Vlada Tasich is a litigation and trial attorney who has been defending the interests of companies and individuals in complex civil litigation matters throughout the state and federal courts of Pennsylvania for over twenty years. As co-chair of the firm’s Product Liability Practice, Vlada was recently recognized by Chambers USA with a Band Two ranking in the area of product liability defense in Pennsylvania. His experience encompasses all aspects of motor vehicle design and manufacture, appliances, consumer electronics, residential and industrial fires, durable medical equipment, industrial equipment, exercise equipment, perishable items, and many other consumer goods. He also represents clients in matters involving pharmacy malpractice, premises liability, transportation litigation, construction accidents, and consumer class actions. Vlada’s clients have retained him to coordinate litigation nationally and to serve as regional counsel.
Having previously been recognized as a “Rising Star” by Pennsylvania Super Lawyers from 2010 to 2012, Vlada has been selected to the Pennsylvania Super Lawyer list for product liability defense each year since 2015. He is also frequently asked by clients and industry organizations to lecture on various issues in product liability, premises liability, and motor vehicle law.
Born and raised in Philadelphia, Vlada received his B.A. from George Washington University in 1997 and his J.D. from the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law in 2001.
Honors & Awards
•Chambers USA, Pennsylvania: Litigation: Product Liability, Band Two (2025)
•Pennsylvania Super Lawyers (2015-2026)
•Pennsylvania Super Lawyers Rising Star (2010-2012)
Classes/Seminars Taught
•Social Inflation, Marshall Dennehey Client Seminar, June 21, 2022
•Autonomous Vehicles: The Rise of the Machines, ILG Virtual Conference, March 25, 2021
•'The Approaching Wave of Autonomous Vehicles Drives New Risks to Insurers,' A.M. Best Insurance Law Podcast, June 27, 2019
Published Works
•'Tincher - One Year Later,' Defense Digest, Vol. 21, No. 4, December 2015
•'Owners of Registered but Uninsured Vehicles Beware Pennsylvania Superior Court Ruling Makes First Party Benefits Unrecoverable,' Defense Digest, Vol. 9, No. 4, December 2003
Results
Summary Judgment Won in a Pennsylvania Premises Liability Case
We secured summary judgment in a premises liability case in Northampton County, Pennsylvania, dismissing all claims against a national sporting goods retailer. The plaintiff claimed he slipped and fell on a slippery substance inside a the store while testing out bicycles. The plaintiff and his wife admitted that after he fell, they did not inspect the floor and quickly left the store. Months later, and after filing suit, the plaintiff and an engineer visited the store and claimed that there was an open can of bicycle grease in the area where the fall had occurred. Based on this evidence alone, the plaintiff theorized, through an expert report, that he must have fallen on bicycle grease negligently left on the floor by the store staff. Summary judgment was sought on the grounds that no witnesses to the fall ever actually identified any substance on the floor, and that the expert’s opinion was based on pure speculation. The court agreed and dismissed all claims against our client.
Dismissal with Prejudice Obtained in Case Targeting Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturer
We secured a dismissal with prejudice in a product liability case in Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs, who were involved, but not responsible, for a drunk driving accident, claimed that the beverage manufacturer was liable to them because the product had more alcohol than other alcoholic beverages and was improperly marketed to minors. Our team successfully argued several points, including that Pennsylvania does not recognize such a product liability cause of action because the dangers of drinking alcohol and driving are obvious, and the manufacturer has no duty to warn potential users of such dangers.
