News Briefs
Super Lawyers Names Five from Wilson Elser to 2025 Florida Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists
June 27, 2025
Secured a summary judgment in favor of a large peer-to-peer boat rental company in a wrongful death case. The court found the client not liable for the death of a young woman who was thrown from a boat rented through the platform, given federal immunity afforded under section 230 and the lack of definition of a livery under the 2021 Florida Livery Statute.
Successfully defended a boat manufacturer in a two-week maritime products liability and personal injury jury trial in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Multiple plaintiffs were seriously injured, but the evidence and presentation of same convinced a jury that the manufacturer was not at fault. At close, plaintiffs' counsel asked for an award of more than $125 million, and the jury returned a verdict for the defense.
Obtained a defense verdict for a national boat manufacturing company in a three-week products liability and personal injury jury trial involving five personal injury plaintiffs and an insurance company seeking millions of dollars in damages. The cross examination of the plaintiffs' liability expert, together with the carefully developed testimony of the defense expert, provided all that the jury needed to return a defense verdict. The facts, the science used to undermine plaintiff theories while supporting defense theories and various entertaining snippets of the trial garnered interest by the media. The verdict was featured in the South Florida Daily Business Review.
Settled an eight-figure case, developing new science via experts on the effectiveness of an engine cut-off switch and lanyard during a first pass strike. The case, which involved a propeller strike to the plaintiff's head resulting in nearly catastrophic injuries, occurred upon ejection from a boat and posed very unique and complex challenges. Engine cut-off switches were designed to prevent injuries when a vessel circles back and strikes the ejected operator. There were no studies on their effectiveness for contact immediately after ejection. Identified novel scientific theories to study this scenario, specific to the particulars of the matter, while also developing the evidence to support how the plaintiff caused the accident, as opposed to a failure in the vessel's steering system. Together with experts, developed the tests to prove the theories that ultimately undermined the plaintiff's experts’ work and postured the matter for resolution at a reasonable figure. Cross examination of the plaintiff's experts proved fatal to the plaintiff's case.
Successfully defended a multimillion-dollar coverage dispute in a federal court trial arising from property damage incurred during Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and Florida. After hearing a week's worth of testimony from all parties and their experts, the court returned a verdict in favor of the insurance carrier.
Secured a summary judgment in favor of a large peer-to-peer boat rental company in a wrongful death case. The court found the client not liable for the death of a young woman who was thrown from a boat rented through the platform, given federal immunity afforded under section 230 and the lack of definition of a livery under the 2021 Florida Livery Statute.
Successfully defended a boat manufacturer in a two-week maritime products liability and personal injury jury trial in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Multiple plaintiffs were seriously injured, but the evidence and presentation of same convinced a jury that the manufacturer was not at fault. At close, plaintiffs' counsel asked for an award of more than $125 million, and the jury returned a verdict for the defense.
Obtained a defense verdict for a national boat manufacturing company in a three-week products liability and personal injury jury trial involving five personal injury plaintiffs and an insurance company seeking millions of dollars in damages. The cross examination of the plaintiffs' liability expert, together with the carefully developed testimony of the defense expert, provided all that the jury needed to return a defense verdict. The facts, the science used to undermine plaintiff theories while supporting defense theories and various entertaining snippets of the trial garnered interest by the media. The verdict was featured in the South Florida Daily Business Review.
Settled an eight-figure case, developing new science via experts on the effectiveness of an engine cut-off switch and lanyard during a first pass strike. The case, which involved a propeller strike to the plaintiff's head resulting in nearly catastrophic injuries, occurred upon ejection from a boat and posed very unique and complex challenges. Engine cut-off switches were designed to prevent injuries when a vessel circles back and strikes the ejected operator. There were no studies on their effectiveness for contact immediately after ejection. Identified novel scientific theories to study this scenario, specific to the particulars of the matter, while also developing the evidence to support how the plaintiff caused the accident, as opposed to a failure in the vessel's steering system. Together with experts, developed the tests to prove the theories that ultimately undermined the plaintiff's experts’ work and postured the matter for resolution at a reasonable figure. Cross examination of the plaintiff's experts proved fatal to the plaintiff's case.
Successfully defended a multimillion-dollar coverage dispute in a federal court trial arising from property damage incurred during Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and Florida. After hearing a week's worth of testimony from all parties and their experts, the court returned a verdict in favor of the insurance carrier.
