.

Defense Digest

On the Pulse…Other Notable Achievements

Defense Digest, Vol. 30, No. 1, March 2024

March 1, 2024


 

APPOINTMENTS

Congratulations to Mark Wellman (New York, NY) on being selected to the Board of the CLM Alliance (Claims and Litigation Management Alliance)’s New York City Chapter. In this capacity, Mark helps to plan events and oversee membership activities. 

Rebecca Doloski (Tampa, FL) has been named secretary of the Claims and Litigation Management Alliance (CLM) Western Florida Chapter Board, effective January 2024.

Mohamed Bakry (Philadelphia, PA) has been named the first Muslim president of the Lawyers’ Club of Philadelphia’s Board of Directors. He has been a member of the club and served on its board since 2016.

Rachel Insalaco (Scranton, PA) has been elected to the Board of Directors of the Young Lawyers Division of the Lackawanna Bar Association.

Valerie Lamb (Tampa, FL) has been accepted to Hillsborough Association for Women Lawyers (HAWL) Leadership Academy. HAWL’s Leadership Academy is a multi-session professional development program designed for attorneys seeking to advance their self-advocacy skills, leverage their talent in current and future positions, identify leadership strategies and opportunities, and create a plan for personal and professional leadership.

 

PUBLISHED ARTICLES

Claire McCudden’s (Wilmington, DE) article “New York Supreme Court Decisions Impart Lessons for Insurance Agents and Brokers” was published on PLUS Blog on January 30, 2024. You can read Claire’s article here. 

On December 26, 2023, the Insurance Journal published “Florida High Court Tapped Brakes on Dangerous Instrumentality Liability” by Kimberly Kanoff Berman and Sheri-Lynn Corey-Forte (both of Fort Lauderdale, FL). You can read their article here. 

Jessica Gordon (Mount Laurel, NJ) authored the article “AI: Detecting Fraud and Improving Claims Handling” that appeared in the CLM’s Workers’ Compensation e-newsletter on December 20, 2023. Read the article here.

David Shannon’s (Philadelphia, PA) article “Cybersecurity Threats: A Year in Review and a Look Ahead” was published in The Legal Intelligencer on December 19, 2023. You can read his article here.

On December 13, 2023, The Legal Intelligencer published Lee Durivage’s (Philadelphia, PA) article “EEOC’s Expansion of Accommodations Under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.” You can read Lee’s article here. 

On December 11, 2023, Insurance Journal published “With Differing Court Rulings on Pre-Suit Notice of Intent, Florida Insurers Left Guessing” written by Sean Greenwalt (Tampa, FL). You can read his article here. 

The Claims and Litigation Management Alliance issued its Top Ten Most Read Articles of 2023 and Tony Natale’s (Philadelphia, PA) workers’ compensation article, “Why Do Claimants Lie?” was #4 on the list! Read what Tony has to say on the topic.


 

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

Mohamed Bakry (Philadelphia, PA) presented at the Defense Research Institute’s 2024 Product Liability Conference “You’ve Been Warned! The Future Is Coming for Labels.” As more product warning labels and instructions are being provided to consumers in digital format (via QR codes, YouTube videos, and even TikTok), juries are left to determine what is (or is not) compliant with the applicable standards. Attendees learned more about the best practices for manufacturers to communicate with consumers about product warnings and instructions in this digital age. 

Michael Bradford (Tampa, FL) co-presented “History of Marine Insurance and the Principles that Guide Us Now” at the Tampa Bay Mariners Club Seminar Sink or Swim in Marine Insurance 2024 Seminar.

Josh J.T. Byrne (Philadelphia, PA) joined a Pennsylvania Bar Institute panel to record the webinar “Continuity of Legal Services for Solo and Small Firm Attorneys 2023.” Click here to register for this on-demand webinar. Josh was also part of a panel which presented on avoiding legal malpractice at the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Mid-Year Meeting. The panel focused on the benefits and risks of generative AI in the practice of law.

James Cole (Philadelphia, PA) teamed up to co-present “Risky Business: New Trends in Insurance Fraud” at the CLM Alliance (Claims and Litigation Management Alliance)’s 2023 Focus Conference in NYC. The panelists addressed new trends in insurance fraud and how to detect and defend against the same. 

Jay Habas, Patrick Carey (both of Erie, PA), and Christian Marquis (Pittsburgh, PA) gave a presentation to the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania. The title of their presentation was “Local Government Immunity in Pennsylvania: A Study of the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act.”

John Hare (Philadelphia, PA) presented a seminar to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania entitled “Speak Easy and Write Stuff: Effective Communication Techniques for Appellate Courts.” The CLE about how to draft effective judicial opinions and present oral arguments was mandatory for all 85 Superior Court legal staffers and law clerks and was attended by the majority of Superior Court judges.

Mark Kozlowski (Scranton, PA) presented the webinar “Employment Law Basics - 2023 Year in Review: What’s New, What’s Changed, and What Do I Need to Know?” This webinar was presented to the Northeastern Pennsylvania Chapter of the Society for Human Resource Management. 

