Legal Opinion

Feigley v. Department of Corrections

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 11, 1999PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McCLOSKEY, Senior Judge.

Presently before this Court are the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer filed by the Department of Corrections (DOC) and the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer filed by the Office of the Attorney General of Pennsylvania (OAG) in response to a pro se petition for review filed by George Feigley (Petitioner), seeking relief in mandamus. We hereby grant the demurrer of DOC and OAG.

Petitioner states that on January 7, 1998, while incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon (SCI-Huntingdon), 1 he became aware of alleged…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Myers v. RidgeCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. HAWKS BY HAWKS v. LivermoreCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Wassell v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Commonwealth Board of Probation & ParoleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  2. Homa v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & ParoleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Dunbar v. Pennsylvania State PoliceCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Banks v. Department of CorrectionsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Arroyo v. PappertCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API