Articles Tagged with New York Personal Injury attorney

Published on:

Over 18 years ago, Leav & Steinberg was founded by two partners.  Dan and Eddy had met at a prior plaintiffs firm and decided to create their own firm.  That was 1999.  They started off renting space within a small firm in lower Manhattan.  We rented just two small offices and had no staff.  We did have tons of energy and desire to be successful.  With about 29 clients we represented at our former job, the firm was founded.  After 18 years the firm has grown into one of the premier NYC personal injury firms. We now have three partners, six associates and a staff totaling 25.  Just last month Edward Steinberg was elected as the Treasurer or the New York State Trial Lawyers Association.  He continues to be a board member as well as an Officer.

The firm has represented and successfully concluded by trial, settlement, or arbitration well over $200 million dollars in cases.  We have been referred matters by firms that don’t handle plaintiff cases.  But most telling the firm has grown mostly by referrals from old happy clients.  At present, the firm represents over 900 clients.

Given the extraordinary growth, the firm had outgrown our previous Manhattan space at 14o Broadway.  As of July 1, 2017, the firm has signed a new lease for nearly 10,000 square feet at 75 Broad Street.  The firm designed the new space from scratch and has built an office that is both modern as well as exceptionally functional and built for the continued success we hope to have.

Published on:

johnny-automatic-scales-of-justice-300x259
Though our country has gone through a turbulent time with the recent election, we understand that many have become frustrated and upset with even discussing the topic of government and politics.  However, it has come to our attention that certain elected government officials have put forth a bill which would severely curtail the rights of all citizens and reduce our access to the Court system as well as the right to receive fair and adequate damages for serious injuries.

This week, the House will vote on a number of bills that will make it difficult for accident victims to seek justice in our nation’s courts. If these bills pass, it will make it nearly impossible for Americans, who are injured in accidents, and their families to pursue legal action. The so-called “Protection Access to Care Act of 2017” [H.R. 1215] will rig the system against us by allowing insurance companies and big corporations to prevail.

You can view the details of the bill by clicking on   HR 1215 Bill.   As you will note, the bill, sponsored by big business and the insurance lobby, sets a cap of $250,000 for all claims of pain and suffering for any person bringing a Health Care Lawsuit.  Such a lawsuit will include all claims of medical malpractice, nursing home negligence and any other claim involving any other health care provider.  If we stop for just one moment and think about this.  An elderly woman who is caused to sustain serious and permanent bed sores while in a Nursing home and suffers for 2 years in awful pain, undergoing debridement (scraping of the necrotic skin) procedures will be limited to $250,000.00 in damages.  A child who suffers a loss of oxygen due to delay and error by the doctor and nurses while being delivered and is rendered handicapped and special needs for the rest of their life; will be limited to $250,000 for their pain and suffering.

Published on:

TI Rap concert
As we reported previously here on May 30th, 2016 Leav & Steinberg, LLP was retained by several individuals who sustained serious and significant injuries at the T.I. Rap Concert.

For many excited concerts goers and fans, the night of May 25, 2016, was supposed to be filled with fun and music at rap artist, T.I.’s, New York concert held at Irving Plaza. Unfortunately, due to inadequate security measure and substandard emergency protocol, violence and gun fire erupted during the show inside New York’s famous music venue tragically leaving one person dead and others seriously injured.

Two of our clients at Leav and Steinberg, LLP were at the T.I concert at Irving Plaza to have fun and enjoy the show at the time of the shooting. They could have never expected that moments later they would be fleeing for their lives. At some point during the show, gun fire inside Irving Plaza sparked mayhem and chaos which quickly combined with overcrowded conditions that spread throughout the venue causing patrons inside the venue to flee to the nearest exits.

Published on:

Ladder accident
On August 10, 2012, while climbing down a ladder at work our client was caused to fall when the ladder tipped over as a result of being placed on wet Masonite. On the date of the accident the client was a 33 year old non-union electrical worker.  He left the job site by cab but upon arriving home he was in such excruciating pain he went to the Emergency Room.  He was admitted and diagnosed with a fracture to his pelvis and a herniation to his lower back.  The client tried to treat conservatively with physical therapy.  In February of 2013 the client attempted to return to work but due to his pain he was forced to go back out on Workers Compensation.   A former client of Leav & Steinberg, who knew the plaintiff from the neighborhood was discussing his accident and pointed out that he should speak with an attorney and recommended Leav & Steinberg given the success we had for him in the past.  After this meeting, the client contacted our office and retained us.

