Pietragallo recognized in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms®

2023/11/02

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP has been recognized in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms®, receiving fourteen Tier 1 Metro rankings in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. These fourteen rankings include: Commercial Litigation (PGH & PHL) Employment Law – Individuals (PHL) Health Care Law (PHL) Insurance Law (PGH) Litigation – Insurance (PGH) Litigation – Labor & Employment (PGH & PHL) Litigation – Real Estate (PGH) Litigation – Trusts & Estates (PGH) Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Plaintiffs (PGH) Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (PGH) Product Liability Litigation – Defendants (PGH) Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers (PGH) In addition to the Tier 1 Metro rankings, Pietragallo also received ten Tier 2 and Tier 3 Metro rankings: Tier 2 Metro firm in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and West Palm Beach in the respective practice areas of Bet-the-Company Litigation, Criminal Defense: General Practice, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Employment Law – Management, and Litigation – Intellectual Property. Tier 3 Metro firm in Pittsburgh and West Palm Beach in the respective practice areas of Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Construction Law, Litigation – Construction, and Criminal Defense: White-Collar Pietragallo has also been named as a Tier 2 National firm in Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Labor & Employment and a Tier 3 National firm for our work in Health Care Law. Prior to merging with Pietragallo, Gentile Horoho & Avalli P.C. (GHA) was slated to be ranked as a Tier 1 Metro firm in Pittsburgh for their work in Family Law and a Tier 3 Metro firm in Pittsburgh for their work in Litigation – Trusts & Estates, and Trusts & Estates Law. All seven GHA attorneys, well-known for their experience in complex and high net-worth divorce and custody disputes as well as intricate estate/trust cases, have joined Pietragallo. Best Law Firms rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. Read More

27 Pietragallo Lawyers Named in 2024 The Best Lawyers in America® and Ones to Watch

2023/08/17

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce that 27 lawyers have been named as 2024 The Best Lawyers in America® and Ones to Watch. In addition, partner Marc Stephen Raspanti have received “Lawyer of the Year” award for his work in Health Care Law in Philadelphia. Recognition by Best Lawyers is based entirely on peer review. Their process is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. The following were chosen as The Best Lawyers in America: Gaetan Alfano Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation Employment Law – Individuals Employment Law – Management Litigation – Labor and Employment Charles Avalli Family Law Litigation – Trusts and Estates Trusts and Estates Joseph J. Bosick Construction Law Pamela Coyle Brecht Qui Tam Law Kerri Lee Cappella Family Law Robert J. D’Anniballe, Jr. Litigation – ERISA Phillip R. Earnest Construction Law Insurance Law Litigation – Construction Mark Gordon Insurance Law Litigation-Insurance Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers Kenneth Horoho, Jr. Family Law David E. Lamm Product Liability Litigation – Defendants James F. Marrion Product Liability Litigation – Defendants Shelly R. Pagac Employment Law-Management Litigation – Labor and Employment Richard J. Parks Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Corporate Law Litigation – Real Estate William Pietragallo, II Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Plaintiffs Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants Francis E. Pipak, Jr. Workers’ Compensation Law – Employer Kevin E. Raphael Criminal Defense: White-Collar Health Care Law Marc Stephen Raspanti Criminal Defense: White-Collar Health Care Law – Lawyer of the Year Qui Tam Law Lourdes Sánchez Ridge Criminal Defense: White-Collar Douglas K. Rosenblum Corporate Compliance Law Criminal Defense: White-Collar Eric G. Soller Commercial Litigation Litigation – Intellectual Property Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Plaintiffs Clem C. Read More

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP and Gentile, Horoho & Avalli, P.C. to Merge

