Jon Michael Dumont

Partner Tel: 215-279-9725 (PA) / 856-354-8074 (NJ) Fax: 215-279-9732 (PA) / 856-354-8075 (NJ) Send an Email

Areas of Practice

Cargo Claims
Public Transit

Bar Admissions

Pennsylvania, 1993
New Jersey, 1995
U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1994
U.S. District Court District of New Jersey, 1996
New York, 2000
U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania
U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania
U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York
U.S. District Court Northern District of New York
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court Western District of New York
U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit


Villanova University School of Law, Villanova, Pennsylvania
J.D. - 1993

Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
M.A. - 1989
Major: Economics

Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
B.A. magna cum laude - 1989
Honors: Member, Gold Key National Honor Society
Major: Economics


-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense where plaintiffs’ 61-year-old decedent, an independent contractor, owner-operator, truck driver, received fatal injuries in a receiver’s parking lot driveway when the load of plastic pipe he was delivering fell on to him from his flatbed trailer after he started to unstrap it. The decedent arrived at the receiver’s facility in Pennsylvania at night after it was closed. He stopped in the parking lot driveway close to the locked gates to the facility. After decedent released one of the straps securing the pipe to his flatbed, a bundle of pipe fell on top of him.
Plaintiffs sued the shipper, the receiver, the motor carrier to whom decedent leased his tractor-trailer, as well as the manufacturer and distributor of the banding used to unitize the plastic pipe for transport on decedent’s flatbed trailer. Plaintiffs asserted negligence claims against all defendants as well as strict product liability claims against the banding manufacturer and distributor. Specifically, plaintiffs claimed the motor carrier was negligent in failing to adequately train and warn the decedent truck driver of the dangers associated with transporting the shipper’s plastic pipe.
Plaintiffs’ trucking industry expert, Brooks Rugemer, testified the motor carrier’s failure to provide additional training to decedent concerning load securement and its failure to warn the decedent that banding can break were causes of the fatal accident. On cross-examination, Rugemer had to admit the decedent had more experience operating a flatbed trailer and hauling plastic pipe than Rugemer had. The trucking industry expert retained for the defense, Garry Wilmoski, testified the motor carrier complied with its obligations under federal law by confirming the decedent’s knowledge, experience, and qualifications to operate his tractor-trailer, and it had no duty to provide him with any additional training. Wilmoski further testified the decedent needed no special warning, and he knew he had to tender the load for delivery to the receiver before unstrapping it.
One week prior to trial, the shipper and the receiver entered confidential, joint tortfeasor settlements with plaintiffs. At jury selection, plaintiffs demanded $2,250,000 from the motor carrier for a joint tortfeasor settlement, but the motor carrier rejected the demand. The jury found the motor carrier was not the cause of decedent’s fatal accident. Rather, the jury found the shipper was 57.5% at fault, the banding distributor was 23.75% at fault, and the decedent was 18.75% at fault for the accident. The jury awarded plaintiffs $1,575,000. (Shipman v. Landstar Ranger, Inc., et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense where the 41-year-old plaintiff, a New York State Trooper, alleged he sustained permanent neck and shoulder injuries resulting in an inability to work in any capacity as a result of the defendant truck driver’s alleged violation of New York’s “move-over” law. On Friday, August 14, 2015, at approximately 6:00 P.M., the State Trooper plaintiff was sitting inside a police SUV that was stopped on the right shoulder of the highway with its emergency lights activated in connection with the investigation of an earlier accident. Pursuant to New York State law, motorists are obligated to exercise “due care” when passing a stopped emergency vehicle