CIVIL VERDICTS - PREMISES LIABILITY * Estate of Joan DeMarco v. The Marquis - Decedent business tenant of apartment/office complex owner murdered by former employee of defendant in violent assault during office burglary. Plaintiff's estate alleged negligent security theory of liability against defendant. Settlement negotiated with responsible insurance company in excess of One Million Two Hundred Thousand ($1,200,000.00) Dollars prior to trial. * Khaled Bakar v. Home Properties, Inc. - Plaintiff was standing on third floor balcony of friend's apartment owned by defendant, when the floor suddenly collapsed causing plaintiff to fall to ground. Plaintiff sustained fractured ribs, non-displaced tibia fracture and herniated disc, which was treated with physical therapy and multiple epidural injections. Montgomery County jury returned a verdict in the amount of Seven Hundred and Sixty Nine Thousand ($769,000.00) Dollars. Plaintiff filed Motion for Delay Damages which was granted and case was settled for Nine Hundred Thousand ($900,000.00) Dollars. * CIVIL VERDICTS - AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS * Riccardo v. Kim - Plaintiff sustained fractured cervical vertebrae at C5-6 level which required two surgeries and metal screws, arising from a two vehicle automobile accident. Out-of-court settlement negotiated with responsible insurance carriers in amount of Four Hundred Thousand ($400,000.00) Dollars prior to trial. * Estate of Robert Kane v. Joseph Falco - Decedent killed while passenger in one-car accident where intoxicated driver lost control of vehicle. Wrongful death claim settlement negotiated with responsible insurance company in the amount of Six Hundred and Sixty Thousand ($660,000.00) Dollars prior to trial. * Vinnie Moss v. Baldi Transportation/Erie Insurance Company - Plaintiff awarded Two Hundred Thirty Five Thousand ($235,000.00) Dollars by jury after trial. Defendant trucking company bankrupt and uninsured. Uninsured motorist claim settlement negotiated with plaintiff's insurance company in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand ($200,00.00) Dollars. * CIVIL VERDICTS - LIQUOR LIABILITY * Gerald & Irene Kane v. Dublin Wine and Spirits and Commonwealth of PA - Plaintiff husband and wife sustained multiple injuries in head-on collision with drunk driver. Husband-plaintiff sustained head injury resulting in brain hemorrhage and coma, with substantial recovery. Wife-plaintiff sustained broken ankle. Out-of-court settlement successfully negotiated against defendants prior to trial. Husband's claim - Two Hundred Forty Thousand ($240,000.00) Dollars. Wife's claim - Ninety Thousand ($90,000.00) Dollars. (Bucks County)* Edward Pisarek v. Adriatric Club - Plaintiff police officer assaulted while on duty by intoxicated bar patron skilled in martial arts. Plaintiff sustained permanent partial hearing loss and multiple lacerations. Non-jury trial verdict in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand ($150,000.00) Dollars. (Philadelphia County) CIVIL VERDICTS - PRODUCT LIABILITY* Keith Rosenberger v. Galoob Toys, Inc. - Plaintiff sustained temporary partial loss of vision in one eye with increased risk of future glaucoma, when struck in eye by defendants' children's toy, while plaintiff demonstrated newly purchased toy for child. Out-of-court settlement successfully negotiated against defendants in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand ($150,000.00) Dollars prior to trial. (Montgomery County)* Raymond Cost v. Caterpillar, Inc. - Plaintiff sustained partial amputation of his lower leg, when his foot was crushed in an unguarded pinchpoint of rotating couplings inside engine area, while plaintiff was performing maintenance of defendant's heavy trash compactor/metal shearer. Out-of-court settlement successfully negotiated against defendant in the amount of Four Hundred Seventy Five Thousand ($475,000.00) Dollars prior to trial. (Montgomery County)

DUI Defense Lawyers and Attorneys in Montgomery County

DUI is a serious offense with possible mandatory jail time and license suspensions. You can’t afford not to retain John McMahon to defend your liberty.

As the circumstances of each and every DUI defense case are different, John I. McMahon will determine the best strategy to achieve the best outcome in your case. He will give your case the individual attention it deserves.

Mr. McMahon is one of the most well-known and highly regarded Montgomery County DUI defense attorneys. His unmatched track record of success throughout EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA  is a testament that your case will be handled with the highest level of skill, experience and diligence.  YOU DESERVE AND NEED NOTHING LESS!

See Mr. McMahon’s PA DUI Attorney track record>>

(Twelve recent decisions, 100% Not-Guilty)

OUR TESTED DUI DEFENSE STRATEGY

First, we conduct a thorough and careful evaluation of the prosecution’s evidence in your particular case, utilizing over twenty five years of experience in handling hundreds of DUI defense cases.

Second, we identify the strengths and weaknesses in the evidence, including field sobriety testing, chemical test results, and evidence of unsafe driving. Often, we can achieve the exclusion of certain prosecution evidence or greatly neutralize its persuasiveness through skillful cross examination, Motions to Suppress, and/or Motions
in Limine.

Lastly, we will proceed to vigorously defend your case at trial unless an attractive non-trial alternative like the ARD Program or House Arrest can be successfully negotiated on your behalf.

Ms. Lentz-McMahon is a former Assistant District Attorney from Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, who previously reviewed ARD Applications, recommended acceptances and denials into the program, and proposed conditions for offenders who would be accepted into the
program. She will educate you about the ARD program, it’s
conditions, as well as vigorously advocate on your behalf for your admission into
the program.

Learn more about recent PA DUI Legislation >>

PA DUI Sentencing Law Update >>

ACCELERATED REHABILITATIVE DISPOSITION (PA ARD PROGRAM)

An individual charged with a first-offense “Driving Under the Influence” now referred to as “Driving After Imbibing” may be eligible for the A.R.D. Program. This program is an excellent alternative outcome for persons charged with “Driving While Imbibing” for the following reasons:

1) no jail time

2) no criminal conviction, and

3) minimal license suspension

3) expungement of record

Learn more about recent PA DUI A.R.D. Program >>

PA DUI Law Updates >>

DUI Frequently Asked Questions >>

Click here for more information on DUI Law in Montgomery County

The information contained herein should not be used as a substitute for personal legal advice. You should contact the Law Offices of McMahon, McMahon & Lentz to schedule a Consultation with an attorney who will speak to you regarding your specific situation.