Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti LLP, a business and litigation law firm with five offices across Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia, is proud to announce that nineteen of our distinguished attorneys have been recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2021 edition.
“The legacy of our law firm is the depth of our courtroom talent,” noted Managing Partner, William Pietragallo, II. He continued, “I could not be more proud.”
Recognition by Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer review within the legal industry. The Best Lawyers® methodology is designed to capture the consensus opinion of industry-leading lawyers regarding the professional capabilities of their colleagues. Best Lawyers® distinction is demonstrative of the respect that recognized lawyers have earned amongst their peers.
The following individuals of The Pietragallo Law Firm have been recognized for their work in the following industries:
Gaetan J. Alfano (2012)
Commercial Litigation
Employment Law – Individuals
Employment Law – Management
Litigation – Labor and Employment
Pamela Coyle Brecht (2021)
Qui Tam Law
Marc S. Raspanti (2006)
Health Care Law
Doug Rosenblum (2021)
Criminal Defense: White-Collar
Phillip R. Earnest (2021)
Construction Law
Insurance Law
Mark Gordon (2011)
Litigation – Insurance
Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers
James W. Kraus (2021)
Criminal Defense: White-Collar
Litigation – Health Care
Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
James F. Marrion (2021)
Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
William Pietragallo II (2005)
Bet-the-Company Litigation
Commercial Litigation
Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions
Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
Francis E. Pipak, Jr. (2011)
Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers
Peter St. Tienne Wolff (2021)
Litigation – Trusts and Estates
Clem C. Trischler, Jr. (2011)
Commercial Litigation
Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
Paul Kenneth Vey (2011)
Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
Sharon, PA
Richard Parks (2021)
Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law
“Ones to Watch”
Leslie A. Read More
Partner Pamela Coyle Brecht of Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP has been appointed as a Hearing Committee Member serving the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania effective July 1, 2020. This appointment is a three-year term.
Ms. Brecht also serves as Chair of the firm’s national Qui Tam/False Claims Act (FCA) Practice Group. She is experienced in white-collar criminal litigation, internal investigations, and complex health care litigation. Some of Ms. Brecht’s largest FCA cases have included alleged fraud by a large multi-state Medicaid managed care contractor and FCA violations by three of the largest hospital corporations in the country.
The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is dedicated to protecting the public, maintaining the integrity of the legal profession, and safeguarding the reputation of the courts. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania established the Disciplinary Board in 1972. In regard to the appointment, Ms. Brecht commented, “I’m honored and proud to accept this appointment. I will do my very best to assist our system of discipline.” Read More
Twenty-one Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP attorneys were named to the 2020 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars list, including founding partners William Pietragallo, II, Mark Gordon, Joseph J Bosick, Gaetan J Alfano, and Marc S Raspanti. These designations are awarded to lawyers who receive the highest feedback regarding their legal practice based on independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations.
In addition to all of the Firm’s founding Partners, the following lawyers were acknowledged by the rating service as 2020 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers: P. Brennan Hart, Christopher A. Iacono, James W. Kraus, Michael A. Morse, Francis E. Pipak, Kevin E. Raphael, Douglas K. Rosenblum, John A. Schwab, Clem C. Trischler, and Paul K. Vey.
The following firm lawyers were recognized by the rating service as 2020 Pennsylvania Rising Stars: John R. Brumberg, Joseph L. Gordon, Leslie A. Mariotti, and Peter St. Tienne Wolff.
In addition to the recognition above, Super Lawyers further distinguished Gaetan J. Alfano as “Top 100: 2020 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers” and “Top 100: 2020 Philadelphia Super Lawyers.” Managing Partner William Pietragallo, II was also further distinguished as “Top 50: 2020 Pittsburgh Super Lawyers List.”
For more information about any of our attorneys, we invite you to visit Our Team page. If you would like to reach one of our attorneys, their direct contact information can be found within their biographies.
For more information about Super Lawyers, we invite you to visit their website: www.superlawyers.com. Read More
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”), which was signed into law today allocates $350 billion for a Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) meant to provide immediate relief to small businesses (less than 500 employees) and other eligible entities impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Process: The process for securing a PPP loan is fairly simple. The law allows Small Business Administration (“SBA”) approved lenders to provide eligible businesses loans of up to $10 million (based on a formula tied to payroll costs) for payroll and other expenses incurred between February 15, 2020 and June 30, 2020. To determine loan eligibility, a lender need only consider whether the borrower was in operation on February 15, 2020 and paid employee salaries and payroll taxes or paid independent contractors. There are separate provisions for new or previously closed businesses. The Act waives fees for both borrowers and lenders.
