Our Results

Cascone & Kluepfel, LLP is proud of our track record of success in all areas of liability defense. Select a categoy below to view some of our results.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

All Claims Dismissed against Client Elevator Contractor in a Wrongful Death Action


In a wrongful death action alleging violations of Labor Law, §240(1), §241(6) and §200/Common Law negligence, the plaintiff, an elevator mechanic, was killed when a brick struck him from above in the courtyard of the building. The building was undergoing two separate construction projects at the time: one consisting of exterior façade work; with the second being an elevator restoration project.

Our client, hired by the general contractor to perform the elevator restoration work, subcontracted with plaintiff’s employer to perform certain work. The accident, resulting in plaintiff’s death, occurred while he was disposing of debris created by his work in the rear courtyard of the building, with no overhead protection, he was struck by a brick.

Our client was initially brought in as a third-party defendant by the property owner and general contractor who asserted claims against our client for contractual and common-law indemnification. Plaintiff then asserted direct claims against our client for negligence and violation of the Labor Law.

In our dispositive motion, we sought the dismissal of all claims against our client on the grounds that: 1) our client did not have direction and control over the injury-producing work and was, thus, not subject to liability under the Labor Law; 2) our client was not negligent in that it did not owe a duty to instruct plaintiff where to dispose of debris or direct him not to enter the outside courtyard and; 3) the contractual indemnification clause was triggered, as the accident was not “caused by” our client’s work but rather caused by the brick façade work. The court agreed with our arguments and dismissed all claims against our client as a matter of law.

Plaintiff was otherwise granted liability against the other defendants under Labor Law §240.

(New York County; January 2024)

Plaintiff’s Medical Award Reduced to Zero in Post-Trial Motion in alleged Brain Injury Case


In this “damages-only” trial in Kings County Supreme Court, a cyclist was struck by our client’s driver’s side door when he opened it into the bike lane, allegedly resulting in severe injuries to plaintiff’s head, shoulder, leg, and hand, including traumatic brain injury (TBI) and cognitive deficits.

The jury agreed with our arguments at trial, and found that plaintiff suffered, at most, a minor non-permanent injury. Despite asking for millions, the jury awarded plaintiff just $20,000 for pain and suffering; $0 for future pain and suffering; and $6,500 for one year of future medical costs.

Post-trial, plaintiff’s counsel moved to set aside the verdict as being too low. We opposed, arguing the award for pain and suffering was more than fair and should remain intact, and cross-moved to reduce the award for future medical expenses to zero, arguing it was against the weight of the evidence. Plaintiff’s motion was denied, and our motion was granted. Plaintiff’s award for future medical expenses was reduced to zero.

(Supreme Court, Kings County, May 2023)

Another Defense Verdict on Causation in the Bronx for CK Law!


We obtained a defense verdict following a 10 -day trial in the Bronx in a premises liability case. Our client operated a grocery store in the Parkchester section of the Bronx. Plaintiff, a customer, tripped and fell over a weather mat. The incident was caught on video. Though plaintiff prevailed on the issue of liability, with the jury finding our client negligent, we prevailed on our causation defenses. Plaintiff, 55 at the time, claims to have sustained medial meniscal tears that required arthroscopic surgery. Plaintiff’s surgeon testified that would need a total right knee replacement as a result. Through cross-examination of plaintiff and her doctors and surgeon, the post-accident films, and expert testimony from a Radiologist, we showed that plaintiff’s knee condition was -pre-existing and not caused by the accident. The jury agreed and found the fall was not the proximate cause of plaintiff’s knee injury. Defense Verdict!

(Supreme Court, Bronx County, September 2023)

Owner and General Contractor Granted Dismissal on Labor Law §240(1) Claim


Plaintiff, a demolition worker, claimed serious back injuries resulting in surgery as a result of a fall while working on a large ramp with heavy debris containers. Plaintiff alleged violations of Labor Law §240(1) and §200 against our client Through use of co-worker testimony and plaintiff’s statements at the scene, we established in our dispositive motion that the owner and general contractor were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The Court confirmed that the Scaffold Law was not violated on account of no real evidence of a significant elevation accident, and confirmed that the site safety law (section 200) was not violated on account of the fact that there no evidence of a dangerous condition inherent in the property itself, and on account of evidence showing our clients exercised nothing more than general supervisory authority over the injury-producing work. Motion Granted!

