Marshall Dennehey provides comprehensive defense representation to insurance companies, their insureds, and self-insured corporations across the full spectrum of casualty liability matters. With a deep bench of experienced litigators practicing throughout our 19 offices, our Casualty Department is well positioned to manage cases of any size or complexity—from routine slip-and-fall claims to high-exposure, multi-party litigation.
Our casualty defense practice encompasses 20 distinct areas of law, reflecting the breadth and depth of our experience. We regularly defend clients in matters involving automobile liability, product liability, premises and retail liability, and general liability—practice areas that have formed the foundation of our casualty litigation work since the firm’s inception.
What sets Marshall Dennehey apart is the scope of specialized defense services offered within our Casualty Department. In addition to core liability matters, our attorneys provide focused representation in niche and emerging areas, including amusement, sports, and entertainment liability; fraud and special investigations; maritime litigation; and trucking and transportation. Attorneys in these practice groups bring extensive experience and are widely recognized as leaders in their respective fields.
Each year, the highly skilled attorneys in our Casualty Department handle thousands of matters nationwide, consistently achieving favorable outcomes for our clients through strategic advocacy and efficient case management.
Casualty Practices
Results
Thought Leadership
Case Law Alerts
Appellate Division Dismisses Contribution Claim Against Employer for Lack of Notice
November 3, 2026
In Rosenblatt v. Mora, the Appellate Division addressed whether defendants could pursue a third-party contribution claim against the decedent's employer, Lots O Bagels, based on allegations of negligent training and supervision. The underlying action arose from a fatal collision involving a vehicle and an employee operating an electric scooter while performing deliveries. Rosenblatt v. Mora, 2026 NY Slip Op 04220, 251 A.D.3d 599 (App. Div.). The court held that the third-party complaint failed to state a viable contribution claim and dismissed it. The court explained that a negligent supervision or training claim requires allegations that the employer knew or should have known of the employee's propensity for the conduct that caused the injury and failed to take appropriate action. Because the complaint contained no factual allegations showing the employer had notice of any dangerous or negligent conduct by the employee, or explaining how the employee's scooter operation was negligent, the allegations were conclusory and insufficient. Accordingly, the court reversed the lower court's ruling and dismissed the contribution claim against the employer.
Case Law Alerts
Emergency Doctrine Bars Claims in Pedestrian-Vehicle Accident
November 3, 2026
In a personal injury action, the Appellate Division considered whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment in a pedestrian-vehicle collision involving an infant pedestrian who ran onto a highway where pedestrian access was prohibited. Defendants argued that the pedestrian's conduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident and that the driver acted reasonably when confronted with a sudden emergency. Danielle W. v. Li, 2026 NY Slip Op 04821, 251 A.D.3d 477 (App. Div.) The court agreed and granted summary judgment to the defendants. It held that the infant pedestrian's unlawful entry onto the highway was the sole proximate cause of the collision and that the driver was protected by the emergency doctrine. The evidence showed that when the pedestrian suddenly ran into the roadway, the driver immediately reacted by removing his foot from the accelerator and attempting to change lanes. The court found these actions reasonable under the circumstances and concluded that neither the driver's common-law duty of care nor his statutory duty to exercise due care toward pedestrians was breached. The court therefore dismissed the claims against all defendants.
