Katy Cummings is Senior Counsel in Tyson & Mendes’ Los Angeles office. Her practice focuses on general liability, including personal injury, premises liability, and products liability claims. She also has extensive experience in professional liability and insurance coverage.
Ms. Cummings has extensive litigation experience, including representing individuals and businesses in state courts throughout California. Ms. Cummings has experience with all aspects of civil litigation, including successfully drafting and arguing motions for summary judgment, including one successful motion which she defended on appeal, and which resulted in the published opinion Moore v. William Jessup University (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 427. Ms. Cummings also has specialized knowledge in defending judicial officers throughout California, including judges and commissioners, in ethics investigations before the Commission on Judicial Performance.
Ms. Cummings obtained her J.D. from American University’s Washington College of Law in 2008, where she served on the Administrative Law Review and participated in her school’s Clinic on Domestic Violence. She obtained her B.A. from New York University in 2003. Ms. Cummings also practiced law in Massachusetts for two years after law school before returning to her home state of California.
In her free time, Ms. Cummings enjoys spending time with her husband and family. She also enjoys live music, theater, travel, and yoga.
Imagine you are an insurance defense attorney handling primarily personal injury, general negligence, and premises liability cases, when a new case lands on your desk. At first glance, it appears just like any other case alleging general negligence and premises liability because plaintiff has injured himself on someone else’s property and has brought a suit to recover damages. You begin to work up the case as you would a hundred others which have crossed your desk and will in the future.
Anyone who has spent at least a year at a law school in the last century is familiar with the seminal 1928 New York case Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., in which the eminent judge (and later Supreme Court Justice) Benjamin Cardozo established the principle that tort liability can only occur when a defendant breaches a duty of care which the defendant owes to the plaintiff. In Palsgraf, the plaintiff was injured when a railroad worker helped a man carrying a package onto…
A recent high-profile case in Nevada is testing the rules regarding when a plaintiff seeking recovery for physical and emotional symptoms must undergo evaluations when requested by defendants, regardless of when those requests are made.
On December 16, 2019, Johnson & Johnson (“J & J”) prevailed at trial in Fong v. Johnson & Johnson in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. This victory was J & J’s latest in a series of lawsuits which alleged their baby powder products contain ingredients such as asbestos, resulting in the plaintiffs’ medical complaints, including fatal cancers. This is the third victory in a row for J & J in the high-profile…