-
FERREN, Associate Judge, concurring:
I concur in Chief Judge Newman’s opinion for the court. I write separately, however, to clarify an ambiguity. The opinion of the court states at the beginning of Part II:
Section 4 of the Compact expressly establishes WMATA as an agency of each sovereign signatory to the Compact. As such, WMATA contends it is clothed with the sovereign immunity granted by the eleventh amendment to its parent states. Cf. Lake County Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe
*908 Regional Planning Agency, 440 U.S. 391 [, 99 S.Ct. 1171, 59 L.Ed.2d 401] (1979).I understand this statement to mean that we assume solely for the sake of argument — we do not decide — that WMATA is entitled to sovereign immunity pursuant to the guidelines in Lake County Estates, Inc., supra.
Document Info
Docket Number: 81-1344, 81-1616, 81-1613, 82-345, 81-1476 and 82-301
Citation Numbers: 455 A.2d 904
Judges: Belson, Fer-Ren, Ferren, Kelly, Kern, Mack, Nebeker, Newman, Pryor, Terry
Filed Date: 3/8/1983
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 8/22/2023