Blumer v. Ford Motor Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION BY
SHOGAN, J.:
While I agree with the Majority in all other respects, I am constrained to disagree with the Majority’s finding of waiver as it concerns hearsay and the trial court’s failure to give a limiting instruction. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
Appellants challenge the admissibility of the Continuous Quality Improvement System (“CQIS”)1 reports and the Master Owner Relations System (“MORS”) reports generated by Ford and/or its dealers. In the second issue, Appellants argue that the trial court erred in admitting the reports because the earlier…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. Frank BakerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
- Hutchinson v. Penske Truck Leasing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Spino v. John S. Tilley Ladder Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- United States v. Edwin Tony DavisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Commonwealth Financial Systems, Inc. v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.