Insights
Overview: CPLR Amendments to §3101(f) and New §3122-b Insurance Disclosure Laws
March 1, 2022
Guy Levasseur maintains a diverse civil litigation practice focused on the defense of complex tort claims through trial as well as related insurance coverage matters. Guy also manages litigation for international and Fortune 500 companies and has supervised national accounts for domestic and London-based insurance carrier clients.
Guy currently defends numerous transportation, construction, premises liability and security, product liability and Labor Law claims for clients in transportation, telecommunications, hospitality, construction, real estate and other areas. During his more than 25 years of varied legal practice, Guy has handled a wide range of litigation and claims throughout the United States and the United Kingdom. Guy directly litigates or supervises all aspects of a case from inception through trial or mediation and often assists in resolving related insurance coverage issues. Many of these cases are severe exposure matters involving wrongful death or permanent disability claims, including cases with allegations of amputations or paraplegia. Additional areas in which Guy has practiced during his career include commercial, subrogation, reinsurance and environmental disputes.
Guy was seconded to a Lloyds of London insurance syndicate/ Fortune 100 corporation in an in-house counsel role, assisting in handling and evaluating claims and providing advice and counsel while learning London Market practices and procedures. Through this experience, he gained an in-depth understanding of insurer operations, including claims management and reserve-setting.
Having delivered presentations to numerous clients in the United States and London on topics such as U.S. civil procedure, insurance coverage, claims handling, e-Discovery and the significance of depositions, Guy also has given CLE and CE presentations on topics ranging from litigation experts to settlement negotiations to fire-related litigation.
Guy assists in recruiting, training, managing and mentoring a team of more than 25 attorneys, paralegals and staff.
Noelle Robinson (Of Counsel-White Plains, NY) and New York partners Guy Levasseur and Thomas Comer defended a NY county, transit operators, and bus driver in a personal injury case with a potential value in excess of $5 million. The plaintiff alleged a fall on a transit bus, from which he initially claimed cervical, lumbar, and right knee complaints treated with injections, but later claimed a traumatic brain injury and cognitive impairments, as well as a permanent inability to work. The plaintiff refused to settle, and the case was set to go to trial in January. Noelle filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff was not able to establish that the braking of the bus was unusual or violent. In its Decision and Order, the court found it persuasive that even in his inconsistent testimony, plaintiff admitted that the bus was “moving very slowly” when the alleged incident occurred. The driver confirmed at deposition that he slowed upon observing the brake lights of the vehicle in front of the bus, and that the passenger reported at the time that he did not need medical attention. The decision determined that our clients were entitled to judgment as a matter of law in that the bus was not caused to move in an unusual or violent manner, agreeing that the plaintiff provided no objective evidence of any movement of the bus other than “the jerks and jolts commonly experienced in city bus travel,” despite the plaintiff’s disclosure of an expert with decades of experience, to assert that the bus violated national standards for “jerk rates,” and that the plaintiff raised no triable issue of fact.
Noelle G. Robinson, Guy J. Levasseur and Thomas W. Comer
New York City Of Counsel Saige Subick and Partner Guy Levasseur obtained summary judgment for our private-sector transit operator client on liability dismissing a New York state court case in which a bus passenger claimed catastrophic injuries after a bus stopped suddenly when cut off by a vehicle that fled the scene. The court found Saige and Guy met the burden of proof in showing an emergency doctrine situation existed as a result of the actions of the non-party vehicle. Saige appeared for oral argument three separate times for several hours overall, as there were multiple judges who were assigned to the case. The plaintiff alleged a shoulder injury and a stroke such that he has not worked since April 2021. The potential exposure/sustainable value exceeded $3 million. The decision is even more rewarding as the plaintiff’s counsel had improperly moved for sanctions, preclusion, and to strike our answer for the alleged failure to provide all discovery sought (that motion was denied but only after more than a year of motion practice).
Saige A. Subick and Guy J. Levasseur
New York City partners Adam Guzik and Guy Levasseur obtained summary judgment for the firm’s client, the largest private-sector transit operator in North America, in New York Supreme Court, Nassau County. The matter involved a bus passenger who was injured when our client’s bus veered into a guardrail on the side of the road after a steering component failed. The court found Guy and Adam met the burden of proof in showing an emergency doctrine situation existed as a result of the sudden loss of steering with no notice, and where evidence in the form of more than 1,800 pages of maintenance records indicated the bus was well maintained. The plaintiff's expert report in opposition was deemed to be purely speculative. The sustainable verdict value at trial could have exceeded $3 million.
Adam C. Guzik and Guy J. Levasseur