Legal Opinion
Mamalis v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 28, 1989No. 61 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1988PublishedCited by 93 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
The issue of first impression presented in this appeal is whether an agent and its principal are joint tortfeasors under the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act (UCATA), Act of July 9, 1976, P.L. 586, No. 142, effective June 27, 1978, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 8321 et seq. We hold that an agent and its principal are not joint tortfeasors under UCATA when the liability of the principal is vicarious liability and is not based upon the principal’s independent actionable fault.
The Appellant, Father James Mamalis, brought actions against McClain Moving Company and Atlas Van…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hilbert v. RothSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Bausewine v. Norristown Herald, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Mamalis v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Blum v. GoldmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
3Cited by93 opinions
- Tincher, T. v. Omega Flex, Inc., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc. v. Shepard Niles, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Scampone v. Highland Park Care Center, LLCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Crowell v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Elias v. Unisys Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
88 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.