Sara Mazzolla (Roseland, NJ) discussed claims and waivers when she participated on a legal panel at the NAFDMA National Agritourism Convention and Expo (North American Farmers Direct Marketing Association). 

Harold Moroknek (Westchester, NY) was a presenter to the American Bus Association/Bus Industry Safety Council at it 2024 Winter Meetings. 

Jeffrey Rapattoni (Mount Laurel, NJ) presented “The Top 10 Cases Impacting Insurance Fraud” at the National Insurance Crime Bureau’s 2024 Mid-Atlantic Training Event.

Alesia Sulock (Philadelphia, PA) co-presented for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute a CLE presentation on “The Business and Ethics Basics of Law Firm Management 2024.” 

 

Defense Digest, Vol. 30, No. 1, March 2024, is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1. © 2024 Marshall Dennehey. All Rights Reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.

Firm Highlights

News

Marshall Dennehey Again Earns Recognition in Distinguished Chambers USA

blue facade of a hospital sign against blue sky

Result

Defense Verdict in Complex Medical Malpractice Trial

graphic with Maria Granaudo photo text announces she has joined the firm as a shareholder in the Health Care Dept.

News

Maria R. Granaudo Joins Marshall Dennehey’s Wilmington Office As a Shareholder in the Health Care Department

Result

No-Cause Jury Verdict Secured in Wrongful Death Trial

We successfully obtained a no-cause jury verdict in a 13-day wrongful death trial. The decedent, a 59-year-old man, was admitted to the emergency room on February 15, 2019, with complaints of abdominal pain, decreased appetite, and constipation, despite the use of laxatives. The patient did not complain of any nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. He had a significant medical history including diabetes, hypertension, prior coronary artery stenting, morbid obesity (with past gastric bypass surgery), longstanding ventral hernia, and back pain. A CT scan revealed multiple hernias and a potential closed-loop bowel obstruction, leading to a surgery consultation. Our client, an emergency general surgeon, interpreted that the patient did not have a closed loop or any significant obstruction and recommended non-surgical management. The patient was approved to have clear liquids, and had a vomiting incident shortly after, but our client was not notified. The patient was returned to NPO status, and after improving overnight, he was returned to “clears” and additional medical and renal consults were ordered. Our client did not receive any communications from the residents/nurses of any changes in the patient’s condition. On February 18, 2019, two rapid responses were called due to increased heart rate and vomiting. It is believed that the vomiting resulted in aspiration, causing sepsis, ultimately leading to the patient’s death. During the trial, the plaintiff’s sole medical expert highlighted imaging on the wrong hernia, which called into question all of his opinions in the case. We made key objections related to the expert testimony, limiting what the allegations were, and preventing new allegations from being made. After approximately two and a half hours of deliberating, the jury returned a no-cause verdict. 

Result

Summary Judgment Secured, Preserving $750,000 in Coverage for Insured in Major Trucking Liability Dispute

Ray Freudiger and Michael A. Roberts (both of Cincinnati) successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of their client in a coverage dispute arising from a May 19, 2022, motor vehicle accident. A permissive driver operated a box truck for an interstate trucking company and caused severe injuries to two tort victims. Prior to the accident, the insured had procured a commercial auto policy for the trucking company with stated limits of $1,000,000. Following the accident, the insurer initiated a declaratory judgment action asserting that only reduced bodily injury limits of $25,000/$50,000 applied and later counterclaimed, alleging it would not have insured the driver had he been properly submitted for approval under the policy. After extensive discovery, briefing, and oral argument, the court rejected the insurer’s attempt to shift responsibility for the $750,000 in coverage it was legally required to provide for permissive drivers under Ohio law, granting summary judgment in favor of the insured and preserving $750,000 in liability exposure.

Thought Leadership

Marijuana Legalization and Workplace Risk: What New Jersey Employers Need to Know

While the legalization of recreational marijuana usage poses a risk of increased work-related accidents for younger workers, employers can work to curb this increase by investing in education, effective drug policies, and employee assistance programs.

Thought Leadership

U.S. Supreme Court Decides Key Issue Regarding Interstate Freight Broker Liability

