Our Successes

Ulster County Court Grants MSD Motion to Dismiss Auto Accident Case

Judge Christopher Cahill granted Joni Linker’s Motion for Summary Judgment, agreeing first that she had made a prima facie case that plaintiff had not, in fact, suffered a serious injury as reflected by the conclusions of the independent examining physicians, a careful review of the plaintiff’s emergency room records, and even her deposition testimony, and then agreeing that the narrative medical reports plaintiff submitted in rebuttal with contrary conclusions were unsupported by the record. Beaulieu v. Jones, et ano.

May 2009

Deli's Defect Ruled De Minumus & Bronx Case Dismissed

The Bronx Supreme Court granted Joni Linker's Motion for Summary Judgment in a lawsuit brought for an alleged trip and fall on the sidewalk in front of our client's Deli. Plaintiff alleged that she tripped on a paved over utility cover when her sneaker was caught due to a depression in the pavement and broke her ankle. The Court agreed that Ms. Linker had met the burden of proving the "de minimus" nature of the defect through the submission of an expert affidavit accompanied by photographs and measurements. Ramirez v. Water Holdings, LLC

April 2009

A Bronx Plaintiff's Case Doesn't Hold Water

Salvatore DeSantis' Motion for Summary Judgment was granted in this slip and fall case by Bronx Supreme Court Judge Betty Owen Stinson, who agreed with Mr. DeSantis that the "mere fact that outside walking surfaces can become wet during a rainfall does not provide actual or constructive notice of a hazardous condition for which the building owner or management can be held responsible". Sean McGuire v. 3901 Independence Owners, Inc., et al.

March 2009

Labor Law Case Dismissed on Appeal

Appellate counsel Marcy Sonneborn appealed the denial of our Motion to Dismiss plaintiff's Labor Law case, brought for injuries plaintiff suffered in a construction accident. The Appellate Division, Second Department, granted the appeal, finding that the delay in the plaintiff's filing of a Notice of Claim against our client, an industrial development agency, was prejudicial. In the Matter of Rickey Grant v. Nassau County Industrial Development Agency.

March 2009

Needle Case Doesn't Stick

Two days into his stay at our client's Bed & Breakfast Inn, plaintiff claims he awoke in the middle of the night, put his feet on a rug near his bed and sustained a needle stick to his right foot. He pulled it out and his wife indicated there was some bleeding as a result. He and his wife sued our client for negligence, the infliction of emotional distress, as well as the loss of consortium as he feared he might have contracted the AIDS virus. Blood tests subsequently proved to be negative for HIV. In a 9-page decision, the New York County Civil Judge granted Salvatore DeSantis' Motion for Summary Judgment. Mr. DeSantis had provided the Court with an Affidavit from Dr. Judith Axelrod, an expert in the field of infectious diseases, who found that the risk of transmission from a needle stick from an unknown source is considered to be negligible and would be substantially less than the known risk of 0.32% when a person is stuck with a needle used in an HIV positive person. The Court ruled that our client had no notice of any needle fragment in the room's carpet and did not engage in any conduct that would constitute the infliction of emotional distress. Belford v. Gracie Inn, et ano.

February 2009

Alice Spitz Becomes President of Harmonie

Alice Spitz begins the Presidency of the national Harmonie Group for a two year term. The Harmonie Group is an affiliation of independent law firms providing a broad spectrum of high quality legal services to corporations, insurance carriers, and third party claim administrators across North America. It is an invitation only organization which extends membership invitations only to experienced, highly qualified law firms that have earned the respect of their peers, the courts and their clients in negotiation, litigation, and trial advocacy. You can access the Harmonie Group's law firm directory here.

January 2009

The entire MSD family wishes you and yours a happy and safe holiday season. May you have a New Year filled with Good Health, Peace, Joy and Prosperity! Since charity gifts represent the true holiday spirit, MSD imitated Oprah's Big Give and turned $800 into almost $4,000 for deserving charities. Click here to read about MSD's Big Give.

December 2008

Defense Verdict for Church in Slip and Fall Case

Plaintiff, recovering from recent hip surgery, claimed she slipped and fell on a large puddle of water during services in defendant's sanctuary. The superintendent, who maintained the premises at the time of the incident, testified that water tracked into the sanctuary on a regular basis when it rained and snowed, and that the area should have been carpeted. Representatives from the Church claimed it had no notice of any dangerous or defective condition and thus no opportunity to rectify it. Following the accident, plaintiff underwent surgery to her right shoulder and right knee, and her treating orthopedic surgeon testified she will also need a hip replacement because of this accident. The jury unanimously found that MSD's client, Marble Collegiate Church, was not negligent. Lawrence Getzler obtained a defense verdict in this New York County case, Wiebusch v Bethany Memorial Reform Church and Marble Collegiate Church.

November 2008

Toxic Mold Case Dismissed by Court of Appeals

Salvatore J. DeSantis and appellate counsel Marcy Sonneborn were successful in having the Court of Appeals affirm the dismissal of a Complaint against a Manhattan landlord, in Litwack v. Plaza Realty. This is the first time New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, has heard a toxic mold case, and the decision was an overwhelming victory for property owners. The plaintiff argued that the landlord was responsible for a hazardous toxic mold condition in her luxury apartment. She had complained for many years about leaking air conditioners, and had recently complained about a brown spot on her dining room wall. In addition, it is undisputed that once she had her apartment tested, it had dangerously high levels of mold. However, plaintiff vacated the apartment before she notified her landlord about the testing. The Supreme Court dismissed the case against the MSD client because plaintiff hadn't given her landlord sufficient notice of a mold condition. The Appellate Division affirmed. The Court of Appeals heard the case because there is currently no standard in New York for establishing a property owner's liability for a toxic mold condition. MSD was successful in arguing that a single minor brown spot on the wall and leaking air conditions is not enough to put a landlord on notice that mold can develop in the future. MSD also argued that the medical and scientific community does not recognize inhaling airborne mold as a cause of illness. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, but did not set a standard for future cases and did not discuss the medical issues.

October 2008

Premises Negligence Claim Dismissed Against Landlord

The Kings County Supreme Court granted Joni Linker's Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that plaintiff had not sustained his burden of proof of actual or constructive notice of an alleged defective condition in the hallway of defendant's residential apartment building. The Motion was granted on a showing of prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by proving that the alleged condition did not exist for a sufficient length of time to put the defendant on notice. Costello v. Kadar, et al.

