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

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8550 (2026)

 Willful misconduct.

✓ 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

§ 8550.  Willful misconduct.

In any action against a local agency or employee thereof for damages on account of an injury caused by the act of the employee in which it is judicially determined that the act of the employee caused the injury and that such act constituted a crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct, the provisions of sections 8545 (relating to official liability generally), 8546 (relating to defense of official immunity), 8548 (relating to indemnity) and 8549 (relating to limitation on damages) shall not apply.

 

Cross References.  Section 8550 is referred to in section 4352 of Title 23 (Domestic Relations).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 259 cases (56 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Renk v. City of Pittsburgh, 641 A.2d 289 (Pa. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Renk v. City of Pittsburgh, 641 A.2d 289 (Pa. 1994). · cites it 4× “42 Pa.C.S. § 8550. This court has held willful misconduct is synonymous with "intentional tort.”
Pettit v. Namie, 931 A.2d 790 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007). · cites it 6× “Because District Attorney did not comply with the court of common pleas' order requiring return of Brilla's property and a jury found this act was intentional and malicious, wanton or oppressive, it maintains, Section 8550 of the Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.”
Kuzel v. Krause, 658 A.2d 856 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1995). · cites it 6× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550. At trial, the Employees presented testimony that at the March 20, 1991 Township Commissioners’ meeting, Commissioner Krause stated “[w]hy keep people that are on disability who are useless to us when we can replace them_” While four out of seven of the…”
Just., S., Aplt. v. Trooper Lombardo, 208 A.3d 1057 (Pa. 2019). · cites it 2× “1994) (citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550), with Kull v. Guisse, 81 A.”
Robbins Ex Rel. Robbins v. Cumberland Cnty. Child. & Youth Servs., 802 A.2d 1239 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002). · cites it 4× “See also 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550. In King v. Breach, 115 Pa.”
Orange Stones Co. v. City of Reading, 87 A.3d 1014 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014). · cites it 3× “In addition, section 8550 of the Tort Claims Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550, does not create an exception to section 8542(a)(2), and, as a result, a local agency may not be held liable for the willful misconduct of its employees.”
Heinly v. Queen, 146 F.R.D. 102 (E.D. Pa. 1993). · cites it 5× “Fourth, in Count III, defendant, Queen, contends that he is not liable for willful misconduct under 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8550 (1982). We shall address each of these arguments in the order presented.”
Sands v. McCormick, 502 F.3d 263 (3d Cir. 2007). “See 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 8550; see also Sanford v.”
Kathleen Sanford, Individually & as Adm'x of the Est. of Michael R. Sanford v. Pamela Stiles Dennis Murphy East Penn Sch. Dist., 456 F.3d 298 (3d Cir. 2006). “42 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 8550 (emphasis added).”
Balletta v. Spadoni, 47 A.3d 183 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550. Appellants maintain that Deputy Sheriff Ruberry and Assistant Solicitor Spadoni (and their employers) must be deemed “non-immune” under the Tort Claims Act.”
La Frankie v. Miklich, 618 A.2d 1145 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). · cites it 2× “2d 424 (1990) (applying 42 Pa.C.S. § 8550). The special interrogatories and the trial court's instructions to the jury indicate that the court applied the test for determining whether a local agency employee rather than a Commonwealth employee lost immunity protection.”
Malia Et Ux. v. Monchak, 543 A.2d 184 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988). · cites it 4× “42 Pa. C. S. §8550 abrogates the immunity defenses provided in sections 8545 and 8546 when the alleged wrongful conduct of the employee “constituted a crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct.”
Show all 259 citing cases →
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.