2023/08/01

Business and Commercial Litigation Firm Adds Family Law and Estate Administration/Orphans’ Court Practice AUGUST 1, 2023 – Two established Pittsburgh law firms have agreed to merge, bringing a highly-experienced family law and estate planning, administration, and litigation practice to a nationally-recognized business and litigation firm. Effective August 1, 2023, Gentile, Horoho & Avalli, P.C (GHA) will merge with Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP (Pietragallo). All seven GHA attorneys, well-known for their experience in complex and high net-worth divorce and custody disputes as well as intricate estate/trust cases will now join Pietragallo, a multi-disciplined business and commercial litigation firm, with offices in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Sharon, PA, Steubenville, OH, Weirton, WV, and Palm Beach Gardens, FL. The merger comes on the heels of Pietragallo’s expansion into Palm Beach Gardens in 2022. Pietragallo’s clients range from Fortune 200 and large privately-held companies to municipal entities and entrepreneurial businesses in a broad diversity of industries and business sectors. Gentile, Horoho & Avalli brings to Pietragallo more than 30 years of experience in providing exceptional legal counsel in the areas of family law and estates and trusts as well as complex orphans’ court litigation. “We are excited to engage with these outstanding practitioners in a new sphere of domestic-business litigation,” said Pietragallo chairman William Pietragallo II. “Our practices share a common commitment to achieving results.” “The lawyers at Pietragallo have distinguished themselves as leaders in our profession and in the communities they serve,” said Kenneth J. Horoho, Jr. “The blending of our two firms will provide our current clients with experienced business litigation attorneys who are known for problem-solving and results.” The family law/estate litigation attorneys joining Pietragallo include: Kenneth Horoho, Jr., Partner Charles Avalli, Partner Kerri Lee Cappella, Partner Carla Schiff Donnelly, Partner Lorraine W. Mervan, Special Counsel Robert D. Weinberg, Associate Adam J. Read More

Phillip Earnest elected to Academy of Trial Lawyers of Allegheny County

2023/06/22

Pietragallo partner Phillip R. Earnest has been elected into membership of the Academy of Trial Lawyers of Allegheny County. Mr. Earnest, chair of the firm’s Construction Practice Group, joins an esteemed group of Pietragallo lawyers who, in part, make up the 250 members of the Academy. The Academy of Trial Lawyers began in 1959 as an organization to promote the highest standards of integrity, civility, and competence in the legal profession. The Academy fosters development, improvement and accomplishment of the highest quality of advocacy before our Courts. Members of the Academy have long represented the most exceptional trial lawyers in Allegheny County. Each year, the Academy completes a rigorous membership process where new members are selected, this year Mr. Earnest is among twelve members who have been selected by the membership committee. Mr. Earnest primarily represents corporations in commercial, construction, and insurance contract drafting, negotiation, claims, and litigation. He has tried numerous jury trials and has successfully conducted commercial and construction arbitrations throughout the federal and state court systems of Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Learn more about the Academy of Trial Lawyers of Allegheny County here. Read More

Could One Plaintiff’s Phone Call Lead to ADA Litigation? The Supreme Court Will Decide

2023/05/22

Every business or nonprofit open to the public, regardless of size, must comply with Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The ADA permits a plaintiff to sue a business for failing to provide full and equal access to goods, services, and facilities. The ADA’s aim is laudable; however, plaintiff attorneys have begun exploiting its breadth. Plaintiff attorneys are bringing claims against businesses of all sizes on behalf of plaintiffs who may never actually intend to use the defendant’s goods, services, or facilities. These lawsuits may include allegations that a website is inaccessible to the visually impaired or that hotel beds are too high for the mobility impaired. A single law firm may file dozens of nearly identical cases, using the same plaintiff, against similarly situated businesses in a short period of time. This type of ADA litigation has become an epidemic in certain parts of the country, including in the Western District of Pennsylvania. Every business is threatened by it. The proliferation of these cases has raised basic but consequential questions of “standing,” the capacity of a particular party to bring suit. Courts, counsel, and businesses alike are asking – are a plaintiff’s “informational injuries” enough to expose businesses to suit under the ADA? May plaintiffs sue because they learn of a potential ADA violation – such as by visiting a website or calling a hotel’s front desk – or must they personally suffer a concrete injury arising from the noncompliance? The U.S. Supreme Court is stepping in to answer. During the 2023-2024 term, the Court will hear the case of Acheson Hotels v. Laufer. The plaintiff, Deborah Laufer, sued Acheson Hotels LLC for failing to sufficiently provide information on its website about accessible hotel rooms, despite no indication that Ms. Laufer intended to patronize the hotel. Ms. Read More

Proportionality, Preservation, and Cost-Sharing: A Reminder on E-Discovery Considerations

2023/01/19

Pretrial practice and discovery are critical stages of the litigation process, as they allow parties to gather and exchange information relevant to the case before it goes to trial. In recent years, the issue of e-discovery has become increasingly prevalent in pretrial practice, as more information is stored electronically. This has led to significant changes in how parties manage discovery, as well as how courts interpret and apply the rules governing e-discovery. A case that highlights these challenges is Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, No. 1:2011cv01279 (S.D.N.Y 2012). In this case, the plaintiff, a former employee of the defendant, brought an employment-discrimination-and-retaliation lawsuit against her former employer. During the discovery process, the defendant argued that the plaintiff’s request for electronic documents was overly broad and unduly burdensome. The court ultimately agreed and ordered the defendant to produce only a limited set of electronic documents. The Da Silva Moore case illustrates the importance of proportionality in e-discovery. The court recognized that, while the defendant had a duty to preserve and produce relevant electronic documents, the plaintiff’s request was so broad and burdensome that it outweighed the potential benefits of producing all the requested documents. This decision demonstrates that, to avoid disputes over e-discovery, parties must be mindful of proportionality when making requests for electronic documents. The Da Silva Moore court also addressed the issue of cost shifting. The court ordered the defendant to bear the cost of producing the electronic documents, but also noted that the plaintiff may be required to reimburse the defendant for certain costs if the plaintiff ultimately loses the case. This highlights the importance of considering not only the breadth of the discovery sought but the potential the costs of that discovery, for both for the requesting party and the producing party. To mitigate the challenges of e-discovery, it is essential for attorneys and their clients to be proactive in identifying and preserving electronic documents that may be relevant to the case. Read More

Cybersecurity Insurance: Circuit Courts Weigh in on Insurers’ Liability for an Insured’s Losses Stemming from a Data Breach

2022/11/08

Takeaway: When a cybersecurity-related incident occurs, an insured should not automatically assume a standard commercial general liability (CGL) policy issued by an insurer will cover their losses, as CGL policies generally afford coverage to an insured for losses resulting from bodily injury and property damage. An insured’s cybersecurity losses can encompass much more, such as losses arising from a data breach concerning confidential or personal information of a client or customer, i.e., third parties who fall outside of the scope of an insured’s traditional CGL policy. Therefore, to ensure cyber coverage exists in the wake of a cyber incident, an insured should make certain that potential cyber-related losses are included within the “four corners” of the underlying insurance policy to secure a defense and, more importantly, coverage from an insurer. Key Point: In determining whether there is a duty to defend, a court must follow the “Eight Corners” Rule and look at the “four corners” of the complaint and the “four corners” of the underlying insurance policies.[1] In other words, an insurer is obligated to defend its insured if the factual allegations of the complaint, on its face, encompass an injury that is actually or potentially within the scope of the policy.[2] Discussion: Recently, an increasing number of legal battles over whether losses related to cybersecurity incidents are covered by an insured’s policy have tested the applicability of the underlying policy. For example, an Eleventh Circuit panel addressed whether a ‘computer fraud’ policy issued by Great American Insurance Company to Interactive Communications International, Inc. and HI Technology Corp. (together, “InComm”) excluded coverage for losses involving fraud.[3] InComm sold “chits” – each of which had a specific monetary value – to consumers, who can then “redeem” them by loading their value onto a debit card.[4] Between November 2013 and May 2014, InComm lost $11.4 million when fraudsters manipulated a glitch in InComm’s computerized interactive-telephone system that enabled them to redeem chits multiple times, with each duplicative redemption of an already-redeemed chit defrauding InComm of the chit’s value.[5] Read More

Pietragallo is recognized as a “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News & World Report

