Gash & Associates, P.C. Attorneys at Law

Our Contact:
866-GASHLAW (427-4529)
235 Main Street
White Plains, NY 10601

Gash & Associates, P.C.

Gash & Associates, P.C., is a full service litigation firm, established in 1989, which maintains offices in White Plains, New York, in Edison, New Jersey and in Greenwich, Connecticut. We provide exceptional legal representation in all areas of litigation, including personal injury, matrimonial, family law, civil rights, commercial, employment and criminal matters.

We love what we do. We are passionate about our clients, which gets us up earlier and to bed late, since we are constantly working to add value to our clients’ matters. Some have referred to us as the “lawyer’s lawyer.” Indeed, many of our clients are lawyers and many lawyers refer their clients to us because of their confidence in us. We value such referrals, because it is a reaffirmation from our colleagues of the quality of our work.

In the personal injury field, it is not uncommon for well known and highly regarded physicians to suggest to their patients, who are seeking legal representation, to consider our firm, because those doctors know first hand of our reputation and of how hard we fight for our clients.

This passion manifests itself in the dedication we bring to our clients and to their cases. Gash & Associates is associated with some of the most distinguished attorneys in the tri-state area, whom you will see listed on our “The Firm” page, to which we invite you to navigate. These associations contribute to our verdicts and settlements, with outcomes which well exceed the values for similar cases in the same venue. As one of our colleagues commented: “Gash & Associates have the unique ability of making a good case great-that is their incredible talent.” Some of our verdicts and settlements, which you will find listed on the “Verdicts” page of this site, bear eloquent witness to our accomplishments, and we encourage you to review them.

Our goal is to provide the highest level of legal representation to every one of our clients. Because we work so tirelessly with our clients in designing the best possible outcome for their case, we tend to view our clients as part of our extended family, and care about their matters as we would for someone close and dear to us. The client has chosen us to champion his or her case; we value and treasure that trust. The client is not a file, nor a case number, but a real person or family, who cry out for us to help make him, her or them whole. We treasure that entrustment. That‘s the “Personal” part of our personal injury practice.

What sets us apart from other firms is that we do not simply process a large volume of cases. Those types of firms are more content to settle cases and move them, rather than to consider what is right for the client. We reject that philosophy and this rejection is reflected in our approach to our cases. Instead, we intentionally limit the number of cases so that each of our clients receives the proper attention that he or she deserves. This permits us to aggressively pursue your case from beginning to end. Opposing law firms, insurance companies, and municipalities, including the Cities of New York and Yonkers as well as the United States Government, know us to be hardworking and aggressive adversaries, as we have a well-deserved reputation for zealously fighting for our clients’ rights. This often results in cases settling quickly. However, if a settlement offer is not reasonable, we have no hesitation to take your case to trial.