Freight brokers are intermediaries.  They connect shippers of goods with trucking companies that transport those goods.  Freight brokers match a load of freight with a trucking company and oversee the logistics of the transportation. For a number of years there has been a division among the Federal Circuits regarding the potential liability of freight brokers when the trucking companies that they retain for interstate loads are involved in accidents.  At the center of this division was the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA).  Some Federal Circuit Courts have held that state law negligent hiring claims against freight brokers were preempted by the FAAAA .  Other Federal Circuits Courts have held that even if preemption applied, the “safety exception” in the FAAAA saved state law negligent hiring claims from federal preemption.  On May 14, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the conflict in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, et al, No24-1238. In that case freight broker C.H. Robinson selected Caribe Transport to haul an interstate load. The commercial truck driver employed by Caribe Transport allegedly caused an accident and the plaintiff, Montgomery, was seriously injured. Montgomery brought an action against the driver, Caribe Transport and C.H. Robinson. The allegation against C.H. Robinson was that it negligently retained Caribe Transport when it knew, or should have known, that it was an unsafe company. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that Montgomery’s claims against C.H. Robinson were preempted by the FAAAA. The plaintiff appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision focused primarily on the safety exception in the FAAAA.  That provision provides that the FAAAA preemption “…shall not restrict the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles.” C.H. Robinson argued, as freight brokers historically have, that their function was not “with respect to motor vehicles” because they do not own trucks or employ drivers. They are merely intermediaries, connecting entities who need freight moved with entities who can do that job. Therefore, C.H. Robinson argued that preemption applied, not the safety exception. The U.S. Supreme Court did not accept that argument. The Court focused on the meaning of the phrase “with respect to” in the safety exception. The Court held that it means “referring to”, “concerning” or “regarding”. Therefore, writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Barrett concluded that “[r]equiring C.H. Robinson to exercise ordinary care in selecting a carrier therefore “concerns” motor vehicles—most obviously, the trucks that will transport the goods. So, Montgomery’s negligent-hiring claim falls within the FAAAA’s safety exception, which saves it from preemption.” Justice Kavanaugh, in his concurring opinion, noted the effect this ruling may have on freight brokers and their insurers throughout the country: Importantly, the Court's decision today should not be read to mean that brokers will routinely be subject to state tort liability in the wake of truck accidents. As even plaintiff's counsel stressed, brokers should be able to successfully defend against state tort suits if the brokers have acted reasonably and arranged transportation with reputable trucking companies. Tr. of Oral Arg. 27-29. In plaintiff's counsel's words, the brokers "just have to hire carriers that actually have a reasonable policy," and "the broker is not going to have a problem if it's asking the hard questions of the carrier." Id., at 42, 45. In addition, the proximate-cause requirement in typical state tort law should help protect brokers from excessive liability. Id., at 25. That said, the brokers rightly caution against naivete. In the real world, as the brokers forcefully respond, state tort law can be unpredictable, and the costs to brokers of litigation and insurance may be significant even when brokers prevail in lawsuits. Moreover, the costs of litigation and insurance, as well as the costs of brokers' conducting more substantial inquiries into trucking companies, will cascade through the economy and be paid in part by American consumers in the form of higher prices. The concerns expressed by the brokers are legitimate and weighty. The key point here is that freight brokers can no longer claim they are protected from negligent retention claims by the FAAAA (in cases involving interstate transportation). The challenge will be to determine what is considered ”reasonable efforts” used by brokers when retaining transportation companies. 

Event

29th Annual FDLA Florida Liability Claims Conference

Jim and Erica will team up to present, "Supporting the Next Generation: Connecting with Associates." This panel-style presentation will explore communication best practices from the perspective of a senior shareholder and newer associate. The discussion will focus on the communication styles of different generations and effective strategies to avoid communication breakdowns. Topics to be discussed include the hiring process, perceptions of defense work among newer lawyers, work-life balance issues after hiring, and mentoring.

News

Christina Gonzales To Speak at the Women of Color Roundtable at DRI’s Diversity and Inclusion Seminar

Thought Leadership

PA Middle District Dismisses Claims Against School District and its Superintendent, Principal, Special Education Director, and Classroom Teacher

A five-year-old special education student was enrolled in the Wyoming Valley West School District and attended the State Street Elementary School during the 2024-2025 school year. The student refused to clean up classroom toys at dismissal. When his teacher allegedly grabbed him by the wrist to walk him back to his seat, the student dropped to the floor and began crying. The teacher then allegedly grabbed the student by the ankle and dragged him across the floor. Following an investigation, criminal charges were not advanced by the county DA, and the school permitted the teacher to return to the classroom. The student’s parents sued, lodging thirteen legal counts under both state and federal law, which sought monetary damages from the teacher, the school district, the superintendent, the principal, and the director of special education. The plaintiff’s 42 USC 1983 claims were dismissed as to the school district for failure to allege a policy or custom violation, and the failure to alleged deliberate indifference in the failure-to-train context. As to the superintendent, building principal, and special education director, the Section 1983 claims were also dismissed for failure to allege personal involvement on the part of the individuals. Regarding an equal protection claim asserted against all defendants, the motion to dismiss was also granted for a failure to advance a plausible equal protection claim, holding that “plaintiffs' single-act allegations do not include a factual basis to even infer that the act was motivated by discriminatory animus rather than some other non-discriminatory impulse.” The court further dismissed the plaintiff’s negligence-based claims including negligence against the teacher and district administrators, NIED, and vicarious liability under the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act (PSTCA). The federal claims under the IDEA, Section 504, and the ADA were also dismissed in various respects. The IDEA claim was dismissed against all defendants with prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Section 504 claims against the individual defendants were also dismissed with prejudice, as districts, not individuals, are the recipients of federal funds under Section 504. However, the Section 504 and ADA claims were dismissed without prejudice as to defendant Wyoming Valley West, and the plaintiff was permitted leave to amend.