Loan Terms: A borrower is eligible for a loan equal to 2.5 months of regular payroll expenses, capped at $10 million. A borrower does not have to provide a personal guarantee or collateral to get a PPP loan. The loans have a maximum interest rate of 4% and only start to mature following the date the employer applies for loan forgiveness (see below). The loan can have a maximum maturity of ten (10) years from such date.
Allowable Uses: Employers can use the funds from loans for (1) Payroll costs; (2) Group health care benefits during periods of paid sick, medical, or family leave, and insurance premiums; (3) Employee Salaries, commissions, or similar compensations (up to $100,000) (4) Payments of interest on mortgage obligations; (5) Rent (including rent under lease agreement); (5) Utilities; and (6) Interest on any other debt obligations incurred before the covered period.
Loan Forgiveness: A portion of the loan may be forgiven in an amount equal to payments made on eligible employee payroll costs, interest payments on a covered mortgage obligation, rent, and utility payments made during the first 8-weeks after the origination date of the loan. Read More
The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (Act) was signed by President Trump on March 18, 2020. The bill becomes law on April 2, 2020.Under the new law, certain employees will be eligible to receive paid sick and family leave through December 31, 2020 for leave related to COVID 19. Relevant portions related to employment law are as follows:
Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act
This provision expands the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). It applies to employers with fewer than 500 employees. It includes employers with less than 50 employees who were previously not subject to the FMLA. Employees who have been employed for thirty days or more are entitled to take up to twelve weeks of job-protected leave:
To care for employee’s child whose school or child care facility has been closed due to the coronavirus.
The first ten days can be unpaid unless the employee chooses to substitute paid time off. After the first ten days, the employee receives two-thirds of their regular rate, capped at $200 per day. Part-time employees will be entitled to two-thirds of their paid sick leave in the amount equal to the average amount of hours they work for the six months prior to taking Emergency FMLA, capped at $200 per day.
The Secretary of Labor may exempt small businesses with fewer than 50 employees if the imposition of such requirements would jeopardize the viability of the business.
Emergency Paid Sick Leave
This provision applies to employers with fewer than 500 employees. Employers will be required to provide job-protected paid sick leave to all employees who require leave for the following reasons:
The employee is subject to a federal, state or local quarantine because of the coronavirus;
The employee must obtain medical care if he or she is experiencing symptoms of coronavirus;
The employee must comply with health care provider recommendations to self-quarantine due to the coronavirus;
The employee must care for an individual who is subject to federal, state or local quarantine or to comply with a health care provider recommendation due to the coronavirus;
The employee must care for the employee’s child whose school or child care facility has been closed due to the coronavirus; and
Any other substantially similar condition specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in consultation with the Secretary of Treasury and the Secretary of Labor. Read More
On Jan. 22, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion ordering the permanent sealing of a grand jury report relating to allegations of sexual abuse and a potential coverup. In the opinion, In re Grand Jury Investigation No. 18, the Supreme Court concluded that because the report did not meet the Investigating Grand Jury Act’s statutory definitions of an “investigating grand jury report,” it could not be released to the public.
This decision comes on the heels of a November 2019 Grand Jury Task Force report that recommended abolishing investigating grand jury reports entirely.[1] From our point of view, it appears that investigating reports are on their way out.
The Investigating Grand Jury Act authorizes only two options for proceeding against an individual: a presentment recommending criminal charges or an investigating grand jury report.[2] Where a presentment is not an option — a common outcome for any number of reasons, including, importantly, that there is simply not enough evidence to proceed on criminal charges — an investigating grand jury report may be considered.
As the Supreme Court recognized here, however, the use of investigative grand jury reports must be greatly limited in their reach, because of their impact on the constitutional rights of those named within them.
Generally, the Investigating Grand Jury Act authorizes the judge supervising grand jury proceedings to make public an investigating grand jury report.[3] But the act’s two-prong definition of an “investigating grand jury report” is narrow. Specifically, only reports that regard “conditions relating to organized crime or public corruption, or both; or that propose recommendations for legislative, executive, or administrative action in the public interest based upon stated findings” meet the act’s definition.
Reports that fail to meet those strict definitions cannot be released.[4] The petitioner here argued that the report in question did not meet the act’s limited definitions. Read More
On Nov. 20, in Commonwealth v. Davis, — A 3d. —, 56 MAP 2018, (Pa. 2019), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that compelling an individual to provide their password to an encrypted electronic device violates the Fifth Amendment. In this case of first impression, the government had moved to compel a defendant accused of distributing child pornography to provide the password to his encrypted computer, a device which itself had been lawfully seized. While the government’s request was through a pretrial motion, Davis’ holding is not limited to that context and will apply equally to grand jury practice.
