Admitted in 1975, New York
1979, U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. District Court, Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Additional Payment Information
Free Initial Consultation
Law School Attended
St. John's University School of Law
Class of 1974
Class of 1970
French, Hebrew and Spanish
Associations & Memberships
American Association for Justice (formerly Association of Trial Lawyers of America); New York State Trial Lawyers Association; Brooklyn Bar Association; The Association of the Bar of the City of New York; New York State Bar Association; Roscoe Pound Foundation; Public Justice Foundation; Metropolitan Women's Bar Association; Association of Trial Lawyers of the City of New York; New York County Lawyers Association.
Savillo v. Greenpoint Landing Associates, Sup. Ct., N.Y.Cnty, Index No.: 114418/2007, jury verdict of $50,549,036 for paralyzed 29-year-old scaffold worker; Nunez v. Levy, 19 Misc.3d 1138, 862 N.Y.S.2d 816 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty. 2008) [Post-trial decision after $10,000,000 verdict for demolition laborer whose leg was crushed and later amputated]; Tipaldo v. The City of New York, Supreme Court, Kings County, Index No.: 4209/2001 [Highest pre-trial personal injury settlement ever against the City of New York, $9,500,000 on behalf of 35 year-old hotel executive left paraplegic from motor vehicle collision caused by highway design defect; March 2006]; Malloy v. Stellar Management, 68 A.D.3d 668, 892 N.Y.S.2d 86 (1st Dept. 2009) [$3,259,744 verdict for elevator mechanic who suffered disabling back injuries in an on-the-job incident; App. Div. affirmed that collateral source offset for future SSD benefits was not warranted as defendants did not meet burden of showing it is "highly probable" plaintiff will continue to be eligible for benefits as evidence demonstrated his condition had improved and, although still primarily disabled, was capable of performing some limited sedentary work]; Weigl v. Quincy Specialties Co., 190 Misc.2d 1, 735 N.Y.S.2d 729 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty, Marcy Friedman, J., 2001) [Post-trial decision in product liability action resulting in $20,000,000 jury verdict in favor of burn victim, highest verdict in New York State history for a flammable fabrics action or for burn injuries]; Cantrell v. New York University, 326 F.Supp 2d 468 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) [In a qui tam action, each invoice, grant application, progress report and financial report may support a claim under the False Claims Act]; Weigl v. Quincy Specialties Co., 1 A.D.3d 132, 766 N.Y.S.2d 428 (1st Dept. 2003) [Unanimous affirmance of post-trial judgment in the principal amount of $7,992,084; highest judgment in New York State history in a flammable fabrics action or for burn injuries]; Weigl v. Quincy Specialties Co., 158 Misc.2d 753, 601 N.Y.S.2d 774, 85 Ed. Law. Rep. 921 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty., Peter Tom, J., 1993) [In product liability action, while New York does not recognize independent cause of action for spoliation of evidence, plaintiff may sue employer for impairing her right to sue by destroying evidence]; Glasburgh v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 213 A.D.2d 196, 623 N.Y.S.2d 578 (1st Dept. 1995) [In product liability action, plaintiff may depose defendant's employee-expert as to his opinions and bases for opinions]; Klos v. N.Y.C. Transit Authority, 240 A.D.2d 635, 659 N.Y.S.2d 97 (2nd Dept. 1997) [Wrongful death construction-site action, $4,500,000 verdict]; Campbell v. Fine, Olin & Anderson, P.C., 168 Misc.2d 305, 642 N.Y.S.2d 819 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty., David Saxe, J., 1996) [In legal malpractice action, attorney's responsibility to client is not limited solely to terms of retainer; attorney has duty to advise client of all possible remedies]; Neferis v. DeStefano, 265 A.D.2d 464, 697 N.Y.S.2d 108 (2nd Dept. 1999) [In personal injury action, plaintiff may obtain disclosure of defendant's treating psychiatrist's and pharmacy's records regarding medications she was taking at time of subject collision]; Rodrigues v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 293 A.D.2d 325, 740 N.Y.S.2d 323 (1st Dept. 2002) [Action against Port Authority may be properly venued in any county situated in whole or in part in the Port of New York district].