Joseph M. Tomaino Member New Jersey
Phone: 973.623.2700 Fax: 973.623.4496
View LinkedIn Profile

Clients value Joe’s ability to assess a case, posture it for early resolution, and, if necessary, use his well-developed skills as a litigator and trial attorney to achieve favorable results.  In representing clients for over 20 years, Joe has obtained defense verdicts in the face of high six-figure and seven-figure demands. He represents a broad range of clients encompassing: transportation; toxic tort; employment; construction; products liability; premises liability; and professional liability (representing engineers, insurance brokers, accountants, attorneys, nurses, home health aides, physical therapists, and orthotic & prosthetic practitioners). 

Examples of results for Joe's clients include:

  • Defense verdict for transportation company whose driver was accused of physically and verbally abusing autistic child and allegedly causing new behavioral problems.  Pre-trial demand exceeded $1 million dollars.
  • Defense verdict in favor of bus company and driver.  Plaintiff claimed traumatic brain injuries and sought monetary damages for pain and suffering, disablitity/impairment and loss of enjoyment of life, as well as $1.7 to $2.2 million in future economic losses.
  • Defense verdict for medical equipment company accused of negligence which allegedly caused multiple leg fractures requiring surgery.  Pre-trial demand was $750,000.
  • Award in employer’s favor following week-long American Arbitration Association hearing on liability in response to corporate officer’s claim of gender and national origin discrimination.  Lost wage claim, inclusive of bonuses and stock options, exceeded $2 million dollars.
  • Defense verdict in race discrimination case where plaintiff asserted claims for harassment and hostile work environment.  Similar claims by co-worker were dismissed via summary judgment.
  • In one of the first fully-virtual trials conducted in NJ, defense verdict in 2021 following an eight-day virtual trial in a premises liability case. Plaintiff’s fall allegedly caused permanent knee and back injuries.  She underwent two knee surgeries and sought to recover for future surgeries to her knee and back.  Cross-examination of plaintiff and her three expert witnesses revealed credibility issues and unrelated pre and post-accident limitations. Plaintiff's Offer of Judgment in advance of trial was $750,000.
  • Summary judgment dismissal of various claims in areas such as toxic tort, employment law, premises liability and professional liability.
  • Numerous favorable settlements, many before significant legal expenses were incurred and/or involving high exposure claims.

Prior to joining the Firm, Joe served as a law clerk for the Honorable Rudy B. Coleman, Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.

Representative Cases

Back to Joseph M. Tomaino Bio

Representative Cases

  • Transportation - Maher v. McKelvin et al.  Defense verdict in an action venued in Nassau County.  The rear-end impact totaled plaintiff's car and allegedly caused injuries to his back that would require surgery and kept him from returning to work.  Despite conceding liability, the defense challenged medical causation, the need for future surgery and the alleged inability to work.  Pre-trial demand was $750,000.

  • Premises - Defense verdict on liability after a four-day trial.  Plaintiff claimed that an excessively hot cast iron skillet was passed into her hand causing burn injuries which required surgery.  Utilized plaintiff’s prior sworn deposition testimony and medical records to show significant credibility issues.  Before trial, plaintiff made a six-figure demand.

  • Professional Liability - Following a four-day virtual arbitration, successfully obtained a finding of no liability as to our client. Claimants alleged that our client’s home inspection and report failed to disclose significant deficiencies.  As a result, they allegedly lost the opportunity to back out of the contract or, alternatively, that they suffered extensive repair/replacement damages.  Demonstrated through cross-examination that, claimants and their liability and damages witnesses lacked credibility and relied on inaccurate information to form their opinions.

  • Professional Liability - $65,000 verdict inclusive of interest when professional conceded calculation error, but challenged causation and damages.  Alleged trial damages exceeded $600,000.  Pre-trial demand was $300,000 and pre-trial offer was $125,000.

  • Employment - Muro v. The MITRE Corp. et al.  Dismissal of plaintiff's claims under New Jersey Law Against Discrimination and Conscientious Employee Protection Act.  Additionally, our client was awarded $150,000 in counsel fees and $118,000 for costs and forensic/electronic data expenses because the defense demonstrated that plaintiff had fraudulently modified electronic communications and intentionally deleted records.

  • Employment - In Saari v. The MITRE Corp. et al., the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed an action alleging unlawful termination and disability discrimination in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination and violations of the Family Medical Leave Act.  Plaintiff, who had been terminated as part of a reduction in force, had filed suit in state court against the corporation and two supervisors.  Removed the case to federal court and conducted e-discovery and depositions to posture the case for summary judgment.  Many of the undisputed material facts were established by defense counsel at plaintiff’s deposition.

  • Toxic Tort - In Mallozzi v. EcoSMART, 2013 WL 2415677 (E.D.N.Y.), obtained summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims that he had suffered permanent injuries and needed future medical treatment as a result of exposure to our client’s pest control product.  Successfully challenged the opinions of plaintiffs' occupational and environmental health expert pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm. Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1983).  As a result of the expert's opinions being deemed unreliable, plaintiff could not establish a causal connection between the alleged exposure and the claimed injuries.

  • Toxic Tort – Williams v. 3M Company, et al.  Dismissal via summary judgment of plaintiff’s asbestos complaint against our clients.  The court granted the motion pursuant to our request to bar the opinions of plaintiff’s expert as inadmissible net opinion.

Back to Joseph M. Tomaino Bio

Practice Areas


New Jersey, 1997
New York, 2011
U.S. District Court District of New Jersey
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York

Associations and Professional Activities

New Jersey Defense Association


J.D., Seton Hall University School of Law, Newark, New Jersey, 1997
Seton Hall Journal of Sports Law

B.A., Rowan University, 1993