ulcn sl15 29er wrsh 10/21/15 12:28 pm pafd 1 wingate ...this year’s hall of fame group. the...

Kathleen Kettles recently obtained afederal court order approving asettlement of $12,085,000 in a caseinvolving the failure to timely deliveran infant to a first-time mother,resulting in severe brain damage to

the child who is now 6 years old. This child cannotspeak, walk or talk and must be tube fed. Her parentsare completely devoted, but their day to dayexistence is filled with dealing with doctors’appointments, emergency room visits, outsidetherapies and managing or providing their child’sneed for extensive nursing services. “I am truly inawe of this family and despite the heartache ofhaving a child this disabled, it has been a joy to workfor them. This settlement will lessen the burden onthis incredible family.”

Kathy heads the Medical Malpractice team. Thougha practicing attorney for almost 28 years, she was anRN for ten years prior to going to law school.

During the litigation, Kathy worked extensively withwell known, respected experts in the fields ofobstetrics, maternal fetal medicine, neonatology,pediatric neurology, pediatric neuroradiology and alife care planner, to prepare the case for trial. It isthis attention to detail which results in an extremelyfavorable settlement for her clients.

“When I was a nurse, I often felt powerless to reallyhelp my patients, but as a nurse attorney, I get tohelp secure a child’s future, and there is no greaterfeeling of satisfaction.”

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

$12,085,000 SETTLEMENT

WWW.WRSHLAW.COM | 212.986.7353 | [email protected]

WINGATE, RUSSOTTI, SHAPIRO HALPERIN, LLP

2015 NEWSLETTER

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM


ANNOUNCEMENTS

FIVE WINGATE, RUSSOTTI, SHAPIRO & HALPERIN ATTORNEYS NAMED NEW YORKWOMEN LEADERS IN THE LAW 2015

As Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperin, LLP,enters its 25th year of practice, the firm has assembled ateam of personal injury and medical malpractice lawyerswho rank among the best in New York State forrepresenting plaintiffs.“Not only do our attorneys have extensive experience inpersonal injury litigation, but they are also well versed inthe courtroom, meaning we can expertly prepare and trythe most complicated of cases,” observes partner and co-founder Philip Russotti. “Simply put, our clients receivethe best representation from experienced litigators withexceptional judgment.”

Among these litigators are five attorneys who were recognized this year as New York Women Leaders in theLaw: Kathleen Kettles, Paula Greco, Nicole Gill, Brielle Goldfaden, and Veronica Sewnarine.A former registered professional nurse, Ms. Kathy Kettles brings more than 25 years of medical and legalexperience to her practice, in which she concentrates exclusively on medical malpractice and products liabilitycases. Her results comprise millions of dollars in verdicts and settlements for her clients; and in 2015, she hasalready secured a settlement of more than $12 million in a case involving a baby who was brain damaged at birth.“Medical malpractice cases require the ability to understand complex medical issues and causation problems, andKathy, with her combined medical and legal expertise, is one of the best there is at handling these issues,” Russottinotes.Like Kettles, Ms. Paula Greco has also been handling complicated plaintiffs’ personal injury litigation for morethan 25 years. In her practice she focuses on premises liability and automobile accident cases, and her manynotable results include a $1.5 million recovery in a premises accident case involving an elevator-related injury.“Paula has been with us since we started the firm in 1990, and she is excellent at conducting depositions in thesecomplicated cases,” Russotti says. “She is tough as nails and relentless.”Ms. Nicole Gill, who has 14 years of legal experience, ranks among the city’s top trial attorneys, with the uniqueadvantage of having served as a defense attorney for the New York City Law Department’s Corporation Counselprior to joining the firm. In one of her most recent trials, Gill obtained a $1.2 million verdict in a hotly contestedvehicle accident case, despite the fact that the firm’s client, a pedestrian, had difficulty explaining how she wasstruck.Since joining the firm in 2012, Mrs. Brielle Goldfaden has distinguished herself in a number of challenginggeneral negligence cases. Already, she has achieved multiple six-figure results, including a $750,000 settlement attrial in a case involving a three-car accident where the client, a doctor, made a terrific recovery and returned towork. These recoveries have led to her inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America, the National Trial Lawyers’“Top 40 Under 40” list, and the Super Lawyers’ “Rising Stars” recognition.Mrs. Veronica Sewnarine has been with the firm since 2013, and during that time she has assisted in all phasesof medical malpractice litigation, from inception through trial. Beyond her legal practice, she is actively involvedin a number of women’s professional organizations—such as the New York Women’s Bar Association, the QueensCounty Women’s Bar Association, and the Asian American Bar Association of New York—where she seeks toadvance the status of women within the profession.“These five women epitomize the caliber of attorney you would expect to find at this firm,” Russotti says. “Theirdedication to clients and the profession is illustrated in the high quality of their work, which is all directed towardone goal—obtaining the best result for each and every victim of negligence they represent.”

