Kathleen S. Murphy focuses her
practice on Litigation and
Labor and Employment Law. Ms. Murphy
has tried more than seventy-five
jury verdict trials. Her extensive
trial experiences involve defense of
enumerable automobile negligence
claims, product liability trials,
environmental claims, and employment
discrimination claims. Ms. Murphy
has broad expertise in the Appellate
Court, having argued dozens of cases
relating to evidential and
substantive issues. She is also
skilled in the Supreme Court, and in
2007 she argued a case which
determined an issue of admissibility
of evidence that had long divided
the Appellate Courts and is now
cited regularly.
The
Supreme Court of New Jersey, Board
of Trial Attorney Certification has
designated Ms. Murphy a Certified
Civil Trial Attorney.
She is a member of the
Fellows of the American Bar
Foundation, a prestigious
organization that requires elected
membership; she was nominated and
elected in 2001. She has also been a
member
of the Supreme Court Advisory
Committee since 2004. Ms. Murphy is
a member of The American Board of
Trial Advocates (ABOTA), a national
organization in which election for
membership is required by the voting
members. She was elected for
membership in 1992, was elected
Treasurer of the North Jersey
chapter from 1997-1998, and served
as elected president from 1999-2000.
In 1998, Ms. Murphy
received the Civil
Trial Attorney Achievement Award
from the Essex County Bar
Association.
Ms. Murphy was Law Secretary to Hon.
Robert A. Matthews, New Jersey
Superior Court, Appellate Division,
from 1977 to 1978. She was a Member
of the Supreme Court of New Jersey
Ethics Committee from 1986 to 1990,
a Barrister in the Essex County Inns
of Court from 1987 to 1988, and
Master in that Inn from 1988 to
1990. Ms. Murphy was a Member of the
Judicial Appointments Committee from
1987 to 1990 and the Judicial
Evaluation Committee from 1989 to
1990.
Lunsford v. Vizcaino v. NJM,
392 N.J. Super. 366, 920 A.2d 754 (2007)
in which the Appellate Division
clarified the insurance carrier’s
obligation to defend an intentional act
when alternatively pled with negligence,
with a favorable result for the
insurance carrier.
•
Brenman v. DeMello,
191 N.J. 18, 921 A.2d 1110 (2007) in
which the Supreme Court made a
conclusive determination of the
admissibility of photographs without
need for expert testimony, reversing a
contrary finding.
•
Argent v. Brady v. NJM,
386 N.J. Super. 343, 901 A.2d 419
((2006) an insurance coverage case
wherein the Appellate Division defined
the business pursuits exclusion
favorably to the insurance industry.