Morris v. Pathmark Corp.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
WIEAND, Judge:
In this action to recover for an allergic reaction following use of a hair straightening product, the trial court entered a compulsory nonsuit in favor of the manufacturer and vendor of the product. After careful review, we affirm.
On February 24, 1983, Lee Connie Morris purchased a sealed container of “Posner Frizzzz Control,” a hair straightening product, from a Pathmark Supermarket in Edgewater Park, New Jersey. Before going to bed the following evening, she applied the contents to her hair in accordance with the directions on the container. Ms. Morris awoke the next morning…
2Cases cited15 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
- Incollingo v. EwingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Incollingo v. EWINGSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Helen W. ANGUS, Appellant, v. SHILEY INC.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- French v. Commonwealth Associates, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Wolfe v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Johnston v. J.C. Ehrlich Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County1991
- Whitson v. Safeskin Corp., Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.