September 2008

Defense Verdict for Church in Employment Discrimination Case

The Seventh Day Adventist Church's fundamental beliefs instruct that sexual relations are a privilege to be enjoyed solely within marriage. The plaintiff, a 5th Grade teacher at the Linden Elementary School of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, although unmarried, became pregnant. The school thereafter discharged her for violating its tenets and engaging in premarital sex. When she began her teaching career at the Seventh Day Adventist School, the plaintiff, a life long Seventh Day Adventist, agreed that she would abide by all the fundamental teachings of the church and be a role model for the students. Her suit for employment discrimination claimed that she was fired because she was pregnant. At trial, Ross Weaver of MSD presented evidence demonstrating that the school's employment decisions were protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution and could not properly be the subject of an action under Federal or State employment discrimination laws. Consequently, at the conclusion of the jury trial in U.S. District Court, Judge Irizarry granted Ross Weaver's motion for a directed verdict for the Church, dismissing the case, agreeing that because of the religious nature of the plaintiff's duties, the ministerial exception applied, and that plaintiff had not been discharged as a result of discrimination but as a result of her failure to abide by the precepts of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Redhead v. Conference of Seventh Day Adventists

August 2008

Double Win for Friendly Baptist Church

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed summary judgment for MSD's client, the Friendly Baptist Church. The lower court had granted Julie Molod's motion, dismissing the case of Ralph Ronda, a police officer who, while riding on his police scooter, was hit in the rear of the scooter by the driver of the Church's bus. As a result of the injuries sustained, the officer underwent surgery to his left shoulder and left knee. He was granted Accident Disability Retirement by the Medical Board Police Pension Fund. Marcy Sonneborn, appellate counsel for MSD, defended the appeal, demonstrating to the Appellate Court that the lower court was correct that plaintiff's injuries did not meet the "threshold" under New York's No-Fault Law. The Court was overwhelmingly persuaded by the numerous line of duty injury reports which preceded the accident when affirming dismissal of the complaint. Ronda v. Friendly Baptist Church

July 2008

Defense Verdict in Food Poisoning Case

MSD's Ross Weaver successfully defended the Third Avenue Frontier Restaurant against a plaintiff's claim that he contracted a salmonella infection within hours after eating in their restaurant. Plaintiff, a practicing dentist, claimed his infection and complications forced him to give up dentistry. MSD's presentation of expert evidence proved to the jury that based upon the unique characteristics of salmonella, the infection did not come from the restaurant. Josilevich v. Third Avenue Frontier Restaurant

June 2008

Defense Verdict for Church

Despite plaintiff’s spinal fusion and arthroscopic surgery from a slip and fall accident while playing basketball, the jury found that MSD’s client, Arverne Church of God, was not liable. Lawrence Getzler obtained a defense verdict in this Queens County case when the jury unanimously found that the defendant Church was not negligent despite claims that water was leaking from a defective roof for months prior to the accident. Representatives from the Church and an independent witness claimed there was no water on the floor where plaintiff fell. Clarke v. Arverne Church of God

May 2008

Restrained Verdict Won in Dog Bite Case Where Dog Wasn't Restrained

MSD Partner Salvatore J. DeSantis received a restrained verdict in a dog bite case in New York County. The jury found our client, the building owner, 20 percent negligent where the subject dog had bitten two people in the building previously in minor incidents. The plaintiff had been talking to the building’s doorman in the lobby when the dog attacked plaintiff, biting her lip, and knocking her to the floor. The dog owner, who was also found 20 percent negligent, testified that plaintiff had ignored warnings not to pet the dog. Plaintiff had 25 stitches to her lip and needs plastic surgery to correct the resulting scar. The defendants successfully demonstrated that the plaintiff was negligent and that she was overreaching on damages when her lawyer claimed during his opening that her face was bitten off. Plaintiff was found 60 percent negligent and the jury’s total award was $43,500. Moreno v. David Frankel Realty, et ano.

May 2008

MSD Win in Wrongful Death Case Upheld on Appeal

A 22 year old suffered a heart attack and died while playing basketball in his employer's evening league at MSD's client's facility Basketball City New York, LLC. His estate claimed that Basketball City New York was negligent in failing to maintain emergency resuscitation equipment and staff trained in its use. MSD’s Marcy Sonneborn successfully argued on appeal that the lower court was correct in dismissing the lawsuit because plaintiff had assumed the risk of playing sports, the basketball facility didn't cause the decedent plaintiff to suffer a heart attack; and because the law did not then require such a facility to have CPR equipment. Colon, as Administratrix of Hernandez Estate v. Basketball City New York, LLC.

April 2008

Slip & Fall Case Dismissed Against Church

Queens County Judge David Elliot granted Salvatore J. DeSantis' Motion for Summary Judgment, dismissing this case against the Church because MSD successfully proved that plaintiff did not know what caused her to fall. Salvatore DeSantis also successfully argued that the opinion of plaintiff’s expert, who never examined the Church’s gymnasium floor, but still stated that floors of such a type are dangerous to persons wearing leather-soled shoes, was unsupported by evidentiary fact and was conclusory. Finally, Judge Elliott was persuaded by Salvatore DeSantis’ argument that the three witness affidavits submitted by plaintiff were from people who had not, in fact, observed wet spots in the area of plaintiff’s fall. Drummings v. Allen A.M.E. Church

April 2008

Arbitrator of Fee Disputes

We are pleased to announce that Frederick M. Molod, already serving as a Mediator in New York’s Federal Court with a noteworthy success rate at achieving settlements, has now also been appointed Arbitrator in the 10th Judicial District’s Fee Dispute Resolution program. This program was established to encourage out-of-court resolution of fee disputes between attorneys and clients in a fair, impartial and efficient manner to both strengthen the integrity of professional relationships between clients and members of the bar, and to advance community confidence in the legal profession as a whole.

April 2008

Experts at Preparing Experts

Alice Spitz lectured to litigation experts of the Gotham Networking Group on the topic of direct testimony and cross examination of the expert witness, providing their members with valuable tips on both preparing for and delivering their opinions and defending them during rigorous cross examination. Ms. Spitz is no stranger to public speaking: She has shared her litigation expertise by lecturing for bar associations, insurance carriers and other organizations, as well as by teaching trial advocacy courses.

April 2008

MSD is Officially Certified as a Woman-Owned Business Enterprise

We are proud to announce that the New York State Division of Minority and Women’s Business Development has just officially certified MSD as a Woman Owned Business Enterprise. At MSD, we have a sincere commitment to diversity. See our Diversity Page here.

March 2008

MSD Partner Shares Expertise on Insurance Coverage in New York State Trial Lawyers Institute's Publication

MSD partner Salvatore DeSantis, provides written guidance to other New York attorneys on a decision by New York’s highest court in a significant insurance dispute which addressed the issue of how priority of coverage is determined. His article about it was entitled BP Air v. One Beacon: Court of Appeals Gets the Last Word and was published in the New York State Trial Lawyers Institute’s most recent issue of their Bill of Particulars magazine. Contact us for a copy of this article.

