As a member of the Casualty Department, Dan defends cases involving premises, retail, construction and transportation matters. He has represented numerous department stores and grocery markets involved in premises liability matters.
A trial attorney with over fourteen years of litigation experience, Dan has tried numerous civil cases to verdict in the state and federal courts in Pennsylvania. His extensive experience with construction management experts as well as medical and vocational experts has allowed him to significantly reduce settlement damages in multiple product liability matters and constructions claims.
Dan began his law career in 1994 working for a defense litigation firm in Philadelphia. He joined the firm in 1997 and was elected Shareholder in 2001. Dan has continued to focus his practice entirely on the defense of individuals and business entities in civil litigation matters
Significant Representative Matters
Successfully defeated a tort action with claims for compensatory and punitive damages where the demand at trial was $3 million by convincing the jury that my client's alleged conduct was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's post-traumatic epilepsy and cognitive impairment.
Successfully defeated a tort action brought on behalf of a minor pedestrian severely injured following a collision with the client driver by convincing the jury that the client was not negligent. The demand at trial was $1.5 million.
Successfully defeated a tort action where the demand was $1.5 million at trial for a claim by an injured security guard who fell from a loading dock sustaining significant injuries to her neck, shoulder, wrist and low back, by convincing the jury that the client was not negligent in maintaining the property.
Through the use of a construction management expert, an architect and a real estate expert, I was able to bring the plaintiffs' settlement demand down from $1 million to $100,000 in a case involving claims of negligent construction management.
With our use of medical experts, vocational experts and an expert civil engineer, the plaintiff's settlement demand was reduced from $1.25 million to $375, 000 in a product liability matter.
