Benjamin M.H. Goshko

Open for Business
no photo

Biography

Benjamin provides legal counsel across a wide range of industries including construction, trucking/transportation, product liability, and hospitality. He has successfully defended claims on behalf of construction contractors, product manufacturers, property owners, restaurants, and hotels in litigation involving fire losses, negligence, auto accidents, catastrophic injuries, and wrongful death. Regardless of complexity, Benjamin handles cases through every stage of litigation in state and federal court, from the taking and defending of depositions to trying matters to verdict. He understands the interests of his clients in the practical, prompt, and efficient resolution of claims.

Prior to joining Marshall Dennehey, Benjamin was an experienced litigator for an defense firm in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, where he represented a broad range of clients in insurance defense and subrogation litigation. He served for many years as an arbiter with the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, as a pro bono PFA volunteer for the Bucks County Court, and as a member of the Inn of Court.

Benjamin graduated from Temple University Beasley School of Law where he served as senior articles editor for the International and Comparative Law Journal. He is licensed to practice law in state and federal courts in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and before the United States Supreme Court.

Outside of the office, Benjamin is an avid cyclist and history buff.

Year joined

2021

Pro Bono

Christian Legal Clinics of Philadelphia

Results

Summary Judgment Secured in a Pennsylvania Breach of Contract Matter

Insurance Services - Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation
November 8, 2024

We won summary judgment before the Honorable Anthony Verwey in Chester County, PA. The plaintiff filed suit for breach of contract and violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (PAUTPCPL) against the defendants over the installation of an allegedly defective storm water remediation system. Summary judgment was sought on the grounds that the plaintiff could not prove damages without an expert.

Summary Judgment Obtained in a Case Involving a Fungal Infection Allegedly Contracted at a Hotel

Premises & Retail Liability
June 14, 2024

We secured summary judgment in Monroe County, Pennsylvania, where the plaintiff filed suit claiming he contracted a fungal infection from staying at the defendant’s hotel. The plaintiff produced an expert microbiologist’s report, in addition to his treating physician’s records, in support of his claims. Summary judgment was sought on the grounds that the plaintiff’s expert was not competent enough to identify a specific fungus from photographs of the hotel room and the treating physician’s records were equivocal as to the cause of the plaintiff’s infection.

Consolidated Cases Successfully Transferred to Correct Venue

Construction Injury Litigation
February 5, 2024

We successfully transferred two consolidated cases involving alleged falls by construction workers from Philadelphia to Cumberland County. Our clients were located in Lancaster County, and the only codefendant was located in Philadelphia County. We filed preliminary objections as to venue, arguing that the codefendant was a “phantom” defendant named to obtain venue in Philadelphia County. The court was convinced by our arguments. This ruling cuts against the current trend of giving broad deference to plaintiffs on venue issues.

Summary judgment in property litigation dispute over water and septic intrusions.

Property Litigation
January 27, 2023

The plaintiff alleged that his client and a neighboring property owner were responsible for water and septic intrusions onto the plaintiff’s property. The three Bucks County properties formed a large triangle between two roads in Perkasie, Pennsylvania. The plaintiff’s complaints against his neighbors went back over seven years. We argued the trespass onto the plaintiff’s property was permanent in nature and was barred under the statute of limitations, and that the plaintiff’s experts failed to establish the intrusion emanated from our client’s property.

Thought Leadership

Appearance of Impropriety by Arbitrator Insufficient to Vacate Arbitrator’s Award

Philadelphia - Headquarters
General Liability
Premises & Retail Liability
October 1, 2025
This York County matter concerned the plaintiff’s claim that Weis Markets was liable for her slip-and-fall and her injuries resulting therefrom. The plaintiff and the defendant agreed to remove the case to binding arbitration after discovery. Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2025 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

Appeals Court Reverses Punitive Damages Award, Finds Late Trial Amendment to Add Recklessness Prejudiced Defense

Philadelphia - Headquarters
General Liability
July 1, 2025
This case concerned an elderly woman’s slip and fall on a shower floor while being assisted by staff in an elder care facility. The plaintiff filed suit for negligence only. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2025 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.

Comparative Negligence Charge Must Be Given for Speeding Plaintiff

Philadelphia - Headquarters
General Liability
April 1, 2025
The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently ruled that a plaintiff’s speeding alone warranted a comparative negligence instruction, even without clear causation or expert testimony. Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, Apri

Superior Court Holds, Seeking Relief in County Court in Alleged Breach of Contract Provides Venue in the Filing County.

Philadelphia - Headquarters
General Liability
October 1, 2024
This case concerned a breach of contract claim related to drilling rights between the parties on the defendant’s property. Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, Octo

Superior Court Limits Judicial Discretion on “Credible” Allegations of Venue

Philadelphia - Headquarters
General Liability
July 1, 2024
In this dental malpractice suit, the plaintiff claimed the defendant negligently performed a tooth implant procedure in Bucks County. The plaintiff filed suit in Philadelphia County on the grounds that the defendant operated a business at 5675 N. Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July

Areas of Practice (5)

  • Construction Injury Litigation
  • Trucking & Transportation Liability
  • Product Liability
  • Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation
  • General Liability

Education & Credentials

University Attended:
Temple University, B.A., summa cum lade, 2005
Law School Attended:
Temple University Beasley School of Law, J.D., 2009
Year of First Admission:
2009
Admission:
2009, Pennsylvania; 2012, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania; 2014, U.S. Supreme Court; 2018, New Jersey; 2021, U.S. District Court District of New Jersey; 2021, U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania
Memberships:

Associations & memberships

Insurance Society of Philadelphia
Montgomery County Bar Association
Montgomery County Inn of Court

Reported Cases:
Significant Representative Matters: Obtained summary judgment for his client in this Bucks County matter which alleged that his client and a neighboring property owner were responsible for water and septic intrusions onto Plaintiff's property. The three properties formed a large triangle between two roads in Perkasie, Pennsylvania and Plaintiff's complaints against his neighbors went back over seven years. Ben argued the trespass onto Plaintiff's property was permanent in nature and barred under the statute of limitations and that Plaintiff's expert's failure to establish the intrusion emanated from his client's property.
ISLN:
923122934

Peer Reviews

This lawyer does not have peer reviews.

Client Reviews Write a Review

Location

Contact Benjamin M.H. Goshko

Required Fields

Required Fields


By clicking on the "Submit" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Martindale and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The Internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.