COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Bethlehem Steel
This text of 404 A.2d 692 (COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Bethlehem Steel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
This appeal is dismissed. Permission to appeal was granted to consider the continued validity of the rule that the statute of limitations does not run against the Commonwealth in light of Mayle v. Pennsylvania Department of Highways, 479 Pa. 384, 388 A.2d 709 (1978). But that issue should not be decided in this case because the Commonwealth Court’s refusal to allow an amendment to the answer in order to raise the statute of limitations in new matter does not constitute an abuse of discretion even if we were to hold the statute of limitations applies to the Commonwealth.
The complaint instantly was filed over three years prior to the request to amend. The pleadings had closed over five months before the request, and discovery had been proceeding during that‘period. Accordingly, the controlling question we sought to review need not now be considered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
404 A.2d 692, 486 Pa. 186, 1979 Pa. LEXIS 665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/com-dept-of-transp-v-bethlehem-steel-pa-1979.