Thought Leadership
Defense Digest
On the Pulse...Our Product Liability Practice Group
December 1, 2021
For almost five decades, Marshall Dennehey has maintained an experienced and sophisticated group of trial attorneys involved in product liability litigation. The product liability landscape has evolved continually since first arriving on the scene in the 1970s. In the intervening forty-plus years, we have successfully represented numerous product defendants, as our defense attorneys have kept abreast of ever-changing legal theories, judicial viewpoints and, of course, evolving technology. The co-chairs of the Product Liability Practice Group, Bradley Remick and Vlada Tasich, have over 50 years of combined experience in handling product liability cases for a myriad of domestic and international product manufacturers, involving virtually every conceivable type of consumer or industrial product. Brad has authored six treatises on Pennsylvania product liability. The demands of a defense product liability practice are such that attorneys must make certain that they are up-to-date on the latest case law. Federal and state appellate and trial court decisions directly impact the defense of product liability defendants. In that respect, we have been at the forefront, providing guidance to clients and collaborating with peers to coordinate broader defense strategies as legal landscapes have shifted in this area of law. For example, in 2014 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014), upending nearly 40 years of prior strict liability precedent. Under earlier case law, a product was defective if it lacked any element necessary to make it safe for its intended use. Jurors were told that a manufacturer was a guarantor of its product’s safety. Tincher expressly rejected these standards, acknowledged that it was for the jury to decide if a product was unreasonably dangerous, and adopted two alternative standards for demonstrating defect: the consumer expectations test and the risk-utility test. While the core legal framework for analyzing if a product is defective changed, many other longstanding product issues were left unresolved; the Tincher court leaving it to future cases where the common law could develop “within the proper factual contexts against the background of targeted advocacy.” The plaintiffs’ bar generally rejected the sweeping nature of the court’s decision, which was a positive development for product defendants. They also influenced efforts by the Pennsylvania Bar Institute to fashion plaintiff-friendly suggested standard jury instructions that, by and large, held on to the principles rejected by Tincher. Marshall Dennehey attorneys were at the forefront of concerted efforts by the defense bar to draft alternative suggested jury instructions that more fairly follow the law. Our trailblazing lawyers, on behalf of our clients, also targeted cases for trial where a number of these alternative instructions were adopted by Pennsylvania courts as more accurate statements of the applicable legal standards post Tincher. Our practice group makes certain that our attorneys are keenly aware of legal changes involving product liability. We employ every avenue of defense available to our clients in order to successfully and fairly defend their products before a jury.Our experienced and sophisticated trial attorneys prepare and handle a variety of complex product liability litigation, including the representation of major product manufacturers, distributors and other manufacturers through insurance carriers. The wide variety of cases and clients we represent evidences the level of experience and sophistication that our clients have come to expect in their defense. Over the years, our attorneys have handled thousands of product liability matters, in all of the jurisdictions to which our regional practice extends.The practice includes defense of accidents and alleged failures of all types, including, for example:A broad variety of vehicle products including automobiles, motorcycles, recreational vehicles and trucks, as well as the component manufacturers and suppliers for those products.Consumer goods and appliances.Drug and dietary supplements.Combining its resources with its legal and medical malpractice groups, the Product Liability Practice Group defends cases involving pharmaceuticals, biologics, compounding pharmacies and medical devices.Recreational equipment, including helmets and exercise equipment.Industrial and manufacturing equipment of all sorts and all sizes, ranging from small generators to large electrical components that provide electric service to municipalities. Building equipment and structures, including all the components involved therein.Elevators and escalators.Fire suppression equipment and systems.Mold and contamination issues. Asbestos and toxic tort claims. Consumer products of all varieties.Marshall Dennehey’s product liability practice also includes multi-district litigation, class actions, and commercial claims arising from allegedly poorly performing and/or defective products and/or their components.The attorneys in this practice group are recognized leaders in this area of the law. They frequently speak at national, regional and local seminars, and they are published in their field. Several have been elected as Fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Their memberships include: Product Liability Advisory Council, Product Liability Committee of the Defense Research Institute, International Association of Defense Counsel, Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, the Pennsylvania Bar Association and the Trial Lawyers of America.Marshall Dennehey recognizes the advantage available to defense counsel by employing the resources of its clients, who have the best expertise pertaining to their product, and then supplementing that expertise with our extensive expert bank to select the appropriate forensic and/or technical expert. Our entire focus is directed at presenting the product to a jury in a persuasive and understandable manner so as to achieve a defense verdict.The next decade will surely see further change, as emerging technologies continue to reshape our world and product liability law continues to evolve. Marshall Dennehey remains at the forefront of the current generation of practitioners, and we are poised and prepared to enhance the defense of product manufacturers into the future.*Brad, chair of the Product Liability Practice Group, and Vlad, co-chair of this group, are shareholders and work in our Philadelphia, Pennsylvania office. They can be reached respectively at 215.575.2762 or bdremick@mdwcg.com and 215.575.2659 or vxtasich@mdwcg.com. Defense Digest, Vol. 27, No. 5, December 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
Marshall Dennehey Announces 2026 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Honorees
May 22, 2026
Marshall Dennehey Secures Four Finalist Honors in the 2026 Pennsylvania Legal Awards
April 15, 2026
