Com v. UPMC, Appeal of Com. by A.G.

JUSTICE BAER, Concurring and Dissenting

While I agree with the Majority that the Commonwealth Court erred in holding that this matter is controlled by our prior decision in Commonwealth by Shapiro v. UPMC , 188 A.3d 1122 (Pa. 2018) (" Shapiro I "), I respectfully dissent from my colleagues' conclusion that the modification provision of the parties' Consent Decree is ambiguous, necessitating a remand to the Commonwealth Court for evidentiary development of the parties' intent in using the term "modification."1 Instead, I conclude that the "modification" sought by the OAG is not a modification…