by PMT | May 29, 2019 | News
By the end of this year, New York State Courts are set to have a system in place requiring civil litigation to attempt to be resolved through presumptive mediation, rather than in open court. This future transition to presumptive mediation will significantly impact how civil cases are litigated in New York State. In an effort to make court proceedings more efficient and cost-effective, New York State Courts are implementing new protocols to alleviate backlogs throughout the judiciary system. For years the New York judicial system has attempted to implement alternatives to in-court litigation with little success. New York courts are following New Jersey and Connecticut’s approaches to creating alternatives to in-court litigation for civil cases – presumptive mediation. New York State’s proposed system mimics that of New Jersey, which has been utilizing an automatic presumptive mediation program for more than a decade. Following the implementation of court-sponsored ADR in New Jersey, fewer than two percent of cases had a jury trial. Statistics from the New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts show that a third of cases referred to mediation are resolved within the first session and 10 percent of cases settle within 90 days of the termination of mediation. Within the coming months, New York administrators will be working in tandem with the state’s administrative and trial courts to expand the number and scope of the court-sponsored ADR programs. In doing so, the Office of Court Administration plans to issue uniform rules for the program as the courts take advantage of the existing resources in place. The statewide program is expected to begin its rollout in September 2019....
by PMT | May 10, 2019 | News
We Are Pleased to Announce PMT’s New Partners Thomas M. Bona and James Freire. Each attorney is a talented advocate for the firm’s clients and has achieved their current position with persistent and successful work. Thomas M. Bona Tom has been a practicing attorney for over 35 years and joined Pillinger Miller Tarallo, LLP in 2019 as a partner at PMT’s Elmsford, NY office. Prior to that, since 1988 Tom was managing partner of Thomas M. Bona, P.C. with years of experience in insurance defense and coverage practice areas. Tom is admitted to practice in New York and has a wealth of experience in all types of civil matters including Construction/Labor law, Coverage Matters, Municipal Liability, Automobile, Dram Shop actions, and Premises Liability cases. See Tom’s Bio James Freire Jim has been a practicing attorney since 1983. His practice over the last twenty years has been primarily focused on professional liability matters. He represents clients in construction work site injury claims, construction defect and property damage claims and environmental claims under the Navigation Law. His clients have included major construction companies, contractors and building owners involved in new construction and renovation projects. Jim has been involved in several high profile matters, including acting as lead counsel for a Fortune 500 company in a confidential mediation which involved 197 days of construction delays. See James’...
by PMT | Apr 11, 2019 | News
The First Department, Appellate Division, in March 2019, addressed an issue of the first impression and ruled that notes created by an observer of an independent medical exam (hereinafter “IME”) performed on an injured plaintiff are not discoverable because they are protected by the prepared-for-litigation privilege. Markel v. Pure Power Boot Camp, Inc., 2019 NY Slip Op 02049 (2019). The Court indicated that this question needed to be addressed because of confusion in the lower Courts. This decision was intended to “clarify whether, and under what circumstances, such materials are protected from disclosure.” The Court in Markel examined this issue in the context of a case “which a personal-injury plaintiff had moved to quash the defendants’ subpoena duces tecum seeking IME observer notes.” In making their decision, the Court discussed the Plaintiff’s control and choice over the IME observer. The purpose of IME observer is to “deter examining doctors hired by defendants from inquiring about matters beyond the scope of the particular action and keeps the IME process honest.” In Markel, Plaintiff alleged that she was forced to complete unsafe exercise practices at a gym owned and operated by Defendant, which caused her to become seriously injured. Plaintiff alleged “serious, lasting and permanent injuries to her knee, among other injuries” and received medical treatment, including surgery. The First Department panel reversed the 2017 decision of the Supreme Court wherein the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for a protective order to quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon the IME observer who accompanied the plaintiff to the exam performed by the Defendant’s orthopedist. The Appellate Division noted that there was no...
