Legal Opinion

James v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 8, 1983No. 2308PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*514BROSKY, Judge:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority Act provided, inter alia, that those suing such authorities had to give notice within six months of the accrual of the action.1 This provision is challenged here on constitutional grounds. Despite the fact that appellant failed to notify the Attorney General of the constitutional challenge at the trial court level,2 we choose to reach the issue on its merits here. We hold that the statute is unconstitutional.

The background of this case is as follows. On May 7, 1975, plaintiff-appellant, James, allegedly slipped on debris littering the…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Carson v. MaurerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
  2. Reich v. State Highway DepartmentMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Hunter v. North Mason School Dist.Washington Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Lunday Ex Rel. Lunday v. VogelmannSupreme Court of Iowa · 1973
  5. Turner v. StaggsNevada Supreme Court · 1973

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. James v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Dranzo v. WinterhalterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Schumer Ex Rel. Schumer v. City of PerryvilleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  4. Estate of CoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Commonwealth v. PollockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

4 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