Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 7
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761 (2026)

 Original jurisdiction.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

 

 

SUBCHAPTER D

JURISDICTION OF COMMONWEALTH COURT

 

Sec.

761.  Original jurisdiction.

762.  Appeals from courts of common pleas.

763.  Direct appeals from government agencies.

764.  Election contests and other matters.

 

Cross References.  Subchapter D is referred to in section 701 of this title.

§ 761.  Original jurisdiction.

(a)  General rule.--The Commonwealth Court shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions or proceedings:

(1)  Against the Commonwealth government, including any officer thereof, acting in his official capacity, except:

(i)  actions or proceedings in the nature of applications for a writ of habeas corpus or post-conviction relief not ancillary to proceedings within the appellate jurisdiction of the court;

(ii)  eminent domain proceedings;

(iii)  actions or proceedings conducted pursuant to Chapter 85 (relating to matters affecting government units);

(iv)  actions or proceedings conducted pursuant to the act of May 20, 1937 (P.L.728, No.193), referred to as the Board of Claims Act; and

(v)  actions or proceedings in the nature of trespass as to which the Commonwealth government formerly enjoyed sovereign or other immunity and actions or proceedings in the nature of assumpsit relating to such actions or proceedings in the nature of trespass.

(2)  By the Commonwealth government, including any officer thereof, acting in his official capacity, except eminent domain proceedings.

(3)  Arising under Article V of the act of May 17, 1921 (P.L.789, No.285), known as "The Insurance Department Act of 1921."

(4)  Original jurisdiction of which is vested in the Commonwealth Court by any statute hereafter enacted.

(b)  Concurrent and exclusive jurisdiction.--The jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court under subsection (a) shall be exclusive except as provided in section 721 (relating to original jurisdiction) and except with respect to actions or proceedings by the Commonwealth government, including any officer thereof, acting in his official capacity, where the jurisdiction of the court shall be concurrent with the several courts of common pleas.

(c)  Ancillary matters.--The Commonwealth Court shall have original jurisdiction in cases of mandamus and prohibition to courts of inferior jurisdiction and other government units where such relief is ancillary to matters within its appellate jurisdiction, and it, or any judge thereof, shall have full power and authority when and as often as there may be occasion, to issue writs of habeas corpus under like conditions returnable to the said court. To the extent prescribed by general rule the Commonwealth Court shall have ancillary jurisdiction over any claim or other matter which is related to a claim or other matter otherwise within its exclusive original jurisdiction.

(Apr. 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53, eff. 60 days; Sept. 28, 1978, P.L.788, No.152, eff. imd.; Oct. 5, 1980, P.L.693, No.142, eff. 60 days; Dec. 5, 1980, P.L.1104, No.189, eff. imd.; Dec. 20, 1982, P.L.1409, No.326, eff. 60 days)

 

1982 Amendment.  Act 326 amended subsec. (a).

1980 Amendments.  Act 142 amended subsec. (a), repealed subsec. (c) and relettered subsec. (d) to (c) and Act 189 amended subsec. (a)(1), retroactive to June 27, 1978.

1978 Amendments.  Act 53 amended subsecs. (a) and (b) and Act 152 amended subsecs. (a) and (c).

Transfer of Records.  Section 6 of Act 189 of 1980 provided that the Prothonotary of the Commonwealth Court shall, except as otherwise ordered by the court in the interest of justice, transfer to the appropriate office of the clerk of the court of common pleas all dockets, records, pleadings and other papers, or certified copies thereof, relating to all pending matters jurisdiction of which is vested in another tribunal by reason of 42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(1)(iv) or 933(a)(1)(v) as added or amended by Act 189.

References in Text.  The act of May 20, 1937, P.L.728, No.193, referred to as the Board of Claims Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(1)(iv), was repealed by the act of December 3, 2002, P.L.1147, No.142. The subject matter is now contained in Subchapter C of Chapter 17 of Title 62 (Procurement).

