Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Noel

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 22, 2004No. 19, 20 WAP 2003PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice NIGRO.

In this appeal, we are asked to consider the constitutionality of Section 3103(a) of the Motor Vehicle Code (the “Code”), which provides:

Every person riding an animal or driving any animal-drawn vehicle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this part, except those provisions of this part which by their very nature can have no application or where specifically provided otherwise.

75 Pa.C.S. § 3103(a) (emphasis added).1 For the reasons set forth below, we agree with the trial court…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BarudSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Commonwealth v. HeinbaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Commonwealth v. MayfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Commonwealth v. MacPhersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. State v. BlowersUtah Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  2. Clifton v. Allegheny CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Commonwealth v. HermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Commonwealth v. CostaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004

6 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