Legal Opinion

Sheehan v. Cincinnati Shaper Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 9, 1989No. 988PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSON, Judge:

Cincinnati Shaper Company (Shaper) appeals from a judgment in a strict liability action in favor of John and Beverly Sheehan. We are asked to consider whether the rule precluding the introduction of industry standards in a strict liability action as pronounced in Majdic v. Cincinnati Machine Co., 370 Pa.Super. 611, 537 A.2d 334 (1988) should be extended to preclude the introduction of OSHA regulations as well. We conclude that it should and thus affirm.

Employed as a machine operator for Pittsburgh Bridge and Iron Works (PBI), John Sheehan was responsible for cutting steel…

2Cases cited6 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. Burch v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Lewis v. Coffing Hoist Div., Duff-NortonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Majdic v. Cincinnati MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Paul R. Forrest v. Beloit Corporation Harnischfeger Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
  2. Mount Olivet Tabernacle Church v. Edwin L. Wiegand DivisionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Havasy v. ResnickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. In re Welding Fume Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2007
  5. Renninger, D. v. A & R Machine ShopSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

18 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