Biography | Noelle G. Robinson

Noelle Robinson is a litigation attorney with experience in insurance defense, premises liability, complex construction and workers’ compensation.

Noelle previously worked at the New York City Law Department in the Administrative Law Division, defending various city agencies in a variety of matters, including the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Housing Preservation and Development, and the Taxi and Limousine Commission. She also served as a litigation attorney for The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, litigating premises liability, property damage, landlord-tenant, personal injury, the Federal Employers Liability Act and workers’ compensation cases. Noelle also litigated insurance defense, personal injury and complex construction matters in small and mid-sized law firms.

Education

New York Law School (J.D., 2014)
High Point University (B.A., 1991)

Bar Admissions

New York
New Jersey

Court Admissions

U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey

Professional Affiliations

Bergen County Bar Association

Legal Analysis

Artisan/Construction Defect Law Review 2025 50-State Survey

April 7, 2025

Robinson, Comer & Levasseur Secure Summary Judgment for a New York County, Transit Operators, and Driver in Personal Injury Case

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