Recent Results

Summary Judgment Defeated in Scaffold/Labor Law § 240(1) Claim

We represented the owner and general contractor with respect to this construction site accident.   Plaintiff alleged that he fell from a bakers scaffold that lacked proper wheel locks and moved for summary judgment under Labor Law § 240(1).  We successfully defeated the motion, utilizing the deposition testimony of plaintiff’s foreman who testified that he had used the scaffold before and after plaintiff’s accident and that the wheel locks functioned properly.  The court found a question of fact as to whether an adequate safety device had been provided. (Supreme Court, Queens County, February 2010)

Client Found Not to be General Contractor - Granted Summary Judgment Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Complaint

Plaintiff, a plasterer, fell from a scaffold while renovating a building, fracturing his heel requiring surgery.  He brought suit against our client, the alleged general contractor.  The court granted our motion for summary judgment dismissal, holding that a party who signs for work permit, but does not hire subcontractors, perform work or have the authority to control the work, does not qualify as a general contractor under the Labor Law.  The court further held that our client was not negligent, and dismissed the complaint against him. (Supreme Court, Kings County, January 2010)

Trip and Fall Lawsuit Dismissed Against Our Client Before Depositions

We represented a contractor who engages in cutting holes in NYC streets in order for other contractors to perform their work.  Plaintiff commenced a lawsuit against our client, alleging that she fell due to a defect created by our client’s work.  The court determined that we established our client’s entitlement to summary judgment dismissal by submitting a sworn affidavit along with NYC DOT records showing that our client performed no work in the immediate area of the accident.  (Supreme Court, Kings County, January 2010)

Client/Property Owner Granted Summary Judgment in Trip and Fall Case

The plaintiff claimed to have tripped over a cobblestone that lined our client’s parking lot after climbing up a small embankment onto our client’s premises.  The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint, finding that we submitted prima facie evidence that the alleged defective condition was open and obvious, was known to the plaintiff, and was not inherently dangerous.  The court found no duty to warn plaintiff of this open and obvious condition.  The court agreed with our argument and excluded plaintiff’s expert affidavits as speculative and conclusory.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, December 2009)

Summary Judgment Dismissal Granted on Constructive Notice Case

Plaintiff alleged that he slipped and fell on our commercial client’s exterior stairs.  He alleged that our client had left a garbage bag on the porch, which leaked oil and debris overnight.  The court determined that our client had neither actual nor constructive notice of the slippery condition on the steps.  The fact that the non-defective garbage bag was placed on an outside porch, with the possibility that it may be damaged by another force (for example, animals) was found to be insufficient to charge our clients with constructive notice.  (Supreme Court, Kings County, December 2009)

Labor Law § 240(1) Claim Dismissed in Case of Paraplegia

In this high-exposure Labor Law § 240(1) case, a contractor’s employee fell through an unguarded skylight in the school’s roof and was rendered paraplegic.  We argued that the elevated portion of the roof where the accident occurred was not an area where construction was to be performed.  The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint, holding that plaintiff was not entitled to the extraordinary protections of the Labor Law because he was not within the construction area.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, December 2009)

Garage Operator Granted Summary Judgment Dismissal in Trip and Fall Case

Plaintiff tripped on a carpet mat located in a parking garage while entering the garage from an adjoining building.  She brought suit against the owner of the building, the owner of the garage, and our client who was hired to operate the garage.  Summary judgment was granted to our client upon our showing that the building owner had placed and maintained the mat, and that our client/garage operator did not have authority to remove or prevent the placement of the mat. (Supreme Court, Queens County, December 2009)

New York Lawsuit Dismissed Against Out-of-State Defendants for Lack of Jurisdiction

This personal injury lawsuit stemmed from a two-car accident that occurred in Virginia.  We represented the owner of one of the vehicles, a Maryland corporation.  We also represented the driver of the vehicle, a resident of Virginia.  The court granted our motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, as plaintiff could not demonstrate that either of our clients had a connection to New York State that would support jurisdiction.  (Supreme Court, Kings County, November 2009)

Court’s Denial of Summary Judgment to Plaintiff Upheld on Appeal

Plaintiff sued his son for injuries he sustained when he fell from an unsecured ladder while painting a room in his son’s home.  Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on liability, based upon the son’s admission that the ladder slipped when he let it go to adjust a floor covering.  The appellate court upheld the motion court’s determination that defendant’s admission of negligence did not establish plaintiff’s freedom from comparative negligence.  (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 2009)

Negligent Maintenance Case Dismissed Against Commercial Tenants of Building

Defense Verdict in Erie County, NY
The jury found that our client was free from liability in a two-vehicle accident at an intersection.  The plaintiff claimed severe damages, including spinal injuries and complications during a subsequent child-birth, allegedly resulting in birth defects. (Supreme Court, Erie County, November 2009).