Secured a summary judgment in favor of a large peer-to-peer boat rental company in a wrongful death case. The court found the client not liable for the death of a young woman who was thrown from a boat rented through the platform, given federal immunity afforded under section 230 and the lack of definition of a livery under the 2021 Florida Livery Statute.
Successfully defended a boat manufacturer in a two-week maritime products liability and personal injury jury trial in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Multiple plaintiffs were seriously injured, but the evidence and presentation of same convinced a jury that the manufacturer was not at fault. At close, plaintiffs' counsel asked for an award of more than $125 million, and the jury returned a verdict for the defense.
Obtained a defense verdict for a national boat manufacturing company in a three-week products liability and personal injury jury trial involving five personal injury plaintiffs and an insurance company seeking millions of dollars in damages. The cross examination of the plaintiffs' liability expert, together with the carefully developed testimony of the defense expert, provided all that the jury needed to return a defense verdict. The facts, the science used to undermine plaintiff theories while supporting defense theories and various entertaining snippets of the trial garnered interest by the media. The verdict was featured in the South Florida Daily Business Review.
Settled an eight-figure case, developing new science via experts on the effectiveness of an engine cut-off switch and lanyard during a first pass strike. The case, which involved a propeller strike to the plaintiff's head resulting in nearly catastrophic injuries, occurred upon ejection from a boat and posed very unique and complex challenges. Engine cut-off switches were designed to prevent injuries when a vessel circles back and strikes the ejected operator. There were no studies on their effectiveness for contact immediately after ejection. Identified novel scientific theories to study this scenario, specific to the particulars of the matter, while also developing the evidence to support how the plaintiff caused the accident, as opposed to a failure in the vessel's steering system. Together with experts, developed the tests to prove the theories that ultimately undermined the plaintiff's experts’ work and postured the matter for resolution at a reasonable figure. Cross examination of the plaintiff's experts proved fatal to the plaintiff's case.
Successfully defended a multimillion-dollar coverage dispute in a federal court trial arising from property damage incurred during Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and Florida. After hearing a week's worth of testimony from all parties and their experts, the court returned a verdict in favor of the insurance carrier.
Miami, Florida, partners Russell M. Pfeifer and Raul J. Chacon and associate Monika Ledlova secured final summary judgment in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court on behalf of a national retail client in a premises liability action. The plaintiff alleged she suffered injuries including a traumatic brain injury when a 25-pound metal price sign fell from the top of a large metal safe inside the store. Monika Ledlova argued the motion, successfully demonstrating that surveillance video clearly showed the plaintiff shaking the metal safe immediately before causing the sign to fall off and strike her in her head, thereby causing her own injuries. The team argued that the metal sign was open and obvious, and that no dangerous or concealed condition existed on the premises. The court agreed, granting summary judgment in favor of our client and finding no breach of duty under Florida law. This decisive win underscores the team’s strategic use of video evidence and persuasive advocacy in defeating unsupported premises liability claims. The victory also positions our client to recover attorneys’ fees and taxable costs under applicable Florida statutes, further solidifying a complete defense outcome.
Russell M. Pfeifer, Raúl J. Chacón Jr. and Monika Ledlova
Miami, Florida, partners Raúl J. Chacón Jr. and Russell M. Pfeifer and associate Monika Ledlova secured an appellate victory in the Third District Court of Appeal with a written opinion affirming summary judgment they obtained in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court in a case involving a national retail client. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit after tripping over a wooden display pallet at our client’s retail store. The trial court granted summary judgment based on the open and obvious doctrine, after the Miami team argued there were no hazardous conditions present on the premises and that the plaintiff’s fall resulted from her own lack of attention. Surveillance video of the incident played a pivotal role in supporting the team’s argument, showing the plaintiff’s failure to follow the designated pathway, and subsequently tripping over a wooden pallet on her second visit to the store the same day. The trial court ruled in favor of our client, granting summary judgment, and following a request for rehearing by the plaintiff reaffirmed its decision. The plaintiff appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal, which affirmed the summary judgment citing case law referenced in our answer brief. This win serves as a crucial precedent, strengthening the defense position for property owners and retailers statewide and opens the plaintiff to the recovery of taxable costs.
Raúl J. Chacón Jr., Russell M. Pfeifer and Monika Ledlova