In late 2013, I authored a piece regarding where the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (as constituted at that time) might be leaning regarding a contested products liability matter, Tincher v. Omega Flex, 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014). At the time, I predicted where the justices might be leaning based on the questions they posed at oral argument. I made the “bold” (quotes intentional, as the prediction was anything but) prediction that the Supreme Court would change the landscape of products liability matters, but not adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts.
Given that the makeup of the Supreme Court has changed yet again (including unexpected vacancies), and as a matter in which I have an interest was being presented, I thought it might be worthwhile to yet again make some “bold” predictions based upon my observations of Supreme Court argument.
This content has been archived.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]
