A construction worker who is crushed, pinned, compressed, or trapped between equipment or materials may assume the accident is strictly a workers' compensation matter. That can be a costly assumption.
Workers' compensation is an important source of benefits after a jobsite injury in New York. It can provide medical treatment and partial wage replacement without requiring the worker to prove that the employer caused the accident. But workers' compensation does not provide every category of damages that may be available through a personal injury lawsuit.
Depending on how a caught-in/between construction accident happened, an injured worker may also have a third-party lawsuit against a property owner, general contractor, subcontractor, equipment manufacturer, or another legally responsible party.
At The Law Offices of Michael S. Lamonsoff, we investigate serious New York City construction accidents to determine every potential source of compensation rather than assuming workers' compensation is the end of the case.
"Crush Injury" or "Caught-In/Between Injury": Why the Label on Your Medical Chart Matters Legally
The same construction accident can be described differently depending on who is documenting it. A hospital may diagnose a "crush injury" after a worker's arm is pinned between machinery and a wall. An accident report, safety investigation, or legal filing may describe the same event as a "caught-in" or "caught-between" accident. Those terms describe related concepts, but they serve different purposes.
"Crush injury" generally describes the physical trauma suffered by the worker. "Caught-in/between" describes the mechanism of the accident, meaning how the injury occurred. That distinction can become important when investigating a New York Labor Law claim.
For a claim under Labor Law § 241(6), the particular circumstances of the accident must be analyzed against applicable provisions of New York's Industrial Code. The legal team therefore needs to understand precisely how the worker was trapped, pinned, crushed, or compressed and determine whether a sufficiently specific safety regulation applied to that situation.
For example, the investigation might examine whether the accident involved:
- Unguarded machinery
- Moving construction equipment
- Excavation or trench hazards
- Collapsing materials
- Improper material storage
- Demolition debris
- Vehicles or heavy equipment
- Hoisting operations
- Defective equipment
Medical documentation establishes the nature and severity of the injury. Accident evidence establishes how it happened. Both can become critical parts of the case.
Can You Sue, or Is It Workers' Comp Only? The Caught-In/Between Answer
Workers' compensation is generally the primary remedy against your employer for an on-the-job injury. But that does not necessarily prevent you from bringing a personal injury lawsuit against a responsible third party. The distinction is critical.
Suppose a worker employed by a subcontractor is pinned between a piece of heavy machinery and a concrete wall. The worker may have a workers' compensation claim through the employer. But depending on the circumstances, there could also be potential claims involving the general contractor, property owner, another subcontractor, or the manufacturer of defective equipment.
New York Labor Law can provide additional protections to qualifying construction workers. Labor Law § 241(6), for example, requires owners, contractors, and their agents covered by the statute to comply with applicable safety rules adopted by the Commissioner of Labor. A successful § 241(6) claim generally requires an applicable Industrial Code provision containing a sufficiently concrete safety requirement and a causal connection between the violation and the injury.
The New York Court of Appeals has described the duty imposed on owners and contractors under § 241(6) as nondelegable, while also recognizing comparative negligence as a potential defense. The applicability and specificity of the Industrial Code provision are therefore major issues in these cases.
A caught-in/between accident should be investigated before anyone concludes that workers' compensation is the worker's only remedy.
What a Third-Party Claim Can Recover That Workers' Comp Cannot
The differences between workers' compensation and a personal injury lawsuit can become substantial when a worker suffers a catastrophic injury.
Workers' compensation provides medical benefits and wage-replacement benefits subject to statutory rules and limits. It does not ordinarily compensate an injured worker for pain and suffering.
A third-party personal injury lawsuit can potentially seek broader damages, including compensation for:
- Past and future pain and suffering
- Past and future lost earnings
- Reduced earning capacity
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Future medical and rehabilitation expenses
- Permanent disability and disfigurement
- A spouse's loss of consortium, when legally available
This difference is especially important for workers who earned substantial wages before their accident.
New York workers' compensation wage benefits are calculated according to statutory formulas and are capped. For accidents occurring between July 1, 2026 and June 30, 2027, the maximum weekly workers' compensation benefit is $1,281.50.
A construction worker who earned significantly more than that before suffering a disabling caught-in/between injury can therefore face a considerable income gap. A third-party lawsuit may provide an avenue for pursuing losses that workers' compensation alone does not fully address.
What About New York Labor Law §§ 240 and 241(6)?
New York provides construction workers with legal protections that can become particularly important after catastrophic accidents. Labor Law § 241(6) requires reasonable and adequate protection and safety in areas where construction, excavation, or demolition work is performed and requires covered owners and contractors to comply with applicable rules promulgated by the Commissioner of Labor.
However, simply citing § 241(6) is not enough.
The injured worker generally needs to identify an applicable Industrial Code provision that establishes a sufficiently specific safety requirement. The violation must also relate to the circumstances that caused the accident.
Labor Law § 240(1), commonly known as the Scaffold Law, can also apply to certain elevation-related construction accidents. But not every caught-in/between or crush accident falls under § 240(1). Its applicability depends on the work being performed and whether the injury resulted from the type of elevation-related risk covered by the statute.
That is why a careful factual investigation matters more than simply attaching a Labor Law section number to the accident.
