The products liability defense bar and a group of national manufacturers, concerned about what they view as a plaintiff-friendly update to the suggested standard jury instructions, are seeking reconsideration by the subcommittee that wrote them. The concern over the recently unveiled instructions marks the latest front in a struggle over the future of products liability law in Pennsylvania following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s landmark 2014 ruling in Tincher v. Omega Flex.
Earlier this summer, the civil instructions subcommittee of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Committee for Proposed Standard Jury Instructions rolled out its first major overhaul to the products liability jury charges in four decades. In a 10-page letter sent last month to the subcommittee, members of the defense bar, along with an alliance of manufacturers including Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline, urged the subcommittee to address the ways in which it “veered sharply from the course that the court plotted in Tincher.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
