OPINION OF THE COURT

Contrary to the contention of the appellant, the record shows that the trial judge undertook to apply the law of Ohio in instructing the jury on the principles of liability that are applicable to this products liability case. Moreover, since appellant’s counsel had taken the position that on the issues contested in this case Ohio and Pennsylvania law are essentially the same, we find no basis for reversal in appellant’s contention on appeal that certain differences between Ohio and Pennsylvania law were not adequately explained to the jury.

The judgment will be affirmed.