Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Pennsylvania: Product Liability Law Post-<i>Tincher</i>
In a sweeping, detailed opinion, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court altered the landscape of Pennsylvania product liability law, reaching back in time to embrace and then update legal principles governing a consumer's burden of proof in recovering for harm caused by a defectively designed product.
Stated in general terms, the decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, 2014 Pa. LEXIS 3031, overruled the language of the court's opinion in Azzarello v. Black Brothers, 480 Pa. 547, 391 A.2d 1020 (1978), and its progeny, replacing that definition of a defective condition with two independent analyses: consumer-expectation and risk-benefit tests. Further, the court emphatically rejected adoption of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, ending a disagreement between state and federal courts (which had wrongly predicted that Pennsylvania would adopt the Third Restatement). Explaining that, stare decisis aside, the Tincher court said that “precedent, of course, is not infallible; if we are to ensure both the perception and the reality of justice, we must be willing to reexamine precedent if it is demonstrated that a prior rule does not serve, or no longer adequately serves, the interests of justice.”
This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.