Legal Opinion
Rohrich Cadillac, Inc. v. Bureau of Professional & Occupational Affairs
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided July 11, 2013PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
Senior Judge COLINS.
This matter is a dispute under the Board of Vehicles Act1 between two competing Pittsburgh area Cadillac dealerships, Rohrich Cadillac, Inc. (Rohrich) and Bowser Cadillac, LLC (Bowser), over the relocation of Bowser’s dealership. Roh-rich petitions for review of an order of the State Board of Vehicle Manufacturers, Dealers and Salespersons (Board) that sustained a protest filed by Bowser against General Motors, LLC (GM) and directed GM to approve Bowser’s request for relocation of its dealership. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Bowser operates a Cadillac…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. RazumicSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Loos & Dilworth v. Quaker State Oil Refining Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Pa. Auto. Ass'n v. PA. ST. BD. OF v. MFG. D. & S.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Subaru of America, Inc. v. State Board of Vehicle Manufacturers, Dealers & SalespersonsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Richard Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru of New EnglandDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- BROOKS AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC v. GENERAL MOTORS LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- BROOKS AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC v. GENERAL MOTORS LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- SMAIL IMPORTS, INC. v. RMJ, MOTORS, INCDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2021