Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 85
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528 (2026)

 Limitations on damages.

✓ 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

 

 

LIMITATIONS ON DAMAGES

§ 8528.  Limitations on damages.

(a)  General rule.--Actions for which damages are limited by reference to this subchapter shall be limited as set forth in this section.

(b)  Amount recoverable.--Damages arising from the same cause of action or transaction or occurrence or series of causes of action or transactions or occurrences shall not exceed $250,000 in favor of any plaintiff or $1,000,000 in the aggregate.

(c)  Types of damages recoverable.--Damages shall be recoverable only for:

(1)  Past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity.

(2)  Pain and suffering.

(3)  Medical and dental expenses including the reasonable value of reasonable and necessary medical and dental services, prosthetic devices and necessary ambulance, hospital, professional nursing, and physical therapy expenses accrued and anticipated in the diagnosis, care and recovery of the claimant.

(4)  Loss of consortium.

(5)  Property losses, except that property losses shall not be recoverable in claims brought pursuant to section 8522(b)(5) (relating to exceptions to sovereign immunity).

(d)  Exclusions.--This section shall not apply to damages awarded under section 8522(b)(10).

(Nov. 26, 2019, P.L.641, No.87, eff. Nov. 26, 2019)

 

2019 Amendment.  Act 87 amended subsec. (c)(5) and added subsec. (d). See sections 9 and 10(3) of Act 87 in the appendix to this title for special provisions relating to severability and applicability.

