By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff
Attorneys told me that the state of products liability law in Pennsylvania is extremely uncertain in the first part of my series on hot issues in products law. The state of uncertainty was triggered because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has twice opined in the last three years that the state Supreme Court is likely to adopt provisions of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, while the Pennsylvania high court has not squarely dealt with whether the Third Restatement should replace the Restatement (Second) of Torts. You can see that first installment of the series here.
Further discord on which version of the Restatement will apply continued this week.
My colleague Sara Spencer reported on the latest wrinkle in this conflict between district courts on whether to follow the Supreme Court or the Third Circuit. You can see Sara’s story here.
U.S. District Judge Mark Hornak of the Western District of Pennsylvania once again opined that the Third Restatement should apply because the Third Circuit has predicted that it will apply and the Supreme Court has not affirmatively disavowed the Third Restatement.
In contrast, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III of the Middle District of Pennsylvania has opined the Second Restatement applies because the Supreme Court has not affirmatively replaced the Second Restatement with the Third Restatement.
As they say, this is a story to be continued.