Appellate Division, First Department Upholds Award of Summary Judgment in Slip and Fall
In November, 2007, our client, a hotel operator, was granted summary judgment dismissal of hotel patron’s slip and fall/products liability action involving an allegedly defective bathmat placed on a ceramic tile floor.  Plaintiff appealed.  The Appellate Division, First Department, upheld the motion court’s decision.  (Appellate Division, First Department, May 2009).

Defense Verdict in Tractor Trailer Sideswipe Accident
Plaintiff alleged that our client, a tractor trailer driver, sideswiped his vehicle while making a wide turn.  The jury determined that our client was not negligent and that plaintiff was 100% at fault for this accident.  Plaintiff, who underwent a cervical fusion and a knee arthroscopy as a result of the incident, maintained a $2.3 million settlement demand during trial.   (Supreme Court, Queens County, April 2009). 

Motion Practice in Declaratory Judgment Action Results in Finding by Court that Co-Defendant was Actively Negligent
In this declaratory judgment action, we represented an insurance company that issued a commercial liability policy to a framing contractor.  An employee of the framing contractor fell through an unguarded stairwell opening.  Through a motion for partial summary judgment, we obtained a declaration from the court that the safety railing protecting the stairwell opening had been removed by another contractor, thus rendering that contractor actively negligent.  As a result, that contractor’s insurance policy will provide primary coverage for this accident.  (Supreme Court, Orange County, April, 2009)

Labor Law § 200, 241(6) and Common Law Negligence Claims Dismissed
Trial Court dismissed causes of action sounding in Labor Law § 200, 241(6) and common law negligence asserted by plaintiff, a retired police officer, who inserted himself into the turning barrel of a cement truck to test the cement.  Plaintiff claimed that the cement truck’s interior slump gauge was broken, thus requiring him to test the cement in this manner.  Plaintiff slipped when he attempted back out of the moving barrel. The court found that our clients did not violate an Industrial Code provision or direct, supervise or control plaintiff’s work.  The Court also denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment under Labor Law § 240(1), finding that a triable issue of fact exists as to whether plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his own accident. (Supreme Court, Queens County, April, 2009)

Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss Granted
Plaintiff, a former municipal worker, sued the municipality for lost pension and health benefits. Plaintiff claimed that his decision to leave his employment was based upon fraudulent information provided by his employer. The Court found: 1.) that plaintiff did not sustain his burden of proving that the alleged fraud could not have been discovered prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations; and 2.) that plaintiff failed to timely serve his complaint.  (Supreme Court, March 2009)

Teenaged Plaintiff’s Head-Injury Case Dismissed Under Doctrine of Primary Assumption of Risk
While playing in a basketball league, plaintiff slipped and fell on water that had leaked from an overhead air conditioning unit.  All parties agreed that there was a recurring leaking condition long before plaintiff’s accident.  The court granted our motion for summary judgment, holding that plaintiff’s actual knowledge of the recurring problem invoked the primary assumption of risk doctrine.  (Supreme Court, Orange County, March 2009)

Claim Against Municipal Defendant Dismissed Based Upon Lack of Specificity in Plaintiff’s Notice of Claim
In this trip and fall case, claimant filed a Notice of Claim alleging that he tripped and fell at a boat ramp at a park owned by our client, a municipality.  When plaintiff put the claim into suit, we filed a pre-answer motion to dismiss plaintiff’s action for filing a defective Notice of Claim.  We argued that the lack of specificity in the Notice of Claim precluded the municipality from conducting an appropriate investigation.  The motion court agreed, and dismissed plaintiff’s complaint.  By filing a pre-Answer motion, we resolved this case quickly and with minimal legal costs to our client.  (Supreme Court, February 2009). 

