Harsh v. Petroll
862 A.2d 581
Pa.2004Check TreatmentORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of November, 2004, the Petitions for Allowance of Appeal are hereby granted, limited to the following issue:
Is the Commonwealth Court’s holding that the Petroll Defendants and GM were joint tortfeasors based on general principles of products liability law, a holding which ignores that the plaintiffs’ claims were based on the crashworthiness doctrine and that the evidence established that the injuries caused by the initial impact and the uncrashworthiness of the GM vehicle were divisible in nature, a question of substance which has not been decided by this Court?