New York Criminal Lawyer Blawg

Attorney Stephen Riebling

In early 2011, Stephen Riebling, Esq. successfully defended Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. during a three week jury trial in New York County Supreme Court. As a trial attorney Mr. Riebling also practices in the areas of criminal defense, divorce and family law.

Due to Mr. Riebling's successful defense of power tool companies Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. hired the law firm of Riebling, Proto & Sachs, LLP in White Plains, New York to defend this action.

Nature of Plaintiff's Claims

On November 15, 2003 the Plaintiff an attorney in his 40s, amputated his left hand while he was operating a sliding miter saw at his Long Island home. The plaintiff sued Milwaukee Tool Corp. alleging that the company was negligent in the design of the saw and failed to provide proper warnings for the saw's use.

The plaintiff claimed that his left hand slid off the saw's pistol grip and into the path of the saw's blade. Plaintiff further claimed that the saw's slide lock malfunctioned and because the pistol grip was an open grip rather than a closed grip there was an increased likelihood of injury. The plaintiff further argued that there were improper warnings regarding the use of the saw.

Milwaukee Electric Tool Defense

Attorney Stephen Riebling defended the plaintiff's allegations by arguing that the saw was in fact properly designed and that its pistol grip, slide lock and warning labels were proper. Mr. Riebling focused on the plaintiff failure to properly use the saw. During the preparation of the case for trial Mr. Riebling discovered various inconsistencies with the plaintiff's claims of how the accident took place and further argued to the jury that the plaintiff's version of events was inaccurate.

Plaintiff's Demand and Result

The plaintiff sought 7.5 million dollars in damages from the New York County Jury. The jury deliberated for 90 minutes and returned a defense verdict finding that the saw was not defectively designed.

Westchester County Family Court -- Custody Trial

Attorney David Sachs was able to obtain sole legal and physical custody, for his client, after a trial conducted over several days in the White Plains Family Court, Westchester County. Mr. Sachs represented the mother who filed a Family Court Petition to modify a previous custody Order of the Westchester County Family Court. The mother wanted sole physical and legal custody of the child.

The mother (Petitioner) testified that she and the father had an embittered relationship, the the father had threatened her and the father had been arrested twice for violating an existing Order of Protection.

Joint Custody Law

The Court found the law for joint custody demands that decisions regarding the welfare of the child be a reasoned determination of the parents and is premised on the notion that the parents are capable of and can engage in cooperative and civil communication Matter of Yetter v Jones, 706 NYS2d 782.

Also, the Court found that an existing custody arrangement established by agreement should be modified only upon a showing that there has been a change of cicumstances that makes modification "necessary to ensure the continued best intrest of the children" Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167. The Westchetser County Family Court also found that where the record has demonstrated that the parties' relationship is so acrimonious that it essentially precludes joint decision making an award of sole custody is appropriate and in the best intrests of the child. Matter of O'Connell v McDermott, 915 NYS2d 143. Lastly, the Westchester County Family Court found that joint custody is inappropriate where the parties are antagonistic towards each other and have demonstrated an inability to cooperate on matters concerning the child.

The Custody Trial

At trial it was clear the parties could not effectively engage in any form of joint decision making with respect to the child. The father's behavior was marked by repeated complaints to CPS, verbal insults and accusations. The mother stated even routine conversations regarding the child devolved into accusations regarding the parties previous relationship and the mother's lack of parental competence.

Custody Decision

Attorney David Sachs was able to show at trial that the father was responsible for the parties lack of cooperation and argued successfully to the judge that joint custody was inappropriate. The judge then awarded sole physical and legal custody to the mother.