Will Revamped High Court Favor Products Liability Plaintiffs?

February 19, 2016
The Legal Intelligencer

Categories : General

Types : In the News

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 The Superior Court has issued one nonprecedential opinion interpreting portions of Tincher, and the high court has agreed to hear argument in one post-Tincher case.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 www.thelegalintelligencer.com to view the full article.


Product Liability, Toxic Torts and Catastrophic Events

Montgomery McCracken’s Product Liability, Toxic Torts and Catastrophic Events Practice has extensive experience representing manufacturers, distributors, and retailers in a variety of products liability and mass tort matters and in […]

Learn more about our Product Liability, Toxic Torts and Catastrophic Events Practice


Montgomery McCracken’s Litigation Department offers a deep bench of skilled and experienced litigators whose practice areas encompass a broad array of industries and substantive legal disciplines.  Our clients include individuals, […]

Learn more about our Litigation Department

1 of 2