Spear v. Atrium Med. Corp., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145085 (E.D. Pa. August 12, 2022) (McHugh, J.)  In this case, Judge McHugh found that strict liability applies.  He rejected views of other judges.  He did say the product must be looked at on an individual basis, and found using that application on a 12(b)(6) motion, […]

Maietta v. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al., No. 19-4170 (E.D. Pa. August 19, 2022) (Baylson, J.)  Judge Baylson granted defendant’s motion on strict liability and struck it.  However, he refused to strike the other counts, which were information defect, design defect, negligence in designing the product, negligence by failing to warn, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation, […]

Gustafson v. Springfield, Inc., 2022 Pa. Super. LEXIS 356 (August 12, 2022).  This federal law prevents any civil action or administrative proceeding against a manufacturer or seller of firearms moving through interstate commerce for damages, fines, etc. resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of that firearm by a third party.  This case involves criminal […]

Sullivan v. Werner Co., 253 A.3d 730; 2021 Pa. Super. LEXIS 210 (April 15, 2021) (Pellegrini, J.)  Michael Sullivan (Sullivan) and Melissa Sullivan, his wife, brought this strict products liability action after he fell through a scaffold made by Werner Company (Werner) and sold by Lowe’s Companies, Inc. (Lowe’s) (collectively, Manufacturer). A jury determined that […]

English v. Eisai, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44977 (M.D. Pa. March 14, 2022) (Conner, U.S. D.J.).  This case involving a weight-loss product said that plaintiffs properly pled an alternative feasible safer design.  That means that the defendant’s motion to dismiss would be denied.  There were other claims here for warranty, fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment and the […]

Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 2018 Pa. Super. LEXIS 117 (February 16, 2018) Lazarus, J.  Omega Flex, Inc. appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Terence D. and Judith R. Tincher following a jury trial and the denial of its post-trial motions.  Omega Flex contends that it is entitled to a new trial because […]

Smith v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp, et al., 17-1174 (E.D. Pa. April 27, 2017) Beetlestone, J. This Court predicts that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would not bar strict liability claims asserting a manufacturing defect against medical device manufacturers under Comment k. of Restatement 402A and Tincher. Here, Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged a manufacturing defect strict liability […]

Claim was that Wyeth was negligent in placing unreasonably dangerous drug on the market which was ultimately withdrawn.  In Pennsylvania, products liability law is superseded as it applies to prescription drugs under Comment k of the Restatement 2nd of Torts 402A.  Due to the inherent risks associated with prescription drugs, the Supreme Court is limited […]

One of the widely asked questions in the wake of Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., ___ A.3d ____, 2014 WL 6474923 (Pa. Nov. 19, 2014) is whether a jury should still be told that a product must contain every element necessary to make it safe.  As a corollary to this, lawyers have asked whether a […]