Pecoraro & Schiesel LLP

We obtained $9,000,000.00 for our client who was paralyzed as a result of a car accident. Our client was a passenger in a rental car which went out of control and struck a divider as the driver negotiated a curve on a highway. Throughout the litigation, the rental car company denied its responsibility by taking the position that our client was completely at fault for her own injuries by sitting on the lap of another passenger and by failing to wear a seatbelt. We proved otherwise. Prior to trial the defendant rental car company attempted to avoid payment by filing for bankruptcy. Our firm successfully fought the bankruptcy petition in Federal Court in Wilmington Delaware. A portion of the proceeds was used to purchase an annuity for the client. She received an up-front cash payment of $4,500,000.00. The remaining $4,500,000.00 was placed into a fixed, lifetime annuity which will pay her an additional $32,427,500.00 during her expected lifetime, making the total payments $36,927,500.00.

El-Al Airlines paid our client $5,000,000.00 in damages resulting from a fall from a Hi-Lift while cleaning the cabin of an El-Al plane. To gain access to interior of the plane from the tarmac, our client used a Hi-Lift supplied by his employer, an aviation maintenance company. While removing garbage from the aircraft to the tarmac below for disposal, the plaintiff fell off of the Hi-Lift to the tarmac and struck his head. He claimed that the High Lift’s hydraulic system malfunctioned causing the Lift to drop two feet thereby propelling him off of the side of the lift to the tarmac below. As a result of the fall, our 52 year-old client sustained a head injury requiring surgery and a hospitalization. Since our client was cleaning an aircraft at the time of the fall, we successfully argued that defendant El-Al Airlines was liable under New York State Labor Law §200, §240,§241, which affords special protection to certain workers injured while cleaning a structure at a height. El-Al Airlines took the position throughout the litigation that our client was completely at fault for his own injuries by using equipment that he knew was broken. El-Al also claimed that our client made an excellent recovery from his injuries based upon his ability to testify clearly and accurately for almost 3 hours at a deposition. Since the State of Israel owned the aircraft, our client was not entitled to a jury trial because Federal Law prohibits jury trials against foreign governments. 

Our client, a welder by trade, fell from a defective ladder while performing a renovation of an apartment building. As he was climbing a ladder which was attached to a water tower on the roof of the building, the ladder suddenly separated from the tower causing him to fall onto the roof. As a result of the fall, he fractured his wrist and required several surgeries. He was unable to return to work as a welder and opened a furniture store with the proceeds of his case. We brought suit under New York State Labor Law §240 (1) which imposes absolute liability on building owners and general contractors for injuries sustained by construction workers who fall from an elevated work site due to defective equipment. We were successful in proving that the ladder from which our client fell was defective, and the defendants paid our client $3,250,000.00 for his injuries. Before we started a lawsuit, our client requested that we negotiate a settlement with the defendant’s insurance company. Our client requested that he be reimbursed for lost wages, medical bills and money for pain and suffering. He would have accepted $750,000.00, but the defendant and its insurance company refused to accept its responsibility and took a “no pay” position until judgment was entered against it on liability. Ultimately, the insurance company paid our client almost five times the amount of money it could have paid had it settled the case early before litigation.

Our infant-client obtained $3,000,000.00 in this medical malpractice case, which involved obstetrical malpractice in the course of her delivery. The infant’s mother went into premature labor. The physicians attempted to stop her contractions with the use of drugs over an extended period of time. After the infant showed signs of distress (lack of oxygen), the doctors continued the use of these drugs rather than permit the child to be delivered as soon as possible. Due to this malpractice, the infant was born with cerebral palsy.

Our infant-client obtained $2.300,000.00 in this medical malpractice case, which involved obstetrical and midwife malpractice. During the course of her pregnancy, the infant’s mother showed signs of a high risk pregnancy. Nevertheless, her obstetrician scheduled her labor and delivery to be handled by a midwife. During labor, the infant showed signs of distress (lack of oxygen), but no physician was present to perform an emergency caesarian section, nor did the midwife attempt to contact a doctor. As a result of this malpractice, the infant was born with cerebral palsy.

We obtained $2,150,000.00 on behalf of two passengers in a motor vehicle that was struck by a garbage truck. During the case, we were able to prove that the truck was in the process of making a dangerous left turn from the right lane when it sideswiped the motor that our clients were riding in as passengers. The defendants maintained throughout the litigation that the driver of the motor vehicle in which our clients were passengers was completely at fault for the accident because he cut-off the garbage truck. They also maintained that our clients’ injuries were not caused by the accident because both clients did not undergo any significant medical treatment until many months after the accident. One client sustained a torn rotator cuff in her shoulder, and as a result, underwent arthroscopic surgery as an outpatient. She made an excellent recovery and received $325,000.00 for her injuries. Our other client, who had back problems before the accident, underwent back and neck surgery for herniated discs. She also made an excellent recovery, and she received $1,825,000.00 for her injuries.