with its lights activated, and according to the applicable statute, “due care” includes, but is not limited to, changing lanes when it is safe and legal to do so. Plaintiff claimed the defendant truck driver failed to exercise due care in violation of the “move-over” law because she did not change lanes or otherwise avoid a collision between her trailer and the plaintiff’s driver-side door. Fortunately, the defendant truck driver had a dash-cam video camera mounted to her front windshield, and the video showed heavy traffic conditions in all lanes as the tractor trailer approached the State Trooper’s SUV. Plaintiff and his accident reconstruction expert claimed the defendant truck driver could have done more to avoid the accident, including stopping in the lane of travel until she was able to safely change lanes. The defense accident reconstruction expert testified his analysis of the dash-cam video revealed there was never an opportunity for the defendant truck driver to safely change lanes before passing the stopped police SUV. The defense expert further testified his analysis of the video revealed the truck driver slowed to 20 M.P.H. and moved to the left portion of the right travel lane before passing the police SUV. Plaintiff demanded $5,000,000 to settle his claim prior to trial. The jury found the truck driver had, in fact, exercised “due care,” and accordingly, returned a verdict in favor of the defendant truck driver and trucking company. (Katz v. Marten Transport, Ltd., et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a spinal injury case involving multiple surgeries and a settlement demand of $4.5 million at the time of trial. The 35 year-old plaintiff alleged defendants’ tractor trailer moved into her lane of travel in a roundabout located in Brooklyn, New York and struck her car. The trucking company denied responsibility for causing the accident. Plaintiff claimed that as a result of the collision she sustained cervical and lumbar disc injuries requiring multiple discograms, discectomies, and a fusion at L5-S1. She further claimed she would require future spine surgeries and incur future medical expenses for the remainder of her life. The jury deliberated for under one hour before returning a verdict in favor of defendants and finding the truck driver was not negligent. (Lescott v. New Prime, Inc., et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a traumatic brain injury case with a settlement demand of $7.4 million at the time of trial. The twenty-one year-old plaintiff was the front seat passenger in his friend’s car when they struck the rear of a tractor trailer owned and operated by the trucking company defendant. At the time of this accident, Pennsylvania still followed the doctrine of pure joint and several liability between joint tortfeasors. Accordingly, plaintiff could recover all of his damages from the defendant if its driver was found to be at least one percent responsible for causing the accident. Plaintiff’s counsel retained trucking industry and human factors experts to testify in support of the negligence claims against the truck driver; however, the majority of plaintiff’s witness at trial testified concerning plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages. The jury deliberated for under one hour before returning a verdict in favor of the defendant and finding the truck driver was not negligent. (Battestelli v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a catastrophic personal injury case with a settlement demand of $4.5 million. The driver plaintiff alleged that a defect in the braking system of a John Deere 300C articulated dump truck owned and leased by Mr. Dumont’s client reportedly caused the plaintiff to lose control of the vehicle and sustain a traumatic brain injury, comminuted tibia and fibula fractures requiring surgical intervention, rib fractures, herniated cervical and lumbar discs as well as other injuries and damages. (Simon v. Abele Tractor & Equipment, et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a fatal vehicular accident case. Plaintiff claimed a turning tractor trailer blocked the decedent’s lane of travel and caused decedent’s vehicle to under-ride the trailer; blood tests showed the decedent had a blood alcohol level of 0.245%, or 3 times above the legal limit, at the time of the accident. (Estate of Warner v. J.B. Hunt transport Inc., et al.)

