Case Name: Theodore C. ROTHROCK and Douglas Rothrock, Respondents v. ROTHROCK MOTOR SALES, INC., Petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2003-10-02
Citations: 574 Pa. 704
Docket Number: Petition No. 8 MAL 2003
Parties: Theodore C. ROTHROCK and Douglas Rothrock, Respondents v. ROTHROCK MOTOR SALES, INC., Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 574
Pages: 704–705

Head Matter:
833 A.2d 138
Theodore C. ROTHROCK and Douglas Rothrock, Respondents v. ROTHROCK MOTOR SALES, INC., Petitioner.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct. 2, 2003.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 2nd day of October, 2003, the above-listed petition for allowance of appeal is GRANTED. The parties are directed to address the following questions:
1) Whether the Superior Court erred in creating a new exception to the at-will employment doctrine.
2). Whether the Superior Court erred in retroactively applying Shick v. Shirey, 552 Pa. 590, 716 A.2d 1231 (1998) to this matter. In addressing this issue, the parties are directed to consider what effect, if any, Harper v. Virginia Dept. of Taxation, 509 U.S. 86, 113 S.Ct. 2510, 125 L.Ed.2d 74 (1993) has on our line of cases arising out of Schreiber v. Republic Intermodal Corp., 473 Pa. 614, 375 A.2d 1285 (1977).