.

Donald L. Carmelite

Shareholder

DLCarmelite@mdwcg.com

Portrait of Donald L. Carmelite

Donald focuses his practice on the representation of police officers and public officials in state and federal court in all aspects of civil rights litigation including claims involving use of force, wrongful arrest, employment, and discrimination. Further, Don represents public entities in land use matters with an emphasis on claims made against building code officials.

In addition to the core areas of his practice, Don also handles a wide array of complex litigation involving liability for environmental, liquor/dram shop and professional claims.  He has additional experience representing real estate professionals in every type of claim arising from the sale of a property covered by E&O policies and has defended claims made against licensed Brokers and Agents in a property manager capacity for HOAs.  He also has years of experience defending motor vehicle and premises liability suits.

During his career, Don has served as first chair in over 10 jury trials and bench trials.  He also has extensive mediation experience.

Don is very dedicated to his community. He engages and supports youth sports organizations and Boy Scouts of America. Don is an involved member of Saint Andrews Episcopal Church in York, Pennsylvania, where he previously served as a member of Vestry (board of directors). He is also the past president of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, Harrisburg Chapter. 

Don received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Penn State University and his juris doctor from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.  Thereafter, Don served as law clerk to the Honorable Michael L. Krancer at the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board.

    • University of Pittsburgh School of Law (J.D., 1999)
    • The Pennsylvania State University (B.A., 1996)
    • Pennsylvania
    • U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania
    • U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • BV® Distinguished™ Rating by LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell
    • Pennsylvania Super Lawyer Rising Star (2011-2014)
    • Susquehanna Valley Select Lawyers™ (2014)
    • Cumberland County Bar Association
    • Dauphin County Bar Association
    • Pennsylvania Bar Association
    • Mobile Devices: Don't Let Good Reception Be Game Over, Dauphin County Bar Association, January 2018 and Cumberland County American Inns of Court, December 2017 
    • Personal Training For Client on All Aspects of the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, March 2016
    • Political Subdivision Claims Act, School Claims Services LLC, December 12, 2014
    • Social Media in Litigation: Reloaded, a Closer Look at Using Social Media in Your Cases, Dauphin County Bar Association, Harrisburg, PA, June 24, 2014
    • How To Try a Case in State Court, Pennsylvania Bar Institute, Mechanicsburg, PA, June 16, 2014
    • Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, Real Property Exception, client seminar, February 2014
    • Basics of Litigation Involving State and Local Government, Pennsylvania Bar Institute, June 2013 
    • “Discovering, Authenticating & Utilizing Social Media in Litigation: Strategy Considerations,” co-author, Defense Digest, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2014
    • "Thumbs Up for Qualified Immunity," co-author, Defense Digest, 2011-03, Vol. 17, No. 1
    • "The Bar Is Set: A Liquor Licensee's Duty to Third Persons in a Civil Suit," Defense Digest, 2008-09, Vol. 14, No. 3
    • Obtained a defense verdict in a state court bench trial on a case of first impression involving claims for excessive construction permit fees made against a local municipality
    • Obtained summary judgment for a county adult probation officer in an excessive force claim
    • Obtained summary judgment for a county corrections officer for a civil rights claim involving an inmate's grievances.
    • Obtained summary judgment in favor of a county and its wardens and correction officers in an 8th Amendment Conditions of Confinement claim
    • Obtained dismissal of inmate's statutory complaint against county DA for alleged misconduct
    • Obtained dismissal of Chief County Detective in a claim involving sexual abuse of a minor during a school sponsored event
    • Successfully defended PA Department of Labor & Industry investigation into child labor violations
    • Obtained dismissal, in favor of liquor licensee, of all claims in general negligence; reaffirming that the exclusive remedy for an injured person is statutorily found in the Dram Shop Act based upon service of alcohol to a visibly intoxicated patron
    • Obtained summary judgment in favor of a police office and township in excessive use of force and failure to train claim
    • Obtained summary judgment, upheld by the Third Circuit, in favor of County Children and Youth Services Agency its social worker in parental rights claim
    • Obtained discontinuance in favor of county vo-tech for negligence claims precluded by the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act
    • Obtained dismissal in favor of District Attorney in a Malicious Prosecution Claim
    • Obtained dismissal from EEOC of Township employee's age discrimination claim
    • Obtained summary judgment in favor of county prison and corrections officers for claims of excessive use of force
    • Obtained discontinuance in favor of regional police department and its officers for claims of illegal search and seizure of personal property
    • No causation jury defense verdict in a claim where plaintiff was determined to be totally disabled by the Social Security Administration, through the use of surveillance video and plaintiff's social media postings

Results

View all

Summary judgment in a municipal liability case involving a trip and fall on a sidewalk.

The plaintiff fell while walking and sued the owners of the property and York City, alleging the City was negligent in failing to maintain the sidewalk and in failing to inspect, correct or repair it. The defense argued that the plaintiff did not establish that York had any actual or constructive notice of the alleged defect, and that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden under the sidewalks exception to the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa. C.S. § 8541, et seq.

