Judy Selmeci is a dedicated appellate specialist and a core member of the firm’s national Appellate practice. She is the go-to resource for briefing and arguing appeals, including new appellate cases. Her practice covers at the appellate level all substantive areas of the law handled by the firm. She has handled hundreds of appeals, including before all New York appellate divisions and New Jersey appellate courts and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. These cases have resulted in more than 200 published decisions to Judy’s name and frequently facilitated favorable dispositions of other cases, including advantageous settlements.

In addition, Judy is heavily involved in setting strategy for cases in the pre-trial and trial phases. She assists at the trial level with advice regarding long-term strategy, procedural issues and drafting complex motions for colleagues, especially in high-exposure cases. This consultation is done with an eye toward dismissal at the trial level and positioning cases in the best possible way for any eventual appeal. Once a case is on trial, Judy provides trial-monitoring, including daily transcript review and assistance. In this capacity, she is able to provide daily feedback and research and analysis that can enhance the strength and impact of the firm’s arguments with the trial court and help ensure error preservation for the possibility of appeal.

Judy is most respected for her ability to win long-shot cases and for advancing the law in a favorable way for our clients. A classic example is an early 2018 victory where Judy handled the appeal of an orphan seeking legal status in the United States before an appellate court that had not heard precedent cases of this type in the past. In the resulting decision, agreeing with Judy’s arguments, the court adopted the law from other appellate courts and awarded our pro bono client the relief he needed. In doing so, the court created new and highly favorable precedent for others in similar circumstances.

Judy has lectured and published extensively on legal issues, including procedural points of law that are helpful to the firm’s clients, many of whom are lawyers or have legal backgrounds. Judy provides nearly daily training in motion writing and procedural issues to many of the firm’s junior associates.

Areas of Focus

Appeals
Appellate law is unique in that attorneys present issues to a multi-judge panel in briefs and at oral argument. There is no additional discovery and the record is limited to the testimony and evidence presented to the trial court. Successful presentations on appeal turn on the record developed before the trial court, the applicable law, and the appellate practitioner’s ability to identify and present favorable arguments. Judy has exceptional research, analytical and writing skills in addition to an effective and distinctive oral argument style that she skillfully combines with her broad and practical knowledge of substantive areas of law and familiarity with appellate practice. These skills, knowledge and abilities enable her to prevail before the often-demanding judges on appellate panels.

The Law of Organ Donation
Among Judy’s impressive credentials is her involvement with most New York City organ donation cases in which an organ procurement organization (OPO) was sued for its role in the transplant process. In most cases, Judy has been able to secure the OPOs’ dismissal in these highly sensitive cases, sometimes in precedent-setting decisions. This experience makes her one of the foremost practitioners in this emerging field.

    Education

    • Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University (J.D., 2005)
    • Rutgers University (B.A., 2000)

    Bar Admissions

    • New York
    • New Jersey

    Court Admissions

    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
    • U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey

    Professional Affiliations

    • New York State Bar Association
    • New York State Medical Defense Bar Association

Judy C. Selmeci

Judy Selmeci is a dedicated appellate specialist and a core member of the firm’s national Appellate practice. She is the go-to resource for briefing and arguing appeals, including new appellate cases. Her practice covers at the appellate level all substantive areas of the law handled by the firm. She has handled hundreds of appeals, including before all New York appellate divisions and New Jersey appellate courts and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. These cases have resulted in more than 200 published decisions to Judy’s name and frequently facilitated favorable dispositions of other cases, including advantageous settlements.

In addition, Judy is heavily involved in setting strategy for cases in the pre-trial and trial phases. She assists at the trial level with advice regarding long-term strategy, procedural issues and drafting complex motions for colleagues, especially in high-exposure cases. This consultation is done with an eye toward dismissal at the trial level and positioning cases in the best possible way for any eventual appeal. Once a case is on trial, Judy provides trial-monitoring, including daily transcript review and assistance. In this capacity, she is able to provide daily feedback and research and analysis that can enhance the strength and impact of the firm’s arguments with the trial court and help ensure error preservation for the possibility of appeal.

Judy is most respected for her ability to win long-shot cases and for advancing the law in a favorable way for our clients. A classic example is an early 2018 victory where Judy handled the appeal of an orphan seeking legal status in the United States before an appellate court that had not heard precedent cases of this type in the past. In the resulting decision, agreeing with Judy’s arguments, the court adopted the law from other appellate courts and awarded our pro bono client the relief he needed. In doing so, the court created new and highly favorable precedent for others in similar circumstances.

Judy has lectured and published extensively on legal issues, including procedural points of law that are helpful to the firm’s clients, many of whom are lawyers or have legal backgrounds. Judy provides nearly daily training in motion writing and procedural issues to many of the firm’s junior associates.

