Court Opinion

ID: 9750317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 14:49:45.447143+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:07.083648
License: Public Domain

McDERMOTT, Justice,
concurring.
I agree with the result reached by the majority and, for the most part, the analysis used. I write separately to reemphasize that the purpose of Rule 238 is to alleviate delay in the disposition of cases. The fact that successful plaintiffs will recover interest on “money properly belonging” to them is an undeniable byproduct of the Rule, but not its purpose. See Majority Opinion. To the extent the majority relies on the “[fundamental fairness” of paying interest on “money properly belonging to the plaintiffs” as a rationale in reaching the instant decision, I disagree. Id. Rule 238 is a procedural exercise of the rule-making powers of this Court, not an exercise of our substantive judicial powers.
FLAHERTY, J., joins this concurring opinion.