Pretrial discovery of a defendant product manufacturer is critical to the development and success of almost every products liability case. Records of design, testing, post-production studies, complaints, etc. are important to both expert and jury analysis of the questions of defect, feasibility, causation, etc.—and often these same topics are raised by defense experts who may claim the absence of a reasonable alternative or no causation. The nature and extent of design work (and discussions among engineers and other corporate employees) who have been working on issues related to product safety are also pertinent to establish “state-of-the-art,” or “state-of-the-industry” in the design, construction and testing of the same or similar products. Most often, in reported appellate decisions, these issues arise in products liability and motor vehicle cases (but the same issues exist in almost any type of products case).

Typically, broad technical discovery is warranted. See, Buongiavanni v. General Motors, 31 Pa. D&C 4th 475 (Bucks Co. 1996) (Discovery allowed of corporation’s internal study of the failure of seat backs and proposed design changes which were not directed specifically to the car model at issue.)