Judy C. Selmeci

Peticca Gets Reckless Language Stricken; Affirmed on Appeal with Audibert & Selmeci

Chris Peticca (Associate-White Plains, NY) defended a hospital in a case in which the plaintiff pled that the our client’s conduct was “careless” and “reckless,” and negligent. In conferences and, ultimately, by motion submitted on the court’s invitation, Chris convinced Judge Frishman (Bronx County) to strike the “careless” and “reckless” language from the pleadings. The plaintiff appealed. On the appeal handled by Julia Audibert (Associate-New York, NY) and Judy Selmeci (Partner-New York, NY), the plaintiff challenged the timeliness of the motion and argued that the possibility of punitive damages lingers, including pursuant to Pub. H. Law 2801-d. We pointed out in response that none of that is right, arguing that the motion was made when the judge invited the defendant to submit it, so it was entirely within the court’s discretion to entertain the motion. In addition, Julia and Judy argued, the defendant is not a residential health care facility, so PHL 2801-d is not applicable. In addition, the plaintiff had not pled any facts to support a punitive claim and there could be no dispute that the language was prejudicial, and an order striking prejudicial language from pleadings is not appealable and the plaintiff had not sought leave to appeal. The First Department agreed that the order was not appealable but sua sponte granted the plaintiff leave to appeal – only to then agree with all of our other points and affirm.   

Christopher J. Peticca, Julia Audibert and Judy C. Selmeci

Friedberg, Peticca & Selmeci Obtain Affirmance of Summary Judgment Motion

Alan Friedberg (Senior Counsel-White Plains, NY), Christopher Peticca (Associate-White Plains, NY), and Judy Selmeci (Partner-New York, NY) obtained affirmance of a summary judgment motion on behalf of our major hospital client, from the Appellate Division, First Department. Alan argued the motion before the five-panel bench, which asked probing questions of the plaintiff’s counsel, who was appealing the dismissal of his case by Bronx Supreme Court because the expert’s affidavit submitted by the plaintiff was insufficient to refute the allegations of the two experts presented by the defense. The EMTs that transported plaintiff’s decedent, while not employees of our client, wore hospital insignias, and the ambulance had a hospital emblem, as the result of a contract with the employers of the EMTs, which subsequently went bankrupt. Accordingly, plaintiff’s counsel was arguing that the EMTs were ostensible employees of our client. Essentially, the argument was that plaintiff’s decedent was provided with oxygen as the result of her abdominal pain, and when she arrived in the emergency room, her blood oxygen level was normal at 100 percent. Accordingly, while plaintiff’s decedent went into a code within nine minutes of arriving in the emergency room, the experts pointed out that she was properly treated for the abdominal pain and even for respiratory distress as she was rapidly brought to the hospital emergency room and was in stable condition at the time she arrived at the hospital’s emergency room. Both the Supreme Court Justice in Bronx County, and the Appellate Division Bench, readily understood the defense made out by the defense team, and appropriately granted and affirmed a dismissal in this case.

Alan B. Friedberg, Christopher J. Peticca and Judy C. Selmeci

Fernandez, Friedberg and Selmeci Extract Plastic Surgeon from Web of Progressive Diagnoses

Emily L. Fernandez (Partner-White Plains, NY), Alan B. Friedberg (Senior Counsel-White Plains, NY) and Judy Selmeci (Partner-New York, NY) obtained dismissal of a complaint, alleging permanent vision loss, orbit deformity, chronic headaches, impairment in ADLS and other sequela, in the NYS Appellate Division, Second Department, reversing the Westchester Supreme Court’s denial of our motion for summary judgment in a medical malpractice case that was scheduled for trial. The plaintiff, a then 32-year-old woman with four children, sought treatment at a non-party emergency room on 3/10/16, reporting she fainted and hit her face, injuring her right eye and causing facial fracture. A CT scan raised suspicion for entrapment of the rectus muscle from the fracture, but the ER doctor documented extraocular movement intact (EMOI). Plaintiff was referred to our client, a plastic surgeon at our hospital’s plastic surgery clinic. 

1. On 3/15/16, our client determined the plaintiff had EOMI and noted no surgical intervention at that time. Plaintiff was instructed to return in one week. 
2. On 3/22/16, the plaintiff reported doing better with continued but improved limitation of movement on extreme right-eye lateral gaze. Plaintiff was permitted to return to work and instructed to avoid heavy lifting, and instructed to return in one week. 
3. Neither our client nor the clinic has records for the plaintiff after 3/22/16. 
4. On 4/20/16, plaintiff reported new symptoms to her internist, who referred her to an ophthalmologist. 
5. At the 6/8/16 ophthalmology visit, plaintiff was referred to an oculoplastic surgeon, who reviewed the 3/10/16 CT and opined the right medial rectus muscle appeared caught on right medial orbital wall fracture. 
6. On 9/2/16, the plaintiff underwent surgery, which documented a defect in abduction on forced duction testing. A titanium implant and microplate screws were placed. On follow-up on 10/20/16, plaintiff continued to have diplopia and right abduction deficit. 

