Andrea M. Alonso

June 11, 2012 | New York Law Journal

Kevin G. Faley and Andrea M. Alonso, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, write that, given the breadth of scenarios covered by the PJI, there is likely to be a relevant charge in most premises liability cases.

By Kevin G. Faley and Andrea M. Alonso

11 minute read

September 24, 2012 | New York Law Journal

Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley partners Andrea M. Alonso and Carl S. Sandel write that the aftermath of Hurricane Irene in 2011 has given rise to a substantial increase in the number of lawsuits seeking to hold municipalities liable for property damage caused by flooding.

By Andrea M. Alonso and Carl S. Sandel

11 minute read

October 27, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, review Insurance Law �3420(g), which protects insurance carriers from collusive spousal actions by holding that they are generally not obligated to defend or indemnify an insured from claims because of injuries to the spouse, a policy that has caused confusion in the courts and amongst automobile insurance holders.

By Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley

10 minute read

January 27, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners with Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, write that thte Court of Appeals has adopted the "employability" standard rather than the "self-care" standard and defined permanent total disability as being "when the evidence establishes that the injured worker is no longer employable in any capacity."

By Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley

12 minute read

December 04, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, write that the New York City Traffic Regulations run the gamut from basic prohibitions ("No person shall operate a vehicle in a manner that will endanger any person or property;" "No person shall sound the horn of a vehicle except when necessary to warn a person or animal of danger") to the enumeration of the 30-plus holidays on which street cleaning rules are suspended. It is important, they advise, that the practitioner in any automobile case scour the regulations to obtain a jury charge in her client's favor.

By Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley

13 minute read

February 01, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, say that death cases in New York are frequently not evaluated properly by claims representatives and attorneys alike.

By Andrea M. Alonso And Kevin G. Faley

11 minute read

October 01, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, write that while courts are certainly protective of a worker's rights under the Labor Law, they have simultaneously recognized that owners and contractors are not insurers and cannot be held responsible for each and every injury suffered at a work site. The courts have resolved these two views, they say, by limiting the application of this safe workplace statute to only those hazards specifically contemplated by the statute and also by questioning the somewhat sacrosanct belief that workers cannot protect themselves from work-site dangers.

By Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley

12 minute read

June 09, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Kevin G. Faley and Andrea M. Alonso, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, write that no court has developed a set formula to ascertain whether or not an activity is protected under the Labor Law. The consensus both from the Court of Appeals and the Appellate Divisions, they say, is that inspections are not protected if merely incidental to a protected activity.

By Kevin G. Faley and Andrea M. Alonso

14 minute read

March 17, 2009 | New York Law Journal

By Reviewed By Andrea M. Alonso

6 minute read

July 24, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley, partners at Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, discuss the recalcitrant worker defense, one of the few defenses available to owners and general contractors when a worker has been injured in a gravity-related accident. In the past, this affirmative defense required a defendant to prove that the injured worker refused to use an available safety device after being specifically and immediately instructed to do so and that this refusal proximately caused the accident. In a recent line of cases, however, courts across New York State have begun to broaden the applicability of this defense, holding workers responsible, at least to a certain extent, for their own safety.

By Andrea M. Alonso and Kevin G. Faley

12 minute read