.

Michael A. Packer

Office Managing Attorney

Co-Chair, Insurance Services Practice Group

MAPacker@mdwcg.com

Portrait of Michael A. Packer

Marshall Dennehey Promotes James Cole and Sunny Sparano to Lead The Firm’s Professional Liability Department and Announces New Board of Directors Appointments

January 5, 2026

Marshall Dennehey announced today that James H. Cole has been appointed Director of the firm’s 140+ attorney Professional Liability Department and Sunny Marie Sparano has been appointed Assistant Director. Cole is succeeding Craig S. Hudson as department director as well as a member of the firm’s Board of Directors. Hudson will remain with the firm in an Emeritus role. The announcements were made following the firm’s shareholders’ meeting on December 9 and take effect January 1, 2026.

“There is no doubt in my mind that Jim and Sunny will be successful in leading and growing our award-winning Professional Liability Department,” said Marshall Dennehey President & CEO, G. Mark Thompson. “Their proven expertise and the respect they command within the department and across the firm ensures we will continue delivering exceptional results for our professional liability clients.”

Cole, who has served as the department’s assistant director since 2021, joined Marshall Dennehey in 1999 after nearly a decade as a claims professional with a national insurance carrier. His first-hand understanding of property and casualty insurance afforded him a true head start in the nuances of claims settlements, insurance risk and litigation, and he ascended to lead the firm’s Insurance Services; Property Litigation; and Fraud/Special Investigation Practice Groups.

Resident in the firm’s Philadelphia office, Cole is a nationally recognized authority on insurance law, frequently speaking at leading conferences on property damage, insurance fraud, and bad faith topics. For the past several years, he has been a featured presenter at many prominent insurance industry events including the Pennsylvania Insurance Fraud Conference and the Property & Liability Resource Bureau (PLRB) conference. An active member of the Claims & Litigation Management Alliance (CLM), he serves as faculty for CLM’s Claims College, School of Property, where he helped shape curriculum on good faith claims handling and coverage issues. Cole holds an AV‑Preeminent rating from Martindale‑Hubbell and is listed among the Best Lawyers in America for Insurance Law. He earned his law degree from Temple University Beasley School of Law in 1999 and his undergraduate degree from Indiana University of Pennsylvania in 1990, and is admitted to practice in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Sparano joined Marshall Dennehey’s Roseland, NJ office in 2005 and chairs the firm’s Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation Practice Group where she oversees a firm-wide team of attorneys who defend design and construction professionals in complex construction defect suits. She is additionally a member of the firm’s Board of Directors. 

Among her numerous professional activities, Sparano is a member of the New Jersey State, New York State and Essex County Bar Associations, and is a frequent speaker at various construction defect conferences, including the annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Conference.
 
Rated AV Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell, she is recognized by the Best Lawyers in America organization for Construction Litigation. A graduate of Seton Hall University and Widener University School of Law, she is admitted to practice in New Jersey and New York.

Additional Board Appointments
Matthew S. Schorr, Executive Committee member and Director of the firm’s Casualty Department, replaces Hudson as Chairman of the firm’s Board of Directors. Since joining the firm in 2008, Schorr has held a series of key leadership roles, including Regional Managing Attorney of the Casualty Department for Northern New Jersey and New York; Assistant Director of the Casualty Department; Director of the Casualty Department; and ultimately Executive Committee member in 2024.

Additionally, shareholders Steven M. Christman and Michael A. Packer have been elected to the firm’s Board. They will serve three-year terms effective January 1, 2026.

Christman is the Managing Attorney of the firm’s New York City office where he defends insureds and self-insureds in a variety of complex casualty liability matters. His background in insurance coverage litigation encompasses the representation of both reinsurers and excess insurers. He also serves as supervisor of the office’s casualty litigation. A graduate of Providence College and the University of Dayton School of Law, he is admitted to practice in New York. 

Packer is the Managing Attorney of the firm’s Fort Lauderdale office and co-chairs the firm’s Insurance Services Practice Group. He has almost 25 years of experience defending property insurers throughout Florida in first party coverage matters, and provides coverage analysis and opinions of third party claims. He is a graduate of the State University of Albany and the University of Miami School of Law. He is admitted to practice in Florida.
 

2026 PL New Leadership

Firm Highlights

blue facade of a hospital sign against blue sky

Result

Defense Verdict in Complex Medical Malpractice Trial

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.

