Talent Development | National Trial Team

Wilson Elser is committed to continually strengthening and expanding our bench of exceptional trial lawyers. We place the highest premium on professional development, with a particular focus on cultivating the next generation of trial attorneys. The Wilson Elser Institute, a proprietary in-house enterprise, administers our National Trial Advocacy Training (NTAT) and Mock Trial offerings. Through these initiatives, and under the guidance of the firm’s National Trial Team (NTT) leaders, many of the firm’s most experienced trial lawyers cover the latest trends in trial and courtroom strategy and technology, preparing attorneys to be skilled litigators equipped to handle all aspects of trial work. The annual NTAT curriculum includes instruction in:

Jury selection
Closing arguments and summations
Examination of fact witnesses
Legal fault evaluation and defense strategy
Opening statements and courtroom decorum
Error preservation at trial
Fundamentals of trial preparation
Trial motions
Evidentiary foundations and objections
Producing and defending witnesses at depositions
Deconstructing the plaintiff and defense counsel’s playbooks
Jury selection in serious injury cases
Working with experts and navigating their reports

Scores of Wilson Elser attorneys have benefited from our NTAT presentations and training and biennial Mock Trial Invitational. Invitational participants engage in comprehensive pre-work, convene for a full-day mock trial in our New York City office and participate in faculty-led feedback sessions, video review, and small-group coaching. Proceedings, including jury deliberations, are videotaped and replayed for competitors, with feedback from NTT courtroom observers and judges. Many participants advance to the National Trial Team. All benefit from meaningful networking and collaborative opportunities.

The result of this dedicated, ongoing training and mentorship is a strong and sustainable pipeline of trial talent ready to serve our clients.

Senior Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Salvatore A. Clemente

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Senior Counsel

Partner

Of Counsel

Benjamin D. Greenfield

Partner

Senior Counsel

Partner

Senior Counsel

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Senior Counsel

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Gustavo A. Martinez Tristani

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Chair

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Senior Counsel

Partner

Melissa A. Murphy-Petros

Of Counsel

Email

Nicholas R. Napoli, lll

Partner

Partner

Partner

Lisa Silva Passalacqua

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Senior Counsel

Associate

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Kathleen D. Wilkinson

Senior Counsel

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Partner

Of Counsel

Partner

Attorney Articles

CLM Publishes Bashor, Buono and Co-author Horres on the Risks of Extreme Tourism

January 18, 2024 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Features Bashor/Horres Article on AI and the Future of Jury Trials

October 2023 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Reuters and Westlaw Publish Horres and Bashor on Presenting Compelling Arguments to the AI Generation

September 7, 2023 - Reuters; Westlaw

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Features Horres/Bashor Article on Preventing Outsized Verdicts and Settlements

June 2023 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Multiple Reuters Outlets Publish Horres on the Future of Artificial Intelligence

May 18, 2023 - Thomson Reuters Westlaw Today, Attorney Analysis

Attorney Articles

Reuters Publishes Horres on AI in the Legal Market

April 10, 2023 - Reuters Legal News and Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Publishes McLeod, Bashor and Horres on How Women Complete a Trial Team

March 2023 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

ABA Journal Publishes Horres on Financial Considerations for Retiring Attorneys

February 17, 2023 - ABA Journal

Attorney Articles

Horres Co-authors Westlaw Article on ChatGPT

February 14, 2023 - Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

Multiple Reuters Sites Publish Bashor and Horres on "Priming the Jury for Trial Success"

January 25, 2023 - Westlaw Today and Reuters Legal News

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Leads with Horres, Bashor, Buono Article, “Forecast 2023”

January 25, 2023 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Reuters Features Horres and Bashor Article on Covid’s Impact on Traditional Jury Trials

November 2, 2022 - Westlaw Today and Reuters - Attorney Analysis

Attorney Articles

DRI’s For the Defense Publishes Horres and Bashor on The Defense Counsel’s Playbook

June 20, 2022 - DRI For the Defense

Attorney Articles

ABA Journal Publishes Stratton Horres on Retiring in Stages

June 13, 2022 - ABA Journal

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Publishes Horres and Bashor on Early Resolution in Bet-the-Company Litigation

June 7, 2022 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Westlaw Today Publishes Horres and Steiger on AI’s Infiltration into the Legal Realm

June 2, 2022 - Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

DRI’s For the Defense Publishes Horres and Bashor on Plaintiff’s Playbook

May 11, 2022 - DRI For the Defense

Attorney Articles

Westlaw Today Publishes Horres, Bashor and Buono on Mass Shooting Liability Claims and Legal Strategy

May 5, 2022 - Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Publishes Horres and Bashor on Early Resolution of Billion-Dollar Claims

May 4, 2022 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Westlaw Today Publishes Horres on Hiring in the AI Field

March 21, 2022 - Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

CLM Magazine Publishes Horres and Bashor on Stages of Crisis Management

February 3, 2022 - CLM Magazine

Attorney Articles

Law360 Publishes Horres and Steiger on Artificial Intelligence in Crisis Management and Litigation

January 31, 2022 - Law360

Attorney Articles

Westlaw Today Publishes Horres, Bashor and Buono on Omicron’s Impact on Jury Trials

January 24, 2022 - Westlaw Today

Attorney Articles

Bloomberg Law Publishes Horres and Bashor on Post-COVID-19 Jury Trial Skills

October 25, 2021 - Bloomberg Law

Attorney Articles

Law360 Publishes Chrostowski and Goodson on Virtual Expert Testimony

October 22, 2021 - Law360

Attorney Articles

Bloomberg Law Publishes Terranova and Grove on Medical Malpractice Case Elements

October 22, 2021 - Bloomberg Law

Attorney Articles

Mitigating a Catastrophic Trial Outcome: Don’t Get Blasted by a Nuclear Verdict

April 5, 2021 - Insights: A Professional Journal by the CPCU Society

Press Releases

New York Medical Malpractice Trial Attorney Joins Wilson Elser as Partner

June 16, 2026

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Mock Trial Invitational Strengthens the Firm’s Next Generation of Trial Talent

May 11, 2026

News Briefs

National Trial Team to Host 2026 Mock Trial Invitational

February 5, 2026

Wilson Elser Designated a BTI Awesome Opponent for 2026

September 18, 2025

News Briefs

Gregory Named to Crain’s Notable Litigators & Trial Attorneys 2025

April 2, 2025

Press Releases

Wilson Elser Elevates 34 to Partnership in 2025

January 8, 2025

News Briefs

BTI Consulting Lists Wilson Elser Among 43 Law Firms that Moved Upmarket

September 27, 2024

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Among the BTI Intimidating Opponents 2025

September 12, 2024

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Awarded Three “Lawyer of the Year” Recognitions by The Best Lawyers in America 2025

