Bryan W. Petrilla

Bryan W. Petrilla is a partner practicing in the area of complex litigation. A significant portion of his practice involves representing insurers with respect to a wide range of coverage issues and disputes throughout the country, including those arising from asbestos claims, directors & officers and financial institution liability, professional liability/errors and omissions, construction defect and additional insured issues and complex first-party claims.  

Bryan has litigated coverage disputes in bench and jury trials in state and federal courts throughout the country, including matters in Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Bryan previously represented policyholders, an experience that provides him with additional insight during his representation of insurers.  In addition to insurance coverage, Bryan has represented clients in commercial litigation and liability defense matters and sits as an arbitrator for the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas.

Bryan was formerly a Member of the Global Insurance Group of Cozen O’Connor. Prior to that, he worked in the Insurance Recovery Group of Reed Smith, LLP and at Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C. Bryan also clerked for Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Primary Practice Areas

Areas of Focus
  • Additional Insured Coverage
  • Advertising Injury & Business Tort Coverage
  • Asbestos Liability Coverage
  • Business Interruption
  • CGL Insurance Coverage
  • Construction Defect Coverage
  • Directors’ & Officers’ (D&O) Coverage
  • Excess & Primary Insurer Relations
  • Long Tail Claims & Allocation
  • Rescission & Fraud
  • Umbrella & Excess Coverage

First Horizon National Corp. v. Houston Cas. Co., Western District of Tennessee (2017) – obtained summary judgment for its client under a Blended Risk Insurance Program totaling $75 million, with a finding that the insurers properly denied coverage under their policies because the underlying claim against the insured did not fall within the applicable policy period, and, even if it did, the insured failed to give proper notice of the Claim. The Court also concluded that the insured’s bad faith claim failed, and dismissed all claims in the matter with prejudice.

R.T. Vanderbilt Co., Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., et al., Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Waterbury, Complex Litigation Dep’t (served as trial counsel for 28 insurers in coverage dispute involving underlying asbestos, silica and talc-related claims, obtaining successful trial verdict finding policyholder self-insured for 22 year period).

Evraz Claymont Steel, Inc., et al. v. Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co., Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County (obtained summary judgment ruling regarding applicability of additional insured endorsement arising from construction accident).

Anna Kormilitsyna, et al. v. Everest National Insurance Co., Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, Index No. 650769/2013 (partial summary judgment entered dismissing declaratory judgment count and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing)

R.T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., et al., Superior Court, Judicial District of Waterbury Connecticut, Complex Litigation Dep’t, No. X02-CV-07-5016321S (served as lead counsel for 28 insurers in a two phase 7 week insurance coverage declaratory judgment trial involving underlying asbestos, silica and talc-related claims)

  • American Bar Association
  • Pennsylvania Bar Association
  • Montgomery County Bar Association

Pennsylvania Rising Stars, Super Lawyers (2015)
Order of the Coif, Villanova University School of Law
Finalist, 44th Annual Moot Court Competition, Villanova University School of Law


Coverage for Faulty Workmanship – Fundamental to Advanced Concepts, CPCU Society, October 2016
New Jersey Answers Critical Question Regarding Coverage For Faulty Workmanship (Insurance Coverage Alert), August 5, 2016
Reservation of Rights/Bad Faith Issues, (Client Seminar), November 2015
New York Appellate Court Rules Named Insured Does Not Need to be at Fault to Trigger Additional Insured Endorsement (Insurance Coverage Alert), August 2015
Fourth Circuit Holds Standard AI Endorsement “Plainly Lacks” Vicarious Liability Limitation, (Insurance Coverage Alert) June 2015
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Allows Assignment of Statutory Bad Faith Claims, (Insurance Coverage Alert) December 2014
DELVACCA: Cyber, Technology and Privacy Claims: The Next Generation of Property and Third Party Loss, November 2011
Anonymous, Hacks Sony PlayStation Network: The Increasing Importance of Obtaining Cyber Security Insurance Coverage (Insurance Coverage Alert) May 2011
15th Annual Insurance Institute, PA Bar Institute: Intellectual Property Insurance Issues, Faculty Member, Philadelphia, PA, April 2011
Excess/Umbrella Insurance Issues, [Client Seminar] December 2010
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rejects Reimbursement of Defense Costs While Tenth Circuit Finds Support Under Colorado Law, [Insurance Coverage Alert!] September 2010
Recent Developments in Property Insurance Coverage Litigation, [Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal], Volume 44, Number 2 (Winter 2009) December 2009
Do Not Overlook the End Result: Finding Coverage Under Ensuing and Resulting Loss Provisions, [Coverage] Volume 18, Number 5, Published by Lexus Nexus September 30, 2008
It’s Alive! Resurrecting Coverage for Property Damage Through an Ensuing Loss Provision, [Legal Intelligencer, Real Estate supplement] June 25, 2007