Patricia Fecile-Moreland and Renee Harris of MOODK’s Philadelphia office successfully handled the appeal of an order granting summary judgment in favor of MOODK’s client in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County. The Trial Court granted summary judgment, holding that the Plaintiff failed to properly supplement the record with evidence which precluded summary judgment in favor of MOODK’s client. The Trial Court further concluded that the Plaintiff failed to comply with both the local rules of civil procedure and the appellate rules of civil procedure, further supporting the dismissal of the case. On appeal, the Plaintiff argued that the Trial Court erred in granting summary judgment because the Court failed to consider Plaintiff’s expert report which created a genuine issue of material fact. In the decision affirming the Trial Court, the Superior Court first concluded that Plaintiff failed to develop her claim that the expert report created a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment, thus it was waived. Further, given the review is plenary, when viewing the record in its entirety including the Plaintiff’s expert report, the Superior Court opined that the expert’s opinions were based upon conjecture and not on facts or evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Superior Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of MOODK’s client.

Marks, O’Neill, O’Brien, Doherty & Kelly is proud to welcome 20 litigation attorneys to our NY, NJ and PA offices.  This group of professionals includes well-respected and accomplished attorneys across all of our practice groups, each possessing unique skills and experiences, and ready to move our firm to its next chapter.  

“Our firm’s growth is solidified by deep and long-standing loyalties of clients whose moral compass sets a powerful industry standard. Our resilience and resurgence is fueled and cultivated from true character, by capable and ethically-driven practitioners,” shares Marks O’Neill shareholder, Joseph O’Neill.

New York City, NY:

Valeria Fernandez

Nick Graves 

Amina Jones 

Elladia Lopez

Emily Marczak 

Bellonne Pierre-Canal

Clara Villarreal

Tarrytown, NY:

Chris Caiazzo

Shania Felix

Susan Finkenberg

William Murphy IV

Aisha Scholes

New Jersey:

Kandace Brackins 

Jeff Daman 

Bernadette Irace

Paul Kelly

Mark Leavy

Adebukola Ogunsanya
Chloe Gartside

Philadelphia, PA:

Eric Romanowski

“It’s a privilege to work with such talented and conscientious professionals. What sets us apart is our ability and willingness to do what is hard, and do it better than others,” says Dawn Doherty, Marks O’Neill shareholder.

Marks, O’Neill, O’Brien, Doherty & Kelly has been at the forefront of defense litigation for over thirty years representing the interests of corporations, carriers and individual clients.  With offices in Pennsylvania (Philadelphia and Pittsburgh), New Jersey, Delaware, New York (Manhattan and Westchester County) and Maryland, Marks, O’Neill, O’Brien, Doherty & Kelly offers our clients a regional approach to their litigation needs.

MOODK Philadelphia attorneys, Kevin J. O’Brien and Casey G. McCurdy, obtained early dismissals for their clients involving a tragic accident on Broad Street which resulted in the amputation of both of Plaintiff’s legs. Plaintiff was unloading furniture on Broad Street outside of a condominium complex when he was struck full-speed by another vehicle. Plaintiff sued the condominium association and property management company asserting negligence and arguing that both defendants failed to provide a usable area to load/unload furniture that was not on Broad Street, and failed to implement safety measures on Broad Street to protect residents unloading/loading vehicles. Plaintiff sought millions of dollars in damages. Attorneys O’Brien and McCurdy filed preliminary objections arguing that neither the association nor the property management company owed a duty to Plaintiff, even if their employees directed Plaintiff to park on Broad Street (as was alleged in the Complaint). The attorneys argued that the accident occurred entirely on Broad Street, which is considered a State highway that is maintained by the Commonwealth. They further argued that under Pennsylvania law, an adjacent landowner to a public highway is not liable for physical harm caused to travelers upon the highway or persons lawfully using the highway. The attorneys argued that there was nothing on their clients’ property which contributed to and/or caused the injuries and damages to Plaintiff. They further argued that prior knowledge of others parking in an active lane of traffic on Broad Street in the past was irrelevant, since the area is not controlled or maintained by their clients. The Court agreed with the attorneys’ reasoning and issued an Order dismissing all claims against their clients, with prejudice.