Our client, a 54 year old warehouse worker, was struck by a commercial van as it was pulling out of a parking space. The client, who was crossing in the middle of the street from behind the van, was struck as the van began to back up. As a result of the accident, our client sustained injuries to his head and abdomen requiring hospitalization and surgery to repair his abdominal wall. The defendant paid our client $1,800,000.00 for his injuries.

Our client, a construction worker, sustained a fractured elbow as a result of a fall from a ladder while installing a ceiling during the construction of a Barnes & Noble Bookstore in Staten Island. Throughout the litigation, the defendants took the position that our client was completely at fault for his injuries by improperly placing his ladder at a dangerous angle upon construction debris. The defendants also claimed that our client failed to use an available scissors lift instead of a ladder even though he was repeatedly told to do so. The defendants paid our client $1,500,000.00 for his injuries. 

Our clients, who were passengers in a motor vehicle, were injured when they were struck by a drunk driver who was drinking at a local pub. We brought suit against the driver and the bar which served the driver alcohol. Under New York’s Dram Shop Act, liability may be imposed upon commercial purveyors of alcohol for serving visibly intoxicated patrons who injure others after leaving their establishment. The clients sustained varying degrees of injuries requiring hospitalization. The case was settled during trial, with all defendants tendering their insurance policies, and the driver also confessing a judgment and agreeing to a garnishment of his wages for life. 

Our client, a homeless individual, was struck by a rented motor vehicle while standing on a Brooklyn street corner at 4:30 a.m. As a result of the accident, he sustained a closed head injury requiring hospitalization. Throughout the litigation the defendant maintained that it was not responsible for our client’s injuries because the vehicle which struck him was stolen. Under New York law, an owner of a motor vehicle is not liable for injuries to a pedestrian if, at the time of the accident, the motor vehicle which struck the pedestrian was stolen. The defendant, a rental car company, had proof that the vehicle was reported to the police as stolen. During our investigation, however, we obtained evidence that the vehicle may not have been stolen but was rented to a person with a fake drivers license who then reported the vehicle stolen after the accident. Under these circumstance, a jury must decide whether the vehicle was stolen at the time it struck our client which would absolve the defendant of liability. Our client received $1,300,000.00 for his injuries. 

Our client, a New York City Taxi Driver, was injured in a motor vehicle collision in Queens, New York after dropping off a fare paying passenger. The defendant claimed that our client rear-ended his car while he was proceeding to make a right turn. Our client claimed that the defendant cut him off before commencing to make the right turn. There was no dispute that our client’s car struck the rear of the defendant’s car. As a result of the accident, our client sustained a shoulder injury requiring arthroscopic repair and physical therapy. The defendant refused to settle the case and offered no money. The case proceeded to trial, and a verdict on liability was obtained in our client’s favor. After the liability verdict, the defendant continued to refuse to offer any money to settle the case, claiming that our client did not sustain a serious injury under New York law. The case settled after the jury verdict on damages, prior to an appeal, for the defendant’s insurance policy limits of $1,250,000.00.

This civil rights case for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution arose out a murder at a Manhattan Nightclub. Prior to his arrest for the murder, our client told his friend that he was the shooter, and he was identified as the shooter in a lineup by three independent eyewitnesses standing in close proximity to the shooting. He was convicted and sentenced to 25 years to life. When he was retried for the murder in 2005 and found not guilty, we were asked to represent him in a 1983 Civil Rights Claim. The case was settled for $1,250,000.00.

We entered judgment against the defendant in the amount of $1,210,088.65 after a jury verdict. Our client, who was employed by an auto-body shop, sustained an injury to the sciatic nerve in his leg while he was at work. We successfully proved that the defendant was completely at fault in causing our client’s injury. During the damages trial, the defendant’s insurance company offered $75,000.00 to settle the case, which was declined by our client. The Trial Judge recommended a settlement of $125,000.00, but the defendant refused to accept his responsibility and declined to accept the Judge’s recommendation, preferring that the jury decide. The jury verdict, which the defendant desperately wanted, was almost ten times the amount of the Judge’s settlement recommendation.

A verdict was rendered for our client in the sum of $1,200,000.00 for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Our client, a patient, was being transported in an ambulette when it went out of control and crashed into a house. The client sustained fractures of the shoulder and arm requiring surgical repair. The client also sustained a vertebral fracture for which the client underwent closed reduction.

Our client, a porter in a commercial building, was injured in a freight elevator in the building in which he was employed. According to our client, the elevator suddenly dropped and then abruptly stopped, causing him to fall to the floor of the elevator car. As a result of the fall, our client sustained multiple injuries, which eventually resulted in surgery. We brought suit against the company which maintained the elevator and the managing agent of the building. We alleged that the defendants negligently maintained and repaired the elevator, and that our client could no longer work as a result of the accident. The defendants claimed that the elevator was properly repaired and maintained and that plaintiff was not badly hurt, since he worked the remainder of the day after the accident, worked the next day, and did not even go to an emergency room until taking a long lunch hour the day after the accident. The defendant’s claimed that his injuries, if any, were pre-existing and unrelated to the accident. Notwithstanding the defendants’ defenses, he ultimately recovered $1,000,000.00.