Benjamin J. Mayerson

Top rated Personal Injury attorney in Pottstown, Pennsylvania

Mayerson Law, P.C.
Benjamin J. Mayerson
Mayerson Law, P.C.
610-410-9379
Contact me today

Practice areas: Personal Injury, Insurance Coverage, Appellate; view more

Licensed in Pennsylvania since: 1994

Education: Widener University – Delaware Law School

Selected to Super Lawyers: 2025 - 2026

Call today:
610-410-9379

Contact me today
Free Consultation

Mayerson Law, P.C.

1 North Sunnybrook Road
Pottstown, PA 19464 Visit website

Mayerson Injury Law was established in 1963, with its main office located in the heart of Pottstown, Pennsylvania. Benjamin Mayerson joined the firm in 1994 and has been a trial lawyer for over 30 years. During that time, his legal practice has focused exclusively upon personal injury law and insurance claim disputes. Attorney Mayerson has represented hundreds of seriously injured people and litigated cases in all counties surrounding Philadelphia. Attorney Mayerson has successfully argued before the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Attorney Mayerson is certified and admitted to the Million Dollar Advocates forum, one of the most prestigious groups of trial lawyers in the United States. He has an Avvo rating of Superb (10 out of 10), is a member of the National Trial Lawyers List of Top 100 Attorneys for the State of Pennsylvania and is a member of The National Traumatic Brain Injury Assocation. In 2025, Attorney Mayerson was selected to the Pennsylvania Super Lawyers list for Personal Injury Law. 

Mr. Mayerson's journey began with achieving cum laude honors at Indiana University of Pennsylvania. He continued his legal education at Widener University School of Law, earning his Juris Doctor in 1994 and gaining his license to practice law in Pennsylvania that same year. He was also admitted to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Over his 30-year legal career, Attorney Mayerson has been actively involved in several associations, including the American Association for Justice, the Pennsylvania Association for Justice, the Pennsylvania Bar Association, the Chester County Bar Association, and the Montgomery County Bar Association.

Practice areas

Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff, Insurance Coverage, Appellate

Focus areas

Appeals, Bad Faith Insurance, Brain Injury, Construction Accident, Insurance, Insurance Defense, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Personal Injury - Plaintiff, Premises Liability - Plaintiff, Trucking Accidents, Wrongful Death

  • 70% Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff
  • 20% Insurance Coverage
  • 10% Appellate

First Admitted: 1994, Pennsylvania

Professional Webpage: https://www.mayersoninjurylaw.com/our-team/benjamin-j-mayers...

Bar / Professional Activity

  • Member of the Pennsylvania Association for Justice
  • Chester County Bar Association, Member
  • Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA), Member
  • American Association for Justice (formally known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA)), Member
  • U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
  • Pennsylvania
  • Member of the Montgomery County Bar Association

Verdicts / Settlements (Case Results)

