.

Defense Digest

On the Pulse…Other Notable Achievements

Defense Digest, Vol. 32, No. 1, March 2026

March 1, 2026

THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

David Shannon, chair of our Privacy & Data Security Practice Group, and William Cordio, director of incident response at Surefire Cyber Inc., discuss remediation v. forensic investigation after a cyber attack on the PLUS (Professional Liability Underwriting Society) podcast. Episode 2 of “Managing Cybersecurity Threats in 2025” explores current and emerging cybersecurity risks facing organizations today. The episode features expert discussions on new threat vectors, recent case studies, and practical approaches to strengthening digital defenses. Listeners will gain a clearer understanding of the evolving cybersecurity landscape and learn about effective strategies and tools for managing risks in 2025 and beyond. Hear their tips for minimizing costly business interruptions: Managing Cybersecurity Threats in 2025 Episode 2 – PLUS

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

On January 15, Mike Bradford (Tampa, FL) presented “Out with the Old and In with the New: Changes in Marine Technology” at the Tampa Bay Mariners Club Marine Insurance Seminar - Emerging Issues 2026.

On January 20, Ben Goshko (Philadelphia, PA) co-presented “Common Building Envelope Failures and the Lawsuits that Follow” to the Philadelphia Chapter of American Institute of Architects.

On February 8, Sara Mazzolla (Roseland, NJ) was a speaker at the NAFDMA (North American Farmers’ Direct Marketing Association) Agritourism Convention & Expo. In “Safety & Legal Prep: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst – Waivers, Signage, Documentation,” Sara and her co-presenters spoke about how managing risk means being proactive and prepared.

On February 11, Rob Aldrich and Melissa Dziak (both of Scranton, PA) presented a webinar for the Pennsylvania Association for Health Care Risk Management (PAHCRM). In “Navigating the Digital Shift: Balancing The Benefits and Legal Risks of Patient Portals,” Rob and Missy discussed mitigation strategies for managing risks associated with the use of patient portals and how the reliance on patient portals impacts medical malpractice laws.

On February 4, Dana Gittleman (Philadelphia, PA) and Jeff Rapattoni (Mount Laurel, NJ) co-presented at Temple University’s Gamma Iota Sigma Chapter’s H. Wayne Snider Distinguished Guest Lecturer series. In this presentation “Hot Topics in Insurance Risk Mitigation,” they discussed risk mitigation best practices, insurance agents and brokers, what to do if you get sued, and insurance fraud (stats, various types, recent trends).

On February 4, Ariel Brownstein and Jonathan Magpantay (both of Mount Laurel, NJ) presented “Modern Staged Accidents & Provider Fraud” at the NICB Mid-Atlantic Region 2026 Training Event held in Philadelphia.

PUBLISHED WORKS

November 25, 2025 – Lisa Maeyer (Wilmington, DE) authored the article, “Delaware Supreme Court Examines Whether Liability Waiver Covers Injuries Based on Implied Agency Relationship,” appearing in The Legal Intelligencer’s Personal Injury Supplement. The article discusses how the court’s ruling may impact how future personal injury cases are litigated.

Winter 2025 – Jeff Rapattoni (Mount Laurel, NJ) and Adam Calvert (New York, NY) authored the article, “Staged Accidents, Real Consequences: Combating Crash-for-Cash Schemes in Commercial Auto,” published in the Winter 2025 issue of SIU Today.

January 2026 – John Hare’s (Philadelphia, PA) article, “What Lawyers Can Do to Protect and Promote Judicial Independence,” was published in the January 2026 issue of Pennsylvania Bar Association Quarterly. The article addresses the responsibilities of lawyers to protect and promote judicial independence and was written as a companion to an article by the Honorable Jordan Yeager about what trial courts can do to protect and promote judicial independence.

January 26, 2026 – Dana Gittleman and Tim Ventura (Philadelphia) authored the article, “Pennsylvania Superior Court Rejects Breach of Oral Contract Claim Against Insurance Agent," appearing in the January issue of PLUS Blog. In the article, they discuss how the court's ruling strengthens existing case law in favor of insurance agents and brokers on both negligence and breach of contract claims.

RECOGNITION

At the Pittsburgh Legal Diversity & Inclusion Coalition (PLDIC) Annual Members Meeting on November 12, Stu Sostmann and Pat Reilly (both of Pittsburgh, PA) were elected to leadership positions. Stu was elected to a three-year term on the Board of Directors, and Pat is the incoming Retention Committee Chair.

Sarah Cole (Wilmington) has been elected to membership in the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). ABOTA is a national association of experienced trial lawyers and judges dedicated to the preservation and promotion of the civil jury trial right provided by the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Membership is invitation-only and is reserved for trial lawyers who meet certain qualifications and have significant experience in leading civil jury trials to verdict.

