NY court reversed denial of summary judgment to vehicle manufacturer/distributor, finding they made prima facie case showing they were not vicariously liable for actions of franchisee dealership and that plaintiff did not raise triable issue of fact.

The plaintiff brought a personal injury action against a vehicle dealership, a manufacturer and a distributor based on injuries allegedly sustained when the front driver’s-side wheel fell off shortly after the vehicle was serviced at the franchise Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirms trial court’s refusal to open the judgment of non pros against plaintiff.

The plaintiff filed a claim for property damage to her vehicle four years after the date of the accident. The arbitration panel dismissed her claim based on the two-year statute of limitations. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

As a result of plaintiff’s unauthenticated exhibits and premature filing of suit, court sided with defendant and strengthened case law for insurance carriers looking to dismiss lawsuits filed primarily to obtain attorney fees.

This suit involved a potential confession of judgment due to the insurance carrier issuing a partial payment on the claim after suit was filed.  Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

New Jersey Superior Court concludes that grant of summary judgment on basis of New Jersey Tort Claims Act was improper because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the cause of motor vehicle accident.

The trial court found that the defendant/township and its snowplow driver were entitled to summary judgment after an accident that occurred while the snowplow driver was plowing the roads and collided with the plaintiff. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

When confronted with evidence that defendant could have avoided accident, a finding that weather caused accident is inappropriate. Court also affirmed lower court’s ruling that strict adherence to specific city’s notice of claim form was not required.

The plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident with a snowplow driver for the City of Kearney. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

Sanctions awarded after court determines insurer knew/should have known its improper venue defense was not supported by application of existing law to material facts where same clause had been determined ambiguous by District Court of Appeal.

This suit involved the defendant’s failure to pay the plaintiff’s claim for PIP benefits for treatment rendered to Mr. Rither. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

Successful defense of claim petition alleging neurologic injuries from a slip and fall on ice.

The claimant alleged issues with his speech, vision and balance. His treating physician diagnosed a concussion with post-concussion syndrome and cervicalgia resulting in gait, visual and speech dysfunction, headaches, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, sensitivity to light and sound, and difficulty walking. The judge limited the injury to a scalp contusion and traumatic Bell’s Palsy, awarded less than 11 weeks’ of benefits, and terminated benefits as of our IME.

Lumbar fusion surgery and indemnity benefits denied.

We represented a national internet retailer in the successful denial of a proposed lumbar fusion surgery and indemnity benefits. The claimant was awarded the injury and conservative medical treatment, however, the lumbar spine fusion surgery was denied, as were total and partial disability benefits. The client avoided a complex multi-level lumbar spine fusion surgery (L3-S1), total and partial disability benefits, and the post-surgical care. Because the surgery will not occur, the client is also relieved of a large post-operative permanent impairment award and surgical disfigurement.