  • A disabled man slipped on an ice covered sidewalk caused by a broken downspout. The tenant in possession of the commercial property had placed a bucket to capture rain from the downspout which had foreseeably overflowed. The liability carrier denied the claim because the property owner claimed to be unaware of the defect and would have repaired it had the tenant identified the defect. We used Google Earth (in 2015) to identify photographs of the defect, with the bucket, dating back to 2013, when a prior tenant occupied the commercial premise. The case promptly settled for $150,000, 2015
  • I represented a man who came to the aid of his son who ran out of gas on Route 422 bypass when the man was struck by a vehicle as he was filling his son's car with gasoline from a gas can he was holding. I collected the $100,000 liability limits from the insurer for the striking vehicle, then the $250,000 limits of Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage on the vehicle our client was touching with the gas can, then the $100,000 UIM limits from the insurer of our client's resident girlfriend, and then an additional $250,000 in UIM coverage on our client's coverage on his ATV vehicles that surprisingly also carried UIM benefits. Total compensation for my client was $700,000. We were unable to show any loss of earning capacity as our client continued to operate his roofing business without any loss despite sustaining a serious injury to his leg that was nearly amputated at the scene of the accident by the force of the collision. Fortunately, his surgery was successful in saving the use of his leg, 2017
  • I represented an on-duty police officer rear-ended at a high rate of speed by a 1996 Nissan Sentra. We had to file suit because the 1996 Nissan Sentra carried only $100,000 in liability coverage and although the operator denied that he was working as a parcel delivery person for a major parcel delivery service, we suspected he was on route to deliver packages at the time of loss because he made a phone call from the scene of the accident for his parcels to be picked up by another delivery person. We thus filed suit and filed a motion to secure an order to secure his cellular phone records to identify the outfit he telephoned from the scene of the accident. The operator also had a long history of driving infractions and had recently had his driver's license restored following suspension. We were able to reach a settlement just prior to trial for $1.6 million, 2019
  • I represented a couple involved in a single vehicle motorcycle crash within a construction zone where a contractor was resurfacing the 4-lane highway. The contractor blamed my client for the loss. I filed suit and, after numerous depositions of company personnel, proved that the height differential between the two northbound lanes, caused by the resurfacing of one lane, was greater than industry standards permit, that even a 4-wheel vehicle could lose control and crash if it attempted to change lanes, that the differential was so great that the contractor knew or should have known of the danger, that the danger had been present for five days prior to our clients' loss because the contractor wanted to remove more asphalt along the highway prior to bringing in the asphalt team, and that the contractor had taken no measures to counsel its employees about the harm caused prior to settlement. The case settled after the pre-trial conference for $575,000 with considerable pressure from the trial judge after the trial judge ruled that punitive damages were not appropriate. No offer was made prior to litigation. The contractor has now implemented warning signs for motorcycle operators within its construction zones when there is a height differential between travel lanes, 2018
  • Berg v. Nationwide, 235 A.3d 1223 (Pa. 2020). In an insurance bad faith action, arising from a $25,000 first party collision loss claim, Berks County Trial Court Judge Jeffrey Sprecher awarded my clients $18 million in punitive damages, plus $3 million in attorney fees, against Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. The verdict was entered June 21, 2014, vacated by a split panel of the Superior Court, which was affirmed by an evenly divided Supreme Court. Id. The case began September 4, 1996, when Sherri Berg was involved in a highspeed motor vehicle collision. A claim was submitted to her insurer, Nationwide Mutual. Nationwide recommended the Bergs have their collision claim appraised and repaired by one of its designated Blue Ribbon repair facilities, through its Blue Ribbon Repair Program. Nationwide promised a Blue Ribbon appraisal, from a Blue Ribbon repair facility, backed by a Blue Ribbon guarantee. Unbeknownst to the Bergs, the vehicle was originally appraised as a structural total loss due to a twisted frame. Instead of reporting the total loss to the Bergs, as required by state law, Nationwide directed the vehicle be transported to an undisclosed, unapproved repair facility to attempt the frame repairs that its Blue Ribbon facility was unable to undertake. Four months later the vehicle was returned to the Bergs in a dangerous condition, with hidden structural repair failures. The evidence supported the trial court's finding that Nationwide was aware of the structural repair failures per routine inspections it performed throughout the extended, 4-month repair period. Nationwide nevertheless permitted the vehicle to be returned to the Bergs with hidden structural repair failures causing the tires to wear down to the metal belts. When the Bergs learned of the extensive, structural repair failures and retained legal representation, Nationwide implemented its well-documented strategy to price us out of the litigation by concealing evidence through a false claim of attorney client privilege. After six years of appellate review this firm won a new trial during which it was proven that Nationwide paid its own attorneys in excess of $3 million to defend its fraudulent/deceitful handling of the underlying collision claim, in what can only be described as a reprehensible attempt to price this firm out of securing justice for the Bergs. Notwithstanding the 20-plus years of litigation, hundreds of thousands of dollars in hard file costs, and the Courts' evenly divided resolution, it remains the most intense legal battle of my 30-year practice. To learn more about the trial court opinion please see: Verdict Judgment Findings of Fact and Law Supreme Court Opinion Superior Court Opinion Associated Press News Article You can also get more information in this news article!, 2014

Representative Clients

  • My clients are people in my community of all ages and socio economic backgrounds.

