defendant in a strict-liability claim (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

defendant in a strict-liability claim in Pennsylvania

6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Tincher, T. v. Omega Flex, Inc., Aplt. green
pa · 2014
2 sentences

2017We note that the Supreme Court granted allocatur in Amato v. Bell & Gossett, — Pa. —, 130 A.3d 1283 (2016) to decide “[wjhether, under the Court's recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 628 Pa. 296 , 104 A.3d 328 (2014), a defendant in a strict-liability claim based on a failure-to-warn theory has the right to have a jury determine whether its product was “unreasonably dangerous?” However, on November 22, 2016, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as improvidently granted.

2017We note that the Supreme Court granted allocatur in Amato v. Bell & Gossett, — Pa. —, 130 A.3d 1283 (2016) to decide “[wjhether, under the Court's recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 628 Pa. 296 , 104 A.3d 328 (2014), a defendant in a strict-liability claim based on a failure-to-warn theory has the right to have a jury determine whether its product was “unreasonably dangerous?” However, on November 22, 2016, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as improvidently granted.

62016–2017
Vinciguerra v. Bayer Cropscience Inc. green
pa · 2016
1 sentence

2017We note that the Supreme Court granted allocatur in Amato v. Bell & Gossett, — Pa. —, 130 A.3d 1283 (2016) to decide “[wjhether, under the Court's recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 628 Pa. 296 , 104 A.3d 328 (2014), a defendant in a strict-liability claim based on a failure-to-warn theory has the right to have a jury determine whether its product was “unreasonably dangerous?” However, on November 22, 2016, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as improvidently granted.

12017–2017
Martz v. Golden Gate National Senior Care, LLC green
pa · 2016
1 sentence

2017Amato v. Bell & Gossett, — Pa, -, 150 A.3d 956 , 2016 WL 6873043 (2016). .

12017–2017
Vinciguerra v. Bayer Cropscience Inc. neutral
pa · 2016
1 sentence

2017Amato v. Bell & Gossett, — Pa, -, 150 A.3d 956 , 2016 WL 6873043 (2016). .

12017–2017

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check