The Altman Law Firm, PLLC

08/19/2026

Justice served for our client! ⚖️

We are pleased to announce that in a decision handed down earlier today, the Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the lower court’s decision denying the defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

This critical ruling clears the way for our injured client to proceed forward and seek the full justice they deserve.

Read the full decision here:

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Caroline Piela Cohen, J.), dated July 18, 2024. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

07/28/2026

This is my post on LinkedIn.

Michael Altman
The Altman Law Firm PLLC -- Owner

Other than acting ethically in conformity with my beliefs, not working on the Sabbath or holidays, and wearing my kippah (yarmulke) in court or when meeting clients and colleagues, I try to keep my personal and religious life separate from my professional life. I have thus refrained from posting anything on LinkedIn about politics or religion.

I can no longer do so.

It really does seem that the Mayor of New York City — the city where I was born, raised, and lived for most of my life — is trying to exclude Jews in every way possible. He appointed 18 lawyers to the Mayor's Advisory Committee on the Judiciary. None are Jewish. Not even an anti-Zionist token — even that would have been too much for him.

It is not inclusion when you exclude Jews. It is not intersectionality when you exclude sections.

I am sad. I am angry. But I am not surprised. I will not be quiet about this.

07/24/2026

We are pleased to share that, earlier this week, we secured a significant decision from the Appellate Division, Second Department, in Bandele v. Rasier.

In an important ruling, the Appellate Division rejected Uber’s argument that its drivers could not be considered employees as a matter of law. The Court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in Uber’s favor, allowing the claims against Uber to proceed.

The decision represents an important development in efforts to hold ride-share and delivery companies accountable when they seek to avoid responsibility by characterizing drivers who use their platforms as independent contractors. It also provides injured plaintiffs with a clearer path to pursue relief when harm occurs on our roads.

The decision is available here:

Gregory Spektor & Associates, P.C. (The Altman Law Firm, PLLC, Woodmere, NY [Michael T. Altman], of counsel), for appellant.

06/18/2026

The Altman Law Firm, PLLC
We are pleased to share that, in a decision issued yesterday, the Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the grant of defendants’ motion for summary judgment and reinstated our client’s action.

Among several holdings favorable to our client, the Court issued a significant ruling on the trivial defect doctrine. The Second Department held that because the evidence demonstrated that the edge of the step bent under the weight of a person, it could not conclude that such a defect — located at the top of a staircase in a residential building — was small enough to be trivial as a matter of law.

The decision can be read in full here:

Law Office of Gennady Yankilevich, P.C. (The Altman Law Firm, PLLC, Woodmere, NY [Michael T. Altman], of counsel), for appellants.

06/10/2026

Altman Law Firm Twofer Tuesday

Altman Law Firm is pleased to report two favorable decisions obtained yesterday from the Appellate Division, First Department.

In Lugo v. Excel Conveyor LLC, the Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss. The decision permits the plaintiff to pursue direct claims against a third party for failing to disclose information that would have enabled the plaintiff to identify the alleged tortfeasor before the statute of limitations expired as to that party. The decision can be found here: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/current/3dseries/2026/2026_03636.shtml

In Brylski v. Residence Inn, the Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Court held that triable issues of fact remain as to whether the placement of a swing chair with a protruding leg created an inherently dangerous condition and whether it constituted a “trap for the unwary.” The decision can be found here: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/current/3dseries/2026/2026_03625.shtml

04/05/2026

We are pleased to share that, in a decision issued last week, the Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the dismissal of our client’s case for failure to timely file a Notice of Claim and reinstated his action.

You can read the decision here: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/current/3dseries/2026/2026_01944.shtml

We thank our colleagues at https://www.facebook.com/GregorySpektorAndAssociates for their excellent work and for entrusting us with the appeal.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kevin J. Kerrigan, J.), entered May 15, 2024. The order granted the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint.

03/11/2026

We are pleased to report that in a decision issued yesterday, the Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the order appointing a Guardian ad Litem and declining to appoint the child’s father as guardian. It was especially gratifying to play a role in helping ensure that the interests of this tragically injured child are properly protected.

02/02/2026

We are pleased to report that, in a decision issued last week, the Appellate Division, First Department affirmed both the issuance of an adverse inference charge and the preclusion of evidence as sanctions for spoliation. Although striking pleadings may be warranted in cases of spoliation, courts are generally reluctant to impose that ultimate sanction. The remedies affirmed here represent the strongest sanctions typically imposed absent truly exceptional circumstances. We are very pleased with the Court’s decision.

01/06/2026

We are pleased to announce that in a very significant environmental decision handed down last week, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed both the determination that private nuisance causes of action are not limited to those in which the conduct affects only a relatively few individuals, and class action certification. This is a major victory for the victims of environmental pollution.

This was the result of a team effort. Our thanks for the groundwork and great record provided by our friends https://www.facebook.com/michael.greenspan.39 at https://www.facebook.com/GreenspanandGreenspan and https://www.facebook.com/LiddleSheetsPC.