August 16, 2024

News Briefs

2024 Annual National Trial Advocacy Training (NTAT) Series Continues

May 2, 2024

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Mock Trial Invitational Helps Ensure Continuity of Firm’s Accomplished Trial Lawyers

March 27, 2024

News Briefs

Felder Serves As Judge in Prestigious Moot Court Competitions

February 15, 2024

News Briefs

National Trial Team to Host 2024 Mock Trial Invitational

February 15, 2024

News Briefs

Vellturo Named to 2023 Connecticut Super Lawyers Rising Stars

October 9, 2023

News Briefs

National Trial Advocacy Training – The Distaff Angle

June 30, 2023

News Briefs

Super Lawyers Names Wilkinson and Smith to 2023 Pennsylvania Lists

May 22, 2023

News Briefs

Wilson Quoted in CLM Magazine’s Women’s History Month Edition

March 14, 2023

News Briefs

Hughes Appointed President of San Diego Chapter of ABOTA

January 12, 2023

News Briefs

Artificial Intelligence: The Top Law360 Guest Articles of 2022

December 27, 2022

News Briefs

Wilson Elser’s National Trial Team Members Share Insights on Combatting Shock Verdicts

December 5, 2022

Press Releases

Wilson Elser Expands East and West Coast Prowess with Three Lateral Hires

October 25, 2022

News Briefs

Legaltech News Highlights Wilson Elser Virtual Litigation Study Findings

September 16, 2022

News Briefs

National Trial Team Reenactment Enlightens Next Generation of Trial Lawyers

August 18, 2022

News Briefs

O'Brien and Burd Obtain Favorable Decision in D&O Case

July 13, 2022

News Briefs

ABA Journal Publishes Horres on Using Trial Experience to Create Retirement Strategy

July 11, 2022 - ABA Journal

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Trial Team Scores Noteworthy Damages Verdict

July 11, 2022

News Briefs

Karp Dismissal in Loss of Sepulcher Matter Affirmed on Appeal by Selmeci

June 21, 2022

News Briefs

Lum and Seltzer Achieve Highly Favorable Apportionment from Jury

June 21, 2022

News Briefs

Kemper and Bokeno Obtain Summary Judgment in Insurance Coverage Dispute

June 13, 2022

News Briefs

Melichar and Koehler Secure Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

June 13, 2022

Events

Wilson Elser is committed to continually strengthening and expanding our bench of exceptional trial lawyers. We place the highest premium on professional development, with a particular focus on cultivating the next generation of trial attorneys. The Wilson Elser Institute, a proprietary in-house enterprise, administers our National Trial Advocacy Training (NTAT) and Mock Trial offerings. Through these initiatives, and under the guidance of the firm’s National Trial Team (NTT) leaders, many of the firm’s most experienced trial lawyers cover the latest trends in trial and courtroom strategy and technology, preparing attorneys to be skilled litigators equipped to handle all aspects of trial work. The annual NTAT curriculum includes instruction in:

Jury selection
Closing arguments and summations
Examination of fact witnesses
Legal fault evaluation and defense strategy
Opening statements and courtroom decorum
Error preservation at trial
Fundamentals of trial preparation
Trial motions
Evidentiary foundations and objections
Producing and defending witnesses at depositions
Deconstructing the plaintiff and defense counsel’s playbooks
Jury selection in serious injury cases
Working with experts and navigating their reports

Scores of Wilson Elser attorneys have benefited from our NTAT presentations and training and biennial Mock Trial Invitational. Invitational participants engage in comprehensive pre-work, convene for a full-day mock trial in our New York City office and participate in faculty-led feedback sessions, video review, and small-group coaching. Proceedings, including jury deliberations, are videotaped and replayed for competitors, with feedback from NTT courtroom observers and judges. Many participants advance to the National Trial Team. All benefit from meaningful networking and collaborative opportunities.

The result of this dedicated, ongoing training and mentorship is a strong and sustainable pipeline of trial talent ready to serve our clients.

Lum, Stein and Budofsky Obtain Jury Verdict in Favor of NY’s Largest Health Care Provider

New York partners Larry Lum and Aviva Stein and White Plains associate Rachel Budofsky successfully defended New York’s largest health care provider serving New York City, Long Island and Westchester County in a premises liability action in Richmond County Supreme Court. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Staten Island University Hospital following a one-week trial. The plaintiff claimed she seriously injured herself when she slipped and fell on fluid that she believed was leaking from an IV bag because she saw the empty bag and the tubing was laying in the puddle. Larry, Aviva and Rachel established that the plaintiff could not prove her assertion that the fluid was from the bag as opposed to another source and highlighted that when reported to the security officer, the plaintiff never mentioned the IV bag or her assumption that it came from the IV bag and only reported that she fell on a watery substance on the floor. The jury concluded that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proof with credible evidence to establish that the hospital created or had notice of the fluid on the floor before her fall and found no negligence on the part of the hospital. The settlement demand was $1.2 million before the defense verdict.

Aviva Stein, Larry Lum and Rachel Budofsky

Lum, Stein and Scoditti Secure Jury Defense Verdict for NY’s Largest Health Care Provider

Larry Lum (Partner-New York, NY), Aviva Stein (Partner-White Plains, NY) and Elizabeth Scoditti (Associate-New York, NY) obtained a defense verdict in a premises liability matter in favor of the largest health care provider in New York, in a Richmond County Supreme Court jury trial. The plaintiff was struck by a motor vehicle operated by a co-defendant while walking in or near a crosswalk at the hospital. The plaintiff claimed the roadway was inadequately lit, the crosswalk and traffic signs were defectively designed, and the roadway markings/ signs lacked sufficient conspicuity. Though two light poles in the parking lot near the accident location had been inoperable for years, Larry, Aviva and Elizabeth were able to present evidence that sufficient lighting had remained. After a week-long trial, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the hospital. The settlement demand to the hospital was never less than $850,000 throughout the trial.

Aviva Stein, Larry Lum and Elizabeth Scoditti

Lum, Stein, Greenfield and Herman Obtain Appellate Victory for Major Arena Client

Larry Lum (Partner-New York, NY), Aviva Stein (Partner-New York, NY), Ben Greenfield (Of Counsel-White Plains, NY) and Elie Herman (Associate-New York, NY | Stamford, CT) obtained a unanimous decision from the First Department Appellate Division, upholding the dismissal of a lawsuit against the firm’s major arena client. The underlying case involved a spectator sitting behind a plexiglass barrier who was hit and injured by a hockey puck at the arena. The court relied on case law established by the firm more than 20 years ago regarding the applicability of the limited duty rule and upholding shielding protections in place. This case, handled by Larry, was the first appellate-level review of the enhanced shielding measures adopted by the National Hockey League in 2002.

