Trying to project how a court will rule can be like throwing darts at a dartboard. Predicting where the Pennsylvania Supreme Court may be leaning on theRestatement (Third) of Torts regarding products liability claims is much the same. I may be somewhat off the mark, and there is plenty of room for disagreement. However, with the benefit of precedent and observing oral argument in the latest case to consider the issue (Tincher v. Omega Flex, 17 MAP 2013), my aim should be improved.
A Full Court
We have an old weather-related joke in Pittsburgh (fittingly, where the Tincher oral arguments were held Oct. 15): Don’t like the weather? Wait a few minutes. When and whether our Supreme Court will adopt the Restatement (Third) has been predictably unpredictable. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has tried to hit the target with buckshot results. Our Supreme Court has had several opportunities and has declined.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
