Source: http://www.marshalldennehey.com/attorneys/kevin-m-mckeon
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 18:25:29+00:00

Document:
Kevin has 25 years of experience representing manufacturers, corporations and businesses in product liability, product warranty and premises liability cases. He has had cases dismissed on behalf of defendants in product liability cases. He defends manufacturers in product warranty cases involving claims pursuant to federal and state statutes, including the Pennsylvania and New Jersey lemon laws, breach of warranty and consumer fraud acts. He represents defendants in premises liability cases.
Kevin had represented and litigated cases for major manufacturers in a variety of industries, including automobiles, truck, boats, homes, and recreational vehicles and equipment. He has litigated cases on behalf of warranty and service contract companies and builders.
He has tried over 75 cases to jury verdicts, numerous bench trials and handled class actions. He has also argued before appellate courts, including the New Jersey Supreme Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
Kevin also serves as an arbitrator in the Commercial Arbitration program in the Superior Court, Camden County, New Jersey.
Malin v. Bayliner Corp., 148 F. 3d 1154 (3rd Cir. 1998), Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed trial court's dismissal of boat manufacturer after lengthy trial involving claims of breach of warranty, fraud, revocation of acceptance.
Palmucci v. Brunswick Corp., 311 N.J. Super. 607, 710 A. 2d 1045 (App. Div. 1998). Holding that manufacturers are entitled to at least one opportunity to cure an allegedly defective product prior to plaintiff filing suit.
Wanetick v. OCT Partnership, 318 N.J. Super. 156, 723 A. 2d 100 (App. Div. 1999). Holding that an ultimate outcome charge must be given to a jury in a consumer fraud case.
Suber v. Chrysler Corp., 104 F. 3d 578 (3rd Cir. 1997). Determining federal jurisdictional issues and stating that a manufacturer cannot be held liable for actions of a dealer absent an indicia of ownership of the dealer in a consumer fraud case.
Poli v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 349 N.J. Super. 169, 793 A. 2d 104 (App. Div. 2001). holding that there is a two-year statute of limitation in a lemon law claim, and addressing breach of warranty statute of limitation issues.
Wanetick v. Gateway Mitsubishi, 163 N.J. 484, 750 A. 2d 79 (2000). New Jersey Supreme Court ruling holding that an ultimate outcome charge must be given to a jury in a Consumer Fraud Act case; Model Jury Charges amended to reflect this ruling.
Ryan v. American Honda, 186 N.J. 431, 896 A. 2d 454 (2006). Holding that leases are covered in New Jersey under the federal Magnuson Moss Warranty Act.
Divigenze v. Chrysler Corp., 345 N.J. Super. 314, 785 A. 2d 37 (App. Div. 2001), cert. den. 171 N.J. 442, 794 A. 2d 181 (2002). Addressing plaintiff's burden of proof and jury instructions in a lemon law case.
Obtained complete summary judgments dismissing entire cases for multiple automobile manufacturers in numerous cases in New Jersey and Pennsylvania involving the Pennsylvania and New Jersey lemon laws, breach of warranty (Uniform Commercial Code), Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and consumer fraud statutes.
Had plaintiff dismiss product liability fire loss case against product manufacturer in claim for over $500,000 in property damage by proving through experts that client's product did not cause fire.
Had plaintiff dismiss products liability case against exercise equipment manufacturer in personal injury case by establishing that client's product did not cause the injury and injury either did not take place or was caused by othe defendants.
Defense verdict in jury trial on behalf of boat manufacturer in product warranty case where plaintiff claimed a defect in a boat led to a boat sinking in Atlantic Ocean.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.