Pro bono / Community Service

  • I routinely offer free legal advise to people involved in motor vehicle collisions and premise liability matters. Of course this is not merely out of good will but also because it often generates future business from referrals and from those people I have helped in the past for no fee. For instance, in a premise case I assist people with submitting a claim for "med pay benefits" that are almost always available under any commercial liability policy without regard to "fault." In motor vehicle collisions, I often assist people in my community with resolution of their property damage claims even where there is no injury or minimal injury or their limited tort status precludes an injury claim. I will also assist with other claims available under their own policy that they may not be aware of, such as wage loss benefits and securing more rental coverage when the liability carrier tells them it will only pay for 3 days, etc.

Honors

  • I was admitted to the Million Dollar Advocates Forum after winning my first verdict in excess of $1 million, Life Member, Million Dollar Advocates Forum
  • The National Trial Lawyers: Top 25 Motor Vehicle Trial Lawyers Association​​​​​​, Member
  • Avvo is a national company that rates attorneys across the country, asserting it has rated 97% of US lawyers, Avvo Rating of 10 out of 10, Avvo

Educational Background

  • Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Psychology, with minor in English Literature, 1991

Scholarly Lectures / Writings

  • I was invited to lecture on the subject of insurer bad faith. The panel, in addition to myself, included a prominent insurance defense attorney and another claimant attorney, Panel Member, Lecturer on Insurance Bad Faith Litigation, Pennsylvania Association for Justice, Insurance Policy Holders, Insurers, And Attorneys, 2015

Other Outstanding Achievements

  • Published Opinion of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania finding the amount of money an insurance company paid its defense attorneys to defend an insurance bad faith lawsuit was relevant and admissible to the disputed issue of whether the insurer had implemented against its insured a strategy to price its insured out of court. The insurer was ordered to present a trial witness who testified that the insurer had paid its attorneys $2.5 million to defend the lawsuit arising out of a $25,000 collision claim dispute. See Berg v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 44 A.3d 1164 (Pa. Super. 2012). This ruling was not reversed on appeal and means large product manufacturers may be required disclose amounts it is paying to defend meritorious lawsuits over product defects where there exists evidence of a strategy to price the injured plaintiff out of court. See also Berg v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 235 A.3d 1223 (Pa. 2020), where an evenly divided Supreme Court affirmed a divided Superior Court panel opinion vacating the trial court's judgment on other grounds., 2012
  • Opinion of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania that helped develop Pennsylvania Appellate Rule 1925(b) which requires the appellant to file and serve the trial court judge with a copy of a timely filed Concise Statement of Errors which itemizes the issues to be raised on appeal. In my case we timely filed the Concise Statement of Errors and requested the location of the judge's chambers for service. The court staff declined to provide the location of the judge's chambers but insisted the judge only wanted the original document and that the original would be delivered to the judge within 10 minutes. The judge quashed the appeal for failing to serve him. I filed a Petition to Enlarge the Record to reflect the fact that the court staff refused to provide the location of the judge and that the judge received the original document ten minutes after it was timely filed. The Superior Court dismissed the appeal. I filed an Application for Review in the Supreme Court which was granted. The Court reversed and remanded back to the Superior Court to rule on the merits of our appeal. The Superior Court then reversed the trial court on every issue raised on appeal and remanded back to the trial court for a new trial on the issue of insurer bad faith. The new trial judge ultimately found the insurer liable for bad faith and entered a $21 million judgment against the insurer. See Berg v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 6 A.3d 1002 (Pa. 2010). The trial court's judgment was reversed on other grounds by an evenly divided Supreme Court, affirming a divided panel of the Superior Court. See Berg v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 235 A.3d 1223 (Pa. 2020)., 2010

Firm News (Newsletters)