February 2008

MSD Wins Again

MSD's Salvatore DeSantis, partnering with fellow Harmonie Group member David Keller, shared their knowledge of the application of attorney ethics to internet email by the publication of their article entitled Ethics Now and for the Future in Our High-Tech Email World in the latest issue of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel’s publication FDCC Quarterly which you can download in its entirety here. At MSD, we appreciate the speed of email communication and strive to ensure that such communication is protected at the same time.

January 2008

The entire MSD family wishes you and yours a happy and safe holiday season. May you have a New Year filled with Good Health, Peace, Joy and Prosperity!

December 2007

MSD Wins Again

The Second Department Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment for MSD’s client, Greyhound Bus Company, a Laidlaw subsidiary. The lower court had granted Alice Spitz' Motion, dismissing the case of a passenger who was injured in a three vehicle collision on the New Jersey Turnpike against Greyhound. Marcy Sonneborn defended the appeal, demonstrating to the appellate court that all witnesses placed the blame for the accident with the defendant Jiffy truck, and not with the Greyhound Bus or the third vehicle, a Peter Pan bus. In fact, the eyewitness testimony demonstrated that the Jiffy truck entered a lane of traffic in which the Greyhound bus was traveling, hit the side of the Greyhound bus, which caused the Greyhound bus to veer left and hit the Peter Pan bus. Merchant v Greyhound Bus Company

November 2007

Construction Site Accidents: The Law and the Trial

MSD's Alice Spitz was a faculty member in the New York State Bar Association’s CLE seminar Construction Site Accidents: The Law and The Trial, a program to educate attorneys unfamiliar with litigating such cases. The topics she addressed included construction contracts, New York’s grave injury statute, insurance indemnification issues, and ethical concerns arising during the defense of clients involved in construction litigation. Alice used policy language, statutory language and examples from actual cases in her written materials disseminated at the seminar, which were published by the New York State Bar Association and are available upon request. Evaluations after the event by the participants consistently rated her presentation as excellent.

October 2007

Defense Verdict in Exploding Lighter Fluid Case

Plaintiff claimed, that while attending Sunday services at his Church, he was asked by a Church employee to light the Church’s barbecue grill and cook food leftover from a Church party held the night before. Plaintiff sustained 1st and 2nd degree burns to his hands, chest, left groin, neck, shoulders and serious disfigurement, claiming that the lighter fluid he used to accomplish this task spontaneously exploded due to exposure to direct sunlight. MSD’s client, the defendant Church, claimed that the grill had already been lit and heating for 45 minutes and that when plaintiff poured lighter fluid on the fire, this caused a flashback. This was supported by the Emergency Room nurse whom Lawrence Getzler subpoenaed to testify at trial. She testified that plaintiff told her at the hospital that the incident occurred when he was lighting the charcoal briquettes on the barbeque grill, when the flames flew back with the lighter fluid, igniting his clothes and hands. The lighter fluid manufacturer settled prior to trial pursuant to a confidentiality agreement. Lawrence Getzler obtained a defense verdict in Kings County when the jury unanimously found that the defendant Church was not negligent. Neamonitis v. SS Anargyroi Taxiarxhis and Gerasimos Greek Orthodox Church.

September 2007

Bronx County Plaintiff Doesn't Meet Serious Injury Treshold - Two Surgeries Found Not Causally Connected

Justice Betty Owen Stinson in Bronx County granted MSD’s motion for summary judgment based upon plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the serious injury threshold of the New York Insurance law. Plaintiff, a police officer, was driving a three-wheeled police scooter when he was rear-ended by defendant’s vehicle. Plaintiff underwent arthroscopic surgery to his left knee and left shoulder following the accident. In her motion papers, Julie Molod argued that the medical evidence established that plaintiff’s operations and injuries were not causally related to the accident. Plaintiff had a history of prior injuries from his years as a police officer. Although plaintiff’s attorney submitted both an affidavit from the plaintiff and his treating orthopedic surgeon, Justice Stinson granted the motion and dismissed the complaint

August 2007

Presentation On The Defense of Nail Salons

Alice Spitz and Joon Park joined two adjusters from Magna Carta Companies and conducted a presentation regarding the defense of Nail Salon cases. Issues focused on the cultural diversity in the industry, investigation, sanitation requirements and practices, the types of cases and their values, and the current insurance policy endorsements incorporated into Nail Salon policies.

August 2007

Defense Verdict in Lack of Supervision Case

A seven-year old plaintiff claimed that he was injured by another child while under the supervision of Chernomorets, a corporation that ran a soccer program. The Chernamorets were playing the Brooklyn Patriots at a gymnasium in Public School 186 in Brooklyn, New York, while plaintiff was "pretend" wrestling with another soccer player. While wrestling, plaintiff was flipped over and his arm was broken, requiring open reduction and internal fixation. Salvatore DeSantis obtained a defense verdict in Kings County when the jury found that defendant Chernamorets, which had two coaches supervising ten children, was not negligent. Lavina v. Chernamorets

July 2007

Premises Liability Case Dismissed on Procedural Grounds

Alice Spitz was successful in having plaintiff's Complaint dismissed against our client, Very Ltd. d/b/a Au Bar due to the plaintiff’s willful defiance of four Court Orders for outstanding discovery. The Court noted that the plaintiff offered no reasonable excuse for failing to timely respond to outstanding discovery demands and the Court further noted that the plaintiff provided said discovery only after they were served with Ms. Spitz’ Motion to Dismiss. The Court dismissed the Supreme Court, New York County Complaint. Sheridan v. Very, Ltd. d/b/a Au Bar, et. al.

June 2007

Labor Law Case Dismissed

Plaintiff, a 46 year old porter employed by the owner of the building in which he worked, was severely injured on the job and allegedly permanently disabled when he fell approximately 15-20 feet from an unsecured ladder. Plaintiff claimed a violation of Labor Law §240(1) and sued the managing agent of the building in which he worked and fell. After discovery, MSD moved for summary judgment based upon the exclusivity of the Workers’ Compensation law. Plaintiff argued that because he did not take any direction and control from the managing agent, that a question of fact existed as to whether he was an employee to whom the Workers’ Compensation bar applied. The Court, however, adopted MSD’s arguments that the managing agent was a “special employer” based upon our suggested interpretation of the management contract and the affidavit of our client, and awarded summary judgment dismissing this action against our client. Bautista v. David Frankel Realty, Inc.

