Loading
Construction
4 min read
Areas of Expertise :
Construction, Crane, Rigging, Occupational Safety And Health (OSHA), Meteorology & Weather
Published Date:
Last Modified Date:
Jurisdiction:
Texas State
The Estate of David Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging, Inc. is recognized as a significant crane-accident wrongful-death matter in recent U.S. construction litigation. The lawsuit arose from a 2021 incident at a Texas A&M University–San Antonio construction site, where journeyman pipefitter David Lester Loree II was fatally injured during the placement of large HVAC and air-handling units.
In May 2025, a Harris County jury returned a $640 million verdict, approximately $159.8 million in compensatory damages and $480 million in punitive damages, after finding gross negligence and assigning no comparative fault to Mr. Loree. Later that year, the parties notified the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals that they had reached a settlement. The appellate court subsequently vacated the judgment without regard to the merits and remanded the case for a settlement-based final order. The case provides insight into how crane-operation decisions, weather assessments, and site-safety practices influence liability findings and the evaluation of causation, operational standards, and damages.
According to OSHA records, the incident occurred on or around September 22, 2021, during construction of the College of Business and Library building. Public filings indicate that the lift involved large HVAC and air-handling units raised by a crane operated by TNT Crane & Rigging.
The plaintiffs alleged that the lift proceeded despite wind gusts near 45 mph, exceeding the 25-mph threshold referenced in their evidence. They asserted that one of the units became unstable and fell, resulting in Mr. Loree’s fatal injuries. These allegations shaped the parties’ positions regarding lift planning, rigging decisions, supervisory judgment, and environmental-condition evaluations on the day of the incident.
Prior to the 2021 incident, TNT Crane & Rigging had been involved in OSHA litigation following a 2016 crane-assembly injury, resulting in a published 2023 Fifth Circuit decision interpreting federal crane-assembly requirements. After Mr. Loree’s death, TNT publicly emphasized its safety record and noted the absence of OSHA citations related to this fatality.
These differing accounts, plaintiffs’ wind-hazard theory versus TNT’s reliance on regulatory history and OSHA findings, formed the basis for disputes over safety expectations and foreseeability.
Following several weeks of testimony, the jury awarded $640 million to the Loree family. Evidence presented at trial focused heavily on weather conditions, communication regarding whether to proceed with the lift, and assessments of the unit’s stability.
The size of the punitive-damages award drew widespread attention and illustrated how juries may view evidence concerning safety oversight in high-risk construction environments.
TNT Crane & Rigging filed a notice of appeal with the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals (Case No. 14-25-00776-CV). In September 2025, both parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement and jointly requested abatement.
On October 30, 2025, the appellate court reinstated the appeal solely to resolve the procedural request, vacated the June 26, 2025 judgment without regard to the merits, and remanded the case for entry of a settlement-based order. This action formally concluded the litigation.
Court:
151st District Court of Harris County, Texas
Case Name:
Milena Loree, individually and on behalf of the Estate of David Loree, Zackary Loree, Cody Loree, and Mary Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging, Inc.
Crane Operator
Cranes and Hoists
Machine Rigging
Design Wind Pressure
Worker Safety
Safety Compliance
Occupational Safety and Health OSHA Industrial Engineering
Weather Forecasting
The Estate of David Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging, Inc. is recognized as a significant crane-accident wrongful-death matter in recent U.S. construction litigation. The lawsuit arose from a 2021 incident at a Texas A&M University–San Antonio construction site, where journeyman pipefitter David Lester Loree II was fatally injured during the placement of large HVAC and air-handling units.
In May 2025, a Harris County jury returned a $640 million verdict, approximately $159.8 million in compensatory damages and $480 million in punitive damages, after finding gross negligence and assigning no comparative fault to Mr. Loree. Later that year, the parties notified the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals that they had reached a settlement. The appellate court subsequently vacated the judgment without regard to the merits and remanded the case for a settlement-based final order. The case provides insight into how crane-operation decisions, weather assessments, and site-safety practices influence liability findings and the evaluation of causation, operational standards, and damages.
According to OSHA records, the incident occurred on or around September 22, 2021, during construction of the College of Business and Library building. Public filings indicate that the lift involved large HVAC and air-handling units raised by a crane operated by TNT Crane & Rigging.
The plaintiffs alleged that the lift proceeded despite wind gusts near 45 mph, exceeding the 25-mph threshold referenced in their evidence. They asserted that one of the units became unstable and fell, resulting in Mr. Loree’s fatal injuries. These allegations shaped the parties’ positions regarding lift planning, rigging decisions, supervisory judgment, and environmental-condition evaluations on the day of the incident.
Prior to the 2021 incident, TNT Crane & Rigging had been involved in OSHA litigation following a 2016 crane-assembly injury, resulting in a published 2023 Fifth Circuit decision interpreting federal crane-assembly requirements. After Mr. Loree’s death, TNT publicly emphasized its safety record and noted the absence of OSHA citations related to this fatality.
These differing accounts, plaintiffs’ wind-hazard theory versus TNT’s reliance on regulatory history and OSHA findings, formed the basis for disputes over safety expectations and foreseeability.
Following several weeks of testimony, the jury awarded $640 million to the Loree family. Evidence presented at trial focused heavily on weather conditions, communication regarding whether to proceed with the lift, and assessments of the unit’s stability.
The size of the punitive-damages award drew widespread attention and illustrated how juries may view evidence concerning safety oversight in high-risk construction environments.
TNT Crane & Rigging filed a notice of appeal with the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals (Case No. 14-25-00776-CV). In September 2025, both parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement and jointly requested abatement.
