This month, the Court issued 9 precedential opinions (linked below) and 4 orders granting allocatur.

On the opinion side, it is a good month to be a plaintiff's medical malpractice attorney, as the Court's decision in Yanakos has opened up a whole new population of potential clients by declaring that the MCARE Act's 7-year statute of repose violates the Pennsylvania constitutional right to open courts/legal remedies. Remarkably, the Court's rationale focused in part on the fact that although the provision was designed to ensure more predictable medical malpractice liability for actuaries, there was no evidence in the legislative record that it would do so. To the extent the Court is now willing to require the General Assembly to authentically make policy decisions, Yanakos could be the beginning of a new constitutional framework and the end of myriad enactments brought about by legislative industry-capture. Yet, one imagines that legislators previously disposed to assist the medical and other industries without evidence already have appointments with lobbyists eager to provide it.

On the allocatur side, the standout order is Chesapeake Energy, in which the Court will consider whether the Commonwealth can maintain an action pursuant to the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (“UTPCPL”) against energy companies employing unfair or deceptive practices in the leasing and acquisition of mineral rights, and whether it may pursue antitrust remedies therein. The Commonwealth Court, for its part, held that it may maintain such an action, but that it may only pursue such remedies to the degree they related to unfair or deceptive trade practices. It is difficult to predict where the Court will fall. It is something of a jurisprudential stretch to classify the leasing and acquisition of mineral rights as a consumer transaction, but the Commonwealth Court's opinion reads quite persuasively, relying in part on precedent holding that the provision of residential housing is a consumer transaction, and, frankly, the energy industry has not fared well before the Court even prior to its more recent, more liberal incarnation.

Precedential Opinions

• Yanakos v. UPMC, 10 WAP 2018 (Majority/Lead Opinion by Mundy J.) (holding the MCARE Act's 7-year statute of repose violates the Pennsylvania constitutional right to open courts/legal remedies)

  • See also Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Donohue, J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Wecht, J.

• Grove v. Port Authority of Allegheny County, 31-32 WAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Mundy, J.) (holding the trial court's failure to give an instruction regarding negligence per se in a personal injury action constituted harmless error)

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Baer, J.

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Donohue, J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Saylor, C.J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Wecht, J.

• Commonwealth v. Olson, 26 WAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Wecht, J.) (holding that the holding of Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016) is procedural in nature and does not apply to cases on collateral review)

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Mundy, J.

  • See alsoDissenting Opinion by Saylor, C.J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Donohue, J.

• In re: 2014 Allegheny County Investigating Grand Jury (Appeal of WPXI), 30 WAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Dougherty, J.) (holding there is no First Amendment right to inspect search warrants and associated materials issued in connection with a grand jury investigation during the pendency of the investigation)

  • See also Dissenting Opinion of Donohue, J.

• In re: Estate of Krasinski, 41 WAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Donohue, J.) (holding a litigant's failure to appeal an order regarding real property in an estate proceeding constituted waiver of her challenge thereto)

  • See also Concurring Opinion of Dougherty, J.

• Commonwealth v. Peters, 29 EAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Saylor, C.J.) (holding that an individual cannot be convicted of carrying a (concealed) firearm on another's person)

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Mundy, J.

• Commonwealth v. Hays, 36 MAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Mundy, J.) (holding a defendant's claim under Birchfield was waived for lack of preservation)

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Saylor, C.J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Donohue, J.

• Bartkowski v. Ramondo, 60 MAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Wecht, J.) (holding that a landowner need only prove practical impossibility to establish an easement by necessity)

  • See also Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Dougherty, J.

  • See also Dissenting Opinion by Mundy, J.

• In re Petition of J.M.Y., 33 WAP 2018 (Majority Opinion by Todd, J.) (holding courts lack jurisdiction to hear untimely filed challenges to involuntary mental health committments)

  • See also Concurring Opinion by Saylor, C.J.

Allocatur Grants

• Commonwealth v. Chesapeake Energy Corp., et al. 225-226 MAL 2019 (granting review of whether the Commonwealth may maintain public actions pursuant to the UTPCPL against energy companies employing unfair or deceptive actions in the leasing and acquisition of mineral rights and whether it may pursue antitrust remedies therein)

• Commonwealth v. Ballentine, 379 MAL 2019 (granting review of whether a sentence of restitution in favor of a non-profit entity is valid despite being entered prior to an amendment to the Sentencing Code providing for such sentences)

• In the Interest of D.R., et al., 296-299 WAL 2019 (granting review of whether the Superior Court improperly vacated an order directing parents involved in a child-dependency action to provide a urine sample for drug testing)

• McMichael v. McMichael, 147-148 WAL 2019 (granting review of whether a jury in a wrongful death action may find liability but award zero damages)