Even among the insurance activists, there are some limits on the abuse of injured employees: duty of one sub-contractor to anotherWhen Rick Beavers showed up to investigate an abandoned property for asbestos abatement prior to demolition, he was reluctant to tour the Tanner building because of its decrepit and unsafe condition. He was encouraged by the Defendants' supervisory employees to make the tour with them, without a flashlight and under their guidance. Ultimately, they directed his attention to a location that caused him to fall from a loading dock in the dark, suffering severe injuries.
Beavers and his attorneys have now spent five years navigating the Michigan's courts in an attempt to have his complaint heard. Under the guidance of Chief Judge Henry Saad, the most thoroughly partisan of Michigan's activist judges, Beavers' claim against Barton Malow Company and others was rejected without substantive analysis. After this holding was repudiated by the Supreme Court, Saad's hearing panel ruled that Beavers enjoyed the right to argue that the actions of the Defendants were a violation of a basic duty of reasonable care. The case was returned to the trial court where Beavers will finally have the opportunity to seek fair compensation from the Defendants, if the jury finds that their behavior violated a reasonable duty to avoid endangering Beavers' safety.
One wouldn't think it would take five years, untold hours of work and dollars of expense, and months of anxiety, just to conclude that a badly injured man who was allegedly hurt by someone else's unsafe behavior, should have a day in court. At least in Beaver's case, the tenacity of his lawyers has preserved his right to be heard: sadly, most injury victims who are exposed to the more extremist Republican activist judges in Michigan never get their opportunity to be heard.