About Walter J. Klekotka

Walter practices in the areas of premises liability, asbestos, hospitality/dram shop, product, auto, trucking & transportation and pharmaceutical matters. He has extensive experience in premises liability in the retail sector, having handled several hundred cases ranging from slip and falls to falling merchandise claims. He likewise has broad experience in pharmaceutical matters, representing numerous pharmacies and pharmacists in misfill and mislabel matters. In the course of his career, Walter has taken more than 50 matters to trial, including many jury trials. He is also quite skilled in alternative dispute resolution forums such as mediations and arbitrations.

Walter is a graduate of the University of Delaware where he obtained a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics. He received his juris doctor from The Delaware Law School of Widener University, after which he joined Marshall Dennehey. In 1991, he moved to the New Jersey office where he concentrated his practice on general liability matters. He has been a shareholder since January of 1996.

Walter initially began his career in the asbestos department where he handled hundreds of asbestos personal injury actions involving various claims of lung disease. As such, early in his career, he took numerous cases to verdict.

Walter is frequently asked by clients and industry organizations to lecture on a variety of topics concerning premises liability, automobile law and general liability matters.

Honors & Awards

•AV Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell
The Martindale Hubbell rated attorney list is issued by Internet Brands, Inc. A description of the selection methodology can be found here . No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.
•The Best Lawyers in America, Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants (2025-2026)
The Best Lawyers list is issued by Woodward & White. A description of the selection methodology can be found here . No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Classes/Seminars Taught

Successful Strategies for Effective Mediation, Marshall Dennehey Client Seminar, July 20, 2022
Jurisdictional Trends & The COVID-19 Impact on FL NY NJ & PA, Marshall Dennehey Virtual Client Presentation, December, 2020
•1997 Civil Motion Practice, New Jersey State Bar Association Civil Litigation for Paralegals, CISI Dram Shop, South Jersey Claims Association

Published Works

•'No More Pigeonholes in Premises Liability Law,' New Jersey Law Journal, August 21, 2006
•'New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act: Public University Exempt From Suit Even Though Judgment Would Be Paid From Public Funds,' Defense Digest, 2002-09, Vol. 8, No. 3
•'The Downsizing of the Collateral Source Rule,' Defense Digest, 2001-12, Vol. 7, No. 6, co-author
•'Then N.J. Appellate Division Clarifies Duty Owed by Commercial Tenant,' Defense Digest, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1997
•'The Blizzard's Backlash: A Symposium on Issues Confronting Pennsylvania and New Jersey Property Owners,' (Co author), Defense Digest, March 1996
•'New Jersey Spoliation of Evidence and the Doctrine of Res Ispa Loquitur,' Defense Digest, August 1995
•'New Jersey Creates Recreational Sports & Leisure Activities Liability Study Commission,' Defense Digest, Summer 1994

Results

Summary Judgment Secured in Slip-and-Fall Case

We were granted summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case where the plaintiff claimed to have slipped and fell on snow/ice in a parking lot when getting into her car. Our client and one of the co-defendants had property lines next to each other. Based on the accident report, the plaintiff’s testimony and our expert report, we argued that the plaintiff did not fall on our property and, as a result, we owed her no duty. The judge agreed and dismissed all claims against our client.

Dismissal of All Claims Secured in a Personal Injury Action in New Jersey

We secured dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, in a personal injury action on behalf of a nonprofit organization operating youth baseball leagues in New Jersey. The plaintiffs sought to hold our client liable under a negligence theory after their minor child was injured while participating in our client’s recreational baseball league. We moved for summary judgment, arguing that the league was a nonprofit organization entitled to protection under New Jersey’s Charitable Immunity Act, which shields nonprofits from ordinary negligence. In opposition, the plaintiffs attempted to avoid dismissal by challenging the league’s nonprofit status, claiming the minor’s age created an exception to the Act. Through targeted arguments and documents evidencing the league’s nonprofit status, the court agreed that the Charitable Immunity Act applied and that the plaintiffs failed to show gross negligence to overcome the Act’s protections. The court granted the league’s motion for summary judgment in its entirety and further agreed with our arguments that the volunteer coaches were independently shielded under New Jersey’s Volunteer-Coach Immunity.

