Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

Automobile Liability

Serving our clients' needs in the automobile field is one of the oldest practice areas at Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin. Our attorneys have a wide range of experience in this dynamic field, and they assist our clients in remaining current with applicable case law updates. From the inception of our firm, we have serviced the insurance industry by both representing its insureds in third party cases as well as the carriers directly in first party and PIP matters.

Specifically, in each of our firm's offices throughout Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Ohio, Florida and New York, our automobile liability defense attorneys are adept at representing insureds in third party work, and carriers in UM/UIM and PIP work.

Robert E. Smith, Esq. of our Scranton, Pennsylvania office heads our Pennsylvania UM/UIM subsection and practices solely in this field. Mr. Smith is not only knowledgeable about UM/UIM law, he also is intimately familiar with the protocols and nuances of each county's local procedures and practices, factors that can have a substantial impact on the final result of a claim. 

In addition, the Automobile Liability Practice Group works closely with members of the firm's Coverage/Bad Faith, Fraud and Warranty Practice Groups as these three areas have a substantial amount of overlap. James H. Cole, Esq. of our Doylestown, Pennsylvania office heads our Special Investigation Group and is a valuable resource for our attorneys handling PIP, third party and UM/UIM claims. 

The Automobile Liability Practice Group also is well experienced and established in third party auto liability cases, including the specific nuances with limited insurance policies and joint and several liability. James Hilly, Esq. of our Philadelphia office, heads our Trucking and Transportation Group and has focused his practice in the representation of self-insured and insurers in complex tort and insurance coverage litigation involving various common carriers and private transportation fleets, such as interstate trucking, railroads, waste haulers, taxicabs, shuttle and bus operators, rental vehicle fleets, Para transit and ambulance services. 

We are aware of today's focus on securing sound legal services at reasonable fees. Our firm has grown because of our sensitivity in this area. Our liability defense trial lawyers take a practical, result-oriented approach to the cases which they are entrusted.  Cases are assigned to the firm's more senior attorneys, who, in turn, oversee tasks completed by their team of younger associates and paralegals. The firm is able to offer competitive rates through this task-appropriate delegation. Our attorneys are keenly aware that these types of matters require responsiveness to the claims professionals, as well as consistent file updating as the matters progress in their respective forums. 

Since there are areas in which some automobile litigation can be streamlined, we are also willing to discuss, develop and implement alternative billing formats wherever possible. We would be pleased to work with you in the handling of your automobile liability matters.
 
Our defense attorneys frequently give presentations and conduct training seminars for our automobile clients as case law is updated or when a client has the need to refresh their employees on the current areas of the automobile law. We can conduct these seminars at your location or at a mutually convenient location.

The Automobile Liability Practice Group of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin serves clients in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Ft. Lauderdale and communities throughout Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Ohio, Florida and New York.

Pages

Sep 27, 2010
Attorney obtained a defense verdict in a four day trial. The plaintiff claimed permanent injuries in the form of herniations in the neck and back as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident. The jury deliberated for nearly six hours before...
Sep 27, 2010
Attorney obtained a non-suit in a case involving a passenger of a vehicle who sustained a significant fracture to her ankle requiring surgery. The vehicle she was occupying struck an uncovered trench causing the airbags to deploy and the car filled...
Jun 14, 2010
Attorney obtained a dismissal with prejudice in a matter tried to conclusion in a case in which the petitioner was injured when the van in which she was a passenger was involved in a motor vehicle accident. At the time of the accident, petitioner...
Apr 26, 2010
Attorney successfully obtained a Motion for Summary Judgment in a declaratory judgment action filed on behalf of a 2nd-priority UIM carrier. At issue was the amount of the credit due under the 1st-priority UIM policy, the resolution of which...
Mar 15, 2010
Attorney obtained a defense verdict in a three-day auto negligence trial. Plaintiff claimed permanent injuries in the form of two cervical disc bulges, a cervical radiculopathy and headaches as a result of the subject accident.  Liability was...
Nov 18, 2009
Attorney obtained a defense verdict in a five day auto negligence trial.  The plaintiff was a passenger in the defendant's vehicle when it was involved in a collision with co-defendant's vehicle.  The plaintiff alleged permanent injuries as a result...
Nov 9, 2009
Attorney successfully defended a claim.  The jury came back in 20 minutes with a defense verdict.  Liability for the motor vehicle accident had been admitted.  Plaintiff had some complaints and treatment the day following the accident, but 6 months...
Aug 12, 2009
Attorneys’ received a defense verdict.  Plaintiff alleged cervical and lumbar herniations as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident.  The defense filed two in limine motions.  The first motion was to preclude the plaintiff from introducing...
Jul 28, 2009
Attorney obtained a defense verdict on behalf of his client in a two day jury trial in the Adams County Court of Common Pleas.  The Plaintiff while riding a motorcycle was struck by the defendant's car in the lower right leg.  While no bones were...
Jul 20, 2009
Attorneys’ convinced the Superior Court to reverse the decision of the trial court and to order that judgment be entered in favor of our client.  The plaintiff filed suit against our client after her decedent was killed in a motor vehicle accident,...

