Worksites can be dangerous places, more so when complex and poorly designed machinery is used. Sometimes, even when a sophisticated operator is using the utmost care, life-altering injuries will occur when machinery is not properly designed.

After sustaining a gruesome facial and dental injury, the Plaintiff was faced with a complicated and extended recovery time. Following his acquisition of an experienced product liability attorney, DK Global was contacted to create a compelling animation that would educate the Defense lawyers and insurance carrier as to the exact reasons why the at-issue product failed, while at the same time, underscoring the severity of the injuries.

The challenge in this case was the task of clearly recreating how an old wall-mounted tire strut compressor, that is hand-operated, works. In properly detailing how the piece of machinery operates, it would become easier to illustrate why it failed as it did, causing great injury to the Plaintiff. DK Global’s creative team began by recreating the Branick MST-580 McPherson strut spring compressor that was being used at the time of the incident. The moving pieces of this three-dimensional machinery was then thoroughly detailed and demonstrated. This was instrumental as the actual machine had been lost by the tire store which had then gone out of business. What could have been an insurmountable obstacle was simply “worked-around.”

The animation progressed to demonstrate a character likeness of the Plaintiff using the machinery as it was intended, with his hands compressing and extending the spring, which in turn caused the explosion of the metal coil upward and out of its retention claws. The mechanism was then shown forcibly striking the Plaintiff in the face, causing catastrophic orthopedic and dental injury. The animation culminated with a facial x-ray of the Plaintiff’s face which had sustained multiple missing teeth and extreme mandible disfigurement.

The animation proved to be a compelling piece of demonstrative evidence when shown to the defense counsel and to an insurance adjuster in settlement discussions. It conveyed to the viewer the danger of operating such a hazardous piece of machinery, and the seriousness of the injuries sustained. The animation actually demonstrated why the at-issue product failed, and the defense lawyers hadn’t really been able to figure it out themselves and were consequently, “lowballing” the claim.