Case Background
This case stemmed from a sidewalk fall in the summer of 2023 in Stafford Springs, Connecticut. Heather Socha Bahler, a resident, filed a personal injury lawsuit against Paramount Construction, LLC, a contractor performing roadwork at the intersection of Routes 32 and 190 under a contract with the State of Connecticut. The Plaintiff claimed she tripped over a broken steel signpost protruding from the sidewalk, which she believed the construction company failed to fix or mark.
The matter proceeded through a year of litigation before reaching trial in May 2025. A Hartford County jury eventually rendered a defence verdict in favour of Paramount Construction.
The cause that led to the events
The dispute arose from a fall that occurred on July 23, 2023. Bahler was walking along the sidewalk in front of Warren Memorial Town Hall near a rotary that was undergoing construction. As she approached a crosswalk, her foot caught a jagged steel post that had been left jutting from the sidewalk.
She argued that this condition existed due to the Defendant's failure to maintain the construction site safely. Her complaint alleged that Paramount Construction exercised control over the area and bore responsibility for preventing hazards to pedestrians.
Injuries suffered
Bahler suffered a left radial head fracture and abrasions to her hands from the fall. Medical evaluations also revealed injuries to soft tissues, along with nerve damage and muscle strain. The pain was immediate and persistent. According to her filings, the injuries affected her range of motion, caused ongoing discomfort, and disrupted her work and daily life.
She also described the incident as emotionally traumatic. She reported anxiety, physical limitation, and long-term distress. The lawsuit included claims for both physical and emotional damages.
Damages sought
Bahler sought compensation for medical treatment, imaging, medications, and rehabilitative care. She also claimed lost income, stating she had missed work due to her injuries. Her request included both past and future economic losses.
On the non-economic side, she requested damages for pain, suffering, emotional upset, and loss of enjoyment of life. The amount in controversy exceeded $15,000, although the jury ultimately was not asked to assign a dollar value because they ruled against the Plaintiff on liability.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
At trial, Bahler’s legal team focused on the Defendant’s control over the sidewalk during construction. They argued that Paramount Construction had a duty to maintain pedestrian areas and should have removed or marked the broken signpost.
They said the company failed to regularly inspect the site or take action to prevent foreseeable injuries. The Plaintiff introduced medical records, incident photos, and testimony about how the protruding post caused the fall.
Paramount Construction denied liability and presented a different picture. They argued that the site was not unsafe and that the Plaintiff could have avoided the hazard by using greater caution. They also said that the area was not actively under their control at the time of the incident and that they had not begun any sidewalk work where the Plaintiff fell.
The defense further claimed that Bahler was responsible for her fall because she failed to watch where she was walking and ignored her surroundings.
After reviewing the facts, the jury sided with the defense.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Heather Socha Bahler
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): William P. O’Brien
· Expert for Plaintiff(s): Scott A. Bissell | Carly M. Muniz
Defendant(s): Paramount Construction, LLC
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Brendan T. Cahill
Key Arguments by Counsel
Plaintiff’s counsel emphasised the visibility and foreseeability of the danger. He argued that leaving a jagged metal post on a sidewalk, even during construction, presented a hazard that the company should have removed or marked. He asked the jury to hold the Defendant accountable for failing to maintain a basic duty of care to pedestrians.
Defense attorney Brendan Cahill countered that the Plaintiff had not been paying attention to her surroundings. He described the accident as one of personal misjudgment, not corporate negligence. He also claimed that the area was not technically under Paramount’s control and that they had not yet begun active sidewalk work where the fall occurred.
Claims Asserted
Negligence
Bahler argued that Paramount Construction breached their duty by allowing a broken steel post to remain on the sidewalk. She said the company failed to inspect, repair, or warn about the hazard and did not put safeguards in place despite having control over the area.
She listed numerous oversights, including a lack of inspection policies, poor site supervision, and a failure to isolate the post with signage or barriers. She also claimed that the hazard had existed for an extended period and should have been identified.
Defense Arguments
Paramount Construction denied responsibility for the sidewalk hazard. They said they had not yet begun work in that particular location and therefore could not be held accountable.
They also argued that Bahler’s conduct contributed to the incident. In their special defenses, they listed several actions that amounted to comparative negligence: failing to watch where she was walking, ignoring a visible hazard, and knowingly walking near a defective area.
The defense claimed that any injuries she sustained were due to her failure to take reasonable precautions.
Jury Verdict
On May 22, 2025, the jury returned a verdict in favour of the Defendant, Paramount Construction, LLC.
Jurors found that the Plaintiff had not proven her claims of negligence by a preponderance of the evidence. As a result, the court entered judgment for the Defendant and awarded no damages.
