Legal Opinion
Pittsburgh Palisades Park, LLC v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided December 28, 2005No. 27 MM 2005PublishedCited by 154 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Chief Justice CAPPY.
In this matter, we address a facial constitutional challenge to a provision contained in The Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and Gaming Act (the “Gaming Act” or the “Act”), 4 Pa.C.S. § 1101 el seq. For the reasons stated below, we find that Petitioners Pittsburgh Palisades Park, LLC and Charles J. Betters (collectively “Petitioners”) do not have standing to bring this action.
The facts and procedural history of this matter are straightforward. The Gaming Act was passed in July 2004. The Act amends the regulation of gaming in the Commonwealth and, inter alia,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wm. Penn Parking Garage, Inc. v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Consumer Party of Pennsylvania v. Com.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- City of Philadelphia v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Kariher's Petition (No. 1)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Pennsylvanians Against Gambling Expansion Fund, Inc. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by154 opinions
- Stilp v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Governor's Office v. Office of Open Records, Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Spahn v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- In Re Administrative Order No. 1-Md-2003Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
149 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.