Seth J. Schwartz

Defense jury verdict in premises liability matter.  Seth was the only defense attorney and Plaintiff had two lawyers during trial.  Plaintiff argued spoliation of evidence, had back surgery and "boarded" over seven figures in damages.  Seth developed inconsistencies during the cross examination of Plaintiff's witnesses, and argued that Plaintiff failed to meet his burden of proof.

Defense jury verdict in premises liability matter.  Seth again was the only defense attorney and Plaintiff had two lawyers during trial.  Plaintiff  argued that the defendant failed to preserve evidence.  It is also noted that the defendant had witness issues with a former employee.  Plaintiff was a grandfatherly gentlemen claiming a serious a  hip injury.  Seth introduced evidence that there were gaps in Plaintiff's story, and during Seth's cross examination of Plaintiff's liability expert, the expert admitted that he did not have his entire file, although he initially told the jury he did; and, he acknowledged that the Defendant was compliant with a different set of industry regulations which he omitted to discuss during direct examination.

Defense jury verdict in automobile rear-end collision with negligence stipulation involving surgery and significant wage loss claim. Negligence was admitted to the jury. Significant credibility issues developed during the case, including Plaintiff's vocational expert admitting in front of the jury of failing to produce all discoverable documents. After hearing the evidence, jury returned a defense verdict, although negligence was admitted. 

Defense jury verdict in rear-end motor vehicle accident case. Negligence was admitted. Plaintiff alleged surgery and a significant vocational claim. Numerous inconsistencies were developed during trial involving the Plaintiff's reporting of the incident to the doctor. After deliberation, jury awarded a defense verdict. 

Defense jury verdict in rear-end collision with negligence stipulation involving two personal injury claims of multiple herniations and permanency. During trial, evidence was developed which revealed that Plaintiffs provided varying medical histories to different doctors. After hearing the evidence, jury returned a defense verdict. 

Defense jury verdict in premises liability case whereby the plaintiff, a pizza delivery person, allegedly fell on ice while delivering a pizza. During trial Plaintiff admitted on cross examination to observing alternative pathways and that he did not maintain a vigilant look out. The jury returned a defense verdict in favor of the homeowners.