How much has the recent Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., Opinion changed the landscape of products liability law in Pennsylvania? So far, this opinion has resulted in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania upholding the dismissal of a manufacturer of a product involved in a...
Phone: 412-281-5060
Houston Harbaugh
Products Liability
Pennsylvania Products Liability Law: Amazon May be Liable for Defective “Marketplace” Items in Oberdorf Case
What role does Amazon play when third party vendors sell defective products? The Third Circuit has recently issued an opinion on the issue in the case of Oberdorf v. Amazon.com Inc., No 18-1041 (3d Cir. 2019). The Third Circuit has held that Amazon can be liable as a...
Is Evidence of a Plaintiff’s Contributory Negligence Admissible in a Strict Product Liability Action? PA Federal Court Allows It, But only for Limited Purposes
Strict product liability generally focuses on the product itself, not the negligent conduct of the defendant, and as a result, defendants often are precluded from relying on certain negligence concepts in defending strict liability actions. A plaintiff's comparative...
Federal Court Grants Summary Judgment to Strict Product Liability Defendant in Case Proceeding Under Tincher’s Consumer Expectations Standard
To prevail on a strict product liability claim under Pennsylvania law, a plaintiff must prove the product at issue is defective, the defect existed when the product left defendant's hands, and the defect caused the harm. A product may be defective based on a...
In the Wake of Tincher, Can a Strict Product Liability Defendant Rely on Compliance Standards?
In a strict product liability claim, compliance with government regulations and industry standards can be powerful evidence for the defense. Such evidence traditionally has been inadmissible under Pennsylvania law based on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in...
Pennsylvania Superior Court Decision Highlights Importance of Rebuttal Evidence on Causation in Defending a Strict-Liability, Failure-to-Warn Claim
The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently affirmed an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County entering a judgment against American Honda Motor Co., Inc. ("Honda") on a jury verdict of $55,325,714 in a personal injury action. American Honda Motor Co.,...
PA Superior Court Rejects “Heeding Presumption” In Strict-Liability, Failure-To-Warn Action
In Dolby v. Ziegler Tire & Supply Co., 2017 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 791 (Pa. Super. Feb. 28, 2017), a case that proceeded to trial solely on a strict-product-liability, failure-to-warn claim, the Superior Court recently affirmed an Allegheny County Court of Common...
The State of Products Liability in Pennsylvania – Part Two
Part One, a general overview of Tincher, can be found HERE. Since Berrier v. Simplicity Mfg., 563 F.3d 83 (3d Cir. 2009), the Third Circuit has been applying the Third Restatement articulation of a products liability design defect cause of action. (The Third Circuit...
The State of Products Liability in Pennsylvania after Tincher – Part One
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has, after decades of only tangentially addressing clear issues with the state products liability law in the Commonwealth, at last spoken. Since the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued Azzarello v. Black Brothers Co., 391 A.2d 1020 (Pa....
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Decides in Tincher Case: “No Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability §§ 1 et seq.”
In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc. (no. 17 MAP 2013) - The Supreme Court also overruled the landmark case Azzarello v. Black Brothers Company, 391 A. 2d 1020 (Pa. 1978). Here are the key statements of opinion below. Our firm will provide analysis in an upcoming blog post...
