Emanuel Galimidi



Mr. Galimidi is the head of the Firm’s Product Liability Department. In his professional career Mr. Galimidi has handled a wide array of both complex litigation and transactional matters. In addition to acting as general counsel for a number of national and international enterprises, Mr. Galimidi has successfully represented both corporate clients and private individuals in all phases of litigation before Local, State and Federal Courts. When necessary Mr. Galimidi assists clients with internal or external media/crisis management teams. Prior to graduating law school Mr. Galimidi was a registered agent with the National Football League and the Canadian Football League.


  • Juris Doctorate, St. Thomas University School of Law, Miami, Florida
  • Bachelor of Arts & Sciences degree in Psychology from Florida State University

Office Location

  • Miami - Florida

Awards, Recognitions & Membership

  • Oralist: Phillip C. Jessup International Moot Court Championship – Third Place, Southeastern Division
  • Recognized as a “Rising Star,” by Florida Super Lawyers. Only 2.5% of Florida attorneys receive this honor each year. Rising Stars are chosen by their peers as being among the top up-and-coming lawyers (40 years or younger, or in practice 10 years or less) in the state.
  • Florida Bar Trial Lawyers Section
Picture of Eg Super Lawyer Logo
Picture of Mem Logo

Areas of Expertise

  • Products Liability
  • Civil Litigation
  • Outside General Counsel

Court Admissions

  • 11th Circuit Court of Appeals
  • U.S District Court Southern District of Florida
  • U.S District Court for the Northern District of Florida

Professional and Community Involvement

  • Dade County Bar Association- Member
  • Young Presidents Club of Mount Sinai Medical Center Foundation - Member
  • Miami Foundation: Professional Advisors Network - Committee

Bar Admissions

  • State of Florida
  • Spanish, fluent

Notable Representations

Travelers Insurance Company, as Subrogee of G. Robert Toney & Associates, Inc. d/b/a National Liquidators and Maritech Services, Inc., v. Commercial Cool –Temp Corp. Case No. 11-61748-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/SNOW

Lead Trial Counsel in Federal Maritime action brought by Plaintiff Subrogee alleging several causes of action against commercial subcontractor for the loss of a vessel entrusted to the Subrogor by the United States Marshals Service. Final Judgment found in favor of the Defendant, Commercial Cool-Temp Corp., with separate Order awarding attorneys’ fees in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff as sanctions for Plaintiff’s discovery violations.


Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC v. Sunset Harbour Marina, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-24469-KAM

Lead Trial Counsel in Federal Maritime action brought by Plaintiff Subrogee alleging several causes of action against a yacht club and its marina (co-defendants) for the loss of a vessel owned by the Subrogor, which was docked at the marina.  After having obtained Plaintiff’s agreement to withdraw its breach of contract claim against the marina, the Court also granted client’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Motion to Compel Arbitration, staying the action and compelling arbitration. Thereafter, a Verified Motion for Attorney’s Fees was filed against Plaintiff for having pursued its civil suit, in violation of the agreement to arbitrate, after which a favorable settlement was reached under which its attorneys’ fees and costs for defense of the matter were recuperated and the Plaintiff Subrogee waived any claims it could pursue in arbitration.


Estate of Virginia Murray v. City of Lake Worth and Palm Beach County, Case No. 502011CA005409XXXXMB, and appeal to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Case No. 13-3958:

Summary Judgment was obtained in favor of the City of Lake Worth in a claim for wrongful death brought by the son and personal representative of a deceased automobile passenger.  After several amendments to the claim brought against the City, Plaintiff ultimately alleged that the City of Lake Worth created a dangerous condition of which it was aware by controlling, operating, and maintaining its electrical power grid in a negligent manner.  After summary judgment was entered in favor of the City, Plaintiff appealed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, claiming not only that the trial court’s ruling was incorrect but also claiming that the trial court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment given that discovery was alleged to have been in its early stages.  After reviewing the briefs on the matter, the Fourth DCA affirmed per curiam.