Our attorneys work hard to get the best possible results for our clients. Please review our recent litigation successes encompassing our four departments and 40 practice areas. You may search by keyword, practice area or year of result.
Marshall Dennehey’s appellate attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania Defense Institute and Pennsylvania Association of Defense Counsel in a case pending in the Pennsylvania Superior Court that involved interpretation of a “regular use” exclusion that commonly appears in underinsured motorist coverage in automobile policies. The Superior Court enforced the exclusion, as PDI and PADC had requested. The plaintiff regularly used a company vehicle for his daily work. But one or two days before the accident, the specific vehicle he had been driving was taken
We successfully defended a workers’ compensation case that was transferred from the insurance carrier’s staff counsel after litigation and motion practice. After a settlement offer in excess of $16 million was rejected, the case went to trial. At trial, we were able to prove that an uninsured subcontractor was hired by the general contractor, who was the actual employer of the injured worker. Under New Jersey Law, this means that the general contractor is responsible for the workers' compensation benefits for the petitioner.
The petitioner filed a motion for additional medical and temporary disability benefits, essentially alleging she was permanently and totally disabled from prior compensable shoulder and leg injuries. After a three-day trial and extensive briefing, the judge dismissed the motion. He determined that, despite the compensable injuries, the petitioner had plateaued medically and was not entitled to any further benefits.
We obtained a defense verdict after a one-week trial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The case involved alleged race, gender and/or “intersectional” (race and gender) discrimination claims by two women against a Philadelphia area school district.
The plaintiff’s wife reported to police that the plaintiff tried to kill her by firing a shotgun at her while she slept. Following a thorough investigation and witness interviews, police arrested the plaintiff and charged him with attempted murder. The next day, the wife recanted her story and told police that she was the one who fired a shotgun in the couple’s home in an effort to frame her husband for attempted murder. Police immediately had the plaintiff released from prison. The wife was later charged with, and pleaded guilty to, making false statements to authorities.
The condo association brought suit against its former property manager, alleging 23 theories of wrongdoing and claiming over $1.5 million in damages. Early mediation was unsuccessful, due in large part to a six-figure claim for attorney’s fees. Preliminary objections were filed on the basis that property management services provided to a condominium association are not “primarily for personal, family or household purposes,” as required for a UTP claim.
Marshall Dennehey successfully argued pre-trial motions to dismiss in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County in a matter involving a $10 million tortious interference and defamation case filed on behalf of investors against an attorney and bank counsel arising out of a multi-million dollar loan for a commercial land transaction. The allegations against the attorney included slander and a claim for tortious interference, with prospective economic advantage for a contract that the plaintiff entered into with the investor.
The plaintiff was named as a defendant in a debt collection action for failing to pay her attorney’s legal bills. Judgment was entered against her but never fully enforced. More than five years later, our client filed a Praecipe to Issue Writ of Revival and then mistakenly filed a Praecipe for Writ of Execution before the judgment was revived by the court.
We successfully obtained an appraisal award in favor of a national insurer. The plaintiff, a roofing company, filed suit in state court seeking damages under an assignment of benefits. It sued to replace the roof, claiming it was damaged as a result of Hurricane Irma. Based upon its investigation, the defendant issued a denial of the plaintiff’s claim on the basis that the roof was not damaged by the hurricane. The plaintiff retained a general contractor as its expert to write a report and to create an estimate totaling $86,000.
We successfully obtained a withdrawal of claims against a national insurance company based on lack of jurisdiction. The claim involved a demand for reimbursement to a claimant-medical provider for a multitude of pain management procedures rendered to our insured following a motor vehicle accident. The insurer’s policy was issued in Delaware to our Delaware resident-insured, and the motor vehicle accident took place in Pennsylvania. The only connection to New Jersey was the location of the treatment in dispute.