The case involving Tim Lowe (as mentioned in previous Litigation section) was not the only example of litigation between Grinnell’s Texas operations and its own employees. In this case Tim Walsh, a former Grinnell salesperson, sued Grinnell on Mach 28, 2000 as stated in court documents. He charged that Grinnell has failed to pay him over $51,000 in his incentive compensation. (Case #00-02265)

Grinnell Fire Protection Systems Company V WHS Contractors, Inc.

Grinnell sued their fellow contractor over an $8,350 debt in this January 2000 court complaint filed in Texas, as stated in original court documents. (Case #CC-00-2351)

Grinnell Corporation V Americon Companies, Inc, Others

Grinnell sued their customer on February 8, 2000. Again, the original agreement was to pay Grinnell $145,000, but there were change orders. After Americon paid Grinnell $75,000, Grinnell said they wanted yet another $110,000, for a total of $185,000, according to the lawsuit. Americon refused to pay that amount so Grinnell sued its own customer. (Case #00-1002)

Beverly Ferrell & Randall Ferrell, Others V McDonald’s Corporation, Tyco International, Grinnell Fire Protection Company, Others

Would you Like Some Toxic Gasses with your Fries?

Beverly Ferrell and her son Tyler went to McDonald’s in McKinney, Texas expecting a Big Mac and a Happy Meal. But what they got was a gas attack with highly toxic chemicals, when Grinnell’s fire protection system discharged a poisonous cloud of gas into their car. The Ferrell’s sued Grinnell, McDonalds, and others on January 26, 2000 charging that they suffered continuing physical injuries, and had to total out their car because of the chemical residues left by the gasses. What the Ferrell’s discovered was that they were unfortunate enough to arrive at the McDonald’s at the same time that a fire had broken out in the kitchen. The Grinnell fire suppression system activated, but it was improperly aimed and it shot its toxic gasses into the Farrell’s car, instead of onto the fire.

According to court documents, the complaint charges that Grinnell and others were negligent in their manufacture and/or installation of the fire protection system, that an unreasonably dangerous system had been installed, and that they attempted to cover up the truth about the hazards of the chemicals that were shot into the Farrell’s car.

The Farrell’s charged that their physical injuries included lung problems, breathing problems, and skin disorders, headaches, nausea, weakness, sleep disturbances, loss of memory, psychological disorders and other physical and health problems. (Case #CC-00-7354)

Grinnell Corporation V Jose Luis Larraga and Laura Lisa Gomez

Grinnell gets Burned for $455,000

In September 1999, Grinnell abruptly realized that these two individuals had ripped off Grinnell in over $455,000 in falsified fraud expenses and other funds. "Defendants have engaged in a scheme of embezzling and converting Plaintiff’s property," the chagrined Grinnell claimed in their court complaint. FPC hopes that none of these embezzlements harmed any of Grinnell’s customers. (Case #C-4762-99-B)

Grinnell Corporation V Victaulic Company of America

These burst pipes are not our fault, Grinnell Claims

Grinnell Corporation installed a fire protection system at the Alucobond Technologies Company in Indiana. But only six months later, the system failed causing $37,940 in property damages to Alucobond and to a neighboring company. At first look, this seems like any of the dozen other court cases against Grinnell for failed fire systems. According to the lawsuit filed, Grinnell claimed that the cause of the failure was from a defective valve obtained from Victaulic Company, so it was not Grinnell’s fault. However in 1999, the court dismissed Grinnell’s claim with prejudice and each party had to bear its own costs. It doesn’t appear that Grinnell proved the valve company was at fault in this case. (Case #49D01-9609-CP-1300)

Idris Copelin & Javonne Alexander Copelin V Gray Insurance Company,

Others

Here is another case involving Grinnell and its own employees. Idris Copelin was injured while working for Grinnell. She fell through a hole in the floor grating while installing a fire sprinkler system on an oil-drilling rig, according to original lawsuit. The whole matter sank into a quagmire over who was responsible for her injuries and the medical expenses. (Case #536-747)

Grinnell Fire Protection Systems Company V Bravo Builders, Inc.

Grinnell claimed that they were owed $10,382 for unpaid work. According to court documents, Grinnell sued its own customer, Bravo Builders over the disputed money. (Case #531-611)

Grinnell Corporation V Aubry-Hansen, Inc.

