After several years of some of the federal district courts and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit claiming confusion and uncertainty with the state of products liability law in Pennsylvania, despite long-standing state appellate precedent to the contrary, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court took the bait and granted allocatur to decide the issue of whether the Restatement (Second) of Torts or Restatement (Third) of Torts should be the substantive products liability law in Pennsylvania.
In agreeing to do so, the Supreme Court will be re-evaluating a social policy decision made in 1966 by a unanimous full court of justices when the Restatement (Second) of Torts was adopted as the substantive law to be applied for all products liability lawsuits filed in Pennsylvania. Since the adoption of the Restatement (Second) by our Supreme Court in Webb v. Zern, every state court, without exception, has continued to apply for the past 47 years the Restatement (Second).
This content has been archived.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]
