IBJNews

Family of woman killed by falling bottled-water pallets files suit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The estate of a woman who died after pallets of bottled water fell on her at a Kroger store in Franklin is suing the bottler, suggesting a new eco-friendly bottle design may have contributed to the accident.

Lori Keen, 32, died March 20, five days after two pallets of Ice Mountain water weighing a total of about 4,100 pounds fell on her. Keen, a 13-year Kroger employee, had been working in the store's receiving dock and had stacked two pallets, each containing 72 cases of 24 half-liter bottles, on a forklift.

Keen's estate, led by her widower Billie, filed suit against Nestle Waters North America Inc., based in Indianapolis, on Aug. 5 in Marion Superior Court. The case moved to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on Aug. 25, at Nestle's request, after the plaintiffs acknowledged they are seeking more than $75,000.

The suit alleges Nestle failed to instruct its customers on the danger of stacking pallets and the increased "collapse/toppling risks" associated with its introduction of Eco-Shape bottles, which Nestle bills as the lightest on the market.

"As a direct and proximate result of defendant Nestle's negligent acts and omissions, Lori suffered fatal injuries, her estate incurred medical bills, funeral and burial expenses and is entitled to damages," according to the suit, brought by locally based Cohen & Malad LLP. "Lori's husband, Billie, and their daughter have suffered the loss of support, services, society, love, affection and acts of kindness of Lori."

Nestle, represented by locally based Frost Brown Todd LLC, has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit. Company officials did not immediately respond to inquiries.

State regulators in April slapped Kroger Co. with a $17,000 fine relating to workplace safety violations tied to the accident.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT