$60 Million Settlement for Woman Left Paraplegic in Illinois Highway Construction Zone

A $60 million settlement was reached on April 13, 2026, for Sarah Grasser, a 31-year-old resident of Minooka, Illinois, who sustained a permanent spinal cord injury after a crash in a defective highway construction zone on Interstate 55 in Will County. The case resolved on the morning it was set for trial in Cook County, with ten construction and engineering companies sharing liability for leaving a hazardous roadway open to the public. Partners Bradley M. Cosgrove, Charles R. Haskins, and Joseph T. Murphy of Clifford Law Offices in Chicago represented Grasser.

Case at a Glance

• Settlement: $60,000,000
• Case Type: Premises Liability
• Court: Cook County Circuit Court
• Settlement Date: April 13, 2026
• Plaintiff: Sarah Grasser, age 31, Minooka, Illinois
• Defendants: K-Five Construction Corporation; D. Construction; Gallagher Asphalt Corporation; R.M. Chin and Associates; AECOM; ATLAS Engineering Group; Traffic Control and Protection; TSI Traffic Control; Maintenance Coating Company; Work Zone Safety, Inc.
• Plaintiff Attorneys: Bradley M. Cosgrove, Charles R. Haskins, Joseph T. Murphy - Clifford Law Offices, Chicago
• Case No.: Grasser v. K-Five Construction Corp., et al., No. 2023 L 0277

What Happened on Interstate 55 That Night?

On August 30, 2022, Grasser was traveling on northbound Interstate 55 near Renwick Road in Will County when a nearby driver swerved to avoid a pothole that experts described as two lanes wide and several inches deep.

That driver's vehicle struck Grasser's car. The collision caused her vehicle to roll over and come to rest in a roadside ditch. Grasser suffered a spinal cord injury at the T-12 vertebral level, leaving her permanently paralyzed from the waist down. She was 31 years old at the time of the crash.

How Did Construction Failures Create This Hazard?

The pothole was not ordinary road wear. Evidence developed during litigation showed it was the direct result of multiple construction and safety failures by the defendants.

Workers milled too deeply into the structural layers of the pavement, weakening the road surface from below. Rather than following the planned staggered milling sequence, defendants milled all three lanes to a full five-inch depth simultaneously and reopened them to live traffic traveling at 65 mph without adequate repairs, warnings, or speed reductions.

"Defendants failed to properly inspect, monitor and maintain the work zone throughout the day, and failed to fulfill their contractual and safety obligations to protect the public," said Cosgrove. "Collectively, these failures created a dangerous roadway condition that posed a foreseeable risk to motorists."

The conditions violated Illinois Department of Transportation safety standards, according to Clifford Law Offices.

Who Was Held Responsible?

Ten separate companies shared liability: K-Five Construction Corporation, D. Construction, Gallagher Asphalt Corporation, R.M. Chin and Associates, AECOM, ATLAS Engineering Group, Traffic Control and Protection, TSI Traffic Control, Maintenance Coating Company, and Work Zone Safety, Inc.

Each entity had a role in the construction, inspection, or traffic safety management of the work zone. Despite multiple parties being responsible for oversight, the roadway was reopened to public traffic while exhibiting conditions that created a foreseeable risk to motorists.

What Are Sarah Grasser's Long-Term Needs?

A T-12 spinal cord injury results in paraplegia, permanent loss of motor and sensory function in the lower body. For Grasser, this means a lifetime of medical care, mobility equipment, home modifications, and significantly reduced earning capacity.

"This settlement will help Sarah cope with all of the physical, mental, and emotional needs for decades to come," Cosgrove said. "She led a normal life until that fateful evening. Had people been doing their jobs properly, she would be enjoying life with her friends and family today."

The $60 million result reflects both the severity of her injuries and the projected cost of lifelong care for a young woman with decades ahead of her.

Why Does This Case Matter for Highway Construction Accountability?

Construction zone injury cases involving multiple contractors are among the most complex in personal injury litigation. Liability is routinely disputed across design firms, general contractors, subcontractors, and traffic control companies, with each party pointing to another.

This result shows that when the evidence is developed properly and every responsible entity is named, accountability follows. The case settled on the morning of trial, a signal that defendants recognized the strength of the evidence against them.

"This incident was preventable," Cosgrove said. "The roadway should not have been open to traffic without appropriate safeguards or corrective measures."

For Illinois residents and travelers on public highways, the case is a reminder that construction companies and their contractors have a legal duty to protect the public, not just to complete the work.

Cases like Sarah Grasser's show what plaintiff attorneys can accomplish when they fully investigate a complex, multi-defendant case and are prepared to take it to trial. If you have secured results like this one, Major Verdict is where trial outcomes like yours get the public recognition they deserve. Browse plaintiff attorneys in Illinois who have the track record to back it up.

FAQ

Q: Can I sue a construction company if I was injured in a road work zone? A: Yes. When a contractor or construction company leaves a roadway in an unsafe condition, injured motorists can bring claims against every entity responsible for the hazard. In complex highway cases, this may include general contractors, subcontractors, engineering firms, and traffic control companies. An experienced plaintiff attorney can identify all liable parties and hold them accountable.

Q: What does it mean when a case "settles on the eve of trial"? A: A settlement reached immediately before trial typically signals that the defendants recognized serious exposure. Once a jury is about to be seated, defendants must weigh the risk of a higher jury verdict against the cost of settling. For plaintiffs, a pre-trial settlement provides faster and more certain compensation than a trial outcome.

Q: How are damages calculated in paraplegia cases? A: Damages in spinal cord injury cases typically include past and future medical expenses, long-term in-home care, lost earning capacity, and compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life. For younger plaintiffs, future care projections extend over a long life expectancy — one of the primary drivers of large settlement figures in permanent paralysis cases.