J. Mark Pecci, II, Esquire and Andrew J. Milisits, Esquire of MOODK’s Philadelphia Office won a series of motions to obtain dismissal of all claims against a subcontractor in a multi-party complex construction defect matter in the Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia County. First, the duo won a Motion precluding the Plaintiffs’ from offering expert evidence regarding any purported defective workmanship. Next, the Court granted their Motion for Summary Judgment seeking dismissal of claims against the client, with prejudice, which argued that Plaintiffs’ claims were legally insufficient and could not be substantiated with the requisite evidence needed to allow the case to proceed to trial.

Philadelphia MOODK Attorneys Mark Merlini and Michael Joyce secure dismissal of all claims against clients in claims for negligence regarding chemical drug testing in Federal District Court. Plaintiff was extended a conditional offer of employment by a co-defendant contingent on a negative drug test result. The co-defendant took a sample of Plaintiff’s hair and sent it to MOODK’s client, who co-defendant had a contract for employment drug screenings with, for a pre-employment drug test. The sample was tested and found positive for an illicit substance. Plaintiff reported that it was a false positive based on a prescription she was taking. The co-defendant refused to provide Plaintiff with the opportunity to perform a new test and rescinded the employment offer. Plaintiff filed suit claiming the co-defendant discriminated against her due to her pregnancy and alleged MOODK’s client was negligent in refusing to provide a new drug test. MOODK’s attorneys argued that the client had no duty to provide a new drug test to Plaintiff because the client was not Plaintiff’s employer and was rather just contracted to provide drug testing for samples received from the co-defendant. The Federal Court agreed and dismissed all claims against MOODK’s clients with prejudice, finding they owed no duty to Plaintiff.

Mark Leavy, Esquire of Marks O’Neill’s New Jersey office defeated all claims against his title insurance client. The claims arose out of a failed real estate transaction by the prospective buyer.  Plaintiff attempted to purchase a distressed property in foreclosure proceedings from the vulnerable owner, and directed the title insurance company to disburse all settlement monies at closing despite not having obtained a deed from the owner.  When Plaintiff failed to ever obtain a deed, Plaintiff commenced suit against the title insurance company for breach of contract, negligence, fraud and consumer fraud.  After prolonged litigation discovery the Court granted our motion for summary judgment based on several creative theories including the unenforceability of the underlying contract to purchase the property, which was in violation of the NJ Tax Sale Law.