Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Albert v. 2001 Legislative Reapportionment Commission

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 15, 2002PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

2Per curiam

AND NOW, this 15th day of February, 2002, upon consideration of the above appeals, we find that the Final Reapportionment Plan of the Pennsylvania State Legislative Reapportionment Commission filed on November 19, 2001, is in compliance with the mandates of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the United States Constitution and therefore shall have the force of law. It is hereby ordered that said Plan shall be used in all forthcoming elections to the General Assembly until the next constitutionally mandated reapportionment shall be approved.

Opinions to follow.

*992 OPINION

Chief Justice ZAPPALA.

Th…

3Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. White v. RegesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Wm. Penn Parking Garage, Inc. v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Gaffney v. CummingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Davis v. BandemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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

4Cited by13 opinions

  1. Holt v. 2011 Legislative Reapportionment CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  2. Erfer v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Holt v. 2011 Legislative Reapportionment CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Kingman Park Civic Ass'n v. WilliamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. Committee to Establish Sherwood Fire Department v. HillmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API