Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  9801-9807 displayed

1  1401 1402 1403 1404 1405  3627

---

Martin & Seibert, L.C. Attorneys At Law

Susan Snowden to Speak at Auto Insurance Litigation Conference
Martin & Seibert, L.C. Shareholder Susan R. Snowden is scheduled to speak at a conference on Auto Insurance Litigation in January 2006, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

The conference, sponsored by the American Conference Institute, is designed to provide practical strategies for minimizing exposure and resolving coverage disputes.

02-24-2007

---

Martin & Seibert, L.C. Attorneys At Law

Susan Snowden Selected as 2005 Woman of Distinction
Martin & Seibert, L.C. Shareholder Susan R. Snowden has been selected by the Girl Scouts of the Shawnee Council as a 2005 Woman of Distinction.

Susan was chosen along with six others from the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia for the honor. The selection was based on demonstrated leadership qualities and because those honored had distinguished themselves as role models for girls and women in the community.

02-24-2007

---

Margolis & Edelstein

Defense Verdict in Testicular Cancer Med Mal Case
This case involved the death of a 25 year old man from complications associated with chemotherapy treatment for nonseminomatous germ cell testicular carcinoma. Following left testes orchiectomy, the decedent blood work demonstrated a persistent rise in the AFP and beta HCG testicular tumor markers. CT scan of the abdomen further revealed left sided retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy. The patient was thus referred by his urologic surgeon to our client medical oncologist for consideration of systemic chemotherapy. A multi-drug protocol consisting of 4 cycles of Bleomycin, Etoposide and Cisplatin (BEP) was employed. Bleomycin is known to be potentially toxic to lung tissue. Midway through the cycles the patient began complaining of breathing difficulties and his Bleomycin was discontinued. The patient had undergone several hospital admissions for treatment of persistent pneumonias. A month following completion of his chemotherapy, the patient presented to the hospital with high fever and a radiographically diagnosed empyema (a large collection of pus in the pleural space). The man died of acute respiratory distress syndrome during a protracted hospitalization to combat the infection. At the time of death, the patient was cancer free. At the time of his testicular cancer diagnosis, the decedent’s wife had learned that she was pregnant with their first child.

Plaintiff’s primarily argued that retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) and not chemotherapy should have been undertaken as the first line of treatment. The defense successfully countered by establishing that the unqualified standard of care with respect to testicular cancer patients who show rises in their tumor markers following orchiectomy is BEP chemotherapy. Rising tumor markers levels with radiographic evidence of lymphadenopathy confirms the presence of advanced metastatic disease which, in turn, mandates aggressive chemotherapy. The defense argued that RPLND, under such circumstances, is absolutely contraindicated . The history of testicular cancer both before and after the advent of the BEP chemo regimen was emphasized by the defense. Despite the potentially toxic effects of these drugs, their use is essential to effectuating a cure of an otherwise rapidly fatal cancer.

A week long jury trial resulted in a unanimous defense verdict on behalf of our medical oncologist client. The case was prosecuted on behalf of the Plaintiff by Eric Zajac from the Zajac Law Firm in Philadelphia. The Defendant medical oncologist was represented at trial by Margolis Edelstein's Michael M. Badowski.

02-24-2007

---

Margolis & Edelstein

Precedent Setting Victory in NJ Interpreting PA Survival Action
Facts of the case: Fatal auto collision in NJ involving decedent, Carson, and defendant, Cracker (employee of defendant Forman). The defendants were NJ residents, but decedent had recently relocated to PA. Estate of Carson sued in NJ seeking damages under PA's Survival Act which defendants challenged at trial contending NJ law should apply. (PA permits estates to recover decedent's net earning capacity - a significant number in this scenario - whereas NJ does not). The trial court agreed with defendants' arguments, granted motion to dismiss and plaintiff filed interlocutory appeal to Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

Decision of the Court: In a reported, precedential decision, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the court below, agreeing with our argument that the Pennsylvania legislature, in enacting its statute, could not have reasonably expected that its laws would be "imposed...onto an unwitting state that has confronted the issue and reached a different balance in its legislative response."

Congratulations to our New Jersey based partner, Ian Sirota!

02-24-2007

---

Margolis & Edelstein

Berkeley Heights Partner Mishky Receives Defense Verdict
Emery J. Mishky tried a premises liability case involving a severe compound fracture of a humerus with surgery for insertion of multiple plates and 15 screws for fixation; and further diagnosis of shoulder derangement and prospective surgical intervention. Plaintiff's lowest demand was $200,000, and $125,000 was offered on behalf of the defense. After a four-day trial the jury returned a defense verdict.

02-24-2007

---

Margolis & Edelstein

Scranton Associate Mark Sheridan Receives Favorable Jury Verdict
Margolis Edelstein received a very favorable jury verdict on behalf of Erie Insurance and their insured, Alkar Realty, following a three day jury trial in the United States Middle District Court of Pennsylvania, Wilkes-Barre. Mark T. Sheridan from the Scranton office represented Alkar Realty in a case brought by a car wash patron who fell through an allegedly defective grate. At the time of the accident the Plaintiff and several of his friends were washing their ATV’s (All Terrain Vehicles) at the insured’s rural car wash located in Lake Ariel, PA. The Plaintiff sustained a deep and substantial wound to his calf which required repair by a plastic surgeon and Plaintiff subsequently developed serious infections to his leg area which required multiple hospitalizations for treatment.

Plaintiff’s final, formal demand prior to the start of the three day trial was $250,000 and during the course of the trial Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that they would reduce their demand but that in no event would they accept settlement for less than six figures. The jury returned a verdict in the amount of only $13,750 in favor of the Plaintiff and as part of their verdict found the Plaintiff himself to have been 45% contributorily negligent for the accident. The Plaintiff’s stipulated medical expenses associated with his injuries was $15,500 and Plaintiff also made claim for $7,000 in lost wages, in addition to pain, suffering and permanent disfigurement as a result of the substantial scar that Plaintiff was left with. Plaintiff called three experts on his behalf including a plastic surgeon, an infectious disease expert and an engineering expert.

02-24-2007

---

Margolis & Edelstein

Summary Judgment in Erie County Wrongful Death Action
Decedent Michael Matson was killed as a result of a motor vehicle accident occurring on Christmas Eve 2003. Matson's vehicle was struck from the side when he emerged from a side street onto W. 38th Street in Erie, PA. In addition to bringing suit against the driver of the adverse vehicle, the Estate sued the tavern which was located on the corner where this incident occurred. Plaintiff claimed that this business owner was negligent for allowing vehicles to park in its lot, in a position where they were close enough to the corner so as to create a potential obstruction to the view of an emerging motorist.

Miles A. Kirshner, Esquire from Margolis Edelstein's Pittsburgh office represented defendant Rack & Roll, Inc. Following extensive discovery, the defense filed a Motion for Summary Judgment contending: (1) that the plaintiff could not establish the presence of a duty upon the business owner to prevent the parking of vehicles in a position where a motorist's vision on the intersecting roadway might be obstructed; and (2) that a jury could not find, absent speculation, that this incident was caused by the obstruction that allegedly did exist. By Order of Court dated November 21, 2006, the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment was granted on both grounds. At the time of this writing, it is uncertain whether plaintiff will appeal.

The attorneys in Margolis Edelstein's Pittsburgh office frequently practice in the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, in all counties in northwestern Pennsylvania and in the United States District Court, Erie Branch. For assistance in any case filed in these jurisdictions.

02-24-2007

---

25383 matches |  9801-9807 displayed

1  1401 1402 1403 1404 1405  3627