Eric J. Berger

Member

Eric concentrates his practice in construction and labor law, product liability, and toxic tort matters.

Eric represents corporations and municipalities in the defense of high-exposure, catastrophic casualty claims, including cases involving traumatic brain injuries, arising from alleged violations of the New York State Labor Laws, and other claims. Eric has extensive experience representing manufacturers in product recalls and representing manufacturers, distributors, and retailers in product liability matters arising from alleged defects in commercial and industrial products. Eric represents building owners and major construction companies in the defense of construction defect, environmental pollution, and property damage claims and represents corporations, municipalities, and building owners and managers in the defense of casualty claims arising from various toxic exposures. 

In addition to handling traumatic brain injury cases, Eric has assisted with presentations to claims representatives at some of the largest insurance companies in the country, including AIG and Travelers, as well as to fellow attorneys at presentations sponsored by the New York State Bar Association Torts, Insurance, and Compensation Law section.

Eric earned his undergraduate degree from Columbia University and his law degree from Boston University School of Law.

Switch to Darwin Exp Data

Experience

Obtained a complete defense verdict on behalf of a well-known former NBA basketball player and media personality following an eight-day trial in the U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of New York.

Prepared and argued an appeal that reversed the granting of partial summary judgment against the one of the largest construction companies in the United States. The decision extinguishes the accrual of more than two years of pre-judgment interest and permits the client to present a liability defense at trial.

Secured reversal of the trial court's denial of summary judgment in a case centering on injuries an infant allegedly sustained from exposure to lead paint in an apartment owned by our client. We convinced the appellate court to grant the motion for summary judgment on the grounds that our client did not have notice that the infant resided at the apartment in question before he sustained any injuries.

Successfully moved for summary judgment on behalf of the State of New York in a personal injury case centering on claims brought under the Labor Law, and on a theory of common law negligence, where the plaintiff sustained injuries after tripping over rebar at a construction site. The trial court granted summary judgment in light of uncontroverted deposition testimony revealing that our client had no authority to supervise or control the performance of the plaintiff's work, and the appellate division affirmed that ruling.

Won summary judgment in a case centering on allegations that an infant suffered injury due to the presence of lead paint in his residence. The trial court found that our client, the manager of the condominium complex at issue, neither owned or controlled the premises, assumed any duty to the plaintiffs, nor had actual or constructive notice of the lead paint condition alleged to have caused the injury. This decision was affirmed on appeal.

Successfully secured remittitur of a verdict, taken by a predecessor defense firm, from almost $6 million to less than $1.9 million in a personal injury case in Bronx County, New York. The plaintiff had sustained a serious back injury when he fell while attempting to climb out of a trench dug by our client, and had been awarded damages for future medical costs, and for pain and suffering, which we convinced the court were against the weight of the evidence, speculative, and/or excessive.

Prepared and argued an appeal that affirmed summary judgment in favor of a building owner in a slip-and-fall action. In affirming the decision, the appellate court held that the building owner was not liable to plaintiff because it did not create, or have notice of, the allegedly dangerous condition that caused the plaintiff to slip and suffer spinal injuries while descending stairs in the rain.

Publications

The Western District of Louisiana Provides Judicial Support for Requiring Inclusion of Medicare Set Asides in Liability Case Settlements [General Litigation Alert!]

February 07, 2011

For those attorneys and insurance carriers who have insisted to plaintiffs’ counsel that certain funds be set aside for the payment of future medical bills following a liability case settlement – but have met strong opposition from plaintiffs’ counsel, or more commonly from, third-party vendors such as the Garretson Firm Resolution Group – a January 5, 2011 decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana has interpreted the requirements of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP Act), 42 U.S.C. § 1395y, as it relates to Medicare’s future interests, a positive development in liability defense as a means to counter such resistance and ensure compliance with statutory requirements.

New York Supreme Court Justice Distinguishes Association From Causation in Mold Case [General Litigation Alert!]

March 17, 2010

In a recent decision, Cornell v. 360 West 51st St. Realty, LLC., Index No. 113104/04, 2009 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3579 (Sup Ct, New York County Dec. 18, 2009), New York County Supreme Court Justice Marcy Friedman followed the rationale set forth by the Appellate Division, First Department in Fraser v. 301-52 Townhouse Corp., 57 A.D.3d 416, 870 N.Y.S.2d 266 (1st Dep’t 2008) regarding the admissibility of scientific and medical evidence in personal injury mold cases.

Winter 2009 [Commercial Litigation Observer]

February 25, 2009

Congratulations are due to the twenty-five attorneys from six of the firm’s national offices who have been selected for inclusion in the 2009 edition of The Best Lawyers in America. Lawyers were selected for inclusion in the 2009 edition of The Best Lawyers in America based on a rigorous peer–review survey that has been developed and refined for nearly 25 years. The current edition is based on 1.8 million confidential evaluations by only the top attorneys in the country. The Cozen O'Connor offices with Attorneys recognized are Cherry Hill, Denver, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC.

Consumer-Driven Diacetyl Litigation: Boom or Bust [Mealey's Litigation Report]

November 01, 2007

With asbestos litigation entering its twilight years, personal injury lawyers have been searching long and hard for a new toxin to form the foundation of lawsuits for decades to come. And while personal injury lawyers have enjoyed some success in prosecuting cases involving occupational exposure to diacetyl, the limited number of individuals exposed to the substance in the occupational setting has been a major stumbling block to crowning diacetyl as the toxin of the new millennium. Years of research into the health effects of diacetyl, together with recent medical findings and increased public scrutiny over food safety issues, however, may serve to broaden diacetyl litigation into the consumer arena and provide personal injury lawyers with the opportunity they have been so anxiously seeking.

Events & Seminars

Past Events

Combating the Anchoring Effect

February 24, 2022 - Webinar

Critical Issues in Litigation – 2016

November 03, 2016 - New York, NY

Critical Issues in Litigation – 2015

May 20, 2015 - New York, NY

Industry Sectors

Insurance

Education

  • Boston University School of Law, J.D., 1999
  • Columbia University, B.A., 1996
  • New Jersey
  • New York
  • U.S. District Court -- Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court -- New Jersey
  • U.S. District Court -- Southern District of New York
  • New York County Lawyers Association
  • New York State Bar Association