Leav & Steinberg, LLP immediately filed a lawsuit alleging Labor Law Sections 240(1) and 241(6), specifically Rule 23 Section 1-21(b)(4)(ii). Over the course of the next two years the client was required to undergo two surgeries; (1) for a torn labrum in his hip and (2) a lumbar fusion in order to stabilize the vertebrae at L4-5.  Leav & Steinberg, LLP completed discovery and had the matter placed on the trail calendar less than 3 years after the date of accident.  The parties participated in Mediation where an offer of $1,500,000.00 was made.  Upon the legal advice of Leav & Steinberg, LLP this offer was rejected by the client.  A motion was also made by Daniela F. Henriques, Esq., for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law Section 240(1).  The motion was still pending on the date of the settlement.  The defendants’ position on the motion was that the accident was caused solely by the decision of the plaintiff to use equipment that was not safe and not secured.

In light of the fact that the trial was scheduled for October, 2016, the defendant’s again requested that we participate in a second non-binding mediation.   They further argued that the client had made a good recovery and that his work history was sporadic.  In addition, they argued that given his intelligence and other skills he could return to employment and earn an equal salary; even if not as an electrician.

Published on:

summer camp
As the summer is winding down, I was thankful that my three kids will be returning home from sleep away camp this weekend.  Seven weeks of organized fun, controlled environment with loving and caring counselors and directors to make sure that my kids and others are safe.  As a personal injury lawyer, I am always concerned about the safety of individuals and was thinking of some of the recent camp cases my firm has handled.

When you sign up to send your child to camp, you are entrusting them with the duty to provide your child with a safe and reasonable environment.  Camp activities include, sports, waterfront activities, art, music, as well as many intercamp Olympics and color war.  Some of the greatest memories kids have are those made during these summers.

Yet, many camps fail to provide the most basic when it comes to reasonable care for the safety of its children.  Recently, I represented a young boy who was at a camp.  They had a banana boat ride.  Many of you may know that this is the ride where 4-5 kids sit on a banana shaped tube and a motor boat pulls the kids.  The goal was usually a fun ride along the lake.  Of course, the counselors and probably the kids, in an effort to make it more “exciting”, have the motor boat drive in a way to cause the banana boat to twist and turn in the wake and knock the kids into the lake.  Seems harmless.  Well it would be if you provided the kids with safety rules and guidelines.  What if the child sitting in the front of the boat, closest to the rope, is not given any hand signals in which to convey that they are not feeling safe or feel like they may fall forward into the rope towards the engine of the boat pulling the banana float.  The sound of the engine and the noise from the movement is such that you cant verbally communicate.  Such was the case and my client suffered a severe laceration (over 100 sutures) from his shoulder around his arm onto his forearm.  This left a lasting scar and permanent residual problems.  Leav & Steinberg, LLP was able to prove that the activity was being performed in a dangerous way with inadequate supervision and training of the counselors and a lack of communication with the campers.   Though the camp felt this was not a case, we were successful in proving otherwise and resulted in a significant award for the child and a recovery of his medical bills.

Published on:

Court Image
The Second Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals held that General Motors failed to properly disclose its knowledge of ignition switch defects and accordingly it will now have to face many lawsuits for injuries and other damages, that were once dismissed as part of its bankruptcy filing.

In 2009 General Motors declared bankruptcy.  In doing so, it sought to take any of its viable assets and in an organized sale, transfer them to a new entity now known as “new GM”.  When a company files for bankruptcy they must disclose claims known or likely to be known.  The reason is that when bankruptcy is granted, all debts known or likely to be known are wiped out and the company gets to move forward as a new “reorganized” entity.

Though GM was near financial collapse and the Court did want to maintain a company with thousands of employees, they are not above the law.  The safety of many was at risk and many injuries and deaths had occurred due to defective ignition switches which had caused movement stalls and air-bag non-deployment.  The cause was simple: the poorly improperly designed  ignition switch could slip from the run position and therefore cause many features to fail while in operation.

Published on:

Eddie Fernandez
As I read the recent stories across the county of police officers using excessive force and taking the life of two men; I was reminded of the events of August 12th, 2012 right here in the Bronx.  28 year old, Eddie Fernandez, enjoying a day in his neighborhood was run down by a NYPD Police officer who decided to use his vehicle as a dangerous weapon and take the life of this young man.

Whether it was the shooting death of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, or the killing of Philandro Castile in St. Paul, Minnesota, the ongoing debate rages around the country.  When should or can a police officer use a level of force they know will or likely to cause serious injury.   Under the general definition an officer may use deadly force when he or she is threatened with the same force or the perpetrator is acting in a way that causes a likelihood of serious injury to others.

When my firm was retained by Eusebia Ramirez to represent her on behalf of her son, Eddie Fernandez for the unlawful and excessive force used, I immediately hoped that some video would exist that would show what happened that day.  Luckily, video surveillance does exist and the story it tells, rivals those recently shown around the country in the recent shootings.