Hare, John J.

Your profile? Update now
Updated 9/9/2009
firm image

Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin

1845 Walnut Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-4797

Phone: 215-575-2609

Fax: (215) 575-0856

Contact Us

Summary

Current Employment Position(s)

Shareholder; Chair, Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice Group

Lawyer Overview

John is a highly-experienced appellate attorney who serves as Chair of the firm's seven-attorney Appellate Advocacy & Post-Trial Practice Group. He has litigated more than 300 appeals in state and federal appellate courts. John's diverse practice includes cases involving professional malpractice, civil rights claims, product liability, toxic torts, construction accidents, employment claims, and premises liability. In addition to litigating cases in the appellate courts, he is actively engaged in developing and implementing both trial and appellate strategy, prosecuting and defending pre-trial, trial, and post-trial motions, and acting as appellate counsel on trial teams in high-exposure cases.   John also frequently speaks on appellate topics and has submitted amicus curiae briefs to appellate courts on behalf of various organizations.  

Along with former Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge Patrick Tamilia, John was commissioned by the Superior Court in 1995 to draft a comprehensive history of the Court to commemorate its Centennial Anniversary. The book, entitled Keystone of Justice: The Pennsylvania Superior Court, 1895-1995, was published by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 2000 and is one of the nation's leading studies of a state appellate court.

In 2008 and 2009, John was recognized by Law & Politics/Philadelphia Magazine as a Pennsylvania Super Lawyer in the area of appellate practice, a distinction applied to five percent of Pennsylvania attorneys based upon a peer selection and evaluation process.  In 2009, John was also selected to Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition.

Significant Representative Cases

  • In the first comprehensive appellate decision interpreting Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1042.3-1042.6, Pennsylvania's tort reform measure intended to increase the threshold of merit for professional liability actions, the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the ruling of the trial court and remanded for the entry of judgment as a matter of law in favor of John's client, a physician, based upon the plaintiff's failure to file a certificate of merit in support of his medical malpractice claim. O'Hara v. Randall, 879 A.2d 240 (Pa. Super. 2005)

  • In the first appellate decision interpreting and applying Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1006(a.1), Pennsylvania's tort reform measure involving venue, the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the ruling of the trial court and held that the plaintiff's medical malpractice action against John's client, a physician, must be transferred out of Philadelphia County. Connor v. Crozer Keystone Health Sys., 832 A.2d 1112 (Pa. Super. 2003)

  • The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed two lower courts and awarded a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, erasing a substantial judgment against John's client, a professional corporation, on the basis that the plaintiff's res ipsa loquitur theory of liability was invalid as a matter of law. Toogood v. Rogal, 824 A.2d 1140 (Pa. 2003)

  • The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the ruling of the trial court and awarded a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, erasing a substantial judgment against John's client, a hospital, on the basis that, although the plaintiff had adduced some evidence to support her claims, the evidence was not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of negligence. Van Zandt v. Holy Redeemer Hospital, 806 A.2d 809 (Pa. 2002)

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the judgment of the federal district court and ruled that an ordinance passed by John's client, a Pennsylvania municipality, did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Philadelphia Owners Association v. City of Philadelphia et al, 57 Fed. Appx. 961 (3d Cir. 2003)

  • The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the ruling of the trial court and remanded for the re-entry of judgment in favor of John's client, a nonprofit corporation that had entered into an agreement to buy real estate, on the basis that the trial court had erroneously stricken the judgment. Crystal Lake Camps v. Alford, 2007 PA Super 119 (Pa. Super. 2007)

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the judgment of the federal district court and dismissed the plaintiff's civil rights claims on the basis that John's clients, county officials, were entitled to absolute immunity from liability for actions taken in their official capacities. Laverdure v. County of Montgomery, 324 F.3d 123 (3d Cir. 2003)

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the judgment of the federal district court and upheld the dismissal of the plaintiff's product liability claims against John's client, a manufacturer of scaffolding equipment, after a jury found that the manufacturer was not responsible for the construction accident that injured the plaintiff. Johnson v. Vanguard Manufacturing, 34 Fed. Appx. 858 (3d Cir. 2002)

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the judgment of the federal district court and upheld the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims against John's clients, attorneys and their law firm, on the basis that the plaintiff had failed to prove the necessary element of causation. My Le Duong v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 27617 (3d Cir. 2006)

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the judgment of the federal district court and upheld the dismissal of all claims against John's client, a law firm, on the basis that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations and the doctrine of collateral estoppel. Seawright v. Greenberg, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 9248 (3d Cir. 2007)

  • The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the ruling of the trial court and held that the plaintiff was not entitled to retry her claims against John's client, a hospital. Stalsitz v. Allentown Hospital, 814 A.2d 766 (Pa. Super. 2004)

  • The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed the ruling of the trial court, which entered judgment for John's client, that the City of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia Phillies owed no duty to a spectator at a baseball game who was partially blinded when hit by a foul ball. Pakett v. The City of Philadelphia et al, 871 A.2d 304 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005)

    • Areas of Practice

    • Appellate Litigation
    • Post-Trial Litigation

    Representative Cases

    West Practice Categories

    Litigation & Appeals

    Next: Qualifications

    Qualifications

    Bar Admissions

    • Pennsylvania, 1994
    • U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit
    • U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania

    Professional Associations and Memberships

    • Bar Association for the Third Federal Circuit
    • Pennsylvania Bar Association
    • Philadelphia Bar Association

    Honors and Awards

    • Pennsylvania Super Lawyer, 2009

    Past Employment Positions

    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Hon. Patrick R. Tamilia, Law Clerk, 1994 - 1997
    • U.S. Marines, 1986 - 1990

    Education

    • Duquesne University School of Law, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1993
      J.D.

      Law Review: Duquesne Law Review, Senior Editor
    • Princeton University, 1999
      Completed Ph.D. Coursework, Legal History
    • University of California, 1998
      M.A., Legal History
    • Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 1990
      B.A.
      Honors: magna cum laude
    Prev: SummaryNext: Articles

    Articles

    Published Works

    • Keystone of Justice: A History of the Pennsylvania Superior Court; 1895-1995, co-author with Hon. P. Tamilia, Superior Court of Pa., Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, January, 2000
    • Protecting Their Own; The Power Of Administrative Agencies To Enforce Regulations Through Litigation, Defense Digest, May, 2003
    • The Legal Doctrines Of Waiver And Estoppel May Not Be Used To Expand The Scope Of An Insurance Policy To Cover Excluded Risks, Defense Digest, September, 2002
    • Defining "Beneficiary" In A Wrongful Death Action Under The Pennsylvania Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association Act, Defense Digest, August, 2001
    • Pennsylvania Appellate News, Defense Digest, 2001-2008
    • Note, Freedom of the Press and the Right to a Fair Trial in Pennsylvania, 30 Duq.L.Rev. 760, 1992
    Prev: QualificationsNext: Office Info

    Office Information

    Address

    1845 Walnut Street
    Philadelphia, PA 19103-4797

    Phones

    215-575-2609

    Faxes

    (215) 575-0856

    Emails

    Contact Us

    Websites

    http://www.marshalldennehey.com

    Prev: Articles

    When viewing a listing, consider the state advertising restrictions to which lawyers and law firms must adhere, as well as our West Legal Directory disclaimers.

    Map location

    Please enable JavaScript to view the map.