Colville v. Crown Equipment Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding plaintiff prejudiced where trial court failed to instruct on crashworthiness even though evidence supported theory
• rejecting the appellees’ claim that “crashworthiness [was] an additional theory recovery that a plaintiff may elect - 43 - J-A18007-25 to pursue”
• “In the instant case, the jury was instructed on the elements of a Section 402A strict products liability claim without any reference to the crashworthiness standard.”
• “Historically, a - 36 - J-A18007-25 Section 402A strict products liability action only create[s] liability for injuries proximately caused by a defect where the defect also caused the accident.”
• applied crashworthiness doctrine to a single collision incident

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).