×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Margolis EdelsteinPartner
no photo
Pro

Kevin E. Monastra

Not yet reviewed

170 S. Independence Mall W., Suite 400E, Philadelphia, PA 19106

Commercial Law, General Liability and Professional Liability

About Kevin E. Monastra

Kevin Monastra has over 20 years of experience in insurance defense, representing insured and self-insured entities in complex, multi-party litigation in federal and state courts. He is licensed in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Kevin represents corporations, businesses, and individuals in construction defects, construction site accidents, professional liability, general liability, premises liability, and automobile and trucking accidents. He has successfully defended construction companies, contractors, subcontractors, architects, engineers, and equipment manufacturers and operators in cases involving equipment failures, structural defects, falls from heights, electrocutions, machinery accidents, and construction and design defect claims.

Kevin’s expertise also includes defending property management companies, retail stores, hotels, restaurants, and various private entities in all types of premises liability matters. He has significant experience litigating slip and fall accidents, trip and fall accidents, and civil assault claims. He has tried dozens of cases to verdict in these areas, as well as numerous AAA commercial and construction arbitrations.

Kevin also serves as a Judge Pro Tempore settlement master and arbitrator with the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas.

Speaking Engagements

•“Navigating the Maze of Bad Faith Claims in Property Damage Cases” PAMIC, April 2024 (Lancaster, PA)

News & Case Results

Summary Judgment Secured in Philadelphia Slip and Fall Case

Negligence Claim Against Pedestrian Dismissed with Prejudice

Philadelphia Arbitration Panel Rules for Defense in Two-Car Collision

Pennsylvania Slip & Fall Matter, Defense Verdict in a Binding Arbitration

6 Margolis Edelstein Attorneys Present at PAMIC’s 2024 Claims Summit

Kevin Monastra Secures Defense Verdict for Apartment Complex Owner in Suburban Philadelphia

Monastra Gets Defense Verdict After 4 Day Jury Trial in Philadelphia County

 

Kevin E. Monastra (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) View website

Reviews for Kevin

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Commercial Law
  • Professional Liability
  • Other 1
    • General Liability

Practice Details

  • Video Calls
    Offers Video Calls
    Video Call Options
    Zoom
  • Firm Information
    Position
    Partner
    Firm Name
    Margolis Edelstein
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Representative Matters: Secured a defense finding in an arbitration where the plaintiff claimed the client caused a lane-change collision
    attempted to link multiple injuries, including a subsequent fall
    surgery, to the accident without medical support. The defense focused on exposing inconsistencies in the plaintiff's account
    demonstrating that his injuries were unrelated to the crash.
    Prevailed in a binding arbitration which resulted in a defense finding for an apartment complex. The arbitrator found both parties to be negligent, with the plaintiff's negligence exceeding that of the defendant, resulting in a verdict for the client. Kevin proved that the plaintiff was aware of icy conditions
    chose to proceed without sufficient caution. At the time of his fall, plaintiff was distracted by his phone
    attempting to locate his ride to work.
    Terry Harris v. Broad Dollar World, LLC, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas (December 2023): Secured a defense verdict after a four-day jury trial for a convenience store owner accused of negligence for an alleged walkway defect. The plaintiff claimed the height differential between a drain grate
    surrounding walkway violated ASTM
    ADA st
    ards, leading to her fall
    a fractured patella requiring two surgeries, with an additional future knee replacement alleged. Despite a $2,000,000 dem
    , the jury deliberated for under an hour following lunch, concluding the store owner was not negligent.
    Kathleen Crawford v. Hankin Group, LLC, Chester County Court of Common Pleas (June 2023): Obtained a defense verdict for an apartment complex owner after a five-day jury trial. The plaintiff alleged negligence for failing to identify a hazard at a walkway step, asserting a railing or warning signage was necessary. Her fall resulted in a fractured tibia
    fibula, a lumbar discectomy,
    knee replacement, with a settlement dem
    of $900,000. After deliberating for less than an hour, the jury returned a defense verdict.
  • Additional Links
    https://www.margolisedelstein.com/attorney/kevin-e-monastra/

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    2003, Pennsylvania
    2003, New Jersey
    Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    District Court of New Jersey
    Memberships
    Pennsylvania and New Jersey State Bar Associations.
  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Temple University, Beasley School of Law
    Class of 2003
    J.D.
    Other Education
    Pennsylvania State University
    Class of 2000
    B.A.
    Economics
  • Personal Details & History
    Age
    Born in 1978
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, October 31, 1978

Contact Kevin E. Monastra

Partner at Margolis Edelstein
Not yet reviewed

The Curtis Center, 170 S. Independence Mall W., Suite 400EPhiladelphia, PA 19106U.S.A.

Show on map

Activity

Legal Community Contributions

Email Kevin E. Monastra

Case type is required.
A valid zip code is required.
A valid city is required.
State is required.
Country is required.
Outside the US or Canada?
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

Contact Information

First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
City:
State:
Country:
Case Description:
Contact Information
First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Phone Number:
Return to Profile

Attorneys FAQs

  • Is this attorney admitted to the bar in more than one state?
    Yes, Kevin E. Monastra is admitted to practice in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
  • How many attorneys are in this law firm?
    Margolis Edelstein has 120 attorneys at this location.
  • What law school did this attorney attend?
    Kevin E. Monastra attended Temple University, Beasley School of Law.
  • What year was this attorney's law firm established?
    Margolis Edelstein was established in 1900.
  • Is this attorney listed in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers?
    Kevin E. Monastra is listed in the Civil Trial Practice, Environmental Law and Insurance Defense section of the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers.

Attorney information displayed in this FAQ section is based upon information the lawyer has included on their profile, in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals.

These FAQs include information about a lawyer's background, but do not evaluate their knowledge of the law, past performance on individual cases, personality, or communication skills.

It is solely the responsibility of lawyers and law firms to ensure that any information they provide complies with all applicable laws and rules of professional conduct.

You should be aware that the information we rely upon may not be comprehensive, or frequently updated.

Always research the lawyer further to get a better understanding of their license credentials, disciplinary status, background, and experience.

Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions