Cases
Significant Representative Matters: Tried one of the first long-term care cases litigated in the City of Philadelphia. Successfully represented the defendant, an owner
operator of a long-term care facility. The plaintiff was a resident of the facility
had been assaulted by a care provider who was convicted of aggravated assault as a result of his mish
ling of the plaintiff. Claims were made for compensatory
punitive damages against the long-term care facility for the actions of its employee
for its failure to properly screen the employee who assaulted the plaintiff. The jury returned a defense verdict on behalf of the long-term care facility.
Successfully represented an insurance broker in an alleged insurance brokerage malpractice matter. Plaintiff sued the insurance brokerage alleging that the brokerage had misrepresented the nature of the insurance coverage available to the l
owner resulting in an economic loss of between $5 million
$8 million. The case was complicated by the fact that the insurance broker whom Tom represented was suffering from Alzheimer's disease
was incompetent to testify at the time of trial.
Defended an underinsured motorist case brought by a plastic surgeon. The plastic surgeon, who had been rear ended in a motor vehicle accident, claimed that as a result of the injuries sustained in the accident, he had developed a radiculopathy radiating into his right dominant arm precluding him from engaging in the practice of plastic surgery. The surgeon had $5 million in underinsured motorist coverage. The arbitrators made an award of $850,000 in favor of the plastic surgeon in a case that was reserved for $5 million.
Successfully represented a psychologist
in-patient treatment facility in a case in which it was alleged that patient was inaccurately evaluated
inappropriately discharged. The patient committed suicide within 10 days after his discharge from the facility by the psychologist. Jury found in favor of defense concluding that the decision to discharge the decedent was appropriate given his presentation on the date of the release.
Defended the manufacturer of a pediculicide (lice treatment) shampoo in a case in which it was alleged that the shampoo caused second degree burns to a 3-year-old child over 60 percent of her body, causing her death. At the time the case was filed, the county coroner
the decedent's treating physicians had opined that her death was caused by an allergic reaction resulting in tissue destruction that manifested itself in the form of second degree burns. The defense assembled a team of experts to establish that the child's death was caused by hot water scalding
not by a chemical reaction to the shampoo. The pediculicide had been manufactured
distributed pursuant to over-the-counter regulations promulgated by the Food
Drug Administration.
Published Works: Sailing to Distant Shores, Philadelphia Bar Reporter, January 2017
Toxic Torts: Workable Defenses Available to the Corporate Defendant, (co-author, Robert Goggin) 28 Villanova L. R. 1208, 1993
How To Evaluate And Settle Personal Injury Claims, Professional Education System, Inc, 1989
Cross Examination of Plaintiff's Life Care Expert, Product Liability Council Deskbook, 1999, 2001
