Robert Joseph Pariser
I supervise a talented team of attorneys who practice in the Northeast Region of Lydecker, including the New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania offices. The attorneys in my office are comprised of former educators, prosecutors, law clerks to state and federal judges and insurance professionals.
My legal practice focuses on the defense of claims against professionals (E&O, A&B, LPL or MPL), directors and officers (D&O) and against employers (EPL). I also represent design professionals (A&E) and other real estate professionals, including managing agents, appraisers, title agents, condo and co-op boards and developers in various disputes. On behalf of construction owners and managers, I defend claims prosecuted by injured workers brought pursuant to the New York Labor Law.
I also represent clients on other types of discrimination claims, including alleged civil rights violations, including the Americans with Disabilities Act.
I defend environmental cases, involving mold, asbestos and ground contamination.
I represent public and private educators in breach of contract, employment, bullying, failing to promote and in due process matters.
I have had election, stock redemption, auction, foreclosure/ sheriff sale, false arrest, prosecutorial misconduct disputes.
I have been on the New York Metro Super Lawyers list from 2011-present.
Bar and Court Admissions
Areas of Expertise
Awards and Recognition
O’Callaghan v. Brunelle, 923 N.Y.S.2d 89, 84 A.D.3d 581 (1st Dept 2011)
Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed lower court’s order granting motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action for legal malpractice filed on behalf of client where Plaintiff alleged that his attorneys had failed to call a certain witness during a disciplinary proceeding which led to his conviction for violations of the rules of the New York Stock Exchange and Securities Exchange Commission,
Alaimo v. McGeorge, 893 N.Y.S.2d 331, 69 A.D.3d 1032 (3d Dept 2010)
Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed order denying motion to dismiss pursuant to collateral estoppel, documentary evidence, and failure to state a cause of action where Plaintiffs filed action for legal malpractice against former attorneys alleged to have allowed case to be struck from trial calendar and to have not taken proper action to restore the case.
Brown v. Vanchieri, 881 N.Y.S.2d 909, 64 A.D.3d 678 (2d Dept 2009)
Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed successful defense against Plaintiff’s motion to vacate dismissal of action for legal malpractice based on Plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate a meritorious cause of action or to provide reasonable excuse for delay.
Walker v. Kramer, 880 N.Y.S.2d 677, 63 A.D.3d 723, 2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 04414 (2d Dept 2009)
Appellate Division, Second Department modified order of lower court that granted motion to dismiss legal malpractice action pursuant to documentary evidence and failure to state a cause of action.
Villarreal v. Atlantic Apartments, LLC, 875 N.Y.S.2d 824, 21 Misc.3d 1136(A), 2008 WL 5050070, 2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 52401(U) (Sup Ct, Bronx County 2008)
Bronx County Supreme Court granted motion to dismiss to property owner’s law firm that had obtained an unambiguous general release in a prior personal injury matter, finding that Plaintiff was precluded from introducing extrinsic and parole evidence to create ambiguity.
Gotay v. Breitbart, 866 N.Y.S.2d 638, 58 A.D.3d 25, 2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 08432 (1st Dept 2008)
Appellate Division, First Department, having already overturned lower court’s order granting attorneys’ motion to dismiss legal malpractice action, affirmed denial of summary judgment arguing claim precluded by the statute of limitations. Lengthy dissent by the Honorable David Friedman argued that claim was barred by statute of limitations. The New York Court of Appeals later reversed, finding that the continuous representation doctrine was inapplicable and the legal malpractice claim was not brought within the statute of limitations.
Wallach v. Unger & Stutman, LLP, 853 N.Y.S.2d 295, 48 A.D.3d 360, 2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 01799 (1st Dept 2008)
Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed lower court’s order granting defendant law firm’s motion to dismiss complaint alleging legal malpractice as barred by separate order which they were precluded from appealing.
Koehler v. Green, 2009 WL 1161042 (US Dist Ct, ED Missouri 2009)
Federal district court, which had already dismissed an underlying action against attorneys for breach of fiduciary duty as barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel, denied attorneys motions for sanctions against Plaintiff in underlying matter.
Galgano v. County of Putnam, New York, 2018 WL 4757968 (US Dist Ct, SD NY 2018)
Obtained partial grant of motion to dismiss of action in federal court action in defense of town, town’s policy department, and detective against claims for retaliation, abuse of process, failure to intercede, and supervisory liability.
Hong Liu v. Queens Library Foundation, Inc., 2017 WL 4217121 (US Dist Ct, ED NY 2017)
Successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of library in employment action asserting claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act, and multiple state laws based on Plaintiff’s inability to demonstrate pretext or discrimination in failure to promote.
Ueth France v. Touro College, 2016 WL 1105400 (US Dist Ct, ED NY 2016); 2016 WL 1117459 (US Dist Ct, ED NY 2016)
Federal district court adopted report and recommendation of magistrate judge granting motion to dismiss in employment action for failure to raise a plausible claim that there was an employer-employee relationship
Bent v. Zounds Hearing Franchising, LLC, 2015 WL 7721838 (US Dist Ct, SD N 2015); 2016 WL 153092 (US Dist Ct, SD NY 2016)
Successfully obtained federal district court’s grant of motions to transfer venue based on a binding forum selection clause, and for remaining defendant in the interest of justice pursuant to federal law.
Wyly v. Weiss, 697 F.3d 131, 2012 WL 4800354 (2nd Cir 2012)
Federal court of appeals affirmed district court’s injunction against state court action legal for legal malpractice action, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and fraud directed at counsel in prior class action matter.