United States: The New Product Liability Paradigm In Pennsylvania: The PA Supreme Court Declines To Adopt The Third Restatement, But Overrules Precedent Prohibiting Consideration Of Negligence Principles In Strict Liability Cases

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court this past week dramatically altered the landscape of product liability litigation in Pennsylvania. In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., No. 17 MAP 2013 (Pa. November 19, 2014), the Court overruled long-standing precedent that stringently segregated negligence concepts from strict liability claims, and finally settled the question of whether Pennsylvania would move to the Third Restatement.


Section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (which was adopted in Pennsylvania in 1966) imposes liability on one who sells a product in a "defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer ..." In Azzarello v. Black Brothers Company, 391 A.2d 1020 (Pa. 1978), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that the phrase "unreasonably dangerous" has no "independent significance" and merely explains the term "defective." The Court thus held that a plaintiff need not prove negligence in strict liability claims. The Court further concluded that whether a product was in a "defective condition unreasonably dangerous" was a decision for the trial judge alone, and not the jury. Subsequent decisions reinforced Azzarello's prohibition on considering negligence principles in strict liability claims and excluded evidence relating to negligence concepts.

In 1998, the American Law Institute introduced the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Product Liability, which sought to improve upon the concepts articulated in the Second Restatement. In addition, whereas the Second Restatement was designed to address manufacturing defects only, the Third Restatement provided guidance for design defect and failure to warn claims as well. Until this week, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had not addressed the potential adoption of the Third Restatement in Pennsylvania, although several Justices individually indicated support for such a move. Over the past ten years, federal and state courts in Pennsylvania have tried to predict whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would adopt the analysis set forth in the Third Restatement, and have reached inconsistent results. As a result of these different conclusions, parties were left to guess which Restatement applied in any given case.

The Tincher case

When lightning struck near the Tinchers' home, steel tubing carrying natural gas to a fireplace was punctured, igniting the gas and causing a fire that resulted in significant damage to the Tinchers' home. The Tinchers sued Omega Flex, the manufacturer of the tubing, on a "design defect" theory and experts rendered differing opinions on the cause of the fire and whether the tubing was defective. Omega Flex argued for application of the Third Restatement. However, the trial court instructed the jury based on the Second Restatement and principles enunciated in Azzarello. The jury returned a verdict in the Tinchers' favor, and Omega Flex appealed.

After the Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the judgment in Plaintiffs' favor, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania granted Omega Flex's petition for allowance of appeal. After exhaustively outlining the development of current law, and some of the problems that have developed under the current paradigm, the Court rendered three notable rulings: (1) it overruled Azzarello; (2) it declined to adopt the Third Restatement; and (3) it provided new guidance for strict liability claims in Pennsylvania going forward.

Azzarello is Overruled

The Court's opinion bluntly explained the result of the Azzarello framework: "decisional law has lapsed into an arguably unprincipled formulaic application of rhetoric, threatening to render the strict liability cause of action hopelessly unmoored in modern circumstances." In particular, the Court noted a number of practical problems. First, the determination of whether a product is defective is made by the trial court under a motion to dismiss standard (light most favorable to the plaintiff). Second, the jury is given no real guidance on what constitutes a defective product, and therefore, cannot make its own determination based on a risk utility or consumer expectations analysis. Third, the exclusion of any evidence relating to "negligence principles" precluded the jury from considering evidence bearing on the risk utility analysis.

Recognizing this unworkable and inconsistent landscape for product liability cases, the Court overruled Azzarello, acknowledging that strict liability claims are based in part on principles of negligence. Further, the Court clarified that the determination of whether a product is defective, including consideration of any factors that implicate principles founded in negligence, is for the fact-finder (i.e., the jury in a case tried to a jury).

The Court Declines to Adopt the Third Restatement

To replace the Azzarello framework, Omega Flex argued for adoption of the Third Restatement, indicating it was the next logical step in the progression of product liability law in Pennsylvania and would bring Pennsylvania in line with the "mainstream" nationally. Omega Flex also argued that the Second Restatement is ill-suited for design defect cases.

The Court declined, however, to adopt the Third Restatement. First, the Court was concerned that adoption of the Third Restatement would require the application of a general principle of liability with respect to all products, while there may be particular products or circumstances that warrant special considerations. In this regard, the Court held, courts are not in a position to make policy judgments as to which products should be exempt from these general rules. Second, the Restatements "reflect the consensus among American jurisdictions as to the applicable liability construct in 'classic design cases.'" But the Court said its role is different; it involves application of general rules to specific factual scenarios based on a developing common law that is not necessarily in line with a consensus of jurisdictions. Further, given the fact-intensive nature of product liability cases, the Court believed the judiciary should be cautious about making broad pronouncements. For these reasons, the Court preferred to take an "incremental" approach, and not simply adopt an entirely new construct.