Cross References.  Section 761 is referred to in section 762 of this title; section 323 of Title 57 (Notaries Public).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 715 cases (149 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). · cites it 26× “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
Blount v. Philadelphia Parking Auth., 965 A.2d 226 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 12× “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 761. Specifically exempted from the definition of "Commonwealth government" are, among other things, "local authorit[ies].”
Miles v. Beard, 847 A.2d 161 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). · cites it 12× “The first issue we must decide is whether the common pleas court incorrectly concluded that it lacked original jurisdiction over Beard, and that original jurisdiction would lie with this Court.”
James J. Gory Mech. Contracting, Inc. v. Philadelphia Hous. Auth., 855 A.2d 669 (Pa. 2004). · cites it 10× “42 Pa.C.S. § 761. The "Commonwealth government" is defined for purposes of the Judicial Code as including, among other things, "the departments, boards, commissions, authorities and officers and agencies of the Commonwealth, but the term does not include any political…”
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). · cites it 20× “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
Pennsylvania Dep't of Aging v. Lindberg, 469 A.2d 1012 (Pa. 1983). · cites it 12× “Initially, we note that ambiguous language in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, which sets forth the "original jurisdiction" of Commonwealth Court is subject to misinterpretation.”
City of Philadelphia v. Philadelphia Parking Auth., 798 A.2d 161 (Pa. 2002). · cites it 10× “[3] The current provision governing the original jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, is derived from the 1970 act.”
Com. Off. of Atty. Gen. Ex Rel. Corbett v. Locust Tp., 968 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 8× “(citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(2)). Addressing the Township's justiciability argument, the Commonwealth Court agreed with the Township.”
Commonwealth v. Harris, 32 A.3d 243 (Pa. 2011). · cites it 4× “As for seeking a writ of mandamus as a substitute for an immediate appeal, mandamus is generally not available in Pennsylvania law as a vehicle for obtaining appellate review.”
Clark v. Beard, 918 A.2d 155 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007). · cites it 4× “42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(1). The second part of Appellants' action, which sounds in trespass, lies within this Court's appellate jurisdiction.”
Clair v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 493 A.2d 146 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1985). · cites it 7× “Clair (Petitioner) filed a civil action in the nature of a request for mandamus against the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Board) addressed to our original jurisdiction under Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C. S. §761. The essence of Petitioner’s contention…”
Bronson v. Cent. Off. Review Comm., 721 A.2d 357 (Pa. 1998). · cites it 5× “), under either 42 Pa.C.S. § 761 (original jurisdiction) or 42 Pa.”
Show all 715 citing cases →
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a) — 139 cases
J. Taylor v. The PSP of the Commonwealth of PA, 132 A.3d 590 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016).
Governor's Off. v. Off. of Open Records, Aplt., 98 A.3d 1223 (Pa. 2014).
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
Clean Air Council, M.M. deMarteleire & M.S. Bomstein v. Sunoco Pipeline, L.P., 185 A.3d 478 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2018).
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1) — 198 cases
Blount v. Philadelphia Parking Auth., 965 A.2d 226 (Pa. 2009). “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 761. Specifically exempted from the definition of "Commonwealth government" are, among other things, "local authorit[ies].”
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
City of Philadelphia v. Philadelphia Parking Auth., 798 A.2d 161 (Pa. 2002). “[3] The current provision governing the original jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, is derived from the 1970 act.”
McCray v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., 872 A.2d 1127 (Pa. 2005).
Bundy, K., Aplt v. Wetzel, 184 A.3d 551 (Pa. 2018).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(a) — 1 case
C.M. Salsman v. Com. of PA, PPB (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2024).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(b) — 1 case
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Arnett, R. (Pa. 2026).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(f) — 1 case
Forbes v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., 931 A.2d 88 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(h) — 1 case
Youst v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Transp., 739 A.2d 625 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1999).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(i) — 36 cases