Firm Highlights

Thought Leadership

New Jersey Expands Family Leave Protections Effective July 17, 2026

On January 17, 2026, Governor Murphy signed into law legislation expanding the New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA). Beginning July 17, 2026, significant amendments to the NJFLA will expand job-protected family leave to smaller businesses and more employees across the state. The new law broadens coverage by lowering the threshold for private employers from 30 employees to 15 employees, meaning many smaller businesses will now be subject to the NJFLA. Employees of state and local government agencies will continue to be covered regardless of the size of the employer. The amendments also make it easier for employees to qualify for leave. Under the revised law, an employee will be eligible after three months of employment and at least 250 hours worked during the preceding 12 months, replacing the previous requirement of 12 months of employment and 1,000 hours worked. Currently, New Jersey's Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI) and Family Leave Insurance (FLI) programs provide eligible employees with wage replacement while they are on leave but do not independently guarantee job protection. The recent amendments to the New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA) expand these protections by extending job-protected leave to additional employees. Under the amended law, employees receiving TDI or FLI benefits may be entitled to return to the same position they held before taking leave, or to an equivalent position with the same seniority, status, pay, and benefits. Although the legislation also states that it does not expand or modify an employee's reinstatement rights under the NJFLA, the amendments appear to provide job protection to eligible employees receiving TDI or FLI benefits without requiring them to separately satisfy the eligibility requirements of the NJFLA or the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). As a result, some employees may be entitled to longer periods of job-protected leave than were previously available under existing law. With these amendments, New Jersey continues to strengthen workplace protections by expanding access to job-protected family leave for eligible employees. These changes significantly expand access to job-protected family leave and may require employers to update their leave policies, employee handbooks, and HR practices. Notably, employers who were previously not required to administer NJFLA may need to amend their policies and/or create new protocols to come into compliance with the NJFLA. Failure to do so would prove costly, as the penalties for non-compliance are significant.

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

News

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

empty courtroom photo

Result

Summary Judgment Secured for Life Insurance Agent

Thought Leadership

SIU Gets a Boost: NJ Supreme Court Affirms Insurers' Right to Litigate, Not Arbitrate, Fraud Claims

In a significant win for insurers' Special Investigation Units, the New Jersey Supreme Court clarified that statutory insurance fraud and racketeering claims may proceed in court rather than through PIP arbitration. At issue was whether insurance fraud claims brought under New Jersey's Insurance Fraud Prevention Act (IFPA) and the state's Anti-Racketeering Act (NJ RICO) are subject to mandatory arbitration under the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act’s (AICRA) PIP dispute-resolution framework. Allstate had sued a network of medical practices, physicians, and related corporate entities, alleging a scheme to extract more than $1.7 million in PIP benefits through fraudulent and misleading billing. The trial court dismissed Allstate's complaint and compelled arbitration, reading AICRA's arbitration clause — which covers "any dispute regarding the recovery of... benefits" under PIP coverage, N.J.S.A. 39:6A-5.1(a) — as sweeping in fraud and racketeering claims along with routine benefit disputes. The Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division's reversal, adopting Judge Gilson's opinion below (480 N.J. Super. 566 (App. Div. 2025)) as its own reasoning. The Court held that IFPA and RICO claims fall outside the scope of AICRA's PIP arbitration mechanism because that "streamlined and specialized" process cannot grant the relief those statutes contemplate — treble damages, injunctive relief, broad discovery, and joinder of third parties — and because arbitrators lack authority to award compensatory or treble damages to an insurer. The Court also rejected the argument that Allstate's own Decision Point Review Plans independently compel arbitration, finding those plan provisions no broader than AICRA's own arbitration clause. Notably, the Court expressly disagreed with the Third Circuit's contrary holding in GEICO v. Mt. Prospect Chiropractic Center, 98 F.4th 463 (3d Cir. 2024), concluding it is not bound by that federal interpretation of New Jersey law. Insurers retain the right to pursue IFPA and RICO claims in the Law Division, with a jury trial. For SIU units and NJ insurance carriers, this decision is a significant win: it forecloses defense clinics' primary procedural tool for shunting fraud investigations into limited-scope PIP arbitration, where treble damages, RICO relief, and meaningful discovery were never realistically available. Carriers building cases against fraudulently structured clinics, straw-owned practices, or coordinated billing networks can now proceed with confidence that a well-pleaded IFPA/RICO complaint stays in the Law Division rather than being diverted to arbitration on a motion to compel. Practically, this strengthens SIU's leverage in settlement negotiations, preserves civil discovery tools (subpoenas, depositions, joinder of related corporate entities) critical to unwinding complex ownership and referral schemes, and resolves the split with the Third Circuit in favor of NJ insurers — at least as a matter of state law. Expect increased reliance on IFPA civil actions, rather than PIP arbitration demands, as SIU's primary enforcement vehicle going forward.

