Florio Perrucci Accused of Botching Defense in $8.7M Verdict
A malpractice lawsuit claims the firm failed to assert statutory immunity defenses.
June 17, 2019 at 05:06 PM
5 minute read
Florio, Perrucci, Steinhardt & Capelli and two attorneys from the firm are facing a malpractice suit for their representation of the New Jersey State Police and the South Jersey Transportation Authority in a suit over a traffic accident that resulted in an $8.7 million verdict.
State National Insurance Co. claims in its suit that the firm and attorneys Mark Peck and Brian Tipton were negligent in their representation of the state police and the SJTA in connection with the December 2005 crash. The malpractice suit says the Florio Perrucci attorneys failed to assert statutory immunity defenses on behalf of the state police and the SJTA in a negligence suit by Janet Henebema, whose right leg was severed in the crash on the Atlantic City Expressway.
Henebema's suit claimed negligence by SJTA dispatchers during a winter storm that resulted in a delayed police response to the crash. Her car struck the left median after she came on a group of five other vehicles that had crashed. She was initially trapped but managed to extricate herself and was standing behind her car when another vehicle came along, struck her car, and pinned her between the vehicles, causing a traumatic amputation at her right knee.
An SJTA dispatcher notified the state police on receiving a call about the first vehicle in the group striking the left guardrail and coming to rest in a travel lane. But as successive calls came in a few minutes apart about other vehicles becoming involved in a multicar crash at the scene, the operators did not update the state police about the mounting severity of the incident, Henebema's suit claimed.
A state Superior Court jury in Atlantic County awarded Henebema $9 million for her injuries. Henebema accepted a $3.5 million settlement after the Appellate Division said she was wrongly granted summary judgment.
State National provided liability coverage to the SJTA and also covered the state police under an indemnity agreement between the two agencies. It was obligated to pay all but $200,000 of the $3.5 million settlement to Henebema.
In an answer to Henebema's suit, Peck and Tipton pleaded that the defendants were entitled to statutory immunity under the Tort Claims Act, but did not specifically plead police protection immunity or 911 dispatcher immunity. The defendants later attempted to include those defenses in their answers, but Henebema refused. A trial judge ruled that the defendants could amend their answers to plead 911 dispatcher immunity, but the defendants never did so.
The SJTA and the state police appealed the subsequent jury verdict and were granted a new trial on liability because the trial judge, rather than the jury, determined that the defendants' conduct was ministerial and thus subject to a negligence standard of liability, rather than qualified immunity. The remand preserved the $9 million verdict.
The SJTA and state police retained new attorneys for the liability retrial. While preparing for trial, the SJTA and state police discovered that, although the trial court granted them leave to file amended answers pleading 911 dispatcher liability, they never did so. The SJTA and state police also discovered that they never raised their unqualified immunity under 911 dispatcher immunity or police protection immunity. The new lawyers for the SJTA and state police moved for summary judgment dismissing Henebema's claims against them under the absolute immunity of statutes granting immunity to police and 911 dispatchers.
Henebema conceded that those immunities barred her claims, but argued that the SJTA and state police waived immunity under those statutes by not pursuing or pleading them earlier.
In January 2016, a trial judge granted motions by the SJTA and state police for summary judgment based on the immunity statutes. In December 2016, the Appellate Division reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment, finding the defendants waived immunity by not pursuing them until the remand.
A retrial on liability was scheduled for July 8, but the SJTA and state police would lack 911 and police protection immunity. They were also constrained by negative prior testimony and admissions by witnesses, which resulted “from inadequate defense preparation by defendants,” the State National suit claims.
For example, a state police sergeant supervising the SJTA dispatchers on the day of the crash previously testified that he was unaware of standard operating procedures for using mutual aid, the suit claimed.
On April 16, State National attended a mediation with Henebema, reaching a $3.5 million settlement that allowed the insurance company to “avoid the retrial and potential litigation catastrophe,” the suit said.
State National seeks to recover reimbursement of more than $5 million, including the $3.5 million settlement, plus attorney fees and costs. The company is represented by Eliyahu Scheiman of Porzio, Bromberg & Newman in Morristown, along with J. Ric Gass and David Turek of Gass Weber Mullins in Milwaukee.
Scheiman, Peck and Tipton did not return calls seeking a comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readJudge Approves $667K Settlement Against Independence Blue Cross for Unpaid, Pre-Shift Computer Work
4 minute readTurning the Tables: Defense Litigators Embrace Lawsuits, Alleging Fraud at Plaintiffs Shops
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250