TTH is a regional civil litigation firm dedicated to protecting clients from the consequences of risk. Since 1977, TTH has provided a one-stop legal solution for individuals, businesses, and insurers across multiple jurisdictions. With over 100 attorneys and 13 offices, TTH delivers practical, highly effective legal representation at every stage of the litigation and claims process.
Our closely connected network of offices leverages modern technology to provide exceptional, predictable legal services and results at a fair price. We believe strong client relationships are the foundation of effective advocacy. We foster a collaborative, results-driven culture where our attorneys are deeply invested in understanding our clients’ unique needs and long-term goals. By combining legal excellence with a client-first approach, we build lasting partnerships based on trust, responsiveness, and unwavering commitment.
TTH attorneys Caroline Gentilcore and John Morgan recently prevailed in appealing and reversing a WCJ’s Section 440(a) fee award. The underlying litigation concluded in a favorable closed period of benefits with a termination. However, the WCJ initially awarded attorney’s fees over and above the award. Caroline and John appealed, arguing
Congratulations to the 2025-2026 TTH New Lawyer Class: Joseph Badami, Eli Weisman, Jared Friedman, Sean Raftery, Danielle Schwartz, Kaylie O’Donnell, Grace Lonergan, Caitlyn Corey, Veronica Giron, and Zoe Wilson who recently completed TTH’s New Lawyer Training Program, which consisted of 31 hours of education and training over the course of
SIGNIFICANT CASE SUMMARIES Federal Case Summaries Berk v. Choy United States Supreme Court No. 24-440, 607 U.S. ____ Decided: January 20, 2026 United States Supreme Court holds that state law Affidavit/Certificate of Merit requirements do not apply to federal court proceedings because they conflict with Rule 8 of the Federal
SIGNIFICANT CASE SUMMARIES Pennsylvania Case Summaries Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Fitzpatrick Pennsylvania Supreme Court 349 A.3d 835 Decided: January 21, 2026 Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds that, even when not required, expert testimony presented at trial must still comply with Pennsylvania’s admissibility standards. Background This action arose from the drowning death
