Brian Dworetzky is an associate at Walsworth who focuses his practice on general liability matters. He is experienced in all aspects of pre-trial litigation, including case management, discovery, law and motion, and trial preparation.
Before joining Walsworth, Brian gained significant experience defending municipal entities in employment discrimination lawsuits, and healthcare professionals in medical malpractice actions. His experience included preparing responsive pleadings and motions for summary judgment, propounding and responding to discovery, taking and defending depositions, consulting with experts, and preparing confidential settlement agreements. He also previously served as a litigation support and e-discovery attorney for several AmLaw 100 firms, where he assisted in writing briefs, and preparing for depositions and trials.
- Plaintiff v. Dentist – Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a dentist client in a medical malpractice/negligence case. The plaintiff alleged that the client left foreign objects inside her mouth during dental surgery. However, a defense expert was able to establish that nothing the defendant did to plaintiff would have resulted in any of the injuries claimed. Additionally, based on medical imaging and notes of multiple medical providers, it was shown that the defendant could not have left any foreign objects inside plaintiff’s mouth.
- Plaintiff v. Surgeon – Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a general surgeon in a case alleging medical malpractice as a result of negligent medical care and treatment. The plaintiff alleged that the client failed to effectively treat and resolve his appendicitis. However, the defense was able to show that the client treated the plaintiff appropriately and complied with the standard of care. Additionally, since the plaintiff could not establish medical negligence, his wife’s pending claim for loss of consortium also failed.
- Successfully obtained a court order sustaining the clients’ demurrer to plaintiffs’ second amended complaint without leave to amend, which served to bar plaintiffs from proceeding with their claims, in a habitability case alleging injuries from exposure to mold in a condominium. Our client demurred based on the statute of limitations, and the court ultimately determined the complaint was barred because plaintiffs failed to investigate or act with due diligence to timely discover the cause of their injuries within the applicable statute of limitations.