Cagey, J., Pet v. PennDOT

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Cagey, J., Pet v. PennDOT

164 A.3d 459, 2016 WL 7228477, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2776

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 13, 2016·No. 329 WAL 2016 (Granted)·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 13th day of December, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Has [the] Commonwealth Court improperly expanded this Court’s holding in Dean v. Department of Transportation, 751 A.2d 1130 (Pa. 2000)[,] that the Department has no duty to erect guardrails on Commonwealth real property along Commonwealth agency roadways, by repeatedly holding that when the Department does erect guardrails, it cannot be liable for injuries caused by negligently dangerously designed guardrails?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 13th day of December, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Has [the] Commonwealth Court improperly expanded this Court’s holding in Dean v. Department of Transportation, 751 A.2d 1130 (Pa. 2000)[,] that the Department has no duty to erect guardrails on Commonwealth real property along Commonwealth agency roadways, by repeatedly holding that when the Department does erect guardrails, it cannot be liable for injuries caused by negligently dangerously designed guardrails?

Cagey, J., Pet v. PennDOT, 164 A.3d 459, 2016 WL 7228477, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2776 (Pa. 2016).

Pincite

164 A.3d 459 (Cagey, J., Pet v. PennDOT) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related