A

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM


ANNOUNCEMENTS

WINGATE, RUSSOTTI, SHAPIRO & HALPERIN JOIN INAUGURAL CLASS OF NEW YORK MEDICAL MALPRACTICE HALL OF FAME

VerdictSearch, an affiliate publication of the New York LawJournal, announced on October 10, 2014 its first evergroup of honorees for the Verdict and SettlementsMedical Malpractice Hall of Fame. The list includesthree cases handled by Phil Russotti.The cases, Diego v. Lin Zhu, LLC, Galindo v. WestchesterCounty HealthCorp, and Alvarez v. Sherman are 3 of 25medical malpractice verdicts and settlements included inthis year’s Hall of Fame group. The selected cases werethe 25 largest malpractice settlements and verdicts inNew York over the past five years as determined byVerdictSearch and the New York Law Journal.

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperin LLP, was one of only 17 law firms statewide that were recognized. Seniorpartner, Phil Russotti and only one other attorney in the state lead all attorneys with 3 of their cases included inthe Hall of Fame. Diego v. Lin Zhu was settled for $10,700,000 after plaintiff suffered a severe head injury due to a fall at work.Plaintiff did not receive a timely CT scan and suffered a stroke, causing her to remain in a wheelchair. Galindo v.WCHC, which settled for $10,200,000, concerned an infant that was not treated properly for symptoms of herpes,causing brain damage that could have been avoided with timely diagnosis and proper medication. Alvarez v.Sherman was settled for $10,000,000, a case where a doctor ignored fetal distress and the baby was ultimatelyborn with brain damage. A dinner was held on Thursday, November 20, 2014 at the University Club of New York to honor the chosenattorneys and firms. The WRSH firm attended where Phil Russotti accepted the three awards for his work onthe selected cases in front of peers and other honorees.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM


SETTLEMENTS & VERDICTS

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT$4 MILLION SETTLEMENT FOR PLUMBER

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partners PhilipRussotti, Kenneth Halperin &Mitchell Kahn Combine ToObtain $4 Million DollarSettlement.

Phil Russotti obtained a$4,000,000 settlement for ourclient, a 47 year old plumber whowas injured in a constructionaccident at the Kings CountyCourthouse. A duct which wasbeing dismantled struck him in thehead as he walked through the areawearing his hard hat. It was notsecured with ropes or pulleys andfell onto our client’s head.

The defendant contended that appropriatesafeguards were used, the plaintiff was warned ontwo occasions preceding the incident to avoid thearea because of the potential hazard, and that heremoved yellow caution tape to enter the areaimmediately before the incident occurred. Thedefendant maintained that the plaintiff was arecalcitrant worker, which constituted a defenseunder the labor law.

Mitch Kahn established at depositions that theworkers doing the dismantling, for amusementpurposes, spent some time watching the nightarraignments at the Courthouse, which remainedopen, and then sat around drinking coffee untilalmost 6:30am. This caused them to start workwhen the day shift was arriving, exactly what theywere not supposed to do.

A co-worker of the defendant’s company heard theplaintiff scream, rushed to him and called 911. Ina sworn statement, the witness indicated thatseveral minutes earlier she observed the defendantsworking without pulleys or ropes and simplycutting the hangers that secured the duct. Thewitness’s statement also reflected that no cautiontape was in the area. Futhermore, the witnessindicated that several minutes before the incidentoccurred she chastised the workers for conductingtheir work in an unsafe manner. The witnessmoved following the incident and when ultimatelyfound several years later, she indicated that she hadno recollection of the details contained in thestatement. However, Phil took her depositionspecifically to allow her to explain that the contentsof her statement were true and accurate whenmade and signed. Thus, we established that in theabsence of current recollection and in view of thefoundation established in the witness’s deposition,the statement would be admitted as a pastrecollection recorded exception to the hearsay rule,greatly strengthening our case.

As a result of the defendant's negligence, theplaintiff suffered a concussion as well as lumbarand cervical herniations. Approximately 1 ½ yearsafter the event the plaintiff underwent a lumbarfusion that included the installation of a titaniumcage. Approximately eight months later, theplaintiff had an initial cervical fusion. However,because of pseudoarthrodosis, the plaintiffrequired a second cervical fusion approximatelytwo years later. The plaintiff further contendedthat he suffered a mild traumatic brain injury thatleft him with moderate, but permanent, memoryand concentration deficits.

During negotiations, the defense relied on reports

of th m at su wh w w ca di a ca ea

T $4

C $3

ra ap hi irr th in fli op to

T de co an wh pl

CONSTRUCTION

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



he In

at nts ly

he on

ss nt ng

ss ly ad

he on nts

en he

he n,

ast le,

he ar

rs ar m he

er, iff ly

ed at ry

rts

of the treating neuropsychologist who found thatthe testing appeared to reflect a degree ofmalingering on the part of the plaintiff. However,at trial we would have pointed out that insubsequent testing, the plaintiff’s results improved,which would be inconsistent with someone whowas malingering. The plaintiff contended that hewas permanently unable to work in a physicalcapacity and that he sustained a significantdiminution in earning capacity. However, he hada limited earning history, which defendantcapitalized on in arguing to reduce the lostearnings claim.