(Supreme Court, Queens County, August 2023)

Dismissal of Labor Law Claims Upheld on Appeal.


The Appellate Division, Second Department upheld the lower Court’s dismissal of Labor Law §240(1), §241(6), and §200 claims against our client. Plaintiff was hit by a falling pipe. Our office represented an entity that was offered the General Contractor position, filed the permit as the General Contractor, but was never granted the job. We prevailed on motion arguing that our client never exercised the requisite supervision and control required to trigger liability under the statutes. Plaintiff argued that our witness was lying and alleged that one of our employees, who happened to work for a subcontractor on the job, proved this. The Court affirmed the dismissal and found that plaintiff’s assertion that our witness was lying was insufficient to raise an issue of fact.

(Appellate Division, Second Department, August 2023)

Defense Verdict on Causation for David Kluepfel in Bronx County


Plaintiff (48) claimed to have sustained a permanent traumatic brain injury and cervical herniations that resulted in cervical laminectomy and fusion surgery when a ceiling collapsed in her bathroom. We represented the defendant, Bronx building owner, and argued that the case was a total exaggeration – from the description of the incident to the claimed injuries, none of which were sustained in the incident. Through aggressive cross-examination of plaintiff’s doctors and witnesses and through the testimony we attacked causation. We established that plaintiff did not sustain trauma to her head, neck, or back, and that there was no objective evidence of any head or brain injury whatsoever. Plaintiff’s claimed neck and back injuries were the result of pre-existing, degenerative conditions throughout her spine.

In the end, while the jury found our client was negligent, it agreed that our client's negligence was not a cause of plaintiff's claimed injuries. The Bronx jury returned a defense verdict on causation!

(Supreme Court, Bronx County; May 2023)

Counterclaims Dismissed against Client Driver via Summary Judgment Motion


Plaintiff and his wife were seriously injured in a significant two-car accident, when an SUV made a left tun front of their vehicle. We represented plaintiff on the counterclaims asserted by defendant, as the driver of the host vehicle. His wife’s injuries consisted of multiple fractured ribs, broken teeth, and numerous cervical and lumbar herniations. On dispositive motion seeking to dismiss the counterclaims, we successfully argued that the SUV’s left turn was sudden and without warning, leaving our client with no time to react. This was supported by the subpoenaed testimony of an independent non-party witness, who we located via an investigator, stating that the driver of the offending SUV was unable to view oncoming traffic prior to attempting a left-hand turn into an parking lot. Our motion was further supported by a certified police report and strong testimony from our client.

The Court found that , we successfully satisfied our burden on motion that our client was not negligent, and defendant failed to raise a trial issue of fact. Motion granted! All counterclaims against our client were dismissed!

(Suffolk County, Supreme Court, March 2023)

Defense Verdict in Premises Case


Following trial in Supreme Court, Queens County, Richard Calabrese obtained a defense verdict on a premises case. Our client is a parking garage operator located in Jackson Heights, Queens. Plaintiff testified that upon returning to the parking lot to retrieve his vehicle, the lot and sliding gate was closed, the lights shut, and the parking attended gone. Plaintiff then attempted to open the sliding gate himself when it fell onto him, crushing him and fracturing his leg and injuring his shoulder. At trial, we produced employment records, the parking garage owner, and the parking lot attendant working that evening who testified no such incident transpired, nor did defendants have any notice of any defect with the gate. Following deliberations the jury found that plaintiff did not have an accident involving the gate at our client’s property. Defense Verdict! (Supreme Court, Queens County, March 2023)

Property Owner Granted Summary Judgement


In trip and fall case occurring on a walkway in our client’s parking lot, we prevailed on our motion for summary judgment dismissing all claims and cross-claims against the property owner. Through testimony and documentary records we established that our client was an out-of-possession landlord; that our client’s one time repair to the walkway several years prior was not a course of conduct counter to lease terms with tenant in possession (co-defendant). The Court agreed we met out prima facia burden. Plaintiff failed to raise a trial issue of fact as to the landlord’s obligation. Case dismissed against property owner!

(Suffolk County, Supreme Court, January 2023)

224 results found. Viewing page 1 of 25. Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  . . . 21 22 23 24 25   Next