Blog 
General
- Another Hot Coffee Burn Case in NY - and the Plaintiff Wins
- Why Proving Notice in a NYC Trip & Fall Case Isn't Easy
- Why Filing an Insurance Claim for Irene in NY Will Probably Fail
- Technicality Splits NY Appeals Court in Right to New Negligence Trial
- Why Jury Verdict Reports From a NY Personal Injury Case May Be Misleading
Library
General
- How New York's Courts Assess Comparative Fault in a Negligence Case
- When an Independent Contractor's Negligence Can Lead to Liability Under NY Law
- What NY Courts May Do When a Plaintiff Can't Remember the Accident
- What a Defendant's Bankruptcy Does to Your New York Personal Injury Lawsuit
- How to Prove a Dog Bite Case Against a Landlord Under New York Law
Case Results
School Negligence / Negligent Supervision
- $250,000 Recovered For 7 Year-Old Student Hit By Car at Dismissal
- $37,500 for NYC Student Who Lost Part of His Finger In Defective Door
- $45,000 Recovered for Brooklyn Girl Burned By Excessively Hot Water
Awarded: $250,000
Awarded: $37,500
Awarded: $45,000
Construction Site Accidents
Car Accidents
- $600,000 Recovered for 30-Year-old Queens Man With Neck Surgery
- $145,000 Settlement for Back Injury Resulting from Suffolk Boating Accident
- $75,000 for Queens Man Who Was Backed Into by Lincoln Navigator
Awarded: $600,000
Awarded: $145,000
Awarded: $75,000
Slip / Trip and Fall Accidents
- $500,000 Recovered for Woman Who Sustains Subdural Hematoma After Falling Through Restaurant's Open Trap Door
- $115,000 Post-Trial Settlement for Trip & Fall in Long Island Store
- Defendant's Insurer Tenders Full Insurance Policy for Mail Carrier Who Fractured His Arm In Slip and Fall on Poorly Shoveled Steps
Awarded: $500,000
Awarded: $115,000
Awarded: $100,000
Defective Products
- $550,000 Recovered for Woman Whose Achilles Tendon Was Cut
- $90,000 Recovered for Woman Who Sustained Second Degree Burns When Handle Broke Off From Ceramic Mug
Awarded: $550,000
Awarded: $90,000
Other
- $80,000 Recovered For Woman Assaulted By Building Superintendent
Awarded: $80,000
1.866.374.1164
Long Island & Queens, New York Negligent Supervision, Defective Product & Accident Lawyer Blog
The blog by published author of the Free book on New York accident claims, "Why Most Accident Victims Do Not Recover the Full Value of Their Claim," as well as the New Yorker's guide to defective product claims, "Why Are There So Few Successful Defective Products Lawsuits?" is intended to educate the general public about issues of interest, particularly innovations and changes in the law, in the areas of school negligence (and/or negligent supervision), construction accidents, slip and/or trip and fall accidents, auto accidents, and, of course, defective or dangerous products.
For additional information on any of these topics, readers are encouraged to download these Free e-books on New York personal injury claims
As featured on:
General
Another Hot Coffee Burn Case in NY - and the Plaintiff Wins
Yes, you can have a viable hot coffee negligence case in New York. Long Island, NY personal injury and negligence lawyer Jonathan Cooper explains. Why Proving Notice in a NYC Trip & Fall Case Isn't Easy
Here's one more reason that proving a trip & fall case against NYC is challenging: maps change. Long Island, NY trip & fall lawyer Jonathan Cooper explains.Why Filing an Insurance Claim for Irene in NY Will Probably Fail
If you're a New Yorker and wondering whether to file an insurance claim for damage you suffered during Irene, you should read this article first.Technicality Splits NY Appeals Court in Right to New Negligence Trial
Technicality Splits NY Appeals Court in Right to New Negligence Trial Why Jury Verdict Reports From a NY Personal Injury Case May Be Misleading
Long Island & Queens, NY car accident & personal injury attorney Jonathan Cooper on why jury verdict reports from a NY car accident case may be misleading. NY Bicyclist's Claim He Was Blown From Bike By Helicopter Survives Dismissal
Long Island & Queens, New York accident attorney Jonathan Cooper discusses a bizarre case that survived a defendant's motion to dismiss the case.Why a NY Court Immunized Police Against Claim They Shot Bystander
