Below is a small sample of cases representative of the nature of our work and some of the successes we have achieved over the years. Feel free look us up and get a idea of what we bring to the table.
OUR RECENT SUCCESSES
Property Damage / Subrogation - 2020
NG&A obtained summary judgment for our client, a plumbing contractor, in a seven-figure property damage subrogation action brought by the insurance carriers for a building owner and tenant rug and home furnishing retailer for damages arising out of a burst flexible water supply line. NG&A successfully argued that although our client had performed work on a different fixture in the immediate area of the hose the day before it burst, our client did not owe any duty of care to the Plaintiffs to inspect or maintain that hose and thus bore no liability for the loss. NG&A obtained the dismissal of all causes of action and cross-claims against our client. Supreme Court, New York County.
Personal Injury - 2020
NG&A obtained summary judgment for our client, a lessor of special effects equipment to the motion picture and television industry, in a personal injury action brought by a make-up artist who sustained serious injuries on the set of a television commercial shoot when she slipped on diffusion fluid in the vicinity of a smoke machine provided by our client. NG&A prevailed on our argument that the smoke machine lessor had no duty to warn machine lessees/users about dangers that might arise from mishandling diffusion fluid when filling and operating the machine. NG&A earned dismissal of all causes of action and cross-claims against our client in the notoriously plaintiff-friendly Bronx County. Supreme Court, Bronx County.
Attorney Client Privilege - 2020
NG&A successfully defeated a motion challenging our assertion of the attorney-client privilege and directing our client’s witness not to answer deposition questions regarding his communications with us. At issue was whether the witness, a former employee and corporate consultant for NG&A’s client, qualified as the “functional equivalent of an employee” for purposes of invoking the attorney-client privilege. In a detailed and potentially far reaching seven page opinion, the Court determined that our client’s witness was the functional equivalent of an employee and that his communications with NG&A were shielded by the attorney-client privilege. Supreme Court, New York County.
Personal Injury - 2019
Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries when a vehicle exiting a car wash accelerated and pinned him against another vehicle. Among other things, Plaintiff alleged that the car wash was defectively designed so as to make Plaintiff’s accident foreseeable. NG&A won summary judgment for our client, the lessee of the car wash premises, on the basis that the vehicle driver’s negligence constituted the sole proximate cause of the accident, and that the design of the car wash did not contribute to the unfortunate incident. Supreme Court, Kings County.
Disability Insurance Coverage - 2017, 2019
Plaintiff sued to recover in excess of $1 billion after denial of his claim under a policy of disability insurance. NG&A first obtained summary judgment in favor of one of our clients, the policy’s wholesale broker, on the grounds that, among other things, they did not owe plaintiff a fiduciary duty of care. Jonas v. National Life Ins. Co., et al, 2015 NY Slip Op 30673(U), aff’d 48 N.Y.S.3d 77 (1st Dep’t 2017). NG&A subsequently obtained dismissal for our other clients, the underwriters of the disability policy, by establishing that plaintiff’s action was time-barred pursuant to the applicable policy limitations provision. Jonas v. National Life Ins. Co., 95 N.Y.S.3d 809 (1st Dep't 2019).
Wrongful Death - 2019
NG&A obtained summary judgment for our client, an elevator maintenance company, in a wrongful death action brought by the estate of man riding a motorized scooter that went through the door of a handicap lift and fell several feet to the ground below. NG&A successfully established that although our client serviced the lift on a time and material basis, it did not owe plaintiff’s decedent a duty of care. Pui Kum Ng Lee v Chatham Green, Inc., 2019 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1391 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. 2019). Plaintiff did not appeal.
Personal Injury / Roller Skating Accident - 2019
NG&A prevailed on a summary judgment motion for our client, a popular roller-skating venue, in an action brought by a patron who fell while skating and sustained a fractured wrist. Plaintiff alleged that she fell over a buckle on an expansion joint on the skating surface. NG&A successfully established that Plaintiff actually fell after colliding with an orange cone the venue had placed over the buckle and that the cone did not unreasonably increase the risk of harm to skaters.
Successful Mediation and Settlement Negotiations - 2017-2019
Representing the Plaintiff, NG&A obtained a significant settlement at mediation for our client, the operator of several club venues, from our client’s insurance broker after the carrier with whom the broker placed our client’s liability coverage went into receivership and liquidation and our client suffered substantial uninsured losses.
In one federal litigation and two separate pre-litigation claims, NG&A represented the operator of a prominent web service accused of vicarious copyright infringement arising out of the use of certain musical tracks in video clips. In each instance, we successfully negotiated favorable settlements for our client, avoiding prolonged and costly litigation.
REPRESENTATIVE EARLIER WORK
Disability Insurance Coverage - 2011-2013
Plaintiff, an insured under a policy of disability insurance, commenced litigation alleging that his claim had been wrongfully denied. NG&A obtained dismissal for the policy’s underwriters. Plaintiff challenged the existence of federal jurisdiction. NG&A successfully argued that the policy’s third physician review provision constituted a binding arbitration clause within the meaning of the Federal Arbitration Act. The District Court agreed with NG&A, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari. Bakoss v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 110834 (E.D.N.Y., 2011), aff’d 707 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2013), cert den 571 U.S. 825 (2013).
Motor Vehicle / Wrongful Death / Personal Injury - 2009
Mr. Goodman acted as lead attorney for the defendants, the husband driver and his wife the vehicle owner, in a group of wrongful death and personal injury cases arising out of a horrific five car accident in Nassau County. All the cases eventually settled on favorable terms. After Mr. Goodman’s firm relinquished representation of the husband, one of the plaintiffs moved to disqualify Mr. Goodman’s firm from representing the wife. The Court denied that motion in an important decision concerning attorney conflicts of interest and ethical standards. DeLorenz v. Moss, 24 Misc. 3d 1218(A) (Sup. Ct. Nassau Co. 2009).
Civil Rights / Discrimination - 2004-2005
Mr. Goodman represented a prominent national retail chain whose employees were alleged to have discriminated against three transgender individuals at a store in Brooklyn. After a high publicity trial in federal court, the jury awarded the three plaintiffs $1 each. The District Judge awarded plaintiffs attorney fees. Defendant’s appeal of that award went from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, to New York’s Court of Appeals, then back to the 2nd Circuit. That court then remanded the case back to the District Court judge who then assigned the case to a Magistrate Judge before whom the case finally settled. McGrath v. Toys ‘R’ Us, 356 F.3d 246 (2d Cir. 2004), on certified question 3 N.Y.3d 421 (2004), on remand 409 F.3d 513 (2d Cir. 2005).
Defamation - 2004
Mr. Goodman obtained dismissal of an action against his clients, accused by Plaintiff of defamation, which dismissal was affirmed on appeal. The Appellate Division’s decision has been frequently cited for its holdings concerning pleading standards in defamation cases and other procedural issues. Simpson v. Cook Pony Farm Real Estate, Inc., 784 N.Y.S.2d 633 (2d Dep't 2004).
Copyright Infringement- 1994
Mr. Goodman tried this copyright infringement case to a defendant’s verdict before then District Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Her opinion explaining her determination to grant Mr. Goodman’s application for attorney fees became an early precedent in the developing caselaw allowing the award of attorney fees to prevailing defendants under the Copyright Act. Screenlife Establishment v. Tower Video, Inc., 868 F.Supp. 47 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).