Will Revamped High Court Favor Products Liability Plaintiffs?

February 19, 2016

The Legal Intelligencer
By Ben Seal

Very little has changed in the products liability landscape since November 2014, when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex and largely reset the practice area. The Superior Court has issued one nonprecedential opinion interpreting portions of Tincher, and the high court has agreed to hear argument in one post-Tincher case. Otherwise, the “considerable confusion” that a Clarion County judge lamented in an October 2015 decision has remained constant.


Defense attorney Jeremy Mishkin of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads said he hasn’t lost hope that another look under different circumstances could persuade the justices to move to the Third Restatement, which is generally perceived as being more friendly to defendants than the Second Restatement. Federal courts in Pennsylvania had predicted the adoption of the Third Restatement before the Tincher court expressly declined to make the switch.

Visit to view the full article.