Firm News: bentleyhoke

Congrats to Alexander Fisher on obtaining a favorable jury verdict for a national restaurant client and wins further hearing forcing plaintiff to pay Counsel fees!

In a just concluded week-long jury trial in Mercer County, New Jersey, gartner + bloom, P.C. partner Alexander Fisher secured a favorable jury verdict in a claim where the plaintiff had sought several hundred thousand dollars for dental injuries.

(more…)

gartner + bloom, P.C. extends our warmest CONGRATULATIONS to experienced litigation Associate, Daniel Montagna, on his recent admission to the New York State Bar. Dan, we're proud to have your depth of expertise driving stellar outcomes for our clients!

In yet another victory for g + b’s clients, Partner Jessica Price was able to utilize plaintiff’s deposition testimony to create a question of fact and defeat plaintiff’s motion seeking summary judgment on a Labor Law Section 240(1) claim.

Plaintiff, an electrician, was roughing out office space. On the date of his accident, plaintiff was running cables with a drag line through hangers in the ceiling. He did not intend to use a ladder for this task and had been working for an hour without one. As plaintiff ran the cables, tension was created on the wires. A ladder was nearby, so plaintiff checked it, saw it was in working condition, and utilized it to gain leverage. As he was standing on the ladder, plaintiff pulled the drag line but the wires recoiled, pulling the plaintiff and causing a shoulder injury as the ladder allegedly wobbled on one of its footings. Plaintiff testified at deposition that he could have pre-rolled the wires to alleviate the tension, but this would have been “a lot of work” as it would require walking back and forth from where the cable reel was located to where the wires needed to be pulled.

Ms Price argued that the proximate cause of plaintiff’s accident was his failure to pre-roll the wires, not any deficiency with the ladder. The Court agreed, and denied plaintiff’s motion. In doing so, the Court held that a jury must determine whether the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury was the ladder, the failure to pre-roll the wires, or gravity related issues caused by the weight of the cables.

Believing victory to be assured, plaintiff did not oppose g + b’s cross-motion to dismiss his other claims under Labor Law Sections 200 and 241(6). As such, the Court dismissed those causes of action entirely.

Gartner + Bloom, P.C. is pleased to announce the promotion of Todd Shaw Esq. to the rank of Equity Partner. As an Associate and then as a Partner, Todd established himself as a formidable litigator who delivers outstanding outcomes for our clients. His rise to our highest level was as a direct result of his endless drive to go the extra mile in everything he does. Todd’s passionate desire to mentor and develop other attorneys and staff to help better their careers and the firm as a whole, sets him apart and has earned him this esteemed honor! We look very much forward to your continued success and working with you for decades to come. Huge Congratulations Todd from all of us!

gartner + bloom is pleased to share that partners, Kenneth A. Bloom, Arthur Xanthos, and Todd Shaw, successfully defended a well-known midtown Manhattan bar and restaurant against a billion dollar commercial developer and its experienced and aggressive real estate law firm in the Commercial Division of Supreme Court, New York County.

In the exceptionally acrimonious litigation, the building owner attempted to utilize purported emergent conditions in the premises at issue to force all tenants, including the bar and restaurant, to vacate for an indeterminate period of time, potentially never being able to re-open.

g+b recruited a team of expert architects and engineers to rebut the owner's claimed emergent conditions and seized the initiative by obtaining a Yellowstone injunction against the owner while simultaneously asserting causes of action premised on New York's newly enacted commercial tenant harassment statute.

In the end, not only is g+b’s client the only tenant in that Manhattan building that is back in possession and up and running, but it is doing so with a new lease under very favorable terms negotiated by g+b that will keep it serving great food and cocktails for many more years to come

Partner Todd Shaw won an extremely acrimonious construction defect arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, defeating a homeowner’s claim for more than $300,000 in alleged damages.  The matter was pending for three years, involved tens of thousands of documents, and resulted in a six day arbitration before the AAA wherein the Firm’s contractor client was vindicated.

The decision, Ellen Zedeck Trust v. SJB, can be accessed in Decisions of Note under Contracts/Business Law or viewed here.

The Firm has secured two separate victories for its clients within the space of three days.

In State Farm v. Sahor, associate Anne Armstrong analyzed complex insurance coverage issues and drafted opposition papers in successfully keeping the Firm’s client from being added to a personal injury arbitration. The decision can be found in Decisions of Note under Insurance Coverage.

In Alpha v. Creative, associate Roy Anderson protected the Firm’s California based website technology client from being sued in New York by arguing that an out of state company that works remotely on a New York website cannot be sued in New York. The decision can be found in Decisions of Note under Contracts/Business Law.

The Firm has just secured a complete dismissal of an acrimonious lawsuit brought against its condominium association client by a condominium unit owner. The plaintiff had defaulted in his payment of common charges and been foreclosed upon; nonetheless, he brought a lawsuit against the condominium and its superintendent alleging among other things conversion, breach of contract, negligence, infliction of emotional distress, slander and assault, seeking $300,000.00 in damages. Following extensive discovery, associate Andrew Bourhill drafted a summary judgment motion and secured a complete dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims. The decision is Courtney v. Chadwin House and can be accessed in Decisions of Note.

The Firm has just secured a very favorable result for its co-op client after 11 years of aggressive litigation and a trial in New York Supreme Court that lasted several months. The case is Burbridge v. Soho Plaza Corp., Index No.  651495/2010.

Plaintiffs-shareholder/tenants sued for injunctive relief, to force their Manhattan co-op to relocate a cooling tower from the co-op roof.  Plaintiffs also sought money damages for a decade of leaks allegedly caused by the cooling tower, as well as attorneys fees and punitive damages.  Plaintiffs’ pretrial settlement demand was over $5 million dollars.

Justice Melissa Crane dismissed all but one claim.  Plaintiffs received no damage award for the leaks, no damage award for the warranty of habitability, no injunctive relief forcing the co-op to relocate the cooling tower, no attorneys fees, and no punitive damages. The sole claim the court gave the plaintiffs has no dollar amount attached, and will be the subject of another litigation.

Art Xanthos and Jeff Miragliotta handled the trial, while Joe Rapice handled the trial motions and the briefs.

Associate Attorney Roy Anderson succeeded in dismissing a New York Labor Law personal injury case brought by an ironworker, and then succeeded in having the decision upheld by the Appellate Division, Second Department.  The incredible result of a Labor Law dismissal by motion, and its affirmance on appeal, was made even more incredible due to the fact the plaintiff ironworker was injured by falling into an open ditch on a construction site.

In ruling for the Firm’s clients – a general contractor and owner - the Second Department held that good, clear deposition testimony submitted on the motion proved the inapplicability of Sections 200, 240(1), and 246 of the Labor Law, thereby warranting dismissal.

The case is Reyes v. Astoria 31^st Street Developers, Index No. 7856/2015.