-- Obtained a defense verdict in favor of an insurer at a bench trial. Following a motor vehicle accident involving the plaintiff corporation’s vehicle, the plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment action to obtain an order declaring that it was entitled to a defense and indemnity under the insurer’s commercial auto policy. The insurer denied coverage and contended that the policy had been cancelled prior to the accident due to non-payment of the premium. (Mortuary Removal Services, Inc. v. Lancer Insurance Company, et al.)

-- Secured a jury verdict for the defense in a $250,000 personal injury case. Plaintiff had been involved in an intersectional collision and sustained a herniated lumbar disc and aggravation of pre-existing avascular necrosis requiring surgery on both hips. (Orlando v. A&R Transport, Inc., et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in an accident case with a settlement demand of $500,000. The case involved a left turn collision where 26 year-old driver plaintiff sustained brachial plexus traction injury and underwent two surgical procedures. (Wysocki v. Apache Transport, et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a case involving a plaintiff with multiple sclerosis, cervical laminectomy, and depressive disorder. (Vitaioli v. J.B. Hunt Transport)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a case alleging that a turning tractor trailer blocked the plaintiff’s lane of travel and caused a collision in which the plaintiff sustained a right ankle injury requiring open reduction and fixation surgeries, and ultimately fusion surgery. Blood test showed that the plaintiff’s blood alcohol level was 0.15% at the time of the accident. (Archer v. Ward Trucking Company, et al.)

-- Obtained a jury verdict for the defense in a disputed lane change accident. The 18 year-old plaintiff sustained multiple fractures to the pelvis requiring a metal plate and eight screws, fractured ribs, a lacerated spleen, lacerated kidney, a right clavicle fracture, and a puncture wound to her left thigh resulting in a 10” scar. (Vargo v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., et al.)

-- Secured a favorable verdict on behalf of trucking client Transportation Co. in a personal injury case. The plaintiff was a truck driver who stopped to assist a Transportation Co. driver and was allegedly injured when the truck moved while he was under the trailer helping to install a pin at the rear tandem. The defense was hampered by the fact that the court had to rely on the plaintiff’s version of the accident because Transportation Co.'s driver was no longer an employee and could not be located. The plaintiff’s initial demand was $750,000, later lowered to $350,000 prior to trial. At trial, the jury found the plaintiff 25% negligent and awarded $75,000. (David v. Transportation Co., et al.)

Published Works

Collateral Estoppel, Trucking Law Update, Vol. VIII, No. 15

Challenge The Expert!, Trucking Law Update, Vol. VII, No. 9

Scranton: Defense Verdict, Trucking Law Update, Vol. V, No. 5

Who is Mary Carter?, The Transportation Lawyer, Vol. 7, No. 1, July, 2005

Boozers are Losers, The Transportation Lawyer, February, 2003

The Future of Trucking Litigation?, The Transportation Lawyer, Vol. 5, No. 1, July, 2003

Trucking Company Not Responsible for Murder By Employee-Driver Occurring While Dispatched, The Legal Intelligencer, Litigation Quarterly Supplement, December, 2000

A Cause for Cancer? Exposure to Diesel Fuel Emissions, For The Defense, November, 2003

Pennsylvania Superior Court Affirms Summary Judgement for Bus Company, The TransportationLawyer, Vol. 3, Number 4, February, 2002

Caught!, TIDA Newsletter, 2001

Every Picture Tells a Story, TIDA Newsletter, 2000

Sympathy vs. Science, TIDA Newsletter, 1999
Summary Judgment Granted to Bus Company when Plaintiff is Injured after Safe Exit from the Bus, Rawle’s Reports, Vol. 4, No. 4

Who You Gonna Call?, The Transportation Lawyer, Vol. 3, No. 2, October, 2001

For the Defense, Defense Research Institute (DRI)
The Transportation Lawyer, Transportation Lawyers Association (TLA)
TIDA Newsletter, The Legal Intelligencer
The Legal Intelligencer, New Jersey Motor Truck Association (NJMTA)
Rawle's Reports, Rawle & Henderson Newsletter


Speaker, Defense Strategies for Bad Venues, TIDA Mini-Seminar, 2004

Speaker, INS Insurance/Schneider National Carriers, 2003 Transportation Industry Seminar, 2003

Speaker, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., Sixth Annual Transportation Customer Outing, 2002

Speaker, Knocking out Plaintiff’s Economist in Federal Court, American Bar Association Transportation Megaconference V, 2001

Honors and Awards

Member, Golden Key National Honor Society
Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Peer Review Rated

Professional Associations and Memberships

Trucking Industry Defense Association (TIDA), Member
American Bar Association, Member
Transportation Lawyers Association (TLA)