# Flaherty v. Allegheny Port Authority

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · January 19, 1973 · 450 Pa. 509

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260719

## Case

- **Full name:** Flaherty v. Allegheny Port Authority
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** January 19, 1973
- **Citations:** 450 Pa. 509; 299 A.2d 613; 1973 Pa. LEXIS 638
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Roberts
- **Judges:** Brien, Eagen, Ino, Jones, Mander, Nix, Pomeroy, Roberts
- **Cited by:** 27 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260719

## Opinion text

Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Roberts:
I agree the decree of injunction should he vacated and, therefore, concur in the result. I would also direct the dismissal of the complaint.
*532 The record with full clarity demonstrates that the plaintiffs unduly deferred instituting this proceeding challenging defendant’s conduct of a public responsibility of great community interest. In my view it matters little whether plaintiffs’ untimely delay is measured from June 4, 1970—as the chancellor did—or from July 10, 1969—as the majority suggests. On this record and the governmental activities—huge public financing and contractual commitments involved—the delay from either date until January 10, 1972, constitutes, in my judgment, a sufficiently long period of non-assertion and non-pursuance of claimed rights by the plaintiff so as to preclude them from obtaining— in so dilatory an action—the relief requested.
This is indeed a classic case for involdng the equitable doctrine of laches. Siegel v. Engstrom, 427 Pa. 381, 235 A. 2d 365 (1967); Wilson v. King of Prussia Enterprises, Inc., 422 Pa. 128 , 221 A. 2d 123 (1966); Gabster v. Mesaros, 422 Pa. 116 , 220 A. 2d 639 (1966).
Mr. Justice Nix joins in this concurring opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260719. Public record. Not legal advice.