Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CIVIL

DIVISION EDGARDO TOUCET, Plaintiff, Case No.: v. Division: SPARTAN STAFFING, LLC and BARBARA PRIDGEN, Defendants. ____________________________________________/ COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet (Toucet), by and through his undersigned attorney, hereby sues the Defendants, Spartan Staffing, LLC (Spartan) and Barbara Pridgen, (Pridgen) and states: 1. 2. This is an action for damages that exceeds Fifteen Thousand dollars. At all times material to this action, Toucet was a resident of Orange

County, Florida. 3. At all times material to this action, Spartan was a foreign corporation

conducting business throughout the state of Florida, including Hillsborough County. 4. At all times material to this action, Pridgen was a Florida resident and

employee of Spartan who conducted business throughout Florida, including Hillsborough County. 5. Spartan is an employee leasing company required to be licensed pursuant

to 468.526(1), Florida Statutes.

6.

A leasing company such as Spartan is defined under 468.520(4), Florida

Statutes as a company that assigns its employees to a client company and allocates the direction and control over the leased employees between the leasing company and the client company. 7. As a leasing company Spartan is required by 468.525(4)(e), Florida

Statutes to retain a right of control over safety and training at the jobsites where their employees temporarily work. 8. As a leasing company Spartan is required by 468.525(4)(e), Florida

Statutes to perform safety inspections of client equipment and administer hazard control and safety policy at its employees temporary worksites. 9. At all times material hereto Toucet was an employee of Spartan. A copy

of Spartans contract of employment with Toucet is attached as Exhibit A. 10. Spartan temporarily leased Toucet to Future Foam Carpet Cushion

Company (Future Foam) on or about November 4, 2009. 11. 12. Future Foam operates a plant that manufactures carpet cushion. Pridgen had authority to bind Spartan in legally enforceable contracts with

Spartans clients. 13. Pridgen was responsible for ensuring compliance with safety training of

Spartans leased employees, and ensuring that onsite inspections of client companys job sites and client company equipment were regularly conducted in accordance with leasing company regulations.

14.

Pridgen, on behalf of Spartan, entered into a hold harmless agreement

with Future Foam whereby Spartan relinquished its responsibility to retain a right of control over job site safety at the Future Foam plant. (Attached as Exhibit B) 15. Spartan assigned Toucet to operate a peeler machine at Future Foams

manufacturing plant. 16. The peeler machine is operated by two individuals a peeler helper and a

peeler operator. 17. carpet foam. 18. 19. 20. The peeler machine does not have a brake that stops it from moving. The peeler machines blade is continuously sharpened as it spins. The peeler machines blade had a protective guard over it which had been The peeler machine utilizes a razor sharp double edged blade to cut

intentionally removed prior to Toucets use of the machine. 21. The peeler machine has a rundown cycle, and the inertia of the spinning

blade takes 45 60 seconds to come to a complete stop. 22. The unguarded spinning blade is positioned at approximately waist level of

the person operating the machine. 23. The peeler machine contained an emergency power off switch that only

functioned properly some of the time. 24. 25. Toucet was assigned to work as a peeler machine helper. Toucet attended high school in Puerto Rico and does not speak or

read/write English.

26.

Neither Future Foam nor Spartan provided a translator and Toucets

training on the peeler machine consisted of directions in broken English and hand signals. 27. Toucet received no orientation or other formalized instruction or training in

preparation for his temporary work assignment as a peeler machine helper. 28. On January 13, 2010, while performing work as a peeler machine helper,

Toucet came into contact with the machines spinning blade and Toucets penis and testicles were completely severed. 29. Spartan was aware that on previous occasions other leased Spartan

employees on temporary assignment to the Future Foam plant were injured in prior similar accidents while operating the same peeler machine. COUNT I - GROSS NEGLIGENCE BY BARBARA PRIDGEN 30. Plaintiff incorporates all of the above referenced allegations herein and

further alleges: 31. As Toucets supervisor at Spartan who contracted with Future Foam to

temporarily lease Toucet to work at Future Foams plant, Pridgen had a duty to comply with all required statutory safety and training requirements applicable under Florida law governing employee leasing companies and their temporarily assigned employees. 32. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by entering into an agreement with Future Foam whereby Spartan surrendered its statutory responsibility to maintain a right of control over machine safety at the Future Foam plant.

33.

Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by failing to implement safety/training policies and procedures or ensure such policies and procedures were enacted at the Future Foam plant. 34. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by failing to conduct inspections of the Future Foam worksite and Future Foam equipment. 35. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by failing to provide Toucet with instructions or warnings regarding the hazards associated with operating the peeler machine at its client Future Foams manufacturing plant. 36. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by deliberately failing to accurately represent to Toucet the dangers associated with operating the peeler machine without an operable guard over the spinning blade during the machines operation. 37. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by deliberately failing to accurately represent to Toucet the dangers associated with operating the peeler machine without an operable emergency power off switch. 38. Pridgen breached that duty and acted with gross negligence and wanton

disregard for the safety of Toucet by deliberately failing to accurately represent to Toucet in Spanish the dangers associated with coming into close contact with the

machine during the 45 60 seconds the machines blade continues to spin after shutdown. 39. Pridgen knew or should have known that her failure to accurately

represent to Toucet the dangers associated with operating the peeler machine without adequate training would, with virtual certainty, result in injury to Toucet. 40. Pridgen was aware of prior similar accidents involving Spartan employees

who were injured while operating the peeler machine at the Future Foam plant. 40. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendant, Future

Foam, by creating a condition that was virtually certain to cause bodily harm or death, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, suffered bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, loss of earnings, loss of ability to earn money and aggravation of a previously existing condition. The losses are either permanent or

continuing and Plaintiff will suffer the losses in the future. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, demands damages from the Defendant, Barbara Pridgen, together with his costs herein and trial by jury. COUNT II - RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR/UNRELATED WORKS CLAIM AGAINST SPARTAN 41. Plaintiff reincorporates all of the above referenced allegations herein and

further alleges: 42. Pridgen was an employee of Spartan who at all times material hereto was

acting in furtherance of Spartans business interests. 43. Pridgen worked for Spartan in a managerial capacity at Spartans office

and did not perform labor at Future Foams plant.

44.

Toucet was employed by Spartan in furtherance of Spartans business,

but was assigned to unrelated works performing labor at the Future Foam plant. 45. Pursuant to 440.11(1)(b)2., Florida Statutes, Spartan is vicariously liable

under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior for the gross negligence of Pridgen. 46. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendant, Future

Foam, by creating a condition that was virtually certain to cause bodily harm or death, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, suffered bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, loss of earnings, loss of ability to earn money and aggravation of a previously existing condition. The losses are either permanent or

continuing and Plaintiff will suffer the losses in the future. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, demands damages from the Defendant, Spartan Staffing, LLC, together with his costs herein and trial by jury. COUNT III - INTENTIONAL TORT CLAIM AGAINST SPARTAN 47. Plaintiff reincorporates all of the above referenced allegations herein and

further alleges: 48. Spartan was aware, based on prior similar accidents involving injuries to

Spartan employees, that Spartan employees temporarily leased to Future Foam and assigned to operate the peeler machine were virtually certain to be injured. 49. Toucet was unaware of the imminent threat of injury posed by failing to

wait the required 45 60 seconds to allow the machines spinning blade to wind down after shutdown.

50.

Toucet was unaware of the imminent threat of bodily injury posed by

operating the peeler machine without an operable guard over the spinning blade during the machines operation. 51. Toucet was unaware of the imminent threat of bodily injury posed by

operating the peeler machine without an operable emergency power off switch. 52. Pridgen deliberately failed to accurately represent to Toucet in Spanish

the dangers associated with operating the peeler machine. 53. Pridgens deliberate failure to implement training and safety procedures

for its temporarily leased employees at the Future Foam plant prevented Toucet from exercising informed judgment about whether to perform work on the peeler machine. 54. Pridgens deliberate failure to communicate warnings in Spanish to Toucet

regarding the hazards of operating the peeler machine prevented Toucet from exercising informed judgment about whether to perform work on the machine. 55. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendant, Future

Foam, by creating a condition that was virtually certain to cause bodily harm or death, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, suffered bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, loss of earnings, loss of ability to earn money and aggravation of a previously existing condition. The losses are either permanent or

continuing and Plaintiff will suffer the losses in the future. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Edgardo Toucet, demands damages from the Defendant, Spartan Staffing, LLC, together with his costs herein and trial by jury.

GENE ODOM, ESQUIRE Florida Bar Number: 314470 MICHAEL J. VALEN, ESQUIRE Florida Bar Number: 997633 Martinez Odom Law Group, P.A. 1111 Oakfield Drive, Suite 115 Brandon, Florida 33511 (813) 685-4414 Attorneys for Plaintiff GOservice@odomlitigation.com