Client Testimonials

What Our Clients Say

Emily R.

Veronica was amazing. She worked hard and settled my case. I have recommended her to all my friends and family!

Roberto M.

Tremendous law firm. Excellent law firm service. I was in a car accident where I was injured and Attorney Joseph Awad helped me tremendously. Highly recommended.

Evaristo J.

I am very grateful for the services that this law firm has provided me. Especially lawyer Joseph Awad who, with his 30 years of experience in trials, managed to get justice for me and my family.

Caterina V.

I am highly satisfied with the services provided by Veronica Sewnarine. She is always available and very easy to speak to as well as very compassionate and knowledgable. Needless to say she was able to get me the best possible outcome. Will definitely be using her for all my legal needs. You will not be disappointed with this firm!

Vena V.

... I had the pleasure of working with Veronica, She handled my accident case well. She was very helpful & extremely easy to work with. I'd recommend this firm, especially this talented young lady.

Tiffany S.

I had nothing but a great experience working with Veronica on my car accident case. She was extremely professional and handled my case with ease and care. I couldn't recommend her more! Excellent attorney and firm.

Chris H.

... The attorneys are very compassionate and knowledgeable. I had the pleasure of getting to know Veronica who is extremely professional and sincere.

Theking475

... I worked with Veronica who was always available and so polite. My case was settled for great value.

Roberto M.

Joseph Awad and his firm have provided me with spectacular service. I was in a car accident where I was left permanently injured and this office and their attorneys helped me get compensated.

Nick R.

... Veronica helped me with my mom's medmal case. I had her cell phone number and could contact her at anytime. I was very happy with the results of my case. Highly recommended!!!

Chris M.

... My lawyer was Jim Baker and he did a great job for me I would recommend this firm and Mr. Baker to anybody who has an accident.

Sullivan Press Release

Jury Awards 20.7 Million in Largest Medical Malpractice Verdict in Manhattan Since Civil Trials Resumed

On April 12, 2022, a New York County jury reported a verdict that neurosurgeon Robert Snow of Weill Cornell and New York Hospital deviated from accepted medical practice by not diagnosing postoperative infection by failing to order repeat blood tests and MRI. The jury verdict for damages was eight million for past pain and suffering (eight years); four million five hundred thousand for future pain and suffering (32 years); six million four hundred thousand for past lost earnings; and future lost earnings of one million eight hundred thousand.

It is reported that it is the largest medical malpractice verdict in the state (20.7 million) since the Covid-19 lockdown of March 2020. It is also the largest sum awarded for pain and suffering for osteomyelitis in the state of New York.

The lasting impact of the Covid-19 pandemic played a role in the plaintiff's presentation of the case. 'The top priority was effectively advocating for our client and ensuring a just result.' To accomplish this goal, plaintiff's counsel adopted a strategy to navigate pandemic related changes within the court room.

The court's plan to ensure the health and safety of those in the courtroom included surrounding the space in plexiglass with each attorney, witness, and member of the court's staff in their own plastic cubicle which, on first viewing, looked like exhibits in a museum display case. To allow for social distancing, jurors were moved from the jury box to the gallery. Everyone in the court room was to wear a mask at all times, with the exception of witnesses while on the witness stand.

Initially there was concern that the barriers meant to hinder the spread of covid would hinder the jury's ability to hear and assess the credibility of witness testimony.

With the strategic use of courtroom technology, these concerns proved unfounded.

The Administrative Judge's attention to effective communication became evident and real by the second day of the trial. Witness testimony was communicated with clarity to jurors who were seemingly more attentive to the television screens than experience in the past with open court," said Plaintiff's lead counsel Joseph P. Awad.

The use of courtroom technology was central to presenting the plaintiff's case. Excerpts from medical records shown on the courtroom's state of the art 86-inch High-Definition screen so jurors could see and read the evidence for themselves, radiology films showing the plaintiff's permanent injuries were displayed on screen while the plaintiff's expert neurosurgeon and infectious disease specialist demonstrated the anatomy of the spine and offered opinions as to how the infectious process progressed over time causing permanent damage to Daniel Sullivan's spine. The jury watched the screen closely and remained attentive throughout the proceedings. "We saw that the jury took on their responsibility with great respect and remained engaged despite the hypothetical concern that jurors may have difficulty hearing the witnesses at times. The experience of the public taking their oath to serve on the jury wholeheartedly was truly humbling," said Erica Moskowitz co-counsel for the plaintiff.

The effective use of court technology was facilitated by the professionalism and dedication of court staff. A representative from the court's division of technology and court research was present to assist counsel in familiarizing themselves with courtroom technology prior to opening statements. "We were very impressed by the court reporters who managed to catch virtually every word that was muffled or missed by microphones," said plaintiff's counsel. During the proceedings the Honorable Justice Frank P. Nervo acknowledged,

"[…] The transcript in these cases, in this case was kind of magical in many respects because of [occasional] difficulties with being able to hear[…]"

"The ability to adapt to change, utilize technology, and employ tried and true trial strategies in new and creative ways resulted in a well-deserved outcome for our client", said Joseph P. Awad.

The virtual juror orientation and selection in Manhattan as announced by Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks would be potentially efficacious in remedying the backlog in trial ready cases, especially those of short duration. Jurors seem comfortable using and paying attention to virtual technology.

On March 26, 2014, the plaintiff, Daniel Sullivan, underwent right L5-S1 lumbar microdiscectomy, laminotomy, foraminotomy, and right L4-L5 lumbar laminotomy, foraminotomy with exploration of right L4-L5 disk space which was performed by the defendant Dr. Robert B. Snow at New York Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center.

At the time of his surgery, Mr. Sullivan was a successful 37-year-old bond broker.

On April 5, 2014, 10 days postoperatively, Mr. Sullivan experienced the sudden onset of severe back pain prompting him to telephone the office of Dr. Snow who prescribed medication to treat pain and inflammation. One day later, on April 6, 2014, Mr. Sullivan returned to New York Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center. At the hospital, lab work revealed abnormal blood values for inflammation, specifically CRP, ESR, and WBC. An MRI was performed, and the corresponding report included findings of phlegmon and a differential diagnosis of infection, placing spinal infection at the paraspinal muscle and fascia level of the operative site at the top of the differential diagnosis.

At trial, the plaintiff contended that reasonable care in accordance with accepted practice required follow up blood studies and imaging which the defendant Dr. Robert Snow failed to do despite including infection on his differential diagnosis. The plaintiff alleged that the delay in diagnosis of infection at the site of the spinal surgery permitted the infection to invade the disc space and bone causing erosion of bone and tissue, obliteration of the L5-S1 disc, and collapse of the spine at L5-S1.

The plaintiff contended that intermittent pain on a daily basis made it impossible for him to do his job. At trial, a high-level banker from Morgan Stanley testified that he had to fire the plaintiff even though they had become good friends due to the plaintiff's poor job performance. Plaintiff has since transitioned to a career as a real estate developer and broker.

The defendant contended that the abnormal blood chemistry, MRI findings, and sudden onset of back pain 10 days post operatively, were consistent with normal spikes in the healing process referred to as granulation. Defendant's infectious disease expert contended that the osteomyelitis and discitis could not and would not have been diagnosed regardless of what the defendant doctor did. Defendant's expert neurosurgeon contended that the abnormal CRP was normal and typical even when confronted with an article he authored which contradicted his testimony.