Haas v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Haas v. Commonwealth

479 A.2d 100, 84 Pa. Commw. 522, 1984 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1647

CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedAugust 13, 1984

DocketAppeal, No. 1516 C.D. 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 479 A.2d 100 (Haas v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Haas v. Commonwealth, 479 A.2d 100, 84 Pa. Commw. 522, 1984 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1647 (Pa. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

President Judge Crumlish, Jr.,

John and Catherine Haas appeal an order of the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas which entered a judgment on the pleadings in favor of New-town Township. We affirm.

John Haas was injured when the vehicle in which he was a passenger skidded out of control on an icy overpass of a state highway in Newtown Township. Haas alleges that the Township was negligent in failing to warn motorists, failing to close the overpass and detour traffic, and failing to anticipate the Department of Transportation’s inadequate response to the hazardous condition.¹ Haas argues on appeal [524]*524that the trial court erroneously characterized his claim as one based on a failure to maintain a state highway.

The Commonwealth has exclusive jurisdiction over the control and maintenance of state highways. In the seminal case, Stevens v. Reading Street Railway Co., 384 Pa. 390, 121 A.2d 128 (1956), our Supreme Court, in interpreting various provisions of the State Highway Law,² wrote :

The effect of these provisions was to place the control and responsibility for repair and maintenance of [state highways] upon the Commonwealth. Since the Commonwealth, by statute, has relieved the City of the obligation to repair the [highway], the City cannot be guilty of negligence since there must be a duty and a breach of duty to produce a right of action.

Id. at 402, 121 A.2d at 134.

Haas distinguishes this case and its progeny by arguing that the Township has a continuing common law duty to warn travelers of known dangers. We disagree. In Calvanese v. Leist, 70 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 251, 252, 452 A.2d 1125, 1126 (1982), we stated: 1‘ Absent any statutorily-imposed duty regulating responsibility to the Township to warn of dangerous conditions, we will not impose such.”³ We hold there is no support for Haas’ argument.

Affirmed.

Order

The order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County at No. 80-10855 entered June 24, 1983, is affirmed.

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

Opinion by

President Judge Crumlish, Jr.,

John and Catherine Haas appeal an order of the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas which entered a judgment on the pleadings in favor of New-town Township. We affirm.

John Haas was injured when the vehicle in which he was a passenger skidded out of control on an icy overpass of a state highway in Newtown Township. Haas alleges that the Township was negligent in failing to warn motorists, failing to close the overpass and detour traffic, and failing to anticipate the Department of Transportation’s inadequate response to the hazardous condition.¹ Haas argues on appeal [524]*524that the trial court erroneously characterized his claim as one based on a failure to maintain a state highway.

The Commonwealth has exclusive jurisdiction over the control and maintenance of state highways. In the seminal case, Stevens v. Reading Street Railway Co., 384 Pa. 390, 121 A.2d 128 (1956), our Supreme Court, in interpreting various provisions of the State Highway Law,² wrote :

The effect of these provisions was to place the control and responsibility for repair and maintenance of [state highways] upon the Commonwealth. Since the Commonwealth, by statute, has relieved the City of the obligation to repair the [highway], the City cannot be guilty of negligence since there must be a duty and a breach of duty to produce a right of action.

Id. at 402, 121 A.2d at 134.

Haas distinguishes this case and its progeny by arguing that the Township has a continuing common law duty to warn travelers of known dangers. We disagree. In Calvanese v. Leist, 70 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 251, 252, 452 A.2d 1125, 1126 (1982), we stated: 1‘ Absent any statutorily-imposed duty regulating responsibility to the Township to warn of dangerous conditions, we will not impose such.”³ We hold there is no support for Haas’ argument.

Affirmed.

Order

The order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County at No. 80-10855 entered June 24, 1983, is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

479 A.2d 100, 84 Pa. Commw. 522, 1984 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haas-v-commonwealth-pacommwct-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack