Biography | Paul Cividanes

Long Island, NY

p. 212.915.5251

Download my vCard

Download my Bio

Paul Cividanes represents clients in general liability and casualty law, defending premises liability, labor law and other personal injury claims. Paul defends cases from the claims stage through resolution. While strongly defending claims in litigation, Paul understands that clients often prefer prompt and cost-effective resolutions to liability claims.

Paul also has experience defending employment discrimination, toxic tort, professional liability and transportation claims.

Areas of Focus

General Liability
In the general liability area, Paul has successfully handled premises liability claims brought against owners and quickly identifies any risk transfer opportunities.

Education

Brooklyn Law School (J.D., 2017)
- Journal of Law and Policy
New York City College of Technology (B.S. Law and Paralegal Studies, 2011)

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

Paul Cividanes represents clients in general liability and casualty law, defending premises liability, labor law and other personal injury claims. Paul defends cases from the claims stage through resolution. While strongly defending claims in litigation, Paul understands that clients often prefer prompt and cost-effective resolutions to liability claims.

Paul also has experience defending employment discrimination, toxic tort, professional liability and transportation claims.

Cividanes and Laird Secure Kings County Dismissal for Hotel Owner

Paul Cividanes (Of Counsel-Long Island) and Joseph Laird (Partner-White Plains, NY) prevailed on their motion for summary judgment in Kings County Supreme Court, Brooklyn, New York, for Wilson Elser’s hotel owner client. The plaintiff had entered the hotel lobby and sat down at a communal table. Shortly thereafter, upon standing up to take a phone call, she walked into and struck her head on a television screen mounted on the wall near the table. The plaintiff allegedly sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI), among other injuries, requiring extensive medical treatment.

Paul and Joe moved for summary judgment after successfully establishing that the plaintiff encountered an open and obvious condition which was not inherently dangerous and could have been avoided with reasonable care and ordinary senses. The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the television was dangerously positioned because it was at eye level and placed close to the table, where it was readily apparent and available to hotel guests. The court was persuaded by the caselaw cited in Paul and Joe’s motion, which supported dismissal where plaintiffs were injured by conditions that were also at eye level but arguably less open and obvious than the large television screen at issue, including a small hook in a department store dressing room and a Fire Department key lock box affixed to a brick exterior wall. Accordingly, the court granted Wilson Elser’s motion and dismissed the claims against the client.

Paul Cividanes and Joseph Laird