Case ID: pa_442/html/0638-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam, \n      Mr. Justice Roberts Mr. Justice Pomeroy", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Young, Appellant, v. Philadelphia School District.
    Argued January 8, 1971.
    Before Bell, C. J., Jones, Eagen, O’Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy and BarBIERI, JJ.
    
      Allan Kaufman, with him Cordon and Kaufman, for appellant.
    
      Jerome A. Zaleshi, for appellee.
    April 22, 1971:
   Opinion

Per Curiam,

Judgment affirmed. See, Carlo v. Scranton, 319 Pa. 417, 179 Atl. 561 (1935).

Mr. Justice Roberts

dissents for the reasons most recently noted in Smelts v. Copeland, 440 Pa. 224, 226, 269 A. 2d 466, 468 (1970) (dissenting opinion) and once again urges that the unwise and unjust doctrine of governmental immunity be abolished.

Mr. Justice Pomeroy

dissents for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in Laughner v. Allegheny County, 436 Pa. 572, 576, 261 A. 2d 607 (1970).