Amato v. Bell
Amato v. Bell
130 A.3d 1283; 634 Pa. 650; 2016 Pa. LEXIS 119
(Atlantic Reporter, Third Series)
Amato v. Bell
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:
Whether, under the Court’s recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc. [628 Pa. 2967, 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014), a defendant in a stricWiability claim based on a failure-to-warn theory has the right to have a jury determine whether its product was “unreasonably dangerous[?]”
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.