of the day, ladies and gentlemen, you represent the conscience of the community, and I’m asking you to award an amount of money that is so significant and substantial that it will do justice that everyone will know that justice is done, not just the Nelson family, ... but everybody that’s in this community. Do not let [this man] die in [vain]. Id. at 83-84. Such language is inflammatory, particularly to the extent that it attributes improper motives to Appellants. Thus, we admonish counsel to refrain from needlessly inflaming the passions of the jury. See Young, 761 A.2d at 563 (noting that “an appeal to passion or prejudice is improper and will not be countenanced” and equating a verdict obtained by such arguments to “one obtained by false testimony”); see also Schmidt, 11 A.3d at 939 (<HOLDING>); Phillips, 841 A.2d at 1007 (“Strict liability
recognizing products liability concepts as part of general maritime law recognizing strict product liability actions recognizing a central premise that negligence concepts have no place in pennsylvanias strict liability law recognizing the significance of control in strict products liability recognizing that a violation of the mbta is a strict liability offense