Case Name: ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, Petitioner v. Catherine KELLY, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Bernard M. Kelly, Deceased, Catherine Kelly, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Leanna Mee Kelly, Deceased, Linda Jenny, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Ernest Jenny, Jr., Deceased, Carolyn G. Woodland and Lawrence J. Woodland, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Carl Robert Woodland, Deceased, Robinson Helicopter Company, Inc., Honeywell International, Inc., and Triumph Engine Control Systems, LLC, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2016-09-16
Citations: 157 A.3d 488
Docket Number: No. 88 EM 2016
Parties: ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, Petitioner v. Catherine KELLY, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Bernard M. Kelly, Deceased, Catherine Kelly, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Leanna Mee Kelly, Deceased, Linda Jenny, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Ernest Jenny, Jr., Deceased, Carolyn G. Woodland and Lawrence J. Woodland, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Carl Robert Woodland, Deceased, Robinson Helicopter Company, Inc., Honeywell International, Inc., and Triumph Engine Control Systems, LLC, Respondents
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 157
Pages: 488–488

Head Matter:
ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, Petitioner v. Catherine KELLY, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Bernard M. Kelly, Deceased, Catherine Kelly, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Leanna Mee Kelly, Deceased, Linda Jenny, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Ernest Jenny, Jr., Deceased, Carolyn G. Woodland and Lawrence J. Woodland, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Carl Robert Woodland, Deceased, Robinson Helicopter Company, Inc., Honeywell International, Inc., and Triumph Engine Control Systems, LLC, Respondents
No. 88 EM 2016
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
September 16, 2016

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 16th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Review is DENIED.