Geoffrey H. Schotter

Attorney Profile

Top Rated Workers' Compensation Attorney in Brooklyn, NY

Law Office of Geoffrey Schotter
 | 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: 347-413-9014
Fax: 718-228-8696
Selected To Rising Stars: 2016 - 2020
Licensed Since: 2012
Practice Areas:
  • Workers' Compensation: Claimant (50%),
  • Social Security Disability (10%),
  • Employment Litigation: Plaintiff (10%),
  • Employment & Labor: Employee (10%),
  • Constitutional Law (10%),
  • Civil Rights (10%)
  • Free Consultation
Attorney Profile

Geoffrey H. Schotter is the principal of his own firm located in Brooklyn, New York. Focusing his practice primarily on workers' compensation law, he assists clients throughout the New York City area who are seeking to obtain benefits under their employer's insurance coverage for illnesses that they have developed on the job or for injuries they have sustained in workplace accidents. Mr. Schotter also helps clients with the Social Security Disability claims, and he provides representation to plaintiffs in employment law litigation.

In 2005, Mr. Schotter received a Bachelor of Arts in history and philosophy from Cornell University. After spending a year tutoring undergraduate students at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, he enrolled at Case Western Reserve University School of Law while at the same time pursuing a Master of Arts in history from CWRU School of Graduate Studies. Mr. Schotter received his master's degree as well as his Juris Doctor in 2011. While in law school, he served on both the Case Western Reserve Law Review and the Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet. He also spent several months as a research assistant for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. After graduation, Mr. Schotter worked as a postgraduate legal fellow at the ACLU national office in New York City and then as a law clerk at a Long Island labor and employment firm before opening his own practice in 2012.

Mr. Schotter is admitted to practice in New York as well as before the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York. He is a member of several legal organizations, including the Brooklyn Bar Association, the New York County Lawyers' Association and the National Employment Lawyers Association.

Practice Areas
  • 50%Workers' Compensation: Claimant
  • 10%Social Security Disability
  • 10%Employment Litigation: Plaintiff
  • 10%Employment & Labor: Employee
  • 10%Constitutional Law
  • 10%Civil Rights
Focus Areas

Employment Discrimination, Wrongful Termination, Retaliation, Employment Law - Employee, Sexual Harassment, Americans with Disabilities Act, Police Misconduct, Race Discrimination, Disability, Discrimination


top-imageSelected to Rising Stars for 5 years

Rising Stars: 2016 - 2020

Email Me

To: Geoffrey H. Schotter
Super Lawyers: Potential Client Inquiry

About Geoffrey Schotter

Admitted: 2012, New York

Professional Webpage:

Bar/Professional Activity:

  • United states District Court for the Northen District of New York , 2019
  • United Stated Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2019
  • United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2012
  • New York, 2012
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, 2012

Scholarly Lectures/Writings:

Other Outstanding Achievements:

  • Rodriguez v. City of New York, 172 A.D.3d 556, 101 N.Y.S.3d 303 (App. Div., 1st Dept. 2019). Petitioner's late notice of claim against City of New York Department of Correction for injuries from an assault by an inmate in a hospital prison ward was excused because an employee of the Departmenbt of Correction interviewed her on the date of the assault about her intention to sue and therefore had actual notice of her intent to sue within the statutory 90-day period and was not prejudiced by her delay in filing a notice of claim., 2019
  • Golovashchenko v. Asar Intl. Corp.,, 153 A.D.3d 1475, 60 N.Y.S.3d 722 (App. Div., 3d Dept., 2017). The Board erred by finding the claimant to have a permanent limitation to light duty work without that finding being supported by any medical opinion in the record, and by classifying the claimant with a 60 percent loss of wage earning capacity on the basis of that erroneous finding., 2017
  • Trusewicz v. Delta Environmental, 178 A.D.3d 1312, 116 N.Y.S.3d 422 (App. Div., 3d Dept. 2019). The Workers' Compensation Board erred in requiring the claimant to sign an open-ended HIPAA release, without limiting that release to treatment records pertaining to injuries he was actually claiming. , 2019
  • Chrostowski v. Pinnacle Environmental Corp., 169 A.D.3d 1217, 93 N.Y.S.3d 472 (App. Div., 3d Dept. 2019). Back and other musculoskeletal injuries sustained while participating in post-9/11 rescue, recovery, or cleanup are compensable under Article 8-A of of the Workers' Compensation Law and the loosened statute of limitations provisions of that Article therefore apply to claims for such injuries., 2019
  • Cox v. Saks Fifth Avenue, 130 A.D.3d 1236, 13 N.Y.S.3d 681 (App. Div., 3d Dept. 2015) As is the case with a number of other states, New York allows recovery for work-related stress if the claimant can show that the stress that caused the injury was greater than that which other similarly situated workers experienced in the normal work environment. A New York appellate court, reversing a decision by the sstate's Workers' Compensation Board, held a worker had established that he was under an unusual level of stress where he testified that during a promotional event for a manufacturer of high-priced luxury goods, he was directed by a supervisor to fabricate reserve orders in order to deceive the manufacturer and enhance the employer's inventory. One supervisor testified that claimant became upset during the promotional event and that the supervisor heard the employee tell another supervisor that he did not want to submit false orders. The WCLJ concluded that claimant sustained a mental injury as a result of 'the stress of being directed to engage in deceptive business practices' and that this stress was greater than that experienced in the normal work environment. The Board subsequently disallowed the claim, finding that, because all of the employees in claimant's department were pressured to place reserve orders and were given the same instruction, claimant's stress was not greater than that of similarly situated workers. The court held that the mere fact that other employees may have received the same instruction could not support a finding that the stress was not unusual; claimant testified that he would have been fired for such conduct in other upscale department stores where he previously had worked. The decision is available at:, 2015
  • Bowers v. New York City Transit Authority, 178 A.D.3d 1172, 115 N.Y.S.3d 159 (App. Div., 3d Dept.. 2019). Workers' compensation claimants cannot be directed to demonstrate a work search as a condition of continuing to receive benefits until either their own treating physicians or the Board determines that their disability is less than total., 2019

Educational Background:

  • Cornell University, B.A., 2005
Show More
Office Location for Geoffrey H. Schotter

300 Cadman Plaza West
12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201

Phone: 347-413-9014

Fax: 718-228-8696

Geoffrey H. Schotter:

Last Updated: 4/2/2020

Page Generated: 0.39240694046021 sec