Justin T. Woods Successfully Argues Traditional and No Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment

June 2025 • Source: Pappas Grubbs Price

Shareholder Justin T. Woods has successfully argued a Traditional and No Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment, resulting in a dismissal of all claims against the Defendants, a large, national convenience store chain. The suit involved a Plaintiff who tripped and fell over an empty pallet on the floor in front of the check-out counter and sued the store and related entities for claimed personal injuries. Relying on several appellate court decisions which have held a pallet on the floor of a convenience or grocery store is not an unreasonably dangerous condition, the Motion argued that the Plaintiff’s trip was not caused by any dangerous condition and Defendants, therefore, had no duty to either move the pallet or warn Plaintiff of its presence. Moreover, the presence of the pallet was readily apparent, and the Plaintiff should have seen and avoided tripping over it. The Court agreed and granted the Motion, dismissing the suit in its entirety.

Kim Townsend and Andrew Lauri Secure Favorable Outcome in Complex Queens Motor Vehicle Trial

June 2025 • Source: Gallo Vitucci Klar LLP

Kim Townsend & Andrew Lauri of GVK’s Trial Team obtained a trial victory in a contentious unified Queens County motor vehicle case involving lumbar herniations, cervical herniations, cervical fusion surgery, shoulder labral tears and shoulder surgery.

Plaintiff was previously awarded conditional summary judgment against our client on liability, which was affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department, which also held that plaintiff’s comparative fault was to be determined by the jury.  At trial, the Court awarded plaintiff a directed verdict on liability and dismissed our affirmative defense of comparative fault right before summations despite the Appellate Court’s decision, and despite dashcam video evidence showing plaintiff travelling at an excessive speed, failing to keep a proper look out, and unsafely changing lanes at the time of the accident.

Kim Townsend argued that, based on the reliable medical evidence, plaintiff’s fusion surgery was entirely unnecessary, and plaintiff’s pre-surgical treatment was steered entirely by his first attorney, before his trial attorneys were retained. The trial narrative echoed complaints of endemic fraud currently permeating our courts.

On summation, plaintiff’s attorneys asked for $6,000,000. While the jury was deliberating, the parties entered in a high/low agreement of $500,000/$1,500,000. After 3 days of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of $250,000.

Briggs Johnson of GVK’s Appellate Practice Group also spent two full days in the Second Department arguing several thorny and hotly contested appellate issues that arose in the middle of trial, including trial court’s decision to strike our affirmative defense of plaintiff’s comparative fault.

Shareholder Justin T. Woods Secures Non-Suit in Response to Motion for Summary Judgment

June 2025 • Source: Pappas Grubbs Price

Shareholder Justin T. Woods has secured a non-suit for our client in response to a Motion for Summary Judgment.

The Plaintiffs were three men who alleged to have been injured on three separate occasions as patrons of a Northgate, College Station bar at the hands of bouncers working on behalf of the bar. Our client was one of these bouncers. Justin moved for Summary Judgment, arguing the claims of two of these Plaintiffs were time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations and that the third Plaintiff had been unable to provide any evidence that it was the actions of our client, in particular, who caused him injuries, if any. The Plaintiffs, rather than respond to the Motion, dismissed all claims against our client.

Defense Verdict for Norfolk Southern Affirmed in Federal Employers’ Liability Act Lawsuit

June 2025 • Source: Gallagher Sharp LLP

Partner, Joe Santoro, and the Appellate team, Partner Richard Rezie and Associate Phil Kelly, obtained a decision from the 11th District Court of Appeals upholding the defense verdict for Norfolk Southern rendered by a jury in a FELA case on March 15, 2024.  Plaintiff Drew Herman alleged that he was struck by a backhoe due to the negligence of the operator. Norfolk Southern contended that the accident was caused by the Plaintiff’s negligence in entering the backhoe’s swing radius without communicating with the operator.  Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury to award his client over $14 million in compensatory damages. 

The jury found that Norfolk Southern was not negligent in any respect leading to the defense verdict.  On appeal, Plaintiff argued that a new trial was necessary due to the trial court’s jury instructions on negligence, assumption of the risk, and contributory negligence. With respect to the instructions on negligence and assumption of the risk, the appellate court held that Plaintiff failed to properly preserve his objections in the record and failed to invoke plain error review. As a result, the appellate court held in a 3-0 decision that Herman forfeited his right to plain error review and, even if he had not done so, the instructions did not constitute plain error. Finally, with respect to the other instructions at issue, the court held that the instructions were correct statements of the law and did not mislead the jury. 

The court of appeals decision can be found at https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2025/2025-Ohio-1498.pdf