Dan's experience includes a diverse range of civil litigation matters in both state and federal courts and at both the trial court and appellate levels. He has represented major electric utilities, motor carriers, and construction, cosmetic, and other companies in a myriad of litigation matters involving commercial disputes, contractual indemnity and insurance coverage issues, property disputes, mechanics liens, quiet title, labor and employment matters, toxic exposure and environmental contamination claims, design and manufacturing defect cases, and the defense of serious personal injury and wrongful death claims.

Dan enjoys determining the proposed defense and litigating it to its conclusion whether that be a settlement or going to trial. He assists clients with risk exposure and takes the time to develop a thorough understanding of the situation and figures out the best way to proceed based on the facts and the applicable law at hand.

Before entering private practice, Dan served a one-year judicial clerkship with the Honorable R. Stanton Wettick, Jr. of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. He received his law degree from Washington University School of Law in St. Louis where he was the Articles Editor on the Journal of Law & Policy as well as the recipient of the Christophine G. Mutharika International Law Prize and the Land Use Law Prize. Dan obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree in International Studies from Kenyon College.

• Obtained summary judgment for premises owner in case alleging toxic exposure at power plant; successfully argued appeal before the Fourth Circuit, securing affirmance of corporate “nerve center” diversity jurisdiction and grant of summary judgment.
• Secured dismissal at pleadings stage on behalf of software company in case where hospital system customer sought to hold it liable in tort for millions in damages suffered as a result of a Russian military cyberattack; persuaded District Court that customer was merely recasting ordinary contract claim as a tort claim in an attempt to escape limitations of liability provisions in the parties’ contract, and thus tort claim was barred by the gist of the action doctrine.
• Proved competitor committed trespass by drilling on parcel within client’s mineral holdings; failure to prove ownership of parcel potentially put client’s entire multimillion-dollar acreage into question; uncovered 1913 court order at National Archives in Philadelphia collaterally estopping defendant from challenging ownership, resulting in defendant leaving premises and paying damages.

Speaking Engagements

• “One Size Does Not Fit All:  Master Service Agreements and the Interplay Between Indemnity, Liability, and Insurance in the Appalachian Basin,” 2015 Kentucky Mineral Law Conference, Energy & Mineral Law Foundation, Lexington, Kentucky, Oct. 22, 2015

Publications

• "IME Expert Discovery under Federal Rule 35: Privileges and Perils," University of Texas School of Law Review of Litigation, The Brief, Vol. 41 (Spring 2022)
• “The Downside of Tort Reform,” Law360, Oct. 7, 2011, Co-author with Michael P. Leahey