stuart schatz
mandracchia and McWhirk
Practice Areas
Website
Mr. Schatz specializes in serious personal injury litigation and family law in Montgomery County and the five county area. He is a member of the Pennsylvania and Montgomery County Bar Associations (Medico-legal Committee, Speaker’s Bureau and Family Law Committee); Pennsylvania and Montgomery County Trial Lawyers Association.
Mr. Schatz has significant experience in litigating jury trials and hundreds of arbitrations. As a former public defender, he still devotes part of his practice to criminal defense.
He successfully argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2001 setting precedent in the case of the American Red Cross vs. W.C.A.B. (Romano), 745 A.2d 78 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) aff’d 766 A.2d 328 (Pa. 2001). The Court held that when an employee sustains a work-related injury as a result of the negligence of an uninsured or underinsured motorist and recovers UM or UIM benefits from his or her own policy, an employer has no right of subrogation against that recovery, because the benefits were not from a third-party but from the employee’s own motor vehicle policy for which the employee paid the premiums.
Mr. Schatz again successfully argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2003 and made new law in the case of Hoffman vs. Troncelliti, (839 A.2d 1013, Pa. Super. 2003). The plaintiff, Sherry Hoffman, owned a car and had selected limited tort coverage. Her mother had full tort coverage. The Court held that in cases where two or more conflicting policies, the tort option covering the vehicle in which the party was injured should apply, so long as the injured party is an insured under that policy.
Mr. Schatz has significant experience in litigating jury trials and hundreds of arbitrations. As a former public defender, he still devotes part of his practice to criminal defense.
He successfully argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2001 setting precedent in the case of the American Red Cross vs. W.C.A.B. (Romano), 745 A.2d 78 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) aff’d 766 A.2d 328 (Pa. 2001). The Court held that when an employee sustains a work-related injury as a result of the negligence of an uninsured or underinsured motorist and recovers UM or UIM benefits from his or her own policy, an employer has no right of subrogation against that recovery, because the benefits were not from a third-party but from the employee’s own motor vehicle policy for which the employee paid the premiums.
Mr. Schatz again successfully argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2003 and made new law in the case of Hoffman vs. Troncelliti, (839 A.2d 1013, Pa. Super. 2003). The plaintiff, Sherry Hoffman, owned a car and had selected limited tort coverage. Her mother had full tort coverage. The Court held that in cases where two or more conflicting policies, the tort option covering the vehicle in which the party was injured should apply, so long as the injured party is an insured under that policy.
This compliance bundle provides access to online video and audio courses which, when completed, will satisfy the entire 15 hour and 3 hour ethics CLE requirement for Texas. These courses have been approved by the State Bar of Texas for full CLE credit.
skippack Personal Injury Lawyers
An experienced workers’ compensation, social security, and employee disability benefit attorney who has handled cases throughout Pennsylvania.
610-584-9400
Personal injury lawyer in Montgomery County, PA, and cofounder of the law firm, Mullaney & Mullaney. With over 20 years of experience in medical malpractice, car and truck accidents.
(610) 584-4416