Larry Lum, Aviva Stein and Benjamin D. Greenfield

Wilson Elser National Team in Hot Pursuit of Phone Records Secures an Appellate Division Affirmance

Patrick Lawless (Partner-New York, NY), Brian Del Gatto (Partner-NY/CT/AZ/WA), Douglas Connors (Partner-Stamford, CT) and Andrea Strain (Of Counsel-Stamford, CT) teamed to defeat an appeal before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department to recover damages for personal injuries from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County in an alleged slip-and-fall incident. The plaintiff offered contradictory statements, first in the emergency room stating that he was talking on his cell phone at the time of the accident, and later at his deposition, denying he was talking on his cell phone when the accident occurred. In defense of our major Canadian aerospace client and our nationally represented insurer, the team moved, inter alia, to compel the production of the plaintiff’s cell phone records, and the Supreme Court directed the plaintiff to produce the records within 30 days, resulting in this from the Court: “Here, the willful and contumacious character of the plaintiff’s conduct can be inferred from his repeated failure to respond to the defendants’ demands for discovery of his cell phone records, his failure to meaningfully and timely comply with the Supreme Court’s order directing such disclosure, and his failure to provide any reasonable excuse for these failures … Even after the conditional order of dismissal was issued, which again directed the plaintiff to produce his cell phone records, the plaintiff still did not comply with the court’s directive. Accordingly, the court properly, in effect, upon re-argument, adhered to its prior determination conditionally granting that branch of the defendants’ motion, which was pursuant to CPLR 3126(3) to dismiss the complaint.”

With a consistent settlement demand of $10 million or more throughout the case, the clients were delighted with the outcome.

Brian Del Gatto, Douglas M. Connors and Patrick J. Lawless

Napoli Obtains Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Matter

Nicholas Napoli (Of Counsel-White Plains, NY) convinced the New York Supreme Court, Bronx County that the plaintiff's unreasonable and unforeseeable decision to climb a fence on our client property owner’s premises was a superseding intervening act that absolved our client of any liability. The plaintiff was a visitor at the property, who decided to exit the building via a clearly marked emergency exit that opened into an enclosed outdoor area separated from the public sidewalk by a seven-foot fence with a gate that was kept locked except for emergencies. The emergency door had locked behind her for security. After 10 minutes confined within the outdoor area, despite having her cell phone to contact management for assistance, plaintiff decided to climb over the fence and fractured both her legs jumping down onto the sidewalk. Nick, rather than retaining a competing expert, moved for summary judgment, arguing that even if the building violated code, which was not corroborated by other evidence, it would not constitute the proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries. The court accepted their arguments and granted the motion dismissing plaintiff's action in its entirety.

Nicholas R. Napoli, lll

Belzer Prevails in Breach of Contract Case after Grueling Three-Year Battle

Geoffrey Belzer (Partner-Chicago) obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a private client in a commercial matter in which a Chicago-area bank sought to recover $1.5 million on loan guarantees and more than $1.1 million in attorney fees spent in prosecuting claims of breach of contract, tortious interference, fraud and conspiracy. The defense verdict followed a three-day bench trial in the Cook County Circuit Court. In ruling for our client and an additional co-defendant, the judge relied on the evidence produced during trial, including the cross-examinations of the bank’s president and loan officer, to determine that the bank did not meet its burden to establish that it had disposed of the collateral for the loan (primarily a bridal design company with significant consumer and industry brand-name recognition) in a commercially reasonably manner. The evidence at trial demonstrated that the bank had received an appraisal in excess of $3.8 million for the business, did not demonstrate significant activity to attempt to sell the business, and ultimately sold it for $775,000 or less than 20 percent of its appraised value.

Geoffrey Belzer

Ross and Lawless Team Up to Win Appeal – Preserving Defense Verdict and Summary Judgment Victory

Mathew Ross (Partner-White Plains) and Patrick Lawless (Partner-New York) obtained an excellent unanimous decision from the Appellate Division, Second Department on a difficult construction case. Mat tried the case for a large city and its School Construction Authority in the latter part of 2019 and obtained a unanimous jury defense verdict after the plaintiff turned down a sizeable offer to settle the case while the jury was deliberating. The plaintiff appealed the final judgment, which included the earlier denial of his summary judgment motions and motion to reargue that we successfully opposed, as well as the jury verdict. Pat handled the appeal with Mat and argued the appeal. This great teamwork sets forth good case law on the industrial code sections that were identified and upholds the jury’s verdict against a well-known plaintiff’s firm.

Mathew P. Ross and Patrick J. Lawless

Bashor, Severino and Buono Obtain Dismissal of Case Involving Misrepresentation of Nature of Legal Advice

Las Vegas partners Karen Bashor and Mark Severino and associate Taylor Buono obtained dismissal of a lawsuit brought one year after a pre-suit settlement was agreed and a release had been signed in a motor vehicle accident matter. Immediately after suit was filed, Karen, Mark and Taylor filed a motion to dismiss, or alternatively, a motion for summary judgment, asserting the release was binding and not void. The plaintiff opposed the motion contending the release was void under a new Nevada statute allowing a plaintiff to void a release signed within 30 days of an incident and without the advice of counsel. However, while plaintiff admitted she “consulted” with a law firm, she claimed she only spoke to a case manager rather than an attorney and never actually retained the law firm. Karen, Mark and Taylor argued that the statute did not require retention of counsel, and that plaintiff admitted she received legal advice at the time of signing the release. In the alternative, they argued that if plaintiff did not receive legal advice, she should be estopped from voiding the release because she intentionally misrepresented to the client that she had sought legal advice, which she used to negotiate a higher settlement. The Eighth Judicial District Court for Clark County agreed, finding that plaintiff received legal advice and/or that she misrepresented that she received legal advice to the client in order to induce a higher settlement. Therefore, the release remained enforceable and plaintiff's suit was dismissed.

Karen L. Bashor and Mark C. Severino

Lowry and Brown Win Motion to Dismiss in Reno

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas) and Kevin Brown (Of Counsel-Las Vegas) won a motion to dismiss in Second Judicial District Court in Reno, having been retained by a local trucking company whose vehicle was involved in a tip-over accident with another commercial truck. Upon filing the suit, Plaintiff completed all required preliminary procedures with one critical exception: the timely opening of discovery. This failure to act, despite reminders from Brown seeking the opening of discovery, resulted in the district court granting a motion to dismiss on behalf of the defendant after finding no extraordinary circumstances to justify the delay.

Michael Lowry and Kevin A. Brown

Lowry's Rapid-Response Avoids Larger Claim

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) helped a paving and aggregate company avoid costly litigation in Eighth Judicial District Court. A man trespassed into an opening mining area during the night and fell to his death. Though federal and state investigators found no violations that caused or contributed to the fall, a the man’s family pursued a claim against the company. Michael was able to help the company gather information about the fall and the circumstances leading up to the fall. Through investigation, it was learned that the decedent had a history of mental illness that had led to a police call earlier that night. Michael and the company decided engaging with the family's lawyer to help them understand what happened would be better in the long term than simply denying the claim. The family appreciated it and eventually resolved by establishing a fund for the decedent's minor child, saving the family and company years of litigation and expenses.

