Can Protz be applied retroactively?
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its Decision in Dana Holding v. WCAB (Smuck), applying its Protz ruling retroactively.
On June 16, 2020, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its decision in Dana Holding Corporation v. WCAB (Smuck). In Dana Holding, the Court addressed the issue of the retroactivity of the Protz v. WCAB (Derry Area School District)
holding in the case at hand. The Defendant/Employer in Dana Holding
had filed an Appeal seeking a clarification as to when new law should be applied retroactively. The Court agreed to hear the Appeal, but on a limited basis, specifically, whether the retroactivity of the Protz
ruling should begin on the date of the IRE or the date of the decision.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court affirmed the Commonwealth Court’s holding that the retroactivity of the Protz
decision dates back to the date of the IRE.
In rendering its Decision, the Supreme Court reviewed the law in various other states and federal districts. The Court noted that there are initially two (2) scenarios when new law is issued: (1) cases that are actively in litigation and the issue(s) is/are preserved throughout the litigation; or (2) applying new law to cases that have become final. Each scenario presents with different results. In Dana Holding, the Court only addressed scenario number 1. As such, the Supreme Court has not addressed scenario number 2.
After reviewing the prior Pennsylvania caselaw on the retroactivity of new law in scenario number 1, the Court held that unless the appellate decision rendering the new law specifically states that it is to be applied prospectively, the new rule of law is to be applied retroactively to cases where the issue in question is properly preserved at all levels of adjudication, including any direct appeal.
Turning to the Dana Holding
case specifically, the Court held that the parties had preserved the constitutionality of the IRE provisions during the litigation of the initial Modification petition. The litigation involving the Modification Petition was ongoing at the time Protz
was issued. Thus, the Court held that the Protz
decision should be applied retroactively to the date of the IRE.
The issue of whether new law should be applied retroactively to final cases is still an open issue.
News & Information
Legal considerations in venture capital financing, from term sheets and preferred stock to liquidation preferences, board control, and securities compliance.
What Pennsylvania trust beneficiaries are entitled to: information, accountings, distributions, and remedies against a trustee who breaches fiduciary duty.
A shareholder agreement protects ownership rights, sets buy-sell terms, and prevents disputes in closely held Pennsylvania corporations. Learn what it should cover.
Estate planning for blended families in Pennsylvania protects a spouse and children from a prior marriage. Learn the wills, trusts, and beneficiary steps involved.
Understand corporate fiduciary duties: the duty of care, the duty of loyalty, and how the business judgment rule protects directors — and when it doesn't.
Where real estate law is heading: emerging technologies, legislative changes on the horizon, and how owners and investors can prepare for what's next.
How subdivision and land development regulations work — planning rules for new development, community consultation, and what legal compliance requires.
Understand trust administration: the trustee's role, managing trust assets, and the legal fiduciary duties and obligations every trustee must uphold.
Stay current on key legal updates in real estate law, including zoning reforms, lease law changes, and new disclosure requirements affecting buyers and sellers.