The case settled on the day of jury selection for$4,000,000.

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT$3.75 MILLION SETTLEMENT FOR BRICKLAYER

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro &Halperin partner Phil Russotti.Our client, a 50 year old bricklayer,contended that a dumpster that wassituated on the forks of a hoistingmachine that was descending a

ramp, fell from the forks and toppledapproximately six inches to the ground, pinninghim against a wall. The plaintiff maintained thatirrespective of whether the dumpster fell becausethe container was not properly secured, hadinadequate hydraulics or if it was driven onto aflimsy ramp, the container was not properlyoperated or secured by hooks which were availableto prevent it from falling.

The plaintiff related that as the load wasdescending the ramp, a wheel at the right frontcorner broke off. He indicated that as he andanother worker pushed from behind, anotherwheel, at the left front corner also broke off. Theplaintiff then squatted in order to pick up the now

wheel-less front end of the device. Plaintiff’sforeman, who was at the back of the device, movedthe device forward, which slipped and pinnedplaintiff against the wall.

We argued that the defendants owner and GeneralContractor should be absolutely liable underLabor Law Sec. 240 (1). The plaintiff maintainedthat he suffered bilateral crush fractures to the feet,necessitating three surgeries, including anarthrodecis, and that future surgery may berequired. The plaintiff contended that he willsuffer permanent pain that will require painmedication, has a limp and that he is permanentlyunemployable in a physical labor position.

The defense moved for Summary Judgment,denying that Sec. 240 should apply. The plaintiffcountered that even if the elevation was very slight,it was nonetheless the effect of gravity whichcaused the dumpster to fall onto the plaintiff andcause the injuries. We cross-moved for SummaryJudgment on the Sec. 240 claim, and the motionswere pending at the time of the settlement.

The case settled for $3,750,000 after two days ofmediation.

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT$2.75 MILLION RECOVERY FOR ELECTRICIAN

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partner KennethHalperin obtained a settlement atmediation in the amount of$2,750,000 for a 50 year oldelectrician who was injured in anaccident on a construction site.

The accident in question occurredat a new building which was beingconstructed. After a lunch break,

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



plaintiff and his co-worker were waiting for thehoist elevator to bring them back to their workarea. The hoist elevator was situated on aplatform approximately four to five feet above theground and surrounded by a safety rail. Whilethe plaintiff was waiting for the elevator, he andhis co-worker were leaning on the safety railwhich suddenly came loose and caused them bothto fall to the ground.

Mitch Kahn was able to establish duringdepositions that the platform was used fordeliveries throughout the day. He furtherestablished that there were no inspections doneby the general contractor to ensure that when thesubject rail was removed for a delivery, that it wasproperly reattached afterward.

At the conclusion of discovery, plaintiff movedfor summary judgment pursuant to Labor Law240(1) and defendant cross-moved to dismissarguing that plaintiff was not entitled to theprotection of the Labor Law because he was notworking at the time of the accident. The Courtagreed with plaintiff and granted summaryjudgment.

As a result of the accident, plaintiff aggravatedpre-existing back disease and sustained herniateddiscs in both his lumbar and cervical spine. Hewas required to undergo an interbody fusion atL4-5 and at C4-5 and C5-6. Defendants arguedthat the cervical spine injury was degenerative.

Shortly after the accident, plaintiff begandeveloping headaches and symptoms of memoryloss and vision difficulties. Although plaintiff didnot strike his head and was not diagnosed with aconcussion, we obtained an expert to argue thatplaintiff may still have sustained cognitive deficitsfrom an undiagnosed concussion as a result of thewhiplash effect of the fall and the movement ofhis brain within his skull.

$1.25 MILLION RECOVERY FOR CONSTRUCTION TRIP AND FALL OVER A PIECE OF MASONITE

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partner KennethHalperin obtained a settlement inthe amount of $1,250,000 for a 39year old man who was injured in anaccident on a construction site.

The accident occurred while theplaintiff was in the process ofrepairing bricks on the parapetwall of the roof of a residential

apartment building in Manhattan. After layingseveral bricks, plaintiff stood up and stepped backto get a better visual of his work. As he steppedback he tripped and fell over a piece of masonitethat was curled up in a corner.

Mitch Kahn, who handled depositions,established that when plaintiff started work, themasonite was not there and that someonediscarded it improperly near where he wasworking. We argued that there was a violation ofLabor Sect. 241(6) and N.Y. State IndustrialCode Sect. 23-1.7.

Plaintiff's co-worker and foreman, however,stated that the masonite had been there whenthey started work and was protecting the roof ofthe building while they were working.Defendants argued that since the masonite wasproperly covering the roof, and thus a necessarypiece of equipment at the site, plaintiff was notentitled to recover.

