Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law

Luongo v. Public Auditorium Authority

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Luongo v. Public Auditorium Authority, 516 Pa. 491 (Pa. 1987)
533 A.2d 89; 1987 Pa. LEXIS 824
Authority, City, Consideration, Flaherty, Forth, Hutchinson, Larsen, McDermott, Nix, Opinions, Papadakos, Philadelphia, Study, Zappala

Luongo v. Public Auditorium Authority

Opinion of the Court

*492ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appeal dismissed as having been improvidently granted. See Johnson v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 516 Pa. —, 532 A.2d 409 (1987); Chevalier v. City of Philadelphia, 516 Pa. —, 532 A.2d 411 (1987); Mascaro v. Youth Study Center, 514 Pa. 351, 523 A.2d 1118 (1987).

Former HUTCHINSON, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. LARSEN, J., dissents for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinions in Johnson v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 516 Pa. 312, 532 A.2d 409 (1987); Chevalier v. City of Philadelphia, 516 Pa. 316, 532 A.2d 411 (1987); and Mascaro v. Youth Study Center, 514 Pa. 351, 523 A.2d 1118 (1987).

Reference

Full Case Name
Rose LUONGO and John Luongo v. PUBLIC AUDITORIUM AUTHORITY OF PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY, a corporation, doing business as Civic Arena—Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ARA Services, Inc., ARA Leisure Service, Inc., and Araserv, Inc.
Status
Published
↑