May 2007

Bronx Lead Poisoning Case Dismissed by Appellate Division

Alice Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn were successful in having the Appellate Division affirm dismissal of a Complaint against MSD client, a Bronx landlord, in Concepcion v. Walsh. The plaintiff argued that the landlord was responsible for a hazardous lead paint condition in the apartment in which the family lived after the minor’s blood test determined that his blood/lead levels were above the accepted standard. In New York City, a plaintiff need only proffer testimony of a peeling paint condition and notice to the landlord that a child lives in the apartment in order to recover for lead poisoning. MSD was successful in arguing that the mother’s deposition testimony was too vague on the issue of a peeling paint condition and the Court found that there was no evidence of the actual existence of a lead hazard in the apartment. Significantly, the Court also rejected plaintiff's argument that the evidence of lead paint in another apartment in the building constitutes evidence of lead paint in the subject apartment. On the issue of damages, the court found that there was not even an issue of fact that the child sustained a lead injury since the medical expert used by the plaintiff relied upon an unsworn report of the child’s psychologist that established that lead in the blood was the cause of the child’s numerous academic, behavioral and emotional problems and that there was no admissible evidence of actual impairment. Read about it in the April 2007 Mealey’s Lead Litigation Report.

April 2007

Appellate Division Reverses Trial Court and Dismisses Complaint Against Clemco Industries Corp.

MSD was successful in the Appellate Division, First Department, in obtaining reversal of the denial of our Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of our client, Clemco Industries Corp., in Supreme Court, Bronx County, and the case was dismissed. Winning a reversal for a defendant in a death case in the First Department, well known for its plaintiff-oriented bent, is a huge victory! Alice Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn argued that despite the tragic death of Jamine Michael Donovan, a long-time welder with Yula Corporation, the supplied air respirator helmet manufactured by Clemco Industries Corp. was not involved in the accident. The evidence proved that the cause of Mr. Donovan's death was asphyxiation due to insufficient oxygen in the air canisters. The Clemco Industries Corp. helmet neither caused the accident nor contributed to it. The Appellate Division agreed and reversed the lower court decision. Donovan v. All-Weld Prods. Corp.

March 2007

Appellate Division Affirms Grant of Summary Judgment to Hospital

Salvatore J. DeSantis and Marcy Sonneborn successfully won summary judgment, and affirmance on appeal in the Appellate Division on behalf of Crothall Healthcare and Soundshore Hospital. The plaintiff, injured in a fall while delivering food trays, was an employee of the Hospital. Plaintiff claimed that the Hospital's manager, Crothall Healthcare, was negligent in the manner in which it trained the Hospital's maintenance staff. The plaintiff argued that the maintenance staff were "special employees" of the defendants, while she was a "general employee" of the Hospital. The Court ruled that the plaintiff was limited by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers Compensation law, and affirmed dismissal. Spencer v. Crothall Healthcare

March 2007

Cooperative Wins After a Decade of Litigation with Tenant

Demonstrating success in trial skills as well as appellate advocacy, MSD Partner Chris Christofides had a double victory, first at the trial level, and then on the appeal. Plaintiff's action involved alleged water damage to her apartment from different sources over a period of years. She was paid for the first loss under the provisions of her homeowner's policy, but plaintiff alleged there was additional damage in the ensuing years that she did not then claim. The Court sustained Chris' objections and denied the admission into evidence of plaintiff's handwritten diaries for lack of foundation, relevance and as being self-serving. Due to the lack of admissible evidence, the Court held that the plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case and granted a directed judgment in favor of each defendant, dismissing plaintiff's Complaint in its entirety. On appeal to the Appellate Term for the First Department, the per curiam decision affirmed the trial court stating: "Even affording plaintiff every favorable inference which could reasonably be drawn from the evidence adduced at trial, we agree that plaintiff failed to establish any actionable negligence on defendants part or that any such negligence caused the 1991 water leaks giving rise to this action." Gamiel v. Harbutt

March 2007

Defense Verdict - Camper's Claim Falls

MSD obtained a defendant's verdict in Guerrier v. Sunshine Acres Camp. Plaintiff Gabrielle Guerrier, an eight year old camper, sustained a medial condylar fracture in her dominant left arm, requiring open reduction and internal fixation, when she fell off the top bunk of a bunk bed that lacked guardrails. At trial, MSD successfully moved to preclude testimony from the plaintiff's self proclaimed child safety and protection expert, Grace Hotchkiss Scarano, by demonstrating that she was not qualified to offer expert testimony relative to the incident in question. We were further able to demonstrate that guardrails for bunk beds in camps in New York State were not required at the time of the incident and would not have prevented a fall occasioned by the manner in which the plaintiff leaned over the side of the bunk bed.

February 2007

MSD Shares Expertise with Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

MSD's Salvatore J. DeSantis, partnering with fellow Harmonie Group member David Keller, shared their knowledge of the application of attorney ethics in our high tech world at the 2007 Winter Meeting of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel in Scottsdale, Arizona. Their presentation focused on the use of email between counsel and client and the various ethical considerations this raises for attorneys desiring to give their clients the most zealous and confidential representation. At MSD, we appreciate the speed of email communication and strive to ensure that such communication is protected at the same time.

February 2007

Alice Spitz Becomes President-Elect of Harmonie

Alice Spitz was elevated to President-Elect of the national Harmonie Group for a two year term. The Harmonie Group is an affiliation of independent law firms providing a broad spectrum of high quality legal services to corporations, insurance carriers, and third party claim administrators across North America. It is an invitation only organization which extends membership invitations only to experienced, highly qualified law firms that have earned the respect of their peers, the courts and their clients in negotiation, litigation, and trial advocacy. You can access the Harmonie Group's law firm directory here. Alice will become President of the Harmonie Group in 2009 for a two year term.

January 2007

Case Dismissed: USTA Floor Grate Not City's Responsibility

MSD was successful in having plaintiff's Complaint against the City of New York dismissed in an action in which it was the sole defendant. Plaintiff was a chef, employed to prepare food for the U.S. Tennis Open located at the Arthur Ashe Tennis Stadium. The USTA (United States Tennis Association) leases the stadium from the City pursuant to a 99 year lease. Plaintiff argued that the grate covering the floor drain in the stadium's kitchen was defective, causing him to slip and fall and spill boiling water, resulting in severe burns to his torso. Alice Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn argued that the City of New York exerted no control over the construction or installation of the kitchen floor and grate. The City's Building Department's approval of the overall kitchen floor plan was in its regulatory capacity and not as a landowner. The Court agreed and dismissed the Complaint. Buhler v. City

December 2006

Case Dismissed: Hazards Inherent in Laborer's Work

Despite the difficulty of obtaining summary judgments for defendants in New York Labor Law cases, MSD was successful in having the complaint against its client - Methodist Church of Glen Cove - dismissed under both Labor Law and common law. MSD partner Salvatore J. DeSantis and Marcy Sonneborn argued that the plaintiff could not prevail under Labor Law §240(1) because the risk of injury was not as a result of an elevation - the plaintiff had already descended a ladder and was back on the ground when sections of rotted soffit and roof fell and injured him. The Court agreed with MSD that Labor Law §241(6) did not apply because a Section of the Industrial Code was not violated. MSD also argued that neither Labor Law §200 nor the common law were violated because an owner's duty does not extend to hazards that are inherent in the work the laborer is to perform. MSD's client was the sole defendant in the case of Hansen v. Trustees of The Methodist Episcopal Church of Glen Cove, et al.