Plaintiff Held to Binding Arbitration Agreement
We successfully moved to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint where plaintiff attempted to renege on an agreement to submit his claim to binding arbitration.  The court agreed with our position that all parties had reached a meeting of the minds as to the basic terms of the arbitration agreement.  The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint and issued an Order compelling plaintiff to proceed with the arbitration.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, February 2009)

Client Found Free of Active Negligence, Opening the Door for Successful Common Law Indemnification Claims Against Subcontractor
Plaintiff, a masonry laborer, sustained crush injuries to two fingers requiring several surgeries when he and a cart filled with stones he was pushing both fell over.  Plaintiff claimed that he tripped over a carpet remnant left by our client’s subcontractor.  Our client, a carpet sales company was found by the Court to be free of negligence as a matter of law.  The motion practice successfully established the first prong of the common law indemnification claim our client is pursuing against its subcontractor/carpet installation company. (Supreme Court, New York County, February, 2009)

Slip and Fall Dismissed
Summary judgment granted in favor of client/owner of a gravel-surfaced parking lot.  Plaintiff slipped on the gravel while descending from a bus and sustained severe injuries requiring multiple surgeries. In granting our dismissal motion, the court held that the gravel was not a significant structural or design defect.  The court further held that our client did not violate any safety provisions and agreed that plaintiff’s expert should be disregarded as he did not examine the property until two years after the accident.  (Supreme Court, Bronx County, February 2009)

Threshold Motion Granted
Summary Judgment granted in favor of clients, owner and operator of rental vehicle, where medical evidence established that plaintiff did not sustain a “serious injury” pursuant to New York Insurance Law.  The court also dismissed plaintiff’s complaint against our client, owner of the rental vehicle, pursuant to the Graves Amendment.  (Supreme Court, Queens County, February 2009)

Pre-Deposition Motion for Summary Judgment Granted
Summary judgment granted to defendant-contractor who performed water main work on street where plaintiff alleged a road defect caused his motorcycle accident.  The court held that our client made a prima facie showing that its work did not extend to the area where plaintiff’s accident occurred and that plaintiff’s speculation to the contrary was insufficient.  (Supreme Court, New York County, February 2009). 

Defense Verdict
Defense verdict granted to client/tractor-trailer operator whose tractor collided with the left side of another vehicle.  The plaintiff was a passenger in the other vehicle and alleged severe injuries resulting in spinal surgery.  It was alleged that our client attempted an improper lane change. The jury was unanimous in its verdict that our client was not negligent. (Supreme Court, Rockland County, January 2009)

Labor Law case Dismissed
The plaintiff sustained severe injuries when he fell from a ladder at our client’s building under construction.  Plaintiff asserted claims under Labor Law §§ 240(1), 241(6), 200 and for common-law negligence.  In our motion for summary judgment, we argued that plaintiff’s height-related work was completed prior to the accident; plaintiff was not engaged in construction at the time of the accident; and our client had no notice of the allegedly defective ladder that plaintiff retrieved from a junk pile.  The court agreed and dismissed plaintiff’s complaint as a matter of law.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, January 2009)

Dismissal Granted on Emergency Doctrine
Summary judgment granted in favor of client involved in a multi-vehicle accident wherein another vehicle was thrust in front of our client just prior to the collision.  The court agreed with our argument that our client was not negligent, but was instead faced with a sudden, emergency situation and acted reasonably. (Supreme Court, Queens County, December 2008)

Million Dollar lost earnings claim withdrawn after Immigration inquiry
Plaintiff, an illegal alien, commenced a personal injury action against our client as a result of a construction-related accident.  Plaintiff alleged severe injuries in addition to a multi-million dollar lost earnings claim.  The lost earnings claim was withdrawn after our extensive inquiry into plaintiff’s immigration status revealed, among other things, that plaintiff was facing possible deportation.  (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, December 2008)

Coverage Issue Resolved in Client’s Favor
Petitioners argued that tractor involved in accident was insured by our client.  Petitioners claimed that although the tractor was deleted from the commercial trucking policy, coverage existed pursuant to a mandatory MCS-90 endorsement required of interstate truckers.  We successfully argued that the Federal Regulations do not obligate insurance companies to provide the endorsement without a request absent a special relationship between the agent and the customer.  (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, August 2008)

