×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLPCounsel
Thomas Kiley Murphy III

Thomas Kiley Murphy III

Not yet reviewed

75 Livingston Avenue, Roseland, NJ 07068

Product Liability Litigation, Automotive Products Liability, Premises Liability and 5 more

About Thomas Kiley Murphy III

Thomas Kiley Murphy III is a lawyer practicing product liability litigation, automotive products liability, premises liability and 5 other areas of law. Thomas received a B.A. degree from The Johns Hopkins University in 2003, and has been licensed for 20 years. Thomas practices at Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLP in Roseland, NJ.

Thomas Kiley Murphy III (Roseland, New Jersey)

Reviews for Thomas

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Products Liability 1
    • Automotive Products Liability
  • Premises Liability
  • Toxic Torts 1
    • Asbestos Litigation
  • Contracts 1
    • Breach of Contract
  • Consumer Law 1
    • Consumer Fraud
  • Other 3
    • Product Liability Litigation
    • Complex Commercial Litigation
    • Class Actions Defense

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Counsel
    Firm Name
    Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLP
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    - Successfully defended an auto manufacturer against Lemon Law claims in multiple cases brought before the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law.
    - Successfully argued a summary judgment motion on behalf of an auto manufacturer in a case involving Lemon Law
    Breach of Warranty claims stemming from an alleged transmission defect.
    - Played an important role in the firm’s significant victory on behalf of Howard Johnson International, Inc. (“HJI”) in Sayles v. G&G Hotels, Inc. The decision is significant in that it is the first published decision in which the Appellate Division approved a broad indemnification provision which provided for indemnification even for acts of one’s own negligence. While the New Jersey Courts had previously indicated that such clauses were enforceable, previous Appellate Division decisions had found the clauses examined to be unenforceable.
    - Played an important role in the firm’s significant victory in Stevenson v. American Honda Finance Corp. The Court’s ruling in favor of the Defendant thwarted a potential class action law suit,
    is significant in that it confirms the insulation of assignees of consumer credit contracts from liability for Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA) violations that may be created by the lender.

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    2006, New Jersey
    2006, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey
    2008, New York
    2010, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
    2010, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
    2022, Pennsylvania
  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Brooklyn Law School
    Class of 2006
    J.D.
    Other Education
    The Johns Hopkins University
    Class of 2003
    B.A.
  • Personal Details & History
    Age
    Born in 1980
    1980

Email Thomas Kiley Murphy III

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions