Ross v. Department of Public Welfare

DISSENTING OPINION by

Judge FRIEDMAN.

Because I believe that the holding in Braig v. Pennsylvania State Employes’ Retirement Board, 682 A.2d 881 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996), is controlling, I respectfully dissent.

The majority concludes Braig is inapplicable to the present controversy, mischar-acterizing that case as one that concerns contract disputes. (Majority op. at 5.) However, like the present case, Braig involved the question of whether interest was payable, despite the absence of a statutory or contractual obligation, where payments required by statute were withheld.

In Braig, the State Employees’…