Majdic v. Cincinnati MacHine Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
DEL SOLE, Judge:
We consider an appeal from the judgment entered in Appellee’s favor in a products liability action. Following the denial of post-trial motions and judgment, an appeal to this Court was filed in which a panel of this Court affirmed the trial court. We have granted reargument, however, for three principal reasons:
1. to clarify the role which “state of the art” evidence, including evidence of industry custom and federal safety standards, plays within the context of a strict liability action;
2. to re-examine the rule which prohibits hearsay statements appearing in learned…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Webb v. ZernSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Berkebile v. Brantly Helicopter Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Azzarello v. Black Bros. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Dambacher by Dambacher v. MallisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Salvador v. Atlantic Steel Boiler Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by77 opinions
- Parr, J. v. Ford Motor CompanySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Paul R. Forrest v. Beloit Corporation Harnischfeger Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Hutchinson v. Penske Truck Leasing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Spino v. John S. Tilley Ladder Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Whyte v. RobinsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.