November 2006

Educating Our Insurance Company Partners

In MSD's continuing effort to provide additional service to clients, associate Stacey E. Steinberg and partner Alice Spitz gave a presentation on New York's no-fault insurance law for the Claims Staff of Harco National Insurance Company and TransGuard Insurance Company of America. Other clients interested in having MSD address their claims departments should contact attorneys@molodspitz.com.

November 2006

Case Dismissed: Basketball Facility Not Negligent

A 22 year old suffered a heart attack and died while playing basketball in his employer's evening league at MSD's client's facility Basketball City New York, LLC. His estate claimed that Basketball City New York was negligent in failing to maintain emergency resuscitation equipment and staff trained in its use. MSD partner Alice Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn successfully argued that the case should be dismissed because plaintiff assumed the risk of playing sports, the basketball facility didn't cause the decedent plaintiff to suffer a heart attack; and because the law did not then require such a facility to have CPR equipment. Colon, as Administratrix of Hernandez Estate v. Basketball City New York, LLC.

October 2006

Case Dismissed: Amateur Softball Players Assume Risk of Injury

In a lengthy decision based on the current law involving "assumption of the risk," Nassau County Judge Tammy Robbins dismissed the case against MSD's defendant client in Gillen v. Nassau Semi-fast Softball League. The Court agreed with MSD partner Alice Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn that with the plaintiff's long history and experience as a softball player, he assumed the risk of injury while playing softball in the defendant's league. The Court considered and rejected the conclusion of the plaintiff's expert that amateur softball players do not assume the risk of base runner crashes, as not supported by the evidence, and disallowed the plaintiff from recovering damages for two cervical spine surgeries.

October 2006

Case Dismissed: Statute of Limitations Had Run

Summary judgment was granted to MSD's client in a case involving an alleged trip and fall on a sidewalk in Manhattan. The plaintiff claimed that MSD's client in Ebner v. MHP Land Associates v. Spring Scaffolding, Inc. erected a sidewalk shed over an expanse of sidewalk and that the weight of the shed created a defect in one of the flags. The plaintiff further alleged sustaining serious injuries from tripping over the flag. Having originally sued the City of New York, the owner and lessee of the premises, the plaintiff then sued MSD's client directly after they were added as a third-party defendant. MSD senior associate Sean P. King successfully argued that the three-year Statute of Limitations had run by the time MSD's client was brought into the case and that the case did not meet the criteria for "relation back."

October 2006

Four Bronx County Claims Dismissed!

The claims of four plaintiffs in a Bronx County lawsuit, stemming from a motor vehicle accident, were dismissed following a motion made by Julie Molod. Justice Sallie Manzanet-Daniels granted the motion for summary judgment, based upon the failure of all four plaintiffs to satisfy the serious injury threshold of the no-fault insurance law. Although the plaintiffs all stopped treatment soon after the incident, they returned to a physician in 2006, after the subject motion was filed. The physician submitted Affidavits concluding that each plaintiff had suffered serious injuries as a result of the incident. Justice Manzanet ruled that the physician affidavits were clearly "tailored" in an attempt to defeat the motion and did not provide an explanation for the plaintiffs' cessation in treatment in 2002. Plaintiffs failed to reasonably explain why there was a gap in treatment for over three years. Silverio v. Leavitt, et al.

October 2006

Case Dismissed Against Tenant who Fell, Claiming a Defect in Concrete Abutement

Plaintiff Paramjit Lal, a tenant in defendant's two-story house, claimed that he fell when he sat down on a concrete abutment adjoining the front steps of the premises. As he sat down, the abutment "came loose" and slipped, causing him to fall. Partner Alice Spitz, Associate Stacey Steinberg, and appellate counsel Marcy Sonneborn, convinced the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division that the defendant had no notice of the alleged defect and there was no evidence that he created it. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment and the Appellate Division affirmed. Our client was the only defendant in the action. The Appellate Division held that the owner established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based upon evidence that he did not create the alleged dangerous condition or have actual or constructive notice of its existence. We were particularly pleased that the Court found the opinion of the plaintiff's expert engineer to be "wholly conclusory".

October 2006

Court Grants MSD Motions & Dismisses Two Horrific Burn Cases Due to Lack of Evidence

Lack of evidence was key to two dismissed cases against MSD clients, both cases involving severe burns. In Rosencrans v. Kiselak, et al. in Orange County, MSD partner Alice Spitz successfully argued that there was no evidence that MSD’s client – an apartment building’s water heater repair company – caused a condition in a bathroom sink that led to third-degree burns to a three year old. In Braun v. County of Orange, et al., Ms. Spitz and Marcy Sonneborn argued that MSD’s plumbing contractor client had a limited scope of employment renovating a portion of a nursing facility in the 1990s. The judge agreed that there was no evidence that MSD’s or other contractors in the case had installed improper equipment that may have led to the excessive hot water which burned the elderly plaintiff– leaving the County as the sole defendant.

September 2006

Case Dismissed Against Northeast Conference of Seventh Day Adventists

MSD associate Eileen Budd was awarded summary judgment dismissing a case against the firm’s defendant client in Pressley v. Northeast Conference of Seventh Day Adventists. The plaintiff made a claim for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, alleging that she was discriminated against because of her gender and because of an alleged medical condition. The plaintiff had previously brought a similar action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, yet attempted to re-file again in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The court held that the plaintiff did not comply with the filing requirements of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), a prerequisite for bringing suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the excuses given by Plaintiff for her failure to timely file with the EEOC were an insufficient basis for the Court to invoke equitable tolling, which would have allowed Plaintiff to continue prosecuting her untimely filed action. Her remaining federal and state law claims were barred by the statute of limitations.

