The American Trial Lawyers Association Badge
American Association for Justice Badge
Florida Justice Association Badge
AV Preeminent Badge
Million Dollar Advocates Forum Badge

Our Results


Jose Pagliery

November 10, 2010

Case: Antonio Acevedo v. GGR, LLC and Danny Gilileo

Case No.: 07-08911-CA-04

Description: Negligence

Filing date: March 28, 2007

Trial dates: September 14-22, 2010

Jury award: $16.6 million

Judge: Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Amy Steele Donner

Plaintiff attorney: Ronald D. Rodman, Friedman, Rodman & Frank, Miami

Defense attorneys: Frank Sioli and Daniel Cruz, Brown Sims, Miami: Philip Glatzer, Marlow Connell Abrams Adler Newman & Lewis, Miami

Details: Much damage was left behind by the busy 2005 hurricane season, and that meant work for Mexican laborer Antonio Acevedo.

Like others before him, Acevedo left his wife and newborn daughter back in Guanajuato, Mexico, for construction work in the United States. With proper immigration documents, the 23-year-old joined his two brothers in February 2006 to replace the roof at an Opa-locka warehouse.

For hours, he and others stood on top of the 86,000-square-foot building under the midday sun, tearing off layers of gravel, rubber and concrete. Unbeknownst to them, half of the 30-year-old roof was supported by only a fragile deck of rusting metal. Construction company GGR and manager Danny Gilileo hadn't allowed the workers inside the building.

Acevedo discovered the precarious support when rusted metal fractured beneath him. He fell 20 feet and slammed onto the warehouse's concrete floor, fracturing his spine and skull.

The injury left him in a coma for three months. When he awoke, he was a paraplegic and barely remembered his past or his family.

Plaintiff case: Although the incident initially began as a workers compensation claim, Acevedo's family hired attorney Ronald Rodman, who discovered the case went beyond the immunity that would have been provided to GGR and its manager.

Rodman claimed GGR and Gilileo were negligent because they knew the metal decking was compromised, posing a danger to the roofers, and they knowingly hid the problem from the laborers by keeping them out of the building.

During trial, Rodman showed photographs that had been taken of the dilapidated metal roofing deck for an insurance claim before the roof work. When Rodman questioned Gilileo on the stand, the company manager admitted he had seen the deck but hadn't closely examined it.

Rodman also contended Gilileo should have recognized the danger since the landlord had shown him its structural instability.

To show jurors the effect of the fall, Rodman had Acevedo take the stand. The attorney showed photos of a youthful Acevedo playing soccer - winning a championship in Mexico and on a mission trip with his church - but Acevedo recognized nothing. He also said he had no recollection of the fall.

Defense case: Attorneys for the company maintained the danger posed by the rusted deck was as concealed to them as it was to Acevedo, and they hid nothing. They also argued there was no proof the roof's condition meant an accident was inevitable.

Outcome: Jurors sided with Acevedo, awarding him $13.32 million for past and future damages. Because he earned about $13,000 yearly as a roofer, he received $667,648 for lost lifetime earnings. He was awarded $2.45 million for pain and suffering. His daughter, Leyti Guadalupe Acevedo, was given $156,550. In total, father and daughter were awarded $16.59 million.

Quote: "Migrant laborers are not disposable workers, and worker safety still is important to jurors. Despite the workers comp immunity changes that have been made over the years, the jury knows and can recognize when there's a bad actor," Rodman said.

Client Reviews
Carolyn Frank and her firm represented me on a workers compensation injury case, under the defense base act. She did a excellent job from the moment I contacted her until 3 years later the case was settled. Every benefit I was entitled too, Carolyn fought hard to secure. E-mails and phone calls were always returned promptly. Definitely 5 star rating. Daniel
Highly recommending Carolyn Frank would be an understatement. Being careful as to whom I would give my case to as I had dedicated most of my adult life to one company. I needed someone who would work for me, value my case and my needs. Carolyn Frank and her valued staff met all of the above. From the first meeting I knew I was in the right office. Her knowledge, professionalism and what I would soon find to be outstanding dedication to my case from her and her staff were second to none. Marcos G.
Mr. Friedman was my choice after a dog bite attack. Him and his firm took on my case in a very professional matter without lacking empathy. I felt like he and his team personally cared for me and they kept me up to date on every step of the process. The outcome was great and I am very happy that I have chosen them. I already have recommended them to my friends and family and if you are looking for legal support I highly recommend a meeting with the firm. Any first time consultation is free, ( to my knowledge). So what do you have to lose. Give them a call! You'll be in great hands. Nora N.
Caroyln's expertise and compassion got me through a very trying period of my life. She is an excellent lawyer and human being. 5 Star all the way! Lois H.
I met Carolyn Frank about three years ago. Once I met her I knew she was the attorney I needed to handle my case.When we met with her the first time we were there for at least two hours. When I left her office I knew she was the right person to handle my case.At that time my case was 22 years old and I needed someone who knew what they were doing. This was a complex case and it fell under the Long shore Act..There are not many attorneys that handle this type of case in Florida. Mike P.