Cross References.  Section 8528 is referred to in section 8522 of this title; sections 17312, 17342 of Title 16 (Counties); section 1711 of Title 74 (Transportation).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 93 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Kmonk-Sullivan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 788 A.2d 955 (Pa. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kmonk-Sullivan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 788 A.2d 955 (Pa. 2001). · cites it 6× “The plaintiffs commenced their claims against their insurers after they were unable to obtain full recoveries from the government entities that caused their injuries because of the statutory limits on the amount of damages that a Commonwealth or local agency may be required to…”
Allen v. Mellinger, 784 A.2d 762 (Pa. 2001). · cites it 12× “[2] The trial court denied the Department's motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, granted the Department's motion to mold the general liability verdict to conform to the statutory cap of $250,000 imposed by 42 Pa.”
E.J. Ewing v. B.D. Potkul & PennDOT ~ Appeal of: PennDOT, 171 A.3d 10 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). · cites it 8× “42 Pa. C.S. § 8528. In short, when considering a wrongful death claim brought against a Commonwealth agency, we examine the claim through the lens of the Sovereign Immunity Act.”
Mineo v. Tancini, 502 A.2d 1300 (Pa. 1986). · cites it 6× “RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF 42 Pa.C.S. § 8528. PennDOT next argues that the trial court should mold the verdict to $250,000 against PennDOT and deny Hope Mineo's request for delay damages.”
Tulewicz v. Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 606 A.2d 427 (Pa. 1992). · cites it 4× “[3] In its petition for reargument SEPTA argued for the first time that the grant of immunity upon which it relied was not that contained in 42 Pa.”
Von Der Heide v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Dep't of Transp., 718 A.2d 286 (Pa. 1998). · cites it 4× “Von der Heide's conduct was neither intentional nor unforeseeable; therefore, I join the majority's holding that an instruction to the jury concerning superseding cause was unwarranted.”
Toombs, Harold T. v. Manning, Sylvester, Brown, James, & Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 835 F.2d 453 (3rd Cir. 1987). · cites it 4× “” 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8528(b) (Purdon 1982).”
Bradley v. West Chester Univ. of the Pennsylvania State Sys. of Higher Educ., 880 F.3d 643 (3rd Cir. 2018). “42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8522 ; see also 42 Pa.”
Zauflik, A., Aplt. v. Pennsbury Sch. Dist., 104 A.3d 1096 (Pa. 2014). · cites it 2× “5 Based on stare decisis, and specifically on this 4 A similar damages cap is included in Section 8528 of the Act with regard to tort claims against the Commonwealth itself: “Damages arising from the same cause of action or transaction or occurrence or series of causes of action…”
J. Grove v. Port Auth. of Allegheny Cnty. -- Appeal of: J. Grove, 178 A.3d 239 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2018). · cites it 4× “See 42 Pa. C.S. §8528(b). The Port Authority filed post-trial motions, arguing that the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on negligence per se resulted in severe prejudice to the Port Authority, and, therefore, it was entitled to a new trial.”
Willet v. Pennsylvania Med. Catastrophe Loss Fund, 702 A.2d 850 (Pa. 1997). · cites it 2× “In Tulewicz , we *625 rejected the argument that the Pennsylvania Sovereign Immunity Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8528(b), did not allow for the imposition of such damages.”
Huda v. Kirk, 551 A.2d 637 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988). · cites it 4× “2d 513 (1988), we affirmed an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County and held that 42 Pa. C. S. §8528 did not permit an action of wrongful death to be maintained against the Commonwealth.”
Show all 93 citing cases →
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(a) — 1 case
Ebersole v. Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 111 A.3d 286 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(b) — 40 cases
Allen v. Mellinger, 784 A.2d 762 (Pa. 2001). “[2] The trial court denied the Department's motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, granted the Department's motion to mold the general liability verdict to conform to the statutory cap of $250,000 imposed by 42 Pa.”
Kmonk-Sullivan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 788 A.2d 955 (Pa. 2001). “The plaintiffs commenced their claims against their insurers after they were unable to obtain full recoveries from the government entities that caused their injuries because of the statutory limits on the amount of damages that a Commonwealth or local agency may be required to…”
Tulewicz v. Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 606 A.2d 427 (Pa. 1992). “[3] In its petition for reargument SEPTA argued for the first time that the grant of immunity upon which it relied was not that contained in 42 Pa.”
Toombs, Harold T. v. Manning, Sylvester, Brown, James, & Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 835 F.2d 453 (3rd Cir. 1987). “” 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8528(b) (Purdon 1982).”
Zauflik, A., Aplt. v. Pennsbury Sch. Dist., 104 A.3d 1096 (Pa. 2014). “5 Based on stare decisis, and specifically on this 4 A similar damages cap is included in Section 8528 of the Act with regard to tort claims against the Commonwealth itself: “Damages arising from the same cause of action or transaction or occurrence or series of causes of action…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(c) — 18 cases
Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Schultz, 855 A.2d 753 (Pa. 2004).
Huda v. Kirk, 551 A.2d 637 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988). “2d 513 (1988), we affirmed an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County and held that 42 Pa. C. S. §8528 did not permit an action of wrongful death to be maintained against the Commonwealth.”
Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Schultz, 822 A.2d 876 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
E.J. Ewing v. B.D. Potkul & PennDOT ~ Appeal of: PennDOT, 171 A.3d 10 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “42 Pa. C.S. § 8528. In short, when considering a wrongful death claim brought against a Commonwealth agency, we examine the claim through the lens of the Sovereign Immunity Act.”
Halstead v. Motorcycle Saf. Found. Inc., 71 F. Supp. 2d 464 (E.D. Pa. 1999).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(c)(1) — 1 case
E.J. Ewing v. B.D. Potkul & PennDOT ~ Appeal of: PennDOT, 171 A.3d 10 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “42 Pa. C.S. § 8528. In short, when considering a wrongful death claim brought against a Commonwealth agency, we examine the claim through the lens of the Sovereign Immunity Act.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(c)(2) — 3 cases
Tomikel v. Commonwealth, 658 A.2d 861 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1995).
Cook v. Gettysburg Borough, 39 Pa. D. & C.4th 342 (1997).
Francart v. Smith, 2 Pa. D. & C.4th 585 (1989).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(c)(4) — 4 cases
E.J. Ewing v. B.D. Potkul & PennDOT ~ Appeal of: PennDOT, 171 A.3d 10 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “42 Pa. C.S. § 8528. In short, when considering a wrongful death claim brought against a Commonwealth agency, we examine the claim through the lens of the Sovereign Immunity Act.”
Huda v. Kirk, 551 A.2d 637 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988). “2d 513 (1988), we affirmed an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County and held that 42 Pa. C. S. §8528 did not permit an action of wrongful death to be maintained against the Commonwealth.”
Mease v. Commonwealth, 603 A.2d 679 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992).
Quinn v. PennDOT, 7 Pa. D. & C.4th 43 (1990).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8528(c)(5) — 1 case
E.J. Ewing v. B.D. Potkul & PennDOT ~ Appeal of: PennDOT, 171 A.3d 10 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “42 Pa. C.S. § 8528. In short, when considering a wrongful death claim brought against a Commonwealth agency, we examine the claim through the lens of the Sovereign Immunity Act.”
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.