Matthew Laver focuses his practice on professional liability and has particular experience in the defense of lawyers.
He also handles matters in major litigation areas, including the defense of corporations in product liability actions that involve catastrophic injury or death.
In addition, Matthew represents restaurants in all aspects of the industry including contracts, leases, alcohol beverage law (licensing and litigation) and business start-up and entity formation.
After graduating from law school, Matthew served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Pamela Pryor Dembe, President Judge, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, and the Honorable Albert W. Sheppard, Jr., Commerce Program, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.
Matthew was awarded the 2013 Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel (PADC) Young Lawyer Award. The award is given annually to a young lawyer who best exemplifies the qualities of professionalism and dedication as defense counsel in the practice of law and in the promotion of the highest ideals of justice in the community. Matthew was also chosen as one of the 2013 Lawyers on the Fast Track by The Legal Intelligencer.
Matthew G. Laver
Prevailed in the defense of a law firm defendant and individual attorneys in a Dragonetti action commenced in Philadelphia County. This action was appealed up to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and on April 7, 2015, the Court entered an Order affirming the ruling of the Lower Courts and in favor of the defendants. This action arose out of the “kids for cash” scandal in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.
Won a four-day jury trial representing both a local affiliate of a national television station and a national sports team in a potentially high exposure premises liability matter. The plaintiff, while attending the opening day of single ticket sales, allegedly tripped over a camera cable and he tore his Achilles tendon. The plaintiff claimed the television station had not properly secured the cable and the sports team did not provide adequate lighting and security. The jury rendered a unanimous verdict (12-0), in favor of the defendants.
Prevailed in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in the defense of a prominent Montgomery county lawyer and law firm in a case sounding in defamation, abuse of process and tortious interference with business relations.
Secured dismissal of all claims against international corporation in a product liability action stemming from a fatality and accompanying negligent infliction of emotional distress case.
Awarded Summary Judgment in defense of regional commercial transportation company based upon the New Jersey Blackout Defense.
Prevailed in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in the defense of a real estate agent alleged to have committed professional malpractice. Issues involved included appellant’s ability to produce expert reports under the applicable rules of civil procedure, collateral estoppel and statute of limitations. The matter was on appeal following a ruling for the defense during dispositive motions practice in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County.
In a Middlesex County, New Jersey, case involving a Charter Bus accident, Laurence T. Bennett, Joseph Goldberg and Matthew G. Laver, prevailed on behalf of the defendants when Judge Richard Plechner granted Summary Judgment based upon the New Jersey Blackout Defense. This consolidated action originated with the defendant driver of a Charter Bus losing consciousness while behind the wheel of his bus and driving through a parking lot striking multiple vehicles. Subsequently, the owners of the damaged vehicles filed multiple Complaints against the defendant driver and his employer sounding in negligence theories. The defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment arguing that because the bus driver's loss of consciousness was sudden and unforeseeable, there was no valid claim for negligence under New Jersey law.
In granting the Motion for Summary Judgment, Judge Plechner explained that the defendants put forth evidence showing that their driver never experienced a sudden loss of consciousness prior to the accident at issue. Moreover, while the defendant driver's medical records suggested that he might be susceptible to a loss of consciousness, the Plaintiffs failed to obtain a medical expert to attest to this possibility. Without such an expert linking the loss of consciousness to a pre-existing condition, Judge Plechner opined that the Plaintiffs were "unable to defeat the black out defense raised by the defendants."
This case confirms the validity of the New Jersey Blackout Defense and that a driver will not be held liable for an accident stemming from a loss of consciousness if such loss of consciousness is sudden and unforeseeable.
- 04.27.15Presenter, "Frequently Asked Questions: Social Media and Ethics," PBI, Philadelphia
- 09.14Presenter “Ethical Dilemmas in Social Media,” PBI, Philadelphia, PA
Professional & Community Involvement
Executive committee member, Young Lawyers Division of the Philadelphia Bar Association
Executive committee member, Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel
Pennsylvania Restaurant Association
Louis D. Brandeis Law Society
215.972.7900 ext. 7820