Successful Defense of Attorney and Firm at Arbitration

by | Oct 4, 2013 | ADR, Legal Malpractice, Successes

Anthony P. DeMichele successfully defended an attorney and his firm at arbitration in a matter involving claims of professional negligence.  The plaintiff was a musician and music producer who claimed that he entered into a contract with a legendary music artist to produce for distribution original songs written and performed by the legendary music artist.  Plaintiff claimed that the legendary music artist breached the contract, and as a result, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking damages for the alleged breach of contract.  Plaintiff retained the services of several attorneys to pursue his breach of contract claim.  After a default judgment was obtained in the breach of contract claim, Plaintiff presented his case for damages at an assessment of damages hearing in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas.  However, after hearing testimony from expert witnesses for both Plaintiff and the legendary music artist, the judge determined that no monetary damages were suffered and awarded no damages to the plaintiff.  As a result of that decision, the plaintiff filed suit against all of the attorneys who represented him in his breach of contract claim.  Plaintiff alleged that, due to a poorly drafted complaint and failure to present sufficient evidence at the assessment of damages hearing, he suffered the loss of the monetary damages he was entitled to under the terms of the contract he entered into with the legendary music artist.  Mr. DeMichele and Mr. Brien represented the attorney and his firm who handled the assessment of damages hearing.

With regard to the allegedly deficient complaint, Plaintiff argued that the default judgment should have been opened and the complaint amended in order to correct the alleged deficiencies.  Defendants countered that it was an appropriate strategy to preserve the default judgment and not open the default judgment in order to amend the allegedly deficient complaint.  Further, Defendants argued that sufficient expert testimony and exhibits were presented at the assessment of damages hearing, which were entered into evidence without objection from opposing counsel.  Defendants also presented evidence that any potential judgment in the underlying breach of contract claim was uncollectible because the estate for the legendary music artist had no assets.  The inability to collect a judgment is an affirmative defense to a legal malpractice claim.  The arbitration panel agreed with Defendants arguments and entered an award in favor of Defendants on all claims.

Successful Defense of MRI Facility & Technologist at Arbitration

by | Sep 13, 2013 | ADR, Professional Liability, Successes

Anthony P. DeMichele successfully defended an MRI facility and one of its technologists at arbitration in a matter involving claims of professional negligence. Plaintiffs were husband and wife and claimed that the husband was injured when he fell from a MRI table after his MRI was completed. The wife brought a claim for loss of consortium. Plaintiffs argued that the MRI facility and its technologist were liable because the technologist failed to safely remove the husband from the table after the MRI machine malfunctioned. Mr. DeMichele argued that the MRI facility had appropriate policies and procedures in place for the safe removal of its patients in the event of a table malfunction and that the technologist followed these policies and procedures. Further, Mr. DeMichele argued that it was the husband’s own actions and failure to follow the instructions that were provided to him, which caused him to sustain his alleged injuries. Mr. DeMichele also argued that the husband’s alleged injuries were inconsistent with the medical records from his treating physicians. The arbitration panel agreed with Mr. DeMichele and entered an award in favor of the MRI facility and its technologist on all claims.

Arbitration Award for General Contractor

by | Aug 20, 2012 | ADR, Commercial Liability / Litigation, Successes

Marshall L. Schwartz obtained an arbitration award in favor of a general contractor in a Montgomery County construction litigation matter. The defendant, and owner of the property at issue, failed to make payment under the contract. The matter proceeded to arbitration under the theories of breach of contract and unjust enrichment. The general contractor was awarded contract damages plus interest.

Arbitration Award for Employee against Former Employers

by | Aug 20, 2012 | ADR, Commercial Liability / Litigation, Successes

Anthony P. DeMichele obtained an arbitration award in favor of a former employee in a Bucks County employment litigation matter. The defendants, the former employers of the plaintiff, failed to pay the plaintiff his earned wages, bonuses and commissions. The matter proceeded to arbitration under the theories of breach of contract and unjust enrichment. The former employee was awarded the full amount claimed in his complaint, as well as attorneys’ fees.

Successful Defense of Buyers at Arbitration Involving Failed Residential Real Estate Transaction

by | Aug 20, 2012 | ADR, Commercial Liability / Litigation, Successes

Anthony P. DeMichele successfully defended the buyers in a failed residential real estate transaction. The buyers and sellers entered into a residential real estate agreement of sale. Problems arose at the closing, and as a result, the closing on the property failed to occur. As part of the agreement of sale, deposit monies were placed in escrow, which were to be used toward the purchase of the property if there was a successful closing. Since there was not a successful closing, the sellers argued that an addendum to the agreement of sale permitted them to receive the deposit monies as liquidated damages. Mr. DeMichele argued that the addendum did not have the effect as represented by the sellers and that the sellers were not entitled to the deposit monies based upon the language of the addendum. Mr. DeMichele also argued that the unreasonableness of the sellers in not completing a successful closing warranted the return of the deposit monies to the buyers. The arbitration panel agreed with Mr. DeMichele and awarded the return of all deposit monies to the buyers.

Summary Judgment for Insurance Company in Declaratory Judgment Action

by | Aug 20, 2012 | ADR, Insurance Coverage, Successes

Anthony P. DeMichele obtained summary judgment for an insurance company in a coverage dispute involving one of its insureds. The insured, an attorney, was sued in two separate state court actions based upon his involvement in several real estate investments.

In the underlying litigation, two individuals had filed separate actions against the insured claiming he misrepresented information about the investment opportunities. After the investments were made, the individuals alleged that the insured misappropriated the money for his personal gain. The insured alleged that he provided legal services for the real estate holding company that was involved in the investments, and therefore, his malpractice insurance covered the claims. As a result, the insured submitted the claims to his insurance company for coverage.

Mr. DeMichele, on behalf of the insurance company, initiated a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania seeking a declaration from the court as to the parties’ rights under the insurance policy at issue. At the conclusion of extensive discovery, Mr. DeMichele moved for summary judgment arguing, among other things, that exclusions in the insurance policy precluded coverage of the claims. Based upon the language of the exclusions, Mr. DeMichele argued that the insurance company did not have a duty to defend or a duty to indemnify its insured with regard to the claims that were asserted in the underlying state court actions.

The insured responded by filing a motion for summary judgment and argued that the policy exclusions did not apply, and therefore, a duty to defend and a duty to indemnify existed.

The district court agreed with Mr. DeMichele’s position and granted the insurance company’s motion for summary judgment while at the same time denying the insured’s motion for summary judgment. Based upon the court’s decision, the insurance company did not owe a duty to defend or indemnify its insured for the claims that were asserted in the state court actions.