Representing the plaintiff’s employer as a third-party defendant in Sookdeo v. Richie Roma Home Improvement Corp., et al. in Kings County Supreme Court, Drolet used effective questioning and CCTV evidence to get the plaintiff to acknowledge that no accident took place.

​

At his deposition the plaintiff alleged that he was injured on a construction site when a ramp collapsed and that the accident occurred at a particular time. CCTV footage showed the plaintiff working at that particular time and the plaintiff is shown to experience a small stumble.

​

The plaintiff eventually admitted that the purported accident was actually the small stumble shown in the video, meaning there was no accident. The plaintiff then changed his testimony claiming that the accident was not shown on the video and that it must have occurred outside of the originally alleged time-frame shown in the footage.

​

Drolet's skilled deposition preparation and questioning backed the plaintiff into a corner resulting in contradictory testimony about a fundamental aspect of the case. As a result the plaintiff discontinued the entire action with prejudice.