On October 30, 2025, the appellate court reinstated the appeal solely to resolve the procedural request, vacated the June 26, 2025 judgment without regard to the merits, and remanded the case for entry of a settlement-based order. This action formally concluded the litigation.
Crane and Rigging Expert Witness
These experts review lift plans, rigging configurations, load management, and adherence to accepted operational standards.
Mechanical and Structural Engineering Expert Witness
Engineers evaluate crane equipment, load behavior, and the mechanical forces acting on large HVAC units.
OSHA Expert Witness
Safety professionals examine hazard-recognition practices, site-safety protocols, and compliance with OSHA requirements, including wind-related shutdown criteria.
Human-Factors Expert Witness
Human-factors specialists assess communication, task sequencing, and decision-making in fast-changing work conditions.
Safety Culture and Punitive-Damages Exposure
Documentation of supervisory decisions, hazard evaluations, and safety practices may influence a jury’s assessment of negligence and punitive damages.
Weather-Risk Evaluation as Critical Evidence
Wind speeds, forecast data, and shutdown thresholds often play a central role in crane-accident disputes.
Benefits of Multidisciplinary Expert Analysis
Combining expertise from rigging specialists, engineers, safety experts, and human-factors professionals strengthens causation and liability evaluations.
Importance of Timely Evidence Preservation
Wind logs, lift plans, rigging diagrams, communication records, and equipment histories often shape expert analysis and trial strategy.
Post-Verdict Dynamics and Settlement Decisions
Large verdicts, particularly those involving punitive damages, can influence negotiation positions and appellate strategy.
The Estate of David Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging, Inc. serves as an informative example of high-stakes construction-accident litigation. Although the case ultimately resolved through settlement, public records and reporting highlight the significance of weather-risk assessment, and lift-planning decisions. The matter provides useful context for attorneys evaluating liability and causation issues in crane-related incidents.
Was the case ultimately resolved?
Yes. After the jury verdict, the parties reached a settlement, and the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals vacated the judgment without regard to the merits.
How did weather conditions influence the litigation?
Wind-related evidence, such as gust measurements, shutdown thresholds, and communication about whether conditions were safe for lifting, played a central role in evaluating foreseeability, decision-making, and alleged breaches of safety standards.
Why was the punitive-damages award significant?
The jury found gross negligence under Texas law based on evidence related to wind conditions, supervisory decisions, and whether the lift should have proceeded.
What types of experts are common in crane-accident cases?
Crane-operations experts, rigging specialists, structural and mechanical engineers, OSHA-compliance professionals, human-factors experts, and economists frequently participate.
Did OSHA issue citations related to the fatal incident?
According to public records, OSHA did not issue citations in connection with this fatality, and TNT Crane & Rigging highlighted this fact during the litigation. However, OSHA’s broader regulatory framework and past enforcement actions remained relevant to the parties’ arguments about safety practices.
Crane and Rigging Expert Witness
These experts review lift plans, rigging configurations, load management, and adherence to accepted operational standards.
Mechanical and Structural Engineering Expert Witness
Engineers evaluate crane equipment, load behavior, and the mechanical forces acting on large HVAC units.
OSHA Expert Witness
Safety professionals examine hazard-recognition practices, site-safety protocols, and compliance with OSHA requirements, including wind-related shutdown criteria.
Human-Factors Expert Witness
Human-factors specialists assess communication, task sequencing, and decision-making in fast-changing work conditions.
Safety Culture and Punitive-Damages Exposure
Documentation of supervisory decisions, hazard evaluations, and safety practices may influence a jury’s assessment of negligence and punitive damages.
Weather-Risk Evaluation as Critical Evidence
Wind speeds, forecast data, and shutdown thresholds often play a central role in crane-accident disputes.
Benefits of Multidisciplinary Expert Analysis
Combining expertise from rigging specialists, engineers, safety experts, and human-factors professionals strengthens causation and liability evaluations.
Importance of Timely Evidence Preservation
Wind logs, lift plans, rigging diagrams, communication records, and equipment histories often shape expert analysis and trial strategy.
Post-Verdict Dynamics and Settlement Decisions
Large verdicts, particularly those involving punitive damages, can influence negotiation positions and appellate strategy.
The Estate of David Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging, Inc. serves as an informative example of high-stakes construction-accident litigation. Although the case ultimately resolved through settlement, public records and reporting highlight the significance of weather-risk assessment, and lift-planning decisions. The matter provides useful context for attorneys evaluating liability and causation issues in crane-related incidents.
Was the case ultimately resolved?
Yes. After the jury verdict, the parties reached a settlement, and the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals vacated the judgment without regard to the merits.
How did weather conditions influence the litigation?
Wind-related evidence, such as gust measurements, shutdown thresholds, and communication about whether conditions were safe for lifting, played a central role in evaluating foreseeability, decision-making, and alleged breaches of safety standards.
Why was the punitive-damages award significant?
The jury found gross negligence under Texas law based on evidence related to wind conditions, supervisory decisions, and whether the lift should have proceeded.
What types of experts are common in crane-accident cases?
Crane-operations experts, rigging specialists, structural and mechanical engineers, OSHA-compliance professionals, human-factors experts, and economists frequently participate.
Did OSHA issue citations related to the fatal incident?
According to public records, OSHA did not issue citations in connection with this fatality, and TNT Crane & Rigging highlighted this fact during the litigation. However, OSHA’s broader regulatory framework and past enforcement actions remained relevant to the parties’ arguments about safety practices.
Crane Operator
Cranes and Hoists
Machine Rigging
Design Wind Pressure
Worker Safety
Safety Compliance
Occupational Safety and Health OSHA Industrial Engineering
Weather Forecasting
Geotechnical Engineering, +4
Construction
Industrial Hygiene, +7
Construction