Opinion ID: 1203209
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Application of the Nullum Tempus Doctrine to Local Governments

Text: While its application to the several states is well settled, the nullum tempus doctrine has not been uniformly applied to their political subdivisions. Cf. Northampton County Area Community College v. Dow Chem., U.S.A., ___ Pa. ___, 598 A.2d 1288 (1991) (Papadakos, J., dissenting) (analyzing which local authorities can invoke the nullum tempus doctrine). Some jurisdictions fully shield their political subdivisions from limitations on actions under the nullum tempus doctrine, while a minority of jurisdictions have declined to extend the nullum tempus doctrine to local government. [4] A majority of jurisdictions, however, provide local governments with limited immunity from statutes of limitations, premised on the notion that political subdivisions do not possess the full attributes of sovereignty held by the states. [5] In these jurisdictions, limited immunity turns on whether the local government is acting in a public or governmental capacity, as opposed to a corporate or private capacity. [6] The distinction in the local governments' actions is justified by local governments' dual nature. Eugene McQuillin, Municipal Corporations [hereinafter Municipal Corporations ] § 2.09 (3d ed. 1987). Unlike the several states, municipalities have long been recognized as both governmental entities and as corporations. Generally, where a municipality acts in a corporate capacity, it is no different than a private citizen. Where a municipality's actions mimic those of a sovereign state, however, the municipality may be viewed as an extension of the sovereign, or as acting on its behalf. Municipal Corporations § 2.08a. The local government will be viewed as seeking to protect public rights, and limitations will not run because public rights stand paramount and should not suffer, no matter how lax or negligent a local government may be in asserting them. [7]