September 2006

Credibility Is Key in Defendant’s Verdict

Credible testimony by the defendant in a case tried in Bronx County Supreme Court played a significant role in a jury’s unanimous verdict in favor of MSD’s client. Tried by MSD partner Irwin Miller over eight days, the case of Haynes/Lyons v. Demera was a tough one: a defendant who claimed that the plaintiff’s car rolled back and contributed to a rear impact. Acknowledging a minor impact, the defendant testified that he was traveling at very low speed with negligible damage to both vehicles. Corroborating his testimony were photographs, which reflected the absence of physical damage. Refuting claims of significant injury to the plaintiff and passenger, defense experts including a neurologist, orthopedist and diagnostic radiologist established the absence of permanency, disability and functional impairment.

August 2006

MSD Partner Provides Expert Opinion in NYLJ Article

“Are Majority, Dissent That Far Apart?” asks MSD partner, Salvatore DeSantis, in the August 3 New York Law Journal. The article focused on a First Department decision in the case of BP Air Conditioning Corp. v. One Beacon Ins. Group, “a significant insurance dispute which arose when a construction worker fell on an oil slick on the 39th floor of the then existing World Trade Center.” In the article, Mr. DeSantis analyzes the “uncharacteristically contentious majority and dissenting opinions.” He concludes that, “As the appellate courts continue to wrestle with public policy considerations along with intertwined issues of insurance policy interpretation and interpretation of contracts between contractors/owners and their subcontractors, counsel must ensure that their clients obtain appropriate coverage and insurers charge appropriate premiums.”

August 2006

No Written Contract Means No Case Against MSD Client

The Supreme Court, New York County, ruled in favor of United National in a case in which a subcontractor sought “additional insured” status under the company’s policy. MSD partner Salvatore DeSantis successfully argued that a written contract was required before United National would provide additional insurance for any person or organization. Since there was no written contract, MSD’s motion for summary judgment was granted. BFP One Liberty Plaza Co. LLC and Turner Construction Company v. Continental Marble, et al.

August 2006

Snow and Ice Case Dismissed on Hottest Day of the Year!

The verdict in a trial over "clear ice" on a sidewalk came in on the hottest day of the year, and it was unanimous in favor of MSD's defendant client. The plaintiff in Singh v. Tabernacle of Prayer, claimed that the defendant failed to properly shovel and salt the area of sidewalk where she slipped and allegedly sustained a knee injury requiring surgery. She brought the action against MSD's client under § 7-210 (b) of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, which in 2003 transferred the responsibility for the maintenance of sidewalks in the five boroughs from the City to the abutting property owner. Senior Associate Sean P. King tried the case in Queens County, where a jury decided that the defendant was not negligent.

August 2006

Plaintiff's Case Didn't Hold Water

Chris Christofides obtained a directed verdict in favor of MSD client, an apartment corporation that was one of several defendants in a case at trial involving alleged water damage. The plaintiff was paid for water damage to her apartment under the provisions of her homeowner's policy, yet alleged that there was subsequent damage that she did not claim. The Court - having denied admission into evidence of the plaintiff's hand-written diaries - ruled in favor of each of the defendants. Gamiel v. Harbutt, et al.

July 2006

MSD Success For Church Client Holds Strong

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed an order granting MSD's motion to dismiss a case against its client, Seventh Day Adventist Church. This is the second time the case has been re-argued; in March 2005, the Supreme Court in Queens County upheld its original finding on behalf of the defendant.

The plaintiff, Glenn Marr, claimed that the defendant failed to prevent a fire set by a trespasser - arson that allegedly caused the plaintiff to sustain an aortic dissection. In November 2004, the Court granted Salvatore J. DeSantis' motion for summary judgment after finding that the Church did take sufficient minimal security precautions, and that there was no causal connection between the plaintiff's aortic dissection and the alleged negligence.

July 2006

MSD Gets Dismissal in High-Stakes Case

In an action where the settlement demand was $10 million, MSD partner Alice Spitz - working with MSD appellate counsel Marcy Sonneborn - obtained a dismissal for client Ambassador Fuel. Ambassador was installing a new boiler and burner system at property owned by co-defendant Holind Realty.

The plaintiffs' claim alleged that violations of the Labor Law caused the deaths of two employees of third-party defendant Eastmond, who were cleaning a fuel oil tank in preparation for the installation. MSD asserted that the plaintiffs' failure to use proper procedures and equipment while cleaning the tank resulted in their deaths.

Justice Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., held that the tank cleaning was not a covered activity under the Labor Law and that "there is no admissible evidence to refute Ambassador and Holind's proof that they did not control or supervise plaintiffs' work."

June 2006

MSD Win in "Stingray" Case Upheld on Appeal

The Appellate Division has upheld a decision by a lower court dismissing a case against MSD client Atlantis Marine World in Riverhead, New York. The plaintiff, a visitor to the aquarium, claimed that he developed an infection after petting a stingray in the aquarium's touch tank and that the aquarium neglected to warn of the danger of Mycobacterium marinum in the tank. According to the appellate decision, "the defendant met its initial burden by providing evidence that the risk of infection was unforeseeable, as an infection by Mycobacterium marinum at a public aquarium had never occurred and cases of that infection in general were exceedingly rare."

May 2006

MSD Uses Plaintiff's Own Testimony to Gain Dismissal for Defendant

MSD obtained a dismissal at trial in Cicciarella v. McLoughlin and Swenson, et. al., a case involving a motor vehicle accident. Associate Stacey Steinberg established that the testimony of all parties in our clients' vehicle, including the plaintiff, demonstrated that MSD's clients were not responsible for the accident, as they were already stopped for approximately five seconds before being hit from the back by a third vehicle.

May 2006

Thank You

As we celebrate a milestone in our more than 50-year history, we at Molod Spitz and DeSantis would like to thank you, our valued client, for your loyalty to the firm. Fred Molod, our founding partner, joins principals Alice Spitz and Salvatore DeSantis in commemorating the 10-year anniversary of our partnership.

Twenty attorneys strong, Molod Spitz and DeSantis recognizes the benefits of a dynamic partnership. Over the past decade, we have strived to go beyond representing clients - instead seeking to partner with you to achieve the best result in thousands of cases, including several landmark cases and precedent-setting decisions.

Our reputation as a formidable adversary in the New York court system - one that does not hesitate to see a trial through to verdict - attests to the strength of your team spirit and trust.

Looking ahead, we plan to gain an even greater understanding of our clients' businesses and needs, and further our commitment to the education of claims professionals - while continuing to achieve the successes in the courtroom you have come to expect from us.

In our next decade, we look forward to building on our relationships with our long-time clients and to building long-standing relationships with our new clients. Thank you, again, for partnering with us.

May 2006

MSD's Thurm Takes Part in "Don't Court Disaster" Program for Agents

Milton Thurm, Of Counsel to Molod Spitz & DeSantis, participated as a presenter in "Don't Court Disaster," a mock court presentation for the Professional Insurance Agents of New York. The subject matter of the program - which was sponsored by the Excess Line Association of New York - was brokers' and agents' errors and omissions. Mr. Thurm has participated in this event twice before.

