Salvador v. Atlantic Steel Boiler Co.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that lack of horizontal privity no longer bars an injured employee from bringing a breach-of-warranty action against a product manufacturer. The court overruled Hochgertel v. Canada Dry Corp., relying on the development of Pennsylvania products-liability law, including adoption of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A and abolition of vertical privity in Kassab v. Central Soya. The court affirmed the Superior Court's reinstatement of Salvador's complaint.

Holdings

1. Lack of horizontal privity is no longer a bar to an injured party's suit for breach of warranty arising from a defective product.
2. Hochgertel v. Canada Dry Corp. is overruled because subsequent developments in Pennsylvania products-liability law eliminated the rationale for requiring horizontal privity.
3. The complaint should not have been dismissed on the ground that horizontal privity was lacking, and the order reinstating the complaint was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether lack of horizontal privity between an injured employee and a product manufacturer bars a breach-of-warranty action.
2. Whether Pennsylvania's adoption of strict products liability under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A requires abandonment of the horizontal-privity requirement in warranty actions.
3. Whether the trial court improperly dismissed Salvador's complaint on preliminary objections based solely on the absence of horizontal privity.

Disposition

affirmed