Michael A. Spero and Christina J. Vassiliou obtained the dismissal of a lawsuit brought against Princeton University by The New York Times for property damage to one of its delivery trucks when a large oak tree fell upon it on Washington Road. Mercer County was also named as a defendant because Washington Road is a County road.  The firm filed a motion for summary judgment and was able to successfully demonstrate to the court through the use of a property survey that the tree which struck the truck was actually within a right of way that Princeton University had granted to Mercer County in 1938. The plaintiff had relied upon a tax map and the court agreed with the firm's argument that, as a matter of law, the survey was more accurate.
Mr. Spero has represented Princeton University in negligence defense matters for more than 20 years

Court Denys Intervenor the right of Planning Board to Enter into Settlement Discussions of Action in Lieu of Progative Writ. On May 9, 2008, Judge Linda Feinberg, A.J.S.C. issued an opinion in Ricciardi Family, L.L.C. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Princeton Township, Governor’s Lane Condominium Association, and Brian and Leahbeth McDonald, MER-L-1960-07, denying an intervenors’ motion to enjoin settlement discussions between the plaintiff and the Zoning Board of Adjustment to resolve a prerogative writ action.  Citing Whispering Woods at Bamm Hollow, Inc. v. Middletown Township Planning Board, 220 N.J. Super 161 (Law Div. 1987).
To read this Case Summary in its entirety, please click here. For more information, please contact Frank J. Petrino, Esq. at (609) 989-5029 or fpetrino@sternslaw.com or Todd D. Greene, Esq. at (609) 989-5023 or tgreene@sternslaw.com

Sterns & Weinroth attorneys Christopher E. Torkelson, David M. Roskos, and Christina J. Vassiliou, successfully challenged an historic preservation ordinance in Moorestown, N.J. in a case in which the Firm represented a group of local property owners.  The ordinance was invalidated following a ruling in our clients' favor on a motion for summary judgment, based upon a lack of proper public notice prior to the adoption of the ordinance.

Michael A. Spero and Christina J. Vassiliou successfully defended Princeton University in a recent negligence case. A lawsuit was brought by a spectator allegedly struck in the head by a puck during a Dartmouth-Princeton men's hockey game. The firm filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the case against Princeton after exchanging written discovery and conducting the deposition of Princeton's assistant athletic director for facilities.

The trial court judge stated the plaintiffs' expert report was not sufficient to meet the requirements of showing negligence under the state's limited duty rule for sporting events since Princeton met its duty to the public by providing protective glass panels higher than the spectator seating.  As an educational institution, Princeton University is covered by the Charitable Immunity Act which requires proof by a plaintiff of gross negligence to maintain a claim.  Since the plaintiffs could not even prove negligence, the judge found that there certainly could not be proof of gross negligence and he dismissed the case. Mr. Spero has represented Princeton University in negligence defense matters for more than 20 years.

Three Sterns & Weinroth attorneys are recognized as 2008 Super Lawyers®. Sterns & Weinroth proudly announces that three directors of the firm have been recognized as New Jersey Super Lawyers® for 2008. The attorneys, who are listed in the April 2008 issue of New Jersey Monthly Magazine,are the firm's managing director, William J. Bigham;Chair of the firm's Real Estate/Transactional Practice Group, Frank J. Petrino; and a director with the firm's Litigation Practice Group, Michael A. Spero. Attorneys are selected via an exhaustive peer review sent to 32,000 active lawyers in New Jersey and a verification and selection process through the independent research of Law & Politics. Only five percent of practicing attorneys in New Jersey are selected for the honor. This is the fourth consecutive year Mr. Bigham and Mr. Petrino have been recognized and the third consecutive year for Mr. Spero

Robert D. Bailey has joined the firm as an Associate. Mr. Bailey focuses his practice on general litigation. Prior to joining the firm, he was engaged in a general litigation practice, representing clients with insurance defense, product liability defense, insurance coverage, personal injury, employment and class actions.  He also served as an Adjunct Professor at Warren County Community College, teaching legal research and writing.  During law school, Mr. Bailey served as an Executive Editor for the Uniform Commercial Code Reporter – Digest, and was a winner of the Best Brief Award in the Wendell F. Grimes Moot Court Competition. Prior to entering law school, Mr. Bailey worked with the Massachusetts Cultural Council, where he administered a statewide granting program that funded and supported long-term arts, sciences and humanities partnerships between school districts, cultural organizations, and local organizations

Todd D. Greene has joined the firm as an Associate. Mr. Greene focuses his practice on real estate and transactional matters. Prior to joining the firm, he was engaged in a general practice, representing developers, businesses and individuals in various commercial and residential real estate matters. He also handles all aspects of eminent domain litigation, including serving as first chair in an eminent domain jury trial and a two-time faculty member for CLE International

In a case tried by Michael A. Spero in Middlesex County in October, 2007, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and firm client, Nayna Patel, against OM Overseas, L.L.C., d/b/a Tuff Ones and Om Prakash. Ms. Patel, a licensed real estate and mortgage broker, had loaned the defendant $125,000, to be repaid within two months. Mr. Prakash asked that the check be made out to his company, Tuff Ones, but on the memo line of the loan check, Ms. Patel noted "Loan to OP," the defendant's initials. In response to the lawsuit, the defendant, who was in the ready-made garment business, maintained that the check was not a loan, but rather a down payment for 6,000 dozen tee shirts that Ms. Patel had ordered from him. The jury rejected the defendant's claim and awarded Ms. Patel the full $125,000, together with approximately $48,500 in interest.

For What's New Archives, click here.