James A. Stranahan IV

Attorney Stranahan is presently handling a number of wrongful death cases on behalf of families who have lost their loved ones due to accidents caused by the negligence of another.  Attorney Stranahan’s twenty-seven plus years of experience, his ability to network with experts in the appropriate fields, and his knowledge of the Court procedures enables him to achieve maximum results without unnecessary delays.

Cases pending include:

• A driver killed when PennDOT road signage confused the driver who proceeded the wrong way on an entrance.
• A child crossing the road who was seriously injured by an inattentive motorist.
• A child on a bicycle killed by a motorist who failed to yield while crossing a one-lane bridge.
• A passenger seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident when the driver ran off the road, required surgery and lost wage income.
• An elderly lady severely injured when T-boned at an intersection.

Attorney Stranahan has also attended many seminars on Elder Law and has achieved expertise in Estate Planning, Wills, Trusts and Estate Administration.  He writes many Wills, Powers of Attorneys and Living Wills for clients each month.  His years of experience and ability to explain Court procedures to his clients make for a smooth process of handling difficult Estate matters.  If necessary, Attorney Stranahan also has the trial experience to litigate in Court.

During 2006, Attorney Stranahan had the opportunity to negotiate the settlement of an insurance claim for a local businessman who had his inventory damaged in a truck accident along Interstate 80.  The insurance company for the trucking company that struck his vehicle and trailer is located out of state and became impossible to deal with for the businessman.  After contacting our law firm, Attorney Stranahan successfully negotiated a settlement which was exactly what the businessman wanted.  He contacted experts, appraised the personal property that was damaged, and received a settlement in the amount of $278,000 without the necessity of going to trial.  The fact that our firm handles expensive litigation allowed us to negotiate this matter, even though the adjusters hired a large Pittsburgh firm in an attempt to defend the claim.

Gregory D. Metrick

Illegal traffic stops and subsequent arrests by police officers outside of their jurisdiction are an all too common occurrence.  Attorney Cline and Attorney Metrick have represented motorists unfairly victimized by these circumstances.  One such individual was stopped by a Thiel College police officer in the city of Greenville, and was later arrested for DUI.  Attorney Cline and Attorney Metrick successfully argued that the stop was made outside of the officer’s jurisdictional boundaries, and any evidence obtained after the stop could not be used by the prosecution.  All charges against the motorist were dismissed.  Commonwealth v. Walsh, 307 CD 2007, Mercer County Court of Common Pleas.

For years, Pennsylvania courts were divided on whether a motorist convicted of DUI could receive house arrest with electronic monitoring in lieu of imprisonment.  The statute dealing with house arrest states that individuals convicted of their first, second, or third DUI are eligible, while the 2004 DUI penalties statute calls for mandatory imprisonment.  Before the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Attorney Metrick argued that the intent of the house arrest statute was clear, and that common pleas judges should have the discretion to place an individual convicted of DUI on house arrest, regardless of the DUI penalties statute.  The Superior Court agreed and affirmed a Mercer County Common Pleas Court sentence of house arrest for a motorist convicted of a second offense DUI, thereby resolving the conflict between the two statutes.  Commonwealth v. Williams, 827 WDA 2006.