Christopher J. DiCicco
Areas of Practice
Christopher is an shareholder in the Casualty Department where he concentrates his practice mostly in the area of admiralty and maritime litigation. Chris regularly handles maritime personal injury defense cases and marine construction cases, including cases involving the Jones Act and the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. He also handles cargo defense matters, including those involving warehouses and transportation brokers. Other maritime experience includes claims involving allisions, collisions, groundings, shipboard fires, and marine insurance disputes. He also has experience handling aviation and product liability matters.
In May 2008, Chris graduated with honors from Villanova University with a bachelor's degree in Political Science. He obtained his juris doctor in June of 2011 from Brooklyn Law School.
Chris has been recognized for the last several years as a New York Metro and New Jersey Super Lawyer Rising Star.
Chris is admitted in the states of New York and New Jersey, and he actively handles litigation in both states. In addition, Chris is admitted in the following federal courts: the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Successfully obtained summary judgment dismissing all claims against our client in a marine construction NY Labor Law case pending in Supreme Court Rockland County. The case involved bodily injuries sustained to an employee of our client which was a sub-subcontractor at the site of the new Mario Cuomo Bridge. The property owner, general contractor and the subcontractor each cross-claimed and/or third-partied our client into the case seeking contractual and common law indemnity and contribution pursuant to the terms and conditions of the various contracts. We argued and the Court agreed, since there was no finding of negligence against our client causing the injuries sustained to plaintiff, the indemnification clauses were not implicated. The Court found that there was no evidence demonstrated that our client caused in whole or in part the injuries plaintiff sustained. The plaintiff and general contractor made motions to reargue which were both denied. The parties also filed appeals which are currently pending in the Appellate Division.
Obtained summary judgment in a maritime personal injury case in favor of The City of New York and the New York City Economic Development Corp. (NYCEDC). The suit was for personal injuries sustained to a dock builder. The City was the owner of the East River Ferry Landing’s Project at a pier on East 34th Street in Manhattan. The NYCEDC acted as The City’s project manager. Suit was brought under the New York State Labor Law Sections 200, 240(1), and 241(6), as well as common law negligence. As to the Labor Law 240(1), the court determined that this section did not apply to the facts as the plaintiff’s alleged injury (caused by the repetitive nature of receiving buckets of epoxy, which were lowered down to him from a barge, and then he carried the buckets across a float stage and poured the epoxy into pile jackets) was only tangentially related to gravity and was not caused by the kind of gravity-related risks that Labor Law 240(1) intended to cover. As to the plaintiff’s Labor Law 200 and common law negligence claims, plaintiff’s counsel conceded during oral argument that there was no basis to proceed with such claims against The City and NYCEDC. Lastly, with respect to the plaintiff’s Labor Law 241(6) claims, the plaintiff did not oppose our motion to dismiss that claim.
Obtained the dismissal for our client by motion as a result of plaintiff's failure to comply with the applicable two-year statute of limitations. Our client was the owner of the facility at which plaintiff was operating a loaded trailer while in the employ of the lessee of the yard, when the trailer tipped over while plaintiff was moving it from the loading bay to the other side of the yard. Plaintiff sustained very serious bodily injuries. In addition to the dismissal of plaintiff's Complaint, we also recovered approximately 50% of our attorney's fees incurred on behalf of our client on our third-party claims against the plaintiff’s employer and lessee of the yard, pursuant to the lease agreement between our client and the lessee of the yard.
Obtained the dismissal of plaintiff's cargo claims against our client, a non-vessel operating common carrier, during a bench trial in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Union County, Special Civil Part, following the successful cross-examination of the plaintiff.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of the owner and property management company of a senior housing complex in a case in which the elevator car doors on one of the elevators in the building struck plaintiff as she was entering the elevator, resulting in personal injuries. The plaintiff alleged that our clients were negligent in allowing a hazardous condition to exist on the property. At the conclusion of discovery, we moved for summary judgment on liability, arguing the lack of any evidence of a defect or malfunction with respect to the elevator doors on the incident date, or alternatively, the lack of any actual or constructive notice of the alleged hazardous condition, if it even existed in the first place. The court (Monmouth County Superior Court) agreed, focusing on the lack of notice to the owner and property manager, and granted our motion for summary judgment dismissing all claims and cross-claims against our clients, with prejudice.
Obtained the dismissal of the plaintiff’s personal injury action, which arose from a boating accident that occurred during a regatta that took place in the waters off of Little Egg Harbor in Beach Haven, New Jersey. At the time of the accident, the plaintiff was sixteen years old. The lawsuit was not commenced until more than three years after the accident. We filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint on the basis that it was barred by the three (3) year Uniform Statute of Limitations (46 U.S.C. § 30106 (formerly 46 U.S.C. § App’x 763a)) applicable to all maritime tort actions and was not subject to New Jersey’s infant tolling statute. The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey agreed and granted our motion dismissing the plaintiff's Complaint.
(Not So) Straight Forward and Freight Forward: Claims Handling Under Shipper's Interest Cargo Insurance, AIMU/MICA Seminar “Marine Insurance: A Global Perspective,” New York, June 2018
Schoenbaum Longshore & Harbor Workers Compensation Act - Chapter 5, Marshall Dennehey Client Presentation, March 2018
Chapter 3 –Schoenbaum's Admiralty and The General Maritime Law (3-14 through 3-24), Client Seminar, December 16, 2015
Chapter 3 –Schoenbaum's Admiralty and The General Maritime Law (3-1 through 3-13), Client Seminar, November 17, 2015
Impact of Long Shore and New York Labor Law, the Jones Act and McBride Decision on Punitive Damages Under Maritime Law, Client Seminar, April 2015
Brief Overview of New York No-Fault Insurance Law, April 2012
Case Law Alerts, regular contributor, 2016-present
“Brief Overview of Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act – History, Procedure and Recent Trends,” Defense Digest, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2014
The Super Lawyers list is issued by Thomson Reuters. A description of the selection methodology can be found here. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.