Construction Accident Complaint - Minnesota

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT COMPLAINT

At filing: Provide the district court administrator a completed Form CIV117 Civil Cover Sheet under Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 104(b). This non-family personal injury action is outside Rule 111.01's listed exceptions.

Table of Contents

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Factual Allegations
5. Count I — Negligence
6. Count II — Premises Liability
7. Count III — Product Liability
8. Damages
9. Jury Demand
10. Prayer for Relief
11. State-Specific Notes

Caption

STATE OF MINNESOTA
DISTRICT COURT
[________________________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COUNTY OF [________________________________]

COURT FILE NO. [____]

COMPLAINT

Parties

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] resides at [ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Minnesota [ZIP CODE].

2. Defendant [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] at [ADDRESS].

3. Defendant [SUBCONTRACTOR NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] at [ADDRESS].

4. Defendant [PROPERTY OWNER NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE/INDIVIDUAL] at [ADDRESS].

5. Defendant [EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] at [ADDRESS].

Jurisdiction and Venue

6. This Court has original jurisdiction over this civil action under Minn. Stat. § 484.01, subd. 1(1).

7. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County under Minn. Stat. § 542.09 because [the cause of action or part of it arose there / one or more Defendants resided there when this action began].

Factual Allegations

8. The construction project at [PROJECT ADDRESS], [CITY], Minnesota, was managed by Defendant General Contractor.

9. Plaintiff was employed by [EMPLOYER NAME] and performing work on [DATE OF ACCIDENT].

10. On [DATE OF ACCIDENT], Plaintiff was [DESCRIPTION OF WORK ACTIVITY] when [DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENT].

11. Plaintiff sustained injuries including [DESCRIPTION OF INJURIES].

12. This action seeks damages from Defendants other than Plaintiff's employer for their own alleged conduct. Any workers' compensation benefits and third-party recovery are subject to Minn. Stat. §§ 176.031 and 176.061.

Count I — Negligence

13. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

14. The [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME] and [SUBCONTRACTOR NAME] named in this count each owed Plaintiff reasonable care in the work and site areas it controlled.

15. Defendants breached their duty by:

☐ Failing to provide fall protection
☐ Failing to maintain scaffolding and platforms
☐ Failing to secure hazardous areas
☐ Failing to provide PPE
☐ Failing to implement safety plans
☐ Failing to train workers
☐ Failing to conduct inspections
☐ Failing to warn of hazards
☐ Failing to coordinate subcontractor work
☐ [OTHER SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE]

16. Defendants' negligence was a direct cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Count II — Premises Liability

17. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

18. Defendant Property Owner controlled the area of the Premises where Plaintiff was injured and owed Plaintiff reasonable care under the circumstances. Foss v. Kincade, 766 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2009) (discussing Peterson v. Balach).

19. Defendant Property Owner breached this duty by:

☐ Failing to maintain safe premises
☐ Failing to warn of known or discoverable hazards
☐ [OTHER BREACHES]

20. The premises condition was a direct cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Count III — Product Liability

21. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

22. Defendant Manufacturer designed and supplied [EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION] used in Plaintiff's work.

23. When used [as intended / in a reasonably foreseeable manner], the equipment presented [DESCRIBE UNREASONABLE RISK OR INADEQUATE WARNING] to workers, including Plaintiff.

24. Defendant Manufacturer failed to [DESCRIBE SAFER DESIGN / ADEQUATE WARNING] despite the foreseeable risk of injury. Montemayor v. Sebright Products, Inc., 898 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. 2017).

25. The defective design or inadequate warning was a direct cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Damages

26. Plaintiff has suffered:

a. Past and future medical expenses;
b. Past and future lost wages and loss of earning capacity;
c. Physical pain and suffering;
d. Mental anguish and emotional distress;
e. Permanent disability and disfigurement;
f. Loss of enjoyment of life;
g. Other compensatory damages proved at trial.

Jury Demand

Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all triable issues pursuant to Minn. Const. art. I, § 4 and Minn. R. Civ. P. 38.01.

Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants for [SELECT ONE: $[AMOUNT] in unliquidated damages / reasonable damages in an amount greater than $50,000], prejudgment interest as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 549.09, costs and disbursements, and such other relief as the Court deems just.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
[BAR NUMBER]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY], Minnesota [ZIP CODE]
[PHONE] | [EMAIL]

Attorney for Plaintiff

Date: [__/__/____]

Acknowledgment under Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 1: Plaintiff acknowledges that sanctions may be imposed under Minn. Stat. § 549.211.

Plaintiff signature: [________________________________] Date: [__/__/____]

State-Specific Notes — Minnesota

Workers' Compensation and Third Parties: Section 176.031 generally makes compensation the exclusive remedy against an insured employer, with an election to sue an uninsured employer in the circumstances stated there. Section 176.061 governs third-party claims, benefit credits and subrogation; its election rule for specified common-enterprise or related-operations defendants requires a separate check. For a third-party action under § 176.061, subd. 5, serve a copy of the complaint and notice of trial or note of issue on the employer or insurer as subd. 8a requires; give the employer prior notice of any intended settlement.

Comparative Fault (Minn. Stat. § 604.01):

• Plaintiff's fault must not be greater than the fault of the person against whom recovery is sought; allowed damages are reduced proportionally
• Damages reduced by plaintiff's fault percentage

Limitation: Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5) generally sets six years for an ordinary noncontract injury claim not governed by a more specific limitation. Classify each asserted claim before filing.

Product Defendant: The product count alleges design or warning failures by the manufacturer. Montemayor recognizes these as separate product claims and addresses foreseeability of injury.

Sources and References:

• Minn. Stat. § 604.01 — Comparative Fault
• Minn. Stat. § 176.061 — Third-Party Claims
• Minn. Stat. § 541.05 — Statute of Limitations
• Minn. R. Civ. P. 8.01 — Damages Demand
• Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 104 — Civil Cover Sheet