Joseph v. Glunt, 96 A.3d 365 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
Brown v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., 81 A.3d 814 (Pa. 2013).
Gillespie v. DEPT. OF CORR., 527 A.2d 1061 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1987).
Kester v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 609 A.2d 622 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
G. Davis, Jr. v. Com. of PA, PA Legislature (Gen. Assembly) (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(ii) — 4 cases
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
Tower Assocs. v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Gen. Servs., 687 A.2d 1225 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1997).
Borough of Pleasant Hills v. DOT (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2024).
De Botton v. Commonwealth, 552 A.2d 1150 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(iii) — 4 cases
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp. v. Joseph Bucheit & Sons Co., 483 A.2d 848 (Pa. 1984).
Empire Roofing & More, LLC v. Dept. of L&I (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2024).
B.E. Griffin v. M. Thompson & Prison Med. Dept. (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2026).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(iv) — 5 cases
James J. Gory Mech. Contracting, Inc. v. Philadelphia Hous. Auth., 855 A.2d 669 (Pa. 2004). “42 Pa.C.S. § 761. The "Commonwealth government" is defined for purposes of the Judicial Code as including, among other things, "the departments, boards, commissions, authorities and officers and agencies of the Commonwealth, but the term does not include any political…”
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
State Pub. Sch. Bldg. Auth. v. Hazleton Area Sch. Dist., 671 A.2d 272 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996).
Empire Roofing & More, LLC v. Dept. of L&I (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2024).
Toner v. McGovern, 486 A.2d 573 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1985).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(1)(v) — 37 cases
Clark v. Beard, 918 A.2d 155 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007). “42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(1). The second part of Appellants' action, which sounds in trespass, lies within this Court's appellate jurisdiction.”
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
Miles v. Beard, 847 A.2d 161 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). “The first issue we must decide is whether the common pleas court incorrectly concluded that it lacked original jurisdiction over Beard, and that original jurisdiction would lie with this Court.”
Pastore v. Com., State Sys. of Higher Educ., 618 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “JURISDICTION The Law The pertinent statutory provisions governing this court's original jurisdiction in this case are found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, as follows: (a) General Rule.”
McCulligan v. Pennsylvania State Police, 123 A.3d 1136 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(2) — 29 cases
Com. Off. of Atty. Gen. Ex Rel. Corbett v. Locust Tp., 968 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2009). “(citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(2)). Addressing the Township's justiciability argument, the Commonwealth Court agreed with the Township.”
In Re Admin. Order No. 1-Md-2003, 936 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2007).
Pennsylvania Dep't of Gen. Servs. v. United States Mineral Prods. Co., 898 A.2d 590 (Pa. 2006).
Troutman v. Court of Common Pleas of Berks Cnty., 936 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2007).
Bd. of Revision of Taxes, City of Philadelphia v. City of Philadelphia, 4 A.3d 610 (Pa. 2010).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(3) — 17 cases
Maleski v. DP Realty Trust, 653 A.2d 54 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1994).
Mazzella v. Koken, 739 A.2d 531 (Pa. 1999).
Koken v. Legion Ins., 831 A.2d 1196 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
Reliance Ins. Co. in Liquidation v. Aramark Corp., 38 A.3d 958 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
Grode v. Mut. Fire, Marine & Inland Ins., 572 A.2d 798 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(4) — 10 cases
Com. Off. of Atty. Gen. Ex Rel. Corbett v. Locust Tp., 968 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2009). “(citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(2)). Addressing the Township's justiciability argument, the Commonwealth Court agreed with the Township.”
Ario v. Reliance Ins., 980 A.2d 588 (Pa. 2009).
Blount v. Philadelphia Parking Auth., 965 A.2d 226 (Pa. 2009). “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 761. Specifically exempted from the definition of "Commonwealth government" are, among other things, "local authorit[ies].”
Keenheel v. Sec. Com'n, 565 A.2d 1147 (Pa. 1989).
Seitel Data, Ltd. v. Ctr. Twp., 92 A.3d 851 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(8) — 1 case
