Jason Edwards obtained summary judgment resulting in the dismissal with prejudice of all claims in a Bucks County lawsuit against a local automotive dealership.
Plaintiff alleged that Jason’s client sold her a defective vehicle that had a hollowed out catalytic convertor which caused the engine of the vehicle to catch fire in October 2019. Plaintiff’s claims against Jason’s client included a claim under the PA Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Plaintiff alleged that a representative from Jason’s client told her the vehicle was in good condition, inspected, and road worthy when she purchased the vehicle. Plaintiff sought treble damages and attorneys’ fees.
Jason litigated this matter over several years and investigated Plaintiff’s allegations extensively. Jason uncovered through discovery and his investigation that the Plaintiff purchased the vehicle in March 2018 and her vehicle caught fire in October 2019. At the time of the fire, the vehicle had over one hundred thousand miles, and had been inspected and repaired numerous times. In fact, the catalytic convertor Plaintiff alleged was hollowed out had been replaced numerous times by other entities (not Jason’s client) prior to the engine fire in October 2019. Additionally, through discovery it was determined that Plaintiff did not have any evidence to actually establish what caused the engine fire.
Jason filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the local automotive dealership and argued that the record contained insufficient evidence to make out a prima facie cause of action against Jason’s client. The Court agreed with Jason’s arguments and dismissed all claims against Jason’s client. Plaintiff did not appeal the Court’s ruling.
Jason Edwards obtained dismissal of two Complaints in Montgomery County on behalf of two clients following the filing of preliminary objections.
The first case arose from a three-vehicle accident in Montgomery County. Plaintiff was a passenger in an Uber. Jason’s client’s vehicle was rear ended by the vehicle directly behind it and pushed into the vehicle Plaintiff was a passenger in. Plaintiff alleged severe injuries as a result of the accident. On behalf of the client, Jason filed preliminary objections seeking dismissal of the Complaint due to the fact that Jason’s client was never served as required under Pennsylvania law. The Court agreed with Jason’s arguments and dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
The second case also arose from a motor vehicle accident in Montgomery County in October 2020. Plaintiff alleged the Jason’s client failed to stop at a stop sign causing the accident. Plaintiff alleged sever injuries as a result of the accident. On behalf of the client, Jason filed preliminary objections seeking dismissal of the Complaint due to Plaintiff’s complete failure to serve Jason’s client as required under Pennsylvania law. The Court agreed with Jason’s argument and dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
Jason Edwards obtained summary judgment resulting in a complete dismissal of all claims, including cross claims with prejudice against a local concrete contractor in Lehigh County following years of litigation.
The Plaintiffs commenced their lawsuit in Lehigh County in August of 2019 against the General Contractor and Architect they hired to construct a new home for them in mid-2012. Construction on the house was completed in early 2013. Plaintiffs alleged that they experienced numerous incidents and events of water intrusion since 2013.
Plaintiffs brought numerous claims against the General Contractor and Architect including breach of contract. The General Contractor joined 14 subcontractors into the lawsuit including Jason’s client, a concrete contractor. The General Contractor’s claims against Jason’s client were for breach of contract/warranty, negligence, and contribution/indemnification.
Jason litigated this matter over several years. Jason extensively investigated the claims of Plaintiffs and the General Contractor. Through his investigation, and with the assistance of a liability expert, Jason was able to establish that his client’s work did not cause any of the water intrusion issues alleged by the Plaintiffs in this case. The deposition testimony of the General Contractor, Plaintiffs, and the individual retained by the Plaintiffs to repair the defects assisted in establishing the defenses. The admissions of both Plaintiffs and the General Contractor during discovery also assisted in establishing the defenses.
Jason filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the client and argued that the General Contractor failed to establish prima facie causes of actions of negligence, breach of contract/warranty, and contribution against his client.
Following oral argument, the Court agreed with Jason’s arguments and granted the Motion for Summary Judgment dismissing with prejudice all claims against the client.