As a result of the accident, plaintiff sustained aherniated disc that required surgery, and elbowand knee injuries that also required arthroscopicsurgery.

M $3

w de

In sh th bi an th in re hu th w sh pl ag th

In hy re pe no su ov

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



N

nd th

in 39 an

he of et

al ng

ck ed

te

ns, he

ne as of

al

er, en

of g.

as ry

ot

a w

ic

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE$3 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Prior to trial, Wingate, Russotti,Shapiro & Halperin partnersPhil Russotti and Jason Rubinobtained a $3,000,000 settlementon the eve of trial in a medicalmalpractice/wrongful death casearising out of a defendantOB/GYN’s failure to recommenda bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy(removal of the ovaries andfallopian tubes) in conjunction

with hysterectomy, resulting in subsequentdevelopment of ovarian cancer.

In April 2005, when decedent was 52 years old,she underwent a hysteroscopy and biopsy withthe defendant OB/GYN. The results of thisbiopsy demonstrated endometrial hyperplasia—an abnormal proliferation of cells of the lining ofthe uterus and a pre-cancerous condition whichincreases risk of ovarian cancer. The defendantrecommended a hysterectomy. Decedent’shusband, who was present during the visit whenthe hysterectomy was recommended, askedwhether his wife’s fallopian tubes and ovariesshould also be removed. According to theplaintiffs, the defendant OB/GYN recommendedagainst removing the tubes and ovaries becausethis would induce menopause.

In June 2005, decedent underwent ahysterectomy, and the tubes and ovaries were notremoved. In May 2007, decedent developedpelvic pain and, upon workup, a pelvic mass wasnoted. She thereafter underwent exploratorysurgery which revealed advanced (Stage IIIC)ovarian cancer. Decedent died of ovarian cancer

in April 2013. During the six year period betweenher diagnosis of cancer and her death sheendured significant pain and suffering.

On behalf of decedent and her husband,Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperincommenced a medical malpractice action andalleged that the defendant OB/GYN departedfrom accepted medical practice in recommendingagainst removal of the fallopian tubes and ovariesduring the 2005 hysterectomy. Specifically, wealleged that plaintiff was near menopause at thetime, and removing the tubes and ovaries wouldhave eliminated the risk of development ofovarian cancer in the future. We claimed that thefailure to remove the ovaries and tubes alloweddecedent to develop ovarian cancer. Thedefendant OB/GYN contended that he did makea recommendation to decedent to remove thetubes and ovaries, but she refused. We claimedthat this defense was refutable, however,inasmuch as none of the OB/GYN’s office notesor hospital notes ever indicated that such arecommendation was made or that plaintiffrefused. All of the settlement was attributed tothe pain and suffering defedent suffered, whichwas a significant settlement for those damages.

FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE BREAST CANCER$2.3 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partner Jason Rubinobtained a $2,300,000 settlement ina medical malpractice actioninvolving a failure to timelydiagnose breast cancer. Plaintiff, a

50 year old school teacher, went for a screening

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



mammogram at defendant medical group in2010, which was read as negative. One year later,plaintiff underwent another screeningmammogram, read by the same radiologist as in2010 which now indicated that there was asuspicious density which required follow up.Additionally, the radiologist dictated anaddendum to this report that stated that thereport of the 2010 mammogram study was notreflective of his dictation, i.e. that there was atranscription error. The 2010 study, in fact,showed a suspicious density which was notreported. As a result, there was a one year delayin the diagnosis of plaintiff’s breast cancer.

Plaintiff was diagnosed in 2011 with Stage IIBbreast cancer. She underwent neoadjuvantchemotherapy, then lumpectomy and radiationtherapy. Approximately one year later, she

developed a recurrence, which required her toundergo a bilateral mastectomy with extensivebreast reconstruction, multiple revision surgeriesand another course of chemotherapy.

We claimed that the radiologist was negligent forfailing to report the suspicious density in the2010 mammogram and, even if there was atranscription error, the radiologist was negligentfor failing to discover the error and signing off onthe report indicating that the study was benign.We claimed that if the cancer had been diagnosedone year earlier, it would have been Stage I andplaintiff would have required only a lumpectomyand radiation treatment. Additionally, herchances of suffering a recurrence would havebeen substantially diminished.

The case settled for the full extent of thedefendants’ malpractice liability policies.

