FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Atlantic City, New Jersey – September 5, 2023
Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. (DH&D) is pleased to announce the addition of six litigation attorneys and the opening of a new office in Absecon, New Jersey.
Timothy M. Cramer, David Bishop, and Timothy B. Crammer, from the law firm of Crammer & Bishop, have joined DH&D in the firm’s civil litigation practice group and will be located in the firm’s new office in Absecon. Tim M. Crammer, Dave Bishop, and Tim B. Crammer are highly experienced and respected litigation and trial attorneys. They add significant depth and breadth to an already deep litigation and trial team at DH&D.
Craig A. Domalewski, Managing Partner of DH&D, stated: “We are thrilled that Tim, Dave, and Tim have joined our firm. They are great lawyers and, together with the opening of a new office in Atlantic County, allow us to grow our presence and better serve our clients in South Jersey.”
“We are excited about joining Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. It is an excellent law firm with an outstanding reputation and a talented team of litigation and trial lawyers and support staff. We believe joining DH&D, with its statewide practice in all state and federal courts, will serve the best interests of our clients,” stated Timothy M. Crammer.
DH&D is also pleased to announce the addition of three more lawyers — Benjamin H. Haftel, Mary Lou Dennis-Suckow, and Janet Glore. Mr. Haftel is a gifted litigation and trial attorney and Ms. Dennis-Suckow and Ms. Glore are highly accomplished litigation attorneys with a broad range of civil litigation experience.
“Ben, Mary Lou, and Janet grow the talent pool of experienced, high-caliber litigators at DH&D and allow the firm to continue to deliver the best legal representation and advocacy to our clients.” Mr. Domalewski added.
About Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C.
Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. has a statewide practice with 3 offices in New Jersey, more than 30 lawyers, and a 40-year history of successfully representing and advocating for clients in a dozen different areas of practice. Mr. Domalewski stated the additions of these six experienced litigation and trial attorneys will enhance DH&D’s position as one of the state’s best boutique law firms: “As a medium-sized law firm in New Jersey, we pride ourselves in offering clients the skill and resources of a big New Jersey firm, but without the crippling costs. We strive to deliver to our clients individualized attention and professional excellence in each representation. The changes we are announcing today will further support our unique position in the New Jersey legal marketplace and ensure we can continue to provide our clients with high-quality legal service and fierce advocacy at an affordable price.” For more information, please visit dughihewit.com
Contact
Telephone: (908)272-0200
Email: info@dughihewit.com
Website: https://www.dughihewit.com/
Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. is pleased to announce that Craig A. Domalewski has once again been included in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® for Commercial Litigation (a trademark of Woodward/White, Inc.). First published in 1983, The Best Lawyers in America is one of the oldest and most respected peer-review publications in the legal profession.
Lawyers on The Best Lawyers in America list are divided by geographic region and practice areas. They are reviewed by their peers based on professional expertise and undergo an authentication process to ensure they are in current practice and in good standing.
Read more about the Best Lawyers selection process.
No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
DHD trial attorney Brandon Minde successfully represented a client in an investigation conducted by the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs, Office of the Attorney General (“the DCA”). After two complaints were made against DHD’s client, the DCA commenced an investigation and issued a Notice of Violation. Mr. Minde was able to persuade the DCA to withdraw the Notice of Violation as to DHD’s client based on his presentation of facts to the DCA which discredited the underlying basis for the complaints.
Mr. Minde has significant experience with civil and criminal matters involving the Office of the Attorney General. His practice focuses on representing individuals and businesses charged with criminal offenses or who are the subject of criminal or government investigations, defending physicians and hospitals in medical malpractice lawsuits and professional licensing board investigations, and handling complex civil-litigation matters.
Mark Petraske secured another defense verdict after a 9-day trial in Middlesex County. Plaintiff alleged that a cataract surgery was performed improperly that resulted in a near loss of vision in the eye. During the insertion of the artificial lens the trailing haptic broke which required the artificial lens to be cut up and removed piece by piece. A new lens was inserted, and the patient was seen on post operative day one. On post op day one the cornea was noted to have significant edema, a known risk of any cataract surgery. The patient had a history of uveitis and an ocular herpes virus that was quite in the eye leading up to surgery. The defendant doctor believed that the virus may have been reactivated due to required extra surgery and began an aggressive course of therapy to resolve the corneal edema. Ultimately, she achieved 20/50 vision under the doctor’s care but could not recover the central portion of the cornea and a referral to a corneal specialist was made. After consulting with several cornea specialists, the plaintiff underwent a cornea transplant but due to some technical issues only achieved a 20/400, uncorrected vision. She now must wear a scleral lens to be able to correct to 20/25. The defense argued that many of the things she is claiming as current complaints pre-existed the surgery, and that her complaints of vertigo were not ocular complaints at all and were being treated by a neurologist on referral from her ophthalmologist. The jury returned a verdict of 5-1 in favor of the doctor, after just under an hour of deliberations. This defense verdict continues a streak of 9 defense jury verdicts — in 5 different counties — since May 2022.
Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. is proud to announce that seven of its attorneys have been selected to the 2023 New Jersey Super Lawyers and Rising Stars lists. Super Lawyers is a part of Thomson Reuters and is a research and peer-review rating service. This is an exclusive list, recognizing no more than five percent of the attorneys in the State of New Jersey.
The DHD attorneys recognized on the 2023 Super Lawyers List are:
In addition, the firm is also proud to announce that Ryan Notarangelo, Alexa Luzzi and Cara Anan were named to the 2023 New Jersey Rising Stars list. Each year, this designation is given to less than 2.5 percent of New Jersey attorneys recognized as the top up-and-coming attorneys who are 40 years old or younger, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less.
