On May 28, 2024, Jordan Karp obtains a trial dismissal in Court of Claims. It was alleged that the defendants were negligent in the maintenance of
Accomplishments
On May 21, 2024, Jordan Karp secures a Defense Verdict in Suffolk County. It was alleged that the defendant was negligent during the
On February 9, 2024, Christian Fumuso received a Defense Verdict after a three week trial in Nassau County Supreme Court before Judge Lisa Cairo….
On December 11, 2023, Alan J. Fumuso obtained a unanimous Defendant’s Verdict after a two week trial in Supreme Court Suffolk County before Judge James Hudson….
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9fb79/9fb7904045b2e5fe154e8147730860c41d43e2b9" alt=""
On May 28, 2024, Jordan Karp obtains a trial dismissal in Court of Claims. It was alleged that the defendants were negligent in the maintenance of their facility allowing for a dangerous condition to exist with that being a broken stairwell that created a dangerous work environment for their employees. The defense asserted that they appropriately maintained their facility, and they were not on notice of any alleged dangerous condition. The Court issued a decision on May 28, 2024 dismissing the case against the defendants.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d7fa8/d7fa8aa20569c2081590f57dac3cdbb029f8648e" alt=""
On May 21, 2024, Jordan Karp secures a Defense Verdict in Suffolk County. It was alleged that the defendant was negligent during the course of an orthopedic examination, causing the plaintiff to have her recent Fulkerson Revision Surgery to fail and for the need for a Patellectomy. It was the defense’s position throughout the course of the trial that at all times the care was appropriate and that it was the plaintiff’s pre-existing condition that was the cause. The trial consisted of the testimony of multiple witnesses and treating doctors as well as experts in the field of orthopedics. After a brief deliberation, the jury returned with a unanimous verdict for the defense.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9b926/9b9263330bc51184051bf6dee87e18ff1a80e4e1" alt=""
On February 9, 2024, Christian Fumuso received a Defense Verdict after a three week trial in Nassau County Supreme Court before Judge Lisa Cairo. It was alleged that the defendant OB/GYN was negligent in her performance of a D&C procedure on a 54 year old patient with a history of abnormal uterine bleeding that allegedly resulted in the perforation of the patients uterus and large bowel. As a result of the alleged dual organ perforation, it was claimed that the patient was required to undergo an exploratory laparotomy after the presence of free air was identified via abdominal CT and the patient sustained multiple post-op complications that required her to be hospitalized for months. The defense maintained that the D&C was both indicated and performed appropriately as there was no clinical, radiological or surgical evidence of a perforated uterus and/or bowel caused by a medical instrument. Instead, the defense argued that the free air shown on the abdominal CT was the result of a ruptured diverticulum that was unrelated to the defendant’s care. The trial consisted of 9 total witnesses with 5 experts from the fields of Gynecology, Radiology and Surgery.
Plaintiff’s attorney asked the jury for 3 million dollars in past pain and suffering at the time of summation along with an additional $500,000 for expected future medical costs. The jury deliberated for three and a half hours and returned a verdict on behalf of the defendant OB/GYN.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9fb79/9fb7904045b2e5fe154e8147730860c41d43e2b9" alt=""
On December 11, 2023, Alan J. Fumuso obtained a unanimous Defendant’s Verdict after a two week trial in Supreme Court Suffolk County before Judge James Hudson. It was alleged that the defendant surgeon was negligent in placing surgical mesh in this then 39 year old plaintiff, resulting in the mesh never integrating and requiring 6 additional abdominal surgeries with resultant chronic, lifetime pain. Plaintiff’s expert testified to multiple departures in the placement of the mesh, as well as the failure to perform a post-operative diagnostic laparotomy. The defense of the case was complicated by the testimony of a subsequent treating surgeon who was very critical of the care given to the plaintiff by the defendant. It was the contention of the Defendant and Defendant’s expert that the mesh was applied properly, that it failed to properly integrate in spite of proper application, and that the plaintiff’s issues could be traced to mesh failure. The defense also asserted that a post-operative diagnostic laparotomy was not indicated.
Plaintiff’s attorney asked the jury for 3 million dollars in past pain and suffering, and a similar amount for future pain and suffering. The jury deliberated for less than 3 hours and returned a unanimous verdict on behalf of the Defendant.