Pennsylvania Supreme Court Revisits the Admissibility of Evidence of Product’s Compliance with Governmental Regulations or Industry Standards Post-Tincher v Omega Flex

In 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated opinion in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 628 Pa. 296, 104 A.3d 328 (2014). That case was a product liability action based on a design defect. The defense bar had hoped the Supreme Court would use the Tincher case to adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts Product Liability §§ 1-8 so that principles of due care and “state of the art,” evidence of which had been rigidly excluded from the section 402A analysis, would be admissible……
By: Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC
Previous Story

Sophos named a Leader in the 2024 IDC MarketScape for Worldwide Modern Endpoint Security for Small Businesses

Next Story

The Sufficiency of a Store’s Inspection and Maintenance Policies Are Only Relevant After Establishment of Notice of the Hazardous Condition.