John is a member of Marshall Dennehey's three-person Executive Committee, which is responsible for the firm’s daily operations and management of more than 500 attorneys across 19 offices in seven states. He also serves on the firm’s Board of Directors and as chair of the fifteen-attorney Post-Trial and Appellate Advocacy Practice Group.
As appellate counsel, John has litigated more than 500 appeals in state and federal appellate courts, representing individuals, corporations, and insurers in many of Pennsylvania’s highest-profile civil appeals. As amicus curiae counsel, John has represented a diverse clientele, including the United States Chamber of Commerce, the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry, the American Medical Association, the Pennsylvania Medical Society, the Pennsylvania Defense Institute, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, other Pennsylvania lawyers, and academics interested in the outcome of appellate litigation.
John is actively involved in the Pennsylvania legal community. He has edited and co-authored two books on Pennsylvania appellate courts. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; Life and Law in the Commonwealth, 1684-2017, was published by the Pennsylvania State University Press in 2018. Keystone of Justice: The Pennsylvania Superior Court, 1895-1995, was published by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 2000.
John serves by appointment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania as the co-chair of the Court’s Historical Commission and on the Commission on Judicial Independence, a group of state and federal judges, academics, and attorneys who promote public awareness of the importance of a strong and independent judiciary. He also spent six years on the Supreme Court’s Civil Procedural Rules Committee, the last two years as chair, and served on the Board of Governors of the Bar Association of the Third Federal Circuit and as co-chair of the Amicus Curiae Committee of the Pennsylvania Defense Institute. He also serves on the advisory board of Ohlbaum on the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence (Lexis-Nexis) and regularly speaks at appellate court events and continuing legal education seminars.
Pennsylvania Super Lawyers magazine has repeatedly recognized John as a Top 100 lawyer in both Philadelphia and Pennsylvania based on a peer selection and evaluation process. He has also been selected as a Super Lawyer in the area of appellate practice every year since 2008. He has been repeatedly selected to The Best Lawyers in America and is a fellow of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, a member of the International Association of Defense Counsel, and has an AV Preeminent (5.0/5.0) rating by Martindale-Hubbell, the highest rating for professional competence.
John is regularly called upon by the media to provide insight and commentary on significant legal issues.
Honors & awards
Legal 500 Philadelphia Legal Elite, Commercial Disputes
2025-2026
Chambers USA, Pennsylvania: Litigation: Appellate Law, Band One
2025
AV Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell
The Best Lawyers in America, Appellate Practice
2024-2026
Pennsylvania Super Lawyers
2008-2025; Top 100 in Pennsylvania, 2018-2025; Top 100 in Philadelphia, 2018-2025
Philadelphia Business Journal, Best of the Bar Award, 2023 and 2018
The Philadelphia Inquirer, Influencers of Law Award, 2019
Results
Favorable Precedential Decision Obtained in High-Stakes Construction Defect Case
Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice
Architectural, Engineering & Construction Defect Litigation
September 29, 2023
We prevailed in a unanimous, precedential decision in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, which reconciled conflicting case law in the state. The plaintiffs were joined by 55 amici, and our client was joined by numerous construction organizations as amici. The court eventually applied Pennsylvania’s statute of repose to bar construction defect claims brought by homeowners.
Pennsylvania Appellate Courts Uphold Nonsuit Obtained By Jack Delany In $11.5 Million Construction Death Case
Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice
Catastrophic Claims Litigation
Construction Injury Litigation
April 5, 2023
By Order dated April 5, 2023, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania refused to review the Superior Court’s affirmance of a 2021 nonsuit obtained by Jack Delany in hotly contested litigation stemming from the death of a construction worker. John Hare and Shane Haselbarth handled the appeal along with Jack.
Appellate attorneys prevail in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice
February 16, 2022
The decision, which reversed the trial court and Superior Court, reinstated a jury verdict in favor of our clients. Following a defense verdict, the trial court awarded a new trial based on a question posed by defense counsel, who was not a Marshall Dennehey attorney. The Superior Court affirmed the award of a new trial, but the Supreme Court reversed and reinstated the defense verdict on the basis that defense counsel’s question was neither improper nor prejudicial.
$40.2 million medical malpractice verdict vacated and remanded for new trial.
Birth & Catastrophic Injury Litigation
Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice
August 24, 2020
Our appellate attorneys succeeded in convincing the Pennsylvania Superior Court to vacate a $40.2 million medical malpractice verdict and remand for a new trial. In its unanimous, precedential decision, the Superior Court ruled that the trial court had erroneously allowed plaintiffs’ counsel to utilize hearsay medical literature as substantive evidence. The case involved a spinal cord birth injury and was tried in Delaware County.
Amicus Curiae Brief on Behalf of PDI and PADC
Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice
Automobile Liability
Insurance Services - Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation
June 12, 2020
Marshall Dennehey’s appellate attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania Defense Institute and Pennsylvania Association of Defense Counsel in a case pending in the Pennsylvania Superior Court that involved interpretation of a “regular use” exclusion that commonly appears in underinsured motorist coverage in automobile policies. The Superior Court enforced the exclusion, as PDI and PADC had requested. The plaintiff regularly used a company vehicle for his daily work. But one or two days before the accident, the specific vehicle he had been driving was taken
