Opinion

Keitt v. Ross

  • 466 Pa. 576
  • 353 A.2d 841
  • 1976 Pa. LEXIS 532
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Mar 17, 1976
Status
Published
Author
Roberts
On the bench
Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino
Cited by
8 cases

The opinion

ROBERTS, Justice

(dissenting).

Although I agree that this Court should hear this appeal, I cannot join the majority’s decision affirming the order of the Commonwealth Court. The effect of that order is to vest the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia with jurisdiction to hear a suit against the Commonwealth. This is contrary to section 401 of the Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act which provides that:

“(a) The Commonwealth Court shall have original jurisdiction of:

(1) All civil actions or proceedings against the Commonwealth . . . .”

Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act of 1970, Act of July 31, 1970, P.L. 673, art. IV, § 401(a), 17 P.S. § 211.401(a) (Supp.1975). Part (b) of this section makes this jurisdiction exclusive. Because this language allows no exception, the case should, in its entirety, be heard by the Commonwealth Court.

Therefore, I dissent.

NIX and MANDERINO, JJ., join in this dissenting opinion.

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.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.