§ 8547. Legal assistance.
(a) Mandatory provision of legal assistance generally.--When an action is brought against an employee of a local agency for damages on account
of an injury to a person or property, and it is alleged that the act of the employee
which gave rise to the claim was within the scope of the office or duties of the employee,
the local agency shall, upon the written request of the employee, defend the action,
unless or until there is a judicial determination that such act was not within the
scope of the office or duties of the employee.
(b) Optional provision of legal assistance generally.--When an action is brought against an employee of a local agency for damages on account
of an injury to a person or property, and it is not alleged that the act of the employee
which gave rise to the claim was within the scope of his office or duties, the local
agency may, upon the written request of the employee, defend the action, and such
undertaking to defend thereafter may be withdrawn only with the approval of the court.
If the local agency has refused a written request to defend the action, and it is
judicially determined that the act was, or that the employee in good faith reasonably
believed that such act was, within the scope of the office or duties of the employee
and did not constitute a crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct,
the local agency shall reimburse the employee for the expenses of his legal defense
in such amounts as shall be determined to be reasonable by the court.
(c) Control of litigation.--When, pursuant to subsection (a) or subsection (b), the local agency defends an action
against an employee thereof at the request of the employee, it may assume exclusive
control of the defense of the employee, keeping him advised with respect thereto,
and the employee shall cooperate fully with the defense, except that in situations
where the legal counsel provided by the local agency determines that the interests
of the employee and the local agency conflict, the local agency shall obtain the express
written consent of the employee for such interested representation or shall supply
independent representation.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
18
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case:
Pettit v. Namie, 931 A.2d 790 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
Pettit v. Namie, 931 A.2d 790 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 4× “42 Pa.C.S. § 8547; Wiehagen; Mosley. [11] D.”
Balshy v. Pennsylvania State Police, 988 A.2d 813 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 3× “§§ 8547, 8548(a), (b) (requiring defense and indemnity of local agency employees absent a “judicial determination” 8 that the employee’s actions were outside the scope of his employment) with 42 Pa.C.S. § 8525 (requiring the Attorney General to defend an action against a…”
Pender v. Susquehanna Twp., 933 A.2d 1085 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 8× “2 The trial court observed that -with respect to legal expenses incurred by employees of local agencies, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 provides: (a) Mandatory provision of legal assistance generally.”
Wiehagen v. Borough of North Braddock, 594 A.2d 303 (Pa. 1991).
· cites it 2× “In addition, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 4 provides further evidence of the Legislature’s intent that Wiehagen and others sim *524 ilarly situated suffer no financial loss while defending acts performed within the scope of their employment.”
Dixon v. Cameron Cnty. Sch. Dist., 802 A.2d 696 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 2× “If the local agency *699 has refused a written request to defend the action, and it is judicially determined that the act was, or that the employee in good faith reasonably believed that such act was, within the scope of the office or duties of the employee and did not…”
City of Harrisburg v. Int'l Surplus Lines Ins., 596 F. Supp. 954 (M.D. Penn. 1984).
“The City of Harrisburg is also a plaintiff apparently because of its pleaded duty under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 to reimburse the mayor for legal expenses incurred in defending a claim arising from conduct within the scope of his office.”
In Re Birmingham Tp., Delaware Cnty., 597 A.2d 253 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1991).
· cites it 4× “[11] This is similar to the procedure under Sections 8547, 8548 and 8550 of the Judicial Code commonly referred to as the Political Subdivision Torts Claim Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8547, 8548, 8550. Section 8547 provides that a local agency shall provide legal assistance to an…”
In re Act 147 of 1990, 598 A.2d 985 (Pa. 1991).
“Thus, this Court determined that the Attorney General was not responsible for providing legal counsel to constables.”
Mosley v. Pollock, 629 A.2d 971 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).
· cites it 2× “WIEAND, Judge: The issue in this appeal is whether a District Attorney is entitled to be reimbursed under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 for counsel fees incurred in defending an action by county officials to remove him from an ongoing criminal investigation into county investment practices.”
Rosenwald v. Barbieri, 456 A.2d 677 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1983).
“The President and the Board of Commissioners of Cheltenham Township, in their preliminary objection that the petitioner failed to state a cause of action against them, maintain that, although a constable is elected by the voters of the municipality in which he serves, he is not…”
Lamar v. Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh, 836 A.2d 1031 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
· cites it 4× “rting that Lamar failed to state a cause of action where (1) the School District supplied Lamar with a defense in the federal civil lawsuit, (2) no damages were assessed against Lamar in the administrative disciplinary hearing or the federal lawsuit, (3) Lamar did not request…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8547(a) — 5 cases
Dixon v. Cameron Cnty. Sch. Dist., 802 A.2d 696 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
“If the local agency *699 has refused a written request to defend the action, and it is judicially determined that the act was, or that the employee in good faith reasonably believed that such act was, within the scope of the office or duties of the employee and did not…”
Pender v. Susquehanna Twp., 933 A.2d 1085 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“2 The trial court observed that -with respect to legal expenses incurred by employees of local agencies, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 provides: (a) Mandatory provision of legal assistance generally.”
Lamar v. Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh, 836 A.2d 1031 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
“rting that Lamar failed to state a cause of action where (1) the School District supplied Lamar with a defense in the federal civil lawsuit, (2) no damages were assessed against Lamar in the administrative disciplinary hearing or the federal lawsuit, (3) Lamar did not request…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8547(b) — 1 case
Pender v. Susquehanna Twp., 933 A.2d 1085 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“2 The trial court observed that -with respect to legal expenses incurred by employees of local agencies, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 provides: (a) Mandatory provision of legal assistance generally.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8547(c) — 3 cases
Pender v. Susquehanna Twp., 933 A.2d 1085 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“2 The trial court observed that -with respect to legal expenses incurred by employees of local agencies, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8547 provides: (a) Mandatory provision of legal assistance generally.”
Dixon v. Cameron Cnty. Sch. Dist., 802 A.2d 696 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
“If the local agency *699 has refused a written request to defend the action, and it is judicially determined that the act was, or that the employee in good faith reasonably believed that such act was, within the scope of the office or duties of the employee and did not…”
Lamar v. Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh, 836 A.2d 1031 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
“rting that Lamar failed to state a cause of action where (1) the School District supplied Lamar with a defense in the federal civil lawsuit, (2) no damages were assessed against Lamar in the administrative disciplinary hearing or the federal lawsuit, (3) Lamar did not request…”
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.