  • By The Associated Press The Associated Press on July 13, 2014 at 4:01 PM, updated July 13, 2014 at 4:04 PM READING, Pa. (AP) — An insurance company that was tongue-lashed in a decision last month by a Pennsylvania judge is contesting his ruling that it pay $18 million in punitive damages after a long court battle over faulty repairs to a family's vehicle in 1996. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. on Friday asked Berks County Judge Jeffrey K. Sprecher to reconsider a decision believed to be the largest punitive award ever handed down in Pennsylvania in a lawsuit accusing an insurer of bad faith, the Philadelphia Inquirer (http://bit.ly/1nkxYqP ) reported Sunday. Sprecher ruled in June that he agreed with Daniel and Sherri Berg that Nationwide had concealed evidence about faulty repairs to their Jeep Grand Cherokee, tried to cover up the conduct of its employees and relied on a strategy to discourage policyholder challenges in court by artificially inflating the cost of suing the company. In his ruling, Sprecher said Nationwide spent more than $3 million to defend its actions in a claim over the Bergs' Jeep that it should have replaced for $25,000. Nationwide risked harm to the Bergs and the public by allowing a structurally unsound vehicle on public roads and erected tremendous obstacles that forced the Bergs to endure years of litigation to achieve justice, Sprecher wrote. "Fortunately, no one was killed or injured; but Nationwide knew there could be a subsequent accident when it permitted the vehicle to be returned with hidden structural repair failures," Sprecher wrote. "This, by definition, is a reckless indifference to its insured. Nationwide was willing to risk the Bergs' lives to save itself money on a collision claim." Nationwide insists the company did not act in bad faith and that no one at the firm ever believed the Bergs' vehicle was unsafe after it was repaired. In the Sept. 4, 1996, accident, Sherri Berg was driving the Jeep when she was hit by a Chevrolet Suburban not far from the Bergs' home in suburban Reading. The manager of the designated repair garage declared the car totaled because "the whole body was twisted," according to court documents. Without telling the Bergs, Nationwide insisted on a second appraisal from the manager that called for the Jeep to be repaired at half the cost. But the car never seemed right again, and in October 1997, a former employee of the repair shop called the Bergs to warn them of structural repair failures. The Bergs hired lawyers and an inspection on their behalf the next month found that the Jeep's crashworthiness was compromised. In 1998, the Bergs sued. Their lawsuit was thrown out of court by a different Berks County judge before the appellate Superior Court ordered it reinstated in 2012. Sherri Berg died of cancer in April at 62. In Nationwide's court filing Friday, its lawyers blamed the Bergs' lawyers for delays in the case, saying they had filed unnecessary motions and wasted time in a failed effort to win a class-action designation. Sprecher also awarded $3 million in lawyers' fees to the Bergs' attorneys., Associated Press Release
  • July 12, 2014 After small crash, a long, costly court battle By Craig R. McCoy, The Philadelphia InquirerMcClatchy-Tribune Information Services July 12--It was a nasty car crash, but not an extraordinary one. Sherri Berg's Jeep Grand Cherokee was hit hard by a car as she pulled onto a highway. The vehicle spun four times and struck a pole, but no one was hurt. What was extraordinary was the epic legal fight that followed, pitting a father-and-son law firm in Chester County against an industry giant, Nationwide Insurance. Nearly 20 years after the accident, that fight climaxed last month with a court ruling that castigated Nationwide and slammed it with $18 million in punitive damages. Experts say it was the largest punitive award ever handed down in Pennsylvania in a suit alleging "bad faith" by an insurer. The judge in the case determined that Nationwide spent more than $3 million to defend a claim over a Jeep it could have replaced for $25,000. He found that Nationwide had engaged in an extensive cover-up, hiding crash photos and other relevant information from Berg and her husband. He said Nationwide followed a written "litigation strategy" that called for it to fight smaller claims tenaciously -- even though such a strategy had been denounced by Pennsylvania courts as "unethical and unprofessional." And Judge Jeffrey K. Sprecher of Berks County concluded his opinion with a caustic list right out of David Letterman's "Top Ten" that he said was Nationwide's message to customers who sued -- and to their lawyers: "Do not mess with us, if you know what is good for you." "You