# Legal Capital, LLC. v. Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss Fund

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2000 · 561 Pa. 336

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9696967

## Case

- **Full name:** LEGAL CAPITAL, LLC., Appellant, v. MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY CATASTROPHE LOSS FUND, Appellee
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** May 1, 2000
- **Citations:** 561 Pa. 336; 750 A.2d 299
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Saylor
- **Judges:** Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor
- **Cited by:** 28 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/9696967

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that sovereign immunity does not apply where plaintiff seeks a declaration that it has a right to receive funds from the state agency
- applying the capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review exception to the mootness doctrine

## Opinion text

SAYLOR, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I join the majority opinion insofar as it concludes that these declaratory judgment proceedings were improperly dismissed on the CAT Fund’s preliminary objections. Rather than proceeding to the merits of the controversy, however, I would remand the matter to the Commonwealth Court for further proceedings as appropriate, since I would not at this juncture foreclose the CAT Fund from developing an evidentiary record to support its claim that preclusion of assignments in this context is a necessary corollary to the legislative scheme essential to protect the integrity and effective administration of the statutory claims procedure.
Justice NEWMAN joins this concurring and dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9696967. Public record. Not legal advice.