2022/11/03

U.S. News & World Report recognizes Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP as a 2023 Tier 1 Metro “Best Law Firm” in twelve practice areas in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. These twelve practice areas are: Commercial Litigation (PGH & PHL) Employment Law – Individuals (PHL) Health Care Law (PHL) Insurance Law (PGH) Litigation – Labor & Employment (PGH & PHL) Litigation – Health Care (PGH) Litigation – Insurance (PGH) Litigation – Trusts & Estates (PGH) Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Plaintiffs (PGH) Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (PGH) Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (PGH) and Product Liability Litigation – Defendants (PGH) In addition to the Tier 1 Metro ratings, Pietragallo was named: Tier 2 Metro in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia in the practice areas of Bet-the-Company Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Employment Law – Management, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants. Tier 3 Metro in Pittsburgh and West Palm Beach in the practice areas of Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Construction Law, Litigation – Construction, Criminal Defense: General Practice, and Criminal Defense: White-Collar Pietragallo has also been named as Tier 2 across the nation in Litigation – Labor & Employment and Tier 3 nationally for our work in Commercial Litigation and Health Care Law. The U.S. News & World Report’s “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. Clients were asked to provide feedback on firm practice groups, addressing: expertise, responsiveness, understanding of a business and its needs, cost-effectiveness, civility, and whether they would refer another client to the firm. Lawyers also voted on expertise, responsiveness, integrity, cost-effectiveness, whether they would refer a matter to a firm, and if they consider a firm a worthy competitor. Read More

Uncharted waters: The University of Pittsburgh’s football team forays into newly available name, image and likeness opportunities

2022/10/21

I. University of Pittsburgh’s Handing of NIL Change The University of Pittsburgh (Pitt) has taken a progressive stance on its Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) policy; choosing to assist its student-athletes rather than hinder them in pursuit of these newfound opportunities. The recent change in the NCAA’s stance on student-athlete compensation has given the players the opportunity for personal financial gain and the ability to partner with charities. “As it relates to providing our student-athletes with the most extraordinary experience at Pitt, our goal is to be progressive, innovative and helpful in every aspect of their student-athlete experience and the world of name, image and likeness is no different…We look forward to helping our student-athletes learn more about this topic and build a transparent relationship with them and their families so we can assist in their efforts or aspirations to maximize compensation and opportunities involving their name, image and likeness,1” said Heather Lyke, Pitt’s Athletic Director. One of Pitt boosters’ first major foray into NIL came in the form of a traditional NIL collective, Alliance 412. Per NCAA guidance, Alliance 412 seeks to support all Pitt athletics without a formal relationship with the University itself. Instead, the collective hopes to connect Pitt student-athletes with businesses and strategic partners while maintaining transparency and compliance.2 On Aug. 10, 2021, the Steel City NIL Club began operation through a partnership with YOKE. This organization offers a unique approach for members of Pitt’s football team to engage in a variety of NIL opportunities. In contrast to Alliance 412, which engages in more traditional NIL deals, the Steel City NIL Club is a more direct revenue stream for the players. The YOKE platform creates a paywalled community granting paying members special access to the participating players in the form of Q and A’s, and exclusive player created content.3 The profits from these memberships are then split evenly among the participating players. Read More

Pietragallo Welcomes New Associates

2022/10/17

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce the addition of two new associates to the firm’s Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Offices. Michael O. Bethune joins our Commercial Litigation team in our Pittsburgh Office. Michael was a law clerk at a regional law firm who specialized in personal injury, legal malpractice, and employment litigation cases. He also served as an extern for the Honorable Helena Barch-Kuchta of the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California. He is a graduate of Duquesne University School of Law. Megan E. Young joins our Employment & Labor team in our Philadelphia Office. Megan completed an externship in the City of Philadelphia’s Law Department where she handled a multitude of aspects of the litigation process including initial responsive pleadings, written discovery, depositions, pre-trial motions, municipal court, and arbitration hearings. She also spent time at a public healthcare technology company. Megan is a graduate of Temple University Beasley School of Law. About Pietragallo Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is a multi-disciplined business and litigation law firm headquartered in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with six offices throughout Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, and West Virginia from which we are able to serve our clients in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Read More