Dan Kain of Littleton Park’s Pennsylvania office published an article in the December, 2018 edition of the Pennsylvania Defense Institute’s Counterpoint publication. Mr. Kain’s article addresses the seminal Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014) opinion and discovery disputes that have arisen across the Commonwealth as attorneys and trial courts attempt to decipher the relevant contours of discovery under Tincher’s composite method of proof: 1) risk-utility and/ or 2) consumer expectations. To date, the relevant scope of discovery in Pennsylvania product liability litigation presents an issue of first impression as no Pennsylvania appellate court has issued an opinion on the topic following Tincher. Mr. Kain’s article posits that an appellate opinion on the topic will provide Pennsylvania’s product liability bar with much needed uniformity and predictability throughout the discovery process.