TRUCK ACCIDENT$3.3 MILLION RECOVERY

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro &Halperin partner Phil Russottisettled the case during juryselection for $3,300,000. This wasa case brought by a 43-year-oldfront seat belted passenger who

had been picked up at her cleaning job by hersister. The collision occurred on Broadway inManhattan and there were two southbound travellanes as well as parking lanes on either side. Theplaintiff contended that the defendant truckdriver negligently steered from the left lane intothe right lane, causing the accident. To prove this,we relied upon rubber tire markings that were onthe host automobile and the absence of metal on

metal gouge marks. The plaintiff maintained thatthe host car then traveled out of control, rotatedaround to become perpendicular to the front oftruck and was struck again by the truck. It wasthis second impact of metal on metal that leftdents on the host vehicle. The defendant truckerdenied that the plaintiff’s claims were accurateand contended that the host driver caused thecollision by cutting him off as she was trying tomove to the left lane in anticipation of anupcoming left turn. The host driver, who had$100,000 in insurance coverage, was also sued.The host automobile had rubber markings thatran from host’s driver’s side door to the back ofthe car. The plaintiff’s accident reconstructionexpert, a former NASA scientist who helpeddesign the lunar landing module, contended therubber marks could only have been made by the

tr ri th in lo th T te w st of ex 19 th te pr cr

T ag he ro be th fr su in co Sh ex su un es w T se re

T $3

AUTOMOBILE

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



to ve

es

or he

a nt

on n. ed nd

my er

ve

he

at ed

of as

eft er te

he to

an ad d.

at of on

ed he he

truck’s tire when the truck was steered to theright and the leading edge of the right front ofthe tire impacted the car. The plaintiff’s expertindicated that the metal indentation marks in 3locations on the side of the car were produced bythe truck when it struck the car a second time.This physical evidence proved the plaintiff’stestimony of multiple impacts that commencedwhen the truck drifted into the right lane andstruck the host automobile, causing it to spin outof control. The plaintiff’s accident reconstructionexpert related that he conducted testing in the1990s which had dynamics that were identical tothat involved in the subject case. Films of thetesting would have played if the case hadproceeded to trial. We asserted that our expert’scredentials rendered him unimpeachable.

The plaintiff contended that she suffered anaggravation of a previously sustained lumbarherniation and a tear of the left, non-dominantrotator cuff tear. The plaintiff asserted thatbecause of the pain and limitations attendant tothe injuries, she will be permanently precludedfrom returning to cleaning work. Plaintiff hadsustained a lumbar herniation in a work-relatedincident in the late 1990s that was treated withconservative care, including physical therapy.She related that except for a short period ofexacerbation approximately eight years before thesubject accident, during which she alsounderwent conservative treatment, she had beenessentially asymptomatic and had been able towork until the collision with the truck occurred.The plaintiff maintained that because of thesevere pain caused by the aggravation, sherequired a lumbar fusion.

The case settled during jury selection for$3,300,000.

AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT$1.2 MILLION VERDICT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin associate NicoleMichelle Gill obtained a verdict of$1,200,000 for a 48 year oldwoman who was struck by a van asshe was crossing the street within

the crosswalk. Our client suffered multiplefractures and contusions to her feet, a torn ankleligament and lumbar herniation, which requiredsurgical fusion.

This was a significant victory because Nicole hadto try the case twice. The first two week trialresulted in a defense verdict, but Nicolesuccessfully moved to set it aside as against theweight of the evidence. It took a bitterly foughtfive week second trial to obtain the verdict.

Our client testified that as she began crossing atthe light, she observed the defendant in theopposite direction, waiting at the intersectionbefore turning left. After the light turned yellow,the defendant turned and was driving behind herwhen his van initially brushed against her back.When our client turned around, the van’s wheelsran over her feet causing her to fall. Thedefendant claimed that he did not see our clientbefore impact, and that his van did not run overour client’s feet. The defendant further deniedthat the accident caused the claimed injuries, andmaintained that they could well have been relatedto Lupus, a condition suffered by our client.Nicole proved through the testimony of medicalexperts that our client’s injuries were a directresult of this incident, which was supported bythe fact that she had no prior symptoms ortreatment that would be consistent with thedefendant’s contentions.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT $2.9 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin attorneys Tom Olivaand Joseph Stoduto obtained a $2,900,000 settlement atmediation for a client who was hit by an Access-A-Ride van. Ourclient, a young woman working inthe finance industry, was crossingan avenue in the MeatpackingDistrict with the light in her favorwhen she was hit in the crosswalk.

Despite being treated and released from BellevueHospital that day, it was later determined that shesuffered bulges to the discs in her neck, aherniated disc in her lower back and injuries toher left elbow which required arthroscopicsurgery to repair torn ligaments. As a result of herspinal injuries, she ultimately underwent cervicaland lumbar disc replacement instead of fusionsurgery. During the pre trial litigation JosephStoduto obtained summary judgment on theissue of liability against the driver defendant.

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT$2 MILLION RECOVERY

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partner Cliff Shapiroobtained a recovery for a 32 yearold male who was in the course ofhis employment with Access-A-Ride. Our client was stopped at a

red light when defendants’ motor vehicle, aflatbed tractor trailer, backed into the minibuswith such impact that the entire bus was pushedto the side. As a result of the accident, our clientsustained numerous injuries, including but not

limited to the necessity to undergo a cervicaldiscectomy and cervical fusion at C4-C5, C5-C6.