Threshold Motion Granted
Plaintiff submitted sworn Affirmations of four physicians in opposition to motion for summary judgment pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102(d).  The Court agreed with our argument that two of the physician’s Affirmations were inadmissible and found that the remainder of plaintiff’s opposition papers was insufficient to establish a serious, permanent injury. (Supreme Court, Nassau County, August 2008)

Labor Law Case Dismissed
Plaintiff slipped on debris on a job site and cut through his kneecap with a circular saw.   Plaintiff alleged that our client, the property owner, violated Labor Law § 241(6) by not providing a safe place, such as a work bench, for plaintiff to work.  The court held that the defendants did not violate any Industrial Code provision and, accordingly, dismissed plaintiff’s complaint.  (Supreme Court, Queens County, July 2008)

Pipe Installer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Granted
Motion for summary judgment dismissal granted to our client, a pipe installer, where plaintiff laborer was scalded by pipe and fell from scissor lift.  The court agreed that our client was not negligent or in violation of New York’s Labor Law as a matter of law.   (Supreme Court, New York County, July 2008)

Summary Judgment Dismissal of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Claim Affirmed
Plaintiff claimed serious injuries as a result of a carbon monoxide leaking from hot water boiler in the basement of our client’s commercial premises.  We argued that the boiler was the tenant’s responsibility and, in any event, our client had no notice of any problems with the boiler.  The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the order of the trial court dismissing the case, agreeing that our client was free from negligence as a matter of law. (Appellate Division, Second Department, June 2008)

Motion to Dismiss Labor Law Claims Granted
Plaintiff, a construction worker, fell from an extension ladder while installing a garage door at our client’s parking garage.  In denying plaintiff’s motion for liability under Labor Law § 240(1), the court agreed with our argument that questions of fact existed as to whether plaintiff’s own negligence was the sole proximate cause of his injuries. The court granted our cross-motion to dismiss the balance of plaintiff’s Labor Law and common law negligence claims.  (Supreme Court, Bronx County, June 2008)

Summary Judgment Granted in Slip and Fall on Ice
Salon customer slipped and fell on ice on our client’s property.  Plaintiff submitted an Affidavit from a former salon employee stating that the ice existed for five days prior to the accident.  The court agreed that the Affidavit could not be considered because plaintiff’s counsel had failed to provide the witness’s last known address to defense counsel.  As a result, plaintiff could not establish that defendant had notice of the icy condition and her complaint was dismissed.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, June 2008)

Declaratory Judgment Action Dismissed
 In an action for insurance coverage, our motion to dismiss in lieu of an answer was granted on behalf of our client/insurance company.  The court agreed that the plaintiff did not have standing to commence the action. (Supreme Court, Queens County, New York, June 2008)

Commercial Client Represented in Contract involving U.S. Open
Our client contracted with the United States Tennis Association to sell and service the mobile modular trailer units that will comprise the Broadcast Village at the 2008 United States Open in Flushing, New York.  The Broadcast Village is the onsite location from which journalists and media from across the globe assemble to cover the event.  We negotiated with the USTA and counseled our client with respect to this multimillion dollar deal.   (May 2008)

Summary Judgment Granted in Trip and Fall at Beach
Plaintiff tripped and fell over concrete buried in the sand at a local beach club. Our client, a contractor who constructed concrete sidewalks at the club, adamantly denied that it dumped concrete in the sand. The court granted our motion for summary judgment dismissal and held that our client established, prima facie, that it did not create the condition. (Supreme Court, Nassau County, May 2008)

Settlement Agreement Upheld as Binding; Lawsuit Dismissed
Our motion to enforce settlement was granted where plaintiff’s former counsel executed a settlement agreement before the action was commenced.  The court agreed that plaintiff’s former counsel, having appeared in court and at mediation, had authority to bind plaintiff to the agreement despite plaintiff’s claims to the contrary. (Supreme Court, Queens County, May 2008)

Construction Accident Leading to Total Disability Defended at Trial
Plaintiff tripped and fell at a construction site, leading to his total disability.  The case settled for a nominal figure after the jury found plaintiff 85% responsible for his own accident.  (Supreme Court, Nassau County, April 2008)

