In Pennsylvania: Product Liability Law Post-<i>Tincher</i>

Stated in general terms, the decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, 2014 Pa. LEXIS 3031, overruled the language of the court's opinion in Azzarello v. Black Brothers, 480 Pa. 547, 391 A.2d 1020 (1978), and its progeny, replacing that definition of a defective condition with two independent analyses: consumer-expectation and risk-benefit tests. Further, the court emphatically rejected adoption of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, ending a disagreement between state and federal courts (which had wrongly predicted that Pennsylvania would adopt the Third Restatement). Explaining that, stare decisis aside, the Tincher court said that “precedent, of course, is not infallible; if we are to ensure both the perception and the reality of justice, we must be willing to reexamine precedent if it is demonstrated that a prior rule does not serve, or no longer adequately serves, the interests of justice.”