cannot run with the big dogs." "There is no level playing field to be had in your case." "You cannot afford it and what client will pay thousands of dollars to fight this battle?" "So we can get away with anything we want to." "You cannot stop us." Nationwide insists that no one at the firm ever believed the car was unsafe after it was repaired. It said Berg and her husband, Daniel, put 27,000 more miles on the car after the post-accident repairs -- and continued to drive even after a whistle-blower had warned them the car was dangerous. In a statement Friday, a spokesman for Nationwide said the company had not acted in bad faith. In the company's latest legal filing, lawyer Robert C. Heim blamed the family's lawyers for delays in the case, saying they had filed a blizzard of unnecessary motions and wasted time in a failed effort to turn the lawsuit into a class-action case. As for the litigation strategy, Nationwide said it had been discontinued before Sherri Berg's crash, and that it had applied only to accidents with injuries. Sprecher, who has served on the bench since 1992, disagreed. He said the tough litigation strategy was "alive and well" at the time of the crash. "Nationwide was willing to risk the Bergs' lives to save itself money on a collision claim," he said. He said the company had bet on on the idea that "what plaintiff, and more importantly, what lawyer in his right mind" would pursue such a case year after year? The lawyers in this marathon were Benjamin J. Mayerson and his father, Hy. After years without a payment, they now stand to profit handsomely. The judge awarded them $3 million in fees, on top of their share of the punitive award. Benjamin Mayerson, 46, the lead lawyer in the case, kept it going almost from the moment he got his law degree, despite many reversals. What sustained him? "It was definitely a visceral anger at what they were doing, and a belief that what was right was right," he said. His father, 77, put it more simply. "I'm a lawyer, and that's my job," he said last week. 'Very severe' It all began Sept. 4, 1996, when a Chevrolet Suburban plowed into the Bergs' new SUV, not far from their home near Reading. How bad was the damage? "Very severe," Sherri Berg testified later. "If you are hit by a Suburban, which is a large vehicle, there's going to be substantial damage, I feel." Still, Berg testified, she felt good that she and her husband were insured by Ohio-based Nationwide, as her parents had been before her. At trial, she explained, "Nationwide is on your side, all of that. I trusted it as well as my parents did." What the Bergs did not know until much later was that the manager of the repair garage had initially declared the car totaled. Its frame was bent, he found; it should be junked. Nationwide had a different opinion. Without telling the Bergs, it demanded and got a second appraisal that called for the Jeep to be repaired -- at a cost of $12,500, half the cost of sending the Bergs a check to replace the vehicle. Because the frame could not be straightened and bolt holes on the Jeep's twisted frame could not be lined up, mechanics welded the frame back together. Because the engine would not drop back in properly, they had to cut away part of a cover so the fan would not strike it. In court, Sherri Berg testified that the car never seemed right again. A slight turn of the wheel would provoke a loud knocking. After a month on the road, "the tires were literally down to the metal," she testified. Still, the Bergs stuck with the car. Then they got a phone call from a stranger -- David Wert, a former mechanic at the garage who had recently been fired. "I knew the vehicle wasn't repaired properly," he testified later. "And I knew if it was in a major accident, it would come apart." In a recent interview, Daniel Berg, 63, recalled: "I got that call, and I got concerned. I thought -- great, I am driving my wife and my children and my grandchildren in this thing." In 1998, the Bergs sued. That same year, they made the last of 36 monthly lease payments on the Jeep. And after that, as Sprecher noted in his opinion, Nationwide "suddenly changed its mind [and] totaled the car," buying it from a bank for $18,000. Nationwide said it bought the car so it could reexamine it as evidence. The judge took a darker view. "If [Nationwide] had not purchased the Jeep, it risked the Jeep being leased or purchased by an entirely new party," he wrote. "If the Jeep was not safe on the road, this new innocent party would have exposed the defendant, not the Bergs, to further liability in the event of another collision because the Jeep was not repaired properly. It was not crash-worthy." After the Bergs put Nationwide on notice that they were planning a lawsuit, the