Author of the Free Consumer Guide to New York Accident Cases, Why Most Accident Victims Do Not Recover the Full Value of Their Claim, http://www.jonathancooperlaw.com/reports/free-new-york-personal-injury-book-why-most-accident-victims-do-not-recover-the-full-value-of-t.cfm, Long Island, New York personal injury lawyer Jonathan Cooper discusses a recent decision that immunized the NYPD against the personal injury claim of a woman that was hurt when she was hit in the crossfire between the police and a criminal suspect. For additional information on this topic, readers are encouraged to contact Jonathan Cooper directly at 516-791-5700.Labels: free book new york accident claims johnson v. city of new york jonathan cooper long island accident attorney New York police liability for shooting police shooting bystander professional judgment rule queens personal injury lawyer why most accident victims do not recover the full value of their claim
NY Mets Deny Liability for Drunken Fan's Fall on Woman That Destroyed Her Back
Long Island, New York author of "Why Most Accident Victims Do Not Recover the Full Value of Their Claim" http://www.jonathancooperlaw.com/reports/free-new-york-personal-injury-book-why-most-accident-victims-do-not-recover-the-full-value-of-t.cfm discusses how a New York County judge responded to the Mets' disavowing any liability for a tragic accident at Shea Stadium. For additional information on this topic, please contact Jonathan Cooper directly at 516-791-5700.How a Building Owner Can Be Liable for a Fire Under New York Law
In this article, and in the context of the April 12 Chinatown fire that consumed an entire building, Long Island, New York personal injury and negligence attorney Jonathan Cooper discusses how you can prove that a building owner's negligence was responsible for an accident under New York law. For additional information on New York accident cases in general, please visit www.TheNewYorkAccidentBook.com or contact Jonathan Cooper directly at 516.791.5700.Finally, New York State to Allow E-Filing of Claims Against New York City
In this blog piece, Long Island, New York school negligence and personal injury lawyer Jonathan Cooper discusses how a new law that is scheduled to become effective this coming fall stands to benefit those with claims against New York City. For additional information on how to prosecute claims against New York municipalities, including New York City, please visit www.JonathanCooperLaw.com.How One New Yorker's Slip and Fall Case Survived a Motion to Dismiss
In this article, Long Island, New York slip and fall accident and personal injury lawyer Jonathan Cooper discusses how in a recent case, a plaintiff managed - just barely - to defeat the defendant property owner's motion to dismiss her negligence lawsuit. For additional information on Why Most Accident Victims Do Not Recover the Full Value of Their Claim in New York, please download a FREE copy of the New York Guide to Accident Cases from www.TheNewYorkAccidentBook.com.When New York Lawyers Try To Defend The Indefensible
In a scathing decision, a federal judge recently sanctioned attorneys who effectively fostered over one year of needless litigation because they refused to disclose that the subject of the litigation had already been rendered moot. For more articles and information pertaining to commercial litigation, accident and defective product claims in New York, please visit www.JonathanCooperLaw.com.Court Compels Liability Insurer to Defend and Indemnify Landlord - Even Though Landlord Was Never Named on the Tenants' Policy
In an "off-the-beat" case, Kassis v. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co., 12 N.Y.3d 595, 885 N.Y.S.2d 241 (2009), New York's Court of Appeals (the highest court in New York State) held in favor of a landlord - and against his tenant's liability insurer - that since the lease required the tenant to name the landlord as an additional insured on their liability policy for their "mutual benefit," the landlord was automatically deemed an additional insured under the policy, even though the landlord wasn't in fact named on the policy at all. Consequently, by dint of the Court's holding, the insurer was obligated to not only defend the landlord in the underlying personal injury action that arose from a worker's claim that he was injured when he slipped and fell on snow fronting the landlord's property, but the insurer was also required to indemnify the landlord for any settlement or judgment up to the policy's full liability limits.A word of caution is in order, however, and here's why: a perusal of this decision suggests that this ruling is of limited scope, and confined to the particular facts of this case. Specifically, in rendering the opinion, Chief Judge Lippman notes that the insurance policy in this case had a provision that extended coverage to the named insured as well as “any person or organization whom [the named insured is] required to name as an additional insured."
