Adam M. Sorce

Adam M. Sorce: Attorney with Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.
  • Shareholder at Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C. (504 Attorneys)
  • 620 Freedom Business Center, Suite 300, King Of Prussia, PA 19406
    View Adam M. Sorce's office location
  • Adam M. Sorce is a shareholder with Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin. His practice is devoted largely to complex tort litigation: primarily premises liability, construction site accidents, products liability, and construction defect cases.
  • Peer Reviews

    5.0/5.0 (6)
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
    • #10 in weekly profile views out of 495 Attorneys in King Of Prussia, PA
    • #42,536 in weekly profile views out of 1,822,458 total attorneys Overall
Attorney Awards

Biography

Adam is a shareholder in the firm's King of Prussia office practicing complex tort litigation: primarily premises liability, construction site accidents, product liability, and construction defect cases. He has had significant experience defending Fortune 500 corporations, building owners, large amusement parks, and contractors in premises matters and construction site accidents.

Adam graduated from Franklin & Marshall College in 1998, where he received degrees in Government and English. He then attended Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Cleveland, Ohio, earning his juris doctor in 2001. He practiced law in Ohio for three years before returning home to the Philadelphia area.

Adam has successfully tried more than a dozen cases before courts in Pennsylvania and Ohio. He has resolved many other cases through private mediation and binding arbitration. He also serves as an arbitrator in Montgomery County.

Classes/Seminars Taught

•CLE - Declaratory Judgment Actions

Published Works

• Eliminating Duplicate Claims With the Gist of the Action Doctrine, Defense Digest, Vol. 22, No. 4, December 2016

Honors & Awards

•Pennsylvania Super Lawyer Rising Star, 2012-2016

Year Joined Organization

2004

Publications

Eliminating Duplicate Claims With the Gist of the Action Doctrine
Defense Digest Article • December 1, 2016

Defense Digest, Vol. 22, No. 4, December 2016 By Adam M. Sorce, Esq.*Key Points:Claims of negligence and breach of contract against insureds in premises liability and property damages cases are increasing.Where a contract..., Defense Digest, Vol. 22, No. 4, December 2016. Defense Digest is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide...

Areas of Practice (4)

  • Premises Liability - Defense
  • Construction Site Accidents
  • Product Liability
  • Construction Defect

Education & Credentials

Contact Information:
(610) 354-8278  Phone
(610) 354-8299  Fax
www.marshalldennehey.com
University Attended:
Franklin and Marshall College, B.A., Government and English, 1998
Law School Attended:
Case Western Reserve University Law School, Cleveland, Ohio, J.D., 2001
Year of First Admission:
2001
Admission:
2001, U.S. District Court Northern District of Ohio; 2007, U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania; 2004, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania; 2002, Pennsylvania; 2001, Ohio
Reported Cases:
Significant Representative Matters: Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a large retail corporation and related entities in a case where Plaintiff was blown off a roof during the contruction of a regional distribution center and severely injured. Plaintiff made a demand of $9.2 million to the retail corporation after discovery had concluded. The Court granted summary judgment on the basis that the retail corporation, which was both the landowner and the general contractor of the project, was not responsible for the acts or omissions of its independent contractor.; Successfully defended a building owner at a construction site in a premises liability case involving a significantly injured plaintiff where the demand was $12.5 million by showing that the owner was entitled to defense and indemnification from the general contractor of the job.; Defended large amusement park in class action brought by season ticket holders alleging breach of contract. Obtained summary judgment, which was affirmed by the appellate court.; Defended electrical contractor in a series of substantial construction defect cases brought by owners of newly constructed multi-million dollar homes in several developments. Obtained dismissal of the contractor by use of the Gist of the Action Doctrine, which set a precedent for many other defendants to seek dismissal.; Defended manufacturer of industrial machinery against products liability claim where a worker allegedly loss the use of his arm after it became entangled in the machine. The case settled for a fraction of the plaintiff's demand after plaintiff's expert's qualifications and opinions were challenged before trial.; Representative Cases: Kazimer v. Methacton School District, 2016 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 71; Shamis v. Moon, 2012 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 343; Zuno v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (E.D. Pa. May 29, 2009); American Logistics Group, Inc. v. Weinpert, 2005 Ohio 4809; Scales v. Six Flags, Inc., 2004 Ohio 4385 (2004 Ohio App. Lexis 3977); Sendejaz v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2003 Ohio 7196 (2003 Ohio App. LEXIS 6649); Published Works: Eliminating Duplicate Claims With the Gist of the Action Doctrine, Defense Digest, Vol. 22, No. 4, December 2016
ISLN:
916638397

Peer Reviews

5.0/5.0 (6 reviews)
Peer Reviewed
  • Legal Knowledge

    5.0/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    5.0/5.0
  • Judgment

    5.0/5.0
  • Communication

    5.0/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    5.0/5.0

*Peer Reviews provided before April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Documents (1)

Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com

King Of Prussia, Pennsylvania

Contact Adam M. Sorce

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.