Pages

Pages

Law Alerts July 1, 2010
This action arises out of a motor vehicle accident in which the plaintiff claimed to have suffered damages for bodily injuries and subsequent medical treatment. The petitioner hospital, a non-party, sought certiorari relief of an order from the..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts July 1, 2010
The plaintiff, insured by codefendant State Farm, was injured while driving a car owned by his employer. He received the bodily injury liability coverage limit under the tortfeasor's insurance policy and settled with his workers' compensation..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts July 1, 2010
The insured sued the insurer for failing to pay personal injury protection (PIP) benefits after she was injured in a motor vehicle accident. The issue on appeal to the Florida Supreme Court was whether the pre-suit provision of Fla. Stat. § 627.736(..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts July 1, 2010
Following an automobile accident, the insured-driver received income-loss benefits under a group plan, paid by his employer, and benefits under two personal disability policies that were purchased privately. Later, the insured-driver sought to..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
An underinsured driver struck the insured-plaintiff's vehicle. The insured tendered bodily injury policy limits to her insurer, State Farm. The insured then offered, in writing, to settle with the insurer and kept the offer open for 30 days. When..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
The plaintiff, Alex Pluchino, then 16 years old, was severely injured in an automobile accident after leaving football practice at Rutherford High School (RHS) in a car driven by third-party defendant Jason Bille, a fellow team member. The plaintiff..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
The plaintiff's decedent lost control of her motor vehicle on a snow-covered road and struck a wooden utility pole. The plaintiff sued Verizon-Pennsylvania alleging that the utility pole was negligently placed and managed. Verizon joined..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
The plaintiff-appellants were injured as a result of the plaintiff's motorcycle collided with a deputy sheriff’s vehicle. The deputy was responding to an emergency call and did not activate his siren, and the record was unclear as to whether he..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
The plaintiff insurance company brought a declaratory judgment action against the insureds where the plaintiff sought an order that it had no duty to indemnify the insured to a consent judgment entered against them in an underlying lawsuit. The..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Law Alerts April 1, 2010
Brent Keys underwent a series of spinal treatments as a result of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident at the plaintiff's, Fort Lee Surgery Center, facilities. The defendant, Proformance Insurance Company, claimed that this treatment was..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010

Pages

Chair

Diane Magram
Chair, Automobile Liability Practice Group
(856) 414-6018
dxmagram@mdwcg.com

Co-Chair

Howard P. Dwoskin
Assistant Director, Casualty Department
(215) 575-2664
hpdwoskin@mdwcg.com

Related Practice Areas

Please read the following disclaimer:

Thank you for your interest in our firm. The information contained on this Website contains statements, videos and other content about the type and quality of services offered by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, as well as past results and testimonials about the firm. This information has not been reviewed nor approved by the Florida Bar.

  • The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the matters in which results and/or testimonials have been provided.
  • All results of cases handled by the firm are not provided and not all clients have given testimonials.
  • The results and testimonials provided are not necessarily representative of results obtained by any individual attorney or by the firm nor of the experience of all clients or others with the firm. Every case is different, and each client's case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits.


Please acknowledge that you have read the above disclaimer by clicking on one of the two links below.

YES I have read and understand the above statements. I am interested in learning more about Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin. NO I do not want to view the information.

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."