Our attorneys work hard to get the best possible results for our clients. Please review our recent litigation successes encompassing our four departments and 40 practice areas. You may search by keyword, practice area or year of result.
Successful defense of large Philadelphia-based law firm in litigation of claim petition alleging post-concussion syndrome.
The claimant slipped and fell at work, injuring his head and neck. The carrier accepted a contusion injury. The claimant alleged multiple additional injuries including cognitive maladies, memory loss, speech problems, vision convergence, photophobia, cranial nerve injuries and balance issues. The claimant testified while wearing sunglasses due to his alleged photophobia condition. Thirteen hours of surveillance video disputed the claimant’s alleged symptoms (including his need for sunglasses).
We successfully defeated a workers’ compensation appeal involving a claim penalty/termination petition on behalf of a worldwide youth adult development organization. A Medical Only Notice of Compensation Payable acknowledged liability for a skull contusion and denied any associated disability. The claimant alleged injuries to the cervical spine, head, eyes, a concussion and post concussive syndrome, resulting in total disability.
We initially successfully defended a bifurcated claim petition filed by the claimant, an independent contractor. Opposing counsel appealed, and the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board reversed and remanded the decision for evidence on the medical component of the claim. However, contrary to the defendant’s argument, on remand, the judge granted the claim petition, finding she was “constrained” to reaffirm the Board on the independent contractor issue.
Defense verdict on a claim petition which alleged significant injuries following fall at a mushroom house.
The claimant fell from the second level of a mushroom house. There was no dispute as to the fall, nor that the claimant required hospitalization for multiple transverse process fractures in the lumbar spine. However, after approximately three months of treatment, the claimant was released to full-duty work, at which point, the claim was denied. A claim petition was filed, alleging not only total disability, but also a multitude of additional cognitive, spine and orthopedic injuries.
The claimant worked as a coal miner for approximately nine years in underground mining. The administrative law judge denied benefits, finding the claimant had failed to establish that he suffered from a totally disabling respiratory condition. The claimant appealed. The denial of benefits was affirmed on appeal.
This was a high-stakes FINRA arbitration case, motion to vacate the defense award in federal district court, and a precedential decision in the First Circuit following oral argument. The claimant retired early with a pension and 401(k) and rolled the funds into a securities account in 2002. On a tip from a friend, he invested his nest egg with a registered representative who years later was charged by the SEC and convicted of securities violations.
We obtained an order of Dismissal in favor of a municipality in connection with a lawsuit filed by a worker. The worker sustained catastrophic injuries as a result of a mishap on the job which caused him to fall from the roof of a condominium project under construction. This was a multi-party action in which our client, the municipality, issued the permits but failed to carry out the inspections.
The agents/agency represented the buyer/plaintiff in his purchase of a home in Dauphin County. The plaintiff claimed the agents failed to disclose to him prior to settlement that there were alleged defects in the A/C system and heat pump, and that the roof was old and needed to be replaced.
The plaintiff filed an Order to Show Cause to compel the defendants to defend and indemnify it in connection with a leak that occurred at a retail gasoline service center. A company retained to perform recent soil and groundwater sampling at the site punctured a 10,000 gallon underground storage tank. The plaintiff did not have the funding to perform the investigation or remediation of the property and, therefore, filed the Order to Show Cause.
In this employment law lawsuit, the plaintiff was a former employee who filed suit against our non-profit agency client, asserting claims of gender discrimination in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination and retaliation in violation of the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act. This matter involved a long and contested period of discovery, including extensive discovery demands, complex e-discovery and extensive motion practice.