Attorney Profile
Kristen L. Worley
Areas of Practice
Contact Info
Overview
Kristen Worley brings more than 22 years of litigation and trial experience to Marshall Dennehey’s Casualty Department. Throughout her career, she has represented a variety of clients in New Jersey and Pennsylvania in the areas of product liability, premises liability, commercial motor vehicle and, specifically, companies specializing in paratransit and non-emergency medical transport lines of business. Additionally, she has handled product defect cases and negligent maintenance cases for elevators and escalators throughout PA and NJ. Kristen routinely defends elevator mechanics in their depositions to defend modernization cases, door strikes, mislevelings, improper passenger extractions by third parties, etc. Kristen has also been admitted on a pro hac basis at the request of her clients to litigate matters with significant exposure in Delaware and New York.
Kristen is driven by results; whether that be identifying those matters that are ripe for early resolution or engaging in targeted discovery for those cases that must be tried. Litigation with a purpose is the key to her success both behind the scenes and in the courtroom. This case management methodology and approach to litigation has proven successful over the years, assisting Kristen in securing the 3rd largest negligent entrustment verdict in New Jersey in 2017.
Kristen is an honors graduate of Trenton State College and earned her law degree at Rutgers School of Law in Camden, New Jersey. In addition to the state courts of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Kristen is admitted in the District Court of New Jersey, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Active in the legal community, she is a member of the International Association of Defense Counsel and the prestigious Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel.
Kristen resides in Southern New Jersey with her family where she enjoys spending her time involved in the local youth soccer community.
Results
Strategically defended and obtained the dismissal of a Laidlow claim asserted by the plaintiff who was acting within the course and scope of his employment with the defendant when he sustained a significant workplace injury. In a 37-page written opinion granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and addressing several other applications, the court ruled the plaintiff failed to establish that his employer committed an intentional and malicious act sufficient to circumvent the workers’ compensation exclusivity provision. In reaching this conclusion, the court applied the Millison “conduct” and “context” prongs, reasoning that the absence of prior accidents or evidence suggesting the plaintiff’s employer intentionally disabled a safety device, the lack of pre-incident OSHA violations or post-accident efforts by the employer to deceive OSHA, and the undeniable determination that the plaintiff’s incident was “part and parcel” of industrial life, all warranted the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant employer and the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim. You can read the opinion here.
Thought Leadership
When Every Second Counts: Managing Catastrophic Claims, A.M. Best Insurance Law Podcast, November 29, 2023