About Jake Shooster

Jake M. Shooster is a dedicated litigator who advocates for individuals and families in cases involving personal injury, medical malpractice, wrongful death, products liability, and premises liability. Since joining the firm, he has been actively involved in all stages of litigation, including case investigation, discovery, motion practice, and trial preparation.

Before focusing on plaintiffs' personal injury and medical malpractice litigation, Shooster practiced at a prominent plaintiffs' firm concentrating on securities and shareholder disputes, gaining valuable experience in complex litigation that informs his strategic and detail-oriented approach.

During law school at Fordham University, he represented low-income workers in disputes with the IRS and New York State Department of Taxation and Finance through Fordham's Federal Tax Litigation Clinic and externed in the Public Corruption Bureau of the Queens County District Attorney's Office.

Proven verdicts and settlements at Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf

These results are credited to Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf. A result appears under an attorney's own name only when a published source names them as counsel on the case.

A 565-foot crawler crane toppled across a Tribeca street in 2016, killing a young mathematician; the case settled for $272.5 million.

New York County (Manhattan), NY · 2025Wrongful DeathRead the full story →

After a Westchester jury found Metro-North 71% at fault for the 2015 Valhalla grade-crossing disaster, a settlement exceeding $182 million resolved the claims of roughly 30 victims and their families.

Westchester County, NY · 2026Wrongful DeathRead the full story →

A Manhattan jury awarded $85 million to a writer and former New York Times columnist who was severely injured by a double-decker sightseeing bus while lawfully crossing the street.

New York County (Manhattan), NY · 2018Car AccidentsRead the full story →

On September 28, 2017, a Manhattan jury awarded Morgan Wang $71 million against Neil Sexton, the driver who fell asleep at the wheel on state Route 79 in August 2012 on the way to Cornell University. Wang, a passenger, suffered a fractured back and a spinal cord injury. The award was $5 million for past pain and suffering, $6 million for future pain and suffering and $60 million for future medical care.

New York Supreme Court, New York County (Manhattan) · 2017Car AccidentsRead the full story →
$60 millionVerdict

After a routine lumbar epidural steroid injection left a Long Island man permanently paralyzed, Gair Gair Conason won a $60 million verdict for the client of attorney Marijo C. Adimey. It is believed to be the largest medical-malpractice award in Nassau County history.

Nassau County, NY · 2025Medical MalpracticeRead the full story →

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts.

Practice areas

Education

Fordham University School of Law
J.D., 2023
University of Michigan
Undergraduate, 2020

Bar admissions & credentials

State Bar of New York
State Bar of New Jersey

Other attorneys at Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf

View firm →

Proven verdicts and settlements from other New York firms

Weitz & Luxenberg
Weitz & Luxenberg
$10.9 billion · Weitz and Luxenberg Helps Win $10.9 Billion Roundup Settlement for 125,000 Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Claimants
Levy Konigsberg LLP
Levy Konigsberg LLP
$43.1 Million Verdict Against R.J. Reynolds for Brake Mechanic's Lung Cancer From Menthol and Asbestos
Kramer Dillof Livingston & Moore
Kramer Dillof Livingston & Moore
$265 million · The Amtrak 188 Derailment and the $265 Million Fund for Its Victims
Jacoby & Meyers, LLP
Jacoby & Meyers, LLP
$34 million · Jury Awards $34 Million After Prempro Hormone Therapy Causes Breast Cancer and Double Mastectomy
Morelli Law Firm PLLC
Morelli Law Firm PLLC
$265 million · The Amtrak 188 Derailment and the $265 Million Fund for Its Victims

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts.