Summary
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reviewed the dismissal of a trespass action arising from the explosion of a beer keg that injured the plaintiff. The court adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A as Pennsylvania law, establishing strict liability for defective products, and held that the plaintiff should be permitted to amend the complaint to plead a defective-products-liability theory. The judgment was vacated and the record remanded for entry of an order permitting amendment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a plaintiff injured by an allegedly defective product may plead and pursue a trespass action under strict products liability without proving negligence or contractual privity.
- Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend his complaint to state a cause of action under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A.
Holdings
- Pennsylvania adopts Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A as the law governing tort liability for defective products.
- Because Webb broadly pleaded facts necessary to a defective-products-liability cause of action, he must be permitted to amend his complaint to state that theory explicitly.
Key quotations
“We hereby adopt the foregoing language as the law of Pennsylvania.” (427)
“The plaintiff in this litigation, therefore, must be given an opportunity to plead and prove his case.” (427)
Factual background
Charles Webb purchased a quarter-keg of beer from distributor John Zern. Webb's brother tapped the keg and drew approximately one gallon of beer from it. Later that evening, the keg exploded while the plaintiff was in the room, severely injuring him. Webb sued the distributor, brewer, and keg manufacturer, alleging he did not know what caused the explosion or which defendant was responsible.
Procedural history
Webb sued the distributor, brewer, and keg manufacturer after a beer keg exploded and injured him. The trial court dismissed the action, reasoning that the exclusive-control theory was unavailable because Webb had not joined his father and brother, who had purchased and tapped the keg. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania vacated the judgment and remanded with instructions to permit amendment of the complaint to plead defective-products liability.
Remand instructions
Vacate the judgment and remand with instructions to enter an order permitting the plaintiff to file an amended complaint explicitly stating a cause of action in trespass for defective-products liability.