insurer had a damage specialist examine the car. Among other findings, the specialist said the left and right front wheels were not aligned and the frame remained damaged. Parts that were to be replaced had not been. Sprecher said the expert's 1998 review found "extensive structural repair failures," but none of his findings were communicated to the Bergs until 2003 on the ground that they were attorney/client material. Yet in court, a Nationwide official said the assessment was part of a routine claims file, not attorney work product. While conceding that the specialist found improper repair work, Nationwide said that his report did not conclude the car was hazardous. In Sprecher's view, Nationwide should have told the Bergs the car was not safe to drive. "Instead," the judge said, "defendant simply buried the evidence and hid the fact that it knew anything about this report and what it means to the safety of anyone in the jeep in a collision." A damaging document In the lawsuit, the Mayersons, joined by longtime firm lawyer Margaret Connors, drew upon a damaging Nationwide document turned up in another suit against the firm, by a man hurt in an auto crash in Allegheny County. This was an appendix to Nationwide's "Pennsylvania's Best Claims Practice Manual." In the other case, a judge in Allegheny County called the document "an embarrassment." Among other points, the appendix said the Nationwide "claim handling philosophy" was to seek "continued reinforcement of Nationwide being a 'defense-minded' carrier in the minds of the plaintiff legal community." The memo, dated 1993, three years before the Berg crash, said the firm aimed at "litigation avoidance" by adopting "a more aggressive posture in handling cases of lesser probable exposure (i.e., cases not exceeding $25,000)." According to evidence uncovered during the suit, Nationwide spent more than $3 million defending itself in the 16-year legal fight with the Bergs, including hiring Constance Foster, a former Pennsylvania insurance commissioner, as an expert witness. Foster was paid about $725 an hour. Citing the millions spent and the litigation memo, Sprecher found that Nationwide had engaged in a "clear effort to price plaintiffs out of their meritorious claim dispute." He noted that the insurer could have totaled the car for $25,000, but instead chose to repair it for half that. "The savings of $12,500 when considered throughout the country for hundreds of other repair claims rather than replacement claims results in hundreds of thousands of dollars being saved by defendant for each year that this strategy is in place," the judge wrote. Daniel Berg praised the Mayersons for sticking with the case. "I can see any other attorney being done 15 years ago," he said. "Ben saw something in this -- and the more he dug, the more he found." Berg's regret, though, is that Sherri Berg never knew the family won the victory. She died of cancer at age 62 on April 25, seven weeks before the ruling. On Friday, Nationwide's lawyers appealed. They filed a new round of legal papers asking Sprecher to reverse his decision. BY THE NUMBERS $25,000 Cost of replacing the damaged Jeep. $3M Amount Nationwide spent to defend itself from a 1998 claim over a Jeep accident. $18M Amount of punitive damages. [email protected] 215-854-4821 @CraigRMcCoy ___ (c)2014 The Philadelphia Inquirer Visit The Philadelphia Inquirer at www.philly.com Distributed by MCT Information Services, Inquirer - Front Page

Office location for Benjamin J. Mayerson

1 North Sunnybrook Road
Pottstown, PA 19464

Phone: 610-410-9379

Selections

2 Years Super Lawyers
  • Super Lawyers: 2025 - 2026

Additional sources of information about Benjamin J. Mayerson

Find me online

Attorney resources for Benjamin J. Mayerson

Download badge
Update profile
Order online

Contact me

Required fields are marked with an asterisk (*).

To: Benjamin J. Mayerson Super Lawyers: Potential Client Inquiry

The information contained in this web site is intended to convey general information. It should not be construed as legal advice or opinion. It is not an offer to represent you, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship. The use of the internet or this contact form for communication is not necessarily a secure environment. Contacting a lawyer or law firm email through this service will not create an attorney-client relationship, and information will not necessarily be treated as privileged or confidential.

Find top lawyerswith confidence

The Super Lawyers patented selection process is peer influenced and research driven, selecting the top 5% of attorneys to the Super Lawyers lists each year. We know lawyers and make it easy to connect with them.

Page Generated: 0.058626890182495 sec