Daniel "Dan" received a J.D. from University of California, Davis School of Law in 1992, after a previous career as a social worker. At UC Davis he was the only member of his class to be named both a Law Review Editor and a Moot Court Judge.
Dan Schiavetta has been defending nursing homes for twenty years, both supervising other attorneys and directly acting as defense counsel in hundreds of cases. He has met with Administrators, Directors of Nursing, and countless R.N.'s, L.P.N.'s and CNA's. At the request of risk managers he has given seminars on "Defensive Charting" at dozens of nursing homes in New York and New Jersey. Due to his reputation for close attention to nursing home issues he has been invited to represent nursing homes in regulatory matters before the Department of Health and the Attorney General.
Dan has a great deal of experience in appellate and insurance coverage litigation. He has prosecuted rescission, declaratory judgment and interpleader actions in state and federal court on behalf of various insurers, and has tried cases involving medical malpractice and premises liability.
Dan gives presentations to nursing homes as to charting and litigation issues and is responsible for two changes in case law which have benefited his clients, Springstead v. Ciba-Geigy, 27 A.D.3d 720 (2nd Dept. 2006) (allowing recovery of costs in pursing third party actions), and Randi A.J. v. Long Island Surgi-Center, 46 A.D.3d 74 (2nd Dept. 2007) (requiring "clear and convincing" evidence for punitive damages).
Dan Schiavetta is speaking at a National Business Institute webinar on June 24 about litigating personal injury cases in federal court. At Russo & Gould, Dan focuses on nursing home and adult residential facility defense, and has wide experience in appellate and insurance coverage litigation.
Representing nurses is different from representing doctors. Doctors implement orders and nurses follow them, so their mindset is different. Doctors are more likely to have their own insurance policies, and because some require the doctor''s consent to settle, medical malpractice cases are more likely to go to trial. Nurses on the other hand are less likely to be familiar with, and more apprehensive about, being the subject of litigation since they are but one employee among many on the same nursing home policy.
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.