We were granted summary judgment on liability.A mediation was held where defendants offered$225,000. Needless to say, we did not accepttheir offer.

After further negotiations, Cliff was able toprocure a $2,000,000 offer of settlement, whichthe client accepted.

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT$1.5 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin attorney Robert J.Bellinson settled a case against theCity of New York on behalf of ourclient, a 55 year old woman whowas working for many years as a

teacher’s aide. While stopped in traffic she wasstruck by a NYC tow truck that backed up intothe front of her stopped car. She immediately feltback pain and went to a medical clinic fortreatment that day. Her back pain gotincreasingly worse and ultimately revealedinjuries to her lumbar spine. After conservativetreatment didn’t help, she underwent apercutaneous discectomy procedure about oneyear after the accident. Although the surgeryrelieved her symptoms temporarily, withinmonths her back pain returned and worsened.She then underwent spinal fusion surgery in thesummer of 2012.

Right before jury selection, the defendant hireda biomechanical engineer who opined that theaccident was so insignificant that it could nothave caused the spinal injuries. Thereafter, weretained a biomechanical engineer who was

pr th ex ca

O of of bo $1

PE $1

W as m on th no

Pr Sh C H du to $1 ye fu

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



al 6.

ty. ed

pt

to ch

nd J.

he ur ho

a as

to elt or

ot ed

ve a

ne ry

in d.

he

ed he

ot we

as

prepared to testify that the forces produced bythe collision, along with the wear and tearexisting on a 55 year old woman, could indeedcause the spinal injuries sustained by our client.

On the day of the trial there was a settlementoffer of $75,000; by the end of the presentationof evidence in our case, which included callingboth of her spinal surgeons, the case settled for$1,500,000.

PEDESTRIAN KNOCKDOWN$1.5 MILLION RECOVERY

Our client, a 63 year old homehealth worker, was injured whilewalking in a cross-walk in theBronx when she was struck by acity vehicle. As a result of theaccident, she suffered a fracturedorbital bone as well as soft tissueinjuries to her back, knee andshoulder, requiring surgery and theloss of three months of work.

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperinassociate Adam J. Roth, prior to depositions,moved for and was granted summary judgmenton the issue of liability. The City’s defense, thatthe driver was distracted by sun in his eyes, wasnot sufficient to defeat summary judgment.

Prior to discovery being completed, CliffShapiro began negotiating with the City. TheCity initially offered $250,000 to settle the case.However, using his expert negotiating skills anddue to our firm’s reputation and willingness to goto trial, Cliff was able to leverage an additional$1.25 million dollars while the case was still threeyears away from trial. Our client currently worksfull-time as a home health aide.

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT$1.45 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin attorneys Tom Oliva and Joseph Stoduto obtained asettlement on behalf of a 35 yearold working mother, who wasinjured when a commercial vanbacked out of a driveway, rammingthe car she was driving on thepassenger side. Her car was forcedinto the left lane, where it was thenside swiped by a garbage truck

which took off her front bumper. Our clientnever went to the hospital, but instead went to aphysical therapy clinic to treat her injuries of neckand shoulder pain. After several months ofphysical therapy offered no relief, she went to apain management doctor who gave her 2 epiduralshots in her neck, which gave her only temporaryrelief.

She had two nerve block treatments which wereunsuccessful. She then underwent aradiofrequency nerve ablation where the nervescausing pain are burned out using radiofrequencies. Unfortunately, this still did notalleviate her pain. Finally, two years later, sheunderwent cervical neck fusion surgery. Duringthis time our client remained at work, ran andworked out at her local gym.

During the discovery phase Joseph Stodutomoved for summary judgment which was grantedagainst the commercial van company. The trialwould have only dealt with damages and Tomsettled the case during jury selection in theamount of $1.45 million.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



STRUCK BY FALLING WALL FAÇADE$940,000 RECOVERY

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin attorneys CliffordShapiro and Victor Goldblumobtained a settlement for our 27year old client who contended thatas he was entering the building inwhich he resided, a piece of theconcrete facade dislodged andstruck him in the head. Theplaintiff contended that as a result,he suffered herniations and bulges

at four cervical levels, that there was cervical cordimpingement and that he required multi-levelspinal fusion surgery.

Since the building was less than six stories tall, thedefendant was not required by the AdministrativeCode to have an engineer periodically inspect it.But the plaintiff’s expert engineer would havemaintained that the facade would have probablyexhibited cracks before the portion fell, and theplaintiff contended that a proper inspection wouldhave disclosed the hazard.

The defendant denied having any notice of thedefective condition, and contended that the 3in x3in x 1in piece of concrete was too light to havecaused the claimed injuries. The plaintiffcountered that the cervical injuries werediagnosed shortly after the incident, and in viewof his age of 27 and the absence of any history ofprior cervical treatment or symptoms, the onlyprobable explanation for the injury was beingstruck by the piece of concrete that fell from thefacade.

The case settled prior to trial for $940,000 of the $1 million available insurance coverage.

TRIP AND FALL$750,000 RECOVERY FOR MILD TBI

Michael Fitzpatrick obtained a$750,000 recovery for a 69 year oldGreek immigrant who tripped andfell due to a raised cellar door lockhinge. The plaintiff caught his footon the exposed hinge and fell head

first into the corner of the defendant’s building,requiring 45 stitches and 13 staples in his head toclose the wound. He missed three months ofwork as a tailor following the accident. Our claimwas that the client suffered a mild traumatic braininjury. The defendant contested the TBI claimand their neuropsychological testing found noTBI but instead malingering. Plaintiff was ableto return to work as a tailor of fine clothing andthe defense claimed this proved he was notseriously injured. However, Michael deposed aco-worker who testified that plaintiff required farmore time to perform his work and was not thesame after the accident. This effort resulted inMichael being able to settle this case at mediationfor $750,000.

SLIP AND FALL$700,000 RECOVERY

Our client, a home health aide inher early 60s, contended that as shewas walking in the defendant’s fishand vegetable market she slippedand fell on a piece of wet cabbage.The plaintiff contended that she

observed produce leaves on the floor when sheentered approximately five to ten minutes earlier,and slipped on one when she was trying to avoidboxes on the floor in the produce aisle.

T w ne m ad m su an

T th lit at ho lu an W pa $7

RA $1

m ca w ca co of al cr th

PREMISES

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



a ld

nd ck

ot ad

g, to

of m

in m

no le

nd ot

a ar

he in

on

in he sh ed e. he

he er,

id

The plaintiff suffered a lumbar herniation thatwas confirmed by MRI and which ultimatelynecessitated fusion surgery, and a torn medialmeniscus which required arthroscopic surgery, inaddition to undergoing surgery for a fracturedmetatarsal. Our client maintained that she willsuffer extensive permanent pain and weaknessand can no longer work.

The defendant argued on the issue of credibilitythat the jury should consider that the plaintiff waslitigious in nature and stopped at her initialattorney’s office on her way home from thehospital. Defendant further contended that herlumbar surgery was unnecessary and her lumbarand knee injuries were degenerative in nature.Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro and Halperinpartner William Hepner settled the case for$700,000 at a mediation.

SLIP AND FALL$700,000 RECOVERY

At pretrial mediation, Wingate,Russotti, Shapiro and Halperinattorney Victor Goldblum,obtained a settlement for ourclient, a 63 year old woman whoslipped and fell as a result of

stepping on a shoe box left in an aisle in adepartment store. As a result of the fall, our clientsuffered a shoulder tear and had shoulderreplacement surgery. The defendant argued thatthe fall was not caused by negligence, but ratherby physical issues caused by the plaintiff’sParkinson’s disease. After a lengthy mediation,the case was settled for $700,000.

RAIL ROAD ACCIDENT$1.5 MILLION SETTLEMENT

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro andHalperin partner Bill Hepnersettled this matter at the secondmediation of this case, five daysbefore he was to begin trial.Plaintiff was a track worker for a

major rail road. He fell off of a stationary flatcar while walking on stacked wood timbers. Itwas alleged that the timbers had a chemical sealercalled creosote on them, which created a slipperycondition for plaintiff, and the rail road did notoffer proper protection for its worker. Defendantalleged that plaintiff let go of the boom of thecrane he was using as a hand hold to walk acrossthe timbers thus causing the accident himself.

Plaintiff died one year after the accident due tocomplications from kidney disease. Billsuccessfully argued under the F.E.L.A. statue thatthe accident was a cause of his death. This wasparticularly helpful in this case because theplaintiff was in such a condition after the accidentthat he could not be deposed to give his renditionof the accident under oath. The defendant wasrelying on a post accident interview with theplaintiff to blame the whole occurrence on theplaintiff, and on one witness who said the plaintiffadmitted to letting go of the crane. Throughextensive depositions of plaintiff’s co-workers andthe use of an expert, Bill was able to effectivelyargue that defendant had a significant chance oflosing liability at trial, and that the allegedadmission by the plaintiff that he let go of the

F.E.L.A.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM



NEW ASSOCIATES

crane claimed to have been heard by a witnesswould prove to be incredible at trial.

Plaintiff sustained a number of fractures in thefall. Due in large part to a severe underlyingand pre-existing kidney problem, plaintiffdeveloped complications in the hospital whichled him to go into a coma, from which he cameout of but was never the same. Bill was able toconvince the defendant that a jury wouldbelieve that plaintiff’s prior condition wasmade significantly worse as a result of theaccident and played a part in causing plaintiff’sdeath. Bill argued that kidney disease andunderlying diabetes did not cause his death,

but that the fall led to an acceleration andworsening of his condition which contributedto his death.