Thought Leadership

Defense Digest

On the Pulse... Premises and Retail Liability Group

June 1, 2021

Marshall Dennehey’s Premises and Retail Liability Practice Group, housed within the firm’s Casualty Department, defends national and regional retail chains in a vast array of premises liability matters. Claims against retail stores, including general liability premises claims, negligent security claims and retail theft claims, make up almost one-third of the firm’s casualty cases. For more than 25 years, the practice has continued to grow, confirming the value that this specialized group offers to our retail clients.Comprised of highly-skilled trial attorneys and litigators, with members of the group located throughout the firm’s 20 offices, our practice group continues to maintain a strong multi-regional presence within the industry. Our premises and retail liability attorneys are well-versed in those legal issues impacting all aspects of the retail industry, from liability both outside and inside of the premises, to the services and products retailers offer their customers. Our comprehensive knowledge of the issues facing our retail clients allows us to identify issues early on, based on the claims asserted and available defenses, in order to: Determine whether the matter should be aggressively defended or placed into an early settlement strategy;Help prevent against possible spoliation issues;Complete a thorough investigation based on internal policies, industry standards and current litigation trends; Timely identify and evaluate significant risk transfer issues to alleviate the financial burden on our retail clients and/or their carriers; andEffectively work toward carrying out our defense strategy with minimal disruption to our clients’ retail businesses, regardless of size.In addition to our practice group’s highly-skilled defense of premises and retail liability claims, our attorneys assist with early investigations of possible claims to ensure a strong plan of action is promptly put in place. These minimal and low-cost efforts, when completed up front, ensure the timely collection of critical information that is often lost over time due to common challenges facing the retail industry, such as employee turnover, subsequent revisions to internal policies, and the failure to timely preserve video and photographic evidence.Our attorneys also play a pivotal role in training clients to be knowledgeable about issues and trends facing the retail industry. By providing on-site seminars to employees and managers, consulting on the drafting of internal policies and procedures, and assisting with the implementation of risk-prevention practices, we can help to reduce the number of claims with which our clients are faced. Having developed long-lasting relationships with many national and local retail clients, they know that the specialized knowledge of our practice group attorneys is just a phone call away.Through memberships with industry groups, such as the Claims and Litigation Management Alliance (CLM) and the National Retail & Restaurant Defense Association (NRRDA), our attorneys are at the forefront of issues and trends facing the retail industry. Their efforts put the Marshall Dennehey Premises and Retail Liability Group in the best position to provide high-level, specialized services to our retail clients.*Marshall Dennehey’s Premises and Retail Liability Practice Group is co-chaired by shareholders Walter J. Klekotka, of our Mount Laurel, New Jersey office, and Amanda J. Podlucky, of our Orlando, Florida office, who have a total of more than 45 years combined experience defending premises claims They may be reached at wjklekotka@mdwcg.com or ajpodlucky@mdwcg.com. Defense Digest, Vol. 27, No. 3, June 2021 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1. 2021 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin. All Rights Reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.

News

98 Marshall Dennehey Attorneys Recognized in the 2026 Editions of The Best Lawyers in America and the Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

August 20, 2025

 

Awards

Reviews for Walter J.

Have you consulted or hired this lawyer?

Leave a review about your experience with this lawyer.

Write a Review

Overall Rating

Services

Areas of Law

  • Other 7
    • Premises & Retail Liability
    • Hospitality & Liquor Liability
    • Product Liability
    • First-Party Property
    • Asbestos & Mass Tort Litigation
    • Trucking & Transportation Liability
    • Catastrophic Claims Litigation

