Thomas M. Bona, P.C.

Attorneys At Law


Anthony M. Napoli


St. John's University School of Law, Jamaica, New York

       J.D., June 1988

Alvarez v. Wentworth Property Management and Meadow Glen at Monroe Condominium Associates


Tender of Defense Accepted 


Plaintiff fell on snow/ice on the driveway of one of the units within the Meadow Glen at Monroe Condominium Associates and sustained a left hip spiral fracture of the proximal third of the femur with subsequent ORIF. We tendered the defense and indemnification of Wentworth Property Management Corp. and Meadow Glen to the insurer of the snow removal company based upon the language in the snow removal agreement which also required the snow removal company to name our clients as additional insureds. After we commenced a DJ action, the snow removal company’s insurer agreed to pay fifty percent of all past and future legal fees.


Luxama v. New York City Transit Authority


Defendant’s Verdict at Trial


Plaintiff alleged that she fell on a Transit Authority bus and sustained a tear of the right knee with a sequential injury to the left knee, a bulge/herniation at L5-S1 and a cervical radiculopathy. Because the jury found that the movement of the bus away from the bus stop was not sudden, unusual or violent, it found that our client NYCTA was not negligent and returned a verdict in its favor.


Progressive v. Laruah Latchman (New York City Transit Authority)


Petition to Stay Arbitration Denied as to Proposed Respondent NYCTA


This matter arose from a two car accident that took place on February 5,

2007 in Manhattan when respondent Latchman was a passenger in a NYCTA bus, when it was struck by a hit-and-run vehicle. A liability lawsuit resulted in a defense verdict in favor of NYCTA. Following a Demand for Arbitration filed against Progressive Direct Insurance Company by Latchman to access the supplementary uninsured motorist benefits of her own policy, Progressive Direct filed a Petition to Stay Arbitration, which included an application to add NYCTA as an additional respondent. The Court agreed with our opposition that respondent Latchman failed to satisfy conditions precedent to coverage and dismissed the petition as to our client NYCTA.