Cecil Floyd, a Partner in Russo & Gould's New York City and Hartford, CT offices, has more than 35 years of trial and litigation experience. Cecil's practice focuses on the defense of general liability matters including construction site accidents/Labor Law, premises liability, commercial transportation, automobile, Dram Shop claims, wrongful death, product liability, construction defects and property damage, as well as medical malpractice actions. He has represented a broad range of clients including construction companies, property owners and managers, restaurants, trucking companies, product manufacturers, gas stations, bus companies, utilities and small businesses.
Over his career, Cecil has taken dozens of high exposure cases to verdict on behalf of numerous major liability and casualty insurance carriers and has a substantial record of obtaining defense verdicts. More recently, a significant part of his work has included matters involving biomechanical analysis of injury causation. His published opinion, Shah v. Rahman, 167 A.D.3d 671 (2nd Dept. 2018) is frequently cited favorably in cases involving the admissibility of biomechanical testimony at trial and is referenced in the National Law Foundation's CLE materials on "Expert Witnesses in New York." Prior to joining Russo & Gould, Cecil served as a senior trial attorney for Nationwide and Scottsdale Insurance Companies, handling complex commercial cases from inception through verdict.
Cecil is a member of the New York State Bar Association and Defense Association of New York. In his spare time, he enjoys playing tennis and billiards. His favorite pastime is playing jazz, blues and classical guitar. He earned his Juris Doctor degree from the American University, Washington College of Law, and his Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy from Colby College.
On January 9, 2023, Marie Castronuovo''s motion for summary judgment was granted on behalf of our client in the case of Laura Marks v. Lessings, Inc. This case involved a plaintiff who fell down exterior steps at Whitby Castle, claiming the steps were visually confusing. To establish that the steps were not visually confusing Ms Castronuovo presented the Court with the photos of the steps marked at plaintiff''s deposition which depicted various shades of gray on each step, and a darker landing as well as a white framed threshold. She also argued that plaintiff''s expert failed to identify a Building Code violation and admitted that the steps were well lit. Plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that the steps were an optical illusion and required a mid-handrail. This was rebutted by Ms. Castronuovo who argued that plaintiff''s expert''s opinion only provided suggestions for making the steps safer and did not identify any Building Code requiring a mid-handrail. She further cited to plaintiff''s testimony that she was looking straight ahead as she exited the building, instead of down at the staircase.
On January 3, 2023, Marie Castronuovo''s motion for summary judgment was granted on behalf of our clients in the case of Brian Crosby v. AJA Turnpike et al. Ms. Castronuovo moved for a dismissal of plaintiff''s Labor Law 200, 240 and 241 claims against various Sonic entities. Plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that there was an agency relationship between the Sonic entities and the owner of the property and the general contractor on the job. Judge Frank Nervo agreed with Ms. Castronuovo''s argument that no agency relationship existed and that the Sonic entities were not subject to the Labor Law.
25 Years and Counting - Reflecting on a Wonderful Anniversary Year What a fantastic 25th year we had at Russo & Gould! Thank you to our clients and friends for your continued support these 25 years. We enjoyed a busy year; below are some highlights that we wanted to share.