Grinnell Backhoe Damaged Electrical Conduits

This case may have started with Grinnell’s usual style of debt collection, a suit against its own contractor Aubry-Hansen over a $55,000 contract. But Aubry-Hansen said wait a second in the court complaint and decided to bring out the problems that the company had with Grinnell. First of all, Grinnell damaged several electrical conduits with a poorly operated backhoe, and Aubry-Hansen was charged a back charge for the equipment. And furthermore, Aubry-Hansen made it clear that there were four cancelled checks for over $59,000 that the company had paid Grinnell for a contract that started off at a cost of only $55,000! In other words according to the court complaint, Aubry-Hansen claimed that they did not own Grinnell anything. (Case #1999-CI-17782)

Grinnell Corporation V Hickman Construction, Inc., Others

This may seem like just another of Grinnell’s countless court suits against a fellow contractor, this time for $43,955. If Grinnell had also filed a lien against Ms. Baird’s Bakery where the work took place, it would have been far from routine to Ms. Baird. A lien against your property can interfere with your ability to obtain financing on your parcel. According to the court documents, Grinnell filed a court suit against Hickman Construction for the amount they felt they were owed. (Case #1999-CI-07423)

The fire protection system at Carlton’s Lodge commercial building in Adrian, Michigan discharged large amounts of water that flooded the offices of this property, causing "disastrous" property damage. The building owner’s insurance company sued Grinnell, who maintained and serviced the defective system, according to the court complaint. 

The complaint charged Grinnell with gross negligence and/or wanton misconduct in their failure to maintain a safe system, and in their failure to provide a separate alarm system, and stated that Grinnell acted with indifference towards the resulting dangers. The suit also charged that Grinnell failed to install and maintain materials that were safe and non-defective.

The suit asked for damages exceeding $10,000. (Case #96-7278-NZ)

In June 1998, Paseo Partners filed a counterclaim against Grinnell, charging that Grinnell and John Lynch had installed thirty-three leaking sprinkler heads at Paseo’s apartment building. Shockingly, Paseo discovered that the sprinkler heads had been glued, not screwed, into the connecting pipes. Because of the leaking sprinkler heads, water damage was extensive, as stated in the original lawsuit:

"...sheetrock had to be removed in order to replace the leaking heads, greatly increasing the repair costs. The project was required to retain another contractor to correct the defective work of Grinnell and/or Lynch. In addition, Lynch and/or Grinnell improperly connected alarms and shutoffs as part of a fire protection system. As a result, during a freeze and pipe break incident at the project, Lynch and/or Grinnell directly contributed to the resulting damage to four units at the project."

Paseo Partners asked for damages from Lynch and Grinnell from their negligence and breach of contract. (Case #CJ-97-4537)

Betty Harper worked at McQuiddy Printing Company in Nashville, Tennessee while Grinnell was installing a sprinkler system at that facility.

According to the lawsuit, Grinnell negligently failed to warn her about the dangerous conditions near the construction site, where materials were scattered on the floor. Harper tripped and permanently injured her knee. She required surgery, so she sued Grinnell for $70,000 in medical costs and lost wages. (Case #98C-1393)

This tragic case began with a fire one evening in 1996 at 89 Petty Drive in Hamilton, Ohio at housing "serviced" by at least two smoke detectors supplied by Grinnell. Both smoke alarms failed to activate. The panicked mother, Jennifer Glover awoke suddenly, choking from the smoke. She was unable to rescue her four-year-old child, Blair Glover, according to her court complaint. Later, Blair was found unconscious at the top of the stairs, beneath the smoke detector. Young Blair was severely injured due to smoke inhalation. He suffered severe brain damage and was permanently disabled. Ms. Glover sued the property owner, the Butler Metropolitan Housing Authority, for product liability because the smoke detectors were defective.

According to the counterclaim, the Butler Metropolitan Housing Authority charged that Grinnell Corporation had primary liability in this tragic case. (Case #CV97-01-0188)

Here is another example of how Grinnell sues its own customer. This time the victim was Enertech International, Inc. and the court records state that the amount was $4,664. (Case #CV97-03-0906)

Grinnell filed a lien for $18,601 against property owned by David L. Dillingham in Butler County, Ohio. Ironically, according to the original lawsuit, Grinnell was later sued because property taxes were due on this property, and the lien gave Grinnell an interest in the parcel. The Money Store also sued Grinnell in this matter, because they sought an interest in the same parcel. (Case #CV96-11-2275)