Reliance Ins. Co. in Liquidation v. Aramark Corp., 38 A.3d 958 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(i)(v) — 1 case
Caparo Real Est., Inc. v. Caparo, 20 Pa. D. & C.4th 193 (1993).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(l) — 23 cases
Allen v. Colautti, 417 A.2d 1303 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1980).
Beckert v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Dist. Council 88, 425 A.2d 859 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1981).
Vespaziani v. Commonwealth, 396 A.2d 489 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1979).
Twp. of Upper Moreland v. Commonwealth, 409 A.2d 118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1979).
Curtis v. Cleland, 552 A.2d 316 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(l)(i) — 7 cases
Lee v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 885 A.2d 634 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005).
Warren v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., 616 A.2d 140 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Saltzburg v. Fulcomer, 555 A.2d 912 (Pa. 1989).
Paz v. Com., Dept. of Corr., 580 A.2d 452 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
Kester v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 609 A.2d 622 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(l)(iii) — 2 cases
Dubaskas v. Commonwealth, 81 A.3d 167 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2013).
Bonsavage v. Borough of Warrior Run, 676 A.2d 1330 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(l)(iv) — 5 cases
James J. Gory Mech. Contracting, Inc. v. Philadelphia Hous. Auth., 855 A.2d 669 (Pa. 2004). “42 Pa.C.S. § 761. The "Commonwealth government" is defined for purposes of the Judicial Code as including, among other things, "the departments, boards, commissions, authorities and officers and agencies of the Commonwealth, but the term does not include any political…”
Tran v. State Sys. of Higher Educ., 986 A.2d 179 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009).
Commonwealth, Dep't of Gen. Servs. v. Bd. of Claims, 881 A.2d 14 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005).
Phillips v. Commonwealth, 577 A.2d 935 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
Commonwealth v. Burr, 557 A.2d 462 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(a)(l)(v) — 8 cases
Fawber v. Cohen, 532 A.2d 429 (Pa. 1987).
Clark v. Beard, 918 A.2d 155 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007). “42 Pa.C.S. § 761(a)(1). The second part of Appellants' action, which sounds in trespass, lies within this Court's appellate jurisdiction.”
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
Miles v. Beard, 847 A.2d 161 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). “The first issue we must decide is whether the common pleas court incorrectly concluded that it lacked original jurisdiction over Beard, and that original jurisdiction would lie with this Court.”
Jones v. Peterman, 743 A.2d 537 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1999).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(b) — 13 cases
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
Guarrasi v. Scott, 25 A.3d 394 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
In Re Admin. Order No. 1-Md-2003, 936 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2007).
Troutman v. Court of Common Pleas of Berks Cnty., 936 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2007).
A. Funk O. Harrison, a minor, by his guardian A. Lee v. Tom Wolf, in his Off. capacity as Governor of Pennsylvania PA DEP, 144 A.3d 228 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(c) — 75 cases
Stackhouse v. Commonwealth, 832 A.2d 1004 (Pa. 2003). “Appellees filed preliminary objections and, in their accompanying brief, argued that, as the action was against the Commonwealth and two of its officers, exclusive original jurisdiction lay in the Commonwealth Court pursuant to Section 761 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 761.…”
Commonwealth v. Harris, 32 A.3d 243 (Pa. 2011). “As for seeking a writ of mandamus as a substitute for an immediate appeal, mandamus is generally not available in Pennsylvania law as a vehicle for obtaining appellate review.”
Pennsylvania Dep't of Aging v. Lindberg, 469 A.2d 1012 (Pa. 1983). “Initially, we note that ambiguous language in 42 Pa.C.S. § 761, which sets forth the "original jurisdiction" of Commonwealth Court is subject to misinterpretation.”
Miles v. Beard, 847 A.2d 161 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). “The first issue we must decide is whether the common pleas court incorrectly concluded that it lacked original jurisdiction over Beard, and that original jurisdiction would lie with this Court.”
Mayle v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Highways, 388 A.2d 709 (Pa. 1978).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 761(d) — 2 cases
Piper Aircraft Corp. v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 417 A.2d 283 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1980).
Long v. Kistler, 457 A.2d 591 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1983).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.