Justice Saylor, with whom Justice Eakin joined, dissented from this part of the Court's opinion, and argued for adoption of the Third Restatement.

Guidance on Strict Liability Claims

Given the overruling of Azzarello, and resulting lack of guidance in this area, the Court provided some discussion on the parameters of strict liability claims going forward.

According to the Court's opinion, the theory of strict liability remains the same as articulated in Webb v. Zurn, 220 A.2d 853 (Pa. 1966): "those who sell a product (i.e., profit from making and putting a product in the stream of commerce) are held responsible for damage caused to a consumer by the reasonable use of the product." The strict liability claim is based on a duty imposed by law which is distinct from the duty of due care applicable to negligence claims. In particular, "a person or entity engaged in the business of selling a product has a duty to make and/or market the product – which 'is expected to and does reach the user or consumer without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold' – free from 'a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the consumer or *the consumer's+ property'" (citing §402A). To demonstrate a breach of that duty, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant sold the product in a "defective condition."

Whether a product is in a "defective condition" depends on a balancing of competing interests, and with respect to design defect claims, the Court adopted a composite of two general standards for balancing those interests. Under the "Consumer Expectations Standard," a product is defective if, upon normal use, the product is "dangerous beyond the reasonable consumer's contemplations." Stated another way, the danger must be "unknowable and unacceptable to the average or ordinary consumer." Among the factors relevant to considering a reasonable consumer's expectations are the nature of the product, the identity of the user, the product's intended use and intended user and any express or implied representations by the manufacturer or seller.

Under the "Risk-Utility Standard," a product is defective if "a 'reasonable person' would conclude that the probability and seriousness of harm caused by the product outweigh the burden or costs of taking precautions" (this standard necessarily incorporates negligence principles). In other words, "a seller's precautions to advert the danger should anticipate and reflect the type and magnitude of the risk posed by the sale and use of the product." The Court identified, but fell short of endorsing, a number of factors that may be relevant to the risk-utility analysis, including the usefulness and desirability of the product, safety aspects of the product, the availability of a substitute product, the manufacturer's ability to eliminate the unsafe condition, the user's ability to avoid the danger, the user's anticipated awareness of the danger, and the feasibility of the manufacturer spreading the loss.

Seeing shortcomings in both standards, the Court elected to adopt a composite approach: a breach of duty can be established under either test. "*W+e hold that, in Pennsylvania, the cause of action in strict products liability requires proof, in the alternative, either of the ordinary consumer's expectations or of the risk utility of a product." The Court also made clear that the cause of action in tort for strict liability retains "those aspects of negligence and breach of warranty liability theories from which it evolved," and "combin*es+ the balancing of interests inherent in those two causes of action." Thus, the fiction created by Azzarello and its progeny of segregating negligence concepts entirely from strict liability claims no longer exists in Pennsylvania.

The Court also clarified the role of trial judge and jury in light of Azzarello's demise. Regardless of which theory (consumer expectations or risk utility) a plaintiff chooses to pursue, the trial court acts in its ordinary gate-keeper role. If plaintiff chooses the risk-utility standard, "proof of risks and utilities are part of the burden to prove that the harm suffered was due to the defective condition of the product." Whether a party has met the burden to prove the elements is a decision for the fact finder unless "reasonable minds cannot differ on the issue."

Throughout the opinion, the Court articulated its hesitancy to make broad-based pronouncements, and expressed a preference for modest, incremental decisions that apply to specific factual scenarios. The opinion also emphasized that a larger shift in policy should be addressed, if at all, by the legislature. Given the legislature's decision not to act on this issue, however, the Court elected to provide some guidance based on the common law. The Court recognized that many questions are left unanswered, but preferred to address those questions as they arise.

Azzarello and its progeny created tremendous difficulties and inconsistencies in product liability litigation for the past thirty years. Further, the uncertainty of whether Pennsylvania would move to the Third Restatement created even more confusion and practical problems. While many questions remain, the Tincher decision is a significant step toward clarifying the standards by which manufacturers and suppliers will be judged.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:
  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.
  • Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.
    If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here
    If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here

    Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

    Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

    Use of www.mondaq.com

    You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


    Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

    The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


    Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

    • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
    • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
    • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

    Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

    Information Collection and Use

    We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

    We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

    Mondaq News Alerts

    In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


    A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

    Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

    Log Files

    We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


    This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

    Surveys & Contests

    From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


    If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


    From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

    *** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


    This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

    Correcting/Updating Personal Information

    If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

    Notification of Changes

    If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

    How to contact Mondaq

    You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

    If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.

    By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions