Brittany has developed valuable litigation experience in several defense practice areas including personal injury, automobile liability, premises liability, property damage and products liability as a member of the Casualty Department. Through her practice, Brittany has represented a variety of clients, including contractors, non-profit organizations, corporations, small businesses and individuals.
Within her diverse practice, Brittany has taken cases to trial, arbitration, and magistrate court and obtained favorable results at all levels. Moreover, she has resolved numerous cases through effective settlement negotiations and mediation. Brittany has represented clients in both state and federal courts.
Brittany earned her juris doctor in 2011 from The University of Pittsburgh School of Law. Brittany attended Franklin & Marshall College where she received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology in 2008.
Results
Summary Judgment Obtained in a Pennsylvania Trip-and-Fall Case
We obtained summary judgment for residential renters in a trip-and-fall case. The plaintiff tripped and fell on a set of porch steps at our clients’ home while attending a barbeque, breaking her ankle. She brought claims against the homeowner. The homeowner then joined our clients, asserting claims of negligence and contractual indemnity under the lease agreement. During her deposition, the plaintiff testified that she was familiar with the poor condition of the steps, had spoken with the renters about the steps prior to her fall, and witnessed two people, an adult and a child, trip on the steps during the same barbeque event. The homeowner also testified at his deposition that it was his responsibility to repair and maintain the subject stairs. We argued that our clients were not required to indemnify the homeowners under the Perri-Ruzzi rule, and that they owed no duty to the plaintiff, a licensee, as she knew of the condition of the steps and the risks involved in using them. The court agreed and dismissed all claims against the clients.
Summary Judgment Secured in Slip and Fall Case
We obtained summary judgment on behalf of a university in a slip and fall case. The plaintiff, a university student, slipped and fell during an active winter storm as she was walking from one campus building to another. Discovery showed that the plaintiff received an emergency alert from the university warning of potentially icy conditions prior to exiting the building and that freezing rain was still falling as the plaintiff was walking. We argued, and the court agreed, that the university owed no duty to the plaintiff to protect against general slippery conditions or to pretreat sidewalks prior to, during or immediately after the storm.
Thought Leadership
Case Law Alerts
Appellate Division Dismisses Contribution Claim Against Employer for Lack of Notice
November 3, 2026
In Rosenblatt v. Mora, the Appellate Division addressed whether defendants could pursue a third-party contribution claim against the decedent's employer, Lots O Bagels, based on allegations of negligent training and supervision. The underlying action arose from a fatal collision involving a vehicle and an employee operating an electric scooter while performing deliveries. Rosenblatt v. Mora, 2026 NY Slip Op 04220, 251 A.D.3d 599 (App. Div.). The court held that the third-party complaint failed to state a viable contribution claim and dismissed it. The court explained that a negligent supervision or training claim requires allegations that the employer knew or should have known of the employee's propensity for the conduct that caused the injury and failed to take appropriate action. Because the complaint contained no factual allegations showing the employer had notice of any dangerous or negligent conduct by the employee, or explaining how the employee's scooter operation was negligent, the allegations were conclusory and insufficient. Accordingly, the court reversed the lower court's ruling and dismissed the contribution claim against the employer.
Case Law Alerts
Emergency Doctrine Bars Claims in Pedestrian-Vehicle Accident
November 3, 2026
In a personal injury action, the Appellate Division considered whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment in a pedestrian-vehicle collision involving an infant pedestrian who ran onto a highway where pedestrian access was prohibited. Defendants argued that the pedestrian's conduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident and that the driver acted reasonably when confronted with a sudden emergency. Danielle W. v. Li, 2026 NY Slip Op 04821, 251 A.D.3d 477 (App. Div.) The court agreed and granted summary judgment to the defendants. It held that the infant pedestrian's unlawful entry onto the highway was the sole proximate cause of the collision and that the driver was protected by the emergency doctrine. The evidence showed that when the pedestrian suddenly ran into the roadway, the driver immediately reacted by removing his foot from the accelerator and attempting to change lanes. The court found these actions reasonable under the circumstances and concluded that neither the driver's common-law duty of care nor his statutory duty to exercise due care toward pedestrians was breached. The court therefore dismissed the claims against all defendants.
