Stutman Law Settles Suppression System Case for $2,750,000 on Eve of Trial

A fire destroyed a commercial building that housed multiple paint spray booths which were utilized to apply paint spray and finishes to commercial truck bodies and chassis. The precise cause of the fire was never determined but investigators were able to conclude that the fire had originated within ventilation ductwork situated above a paint spray booth.

Though the cause of the fire was not determined, our investigation revealed that, at the time of the fire, the paint spray booths situated inside the building had been equipped with dry chemical fire suppression systems which activated on the day of the fire. However, because the fire originated within ductwork on the roof of the building, the fire suppression systems were ineffective. As a result, Stutman Law investigated the construction of the booths, associated ductwork and their dry chemical systems and determined that the suppression systems should have been extended from the paint spray booths into the rooftop ducts.

Stutman Law attorney Daniel Hogan filed a lawsuit against the company that not only designed but also inspected the spray booth fire suppression systems on a semi-annual basis. Ultimately, after years of litigation, Stutman Law amassed substantial evidence which showed that the spray booth suppression systems were defective and failed to comply with the manufacturer’s instructions, NFPA standards or UL requirements. When faced with this evidence, the suppression system defendant settled the case and paid our client $2,750,000.00 on the eve of trial.

Posted in Recoveries | Tagged |