Michael Lowry

Lowry & Richardson Achieve Nuisance Settlement for National Private Security Contractor

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Chris Richardson (Of Counsel-Las Vegas, NV) achieved a favorable settlement before the Eighth Judicial District Court on behalf of a national private security contractor providing services for a hospital. . During an intake, a patient became violent, injured her mother and assaulted a nurse. The mother sued, alleging the security contractor should have better protected her from her daughter. Michael and Chris collaborated with the hospital to identify video obtained through the discovery process that recorded the event showing the mother trying to intervene when the daughter injured her. The mother's case then collapsed and she accepted a nuisance settlement.

Michael Lowry and Chris J. Richardson

Dismissal of Data Breach Class Action on Behalf of Radiology Facility and Archival Imaging System

Geoffrey A. Belzer (Partner-Chicago), Anjali C. Das (Partner-Chicago), Peter J. Larkin (Partner-White Plains) and Jennifer S. Stegmaier (Of Counsel-Chicago) obtained a data breach class action dismissal in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a radiology facility and archival imaging system that contained protected health information. About a year and a half after receiving notice of a breach, two patients filed a complaint against the firm’s client and its IT service provider for failing to implement adequate cybersecurity measures, alleging multiple unauthorized individuals had accessed their information. Geoffrey, Anjali, Peter and Jennifer prevailed on their motion to dismiss when the court held that allegations of increased risk of future harm alone is not a cognizable injury. The court also rejected each of the plaintiffs' additional theories of injury based on time and money spent on theft and fraud monitoring, “benefit of the bargain” injury, intrusion upon seclusion and statutory violations. Plaintiff’s counsel initially filed a purported class action designating another individual who was ultimately determined to never have been a patient of the radiology practice. Plaintiff’s counsel dismissed that action after the team moved for dismissal, and counsel then instituted the parallel suit involving these two plaintiffs and the motion to dismiss follows.

Geoffrey Belzer, Anjali C. Das, Peter J. Larkin and Jennifer S. Stegmaier

Jury Defense Verdict against $12 Million Demand in Premises Security Incident

Peter Hughes (Partner-San Diego | San Francisco) and Kammann Cole (Associate-San Diego) obtained a jury defense verdict on behalf of an insured bar owner in San Diego Superior Court after a three-week trial. The plaintiffs attempted to enter the insured’s restaurant/bar on St. Patrick's Day in 2019 after having been expelled from the bar next door. The plaintiffs were intoxicated and spit on the bar’s security guards, who were not properly licensed at the time of the incident, and an altercation ensued. One of the plaintiffs suffered a fractured leg and another alleged a traumatic brain injury. The plaintiffs' counsel demanded $12 million in compensation and punitive damages. Peter and Kammann were able to secure a favorable defense verdict on behalf of the firm’s client.

Kammann S. Cole

$74 Million Cliffhanger Ends with Affirmance on Appeal

Edward Garson (Partner-San Francisco), William Cook (Partner-Detroit), and Francis Torrance (Of Counsel-San Francisco) brought to a satisfactory conclusion the hugely contentious case, TransMart, Inc. v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART). In the underlying case, defended by Ed Garson, Francis Torrence and other members of the San Francisco team in 2019, TransMart entered into an option contract with BART, giving TransMart the opportunity to lease space in BART’s train stations for retail space. When the deal fell apart and BART rejected TransMart’s effort to exercise the option, TransMart sought $90+ million in damages. The jury unanimously ruled against the plaintiff’s breach of contract action and 9–3 against their breach of covenant of good faith claim. On April 28, 2022, Ed argued the appeal and Bill was the chief author of the appellate briefs. The Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District wasted no time in agreeing with Ed and Bill in all respects. Another great win for BART, a long-standing client of the firm.

Edward P. Garson and William S. Cook

Unanimous Defense Verdict against $9 Million Demand in Product Liability Case

Russ Vignali (Partner-White Plains) and Matthew Vaccaro (Associate-New York) achieved a unanimous defense verdict in the Eastern District of New York following a four-day trial. The plaintiff alleged that he lost a non-dominant index finger and suffered severe lacerations to his thumb due to a defect in a benchtop table saw manufactured by the firm’s client. Russ and Matt argued that the plaintiff was not injured during a kickback by the saw, but was instead injured by contacting the unguarded saw blade. In his closing, Russ emphasized that the plaintiff had removed the blade guard before the accident and had admitted that, after the accident, one-half of the workpiece remained on the saw’s table and one-half was still in his hand, calling into question the veracity of the plaintiff’s story about the kickback and thrown workpiece. The jury returned its verdict in less than two hours. Demand before trial was $9 million.

Rosario M. Vignali and Matthew Vaccaro

Lowry & Richardson's Discovery Strategies Net Nuisance Settlement for National Private Security Contractor

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Chris Richardson (Of Counsel-Las Vegas, NV) achieved a favorable settlement on behalf of a national private security contractor before the Eighth Judicial District Court. The client was one of several security contractors hired to work at a large, outdoor festival in Las Vegas, Nevada, where two people were injured. The plaintiffs sued all of the security companies because they were unable to identify the correct one. Michael and Chris used the security contractor’s own documents to pursue targeted discovery from other vendors involved with the festival, which eventually confirmed that the client was not even assigned to the area of the festival where the injuries occurred. The plaintiffs accepted a nuisance settlement in lieu of a motion for summary judgment.

Michael Lowry and Chris J. Richardson

Bashor, Wyatt and Buono Obtain Dismissal of Complaint against Skilled Nursing Facility

Karen L. Bashor (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Las Vegas associates Elisa Wyatt and Taylor Buono obtained a dismissal without leave to amend in the Eighth Judicial District Court on behalf of a skilled nursing facility. The plaintiff filed a complaint alleging the nursing facility was negligent in the care of the decedent, causing him to develop a bed sore and contract COVID-19. Karen, Elisa and Taylor filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the plaintiff did not comply with requirements to state a claim for professional negligence in Nevada, or to state a claim for injury related to exposure to COVID-19. The plaintiff argued a skilled nursing facility is not a health care provider under Nevada law. The judge had previously agreed with the plaintiff’s counsel’s argument in an unrelated but identical case, and the issue is currently on appeal. This time, the court disagreed with the plaintiff’s counsel and granted the motion, dismissing the complaint without leave to amend, finding the plaintiff did not comply with Nevada’s pleading requirements.

