The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has granted allocatur in a pair of cases to answer the question of whether a jury should decide if a product is “unreasonably dangerous.” The cases are the first the court has agreed to hear that deal with its 2014 ruling in Tincher v. Omega Flex, which reshaped products liability law in the state, as well as the first it has agreed to hear since adding three new justices this year.
The high court on Monday accepted appeals from Crane Co. in Amato v. Bell & Gossett and Vinciguerra v. Bayer CropScience, both of which are asbestos-related personal-injury actions that resulted in verdicts of more than $2 million at the trial-court level. Crane said in its petitions to the Supreme Court that it was not allowed to present at trial a requested jury instruction focused on whether its product was “reasonably safe” or could have been rendered so by “reasonable instructions or warnings.”
This content has been archived.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]
