Bridgeport Staircase Collapse Injury Verdict
Table of Contents
Case Background
The lawsuit Majolie Augustin v. Tan Pham came before the Connecticut Superior Court in Bridgeport as a personal injury case connected to a property accident. The events went back to October 9, 2020, when a staircase collapse inside a residential property on Hill Street in Bridgeport led to serious injuries. At the time, the property belonged to and was controlled by the Defendant Tan Pham.
The Plaintiff, Majolie Augustin, claimed she fell when part of the staircase gave way shortly after a fire had already damaged that same structure earlier in the day. She argued that the Defendant, as the property owner and person in control of the premises, had known about the danger and failed to fix or block off the unsafe stairs. After a long trial and arguments from both legal teams, the jury ruled in favor of the Plaintiff in July 2024, almost four years after the accident.
Cause that led to the legal dispute
The cause of the lawsuit rested on whether the property owner was negligent in his duty to maintain and inspect the staircase. Hours before the fall, a fire had damaged the lower part of the house, including the interior stairs. The Plaintiff claimed the property owner either knew or clearly should have known that the stairs could not safely be used. Despite this, there were no warnings, barriers, or repairs in place.
The Plaintiff therefore argued that her fall occurred directly because of the Defendant’s negligence in maintaining and securing the staircase after the fire damage.
Injury
The fall resulted in a wide range of injuries for Majolie Augustin. Medical records and testimony described not just bruises but several strains, contusions, and long‑lasting pain. She suffered acute ligament strain in her neck, back, and spine, a shoulder injury, knee damage, and rib pain. She also lived with continuing arm weakness and chest pain. Doctors testified that some of those injuries could remain permanent in nature and that her usual daily activities had been disrupted for years after the accident.
Damages
The Plaintiff claimed both economic and non‑economic losses. The economic damages included medical bills for emergency treatment, physical therapy, and continuing rehabilitation. Her doctors confirmed that she would likely face further medical expenses in the future.
Beyond her financial losses, she sought non‑economic damages for pain, suffering, and the long‑term impact on the quality of her life.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Majolie Augustin
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Christopher J. Flood
· Expert for Plaintiff: David Tung | Kenneth Donohue
Defendant: Tan Pham
· Counsel for Defendant: Greg S. Krieger
Key Arguments by Counsel
For the Plaintiff, attorney Christopher Flood emphasized that Tan Pham had a clear duty as the property owner to ensure the stairs were safe after the fire earlier that same day. Flood pointed out that the fire damage was known to the Defendant and yet the staircase remained open with no warnings or barriers. He highlighted testimony showing that a proper inspection or even a visible warning could have prevented the accident entirely.
For the defense, attorney Greg Krieger pressed the argument that the Plaintiff carried responsibility for her own accident. He claimed she had failed to keep a proper lookout, failed to use her senses carefully, and should have protected herself by observing the surrounding conditions. His remarks mostly cantered on personal responsibility and the idea that property owners cannot always prevent every possible danger, especially when a person ignores visible risks.
Claims
The Plaintiff’s claims included negligence in maintaining the staircase, failure to inspect after the fire damage, failure to warn visitors, and failure to restrict access to a staircase that was clearly unsafe. She argued that each of these failings directly caused her fall and created liability for Tan Pham.
Defense
The defense’s special response, filed earlier, denied most of the claims in the complaint and introduced a comparative negligence argument. The defense maintained that the Plaintiff was negligent herself. Krieger argued that she should have been watching her step and taking proper precautions given the situation in the building after the fire.
Jury Verdict
After weighing the arguments and testimony, the jury came back with its verdict on July 2, 2024. The jury found in favor of the Plaintiff, Majolie Augustin, but concluded that she shared some of the blame for the fall.
The final decision assigned 75 percent liability to the Defendant, Tan Pham, and 25 percent liability to the Plaintiff. This comparative negligence split showed that the jury believed both parties carried responsibility but ultimately held the property owner’s role much greater.
The total damages calculated by the jury came to $73,954.91. That figure included just under $74,000 for economic losses and $650,000 for pain, suffering, and non‑economic injuries. After applying the Plaintiff’s share of liability, the court reduced the total award to $542,966.18 payable by the Defendant.