blue facade of a hospital sign against blue sky

Result

Defense Verdict in Complex Medical Malpractice Trial

Thought Leadership

Congress Passes Financial Exploitation Prevention Act

On June 25, 2026, the House passed the Financial Exploitation Prevention Act of 2025 (“the Act”) by a vote of 414 to 2. The Act allows financial advisors and firms to delay suspicious transactions regarding the accounts of clients who are 65 or older, if they believe financial exploitation has occurred or is about to take place. With the advancement of technology and AI, the House’s overwhelming bipartisan passage of the Financial Exploitation Prevention Act represents an important step in strengthening the financial industry’s ability to combat the growing threat of elder financial exploitation. The Act recognizes what advisors have long known that financial professionals are often the first to detect suspicious behavior but have historically lacked clear legal authority to intervene before irreversible financial harm occurs. From the industry’s perspective, the bill accomplishes several important objectives, including the following: (1) Provides a practical “pause button” by allowing financial professionals to temporarily delay certain transaction requests when there is a reasonable belief that a senior or vulnerable adult is being financially exploited; (2) Empowers financial professionals to act by providing greater certainty that firms can act in good faith to protect clients without unnecessary legal risk; and (3) Strengthens investor protection without sacrificing client rights by allowing temporary delays based on a reasonable suspicion of exploitation, which is intended only to allow additional review and not to deny clients access to their money indefinitely. In sum, the Financial Exploitation Prevention Act will equip financial professionals with practical, carefully tailored tools to stop suspected financial exploitation before client assets are lost. By allowing firms to temporarily delay suspicious transactions under defined circumstances, Congress is recognizing the critical role advisors play as the first line of defense against increasingly sophisticated fraud schemes. The Act strikes an appropriate balance between protecting vulnerable investors and preserving individual financial autonomy, while reinforcing collaboration among advisors, families, and law enforcement to combat financial exploitation. The bill now awaits Senate action.

Portrait of Carolyn Schweizer, with text below: Philadelphia Office Managing Attorney

News

Marshall Dennehey Names Carolyn Schweizer New Philadelphia Office Managing Attorney

Result

Summary Judgment Secured, Preserving $750,000 in Coverage for Insured in Major Trucking Liability Dispute

Ray Freudiger and Michael A. Roberts (both of Cincinnati) successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of their client in a coverage dispute arising from a May 19, 2022, motor vehicle accident. A permissive driver operated a box truck for an interstate trucking company and caused severe injuries to two tort victims. Prior to the accident, the insured had procured a commercial auto policy for the trucking company with stated limits of $1,000,000. Following the accident, the insurer initiated a declaratory judgment action asserting that only reduced bodily injury limits of $25,000/$50,000 applied and later counterclaimed, alleging it would not have insured the driver had he been properly submitted for approval under the policy. After extensive discovery, briefing, and oral argument, the court rejected the insurer’s attempt to shift responsibility for the $750,000 in coverage it was legally required to provide for permissive drivers under Ohio law, granting summary judgment in favor of the insured and preserving $750,000 in liability exposure.

Casey Alan Coyle Joins Marshall Dennehey's PA Appellate Practice as a Shareholder in Harrisburg and Philadelphia

News

Marshall Dennehey Expands Leading Pennsylvania Appellate Practice With Addition of Shareholder Casey Coyle

Result

No-Cause Jury Verdict Secured in Wrongful Death Trial

We successfully obtained a no-cause jury verdict in a 13-day wrongful death trial. The decedent, a 59-year-old man, was admitted to the emergency room on February 15, 2019, with complaints of abdominal pain, decreased appetite, and constipation, despite the use of laxatives. The patient did not complain of any nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. He had a significant medical history including diabetes, hypertension, prior coronary artery stenting, morbid obesity (with past gastric bypass surgery), longstanding ventral hernia, and back pain. A CT scan revealed multiple hernias and a potential closed-loop bowel obstruction, leading to a surgery consultation. Our client, an emergency general surgeon, interpreted that the patient did not have a closed loop or any significant obstruction and recommended non-surgical management. The patient was approved to have clear liquids, and had a vomiting incident shortly after, but our client was not notified. The patient was returned to NPO status, and after improving overnight, he was returned to “clears” and additional medical and renal consults were ordered. Our client did not receive any communications from the residents/nurses of any changes in the patient’s condition. On February 18, 2019, two rapid responses were called due to increased heart rate and vomiting. It is believed that the vomiting resulted in aspiration, causing sepsis, ultimately leading to the patient’s death. During the trial, the plaintiff’s sole medical expert highlighted imaging on the wrong hernia, which called into question all of his opinions in the case. We made key objections related to the expert testimony, limiting what the allegations were, and preventing new allegations from being made. After approximately two and a half hours of deliberating, the jury returned a no-cause verdict.