by PMT | Feb 18, 2019 | News
After an intense eight-day trial, Ernest J. Bernabei lll obtained a unanimous defense verdict in an attorney malpractice case in New Jersey Superior Court, Bergen County. Plaintiff, a New York immigration attorney, contended that our client, a real estate attorney, failed to protect him in closing on a parcel of land in which he intended to build a house. Plaintiff alleged that environmental restrictions caused him substantial additional construction costs and were not properly investigated and discussed by our client. Through heavy cross-examination of both plaintiff and his experts, it was established that the defendant had fully advised the plaintiff of the need for due diligence, including engineering inspection prior to closing. Most importantly, Mr. Bernabei was able to point out how the plaintiff repeatedly ignored advice, delayed his expert inspections, and was the sole cause of any issues with the construction. Mr. Bernabei raised numerous issues as to the plaintiff’s credibility by pointing out many contradictions and inconsistencies in his testimony, as well as many issues with his experts. Our damages expert effectively challenged the number of costs and causation. Our liability expert, as well as the client’s direct testimony, established a clear chronology of proper negotiation of due diligence language and handling of the closing. Ultimately, the plaintiff built a house with about 15,000 square feet of usable space. The plaintiff was seeking damages, along with fees, in the range of $1.4...
by PMT | Feb 18, 2019 | News
By PMT Attorney, Jamie V. Tarallo – PMT Attorney Social media such as Twitter, Facebook, Myspace and LinkedIn have become major resources in the legal world. Lawyers have found that these resources can provide accurate information as to potential litigants’ background, history, the seriousness of injury or level of disability. The law around the discoverability and use of these social media platforms is recent and relevant as the world is continuously shifting to fast-paced social networking. The information sought on these social platforms cannot only be useful for finding litigants, but also for strengthening a defense as to the extent of personal injuries claimed. It is no longer the norm that only major companies have to preserve electronic data for litigation. Plaintiffs in personal injury actions now also have to preserve social media platforms as the information contained therein can be highly relevant and useful for the defense of a case. Use of E-discovery is broadening as society becomes more immersed in social media and the online world. Recent decisions have held that when a person puts their mental or physical health in question, social media platforms can be very useful and determinative in the outcome of a case. Counsel can use law mechanisms such as notices to admit, motions to compel, and discovery demands to extract such information that is necessary and relevant to the cause of action. In a recent ruling, Vasquez-Santos v. Matthew, Appellate Division, First Department, opened the door even further for Defendants and granted a motion to compel to allow an expert to dive through the plaintiff’s electronic devices, including through email accounts and other social...
by PMT | Feb 15, 2019 | News
We Are Pleased to Announce Attorneys Michael Neri and John A. Risi Have Been Named Partners at the PMT Law Firm. Each attorney is a talented advocate for the firm’s clients and has achieved their current position with persistent and successful work. John A. Risi John Risi joined the firm in 2014. His practice focuses on the defense of personal injury/product liability cases, complex commercial litigation, and insurance coverage disputes. John is licensed to practice law in Connecticut, New York, U.S. Court of Appeals Second Circuit, U.S. District Court, Eastern and Southern Districts of New York. He practices in the firm’s offices in Elmsford, NY and Norwalk, CT. He has extensive experience in all facets of general civil litigation in both federal and state courts, including extensive pre-trial, trial, and appellate work. He has successfully represented manufacturers, property owners, contractors and insurers in federal and state litigation. See John’s Bio Michael Neri Michael Neri joined the firm in 2014 and is focused in the practice areas of automobile, construction, general liability, and non-profit organizations. He is licensed to practice law in New York and the Eastern and Southern District Courts of New York. Michael practices out of the firm’s Elmsford, NY office. He handles a broad range of litigation matters in state and federal courts from the outset of litigation through trial and appeal. Michael demonstrates a great passion for his work. His litigation experience includes landowner/property owner liability, construction accidents, automobile liability, professional liability and matters involving general allegations of negligence. See Michael’s...
