J. Mark Pecci, II and Andrew J. Milisits of MOODK’s Philadelphia Office obtained dismissal of all claims brought against a client in trip and fall case filed against multiple parties. The attorneys were able to produce evidence that situs of the alleged fall was located outside the premises owned and maintained by the client. Upon production of the evidence, Plaintiff agreed to dismiss all claims against the client.

After a 5-day trial in Chester County, PA, Mark Merlini and Mike Joyce of MOODK’s Philadelphia office secured a defense verdict in favor of a chiropractor in a case involving claims that negligent chiropractic manipulations damaged a 45-year-old patient’s cervical vertebral artery resulting in a dissection and stroke.  Although the patient was left with permanent deficits from the stroke, the defense was able to prove that the chiropractic treatment had nothing to do with the patient’s outcome. 

Philip J. Degnan and Kandace R. Brackins of MOODK’s New Jersey office obtained summary judgment dismissing all claims with prejudice against their client, a snow removal company.  Plaintiff alleged that the snow removal company negligently failed to treat ice during a snowstorm causing her to slip and fall. Despite a gallant effort to establish liability through multiple rounds of depositions, Plaintiff did not prevail.  As a result of strong motion practice and oral arguments, MOODK attorneys successfully argued, pursuant to New Jersey’s Ongoing Storm Rule, that no duty existed to remove snow or treat ice during an ongoing snowstorm.

Attorneys Fabio Sciarrino and ­­­­­Mark Merlini, Jr. of MOODK’s Philadelphia office obtained a dismissal with prejudice on behalf of their client, a flea market organizer, in a products liability claim. Plaintiff was injured when the tires on his used snowblower exploded during inflation. Plaintiff claimed that the snowblower, which was purchased from a flea market, was defective and subject to a recall.  In their complaint, they argued that secondhand retailers (i.e. thrift shops, flea markets, garage sales, etc.) not only have a duty to disclose “defective or unsafe operating conditions” but also to “realize” those unsafe conditions.  In the pleadings stage, the case was removed from the Court of Common Pleas to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania where MOODK attorneys successfully argued that Plaintiff had fraudulently joined their client in the lawsuit and, furthermore, Plaintiff’s theory about the standard applicable to secondhand retailers, is untenable and a reach of current law.   In its opinion, the Court held that there was “simply no basis … in Pennsylvania law” to require secondhand retailers to inspect “seemingly legal, safe, and ordinary products to ensure they are not subject to recall or are otherwise dangerous.”