master.com.content
   
Last Updated:
January 28, 2015 5:07 PM




Attorney Advertising
MSSSV Wins Police Excessive Force Case
In Gomez v. Village of Sleepy Hollow, Southern District Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy granted the Village summary judgment in this police excessive force case. The husband and wife Plaintiffs alleged that they were tasered multiple times by several police officers, as well as being punched and kicked in the face and head while handcuffed. Plaintiffs alleged improper training, failure to supervise and the existence of a pattern of excessive force by the Sleepy Hollow Police Department. To support his claim, plaintiff pointed to ten (10) incidents involving one of the police officers in question. In granting the Village summary judgment, MSSSV convinced the Court that plaintiff failed to establish deliberate indifference by the Police Department towards the use of force by its police officers. Sleepy Hollow provided use of force training and annual taser training to its police officers. So too, MSSSV was able to distinguish the other alleged incidents raised by plaintiff in support of his claim. In this regard, the Court agreed with our position that the alleged incidents of excessive force that occurred after the incident with the plaintiff could not be used to establish the requisite policy. Further, the Court also adopted our position that off-duty incidents of police officers could not be used to establish a policy. Further, as the Police Department investigated the remaining incidents and found them to be without merit. [More]

MSSSV Wins Coverage Dispute Based on Clear Non-Cumulation Clause
Senior Judge McAvoy of the Northern District of New York granted our motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiff insurer’s complaint against our client, Vermont Mutual Insurance Company. This case involved a dispute over coverage for an approximately $800,000 verdict in an underlying lead paint case against the mutually insured landlord. The plaintiff excess insurer alleged that our client, the primary insurer, was liable for the full sum of verdict against the mutual insured because the underlying infant plaintiff was allegedly exposed to lead during three of our client’s policy periods. We successfully argued that our client’s occurrence language and non-cumulation clause unambiguously limited its liability to a single policy – roughly one-third of the verdict. The Court also agreed with our argument that the excess insurer was liable for all pre-judgment interest and ordered the plaintiff to reimburse all interest paid. Michael A. Miranda and Michael T. Cataldo worked on the case for MSSSV. [More]
Long Island, NY (Main Office)
The Esposito Building
240 Mineola Boulevard
Mineola, NY 11501
516.741.7676 (TEL)
516.741.9060 (FAX)

Westchester County , NY

570 Taxter Road
Suite 561
Elmsford, NY 10523
914.345.6510 (TEL)
914.345.6517 (FAX)

New York City
1430 Broadway
17th Floor
New York, NY 10018

New Jersey
11 Broadway
2nd Floor
Clark, NJ 07066