Opinion

Nagle v. Pennsylvania Insurance Department

46 Pa. Commw. 621
406 A.2d 1229
1979 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 2109

Court: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Filed: Oct 26, 1979
Status: Published
Author: Disalle
On the bench: Blatt, Bowman, Craig, Crumlish, Disalle, MacPhail, Mencek, Mencer, Reargued, Rogers, Wilkinson
Cited by: 23 cases
Authority: More cited than 9.1%

Reversed in part, on other grounds by PECHNER, DORFMAN, ETC. v. Pa. Ins. Dept., 499 Pa. 139 (1982)

holding that the petitioner had an adequate remedy at law where a separate pending case raised the same issue

How later courts described this case

holding that the petitioner had an adequate remedy at law where a separate pending case raised the same issue

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

Judge DiSalle:

I dissent from that part of the majority’s decision sustaining, on grounds of sovereign immunity, the preliminary objections of the Pennsylvania Department *641 of Insurance, the State Workmen’s Insurance Board, and the State Workmen’s Insurance Fund (all Commonwealth agencies) for the reasons set forth in my concurring and dissenting opinion in Estate of Armstrong v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 46 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 33 , 405 A.2d 1099 (1979). I concur in the majority decision in all other respects.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.