Jim is a member of the Casualty Department and concentrates his practice in insurance fraud investigation and insurance litigation defense on behalf of major insurers throughout the state of New Jersey. His position is critical in ensuring that major client matters involving a large caseload are handled effectively and professionally in a cost-effective manner. During the past 15 years of legal practice, Jim has developed extensive experience in the defense of product warranty, commercial law, personal injury, product liability, premises liability, motor vehicle accident, property damage, aviation defense, and construction accident litigation cases.
Prior to joining Marshall Dennehey in 1996, Jim was employed as an associate attorney at Yost & Tretta, where he handled the defense of diverse litigation matters involving premises liability, personal injury, insurance coverage, transportation, products liability, and property damage disputes. From 1992 to 1994, Jim assisted in the defense of complex environmental litigation matters as a law clerk to a senior partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.
Jim achieved Dean's List honors at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics. He subsequently attended the Temple University School of Law, where he earned his juris doctor.
Significant Representative Matters
•Defense verdict in product warranty litigation case. Represented a major motor vehicle manufacturer in a case involving claims of statutory violations. Plaintiff sought a repurchase of motor vehicle and recovery of attorney fees. Defense expert established that vehicle was effectively repaired and suffered no substantial impairment in use, value, or safety.
•Defense verdict in breach of service contract case. Represented a major motor vehicle manufacturer in a civil action asserting claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the Uniform Commercial Code, and the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Established no liability or recoverable damages by means of effective cross-examination of the plaintiff and direct examination of the defense witnesses.
•Defense verdict at binding arbitration in fatal motor vehicle accident case. Executrix of decedent plaintiff alleged that the defendant driver of motor vehicle negligently entered roadway and struck the vehicle operated by the plaintiff. Defense witnesses, the investigating police officer, and photographic evidence convinced the arbitrator that the plaintiff ignored a stop sign, causing the defendant driver to be confronted with a sudden emergency.
•Represented restaurant in premises liability lawsuit involving a fall down resulting from an alleged defective sidewalk. Plaintiff underwent four foot surgeries and multiple injections of the spine. Case settled for $10,000. The initial settlement demand was $500,000. Defense investigation and discovery revealed numerous contradictions and inconsistencies in the plaintiff's version of events, and the physician retained on behalf of client established that most of the plaintiff's required medical treatment resulted from his failure to comply with his physicians' orders to remain non-weight bearing during treatment.
•Represented major sports and fitness center in personal injury civil action in which the plaintiff underwent three surgeries on his right ankle. Plaintiff fell while playing hockey and claimed that his accident was caused by water accumulation on the floor caused by a leaking roof. Plaintiff's initial settlement demand was in the amount of $1,800,000, and the case settled for $250,000. Defense cast doubt on the plaintiff's deposition testimony through the testimony of other witnesses to the accident. Potential damages were reduced by the expert opinions of defense physician, vocational expert, and economist.
•Pennsylvania Superior Court Affirms Importance of the Lack of Constructive Notice Defense in Premises Liability Wrongful Death Action, Co-author, Defense Digest, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1997
•Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Upholds Admissibility of No Prior Claims Evidence in Product Liability Actions, 1997
•Good Faith Effort Requirements and Guidelines For Service Of Process Under Lamp v. Heyman, Co-author, Defense Digest, 1998
•Subsequent Remedial Measures May Not Be Admissible To Establish Product Design Defect, The Journal of the Allegheny County Bar Association, 2001
•Case Of Failure To Properly Serve Action Puts Statute Of Limitations Rule In Question, Co-author, The Legal Intelligencer, 2001
•Adequate Safety Warnings May Preclude Strict Product Liability Under Pennsylvania Law, Defense Digest, 2005
Past Employment Positions
•Yost & Tretta, Associate, 1992 -1996 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Law Clerk, 1990 - 1992
Honors & Awards
•BV Distinguished by LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell
Year Joined Organization: 1996