Legal Opinion · Dissent

Auresto v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 3, 1985No. Appeal, No. 1747 C.D. 1984Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Judge Palladino:

I respectfully dissent.

The doctrine of sovereign immunity historically barred all suits against a sovereign, including the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, unless the sovereign specifically consented to being sued. See Mayle v. Pennsylvania Department of Highways, 479 Pa. 384, 388 A.2d 709 (1978) (discussing the history of the doctrine of sovereign immunity). Prior to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Mayle, the Pennsylvania Courts consistently held that the doctrine of sovereign immunity was incorporated into the Penn*480sylvania Constitution, Article…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mayle v. Pennsylvania Department of HighwaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Biello v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Borgen v. Fort Pitt Museum Associates, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Ehehalt v. Nyari O'Dette, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API