Legal Opinion

Pettit v. Namie

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 10, 2007PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

Judge SIMPSON.

In these complex cross-appeals, we are asked whether indemnification by a local agency for payment of a judgment against a county district attorney in a federal civil rights action is prohibited under the statute commonly known as the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act (Tort Claims Act).1 We are also asked whether the county district attorney is entitled to reimbursement for attorney’s fees, costs, expenses and prejudgment interest.

For the reasons that follow, we conclude the county district attorney is entitled to indemnification for the judgment entered against…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Smith v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Flagg Bros., Inc. v. BrooksSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Renk v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Savarese v. AgrissCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
  5. Evans v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Cornell Narberth, LLC v. Borough of NarberthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Francis v. Northumberland CountyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Reading Area Water AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Filippi v. City of ErieCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Philadelphia District Attorney's Office v. StoverCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API