Nevertheless, this decision serves as yet another reminder to small businesses in New York why you should never assume the validity of an insurer's disclaimer of coverage.
Frivolous Lawsuit: Injured Skydiver Sues In Negligence
Sometimes the courts get it right - and for the right reason.In Nutley v. Skydive the Ranch, the plaintiff suffered personal injuries when he was forced to rely on his secondary chute rather than on his primary parachute which had failed. In their motion to dismiss the complaint, the Skydive ranch pointed out to the Court that before he embarked on the skydive, the plaintiff had signed an agreement in which he expressly waived his right to sue for the ranch's negligence.
But that's not why the appellate court dismissed the case: under New York law, any contract or agreement between the owner or operator of a facility and a paying customer stating that the owner may not be held liable for its negligence is void and unenforceable (see NY General Obligations Law 5-326). Instead, the appellate court noted that since the plaintiff's claimed injury resulted from a risk that was open and obvious, and inherently part of, the activity of skydiving, the plaintiff voluntarily assumed this risk, and therefore the defendant Skydive ranch could not be held liable for his injuries.
Misconceptions About the Consequences of Destroying (or Even Losing) Evidence in NY
From the apparently cavalier attitude, by virtue of their utter lack of response, to Apple's claim that they have deliberately destroyed evidence that is critical to Apple's claims for copyright infringement, unfair competition and breach of contract, Psystar seems to believe, or at least would like to give the impression, that Apple's assertion is inconsequential. Here's why they may be wrong - very wrong.- Misconception #1 - If I Destroy Evidence That The Other Side Needs For Their Case, It's Their Problem, Not Mine - This notion is patently false. As noted in "The Penalties For Destroying or Losing Critical Evidence," the Court is obliged to assure that your loss of the evidence does not unfairly prejudice the other side's ability to prosecute its claim or defense.
- Misconception #2 - If I Merely Lost the Evidence, Rather Than Deliberately Destroyed It, The Court Will Not Sanction Me - Though this used to be the rule in New York, it hasn't been true for over 10 years. Since 1997, New York's courts have increasingly held that where the critical piece of evidence has been retained by a party - even just in anticipation of litigation, and that piece of evidence is negligently lost or destroyed, the responsible party's claims or defenses may be dismissed.
Another Way To Curb NY Medical Malpractice/Negligence Lawsuits: Saying You're Sorry
Yesterday, msnbc published a fascinating story on the University of Michigan Health System, which, unlike nearly every other health care facility in the Country, has seen the number of medical malpractice claims (and concurrently, the amounts paid out on claims) against it cut in half over the last several years. This is no fluke. Their secret? When they make a mistake, they own up to it and apologize. In the words of their general counsel, they are practicing "basic common decency." As a corollary to this approach, this particular health care system actively tries to make fair offers to resolve meritorious cases early on, rather than allowing the cases to wind their way through the court system for years, and in the process, incurring higher defense costs. Not surprisingly, this tactic tends to lessen the patients' anger, and less likely to sue. Given the obvious logic and fantastic success of this program, it is apparent that this approach should be made a central component of any tort reform package, don't you think?NY Court Shows Why Speculation Is No Substitute For Qualifications When It Comes to Selecting An Expert
In a decision that was handed down on July 7, New York's Appellate Division, First Department (which, as set forth previously, oversees the courts in the Bronx and Manhattan) issued a stark reminder, particularly to those attorneys who practice in the personal injury arena, that before someone's "expert" opinion will be given any deference, it must be shown that this individual has the pertinent training, certifications and familiarity with the relevant laws, rules and regulations in that field.In this case, Schechter v. 3320 Holding, LLC, the plaintiff sustained serious personal injuries when he opened an elevator door and stepped into an empty elevator shaft. In opposing plaintiff's arguments that the defendant building owner and elevator maintenance company should be deemed automatically liable for this elevator accident, the defendants relied on the testimony of an elevator maintenance employee, who opined that the interlock for the cab door had malfunctioned because both excess mop water and urine had gotten into the interlock, and caused it to stop working. In reversing the lower court's order, the appellate court rejected this argument out of hand, holding that the defendants' employee could not be considered an expert regarding elevator maintenance because he had no formal training or education regarding elevators, and was unfamiliar with the relevant codes and regulations. Although there was a dissenting judge to this opinion, I think the courts should take a more active role in assuring that the parties' experts are indeed appropriately qualified before accepting their opinion or giving it any deference.
