Employment & Labor Relations

We take pride in maximizing economic recoveries for clients who have suffered serious physical and psychological on the job injuries.

Many of our clients' cases involve civil court law suits against third parties, such as a responsible sub-contractor.

Employment & Labor Relations

• Workers' Compensation
• Mediation/Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Employees

• Disability Discrimination
• Discipline/Suspension
• Emotional Distress
• Employee Rights
• Employment Contracts
• Jones Act
• Race Discrimination
• Racial Harassment
• Severance Packages
• Sex Discrimination
• Sexual Harassment
• Termination
• Wage & Hour Laws
• Wrongful Termination

Employers

• Age Discrimination
• Compensation, Benefits, & Pensions
• Emotional Distress
• Jones Act
• Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA)
• Race Discrimination
• Racial Harassment
• Sex Discrimination
• Sexual Harassment
• Termination
• Wage & Hour Laws
• Whistleblower
• Workers' Compensation
• Wrongful Termination

Labor Law - Employers

• Labor Arbitration

Labor Law - Unions

• Labor Arbitration
• Unions

CA, May 1979
Bar Number: 85610

All California and Federal Courts.

Contra Costa County Bar Association and the California State Bar Association.

I continue to participate in and exceed the State Bar required continuing education hours.

Please refer to www.goforthlucas.com.

Recent Workers' Compensation/Third Party Settlement

Court/Branch: Contra Costa Superior Unlimited Jurisdiction, Martinez, CA
Case Name: Gary Taylor v. Confidential refinery owner and Confidential Scaffold Contractor
Judge: Hon. Barbara Zuñiga, Dept 2
Mediator: Hon. Raul A. Ramirez (Ret), Sacramento, CA
Date of Settlement: 2009
Type of case: Industrial/negligence
Settlement amount: $1,500,000 ($65,000 from Refinery Owner, $1,435,000 from Scaffold Co). This case settled following one full day of mediation. The settlement was a third party Compromise and Release wherein intervener agreed to waive its $322,614.17 industrial lien.

Plaintiff counsel: Michael D. Goforth, Goforth & Lucas Law Partnership, 2300 Clayton Rd., Suite 1460, Concord, CA; Phone: 925-682-9500; Fax: 925-682-2353; email mdg@goforthlucas.com. Mr. Goforth also represented the plaintiff in the workers' compensation claim filed October 26, 2006.

Facts

On August 3, 2006, plaintiff, then 51, was working as a pipefitter for Timec Company, Inc. inside of a Martinez, CA flexicoker reactor, during a refinery "turnaround" (shutdown).

The reactor is a multi-story cylinder with a circular metal dipleg (pipe) running vertically through its center.

The scaffold within the reactor consisted of steel planks connected in a rectangular configuration around the dipleg which left a gap between the metal planks and the dipleg. Brand covered the gap with wooden planks and plywood to prevent workers from falling through the scaffold deck in the areas near the dipleg.

At the beginning of his shift plaintiff entered the reactor and began looking for a power source to connect his electric grinding tools. When plaintiff stepped near the dipleg, a wooden board gave way and plaintiff's right leg plunged through the deck to waist level.

Plaintiff's left leg hyperflexed under his weight. Plaintiff was able to halt his downward plummet by his elbows, shoulders, and large body size which kept him from passing entirely through to the floor below. Plaintiff fell forward with a twisting motion onto both hands and arms. He was able to get himself out of the hole and down a 7 foot ladder. First aid was rendered on site and plaintiff tried to continue working over the next several days, but noted progressive pain in his left knee. Within a few days of the accident plaintiff also complained of soreness all over as well as localized pain to his right shoulder.

Ultimately, plaintiff's injuries were diagnosed as: left knee derangement, right and left shoulder ruptured tendons, and L2-3 and L4-L5 disc herniations. In November 2006 plaintiff underwent arthroscopic partial medial and lateral meniscectomy of the left knee. In December 2007 plaintiff underwent open rotator cuff repair of the right shoulder.

In February 2007 plaintiff returned to work for 43 days but stopped due to progressive pain in his shoulders, back and left knee. In January 2008 Plaintiff underwent left total knee replacement and did not return to work thereafter due to worsening back pain.

Plaintiff had worked for Timec for 6 months and as a pipefitter intermittently prior to that time for several years. Plaintiff's contended that his injuries prevented him from returning to work as a pipefitter.

Plaintiff's contentions:

1.) Scaffold Co. failed to safely build and maintain the scaffold that the plaintiff was using
2.) Refinery, as owner operator of the reactor, failed to protect the integrity of the work site or insure project safety
3.) Employer, failed to inspect the worksite or properly train its workers
4.) Plaintiff could never return to work as a pipefitter as a result of his injuries

Defendants' contentions:

1.) Plaintiff was inattentive to an open and obvious hole in the scaffold
2.) Scaffold Co. was not liable since it appeared that one of the contractors working on the project modified the scaffold
3.) Plaintiff's back injuries were non-industrial since the medical file doesn't mention plaintiff's back complaints until some 5 weeks post-accident
4.) Refinery had no liability because Scaffold Co. was responsible for the scaffold construction

Intervener's contentions:

1.) There is no evidence that the employer did anything or failed to do something that caused the subject accident
2.) Intervener is entitled to full reimbursement of benefits paid (medical $231,259.14, indemnity $91,355.03) pursuant to LC § 3850, et seq.
3.) Any comparative fault assessed against the plaintiff may not be imputed to the employer

Amputation case:

Our 18 year old client suffered traumatic amputation of her left arm at the shoulder as the result of a head on collision which killed three other people. Our client was seat belted and sitting in the rear passenger seat.

The sudden deceleration forces of the collision caused luggage in the trunk to generate several tons of forward pressure, breaking through the rear bulkhead of the car. The enormous pressure caused our client's seat belt to act as a ligature, forcing the amputation.

Our mediated settlement against the at fault driver and the auto manufacturer is confidential. The condition of confidentiality was demanded by the auto manufacturer. The settlement enabled our client to return to a relatively comfortable life.

Recent Workers' Compensation/Third Party Settlement:

Our client, an ironworker, fell through a HVAC floor duct hatch that had not been properly secured. I represented the injured employee in the workers' compensation claim at the Oakland Workers' Compensation Appeals Board against the employer and in a civil law suit in San Francisco Superior Court against the general contractor and a sub-contractor, both of whom violated safety standards. The civil claim settled for $650,000.00 after a two day mediation hearing. Through my office's investigation, employer negligence was found to be a contributing cause in the accident which precluded the workers' compensation carrier from recovering reimbursement of my client's settlement money.

2

California

Goforth & Lucas Law Partnership handles Workers' compensation and serious injury claims.

Goforth & Lucas was established in the early '80's as a plaintiffs' personal injury firm. In the decades since the firm has expanded its focus to include workers' compensation and third party claims against negligent sub-contractors or uninsured employers.

For 30 years I have represented severely injured clients.

I have served as an arbitrator and mediator in many cases involving bodily injuries and tort claims. I have served as a fee arbitrator for the Contra Costa County Bar Association.

Law clerk: Carmen Fazli, Scheduling clerk: Itzel Rivera

(925) 682-2353

Monday through Friday
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Yes

Yes. Both attorneys and the staff speak Spanish.

We work on a contingency fee basis. The client never has to pay out of pocket.

Not applicable.

Free consultation for as long as it takes.

Not applicable.