Legal Opinion

Schmidt v. Boardman Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 2, 2008PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

ALLEN, J.:

¶ 1 Sinor Manufacturing, Inc., n/k/a Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. and Freightliner Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the judgment entered against them and in favor of various plaintiffs on their claims of strict product liability and infliction of emotional distress.

¶ 2 Plaintiffs commenced this suit against Appellants asserting that they were liable as the successor companies to the original company that manufactured the defective product. On appeal, Appel*502lants contend that the trial court erred in denying their motion for judgment…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Sinn v. BurdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Reilly v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Ray v. Alad Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Berrier v. Simplicity Manufacturing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
  2. Passarello v. GrumbineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Schmidt v. Boardman Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Krepps, F. v. Snyder, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  5. Blumer v. Ford Motor Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011

20 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