Karen L. Bashor and Elisa L. Wyatt

Lowry and Pattillo Achieve Favorable Settlement for Las Vegas Resort

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Jonathan Pattillo (Associate-Las Vegas, NV) obtained a favorable settlement in the Eighth Judicial District Court on behalf of a resort on the Las Vegas strip. The general liability case involved a plaintiff who was on the premises working for a florist at a wedding. A separate vendor installed a chuppah, which collapsed on the plaintiff, who then alleged a mild traumatic brain injury and sought nearly $60,000 in medical bills and loss of income. During discovery Michael and Jonathan obtained post-event emails from the plaintiff's employer that documented the resort had no involvement with the chuppah and that the employer had expressed concerns to the vendor about the chuppah's integrity. After these facts were confirmed via the employers' depositions, the resort moved for summary judgment and the plaintiff accepted a de minimis settlement before the motion could be heard.

Michael Lowry and Jonathan C. Pattillo

Bashor and Dodrill Achieve Summary Judgment for Client in Staged Accident Case

Karen L. Bashor (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Colt Dodrill (Of Counsel-Las Vegas, NV) obtained summary judgment in favor a petroleum transportation company in Clark County District Court. The plaintiffs alleged the client’s tractor-trailer negligently rear-ended their vehicle, causing significant bodily injuries and totaling the vehicle. Suspecting this was a staged accident, Karen and Colt propounded extensive discovery, including requests to admit the accident was staged. Their investigation revealed that a witness had been a defendant in a separate action filed by the same plaintiffs’ counsel regarding a similar accident that occurred just a half hour before. That witness’s deposition testimony confirmed the first accident was staged by the same individuals in the same vehicles involved in the client’s accident. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiffs’ counsel withdrew, and Karen and Colt moved for summary judgment based on the witness’s testimony, accident photographs, the client’s statement and the plaintiffs’ failure to respond to discovery. The plaintiffs elected not to oppose the motion, which the court granted, finding that by staging the accident, the plaintiffs consented to and assumed the risk of injury as a matter of law.

Karen L. Bashor and Colt B. Dodrill

Yvars and Koehler Obtain Summary Judgment for Self-Storage Company in Chop Shop Fire Case

Christopher Yvars (Partner-Denver, CO) and Kim Koehler (Partner-Denver, CO) defended a national self-storage company in Denver County District Court in a case brought by one of its renters. The plaintiff sued the client for approximately $100,000 in alleged property damage, plus attorney’s fees and costs. She alleged that another renter was running an illegal chop shop out of his storage unit, which resulted in a fire that spread to and damaged other units, including the plaintiff’s. The plaintiff pled a single claim of gross negligence against the client in an attempt to plead around the waiver in her rental agreement, which clearly prohibits any simple negligence claims. Through discovery, Chris and Kim found that the plaintiff’s damages valuation was substantially inflated, and that she had discarded important evidence. They were ultimately successful in moving to dismiss plaintiff’s gross negligence claim against the client. Subsequent to the order of dismissal, the plaintiff filed a motion to bring new claims against the storage facility under Colorado's Premises Liability Act, and breach of contract and negligence theories. The court agreed with Chris and Kim’s opposition and denied the plaintiff’s motion, noting that allowing her counsel to essentially restart the case based on claims that could have been but were not asserted in the original complaint would undermine the purpose and spirit of the rules.

Christopher D. Yvars and Kim L. Koehler

Hattar, Flannery & Tommer Obtain Summary Judgment in Labor Law/Construction Accident Action in Kings County

Jacqueline Hattar (Partner-White Plains, NY), John M. Flannery (Partner-White Plains, NY) and Karen Tommer (Of Counsel-White Plains, NY) obtained summary judgment on behalf of a Brooklyn property owner, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint in a labor law/construction accident case in the New York State Supreme Court, Kings County. The plaintiff mechanic was installing electrical cables on the ground outside of the firm’s client’s warehouse when a wire dislodged from a cable box and struck him in the left eye, resulting in a severe laceration to the cornea that required surgical repair and loss of vision. The Plaintiff asserted New York Labor Law Sections 200, 240(1) and 241(6), and common law negligence claims against the firm’s client. After discovery was completed, Jackie, John and Karen moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of all claims, arguing the client did not direct, control or supervise any of the electrical work that the plaintiff was performing at the time of the accident. Additionally, they argued the New York State Industrial Code provisions, which plaintiff alleged in his Bill of Particulars, did not apply since he was not engaged in “construction, excavation or demolition” work at the time of the alleged accident and that the firm’s client did not have any prior notice of any dangerous condition. The court agreed with the arguments and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff’s settlement demand was $1.25 million while the motion was pending.

John M. Flannery, Jacqueline Hattar and Karen Tommer

Lowry and Pattillo Obtain Favorable Settlement for Mass Transit Provider

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Jonathan Pattillo (Associate-Las Vegas, NV) obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of a mass transit provider in the Las Vegas Eighth Judicial District Court for a case where a passenger alleged he was injured in a rear-end collision. The passenger claimed the accident re-aggravated a healing break in his left arm and resulted in medical bills exceeding $100,000. He testified the injury happened because he braced for the rear-end collision with his left arm, causing him severe pain at the scene. Michael and Jonathan used the bus’s onboard surveillance video to demonstrate that the man never braced with his left arm. He was also walking and talking amicably after the rear-end collision occurred. The plaintiff also gave medical testimony that contradicted his own medical records. Michael and Jonathan obtained a settlement for the firm’s client of less than $5,000.

Michael Lowry and Jonathan C. Pattillo

Lowry and Pattillo Obtain Summary Judgment on Lack of Expert Testimony

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) and Jonathan Pattillo (Associate-Las Vegas, NV) obtained summary judgment in Eighth Judicial District Court on behalf of a client that provides mass transit services. A tractor-trailer turned in front of a bus and a passenger on the bus alleged injury and filed suit. After discovery closed, Michael and Jonathan moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff had not produced the medical experts required under the circumstances to prove damages. The plaintiff argued his injuries were obvious and did not require medical experts. The district court agreed with Michael and Jonathan, noting the injuries required expert testimony to prove causation and the plaintiff lacked expert testimony to meet that burden. Without any provable damages, summary judgment was entered against the plaintiff.

Michael Lowry and Jonathan C. Pattillo

Lowry Obtains Dismissal for Sports Bar in Food Poisoning Case

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) obtained a dismissal in the Eighth Judicial District Court on behalf of a national sports bar restaurant with a flagship store on the Las Vegas Strip. Two customers alleged they were served drinks spiked with illicit drugs, causing both of them to become impaired, with one asserting he had been hospitalized as a result. The customers filed suit, but did not complete in a timely manner the process to open the discovery period. Michael moved to dismiss, noting the long delay, and the district court dismissed the case over the customers' objection.