April 2006

Web Research Disproves Plaintiff's Deposition Testimony

An Internet investigation by MSD associate Dennis Monaco demonstrated that an avid bodybuilder did not sustain a "serious injury" - as defined by New York State Insurance Law — in the case of Croce v. Payne Inc. Mr. Monaco's research revealed that, contrary to deposition testimony, the plaintiff not only remained active, but even excelled as a competitive bodybuilder after his June 2001 automobile accident. Judge David I. Schmidt, Supreme Court, King's County, granted Mr. Monaco's motion to dismiss the case.

March 2006

20-Month Gap in Medical Treatment Undermines Claim of Serious Injury

Judge Howard R. Silver, Supreme Court, Bronx County, granted MSD's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claim of a "serious injury" in the case of DeLeon v. D & W Truck Lines, Inc. MSD associate Dennis Monaco noted that there was a 20-month gap since the plaintiff's last physical examination. He bolstered his argument that the plaintiff's complaints of pain were not supported by objective medical findings by presenting medical reports from two experts — an orthopedist and a neurologist. They concluded that the plaintiff neither had a disability nor required any further orthopedic or neurological treatment, therapy or testing.

March 2006

No Second Chances, Case Dismissed

In the case of Cernuda v. Dompereh, a motion for summary judgment made by Julie Molod was granted by Justice Betty Stinson on Feb 1, 2006. The case was dismissed based upon collateral estoppel. In a prior non-jury trial, the two parties were co-defendants. Plaintiff Cernuda did not meet his burden of demonstrating that he did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue decided by Justice Friedlander in the first trial. Also of interest was Justice Stinson's decision that defendant Dompereh demonstrated good cause to make this late summary judgment motion since Justice Friedlander's decision in the prior action was not entered until after the statutory 120–day period had run in the instant action.

February 2006

Memberships & Affiliations

Alice Spitz and Fred Molod attended the tri-annual Harmonie Group Meeting in Florida. This meeting of the insurance industry and the Harmonie Group network included representatives from two of our clients, Adventist Risk Management and Magna Carta Companies, and all appreciated the insights they shared. For additional information on the Harmonie Group, please see their website or contact us.

January 2006

Sharing Knowledge with Insurance Professionals

In an ongoing commitment to keep clients apprised of legal issues that affect the way they do business, MSD partners Alice Spitz and Salvatore DeSantis tailored a presentation for its insurer client Guide One. The presentation - which covered current issues regarding labor law - was well-received. Other clients who want MSD to address their claims departments should contact aspitz@molodspitz.com.

December 2005

Case Dismissed: MSD Contends Lessee Not Responsible for Fallen Ceiling

MSD prevailed in Johnson v. Yorktown Country Inn, et al., a case disputing who was responsible for a fallen ceiling that allegedly injured an employee of the Volunteers of America (VOA). The plaintiff, claiming to have sustained herniated discs that required two surgeries, had sued the property owner, Yorktown. Yorktown, in turn, sued its lessee, the County of Westchester and the county's licensee, Volunteers of America (VOA) - claiming that, as an out-of-possession landlord, it was not legally responsible for the ceiling collapse. MSD's Milton Thurm moved to dismiss the third-party complaint against the county and VOA - contending that, under the lease agreement, MSD's clients were not responsible for the condition that caused the ceiling to collapse and that the plaintiff had not suffered a grave injury. The court granted MSD's cross-motion, dismissing the case against its clients.

November 2005

It’s 10 p.m. – Do You Know Where Your Claimant Is?

At the request of a client, MSD partner Alice Spitz and associate Stacey Steinberg prepared a multimedia presentation on the use of surveillance in the defense of personal injury actions. The presentation covers the history of the law regarding surveillance and current practical considerations for claims department personnel, those in the workers’ compensation department and outside counsel. The presentation was well-received by the client and is available for other clients who want MSD to address their claims departments. Please contact aspitz@molodspitz.com.

November 2005

MSD Partner Shares Expertise in NYLJ article

In "Standoffs Over Standing Down, an Attorney's Right to Withdraw" (New York Law Journal, October 6), MSD partner Chris Christofides discusses an important legal decision concerning disclaimer and withdrawal of counsel. He writes: “Recently, the First Department Appellate Division in reviewing a motion to withdraw by a defense firm retained by a liability insurer, emphasized that the effectiveness of counsel dictates that the insured must cooperate in their defense and it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the trial court to grant counsel’s motion.” Mr. Christofides talks about the implications of the decision in the context of other defining cases.

October 2005

Insurance Coverage Issues Arising from Hurricanes Katrina & Rita

MSD's memberships and firm affiliations assist in keeping all our attorneys abreast of the latest significant developments in the law. This month, MSD's Milton Thurm traveled to New Mexico to attend the Excess & Surplus Lines Claims Association Conference where many of the coverage issues arising from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were considered.

September 2005

Case Dismissed: MSD Argues Too Much Speculation Over Causes of Behavioral Problems

MSD won summary judgment in Concepcion v. Walsh, a lead poisoning case brought against its client, the owner of an apartment building. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, dismissed the case, agreeing with MSD's argument that opinions regarding the cause of the plaintiff's learning disabilities and behavioral problems were too speculative for a jury's consideration. MSD partner Andrew M. Harrison pointed out that no Department of Health lead paint violations were ever issued to the subject apartment. He also argued that medical records documented other possible causes of the problems experienced by the plaintiff (now a teenager) — including a congenital frontal lobe infarction (or stroke) resulting either from an unrelated trauma or premature closure of cranial fissures during infancy.

August 2005

MSD Wins Summary Judgment in Case Over Hospital Housekeeping

The Supreme Court, Westchester County, dismissed all claims against MSD's client — a management company that contracted with a local hospital to train and supervise employees of the hospital's Housekeeping and other departments. The plaintiff in Spencer v. Crosthall Healthcare — a Food Service employee who slipped and fell on a hospital room floor — alleged that a "Wet Floor" sign was improperly placed. MSD partner Andrew M. Harrison successfully argued that, despite regular supervision by MSD's client, the housekeepers were employees of the hospital and, therefore, the plaintiff's sole recourse was Workers Compensation.

July 2005

MSD Expands Subrogation Practice, Welcomes Chris Christofides

We are pleased to announce the expansion of our subrogation practice under Chris Christofides. The expanded subrogation business represents a strategic complement to our insurance defense focus, enabling MSD to provide an even broader range of capabilities for our insurer clients.