One Reason You Don't Want A Jury Trial: An Inconsistent Verdict
Recently, a Queens County jury awarded a woman of Chinese-American descent, who claimed that her Flushing, Queens cooperative board had discriminated against her, $225,000. While that verdict, in and of itself, isn't particularly blog-worthy, a closer reading of the jury's finding is: the jury awarded the plaintiff money damages even though they did not believe that the plaintiff had proved that the coop board had been guilty of racism.Not surprisingly, the coop board has indicated that they intend to appeal this verdict.
This case serves as a useful reminder that a jury's verdict is often unpredictable, and may be internally inconsistent. Consequently, a jury's verdict may not give the parties to the lawsuit the finality that they might otherwise expect; it may only lead to further appeals (and legal bills).
Study Claims That Employee Theft Rises as Economy Worsens
I recently came across an interesting blog post entitled "Does Theft Go Up In Economic Downturn?" which cited a study discussing whether there is a documented, proven connection between the state of the overall economy and job market and the rate of theft and other dishonest or counterproductive acts (such as a breach of fiduciary duty) by company employees.One interesting theory in the study was promulgated by researchers from DePaul University, who articulated an "Employee Risk Triangle" theory of employee theft. Basically, this theorry subscribes to the notion that when 3 factors work together - need, attidude and opportunity - the likelihood of employee dishonesty rises dramatically.
According to this theory, although the any of these factors could manifest before the others, one scenario where the 3 factors could intersect would be as follows: due to a slumping economy, a company is forced to lay off many workers, and reduce (as well as eliminate) managerial positions. The resulting uncertaintly about their job security causes many employees to start feeling apathathetic about their jobs [attitude]; concurrently, some of these employees' spouses lose their jobs, putting them under greater financial strain [need]; finally, due to the reduced supervisory oversight on the job and co-employees' own degree of distraction, co-workers may be more apt to look the other way or outright ignore others' unethical behavior [opportunity].
Leaving aside my questions about the scientific reliability of this study, it seems to me that from the small business owner's perspective, the study, and the blog post quoting it, suffer from two flawed assumptions: (1) that the majority of people will falter if their ethics are put to the test (see my earlier blog article "Employee Theft Insurance Policies and the Culture That Spawned Them"); and, (2) that unless you use pre-fabricated tests to screen prospective employees, you are all but guaranteed to hire people of dubious character (paradoxically, although the blog post cites the study for the proposition that employees' ethics can be compromised as circumstances change, the blog post is silent on the issue of ongoing screening of existing employees).
Nevertheless, I think the study serves as a useful reminder to adhere strictly to Dan Kennedy's maxim: hire slow, fire fast.
The Most Important Thing For Any Trial Witness To Remember
Sometimes those of us who litigate and try cases for a living, whether in the context of small business litigation, personal injury or defective products lawsuits, tend to get "tunnel vision," and fail to see the forest for the trees. That's why an otherwise unremarkable jury verdict out of the Federal Court in Brooklyn, New York is important: it is a potent reminder to trial lawyers everywhere to remain mindful of the credibility of your witnesses in evaluating the viability and value your case.In this particular case, there was a stark factual discrepancy between the plaintiff, who alleged that he was pushed off the roof of a 3 story apartment building by a police officer that was chasing him, and the police officer's claim that the plaintiff was in the process of running away from the police when the plaintiff lost his grip on the roof's ledge.
The jury sided with the plaintiff, finding more credible the claim by plaintiff. I suspect that the reason they bought plaintiff's version of events is because he conceded that the police officer did not intend to push him off the roof; according to the plaintiff, the police officer merely intended to push him off of a short 2 foot high paparet wall. And by conceding that small point, or "giving a little," he got a lot: the jury awarded him $4.6 million in damages for his personal injuries, which were quite severe: a fractured spine which resulted in paralysis.
