Widow accepts a settlement of 282,000 euros for the death of her husband on the farm



[ad_1]

A widow whose husband died, along with her close friend and neighbor, in a tragic agricultural accident, has obtained some 282,500 euros under a settlement of her lawsuit in High Court for her death.

Seamus Hegarty and Kevin Woods, both 52, from the Raphoe area of ​​County Donegal, died six years ago when a flat tractor tire they were fixing became over-inflated and their steel tire exploded and struck them, causing fatal injuries. in the head.

Mr. Hegarty’s widow, Mary, of Cloughfin, Ballindrait, Lifford, filed a proceeding on her own behalf and on behalf of her four children, who were between the ages of seven and 18 when the accident occurred on November 21, 2014. At that time At the time, both men, who grew up together, were involved in potato picking work in Crossroads, Killygordan, stopping around 6pm to fix Mr. Woods’ tractor tire.

The case was defended by the late Mr. Woods’ insurer, FBD. Miriam Reilly, representing Ms. Hegarty, told Judge Garrett Simons on Monday that FBD had provided a full defense and that contributory negligence was alleged on the part of Mr. Hegarty.

He said that a settlement negotiated last July of 282,500 euros represented just over 50% of the total value of the case, but that several complex elements had been taken into account, including the accelerated benefit for the youngest son of the inheritance couple of the inheritance from his father. .

Ms. Hegarty is very pleased with the settlement offer, is willing to resolve the matter for herself and her children, and has committed to distributing the settlement fairly among them, the attorney added.

Judge Simons said the offer was a very good one given the risk the case posed if it made it to the hearing. There were significant issues related to causation and contributory negligence, including whether Mr. Hegarty should have waited for a pressure gauge to arrive, which was on its way from a local garage, he said.

Noting that court approval was only required in relation to payments for the couple’s youngest child, as she is still a minor, he granted that approval.

[ad_2]