Michael Lowry

Yvars Obtains Summary Judgment for Army & Navy Surplus Store

Christopher D. Yvars (Partner, Denver, CO) obtained summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case for the lessee and property owner of an Army & Navy Surplus Store in Arapahoe County District Court, Colorado. The plaintiff was walking to her car when she slipped on some ice and fell in the alley separating the clients’ store and their parking lot. Chris established as a matter of law that the clients had no ownership of the alley and owed no legal duty to maintain the area under Colorado’s Premises Liability Act or common law. The court agreed and granted dismissal of the case in its entirety. Chris obtained full resolution of the case before any depositions were taken and without the need for expert discovery.

Christopher D. Yvars

Lowry Secures Dismissal Based on Forum Non Conveniens

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) obtained a dismissal based on the court’s discretionary use of forum non conveniens in a car accident case for a trucking company in Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada. A car rear-ended a stopped tractor-trailer in Texas, and the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in Las Vegas, Nevada, where the truck driver lived. Michael filed a motion for the Nevada court to apply forum non conveniens and dismiss the case so it could be re-filed in Texas. During oral argument on the motion, the plaintiffs noted one of the reasons the case was filed in Nevada was to avoid the effects of Texas House Bill 19, which was enacted to protect truckers. Nonetheless, the Nevada court agreed Texas was the more appropriate forum for the case, and dismissed it without prejudice.

Michael Lowry

Yvars and Koehler Obtain Summary Judgment for International Hotel Brand in $1.5 Million Premises Liability Lawsuit

Christopher D. Yvars (Partner-Denver, CO) and Kim L. Koehler (Partner-Denver, CO) were granted their motion for summary judgment and dismissal of a premises liability case in Denver District Court on behalf of an international brand hotel in downtown Denver, Colorado. The plaintiff, a guest at the hotel for multiple nights, alleged an unreasonably slippery bathroom floor caused him to fall forward and strike his head on the granite counter and door, causing a large facial laceration, traumatic brain injury, permanent neurologic and vision issues, and scarring. He sued the hotel under Colorado's Premises Liability Act, demanding $1.5 million. In obtaining a judgment on the merits of the case, Chris and Kim argued that an ordinary, common, tile bathroom floor is not a “danger” contemplated by the Premises Liability Act and that their client was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court granted their motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit.

Christopher D. Yvars and Kim L. Koehler

Yvars Obtains Jury Defense Verdict in Premises Liability Case

Christopher Yvars (Partner, Denver, CO) obtained a full jury defense verdict in a premises liability case on behalf of a major national bookstore client in Larimer County, Colorado, District Court. The plaintiff suffered significant injuries when he tripped and fell on a display stand at the client’s bookstore. The plaintiff, who is in his 70s, claimed the display created a dangerous condition and sued the client under Colorado’s Premises Liability Act. The plaintiff claimed the store had notice of the danger, as several management-level employees testified they had witnessed similar incidents over the years, and that the store disposed of the video of the incident, implying there was a cover-up. The plaintiff had over $300,000 in billed medical costs, a claim for noneconomic damages, and an uncapped claim for permanent impairment and disfigurement. His demand at trial was in excess of $1.3 million. Liability and the reasonableness of the plaintiff’s medical bills were disputed, though the nature of the plaintiff’s injury and need for surgeries were not. The jury agreed with Chris on his primary defense: the display was not a dangerous condition, and the client did not act unreasonably. As a result, the jury did not even need to address the affirmative defense that the plaintiff’s fall and injuries and damages were a result of his own comparative fault. The client is entitled to and is pursuing recovery of fees and costs, pursuant to Colorado’s Offer of Settlement statute, after the plaintiff rejected the client’s $1 statutory offer thereunder.

Christopher D. Yvars

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

Yvars Prevails in Trip-and-Fall Jury Trial for National Retail Clothing Store

Christopher Yvars (Partner-Denver, CO) won a defense verdict in a jury trial in Denver District Court for a national retail clothing store. While shopping at the factory outlet store, the plaintiff tripped and fell on a stanchion chain that was part of the checkout queue. The fall resulted in a broken arm at her elbow, which required medical transport and surgical intervention. The plaintiff, relying in part on expert testimony, claimed the condition, as designed and constructed, fell below the standard of care for retail store customer safety; that store knew or should have known it was a tripping hazard; and that the store breached its duty of care owed to her under Colorado’s Premises Liability Act. Chris successfully argued that plaintiff’s claim lacked merit, establishing that the stanchion was not a danger and, through effective cross of plaintiff’s expert, demonstrating the lack of any applicable industry standard. After deliberating for less than an hour, the jury agreed in full, and ultimately did not even need to consider Chris’s additional defenses of plaintiff’s comparative fault and assumption of risk. A complete victory for the defense.

Christopher D. Yvars

Page 1 of 2

Wilson Elser is committed to continually strengthening and expanding our bench of exceptional trial lawyers. We place the highest premium on professional development, with a particular focus on cultivating the next generation of trial attorneys. The Wilson Elser Institute, a proprietary in-house enterprise, administers our National Trial Advocacy Training (NTAT) and Mock Trial offerings. Through these initiatives, and under the guidance of the firm’s National Trial Team (NTT) leaders, many of the firm’s most experienced trial lawyers cover the latest trends in trial and courtroom strategy and technology, preparing attorneys to be skilled litigators equipped to handle all aspects of trial work. The annual NTAT curriculum includes instruction in:

Jury selection
Closing arguments and summations
Examination of fact witnesses
Legal fault evaluation and defense strategy
Opening statements and courtroom decorum
Error preservation at trial
Fundamentals of trial preparation
Trial motions
Evidentiary foundations and objections
Producing and defending witnesses at depositions
Deconstructing the plaintiff and defense counsel’s playbooks
Jury selection in serious injury cases
Working with experts and navigating their reports

Scores of Wilson Elser attorneys have benefited from our NTAT presentations and training and biennial Mock Trial Invitational. Invitational participants engage in comprehensive pre-work, convene for a full-day mock trial in our New York City office and participate in faculty-led feedback sessions, video review, and small-group coaching. Proceedings, including jury deliberations, are videotaped and replayed for competitors, with feedback from NTT courtroom observers and judges. Many participants advance to the National Trial Team. All benefit from meaningful networking and collaborative opportunities.

The result of this dedicated, ongoing training and mentorship is a strong and sustainable pipeline of trial talent ready to serve our clients.

