Case Studies
Defending a Negligence Claim Against a Modular Home Builder
The firm recently defended a modular home manufacturer who was sued for property damage based upon negligence and related claims by the owners of attached townhouses that had been constructed by the manufacturer approximately fifteen (15) years ago and were recently damaged in an electrical fire.The firm made and won a motion for partial summary judgment that substantially dismissed many of the claims against its client and greatly reduced the remaining claims based on the "Economic Loss Doctrine" as adopted by the New York Court of Appeals in Bocre Leasing Corp. v. General Motors Corp. 84 N.Y.2d 685, 687 (1995). Thereafter, the case was settled favorably for a very small percentage of the original claims.
READ DECISION
Winning Return of Clients' Down Payment In A Real Estate Dispute
Schlanger & Schlanger recently brought suit in New York State Court to force return of a buyers' $50,000 down payment in a real estate dispute. Sellers and their real estate attorney contended that buyers had forfeited their right to return of the down payment after their lender turned them down for a mortgage because buyers' mortgage application had listed only two of the four buyers. Representing plaintiffs, Schlanger & Schlanger contended that the two buyers left off the application had only a 5% interest in the property and that it was clear as a matter of law that any failure to include them was immaterial, playing no role in the bank's decision. The court sided with plaintiffs and ordered return of the clients' money together with interest.READ DECISION
Litigating an ERISA Case
Michael Schlanger brought suit in federal court under ERISA, on behalf of an executive who had retired due to a disability and whose employer was computing his disability benefit by interpreting his compensation on which his disability was to be based without including a large bonus agreed to be paid to the employee before he left but not actually paid until shortly after.Enforcing his client's rights under ERISA in federal court, Michael Schlanger took on one of the largest employer benefit firms in the United States, alleging that the executive had been denied his proper disability benefits under the company's plan. After extensive pretrial discovery of documents and depositions, he compelled and uncovered an admission by the insurance company that insured the plan, that is, his client's interpretation of the plan defining his benefits was correct; and thereafter the case was favorably settled.
Forcing a collection firm to release a young couple's bank account
A young couple had their bank account frozen in a lawsuit brought by a creditor against the husband. The lawsuit was brought based on a debt allegedly incurred years earlier on a Discover Card. The couple was not even aware of the lawsuit, since the papers had been served at the address where the husband grew up, an address where neither he nor his parents had lived for many years.Since the debtor failed to respond in the lawsuit (unaware that a suit had been filed), a default judgment was taken against him. Cohen & Slamowitz, a large New York debt collection firm, located the couple's bank account and had it restrained in an attempt to strong arm the couple into paying the alleged debt.
Schlanger & Schlanger moved to vacate the judgment for failure to make proper service, and sought to have the action discontinued and the bank account released. The creditor, in turn, contended that the default judgment should be vacated only if the couple waived all defenses based on failure to be served properly, a result which would have let the case against the couple continue.
The judge ruled in favor of the couple and vacated judgment, dismissing the case and ordering the account to be released.
Read the opinion here (PDF File, 145KB)
Read a similar case that our firm also won (PDF File, 45KB)