Eric C. Palombo


Eric Palombo is an officer of the firm, who has litigated cases in state and federal courts throughout the country including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, North and South Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia. 

In the course of his practice, he has litigated disputes involving construction claims, freight claims, demurrage, transportation contracts, products liability, and vendor disputes as well as bridge allisions involving admiralty law. Eric also has experience drafting transportation contracts, carrier tariffs, and commercial sales agreements. Eric works diligently to achieve the best possible outcome for his clients whether through dispositive motions, trial, appeal or settlement.

Eric graduated cum laude from The Villanova University Law School, where he was awarded Order of the Coif. After having completed a judicial clerkship, Eric joined Keenan, Cohen & Merrick in 2010.


Villanova University School of Law, J.D. 2009, cum laude, Order of the Coif
West Chester University of Pennsylvania, B.S. 2003, cum laude 


Direct Line: 215.609.1108




  • Commercial Transportation Litigation
  • Transportation and Logistics Contracts
  • Vendor Disputes
  • Products Liability
  • Judgment Enforcement


  •  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of New Jersey
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey
  • U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana
  • U.S. District Court, Western District of Tennessee
  • Association of Transportation Law Professionals


  • The STB’s Proposed Rules for Demurrage: Old Problems Solved and New Problems Created
  • Freight Loss and Damage Claims: Preemption in the Context of Private Transportation Contracts


  • Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC, et. al. v. Great American Lines, Inc. et al., No. 16-3668, 2017 WL 6032465, (3d Cir. Dec. 6, 2017) obtained summary judgment and drafted appellate brief successfully convincing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to affirm the District Court’s award of summary judgment finding that his client was not liable for a $9 million freight claim arising from the theft of a trailer of pharmaceuticals while in transit based upon the terms and conditions contained within the governing transportation contract.
  • CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Niagara Lubricant, U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, Civil Action No: 1:12-cv-00540, sat as second chair in a five day jury trial involving the recovery of damages arising from environmental remediation and resulting in a substantial jury verdict for his client.
  • CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Port Newark Container Terminal, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, 2:13-cv-04434 successfully defeated defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment, in which the defendant argued, inter alia, that it was not liable for flood damage to railcars arising from Superstorm Sandy due to an Act of God. The matter proceeded to a bench trial where Mr. Palombo sat as second chair and which resulted in a full judgment in favor of his client. 
  • Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. New York Terminals, LLC, No. CV 2:14-07664, 2017 WL 4005158, (D.N.J. Sept. 12, 2017), successfully moved for summary judgment on his client’s claim for demurrage and hazardous material charges. The District Court enforced the terms of the carrier’s tariff holding that the defendant was liable for the demurrage charges and that the railcars contained hazardous materials as a matter of law based upon the shipper’s hazardous material designation contained in the bills of lading.  
  • Transflo Terminal Services, Inc. v. Brooklyn Res. Recovery, Inc., 248 F. Supp. 3d 397 (E.D.N.Y. 2017), successfully moved the District Court to grant summary judgment on his client’s breach of contract claim despite the defendant’s meritless claim that plaintiff’s supporting documentation was fabricated. The matter subsequently settled on appeal.
  • CSX Transp., Inc. v. Auburn Thirty Six, LLC, et al.4:12-CV-1984-JAR, 2014 WL 2480610 (E.D. Mo. June 3, 2014) successful in moving U.S. District Court in Missouri to grant summary judgment on behalf of client in a breach of contract dispute, resulting a judgment in excess of $900,000 against both the defendant corporation and its principal, as well as dismissal of defendants’ counterclaim of misrepresentation.
  • CSX Transp., Inc. v. ABC & D Recycling, Inc.CIV.A. 11-30268-FDS, 2013 WL 3070770 (D. Mass. June 14, 2013) successful in convincing U.S. District Court in Massachusetts that parties had incorporated additional tariff terms into their transportation contract, which resulted in summary judgment in the amount of $425,000 on behalf of his client.
  • Pegasus Transp. Grp., Inc. v. CSX Transp., Inc., 05-12-00465-CV, 2013 WL 4130899 (Tex. App. Aug. 14, 2013) successful in convincing Texas Court of Appeals to uphold award of summary judgment, despite defendant’s attempt to use a sham affidavit to create an issue of fact.