Annette G. Hasapidis

Counsel

Ms. Hasapidis is Of Counsel to the Firm and resident in our Ridgefield, Connecticut office.  Ms. Hasapidis is an Appellate Attorney, practicing before both State and Federal Appellate Courts in numerous areas of law including matrimonial and family law, medical malpractice, personal injury and employment law.  She has appeared in more than 310 reported cases. 

Prior to joining the Firm, Annette was an Assistant District Attorney, Kings County, 1991-1995; Assistant Attorney, Westchester County, 1995-1996; Lester Schwab Katz and Dwyer, 1996-1999; and private practice.

Education 

  • Brooklyn Law School, J.D., 1991
  • New York University, B.S., 1987 

Bar Admissions 

  • New York
  • Connecticut
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
  • U.S. Supreme Court 

Memberships

  • Fellow, Litigation Counsel of America
  • American Institute of Appellate Advocacy, Certified Appellate Specialist 
  • Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York, 2004 – Present; Officer, 2012-2014; Co-Chair Legislation Committee, 2008 – 2012; Co-Chair Judiciary Committee, 2006 – 2008
  • New York State Trial Lawyers Association, 2010 – Present; Executive Board, 2011 – Present; Co-Chair, Amicus Committee, 2011 - Present
  • New York State Bar Association, Member, 1999 – Present; Committee on Courts of Appellate Jurisdiction, Member, 2011 - Present
  • Westchester County Women’s Bar Association, 1999 – Present; Vice President, 2011 – 2012; Recording Secretary, 2010 – 2011; Chair, Appellate Practice Committee, 2007 – 2011
  • Westchester County Bar Association, Member, 1999 – Present
  • Pace University School of Law's Women's Justice Center's "The Friends of Gail," Executive Board Member, 2007 – Present
  • Northern Westchester Bar Association, 2007 – Present
  • Dutchess County Bar Association, 2007 – Present
  • White Plains Bar Association, 2009 – Present
  • Rotary International, 2015
  • Ridgefield Chamber of Commerce, Chair, 2014-2015

Professional Recognition and Community Involvement

  • AV® rated by Martindale-Hubbell’s Law Directory
  • New York Metro Super Lawyers, 2016

Representative Cases

  • In Weiss v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co., 98 AD3d 1107 (2d Dep’t 2016), the Second Department reversed its earlier precedent and held that SUM insurance coverage should not be offset by payments from a non-motor vehicle bodily injury insurance policy.
  • In Palydowycz v Palydowycz, 138 AD3d 810 (2d Dep’t 2016), the Appellate Division, Second Department, held that the husband’s medical practices hold a value, distinct from the income stream that the medical practices generated. As a result, the wife was entitled to maintenance based on the income stream from the practices in addition to a share of the value of the medical practices themselves. This ruling constituted a departure from the Second Department’s earlier decisions on this issue.
  • In Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership, 22 N.Y.3d 246 (2013), Ms. Hasapidis represented a worker who was injured when a sheet of plywood fell from a 50-story-high construction site and struck him on the head as he walked down a New York City street.  On February 14, 2013, the Court of Appeals, for the first time, granted collateral estoppel effect to Decisions of the workers’ compensation board in third-party actions regarding disability issues. The Decision jeopardized the right to a jury trial on those issues and would have a serious impact on the ability of injured workers to seek justice through the court system, while also undermining the workers’ compensation system.  Ms. Hasapidis requested that the Court of Appeals grant reargument of its Decision and Order, which is rarely granted. Yet, the Court granted reargument and, after a second round of briefing and oral argument, the Court unanimously vacated the earlier Decision, and held that a determination of the workers’ compensation board as to duration of disability could not be granted preclusive effect.
  • Perl v. Meher, 2011 WL 5838721 (2011) (holding, inter alia, that in a threshold personal injury case, a plaintiff is not required to proffer “contemporaneous” numerical measurements of range of motion in order to defeat summary judgment).
  • Natiello v. Carrion, 73 A.D.3d 1070 (2d Dep’t 2010) (annulling determination that mother failed to provide adequate supervision of her 16 year old autistic son and had committed educational neglect of her other emotionally disturbed son).
  • Verdugo v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. Partnership, 70 A.D.3d 600 (1st Dep’t 2010) (dismissing the "act of God" affirmative defense, and determining that the existence of 30 mph winds, which caused plywood to become airborne and strike Plaintiff in the head, was not an "unusual, extraordinary and unprecedented event").
  • Valdez ex rel. Donely v. U.S., 518 F.3d. 173 (2d Cir. 2008) (reinstating a plaintiffs’ medical malpractice action as timely based upon federal accrual and equitable estoppel rules).
  • Ellis v. Chao, 336 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 2003) (finding that candidate for a union election raised a question of fact whether the Secretary of Labor’s decision not to sue to set aside a union election was arbitrary and capricious).
  • Galanos v. Galanos, 20 A.D.3d 450 (2d Dep’t 2005) (disqualifying the husband’s counsel in a matrimonial action who had represented the wife’s father in prior proceedings; the first case in New York to find that a father and child’s finances were so inextricably intertwined as to justify disqualification).
  • Massimi v. Massimi, 35 A.D.3d 400 (2d Dep’t 2006) (ruling that the husband had commingled marital and separate property, thereby entitling the wife to a distributive award of that property).
  • Xiao Yang Chen v. Fischer, 6 N.Y.3d 94 (2005) (as amicus curiae counsel for the Women’s Bar of the State of New York) (ruling that joinder of tort claims in a matrimonial action is permissive, not mandatory).