Arthur concentrates his practice in the defense of complex professional liability matters with an emphasis on the defense of attorneys in legal malpractice matters as well as architects and engineers, directors, and officers. Arthur has also represented a large number of product manufacturers, designers, and distributors in products liability actions and has defended numerous restaurants, hotels, and businesses in premises liability claims involving allegations of serious and permanent injuries. He has successfully arbitrated approximately 100 cases in the Superior Court of New Jersey and Common Pleas Courts of Pennsylvania.
In 1990, Arthur graduated, cum laude, from St. Joseph's University. Following graduation, he attended Georgetown University Law Center and received his J.D. in 1993. He worked as a law clerk for the United States Department of Justice while he was a student at Georgetown. In addition Arthur went on to earn his LLM Degree in Trial Advocacy from Temple University in 1998. In 2009, Arthur received an AV 'Preeminent' Peer review rating from Martindale-Hubbell.
Significant Representative Matters
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a real estate closing attorney in a matter filed in Cape May County, New Jersey, involving the refinance of a marital home in connection with a divorce settlement. The plaintiff's claims of legal malpractice, misrepresentation, and detrimental reliance upon our client's advice and actions were successfully defeated.
Obtained summary judgment and successfully defended an appeal of the dismissal on behalf of a deputy surrogate of Mercer County, New Jersey. The trial court's decision was upheld, which granted summary judgment in connection with the administration of an estate involving properties worth several million dollars in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Obtained summary judgment for a well-known Camden County plaintiff's law firm which had been sued for legal malpractice by their former client because the underlying personal injury matter had been dismissed by the trial court. Summary judgment was granted since the plaintiff could not prove that the necessary doctor's report, setting forth the analysis to overcome the New Jersey verbal threshold statute, would have been unable to be obtained by the plaintiff in the underlying matter.
Obtained dismissal of a legal malpractice claim against a large, well-known plaintiff's firm in New Jersey in which the plaintiff was counseled by one of the two original defendant law firms concerning a workers' compensation claim for asbestosis. Subsequently, the first firm referred the matter to the other co-defendant firm for handling. Our client was asked to consult for a potential third party asbestos claim against the asbestos manufacturer. We successfully argued that the claim was referred to our client for review after the statute of limitations and, further, we argued that there was no attorney-client relationship with the plaintiff in the underlying matter, nor was there any duty owed to the referring law firm.
Obtained summary judgment in a legal malpractice action by successfully arguing that our client's actions in representing the plaintiff in connection with the appeal of his police sergeant's exam in Camden County, New Jersey, were not the proximate cause of the unsuccessful appeal. Although our client did not file an Appellate Brief within the time prescribed by the court, we successfully argued that the underlying sergeant's exam appeal would have been rejected by the Appellate Division even if the filing deadline had been met by the client.
Obtained dismissal of a dram shop, premises liability case by showing through deposition testimony that our client did not serve the plaintiff while visibly intoxicated.
Obtained summary judgment in a premises liability claim against a restaurant in southern New Jersey in which the plaintiff claimed to have fallen, sustaining knee injuries and an aggravation of an arthritic condition. The court granted summary judgment in the matter where the plaintiff admitted in depositions that she could not describe the area where she fell. Further, emergency room records showed that the plaintiff, in fact, went to the emergency room on the day before the subject accident.
