Legal Opinion

Ellis v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 27, 1990No. 20 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1989PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ZAPPALA, Justice.

The issue presented in this appeal is whether a Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, (SEPTA) trolley that runs on tracks is a motor vehicle for purposes of the Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa.C. §§ 1701 et seq. We hold that it is not. The Commonwealth Court order reversing the order of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment to Appellant Harleysville Insurance Company (Harleysville), 116 Pa. Cmwlth. 299, 541 A.2d 843, is affirmed.

Dorothy Ellis was injured while riding as a passenger on a SEPTA trolley when the trolley was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Adams v. Harleysville InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Ellis v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Rogers v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Litzelman v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Jones-Molina v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. Jones-Molina v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Rice v. Travelers CompaniesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Walker v. Pennsylvania Financial Responsibility Assigned Claims Plan, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1999

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

Powered by the Exa API