  • Monahan v. Reynolds
    Auto Accident Case
    Plaintiff’s car was hit in the rear on Rt. 287. No offer was made. Jury verdict of $103,333.
  • Bouldin v. Sound Shore Medical Center
    Medical Malpractice Case
    Plaintiff was pregnant with her third child and discussed with her doctor a tubal ligation after the birth of the child. Unfortunately, after repeat ultrasounds the fetus was diagnosed with an almost always fetal renal anomaly. The child was born and died two days later. Despite this, the doctor, without permission, performed the tubal ligation.
  • O’Neill v. Garcia
    Auto Accident Case
    Plaintiff’s vehicle was side-swiped by the defendant in a parking lot. At the time of trial, O’Neill was 28 years old. The defendant contended that O’Neill did not sustain a “serious injury” under the law; that all of her injuries were short lived and resolved within weeks after the accident. After trial the jury awarded the plaintiff $350,000.
  • Salant v. Grubman
    Auto Accident Case
    Ms. Salant, and thirteen other young ladies, were struck by the defendant, Lizzie Grubman, when she recklessly backed up her Mercedes SUV in the infamous case that garnered national attention. These cases were settled for substantial sums before trial with the stipulation that the specific amounts not be disclosed.
  • Toriello v. Jeraci Food Distributors
    Auto Accident Case
    Plaintiff making left hand turn was struck by defendant’s van which ran a stop sign. The case settled prior to trial for $175,000.
  • Dipippo v. New York Orthopedics
    Medical Malpractice Case
    In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff had a workplace accident in which he fractured both the first and second toe of his left foot. the defendant doctor failed to appropriately diagnose the severity of the fracture and indicated that the fracture could be successfully healed with non-surgical treatment.
  • Femia v. St. John’s Riverside Hospital
    Medical Malpractice Case
    Plaintiff died from systemic infection in hopital after routine hernia repair. Case settled for $300,000 on eve of settlement.
  • Mezzetta v. Northern Westchester Medical Center
    Medical Malpractice Case
    The defendant, a Board Certified neurosurgeon, diagnosed the plaintiff with Chari I malformation. This is a genetic malformation of the bones in the back of the brain, which results in increased intra-cranial pressure and related symptoms. As a result of this diagnosis, he persuaded the plaintiff to undergo neurosurgery of the brain.
  • Paruolo v. Northern Westchester Medical Center
    Medical Malpractice Case
    Plaintiff suffered third degree burns to his elbow during surgery due to a defective operating room light. The defendant took a no-pay position. Jury verdict was $325,000. Plaintiff appealed and the Appellate Division raised the recovery to $450,000.
  • Asheeka Allison Carty v. Montefiore Medical Center, et al.
    Medical Malpractice Case
    While a patient in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) of defendant Montefiore Medical Center, when the defendants infused 27 cc. of fluid into the left hand of the infant plaintiff. As a consequence, Asheeka had extensive scarring of her wrist. The matter was settled before trial, with a confidentiality agreement regarding the amount.
  • William Rosario v. The NYC School Construction Authority, the City of New York and Skanska USA Building, Inc.
    Labor Law Case
    Construction worker’s fell about 10 feet to the ground, resulting in tears to the lateral and medial meniscus, arthroscopic surgery, the development of avascular necrosis and a knee replacement. Rosario alleged that the defendants violated the New York State Labor Law in that they failed to provide him with a safe place to work.
  • Martos v. Goldoff
    Auto Accident Case
    Plaintiff‘s vehicle was struck in intersection by 14 year old driver of defendant’s car. Defendant claimed that his son was driving the family Lexus without his permission or consent. We proved that the family knew that the underage driver was doing so since he was 11 years old. After a verdict on liability, the jury awarded a verdict of $195,000.
  • Abrams v. Baltic Estates
    Slip, Trip and Fall Case
    Plaintiff slipped on a ribbon of black ice on defendant’s parking lot. The plaintiff suffered a tear of the non-dominant shoulder’s rotator cuff. The matter settled for a substantial sum, but the client has requested that the amount not be disclosed.
  • Flaherty v. American Turners of New York
    Slip, Trip and Fall Case
    Plaintiff trip and fell due to accumulated ice at a social club owned and operated by the defendant. Plaintiff suffered chip fractures to the knee requiring total knee replacement. The defendant offered $35,000 during trial. After two weeks of trial the jury returned a verdict in the amount of $210,000.
  • Jose Carrero v. PMD Properties LLC and Nicola Dedaj / Nicola Dedaj v. Osvaldo Mercado, Bronx County Supreme Court.
    Premises Liability Case
    Plaintiff sustained a comminuted fracture of the distal radius of his wrist and ulna, which required open reduction, internal fixation, a plate and screws and resulted in post traumatic arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome and neuropathy when he slipped, tripped and fell on an ice covered parking lot. After trial the jury awarded $1,649,000.
  • Mervin v. Voeller
    Products Liability Case
    Case involved a defective design of a cement mixer, which lacked a “kill switch.” The plaintiff was unable to turn it off when he became caught in the mechanism. Plaintiff suffered crush injuries to both legs. Case settled during trial for $1,500,000.
  • Kerzic and Fulford v. Holiday Inn
    Premises Liability Case
    Plaintiff was severely burned while attending a Bahamian Culture Show in the Bahamas. The case was brought in the Federal Court in New Jersey, where it settled prior to trial for $1,500,000.
  • Ramos v. City of New York
    Slip, Trip and Fall Case
    Plaintiff slipped and fell on water caused by a leaking water fountain in the Bronx County Housing Court. The defendants took a “no-pay” position until half-way through the trial, when the case settled for $350,000.
  • Vasquez v. The City of New York
    Slip, Trip and Fall Case
    Plaintiff slipped, tripped and fell over a defective sidewalk on E. 170th Street in the Bronx. He suffered a fracture of his right tibia and fibula requiring surgery. After a trial, the jury returned a verdict of $1,200,000.
  • Rodriguez v. LAM Medical Associates, P.C., et. al.
    Medical Malpractice Case
    One year prior to the surgery complained of in this lawsuit, the plaintiff was diagnosed with a ganglion cyst, for which there was no surgery, nor was there any medical intervention of any kind. A year later, without any medical work-up, plaintiff presented with an identical ganglion cyst.