Building A Winning Case
I just came across an interesting blog post by one of my favorite bloggers, Seth Godin, entitled "Won By A Walk." In this post, he highlights how commentators on a recent New York Mets game, as is often the case in sporting events, attribute the outcome of the game to a relatively insignificant play - in this case a walk - when in truth, that play which ended the game was only made possible by that which preceded it, e.g., the runners who got on base before that fateful walk.I think the same is true regarding lawsuits, whether they be in the small business context, defective products or personal injury; although trial lawyers often get the glory, the rewards you reap at the end of the case are often sown in the preparation and work that you did to get to that point. Otherwise, the "walk" could end up just getting you a runner on base rather than driving in the winning run.
Bronx Man Dies in Tragic Elevator Accident
In a tragic incident that occurred on Friday, May 1, a blind 67 year-old man from Riverdale, in the Bronx section of New York, fell to his death when, after the door to his 10-floor building's elevator opened, he stepped into an empty elevator shaft. By that same afternoon, New York City's Department of Buildings concluded that the elevator accident occurred because the safety device on the elevator door had malfunctioned, allowing the door to open even though the elevator had not yet arrived.
In interviews with reporters, some of the building's tenants claimed that there had been ongoing elevator maintenance and repair work at the building for several weeks prior to this incident.Some building residents said the elevators had been worked on for weeks.
Not surprisingly, this was not the first problem with this particular elevator; however, it does not appear that this elevator ever experienced the same problem that was responsible for this accident beforehand. In an interview with the New York Times, elevator consultant Scott Hayes opined that the mechanical devices that are designed to assure that the elevator's outer door remains shut until the elevator has arrived can occasionally become defective due to wear and tear or inadequate, improper or negligent maintenance. For this reason, he recommended the obvious: that elevator passengers peer through the elevator door's window to assure that the elevator has arrived before opening the door and stepping into the shaft. He conceded, however, that this advice wouldn't prove effective in this case, where the person was legally blind.
For more information on building owners' and elevator repair company's liability for elevator accidents, see "Elevator Accidents and Injuries Under New York Law."
How Videotapes Can Dramatically Impact Upon Your NY Personal Injury Lawsuit
In this article, Long Island, NY personal injury and trial lawyer Jonathan Cooper discusses how a videotape can have a dramatic impact upon how both liability and damages are perceived by a trial jury in New York. For additional FREE information on accident cases generally under New York law, please visit www.JonathanCooperLaw.com.Trial Lawyers As Part of the Solution to Wall Street Greed: A Radical Concept?
In a blog posted lasted week, Matt Miller floats a radical suggestion to recover those obscene bonuses that were paid out by Wall Street firms who had just taken billions in U.S. taxpayer aid: hire a class action trial lawyer who will take the case on a contingent fee.William Lerach, who would have been the natural choice to lead the charge, is unfortunately unavailable to take this case because he is currently in the middle of a two-year prison term. But that doesn't mean the idea doesn't have merit. In fact, the blog cites Mr. Lerach's lengthy and detailed response of how such a case would work - the U.S., in one form or another, may actually have standing to bring such a suit against the various banks and their boards of directors. And although there may be some procedural and substantive challenges that would need to be surmounted, he believed that the cases would still be worthwhile, if for no other reason than to serve as a potent deterrent against similar conduct by these financial institutions moving forward.
While it is unclear whether this particular tactic would work, one thing is fairly certain: it certainly stands a greater chance of success than trying to "shame" these bankers into ethical behavior.
Labels: contingent fees trial lawyers
How to Prevent a Product Recall From Destroying Your Small Business
After 2007, which bore the dubious distinction as "The Year of the Recall," and 2008, which saw even more recalls that were undertaken either voluntarily or in response to a governmental demand (not to mention the recent recall of well over 2,000 peanut-based products following the salmonella scare), there were several news reports of small businesses, particularly children's toy distributors and tire suppliers, that openly expressed their fears that any recall of their particular products would force them to close their doors. Strangely, none of these articles discussed a relatively straightforward solution to this threat: defective product or product contamination insurance.
According to A.M. Best Co., this area of insurance, despite the economic recession, is continuing to grow at a rapid clip of over 30% a year.
If you run a small business that either manufactures or distributes products that could potentially become the subject of a safety recall, it certainly behooves you to ascertain whether this brand of insurance can cover your business; your business's survival may one day depend on it.
