Legal Opinion

Carrecter v. Colson Equipment Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 18, 1985No. 02104PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

The instant appeal requires us once again to reaffirm the sharp distinction which the courts of this Commonwealth have drawn between negligence suits and products liability actions based on section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. We hold that the trial court may not invite the jury to consider the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct by instructing on the “state of the art defense.”

Appellant Fletcher Carrecter Jr. appeals from a judgment in favor of appellee Colson 1 entered on a jury verdict in a products liability action based upon an injury allegedly caused by a…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Berkebile v. Brantly Helicopter Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Azzarello v. Black Bros. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  4. Dambacher by Dambacher v. MallisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Salvador v. Atlantic Steel Boiler Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Brown v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Supreme Court · 1991
  3. McDaniel v. Merck, Sharp & DohmeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Alvin DILLINGER, Appellant, v. CATERPILLAR, INC., a Delaware Corporation; Wheeler MacHinery Company, Inc., a Utah CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  5. Michael SURACE; Alice Surace, H/w, Appellants, v. CATERPILLAR, INC.; CMI Corporation, AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997

41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API