Defense Verdict, twice; Affirmed on Appeal
At first trial, jury found that negligence of client with stop sign was not a substantial factor in causing the accident.  Plaintiff was granted a second trial that resulted in a jury verdict that our client was not negligent.  The verdict was affirmed on appeal (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, April 2007; Appellate Division, Second Department, April 2008)

Insured’s First-Party Action Against Insurance Company Dismissed
Insured sued our client/insurance company for difference between amount charged by body shop for repairs to her vehicle and amount paid by insurance company.  Following trial, the insured’s suit was dismissed as a result of her failure to comply with UCC provisions requiring endorser of check to explicitly reserve right to seek additional sums from check issuer.  (District Court, Suffolk County, March 2008)

Electrician’s Labor Law Claims Dismissed
Electrician fell from an eight-foot A-frame ladder while removing an exterior sign from our client’s premises.  The court agreed that plaintiff was engaged in routine maintenance, and not construction or alteration of a structure, as defined by the Labor Law.  Accordingly, the court dismissed all claims against our client. (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, February 2008)

Appeal Granted; Case Dismissed against Handrail Installer
Appellate Court reversed trial court’s decision and dismissed action against our client contractor as a matter of law.  Our client, the installer of a handrail, faced significant exposure in this personal injury action.  The Appellate Court, however, agreed with our position that certain repairs by the building’s maintenance staff constituted intervening, superseding acts breaking any causal connection between our client’s alleged conduct and the plaintiff’s injuries.  (Appellate Division, First Department, January 2008)

Summary Judgment on Liability Granted in Case Involving Seven Car Pileup
Plaintiffs in the sixth vehicle claimed that our client/driver caused the accident by rear-ending the first vehicle. We elicited deposition testimony from the operator of the first vehicle that she was lost, scared, and was on her way home from a night out in Manhattan. The court agreed with our arguments that our client was not negligent and, in any event, that the chain of causation between our client’s actions and the injuries sustained by the passengers in the sixth vehicle was twice broken by vehicles three and five who were able to stop safely without incident. (NJ Superior Court, Union County December 2007)

Summary Judgment Granted in Slip and Fall on Bathmat Alleged to be Defective
Our client, a hotel operator, was granted summary judgment dismissal of hotel patron’s slip and fall/products liability action involving an allegedly defective bathmat placed on a ceramic tile floor. (Supreme Court, New York County, November 2007)

Summary Judgment “Threshold” Motion Granted
Plaintiff claimed serious neck and shoulder injuries as a result of a motor vehicle accident with our client.  We moved for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff did not sustain “serious injury” as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d).  Although plaintiff submitted an affirmation from his treating physician, he could not overcome an unexplained 28-month gap in treatment.  Motion granted; Cased dismissed.  (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, October 2007)  

Defense Verdict; Affirmed on Appeal
Building owner granted defense verdict at trial in multi-million dollar personal injury claim proved to be staged. (Supreme Court, Queens County, December 2005; Appellate Division, Second Department, October 2007)

Contractual Indemnification Granted in Labor Law Case
Client/owner of property where construction accident occurred was granted summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification against plaintiff’s employer.  The court agreed that our client was free from negligence, that the accident occurred in the course of plaintiff’s work, and that the indemnification provision was triggered as a matter of law. (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, June 2007)

Negligent Property Design Case Dismissed
In pedestrian knockdown case, our client, a resort, was granted summary judgment dismissal of a third-party action that alleged defective design/layout of the parking lot and walkways.  (Supreme Court, Kings County, April 2007)

Defense Verdict in Motor Vehicle Case
Defense verdict granted to clients, car rental company and renter/driver. The plaintiff was a passenger in the co-defendant’s minimally-insured vehicle and sustained severe injuries. Our clients faced significant exposure if found just 1% at fault.  (Supreme Court, Queens County, April 2007)

Defense Verdict in Labor Law Case
Defense verdict granted to client/contractor in a trip and fall construction accident involving claims of negligence and violations of New York’s Labor Law.  We proved that our client was not responsible for the dangerous condition at the jobsite. (Supreme Court, Queens County, February 2007)

Defense Verdict
Defense verdict granted to client in high-exposure motor vehicle case involving severe permanent injuries and a question as to which driver had the right of way.  (Supreme Court, Suffolk County, March 2006)

Contact us today about your legal matter.