Long Island, New York child accident attorney, construction site accident and personal injury lawyer Jonathan Cooper practices in Nassau, Queens, Brooklyn, Bronx, New York City and Westchester. In order to order a FREE copy of his Book on New York accident lawsuits entitled "Why Most Accident Victims Do Not Recover the Full Value of Their Claim," or to schedule a free consultation with Mr. Cooper, please contact his main office located in Cedarhurst, Long Island at 516.791.5700.
To Receive Our
Newsletter, sign up here
Let our legal experts review your case, and we'll help you obtain the compensation you deserve. Begin your case review by filling out the form below:
Law Offices of Jonathan M. Cooper
483 Chestnut St.
Cedarhurst NY 11516
Phone: 516.791.5700
Fax: 516.791.8188
Get Directions
New York City
135 West 29th Street
Suite 801
New York, NY 10001
Get Directions
Testimonials
- I appreciate what you have done and your online information is a boon to the average citizen - B.W.
- "I found the information on your website very helpful; I think it's a great resource for lawyers and laypeople alike." - Anil Taneja
- Jonathan quickly impressed me as a savvy strategist and a vigorous and thorough advocate. He was a tough adversary, but was collegial, and we worked constructively on behalf of our respective clients. - J. Wiener
- "Jonathan Cooper is not just the best personal injury lawyer in New York; he is the best lawyer period." - Anissa F.
- A lawyer's lawyer.
News
- Bronx Pedestrian Killed While Crossing Middle of Bruckner Expressway...
Posted on 12/30/2010 - After Falling Down NY Hotel Elevator Shaft, Man Gets $8.5 Million...
Posted on 12/14/2010 - Jury Awards NY Couple Nearly $200,000 For Mold Damage...
Posted on 8/9/2010 - Finance Company Files $24 Million Breach of Contract Claim Against Annie Leibovitz...
Posted on 8/2/2009 - Trade Secret Soft Drink Formula Found To Have Traces of Cocaine...
Posted on 6/11/2009 - ...
Posted on 6/11/2009 - New York Company Wins $17.5 Million in Breach of Contract, Trade Secret Theft Lawsuit...
Posted on 3/10/2009 - Two Engineers Indicted for Trying to Steal Goodyear Tire's Trade Secrets...
Posted on 3/7/2009 - Homeowners Awarded Over $20 Million For Property Damage Caused by Hurricane...
Posted on 2/16/2009 - Supplier Sues Putnam County Manufacturer for Breach of Contract, Defective Parts...
Posted on 2/15/2009
FAQs
School Negligence / Negligent Supervision
- Are day care facilities in New York required to carry insurance before they are allowed to be licensed?
- Can a child be held liable for negligence under New York law?
- Can a parent be held responsible, or liable in negligence, for the acts of his child under New York law?
Construction Site Accidents
Can a construction worker recover damages for his personal injuries that were sustained when he trips over a cinder block at a worksite under New York law?- What laws apply to a New York construction accident?
- Can I sue my employer in NY for the personal injuries I suffered while working on a construction job site?
Car Accidents
- If I rear-end another vehicle, does that automatically mean that a court will find me 100% at fault for the accident under New York law?
- Who is responsible to maintain the roadways in New York?
- If a traffic light governing an intersection isn't working, does that mean that New York City or the municipality can automatically be held liable in negligence for my accident under New York law?
Slip / Trip and Fall Accidents
- Can New York State be held liable for a trip and fall accident on a defective sidewalk fronting its property?
- What does a property owner need to prove in order to have a slip and fall case dismissed before trial in New York?
- What is the most important factor to proving a trip and fall case against New York City?
Defective Products
- If a product is obviously dangerous, does that mean that it can't be considered defective as a matter of New York law?
- If someone is largely - but not entirely - to blame for their own accident, will that preclude them from recovering damages for their personal injuries in a negligence or defective products lawsuit?
- If a manufacturer or distributor of a product issues a product recall, does that mean that they have conceded that their product is defective?
General
- If a plaintiff cannot remember how his accident occurred, does that mean that his case must be dismissed as a matter of New York law?
- Is a school required to supervise its students at an after school program under New York law, and if so, what is the school's standard of care?
What effect, if any, does a defendant's declaration of bankruptcy have on my personal injury lawsuit in New York?