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Shareholder
    Firm Name
    Marshall Dennehey
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Significant Representative Matters: Obtained summary judgment for their client, a large retail store, in a premises liability case.
    Plaintiff brought suit against our client, a large retail store, alleging negligence for a physical altercation between a former employee
    a customer. Plaintiff argued that the former employee held himself out as an employee,
    the store was negligent in failing to protect the customer from criminal acts. We moved for Summary Judgment as the assailant was a former employee,
    there was no foreseeability to put the store on notice for any criminal acts by a third party. At oral argument, we established that the record was clear as to the former employee's status at the time of the incident,
    that the opposition arguments (the employee was stocking shelves
    wearing clothing similar to the store uniform) were not genuine issues of material fact. The judge agreed
    granted Summary Judgment for our client.
    Successfully defended a grant of summary judgment in the New Jersey Appellate Division that resulted in a published opinion. Our clients were the owner
    manager of an apartment complex for seniors. The plaintiff resident had returned from walking her dog
    alleged she received injuries entering the elevator. She had allowed the dog to enter first, when the doors began to close. She alleged injuries occurring when the right door struck her arm,
    when she used her left arm
    left side of her body to slow the doors from closing while she leapt into the elevator.
    She sued our clients
    the company hired to maintain the elevator, but was unable to establish any proof of negligence. The trial judge dismissed the case, declining to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, in part, because the plaintiff could not establish the third element of the doctrine: that the injury did not result from the plaintiff's own voluntary act or neglect. On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the Appellate Division should eliminate this third element. The Appellate Division, in a published opinion, concluded that the third element is a well-established law in New Jersey
    only the New Jersey Supreme Court could eliminate it,
    that court has shown no inclination to do so. Because the plaintiff could not demonstrate the third prong, res ipsa was not applicable
    the failure of the plaintiff to establish negligence resulted in summary judgment in the defendants' favor.
    Obtained a defense verdict for a large supermarket chain involving an injury to a vendor from a swinging door.
    Obtained a defense verdict for a large supermarket chain involving a fall down as a result of a foreign substance on the floor.
    Obtained a defense verdict representing a Gas station Mini Market involving a slip
    fall on foreign substance on the floor.
    Obtained a defense verdict in a case involving allegations of RSD.
    Successfully mediated products liability matter with loss of sight in one eye.
    Successfully mediated products liability case involving permanent facial disfigurement.
    Published Works: 'No More Pigeonholes in Premises Liability Law,' New Jersey Law Journal, August 21, 2006
    'New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act: Public University Exempt From Suit Even Though Judgment Would Be Paid From Public Funds,' Defense Digest, 2002-09, Vol. 8, No. 3
    'The Downsizing of the Collateral Source Rule,' Defense Digest, 2001-12, Vol. 7, No. 6, co-author
    'Then N.J. Appellate Division Clarifies Duty Owed by Commercial Tenant,' Defense Digest, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1997
    'The Blizzard's Backlash: A Symposium on Issues Confronting Pennsylvania
    New Jersey Property Owners,' (Co author), Defense Digest, March 1996
    'New Jersey Spoliation of Evidence
    the Doctrine of Res Ispa Loquitur,' Defense Digest, August 1995
    'New Jersey Creates Recreational Sports & Leisure Activities Liability Study Commission,' Defense Digest, Summer 1994
  • Additional Links

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1987, Pennsylvania
    1987, New Jersey
    Memberships

    Associations & Memberships

    Camden County Bar Association
    Claims & Litigation Management Alliance (CLM)
    New Jersey State Bar Association

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Widener University School of Law, Wilmington, Delaware
    Class of 1987
    J.D.
    Other Education
    University of Delaware
    Class of 1983
    B.S.
    Economics

Contact Walter J. Klekotka

Share Holder at Marshall Dennehey
4.7
10 reviews

15000 Midlantic Drive, Suite 200P.O. Box 5429Mount Laurel, NJ 08054U.S.A.

Show on map
Fax: (856) 414-6077

Activity

Legal Community Contributions

Case type is required.
A valid zip code is required.
A valid city is required.
State is required.
Country is required.
Outside the US or Canada?
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

Contact Information

First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
City:
State:
Country:
Case Description:
Contact Information
First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Phone Number:

Attorneys FAQs

  • What year was this attorney first admitted to the bar?
    Walter J. Klekotka was admitted in 1987 to the State of New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
  • Is this attorney admitted to the bar in more than one state?
    Yes, Walter J. Klekotka is admitted to practice in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
  • Is this attorney Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review rated?
    Yes, Walter J. Klekotka has a 4.7 Peer Rating from Martindale-Hubbell.
  • What law school did this attorney attend?
    Walter J. Klekotka attended Widener University School of Law, Wilmington, Delaware.
  • What year was this attorney's law firm established?
    Marshall Dennehey was established in 1962.