Mr. Christofides brings more than 25 years' experience in the courtroom to MSD. His extensive litigation experience encompasses complex property subrogation claims, as well as matters related to insurance defense - from contractors' liability to product liability. His record of trial successes includes high-profile property damage and personal injury cases in New York City. Mr. Christofides also has a strong reputation in the legal community for trying cases that involve novel issues; two such cases are believed to be the first of their kind litigated in New York County.

July 2005

MSD Successfully Argues: Club Owner Not Negligent in Security Guard Assault

Judge David Schmidt granted a summary judgment motion by MSD associate Gene Stith, dismissing a negligence complaint against MSD client Webster Hall Entertainment Corp. The plaintiff, a security guard, sued Webster Hall for personal injuries resulting from an assault while breaking up a fight between two patrons. The finding in Banton v. Webster Hall Entertainment Corp. was that the plaintiff had failed to establish the requisite notice of criminal activity. There had been no similar prior incidents at Webster Hall.

July 2005

MSD Gets Personal Injury Case Dismissed

Judge Thomas J. Dolan dismissed a personal injury case against MSD’s client in which the plaintiff alleged serious injuries resulting from a two-car accident involving the defendant. MSD associate Gene Stith successfully argued in Relly v. Farley, et al that the plaintiff’s claim of two disc bulges, and cervical and lumbar radiculapthy, did not meet the serious injury requirement under Insurance Law §5102(d). MSD called on two experts to give their opinions: a radiologist, who testified that both the cervical and lumbar spine were normal, and a neurologist, who stated that the plaintiff’s motor strength and gait were normal and that there were no physical barriers to re-employment.

July 2005

Building Owner Found Not Responsible Under Law in Effect at Time of Plaintiff's Injury

Further demonstrating its ability to get cases against its clients dismissed, MSD obtained summary judgment dismissing a case against defendant client HLV Associates under a law that was in effect in 2001. The plaintiff alleged that she sustained an injury after falling on a broken sidewalk adjacent to a Brooklyn building then owned by HLV. The plaintiff sued both HLV and the City of New York, claiming negligence in Crane v. NYC and HLV Associates, Kings County. Judge Solomon granted the motion by MSD associate Gene Stith, who argued that HLV did not cause the alleged defect in the public sidewalk, made no special use of the sidewalk and, as the law existed at that time, was not negligent as a matter of law.

The law was changed in 2003, shifting liability for sidewalk accidents from the City to abutting landowners. The law (Int. No. 193) is available here, as well as its companion statute (Int. No. 522), which requires abutting landowners to maintain liability coverage for such injuries. MSD members Frederick M. Molod and Salvatore J. DeSantis have lectured on the impact of these changes and preparedness with regard to these issues for the benefit of MSD's insurer clients.

July 2005

MSD Shares Expertise at Cross-Examination Seminar

MSD's Alice Spitz shared her knowledge of cross-examining plaintiffs at a seminar held by the New York State Trial Lawyers Association (NYSTLA) in June. Her presentation focused on "The Cross-Examination of a Plaintiff in a General Negligence Case." Ms. Spitz was among several trial experts, including a judge, who spoke at the seminar on topics ranging from the basics of cross-examination to lessons learned from specific cases. Ms. Spitz is no stranger to public speaking: She has shared her litigation expertise by lecturing for bar associations, insurance carriers and other organizations, as well as by teaching trial advocacy courses. The presentation for NYSTLA helps further the organization's mission to, among other things, "advance representation of the public by ethical, well-trained lawyers."

June 2005

Jury Awards Unanimous Verdict to MSD Client

Demonstrating MSD's core strength of conducting trials through to successful verdicts, MSD received a unanimous verdict dismissing the case against its defendant client in Korinn Alexander v. Ronzine C. Felago, et al. The jury concluded that plaintiff Alexander did not sustain a "serious injury" - as defined by New York State Insurance Law, Section 5102(d) - in a three-vehicle collision involving MSD client Felago. MSD's Victor N. DeGeorge tried the case in New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County. Mr. DeGeorge called on medical experts, who testified that the plaintiff's injuries were not as alleged and had resolved.

May 2005

Premises Liability Case Shows MSD's Ability to Get Cases Dismissed

While MSD has built its reputation on seeing cases through trial to a jury verdict, the firm is also skilled in ensuring that a case does not see a trial when appropriate. For instance, in the premises liability case of Paramjit Lal v. Ching Po Ng and Lu Hua He, MSD associate Stacey E. Steinberg successfully argued that there was no "triable issue of fact" as to whether MSD client Ng, a building owner, created any defective condition - or had actual or constructive notice of a defective condition - in a concrete abutment on the building's staircase. The plaintiff alleged that a loose piece of concrete from the abutment caused him to fall and sustain injuries to his arm and elbow. The Queens County Court granted MSD's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case.

April 2005

Success in Re-Argued Case is a Win-Win Situation for Church

After granting plaintiff Glenn Marr's motion to re-argue a case against Seventh Day Adventist Church, the Supreme Court in Queens County upheld its original finding on behalf of defendant and MSD client Seventh Day Adventist Church. MSD successfully defended the Church for the second time in March 2005 in the plaintiff's claim that the defendant failed to prevent a fire set by a trespasser - arson that allegedly caused the plaintiff to sustain an aortic dissection. In November 2004, the Court had granted Salvatore J. DeSantis' motion for summary judgment after finding that the Church did take sufficient minimal security precautions, and that there was no causal connection between the plaintiff's aortic dissection and the alleged negligence.

March 2005

MSD Wins Summary Judgment in Case Against Parade Organizer

In a 48-page decision with potential implications for many other parade accident cases, MSD partner Andrew M. Harrison won summary judgment in favor of MSD's client, a nonprofit corporation that organizes an annual cultural parade attracting more than a million spectators every Labor Day. The 17-year-old plaintiff in Donovan v. West Indian American Day Carnival Association, Inc., et al, had vaulted police barricades and fallen beneath the wheel of one of the floats. Supreme Court, Kings County Justice Mark Partnow dismissed the case against the parade organizer and other defendants. The Court accepted MSD's argument that the decedent plaintiff's actions constituted an intervening factor, so there was no causal connection between the claimed negligence and the accident. Copies of the decision are available on request.

February 2005

MSD Gets Case Dismissed Against Security Guard Following Instructions

MSD won a motion for summary judgment in the case of Williams v. AZ Security. The Supreme Court in Kings County dismissed the case after MSD associate Eileen T. Budd established that (a) it was unforeseeable that a patient at a mental health facility would hide behind a plant and strike a nurse with a fan and (b) under the hospital's specific instructions, AZ Security guards were relieved of any duty to intervene in patient-employee confrontations unless they were part of a trained response team.

January 2005