Legal Opinion

Mickle v. City of Philadelphia

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 25, 1998PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NIGRO, Justice.

Appellee Fred Mickle was injured while a passenger in a City of Philadelphia vehicle. Mickle sued the City of Philadelphia for damages. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment as to whether the City is immune from liability. The lower courts found that the City is not immune from suit because Mickle’s claims fall within the motor vehicle exception to governmental immunity. The Commonwealth Court thus affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for Mickle. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

On February 14, 1990, Mickle experienced chest pains…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Love v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Com., Dept. of Transp. v. PattonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Balentine v. Aplt. v. Chester Water AuthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  2. Byrd v. PA. Board of Probation/ParoleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. A. Ward v. M.C. PotteigerCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Beitler v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  5. Cornelius v. RobertsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

15 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