Legal Opinion
Baker v. ACandS
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 26, 2000No. 43 E.D. Appeal Docket 1999PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*293CAPPY, Justice.
OPINION
The question at issue concerns which method of set-off applies in this strict liability matter: pro tanto or pro rata set-off. For the following reasons, we find that pro tanto methodology of set-off is warranted. Accordingly, we now affirm the order of the Superior Court.
Albert and Suzanne Baker filed a civil action against several manufacturers and/or sellers of asbestos-containing products, seeking damages resulting from Mr. Baker’s exposure to asbestos and Mrs. Baker’s loss of consortium. This first complaint was dismissed without prejudice on January 13, 1994 as Mr.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Phillips v. A-Best Products Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Walton v. Avco Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Charles v. Giant Eagle MarketsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- In re T.J.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Incollingo v. EwingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Rost, Richard, M., Exec. v. Ford Motor Co., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Carrozza v. GreenbaumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Hyrcza v. West Penn Allegheny Health System, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Bugosh v. Allen Refractories Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Herbert v. Parkview HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.