Madonna v. Harley Davidson, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
708 A.2d 507 (1998)
![SC](https://quimbee-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/educator/photo/11/Sean_Carroll.webp)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Charles Madonna (plaintiff) was injured when his motorcycle, which was manufactured by Harley Davidson, Inc. (Harley) (defendant), crashed. Madonna had a blood-alcohol level of 0.14 percent at the time of the crash. Madonna’s Harley motorcycle contained a defective bolt on the brake caliper. Madonna and his passenger Delores Wilson (plaintiff) brought a products-liability suit against Harley based on strict liability. Harley presented evidence that the bolt was functioning properly at the time of the accident. Harley also argued that Madonna’s contributory negligence of driving while intoxicated should shield Harley from liability. The trial court ruled in favor of Harley. Madonna appealed, arguing that a plaintiff’s conduct is not relevant in a products-liability suit based on strict liability.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Del Sole, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.