Our team’s summary judgment motion was denied by Judge Alexandra Murphy, Westchester County Supreme Court, based on an alleged issue of fact raised in the affidavit of plaintiff’s plastic surgery expert, based on the 3/10/16 CT, our client should have known plaintiff would suffer muscle entrapment and that our client abandoned plaintiff. The Second Department, in reversing Judge Murphy and granting summary judgment on all claims, agreed with our argument that plaintiff’s expert’s opinions were conclusory, speculative and unsupported by competent evidence tending to establish proximate causation. 

Emily L. Fernandez, Alan B. Friedberg and Judy C. Selmeci

Selmeci Upholds Trial Win by Grady and Semlies at Second Department

Judy Selmeci (Partner-New York, NY) successfully defended in New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division the defense verdict obtained by White Plains partners Michael Grady and Lori Semlies. In the underlying matter, the plaintiff alleged that the hospital’s radiology technician violated hospital protocols while administering intravenous contrast. Mike and Lori argued at trial that although the employee administered contrast at a different rate than the hospital’s policy suggested, the technician abided by the guidelines of the American College of Radiology which reflect the standard of care; therefore there was no malpractice. Mike and Lori consulted with the Appellate team frequently during the contentious trial and built record that proved to be a solid foundation of research and arguments for the appeal. The Appellate Division held that the hospital’s policy was merely “some evidence of negligence” and the jury could find, despite violation of the policy, as it did that the defendants did not depart from the standard of care.

Michael F. Grady, Lori Rosen Semlies and Judy C. Selmeci

Events

Judy Selmeci is a dedicated appellate specialist and a core member of the firm’s national Appellate practice. She is the go-to resource for briefing and arguing appeals, including new appellate cases. Her practice covers at the appellate level all substantive areas of the law handled by the firm. She has handled hundreds of appeals, including before all New York appellate divisions and New Jersey appellate courts and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. These cases have resulted in more than 200 published decisions to Judy’s name and frequently facilitated favorable dispositions of other cases, including advantageous settlements.

In addition, Judy is heavily involved in setting strategy for cases in the pre-trial and trial phases. She assists at the trial level with advice regarding long-term strategy, procedural issues and drafting complex motions for colleagues, especially in high-exposure cases. This consultation is done with an eye toward dismissal at the trial level and positioning cases in the best possible way for any eventual appeal. Once a case is on trial, Judy provides trial-monitoring, including daily transcript review and assistance. In this capacity, she is able to provide daily feedback and research and analysis that can enhance the strength and impact of the firm’s arguments with the trial court and help ensure error preservation for the possibility of appeal.

Judy is most respected for her ability to win long-shot cases and for advancing the law in a favorable way for our clients. A classic example is an early 2018 victory where Judy handled the appeal of an orphan seeking legal status in the United States before an appellate court that had not heard precedent cases of this type in the past. In the resulting decision, agreeing with Judy’s arguments, the court adopted the law from other appellate courts and awarded our pro bono client the relief he needed. In doing so, the court created new and highly favorable precedent for others in similar circumstances.

Judy has lectured and published extensively on legal issues, including procedural points of law that are helpful to the firm’s clients, many of whom are lawyers or have legal backgrounds. Judy provides nearly daily training in motion writing and procedural issues to many of the firm’s junior associates.

Your Privacy Choices
We value your privacy. Under privacy laws in your jurisdiction, you have the right to control how your personal information is used, including the right to opt out of the “sale” or “sharing” of your personal information for cross-context behavioral advertising. You may also limit the use of your sensitive personal information.

Below, you can review and adjust your cookie and data sharing preferences. For more information about how we use your data, please see our Privacy Policy.

Your Rights and Choices

Opt Out of Sale or Sharing: You may opt out of the sale or sharing of your personal information for advertising and analytics purposes by turning off Advertising & Targeting Cookies. We will honor your choice and will not sell or share your personal information for these purposes unless you enable these cookies again. Wilson Elser does not sell or share personal information in any other manner.

Limit Use of Sensitive Personal Information: If we collect sensitive personal information, you may limit its use to only what is necessary to provide requested services by adjusting your preferences here. Please contact privacy@wilsonelser.com with any questions.

Global Privacy Control: We honor browser-based opt-out signals, such as the Global Privacy Control (GPC). If we detect such a signal, your opt-out preference will be automatically applied.
These cookies are essential for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually set in response to actions made by you, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in, or filling in forms.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalization. If you do not allow these cookies, some or all of these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They may be set through our site by us or our analytics partners to understand your interests and deliver more relevant content to you. If you do not allow these cookies, we will not know when you have visited our site
Privacy Settings