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

News

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Thought Leadership

State of Insurance: Q2 Notes From Pennsylvania

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. 

empty courtroom photo

Result

Summary Judgment Secured for Life Insurance Agent

Thought Leadership

Ohio Supreme Court Holds That a Binding Appraisal Award May Not Be Set Aside Absent Specific Evidence of Manifest Mistake or Fraud

On July 23, 2026, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a rare opinion on the binding effect of an appraisal award in a property insurance policy.  The Court in One Church held: A binding appraisal award will not be set aside unless an error is so palpably wrong that it undermines the intent of the agreement, such as corruption or gross mistake, not a mere error of judgment—To plead a claim of mistake with particularity as required by Civ.R. 9(B), facts alleged in a complaint must constitute the elements of mistake—Allegation that additional, hidden damage was discovered after appraisal award failed to state a claim of mistake that could justify setting aside binding appraisal.  The case arose out of a claim brought by One Church against its insurer, Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company for roof damage from a storm. Pursuant to the terms of the insurance policy, the parties agreed to submit the matter to appraisal. The two appraisers inspected the building, and both appraisers agreed that the damages were $313,271.98. The insurer paid the agreed appraised amount.  Thereafter, the insured submitted a claim for an additional $206,663.09 in damages. The insured argued that these additional damages were not discovered until after the repairs began, and that they should be permitted to submit an additional claim, even though there had already been a binding appraisal of damages. The insurer refused to pay the additional damages, and the insured sued for breach of contract and bad faith.  In the trial court, the insurer moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing that the binding appraisal award barred any further claims. The insured took the position that additional hidden damages could not be discovered until after the repairs began, and therefore there was a mutual mistake. The trial court dismissed the case on the insurer’s motion, because there was no “evidence of fraud, misfeasance, or mistake”. The Court of Appeals agreed that appraisal awards are generally binding, but noted that an appraisal award can be set aside for fraud or manifest mistake. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case to the trial court, finding that the insured had pled mistake with sufficient particularity. The insurer appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. On appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, and reinstated the trial court decision dismissing the case for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Supreme Court found that since the insured had already demanded appraisal, and the appraisal award was binding, “something more than error of judgement, such as corruption in the arbitrator, or gross mistake” must be pled with particularity, and proven for the insured to override the appraisal award. Since the complaint did not allege fraud or manifest mistake with sufficient particularity, something more than a mere error of judgment, the complaint was insufficient to state a claim.  The complaint in this case did not challenge the appraisal award. It pled that additional damages were discovered that were not apparent when the appraisal was done. It did not specify “who discovered the damages, how they were discovered, where they were found, why they were previously hidden, or why they rise to the level of a manifest mistake that the “appraiser would have corrected...had it been called to his attention”. Id at ¶22 citing Lakewood Mfg. Co. v. Home Ins. Co. of New York, 422 F.2d 796, 798 (6th Cir. 1970). Cases deciding the effect of appraisal awards are unusual. The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in One Church relies primarily on 19th century case law for its conclusion. This emphasizes the fact that there is minimal case law deciding the effect of binding appraisal clauses in property insurance policies, and makes this case all the more significant. A lengthy dissent was written by Justice Fisher, who would have affirmed the Court of Appeals decision reversing and remanding the case for a decision on the merits. Of course, the decision works both ways, and an insurer dissatisfied with a binding appraisal award will likewise be without further recourse absent evidence of corruption, fraud, misfeasance, or manifest mistake, which must be pled with particularity. To constitute manifest mistake, “the mistake must be of such character that the arbitrator or appraiser would have corrected it had it been called to his attention.”  Lakewood Mfg. Co. v. Home Ins. Co. of New York, 422 F.2d 796, 798 (6th Cir. 1970).  The majority opinion does not specifically identify what would have been sufficient to plead mistake with particularity, or if the insured could have amended the complaint to overcome the deficiencies. The dissent argues that this was not really a case alleging mistake, but rather a question of contract interpretation. The insured did not challenge the appraisal, but argued that the hidden damage was not part of the appraisal, and the appraisal only covered the known damages.  However, this argument did not carry the day with the majority.  *Thomas F. Glassman, a shareholder in Marshall Dennehey’s Cincinnati office, filed a brief in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the Ohio Association of Civil Trial Attorneys, in support of the insurer’s position.

Jason Banonis Holds PDI Attorney of the Year Award with the PDI President

News

Jason Banonis Named Attorney of the Year by the Pennsylvania Defense Institute

Thought Leadership

The Best Defense is Already in the File: Documentation in Civil Rights Litigation

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

News

Marshall Dennehey Names Carolyn Schweizer New Philadelphia Office Managing Attorney