the same herringbone-pattern as the stairs and the waiting room floor.

$1.42 Million Arbitration Award in Construction Dispute

After an 18-month arbitration hearing, Gushue Law obtained a $1.42M arbitration award for breach of a construction contract. The general contractor failed to provide adequate site storm water management, which resulted in extensive damage to the job-site and adjacent wetlands, and significant environmental fines, then abandoned the job. A replacement contractor was hired to correct the damage and complete the project. The defendant blamed the site design engineer, the weather and God for causing the damage. The Arbitrator found that the contractor had negligently failing to perform the work in accordance with the contract and good construction practices and environmental protection requirements.

$100,000 Plus Remedial Action in Gasoline Tank Release Case

An unusual settlement was obtained by Gushue Law for an elderly couple whose home was contaminated as a result of gasoline tank release from municipal property.  The settlement included $100,000 in money damages plus property improvements, including water- and vapor-proofing of the basement of the dwelling, and replacement of a paved driveway damaged during environmental assessment activities.  In addition, a first-refusal provision with the municipality was negotiated, which guarantees that the future market value of the property would be within 10% of the current value.  The case involved a situation where the municipality had initiated response actions under Chapter 21E to prevent groundwater contamination from reaching the residence, then terminated the response actions without any engineering or regulatory approval. 

$162,500 Settlement in Boating Accident

In this case, a settlement of $162,500 was obtained through private mediation for a 54 year old victim of a boating accident.  Under Massachusetts law, a boat owner’s duty to his guests (invitees) is to exercise that degree of care that a reasonably prudent boat owner would exercise under similar circumstances. In this case, the boat owner’s actions caused the plaintiff to fall backwards, striking a rigid metal support rod with her coccyx. The resulting injuries included pervasive abdominal-perineal and lumbar pain, sciatica, impaired bowel and urinary function, anxiety and depression.  She was subsequently diagnosed as having a post-traumatic neuropathic pain syndrome, referred to as chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS), due to a sacral plexus injury suffered in the fall.  No fracture, dislocation or other specific injury from the fall was found in extensive diagnostic testing, and both the liability claims and the extent of the injuries were vigorously denied by the insurer.