Oliver v. City of Pittsburgh
Cassandra OLIVER, Petitioner v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, Respondent
Opinion
ORDER PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:
(1) In light of Section 25(b) of Act 44, does the City of Pittsburgh have a valid subrogation claim against Petitioner Cassandra Oliver’s settlement with the third party tortfeasor equal to the amount of benefits that she received under the Heart and Lung Act?
(2) Does Petitioner Cassandra Oliver have immunity from the City of Pittsburgh’s reimbursement claim under Section 23 of Act 44?
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(granting petition for allowance of appeal)
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.