Case at a glance
- Recovery: Confidential Settlement
- Injury: Left ankle injury requiring two surgeries
- Practice: Maritime injuries
- Attorney: Vuk Vujasinovic
A ladder between two barges
Dustin worked as a deckhand on the Mississippi River. His crew was putting together a tow that included an empty barge and a loaded barge, with a ladder providing access between their decks.
The top of the ladder was tied off. No one was holding the bottom when Dustin descended. The company’s incident report described the bottom sliding across the barge deck and Dustin falling, with his ankle striking a rung.
The injury took him to the hospital and eventually led to two ankle surgeries. By the time the case approached trial, his doctors had released him to work without restrictions. The case therefore focused on the injury, treatment and consequences he had experienced, rather than a claim that he could never work again.
What the crew said about holding the ladder
Vuk questioned the other deckhand about the ladder setup. The witness confirmed that the top was secured and that no one had been positioned at the bottom.
The witness explained that another crew member would typically hold the bottom if someone was available in the correct position. At the time of Dustin’s fall, both deckhands were on the empty barge.
He also explained why tying both ends of a ladder between moving vessels could create a different hazard: movement could distort or damage the ladder. He agreed that having another crew member hold the bottom was the better approach.
That testimony helped the team examine the crew arrangement and the method of moving between the barges, not just whether the top of the ladder had been tied off.
Comparing later testimony with the incident report
The crew’s later recollections did not answer every question. The other deckhand said he had not been watching the bottom of the ladder and could not independently say whether it slid.
Vuk also questioned the company’s vice president of operations, who had investigated the injury by telephone and prepared the Coast Guard incident form. He confirmed that the report’s description of the ladder sliding came from his conversations with the crew.
The operations manager said he was not aware of photographs, video or written witness statements collected during that investigation. He also was not aware that anyone had preserved the ladder.
The team used those answers to distinguish the company’s contemporaneous report from what the witnesses could personally remember years later. Those distinctions mattered to evaluating how the incident happened and what the company knew about it.
Preparing the case for trial
The team developed testimony from the captain, the other deckhand and the operations manager, and prepared the exhibits and witness testimony for trial in Iowa.
The defense disputed liability and emphasized Dustin’s medical recovery. Vuk and the team continued pursuing the claim while addressing those arguments and the evidence about the way the ladder had been used.
The case settled before trial. The confidential settlement resolved Dustin’s maritime injury claim after the team examined the ladder arrangement, the crew’s responsibilities and the treatment that followed his fall.
Questions about the case
Related legal help
Learn about maritime injury claims, or read about another maritime workplace injury case.
To speak with VB Attorneys about an injury aboard a vessel, call 877-724-7800 for a free consultation.
Every case is different. Prior results depend on the facts of the individual case and do not guarantee a similar outcome.