Defenses NYC Contractors Raise in Caught-In/Between Lawsuits
Owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and their insurers may attempt to shift responsibility after a caught-in/between accident. Their defenses often focus on the worker's conduct.
"The Worker Was Somewhere He Wasn't Supposed to Be"
A contractor may claim that the worker entered an unauthorized or restricted area. The investigation should ask why the worker was there.
Was the area clearly restricted? Were barriers or warnings present? Did supervisors know workers routinely entered the area? Did the worker's assigned duties require access? Were site rules actually enforced?
Witness testimony, photographs, surveillance footage, site plans, daily logs, and supervisor communications can help answer these questions.
"The Worker Removed the Safety Guard"
Another common allegation is that the injured employee disabled or removed a machine guard. Again, the allegation needs evidence.
An investigation may examine the condition of the machinery, photographs taken after the accident, maintenance history, prior complaints, training records, and testimony from coworkers.
It may also reveal whether guards were routinely removed to perform assigned tasks, whether supervisors knew about the practice, or whether the equipment was defective before the worker ever touched it.
"The Worker Was Comparatively Negligent"
Comparative negligence can be raised as a defense to a Labor Law § 241(6) claim. This does not necessarily mean the worker loses the case. Rather, when comparative negligence applies, responsibility can be apportioned between the parties and the worker's recoverable damages may be reduced according to their share of fault.
That distinction matters. An insurer arguing that a worker was partly responsible is not necessarily establishing that the worker is entitled to nothing.
"The Worker Was the Sole Cause of the Accident"
Defendants may also attempt to argue that the worker's own actions were the only cause of what happened. The evidence needs to support that assertion. If unsafe equipment, inadequate guarding, dangerous worksite conditions, another contractor's actions, or a violation of an applicable safety regulation contributed to the accident, the defense may face significant factual challenges.
This is where photographs, machinery inspections, witness statements, construction records, safety documentation, and expert analysis can become particularly important.
How Industrial Code Violations Can Strengthen a Caught-In/Between Claim
Labor Law § 241(6) cases often turn on details.
The New York Court of Appeals has made clear that the Industrial Code provision relied upon must contain a concrete safety requirement rather than merely expressing a broad general safety standard. That means an attorney investigating a caught-in/between accident should determine exactly what occurred before selecting the regulations that may apply.
For example, a worker pinned by operating machinery presents different regulatory questions from a worker trapped by collapsing excavation material. The legal analysis follows the accident facts, not the other way around.
Evidence such as OSHA reports can also be important to the investigation, but OSHA regulations themselves should not be confused with the specific New York Industrial Code predicate required for a Labor Law § 241(6) claim.
How Long Do You Have to File a Third-Party Construction Accident Lawsuit?
Timing is extremely important. Under CPLR § 214, New York generally provides three years to commence an action for personal injury. Different deadlines and procedural requirements can apply in particular circumstances, including claims involving public entities. The workers' compensation system has its own separate notice and filing requirements.
An injured construction worker therefore should not assume that filing for workers' compensation automatically protects the deadline for a separate personal injury lawsuit. Waiting can create another problem even before the statute of limitations expires: evidence disappears.
Construction sites change constantly. Equipment gets repaired or moved. Contractors leave projects. Surveillance footage can be overwritten. Witnesses become harder to locate. A serious caught-in/between accident should be investigated as soon as possible.
Frequently Asked Questions About Third-Party Caught-In/Between Claims
Can I receive workers' compensation and still sue someone?
Potentially, yes. Workers' compensation benefits do not necessarily prevent an injured worker from pursuing a personal injury lawsuit against a legally responsible third party. The facts of the accident determine whether such a claim exists.
Can I sue my employer after a caught-in/between accident?
Workers' compensation generally limits an employee's ability to sue their employer for an ordinary workplace injury. However, claims may exist against other parties, such as owners, general contractors, subcontractors, or equipment manufacturers.
Does receiving workers' comp mean I cannot file a Labor Law claim?
Not necessarily. A qualifying worker may receive workers' compensation benefits and also have claims against third parties under New York Labor Law, depending on the circumstances.
Is a crush injury the same as a caught-in/between accident?
The terms can describe different aspects of the same event. "Crush injury" commonly describes the resulting physical injury, while "caught-in/between" describes the accident mechanism.
How long do I have to sue after a construction accident in New York?
New York's general statute of limitations for personal injury actions is three years, although exceptions and shorter deadlines can apply. Workers' compensation deadlines are separate.
Workers' Compensation May Be the Beginning of Your Claim, Not the End
After a catastrophic construction accident, receiving workers' compensation benefits can provide essential medical treatment and income support. But do not assume those benefits represent everything you may be entitled to recover.
When a property owner, general contractor, subcontractor, equipment company, or another third party contributed to a caught-in/between accident, additional legal claims may be available. Those claims can become especially important when a worker suffers permanent injuries, cannot return to construction, or faces a lifetime of pain and medical treatment.
The Law Offices of Michael S. Lamonsoff has more than 150 years of combined litigation experience and has recovered more than $500 million in settlements and verdicts for injured clients. Led by Michael S. Lamonsoff, "The Bull," our firm aggressively investigates construction accidents and prepares serious injury cases with trial in mind.
If you or a loved one was crushed, pinned, or trapped in a New York City construction accident, contact The Law Offices of Michael S. Lamonsoff for a free consultation. You're in the hands of a fighter.