News Briefs

Harrison, Hurwitz and Lee Secure Defense Verdict Against $3.5 Million Demand

June 13, 2022

News Briefs

Kearns and Kustic Affirm Prevail before Ninth Circuit in Airline Discrimination Case

June 10, 2022

News Briefs

Hanrahan and Farrell Obtain Dismissal on Behalf of Housing Authority

June 1, 2022

News Briefs

Brinker and Loya Obtain Dismissal of Texas Dram Shop Matter

May 31, 2022

News Briefs

McLeod Obtains Summary Judgment in Slip-and-Fall Action

May 13, 2022

News Briefs

Lum, Wilder and Swanson Secure Unanimous Jury Defense Verdict in Liability Suit

May 13, 2022

News Briefs

Song Obtains Dismissal Against California Dental Board

May 11, 2022

News Briefs

Priore and Orlando Obtain Full Voluntary Dismissal for NY Agency in Federal Employment Discrimination Case

May 4, 2022

News Briefs

Goldstein Obtains Dismissal in Legal Malpractice Action

May 3, 2022

News Briefs

Del Gatto and Nafisi Obtain Dismissal before Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners Based on Brief Alone

May 3, 2022

News Briefs

Gentile and Fisher Obtain Affirmance of Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Suit

April 29, 2022

News Briefs

Perez and Harowski Obtain Dismissal with Prejudice in Boating Accident Case

April 29, 2022

News Briefs

Cheng and O’Brien Secure Decision Affirming Dismissal of Engineering Firm on Appeal in Labor Law Action

April 28, 2022

News Briefs

Perez and Lee Secure Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss for Baseball Bat Manufacturer

April 14, 2022

News Briefs

Tauber Obtains Summary Judgement in Trip-and-Fall Case

April 8, 2022

News Briefs

Simantob and Tolbert Obtain Summary Judgment on Duty to Defend in Favor of Insurer Client

April 7, 2022

News Briefs

Nienow Obtains Affirmation of Summary Judgment for Security Company

April 7, 2022

News Briefs

Vespole, Moran and Levitsky Prevail on Summary Judgment with 8-Figure Demand

April 7, 2022

News Briefs

Thome Prevails on Motion for Summary Judgment on Aviation Insurance Claim

April 4, 2022

News Briefs

Herman Obtains Arbitration Award and Attorney Fees for Staffing Company

March 30, 2022

News Briefs

McDevitt Prevails on Dismissal for Insurance Broker in Professional Liability Matter

March 30, 2022

News Briefs

Dougherty and Granata Achieve Defense Verdict and Full Exoneration for Medical Equipment Distributor

March 29, 2022

Press Releases

Wilson Elser Sees Virtual or Hybrid Trials and Arbitrations as a Fact of Life in the Future

March 24, 2022

News Briefs

Natal Obtains Summary Judgment and Costs Incurred for Insurance Carrier

March 23, 2022

News Briefs

Proctor Secures Defense Verdict for Rehabilitation Center

March 22, 2022

News Briefs

Martin and Delabar Secure Complete Victory in Fifth Circuit for Insurance Company

March 18, 2022

News Briefs

Young Obtains Full and Final Summary Judgment for Insurance Carrier

March 17, 2022

News Briefs

Young Obtains Summary Judgment and Recoups Majority of Litigation Costs for Insurance Carrier

March 17, 2022

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Developing the Next Generation of Trial Attorneys

March 16, 2022

News Briefs

Grandison and Boulé Defend Contractor in Accident Case

March 16, 2022

News Briefs

Sheehan and Phetsanghane Prevail on Motion for Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Suit

March 16, 2022

News Briefs

Wiegmann Helps Young Guatemalan Migrant Secure Dismissal in Pro Bono Deportation Case

March 14, 2022

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Launches Cyber Class Action Defense Team

March 8, 2022

News Briefs

Hattar, Flannery & Tommer Obtain Summary Judgment in Labor Law/Construction Accident Action in Kings County

March 7, 2022

News Briefs

Butterfield and Buono Prevail in Ninth Circuit Appeal of Dismissal of Bad Faith Suit

March 4, 2022

News Briefs

Nevada Lawyer Magazine Names Bashor “Trailblazer,” Highlights Achievements

March 2, 2022 - Nevada Lawyer Magazine

News Briefs

Friedberg, Fernandez and Peticca Obtain Unanimous Jury Defense Verdict in Medical Malpractice Case

February 25, 2022

News Briefs

Lee and Powell Prevail in Motion to Dismiss Legal Malpractice Lawsuit

February 24, 2022

News Briefs

Mulvaney Obtains Dismissal of Breach of Contract and Fraudulent Misrepresentation Complaint for Software Company

February 11, 2022

News Briefs

Simantob and Butterfield Secure Dismissal for Insurance Company on Appeal to the Ninth Circuit

February 10, 2022

News Briefs

Washburn Prevails on Motion for Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Suit

February 10, 2022

News Briefs

Tranen Successfully Argues Motion to Dismiss in Legal Malpractice Garnishment Suit

February 10, 2022

News Briefs

Lee Prevails on Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction in Defamation Suit for Internet Post

February 8, 2022

News Briefs

Lee Achieves Dismissal in Legal Malpractice Suit Using Issue Preclusion

February 7, 2022

News Briefs

Quinn and Campos Granted Motion to Dismiss in Professional Negligence Case

February 7, 2022

News Briefs

Holland and Lauricella Argue NY’s New Anti-SLAPP Law for Attorney’s Fees

February 3, 2022

News Briefs

Epstein’s N.J. Supreme Court Argument Leads to Reversal of Disciplinary Review Board’s Censure

February 1, 2022

News Briefs

Neff Obtains Summary Judgment on Behalf of N.J. Landscaping Company

February 1, 2022

News Briefs

Holland and Lauricella Secure Least Severe Penalty for Physician before New York Board of Professional Medical Conduct

February 1, 2022

News Briefs

Felder and Granata Obtain Dismissal of Alleged Building Code Violation Suit

January 31, 2022

News Briefs

Freeman and Driskill Obtain Summary Judgment on Behalf of Insurance Client

January 21, 2022

News Briefs

Young Successfully Defends Carrier Facing Massive Liability Risk to an Insured Condominium

January 19, 2022

News Briefs

Thorvaldsen Prevails in Motion for Summary Judgment in Negligent Security Suit

January 19, 2022

News Briefs

Hammer and Kelly Obtain Defense Verdict in Psychiatric Malpractice Jury Trial against $5 Million Demand

December 21, 2021

News Briefs

Fernandez and Hofmann Obtain Summary Judgment in Mispled Wrongful Life Action

December 15, 2021

News Briefs

Thorvaldsen and Simantob Prevail on Motion to Dismiss Suit Seeking Coverage of Abuse of Process Claims

December 7, 2021

News Briefs

Friedberg and Shapiro Obtain Dismissal of Failed Diagnosis Claim

December 6, 2021

News Briefs

D.C. Office Class Action Team Obtains Judgment on the Pleadings after Appeals Court Reversal

November 16, 2021

News Briefs

Lee and Basile Secure Summary Judgment in Racial Discrimination Lawsuit

November 12, 2021

News Briefs

O’Brien Defeats Effort to Add Multimillion-Dollar Untimely Claims to Long-Term Care Case

