Marshall v. Port Authority
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentPapadakos, Justice
While I agree with the Majority that PAT is a “Commonwealth agency,” albeit for slightly different reasons, I do not believe that PAT is protected by sovereign immunity here and I conclude that the majority is wrong, not only in affirming the Commonwealth Court reversal of the judgment entered against PAT herein, but that the majority is also wrong in affirming the Commonwealth Court reversal of the judgment entered against Appellee Baker. Hence, I dissent.
Before addressing the issue of whether PAT is entitled to sovereign or governmental immunity, a brief explanation of the history of…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Ayala v. Philadelphia Board of Public EducationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Mayle v. Pennsylvania Department of HighwaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Feingold v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Community College v. Community College, Society of the FacultySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Tranter v. Alleghency County Co. AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.