Ben Crane

Saturday, October 30th, 2021 // From 1:30pm to 5:00pm

Subject: Wrongful Death

3 hr Case Analysis


Oak Park personal injury lawyer Benjamin A. Crane is a principal in the law firm of Coplan & Crane where he exclusively represents individuals and families victimized by wrongful conduct in the Chicago area and throughout Illinois and the Midwest.  Ben concentrates his practice in plaintiff’s personal injury law including cases arising under the FELA, from medical malpractice, workplace injuries, transportation (automobile, truck, and railroad) negligence, premises liability, and wrongful death litigation.

After earning his Bachelor of Arts degree from St. Norbert College (DePere, Wisconsin) in 1997, Ben attended The John Marshall Law School (Chicago, Illinois) and was awarded a Juris Doctor in 2000.  During law school, Ben clerked for the Presiding Judge of the Law Division, the Honorable Judith Cohen, and at a large Chicago law firm.  Upon receiving his license to practice law, Ben went to work for a large defense firm, representing doctors and hospitals in medical malpractice cases and insurance companies in a variety of personal injury matters.

Case Analysis Details

"Pivot v. Blackhorse Carriers"

Voir Dire, Opening Statement, Closing Argument, & Rebuttal

In the early morning hours of March 23, 2013, Jenny Pivot (64) was driving to the airport to pick up her grandson at the airport when she came upon a crash on a rural highway. This initial crash was caused by a driver who admitted she was intoxicated. Multiple vehicles were stopped around the scene of the crash, and Jenny stopped her car in the right-hand lane. Moments later, a Black Horse Carriers tractor-trailer crashed into the back of her car, killing her instantly.

Follow the ups and downs of three young lawyers as they deal with the loss of their founding partner on the eve of their biggest trial. Hear about turning points in securing a hi-lo agreement minutes ahead of a record-setting $15 million verdict. Watch as they reframe a defense argument that could have sunk the case, leading to a finding of 99% fault against the trucking company, 1% against the drunk driver, and 0% against the decedent.