Stephen M. McManus
Prior to becoming an attorney, Mr. McManus was a chemical engineer specializing in the control system design for the operation of water, wastewater and hazardous waste treatment facilities. With respect to this work, Mr. McManus originally worked for Metcalf & Eddy in Boston and, later, for Leeds & Northrup in North Wales, PA.
After graduating from Delaware Law School in 1986, Mr. McManus’ legal work has included a wide range of products liability, toxic torts, environmental actions, and construction litigation, including the insurance coverage issues that relate thereto. Mr. McManus has been involved in a myriad of mass tort litigation, including class actions, federal court MDL cases and other cases involving dozens of plaintiffs. These cases have involved claims pertaining to PCB’, latex gloves, Norplant birth control devices, the use of phentermine in the Fen-Phen litigation, and various claims of injuries and property damage resulting from landfills and the release of chemicals into the soil and water. In addition, Mr. McManus’ practice involved construction matters, premised liability claims, products liability actions, and insurance coverage matters.
Mr. McManus also has been a frequent lecturer on such subjects as contractual indemnification, the analysis of coverage claims by entities seeking additional insured coverage, the handling of premises liability claims and lawsuits, and on other pertinent subjects. These seminars have been approved for CLE credits in Pennsylvania, as well as for CE credits by the insurance departments in multiple jurisdictions (Florida, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Arizona and Oklahoma).
Having worked with Dave McCormick and Phil Priore at Liebert, Short & Hirshland, Mr. McManus joined them to start McCormick & Priore on April 1, 1994. Mr. McManus became an equity shareholder in the firm in 1998. As of March 1, 2024, Mr. McManus become Of Counsel with the firm. He now focuses his practice on the training and development of younger attorneys, as well as the development and presentation of seminars for lawyers and for clients’ legal and claims departments.
Among his hobbies and interests, Mr. McManus is an avid tennis player and golfer, enjoys sailing, playing guitar, and he conducts research on the 18th Massachusetts Vol. Infantry (a regiment in the Civil War) and he authored a book on this subject: McManus, Stephen. The Civil War Research Guide. Stackpole Books, 2003. In addition, Mr. McManus enjoys traveling and history.
- Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- S. District for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- S. District for the District of New Jersey
- S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- Court of Appeals of Maryland
- Delaware Law School (J.D.)
- Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (B.S., Chemical Engineering)
- Defense Research Institute
- Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel
• Construction Litigation
• Environmental Litigation
• Insurance Coverage
• Mass Tort and Complex Litigation
• Premises Liability
• Property Damage Claims
• Toxic Torts
- In Re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig., No. 99-1692, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 221 F.3d 449; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 19138; 47 Fed. R. Serv.3d (Callaghan) 985, April, 2000, Argued, August 10, 2000, Filed, As Amended September 15, 2000. (It was an abuse of discretion to impose joint and several liability on a minority group of toxic tort plaintiffs whose claims were merely responsible for a small share of defendants’ expenses.)
- Brown v. SEPTA (In Re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig.), No. 95-2098, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 113 F.3d 444; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 10823; 47 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 302; 44 ERC (BNA)1611; 27 ELR 20941, September 16, 1996, Argued, May 12, 1997, Filed (In a toxic tort case, plaintiffs were properly required to prove that they were exposed to toxic substances at a level greater than that ordinarily encountered in everyday life to be successful on their medical monitoring claims.)
- Airco Industrial Gases, Inc. Div. of BOC Group, Inc. v. Teamsters Health Welfare Pensions Fund, No. 87-3642, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 850 F.2d 1028; 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8994; 11 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 830; 9 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2305, March 1, 1988, Argued, June 30, 1988, Filed (A retirement fund admitted a refund policy, but, in the absence of specific statute, interest and attorneys’ fees were properly denied as contrary to the policy underlying the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.)
- Lie v. Dara, CIVIL ACTION NO. 01-3167, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8788, May 15, 2002, Decided (In a personal injury case, defendants’ summary judgment motion was denied in part and granted. The federal claims could go forward since the state workers’ compensation act did not apply. Two supplemental claims survived against two defendants.)
- Nestor v. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 559 Pa. 8,789 A.2d 107 (1999). (In a medical malpractice case, plaintiff claimed emotional distress and fear of cancer regarding the loss of biopsies by the hospital.)