» Civil

New Jersey’s Appellate Division agreed with Hegge & Confusione that the State’s disclosure in opening statement that a co-defendant “had confessed to his grandmother, who never testified” at trial “was too prejudicial to both defendants to be remedied by the court’s cautionary instruction” and required a new trial. Read More

New York’s First Appellate Division Department agreed with Hegge & Confusione that summary judgment was improperly granted on the client’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress: “There is a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant’s conduct was sufficiently outrageous to sustain a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress…” Read More

New Jersey’s Appellate Division agreed with Hegge & Confusione that the trial court deprived the injured client of a fair trial before the jury on her personal injury claims: “We find that the effect of these two rulings deprived the jury of an opportunity to assess the full extent of plaintiff’s alleged injuries and render its own determination as to the etiology of plaintiff’s complaints and her need for surgery. Because the evidence was essential to a full and fair presentation of plaintiff’s case, its exclusion was clearly capable of producing an unjust result. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.” Read More

New Jersey’s Appellate Division agreed with Hegge & Confusione in rejecting the appeal by the adversary and affirming the family court’s equitable distribution ruling on the client’s behalf arising from a divorce. Read More

New York’s Second Appellate Division Department agreed with Hegge & Confusione that summary judgment was improperly entered on the client’s claim for unpaid goods, reversing for trial on the client’s account stated claim. Read More

New Jersey’s Appellate Division agreed with Hegge & Confusione that no reversible error occurred in the trial court, affirming the judgment in the client’s behalf on appeal. Read More

New Jersey’s Appellate Division agreed with Hegge & Confusione for a second time in the same civil litigation, again reversing the trial court’s ruling below. Read More

New York’s Second Appellate Division Department agreed with Hegge & Confusione that the Supreme Court improperly dismissed our client’s medical malpractice claim on the proximate causation element, ruling that a jury must decide the client’s claim at trial. Read More