The sole beneficiary of the plaintiff’s estate washis son, who was five years old at the time ofthe accident and did not live with his father.Bill argued that there should be a significantrecovery for the loss of guidance plaintiff's sonwould suffer without his father’s presence.The case settled at mediation for $1.5 million.

ERIC HORN

Eric Horn joined the firm in 2015 as an associate. He currently handles pretriallitigation in construction accident matters. Eric’s responsibilities also include casemanagement in a wide variety of cases in the areas of general negligence, automobileliability and premises liability. Prior to joining WRSH, Eric practiced in the field ofplaintiff personal injury law and litigated numerous cases to both trial and settlement.Eric has practiced for approximately 16 years in New York City.

Eric was born in New York City and raised in neighboring Rockland County, New York. Hegraduated from Lehigh University in 1994 with a major in history and minor in political science.Eric’s undergraduate studies were distinguished by Dean’s List distinction for academic achievement.He also graduated from Western New England College School of Law in 1997 where he was amember/editor on the law review. Eric was admitted to practice in New York in 1999.

Eric is currently a member of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association and Association of theBar of the City of New York. Eric currently resides in New Jersey with his wife and son.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:28 PM


NEW ASSOCIATESContinued

f

FRANK J. LOMBARDO

Attorney Frank J. Lombardo began his career in 1987 after graduating fromThomas M. Cooley Law School. Mr. Lombardo has been litigating and trying casesto verdict in the New York and Federal District Courts for over 25 years, specializingin construction and Labor Law cases, insurance coverage litigation and othernegligence actions including automobile, premises and products liability. He hassuccessfully briefed and argued appeals in the New York Appellate Division, Firstand Second Departments, as well as the New York State Court of Appeals. Mr.

Lombardo has been a member of the Brooklyn-Manhattan Trial Lawyers Association for the past19 years, of which he is the former President.

BRYCE MOSES

Hired by former United States Attorney General Janet Reno, Bryce Moses forgedhis trial skills in Miami, Florida, as a felony prosecutor and conducted many successfultrials resulting in the conviction and sentencing of violent criminals. His performancecaught the attention of the State Attorney and Circuit Court Judges who describedBryce as a trial attorney whose ”...trial skills and preparation not only showed in hissuccess after success in trial, but earned the respect of opposing counsel.”

Bryce returned to New York where he continues to fight for victims' rights. He focuseshis practice exclusively on representing people seriously injured due to the negligence of others, againstmunicipalities and corporate defendants resulting in multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements.

Bryce's results have earned him the privilege, at the request of the New York State Bar Association, tolecture hundreds of practicing New York lawyers on winning trial techniques. His clients enjoy awonderful trial success rate that provides them well deserved results. He has conducted trials in everyborough of New York City, and is admitted to practice law in the states of New York and Florida.

OF COUNSEL

PAUL CORDELLA

Paul Cordella joined Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperin in 2015. He has spenthis career representing injured clients in an array of legal matters involving premisesliability, automobile accidents, construction accidents, complex product liability, andpharmaceutical litigation.

Paul received his Juris Doctor from New York Law School, where he served as aneditor on the law school’s Media Law and Policy Bulletin. He received his Bachelor’s

degree from Hofstra University.

Paul is admitted to practice law in New York State and the United States District Court for theSouthern and Eastern Districts of New York.

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:29 PM

The Graybar Building420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2750New York, NY 10170

PRSRT STDU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDBURLINGTON, VTPERMIT NO 601

WINGATE, RUSSOTTI, SHAPIRO HALPERIN, LLP

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING WWW.WRSHLAW.COM | 212.986.7353 | [email protected]

NEWSLETTERWINGATE, RUSSOTTI, SHAPIRO HALPERIN, LLP

PARTNERS

Philip A. Russotti

Clifford H. Shapiro

Kenneth J. Halperin

William P. Hepner

Jason M. Rubin

Mitchell R. Kahn

William A. Wingate(1927 – 2009)

ASSOCIATES

Joseph P. Stoduto

Nicole M. Gill

Michael J. Fitzpatrick

Adam J. Roth

Brielle C. Goldfaden

Veronica Sewnarine

Victor Goldblum

Jason Linden

Eric Horn

Paul Cordella

OF COUNSEL

Kathleen P. Kettles

Paula M. Greco

Robert J. Bellinson

Thomas M. Oliva

I. Bryce Moses

Frank J. Lombardo

Enrique O. Guerrero

David M. Schwarz

PRACTICE AREAS

• Construction Accidents

• Medical Malpractice

• Premises Liability

• Products Liability

• Motor Vehicle Accidents

• Wrongful Death

• Birth Injuries

• Brain Injuries

OUR TEAM

Updt_Sp15_29fx_WRSH 10/21/15 12:29 PM

ulcn sl15 29er wrsh 10/21/15 12:28 pm pafd 1 wingate ...this year’s hall of fame group. the...

Documents