Legal Opinion

Stanton v. Lackawanna Energy, Ltd.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 23, 2005No. 50 MAP 2004PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice CASTILLE.

This matter involves a claim against Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (“PP & L”), initiated by Benjamin and Elaine Stanton, the parents of Jesse Stanton, a minor (collectively, “appellants” or “the Stantons”), who was injured on undeveloped land contained within an easement held by PP & L, while participating in recreational motorbike riding. 1 Prior to the start of trial, PP & L moved for summary judgment, relying on the provisions of the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act (“the RULWA” or “the Act”), 68 P.S. §§ 477-1— 477-8, which provides immunity to owners…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. 401 Fourth Street, Inc. v. Investors Insurance GroupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Rivera v. Philadelphia Theological Seminary of St. Charles Borromeo, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Lory v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Cooper v. ReadingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  5. Mills v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Stanley v. LemireMontana Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Keffer v. Bob Nolan's Auto Service, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Ruspi v. GlatzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Matharu v. MuirSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Stanton v. Lackawanna Energy, Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

22 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