Brad E. Haas

Practice Details

• Firm Information
  Position

  Shareholder

  Firm Name

  Marshall Dennehey
• Representative Cases & Transactions
  Cases

  Significant Representative Matters: Obtained a defense verdict following a jury trial related to an automobile accident. Brad's client admitted to liability for causing the accident at trial. Despite this admission, during trial Brad was able to convince the jury that Plaintiff's limited tort selection applied
  that her alleged injuries did not breach the limited tort threshold. The jury returned a verdict against Plaintiff on the limited tort issue, resulting in a complete defense verdict.
  Secured an extremely favorable verdict following a jury trial solely on damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff alleged a collision with the Defendant's large truck caused serious head
  neck injuries. Through cross examination, Brad was able to demonstrate the Plaintiff's injuries were largely related to significant pre-accident
  degenerative medical conditions. At the conclusion of trial, the jury awarded Plaintiff less than four percent of her settlement dem
  .
  Negotiated a mid-trial settlement equivalent to less than six percent of the Plaintiff's dem
  on behalf of an automotive dealership. The Plaintiff sought compensation for spinal injuries allegedly caused by a hazardous condition on the company's premises. Extensive discovery revealed the Plaintiff had a pre-existing history of spinal issues unrelated to the incident in question. Additionally, evidence from social media
  surveillance was leveraged to undermine the credibility of the Plaintiff's allegations. The case was settled just prior to opening statements.
  Successfully defended a national carsharing company, resulting in a dismissal of all claims. The case involved a multi-party suit arising out of a commercial auto accident. Through aggressive pleading, Brad obtained a dismissal by arguing that both Federal
  State law provisions prohibited any claims against the company. Brad additionally argued the facts as set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint failed to establish any duty
  /or breach on the client's behalf.
  Obtained a favorable settlement in seven-figure lawsuit, involving a tractor-trailer accident. Following significant discovery, Brad was able to secure a settlement significantly below Plaintiff's initial dem
  , after uncovering pre-accident medical records, which identified various inconsistencies related to Plaintiff's alleged medical damages.
  Secured a dismissal of Plaintiff's claims via a Motion for Summary Judgment in a lawsuit involving a six-vehicle commercial automobile accident. Brad argued Plaintiff's own deposition testimony, along with documentary evidence failed to establish any negligence on the part of the Defendant.
  Secured a favorable verdict in a non-jury trial based on an alleged breach of an automobile warranty. Following testimony, the judge awarded less than ten percent of Plaintiff's pre-trial settlement dem
  .
  Successfully defended an insurance company in multiple direct lawsuits brought by an insured. Plaintiff alleged property damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff also alleged, in a separate lawsuit, that the insurance company failed to comply with the terms of a warranty
  acted in bad faith. Brad argued that Plaintiff lacked st
  ing to bring these suits, while also disputing the merits of Plaintiff's allegations. The cases were dismissed via a Motion for Judgment Non Pros
  a Motion for Summary Judgment.
  Secured a dismissal of all claims via Summary Judgment on behalf of a national grocery store chain. Plaintiff alleged she was caused to fall in the store due to an accumulation of a wet substance. Deposition testimony
  written discovery revealed that Plaintiff could not identify what the substance was, how long it had been present, or whether the store had notice of the substance. Based upon this the Court granted the store's Motion for Summary Judgment.
  Negotiated a favorable settlement in a six-figure UIM/Bad Faith case. Discovery
  deposition evidence revealed Plaintiff had pre-existing injuries, which were not initially reported. Research further revealed Plaintiff working a second, under-the-table job during her alleged disability period. This information eventually led to a successful settlement on behalf of our client.
  Secured a dismissal of Plaintiffs' claims in a product liability lawsuit brought against a national manufacturer. Plaintiffs alleged they sustained property damage due to a defective washing machine. Brad argued that Plaintiffs could not establish the requisite expert testimony to pursue a specific design theory
  or the requisite documentary evidence to proceed under a malfunction theory. As a result, the Court granted the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.
  Obtained Summary Judgment on behalf of an insurance agency in a seven-figure negligent procurement case. The trial court's ruling was based upon a determination of a lack of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation,
  causation on behalf of both the insurance agent
  agency.
  Successfully defended a global food service corporation against a Plaintiff alleging various violations under 42 U.S.C. 1981
  42 U.S.C. 1985. In our client's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Brad argued Plaintiff's section 1981 right to contract claims were invalid as she failed to demonstrate any contractual impairments. Brad argued Plaintiff's section 1985 claims were barred by the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine, as the alleged conspiracy involved two employees of the same company. Plaintiff's claims were dismissed in their entirety.
  Obtained a defense judgement at arbitration on behalf of an apartment complex in a case involving a Plaintiff's suit for invasion of privacy
  negligent infliction of emotional distress. Brad argued that Plaintiff's claims for invasion of privacy were legally insufficient, as there existed no proof of an actual intrusion. He further argued that Plaintiff could not pursue her negligent infliction of emotional distress claim, as she suffered no physical harm.
  Obtained multiple defense judgments on behalf of various auto manufacturers involved in breach of warranty lawsuits.
  Published Works: 'Paul Miller's Law: Direct
  Punitive Transportation Exposure,' CLM Magazine, March 19, 2026
  'From Instagram to the Jury - Lessons in Digital Evidence Authentication,' PAMIC Pulse, October 20, 2025
  'Pennsylvania's Exp
  ing Vicarious Liability St
  ard,' The Legal Intelligencer, February 27, 2025
  'The Impact of Recent Decisions on Gig Transportation Company Litigation in Pa.,' The Legal Intelligencer, February 2, 2024
  'Unveiling the Power of Usage-Based Insurance in Personal Injury Discovery,' The Legal Intelligencer, Personal Injury Supplement, November 7, 2023
  ' Tracking the Truth: Utilizing App Data in Personal Injury Defense, ' The Legal Intelligencer, July 6, 2023
  Managing Liability for Videoconferencing While Driving, Risk Management Magazine, January 3, 2023
  'Pennsylvania Superior Court Ends Split of Authority Based on Allegations of Recklessness Within a Negligence Complaint,' Defense Digest, Vol. 28, No. 12, December 2022
  Federal District Court Comments on Fair Share Act's Applicability In Cases Involving A 'Faultless' Plaintiff in Light of Spencer V. Johnson, Legal Update for Pennsylvania Civil Litigation, July 13, 2022
  'Superior Court Reviews Discoverability of Mental Health Records,' Lawyers Journal, April 8, 2022
  ' Does the Fair Share Act Apply to Faultless Plaintiffs? A Defense Position in the Wake of Spencer v. Johnson, ' CounterPoint, newsletter of the PA Defense Institute, December 2021.
  'Pennsylvania Supreme Court Holds Sudden Emergency Doctrine No Longer a 'Defense',' Defense Digest, Vol. 27, No. 4, September 2021
  'Pennsylvania Superior Court Holds that Future Medical Expenses in Motor Vehicle Litigation Are Not Subject to Act VI Cost Containment Provisions,' Defense Digest, Vol. 26, No. 1, March 2020
  'Social Media Discovery: Examining the Factual Predicate St
  ard,' The Legal Intelligencer, March 5, 2016
  'Autonomous Vehicles May Impact Legal Profession,' Lawyers Journal, October 2, 2015
  'Now You See It, Now You Don't: Self-Deleting Apps & Spoliation,' Lawyers Journal, June 12, 2015
  Defense Digest, Vol. 21, No. 3, September 2015
  ' Deposition Tips for Earning Respect as a Young Attorney, ' The Legal Intelligencer, March 12, 2015