In Davis, the court found that the act of producing the password was “testimonial” in nature and thus the government’s request violates the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The court reviewed decades of U.S. Supreme Court precedent on the Fifth Amendment and distilled the caselaw to a few key points:
First, the Supreme Court has made, and continues to make, a distinction between physical production and testimonial production. As made clear by the U.S. Supreme Court, where the government compels a physical act, such production is not testimonial, and the privilege is not recognized. Second, an act of production, however, may be testimonial when the act expresses some explicit or implicit statement of fact that certain materials exist, are in the defendant’s custody or control, or are authentic. The crux of whether an act of production is testimonial is whether the government compels the defendant to use the “contents of his own mind” in explicitly or implicitly communicating a fact. Third, and broadly speaking, the high court has recognized that the vast majority of compelled oral statements of facts will be considered testimonial, as they convey information or assert facts.
Applying those principles, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that Davis’ provision of his password would be “testimonial” in nature:
“Distilled to its essence, the revealing of a computer password is a verbal communication, not merely a physical act that would be nontestimonial in nature. Read More
Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP Partner Gaetan J. Alfano will be presenting at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute’s (“PBI”) November 7 Program, “Best Practices in Pretrial Litigation in the Federal Courts 2019.”
The program will start at 9:00 AM and takes place at the CLE Conference Center in the Wanamaker Building in Philadelphia.
During this course, attendees will review the practices and procedures for pretrial litigation in the federal courts with a distinguished panel of judges and practitioners, learn the processes and strategies to litigate in federal court, and perfect planning habits.
To register for this course, please visit the PBI website .
For more information about Gaetan J. Alfano, we invite you to visit his biography or contact him directly. Read More
Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce it will be an Advocate Sponsor of the 2019 Benefit for the Hub of Hope which will take place on Thursday, October 31, 2019 at the Loews Philadelphia Hotel.
The Hub of Hope is a walk-in engagement center, in Philadelphia’s SEPTA’s Suburban Station, for those who are experiencing homelessness in Philadelphia. It opened its doors on January 31, 2018 and since its opening, the Hub of Hope has touched over 4,000 people through more than 125,000 visits.
Since inception, the Hub of Hope has provided:
over 3,500 case management visits;
poured 150,000 cups of Wawa coffee;
expanded meal service to provide over 50,000 meals;
provided 8,000 shower ;
provided 4,000 loads of laundry;
conducted nearly 1,000 health clinic visits; and
facilitated over 4,000 outreach transports to shelters, treatment programs, and safe havens.
Each day, approximately 400 people visit the Hub of Hope and, with every visit, they move closer to permanent housing, employment, and recovery.
Through a partnership between SEPTA, the City of Philadelphia, and Project HOME, the Hub of Hope opened an expanded, permanent location in Suburban Station and offers year-round services.
For more information, including to volunteer or make donations in kind, please visit their website here: https://www.projecthome.org/hubofhope Read More
In the wake of several massive data breaches, consumer privacy (or lack thereof) has become a growing concern. For some, more surprising than the breaches was learning how much personal information companies collect from consumers—everything from Social Security numbers and email addresses to location data and demographics—and how much personal information is being sold or otherwise disseminated. As a result, legislation is being enacted around the world requiring companies to inform consumers about the collection and use of their personal information. Most notably in 2018, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, commonly referred to as the GDPR, established groundbreaking consumer rights over the collection, retention and dissemination of personal information. In the United States, in the absence of federal consumer privacy law, states are enacting privacy legislation focusing upon: requiring transparency around the consumer personal information that companies are collecting and using; and providing consumers with control over the personal information. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2020.
Now, Pennsylvania is following suit. On April 5, Pennsylvania introduced House Bill 1049, which is currently pending before the Committee on Consumer Affairs. House Bill 1049, modeled after the CCPA, addresses consumer data privacy by setting forth the rights of consumers as well as the duties of companies relating to the collection of consumer personal information. Therefore, companies doing business in Pennsylvania should familiarize themselves with its key provisions and prepare for its enactment.
Important Provisions
Even though House Bill 1049 is in committee and will likely be amended prior to its enactment, the are several provisions of the current bill that are the cornerstones of recent consumer privacy legislation and are likely to remain in the final bill. These are:
Narrow definition of “businesses” subject to compliance—House Bill 1049 applies to companies doing business in Pennsylvania satisfying one or more of the following requirements: companies with an annual gross revenue exceeding $10 million; companies that annually buy, receive, sell or share for commercial purposes the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers; or companies that derive 50% or more of their annual revenue from selling consumers’ personal information. Read More
October 21, 2024
Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce the addition of three new associates to the firm’s Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Offices. Read More
May 17, 2024
Pietragallo is pleased to announce that 24 lawyers have been named to the 2024 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars list. Read More
