New York Construction Attorneys Rely on Experts to Safeguard Client Testimony
In a construction-related New York Labor Law action pending in Bronx County, New York, Litchfield Cavo attorneys Dennis J. Dozis and Dana M. Catanzaro defeated plaintiff’s mid-discovery New York Labor Law 240(1) summary judgment motion. Dennis and Dana took an unorthodox approach to opposing the motion. They proffered expert proof, instead of factual testimony, to show that plaintiff’s case theory was not grounded in fact or science, and that potential non-party testimony could altogether rebut plaintiff’s expert’s opinion in the first instance.
Without the offering their client’s own testimony, Dennis and Dana convinced the Court to deny plaintiff’s summary judgment motion in its entirety as premature. In so doing, Dennis and Dana stunted plaintiff’s hopes for a quick payday, quashed plaintiff’s attempt to make an end-run around discovery, and shielded their client from subsequent cross examination based upon factual statements in affidavits that they otherwise could have offered to defeat the procedurally nascent dispositive motion.