Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Choice of Law Analysis Reviewed by Western Federal District Court of Pennsylvania

In the case of Alley v. MTD Products, Inc., No. 3: 17-CV-3 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 20, 2017 Gibson, J.), the court denied summary judgment filed by the Defendant in this products liability case involving alleged injuries from a snowblower. 

This decision is also notable for its Choice of Law analysis in terms of whether Ohio law or Pennsylvania law should be applied.  In the end, the court found that Pennsylvania law should be applied under the analysis.

In its decision, the court ruled that, where a product manufactured in another state injures a Pennsylvania resident who bought and used the product in Pennsylvania, the law of Pennsylvania will be applied to the personal injury case.   The court found that Pennsylvania’s contacts and interests are stronger than those of the state where the product is merely manufactured.  

Anyone wishing to review this decision may click this LINK.

I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Philadelphia law office of Reed Smith for bringing this case to my attention. 

Source of image:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.