Jessica Santacroce
Associate
-
-
Phone: +1 973 424 2052
- Duane Morris LLP
200 Campus Drive, Suite 300
Florham Park, NJ 07932-1007
USA
Jessica A. Santacroce practices in the firm’s Trial Practice Group. Ms. Santacroce is also a member of the firm’s Climate Change litigation team, and has experience handling complex, multi-district litigation.
Ms. Santacroce is a 2024 graduate of Seton Hall University School of Law and a cum laude graduate of Marist College.
Admissions
- New Jersey
- New York
- U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
Education
- Seton Hall University School of Law, J.D., 2024
- Marist College, B.A., 2021
Experience
- Duane Morris LLP
- Associate, 2024-present
Selected Publications
- Co-author, "How West Virginia's HB 2354 Will Impact the Food Industry," Duane Morris Alert, April 21, 2025
- Co-author, “Duane Morris Class Action Review – 2025”
- Co-author, "International Agency for Research on Cancer Identifies Automotive Gasoline as 'Carcinogenic to Humans'," Duane Morris Alert, April 3, 2025
- Co-author, "U.S. Surgeon General Advisory on Alcohol and Cancer Risks Prompts Legal and Regulatory Considerations for Industry," Duane Morris Alert, February 19, 2025
- Co-author, "FDA Revokes Red Dye No. 3 Authorization for Food, Drinks and Drugs - What Manufacturers Need to Know," Duane Morris Alert, January 30, 2025
Representative Matters
Pro bono representation of a survivor of intimate partner violence against her former partner seeking to compel the client to return their two children to a foreign country under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA). The court denied the petition for the return of the two minor children and found the petitioner failed to establish the client wrongfully removed the children in breach of right of custody the petitioner held under Norwegian law. The court concluded the petitioner lacked rights of custody over the younger child at the time of her removal, thus failing to establish a prima facie case for her return. Although the petitioner established a prima facie case for the older child’s return, the court determine that separating the siblings would pose a grave risk of psychological harm to both children. The case is currently on appeal in the Seventh Circuit.