Erik A. Goergen

My focus

I focus my practice in the areas of complex commercial litigation and litigation concerning aviation, product liability, health care, employee benefits and commercial real estate, drawing upon my background as a judicial law clerk at both the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the New York State Court of Appeals.

I also represent companies and individuals in critical investigative and compliance matters involving federal and state government enforcement authorities.

Representative experience

• Alfred-Almond Central School District, et al. v. NY44 Health Benefits Plan Trust, et al., Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department. Secured an appellate win for client NY44 Health Benefits Plan Trust and its Board of Trustees in litigation brought by 15 school districts across New York State. The Appellate Division affirmed an order granting our clients’ partial motion to dismiss and dismissed as moot the plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment claim.
• McCaleb v. Daher-Socata et al., Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Broward County. Secured a unanimous defense verdict for French aircraft company Daher-Socata Aerospace in a case that was featured as #4 in CVN’s Top 10 Most Impressive Defense Verdicts of 2018. After a three-week trial, the jury agreed that pilot error caused the crash of a single-engine TBM 850 and that the aircraft is safe and free of any defect.
• Prosthetic Home Services v. Fidelis Care, 154 A.D.3d 1283 (4th Dept. 2017). Secured an affirmance on appeal of the dismissal of a complaint against Fidelis Care, a New York State–sponsored health insurance provider, for fraud, breach of contract and prima facie tort.
• Wells Fargo Bank Northwest N.A. v. Airbus Helicopters Inc. et al., Texas District Court, Dallas County.  Representation of Airbus Helicopters in a complex commercial case that was favorably resolved immediately before the commencement of trial.
• Representation of Xerox Corporation in an arbitration involving claims alleging damages in excess of $200 million for breach of contract, unfair competition and misuse of confidential information asserted by a large group of various agents and dealers of Xerox products.
• Representation of Xerox Corporation in three separate lawsuits and a subsequent arbitration commenced by a former Xerox sales agent. Successfully dismissed or stayed each action pending arbitration.
• Varrenti v. Gannett Co., Inc., 33 Misc. 3d 405 (Sup. Ct. Monroe Cty. 2011). Representation of Gannett Company in case holding that anonymous internet speech was protected by the First Amendment; newspaper not required to disclose the identities of anonymous posters to online news articles.
• National Organization of Veterans’ Advocates, Inc. v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Case Nos. 2010-7136, 7139, 7142. Pro bono representation of veterans’ rights group challenging VA Secretary’s rule permitting only VA-employed (or contracted) psychiatrists and psychologists to determine, in a certain class of cases, whether the veteran’s diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder was incurred in military service (excluding all equally or better qualified doctors in private practice).
• Matter of Davis v. Carballada, 31 Misc. 3d 728 (Sup. Ct. Monroe Cty. 2011). Representation of the City of Rochester in two lawsuits challenging the authority of the former acting mayor to execute mayoral duties and the City Council’s decision to hold a special election to fill the mayoral vacancy.
• Matter of Brown v. Egriu, 76 A.D.3d 799 (4th Dept. 2010), lv denied 15 N.Y.3d 704 (2010). Representation of voter in New York’s 28th Congressional District challenging the validity of the designating petition of Congresswoman Louise Slaughter’s Democratic Party primary opponent.
• Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation, 131 S. Ct. 704 (2011).  U.S. Supreme Court vacated circuit court decision preventing defendant-counties from using tax foreclosure to collect lawfully owed property taxes from Indian tribe and remanded for further proceedings.
• Madison County v. State of New York, et al., v. Salazar, 6:08-CV-00644 (NDNY). Representation of Madison and Oneida Counties in challenge to the Department of Interior’s decision to acquire land-into-trust for the Oneida Indian Nation of New York.
• Stockbridge-Munsee Community v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York and State of New York, et al., 86-cv-1140 (NDNY).  Representation of Madison and Oneida Counties in Stockbridge-Munsee Community land claim action.

Insights

Erik Goergen is an author and editor for the Defense Research Institute’s Appellate Advocacy Committee Newsletter, Certworthy.

• “Appellate Jurisdiction—Final Judgements,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 19, Issue 1, June 2018.
• “Appellate Jurisdiction—Timeliness of Interlocutory Appeal,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 18, Issue 2, December 2017.
• “Appellate Jurisdiction—No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Enforcement of Permanent Anti-Suit Injunction,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 18, Issue 1, July 2017.
• “Appellate Jurisdiction—Consent to Magistrate Jurisdiction in Attorneys’ Fees Dispute,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 17, Issue 2, November 2016.  
• “Appellate Jurisdiction—Finality of Order Enforcing an Information Subpoena,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 17, Issue 1, April 2016.   
• Co-Author, “Appellate Procedure/Jurisdiction—Interlocutory Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction,” Certworthy Newsletter, Defense Research Institute, Vol. 16, Issue 2, September 2015 (Co-author).