…
A description of the selection process methodology for the awards referenced is available at SuperLawyers.com
No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Latte with a Lawyer is a podcast featuring the stories of attorneys and their strategies and tactics for making an impact in their profession. This 30-minute podcast explores Brandon’s current practice, background, and how he has achieved success as a certified criminal trial attorney who puts his clients first.
In Camp v. Scimeca, plaintiff alleged the defendant physician deviated from accepted standards in failing to diagnose and treat glaucoma in the plaintiff’s left eye, resulting in permanent loss of vision. Plaintiff, an avid reader and author, had presented to the defendant ophthalmologist with complaints of loss of peripheral vision and was found to have elevated intraocular pressure. Defendant physician prescribed medication to increase the outflow of the fluid within the eye (aqueous humor) to reduce the pressure, which initially was effective, but the patient was not able to tolerate the medication. The patient then underwent two laser procedures to reduce the intraocular pressure, which also was initially effective, but the pressure ultimately crept back up. The patient went to another eye surgeon and underwent a shunt procedure, the placement of a tube directly into the eye to drain the fluid to reduce the patient’s intraocular pressure, but the patient nevertheless lost 90% of her peripheral vision in her left eye. Plaintiff’s expert opined that defendant physician should have performed the shunt procedure much earlier and that had he done so plaintiff would not have lost her eyesight. The defense demonstrated that the doctor maintained intraocular pressure below the 30 mm Hg threshold that damages the optic nerve, a standard with which the plaintiff’s expert agreed. Using literature supplied by plaintiff’s expert, the defense demonstrated that it would have been inappropriate to do the shunt procedure until it was clear that the less risky and less invasive treatments of medication therapy and laser therapy were not working. The jury returned a unanimous verdict that the defendant was not negligent in his treatment.
Russ Hewit and Mark Petraske both obtained defense jury verdicts of no cause for action in favor of their clients within the span of a week. Russ Hewit tried a medical malpractice case in Union County from January 9 to February 9 and Mark Petraske completed a 7-day dental malpractice trial in Middlesex County on February 7.
Russ Hewit obtains defense verdict in suit for the wrongful death of a 35 year old married mother of two. In Teixeira v. Khazaei, tried in Union County, Marlenes Teixeira, a 35 year old 1st time mother delivered healthy baby twins. Within an hour of delivery and for the next 3-4 hours, she developed elevated blood pressures that fluctuated into the severe range. She suffered a cerebral hemorrhage four and half hours after delivery and then passed 5 months later. Plaintiffs sued her treating obstetrician and the resident and labor and delivery nurse providing postpartum care for failure to diagnose and treat preeclampsia and postpartum hypertension. Plaintiff called an obstetrical expert on the standard of care and a neurologist and neuroradiologist that decedent’s cerebral hemorrhage was caused by untreated hypertension. Decedent was a public-school principal in Elizabeth and plaintiff’s economist testified that net economic damages exceeded $6.8 million. Plaintiff also sought pain and suffering experienced by decedent prior to her death. Russ Hewit, representing the attending obstetrician, presented expert testimony from an obstetrician that the decedent’s fluctuating blood pressures did not require treatment with antihypertensive medications and testimony from a nephrologist / hypertension expert and neuroradiologist that decedent’s cerebral hemorrhage was not caused by the elevated blood pressures, but by pregnancy induced changes to the mother’s cardiovascular system and/or by an unknown, pre-existing arteriovenous fistula in the brain. Following four weeks of testimony, the jury returned a verdict on February 9 that the attending obstetrician had not deviated from accepted standards of care in his treatment. The jury found that the co-defendant nurse had deviated from nursing standards of care, but that such deviation did not cause the decedent’s hemorrhage. The co-defendant resident settled prior to trial.
Mark Petraske secures jury verdict in case alleging permanent bone destruction in jaw. In Green v Albani, tried in Middlesex County, plaintiff alleged defendant dentist was negligent in the placement of two implants, causing an infection that developed into an antibiotic resistant infection and osteomyelitis (infection of the jawbone) and resulting in permanent bone destruction and bone loss. The patient required subsequent hospitalization, surgery and IV antibiotic treatment and also sought damages for the permanent bone loss in her jaw. Plaintiff called a dental expert who opined that the defendant dentist should have used advanced imaging techniques which would have enabled better evaluation of the jaw in order to determine where and how best to locate the implants in order to avoid a predictable jawbone defect that allowed the infection to take hold. Plaintiff also alleged a lack of informed consent on the risks of the procedure. Mark Petraske presented expert testimony and evidence that advanced radiology was not necessary and would not have resulted in any different location of the implants, and that the proper pre-procedure workup was performed. Using the existing radiology studies, Mark demonstrated to the jury that the implants were placed in solid bone structure and presented convincing evidence that the infection was a disclosed and accepted risk of the procedure. After 7 days of trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant after only 26 minutes of deliberation. This is Mark Petraske’s sixth favorable jury verdict in 7 months. Since jury trials resumed in June 2022 (after courts were closed during COVID), Mark is 6-0 at trial.
Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C., is pleased to announce that it has been named a 2023 Best Law Firm in New Jersey by Best Lawyers® and U.S. News & World Report. The law firm has been recognized as a Metropolitan Tier 1 Law Firm for Commercial Litigation.
View the 13th edition of the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms”.
View the Methodology Used for this Ranking can be found here | Best Law Firms (usnews.com)