Firm Highlights

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

Fla. Workers' Comp Physician Dispensing Ruling Could Produce New Legislative Fight

In a significant decision issued on February 25, 2026, the First District Court of Appeal (DCA) ruled in Publix Super Markets, Inc., et al. v. Department of Financial Services, et al., 430 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 2026), that while injured workers have an absolute right to choose their own pharmacy or pharmacist, that right does not extend to physicians who dispense medications directly to their patients.  Read Blake's article in Insurance Journal: https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2026/08/05/880229.htm. 

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.

empty courtroom photo

Result

Summary Judgment Secured for Life Insurance Agent

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

News

Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Thought Leadership

A Unified, Single Claim for Damages Requires Apportionment in a Joint Proposal: What the Decision in 'Trace Elements' Means for Property Insurance Claims

Kimberly and Seth, shareholders in the Insurance Services Practice in our Fort Lauderdale office, break down the Florida Supreme Court's decision in 'Trace Elements v. MacKensen' and what it means for property insurance claims in the state. Read the article here.

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

News

Marshall Dennehey Names Carolyn Schweizer New Philadelphia Office Managing Attorney

Thought Leadership

Appellate Division Affirms Dismissal of Legal Malpractice Counterclaim Against Martin Law Firm

In Martin v. Loury, 2026 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1617 (App. Div. July 15, 2026), Martin Law Firm represented Kirk Loury in an employment matter Mr. Loury filed against his former employer, Concord Equity Group Advisors LLC (“Concord”). The allegations included, among other things, that Loury was not fairly compensated for his employment with Concord. After a bench trial finding in Loury’s favor, the Appellate Division remanded this matter in February 2016 for a second trial. During the second trial, Concord CEO, Lee Argush, testified to lower compensation estimate than first trial. On remand, the second trial judge awarded Mr. Loury the same damages as the first judge, finding Mr. Argush not credible. After the findings during the second trial, Martin Law Firm filed an action against Mr. Loury to recover legal fees and costs of representing Mr. Loury in a second bench trial and Mr. Loury filed a counterclaim against Martin Law Firm for legal malpractice, alleging he should have received an even higher award in the second bench trial. In this allegation, Mr. Loury, through his expert, claimed that Martin Law Firm should have recalled Mr. Loury to the stand to rebut Mr. Argush’s testimony to allege an alternative theory of damages. Mr. Loury’s expert admitted that the second judge already rejected Mr. Argush's theory and accepted Loury's damages theory. The trial court barred Mr. Loury’s expert and dismissed Loury's counterclaim with prejudice before convening the collection trial, and the jury ruled in Martin Law Firm’s favor. Mr. Loury appealed the trial court's pretrial rulings barring his liability expert from testifying in support of his legal malpractice counterclaim, denying his motion for summary judgment on that counterclaim, and denying his motion to amend his counterclaim by adding attorney Joseph A. Martin as a codefendant. In affirming the trial court’s decision, the Appellate Division held that the trial court properly excluded Loury’s expert testimony in the counterclaim against Martin Law Firm because the expert could not explain how calling Loury as a rebuttal witness would have increased damages when the second judge already rejected Mr. Argush's testimony and accepted Loury's damages theory, making the expert’s causation opinion speculative. The Appellate Division also held that the trial court properly denied Mr. Loury's summary judgment motion on his malpractice counterclaim because reasonable minds could differ on whether Mr. Martin's alleged failures would have changed the second judge's damages award, given the judge already found Mr. Argush not credible, creating genuine factual disputes precluding summary judgment. Also, the Appellate Division held that the trial court properly denied Loury's May 2023 motion to add Joseph Martin individually because the statute of limitations expired in February 2022, six years after the 2016 appellate remand when Mr. Loury incurred new legal costs, and relation back did not apply because Mr. Loury knew Mr. Martin's identity throughout and strategically chose to sue only Martin Law Firm in his 2019 counterclaim.

blue facade of a hospital sign against blue sky

Result

Defense Verdict in Complex Medical Malpractice Trial

Event

Pennsylvania Appellate Update 2025-2026

On August 21, 2026, Casey will serve as a panelist for the live webcast program, “Pennsylvania Appellate Update 2025-2026” presented by the Appellate Advocacy Committee of the Pennsylvania Bar Association and Pennsylvania Bar Institute. The program is divided into three parts—Criminal, Civil, and Administrative. Casey will serve as a panelist for the Civil portion, along with Christina McKinley of Blank Rome, Ben Baer of Injury Law Partners, John Masslon of Keller Postman, Jonathan Bruno of Bruno Litigation LLC, and moderator, Ezza Ahmed of Buchanan Ingersoll.  Registration and more information: https://www.pbi.org/product/pennsylvania-appellate-update-2025-2026/