November 12, 2021

News Briefs

Mulvaney, Haraskiewicz and High Obtain Dismissal on Eve of Trial

November 12, 2021

News Briefs

Stephenson Secures Defense Jury Verdict for Local Homebuilder

November 9, 2021

News Briefs

Del Gatto and Gauer Prevail in Motion to Quash Service of Process, Showing Plaintiff’s Failure to Comply with Hague Convention

November 8, 2021

News Briefs

Kemper Obtains Jury Verdict Awarding Plaintiff Significant Decrease in Damages Sought for Vehicular Accident

November 8, 2021

News Briefs

Shapiro and Friedberg Obtain Summary Judgment in Surgical Negligence Suit

November 2, 2021

News Briefs

Kersting prevails on Appeal for Firm’s Life Insurance Client

November 2, 2021

News Briefs

BTI Consulting Group Names Wilson Elser among 48 Best Law Firms in Complex Commercial Litigation

November 1, 2021

News Briefs

BTI Consulting Group Names Wilson Elser among 40 Best Law Firms in Class Actions

November 1, 2021

News Briefs

BTI Consulting Group Names Wilson Elser among 22 Best Law Firms in Product Liability Litigation

November 1, 2021

News Briefs

New York-Chicago Team Secures Significant Decrease in Award in Damages-Only Jury Trial

October 28, 2021

News Briefs

Terranova and Scott Secure Defense Verdict for Senior Care Facility in Wrongful Death Action

October 27, 2021

News Briefs

Young Obtains Dismissal in Slander and Harassment Case

October 27, 2021

News Briefs

Grace, Tomberg and Moore Obtain Dismissal for Excess Insurer in Homeowners Association Suit

October 22, 2021

News Briefs

Lum, Cash & Greenfield Tag-Team to Score Queens Supreme Court Jury Verdict for NYC Casino

October 22, 2021

News Briefs

BTI Consulting Group Counts Wilson Elser among 39 Most Feared Firms in Litigation

October 7, 2021

News Briefs

Los Angeles Attorneys Secure Dismissal of Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit

October 7, 2021

News Briefs

Whiteman Secures Dismissal with Prejudice in Insurance Broker Malpractice Litigation

October 7, 2021

News Briefs

Francoeur and Cho Take Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Matter

October 6, 2021

News Briefs

Gray and O’Brien Obtain Summary Judgment in Malicious Prosecution Case

October 5, 2021

News Briefs

Lum, Cash and Seltzer Successfully Defend NYC’s Only Legally Licensed Casino in Premises Liability Jury Trial

October 5, 2021

News Briefs

Shora and Brahan Obtain Dismissal of Dental Malpractice Claim

September 30, 2021

News Briefs

Ramirez and Lai Obtain Jury Defense Verdict in Slip-and-Fall Case

September 30, 2021

News Briefs

Shora Obtains Summary Judgment and Dismissal in Construction Defect Case

September 30, 2021

News Briefs

Maskol Succeeds Before Maryland Commission on Civil Rights in Tenant Discrimination Case

September 20, 2021

News Briefs

Goodson and Chrostowski Achieve Success in MedMal Verdict

September 20, 2021

News Briefs

Williams and Lintner Achieve Dismissal in ADA Case

September 9, 2021

News Briefs

Martin and Orlando Obtain “No Probable Cause” Finding and Case Dismissal from NYS Division of Human Rights

September 9, 2021

News Briefs

O’Brien Obtains Rare Trial Court Reversal on Appeal for Long-Term Care Facility

September 2, 2021

News Briefs

Bachrach Obtains Defense Judgment in ERISA Benefits Lawsuit

August 31, 2021

News Briefs

Wiegmann and Maloney Prevail on a Demurer Citing Graves Amendment Preemption

August 13, 2021

News Briefs

Reif and Horst Obtain Pre-answer Dismissal of Product Liability Third-Party Complaint

August 12, 2021

News Briefs

Semlies Achieves Motion to Dismiss in COVID-19 Discrimination Case

July 28, 2021

News Briefs

Kaim and Orlando Successfully Obtain Pre-Answer Dismissal in Product Liability Case

July 28, 2021

News Briefs

Stone and Jolley Secure Victory in the Georgia Court of Appeals for Major Firm Retailer Client

July 27, 2021

News Briefs

Williams Assumes Chair Role for the Colorado Bar Association’s Construction Law Section

July 12, 2021

News Briefs

Simantob, Hoshide, and Morrow Granted Summary Judgment for Insurer in IP Coverage and Bad Faith Case

July 12, 2021

Press Releases

Wilson Elser Phoenix Office Attorney Sworn in as President of State Bar of Arizona

June 16, 2021

News Briefs

Wilson Elser Counted among 43 Law Firms Winning in the COVID-19 World

April 30, 2020

Press Releases

James Montano Joins Wilson Elser’s Florham Park Office

March 4, 2020

Lowry and Pattillo Obtain Summary Judgment in Slip and Fall Case for Retail Client

Las Vegas partner Michael Lowry and associate Jonathan Pattillo obtained summary judgment for a national big box retailer on a slip and fall claim, filed in United States District Court, District of Nevada. Plaintiff, a customer of the store, alleged she fell due to wet conditions on the retail floor. Michael and Jonathan argued the plaintiff’s claims conflicted even with the testimony of her own husband as to whether there was any wet substance present. Even assuming there was something wet on the floor though, the federal judge granted summary judgment for the firm’s client because the customer lacked evidence indicating the store had actual or constructive notice it was there.

Michael Lowry and Jonathan C. Pattillo

Grady Obtains Defense Verdict in BRCA-2 Prophylactic Mastectomy Case

Michael Grady (Partner-White Plains, NY) obtained a defense verdict in the first in-person jury trial conducted in Supreme Court, Westchester County since the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The case involved a woman who was found to be BRCA-2 positive and opted to undergo a prophylactic bilateral nipple-sparring mastectomy, performed by our client, a breast surgeon. The surgery reduced the plaintiff’s risk of cancer to 3-4 percent and there were no complications. The plaintiff later had a third child and suffered swollen and deformed breasts due to unilateral milk discharge. A second opinion from another breast surgeon initially indicated too much tissue had been left behind, but he later opined that the plaintiff had significant risk reduction of cancer and there was “no absolute need” to remove additional tissue. Six months later plaintiff elected surgery for larger implants and had additional breast tissue and fat excised. Mike proved to the jury that (1) our client removed as much tissue as physiologically possible, greatly reducing the plaintiff’s risk of breast cancer; (2) the excess tissue was visualized after pregnancy due to the influence of pregnancy and lactation hormones; and (3) the subsequent surgery was not medically necessary and was in whole or in part performed due to the plaintiff’s desire for larger breast implants. After a two-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict in under 30 minutes.

Michael F. Grady

Page 2 of 2